"Current basing questions" Topic

I spend a lot of time working through basing questions as they have such widespread consequences.

I want the figures to be as close to one another as in real life, but I also want flexibility to use with several games I have in mind and others I haven't come across yet.

25/28mm figures ranging between 14th to 16th century (plus Tolkien) is what I'm deciding about now.

I should say I expect to be furnishing both sides in 90% or more of the games I play.

A few games I have in mind are Gore's Medieval Warfare, Hail Caesar/Pike & Shotte and Field of Glory.

Default or fall back footprint size is 20mm per man, but even here, do I do individual square, individual round, 40mm square, 60mm x 40, etc. I lean toward square individual or strips 1 rank deep, which I realize is old fashioned.

On top of this, as I do some dry tests 20mm sometimes feels like too much space. In 28mm scale I figure it represents about 3 and 3/4 feet square. For 18th century this would be right out, but it also doesn't look quite right for swiss pike, for example, or even HYW dismounted knights. I'm thinking 16mm feels a bit better (representing 3' in real life), which lends itself to 50mm x 20mm or 50mm x 40mm bases with 3 or 6 men to a base.

Perhaps not coincidentally what I arrived at for my 18mm FIW after long debate is 30mm x 10mm, three men to a base. I'm fully satisfied with that decision. The decision I'm making today has more widespread consequences, though, as I have a number of 28mm armies currently and planned.

Generally I think the closer you pack them in the better. I'm really not a fan of putting fewer men on a stand than fit a la DBA.

50mm x 40mm would work fine for the games above. I lean toward 50mm x 20mm though, except for pike and maybe some others, as I like the flexibility of more granular stands.

I'm far from decided though. I may just go with individual 20mm bases, or at least for things that aren't pike.

In addition to any other thoughts people have I'd be curious how appropriate you think the 3' footprint is for various medieval and renaissance types, aside from skirmishers.

Also, any pitfalls that may await me. Already I have some various Swiss types on 20mm bases which I don't expect to rebase, so if I adopt the 50mm standard there will inevitably be some fudging needed here and there. And I have some bigger figures like Front Rank that look ok on 20mm square.

I guess that you've already looked at photos of other peoples' units. Do they look okay to you.
The reason I ask is that if you are going to do large(ish) units it is often the bulk of the army when deployed that makes the units look like the individuals are packed together even though most people, these days, tend to use the 20mm square as a standard.

If you are providing the figures for the games then basing is irrelevant. All games will work with any basing, provided that you can show some way of indicating they are in different formations.

If both sides are based the same then it won't matter. Even if they aren't and you are playing with reasonable people it won't matter, as long as the basing isn't wildly divergent. And maybe even if it is.

I have had those same thoughts and fears. If you have ANY interest in skirmish gaming, you should stick with individually basing your figures (20mmX20mm) and using trays of various sizes depending on the rules being used. I agree with your point about pike, though, and given that pikemen are not that suitable for skirmish gaming you could always multi-base those together in a tighter formation (like 4 on a 60mmX20mm bases or the like).

I created my own sabot bases with a dial built in for mass combat games, but since the figures are individually mounted, I can still use them for skirmish games.

20mm squares and sabots provide maximum flexibility in basing.

Thanks for the replies all!

@IanKHemm: Yeah, I've looked at others and my own. I think 20mm makes them look too sparse and spread out. Here I realize they are not base to base (I didn't take this today or I would have lined them up better) but it still shows what I'm talking about:

@Pictors Studio: I know in what sense you mean when say basing is irrelevant but what's very relevant to me is striking the right balance between flexibility and what looks good and realistic, and I think there are a lot of pitfalls out there if one doesn't think them through, chances to wind up unhappy down the road.

@YogiBearMinis: I do want the flexibility to skirmish so will probably go with individual for all but pike, etc, as you suggest. I see the pros of 4 men across on a 60mm base wide base as being 60mm divides by 20mm easily so you can keep the "element" or regiment width the same between individually based figures and multi-based figures, though on the flip side that means my elements have to be at least 60mm across and this means a sizable percentage more figures are needed to play games like FoG and Medieval Warfare with the same number of units as compared to 50mm bases with 3 men. Of course one could up the imagined ratio of figures to men represented and play with fewer elements. (Medieval Warfare the default is 40mm square elements and FoG the default is 60mm x 20 or 30mm (single rank).

@rampantlion and Frederick: I magnatize my figures and will probably use steel trays of the size of the element (for element games) or unit (for Hail Caesar). Samples I got from from shogunminiatures.com are awesome. Though I prefer not to have mounds when I can help it so may wind up using mantic bases, which I can sink the figure into and drill for a magnet, along with shogun trays. The wip swiss above are on mantic bases and you can see the no-mound effect.

At this point I'm thinking 20mm square for most and 60mm x 20mm for pike, 4 across, and use 60mm single rank elements for element games. Though part of me wants to have Shogun cut me 15mm x 20mm bases for some figures, which would not mess up anything should I go for it.