Pendraken Miniatures Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
22 October 2020, 09:43:57 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
We are now stocking the excellent 1:285th Raiden aircraft ranges!
308691 Posts in 17951 Topics by 2265 Members
Latest Member: siredazirahk
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  Pendraken Miniatures Forum
|-+  Wider Wargaming
| |-+  Painting & Modelling
| | |-+  Painting Diaries (Moderator: nikharwood)
| | | |-+  As the House is pleased to direct me... Another ECW project
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 Go Down Print
Author Topic: As the House is pleased to direct me... Another ECW project  (Read 8990 times)
mmcv
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1615


WWW
« on: 20 January 2019, 11:18:43 PM »

Hey folks,

I started on an English Civil War project a few months back and while progress has been slower than I'd hope (pesky real life getting in the way of painting!), it's coming along well.

I'm basing the armies roughly on Nasbey with a well equipped but largely newly recruited New Model Army and the ragtag but battle hardened Royalists. I'm starting with a few regiments each side to get some battles going and will add to it over time.

At this point I have most of the NMA painted and just need to paint up a few more bits and bobs to add some flavour into the mix. I thought it would be a good time to start up a project thread to share thoughts and pictures.

While I don't quite have the painting skills to match up to the excellent Cheriton based project by Paul and Pierre (http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,17480.0.html) I've found my painting coming on a bit from my first major project (http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,18100.0.html) and hopefully it'll continue to improve as I continue adding to them and take on new projects!
Logged

mmcv
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1615


WWW
« Reply #1 on: 20 January 2019, 11:33:59 PM »

I spent a lot of time pondering over basing and unit layouts. I've come to a solution for the foot regiments that I'm pretty happy with, namely three bases on 40*30 with a 40*10 behind each. I'm adding magnetic paper to the bases so I can make magnetised movement trays and labels. I'll probably keep the trays flush and invisible, though have been experimenting with bordered sabots too.

My initial plan was 15 units to a base in three rows of five, but when I came to putting the painted models on I found that looked a little too crushed and have gone with 12 in three rows of four each.

Cavalry basing I'm still playing about with. I'm thinking using a flying v shape layout for royalist gallopers and a double row layout for parliament trotters, but not sure how many bases or models to use. Possibly two 40*40 bases with 6 troopers for gallopers and 8 for trotters, but that might look too sparse in the face of a regiment of foot. Another alternative is three bases with 9 and 12 total troopers respectively. I want to get a few more painted up and can see how they'll look properly. For some reason it's just not the same working out how positioning will look with unpainted models!
Logged

mmcv
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1615


WWW
« Reply #2 on: 20 January 2019, 11:57:24 PM »

My current dilemma is deciding on a flag size standard for the units of foot. The strictly proportional standard looks a little small so likely need to go with something bigger, though that may mean modding the standard bearer to fit it.

I've some examples of what sizes I'm playing about with below with still l me hastily put together flags:



Counting 1 to 6 left to right, my favourites are probably 3, 5 and 6. 2 is too small, 4 too wide. 1 I'm unsure of but think might be too big even if I modified the bearer.

What do you fine fellows of the forum think on the sizes?

The flags in with a pike block for context:


Once I settle on a flag type I'll put up proper pictures of the finished units.
Logged

mmcv
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1615


WWW
« Reply #3 on: 20 January 2019, 11:58:13 PM »

P.S. I'm trying out imgur rather than Google for the photos, let me know if they show okay!
Logged

paulr
Field Marshal
*
*
Posts: 10148


« Reply #4 on: 21 January 2019, 02:09:57 AM »

 Thumbs up Applause Thumbs up

A couple of observations:
  • I went with 12mm square flags (6'2" @ 1/150) these looked about the right size to me, and I've seen references to 6' square flags. I add about 5mm to the standard bearer's pole, in the middle of the flag
  • I've seen several references that indicate that both Pike and Shot were 6 ranks deep so I have gone with only 2 figures deep (2 ranks of 5 on a 40x30). I admit the Pike do look odd to wargamers initially
Logged

2018 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
Techno
Guest
« Reply #5 on: 21 January 2019, 07:21:52 AM »

Damn fine work on the figures !!
I like those a lot.  Cool

Cheers - Phil
Logged
mollinary
Major General
*
Posts: 3106


« Reply #6 on: 21 January 2019, 08:09:57 AM »

Cavalry basing I'm still playing about with. I'm thinking using a flying v shape layout for royalist gallopers and a double row layout for parliament trotters, but not sure how many bases or models to use. Possibly two 40*40 bases with 6 troopers for gallopers and 8 for trotters, but that might look too sparse in the face of a regiment of foot. Another alternative is three bases with 9 and 12 total troopers respectively. I want to get a few more painted up and can see how they'll look properly. For some reason it's just not the same working out how positioning will look with unpainted models!

If you are basing your armies on Naseby, you may wish to think about whether you need any trotters at all. Most authorities seem to be believe that the deeper Dutch style had gone out of use by about the end of 1643, and that by 1645 there would hvae been little or no difference in tactical approach between the hirse of the two sides.
Logged
mmcv
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1615


WWW
« Reply #7 on: 21 January 2019, 08:24:34 AM »

Thumbs up Applause Thumbs up

A couple of observations:
  • I went with 12mm square flags (6'2" @ 1/150) these looked about the right size to me, and I've seen references to 6' square flags. I add about 5mm to the standard bearer's pole, in the middle of the flag
  • I've seen several references that indicate that both Pike and Shot were 6 ranks deep so I have gone with only 2 figures deep (2 ranks of 5 on a 40x30). I admit the Pike do look odd to wargamers initially

I did toy with the two row idea but found I wanted a bit more of a visual block on the base, so with the drum and standard of makes it 4*4. I've kept the musketeers similarity deep as the musketeers seemed to be deep as the pike quite often.


I think flag number 5 is 12*12, I thought I had an 11*11 in there too but a quick measure this morning seems not so will have to find that one and stick it on too to see. Number 3 is actually 10*12 which while not the traditional square doesn't look wildly out of place. May try a 10*11 too. Gives the bigger look without pole lengthening.
Logged

mmcv
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1615


WWW
« Reply #8 on: 21 January 2019, 08:29:54 AM »

If you are basing your armies on Naseby, you may wish to think about whether you need any trotters at all. Most authorities seem to be believe that the deeper Dutch style had gone out of use by about the end of 1643, and that by 1645 there would hvae been little or no difference in tactical approach between the hirse of the two sides.

My thinking with the trotters is I can use them for other earlier battles in future as Dutch and at Nasbey they can represent the more disciplined nature of the likes of the Ironsides which some rule sets I've looked into differentiate with special rules. As you say both fought much the same so in something like Naseby there's less need to show different styles beyond look and special rules.
Logged

mmcv
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1615


WWW
« Reply #9 on: 21 January 2019, 08:30:39 AM »

Damn fine work on the figures !!
I like those a lot.  Cool

Cheers - Phil

Thanks, I'll get some proper pics done up when they're all put together!
Logged

mmcv
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1615


WWW
« Reply #10 on: 22 January 2019, 08:20:34 AM »

Down to the final four flags options:

10*12 10*11 12*12 11*11 with a 10*10 for comparison.







I'm leaning towards the 10*11 or 10*12 as you get the bigger surface area without additional height and with a crinkled flag and the attachment to the pole they still look fairly square.
Logged

fsn
General
*
Posts: 9289



« Reply #11 on: 22 January 2019, 09:17:47 AM »

As with so many things in life, I think bigger is better. For some reason, I think of ECW flags as being square, so I would go for the 12x12.

Logged

Lord Oik of Runcorn
(You may refer to me as Milord Oik)

Oik of the Year 2013
Oik of the Year 2014
Prize for originality and 'having a go, bless him', 2015
3 votes in the 2016 Painting Competition!

15mm is dead. It just doesn't know it yet.
Westmarcher
Major General
*
Posts: 3124


Sir Oik of Westmarch


« Reply #12 on: 22 January 2019, 11:29:00 AM »

I've come across this topic late in the day, so assume the Pendraken flags don't actually fit the flag poles? Anyhoo, according to my 'go to' book for this era (I only have one  Embarrassed ), Haythornthwaite's The English Civil War 1642-1651; An Illustrated Military History, Foot Colours were usually 6.5 feet (2 metres) square. Therefore if you consider average height to be about 5 feet 6 inches*, a 12mm by 12mm flag on a 10mm scale miniature seems reasonable. No doubt sizes varied due to the fact that many regiments were raised by local gentry and landowners, etc. (nor would personal standards be uniform in size, I would imagine).  If you are re-sizing your own, I would therefore aim for square but when actually re-sizing, add in a millimetre or two to the width to account for the wrap around the pole (experimentation should reveal the correct amount to use). It almost goes without saying you also want to make sure you have a spear tip showing above the flag.

From a 'practical' viewpoint, I wouldn't go too large, scale wise, either. As a skinny teenager in the Boys Brigade, I learned an important lesson about flag sizes and weight of cloth. One Easter, we had to march from our halls to the church and I was given the honour of standard bearer at the head of the column. When the flag is unfurled in a strong breeze, it was then that I discovered you can only physically hold it up for so long before fatigue sets in or your arms break(!).  Grin

* According to a study by economist John Komlos and Francesco Cinnirella, in the first half of the 18th century, the average height of an English male was 165 cm (5 ft 5 in), and the average height of an Irish male was 168 cm (5 ft 6 in). The estimated mean height of English, German, and Scottish soldiers was 163.6 cm 165.9 cm (5 ft 4.4 in 5 ft 5.3 in) for the period as a whole, while that of Irish was 167.9 cm (5 ft 6.1 in). The average height of male slaves and convicts in North America was 171 cm (5 ft 7 in).

The height of the English, Irish and Saxon populations in the first half of the 18th century is estimated on the basis of North American military records. English and Irish male heights are estimated at c. 165 cm, and 168 cm respectively. These values are below those obtained from the only other sample available for the period pertaining to British and Irish men, namely those of runaway indentured and convict servants in colonial North America. At c. 164 cm Saxon and German military heights appear to be near the bottom of the European height distribution in this period. The English were about as tall as Czechs and Northern French, but shorter than the Irish and Hungarians. A large decline in English heights is evident among the birth cohorts of 17251729, suggesting that the subsistence crisis of this period must have had a substantial lasting impact on the nutritional status of the cohort born during a time of nutritional deprivation. American-born colonial soldiers of the late 1770s were on average more than 7.6 cm (3 inches) taller than their English counterparts who served in Royal Marines at the same time.

Logged

I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
mmcv
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1615


WWW
« Reply #13 on: 22 January 2019, 12:53:10 PM »

Thanks for your excellent information!

I've come across this topic late in the day, so assume the Pendraken flags don't actually fit the flag poles?

The Pendraken flags seem to be 11*11 so would be needing a bit of modification to the poles yeah. They also have a white stripe down the middle where it connects to the flagpole which would need to be painted in to a matching colour. Given the relative simplicity of most of the flags of the period I'm intending to make my own. I may regret this when it comes to the likes of the Kings Lifeguard, but what's life without a bit of a challenge here and there!

Anyhoo, according to my 'go to' book for this era (I only have one  Embarrassed ), Haythornthwaite's The English Civil War 1642-1651; An Illustrated Military History, Foot Colours were usually 6.5 feet (2 metres) square. Therefore if you consider average height to be about 5 feet 6 inches*, a 12mm by 12mm flag on a 10mm scale miniature seems reasonable. No doubt sizes varied due to the fact that many regiments were raised by local gentry and landowners, etc. (nor would personal standards be uniform in size, I would imagine).  If you are re-sizing your own, I would therefore aim for square but when actually re-sizing, add in a millimetre or two to the width to account for the wrap around the pole (experimentation should reveal the correct amount to use). It almost goes without saying you also want to make sure you have a spear tip showing above the flag.

I had them being 6ft square in my head, good to know there's a bit of variety in scale, 6.5ft must have been a huge one to handle for someone of shorter than modern height! I've found adding 1-2mm (probably works out about 1.5 mm with pencil lines) to be about right for the wrap around.

From a 'practical' viewpoint, I wouldn't go too large, scale wise, either. As a skinny teenager in the Boys Brigade, I learned an important lesson about flag sizes and weight of cloth. One Easter, we had to march from our halls to the church and I was given the honour of standard bearer at the head of the column. When the flag is unfurled in a strong breeze, it was then that I discovered you can only physically hold it up for so long before fatigue sets in or your arms break(!).  Grin

I was never accused of being skinny, even as a teenager, but I do remember flags being somewhat unwieldy even indoors, let alone when the wind catches them!

As with so many things in life, I think bigger is better. For some reason, I think of ECW flags as being square, so I would go for the 12x12.

I think I'm going to have to lengthen the pole regardless to fit without squishing the ends, so 12*12 may be the best option, though don't want to have to make the pole longer than the pikes. Think I'm just going to have to mod one of the poles the way Paul suggested earlier and see how it looks.
Logged

mmcv
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1615


WWW
« Reply #14 on: 22 January 2019, 12:54:24 PM »

In the meantime, think I'll see how much of some horse I can get painted in the 15 mins I have before I have to head back to work!
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!