"Has WRG base sizes changed for 28mm?" Topic

I have several sets of rules lying about ( Armati, The Killing Ground) which states 6omm frontages for 25mm. Is it possible to fit 4 28mm figures on that size base? It seems to me it would be to small.

"Has WRG base sizes changed for 28mm?"

Nope.

"Is it possible to fit 4 28mm figures on that size base?"

Not usually. Most people I know of only fit 3 on a 60mm width base.

It IS too small, and the heirs to WRG refuse to admit it.
In DBM, the number of figures on a base is irrelevant. In Warrior, it is not.

In my not so humble opinion, they are loathe to force old timers (the bulk of the tournament players) to rebase their Hinchliffe and Lamming armies from the 70s and 80s.

It's still 60mm; personally, I find it possible to fit most 28mm figures on 4 to a base (although sometimes I find I need to increase base depths for irregulars), but others will disagree with me on this.

Simon

Doesn't FOG use WRG basing, or has that been changed ?

Is there a WRG anymore?
Isn't DBMM not under that aegis any more?

WRG did come up with the standard but I probably am behind the times. I guess Warrior is the old WRG rules ( I think).

Is it possible to fit 4 28mm figures on that size base?

You can do it but they have to be close friends.

80mm is a better standard.

"In my not so humble opinion, they are loathe to force old timers (the bulk of the tournament players) to rebase their Hinchliffe and Lamming armies from the 70s and 80s."

Because they would probably snap off at the ankles?

I don't have much difficulty getting four 28mm figures to a base when you talk about infantry. The cavalry is a different story, I usually use a 50mm deep base instead of a 40mm one.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

please pass the popcorn!

We have been around this particular block a few times! :-)

Simon

For DBR … 60x30 is the basic base size. I have Foundry and Old Glory models in most of my Renaissance armies. I have had no problem getting 4 models on a base, although in DBR there are not too many 4 figure-based elements. 3 Carrocoling Horse suchs as Reiters can be a bit difficult for the 60x40 bases … but it can be done.

20mm depth for DBMM is the real problem. 28mm models' bases are all at least 20mm deep even when trimmed up.

Someone should rethink this whole base thing. There should be a way to base our models and still play any game including WAB/WECW. There is just too much anitmosity out there. And too many armies already based. Even I would hate to have to remount the nearly 2000 figures I have. 20x25 would be an excellent size (per model) for 28mm models. How could we use that size and satisfy everyone's needs?

Mike B

I'm sorry thia topic has irritated a few people. I'm just trying to figure out if DBx basing with 28mm works with FOG. Is the number of figures per stand matters in FOG>

-If I were to build a 28mm army for FOG I would want to be able to use it in as many rule sets as possible for variety's sake.

I use WRG for SYW and found the bases too small I had to increase them by 1.1579 to make them all fit.

Granddad, it's not that it has irritated us, it's just that you've tapped into a source of great angst for those of us that spend almost as much time basis our minis as we do painting them.

I'm off to trim a tussock of long grass!

Simon

"I'm just trying to figure out if DBx basing with 28mm works with FOG."

Yes, DBx basing works very well for FoG.

"Is the number of figures per stand matters in FOG"

In FoG, the number of figures per base has no effect on play.

Cheers,
Scott

I will echo what Scott says, you could use one figure per stand (cheaper).

28mm basing for DBM really should have been revised to 80mm by now. Fog missed a trick by sticking to the old standard.

DBMM's basing for 28-30mm figs is 3-4 where 20-25mm would be 4.

And yes WRG still exists – it's now (I think) partly owned by "Keep Wargaming"

Ironicaly Phil Barker recently posted to the DBMM list that one of the reasons WRG started up was that Osprey wanted him to write a book, but only offered UKL100 as a fee – no on-going royalties.

He was advised by a writer friend never to accept such a deal, so didn't & published himself (with friends). However it did lead to some bad blood with Osprey through the 70's and 80's because "army books were THEIR thing nd we had no right to meddle".

I think that spat is over now tho…..

I use 1/72 p****ic figs, and for the most part they fit pretty neatly on WRG/DBX 60mm frontages…

I can usually find the magic it takes to put 4 28/30mm figures on a 60mm base, especially if I can increase the depth. I have even put 4 Essex cataphracts on a 60mm frontage, whew that's some really heavy metal! Lately, though, I tend to focus on really nice looking stands, and I don't care about matching numbers of figures to rules standards. Which is ok if I stay away from formal tournament gaming, which these days I do. The 4-3-2 figures per stand formula is pretty dumb anyway, for reasons I would elaborate at another place and time (don't get me started…)

80mm bases are fine but would have an impact on table size. Us Brits are strapped for space and can typically manage only 6 ft x 4 ft tables. So rather than rebasing, 60mm-wide-base owners would tend to stick with what they've got. Then we'd have two standards.

With modern element-based rules, it doesn't really matter how many figures you stick on a base or what scale they are, and even base depths aren't usually critical. So allowing 3 figures on a base and larger base depths will be less disruptive to the playing community than introducing 80mm wide bases.

I believe that DBMM has a 28-30mm basing option for the current 'heroic' 28mm and larger figures. This uses an 80mm forntage but as yet I have not seen anyone base their figures this way.

Persoanlly I would far rather that 25mm figures had stayed just that 25mm and that all these nice new 28mm figures would have been made to be compatible.

No, DBMM just gives you the option to use fewer figures on the base if you wish.

Checks his copy of DBMM (yes I do have one) and you are right. I have no idea where I got the 80mm from but that would explain why I haven't seen it.

The only concession for large figures in DBMM is that you can have close order foot or cataphracts 3 or 4 to a base.

You must all get in step with me & buy old Ral Partha Condottieri !

For this reason with Impetus I have opted for 12cm base units. A multiple of the anachronistic 6cm bases suitable for nowdays wonderful 28mm and with the possibility to save a lot of figs with the best visual result.

See how they look at link

Very pretty, losart. I love to see a bit of good basing.

Mind you, I also love to see almost that many figures slapped on a 6cm base, and then stick another packed 6cm base next to it to make a 12cm frontage unit of around 16 figures.

link

And with 6cm frontage one can make 18cm frontage units, too, with a command stand in the middle; or shrink a unit to 6cm wide to march along a road.

Having said that, I am planning to base some light cavalry elements 12cm wide, with 6cm elements in case I need to break them down due to casualties.

Simon

80mm bases are fine but would have an impact on table size. Us Brits are strapped for space and can typically manage only 6 ft x 4 ft tables. So rather than rebasing, 60mm-wide-base owners would tend to stick with what they've got. Then we'd have two standards.

Lots of my figures are based for WAB with 20mm infantry frontages and yes we play on 6x44 tables.

Easy solution: have the guys with the old style elements with the old style figures place cards the size of the larger elements under their bases.

Personally, I mount individually, and make sabots for the elements the idiot game designer of the moment requires. If the idiot game designer wants us to mount on a 53mm frontage, I just cut out sabots for this size and put the requisite number of figures on the sabot. (53 number is perfect for an idiot game designer, since it is a prime number!)

On the other hand, I have stopped worrying about the demands of idiot game designers, and have been using a lot of 1" x 2" sabots with two figures.

Besides, where does the notion come from that unit frontages were uniform come from? What evidence do we have that half of a cohort (1.5 maniples or approximately 250 men) would have the same frontage as a Celtic warband? Seems awful convenient!

Granddad Abu, welcome to the third rail of wargaming!

I have been annoying people online with this issue for some years. Current 28mm ranges DO NOT fit on the old WRG 25mm bases. Those who tell you otherwise are delusional.

FoG not only didn't change the basing for 28mm--they didn't even change the ground scale!!!! I basically think they chickened out from touching that third rail and the result is a lot of flapdoodle on various lists about MU measurement and table size.

The issue is that most (not all) of the current crop of 25/28mm gamers already have a lot of armies based on the 60mm element frontage and would sooner boil and eat their children than rebase. Those of us who want to do 28mm, but have no official sanction for larger base sizes, are considered heretics and dismissed as "obsessed" lunatics.

That's about where it stands. In my part of the world, we will adopt an 80mm element base frontage, thumb our noses at the rest, and laugh up our sleeves as they resort to ever more ludicrous expedients to get HUGE 28mm figures on wee, tiny bases.

Personally I would far rather that 25mm figures had stayed just that 25mm and that all these nice new 28mm figures would have been made to be compatible.

I agree with that, Hammy. However, reality being what it is…

I did look into buying an army of Minifigs, which would fit the standard 60mm element frontage, but I couldn't do it. I haven't painted a Minifig 25 since the 70s. If they were cheap, I could do it again, but their price is not much less than current 28mm ranges--which are of vastly superior quality.

I don't see a problem with players taking it into their own hands to increase the 28mm base size to 80mm and making suitable adjustments to game distances.