"best poses for ACW?" Topic

Thinking about getting some acw miniatures and there is a lot of choices available. I think I know what scale and brands I want to get but have a few questions about the poses. What poses are the most commonly used and useful for tabletop battle? Many manufacturers have different poses that seem useful. The marching pose, advancing pose seem really good.
Firing line could seem odd for a unit in reserve or not yet in combat range but really could give some life to a regiment. At the ready or shouldered arms seem a little stiff. Like Napoleons guard watching the battle in reserve. Do you use alot of dismounted cavalry or sharpshooters skirmishing poses? Any advice from experienced acw gamers?

Thanks rooter

I have a wide variety of poses by a wide variety of manufacturers in my armies. I think the most useful figures are marching or advancing, but other will tell you they prefer the firing line.

I too like having a wide variety, but I also like grouping the figures in units of similar poses. Since it can be hard to tell ACW units apart by uniform, it helps to have all the stands in a unit matching in some way – all firing, all shouldered muskets, all marching, 2 firing and one reloading, one kneeling and one standing, etc.

- Ix

I prefer advancing, or marching. To me, both look fine in almost any situation, from marching in column, to assaulting in line, to defending a position. By contrast, shooting poses only really look good when defending, and look positively weird in column.

On the move type of poses.
Avoid prone and shooting type of poses.

I prefer poses where the muskets don't stick out too far beyond the edge of the base.

The "Assaulting" pose is probably the most common one for miniatures, but ironically, the rarest in real life. It would technically be "Charge Bayonets" but this would only be used in the final yards before contact with the enemy (which rarely happened). Shoulder Arms, Right Shoulder Shift Arms and Support Arms would be the most common marching positions. Units standing in reserve would be "In Place Rest", but no one is going to buy figures like that :)

As Scott says, you will get a great look by using right shoulder shift (etc.) and ranking your miniatures how they actually marched – shoulder to shoulder. I'm not sure where the penchant for basing ACW units as chaotic charging mobs came from, but it makes every unit look like its about to disintegrate into disorder – where are your sergeants? And don't even get me started on all the miniature lines that have the musket sculpted on the left … :)

Dismounted cavalry is an exception – they look great in skirmishing or firing poses, and as they usually only dismounted where they were going to fight, you can get away with it easier than normal infantry.

I've never been a big fan of the marching poses. Looks like they are on parade instead of fighting in a battle.

Having several units in different poses allows some variety in painting.

I divide my armies into one unit as firing line, one marching and one advancing/charging. So, if I have 12 units in my battle four would be marching, four would be advancing/charging and four would be in firing line positions. I like the variety.

I prefer the advancing. Marching and shoulder shift does seem like more on parade.

All a matter of taste and of what you pick up over the years – the same applies to different manufacturers. In an ideal world we'd swap all of our units that are in firing line or charging for figures at right shoulder shift, marching or standing to attention. Equally, we'd swap all of our Dixons figures for S&S/Foundry/Redoubt figures. It's not that we dislike Dixons (in fact we've got some really lovely ones), it's just that they never really fit in with other manufacturers.

I like all poses. I can overlook firing poses looking goofy in column because they look great in line, especially behind a fence, earthworks, etc. So, I don't mind.

Besides, who wants to see a unit of Berdan's SS in advancing or right shoulder shift? :)

Yeah marching poses are the most practical for sure. I don't think I can resist at least one firing line unit though, hide them behind some rocks on a hill and they'd look awesome. Anybody put casualty figures mixed into units or are they mainly used as game markers?

Anybody put casualty figures mixed into units or are they mainly used as game markers?

Game markers for me.

I like advancing (sometimes at high port) and mix in the occasional firing or reloading guy in the unit. I sometimes put in one guy in the unit getting hit on the stands. Otherwise, wounded are markers.

I probably have way too many firing and reloading figures in my predominantly 1st corps collection …that being said I am going to remedy this by the simple expedient of purchasing a shed-load of 'right shoulder shift' figures to join my existing regiments.

As regard casualty figures within units, I tend to use only 'falling' wounded figures …leaving the dead to represent actual casualties when bases are removed?

Maybe create units such that each one has a firing pose group that can be switched for some advancing pose depending on circumstances of the unit. Need more units that way but table looks cooler.

March-Attack It's nice compromise between charging and marching.

Sometimes pose availability gives you only one choice. Unless this doesn't bother you, at least one manufacturer offers standing firing, marching and advancing Zouaves but only a standing Command pose.

My 15mm regiments have a wide variety of poses. The more the better. Gives the illusion of movement.

"March Attack" was called Support Arms in ACW drill. It was one of the three most common arms positions for marching (Shoulder Arms and Right Shoulder Shift Arms being the other two). A good officer would rotate through those three positions to keep the men from getting fatigued. On a long road march it would typically be 'arms at will' and 'route step' which allowed the men to not march in step and to carry their weapons however they chose.

Right shoulder shift was the prescribed position for any movements made at the double-quick.

I prefer marching positions. Especially nice, to me, is "Right Shoulder Shift" arms. That looks good for a variety of reasons.

One pose that I have rarely seen, but was used, is "trail arms". I have read several accounts of federal troops using this while advancing over rough terrain as well as in the advance. "Port Arms" was another one used in the attack, and again, it's rarely seen in minis.

V/R

I am with TKindred on the "Right Shoulder Shift" arms preference.

certainly makes for a dynamic look to a regiment …yet allows for the models to be positioned neatly together, unlike the 'charge' pose

I am going to join in the chorus above. I prefer right shoulder shift for any figures other than skirmishers. To me that pose captures the look of a civil war formation better than any other, and I proababy have at least one regiment in every pose thats ever been produced in 15mm. I now use firing, loading, etc. only for skirmishers. John Miller

Of course you should remember that the flag and color guard were in the center of the line of battle. The colonel and his bugler was behind the line of battle and the drummers (if they hadn't been told off to be stretcher bears) would be in a group behind the colonel. The drummer boy was not next to the flag- how would the flag-bearer know what the officer's order was with the drum going off next to him? The officer was behind the line, so he could see the alignment, watch the sargent file closers. He either gave orders verbally to the flag bearer or more usually had the bugler sound the commands. ….Opps, do you have buglers with the officer?

"Of course you should remember that the flag and color guard were in the center of the line of battle"

In the Union color guards, was it common place to have a soldier between the national and regimental colors?

Additionally, right shoulder shift seems to be predominately shown in most contemporary illustrations of large bodies of troops on the move.

Interestingly, despite our consistent opinions to the contrary, they are also typically shown with fixed bayonets. Not sure if this is a bit of artistic license on the part of the Special Artists, but there is no denying the predominance of fixed steel.

Cheers,
Bob