Ship Basing

[Soulmage]

To base, or not to base?

O.K. got my Panzerschiffe miniatures in last night.

I must say the battleships are a little bigger than I thought they'd be. OTOH, I hadn't realized how much smaller destroyers were than battleships! :shock:

I hadn't planned on basing the ships, but seeing how small the destroyers are, I'm thinking it might be necessary to make them easier to move around. BUT. . . the primary reason I'm thinking about basing them is so I can put the name on the base so that people can keep track of which is which.

So. . . I need some feedback. Do you think its realistic for somebody to keep track of 4 -5 individual destroyers if they don't have a base with the name on them, or would that be too confusing for most?

Thoughts?

 

[Wulf Corbett]

So. . . I need some feedback. Do you think its realistic for somebody to keep track of 4 -5 individual destroyers if they don't have a base with the name on them, or would that be too confusing for most?

I know I wouldn't stand a chance with my 1/3000 scale, and I consider myself relatively good at this (20-odd Drazi all at once...)

What scale are these?

Wulf

 

[Soulmage]

1/2400 scale.

 

[Reaverman]

I've based mine, with the name of the ship on the base at the back

 

[Agis]

The ship are 1/2400.

IMO you definately need a base with the name or ID on it.
As far as I am concerned you even need numbered aircraft counters, since some flights have 1 danage points.
Even the observation aircraft needs an ID since they are only giving the "parent" ship a bonus...

 

[DM]

From a more practical perspective I find that basing my ships makes them more robust in storage.

 

[oggie x]

I will make them less likely to roll over in storage and the masts to break. Iam sorted as the ships I have come with bases or if they are small attached to bases. ID on bases is so useful especially if you have multiples of the same class in the fleet e.g. King George V class.

oggie

 

[Mr Evil]

this is all quite interesting from my perspective.

i think it would be nice to have a scale that the majority stick to and a base size for diferent classes so battles look about right.

once i see a popular scale im going to see what i can do for a fleet, one idea is to produce my entire fleet in latex so there light weight robust and prebased.

so if there is a prefered scale can some one let me know and il get a test ship done.

 

[oggie x]

Most seen to be inclined towards 1:2400.

oggie

 

[Soulmage]

1/2400 does seem to make for some impressive looking ships!

 

[Wulf Corbett]

1/2400 does seem to make for some impressive looking ships!

1/2400 is too big and too expensive. 1/6000 is way too small. 1/3000 is the most manageable scale.

Wulf

 

[DM]

I'm another proponent of 1/3000, which is pretty much the standard naval wargaming scale in the UK. As well as the size and storage issue 1/3000 also has the benefit of the greatest breadth of availability of models. That may not be much of an issue if you are only looking at the common ships of the main navies, but if you want something a bit less well-known (or even downright unusual - such as Swedish, Finnish, Yugosavian, Brazilian and Argentinean ships of the WW2 era) then you can probably find it or something similar in 1/3000.

Using 1/3000 for my WW2 collection also gives me commonality with my pre-dreadnought, WW1 and modern collections which are to the same scale, so no need to get terrain such as coastal defences and harbour bits and pieces in different scales.

 

[Agis]

I'm another proponent of 1/3000, which is pretty much the standard naval wargaming scale in the UK. As well as the size and storage issue 1/3000 also has the benefit of the greatest breadth of availability of models. That may not be much of an issue if you are only looking at the common ships of the main navies, but if you want something a bit less well-known (or even downright unusual - such as Swedish, Finnish, Yugosavian, Brazilian and Argentinean ships of the WW2 era) then you can probably find it or something similar in 1/3000.

Using 1/3000 for my WW2 collection also gives me commonality with my pre-dreadnought, WW1 and modern collections which are to the same scale, so no need to get terrain such as coastal defences and harbour bits and pieces in different scales.

Can't disagree more with you and Wulf! :wink: :wink:
I am all for 1/2400. All the 1/3000 models I have seen look very bad.
For me it is 1/6000 to get a better feel for the "scale" or 1/2400 for the look of the models.
I have however to agree about the greatest breadth of availability in 1/3000.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

I'm another proponent of 1/3000, which is pretty much the standard naval wargaming scale in the UK. As well as the size and storage issue 1/3000 also has the benefit of the greatest breadth of availability of models. That may not be much of an issue if you are only looking at the common ships of the main navies, but if you want something a bit less well-known (or even downright unusual - such as Swedish, Finnish, Yugosavian, Brazilian and Argentinean ships of the WW2 era) then you can probably find it or something similar in 1/3000.

Using 1/3000 for my WW2 collection also gives me commonality with my pre-dreadnought, WW1 and modern collections which are to the same scale, so no need to get terrain such as coastal defences and harbour bits and pieces in different scales.

Got any links for 1/3000 models?

 

[soulman]

Basing looks good, somebody used deep bases about a 1" deep, looks a little strange at first, BUT... stops you damaging the ship with fingers, and easy to move...

 

[Chernobyl]

my choice will probably be limited to what I can get at my local hobby shop. Though, as a modeler, 1/2400 probably looks preferable.

Chern

 

[Sgt. Brassones]

Speaking of basing...I picked up some 1/2400 PT Boats today and was wondering how they should be based; singly or in groups.

 

[DM]

MTBs, PTs and other coastal forces craft don't feature in the main rules, but will hopefully be the subject of an S&P article shortly (a draft has just been sent to Mongoose HQ). The rules I've drafted have them operating in pairs and in a similar manner to aircraft, so basing them in groups of 2 would be the way to go.

 

[Sgt. Brassones]

Thanks DM. I was thinking that basing them singly would just be way to small anyway.

 

[Twin-Linked Aldades]

I base on metal plates who are then painted. My carrying cases are all laid in with magnetic bottoms, so there is very few shifting and moving during transportation.

On the scale issue, I'm a 2400'er Micronauts cause, well, that was the first range I ever started buying in like 1997 or so :s