wargaming is everything from gaming on the table top with dice, painting figures, reading history, collecting figures, scenery and rules through to geography, politics, art, crafts and imaginative writing……..
James Fisher has a fascinating blog on Napoleonics. James asked me about Warrior Miniatures. Now I will say at this point Warrior Miniatures and I go back to the mid 1970’s, however my association has only ever been as a paying customer. So any effusive comments about them is simply reflecting my enthusiasm for their products.
So James wondered about plastics and the metals from Warrior Miniatures which I would add, shown here, are from their advertised 25mm range.
Now I have chosen to show the figures randomly arranged. Previously I have posted with some attempt to show exact height difference. Yet I think that ultimately it is the opinion that matters not the maths. So do they look ok?
First up the plastics – L to R Hat Russian Militia, Waterloo1815 Austrian 1859 Artillery and then Strelets 1877 Russian Artillery. Note thin strelets bases probably make between 1-2 mm height difference. The austrians have been on short rations while the green russians look rather too well fed……….The blue strelets are slightly shorter and as they are furtherest from the camera this is enhanced. unless you game with all troops in one neat row view exactly side on then that comparison is false. So my slightly layered approach is more suited to judging if figures will “mix well”. L-R Hat Russian Militia; Strelets Russian 1877 Artillery then Strelets ACW Union in attack converted with Hat stove pipe hats and finally Hat Napoleonic Austrian Landwehr L-R strelets 1877 russians; converted strelets attacking union ACW infantry, Hat austrian landwehr and far right Waterloo1815 Austrian 1859 infantry, again thin strelets bases and they being shorter yet squatter mean they could be easily 2mm shorter. I think it will be fine.Warrior Napoleonic 25mm range L-R irregular spanish, then a sole British Napoleonic Light Infantryman BN10 I think and finally spanish line troops (these are the standard 4 poses you get with Warrior along with a firing pose. To me they are active and uncomplicated – great for gaming pieces – not so good if you are producing perfect rembrandtsWarrior Napoleonics SN8, SN6, SN9, SN5 irregular spanish infantryWarrior Napoleonics Spanish SN5; British Light Infantry BN10 – with shoulder pads!; Spanish Line Infantry SN1 and SN4Warrior 25mm Napoleonics – 4 of the 5 standard poses – firing pose not shownwarrior and waterloo 1815 figures interposedWarrior and Waterloo1815 figures interposedWarrior and converted Hat figures interposed (conversion from kepi to stove pipe has added almost 2mm to top of figure)Warrior and Hat Landwehr interposedWarrior and Strelets 1877 russians interposedWarrior and Russian Militia interposed
Just for fun here are some other figure comparisons – I think hinds and caliver books still run these “retro” minifig/hinchliffe lines. I have posted elsewhere the gross sculpture change Greenwood & Ball did between their Garrison Normans and Vikings. I think the bigger more detailed Vikings shown here sunk without trace – while the older G&B figures were rerun for a time into the 2000’s?
1970 era Hinchliffe persian, Greenwood and Ball Garrison Viking, Minifig ECW, Hinchliffe Assyrian and Minifig 7YW french musketeer – minifigs tended to be shorter and fatter1970’s metals interposed with strelets russians1970’s metals interposed with Austrain Landwehr Hat figures1970’s metals interposed with Russian Militia Hat figures1970’s metals interposed with strelets ACW conversions1970’s metals interposed with Waterloo1815 Austrian 1859 infantry
Here is another oddity – again a short life production from Minifigs
a persian horseman for the Cyrus the Great era who dwarfs a standard 1970’s minifig horse which was all that was offered then! The figures were completely oversizing the existing ranges when they came out. again I think they sank without traceI quite liked the figure at the time – but they never got beyond my by then favoured black undercoat and some block paintingmagnificant helmet comb……….with skirts – they deserve painting one day……….
Now I have dug out a later 25mm 1700 grenadier – I think its a foundry chap with practically no base.
base starts at 10cmeyes at 28mm and grenadier cap tops out at 34mmso how does he match up?Warrior examples with two 25/28mm figures – the chap on the left is more 25mm but still above 25mm foot to eye.Bulk is one issue – warrior are campaign figures so half starved whereas most 28mm figures are obviously garrison based and well fed warrior napoleonics alongside minifigs 7YW musketeer and 25/28mm grenadierwarrior napoleonics alongside hinchliffe assyrian and 25/28mm grenadierwarrior napoleonics alongside hinchliffe persian and 25/28mm grenadierwarrior napoleonics alongside Greenwood and Ball Garrison viking and 25/28mm grenadier. I actually think the vikings cut the mustard in the 25/28mm sector but 45 years too early!warrior napoleonics alongside minifigs ECW and 25/28mm grenadier
Now some finished and based figures to compare against
Warrior Napoleonics and minifig austrian 7YW very very fat figures – the frei corps figure I hated even painted as it turns out and still don’t like even today. Yet they have done good service on the gaming table.Warrior Napoleonics and Hinchliffe Bavarians who match well for campaign slightness while height is fine in my viewWarrior Napoleonics and Zvezda 1/72 Great Northern War Russian Infantry in some inexplicable uniform from the mythical world of Fauxterre of course. With thinner bases the Zvezda figures are physique wise taller. Zvezda have produced some significant variations in their historical ranges which puts certain figures in the 25/28mm categoryALL Warrior Napoleonics and their french counterparts with painting 45 years apart! clearly there is a very stiff breeze blowing……Warrior Napoleonics and Tradition 25mm Russian Guard. Slender style matches and as guardsmen they are just a bit taller to eye level.Warrior Napoleonics and early minifig french napoleonic line infantry
To sum up, when it comes to height, I have become ever more tolerant and actually it is anatomy which jarrs my view. This is why I struggle with Perry figures – they are just so perfect. Which shows you just can’t please some people.
Some beautiful plastic 28mm Perrys from my stalled Wars of the Roses project with a metal tumbling dice norman (1/72) thrown in
Finally a book which started my wargaming in earnest and is a celebration of fantasy gaming – I kid you not!
This books celebrates fantasy gaming
I leave you with this image from that book – published in 1967 – when it really probably was bad form not to have the correct facings or turnback colours etc. Lawford and Young said “play fantasy” and in the game photos they showed that scale was not a big issue. These look like 30mm figures rubbing shoulders with 45mm figures?????
The lancers smallness is offset by their horse size while the bearskin wearer looks almost 20th century parade dress with a decididly 18th century chap next to him…. who cares….the game was a cracker.
Above all if it looks right to you then it is fine – play* away.
*tournament players will not be so lucky methinks.
quick coat of cheap green acrylic – quite good I thinkquick coat of cheap dark brown acrylic – oh!
Can you guess the manufacturers and vehicles modelled?
They are a work in progress but I don’t intend to be kind to them – they should look grubby and rough. And I am not happy about all this post Baroque malarkey………but thats the essence of erratic wargaming I guess.
A 1970’s 4VEP British Rail commuter train of slam door stock – what is going on?
A tenuous link I admit but I could not wrench it from my mind. I don’t think I have any older figures unpainted so this is my sort of painting record.
basing – using my current preferred style of 3 layers brown, ochre, cream highlights plus some foliageI am basing these guys on 40mm square bases and normally have 4 bases to a unit. Perfect for Neil Thomas or Piquet – amongst my favoured rulesetsI always liked the Kleber dragoons as red coated French Dragoons are a not so common
These figures are by Warrior Miniatures and are sold as french dragoons in their 25 mm napoleonic range. They are a slim 25mm and contrast with their then contemporary overfed minifigs from the 1970’s. I guess they were more like early hinchliffe before those got taller and bulked out somewhat.
I still love them after all these years so I am pleased they finally got a coat of paint!
Funcken books have remained popular with me – the artwork seems more aligned to my painting ideas – I bought these 4 volumes in the 1970’s before I discovered Osprey. In a way Funckens have aged better than Ospreys to my mind. Maybe it is because the style is more simplistic
I painted them as kleber dragoon’s and my inspiration is from the Funcken 18th century to modern times volume.
tucked away on the Egyptian campaign page is the red coated french dragoon
My intention is to use them in early campaigns of my Fauxterre Mythical Realm which covers 1815 to 1870 at present. It is all because of Fauxterre and Faux Napoleonics that they got painted anyway!
Thats another thank you to Renaissance Troll and his fantasy napoleonics post.
No sooner am I drifting from the mid 19th century by almost 100 years into world war 2, than I go the whole hog and leap several centuries – welcome to Bronze Age to Baroque does SciFi! – maybe.
I started the Wargaming Erratic blog in 2019 and aimed to cover my self declared restriction of “Bronze Age to Baroque”. In fact I had determined (for wargamer sanity reasons) to abandon not just my long time interests in world war 2 but also Napoleonics and the Seven Years War – anything after about 1730. The decision has proven to be easier to say than do.
It is not just bookshopping which can sidetrack your latest project (in my case Wars of the Italian Unification 1,2,3 – WOTIU). Strolling through other gamers blogs can be seriously distracting. Of course that is a very enjoyable activity with the vast range of ideas, activity and games being shown.
In this case “wargaming with barks” served up their new project using “five parsecs from home”. Now SciFi wargaming really has passed me by – even my D&D era, now eons gone, did not really depart from ancient medieval themes.
What caught me eye was that this ruleset is for solo wargaming – now that it is something that does fascinate me: Well wargames rules fascinate me anyway, solo rules especially so, because of the potential mechanisms on offer.
A hardback subA4 sized rulebook with very high quality print – colour throughout.
As Neil Thomas (author of one hour wargames) says, it is easy to write complex wargame rules while simple ones that constantly work are very challenging to compose.
In Five Parsecs from Home (FPfH) the movement and combat mechanisms themselves, look simple with the narrative derived from the wider aspects of character and weaponry for example.
at almost 200 pages loaded with data and ideas – this is the 2021 edition
So it is the case that two player wargames rules are more easily composed than solo rules when it comes to creating that unexpected and surprising element, which is at the heart of so much enjoyment in wargaming.
So far I have bought the book and had a quick speed read.
It looks very interesting and is a complete package including all your necessary rules plus both scenario and force generators.
Solo wargames much depend upon narrative to provide the variety and surprise in any game. It looks like this ruleset offers that potential in spades?
Finally solo wargames work just as well with live opponents – often just simply leaving out some rules is all it takes. So maybe you actually get two rulesets for the price of one!
The October edition of Wargames Illustrated is a fantasy special. So you might miss the article on railways in war, specifically the Franco Prussian war. As part of my wars of the Italian independence I have been considering railways – something that really marks out post napoleonic warfare.
WI have a good introductory article on the subject with images of models available as well period art.
Is it me or does the Amercian Civil War wargame hobby tend to cover railways more than their european counterparts even though a railway often ran through or near the european battle fields?
The magazine is mainly about fantasy and I am pleased that again the message is that at the start of the fantasy era of gaming miniatures it was simply another theme that players did – the historical gamer was a fantasy gamer. The divergence came later on with phenomenal growth in the hobby.
One article shows 1970’s era D&D figures so here are two of mine – some layering with only fleshtone shading. And note plain grey bases with the dungeoner having both shoulder bag (for storing loot) and a rope. At the beginning there was a bit of “what you see is what you get” – WYSIWYG or wizziwig.
Ral Partha Elf Warrior – circa 1977some shading facially but otherwise layering was the order of the day.Ral Partha Thief – These figures were just awash with detail that the historical wargames makers of the day did not offer – they soon followed though and started the journey to 28mm even back then.The chunkier style was completely new but with such great detail no one complained as I recall, base detailing gives away that these were figures bought singularly and were for the dungeonNo self respecting dungeoner in the 1970’s sent their characters into a game without equipment and baggage – very WYSIWYG!Despite a few chips this is still one of my favorite character figures and is now a mature 45 years old!
I have posted previously about Grognardia who has some excellent posts on 1970’s D&D. This link shows the first? full colour White Dwarf Magazine edition No7.
In the previous two posts I have set out the campaign and mechanics that brought the two forces to action at Baumdorf.
In the distance the Nuringians advance boldly upon Baumdorf as the Zarlanders attempt to seize the hill
The forces were
Zarland Eastern Army commanded by General Kratzen
IR 8th Adelburg CF5 (2)
IR 6th Nurtberg CF5 (1)
2nd Tuttingen Skirmishers CF2 (1)
Pioneer Regiment 2nd Eyachdorf CF5 (2)
5th Gellenstein Cavalry CF6 (2)
Artillery Regiment 12th Pinkenfels CF6 (2)
8th Filstad Skirmishers CF4 (1)
IR 4th Beckendorf CF6 (2)
The Nuringian Army commanded by General Paskievich comprised
IR Von Rechten CF3 (1)
IR Von Ryssel CF5 (1)
1st Sharpshooters CF5 (1)
CR Prince Clement Dragoons CF6 (2)
CR Polenz Lancers CF14 (3)
1st Field Artillery Battery CF4 (1)
2nd Field Artillery Battery CF5 (1)
1st Pioneer Regiment CF14 (3)
Both armies had a similar mix of forces and both had pioneer units which often fight in these small actions in the realms of Fauxterre…….. and are feared in the same way as Grenadiers.
Each unit shows its campaign condition or “CF factor” – a value that is training, experience, morale and fighting ability all in one. This was converted to the relevant Table Top Battles unit class – again an “all in one” fighting factor.
The battle was fought over three objectives – possession of the village and the hill and also driving off the enemy from the area of Baumdorf.
This encounter action after numerous skirmishes caught each force unawares and they both aimed to seize the village and hill.
In TTB you dice for initiative, important when using alternating movement rules – Zarland won the first two rounds as the forces closed on the village of Baumdorf and its hill.
The Zarlanders gained an early advantage
Both entered the village and commenced a firefight involving infantry and artillery (these were only allowed in the village on the road).
Meanwhile the Zarlander 8th Adelburg IR and 8th Filstad skirmishers took the hill.
The forces close for action
On Move 3 Paskievich (Nuringians) took the initiative and attacked all along the battle line. Around the village the Zarlander 2nd Eyachdorf Pioneers and 4th Beckendorf IR broke.
Looking towards the Zarland lines. Somewhat chastened – the sole Zarland Artillery 12th Pinkenfels on the village road watched as their infantry broke on either side of them
On the Nuringian right flank the Zarland 2nd Tuttlingen skirmishers retired before the measured advance of the Prinz Clement Dragoons.
The fight for the hill is in the balanceThe Zarland Gellenstein Cavalry simply follow the Prinz Clement Dragoons onto the hill while the Zarland infantry are losing the fight for the hill
On Move 4 the Nuringians again pushed on, with the artillery duel in Baumdorf reaching a crescendo. The hill is taken by the Von Rechten IR and the Prinz Clement Dragoons, despite the Zarland Gellenstein Cavalry trying to draw off the Dragoons.
Looking towards the Zarland lines. On the Nuringian left the brave Zarland Artillery are driven from the village while the Nuringian Polenz Lancers break the remains of the Zarland Right wing on the edge of the village
Finally the Zarland Artillery (12th Pinkenfels) withdraw from the village. Elsewhere the 8th Adelburg IR are driven fully off the hill while the 6th Nurtberg are broken by the gallant charge of the Nuringian Polenz Lancers.
Paskievich had taken both objectives and very soon would achieve the third objective of driving the enemy from the field. This meant earning maximum “Control Points” for this action which would add weight to any campaign negotiations.
The Zarlanders stream from the field, while the Nuringians secure Baumdorf
After this action the campaign then ended with a final skirmish to complete the 32 segments.
Zarland won that last skirmish but overall lost the campaign – winning just 2 skirmishes to Nuringia’s 6 who also won the Baumdorf action. Nuringia took all the control points available in the campaign while Zarland had 4 units break in action to none for Nuringia.
For each skirmish or action experience points acrue to each unit taking part, 4 experience points = 1 condition point. Those broken units lose 5 condition points reflecting the wider consequences of a units collapse on the field with soldiers missing, deserting and having been in close fighting – more wounded not to mention those killed. It also counts as a measure of morale of those still in the unit.
So each units takes time to build its condition yet can lose it a lot more easily.
This meant the following units dropped to the lowest condition factor (CF) of “green” as replacements diluted the remaining expertise of the unit.
8th Adelburg was seasoned and is now green
6th Nurtberg were green on CF5 and are now on CF0 still green
2nd Eyachdorf were green on CF5 and are now on CF0 still green
4th Beckendorf were seasoned on CF6 and are now on CF1 green
This will dent Zarland forces capability in the 1818 campaigns.
My Abstraction of conflicts with the use of segments of the years campaign, being both in parallel and in sequence, means a unit could be propelled into another campaign activity in the same year. So those Zarland losses could yet affect other 1817 campaign outcomes.
I am tempted to apply a similar condition factor in my approach for Generals experience/rating. I typically use -1,0,1 or 2 range as in poor, average, good and great. Currently I am thinking of converting these to ranges and applying positive and negative moves to a Generals condition – all experience is growth so it is the reaction to the experience that matters and of course I am moving away from simply an inherent – your either a good or bad general for all time.
For each General the following could apply
General Kratzen (rated +1 = good) now means veteran so has a CF of 16 prior to the campaign and after it is up 3 experience – not enough for +1 CF. He is -5 CF for the defeat. A bit brutal – he ends up seasoned on a CF of 11.
General Paskievich (rated 0 = average) now means seasoned so has a CF of 10 prior to the campaign and earns 2 CF’s for all his victories giving a CF of 12 and still seasoned.
A long serving general declining back to green means while the ranges work the name tags need adjusting.
This approach could prove a bit onerous though – we shall see.
Although war with VinAlba was inevitable, the Duke Constantius Regent of Zarland knew that Maximilian of Nuringia was likely to act in 1817. The Elector had marched to war in 1816 yet then suddenly withdrew his troops.
The Duke’s concerns about Nuringia were well founded. In spring 1817 the Elector of Nuringia, Grand Duke Maximilian resumed his attack on Greater Zarland.
In a series of skirmishes he engaged with Eastern Zarland forces now commanded by General Kratzen – who had been praised for his success at Kloster Arens the previous year while fighting the combined VinAlban/Davarian army.
Almost at every turn the Zarland forces found themselves outfought in these skirmishes. Eventually Maximilian’s General Paskievich manoeuvred the Zarlanders to battle.
In a small action General Kratzen attempted to hold the village of Baumdorf. The Nuringians needed something to show for their efforts beyond successful skirmishing. General Paskievich ordered his forces to take Baumdorf once he realised the Zarlanders were not retiring.
The resulting encounter saw the two forces fight for Baumdorf with its nearby hill also the focus of attention.
Sharp Action at Baumdorf. This battle was fought using Table Top Battles by Mike Smith using has “Grid” option.on land, on sea, even fantasy – these grid rules are in their second edition – my first edition is shown here
King Karol of VinAlba had other things to occupy his mind which meant Prince Otto and the Zarland succession would have to wait another day.
Both Nuringia and Genachia would no doubt be pressing their claims.
As 1816 closed VinAlba remained officially at war with Zarland although relations had cooled with Davaria. King Karol did not expect any help from that direction after the Kloster Arens fiasco. His view was that, had the Davarians committed all their forces to his attack things would have fared better. Instead they had pursued their own small war to little avail.
The mechanical map – each link provided a viable invasion route between the nodal countries
Nuringia also remained at war with Zarland.
And Davaria seemingly had lost interest in taking some of Zarland as trouble brewed with its south eastern neighbour – Verbonia.
In Nuringia the Elector, Grand Duke Maximilian had been building his forces waiting for an opportune moment to strike. His objective was a land grab – well recovery of historic Nuringian lands. The broader objective was to acquire control of Zarland.
Maximilian decided to attack once the Zarlanders were fully occupied by the VinAlban/Davarian actions in the west. In the event his troops were marching only as the VinAlbans were failing at the battle of Kloster Arens.
This meant the Zarland Regent, Duke Constantius, was able to move quickly against Maximilian.
When both sides began to make contact their respective scouts reported the following numbers.
Nuringian Scouts estimated 11,000 Zarlanders in the field – this was not what Maximilian had expected.
Zarlanden Scouts estimated 9000 Nuringians in the field.
These estimates* were not far wrong and Maximilian realised his opportunity was gone. He ordered his forces to retire.
In just a few months the apparently tottering Zarland regime had repulsed three attacks on Greater Zarland.
Duke Constantius was well pleased with this outcome at the close of the first year of Princess Maria’s reign. He did not expect matters to improve though.
*for my campiagns I use various systems to create “establishments”. These are then subject to availability based on the turn of events. To add to the uncertainty for solo games I then use variable assessments by the enemy of the opposing forces. In this case Zarland actually did not field 11,000 men.
They had a lot less than Nuringia. It was just poor information and and misreporting that gave the high figure. The fog of war so to speak.
For solo gaming narrative campaigns its all grist to the mill. And it throws up more variety in terms of battles and forces.
My Greater Zarland story fed the belligerents and circumstances
Each state has a relationship varying between allied, peace, neutral, disputes and war. With disputes these are irritating affairs of state that erode the capability of the state to mobilise for war. I randomly (1d6 123 = 5% or 456 = 10%) chose the part of the establishment diverted to deal with each dispute. Equally the reverse applies for allied states routinely supplying supporting forces.
Each dispute or war is diced for in terms of its occurrence and sequencing (one after the other or in parallel).
Disputes are a series of major or minor skirmishes with the possibility of a small action
Wars extend to larger actions and even greater engagements – possibly big set piece battles.
I used my campaign rules to generate the campaign forces available.
The campaign duration was made up of 32 segments. After each campaign turn a 1d6 determined how many segments were consumed. Once all 32 segments were consumed this campaign sequence ended.
In this case 7 turns had been played and 28 of the 32 segments consumed. Autumn was approaching and both sides had only a series of skirmishes to show for their efforts.
Each turn either a skirmish, action or engagement could occur – skirmishes most likely and engagements (large battles) least likely.
Now on this eighth turn an “action” was drawn. As it was a “small action” each force would have 8 units available to fight.
In this case I randomly selected the 8 units from each establishment.
Zarland defended the village because they had lost the skirmishes up till then.
I fought the battle using Table Top Battles on a grid. The rules generated the terrain. I used 50mm multi figure element bases representing a battalion of infantry or regiment of cavalry. One gun represented a battery of artillery.
The playing area measured 28″ x 40″ – 70cm x 101cm marked with a 5cm or 2″ grid.
The forces were
Zarland Eastern Army commanded by General Kratzen
IR 8th Adelburg CF5 (2)*
IR 6th Nurtberg CF5 (1)
2nd Tuttingen Skirmishers CF2 (1)
Pioneer Regiment 2nd Eyachdorf CF5 (2)*
5th Gellenstein Cavalry CF6 (2)
Artillery Regiment 12th Pinkenfels CF6 (2)
8th Filstad Skirmishers CF4 (1)
IR 4th Beckendorf CF6 (2)
Despite constant harrassment and losing many of the skirmishes the Zarlanders were in surprisingly good spirits. The last two units had just joined the army when the action commenced. Two units with * against them upped their morale rating on the day.
The Nuringian Army commanded by General Paskievich comprised
IR Von Rechten CF3 (1)
IR Von Ryssel CF5 (1)
1st Sharpshooters CF5 (1)
CR Prince Clement Dragoons CF6 (2)
CR Polenz Lancers CF14 (3)
1st Field Artillery Battery CF4 (1)
2nd Field Artillery Battery CF5 (1)
1st Pioneer Regiment CF14 (3)
The units were allocated cards which randomised their deployment.
The Nuringian advantage lay in their artillery and cavalryThe Zarlanders were blessed with an advantage in infantry – ideal for holding Baumdorf
The Wargaming Erratic 