Friday, 3 November 2017

Sharp Practice Basing Dilemma

Basing figures is always worthy of some consideration I feel. So I've been mulling over various ideas for my nascent Sharp Practice II collection.

I rather like the idea of basing all the figures for each group on a single base so as to make some nice vignettes. However, in these rules figures are removed to track casualties, so I would need to devise suitable tokens to represent this, that's in addition to tokens for shock and possibly other rules too; perhaps this might result in "token overload"?

Chum Colin of Charlie Foxtrot Models makes some lovely sabot bases for a variety of round base sizes. These, I think, are the way forward! But that in turn leads to the conundrum of what base size to use. Options are basically 1p or 2p coins. This has the added bonus of being able to utilise rare earth magnets (embedded in the base of the tray) to hold the figures in place.

So, here are the two options.
British 1p bases on the left, 2p on the right.

From above for comparison.
Many people have gone for the 2p (or similar) option which does offer the opportunity to do a little more with the base. It also suits the slight 'larger' figures from manufacturers such as Front Rank. However, I'm currently favouring the 1p configuration as it seems to better suit the slightly finer scale Foundry and Perry figures I have.

Anyway, here are the figures a little more clearly.
Foundry British Regulars circa 1775
Foundry Loyalist American Militia, a lovely present from chum Paul :o)
So now you know where I'm going with Sharp Practice II, the American Revolutionary War, or as we say over here, the American War of Independence!

10 comments:

Unknown said...

Personally I went with 20mm square bases with rounded corners.
Take up less space than 25mm round, but give more elbow room than 20mm round, and rank up better. Sabots are simpler as you just need a lip to hold the figures, not individual holes.

Whiskey Priest said...

Also, 1p option is half the price! (I'll get me coat...)

NW Crew said...

To me it sounds like you could use a 1-2-3 basing approach, like described by Dalauppror here: http://dalauppror.blogspot.se/2015/11/123-basing.html?m=1
It's a clever way of avoiding casualty markers but still having some of the multibasing advantages. And it looks great in my opinion, especially for skirmish gaming with men in small(ish) groups rather than battalions. /Mattias

chris smith said...

I am going 20mm for close order and 25mm for open order and individuals. 25mm for rank and file esthetically looks too open to me.

Ray Rousell said...

2p's are more stable, you can fit more scenic bits on them, but do tend to look a little to far spaced apart? I went for 25mm off for my Donnybrook figures, wish I'd have bought the msg with the holes in for magnets though.

Matt Crump said...

I do find for skirmish games the 2p size helps stability. But my ancients are mainly on smaller bases which we occasionally use of skirmish games and they are fine 😀

The Wargames Table said...

Thanks! I really appreciate all the feedback, comments and ideas, both here and on FB. Faced with such a variety of ideas I'm still undecided so I'll get on and paint some and in the meantime continue to browse other gamers collections to see what I finally want to settle on.

George Anderson said...

2p for me, they look better and are more stable, I am going to change my skirmishes in the future to 25mm bases when I get time.

Andy Duffell said...

Most of my stuff is already on 20mm squares for M&T, so I'm just going to stick with that. One of the nice things about Sharp Practice is that there's no wrong way to base.

The Wargames Table said...

That's a good point Andy!