/hwg/ - Historical Wargames General

File: Death_of_Sten_Sture_the_Younger.jpg (57KB, 680x448px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 680x448px

>Advanced Squad Leader
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/d9x0dbxrpjg48/Advanced_Squad_Leader
>Battleground WWII
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/cb83cg7ays4l1/Battleground_WWII
>Battlegroup
https://mega.nz/#F!SolyxarJ!GUg6zWBStfznr6BvYedghQ
>Black Powder
http://www.mediafire.com/download/o5x6blwoczojmfr/Black+Powder.pdf
>Bolt Action
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/n7jmdnlv1n0ju/Bolt_Action
>By Fire And Sword
https://mega.co.nz/#!jxgCWTYD!FCp52DAqIUc-EM-TsRsWv7fB92nJ3kkzKsNcD_urI5Q
>Fleet Series
https://mega.nz/#F!i1N3xZxL!C6fQ3Z8o2U0gtk5kdXuVcQ
>Hail Caesar
https://mega.nz/#F!XsVD0KgT!twB1NWiFE3aKXK_O1EZ4pA
>Impetus
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/28i9gevqws518/Impetus
>Modelling & painting guides
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/7b5027l7oaz05/Modelling_%26_Painting_Guides
>Next War (GMT)
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/eupungrg93xgb/Next_War
>Phoenix Command RPG
https://mega.co.nz/#F!b5tgXRwa!mzelRNrKPjiT8gP7VrS-Jw
>Saga
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/alj31go19tmpm/SAGA
>Twilight 2000/2013 RPG
https://mega.co.nz/#F!C9sQhbwb!NVnD4jvUn5inOrPJIAkBhA
>Wargaming Compendium
http://www.mediafire.com/download/cghxf3475qy46aq/Wargaming+Compendium.pdf
>Warhammer Ancient battles 2.0
http://www.mediafire.com/download/uttov32riixm9b0/Warhammer+Ancient+Battles+2E.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/ta7aj1erh7sap1t/Warhammer+Ancient+Battles+-+Armies+of+Antiquity+v2.pdf
>Warhammer Historical
https://mega.nz/#F!LxkElYYY!FJB5miNmlWZKMj2VfSYdxg
>Warmaster Ancients
http://www.mediafire.com/download/cifld8bl3uy2i5g/Warmaster+Ancients.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/download/3emyvka11bnna1b/Warmaster+Ancient+Armies.pdf

Desired scans :
Rank and File supplements
Harpoon 3 & 4 supplements
Force on Force supplements
Hind Commander
At Close Quarters
War and Conquest

File: 2187996026.jpg (256KB, 630x630px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 630x630px

19th January in military history:

649 – Conquest of Kucha: The forces of Kucha surrender after a forty-day siege led by Tang dynasty general Ashina She'er, establishing Tang control over the northern Tarim Basin in Xinjiang.
1419 – Hundred Years' War: Rouen surrenders to Henry V of England, completing his reconquest of Normandy.
1520 – Sten Sture the Younger, the Regent of Sweden, is mortally wounded at the Battle of Bogesund.
1806 – Britain occupies the Dutch Cape Colony after the Battle of Blaauwberg.
1812 – Peninsular War: After a ten-day siege, Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington, orders British soldiers to storm Ciudad Rodrigo.
1817 – An army led by General José de San Martín crosses the Andes from Argentina to liberate Chile and then Peru.
1839 – The British East India Company captures Aden.
1862 – American Civil War: Battle of Mill Springs: The Confederacy suffers its first significant defeat in the conflict.
1871 – Franco-Prussian War: In the Siege of Paris, Prussia wins the Battle of St. Quentin. Meanwhile, the French attempt to break the siege in the Battle of Buzenval will end unsuccessfully the following day.
1915 – World War I: German zeppelins bomb the towns of Great Yarmouth and King's Lynn in the United Kingdom killing at least 20 people, in the first major aerial bombardment of a civilian target.
1917 – Seventy-three people are killed and 400 injured in an explosion in a munitions plant in London.
1941 – World War II: The Greek Triton (Y-5) sinks the Italian submarine Neghelli in Otranto.
1942 – World War II: The Japanese conquest of Burma begins.
1960 – Japan and the United States sign the US–Japan Mutual Security Treaty
1991 – Gulf War: Iraq fires a second Scud missile into Israel, causing 15 injuries.

File: Siege_of_Ciudad_Rodrigo_(1812)_map.jpg (596KB, 1661x2266px) Image search: [Google]

596KB, 1661x2266px

It is 204 years since the end of the Siege of Ciudad Rodrigo, where Wellington's Anglo-Portuguese Army had besieged the city's French garrison. After two breaches were blasted in the walls by British heavy artillery, the fortress was successfully stormed on the evening of 19 January 1812. After breaking into the city, British troops went on a rampage for several hours before order was restored. Strategically, the fall of the fortress opened the northern gateway into French-dominated Spain from British-held Portugal. An earlier siege of Ciudad Rodrigo occurred in 1810 when the French captured the city from Spanish forces.

As part of his strategy in Spain, Napoleon had ordered Marshal Auguste Marmont to send 10,000 troops to help Marshal Louis Suchet's forces capture Valencia and 4,000 more to reinforce the central reserve. When Wellington received news that Marmont's Army of Portugal sent forces eastward, he moved in bad snowstorm conditions on Ciudad Rodrigo and arrived in the area on 6 January.

Ciudad Rodrigo was a second class fortress with a 32-foot (9.8 m) high main wall built of "bad masonry, without flanks, and with weak parapets and narrow ramparts." The city being dominated by the 600-foot (180 m) high Grand Teson hill to the north, the French built a redoubt there. The 2,000-man garrison was far too weak to properly man the defences. The French garrison included single battalions of the 34th Light and 113th Line Infantry Regiments, a platoon of sappers and only 167 artillerists to man 153 cannons.

The fortress was invested, and on the night of 8 January, the Light Division stormed and took the Grand Teson redoubt by surprise, and began digging trenches to and positions for the breaching batteries. Digging in the rocky soil at night caused a peculiar hazard. When a pickaxe struck a stone, the resulting spark drew accurate French fire. By 12 January the trenches to battery positions were complete and the batteries were being installed.

File: 1011911.jpg (292KB, 960x757px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 960x757px

>>51296271
Wellington received a message concerning Marshal Marmont's movements and decided the siege must be undertaken rapidly. The Santa Cruz Convent, to the right, was stormed on 13 January by the KGL and one company of the 60th Rifles. The defenders made a vigorous sortie at 11am on 14 January with 500 men, as the troops were being relieved, this sortie was repulsed, and that night an escalade was mounted against the San Francisco Convent, on the left, by men from the 40th (2nd Somersetshire) Regiment which was successful, all French troops falling back inside the town walls. The batteries, which opened fire at 4pm on 14 January, included thirty-four 24-lb and four 18-lb siege cannon. Work began on the second parallel, to provide closer batteries and a safe covered route for assaulting troops. In five days, the guns fired over 9,500 rounds and opened two effective breaches; one called the 'great breach' in a wall and a smaller one in an exposed tower. Wellington ordered an assault for the night of 19 January.

Major-General Thomas Picton's 3rd Division was ordered to storm the greater breach on the northwest while Robert Craufurd's Light Division was sent against the lesser breach on the north. Diversionary attacks by Denis Pack's Portuguese brigade would probe the defences at the San Pelayo Gate on the east and across the Agueda River on the south. All told, Wellington planned to use 10,700 men in his assault.

Launched at 7pm, the assault met determined resistance in the great breach. The men assaulting the small breach had less problems and managed to get through the wall and behind the defenders of the great breach, making further resistance hopeless, the assault was completely successful. There had been two cannons embedded in the wall of the greater breach that caused most casualties in the storming. The 88th (Connaught Rangers) Regiment took one of the guns while the 45th (Nottinghamshire) Regiment took the other.

File: Sharpe's Company (13).webm (2MB, 1000x563px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1000x563px

>>51296287
Allied losses in the assault were 195 killed and 916 wounded, although amongst the dead was Major-General "Black Bob" Craufurd; the Light Division would never be quite the same. The victory was somewhat marred when the British rank and file thoroughly sacked the city, despite the efforts of their officers and the fact the civilians were Spanish and therefore allies of the British.

The French garrison lost 529 killed and wounded, while the rest were captured. The French Army of Portugal lost its entire siege train among the 153 captured cannon. The rapid loss of Ciudad Rodrigo badly upset the calculations of Marmont who believed the town would hold for three weeks, which would give him enough time to concentrate a relief force at Salamanca. It fell in less than two Marmont decided not to try to recapture it as he needed the troops to defend other towns. Wellington received an earldom and a generous pension from the British. The Spanish made him Duque de Ciudad Rodrigo. The capture of Ciudad Rodrigo opened up the possibility of a northern invasion corridor from Portugal into Spain. It also allowed Wellington to proceed to Badajoz, whose taking would be a much more bloody affair.

Napoleonic sieges are a perfect subject for wargaming, but has usually been a neglected part of the period. You have all the strategy and planning that goes into the buildup; the skirmishing and forays of the siege; then the chaos and fury of the assault, which was some of the most brutal fighting the era ever saw. As every Sharpe fan knows, there were a big part of the Peninsular War. Quarrie goes into the subject of bringing it to the tabletop in a little detail.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/yz48dg5v3r4fyse/Napoleon%27s+Campaigns+In+Miniature.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/file/otmi66s66fjouo7/Osprey+-+CAM+065+-+Badajoz+1812.pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/file/lv2rfb5el2ylk88/Osprey+-+FOR+012+-+Fortresses+of+the+Peninsular+War+1808-14.pdf

File: kellys_heroes_1.jpg (33KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 640x427px

The community project this month, is a mini or unit based on something from military fiction.

>>51296304
Sharpe was there aswell!

>>51296220
Has anyone read any good books on the Soviet-Afghan War that they would recommend? I've had my eye on GHQ's mujahadeen and Soviet Motor-Rifle companies for a while, but I want to do some homework first

>>51291432
>Don't know if this has been mentioned before, but I've found a great resource for Ming Chinese wargaming.
Now if only this can be replicated in 28mm to represent the Imjin War.

>>51297655
Depends what you want.

"The Bear Went Over the Mountain" is pretty good for a battle by battle account, though detail and analysis is a bit lacking.

>>51297655
Check the last thread, there was a good list at the end that had three solid recommendations.

File: the-bear-went-over-the-mountain-soviet-combat-tactics-in-afghanistan.jpg (20KB, 320x480px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 320x480px

>>51297655
>>51294750
The Bear Went Over the Mountain is been recommended a lot but importantly it's companion piece The Other Side of the Mountain also needs recommending.

You'll not get better gaming reference material in English because the latter is based on accounts collected directly from the Mujahideen and the former is based on the Soviet tactical studies of encounters that were made to analyse and attempt to improve performance so is full of account of battles from the Soviet side.

You'll not get vast amounts of detail from the reports because the information on exact composition of units and equipment for either side just doesn't exist due ot the very chaotic supply states involved. And the distances involved in a lot of the fights make them ungamable unless you're running in 6mm and even then with some serious ground scale compression. And how completely mismatched the sides are in conventional terms requires special accounting for.
But you'll gain good knowledge on how stuff went down.

File: 9781909384774.jpg (45KB, 372x400px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 372x400px

Incidentally there's also a book in the same style about the Chechen wars. Which is interesting for read in the different tactics used. A lot more conventional warfare there despite the irregular force involved due to the need to defend specific terrain/locations. Also the terrain considerations are a hell of a lot different to Afghanistan's.

File: 21_cm_Morser_16_in_Stanley_Park_right_side_1923.jpg (468KB, 3000x1757px) Image search: [Google]

468KB, 3000x1757px

>>51291064
10mm and 15mm are pretty good, 1/72 is surprisingly good too - all have pretty good ranges and are around the same price. 10mm may be a little cheaper.

Kallistra also do 12mm which is an interesting middle ground. They have a free rule set available on their website. Its quite unusual in that its hex based, but looks like it would handle massive battles very well - say you want to re fight the entire battle of the Marne of something... The large hexes also mean you can do fun things with artillery like box barrages and creeping barrages very easily.

https://www.kallistra.co.uk/?page=113

As for rules, there's a bunch in the OP folder. Over the top is a classic, although quite in-depth. Aimed at company to battalion level. Through the Mud and Blood is more skirmish level, Westfront is a good balance of simplicity and history, and aimed at company to battalion level.

Currently painting a couple of pic related in 1/72 for Westfront. Finished my A7V and built some Renault FTs, as well as some Russian field guns from Tumbling dice (which were very nice - they do a bunch of 20mm metal stuff pretty cheap)

Should end up with some decent sized German, Allied and Russian armies.

Looking for pdf of book;
Scenarios for Wargames
by Charles Grant (1981).

This old book is not easy to find anymore, and at crazy prices when one is available!

File: ww1-a-013-dobrula.jpg.jpg (69KB, 821x506px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 821x506px

>>51299147
Thanks for the tips. I'll probably lean more towards the Over the Top scale of things.

File: Weltenbrand_564.jpg (60KB, 564x383px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 564x383px

>>51299419
Chain of Command I've heard good things about too. Try the TMP message boards and have a look through some of the early 20th century discussion posts.

Nice rooskies there

>>51299525
>Try the TMP message boards
Woah woah woah, lets not tell anyone with enthusiasm to go to that shithole of bitter old men who do nothing but argue and denigrate everyone who isn't their exact brand of bitter old man.

>>51300189
Sounds like you've been in the wrong areas. The early 20th century discussion area is alright, also the WW2 rules boards. I dont really go anywhere outside those two.

At least on those 2 boards they do often have good recommendations on game systems and many of them know their shit with regards to history, and are game designers themselves.

File: SAM_0899.jpg (245KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 800x600px

>>51300643
>the wrong areas
>implying there are any right areas on TMP
>or at least anywhere free of Armand posting

>>51300746
He only really posts in the galleries from what I've seen. Pretty harmless pictures of miniatures.

File: tmp_9461-IMAG0378-354148625.jpg (1MB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1440x2560px

First time doing Hinterhaltern camo or camo on vehicles

How did I do?

File: IMG_20170119_215604680.jpg (3MB, 5344x3006px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5344x3006px

Muh Canadians. Sorry for shit tier lighting.

>>51299307
I have a copy of this, somewhere, but no reasonable way to scan it. Or find it. But it's a bloody good book and well worth £20 or so.

I hope someone else has a copy and will do the PDF needful for you and us all, friend.

>>51300790
He posts everywhere. (smile)

Amicalement
Armand

File: IMG_20170119_221703053.jpg (325KB, 1356x760px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 1356x760px

The fleets grow.

I've gotten a few ships done, just need to print labels.

Chiyoda, Nachi Oyodo, a Kagero, 2 Akitzukis, San Juan, Belleau Wood, Boston, 2 Gleaves, and a Fletcher.

Next up is New Mexico, Franklin, Zuikaku, Ise, and a grab bag of destroyers.

>>51303156
They look fine from what I can tell.
Not a good image though and could really do with some resizing.

File: charlesgrant02.jpg (50KB, 525x408px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 525x408px

>>51296508
He certainly was, although as it happens Ciudad Rodrigo takes place "offstage" in both book and movie, probably because Badajoz comes straight afterwards and was much nastier.

>>51299307
Anything Charles Grant would be gold these days. As a kid I remember seeing a whole bunch of those titles down at my local library and read them eagerly, but over the years they seemed to quietly disappear, snaffled into private collections.

File: 000 Turn 1.jpg (996KB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

996KB, 2560x1536px

Another Naval War battle report up on the Marqod blogspot.

This time it's a cruiser/destroyer battle in the Pacific, played using some 1/3000 scale minis instead of the usual 1/1800.

>>51303726
Looking good anon, did you do something to clean up the aft deck markings on Chiyoda? They look quite nice in this picture.

>>51305833
Nice! I'll have to give it read later this morning when I get a chance.

>>51302461
Needs more little dots and a better pic

>>51303156
Looks shiny, could probably use some dullcote.

>>51306926
i assume its in the OP

>>51305426
Woah look at that poor terrain placement it's all in one corner, Charles is just setting up the terrain up to screw his son up.

>>51307444
>Terrain placed in one corner

Towns tend to do that

>>51305952
Thanks but no, I didn't change Chiyoda, I think the last picture was just extremely close up for a 1\3000 scale ship.

Are the various Bolt Action errata still valid unless the 2nd Ed rulebook contradicts them?

>>51305426
I just read The War Game Companion, by Charles S Grant, who's the son here. It's kind of adorable - he includes the battle report of his First Ever Wargame! With Dad! and then follows it up with a refight of the same scenario (Sawmill Village) with his own son, 40 years later, also named Charles. Pretty interesting book. Also, it's in-print. The same publisher has a reprint of The War Game in addition to a cleaned-up set of rules as The War Game Rules.

I think John Curry said he was working on getting the rights and sorting out a reprint of some of Grant 1's books as part of his History of Wargaming project.

CS Grant is good too, and has a ton of books out.

File: Bob's Solo Wargaming Scrapbook.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Posting a thing nicked from the solowargame yahoo group, because it's an interesting hundred or so pages once you get past the slow introduction I'm sure you don't need to read. Lots of neat content in here.

File: The War Game playsheet.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51308299
Related - the "playsheet" version of The War Game Henry Hyde did up for The War Game Companion. Note there are a few changes in later publications and other sources - apparently Grant now uses 4 officers in light infantry and all cavalry units, to let them split into quarters - cavalry units still move together, just in a two-by-two formation with some spacing between each 6+1. Grenadiers also fire in 6s just like Line, and he has optional Converged Grenadier regiments with 32 rankers and... 4? officers.

I don't know if you'll be able to figure out how artillery works from this version, especially since they apparently changed the way they handled it just after the *original* War Game was published and this is based on the later version, but fuck it, I use the artillery rules from Charge! instead. The two games have a lot of similarities, as you'd expect from authors who played each other regularly.

ADATS

>go to local club to play my a guys homemade rules which need more testing
>played them before and they were a blast
>he's turned it into a tedious roll a million dice and check a bunch of charts for every single fucking thing
>didn't tell me one of the big changes (retreating units now put 2 disruptions on units they interpenetrate whilst retreating) until it occurs, despite seeing me deploy in a double line and march up as such.

Awful night's gaming.

File: IMG_0885.jpg (4MB, 4608x3456px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4608x3456px

Well......punching them was pretty easy....now to clip and sort.....

Anybody got Check Your 6!?

File: IMG_20170120_174628071.jpg (168KB, 1092x614px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1092x614px

All Chiyoda needs now is a label.

And yes 1/3000th scale planes are awful.

>>51315301
>And yes 1/3000th scale planes are awful.

You mis-spelled cute there Anon.

>>51315301
So it turns out even at 1/3000 a Val can't stand in for an Avenger very well, anyone in the states ever order from NavWar? Also anyone know if their planes are any good?

I'd order from the same source as my Japs but the only american planes he sells are in a pack that's 75% French and I don't want no French planes.

>>51315753
https://www.shapeways.com/product/N6VPSQBLC/1-3000-ijn-aircraft-set?optionId=60301948

He does early and late war US planes in 1/1800. If you ask nicely he might do a set in 1/3000 like the IJN ones I linked.

>>51315861
>That was the guy I was talking about, he does make US planes in 1/3000 but the problem is it's all of the allies and given I have 10 carriers I'd need quite a few packs. guess it never hurt to ask though.

>>51315913
I'm 1/1800, wasn't particularly familiar with his smaller offerings. I do know he has done bundles and other things on request though, so I expect he probably will.

>>51316029
Part of the problem is the only aircraft of the pack I actually want is the Wildcat, and even then just as a stand in for the Hellcat.

And I really don't want to pay for custom designs.

File: cleaning-armoured-cars-canadian-motor-machine-gun-brigade-april-1918.jpg (203KB, 1000x715px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1000x715px

>>51315753
Maybe email the seller and see if he'll split up a pack for you?

>>51316054
>>51316069

Yeah, for all of my bitching I did send him an email, hoping for the best.

File: Aprile 2014 031.jpg (283KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 1600x1200px

>51280118

Paper soldiers can look pretty good if you put some time in.

Spam filter doesn't like the direct link but add a period between each part of: papersoldiersjournal blogspot it

File: SWMEE2014007_zps1299d635.jpg (126KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1024x768px

>>51316459
I think the filter still lets through blogspot addresses if you set it to .co.nz so there's a fun tip to remember.
Also highlight text and ctrl-s for easy spoiler tags for another fun tip.

>>51316667
>Leo 1s

W H A T G A M E?

File: SWMEE2014003_zpsecac1c39.jpg (113KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1024x768px

>>51316839
Dunno, could be a whole bunch. Models themselves look like 20mm, resin stuff rather than 1:72 or 1:76 model kits.

File: 07_zps9c00e5d0.jpg (96KB, 1024x633px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1024x633px

>>51313861
I put it on Mega because it keeps being snapped on MF.

https://mega.nz/#!vwMngZbR!91OrqgI5u2imvHC6h-8IgHkHyHmXZ997crB9O6tXhqw

>>51316839
>>51316906
Filename tells us it's the 2014 South West Model Engineering Exhibition; looking that up we find it was called The Battle of Gyros Teller, used a modern conversion of Battlegroup Kursk, and was actually fought in several parts over a number of different events.

Merkava

>>51316069
>emailing NavWar

Better send a runner or a pigeon.

>>51316459
True, but for the effort I put into them...I could put that effort into actual figures. A 10mm army doesn't cost that much.

>>51316459
That guy's nuts. Seriously, isn't he the one doing 1:1 figure ratio stuff? So many soldiers.

File: CameroneDay_131.jpg (180KB, 957x638px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 957x638px

>>51201994

http://www.rpgnow.com/product/16659/Vulture-Gulch-old-west-cardstock-buildings-set?it=1&

>>51297655
Rodric Braithwaite's "Afghantsy" is another good one on the war as a whole

File: 16196030_1417059501638640_352699923717723458_n.jpg (153KB, 960x912px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 960x912px

for years the military had actually gotten away from using gaming to assist their training of up and coming officers. Used to be a common thing back up until the early 80s.

fortunately they are starting to get back into the practice....

Someone mentioned a "Naval War" in the V@S thread that just died and I can't find it in the folders?

>>51323815

Feel free to download it at:
https://www.naval-war.com/

>>51323900
Wow. How the fuck did that not come up when I googled it?

>>51323933

The usual suspects:
Navwar on Steam + reviews + videos, Naval War College ads ... I almost expected porn to pop up, as well ...

File: Royal Navy Samples.jpg (1MB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1536px

Took this pic for another discussion, felt I might as well post it here as well.

A sample of my 1/1800 Royal Navy collection: I also have HMS Hood, HMS Achilles and a half-dozen destroyers.

File: Hot.png (139KB, 345x355px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 345x355px

Quite a large bump

File: glorious T34.jpg (85KB, 1072x832px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1072x832px

Bumping on forward to the frontpage

File: 1600s wow.png (172KB, 362x298px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 362x298px

had an 4K game of bolt action wasn't as bad as i thought but could have strangled one of the players for being autistically slow.

>>51300189
>>Try 4chan
>Woah woah woah, lets not tell anyone with enthusiasm to go to that shithole of bitter young men who do nothing but argue and denigrate everyone who isn't their exact brand of bitter young man.

>>51323550
>not being a professional wargamer
ISHYGDDT
You can be paid by the military to design, run, and analyse wargames.

>>51327621
Try a defense think tank instead
>tfw you spend two months to simulate the causes and effects of a low intensity conflict between developing nations

File: IMG_0886.jpg (4MB, 4608x3456px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4608x3456px

>>51312327
bringing order from the chaos....

Got a 1000 point game of Bolt Action coming up.

My opponent is Last Levy Germany.

I chose Norway.

How fucked am I?

>>51330323
Depends how much of a min-maxing cunt your opponent is.

>>51330376
Very.

I agreed to it just to see how long I can hold out, my overall strategy is to spam inexperienced infantry to get a command dice advantage, with some royal guards and artillery spotters for any armor

But yeah, I'm probably gonna die.

>>51330849
Gotta question why you're playing them when you're unavoidably going to have a bad game.

Surely there's someone running a thematic list around you could play instead? Or a different game entirely?

>>51324437
Is that your Force Z stuff? Looks good! Did you end up converting York, or get your hands on an Exeter?

Are there any solo table top war games?

Ww2, miniatures preferable.

>>51331638

Two Hours Wargames has a lot of rulesets suitable for solo miniature gaming.

Nuts! covers the WW2, and is in the OP's WW2 folder.

>>51331638
Silent Victory and The Hunters/The Hunted are solitaire sub captain games (US and Germany early/late war respectively), and there's Silent War for US sub command (vs Japan) solitaire.

Also B-17 - Queen of the Skies, which is basically "hope you roll well enough to not get shot down/crash land" but basically has no player input.

File: Albrecht_II._von_Habsburg.jpg (112KB, 433x599px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 433x599px

>>51331145
Fighting against long odds with an underdog force I understand but fielding some 1940 troops versus 'lol I brought a sturmtiger, get fucked fgt" just doesn't seem fun

File: Panzers.jpg (45KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x360px

>>51331638
This reminds me I should write more solo stuff.

Solo Ostfront supplement could be cool. One thing solo is good for is hidden movement and surprise.
Main challenge of solo is to get enemy units to behave in a realistic and interesting way, without being too predictable and having large situation/reaction charts. Bound to be a way to simply and effectively simulate an enemy force.

If I could make the campaign map and enemy army list composition solo as well, shit would get real.

>>51317175
You got Jet Age too?

>>51332115
I think it's a good challenge on my part.
Since it's only 1000 points, my opponent's the one that's gonna have to make some hard choices. He'll probably take some big tanks and only a few squads of high tech infantry.
The board is hilly with a large road and village right in the middle, so my mastah plan is to use the hills as cover to quickly advance into the town, then withdraw and bait him forward. Once he comes close enough my reserves will outflank and hopefully be in range to quickly take out some dudes or vehicles.

File: pic1413566_lg.jpg (668KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

668KB, 1024x768px

>>51332722
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/8fsiyo1o1eqm6/CY6_Jet_Age

File: IMG_20170121_231117_noexif.jpg (3MB, 3036x4048px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3036x4048px

Anyone know how to paint the oars on these damn tiny boats while letting the ocean show between them? Do I just need a smaller brush?

>>51333167
You could take some blue ink and do a wash, or you could try drybrushing, or a combo of both.

>>51332724
>not taking Volksturm

Why even play Berlin if you miss the whole theme?

Any suggestions for cold war era division level games? There's NATO Division Commander, but it's out of production.

>>51333473
Last Levy is not limited on Berlin Anon.

File: pic124679.jpg (150KB, 1000x808px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1000x808px

>>51334422
We do have a PDF

http://www.mediafire.com/file/z8e54dge799961n/NATO+Division+Commander.pdf

Technically it's battalion-level, because while it adds up to a division your forces are no larger than that. Divisional-level would be something like GDW's Third World War (see the folder in the OP).

Some of the WW3-themed S&T games operate at divisional-level, although I'd have to look through them again to remember which ones!

>>51330323
>not playing historical matchups

I refuse to comment.

>>51331244
>Is that your Force Z stuff?
Some is for Force Z, but there's some Java Sea and random other stuff in my Brit collection as well.

>Did you end up converting York, or get your hands on an Exeter?
It's a York conversion.
Altered the bridge and changed the angle of the funnels, which are the most notable differences.

Since I now have all the naval minis I intend to play with in my collection painted, I might try to get some full fleet pics later today.

>>51327116
How many players?

File: cavalry.jpg (225KB, 1095x801px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1095x801px

I just started to build a unit of "german" Cossacks.

First time using the hobby saw i bought recently. I'm really impressed how clean it goes through the plastic. A pleasant surprise, i expected it to be alot more annoying.

>>51336597
Nice. I'm going to be converting a an M7 Priest into a Kangaroo APC and was thinking a saw + some chisels to gut.the interior would be the way to go.

>>51336502
four

>>51337916
sorry 4k a side

File: horse carriage.jpg (98KB, 846x472px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 846x472px

>been watching a battle report for bolt action
>germans vs americans
>the guys show their army before the game and tell you what they brought.. neat
>us airborne
>no armor, lots of veteran infantry squads, light howitzer
>veteran horse carriage

What the actual fuck.

>>51339146
>half-painted unbased minis
Into the trash the channel goes.

File: 63f1e274debd8619c3be91d2b5514040.jpg (68KB, 564x402px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 564x402px

>>51339146
No doubt borrowed from the locals. In Sicily, US paras used local horse carriages in the absence of any other transport.

File: german side.jpg (98KB, 837x460px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 837x460px

>>51339163
have a pic of the german army.

The channel isn't totally bad though, they did a series on how they built their pacific terrain which was interesting and they do nice unboxings and other tutorials.

>>51339198
Interesting. I didn't even consider that. Now thinking about it it would actually make sense and somewhat fits.

File: genuineanger.jpg (20KB, 480x470px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 480x470px

>>51339207
I paint my fucking army for games I haven't even played before.

I get that people play with unpainted figures, I don't like it but I get it.

But who posts images/videos of them? Pointless.

File: cossacks.jpg (193KB, 1293x645px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1293x645px

Some progress.

I'm going for a mixture of german heads (mostly sidecaps) and russian fur caps to make it clear that these guys are actually russians.
Uniforms (upper bodies only ofc) is german and i plan to mix in a couple of ppsh-smgs.

Any advise for their sables? Pretty sure cossacks wore them in ww2, but all of them? Or just officers?

>>51339561
Why 'German' Cossacks who are actually Russians (or rather Soviets)?

>>51339608
Because i already have a huge soviet force and wanted to add something to my germans.

I also like the idea of having some "colorful" units instead of just another group of veterans with ARs.

Sadly the only cavalry option in the BA-rules for the germans is SS and the Wehrmacht didn't deploy cavalry units after the initial campaigns which would limit their use in my games, so i went for an alternative that allows me to take advantage of all the spare heads and weapons i have from the russian infantry boxes while also enables me to play them in "generic" mid/late war games.

>>51339690
I use Bolt Action stats for their wrong purposes all the time, as long as you have historical justification I think it's fine.

Like using Kriegsmarine as Volksturm to give them a few MGs, because god knows they did have them.

>>51339751
Thats my thinking as well.
There were millions of russians fighting for the germans, but all there is for them is the "Osttruppen" stats which fits poorly to Cossack-cavalry.

>>51339360
I don't mind unpainted minis, but if you do videos or something else to actively "promote" a game or the hobby i think the effort of using a fully painted army is not to much to ask.

>>51339207
>unboxings
Why the fuck can't people just fucking open shit anymore. Goddamn

>>51339198
Come on now, we both know that's not what's happening here.

I was just gifted a Transylvanian skirmish box for Fire and Sword last week. Anyone know of any good uniform references? I'm looking for something a little more clear than other painted 15mms.

>>51334944
It looks like only half the token sheets are shown in color (but all are shown uncolored too), which might make it a pain to play.

File: IMG_20170121_145940.jpg (3MB, 3286x2432px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3286x2432px

Played my first game with my Winter Germans.

File: C2uCc4SWEAE_490.jpg (236KB, 1200x888px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 1200x888px

>>51344573

File: C2uCO8XXEAAVEFr.jpg (250KB, 888x1200px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 888x1200px

>>51344620

File: C2uCL1JXcAAgYRr.jpg (314KB, 888x1200px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 888x1200px

>>51344664

File: Stalingrad_tank_battle.jpg (136KB, 1591x805px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1591x805px

>>51344684
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE2vyGSbUVM&ab_channel=Valhallavideos

Looks great anon, is that board and all the scenery yours?
In addition to what look like animu posters in the background?

My group is looking to get into either 10 or 15mm HWG using the hail ceaser rules. Which scale has a better variety of better looking models?

Any good manufacturers?

>>51346092
10mm will be cheaper but 15mm will have a little more detail.

Although with 15mm if you go for DBx basing conventions you don't actually need that many models.

For manufacturers, check Pendraken for 10mm, Forged in Battle for 15mm and Magister Militum for both.

>>51346162
What is DBx?

>>51346092
>Which scale has a better variety of better looking models?
better looking is a bit subjective.
Would you prefer your units look more weighty and numerous, then 10mm
do you want more detail on individual models but smaller units, then 15mm

Frankly I prefer 10mm, and some sculpts are really detailed these days. Pendrakens new sculpts are especially pretty.

>>51346189
A range of rules systems, most famously including De Bellis Antiquitatis.

They've been around for ages so their basing system has become sort of an unofficial standard, which is to say if you base your models that way they'll work with a lot of systems.

>>51346092
Go with 6mm baccus

>>51346092
15mm's probably your best pick when it comes to variety and detail. I got all of my Polybian Romans from Essex, but that's not to say I couldn't have shopped for more variety.

>>51346189
DBX is the catch-all term for De Bellis Antiquitatis and De Bellis Multitudinus, which are variants of a ruleset. DBA uses fewer minis, but DBM offers a larger scale of battle

>>51346252
>DBX is the catch-all term for De Bellis Antiquitatis and De Bellis Multitudinus
and DBR and HoTT etc. Its not just a and m anymore.

>>51345948
yep it is. and yep it is

>>51346317
Didn't realize there was more than the two. I never did a lot with DBx aside from one or two games of DBA. No interest in my area for ancients.

>>51346092
We play HC in 15mm, War & Empire figures are really good.

You can start with 16 guys in a unit, expand to 24 if you use WRG basing (basically a 40mm frontage by 20mm depth with 2-4 dudes on a base)

>>51346437
>Didn't realise there was more than the two.

There's so fucking many variants I can't even remember all of them. Way, way more than just two.

I don't even like DBx

>>51346189
It's the TMP of rulesets

File: home-family-beef-wellington.jpg (1MB, 2500x1667px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2500x1667px

>>51296287
Beef Wellington is so good

>>51346873
Well researched, aimed at people over 25, but yet with a dated appearance?

>>51350360
I'd say obtuse despite being incredibly simple, favoured by old men who argue over everything. TMP is very much aimed at men over 40+ and populated by a lot of aged 55+ gamers.

>>51350360
Favored by those with a mindset of "we've always done it this way, why try anything different?"

File: War and Peace.webm (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

Bump

>>51346092
I'd go with Pendraken 10mm.

Yes, you'll have a more limited range, although Pendraken do a ton of stuff - I still think it's worth it, because 10mm looks much better for massed infantry than 15mm.

Go 10mm or 28mm.

(or 6mm or 3mm, but you probably won't find the minis you need - baccus are great but don't have a huge range, modern 3mm is great but basically romans and nothing else, 2mm is trash and not worth your time)

>>51350963
Hey, did you see TMP added a whole new set of boards? The Getting Started boards, one in every genre.

Also the Rules boards, which are separate from the main boards and have specific boards for whatever random rulesets bill's bothered to add, because adding even more boards and making it even harder to find shit is definitely what tmp needed.

fuck, at this point I'd put armand in charge of organisation over there if I could.

>>51300189
(smiles)

Amicalement Armand

Does anyone have a copy of Sword and Spear ancient rules as a pdf please? Latest edn....

Does anyone know of any upcoming 1/72 Mughal or Maratha sets?

Also any historical wargames similar in size (few small units) to Bolt Action, or even a Bolt Action mod but for Ancients, Medieval or other settings pre world war

>>51355212
Lords&Servants for medievals.

>>51353366
Googling about why TMP is so shit lead me to this page http://katiethewargamer.blogspot.ca/2015/03/the-miniatures-page.html

The fucking comments are gold, but what I really want is a picture of Bill. Does the reality match my image of him being an 80 year old creepy uncle?

>>51355915
There is a picture of him, just click his name on the TMP page:
http://theminiaturespage.com/member/profile.mv?id=Editor%20in%20Chief%20Bill

I personally found TMP to be fine, full of knowledgeable people who are happy to help. If you treat it like any other internet forum and try not to take things too personally you can get a lot of interesting information and recommendations.

>>51350360
>>51346873
Moderated by Thai Trannies?

>>51356325
The best kind of trannies.

>>51356325
They Filipino. The Many Philippinos is what TMP stands for

File: Everyone i don't like is rightwing.png (8KB, 660x141px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 660x141px

>>51356165
TMP right wing What?
Or are they just butthurt lefties that history hasn't gone their way

>>51346092
I'd go with either 6mm or 10mm. At first I leaned more to 10mm for model detail, but I like GHQ's line of modern stuff and Baccus has a lot of good selection for anything before the 20th century.

I have a bunch of epic 40k stuff, so I was really looking for something that would allow me to best use the terrain I already had

File: Platoon-Forward.jpg (94KB, 427x600px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 427x600px

did anyone ever post Platoon Forward here?
I've seen it being requested from time to time.

>>51356386
Nah, he just fired four of them.

http://theminiaturespage.com/editorial/

I hope they find better and saner employment soon.

>>51358610
Guess they didn't swallow.

BRDM

File: Redoubt Indians.jpg (314KB, 861x1293px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 861x1293px

Redoubt Indians are bigger and clumsier than the Conquest and Perrys I had been painting, and not as easy I think. Don't think they will stand out too much at least.

Only 6 more Indians and I am finally out of ones left to paint in my box of figures

>>51296220
Odd question, does anyone have an idea as to when the "section" as in the organisational division of the platoon came into use, particularly in the British Army?

>>51361633
No paint job could make those pretty.

>>51363344
th..thanks I think

File: £2300.jpg (187KB, 1600x427px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1600x427px

Would you pay £2,300 for miniatures all in one go?

Just saw this army for that price whilst absently browsing ebay.

>>51361633
>>51363344
>>51363805
I like them anon, except for those butt-drapes. Those are very distracting.

>>51363947
What's wrong with the Breechcloths?

>>51363987
They are anti-fashionable as fuck. Skirts look way better.


You painted them very well though.

>>51355212
Irregular Wars.
http://irregularwars.blogspot.com

http://knightrecoil.blogspot.com/2013/08/irregular-wars-conflict-at-worlds-end.html

https://www.amazon.com/Irregular-Wars-Conflict-Worlds-End/dp/1494483467

>>51361633
The paint is great, but the sculpts aren't nearly on par with the ones you'd been posting before. Those fellas have some huge noggins going on.

So, me and my friend are interested in getting into historical wargaming with crossfire (we have previous nonhistorical experience with 40k).
First off all, OPs links only have the core rules, so it would be appreciated if someone could add the supplement hit the dirt.
And secondly, we're still deciding on what scale to use - either 28mm or 16mm. Any thoughts on that?
And last of all, i really appreciate the amount of historic info and sources you provide in this thread, you are amazing guys

>>51364667
15mm is nice if you want bang for your buck. For example PSC will give you a full company-strength box of dudes for slightly more than 20 Britbux.

>>51365208
PSC is great in general, their army deals are pretty nuts.

Shame I prefer having my men in metal at 15mm or smaller.

>>51365208
>>51365264
Thanks, i appreciate the answers.

>>51358630
as underrated a post as the owner's underage jailb8

>>51363942
I'm about to spend about that much in USD next month, actually. On a variety of 15mm WWII and moderns stuff.

>>51364667
What other anon said; 15mm is cheapest and easiest to get into. Once you have your forces, you can use them for almost any ruleset out there. I started in Flames of War, but am now playing Bolt Action and Chain of Command in 15mm and loving it.

File: WW1 and RCW Russians.png (1MB, 1585x1509px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1585x1509px

>>51363942
I tend to spend $60 - $70 in a go, grab a bunch of forces and build / paint them up. That way I can watch armies grow and always have something to do.

Just got some Russians in the mail, I'll be able to use them for WW1 and RCW. Gotta finish off my WW1 germans first - a few 21cm Mörsers and 8 MG teams almost done painting

You know you're in too deep when you start dreaming about 21cm Mörsers

>>51363942

Depends. Paying it all in one go isn't that bad, telescopes and other hobbies cost more than that.

I really like building and painting though, so I wouldn't want to pay the premium for a fully built and painted army.

I guess it depends how you value your time. When you imagine how many months it would take to paint all that it probably is just cheaper to buy that army.

>>51369470
>not "let me tell you about the picts"

>>51371547
BMP-2

File: Panther and Halftracks.jpg (772KB, 1280x915px) Image search: [Google]

772KB, 1280x915px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3lYsSNN9yc&ab_channel=CoolBeansTV

Looking for copy of Wargame Rules:
Maurice, from Honour series (Sam Mustafa) with card files.

File: lelelelelelle.jpg (9KB, 278x181px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 278x181px

>>51374718
What's wrong with this?

>>51363942
>Would you pay £2,300 for miniatures all in one go?

Probably, if its a good deal or if i know i will buy the whole army eventually anyway.

> this army

Already painted? I wouldn't buy that.

>>51358200
I asked for it a while ago, but never saw someone posting it.

>>51363942
>£2,300

With that much money to spare purely on luxuries I'd build a better PC (because I'd get a several thousand times more hours of use out of it) and then wonder what to do with the remaining £700. Because it sure as shit is way too much money to spend on models, even if they are already painted and based to make probably two complete armies from the collection.

But that's because to me that much money is a lot. Especially to spend in one go. I can easily see someone with a 6 figure income just grabbing it and having a few games.

>>51378519
>Especially to spend in one go.
but that's the thing, if you were going to spend lots of money anyway, why not do it in one go?

>>51378775
Because I don't have that much in one go, maybe. I can spend 100$ a month for miniatures, so if I gather enough shit for an army in 6 months, I can't spend simply 600$ on it and be done with it. Also, building it up slowly helps with the painting as you won't feel overwhelmed by the amount of stuff you have to do.

File: perry running-indian.jpg (67KB, 450x581px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 450x581px

How do you guys deal with the integral bases on some figures if you don't want to pile up sand around them?
Reason I'm asking is that I want to put a handful of metal figures I have on bases with cobblestone pavement or something like that.
Was hoping that maybe someone could point me to a cheap solution for hollow bases or something like that.

>>51378864
Get a good hobby saw, or Mantic's round bases with holes in them. You'll probably need to use some filler anyway.

>>51378775
Because I don't value anything that limited in use to be worth that amount of money. Because I have very little. And even at points I've had a whole bunch of spending money, I'm conditioned to try and get the greatest return on my investment in terms of enjoyment. Even just counting the leftover £700, that's more than my typical wargaming budget for a year. Sometimes 2 years.

>>51378775
I wouldn't spend as much at once either. The only exception would be a really good discount or a once in a lifetime opportunity (like buying parts of a store inventory for next to nothing compared to retail prices for example).

For my regular hobby spendings i prefer to spend smaller sums (usually around 50€-75€ per month, mostly because where i live free shipping starts at 50).
I usually don't see the point in buying more than that at once because i'm a very slow painter anyway, so it won't matter if its a regular, but huge, purchase and not an exception like described above. I can buy and paint the stuff in a couple of month just as well.

>>51378864
That is one sexy Indian.

the Stalhelm in the Middle East: did the Germans ever wear them?

In WW1, 5400 were sold to the Ottomans, and a number of German battalions were shipped over to Palestine from Macedonia (how many?), is it likely they would have all been issued tropical uniforms or not in time?

>>51378519
>wonder what to do with the remaining £700.

Roast dinners.

File: Falklands.jpg (82KB, 634x427px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 634x427px

Bump

File: Fear Naught Test.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Bumping with the lastest version of Fear Naught, a rules-lite naval wargame I've got in the works.

It's pretty rudimentary but if anyone wants to try it out I'd love to hear how you got on with it.

File: uniforms-of-imperial-german-colonial-soldiers-in-east-africa1894-EEYTHJ.jpg (316KB, 1300x961px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 1300x961px

>>51381654
I doubt they would be wearing stahlhelms in the desert, certainly the east African Schutztruppe had either light caps or white safari-style helmets.

If you google "German WW1 Palestine" You'll see them mostly in the white safari-esque helmets (not sure of the proper name)

>>51381943
Lookin' good. Got any more?

>>51381654

I could swear I've seen a pic of an WW1 A-H artillery battery in Palestine/Gaza with some of the redlegs wearing the Stalhelm. I remember it because one of them is stripped to the waist.

Damned if I can put my hands on it now. Maybe it's in an Osprey title?

>>51381943

Sweet.

>>51383883
I'm gonna cross post this in the current botes thread. >>51325220

Can't look over it now, but excited to give an eye tomorrow.

>>51384480
> A while ago some anons started a naval thread
> This eventually diversified into general historicals
> Thus /hwg/ was born
> Now independent naval threads have returned

This feels like a betrayal, somehow.

>>51384533
It's not one of that's been starting them. The past one was somebody's Victory at Sea campaign report that became a general, and this one started with a question about Seakrieg 5. I don't know how many cross posters we have, but we might get some new blood here out of it. But I remember those heady days of scratchbuilt dreadnoughts and golf tees too, and I'd prefer all of that posting and energy over here too.

For some reason I've found myself with 120 Macedonian Phalangists in 28mm.

Anyone recommend a colour scheme?

>>51385082
Bronze with red.

File: 2016-03-25 13.04.57.jpg (342KB, 1600x1150px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 1600x1150px

>>51384759
We're all still here anon

I still have my scratch-built pre dreadnaughts for Russo-Japanese naval battles. Pic not related. Playing harpoon was also pretty fun

>>51385082
Fifty shades of Feldgrau.

File: epinap.jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x3024px

Got the Epic expansion for Commands & Colors Napoleonics a few days ago and set up the EPIC Austerlitz scenario.

Commands & Colors system never ceases to amaze me.

There is also included another rules variant called La Grande Battle which has a board that is slightly larger than even this EPIC board.

File: swelines.jpg (800KB, 1050x808px) Image search: [Google]

800KB, 1050x808px

>>51386679
>Commands & Colors system never ceases to amaze me.

I'm quite a fan of it myself. If I had the energy I'd make my own variant for something like the 30 years war. Something with pikes and shot at least.

>>51386827

I wouldn't be surprised to see C&C Pike'n'shot come along in a few years.

The system is definitely moving into new territories with the help of several publishers.
We recently got The Great War from PSC, GMT has Medieval up on preorder and Compass Games will release a "Tricorn era" version starting off with the American Revolution.

File: IMG_1349.jpg (708KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

708KB, 1600x1200px

>>51387035
I wish Medieval was high/late medieval not just-after-the-fall-of-rome tier Early medieval.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 2592x1936px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2592x1936px

>>51384533
/hwg/ has a bit of a mixed pedigree. There was an anon who posted occasional historical wargaming threads as far back as 2010, that's where our list of minis and suppliers originally came from. There was the AK-47 Republic Craze of 2011, where /tg/ really got into that game and I uploaded the first Ospreys for it. Then came Planes 'n' Mercs, which led to the creation of the MF folders as we know them today. The naval wargaming threads built a little community which kept things active. The real birth of /hwg/ began with the death of Don Featherstone, and the memorial thread we had for him could be considered the daddy of these threads.

I'm quite happy with a separate naval thread; it handles specific things while we're more general.

File: 144511390828.jpg (119KB, 800x536px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 800x536px

>>51387149
Good lord, was the AK47 craze that long ago? How time flies.

>>51387647
I know right? That was my first historical wargame /tg/ talked about it so much

File: IMG_5181.jpg (368KB, 1600x807px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 1600x807px

I once saw a page that was a guy (I think with actual military wargame experience) explaining cold war soviet tactics and arguing that the soviet tactics only really work/make sense in large scale (say regiment to division on up) games. Does this ring a bell? Anyone know where I can find that article?

File: Technical 4543_image_196201.jpg (109KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1000x667px

>>51388477
Nevermind, I tried a few different search terms and found it again

https://20thcenturywargaming.wordpress.com/2013/06/16/why-cold-war-warsaw-pact-tactics-work-in-wargaming/

>>51388520
>>51388477

There's a really good response article to this pointing out the massive flaws in their tactics as a representation of how USSR units were expected to prepare and attack. Basically, they played the game not the history. Will have to find it.

Big part of it is the planning they skipped and the lack of restrictions on command that let them change route swiftly, far swifter than a unit would realistically.

>>51387921
tempted to pick it up, really need to do some single box stuff to play with friends first though

>>51387149
>The real birth of /hwg/ began with the death of Don Featherstone, and the memorial thread we had for him could be considered the daddy of these threads.
rip

Guess I'll play a quick game of close little wars tonight in memorial. not that it's a memorial date or anything, just because I was reminded and I cry every time.

File: dkrussiantactics.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51388585
>>51388520

Found it.

Definitely worth a read for the commentary on wargames design;

>"wargames rules habitually underestimate the extreme difficulty of visually acquiring a defender who is trying to stay concealed, do not sufficiently reward shooters for engaging targets clumped together, and tend to make fire on the move or from the short halt (as Russian armoured tactics favour) unduly effective."

>"simplifications in combat models tend to favour the attacker. One might think that any given simplification is likely to benefit attacker or defender with equal probability, but it turns out that this is not so. Complexity generally makes it hard to do things; the simplifications present in wargames mean that things are easier to do than they should really be."

>"a traditional British Army adage has been amended to "Time spent in reconaissance is always wasted", because on the wargames table it almost always is."

>"Putting all your forces into one hulking great column may seem an attractive way to move a high concentration of force fast, but it is also a good way to lose it all in short order if you drive into an enemy killing zone. Few wargames show the full magnitude of this effect, players being given not only a miraculous ability to locate the enemy, but also instantaneous communications to get troops to react suitably to unexpected changes of circumstances."

>>51384140
It's a guy on the LAF, hes posted loads of in progress pics etc. It's in the Pikes Muskets and Flouncy Shirts section.

M113

>>51389912

"So, staggering to some sort of conclusion to these ramblings"

That's a rather poor article. Full of data and I guess good data, even, but it's since I left Uni that I didn't read such a mess of incoherent and stream of consciousness ramblings.

Pity.

>>51391366
Still at uni, this is so easy to read compared to what my work is that I am using it as a break. Not even studying a "real" subject so feel for the engineers

>>51393707
[soviet march intensifies]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDQ7hXMLxGc

>>51385082
Alexandrian or Hellenistic? If you go with the Hellenistic era you can get a lot of different, vibrant and colourful schemes.

>>51393996
Only problem is that they didn't really use the pike, only spears as far as I'm concerned.

>>51394242
Hellenistic would be the period after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the stuggles of the Diadachoi up to say 150ish bc. The sarissa was very much in use throughout.

>>51394335
Ah, isn't that called Successors period?

>>51394355
That is literally what Diadochi means.

Hellenistic/Hellenic means Greek so is the period of Greek dominance typically associated with the Diadochi.

File: 20140215_160146.jpg (490KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 1600x1200px

>>51393756

>>51394574
Would this shoulder to shoulder for hundreds of meters ever happen irl? Looks a bit ugly

>>51394967
No, this is why FoW is fucking bonkers.

File: DSC00454.jpg (388KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

388KB, 1600x1200px

>>51394967
No. Not only ugly, it's also a reinforcement of the points in >>51389912

If ever there was a force calling to be systematically annihilated by artillery and air-strikes or even just a counter-attack by other armour units, because they're in a giant fucking line which should be bogged down by the terrain and opposing concealed infantry threat it's that force right there.

>>51394995
Game in question here I believe from the basing is Cold War Commander.

I think this would be less of a problem in FFoT, or rather the problem of the tank blob would quickly be resolved in showing why it's a bad idea

>>51395071
>>51394574
>>51394967

And if there's mines in those fields to the front of the tanks (and there really should be) they're even more fucked.

File: Seleukid Phalangites.png (2MB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1632x1224px

First of two images of my recently finished Macedonians. I quite like the Victrix miniatures and I don't believe someone else has uploaded painted examples of their Successor miniatures.

File: Seleukid Phalangites2.png (873KB, 974x728px) Image search: [Google]

873KB, 974x728px

Second image and I'm terribly sorry for the large file size of my images.

>>51386679
do love me some C&C

File: elvis_feature_splash650.jpg (108KB, 650x400px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 650x400px

>>51387149
>Then came Planes 'n' Mercs

call sign 'Elvis' from the Congo campaign right here....

>"Putting all your forces into one hulking great column may seem an attractive way to move a high concentration of force fast, but it is also a good way to lose it all in short order if you drive into an enemy killing zone. Few wargames show the full magnitude of this effect, players being given not only a miraculous ability to locate the enemy, but also instantaneous communications to get troops to react suitably to unexpected changes of circumstances."
>>51389912
I think this can be solved by allowing units to target models within a certain distance of their initial target. FiveCore does this and it works, though it should be a lot more deadly for a larger scale games.

>>51393996
I was thinking Hellenistic. I was tempted with a kind of white-red-black theme but wasn't sure.

If not I'll probably go for some sort of Seleucid theme

>>51389912
Speaking of Deep Battle, anyone have Simpkin's stuff in .pdf?

File: DSC02193.jpg (2MB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2592x1944px

>>51395951
Also important is the use of areas-of-effect weaponry. Nothing reminds a player to not clump up than blowing up a shitload of stuff all in one go because it is close enough together to get hit.

I used to not like template weapons, preferring the simplicity of just dice-rolling for amount of hits on a unit. But in more recent years I've seen how they actually help make for a more 'realistic' game where used appropriately by giving real consequences for being dumb.

Saying that though Cold War Commander, whilst using area-of-effect for artillery I don't think manages to couple that to a system where artillery is likely to be as disruptive as it needs to be, especially against the tanks arrayed >>51394574 as it takes a metric fuckton of hits to actually knock out that kind of hardware. FFoT's focus on unit quality and much better artillery system (more options and detail all around) lets breaking out the big guns be a lot more useful, even if they're not gonna cause kills.

>>51378864
lipped bases from warlord plus base filler.

I always thought FFOT3 would lead to more clumping as you can only shoot at the closest unit?

>>51397191
Command Decision uses a template for small arms fire IIRC. So you open up on close packed troops then multiple platoons can get hit from one round of shooitng

File: 12717786.jpg (200KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 960x960px

>>51397604
To directly quote Target Priority;
>A stand must fire at the nearest enemy stand, at the moment it fires, subject to the following exceptions:

>• Firing stands may ignore any enemy stands being fired at by other friendly stands during the current phase. All overwatch fire in a given phase counts for this rule. So, a stand firing in overwatch at a tank 10˝away may ignore the tank 5˝ away, if a friendly stand has already made an overwatch attack against the stand, during the current phase.

>• Firing stands may ignore infantry in favor of vehicles or vice versa.

>• Firing stands may ignore a target in cover or behind an obstacle in favor of a target in the open.

>• Firing stands may ignore lighter vehicles to fire at heavier armored vehicles (but not vice-versa). Compare the vehicles’ front armor ratings if there’s a question which is the heavier armored vehicle. Soft vehicles may be ignored to fire on armored vehicles.

>• Treat helicopters as armored vehicles with armor ‘0’ for targeting restrictions, except that an anti-aircraft stand may always engage the nearest helicopter over any other type of stand.

>Artillery stands (on-board and off-board) aren’t subject to this rule when making indirect-fire attacks. They are subject to it when making direct-fire and direct-area-fire attacks.

Top bit is most important, you can shoot at another stand as long as there's something already shooting at the closest target. And artillery just ignores all of it.

File: BMPT.jpg (101KB, 600x426px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 600x426px

BMPT

Is there a painting guide anywhere for WW2 German Panzergrenadiers circa mid-1944 Western Front using Vallejo Model Color paints? I've been poking around on Google for the last several days, and I'm finding a ton of stuff that's referencing the actual FS color codes, but nothing using Vallejo paint names.

If it matters, the models in question are the Wargames factory late war Germans.

>>51404100
http://www.militarymodelling.com/forums/postings.asp?th=23796

List of Vallejo colors as you scroll down

>>51404100

It's pretty fucked up, because most of the guides you'll be recommended to off of a google search will 404 on you.

I'm doing a similar project (same theater, even), and for the uniforms, I'm essentially taking Vallejo 979 (German Camo Dark Green) and Vallejo 830 (German Feldgrau) and I'm putting them on a wet palette.

One paint mix is 90/10 Feldgrau/Green
One paint mix is 80/20 Feldgrau/Green
One paint mix is 60/40 Feldgrau/Green
One paint mix is 50/50 ""
One paint mix is 40/60 "" (this is as far towards the green as I go - any more and the Feldgrau will get lost in the darker color).


I then simply batch paint minis so that 5 guys at a time get their trousers from the first paint mix. The next 5 guys get their trousers from the second mix, and so on until all trousers are painted. I then take one guy who's trousers are from the first mix, and I apply the second mix on the tunic. Then I take another "1st mix trouser" guy, and I apply the third mix on the tunic. And so on - it'll create a range of colors combinations which are all very closely related, but are still clearly different colors. Basically everything can be highlighted with straight-up German Feldgrau paint.

German uniforms evidently varied hugely even within the same unit, so this is a way to ensure that there's a mix of colors across my model range, while keeping the logistics of actually painting 10 different custom-mixed shades of paint from driving me even *more* insane.

I'm still working on the smock coloring, because of COURSE there's one fucking guy with a smock. I'll worry about my pair of Sdkfz 251s and my Panzer IV when they get here in March.

>>51394967
Ground scale, figure ratio, but it still looks ugly.

>>51395071

If you're playing 15mm scale, having more than 4 tanks per side on a 6x4 table is too high a concentration.

If you're playing 6mm, ~12 tanks per side on a 6x4 table is the max.

If you're playing 28mm, you shouldn't have any tanks at all on a 6x4 table, but if you MUST have them, no ruleset should allow you to take more than one.

>>51405507
Years of 1:1 skirmish games have rotted this poor anon's mind into mush. Weep for them, /hwg/.

Probably a long shot - anyone have scans of the Lace Wars volumes by Funcken?

File: lace.jpg (660KB, 771x933px) Image search: [Google]

660KB, 771x933px

>>51405840
Good news: yes!

https://mega.nz/#!WwEETL4L!v6Qdwzx1vF9gu-O9aFlzzF9iBHbaKz0kzuK7Mp-l3Rc
https://mega.nz/#!GwND1SiZ!nYL4igp-56aApwHAAU9Zn1zw3fe0wjA9JbhJWKpaVP4

Bad news: they're in French

>>51395286
That´s one smug looking macedonian

>>51404100
Check Artizan Designs' paintign guides.

File: P1090782.jpg (389KB, 1600x1062px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 1600x1062px

>>51405507
Your rules are arbitrary to the point of obscenity, fail to take into account table size, ground scaling, unit scaling and terrain.

>>51406242
Motherfucker you have made. my. day. and I don't even care about the language, I'm in it for the art. J'aime l'oignon. Ou est la plage? Je t'adore.

>>51406242
Those are some stylish motherfuckers there.

>>51411214
>fail to take into account table size
>having more than 4 tanks per side on a 6x4 table is too high a concentration.
>on a 6x4 table is too high a concentration.
>on a 6x4 table
>fail to take into account table size

wew lad

LAV-25

File: BTRT1.jpg (207KB, 1024x647px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 1024x647px

>>51412891
Eh, close enough.

>>51406242
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5hrUGFhsXo

Thanks a load :D

Does anyone have any advice or links for scratch building boats? I'm interested in doing some wwi or wwii stuff but I'm strapped for cash rn.

>>51416819
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/archive/vallejo-naval-paint-scratchbuild-and-painting-tutorials__o_t__t_22884.html

Be prepared to lay out money for materials initially, if you don't have any at the moment.

>>51416819
Alternatively, you can print counters out of the Victory at Sea books in the naval folder in op, or buy PDFs of counters, or buy some really nice counters for pretty cheap from Topside Minis. I bought the Falklands and Coronel set to branch out into WW1 stuff with a minimum outlay of cash.
> http://topsideminis.com

>>51416940
Was trying to find these earlier too:
http://calltoarmsmwg.blogspot.nl/2012/07/building-ijn-nachi.html?m=1
http://calltoarmsmwg.blogspot.nl/2012/07/battleship-fuso-of-imperial-japanese.html?m=1
http://calltoarmsmwg.blogspot.nl/2012/08/hms-king-george-v-and-hms-prince-of.html?m=1

File: ww1-a-295-emden.jpg.jpg (70KB, 824x522px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 824x522px

>>51416819
>>51416940
If you're not too concerned about detail you could make some very basic ships out of just different thicknesses of card and paper plus bits of wood or wire for guns/masts

>>51405507
How about you read up on some battles that weren't tank sniper wank fests, and get back to us on that.

File: Battle of Kursk StuGs.jpg (98KB, 800x414px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 800x414px

>>51418439
Pic related was probably 2' X 2' worth of table. I suppose we could post photos of tanks very close during action but we'll never change his headcanon

>>51418439
>>51418641

This, honestly. Flames of War tables that are 4x4 with a battalion of tanks per side are completely historical and appropriate. There's absolutely nothing ahistorical at all about parking a dozen tanks so adjacent to one another that their track shields are touching, firing at targets that are only as far away as 10 times the length of the tank itself.

Totes historical. Happened all the time in Kursk.

File: Nederland-05.jpg (26KB, 500x345px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x345px

>>51419142
Only faggots play entire tank battalions in 15mm scale on side tables. You seem pretty triggered, anon.

File: Fun is haram.png (53KB, 590x618px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 590x618px

>>51420421
>Only faggots
No anon, I'd say that its you that is the triggered one

File: ce47daa6f1baa3180e19cc2722a06e8a.jpg (128KB, 736x552px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 736x552px

:^)

File: Golan-1973.jpg (69KB, 594x396px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 594x396px

>>51420633
;^)

File: comrade I cant write that small.jpg (91KB, 439x601px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 439x601px

>>51419142
While both sides cramming a battalion into that space would be really bizarre, it was normal for attackers to reach retard densities. Like, an entire corps attacking into an area 4km wide in Bagration. Look at this fucking map the dude just gave up trying to fit everything in.

>>51420708
Dem bridge-laying skills.

I'll object to people ranking up their tanks as if they're horses.

And I'm gonna look funny at anyone wanting to do MBT battles in 28mm. Especially if they're surprised when shit dies in one good hit.

But to call for around a dozen tanks per side in 6mm is ludicrous. Tanks and other vehicles in 6mm are equivalent to infantry in 28mm, with much less height.

Frankly, if someone wants to mass up their tanks, they should be allowed. The game should let you fucking wreck their shit for it too.

>>51422361

This. This is the problem with Flames of War (and indeed most beer&pretzels historicals). Dropping an artillery shell on a platoon of tanks parked cheek-by-jowl in FoW is perhaps going to disable a single tank. Dropping an artillery shell squarely on a pair of adjacent tanks in something like Bolt Action is going to do even less - you're most likely going to slightly inconvenience them with 1-2 pinning markers, which will then be discarded the next turn when they almost certainly pass their order test.

Artillery gets de-powered in a ton of games, because losing 50% of your dudes to off-board artillery fire isn't <fun> in the slightest. Even if it is historically accurate.

jesus fucking christ, people

ground scale.

figure ratios.

time scale, even, that shit matters too.

>>51423125
>ground scale.
>figure ratios.

Must match. It's not that hard.

>time scale

Would ideally be real-time, but unlike table size and miniatures scale, it's hard to actually match that up to the correct scale. Still, certainly the player's decision time needs to be heavily limited; dithering and constant rules referencing by the commanding officer should cost their troops in wargaming just as dithering and referrals to higher command regarding ROEs costs troops in real life.

The point of wargaming is to portray war, after all.

>>51423292
>Must match. It's not that hard.
Are you high.

>>51423339
Because I mean it sounds like you believe the only true wargames are tiny skirmishes, even if you drop down to 6mm or whatever, because otherwise waah the tanks are too big and too close.

The point of wargaming is to portray war? I'll accept that, but hey look suddenly you can't portray anything other than a squad or two wandering through a crossroads.

>>51423292
>The point of wargaming is to portray war, after all.
Really? I thought it was to sell overpriced shitty-detailed lead/pewter mix figurines with inaccurate detailing to spergs by the mortgage-load.

>>51423456
Nah, it's to push toy soldiers around a table in a way almost but not quite entirely unlike war.

>>51423456

Found the GW exec

>>51423292
>Must match. It's not that hard.
?????

>>51423292
>Would ideally be real-time
A real time table top wargame? are you a memer?

>>51423359
> it sounds like you believe the only true wargames are tiny skirmishes

Not at all!

The only true MODERN MINIATURE wargames are tiny skirmishes. Got a shitton of 6mm ancients on a 6x4 battlefield? Just fine. The problem with putting miniatures with 20th century guns on the battlefield is that the ranges never work, and having completely separate scales for the miniatures and the tables is just poor and unintuitive game design.

If you're going to play WW1 or later battles using miniatures, then yes, it needs to be a skirmish game. And yes, bigger minis mean less troops. 5 Men in Kursk is absolutely the most minis (~5) per side a 28mm battle should ever have on a standard-size gaming table, and you'll note that they don't really even bother to give weapons a range. It's one of the only games with the courage to give its weapons the range of "the table", because they're acknowledging that a 6x4 table means almost point-blank range for 28mm weapons fire.

If you want to play bigger-scale wargames and care at all about the integrity and accuracy of the hobby, then you must to leave tabletop miniatures behind and move to counters or blocks on a large-scale actual terrain map (1:10,000 is a good starting point for a platoon-scale engagement, that's about 1 inch=300 yards). Hex-and-counter is acceptable as well, provided it's not something with an artificially-small battlefield like Avalon Hill's "Blitzkrieg", and the terrain isn't skewed to make the hexes "work".

>>51423666
Most infantry combat engagements take place within 250 m, which given how many games want to just do a few turns of exchanging combat, seems pretty easy to model.

>>51423666
>care at all about the integrity and accuracy of the hobby
>integrity
At the end of the day aren't we all just trying to have fun with our buddies? Who cares if it isn't a 1:1 simulation?

>>51423689

By having the engagement take place within small-arms range from the start, you completely negate the purpose of movement, reconnaissance, and a whole lot of other critical factors.

Imagine you're playing on a 6x4 battlefield, and your small-arms have a 6-inch range. Suddenly, you have a ton of room to maneuver. It actually matters hugely. You can include logistic elements - trucks and so forth - to move troops quickly across a front. Artillery and field pieces aren't stupidly close to the FEBA. By ensuring battles take place on ground sized appropriately to the fighting forces, you've actually got a legitimate WARgame, instead of just moving up and rolling buckets of dice to see who gets unlucky first.

And then, when you get close enough, you can totally have your close-range infantry engagement. There's no difference if I have a block counter that attacks your block counter rolling 13d6 to attack (hitting your veteran forces on 5s) than if I had a squad of 10 miniatures (7 with rifles for 1d6 each, a 2-man LMG team for 4d6, and the NCO with an SMG for 2d6, all hitting on 5s). The only difference is that doing it with the minis on a 6x4 board means that maneuver is pointless, while my way, it's a more genuine experience and a more historically accurate process and therefore result.

>>51423292
>The point of wargaming is to portray war, after all.
In a fun and abstract way. You cannot accurately represent war on the tabletop with miniatures, so you must accept a degree of abstraction.

If you want to portray war more accurately, you should focus on good fog of war and recon rules rather than get autistic about exact ground scales and miniature sizes. Tanks being slightly too close is easy to ignore. Being able to see your opponents forces at all times is much less realistic.

>>51423785
I know, man. Go after all those games that do that, with all this boundless angst and malaise you have.

>>51423726
>Who cares if it isn't a 1:1 simulation

Those of us who are professional wargamers for the Defence Academy of the UK, for starters.

There's a right way and a wrong way to wargame. Right now, the wargaming hobby is so poor in their scale choices that they obviate every useful piece of information which can be gleaned from it. What you people are doing would make Adm Yamamoto's pre-Midway gaming look like the bloody epitome of accuracy.

>>51423827
I hate this kind of gatekeeper shit
literally "you're having fun wrong" combined with an argument from authority

>>51423827
>wargame
>game
it should be fun firstly. Accuracy is an added bonus for history buffs. Very few of us need to "glean" information from wargames. We simply need to enjoy it and have laugh with our buddies. The fate of our empire is not at stake.

>>51423890
>literally "you're having fun wrong"

But your fun IS wrong.

Like, objectively and measurably. If you don't care about history nor learning from/hypothetically changing it, why are you playing historical games in the first place? There's plenty of other fantasy or science fictional games you can go play where they try to justify why their huge-bore guns only reach 15 feet away from the person firing them. If all you're going is looking to roll dice and push your dolls around, why misrepresent yourself as historical wargamers?

File: bodies.gif (32KB, 500x447px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 500x447px

>back from holiday just in time for new thread
Gosh lads, bit of a shortage of notable military events on the 27th and 28th. I could maybe do the 29th with Khafji 1991. Anyone have a suggestion for a theme? I once had no interesting inspiration so I did Medieval marginalia instead, and that was fun.

>>51423926
see >>51423827

File: img-195264453d4.jpg (209KB, 570x779px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 570x779px

>>51423959
Hang on: we'll go for Brienne 1814. Dramatic one that; both Blucher and Napoleon were nearly killed/captured at some point in the fighting.

>>51423926
>But your fun IS wrong
This is like me, a librarian, telling people that what they are reading is wrong because it isn't literary enough.
Even if you do wargame for the mod, which I doubt, there's a big difference between simulations for defence and playing a game with your friends and an even bigger gap between your job and a right to tell people how to have fun.

File: Muller's_boys.jpg (30KB, 493x233px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 493x233px

>>51423926
Go play your tepid copy of Contact! and get your head out of your ass. If that's truly your job, you would understand that milsims and civilian wargames have always had a big divide in end goals.

>>51423827
>professional wargamer
Unless you have a PhD in Applied Professional Wargamery, I couldn't really give a shit. What if my wargame is not entirely true to reality? I don't give a shit, it feels like the period and it was fun.

And as for accuracy, modified M551 Sheridans are used as T-72s for training purposes, an incorrect turret number wouldn't be too much of a problem for me.

>>51417195
Fun fact: the guy who wrote those is the dev of Naval War.

>>51424413
I'm jelly as fuck that you've probably seen them all in person.