Well, I didn't get the Resistance figures finished in time for last VWC. Maybe two weeks down the line then. Part of the problem is that I keep finding parts I missed (taking photos is really good for this) and so completion feels like it's slipping further away. But one step at a time...
I did find an interesting Youtube video that made me think about my scattershot way of doing things:
So I tried (and failed) to focus on these guys. Here's where I am at present, with the rifles and SMGs painted with Sir Coates Silver. This is a Duncan Rhodes paint, and I am painting quite a bit to the accompaniment of his painting videos.
Since, I've done spot colors on things like scarves, bottles and blankets. Scarves, bottles and a pair of glasses in green, socks and blanket in red (I intended to try stripes or a plaid pattern on these, but it didn't work).
Last "base colors" are the hair. Finally, touch-up. Which I simply haven't got to, partly because I find it frustrating. Photography makes it worse, because pictures are really good for picking up mistakes! At this point, I may just base them and have done; a "dirty" look is less obvious from tabletop height anyway.
Have also done a few more Paperboys, this time for work:
Ran an early version of The Portable Wargame at work. Some Patriots, faced by 1812 British I already had, and guns and dragoons from the '45 set.
Peter Dennis has most recently put out a very nice set of "tidelines" with driftwood, stones and even a sea turtle for decoration. I put a few out in the children's area for what I think of as a "guerrilla craft."
I'll be working at a local convention this Friday, and have printed off some Fantasy sheets for a bit more crafting. We'll see how it goes.
Finally, again a bit late, here's the conclusion-video to the club Saipan game:
Yet another Oriskany Jim game yesterday, this one timed for the 80th anniversary of the invasion of Saipan. As usual, a beautiful board and miniatures, some of them lent by my partner for the day, Mark Ritchie.
Another reason I came was to play a bit of my part as club librarian. There is quite a nice collection of books and games that we need to organise. Mark suggested using a clipboard to track anything "checked out." I should've thought of that myself, as it's how my library handles computer sessions and magazines. I'll make a grid with spaces for name, title, date checked out and date returned, which should be perfectly workable. I also photographed the book spines and boardgame boxes, with intent to make a list of the collection - the magazines and slim wargame rule volumes will have to wait.
The arrangement seen above turned out to be for show; Mark and I were invited to determine our own "waves" and assault objectives, while our opponent Devon could shift around some of his Japanese units. There were five game objectives scattered in the green area of the board; these were worth 3 points to the Japanese player and 2 points to us - 3 points if we could get an engineering vehicle to them. Initiative was by platoon, plus a naval fire phase and an air attack phase for the Americans.
The rules are Jim's own homebrew, with I think squads repping platoons. D10s are used, with D12s for artillery scatter. Moves are turn-and-turn-about, by platoon (ie usually 2-4 sections or gun positions), so reaction to moves is possible - much better than UGoIGo, I felt. It kept our interest and the game was quite active. On a unit's move, it can choose two of a selection of options - move/shoot, move/move, shoot/shoot, disembark/charge, etc. Unlike some of the other games we've played with Jim as GM, there is no morale, pinning, etc. The Japanese are fanatics and the Marines are... well, the game is run by an ex-Marine.
Second Battalion, 6th Marines had:
12 LVT amtracs
4 LVT "amtanks", two with M8 howitzer turrets and two with M5 37mm turrets.
Three platoons of Marines loaded in the amtracs, ten to a vehicle. Eight of these line infantry with machine guns, bazookas and rifles, three heavy weapon/engineer units with flamers, mortars, etc.
Four scratch-built card LCTs, loaded with...
3 M5 Stuarts, two bulldozers and four trucks (the dozers and trucks counted as engineering vehicles).
Three shots from offshore ships, and one airstrike (an F4F Wildcat, which I hadn't known was still operated by the USN at this point).
The Japanese defenders of 136th Regiment had:
Two heavy and eight lighter guns
Bunkers and emplacements.
Six assorted light tanks and tankettes
Three twin 25mm antiaircraft guns
Four platoons of thirty infantry each (with light machine guns, grenade launchers, and a few katanas)
Two heavy machine gun teams
Two mortar teams
Japanese armor.
The infantry elements - US left, Japanese right.
A selection of US vehicles...
A classic F4F, replaced as a fighter by the F6F by now but kept on as a support plane. The Brits used them into 1945.
And, as usual, lovely terrain pieces. (and a few toy trees, but they match pretty well.) Walls stand in for trenches.
Turn 1:
Our three "naval-bombardment" shots fell and satisfyingly destroyed two guns and one infantryman. There is a scatter rules, so it's easy enough to pick a crowded area and still hit something.
Then the Japanese big guns went on overwatch for when we brought our transports on the table towards the beach.
Then the Wildcat destroyed an AA gun position.
The US assault was split - not a smart move, but we were aiming to keep out of the arc of fire of the biggest gun and hoped to sweep around both flanks. The table was laid out in a manner calculated to allow vehicles to reach the beach in one turn, then cross it in another, IF they double-moved. So we could go in slowly, firing as we went, or race forward and ultimately have less fire thrown back at us. We chose speed, despite having a dozen .50 cals to work with.
I started as far left (north on the tabletop) as I could, but was still barely in the fire arc and lost one LVT when it hit the beach:
Jim thoughtfully had destroyed vehicles prepared, all with damage to their port sides, so the hits had to spin the victims around.
I was disconcerted to be reminded that that had been overwatch fire in my turn, so an immediate second shot was fired and took out another LVT:
Jim ran out of these destroyed models pretty quickly...
So far I'd lost seven of the twenty men in these vehicles, though I had one sergeant and all the heavy weapons still to plaster the trenches with.
Then I moved the gun LVTs - move/fire - to no effect, and in response Japanese infantry fired into my survivors, twice, and killed five more of them.
Mark then moved our third LVT platoon onto the beach, and got blasted by overwatch, losing two of the LVTs and half the infantry in them. Then Japanese infantry took their turn and plastered the survivors. Mark moved up our fourth platoon and lost another LVT, but at least all our infantry was now on the shore. As the Japanese moved up their tank reserves, Jim double-checked the rules and realised he'd gotten the modifiers wrong, so a sixth LVT was added to the dead pile. That was fully half our transports! And the infantry survivors not in vehicles would have to slog across a clear beach...
More wreckage at the waterline.
Turn's end, with splashes for the shots that missed.
Turn 2:
Mark decided to drop our three fire support missions on the Japanese tanks. They scattered, but still did plenty of damage - three guns, a tank and a dozen infanty. Then the Wildcat came in again and killed two more tanks with its 100-pound bombs. The Navy was doing more work than the Marines so far.
Close-up on a target.
And another.
I moved our heavy LVTs up to the beach, but failed to shoot any of the tanks in sight. Mark moved his own surviving transports up the beach and disembarked the passengers - but that was his two actions, and they could not then assault the bunkers.
"We're right here next to the opening! Why don't our flamers work?"
Then Devon characterfully assaulted us instead. It just seemed the thing to do.
"Banzai!"
As the LCTs hit the beach with their loads of tanks and trucks, there was a second assault. Marines won both, wiping out an entire squad. Granted, the rolls were basic, adding up points and rolling that many dice, and since Mark's units were the engineers and got ten points for their flamers, two for the MGs, etc agains one for a rifle, it was clearly more of a point-blank firefight.
After a couple more assaults and an exchange of mortar fire, the Marines had a toehold up and off the beach.
I threw my two surviving LVTs forward - one a double move but out of LOS of the tanks, the other a move and disembarkation.
Turn 3:
The Navy took out a couple more tanks, a mortar and a dozen Japanese infantry. In exchange the one remaining tank destroyed yet another LVT, but then it was the Marines' turn again.
I've started reading Storm of Steel. It seems apposite.
Wildcat dives on the mortar team.
Tanks handled by bazooka, the flamer teams deal with the bunker.
At this point, there were almost no Japanese left, and they were all in the southeast corner of the board (opposite to where I'd started. With nothing left to shoot at us, I double-moved all our vehicles and started picking up objective markers.
View from the left flank. Note the lightning-fast Stuarts (42"!)
Turn 4:
All over bar a few high-explosive shells, which we dropped on the building now sheltering ten Japanese. Since it killed nine of them, the building was obviously kaput too, so Jim replaced it with a representative handful of scrap:
Standard still bravely waving over the ruins.
In Devon's turn, one fellow charged the Marines and was cut down. Then the F4F dealt with the last three, including the last AA gun (the AA guys simply did not earn their keep this game).
Turn 5:
Game not quite over yet, as technically the Japanese were still posthumously winning by objective points! So we spent the rest of turns 4 and 5 double-moving vehicles and grabbing them for the news photographers (read: Jim and his phone camera with an ending monologue for the upcoming video).
In general, a good game and good people to play it with. This was not a "fair" scenario, but rather the sort where the goal for the Japanese isn't to win, but to see how long they can hold out and how much damage they can do in the process. And they did do a lot of damage! It's just that it was only in the first two turns. Amphibious landings aren't fun at all and I for one was very discouraged by the casualties, ready to throw in the towel when I realised how far we still had to go under fire. But the Japanese took enough casualties doing it that by the time we made it off the beach, there wasn't much left to stop us. Praise to Devon for being a willing opponent with a few tactical tips. An enjoyable game all round.
As usual, Jim should have a two-part video up in a couple weeks. Til next time.
I worked late Thursday, so missed entirely the club 80th anniversary reenactment of D-Day, as presented by GM Pete Panzeri and recorded by Oriskany Jim:
But today I've got another game, my second with Jon Freitag and Fields of Honor, this time set in 1745 Piedmont. Let's see how it went!
The sides are me and Brian (Austria and Sardinia) vs. Doug and Alan (Bourbon France and Spain). All members of the Virtual Wargames Club. A difficult task for my side. I haven't followed Jon's previous run-thrus of this scenario, so I'm going in blind.
Now where did I put that dice tower...?
Lex has a new toy.
Note: This isn't entirely IgoUgo - initiative dice are drawn for each brigade. Also, I had trouble grokking Zoom and ended up looking from the Gallispan side for most of the game, and I didn't get many screenshots either. At one point, I tried to order enemy cavalry to charge. The others reckoned this was because I was using the browser version - will have to update. Another reason is that, unlike in the ACW game, most of the units on both sides wore white. I have seen that as a "fun" (depending on which side you're playing) mechanic - if you mistakenly fire into your own side under the impression they are the other side, it counts!
My side's deployment - I command the right (Austrians) while Brian has the left (Piedmontese). Bourbons across the river.
Turn 1: Alan's (enemy right) opposing infantry moved up to the river. It was actually a creek - harder to cross in line than in column, but not really a detriment to shooting or fighting.
Next, Brian (our left) retreated a cavalry brigade.
Doug fired at my gun and scored a hit.
Then I went. My gun returned fire and hit the infantry regiment opposite.
Brian's turn again, firing across the river again and doing a hit on another Gallispan unit.
Doug's de Grammont brigade started into the river.
End of turn 1 as seen from the Bourbon side of the table.
Turn 2: I went. Couldn't do anything, really, being out of range still for musketry. I fired my light gun (on 2d10), but got a 1 and 5 when I needed 6s to hit.
Doug moved forward into the river and over the bridge. After some back-and-forth, Brian decided to pop out his light infantry and fire into them. There was a brisk exchange.
Then Alan charged two cavalry regiments from the bridge into the Sardinian unit with King Emmanuele next to it, and moved an infantry regiment into the river on his flank and the light infantry's. Before the cavalry melee, though, Brian marched a musketeer unit forward and fired. He managed to eliminate one of the Spanish cavalry regiments! Close combat was also lucky for us and the second cavalry unit was killed off. The brigadier was also hurt, so Doug's infantry was "out of command."
Brian and I fired our guns into the central infantry regiment in the stream, to no effect.
The light infantry on our left, faced with four splashing line regiments, retreated into the woods.
Infantry and Cav advanced on my side of the table. I got three musketry hits (with first fire) but only one converted to a wound.
Still doing alright, but cracks are showing...
It was at this point that I became increasingly confused, which is one reason why the following notes are so sparse. (Or maybe it's the other way round.)
Turn 3: Doug crossed the river and slammed into me. With poor dice rolls, a cavalry unit was eliminated and my brigade broken. This is not bad per se - a minus one to rolls - but break half your brigades and you've lost.
I advanced infantry to the river and tried to stem an attack by two regiments. I got four dice, two hits (on 3+!), doubled for there being two opposing units in the hex, but my opponent saved all but one hit.
Like I said, I can barely tell these guys apart...
(These mini-dice are not very good, are they?)
Brian and I egged each other on here, persisting in ill-advised attacks. So did Doug, but his were more successful. Someone quoted Claverhouse - "He fears his fate too much, or his desserts are small, who will not put it to the touch to win or lose it all."
So we started to fall back. At this point I think the Bourbons had earned the minor victory conditions of holding three of the settlements - the major conditions were to hold Bassignana, the bridge on our side of the table, and two settlements.
"Advance in the opposite direction!" Note that both our flanks are no longer in touch with the enemy.
Turn 4: Some of our reserves turned up on our back line, for all the good it might do.
Alan's right flank (our left) went after Brian's light infantry in the woods. His line infantry advanced down the road, but Brian managed to counter-charge and destroy the regiment with his cavalry.
Then we lost a cavalry unit AND King Emmanuele (whoops). This meant that three of our four brigades were broken, and the survivors had to retire per Sudden Death conditions. End game, earlier than expected.
I rolled poorly today, but the real issue was my own confusion. Though, when you think about it, this mirrors the confusion of real generals. At least we pretty much mirrored the historical result of the battle!
I rather think it might have been a better idea to pull back my brigade - which turned out to have the best regiments, like grenadiers and guards - towards Brian's side of the table. By the time I decided on that, it was too late.
No blame to Jon here - as usual, his presentation and GMing were excellent. The time flew by, and I barely thought about the rules at all. It may not sound it from my description, but I enjoyed the game. Hopefully I can get another in, less than two-plus years from now!
After the self-recrimination in last post, I've decided to track what I get up to in a week of dancing around the fringes of gaming.
Friday:
Read most of The Price of Admiralty, by John Keegan.
Bought the Paperboys Buccaneers set (thinking of building pirates as a library craft, perhaps oversized, for skirmish games and take-home).
Watched a Duncan Rhodes 40K painting videos (23 minutes)
Read one White Dwarf (497). Had an interesting "hobby bingo" bit as well as a writeup of the latest version of Tale of Four Gamers, which might be a useful way to organize and plan a project.
Browsed Wofun Games site and deliberated over ordering Seven Years War 10mms or Maratha 18mms.
Saturday:
Listened to three more Duncan Rhodes videos whilst trying to get to sleep at 3am on a work day.
Printed a dozen sheets of the Buccaneers set.
Started cutting them out - just cutting away the wide white margins for now.
Printed one sheet at 200% (giving me six figures) and experimented for summer craft project purposes. An interested parent built most of them for me!
Sunday:
Watched another Duncan Rhodes video, and a Warhammer TV short painting video. I like ones that are basic (just a handful of colors) - they seem more achievable - but Duncan has a soothing voice, like Bob Ross for wargaming.
Finished The Price of Admiralty. Like anything by Keegan, it's good. Resembles his The Face of Battle, in that it focuses on several battles separated by time to look for commonalities and differences.
Started Marine Sniper. It feels more superficial than I expected, perhaps because it's written as a narrative rather than history or biography - more adventure story. The style is like fiction for younger readers, though clipped and straightforward. Hathcock calls the VC "hot dogs" and "hamburgers," slang terms I've never encountered. Excerpts from an official proposal are included, and have suggested further reading (from WWI).
Finished trimming the Buccaneer sheets. Also assembled one leftover 18mm-scale crosstree. The bright yellow Maritime Regiment sheet reminds me of Every Bullet Has Its Billet; might reread that soon to work out what I can do with these figures. As the figures are individual, I thought about using Charge! for them - I was working at one point on a Pocketmod one-page version of the rules which I need to get back to. Whilst snipping, I watched part two of Oriskany Jim's Anzio Breakout report, and the movie Aliens on Youtube. Have never seen it before (and still haven't, given the bad pan-and-scan), though I'm familiar with the basic plot and memes. It in turn reminded me of my Space Hulk box, which I assembled but have never painted or played.
See how this works?
Listened to one episode of Juggz, a Youtube podcast by a couple of my favorite ex-GW presenters. They talked a bit about how they choose titles, thumbnails, etc for Youtube videos (because Youtube has this annoying algorithm that relies entirely on clicks). Apparently it's even possible to buy views?! My own titles are rarely that interesting. Space Marines suck all the air out of the room when it comes to 40K topics, so in a way, historical gaming is a breath of fresh air (heh). While I still dabble in GW stuff, I'm happy I made it back to the historical stuff that initially attracted me to this hobby.
Monday:
Finished Marine Sniper. Started on one of the books mentioned in it, A Rifleman Went to War.
Watched a WarhammerTV video about painting the newest starter set for Age of Sigmar. Makes me want to go back to my 1st-edition pocket-size starter set, which I started on the gold and then left off when it looked a mess. Perhaps spray them gold and go from there?
Listened to another two Juggz podcasts. In the first, they discussed Silver Bayonet, and for the first time actually interested me in it. (They had me at solo mechanics.) I could probably do it with Paperboys - will have to go ahead and read it. They also point out that other periods can fit - ECW, Victorian, etc. In the second, they discussed Blood Bowl, which I have unpainted sets of as well as the videogame (never got past the demo bits...)
Made one (1) six-man Paperboys base for what I think is the Duke of York's Maritime Regiment. I really like this unit, and since it is all musketeers, once Wofun makes it I think I'll buy a set for my Imaginations - and a second with single bases to go with Limeys and Slimeys games at the club.
Got out the Sisters of Battle I bought at Recon last year. I have a vague idea of playing 40K solo with the Charles Grant rules (though, given the smaller scale, this might need refinement). The Sisters are beautifully painted and based, but a mixed bag from at least three different orders, and I find it difficult to tell some of them apart. Might have to repaint the base rims at some point to differentiate units. Many have storm bolters, which didn't appear until the Hereticus Codex with faith-point mechanics I never really understood; I'd prefer to use the initial 3rd Edition "Black Book".
This squad is distinguished by its transfers - the Order of the Valorous Heart. It's unfinished, as it should have white cloak linings.
Watched several short guides on quickly-painting 40K Termagants, of which I've got over twenty. I experimented some time ago with Slap-Chop, but wasn't pleased with it and at some point (but when?) will use more conventional techniques on these figures.
Tuesday:
At work, experimented with blowing up ACW Colored Infantry troops the same way as the pirates. Not nearly as good, probably due to older art and having been digitized by Helion rather than the way Peter's own website does it. I want something for the upcoming Juneteenth, but might have to stick to regular sizes. I've done that before, by stapling the figure sheet to an instruction sheet and providing it as a handout.
A short painting-and-discussion video by Louise Sugden, with some interesting commentary on how the right paint-job can redeem a middling miniature.
Read two chapters of A Rifleman Went to War.
Wednesday:
Read six and a half chapters of A Rifleman Went to War.
Spent an hour talking with my brother about 18th-century miniatures. He's gotten into Blood and Plunder, so was looking for help with uniforms. So I introduced him to Kronoskaf and some of the basics - facings, reversed colors for musicians, grenadier caps, etc. He was especially impressed by a Bob Marrion painting of a very fancy French trumpeter.
Thursday:
Was offered a place in one of Jon Freitag's remote games next week. Had to double-check my schedule, but I should be able to make it. Really looking forward to it, as the last one I did was remarkably fun.
Read more of A Rifleman Went to War (over halfway thru now). It is not much about sniping, contrary to the impression given in Marine Sniper; it's a memoir by an American machine-gunner in the Canadian Army, though he also used a rifle when he could, seems to have been a crack shot, and knew some famous gunfighters. The classic .45 M1911 pistol also comes in for praise. There is some sardonic humor ("Heinie tried to rush our lines in one of his many charitable attempts to chase us out of our muddy muskrat holes and back on to the high and dry ground in our rear and we, with characteristic soldier perversity, declined to go,"). Quite good, in its way.
Printed a sheet of Paperboys Armada ships. Summer reading is about to start and I have been hunting for decorations matching the "adventure" theme, as well as crafts like the pirate figures. I think a small squadron of "pirate" ships on the wall ought to help.
Watched a new Duncan Rhodes video about desert-camo tanks, but another interesting bit he pointed out were rubber bits on the treads. I don't know how common that is on real tanks (this was a 40K vehicle). Watching the method of making shiny glass (steadily brightening one side, then adding a specular spot on the opposite corner), I'm reminded of the windows in the card houses from the Charles Grant books. Makes me want to try it on an a paper window too. Finally, he emphasizes recess-shading (with a fine brush - I've seen pens used too - rather than just a wash and highlight) on such a large model. I'll keep that in mind for any future tanks.
So! That's the sort of thing I get up to in a week. No serious progress towards any of my projects, but plenty of food for thought.
I don't feel like I've accomplished as much this last year - gaming as well as blogging.
Year 1: 61 posts.
Year 2: 71 posts.
Year 3: 48 posts.
While the club has become more active, especially this year, I still haven't gotten there as often as I like. They are doing more weekday games now, which provides more opportunities, which I haven't always taken advantage of. I also hoped to go to Recon again, but an aging and picky cat has prevented me from being away from home for more than 24 hours. One member is planning a The Longest Day extravaganza - watch the movie, then play an epic game. Whether I'm willing to spend all afternoon on it, I dunno yet. I'm somewhere between depression and laziness at present, or maybe Executive Dysfunction, which is why I've been reading and picking away at my projects rather than anything more productive.
I did get to a local con last week, but not, strictly speaking, for gaming. I was helping man the library presence. In addition to a booth on the "floor", we were given an activity room to do as we liked, which meant crafts and board games. I hoped to demonstrate some one-page RPGs and Paperboys figure-building, but failed to prepare properly (under the assumption that a: it would be easy to find dice at a geek convention and b: that my coworkers would bring plenty of scissors). Will do better next time - another local con comes up in July, then Hurricon in September. (I won't be able to get away in August.)
The chess club at work is going well; since chess doesn't really appeal to me, I've been experimenting with variants and a few other games. My Scottish Museum version of Tafl -
- has actually seen some play, and I've been reading Discworld and thus tempted by Thud. I learned Peter Dennis of Paperboys has even does some work on Discworld products.
Speaking of Peter, a lot of new stuff has come out recently, but it's inspired more reading than playing. A "pirate" series, some late 17th-century figures, and new large ships are tempting, especially the ships which could be used in the club's regular Limeys and Slimeys games. But they will be intimidating to build! Another thing I was looking forward to was the 10mm Seven Years War series in Wofun plastic, which have just come out this week but at 500USD for the full pack. Again, tempting, but is it really a good idea? I held off on the paper ones because I wanted to try the plastic 10s, but I may put them off for a bit. The 17th-century types are designed for the Monmouth rebellion, so I read up on it. Interviewing a glider veteran of Operation Varsity - and finally getting hold of Featherstone's Tackle Model Soldiers This Way - got me building some US troops, but that too has paused.
I intended to try the Mike Lambo solo ECW rules with my Memoir '44 tiles. Haven't.
I've been wanting to paint up my two-past-editions Warhammer and 40K starter sets. Haven't.
Wanted to play some more Charles Grant solo scenarios. Nope.
Wanted to play more Charge! ...
I have managed to amass quite a bit of VCBW stuff and even terrain to go with it. But no serious play. Misplaced a couple of the (hard-to-obtain) books, too - will probably find them minutes after I've bought new ones, heh.
Also built up and organized quite a collection of 18th Century 18mm Wofuns. One big solo game.
I've built a lot of Paperboys, but aside from that one big game, without direction.
It's an odd combination of Asperger's and what I suspect is executive dysfunction. Together, they are a project-killer, when it comes down to it. I edge towards building/painting something, but would rather procrastinate (read, watch, design) than do it.
That's not to say I'm not enjoying myself, sometimes immensely. I'm proud of what little I have achieved this year, in particular having finished a gaming painting project (two units) for the first time in, oh, around a decade.
What next? Given past events, more reading and more watching painting videos, inching towards doing some work.
I don't mean to feel sorry for myself here. It sounds like it, I know, and I'm having a hard time convincing myself otherwise. But there is more to gaming than play, or emptying the Closet of Shame. Just gotta remember that. The play's [not] the [only] thing, and one thing I've been trying to get across with this blog, besides just tracking my projects and encouraging myself, is to demonstrate that it's just part of the whole "hobby." As Featherstone pointed out more than once. I've just done more of the research and planning side of things, or at least it feels that way.
Friendship is a thing too, which is why I've forced myself to go to the club a little more often than usual.
Whatever happens in the next year, I'll still enjoy it. And I hope you will too. Thanks for your support.
An excellent narrative by the man who seems to have basically built the British sniper/scout/observation concept from the ground up.
What caught my eye:
"A good shot not only strengthens his unit, it raises the morale of the whole unit to know that it contains several first-class shots."
"What was wanted ... was the hunter spirit." (In the sense of having learned to outwit difficult targets)
Observation also useful and important - this explains why snipers are often in the scout or recon platoon, and it's the observer who does much of the work with his telescope (which is claimed to be preferable to the German field-glasses).
This was very painstaking work, and there is an entertaining but eye-opening commentary on the Royal Blankshires and Loamshires (great names for Imagi-nations units!) and how the one's careful design and use of sniping positions is ruined by the other's carelessness when they exchange places in the line. The author uses characterful short-fiction prose to illustrate procedure as well.
The Germans initially had the advantage in sniping (and in light artillery, as they could mortar suspected positions, to the chagrin of everyone else in the British unit). The author mentions doing the same thing, by observing hidden German strongpoints by the sniper positions, then having them bombarded.
Lots of technical tricks and tips, like a dummy head positioned so that after it was shot, a telescope could be placed to look exactly along the opposite line to spot the sniper. There are even puzzle-pictures - "find the sniper."
Makes me want to look up the Vietnam sniper Carlos Hathcock; I had access to a book about him as a kid but never got around to reading it. So far, I can only find audio versions for free, may buy the ebook.
I've got fewer specifics about this book, as I wasn't taking notes, but it's quite good too:
It's not a military history per se; it's more a cultural history. This being the lenses through which people saw how they fought. The title is apropos, because there are many examples of soldiers following the ghosts of the past.
What does this mean? That the Greeks saw the way they waged war as following that fought in The Iliad, and Roman tactics in turn were influenced by the Greeks in whose cultural footsteps they followed. Particularly in late Roman times, "education" was a matter of having read the classics.
The catch is that war in The Iliad was the epitome of "Heroic"; ie, individual heroes challenging each other, to the point that it's actually kind of difficult to tell how the armies of the Trojan War were actually organized or manuevered. There are endless lists of which individual heroes killed who. And this filtered into the way the armies centuries later fought; individual heroism was subsumed into units, and all of a sudden individuals couldn't be famed for their heroism anymore. Except in the sense of, not who or how they killed, but whether they stood their ground in the phalanx. You would think this was the nature of "defending the man next to you," but the author claims it wasn't. The man who stood his ground - which often meant he was killed - was lionized in defeat, while the man who survived (even if he'd been ordered to retreat, saved the colours, etc) was not. This is, of course, where the Spartan meme of "return with your shield or on it" came from, and examples are cited of the families of the dead gaining influence, and being happy and proud of those they had lost, even as they were losing wars, while the families of those who survived were ashamed.
Alexander is said to have fought in the front line not because it encouraged his men or helped him command at the point of greatest importance, but because his education told him that that was what heroes did. And commanders really did go after opposing commanders in those day, just as the fantastic games of Warhammer and 40K tell us they should.
The Romans seem often to have done the same thing; Titus personally seized bits of Jerusalem during the 70CE siege. This despite us thinking of Romans as the soldier end of the soldier vs. warrior dichotomy. The Roman invasion of Persia in the early 300s is also shown as an example, as well as several examples in the late Western Empire of emperors being killed in battle.
I attended OtakuFest (one of our local comic conventions) with the library yesterday, and built a few Paperboys while idling behind the table. Sadly, there weren't enough scissors to get a group of people together and teach them to make their own; I'll bring more next time.
Have been building a lot of paper trees lately - I've been defaulting to it when I can't decide what to work on next, because forests are always useful on a table no matter the period.
Oh, and Oriskany Jim has posted the first half of his video battle report for last post's Anzio game. Enjoy:
