February Blues

Not sure why but I feel at a bit of a gap moment between projects. I've been encouraged into trying Bolt Action, so went about turning my Chain of Command units into something I can use in BA. There's a  whole series of posts about how those rules compare but maybe another time...

So I've been painting WW2 Germans, and backfilling WW2 Soviets, and all that is good. Problem is those projects are hovering around the "good enough" mark. 

As I've got older I've realised that having a project is very good for my mental health, and gives me something to distract from the shitshow that is existence :-) , so I'm looking at options.

First up - Flint & Feather \ Contact 

I came to this by roundabout routes. I saw some YouTube vids by Atun-Shei films https://www.youtube.com/@AtunSheiFilms about King Phillip's War, and I got a bit interested. BTW Atun-Shei does a fantastic series on the ACW which I would highly recommend.

I've picked up Flint & Feather and am slowly building up some small forces. I'm going to need a LOT of trees to get this on the table. 

Other project options - I feel the need for some naval gazing - not sure what exactly, and I have a Napoleonic Spanish Army to start, though as that has not been on the shelf for the obligatory year I dont think it counts towards my "pile of shame" :-)

Six Year Plan - Mortal Gods hits the table, and why cards will strangle a game.

So in 2019 I was playing Impetus in 28mm (great game) and Mortal Gods from Footsore Miniatures* was released. As I already had some Persians I thought Hoplites? "Why not?" So I split the starter set with my mate Paul and then ............... got distracted. The plastic hoplites got given away and the rules sat idle.

Then a few weeks ago Rob and Mark suggested we get into a small scale historical skirmish - they suggested Saga, but sometimes you just have to go with the flow. I'm not a fan of Saga. 

While the Saga wheels were slowly turning I remembered Mortal Gods and mentioned it - and was surprised that both Rob and Mark had it but had never played. So we decided to give it a go.

AND - it's been fun. We've played twice now and will be introducing them to our games group next week.

The rules are a development of Test of Honour, but they certainly have quite a lot more hidden under the hood and don't have the problems I remember with power creep that ToH succumbed to (IMHO).

One positive now we are playing is just how small the forces are. The rules say the usual 12-20 figures a side, but as we are initially only playing 225 points it's looking very much on the 12 figures end of the scale. I can probably paint that in a week. The group bases were easy enough to manage now I have a 3d printer (yes everything is a 3d printer problem when you have one)

AND - there's the rub. The starter set is now out of print. The game relies on a number of cards. Stat cards, Omens, Wound Cards, and Gifts (special abilities). Back in 2019 when this was released cards were all the rage. EVERYTHING had cards, and some of them were even limited availability just to encourage the FOMO \ Gotta catch them all thing. Luckily Mortal Gods didn't, but it did rely heavily on cards to carry the info that in the past would maybe be handled by army lists and playsheets. This is a bugger if you want to introduce a game to a new player "It's great but you cant play without the cards so tough" etc

So now I'm speculating (based on conversations with folks in "The Industry") but cards are expensive. Compared to the other content, printed materials are a major cost factor. You can't do without rules, and playsheets are pretty much essential, but other printed "stuff" like cards or counters ain't cheap. Plastic figures - what usually draws the punters in, is ridiculously cheap to manufacture once the frame \ mould is created. I'd wager in many cases the cardboard box almost costs more than the figures inside. Here the Mortal Gods starter set was already in a happy place because the project was a collaboration with Victrix, who had already made the Hoplite and other figure sprues. The problem is the Mortal Gods starter had 163 cards in there. When Footsore planned the game they will have bought x sets of cards, which would be enough for their expected production run. No idea, but let's say a thousand just to work with. They got the printing done at a bulk discount, but what happens when you sell them all? Crap! You probably can't expect to sell another thousand sets any time soon as the peak demand will have passed, but printing cards in smaller batches is going to ramp up the costs. So cards strangle wargames. 

Footsore have obviously realised this and have converted the info on the cards into a more traditional roster system and tables. They have done the same with their Gangs of Rome game which in v1 released with lots of individual cards but now have shifted to playsheets and roster sheets for v2. 

So I've bought some Hoplites and will hopefully be playing some more games soon.

*It's a skirmish \ warband game set in Ancient Greece, a little bit like Warlord's SPQR except it works . I forgot to explain that !

The God of Lost Things

Quick moment of whimsy. All gamers are aware of "The God of Lost Things" (GOLT).

You know, that entity that hides the thing you are looking for that you know was just there. I'm aware of two sure-fire ways of placating him\her.

1. Buy the lost thing again. This is drastic but sometimes required. It is usual that once you have ordered the "thing" the original will turn up. Current prime example is the roof section of a Pegasus Hobbies Russian building. I got so frustrated I ordered a replacement. Guess what I found today while looking for.....

2. The other method is to accept and mollify the GOLT by sacrificing something else. While searching for the other lost thing you will almost always find the thing you lost before the one you are looking for.

I'm currently suffering from the following GOLT depredations:

A set of 20x40mm mdf bases to allow me to progress my Warmaster Lizardmen. I've decided to go for solution 1 and ordered some more from Warbases. The originals will turn up tomorrow, probably lodged in a shoe or something.

Not one but two Exacto knives. (I bought a spare "just in case" but didn't take account of the GOLT. Both were sighted mere days ago in my tool tin, but are no longer there......

A set of laser cut shingle tiles I ordered when I realised the aforementioned Pegasus Hobbies roof section was missing. Having ordered another I was going to mod the original with a new roof so they looked different. But I cant find them...........

Anyone else have experience of this and any other solutions??

Traits in Blood Red Skies 1 - Turning

I thought it may be interesting to share some thoughts on Traits and the like in Blood Red Skies. Part one is about traits that effect turning.

There are currently only three Traits that relate to turning, Tight Turn, Rapid Roll, and Biplane. Lets look at them one by one.

Tight Turn (TT). Probably the most useful trait in the game, at least for novice players (and me!), accounting for more shot down Me109Es than any other factor in BRS. TT allows you to take your "normal" 45 degree turn at any point in your move, not just at the end. Planes with TT such as Spitfires, Zeros and Yaks find it much easier to set shots up, get into tailing positions, or even just get into the safety of clouds. It is a damned useful trait. Additionally for the more advanced players TT acts as a bonus card for a number of doctrines. Of these Aggressive Tactics is probably the most potent, allowing you to take an additional 45 degree turn at the start of the move, in effect giving you a 90 degree turn at the start, or two 45 degree turns. Defensive Tactics is in vogue at the moment with players who are using the optional "Deflection Shot" rule. Defensive Tactics can turn a rear shot into a deflection shot (though it can't prevent becoming disadvantaged through tailing) or a deflection shot into a head to head. I'm not so sure of its value however as a canny opponent can use the turns of Defensive Tactics to break up your formation, and it is at heart a defensive option. TT costs 3 points.

Rapid Roll (RR). Often seen as a poor man's TT, RR allows you to take your turn at the start of the move ONLY, rather than at any time like TT. As such it is clearly not as flexible as TT, and is often overlooked. Where RR shines for me however is the synergy with doctrines. In addition to Defensive Tactics RR combines with Slashing Attack, allowing a bonus firepower dice (Edit - I need to RTFM) hits to become Crits when you dive into an attack. In the new Meta with deflection shots needing Crits this is a big deal, or my particular favourite Low Altitude Performance, which means you will never be disadvantaged after activation, and you can climb from disadvantaged to advantaged in one turn. This has a number of benefits - such as allowing you to burn advantage to dive even when you start disadvantaged, or if you are lucky, set up a shot that your opponent doesn't think is possible. Not bad for 2 points.

Biplane. This is a new Positive Trait, officially only introduced in Air Strike. Biplane allows you a free 45 degree turn at the start of your activation. In theory this could stack with Tight Turn and Aggressive Tactics to give you a 135 degree turn! The down side is this is an "always on" and comes with some disadvantages - you can't climb for advantage within 9" of an enemy and your dive is restricted to 3" not 6". Biplane doesn't have any synergy with particular doctrines. As Biplane has both positive and negative aspects it is a free trait.

Lastly there is one other turn based Trait that may be making an appearance. Andy Chambers has always felt that Tight Turn is a bit of a blunt instrument that doesn't reflect some aircraft handling - particularly those that either have exceptional slow speed handling or some mechanical options such as manoeuvre slats that only work at slow speed. The classic example is the Zero, which turned very well at slow speed but became quite heavy on the controls as speed increased. To solve this he is thinking of introducing a new trait "No Stalling" (NS). NS will allow a plane to move between 1" and half speed and turn at any point in that range - basically a half speed TT. This may  get applied to the A6M2 Zero in the new Midway starter set, but others that could potentially benefit would be the P38Js with their redesigned dive flaps, Me109Es with their manoeuvre slats, or the Fairy Firefly with its Fowler Flaps. Personally I don't like the name, but I do like the capability this trait will bring, and anyway, Andy gets the final vote :-).  This is quite a big change and may wait to Blood Red Skies Version 2, where some re balancing of stats is probable, so don't get too excited yet.

I hope you fond that interesting and useful - if so, or if you disagree, please post a comment below.

Next we can move from the horizontal to the vertical, and look at the Traits that work with diving and climbing.

And if you like this sort of thing, why not click the "follow" button up there on the right to get updates?

I'd also recommend the Lead Pursuit podcast which is full of BRS "stuff".

Merry Christmas! - War is back!

Just a thought based on some discussions at our local wargames club. There seems to be an over saturation of what I have called "Boutique" games - you know the type, small figure count, 3 foot table etc etc. Every month we see the next "Big Thing", which gets replaced in a month or so. I'm sensing a growing appetite for a return to "traditional" games with higher figure count, games where you can sweep your arm across a table full of models. Should I jump on board?

The problem of course is commitment. Playing a Grand Manner style game of say Napoleonics requires a metric sh!t ton* of figures - a dozen 36 man battalions is 436 figures - and even if you take the quick way (which I would) and have everyone in Greatcoat that's a major commitment of painting time. Then again, we have done it before, and relative cost of individual plastic figures for units is still cheap, the total cost is considerable.  Perry's are £20 a box of 40 ish figures - damned good value, but still an outlay of £200+ just on the infantry. As I said, commitment.

And I don't think I'm quite there yet. Hopefully 2020 will see the return of Impetus 2 to my gaming nights, and some more Chain of Command - both fairly "hefty" sized games. I'm also still deeply enamoured with Blood Red Skies (no surprise there).

Over the holidays I'm going to try and get my new WW2 Dutch Marines painted before I go back to work in the New Year - not much chance, but it wont get done unless I start, so tomorrow is going to be first steps - cleaning them up, and getting them stuck to their bases which will be 1p pieces - a sad reflection on the value of our currency when it is cheaper to use coins than plastic bases :-)

Cheers, and Merry Christmas 

* We are still using the metric system in the UK, however once Brexit is out the way I suspect we will shift back, so you will need an Imperial sh!t ton at that point. 

Soft vs Hard

I suspect this is going to cause some comments. I should say from the outset I'm not attempting to cast any doubt on the bravery of anyone. That being said, on to the main part....

I'm busy painting up some Germans for Chain of Command to use in the rather excellent Blitzkrieg 1940 campaign supplement from Two Fat Lardies. Actually my "cunning plan" is to add to the stuff I already have for Stalingrad, as the infantry are pretty much interchangeable so all I need is some new (earlier) vehicles. This is turning out to be predictably more complicated than first envisaged, but that is something for a later post.  All that got me thinking about how we wargamers value hard stats, and tend to disregard the soft ones.

I'm going to use two examples to explain this. The Char B, and the Douglas TBD Devastator. 

The Char B is well regarded by history and wargamers. On the table top it is an absolute beast, with an excellent 47mm gun in the turret to engage armour, and a short barrelled 75mm howitzer in the hull to shoot softer targets. The 75 is rather strange in that it is fixed - you aim the gun by aiming the tank - actually the driver aims and fires the 75mm using a complex but quite responsive steering system. The Char B also has very heavy armour, particularly on the front. When we read about it, and French tanks in general, the usual comments are that the tanks are excellent but the French deployed them in "penny packets" which meant the Germans could concentrate their tanks and beat the French monsters piecemeal.  You can't read about the Char B without getting the story of  Captain Pierre Billotte and his attack at the village of Stonne, where his tank Char B1 "Eure" on it's own managed to break through the German positions and destroyed thirteen Panzers which he caught in a line on the main street, which seems to support the "good tank" theory. Bilotte said he ordered his hull gun to engage the last panzer while he used the turret gun on the lead one, and then having blocked both ends of the street with wrecks proceeded to work his way down the column, apparently taking 140 hits that bounced off his thick armour in the process, before calmly heading back to his start point. 

This is a preserved Char B, actually in Stonne as a memorial to the battle.

Stirring stuff. The problem is, that really seems to be it. I've been reading through German reports and after a week or so of frustration, it seems pretty much that Billotte and his rampage is almost unique, and when we look at French tanks fighting German ones, even the mighty Char B, they are totally useless. Germans do lose lots of tanks, but not to French tanks. The French anti tank gunners and artillery both perform very well, but the tanks do almost nothing.  So what about the penny packets? I really can't see any evidence this is the case. Billotte may have carried out his devastating lone ride on his own, but he started with a company of 7 tanks and managed to lose the other 6. In fact he is a good example of what went wrong as he was the Company Commander yet he got separated from the rest of his unit and due to the poor communications and some sort of brain fade he ends up on his own. Company Commanders really shouldn't do this. It is true that French tanks were often outnumbered, but even when they were not, they don't seem to have performed very well against other tanks.

The thing about the Char B however is that although the "hard" stats look good, gun, armour etc the soft stats, the things we don't really represent well in wargames, are awful. Really awful. These problems are twofold. Firstly visibility. All tanks have visibility problems, French tanks are probably the worse of the bunch because unlike everyone else the French didn't believe in turret hatches and instead fitted their tanks with a domed cupola. The Commander couldn't stick his head up to look around. Instead the French had doors in the back of the turret that the TC would have to squirm through to see outside. How bad this feature is cannot be over stressed. German accounts speak of Panzers simply driving past French tanks at ranges of 80-100 meters and the French apparently not even seeing them.  If he did see something he then would have to get back in the turret to communicate with the crew, and that's when the real (second) problem starts. 

This pic above shows a Char B being loaded onto a tank transporter at Saumur tank museum. You can clearly see the commanders rear turret "door \ seat". 

The second problem is that the Commander isn't just the commander, he is also the gunner for the 47mm AND co ax MG. He also loads them. He is also supposed to command the tank, instruct the rest of the crew and if he is a platoon or Company Commander, direct the other tanks too. He doesn't have a seat in the turret either, unless he has the rear turret hatch open and he sits on the outside.

So let's talk through an engagement scenario.  The commander is sat outside, protected a little from fire directly to his front by the bulk of the turret, but against shell splinters or anything approaching him from any other angle he is totally exposed. His B1 is advancing slowly - it's not a fast tank, and anyway unlike most tanks the driver cant get instructions about where to drive very well because the commander, on his turret door seat, can't see forward where the tank is driving. This may help explain the number of pictures of Char Bs abandoned in roadside ditches. How he communicates with the rest of the tank crew from that position is something of a mystery anyway. Hopefully he sees his target - so he quickly shimmies back into the turret - losing his view of the target in the process, and remember his tank is moving, and he has no seat, so he is getting thrown around inside a metal box banging his head on the walls no doubt. Now he has a choice - he can either rotate the turret - and at least here the APX turret is electrically powered, then lay the gun on target, or load the gun. On this last one he does have some help - there is a radio operator below him in the hull who can at least pass him the shells for his 47mm, and the gun is primarily an anti tank gun so choice of ammo is not that much of a problem. So he loads the 47mm AP the radio man  has passed up to him - and then where is the target? He has three options. He can jump back out onto his turret door \ seat to get a fairly clear view, or he can use the rotating cupola and try to locate the target through the very narrow slits in it, or he can use the gunners sight. The best view is of course from the rear turret door, but there is a war going on out there. The view from the cupola is very limited, and the gunners sight is basically a telescope that has excellent focus but almost zero field of view. If he uses the cupola once he has located the target he must move out of that position into the gunner's position - losing the target again, but hopefully if he has got the turret lined up and both the target and his tank haven't moved far he can use the gunners sight and take the shot. If he misses, or more likely  momentarily loses sight of the target when the gun goes off six inches from his ear, he has to reload, then re-acquire, aim then.....

You can see where this is going. In this light the German stories of French tanks just stopping in the middle of a field and apparently allowing the panzers to just drive around at their leisure and shoot them in the rear starts to make sense. In comparison a PzIII has a three man turret. The Commander has a split hatch with rotating cupola. Even in combat he can drop the bulk of his body through the hatch and fight the tank "head up" to maintain visibility and situational awareness. He has internal communication with his crew via headsets and a throat mike. His job is to command his tank, and coordinate with the others in the platoon, nothing more. The gunner has nothing to do other than follow his commander's instructions til he locates the target, and then shoot. After each shot he can keep the target in his sights because the loader will load the gun for him. My money is on the panzer - every time. So what happened at Stonne?

To put this in context, Stonne was a very intense fight. The village changed hands 17 times in three days. French sources compared the close and vicious infantry fighting that took place there to Verdun in the First World War, and some Germans compared it to Stalingrad. 

According to reports Billotte approached down the road and suddenly came face to face with this column of panzers at 30 meter range. Now at this point the story starts to sound a bit strange. I can believe he didn't see the panzers, given the problems with his tanks visibility, but it seems a stretch that they didn't see him in his rather large tank. It also seems strange that he could order his driver to do the "shoot the rear tank" trick and shoot a tank thirteen tanks down a column when at the same time the panzers cant just turn around and drive away? Are they really parked nose to tail in the middle of a battle? If they are - how do you shoot the thirteenth - surely the line of fire s blocked by all those parked panzers?? Remember, the Char B cant fire the 75mm on the move............. It just seems strange. I also can't find any German reports that directly corroborate this event, though they do note the loss of 25 tanks in the three day battle. This map claims to show the route taken by Billotte, and if it's accurate, his gunner could not see the other end of the column.

Here is the village today on Google Earth - the road layout remarkably unchanged from 1940 though many of the buildings that lined the road have now gone.

Maybe not all the tanks claimed were killed on the day, maybe some are victims of the earlier battles and get included in the total anyway? Then again, if the Germans do sit it out and try and shoot the Char B in the face their chance of success isn't that high. I also wonder how much the Bonny Tyler factor kicked in. At the end of WW2 France was very much a country riven by internal division and self doubt. After the disaster of 1940 there was a great deal of finger pointing and scapegoating. In some ways this is still happening today, with various explanations being offered for the French collapse in 1940. This is understandable, and a nation in such a position, as Bonnie famously said "Needs a Hero". Billotte is a great candidate, a dashing tank commander who also happened to be the son of a high ranking general (sorry I forgot to mention that). 

My second example is a plane that all wargamers know is a pile of crap - the Douglas TBD Devastator, a byword for mediocrity.

In two major engagements in 1942 the Devastator Squadrons achieved almost precisely zero (pun intended) and lost the vast majority of their planes in doing so - losses at Midway topped 90%. Actually that's a bit unfair as the TBDs did manage to cripple the light carrier Shoho at Coral Sea, but.....

The problem is when you look at the hard stats the TBD isn't that bad. OK it is certainly slow, particularly in comparison to Japanese aircraft or land based planes, but this can also be compared with the British Fairy Swordfish, an antiquated biplane that still managed to give useful service through WW2 and accounted for damaging \ sinking several battleships and 20 odd submarines, and the Swordfish makes the Devastator look decidedly sprightly. Why did it do so badly?

The answer is, really, it didnt. At Midway there were six new TBF Avengers based on the island. The Avenger is acclaimed as one of the better torpedo planes of WW2. but they lost 5 out of 6 trying to attack the Japanese fleet, and achieved no hits. This pattern is repeated regularly with torpedo bombers throughout the war - against any sort of fighter opposition they simply fail to perform, to the extent that in the USN retired most torpedo squadrons or converted them to bombing units. To some extent the Japanese are the exception, their superbly trained crews pushed their Kates through to point blank range before dropping, but also suffered crippling losses in the process so they simply could not do it again.

I think the Devastator's bad rep is therefore not really to do with a measurable deficiency in equipment or capability, the "hard" stats, but more about the environment and circumstances they were deployed in, the "soft" factors we find hard to represent in our games. Char Bs have good "hard" stats but lousy "soft" ones, so do much better in games than their real performance would justify, Devastators are seen as a disaster without recognising that any plane that has to fly low, slow and in a straight line to make an attack will get mauled by an even vaguely capable defence 

So there you go, some musings on hard and soft stats and factors that maybe we should be more aware of. There are many other examples, equipment that has a bad reputation with gamers (Sherman) but were loved by their crews because they were easy to live and work in.

All of which wont help when that bloody Char B rolls down the road, but at least I can say in "real life" it would probably just have been abandoned in the nearest ditch.

Cheers

Warlord Games Open Day - The Future is Bright, and Blood Red

So back from the Warlord Games Open Day, with a bunch of updates and general BRS related information gleaned by attending the seminar by Andy Chambers - Internationally Renowned Games Designer (or IRDG for short) and also cunning interrogation techniques worthy of the KGB.

So all that aside here we go, and in no particular order

1. Warlord are planning a second Blood Red Skies Starter set for release "next year". It will follow the same format as the Battle of Britain one but will be centred on Pacific carrier warfare - Midway being the focus. Still in development but Plastic Wildcats (huzzah!) and Zeros. The Zero is slated to be the same one from the current release - ie the later A6M5 not the A6M2 that should be there - rivet counters like me will be disappointed but the costs of another tool when the models are so close visually it doesn't make financial sense, however the stats and cards will be different (I assume). Lots still unanswered such as will the Wildcats be hard or soft plastic, when is it expected etc, but plenty to be hopeful for - would expect some new scenarios involving torpedo and dive bombing too. ETA "Next Year"

2. Card packs. Warlord are releasing card packs (Hallelujah!) to allow some expansion. These will be Nation specific sets to allow you to play aircraft that are not available yet. The example given for the RAF was it would include later marks of Spitfire, plus possibly Typhoons and Hurricanes, plus the associated Trait and Doctrine cards. Similar packs for US, German, Russian and Japanese, with the possibility of USN\USMC and Italians. First release expected "early in the New Year"

3. Plastic expansions. We saw "test shots" of the new Hurricanes, Mosquito, Fw190 and Me110. Test shots are pre production models that are run to test the mould for issues before it goes into production. They are hard plastic NOT the soft of the current releases. They still have a couple of issues but initial impression was very favourable - I will do a full post on this later but for now thumbs up. Hurricanes and Mosquito's release is expected early November, 190 and 110 January (ish). No idea if the production ones will be pre coloured - forgot to ask (doh!). On the subject of hard plastic, it is unlikely the current "soft" plastic models will be re released in hard plastic if it means new mould plates, again a question of economics over desirability.

4. Plastic Yanks. This slipped out in conversation but the next plastic set AFTER the Germans will be US and will be the P40 and P38 - no confirmed date but next year.

5. More metal. I've rattled on about why BRS should be in plastic or resin not metal but I could be wrong. Warlord hope so - they've released the Wildcat set in metal and I bought it to try it out. Again I will be doing a fuller review at a later date. The advantage of metal is the individual models are more expensive to produce but the set up costs are far less - the upshot being if the Wildcats and Kates sell we may see some more in metal. They have already done the 3D design work on Beaufighters and Ju87s for Cruel Seas (more later) and they see no reason why they could not upscale them to 1:200. If the metals work we could see more by the end of this year so......glass half full I suppose.

6. More Aces. There is a good chance we will see more aces, at least two for each release. Bombo Schenk, Otto Kittel and Pips Priller got a mention. Ace packs are a good way for Warlord to fill release schedules as they will use existing models and they give players more options.

Andy Chambers IRGD is busy on new ground attack rules and missions for BRS too. We playtested his early draft High Altitude Interception scenario and it worked rather well - needs tweaks but where it went wrong was more me trying to push too much in rather than problems with the scenario, which I suppose is why IRGD is IRGD :-)

So overall I came away from the Open Day feeling quite positive for the future of BRS. It was pretty clear reading between the lines Warlord were surprised by the success of BRS and they are taking a bit of time adjusting, but they are getting there. I also bagged a test shot Mossie and Hurricane so I will be able to do a more in depth look at those later.

What do you think - comments welcome below

EDIT I forgot 7. Warlord have a deal with Rebellion who have the rights to the old 2000AD and other UK Comics. This is of interest to BRS players because that includes "Battle", and therefore "Johnny Red". There was a mention of a special Ace \ Squadron box for this , which could conceivably include some Russian planes along with the signature Hurricane.

EDIT I also forgot 8 (old age I suppose) but the possibility of Jets was discussed, with WW2 being pretty much certain, but also extending into the Cold War and possibly Alt History 1946 etc - not the weird war stuff, more the new tech. Similarly pushing the system back to 1914-18. All that seems perfectly possible, at least up to the arrival of the missile which may mess with the way Advantage works, so more to look forward to.

     

Show report - Border Reiver, Gateshead

There has been a couple of wargames shows cancelled over the last year - Derby being the latest, although given how piss poor it was in 2017 that's no surprise. Triples also seems to have breathed its last. That means in the North we are losing opportunities to wander around and look at the toys in person rather than on line. I'm a bit saddened by this.

With that in mind I decided it may be worth while to have a run up to Gateshead for the Border Reiver show held at the Gateshead International Stadium yesterday.

Border Reiver this year was not bad at all. There was a fairly upbeat feeling in the room, and footfall on the morning seemed quite reasonable. There were some traders - Warlord being the most noteworthy, but most of the rest were fairly local rather than "national" and as a result at least for me the choice was not great - in fact I only had 2 definite items on my shopping list, and I managed to find neither - though one trader has kindly agreed to forward one item post free - which was very welcome. The two biggest "misses" on the trade side were Old Glory, and Dave Thomas. I think OG had decided to stay away due to previous poor customer turn out. Dave Thomas has decided that after years of trading at just about every show in the land, it was time to put up his feet and enjoy the weekends. Gateshead was the first show I have attended where he was a regular, and I have to say he was missed. I doubt he will read this, but just in case can I say "Thanks" for the years of service and chats up and down the country - first rate gang and I suspect a big set of boots to fill.

DTs stall at a previous show

I would stress the show overall was quite good - well organised and a good venue, so hopefully they can grow and maybe attract more gamers and traders next year.  

Stalingrad Campaign - Day 2, into the Kill House and thoughts on Chain of Command

It was my turn this week to try to push the Russian patrols out of Fallen Heroes Square using Chain of Command (CoC).

I won't go into a blow by blow after action report for a couple of reasons. The main one is that we at the Old Codgers Gaming Club (OCGC) have four members and three of us have Blogs, so it seems a good idea to take it in turns to run the battle reports when the others are playing. This division of labour should mean we are free to play and enjoy the game without the constant urge to take photos and make notes. In theory at least. Day 2 s patrol action is covered on Andy's Blog which can be found here

https://rangoruk.blogspot.com/

Mark will also be covering this too - but he is a bit partisan so take what he says with a pinch of salt!

http://exiledfog.blogspot.com/

I can give a quick run down on "the cunning plan" which was to push forward with only 3 patrol markers right up the centre of the table to try and gain some advanced Jump Off Points (JOPS) then just kick the Soviets out by brute force in close assaults with our "HandGranaten!" tactics before their numerical advantage kicked in. It sort of worked. My Pioneers are rated Elite so they can deploy further forward than Regulars, and they're better in close assaults and slightly less likely to be hit by small arms fire. We managed to grab one building but the fighting in and around it was fierce and casualties were very heavy on both sides. The Soviets withdrew, handing a somewhat Pyrrhic victory to the Germans. It was an interesting game but it showed up our "ring rustiness" with the CoC rules - we made several slips, but they probably evened out so no real damage done.

What it also did was make me think of why I like Chain so much (see - I nearly typed something else there). I think it comes down to something I had not really thought about before - pressure to be competent. Unlike any other set of WW2 rules I have played CoC rewards competence and punishes incompetence with usually equal measure. Because the games are brutal and unforgiving if you screw up you only have yourself to blame. In a campaign setting that is even more apparent. I'm really enjoying our campaign, but the pressure really is on.

Obergefreiter Michael Baumbach will not be returning to Ausburg

Day 3 will be a German attempt to probe the Soviet lines in preparation for the main assault.

When the web was young one man stood for all that was good and proper and British!

And his name was .......................

Major General Tremorden Redderring.

I discovered The Major General's site about an hour after first logging on the the internet - probably from the local library - something like that, it was a long time ago. I fell under the spell of that eclectic eccentric at once, and remain there to this day. What makes the Redderring so good is that it is clear from the outset that he and his mates are also having loads of fun. Their games take place in a fictional late 19th Century colonial setting - Ouragistan, and vary from game to game from "straight" Colonial gaming to some rather more VSF (Victorian Science Fiction) - Steam Punk before we knew what that was.

In many ways he reminds me forcibly of Richard Clarke of Two Fat Lardies fame - he likes to tell a story with his games. Actually it was listening to the Lord of Lard on a recent podcast that made me look up old Rederring again, as Rich was musing as he does about the difference between the beautiful staged photos in our War Games magazines, compared to the stuff on our table. Clarkie is no mean brushman himself, but as he said, we shouldn't be put off because our toys are pedestrian compared to the stuff in the magazines.  And he has a point. The Major General was firmly in the "good enough for the table" category too (some stuff was beautiful) but also him and his group of friends who he played with also shared a lot with TFL  they have vision and style. They also liked to "go large", something we seem to be in danger of losing in a world of a dozen figures a side on a 3x3 table.

Sadly the Major General's site is no more, but thanks to the amazing scientific advances and the Mackintosh Patent Galvanic Analytical Engine you can still find a facsimile preserved here HERE , frozen in time from 2006.

Have a look - you wont regret it, but you will need your stiff upper lip and pith helmet :-)

What is even more surprising is the Major General is in fact an American named David Helber. Who would have thought it? I'd like to take the opportunity to thank him for the inspirational stuff he produced (and also curse him because as a direct result of his damned games I still have a box of bits that will one day become an HM Landship but til then is taking up storage space in my loft). Fine chap.

and I hope he doesnt mind me pinching the portrait ............




  

Spring is here! April excitement, Salute, plans and plots

April in the UK is great. Spring is here, beautiful crisp sunny mornings (between about 9.02 and 9:30 am), flowers appear, lots of daffodils, and for the wargaming community, we all come out of hibernation to sniff the fresh air, soak up the sunshine, and for Salute, this year held on April 14th at the ExCel.

Salute remains wargamings big UK event. VERY big. I've a love\hate relationship with Salute. In the past I've had a mixed day at Salute - sometimes it can be overwhelming and for me it is a long haul - 260 miles each way and no change out of 4 and a half hours drive, plus another hour in the queue. I've been a couple of times by train and last year the luxury of a car share where I got to be the passenger all the way both ways. This year I'm "designated driver" but we've wangled some accommodation so the cunning plan is to cruise down Friday then Tube \ DLR to the ExCel. It can be a pain getting in but once you get in however, well, you get to feel the love :-).

This year I'm helping demo Dropfleet Commander at the TT Combat DZC pitch, alongside Emily K who is demoing Dropzone Commander. I'm looking forward to this as it will be the first chance to meet the new TT Combat DZC\DFC team and chat about "the future" after they took over Hawk Wargames. Additionally there will be the "show specials" available, plus hopefully the new Dropfleet Destroyers on sale for the first time. That could be expensive :-(

But there's more! Rather a lot of companies use Salute as a showcase and launch games to coincide. This year there are two games I am really looking forward to playing -  "What a Tanker" from Two Fat Lardies, and (no surprise) Blood Red Skies from Warlord Games. WAT has a release date of 9th April but Rich (the Lard Meister) is running a "rolling" demo game where you can just turn up, drive a tank around to get a feel for the game mechanics, have fun, then probably blow up!

Blood Red Skies isn't due for release until mid May but customers who pre ordered (err me !) will get theirs a month before or can arrange to pick up at Salute - there's a link here if you want to do that - and if you have not pre ordered if you are quick you may still get one. Warlord are planning to have a limited supply available at Salute, and they're running a stunning demo with a 1:200 scale attack on the USS Hornet which should be spectacular.

And then there's the other stuff that you just run across when you are wandering (assuming I can escape the stand for a while).

So it is looking like a rather busy April, and I'm really looking forward to these new games landing.

On the subject of Sporing and Spring Cleaning I've done a bit of tidying up here on the Blog, a couple of layout changes, and importantly a nice, shiny new "follow" button which for some reason (probably my incomprehension) should have been there all along but wasn't. It's over here somewhere near the top ================================>>>>>>>>>
Please click it - not only will you get notifications on any updates here but you will also (probably) get a nice warm feeling from knowing you are making a curmudgeonly old gamer a bit happier. Thanks :-)

As Richard Sharpe would say - "Aim low, fire more often"

The internet is a wonderful thing. It allows us to see and share our projects, the materials and techniques we use, and in doing so can be a great source of inspiration. Have a look here and you can see what I mean Canister & Grape blog  Superb work.

Musing a while however, I am also aware that there is also a danger of making comparisons with others projects, and finding yours wanting, becoming disillusioned with the result of another shelved project. This has happened to me countless times in the past.

Looking back at those Boxer Rebellion buildings I mentioned in the last blog post, it is fair to say they are OK, but not great. Of course I would like to be great, and I probably possess some of the skills (not all) to improve them. The question is, because they are not great, should I spend time and money making them better or plough on accepting "not Great" is "good enough"?  I could source some plastic tiled roof sections and incorporate them? Get some resin accessories? Buy in some mdf windows and doors etc?

I'm going to say "no" to all that at the moment, because above all else I've come to the conclusion that although they will never be up to a demonstration standard, what I really need now is to plough on and make the most \ best of what I\we have now so we have enough to make the game work. I can always come back and rejuvenate them at a later date, but for now what I want is volume, not accuracy. They're "good enough" for now

So how to progress? This afternoon, assuming the snow allows, I will spray another three buildings with the hope of getting them finished tonight. That's a bit ambitious I think, but time will tell.

Planning slightly further ahead I'm going to investigate using the same basic buildings as the more imposing Legation buildings. It may seem strange but the offset between the size and scale of the  buildings and the table area means any attempt at a realistic model is doomed to failure. That being said all we need is something representative, and having accepted that, maybe there is some use to be had recycling the old carcasses . I'll stare meaningfully at them tomorrow and see what I can come up with.

Current Projects - Project Creep and Abstinence

Its been a bit quiet on the blog front - mainly due to Real World stuff, but also because I have been fairly single minded in trying to get some of the lead mountain painted and ready to play, so rather than hitting the keyboard I've been using a paintbrush.

I've also decided to pair down the number of games I'm buying into for a couple of months just to allow myself time to enjoy what I already have. This has meant some "culling" and abstaining from games that I would usually be very interested in. Current abstentions being Gangs of Rome, Dreadball 2, Tanks (ok not that hard to abstain as the game is DOA around here) and Dr Who.

The "Big Project" this year is going to be Stalingrad in 28mm for Chain of Command. To that effect I have been sticking together and assembling German Pioneers from Warlord Games, plus supports. The original plan has started to expand to include at least 4 tables of themed terrain - more on that later.

The "new" project is going to be Blood Red Skies - assuming it takes of (geddit?) I think this is a no-brainer because unlike a lot of games where the rules are an excuse to sell minis or jump on a franchise these rules were developed by that Andy Chambers bloke because he thought WW2 dogfighting hadn't been done properly. They have been his pet project for years - the delay has been down to him trying to convince games manufacturers there is a market. Having tried them, I have to say I think theyre pretty darned good and am therefore getting ready for the release in April.

And the dark horse is .............. Boxer Rebellion in 28mm. I've been looking for a multi player \ Beer & Pretzels type game I can run at our local club - Hartlepool Wargames Society. I saw some "fun" games of Rourkes Drift run at Asgard Wargames at Middlesbrough and using "The Men Who Would Be Kings" rules and thought they would work well for Boxers - so I'm slowly prepping for that too.

That's about all for the mo - some pics of work in progress to follow once I get that damned Heinkel sawed up :-) 

Musings on models - production and the future

I'm busy tooling up for a Stalingrad campaign using Chain of Command in 28mm along with a couple of friends Andy, Mark & Paul. Blogs from a couple of them can be found here and here and are well worth a look.

Anyway we were exchanging progress pics and I sent this one of some of my support options currently getting painted up. Left is a Perry Miniatures Pak 38 in metal from their Afrika Korps range, centre is a Warlord Games leIG18, right is a Rubicon Models Pak 36 and lurking at the back is a Butlers Printed Models StuIG 33.

In between banter it struck me that this pic shows just how varied and diverse our supply of toys has become, and also highlights the way technology is moving forward, even for hobbyists like us. The Perry and Warlord models are "traditional" metal, mastered (I assume) by hand from plasticard, brass rod and greenstuff then converted into production models and cast in a centrifugal casting machine. That can mean mould lines, flash and warping (though mercifully both were almost free from those) They're sold in plastic blister packs with only a generic card back.  They're both very nice too, but are still being made the way we've been making wargames models for the last 50 years and if we had the talent you or I could set up with limited outgoings and do the same (though clearly not as well) from the garage. In fact the only thing that has changed about the whole process as far as I can tell since I started wargaming in the late 1970s is the packaging, which once upon a time would probably be a zip lock bag or cardboard box.

The Rubicon Pak 36 is a CAD (Computer Aided Design) model, digitally mastered which has then been converted to an injection moulded plastic kit. Detail is therefore precise and crisp. This is a big step up both in technology and scale of production. The mould needed to produce this kit is very expensive (relatively) and therefore only viable with production runs spin casters could only dream of. Injection moulding brings more detail and precision - unlike spin casting every model should be the same, and flash and mould lines are minimal. The kit is packaged "commercially" in a full coloured printed box with printed instructions. This is a quantum leap ahead of the other two, though you could reasonably argue that when viewed at the distance you would when they were on the table you would be hard pushed to tell the difference.

The Butlers StuIG is a 3d print. It's also the budget option. In all honesty the detail is ok but not great - in fact it is positively poor on the running gear particularly, and there are areas where it has failed to print such as the front tracks, but as you can see, it painted up well enough. I'm not going to harp on about 3d printing being the next big thing - I did that a few years ago when I first saw the Shapeways aircraft for Wings of War. The difference is that 3d printing is now within the reach of "Joe Wargamer" - in fact I know of at least two local chaps who have taken the plunge and got 3d printers. At the moment this is still an art or craft rather than a full on manufacturing capability, but assuming the usual laws of cost and capability continue, we will see both costs fall and quality rise on home 3d printing - then, well who knows?

I suppose I should mention prices. All the guns came in at around £12-£13 including crew (3 on the leIG, 4 on the Pak38 and 5 on the Pak 36) The StuIG was also £12. At the time I ordered it I thought it was the only model of this vehicle available in this scale but I later found out Company B do one - albeit for £30ish.

Only one day late.... weekly Wednesday update

I had planned to have a Blood Red Skies update, but for a variety of reasons that hasn't happened yet.

In fact the last week has flown by but without a great deal of progress. Actually there has been some progress. I finished painting another half dozen AWI Militia and I can now go ahead and play another Sharp Practice campaign game in confidence - or rather I will once the next batch of movement trays arrive from Warbases but they tend to be fast and efficient.

No progress on Shadespire - actually a bit of a retrograde step as I bought the Ork expansion to get to the non orkish cards in the pack , which is as good an example of why you should avoid this sort of game (I'm looking at you X-Wing) like the plague.

The big news I suppose was the game of Zombiecide, which my non gaming non geek wife actually enjoyed and was interested in having another go. After 20+ years of marriage this is something of an eye opener - who knew?

Other big news is I pre-ordered by set of Blood Red Skies. Getting too close to release date to miss out.

So the big picture is the "Pile of Shame" aka unpainted figures has reduced by an aggregate of 2 figures this week.

That's all for now folks!

Another interlude followed by a resolution

I've always tried to post when I have something to post about, usually a new project, a nice model or game report or whatever. The problem is that can mean long interludes where nothing gets posted up, because I'm either busy with "real world" stuff, or alternatively so busy having fun with playing toys soldiers that I cant be arsed to take the required photographs to illustrate the blog posts. This is a bit of a flaw.

So in an attempt to impose some discipline and structure I'm now planning to post at least once a week, probably Wednesdays. That will also mean my current scattergun approach to subject matter will also almost certainly get worse. C'est la Guerre I suppose.

So whats happened recently I hear no-one ask?

Well I visited Warlord Games for their 10th Birthday and had a really interesting time. There's so much musing there that can wait for another post. Also I resolved NOT to get involved in any new projects, and self righteously abstained from buying into Ghost Archipelago only to order Shadespire in a moment of weakness (thanks to Jamie White) and I'm sure I can follow that up with a detailed look later.

In other news one of my favourite game companies Hawk Wargames has been bought out by TT Combat. I'm pretty conflicted by that. I was (and possibly still am?) part of the Talon demo team for Hawk. They give me toys for playing their games with strangers. This is a good thing. Both Hawk games, Dropzone Commander and Dropfleet Commander are excellent games with superb miniatures and the head Honcho Dave Lewis is as nice a chap as you could want to meet, and a superb designer too. All the Hawk staff are also clearly "in" to the game - they're gamers not businessmen - T-shirts not "Suits". All that being said it is clear that after the problems distributing the Kickstarter for Dropfleet, Hawk had some internal issues that they didn't or couldn't resolve. Rumours were rife they were in trouble, and then the news they are being bought out, but that Dropfleet & Dropzone are still live and Dave is still lead designer. TT are (as I understand) the miniatures arm of Troll Trader, and they in turn are Kingsley distribution. Both Troll and Kingsley have pretty impeccable records at organising the toys getting to the customer, but pretty much zero on design etc, so if TTC are providing the heavy lifting leaving Dave to do the design work this could be a good thing in the long run. That being said, no matter how you sugar coat it a buy out is a worrying thing. I understand TTC have already culled much of the Hawk staff. That is entirely understandable but must be personally hard for the individuals involved. I hope they manage to move on and upwards. Similarly I hope Dave has made the decision to sell up early enough so that he hasn't lost out too much either. These are starting to look like difficult times for gaming companies, with Spartan, then Hawk and I doubt they will be the last.  I'm going to leave the postmortem speculation to others for now.

So on that happy note I'll leave you for now

On being a Dick

So when does a game become bad for you, or bring out the worst?

I ask this because recently a friend and fellow blogger had a bit of an incident playing Bloodbowl and "lost it" because of his dice rolling. He's realised he stepped across a boundary and to prevent further instances he's sold off all his Bloodbowl stuff. His take on this is here pileofshame - and well worth a read.

The guy isn't a Dick, any more than any of us are. He's an affable and friendly sort of guy, but somehow the game got under his skin and made him act like a Dick. So why? And let's not pretend we don't all have those moments. I have seen tantrums, rages and dummy spitting that beggars belief, and have also been a perp too - in fact I can be a real Dick to play when the stars are wrong. In our club there is a now legendary story of a gamer getting so annoyed at his army that he scraped the lot into the bin! What makes this happen?

Is it something in us, or the game itself? Actually I'm sure its a bit of both, but there was a discussion about the way Bloodbowl in particular is based on a system of testing to fail, with the game being decided not so much by tactics but by a series of dice rolls, with a fail ending your turn. It follows that one turn in six will simply be a total disaster because of one dice roll - the first. Dreadball is better in that it actually rewards success, and even abject failure usually isn't a cataclysmic loss.

Is it the "sports" element - and buy that I mean the competition? All games are competitive, and all gamers are competitive too. I've met many who say they are not, but the truth is they are deluding themselves (or attempting to delude you!). Somehow "sports" games seem to emphasise that. Maybe it's something to do with their being a clear focus on points \ goal scoring  - a game of Impetus or similar Ancients mass battle rules set will not be decided by the roll of one dice or the performance of one unit, the victory goes to the player who uses his troops best overall. Sure you CAN lose by getting a General killed off by a fluke result, but those are so rare as to be memorable. Similar fails in Bloodbowl and most sports games happen just about every turn.

Is it just we gamers are competitive by nature and that some times we lose sight of the big picture and forget to play nice? Actually I think some guys ARE just cheats who twist the rules to breaking and beyond, but they are thankfully few and far between. I suspect there are many more of us that manage to conveniently forget the rules or add a few inches to a critical move in the heat of the moment, and hopefully feel remorseful about it later. Again for clarity I must admit to doing something similar in the past (clearly not now, I'm more relaxed and balanced - No Sir not me anymore.......)

Another issue is, just how far should you go with being open? I've seen and played several games where "things aint what they seem". "Oh I forgot to mention that's my General" or those peasant skirmishers with bows are actually elite Javelin men, or my "favourite" which happened to me in a Flames of War tourney - you need to kill 2 platoons to break a Company and win, bit the opponent is fielding multiple companies and wont identify which platoon is from which and only he can tell the difference.  Is that cheating? In all honesty I think it is.

Lastly, and probably the most difficult to address, is the dreaded "Rules Lawyer" who plays the rules for loopholes and exploits them, or the list maker, who exploits a weakness in the list writing mercilessly. Again I've done both in the past. This isn't cheating but its hardly fair and gentlemanly play either.  It is particularly galling as the players involved are all not only grown up enough to know better but are good enough players to win without it.

So to get back on topic, why do we sometimes lose it and act like a spoilt child, and what can we do about it?  My friend disposed of the offending game - I hope that works, even if I would question if it was the game or something else at the root of the problem.  I don't have a good answer, but when I realised I was slipping down that route I bought a hat. It's not very flattering and makes me look silly.  I now take it with me to tournaments and wear it to remind myself that its only a game and not to take it too seriously. So far it works, at least mostly.

I'll finish with a quote from Micheal Jackson - not someone I would usually take advice from, but in this case maybe it is appropriate.

"If you want to make the world a better place take a look at yourself and make a change".

Building an Impetus Army Part 3 - Ecce Romani

 or “What have the Romans ever done for us?”

The Early Imperial Roman Army is something of a classic. The hard core of the army are the Legionaries. These are the benchmark Heavy Infantry in Impetus, and they represent the Romans at their most basic, a simple and horribly efficient meat grinder. You feed the opposition in at the front and mincemeat comes out at the rear. You need to take a minimum of four units, and a theoretical maximum of twenty. At a basic cost of 28pts each they’re not cheap, and you can upgrade them to A class if you really want to push the point home.  The trick is to ensure you keep these efficient killers in fighting condition and get them into contact at the appropriate point. The rest of the army exists to funnel the opponent into the blades, or protect them from pesky things like cavalry and skirmishers. 

To do this you have two different supporting arms, both of which are worth getting. Firstly there is the Cavalry. Roman Cavalry is not very special. There is nothing wrong with them, it’s just that they’re a bit err, Meh. They can have some average medium cavalry, and a couple of javelin armed light horse. You don’t get enough of either to make them a main fighting arm, and the opposition are usually either better or more numerous, or both. That is in many ways fortunate in that it makes you concentrate on doing the main thing, staying uncommitted and keeping the opposition cavalry off the Legionaries until they’re in position to do their thing. 

The other troops you need are your light infantry. You get some Auxilia infantry, and a few skirmishers. The Auxilia are a bit of a puzzle in some ways, particularly to new players, as they look a little bit like weak Legion, and they don’t have a missile weapon unlike most other light infantry. They do have a high initial combat factor and also the handy ability to negate the Impetus bonus of warband. They’re also very good at clearing woods – something the Legionaries are pretty poor at, and you really should take at least a couple of units. You also need some skirmishers. These can harry opposition heavy infantry as the Legions move up, or screen the Legions from enemy missile troops.  

Proportionally I think you need enough Auxilia to intersperse them between your Legionaries, so 4 Legions will require 3 Auxilia, 5 Legions 4 Auxilia, That allows you to intersperse an Auxilia between each Legion if you are fighting Warband, or to mass them to fight enemy light troops in bad terrain or operate as a mass on a flank if your opponent does not. Half as many skirmishers as Legions is more than enough to act as a skirmish screen. Your Cavalry force needs to be large enough to hold it's own, or rather not get overrun too early, so one or two medium Cavalry and two light Cavalry are probably enough.

So where does that leave us?

4 Legions @ 28pts each = 112
3 Auxilia @ 23pts each = 69
2 Funditores (Skirmish slingers) @ 14pts each = 28
2 Equites Alares Medium Cavalry @ 23pts each = 46
2 Mauri Javelin armed Light Cavalry  @ 21pts each = 42

Total so far is 297, so plenty to play with if we are planning a 400 point Army.  Romans have an Average or Good Command Structure, for 12 or 20 points, and you will need some Generals too. How many Generals and how good they are is up to you, but at least two. There's a big debate to be had as to the merits of three smaller Commands over two larger ones, but the Romans seem to be able to make 2 work as long as you are careful with the cavalry, so you can split the cavalry into one Command and the Infantry into the other, which is a straight 60/40 split so within the list building constraints. The Romans don't rely on flamboyant or high risk tactics, so they don't really need high value Generals - two Fair, or even Poor Generals will manage, but you do probably need some help from The Gods so maximise on 3 Rolls of Destiny (re-rolls) at 5 pts each.

So here is the a suggested Roman Army based on the above ideas. It's solid, conventional, and efficient.

Average Command Rating
3 Rolls of Destiny

Commander in Chief (Poor)
4 Legions
3 Auxilia
2 Slingers
Total Break 20, Breaks on 10

Cavalry Command (Poor)
2 Medium Cavalry
2 Light Cavalry
Total Break 8 Breaks on 4

Army Break Total 28 Breaks on 14
Total points 344

Your opponent will only guarantee a win if he breaks the main Infantry Command, or the Cavalry and a chunk of the Legion. If you are cagey with your Cavalry he will find the latter hard to do, and if he breaks the Legion its Game Over anyway.

That leaves you 56 points to play with. The Romans get a lot of support options, and plenty of Allies too. The Allies are a bit risky as they have to deploy as a Command themselves, so at 400 points I would tend to avoid them. You could upgrade you Legions to Veteran for 11 points each. Veteram Legions are superb, but if you are fighting enemy Warband you will probably not be doing much other than walking steadily forward so the extra training and experience is probably wasted. Other options are to add a couple of Archer units, or maybe some Light Artillery.

Weaknesses - deep heavy infantry - here I mean good quality Hoplites or Pikes deployed as large units. In Impetus large units maintain their fighting power longer than normal ones, so Legions are in danger if fighting 1-1, however those Large Units are sacrificing width for fighting power, so can usually be outflanked and then surrounded - another good use for your Auxilia.

Charging cavalry can sometimes bowl the Legions over, but they are rare and will certainly be outnumbered.

So that's it - a possible Roman Army for Impetus - next, what to buy and where? 

RTFM - Musing on rules

I've realised I have been guilty of falling into games unprepared. By that I mean over the last year or so I have been caught up in the enthusiasm of a new rules set, skimmed the rules while rushing headlong to get the toys painted, and arrived at the table with much fanfare to find the games halting and not as successful as I had hoped. 

A prime example I played a game of Dux Britanarrium last week at the Hartlepool Club. It was our first try out, and at the end I thought it went OK - but just OK. The truth was we had missed large bits of rules we skimmed over in our enthusiasm, and as a result both our enjoyment and enthusiasm suffered - what should have been a good gaming session was just OK.

That got me musing, because it is not the first time it has happened. So I decided to have another game, this time just to try out the mechanisms, and whenever there was any doubt to read the rules carefully.

So I set up a game between Dave & John with me manning the rule book - a full battle rather than a raid so we could concentrate on the rules rather than rushing around in the chaos and tempo that raiding scenarios involve, and we got stuck in. Actually before that I READ THE RULES again just to refresh my memory, and read the rules as things happened to make sure we were getting it right.

It took a while, but we learned rather a lot. One thing I learned was just how good and well thought through Dux actually is, Our skimming and fumbling had meant we had missed some of the more subtle bits in there, and at the end we also had much better understanding and dare I say it, fun. Last night wasn't an OK gaming session, it was a good gaming session. I'm sure the others felt it too.

Moral of the story RTFM!

One last rambling thought. For the last few years I had heard of the Two Fat Lardies rules but had never really tried them. They were for me pigeon holed in the same niche as some Peter Pig rules - nice mechanisms but too light hearted and tongue in cheek to be thought of as "serious" sets of rules - the Carry on Wargaming style of naming, and indeed the whole company name and pie and pint logo thing helped reinforce that. I was (and am) a fan of some of the older PeterPig rules but the layout, presentation and general impressions were always of an amateur production - one man and his photocopier (which to be fair is pretty much what they were at the time). I had subconsciously  expected the same from TFL. The other side of the coin was the WRG style written in almost legalistic precision (Barkerese). Like them or loath them you had to take them seriously and read them carefully.

Taking the plunge with Chain of Command educated me otherwise.  I think it also showed a step up in ambition for the TFLs. Here they had a product that was in their view (and mine as it happened) superior to the market leader (Bolt Action) in almost every way, but it still lagged behind BA in popularity. I don't want to get into the whole "why" one rules set is better than the other, or what drives popularity, but having looked at both, Chain should have beaten BA hands down in my opinion, and it didn't. 

Like Chain, Dux is a well put together and very nuanced set of rules (at least as far as I can say that after 3-4 games), and the resulting game is interesting and enjoyable. It deserves a bit more respect, to be treated more seriously, but I think my initial expectations that the TFL "brand" is a little frivolous had coloured my view. I wonder if the happy go lucky branding that TFL have used in the past is now starting to bite them back a little?  I hope not, because if Dux and Chain are any indication, TFL are producing some of the most interesting, thought provoking and, yes fun, rules I have seen in quite a while, with production quality to match. Long may they continue