Forum Replies Created
Just to back Iain up on ‘With Eagles to Glory’ – it really is the go-to for the Rhinbund armies!
In the context of armour gaming, I’ve actually found the barrier to 6mil is not actually painting the figures, even infantry, its the terrain. So ideal for large games set, say, on the Russian steppes or the Sinai desert. NW Europe, not so much…
Horse and musket though, why not go the whole hog and used counters or wooden blocks, or Sam Mustafa’s lovely unit cards he’s produced for Blucher? No, for me, wargaming, as opposed to boardgaming, is about going as large as you can…(Says the guy living in Oz with acres of space….)07/08/2015 at 23:57 in reply to: Sparker's Wargaming Podcast # 2 – Cold War Gone Hot special #28907
I sympathise mate – I can only chain myself to the painting desk for hours on end if I have something to listen to – any old crap will do – hence my podcasts!
Great work with the site mate. Also loving the what-if modern micro armour – interesting camo job on the Poles. I do think you’ll have much more variety of scenarios with your alternate universe…05/08/2015 at 06:16 in reply to: Sparker's Wargaming Podcast # 2 – Cold War Gone Hot special #28678
Thanks guys for all the positive comments. I’m glad more people are actually listening whilst painting – I don’t really think the content stands on its on under primary focus – definitely background noise at this stage! Particularly pleased some Cold War stuff got painted, looking forward to seeing the alt history Polish armour!
Yes that’s the general idea. Its quite clear from Col Chris Wilbeck’s analysis that the Sovs had given up on trying to frontally penetrate Tigers, but occasionally immobilised or held them up momentarily by aiming for the vision blocks, tracks etc, so as frustrating as this fire is, particularly from a 45mm!!!, I’m happy that its realistic…
Thanks William! Yes event cards a la Donald Featherstone – never tried those yet, must get around to it!
Thanks for the kind words Tim! Pinning fire is suppressive fire, very easy to apply in these rules, which if successful results in the target being ‘pinned’ rather than damaged in any way. Needs a 6D6, so fairly hard to achieve, but when you’ve got shedloads of T34s all doing it on a handful of vehicles it tends to add up. Then you can’t fire in your turn, which is frustrating! Works well overall, usually!
I think the problem was having both the balka and the turret deep dead ground at opposite ends of the table. With just one, some of the Tigers could have dealt with the flank attack whilst pulling back, thus getting more time in their ‘invulnerable’ zone, as it was, getting flanked from both sides there was nowhere to go except back off the table!
Good point about the PzIIIs as flank guards, the account suggests it was just 18 Tigers and a couple of FAOs who sprang the ambush…
This seems to represent the US on the offensive! That alone makes it interesting to me. The majority of Cold War Goes Hot scenarios are about the unstoppable Soviet throwing back the outnumbered and outgunned Allies, which started to bore me after the first five hundred games.
Well, yes, some of the scenarios in the novel send Team Yankee out on a deep counterattack against the Sov MSR…
Battlefront are releasing their Cold War ruleset in October, which I am really excited about. In the meantime my suggestion, if you are looking for authenticity, would be the Canadian Army’s ‘Contact’ rules, which they developed from the WRG rules. Published by John Curry at the ‘History of Wargaming’ project.
Recently played a 6mil desert game on a 4’x 4′ and it still felt like the wide open spaces with plenty of room for manoeuvre…
Nice big regiment – good to see!
Lovely, lovely work Mike, well done! Do you use the same ground and range scale in BGK for your 6millers?
I’ve always found it odd they keep the same scale for 15mm and 20mm figures, but the effect must be splendid in micro scale!
Thanks Jonathan! As I keep saying, do these two comments of Kevin’s, if they are the most egregious, really justify the tsunami of opprobrium Kevin had to endure – including some quite disgusting sexual references and innuendo?
So glad discussion is more measured and courteous in this neck of the woods.
I’m still none the wiser about modern etiquette with regard to book reviews however. I enquire purely as a consumer, I’m hardly likely ever to pen one, but it would help to know if fulsome praise is now the only politically acceptable commentary – if so I shan’t take bother to take note any longer!
Hi Mike, I was making a reference to the thread on TMP that Jonathan was alluding to, where Kevin Kiley has been jumped on by a crowd incensed that he dared to post a negative book review on Amazon. If TMP threads have to be dragged over here, which Jonathan seems to have a habit of doing, then my only agenda, as on TMP, is to attempt to clear away all the mud slinging and obfuscation and actually ask what it is that Kevin said that was untrue or unacceptable.
A subsidiary issue, and also a genuine question, I suppose, in these ‘enlightened’ days, is:
Is there now a convention that amazon book reviews should only be positive? And if so, what then is the point of them?
(But Kiley’s certitude, ax-grinding, and miscomprehension are still entirely unprofessional;-)
He says with certitude! Since once again you drag this across from TMP I repeat what I said there and as yet have had no takers – please point out the exact parts of either his Amazon review or his comments which are unprofessional…(BTW, I don’t count criticism per se as a lack of professionalism so long as its evidenced, neither is calling someone out on ad-hominem attacks)
I would like to represent limbers by a separate one piece model of 4 limber horses, limber, gun and riders/drivers, and, if a horse battery, accompanying mounted horseartillerymen. That’s what I’d like to do… And I am beginning to get there with my horse batteries, but most times its just a case of representing the battery in limber by reversing the stand!
Yes 5 also – we must be getting somewhere to be specifically named! Survey seems very good, and actually improved from last year. If they can keep this going I think it will be very useful after a few years to see trends in the hobby.
Well off the top of my head, don’t most wargamers have interests that span periods and scales? To take your example, a specialised forum might result in a 10mm Naps wargamer being unaware of the site and its value. A Nap 2mm gamer (if there is such a hawk-eyed beast!) also. And surely there might be potential cross over into 6mm ACW gaming that would be lost unless each individual signed up to multiple such groups?
And certainly people always seem interested in new (or old) rules they haven’t come across, particularly those types who adapt their house rules from several rulesets…
I think a broad church is the way to go, at least by period…
Great stuff! ”Shot! – Splash – Out!”
Yes, at the risk of sounding like a tree hugging lefty áll must have prizes’ relativist, I think and hope that wargaming as a community, and any wargaming club worth belonging to, is a ‘big tent’ were all levels of presentation and accomplishment are welcomed. I have learnt the hard way that if you are addicted to huge games with large teams of players, you are going to have to accept all standards of painting and presentation. To be elitist is to be lonely!
And whilst trying to get the best out of people may be ingrained in sad old ex servicemen like me, its worth remembering we are talking about games with toy soldiers!
That said, surely presenting the very best of the hobby in the media can only serve to inspire and attract, not deter?
@ Rodheric – Yes, thank you, I’m sure you’re right, Warmaster it may be that Rick Priestly imported the mechanisms from for Black Powder, Hail Caesar etc. That actually makes more sense as I actually really enjoyed Warmaster Ancients back in the day. Anyhow, the important thing is the kids and teenagers take seconds few to grasp the mechanics, as they’ve been exposed to them before.03/07/2015 at 09:40 in reply to: The French cavalry Charge at Waterloo – A Black Powder AAR #27195
Good to see limbers provided for the guns – I wish I could manage such attention to detail!
Good looking game!
Sparker, I was actually surprised not to hear / see / read you trumpet Black Powder as an example of “start simple, become more involved”. As you know, I don’t like the game – but you do and from the way you describe it, it seems a very good example. I didn’t know what ‘FLGS’ were and had to look them up. They are pretty sparse in the US at this point, I’m lucky that there is one near by and that wargaming is very healthy in the general vicinity I live and work in. I think we’ve got maybe 4-5 historical groups that meet regularly with around 100 participants among them? It is a little hard to know because the sad thing is we are all self-segragated but no one seems to know why….. Cheers, The Bandit
Lol! Seriously though, Black Powder is not lowering the cost of entry because of its simplicity and elegance – to any 12 year old new potential entrant any rule system is complicated. The reason BP has been such a suceesful bridge is because it has adapted its basic mechanisms from juvenile type wargames – 40K or Warhammer, I’m not sure which but one of these – attack throw followed by a saving throw. So straight away those interested in stepping into historicals from those games have something they can latch onto, and feel reassured.
Given a scarcity of FLGS, maybe the same technique could be used in any suitable public venue that might have some interest in allowing you space – local museum, shopping mall outside a model or book shop, defence force base, etc. Be sure to get the local media involved, and hope its a slow news day!
So as an avowed ‘grand manner’ Napoleonics and ACW gamer, I am in a minority here, despite being one of the first to join? Well fair enough! Looking back at those threads I have contributed to, or taken info from, most of them are Cold War orientated – but that’s more a function of the expertise we have around here.
As far as the friendly and welcoming environment goes, I am reminded of a sign that supposedly hung outside the Paris Zoo (before its exhibits were consumed in the FPW siege) ‘Beware of the dangerous wild animals within – if attacked, they will bite’! Whilst on other fora I have responded to attacks robustly, here I simply have not felt the need to.
(One of my first experiences on TMP was being advised to check into a lunatic asylum by a poster who was a published author, who up to that point I had respected. He questioned my sanity because I asked him why he had not referred to Wellington’s Waterloo Dispatch as a source when discussing the Duke’s attitude to the question of how much he owed to the Prussian arrival at Waterloo – cheeky perhaps, but not a sign of incipient madness I would have thought!)
There is one character around here who’s pomposity I long to puncture, but I suppose the calm and gentlemanly atmosphere has had an influence….The momentary satisfaction soon be replaced by remorse knowing that I had taken the forum a tiny way down the slippery slope…
Grizzly MC has it right – the key to entry is the FLGS.
And you know how many FLGS exist in the UK, right?
I wasn’t aware this was a UK only site? Anyhow, rising above literal interpretations, my point remains – work collectively and the cost of entry are surmountable, and you create a big impression so that you gather momentum.
Grizzly MC has it right – the key to entry is the FLGS. I recently organised a Napoleonic Megagame which I am quite prepared to hold up as one of the biggest and best horse and musket games ever held, anywhere. And of the 20 participants, including one of 12, I would say that prior to the 2 year build up at least half had never played a ‘historicals’ game, and a further half dozen had never played Napoleonics. And we had a waiting list for vacancies of a couple of other young adults whose previous experience was limited to flames of war. Whilst some of these newbies did plunge into some research and painting, most were content to play with other’s figures and limit their research to that distilled in the project’s admin instruction.
So if you want to overcome any barriers to entry, get a big idea and find a suitable venue to expose it. Initially you may be met by bafflement or indifference, but if you preserve with your small hard corps of buffs and put on increasingly spectacular looking practice games at various venues, eventually you will build up a following who you can then call on in the future….
Thanks William, very kind!28/06/2015 at 22:39 in reply to: Standards / Flags and Russian Grenadier Battalions #2687328/06/2015 at 09:57 in reply to: Standards / Flags and Russian Grenadier Battalions #26833
Well bear in mind that post 1810 the Combined Grenadier battalions were only made up from each Infantry Regiment’s Second (or Zapasnyi – replacement) battalion’s Grenadier company. (The Grenadier companies of the First and Third Battalions remained with their parent battalions, who were formed of one grenadier and 3 fusilier companies.) The Combined Grenadier battalions, formed into Combined Grenadier Brigades, were formed of 3 such companies, thus would have had claims on Colours from 3 Infantry Regiments, but only after these had furnished their own First and Third Battalions. I reckon it would have been slim pickings!
Thanks Tim – You are preaching to the choir as far as I’m concerned – I have two left hands and 10 thumbs – but its good to be reminded every now and again of how we live in a golden age of wargaming with all the hard plastic dedicated wargaming products coming out these days!