So finishing the game was always going to be tense, as the players were heavily invested in the result...BUT, in this case BOTH sides were close to break point and BOTH had last minute events which could have swung the battle either way - quite a game!
Testament to the Iron Cross rules to an extent, and these were well enjoyed...though again I salute the QRS mentioned previously, because although everything is in the book, it's not always as intuitive as the QRS makes it.
Very dangerous German armour moves on the British right
...although on their left, they capture the abbey
British armour, not quite disabled...there is a Firefly still very actively 'hunting'
German infantry makes a mechanised move in the centre, in a bid to capture the town...although we had Victory Points, so many areas were still being actively contested, it would come down to Break Points...
'Panzer! Panzer!...umm not one of ours Hans!!!'
German armour forced to react to the Firefly on the crest line...
...although the STGIII takes it out at range, allowing German thrust in the centre to continue...
...despite some long range fire from scout elements
The British left and centre; burning wrecks litter the road and approaches - Iron Cross is very unforgiving for armour
In the last minutes of the game, British infantry assault the lonely Stug (now these rules do need checked - but it worked out alright, as the infantry were ineffectivethough...)
Despite the Stug's good response, effectively about to end the British assault...
A certain 'company morale' roll, managed to rally them on a '6', completely...
...and in the dying seconds, as each side was about to break, the British called in mortars on German infantry in the open...effectively breaking them, but it was down to the wire...
An excellent game, and despite the vagaries and weirdness of some of those rules elements (I appreciate these are mostly fixed in 'Seven Days to the River Rhine'), it all worked quite well.
"been busy today mate? ...yeah, we fired one shell mate...cup 'o' tea mate?"
"A close run thing Archie eh? Archie? Why you are made of 20mm plastic...damn your eyes! Cup 'o' tea?"
Just as i am posting about being confounded by the younger players' interest in D&D, they wanted to start wargaming :)
Bwoooha...bwooohahahahhaha
'Iron Cross' was very well received today. The game still unfinished, and i gave myself a rapid refresher on the rules via an excellent QR sheet available online: https://sites.google.com/site/borderreiverwargamessociety/files
A 500 point 'ish' encounter battle - Germans and British, with a twist...
A little victory point quandry, with the 'Abbey' worth 2 VPs, the 'Casino' worth 2 VPs, and other buildings worth 1VP each ...it got a bit competitive.
Both sides will drive toward the centre - Abbey on British left flank, Casino on right
Early tactical positioning of average ATGs
British infantry on the right flank
The supported Firefly on the left...
The 'Abbey'
The 'Casino' where most of the dudes from the abbey hung out, before the war that is...
(Counters liberally stolen from 'Axis and Allies')
British take the Casino early on
Good use of mortar fire on unmoving targets
Brew up!
Germans hold the Abbey...
Panther moves late...but is unlucky
Accurate flanking fire takes down the Panther...
An excellent game overall - now, as the rules are not well explained and a little internally divisive (mostly fixed in '7 days to the river rhine' in terms of mechanics and explanation), these chaps have done all the work for you though...
There has been a distinct lack of actual wargaming posts in the last year - I'm not proud I know...which of course begs the question, what have I been doing?
Now, it's not the end of the blog - far from it, though I do have to mention that term, which makes even the most steadfast of Grognards quake in his boots, that makes even the most hardened of wargames tabletop generals make the -3 morale check, that creates discord in the ranks of even the hardiest Napoleonic (simulated) line - that of the dreaded, and most foul curse to wargaming, that is...'role-playing games'.
Gwen, Marduk, Jolene and Alric...hangin' out
Though I have a vast and (un)impressive experience with 'RPG's since my initial forays into D&D at age 11 - whilst simultaneously discovering wargaming, (which of course got me into Swords & Sorcery literature - R.E.Howard and the 1982 Conan movie, Ah'm lookin' at youuu!)
'It can't be my fault...nooo...i even get accused of being a modern pro Nietzschean, anti woke, pro fascist classic these days...I mean ok...well actually yeah, but surely the movie is about the dangers surrounding the abuse of power...an allegory if you will...uhh...da riddell of steeeel.' So Conan might have an Int score between 5 and 18 , depending on which story you read...
Now I could wax lyrical about the absolute and complete saturation of RPGs in the 'market' (let's not call it an industry), but what actually put me on board with this was (1) my nephews and (2) my friends' kids - who, in the post pandemic, post 'Stranger Things' Dungeons and Dragons frenzy - all became interested in playing, and understanding 'D&D'.
So as 'DM' and a bit of an old school hack, I started here:
Original 'Mentzer', which defined a lot of early stuff in the 80s, but wasn't the eponymous 'AD&D' which seemed to matter when I was 12, but not so much now...
...and ended up graduating to '5e' (just to keep things current for them)
The current edition, well this week, well as long as corporates can make millions from it, well...uhh...whatever works
NOw i also play in a game composed of old wargamers like me - in fact wargamers from that same era of the 80s, and here is what I noticed...(get the popcorn ready)...
Wargamers are obsessed with rules, because without rules, we don't have a 'fair' game, and that sense of 'simulation' is nothing more than playing Monopoly...uhh...without said rules.
Hence we become fixated with the rules in 5e - because that makes it serious fun (uhh) and thereby we don't (always) have our basis for the game based upon Sword and Sorcery (or Fantasy?) fiction that the originals were very closely fixated upon.
Younger people, who have never played before, want a 'story', a hook, excitement, characters they can feel a part of. Now this amazed me; and it should not have. They want interesting characters, in interesting situations, like the books they still read (now and then when not videogaming and panicking about World War 3 or something).
...and the clear thing that hit me like a brick, is that they think 'outside the box'. They don't want the simulated fight - though they like the dice; they want to do 'sneaky stuff' - VERY reminiscent of the original games. They would rather talk their way out, or at least get advantage in a fight.
They want to imagine their own worlds - not have it all dictated to them, having no hesitation in suggesting things for the game and the world and the characters, and to be honest, I would bend or break a rule to let this happen...this suggestion matrix also helps because i am a lazy bastard that does very little prep...
Now that...becomes very refreshing for a guy who stopped RPGs many years ago because people were taking it far too seriously...so this is set to continue (though wargaming will return with a vengeance), and with an interest in some umm 'books' i have suggested, we might see these in future:
A more modern OSR version and Stormbringer above it
'Index Card RPG' might also get some traction
Now that said, D&D has also been in the news recently, and citing Conan and its pastiche in terms of scriptwriter John Milius's allegory referring to the abuse of power by 'corporations', D&D is going through its own trials as we speak:
And to wrap up, I hope you all had a great Christmas, and may I be the first to wish y'all a Happy New Year....here's three movies we watched over Christmas, which all beat the pants off that Napoleon crap :) (and all of them are funnier)
'Overact mes Amis! Like you have never over-acted beforrrrre!'
Ok, so I didn’t want to do this; I honestly tried not to do
this, but it’s embarrassing ffs!
Am I talking about rumours of a new edition of Black
Powder? Nope!
Am I alluding to the
latest news that Warhammer is to hit the big screen, promoted by your
favourite multinational? Nope!
Phew...
I’m talking about that Napoleon movie.
I really wanted to like it; I really tried to like
it.
The highlights for me were as follows:
It looked really nice – there is a lovely 3
second scene of Cuirassiers charging squares as they form at Waterloo. The
re-enactors did a brilliant job, as far as I could see
·Vanessa Kirby was beautiful as ever
·…then I ran out of ideas.
'So, I may be stunning dahling...but unless I get this f**king Napoleon neck tattoo taken off, my career is f**ked.'
Ok – there were a few things which concerned me, on a more
minor level at first, but as a whole they allowed the fast moving train to not
only leave the potentially well constructed rails, but ultimately vanish into a
hole in the ground, leading directly to hell…
·Toulon – I tried to convince myself that
it looked good even though Napoleon in his 20s looked like an old man…I mean
could they not have used a younger actor, at least for this part
·The revolutionary scenes ‘looked’ superb, but
for all of the concentration on getting dates correct, everything else seems
rushed or bluffed
·Austerlitz – surely CGI, even thought people
hate it, could have been used to give an impression of the wider massive battle?
·Austerlitz (again) – I wanted to hear him say to
a messenger “take these orders to General ‘X’ on the right flank – ensure that
he does not move until ‘X’pm…now GO!”.Never, in my wildest dreams, did I expect Napoleon in 1805 to say “SEND
IN THE INFANTRY!”. You can suspend all the disbelief you want, but this is
bullshit
·Napoleon acting like a dying fish when he wants
a shag is weird enough, without using it to make the film even more ridiculous.
I’m sure Vanessa wasn’t actually acting in response to some of these antics,
she was just wondering when she got paid
·Bits of Russia looked nice, but he led a charge
at Borodino (on a budget). Now I get that Napoleon once (or twice)
surged forward and added to morale…buuut he makes contact with Russian lines
etc. By this stage I was beginning to wonder just how bad Waterloo would be
·…and the Waterloo ‘scene’. To summarise…’over
the top boys’; charging Wellington’s lines. Little tents, and holes through
hats…I had actually starting laughing at the comedic value by this stage
'Charge! ...dudes...'
Now, were I to jump to major issues, we could have a
field day, but let’s talk up conspiracy theory first…
Do I believe that viruses escape labs via accident or by
design? I’ve worked in industry long enough to know that people can be stupid, and
accidents happen; so accident, not design.
So thereby, if I am asked whether the Napoleon movie
is some sort of deliberate attempt to dumb down history and make people more
pliable to stupid ideas? …nope, because producers aren’t that smart – they just
want your money – like any good corporation; but was it just a shit movie
because too many cooks were spoiling the broth, and control/management was
abrogated because no one gave a shit, or lower ranks were terrified? Absolutely yes.
Clickbait...clickbait...clickbaaaait...
…and for the director to answer critics with a cry of ‘were
you there?’ when historians criticise, just succinctly proves, that he is less than engaged. Believe me; I know that history can be bunk; I am aware that much of what we consider
sacrosanct in terms of primary sources, can actually be disproven from a modern standpoint - ignoring the fact that history has been manipulated when it suits, but ffs... wise
up! I mean I get that the older generation loves to stick two fingers up at the
world…but screwing with a historical figure’s story? Naaah!
I watched this Waterloo movie twice after I’d seen Napoleon. I always
thought it was a great film. Now? It’s a stunning classic.
