Next batch of figures

I had previously harped on here about how keen I was to next get stuck into painting some Persians. Well, so much for that: this next batch (due for magic wash tomorrow) is Greek cavalry and hamippoi of the Theban variety. 

Xyston figures. My goodness, they are a treat to paint. I am a workman, not an artist, so am not able to quite do them justice, but even so, they are wonderful to work with. They do take a bit of prepping, mind....

I'm also working on some 3d printed elephants and from the Xyston pile have another 50-odd Greek cavalry and 80-odd Theban hoplites prepped. 

Successor beasts from Potbelly. Drybrushing underway.

With work extremely busy at the moment but without much tangible to show for it it has been nice to come back home to practical hobbying and feel like you are getting somewhere in at least one aspect of your life!

In the post

Since moving back to New Zealand in 2019 I've missed playing Commands & Colors: Ancients. I have the boardgames of course, but playing with figures is for me where the game is best as a spectacle.  

In Japan I had made a hexmat myself, but utilizing as it did quite a lot of spray paint, it would not be very economical to use that method in New Zealand. So after a delay of five almost gameless C&C:A years, I decided to order a mat from Tiny Wargames in the UK. It should arrive soonish, and I am looking forward to it very much. Commands & Colors will never be the best simulation you will find, but it is easy to remember, small enough to play on the kitchen table, and so quick to set up and take down you can give the table back to the family by breakfast. 

Also heading this way is the World War One boardgame The Lamps Are Going Out. I have been looking for an affordable copy of it for years. The one I am getting is the paper map first edition, but that suits me fine. I will be playing it solo, and the fact that it uses areas rather than hexes is something I find helps to avoid analysis paralysis. Time will tell how much play it gets (my record with boardgames is not great!), but I hope that it will be one I can set up and play in a weekend, and come back to repeatedly when the mood strikes.

Speaking of boardgames, I also recently got hold of a copy of Ben Hull's Fields of Fire. It is a heavy undertaking, but I am building up to it. As a dedicated solitaire game it is something that once learned will be rewarding. But I digress from my stated purpose - that one is already out of the post and on the shelf!

Sentinum 295 BC with Lost Battles

SP came around tonight for another session of Lost Battles. Our last ancients game was, looking at blog records, late last year, when we played Zama and SP carried off the Washbourn Trophy in triumph. This time around we would play Sentinum. 

SP elected to play the Romans. They have an advantage in fighting value, 69 as against 60 for the Samnites and Gauls, but most of that is taken up with superior Roman generalship. The armies themselves are pretty even - five units of cavalry for the Romans - one veteran, the rest average; five units of mounted for the coalition, four heavy cavalry, one chariotry.

In infantry the coalition has fourteen units of heavy infantry against the Roman ten legionary units and two levy light infantry units. The numbers favour the coalition, but the Roman legionaries have better morale and when fresh are harder to hit.

The Romans have an average commander in Fabius and an uninspired cavalry leader in Decius Mus. The coalition has Gellius Egnatius as an uninspired infantry leader.

So far there is not much between the armies, but at Sentinum the coalition is classed as fatigued: that is, their staying power is compromised. Once a Gallic or Samnite unit has taken a hit, it attacks thereafter at -1, meaning in effect that all things being equal a fatigued heavy infantry unit up against a legionary unit will need 11 or 12 on two dice to to score a hit, so the coalition troops have to try to make an impact early and keep as many units fresh as possible for as long as possible.

Looking from behind the Roman right.

As it eventuated, there was not too much need for deep strategy: it was one of those rare games when everything went right for my side and nothing for my worthy opponent. 

Our right wing engaged immediately, and the infantry in the three central zones advanced. I kept the cavalry on my left refused. They were outnumbered and I felt it was best to be circumspect at the outset.

One wing and the centre engaged. My refused left can be seen on right of the picture.

The Gauls on my right quickly made inroads and the chariots burst through after just two turns of combat, shattering one unit and routing the guard for the unfortunate Decius Mus and denuding the Roman left of any meaningful defenders.

A double hit is scored, Decius Mus is unable to rally either of them, and the Roman left is lost.

Why did the Romans not invoke Favour of the Gods and force a re-roll, Lost Battles afficionadoes may ask? The reason for this is that I had already had such frighteningly good dice in the centre that SP had invoked the gods there, and with the token now in my hands, could not do so again until I had issued an invocation of my own. 

The action continued apace.

Galvanised by the early loss of his left wing and cognisant of the need to fight fire with fire in the centre, SP put as many command points into combat bonuses as he could. This paid off with hits against the Samnite left centre under Gellius. But in doing this he neglected to make use of his cavalry superiority on the right.

 

The refused Samnite cavalry wing is left unmolested.

Gellius Egnatius leads the Samnites as the centres continue the fight. The victorious Gallic cavalry and chariotry can just be seen in the distance in behind the Roman left.

The Roman rear is now exposed and with three units to use for this purpose, the Gauls focus on getting deep in behind the Romans to interfere with their morale and prepare to strike in future turns. SP pulls two units of cavalry out of the line on his right to respond to the threat.

A double hit by Gellius on the Roman right centre sees another unit shattered and the levy light infantry flee.  

With options running out for Rome bold attacks are initiated by the cavalry, now split across two zones to meet threats from two directions, and by the legionaries in the central zones.

Black arrows show direction of Roman attacks in turn 6.

The chariots are hit, but do not break. The other cavalry fails to hit at all. In the right centre, a mighty effort smites Gellius's unit, but in a scene which epitomises SP's luck tonight, Gellius rallies the hit. There is another successful attack in the central zone, but not enough to turn the tide. 

A series of attacks by the coalition sweep away the remaining Roman cavalry and Fabius's sector of the infantry line. The rest of the army holds on for the remainder of the turn, but Gellius administers the coup de grace on the turn after.

Final attack: Gellius rolls up the Roman line, already beset front and rear, with an attack from the flank.

It was a rather unfortunate game for SP. He stuck at it but you can't do much when the dice are your enemy.

From my perspective The Gauls and Samnites were able to keep just enough units fresh to avoid the worst effects of fatigue, and seemed to manage to align their most important attacking moments with their most potent dice rolling. The luck went entirely my way, but it was interesting to see a Lost Battles Roman army unexpected defeated on the table: beat the cavalry, surround the infantry, wear them down until morale starts to fail. 

It was pretty much the historical formula.

Victory Points:

Rome: 

The coalition spent: 3 x average heavy cavalry, 1 x average chariot, 9 x average heavy infantry equates to 52 points

Samnites & Gauls:

Roman shattered: 2 x average legionaries, 2 x average heavy cavalry, 1 x veteran heavy cavalry equates to 32 points

Roman routed: 2 x levy light infantry, 8 x average legionaries, 2 x average heavy cavalry equates to 46 points

Withdrawn: 1 x average commander, 1 x uninspired leader, equates to 9 points. 

Handicap: 18 points

Fatigued: 20 points

Total points for Rome: 52; for Samnites & Gauls: 125, for a major victory.

I now get to keep the Washbourn Trophy for a spell, which makes a bit of a change!

Libyans on base

There have been a few delays but we've finally got to the fun part - taking the freshly varnished figures off their temporary strips and arranging them on their bases. I think I've said it here before, but it's the part of the painting process I enjoy most. 

The hard work is done and the game - as it were - is almost afoot.

To delay things further, the reason it took about four weeks to get these chaps to this stage is two-fold: one, I decided to bolster the ranks a little, and two, it has been difficult to find the right paints I use during the basing process.

The extra figures I got are from Potbelly Miniatures, a 3d printing enterprise based in New Zealand, of whose existence Mike of Bucellarii kindly apprised me a few posts ago. They are nice figures, but the resin used presented a challenge - none of my glues would work! It took me a bit of time to find the solution, which turned out to be Cyanoacrylate from Avetek NZ. 

The other problem (still not resolved, unfortunately!) is paint. In Japan I used to finish figure bases in Tamiya Flat Green, cardboard bases in any variety of green or khaki, and the edges of said bases in Mr Hobby H58, Interior Green. In order to maintain consistency, I wanted to use the same colours over here, but had not got them yet. I therefore ordered a few pots of the H58. These took about a week to arrive. When I went to use them, I found to my surprise that it is no longer the same colour. I wondered if I'd ordered the wrong code, and went to check: apparently Mr Hobby changed the formula in 2019. 

So I was stuck. I had two pots of paint that won't do the business. Do I order some black and try to mix them to the right colour or find something from another manufacturer that's closer? In the interests of saving time and shipping costs I tried buying a Humbrol pot from a local store, but that is not quite right either. Hmm.

It wouldn't be so bad if this were Japan. It would take ten minutes to find an alternative hobby paint at the local Joshin, and even if you got things wrong it would cost you about $10 for the various paints and thinners I've picked up so far. In New Zealand these mis-steps have cost me $80 and I still don't have the right colour. Oh well. It's never going to do much for your equilibrium comparing prices of hobby products between NZ and Japan!

So I will just use the wrong colour in the meantime and hope it is only me that notices the difference.

The figures drying on their bases (with the offending H58 in the background!)

One thing I have reason to be thankful for is that I was able to bring my non-hobby acrylic paints back here from Japan with me, so it's rare for me to need to actually buy any paint. I shouldn't grumble too much!

Anyway, on to the flocking stage, and I have a game planned for tonight with SP, so it should be a good long weekend.

A Game of Empire

 As a break from painting I got out my copy of Phil Sabin's Empire to play a solo game. Empire is a light wargame set in the ancient era covering 200 years from the time of Alexander through to the demise of an independent Macedon. The map covers Iberia to India, with areas connected by land or sea. It starts with the Achaemenid Persians pre-eminent in the east, controlling eight areas, and Carthage (three areas) dwarfing the foundling Roman Republic (which has to meet consolidation conditions before it can begin to campaign) and Macedon, both of which control just one home area to begin with.

There is a revolt phase (die rolls to find which area throws off the yoke of its oppressor) then a campaign phase in which each of the four powers look to expand their territory or reassert control over territory lost. Three 'great captains' (you can probably guess who they are!) allow five campaigns on the turn(s) they are active instead of the usual single campaign per power.  

There are two scoring rounds, turn 10 and turn 20. Carthage and Persian start with 12 VPs each; Rome and Macedon start with 0

We pick up the action in 350 BC.

350-341 BC. Bactria revolts. Carthage conquers Sicilia. Rome bickers with its Latin neighbours. The Persian Empire moves on Aegyptus but is defeated. Macedon conquers Graecia.

340-331 BC. Persia revolts. Alexander rampages through the east, taking Thracia, Asia, Pontus, Syria and Aegyptus. Rome continues to bicker. Persia takes back the province of Persia. Carthage fails to take Magna Graecia.

330-321 BC. Aegyptus revolts. Alexander continues his campaign, taking Armenia, Mesopotamia, Persia and Parthia. The Persians attempt a revolt in their home territory but fail. Carthage again fails to find a foothold in Magna Graecia. Rome is still embroiled in internecine conflicts. 

320-311 BC. Macedon fails to take Bactria. The Parthians successfully reclaim their capital. Rome consolidates Italia and now has a presence in the Mediterannean. Carthage fails to make any headway in Magna Graecia.

Alexander's conquests and Parthia reclaimed for the green team.

 

Carthage dominates the western sea as Rome emerges.

310-301 BC. Pontus revolts. The Parthians fail to take Bactria. Rome fails to take Magna Graecia, and so fails Carthage. The Successor kingdoms reassert control of Pontus.

300-291 BC. Thracia revolts. The Parthians again fail to take Bactria. Carthage takes Magna Graecia; Rome promptly takes it off Carthage. 

290-281 BC. Persia revolts. Carthage tries another futile expedition to Magna Graecia. The Successors fail to bring Aegyptus into their orbit. Parthia fails to take Bactria. Rome fails to take Cisalpina. Failure is epidemic!

280 - 271 BC. Macedon takes Thracia. Rome fails in an expedition to Sicilia, Parthia fails to take Bactria, and Carthage fails to take Magna Graecia.

270 - 261 BC. There is a revolt in Numidia. Rome takes Sicilia. Successors fail to take Aegyptus. Carthage fails to retake Numidia. Parthia takes Bactria at last. 

260 - 251 BC. Thracia revolts. Carthage brings Numidia back into the fold. The Successors again fail to take Aegyptus. Rome fails to take Cisalpina. 

Rome and Carthage with their spheres of influence (251 BC).

Rome and Macedon (251 BC)

The east (251 BC)

This is now the first scoring round. Parthia controls Parthia and Bactria for 2 points, taking them to 14. Carthage controls Africa (2), Numidia, Iberia (2) for 5 points. This takes them to 17. Rome controls Italia (3), Magna Graecia, Sicilia for 5 points, giving them 5. Macedon controls Macedonia, Graecia, Asia, Pontus, Syria, Armenia, Mesopotamia for 7 points. 

At this stage I thought that Rome looked to be in a strong position to push for a win in turn 20. 

250-241 BC. Revolt in Graecia. Rome tries to attack Africa, unsuccessfully. Carthage attempts to take Sicilia but fails. Macedon takes Graecia again.Parthia fails to take Persian. 

240-231 BC. Rome takes Cisalpina. Carthage fails to take Gallia. Greeks fail against Aegyptus; Parthians fail against Persia.

230-221. Revolt in Magna Graecia. Rome fails to retake it. Parthia fails to take India. Legacy Successors take Aegyptus. Carthage fails to take Gallia.

220-211 BC. Hannibal sweeps through Gallia, Cisalpina, Italia, bringing Rome to its knees. Macedon fails to take Thracia, Parthians succeed in taking Persia, Rome, forced to consolidate again, fails. 

After Hannibal's devastating campaigns against Rome.

210-201 BC. Revolt in Iberia. Scipio consolidates Rome and retakes Magna Graecia, but three other campaigns fail. Carthage fails to reclaim Iberia. Macedon takes Thracia. Parthia successfully conquers India. 

200-191 BC. Pontus revolts. The Roman expansion continues: they take Cisalpina, Gallia, Iberia, Numidia, and just fail to take Africa. Parthia fails to take Mesopotamia. the Successors retake Pontus. Carthage reclaims Numidia.

The Roman revenge is swift, but they do not expand east into Greece.

190-181 BC. Revolt in Syria. Carthage fails to take Iberia. Parthia fails against Mesopotamia. Successors take Syria and Rome fails to claim Sicilia.

180-171 BC. Revolt in Syria again. Parthia takes Mesopotamia. Carthage fails to take Iberia.  Successors claim Syria. Rome takes Sicilia. 

170-161 BC. Revolt in India. Macedon fails to take Illyria. Rome takes Numidia. Parthia fails to claim India. Carthage can't wrest back Numidia.

160-151 BC FINAL TURN: Revolt in Asia. Rome takes Africa. Carthage's attempt to revolt fails. Parthia is unsuccessful in India again and the Successors fail to take Asia.

Last turn scoring: 

Rome: Italia (3) Magna Graecia, Sicilia, Africa (2), Numidia, Iberia (2), Gallia, Cisalpina for 12 points, taking them to 17.

Macedon: Macedonia, Graecia, Thracia, Aegyptus (2), Syria, Pontus, Armenia for 8 points, or 15 all up.

Carthage: no territories remaining, it rests on the 17 it had at turn 10.

Parthia: Parthia, Bactria, Persia, Mesopotamia for 4 points, taking them to 18.

Parthia takes the win with 18. 17 for Rome and Carthage and 15 for Macedon.

Views of the board at game end.

Final positions. 

It was another interesting play of a Phil Sabin game, and surprisingly close. With two turns to go any of the four powers could have won mathmatically. By the last turn it was down to Carthage and Parthia, though I didn't know that until I tallied up the final score. If Carthage had held Africa on the final turn they would have taken the game.

Thoughts: Rome was fighting Carthage all game and never got a chance to expand east. Macedon could not hold Alexander's conquests, with vital revolts depriving it of a stronger result in the first scoring round. But it did manage to stay competitive. Carthage had a worthy fight with Rome and was only just short of victory. Parthia got back into the game with an early successful revolt against Macedon in its home area, and did just enough to take the win.

I wonder if Rome slightly underperforms in Empire. I don't recall a Roman victory in the times I've played it, and the need to risk a sea attack to get a foothold in Greece seems to result in a 'Carthage first' policy when an attack east earlier is probably necessary to achieve a win. 

Good, thoughtful fun anyway, as is usual with Phil Sabin's designs.

Ventures into the leadpile and other matters

Now that I seem to have got myself back into a bit of a painting routine* and have nearly finished my latest batch of figures, I've naturally started to look at a) what to prep next and b) what next to buy. 

I would dearly like to get my Achaemenid Persians to the point that they could be fielded for a Lost Battles scenario or two, but it would also be an asset to have more Hellenistics painted up. Greek City State and Successor scenarios make magnificent spectacles, but Plataea, Issus and Gaugamela would look fairly presentable as well.  

What to do.

Well, I had a look at the lead pile, or at least the most relevant portions of it.

Hellenistics

Geez, that's a lot to paint... 

The Persians

And so is that... 

For the Persians, ironically enough, what sticks out is what I don't have. There are no Immortals or Sparabara in the pile, and I want to be able to cover Early Achaemenids as well. I've placed a test order with Potbelly Miniatures at the suggestion of Mike, author of the excellent Bucellarii blog, and am also going to look at putting in an order at Museum for some of their Z range Persians. Right at this moment I am probably more interested in gaming the Persian invasion of Greece than I am in Alexander's expeditions (for which I have, unpainted, the Persian figures already). I don't however want to rush in and buy figures that may not fit with the rest of the collection. I will get a few samples and make sure I'm going to be happy with what I do finally order.

As always, the painting focus is on economy of action: the quicker I can get to playing status the better. Coming off painting Libyan foot, more phalangites (for Raphia and the bigger Successor battles) is tempting - it's basically the same colour scheme but with pikes - but that is also the challenge: would painting ennui await? 

While economy of action is all well and good, at some point, with any army, you simply have to knuckle down and do the work. I think that's about where I'm at with the Persians. I have quite a few skirmishers, archers, Egyptian spearmen and cavalry done already, but nowhere near enough to field a Lost Battles army. If I want to make decent progress I need to just sit down and do it.

That said, at the moment I think I will prevaricate, prep some Greek horse, and see what the new orders look like when they arrive.

One of the things I have to be wary of (and seeing the huge amount of lead in the Hellenistic pile above provides proof!) is a tendency towards the never-ending army syndrome. For a variety of reasons, I buy figures for armies that are, by most reasonable measures, finished. A sensible person would be devoting their dosh and time to working on their other armies that are not. 

But who said that you have to be sensible in wargaming? 

State of my 15mm Ancient-era armies.

Complete:

Polybian Romans (x2). Marian Romans (x2). Gauls. Iberians. Early and Later Carthaginians. Macedonians/Successors (x1.5). Latins/Samnites.

Incomplete but fieldable for some scenarios or as contingents:

Hoplite Greeks. 

Fieldable as contingents, or for half-sized games:

Parthians. Numidians. 

Awaiting the brush:

Achaemenid Persians. Second Successor army. Polybian Romans (to replace some figures I'm not happy with). Second hoplite Greek army.

Looking at this, it is clear what I need to do: just get on with the Persians, and throw in some Successors / Greeks in small batches every now and then for a change.

 *at the cost, sadly, of my guitar-playing routine!

On the painting table

A little later in the year than I'd hoped, but we're finally making a spot of painting progress at the house of Prufrock.

I had planned to have these ready to do Ilipa for the Society of Ancients Battle Day, but as so often happens, the plan did not come to fruition!

These are work in progress Carthaginian spearmen with hoplon, who can be used as Sacred Band for earlier periods or Libyan infantry for Hannibal's war. They are from the Corvus Belli range, but produced in plastic by the Plastic Soldier Company. They are lovely figures. I'm a little pickier with their cavalry, but the Corvus Belli infantry ranges are superb. Unfortunately, they seem to be out of stock at the Plastic Soldier Company now, so when or whether they will be available again I don't know.

Getting close to completion...

Which means I'd best make the most of the ones I have. There are enough for four 16-man units, but as my initial purchase was a couple of figures short, they sent me an extra 8, meaning if I scrounge the bits box and repurpose some command figures I can probably field 72 altogether.

Batch 2 still has more work to do

I'm yet to decide whether to leave the shields as they are or add designs. 

Painting guide:

Dark grey undercoat

Mid brown for spear shafts, sandals, shield backs

Flesh for arms, legs, hands, faces

Light grey for linen armour and shields

Red brown for straps, scabbards

Red for tunics

Dark silver / iron for spearheads

Antique bronze for helmets, shield edges.

White highlight for linen armour, shields

Gold to highlight bronze, shield edges

Silver highlight for spearheads

Highlight for tunics

Green for bases

Magic wash

Highlight for flesh, other areas that might need a touch up

Spray varnish x 2

I haven't been in a painting routine for a long time so am just trying to do a bit each night before dinner and/or after the kids are in bed. I'd like to get some Greek cavalry done next and then try to make a dent in my Achaemenid Persians.

We'll see how we go!