Discussion - Scale of WGA Vehicles

Which Scale should Wargames Atlantic's Vehicles use?

  • This topic seems to be important - supplementary to this discussion - when WGA releases Vehicles, which scale should they have?


  • 1/48 vs 1/56 has been talked about a lot on about three different threads here. 

    So I'll keep my comments brief.

    Would prefer WGA produce 1/48 for three reasons:

    1.  1/48 is a better fit for 28mm.  1/56 is painfully too small.


    2.  1/48 plastic gaming models is a wide open field.  (The 259 part 1/48 Hobby Boss Panzer IV on Ebay is not a gaming model.)  (Rubicon and Warlord/Italeri have 1/56 sewn up.  Or to look at it another way, persons who like 1/56 are already spoiled for choice.)

    3.  Based on the above this is an opportunity for WGA to single handedly improve 20th century wargaming with miniatures and vehicles that actually match each other for scale.

    (1/56)  (Note the tank commander made to fit the 1/56 tank is significantly smaller than the 28mm Infantry.) (What is this!  A tank for ants!)

    (Actual T34).


  • I suppose that a third option could have been "28mm/heroic", such that it is: a sort of loose, sloppy, exaggerated "scale" with oversized guns and hatches, and dimensions that are otherwise distorted in odd and strange ways to fit 28mm wargame figures. 

    In the grimdark darkness of the far future, there can be only wonky proportions:

    Not really my preference, but it's probably the truest choice to match most 28mm/heroic fantasy/sci-fi gaming miniatures....

  • Maybe this suggestion would work? I know that a 3D printing company, Arctic Skunk, make 28mm compatible vehicles in 1/53 scale. That is roughly in between the two scales. It would be a compromise,as I don't know if the debate between Wargames Atlantic  making 1/48 or 1/56 plastic vehicles could be settled otherwise.

    Honestly, I'd prefer 1/56 scale, but won't mind either way which their decision is

  • Between those two options, I am going to have to hard vote 1/56 because the WW2 Italian and French vehicles WA might do, should match up with the ones done by Warlord and Rubicon so WA is not remaking the whole motor pool for those two nations all over again from scratch in 1/48 which would be stupide on the buyer end at this point in addition to being a waste time and resources that could be spent elsewhere on  things like cavalry or even other eras.

    If you had offered 1/50 I would voted that, but as it stands between those two I don’t even think this is really negotiable or something that should even be polled, WA should stick with 1/56 options for WW2 France and Italy on the wargaming market front at the moment. 

    Those of you who voted 1/48 try talking or even writing a petition to Tamiya, Bandai, and Revellie, instead of WA, about how much you want 1/48 scale wargaming vehicles,  they might actually do more stuff in 1/48 if they know there is a dedicated market, particularly if this is for Sci-Fi kitbash reasons as opposed pure history. I say this because as it stands 1/48 is on and off veiwed as the "redheaded stepchild" scale by the normal main section of modeling community even though it has good deal of the main WW2 nations covered on the tank front, not mention the modern JSDF, etc. As it stands though, 1/56 looks like it has a better dedcated market than 1/48.

  • Let's look at it another way.

    This is a small sample size but right now 64.7% of the polled prefer 1/48.  Let's be on the safe side and say 50% of gamers prefer 1/48th and 50% prefer 1/56.

    Gamers who prefer 1/56 are spoiled for choice.  If WGA comes out with a 1/56th vehicle those gamers might buy that, or they might buy the  Rubicon kit,  the Warlord/Italeri kit, or one of dozens of choices in resin.  Rubicon and Warlord have 1/56 kits for just about every major and quite a few minor vehicle types used in WW2.  WGA could only nibble around the edges with oddball types.  

    Now if WGA comes out with the same kit in 1/48, then those 50% of gamers who prefer 1/48 are going to get that kit.  There's zero competion in 1/48 gaming models.  There's minimal opposition from the resin market.  

  • Here's an illustration of the difference between display models and gaming models.

    Here are some sprues from a Rubicon (gaming model) Sherman:

    It looks like the suspension is 8 parts.

    Contrast this with some sprues from a Hobby Boss (display model) 1/48 Sherman model.

    The above is only part of the suspension.  I only count 4 of 6 bogies.  The Hobby Boss kit has (no joke) 263 pieces.

    Even if I had the patience for all that, the finished product is going to be too weak for the tabletop.  

    Look at this monumental chunk of plastic that is the Rubicon kit.  That's a game model:

    (Last pic is from a nice review done here):





  • @JTam  

    The 1/56 Rubicon M4A3 Sherman kit that you showed is their first release of that kit. They have since retired it, and replaced it with a kit that has more than two sprues.

    I don't see people who collect 1/48 scale armor kits being very interested in a 'wargaming scale' kit with a minimal amount of parts, just as wargamers aren't  as interested in a 1/48 scale model kit with hundreds of parts.


  • There are definitely pros and cons to each. I voted for 1/56 out of sheer self interest but I suppose that's what we're all doing! 

    Clearly 1/56 tanks aren't 'to scale' and I can understand how that must annoy some folks, but I can see a few advantages to sticking with that scale: 

    1. Wargamers are just used to it. I don't really hear anyone complain about it at my gaming club, at least not from the more casual Bolt Action players. Most of the folks I know who play BA are just wargamers, they like painting things up nicely but they don't rivet count. Personally, I build 1/35 kits to satisfy that itch and my Rubicon models are more for leisurely builds and paints. 
    2. "Fitting the market" isn't always a bad thing. The fact that WGA figs scale so well and are basically interchangeable with Warlord plastics was one of the things that initially drew me in. I know the Sci Fi / 40k fans love how the Death Fields stuff works with warhammer figs. 
    3. By simply attaching the words "1/48 scale" to the kits you might inadvertedly reduce traffic online and put off potential buyers who are used to 1/56. 
    4. Cash and time limited folks (like myself) might not want to rebuy and then repaint their entire collection in 1/48 (took me long enough to build what I've got!)
    5. As mentioned above, Rubicon and Warlord have got WW2 pretty well covered. But I'm sure there are still gaps there, especially with the smaller nations or early war (even inter war?). I for one have always wanted to see a 1/56 plastic Vickers Light Tank.
    6. WGA figures are already 'heroic' scale, so scale rules are already being bent there. If the figures were anatomically accurate like Perry's I would say 1/48 all the way. 
    7. Kitbashing and using parts from other 1/56 manufacturers would be possible. 
    8. THE BIGGEST ONE for me - No one has covered WW1 vehicles in this scale in plastic! 
    9. I love comparing the sizes of different vehicles within the same scale. Seeing how small a Bren Carrier is vs. a King Tiger etc. 1/48 would ruin that for me (being self serving again, sorry!)


    The only advantage (might be a huge one to some people) that I see with 1/48 is that they 'look right'. I suppose it comes down to whether you want WGA to fill gaps in the market, like they have been doing with figures - in which case it's 1/56. Or whether you want them to redo subjects that have already been covered in a new scale - 1/48. 

     I had a similar conversation in the Renaissance subforum with a chap about Landschnekts - he wanted WGA to release a set of them (at which point I argued that Warlord already had a decent plastic set of them so we might be better off asking for a novel subject). To which he replied that he didn't like the Warlord Landschnekts sculpts, which is completely understandable. But we have only a few plastic 28mm manufacturers and I'd much rather see a range of subjects covered rather than the fan favourites many times over. 

    That's why I love WGA so much! 


    Ultimately, I'm always happy for any new 28mm kits to hit the market. 

  • I think it's worth noting that ANY choice is going to be a compromise.

    28mm wargaming figures are such a strange 'scale' that NOTHING is quite "right".

    I think the real question to ask first is whether all the gaming companies need to conform to one universal standard, or whether we as gamers are OK with something a little looser and sloppier, with several competing standards that are "close enough" to tolerate alongside each other.

    I'm OK with something looser and sloppier - I prefer 1/48 as the "looks visually closer to 'close enough' scale", BUT I'm perfectly fine seeing 1/50, 1/53, 1/56, or 28mm, instead, or even all of those scales on the same table, as long as you don't have, say, historical 1/35 and 1/72 vehicles on the same table (1/35 and 1/72 vehicles souped up to look like sci-fi vehicles would likely be a different story....)  The differences between 1/48 and 1/56 and even 28mm Heroic are small enough for me to handwave alongside each other.

    The real conflict here is going to be between the "close enough" gamers, and the "standardized scale" gamers, and with something as weird and sloppy as 28mm "scale", the "standardized scale" gamers are not likely to agree with each other on what the "right scale for the job" will ever be.  And in that direction, only Neverending Holy Wars reign supreme, in a hobby that arguably has enough Holy Wars already....

    Also, JTam's illustrations of the differences between display scale model kits and wargaming minis is maybe an extreme example, but still an example of the fact that display scale modeling and wargaming are two very different animals!  Which is why "28mm Heroic" is a thing at all....

  • @JTam

    I am sorry we are just not going to see eye to eye on this one.  While I understand you think it looks better next to figures and you have point in that regard, nothing you can say or show at this point is going to convince me that Wargames Atlantic should do 1/48 scale vehicles for WW2, particularly now since you argued  that Tamiya, etc. kits "are not suitable for wargaming and limited"  and “there would be no competing manufacturers in 1/48”, since that detail actually makes the case to sticking with 1/56 even stronger.

    Why, because waiting around for "suitable 1/48 tanks and other vehicles" for decades (which is what will happen) sounds incredibly unappealing versus "getting that one vehicle added to my 1/56 motor pool to make it war game ready ", which is what this argument is really about🤣.


     ie To me you essentially killed the 1/48 position completely yourself by making 1/48 scale out to be something that isn’t even there as a real wargaming option already due to  kit build complaints about whats already out there in 1/48, meaning vehicle wise there would be nothing scale wise to complement WA’s 1/48 vehicles at all at first on vehicle front and quite never would be. THIS IS NOT A POSITIVE FEATURE!😤

    We want WA to do new stuff that’s is not in plastic for wargaming like FT17s and the L3s, not more Shermans and T34s.


    Heck when it comes to actual plastic kits as opposed resin metal hybrid kits, Tamiya 1/48 Land library by itself  (the one you said only offered limited coverage) is only somewhat behind Warlord in the WW2 vehicle count and  ahead of  Italeri’s 1/56 plastic collection (warlord’s main partner when it comes to plastic vehicle kits), though its not as useful for war gaming due to subject chose (fuel truck versus M3, etc.).  

    Now Rubicon is fairly ahead of the Tamiya 1/48 library when it comes to plastic kits in 1/56, but that’s only because they have been dead focused on 1/56 scale and they have made a lot of resins to cover a ton of stuff they think they can’t cover successfully in plastic and quite a bit of it was stuff that could use plastics now or even back when they did it, also its mostly focused  WW2 US, Russians, British, and German (this last of which is likely never going to be fully covered for wargaming due wide spread use of prototypes😆) beyond those four they have a couple tanks for Italy and a horse wagon but thats it for WW2 in plasic, they have nothing for Japan or France in plastic,  not to mention the minor powers.  

     So I would hardly call that stiff competition, when comes to actual plastic kits particularly since the small armored car and tankette section is a good place for plastic kits and for the most part wide open as far as 1/56 plastics go which is the type of vehicals that WA seems to be aiming at making in the previews.

     I can even see a Citroën Traction Avant kit being a good seller in 1/56 plastic (relatively common car in the western front, perfect for terrain, good fodder for crazy partisan car conversions and all thats out there in the “big” 1/56 market that is easy to find is a Rubicon risen kit, by the way Tamiya has a plastic Citroen in 1/48😆). Not to mention I have not seen  an FT17 in Plastic 1/56 which is probably one of the more famous “everyone seems to have them” tanks in the early stages of WW2 from either Warlord or Rubicon, resin yes, plastic no not really.

    I understand your passion about doing vehicles in 1/48 because of the scaling with figures, but the fact is none of the scalists will want to buy whole new motorpools and no one really wants to have Wargames Atlantic to switch gears entirely to making just WW2 vehicles in 1/48 which is what would have to happen for WA to get decent wargame able vehicle coverage in 1/48 for WW2 given you arguements.

    Also if you think Tamiya and the other people already doing 1/48 is not wide coverage wise, what makes you think WA starting from zero vehicles by itself will get to decent coverage of WW2 this decade in 1/48?

    Its clear as day that WA or anyone else doing 28mm WW2 whos main focus is not vehicles should stick with 1/56 for the vehicles they do make, at least for now to match up whats there.

    That said if we were talking about modern instead of WW2 (things like 80’s Coldwar to war on terror or cyberpunk/zed apoc), I don’t think 1/48 would be out of place for vehicles for that since there really isn’t anything currently in print for wargaming in 1/56 plastic in big way for modern unless one counts Vietnam and to be honest that’s so old tech wise it only really works for 3rd world counties (plus that coverage in 1/56 is limited regardless of material used). Not to mention the worlds cheapest Patton Tank option is in 1/48 (thank you TimMee Toys😉).

    Likewise I feel your argument about the 1/48 scale kits out there "not being suitable for wargaming " might be tad on the “to each his own” side since the Tamiya kits I have built are at least seem to me to be as simple and sturdy as some of the warlord kits I have also built if not more so in both departments.  I will grant you that the Hobby Boss Sherman is a freaking gunpla master grade kit though (I own the Korean War one), but the Tamiya kits I have built thus far were not that hard and I think it may vary depending on the kit,(but that is also the same deal with 1/56 kits).

    Also I hear you on the 1/48 truck, but I get the feeling detailed trucks are just hard to make sturdy and simple to build after looking at my still unbuilt Rubicon British CMP truck sprues (lots of fiddley little parts, interior that needs painting before assembly, etc.) and after building my Warlord sdfkz mini (similar issues though not as intimidating as the Rubicon kit, since I don’t need to paint the front of the drivers chairs). To be honest I have been thinking of getting the nice cheap Chinese "proxy for every WW2 truck" toy option on ebay and Amazon for main force trucks from now on and use the one CMP for something special once I finally build it.

  • @Yronimos Whateley to be honest 1/35 souped up to be sci-fi is probably better looking next to heroic scale minis than 1/48.

  • I'd considered buying some 1/35 scale vehicles before just to see what I could do with them.  And, there are plenty of them out there - 1/35 seems to be THE scale to go to, for a wide selection of armor outside of the second world war!  I have no hands-on familiarity with it, though.

    1/72 has a nice selection, too, but that's pretty small compared to modern heroic minis.  Someone in another discussion did make a fair argument in favor of 1/72 scale modern vehicles in terms of sci-fi wargaming tokens/pawns for 28mm gaming, though.  Back in the day when I had the steady hand and patience to build scale models, 1/72 was my favorite - it wasn't at all a bad place to go to for a great variety of scale models that don't take up very much space, and I really enjoyed modeling in that scale!  In many ways, 1/72 probably the better scale to go with - both for vehicles and infantry - in tabletop battles where you're dealing with more than a couple small or medium-sized vehicles - things like tank battles, mecha duels, battles between multiple vehicles, and so on seem like they would work better in smaller scales, for example!  And, unlike 28mm figures, 1/72 figures tend to actually have human proportions, and to be (more or less) in scale with 1/72 vehicles.  Not that you won't find exceptions that are a little bigger or smaller than they should be, but for the most part, 1/72 is intended to be an actual consistant scale!  And furthermore, those 1/72 figures and vehicles were pretty affordable.

    1/48 is a bit of an odd case, in scale modeling:  it seems like it's more of the go-to for aircraft in a larger scale than 1/72, somewhat comparable in that sense to 1/35 which seems to be the go-to for larger-scaled armor.  In either case, they seem to be the larger practical scale for bookshelf display or whatever.  If you're looking for aircraft in 1/48 scale, that's easy!  Armor, not so much so... vice-versa for 1/35 scale.  And to my knowledge, it's slim pickings for infantry in either of those larger scales....

    All of which is probably way off-topic here, except to say that wargames involving anything more than light vehicles and light sci-fi power armor is probably better left to, say, 1/72 or 15mm or other small scales.

    And for light vehicles - sci-fi power armor, motorcycles, technicals and jeeps, armored cars, tankettes - maybe that makes a bigger case than I originally intended to make for 28mm Heroic scale:  those sorts of smaller vehicles aren't going to look too weird with 28mm heroic exaggeration.

  • I dont think WGA has any plans to go fully into the tanks/armoured production as that alone requires a different style of model making then we see on 28mm figures. 

    A big Issue I have with things like the ww1 or ww2 lines using anything 1/48 is it will not be usable in Bolt Action normally. If people wanna push for other lines like death fields I can see the logic but I dont see WGA making its own game rules and setting a new started for vehicle scale forcing anyone transfering from BA to WGA to buy all new vehicles.

  • Can't you just figure out the proportion of WGA figures and make models scaled to that?

  • @Will Mansell 

    All good points, clearly expressed.

    Reference your number 9.

    It I agree it is pleasure to compare different models of the same scale together.  To get a sense of their scale, proportions, height, etc., versus each other.  For instance I was surprised that a Tiger 1 wasn't THAT much bigger than a Sherman (perhaps because a Sherman is so tall).  On the other hand I hadn't realized how much bigger a Panther was compared to a Sherman, Cromwell, or T34.

  • @Cole Lassell 

    1/48 vehicles are usuable in Bolt Action.  Many do so.  A few pictures of 1/48 armor have crept into a few Warlord Games Bolt Action campaign books.  I own an example.  

    No opponent should object as there's no advantage to using 1/48th vehicles. 

    Ranges are measured from the center of the vehicle. 

    If you're using a 1/48th medium tank you can no longer hide behind a shrubbery like you can with a 1/56 tank.  That's a trade off I'm willing to make to have my armor the same scale as my Infantry.  I dare say it's even (and I know this is Bolt Action) slightly more realistic.

  • I notice few (no one?) seems to be arguing 1/56 is actually the right scale to match 28mm.

    Arguments tend to be along the lines of 1/56 being more or less the defacto standard.  (True enough).

    Or that somehow owning one 1/48 vehicle somehow invalidates all your other 1/56th models and they must also be replaced.  I don't believe that is true.  Having one 1/48 vehicle  "that looks funny next to the others" is not cause to replace your other vehicle models.  

    I would rather have a model that matches the scale of my Infantry and "looks funny" next to my 1/56 vehicles, than have yet another 1/56 vehicle that looks funny next to all my Infantry.

  • I don't presume to speak for WGA.  But I will note they aren't afraid to take risks.  Plastic 28mm Aztecs????  That's a bold move.  And I hoping it continues to pay off for them because they are coming out with awesome stuff.

    Coming out with plastic gaming vehicle models that actually match 28mm for size (1/48 or there abouts) would change the paradigm.  WGA could make a bold choice and start to change 20th century wargaming for the better.  The answer that we know it's wrong but we've always done it this way is weak sauce.

    Most of those stuck on 1/56 have been in the hobby for years and have an extensive "motorpool."  I get that.  But new people enter the hobby every day.  New players are the life blood of the hobby, it can't just be Boomer Bolt Action players.  How disappointing is it to get into a new hobby, buy say some 28mm plastic Italian Infantry and a 1/56 CV33 and once it's built notice only half a Soldier's body would actually fit in it?  It's a turn off.  (1/56 is at its worst in small vehicle like tankettes.  With an undersized 1/56 Sherman it looks off but you can squint your eyes and pretend a crew would fit in there.  No room for anything else, but they would fit in there.  With a tankette it's painfully obvious a 28mm Soldier just wouldn't fit).

    1/56 tankette next to 28mm Infantry.  I'll let you draw your own conclusions on the scaling or lack thereof.

    Edit:  The 28mm miniatures in the photo above are about as small as 28mm Infantry gets and it looks bad.  The problem will be even worse with the new WGA plastics.

    Screen capture from this excellent video:



  • The shift in size, despite being labeled the same scale, between Warlord Games metal and plastic WW2 Italians is annoying. The same with buying Perry and Warlord Games 28mm WW2 figures and not having them look right next to each other. Then seeing Perry 28mm WW2 figures do not match the size of Perry 28mm Medieval figures. 

    I won some Warlord WW2 28mm metal Italians on eBay, when they arrive I will need to decide if they go back on eBay or not.... just like the 1/56 Warlord vehicles.

    If I am going to spend thousands of hours painting and thousands of dollars buying miniatures/vehicles/terrain I want to like... no make that love...the aesthetic.

    Fortunately for 20th Century gaming  I realized this vehicle scale issue before changing from 1/56 to 1/48 is too painful. 

    If WGA decides to make vehicles I am not fussed if they are specifically 1/48 but as@Estoc  suggested, I want them made to specifically suit the WGA miniatures not try to match the size of products from other companies.

  • @Grumpy Gnome 



  • Part of the disconnect between minis and vehicle sizes I think stems from the fact that rulesets are evolving. Older rulesets tended to be more representational with abstract ground scaling. Visual size matching wasn't a requirement because you were effectively just using minis instead of tokens and the map scale was always greater than the minis scale. (When 1 inch equals 30ft for the map scale, the minis being proportional isn't required, and undersized vehicles are actually a play advantage)


    More modern rulesets tend to be less abstract and representational, and much more miniatures centric, with 3d line of sight and so on. These types of rules tend to require the different elements to more closely match in terms of sizes, though as long as they are close enough you can fudge things a bit. The shift recently towards smaller force skirmish rules pushes the need for matching sizes more to the forefront, since the games put much more emphasis and attention on the figures than previous large force size rulesets where the spectacle is more the number of figures rather than their appearance.

  • @Mithril2098  That is one reason I am thinking of changing the ranges and movement in my house rules for Chain of Command... I want the rules to reflect 28mm instead of 15mm figures.

  • Hi all been in the real world for a couple of days, after reading all of the above, for what it`s worth here`s my twopence. What ever scale your choise is really does`t matter, all you need to do to get good boards and figure collections is pick your scale, and then stay with it. If 1/48th use 1/48th figures,buildings.etc. several wargaming brands do them. All equipment will match and nothing will be out of place, your board may be biger,  but wow, it will rock. Now if like me your choise is 1/56th, then as the 1/48th player, all I do is use 1/56th items, my vehicles are smaller. but very detailed. and in the hands of masters look more like 1/35th in photos. My boards can be 4x4 and look great 8x4 and you have a world. It does not  matter what your scale, just don`t mix that will not work, Find what you want, blow the scale ,see if you can get all the assessories you need.and then go with it enjoy your`e game in your scale .Cheers all

  • Neither, they should scale to fit which ever kits the vehicles are meant to go with,

    i've got some rubicon 1/56 kits and while they're very nice they feel a touch on the small side compared to WGA stuff (deathfields or WWI ) as do their crew figures,

    and 1/48 are certainly too large

    so unless they're aiming to mix them in with another manufacturers kits in which they'll need to be the same scale they just need to pick a number in between at looks best compared to the size of the minis and stick to it (and call it 28mm)

    now if there's space on the sprue additional oversized weapons could be added to 40K-ify them

  • @JTam

    Bro,  another line of "already being done WW2 vehicles”, even if it is in a simpler 1/48 format, would not be bold it would be kind of boring and pointless (does the world really need more Shermans, T34s, Churchills and Tigers in either 1/48 or 1/56 for 28mm gaming? no it does not really), and I think you invalidated your own argument when stated that they should go that route because "no else was doing it" and "the 1/48 models out there are too delicate for wargaming."

    I understand what you are trying to say but we are talking a model scale for WW2 vehicles, not a new “uncovered by plastic” subject like the Aztecs or warring States Chinese. They are diffrent things (one is a whole medium while the other is just missing stuff, some of which could have been covered earler if certain people in the industry had had the vision to do so) so your risk comparison  arguement does not really fly with me.

     Likewise I am thinking about the new players, given the big rule set for WW2 is Boltaction they are less likely to look at 1/48 and more likely to look at Warlord's 1/56 offerings first and then at  Rubicon and then maybe at WA if WA does vehicles. Older gamers are normally the ones who use the 1/48 Tamiya and Bandai models they often  already have on the shelf.

    Likewise that one model that looks funny compared to the rest of your motor pool is the one that goes on ebay and you never buy again if your into "everything looking just right". By doing everything in 1/48 your asking those newer players with obsessive compulsives tendencies to do the reverse of what is common sense since they are probably going to start with 1/56 kits for WW2.

    Frankly I think WA should  do it in 1/50 since that slides between the two scales nicely if they are going to do a model scale instead of doing the smart thing and just matching up with thier own stuff, but neither where options on the votes just 1/48 and 1/56, so I have to vote 1/56.

    Also Italian tankettes at least in real life do look too small next people pretty much the same way they are in your minature photo, in fact I would say they are smaller (girls und panzer got it right guys, they are hotwheels):

    I get the feeling if the human height of our wargaming figures, at least for WW2, where accurate to the time instead of all of them being 28mm (everyone on the game table is actually modern sized, not  average height they should have been at the time), we would likely not be arguing as much about this since people seemed to have just been a bit shorter on average during WW2 compared today (remember these are the same tankettes, though looking at them they still look a little hotwheel sized):  

    @Grumpy Gnome @Estoc @Yronimos Whateley 

    Would say 1/50 is what Warlord should have been using instead of 1/56 given the proportion their figures have, I was thinking the same for WGA or just non-scale, though when it come to what you guys actually play with I will let you guys be the judge its your game table and neither 1/56 or 1/48 are bad.

    Just in case you guys are wondering though, this is an Italeri 1/56 Italian Tank kit (sold by warlord), which is one of the kits I would be concerned about in 1/56 matching up to WGA's stuff, I am pretty sure Rubicons Italian tank offerings more or less match up to this tank kit but I could be wrong:

    It seems to be okay compared to more realistic proportions, probably would not look good next warlords own minis, but seems fine next to the WA partisan.

    I also used some of the spare parts for kitbashing/converting a warlord universail carrier:

    Also I do have a 1/56 German halftrack by Warlord (it is not listed on   Italeri's 1/56 section , it was in Warlord box  with just Warlord's logo so I assume it’s just Warlord’s, not a coproduction) and it actually does look good next to WA figure surprisingly, but I do mildly regret placing the benches in it:


    However they all do look really small next to the 1/48 Churchill (which looks like it could eat all of them😆)  and the 1/48 Kettenkrad is a bit big next to them. Not a big deal for me since these guys are going to be seeing fantasy setting games not history😉, but I can see it being a big bug a boo for button counters and possibly others which is why if WA decides "they must choose between those two scales" for WW2 vehicles I vote 1/56, it the official gaming scale for now and it looks just as good next WA stuff as 1/48, at least the WA stuff you would be putting on the table next to it for actual historical gaming normally:


    (edit: I forgot to upload the other halftrack pic I had wanted add)

  • I think 1/56 figs just look cartoonisly small compared to my figs. I use primaerly boltaction, Artizan and Empress mins. And when I put them togther some Wargames atlanitc of course. And i currently use 1/48 model kits for my figs as well. Most Tamya and Blitzkrege resen vechicals. 
    So I vote for 1/48 or 1/50. 

  • @Brian Van De Walker 

    Quick question: why was I referenced/messegaged here? I wasn't promoting a listed scale, but rather an accurate proportion (which I shoddily calculated as 1/36 a year or two ago, probably incorrectly, for 28mm as a whole).

  • I recently received 3 Warlord German halftracks, three different designs and all three with crew that are much smaller than Warlord WW2 plastic Germans. This has confirmed to me my decision to move to 1/48.

    That said, the Italian Carro Armato M15/41 above does look decent next to the WGA figure in your picture above. And I am unaware of a plastic 1/48 Carro Armato kit. I have a Carro Armato on the way from eBay and will see how it looks in person I suppose.

    But my painted Warlord M4 Sherman which looks dinky to me next to Warlord plastic Americans is destined for eBay. It is nicely painted so a bit sorry to see it go but the size will always annoy me.


  • @Estoc

    Basically I agree with your earlier statement, or at least the logical conclusion that can be made from your earlier statement, they should try to do the vehicles to match up with the historical proportioned figures.  I apologize if that wasn't clear😅

    @Grumpy Gnome Well my guess is Carro Armato M15/41 will look great next WA  italians,  Warlord's might be a differnt story, but I suppose its not too bad (pardon the SF bits, but that is why I buy warlord):


    Since your thinking of replacing your Sherman, I do have an unbuilt 1/48 M4A3 kit by hobby boss (thought it was the one for Korea, but given the panzer in the background I was mistaken😅), if your interested I could send it to you after this week though as mentioned it is a complex kit, like the ones Jtam was complaining about:



    Also have you considered just chopping off the halftrack crewmen's heads an using bigger heads or is that too extreme difference with thier bodies? (I ask because I have been considering it, particularly after taking pics of it next to the WA partisan figure, I totally should have left the bench seats out).



  • @Brian Van De Walker Very kind of you to offer but I have not decided on exactly which Sherman yet... I was thinking that since I am replacing it anyway to move up to a Tamiya “Easy Eight” but I have also been considering a 1/50 scale die cast model on eBay in order to save time.

    The previous owner of one of the halftracks replaced the heads of the crew with 28mm plastic infantry heads. They do not look too bad if you focus on the heads but the bodies are rather weedy looking in comparison.

    I will feel better about my Italian situation when I finally get my hands on some WGA Italians. The Warlord Italians look pretty good but I still want some WGA Italians and hope the mix and match well.

  • @Grumpy Gnome Yeah, thats probably the wise chose, the HB kit has lots of parts and I think 2 or 3 ways to make it up and it is more of a display kit (so yeah, not a single sitting kit to build), but if you change your mind just ask (though after looking at it, I am tempted to get it started). 

    Guess I will keep thinking  it over on the half track bit. maybe I should just use some standing bodies.

  • Not the best but should help. It was interesting for me to see that the bigger heads looked better to my naked eye than they do in the photos.

    The vehicles were sold to me on eBay, used but sold as Warlord Bolt Action vehicles. You can see the two different plastic loaders are different sizes. Warlord infantry heads have been added to the smaller bodies and look a bit “off” to me but others may be ok with it. Especially once painted and at arms length away on a tabletop. 

    The riflemen are both Warlord Games, one Winter Infantry and one Grenadier.






  • @Grumpy Gnome

    you do have a point things in real life tend look better with big heads (which is why I asked) but it does look like warlord infantry heads are bit too big for crewmen for my tastes (going to have to come up with a more creative solution I guess, maybe try shako heads).

    Looks like you might be right have a point about there being a need for crewmen sets we argued about earlier simply due to Warlord's near heroic proportions even though Rubicon has crewmen with practically every vehicle and upgrade set but the horse wagon and various stowage sets, and yes I actually checked (some upgrade kits even come with options to do them  detached from vehicle as a weapon crew) but they are probably going to be too thin next Warlord’s infantry (though Rubicon with WA and Perry’s parts might actually be a good way to play a 28mm WW2 themed  gaslands game, though I would have to see how they match up and if the parts kitbash together myself).  

    Though I am not sure if crewmen sets would fix the problem @Jtam, you and others have with 1/56 scale vehicles, which seems to stem from combination of Warlord’s infantry figures being a bit too chunky compared to 1/56 scale half the time and personal aesthetics which I can’t help but feel may have been influenced a wee bit by 40k and Hollywood (particularly after the photos I took of the 1/56 stuff next to the WW2 WA figure looked better than even I expected).  

  • OK, I have spent several hours researching this which I probably should have spent painting instead but this is very frustrating. I have searched for and read old several threads on this topic on various forums. Yes, it is an old chestnut that keeps popping up. Sorry if I keep trying to solve an unsolvable issue.

    I did find a thread about the 1/50 scale Solido R35 that was helpful.

    1/50 Solido R35 with 28mm figures

    Does anyone here own both the 1/48 scale New Millennium Toys MB 170V and the 1/43 scale Atlas MB 179V? Are they really two different sized models?

    I ordered a 1/43 Atlas Autoblinda to try the size.

    The 1/43 Atlas models are so much more affordable here in Germany.


  • @Grumpy Gnome 

    The 1/43 models are alas too big.  It's a real shame because there are some nice and affordable Eagle Moss and Russian diecasts in that scale.

    I ended up with a Panhard and a Italian armored car in 1/43 and they went into the sci-fi conversion pile as they are pretty big.

    The New Millennium "diecasts" are mostly plastic but decent for all that.  They scale well with 28mm.

    I have that Solido 1/50th R35 for my in progress 28mm WW2 Romanian Army.  It's a nice representation.  I plan to muddy up the tracks a bit to hide the oversized "Solido" tracks.

  • I thought 1/43 would be too big but it really is not that simple it appears. 

    It seems to me Eaglemoss is Atlas... which is also De Agostini... which is also Classic Armor... which is also New Millennium Toys. Different faces of the same company? Different companies selling the same products? *shrug*

    Which means the very same model is being marketed as both 1/43 and 1/48.

    Check out this blog...


    And then there is this blog, suggesting 1/43 is not too big...


    I have heard a lot of opinions on this on Lead Adventure, where I started the most thread on this very old topic....


    It looks to me like I will be stuck buying each vehicle I want in turn and trying it out individually rather than being able to rely on a stated scale on the packaging. 



  • @Grumpy Gnome 

    Well the pictures seem very clear:


    That is definitely the same model sold as 1/43 and 1/48th.

    That IS an interesting link:


    I've never seen clearer 1/56 is silly for 28mm pictures.  It illustrates what I was trying to say about the CV33.  The smaller a vehicle is in real life the sillier it looks in 1/56 next to 28mm. The CV33 is very small, the crew is basically cocooned in a thin layer of steel.  That's why when the CV33 is 1/56 it's obvious there's no way on earth a 28mm Soldier would fit in there.

    What I get from the above link:

    1/43 is too big.  However, a lot of what's sold as 1/43 is actually 1/48th, 1/50th, or who knows.

    This jibes with a blog entry I saw where the author had bought some "1/43" Russian diecast T-55s that happily turned out far closer to 1/50th.


  • Well a couple of packages arrived in the mail.

    At first the 1/56 Warlord vehicles looked too small. Especially with the driver of the truck being so tiny. And I thought the Atlas AB41 looked “right”.

    However I also received some 28mm Warlord metal Italians and putting one of those as well as a 28mm Warlord plastic German next to the vehicles it seems that the Atlas is indeed too big…. While perhaps the Warlord model is a bit too small. It seems the AB41 is smaller in real life than I expected. Sigh.

    I also noticed there is no scale listed on the Atlas packaging. Just an interesting not about scale interpretation and licensing.

  • @Grumpy Gnome 

    The Warlord 1/56 is clearly too small.  My guess is the too big Atlas brand model is 1/43.

    This supports the 1/50th and/or 1/48th being the sweet spot.

    What brand/what is the painted "firing" miniature?

  • The painted mini is a 28mm metal Warlord Italian Infantry... I believe. You know how eBay goes. The painting standard was better than what I expected from the auction photos.

  • @Grumpy Gnome 

    One more factor for your mental calculus.  The Warlord metal Italians are the smaller end of 28mm.  The newer WGA Italians appear to be on the upper end.

    Screenshots from this nice video:





  • Yeah, I am familiar with that comparison. However, it is one thing to see photos/videos.... it is quite another to see things in person. I will feel better when I have some WGA Italians to personally compare.

    And I need to put together a Tamiya 1/48 Autoblinda. Based on checking the parts last night it looks like it is sized right between the Warlord and Atlas Autoblindas.

  • I am leaning towards 1/43 now as appropriate die cast vehicles are so readily available and affordable. And being prebuilt, they save me so much time over 1/48 model kits. I spent way too much frustrating time repairing the tracks on a second hand 1/48 model tank.

    Given the nature of the games I want to play I will tolerate vehicles being a little too big.

    Admittedly though the scale is weird on these toys, the vehicles are very different but the .50 HMGs are almost the same size on each.

    1/50 Solido on the left and Atlas/Altaya/Eaglemoss whatever 1/43 on the right with a Warlord Games 28mm US Army Infantry figure.

    1/50 vs 1/43

Please login to reply this topic!