Forum Replies Created

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 403 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Tov ma’od.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Pay to put on a display game? #171254
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    I have seen signs where the faces of people are not to be published online.

    Ye gods. Where I come from, we like to see our own and our friends’ happy faces gathered around a game table, posted on the social media of our choice.

    We’re all under constant surveillance by security cameras, anyway, and our phones listen to us and report what we say.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Game Free Shows #171187
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Absolutely not. I go to a convention to play games. If a dealer at the con has something that catches my eye, I’ll buy it. But really, I can buy anything I want these days via the internet.

    But, as Connard noted in that other thread, y’all are in the UK, not the US. So go on talking among yourselves about what concerns you.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Turn systems? #171167
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Ima agree with Mike, and add that some further advantages to IGOUGO turn structure are:

    * Allows  the player to coordinate his units’ movement, such as order a ‘general advance’, which is impossible in a game where only one unit activates at a time.

    * Avoids (or at least limits) the problem of one unit which fails to activate blocking the movement of a chain of other units, such as a division in column on a road through a defile.

    * In multi-player games, allows all players on the same side to act at the same time, and keeps all players on the other side involved, because they’re all facing an active opponent. I usually GM for a game club, so keeping six or eight players involved in the game is a priority to me.

    * Avoids the problem, in multi-player games, of the ‘argument over who gets the next activation’ phase of the game turn. “I need it, I’m gonna get killed here if I don’t act!” “No! You got the last action! This one is mine!” etc.

    * Speeds play a lot in multi-player games, and even in two-player games, because a player can quickly move all units to execute a plan, instead of having to re-evaluate the game situation every time another unit randomly activates.

    The biggest drawback I see to IGOUGU is that it’s too predictable, and perhaps gives a player too much control over his force. I enjoy managing randomized activations in a card-draw or chit-pull game system, but I find these work best in two-player games, and slow multi-player games to the point that my players lose interest and focus.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Looking for book recomendations #170242
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Have you read Avram Davidson’s Peregrine series? Peregrine Primus and Peregrine Secundus are Avram at his best. He passed before he published Peregrine Tertius, so it was finished in some haste from his notes and lacks Avram’s whimsy, but it was good to see how he intended to end the story. His Vergil Magus series, starting with The Phoenix and the Mirror, are also very fine.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Pay to put on a display game? #170241
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    I have paid an admission charge to a convention where I GMed a game. It was a reduced charge for GMs, but it was a charge.

    I feel flattered and valued when I get into the con free for running a game, but I run the game to support the con, not for the freebie. I GM, donate to the raffle and buy raffle tickets, and buy and eat the dubious convention food, all to support the con. Sometimes I even help set the tables up.

    Game conventions here in the fly-over are not big money makers, and if we want them to continue, we had better support them.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    The Twilight Riders is a history of the 26th Cavalry Philippine Scouts in the Luzon campaign. It includes detail of several small unit actions. The author seems not to be a war nerd and drops several technical clunkers, like US troops in the Philippines in 1941 using bazookas against Japanese tanks, but the main narrative is drawn from veterans’ accounts.

     

     

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Ever Happy? #161933
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    These days I usually GM for one of the local game clubs, or play in a club game myself. I’m heavily influenced by what my friends want to play. If I like a set of rules, but the gang doesn’t want to play them, they’re no use to me. Often there will be one member who has a strong dislike for a rule set, who blocks its use. Wargamers are the proverbial herd of cats. Sigh.

    I’m always on the lookout for a new set of rules that supports my existing ginormous collection of toys, and works well for big multi-player games. Main criteria are:

    • 6 to 12 players can have meaningful commands without overcrowding the game table with too many figures and units.
    • All players move/act at the same time, or at least all players on the same side act at once. Single-threading a big multi-player game through single unit activations, one unit at a time, is intolerable.
    • All the usual stuff that makes a good historical consim rule set: not too many tables, charts or dice rolls, players make decisions that decide the outcome of the game, stuff happens, convincing illusion of verisimilitude, the thrill of victory, the agony of de feet.

    The gang has some favorites, currently Check Your Six, Muskets and Tomahawks, and Sword and Spear, that they often ask for. On the other hand, I have a shelf of rules that are excellent for one-on-one games that I rarely get to play, because they’re built around single unit activation. I dabble in a lot of rules, checking them out, but only some reach the table, and few succeed there.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Biblical Royal Palace – Finished! #157151
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Amazing work, Geoff, even beyond your usual excellence.

    The wooden gallery above the throne room is interesting. I suppose it’s archaeologically attested. Seems like a security risk to me. I wonder what purpose it served, what part of the ‘public’ was up there, for what purpose?

    You put in just about everything I could think of. I like the roof penthouse, above the stink and the flies, where the King can catch a cool breeze. I wondered, “Where is the harem? Oh, there it is! Where are the eunuchs? Oh there they are!” No luxurious palace latrine, though. I guess these folks pissed in pots. And all of that tiny, exquisitely detailed furniture!

    That’s one helluva doll house! Very well done, that man.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Who watched this Move..? #157049
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Hm. I wonder why you care what I thought of this movie? But since you ask…

    I liked it, thought it was a good war movie. Yes, it was based on true events. I found it interesting that Hollywood wouldn’t make a heroic war movie, and the director had to go to the PRC for backing. The portrayal of the Japanese was unsympathetic, but I suppose that’s fair enough. It was bad to be on the receiving end of their bushido during WWII, and the Chinese are still sore about that.

    You could see through the CGI at some points, but it was better than the combination of crappy model work, old gun camera footage and modern warships that I’ve seen in so many older movies. I liked the way the Dauntless dive bombers rattled and clanked during flight, that felt like a nice touch to me.

    The acting was good. They had some big stars, and some unknowns who did very good work. I especially enjoyed Woody Harrelson playing against type as Admiral Nimitz. The Navy wives were good supporting characters who added human depth to the story without distracting from the main plot.

    Where I thought the movie excelled was in portraying the heroism of the US Navy aircrews. They all went out to fight, and only a few came back. Then the few re-armed and went back out to finish the fight. That’s really what happened. And I couldn’t help but feel some pity for the poor bastards fighting the fire on Akagi’s hangar deck, waiting to inevitably be blown up. But I cheered when they were. It was that kind of war movie.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: When wargames shows start again. #154165
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    My wife and I just got fully vaxxed up, and I feel somewhat optimistic about 2021. I intend to rejoin the local club gaming scene, which never entirely shut down, in April. Two regional cons are now scheduled for October, Cincycon and Advance The Colors. I hope to attend both.

    The lockdown has been no obstacle to spending money on the hobby. There has been plenty of opportunity to look at and order toys I don’t really need. But I miss wargaming a lot. I’m working up some mojo to GM. Did I say I feel somewhat optimistic? Yeah.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: How would you rate WWII fighters? #153689
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Thomaston, I agree with the posters who say it is very difficult to distill all the variables of WWII fighter performance into a single figure-of-merit, and limiting yourself to a 1 to 5 scale across all aircraft types in all theaters for the entire duration of the war makes the problem more difficult.

    If you want to see an attempt at something like that, you might look at the counter sets for the old, long OOP Europa series of board wargames. The designers for those games rated the relative combat abilities of squadrons of aircraft on a universal scale across all of WWII in Europe. A fighter squadron was rated for: attack strength, defense strength, bomb load and range. For instance, a Bf-109E has values 7, 5, 1, 7. For your purposes, you can ignore the bomb factor and range, and average the attack and defense strengths. However, the scale of values in Europa is greater than 1 to 5, so you’ll need to re-scale the resulting values. I know where you can find images of these counter sheets, if you want to wade through them.

    Instead, I suggest you take a simplistic, subjective approach. On your scale of 1 to 5, pretty much every modern WWII fighter is a 3. Early war fighters that did poorly, like the Fokker D-21 or the Buffalo, or later fighters with deficient performance like the Boomerang are 2s. Totally obsolete death traps like the PZL-11 or the Wirraway are 1s. Outstanding late war fighters like the Mustang and FW-190 are 4s. Jets, like the Me-262 and P-80 are 5s.

    I see now that you were posting something similar to this suggestion while I was typing. It really seems to be the best approach to what you want.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Biblical Royal Palace – Work in Progress… #148215
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Geof, your proto-Ionic capitals make my heart sing.

    Dovid

    Melech Yisroel

    Chai! Chai!

    V’kayom!

    Dovid Melech Yisroel

    Chai! Chai! V’kayom!

    Dovid Melech Yisroel

    Chai! Chai! V’kayom!

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Holy Smoke! #147153
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    What an excellent model of a fascinating and significant archaeological site. Bravo.

    If I may…you might include in the scene some families come from the countryside with livestock to make a sacrifice, and some other families camped, making a feast from the sacrificed animal.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Portuguese Flag #146129
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    one of the links appears to indicate red cloth backing rather than white.

    The red field was the royal standard. I’m not entirely sure of the protocol, but I believe it would be flown on the palace when the king was in residence, flown on the royal yacht went the king went water-skiing, etc.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Portuguese Flag #146118
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Well said, Jemima!

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Portuguese Flag #146094
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    In the 18th and early 19th centuries, national flags were flown on ships, fortresses and other public buildings. I believe the Portuguese national flag of this era was the white flag with the crowned national coat of arms, as shown on the historical flag page I linked earlier.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Portuguese Flag #146056
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Portuguese infantry in the Napoleonic Wars did not carry a ‘national flag’. They carried a King’s Color and a Regimental Color. The King’s Color was the multi-colored design shown on the left in this picture. It was the same for all regiments. The Regimental Color had a solid colored field, and is shown on the right in this picture. The field of the Regimental Color was the same as that regiment’s facing color. (Hmm, actually not in this picture. That’s not what I expected to see.) These flags are shown in more detail on the Warflags site that I linked earlier.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Portuguese Flag #145989
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Ian Croxall’s Warflag site has these designs:

    http://www.warflag.com/flags/napoleon/napportt.shtml

    I believe the regimental color matched the regiment’s facings.

    Here’s a good site on historical flags, although it doesn’t cover military standards:

    https://www.fotw.info/flags/pt_1706.html

     

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: CY6! Thunder Gods Shake Heaven #145975
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Thanx. The models are mostly pre-paints, F-Toys and 21st Century Hayates and New-Ray/Testors B-29s. Japanese robots painted them, I can only  take credit for collecting and staging them in a game.

    I built just one of those toy airplanes, Dauntless Dotty, the B-29 in the middle of  the formation that’s less shiny than the others. She’s the old Revell Picture Box Kit B-29. She illustrates the trajectory of my life  in the hobby.

    I first built that kit in the early 1960s, when it was new and so was I. Some time in the 90s, Revell sold off the molds. I found a copy on a store shelf that carried the Academy label. I suppose some other Chinese toy company has the molds now. Thinking I recognized it, I brought it home, ripped off the shrink-wrap and confirmed it was the classic old kit. The engineering was okay for the era, and  the molds were still in pretty good shape. I glued Dotty together in a few hours snatched from my middle-aged life, slapped on some paint, then I got frustrated when some masking failed me, and put the part-built project away in a box on a shelf.

    Twenty-odd years later…after retirement…digging  through boxes…I opened that one, and determined to finish the model, now that I had the time and patience to fix my mistakes. I still had the decals, and they didn’t disintegrate when I dipped them in water. Success! Completion! Game time!

    So what Dotty illustrates is: my continual magpie distraction from one project to another, my hoarding tendencies, and the fact that once in a great while, I complete something and play with it. That’s life as I know it.

    I have fun.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: CY6! Thunder Gods Shake Heaven #145668
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Good to hear from you, Dave. It’s been a while. I hope you and your family are well.

    Thunder Gods is a fun scenario. The giant bombers get attention. They’re Robustness 4, so it’s a lot of work to shoot them down. I’ve run this game once each for both of my local game clubs. I hope to take it on the road once we start having game cons again.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: What are you reading? #143627
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    …the first volume of Khrushchev Remembers.


    I have never read this but it sounds fascinating. I will add it to my wish list.

    I recommend having a firm grasp of Stalin-era events and personalities before tackling Khrushschev Remembers. The book is not a purposeful memoir, but rather edited notes from a series of long conversations with Khrushschev in his retirement. The old man rambles around and leaves a great deal out.

    I have recently read Timothy Snyder’s Bloodlands for a modern view of  the collectivization famines and the terror, and Robert Conquest’s Stalin, Breaker of Nations for a biography of  the monster himself.

     

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: What are you reading? #143597
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    …the first volume of Khrushchev Remembers.

    I read that back in the 1970s when it was new, then re-read it a few months ago. Seeing the movie The Death of Stalin set me to re-reading my shelf of books on Stalin and his minions. When KR was first published there were doubts about its authenticity, but I think it’s the real thing, based only on my own intuition. On the second reading, it’s a fascinating and terrible confession of a life of cognitive dissonance. Khrushchev participated enthusiastically in some of the greatest crimes against humanity, later denounced those crimes without taking personal responsibility, and apparently remained an idealistic and believing Communist through it all and until the end. What terrible things humans are capable of.

    I apologize if that was political. Sometimes the mouth must speak the words that are in the heart.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: What are you reading? #143590
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    The Polish Air Force At War: The Official History Vol.1 1939-1943

    Kangaroo Squadron: American Courage in the Darkest Days of World War II

    The Arabian Nights

     

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Alternatives to Bag the Hun #143401
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Red Sun/Blue Sky covers Pacific and East Asia 1941-42. Besides the base rules and the aircraft data, I’d say that the best part is the scenario section, that includes all the main carrier battles.

    If you have trouble finding the RS/BS book, email me: zippy-at-fuse-dot-net. I have a spreadsheet that consolidates aircraft data from the first four published Blue Skies books, including RS/BS, along with some fan-developed stats from the old Blue Skies Yahoo group. I’d be happy to share it. You could use the spreadsheet data along with the Luftwaffe 1946 rule book to stage games.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Alternatives to Bag the Hun #143378
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    MSD Games carries the whole Blue Skies and Luft 46 series, except for Squadrons and Black Cross/Blue Sky, which are both OOP. I’m sure MSD will happily ship to the UK. No, I’m not a shareholder, just a fanboy:

    http://msdgames.com/epages/bccb46a7-1a07-48ac-8a77-e8e6cce9e958.sf/en_US/?ObjectPath=/Shops/bccb46a7-1a07-48ac-8a77-e8e6cce9e958/Categories/%22LUFTWAFFE%201946%22/%22LUFTWAFFE%201946%7CRules%20and%20Supplements%22

    In the UK, Caliver Books has Black Cross/Blue Sky (only 2 copies left!) and Lost Squadrons. I couldn’t find any other Blue Skies or Luft 46 rules in the Caliver catalog, but they’ve carried them in the past, so you might want to email and check:

    https://www.caliverbooks.com/searchcat.php?words=blue+sky&price=&period=

    You will note that the prices on BC/BS and LS are mighty stiff. That’s because these are boxed sets, and there’s a lot in the box besides rule books. If you want to know more, ask and I’ll drone on about it.

    One thing to beware is that the base rules for Blue Skies are not in every volume of the series. You can find base rules in Squadrons (a prototype rule set, but they work, if you can find a copy), Red Sun/Blue Sky (a more developed set, note that there are additional rules, but not the base rules, in other Blue Skies volumes), Black Cross/Blue Sky (a consolidated rule book, including the base rules from RS/BS and all additions), Luftwaffe 1946 (complete rules, slightly re-engineered), and Kamikaze 1946 (same rules as L46). Any of the rule versions work with any set of airplane statistics, though some players prefer a particular version. But you need to have at least one in order to play.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Alternatives to Bag the Hun #142382
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    I think the one I haven’t got is the Battle of Britain one but I could extract the aircraft stats from the other books then use the CY6 scenario books for games.

    I happen to have a spreadsheet of Blue Skies BoB aircraft stats. It came from Marty Fenelon’s MSD Games website. Here’s a link. Or if you don’t want to bother setting up an MSD Games account to get the free downloads, email me and I’ll send you a copy.  zippy-at-fuse-dot-net is my email.

    http://msdgames.com/epages/bccb46a7-1a07-48ac-8a77-e8e6cce9e958.sf/en_US/?ObjectPath=/Shops/bccb46a7-1a07-48ac-8a77-e8e6cce9e958/Products/D-0023

     

    I just found this different spreadsheet on the MSD Games site that may be more complete. I haven’t downloaded this one yet, so I’m guessing:

    http://msdgames.com/epages/bccb46a7-1a07-48ac-8a77-e8e6cce9e958.sf/en_US/?ObjectPath=/Shops/bccb46a7-1a07-48ac-8a77-e8e6cce9e958/Products/D-0026

     

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Alternatives to Bag the Hun #142341
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    I didn’t initially bring  up Luftwaffe 1946 because it fails your spec “a non-hex based system”. Since you’re interested after all, I’ll add a few thoughts.

    Luftwaffe 1946 is a descendant of John Stanoch’s Blue Skies series of miniatures rules, that started with the Squadrons Battle of Britain rules in 1994.

    https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/14144/squadrons-air-combat-rules-1300th-scale-planes

    The game engine supports play by a few players with a large number of 1/285 airplane models: squadrons and sometimes groups. The biggest game I’ve played is the Midway ‘Death of Kido Butai’ scenario from Red Sun/Blue Sky, with 60 aircraft models in the game, besides half a dozen ship models. Most scenarios are smaller than that. No rules enforce formation flying, but it’s usually smart to keep your planes together for mutual support.

    Each book in the Blue Skies series and its cousins covers a year or two in a specific theater. Luftwaffe 1946 features mostly German, British and US aircraft from 1944-46, including some German types that were never built, and some Allied prototype and post-war designs. Kamikaze 1946 similarly covers 1944-46 in the Pacific. If you’re looking for Blitzkrieg Era, or Barbarossa or other campaigns, those planes and their statistics are in other books of the series. There are also some spreadsheets floating around that consolidate and reconcile airplane stats from different books, but beware that the stats are not entirely consistent across the books. The planes are rated for each book in relation to one another, so the stats for a Spitfire V, for example, can be different from one theater to another. Marty Fenelon has tried to reconcile all the statistics for his 1946 series rules. Post if you’re interested in a particular campaign, and I’ll try to identify the book you want.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: My 20mm ACW forces #137115
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Thanks for the close-up fairoaks. I enjoy getting a good look at them.

    It appears you’re building one  eight-figure base per regiment. That’s a good system. You can get something done that way.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: I need advice on a vice #136912
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    I agree with others’ advice.

    Note also that brass rod is much easier to cut and work than steel wire. I’ve notched my wire snips trying to cut the wrong stuff.

    “The Minifigs I am hoping to repair are old 2nd gen figures and their hands are quite small. Has anyone successfully managed to drill out the hands on figures like these or would I be better off filing a groove into one side of the hand and gluing the pike in place.”

    I repair a lot of small figures. I work with obsessive care, but I often destroy a hand in the process of drilling it out. I attach the replacement bit with a blob of  two-part epoxy to whatever fragment or stump is left. In 15mm scale, no one notices the damage under a coat of paint.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: My 20mm ACW forces #136784
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    I’ve always liked 20mm plastic. I used to pedal my bicycle to the hobby shop at the mall and plunk down a quarter for a box of Airfix HO/OO figures. The product today is much better. With ACW collections in 15mm and 28mm, I won’t start up again with 1/72 plastic, but I’d enjoy looking at yours.

    These old eyes could see better if your photos were a bit bigger…

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Corn… more properly, Maize… #136641
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Btw, do you know of anyone selling Aztec temples (large)?

    You might find something useful in the Acheson Creations 25mm Meso-American range:

    https://achesoncreations.com/index.php/storefront/meso-america/25mm-meso-america

     

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Minifigs S range.. #136411
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    The Minifigs S range are small, ‘one inch’ 25mm figures. Some modern 1/72 figures approach 23 or 24mm, but metal figures are usually bulkier than plastic. It’s a matter of taste, but I wouldn’t mix S range figs with 20mm, the difference would be visible.

     

     

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Corn… more properly, Maize… #135931
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    I like it.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Great work on one of my favorite armies. I like the detail on those tiny little Chariot Miniatures faces. And the lightning bolt is a stab of genius. I’m a fan of Chariot minis, though I find them to sometimes be weak in the ankles. I often reinforce their ankles with a dab of epoxy.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Bombing Height #134945
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    I suppose you’re thinking of WWII. It seems to me that practice varied for different air forces at different times in different theaters.

    In New Guinea in 1943, US A-20s and B-25s raided Japanese airbases at tree-top altitude to avoid flak, coming in so low that they developed a new type of munition, the ‘para-frag bomb’, a fragmentation bomb on a parachute, so that the raider could get clear of the target before the bomb load went off.

    On the other hand, I was just reading Danny Parker To Win The Winter Sky, a detailed account of the tactical airwar in northwest Europe 1944-5, with special focus on the Battle of the Bulge. Without pulling the book to refresh my memory…Parker recounts that one of the senior commanders in US 9th Air Force had the fixed idea that his medium bombers should operate like fighter bombers, coming in low and fast to hit their targets with pinpoint accuracy. A couple of times he sent medium bombardment groups on low-level missions, and they were shot to pieces by German light flak. After that, the mediums bombed from altitudes above the German light flak.

    I don’t know why the low-and-fast tactic worked against the Japanese in New Guinea but failed against the Germans in 1944.

    I expect to get an accurate picture of medium bomber tactics, you’ll need to read up on the particular campaign that interests you.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: More Biblical Buildings (and People) #134395
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Very impressive modeling. Do you play games with them?

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: Military sci-fi book suggestions? #133738
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    If you like Larry Niven, you might want to try the Man-Kzin Wars series. It’s not Niven, Niven franchised his war to whomever might want to try it out, and a great many authors have written their takes on various episodes. It’s not a novel nor a series of novels, but it’s multi-volume; some of the contributions are novella length, and there’s a unifying theme. I dug it:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-Kzin_Wars

     

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: 18th c. Northeast Native American Longhouses… #132859
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Those came out great. The weathering on the roofs is something many models are missing. (I should touch mine up. Henh.) Nice set of villagers, too.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    in reply to: 18th c. Northeast Native American Longhouses… #132512
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    I’m glad you’re enjoying the pix. I worried that I’d hijacked your thread. Since you encourage me, I’ll carry on. I’m no expert of course, but I’ll share what I have.

    There’s no signage at Kispoko, so sometimes we have to guess. I don’t think this is a beehive – honey bees aren’t native to North America, they were brought over from Europe. My best guess is that this is a smoker. Someone built a small fire in the bottom of the structure, and the top part looks smokey on the inside. Maybe it was an experiment, the top part couldn’t hold more than a few pounds of meat.

    Justin Houston told me that the thatch-roofed building with vertical log walls is Cherokee traditional architecture. It looks different than the buildings I saw at Oconaluftee Indian Village in Cherokee North Carolina. I’ll take Justin’s word, I’m not familiar.

    Here’s an open-front booth that seems too open to live in. I expect it’s to sit in and do craft work in good weather. That’s what  people were doing in structures like this at Oconaluftee. I think open-sided arbors, roofed with leafy branches for shade were also common village structures, probably every household had one or two:

    I know that the Creek Indians farther south built above-ground granaries, but I don’t know about any north of the Ohio River or in the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence region. I’ve read that people in the Ohio country often stored corn in underground pits. People in the Ohio country usually left their villages after the fall harvest, to go on the winter hunt in family groups, so it was wise to secure the corn in a pit under a big rock.

    In Osage Indian Customs and Myths, Louis F. Burns wrote something I’ve long suspected: that Indians usually gathered deadfall for firewood, and rarely cut or chopped wood. Burns wrote specifically about the Osage, but I have noted many accounts of Indian women and children gathering wood, and none of wood-cutting, so I think the practice was general. In this well-known Karl Bodmer painting Sioux Camp, there’s a low pile of brushwood in  front of the rightmost tipi, and I think that’s the woodpile:

    I made a couple of Indian woodpiles, out of scraps of grape stem. You could use any twigs you have handy. Grape stem is lovely, organic, woody, fractal-looking stuff. It’s not very robust, but if some pieces break off, no problem, I eat another bag of grapes and glue on some more stem. Behind the woodpiles is a section of abatis that I’ve built from grape stem.

    Here’s some other bric-a-brac I use to decorate Indian camps and villages. The stretched hides and cooking gear are all from the 1/72 Imex Eastern Friendly Indian, Lewis and Clark and Pioneer sets. They’re theoretically a bit small for 28mm models, but really, they look fine. Besides the camp items, I pillage the Imex sets for figures I can use in my 28mm collection as teenagers and children. Also, a couple of  the sets have plastic tipis and wigwams that are too small for their nominal 1/72 scale, but great for 15mm:

    Here are a few more pix from Kispoko. It’s an experimental archaeology project, and probably not all the experiments succeed. Here’s a stretch of wicker fence that someone experimented with. It doesn’t seem to fence anything in particular. I don’t know why anything in an Indian village would be fenced:

    This structure with wicker walls and bark roof looks like a pen for animals, maybe a chicken coop. Pre-contact Indians kept no domestic animals besides dogs, but some native people learned to keep livestock:

    Someone carved this turtle into a tree at Kispoko. Woodwork sculpture is a deep tradition in the woodlands. Might be hard to represent in 28mm, though:

    That’s all I have for now. Best regards.

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 403 total)