These models all utilize the unit organizing system that I used in my Wagram game, but simplified and genericized. I'm working on a set of tournament-style rules that lets you design your own army using these pre-labeled game pieces, so the OOB information has some in game effect. I'm hoping to get those done sooner rather than later, because my work load is going to shoot up around the holidays. Which is also the timeframe when I'm hoping to get the new FMS store up and running. It'll be an interesting few months coming up, for sure.
But that said, I'm pretty happy with how these came out, and with how they printed up. I printed up 60 pieces of a re-design of the old cavalry last night. The flags need to be re-designed, and I feel like the OOB system I used for the cavalry isn't quite as thorough as the system I used for the infantry. I may have to re-think them a bit.
Here's a preview of the cavalry that I just inked (still wet!) for feedback. I really want to keep the letters on there so that you can tell at a glance what sort of cavalry they represent. This is sort of fundamental. But The number coding would have to represent not only corps/division organization, but sub-corps assets that are controlled by individual corps commanders. But as I'm thinking about it, this might be ok. I may be over thinking it?
Designer and owner of Forward March Studios: The World's first comprehensive range of 3D printed historic miniatures.
I agree, too much info on the base looks bad. I actually cut out the third number for s set of rules I’m working on, which makes it a lot less intimidating.
I don’t have a problem with army lists; in fact the rules I’m working on utilize them to track casualties. My gripe is with “rosters.” In my mind the difference is that a roster tends to be longer, and is rigid- a roster of units is normally a historic OOB which you need to collect and double check everything against. Whereas an army list is designed by the player. This has two advantages. You get to know your army well, since you designed it. It increases the sende of ownership and being invested in the outcome of the game. And just as importantly, you can design an army to fit the figures you have on hand. So I’m a big fan of army lists. There’s a reason the most popular systems all have them.
I use a labelling system like yours so I can use my figures across multiple battles. Allows me to fight any battle from the start to the end of the Rev/Nap wars. I have rosters for set historical battles and armies for a bit more 'what if'.