When I bought my first Prince August moulds, in the 1990's, it was to bring a regiment to play in the Hartford Area Weekly Kriegspiel's (H.A.W.Ks) club's multiplayer Charge! games at H.M.G.S. conventions. To fit in, I mounted each figure on a 1" wide metal washer. Since then, as the armies grew and I started experimenting at home and at conventions with different rules and levels of game, my poor armies went through a variety of basing ideas from single figures, to fixed stands with markers, to magnetised bases and so on.
Well, life goes on and making a 3,200 km round trip drive is less attractive now than it was 20-25 years ago. This year, I donated a large contingent of my "Rosmark" troops to the H.A.W.K's to do their bit in club and convention games, and kept the units that would be useful in my planned not-quite-historical Acadian and Quebec campaigns. |
| My process: The single figures were mounted on steel washers using ordinary White (aka Carpenter's) glue and an hour of standing in water up to their shoes, makes it easy to pop them off. Being thrifty by upbringing as well as necessity after my choice of very early retirement, I cut my own bases from scraps, mostly from the boxes of Clementines etc.. Once the glue is dry, I flock with sawdust I've saved when doing repairs or projects and finally paint to match my table as well as I can. |
I confess that it hadn't taken long pushing scores and at times, hundreds, of individual figures to become a bit tiresome and, over the years, I have experimented with various alternate solutions from magnetic multi-figure stands and steel washers as bases on the figures, to a mix of multifigure and single figures and so on. Well, these days, the less fiddling with individual soldiers, the better, and since this is a solo project, open to a club or convention game now and then, all my armies, except Prince Valiant and friends, are going back on multi-figure stands.
Since I want to do both battles and large skirmishers, and want to play a game of toy soldiers, not conduct an accurate recreation, I have opted for an Old School approach where a Battalion of 300-500 men in a battle will be represented by 3 stands or "companies" of around 6 figures on a base. In small actions or certain scenarios, an individual stand might be used to represent a detachment of 100 or so men or even less, depending on the situation, but with no change is ground scale, ranges etc.. Remember, its a game of toy soldiers.
For my own convenience, the same rules will be used for my 1840's games at the other end of the smoothbore musket era but with different hats.
More to follow.
Very much agree that multi stand bases make for an easier life - there seems to have been much haste across the hobby to embrace single based figures, generally with the view that they are more multi-function as they can be collected into various basing systems …. But for my own preferences that often leaves them too spaced out - the worst of all worlds! But horses for courses of course.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I got a copy of Charge! in '73, by '74 I was playing wrg with figures on bases and it took me till the mid 90's to start playing some low level games (Colonial) with single figures as well as my usual 15mm battle games with stands of figures.
DeleteThis is one of my go too’s for basing… that and 3,2,1 basing for Lion Rampant/ skirmish games.
ReplyDeleteI find both a lot more flexible.
All the best. Aly
The 3,2,1 reminds me of my WRG ancients days :)
DeleteI like individualy based figures , but multi based are more practical .
ReplyDeleteThe only ones left now are my Prince Valiant figures, but they were intended for low level actions with small forces and named characters.
DeleteAs time goes by, I think one looks increasing towards a better return on time invested. Personally, I like individual basing, but as time goes by, it becomes less convenient. Some armies I have use 3- or 4-figure stands; others in pairs with the odd individual - a kind of 'quasi' individual basing. My ACW armies lie in between - 1, 2 and 3-figure bases -
ReplyDeleteI like the look of 6- or 8- or 12-figure stands qua 'stands', but I just don't like the way they look on the table, especially of the table has undulating terrain. To me they seem soulless. But that's just me.
Cheers,
Ion
I think the size of the table, figures, units and games make a difference. Your method looks good on your blog and seems to work well for your games.
DeleteMy 1/72nd ACW regiments are based 6 figures (3x2) to a base, 3 bases to a regiment which works well. At least it works well with small games, but in bigger games with the combined armies starting to number in the order of 20-40 regiments or 60-120 bases to move each turn, I start thinking of movement trays and its only my desire to show march columns, and the work involved that makes me refuse to change to one stand regiments!
Looks good - individual figures may be lovely, but hard work - how did Charles Grant ever get a game finished, moving 48-figure regiments one by one?! Equally, large single-base units of 20 or more seem a bit unwieldy, so the 'company' base of 4 or 6 figures seems about right. I admire your thriftiness with materials!
ReplyDeleteMy Mom grew up in the Great Depression, the daughter of a retired soldier without a post war career. As I grew up, I was well taught to waste nothing! Now there is the added pressure of "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.
DeleteSometimes, I think my hobby is actually rebasing, and painting toy soldiers and playing games with them is just an excuse to do it.
ReplyDeleteSounds familiar...
DeleteMy 40mm armies have 16 figure battalions which were originally organised on 4 bases of 4, as that fit rules such as Field of Battle, however they are now have 2x4 plus 8 singles in movement trays to allow figure removal etc.
ReplyDeleteThe 2x4 helps them stand up better!
It does indeed.
DeleteI've recently broken down and am tracking hits on small dice till a stand comes off
We've all been there, Ross. :-)
ReplyDeleteRegards, Chris
Sometimes I think it's a separate hobby on its own.
Delete