Army Unity

[Ironworker]

I'd like to start off by starting a discussion by discussing some things that help keep an army looking cohesive. Some armies are easier than others. Often historic armies have all the same or similar uniforms which can help but just as often you find irregular forces or specialist or units that do not share the same type of uniform that regulars have. With fantasy and Sci-Fi armies there is often even greater varriation.

 

Rather than starting out with a lot of techniques I use I thought it might be nice if we all posted one idea at a time on this subject. I'll start with bases.

 

I've found that if there is one thing that ties a force together be it a rather uniform army or a band of irregular troops giving them all exactly or very similar bases is one of the easiest ways to tie the army together. I usually try to keep bases simple enough I can do them in mass but not so simple that they look unfinished or plain. I ofen use one type of flock plus one type of balast or sand or gravel. I feel a minimum of two different elements are needed but one should be careful not to clutter the base too much.

[orcsoul]

One thing that comes to mind for me in my limited experience with armies is a similar color scheme for a particular army or subgroup within that army...

 

For example say you've got an army, and within that army you have three different troop types. You want to keep the army as a whole looking uniform, and at the same time, be able to easily distinguish between the troop types. So you might take a dominant color that you're going to have in common for every unit within that army, but apply it differently for unit type 1 than you would unit type 2 or 3... Or use a different shade of the color in addition to the primary on the different unit types within the army. Something like using reptus green as the primary color that dominates throughout the army, but for one unit type you might choose to add in some scaly shadow somewhere on those minis, and on another type of unit use scaly highlight, and for the third some mixture of the triad that's easily distinguished. And you'd add these colors to some accessory for each unit type. If one unit is wearing helmets you might paint in some design in one of the identifying colors, or maybe paint the stocks of a rifle barrel or boots, or a bandana around the arm or some other freehand mark on a sleeve or chest, even a tattoo.

[anvil]

In my Warhammer Dwarf army of old (yes, even I was that naive once) I went with a quartered blue/white tabard on everything, but different types had one quarter different. Engineers were red and yellow in one quarter, grunt types were straight blue, long-beards were black. That way I could tell fairly easily the different types of troops on the board. This has carried over into every other dwarf army, in whatever system, I have played. It makes army painting much easier since I don't have to come up with a new color scheme each time.

[Stubbdog]

For me, since I dont like to get toooo boring having 15-20 grunts in the exact same scheme, I prefer to paint about 5 at a time and keep a 1-2 color tie between them. For example, in my Overlords. I have decided that I like my color tie to be Blue Liner. Every overlord I paint will have blue liner on it somewhere. It could be a large amount like my first troop of warriors where their armor was bsaed on blue liner, or it could be small, like my Balthon cleric where only his under armor chain mail has the blue liner. In another troop, there is blue liner in their sashes. Meanwhile it leaves it open to have all sorts of other colors on the rest of the model but still have them work together. It also helps in troop identification during play.

[Jen]

Well, it's not exactly an army, but many, many moons ago I did a GW Necromunda gang -- Escher. That's about 8 minis, and I think I did an extra or two. This particular gang is all female. I gave them all different clothing, skin tones, etc., but to keep coherency within the group they all had at least a few locks of bleach-blonde hair.

[PaintByNumbers]

A lot of historical figures can be used in many armies. And the same batch of figures might need to be divided up between the opposing forces in a battle.

 

I try to have a color scheme that is divisible by useful factors.

 

For example, if I have 12 bases worth, I might create visual distinction in 6, 4, 2.

Or if they don't operate two deep: 4, 3, 3, 2.

[kristof65]

Sometimes the colors don't matter as much as the pattern. I did a Marine's Errant Space Marine Army where each squad was a completely different color, but they all had a half white/half colored armor paint scheme - right half of the fig was white, left half colored, usually a primary color. Hero's were defined by reversing the white/colored half.

 

A friend painted an awesome looking Space Marine Army by incorporating flames onto each of the figures shoulder pads and legs. Other than the flames, the figs were all different.

[vutpakdi]

For any given faction or subfaction, I make the bases the same (same color on the sides, same type of ground material (ballast vs. sand), same type of flock or static grass.

 

Then, I usually have one faction color that shows up *somewhere* on the mini.

 

For my Crusaders, I have one faction color (Templar Blue) for the Templars and another faction color (Ashen Blue) for the Ivy Crown. The Ivy Crown minis stand out as their own sub-group, but the base and the fact that Ashen Blue is the highlght for Templar Blue ties them together for me.

 

Ron

[Sergeant_Crunch]

It also depends on the type of army your painting. Take CAV for example. The forces I have are comprised of several dissimilar model types, though I have 2~3 of each model. You have instant variation but now you almost have to rely on color to keep them coherent. Then you run into the problem of differentiation on the table. Thankfully military sci-fi allows for numbering units so I can put numbers on my CAVs and tanks. (Which I need to do with my Rach force still. I'm always confusing which Dictator has completed it turn and which hasn't.) Or if you decide on camo, varying the camo pattern but not the colors allows for discerning between two of the same model.

[Ironworker]

It also depends on the type of army your painting. Take CAV for example. The forces I have are comprised of several dissimilar model types, though I have 2~3 of each model. You have instant variation but now you almost have to rely on color to keep them coherent. Then you run into the problem of differentiation on the table. Thankfully military sci-fi allows for numbering units so I can put numbers on my CAVs and tanks. (Which I need to do with my Rach force still. I'm always confusing which Dictator has completed it turn and which hasn't.) Or if you decide on camo, varying the camo pattern but not the colors allows for discerning between two of the same model.

 

 

I also want to add here that using the same method and style of numbering and marking also helps tie an irregular group of mechs and tanks together.

[Mojoman]

I'm just getting into Warlord, so I've been painting a group of 9 Templar Unforgiven. They all have the same color scheme... white tabbards with red details. I figure I can continue a similar pattern throughout the army and retain some cohesiveness. Also, I'm planning on painting the front and sides of the bases in red and the rear in white with a letter/number scheme written on the white part to tell them apart.

 

- mojoman

[Baphomet69]

I'm working on a 15mm Roman army atm. The legionaries will all be painted the same, obviously. I've also got auxilia cavalry and auxilia infantry. Each of those will have their own paint schemes on shields, etc. but we're only talking three different paint schemes throughout a 102 stand army. Shouldn't be a problem to keep track of who's who and in what army...

[Lars Porsenna]

Since most of the armies I enjoy painting are either medieval Europeans (or something based on that theme), having a unified color scheme sort of defeats the purpose and charm of the army: a unit of knights FREX should look like victims of a Crayola grenade, whereas foot sloggers should look like a mob. Thus I try to paint every figure differently. The resulting appearance of the army makes it look like one built on the individual resources of the troops fighting...just as it was historically...

 

Damon.

[Rastl]

I'm going for the unified color in that every mini in the faction will have the color on them somewhere. That gives me flexibility to have some fun.

 

I'm also doing unified basing so that helps.

[matsumoto]

japanese samurai armies have a very similar army unity easy-shot: all the ashigaru were given at the very least matching sashimono...though in the sengoku period giving every last man a matching uniform was not at all uncommon.

samurai are unlike euro knights in that they chose to mix muted and bright colors for maximum effect, and usually had some idea of continuity with their army while maintaining uniqueness. for example, Honda Tadakatsu wore deep indigo to match his lord's indigo and blue, but he also used a lot of red lacing and gold trim, whereas Tokugawa use a lighter blue and grey...

 

samurai armies thus tend to have ashigaru that look similar if not uniform. with somewhat matching samurai, and a lord of the army who can dress as he pleases...

what gets fun is when muliple lords fight under a single greater lord's banner...now there you have a color bananza.

 

painting such an army can be both greatly satisfying, and also a verified PITA.