Individually mounted figures

[Ochoin]

These, of course, are the ultimate in 'Old School' - they're what HG wells used.

They have several benefits - flexibility being one - but are also difficult in many ways.
Moving several hundred figures, one at a time, is both tedious & time consuming. That's why movement trays were developed.



These, however, have their problems. After a large AZW game, sorting through the numerous Zulu casualties to ascertain which regiment/movement tray each individual figure belonged to, is a chore.



You also get the phenomena of "shaky figures" where, say, 20 figures sit on a large tray none too securely and any sudden lurch when you're moving the tray results in an avalanche of loose figures.

I may have solved this one. A small blob of blue tac on the underside of the individual base allows a more secure attachment to the movement base. If you remove the figure, as a casualty, a quick squeeze of the blob back into a ball, as you replace the figure at game's end restores this attachment.

This certainly works short term as I believe blue tac to be eternally indestructible, should work long term too.

donald

[steve_pickstock]

I like your bases, movement trays are definitely the way forwards.

When I am doing the movement trays for an army that means that it's nearly done. And when they're done they bring an army together. The type of tray says a lot about the army. If it's a sort of tribal/rabble/horde sort of army - if the figures are zombies, or goblins or it's a loose order type of army then I use movement trays that reflect that. If it's the sort of army that has serried ranks then the movement trays are like 4x3 types.
Loose order

Close Order


A well done movement tray also brings a unit together and makes it a 'whole'.


With regard to figures bouncing out of their slots, Warbases, where I get my movement trays from, do bases with a round hole in the middle of the slot. These are big enough for a 2mmx2mm neodemium magnet. Put a bit of steel paper under the figure base and they stay pretty much where you put them.

[Minuteman]

I have hovered, indecisively, for a while around whether to use movement trays or not, but for active wargaming I can certainly see the advantages.

Being a bit 'old school', and given also that my armies are wargames-style but are not used or wargaming (if this makes sense) then I tend to stick with bases of 1,2,3, sometimes 4 figures per base. This works for me, at least for units which are made up of one troop type.

I can well see a good case for the sort of bases that you are both using where there is a need to mix up troop types, and have some flexibility in the unit. This seems particularly appropriate for Medieval and pre-medieval units, where for example you might have archers (as marksmen) mingled in with dismounted men-at-arms.

It's good to see Steve's reference to bases which accord with the 'open order/order/closed order realities of historical warfare. Again, as 'old school' I remain wedded to the concepts of the old Wargames Research Group rules and the importance of putting troops in the 'right' order. Pikemen are order or close order; but longbow archers cannot be close order as they have to have space to draw and shoot their bows. etc, etc.

All good stuff, and certainly convenient for moving troops around the wargames table...even if hand-tremors and an avalanche of figures are an occasional problem.

[blacksmith]

I simply use a very cheap, easy to cut with scissors magnetic sheets. They are not so cool as others but they are fast to do and easy to store.
An example:

[Ochoin]

The magnets are a great idea.

I wish I wasn't too far down the track to retrospectively do this.

I do use base & movement trays to differentiate between troop types - notably with Late Antiquity.



You'll notice light cavalry with oval bases, heavy with large round, heavy infantry on rectangular movement trays & skirmishers on irregular trays.

This helps differentiate some of the vital differences in units in 'War & Conquest'.

donald

[steve_pickstock]

I have hovered, indecisively, for a while around whether to use movement trays or not, but for active wargaming I can certainly see the advantages.

Being a bit 'old school', and given also that my armies are wargames-style but are not used or wargaming (if this makes sense) then I tend to stick with bases of 1,2,3, sometimes 4 figures per base. This works for me, at least for units which are made up of one troop type.

I can well see a good case for the sort of bases that you are both using where there is a need to mix up troop types, and have some flexibility in the unit. This seems particularly appropriate for Medieval and pre-medieval units, where for example you might have archers (as marksmen) mingled in with dismounted men-at-arms.

It's good to see Steve's reference to bases which accord with the 'open order/order/closed order realities of historical warfare. Again, as 'old school' I remain wedded to the concepts of the old Wargames Research Group rules and the importance of putting troops in the 'right' order. Pikemen are order or close order; but longbow archers cannot be close order as they have to have space to draw and shoot their bows. etc, etc.

All good stuff, and certainly convenient for moving troops around the wargames table...even if hand-tremors and an avalanche of figures are an occasional problem.

I have loads of figures on multiple figure bases, depending on which rules I'm using, but as most of the armies I'm working on at the moment are for Osprey's Rampant these movement Ray's work really well for them.