Forum Replies Created
“War isn’t fair” is a common refrain but this isn’t war, it’s a game, and feedback loops that make the winner keep winning lead to a player on the short end feeling railroaded. Campaigns generally have a better chance of making this kind of scenario work in my experience, since there can be some point to sending your little cardboard counters off to die in a hopeless battle if some larger strategic purpose can be served. But stating outright that you’re going to railroad one side because they “can’t” win kind of kills the mood – I recall this happened in one of the old World at War scenario packs, driven by the need to shoehorn the game into the author’s novelistic monologue in which the Soviet “had” to win. If there’s no chance to at least make the game seem to have meaning beyond a planned loss, it starts to feel like an exercise in futility.
I find more satisfying the scenario in which one side isn’t supposed to win, but still can. When the scales are deliberately set against it, it makes for an irritating experience, and losing streaks, when they happen by design because obviously one side is going to win, well – that’s not what I go down to the club for on Saturdays.
That actually sounds much more like what the OP was referring to. Although again I’d caution against taking the analogy too far since this is exploiting a system of constructed rules to win at the margins, and the physical universe is not a construct, it’s a set of immutable natural laws (not all of which we fully understand).
And thank you for the vote of confidence by the way. This one is like coming full circle in a way. FWC is going to let me be a little more freeform with the 40k lore and build an old style regiment, back when battalions were still a thing. Remember Issue 135, I think it was, when they had a whole system for building Imperial Guard armies? I’m basically following that for structure.
As in, a “Tiger was worth four Shermans, but the Americans always brought five?”
I think the Millennium Challenge Exercise is what you’re thinking of, but I don’t know if the lesson learned is really medically applicable, in that counterinsurgency is defeatable by tactics that are not purely military, so such an analogy is not really sustainable beyond a surface level. That is to say, low tech can beat high tech in battle, but it doesn’t mean that sustained logistics and psychological, political, and diplomatic tactics wouldn’t end run such a circumstance, and one does not negotiate with an invasive species or a biological pathogen.
I definitely did! We did a campaign, back in the ancient times of 19XX, when I was in high school. A friend and I had a running game where the Ordovician Empire fought a series of world wars against the allied forces of the Silurian League and the Nesebian Republic. It started with horse and rifle and by the end they had primitive tanks and machine guns. Most of it me made up as we went along – in between games we sent each other newspaper headlines from our respective countries’ yellow journalists to get into the spirit of it.
Eventually, Ordovicia began to collapse and in the ensuing chaos dropped a primitive atomic bomb on the city of Coulondre in the north of Nesebia. We allowed the campaign to end on a cliffhanger.07/01/2020 at 18:14 in reply to: Yet another attempt at a 3mm terrain system (sigh) #12914907/01/2020 at 17:45 in reply to: Yet another attempt at a 3mm terrain system (sigh) #129145
Love that mecha! It’s a Kaiju, isn’t it?
They’re Onslaught Tengu Rig Sergeants. Small at 6mm scale, but just right at 3mm! Trimmed the base down though – Onslaught mechs are all a bit base-y, if you know what I mean.
And yes that’s a GW crackle paint on the base – Martian Ironearth, on a plywood base stained with dark red printers’ ink so the wood doesn’t show through the cracks in the basing.
My advice is to use more than one kind of silver paint. Reaper makes a set of three that, together, give a very satisfactory effect: Shadowed Steel, Honed Steel and Polished Silver. If you use the dark silver as a base, then allow some of it to show through on the middle coat, it will create dark and light shadow effects that will read as polished metal at table distance. A small touch of the brightest silver as a highlight will enhance the effect.
The trick is that you want it to seem to be reflecting things at its own scale, not from the real world. If it mirrors large objects it will ruin the scale effect. It’s why painting things a single plain color tends to flatten a miniature out – it’s not big enough to generate its own realistic shade and shadow, so you have to paint it to exaggerate the effect and make it look “right.” The same is doubly true for shiny metal. If it has light and dark areas that seem like they’re reflecting things at the mini’s own size, it will maintain the overall illusion better.
You know, these would be great with some of the Baccus 6mms. Drill out some little recesses for magnets and you can put gun crews on the deck and pick them off one by one. Basically use the rules from Sky Galleons of Mars with no alterations.
And since I’m on a Quar kick these days, I could see using them with 6mm Quar crews as well for a third dimension to the battlefield.11/11/2019 at 14:15 in reply to: The Unnamed Legion (3mm scale Epic Armageddon "Heresy" Proxies) #12630310/11/2019 at 23:33 in reply to: The Unnamed Legion (3mm scale Epic Armageddon "Heresy" Proxies) #126277
Never too late to come back to a fun project! Basing is the most rewarding yet laborious part of how I do my 3mm figures, especially the infantry. But in the end this scheme, as I’ve developed it, is the one I’m most consistently happy with.
This weekend, trying to cool my brains after a really horrible and hectic couple of days, I finally finished off my two full detachments of Tactical marines, who take their place next to Armored Support, Whirlwinds, and (not yet shown) Marine Aviation in the form of Xiphon interceptors ready to dive into the atmosphere from their orbiting carriers to strike at the corrupt Imperial forces whose betrayal of Humanity threatens all of civilization.
Yeah the point system specified in the base Team Yankee game is limited to the base components, which is enough to play quite a bit, and also to pit the Zavtran factions against each other. Thereafter I imagine I’ll work the scenarios up on the fly, and with a NATO/Russian intervention as a framework, an asymmetric setup will probably be the order of the day anyhow. With up to four or more players, if I end up rolling it out at the club, my method for balance would be to build forces and then randomize who you get to play. Maybe your force, maybe someone else’s!
In perspective and under decent lighting the tanks and infantry show up all right. But the main protagonists, the Zavtrans, get bright colors for easy recognition. As for the infantry labels, I’m not quite sure why I do it that way. Visual appeal I guess – there’s no mistaking infantry for tanks and vice versa.
After a reminder from a friend that I left out an “R” in USAREUR, it occurred to me that, with a game set in Zaftra being a NATO operation, the A ericans et al would probably be deployed as part of ZFOR, not directly from USAREUR or SHAPE. So off come the labels, new ones made… I’m so hard to satisfy. But it also gave me the time to consider painting some M60s I found as part of a Turkish contingent contributing to ZFOR.
It also made me think: in a confused, multinational End-Of-Cold-War battle environment, an interesting idea (one I’ve been tossing around for a long time) is that the non-native powers involved might not be predictable. NATO and Russia (or the Soviet, if I go that route) might have priorities that change during the game.
At the moment I’m not sure how to manage that in a game like this, but my mind’s eye goes to those little decodes you could find in cereal boxes when you were a kid, where a slip of colored acetate would reveal a secret message. If there were a way to make two messages on a single card, such that you could capture and potentially decode your enemy’s next order, but not necessarily with certainty, it would make a very interesting meta-game.
For example, say NATO and the Reformists decode with blue, while the Hardliners and the Soviet decode with red. Get the card first by reaching an objective and you get to decode it, along with a level of confidence as to how accurately it reflects what the other side would read. Or, alternatively, you may only be able to reveal SOME words in his orders and would have to guess at the remainder. Then you pass the card to your opponent and he decodes it for his next objective: do you know his next orders or not?
I have zero idea if it would work, just a thought.
Opposing forces – both potential allies and potential enemies. Hardline and Reformist factions in the collapsing post-Soviet state of Zaftra. The Blue force (Republic of Zaftra) is appealing to NATO for assistance in defending its nascent democracy; the Red force (Democratic People’s Republic of Zaftra) is clinging to power in a death grip that isn’t even being loosened by the collapsing Soviet Union.
We have sand tables at our club and I can confirm they’re butt-ass heavy. We have concrete floors, and I wouldn’t recommend putting them on anything lighter. Sand is like lots of tiny stones and collectively it weighs upwards of a hundred pounds per cubic foot.
As basing material it’s my favorite. It adheres beautifully with plain white glue, which also gives it enough body to cover 3mm scale and 6mm scale infantry bases as thick as 1/16” and primes and paints beautifully. To wit: