The Loose Association of Wargamers

Funny enough I was discussing with Goatmajor using the system for WSS as well...
It’s nice there is a little DBN action going on.
I’m starting my Nap armies in 15mm at some point when my 18th century itch starts to waver,

For 15mm I would stick with the standard 40mm frontage and separate bases for pike and shot to allow for commanded shot etc... I would double depth pike and brigade two shot and one pike base together to form a regt. if needed.

Wss actually works best if you do syw/was and just strip out light cavalry and infantry. Gnw, is another matter as are turks vs austrians.

Yes, sorry I assumed 15mm was the given DbX standard, though our ACW and Zulu war are 1/72 plastics. Alex and Bob have done WWI in 10mm too.

tim.w wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:15 pm Yes, sorry I assumed 15mm was the given DbX standard, though our ACW and Zulu war are 1/72 plastics. Alex and Bob have done WWI in 10mm too.

DBx has 40mm frontages for 15mm and 60mm for 28mm figures...hence the confusion

Paul wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 9:00 pm

tim.w wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:15 pm Yes, sorry I assumed 15mm was the given DbX standard, though our ACW and Zulu war are 1/72 plastics. Alex and Bob have done WWI in 10mm too.

DBx has 40mm frontages for 15mm and 60mm for 28mm figures...hence the confusion

It's because we needed a mix of pike and shotte in the same unit and less than 12 figures in total doesn't look quite right. I boght the test samples of cavalry in 4's which was a mistake, should be better with 5 to a base.

Alex T wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 4:30 pm Thanks Baron VW, very useful. Do you know about the so called 'pistol cavalry' Mr Barker talks about. He has a quite strict separation with Parliament Cavalry being partially armoured 'pistol cavalry' and Royalists being Charging lightly armoured sword cavalry. IYO did Pistol Cavalry operate on the ECW battlefield and was there both types on both sides ?

Again, this is Mr Barker generalising (as most ECW rules-writers have) and creating a false impression. In the early part of the war, there was a view (among wargamers) that Parliament's cavalry relied on firepower (pistols, or rarely, carbines) to break up a Royalist attack, which was a full-on sword charge. The reality was slightly more complex, in that both sides started off using whichever tactics their commanders had experienced in the TYW, Bishops War, etc. I would ignore carbines and mark your cavalry as either "shooting" or "charging" (and let the tabletop commanders pick whichever they want); your Scottish cavalry will be the same, as they were either pistol-armed or lance-armed. When it comes to armour, this ranged from the odd unit of cuirassiers (principally Haslerigge's Lobsters, but also a few - much smaller - lifeguard units on each side), through the "harquebusier" of the TYW, with pot, breast, back and rein arm gauntlet (possibly the most common, and the archetypal "Ironside" of the late war), to floppy hat, buff coat and thick gloves for local cavalry who had been kitted out by a local gent. All these types would be found in varying numbers on both sides, throughout the war (especially at local level). Obviously the better armed/armoured types would go in the front ranks, the less well equipped in the second/rear rank, in line of battle. If you want to keep the rules simple, I would forget cuirassiers and go for either armoured or unarmoured, and give the former a small, but not decisive, advantage over the latter.

Incidentally, I play ECW using the FoG:R rules, which also have 40mm-wide bases for all elements, with depth being the point of differentiation. You would normally have 3 figures to a normal base, and 2 for light cavalry; occasionally, you might see 4 figures to a base for real close order horse, such as heavily armoured cuirassiers. You won't get 5 cavalry figures on a 40mm base. Foot is usually 3 or 4 shot, 4 pike, 4 warriors, and 5-8 "mob" types (Clubmen in the ECW). If you are worried about the "look" of P&S units in a single rank, you can, with a little judicious base-trimming, double-rank the pike (and the shot, too, if you want) on a singe base - even easier if you scale down slightly and use 10mm figures.

As I pointed out in the thread on a 28mm ECW game for Ayton, ECW is pretty simple in that you have just foot (either P&S or all-shot, occasionally with a "big" pike block composed of left-overs), horse, dragoons and artillery. I see a couple of difficult bar stewards have mentioned the TYW - this is where you will need to allow for people like Croats, Cossacks, sword & buckler men, archers (foot or mounted), heavy lancers, cuirassiers, etc. Up to you whether you want to write a rule-set for both conflicts right away, or leave the TYW variations for after you've seen how well the rules work for ECW.

(Would it help if I transferred my answer to your original three questions to this thread?)

And tercios and multiple other complications. The TYW even has 3 phases in tactical evolution, and variations with the italian and spanish/french campaigns as well. It is not just swedes v imperials.

I claim no great knowledge of the period but I would place WSS and possibly GNW at the end of the pike and shotte period. The use of pike continued to some extent but deep, rank volleying, foot formations was common. And there remained a doctrine of horse charging with cold steel alone and of horse shooting first.
On the other hand, I agree with Fred. Adapting WAS or SYW would give a perfectly sound result, because however the troops fought, it didn't seem to make much overall difference in the greater scheme of things.
I'm in the pub, so can't be held to any of this tomorrow.

Deep rank volley infantry was only common at the start of the war, and the only with French, Austrian and German units, as the war progressed more and more converted to 3 rank platoon fire.