How should I base my figures?

[Antonio J Carrasco]

It shouldn't be a problem. Good wargamers chose a ruleset and stick to it. Then there are some species of wargamers that are incapable to decide which rules they want to use, nor which scale for their games. That's me, by the way. My medieval nickname would have been the Undecided.

Anyway, my problem is that after years of neglect I have decided that my collection of Late Romans (5th Century Romans) must abandon the boxes where they lay unpainted and unloved for ages. The muster has been called -I blame Koyote and his wonderful thread, by the way- and the legions are marching on. Now, I am of two minds. On one hand, I like Saga a lot -I have two warbands, Vikings and Anglo-Saxons, that use to fight each other to the death- and it has the definite advantage of being "gameable" with a relatively low figure count. On the other hand, I have one Late Roman unit already painted and based... as a regiment, i.e. not as individual figures.

So I am stuck. I have been painting the minis and I have even finished a few... but I am procrastinating at basing the figures. The poor guys are in their "painting bases" (I use empty Vallejo bottles that I fill with sand for extra stability) waiting for me to decide what to do with them.

What should I do? Maybe two different projects? One for skirmishes with Saga and other for bigger battles with other rulesets? Basing them as singles and using movement trays? It is not a solution I like too much because when in formation they look, don't know, odd... too much space between figures, but maybe it is the most cost/time efficient.

I wonder if anyone has travelled through the same sea of doubts, or if it is that something is broken inside my wargaming mind.

[Jacksarge]

Personally, I would go for singles & use movement trays for mass battle - far more flexibility in my opinion.

[Orctrader]

I almost always base figures singly.  However...

I'm working on a project currently that will see DBX-type basing used.  In part so I can have more of a diorama effect, in part because I like to try different things in my hobby.   

[Charlie_]

Basing them as singles and using movement trays? It is not a solution I like too much because when in formation they look, don't know, odd... too much space between figures, but it is the most cost/time efficient.

I agree that round saga style bases on movement trays don't look good, too much space between figures. But square 20mm bases on trays look great I think, as it has the figures tightly packed to give a great unit effect. Have you considered square bases? I know its maybe unfashionable these days as it perhaps has too much of an association with WAB, but it works for me. Check out my 15th century thread on this board to see what I mean.

[Dr. Zombie]

I used to be a single base guy myself. But I am finding I like unit bases more and more. Because of the small mini dioramas you can turn every unit into.

With my own Viking army I have done something in between single and unit basing. You can see it here

But really I find that basing is rarely an issue when you switch from one rules set to another. I find that you can get around most issues with a bit of common sense and perhaps a few markers.

[Patrice]

Since a long time I only play skirmish, with rather small units, so I base everyone individually; most minis on round bases 2 cm wide, and some (the regular troops trained to walk in close order) on square bases it helps to push them together as a unit.

[levied troop]

I've been changing my basing approach to sabots to try and make my armies rules neutral. So:



The top line suits Lion Rampant, two blocks of 6 make up a unit.

The middle line suits DBx, 3 blocks making 3 elements.

Or third line, Impetus can be dealt with just by keeping a Lion Rampant's unit blocks together.  Equally, the figures as they stand are suitable for man-to-man skirmish rules.

The base is the top layer of Warbases regimental bases, specially cut for me by the nice people at Warbases because I think their normal regimental bases are a little too thick for my taste. I plonked the thinner base onto a bit of self-adhesive steel paper, which holds the base into the storage box. A neodymium magnet makes sure nothing falls about. Steel repair washers, 25mm, for the use of, provide the figure base.

I'm toying with making separate bases of rocks/bushes/possibly casualties* to either replace losses or to adjust 4 man bases to 3 man Auxilia or 2 man Psloi elements for DBx.
Hopefully this copes with most rules options, but it should be easy enough to make up alternative size/shape bases with Warbases help. I'm aiming to do all new armies on this basis and am redoing some of my older armies where it looks to be worthwhile.

To be honest, I wish I'd done this years ago.

 
* or I could be lazy and paint the magnets over with Earth Brown  :winky:

[Antonio J Carrasco]

Wow! Lots of good advice! I like the idea of using sabots a lot, although combining them with square bases rather than round ones, as Charlie sugests. Actually, my Vikings and Anglo-Saxons are in square bases, being originally mustered with WAB in mind. Thanks for your help!

[Codsticker]

I have done exactly as Levied Troop however, singly based on 20mm squares would probably be best of you wanted the option to use them in movement trays and have them look like they are fighting shoulder to shoulder.

[Koyote]

Anyway, my problem is that after years of neglect I have decided that my collection of Late Romans (5th Century Romans) must abandon the boxes where they lay unpainted and unloved for ages. The muster has been called -I blame Koyote...
 

[Gracchus Armisurplus]

I can't find it now, but there was a great blog post from a guy who made sabot style movement trays for his SAGA figures. He also encountered the problem of the unit looking a little spaced out. But what he did was take a few 25mm round bases, and cram two figures onto them. The models crowded over the edge of the base, but when placed between two 'single based' figures on a sabot style movement tray, they really fleshed out the unit and made it look much more solid.

The units looked great, and were easily transposed from one game system to the other, and all he had to do was do maybe four or six extra models per unit, to put them on double bases, to pad the units out and make them look full. And of course, every time you're putting a double-based model on the tray, you've got one less spot to fill with your regular models so you get more mileage out of them.

[Charlie_]

With my own Viking army I have done something in between single and unit basing. You can see it here

Yes, I remember seeing that some time ago! It's a really clever idea, and an effective solution!

[Parrot]

I have all of my historical minis on 20mm individual squares, but I am looking at doing some in the 3-2-1 system from the Pikeman's Lament book.  But 20mm squares is my go to choice currently for flexibility.  The only problem seems to be getting figures to fit next to each other occasionally.

[rumacara]

Follow the exemple of Levied Troop.
You can use your figures in any rules system and you can always add some more figures on the movement bases if you like.
Warbases has both square and round movement bases so you can keep your vikings and saxons for Saga and also use them for other systems.

[katie]

"Warbases has both square and round movement bases"

They're making me some 60mm square sabots with slots for 20mm bases at angles, to convert ECW from  close-packed units from regiment-oriented games into looser skirmish units for Pikeman's Lament.

I'm sure they'll happily sell more of them..