Forum Replies Created
If they are for 20 mm minis, what are the dimensions of your ship models? Will you base them or leave them free-standings?
Rod: about 9 inches long. Yes, they’re for 1/72-20mm gaming & will be placed on the “terrain” (well, the “water”, obviously).
We use the Field of Glory rules & always keep within the same Army book. So the natural enemy of the Mycenaeans would be the Hittites….but I don’t have any. So my burgeoning Mycenaean army (about 800 points at the moment) will take on the NKE of which I have over 1000 points. Latest unit (just finished) was these:
I have Caesar & Newline NKE chariots but I like variety. When I acquired a set of the old Atlantic Egyptian chariots, I realised they needed work……
axle replaced with a longer length of wire & moved to rear
additional detail on the chariot body
driver given a whip
Still a bit “toy-like” but not too bad.
I’d love to move into a campaign with the period but FoG seemingly reneged on their earlier promise to publish campaign & siege rules.
You can make your own hot wire cutter:
One of my pals has & he’s still alive.
Your planes are far from plain. Indeed, with this idea I think you’re taking off & reaching new heights.
Anyway, I should stop droning on…
Nice point, KB. I hadn’t considered this, which is dumb as I see these galleys as glorified Canadian canoes.
Rod: you’d have to be a complete Geek to like that article. I love it!
Ochoin: Lovely work and the result is most impressive. Do not fear to be gawdy. Some Bronze Age ships were lavishly decorated with carvings which were very colourfully painted and lacquered. .
Thanks, Rod. I seem to have some spare time after another run-in over at TMP 87))).
My research took some weird turns: amongst other twists into the wet-world of Teredo navalis.
I figure you’d be lucky to keep a vessel afloat for 2-3 years? So decoration may have been rather superfluous at times?
At any rate, I decided plain & warlike would suit.
Gentlemen: thanks for the suggestions.
I’ve never built anything like this before. It’s been quite enjoyable so far.
One of the positives is the galley is simplified, by virtue of it being a usable, wargames’ model. Also, even with sources such as Salimbeti, there is a degree of lea-way in design because of the tenuous nature of the sources.
I’m currently “designing” a removable mast & sail (which I think will be lashed to the top spar for simplicity).
The pair of galleys should get a “run” next year with my Sea Peoples.
Re; boat building.
I’m making progress. The hulls, carved out of balsa look good but despite sanding are a little rough.
Would coating them in white (wood) glue help?
Re; forums in general.
We’d survive without them: we certainly used to before they existed.
But they add much to our hobby:
information & stimulating discussion
links to historical & hobby sites
inspiration to improve our painting & explore new areas
and definitely not least, a sense of camaraderie & community
So here’s to WD3 http://www.wd3.org.uk/index.php
Much appreciated, Rod.
Re: rule revisions in general.
Isn’t it often the case that V1 is OK but with just a few annoying flaws.
V2 corrects them but inadvertently adds others.
V3 is the beginning of the spiral into unworkable, unlovable & unbalanced.
V4…you can’t give them away.
I wonder if I’ve missed something all these years of gaming?
My “take” on a dice-driven strategy game has always been it involves skill in every aspect short of the situations that need a dice roll to determine an outcome.
Thus, how I field my army (ie troop types), deploy & manoeuvre the units takes a degree of skill (call it “generalship” if you like: I’d prefer to avoid pretending what I do with mini figs is overly military). The dice rolling covers the imponderables we call “luck”. In the games I play, certainly “luck” is moderated by various factors ie the spread is greater when your Sherdan Guard have better armour than his Arzawa levy. However, I have always expected the “left field” dice roll to occur on occasion &, indeed, would be disappointed if it didn’t ever eventuate. That’s what luck is.
Can I give you a recent example? In a Field of Glory Ancients game, my Gallic warband slowly fought a losing battle against a unit of Polybian Roman legionnaires. The Romans were drilled, of better quality & were wearing better armour, so the dice, as you’d expect, reflected the Gauls were going to lose. To stave off the inevitable, I added a Gallic chieftain to the melee: a tactic that would give me some re-rolling of poor dice. My opponent, blast him, did the same. However, miraculously I threw some great numbers whilst me opponent did the converse. I won that round! However, the rules state leaders in melee must be diced for, to see if they became casualties. As I’d won, I needed an ’11’ or ’12. I threw an ’11’! Dead Roman general!! My opponent needed to throw a ’12’ (I’d won the melee)….& threw the needed’12’. Dead Gallic chieftain. As my army was lead by fewer Leaders than the Romans, this was a far bigger disaster for me & was the event that marked my decent into defeat.
Did I “deserve” this outcome? Hadn’t I taken the initiative by adding a leader to the fray? Hadn’t I, against the odds, won the melee? Possibly but luck dictated otherwise & the sheer unpredictability is what gives games their spice. Cyrus the Younger can be killed just as Xenophon & his fellow Greeks win the battle for him.
I probably have missed something in that I don’t often let the calculation of odds interfere too much in my gaming. One die or a bucket of dice: I expect the little cubes to be perverse.
donald28/11/2016 at 06:30 in reply to: We have had first times, but what is your origin story? #53102
Coincidentally this little ditty seems to sum up my origin:
Yes, anything’s possible….not Fantasy, obviously. However, if swords are in such numbers, if warriors are depicted in art only carrying/fighting with them, it is indeed possible they were carried as a primary weapon. Others would carry spears, axes etc. Groups (units?) would not be armed in a a uniformly neat way, of course. However, the exigencies of wargaming…..
Can you just imagine Agamemnon saying, “Hey we have too many spears, some of you guys go home. I need some more light horse and we are one BG too short. WTF are all those guys with swords doing here? They aren’t on my order of battle. The enemy commander won’t like this – he’ll object and make me remove them from the battlefield.”
For further possibilities:
So mounted units are possible IMO too. At least more likely than a Mesopotamian Humbuby. 87)
Well, we’ll have to disagree with the “fantasy” aspect.
This seems quite factual….
Obviously, warriors would carry an array of weapons but wargames’ rules need to simplify in order to allow something to be playable.
Sword-armed warriors weren’t unheard of in the period. The Egyptians depicted the Sea Peoples as such:
Mycenaeans armed similarly don’t seem such a stretch. I appreciate the allusions to fantasy as the sheer distance in time makes almost anything seem possible but the line between historical & fantasy isn’t one I want to cross: this is personal taste & in no way meant as a criticism.
Maybe it’s CPX experience that makes me think filling in forms is more how it’s really done!
Sir, please don’t bring reality into this. You’ll note, I used the word “fantasy”.
…….and needless to say, however it works for you is the correct way.
I have a personal dislike for the roster sheet. In my fantasy that I’m somehow a Napoleon (but taller & better looking) or a Hannibal (who hates the thought of using elephants, poor beasts, in battle), filling in minutiae on a sheaf of paper doesn’t fit. I’m a General, forsooth, not a general’s clerk!
I’m in the “it’s a game” camp”. Markers etc are a compromise but *some* effort can be made to allow them to blend without losing their message.
The ones above were made by us for Field of Glory.
Oh, and mention TWW.
I’ll tell you something interesting (but possibly depressing). None of my wargames’ pals can be bothered with wargaming forums. I’ve tried to get them interested in WD3 but no dice (pun intentional).
Partly it’s a time thing: I’m a bit of an insomniac & have more time than them. But mostly they just can’t be bothered. I think there’s a sort of continuum of gamers: those who contribute to forums; those who lurk & those who don’t even read them. And I’m pretty sure the numbers are larger as you move down the continuum towards the totally indifferent.
If I’m correct ( & I sometimes am), I don’t think there’s much you can do about it.
…oh, religion & politics are largely personal & not for up for discussion & with regards to race, anyone saying anything “off” wouldn’t be invited back.
You might attract an orange flavoured fizzy drink…
LOL. The drink in question has given posting somewhat random links a bad name.
I think what the OP was really asking was a for a comment on his rules.
Being in the market for a new set of Napoleonic rules I looked into these & they seem to fit my needs & prejudices.
I haven’t progressed beyond this stage, being busy with other projects.
The big hurdle will be, if I buy a set & I like them, is to convince my pals to climb on board & buy sets too.
The local club is Brisbane Independent Gamers (B.I.G.) also so I half expected a bit of hometown news instead of something a world away.
You’d better tell the Bristol mob to expect a court case over the name when the Brisbane lot unleash their standing team of highly paid corporate lawyers.
Fopishly elegant figures!
Thanks: everything scratch built.
That was one of our annual Show games & played to a conclusion over two days (with lots of talking to the passing crowd) so clearly you can use TSATF for a big game but it is clunky.
I like Victoria’s suggestion.
Without getting too political about other forums, too many boards simply mean stuff gets lost. However, stuff gets lost as well if there’s not a minimum of necessary ones.
( and apologies for the fact I’ve been here for 5 minutes & I seem to be already moving the furniture around. I can live with what ever’s decided).
A very interesting thread. Overall, wargamers must be one of the more difficult markets. I also have written a set (of SYW rules) for myself & my pals & even this very finite “market” were a challenge to satisfy.
BTW an observation on free rules. I believe there is a fairly common tendency to value something according to its ticket price. Hence the diamond market. Anything “free” is often regarded as worthless. I hasten to add this is a perception rather than reality but with regard to this topic, it may well be easier to sell a glossy but flawed rule set than to give away a sterling set of free rules. That’s humans for you!
Some other titles: Robert Drews The End of the Bronze Age: Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe ca. 1200 BC.
Michael Wood In Search of the Trojan War.
: John Chadwick The Mycenaean World. .
I’m actually reading Drew right now (arrived in the post yesterday). The Wood & Chadwick books reside in my library. Thanks for the other recommendations.
Personally I have more difficulty understanding the “nothing should ever change” camp
I don’t think I’m a GOM*. Repair problems by all means but a good rule set is, after all, a good rule set & needn’t be changed for no good reason.
Interestingly, when we noticed the pending #3, one of my pals wrote, “I have been looking at Sword and Spear …..”.
This tendency was noted (above).
- Grumpy Old Man
One of the issues is to try to minimise “killer armies” & bolster those that never win. It *is* a tournament set after all.
Now I don’t game competitively & some of the disparity I think #3 seems to address have been settled via gentlemen’s agreement between my pals & I.
So, yes, why weren’t these issues solved in preliminary testing?
Thanks, gents: several additions to my future library.
Now, I’d like to talk about mercenaries. It’s a term bandied about in the period. Given no cash economy, I suppose it means groups of free-booters willing to fight for the major powers in exchange for provisions & land. I believe many Sherdan were settled on the Libyan border side of the Delta.
Now I bring this up not for a geeky-history discussion (nothing wrong with that of course) but to give credence to the concept of many minor powers lining up with one side or the other. In other words, the forces I use in my wargames can be quite fluid. The Field of Glory rules endorses this idea & it suits me to have a least some sense of authenticity when I’m pushing my little plastic men around the table. Am I kidding myself?
Speaking of books….Bronze Age warfare isn’t exactly a “hot” topic. I’ve finished Spalinger’s book on “War in Ancient Egypt” & the equally excellentCline one on the key year (1177BC). The Dawes book on the same subject is in transit. So apart from the Ospreys (I have several & they are what they are) what else is worth reading?
Sea Peoples? Yes, I have several BGs of them. They are useful as they can fight with the NKE, against them by themselves or as allies of the Hittites.
Mike, I agree with all you write & the FoG rules (mostly) support this. But even so, a force designed to harass won’t win much unless you make “survival” a victory condition. Indeed, as you say, history is against me.
AFAIK despite the regular forays into Palestine by NKE pharaohs, they never seem to have lost against the Shasu.
I still think I’ll create the “army”, but probably only as a limited allied force, working either for the Egyptians or their enemies.
As to dealing with the armies of the more settled areas, historically the nomad faced much the same problem. If you fail to do it take heart from the fact that the originals pretty much did too.
Like most people, I claim winning or losing a game doesn’t matter. But to be strictly honest, there has to be the possibility of winning or why bother?
In other words a beautifully painted Desert army, invariably smashed, will not be used much. Sad….but true.
Another aficionado: thanks for your informed opinion, Mike.
One of the more amazing facts I’ve gleaned is the size of the armies. One modern author gives Thuthmosis III a force of only 5000 men at Meggido!
Not quite an “Armageddon” of a battle!
The challenge of the task I’ve outlined is creating a force that can hold its own against a chariot force like the NKE. The FoG rules on terrain are quite interesting & lots of skirmisher-friendly terrain will be necessary for survival. Probably the desert army will need allies such as Mitanni or the Hittites to be viable.
Here’s some photos from our first foray into the period:
Thanks for the suggestion. I’m clearly going to have to do some work on this.
My thought at the moment is choose some Punic War battle (I’ll use your suggestion) – possibly one from Spain – & twist it to fit our needs. This will mainly be in the area of what forces we’re fielding but might include FoG devices such as ambush & flank march etc.
If anyone’s interested, I’ll get back to you with the details when I’ve worked something out.
So impressive. I applaud your efforts. Seeing the models all together certainly underlines what a magnificent force the Grand Fleet was.
BTW I will be going to Scapa Flow next year. So although I won’t get the chance to see the Grand Fleet in reality, I won’t be too far from some of the High Sees Fleet 87).
Ken, that was lovely.
Great stuff. I have a connection with the battle. Grand dad’s photo album shows some shots taken during the battle (water spouts, primarily). He served in the HMS Benbow, a dreadnought. His album documents his service in the RN before the war (primarily in China & Malta), during and just after. It’s a treasure.