My little (stupid looking) soldiers

The link that you have given is a familiar one for me. Still I like less helmet, more body though.
I have found about 12 different sites before even asking here. I even looked in old games (GTA as example). Perhaps you know some other looking criteria for me? I used for example "topdown", "from top", "from above", "soldier", "infantry" etc.

Glad someone agrees with me :). Although, many old RTS do have a difference between soldiers and tanks with viewpoint. dune 2 and C&C dawn anyone? That is the reason for confusion. Especially since soldiers only show an helmet.
The reason for 45 degrees would be that the camo that is used for the tank, is also "only" used for the suit. Not the helmet/backpack?
If it is going to be topdown view, I need at least 50% other body than the helmet/backpack. And it can't be the weapon either.

That is a new one for me, thanks. Will study it. It does show more body than helmet.

***

When I have plenty of time, I get down to it.
First I'll create the rifle infantry. Which is most basic, but also holds a weapon.
Several versions for show and tell.
Once chosen the right one: Then the other infantry will be done in a short time.

More links/suggesitons are always welcome.

Thanks.

This one also gave good insights. Thanks.

However, since soldiers are much smaller than the average tank. would it be ok to use different scale's?

If the tank picture is normal size. Than the soldier is going to be around 3 to 5 times bigger. If I use the same scale for the soldier as the tank, a lot of white space remains on the card. (See the size of those hatches on the tank)
And it isn't like that I am going to put squads on one card.
Further, I want the camo to be clearly visible (same quality).

And how do I make these different scale's clear to a player?

Sorry, for the pieces; 20² to 25² mm is about the upper limit. This due to the board size and hexagon field sizes. Or else it would have been a swell idea. Every piece needs to be the same size.

Also, they are going to be stacked and need to be able to move stacked on various occasions.

Each piece is also going to have at least 1 whiteboard counter piece when needed. They too are needed to remain multi functional.

Currently there are 3 valid options, please an opinion on all three:

1 - Smaller units will go in group shot pictures, the counter is simply going to say how much units I have of that type. It doesn't matter if it is just one of them.

Although, future and most likely bigger units than the current light tank, would be sized down.

2 - The second option that I value more: A little thin line in the upper right corner that indicates 1 meter (and perhaps 10 centimetres).
:) It did well on the doodle units.

This means that a soldier piece has the l metre line across almost the entire piece. And the soldier itself is going to be roughly "50 cm" in diameter.

Not only that, but the second option would mean that the tank is going to have about 1/6th line. And I have my mathematical reasons for that.

The most positive about this is that I can keep detail in my soldier because of the size. Things like guns/grenades or simply being a medic/mechanic can be made more clear.

3 - Both previous options could be combined. But then I will do this when a group of units is trained as a whole squad. (Less cover options in open field, but more fire power over time). It can be done when using only option 2. But it cannot be done when using only option 1.

The game is rather, complete and done. Changing size will work against the balance in the rules. Range, domination and movement are all locked in the current balance. This also regards strategy that is intertwined with the terrain and the location of the units.

All I want is to make a better prototype. I am not going to burn down a working game just because for the art.

To keep the size of the game field (= number of hexagons on the map) fun. I can't go bigger then 25² mm. And smaller than 20² mm will provide problems with picking them up etc.? Also, I don't want players to be using a magnifying glass just to tell the units.

Hey, that is actually a cool idea.
Thickness equals size.

Although, I need to keep in mind that the first game allows up to 3,600 worth of points as maximum. But in future games, 6,000 and after that, who knows. So, no kubes.
Of course I have to apply a minimum as well. Can't have paper thin units.

I'll throw it into the group as an extra option

PS, I see you think the units are hexagons as well, the units are actually square pieces while the map has hexagons, reasons are:
- to be able to pick them up without trouble, no shifting of other pieces.
- the battle takes place off the map, placing them appart while maintaining cover/support is easier with squares as well
- storage of the units is easier with squares as well

***

Meanwhile, I am experimenting with the meter line. It actually looks cool.