Thursday, 11 April 2013

What is accurate enough?



This has no doubt been discussed plenty of times and I know that these particular models have been the centre of at least one such discussion.
But what is accurate enough for you?

For me, accurate enough is a model that is easily recognisable as what it is meant to be representing.
In my games I don’t have actual tanks, people or sandbags, I have models that represent them, and as such they do not need to be especially accurate.

The sandbags below for example would no doubt, in the real world be 2 or 3 layers thick and stacked the other way.
However these models meet my criteria of being easily recognisable as sandbags.
Irregular Miniatures make a straight section of 6mm sandbags that are pretty much as accurate to 1/300th as I think you will find, however they are not easily recognisable as sandbags; even when painted people have thought them dry stone walls.

How much does scale play a factor in this?
At 25mm I would expect the bags to be the ‘correct’ size and stacked more accurately.
At 6mm however I would not, I just want to be able to tell what it is meant to be.








 

What is accurate enough for you and do you like the game itself more than the modelling side, do you prefer the modelling over the gaming..

What works for you?




3 comments:

  1. I can't say I have strong feelings one way or the other, when it comes to sandbags. "Real" sandbags, when built up properly, would be largely indistinguishable from dry stone walling at any scale from 28mm downwards. They are hardly ever built up into walls one bag thick, as most battlefield small arms will comfortably penetrate a single sandbag, and their primary purpose (to protect from blast and shrapnel) isn't fulfilled by building one bag thick, as it will topple over far too easily.

    None of that, however, factors in my head when considering battlefield terrain at 6mm. What I'm looking for isn't a 1:1 recreation of a real battlefield. I'm looking for something that conveys the sense of a real battlezone, without impeding my ease of play. I'm not sure that I'd be in the market for the sandbag bases shown, not because they aren't to scale, but because in my 6mm games they would fulfil very little purpose. I take it for granted that a 6mm battlefield is littered with convenient foxholes, ruined walls, abandoned bunkers and other such cover for my infantry to make use of as they move. Infantry don't manoeuvre across open green fields if they have a choice about it, especially not when effective fire starts dropping in.

    That said, I also don't play 6mm skirmish like you do. I use 6mm for the big, platoon+ to company+ games that can be all "big hand, small map" about stuff like sandbags.

    What I *would* like to see, though, would be some versions of your (really awesome) buildings that are a bit more battle-scarred, perhaps with holes in the roofs, or bullet marks across the walls - and then you could perhaps see sandbags built up across the garage doors and porches etc.

    In fact, I might just convert one of the ones you sent me in exactly that fashion...

    ReplyDelete
  2. No need, well not that I should stop you.
    But I have some set aside that I will be damaging with the purpose of making them battle worn.
    First though will be a damaged OKI wall section...

    :D

    ReplyDelete
  3. I like good enough. If it looks "right" that's all I need. I do prefer gaming to modelling/painting.

    ReplyDelete