Forum Replies Created

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 599 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Unbelievably Crass and Rude #155587
    deephorse
    Participant

    It’s the way of the world.  Saying something mean and nasty to someone you will never encounter in person is all too common.  The cess pit that is social media has mostly made things worse.  Zuckerberg has a lot to answer for.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    deephorse
    Participant

    Having recently watched ‘The Yangtse Incident’ and ‘The Bedford Incident’ (you’ve got to love those incident films), your explanation of something that I have long wondered about makes perfect sense.  Thanks.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: 1/56 SU122 (Rubicon) #155041
    deephorse
    Participant

    “In case you’re wondering what the white stuff is inside the tank,”

    Actually I was wondering why the howitzer version had no white camouflage on its fighting compartment roof?  Very nice paint job though.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: FOR SALE #154873
    deephorse
    Participant

    I can see what you mean.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: When wargames shows start again. #154196
    deephorse
    Participant

    Once we have all been vaccinated, what’s the problem?

    Oh dear.  I hope that this is an attempt at humour Martin.  There is plenty of factual evidence from reliable sources out there that means that I don’t have to set out the case for remaining careful here.  “Covid will be with us for the indefinite future” said a Government scientist just the other day.  Masks and social distancing will continue to be sensible precautions for as far head as I can presently see.  As someone above pointed out, you can’t remain 12″ from other people at York, let alone 2m.  I have no desire to catch the Vapnartak variant any time soon.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Japanese artillery tactics — deception #154161
    deephorse
    Participant

    There’s yet another set of WWII rules with the words ‘Battle’ and ‘Group’ in the title?  So that’s three that I’m know of, and I am by no means aware of all such rules.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Thoughts on ebay managed payments and ecommerce #153758
    deephorse
    Participant

    I’m not a seller on any platform, so I’m not concerned with who ends up paying me, or any delay in receiving those payments.  However, I do buy on ebay on a regular basis, and this leaves me wondering who my contract is with when I do buy something?  If my payment goes to ebay, is ebay responsible if no product arrives or it arrives damaged?  Am I buying from ebay or the listed seller?  On the face if it this might be no different from me paying Paypal and them paying the seller, but then Paypal are not operating an online marketplace.  Or am I overthinking this?

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: How would you rate WWII fighters? #153652
    deephorse
    Participant

    “I’m looking for a simple way of rating how good a WWII fighter is. Looking for a single number, preferaly 1-5.”

    As I read this sentence I thought to myself, “why not look at some air war boardgames, they usually distill combat values down to just one or two numbers?”

    And then you write this!

    “Should I just use numbers from boardgame counters?”

     

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: 3D Printing Experiments #153576
    deephorse
    Participant

    I buy 20mm WWII models that are injection moulded, cast resin, spun metal and 3D printed.  I enjoy building injection moulded kits.  I don’t really enjoy the construction of resin and metal kits because the precision in the parts is generally just not there.  The 3D printed models I have bought have varied from just a little clean up required, all the way to about an hour per track assembly because of all the fine filaments that need to be removed.  The banding can also be an issue.

    An on-line friend recently showed me some 3D resin prints of vehicles that he had bought.  They were superb.  There was no banding at all.  Any curves involved were absolutely smooth.  I would buy models like that in a flash, plus they were of obscure vehicle types that would probably not be economic (in terms of sales) for a commercial enterprise to make in traditional materials.  So I would buy 3D prints of the right quality, without a doubt.

     

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Thoughts on ebay managed payments and ecommerce #153514
    deephorse
    Participant

    Have I read this correctly, ebay is binning Paypal?  How are buyers supposed to pay for purchases then?  I don’t sell on ebay but I buy frequently.  I’ve not had any notification myself about this.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Rapid Fire Reloaded: US vs Germans #153513
    deephorse
    Participant

    Being a keen Rapid Fire player I was interested to read this.  I think you’ve misunderstood the purpose behind the RF rules.  As Martin says, they are intended for much bigger battles, with players throwing battalions and brigades at each other.  I can see how using just a few figures per side would lead to disappointment.  They are not a set of rules for skirmish type actions.  The unit organisations given at the start of Reloaded give a clue as to what level of combat the rules are aimed at.

    Reloaded is a new way of resolving combat for RF.  There are only 7 pages of actual rules in Reloaded, and currently you need a copy of RF2 to fill in the vast majority of actions that Reloaded doesn’t cover.  One criticism of RF was that infantry died too easily.  Reloaded sets about making them less brittle by having to kill all the figures on a base before that base is removed.  Personally, I think the authors missed a trick by sticking with the base 6 armour and tank/anti-tank gun classes.  The absence of almost any granularity in this part of the rules has always irritated me.  And quite why the chance of hitting an AFV depends upon how well armoured it is defeats me entirely.  But you can play a very big game quite quickly, and that has an attraction all of its own.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: A Kursk based boardgame #151633
    deephorse
    Participant

    COBRA eh?  Now that (IMHO) is a very fine boardgame, and one I’ve played many times.  Always solo though.  I play all my boardgames solo.  And Drang Nach Osten gets a mention too!  I can’t remember when now, it’s that long ago, but I took part in a play by mail (remember that?) game of Drang.  I was allocated a tiny Soviet command somewhere in the wilds of Finland, with probably no more than 6 counters to command.  I never knew how many people were taking part, but it must have been a lot if all I got was 10 hexes of the Arctic to defend.

    Anyway, each week I’d look forward to the next envelope arriving, showing me how much territory I’d lost, and how few units I still had left.  But actually I must have done quite well, because one week I was told that I’d been promoted and moved to a more interesting part of the Arctic with instructions to defend that.  We’d all been given a photocopy of the rules (did photocopiers exist then?  Well, we all got a copy of the rules somehow), and my teenage self took my task very seriously, and I agonised over how to move my meagre forces for days before sending my orders back in.

    I can’t remember how long this lasted for, but ultimately the final letter arrived informing me that Stalin was dead and it was all over.  PBM Drang had entertained me for a long time, and when I had enough money it inspired me to buy SPI’s War in the East.  During a long period of unemployment, around 1980, I played the full campaign solo, and it hasn’t seen the light of day since.  Not because it’s bad, I think it’s pretty good, but who has a spare 6 months to throw at a game like that?  Actually probably quite a few people might have had that much time in 2020/21.  I’m seriously thinking of breaking it out again and playing it for one last time before I get too old to bend over a huge counter filled map for hours/days/weeks on end.

    Thanks for bringing back those memories Guy.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: A Kursk based boardgame #151609
    deephorse
    Participant

    Thanks for the review Norm.  I don’t usually read blogs, but being a long-time player of what I call ‘SPI-style’ boardgames, and owning a very large number of them, I was interested enough to dive in.

    The opening few paragraphs made me doubt the game, especially when the battle of Kursk itself would fit into a single game turn.  I also couldn’t see how being on the offensive was justification for not receiving reinforcements/replacements.  But as I read on I could see that this was just a mechanic to bring about the effect of offensives running out of steam, and that made sense.

    By the end of your review I felt quite favourable towards the game, and if I didn’t already own a lot of similar games, and if my gaming budget was not already allocated to a different project, I could have seen myself looking for a copy of this.  Thanks again for a well written review Norm.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Game / Battle Reports #150971
    deephorse
    Participant

    Frankly I have zero interest in battle reports.  When wargame shows existed I would look at the demo/display games just to check out the modelling of scenery and miniatures.  I wouldn’t stand there watching the people play.  Likewise a video of someone’s game.  So a text with photos version of a battle report wouldn’t interest me at all.  This even applies to games played with rules that I use.  A FB group I belong to that is dedicated to my favourite WWII rules has featured many battle reports during lockdown.  I look at the photos but don’t bother to read much, if any, of the text.  But this is just me, YMMV!

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Turtle Ships #150561
    deephorse
    Participant

    The ship in that picture is around 32mm in length, Some of the “blocks of flats” ships (a good description that I’ve used a few times) are 45-50mm. There are smaller Panokseon and Mekura Bune types that are around 20mm

    Thanks.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Turtle Ships #150554
    deephorse
    Participant

    I remember being amazed when I first saw an illustration of a Turtle ship back when I was ‘into’ samurai warfare.  Your blog photos are good but don’t give me an indication of how big the models are.  Some bigger ships look like blocks of flats if the illustrations are anything to go by.  Can you give us some measurements please David?

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    deephorse
    Participant

    Just how good is that matt varnish spray?  I have yet to find one I’m happy with, but the price I’ve seen for that W&N one is quite high.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: O Group #150520
    deephorse
    Participant

    Put in my pre-order today.  Seems like the least I could do after doing a little play testing for it back when you could see other human beings and eat in a restaurant.  I find it a bit surprising how quickly you can adapt to a new normal.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Casualty rates vs combat experience? #150435
    deephorse
    Participant

    There was one referred to in Brains and Bullets:

    The realisation of Sherman vulnerability is reflected in the way tank and crew casualties changed over time. For US armoured divisions, the first week in combat saw four crewmen killed or wounded for each tank that was destroyed. Crew casualties dropped sharply after the first few weeks then bounced along, gradually declining until, by the fifteenth week in combat, only one crewman was lost for each tank destroyed. This was a remarkable survival rate given the Sherman’s tendency to burst into flames.

    Was any explanation offered for this, to me at any rate, surprising effect?  It’s not as though the crews were getting better at handling their tanks because the tanks are still getting destroyed.  Did the definition of ‘destroyed’ change?  Did the crews bail out earlier in the engagement?

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Paint & Glue & Airfix Too #150383
    deephorse
    Participant

    I did, and we are!

    Having played in a club up until about 4 years ago I know all about other players hating this or that.  I have to admit to very actively disliking Seekrieg 5, for example.  I just couldn’t see the point in tracking the progress of a 15″ shell as it pierced the armoured deck, knifed through the cocoa store and killed the ship’s cat.  It appealed to a certain type of mind I suppose, and I gamed with two of them!

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Paint & Glue & Airfix Too #150349
    deephorse
    Participant

    Interesting to read that you intend to use Rapid Fire Reloaded for your WWII games.  I’ve used RF ever since v.1 came out many years ago.  It’s certainly not the B all and end all in terms of realism, but it achieves what it sets out to do, and that is to allow ‘large’ games to be played quickly.  RFR speeds things up even more, with minimal reference to charts and tables.  Most resolution of firing can now be done in your head.  I think the authors missed a trick by sticking to D6 to resolve gunnery, and thereby only having six different gun and armour classes.  But it’s easy to insert house rules into RF if you think you need them.  Of course RFR is just the bare bones of a rule set, you still need RF v.2 to fill in the details for the time being.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Invasion of Germany, 1939? #150249
    deephorse
    Participant

    Anybody tried a “what if the French and British invaded Germany properly in 1939”?

    Any French offensive into Germany in 1939 would have been without much, if any, contribution from the British.  The B.E.F. troop ships didn’t start leaving Britain for France until September 1939.  If you want the entire B.E.F. to be in France, and ready to assist a French offensive, then you probably have to have all the events that lead to this taking place a year earlier too.  A 1937 Munich Crisis?  A 1938 invasion of Poland?  So then do you postulate a 1938 French offensive into Germany?  And so on…..

    As Martin says, the French Army was not a Blitzkrieg style force.  It was large but it generally lumbered along at a slow pace.  It’s command & control was not suited to respond to rapidly changing situations.  It had to develop armoured fuel supply vehicles for its tank units because they used up so much fuel, and anticipated having to refuel almost in contact with the enemy.  A well placed Stuka attack, or artillery bombardment, on these vital vehicles would have stopped a French advance in its tracks.  Several photos exist of groups of these Lorraine or Renault tractors and their fuel bowsers destroyed, or simply abandoned at the roadside.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: What You Look Like #150205
    deephorse
    Participant

    Now that I have discovered the “visual” tab (thanks for the help, Mike and willz) here is a piccy from years ago and La Gleize. I am the one with the beard. Also in the picture are six other wargamers, four other old boys of Collyers school, and four other Queensmen. Three of us are all three. All the best, John. Dollinger's Koenigstiger at La Gleize

    OMG!  There’s that Archers/Radio Times effect again.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: What You Look Like #150132
    deephorse
    Participant

    And what do I look like?  Well here’s me addressing the troops.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: What You Look Like #150129
    deephorse
    Participant

    This topic is massively disappointing.  It’s somewhat akin to an experience I had quite some time ago whilst reading a copy of the Radio Times.  Other TV listings magazines are available, but are nowhere near as good.

    I listen to The Archers, the omnibus version via podcast, on headphones whilst pursuing the hobby.  It makes no demands upon the brain and can be quite entertaining.  I’ve done this for more years than I care to remember.  Being purely audio I find that my mind wants to associate an image of a person with the voices that I hear.  I understand that this is quite a normal human reaction.

    So in my mind’s eye I have images of the various characters, right up until the Radio Times publishes an article on the actors involved in the soap and destroys my fantasy forever.  The same thing happened when I found out what the radio DJ Johnny Walker actually looked like.  Nothing at all as I had imagined.  Great voice, terrible face.

    Of course the same thing has happened here.  I had a mental picture of Not Connard Sage, and I’ve been terribly disappointed to discover exactly what he looks like.  And Mike, why are you using a photo of John Oliver?  And what have you done with him because he’s disappeared from my TV screen for the last month or so?

     

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: KISS #149825
    deephorse
    Participant

    Just set your inner megalomaniac free Mike.  My gaming is mostly WWII and I have more Maus models than were made in real life, plus an E100, two E75s, some other stuff that only existed as ink on paper, and a bunch of Katzchen.  You’ll feel better for it.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    deephorse
    Participant

    One of the real arguments for paying more for better figures is that they have longevity… standards and styles change, so what was an acceptable figure in 1990 is often not an acceptable figure now.

     

    I don’t buy this argument either.  My gaming interests have always been primarily WWII in 20mm, and my purchases have (until recent times) centred upon the German Army.  My German figure collection consists mostly of FAA’s product, bought when FAA were still based in Britain.  So, and I’m guessing here, they were probably obtained in the mid to late 1980s.  They stand comparison with almost any figures available today.  I also have a collection of Volkssturm which I think are Drews Militia.  They too are every bit as good as anything I could buy now.  And then I see notifications of new releases from Company X, or Company Y (apologies in advance if there are such companies!) where I struggle to see any similarity to a human being.  Arms are too long and bent in the wrong place.  Poses are sculpted which no human could possibly adopt.  Body proportions are all wrong.  Yes, there are cracking figures produced now, AB, Adler, Blitz/Battlefield (before they ceased – but ably continued in style by Simon’s Soldiers), but there’s also some dross being turned out masquerading as 20mm WWII.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: US Companies not selling to the UK #149499
    deephorse
    Participant

    I’d better hope that my parcel washes up on some beach in Cornwall then.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: US Companies not selling to the UK #149481
    deephorse
    Participant

    I will soon be placing an order with an Australian seller that I’ve bought from before.  I can’t imagine for one moment that he will be aware of these regulations, let alone be ready to comply with them.  So what will happen to my purchase when it reaches these shores?  Does HMRC really expect the myriad of small businesses around the world to know about this?  What was wrong with the old system where I paid the VAT on stuff that I bought from overseas?

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: What’s going on here? #149476
    deephorse
    Participant

    Nothing untoward in the reply.  Just thanks for the tip basically.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: It’s the end of the world #149235
    deephorse
    Participant

    Not wishing to derail your perfectly good thread – I have always wondered – why do people use daylight bulbs to paint? do you do a lot of gaming outdoors? !

    Nope, but I do a lot of gaming in daylight.  And consequently I use a daylight bulb so that I know the colours will be correct.  I’m guessing that all your miniatures have that ghastly sodium yellow look about them 😉

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Tinywargames. #148969
    deephorse
    Participant

     

    At the Stockton show in November (IIRC) 2018 I ordered a mat at their stand.

    That might have been Geek Villain instead, as Tiny Wargames have never attended Battleground?

    Really?  Maybe it was Sheffield then, before it went belly up.  In recent years Sheffield and Stockton were the only shows I went to.  It was definitely Tiny that I bought from.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Crom’s Printer #148887
    deephorse
    Participant

    It has a remarkable similarity to a wood burning stove.  Are you sure you’ve bought the right thing? 😁

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Tinywargames. #148850
    deephorse
    Participant

    At the Stockton show in November (IIRC) 2018 I ordered a mat at their stand.  The selling point for me was that they could print it to your exact requirements.  10cm hexes on a WWI trench mat and 10′ x 8′ in size.  Of course dealing in person meant that I wasn’t aware of any website issues.  However, I was handing over about £100 (again, IIRC) to a company I knew nothing about.  The mat did turn up and I am happy with it.  If they are still in business two years later they are probably doing something right.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: A Christmas Day review of 2020 wargaming #148777
    deephorse
    Participant

    Thanks for that Norm, you’ve clearly put a lot into that blog post.  Unfortunately for me, as I scrolled down it took on the ‘wall of text’ appearance, and when the slider showed that I was only a short way into the post I stopped reading.  My loss, I’m sure.  Maybe breaking it into instalments would have helped my goldfish attention span.  I did zoom to near the bottom and read your ‘Cobra’ paragraph.  If it’s the SPI game that you are referring to then I am in full agreement with you.  I’ve had so much enjoyment from that game, and even though I haven’t played it in about 40 years now it still sticks in the memory.

    My 2020 can be summed up as;

    Bought an awful lot of stuff

    Made hardly any if it

    Played with even less of it

    Congrats Norm on achieving so much this year. 🙂

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Some WW2 20mm I have finished this week #148731
    deephorse
    Participant

    Excellent!  The Panzer III is my absolute favourite WWII tank.  Just the right size, shape and design.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Some WW2 20mm I have finished this week #148581
    deephorse
    Participant

    Nice!

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Miniature Wargames #148580
    deephorse
    Participant

    🙂 There’s always something useful in every wargaming magazine.

     

    I wouldn’t go quite that far.  I’ve bought MW and WI for more years than I care to remember.  Covid put a stop to that though.  A newsagent in my home town put aside these magazines for me, and I would collect them every month.  I couldn’t travel during the first lockdown, but knew that the magazines would be waiting for me when next I could go.

    How wrong can you be?  During lockdown my newsagent changed ownership and when I finally managed to visit I discovered that they had no idea who I was and they had no magazines for me.  This caused me to reflect upon the value of these magazines to me, and I came to the conclusion that this value was essentially nil.  There had been no content of interest to me for months.  The fault here though lies with me.  My wargaming interests are very narrow, and based on rules and games that are no longer at the cutting edge.

    Ironically, having decided to ditch the mags, MW goes and publishes a single page in #453 that is of interest, so I bought that issue.  Spending £5.99 for a single page of text is not an expense that I can justify month in, month out, so this will be a one-off I’m afraid.  Sorry John.

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: Miniature Wargames #148517
    deephorse
    Participant

    😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

    Trust science, not the scientists.

    in reply to: The Year Thus Far #148516
    deephorse
    Participant

    I’d rather you got all the money Mike, so if you’re prepared to give me your details I can do an electronic transfer.  I’ll probably do 12 months at once so that there’s less remembering to do.  A crucial factor at my age.  What’s your name again? 😉

    Trust science, not the scientists.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 599 total)