Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Future Wars => Topic started by: KermittheFrog on 20 February 2011, 02:54:06 AM
-
Im wanting to eventually start up my own zombie skirmish game, probaly using AR:SE rules.
Anyways, to get me motivated I was looking around some of the toy stores at my local shopping centre and was tempted to buy a few vehilces just to play around with, add damage to them, paint them, reinforce them as a "survivor" vehicles but before I bought anything I wanted to know the right technical scale for 28mm.
Second question.
When it comes to zombie skirmish where should I start? Ive read a few of the posts about building cities and collecting figures but dont really know where to begin.
Anyways, thanks.
-
I like 1:48 myself. It eyeballs very, very closely IMO (I use the seats to compare, as they're the easiest/clearest bit to size up next to a figure), and there's lots more stuff in that scale than in it's neighbors.
I've heard it said that 1:fiftysomething or 1:60 are supposed to be technically correct, but how does one establish that when the heights of a varying bunch of fictional people is the major reference point? Even theoretically consistent real world kit (rifles and such) often varies enough from company to company to make this fuzzy IMO.
-
thanks for that, it just so happens one of the trucks I was looking at was 1.48 and I took a 28mm DnD figure with me to the store and it looked about the right scale.
Do you use just 1/48 or a few scales?
-
I've used everything from 1/43 to 1/60, depending on the vehicle in question. If it looks right, then it is right. Nice and simple.
-
It also depends on what miniatures you're using. If you use Rafm's USX Modern line or the Reaper Chronoscope figures even the 1/43 scale stuff looks good. If you have any of the older stuff those vehicles look huge.
-
Go to a local toy or big box store if you have them and trawl the car aisle with a figure looking for stuff that looks right. Most of the toys from the CARS line (from the Pixar movie) for example are a good match. Non-Matchbox and Hotwheels diecast lines like Jada, M2, and the like are good to look at as well.
-
Siku make a good line of Modern 1/55 scale cars. Actually the perfect fit.
They also make a series of very nice 1/50 scale models if 1:48 or 1:50 is your preference. Corgi is very good as well. They have a nice line of 1:50 police cars and fire trucks that would work well.
And of course, there's our new SWAT truck coming out. Might as well spill it that I have three or 4 other "modern Vehicles" in the works, specifically for Zombie games.
Brent
Company B
-
cheers guys, very helpful.
Many of the sotres you guys have said to shop at I simply dont have as I live in Australia but thats fine. Ill know what to look out for next time.
I wanted an accurate scale not just for the looks but for playability. For example, a large truck I was going to cut the roof of the trailer and add doors that open (if they dont already) so the survivors (or zombies) can hold up in there for whatever reason. Just adds more enjoyment and options to a game.
-
I use different scales due to availability of models for different subjects:
1/48 for WW2 (Tamiya vehicle kits)
1/64 for modern (HotWheels usually are and they are cheap)
-
What you want is Tonkin Collectibles. They are here in Seattle, and make very nice diecast trucks in 1/53 scale, with full interiors.
(http://www.tonkinprecision.com/images/Tractor/Freightliner/Cascadia//detail3.jpg)
Price varies on the model. $29 to $79.
http://tonkinreplicas.com/brands/precisionseries.html (http://tonkinreplicas.com/brands/precisionseries.html)
Good source for these a well as any other diecast in various scales
http://www.diecastdirect.com/asp_modules/catalogmfg.asp?Mfg=TR&Type=&SubType=&Brand=&RChar=&Scale=&Mv=Previous&pageNo=2 (http://www.diecastdirect.com/asp_modules/catalogmfg.asp?Mfg=TR&Type=&SubType=&Brand=&RChar=&Scale=&Mv=Previous&pageNo=2)
-
I like that tonka truck. Though im not looking for super detail necessarily as opposed to an interior with a few decals or something just to make it look good.
Hotwheels are great, I used to collect them as a kid! but afraid there a tad to small for 28mm.
It seems im shttung all your suggestions down guys, for that I apologise :D
-
Personally anything from 1/43 to 1/50, don't mix models of vehicle and use what works for you, no hard and fast rules really.
Plenty of vehicles of various scales in my zed thread, you should be able to see how they all work together.
The Commander
-
as said depends on your minis/bases... but I go 1/48 or 1/50 or it just looks right...
1/43 is too big even for slotta'd figures...
(http://homepage.ntlworld.com/roweller/drwho/mobile/IMG_0798.JPG)
1/48 Bedford OB van (not really relevant, but looks good big), BTD 28mm, Mongrel 28mm, 1/43 Police Mini
-
The vehicle scale debate. 1:55 is pretty good mathematically. I have two of the siku Citroen Avants and they line up quite well. I also have vehicles from Hot Wheels, Matchbox, and some generic. These are all random scales -- "box scale" most commonly -- and all work.
So I guess I will echo the comment that it is what "looks right." Sometimes that means larger scale, sometimes that means smaller scale. Caveat to that: table space is precious. Go as small as visually possible to preserve it.
-
(...)So I guess I will echo the comment that it is what "looks right." Sometimes that means larger scale, sometimes that means smaller scale. (...)
+1 on that!
Unfortunately the "miniature vehicle companies" don't use the same scales amongst them selves.
What's even worst, some of them don't even respect the scale of their own line of products.
By that I mean, they have a standard box size (lets say for 1/43 minis), and then they just "fill the box" (as in stretch the mini till the box is filled) so you end up with a "smart" the same hight of a "humvee", if you see what I mean.
So as said before and as rule of thumb, take a scale with you and check.
-
I just go to the store and if a toy car looks right I buy it. If I get it home and it is a little too big or too small, I toss it in a box to use as a project. If it fits I use it. I also get a lot of toy car at second hand stores.
-
Im wanting to eventually start up my own zombie skirmish game, probaly using AR:SE rules.
Good man!
8)
1/55th is my personal preference, but whatever looks right to you - i've also got 1/43rd police cars, and 1/50th corgi trucks.
if you've got big chunky bases on your figures, and the cars aren't based, the bigger scale vehicles still look alright IMHO.
-
If you really want to get into the "what scale goes best with 28mm" then the mainly28s website has some pages that discuss it in depth.
As others have said, do what is to your liking. :)
My personal preference is to start at 1/56 and then vary as necessary according to whatever figures I am using (which aren't scaled but are sized and inconsistently at that!).
-
it's still worth checking pound or dollar stores . It's surprising how many useful vehicles you find there
d ex
-
A few shots of my gaming board, a number of scales from 1/43 to 1/50 to 1/64 on display
(http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq186/Vyperzoom/Gamethreepullback.jpg)
(http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq186/Vyperzoom/Zombie%20Game%2024th%20April%20post%20salute/RIMG2925.jpg)
(http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq186/Vyperzoom/Zombie%20Game%2024th%20April%20post%20salute/RIMG2921.jpg)
And I'm always scouting the pound shops, my latest RV is perfectly scaled and cost a measely £2.50:
(http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq186/Vyperzoom/GameTwofuelstop.jpg)
The London Ambulance next to it 50p from a car boot sale.
(http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq186/Vyperzoom/Gameoneroundtheback.jpg)
Recycling lorry £3.50
So get an idea of how things work together and never pass a second hand store or supermarket without checking for vehicles! ;)
The Commander
-
Wow fantastic replies guys, you couldn't have been more helpful.
Im going to go with what looks right but might allow slighly smaller then scale just to preserve board space but again, what feels right is definitley going to be my first option.
I was recommended this site by a friend at my gaming club and he told me I would get good anwsers. Certainly haven't been let down.
I only hope I can provide as much help to others.
-
1/48 is 0.5mm off a 28mm figure on a 5mm base (33.5mm v 33mm)
having said that some 1/48 vehicles are not 1/48, and many 1/56 are nowhere near 1/56 either, but are actually 1/48...and others use different scales vertically to horizontally...so theya re 1/48 upwards, and 1/56 (even 1/60) lengthways and sideways.
I use 1/48 because, for a 28mm figure on a 5mm base it is pretty much perfect.....(What is 1.5% error between friends eh?)
This concept confuses some people though, indeed makes some of them very angry indeed... (although that transpired to be because they'd just designed some of their own vehicles in a smaller scale and were about to start selling them.)
Obviously, if you put your vehicle on a base then this will no longer look correct anymore.....
Then again, many 28mm figures are not 28mm, so.... "what looks right" is the accurate answer for most people.
Very few die-cast and plastic vehicles are the scale they say they are either, most are actually box-scale or sprue-scale/die-scale etc, which means they are the size they are to fit to a pre-used size of box, packaging, sprue or casting process, rather than a specific scale. They are often given a scale though as people like seeing a scale...even if it isnt even close to that scale.
Which is why you often put two 1/48 vehicles of the same type/model, from different manufacturers, next to each other and they are radically different.
Occaisionally the vehicle "scale" is an outright marketing ploy (lie) to make you buy that "scale" and not cheaper alternaties in more common scales.... "Those figures/toys/dolls/things will only work with our 1/56 vehicles/toys/barbiedoll!" ... hmm... so why, if they are 1/56, wont other 1/56 vehicles work, and why are your 1/56 vehicles the exact same size as 1/48 plastic kits of the same thing?
You may ask the question..but dont expect a good answer... :-X
As far as the human brain works, and how we judge the size of objects, the height of the vehicles is the most important thing, so if it looks right when placed next to a based-figure then it is unlikely anybody will notice it is a different scale and too short, or too narrow etc....'coz thats just how the brain does things. (an image of a man in a doorway, where his head is close to the top of the door frame, is automatically thought of as being "tall" by the subconcious mind.... one has to conciously stop and consider how big the doorframe is afterwards....and how that might rather change the impression of his height.)
sneaky huh?
-
One thing to remember is that the scale quoted on a toy's box can be completely wrong. I just saw two different buses made by Maisto sitting next to each other in the shop. Both claimed to be 1/50, but the double-length bendy bus was significantly lower than the (shorter) regular bus, and the seats inside much smaller. The old habit of scaling to fit the box is still there!
-
One thing to remember is that the scale quoted on a toy's box can be completely wrong. I just saw two different buses made by Maisto sitting next to each other in the shop. Both claimed to be 1/50, but the double-length bendy bus was significantly lower than the (shorter) regular bus, and the seats inside much smaller. The old habit of scaling to fit the box is still there!
This is the difference between toys and collector´s models. The latter are usually exactly to scale and much more detailed, but way more expensive.
-
The old habit of scaling to fit the box is still there!
yeah good-old "box-scale"... revell are rampant about it with their star-wars stuff, nothing is in the same scale.
-
I'm definitely in the 'as long as it looks right' group, but even then it's often hard to determine what looks right. Thankfully there's often a huge amount of material on the web, not withstanding the IDF's efforts at scale comparison shots;
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/_WG5alGp4ptY/TWO_31_7etI/AAAAAAAADIw/j6-GLep9bzA/2.jpg)
Sherman vs M48
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/_WG5alGp4ptY/TWO_4J8XynI/AAAAAAAADI0/m-6SjUkBboI/3.jpg)
Merkava vs Cromwell
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_WG5alGp4ptY/TWO_33NxwyI/AAAAAAAADIs/gFYvGg2htmY/1.jpg)
Merkava vs H-39
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_WG5alGp4ptY/TWPBzFasVDI/AAAAAAAADI8/HiRModkOMYg/s640/4.jpg)
M113 vs People ... do they look quite small in comparison?
There's lots of pics out there of other armies and times to look at.
The point I'm trying to illustrate is that there is no 'right' scale for 28mm figures, just as there is no 'right' size for the 28mm figures themselves, you just have to go for whatever fits the particular figures you have. As mentioned above it's often a suck it and see process, especially with die-casts, and quite frustrating sometimes too.
We also tend to worry a lot about what's right between figures and vehicles, and then don't consider the terrain surrounding them. Why worry if your vehicle appears a couple of feet too small, when the building they are parked next to is often so under scale that their occupants would have to sleep upright? A typical farmer's field would cover a typical gaming table in real life, yet we usually depict several of them in our games.
-
I'm with Vyper on this one, 1:43-50 and never leave a store without checking for vehicles ;). I found the scales usually break down like this:
1:43 is common for regular cars, though some car companies don't adhere very strict to the scales. Especially small car models from Bburago are larger than they should be.
1:48 is a pretty standard model size for truck models and military kits, it looks good but it's hard to find a normal car in this size.
1:50 is a common size for specialist die-cast models like military vehicles and construction equipment. I find 1:50 tends to look too small for my EM4 models, though it might look good with less bulky historical/modern types. However, because a lot of vehicles in 1:50 are supposed to be large they often get away with it.
I think in general 1:48 looks best but the sheer abundance of 1:43 cars makes me favour them. Here are some examples of my vehicles:
(http://members.multimania.nl/Pil3/Miniatures/Water_Merchants/merchants-10.jpg)
1:43 Cararama Ford Transit with TAG (The Assault Group) US Vietnam helicopter crew (with head swaps).
More info and pictures here:
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=22688.0
(http://members.multimania.nl/Pil3/Miniatures/Suits/suits04.jpg)
1:43 Bburago Ferrari with EM4 Future Warriors. More info and pictures here:
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=12234.0
http://www.combatzonechronicles.net/cozoxb/white.htm
(http://members.multimania.nl/Pil3/Miniatures/Stryker/stryker02.jpg)
1:43 Cararama Hummer H2 with EM4 Future Warriors, you can see the Hummer looks pretty huge, but then so it does in real life. More info and picturess here:
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=13962.0
http://www.combatzonechronicles.net/cozoxc/stryker.htm
(http://members.multimania.nl/Pil3/Miniatures/SpecOps/specops05.jpg)
1:43 Bburago Lamborghini Reventón with EM4 Future Warriors. More pictures and info here:
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=24475.0
http://www.combatzonechronicles.net/cozoxc/hauer.htm
(http://members.multimania.nl/Pil3/Miniatures/politie/bikers/convoy.jpg)
1:43 Cararama VW T4 vans with EM4 Future Warriors Police Bikes and riders. More info and pictures here:
http://www.combatzonechronicles.net/cozox/polis2.htm
(http://members.multimania.nl/Pil3/Miniatures/Hatchetheadz/manowar_dio_shark.jpg)
1:50 GMC DUKW, I thought the seating was a bit too small so I removed it, it also helped because I could put a standing model inside. More of this model here:
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=24733.0
http://www.combatzonechronicles.net/cozoxc/hatchet.htm
(http://members.multimania.nl/Pil3/Miniatures/wpla_tv/wpla-chopper.jpg)
1:60 Cararama helicopter. As you can see the helicopter looks good as a small helicopter though this model should in fact be much larger (compare to: http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/8/6/3/1058368.jpg ), again, if it looks good go for it! More info and pics here:
http://www.combatzonechronicles.net/cozox/wpla.htm
(http://members.multimania.nl/Pil3/Miniatures/Water_Merchants/merchants-03.jpg)
No scale plastic dumper. There are a lot of cheap toys out there that are not actually scale models but that still look good, so develop an eye for them and look around.
More info and pictures here:
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=22688.0
-
1/48 is 0.5mm off a 28mm figure on a 5mm base (33.5mm v 33mm)
This is what I was wondering about before, though. In order to calculate a ratio scale, you have to have something on the mini that can be compared to a known measurement for it's life-size equivalent.
The closest thing to that on a mini is going to be an identifiable piece of kit, like a real world model of weapon, or something similar. Problem with this is that these are inconsistent from sculptor to sculptor, and manufacturer to manufacturer.
You could just assume that the given mm scale category represents an abstract hypothetical average human height (like 6'). This has loads of problems too though: MMs just tell you how tall the mini is, they don't tell you how tall the character it represents is, and that mm number may include things like shoe soles, hats, hair, posture/pose, base thickness in the case of molded in bases, all of which can add or subtract quite a lot to/from the character's scale height. Plus there's the whole crown vs eyeline thing, and varying degrees of stylization and scale creep which may confuse the character's actual height.
And even if one chooses to adopt a given argument, that doesn't mean it's the same logic used by the people who originated a given mm scale, or by those who made the figures. As I understand it, the common scaling conventions of 25/28/30mm etc were codified by smart mob over a period of decades, and have no consistent logic beyond the desire of individual gamers to have all their stuff look consistent on the table. In fact, for strictly gaming purposes, exact scale isn't important at all, and is openly fudged by both players and manufacturers. Mini size is what matters consistently.
I can see how someone might consider a certain ratio scale correct as a matter of personal preference, but I'm not sure I understand how one can be claimed as being objectively correct.
-
well thats the entire "wish-bang" issue with figures... the generally accepted method of measuring is foot-to-eye, so 28mm is the distance from the bottom of the foot to the figure's eye level. The next elelemnt is the height of the "actual" figure, and this is the usualy part when things go wrong.
The working "average" height was judged to be 5'3" to the eye, which is 1610mm. That resulting in an average total height of 5'8" which is 1730mm.
Then just divide the mm height by the "scale" to get the working height i.e. 1610/48 = 33.5mm Which gives you the height of a figure from bottom of foot to the eye level for 1/48 scale.
And that obviously works the other way... so a 6mm figure is 1610/6 = 1/268 scale
1610/28 = 57.5 scale, so that is your "true scale" for 28mm figures.
(If you want to use the figures full height then just use the 1730 number in place of 1610.)
If your "average" human is taller, than just change the numbers; a 6-foot Viking will 1829mm tall and in our 57.5 scale that means it will be 1829/57.5 = 31.8mm to the top of the head. i.e. about 1 mm taller than the 5'8" bloke.
Clearly the major factor influencing any result is what you take as your average height, how tall you want your figure to be, and whether you then use "28mm" to refer to eye-height or total height.... which is why it is a very bad way of doing things, and using a Scale would be far, far easier.
The next major issue, with buildings, scenery and vehicles, is that most people base their figures and (as discussed) because of how we judge ehight, that raising-up of the figure affects how we judge the scenery, buildings and vehicles (unless we also raise those up on bases).
For that reason, un-based scenery, vehciles and buildings can be a larger scale than the figure and look correct. Indeed same-scale can look too small. Pil's iamges are a very good example of over-scale vehicles looking correct... which is partly figure height but also because wargames figures tend to be a lot "fatter" than in reality, meaning that not only cna they appear talla gainst same-scale objects, but they can also make those objects look "thin": agood example being wargames figures being too "fat" for scale-accurate chairs/seats etc.
And even if one chooses to adopt a given argument, that doesn't mean it's the same logic used by the people who originated a given mm scale, or by those who made the figures. As I understand it, the common scaling conventions of 25/28/30mm etc were codified by smart mob over a period of decades, and have no consistent logic beyond the desire of individual gamers to have all their stuff look consistent on the table. In fact, for strictly gaming purposes, exact scale isn't important at all, and is openly fudged by both players and manufacturers. Mini size is what matters consistently.
Mini size is no more or less important than scenery, vehicle or buildings then: its only real use, if scale is fudged, is in relative terms i.e. knowing that CompanyA's 28mm figure will look OK next to CompanyZ's 28mm figures...and as we all know, this is not true.
Scale though is always accurate, its just s imple division, the problem is that we generally arent told the height of a figure... and often we dont consider the vast variations in height in reality. When we see a small wargame figure we tend to say "that looks like a 25mm, wouldnt work with my Heroic 28mm" (Heroic 28mm whats THAT then?! = 30mm or 32mm??) In actuality the wargame figure may be a model of 5 foot tall person and therefore a '28mm figure'.
So mini size is generally miss-leading, sometimes an outright lie "Heroic 28mm" just isnt 28mm, it is anywhere from 30-32mm, in some cases 33mm (1/48), but labelled as 28mm so that people who have 28mm figures will consider buying them and not regard them as " a different scale".
Calling wargames figures "28mm scale" is what is missleading because it isnt codified and it is openly abused for marketing purposes, but if you wanted an accurate systme then, yes, you would ahve to use scale as well as indicating the intended figure-hieght of each wargame-figure i.e. this is a 5 foot 6 inch human in 1/56th scale.
Otherwise, as you say, it is all rather useless.
THis is also why websites that show comparison images of different figure ranges, buildings and vehciles are SO very, very, useful: we simply cannot trust the "mm scale" so comparitive photos are the only real way to judge if figures from one range are suited with another, and the same applies to vehicles. I ahve had discussion with people who have angrily dissmissed 1/48, let alone 1/43 vehicles EVER being able to look right next to 28mm figures...yet one only has to look at PIls photos to know that this is not so, and to see that a 1/57.5 vehicle would look tiny and very weird indeed! So how do some 1/56 things look right? Well either you raise them up on bases, or, often, they simply are not 1/56.... what vehicle maunfacturer wants toa dmit that his £30 resin WWII tank is actually 1/48, when that means you can go out and get 3 1/48 tank plastic kits with more detail for the same money?! (I certainly wouldn't!)
So, ultimately, the thing to bear in mind is that the only true test is comparitive images and keeping an old, based figure in your jacket as you browse toy-stores, is about the best way to pick up vehicles, whilst totally ignoring anything on their boxes about their supposed scale.
Thus: If it looks right, use it.
-
... and I thought my posts were long. :D
But it is essentially correct in all its points. Most manufacturers who produce vehicles and figures do so to make them compatible with their own figures... Companies that just do vehicles sometimes scale them to suit a specified range by another manufacturer. With fictional or futuristic models it isn't so bad as there is no real item for comparison, but for historic items it's very different.
Figure bases do make a great difference too, which can make things easier or harder when trying to find vehicles to match, depending on the figure. With some manufacturers going for 'slotta' bases and others going for the thin/fat traditional flat blob of metal, even compatible ranges become incompatible.
It would definitely make life easier if people were to make things to scale, but it isn't going to happen and we'll just have to get used to 28mm as meaning 28mm+/-whatever.
-
snip
;) Basically an elaborated restatement of what I was saying: you can establish a hypothetical true scale, but because the deciding variables are unfixed in practical reality, no such hypothetical scale will be applicable/accurate beyond a specific figure or range within a given mm scale.
Thus no ratio scale can be considered "true scale" in this context. The best you can do is establish a "fuzzy logic" range of ratio scales for a given mm, but not a single "true" scale.
You and I are thinking the same things, I just don't see how this train of logic supports any "true scale" in a more than illusory way. You came up with a figure of 1:57.5, but by your own admission that is dependent on particular assumptions and variable values which are anything but universal. That means it's only really "true" for certain figures under certain conditions, not in general.
-
Thus: If it looks right, use it.
That's good enough for me.
-
That's good enough for me.
I think this is the consensus...
-
You and I are thinking the same things, I just don't see how this train of logic supports any "true scale" in a more than illusory way. You came up with a figure of 1:57.5, but by your own admission that is dependent on particular assumptions and variable values which are anything but universal. That means it's only really "true" for certain figures under certain conditions, not in general.
I'm sorry, I'm not really sure what you are trying to say: Perhaps the use of the term "true scale" was missleading?
All i meant was that the correct scale of a 28mm figure was 1/57.5 using the given parameters, which are what are usually hoiked out for show as "the industry standard"... as indicated in the post.
(I had forgotten the miasma that is the "one true scale" arguments, it was in no way intended to mean that in any way, shape or form... it merely meant "correct" using the stated parameters.)
-
I'm using "true" to mean the same thing you mean when you say "correct".
I'm saying that in my observation there is no "industry standard": the parameters are defined differently by different sculptors/manufactures (or more accurately, usually not at all- things are just done to eyeball spec), so a mathematically correct scale can only be determined for individual figures or figure lines. I don't know to what degree any scale is touted as an official standard within the industry, as I've never seen the issue addressed outside of forum discussions like this one (i.e. never in an official industry context). That's irrelevant though, since there's no verifiable de facto standard, and without that no claimed standard is meaningful. The assumed variables have to be born out consistently when the equation's reversed.
So you can determine the mathematically correct scale for a given figure or line, but not for 28mm as a category. Any scale assumed to be categorically correct will be limited in accuracy by practical variation, and thus similarly limited in correctness.
By assuming a standard that exists in principal (if at all), but not in practice, you're placing yourself in the realm of the very "one true scale" miasma (by your definition) that you wanted to avoid.
Or so it seems to me.
-
Another problem is that scales that are supposed to be the same (or at least close) vary wildly. Case in point: Hot Wheels G-Machines is a line of really, really nice die-cast muscle/classic cars. They look more or less perfect alongside 28mm minis like Copplestone Future Wars, or the slightly larger Hasslefree minis (even beside Dionne). They might look a little wide to a purist, but in terms of height they're great, and the length looks good too.
With that in mind, I picked up some Siku 1:55 vehicles (only a couple, thankfully), and while they are very nice die-cast cars, they look tiny with a based Copplestone Future Wars mini beside them. With the minis off the bases, would the cars look right? Maybe, but I'm not sure that they would, to be honest. For this reason, I tend to stick to 1:50 for die-casts, and 1:48 for plastic kits. A little overscaled, perhaps (but only a little), and for something like tanks and planes, I have no problem with that.
It's a tough one to call, no doubt about it.
-
I'm using "true" to mean the same thing you mean when you say "correct". *snip*
By assuming a standard that exists in principal (if at all), but not in practice, you're placing yourself in the realm of the very "one true scale" miasma (by your definition) that you wanted to avoid.
Or so it seems to me.
I offered an example using a common size of figure.
Anything else is of your own creation. :-I
-
Another problem is that scales that are supposed to be the same (or at least close) vary wildly. Case in point: Hot Wheels G-Machines is a line of really, really nice die-cast muscle/classic cars. They look more or less perfect alongside 28mm minis like Copplestone Future Wars, or the slightly larger Hasslefree minis (even beside Dionne). They might look a little wide to a purist, but in terms of height they're great, and the length looks good too.
With that in mind, I picked up some Siku 1:55 vehicles (only a couple, thankfully), and while they are very nice die-cast cars, they look tiny with a based Copplestone Future Wars mini beside them. With the minis off the bases, would the cars look right? Maybe, but I'm not sure that they would, to be honest. For this reason, I tend to stick to 1:50 for die-casts, and 1:48 for plastic kits. A little overscaled, perhaps (but only a little), and for something like tanks and planes, I have no problem with that.
It's a tough one to call, no doubt about it.
I second that
Let me show you two examples of 1:50 models with minis next to them: Valmet harvester (http://basteltisch.blogspot.com/2011/02/wer-hat-dich-du-schoner-wald.html) and cars (http://basteltisch.blogspot.com/2008/03/auf-die-gre-kommt-es-eben-doch.html)
1:50 works especially well with the heroic 28mms which would be about 35mm high if they were not in dynamic poses.
-
Just use what works for you, either the scientific way or to the gut/gut feeling. At the end of the day, the fun's in the playing not always the scaling of the vehicles!
;)
-
Anything else is of your own creation. :-I
1/48 is 0.5mm off a 28mm figure on a 5mm base (33.5mm v 33mm)
1610/28 = 57.5 scale, so that is your "true scale" for 28mm figures.
All i meant was that the correct scale of a 28mm figure was 1/57.5 using the given parameters, which are what are usually hoiked out for show as "the industry standard"... as indicated in the post.
Hope you can forgive me for getting the wrong impression? ;)
But it's true: no matter what, I let myself get waaaaaayyyy too pedantic there for a bit. Dunno why. Sorry about that, shan't happen again. :-X
-
Hope you can forgive me for getting the wrong impression? ;)
But it's true: no matter what, I let myself get waaaaaayyyy too pedantic there for a bit. Dunno why. Sorry about that, shan't happen again. :-X
You can't be too pedantic about scale. Because we all know: Scale Wars are religous debate (I think there was a funny LL Strip about scale debates somewhile ago)
-
Hope you can forgive me for getting the wrong impression? ;)
Not really, you're just being an arse as far as I can see.
All i meant was that the correct scale of a 28mm figure was 1/57.5 using the given parameters, which are what are usually hoiked out for show as "the industry standard"... as indicated in the post.
that quote is perfectly correct... you chose to ignore the important bits I have underlined, as a very odd attempt at, well, I'm really not sure: I dont know what point you are trying to make to be honest. I think you are trying to say that I am wrong, although i dont know what I am supposed to be wrong about....
If you think the method for calculating scale is wrong then please just post what you think is the correct method...if it is something else can you just say so plainly, without the arse-hattery?