Do you go the extra mile to ensure your bases fit as many of the rule sets you are likely to play or base them for the game you first plan to play and just make it work? Do you adhere to the basing conventions for a set of rules or are you a convention breaker?
I settled on 50mm square bases years ago for 25/28mm for anything ancient up to about 14C; I think that was to play Medieval/Ancient Warfare. I never played a game but stuck with the basing. The rules allowed different numbers of figures on a base. I use the figures so rarely basing has not been an issue. Most of my gaming these days is skirmish - Frostgrave, Pulp, IHMN, CoC.
ReplyDeleteFor many, many years now, I find 25mm square bases (with 4 making a unit) work for every ruleset I'm likely to play. They also make it easy to for line, column, square etc as well as being OK for skirmish games.
ReplyDeleteInteresting topic, though one that is far removed from my concerns as I do not employ miniatures. I guess, then, that I don't even take a step to go that extra mile (or kilometer). Generally speaking, I do try to adhere to the conventions or restrictions provided in the chosen set of rules. That often tends to be the sticking point: the choice of rules. (As evident by my latest project wherein I tried 3 rulebooks before landing on a fourth.) Often time, to maximize space, I will modify the provided base/stand sizes so as to be able to play a larger game. This adjustment carries over to movement rates and missile ranges, etc. In sum, I guess I "work" from battle idea or period first, and then narrow it down to rules and then make a decision about stand sizes.
ReplyDelete50/50 for me. It is best to have a plan of course, but when does that stop anyone?
ReplyDeleteIf a game is so reliant on basing I will avoid it …
ReplyDeleteAfter a number of rebasing projects, I made the decision never to rebase. Ever. I adjust the rules to whatever figures I have and in whatever manner they are based. If rules insist on specific basing, then they're out.
ReplyDeleteAfter all, rules come and go, but your miniatures stay with you for a much longer time. I tend to say that 20 years from now, I probably will use rulesets that yet have to be written, but most likely I will use figures already in my collection today.
To add to that: miniature wargaming is about the figures, not the rules. Figures take precedence. Always.
DeleteThe gentleman is correct and is entitled to his opinion. Miniature wargaming must, by definition, be about the figures. Respectfully, I think he does not factor in how important rules are or how much progress has been made with respect to rule design, mechanics, and innovations. Where does terrain fit in within this scheme? If the subject is opened up to wargaming, well then, it seems that what it is about will be as diverse as the individuals who partake. There may be some broad similarity in the categories and even some agreement as to the priorities, but it seems that wargaming, if not miniature wargaming, cannot just be about one thing.
DeleteI very rarely rebase but make what I have work with the rules I want to play, which are many. 47 different sets this year, including naval, air and spaceship and many of them being with friends figures. For me wargaming is about gaming (the clue is in the name) and figures, terrain etc. are simply a means to an end. Other opinions may vary of course.
ReplyDelete