Tuesday 26 June 2012

Hind Commander: 1:600 Helo Minis (Oddzial Osmy)

Another wet day confined me to the shed (no mowing, yay!) and I got some of the Hind Commander minis finished.  

US forces (Kiowas, Apaches and Blackhawks) fly over a hill, supported by two F16s.

The rotors supplied were a tad sticky and attracted fingerprints which made them more 'reflective' than I would like. However they attached easily and were a worthwhile addition.

 Tail rotors were also supplied but I didn't bother with them as they were so tiny; I felt they added nothing to the model from tabletop distance. 

Russian forces move through a near-future town (Brigade buildings, reviewed here); Mi2s, Mi8s and Mi24 Hinds. I found a toothpick handy for painting the portholes on the Mi8/Mi17s. 

1:600 - To Small?
My plans for using the sand table were ruined when I realised how easily the tiny 1cm-long tanks would vanish into the sands.  I should be safe with 1:300 but the helos have turned out OK and I am now not sure: to go 1:300 or stay with the 1:600?  I've made a start in 1:600 and terrain is very cheap; but the tiny 1:600 "rice grain" infantry turn me off and the scout helos don't do much for me as I mentioned here.

The 1:600 helos paint up OK, rotors are good; but still not sure if should switch to 1:300...

Check back soon for a AAR/retrospective review of Hind Commander


  1. Well my take is that we play miniatures games (as opposed to board wargames) because of the aesthetics of laying out the goodies on the tabletop and the impact/fun that has. If 1/600 isn't giving you that, then the switch may be in order. 1/300 is still darn cheap and your investment in 1/600 as it currently stands is pretty minimal in relative terms. My 2c worth anyway!

    BTW I think you did a bang up job with those models!

    1. Thanks - I certainly didn't labour over them - some people put more work into 1:600 than 28mm - IMO small = cheap n easy

      Problem is, 1:600 terrain is a LOT cheaper than 1:300; I did a big study on 1:300 terrain a month or so back and I concluded all of them are ripoffs, considering (a) resin used and (b) outrageous postage (sometimes up to 50% of purchase price)

      Also, 1:300 is large enough that you need to worry about details and decals - something you can "gloss over" with 1:600 - a undercoat, quick drybrush and a few highlights - Bob's your uncle...

  2. sorry for the late reply but I just stumbled on this post,
    my recommendation is to base your 3mm stuff, its what I do.
    depending on what rules you plan to use, platoon bases would work. I am working on forces for Modern Spearhead so i have Platoon bases for US/NATO and half company bases for WARPAC. this also works for Cold War Commander. the other thing to keep in mind is that 3mm miniatures introduce a fog of war aspect to your games that is rules free (is that a BMP or T72 over there? are those ATGM or HMG teams?) so long as you play it that way, which I like. between me and a friend we have a full 1 to 1 Russian Motorised Rifle division, a West German Panzer Brigade, a US Armored Cavalry Squadron, and a few other budding forces. as a way of price comparison, I bought a T72 battalion online in 6mm GHQ at a discount, and it was still more expensive than my 3mm Tank REGIMENT... that is with all the supports...

  3. I suppose making a "diaorama" makes sense. The 1:300 vehicles and infantry would benefit from being "dressed up".

    The individual basing is awfully fiddly but seems to be needed for HC.

    I'm starting a 6mm mechwarrior/heavy gear project so I'll run a comparison between 6mm and 3mm when the project is up and running...