Slitherine

steadythebuffs wrote:Looking at the Wargames Illustrated article there are single figures behind each musket block (officers/ sergeants?) and would like to know if they are necessary (I presume they are) and if they are what figures (officers/ sergeants?) and what basing sizes should be used.

Commanders can be mounted as individuals, but I conclude from your description that those are single figures or duos being used as attractive cohesion status markers the same way as is often done in FOG.

Commanders can be mounted as individuals, but I conclude from your description that those are single figures or duos being used as attractive cohesion status markers the same way as is often done in FOG.

Hi,

Thanks for the reply.

Maybe they are markers but there are 4 tercios/brigades in the photo and each has one figure behind each musket block flanking the pikes as below so I'm not sure about that. The hyphens are just there to preserve spacing but as you can see the brigades have 3 bases of pikes (PPP) with 4 bases of muskets (MMM) equally divided left and right of the pike (classic mid 17thC foot regiment formation) with a single figure (O) behind each musket block. I just want to know what figures I need to buy e.g. officers, how many for each tercio/brigade and if there is a recommended base size. I'm not fussed about their function as I'll find that out when I buy the rules. I could go ahead on the assumption that I need 2 for each tercio/brigade so that's 12 for each army and bases them on a 15x15 square bases but some confirmation would be nice.

MMMPPPMMM
MMMPPPMMM
O----PPP----O

Thanks, Kevin.

There is no need for them in FoG:R - however, having a few as cohesion markers would be nice, but you won't need 2 per BG.

Hi Nik,

Thanks very much for the reply - saved me a little money and some painting...

Cheers, Kevin.

GeorgeS wrote:Thanks for the base sizes posted above, but these all appear to be info on base depths. Can I assume that the base widths stay a constant 40mm as in FoG-AM?

For 15mm - yes

As far as painting uniforms, well almost anything goes.
Really the only totally uniform units were the Royalist Oxford army. Uniform being coat, breeches and cap in the same color. Reds and blues were common. Along with Yellow (Talbot's yellow coats) and white (Newcastle's white coats).

For Parliament there was no total uniform issued as such until 1645. Red, and grey were popular colors along with blue. Also a regiment may change coat colors every time there was a refit!

To keep from hurting your brain you could try painting the Royalist all one color (white cuffs I guess). And Parliament red, blue or grey coats. I kind of match cuffs to flags but it is more of a guide that a rule. Pants could be grey (my choice) or brown. Officers dressed in Civilian wear.

Cavalry on both sides looked pretty much the same so don't sweat the headgear.
Royalist had red sashes and Parliament (well Essex at least) orange. I forgot which general hated Essex on the Parliament side but his troops also had red sashes!
Forlorn Hope has a great uniform guide.

Adding more confusion... I believe I read somewhere that some Parliamentarian army had blue sashes.
From what I have seen from the Osprey books the coloured cuffs seem to be more of a Parliament thing with the Royalists cuffs being the same colour as the jacket. Then again who can say for sure......
Of course I want to do that 1 regiment that wore purple in the opening year of the ECW, thats a colour you do not get to see often on the table top.

Adding more confusion... I believe I read somewhere that some Parliamentarian army had blue sashes.
From what I have seen from the Osprey books the coloured cuffs seem to be more of a Parliament thing with the Royalists cuffs being the same colour as the jacket. Then again who can say for sure......
Of course I want to do that 1 regiment that wore purple in the opening year of the ECW, thats a colour you do not get to see often on the table top.

The one thing which is certain in the ECW is there was no consistency across and even withing units and there was no official uniform as in even 50 years further on. Field signs (physical and verbal) were the order of the day for a reason.

Some units were much more consistent than others - Newcastle's white coats and the Oxford army for example. However, even them I'm sure that there was a huge variation in clothing and shades etc.

BGs are getting uniform uniforms here! Am going crazy trying to paint the cuffs and garters as is without trying to make sure each guy is different!!

When/if I do up something German or such..that would be a good one to really mix them up.

Personally I tend to keep the jackets the same, Kings Bodyguard I kept in one colour for the lot of them, but my newest unit a grey coated regt I kept the jackets the same but a bunch of them got nice med blue pants. Actually came out looking pretty good in the end. For gaming purposes having some kind of similarities makes it easier to keep track of which unit is which. Apparently at one time the Royalists were clothed in reds and blues, clothing being provided. However it was such cheap cloth that no one is sure if it lasted much longer than the first battle.
Perhaps we should force our generals in ECW to pass a CMT to see if they want to ride up to a friendly unit or got lost and mistake that enemy unit for one of theirs

An earlier thread even talked about the dying techniques - apparently in large dye batches, the consistency of dye changed even during the same run, becoming weaker towards the end. Different shades for garments from the same dye lot seems to be historically attested.

Unrelated to 25mm dollies - applies to all scales.

deadtorius wrote: Perhaps we should force our generals in ECW to pass a CMT to see if they want to ride up to a friendly unit or got lost and mistake that enemy unit for one of theirs

Not just ECW but 30 years war was well known for people getting mixed up as even the flags were'nt that well known and uniforms were'nt around in the early and mid part.

Just so I have something clear.

15mm Dragoons should be 4 figs when mounted and on a 40 x 30 base and when dismounted should be 5 figs one of which depicted as a horseholder and a horse or two also to a 40 x 30 base?

Dragoons are depicted on a base with 3 figs up front shooting and 1 or 2 empty horses with a holder on the back of the base. You don't need to have mounted and dismounted separate units.
If you are familiar with DBR its the same basing idea

D=dragoon
H=horse
L= horse holder

DDD
HLH

Something like that anyway, the position of the horses is really irrelevant. Makes it so you can differentiate between dragoons and regular foot.

Thanks deadtorius.

I thought 4 mounted seemed wrong.

Mine are from 20 years ago with the WRG (was it George Gush?) ruleset. and as all those years ago I had an exact copy of each Dragoon mounted and dismounted I wanted to use same.

I have just painted and based 8 bases of Testudo 15mm Baboons for my Swedish Army (Ok four bases painted as Mounted Jagers!) They are on the standard 40 x 40 bases. Which designates Guns or Baboons. Some have 3 figures, some 2 figs and a horse, the aim was to use 20 figures and 4 horses to make up the bases. Although the rules state 4 or 5 ** figures per base I dont think anyone will look at them and think mmm that must be artillery or what a strange looking medium infantry base.

I know how you feel. Warlord gives you 12 dismounted dragoon figures, that is enough for 4 bases but I am thinking I might try to add some extra infantry dudes to push it to 6 bases for 2 BG's of 3 bases each.
From what I have read the Royalists would take some poor infantry sod, tell him to lose the musket rest and ride that horse and viola, a new dragoon. Not so sure they all got the necessary boots in time so having some poor sods in shoes would be ok. As for the horses, I am looking into my excess lead for some appropriate horses, the Warlord ones are all running about and they are pretty pricey to start taking an entire sprue and putting empty horses on bases.

Here's how I based my Dragoons for DBR:-

http://www.nwa.org.au/index.php?option= ... Itemid=168

That works.
As long as you have guys on foot and some lonely horses out back your opponent knows what that base is. I Personally like the look of 3 shooters, makes them more ominous looking. In DBR I found them pretty useless, much like artillery, so I have higher hopes for them in FOG R. The AAR reports by Madaxeman show that artillery is good, I think you need some extra firepower for the dragoons to make a lot of difference so they might need to target an enemy that another shot unit is shooting at.