[Piyan Glupak]

Sometimes I wish that this forum had an ‘Agree’ button for posts, like RMWeb (a model railway forum), and some other forums.  If it did have, I would use it to show my agreement with Guy Farrish’s post just above this one.

[Piyan Glupak]

I don’t usually bother with caissons, but I use limbers to bulk out my Napoleonic artillery bases.  I used to use 60mm wide by 30mm deep artillery bases with 4 guns plus crew.  I found that it was difficult not to manoeuvre directly behind the artillery, which I believe to be very unrealistic.  I went over to using 60mm wide by 80mm deep bases with limbers behind the guns, to discourage that.

[Piyan Glupak]

Baccus do some, as do Irregular Miniatures.

I wouldn’t call the Baccus ones cheap, nor do they have a huge range, but they seem nice.

The Irregular Miniature ones are white metal, which means that they are robust.  They paint up okay, though.  Hint: Don’t carry Irregular Miniatures metal buildings around in the same bag as more delicate offerings. 

[Piyan Glupak]

Having been very disappointed with some sets of rules that I have bought, I would be extremely cautious about a £40 or £5o outlay for a set of rules.  Although I want rules to be easy to understand, and see diagrams as frequently being a very good idea, I don’t want to have to pay for pretty coloured pictures of other people’s armies.  Even if the army lists are included, are well researched and cover a very large number of armies in excellent detail, that kind of price still seems high to risk buying something that may be a pain to play.

The rules that have given me the most fun are DBA, HotT and DBR.  They were all on the cheap side.  They are not the longest or most detailed rules around, but they play well for me.  DBA includes its army lists.  With HotT you do your own army lists, but the rules book includes examples.  DBR usually requires at least one of the three army list books; however, the DBR army list books were cheap.

EDIT: Forgot to mention DBN.  Very pleasurable to play.  Includes its own army lists.  Napoleonic buffs I know say that for a fast play set of rules, it is accurate.  The cost is quoted on the DBN website as $15 for the PDF download, whatever that is in pounds. I bought a hard copy a few years ago (I think at Recon) and have never looked back.

[Piyan Glupak]

Done.

I don’t like the software that was used for the survey, though.  Some things that would have been, for instance, ‘next’ in English appeared in Bulgarian for me, presumably because I live in Bulgaria.  That tends to put me off doing things like the survey, because I sometimes lose confidence in my ability to quickly understand Bulgarian, especially when used outside the contexts that I normally speak Bulgarian.

[Piyan Glupak]

If you don’t get any effective help here, there will be people on Frothers who will be able to help.

Frothers has a bit of a reputation because it has very little moderation, and because posts by people who have not logged in are permitted.  People sometimes express their opinions in a very forthright manner.  Short words referring to bodily functions are permitted, although not obligatory.  If you are unsure that Frothers is within your comfort zone then I suggest that you just stick to the normal boards, and avoid the ‘Frothpot’.

http://frothersunite.com/

[Piyan Glupak]

I voted, but to be honest, I don’t see myself doing any more 28mm any time soon.  I prefer 6mm and 15mm now. Perhaps this is because I am more interested in massed battles than skirmishes, which is where 28mm figures are particularly good.

If I was a wonderful painter of 28mm like some of the people posting pictures on this site, then I might be more interested in big figures.

[Piyan Glupak]

Don’t Peter Pig do fantasy set?  I seem to remember playing a trial version quite a few years ago.  I quite enjoyed the game, but don’t remember too many specific details about it.

I never followed up on them because I play Hordes of the things for my massed fantasy games.

[Piyan Glupak]

Sorry to hear about your troubles.  It must have been awful.  It sounds as if the retail business was not a bed of roses, either.

If I was starting again, I think that I would concentrate on one figure size, not necessarily going over old ground and replacing lost armies.  I personally would go for either 6mm or 15mm, but that is because I like those figure sizes and they are convenient for me – others are likely to have different preferences.

[Piyan Glupak]

When I look at the Irregular Miniatures site (with Firefox) I see:

“Browser Compatibility”

“Firefox” [ticked]

“Chrome” [ticked]

“Internet

Explorer” [little red cross]

Would it be possible for some kind of script to detect the browser, and direct IE users to the old website?

[Piyan Glupak]

After getting rid of flash if necessary, filling holes in elephants, filing mold lines and all the other malarky that is sometimes necessary, I was the figures with a hot solution of washing-up liquid, rinsing them with water as hot as my hands can stand.

Once the figures are dry (usually overnight unless the temperature is higher than 30 degrees Centigrade) I undercoat with Humbol matt enamel.  I used to use matt black, but now usually use matt white.  I like to let them dry at least overnight.

I block paint with acrylic paints, usually doing any metals last.  Unless I am doing 15mm or larger figures, I don’t generally do a lot of dry-brushing or inking.  I leave the figures to dry for at least 24 hours.  Please note that 23 hours 45 minutes is less than 24 hours, whereas 3 days is a very suitable time.

I brush my version of ‘magic dip’ onto the figures.  This is a 1/3 solution of liquid floor polish with a few drops of Windsor and Newton’s peat brown ink in.  Again, I leave the figures to dry for at least 24 hours.

If the figures are on small bases (40mm wide) or are 15mm or larger, I brush clear, matt, traditional (spirit-based) varnish for wood onto the figures.  Once this has dried, the figures are ready for basing.

For 6mm figure on 60mm wide bases, I don’t bother varnishing because I usually pick the bases up rather than the figures.  However, I do make sure that I brush dilute PVA (I think it is called ‘white glue’ in the USA) over the figures when I brush it over the flocked base.

[Piyan Glupak]

willb wrote:

However, the past two months people have been having problems with getting orders from Rapier for reasons unknown. You should email your order instead of directly paying through the site. Regards, Bill

I sent an email to order some Hittites (plus some Libyan infantry) on 04/10/2015 and get them to raise a Paypal invoice.  So far they haven’t responded.

Emails can be less prompt and reliable the we tend to think, so this may not be their fault.

[Piyan Glupak]

I bought some Rapier Miniatures camel riders for use with my Baccus Seleucid army.  I was delighted with them; they fit in very well, and were good castings.

At the moment I am mulling over getting Rapier Hittites to go against my Baccus New Kingdom Egyptians, Syro-Canaanites and Sea-Peoples.  Factors in favour include cost, pack sizes, the fact that you have to wait up to 3 weeks before Baccus send your order, and the fact that Rapier Miniatures also do Libyan infantry that would be a useful option for my NKEs.

Against that, I do find the Baccus non-light infantry bases very good to work with.  I note WillB’s advice about ordering from Rapier, thank you.

[Piyan Glupak]

Grizzlymc, if you are not reading WRG rules under pressure, then I would agree that the meaning is nearly always all there.  The concise and compact text can sometimes be a bit of a problem if, for instance, you are in the middle of your first game, and the other person(s) playing are expecting you to resolve the query rapidly.  Noticing the position of commas can make a huge difference in what a sentence means.  Some of their rules (such as HotT 2nd edition) give few if any problems, in my opinion.  Some (such as DBR and the versions of DBA that I have) are not too bad, particularly if you put in a couple of hours study the night before your first game.  DBM I found much more difficult, I am afraid; if that means that I am intellectually challenged, so be it.

Not seen any recent versions of Horse, Foot and Guns, so can’t comment about them.

[Piyan Glupak]

John D Salt wrote:

15. With a catchy title, ideally containing not more than one of the words “fields”, “fire”, “flames”, “freedom”, “honour”, or “glory”, and none at all of “death”, “gore”, “blood”, “unleashed” or “grapefruit segments”.

Do I take it that you wouldn’t quite like “Glory-Fields of Blood Grapefruit Segments of Death, Gore and Flames Unleashed”?

[Piyan Glupak]

In my opinion, the most important aspect of a rulebook is that it should be easy to use when you play.  This is particularly important for the first few times that you have a go with it, especially when not playing solo.

I like the text to be clear (easily understood and reasonably unambiguous), WRG please take note.  Diagrams can be useful.  A reasonable proportion of white space makes reading easier.  Within those limitations though, concise is good because you have a better chance of finding things.  An index or contents can be helpful.  A5 is a more convenient size than A4, but that is a considerably less important factor than the text being readily readable and understandable when you are in the middle of your first game.

Not fond of the tiny fonts used in the old DBM rulebook, for example.  As stated above, the first few times time that attempt to play the rules you will be trying to find things and be able to understand them quickly when you are under a certain amount of pressure because of the other people playing.

Lack of adequate proof reading can make rules difficult to understand.  The first version of the Polemos Napoleonic rules had many errata.  Can’t talk about later versions because I wouldn’t touch any Polemos rules with a bargepole after my experiences.

Not that impressed with ‘eye candy’ – large colour pictures that don’t necessarily illustrate anything in particular.  Although there is nothing wrong with eye candy, it can increase the size and price, and you can always see it on the Internet.  I would suggest that colour is only used if it makes things clearer.

Cheap is preferable, bearing in mind that I am likely to buy many more sets of rules than I actually use.  However, clarity, good mechanisms and believable results are all more important, in my opinion.

[Piyan Glupak]

Looks good.

For metal buildings (such as those from Irregular Miniatures) milliput can be used, although I haven’t had much to correct on them, as they are usually molded in one piece.

I confess that I am interested in MDF as a material for kits because of my toy trains.  There is a type of brake van that I particularly want.  It is available as an etched brass kit, and also (from another firm) a laser-cut MDF kit without a chassis.  I don’t think that I am up to soldering etched brass yet.  I think that I know of a resin kit that could be the basis of the chassis.

[Piyan Glupak]

Alvin Molethrottler wrote:

I prefer the armies to match up, otherwise you are playing a fantasy battle. 

Pretty much the same for me, except when I do play fantasy I prefer the armies to be from the same fantasy setting.

[Piyan Glupak]

I live in Bulgaria, and there are not a huge number of wargamers here.

[Piyan Glupak]

Most of my wargaming is solo now, so both sides it is for me.  Even when I lived in a town with a wargames club, I still found it a good idea to do opposing sides.

[Piyan Glupak]

Thanks, Alvin, that is good news.  MY Miniatures is a firm that I might be ordering from for a couple of other things as well, in the autumn.

@Northern Monkey – Sorry about the off-topic posts.

[Piyan Glupak]

Kremlin Miniatures had some good stuff.  I wish that I had bought some of their Siberian tribes 15mm figures when they had them.

[Piyan Glupak]

Nothing wrong with interpreting historical armies in whatever way you want.  I am starting to paint a British army for the American War of Independence using Baccus figures.  I am considering painting the rebels as if they are undead, and using a spare necromancer figure for their general.

[Piyan Glupak]

Sounds reasonable to me!

[Piyan Glupak]

Wonderful painting.

Have a feeling that I might be doing some Russians of 1812 vintage in 6mm reasonably soon.  A friend may be selling some unpainted Russians.  I do know that I won’t manage as nice a pint job as yours.

[Piyan Glupak]

Very nice indeed.  Much better painted than I attempt to do.

I bet that they will look fantastic when based.

[Piyan Glupak]

Have a good holiday, Mike.

I must admit that I find it a little bit of a pain as well, sometimes.

[Piyan Glupak]

Thanks for that advice.

I do know what you mean about Baccus pikes.  I avoid basing schemes with more than 2 ranks on the same base now because more than 2 ranks of pikes are tricky to straighten.

[Piyan Glupak]

My feeling about 6mm figures is that you don’t necessarily use less space, but you get a lot more figures in the same space.

For Napoleonics, I have taken to DBN.  I use 60mm wide by 30mm deep bases (I use deeper bases for artillery to help me avoid moves directly behind the guns.)  On the same bases, I could have about 4 figures in 25mm for most infantry.  I prefer the look of 24 men in 2 ranks.

With ancients, I use the same sized bases that 15mm figures use; 40mm wide and various depths depending upon troop type.  I use 4 times as many figures as a 15mm army would use; for instance, hoplites would have 16 figures in 2 ranks.  (With chariots, elephants and artillery I usually just go for double the number of models per base.)  With 40mm wide bases, I prefer using 6mm for games with, for instance, 36 bases per side, whereas for 12 bases a side I tend to use 15mm.

With 6mm, you can do things in basing that you can’t usually do with bigger figures, for instance show Mid-Republican Roman pila armed legionaries in manipules of hastati and princepes.  You can show mounted troops that charge in wedge-shaped formations, if you choose.

One aspect is that because the figure to man ratio is usually a bit more generous, it can be a bit easier to do convincing terrain.

However, wargaming is a hobby, and the figure size that you use is a matter of personal choice.  If I had been a more talented painter, then I may well have focused upon 25/28mm.  I find 6mm easy to paint compared with 15mm, and very much easier than 25/28mm.

[Piyan Glupak]

Looks very good.  I do think that small figures used for battles larger than a certain size look excellent.  (I prefer 6mm for BBDBA with 36 bases per side but 15mm figures for standard 12 bases per side DBA.)

I noticed that from flicking through other articles on your blog that you sometimes use a mixture of Rapier and Baccus figures.  That is interesting for me because I am considering getting a Rapier Hittite army to go against my Baccus New Kingdom Egyptian, Sea Peoples and Syro-Canaanite armies.  In fact, Rapier seem to do Libyan swordsmen that would let me use the preferred New Kingdom Egyptian option against the Sea Peoples.

[Piyan Glupak]

I use casualty figures as attrition markers with my Napoleonic games.  They are conveniently sized, and don’t look out of place too much.  One or two casualties added to a base of 24 figures doesn’t look over the top, in my opinion.

We wargame as a hobby; the sad fact is that a lot of soldiers died or were maimed in the fighting.  Before the 20th Century, even more died from disease.  I understand that Ulysses S. Grant stated that war is hell.  Nothing that I have read or heard contradicts that statement.

[Piyan Glupak]

Just to clarify, my armies with the artillery with 4 guns, plus crew, plus limbers and horses on 60mm wide by 80mm deep bases are in 6mm, not 28mm.

[Piyan Glupak]

Interestingly enough, I started out by using 60mm wide by 30mm deep bases for my artillery, with 4 guns and their crew per base.  I found that it was quite difficult not to be tempted to manoeuvre infantry and cavalry units immediately behind them, which I felt was not realistic.  I re-based my artillery on 60mm wide by 80mm deep bases, with limbers, horses and other stuff to take up the extra space behind the guns.

Although I like it when all the bases are the same size, I do believe that this was an improvement.

[Piyan Glupak]

Thank you to the original poster, Shaun Travers.  It looks extremely interesting for me.  I used to like DBA, and still like version 2.2 and the 2.2+ variant, but I have a different opinion of the latest version (3.0).  I don’t live near other wargamers now, so something with a built-in solo-play module that uses similar resources (including space and time) grabs my eye.

[Piyan Glupak]

I liked the Warrior Miniatures 1/650 ancient galleys set.  Have to admit that I couldn’t get to grips with rules that they supplied with them at the time, so I had a go at writing my own.

[Piyan Glupak]

I do DBA with 6mm using 40mm wide bases.  With infantry and cavalry, I put 4 times as many figures, usually in 2 ranks.  For instance, a hoplite element (base) would have 2 ranks of 8 figures instead of 4 figures of 15mm size.  For most kids of chariots, artillery and elephants I have 2 models on a base (I could only fit one scythed chariot on a base).

For normal (12 elements per side) DBA games I prefer my 15mm armies.  However, for BBDBA (DBA with 36 elements per side) I much prefer the 6mm armies.  When I do a new 6mm DBA army, I go for 36 bases per side.

Please excuse the poor painting and photography:-

[Piyan Glupak]

Cameronian wrote:

I much prefer the term ‘Chariot Age’ for the ‘Biblical’. For the former ECW, ‘The War of the Three Kingdoms’ is all round better.

Those terms seem to me to fit the bill very well.

[Piyan Glupak]

Very nice, and also impressive.  Must admit that I have always considered that the 6mm figure size was better for wargames involving massed troops fighting shoulder to shoulder than skirmishes.  However, that looks very interesting to me.

[Piyan Glupak]

Thanks, George.  That is a good site.

I find similar troubles with using Gods in HotT, with bringing them on after rolling a 6 on the pip dice, then losing them within the next couple of turns by rolling a 1.

[Piyan Glupak]

repiqueone wrote:

Odd, I always thought that most ancient wargaming, was by any standard, fictional. I suppose if Burmese can fight Hellenes it isn’t such a leap to Carthaginians fighting Zulus. Call it DBZ and have fun!

I don’t play ancients with opposing armies that would have been impossible enemies (for instance, because of huge geographical separation, or armies of different times).

Interesting enough, DBA is one set of rules that makes it easier to use suitable opposing armies because the armies are small, so it is less difficult to buy and paint armies in opposing pairs, or to do armies for themed tournaments.

[Author]

Posts