Hi,
So, the refund from Blizzard came through, the order to the warstore was sent, and the package, I am told, is en route. Dystopian Wars is a comin'. Huzzah!
So, what do I do with the rest of the money?
I realise this is a bit like a kid complaining because he's got too much candy, but there's a degree of logic to my lament. I generally try to keep my geek habit (aside from the occasional puchase of locktight and Wargames Illustrated) self-financing. If I want to get into a new game, buy a new army, etc., I either trade for it (hellooooo, Bartertown), sell some of my painted stuff (helloooooo, EBay), or do without.
Having disposable geek income is kind of blowing my mind a little.
Everyone has those "Rainy Day" projects kicking around in the back of their head. For me, it's the notion of an army for the SYW or the Napoleonic wars. One of my earlier memories is reading a book my dad had of famous battles, published by Sandhurst, and illustrated with minature dioramas. The chapter on Leipzig is, I think, what hooked me on miniature gaming, history in general, and the Napoleonic period in particular. Thanks, Dad! Once upon a time I had a rather nice French nappie army from Baccus, but I sold it off in what turned out to be the run-up to my divorce. Frankly, since then, I've missed the army a hell of a lot more than my ex-wife.
FoW has also introduced me to the wonders of 15mm scale. While 6mm is great, 15mm seem to be a sweet spot for me - small enough that you can get a dioramic effect (check out JET's work at Geektactica to see what I mean), but large enough to really pick out the detail on the figs. While you can do the latter with 6mm (I once painted tartan on a 6mm fig), and some of the 6mm sculpts are outstanding (take a look at the Baccus Franco-Prussian war range), I find the effort tends to be wasted, as the detail is lost in the mass. 15mm strikes a lovely balance between payback for attention to individual figs, coupled with dioramic / mass effect.
So, one option would be a napoleonic army in 15mm, using one of the newer rulesets - maybe Lasalle by Sam Mustafa, or even using Polemos rules, as I enjoyed playing with them at 6mm scale. Another would be something for the SYW, though my interests there tend more towards the North American theatre.
The problem here is time and opportunity to play. While I have grandiose visions of a 5-year project gearing up towards a 200-year anniversay replay of Waterloo, a) I don't think I have that degree of concentrated effort in me, and b) who the hell would I play with?
Another option is an ancients army. I always feel slightly guilty for never really getting into ancients. It's sort of like being the 40 year-old virgin of miniatures wargaming. For years, I've toyed with a number of rule sets, and even have a good idea of what army I'd like to do, having been fascinated by the indo-greek successor cultures for years.
Brief aside - do you know why Buddhists have statues of the Buddha? Because of the hellenistic influence of the greek successor cultures in India, who adopted Buddhism as a political counter to the association between traditional / indigenous authorities and Hinduism. The humanist tradition in hellenic culture prompted them to make statues of the Buddha as a person - something that hadn't been done elsewhere, or before, but which spread along with Buddhism form that point. The army is cool too, as the Indo-greeks combined the traditional elements of a Macedonian army, like pike and horse, with local troops. The ability to take pike, Indian bow, a range of cavalry, and Elephants in one army is, frankly, the bomb-diggity. But again, who would I play with? JET emerged out east as a sort of one-man Impetus road show in NFLD, but the local scene here seems kind of devoid of interest in ancients. Instead of being a 40-year old virgin, I'd have a trophy wife. Or possibly just a trophy.
I could just sit on the money, and dole it out piece-meal when I want to buy something. This is probably the most sensible thing to do, as it means I don't have to muck about with trades etc. every time I want to pick up a blister, but it seems . . . boring. I have an opportunity here to one-shot my way into a totally new dimension of the hobby - a new army, a new game, a whole new kind of gaming. Spending the moola piece-meal feels like wasting an opportunity.
Any thoughts?
TMtW
Showing posts with label Lists. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lists. Show all posts
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Bat Rep: Learning from losing
Hi,
Had a game last night at DG, against a buddy of JJMicromegas, with JJM giving some advice, and a few of the other THMGers serving as advisors and rules consultants. Again, props to the club for the use of terrain.
I ran a late war FE Motostrelkovy list at 1750 with the following:
HQ 30
CC1: 2 MStrelk platoons, SMG option, Kommisar
CC2: 2 MStrelk platoons, SMG option
WC1: Full H. Morter with observer
WC2: 8 M4s
SC2: 2 SU-152
SC2: 5 KV-85
He ran a FE Panzer company with two units of panzer III/IVs, a Tiger, a platoon of pioneers, some stugs, and a few other odds and ends.
The game was something of an education. We played an Encounter scenario, which I've since learned is somewhat controversial among the competitive FoW community, for reasons that shoudl become clear. This was the second time I'd used infantry in numbers, the first time in late war, and the first time I defended (technically, I was the attacker in this scenario, but again, as will become clear, it didn't work out that way).
The defining features of the Encounter scenario is the role played by reserves. Half of one's platoons start off table (which is why so many of the lists posted on the FoW boards have "lopsided" platoon structures - 3 large, point-intensive platoons and three "filler" platoons. Beginning on turn three, there is a chance they can come on - you roll one die turn 3, two on turn 4, three on turn 5, etc. For each 5/6 that turns up, you can bring on a platoon. However, where the platoon comes on is randomly determined. In a scenario where victory is determined by control of objectives, this random element can make or break a game - again, as will become clear.
I chose to keep my mobile / armoured elements in reserve. The plan was to dig in with my infantry on the objectives, weather the storm while plinking away with morters, and then counter-attack with my tanks.
These pics show the situation on turn three - no reserves turned up, my morters had been only minimally effective, and my opponent had spent the last few turns machine gunning my infantry guarding the rightmost objective.
I had managed to dig in my infantry by turn 2, which gave them some protection, but the limiting factor was that Soviet infantry lack any integral anti-tank assets. With strelkovy, this can be mitigated by attaching flamethrowers, anti-tank guns, and ATRs, but Motostrelk rely on their armoured support. Without that back-up, there was little I could do but hunker down, and hope I got lucky with the HEavy mortars. While they have a chance to take out tanks (note the smoke), it's not huge.
The next turn, he assaulted with his tanks, pulling in the heavy mortars (if a unit is close enough, it gets dragged in), mauling both the infantry and the mortars, and seizing the objective.
While I was still contesting, things were not looking good on the right. I really needed a reserve unit on the table, and on my turn, was able to bring on one. It's at this point that the dynamics of the Encounter scenario come into play. I decided to bring on my heavy KV-85 tanks. These had a chance to take out the Tiger, and have a good chance of shrugging off the main guns of the PzIII/IVs. Unfortuneately, they came in on the wrong side of the table - my left, well away from the action. Because that side of the table was heavily wooded, it meant that the tanks only had a narrow approach, and while they were able to account for a few dead Panzers (and drive off the remainder), never got close enough to the objective to contest it.
On his next turn, my opponent finished off my remaining infantry, consolidated his hold on the objective, and hunkered down. I either had to contest the objective on my turn, or lose. To do this, I needed to get some reserves on the table. At this point, I was rolling three dice - all I needed was a single 5+, and I was back in the game. Worst case, if they came on the left side again, I could move my heavy tanks out of the way, and double across the table to contest. I would lose some tanks the following turn, but could at least buy some time.
So, of course, I rolled a 1, 2, and 4. No reserves, no way to contest the objective (my heavies were too far away). My only chance would be to drive the infantry and Tiger off, and with only the rump of my mortars and the few heavies in a position ot fire, it just wasn't enough.
I think I learned a couple-three critical lessons in this game. First, while Soviet infantry is tough (It did take him four turns using 7 tanks and infantry to shift them), without tanks in support they are hamstrung. One of the observers suggested deploying the KV-85s at the start of the game, something I might think about in future, trading them for either the mortars or an infantry unit. I have tried deploying the KVs in cover before, and they can be remarkably durable. It also gives me a fair bit of AT on the table - five 85mm guns can go a long way to influencing the game.
Second, I was hesitant to move my second infantry platoon, with what seemed like good reason. In the open, on the move, infantry are far more vulnerable than they are hunkered down. However, in a game like this, immobility is less of an option. While it would have been a risk, advancing with the infantry would have at least threatened my opponent's assaulting force, and put him in a position of having to make choices. I suspect knowing when to move infantry is one of the subtle, but important elements of this game.
Last, I learned a few things about list design. I've wondered for a while why so many lists posted to the FoW forums seemed disproportionate or lopsided - several large platoons, along with several small ones. Now I know. In scenarios where half your force starts off table, beginning the game with a disproportionate amount of points in play give you a huge advantage. I've been playing around with this concept, and came up with the following list by way of illustration.
HQ: T-34/85
CC1: 10 T-34, 5/85
CC2: 10 T-34, 5/85
WC1: 2 45mm AT guns
WC2: 3 82mm Mortars
SC1: 5 KV-85s
SC2: 2 45mm AT guns.
In encounter, that list can start with the 26 tanks on the table - more than 1500 out of 1750 points. When, or if, reserves come on becomes an academic issue. While this is a bit of an exagerrated example, I think it makes the point.
I should have a few other things to post in the next couple of days, but in the mean time - a happy New Year to all and sundry.
TMtW
Had a game last night at DG, against a buddy of JJMicromegas, with JJM giving some advice, and a few of the other THMGers serving as advisors and rules consultants. Again, props to the club for the use of terrain.
I ran a late war FE Motostrelkovy list at 1750 with the following:
HQ 30
CC1: 2 MStrelk platoons, SMG option, Kommisar
CC2: 2 MStrelk platoons, SMG option
WC1: Full H. Morter with observer
WC2: 8 M4s
SC2: 2 SU-152
SC2: 5 KV-85
He ran a FE Panzer company with two units of panzer III/IVs, a Tiger, a platoon of pioneers, some stugs, and a few other odds and ends.
The game was something of an education. We played an Encounter scenario, which I've since learned is somewhat controversial among the competitive FoW community, for reasons that shoudl become clear. This was the second time I'd used infantry in numbers, the first time in late war, and the first time I defended (technically, I was the attacker in this scenario, but again, as will become clear, it didn't work out that way).
The defining features of the Encounter scenario is the role played by reserves. Half of one's platoons start off table (which is why so many of the lists posted on the FoW boards have "lopsided" platoon structures - 3 large, point-intensive platoons and three "filler" platoons. Beginning on turn three, there is a chance they can come on - you roll one die turn 3, two on turn 4, three on turn 5, etc. For each 5/6 that turns up, you can bring on a platoon. However, where the platoon comes on is randomly determined. In a scenario where victory is determined by control of objectives, this random element can make or break a game - again, as will become clear.
I chose to keep my mobile / armoured elements in reserve. The plan was to dig in with my infantry on the objectives, weather the storm while plinking away with morters, and then counter-attack with my tanks.
These pics show the situation on turn three - no reserves turned up, my morters had been only minimally effective, and my opponent had spent the last few turns machine gunning my infantry guarding the rightmost objective.
I had managed to dig in my infantry by turn 2, which gave them some protection, but the limiting factor was that Soviet infantry lack any integral anti-tank assets. With strelkovy, this can be mitigated by attaching flamethrowers, anti-tank guns, and ATRs, but Motostrelk rely on their armoured support. Without that back-up, there was little I could do but hunker down, and hope I got lucky with the HEavy mortars. While they have a chance to take out tanks (note the smoke), it's not huge.
The next turn, he assaulted with his tanks, pulling in the heavy mortars (if a unit is close enough, it gets dragged in), mauling both the infantry and the mortars, and seizing the objective.
While I was still contesting, things were not looking good on the right. I really needed a reserve unit on the table, and on my turn, was able to bring on one. It's at this point that the dynamics of the Encounter scenario come into play. I decided to bring on my heavy KV-85 tanks. These had a chance to take out the Tiger, and have a good chance of shrugging off the main guns of the PzIII/IVs. Unfortuneately, they came in on the wrong side of the table - my left, well away from the action. Because that side of the table was heavily wooded, it meant that the tanks only had a narrow approach, and while they were able to account for a few dead Panzers (and drive off the remainder), never got close enough to the objective to contest it.
On his next turn, my opponent finished off my remaining infantry, consolidated his hold on the objective, and hunkered down. I either had to contest the objective on my turn, or lose. To do this, I needed to get some reserves on the table. At this point, I was rolling three dice - all I needed was a single 5+, and I was back in the game. Worst case, if they came on the left side again, I could move my heavy tanks out of the way, and double across the table to contest. I would lose some tanks the following turn, but could at least buy some time.
So, of course, I rolled a 1, 2, and 4. No reserves, no way to contest the objective (my heavies were too far away). My only chance would be to drive the infantry and Tiger off, and with only the rump of my mortars and the few heavies in a position ot fire, it just wasn't enough.
I think I learned a couple-three critical lessons in this game. First, while Soviet infantry is tough (It did take him four turns using 7 tanks and infantry to shift them), without tanks in support they are hamstrung. One of the observers suggested deploying the KV-85s at the start of the game, something I might think about in future, trading them for either the mortars or an infantry unit. I have tried deploying the KVs in cover before, and they can be remarkably durable. It also gives me a fair bit of AT on the table - five 85mm guns can go a long way to influencing the game.
Second, I was hesitant to move my second infantry platoon, with what seemed like good reason. In the open, on the move, infantry are far more vulnerable than they are hunkered down. However, in a game like this, immobility is less of an option. While it would have been a risk, advancing with the infantry would have at least threatened my opponent's assaulting force, and put him in a position of having to make choices. I suspect knowing when to move infantry is one of the subtle, but important elements of this game.
Last, I learned a few things about list design. I've wondered for a while why so many lists posted to the FoW forums seemed disproportionate or lopsided - several large platoons, along with several small ones. Now I know. In scenarios where half your force starts off table, beginning the game with a disproportionate amount of points in play give you a huge advantage. I've been playing around with this concept, and came up with the following list by way of illustration.
HQ: T-34/85
CC1: 10 T-34, 5/85
CC2: 10 T-34, 5/85
WC1: 2 45mm AT guns
WC2: 3 82mm Mortars
SC1: 5 KV-85s
SC2: 2 45mm AT guns.
In encounter, that list can start with the 26 tanks on the table - more than 1500 out of 1750 points. When, or if, reserves come on becomes an academic issue. While this is a bit of an exagerrated example, I think it makes the point.
I should have a few other things to post in the next couple of days, but in the mean time - a happy New Year to all and sundry.
TMtW
Friday, December 24, 2010
Merry Christmas
Hi,
For most of the last month, I've either been in end-of-term mode or dad mode, leaving little time for painting. However, the last few days have seen me at loose ends, with little to do but paint, so I've made up the time. A couple of quick pics to round off the year.
Bretonnian archers painted and (mostly) based:
Bret knights (mostly) based:
Soviet SU-76Ms painted and based:
In other news, the local gaming club has announced a small-point (600) FoW tournament in January, and I'll be playing - I'll update with pics as my tournament list gets painted, and of course, pics from the tourney. Planned list keeps changing, but current front runner is:
FE Strelk
HQ add anti-tank platoon 75
CC: 2 platoons Strelkovy = 215 / 290
SC: 4 SU-76M = 150 / 440
WC: Short Mortar (85mm) w. Observer = 70 / 510
SC2: 1 platoons flamethrowers = 90 / 600
The list gives me predictability (I'll be defending), durability (that big infantry unit plus add-ons will be hard to shift), reasonable AT (especially in defence) and good combined-arms options. I think ;)
I'm also about half-way through the mother of all trades - unloaded my Cryx, both painted and unpainted, for a metric crap ton of other stuff. I'll post pics of the great unboxing when my end arrives.
Thanks to all who've been following, and the best of the holiday to you and your families.
TMtW
For most of the last month, I've either been in end-of-term mode or dad mode, leaving little time for painting. However, the last few days have seen me at loose ends, with little to do but paint, so I've made up the time. A couple of quick pics to round off the year.
Bretonnian archers painted and (mostly) based:
Bret knights (mostly) based:
Soviet SU-76Ms painted and based:
In other news, the local gaming club has announced a small-point (600) FoW tournament in January, and I'll be playing - I'll update with pics as my tournament list gets painted, and of course, pics from the tourney. Planned list keeps changing, but current front runner is:
FE Strelk
HQ add anti-tank platoon 75
CC: 2 platoons Strelkovy = 215 / 290
SC: 4 SU-76M = 150 / 440
WC: Short Mortar (85mm) w. Observer = 70 / 510
SC2: 1 platoons flamethrowers = 90 / 600
The list gives me predictability (I'll be defending), durability (that big infantry unit plus add-ons will be hard to shift), reasonable AT (especially in defence) and good combined-arms options. I think ;)
I'm also about half-way through the mother of all trades - unloaded my Cryx, both painted and unpainted, for a metric crap ton of other stuff. I'll post pics of the great unboxing when my end arrives.
Thanks to all who've been following, and the best of the holiday to you and your families.
TMtW
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)