Thursday, August 14, 2014

Finished: 15mm PSC Soviet T34s

 

NewImage

My 15mm Soviet WW2 project took a step forward recently when I finished off a box of Plastic Soldier Company T34 tanks, purchased from my favourite wargames emporium.   Here they are on maneuvers, with a Battlefront resin road and a 4Ground building in the background.  Is that the Dniepr glinting in the evening sun behind them?

I’m still liking my decision to start using bases for my vehicles.  It’s hard to see but I kept the weathering to a minimum in the interests of time, just a bit of Vallejo Panzer Aces Rust on the tracks and some dry brushed Yellow Ochre on the tanks for a coating of summer dust.  Terrible lighting in my basement.  Hopefully once I move next year, I’ll have a proper window in my gaming room.

That’s my attempt at hand painted Cyrillic tank slogans.  I bought a white gel pen at a craft store but found that the nib was hopelessly fat, so I took my smallest and best paintbrush, took a shot of gin to steady my nerves, and consulted my favourite website for Russian propaganda posters.

 

The great thing about this particular PSC set is that it provides turrets for both the T34 and the T34/85 models, should I want these tanks for a late-war game.

 

Glory to the Soviet tank forces!  On to the West!

These figures bring my 2014 totals to:

28mm Mounted: 13, 28mm Foot: 22, 28mm Artillery: 1

20mm Foot: 33, 20mm Artillery: 2, 20mm Vehicles: 2, 20mm Terrain Pieces: 2

15mm Vehicles: 5, 15mm Foot: 26, 15mm Terrain Pieces: 3

6mm Foot:  120, 6mm Terrain Pieces: 2

Kilometres Run: 770

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Rebel Raiders Recap

 

I hate this cruise company!  I’m never booking with them again!

 

I meant to report on this yesterday (the putative Tuesday Boardgame feature on this blog) but didn’t have time.   Last week I described the GMT game Rebel Raiders On The High Seas, a strategic-level game about the American Civil War at sea.

My solitaire game ended in a blowout, with the Confederacy achieving a Sudden Death Victory in the Summer 1863 turn.   By that point the Union had only captured four of twenty CSA Cities/Ports and had enjoyed a spell of terrible luck, losing several key battles to tied dice rolls.   While the Union successfully took Norfolk, VA using the Sea to Shining Sea card, which allows two extra Amphibious Assaults in a turn, and had a clear shot at an undefended Richmond, the CSA had the Longstreet card, giving an extra assault die which rolled a “6”.  The rebs win ties in Assaults, so old Pete saved Richmond and saved the Tredegar Ironworks, a key production centre for the CSA.  At Vicksburg a small CSN flotilla and battery gutted Porter’s ironclads, while Farragut, with a mighty armada, crapped out at Mobile.  A terrible turn and fairly typical of US dice luck.  With six Raiders active at sea (including one that SANK a USN screw sloop in the Whaling Area - the only time a sloop CAUGHT a raider and it gets promptly sunk!), and several good turns by Blockade Runners, and the CSA maxed out its VPs, forced the Union to Fail a Resolve roll, and ended the game.  

Half way through I realized I was doing a few things wrong.  I didn’t realize that Union Screw Sloops (the blue water navy) take 2 turns to build and not just 1, which gave a USA advantage, but I also didn’t realize that one could assault a CSA Port/Fort even if it was defended by a Battery.  Only CSN ships must be defeated first before an Assault.  The Battery may be present, but it gives the CS player an extra assault dice to roll.  That latter mistake was an advantage for the CSA, because the USN took heavy ship casualties trying to assault several positions with just batteries present.

After one complete play through, I have to say that I REALLY like this game.  The cards are a satisfying source of chrome and historical flavour, and the game is a real challenge for both sides.   For the Union, I think that the key to success in 1862 is to divert precious build points into buying extra assaults, since the USA MUST reduce the number of CS cities/ports early on if it is to have any chance.  The blockade is great, but taking ports is the best way to defeat the Blockade Runners.  

There will be a replay.  I just unboxed another GMT game, A Distant Plain, Brian Train’s treatment of contemporary Afghanistan, so hopefully I’ll have something to say about that next week.

Blessings to your dice rolls!  MP+

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Diplomacy - Who's In?

Again with the Diplomacy!  Last Friday’s post garnered a lot of comments in a short period of time, and it was terrific to hear so many great stories about this game that many of us have a love/hate relationship with.   I hope to answer your comments shortly.  They all made me quite nostalgic and I went and pulled my original copy off the shelf.

 

It’s a little stained and battered in a few places, but not bad for it’s forty+ years and the sight of that board and artwork still gives me a bit of a shiver.

So here’s the deal.

Who’s in for a blind email game?

I’ll act as the referee and the point of contact.  

I’ll take names via email, mad padre (at) gmail (dot) com.   Let me know your three preferences for the country you want to play in descending order.  If I have more than seven players, I’’ll do my best to figure out who plays what.  You have until this Saturday night at midnight EST to get in on this.

All diplomacy will go through me.   Turns will be two weeks calendar time.   Moves, updates, and snide comments will be posted regularly on this blog.

If you don’t know the rules, the original ones are here although the 2000 Avalon Hill Rules are clearer and have a bunch of play examples.  and a bunch of other resources, including maps, here.

Come on, you know you want to!

Cheers,

Michael 

Friday, August 8, 2014

Diplomacy: Not For The Faint Hearted

 

If you don’t like playing games with intense people like this one, Diplomacy’s probably not for you.

Does anyone else remember Diplomacy fondly?   I do.   I may have been the only twelve year old ever to own a copy, and no one in my family understood it or wanted to play it.  I think my father understood it, but he wanted nothing to do with it.   I didn’t play my first game with real people until college, and usually things went fine until someone realized that the game favoured Machiavellian-style Realist game play, served up with dollops of treachery that would make a Renaissance Doge approve.   usually they realized this while watching an “ally’s” rapier emerging from their chest.

I played one game by mail in the days before computers (and won) but I recall that the poor GM had to find quite a few replacement players when others dropped out.   All negotiations and moves had to go through the GM’s postal address, and I never knew the other players, but I recall that it was one of the best experiences of my gaming life.  In my last army posting, I tried halfheartedly to get some officers together for a game of diplomacy.  The idea was that we would wear mess dress with black tie, and play over brandy and cigars, but sadly they were mostly the PS generation and it never caught fire.

I still have the original set, in the big flat red box, as published by Games Research Inc, and the map board is still a thing of beauty to this day.   I don’t think any other board game, even Charles Roberts’ Tactics Two which came out a year before Dip in 1958, is as iconic of the dawn of modern wargaming.   But I digress.

Anyway, the purpose of this post is to flag an excellent essay, by David Hill, “The Board-Game of the Alpha Nerds" on the way Diplomacy is played today at the tournament level, and the psychologies of the people who thrive (or fail) in that highly competitive atmosphere.  There’s also an NPR interview with David Hill here - it is very entertaining, especially the part where he brings a “ringer”, a former US Ambassador who has counselled four Presidents, to a tournament.

The average player, David Hill says, is a middle aged male nerd.  I guess I qualify, barely.

Does anyone have any Diplomacy stories to share?

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

Tuesday Boardgame: GMT's Rebel Raiders On The High Seas

Rebel Raiders On The High Seas (I’m going to call it RR from now on) was released by GMT in 2013.  It’s a design by Mark McLaughlin, who is interviewed on the game’s development here if you’re interested.

i haven’t finished a complete game yet, but I can tell you that it’s a terrific design, that will appeal to any student of the American Civil War.

RR is a strategic game, using an area movement map and a simple combat mechanism that puts it in the lineage of classic games like Avalon Hill’s War at Sea (1976).  RR has all of the attractive art work and detailed rules that one expects of GMT.

The Union player wins by capturing the strategic Mississippi River, from Memphis down to New Orleans, by capturing ports and cities, and by establishing a blockade to choke off supplies to the Confederacy.  Units represent individual ships and squadrons, and there are three turns to a year.

The Confederacy wins by avoiding this fate, which means finding a balance between fortifying and defending key points, or by keeping the Union off balance through diverting resources to raider and blockade running ships.   Union resources spent blockading ports and chasing raiders are not available to steam into ports and duke it out with the defenders.

Combat and movement mechanisms are very simple.  The heart of the game is all about choices.   The Union player has a steadily increasing number of resources for building ships, but has to use them wisely.  Too much emphasis on capturing forts and ports leaves the raiders and blockade runners free to move and run up the score of Victory Points for the rebels towards the tipping point, while too much of an emphasis on chasing ships at sea means that a mostly undamaged Confederacy will almost certainly win the long game.

Key units for the Union are Screw Sloops (the blue water navy), and ironclads and gunboats, which are littoral/riverine capable only.   Screw sloops can hunt the sea lanes for raiders and establish an Outer Blockade, while gunboats and ironclads can maintain an inner blockade outside particular ports and fight the river war.  Confederate units include batteries for port and fort defense, gunboats and ironclads for river and coastal defence, and high seas raiders and blockade runners.  Most of these ships are generic, but cards can bring famous ships into play.  Land combat is abstract and other than batteries and a chrome rule for CSA militia, there are no land units represented.

While not a card driven game, the use of cards allows players to invoke key moments such as the Trent Affair, and key technologies, such as mines and submarines, to give the game a satisfying degree of chrome.  These cards would be a lot of fun in a two player game, but the game also works as a solitaire game.  As a two player game, I suspect it might get frustrating to the CSA player, who is restricted in his ability to strike back and mostly has to play a waiting game.

The Basic Game begins in 1861, and while there’s not a lot that either player can do until 1862, it’s a good way to learn the basics before the board starts getting crowded with ships.   The Union player has virtually no chance of successfully assaulting a port/fort until the 1862 turns begin, and even then has to choose carefully.   An unsuccessful assault on a port/fort is costly in terms of ships and VPs.  The number of assaults per turn is rationed, though later in the game the Union can be more aggressive on more fronts.  The CSA has a limited ability to counterattack, but doing so means diverting resources from shipbuilding.  Players who want to jump into the action should look at the 1862 scenario.

In the game I’m playing at the moment, it’s 1862 and things are slowly heating up.  The Union made a costly and unsuccessful assault on Louisville, which the CSA insolently seized at the start of the game, paying a small penalty to violate Kentucky neutrality.  This means that the top of the Mississippi will be a hard nut to crack, but that seems the best place to start.   The USN blockade is slowly building up, but is yielding mixed results.   In the Winter 1861 turn, 60% of the CSA blockade runners were captured, but in the Spring 1862 turn none were, and the CSA reaped quite a few VPs.   As the CSA I’ve been steadily building Raiders, and now have four operating at sea, forcing the USN to divert two precious Screw Sloops to the Pacific to defend the vital Whaling Grounds.   Raiders are tough to intercept and bring to battle, but they can’t be allowed to run around and drive up the CSA score unmolested.  However, the first US assaults on CSA ports and forts are ready to launch in the still unplayed Spring 1862 turn, so it’s still anyone’s game.

As an aside, you may remember that back in March I was musing here about what might have happened had the Trent Affair resulted in a British intervention in the ACW.   It occurs to me that with an extension of this map to include Canada and some extra counters and rules, RR would give you a way to model that what-if war.  Just a thought.

I’ll report back when my solitaire game is concluded, but I quite like this game and recommend it.  Another recommendation I’ll gladly make is the book visible in the photo, James McPherson’s War On The Waters, a cracking good book which gives you all the background you could want on this subject.

 

 

 

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

Finished: Italieri Country House With Porch

A few weeks back my Saturday Painting Desk post featured this model kit in progress.   Like the last Italieri kit I featured here, the stone bridge, this is also a beautifully produced model.   Other than the small shutters and window ledges, there are only a very few pieces to glue together.   The parts are made of thick, sturdy plastic and they fit well together.   Very solid and suitable for the gaming table.

When I was in Tuscany last month I noticed quite a few houses with doors and shutters painted green, so I followed suit.   Once the painting was finished I treated the whole thing to a coat of Army Painter Soft Tone out of the can, and was horrified at how glossy it all looked.   Fortunately a spray of Dull Cote got rid of the gloss and the final result is quite satisfying, especially the roof.

 

 

Somewhere in Italy, some Tommies out for a patrol wonder if there might be a store of wine in the cellar, or maybe some nice prosciutto.

 

 

The alarmingly bright green vines on the side of the house were found in a craft store (Michael’s).  

 

 

 

A detachable roof reveals a sturdy second floor, very easy to put figures in and take them out, like these Jerries who want that chianti and prosciutto all for themselves.

 

 

These figures bring my 2014 totals to:

28mm Mounted: 13, 28mm Foot: 22, 28mm Artillery: 1

20mm Foot: 33, 20mm Artillery: 2, 20mm Vehicles: 2, 20mm Terrain Pieces: 2

15mm Foot: 26, 15mm Terrain Pieces: 3

6mm Foot:  120, 6mm Terrain Pieces: 2

Kilometres Run: 738

 

 

Sunday, August 3, 2014

CC Napoleonics Barossa Refight - Boom!

Last week when young Kinch and I used Google Hangouts to play Command and Colors Napoleonics, using the Barossa scenario from the Spanish Army Expansion 1 set.  During that game, Kinch showed me that one needs to be aggressive and audacious when you play the French.

I left the board set up and played the scenario again solo, trying to Kinch’s advice to heart.   Here’s what happened with the score at 6-3 in favour of the French.   The second of the two British five-block Grenadier Guards units has moved up to contest the vital hill. It hasn’t had a chance to unleash its deadly firepower yet, simply because the British were unlucky getting cards to order units on their right flank.   

On the French turn, I decide to use the Probe Centre card to move order two units, one of which is an untouched Line Infantry unit straddling the line between left flank and centre.   If I move it forward and melee the Guards, the French get four dice plus 1 for the signature French characteristic bonus for infantry fighting infantry.  Hopefully the French can whittle the Guards down a little bit.  And here’s the roll.

BOOM!   The crossed sabres cause casualties in melee, and with the two infantry figures, that wipes out the Guards and gives the French a 7-3 win.   And that’s the game.

And my takeaway from this is:  Audacity.  Always Audacity.  And a bit of luck never hurts.

 

Blog Archive

Followers