Impact foot better than knights?

[grahambriggs]

Having the MF/HF split was handy when we came to do the American armies. Lots of them fought in close order but couldn't stand against Spanish cavalry (slightly out of period but not much). Making them MF meant that their historical reaction - stick to terrain if you can - is sensible in a game. It also seemed to give the right result against Spanish foot - fierce at impact but if that doesn't work you're in trouble.

Of course, fighting American enemies they don't particularly care that they're MF.

There's not evidence that they were particularly troubled by terrain.

I do have a slight issue that this means they move faster, but nothing's perfect.

[mellis1644]

Or simply allow all HF to be the same depth bases as MF?

To all intents they already do with the bit on non-standard basing.

I very nearly based my WotR billmen on MF sized bases but refrained because I was just lloking to exploit the geometrical advantages

So making the standard depth basing even more optional seems like a good idea for allowing old armies and then getting the troops classed and 'functioning' correctly on the battle field. After all base depths are completely out of proportion in most wargames compared to what is being modeled. The base depth has limited impact and is a visual clue more than anything else and asking an opponent the troop type can solve that.