Help support TMP


"Scope of a Game - What Size Battle?" Topic


6 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

In order to respect possible copyright issues, when quoting from a book or article, please quote no more than three paragraphs.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Return to the Scope of a Game - What Size Battle? Poll


Areas of Interest

General

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Showcase Article

Modular Buildings from ESLO

ESLO Terrain explains about their range of modular buildings.


Featured Workbench Article


Featured Profile Article

Raincoats

Editor Julia reports once again on our Christmas fundraising project.


Current Poll


216 hits since 23 Mar 2018
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

advocate23 Mar 2018 2:12 a.m. PST

What is important is to have enough figures to give a decent spectacle, and enough space to give them some opportunity to manoeuvre.
Assuming I'm playing a battle, not a skirmish. But the figure/man ratio would be different if it is a division per side or an army. Could be 1:10; could be as much as 1:100

robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP23 Mar 2018 4:05 a.m. PST

advocate is right, of course. The scale of the real battle is important, as is the size of the table, figure size and the number of players. The most important thing is to give each player enough to keep him busy but not overwhelmed, and that depends on the rules.

Frederick Supporting Member of TMP23 Mar 2018 6:19 a.m. PST

While size is without question important I do like the time-honoured 1:20 ratio

Which for me is easy to say was I have way more SYW figures at this scale than I could ever fit on a table

Personal logo etotheipi Sponsoring Member of TMP23 Mar 2018 6:38 a.m. PST

I don't really care about the raw numbers of figures or the representational ratio. What is important to me is the ratio of command units to physical units. I like that as low as possible.

Basically, the idea is if I issue one maneuver order and then move twenty plus figures to execute it. Not always 1:1. F'r'ex – If I issue one order to "fan out", "collapse ranks", or "form a square", moving around a dozen or so figures might be just fine.

Context – I mostly play skirmish games.

robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP23 Mar 2018 9:01 a.m. PST

Let's do the basics. If you do a roster system or a stand removal system, then the actual number of figures in a unit is purely a matter of aesthetics. For figure removal systems, you're balancing aesthetics with ease of handling and the granularity of the game. But a ratio suitable for the Danube Valley in 1809 is probably not suitable for North Carolina in 1780.

What IS important is that each player have enough units to keep him busy--fewer if they can change formation and take losses, more if they can't--and that the units be of different types to make the tactics about more than just geometry. Probably the OHW 4-6 units of 2-4 types is about right for a quick game, and the Grant army of about 12 units of maybe five or more types is more of an all day affair--given, again, that the units have different formations and can absorb losses instead of either being full strength or removed from play DBA style. But the figure ratio this calls for will vary tremendously depending on the size of the historical battle--and the size of the castings, come to that.

deephorse26 Mar 2018 3:36 p.m. PST

Some people take these polls far too seriously.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.