The only 15mm figures I have are one packet of the old Traveller figures back
from when GW did them. I understand and agree with the argument about how much
you can fit on the table but the only thing that attracts me to the scale are
the new toys from GZG and so far I have managed to
resist. To me it seems to be an in-between scale, stuck between 6mm (big
armies, tiny figures) and 28mm (big figures, armies too big) â I know this
is wrong but still I am stuck with it. I have heard the point made that they
are tricky to paint â too small to do detail easily but too big not to need
it but I cannot comment on that, I hate painting, passing it on to my brother
who loves it. Â 20mm would seem to be a far better scale than 15mm except
possibly for the painting argument. I do use it for WW II mainly, in fact only
because of the wide range of (mostly) reasonably priced plastic kits. Â I am
disgusted by the scale creep that has led to 25mm becoming 28mm and frankly I
would not be surprised to see them continuing to grow. This must be a horrible
situation for the smaller companies, do they stick with 25mm and become a
backwater or do they go large and make all their old figures obsolete? Â If I
start another scale it will likely be 6mm. 10mm seems to be just a more
expensive version of 6mm without he range available. 40mm figures are very
pretty but they do nothing for me that 28mm figures can not. Â So I have 28mm
figures for skirmishing and GW games â alas one of our group will play
nothing else. Though I must admit I do rather like their Necrons â they suit
my painting style (spray black, spray dark silver â badly, paint details,
done). Â What I would like to see some relatively realistic low tech SF
figures in 28mm. Off hand those from Copplestone would come closest to this
goal.
> Michael R. Blair wrote:
It's happening. You see a lot of vehicles and scenery advertised as
"suitable for 25/28 mm", and there's stuff out there now that calls
itself "28/30 mm". It'll be 30/32 next, and so on.
> This must be a horrible situation for the smaller companies: do they
Is there really _that_ much difference in size? Okay, 28mm is nominally
12% bigger than 25mm, but by the time you consider poses, helmets,
equipment and the like, do 28mm figs tower over 25mm all that much --
any more than, say, my 6-foot-7-inch son looms over my 6 feet? It
strikes me as slightly odd that these two scales are thought to be so
incompatible, especially in an SF setting when you can PSB your way out
of the size difference (low- or high-grav homeworld, genetic tinkering,
etc.).
If it was up to me, and the figures wsere available, I'd go for 1/72
scale (which is what? Between 20 and 25 mm?) as the standard, so as to be able
to use all the commercial kits and related stuff, and if I had
to incorporate some 1/75 figures, well why not? Gaming scales have
always seemed a bit odd to me anyway, not unlike railway model scales.
Let us never forget the joys of OO/HO scale -- and if train enthusiasts
can do so much with that, why do gamers have such problems with 25mm vs 28mm?
These are genuine questions, BTW. Being a vacc-head, I'm more used to
having to mix-and-match scales because starships don't come in
consistent scales. In some ranges, the scale isn't even consistent in a
single nation/faction's fleet (and I'm not talking about fighters being
out of scale with capital ships), much less between foes in the same universe;
and let's not even think about crossovers...!
Phil
> On Fri, October 17, 2008 11:31, Phillip Atcliffe wrote:
> It's happening. You see a lot of vehicles and scenery advertised as
> Is there really _that_ much difference in size?
It can be very noticeable. It's okay if you've got a mix of humans and aliens
(or aliens and aliens), where a size difference is acceptable. If you've got
what is meant to be a slender 28mm female next to a typical 25mm bloke, then
it looks wrong.
(yes, you could pretend she's an Amazonian barbarian or whatever, but if you
bought her to represent an RPG character who is a weedy technician, then that
misses the whole point of buying the figure in the first place).
> Samuel Penn wrote:
I always like to refer to Andy Cowell's page since it has a nice picture
showing the popular scales:
<http://www.cowell.org/~andy/min/scale.html>.
I don't think that Kra'vak would look good against GW figures (at least from
this example). Since they're aliens one could probably get away with it,
maybe.
So even outside human-vs-human comparisons, some aliens or monsters are
just supposed to be bigger. For example, I've run into scale problems when the
old D&D troll no longer looks imposing when facing a Reaper hero that is as
big or bigger.
> Samuel Penn wrote:
All these are not 'in scale' they just give a size indication. To the eyes,
top of the head, top of the hat etc...
At least with 15mm some manufacturers actually try to stay compatible
with "1/100" scale. And a bit of variation in the height of figures
isn't that big of a problem.
Unfortunately, 28mm superheorically scaled figures become bigger every year,
mostly because manufacturers want to stand out from and be incompatible with
the ones who went before. All under the guise of 'even more detail'.
Sigh:-)
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Phillip Atcliffe
> <atcliffe@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Is there really _that_ much difference in size?
The short answer to your question is yes...it does make a difference.
Your typical 28mm figure tends to be somewhat "heroically" proportioned
compared to your standard true 25mm figure. My GW IG figures look like muscle
bound brutes standing next to their anemic GZG 25mm brothers. Same story for
Foundry and Copplestone. I can live with that because they're toys and I like
to game. I do know some folks who will not mix 25mm and 28mm figs on the
table.
D.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lIf
you're looking for True 25mm moderate-tech figures, Denizen's Mid-Tech
marines are a good choice. Very "Aliens"/USCMC esque.
http://www.denizenminiatures.co.uk/
The Ventaurans are good high tech troops or Zhodani, just don't get the ones
with helmets off since they have Yoda-heads They're in what looks like
Zhodani battle dress or combat armour from Traveller.
Federation marines are in what looks a bit like space suits with a vaguely
original-Battlestar Galctica sort of helmet.
If you click on the gallery link (man they've got some rotten pic selection)
you can see the top right image is a mix of "not Doctor Who/Tom Baker"
and Ventaurans. Ignore their helmetless heads... the helmeted versions are
fine.
The nice part of these lines is that Adler (linked from the sci-fi page)
makes a 6mm line to match.
If anyone wants some half decent pictures of painted Ventaurans in a nice
camouflage pattern, let me know. I'll see what I can do.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lMik
e,
I hate to mix 25mm and 28mm, even older Future Wars which are somewhat less
than 28mm today and more than GZG 25mm.
With FT ships, this is okay. The ship model scale is *sooo* out of scale to
the ground scale, you can just tell yourself 'all I'm seeing is a tactical
table view anyway'. In that case, blips would be exaggerated in size and
perhaps not even in scale to one another.
OTOH, in 25mm skirmish, if you're playing WYSIWYG for cover and such, the
difference between a 28-30mm and a true 25mm is significant both
visually *and* in game impact (you can't hide behind the same cover!). More
generally, it is unaesthetic to have figures that are close to WYSIWYG with
the vehicles and then have some other outscale figure ruin the aesthetic. If
you spend a lot of time selecting, scratchbuilding, painting vehicles and
figures, then you want the aesthetic side to work too.
When your figures disproportionate, it just doesn't look good for games where
you image what you are seeing is the actual thing, not an abstract electronic
representation. That's why it doesn't work for me in 25mm
SG/FMAS
but doesn't bother me much in FT.
(As for proportion changes - take some of the wimpiest Old NAC 25mm figs
and
some of the newer 'heftier' New NAC 25mm figures - height might have
stayed the same, but bulk didn't... I forgive this one as some of the original
NAC are prone to leg breakage if they get subjected to an accidental standing
upon... the new ones not so much....)
When I asked Mike Broadbent to sculpt the original Gurkha figs for the
GZGverse, I made the point that nepalese were often smaller (height wise). You
can actually see that if you put the figures up next to most other GZG lines.
It is subtle, but I enjoyed that little detail.
TomB
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com> wrote:
> More
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
However, for some reason the difference isn't as big a deal on board
game/miniature hybrids, such as Memoir '44. In Memoir 44 an infantry
unit is made up of 4 figures of roughly 20mm scale while an armoured unit is
made up of 3 tanks of roughly 6mm scale. Yes, it's wonky, but it never really
bothers me. Perhaps it's because of the hexes. Not arguing your point, of
course, just pointing out an interesting feature of human psychology.
Just in case anyone thinks I'm refraining from answering the implicit
questions in this topic, I'm not! ;-)
I need to find the time to write a proper response to this, which I will
hopefully do at some point over this weekend....
Speaking from a business perspective, is the market for 25/28mm worth
playing in at all? I see a huge number of companies selling (mostly 28mm,
admittedly) and in that crowded market there might be buyers, but I'm not sure
the opportunity is there compared to 15mm. GZG is a boutique operation and as
far as I can tell wants to stay that way. So they can't get the economies of
scale that the bigger players like GW get (not even counting GW's aggressive
move into plastics). Since he has a ton of 25mm SKUs already, it isn't like
GZG is exiting the 25mm market, he's just applying his effort toward a scale
that doesn't have as much competition at the moment and where he doesn't have
as complete a product line. The question usually isn't "Is there a buyer?", or
even "are there enough buyers", it's "where are the most buyers, and at what
prices?"
I'm curious about how Jon's customer base breaks down among hard-core
GZG fans vs people who play casually, vs people who are company agnostic.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Allan Goodall <agoodall@hyperbear.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2008, at 3:44 AM, Ground Zero Games wrote:
> Just in case anyone thinks I'm refraining from answering the implicit
<presses play on the ominous music> Sad portents are a comin'
</presses play on the ominous music>
> At 5:25 PM -0500 10/17/08, Allan Goodall wrote:
I've always hated anything but 1:1 for miniature gaming purposes. If you're
going to go with scale, just go with chits or an ersatz marker that you can
increment the size of the unit with a dial or different base? Not unlike how
the Avalon hill games add a slash to the chit to indicate company strength vs
a battalion as normal.
Oh, and it is interesting that this came up. I finally pulled some stops
out and re-paintd my SunRoom in my house. I can finally do proper games
there again and I pulled all my figures and such out and indexed them on
shelves and even put my NAC 25mm infantry in a place of honor on the 3 shelves
with figures on them. I think I'm hating the idea of having to
re-paint a whole new set of NAC infantry, PA and Gurkhas. Luckily I only
have 2 25mm vehices from the Stargrunt range.
It's sad really though, I used to dream about having a dedicated gaming room
and now that I have had a house for 7 years, I still haven't really set one up
in it. The basement is too small to make a rapid conversion so it's one of the
rooms of the house.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com> wrote:
> I've always hated anything but 1:1 for miniature gaming purposes. If
Quick question, since I don't play in this scale: have you noticed any scale
creep at 1:1? I would think that this is an advantage at this scale, though
flocking and painting the terrain would take weeks without a helicopter.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn
Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Robert Mayberry
<robert.mayberry@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com>
wrote:
> > I've always hated anything but 1:1 for miniature gaming purposes. If
Not
> unlike how the Avalon hill games add a slash to the chit to indicate
Hell yah! I'm at least 8 inchs taller than my dad..... (ok 6ft 4in taller
now as he is a little box of ashes..... 8-) )
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com>
wrote:
> I've always hated anything but 1:1 for miniature gaming purposes.
I have noticed some scale creep - the human figures are certainly taller
now than they were when I was young.
I've found an excellent alternative to flocking in this scale by the way.
Apart from the usual quick-to-apply but expensive AstroTurf, you can get
a more compact item, called "seeds" from many stores. It takes almost no time
to apply, but may take over a year to completely cure, or "grow" as the maker
puts it.
Zoe
Are these "seeds" pre-painted? I wore out five drybrushes and am still
working on the first quarter-acre.
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 11:20 PM, Zoe Brain <aebrain@webone.com.au> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com>
wrote:
> I've always hated anything but 1:1 for miniature gaming purposes.