"Cavalry basing, and companies" Topic

A couple of questions for the collective. I'm a painter rather than gamer, but do like to paint 28mm figures.

I've the Perry's plastic Chasseurs a Chevel on the go at the moment and am wondering about base sizes and and figures per company, as I have a mind to offer the unit for sale when painted.

I'm thinking of basing two figures per base with 20mm width for each ?

How hung up do people get over the number of companies within a regiment, and is they any kind of accepted number of figures per company.

A six company regiment for a unit consisting of 12 troopers and two command figures means only two figures per company.Is this what people expect to see or can you just have say three companies represented with 4 figures each ?

All thoughts welcome

and a couple of photos for interest of my trial run on an 18th Hussar's mount.

P

I think that it only becomes an issue when you have uniform distinctions between the companies or troops. Otherwise I do not think it matters,

The size of the unit will depend on the scale you use. As an example, I use 1:20 which means that the average cavalry regiment comes in at 20 – 24 figures. For a French regiment that means 8 bases of three figures each representing a company. Also, the bases are 60mm x 50mm which means 20mm frontage for each horseman as you suggest (a common solution).

For your chasseurs, if you want to keep the numbers down, I would go for eight 2-man bases so that each company is represented by headgear (compagnie d'elite') or pom pom colours. I think that any smaller than that and company representation becomes moot.

Hope that helps.

P.S. I like the way you have painted that horse.

Cavalry are in squadrons, not companies as in Infantry.

Well without wanting to get too pedantic, my understanding is that a French Chasseur Regiment was comprised of typically 4 to 6 squadrons, and that each squadron comprised of two companies. Each company being distinguished by it's own pom pom colour.

P

Thanks Artyman – that is useful info. I think I'll go with 3 figures per base as you suggest at this stage and see how it looks.

P

You are both right!

Wargamers tend to use squadrons as this was the tactical unit.

Each squadron comprised two companies, or troops if you were in the British army. In the French army the Elite company had a distinctive uniform which is irritating for wargamers because you need different figures for half a squadron.

If you are painting the figures for sale, you might want to consider NOT basing them. Paint the horse's base natural green or tan shade, and let the buyer mount them for his own use.

GdeP

I agree with Garde. You may have to paint them to match a particular basing scheme (in terms of number of figures to paint), but if sold unbased that at least makes it easy for someone to base to their scheme instead.

I could be wrong but 20mm frontage for a 28mm mounted figure is a bit tight.

I would normally base two mounted figures on a 50mm square base.

1. I would be inclined not to base figures intended for sale.

2. If you ignore (1) the next question is not "how are cavalry organized and represented?" but "how are 28mm cavalry normally based?" Perhaps some of the people playing hot new rules can suggest something?

Nah, 20mm width per horse works fine for most cavalry. That's what I use.

Cheers all – some good info here.

Despite the very good points raised above about not basing the figures if for sale, I think I will base these, and work to finish them to what I would call a collectors standard (if I can).

I can then use them as a "shop window" for further figure painting.

P

I worked with Stadden and Willie 30mm figures, mounting them for Spain in a 1:20 (or 1:12, or whatever the day might have called for). We used a 2" piece of wooden Venetian blind slats for 3 infantry figures (about 17mm per figure), and a one inch wide slat for each cavalry figure. 3 infantry would face 2 horsemen.

We liked 36 figures for a French line or light battalion, and 6 cavalry figures for a squadron. We enjoyed putting Lancers, Hussars and line chasseurs together as provisional 3- or 4-squadron regiments of 18 or 24 figures. This allowed us to make use of all the colorful French cavalry.

I preferred to mount my guns on a 2" wide slat, with 2 gunners. 4 guns would cover 8". A 36 figure battalion, 3 figures deep would occupy 8" as well. So a battery of 8 guns was as wide as a battalion of infantry.

Buy mounting all cavalry singly and the French infancty on 1 or 2 figure stands, we could fight a "battalion" as 12 figures, 18 figures, or 36.

GdeP

The standard for 28mm basing is 25mm x 50mm per mounted figure.

Again, a good reason not to base figures you want to sell.

By the way, the "typical" US venetian blind slat is 2 inches wide. An inch is 25.4 millimeters – very close to this 25 mm "Standard."

GdeP

I agree with Garde as well. Based figures are worth less to me because I tend to use rules in which one or two typically non conventional bases are a unit. I frequently don't bid on based units as it is too much hassle to unbase them without damaging the figure.

Interesting to see the difference of opinions over base width and the 20mm vs 25mm arguements. How much impact do the various rules used have on this.

P

Regrettably the situation with unit size / composition may be even more complicated than the above would suggest.

It is absolutely correct that – taking the French army – two companies made a squadron and four squadrons made a regiment. It does not follow, however, that two out of (eg) sixteen figures, or three of twenty-four, must be élite company, simply because all four squadrons didn't necessarily go on campaign. It could be four, but it could also be three, or it could also be two. In such cases, it would a quarter or a sixth of the men who would be élite.

The other thing to recall is that as far as possible, cavalry regiments observed horse colour conventions. Squadrons sought to have horses all of the same colour, partly as an aid to rallying and to identifying squadrons and important individuals in battle, partly to make the unit look sharper. The senior squadron got the darkest horses, the junior squadron would be on bright bays. Trumpeters and guidon bearers would if possible be on greys. There are lots of exceptions to this, and in the field they made do with what replacements they were given, but it was something regiments generally tried to observe. They also didn't like white leg or face markings. This would have gone quickly by the board in French units, but the British army had few cavalry and lots of high quality Irish horseflesh, so it seems to have been able to observe this. If you look at contemporary battle paintings that have a lot of horses in them, this odd feature is actually noticeable.

Finally, be careful with cavalry carbines, as depending on the unit, they may have been official kit that was not actually used. A good example are French cuirassiers, which were issued them at a regiment level, but whose actual use appears to have been at the commanding officer's discretion. Some commanders distributed them to horseless cuirassiers doing depot duty, some issued them to ten men per squadron, some handed them out to those on picket duty (this specific doesn't apply to cuirassiers, who did not do this duty), and so on. Conceivably some cuirassier regiments did issue one to every man and expected them to tote the thing around, but given the weight penalty versus the limited utility, this must have been quite rare.

Good comments, 4th Cuirassier.

I know it's wrong, but I love all varieties of bay (black mane, tail, and legs from the "knee" down) and a bit of white on at least one "sock."

I recall that the 5th French Chasseurs a cheval tried to mount all their men on "claybanks," Khaki, or tan, horses. This regiment also retained the corded dolman longer than other regiments, without the hussar barrel sash.

The elite company of the 4th Hussars tried to use blacks, and had a brass grenade on the front of their colpaks.

I do not recall how varied the Polish lancers of the Guard were, but I believe one full squadron used greys.

GdeP

@ G d P

I think there's a lot to be said for using things like horse colour or unit composition as gamer's aids. Nose or leg markings to denote squadrons or companies make much sense. An 18-figure cavalry regiment with three elite company figures is instantly recognisable thereby as a three-squadron regiment. Likewise if you have a four-battalion French infantry regiment on the table, you can do things like have the first battalion carry the eagle while the 2nd, 3rd and 4th battalions have respectively two, three and four command figures to tell you which battalion they are.

With French regiments where they all look literally the same, or British ones where they often look very very similar (all those yellow facings), it is sort of visual shorthand.

Cheers for all the info – some good stuff here.

At the moment have enough figures for 2 squadrons, with three figures per company, and have noted the comments on horse colours.

Making good progress with my trail efforts on the 18th Hussar command figures, albeit the photo is pretty dodgy

P

Rigid adherence to ridiculous criteria like figure ratio; ground ratio and time etc. is what makes gaming a mess.

Until gamers drop these 'strictures' and think about playing 'the period' historically rather than the law (the holy guidebook written by ??) will they truly enjoy the sport and games, not gamesmanship, of the hobby.

Even recently I saw a gimmick army and down trodden player because his 'trick' deployment and force didn't win for him, just like the WRG 'lawyers' who ruined the games 30 years ago,
FWIW davew

How do you play the period without acknowledging the importance of ground and time?

Agree with 4th – tactics are all about utilization and synchronization of space and time.