Tactical Command :: View topic - Scales?

Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Scales? http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=19249	Page 1 of 3

Author:	madmagician [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 4:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Scales?
I have to admit, I am quite confused by all of the talk about 1:5, 1:6, heroic, true scale on these forums. I always felt that Epic's vehicles were a bit undersized and by the time it got to the Leviathan, CI and Titans it was woefully under scale. Titans seem to closer to 3mm scale. In addition I think Only marines were actually done in 6mm whereas all other forces were actually 8mm. So what's the deal $:-\$

Author:	zombocom [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 4:15 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
The deal is this: As you say, all of the specialist games larger vehicles are underscaled to a greater or lesser extent. The forgeworld models, excluding the titans, were made at a fixed 5:1 ratio from 40k scale, i.e. reducing from 30mm scale to 6mm. This "truescale" has become the standard for scratch building at epic scale.

Author:	madmagician [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 4:22 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
ahh, that makes a bit more sense, I was always thinking backwards form that (i.e. assume that a Space Marine is about 7 feet tall and work form there)

Author:	semajnollissor [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 4:23 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
Well, the real answer is that you should try sculpting a product line of hundreds of minis to the same scale, with the same accuracy and level of detail as the 10 other guys sculpting for the same game. It's a difficult thing to do, especially back then. Another thing to keep in mind is that models have to be of a size that is manageable on the tabletop. When AT came out, the titans were 'truescale,' since there weren't any infantry or vehicles. Not only that, but they were huge for a minatures game (compare them to battlemech minis). When infantry and vehicles were added, they decided it was either too difficult or just wasn't that important to match the infantry scale to the existing titans. Infantry was made much larger than it ought to have been, in order to include as much detail as possible, and vehicles sort of split the difference between the infantry and titans. Now things have swung the opposite way, and people seem to have gotten the idea that the titans were sculpted too small, when it was kind of the other way around. In anycase, being a slave to scale is a bit detrimental at these small scales, and any talk of 'true scale' is pretty silly to me considering the fact that the 28mm figs aren't true-scale to real life, which is what the 6mm game should be compared to anyway.

Author:	Otterman [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 4:31 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
There are also physical limitations on how small something can be. For example, a protrusion (like a fin or antenna) may 'need' to be .4mm thick, but something that thin won't spincast properly.

Author:	Evil and Chaos [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 4:48 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
One consideration is that back in the day, GW couldn't afford to make the larger models at "true scale". So large vehicles and aircraft etc. were knowingly sculpted undersized. Nowadays, it's possible to do things correctly.

Author:	The_Real_Chris [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 7:14 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
The most important thing for me is matching other ranges. Most 'old' sci fi tends to be 6mm - 1:285 or 1:300. Some is smaller, e.g. the original marines and rhinos. Now with DRM and exodus going for the GW style of 6mm its a bit better (if you discount the 3rd edition sculpts which infantry wise could hit 8mm), but personally I would prefer scales to match stuff like GZG. Also remember that tanks, apc's etc are actually surprisingly small, while modern jets like the f-15 very big.

Author:	Dwarf Supreme [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 7:27 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
The_Real_Chris wrote: Also remember that tanks, apc's etc are actually surprisingly small, while modern jets like the f-15 very big. That's so true. I remember the first time I saw an F-105, my first reaction was, "Holy cow, that plane is huge! It's almost as long as a B-17." It turns out that I was right. A B-17 is only 10 feet longer than an F-105.

Author:	Legion 4 [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:35 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
Dwarf Supreme wrote: The_Real_Chris wrote: Also remember that tanks, apc's etc are actually surprisingly small, while modern jets like the f-15 very big. That's so true. I remember the first time I saw an F-105, my first reaction was, "Holy cow, that plane is huge! It's almost as long as a B-17." It turns out that I was right. A B-17 is only 10 feet longer than an F-105. Surprisingly small is relative ... a WWI FT-17, WWII R-35 ... yes, they are small ... a modern M1 ... is BIG ... And no matter the size of the APC/IFV, it is always too small, if you have to ride around in it ...

Author:	Hedgehobbit2 [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:47 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
I've always been a proponent that the epic Titan models are as big as the titans are supposed to be. It seems that GW agreed with me at one point. Look how tiny this Warlord head is. You can see the controls through the broken eye window. It's similar in scale to this picture of the Forge World Reaver head. One thing to consider is that GW now makes a SHT with a volcano cannon. A old beatleback Warlord is about 1.72 as high as the volcano cannon is long. Measuring the Volcano cannon on GW Shadowsword will give a decent approximation of the height of a Warlord. Aaron as measured to the top of the carapace, excluding any carapace weapons (which vary in height)

Author:	Ghudra [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 5:49 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
Hedgehobbit2 wrote: I've always been a proponent that the epic Titan models are as big as the titans are supposed to be. It seems that GW agreed with me at one point. GW never even agreed with themselves, or at least the various artists didn't, at any point. Look at the box art for AT (gold standard?) & you have marines in the foreground that are near a downed Warlord and then masses of marines around the feet of Warlord Titans in the center of the picture. The scales *in the same picture* are not even consistent. You see this type of thing throughout Epic art, even if you exclude stuff from John Blanche.

Author:	Legion 4 [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:34 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
With G/W scale is relative ... $:-\$ E&C made a to scale Warhound, IIRC ... it's about the size of a G/W Plastic Warlord Mk.1 ...

Author:	madmagician [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 8:03 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
Very interesting takes on the scale issue. My problem was never really with the Titans, but the normal and super heavy vehicles always felt a bit small (and in the case of the Praetorian, CI and Hellbore, rather small and unimpressive). I really have no problem overall with the infantry varying in size or the tanks either, but I am very much Pro 1:5 or a more accurate scale overall for new products.

Author:	BlackLegion [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:30 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
Even the Infantry isn't in the same scale. For example Imperial Guard Infantry would only reach the chest of a Space Marine yet in Epic they have the same height.

Author:	The_Real_Chris [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:41 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Scales?
Fundementally I want a consistent scale not to 40k which is rubbish as well, but rather with each other. So Infantry matching up with marines taller than guard, a hunched up ork the same size as a man, scout marines matching everyone else, APC's being scaled correctly for their contents etc etc. Saying that when it comes to vehicles I quite like them tiny as they really are. Also though as to the restrictions interplanetary transport puts on things is nice - for example western tanks are limited by the width of railway tunnels in Germany as its their main form of transport.

Page 1 of 3	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/