I reckon those decals for the Japanese carriers are just the ticket, even if I did fail to apply them quite as beautifully as they deserved.
Tuesday, October 31, 2017
Carriers and other bits and pieces.
A few more ships to add to the 1/3000 collection. Akagi, Kaga and Shokaku are the main attractions, but with USS Houston, HMAS Canberra, Suffolk, Java and Admiral de Ruyter and a few support vessels in there as well.
I reckon those decals for the Japanese carriers are just the ticket, even if I did fail to apply them quite as beautifully as they deserved.
I reckon those decals for the Japanese carriers are just the ticket, even if I did fail to apply them quite as beautifully as they deserved.
Sunday, October 29, 2017
1/3000 naval progress
I've been making a bit of progress with my 1/3000 naval project over the last week or so.
The British.
Bismarck and Prinz Eugen.
The IJN.
Still a few more to do, but we're starting to get somewhere.
As a small observation, this project has really brought home to me how just useful the internet is. I don't know how many books you'd have had to have bought to get the info for each ship / ship class that one google search will bring you. This project would still be a mere pipe dream without the 'net.
The British.
The IJN.
Still a few more to do, but we're starting to get somewhere.
As a small observation, this project has really brought home to me how just useful the internet is. I don't know how many books you'd have had to have bought to get the info for each ship / ship class that one google search will bring you. This project would still be a mere pipe dream without the 'net.
Monday, October 23, 2017
WIP: Ships and terrain
The weekend has seen a couple of terrain items finished, some new 1/3000 ship packs bought, and a few Navwar models varnished.
The new camps, enclosures and pond should do the trick, I hope.
I'd been meaning to pick up the last three Fujimi 1/3000 model expansion kits and finally did so. Unfortunately, most of the shops double up with those in the packs I already have, so that's a slight disappointment.
It's my own fault: I suspected this already, but rather than fiddle about trying to read the kanji in the shop, I just bought them anyway.
I can use the destroyers of course, but there are only so many Yamatos, Musashis, Akagis, Kagas and Nagatos a man needs. The good thing is that I can use the extras to experiment with painting. I find plastic models harder to paint than metal ones, so I might well end up being grateful for getting a second go!
Hopefully there will be a few more finished 1/3000 models to game with in the near future.
The new camps, enclosures and pond should do the trick, I hope.
I'd been meaning to pick up the last three Fujimi 1/3000 model expansion kits and finally did so. Unfortunately, most of the shops double up with those in the packs I already have, so that's a slight disappointment.
It's my own fault: I suspected this already, but rather than fiddle about trying to read the kanji in the shop, I just bought them anyway.
I can use the destroyers of course, but there are only so many Yamatos, Musashis, Akagis, Kagas and Nagatos a man needs. The good thing is that I can use the extras to experiment with painting. I find plastic models harder to paint than metal ones, so I might well end up being grateful for getting a second go!
Hopefully there will be a few more finished 1/3000 models to game with in the near future.
Thursday, October 19, 2017
Terrain workings
After being less than impressed with my own table last week I decided it was time to get some terrain organised. I'm not really very good at making terrain, but I wanted something to pass for a camp, something else I could use as a suitable enclosure for a Celtic or Dark Age village, and something that might do for a pond or small lake.
Village enclosure:
First up, cut a stick mat used for rolling sushi into two 2 cm width lengths and affix to an 80 x 80 base. Use white glue and sand to texture the base.
Spray with gray primer to help the glue hold better.
Brush on some old craft paint in burnt umber.
Dry brush with buff.
Flock to taste.
Think about getting some better houses!
(Roman) Camp
100 yen shop bricks glued together and onto a base.
Texture base, prime gray, and then paint tents darker gray using brush.
Apply burnt umber, then dry brush the tents lighter using various grays and off whites.
Prepare to flock.
Pond (so far).
Cut out shape. Glue on small stones pond.
Add sand. Paint bottom of pond green. Burnt umber elsewhere.
Flocking and water effect still to come...
Village enclosure:
First up, cut a stick mat used for rolling sushi into two 2 cm width lengths and affix to an 80 x 80 base. Use white glue and sand to texture the base.
Spray with gray primer to help the glue hold better.
Brush on some old craft paint in burnt umber.
Dry brush with buff.
Flock to taste.
Think about getting some better houses!
(Roman) Camp
100 yen shop bricks glued together and onto a base.
Texture base, prime gray, and then paint tents darker gray using brush.
Apply burnt umber, then dry brush the tents lighter using various grays and off whites.
Prepare to flock.
Pond (so far).
Cut out shape. Glue on small stones pond.
Add sand. Paint bottom of pond green. Burnt umber elsewhere.
Flocking and water effect still to come...
Sunday, October 15, 2017
Of blowouts and birthdays.
My recent return to To the Strongest! has now concluded. Unfortunately, there were a few problems with the camera, but now that I have a new SD card installed, we are back to normal on that score. The other camera problem is that the tabletop looks a tad forlorn, though this is not the camera's fault. My carpet tiles are fine for a biggish 5 x 4 game with five hundred figures on the table, but rather sad and flat for a 3 x 2 one with only 150. So too do my generic 100 yen shop hovels look rather less than impressive. Not for the first time I can see that I'm going to need to up my terrain game...
Anyway, to my surprise, the game ended up a blowout in favour of the Normans, who I thought were going to struggle to make much headway against the Anglo-Saxon shieldwall. As it turns out, the Anglo-Saxons were a little too enthusiastic in their attempts to bring the Norman horse to battle, and as a consequence the line became disjointed early and the Normans were able to gang up on poorly supported units and wear them down.
The deep shieldwalls were tough, but they just could not get back into position and suffered for it, by being out of command and/or teamed-up upon.
Any normal wargamer would have known this already - as did I in fact - but sometimes it seems I just have to learn the hard way!
The Anglo-Saxons lost three deep shieldwall units and 2 generals (13 victory banners) against no losses for the Normans, so the game was up. The Norman horse managed to evade Anglo-Saxon charges for the most part, but even when they were caught or elected to stand they were able to pull back or rally before they were finished off.
Anglo-Saxons/Normans is quite an intriguing match-up (as you would hope!) in TtS. There are some nice tactics to play around with, but I must have the Anglo-Saxons hold their line and their discipline better in future.
In other news, it was my birthday earlier this week, and my dear and long-suffering wife sanctioned the online purchasing of some birthday treats. A visit to the Book Depository website later and the reprint of Ian Heath's classic Armies of Feudal Europe and the Dan Mersey fantasy skirmish rules Dragon Rampant were on their way here. I was sorely tempted to pick up Bloody Big Battles too, but will save that one for next time.
On the figure front I see that I'm not quite finished with my Dark Age project after all: I'm going to have to pick a few more Anglo-Saxons, Vikings and Normans to paint up as hero and leader figures so that I don't need to cover the table with those mood-damaging cube markers.
It seems a wargamer's armies are never done!
Anyway, to my surprise, the game ended up a blowout in favour of the Normans, who I thought were going to struggle to make much headway against the Anglo-Saxon shieldwall. As it turns out, the Anglo-Saxons were a little too enthusiastic in their attempts to bring the Norman horse to battle, and as a consequence the line became disjointed early and the Normans were able to gang up on poorly supported units and wear them down.
The deep shieldwalls were tough, but they just could not get back into position and suffered for it, by being out of command and/or teamed-up upon.
Any normal wargamer would have known this already - as did I in fact - but sometimes it seems I just have to learn the hard way!
The Anglo-Saxons lost three deep shieldwall units and 2 generals (13 victory banners) against no losses for the Normans, so the game was up. The Norman horse managed to evade Anglo-Saxon charges for the most part, but even when they were caught or elected to stand they were able to pull back or rally before they were finished off.
Anglo-Saxons/Normans is quite an intriguing match-up (as you would hope!) in TtS. There are some nice tactics to play around with, but I must have the Anglo-Saxons hold their line and their discipline better in future.
 |
| View from behind the victorious Norman left. Dodgy hovels can be seen in the distance. |
 |
| Again from the Norman centre. |
 |
| And finally from the Norman right. |
In other news, it was my birthday earlier this week, and my dear and long-suffering wife sanctioned the online purchasing of some birthday treats. A visit to the Book Depository website later and the reprint of Ian Heath's classic Armies of Feudal Europe and the Dan Mersey fantasy skirmish rules Dragon Rampant were on their way here. I was sorely tempted to pick up Bloody Big Battles too, but will save that one for next time.
On the figure front I see that I'm not quite finished with my Dark Age project after all: I'm going to have to pick a few more Anglo-Saxons, Vikings and Normans to paint up as hero and leader figures so that I don't need to cover the table with those mood-damaging cube markers.
It seems a wargamer's armies are never done!
Tuesday, October 10, 2017
Blogging enters middle age.
I've been putting a little thought into blogging recently, particularly around some of the changes I have noticed since I started the caper.
When I first began, I got hardly any traffic at all. That was fine and what I expected. I was in it for my own pottering-around satisfaction, not for popularity. But if I did a battle report I'd put it on TMP, and soon found that I'd perhaps get 300 hits over two days - more if it was on a popular battle or topic - and I started to like it.
I began to post links to my newly-painted figures there to show what particular ranges looked like (there were not so many photos on manufacturers' websites in those days - or that was my excuse anyway), and the odd how-to article, game review, or lighthearted take on something. Again, these would get some hits and over time you'd build up a list of followers and make virtual connections with other bloggers.
After a couple of years of this I noticed there were diminishing returns. People stopped clicking on my links so much from forums. I'd get 200 hits instead of 300, 150 instead of 200, until, eventually I was down to about 50. Sometimes less.
And the chat around a post dropped off, too. Instead of 5-10 other forum members adding comments, you might get one or two if you were lucky.
So with both interest and engagement dropping off, it seemed that posting links was shooting myself (and the forums that hosted the links) in the foot. People had perhaps become tired of blog-hawking and blog-hawkers, and also perhaps resentful of the draining effect the constant outside links had on the vitality of the original forums. Denizens were no longer so impressed by the promise of battle reports, game reviews or painting updates, and there was, I felt, a perceptible undercurrent of hardening passive-aggressive antagonism on both sides (Why are you posting that here? We've all seen it done better before! vs I've put loads of work into this. The least you ungrateful lot could do is have a flamin' look!).
At any rate, the blog honeymoon was over.
I've since adjusted, and now I pretty much don't link to my blog anywhere, unless it's for 'educational' purposes, or I'm particularly excited about something, and want to share that excitement in the relevant forum.
It seems to me that bloggers have naturally congregated into loose circles of like-minded folk. Not necessarily like-minded in era, figure scale or rule set, either; often it seems to be a shared set of ideas about what you like to see in a blog, and so you comment or show your support for those people whose blogs you enjoy, learn from, or are in awe of in some way, regardless of whether you play the same games or not.
These days my hits are a long way down on what they were at their peak, but the peak was actually vastly inflated by bot visitors, anyway. I'm very content to keep pottering along at 100-250 hits per day - hopefully mostly by real people - and enjoying the comments that people leave and the little community that builds up.
It's been good. I'm happier, more relaxed - and hopefully a slightly kinder hobbiest - than I was when I felt a certain amount of pressure to try to spread the word.
Anyway, I'd be interested in other people's observations around blogging and the changes they have noticed.
Thanks for reading (if anyone has got this far!).
When I first began, I got hardly any traffic at all. That was fine and what I expected. I was in it for my own pottering-around satisfaction, not for popularity. But if I did a battle report I'd put it on TMP, and soon found that I'd perhaps get 300 hits over two days - more if it was on a popular battle or topic - and I started to like it.
I began to post links to my newly-painted figures there to show what particular ranges looked like (there were not so many photos on manufacturers' websites in those days - or that was my excuse anyway), and the odd how-to article, game review, or lighthearted take on something. Again, these would get some hits and over time you'd build up a list of followers and make virtual connections with other bloggers.
After a couple of years of this I noticed there were diminishing returns. People stopped clicking on my links so much from forums. I'd get 200 hits instead of 300, 150 instead of 200, until, eventually I was down to about 50. Sometimes less.
And the chat around a post dropped off, too. Instead of 5-10 other forum members adding comments, you might get one or two if you were lucky.
So with both interest and engagement dropping off, it seemed that posting links was shooting myself (and the forums that hosted the links) in the foot. People had perhaps become tired of blog-hawking and blog-hawkers, and also perhaps resentful of the draining effect the constant outside links had on the vitality of the original forums. Denizens were no longer so impressed by the promise of battle reports, game reviews or painting updates, and there was, I felt, a perceptible undercurrent of hardening passive-aggressive antagonism on both sides (Why are you posting that here? We've all seen it done better before! vs I've put loads of work into this. The least you ungrateful lot could do is have a flamin' look!).
At any rate, the blog honeymoon was over.
I've since adjusted, and now I pretty much don't link to my blog anywhere, unless it's for 'educational' purposes, or I'm particularly excited about something, and want to share that excitement in the relevant forum.
It seems to me that bloggers have naturally congregated into loose circles of like-minded folk. Not necessarily like-minded in era, figure scale or rule set, either; often it seems to be a shared set of ideas about what you like to see in a blog, and so you comment or show your support for those people whose blogs you enjoy, learn from, or are in awe of in some way, regardless of whether you play the same games or not.
These days my hits are a long way down on what they were at their peak, but the peak was actually vastly inflated by bot visitors, anyway. I'm very content to keep pottering along at 100-250 hits per day - hopefully mostly by real people - and enjoying the comments that people leave and the little community that builds up.
It's been good. I'm happier, more relaxed - and hopefully a slightly kinder hobbiest - than I was when I felt a certain amount of pressure to try to spread the word.
Anyway, I'd be interested in other people's observations around blogging and the changes they have noticed.
Thanks for reading (if anyone has got this far!).
To the Strongest revisited
Well, the time has come to pull out Simon Miller's fine To the Strongest! rules again. I keep meaning to play them, and now that my Dex Bellorum project is complete, I've got small-based units I can use to do so, and don't need to use the big table.
So I'm going to do a solo run-through to reacquaint myself with the rules.
Here are the armies:
Normans.
3 Generals
13 Units
|
3 Commands
32 VPs, 11 Victory Medals, 133 points
|
Save / VPs /
Pts / Ammo
|
The King (R)
|
Great leader, heroic, mounted, senior
|
3+ / 2 / 11 / -
|
Milites
|
Veteran cav, javelin,
|
6+/ 2 / 11 / 2
|
Milites
|
Veteran cav, javelin,hero
|
6+/ 2 /12 / 2
|
Milites
|
Cav, javelin, hero
|
7+/ 2 /10 / 2
|
Gascons
|
Light infantry, javelin
|
7+/ 1 / 4 / 2
|
Camp
|
12 VPs, Demoralised on 6, 51 points
|
-- / 3 / 1 / --
|
His Retainer (C)
|
Heroic, mounted
|
3+ / 2 / 6 / -
|
Spearmen
|
Veteran shieldwall, hero
|
6+/ 2 / 10 / -
|
Spearmen
|
Shieldwall
|
7+/ 2 / 7 / -
|
Spearmen
|
Shieldwall
|
7+/ 2 / 7 / -
|
Crossbowmen
|
Crossbowmen
|
8+/ 2 / 7 / 6
|
Skirmishers
|
Light infantry other, bow
|
8+/ 1 / 4 / 3
|
Skirmishers
|
Light infantry other, bow
|
8+/ 1 / 4 / 3
|
Camp
|
15 VPs, Demoralised on 8, 46 points
|
-- / 3 / 1 / --
|
The Bishop (L)
|
Heroic, mounted
|
3+ / 2 / 6 / -
|
Milites
|
Veteran cav, javelin, hero
|
6+/ 2 /12 / 2
|
Milites
|
Cav, javelin
|
7+/ 2 / 9 / 2
|
Milites
|
Cav, javelin
|
7+/ 2 / 9 / 2
|
8 VPs, Demoralised on 4, 36 points
|
Anglo-Saxons.
3 Generals
12 Units
|
3 Commands
34 VPs, 11 Victory Medals, 133 points
|
Save / VPs /
Pts / Ammo
|
The King (C)
|
Heroic, senior
|
3+ / 2 / 6 / -
|
Fyrd
|
Veteran shieldwall, deep, hero
|
6+/ 3 / 14 / -
|
Fyrd
|
Veteran shieldwall, deep, hero
|
6+/ 3 / 14 / -
|
Fyrd
|
Shieldwall, deep
|
7+/ 3 / 10 / -
|
Fyrd
|
Shieldwall, deep
|
7+/ 3 / 10 / -
|
Skirmishers
|
Light infantry, other, bow
|
8+/ 1 / 4 / 3
|
Camp
|
18 VPs, Demoralised on 9, 59 points
|
-- / 3 / 1 / --
|
His Brother (R)
|
Heroic
|
3+ / 2 / 5 / -
|
Fyrd
|
Shieldwall, deep, hero
|
7+/ 3 / 11 / -
|
Fyrd
|
Shieldwall, deep, hero
|
7+/ 3 / 10 / -
|
Fyrd
|
Shieldwall, deep, raw
|
8+/ 3 / 7 / -
|
Skirmishers
|
Light infantry other, sling, raw
|
9+/ 1 / 3 / 2
|
Camp
|
15 VPs, Demoralised on 8, 38 points
|
-- / 3 / 1 / --
|
His Brother (L)
|
2+ / 2 / 4 / -
|
|
Fyrd
|
Shieldwall, deep, hero
|
7+/ 3 / 11 / -
|
Fyrd
|
Shieldwall, deep, hero
|
7+/ 3 / 11 / -
|
Fyrd
|
Shieldwall, deep
|
7+/ 3 / 10 / -
|
11 VPs, Demoralised on 6, 36 points
|
The battlefield is 8 squares by 12, with minimal terrain, so that the two armies will have a good opportunity to just go at each other hammer and tongs.
Sunday, October 8, 2017
Chits and giggles: the "Conquest of Paradise" solitaire system
I have an interesting board game in the collection called Conquest of Paradise, a GMT title based on the theme of Polynesian settlement of the South Pacific. Having recently discovered that the second edition rules include a dedicated solitaire system, I decided to give the thing a whirl.
 |
| In my cups in the South Pacific. |
The game itself revolves around exploration (sending out an explorer to look for island chains), movement (sending out transport canoes to create lines of supply, settlers to found colonies, and war canoes and warriors to menace your rivals), battle (possibly attacking enemy island chains), and building (new villages for your controlled territories and more units in pursuit of further expansion).
What the solitaire system does is provide instruction chits that direct the AI player against you. You do your own player turn then draw a chit to see what your robot rival will do. He may build, he may expand, he may attack, he may defend; and with actions printed on both sides of the chit, a strategy may well manifest itself. There are 15 AI chits in the cup. By the time 13 have been pulled, the human player (that's you) must have gathered a minimum of 30 victory points. If not, you, as that human player, lose ignominiously to a decorated cup.
It sounded like just my kind of game.
It sounded like just my kind of game.
First time up, I'm ashamed to say that the decorative cup was victorious. I scored only 11 victory points after a series of 'nope, that's not an island chain!' exploration phases and a vicious and effective final-turn attack which took four island chains and 8 VP off me. I wasn't anywhere close, and saw that I needed to up my game to compete.
 |
| Mine are the kind of yellowy-green pieces emanating from the Tongan homeland. They are easy to miss - there aren't many left! |
Second game around I had much better luck with my island searches while the decorative cup did not. A freakish run of poorly ordered chit draws for the cup also helped, and this time I was able to score 33 victory points. I think I'm very unlikely to get the advantages I got this time around again, so it might be time to retire and rest on my laurels for a little!
 |
| Note the prevalence of yellowy-green pieces this time around due to a very different and ridiculously lucky island chain draw. |
Besides being a clever system, the solitaire game is a lot of fun. Note to self: I think it could be quite profitably ported to other environments. I doubt I'll ever get around to doing such ideas justice, but I wouldn't be a real wargamer if I didn't at least contemplate the idea in idle moments...
Anyway, Conquest of Paradise is a good little game already, but the solitaire system is a tidy addition and makes getting the game onto the table an attractive proposition if you have 90 minutes to spare for a bit of Civ-lite play but no buddies available.
Well done to the designer and playtesters.
Friday, October 6, 2017
Coming back to One Hour Wargames
As a rule, I don't like to be negative as far as wargaming is concerned. It's a small hobby, and while there are times when a serve may be required I've seen that firing off with double barrels tends not to win you any friends, and nor does it take into account that most people are writing rules for the love of it, not for the money. On top of that, should some eagle-eyed reader realise that you've misunderstood the rules you are savaging you end up embarrassed, apologetic for having been unjust, and overall looking like a prize idiot.
Despite knowing all that I was almost about to go off on a rant here. Having come back to and played through a game of Neil Thomas's One Hour Wargames, I'd been thoroughly disappointed. It had not been all that impressive first time around, but here I could see that it was completely broken. I was incensed enough to gear up to write up a negative review, wondering why it is that Neil Thomas can serve up garbage and apparently get given a free pass.
But at that point a sort of wargamer's 6th sense kicked in.
I went over the rules again. Was I sure I hadn't been doing something wrong? Nope, nothing jumped out at me. I was pretty sure I was playing it as written.
I checked again. This time I looked at a few reviews from bloggers I respect. Mostly positive. There was the odd dissenting voice, but nobody saying what the problem I had with the rules was.
And then I realised: yes, I had in fact been playing it wrong.
Ahem.
 |
| Franks observe Norsemen as yet unaware their flank is threatened... |
So I went back and replayed the game with the right rule interpretation, and it was far more satisfactory.
There are still grey areas, but it was not the disaster that my rule misinterpretation had made it.
And the lesson here for me? It's wise to think before I post!