Historicals: Only ordered 5 reference books for my lead barbies, any recommendations?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Historicals: Only ordered 5 reference books for my lead barbies, any recommendations?

«‹›17 »

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

Comrade Merf posted:

Oh lovely would you mind showing off how you did basing? I'm in a tossup between multiple men on a base for multiple game duty like General DArmee or going the individual casualty method.

I've done them a couple of different ways. For Gettysburg soldiers I mounted them on 1" square sheet metal plates I got from somewhere (above, right). But for Sharp Practice I use sabot bases (above, left). The minis are individually based on #8 steel washers. The base is then made of magnetic sheet (the kind used for refrigerator magnets) and laser-cut card. The cool part about this is that you can use the same kind of bases for both infantry and cavalry (as individual horses are just glued to two washers instead of one).

I am in the process of redoing everything as sabot bases.

# ¿ Oct 20, 2023 16:39

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 11, 2024 08:48

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

spectralent posted:

I've kind of got a hankering for big battle rank-and-flank stuff, ideally early medieval ("dark age") - what's my options there? It seems a bunch of people play Hail Caesar for it or just use the KOW Historicals stuff but I'm assuming there's some hidden gems this thread knows about and I don't. We've got a bunch of 6mm and 28mm viking/saxon stuff for use.

I don't know how big you mean by "big battle," but we've always had a poo poo-ton of fun with Dux Britanniarum.

# ¿ Nov 13, 2023 17:28

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

Cessna posted:

I use fender washers; they're cheap and readily available in different sizes.

100% this ^

# ¿ Dec 14, 2023 22:41

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

You can do more asymmetric stuff with CoC, but I think it works better in campaign mode. I wrote an entire Pint-Sized Campaign for CoC (Totensonntag, in the 2019 Lard Annual) that features an armored force against an infantry force. The campaign is highly asymmetric, but the balance is derived from the fact that the armored force has bigger fish to fry than just rolling around blasting infantry. In that campaign pretty much any enemy AT capability represents "A Problem (TM)" for the tanks. I've written up a play-though on Goonhammer, you can read the first article in the series here:
https://www.goonhammer.com/goonhammer-historicals-playing-a-chain-of-command-pint-sized-campaign-part-1-intro-to-totensonntag/

The campaign is still ongoing. I have Game 6 in the books, hope to finish the write-up for that in the next few weeks.

# ¿ Dec 18, 2023 18:38

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

Springfield Fatts posted:

Got bored and tried knocking together a vehicle status dice for CoC or BA. Any inputs on what I covered or might be missing? Trying to keep it six-sided.

https://www.printables.com/model/687735-coc-vehicle-status-die

Driver killed, loader killed, commander killed, gunner killed, immobilized, engine destroyed?

# ¿ Dec 20, 2023 22:29

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

Nice!

# ¿ Dec 21, 2023 17:38

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

I finished off those Victrix Norman Cavalry I'd been working on. Seeing your SAGA pictures makes me want to get a game of that in!

# ¿ Jan 16, 2024 20:26

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

spectralent posted:

Those look a lot nicer than mine

I've got that kit but haven't put it together yet! It looks great, though those lances fill me with anxiety.

They are super-fiddly, to be sure.

EDIT: The guy on the Andalusian in the front rank? The one with the vertical lance? Yeah, his spear is about a quarter inch too long to fit in my storage/transport box standing up. :negative:

# ¿ Jan 17, 2024 00:03

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

War and Pieces posted:

Reading up on Napoleon's campaigns and it got me wondering how are Historicals balanced? For example, are the French units faster?

It really depends on the game. A lot of rule systems use "national characteristics" to differentiate between forces, and these tend to be based on the doctrine or organization of the armies. For instance, in the Napoleonic era, French units trained and drilled in the art of forming an assault column with the intent to close with the enemy and get stuck in. In Sharp Practice, for instance, French line infantry units get the "Pas de Charge" ability, which gives them a bonus when making such attacks. It costs in-game resources to use, but if/when you can pull it of it's pretty cool. Similarly, British units of that era focused their drill on forming a solid firing line, discharging a close-range volley, and surging forward with the bayonet. This is represented in the "Thin Red Line" special ability that their line infantry get.

Additionally, many games have "points" systems that assign a value to a particular unit. Games like Bolt Action work just like 40K in that the game is played at an agreed-upon points value and you just buy whatever troops fit. Others, like Chain of Command, give each force a relative rating, and the differential between forces is used to give the "weaker" unit a little bit of extra support (over and above whatever comes along with the scenario).

And finally, the scenario/campaign design is where you find a lot of the balance. One force might be very strong, but its objectives are more difficult to achieve, for instance. This is how you get asymmetric scenarios, which can be a ton of fun. I actually wrote an article for Goonhammer about things to consider when designing asymmetric scenarios, handy link: https://www.goonhammer.com/goonhammer-historicals-asymmetric-conflict-in-wargaming/

# ¿ Jan 29, 2024 16:23

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

poop chute posted:

My partners and I have recently gotten into Bolt Action and Flames of War, and I was wondering if there were any good resources on painting them up. I won't let myself become a real scale modeling sicko, but that doesn't mean I can't do it at a smaller scale.

The Farnworth painting guides are usually pretty handy, and there are scads of YouTube channels that have painting tutorials for a variety of different nationalities. Just Google something like "WW2 Marine painting guide" or "early war fallschirmjager painting guide" and you'll get lots of images, videos, and write-ups.

# ¿ Feb 2, 2024 22:50

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

The next episode of our play-through of the Totensonntag PSC for Chain of Command is up:

https://www.goonhammer.com/goonhammer-historicals-playing-a-chain-of-command-campaign-part-7-a-renewed-assault/

# ¿ Feb 12, 2024 16:41

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

StashAugustine posted:

Great writeup! Every time I read one of these I really wanna buy into Chain of Command. Usually reading the rulebook cures me of it, but still

Thanks! And yeah, the rulebook can be a little hard to parse sometimes, especially with its use of the term "unit" to mean a couple of different things in different contexts. But once you get the hang of it, it really is a fantastic game. It produces narrative like almost no other game I have played, and in campaign mode it is hands down some of the best tabletop wargaming experience I've ever had.

# ¿ Feb 12, 2024 18:37

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

StashAugustine posted:

I'm trying not to sound pejorative but it feels like it's written as guidelines for a reenactment rather than rules for a game, which is just absolutely not my style at all. Like I'm willing to put up with some of the asymmetric setups and dice rolls simulating the chaos of command, but I would like the rules to actually tell me how to play the game

I feel like this is a little bit off the mark, because I'm basically an idiot and I figured it out. The main problem with the rulebook as I see it is that it's not always clear in its use of terminology and it doesn't do a great job of handling some of the common "corner cases" that can pop up in games (like how do you handle allocating hits if only leaders are left in a unit). Most of the answers to these questions make perfect sense, but they're not always called out in the rulebook.

StashAugustine posted:

Giving Soviet commissars a points cost but no actual rules text would probably be the best mechanical representation of them if it was intentional

This is another case where they punted from the main rulebook off to the campaign scenarios, largely because the actual function of commissars changed significantly over the course of the war. So whereas in the early war he's essentially the literate dude in the unit who helps you write letters home (and censors them to make sure you're not revealing operational details), in Stalingrad under Stalin's "not one step backward," edict the function of the commissar was a far different beast. Unfortunately it doesn't say that in the main rulebook (though it is explained in the FAQ).

# ¿ Feb 13, 2024 00:36

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

3 Action Economist posted:

Except not really.

I mean, this is a direct quote from the CoC FAQ:

"Commissars. The role of the Commissar changed throughout the war and as such the role is not defined in the main rules. However, various interpretations of the Commissars role have been outlined on a number of Army lists and Pint Sized Campaigns. Full and complete details will be covered in the handbooks which will cover the entire war."

And as an example of this, IIRC the Operation Citadel PSC treats commissars as essentially morale officers; they are an extra man in whatever squad they are attached to and count as two men for the purposes of pinning/breaking. I forget how they're handled in the Winter War campaign book.

As for that last bit, I'm still waiting for handbooks to cover the entire war. They're about to release their second (the Far East handbook), so I'm not going to hold my breath.

# ¿ Feb 13, 2024 17:11

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

I must have missed it then. The only discussion about commissars I remember in this thread was debunking the "shoot every man who retreats" myth that has lodged itself in the popular wargaming psyche because of 40K.

# ¿ Feb 13, 2024 21:45

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

LatwPIAT posted:

I'm going down a rabbithole of wanting to research ways late medieval/early renaissance warfare have been gamified (for a tabletop RPG), especially at the smaller scale. What are some good miniature games I could look to for 15th Century warfare? This is of course a period that spans a sea change in combat, but I'm mostly interested in specifically the Hussite Revolt and the 1470+ period of pike squares becoming the dominant form of warfare.

It's a little early for your purposes, but Firelock Games' new Blood & Crowns covers the 100 Years War (which ended in 1453).

# ¿ Mar 8, 2024 22:29

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

Finished a British 8th Army 40mm Bofors gun and crew (Rubicon miniatures):

As well as a kit-bashed medic from a spare Warlord 8th Army sprue I had lying around:

I always knew Warlord minis tended towards the "heroic" proportions, but these lads are downright chonky compared to the Perry and Rubicon sculpts (which are good matches to each other).

# ¿ Mar 11, 2024 18:52

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

soviet elsa posted:

I guess my question is can I paint DAK and not be labelled/heiled as a Nazi-lover?

Short answer: yes, you can paint your DAK and not be labeled as a Nazi-lover. And as an aside, I too started with the Perry DAK and they are lovely miniatures.

Longer answer: lots of people struggle with this, so here's a really thought-provoking article on the topic that may help you come to a decision:

https://www.goonhammer.com/goonhammer-historicals-butterflies-pinned-to-a-board-or-why-we-play-the-baddies/

# ¿ Mar 13, 2024 20:05

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

Victrix Vikings are right there for all your big axe needs.

# ¿ Mar 18, 2024 16:10

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

Last battle in the Totensonntag Pint-Sized Campaign for Chain of Command is done, and you can read all about it here:
https://www.goonhammer.com/goonhammer-historicals-playing-a-chain-of-command-campaign-part-8-breakthrough/

Obligatory photo from the game:

# ¿ Mar 29, 2024 03:14

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

I haven't played O-Group yet, but I like the way it's structured. There are some good YouTube videos about it that show pretty well how it plays.

# ¿ Mar 29, 2024 15:45

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

I just hope they finally ditch the purely punitive special rules for some of the nations.

# ¿ Apr 19, 2024 16:30

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

Panzeh posted:

Do they get point discounts for this?

See, this is my intrinsic problem with points-based systems, and that's that so many game designers take the laziest approach possible to "balancing" things (lower quality troops == cheaper == more of them). That's not how asymmetric conflict actually works. Having a lovely squad LMG did not lead to Italians fielding more men, for instance. Balance is done so much better across multiple games (in a campaign setting) than as one-off scenarios, but that's not "tournament friendly," so as a result you end up with lovely rules that skew the forces on the table.

# ¿ Apr 22, 2024 19:24

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

Panzeh posted:

Yeah, but you gotta work out ways to like, give a lower quality force a chance in an individual game- it's not always through numbers, but, without a scenario designer behind the hood, things start getting a lot more nebulous, like Chain of Command's support list or whatever. You can just throw up your hands and shrug about it all, but i mean, it is what it is, when somebody's platoon goes up against somebody else's platoon, this is what the game is.

Yes, and that's my point - I'm not a big fan of that particular game as designed, because the "balance" method is so ahistorical.

Go back to my post, my contention is that individual "points" systems encourage game designers to be lazy. There are loads of ways to balance forces that don't involve "just have more dudes," and I feel like good games are going to use some of those methods, and further that those methods often work better across multiple games than just a single game.
I am not throwing up my hands and shrugging, I am being the change I want to see. That's why I wrote the "Totensonntag" Pint-Sized Campaign for CoC the way I did.

# ¿ Apr 22, 2024 21:05

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

spectralent posted:

I was thinking today that it's odd that air wargames are all extremely finickity and full of stuff to track - many have written orders, most involve meticulous tracking of heights, speeds, and ammunition. Are there many examples of "cinematic" style dogfighting games that're aiming to be quick and breezy?

Bag the Hun (by Too Fat Lardies, unsurprisingly) is hands down the best aerial combat game I've played. It does have altitude bands and ammo, but these are stupid easy to track. It also neatly avoids the problem that X-Wing and Wings of Glory have where both sides are plotting their movement blind (which forces you to guess what your opponent is doing and often ends up in you zigging left when they zag right and then spending like the next three turns maneuvering to get in another shot). Movement and firing order is randomly determined by card draw (which nicely represents those fleeting moments where an opportunity slips by you before you can seize it) and one of the coolest mechanics is the "tailing test," which if you can get into position and pass allows you to move when your opponent moves - greatly increasing your chances of being able to blast him.

It also has stuff for level-bombing, dive-bombing, strafing, and similar right in the basic rules (as opposed to a supplement like most other rule sets). I reviewed it for Goonhammer back in the day if your interest is piqued: https://www.goonhammer.com/goonhammer-historicals-review-bag-the-hun/

I just recently got it to the table for my regular gaming group, doing a quick scenario of Spitfires vs Bf-109s over the English Channel:

It's a ton of fun and once you get the hang of it plays pretty quickly. And like all Lardies games it does cinematic/narrative really well.

Ilor fucked around with this message at 16:03 on Apr 29, 2024

# ¿ Apr 24, 2024 23:56

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 11, 2024 08:48

Ilor: Feb 2, 2008; That's a crit.

Endman posted:

They really should be paying you for all the great advertising you do for their games

I know, right? I can't help it, though; their design vibe very much fits what I am generally looking for in games.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 15:57

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Historicals: Only ordered 5 reference books for my lead barbies, any recommendations?

«‹›17 »