inquisitor scale debate

[Stormgrad]

GAV'S EDIT: this is a blend of arguments about inq28 and their place at IGTs; i've done my best to split the topic properly, but as with alot of debates it's a mess


The Painting and modeling round brings up some issues on if it's done the same way as this year with competitors voting on each others mini's will this be limited to voting only on your scale. I hope so mostly because i know that people will be bias towards there native scales. Also those of us that work and play at 54mm know the limitations of the range that's out there where as those who play at 28mm might not understand the challenges faced by modelling in the 54mm scale(and vice versa).

Actually I'm just going to come out and say it Playing inquisitor at 28mm isn't for me i don't like it and it does not interest me i skip over the 28mm modeling threads. Frankly it is not my cup of tea, i have no problem with others indulging it. If i was in a situation where i was marking 28mm models id probably mark them lower than 54mm just because it isn't for me. Frankly i would be happier if i was marked and competing against my fellow 54mm players than only marked by 54mm players and competing against 28 and 54mm players.

[Draco Ferox]

Whereas I don't see a difference between the two scales- in fact, I like what Kaled has done with his namesake, and I appreciate that whilst the two scales are different, if a really well painted/modelled 54mm model and a really well painted/modelled 28mm model were in a painting and modelling contest, the  people's perceptions of scale shouldn't affect their scores. Say you decided to try Inq28 and you had a great game- would you still score the GM low because it's not your preferred scale. I like projects at both scales, as 54mm models are generally better painted and modelled by virtue of the larger size being easier to work with, but that makes truly excellent 28mm models all the more remarkable.

[Stormgrad]

This isn't about my personal feelings over the two scales I am pointing out the fact that people may be bias towards there native scale and the fact that people who model at the opposing scale are less likely to appreciate the work due to a lack of understanding about the range of models available an example is a model using only base gw inquistor parts put together in a new unseen way well since the game is over a decade old now that is fairly impressive someone who models at the 28mm scale may not appreciate that. 

My point about how i feel about 28mm is to emphasize the fact that i wouldn't know what i was looking for if i was to mark a miniature at that scale beyond the painting (As it is painting AND modelling competition). I also used it to again reinforce the point about being bias towards ones native scale, I know that i would be bias this isn't a bad thing i know i am and i know other people are likely to be so all in all it will likely even out but still its going to be present.

You say that you like projects at both scales and then you go onto say that 54mm are easier to work with does that mean that when presented with two well done models that are roughly equal at both scales that you would mark the 28mm model higher because 54mm are "easier to work with" so obviously the 28mm model required more modelling and painting skill? This isn't a personal attack you believe that 54mm models are easier to work with by that token you must believe 28mm models are harder to work with and so achieving the same result at the smaller scale must take more skill. This is your opinion but it also shows a bias towards 28mm models over 54mm.

Just making the point that the scoring for 28mm and 54mm should be separated and you should only score players and models and compete against players and models from your chosen scale due to numerous personal bias in regards to scale.

[Stormgrad]

I just want to clear one thing up I like 28mm Models i got into wargaming via warhammer and then 40k and then it spiraled but i just feel that the enhanced details in the system require enhanced details in the model, playing at 54mm just seems right to me where as playing at 28mm the suggestion some how feels wrong. That is not to say i think its wrong, hey each to there own playing it at 28mm does not interest me like im sure for your own reasons gaming at 54mm does not interest you guys. My problem is the intrinsic unfairness in judging the two scales side by side, they are different and although the game should play the same its in reality unlikely too, just take LOS a game played on the same board with identical warbands at both scales will not be the same game based on this simple mechanic alone 28mm models are less likely to be able to see over objects, this increases cover and would make the game play vastly different (most of the boards and terrain we use for INQ are just some of there larger 40k buildings, its not like we really get "Special" terrain we just get some of the larger stuff they have).

As well as my previous comments about the P&M and how different scale will present different challenges and what i said last night over skype (by the way both the DH and RT rp groups are looking for 1 more member) which basicly boils down to that there seems to be something very unfair about being in a tournament competing against people you may never have a chance to play against or gm for and score against.

theres also the issue of game length Marco made an interesting comment last night that he felt the inq 28 games ran slower than the 54mm games now maybe this is something to do with the scale or just down to the players and there possible inexperience with the game (although i managed to get through my first game ok and i didnt feel i slowed it down and that was at last years IGT). In the IGT game times are arranged ahead of the day and your encouraged to wrap things up on time so you have time to move to your next table and set up and its all fairly regimented if the inq 28 guys are taking longer on a turn than the inq 54 guys (on average) then that will greatly impact there chance of securing there objective and thus impact on there overall score

[Keravin]

Hopefully before then I'll have had the cash to pick up the new models for my 54mm to be one of those bridging the gap.

[Molotov]

It's taken me a couple of attempts to reply to this thread because I've actually gotten quite annoyed reading through it.



I'll stand up and say that I'm one of the key standbearers/figureheads/proponents of INQ28. Of course that doesn't mean it's "mine". But when I started to display my figures, the reaction was very cool, and the viewpoint towards playing the game at an alternative scale was seen in a very negative light. Saussure's Fanatic Article Piercing the Shadows (Fanatic Online #87; I can't access Marco's archive on my work computer to find a direct link) summed up many of the negative viewpoints levelled towards the nascent INQ28 community - that the models weren't as good, that players simply couldn't control themselves from including powerful weapons, and that on some primal level, it was just wrong.  You can read a rebuttal I posted in 2009 here. I'd like to think that almost three years later, some of those arguments have proven to be false - especially whilst elements of the 54mm community enjoy building 54mm Valkyries, battle tanks, and even titans!



My argument has always been thus: That INQ28 and INQ54 share the same heart and the same soul; they're just expressed slightly differently. Live and let live - because after all, they're all just little plastic men, just differently-sized.



The Inquisitor community has always been a little insecure, I think, on some level. Neglected by GW, forced to fashion that neglect into a badge of honour - "At least GW won't ruin our game." / "It's on our hands to make it what we want to make it." Those viewpoints are valid, but people have always seemed worried that the game might die out, worried that GW might drop it entirely, worried that INQ28 might dilute the community or muddy the waters. That attitude is somewhat irksome. Look at these threads on the Ammobunker: (Warhammer 40k in 90mm | Necromunda in 120mm | Mordheim in 54mm) - post 54mm Mordheim on a Mordheim forum, and most people would go "Wow, that's cool!" rather than "You're going against the spirit of the game." And I think it's clear that the Inquisitor community does need to recognise that INQ28 isn't a hostile threat, but something to be welcomed, if only for the opportunity to share ideas and creativity.



And then on the other hand, suddenly some of the more popular members of the board have (fairly recently) decided that INQ28 is acceptable - (with this I'd consider Marco and Gav my two prime exemplars; clearly people like Hadriel Cane have been doing it for longer.) Suddenly there's a push to include INQ28. With the INQvitational I wanted to showcase the incredible range of talent inherent within the INQ28 community - to show that events could run, that INQ28 can be played in the same spirit as the 54mm Conclave events. I've received great support from Marco and Kaled (and yes, John Blanche has been instrumental also in certain aspects) and I hope that the day will run very smoothly, and be a starting point for both an "INQ28 Community" (most definitely in inverted commas) and for future events along with the greater Inquisitor community.



From my viewpoint, I want to see how the INQvitational goes before I can commit myself elsewhere. It's also another reason why I've refrained from commenting in this thread. (That, along with the seeming lack of sensitivity shown in some posts in this thread.)



------------------



Lastly:



In order to quickly reply to Stormgrad's comment here:

theres also the issue of game length Marco made an interesting comment last night that he felt the inq 28 games ran slower than the 54mm games now maybe this is something to do with the scale or just down to the players and there possible inexperience with the game (although i managed to get through my first game ok and i didnt feel i slowed it down and that was at last years IGT). In the IGT game times are arranged ahead of the day and your encouraged to wrap things up on time so you have time to move to your next table and set up and its all fairly regimented if the inq 28 guys are taking longer on a turn than the inq 54 guys (on average) then that will greatly impact there chance of securing there objective and thus impact on there overall score

It's important to note that the game didn't really run that much slower - but we did accidentally play on a 4x2 board rather than a 2x2 board. That means a game that was (effectively) being played on 8x4 instead of 4x4. That simply meant that the action took a lot longer to get going. The INQvitational, being heavily based on Kaled's previously-run Carthaxian Succession, will run to a similar timescale - 75 minute games. I think that's eminently achieveable, especially when I read battle reports from the IGT saying "...and then we ran out of time."

[MarcoSkoll]

It's taken me a couple of attempts to reply to this thread because I've actually gotten quite annoyed reading through it.

Ah yes. I did wonder when you might show up.

I'd like to think that almost three years later, some of those arguments have proven to be false -  especially whilst elements of the 54mm community enjoy building 54mm Valkyries, battle tanks, and even titans!

Yessss.... but I can say that these projects aren't entirely a proof that INQ54 players "couldn't control themselves from including" either. I do it not just from a case of "something to use", but also "something to have" and "something to do".

A scratch-built 54mm Rhino is a much more interesting thing to have than a store-bought 28mm one. And I love building things - I'm a very kinaesthetic person. I imagine both come across in my Inquisitor modelling a lot - doing things for the uniqueness and challenge.

But yeah, there is a degree of girlish giggling about the idea of doing an Inquisitor game with a Titan.

Post 54mm Mordheim on a Mordheim forum, and most people would go "Wow, that's cool!" rather than "You're going against the spirit of the game."

True, but it is different to see a group's pet project versus something that's splitting the community down the middle.

And I don't exactly imagine a whole lot of the Mordheim players would disagree with Stormgrad's sentiment of "if it works for them, but it's not something I'd get into myself" if they were presented with a scale they didn't play in.

And then on the other hand, suddenly some of the more popular members of the board have (fairly recently) decided that INQ28 is acceptable

In my case, I think you're confusing the points I decided it was acceptable and the point I got into it. This is me posting in late 2009 (#1 and #2), and I'd say I was accepting it with the same caveat that I would today - that it was 28mm Inquisitor, not 28mm WH40K. (But, largely as a result of your own work, we have been seeing a trend away from the people who did the latter).

This is about two years earlier than I got into it, which largely came about due to three things coming together.
1) My GW boycott started a search for new things to do with my hobby and this got me looking at model ranges I'd largely previously overlooked. Lots of models and ideas.
2) The fact there were actually 28mm events starting to appear on the calendar meant I'd actually have a chance to use some of what I put together. Previously, everyone else I could play against used 54mm.
3) I started writing a comparison for the Carthax Wiki that I then realised I was probably under-qualified to pen.

I think a variant of #2 is part of the reason why we're seeing a "sudden" push to include 28mm. There weren't really enough event-ready 28mm players to invite until now.

That simply meant that the action took a lot longer to get going.

Particularly with the slowest floating in the world.  All of those one action turns you rolled...

Is that alright for people to wait that long, or would someone prefer to take that slot for a mixed event?

If I'm running something I'd want to push it later rather than earlier - events are a lot of prep work anyway, and I can't imagine that the extra complication of having to cater for both scales would do anything to help that.

[greenstuff_gav]

All of those one action turns you rolled...

that happens in either scale 

on getting into 28mm, i've never had issue with inq28 and my latest campaign (The Lachesis Affair) is designed for inq28...
while the models are easier to work at (due to the plethora of components) it's never been a high priority for me as i prefer bigger figures and the more character-heavy feel of the game
the opportunity to play some Inq28 has me working on a crew (which i told myself i'd do a long while ago) i'm not opposed to a dual-scale event... just i think the non-GT Inq gaming day would be a better opportunity to get the two communitys to interact without the slightly competitive motivation...

[Heroka Vendile]

The Inquisitor community has always been a little insecure, I think, on some level. Neglected by GW, forced to fashion that neglect into a badge of honour - "At least GW won't ruin our game." / "It's on our hands to make it what we want to make it." Those viewpoints are valid, but people have always seemed worried that the game might die out, worried that GW might drop it entirely, worried that INQ28 might dilute the community or muddy the waters. That attitude is somewhat irksome. Look at these threads on the Ammobunker: (Warhammer 40k in 90mm | Necromunda in 120mm | Mordheim in 54mm) - post 54mm Mordheim on a Mordheim forum, and most people would go "Wow, that's cool!" rather than "You're going against the spirit of the game." And I think it's clear that the Inquisitor community does need to recognise that INQ28 isn't a hostile threat, but something to be welcomed, if only for the opportunity to share ideas and creativity.

Just as a couple general statements rather than a dig at Inq28 or anything you've said Mol; in the miniatures world things are always deemed cooler and interesting when made bigger than normal. Smaller, not so much.
Inquisitor, like other SGs such as Epic and BFG, benefitted from using a scale proportionally rare in wargaming, all major systems are either 28 or 15mm, so the scale acts as a noteworthy part of the games USP (unique selling point). You might argue there are far more games like Dystopian Wars and Babylon 5 now to address that, but there are cancelled out by there being far more new 28mm ranges and games than non-28mm.

words n stuff



To be honest the only point of contention with this whole idea is whether or not the points should be integrated into a single score. I doubt anyone has any qualms with 28 and 54mm GTs occurring side-by-side.

Actually you know what might be the simplest idea for the 2013 IGT? Run parallel GTs on the same day/place/times/etc, keep the scoring of the two scales separate, but in addition to having best GM/P&M/Overall awards in each scale, also have a "Grand Master" prize for the highest overall score in either scale – with the prize being a small bonus or joke trophy added to their existing "Overall winner in X scale" prize, rather than some great big I R CHAMPION prize.
This way we get a joint event that doesn't really raise any issues with scale difference and it's effect on gameplay, yet still produces a nominal "outright" single winner (not that we're a community with an "only the winner matters" attitude).

This will also give [the organiser] the opportunity to compare average scoring biases within each scale and thus determine whether or not a single scoresheet would be workable for the 2014 IGT.

The above was thrown down fair fast and loose and I'm quite tired right now, but I'm sure you (hopefully) get the jist.

[MarcoSkoll]

In the miniatures world things are always deemed cooler and interesting when made bigger than normal. Smaller, not so much.

I can think of a lot more cases of players scaling games up than scaling them down - Inquisitor is somewhat unusual in that respect.

And in most other cases, scaling down is seen as an economy approach - less cost, less space - and I have to say, a lot of the reasons I've heard over the years for for 28mm have played right into that stereotype (54mm takes more space, the models cost more, it won't work with my old terrain, etc, etc...). The problem is that this stereotype brings with it the assumptions of lesser detail and character (for example, you won't find many Epic armies where the player's carefully converted a squad of unique and individual veterans) - and that can feel a bit like an attack on a game where detail and character are so key.

Combined with what I said earlier about pet projects vs. community schisms, I'm not entirely surprised that 28mm Inquisitor has taken more flack than the odd 54mm Mordheim project. (My lack of surprise is, of course, very different to saying that the flack is justified.)

Run parallel GTs on the same day/place/times/etc, keep the scoring of the two scales separate, but <snip> also have a "Grand Master" prize for the highest overall score in either scale

You know, this seems a pretty good idea. We get a combined result, but without totally throwing caution to the wind as to whether the combined scoring would work out.

And I suspect we already have such a prize on hand in the form of the rather nice Inquisitor print that's currently adorning the wall above my model display shelf. (Which looks pretty awesome actually. I'll be disappointed when I have to give it back next GT...)