I recently painted two cavalry bases for my English Civil War (ECW) armies. This will provide each side has an equal number of cavalry units which will allow me to use units consisting of two bases. Further details on the whys and wherefores of this idea are explained below.
 |
| A Royalist cavalry base. |
It has been quite some time since I last painted ECW figures and I had to remember my painting approach, which involves block painting initially, followed by adding highlights of a lighter colour to clothing, armour, and horses as needed and to breakup the blocks of colour. This works well providing there is no close scrutiny.
 |
| A cavalry base for the Parliamentarian army |
I have cleared the tabletop in preparation for some face-to-face sci-fi skirmish games with my daughter, who is visiting for a week. However, before starting the tabletop tidy up I was trying to decide whether I prefer gaming with fewer larger units consisting of two bases or more smaller units made up of a single base. I treat the larger units as brigades, while still keep the independent units like dragoons and artillery as single bases. These independent units are eliminated with half the hits compared to the larger two base units.
 |
| A game setup using the larger bases representing brigades of infantry and cavalry. Dragoons and artillery are still single bases and take half the hits before elimination. |
The use of two base units aligns well with the army’s deployment of flanks and centre units, with their first lines, reserve lines, and independent dragoons and artillery positioned in front.
 |
| An army’s deployment zones. |
However, when using individual base units, I have added a rule where the units in a line, the first line centre for example, must be of the same type and must remain within 3" of another unit. Essentially, I am treating them as one unit for the purpose of movement orders and unit cohesion. However, they still engage in combat separately.
 |
| An example of Brigades using single based units. |
Here are some pros and cons I have discovered so far for the different unit basing options:
- With larger units there is a clear distinction between single base independent units like dragoons, commanded shot, and artillery, and the two base cavalry and infantry brigades.
- Fewer units speed up the shooting and combat phases.
- Having a greater number of units with single bases allows for additional rules to be added for unit qualities, such as Raw, Trained, and Veteran.
- When using the solo wargaming decision cards I am developing, having fewer units does help simplify things.
- I have a slight preference for the aesthetic of single based units, when I look at some of the old engravings and paintings.
 |
| Engraving of the battle lines at Naseby. |
 |
| Another view |
For the moment I have put all these considerations aside as I now prepare to play few face-to-face sci-fi games.
 |
| A very different tabletop from the lush green fields of England from the 1640’s. |
 |
| Lots of sneaking around in the sci-fi game. |
I like the larger units although I would double the number of units and field each brigade as two large regiments.
ReplyDeleteLarger units and two units per brigade? That sounds like a lot of painting and I am not sure my 6x4 tabletop would cope :-)
DeleteI have been wondering about this. Perhaps effective command and control for these armies was difficult for large units, so they manoeuvred into position in the smaller groups to maintain cohesion on the march, but as the lines closed and they got into final attack / defence positions, they grouped into the bigger formation. Rather like in napoleonics, the attack column being used to get close to to the enemy before deploying into line to get the best combination of easier movement and maximum firepower.
ReplyDeleteSome things to consider and how they get reflected on the tabletop. I will be trying out both approaches over the next week to see which works best and also provides an enjoyable game.
DeleteThe sci fi scenery looks great Peter - looking forward to seeing how your games with your daughter go!
ReplyDeleteSo far it is 2 to 1 in her favour, but with lots of fun.
DeleteAside from the aesthetic, the balance seems to be strongly in favour of the larger units. If the figures were grouped a little tighter in the centre of the base it would look like the gaps seen in the Naseby print. Not sure that helps though as re-basing would be a massive pain and even then it wouldn't exactly mimic the Naseby image unless you separated the pike and shot - but then you can't play with small units! It's a conundrum alright.
ReplyDeleteI have thought along those lines too, but using a spacer between the units.
DeleteBTW the battle painting is The Battle of Kircholm (1605): Poland's Triumph over Sweden.
ReplyDeleteThanks, my mistake. Too much haste.
DeleteUpdated picture now - thanks.
DeleteI'm probably with Jonathan on this. But then I would go for a smaller scale... which is not an option.
ReplyDeleteI sometimes think about 15mm armies, as I have a couple, and the larger looking units they offer.
DeleteGood to see your Sci-Fi Terrain Peter- very nice structures and your backdrop certainly completed the scene. Cheers. KEV.
ReplyDeleteMost of the Terrain is using bits from Games Workshop. Sometimes added to scratch built structures to make it go further. The backdrops are just fun to do and add to the overall atmosphere. Thanks.
DeleteI like the replacement line drawing of Naseby, where's it from?
ReplyDeleteThe battle of Naseby project - https://www.naseby.com/project/the-battle/
Delete