In a few recent posts, I have dropped a hint or two that I planned to rebase my growing Wars of the Roses collection. True, and the work is completed.
Why consider rebasing a relatively new collection in the first place? That is a good question. When I first dived into the project, my mind and sensibilities were set on building armies for a set of rules that were in playtests a few years ago. I figured that I would follow that lead. Each archer and melee line was based on three bases. Since I primarily play on a hex grid for remote games, each three-base unit spanned two, four-inch hexes. Now, this was fine, but I prefer moving fewer stands to more. Perhaps my initial sensibilities were not so sensible? I also thought that having one stand in each hex might simplify a few features of the rules that I am developing myself. The "before" basing is illustrated in the photo below.
| Old basing scheme |
That brings me to the current iteration of my basing scheme.
Now each BMU consists of two stands, each element of which fits into the four-inch hex. A supported unit is still identified by having two units in the same two hexes. Having two stands fitting in two hexes opens up some possibilities for play and facing that were not so easily accomplished with three bases spanning those same two hexes. The photos below show the new basing scheme.
| New basing scheme with each BMU in its own hex pair. |
| New basing scheme with two BMUs in support. |
How was the weight issue addressed? Adding some weight and heft to each base was accomplished by affixing a heavy-duty magnetic piece onto the bottom of each base. Magnetic base bottoms are from Litko Aerosystems.
| Magnetic bases stuck to the bottom of each base. |
So, where does the WotR collection stand today? Well, a brief parade will help assess my progress. By the way, one more Battle is in work and soon to join the armies, here, on display.
As a reminder, the Great Wargaming Survey, 2026 Edition closes on 31 August. If you have yet to complete this year's survey, please consider doing so. Details can be found at Palouse Wargaming Journal: If it is August...
Next time, more painted figures marching out from the painting desk.
An army of impressive size! Large bases look more realistic and aesthetically pleasing. That’s undeniable. But personally, I prefer traditional basing (4x4 cm for infantry and 5x5 cm for cavalry). Of course, it doesn’t look as beautiful, but to each their own. Great job!
ReplyDeleteI confess Jonathan that I have never (as far as I can remember) rebased figures.....
ReplyDeleteCertainly not a whole army!
Kudos for pursuing a vision ( or scratching that itch that won't go away......)
Neil
My word Jonathan, that is a lot of work, and I too have never rebased an army, although I have considered it with one that comes to mind.
ReplyDeleteNice job, well done.
JJ
A very nice, and big, army parade. Were you able to avoid any breakages in the re-basing process?
ReplyDeleteAh, rebasing. Well done, a tedious job at the best of times but satisfying when complete. Increasingly I use magnetic Sabot bases to avoid doing this, but some of my poor 6mm Napoleonics have been rebased five times! Perhaps I've got it right this time...
ReplyDeleteThat was one epic rebasing task, I have a little bit to do only a couple of units this time though, it now appears a lot less daunting🙂
ReplyDelete