Inches or centimetres

[SteveBurt]

I tend to work with cm, though as mentioned most rules give both or can be easily converted as said elsewhere. I do a lot of smaller-scale gaming and often scale table sizes down so either convert inches to cm, or come up with some sort of appropriate ratio based on whatever the standard measurement of the game is. I had a sheet stuck in the back of one book for a bit when I had a medium-sized table that had cm distances and ranges worked out as around 2/3 of the standard movement inches as that was just about right for the table size. Think it worked out nicely into bands of 5cm which are easy to remember and work with. I only really use feet and inches for people's heights colloquially.

Ah but 2 letters again four for writing...

Inches just need one symbol. 6” or 15 cm

[Blackwolf]

Cubits.

Always been partial to the gird myself 

[Mammoth miniatures]

As has already been said, people generally prefer to discuss a 6x4 table than a 180x120 or 6 inches rather than 15 centimetres.

That again seems like more of a personal preference, not an actual benefit. A system with smaller standard increments seems far more sensible.

[Legionnaire]

I grew up with the metric system, but think the vast majority of games I've played are using inches. I'm comfortable with that.

[Jemima Fawr]

That again seems like more of a personal preference, not an actual benefit. A system with smaller standard increments seems far more sensible.

Have you been speaking to my wife?  She always maintains that six inches is far less than I think it is.

[has.been]

I do recall a 15mm Sci-Fi game, where it only came to light
after we had been playing for an hour, that one side was
using inches for all its firing ranges,
 'Cuz dats wot it sayz in da rools'
while the other had been using CMs,
'Cuz weez playing 15mm figs!'

[Patrice]

The question is interesting, I know many French players who use measuring sticks in inches in their games although in their everyday life they certainly wouldn't think in inches for everything else.

12 is a really nice number to sub divide and multiply so ranges based upon 12" are nice and easy to manipulate and remember

Yes, I discovered that years ago in medieval re-enactments. If you want to be more historical, you can use old French monarchy inches (pouces) which were 2.7 cm long...   

I use cm in my rules, but for practicality all movements are multiples of 4 cm (easy to divide by 2 in very difficult terrain) and all shooting ranges are multiples of 10 cm (easy to remember). Conversion to inches would not be too difficult if asked for.

[Just a few orcs]

I grew up with both inches and cm in real life. I tend to use tape measures with both on them. Consequently its not unusual for me to use both when measuring say to cut a pice of wood, choosing whatever is the most convenient for the length I want. ie a piece of wood 32cm x 6 1/2 inches.

As far as wargames go I use whatever the rules say, But I prefer them in inches for the larger scales as its easy to drop  down to cm when using smaller scales without re-making the QR sheet wrong.

The one I hate is BW base widths.

[Antonio J Carrasco]

Depends on the ruleset I am using. If it is in inches, I use inches; if in cm, cm.

[Wellington]

In my opinion metric in superior in every aspect, but switching between the system is not that difficulty.

[Patrice]

...Another difference which becomes obvious when reading this thread (I knew it already, but here we can see it) is a space, or not, before cm or mm... 

For exemple, French people write: "28 mm" (figures), or "60 cm" (gaming table), etc. instead of 28mm, 60cm, without space as usual in English.

OOoops, slightly off subject I fear. 

[RSDean]

In practice, measurements in cm feel more precise than actual tabletop play warrants, much of the time.  I’ve been playing a fair number of games recently with created measuring sticks (Song of Blades and Heroes) or measuring sticks in “base widths” (DBA and Dux Bellorum in particular). Both of those have underlying metric bases, but the unit of measure has been expanded to something even bigger than the inch, presumably because the cm level of granularity was too fussy.

[fred]

I think a lot of the Base Width games are more aiming to give flexibility around which figures are used, so it doesn’t matter if you have 30mm, 40mm or 50mm bases, as long as you have correct measuring sticks its all straight forward for measurement (once you have made the measuring stick).

[Vanvlak]

Wait, so does no-one else use parsecs then?   

[Cat]

I generally prefer inches; the larger unit is better suited better suited for tabeltop meashurement than the cm.  When reaching out into the middle of a table to measure distance, it's also easier to see and get a reading of the inch markings on the tape measure than the cm markings.

And the base-width measurements of DBA and custom measuring sticks are even easier to read while also being more slender for sliding into tighter spots.  And yes, base-width measuring is superb for adjusting to any size base.  As a bonus feature, the measuring sticks work perfectly for wheeling sticks — one is place along the front edge of the formation, measure how far the outer corner moves, then neatly align the troops along the stick at the end of their move — very quick and tidy process.

On the side tangent of 15mm vs. 15 mm, I hadn't thought about that variation in custom before.  Although now that you mention it, it is a noticeable occurance on the DBN Fr De Bellis Napoleonicis group on Facebook.  Much of the discussion is in French, but a fair amount of English, Russian, and other languages too (and the FB translation works well enough, if not perfect, universal translator).  And yes, the different style application is there.  My guess is that the English language usage of no space in 25mm or 150cm is a carry over from inch and feet notation of 1" or 5', etc.