 | ||
| Sir Allan Apsley's Regiment |
 | ||
| Earl of Northampton's Regiment |
 | |||
| Sir Stephan Hawkins' Regiment |
 | |||
| Sir Edward Stradling's Regiment |
 | |||
| Lord General's Regiment |
 |
| Sir Thomas Blackwell's Regiment |
So why did I place five figures on the pike stands (placed like a five pip on a d6) and three figures on each shot stand . . . all instead of the usual four on each?
I firmly believe that pikes should be in "close order" and that (with burning matches) matchlock men would be in a looser (although not "open") order for safety's sake. Others may well disagree, but I think that it looks good.
As for the "command figure" in front of each unit, it does not fight. It is simply a marker for the unit's current status . . . in front for good order, in back for disordered, and well behind the unit if shaken. This allows for a "marker" that does not disrupt the look of the battlefield.
Flags (and coat colors) are from the fine Wargames Design website . . . although I have increased the flag size to 45mm square (pikes/flagstaffs are 80mm). My bases are nominally 2" square . . . but are actually 47mm square so that they will fit into my display cabinet.
Figures are a mix of 28mm Perry, Warlord plastics and some unknown figures I got from another gamer.
Now to finish the rest of the Foot so that I can move on to the cavalry.
-- Jeff
15 comments:
You have a good start, Jeff. Your idea with the command figure is very interesting; I also prefer to not clutter up the table with markers and that fits in perfectly.
Any more thoughts on rules?
Greg
Thanks, Greg. There has been no decision on rules yet. Murdock is reading a number of them.
-- Jeff
I do like these - nice colours and an interesting concept. It seems to me that you could just about add a extra 'shot' stand on either wing for variety in unit size, or to represent units with nearer a 2-1 ratio of shot and pike.
This promises to form a very fine looking army.
Very good looking Jeff! The command officer indicated status is a great idea! I look forward to seeing more.
Cheers,
Bill
Looking good, I remember the officer marker from your tricorne rules.
I agree, they look good! Both the figures and the units the way you based them. And the officer/status marker. Nice work!
Looking good Jeff! The basing works well I feel and the command figure is an excellent plan.
Will we see them in action soon I hope.
Excellent progress!
Gentlemen,
Thank you for your various comments . . . they do help encourage me.
Archduke Piccolo,
Another thing that can be done for a large battle is to split these into two units.
Everyone Else,
I'm glad that you like the "command figure" concept. I have used it in other periods (as Ross indicated) and it works well and doesn't add inappropriate "chaff" to the look of the table top.
-- Jeff
Great looking regiments; your ECW project is coming along well
-- Allan
They look grate, Jeff!
Best Regards,
Stokes
I think the basing works nicely. It gives flexibility to the formation while keeping the look of the period. The figures' paintwork looks splendid!
Great looking regiments, love these colors!
A note on my painting:
While it isn't too obvious in these photos, what I did with the figures is to put four on each painting stick.
Then I selected three similar coat colors (and four less similar trouser colors).
I would paint all of the coats on a stick the same color. Then I would paint one of the pants on each stick a color.
This resulted in a good mix of color within the unit (no two figures of the same type being quite the same).
-- Jeff
Jeff, your new model Army (sic!) is very well turned out, well done! I like your basing argument and, even better, its results. I have done something similar to get variety in irregular units (Ottomans) , it works well and saves some time. I'm looking forward to seeing your cavalry.
Jim
Post a Comment