"OK soldiers, adopt a position" Topic

How do you decide on the figure stance for your 28mm line troops?

March attack, or charging, or firing, or what?

This is fast becoming the most difficult decision. Thanks.

- Hugh

March attack.

I'll have a variety of unit poses. Some units marching, some units in firing line, some units charging, etc.

I'll have a variety of unit poses. Some units marching, some units in firing line, some units charging, etc.

My difficulty with that is the firing stance when it comes to line movement – I cannot suspend belief with figures clearly firing weapons but are supposed to be marching/attacking. How do you reconcile that, Doug MSC?

Thanks.

I have all mine advancing or "charging" except for the odd Ebay purchase along the way. I prefer large 28s with a bit of animation about them. back when I was doing 15mm in was all march attack.

I try to have all my "heavy" infantry at march-attack. This is partly because it reminds me of the old book "Charge," where all the infantry was marching. Mostly it's because with march attack there are no bayonets sticking over the edge ot the stand, which can make it hard to get the figures to fit into a formation (i.e., 2nd-rank guys stabbing their comrades in the front rank in the back) and because any long thin piece of metal sticking out is prone to breakage.

For light infantry I also prefer march attack (with separate skirmishers), but the running at trail pose that the Perrys prefer for lights is fine by me as well.

Given that march attack is now the default pose for Perry Bros, Front Rank, Sash & Saber, and OG 2nd edition, I can only conclude that many other gamers have reached the same conclusion.

For cavalry I go with guys who are holding the sword at rest, for the same reasons I prefer march attack infantry – they fit together in formation better and are less prone to breakage.

My preference is for:

March attack pose for troops mounted on bases representing close order units.

Advancing pose for minis on single bases that may be used in skirmish games.

March attack all the way

An old friend used to use the pose to show troops status – march attack for regular, firing for green (figuring they had discipline problems in waiting to see the whites of their eyes)

Plus I base my troops 2 X 2 on a 40 X 40 mm stand, and arranging firing troops is a pain in the neck

For me I treat each unit as a snap in time. I like the firing line. For one of the AWI American units I have the Perry nervous militia. So I have one stand of them and then a mix to the stand next to the and hen troops still in the fight. It is a mini diorama I guess, but it looks neat to me to see the unit "breaking".

I know, not realistic marching down a road. Most of my units are marching with some advancing mixed in. Cavalry is the same pose for the unit with most units advancing. I have one or two charging.

The various poses for me, helps while painting. After 24 figures marching, I need another pose to keep me engaged in the project.

As I think about Napoleonic era, I think I would have them marching. It just looks right, especially the French.

The bottom line for me is that I decide by look. I like a mini diorama and when I am playing a game, I don't get too bothered by pose as I am not really thinking about that so much as I am thinking about how I can get some new dice that roll better. :-)

Matthew

March attack by preference for line troops. Multi pose for skirmishers. SOme packages force me to use sloped arms or charging for line troops, too.

Poooorrrt Harms!

For European regulars I prefer March attack.

The Yanks get to be full of Hey Steve! poses.

I'll have a variety of unit poses. Some units marching, some units in firing line, some units charging, etc.

My difficulty with that is the firing stance when it comes to line movement – I cannot suspend belief with figures clearly firing weapons but are supposed to be marching/attacking. How do you reconcile that, Doug MSC?

I do the same thing, my 15mm ACW and FPW. They are in a variety of poses. It gives the impression of movement. Almost every figure on a base has a different pose. The more variety the better.

My 25/28mm Boer War figures are also in a variety of poses. It works for mid 19th Cent. and later periods, because of the more lethal battlefield. Looks more realistic.

Doesn't work as well in earlier periods. My AWI British are mostly in march attack or charging with bayonets sloped. Most but not all, but most of my Continentals are firing and reloading. Untrained Militia are in a variety of poses.

With Napoleonics I did do my 15mm 1815 Prussians in a mix of poses and they look really nice. But for 25mm Naps I will have them all in one or similar positions.

link

link

link

link

link

link

link

After experimenting with various approaches, to me it feels as though the smaller the unit, the more uniform the poses have to be for the visual effect to work: 24 figures all in different poses look like, well, a couple of dozen soldiers, while 12 figures in a rigid line, all at port arms or with bayonets levelled, can look like a formed unit. This is one reason why representing platoon fire in a wargames unit rarely works, unless you have a battalion of 40 or more figures.

Period obviously plays a role as well, as Rallynow pointed out: Late 19thC "fire at will" turned a battalion into a thick skirmish line, whereas earlier periods would actually have seen all the men go through the same drill movements.

Figure size is yet another factor, in connection with the first point: Since 15mm wargames units usually have more figures, they'll provide some room for variety. With 28mm figures, you're better off with uniform poses.

Finally, unless taking 45th Div's "snapshot" approach, you could go with the position the troops would have been in for most of the time. I'd have all my 18th C. infantry standing under arms if there were figures for it (I know there are some); the so-called "march attack" pose is probably the next best thing. At least most manufacturers do cavalry with swords shouldered.

Some units marching.
Some units firing.
I don't really have charging units. Don't know why.

Using 1:72 plastics, my line infantry are in a variety of advancing or "port arms" poses. I use a convention that all of my light infantry, including battalion light companies, are in firing poses, which means I can quickly recognise which are "lights".

Rod

With charging units the first rank at the "charge bayonets" position and the second rank at the "recover" position because that is how it was done. In an ideal world I would put shock troops at the charge, line troops at the shoulder, and skirmishers at firing and loading. Most of my troops are 15mm though so I have to make compromises.

I put all the charging figures in one unit, all the marching figures in another unit, all the soldiers in another. Isn't that pretty much what everyone does?

I cannot suspend belief with figures clearly firing weapons but are supposed to be marching/attacking

That could be a big problem for a wargamer.

I cannot suspend belief with figures clearly firing weapons but are supposed to be marching/attacking

But then isn't the reverse situation true as well? How do you imagine troops are firing when they are posed in march attack?

The solution is obvious.
For each regiment in the battle, you need three or four different sets of figures.
One marching, one firing, one charging, and one….
Figure manufacturers will love you if you can get the whole Hobby™ to adopt this solution.

thats what gives the advancing pose such universal utility. i like minifigs

I started building French Napoleonic units of 36 in the late 1960's when the best we had were the Stadden 30mm wargame figures – remarkable true-human proportions. We had Old Guard Grenadiers advancing, firing; advancing low port; advancing high port; and advancing at the carry. An officer advancing with right hand raised, leading with sword; an officer with sword at the right shoulder, holding the eagle staff in his right hand; and a great drummer figure advancing. Stadden hussar heads with tall plume could be used to make line voltigeurs or grenadiers in shako.

I cut the plume to a ball to make line fusiliers, and mixed all the advancing (firing and low port first line; low port; high port second line, highport rear or 3rd line) except the carry figure – is seemed very poor relative to the others, and I did not use any.

Now that we have Victrix plastics, I am doing defending French units with front rank kneeling at ready; second rank firing, priming, loadig, and ready at port to fire across the unit. The third line match the soldier in front of each. The 36 figures in 3 ranks look like a 1:1 platoon!

These sets also allow advancing units, and I use low port for the first rank, high port and carry mixed for second, and carry for the 3rd line. Mount them 1 or 2 to a stand, and they can be deployed in two lines of 18 each.

With "lighters" as AICUSV likes to use, can do at 3 "battalions" of 12; 2 of 18; or 1 of 36 in 2 or 3 deep line.

AICUSV commented on how our gamers always seemed to use their troops according to the position of the soldiers in the unit, and – frankly – I do not ever recall seeing a dragoon unit on standing horses go into a charge!

If I ever get to game again, I know how to surprise the opposition!

I would find troops marching at the carry as odd!

GdeP

I like a slow march attack or standing, such as Perry's Old Guard grenadiers. link
If the figures are designed as a "fast" march attack I like some out of cadence. Perry's AWI Hessians march too perfectly.
link

If using firing lines I prefer them without bayonets.

"But then isn't the reverse situation true as well? How do you imagine troops are firing when they are posed in march attack?"

- Except their real-world counterparts would be in a firing stance for a few seconds at a time only, as opposed to standing around in reserve for hours, marching for increments of 15 minutes maybe – and lying dead for a very long time.

So unless we all adopt the OFM's suggested solution, we have to resign ourselves to the fact that our casualty figures are the only ones in realistic poses throughout the whole game.

I mainly use these with head swops for British -it's close enough…

So is there a difference between regular marching and march attack?

Did AWI soldiers ever march as in the picture above, with the musket in the crook of the elbow?

Those troops are standing at "support" which was used by AWI troops sometimes. To march at "support" the other arm crosses over the chest to to give a better grip on the musket.

Wouldn't it be great if the figures were tiny robots and marched around. Give technology another 50 years and who knows it might be affordable. I have always found laying down a cotton smoke line creates a nice illusion of troops firing regardless of pose. The problem is the cotton sticks to my mat and leaves residue.

The problem is the cotton sticks to my mat and leaves residue.

Rather like the way powder smoke hangs around a battlefield? Doesn't really sound like a problem.

"Charge bayonets" is probably the closest actual stance to "march attack," but as I noted before the second rank would be at the recover because you don't want to point fixed bayonets at your file mate's back. I think march attack is a term made up by the company's that make figures.

I use what they sell.

I mix them up and use all sorts of poses including three rank volley lines.

"Wouldn't it be great if the figures were tiny robots and marched around. Give technology another 50 years and who knows it might be affordable"

Who was the 60s/70s comic book character that had a radio controlled army of little soldiers?

GdeP stated my usual comment on figure position. After too many years of gaming I have notice that some gamers will be more aggressive with figure that are in a charging pose and hold back those in a standing one. I'm sure there are many gamers who will use their figures as needed regardless of the pose, but there are those appear influenced by the figure's positioning.

For myself I like different positions based upon time periods;
7YW – march attack
Naps- charging
ACW – mixed

1/72 plastics, so I am happy with mixed. the newer ranges (ie from HaT) come in choices (ie – buy a box of all marching), so I might gradually shift, but currently I am happy.

I can suspend my disbelief enough that "firing" guys marching, and vice versa, works fine. And I note that the Perry's British are in a firing line.

My ACW are rather more mixed, as that is how "I" see them.

Perry's AWI Hessians march too perfectly.
link

Ah, but you forget that the Hessians were criticised for marching much more slowly than their British allies – 75 paces compared to every 100 by their own reckoning – and so the chances of getting out of step were that much less for them.

I think march attack is a term made up by the company's that make figures.

Yes, several manufacturers in the UK started using it back in the late 70s and early 80s (it might also have appeared in the US around the same time, although over there the terms "attacking" and "defending" were very popular for describing various poses one might call "on guard"). And back in the 1960s, Minifigs invented the "advancing" pose, which is a hybrid position (somewhere between "charge bayonets" and "recover") that does not appear in any drill book of the time.

…an officer with sword at the right shoulder, holding the eagle staff in his right hand…

I've heard of people having two left feet, but…… ;^))

And I note that the Perry's British are in a firing line.

I think what the Perrys try to do with their plastics, at least in the H&M period, is represent the popular image of that nation – eg the iconic Napoleonic image is British two-deep firing line versus the advancing French, so they have British in firing poses, and French marching. Incidentally, if you want to try something a little different with your Napoleonic British (or their AWI counterparts for that matter), I believe that the arms from both sets are interchangeable as that part of the uniform stayed the same from 1775 through to 1815. You might need to do some head tweaking to get AWI British in firing poses, but you could easily have Napoleonic British at trailed arms, which would look good for the support element of a skirmish line, for example.

…isn't the reverse situation true as well?

True. And that's my dilemma and impasse.

I am beginning to think that a figure in an advancing pose at least has his rifle close enough to a semi-firing position that I could find acceptable. Aaaargh!!

I appreciate your replies. Thanks all.

- Hugh

Who was the 60s/70s comic book character that had a radio controlled army of little soldiers?

Now wasn't that General Jumbo Johnson from The Beano. He had small mechanical soldiers operated from a control pad on his forearm, then they were replaced by medium-sized mechanical soldiers, air craft, aircraft carrier, and, maybe, planes. His grandfather designed and built them in his garden shed.

Great idea and great read.

His grandfather designed and built them in his garden shed.

I really wish I'd had a grandfather like that…

Well my wife bought my daughter a toy fairy that flaps its wings like a hummingbird and sort of hovers above your hand. With slight novements of her hand my toddler daughter can control her and she will fly from about 6 inches to 12 feet above one's hand. It is kind of a coincidence that the fairy was brought home after my post about robot soldiers! Like I said give technology 50 years, maybe by then if there is interest people could game with holographic armies, but I suppose most wargamers are old school, so maybe not.

Of course technology has its limits, I can't fix the typo in my posting with my mobile device!

Can't paint a holographic soldier, and hoarding them would amount to expanding your hard drive.

Where's the fun in that?

:)

Hello Fennells Mead!

When I collected 25mm I always found it a problem mounting figures that were firing if you had more then one rank of figures. The second rank had to be askew which never seemed to look right and made your bases wider. They were always getting in the way, especially those with bayonets and seem to be easily damaged. March attack was not much better. Players very often moved the units into combat and bent some every game. So my preference was always at attention, etc. Now that I only do 6mm all those problems have disappeared.

Best regards,

Glenn

The new Perry plastics have dictated what my basic British infantry look like as in they are charging or have weapons at trail. Grenadiers from F&D are marching. I do have a couple regiments firing that are not painted.

For some reason 4 out of 5 of my painted continental regiments are in firing position. I have found it important to set placement of both ranks so that the second rank doesn't poke the first.

For ease of use and storage I would say marching is the best, but I want variety. My artillery is also a mix.

My artillery is also a mix

Oh yes, I didn't mention artillery. I can live with a mix of that. Thanks.

AICUSV has been a proponent of at "lighter" – a movement box for figures, so none has to be touched. This appeals to me, as I have packed away metal units that are mounted on 1 and 2-figure wooden bases allowing 17mm for a figure. I was working on 3rd Swiss on the French side in Spain, wth the first two rank firing, and mounted the first rank toward the rear, and on the left edge of their 17mm allowance, and the second rank at the front edge, and right side of their respective stands. This allowed for a more tight formation. I have no figures yet for the third rank, which will be at high port, sort of in reserve.

A lighter built to hold the four fusilier comapanies would permit them always to be deployed in line, but I recall seeing other gamers "form column" by turning the lighter sideways, and move forward the unit facing to the left in firing position. No way to avoid that without having a second set of 36 figures in advancing positions, on their own lighter. Always need to "suspend disbelief!"

GdeP

@redcoat 55;

I think you misunderstand the term " March Attack". It's a figure manufacturer's description of ancient provenance. No connection to manual of arms. The closest description from the British Napoleonic manual of arms would be " Support Arms'.

Thanks Captain!!

What position? Well volleyfire obviously :-)

Didn't know Jumbo Johnson was a Redcap!

How about NO fixed bayonets on firing figures??
Bayonets were rarely fixed when firing due to the difficulties of loading with a fixed bayonet.

Bob