|
Post by danielweitz on Nov 19, 2016 16:28:27 GMT
I plan to do matched sets of armies using 6mm figures on 60mm bases for the visual appeal of massed troops. If possible, I plan to have 48 pikes, blades, and spears to a base. The rules allow for increasing the depth from 20mm to 30 mm. I also plan to place chariots and elephants on 60 by 60 bases. I'm thinking of: close formation troops 48 to a base. bows and fast troops 36 to a base. Light horse and psiloi 2 to a base. Cavalry 18 to a base Cataphracts 24 to a base, Elephants and chariots 4 to a base. Comments or suggestions? Danny Weitz California Central Coast
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Nov 19, 2016 17:07:11 GMT
Is LH and Psiloi 2 to a base a typo (for 12, perhaps)? Two to a base would be pretty sparse.
My only other thought is that having close formation troops 48 to a base might be a bit crowded. If I am right, this would more or less fill a 60x30 base. Leaving a bit of space gives a different visual effect. You might want to play around with it a bit before finally deciding. (Say, close formation 36 to a base and Bw and Fast troops 24 to a base?)
What depth bases are you planning to use for LH, Cavalry and cataphracts? 30mm or 45?
|
|
|
Post by bob on Nov 19, 2016 19:48:02 GMT
I have tried 6mm figures both on 40mm and 60mm wide bases. In both cases using 6 to 8 times the standard number of figures, 2 -3 elephants, artillery and chariots. I found that with the larger bases, I needed to play on a larger board and was thus much further from the figures and the view of any details. With the 40mm bases, sitting at a 2 foot square board, I enjoyed the visual aspect more and could recognize the troops. I have done giant battles with the 40mm bases, Here 6mm on 60mm bases here 6mm on 40mm bases, standard DBA game
|
|
|
Post by Piyan Glupak on Nov 20, 2016 7:00:41 GMT
Some years ago, I did a couple of 6mm armies (II/10 Camillan Roman and II/27b Pyrrhic) on 60mm wide bases. I used the same sized bases that 25mm figures would use, except that the elephants were on 60mm by 60mm bases, and two of the pike elements had deeper bases to accommodate pikes pointing forward. I used 48 figures per base for close order infantry, 48 figures for the Italian auxilia, 18 figures for cavalry and knights, 12 figures for light horse, 16 for psiloi, with 4 elephants on the jumbo base. In retrospect, slightly less psiloi and light horse figures per base would have looked better. They looked good (even with my mediocre painting) but have only been used a few times because I much prefer to use the smaller boards (24" or 30" square rather than 3' or 4' square). I found the project a bit of a chore because of the number of figures to paint. It got bogged down and it was a matter of years between finishing the Romans and finishing the Pyrrhic army. What I tend to find more satisfying both to paint and play is BBDBA armies in 6mm on 40mm wide bases. Another problem was the fact that I find it difficult to straighten pikes if they if they are based in more than 2 ranks. Although I don't plan to do any more 6mm on 60mm wide bases ancient armies, if I did I would consider using less psiloi figures, reducing the cavalry and knights from 18 figures in two ranks to one rank of 9, and consider reducing the number of close order infantry and auxilia to 3 ranks instead of 4. I would probably use 60mm by 30mm bases for everything. probably reducing the numbers of elephants to 3 per base. I wouldn't bother with pike facing forward. If you have a look at the Baccus site, you will be able to see how they have done their figures for photographs. Somewhere on their forum is a good thread with a lot of pictures of 6mm figures based on various bases. www.baccus6mm.com/index.php
|
|
|
Post by danielweitz on Nov 20, 2016 8:06:08 GMT
Many thanks for all the great suggestions. I was planning to put 12 (not 2!) psiloi and light horse to a base; perhaps I'll reduce the light horse to 8? I as also planning to put 4 elephants on 60 by 60 bases. You are probably right about reducing the number of foot figures and using 60 by 30 bases. If I used 60 by 30 for everything, would it have a major impact on the game?
|
|
|
Post by Piyan Glupak on Nov 22, 2016 7:32:46 GMT
Twelve psiloi to a base would look certainly better than the 16 that I used. For light horse, about 8 would look better than 12. It might be worth doing a couple of bases as a test run, before you commit yourself to a standard. You may find that even fewer per base would work well. What I have found is that the exact number of figures isn't so important if you have a lot more figures than you would use with 15mm or 25mm. There is a very noticeable difference between 2 and 3 figures on a base, whereas you might not notice whether some bases have 8 and some have 9 figures.
The depth of recoil would be the same for all if you used bases of the same size. In my opinion (which some people may disagree with) the different base depths in DBA are not some arcane but deeply thought-out and vitally important part of the combat mechanism, but are due to several factors, including:
* Base depths being dictated by larger figure mounted figures, including elephants and chariots * The authors finding backward compatibility with basing for WRG 7 convenient * Trying to indicate the category of troop type on the base
I have noticed that the ratio between recommended base depth and base width is different for 40mm and 60mm bases for chariots and elephants. I understand that for DBA version 3, close order troops with 4 figures on a base can either be based on 60mm by 20mm or 60mm by 30mm bases, whereas before the recommendation was 60mm by 20mm.
Personally, I like the neatness of bases of similar size, and also the convenience for storage, and not having to have lots of different sized bases in stock before I start an army. I stress that this is a purely personal preference; you might well like things done differently.
With 6mm figures, you can usually show information about the troop type on a base in different ways. Knights or cavalry? Consider basing the knights in a 'V'. Close order foot or auxilia? Put your ranks of hoplites or legionaries close to each other whereas allow a bit more space between ranks of auxilia or looser order warband. (You could splitting up the strips of warband figures to base them in a 'Charge' formation.)
As far as I know, there aren't any competitions for 6mm figures on 60mm wide bases. You would be lucky to find other DBA players in travelling distance that use 6mm figures on 60mm wide bases. You would almost certainly play with and against armies painted and based by you. You may as well please yourself and do what you prefer.
|
|
|
Post by danielweitz on Nov 22, 2016 8:13:52 GMT
I find your analysis very impressive, and I tend to agree with you about using 60 by 30 bases, which seem to have become the 'industry standard' for 6 mm players. The one exception would be elephants and chariots' would they not look better with four on a 60 by 60 base? The 60 by 80 was obviously done to allow the larger size figures to fit. Danny Weitz California
|
|
|
Post by mellis1644 on Nov 22, 2016 15:06:00 GMT
6mm on normal 25mm bases as you mention work fine. I have done exactly as you plan. To be honest just don't put too many figs on them as it defeats the overall look IMO. You can make the bases scenic and have really nice results with a reasonable number of figs. The less organized forces especially should not have lines of ranks etc like are seen in later wars. The only challenge can be to differentiate commanders at times. I have tried various tricks with this as using purely the number of figs on a base is hard to always keep track of in a game. I also created some separate commander bases so I can use these for other games as well - such as Dux Bellorum & Sword and Spear. I have completed several 'fall of rome armies in the British isles' - so Romano-Brits, Saxons, Picts etc. You can see them on my blog: mellis1644.wordpress.com/category/6mm/ - you'll have to skip the other 6mm projects/posts though as these were done a year or so ago. Here are a few pictures. First some British Chariots: Then some Romano-British infantry: And then some Barbarian infantry - spears/blades here - if you check my blog I did ones which look a lot more random for war bands: A shot of the various mounted Pict/Barbarian forces - where you can see the light (front) vs. medium (middle) vs. heavy (at the back) cav as well as some foot skirmishers. Overall this works but in the end the larger table means they get less play for DBA than my 15mm armies.
|
|
|
Post by danielweitz on Nov 22, 2016 18:08:17 GMT
I really like the way your foot looks in two ranks with the spacing you used.
|
|
|
Post by Piyan Glupak on Nov 23, 2016 7:32:37 GMT
Although I would certainly try, and probably choose, 60m by 30mm for chariots and elephants; that is purely a matter of personal choice, and I certainly wouldn't argue with anyone who went for 60mm by 60mm.
I do concur with mellis1644 that not completely filling a base with figures and making the bases scenic works particularly well for 6mm.
Although I don't have any more DBA armies planned in 6mm on 60mm wide bases, I do do my horse and musket armies on 60 mm wide bases for DBN. For most infantry, I have 24 figures two lines of 12 figures, with half a centimetre gap between them for 'Light Infantry'. "Jagers' and 'Guerrillas' get 12 figures per base, distributed almost randomly (the 'Jagers' I usually try to do in pairs). Cavalry get 9 figures per base, 'Light Cavalry' in one line and 'Heavy Cavalry' in echelon (the outer 3 on each side about half a centimetre further back than the middle 3). For the Napoleonic armies, I do use deeper bases for the artillery, using limbers and things like behind the guns (4 guns plus crew per base). I used to find it tempting to manoeuvre other units immediately behind the guns in an unrealsitic manner, and adopted deeper (80 or 90mm for foot artillery, 60mm for horse artillery) to stop me doing that. The American War of Independence armies are a much smaller project; I couldn't find the right limbers and crew easily, so the artillery is just on 60mm by 30mm.
|
|
|
Post by korean on Nov 24, 2016 9:02:14 GMT
if you make the army by 6mm miniatures. it`ll such a huge army! but I don`t know 6mm miniatures have massed effect.
|
|
|
Post by korean on Nov 24, 2016 9:08:22 GMT
Some years ago, I did a couple of 6mm armies (II/10 Camillan Roman and II/27b Pyrrhic) on 60mm wide bases. I used the same sized bases that 25mm figures would use, except that the elephants were on 60mm by 60mm bases, and two of the pike elements had deeper bases to accommodate pikes pointing forward. I used 48 figures per base for close order infantry, 48 figures for the Italian auxilia, 18 figures for cavalry and knights, 12 figures for light horse, 16 for psiloi, with 4 elephants on the jumbo base. In retrospect, slightly less psiloi and light horse figures per base would have looked better. They looked good (even with my mediocre painting) but have only been used a few times because I much prefer to use the smaller boards (24" or 30" square rather than 3' or 4' square). I found the project a bit of a chore because of the number of figures to paint. It got bogged down and it was a matter of years between finishing the Romans and finishing the Pyrrhic army. What I tend to find more satisfying both to paint and play is BBDBA armies in 6mm on 40mm wide bases. Another problem was the fact that I find it difficult to straighten pikes if they if they are based in more than 2 ranks. Although I don't plan to do any more 6mm on 60mm wide bases ancient armies, if I did I would consider using less psiloi figures, reducing the cavalry and knights from 18 figures in two ranks to one rank of 9, and consider reducing the number of close order infantry and auxilia to 3 ranks instead of 4. I would probably use 60mm by 30mm bases for everything. probably reducing the numbers of elephants to 3 per base. I wouldn't bother with pike facing forward. If you have a look at the Baccus site, you will be able to see how they have done their figures for photographs. Somewhere on their forum is a good thread with a lot of pictures of 6mm figures based on various bases. www.baccus6mm.com/index.php I have prepared 10mm miniature at pendraken. personally, I think 6mm miniature is so small that massed effect is lost.
|
|
|
Post by mellis1644 on Nov 25, 2016 15:28:59 GMT
If you are doing 6mm you may want to look at Baccus for some of the camp items. Their terrain items are nice and make that an easier aspect.
|
|
|
Post by davidconstable on Nov 26, 2016 9:09:53 GMT
Not 100% on subject, but I was thinking of trying the Magister Militum 3mm figures to correct depths, probably 40mm wide bases.
Has anybody any experience of this size with DBA?
David Constable
|
|
|
Post by danielweitz on Nov 26, 2016 16:18:02 GMT
What size camps should be used if I'm using 60mm by 30 mm bases? Danny
|
|