>>11066441>you don't really need that for 1:12 cause the figures themselves take up more of the focusI disagree, because almost everyone just wants to fill space, creating clusterfucks, so of course something bigger will stand out a little more. With 1:18, it's easy to go even more overboard.
If 1:12 were easier to make dioramas for (playsets and background pieces are super abundant for 1:18), you'd also see more people doing it, instead of putting the focus on the figure. It's visually more interesting and tells a story about the character themselves vs wood or white wall backgrounds that are so common for 1:12 displays.
It's why those Little Armory sets are so popular here for 1:12 fans, because it's one of the few ways to get 1:12 backgrounds.
For 1:18, the vehicles themselves are background pieces if you want them to be. It's a cheap way to tell a story with your figures and can be irresistible to want to play with the toys to further that story and actually have space to tell it, since 1:18 isn't that big. So you have that vehicle or two on the same shelf and it's exciting to look at.
If you try to make 1:12 do something interesting, you basically take up half the shelf making 2 characters look like they're in a fight.
And Detolfs only look good with 1/6 figures. With 1/12, you're leaving 2/3rds of the shelf looking empty, because there's so much vertical space
>>11066811Margins on 1:18 figures are bigger, thanks to their lower price point. 1:12 stayed $19.99 for almost a decade, despite costs rising, because they feared breaking the $20 point. After breaking that price point, they're still cautious about it. Whereas 1:18 has freely increased whenever and nary a complaint, because they were still cheap.
Anyway, point of the matter is that it's not profit margins the company cares about, it's that increase in revenue. Hence other companies still charging $10 for 1:18. Two packs for 1:18 are common for that extra revenue btw.
