I am in the process of extending my later crusaders to include the Bows X option, just wondering what the thinking was behind them being the only army with single based Bows X rather than the usual bows O/I/S behind BowsX on a double base ?....or at least the only one I have noticed....
They're not the only army with single-based Bw (X). The Early Tang Chinese can get them in the already-released DBMM Book 3. I think the Ming Chinese can get them in DBM Book 4.
The thinking behind it is that these were particularly shallow formations on the occasions where they're described. The double-based Byzantine Bw (X/O) are based on formations which we know were in 7 ranks of archers and spearmen, while IIRC the Later Crusader infantry were only in about 3 ranks.
....Just thought I would mention it in case it was likely to change in the revised Book 4 (whenever that happens) I would hate to have to re-base all those bows X if they switched to double-based...........also do irregular bows X have three figures to a base if single based ? they look better with four (2 spear and 2 bow figures)....?
Sadly, we can't make any predictions about what might be in unpublished list books. We know from experience that the rules themselves were changed only days before publication, so I wouldn't make any basing decisions until I actually had the book in my hot little hands.
As for depiction, the rules do say three figures per base for irregular Bow. And if I remember the story of the mixed crossbow/spear formations in the Later Crusader army, there was one spearman for every two crossbowmen, so that sort of ratio would be reasonable on the bases. Having said that, there are sometimes aesthetic reasons to depart from the basing rules. But if you do so, it's your responsibility to make sure your opponent knows what you've done - the rules say that figures should accurately represent the troops in the army. If you put four figures on each base and say nothing, your opponent may assume they're regular, and make decisions on that basis, which is unfair to him.
