Name All the Units That Are Not to Scale

[Joisey]

Have you plunked a Screaming Eagle down next to a jeep lately? Look closely. Now put four S.E.'s next to that jeep and remember that the jeep is supposed to seat 4 soldiers.

Notice anything out of whack? Like the jeep looks like it is sized for a Mummer's Parade or a clown car at the circus maybe?

And how many soldiers are supposed to fit in a Skd 251? 6? 8? 10? Do ten of your SS Panzer Grenadiers look like they can sit in the back of the 251? Could even ONE stretch out across the back without his feet hanging off the back? How tall would that make him? 15 feet? 20?

Every single soldier unit is too large vis-a-vis the AFV's. Hell, the soldiers are almost as tall as the King Tiger! No way a normal sized person would be looking at eye level at the top of a tank turret like our AAM guys do. If anything, the average sized person comes up to the top of the hull deck of a WWII heavy tank, and would have to look UP at the turret. I remember climbing up on a churchill in Normandy. I had to haul myself up onto the top of treads.

And we all know the Hellcat is too large, even WotC have owned up to this goof.

How about the Liliputian sized 3" American ATG? Looks like a Screaming Eagle could use one for a skate board, right?

What else has WotC been lazy about?

[Sturmgrenadier]

I dont really care, its a game not diorama... :)

[XAos]

I dont really care, its a game not diorama... :)
But it would be more "fun", if they got the scales right. ;)
That the vehicles & soldiers are to 2 different scales is acceptable to make everything fit in a hex.
I see no excuse for the following units;
M-18 (too large)
Nashorn (too small)
3" gun (way too small, the russian AT-rifle has a larger gun barrel)
PAK-40 (too large, this is nearer the size of an 88mm PAK-43)

[Rauxa]

The M3 Lee is definitely too small, specially when compared to the M4 Sherman. Do you know that the russians used to call it the "coffin for seven brothers"?
On a more serious tone, its heigth is 3,12 meters, vs the 2,74 meters of the Sherman. This is NOT the scale in the AAm miniatures.

[Remember-OWS-]

It would be really nice to have the good size, but unless we all went back do DASL with the 1/285 ratio, then you have to use either bigger Tanks, that means bigger hexes, or smaller Infantry, that are rarely produce for lack of details.

I am happy as it is right now, even if I use to play 1/72-1/76 (20mm) size in lead and pewter. The tanks are even built in plastic, planes also, not to mention diorama from all kind. This is a expensive way to play WWII, and honestly nobody around me play that size anymore.

With an all paint, easy rules (somewhat too easy sometimes) ready to play game, I do not expect less, but don't see more coming in the future in matter of realism.

[Type-A]

Aren't the tanks represting individual tanks and the infantry representing several soldiers? I don't have an issue with the infantry to vehicle (infantry is small enough as it is), however I DO have an issue with the inconsistancies of scale within each. Vehicles should scale to each other.

How would it look to have a Screaming Eagle half again as big as an SSPG, or a gnome Italian (ala the 3" gun).

That have to work on quality control within each group of minis.

By the same token, I won't have a problem with the planes being smaller than scale as long as they stay consistant among themselves.

[Remember-OWS-]

Yep, Type-A, good point!

Inconsistency... That is the best definition up to now with the Tanks and Artillery piece.

I was thinking that WOTC had to go with many company to built the entire SET I to IV. They probably did not toughed grognard would play this game that much. And when you say Grognard, you know it means realistic.

I would classify myself as a Grognard that could leave some space to little errors. So if they WOTC is reading and listening to the majority of players, what I suspect they do, they will address that issue in future sets.

Don't you WOTC :D

[Aries]

I dont really care, its a game not diorama...

It actually makes diorama making interesting as you can use the scale differences to force perspective. Instead of your troops standing next to a 3" AT they are now half and mile away!! :)

[TheLimey]

I work in a company that deals with Chinese factories, and believe me, problems like this are not uncommon. If they share out to more factories, then this problem is just increased.

[Timmon]

Hi,

May have been mentioned several times, but I have to wonder if the japanese AT-gun is also too small compared to british and germans ones? Seems more like their small 75mm infantry gun to me.

Timmon

[Autarch]

Actually, I think the PAK 40 is the only AT gun that is correctly scaled. At least to the vehicles.

[Aries]

When you are dealing with offshore factories the main problem is communication (language, 12 hour difference, etc...) and scheduling (your company may only be one of a 100 others using that same factory so your build window many only be a few days).

However, why WOTC quality assurance people did not catch the 3" Gun scaling problem is beyond my understanding, unless they choose not to do a pilot run. Pilot runs cost much more than production runs (ties up the factory resources for a very limited amount of product, etc...) but often prove to be invaluable in catching that one tiny mistake (decimal point in the wrong place) that ruins the product.

[Domhnall101]

I work in a company that deals with Chinese factories, and believe me, problems like this are not uncommon. If they share out to more factories, then this problem is just increased.
Absolutely. And judging by the differneces in packing, quality of finish and even modeling there are at least 3-4 different locations being used.

I can live with the infantry being out of scale with the armour-who wants to fiddle with 6mm high troops and don't even talk to me about identification.

The scale issues with about 1/3 of the armour is a pity and I hope they at least correct the scaling on future modeling.

Saying that I play this game after spending my youth playing Warhammer II and III. Just on the cusp of it changing froma wargame into a minature flogging machine.
I have spent too much of my gaming life reading rule books and painting minatures.
This saves me that pain.
I get my creative urges out at work as an art director so I only need to get my gaming fix when at home. AAM over all keeps me happy

[Irish]

Actually, I think the PAK 40 is the only AT gun that is correctly scaled. At least to the vehicles.
I must say I respectfully disagree with the above statement, the German Paks are closer to scale to the other soldier figures than to vehicles.
I hate to say it but the scale of the M5 3 inch gun is much closer to the scale of some of the other vehicles. Just put one behind the M5 halftrack--pretty close....
By the way, the jeeps are probably a little too big..... :)

[Aries]

Here is a M5 towing a ZIS-3 76.2 mm (similar to the 3" Gun) I would say it is nearly the same length and half as tall as the M5. No where close to the M5 3 inch gun as modeled.

[PatrickWR]

I'm so glad this is a thread... :(

[Joisey]

I'm so glad this is a thread... :(
Please accept it in the manner in which it is offered: constructive feedback.

We have to keep WotC honest by letting them know we're paying attention and that we notice these things, lest the phrase "Ah, let it go, what do our customers know, anyway?" becomes too prevalent at manager meetings.

I think the foregoing phrase, along with "Ah, they'll buy anything we make." is an old familiar tale retold countless times in American consumer products, from Coca-Cola (remember New Coke?), to General Motors (those of you old enough to remember the 1970's know what I'm talking about) to Lucasfilms (Jar Jar Binks. Need I say more?).

It is a tale that never ends well for the retailer. WotC, take note.

[Joisey]

Good Pic, ARIES!

[elbowsanchez]

When you are dealing with offshore factories the main problem is communication (language, 12 hour difference, etc...) and scheduling (your company may only be one of a 100 others using that same factory so your build window many only be a few days).

However, why WOTC quality assurance people did not catch the 3" Gun scaling problem is beyond my understanding, unless they choose not to do a pilot run. Pilot runs cost much more than production runs (ties up the factory resources for a very limited amount of product, etc...) but often prove to be invaluable in catching that one tiny mistake (decimal point in the wrong place) that ruins the product.

WotC QA lacks big time in my book...I take offense to people saying it is OK for these errors...Just look how many of the new games they release have silly QA error, Axis & Allies revised is a classic example of...OOPS...

does anyone ever remember getting a monopoly game with 10 irons, or missing money, cards or dice??? Quality with the new generation of game, at least with this company, has left a sour taste in my mouth, and knocked down a few notches in my positive feeling about this company...

the way I look at it, I now own well over 30$ worth of defects from this company, sure the free maps are great, and the designer support, excellent, but let me trade in these subpar items for one of the quality units...wonder what funky unit set 3 will contain?? I hope none, that will certainly help for me...

anyone care to trade for my m5's, hellcat, ugly tiger tank, vet rhino with gapped turret, valentine with extended gun, similar to the rhino...

didnt think so...I think Wotc should take these defects back and either give us our money back, or replace them with the corrected units...better yet, how about I pay you (AH) with monopoly money, no biggy, it is money afterall...

yet I still support this game because I want the brand name to continue...this flame is not for the game play itself...

ES

[Irish]

Here is a M5 towing a ZIS-3 76.2 mm (similar to the 3" Gun) I would say it is nearly the same length and half as tall as the M5. No where close to the M5 3 inch gun as modeled.
A lot closer than the size of the Pak 40.....

[Y2UAsk]

When comparing infantry to vehicles, remember that the infantry are on bases and the vehicles aren't. Try this -- set three infantry in a close triangle and then put a tank between them so that the tank's treads rest on the soldiers' bases. It's surprising how much more in scale everything looks that way.

Steve

[Irish]

When comparing infantry to vehicles, remember that the infantry are on bases and the vehicles aren't. Try this -- set three infantry in a close triangle and then put a tank between them so that the tank's treads rest on the soldiers' bases. It's surprising how much more in scale everything looks that way.

Steve
Steve,
I'm not busting WOTC's chops on scale, without a doubt some mini's are better looking than others, but considering the overall cost when compared with the quantity one gets in a booster, it's a fair balance.
The game is certainly playable whether or not the various units are perfectly in scale with each other.

Just for fun here's some more size trivia. M5 halftrack 20.75 ft long, Zis 3 20.01 ft long, Pak 40 20.34 ft long, M5 3inch gun 13.15 ft long, Zis 2 23.29 ft long...... ;)

[Ming]

Indeed, if you remove the bases the infantry look much better. While still not perfect, nothing ever is.

I would urge WOTC to do better with scaling in the future however, while it isn't necessary to the game, out of scale units take much away from the collectibilty. As it is, I have no desire to trade for or acquire an M10, despite how Fond I am of the American open topped tank destroyers.

It's puzzling, many of the errors seem easy to fix, but they slip through. It creates a bit of frustration on the part of the consumer.

[Sniperism]

I dont really care, its a game not diorama... :)
seriously if scale's that important you should get into one of the many other ww2 miniature games.

[Surfer_Sam]

If this game was to scall then tanks and infrantry would be small because one hex is what?, 60 meters our something.

[Dr_Strangelove]

I'm not all that worried about the scale problems but the M5 should really be redone. I'm actually very impressed with some of the miniatures but the M5 has some issues.

[Autarch]

I must say I respectfully disagree with the above statement, the German Paks are closer to scale to the other soldier figures than to vehicles.
I hate to say it but the scale of the M5 3 inch gun is much closer to the scale of some of the other vehicles. Just put one behind the M5 halftrack--pretty close....
By the way, the jeeps are probably a little too big..... :)

I was wrong, it is not correctly scaled. Closer scrutiny shows it is still too small at least by about 1mm in all dimensions. But that's good enough for me.

The mis-scaling of various vehicles makes it difficult to do any worthwhile comparison. I should have qualified with correctly scaled vehicles. Just look at the vehicles based on the Pkw IV hull. They run the scale from too small to too large when they should all be identical.

However, infantry is still off. Feel free to recreate this scene with any kneeling infantrymen in the game:

http://homepage.tinet.ie/~nightingale/graphics/75mmat_1.jpg

As has been pointed out before, the infantry aren't truly to scale with the vehicles (or AT guns). Which again, is fine with me. I just want the vehicles and AT guns to scale properly.

As for the M5, well, I don't think it could fit in the back of the half-track
carriage and all.

[PatrickWR]

I think the foregoing phrase, along with "Ah, they'll buy anything we make." is an old familiar tale retold countless times in American consumer products, from Coca-Cola (remember New Coke?), to General Motors (those of you old enough to remember the 1970's know what I'm talking about) to Lucasfilms (Jar Jar Binks. Need I say more?).

Funny, I just watched a thing on the History Channel today about the history of colas...they talked about the debacle that was New Coke.

I see what you're sayin', Joisey, and I certainly didn't mean to diss your thread or anything. However, from a strict modeller's standpoint, all the figs are out of scale...infantry isn't exactly 1/100 (plus they were made to look intentionally "chunky" for painting and aesthetic reasons), tanks are a far cry from 1/120, etc.

[Type-A]

seriously if scale's that important you should get into one of the many other ww2 miniature games.
Seriously, when I spend serious money I have certain expectations. All is understood that the scale is abstract... The main issue, at least for me, is the scale of each 'type' of unit relative to each other.

Vehicle to vehicle, gun to gun, infantry to infantry... hopefully you get the picture.

I don't understand the attitude that things can't be improved upon. This is a collectable game representing WWII vehicles and units; they should at least stay consistent among themselves. I would assume that WotC would understand that quality control is important for the serious collector.

And in direct response to your statement, if the quality isn’t maintained there will be an exodus from the game.

I enjoy the game and don’t wish to see that happen. I would love to keep supporting the game with the same passion and loyalty I have thus far with the first two sets (I have purchased some 10 cases).

Nothing wrong with a little criticism from a member of the family.

[henrym203]

Seriously, when I spend serious money I have certain expectations. All is understood that the scale is abstract... The main issue, at least for me, is the scale of each 'type' of unit relative to each other.

.

A few cases of AAm isnt really serious money. Try spending $900 on ONE nicely painted Flames of war army....I know guys thats have 5 grand or better tied into their "game".

AAM doesnt care for us grognards or to-scale players. Their market is towards 12yr olds spending moms money. Thats why they have over simplified rules and it takes an hour to play.

[Type-A]

A few cases of AAm isnt really serious money. Try spending $900 on ONE nicely painted Flames of war army....I know guys thats have 5 grand or better tied into their "game".

AAM doesnt care for us grognards or to-scale players. Their market is towards 12yr olds spending moms money. Thats why they have over simplified rules and it takes an hour to play.

I just spent $500 on a DAK Fow Army, spent about $15k on extraordinary Warhammer Armies, a few grand on various other collectible games besides the more than 1k I've already spent on AAM. Does that count as serious?

Besides, there are only 2 sets out thus far... only so much to buy.

And I beg to differ, if WotC didn't care about us they wouldn't pay so much attention to this board. Which is part of the appeal; we mention our peeves and they respond.

Without disagreement there is no progress as long as all in the conversation are interested in the same goal. To produce and support a better product.

[Thunderanger]

Seriously, when I spend serious money I have certain expectations. All is understood that the scale is abstract... The main issue, at least for me, is the scale of each 'type' of unit relative to each other.

Vehicle to vehicle, gun to gun, infantry to infantry... hopefully you get the picture.

...

You spoke my mind.

It's understood that in AAM, a tank miniature "represents" a single tank, a soldier miniature "represents" a squard (a few) soldiers, and a AT gun "represents" the gun with the crews manning the gun. To have reasonable sized maps, and be able to place the miniatures in hexes on those maps, and yet big enough to allow each unit to have enough details to be distinguishable and aesthetically pleasing. Therefore certain scale were chosen for each type of units, and they are different.

However, it just bugs me when I see same type of units are not in scale, especially when a lot of us actually have some idea how the units should compare to each other.

I don't think it has to do with the fact that the minis are manufactured oversea either. I doubt those folks who make the mold for the AAM minis are expert in WWII vehicles and infantry, and WoTC must be the ones providing them with reference pictures on each of the units, I don't understand how would it be difficult for WoTC to also provide them with proper dimension for each unit.

Oh well, I really hope this is not going to happen again and in such extreme cases in set 3.

[Rauxa]

I just received my first three cases of Set II (things can take a while in arriving to this part of the Sea) and was sorely DISSAPOINTED by the shabby quality of some of the figures (i.e. bent towers in Pz III, bent bases for PIAT...) but also, specially, by two issues:

1. The by now old disaster with the US 3 inch gun scale. This is simply a joke from the quality point of view, with the gun at around half of the scale of vehicles, not to mention other guns!. In my view, this is clearly an unacceptable product, which WotC should exchange to customers - and I know that this is VERY complicated-. I do not personnally accept it as it is, and obviously I am not using them, waiting - I know that maybe forever- for a proper solution.

2. I perceive a lower quality vs the average of first set. That one had some wrong scaled vehicles, as we all know, but many of them (i.e. Stuart, Pz II...) had an excellent finish, in the bottom as well as the top part. What I see in this second set is that plastic has been saved from the bottoms, fronts and backs of many tanks (painful examples are the back of Pz III and front and back of the Chafee, which has the look of a flying carpet with a gun turret... and this simply could have been avoided.

We can all argue about rules or values / special abilities we find better or worse. I am convinced that this game has excellent possibilities, and have invested on it already three times as much as I invested in many years of SL/ASL. I am looking forward to WotC to expand it, but also to improve on quality assurance and inter-vehicle and inter-gun relative scaling, and will like to see in addition to the excellent support we are getting on-line, practical action on their side on issues like the 3 inch gun.

Most of us players are not so picky about minor scale differences. This is a game, anyway. Everybody makes errors, but some of them require a solution. Addressing in some way, even if we have to buy it again, the issue of the 3 inch gun would be an excellent example of taking care of us customers...

[Homer]

A few cases of AAm isnt really serious money. Try spending $900 on ONE nicely painted Flames of war army....I know guys thats have 5 grand or better tied into their "game".

AAM doesnt care for us grognards or to-scale players. Their market is towards 12yr olds spending moms money. Thats why they have over simplified rules and it takes an hour to play.

Exactly. All CMG are like that. They're simplified games for people who don't have the time, skill, or money to invest that is needed for a traditional miniatures game. People like me who don't even have anybody to play against and just buy enough to get sets because I like the way the miniuatures look. I could care less about scale issues, stats of pieces, all that sort of stuff. If the mini looks good on my desk I like it.

If people are so obbessed with scale that they can't even get over the fact that infantry minis are the size they are because if they really were scaled small enough to seat 4 in the jeep mini you'd need tweezers and a magnifying glass to play a game, maybe a game like this isn't for you.

[Rauxa]

There are no worse deaf than the ones that do not want to hear.

A series of messages in this thread have shown the concern of quite a few people about the quality of some specific miniatures, not up to the standards of the majority of them, in scale or in finishing. I understand that some or even many people do not care that much about quality. This is their rigth, as it is the rigth/duty of others to strive to make things better.
We are talking product anomalyes here, in a game we like enough to care about it, after investing significant money (if more or less money is significant is different for different people, and that is OK, nobody is better or worse than anybody else for investing 50 or 5000 dollars...).

In conclussion, some action and/or commitment from WotC on addressing some current issues (i.e. scale for some units clearly out of reasonable deviations no one cares about) and upgrading quality control would be most welcome. This will make happy many people. As per the ones who are completely happy already, good for them!

[Yves_Van_Herp]

In conclussion, some action and/or commitment from WotC on addressing some current issues (i.e. scale for some units clearly out of reasonable deviations no one cares about) and upgrading quality control would be most welcome. This will make happy many people. As per the ones who are completely happy already, good for them!

You are very right there!