Superior vs Inferior basing

[levied troop]

A special topic for EB to cheer him up during lockdown .
Or.
I'm interested in people's opinions a piece of basing planning I'm doing for my 1544 project. I'm planning on using a mash-up of Pikemen's Lament and Lion Rampant, with a few changes, not least losing the single basing those rules suggest and having multiple bases.

For Pike blocks of this period there's a general view that the Swiss and German pike were superior in all respects, that the French Legion Pikes varied between average and poor and that the English were poor. Rather than have different rules for these I thought that the basing might reflect the advantages visually and mathematically (by having more troops per base and since there's individual figure removal, the poorer quality troops collapse quicker).

So, left to right, Superior, Average and Poor with 18, 12 and 10 figures respectively:



and a face-off between Swiss and English:


The Pikeman's Lament standard is two bases of 6 men (as the Average above). But, does my approach work/look better?

[FreddBloggs]

With my pointy sticks (Phalangites) I got a custom sabot and had the figures on smaller bases so they ranked up tighter, showing a mass of them, rather than spread out like regular infantry, if and when I ever get around to Italian wars and even ECW I will do the same thing for the pike blocks.

[BaronVonWreckedoften]

Two thoughts:-

1) As Fredd says, the dispersal of the figures tends to undermine the "pike block" image. A bit late now as you've already based them individually, but closer together would reinforce the desired im,pression.

2) The Swiss block looks unbalanced being twice as deep as it is wide. Whilst I like your reasoning re. numbers reflecting quality, should a pike block not be square (or at least squarish)? Rather than greater depth, I would give a superior pike block greater width and allow it to outflank it's lesser opponent, as the greater depth thing doesn't really say "better" to my mind. So if you made the Swiss 5 wide by 4 deep (with two spaces in the rear rank), I think it would more easily relate to the impression you are trying to give, as it would outflank the poor English block by one figure on each side. Alternatively, make the blocks 20, 15 and 10 and base each 5 figures wide and however many deep?

BvW

[Shahbahraz]

And I am going to be contrary, and suggest 4 wide, on penny bases so they can rank up closer. (I tend to use the same Warbases 1p 4 x 2 sabot for lots of things..) To me it looks like you have 2p bases which give quite a dispersed look. (I use 2p for WW2 and 'Officers' - everything else goes on 1p pieces, even if I have to clip the bases to fit.)

I do like the idea of differing quality being shown by depth, (shades of that Theban chap really), you could go to 12, 16, 20. or possible even better 10, 12, 16, so your elite 'Kiels' would be 4 x 4, and look pretty chunky.

I don't like the idea of making 'units' different frontages, simply because it adds a load of complexity when you have multiple units fighting a single one.

[valleyboy]

A pike block is a pike block when it has some density, purely aesthetics but the spacing in the poor group I think makes me think its not a pike block

[Essex Boy]

So, you need more men to be good?

[grizzlymc]

I think you need denser men more than more men. Denser men, hmmmmm.

[Etranger]

TMI Grizz!

A pike block is a pike block when it has some density, purely aesthetics but the spacing in the poor group I think makes me think its not a pike block

Or perhaps reflect that through the basing. The 'superior' block is regularly spaced, thrusting forwards in the recommended manner, the 'average' block is a little more irregularly based , particularly in the rear ranks; and the 'poor' block quite ragged in the rear ranks, possibly with a few shirkers trying to run away already?

[grizzlymc]

I like that.

[levied troop]

Thanks chaps, some interesting ideas (and Grizz!).

As Fredd says, the dispersal of the figures tends to undermine the "pike block" image. A bit late now as you've already based them individually, but closer together would reinforce the desired impression

I agree, but that ship has sailed. I should have thought of it sooner.

The Swiss block looks unbalanced being twice as deep as it is wide. Whilst I like your reasoning re. numbers reflecting quality, should a pike block not be square (or at least squarish)? Rather than greater depth, I would give a superior pike block greater width and allow it to outflank it's lesser opponent, as the greater depth thing doesn't really say "better" to my mind.

I think there are problems with different basing widths and I went with depth to suggest strength, albeit the ‘poor’ basing is actually a few millimetres wider (I was using the Warbases Infamy Infamy bases - custom bases might solve the issue). I quite like the idea of 4 bases (ie 36 figures) in a square representing the pike block, it would look good but may not reflect the size of game I’m aiming for - and increases the amount of painting! Might just trial that.

I don't like the idea of making 'units' different frontages, simply because it adds a load of complexity when you have multiple units fighting a single one.

I think that’s the big issue - it makes pike blocks easier to gang up on and may ironically make them more vulnerable.

A pike block is a pike block when it has some density, purely aesthetics but the spacing in the poor group I think makes me think its not a pike block

Or perhaps reflect that through the basing. The 'superior' block is regularly spaced, thrusting forwards in the recommended manner, the 'average' block is a little more irregularly based , particularly in the rear ranks; and the 'poor' block quite ragged in the rear ranks, possibly with a few shirkers trying to run away already?

TBH that’s the impression I was trying to give. The power of a pike block comes from it’s coordination and discipline and the ‘poor’ approach was trying to achieve that look of ‘lack of coordination’. I could even do away with the ‘standard’ and just have ‘superior’ and ‘poor’ - which probably reflects reality just as well.

Some food for thought there, I shall have a play around. Might need to do a dummy of the scenario I had planned (unpainted figures and all :o ) to see how the pike blocks operate. Now, if only I had some time to stay home and .......