2025 review

A furious cavalry melee. From a Maurice 
War of Spanish Succession game with 
18mm Wofun standees.

My main areas of focus this year have been Eisenhower, Maurice and collecting Wofun standees.

I've had to ration computer use because of migraines so posting blog articles has suffered, but I did manage some gaming, collecting and even some modelling/painting.

Eisenhower gave me the incentive to base and paint some of my 3mm 1940 French and German armies originally bought for Rommel.

Maurice has been a welcome return to another set of Sam Mustafa rules. I do have 10mm SYW armies for this but never got round to painting them. I now have 18mm Wofun War of Spanish Succession armies as indicated in the photo here.

I also accumulated Wofun 18mm English Civil War armies, but haven't yet used them, and have now started to collect Wofun 18mm Peninsular War forces.

I also relabelled my ceramic blocks for playing later 19thC Bloody Big Battles! again though I would prefer to use Wofun Peter Dennis 18mm Franco-Prussian War standees if they ever appear. 

I'll post separately about my plans for next year...

Distortion of ranges in Grand Tactical wargame rules

Swedes with muskets circa 1660

(The original version of this article failed to acknowledge my debt to Chris Pringle's Bloody Big Battles! and added insult to injury by inadvertently - and inexplicably - misrepresenting BBB itself. I have therefore eaten humble pie and amended it. doctorphalanx, 16 March 2020.)

Tilly's Very Bad Day doesn't have a declared ground scale. Some may notice, however, that Horse have a Shooting Range of 2TUM and Pike+shot of 4TUM. As a TUM is half a base width and as bases represent brigades, it means that Horse can fire a distance equivalent to the frontage occupied by a Brigade and that Pike+shot units can fire a distance equivalent to the frontages of two brigades.

In correspondence TVBD author, Steven Thomas, explained: "Inside the game, there are several related mechanisms that interact. The key ones are shooting distance, normal movement, charge movement. The relationships between these are complex. We play tested a bunch of options."

The large ranges are, therefore, a compromise and a result of trial-and-error tests made during the development of the game mechanics. They can, to some extent, be justified on the grounds that a brigade base is not a solid body of men but rather 'an operational centre of gravity'. The actual units that it represents may be rattling around within its perimeter or spilling over its edges to approach enemy brigades doing the same thing. They may indeed come a lot closer to shoot at one another than appearances suggest, in which case the 2 TUM may to some extent reflect their reach as much as their range. This concept is inspired by Chris Pringle’s Bloody Big Battles! See his comment below for a full explanation.

(Cf Horse, Foot and Guns in which musket-equipped troops have ranges varying from 200 to 400 paces, the higher range representing an invisible skirmish screen notionally thrown out in advance of the visible parent unit.)

It would be a mistake, however, to push this rationalisation too far. At the end of the day we have to recognise that hobby wargames are games, not simulations, and we are kidding ourselves if we think any of them are ‘realistic’. They reference realism in the same way a novel might, but they are not real: they are games of chance with a military flavour.

And if you do try to create rules that are trudgingly ‘realistic’ you may also find that the small increments and lack of dynamism lead to a game-play that is arthritic.

Rather than simply leave things there, however, I thought it would be interesting to look at ground scales and ranges in other rules with which I am acquainted. The results are a mixed bag and I’m not really sure what conclusions to draw. Some hit the mark or make a reasonable attempt at realistic ranges, others certainly do not.

I’ve played most of these games with a range of other players and none of them have ever questioned the ground-scale or ranges. Nobody, of course, is going to question the length of a ‘normal move’ because it’s part and parcel of the game and we don’t specifically know what it represents, but if you are looking for holes in a game because you are looking for holes in a game, ranges are an easy target!

Altar of Freedom

I haven't played these rules yet but I'm very impressed by their approach. The ground scale is 1" = 150 yds. The bases are 60mm x 30mm and represent  brigades.

There is ranged fire and close combat. However, the ranged fire represents only skirmish fire and the close combat principally represents point blank shooting. The skirmishing fire range is 2" inches so 300 yds, and may include the distance of the skirmishers from their parent unit as well as the range of their weapons.

This approach exactly captures the unique nature of battle during the American Civil War but I don’t think it’s applicable to other times and places.

It may also be noted that although  the firing aspect and the close combat aspect may be defined differently from other rules, game play still includes these two aspects. As such, AoF is not radically different from other rule sets.

Bloody Big Battles!

Ground scale: 1 inch = 150-250 yards/metres. Smoothbore musket range  is 3 inches which equals 450-750 yards/metres. (The Dreyse Needle Gun is given a range of 6” and the Chassepot 12”.)

BBB author, Chris Pringle, explains this approach in his comment below, a reaction to the original and misleading text in this section.

I accept Chris’s concept but have some reservations about the ratios between the respective ranges, a subject I might return to another time. As with TVBD, the outcomes at the macro level are, in my opinion, more important than strict simulation at the micro level.

Horse, Foot and Guns

Musket range is 200 paces if 'Musketeers' and 400p if certain other types, representing the reach of skirmishers. A pace is 30" so that means 166 yds and 332 yds respectively.

Impetus (first edition)

1U = 6-7 m. Unfortunately the U is sort of tied to the scale of figures used rather than the size of the bases. However, if you have 6-15mm figures on the suggested 8cm-wide bases, 1U is 1cm and your 8 cm base frontage will represent say 6.5 m x 8 = 52 m (about 57 yds).

Interestingly a heavy Infantry unit in Impetus represents 600-1200 men, roughly equal to a cohort or double cohort. Assuming that each cohort is eight lines deep, and that each legionary has a 1-yard frontage, one 480-man cohort would have a frontage of 60 yards (100 yards for the oversized first cohort). This from here. All of which goes to show that an Impetus HI unit is a fair match for a Roman cohort. Now on to ranges.

Ranges in Impetus typically go out 30U, about 195 m or 213 yards which seems long but not absurd.

The new, second, edition of Impetus uses measurement related to BW, a much more rational and increasingly universal approach for pre-Twentieth Century warfare.

Maurice 

No ground scale. Musket range is 4BW, equivalent to a unit’s frontage. If the unit is a battalion in two ranks it might have a frontage of 500/2 x 2’ which would be 500 feet or about 167 yds. However, Maurice uses bath-tubbing with no alteration to range so a unit could just as easily represent a brigade.

At battalion-level (my preference) Maurice is not a grand-tactical game. At brigade-level it is, but the numbers go out of the window.

Above all it is a game, and a very good one, not a pretence at simulation. It gets by because it splendidly captures an Eighteenth Century look and feel. And IMO that's more important than claiming some notional representation of accuracy in a small arms table.

Rules of Battle 

Forgotten now, perhaps, but apart from DBA and HOTT I think Neil Graber's Rules of Battle was the best implementation of the DBX-style design ever achieved.

The ground scale is 1" = 500 ft. Each 40 mm by 20 mm Foot base represents 1000 men (and a frontage of 267 yds).

Apart from artillery there is no ranged shooting. All combat is point blank, i.e. base to base contact.

Of the rules reviewed here, Rules of Battle is the only one not to have ranged infantry fire.

Twilight of Divine Right 

1BW = 150 m. Foot and dismounted dragoons have a range of 1/2BW = 75m. Ranged pistol fire at 1/4 BW is used and it is potentially a very small measurement. ToDR units consist of two bases so the ¼ BW measurement is actually only 1/8 of a unit’s frontage. This drives the need for bases (and a table) that are relatively large. In comparison with TVBD this set has realistic ranges but I find the small size problematical.

Irregular Wars

Irregular Wars is a much lower level game than the ones above, but I’ve included it for comparison. Bases represent companies of 125 men. It has a ground scale of 1U = 30 yds, and long range for most weapons is 6U or 180 yds. I suspect that the smaller the scale represented, the easier it is to avoid distortion without crippling a game.

Fastest to table

Lancers. 2mm is now my way to go for mass armies.

I might have written something like this before but no matter as it is a topic that demands revisiting. I often wonder what miniature wargames I would do if I was starting from scratch now. Obviously I would do games that appealed to me historically, but, more generally, I would do games that could be brought to table as quickly as possible. This is partly because I lack time to paint but also because I'd like the fruits of my labour to end up on the table rather than in the lead mountain.

At one end of the spectrum I would focus on skirmish games like Dan Mersey's Rampant series for which 28mm figures have the most appeal. Somewhere in the middle are games that are 'compact' or otherwise economical on figures like Crossfire, Irregular Wars or DBA. For these I would use 15mm, 10mm or 6mm, and these scales would satisfy the aesthetic appeal of playing with toy soldiers.

Any games featuring mass armies, however, would have to be base-orientated so I could use 2mm or 3mm models, and thìs end of the spectrum would satisfy my desire to play large historical battles. I think this is the way I will now go with Bloody Big Battles! if and when I get round to it. The other advantage of these small scales is of course that they put less pressure on storage and carrying.

This  is not an entirely futile speculation as it should also help me to regulate what to do in future. I feel sure I've written that before as well. The difficulty is remembering it.

Spoils of war from Cavalier 2017

I made a quick raid on the Cavalier show in Tonbridge. With shelves full of unpainted figures and very little time, I didn't have a shopping list and was determined not to add to the lead mountain by buying anything that would need painting.

I thought I would come away empty-handed but spotted these nice, well-painted 6mm buildings on the bring-and-buy stall. They will be ideal for my Bloody Big Battles! Franco-Prussian War project.

Bloody Big Battles of WW2

WW2 at grand-tactical level on Bob Mackenzie's
website. 

I was always intending to have a crack at the 1940 campaign in France using Megablitz, or, more likely, the hex-based Hexblitz variant, using 3mm models. Now there is a new option for WW2 grand tactical/operational rules in beta, Bloody Big World War Two Battles, an extension of Chris Pringle's 19th Century Bloody Big Battles! It will be interesting to see how well a set of 19th Century rules can spawn a WW2 derivative. At this operational level with its inevitable abstractions I see no reason why it shouldn't.

The big advantage of something coming from the BBB stable is that it will be driven by historical scenarios. The provision of OOBs and maps will save months of research that would probably never be adequate anyway. Are historical scenarios obligatory for an operational level game? Well, they're not going to be possible for depicting the 'Cold War gone hot' because it never happened, but in general historical actuality does seem to go hand in hand with grand tactical wargaming.

BBWW2B uses 3" bases and a ground scale of 3" to the kilometre at the regimental level or 6" to the kilometre at battalion level. Bob Mackenzie, who is developing this WW2 variant, uses existing 6mm models on sabots which is not merely decorative but apparently allows for removal of casualties.

Bob Mackenzie's website has some some BBWW2B scenarios including battle reports and photos. Click on What's New to find them. Further details can be found on Chris Pringle's blog and the BBB Yahoo Group.

Bloody Big Battles! - basing figures 3

I have to admit that I didn't like the suggested basing for Skirmisher stands in Bloody Big Battles! and wrote about it here. I suggested the use of Skirmisher markers, thinking that there wasn't enough room on a 1" stand for additional skirmisher figures. Since getting my hands on some actual Baccus 6mm Franco-Prussian War figures, however, I think it is practical - for 6mm figures - to get skirmishers onto an ordinary base by placing the formed troops at the back. And that's not the only way in which my plans have changed.

The left-hand Imperial French infantry base (above) has a Skirmisher characteristic. The other one doesn't. The Baccus strips of formed figures have been clipped so the figures fill the MDF bases from side-to-side. However, I think it will be difficult to texture the MDF when the figure bases are flush with the edge. I've therefore rejected the idea of having five figures in line. Simply adding two strips per base will keep everything simpler (below).

I had assumed that two skirmisher figures would be needed, but one figure makes the point just as well if not better (above). This is obviously a more abstract representation than I had originally planned.

Heavy cavalry will be three-up as expected. Light cavalry might have two.

1" bases provide plenty of room for a gun and four crew. 

Reading Warfare - scenery grab and Bloody Big Battles! game

I had a very productive day at Reading Warfare last Saturday. I spent the morning accumulating scatter scenery for my Gruntz 15mm Sci-Fi skirmish project and some 10mm houses suitable for my Chinese Warlord Era Red Actions project. In the afternoon I was privileged to participate in a game of Bloody Big Battles! organised by its author Chris Pringle and his comrades from the Oxford Wargames Society.

Scatter scenery. I regret that I didn't note the names of the suppliers.

I'll write in more detail about my Gruntz scenery plans another time, but this shows the sort of thing I'm collecting or making for my grungy, post-Apocalyptic environment. Scatter scenery will be either low enough to provide cover or high enough to block line of sight.

10mm Far Eastern houses.

The houses come from two sources. The painted ones are Epsilon buildings from Pendraken while the remainder are from the Timecast Vietnam range. The Epsilon buildings are a slightly larger interpretation of 10mm but I think they will work well enough together. I was a bit unsure whether Vietnamese buildings would do for China, but I did a lot of Googling and am satisfied that similar buildings could be found in China.

The fallback position of the Bavarian I Korps at Loigny.

I arrived at Oxford's Bloody Big Battles! table at about 2pm, just as their second game of the Loigny/Poupry 1870 scenario was about to start. I was keen to play with the experts and was delighted to be given command of the I Bavarian Korps on the German right.

I was tempted to take advantage of the towns near the enemy edge of the table, but this forward defence was overwhelmed by the superior French numbers. I then fell back in line with the objective I was defending (Loigny). Hanging on to this was very touch-and-go the whole afternoon, but I just managed to do so. I was a bit rusty on the rules but got a lot of guidance, including tactical advice. After a while I began to make my own decisions, not that these always proved to be a good idea.

I didn't have much chance to take in what was happening on the German left or centre but did witness the final German assault on the left wing which, in the last (tenth) turn of the scenario, regained Poupry. This was very exciting to see and put all three objectives firmly in German hands. The game was over by 5pm, so it had taken four plus people nearly three hours of playing. Once again I felt I had relived history or an alternative history.

I also had a chat with Chris about doing the Urabi Revolt (Tel-el-Kebir) with BBB. I have been thinking about that for quite a long time because of an ancestral connection (British side) but Chris pointed out that it was a bit of a walkover and I realised that it wouldn't make for a very balanced game. I am thus able to cross something off my to-do list!

 I really enjoyed the afternoon and must make the effort to play BBB more. I will probably send off for some sample Baccus 6mm Franco-Prussian War figures, decide how I am actually going to base them and then put in a full order.

Bloody Big Battles! - Gettysburg game blow by blow

This is the blow-by-blow account in photos of the BBB! Gettysburg game which I first reported on here. It was difficult to recall all the detail even directly after the game, and harder still at this remove in time. But if you study the photos you should be able to follow the main flow of the battle.

Unfortunately, it's a little difficult to tell the two sides apart in the photos. It may be clearer if you click on the photos to enlarge them and look for the ID markers which are predominantly grey or blue. The large numbers are turn indicators for the benefit of the camera.

The battle was fought on a blown-up version of the map. The map squares are only 8" square, but the figure bases are only 20mm square (instead of 25mm) so the table and the units are more-or-less in proportion.

Deployment. Union troops are deployed around Gettysburg or moving north-west towards Gettysburg up the Baltimore Pike. Two Confederate units are shown in the north-east moving south to turn the Union left flank and threaten the Union supply line.

Union troops (nearest) form line. As the Union commander I am feeling relatively secure, but that's mainly because I hadn't actually read the scenario in detail...

Other potential 20thC projects

Pendraken 10mm early WW1 British

I've recently written about doing the Mexican Revolution and Chinese Warlord Era in 10mm for use with Red Actions, but I have also long been interested in doing the Russo-Polish War or other aspects of the Russian Civil War for which RA was of course specifically designed, and for which 10mm figures are readily available.

Another conflict that has previously captured my interest is the Chaco War, but given the current availability of figures and vehicles, this would be much better tackled in 15mm.

Pendraken 10mm Colonial Egyptians

The other 20thC projects in which I've previously taken an interest are early WW1 and the First Balkan War. These would be for both Square Bashing and for Bloody Big Battles! For 1914 I have considered 6mm in order to cut down on the work. However, the aesthetic appeal of 1914 for me is the distinctiveness of the British caps and German Pickelhauben which IMO are just capturable in 10mm but somewhat lost in 6mm.

The appeal of the First Balkan War lies in it being an offbeat precursor of WW1. The armies I would do would be Bulgarian (using WW1 Russians) and Turkish (using Late Nineteenth Century Colonial Egyptians) and Zouaves. The Turks would be doable in 6mm, but WW1 Russians are available only in 10mm.

Finding appropriate artillery is an issue but there are options which most people wouldn't be knowledgeable enough to question!

Bloody Big Battles! - Gettysburg game overview

The 2D battlefield was not only uninspiring
but unexpectedly awkward to use.

My friend Ian and I played the Gettysburg scenario as we were keen to see how BBB played for the American Civil War and because I have always had a particular interest in this iconic battle. As usual I took a lot of photos during the game and will post a blow by blow photo report in due course. However, such AARs take a long time to write so I’m starting with an overview which is arguably more interesting.

The game is divided into three days. In real time we took about ten hours (with breaks) getting through deployment, 8 full game turns, 2 night intervals, and an assessment of turn 9 probabilities. We could have gone quicker if we knew the rules better and played them more often.

Bloody Big Battles! - Blocks or figures?

Labels for blocks

I was just about to place an order for some 6mm Franco-Prussian War figures when I wavered at the prospect of buying and painting almost 50 packs of figures, and that would be just to do the battles of the Imperial period. In the meantime, the use of the blocks, Hexon and wooden toy village buildings has received a lot of compliments. I've therefore decided to put any figure orders on hold for the time being.

I began with block labels showing standard  NATO symbols. They don't have the 'Xs' and 'Is' used to denote level (e.g. 'II' for a Battalion) because while in one game the blocks might represent Platoons, in another they might represent Divisions or anything in between. I soon realised that it would often be important to indicate facing, so I later added triangular arrows.

Bloody Big Battles! - Preparing for Gettysburg

In an ironic reversal of using my block armies with 3D scenery, my next game will be played with actual figures but on a 2D printout of the Gettysburg scenario map.

I've printed the map at 2/3 scale which allows me to get two 8" map squares on an A3 sheet of paper, and better matches the 20mm-wide bases of my ACW armies. (Actually 40mm counting as double bases.)

In previous games I've found it very useful to have a counter for each unit with its stats. I've now extended that to include any relevant lines of command as identifying that caused some problems in my last game.

I've also tried to make the unit ID counters more distinctive and attractive. It doesn't matter so much when using figures, but all block armies look the same! This gives them a bit more character.

Bloody Big Battles! Borny-Colombey Hexoned

I'm not planning to fight this Bloody Big Battles! scenario just at the moment, but other players have referred to the difficulty of modelling the terrain for Borny-Colombey so I thought this would be the ultimate test for using Hexon.

Having established my basic approach and having played about in the drawing program with these maps and hexes for some time, it was actually extremely straightforward and quick (less than 20 minutes) to decide on and 'colour in' the hill hexes.

I used to do this by hand on a printout, but since completing these maps for the blog, I'm now finding it much easier to do it in the drawing program itself. Using a 50% transparent fill I can still see the original map detail underneath which helps me both to make and revise the hex definitions. The latest version of CorelDRAW (X7) works extremely smoothly and is a pleasure to use.

I would probably stagger the hexes to the north-north-east of Fort St-Julien to follow the original angle of the ridge and avoid encroaching on the river. A few villages need shifting slightly so they are on or off hill hexes in compliance with the original contour lines. Otherwise, everything is much as it falls under the grid.

All the high ground can be represented with Hexon - no non-hex features are required. One would be hard-pressed to reproduce the map as accurately with ready-made stand-alone hill pieces, and unlike bespoke scenery directly tracing the map, the Hexon tiles can be reused for completely different battles. Overall this proves to me that Hexon is an ideal solution for reproducing BBB scenario maps.

Bloody Big Battles! - Langensalza Hexoned

This is how I would now reproduce the Bloody Big Battles! Langensalza scenario map with Hexon. The main part of Langensalza needs to be moved slightly to the right to get the bottom left-hand corner off the hill. All connecting rivers and roads should be shifted with it to maintain relative positions.

I've represented three of the small, isolated hills with Hexon, but non-hex features could be more accurate especially for the Judenhuegel and the Erbsberg. There is a loss of detail in the contour line to the north of Illeben but that's not likely to be of any significance. If it was significant, I'd move depiction of that area half a hex to the left so that the shape could be represented better, albeit displaced.

Once again, Hexon proves to be a very adequate tool IMO.

Bloody Big Battles! - Converting scenario maps to Hexon

Hexon grid for a 4' x 6' table.

I thought I'd write again and in a bit more detail about converting Bloody Big Battles! scenario maps to Hexon II hexes.

I use the maximum number of hexes that can be fitted on a physical 6' x 4' table using the given orientation of the hexes. The equivalent diagram on the Kallistra website is only approximately 6' x 4' and requires an area larger than that to avoid overlapping the table edges.

The grid I use measures 13 x 18 hexes. It uses 36 6-hex tiles and a column of 18 single-hex tiles. When laying out the tiles I use a non-slip mat rather than the Hexon clips, and bury the single column in the middle. I do clip the single column for stability.

Bloody Big Battles! - Behind the 2/3 scale idea

I wrote about the accuracy of using Hexon to reproduce BBB terrain maps at 2/3 size but I didn't fully explain how I came to that idea in the first place.

BBB scenario maps are very considerately designed for a standard 6' x 4' wargaming table. I can create an area of that size at home but it requires extension boards. It would be a little easier to play on my dining-room table without extension boards. Also, my 10mm American Civil War armies use 20 mm bases (rather than 1" bases) so the 2/3 size is a better proportional fit. (To be exact the bases are 40 mm wide, but I am counting them as double bases and making up some 20 mm wide ones for singles.)

Another advantage of the reduced size is the ability to print the 8" map squares 2-up on A3 paper. This means I can play on the printout of a map rather than having to set up 3D scenery. There are times when this could be advantageous.

It's obviously a good option for my ACW armies but I was also considering it for any future armies so I floated the idea on the BBB Yahoo Group. Rules author, Chris Pringle, suggested combining the 2/3 map size with normal size bases but reducing the number of bases in each unit. I didn't immediately warm to this idea but then I realised it would allow me to play at both scales without irretrievably committing myself to smaller bases.

For someone of my clumsiness 1" bases are fiddly enough! In extremis I could also borrow the 1" square bases from my Seven Years War Maurice armies.

Bloody Big Battles! - Spicheren

Spicheren (6 August 1870) was a Franco-Prussian War battle which compelled the French to withdraw to the defences of Metz. In the Bloody Big Battles! refight we rolled dice for the privilege of choosing sides. I won the roll and chose the hasty and aggressive Prussians whilst my friend Ian commanded the defensive and well-armed French.

The game was fought over a 6' x 4' table using Hexon tiles to create the terrain. That involved some simplification of the contour lines, but none significant IMO. The river, roads, railway (black), towns, villages and ponds were fashioned from felt. Buildings were from a wooden toy village set. The bridge was resin. Matchsticks at the edges of the hexes were used to indicate steep slopes. Hexes that contain tree models or lichen (not enough trees) were wooded.

Deployment

Deployment

The Prussians (blue) were mostly off-table at the beginning. The main Prussian force came over the river in the north-west. The French (red) were somewhat spread out. A subsidiary Prussian force threatens to enter further to the south at Schoeneck or on the southern edge. The five white counters denote the objectives. The French must be prepared to defend the southern objectives as well as fending off the main Prussian force.

Bloody Big Battles! - Accuracy of Hexon terrain at 2/3 scale

Gravelotte

Ideally one would create customised terrain for each battle directly tracing the contours in the scenario maps, and some people have done just that. Most people, however, probably use ready-made hills of one sort or another and I've been happy with Hexon tiles.

Recently, however, I've been thinking of reducing the maps by 2/3 so they will fit on a smaller table, i.e. 32" x 48", and using smaller base widths (20 mm). The issue that concerned me most was whether Hexon would still work at the reduced granularity.

The battleground in hexes would become 9 x 12 so I superimposed the hex grid on a sample map (Gravelotte) to see how well the contours could be represented. The illustration shows the original map next to my representation in hexes.

I personally think the representation is good enough and, more to the point, is likely to be at least as accurate if not better than using any other system of ready-made hill features.

I'm not now intending to adopt the 2/3 scale in general but it's a useful option and I'll write more about it in a future post.

Bloody Big Battles! - basing figures 2

The BBB standard solution for representing a "4S" unit.
This assumes 6mm figures on 1" square bases.

Following my little article on BBB figure basing,  I posted to TMP about what late 19thC warfare really looked like. There were some interesting responses with links to pictures that contributors considered to be realistic. My overall impression was that while the firing line was fairly loose and irregular, the supports were in quite close order.

A parallel discussion recently took place on the BBB Yahoo Group about skirmisher basing. In BBB a unit (Brigade/Division) might consist of say 4 bases, one of which will typically be rated as giving the unit a skirmishing capacity ("4S"). The suggested way of representing this is to have 3 bases of close order troops and 1 of skirmishers.

A "4S" unit using a skirmisher marker.

However, the appearance of a skirmishing base in line with close order troops doesn't look right to me. Another approach would be to have, in this instance, 4 close order bases and 1 skirmisher base as a marker. The marker is ignored for all purposes other than indicating the skirmishing capacity. When the first base is removed as a casualty, you remove 1 close order base and the skirmisher marker.

This makes things a little more fiddly but should look a whole lot better while neatly fulfilling rule requirements. It also inclines me back to my original preference for 6mm Baccus figures...It's a good job I'm allowing this project to mature before hitting the 'buy now' button!

Bloody Big Battles! - basing figures

French infantry in a loose firing line

When attacking, Late Nineteenth Century European armies basically operated in skirmish lines with supports in closer formations. With a large enough base and small enough figures, e.g. 6mm figures on a 60mm x 30mm base, it is possible to suggest both the skirmishers and their supports, but with the 1" bases in Bloody Big Battles! this doesn't really work unless going down to 2mm.