"3-2-1 Basing & Models in Formation" Topic

Has anyone used 3-2-1 basing with regular troops that use formations like line, column and square?

(If you're not familiar with 3-2-1 basing and why people use it, perhaps this article could help: link)

I could see the use of 3-2-1 basing for loose order and mass formations, but would it interfere with those other regular formations mentioned above? Would it mess up the clean lines of a line formation or square?

Link goes to a page that "does not exist" at the moment.

Regardless … I've seen the 3-2-1 basing work for regular troops as a skirmish game. However, 4-2-1 could be used for formed troops instead. A a unit of 12 figures could consist of 2 stands of 4, 1 of 2, and 2 of 1, or 1 of 4, 3 of 2, 2 of 1.

These same units could then translate into other rule systems as well.

I mostly just use 2-1, without the 3. For lighter and skirmish troops I will tend to focus mostly on 1s with a few 2s. For heavier formed troops, I do mostly 2s with a few 1s. Since my 2s are just two models side by side on a base, either option is pretty easy to form up.

My primary games with formations are all 15mm DBx style derivatives. So I throw a pair of 2s on a 40x20 base and that's any sort of heavy infantry like Blades or Spears. For faster, lighter infantry like Auxilia and Warbands, I'll throw a 2 and a 1 on a base. And Psiloi, just two ones.

The only time I bother with bases of 3 are for the real "rabble" or "horde" types, which don't really tend to be in formations, and even in DBx games, I can throw a 3 and a couple 1s all a 40x40 base and call it good.

I haven't used basing with wierd multiples of troops since the old WRG Napoleonic rules back in the 1970s.

I like that idea of just using bases of 1 or 2, going to consider that for my 40mm AWI, which currently I only have based with 1 to a base. The other counts listed in my post above were for 25/28mm.

Link fixed.

Bill, thanks for fixing the link.

And thanks to all for the great ideas. I like the suggestions for 4-2-1 or simply 2-1 basing.

I did a lot of Medieval's and AWI in that basing.

link

link

For Warhammer Fantasy Battle, I was using the GW regimental bases, so 4:1 basing, and decided that 3:2 with some change makers, e.g., 3:2:1, was more versatile.

Stopped playing WHFB before I did an army that way though, and of course these were regimental blocks not skirmish arrangements.

But compared to other multi-model basing approaches, I agree 3:2:1 has the best flexibility for casualty removal. Seems likely it would also have best flexibility for skirmish movement.

@Greenknight4, Thanks, those links were quite helpful!

Glad to help :)