Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I've been wondering about this for some while now. I'm really not very good at gaging whether 40k vehicles are scaled decently or not. Of course this can hardly be generalized and it greatly depends on the specific kit. For example I think rhinos are way too small, while a land raider at least seems to be able to carry a few people.

How do you feel about the scale of 40k vehicles in general and what specific kits are the right size or too small in your opinion. Just as a disclaimer: I am aware that it would not be feasible to scale every 40k vehicle 100% accurately due to not being practical in actual gameplay, but in some cases it really breaks my immersion. For example, as much as I love harlequins, I can not understand how 5 guys would fit into or on a starweaver unless they get crammed in there like in a literal clown car....which wouldn't be too far off actually, but still

I am mostly happy with the asthetics of it on the table etc - far more so than Bolt Action.

I think overall they've improved a lot over the years (perhaps slightly sacrificing how well they work as game pieces).

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I think overall they've improved a lot over the years (perhaps slightly sacrificing how well they work as game pieces).

This. The improvements in plastic casting and the practicalities of making bigger plastic models has meant GW can boost the scale on models without only relying on massive chunks of resin from Forgeworld*. I think that most gamers accept that fully realistic scale is impractical; heck most of the buildings we play with as terrain are also woefully undersized. It's the nature of the game and I only tend to see "real scale" being rolled out in either pure skirmish games where you might only have 3 or 5 models per side in infantry only; or in games like Dropzone Commander where the scale is much smaller and thus you can be more practical with sizing because your tanks are now tiny and thus can be scaled to match other things and still be practical to game with.

Tabletop games - heck even PC RTS games have always been like this. It's about representation and playing with a theme rather than pure realistic recreation.


IT seeps into other areas too, I recall one of the Spartan Games developers talking about how they'd designed a super realistic WW2 game years back. Everything was present and simulated with dice rolls and charts and tables. Even down to the angle of shots, the area they hit and all kinds of things. Problem was it wasn't fun. It was so heavy with technical aspects that it took forever to play out. In contrast many games use a "to hit to wound" type roll system which, whilst very rough and ready, is very practical for the game.

Practicality should trump design and other features for the tabletop. Imagination is where we can recreate the battle in our minds eye with "true scale"





* I would add "at a premium price" but the price gap between FW and GW has been closing for years now

I feel like rhinos and LR should be twice as big. A chimera maybe 1,5 times.

Things like Landraiders would be three times as large if they were scaled properly, obviously that wouldn't really work on the table top.

But then scale has always been slapdash so it's nothing new.

 p5freak wrote:
I feel like rhinos and LR should be twice as big. A chimera maybe 1,5 times.

Rhinos and LR could serve as benchmarks.
Too small for my liking.

hobojebus wrote:
Things like Landraiders would be three times as large if they were scaled properly, obviously that wouldn't really work on the table top.

But then scale has always been slapdash so it's nothing new.

Like I said I'm not good at gaging these things, but three times as large for a landraider seems extreme. He'd be as tall as a building.

The core issue here is that humans have what they call "heroic scale". What this basically means is they are very broad with large heads. Take a picture of a cadian and line it up to a real world soldier so they're the same height. The cadian is about twice as wide across the shoulders with a much bigger head.

It varies somewhat for different models, with Primaris marines having probably the most realistic proportions so far. But they're still a fair way off.

There's nothing inherently wrong about having stylised proportions like this of course. It's just an aesthetic, some people like it some don't. But what it does mean is that its pretty much impossible to realistically proportion vehicles. Chimeras are already very big if you scale them based on height of a Cadian, but they struggle to fit many soldiers based on width.

 Stux wrote:
The core issue here is that humans have what they call "heroic scale". What this basically means is they are very broad with large heads. Take a picture of a cadian and line it up to a real world soldier so they're the same height. The cadian is about twice as wide across the shoulders with a much bigger head.

It varies somewhat for different models, with Primaris marines having probably the most realistic proportions so far. But they're still a fair way off.

There's nothing inherently wrong about having stylised proportions like this of course. It's just an aesthetic, some people like it some don't. But what it does mean is that its pretty much impossible to realistically proportion vehicles. Chimeras are already very big if you scale them based on height of a Cadian, but they struggle to fit many soldiers based on width.

What you say is of course correct, but hasn't GW also improved the scale of normal human miniatures in the last couple of years?
I mean the traitor guardsman from Blackstone fortress look really good regarding their scale. To me at least they don't look like their heads are oversized compared to old cadians.

Yeah, definitely gotten better over time. It's still an exaggerated scale, but its sort of splitting the difference between old scale and reality. It's a lot less noticeable on newer models generally though.

I'd say for the most part the scaling is "decent" as you say, considering the way that the heroic scaling on the infantry and the guns warp the perspective as compared to a true scale. The cannon on a Leman Russ is battleship sized and there is no way it could fire a conventional shell. Every IG private is NFL size.

Another part of it is that the WWII stuff that you might compare them to are really smaller than you might expect, with the crew really being jammed in there. The 1/35 WWII vehicles look pretty good next to 40k infantry on the tabletop even though the 1/35 crewmen are gigantic in comparison. They don't look as right when next to more modern 1/35 models as they are larger now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVZb8h-BB1k

Imagine an NFL offensive line crewing one of those little scout cars.

For the small flyer transports, those do seem to be in a good scale. The US deploys special forces from tiny helicopters and they just ride on the sides not actually being in the vehicle. I imagine other countries do the same.

The mk2 Rhino and Land Raider were the right size for the original plastic marine models. I think they even had a cut-away model where they showed how the marines could fit in the Rhino (3 per bench, 3 in the middle, sergeant seated up front/in turret). Problem is, the figure scale creep has made all the marine vehicles - including the new ones - too small.

Same thing happened with guard when the Cadian sculpts were released - Chimeras became too small for the figure models.

So do you think GW should adapt old vehicle kits to the new infantry at some point? I know this would be highly unlikely, but just speaking hypothetically.

Drukhari Raiders are to scale, which is really fun and one of the reasons why I appreciate (read: love) that kit so much (it’s also just a fantastic design and model)
I believe the Venom (their smaller transport) is too, but I haven’t tried modelling a full squad on one of those (yet?!)

It always bugs me when vehicles are not to scale. I think if a vehicle would be 'too big' if properly scaled then the solution is to stick to smaller ones. That said, we have baneblades and imperial knights rolling around the table. Having a rhino sized to actually carry 10 marines shouldn't be a problem.

They're scaled perfectly if you assume they need no engine or driver or fuel or electronics to shoot and move around.

40k vehicles are too small for their transport function and for how large their guns are/how many guns they have. They're in essence vehicle-shaped tokens as opposed to any sort of "accurate" representation.

Let's say this is a Rhino with some space marine:



and this is an actual infantry fighting vehicle able to carry up to 9 men (a crew of 3 plus a squad of 6):



Drawn your own conclusion…

Conclusion - Rhinos need hooks on the outside to hang your marine armour on so that you can all fit inside the Rhino!

Or you can tow them:

It's apparent that few people here have actually been around military vehicles. They simply aren't that large. The deck of an M1 Abrams is only a foot higher than a Toyota Corolla.

A BMP-3 can hold 12 people and it's much smaller than a Rhino.
You can argue with certainty that 7' super soldiers would need a bigger ride, but the land raider is 14' high according to GW.

The game's vehicles are around 1/43th scale, not 1/56th or 1/48th or other values I've seen people post, at least according to the earliest sculptors from 2nd & 3rd edition.

Are you sure?
This is a BMP-3 and it seems to me it is by far large than the Rhino, in comparison to the troops that both of vehicles should carry.



P.S. I was in a Regiment of the Italian Army and ours vehicle was the B1 Centauro (see the image below), so I can say I haven't been around military vehicle because I was inside one of them.

I used a 1/35 tank for my Imperial Guard (subtlety pimping my gallery).
It looks like a reasonable size next to miniatures, and is approximately the same height and width as the Leman Russ it's counting as (although is about 50% longer).
But 1/35 is huge compared to the nominal scale of 1/56 that 40k uses.

Tiberias wrote:
I've been wondering about this for some while now. I'm really not very good at gaging whether 40k vehicles are scaled decently or not. Of course this can hardly be generalized and it greatly depends on the specific kit. For example I think rhinos are way too small, while a land raider at least seems to be able to carry a few people.

How do you feel about the scale of 40k vehicles in general and what specific kits are the right size or too small in your opinion. Just as a disclaimer: I am aware that it would not be feasible to scale every 40k vehicle 100% accurately due to not being practical in actual gameplay, but in some cases it really breaks my immersion. For example, as much as I love harlequins, I can not understand how 5 guys would fit into or on a starweaver unless they get crammed in there like in a literal clown car....which wouldn't be too far off actually, but still

It varies.

The Rhino and it's family is approximately in-scale with a Space Marine relative to the M113 family, and relatively reasonably dimensioned. It's a little wide, but otherwise about as much bigger than an M113 as a Space Marine is bigger than a human [and this works scaling off of both 1/56 and a Space Marine IIRC]
The Leman Russ on the other hand, is strangely square, unreasonably tall, and it's interior layout just plain doesn't work on the model as modeled. The tank commander's legs intersect with the breech, there's nowhere for the gunner, or ammunition, etc.

ursvamp wrote:
Drukhari Raiders are to scale, which is really fun and one of the reasons why I appreciate (read: love) that kit so much (it’s also just a fantastic design and model)
I believe the Venom (their smaller transport) is too, but I haven’t tried modelling a full squad on one of those (yet?!)

While I feel that Venoms are quite close to scale, I find that Raiders look really small, particularly when you add the gunner and helmsman. I think this has more to do with me imagining them to be big war galley type vessels, rather than the skiffs with spikes which I think they are meant to be.

The trouble is more with table size, move distances, weapon ranges, etc...

GSC cult ridge runner is quite good.

SM vehicles are very under proporsonet. I consider them more representations then model reenactment.

 Niiai wrote:
GSC cult ridge runner is quite good.

SM vehicles are very under proporsonet. I consider them more representations then model reenactment.

This is pretty much how I view "scale" in 40k.

Tiberias wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
Things like Landraiders would be three times as large if they were scaled properly, obviously that wouldn't really work on the table top.

But then scale has always been slapdash so it's nothing new.

Like I said I'm not good at gaging these things, but three times as large for a landraider seems extreme. He'd be as tall as a building.

The Land Raider is already as tall as a building. If we're assuming Trueborn are 7 ft tall, a Land Raider is like 16 feet high, which is f****** enourmous.

Like, this is what I get if I measure a Rhino out: