Basing

Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 11 Location: Defiance, Ohio, USA

Question is, I think before we all get crazy about painting bases of figs and all, we need to figure out the basing scheme.

I vote for what I mentioned in the yahoo group list, but then thats just my personal bias. Smile

Site Admin Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 174

I agree. I was going to base some stuff up tonight ... but then I was reading the other basing scheme posted in Flames of the Revolution by Thresh and those are pretty good too. Now I'm not sure which way to go, but I know basing is the next step towards doing some playtesting.

Posted: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:14 am

The basing proposed by Dillingham :

and

Posted: Sun Mar 05, 2006 12:40 pm

Have we secided how many figs to a base yet? If not I was thinking of the following.

line inf. 8 shoulder to shoulder and an sgt to the side or behind 9 total (same as the other company had them) medium base.

skirmishers 3 spread out and 2 spread out with an sgt behind on two small basses

officers 2 to a small base (can be mounted or on foot)

messangers 1 to a small base (mounted and used for order phase if we decide on having one)

artillery (light) 2 guns with 4 man crew each on a large base (long edge front)

artillery (heavy) 1 gun with 6 man crew on a large base short edge to the front.

Cav. 4 mounted troups to a large base ( a la wwii cossacks)

Cav. (elites) 3 mounted troops to a medium base (a la wwii cossacks command)

Divisional commander 5+ models on a large base short edge front (represents him and his enterage)

well thats a rough idea anyone else have any thoughts or do we want to make this our bassing convention and modify it as needed later?

just my ideas!
Cool

renleg aka Dan

Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 5 Location: Sweden

Quote:

Divisional commander 5+ models on a large base short edge front (represents him and his enterage)

This isn't the "one platoon equals a division" version right?

Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 11 Location: Defiance, Ohio, USA

*hrms* My only concearn with the 2 bases is a unit convention is that its awefully small, and hard to represent larger and smaller units. Up it to three, and thats more than fine.

The other posting I like, other than the use of large bases: I would think keeping the base variation down to just the two sizes would be best from a simplicities sake: 3-4 cav on a Medium long edge front would work just as well.

Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 5 Location: Sweden

Wow, this is going to be a tough nut to crack. I thought everyone was agreed on "one base=one battalion" Shocked

Posted: Sun Mar 05, 2006 7:16 pm

ok i think i didnt explain well as there is a bit of confussion. so I thought we had agreed that 2-3 medium basses was a regiment (4 small basses for skirmishers). now that being said the last post would be whats on each of those basses. Does that clear things up? I wanted to get a feel of what each base would have so that we can move on to the next step. What does everyone think of that? As for the commander that was just an Idea its not set in stone. I just wanted it to be large than the regimental command for ease of play and spotting. If anyone had any better ideas then fire away! Question

Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 5 Location: Sweden

Certainly clear things up for me. A NapFoW regiment translating to a FoW squad. Several regiments with commander (brigade or division depending on nationality?) and maybe artillary and/or detached cavalry translating in to a FoW platoon.
Maybe I'm stating the obvious here but you don't mind do you? Wink

Posted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:20 am

thats sounds like what i was trying to say. Sorry if it wasnt that clear. Hope this has cleared things up. Does anyone else have any ideas for this or does this sound ok? I was thinking we could go on the firing ranges next, and some sort of overwatch or volley fire between inf. teams. but thats only what i want to do right now, that can change at a mo. notice LOL Surprised

Site Admin Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 174

OK. I've been wrestling with this a bit. I've dragged out my figs and old books and read some of the two rules sets we have now. Though I am very concerned about straying closer to the problem with Empire V of having to move around 4 bases per batallion and how it slows the game down .... I kind of like Thresh's suggestions for basing and have moved more in that direction. As a result, I've updated my own suggestion for basing (infantry, I haven't diagrammed out the cavalry or artillery yet). There is a PDF at full size here:

http://f2.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/kIkLRPbiMJFtkYinAHA4VBaBk-j1v0Geu6c716Uel8vh2okaFAnXonvX0BRVRnpeCv-EJnt3TzvbhU4WUJ30Ug/NapoFoW%20Basing.pdf

but here's a GIF of it for consideration (note the green units in the middle are not part of the Divisions to either side - they're just there to show different formations).

Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 11 Location: Defiance, Ohio, USA

I think it works out pretty good: And easy for us to rebase, for in my case I do all mine on thin metal bases, just glue the base to a FOW base, and reflock.

Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 10 Location: Franklin, VT

Dill,

These are small bases or bigger figs or just rough pics?

Site Admin Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 174

Four small bases per Regiment/Brigade instead of two large ones in the above image.

I still like the two bases version, but this one does make it easier to represent march columns and attack columns.

... by the way, I realized that I messed up and labeled a march column as a column and didn't show a column of two bases wide and two bases deep. Also an attack column could probably be represented by two forward and two backwards instead of in a line as I've shown.

The idea of short side facing for three rank nations and long side for two rank nations does also allow for a representation of enfilade fire too. Smile

I did rebase a very small Prussian corps tonight. Two Divisions each of three Regiments/Brigades, a Regiment of Hussars and a corps commander. Still have to do the artilery for them too.

I did base the cavalry to the long side. As mentioned by Prussian Al, this basing scheme does allow those with Empire V basing to simply glue their bases onto the FoW bases, if they like and I'm used to my cavalry being in regiments of 6 figures on three bases mounted to the long edge ... though admitedly, that is just what I am familiar with.

I'll try to get some additional diagrams as requested as I'm able, but I'm personally kind of hoping for something close to a general consensus on how we feel about the whole basing thing. Smile

Posted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:22 pm

I can live with this. Although for the record I do like the larger bases. Oh and thanks for the visual aid it does help in figuring out what things will look like! So does that mean this is finally decided then?