Wednesday, August 23, 2017

A Rebasing Dilemma - Chariots

Having refurbished and rebased nine Assyrian chariots over the 2016 Christmas holidays, today I face a dilemma.  My original plan proposed basing each chariot on a one half-sized Impetvs cavalry base of 60mm x 80mm.  Two such stands would be placed together on the table to form one, 120mm x 80mm regular-sized cavalry base.  This original concept is shown in the photo below.     
Original basing scheme
After having based elephants for the Punic Wars project (see Seeing the Elephant) at one elephant per 120mm x 80mm base with runners, I thought this scheme would look good for chariots as well.
New basing scheme
As a test, I rebased the King's chariot in this fashion with four heavy infantry flanking the cart.  The result to my eye looks great. 
The chariot and crew are Wargames Foundry.  The Assyrian heavy infantry are from BTD.  With no photos of the BTD Assyrian infantry, I was a bit hesitant to order sight unseen.  When the figures arrived, however, I was pleasantly surprised.  The heavy infantry are exquisite!  The BTD shields have been replaced with left over Foundry shields.
To implement this proposed basing change, more runners will need to jump into the painting queue.  One major benefit of this approach is that the number of chariot BMUs will essentially double.  Yes, double!  That is, the nine chariots can be converted into nine chariots BMUs under Impetvs rather than the four BMUs plus one King's command chariot.

Is the new basing scheme a reasonable choice?   

30 comments:

  1. The kings chariot looks like a mini diorama. So from a looks perspective the rebasing works well. Not knowing the rules will you ever need, or use, 9 chariots in a game? If not, go with getting more models on the tabletop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your feedback, Peter on the diorama-like stand. Nine chariots is a lot for Impetvs but up to five are allowed. My thought is that I can field enough chariots for TWO armies.

      Delete
  2. Of course it's a good choice! They look good and the addition of the chariot runners make for a !ore interesting looking battle line.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The chariot runners look good. The command for Neo-Assyrians and Neo-Babylonians would all be in four horse chariots so you need a few even if you're only running two a side.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All of my Assyrian chariots are the big four man, four horse variety. With nine, I should be able to put two forces on the table. Glad you like the addition of the runners.

      Delete
  4. Most beautiful and impressive new basing scheme, I really like this one!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Impetus basing is becoming a standard and since 2 x60mm are being used to get there, you may as well just go straight for the 120mm base, get a nicer diorama and as you say, effectively double the number of chariot bases (providing the army lists can use 8 chariot bases).

    Would runners be of a lighter infantry type?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For me, Impetvs basing has become the norm for ancients and a number of other periods. The same basing scheme will work for To the Strongest which I look forward to rolling out some day.

      As for your comment on the runners, you are correct. Runners would typically be of the lighter variety of warrior but I thought a King ought to have a heavier entourage.

      Delete
    2. I am taking the same approach with my chariots. My Pharaoh's chariot has three spearmen and a trumpeter, vs the 2-3 Javelins for the other heavies.

      Delete
    3. Good, Jake! I was planning to field only three runners (most likely spearmen) on the other chariots with four heavier foot on the King's chariot. Saves me from painting one more figure per stand. As it is, I need to go back and paint three more figures for each of my chariots.

      Delete
  6. Visually the new basing scheme looks fantastic. It's a bit more work, but I would totally say go for it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wouldn't argue against you, Rod. The base looks cool to me. I now have more foot figures to paint...

      Delete
  7. That is a wonderfully re-base, Jonathan. The BTD figures look great - reminds me of the Angus McBride illustrations - one of my favorite Ospreys due to the illustrations. BTW, that base must be very imposing in person too!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Dean!

      The BTD heavy Assyrians do look like McBride illustrations. Probably the inspiration for the figures.

      The chariot is a large, heavy piece. Nine of these monsters on the table will be a sight.

      Delete
  8. Well, what an excellent "dilemma" to have: stretching the number of these amazing chariots on the table while enhancing their look with superb runner figures. I look forward to seeing the game report when these biblical armies clash en masse!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A dilemma where either outcome is agreeable is a good corner to be forced into.

      I do prefer the single chariot with "runners" and I will begin the conversion process. Seems like I only recently rebased these carts. Actually, it was not long ago at all!

      Delete
  9. What a great looking chariots Jonathan!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Looks even better rebased as a diorama, the BTD figures work really well with the chariot and doubling the number of units can't be bad!
    Best Iain

    ReplyDelete
  11. I like them. You can always do a double chariot base for variety but I think they're great just like that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I could do a double chariot base for variety but once I forge down this road, I will likely transform all to this "single wide" chariot basing scheme.

      Delete
  12. My vote is for rebasing. They look fabulous in the new scheme, but a little cramped with two side by side. Getting the visual right in a collection is half the joy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vote seems unanimous, Mark. I will be painting more runners and rebasing all chariots.

      Delete
  13. Both look fine to me, but doubling the number of chariot units without actually having to paint more chariots seems like a piece of wonderful magic!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nearly magic, Aaron. Going to a different basing requires me to paint and field a handful of infantry for each chariot.

      Delete
  14. I am late in on this. Have mixed feelings. As stand alone base it looks brilliant. Black Tree are nicely animated for runners and good sculpts.
    Not sure if heavy chariots had runners at this time.
    Great for people who wish to game period without getting lots of chariots. I know it looks good with Sumerians. Squeezing heavy chariots together does hide some of the models (not good).
    If you already have lots of chariots single basing models like this is not needed but can allow another army to face e.g. Babylonians.
    Would be good to see chariot units like this together in army set up.
    In conclusion it does look great. Got me thinking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Never too late and very good to see you adding into the commentary.

      Assyrian heavy chariots may not have maintained "runners" but don't you suppose they had some infantry support?

      I wrestled with the decision of double chariot bases vs single chariots with runners and decided the look of the latter is my preference. Others may disagree but that is ok.

      You can decide once you see the army arrayed for battle. That parade is likely still a few weeks away.

      Delete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...