BaseDesigns for Horse, Foot andGuns

Using2mmfigureblocks
Thedesigns on thefollowingpages areshown full size.
I haveretainedthestandardbasesizes thoughit may havebeen possibleto
reducethedepths in most cases.
For thoseelements that PB has given a suggestedlayout I haveplacedthis on the
left withmy versions totheright. Thefist is my preferredoption withany
alternatives shown further totheright. In general my versions usemoreblocks.
Somealternatives areperiodspecific, others arenot. I havenodoubt that other
alternatives arepossiblebut I havetriedtomakesurethat all basedesigns for a
particular element aresimilar in layout andstill distinguishablefromother
element types.
Not all element types areincluded, I amstill workingon themoreesoteric types.
I haveincludedexplanatory notes whereI thought it was appropriateor
necessary ans alsosomedescriptions of variants within thesamedesign.
Havingalready producedtwoACW armies (tosomewhat different designs) I
know that 2mmis an excellent choicefor theserules. I amin theprocess of
completinga set of armies for theWar of theSpanishSuccession andwill post
pictures tothegroup when they areavailable(probably about theendof March).
I wouldwelcomeany comments or suggestions on thesedesigns andwill use
themtomodify andextendthis document withtheeventual intent of sendinga
copy toPB. As it is clear that PB takes 2mmseriously (unlikemost other rules
writers) they may havesomepositiveeffect on thepopularity of thescale.
Tony Hughes 8thFebruary 2003
Notes for theDiagrams
Eachbock is shown as thecorrect sizeandwiththecorrect number of
figures.
Thenumber on theblock is Irregulars codenumber for theblock.
Thosewithnoletter arefromtheBG range(Horse& Musket)
Thosewithan R fromtheRBG range(Renaissance)
Thosewithan A arefromtheABG range(Ancient).
Someblocks (mostly theopen order Foot andHorse) can becut into
singlefigures or smaller groups (withcare). Irregular units can be
mademorerealistic by doingthis.
TheBG3(H&M skirmisher) is not a particularly goodblock andyou
may prefer toreplaceit withtheRBG11(Renaissancedismounted
dragoon) whichis muchsuperior andcan bequiteeasily separated
intoindividuals.
If you decidetomodify any of thedesigns (or tosuggest modifications to
me) then pleasetry tokeep thebasic layout similar anddonot make
changes that wouldmaketheelement similar in layout toanother.
It is often possibletoreplaceoneblock witha similar one(e.g. in the
artillery) and this can be a simple way of making smaller
distinctions, suchas for quality (e.g. Superior has a different sized
block toInferior or larger guns etc.)
1
1 1
1
1 1
31
32
Flk
Mus
StF
By(L)
By(C)
LI
Min
3
3
3
3
3
14
17 17
17 17
1
1 1
Phils
Description
40(4d)
48(3d)
48(6d)
5Sk
++
26(2d)
10Sk
++
2x16(4d)
10Sk
++
20(2d)
40-48(2d)
Mm
3 3
10Sk
3 3
3 3 3
3
3
3
3 3
3
3
3
3 3 3
3
3
3
3 3
31 31 31
31 31 31
34
34 34
2
33 33
33 33
14 14
Still 4d but spaced to indicate
greater space between ranks
and also wider to model
continuous front presented
A Galloper Gun can be added
as an option to indicate
attached regimental artillery
Same basic idea but this
represents the continuous
linear frontage of these
armies better I think
Could use 4 smaller 2 rank blocks
for earlier Mu to indicate greater depth
and to distinguish from Fl
A wider block is better
here I think. Later period Bay
(e.g. ACWshould have a
2-rank block BG33
Regimental artillery can also be
added to Bay (or to most other
elements).
Alternatives making use of the 6-ranks deep BG32
Might as well indicate a solid
block of foot properly
Still not sure that this is the
best way to showStoic Foot
but then Imstill not convinced
by the element type either
Use 2xtwo rank blocks
to make it easier to tell
Min fromMu
Again, Id use a full
screen of skirmishers
Again, Id use a full
screen of skirmishers
The front 3 blocks could be
cut up and spread around and
the rear two could be the
standing dismounted dragoons
This is OK but I would
add a 3rd skirmish block
to give a full screen
R11 R11
R
2
6
R
3
2
BL
Rf
14 14 14
17
17
23 23 23
23 23 23
23 23 23
23 23
23 23 23
20L
++
2x16(4d)
20L
++
26(2d)
Sp
Art(F)
Art(Ho)
Art(Hvy)
Phil says these are not in
line or column so I think that
this is a better representation
This is OK
Irish rebel pikemen or
Russian Opolchenie militia ?
Using Ren Pike & Shot blocks.
Alternate versions
with Mitrailluese
as Gatling or
other Machine Gun
Probably any Ancient blocks
would do here. I have chosen
a solid line of spearmen
backed by a looser mass of
warriors. 4 blocks of ABG6
may be better.
A6 A6
A18 A18
6 6 6
66
Done according to Phils notes
with Foot guns deployed and
Horse guns limbered. Heavy
guns have only 2 gun models
and have 6 horse limbers plus
a caisson.
Artillery type will need to be
marked in some way or just
declared in play.
20
20
R
2
9
R
2
9
R22
24
13
17
CP
Has both a foot and a
mounted defence force,
messengers and
commanders
R5 R5
2
8
2
8
2
8
2
2
2
7
2
7
Cu
HC
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Lh
Si
Pi
10Rs
5
5
8R
8R
12-16R
++
0-6R
12-16R
++
0-6R
A swarmof separate
skirmishing horse backed by
a solid mass of horse.
Could use Cossacks, Dragoons
or Demilance (for Turks)
I like the feeling of depth that
the 3-rank cavalry blocks give
so I would use those.
The 2-rank blocks would do
just as well though.
Best I can think of for your idea of
caracolling horse. It is possible to cut
the 2rk block into ranks so it might
be better to use that. Another poss.
may be single riders in a file going
down the side (see above)
I see Cuirassiers as a one-shot
weapon so I have only given
thema single rank.
I still think a single rank is better
but a 2 rank option should not
clash with any other base design
Standard Heavies tended to
attack in waves so I have
given them2 full ranks,
well spaced
Some of the 5/6 man Cavalry
blocks can be cut up quite easily
and stuck randomly over the
base. Cossacks & Renaissance
Dragoons are both good but
Ancient horse bows would
do for Tartars
This version represents the
alternative description of this
element - a small body of
European horse, detachment
or similar unit.
R21
R21
R21 R21
R21
R 2 3
R23
18
4
MRf
RfC
Dr
3 3 3
3 3
3
3
3 3
3
3 3 3
Rep
LC
11 11 11 11
11 11 11
11 11
8 8 8
8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8 8
5Sk
++
6R
6H
12-16R
++
0-6R
12
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
17
16(2d)
+
2R
++
16H
10Sk
++
12H
5Sk
6R
++
6H
4
4
4
Similar idea to the Heavies
but using 3 of the 6 man blocks
Phils design is OK for earlier
periods but I would represent
the dismounted dragoons by
skirmishers for later periods
I would also place a
mounted reserve on the flanks
As with the Infantry, Id put
more skirmishers in, otherwise
the same as Phils
Alternative with formed
troops as the dismounted
earlier dragoons. I think 2rk
is more appropriate than 3 rk
BG3 does have kneeling figures
I may try the Modern Infantry painted
in brighter colours and see if it works
Not sure that this is a good idea,
it is too similar to the RfC with
the same blocks.
Adding the 3rd skirmisher block
makes it more distinguishable
fromRepeaters. Could replace
BG3 skirmishers with RBG11,
dismounted Dragoons or possibly
the prone modern infantry.
May not represent a true
formation but needs to be
easily distinguished
fromRepeaters
13 13 13 13 13 13
1 1
R11
33
SB
Lag
1
2
2
9
9
9
9
9
1
3
3
1
3
3
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2 1
HQ
1
4
R
2
4
130
134
2
1
9
R11
R11
R11
R11
This would be a fully modeled
base with the components shown
placed around the base.
Each one would differ to some
extent fromothers.
A simpler and cheaper
alternative could be simply
textured and have only one set
of tents, 2 wagons and a base
of defending foot.
This would be a textured
(not enough roon for full
modeling) base with the
components shown placed
around the base.
Each one would differ to some
extent fromothers.
Rather a crowded and costly
element
Redoubt (Infantry)
Modeled base
Redoubt (Artillery)
Modeled base with
components shown
(or similar) distributed
around rear of base.
This would be a fully modeled
base with the components shown
placed around the base.
Each one would differ to some
extent fromothers.
A simpler and cheaper
alternative could be simply
textured and not have the
wagons or tents.
128
129
1
7
1
7
R
2
2
R12
R
2
9
R
2
9