Mulit Bases vs. Single Bases

Hi!

How are your experiences using Infantry on multi bases? Most gamers of our group and some other groups using their old Fow bases.

Pro
- no rebasing necessary
- faster moving of large infantry formations
- still possible to play Fo40k

Con
- problems with wepon variations and upgrades
- marker for losses necessary
- ...

Whats your experience?

Cheers

Wellington

I state that mine is not direct experience with BG (with which I now only experiment with the rules) but based on other similar experiences (crossfire) I would say that:
- basic:
° facilitates movement
° from the aesthetic point of view it allows small dioramas
° as you say it is reusable for the "original" regulation
° I agree that it causes problems in measurements and they need makers.
° as far as I do not like the multibases (iI have redone the single bases) I think that in the end they are more practical (since we are talking about 15mm)

(sorry for my English)

Andrea

Premetto che la mia non è esperienza diretta con BG (con cui per ora sperimento solo le regole) ma sulla base di altre esperienze simili (crossfire) direi che:
-multi base:
°facilita il movimento
°dal punto di vista estetico permette dei piccoli diorami
°come dici tu è riutilizzabile per il regolamento "originario"
°concordo nel ritenere che provoca problemi nelle misurazioni ed hanno bisogno di makers.
°per quanto a me non piacciano le multibases (io ho rifatto le basi singole) credo che alla fine siano più pratiche (dato che si parla di 15mm)

Hi

Of course both work, (as does one side using 20mm and the other 15) but the footprint of a unit is very different. I must say I like the basing illustrated in the rule books, but I support it depends on how many chaps one puts on a FOW "biscuit". I think 4 or more can throw in some problems.

Atkins

In my group we are going to experiment with installing a little rod on the back of the base and use beads for damage markers. Just add a bead for a unit death or fill the rod before hand and take them off for damage. Not sure if we'll like it or if it'll be too fiddly but I think the concept is worth persueing.

I played several BG games using FoW bases. The only problems/difficultis are those units, where you have compsition wich are different from the standard 4 men FoW base. Prime example are the Germans with their 5-6 men rifle sections and 3 men LMG sections. Unless you rebase some of your miniatures, you have to ignore one miniature in the LMG section, and you add mentally one miniature to the rifle section. But as long it is clear wich bases are rifle sections and which one are LMG sections, this proved to be no problem in our games so far.

For casaulties i add small heart markers from Litko (but other markers will also do the job) beside the base.

In the above picture, there is a Soviet Rifle squad on the far left, wich is pinned down (FoW Soviet Pinned Down Marker) and has lost 1 man ( one Red Heart Marker).

I also played some games with Minis based single on small coins. Despite the small size of the miniatures, the heavy coin adds enough stability while moving them around the battlefield. While moving takes a little bit longer wih single miniatures, removing casaulties is very easy. Another advantage is the possibility to vary the footprint of your unit.

I like both ways to play and while i base my new Fallschirmjäger for Kreta on single bases (at least most of them, MG teams and heavy weapons like HMG's and mortars are on group bases)i will use for my LW Soviets my FOW bases. But i will add some new single miniatures bases to represent such units like Recce sections or medics.


Greetings
Wolflord

I use a bit of both, singles, 2s and 3s... 3 s for MG teams, mortars etc, and the occasional command O-group...

Same here mainly base in pairs now but all sorts done in the past and I often change to whatever looks right for a particular unit.

Weapons crews based with their gun look like they are interacting with it and fixed to irregular shaped bases, just large enough to accomodate them. Single figures can interact better with terrain, spread out or clump together and look good on circular bases.

Our group started with 15mm FoW bases and just talked through how many figures were ono the base for game purposes, and then marked casualties with tokens, made by our very own Dennis Bamber. This worked fine for us to start.  Since then we have based/rebased specifically for Battlegroup. Gun crews on a base, special weapons teams on a base (ie 2 man Bren team, 3 man HMG teams)... infantry platoons split into convenient numbers.  But no single figures, unless they are clearly a single figure such as a medic. We still use markers to denote casualties on multi figure bases.  At the end of the day it is whatever works for you.

So, someone totally new here NOT coming from any other game, Sabot bases would work like a charm for me then?

I have my rifles on 3-4 fig bases and use counters to represent casualties - I also have individual based figures to allow 'change' and replace hit bases, so best of both worlds. Multi bases for infantry help movement - single bases all the way for other stuff though

I come from Command Decision and have converted nearly all my bases to single figures. We have several galvanized iron base sizes which we use. There is a cross on the tank bases and it's center is the point from which we measure. The cross also serves to determine front/side/rear and firing angles for non-turreted ordnance. For infantry we measure to the centre of the nearest edge. We've added all sorts of magnetized markers and this allows for quick movement as the base carries everything with it. If you want to you can also add casualties to the base as hits occur. As most units are standardized we don't usually do that.

Dirk

I used to be totally 1 man 1 base. After moving some 300 models around the table i now have a large mix of multi and single based units. Large infantry games imo are far more practical when squads are no more than 1-2 bases. Moving a platoon of infantry on 4-8 bases is far better than attempting to deal with aprox 40 models. When you start hitting 3-6 platoons of infantry you'll really start rolling in the pain of individual basing.

Ilkahn wrote:I used to be totally 1 man 1 base. After moving some 300 models around the table i now have a large mix of multi and single based units. Large infantry games imo are far more practical when squads are no more than 1-2 bases. Moving a platoon of infantry on 4-8 bases is far better than attempting to deal with aprox 40 models. When you start hitting 3-6 platoons of infantry you'll really start rolling in the pain of individual basing.

Ah thats the answer I expected! I will stick to multibases, because I want o play infantry heavy games, even in the desert.

These are from my last game. What you see are most of 2 platoons of Russians. I base mine in half squads for casualties. I have individuals ill drop when squads start getting chewed up and replace the half. I'm building bases with 2 and 3 men musty because. Point is. That's 9 bases per platoon vs 35 dudes. This game was 18 bases vs handling 70 models. I do like the individual far more than the group however i find it incredibly difficult to keep up with who is with whom when things get to close. Not to mention after games where I've had 170 or so platoon infantry along with recon dudes etc i spend an hour or so just making sure i have them all while i sift through the board.

It boils down to what's practical.