Forum Replies Created
How does one go about getting their hands on SOTCW Issue #69?
I’ve only just seen this, so it may be too late to be of interest, but we’re working on getting back issues into PDF and on Wargame Vault. So far, we’ve got issues 65 to 82 available. Price is £2 each, or £5 for a set of six. Members (if you buy the current subscription in PDF you’re considered a member) can get a set of six for $1.50 (about £1).
…and to compound the crimes against wargaming, he did exactly the same with the Modern rules
I had (probably still have) both editions of the modern rules. I remember reading the introduction to the second edition at a wargames show. I bought them, thinking they sounded fantastic, then started reading them when I got home. I don’t think I got more than about a quarter of the way through before I gave up.
To answer the original question:
Miniature wargames. Generally Cold War.
Board games. Not usually board wargames, though.
No video games for me.
I don’t play any of them as often as I’d like 🙁
Last year it varied a lot depending on people’s commitments in the real world. I think turns generally took one or two weeks, and you’d submit one argument per turn. Richard wrote up a summary of what had happened at the end of each turn.
So, you’d probably need to write an email every week or so, and read emails in between times.
Apparently they were invented by Chris Engle. They’re good for high-level games, and we use them to establish the background to the actions that are wargamed out at the weekend. They also lend themselves to play by email.
Taken from Richard’s initial explanation:
[Matrix games] involve players taking turns to state “arguments” that establish events.
I’d propose that our arguments be of the form:
Action – Result – Reason 1 – Reason 2 – Reason 3
The Umpire would then rate the argument as one of:
Very Strong (succeeds on a 2+)
Strong (succeeds on a 3+)
Average (succeeds on a 4+)
Weak (succeeds on a 5+)
Very weak (succeeds on a 6)
Unrealistic (fails automatically).
Suppose we are playing a three player (plus umpire) Matrix Game of the 1066 campaign. The umpire has determined (by dice rolling) that the players will make their arguments in the order Normans then Saxons then Danes.
The first time round various arguments were made with the Norman player successfully arguing that William has the full support of the other Norman nobles. The Saxon and Danish players both failed in their arguments.
When the turn returns again to William, he argues as follows:
“The Normans build a fleet of ships in the bay of the Seine (Action). This means they will be able to transport an army to England (Result). They can do this because the coast of Normandy is wooded, the weather is fair in Spring and William has the support of the nobles (three Reasons).”
Note that of the three supporting Reasons only one has previously been established by an Argument. The other reasons may or may not be true. They don’t become true even if this Argument succeeds.
The umpire wavers between rating this Argument as Average or Weak but he rolls a d6 and gets five! The Normans now have a fleet of ships ready to carry their army (but note than neither good weather nor wooded coast are established as facts).
Fearing that he is getting left behind, Harold Godwinson argues:
“Bad weather destroys the Norman fleet (Action) setting their invasion plans back by months (Result). This happens because the English Channel can be stormy in Spring, the Bay of the Seine is relatively open and God supports the Anglo-Saxon side.”
This is asking for a lot and doesn’t have much in its favour. The Umpire declares that he can’t, in conscience, rate it higher than Very Weak (but notes that he’d have looked more favourably on an argument calling for a shorter delay or a partially damaged fleet). He rolls the die and it comes up… six! Harold has lucked out and the Norman fleet is indeed scattered by unseasonable storms.
It’s then Harald Hardrada’s turm and the game continues…
I’m Russell Phillips of Shilka Publishing. I played my first board wargame (Avalon Hill’s Stalingrad) back in the late 1970s, and started wargaming with miniatures in the 1980s.
My first interest was World War II, but nowadays my primary interest is the Cold War, which was known as Ultra-Moderns when I first started playing it 😉 I’ve also enjoyed Napoleonics and dabbled with Warhammer 40K for a while, as well as playing odd games of various other periods.
I was out of the hobby for some years, and gave away all of my miniatures, which of course, I now regret 🙁
I started writing articles for various magazines (the wargames glossies, the SOTCW Journal, trade magazines) back in the 1990s. A few years ago, I decided to try writing something longer, and that led to Shilka. Although wargamers are a sizeable chunk of Shilka’s target market, we’re a publisher rather than a “pure” wargames company.
I have a blog at http://www.russellphillipsbooks.co.uk/blog.
A WordPress blog can be managed from a smartphone, though I prefer to do almost everything on mine from a laptop or desktop. I find the full-size screen and keyboard much easier. If you want to use a smartphone, install the relevant app, as it will make life a lot simpler.
I don’t think any sensible manufacturer would prosecute a blogger simply for posting pics of their figures and giving them credit.
I’ve never heard of it happening, and I’d be amazed if it did happen. For the OP, though, I’d suggest contacting the manufacturers. I think it’s very unlikely they’ll say you can’t use photos of their figures, but they might be able to provide professional photos, or help in some other way.
I think it would fall under fair use and you would be ok*
The UK doesn’t have a fair use provision (the US does). In the UK, it’s illegal to rip a CD to MP3 to play on your MP3 player. Remember when people taped albums to listen to them in the car or on a walkman? That was also illegal in the UK. Of course, people have been doing it for years, but it’s still illegal.
This is where things can get hideously complicated. Which jurisdiction will apply? If it’s the US, then as you say, fair use would probably apply. If it’s the UK, there’s no such thing 🙁
Otherwise things like photos of clothes, cars, buildings, doors, street lamps could also be a violation of copyright.
After all, any design is someone’s intellectual property.
Well, in Germany, “A 2013 Federal Court of Justice ruling expanded copyright protections to apply to elaborately arranged food, making it the artistic property of its creator. That means that anyone wanting to post a pic of the work of culinary art may have to ask permission first.” link
It’s an interesting question.
I suspect figures are protected by copyright. If that is the case, then legally, you would need the manufacturer’s permission. Giving credit would not, in and of itself, be sufficient to make it legal.
That said, if figures are protected by copyright, every blogger that has ever posted photos of figures online has also broken the law unless they got permission from the manufacturer first. I’ve never heard of anyone being sued over it, though.04/08/2015 at 12:18 in reply to: Sparker's Wargaming Podcast # 2 – Cold War Gone Hot special #2861306/07/2015 at 08:09 in reply to: Tanks! Also games. And some things that are not tanks. (image heavy) #27323
Yes but they will have to be approved by me or another admin, otherwise the site could be wrecked by people uploading silly sized banners etc…
In that case, what would be useful for me would be if I could have several banners uploaded, and a simple form to enable/disable each one. I sometimes run sales that only last a day or two, or get featured on things like Wargame Vault’s deal of the day. I’d like to have a banner to advertise such things, but would need to be able to switch it on/off fairly quickly.
No train sets. Yes to a pony. Undecided on the moon, but a stick with something on the end for sure.
Looks like an interesting read. Care to give us a preview of where your going with your treatment?
It’s generally a straightforward history. That said, I found some things in my research that I haven’t seen elsewhere, or where my research led to me thinking that other accounts got certain things wrong. For instance, most accounts state that bricks were removed from the wall joining the Iranian and Ethiopian embassies. I don’t believe that’s true, so it’s not in the main account. My reasons for believing it didn’t happen are in an appendix.
Mr. Picky belatedly asks why have the Iranian republic symbol at all? The hostage-takers were Arabistan separatists.
I see your point, but on the other hand, it was the Iranian embassy and most of the hostages were Iranians. I’m still undecided on the use of the symbol, though.
General Slade, you’re right, although there are plenty of images from the siege, they’re covered by copyright and not available to licence (except possibly for much more than I could afford).
The S6 is a good point, though. I suggested an MP5 to my designer because I guessed he’d have trouble sourcing a suitable SAS image. It never occurred to me to tell him about the S6, but I’ve done that now, so I may end up with a cover that isn’t any of those six 🙂
If it looks good then use it, you can put a disclaimer inside the book. After all, despite the saying, people do judge a book by its cover and if you think it looks best…
I completely agree that people judge books by the covers. The trouble is, they can also be very pedantic about them 🙂
Usually, when I get the designs back from my cover designer, I know which one I want (sometimes with some tweaks). This time, though, I’m really not sure 🙁
I’m really torn about the flag with the symbol. On the one hand, I like it. On the other hand, that flag wasn’t adopted until July 29, a couple of months after the siege. Just to complicate things, before then Iran had a state flag and a national flag. I’m not sure which one would have been used at the embassy.
Edited to Add: Wikipedia’s “Flag of Iran” page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Iran
- This reply was modified 6 years, 1 month ago by Russell Phillips.
I’ve been using adblock for a while now, because as Rhoderic says some sites are unreadable now with the aggressive ads. I do however disable domains I want to support like this one.
The advertising on TWW doesn’t bother me. If all web advertising were like that, I wouldn’t bother with AdBlock. I only installed it because too many sites were too difficult to use, because of the advertising.
On reading this, I immediately thought of One Hour Wargames by Neil Thomas. That’s not exactly what you’re talking about (the mechanics aren’t particularly innovative, it includes a bunch of scenarios, etc), but there are some similarities.
I expect there is a market. I’d certainly be interested.