Monday, 1 March 2021

Re-basing Project: Format


I decided to write this rambling post to get my head around what I want to achieve with the base sizes and figures that will be stuck on them! I like the Imptvs style of 1 base = 1 unit philosophy and I was going for that with my original style but I felt it didn't "look right". Mainly playing Lost Battles on our 5x3ft table with a view to trying other rules namely To the Strongest! I wanted to have a single base have more of a heft, however because of lack of room I could not push it too far. In then end I have settled for an 80mm frontage as the previous posts show.

Now if I were just sticking with TtS! I would be done and all units would be 80mm wide to fit into 80mm+ grid boxes, however playing Lost Battles I would like to represent, to a certain degree at least, the aspects of the various units represented in that ruleset. 

For those not familiar with Lost Battles I highly recommend the book as required reading on classical era warfare, it covers from the Peloponnesian War to Caesar's Civil War which provides a good analysis of the eras battles. It aims to provide a way to model battles based on the ancient sources and provides the rules as an appendix. 

It is a very abstract game with a few quirks that would make it seem alien to more free form tabletop games. One of these is a very broad grid 5 wide by 4 deep the opposing forces interact across the squares and does so by activating for attacks. Each square has depending on the scenario 3-5 unit "attack limit" and each unit counts between 0.5-2 towards that limit. Also the quality of the unit determines the numerical strength, for example, if an average infantry unit is 1000 strong a levy unit is 2000 strong and a veteran 500 (this can change scenario dependent but the ratio is constant). Furthermore average cavalry is half the size of an average infantry unit with the same double & half strengths for levy and veteran respectively. So with attack limits reflecting a units "frontage" and its numerical strength roughly being used to determine the amount of figures I decided to go with the following: 

    ❋1 base of 12 figures for average heavy infantry. 

    ❋Levy infantry units will need 2 bases, 1 behind the other. Although twice the size it compensates its fragility by an increased depth  

    ❋ veteran infantry will then be represented by 6 figures. They have a few bonuses one being they only have an 0.5 attack limit allowing extra attacks so I will go for 40mm frontage for these. This has lead me to go through the scenarios and working out what veteran units I "need" to paint up on these smaller frontages. 

    ❋There is a special case for veteran legionary units which represent the same strength of a veteran infantry unit but lack the 0.5 attack limit bonus. It is a bit of a gamey fix to encourage the use of their superior manoeuvrability so my thoughts are 6 figures spread across an 80mm base (more confident to fight in a looser or thinner formation perhaps).   

    ❋ Light infantry have an attack limit of 2 so my light bases will have 6 figures spread across and 2 bases side by side to represent them. This is despite the fact that light infantry units attacking first in that square has an attack limit of 1 again a fix to encourage their historical use! Like the heavy infantry levy lights double up in depth (2x2 bases) and veterans have a smaller frontage (1 base).

Cavalry basing, I decided to rebase my heavy cavalry units (3 on 4 bases of 60x40mm) onto 2 x 80x40mm and 2 x 40mm bases. This allows me to maintain the current formation whilst making them into 80mm frontages. In Lost Battles terms:

    ❋ Average cavalry although representing half the numbers in an average infantry unit have double the attack limit. This is rationalised as cavalry units needing manoeuvre room and I am going for 6 figures so 1 x 80mm and 1 x 40mm, which keeps the figure ratio right and reminds visually of the higher attack limit.

    ❋ Levy double that of above.

    ❋ Veterans really should be 3 but they will have to suit my basing choices so 1 base either 4 figures on 80mm front or 2 on 40mm. Ideally 80mm option as the attack limit is 1.

    ❋ There should be a special case for cataphracts, they attack with half the limit of their respective quality cavalry units owing to a denser formation. However I will just follow the same format and attempt to remember they are cataphracts with special rules. 

I think I will keep elephants on 40mm frontage, 2 can make 80mm for TtS! and I can team them up with light infantry bases to make accompanied elephants for Lost Battles. Chariots will hopefully fit onto either 40mm or 80mm base I'll see when I start building some. Characters as some may have noticed will be appearing on round bases they look more attractive and will make the generals stand out,

So to conclude this post will be a handy reference to go back to. I originally started writing it in June but a combination of factors lead me to kicking the can down the road. One of them being combining my blogs and starting to revamp it which is partly done. After experimenting a bit with some heavy infantry and characters I am ready to get the rebasing mission underway after our relocation if all goes well. 

5 comments:

  1. "Lost Battles" is definitely required reading. A great book from which one can gain a lot of useful insight. As for basing, I use Impetvs style basing with 120mm frontage for both Impetvs and TtS! To me, the diorama style basing looks terrific. This style of basing could work with "Lost Battles too. I have yet to try LB but have wanted to for a very long time. I even picked up the boardgame several year ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree! I think the bigger the better look is the way. The bases look more like units in their own right.

      Its a funny one LB, I loved the book but found the rules underwhelming on reading, probably because of the abstraction. However after seeing it played on blogs and you tube it seemed to play very well.

      Then playing it a few times myself found that although abstract it provides battlelines wearing down to breaking point and potentially an infectious morale collapse. The battles do feel like an ancient account of battle. Its a good one to play solo too!

      The boardgame came with the Kadesh scenario suggesting it can work for earlier battles! Ideal for your Biblicals!

      Delete
    2. I need to pull it off the shelf for a look at Kadesh.

      Delete
  2. Great idea Tony. You want to get the basing looking right for any set of rules, but it's especially satisfying with Lost Battles. For what it's worth, I found that you have to be happy with the look of your veteran units. If they have too few figures to look sufficiently intimidating, then the game loses much of its visual appeal. After much trial and error I ended up using 12 figures for Caaesarian Roman veterans (2 40x30 bases), and 18 figures for average legionaries (2 40x30, 2 40x15). For phalangites and hoplites I use 16 figures on 2 40x30s for veterans (in column), 24 (2 40x30, 2 20x15) figures for average, and 32 (4 40x30) for levy. Cavalry I use 80 mm total frontage for veteran, 120mm for average, 160mm for levy.

    Flexibility is really important, so I like to have the 40mm wide bases in case you need to alter your scheme to get more units than you quite have enough bases for. Some games I've used 9 or 12 figures for a veteran unit, but you pair them with another so that you don't get odd bases lying around looking silly.

    Have fun, and I'm sure your scheme will look grand!

    Cheers,
    Aaron

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Aaron great insights! I'll give the 6 man veteran foot a go but they will be part of larger 24 man unit packs just incase the 6 man units look weird. Also for other systems so a 24 man packon 4 x 40mm bases can make a few units for TtS! or others.

      Delete