I've been steadily working my way through the stone-cold classic comic series Lone Wolf and Cub. I started it around twenty years back and only read about a quarter - now I've found the volumes at work and on Hoopla.
There are no pitched battles in the series (as usually it is one, the anti-hero Ogami Itto, versus hordes of ninja or mercenaries), but there is plenty of inspiration for small skirmishes. Yakuza gang fights and peasant revolts are hinted at, but even for very small games there are many interesting settings as the author and artist seek exciting setpieces. Dueling from small boats, in river crossings, in snow-bound passes and at guarded road-gates, assaults on caravans and more. It's never just one-on-one (and one-sided) duels. There are some uncolored Samurai Paperboys out there... and rabbit samurai minis, too.
The other is The Bronze Lie by Myke Cole, a curious critical review of the vaunted Spartan reputation. I'm not well-versed in ancient warfare, and may pick up his other nonfiction volume, Legion vs. Phalanx, which promises to go deeper into tactics and organization. He really picks on Thermopylae and 300, with a useful thesis basically opposite that of Hanlon's Razor - "don't assume professional commanders were incompetent." IE, the Persians would have done proper reconnaissance at Thermopylae (and if they hadn't, then they had Greek allies who would have told them there was a back way around the pass). Which means that Thermopylae would not have been an exercise in Spartan valor, but a Spartan mistake.
He's also hard on the concept that the Spartans were heroes for modern society to look up to - not just because they were far less "pro-freedom" than they're often made out to be, but because they actually lost the majority of their battles, and rarely lived up to their own codes of honor. Their record of defeating other Greek states largely lies in the fact that they were the only professional force while everyone else raised armies only as needed, but they didn't need to be a good professional force - a "one-eyed man is king in the land of the blind" sort of thing. And that professional force was raised to hold down the helot slaves, not really to conquer or defend other free Greeks.
There is unfortunately a lot of speculation (understandable given the paucity of sources that weren't centuries out of date). But there's still plenty of food for thought in this one.
I've also bought a second 2x4 table, enabling me to play larger battles without my unwieldy piece of plywood. The VBCW ruleset Went the Day Well has fairly short ranges and may work alright on a 4x4 table, as should Bundock and Bayonet. Maybe a game for Sunday?
It's been a quiet month on the blog. I've concentrated on work and reading, haven't done any solo gaming, and haven't been to the club at all - though I did get in a couple meetings of the Virtual Wargames Club.
Today brought up several things, however, which should keep me busy game-wise for a while.
I found my missing VBCW volumes, down the side of a bureau in my bedroom. One is the Went the Day Well ruleset which I am itching to try now I've assembled some painted troops.
I started reading Myke Cole's The Bronze Lie: Shattering the Myth of Spartan Warrior Supremacy.
I missed a bunch of texts and a zoom meeting of the South Florida Miniatures Gamers, which is (after close to fifty years) finally getting around to doing formal things like bylaws, regular dues, etc. I still need to start a "catalog" for the games and books.
I started watching the Prestonpans Museum's 1745 campaign, which just concluded. Looking forward to their homebrew campaign rules.
At work, we had a cracking successful "family" program last Tuesday, and as next week's theme is the Olympics I am hoping to run a sailing-race game with modified Junior General rules.
I finished a QRS for Charge! in the form of a one-page foldable Pocketmod, and started on another for Bundock and Bayonet. With those done, I will feel more confident playing them and perhaps even taking them to the club.
Looked up St. John's, Newfoundland on a whim today (I've always wanted to go there for the history and music) and found a week's visit in September - flights, hotel and all - might be for surprisingly low cost. I haven't gone on a real vacation in a while, so very tempted...
Lots of food for thought, even if it's not much to say. I hope next month will be more creatively fruitful!
Not much gaming or posting this month. I worked at a local convention and brought a few Paperboys sheets:
And finished off the LDV bases with some Stirland Mud:
Re: Paperboys, I've had little interest in the Portable Wargame during Chess Club, but a couple players suggested that the figures would make good chessmen. I've been thinking for a while, but so far I haven't worked out what all the pieces would be. Pawns, Kings and Knights are easy enough. Elephants or war engines would work as Rooks, as these were the original name for the piece. The Bishop can be taken from one of the medieval sets with monks. The Queen is the real problem, as (Paperboys focusing on wargaming pieces) there are few women. I could use Boudicca, for example, from the Romans-and-Britons volume, but then there are no Roman women, and while the Britons have druids for the Bishop, there's no corresponding figure for the Romans. While for the Rook, the Romans have both elephants and war engines, but the Britons have neither.
Best for the purpose might be the clearly differentiated Little Wars figures, in blue and red. Still need a queen, though it might be possible to modify the civilian women a bit - someone has already done it to make suffragettes. There is one with a huge flowery hat, just the sort of Ascot wear you might expect of an 1890s upper-class woman. I've looked up French first ladies of the period, and they wore the same hats, so I could use the same figure (or head, anyway).
After a little experimentation, I also suspect I'll need to modify the size of different pieces. The size of chessmen is an important element of any set, with the pawns half the size of the pieces. A knight at the same scale as "infantry" bishop, rook, king and queen would also tower over them. I'm thinking 28mm Pawns and Knights, with the others in 54mm.
Finally, heavier bases would be useful. I've been using old business cards, which works very well for smaller figures. I would prefer thick "grey card," the sort at the back of notepads, but am not sure where to find it.
Finally, I've started painting my Warhammer 40K 8th Edition starter set:
Tricky to undercoat in blue when they're already blue...
Though in the circumstances under which I'm likeliest to play with them, leaving them bare might actually be preferable, as they seem more like "playing pieces" than complex models this way. So I'm undecided.
And that's what I'm on about this month. Other than reading, of course. Have got thru four Leaphorn/Chee novels and one and a half Poul Anderson fantasies so far. See you next time,
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!
