Home Forums General General Terrain & Building Scale Question

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #97516
    irishserb
    Participant

    Do you use terrain and buildings made in the same scale as the figures on your table, or use stuff that is scaled/sized differently from the terrain and scenery?

    I pretty much always go with everything being in the same scale, playing mostly with 1 to 1 representation, and incorporating what-you-see-is-what-get with respect to siting and whatnot.  Jjust curious about member’s gaming styles/methods.

    #97517
    Mike
    Keymaster

    The same but not.

    I like my buildings to look big enough when next to my based figures.
    So back when doing 6mm, given the figures could be 7mm tall and then stuck on 2mm thick bases, I wanted them to look like they fitted into doorways, so my doorways were 9mm or so high and the rest of the building in proportion with the door.
    Clearly not to scale for a normal door/dwelling, but for me it looked better.

    Same with my 15mm now.
    Scale wise they are a bit big maybe, but they look/feel right.

    But overall and in answer, yes 6mm figures with 6mm terrain, 15mm figures with 15mm terrain and so on.

    #97518
    Mike
    Keymaster

    This meant that I could not use the excellent Brigade Models buildings as they were quite accurate 1/300th scale so did not fit with my visual needs.
    Which was a pity.

    #97519
    Phil Dutré
    Participant

    It really depends. In big battles, we usually go 1 scale down. E.g. when playing 25mm Napoleonics with large battalions, houses are in 15mm. When playing in 15mm, we might use 6mm buildings. This works because the terrain is more like a map instead of a proper-scale diorama. And there’s the whole issue of foot-print (horizontal ground scale vs vertical figure scale).

    But in skirmish games, where 1 fig = 1 man, and figures are supposed to enter houses, a scale closer to the figure scale is used.

    In any case, most buildings marketed as “25mm” are not really the same as 25mm figure scale. There is a discrepancy between building/vehicle scales, and figure scales, although they are nominally the same. The problem is not with the buildings or vehicles, but the figures, which never are the proper scale they are supposed to be.

    In the end, just use what looks visually attractive.

    BTW, no-one ever questions trees. The scale discrepancy between figures and trees is even larger…

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Phil Dutré.
    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Phil Dutré.
    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Phil Dutré.
    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Phil Dutré.
    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Phil Dutré.
    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Phil Dutré.

    Tiny Tin Men Blog: http://snv-ttm.blogspot.com/
    Wargaming Mechanics Blog: http://wargaming-mechanics.blogspot.com/

    #97527
    Rhoderic
    Participant

    I pretty much always go with everything being in the same scale, playing mostly with 1 to 1 representation, and incorporating what-you-see-is-what-get with respect to siting and whatnot.

    Same here. I need a sense of WYSIWYG and scale consistency on my table. However, as I don’t have the preconditions for gaming on large tables, I’m prepared to tolerate the resulting loss of realism in other respects (such as weapon ranges) as acceptable sacrifices. (Hey, we all have idiosyncrasies, just different ones.)

    I do also need the figures and scenery to genuinely match up well, and not only be the same nominal scale. Not to state the obvious, but commercially available buildings (especially cast resin ones) are often smaller than what their nominal scale would dictate they’re supposed to be, while figures are often larger. That won’t do. I’d sooner go through the extra trouble to scratchbuild, convert or otherwise acquire visually compatible buildings, than to use nominal-15mm-but-really-13mm buildings with nominal-15mm-but-really-17mm figures.

    That said I could maybe come around to accept abstraction of scales and ratios for some prospective mini-projects that would have no contact surface with the rest of my hobby endeavours. I’ve been eyeing the Travel Battle game from Perry Miniatures (which uses 8mm figures with I-don’t-know-what-scale buildings, and ratios for figures and ground scale that seem entirely open to interpretation) and if I put myself in the right mindset I can see a certain quaint charm in the old-timey extreme abstraction of that game. It is, perhaps, more of a boardgame, though.

     

    This meant that I could not use the excellent Brigade Models buildings as they were quite accurate 1/300th scale so did not fit with my visual needs. Which was a pity.

    Not sure if you’re doing 6mm sci-fi at all anymore, but I’ll see if I can do a size comparison of Brigade’s 10mm buildings with 6mm figures (it’ll entail having to dig through unsorted boxes of figures and resin terrain). I haven’t thought of comparing those before, but when I ordered one of Brigade’s sci-fi buildings in both 10mm scale and 15mm scale (to see if either of them would suit 12mm Heavy Gear Blitz), I thought the 10mm one looked absolutely tiny next to the 15mm one. So maybe, just maybe, it’s a bit undersized for 10mm and could suit “large 6mm” well enough. At worst, some remodelling of the doors should make them compatible if one assumes the houses to be quite spacious.

    Of course, the Brigade 10mm range isn’t very extensive and might not have the buildings you’re interested in. For instance it doesn’t include the Research Base pieces that are available in both 6mm and 15mm.

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Rhoderic.
    #97530
    Darkest Star Games
    Participant

    I tend to purchase buildings and the like in the size/scale of the figures (except for Heavy Gear, which I use 15mm buildings as I don’t feel the need to buy 12mm buildings).  However, when I scratch build something it is to the nearest known scale.  So, 15mm figures get 1/100 scale buildings and vehicles, etc., 6mm gets 1/300, 35mm gets 1/48, etc.

     

    Oh, space games are the other exception to scale, obviously…

    "I saw this in a cartoon once, but I'm pretty sure I can do it..."

    #97534
    irishserb
    Participant

    Thanks for the replies thus far.

    I’m glad Phil mentioned trees.  I tend to think of them as being part “terrain” or “scenery”, but know that many do not.

    In my case, I game in four different scales, or at least relate to scales with respect to my scratch-building, and my trees tend to smaller larger scale, and range to taller smaller scale.

    For 28mm, I loosely use 1/56, which makes my taller trees about 56 feet tall, toward the shorter side for mature trees.  With 20mm, 15mm, and 6mm, the trees scale larger topping out at roughly 70, 70, and 85 feet, which at least gets them into mid-range for mature trees.  Though a lot of the trees could be used in multiple scales, I tend to package them for use with specific scales and theatres/locations.

    The tallest tree models that I use are about 12 inches tall, but even in the largest scale most range 4-8 inches in height.

    #97539
    Rhoderic
    Participant

    Good point about trees. Thinking about it now, I suppose I find that trees can still “look right” even when somewhat out-of-scale, in a way that buildings and other man-made things with unambiguous points of reference can’t.

    I’ve also seen other plants like corn stalks, banana plants and bamboo modelled in a scale-iffy way, although that’s often a case of the plants being too big rather than too small. I’m ambivalent to this practice, so I’m not saying I’d never do it myself.

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Rhoderic.
    #97544
    Norm S
    Participant

    For 10 / 12mm I use 10mm buildings.

    For 1/72 WWII I use HO/00

    For 28mm I use the same HO/00 buildings, with a few small footprint 28mm buildings thrown in

    Animals, I like to keep to scale.

    Trees – whatever looks right

    Hills, probably too low, but functional

    Rivers, slightly wider with the big scale, but still quite slim (4″) due to smaller table

    Roads, narrow and wide to match scale and buildings

    Ambition …….. to move to one scale so that my terrain storage is easier.

    #97580
    greg954
    Participant

    Not sure if you’re doing 6mm sci-fi at all anymore, but I’ll see if I can do a size comparison

    I like to use a mix of manufacturers, especially for 6mm SF. I agree with Mike for the most part. BM do a lovely range of scenery and one of my favourites. But when mixing with other manufacturers, size and scale plays a part from visual aspect for me.

    Both these are BM’s SF buildings, 10mm on the left and 6mm on the right. Now the 6mm building next to the RDF model is doable, looks okay despite the chunkyness of the figure and the fact his head will be close to the ceiling. This isn’t the case all the time, in fact some BM’s buildings are no good for 6mm and would work better in 3mm IMO. The 10mm building works for 10mm as intended, but the height of the door is tight once the figures are based. Works good for 6mm.

     

    #97581
    OB
    Participant

    I pretty much try to keep things in scale which is 15mm for me.  I made an Indian city using foam board which looks nice but is a monster to store so I’m sympathetic to the one scale down approach.

    Indian Mutiny

    indian mutiny

    The whole thing fills two hampers which is inconvenient on the other hand I think the scale is right.

     

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by OB.
    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by OB.

    OB
    http://withob.blogspot.co.uk/

    #97590
    Rhoderic
    Participant

    Thanks greg954, I hadn’t started digging yet.

    OB’s Indian city has me absolutely enamoured.

    One more thing I ought to point out about my approach to scale in regard to scenery, lest I represent myself in a way that conflicts with things I’ve said recently in other posts, is that I’m only a stickler when a piece of scenery has points of reference that don’t leave leeway for interpretation. If something can be reasonably well interpreted to suit multiple scales (just as different-sized objects), I tend to consider it a worthwhile purchase or scratchbuilding/conversion project, considering how many scales I’m invested in.

    BTW, I’m also a fan of modelling large things that “stick in from off-table”, implying there’s more of it beyond the boundaries of the space being modelled. It’s an advantageous way of representing big scenery in scale while keeping the scenery pieces themselves practical in size.

    #97591
    Mike
    Keymaster

    oooh yeah that city is nice.

    #97594
    OB
    Participant

    Cheers lads, the problem is I keep wanting to add to it.

     

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by OB.

    OB
    http://withob.blogspot.co.uk/

    #97596
    Mike
    Keymaster

    Be like Major Alan “Dutch” Schaefer.

     

    #97602

    . BTW, I’m also a fan of modelling large things that “stick in from off-table”, implying there’s more of it beyond the boundaries of the space being modelled. It’s an advantageous way of representing big scenery in scale while keeping the scenery pieces themselves practical in size.

    Yes, this is what we try to do.

    In the photos, a Vauban fort appears in part:

    [/url]

    [/url]

    [/url]

    [/url]

     

    donald

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Deleted User.
Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.