Tru Scale Marines

[DarkAngelDelight]

I've always been on the fence with true scaling marines. To be perfectly honest though the negatives of it are only from a modelling standpoint - because i'm sort of lazy and worried about chopping my hard earned money up in case i get it wrong. Kudos to those who do try it and pull it off. I guess who dares wins lol

 

A3. So do many conversions, so does reposing, so does moving the turret from one end of a Chimera to another. If you're going to adopt this attitude, you might as well follow it to its logical conclusion and make using anything other than the standard GW model on a standard plastic base illegal, because anything else is going to alter the game from what it "should" be. I put "should" in quotes because A - using the word implies you are proceeding from a position of authority, which you're not, you're stating an opinion, and B - TLoS automatically balances variations in height or bulk for models to a certain degree, because a taller model doesn't just get better views of the enemy, they become an easier target themselves.

 

This is a very good point though, especially the last part. If someone wants to true scale and risk losing a cover save then it's all fine. In my eyes though, a space marine is too cool (arrogant ;) ) to feel the need to hide in cover from incoming fire. That's what would make me want to try out true scaling for gaming - to really get into the narrative of the game and to see how a space marine's presence would look like on the battlefield.

 

In another light though, i've never seen a true scale army used for gaming anywhere, so it must be a modelling thing. I can't say i'll never try it ever, because chaos true scale marines look amazing.

 

First off, it's not butchering your models. And telling people that's what they are doing is not going to do you any favors. And there are many reasons. I do it because I want my Marines to look more like the art. An 8 foot tall Marine should tower over a standard human. It looks cooler, and for me that enough. Yes, in games my Marines will be easier to hit and see. But again, to me, I am more than willing to take a few more shots and have kick-ass Marines. And if I was so worried about line of sight and whatnot, I would use the old RTB-01 marines.

 

http://i568.photobucket.com/albums/ss124/Dust_king/spacemarinereference-1.jpg

 

http://www.masteroftheforge.com/images/oct...orcomplarge.jpg

 

Of course these images are not mine, but I hope they get my point across. If that marine with the Plasma gun is the same size as a Guardsman, then that Blood Angel on the left is just perfect to me. I want my marines to be the massive, 7-8 foot tall biological weapons of mass destruction that they are in the lore and art.

 

-Tarvik

 

That picture makes me lol. I think this is the thing that puts me off making true scale marines. I like the 'Hero' scale ( as i believe it's called) the best example of why i love this scale is from a diorama of a space marine getting armour fitted to him. This unfortunately, i can't find ( this irritates me greatly )..... basically if i was to imagine a space marine in true scale, he'd be the nba players size and width, considering space marine armour used to be plates of ceramite and plasteel ( i think) and a load of fibrous cabling. which would make the fat one look weird (or more ridiculous than he already does).

 

But, people see the game differently to each other so everyone is going to have their own views on the matter. And as you can see, my mind gets confused when thinking about the ifs and buts of true scaling. The best thing to do is to just not worry about it lol. Some people i've seen that use all the standard GW sized stuff cheat by moving things too far etc etc. And cheating at the game is much worse than true scaling your mini's up.

 

EDIT: to add also, most space marine models are pulling the power stance, so if i were to stand them up properly they'd be taller which i tend to prefer.... at the moment....

 

Thats my confusing and slightly contradictory 50 pence. :yes:

[Veteran Sergeant]

My 31mm tall scales are awesome.

 

That makes every argument to the contrary invalid.

[Anvilarium]

It's a game and we should all be having fun playing it. Dice are there to be rolled, tape measures are there to facilitate the rolling of dice, and the most important thing is to create a freakin' awesome spectacle. At least, IMHO. Become more than a little dismayed recently that people in my gaming group seem to view 40K as a valid outlet for pent up frustration and petty oneupmanship. I'm lucky in that I have other outlets for that, so maybe I'm being unfair, but I'll never understand how some people think that this hobby should be anything other than a good laugh for all involved. Just have fun, doesn't matter who wins or loses as long as it'd make a good story.

 

This is the best thing I think I've ever read on this forum. Its a shame more gamers don't think like you!

[Ioldanach]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v387/Avicenna/8ft_marine.jpg

 

It's a direct copy of this picture when Jes designed the Inquisitor scale space marine he didn't work from a 28mm up he drew the full size marine that you can see in the picture and then scaled it down to 54mm scale

Astute viewers will note that the first marking is 2' rather than 1', with the feet starting at 1' rather than 0'. So subtract 1' from the top and you have a more accurate result. :tu:

[Darklighter]

Hahaha, Thank you Brule the spear-slayer I totally missed that!

[Gargantuan]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v387/Avicenna/8ft_marine.jpg

 

It's a direct copy of this picture when Jes designed the Inquisitor scale space marine he didn't work from a 28mm up he drew the full size marine that you can see in the picture and then scaled it down to 54mm scale

Astute viewers will note that the first marking is 2' rather than 1', with the feet starting at 1' rather than 0'. So subtract 1' from the top and you have a more accurate result. :tu:

 

And on page 36 in the Chaos Marines codex it says "the Space Marines stand seven feet tall". Where does this eight feet nonsense come from?

 

I don't like true scaling simply because it makes everything other than humans and tau look to small compared to the marine. A marine looks perfect scale wise if you compare him to an Ork. Eldar are supposed to be tall and tyranid warriors should look terrifying. True scaling ruins that. The problem isn't that Marines are too small, they are perfectly fine. It's the IG that's the problem.

[Darklighter]

It's good to have a definitive answer on the hight of a Marine as my initial search came up with nothing solid. I guess Chaos are good for something after all! Gargantuan I totally agree with you about "True scaling" and thank you for the enlightening us with correct hight for a Marine with a viable source to check.

[Cleal Baros]

It's clear the sources have their height between 7-8', with some marines being taller still (certain individuals and if memory serves me right a whole batch of alpha legion).

 

With most sources not stating whether the heights are with or without armour I think I'd largely assume that it's 7' without and 8' with which largely corresponds with what both sides are claiming and how they're represented in the fluff.

 

With regards to the points made I'd like to just offer a few thoughts.

 

'Truescale' - This is very difficult to quantify or legitimise with 'heroic scale' miniatures as we aren't really offered any precedent to gauge 'true scales' on. I would have ran with the idea that guardsman (as a representative of the bog standard human) should be seen the standard measure until I took into account a point offered earlier in the discussion that Orks, Tyranids and a myriad of other models should also be larger than they are thereby bringing us to the conclusion that it is guardsmen that are 'too small'. Never the less I think the point stands that 'true scale' now simply means a marine made larger to appear more accurate when stood next to a mortal human model and should be taken as much. Yes guard should be smaller, but I don't play guard and I don't expect my opponents to go through the massive ordeal of self sculpting all of his guys, I therefore choose to make my marines larger with a fairly simple and time affective method.

 

Balance - I for one have very little time for this aspect of the discussion, a taller marine can see more, opponents can see more taller marines... With some (and in particular my chosen method) we are talking a couple of mm and anyone who has an such a great issue should probably stick to games with standardised no assembled pieces and a lack of 'random' elements such as dice. My truescale marines are no taller than individuals who attached their completed figueres to bases after applying sand or cork and i find the idea that 2mm may offer any kind of significant advantage rather laughable and petty.

 

In relation the the 'height' of humans, I'd just like to point out (as this is my field of research and study) that humans are not getting taller through evolution, at least not at any kind of noticeable rate. It's a 'myth' or common misconception that's fuelled by the idea that 'people were shorter in the past', they quite often were but that was as a result of diet and environment and has nothing to do with genetics. We simply haven't had time since the earliest of our fossil records to demonstrate any noticeable evolutionary direction and it is very unlikely we will have had even if we last to the year 40k. When reading the 40k fluff and looking at peoples arguments stating that harsh conditions and difficult environments could have or would most likely make humans taller in the future I'd like to offer reality as a counter argument. The VAST majority of human populations living in hard, harsh and dangerous condition and environments on Earth are much smaller than those of us in the first world who live lives of comparative ease. Diet makes humans tall, the Imperium is not known for it's comfortable atmosphere and the an over abundance of material wealth shared amongst it's citizen and this causes me to believe that in all likelihood it's citizens generally be of 'average' height and certainly not demonstrating and significant variation from Humans today.

 

In relation to the over all issue...Rule of cool wins...as does personal effort, originality and giant bad ass super humans. It really makes no difference to the game and the examples given are spurious, ill conceived and unrealistically specific. They scream of power gamer whining in relation to a game that is is unbalanced at its, uses random number generation to determine outcomes and uses models that are not designed alongside the rules and so are not designed with a 'competitive' dynamic in mind.

 

Yours exasperated,

Cleal.

[Darklighter]

With regards to game balance it's not just about the hight of a Marine it's about the base size they are put on and the added impact of making vehicles much much larger than intended that have a huge knock on effect with the game system.

 

Human hight being diet over evolution is still up for debate and I'd agree that most of the scientific community support the diet theory. But it's much more plausible idea that in 38 thousand years people could get taller than taking Train scales badly converted as the yard stick to measure 40k against.

 

"True scale" being cooler than out of the box Marines is just a matter of opinion, but not game practical what ever you feel about them!

 

I also don't think calling people who know the rules and can see the impact of these changes WAAC whiners as a helpful way to put your point across. From my point of view it's about maintaining an element of fairness, not picking on an army for being different.

[Cleal Baros]

It simply isn't still a topic of debate in the scientific community, diet IS responsible and evolution most certainly is not.

 

Most 'true scale' marines remain on standard bases and the majority do not alter the size of vehicles. My point stands that the differences it makes to game play are minute an that 40k is not designed for competitor play to begin with. It's not balance, it's designe around random elements and te models are designed separate from the rules. If you want a competitive game play chess. 40k is meant to be a narrative based tabletop game, this is the view of GW and the current game designers and I for one am quite sick of how every 40k board seems to be dominated by rule lawyer power gamers who frame everything in tournament rhetoric and 'competitive' tacticas.

 

It's a game for fun, used to recreate battles and form new narrative in the 40k universe, larger marines better represent how Marines are presented in the fluff and so do a better job of reflecting the grand narratives on which the game is based. A marine shoul be able to look over a standard height wall, a marine should stand much taller than an average human and a marine should be able to be seen and targeted more easily than a guardsman.

 

The key issue is your argument that they somehow give a truescale player an advantage, aesthetics is personal and so not a worthy topic of debate, claiming individuals gain game advantage is as it has implications or those of us ho resent and disagree with the accusation. The game is nowhere near so finely balanced that the mm differences (which give advantages to BOTH sides) will ever actually alter the outcome of games.

 

The whole anti-true scale debate (order than this e of aesthetics which as I've said are personal ad therefore valid and unavoidable) is virtual none sense. Complaining of mm differences in a fundamentally unbalanced game is ridiculous, we might as well be implementing rules of the positioning of models on the bases, the exact posing of the rich multi-pose kits and the banning of all conversions as they all can make mm differences which you appear dead against.

[J!MM!L!C!OUS]

OK, please don't take this post the wrong way, I know how aggressive multi quoted posts look n all, but here's my counter argument.

 

With most sources not stating whether the heights are with or without armour I think I'd largely assume that it's 7' without and 8' with which largely corresponds with what both sides are claiming and how they're represented in the fluff.

 

Is that not a mightily convenient assumption? We could just as easily assume the opposite, which to me makes more sense, since if the author were intending to be so specific as to mean 7' outside of armour, then surely he would say so?

 

Balance - I for one have very little time for this aspect of the discussion

 

Yet it's the key really isn't it? The rules of the game are the rules of the game, and no matter how slight you break the rules, the rules are still broken. Think of it like this - how would you feel if in a game of chess your opponent moved his pawns diagonally instead of laterally (right word? What the opposite of diagonal??) it's a relatively minor change in the scheme of things, but potentially game breaking. In the same way, bigger bases -> taller infantry -> Bigger tanks (gotta stay in scale!) all change the dynamics of LoS, template and blast weapons, base contact, and blocking movement.

 

In relation the the 'height' of humans, I'd just like to point out (as this is my field of research and study) that humans are not getting taller through evolution, at least not at any kind of noticeable rate. It's a 'myth' or common misconception that's fuelled by the idea that 'people were shorter in the past', they quite often were but that was as a result of diet and environment and has nothing to do with genetics. We simply haven't had time since the earliest of our fossil records to demonstrate any noticeable evolutionary direction and it is very unlikely we will have had even if we last to the year 40k. When reading the 40k fluff and looking at peoples arguments stating that harsh conditions and difficult environments could have or would most likely make humans taller in the future I'd like to offer reality as a counter argument. The VAST majority of human populations living in hard, harsh and dangerous condition and environments on Earth are much smaller than those of us in the first world who live lives of comparative ease. Diet makes humans tall, the Imperium is not known for it's comfortable atmosphere and the an over abundance of material wealth shared amongst it's citizen and this causes me to believe that in all likelihood it's citizens generally be of 'average' height and certainly not demonstrating and significant variation from Humans today.

 

Diet has a big part in our personal growth, but as a species, to say we've not been changing at a genetic level is wrong - in terms of evolution, our ancestors have been getting progressively bigger all the time for example, here's a simplified and roughly correct guide to the evolutionary chain of humans.....

 

amoeba -> fishy thing -> fishy thing with legs -> fishy thing with legs without gills -> bigger and more complex land creature -> early chimp thing -> caveman -> modern human. Each stage getting progressively larger as it gets more complex. Can you honestly say that it's likely that we won't have grown any bigger in 39,000 years?

 

In relation to the over all issue...Rule of cool wins...as does personal effort, originality and giant bad ass super humans. It really makes no difference to the game and the examples given are spurious, ill conceived and unrealistically specific. They scream of power gamer whining in relation to a game that is is unbalanced at its, uses random number generation to determine outcomes and uses models that are not designed alongside the rules and so are not designed with a 'competitive' dynamic in mind.

 

C'mon man - simply saying that you're right, and dismissing all other concerns because you "have very little time for [game balance]" does not make you right.

 

All IMHO of course

 

Jim

[Cleal Baros]

The models and the rules are not linked, they are not designed together and their are no rules to determine their size/shape an as such your chess analogy cannot be applied as rules no rules are changed or broken through truescaling.

 

Archaeological anthropology is my area of study (to doctorate level), please do not try and present a basic high school understanding of evolution to counter my assurances that the increase in human height (which is only demonstrated over the past century and a half) is in any way a result of evolutionary processes, it simply is not.

 

I agree that bases make a difference, I feel that all models should be placed on the same size base as they are purchased and would certainly push the issue in a competitive environment.

 

I'd argue larger vehicles are far easier to hit and destroy and as a result balance the majority of the LOS issues, if this became an issue I really don't see a problem with people ruling or simply demonstrating that they'd be able to see if a standard sized model was being used and as a result they be allowed to perform shooting and charges as such.

 

Any and all of these issues can be resolved with a friendly and sensible approach IMO.

 

Just FYI also, the Human Race in 200,000 years old anf we have demonstrated virtually no discernible genetic deviance/variation since this time. The driving forces of evolutionary process have now largely been removed/reduced through our progress as a species and this means, if anything, the rate of change will now slow further as modern medicine, farming and infrastructure removes the hardships and conflict the drives evolutionary processes.

[J!MM!L!C!OUS]

The driving forces of evolutionary process have now largely been removed/reduced through our progress as a species and this means, if anything, the rate of change will now slow further as modern medicine, farming and infrastructure removes the hardships and conflict the drives evolutionary processes.

 

Someone clearly hasn't seen or doesn't respect Xmen as the leading authority on evolution :huh:

[Darklighter]

@Cleal Baros

The talk of evolution over diet is kind of moot and I really don't want to get into it on a gaming board. We are talking about a made up universe created to sell plastic models, real world science has very little to do with it and I think you are taking these things a little out of context.

 

From the WiP threads I've looked at here and on other sites I'd have to say I've found that keeping Marines on 25mm bases is the minority rather than the norm. Also of these threads I've looked at more have upscaled vehicles and have expressed plans to do so than have not.

 

Also a friendly chat before a game doesn't cut it. It would be quite easy to over look the nuances with out the time to fully look at how a list synergies with the changes and how an opponent has adjusted tactically to use said advantages. I'm not saying that anyone is guilty of this on a personal level just that it can and does happen. So from my point of view is an advantage to the owner of the "true scaled" list as they are used to playing with these factors even if it's just subconsciously.

 

Narrative over Tournament play is all about personal choice and not mutually exclusive you can still be a good player and use a fluffy list same as you can be a sucky player with perceived WAAC list. It's all about personal skill. My point is about fairness and sticking to the rules keeps things fair In my mind at least. People can do as they please within there own gaming groups and friends, it's when they force house rules and made up units/models on others out side of that(them) group(s) that I have a problem with it. Not everyone who "true scales" keeps models on the base they came with, not all use the vehicle at box standard size. Not every one sees the game the same way. But to fail to see that "true scaling" offers a fundamental change to the game is absurd to me. Be it for the better or worse of the army it changes a lot of the game and shouldn't be just dismissed as picky and petty rules lawyering!!

 

@J!mm!l!c!ous

Dude!! I was drinking!!!! I almost choked!!!!!!

[Cleal Baros]

The comment that was originally here was discourteous of me, I should just say that I don't think we're going to agree.

 

Regards,

Cleal.

[Harleqvin]

There really isn't anything wrong with "TruScale" or however people call it. It's a modeling aspect and people like it as it makes the marines look more accurate to them compared to the other models as most are all the same size or they think it's cool.

 

Yeah it's really Tau and IG that are at issue with this as they are the ones most likely that should be changed as they( a certain number of their models,) should be smaller than the rest but that's harder to do than it is to make a Marine larger. And we all know GW won't start making all the minis accurate scale. We already pay too much in my opinion for models.....

 

A bigger model is more a hindrance than a boon. It makes vehicles less likely to gain cover and they will be seen more for LoS (both will you and them will see more.)

The only real issue is with a larger sized base than what it should have for what the model is supposed to be (but if you make the marine bigger it would make sense to have a larger base. TDA sized models should be on 40mm base.)

The larger base comes in for benefits for: less models being hit by template and Blast markers, being able to spread out more to a degree (can hold up you deployment,) and then deep striking as you are taking up more space so you have a little bit more range kinda in that instance, possible boon is more models can get into B2B (that's a give and take thing, not all models want more models on them in combat.)

 

Hindrance goes to all those except the template and blast markers. Deep striking you have more of a chance of hitting terrain or other models. Movement is hindered as you may not fit in areas, may end up in difficult/Dangerous terrain, won't be able to fit through between enemy models/your own of different unit. Also if your tank has been sized up it can be hurt by coming(driving on) onto the board and not being able to fully be on the board it will be destroyed as only Super heavies have the benefit of coming on and being sat down (pretty sure on that last one.)

 

Pretty much all advantages are also disadvantages. It really comes down to what people think is cool.

 

For the thought of it makes it look weird when they are mixed with normal, there are some marines that are taller than the norm for marines in the fluff. lqtm. There are also in Pre/heresy there are marines that weren't able to be made fully into Astartes. So they are smaller than normal marines but taller than humans. That being a fluff reason for different sized marines but I would say, personally for rules, if you do the upsizing that they should still be on base that would be normal for what that model is to be, norm on 25mm should be 25mm, 40mm for 40mm.

 

bases, scenic bases, with stuff on them, I personally don't care as long as you are not making, for example, your Devs modeled to be on a fraking cliff making them 6" above the base :D

[Darklighter]

You are missing the point about base size and model size effecting games. It's not about how balanced you think it is or isn't it's about familiarity. A player that is familiar with the changes and knows how to use or avoid these differences has a distinct advantage over a player used to playing (in my eyes) a fair game. The point about terrain and not being able to hide is all down to who made the scenery and how it was placed and is a total none argument in my eyes.

 

bases, scenic bases, with stuff on them, I personally don't care as long as you are not making, for example, your Devs modeled to be on a fraking cliff making them 6" above the base

 

This is another problem with no consensus of how tall a marine should look or actually be (within the "true scale" community) it can't be regulated to control this kind of abuse. What's to stop a person making a marine 10 inches tall but slim enough to fit on a 25mm base because he/she thinks it's looks cooler and fits with his/her idea of what a Marine would look like. It's a little extreme but warp travel can do odd things to a man! Just because some people think it looks cooler or has a plausible reason doesn't mean it's fair!