"Regimental Fire&Fury basing" Topic

Does anyone know what the basing size is going to be for the new rules? Rich has generously kept our club updated with the latest versions of the charts, and we have been using our stands (based for brigade level) as is. However, I had heard that re-basing will not be required, and each stand could essentially be used as two- a front and rear rank. I'm thinking about running a large game (Bentonville, NC) for Cold Wars, and I made need to go this route with the stands as I don't know if I will have time to rebase.

My own take on it was that, if you are just starting out, use 3 figures on a 1" wide by 3/4" deep base – putting the figures in 1 ragged rank. That way, when you put your bases in 2 ranks, it actually looks like 2 ranks, not 4.

If you already have you figs based 4 to a 1" square (or 1x7/8") base, you might want to assume that each stand counts as 2 bases, one behind each other. If you need to lose 1 base, place a marker on an existing base and when forced to lose a 2nd base, then remove the entire stand. When your "2 rank" bases are side-by-side, assume they are in normal, 2 rank deep lines. If you want to go into extended line formation, spread your bases out with a one inch gap between the stands.

That's not "official" rules, just how I would do it…

Thanks Dave. That is how I will probably do it. I just hope it isn't too confusing when counting up stand totals for firing and taking into effects of halved fire points, etc. I'll try it with my club. We drink alot while we play, so if it works with them, it will work for the convention.

Maybe you could make up a revised reference sheet and make stands worth 2 points instead of one, and that they lose 1 point if they have a hit marker. Then state that units in extended line formation halve (or quarter – can't remember off hand the fire points) their points. Maybe that way they won't have to think about it…

Great idea. Thanks again Dave.

When a new rules set requires rebasing (or strongly advises rebasing) it is prematurely curtailing a lot of people from joining in! This is not a value judgment, simply a hobby fact! So if you can devise a method to avoid rebasing without messing up the visuals or mechanics too much, it should be a high priority for the rules designer IMHO!

that is why the thought, as I understand it, is to allow for current BOFF bases to be used.

And they can, as described above, as two infantry bases.

A gun stand, if on a 1in x 1 or 1.5 in deep stand represents a 2-gun section vs a battery or 6-8 guns in BOFF.

Where I have trouble, is that, cavalry stand of 1 inch wide really translate into more of a 1.5-2 in. wide at the regimental scale. So I will base my cavalry figures on a 1.5 wide base. But then my troops are based for regimental already. If they were already based for BOFF. I'd leave them as is.

We already had our figures three to a base for BOFF (although 7/8" deep) so it wasn't a real problem. New figures (and there have been plenty of those as we've moved away from the old Heritage and Minifigs) we have based 3/4" deep.

My recommendation is to do what is easiest, which is to keep with the BOFF basing. I have used borrowed figures that used 1" deep bases with 4 figures. Sure it looks odd, but I am less enamored with precision ACW infantry formations. I'm also less adverse to rebasing, but I can understand those who don't want to start down that road.

I definately would keep to BOFF basing for cavalry. In fact, I continue to base my cavalry for BOFF, not with a 1.5" frontage. I know that might start a debate, but out group has settled on the BOFF basing for cav, so I've decided to go with the flow and save some money.

Mark