Round or square bases – which are better as universal bases for most games?

[Gonzo100100]

I only know SAGA but I have books for Hail Caesar, Sword Point, Deus Vault, now I even bought Bolt Action (I am more in this hobby for painting than for gaming but it doesn’t mean I won’t get into all of those games with time because I will – I’m sure of that).
So far, most of my figures are of Dark Ages theme and they are based on square 20x20mm bases. SAGA doesn’t care about bases. However, round ones are promoted and I have to say they look better aesthetically in a small formation as it is in SAGA.
Because I already have about 400 painted and ready dark age miniatures, I believe it’s enough to get into Hail Caesar that is on my ‘hot’ to do list.
Soon I am going to spend some time at a smaller project (compared to painting hundreds of miniatures) - Bolt Action that definitely will be on round bases.
Anyway, I am dreaming about starting a classical era project and I would like to make those armies of Rome and their enemies on round bases. Unfortunately, I fear it can make my life harder when I will finally get to those bigger games like Hail Caesar, Sword Point + another historical table top games I’ll discover in the future.
If I want my miniatures to be universal to maximum number of games, should I stick to square bases or can I safely allow myself move to round ones for all of my future projects?
What are your thoughts about basing miniatures on square vs round bases? (Especially for historical games)

[Grumpy Gnome]

I prefer round bases for the look and versatility.

You can put round bases into sabot movement trays if you need to.

https://sarissa-precision.com/collections/trays/products/1x1-conversion-tray-for-25mm-round-bases

[OSHIROmodels]

I use round for everything now along with sabot trays if the figures need to be ranked up.

https://oshiromodels.wixsite.com/oshiromodelswebshop/gamingaid?page=2

[Roo]

Those sabots look great as they are smaller like normal stands not these huge great mDF monstrosities advancing empty bank ranked across the table.  Small functional and flexible.  Nice.

[v_lazy_dragon]

Individually on round bases for all my projects (10-100 ish figures as side; from Pike and shotte Onwards). The trickier question for me is cavalry on lozenges (25mmx50mm usually) or rounds (40mm usually). I've got both; rounds look better for smaller level skirmishes; but lozenges seem more useful/versatile for ranking up (and fitting in figure cases!)

[OSHIROmodels]

Those sabots look great as they are smaller like normal stands not these huge great mDF monstrosities advancing empty bank ranked across the table.  Small functional and flexible.  Nice.

Thanks. They are useful for different formations without changing the trays and as the figures are on round bases they can be rotated 

[SteveBurt]

I prefer square for figures which might be in close order. They also take up less room than round; you can fit a figure on a 20mm square which requires a 25mm round base. My Congo stuff and gladiators are on 25mm round, everything else is 20mm squares or 40x20 for mounted.

[Hobgoblin]

I'm very much in the minority on this, I suspect, but I increasingly prefer square bases for individually based miniatures. I'm actually rebasing some of my fantasy stuff from 'high' round slottabases to 'low' square bases. I keep my individual 1/72 and 15mm miniatures on round bases (coins), though.

The main reason I'm going with squares is for maximum versatility. As far as I can tell, the only advantages of round are aesthetic (and those are subjective). Square bases allow me to use my RPG stuff for rank'n'flank games (Hordes of the Things, Mayhem, Oathmark, Book of War, etc.). And because I put all my 28s on 25mm squares, I can sabot the coin-based smaller stuff and have matching frontages when I need hordes of small goblins or whatever.

I also increasingly prefer square bases for skirmish games. Song of Blades and Heroes is pretty much basing-agnostic, with rounds recommended, but I find that you get more clarity with squares. For example, the SoBH variants typically allow one normal-sized figure to be engaged by up to six foes. That's very neatly done with squares because you can get the edges into full alignment on two sides but only partially on two others - limiting it to six.

And then there's Melee/The Fantasy Trip. It's played on a hex grid, but it's useful to be able to see the front facing of any figure immediately (as shifting to outflank is a big part of the game). So squares are better for rounds, especially in large fights.

For 'large skirmish' games, too, squares have advantages. In the Rampant family of games, squares allow you to form up units into spear/shieldwalls very clearly. And in Of Gods and Mortals, they're useful, too, for mortal infantry.

There are aesthetic advantages in both directions, I think. Rounds are certainly pleasing, but squares can offer ranked-up neatness - especially when they're low and aren't interrupted by the inclined edges of slottabases.

The big dilemma with squares, though, is the size. I've gone with 25mm for all my fantasy stuff - including goblins, humans and dwarves - for a couple of reasons. First, uniformity of frontage is important for a lot of games, and so many modern figures - including historicals - just look more appropriately spaced on 25s. For example, Perry foot knights with two-handed weapons can look pretty cramped on 20s but look as if they have room to swing on 25s. And even a lot of smaller creatures look better on 25s. Some do look a bit stranded, but I tell myself that they're skirmishers and so shouldn't be cramped!

[SpaceCudet]

They are useful for different formations without changing the trays and as the figures are on round bases they can be rotated 

Uncle Atom (Tabletop Minions) pointed out in a recent video that this also allows you jiggle figures with pointy out bits about to get them to fit without stabbing the figure in front in the back. This is something I never considered and has me regretting my life choices.

[Gonzo100100]

Thanks for your answers, I began to work on my own movement trays. Now I am not sure if I should continue on 3mm MDF or go just get some 2mm MDF, cut through the holes and glue the frame on another 2mm sheet. I am strongly considering the transparent movement trays from Oshiro Model Terrain. I will order few to try out and if I'll like them, I'll get a bunch of them. The good side is that with them I just buy them and they are 100% ready. No need to add sand, stones and grass to them (I never leave bare MDF).

@Hobgoblin
To address the spacing issue on 20x20mm square bases I got an idea to make some spacing bars.
it is my unfinished project I was working on some time ago. those blocks on second picture once completed, they will space out some miniatures that are too close to each other. I have different sizes of them 3mmx20mm, 5mmx20mm and longer ones of 4cm and 8cm in 3mm and 5mm variants.
To finish them I need to paint the edges, highlight the stones, matt varnish and add static grass. I hope they will look alright when ready - just my idea to fight cramped figures issue.

[robh]

I prefer square for figures which might be in close order. They also take up less room than round; you can fit a figure on a 20mm square which requires a 25mm round base.

I think that may be the perfect skirmish basing option in that image, small square bases with rounded clipped corners,  the aesthetic appeal of round bases with the functionality of squares for ranking up.

[OSHIROmodels]

I am strongly considering the transparent movement trays from Oshiro Model Terrain. I will order few to try out and if I'll like them, I'll get a bunch of them. The good side is that with them I just buy them and they are 100% ready. No need to add sand, stones and grass to them (I never leave bare MDF).

I do custom sizes/arrangements as well so if there isn't anything in the webshop that suits, drop me a line 

[SteveBurt]

I think that may be the perfect skirmish basing option in that image, small square bases with rounded clipped corners,  the aesthetic appeal of round bases with the functionality of squares for ranking up.

For Pirates, who need to fit on model ships, smaller bases are definitely better. I think the clipped corners look nice

[Pattus Magnus]

I have gone with all circles due to being able to spin them slightly to get pointy bits lined up between figures. I based my first Napoleonics figures on 20mm squares and quickly decided ‘never again’ - somebody always managed to have his bayonette in a front ranker’s back, no matter how carefully I planned when I based them...

[Easy E]

Round because metal washers are cheap and add a it of heft to plastic minis.