Hello,

I've been watching videos on how people base and paint their miniatures in 6 mm. It seems most people will put all 24 infantry or 9 calvary on a single base. How do represents squares, march columns and attack columns if your battalion/squadron is in constant line formation?

Of course depending on the period you might not need all these formations and similarly you might not need them in some rules. What we do is either use 2 or more bases for a unit which allows them to be arranged in different ways for the formation. Alternatively we us a marker of some kind.

I'd agree with Nick, in general even rulesets that kind of require differentiating formations like Black powder or Maurice or Lasalle work well enough using just two rectangular bases. And the fact that Blucher has become so big in all scales of Napoleonics scene with it's no formations required seems to have also helped.

Hello gsayhi! The Polemos series of rules written by 6mm players for 6mm games, sold by Baccus don't require players to show formations. Most of them have a common rule "units are assumed to be in the proper formation for the situation at hand". So if a unit should be in square it's in square, etc. The players don't have to waste valuable game time playing unrealistic tactical situations, should they be in square or not, etc. every turn. The situation is simply resolved by using combat modiers and dice rolls the actual formation is not a modifier. The more critical factors are used such as the condition of the troops, their training, terrain, etc. Hope this helps if not, just ask.      Glenn

While I have sympathy with the "units are assumed to be in the proper formation for the situation at hand" approach, I do feel that it matters what "posture" a unit is in (whether a battalion, a brigade or a division): i.e., whether it is set up to prioritise movement (in columns of march), or the assault (in attack formations such as ordre mixte etc), or the defence (in line for maximum firepower, or in square to repel cavalry, etc). The transition from one posture to another takes time, and it also requires some orders process to initiate and execute it. Thus in my view it is better if a game allows the chance of catching an enemy in the wrong posture.

If you're going to base your armies as single-base units but want to portray different formations or postures, then I suppose you need markers. I'd designate line/defence as the default posture (no marker); stick a charging officer figure or something in front for assault formation; and have one or two marching figures trailing behind when in column of march.

But maybe you should settle on your ruleset first, and then organise your armies to suit it?

Anyway, good luck with finding the right solution to your problem, and the right rules for your games.

Chris

Bloody Big BATTLES!

https://groups.io/g/bloodybigbattles

http://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.com/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1412549408869331/

The Polemos rules don't waste valuable game time with battalion formations. The battalion and brigade commanders are considered to know their stuff better then gamers do. The players are then given the time to concentrate on the "posture" of the brigade and the Divisions. 

"Thus in my view it is better if a game allows the chance of catching an enemy in the wrong posture."

That is exactly what transfers it from being a reasonable reflection of actual Napoleonic tactics into a "game". Napoleonic battalion commanders did not play rock/paper/scissors on the battlefield. They were under tactical orders to  maintain a postion and formation within the brigade. Any change had to be justified or ordered. Not on the whim of a gaming system. The entire concept of catching an enemy in the wrong battalion posture is pure mythical gaming. Promoted mainly by the mythical gaming concept that cavalry were under orders to wander around the battlefield to try and catch infantry not in square.

It's always a better idea to mount your figures to match the scale not the rules. The Baccus basing system is called by some as "standard 6mm basing" for a reason. You can play pretty much any popular rule system as is or with a few simple house rules. Absoutly no need for any markers unless your playing a mythical set of rules.  

I use three 20x20mm squares and a movement tray. That way you can get a line or a column. Remove the movement tray and your unit is disordered or you can make a rather odd-looking square. Skirmishers, light cavalry and other small units (I use the Black Powder family of rules) are on 20x40mm bases. I'll try putting on a couple of pics from a recent Lockdown game with my son, but the Baccus Copy & Paste function and I don't always get on....

BikesBrownBeer&ToySoldiers

Always match the rules, not an arbirary base size chosen by someone else that doesn't match the rules. If you want to play other people, then you'll nt to base your figures the same way they have, and they're more than likely to have based them according to the rules. That's simple common sense.

For Maurice, my figures are based on 60x30 bases, a base size being 30x30 and 4 needed for a unit, but it saves time on moving them to use those bases. For my ancients, using Hannibal, I use the recommened 40mm square bases, and 60x30 would be completely out of place and mismatched for anyone else using those rules. For Impetus and Sword and Spear, you can use either 60x30mm bases or 80mm x 40mm bases - in which case, I can put two of my 40mm bases together an use them for all three sets of rules. If I'd based them to 60x30, I wouldn't be able to play anyone with my Carthaginains, Romans, Gauls, Spanish, Numidians, etc, using Hannibal.

For Napoleonics, I use Bluecher, which use 80x60 big bases because they're denoting large units; a 60x30 base is going to look weedy in comparison, and I'd need to put several of them on a sabot base to make up a unit. Not worth the bother, and they don;t look as good in their formations as the larger units do.

Somewher eon teh forum is a pic of Peter's ECW big bases - have a look at those, I think they were 120mm long, and filled with figures - now that's a proper lookng unit.

So if I enjoy say five or more different rule sets and the rules in each sugguest a different basing regime and I mount my figures five or more different ways even though some of them may even cover the same period that is simply common sense? Yet using one basing system for possibly all of them is not common sense? There certainly was a time in the previous century that in order to play most rule sets your basing had to be in the mandatory format, otherwise it might be difficult to play the game. Most popular modern rule sets written in the past 30 years only have recommended base sizes. They are generally base neutral and allow you to use pretty much any size base you want and often any scale as well. Some caution you on some base sizes or shapes while others are fully open. I've not seen any restrictions for Maurice, Hannibal, Impetus, Sword and Spear or Blucher. I know that players are certainly using 60x30 for Maurice and Blucher. The 60x30 base is clearly being used for a wide variety of rule sets. I've not heard of anyone stating that they couldn't use this basing with any popular rule set. I did hear the author of Hannibal state that pretty much any basing could be used. I can't imagine any modern author boxing his gaming system into a single basing regime if it could be avoided. That's simply not using common sense. 

I know I play Maurice with two 60x30 bases representing four 30x30 bases, but if I am ever to do the the 1745 Jacobites I would probably do those with 30x30s instead. The rules work perfectly well with 60x30s and I don't think there is anything stopping anyone from playing and enjoying the rules with them, though Dr. Mustafa does state in the rulebook that if your bases are 2:1 ratio you should consider rebasing. I still play with 60x30. 

I do get where you are coming from Glenn, I'm definitely the type of person who will rather skip a new ruleset rather than re-base my armies, but I do agree with Nick the Lemming's view that with 60x30 you don't have the same space for representing the troops in as neat and interesting ways as with larger bases. I don't have any napoleonics in 6mm, but if I were to start, I'd likely go with 60x60 bases rather than 60x30s.