Size comparison -MWDA vs KS vehs

[Colt Ward]

Just wondering if anyone has done side by side comparisons since lots of folks are getting KS vehs in.  I am suddenly thinking some that seemed too big will work, like the Po II Heavy Tank.  Before only a few were good, more were close, and the rest too large.

[General308]

I haven't got my stuff in yet.  But wasn't MWDA on the 10MM scale and a little large on the 10mm scale.   Been a long time so I don't remember for sure.  But hey i have made some of the MWDA stuff work with the old BT minis.   I think with the MWDA stuff it varries so much if it passes the eyeball test.

[Colt Ward]

For vehicles and BA the scale was all over.  Consider the SM1 Tank Destroyer is as big in the body let alone height as some assault tanks like the M1 Marksman.  Part of the reason I mentioned the Po II was I have one sitting on my desk and I am going to put it next to a Von Luckner, Manticore, and Rommel/Patton plastic and IWM Merkava IX for comparison.

[Wolf72]

don't have stuff (or email) yet,

but I've popped a hover apc (with 2 MG on turret in front) off ... I'd say it would qualify as a 50 ton hover w/o to much of stretch of the imagination.

[worktroll]

Also haven't got my stuff, but by looking at the way the new vehicles fill their hex bases, I'd say they scale well compared to the smaller end of MW:DA vehicles - things like the Partisan, Scimitar II, Saxon, etc.

Worth noting that some of the IWM metals are slightly bigger than their MW:DA equivalents - Carnivore, I'm looking at you! The Maxim II is another big one, but looks surprisingly OK next to the modern 'Mech minis.

Yes, some like the SM1, or the Marksman tank, are just too big. As is, alas, the Po mini - the IWM one is shall we say rather bland, and if I could get the MW:DA Po in smaller size I'd be rapt.

[Colt Ward]

Photos in a bit but . . . I actually think the Po II is fine . . . it is a BIT long but I snagged out the Ontos & Behemoth as they were close at hand.  The Tokugawa I was already planning to use, but it is perfect along side.  It is barely longer than the Ontos (which is longer than the Behemoth) but like the Po is a lot shorter over the chassis with the turret's patching height though the Tokugawa has a upside-down saucer instead of the Ontos box-like turret.

Actually, the Po II's tracks are as long as the Ontos tracks, the Po just has a better hull for fording.

[Colt Ward]

Upper left is the Maxim Mk II parked behind the new Maxim, which has a BR Saxon APC next to it.  The Tokugawa is next to the Ontos.  The Behemoth is next to the Morning Star Mobile HQ.  Off the front of the Morning Star is the Drillson that has a Partisan AA Tank next to it.

[ANS Kamas P81]

Your photos aren't showing.  Save them to your computer and upload them as attachments.  It's a weird issue with Facebook photo links.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Looks like the DA minis are still a little bigger than the new ones.

[worktroll]

Given they tended to be massively bigger than the old metals, it's a good thing :)

[Colt Ward]

I did not include the ones that are still too big like the Marksman.  The Morning Star is a bit too big but the Po it's, the CGL tanks are actually 'beefier' and their turrets are all bigger.  When I get time I can do some more comparison but I think it opens up to a lot more options.  Forgot to grab the old IWM Po, Zhukov and Merkava for comparison.

[Weirdo]

I wonder how some other Clix heavy tanks compare, like the Kinnol and Mantueffel.

[Colt Ward]

Never got either of those, but I am going to dig out the box of figures and see a long with pulling the other CGL heavy tanks into a comparison along with showing a height comparison since my heavies have been de-based.