The Truth about Wargaming Scales

For many tabletop wargamers, 28mm has become the default scale, so familiar that it’s rarely questioned. But how did we get here, and what might we be missing by sticking to it? In today’s video, I take a deep dive into the evolution of miniature scales in wargaming, starting with my own early experiences painting true 25mm fantasy figures from classic ranges like Ral Partha and early Citadel. These slimmer, more delicately proportioned miniatures represent a very different era of the hobby. One where scale was less about spectacle and more about practicality, and where the focus was firmly on getting armies onto the table rather than individual figures stealing the spotlight.

From there, we trace the gradual shift toward 28mm and the rise of “heroic scale,” where exaggerated proportions made figures more visually striking and easier to paint. While this change helped define modern wargaming and undeniably made the hobby more visually appealing, it also subtly reshaped how games are played, often favouring smaller, more narrative-driven encounters over large-scale battles. In many ways, the scale itself began to influence the kinds of stories we tell on the tabletop.

But scale isn’t just about size, it’s about experience. Drawing on my time playing Epic-scale games in true 6mm (roughly 1/285–1/300), along with dozens of later historical 6mm games, I explore why smaller scales remain my personal favourite for mass battle gaming. At that level, the focus shifts away from individual figures and onto formations, manoeuvres, and battlefield tactics, offering a very different, and arguably more “historical”, feel. Instead of a skirmish, you get something that genuinely resembles a battle, with space to think, plan, and react at a higher level.

I also touch on more recent experiences with 10mm miniatures, particularly from Pendraken, which sit in an appealing middle ground between detail and spectacle. They offer enough visual character to satisfy the painter, while still allowing for battles that feel expansive and dynamic. And while I make a strong case for smaller scales in gameplay terms, I’m equally clear about the strengths of 28mm, especially when it comes to painting, where larger figures offer more room for creativity, experimentation, and expression. There’s a reason so many of us keep coming back to it, even if we occasionally wander off into smaller scales.

One of the key topics covered is the often confusing difference between wargaming scales and traditional model scales. While model makers use precise ratios like 1/72 or 1/285, wargamers tend to rely on approximate figure heights, and even then, we can’t quite agree whether that’s measured to the eye line or the top of the head. The result is a system that’s flexible, but not always consistent, and it’s something that has caused confusion for generations of hobbyists trying to mix ranges or understand what they’re actually buying.

In fact, it’s exactly that confusion that led me to create a dedicated scale guide on my blog many years ago, which has remained one of the most consistently visited pages ever since. If you’re curious, you can find it here. It compares wargaming scales alongside model-making and model railway standards, and judging by how often people still land on that page, it’s clear this is a topic that continues to puzzle hobbyists across all corners of the miniature world.

Ultimately, this isn’t about declaring a “best” scale. It’s about recognising that each scale offers a different way to experience the hobby. Whether you prefer the detail and character of 28mm, the sweeping scope of 6mm, or something in between, scale is less a hierarchy and more a toolbox, one that gives you the freedom to shape your games, your projects, and your enjoyment of the hobby in whatever way suits you best.