The Commander Series Forum

Is there any reason game mechanics wise that I couldn't use round bases for the CO/HQ/FAO and FAC? Obviously there is no flank or rear on a round base.

Which leads to my next question. What are the thoughts on the differences of using square bases over rectangular?

Cheers

I use round bases for my 6mm as it makes the command more easily recognisable, and rectangle for my 15mm. Flanks have no effect on command stands.

Personally I see no reason you canot use either square or rectangular, although I would always look to have a longer frontage than depth for nfantry.

Both cueball and I have been using circular bases for Commander, HQs, FAOs and FACs for a good couple of years now.

It does make it much easier to spot the relevant stands!

Loads of people use square bases, so no problems there.

No problems with using round bases for commands either - they'll be easier to spot.

I use round for FAO and hexes for HQs - COs a 50mm square.

Square, round, triangular - makes no difference at all

My Tring we all use round bases for HQs and FAOs/FACs. Old pennies or 2ps for the HQs and smaller sizes for the FAOs/FACs.

Graham

Pete wrote: "Square, round, triangular - makes no difference at all"

Dang it, Pete! There you go being non-dogmatic again. Haven't you read the game designers' manual?

I use round(ish) bases for my command stands. Works great.

Rightio then. I think we'll go round bases.

For the rest I was thinking 40x20mm for infantry and support, 20x40mm for all guns and armour. But I'm still undecided as I like the idead of a square base for infantry.

I'll go GHQ 6mm so wondering if the large guns and armour would fit on 20x40mm?

I'm getting worse in my advancing years....I could procrastinate on this for days...though my regular gaming buddy would say it's not the age.

Some of the tanks will have slightly overhanging gun-barrels.