CAVSO True Scale

[Colonel Kane 5429]

LOL @ FOXDEN.  I will voice my opinion, I would like to see the airplanes in scale with the CAVs, but as is my OP, I will defer to the decision that CAVBOSS makes. I may or may not agree with it, however I will except it. 

[Girot 8280]

I'm comfortable with the old "True Scale" for aircraft and I'd recommend using the Tsuiseki as the benchmark.  

 

Anything bigger than that and the aircraft may as well be their own game, IMHO.

 

I am also satisfied with the final 44mm on the Despot and with it being the tank benchmark.  Thank you, bossman!

[Foxden Racing 629]

I'm comfortable with the old "True Scale" for aircraft and I'd recommend using the Tsuiseki as the benchmark.  

 

Anything bigger than that and the aircraft may as well be their own game, IMHO.

 

I am also satisfied with the final 44mm on the Despot and with it being the tank benchmark.  Thank you, bossman!

 

Likewise.  After you shared the perspective photos I came to understand just how big they currently are (and where the bossman was coming from with his concern).  Between that, doing the research on what N-gauge means, and a private conversation with said bossman, I can see every side of the debate and then some. 

 

I wouldn't want them any bigger than the current "True Scale", that's for sure...but would honestly be ok with a small bump downward if he decides not to resize things in fluff instead, given that the overall scale is moving downward as well.  Screwing around in photoshop, 2" is definitely at the small end of the range now that we know that tanks like Despot are getting upsized, and I'd like to see them bigger than that...but I'm not the only guy they have to consider.

[Maredudd 2882]

I still like the idea of full N-Scale, or rather slightly less as that is what 1:180 turns out to be, but can also deal with even smaller if I have to. The pics Girot posted helped me "get the picture". I will, on the other hand, mount the aircraft on taller posts . . . wouldn't want them to run into and CAVs as they fly around the battlefield! :-)

 

Cuz you know, there are all those . . . wait for it . . . wait for it . . . wait for it . . . BIG STOMPY ROBOTS!!!  (Sorry folks! I just love that phrase! Can you tell?    )

Edited September 29, 2014 by Maredudd

[Foxden Racing 629]

Right.  I don't mind if they get smaller, because the whole universe is getting smaller [1/180 is outside the range of N-gauge scales, on the small side].  As long as they're big enough that they're not visually dominated, I'm good. 

 

If that means model sizes change because the scale did and fluff sizes didn't...or because the old ones weren't correct in the first place...so be it.

 

If that means fluff sizes change becuse the scale did and the models didn't, so be it.

 

I wouldn't recommend the scale being different than the others, if only because there was a week-long argument that broke out the minute it was suggested the planes might be at a different scale than the rest.

 

I do hope they keep the Game Scale planes in production [even if they don't jump to Bonesium], as they look fine when they're not on a mixed-unit tabletop.  Pair with the true-scale versions of the planes being upgraded to dropship status, and boom!  Space superiority scenarios with models that at least differentiate the roles [if not completely correct in scale].  Hey Chrome, what's the finished size of that Herc?  I feel like doing math now...

[Titus 173]

So whats the final word CAVBOSS?

Edited October 1, 2014 by Titus

[CAVBOSS 3145]

While its not "final" yet, Im leaning towards making the aircraft 1/350th scale (basically 1/2 scale). This would keep the aircraft around 2" (the "true scale" aircraft we now have). I really feel fielding possibly 4" aircraft on the board, even 6" up on a stand would just look "dumb" IMO. Also this scale is a popular aircraft and ship scale (see http://www.1001modelkits.com/1980-1-350-model-kits ) and might make for some interesting conversions for the game. Please discuss.

[falstius 2402]

I think so long as it is clear that ground units are scale X, air units are scale Y, space units are scale Z, it is good. I also think 2" is a good size for painting efficiently.

[Colonel Kane 5429]

I can live with that. It would help tie in the MetalTS ones.

[Titus 173]

Thus the word was spoken. Ramen

 

(I think your reasoning is fair)

[Girot 8280]

I'll cast my vote again, this time for 1/350th scale aircraft.

[Vil-hatarn 1630]

Seems like a reasonable compromise, and I like that it's a simple ratio to the other models--much easier to tell people "these are half-scale" than "these are [random fraction] smaller".

[Pegazus 35195]

I really think this is a good way to go. Aircraft have the potential to get so large that they'd be ridiculous to try to produce.

[Maredudd 2882]

I can live with 1:350 . . . 2" sounds like a good size. Not sure what the Dragonflies I saw this past weekend but they were ridiculously small. They looked almost like WWI Biplanes flying around BIG STOMPY ROBOTS hang in off of the Empire State building!

 

[Vil-hatarn 1630]

Historically, the Dragonfly was true scale (or closer to it than other aircraft at least). It's basically a single-seat glider with a gun and some engines strapped on.