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 have a question. Why does it matter. On the tabletop, you can't tell the difference

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I have a question. Why does it matter. On the tabletop, you can't tell the difference

Because not everyone builds up a force just to look at it from three to four feet away and above perspective.

And actually yeah, you can tell the difference.

I have to be honest.. there are other things I would be much more likely go get a hook in my craw about, this rates pretty low down my scale of annoyances in terms of my time in the hobby (although I realise such a thing is subjective).

The scaling issue with those minis posted above is an issue. But, we know from experience that CB tries to listen to fan feedback. If enough people shout about it, then hopefully there should be more consistency with some of the future releases, and instead this will be seen as transitory period. In the meantime I think we still have, for the most part, what for a lot of people is probably the most vibrant and accomplished miniature ranges coming out of the industry at the moment.

It bothers me with my Ariadna forces. The new size difference is quite noticeable. I have recently purchased a bunch of Ariadna miniatures, and the latest Tankhunter and Scout Sniper miniatures have been a full head taller than most of the other miniatures, as well as a hell of a lot bulkier.

I wish CB would give some kind of explanation or consult with the community before doing stuff like this. It's very off-putting as well as frustrating, especially as I like the scale that it was set at previously. Who has convinced them that this much larger scale is a better way forward, and why did they not discuss this with the community or seek feedback for this change? If they're seeking to change the scale over the entire line by degrees, and eventually end up at 32mm for the entire line via resculpts, what's the point in collecting any of the miniatures now?

I like the 28mm scale, especially when it keeps itself close to true-scale, and my only gripe is with some of the weapon sizes (which they are thankfully shrinking down). I don't believe they need to be so radical for future releases, and should really pare it back and consult the community before going forward with any large changes. I don't want 1/4 of my force to be vastly out of scale with the rest of my army, especially with the new USAriadna miniatures and Kazak Sectorials due out soon.

 Fenriswulf wrote:
It bothers me with my Ariadna forces. The new size difference is quite noticeable. I have recently purchased a bunch of Ariadna miniatures, and the latest Tankhunter and Scout Sniper miniatures have been a full head taller than most of the other miniatures, as well as a hell of a lot bulkier.

I wish CB would give some kind of explanation or consult with the community before doing stuff like this. It's very off-putting as well as frustrating, especially as I like the scale that it was set at previously. Who has convinced them that this much larger scale is a better way forward, and why did they not discuss this with the community or seek feedback for this change? If they're seeking to change the scale over the entire line by degrees, and eventually end up at 32mm for the entire line via resculpts, what's the point in collecting any of the miniatures now?

I like the 28mm scale, especially when it keeps itself close to true-scale, and my only gripe is with some of the weapon sizes (which they are thankfully shrinking down). I don't believe they need to be so radical for future releases, and should really pare it back and consult the community before going forward with any large changes. I don't want 1/4 of my force to be vastly out of scale with the rest of my army, especially with the new USAriadna miniatures and Kazak Sectorials due out soon.

They did give a explanation. The community gave feed back the models were to small with all the detail the community also wanted more open models, consulting the community is not always a good idea.

What members of the community posted that?

 Kanluwen wrote:
And yet that Wildcat is in line with the vast majority of Paradiso/Human Sphere releases

I wasn't in any way dishonest or selective about which models I used for the various comparisons I've done, and while I certainly don't claim to own every model ever released for Infinity, my collection has models from every sectorial and covers a time range back to the original 1st edition starter packs; While it is theoretically possible that my collection does somehow represent a cross-section of the range that is coincidentally above the average height, I need more proof in support of that possibility than merely your insistence that this particular Wildcat is a fine example of the breed.

Line the Wildcat up with any model from HS/CP and he fits in better than your conversions would.

Please, go nuts. Give me comparison photos of as many of these "any models from HS/CP" as you can manage.

CORREGIDOR WAS IN THE MIDST OF BEING REDESIGNED FROM THE GROUND-UP TO BE A FLAGSHIP RANGE

I know the search function on the Infinity forums is rubbish, but could you actually provide a credible source for this "flagship" thing? I wasn't aware that CB were intentionally giving any of the ranges that kind of preferential treatment. (Although it sometimes feels like ALEPH gets the biggest cut of the effort anyway, what with all of those characters that need designing).

Oh, and stop pretending that height is the only factor. Compare the bulk of any of those models and come back to this thread.

You seem unclear on what my position is here. I admitted that there are other factors...

 MarcoSkoll wrote:
Yes, there has been some shift in the styling of the models

... and on that front, I have issues. For an easy example, I now have a collection of Alguaciles in unmatched uniforms and, even as a competent sculptor, that's going to be a bit of work to fix.

Anyway, by this point, my commitment to this discussion is not about whether or not even the height of the models is an issue, it's that you're using one picture of two models with a mere asssertion that they are "in line with the vast majority". I approached this issue using photos of all of the Nomad half of Icestorm alongside a great many models from the wider range, so whether or not people thought I was drawing the right conclusion from those photographs, they actually left the discussion well informed.

CB pays attention to certain representatives of the community (organisers of larger groups from Spain/US/Australia).

For me the real irony is that AW changed all there scenery to match the old true scale minis. So now it is all going to look very odd against the gw scale mutants that all the humans have become.

I would guess that all there new buildings that were ks are going to have issues with the doors being shoulder high on the new scale models.

Overall I think CB seem to be going out of there way to throw away the things that made infinity different. From the inane open chest policy that has lead to the now famous rage fist epidemic, to the uninspired posing and reliance on the copy paste function of digital sculpting that gave us the morat triplets, the decision to start using digital sculpting without actually having any experienced digital sculptors which has lead to the less detail policy and finally the decision to increase the scale to match gw.

SeanDrake wrote:
I would guess that all there new buildings that were ks are going to have issues with the doors being shoulder high on the new scale models.

If those doors have issues with anything other than the new HI, they weren't tall enough in the first place.


Models 1, 4, 7 and 9 in this line up are from Icestorm.
Model 2, the old Ghulam Doc, is the third tallest in this line up, but is one of the very earliest Infinity models, with product code 33.
Model 3, an Ahl Fassed (originally Azra'il, but there's no Panzerfaust profile for them any more) converted from a Domaru... well, I'll concede that the YJ female HI are stupidly frail and couldn't possibly fit into their armour (I bulked her up quite a bit), but stood straight, she would at match the Alguacil next to her for height.
Model 5, a Starter Pack Ghulam. Dates from around N2 change-over, I think. Matches height of Alguacil.
Model 6, a Sekban converted from Anyat, from the Dire Foes boxes. I've removed her combat heels, so she's shorter than she used to be, yet still the second tallest model here.
Model 8, Janissary, from the same Starter as the Ghulam. More or less the same height as the Healer next to him - despite the Icestorm exclusives having been made deliberately taller for dramatic effect.
Model 10, a Lasiq converted from a Corax, one of the very first Paradiso releases. Shorter than the Healer, but like Anyat, I've also removed her heels.
Model 11, one of the Wildcats from the CJC starter. Shortest model in this line up.

You can argue until the cows come home about the bulk of these models, but other than perhaps the Mobile Brigada, if they won't fit through the doors, then those doors were never tall enough.

Noir wrote:

 Fenriswulf wrote:
It bothers me with my Ariadna forces. The new size difference is quite noticeable. I have recently purchased a bunch of Ariadna miniatures, and the latest Tankhunter and Scout Sniper miniatures have been a full head taller than most of the other miniatures, as well as a hell of a lot bulkier.

I wish CB would give some kind of explanation or consult with the community before doing stuff like this. It's very off-putting as well as frustrating, especially as I like the scale that it was set at previously. Who has convinced them that this much larger scale is a better way forward, and why did they not discuss this with the community or seek feedback for this change? If they're seeking to change the scale over the entire line by degrees, and eventually end up at 32mm for the entire line via resculpts, what's the point in collecting any of the miniatures now?

I like the 28mm scale, especially when it keeps itself close to true-scale, and my only gripe is with some of the weapon sizes (which they are thankfully shrinking down). I don't believe they need to be so radical for future releases, and should really pare it back and consult the community before going forward with any large changes. I don't want 1/4 of my force to be vastly out of scale with the rest of my army, especially with the new USAriadna miniatures and Kazak Sectorials due out soon.

They did give a explanation. The community gave feed back the models were to small with all the detail the community also wanted more open models, consulting the community is not always a good idea.

I hope this is not true, or so I'm very sad ...

I believe CB just wanted to improve the quantity of produced mini and have to go to 3D print and 3D print change everything

SeanDrake wrote:
For me the real irony is that AW changed all there scenery to match the old true scale minis. So now it is all going to look very odd against the gw scale mutants that all the humans have become.

I think we should cut the hyperbole and keep this discussion on track.

GW have a specific ham fisted Mr Potato Head proportioning that CB is in no way going near. CB's might be getting a bit bigger and bulkier, but they're still keeping the proportions to scale.

 Fenriswulf wrote:
It bothers me with my Ariadna forces. The new size difference is quite noticeable. I have recently purchased a bunch of Ariadna miniatures, and the latest Tankhunter and Scout Sniper miniatures have been a full head taller than most of the other miniatures, as well as a hell of a lot bulkier.

Pics?

 Sangarn wrote:

Noir wrote:

 Fenriswulf wrote:
It bothers me with my Ariadna forces. The new size difference is quite noticeable. I have recently purchased a bunch of Ariadna miniatures, and the latest Tankhunter and Scout Sniper miniatures have been a full head taller than most of the other miniatures, as well as a hell of a lot bulkier.

I wish CB would give some kind of explanation or consult with the community before doing stuff like this. It's very off-putting as well as frustrating, especially as I like the scale that it was set at previously. Who has convinced them that this much larger scale is a better way forward, and why did they not discuss this with the community or seek feedback for this change? If they're seeking to change the scale over the entire line by degrees, and eventually end up at 32mm for the entire line via resculpts, what's the point in collecting any of the miniatures now?

I like the 28mm scale, especially when it keeps itself close to true-scale, and my only gripe is with some of the weapon sizes (which they are thankfully shrinking down). I don't believe they need to be so radical for future releases, and should really pare it back and consult the community before going forward with any large changes. I don't want 1/4 of my force to be vastly out of scale with the rest of my army, especially with the new USAriadna miniatures and Kazak Sectorials due out soon.

They did give a explanation. The community gave feed back the models were to small with all the detail the community also wanted more open models, consulting the community is not always a good idea.

I hope this is not true, or so I'm very sad ...

I believe CB just wanted to improve the quantity of produced mini and have to go to 3D print and 3D print change everything

Then be sad. As for the digital, they being using it for over a year before they went full on digital it not like it happened over night or we didn't know it was coming.

Yeah, they're not as bad as GW, but looking at the new scale of my Tankhunter and Scout Sniper, I am a bit disappointed.

As for community consultation, I heard nothing about it, and I follow Dakka quite a bit as well as their own website. I would have cautioned against it myself. I hope it doesn't permanently go this way, I don't like the idea of a force that is too differently skewed and all over the place with sizes. If that becomes the case, I might need to go elsewhere for miniatures to represent them, which stay within the scale of the majority of the existing miniatures to fill my forces. I already have some Statuesque Miniatures, and have sourced others to fill the niche miniature sets, I don't want to have to do it for the other ones here on out.

As for pictures, I will see about taking some photo's and putting up a comparison. As both the Tank Hunter and Scout Sniper are standing pretty much fully erect, I will be endeavouring to find suitable existing miniatures with a similar pose.

 Fenriswulf wrote:
As for pictures, I will see about taking some photo's and putting up a comparison. As both the Tank Hunter and Scout Sniper are standing pretty much fully erect, I will be endeavoring to find suitable existing miniatures with a similar pose.

You don't necessarily need a different pose but I was curious if the pose led to it being a full head taller. I've seen different sizes with like versions but not that big of a difference. Having something not standing is fine, most people are pretty good at extrapolating the size based on the stance and measurements that exist... at least when comparing sizes at least.

I like big models, and I cannot lie.

I think the issue is the way they release models. having releases for each faction each month spreads any changes in scale throughout the range instead of having an entire faction released at once and all of the models are sculpted and manufactured in the same manner. I'd rather have it the way CB is doing it and just wait for all of the tiny models to get redone.

It's not like most other ranges haven't gone through the same creep in the last 10 years.

God even does it!

People keep comparing only the heights which is only a secondary factor in the scale creep and this debate goes no where because of it.

THE REAL PROBLEM IS THE BULK. And 'll repeat it to make the point.

BULK BULK BULK BULK BULK.

The new bulkier scale is hulkesque and shouldnt be used for low armour types ever. And if you think its not over the top, you can literally take a nomad and chop off the head and legs and proxy the chest as a space marines with ease. Theyre that big and round and drumlike.

I'm equally happy with each of the three "kinds" of style - 1st edition "heroic", 2nd edition "realistic" or the new "heroic" style, but the mix of the three is what bugs me.

As for sizes, my bugbear is the Hac Tao and the Shang Ji Invincible next to the new Terracotta Warrior.

In the case of the Hac Tao, the female model could fit inside the armour of the new one, while still in her own armour. That's not natural size difference or gender dimorphism; they're not the same species.

The Shang Ji comes up to the Terracotta Warrior's chest, despite having higher ARM and PHY; Admittedly the Shang Ji always was a bit too small, but it's getting silly IMO.

The weapons is a different issue. Yes, guns come in different sizes, but this is more like the British Army making a version of the SA-80 that's 70% the size of the normal one but otherwise visually identical, and issuing that version randomly to some soldiers. Redesigning the HMG helps in that regard. Hopefully the RPG will help too, by giving some background on the different guns - even just giving them a name and manufacturer will be fine.

It's not yet got to the point where I'll stop buying minis, but it's affecting my force composition; I won't be including the new Hac Tao HMG and the missile launcher models in the same army, for example.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
In the case of the Hac Tao, the female model could fit inside the armour of the new one, while still in her own armour.

Given her armour would have been skin-tight on an anorexic, that's not that much of a claim.

The Shang Ji comes up to the Terracotta Warrior's chest, despite having higher ARM and PHY; Admittedly the Shang Ji always was a bit too small, but it's getting silly IMO.

Both of these models are Yannick Hennebo's work... and on that front, working from France rather than Spain probably wasn't the most conducive thing to making sure traditionally sculpted models were the right size in the first place.

That said, I do agree that the new HI do look like their pilots must be starting at about two metres tall. The armour should be bulky, but the effect on height will be relatively small (only the thickness of the soles and helmet should affect the overall height, and they can only be so thick and keep sane proportions for the armour) - I'm carefully cutting down my own Brigada to make it look like the pilot is of a more normal height and proportion.

Child Soldiers! It's the only thing that makes sense, the newer models are adults. But the corr sectorial starter and following models were an example of there famous pragmatism, which was shown by the use of child soldiers.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I really don't see a problem. People from different walks of life tend to be smaller or bigger. Its all genetics

I don't think you quite understand the issue then.

This has nothing to do with genetics in this case. It's also not one would expect from dimorphism. It's the difference between neanderthal and homo sapiens.

A Neanderthal averaged about the same height and build as a modern human. Though their facial bones are a bit more robust.

Doesn't bother me one bit. I think the models keep getting better and better. 3D is the way to go.

Poll feels a little biased, since all 4 options are pretty negative against Scale Shift

I not only prefer the larger models but dislike how sensitive the older models were.

Resurrecting this - the new Jannisarys show a pretty big scale shift.

1st edition, 2nd edition, 3rd edition blister, 3rd edition box.



To be fair, I had a game with a link of these tonight, and the only model that looked out of place was the 2nd edition model which is noticeably smaller. On the table you don't see it much.

i could be mistaken but wasnt the size increase to bring models closer to their actual silhouette size? as many of the early models were smaller than their silhouette.

blaktoof wrote:
i could be mistaken but wasnt the size increase to bring models closer to their actual silhouette size? as many of the early models were smaller than their silhouette.

Silhouettes were done after the scale shift happened, for all intents and purposes.

The official explanation is that they wanted to make it easier to paint. Same with the poses, more simplistic and open so you have easier access to the surface with your brush. I find some of the Infinity character got lost with this decision.

Silhouettes are supposed to solve the dynamic factor. If a miniature is kneeling or simply displaying a pose that is smaller (might also be because it's part of the older generation) than the silhouette indicates. Drawing LoF was problematic at times.

 Knight wrote:
The official explanation is that they wanted to make it easier to paint. Same with the poses, more simplistic and open so you have easier access to the surface with your brush. I find some of the Infinity character got lost with this decision.

If this was the intention with the poses I'm not sure they'e nailed it yet, at least not with the O:I models. About 7 of the models have poses with guns close to their chest which make it difficult to paint pre-assembled, and two of them have guns angled down which covers most of the torso.

Damn. I can forgive size differences from originals and AP Rifle, but having it different from the HMG which JUST came out is kind is idiotic.

I'll still get the box, though....let's not get crazy here...