He's baaaack!

 All hail the return of the Dachshund, formerly a fusilier in a bad mood.

Welcome back Steve-O. 

 https://angrydackel.com/

 

 

The Great Jeffers CheapAss Wargaming MDF Base Post

 To quote Jeffers in comments related to the previous post:

 "It would be really useful if you did a ‘wargaming on the cheap’ post showing your unit sizes and what you found worked/failed from a practical and aesthetic perspective."

Now this question referred to the troops in the previous Aughrim 1691 game. These pretty much form the backbone of my 25mm troops (not 28mm, most were purchased in the 90s and early 2000s) for the period 1670-1715 - the single most maligned, misunderstood (and that's just by the rules-writers) and badly mis-interpreted period that exists in wargaming...possibly. So controversial it still gets people angry; so badly understood it still confounds researchers; and so maligned by history that many secrets still remain hidden in forgotten annals of folklore, more than stuffy academic history.

Danes kicking ass, with four figures to a base in the traditional manner

 I won't mention fraising battalions with pikes, platoon firing and firing by ranks, cavalry charge methodologies (see Brent Nosworthy for all associated refs); instead I will focus on the important thing - 3mm MDF bases for the model troops, and 'how i got away with having more bases than I should have', otherwise known as the 'very capitalist MDF base economy' !

Cavalry used to be based on 2" x 2" - then the V&B Marlburian supplement came out...

 I use two main sets of rules for these so far: 'Field of Battle' and 'Volley & Bayonet'. Much lyrical waxing has taken place on these, in terms of why they work for the period - and are eminently more suited than some other rules, and there is an option to also look at a Blucher variant soon. 

INFANTRY : based on 1.5" x 1.5" bases - this allows massive amounts of flexibility. ALSO - the little secret of using 3 figures (staggered) instead of 4 figures, saves an absolute multitude of cost and fannying about. In essence a four stand battalion with 16 figures, becomes 12 figures. Pics above show that this can be effective, with less figure bang for your buck.

Standard Marlburian types - Minifigs and Old Glory - 3 on a base, but with enough units they look fine

Now these guys offer lots of options (old Dixon Grand Alliance - still the best figures for this period in my view)

 

3 to a base and 3 bases - offering lots of battalion, with the en masse effect clearing up any issues with the fact that is 12 blokes taking a flag for a walk

 

Add another base, and they seem a little more dense - though remember, these boys did not operate shoulder to shoulder anyway - there was too much loose powder in the '12 apostles' even at this stage , and nutty matchlocks just make things even more dangerous

  

This also allows for the pike 'block' the late 17th century remnant of it with 11 foot pikes...

...which can also be placed frontally to indicate 'fraising', or hedgehog, depending on year and rules

 

These Dutch guards, are densely packed on bases - and despite flop hat could be used right through the period

 

...again add pikes to taste

 

...or drop them to three stand unit, and use battalions en masse

a dense battalion and thinner battalion operating together. Honestly, with enough of these, it looks great

 

 

 

CAVALRY & ARTILLERY: I used to have them based x2 on a 2" x 2" base (see first couple of pics), though the recent release of the V&B Marlburian book convinced me to shift to 3" x 3". In similar fashion to infantry, this allows 3 or 4 cavalry per base, which can be really useful again to save in figures per base, without looking daft. 

For guns, I just go with the flow, and keep figures loose - so that they can vary from economical to comedic! 

 

A standard 3 cav on a 3x3 base - recently changed due to release of Marlburian V&B book

 

 

Using older Irregular miniatures on 4 to a base, looking a little more Marlburian, though still staggered for effect, and due to space.

 

 

Some of the Jacobite lads wout with the Oxford Blues, looking for trouble...large figures look well in 'attack poses' on the 3" x 3" s

 

 

A few random generals - always useful in FoB and V&B

Random artillery, with crew varying from professional amateur, through dragoon, to interested ladies

'He can't even hold the bloody map straight!'

I have tried so many variations with these bases, even at one stage putting everything on 2" x 2", which frankly was a disaster. I can get a lot of figures / bases on the table with the current variant, and it all seems to work.
 

Bish Bash Bosh

 I am not normally a 'kit basher' but...I have been building forces for a 'Field of Battle' Scenario (the ww2 version with some modern additions for Vietnam), based around Operation Starlite in 1965, with Marines vs VC, with boocoo armed villes -based on the old Command Decision scenario by Greg Novak.

Getting ready for Operation Starlite 1965. These 'US Marines (Early War)' are from the Orion plastic range. Absolutely superb figures, which combine plastic utility with Platoon 20 character (I needed Marines with M14s...not M16s...an important detail...M48s be damned...)

 Bearing in mind a unit is a company, and support elements range from LVTP-5s (yes - the big awkward one) to M48 tanks, and I use 20mm / 1/72, there would be some vehicles required.

So having bought the LVTP5s as 3D prints, I thought "It's ok, I have plenty of M48s", until I discovered that what I had, was one kit, one dodgy incorrect scale abomination..and a polythene Airfix Patton turret on a polythene Airfix Centurion hull... uhhh ok? 

A panicked look in the bits box ensued (I mean I wasn't going to buy MORE 3D prints after buying the Big Beautiful. LVTP5s - that's far too easy).

 

Airfix polythene Patton turret, gun from the other kit, cheap chinese knock-off hull in stamped metal from the bits box, and tracks from 'i really don't know where'...what can go wrong?

I managed to find a cheap chinese knock off of an 'M60?' which had an M48 hull, and joy of joys, discovered that the dodgy gun without muzzle break on the polythene, could be replaced with extra bits from the M48 1/72 model (two barrels in one kit..who knew?) 

The next problem...

 There remained however, one slight issue...the new gun,with the muzzle brake, did not have the front piece. Now I thought...AHA! a brass fixing...nope, wrong diameter...a piece of plastic rod! nope, wrong diameter...and then I thought...a bloody PLASTIC STRAW!

Now, someone once told me that these were getting banned. PAH! I say...apparently that's been reversed, so Operation Starlite can go ahead, unfettered by StrawGate.

 

The solution...apparently you can find them on the beach? Who knew?

And then, I found a second MG/command turret in the model kit - the gift that just keeps on giving...(muzzle brakes notwithstanding)...

...and an MG turret too? Oh Italeri - you rock!

The two M48s, undercoated...to see action soon in FoB Vietnam

Guys! It was one damned muzzle-brake...seriously! I mean the plastic in the model, and chemicals in the glue, surely outweighs..I mean...

And of course, very sad news about the Oz this week. One of the creators of classic and modern metal.. RIP.

 

Paints 'n' Cards

 I have mentioned the virtues of contrast paints in the past, but noted yesterday that I was able to paint 5 figures in about 15 minutes...

The central command figure is Valiant miniatures - a little bigger, but takes contrast paints so well - the others are Revell that I have not been inspired to paint for 20 years.

Now I had previously sprayed these a 'mustardy tan' (the army painter sand colour) - the undercoat very much being the key to contrast paint, and I used GW contrasts (see, they are good for something) and Army Painter speed paint.

This is all 'one' coat bar the webbing. I get highlights, detail on the flesh (check the fingers), and an overall finished impression.

 I have experimented with white, off white, and mustardy tan as undercoats, and the results are always good depending on what you want. Sword n Sorcery style figures seem to benefit from the pure white undercoat.

Now I have never been a painter of quality (uhh painting specifically that is; I am of course the veritable gentleman)- I want the troops on the table, and patience for 'serious' painting has always eluded me, but this method really works for me.

 

The contrast paint forms a dark tone, base colour and highlight in one hit. Now granted, for these British infantry I did use a little acrylic to highlight the webbing, but the time factor was the main thing...outstanding results, and more than enough for the 'two-foot rule', once the younger eyesight has gone. 

 

In other news, have lifted 'Field of Battle ww2' which used to be a house fave for larger battles - where a base is a company, and a maneuver unit a battalion. 

'Do you mean Clare-MON'T' Brooker???'

 

 

Now, this uses cards, and as those I used before are a little drab, I opted to make some for myself on menu cardstock...incorporating great ww2 Hollywood movies where practical...and WW2 pics where possible.

The Kelly's Heroes Morale card still makes me laugh

 

 

(It should be noted that most of the actors/actresses in these pics are dead now. RIP.)

Woof woof!

Ingrid Pitt, Mary Ure, Clint Eastwood and Richard Burton in the absolute classic 'Where Eagles Dare'. Sadly, only Clint is still alive.

'It's a mother beautiful bridge, and it's gonna be there...'

 Looking forward to these seeing some action.

 ...accompanied by the single best war movie theme ever written...

...although this one is a close second...

 

I know what I did last summer...

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)

that movie rant...

 

'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.

Do yourself a favour...

It's all about the base...

 While most bloggers are using the first post of 2023 to display their early year paint jobs, I instead rebased my 15mm Seven Years War stuff for Volley and Bayonet.

Now, I don't have a lot of 15mm, but I remember buying the earliest figures here (Matchlock Miniatures) in the 1990s when 'Last of the Mohicans' came out, with a view to French & Indian War action.

Matchlock miniatures from the 90s (Green Howards of course)

More Matchlock French

To that end, they were only ever used for a Quebec 1763 game with WRG rules in mind but Canadian Wargames Group rules played.

There are also some Lancashire Games and Frei Korps figures in there for good measure, but here's the rub...

These figures were originally based in the nineties - on single and collective 3/8" per figure cardboard;

• then rebased for Volley & Bayonet around 2010
• then rebased on 30x30s to fit the groups' scheme around 2017
• now rebased once more for Volley and Bayonet...(on 3"x1.5" and 3"x3")

What the hell am I doing? ...

Well, as the kidz say this days, 'I like the aesthetic' of the chunky V&B base for one, and I'm trying to get back into it as a multi-player, multi-period standard when Field of Battle will not do. Granted, having a lot of 3mm MDF which I got cut to various sizes many years ago, most certainly helps too.

And dammit...I have to say, aside from task of leveraging PVA stuck figures off their old bases, without a risk assessment, and the chance of slicing a finger off or losing an eye - I actually enjoy rebasing?!?! The new flock always looks good, for a while...

The problem of course remains now, with regard to differentiating between attack column and line for cavalry...but I don't care, if a marker will suffice. Previously, with 3 bases, the frontage only differed by 30mm, or a third of base width, if using three bases, so mehh.

In other news, I recently sold this 1989 boardgame on boardgamegeek:

I bought this in 1989, and despite still being a fan of WW3 wargaming, I have never even punched the counters out (and the scenarios are a bit crap anyway). Then of course, complex rules seemed to be the best way to (1) simulate modern combat, (2) impress your friends. Of course, now that I can't be bothered, there are invariably better ways to (1) simulate both the quasi-realities AND required 'gamey' elements of modern warfare, as we're all a lot smarter now and (2) I scarcely read rules which require heavy investment, and have little interest in them.

Hence a renewed interest in systems like GDW's 'First Battle', which does the same thing as MBT in my view, and even more renewed interest in attributing operation points to systems like this (which Steve is doing with PanzerBlitzHack).

My youngest daughter has been playing this video game (Valkyria Chronicles below) over Christmas (it was about 4 quid on Steam), which incredibly uses a similar operational system - the video game element involves moving characters and/or tanks under restricted action points - but the map element reminds you of 'ops points' for unit actions and 'action points' for individuals as they move and how they might be used. You can move an element 2 or 3 points, but your command/ops points thereby dwindle for doing other things.

Yes, it's an Anime ww2 crossover (fictional Europa vs the Russian Empire; based on the Russo Finnish war I think - with mad manga) but even video game designers have been 'thinking outside the turn sequence'. Don't laugh, but this game has every single modern wargaming turn sequence mutation, that we have felt so proud about in recent years, and it came out in 2008. Granted, most of these companies have designers who are wargamers on staff, so it all works.

(There was now to follow the video for 'it's all about the Bass' (see what I did there?) This 'pastiche' version of the original song has been chosen as it is more 'aesthetically pleasing' (trust me...no really, trust me). I hope I'm proud of myself)...