Bad Workmen...

I managed to get to the club this week.



I got in a couple of games the first was a Force on Force game set in Bosnia.

Now, I don't want to get too grumpy about this game. And certainly at the time I did get a bit of the face on. But I really didn't get the rule system. To put that statement into some sort of context, I hadn't read the rules and therefore didn't cotton on to a couple of things that perhaps expose my prejudices.

The first is that Force on Force is so obviously an American ruleset. Which I define as being overly complicated, non intuative, and requiring of playing in a defined playstyle.

And I accept this is harsh, and I am sure that it is a fun game - I have seen and heard many people say that it is. But...

Let's put it this way...

I get the iniative, drive onto the table, take a position in cover behind a hedge and declare that I am going to shoot at some Croats hidden in a nearby wood. A dice gets rolled. For some reason they get to shoot first. Ok I can live with that. They shoot, three of my guys get wounded. Ok I can live with that. So I drive onto the table with an APC, take up a position near to the first truck, declare I am going to shoot the guys int he wood with a heavy machine gun. They decide they are going to run away. They roll a dice. And they get to run away, I don't get to shoot at them or anyone else.

At which point I am thinking... eh?

I mean I get that things have different reaction times, and it is perfectly possible for those guys to take a shot at the first truck, and then at the sight of the APC they leg it. But it seems a little strange to me the APC can't then target something else.

And it go even more bizarre when in the second turn some guys started blowing things up with what appeared to be a belt fed RPG. Everything of mine that so much as blinked an eye in their direction granted them a reaction, and every reaction shot they took involved firing a rocket at my troops.

But like I said I haven't read the rules so I don't know what the time scale in a turn it is.



Perhaps the intention is that each action of the player with the iniative is abstracted to represent a period twenty or thirty seconds after the previous action - or howver long it takes for the non-active player to spot, be int he perfect position, and have a reloaded piece of anti-tank ordinance ready for action (although to be fair, the attacks were made with one less dice for each subsequent attack ;))

And seemingly the player with the iniative can't even turn the tables on the seemingly super human non-active player by trying to give the iniative away. I tried this by going on overwatch, but even then it turned out the non-active got the advantage and just blew stuff up before I even got to fire.

Add to this the rather weird notion - given the super human ability of the defending player to spot everything and react according - that when the attacking player had finished their turn, the defender was then allowed to run around and redeploy without interferance.

It was at this point that I got a bit of the game face on, and went for a fag, thinking this was the silliest game I have played in a long while and wondering why this abstract nonsense was so popular.

When I returned, calmed by nicoteine, I declared my intention to retreat of the board, had a bit of cross purpose conversation with Dean who was umpiring and we agree to move onto a game of General Quarters.



Dean played the Japanese, Rich (I'm terrible with names, so my apologies if I get your name wrong) played the Americans and I umpired.

There wasn't really a scenario, I ran through the SDS cards, a few of the basic rules, advised both players to make smoke and away we went.

It is a long time since I played General Quarters, and I wondered if I had got the balance of the forces a little wrong when in the first turn the US heavy cruiser, Quincy, crippled the Japanese light cruiser, Kino, with a single salvo. But I needed have worried as the game progressed rather nicely, with the usual torpedo fuelled mayhem amid the trails of smoke.

It was pretty much a draw, with Japanese losing 2 light cruisers, and a couple of destroyers, and the US losing the heavy cruiser Helena, and a couple of destroyers, with the Quincy managing to limp off the table to safety with it's bridge and rudder destroyed, having only recently managed ot put out a serious fire.



Afterwards I sort of managed to arrange a RCW game with Rich (sorry if I got your name wrong) and then it was off to catch the bus, and grab a latte (with a northern flat 'a') and a couple of sausage rolls from Greggs.

On the way home after reading through the 8 pages of rules for General Quarters and noticing a few rules that had been played wrongly - such as forgetting to apply the minimal range - my mind turned to the substantially thicker set of rules that is Force on Force.

One obvious note to make is that no one involved with the game today was entirely conversant with the rules, but leaving that aside.

I get that the intention of the rules to cut out the early turns of the game, and plunge the player into the action. And if we were looking at today's game from a narrative perspective it was a good simulation of modern warfare - I as the Serb commander who had very little idea of what he was doing, turned up at a village, got ambushed and killed in very short order.

But as I mulled over my perception of the mechanics I found myself wondering about some of the game design choices.

For instance I didn't understand why troops could get badly wounded. In terms of the game they served no further purpose, yet for some reason they remained on the table. Perhaps it offered scenarios for evacution. And ok it did have a psychological effect on me, in that as soon as one of the squads took such casualties I had a distinct disincentive to move the rest of the squad - but then the rather odd reaction mechanic did this any way.

I am not saying that the reaction mechanic was bad - well actually I am sort of.

For instance I lost the APC because I declared that I was going to fire a .50cal machine gun at a house that had a squad with an RPG. The got the jump on me fired first and blew up the APC. Fine, if I was in a house with an RPG and their was an APC in the vacinity, that would probably be my No 1 target. But my problem with the mechanic in the game is that keeping that 'truism' in mind had the APC declared against another target, and another unit had targetted the squad with the RPG, then the RPG would have targetted them. Add to this that it wasn't even the fire of the .50cal machine gun that prompted the response but the controlling players intention.

Which to me brings it back to this being a matter of 'modern' American game design, imo. That the mechanics of the game are played rather than the situation - which is one of the reasons games like Warmachine and Malifaux have no interest for me. In the situation with the APC I had three squads and the APC. Had I played the mechanics, and fired the three squads before the APC, and drawn the fire of the RPG with the accompanying diminishing number of dice, by the time the APC fired it would have been less likely that the APC would have been destroyed. Which just seems wrong - and tantamount to combo play.

It may seem that I am simply moaning, however I am willing to give the game another go - more than one if I can. And I am quite happy to adopt the playstyle in order to enter into the enjoyment. It's just, and allowing for the truthful nature of the narrative created by the game it just isn't my idea of what a modern battle should feel like.

I found myself comparing Force on Force with Through the Mud and the Blood. True I haven't played the latter - which will hopefully be rectified, either next Sunday or in the near future - and I found myself wishing that Force on Force had more friction. For instance, instead of a unit getting a reaction to every threat, and the test being whether it got the jump or had to take the punishment before the reaction, that there was a chance that it just didn't react at all - which in game turns is solved by the simple expedient of only being able to fire once per turn. Or that instead of wounds, the figure is either dead or alive and the wounds are implied by the suppression counters.

Still very few plans in war stand up to the first contact with the enemy, so it may well be that Through the Mud and the Blood won't stand up to my expectations.

And Force on Force certainly gave me plenty to think about on the way home.

Still it was nice to see Dean and Rich (sorry if that's not your name) having fun playing General Quarters.

peace:)

The Spanish Ulcer

My guess is that every wargamer has a particular army/project that they 'obsess' about in idle moments.

For me at the present time, that army/project is the Spanish Napoleonic force I am currently window shopping for.

I have made a few decisions. The regular line infantry will be Victrix French 1804-07 - with plumes added. The militia will be a mixture of Eagle miniatures and Perry Carlists. I may add a few Front Rank. The plan is to work on the infantry first and then see what is available for the cavalry and the artillery.

In considering the force I have a number of issues/questions that I am looking to built into the army.

The first relates to the regular forces. From all acounts the Spanish army was hamstrung by outdated ideas, a shortage of officers and corruption. Using Black Powder rules, my idea is to have battalions of 24 infantry but in 4 companies (4 bases). I realise many people prefer 4 figures to a base, but for me it doesn't really give the feeling of massed infantry that I prefer. My plan is then to have the Grenadier detached into small grenadier battlions of 12 figures. And similarly sized units of light infantry.

Thus in an infantry brigade the regulars would have 6 units - 2 standard sized infantry battlions plus 4 small units of detached grenadiers and light infantry. The detached units would not have the 'must form square' special rule though they would be able to form square as part of the brigade.

The brigade would also include between two and four militia battalions of 12 figures on two bases - counting as small units - with the same rules about forming square.

This would create a brigade of between 8 and 10 units, that would have the potential for good fire power, and good support options which encourage the brigade to be used in successive lines in the 18th century fashion, but is unweildy and potentially difficult to control and co-ordinate.

The other idea I am working on is to give this force minimal cavalry and artilley support, perhaps more than the maladministration of the Spanish army explains the percieved poor performance. Also I am struck by the numerous accounts of the army in the field using what can be best described as 'elan' tactics akin to the French in 1914 - that may be surmised in the immortal words of Corporal Jones as, 'they don't like it up 'em.' Hence my current thinking of pitting numerous small Spanish battalions - with a stamina of 2 - against large French battalions - with stamina of 4. The aim is to create an army that is liable to shock, with built in morale and command problems, but doesn't use the catch all - and imo rather silly - unreliable special rule.

If you can get the army deployed correctly and acting on brigade orders, and when close to the enemy using independent moves, then it could be very effective. leaving the commander running around the brigade trying to keep on top of all the shaken units to keep the brigade in the fight.

The current plan is to have two of these brigades, supported by minimal artillery and cavalry.

We shall see how this develops.

peace:)

Mes Enfants

Another unit of French rolls off the production line.



To get me through the painting process I have been binging on Sharpe on utube. It hardly seemed worth painting them at some points, given the French proclivity to die at the hands of the gallent 95th ;)

peace:)

A Matter of Scale

I'm a little less grumpy today.

I'm still plugging on painting Napoleonic infantry. Oh and the Russian hovel mentioned a few days ago is coming along nicely. The thatching on the roof - bristles from a broom - is proving more problematic than anticipated.

For those wondering about the scale of Matchbox Yesteryear vehicles, this is a useful link.

Interestingly, the designers at Matchbox took the approach that the most important thing was that the product fitted into the box. Therefore the range goes from 1/34th scale to 1/130th.

If only many wargamers would take a similar approach to their games.

peace:)

Moithering On

Occasionally I pop over to the Warlord forums to see what is going on with Black Powder.

I have to admit that my heart sinks whenever I do so. The first cause of dismay is the chatter about producing a book of army lists. And, the second is people chipping and chirping about rules questions. What makes this depressing is that the two are pretty linked. Which is a shame. Not least because it will not be long before numpties start organising Black Powder tournaments, and what should be a mildly competative game played between gentlemen becomes subject to 'modern' wargaming culture.

Anywho...

I have found myself making the kind of web searches that usually indicate a new project.

Ok, I still have some more things that I want to get for the RCW - and maybe even a new faction - but increasing I find myself looking for information on the Spanish armies in the Peninsula War.

Now obviously the Spanish forces in the Peninsula do not have a great reputation. But the thing that has always puzzled me is that this perception doesn't entirely match the facts. No one argues that the French army were composed of poor soldiers because of the Battle of Baylen. No one claims the French officers were terrible because the supply broke down, or their men were in terrible shape. And given the political situation and recent history, it is highly likely that the recorded views of the British toward their Spanish allies - and vice versa - is highly likely to be clouded.

And the one thing that cannot be denied is that the Spanish managed to maintain forces in the field, and continue fighting despite having no central government. The standardised answer is to state this was only possible because of the actions of the guerillas, the length of the French supply lines, the terrain, and the huge numbers of French troops tied down by civilian actions. All of which may be true. But it doesn't explain how armies were kept in the field without a central treasury, commiseriate, etc.

I'm sure there are those that will come up with complicated explanations to these points, and I am equally sure I dont give a monkeys if they do. Because the question I am exploring is there must be a way of creating a Spanish force that represents the actual Spanish fighting capacity beyond giving them the unreliable special rule.

Anywho...

One of the joys of blogging is having a traffic counter. It is interesting to see where people viewing the site live. It is equally interesting to see what brought them to the site.

What I don't understand is why people in the wee small hours of the soul turn to google and go looking for "elven butt sex" or "28mm Vikings in stockings" or whatever.

Anywho...

I have been working on the next unit of French infantry. Only two more after this one, yay :).

peace:)

Nearly There

The Napoleonic infantry are finished...


In case you are thinking they don't look very French you'd be right... they are Swiss.

I didn't make it to the club for the game of Epic due to the snow. which was a shame. Still I have been pressing on with the painting. Currently I have three more battalions of French infantry to paint and 10 British WWI infantry to repaint - following the frosting incident - and then I will have painted everything that I have.

Obviously I have been window shopping for the things I would like to get - I wouldn't be a wargamer if I didn't - but there is a certain satisfaction to be so close to completeing the projects I started 18 months ago.

peace:)

It's Behind You

Continuing to work on the Napoleonics, and have started work on a matchstick Russian hovel.

Plus there is some light with regard to the weekend as I may have been offered a way out of the purgatory of the tournament, in the form of an introduction to Epic.

Fingers crossed.

peace:)

Place Holder

So I have plunged into painting another 36 man Napoleonic unit.

Not much else to say today...

peace:)