Help support TMP


"The fantasy of 60mm basing" Topic


57 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Remember that you can Stifle members so that you don't have to read their posts.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Medieval Discussion Message Board

Back to the Ancients Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

Ancients
Medieval

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Recent Link


Featured Ruleset

War & Conquest


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

Little Lost Dinosaur

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian discovers a lost dinosaur.


4,006 hits since 13 Jul 2010
©1994-2025 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.

Pages: 1 2 

Diocletian28415 Nov 2015 6:15 a.m. PST

This is a problem I have faced with my 28mm Late Imperial Romans. I cannot get four on a 60mm base and have it fit right or look too cramped. Tom Thomas makes a good point about cavalry. My 28mm cataphract cavalry fit much better on a base 80mm wide and 50mm deep. I can at least get three on a base that size.

This does create a problem for DBA like Tom mentions with recoil being base depth. 50mm deep would make too large a recoil for the cataphracts for the rules as written. That is one reason of several reasons why I gravitate more to other games for 28mm like Impetus, Hail Caesar, and ADLG. They do not have recoil like DBA, but rather take fatigue or hit points to reflect casualties.

MajorB15 Nov 2015 8:32 a.m. PST

This does create a problem for DBA like Tom mentions with recoil being base depth. 50mm deep would make too large a recoil for the cataphracts for the rules as written.

If you use bases that are deeper than normal in DBA, just put a mark on one edge of the base to show what the base depth SHOULD be and use that as a guide.

Bandolier15 Nov 2015 6:16 p.m. PST

I now use 60mmx30mm and the extra depth makes all the difference. I like the look of tightly ranked heavy infantry and the contrasting looser 3 or 2 figure stands.

The same with cavalry, I've gone with 60mmx50mm to accommodate 28mm mounted figures.

Personal logo BigRedBat Sponsoring Member of TMP16 Nov 2015 2:24 a.m. PST

I also go 60 or 70mm deep for mounted. I find that the extra depth really improves the amination of the unit and also protects the vulnerable paint on the horses' noses and tails.

picture

All of my infantry are deeper-based too, except pikemen. I like them to be massed closely together.

Dexter Ward16 Nov 2015 3:02 a.m. PST

If you can't fit four figures on a base, just put 3 on.
The number of figures per base doesn't affect game play at all in DBx (or indeed FoG); it's just an aid to identifying troop types. The only rules where you count figures these days are WAB and its descendants (CoE and WaC), and they don't use multi-basing anyway.

Thomas Thomas16 Nov 2015 2:46 p.m. PST

Dio284:

In DBA 3.0 mounted can recoil up to 60mm (a base width). Offically you can mount them on 45mm deep bases (the size of the bases that come with Perry miniatures). But mounting them as deep as 60mm makes very little difference in game play.

Getting the Recoil mechanic rather than tedious marker counters is well worth the effort.

If you can't fit 4 Romans on a 60mm base – do as I do (and 3.0 allows) just put 3 on the base.

TomT

Diocletian28416 Nov 2015 4:05 p.m. PST

TomT. Thanks for the clarification. Good to know.

Pages: 1 2 

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.