Pre-Dreads 1/2400 vs 1/3000

[Bluebear]

Don't Panic (and others),

I will paint my own ships, but I wonder what you think of the relative merits of Panzerschiffe 1/2400 Pre-Dreads and WTJ 1/3000 Pre-Dreads.

I am primarily worried about visibility. I'm in my sixties and wear bifocals . . . and my game table is 5' wide.

Please share your thoughts.


-- Jeff

[Wulf]

I use 1/2400 for my ww1 and ww2 games, The main reason I like this scale is it looks good on the table. I have to say we don't play that many big games, the largest has been Dogger Bank.

I play table top games for the look so 1/2400th suits me.

The only issue we have with the 1/2400th scale ships is when we are at short ranges the scale of the rules compare to the model looks a little out.


For the pre-dread stuff my mate David uses 1/3000th and it works on the table due to the shorter ranges the engagments are. To myself they look a little bit squash.

The cost are very similar for both scales.

[warchariot]

The reason most people use 1/2400 is space and availability. Of course they are made in that scale because of space. Anyway, you should be able to see them and at a distance the paint job doesn't have to be prefect either. Something my eyes are grateful for.

[TheDreadnought]

Either is fine, just depends on what works best for you.

As far as scale goes, if the ranges look weird, just double them - I thought about doing that anyway, but wanted to keep the scale consistent across all three periods (Pre-Dread, WWI, WWII)

Rather than changing the data cards, the easiest is just measure range, divide by 2 and use that as your actual range.

[warchariot]

Great tip on ranges

[shigure]

I have played in several different scales (1/700, 1/1200-1250, 1/2400, and smaller) and the 1/2400 seems to be the best from the standpoint of space required, model cost, ship availability, ship recognition, and level of detail one may want in their models (GHQ vs. Panzerschiffes).

[Bluebear]

I have ordered some of each so that I can see them in "real life", but given the glacial pace of Canada Post, it will probably be a couple of weeks before I see them.

From Panzerschiffe I ordered the six major ships of each side for the Battle of the Yellow Sea.

From WTJ I ordered the seven major cruisers for the Battle off Ulsan.

This way I'll at least get a chance to fight a battle with them in order to see them in action. . . . But I'm still interested in Don't Panic's comments.


-- Jeff

[TheDreadnought]

I think the WTJ ships might actually be a smidgen higher detail. And by a smidgen, I mean a smidgen. But, since it's the same level of detail on a smaller ship, it looks more detailed.

If I were to buy a pre-dread fleet I'd probably go the WTJ route. Of course, I haven't really looked at the smaller ships. I'm sure the detail is consistent, but some pre-dread cruisers and especially destroyers in 1/3000 must be tiny!

So if eyesight is a concern, I might go the 1/2400 route if you're using anything smaller than pre-dread battleships.

[Bluebear]

Well the Panzerschiffe 1/2400 ships arrived today. I really like them. There is plenty of detail . . . but . . . they are SMALL! The battleships are around two inches in length (some slightly over, some slightly under, most pretty close).

Despite liking them, I suspect that they may be a bit too tiny for my eyes . . . I'll have to see once I've painted them up, but they are small. I imagine that the 1/3000 WTJ ships will be too small, but they have not yet arrived (I had ordered the Panzerschiffes first).


-- Jeff

[theoz]

If you think those are small (1/2400) you should try the Figurehead 1/6000 scale ships.

OTOH, you can use 1/6000 scale ships at what I call "real-scale," with a ground scale of 1 foot=1 nautical mile, which puts the ships the correct scale distance apart. I find I like this scale a lot because the ships look more "real" when they look so far apart.

[Bluebear]

theoz,

Keep in mind the fact that Pre-Dreadnoughts were smaller ships than the WWI Dreadnoughts and much smaller than WWII ships. For me, 1/6000 are completely out of reason . . . I couldn't see them!

Also Pre-Dreads fought at much shorter ranges than did later ships since most ranges were estimated via the Mark I Human Eyeball . . . guns could shoot much farther than actual combat ranges. So a "correct" ground scale is not really a concern for me.


-- Jeff

[shigure]

During the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05 the one of best rangefinders available was the Barr & Stroud FA3 used on all of the IJN BB's. It boasted good accuracy out to 7.3 km, but had a significant margin of error beyond that range. Of the Russian BB's only the Borodino class were equiped with the FA3. Some of the Russian BB's had a max range of 14,640 km at 15 deg. elevation. The IJN BB's British guns had a max range of 13.7 km at 15 deg. elevation. So based on this information the guns were really only effective at about half their maximum range due to range finders of the day. Source: 'Russian Battleship vs. Japanese Battleship: Yellow Sea 1904-05" by Robert Forczyk.

[Bluebear]

" Some of the Russian BB's had a max range of 14,640 km at 15 deg. elevation. "

Wow, that's either a typo or those ships could throw a shell over nine thousand miles! . . . . I'm presuming that you meant meters instead of kilometers. . . . *grin*


-- Jeff

[warchariot]

The shot heard round the world!

[theoz]

Jul 13, 2010 17:36:09 GMT -5 Bluebear said:

theoz,

Keep in mind the fact that Pre-Dreadnoughts were smaller ships than the WWI Dreadnoughts and much smaller than WWII ships. For me, 1/6000 are completely out of reason . . . I couldn't see them!

Also Pre-Dreads fought at much shorter ranges than did later ships since most ranges were estimated via the Mark I Human Eyeball . . . guns could shoot much farther than actual combat ranges. So a "correct" ground scale is not really a concern for me.


-- Jeff

To each their own.

I have a fleet of pre-dreadnoughts (for the Dardanelles 1915 scenario I'm bulding) and while 1/6000 pre-dreads are small they are quite visible when mounted on proper bases.

I find that 1/6000 scale has several advantages: they're cheaper (the entire British OOB for Jutland costs only $200, including DDs), they're easier to paint (because nobody expects much detailing on such small pieces), and you can get large scenarios on the table much easier (since the actual models take up much less space). Try to fit a complete Jutland scenario onto a 4'x6'table with 1/2400 miniatures!

I confess here that I am a gamer who uses his miniatures to play wargames, not a minatures artist who plays wargames with his miniatures. To me the simulation of conflict is the thing, not how pretty the miniatures look. I have cheerfully used cardboard counters to represent ships on a gaming table (the ones from Avalanche Press' "Great War at Sea" series of games work quite well) using various miniatures combat rules. At Historicon every year I am the subject of varyingly horrified/pitying looks at my flat gray-painted ships.

[Bluebear]

theoz,

While you have a 24 sq ft table, mine is 52.5 sq ft . . . so, while the 1/6000 works for you (which is fine); a larger scale will work better for me . . . and I'm not looking at Jutland or even Tsushima, but much smaller actions. The nice thing is that the hobby can easily encompass both of us.


-- Jeff

[shigure]

Hmmm...I guess that will teach me to post late at night when my eyes are tired. It is meters, not kilometers. I must have been thinking space gaming...;-D

[Bluebear]

Well, the 1/3000 WTJ ships arrived today. Unlike the Panzerschiffe 1/2400s, with are cast in gray resin, the WTJ ships are pewter.

They are very nice, but SMALL. The various WTJ Pre-Dread ACs that I got are around an inch and a half in length. Their silhouette is also much lower than that of the Panzerschiffe's . . . and probably more realistic although the higher silhouette's of the 1/2400 doesn't bother me at all . . . it makes them more visible.

For someone with a smaller table (and better eyes), the WTJ 1/3000 models would be great . . . and they have a much more extensive range of ships than Panzerschiffe, covering most navies of the period, not just those in active shooting wars (like Panzerschiffe).

I will paint both up and see which appeals to me more . . . but right now I think that I'm leaning toward the 1/2400s.


-- Jeff

[dontpanic]

Yeah, from a painting perspective, I prefer the WTJ - they're small, but so detailed for how tiny they are. Very clean models with no flash. I've painted a couple sets of them so far, and everyone likes them.

Panzerschiffe are really about the cost. The models are ok, not awesome, but they're cheap! The gun barrels are really too fat to be in scale, and I've encountered issues with painting camo on them because the profile from the side of the decks is not to scale. They look good from the top, but not necessarily from the side. That said, I know lots of people who are really happy with Panzerschiffe. And a random rant, they list things on their website by "most important ship in class" not by class. Argh!

So I guess it depends what you're going for. Because they're so drastically different with regards to detail and scale, it's kind of apples and oranges.

[Bluebear]

Don't Panic,

Oh, I LIKE the WTJ ships. They look very nice and are realistically proportioned . . . but they are small. My game table is 5' x 10 1/2' and my eyes are old and less than sharp . . . so visibility is a definite concern for me. The Panzerschiffe's show more freeboard than they should . . . but for me, that's a bit of a plus.

Still I will wait until I've painted them up and played a bit with them. I do prefer the extensive range of Pre-Dread ships that the WTJ has. Panzerschiffe is pretty much limited to Russia, Japan, USA, Spain and China. I'd like at least to have Germany and Britain as well . . . but except for a few Pre-Dreads in their WWI ranges that's pretty much it.


-- Jeff