How much does size matter??

[Stelzone]

Now that I have peoples attention. smile.gif

What I am asking about is the slight variation in the size of some makers figures. I see bulk as a more limiting factor than height. And I am starting to believe that bulk is less important as well. As long as it isn't drastic, the difference in height and bulk should happen as it would in any real group of people.

Remember that we are not gamers of the industrial period when the need for some uniformity came into play. In the ancient periods the armor and clothes were made to fit the man. So you probably had a wider variation in peoples sizes in ancient armies than you do now or any time in the industrial age.

I think the size and shape of the horses in a line are more important than for the men. Horses seem to be more alike size wise in a given geographic area than the people are.

And why should a 5'2" Roman look as big as a 5'10" German? Even if he is in line with him or against him he is still smaller than the German.

I'd like to know how others feel about this.

[ February 11, 2005, 09:11: Message edited by: Stelzone ]

[David Kuijt]

I agree with you, mostly.

The problem is that the variation in sizes is not on the order of 15% (62 inches to 70 inches); it is more on the order of 30% (14mm to 19mm). And that is pretty severe: the difference in size is like that between Mugsy Boggs and Shaquille O'Neall. Now that is within the range of human size variation (clearly), but not for one army or element to be all 7' tall guys, and another army or element to be the equivalent of 5' tall. That just looks wierd.

[Odious Asparagus]

Aesthetically looking, I would prefer if my figures were the same scale. I have Essex Late Carthos and Polybian Romans and they look fine at 15mm, but when set up across my Freikorps Gallic line, at 18mm, it just looks awkward. The Freikorps are less in scale than the Essex, with larger heads, hands, etc. I wouldn't mind it as much if there was a little variation in height to duplicate the differing heights of people, but I would prefer the figures to remain anatomically correct (and I don't mean that in a way that I'm sure it will be taken).

Just my two cents worth.

Kurt

[Chris Brantley]

Style of castings is also an issue for me; as much or more than variation in scale. I've seen 17-18mm figures that mix well with 15mm figures because the style is similar, whereas I've seen figures very comparable in scale that I would not mix because of differences in figure style.

Some figures are chunky, others are very lithe. Compare an Essex biblical or Gladiator Hittite figure with a Mirliton medieval or Chariot ancient figure for example. Some sculptors increase the size of the head in proportion to the body in order to get great facial detail, which looks great until you mix them with other figures with much smaller heads.

[Darren Buxbaum]

I do agree that uniformity doesn't have to exist in figure size, since people can come in different heights. There are historical references of "giants" in battles and sieges. One comes to mind during Mohemmed II siege of Constantinople. But the numbers of these people had to have been very small (as they are today) since they are mentioned as giants.
Conversely, what I can't stand is a manufacturer's range that is inconsistant in scale when it comes to mounted and dismounted figures notably in 15mm. There are many manufactures that make diminutive riders or a few that make towering dismounted knights.

[derek]

Hullo
I have settled on collecting figures from a few (relatively ? smile.gif manufacturer's whose figures I particularly like.
In no particular order these are: Essex, Museum, Corvus Belli, Outpost Wargames Services, Grumpy's and Gladiator (Ochmann carved ranges). Gladiator is on the small side, while Museum (especially some mounted ranges like their Early Byzantines) are on the large size. As I am both a DBA & DBM player, one way of easily distinguishing commands is to buy a DBA pack from Essex, another from Museum, and then sufficient packs of figures from a third manufacturer to build a third command. Essex & Museum also tend to have a good selection of DBA armies between them in the periods I am most interested in at present. For me this makes assembling a DBM army a more feasible project than starting with 300AP of unpainted figures!
With regular armies like Romans all figures tend to be from one manufacturer. With irregular Warband armies like Ancient Brits or Gauls, I like to have as much figure variety as possible. Only Corvus Belli allows a DBA army with very few of the same pose when it comes to Ancient Brits or Gauls!
Again, in no particular order I like Xyston, Donnington, Irregular (some ranges - equipment tends to be a good buy), Mirliton, PotN and Chariot. I hope to collect more figures from these manufacturer's in future. I very seldom mix figures from different manufacturer's on the same base. One exception are Essex Romans because of the lack of mounted Standard Bearers ?
Fortunately Corvus Belli has filled the gap for Early Imperial Romans and Donnington and Irregular for Middle Imperial Romans (& LIR) and OWS for Late Imperial Romans.
Kind Regards
Derek

[E_A_Lindberg]

As both Dave and Chris pointed out, there's a lot more to consider than just the fact that some people are taller than others. While that's true, there is something approaching a bell-curve distribution of heights. In lead miniatures, though, it's as though everyone is either 4'8" or else 6'2" tall.

Then, as Chris points out, even if the heights are the same, the casting style can look very different. It's not quite DBA-era, but I collect early-twentieth century miniatures. Reviresco released some 1920s Chinese figures in 28mm, which they just up-scaled from their 25mm figures. The result looks very gaunt, possibly appropriate for soldiers in Warlord-era China, but definitely looking strange next to Copplestone or Pulp figures.

Finally, there are some things that are plausible in the real world, but that just end up looking completely bizarre when modeled. The same batch of Reviresco figures included some 1920s era civilians. While I suppose that somewhere there was a 6'4" tall flapper, the resulting miniature looks more like a circus freak than a fashion faux-pas.

[ February 11, 2005, 17:22: Message edited by: E_A_Lindberg ]

[Redwilde]

Porportion is also important.

I have Outpost Khmer and Burmese figures that are about 18mm and rather scrawny -- so the net effect is they look like the tallest lankiest Cambodians you've never seen. 14-15mm and scrawny would have been a better proportion.

I also have two Republican Roman armies I picked up on EBay for a BB army (w/Numidian ally), one I'm pretty sure is Essex, the other I don't know. The Essex is a little shorter and lighter. The Essex height is easily compensated by elevating the base a bit more (I just added an extra magnet under the one that was already there), but side-by-side, the extra heft of the other stands does jump out more than the height now.

I also picked up a few extra Outpost Romans to morph these armies into Camillans. (I went with Outpost to get their Gladiators for the camp -- a small provincial arena). Strangely, each code of the Outpost Roman packs I got (and some Samnites to vary the Camillan spear) are all different heights from 15-18mm. The velites were the tallest and bulkiest -- towering over both my Polybian armies. Quite distracting, and inappropriate for underfed plebes and rustics, so I won't be using them. A shame since I liked their fur capped helmets that don't have a full pelt going down the back. And I wanted to replace the velites I have with something like this. The Outpost heads are too bulky to swap onto the Essex figs, but at some point I may put them onto some CB javelineers next time I get more CB figs.

[derek]

Hullo
I agree that body proportions do matter as well when mixing figures from different manufacturers in the same army. It is also one of the main reasons why I generally do not base figures from different manufacturers on the same base.
Sometimes differences in body proportions are the consequence of the manufacturer using different sculptors over time. Donnington, Lancashire Games & Outpost Wargames Services are three examples that I know of. I much prefer Outpost Wargames Services more recently sculpted figure ranges; for example: their Late Imperial Romans, Central Asian Turks, Macedonians, Hindu and Tamil Indians and Islamic Crusades ranges to their Republican Romans.
To return to the earlier thread on figure hight, Museum seems to have gone through some "scale creep" with newer ranges being a couple of mm taller than earlier ranges. As all figures are sculpted by the same person I asked him why they were getting taller? :confused:
His reply: old age :D
Kind Regards
Derek

[ February 12, 2005, 02:49: Message edited by: derek ]

[Ivan]

I bought some of Museum's armed civlians/hordes types, they are much bigger, in fact I think they are incompatible with their older figures that I have, such as the gladiators I was planning on using them with. I'll probably use one or two, to represent some German giant, but that's it. Its shame, but I'm not too fussed, since Gladiator makes some better hordes anyway.

I mix figures from different companies fairly often. The extreme was when I used 6 different companies for the humans accompanying my Successor War elephants.

I also worry more about style differences than height differences. As others have mentioned, putting a small booster under a smaller figure is very effective for disguising it. I've mixed Xyston and Gladiator Thracians this way.

[Mark Davies]

I've just come across an unusual variant on this issue. I've got some figures from the Outpost Crusades range and they have major variations in size between figures in the same range. For example their Turkopoles (BZ7) and Pecheneg light horse (BZ6) are a head shorter than their Byzantine Kavallarioi (BZ5). Perhaps they're midget nomads! However, the horses of the Turkomans (CI4) that I was sent are larger than any of the other horses, noticeably those of the Knights (CC1).

Has anyone else noticed this?

[Tony Aguilar]

Museum has some huge variations. Their some of their Ottomans (including the gun crew) for instance and their Asian hordes are HUGE. I still like them though.

[Mark Davies]

In that you suggest that this variation doesn't prevent you liking a range, it's probably the case that I focus on it too much. It's something I don't like about the old Tabletop range, which has knights on the equivalent of ponies compared to other ranges, something that reminds me of the even older Airfix Napoleonics figures that had much bigger British Hussars on much bigger horses than the French Cuirassiers.

I wonder if the rest of the Outpost Islamic range have as big horses as at least one of the Turkomans? I was only sent one type of horse with the two Turkomans that I got. It's the one on the far left of their picture of them at:

http://www.outpostwargameservices.co.uk/images/Web%20Photos/Ghulam/CI4A.jpg

It's possible the other one is smaller.

[Tony Aguilar]

In that you suggest that this variation doesn't prevent you liking a range, it's probably the case that I focus on it too much.


Not at all. As long as they are on different stands, I am OK with it. I have a much bigger problem with style and poses of some of the manufacturers. The following poses I find quite irritating:

"horse with head held down in shame"
"horse riders with lances that are holding them away from their body as if they do not want anything to do with them"
"troops with javelins leaning WAY back to toss them as if around a corner"
"overfed fatty-horses"

With that said, some manufacturers that feature these poses make others that are just fine. There is something to like and something to dislike in almost every manufacturer.

[peachy]

"horse with head held down in shame"
"horse riders with lances that are holding them away from their body as if they do not want anything to do with them"

I only have a couple of armies' worth, but even I recognise those as Essex specials. Cataphracts/clibanarii and their horses get you two for one - perhaps they're ashamed because their riders are so transparently uninterested in the battle, and the poor horsies feels that it reflects on them. :rotfl

[Blackadder]

Museum and Xyston are the absolute worst for incompatible sizes.

[Tony Aguilar]

Museum and Xyston are the absolute worst for incompatible sizes.

Don't forget Tin Soldier also.