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.
Ishagu wrote: If scale is one of your top priorities you picked the wrong wargame. Scale has never been accurate at any point in any edition.
Depends on what models you're looking at. 2nd ed Abaddon next to 2nd ed Terminators looks great.
Yes, and in the same edition we had tiny, clown car Rhinos that apparently fit 10 Astartes.
Concessions are made for certain larger models, and vehicle scale is often built around presentation and playability. Additionally, the original Rhino was released in the RTB01 era, so it was scaled for smaller passengers.
As a proud stick in the mud and owner of both two RTB01 era rhinos, half a box of still surviving original RTB01 Space Marines, and about a gallon of Realm of Chaos era Chaos Space Marines, the RTB01 era rhino was either a clown car or a sardine can.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that if I took ten models, stripped them off their bases, and broke their backpacks off, I could fit all of the pieces in the RTB01 era rhino. Which would be great, if it wasn't for the fact that the rhino's supposed to have an interior and drivers. :-/
And the whole "representational" claim sort of goes out the window when they put interiors in the vehicle models. (I painted the interiors of my first two 90's era rhinos, and made sure the hatches opened. I stopped short of trying to figure out how to get the side doors to open.). Mid-90's era Space Marines were cramped in the mid-90's era vehicles.
The current size marines make the 90's era vehicles look silly.
Edit for relevance: Abadon is out of scale in the same manner that the rhinos are. :-/
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/20 19:49:42
Well my take on it was always that at least on the older kit, the Rhinos had running boards and those bars on the top, so even if you figured only 4 guys could fit in the tank, another 6 could hang on the outside to get where they gotta go. I think theres even a couple beakies built for it.
I also think the tank scales are pretty deceptive. If you look at a model and determine that one inch is roughly 6 ft, most 40k tanks are absolutely massive compared to their real world counterparts. The modern Rhino kit comes to ~10 feet tall and 28 feet long. An Abrams tank is 8 feet tall and 26 feet long. Like, that little marine APC is bigger than a real MBT. If the model was designed less for aesthetics and more for function, I think it'd be trivial to pack 10 Space Marines into that volume, with hardware.
The real problem is that GW keeps making these space marines even more obsurdly large and yet the things that are suppose to be huge like an Ork Warboss looks way too small. Ghaz is tiny for what's suppose to be "da biggest and da strongest" Ork in the universe.
"Hold my shoota, I'm goin in"
Armies (7th edition points)
7000+ Points Death Skullz
4000 Points
+ + 3000 Points "The Fiery Heart of the Emperor"
3500 Points "Void Kraken" Space Marines
3000 Points "Bard's Booze Cruise"
I'm not to unhappy with his size but I dislike size creep in general. Models in general are getting bigger and bigger and it's not really practical to increase table size to compensate for that. Most gaming stores near me can already fit at most three tables due to rather high rent costs. I myself have an entire room dedicated to 40k and I can't fit a bigger table either.
A: They're obviously the stock GW images, and thus on their respective stock bases. The author of the image presumably measured their ratios to do the composite, as accuracy was what they were after.
B: I'm not mad. I'm shocked you couldn't see the obvious. There are clear cutout lines in the image and you're talking about one model being "behind" the other.
B2: Given the above, I'm less shocked that you cant tell these are GW stock images of the models, straight off their website, and thus are making claims about "unknown quantities".
C: If you don't accept the image, post your own as I've invited multiple times. Aka, Put up or shut up.
A) They are, which is why I used a stock GW photo of a Warlord Titan when I made my own composite.
B) The grey lines blended into the white background for me.
B2) Stock photos are not scientifically accurate, that's not the point - I'm shocked you didn't figure this out when I pointed out The Terminator may have been at one zoom level for the unit photo, and Abaddon may have been at another to sell the details.
C) I did post my own. Look at how much bigger Abaddon is than the Stock image of an Adeptus Titanicus Warlord Titan. Do you suppose zoom and distance to lense makes a difference now? The stock photos are zoomed to take up a given space on the webpage and provide a given sculpt detail, not to accurately convey model size.
Much better. Now if you really want to bake your noodle - why is the top of a tactical helmet lower than the top of a Terminator helmet. The armor itself is taller coming over the shoulder/head like it does, but the guy's head should be the same height, because its the relatively the same guy.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/21 04:36:04
A: They're obviously the stock GW images, and thus on their respective stock bases. The author of the image presumably measured their ratios to do the composite, as accuracy was what they were after.
B: I'm not mad. I'm shocked you couldn't see the obvious. There are clear cutout lines in the image and you're talking about one model being "behind" the other.
B2: Given the above, I'm less shocked that you cant tell these are GW stock images of the models, straight off their website, and thus are making claims about "unknown quantities".
C: If you don't accept the image, post your own as I've invited multiple times. Aka, Put up or shut up.
A) They are, which is why I used a stock GW photo of a Warlord Titan when I made my own composite.
B) The grey lines blended into the white background for me.
B2) Stock photos are not scientifically accurate, that's not the point - I'm shocked you didn't figure this out when I pointed out The Terminator may have been at one zoom level for the unit photo, and Abaddon may have been at another to sell the details.
C) I did post my own. Look at how much bigger Abaddon is than the Stock image of an Adeptus Titanicus Warlord Titan. Do you suppose zoom and distance to lense makes a difference now? The stock photos are zoomed to take up a given space on the webpage and provide a given sculpt detail, not to accurately convey model size.
That's true, you posted an irrelevant image while making irrelevant claims. You could have spent your time making an image that compared the base sizes to check if they were accurately in scale with one another, instead you spent your time posting something that superfluously illustrated that it could be inaccurate. And you still seem to be going down that path, for some unknown reason.
That's true, you posted an irrelevant image while making irrelevant claims. You could have spent your time making an image that compared the base sizes to check if they were accurately in scale with one another, instead you spent your time posting something that superfluously illustrated that it could be inaccurate. And you still seem to be going down that path, for some unknown reason.
You're kidding, I reposted your irrelevant image with another irrelevant image? And you still don't know the reason even after I've explained it to you several times and your response was... "I'm sure the guy who made it did all that" instead of "I never thought of that, maybe patching two different images together isn't the most scientific thing to do, does anyone have the models to put them into one photo at the same time?"? Which someone then did so we now have a relevant accurate photo while you still complain someone pointed out your Frankenstein didn't really establish anything?
Daba wrote: The real photo with them standing next to each other in real life makes him look even bigger in comparison than the composite from GW product shots.
Quick and dirty MS Paint Cut/Copy Paste - sticking the Termie foot a little below Abby's front/left foot because he's standing on something. Surprisingly the Havoc Helmet is close to the Terminator Helmet than I thought.
his stepping foot is clearly bent though as if he's about to step up. The rear foot is a much better comparison which isn't (in effect) measuring a squatting Abaddon against a standing terminator.
Daba wrote: his stepping foot is clearly bent though as if he's about to step up. The rear foot is a much better comparison which isn't (in effect) measuring a squatting Abaddon against a standing terminator.
That's why I put the Termie foot below Abby's higher foot. I can't see the back foot well enough to use that as a marker. I lose it in the loin cloth and basing. I'm old.
It's kinda pointless comparing scale with terminators, which are so anatomically wonky.
Plus the fluff has well established that Abaddon is a giant among astartes. Just imagine he's the pro astartes basketball player standing next to average astartes . The size difference among normal people accounts for this in reality just fine, so I don't know why people get so upset about it with their models.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/21 19:49:40
2019/07/22 07:01:38
Subject: Re:Is abaddon's newest model scale correct?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/22 07:02:04
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
That's true, you posted an irrelevant image while making irrelevant claims. You could have spent your time making an image that compared the base sizes to check if they were accurately in scale with one another, instead you spent your time posting something that superfluously illustrated that it could be inaccurate. And you still seem to be going down that path, for some unknown reason.
You're kidding, I reposted your irrelevant image with another irrelevant image? And you still don't know the reason even after I've explained it to you several times and your response was... "I'm sure the guy who made it did all that" instead of "I never thought of that, maybe patching two different images together isn't the most scientific thing to do, does anyone have the models to put them into one photo at the same time?"? Which someone then did so we now have a relevant accurate photo while you still complain someone pointed out your Frankenstein didn't really establish anything?
Crimson wrote: A bit more, yes. The terminator is more hunched though.
If you want to go that route, Abaddons legs are splayed. Both models could "stand" taller.
The Terminator is also behind Abaddon. They're not on the same 3D Plane/centerline. The top of the Termie Head is likely to be even with the top of Abaddon's gorget if he's pulled to the same Depth.
The image is a composite using base size to guage scale, neither model is in front of the other. It was just the image I could find. Feel free to post your own.
So, let the record state:
I gave you the frame of reference used to scale the models in the image, the base size. - You could have checked against that frame of reference, but instead you post a lecture and a scaled down Warlord Titan.
I've asked for further reference multiple times in the thread. - But you now say I never invited further reference
Given the fact you couldn't tell the original was a composite in the first place, and your weird assumption that the stock GW images wouldn't have the models on their respective stock GW bases to be used for size comparison. . . you're at least 0 for 4 by now.
I would suggest that instead of ignoring what is written, assuming incompetence and going on some tirade, you do a little deductive reasoning and research first.
That's true, you posted an irrelevant image while making irrelevant claims. You could have spent your time making an image that compared the base sizes to check if they were accurately in scale with one another, instead you spent your time posting something that superfluously illustrated that it could be inaccurate. And you still seem to be going down that path, for some unknown reason.
You're kidding, I reposted your irrelevant image with another irrelevant image? And you still don't know the reason even after I've explained it to you several times and your response was... "I'm sure the guy who made it did all that" instead of "I never thought of that, maybe patching two different images together isn't the most scientific thing to do, does anyone have the models to put them into one photo at the same time?"? Which someone then did so we now have a relevant accurate photo while you still complain someone pointed out your Frankenstein didn't really establish anything?
Crimson wrote: A bit more, yes. The terminator is more hunched though.
If you want to go that route, Abaddons legs are splayed. Both models could "stand" taller.
The Terminator is also behind Abaddon. They're not on the same 3D Plane/centerline. The top of the Termie Head is likely to be even with the top of Abaddon's gorget if he's pulled to the same Depth.
The image is a composite using base size to guage scale, neither model is in front of the other. It was just the image I could find. Feel free to post your own.
So, let the record state:
I gave you the frame of reference used to scale the models in the image, the base size. - You could have checked against that frame of reference, but instead you post a lecture and a scaled down Warlord Titan.
I've asked for further reference multiple times in the thread. - But you now say I never invited further reference
Given the fact you couldn't tell the original was a composite in the first place, and your weird assumption that the stock GW images wouldn't have the models on their respective stock GW bases to be used for size comparison. . . you're at least 0 for 4 by now.
I would suggest that instead of ignoring what is written, assuming incompetence and going on some tirade, you do a little deductive reasoning and research first.
You took two different pictures with potentially two different Distance-To-Lens scales, tried to compare them, and you're mad someone pointed out that's not how photographic comparison works? Do you know which base the Chaos Terminator is on? Did you measure the size of the base in the photo to figure out what % the Terminator has been shrunk/enlarged? Then do the same thing with Abaddon who may have more Zoom to show off more detail, in addition to having a shorter distance-to-lens?
Put this another way- you're not comparing known quantity/quality. That Terminator is probably on a 40mm base. Probably. But it could be zoomed out so the base is only 30mm on the screen because it was part of a unit photo. Or that's where the zoom on the camera was from the last photo. Meanwhile, the Abaddon base is probably officially a 60mm base. But it could be zoomed in for selling the detail on the sculpt so it's 90 mm across. This would result in an image of a Terminator 75% of it's actual height being compared to Abaddon 150% of his actual height. Playing with zoom is an easy way to throw this off, playing with distance to lens and camera angle is how Peter Jackson make Elijah Wood look like a hobbit.
You're welcome to let the record state whatever you want to make up.
I didn't ASSUME any base size. I did ALLOW it was PROBABLY on the standard base. I also pointed out that between zoom and distance to lens, the images may not be at a 1:1 scale.
You "invited" me to post my own images, yet couldn't be bothered to post YOUR own images, you grabbed someone else's images. I do thank you for "inviting" me to perform labor you were unwilling to do yourself for pointing out the flaws in your methodology.
I would suggest instead of getting your knickers in a twist because someone would question your own competence - with deductive reasoning, research on MS Paint, and the laws of physics (focal length, magnification, zoom) - you not go on a tirade yourself and instead evaluate if someone who questions your supporting "evidence" may have a valid point about comparing two different images with two unlinked, unrelated, unknown levels of zoom not being a particulary accurate or effective method of establishing relative size.
You're welcome to let the record state whatever you want to make up.
The record is the record and I'll stand by it. Thanks.
I wouldn't if I were you...
and your weird assumption that the stock GW images wouldn't have the models on their respective stock GW bases to be used for size comparison
Put this another way- you're not comparing known quantity/quality. That Terminator is probably on a 40mm base. Probably. But it could be zoomed out so the base is only 30mm on the screen because it was part of a unit photo. Or that's where the zoom on the camera was from the last photo. Meanwhile, the Abaddon base is probably officially a 60mm base
But you do a lot of things I wouldn't. Like try and use completely unrelated (to each other) images as some sort of scientific evidence they weren't designed for in the first place then spend days whining and sniping when someone points out basic accuracy issues with doing so. Even after someone else has been kind of to actually provide their own photo of all the models together in ONE image with ONE Focal Length long after your tantrum over being educated about photographic principles you probably had no reason to know should have ended with you learning a little about the world and moving on.
7000+ Points Death Skullz
4000 Points
+ 
+ 3000 Points "The Fiery Heart of the Emperor"
3000 Points "Bard's Booze Cruise" 
. The size difference among normal people accounts for this in reality just fine, so I don't know why people get so upset about it with their models.
