Ghost Panzer: Quick Out of the Box Review

I picked up Ghost Panzer over Christmas break. It is the sequel to Screaming Eagles, part of the Band of Brothers series by Worthington Games. I played the learning scenarios a couple of times, and while I did a few things wrong, I definitely thought that the game had potential. There are two features that make the game unique: fire combat and "proficiency". They definitely give the game a different feel. I'll need to play it a bit more to fully appreciate how all of the components work.

The combat system is designed to generate suppression over casualties. Here's how it works... A unit has a firepower value and casualty value. A typical German line squad has a firepower of 6 and a casualty value of 4/7. When a unit shoots, you adjust the shooting unit's firepower by any modifiers that are applicable, such as terrain, open ground, etc. You then roll a 10 sided die. If the roll is less than the modified firepower, the target unit is suppressed. If the difference between the modified firepower and the die roll is less than the first casualty number, the unit is fully suppressed and suffers a step reduction. If the difference is less than the second number, the unit is eliminated. There are two levels of suppression, and once a unit is fully suppressed, additional suppression results have no effect.

Here's a shooting example. Lets assume that the German squad (firepower 6, casualty value 4/7) is shooting at a Russian squad (firepower 5, casualty value 3/7) across the street in a wooden building. The modifier for the wooden building is -1, so the German's final firepower is 5. If he rolls a 5 or less, the Russian squad is suppressed. If he rolls a 1 or a 2, the Russian squad is fully suppressed and suffers a step reduction. If he rolls 6 or higher, there is no effect. Coming back the other way, the Russian starts with a firepower of 5, which is reduced to 4 if we assume that the German squad is in a wooden building, too. He will suppress the German on a die roll of 4 or less, but cannot step reduce it.

The effects of suppression are simple.They reduce the morale of a unit. This is significant because a unit must pass a morale check to do anything... move, shoot, etc. Normal units have a morale of 10, so they can do anything that they want. A suppressed unit has a morale of 5 or 6, meaning that they have about a 50/50 chance of doing anything. You also don't roll the morale check until you try to perform the action, so you don't know how your units are going to react. A fully suppressed unit has a morale of 1, so its very unlikely to be able to do anything. You recover one level of suppression at the end of the turn.

Proficiency is the other interesting concept in the rules. For infantry, there is simply a "proficient firepower" which is a bit less than the normal firepower. German squads have a proficient firepower of 5, while Russian line squads are 2 and SMG squads are 4. You use the proficient firepower whenever you fire after moving or use defensive fire. Its an abstraction that measures your ability to adapt to different situations.

Vehicles have a separate proficiency value. Whenever a vehicle wants to do something that is a bit more complex than just moving or shooting, it has to make a proficiency check. Most German vehicles have a proficiency of 8 while most Soviet vehicles are 5 or 6. Vehicles are required to make a check when they defensive fire, fire after moving, and fire at long range. This makes the Germans a bit more flexible than the Russians. It also encourages a more fluid battle, as there is a significant defensive benefit to moving to offset the offensive penalty.

I managed to play a face to face game a couple of weeks ago. We played the initial infantry scenario vaguely reminiscent of the venerable Guards Counterattack from Squad Leader. I don't remember many details, but the Russians managed to win in the end, pushing the Germans out of the target building. We both thought that the game mechanics worked well and are excited to try the armor rules.

Buchholz Station, a Scenario for Flames of War

I've been doing a bit of reading on The Battle of the Bulge recently, focusing mostly on the northern sector. This is the area where the 6th SS Panzer Army was supposed to break through. The American divisions located in that sector, the 99th and 2nd infantry divisions, put up a significant resistance, which delayed the breakthrough and contributed to the overall failure of the attack.

This is a small scenario that captures one of the encounters on the morning of the first day of the offensive. The 12th Volksgrenadier Division was supposed to take the Losheimergraben Crossroads and allow Kampfgruppe Peiper to break through along that route. One regiment attacked the crossroads from the north, while a second regiment attempted to flank it from the south west. The flanking force moved along a railroad line and ran into an American unit located at Buchholz Station, much to the surprise of both sides. They traded rifle and artillery fire for several hours, but the arrival of some towed anti-tank guns forced the Germans to retreat. This scenario represents that battle.

Buchholz Station, December 16th, 1944

American Forces

Company L, 394th Infantry Battalion, 99th Infantry Division

Rifle Company:  Confident Trained

Setup: One rifle platoon and the company HQ sets up within 4" of the chow truck. The other rifle platoon sets up in Ambush. The rest of the forces enter as Delayed Reinforcements. See also SSRs 1 and 3.

• Company HQ: ­ 1x CinC Carbine, 1x 2iC Carbine
• Rifle Platoon: 1x Command Rifle, 6x Rifle, 1x Bazooka
• Rifle Platoon:­ 1x Command Rifle, 6x Rifle, 1x Bazooka
• Rifle Platoon: 1x Command Rifle, 6x Rifle, 1x Bazooka
• Weapons Platoon: ­ 1x Command Carbine, 3x M2 60mm mortar, 4x M1919 LMG
• Trained Towed Tank Destroyer Platoon ­ 1x Command .50cal Recon Jeep, 2x Recon Jeep, 1x Command Carbine, 2x M5 3in gun (late)
• Mortar Platoon: 1x Command Carbine, 4x 81mm Mortar

German Forces

Elements of 1st Battalion, 27th Fusilier Regiment, 12th VG Division

VG Rifle Company: Confident Veteran

Setup: All platoons set up in the SE half of the map no closer than 16" from the center line. See also SSR 2.

• Company HQ: 1x CinC Panzerfaust Assault Rifle, 1x 2iC Panzerfaust Assault Rifle
• Sturm Platoon: 1x Command Panzerfaust Assault Rifle, 4x Panzerfaust Assault Rifle, 1x MG42 HMG team
• Sturm Platoon: 1x Command Panzerfaust Assault Rifle, 4x Panzerfaust Assault Rifle, 1x MG42 HMG team
• Schutzen Platoon: 1x Command Panzerfaust Rifle/MG, 6x Panzerfaust Rifle/MG, 1x MG42 HMG team
• Mortar Platoon: 1x Command SMG, 2x Observer Rifle, 4x 8cm mortar

Scenario Special Rules

1. The American mortar platoon sets up off board and never enters play. All American Command stands can call in fire. It doesn't count as a unit for company morale, so the Americans will have to lose three platoons before they begin to roll to see if the company breaks.
2. The German mortars set up off board, but the Observer Teams do set up on board. It doesn't count for company morale, so the Germans have to lose three platoons before they begin to roll to see if the company breaks.
3. The Americans start the game with two Rifle Platoons and the HQ units on board. One of these platoons can set up in Ambush. The other platoon must set up within 4 in of the chow truck. Everyone else enters as Delayed Reinforcements. The tank destroyer platoon must be the last platoon to enter the map.
4. Because of the surprise nature of the attack, the Americans are not in Prepared Positions. In addition, neither side can fire or call in artillery on their first turn. 

Map

The Americans set up on the left (NNW) while the Germans set up on the right (SSE). I used individual trees, but feel free to set up clumps of wooded terrain, since one large mass of woods would be a bit dull. The chow truck and the objective buildings are clearly marked. Note the walls around the buildings in the NW corner of the map. I included an opening to make it easier to enter and exit the area, but feel free to tweak as appropriate.

Victory Conditions

The Germans are attacking into the Station from the southeast. The two large buildings are the scenario objectives. The Germans win if they take and hold either of them. The Americans win if the Germans haven’t captured an objective by Turn 10. If either side fails a company morale test at any time, then the other side wins.

References

1. William C. C. Cavanagh, The Battle East of Elsenborn. South Yorkshire: Pen and Sword, 2012.
2. Stephen M. Rusieicki, The Key to the Bulge. Mechanicsburg: Stackpole Books, 2009.
3. Hans Wijers, Battle of the Bulge. Volume One: The Losheim Gap / Holding the Line. Mechanicsburg: Stackpole Books, 2009.

Book Review: The Devil's Adjutant

I read The Devil's Adjutant by Michael Reynolds while on a recent business trip. Even though it purports to be a biography of Jochen Peiper, its really about the battle group that he commanded (Kampfgruppe Peiper, or KGP) during the Battle of the Bulge. There is a chapter on Peiper pre-Ardennes that describes his time as a Nazi who served in the 1st SS Panzer Division Leibstandarte Adolph Hitler throughout the war, and fought in many battles on the Eastern front. Leibstandarte translates as "bodyguard", so he was originally part of Hitler's bodyguard, and the 1st SS Panzer division was drawn from that cadre. There is also a chapter on his post-war life, where he was convicted of war crimes, served 11 years in prison, lived in France, and was eventually murdered by French Communists. However, the bulk of book is a day by day, blow by blow account of the fighting centered around KGP's attack during the battle.

The author does a really good job of correlating official histories and personal interviews with many of the combatants. The author spent a lot of time using both American and German sources, and its quite interesting to see how the two sides viewed the same action. He was also able to interview veterans from both sides. The author was unable to interview Peiper, so his commentary was taken from post-war interrogation, some of which should be taken with a grain of salt. The book has excellent maps and a very comprehensive order of battle for 1ss Panzer and the American 30th Infantry Division, both of which make it easy to follow the battle. You end up with a pretty solid picture of the "campaign", even if it only lasted a little more than a week.

I was inspired to pull out my copy of ASL's KGP maps and scenarios when I got home! I compared the KGP maps with those in the book, and they are pretty similar. I took a quick look at the scenarios, and they seem reasonable, too. The book was published after KGP was released, so it wasn't used as a reference for the game.

I think that Avalon Hill could have published a KGP III that focused on the battles around Stavelot. There were quite a few battles over multiple days, both over the bridge and the villages to the west. I also think that you could do an interesting game focusing on the entire campaign, either at a platoon or company level. A TCS module would be very interesting, although you would need a lot of vehicles. I am planning on putting together some scenarios based on the action, although I'm not exactly sure what rules set I'm going to use.

Stooge Con 2013 - Part II

I described my army lists in Part I of this post. Now I'll give a short report on each of my games.

Game 1 vs Ming Chinese (Jim Naughton). This was my first game in a couple of weeks, and my rust really showed. It was made worse by the fact that a) the weather was mist and b) Jim really has my number. The board had some steep hills on my right flank and a small patch of rough going on my left. Jim set up his cavalry on my left flank, his gunners in the steep hills on the right, and his big gun line in the center. I set up my knights and cavalry opposite his cavalry, my spears opposite his gun line, and the Dailami opposite his gunners.

I felt pretty good about the setup. I figured that I could use the mist to screen my guys as I closed. However, I didn't realize that it would force my commands to roll pips independently. Ugh. Still, I figured that I'd be able to drive the right groups forward and delay out of range until I got some pips. Sadly, it didn't work that way. The allied command was unreliable, and, of course, the cavalry command also got 1 pip. Instead of hanging tight, I decided to press on, figuring that things would work out. Dumb, dumb move. The attack sort of stumbled forward. The allied command activated, then promptly rolled a 1. The knights ended up right next to the rough going, and a Ps ambush killed two of them. That meant that they hit the cavalry line a bit disorganized, and I lost another two, breaking the command. On the other flank, the Dailami hit the gunners and started taking casualties. His light horse then hit my bows supporting the attack and quickly disposed of them. Another couple of bad rolls and the Dailami command broke. I had lost one or two other stands by then, so the whole army broke. What a beating...

Game 2 vs Teutonic Order (Dave Shepps). Once again, the weather played a critical role in this game. I decided to go with the B List in this game, as I didn't want my Kn(F) fighting the Teutonic Kn(S)! Dave set up with the knights in the middle and bows and light horse on either flank. I put my spear in the middle, the Dailami on my right flank, and the cavalry horde on the left. As the game started, I pressed hard with the cavalry while soft pedaling with the other two commands. Several bounds into the game, it started to rain. Knowing the that bows were now at a disadvantage, I attacked aggressively with the cavalry and the Dailami. The Dailami tore into the bows, and I keep feeding them into the melee until all of the bows were dead and the command was broken. On the other flank, the Cv(S) survived one bound of ineffective bow fire and then slammed home, quickly killing them. My other cavalry and light horse attacked the opposing light horse, finally killing enough to break that command, and therefore breaking the army. Luckily, I was able to avoid direct confrontation with the knights. Those guys were scary!

The cavalry attack the Teutonic left wing...

...while the Dailami attack the right.

Game 3 vs French Ordonnance (Jim Wood). This was the first game that I played on Saturday. Jim was playing French Ordonnance. Once again, I wanted to avoid the Kn(F) vs Kn(S) matchup, so I went with the B List. There was a large woods on my left flank, but the rest of the table was wide open. I put the Dailami command near the woods, the spears in the center, and the big cavalry command on my right flank. Jim had three fairly similar commands consisting of artillery (S and I), bows (S and O), and knights (S). He deployed them on the half of the table with the woods forming a semi-circle around his camp. It was an intimidating sight, but I had a plan to attack it.

The main attack came from the cavalry wing. I used the light horse to screen the guns, then took the Cv(S) on a wide flanking move. The rest of the Cv(O) moved to 10 1/2 inches away from the guns and stopped. I was able to maneuver the Cv(S) into favorable overlaps against the Bw(S). It took several turns, but I was able to kill most of them. That freed up two units on the edge, and I was able to break the command by killing an Art(I) organ gun. There were still a few scattered units, so it would be a while before I'd be able to get into the flank of the next command.

The second part of the attack involved the Dailami. I moved the light horse from that command into a screen position while moving the Ax(S) in column through the edge of the woods towards the guns. They were able to approach without getting shot, but then Jim moved his dismounted knights (Bd(S)) to cover them. I was able to hold them off using the woods, then drive a few pairs of Dailami into the bows and guns. The Ax started to slowly grind them down, killing a Bw and Ax. But they were both S units, so it took a lot longer than I had hoped. Long enough for us to run out of time, since the cavalry was on the other side of the board, and I still needed to kill a few more units to break the command. In the end, I broke one of his commands and he broke none of mine, so it was a minor victory.

Game 4 vs New Kingdom Egyptians (Dave May). I decided to go with List A for this game, hoping to send my knights against his warband. As they say... "Be careful what you wish for!" There were some steep hills in the center of my setup area and a few rough patches in his. Otherwise, things were pretty open. I set up my three Arab commands slightly back, allowing the ally command to set up anywhere in front. The spears refused the left flank, the cavalry was in the center, and the Dailami were on the right. Dave set up all of his units in the left half (relative to me) of the board. He had a blade and bow command on the far left, followed by the warband block in the center, with an extended line of blades and bows on the right. He also had a pip dump command consisting of a general in a chariot and a bunch of Ps(I).

I was able to set up my knights across from the warbands and sent them straight in. It was a glorious attack... that completely failed! I lost a stand of knights in the first bound and two stands of light horse in the second. In retrospect, sending in the light horse to guard the flanks was a mistake. Anyways, it took a few more bounds before he was able to kill another stand and break that command. I was a bit bummed... five bounds in and I was down a command.

I sent the cavalry after the extended bow line. I used the light horse to screen, then attacked with double ranked Cv(O). It took a few bounds, but I was eventually able to grind down the bows and break them. I had been marching the Dailami like mad, and they were able to provide a bit of support in the attack. Dave attacked them with his pip dump general and managed to kill an aux stand and its supporting psiloi on my flank. I was then able to surround him with Dailami and their cavalry general and kill him. Of course, it wasn't enough to break the tiny command, as he made sure to allocate two pips to it next turn. Sigh.

The Egyptian chariots hold off the Arab cavalry.

Now we each had one broken command, and it would be a race to see who could break a second. Rather foolishly, I inched my spears forward after the knight command broke. The warband slammed into them, quickly killing two, but the attack stalled after that. I was able to delay them using the general and a light horse stand from the broken ally. In the center, I had to make my way through some broken chariots and blades. By the time I did that, a group of unbroken chariots arrived to prevent my cavalry from getting into the flanks of the warband. I think I would have been able to overwhelm them, but I had to kill way too many to break the command. In the end, neither of us were able to break the last command and the game ended in a draw.

The Dailami butcher some skirmishers, but don't make it to the camp.

Overall I went 2-1-1, so I was happy with the army's debut. Interestingly, I had better results with the three command "hammer" list than the four command "rapier" list. I do think the army is a winner, but it does so very slowly. It doesn't have any troops that can quickly kill opponents, but it is very resilient. The biggest enemy is time, so its worth working on ways to attack more efficiently. I'm definitely going to use them again in tournaments later this year.

I had a great time at the event. Thanks to Howard for running it, Legions Games for hosting it, and all of my opponents. I'm looking forward to playing them all again. (Well, except for the Ming. I hate those guys... :-)

Stooge Con 2013 - Part I

My local club sponsored a DBM event this past weekend. I have been working on an early Arab army and was eager to try it in competition. The tournament used an open format using either the DBM or DBMM army lists.

I decided on the Umayyad Arab list (III/31, DBMM) set in 680 AD. My A List was the one that I used the most during play test. It consisted of four commands, three Arab and one Central Asian Ally, and was designed for maximum mobility:

Reg Cv(O) - CinC
9x Irr Cv(O)
3x Irr Cv(S)
6x Irr LH(O)
19 EE - Breaks on 7

Reg Cv(O) - SG
8x Reg Ax(S)
4x Reg Ps(O)
4x Irr Bw(O)
2x Irr Ps(O)
16 EE - Breaks on 5.5

Reg Cv(O) - SG
12x Irr Sp(I)
6x Irr Ps(O)
16 EE - Breaks on 5.5

Irr Kn(F) - AG
4x Irr Kn(F)
4x Irr LH(F)
6x Irr Bw(I)
15 EE - Breaks on 5

The theory was to use the allied command and the CinC's command to double team one of the enemy's commands. The spear would anchor some part of the line, and could double as a pip sink, since it wasn't designed to do fancy moves. The Dailami command would dominate bad going and be a threat to light troops and bows.

The B list was a hammer to balance the first list's rapier. It consisted of three large Arab commands:

Reg Cv(O) - CinC
14x Irr Cv(O)
7x Irr Cv(S)
3x Irr LH(O)
25 EE - Breaks on 9

Reg Cv(O) - SG
4x Irr Cv(O)
8x Irr Bw(O)
9x Reg Ax(S)
3x Irr LH(O)
25 EE - Breaks on 9

Reg Cv(O) - SG
16x Irr Sp(I)
8x Irr Ps(O)
21 EE - Breaks on 7

The theory here was pretty simple. The spears anchor the center, the Dailami attack through terrain on one flank, the cavalry attack in the open on the other. The big commands assured that I could take a lot of punishment before breaking. The huge cavalry command would give me a good shot at dominating one of the flanks. The biggest downside, of course, was that the commands were pretty clumsy. Looking down 21 cavalry stands can be pretty scary, but I often found that I could only engage with half of them, so I had a lot of guys standing around doing nothing. That said, losing all of the Cv(S) wasn't enough to break the command, so it could fight for a long time.

I'll describe my games in the next post. Slight spoiler, things did seem to go according to plan, except for the game that was played in the mist! :)

The Sultan orders his troops forward!

On the Table: Later Carthaginians

About four months ago I started playing around with a Later Carthaginian army list. The army is incredibly flexible, which can be a bit intimidated, but allows it to be very powerful. I have done quite well with it, going 4-2-1 in two local tournaments.

When I first started, the army was a hodge-podge of figures, some proxy, some correct. And like the Carthaginians, I had bought a good deal of them! Of course, eBay didn't exist during the Punic Wars. Over the summer, I slowly started replacing proxies with correct figures that I painted. I also touched up some of the figures that I bought to better match the army.

The first batch of figures that I painted was a group of Spanish Celtiberian infantry. The Celtiberians were a Celtic tribe from central Spain that fought in Hannibal's army. They looked a lot like other contemporary Celtic warriors except that they wore distinctive black cloaks. For shield patterns, I went with a combination of the Spanish "S" pattern and more "classic" Gallic patterns. I'm pretty happy with the result.

The next group of figures were the Numidians. Here, I painted a mix of light horse and auxiliaries (medium foot). The sources all agree that they wore plain linen clothes, but, as always, shield designs were a bit speculative. I chose to go with plain hide, since it looks more natural. I'm not super happy with the infantry, mostly because all of the models have the same pose and even though I used different colors for their clothes, the mix of earth tones tends to blend together. I am much happier with the horses, though.

This was the the first time that I used the Army Painter primers. For the infantry I used the Barbarian Flesh color and for the cavalry I used Fur Brown. I am generally pleased, although I'm not 100% sold. It is a very high quality primer, which is a big plus. It did save a lot of time with the infantry, since they had a lot of exposed skin. It saved a bit less time with the cavalry, since the color was quite reddish, so I had to wash multiple times to get it to be more brown. The only real issue that I had was that you don't get any natural shading with the lighter primers. I normally prime black, which allows you to get some nice shading effects and solid color boundaries by not painting those areas. You cannot do that with the light primers, so you have to spend a bit more time fussing with details. For some applications, such as infantry without much clothing, I do think its an overall win.

I painted a bunch of Spanish units as well. I've really just started with them, since I would like to paint a Spanish ally and then possibly a full Spanish list some day in the future. There were two main types of figures that I painted: light horse and scutarii. The light horse are pretty straightforward, consisting of guys with white tunics, leather hats, and plain shields on horseback. The scutarii were a bit more interesting. They had the same white tunics, but I got to paint some interesting patterns on their shields. There are only a couple of known shield patterns, so you have a lot of leeway, and I chose to give them a variety of Celtic patterns. Also note that I bought some of the units already painted, but re-painted their shields to match the others. Those are the figures in the first picture that have oval shields and are all in the same kneeling pose.

Finally, I touched up four stands of Liby-Phonecian cavalry. These guys, along with the spearmen (not pictured), are the only native Carthaginians in the list (for a loose definition of "native"). I stared with some Greek cavalry that I bought already painted and added patterns to the shields. They are all highly speculative, since we don't have much evidence for Carthaginian shield patterns. I got my inspiration from pictures in the Hannibal and the Punic Wars WAB supplement. I'm very happy with the way the shields turned out. I'm tempted to paint the shields on my spearmen (which I also bought already painted), but that is lower priority than painting all of my Spanish!

I'm still working on the army. By now, about half is actually painted by me. I plan on expanding the Spanish contingents as well as painting more Peoni cavalry and spearmen. I might create some shields for the Numidian infantry as well, just to make them a bit more interesting. The army is a lot of fun to play, and I still have a few different builds that I would like to try. I plan on using it again this fall at the Eastern conventions.

References.
1. Curtis, Allen E. Hannibal and the Punic Wars. Warhammer Historical, 2005.
2. Head, Duncan. Armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars. Wargames Research Group, 1982.

Stooge Con 2012

I attended the local Stooge Con last weekend at Legions Games in the North Hills (a suburb of Pittsburgh). There were several historical miniatures events: an open DBM event, an open DBA event, and a matched pairs DBA event. For a local con, it was pretty well attended. We had about a dozen guys playing in the DBM event, and I think the DBA events had about 10 each.

I chose to bring my Later Carthaginians, which I had assembled over the last couple of months. What was unusual for me was that I had only painted about half of the army. I purchased most of the figures at various conventions over the years. The figures are mostly accurate, although I had to proxy some Numidian auxilia and light horse. Ugh. I like the army, so I am planning on correcting that in the near future. Anyways, here is my army list:

Later Carthaginian (205BC, in Africa)
CinC - Heavy Infantry
Reg Cv(O) (CinC)
Reg Sp(O)x6
Irr Wb(O)x18
25 EE, breaks on 9

SG - Medium Infantry
Reg Cv(O) (SG)
Irr Ax(S)x12
Irr Bd(F)x6
Irr El(I)x2
Irr Ps(O)
21.7 EE, breaks on 7.5

SG - Cavalry
Reg Cv(O) (SG)
Irr Cv(O)x3
Irr LH(O)x6
Irr Ps(S)x6
13 EE, breaks on 4.5

Numidian Allies
Irr LH(O) (AG)
Irr LH(O)x5
Irr Ax(I)x10
11 EE, breaks on 4

Army total: 70.5 EE, breaks on 35.5

Its about the same size as the Norman list that I had been playing, but it feels much more resilient. The idea was to put the heavy infantry block in the middle of the board, anchor one flank with the auxilia and fast blades, and use the two smaller cavalry commands on the other flank.

Game 1. I got pared against Rob Cunninham who was running Middle Imperial Romans (c. 250 AD). His army consisted of legionnaires (Reg Bd(O)), Roman auxilia (Reg Ax(O)), and a bunch of heavy cavalry (Reg Cv(O), I think). The terrain fell with some rough going on my left flank and a big hill in the center left of Rob's setup. I deployed my auxilia command along the rough going, the heavy foot command in the center, the Carthaginian cavalry on the right, and the Numidian ally on the far right. Rob deployed a cavalry command in front of my fast blades, one legion in front of each of my cavalry commands. He was the attacker and quickly advanced across the table. I used my light horse to skirmish against his legions, while I sent my medium foot against his cavalry. It was a bit of a crap shoot, but I managed to break his cavalry command. I was then able to combine my heavy and medium foot against the legions. While this was going on, my Numidians were taking a beating. Luckily I was able to slowly grind down one of his legions with my heavy foot, breaking his army a turn after the Numidians broke.
1-0

Game 2. I played against Howard West, the tournament director, and his Picts (roughly 100 AD). The terrain setup was similar to the first game, with some rough going on my left flank, a bunch of rough going in his backfield, and a hill in his center left (i.e., opposite my right). I used the exact same setup, medium foot, heavy foot, cavalry, left to right. He had a bunch of chariots in front of my medium foot, light horse in front of my light horse, and a HUGE block of lightly armored pikes (Irr Ax(I)) in front of my heavy foot. I had a reasonable advantage in light horse, so I attacked heavily there and held back across the line. Sadly, my light horse pretty much rolled over, and that command quickly broke. His cavalry was busy chasing my routed guys, so he couldn't bring them back into the fight. He was pretty aggressive with his chariots and pike, sending the former into my fast blades and the latter into my heavy foot block. I ended up grinding down his chariots with my medium foot and his pike took a beating from my warband. The latter was a bit of a surprise, but I always appreciate some luck! Once the chariots broke, I was able to get my fast blades into the action as well, eventually breaking his Ax(I) command and the army.
2-0

Game 3. I played against Doug Anderson and his Central Asian Turks (Uighur, c. 1000 AD). The Uighurs are a steppe army, so they are mostly cavalry (LH(F) and Cv(S)) and cataphracts (Kn(X), ugh), with a tiny group of spearmen. He also had a Turkish ally consisting of a mix of LH(S) and Cv(S). More ugh. There was much terrain to speak of, but there was a patch of rough on my left flank. So once again, I used the standard setup... medium foot, heavy foot, cavalry. His cavalry was way better than mine, so I had no choice but skirmish. Knowing that I would have trouble with the cavalry battle, I decided to drive my heavy foot as fast as I could at his spears. His light horse skirmished in front of my heavy foot, slowing me down, while my light horse skirmished in front of his cavalry. Eventually, his cavalry caught mine, and while they lasted much longer than I thought they would, they took a beating broke. I did have a few low odds chances of getting a general, but they never panned out. On my left flank, he decided to attack my medium foot instead of skirmishing against them. For the third time, my medium foot command turned out to be cavalry killers, chewing up the cavalry and savaging some supporting bowmen. At this point, we each had one broken command, and the foot battle in the center was about to begin. I started grinding down his guys, but he caused some casualties, too. He was able to get his cavalry back into the fight (after chasing off my cavalry), and that was the turning point. He was able to break up my spears, which had been protecting the flanks of the warband, and start grinding them down. Going into the last turn, we were both 2 guys away from breaking. He won the combats and I didn't, so my army broke, and I lost. Still, it turned out to be a fantastic game.
2-1

Overall, I was pretty happy. The Carthaginians did well... Hannibal would have been proud! My medium foot were the MVPs, breaking a cavalry command in every battle. The mix of elephants and fast blades has a surprising punch, and the the Ax(S) are surprisingly resilient. My cavalry seemed a bit weak, however, breaking in every battle. I think the commands are a bit too small, so I'm going to rework them for the future. Needless to say, the cavalry commander will get a talking to when we get back to Carthage. Oh, wait, the Uighur cavalry killed him...

I had a terrific weekend. All of the guys that I played are very cool, and I enjoyed playing against them. All of the games were very very exciting, too! I definitely plan on playing the army again. It felt much more resilient than the Normans, and while it doesn't have the flair of a knightly charge, the infantry is tough enough to grind opponents down.

Force on Force: Infantry Rules Mini-Review

While attending Stooge Con, I noticed up a new set of rules titled Force on Force. They are published by Osprey and contain rules for modern skirmish gaming. I've always been interested about the recent campaigns in Afghanistan, both Soviet and NATO. I read through them at the store, and they seemed to be pretty interesting. After a quick check of a few online reviews, I decided to buy them.

Last week, I had a chance to kick the tires on the rules set. As I don't have any modern minis, I set up a few fights between American and German troops in France. First I'll give a quick overview of the rules then I'll give a mini AAR.

The basic unit in the game is a fire team of 2-5 men. Each team is rated on three things; Troop Quality, Morale, and Confidence. TQ and Morale ratings are represented as a die ranging from d6 to d12. To pass a check, the unit or soldier must roll 4 or higher on its die. As you can see, units rated d6 have a harder time passing that units rated d12. The Confidence rating is given as Low, Normal, or High, and affects when a unit has to take a morale check.

Shooting is done as a unit, and the target is also a unit. You cannot specify a single soldier as a target. To shoot, you roll one TQ die per soldier in the unit. You add one die if the unit has a light support weapon (LMG, SAW, grenade launcher) and two dice if it has a heavy support weapon (HMG, RPG). In addition, you roll an extra die if you are in effective range, which is based upon your TQ. You keep track of all of your successes, included the value rolled. The target rolls one die for each soldier in the unit, plus a number of dice based upon the terrain it occupies. Every success the defender rolls can negate one of the attacker's successes that has an equal or lower value. Its not just based on number of successes. For example, an attacker rolls four dice, scoring 1, 4, 5, 8. The defender rolls four dice, scoring 2, 7, 7, 7. The 1 and 2 are discarded. Two of the defender's 7s negate the attacker's 4 and 5 rolls, but the final 7 doesn't negate the attacker's 8. Therefore, the defender takes one hit.

One other interesting bit about fire combat is that its executed in a round of fire. If a unit is shot at, it has a chance to respond. When a unit declares that its shooting at a target, both the attacker and the defender make a TQ check using a single die. If the attacker rolls equal or better than the defender, he shoots first. If not, the defender shoots first! Basically, the TQ check represents who gets the jump in a firefight. Note that a unit can respond multiple times if multiple units attack it, although it rolls one less die each time.

At the beginning of each game turn, the two sides make a modified TQ check. The side that wins gets the initiative, and sequentially activates all of its units. The non-initiative player can react to any of the initiative player's activations, and then can move any left over units at the end of the turn. There are a bunch of different activations, but there are four main ones: fire, move, fire and move, and overwatch. The first three are exactly what they say, while the overwatch action allows you to fire at any units that react. Note that the defender cannot react to overwatch actions, but can react to the others. This allows the initiative player to set up a bounding overwatch, where one unit covers another as it moves. Reacting units can choose to move or fire as a reaction, but while a unit can fire multiple times, it can move only once in a turn. When a unit reacts, both it and the active unit make a TQ check, and the winner gets to perform its action first. So, a unit can attempt to shoot at an enemy unit, but if the enemy unit wins the reaction test, it can move out of LOS before the activated unit shoots. The action/reaction system makes the game very fluid.

Morale checks are handled by making a TQ check for every soldier in the unit. If the unit passes more checks than it fails, its fine. If not, it is pinned, which forces it to take cover (i.e., not move) and reduces its TQ by one die. If a unit is pinned a second time, it falls back. A unit recovers from pinning at the end of the turn.

That's a basic summary of the rules. Now a quick AAR of my two fights.

In the first fight, I had two teams of Germans and two teams of Americans do a meeting engagement in the woods. I wasn't too clever, and tried a basic bounding overwatch advance into each other. One German and one American team blundered into each other, with the Germans firing first and causing some casualties. The second German team followed up and finished off the Americans. In the next turn, they started dragging the wounded Americans back to their lines as prisoners, while the initial team took up a position at the edge of the woods. The remaining Americans didn't have much chance, so I tried to charge the Germans in the woods! It didn't work so well... two of the Americans were hit, and the unit failed its morale check. In the next turn, the Germans finished off the remaining Americans.

In the second fight, I had a German half squad and MG team defending a couple of houses. The Americans had three teams of riflemen, a light mortar team, and a MG team. The assault group consisted of two rifle teams on the left flank. The support group had the MG team, the mortar team, and the third rifle team on the right flank. As the assault teams moved through the woods, the support teams took up their positions. The Germans fired on the support teams, quickly knocking out the MG team with their own machine gun, while the half squad waited behind a wall trading shots with its American counterpart in another set of trees. The assault troops managed to get behind a second wall near the house with the machine gun, and caused several casualties to the German half squad. The German machine gun wasn't able to do to much, although it did take out one or two more troopers. Finally, the weight of American fire took out the rest of the German half squad, leaving the German MG team alone to defend the house. A lucky mortar shot wounded the two machine gunners, and the fight was over.

Overall, I like the system. The game moves fairly quickly, and both players are involved all of the time. The results seemed to make sense. I made a lot of mistakes in the first game, and a lot less in the second. There are rules for vehicles, artillery, and air support, but I haven't really read them yet. I'm definitely looking forward to trying it out a bit more. Hopefully I'll be able to find a game at Origins.

Stooge Con 2011 AAR

Two weeks ago, our local wargames group hosted a mini-con. There were about eight people playing DBA and the same number playing DBM. It was hosted a local game store, Legions Hobbies & Games, which sells all sort of cool stuff and has a huge gaming area.

I played DBM and brought the latest version of my Norman army. The army has evolved over time, starting as a Sicilian group including some Arab allies and changing into William the Conquerer's list utilizing a mix of regular and dismounted knights.

III/52 Norman

Command 1
CinC Irr Kn(F)
Milites Irr Kn(F) x8
Scouts Irr LH(I) x3
Archers Irr Bw(I) x2
Peasants Irr Hd(O) x12
20 EE, Breaks on 7

Command 2
Sub-General Irr Kn(F)
Milites Irr Kn(F) x4
Dismounted Irr Bd(O) x9
Spearmen Irr Sp(I) x4
18 EE, Breaks on 6

Command 3
Sub-General Irr Kn(F)
Archers Irr Bw(I) x10
Crossbowmen Irr Bw(O) x6
17 EE, Breaks on 6

Command 4
Breton SG Irr Cv(O)
Breton Horse Irr Cv(O) x6
Dismounted Irr Bd(O) x4
Spearmen Irr Sp(I) x6
17 EE, Breaks on 6

Army total: 72 EE, Breaks on 36


I was a little pressed for time, so I only got to play three games. I went 1-1-1, and would probably have gone 2-1 if I didn't arrive late on Saturday. Overall, I was pretty pleased.

The first game was against Howard West's Bosporans. His army had a bunch of Ax, Sp, Bw, and Kn. He also had a Scythian ally with a bunch of LH(F). There was a large batch of rough going in the middle of the table, and two smaller areas on the flanks. I set up with my Bretons on the right flank, my dismounted milites on the left, and my knights and bowmen in the middle. I pushed the whole lot forward, and Howard was happy to oblige. The match almost ended in disaster, as his bowmen shot up my Breton cavalry pretty badly. Luckily, I managed to extract them before the command broke. On the other flank, I had a slight numerical advantage, so I decided to sweep the rough going clear with my dismounted milites. Through sheer weight of numbers, and a bit of luck, I was able to push the Ax out of the rough going and was in a pretty good position to put pressure on his flank. In the middle, my bowmen and knights were slowly grinding down Howard's Sp and remaining Bw. The losses were spread over several commands, so I wasn't able to break anything before time was called, but we sort of agreed that with a couple of more bounds, I had a good chance of breaking a command and possibly the army. It ended in a draw, but I felt pretty good.

That feeling was quickly erased in my second game agains Rob Cunningham and his New Kingdom Egyptians. The terrain featured two areas of difficult going on Rob's flanks, and a river near my back edge. Rob set up his bow and blade line anchored between the two pieces of terrain. He also placed two groups of psiloi in ambush, one in each piece. I set up with my Bretons on the left flank, the knights and bows in the middle, and the mixed blade and knight command on the right. I made quite a few mistakes in this fight. First, I tried to sweep the difficult going with my blades. I forgot that they couldn't do group moves in difficult terrain, and by the time that I remembered, they were out of position to attack the bows. I tried to make an end around with some knights on the other flank, but they got tied up by the psiloi. In the center, I lumbered forward with the bows and main group of knights. I managed to charge the knights as a cohesive group, but didn't kill a thing on the charge. After that, it didn't take long for Rob to break both my knight and bow commands, causing me to go down in defeat. We had a good talk about using Normans and fast knights after the battle, which would go on to be a big help the next day...

On Sunday, I played my last game against Carl and his Successor Army. I knew he had a whole lot of pike, so I planned to dismount my main knight command at setup. When the terrain fell, there was a lot of rough going on my right flank, but my left flank was wide open. Figuring that I had nothing to lose, I sent the Breton command on a flank march. The plan was to engage the pikes with my blades, delay on my right flank with the light horse, and use the Breton cavalry to flank the pike block. I set up with my bow line in front of my blades, and marched forward. Carl's pikes did the same. I got lucky, and my flank march arrived on turn two. This forced Carl to divert a lot of pips to the counter them just as the blades and pikes started their shoving match. I then sent my reserve group of knights to aid the flank march. Carl was forced to spend pips all over the entire battlefield while I was able to focus two commands on one of his, including a group of impetuous knights. I managed to close the door and kill his pike subgeneral, causing even greater command problems. He did kill quite a bit of my guys, but not before I was able to overwhelm the command opposing the flank march and break it. A few bounds later, they called time, and I won by virtue of breaking a command without losing any.

I was very pleased with this last game. I formulated a plan and executed it almost exactly as I had wanted. I was able to delay in the areas where I couldn't win and was able to combine forces on one command where I could. By engaging the entire line at once, I was able to force Carl to spend pips in places where he didn't want to spend them. I was pretty happy that my crazy plan had worked.

I had a really good time at the event. I thought I played well, except for the middle game, and I felt much more comfortable with the rules. I also felt more comfortable with my army, utilizing its strengths and mostly handling its weaknesses. Its a fun army to play, although you have to deal with the fact that sometimes you will lose in a spectacular fashion! In that case, you have to look on the bright side... you will get to spend more time shopping in the dealer's hall!

Cold Wars 2011 AAR

I apologize for the delay on this one. Work was busy the first week back, and I was out of it most of this week with strep throat. OK. On with the show...

I arrived at Cold Wars early Thursday afternoon. I was feeling a bit under the weather (yes, its been a rough beginning of the year), so I was a bit medicated. After enjoying a spicy dinner at the crazy Thai place, I kicked off the weekend with the Dismounting Armies DBA tournament. I played one of the classic "cheater" armies, the Anglo Normans (i.e., post-conquest Normans). In my first game, I played against the East Franks, which were very similar. I managed to shoot one of his knights pretty quickly, going up 1-0. Then I maneuvered to get a couple of double overlaps, but couldn't seal the deal. My opponent kept coming back, and slowly picked off my guys. He wen't up 3-1, but we managed to have two quick kill situations, one on my side and one on his. He won both rolls, so I lost the game 1-4. My next opponent played the Early Byzantines. It turned out to be a bad match up for him. He had mostly cavalry while I had all knights. I don't remember much of the action due to the cold medicine, but I do remember basically grinding him down with bad match ups. I won 4-2. In my final game, I played the Medieval French, one of the other classic "cheater" armies. I managed to do something right, and get my crossbows in front of his knights and my spearmen in front of his bows. He dismounted his knights to take on my bow, but I managed to work my knights into his blades. On the other side, my spearmen were making progress against his bows. I was up 3-2 and deliberating a move when they called "5 minutes", so I just said f--- it and charged a spear into an overlap position against a bow. I rolled a six, he rolled a one, and I finished the tournament 2-1. I ended up coming in third place, which wasn't bad for someone high on sudafed.

I felt a bit better Friday. I was supposed to teach a painting class at 10:00 and one at 3:00, then play in a DBA even that evening. At like 9:30 I found out that they messed up the schedule, and my classes were back to back at 12:00 and 2:00. I had a little bit of extra time, so I watched the beginning of the double DBA tournament and then walked around the flea market. I picked up a couple of stands of Gallic cavalry and warriors (you can never really have enough), but that was about it. I showed up around 11:30 for my first class, got everything set up, and no one made it. :-( It turned out that no one made any of the noon classes because of the scheduling snafu, so I gave one of the other artists a private class on painting horses. I did have two people show up for my 2 PM heraldry class, and they really enjoyed it. Its definitely a cool feeling when you teach someone something and you can see that they get it. One of the people attending does 1/300 aircraft, and we discussed some techniques for painting that as well. They complimented my both on my work and my teaching, so it was a very cool experience. I go to the crazy art college, and I'm a bit intimidated by some of the people there. Some of them are real artists, as in, have sculpted stuff for miniatures companies or have painted stuff for commission. I'm starting to feel a bit more comfortable there, and it really is a cool experience.

Friday night I got sucked into playing a game of DBM in 25mm instead of the DBA tournament. To be honest, I was still a bit tired, so I didn't mind a quick game. I played the Sciri, which is a Germanic tribe from the end of the 4th century AD. The army was composed of knights, warband, bows, and some allied Hunnic light horse. It was an army borrowed from a fellow DBM gamer, and it was painted beautifully. I played against a random Chinese army consisting of spearmen, bowmen, cavalry, and chariots. The guy set up in the corner, utilizing temporary fortifications to anchor his wing. I sent my warbands after his spearmen, my bows after his bows, and my mounted troops after his mounted troops. I figured, I have no idea how these armies work, so charging seemed like the right idea! I managed to gain an early advantage. The combined weight of my warband and bows broke his smaller spearmen command. Then his cavalry absolutely crushed the Huns. Ugh. I sent the knights in after the cavalry and chariots. I started to grind them down, but then he managed to break my warband command. Things were starting to get pretty hairy, where one or two losses on either side would determine the winner, when I made a rookie mistake. I advanced a column of knights, but left a kink in the line. Sure enough, I lost a combat in front of them, recoiled into the column, which killed the one guy needed to break the army. Oh well, it was a good game!

Saturday was the double DBM tournament. My partner and I played an Early Vietnamese army, affectionately known as a "wall of junk". It consisted of a bunch of inferior bow, a bunch of warbard, a bunch of mediocre light troops, and three elephants! The army had roughly 140 elements, which is more than double the size of my Norman army! Crazy. Our first game was against the Neo-Elamites, a biblical army with a very similar composition (IOW, wall of junk). Both armies stretched from board edge to board edge, so there wasn't any fancy maneuvering. We managed to get the favorable match ups, so ended up with a slight advantage. Since there were so many troops on the table, we ran out of time before either side completely broke. They did break one of our smaller commands, but we broke his C-in-C's command, so we won via points. Our second game was against the Later Achaemenid Persians, which was composed of a bunch of cavalry, a bunch of Greek hoplites, and a handful of lighter troops. They demonstrated on my wing, and sent the other cavalry command into our bows, where it was promptly shot to pieces. We simply charged the warband into the spear block, quickly breaking it in several bounds. It took us several more turns to break their army, but not before they broke the warband command. Ironically, the spearmen did more damage after they broke! Anyways, we had won again, so we were headed to the championship game! In that, we played a Bosporan army, composed of knights, light horse, and assorted light troops. We lined up with the auxilia in some bad going in the middle, the two bow commands on the wings, and the warband as a reserve. The Bosporans did a general advance, hitting our three main commands with knight attacks and adding the light horse to the center attack. Our middle command and right commands collapsed, but we managed to break their C-in-C command. We had lost two smaller commands, while they lost their biggest command. Now it was a race to see who could break the final command. I was doing alright holding off the knight command on the left, killing a knight and some light horse, and devastating the light infantry supporting them. Once again, I was in a situation where the next element lost determined the winner. They charged in with the knights, my bows held off a couple of attacks, but couldn't stop them all. My command finally broke, breaking our army. We were one element away from breaking theirs! Yet another close game. It was disappointing losing in the finals, but it was very cool actually making it there.

I did some shopping every day of the con. Overall, I thought it was a bit mediocre. I was mostly focused on ancients, and there weren't a lot of things to get. In addition to the Gauls, I got a half dozen Hundred Years War English longbowmen, a couple of army books for various games, an interesting book on the Mongols (which I'm halfway through by now), a used copy of Hornet Leader, and a copy of Steel Wolves (which I've been lusting over for quite a while). I was hoping for more in the way of painted guys, but most of the vendors either had Second World War or Napoleonics. Very few had ancients. No worries, though. I have enough unpainted lead to last me for quite a while.

The show was definitely a success. I had a lot of fun playing DBA and DBM. I also really enjoyed the painting classes. I ended up with a pretty packed schedule, so I didn't have a chance to play any other games. I don't remember seeing any crazy setups, although I didn't do much exploration beyond the NASAMW room. I do wish that Historicon and Origins weren't so close together, since I can only go to one of them. I am looking forward to Fall In. It should be a lot of fun as well.

On the Table: Saladin and His Army

In my previous two posts, I discussed painting an assortment of Muslim troops for my Ayybid Egyptian army. In this post, I will describe the last elements of the army and Saladin himself.

The last batch of troops needed for the DBM and FoG versions of the army are the Adath Militia. They represent the local town militias and were quite common in Syria. For my figures, I chose the standard palette and gave them generic Muslim heraldry. I did have one base of guys with a bit more interesting blazons. I suppose they were the more wealthy townsfolk!





Last, but not least, we have Saladin's figure. I spent some time agonizing over his banner, but in the end I decided to go with the Bismillah on a yellow banner. Most of the references that I found showed banners with some form of Islamic text, so it seemed appropriate. Yellow was the color of the Ayyubids, so I used that as the banner color. To make it, I laser printed the text and outline for the banner on regular paper. I painted the banner yellow, using a thin enough mixture so the text was still visible. Then I went over the text with some black paint. Finally, glued it to the staff and put a little kink in it so it looked like it was flowing in the wind. I also used yellow for Saladin's cloak and the shield and trim for the standard bearer. I used red for the other horsemen because it is an appropriate Muslim color and, well, I like it!





Shown below is the DBA version of the Ayyubid army. I painted all of the figures, just not all recently. We have the cavalry, Kurdish auxiliary, and the light archers from the previous blog entries. We have one stand of Mamluks that I painted a while back. You can tell them apart from the lancers by the barding on the horses. We also have a pair of Turkish horse archers and a stand of Bedouin light horse. Finally, we have a pair of stands of Sudanese archers. I've used the army in the past and have had pretty good success with it. It doesn't have any killer troops, but it also doesn't have any real weak spots. The army is very mobile, and if you are patient, you can capitalize on your opponents mistakes.




My next project is a Later Crusader army. I'm actually assembling figures for two armies: one representing the Kingdom of Jerusalem and the other representing the army of Richard the Lionheart on the Third Crusade. As with the Muslims, I already have a lot of "generic" figures for the army. What I'm doing now is adding a handful of figures that are specific for the period.

I'm still working on things, but here is a sneak peak. There are two stands of spearmen with the colors of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and a stand of spearmen in Richard's colors. They are flanked by several stands of Knights Hospitaller. The spearmen are some older figures that I had, but the knights are recently purchased from Legio Heroica. I hope to have another post soon describing the Crusader army.

On the Table: Muslim Mounted and Foot (Part Two)

In my first post, I described the early Muslim infantry that I recently painted as part of my Crusades project. In this post, I'm going to talk about figures that are specifically part of Crusader era Muslim armies. I purchased the figures specifically for my Ayyubid Egyptian army. This is the army led by Saladin which fought both the Kingdom of Jerusalem and King Richard the Lionheart's army in the Third Crusade.

The first batch of figures are four stands of javelinmen. They made up the bulk of the Muslim auxiliaries in the period, and could be of either Kurdish or Arabic origin. I used the same techniques as in my previous post: prime white, raw umber wash, paint the rest of the figure. I also used the "standard" Middle Eastern color palette. Since these troops were a step up from the city militia, I assumed that they would have less "natural" fiber. I painted them with a bit more color than the either the swordsmen or the archer. For the shields, I used designs almost exclusively from Saracenic Heraldry. Since these figure represent troops from the 12th and 13th centuries, I feel a lot more comfortable using the later devices.

Again, I'm pretty pleased with the results. The figures are from Legio Heroica, and I really like the sculpts. I also like the fact that the shields are separate from the figures, so you can really mix and match to get the effect that you want. The only down side is that the javelins are also separate, so you have to individually glue them. We'll have to see how they hold up with repeated play.

The last batch of troops are four stands of Arab lancers, also known as askari (Arabic for "soldier"). The made up the bulk of the heavy cavalry in Ayyubid armies. Unlike the Mamluks, which were slave soldiers specifically trained to fight, the askari were all nobles and free men. They would be the rough equivalent to knights in Western armies. One of the most famous (infamous?) of these troops is Usamah ibn-Munquidh, author of "An Arab-Syrian Gentleman and Warrior in the period of the Crusades." He lived during the first half of the 12th century, and his memoirs are quite an interesting read. The figures are all from Legio Heroica, same as the javelinmen.

Once again, I used the standard painting technique for these figures, somewhat altered to account for horses. For the horses, I started with whiter primer and a raw umber wash. Then, I block painted each horse with a different color according to the type of horse that I wanted to paint: brown for dark bay, sand for dun, mahogany for chestnut, toffee for roan. After that, I washed the horses again, using black for the bay and brown for the other colors. This really brings out the detail on the figures and makes the colors more lifelike. I then paint the manes and tails, black for bay, dark gray for dun, and brown for chestnut and roan. Finally, I add a few markings on the face and legs.

For the riders, I followed the standard Middle Eastern palette for color. As these would be nobles, I assumed that they would have brightly colored robes over their armor. All of the figures have armor, and about half of them have robes while the other half do not. The shields all had designs as part of the sculpts, so I didn't add any heraldry. I painted them using the standard palette, but picked colors to be aesthetically pleasing. (Pleasing to me, of course!)

That completes my post. These four stands will almost complete my Ayybid army. I still need to paint a few stands of militia, but I hope to complete them in the next week or so. Once they are done, then I'll create another post containing pictures of the entire army. After that, I will start cleaning up my Later Crusader army to provide an opponent for the Ayyubids.

As always, if you have any questions or comments, please feel free to ask.

On the Table: Muslim Mounted and Foot (Part One)

The idea behind this post is to talk about my latest painting projects. I'd like to discuss both the history behind the figures, the inspiration behind the colors and designs, and the painting techniques that I used. Hopefully this will become a regular feature documenting my projects.

My current project focuses on Crusader era Muslim armies. It is part of a larger project to build a set of Crusader Era armies, including Christian, Muslim, and Mongol armies. Except for the Mongol army, I'm actually pretty close. A lot of my guys are a bit "generic", so I am painting these figures so they are accurate for specific armies and campaigns.

The first batch of figures are actually predate the Crusades. They are Dailami zupin men from Khurasan Miniatures. The Dailami were mountain people from northern Iran that appeared as mercenaries in Muslim armies from the 7th through 12th centuries. The "zupin" was a double headed spear (i.e., had points on both ends) and was their premier weapon. The Dailami had a well deserved reputation as fierce fighters.For these figures, I chose a generic "Middle Eastern" color palette of yellow, red, and blue, with some green and white as accents. These colors are based upon the dyes that would be available in that region: indigo (blue, saffron (yellow), and cochineal (red). I also used some green and white. It would also be common to see some "natural" fiber colors, too. See Dr Brendan Moyle's web site (http://users.actrix.co.nz/moyle/figs/standard.html) for more information.

Since I couldn't find any definite references, I chose basic Islamic designs. I used a couple of designs from Osprey's The Armies of Islam 7th–11th Centuries and a couple from Mayer's Saracenic Heraldry. For the shield colors, I stuck to the generic palette from above, picking shield colors that complement the clothing.I have been experimenting with a new painting technique, and I used it on these figures. I prime the figures white, then wash them with a thin raw umber wash. This helps bring out some details and works well for undyed clothing. It also helps fill in some "cracks" with color, which can be a problem when you prime white, since unpainted areas tend to stand out. I first read about the technique on Simon MacDowall's web site (http://legio-wargames.com) and have been really please with the results. After the wash, you paint the figures normally. For me, that means you start at the boots and work your way up the figure, finishing with the shield design. Finally, I base them on 3mm thick bases, apply some Woodland Scenics fine ballast, and then a few tufts of static grass. Voila!

I'm pretty happy with the results. I think the stands look pretty good, and I now have a core groups of Dailami troops for all of my Muslim armies. I base all of my armies the same way so that they look consistent on the table. They might not always win, but at least they look good!

I also painted a couple of stands of Arab swordsmen from Khurasan. Originally, I was going to use them as Arab auxiliaries, but after seeing them, it was pretty clear that they were really Conquest era troops. I decided to paint and base them that way, so I can use them in early Islamic armies as swordsmen. It also gives me an excuse to build a Conquest army! I use the standard color palette and a lot of "natural" color. In fact, some of the figures are just washed, with no other colors applied to the clothing.

The next batch of figures are Arab archers, also from Khurasan. for these guys, I used the same color palette and the same painting techniques as mentioned above. The figures represent "generic" Arab skirmishing archers, and can be used from the time period of the Islamic Conquest until the 12th or 13th century. Like the swordsmen, I left quite a few of them in natural colors. And like the rest, I based them on thick bases with gravel and static grass.

This post turned out to be a lot longer than I had originally thought, so I'm going to break it up into two posts. The next post will focus on troops specific for the Crusades, which was actually the original point of the project!

2010 In review

Its been over a year since I posted anything, and I have been doing a lot of gaming. I have focused almost exclusively on historical miniatures and World of Warcraft, really only playing other games at special events. I've found really good people to play with, so its been easy to focus on these two areas.

I got back into World of Warcraft over the summer. I got a Cataclysm beta key, but when I tried to use it, I found out that my account had been hacked! Of course, I had to log in to make sure that everything was okay. One thing led to another, and there I was playing again. My main character was on another server, so I moved him back to the original server, and I was ready to go.

Playing on the old server with the old guild was pretty awesome. Most of the old faces were there, and the new faces turned out to be super cool. The questing was a lot of fun and the high end content was also pretty interesting. The only downside to the whole thing was the gear grind. By this point in the expansion, most of the content was stupidly simple. It often took less than 15 minutes to complete a heroic dungeon. It was fun doing each one once, but then it became pretty boring. I did manage to get my main geared to the point that I was able to participate in my guild's first downing of the Lich King. That was an awesome experience.

I've spent the last month and a half playing Cataclysm. Its been a great experience. The questing was really, really good. Blizzard has done a great job with the phasing and quest design. The artwork was also top notch. The dungeons are a lot harder than before. I like that a lot, since it actually requires some planning to successfully complete them. My only complaint is about the crafting grind. It is really, really painful. We'll see if I still think that a couple of months from now. My guild is just starting to raid, and so far its been pretty tough. I'm looking forward to the progression.

On the historical minis front, I've been playing a lot of DBM and a little bit of FoG and DBA. I'm really starting to get into DBM. It has a LOT more going on than DBA, and I find that quite interesting. I've mostly been playing my Normans, although I will also play a Roman army on occasion. I still like both FoG and DBA, but I don't have as much chance to play them.

I did a lot of painting in the second half of the year. My first project involved wrapping up my Roman army. I painted a bunch of legionnaires, velites, and cavalry. My second project was going to be Alexander's Macedonians, but I haven't made much progress. My current project is Islamic and Crusader armies. I've painted a lot of Arab and related foot, as well as Muslim and crusader cavalry. I have been trying to be as accurate as possible regarding colors and shield designs, and I've been very happy so far with the results.

That's a short summary of the past year. I hope to start posting a bit more regularly. I have weekly WoW and mini sessions, as well as a constant flow of guys to paint. The plan is to create updates on all of these topics. Stay posted!