28mm GB Roman cataphracts as Seleucids - 4 to a base madness!

[madaxeman]

My Successor army moves on apace, with the latest addition being 3 units of Cataphracts, making the later version of the Seleucids an option to use at a future event (aka "Beachhead" in a couple of weeks!).

I already have some Gripping Beast fully armoured horse troops, which I painted up as Arab Ghilmen cavalry quite some time ago - however those figures were very wide, with the horse armour making it impossible to do the "wargames-standard" 4 figures to a base. 

It was therefore with some trepidation that I picked up a box of GB's new Roman Cataphracts, only to be pleasantly surprised to find that they appear to have thinned-down the horses so it is almost - with caveats - possible to squeeze 4 of them together on a standard DBx-style 60mm wide base.



However, this feat of engineering was achieved with a bit of careful arrangement, slightly deeper than usual (50mm) bases, and some judicious use of the sprue clipper to remove any lower legs that were keeping the horses in the middle of each block too far apart!



With a number of "Greek" heads, and the aforementioned lack of leg action, they are now Successor Cataphracts !



A full explanation and more pictures can now be found on my website at: https://madaxemandotcom.blogspot.com/2024/01/28mm-cataphracts-for-successor-project.html

[Pattus Magnus]

Great work, they look very impressive! Your observations about figure width are helpful, too, for planning future additions to my successor forces.

[AdamPHayes]

Obsession bordering on insanity I call it! What have you done to ‘is leg?!  I long ago reconciled myself to having just three cataphracts to a base. If my opponent doesn’t see all that horse armour heading their way,  that’s their lookout!

[trev]

That head swap works very well.  Neat. 

Why even try cramming the figures onto DBM-sized bases though?  Obviously, it's fine to prefer more densely packed bases but sticking to the shortest possible depth when you have to cut legs off miniatures just seems like dogma.  The ADLG rules don't require it.  What am I missing? 

Love the the battle reports. 

[Norm]

I go for 4 horses per base, though on a slightly bigger base and love the look. I have had some difficulties here and there and welcome your idea on clipping legs parts …. It seems so obvious now that you mention it! Cheers

[Easy E]

Those will look smashing at arm's length, and that is what matters!

[Ceeteegee]

Very nice minis.  I'm reading the Pen and Sword book on the Seleucid army of Antiochus the Great.
Having just read the interesting chapter on Seleucid cavalry, I couldn't help but start looking at the GB and Victrix minis wi5h a view to a little kitbash or two. After my Hiberians of course.

[madaxeman]

That head swap works very well.  Neat. 

Why even try cramming the figures onto DBM-sized bases though?  Obviously, it's fine to prefer more densely packed bases but sticking to the shortest possible depth when you have to cut legs off miniatures just seems like dogma.  The ADLG rules don't require it.  What am I missing? 

Love the the battle reports. 

These guys are on “longer than standard DBx” bases. - I think they are on 50mm or even 55mm rather than the old DBm 40mm depth, as you’re right, almost no cavalry today will fit on 40mm

The leg snipping is to get them 4-wide on 60mm frontage however - which is still important as that’s the “standard” for compatibility with other players

[trev]

I suppose, it is the adherence to a 'standard', that isn't required, and seems unfit for purpose, which I find odd.   I'm not the fun police though, so I'll shut up now.  Thanks for the reply.