Scale standards

[eflfanatic]

Does the MFCA need to set a standard for scales used in producing figures, bases, game boards, and accessories. I believe that we do just to give manufacturers, current and future, a guide to go by when considering developing anything to be used with miniature football.

In my opinion the MFCA and its members are the foremost authority on all things miniature football. We can still do this and stay within our purpose and mission.

Just about any organization that has anything to do with playing board games in competition has standards in regards to equipment, rules and regulations.

Its time we do this.

Thanks,
Chris LeMay

[daainchent1]

sounds like a plan in the works,but um only the new guy!

[eflfanatic]

Members as well as non members may vote. I would like everyone's opinion.

Thanks

[eflfanatic]

I have been doing a lot of research on this today, primarily on wargaming and scales used in wargaming. 25 mm to 28 mm seems to be the most popular for figures. Which I think is pretty much the scale we use for figures anyway. So I don't think by setting a standard we would be drasticlly changing anything anyway. Our biggest differences are in the scale of game boards which is where a standard needs to be set to give gameboard manufactures something to consider and league and tournamnet organizers a standard by which to set their equipment rules.

Thanks

[Shabby J]

Horrible idea and a waste of time. We already have a scale standard, all currently manufactured figures fall within the same scale as it relates to the others, give or take a few millimeters. A scale figure standard is not needed.

Differences in game boards as mentioned will never go away. We have guys using 620's, 308's, Watts, Rollers, boards made by Celo and Bill Porche, boards made by their own owners and I am sure I have forgotten a host of other board makers as well.

Are we seriously going to ask coaches not to play on their $500 fields because it does not fit the scale standard?

Are we going to set aside excellent running fields in a tournament or game day to play on fields that run like an 10 year old's science class experiment just because it fits the scale?

This is never going to happen, there are too many fields out there in use that cost too much money and run too good to even consider this.

Bad idea, a tough sell and really not time well spent. You would never get this community to agree on one scale size field anyways.

Just my two cents worth.

[detroitchild]

Chris,

I think that each item/issue should be address separately. I think the debate about figure standards (size, weight) has been and will continue to be a good one. I could see some standards there. We have already moved towards a standard rule set for beginning and advanced play. I think it may be a little difficult to regulate field size for the very reasons that Shabby has pointed out. Guys will play on various sized boards for whatever reasons (preference, economics, availability, etc). That should probably be enforced at the league/tournament level...if at all. Therefore, I think there should be a separate poll for each item mentioned (i.e. figures, rules, board, accessories, etc.).

Just a thought.

[eflfanatic]

Shabby J and detroitchild,

Just about all current rule sets that I have read lately allow for any size game board to be used with the "Home Team" coach being allowed or requested to provide the game board to allow for "home field advantage".

I am not looking to change that. I like that rule and prefer to participate in any competitive venue that does allow it. You are always going to have certain league and tournament organizers who prefer one game board over another, mainly the manufacturers of particular game boards and equipment, because they are sponsoring that league or tournament. Namely, Miggle and Buzzball. Nothing wrong with that.

The question came up when the MFCA was trying to decide what scale to use in its skills competitions. Refer to the previous thread regarding "Height and Scale." http://www.miniaturefootball.com/for...t=Height+Scale

I know getting everyone to agree on anything is going to be impossible. But standards have to be set to use as guidelines for the future development, unity and continued growth of the game as a whole.

If you study the history of any organized sport standard rules had to be established for game play and equipment for any sport to survive which was certainly the case for college and professional football. Even they still have their own variations and rules that are unique to their styles of play. But a football field is still 100 yards long by 53 1/3 yards wide no matter whether it is professional, college or high school. We still need to set a standard scale to use as a guide and that's all it is "just a guide" not something to be "set in stone" and say "you can't play unless your game board is this size."

Just my opinion and "two cents" worth.

[eflfanatic]

Just bumping back up because the voting is so close. I would greatly appreciate some more input on this. Over 250 members and only 20 people voting? This is your chance to let your voice be heard on something that I feel is very important to our hobby.

If you do not wish to express your opionion publicly, then please send me an email or pm. http://www.miniaturefootball.com/forum/member.php?u=32

Thanks,
Chris LeMay

[roller]

Fellas,

I've got an idea that may satisfy the masses. Instead of one standard field scale, why don't we have several. Some people like the portability and the tradition of the 620. Some like the expanded play of a monster board (24x48). Some want to take it even further and build true size boards (think pit couture).

I'm sure there are others but I just chose three to keep the example short.

Model train enthusiasts realized that different hobbyists had different preferences so they created different scales to accomodate the hobby. I think we could do the same.

We could create a standard scale for 620 sized boards, another for the 24x48 boards and another "true scale" that perfectly matches our 25/28mm figures.

I'm certain that coaches will still want to create other concepts and that's fine. The home coach always has the choice of field. But, as a maker of boards and accessories, it would certainly help to have a standard size to build to.

For instance, I get orders to field dress kits. I have to have the coach measure various parts of their field so that I may be able to match their board. If we had a standard, they could just tell me that they are using "Tourney Scale", "True Scale", "Play Scale", etc..

What do ya think?

[gridironpainter]

I have noticed what is called "scale creep" in the wargaming community. Each new figure on the market pushes for more detail, but with that comes a slight size increase. I have noticed this with the Jennings figures, but man do they look good.

However, I somewhat miss the simple pleasure I got from Tudor/miggle teams. There is a certain charm to the figures which comes from using your imagination to fill in the lacking detail. I can tell you when I got my first painted Tudor teams, in my mind they looked just as good as the best painted miniatures do to me now.

Also, I love my 620. I tweaked it to work the way I like, but I also realize that there are much faster/better boards out there, and I have to decide whether to make that change/investement.

In the end I am just overwhelmed by the options right now, and I would be reluctant to make a stand for any one option. I bet that the lack of voting has to do more with this uncertainty of preference.