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 am about to start up a space marine army and my original plan was to make it in truescale with termie legs and what not. However, now I've been having to think about it because I thought of how weird it would be if I were to playing against normal sized space marines. I have accepted the fact that these will stand out a lot with true line of sight and I don't mind. I will also be placing them on their correct bases so tacticals will get normal sized bases and not termie sized bases.

I'm basically asking who is in favour of truescaling and why? or who is against truescaling and why?

Thanks for any opinions.

Lucas

Problems with truescale...

a. space marines were originally meant to be around 7 foot 5, they only became taller when black library publications and other things gradually made them that way over the years.

b. miniatures at 40k scale are completely out of scale anyway. If you blew them up their hands and heads would lok ridiculous. Making a marine taller does not make it "true" scale.

Basically if the most creative thing you can think of to make your army look better is to make your models taller, don't bother. if it's for other reasons fair enough. But truescale is overated, thasafact.

I'm not sure if there is a tutorial on how to mod SM's to Truescale on the boards here but I know I've seen some done very nicely. The technique definately involves lots of time cutting and re-assembling but done well, it looks very nice. Wish I could remeber where I saw them here.

You can do what you like, but I'd suggest against it.

It's a lot of conversion work, which makes it hard to grow or complete an army.

And the models tend to end up very expensive, due to the Termie legs.

I'm not even voting.

What's the point, when you're playing a game that is supposed to be 1:1 scale and has effective artillery ranges of 300 yards?

It's not 1:1 scale. Where did you ever hear that?

I wouldn't (and don't) bother to adjust the scaling of my marines, personally. I like the way space marines look as they are.

I assume that by true scale you mean a marine figure should stand about 40mm high -- 7 feet 6 * 1/56 scale, compared to a normal man about 28mm.

I've never thought about this and I don't think it matters. It looks like a lot of extra work and expense to make an army that will look different to everyone else's but not in a good way.

True-scale would be nice for 40K in 40 or Killteam games though. Why not try it out with a small squad and see how you get on.

If you make it look right, I'd say truescale marines look a lot better. I'm not a fan of oversized heads and hands.

Pariah Press wrote: It's not 1:1 scale. Where did you ever hear that?

I wouldn't (and don't) bother to adjust the scaling of my marines, personally. I like the way space marines look as they are.

"
1:1 was not the best way state this. Rogue Trader Page 6 "Each model represents a single man, alien, vehicle, building or whatever." and "ground scale of 1 tabletop inch = 2 metres of real distance".

So a Earthshaker fires 240 metres. That's silly.

Sometime back in 2nd edition, they retconned the ground scale to 1 tabletop inch= 8 meters of real distance, but the model scale is still 1 inch= 2 meters.

Zip Napalm wrote:

Pariah Press wrote: It's not 1:1 scale. Where did you ever hear that?

I wouldn't (and don't) bother to adjust the scaling of my marines, personally. I like the way space marines look as they are.

"
1:1 was not the best way state this. Rogue Trader Page 6 "Each model represents a single man, alien, vehicle, building or whatever." and "ground scale of 1 tabletop inch = 2 metres of real distance".

So a Earthshaker fires 240 metres. That's silly.

Why on earth are you quoting Rogue Trader on this?

Anyway, if you want to go truescale, have fun, but I've always looked it as something that takes a lot work in exchange for just about zero payoff.

I personally am planning to eventually do some 'true-scale' marines myself. Even if you grant that the description of the size has crept up due to Black Library fiction, the marines have always been supposed to be larger than regular humans. I love the look that some have been able to achieve, especially Migsula's Alpha Legion marine for his =I=munda stuff.

Is that a Hello Cthulhu in your avatar?

Omg, yes, yes it is!!!

chaplaingrabthar wrote:Sometime back in 2nd edition, they retconned the ground scale to 1 tabletop inch= 8 meters of real distance, but the model scale is still 1 inch= 2 meters.

I thought it was retconned again to say there was no consistent scale (for ranges and movement distances, anyways).

There isn't a consistent scale.

It's only a game, not a simulation, so I don't think it matters.

As in most TTGs, 40k models are considerably larger than what ground scale would suggest.

Kilkrazy wrote:Is that a Hello Cthulhu in your avatar?

Why yes. http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=167622

Truescale is fine for show pieces and other experiments, indeed I've had a go myself ( http://img4.imageshack.us/my.php?image=painting1lh6.jpg if you were interested) but it's time consuming, and expensive. Every attempt I've made at producing in bulk has ended badly, mainly because the effort required to produce large quantities of these things is huge. Little things become huge problems. Sure, you can use Land Raiders as truescale Rhinos, but what if you want an actual Land Raider? Or a Land Speeder?

My advice is to keep Truescale to the small scale. If it's an army you want, find another way to make it stand out. Even nice bases make a huge difference. Or giving every marine an unhelmeted head (or as I like to call it, putting the human back into superhuman).

I'd call going into battle with an unprotected head is more putting the stupid into superhuman myself, but yes, True-scale is a lot of effort on an army wide basis that doesn't seem worth the payof

Its all personal preference IMO.

GW figures are pretty off scale, as in their limbs
are usually too wide and too short with giant head,
hands etc etc.

They look silly ya, if it bothers you that much you can
make them truescale though, but its tones of work :x

Give them deserving paint job and the conversion will be worth the effort!

Eh, just do what your passionate about, if you think the end result is worth it who cares how much work it is? I always thought "true scale" SP infantry armies looked wicked when done right.

Just make sure you take pics and journal the WIP, you'll be happy you did and the community im sure would be happy to help with c&c.

I'd call going into battle with an unprotected head is more putting the stupid into superhuman myself,

Stupid yes, but it's not about that. There's a reason commander models almost universally have exposed heads. There's a reason the main characters in Gears of War have exposed heads, same with all sorts of media. It's cinematic effect. We as humans look to the face of humanoid figures first, and being met with a plain helmet removes most of the human element from it. In fact, Master Chief is about the only power-armoured character I can think of who doesn't rock out with his head out. And no, not that head.

Oh, I know it's done for effect, but it's still dumb if you view it dispassionately.

I don't like it. I can only recall one true scale model that I ever liked.

Zip Napalm wrote:

Pariah Press wrote: It's not 1:1 scale. Where did you ever hear that?

I wouldn't (and don't) bother to adjust the scaling of my marines, personally. I like the way space marines look as they are.

"
1:1 was not the best way state this. Rogue Trader Page 6 "Each model represents a single man, alien, vehicle, building or whatever." and "ground scale of 1 tabletop inch = 2 metres of real distance".

So a Earthshaker fires 240 metres. That's silly.

Also remember that in RT some of the weapons like defence lasers and macro cannons had ranges that were listed as infinite for the purposes of the game or had ranges longer than the table. They were added for completeness.

LunaHound wrote:GW figures are pretty off scale, as in their limbs are usually too wide and too short with giant head, hands etc etc.

This is intentional by GW, because GW originally cast this stuff in softer pewter than today.

If you've ever played with true 25mm Ral Partha figures, they're just far too bendy for mass battle play.

Hence, GW choosing to bulk everything up to make sturdier gaming models.