Wednesday, February 14, 2024

14 February 2024: It's all about the minor details

"...It's the little details that are vital. Little things make big things happen..." John Wooden

Still reviewing Mr. Wise's booklet. A nagging minor problem has arisen that refuses to lie still and quiet inside my head.

The artillery basing proposed by Mr. Wise is an equilateral triangle (page 13) and describes the firing arc which thereby also happened to be the actual base. But fitting crews always seemed to be of secondary significance. At the time, back then, I did not question or bother with the issue instead simply complying. And figures were individual placed (casualty removal) rather than permanently attached to the base as is the modern trend. 

The modern trend, on the other hand, dealt with the basing problem in a brilliant yet direct manner. What they did - and still do - is keep whatever the base frontage is according to the scale used and simple extended back perpendicular so that the result is either a square or short rectangle. Room for placement of figures. 

The firing arc itself is either within the rules or the player used firing aids such as firing arc templates. 




























But, for me, schooled in both ways, the solution offered by both seemed incomplete. I wanted a more direct solution without having to resort to rules or firing arc templates. Then I had a Gunny Highway brainfart. Compromise. Modify. Adapt. Overcome. No face camo...

























Reconciling both styles - old school and modern - was therefore simplified (a philosophy I adhere to thanks to life): superimpose the triangle on to the square/short rectangle portion so that (a) the firing arc is maintained, and (b) there is room for the gunners to swing their tools of war. 

My initial idea was to "extend" the triangular firing arc from the square/short rectangle basing like so:

























Not a fan, to be honest. Too fiddly, and a bit of work to create. And also over-complicating matters. So I went with the next obvious amendement:

























Clean. Simple. Successful amalgamation of both styles. There is now room for a gun crew without feeling cramped and limiting (numbers-wise), and the firing arc integrity is maintained. 

If the firing arc is obscured during the flocking process, simply differentiate between both areas by using different flocking: the immediate area surrounding the gun will be trampled down due lots to traffic and other activities; the further out from the gun, not so much.

A roundabout way of reaching the solution for the dilemma posed by myself. But at least that's one less issue to concern my cluttered mind. 

Incidentally, Mr. Wise also uses artillery firing aids - scatter template, canister device, etc - so nothing has changed all that much since this was published back in 1977. More on them and my attempts to reconstruct them. Cheers.
================================

Thursday, February 8, 2024

8 February 2024: Short attention span

Been a fun intense few days jumping down the ECW rabbit hole. For me the warren has so many tunnels to explore and investigate thoroughly that it can quickly become a self-losing venture. So, to spare spawning further any rising frustration or dead-end moments, I will pause here now and draw back a little to re-focus on the many other projects I have awaiting completion this year - the Makeover Year.

American Civil War
Part of my thought process in acquiring Mr. Wise's Airfix Guide involved extracting the necessary background information needed to reverse engineer some adaptation of Mr. Empson's Tables and Mechanics so that I may generate a working ruleset to run (eventually) my Red River campaign. By reverse engineer, I mean nothing as serious or as ludicrous as anything undertaken by the Tofu regime or the Orc Natives. 

I will be using the historical names for the RR campaign as extracted from wikipedia's OOB. But for the early playtesting and rules refinements I am simply going with my imaginary ACW formations - the Union 53rd Corps (Evans) and the Confederate 32nd Corps (Lawerton). As I have previously posted MG Evans' Union formation, here now I present the Confederate side. 

But firstly let me confess: copying to paste from one PC to another doesn't work if they're not connected. D'oh! Tells me I'm still tired from the past few nights. 

Nonetheless, Lawerton's 32nd Confederate Corps is generated using Mr. Empson's Tables sections 3.1 and 3.2. I've decided to name them "units" instead of "regiments" because the latter denotes some fixed and large body of troops which wasn't necessarily so especially towards the latter part of the Civil War. And thereby misleading. The term "units" however gives more flexibility and leeway regarding composition and design, as in it permits play with numbers. So a unit might be anything from an ad-hoc battlegroup of a few companies, a battalion of several companies of varying size and strength, or it might be an under-strength regiment that's taken several heavy losses from recent engagements and actions, or it can be a severely-depleted regiment that's on its last legs, or a legion comprising all three teeth arms of infantry, cavalry and artillery (probably uncommon in 1863), or it might be a locally raised conscripted militia or state militia. Anything's possible therefore. 

I will also amend the Union corps after having read Mr. Wise's text. Both original postings will therefore suffer some unit and formation restructuring to make the whole shebang playable. I mean, I really don't own that many ACW figures in my collection. Close to it but not totally. 

Commander-in-Chief - Lawerton (name resurfacing from my late nineties campaign)
  • 1st Division Polson (another remembered name from the same late nineties campaign)
    • 1st Brigade - 4 infantry units
    • 2nd Brigade - 6 infantry units
    • 3rd Brigade - 4 infantry units
    • 4th Brigade - 5 infantry units
    • 5th Brigade - 5 infantry units
    • 1st Divison artillery - 3 units
  • 2nd Division
    • 1st Brigade - 5 infantry units
    • 2nd Brigade - 5 infantry units
    • 3rd Brigade - 5 infantry units
    • 4th Brigade - 5 infantry units
    • 2nd Division artillery - 4 units
  • 3rd Division 
    • 1st Brigade - 5 infantry units
    • 2nd Brigade - 4 infantry units
    • 3rd Brigade - 6 infantry units
    • 3rd Division artillery - 4 units
  • Cavalry Division
    • 1st Cavalry Brigade - 4 cavalry units
    • 2nd Cavalry Brigade - 6 cavalry units
    • 3rd Cavalry Brigade - 4 cavalry units
    • 4th Cavalry Brigade - 5 cavalry units
    • 5th Cavalry Brigade - 4 cavalry units
    • 6th Cavalry Brigade - 6 cavalry units
  • Corps Artillery Reserve
    • 1st Battalion - 5 units
    • 2nd Battalion - 5 units
After thoroughly reading, reviewing, and totally enjoying Mr. Wise's Airfix Guide all over again after all these decades, revising my ACW imaginary lists is definitely on the cards. Not a criticism nor a rejection of Mr. Empson's work but I fear not everything was disclosed when he generously donated his Tables and Mechanisms for public scrutiny. And there is also the factor that I probably failed to understand the instructions when generating the units and formations (I cite my recent design work on the ECW Orders Cards as proof that I need to de-wax my taringas when it comes to hearing right). I suspect that the latter might be the case. Anyway, here is a quote from Mr. Wise that made me laugh out loud. And reinvigorated my well of inspiration which was dried out last year.

"...wargaming is a highly individualistic hobby, and there are really no rules except those you make yourself..."   (p7, Wise. T, Patrick Stephens Ltd, Cambridge, 1977)

Point worth remembering - for me especially. Of late, I have lost my way a little. Burn out? Not really. Just flat maybe. Need an injection of good old wargaming medicine. Touch base with my origins, so to speak. As the author points out a few sentences later,

"...periodically, as the rules become too unwieldy, people revert to their original simple rules of two or three pages in order to just gain the maximum enjoyment from a game..." 



And I am finding much that I had forgotten or that knowledge was gradually replaced as the wargaming years progressed and I was exposed to many other subsequent rules. Times change many things. Obviously. The current meta seems more into "playing the game" and not the period with blocks of minis. To what end? The same outcome is reached across the board but it's a lifeless kind of outcome irrespective of period, rules, or innovations. It's been the fashion for many years now whereby historical rules are a bland entity clothed in historical costume. It's all about convenience, and looking good, from my observation. I really don't like that fad or I've grown weary of it. 

For instance, Mr. Wise makes valid again certain elements and aspects of ACW wargaming that drew me in all those years ago in the first place. Stuff such as how much influence an artillery train has upon deployment and how it will at times influence ensuing tactics,

"...Most wargamers do not bother with limbers, certainly not caissons and baggage wagons, but it should be pointed out that each gun had a limber, a caisson with ammunition, and the battery as a whole extra caissons, a baggage wagon to each gun, and a field forge. This clutter of vehicles often caused problems on a battlefield,  where the gun and caisson horse teams were drawn up to a depth of 47 yards..."  (p21)

Convenience dictates we simplify it and thereby lose a certain aspect of period "feel". And how much more interesting would it make the game if somehow a ruleset incorporated this aspect. As Mr. Wise points out, "...Such models will cause loss of manoeuvre..." but how much more interesting would that situation add to the gaming experience itself. 

I'm about two-thirds of the way through re-reading the Guide. And already it's given me a boost to my motivation. I will complete the review and give a summary. Cheers.
===========================

POST EDIT: 9 February 2024

The more I read into this text, the more I see myself using Mr. Wise's rules (adapting more like) because they suit me to a T. But I will also utilise parts of Mr. Empson's Tables and Mechanism (especially his unit/formation creation and terrain generation, both of which I find very detailed and extremely useful in adding "more colour" to the individual engagements proposed). In fact I will tweak the best bits from both to run my Red River campaign although I was sorely tempted switch to Mr. Wise's 1862 Peninsular campaign because it looked interesting enough from the standpoint that he has presented the outline of the campaign; all one has to do is fill out the details. Cheers. 
===========================

Wednesday, February 7, 2024

7 February 2024: Version 2 of VWQ Orders cards

Informed the gaming group of my endeavours to make my own VWQ cards and sent through my initial design (2 February post). They got back to me pronto with some major correction. Anyway, here's version 2 of my proposed New Model Army (1645) Orders cards.



























Apparently I misunderstood what the actual Orders card entails. Thanks guys for the correction. No real change to the basic design although I have modelled this new set on the recommendations to differentiate the armies (four) by colouring the card decks. So my New Model Army will comprise an orange deck of cards because it's Parliamentarian. The others are Royalist (Red), Covenant (Sky Blue), and Montrose (Dark Blue). One could also add the Irish (Green) but I don't think the group has an Irish Army list. 

Special events are deemed according to scenario dictates or objective needs and will be identifiable by a black border on the card face (as shown in the above A4 sheet). 



























I am customising my Unit cards by adding their unit flags. Have not started the cavalry although they will prove a little more difficult. But as can be seen I plan to field five full foot regiments. I've also resized the cards because I miscalculated the original size (much too large). The cards are displayed to print out on an A4 sheet.
============================
Had some minor success with my research endeavours in the past day or so in that I've found some very useful new sources for this period. Unfortunately I still haven't been able to obtain more information beyond what's scantily available regarding the cornets of the Horse and Dragoons. It would probably help if I bought the texts mentioned a few days back. But I am also mindful, and aware, that historical sources tended to describe more than they illustrated which says much regarding how people communicated back in the day. Anyway, I just need to access a well-known original source text and read it through to find what I know I will find. Even if it takes me over thirty years doing so. Cheers.
=============================
ADDENDUM: I will follow the same format regarding border trim on the front face that the group will adhere to once they settle upon the final card design. I mean, at the exhibition show, there will be four different armies - Royalist, Parliament, Covenant, and Montrose. This means at least ninety-plus card deck will be used! Only the front of the card will identify which army the card refers to. So rather than stick out like a dog with three balls I will comply and conform. 

So, what I've come up is the front card has a decoration placed in the middle to separate the two halves; the top half denotes the identity or activity; the bottom half has space that permits whatever pretty picture you want, however you want it, to depict the period itself. There may, or may not, be a border trim in the Army colour scheme (group to decide which). The back itself will be plain and simple with a title, perhaps a nice trim. But, most important, all the same backing. This describes the entire card design.
==============================
POSTCRIPT: After further thought I believe I need to change the Artillery, Turn Over, and Reload cards over to Special Event status as stated in the rules. So it's a black border for these guys. At least that's how I reckon this will pan out once the guys get back to me. Cheers.

Monday, February 5, 2024

4 January 2024: Buying minis

It's always been a private matter between purchaser and need. 

With my new-found interest in the English Civil War, a major focus has been the minis. 

Firstly, scale is what the gaming group is playing which is mianly 25mm. 

But the range is limiting because 25mm is not a popular or familiar scale although what's available commercially is promising. Obvious recommendations from the gaming group help. I've begun looking closely at the options available to me.

(1) Tumbling Dice (UK) - 25mm - white metal - own website (currently being updated so I was informed upon making a query last week) - figure quality okay - small lot packets offer value for money (best of those looked at) - no but officer figures can be co-opted as personalities with some work

(2) Dixon Miniatures (UK) - 25mm - white metal - own website - quality good - army packs available - optional heads offer variety in figure presentation - greater variety of individual figure poses - no personalities apart from King Charles

(3) Old Glory (USA) - 25mm - white metal - own website - personalities range - extensive range - 30 figure packs for Foot and 10 figures for Cavalry  

(4) A Call to Arms (UK) - 20mm - plastic - no site as such, only available via retailers that stock its products - range very limited - stock availability an issue (unlike the others listed)

(5) Lancashire Miniatures (UK) - 25mm - white metal - only included because its range of personalities is pretty good but there is nothing else ECW in the scale; plenty in 15mm and 28mm though

That's pretty much the main stockists I'll be using for now. No doubt others will pop up later on but for now too many choices makes it hard to settle on one, as they say. 
========================================

Further work done on flags just now. Calling it a night having done the Foot component of my NMA list. Struggling to obtain enough information for my cavalry however. 
























Making slow progress. And now I have something visual and concrete instead of imagined and floating around in my head like it usually does. It is a starting point because this presentation is by no means the final end result. 

In the meantime, I will probably switch to something else now because I can only keep this intense involvement up for so long before interest wanes and I move onto something else. For now though I'm glad to have made a start. For one thing, I have a better idea of what I'm getting myself into. Done enough initial researching to satisfy myself to head in the right direction. Cheers.
==========================

Sunday, February 4, 2024

4 January 2024: Everything happens of its own accord

While researching cavalry standards for the English Civil War, I found a book I've been searching for since I lost my own copy in the early 90s.

Terence Wise's Airfix Magazine Guide 24: American Civil War (1977) was my main go-to ruleset after Donald Featherstone's seminal Wargames (1962). This little booklet was the main inspiration behind many of solo ACW games and even my late 90s solo campaign. 

Now I have a very good quality PDF copy. By that I mean everything is legible, both text and imaging. Found it both by luck and persistence. Good luck finding yours.
















======================

As for the ECW cavalry standards, I should bite the bullet and simply purchase Steve Archibald's excellent reference titles (there are two in the series I believe). It will save me on time wasting. As one blogsite reviewer pointed out (among others no doubt), they're an excellent source of information on various ECW flags because the book is all illustrations. 

Instead, I am spending time doing needless research with no real clue where to look. The best source are the original sources but accessing them requires jumping through various hoops that I'm not prepared to undertake. My usual lazy man's approach of searching online comes with severe limitations and often relies more on luck than any basic research skills. I vainly persist however.

Started on my own range of copies of the excellent range of ECW standards last night based on those already available commercially. Reasons: (1) I don't appreciate watermarks on my flags, (2) As commercial entites they cost which, again, I protest because it's pretty obvious that anyone can recreate these product freely, and (3) following on from (2) I like being creative. 

There are discrepancies between same flag identities having different colours or devices. Inital guess for this is that they're earlier and later versions. Units shifted around, were reorganised, received new commanders, new postings, and so on. No mind; they give me the luxury of choice. 

Below is an example showing my progress so far in recreating my own ECW flags graphically. This is my copy of Sir John Gell's Regiment of Foot # 2 based on the Flag of War website item. 




















The base template for all Foot flags - background - was created in MS Paint (I love my old tools). Getting the folds and shading has been hit and miss but sufficient as an experiment. The actual final designs may go solely 2D in look. Or not. I've done multiple colours - black, white, blue, green, purple, yellow. Next, I've added the St George Cross in the upper left corner to complete the template. The subsequent company flags cater for variants (depending on devices used). For the example above I simply added two inverted 5-point stars and voila!

The cavalry cornets have also been given similar treatment to the infantry standards - a base flag colour background and then adding the various choices of flag trim before applying the numerous devices and emblems. 


 

















The example above is based on an actual Parliament unit whose name eludes me at the moment. This is one of the companies. The source I am using has Latin mottos but I can't decipher or distinguish properly because the image I working with as source is so tiny. Needless to say, there is loads of further work needed to improve to finish status - sizing, placements, designs, etc. 

The entire flag group as a whole is only at the start stage. At least a start has been made. Cheers.
=======================
Addendum: 
Instruction on How to create basic and simple double-sided flags using MS Paint.

To get the double sided flag look is really simple. I use the convenience and familiarity of the old MS Paint (Win7/8/10) instead of the latest MS Paint (Win11). It is still the best for basic 2D designs.

STEP 1: Start with your design (by choice I always start with the flagpole side on the left as you're looking at the design). Next, and pretty important step, copy design by keying in Select All (Ctrl + A shortcut) then Copy (Ctrl + C).




















STEP 2: Next, expand the canvas (background) area by selecting the handle on the right side of the canvas to stretch your canvas to double the size of your original design as shown below. Be careful of selecting the canvas resizing handle and not the design handle otherwise you will have a very distorted and very stretched out looking image.





















I have coloured the expanded area light blue for visual reference; by default it is white. Add a little extra gap for the flagpole (as seen below in the final image).





















The copying step now comes into play as you now finish your design. 
  1. Paste (Ctrl + V). The copied image will superimpose itself over the original (you will see handles of the superimposed image: don't touch) in the top left corner by default. Next I use the right arrow key (>) for simple precision sake in moving the new image to its new position on the far right of the canvas. If you have a good eye and steady hand you can select the image and slide it manually. But I have wobbly hands and a wandering eye. 
  2. Next, paste a second copy atop the original. Use the Flip horizontal tool to reverse the design without moving the second copy. It should look like the above image. 
  3. I tidy up by using the Fill tool to colour in the background which in this example is your base Green colour of this flag design. Or whatever source material tells you.
Voila! You now have a double-sided 2D image of the flag.

NOTE: This is my approach to creating simple double-sided 2D flags using MS Paint. Very basic but quick. You will, no doubt, find a more convenient or quicker approach. There are a plethora of other more suitable graphical design programs, preferably those that generate vector designs as opposed to the pixelated effect that I use a la MS Paint. You're really spoiled for choice. I recommend going with what you're comfortable using.

The graphical devices (the cloud, the sword and arm, and the scroll banners) created in the above example were all done using the various Shapes and Brushes tools. And the Flag folds was created using the Spray Paint Brush tool (widest setting and fast runs) along with excellent shades generated using the Colour swatch tool to break up the plain and flat 2D background. Not ideal or perfect but sufficient for my needs; at least there is no Watermark. 

Friday, February 2, 2024

2 February 2024: English Civil War

Finished my Orders Cards for the New Model Army tonight. There may be a slight problem printing though because I haven't generated alignment marks (ex-Bureau Operator for a typesetter) for both front and back sides. No mind. Here are my A4 sheets. If I haven't already stated the ruleset is Victory Without Quarter by Clarence Harrison, Quindia Studios. It's free and it's very brief. Another quick-play set favoured by the gaming group who have played Field of Glory. Perhaps they were looking for a change of pace? 

There are four basic Orders Cards associated with this ruleset: HOLD, MOVE, MANOEUVRE, CHARGE. One set per unit. There are several others cards necessary with these rules: ARTILLERY (x2), RELOAD (x2), TURN OVER. Also COMMANDER cards are added for the C-in-C and brigade commanders. Other cards can be added for specific scenarios as well (up to scenario writer) as an option. 

Here is one sheet for my New Model Army just for show to prove I'm not talking ka-ka. Hoping to get started on this project around late March when the first batch of minis arrive from the UK. 

In the meantime, still plenty of other to-do stuff lying about the studio. And games to finish. Cheers.

Sheet 4 - Hold Order card sheet: Hold your position. Morale tests for Shaken or Routing units. If beyond musket range (12") any Steady unit under Hold orders may remove a Reload Marker.






































Back of the cards. First attempt. May upgrade later but suffice to say, it will do, Donkey. The backing colour is supposed to be Venice Red which was the official uniform coat colour for the New Model Army. 

As mentioned in last post, I've gone with B8 size (normal playing card) for the individual card sizes. But I have assembled the individual cards for printing onto an A4 sheet. The back side is purely optional, one can forego the backing altogether and just use the front sheet - just cut out the pieces and paste to normal playing cards. Bob's your uncle! 
===================

Aw bugger it! One of my fundamental reasons for doing this is to make things accessible and free to use. Here are the rest of the Orders sheets created.






































Sheet 5: Move Order sheet.







































Sheet 6 - Manoeuvre Order sheet. Yes, I still use the old English-French version of the word. 






































Sheet 7 - Charge Order sheet.







































Sheet 3 - the Others Order sheet. Four Officers (Fairfax, Cromwell, Skippon, Ireton), two Artillery, two Reload, and one Turn Over (reshuffle the card deck and start new turn). I'm still considering doing the individual unit commanders (all fifteen of them. Or is it fourteen?). Will make a decision eventually. That's the cards done. Next task? Flags, done my way. Ka ki te ano. 
===================================

Thursday, February 1, 2024

1 February 2024: English Civil War: New Model Army

Giggles
Read this in the latest bulletin from the global Naval Wargaming tabletop gaming group. Made me chortle so much so I had to wake the wife and tell her. She enjoyed the laugh too.

"...I believe this is true...In WWII the Admiralty sent a signal which ended, “the Fleet will act as a hole in a bayonet”. A correction was [quickly] issued, “the Fleet will act as a whole in obeying it”..." 😁

New Model Army
Been doing some intense research on the background plus what it takes to assemble a tabletop New Model Army (Parliamentarian as they are now known as when originally I knew them as Roundheads) in time for the event. I have over nine months to get something together which should be a real challenge as I am starting completely from scratch. It means importing the miniatures completely from overseas (UK mainly but also USA) which will be pricey for sure. But I have sussed out the necessary retailers already which will provide everything required - musketeers, pikemen, dragoons, harquebusiers, cuirassiers, artillery, commanders/personalities.  

After some dithering on what list to create I have settled (for now) on a historical partial list derived from the Battle of Naseby 1645 which was the first major engagement for the newly-formed New Model Army.

Commander-in-Chief : Sir Thomas Fairfax

Left Wing : Henry Ireton
    John Okey's Regiment of Dragoons
    John Butler's Regiment of Horse
    Cornelius Vermuyden's Regiment of Horse
    Henry Ireton's Regiment of Horse

Centre : Sir Philip Skippon
    Artillery (4 batteries)
    Sir Philip Skippon's Regiment of Foot
    Sir Hardress Waller's Regiment of Foot
    John Pickering's Regiment of Foot
    Edward Montagu's Regiment of Foot
    Sir Thomas Fairfax's Regiment of Foot
    Forlorn Hope of commanded musketeers

Right Wing : Oliver Cromwell
    Edward Whalley's Regiment of Horse
    Robert Pye's Regiment of Horse (one division)
    Sir Thomas Fairfax's Regiment of Horse
    Edward Rossiter's Regiment of Horse (one division)

NOTE: This list is basically the historical 1st Line of the Parliamentarian line at Naseby, according to the OOM shown in wikipedia. 

This will be the proposed long-term target goal. It will no doubt change over time.

Since starting to research, I have been mainly interested in and concentrating on gathering as much information on the units flags for the infantry and cavalry simply because such information tends to be scanty and subject to much variation. I have managed to obtain most on my proposed Army list but still lack a remaining few. 

I do have old copies of Osprey Men-at-Arms series that I can access in storage. Despite the variations in devices and flag colour, I find the whole subject of vexillology fascinating (before Sheldon by the way). It does involve a fair bit of educated (and uneducated) guessing and imagining but it's definitely fun and much much better than no information at all. Any final decision should disputes arise will be settled by what looks visually good on the tabletop.

There are numerous online ECW-centric blogsites that provide clues and expand one's knowledge regarding historical flag information. And, at times, useful tidbits on other matters pertinent to my ongoing research, much of which is all-new to me. Such as the uniform colour for tne NMA was supposedly Venice Red which at the time of purchase was abundant and cheap. And that the lining were colour of choice by the proprietors of the unit. 

With flags mostly sorted out, my next task will be to create the Army list card deck as the rules used are card-driven. This is familiar ground for me as I've created my own card decks for other games before - Admiral of the Fleet by Seekrieg being the last and latest. I will be using playing card size which I've since learned is B8 size (62mm by 88mm). Or 3.5" by 2.45" Imperial. Should whet the creative side of me. I calculated (badly of course) that I'm going to need 69 cards in total. 

But the creativity aspect of this new project won't end there.  No, for while I assemble my list in stages because it's a very big expense buying everything in one hit I will also begin reproducing the various unit flags according to my preference. As I now have my own laser printer print quality won't ever be an issue. Product quality however is another matter altogether. And I really want this new project to be top notch quality from start to finish.

Cheers.
==========================