WARGAMING ON THE CHEAP
When I made the transition from board to miniature wargaming, I immediately found myself faced with three constraining factors: time in which to paint, lack of appropriate playing area, and last, but not least, hobby-related cash flow difficulties. I have somewhat alleviated these problems by applying two simple remedies -- I carefully research my armies with an eye for a versatile, adaptable entity and I use the 6mm scale where possible.
Some gamers can experience tabletop happiness only by fielding a pet unit or army; others of us are fortunately blessed with eclectic tastes which allow greater leeway in the purchase of one of the vast number of miniature armies available in today's marketplace. Whether it be Clive's men or a horde of Khmer irregulars, the options open seem endless. With but a modicum of research and planning one can augment one's purchasing power by choosing an army which can appear in a variety of roles -- can you tell a US ACW zouave from one with Maximillian in Mexico? Flexibility and utility should be paramount in making your decision.
Let's look at a few examples: a Roman army of the early 5th Century can parade either as a Later Imperial or Patrician army of the WRG Lists. It can, with Hunnic and Gothic wings, take to the field as a 3000 point host, or after division into its constituent parts, supply the gamer with three convention-sized arrays available for combat against one another. This is the type of armyeasily expanded into several possible combinations - allied or otherwise.
Numerous armies lend themselves to this approach; one has but to look at the numerous coalition armies which have graced the battlefields of Europe to find an abundance of examples. Quite a few heterogeneous military establishments have made their mark on history - the Successor armies, Byzantines of almost any era, the Dark Ages combatants of the British Isles - the list is endless.
It takes only the most minute amount of reading to uncover any number of satellite contingents which, after the addition of a few figures, readily move into an orbit of their own, ready to contend against their erstwhile allies. The Franco-Confederation of the Rhine Napoleonics comes to mind immediately.
Let's return to our Late Romans and look at a possible schedule of purchases:
1. CinC, Standards, Roman heavy cavalry and Legionnaires 2. Sub-general, Hunnic horse 1 Ally generals, Gothic horse and foot 4. Roman auxiliaries, barbarian skirmishers 5. Add to all above (1,000 points total) 6. Finish allRoman core units (up to 1,000 points) 7. Finish Gothic wing (1,000 points) 8. Finish Huns (1,000 points) 9. Pray your wife doesn't find the check book!
As one continues in the hobby through the years a long range approach to your army building is merely sound economics -- a little careon your part in planning your investment over time yields handsome dividends. Gritting your teeth and building at least a portion of your forces in 6mm can also put an extra army or two on your shelves.
If you can't resist the beauty of 25mm figures or your budget allows you to field 15's in ample quantity read no more but if, as with me, the old combination of time-space-money is making itself felt, please continue.
Miniature wargaming can be as expensive a proposition as you care to make it - the rapidly growing number of 6mm wargame ar.iesavailable today providesan alternative. Needless to say these figures aren't for everyone but, for the budget conscious, a 1,000 point army for $7 has to make one stop and think. One firm is marketing, at a scale of 1:20, a French Napoleonic Division for under $30. An army of smaller dimensions also lessens the required elbow room for combat; my 52x30 table allows plenty of maneuver area for cavalry-heavy armies of ancient "small boys".
This scale also allows the gamer to experiment with armies he would not otherwise build. These provide a useful testbed demanding low initial investment and if you discover your Pictish mob to be less than satisfactory you're not out a mint. I can vouch for the sharp decline in time spent wielding the brush with a complimentary increase in time spent wielding the dice (you may have to put up with comments such as: "Why don't you just spray paint them?").
Many Commanders-in-Chief seem averse to increases in the military spending budget so getting as much bang for your buck as possible certainly is appreciated on the home front. Logistics, or rather a lack of, has lain manya commander of the past low. A move to a smaller scale might prove to be just the strategy for dealing with that new, tiny apartment or that payment for the second car. Regardless ofwhat scaleyou choose, the careful selection ofa dynamic army, able to appear on the field under a wide variety of guises,will give you a richer wargaming experience irrespective of your arena.
FROM ENGLAND My present wargame project is the Franco-Prussian War using Heroicsand Ros 6mm figures. I also use the Franco-Russian variant of OTR, with some modifications of my own, e.g., I have made it easier to stop cavalry charging home on formed infantry, but more difficult for unsupported artillery to stop them. I also use slightly different base sizes to allow for depiction of battalions and squadrons. I have also incorporated tfie smoke rules from the FPW rules published in No. 1 (Vol. VII, No. 1: They Died for Glory - ED.), but of course given a +1 instead of a -1. finally, all movement in 6mm is centimeters instead of inches.
From the articles by Pat Condray and Larry Brom my organizational and uniform knowledge of the FPW has more than doubled and for this I am most grateful.
American gamers might like to know that a new book has recently been published in the U.K. which covers the battles of Mars-la-Tour and Gravelotte-St. Privat in great detail. It is A Day of Battle - Mars-la-Tour 16 August 1870 by David Ascoli, published by Harrap, and is available from International Military Books,76 Priestfield Road, Gillingham, Kent, ME7 4RF, U.K., priced at £ 16.50, plus p&p. A major feature of this book is numerous battlefield maps with supporting photographs. Also, for those interested in FPW 6mm, Heroics and Ros have now released Prussian Hussars and Cuirassiers, Bavarian troops, French Cuirassiers and Lancers, Zouaves and Mitrailleuses.
NOTES ON THE AUSTRIAN ARMY OF 1959
(See Vol. VII, No. 5 - ED.) According to Luigi Casali in his article on the Austrian Army in Miniature Wargames No. 47 that army was in the process of reequipping with the Lorenz. Some units were familiar with the weapon while others received it on the march or prior to a battle, and, thus, were unfamiliar with it. Still other line units soldiered on with the percussion musket, the Console-Augustin.
Regarding the jagers' gray, Casali says it was a greenish gray while Knoetel says it was bluish.
As for using 1914 lists of colors for regiments, be wary. Regimental numbers that are German in 1859 are Hungarian in 1914 in several instances. This caution may be valid for 1866 as well, although 'he army seems to have been greatly expanded in the interim.
MORE CRIMEAN WAR FIGURES
The Crimean War article in VII-6 omitted a growing range of 15mm models: Lancashire Games, 8 Ducie St., Bardsley, Oldhem OL8 2RD England - BILL MARSHALL
A REPLY TO SLINGSHOT
As usual, those not actively involved in the NASAMW's (North American Society of Ancient and Medieval Wargamers - ED.) efforts in the field, miss the point. Hence letters like those written by Jim McDaniel don't bother me. On the other hand, Ian Greenwood's attempt (see Dispatches, VIII-1) to recruit members and cast the NASAMW as some reactionary dictatorship trying to hold down the masses of ancient wargamers yearning to be free from WRG is appalling!
I admit, we are presently myopic in our approach to ancients. We have been this way for two reasons:
1. Until the last couple of years, NASAMW was literally a one-man operation, Kruse Smith. One person can only do so much and he had to basically lay the foundation for the NASAMW which was a full-time endeavor.
2. Demand, The McDaniels and Greenwoods of this world fail to realize that the majority of those willing to come to conventions, write the NASAMW, and otherwise speak up about the hobby want the "old-style competition" ancient gaming. So what if we are unwilling or unable to break free from our "very limiting stereotype of wargaming?" The NASAMW is only responding to the gamer's demand for a better set of rules and tournament settings.
We are still in our infancy in many areas and don't have the years of organization expenence that the British Society of ancients accrued over the years. We are trying though. The NASAMW also represents a strong historical group that has worked to refine and update the army lists that are widely used. Believe me, these people are not necessarily interested in better tournament play, but accuracy. in addition, we are actively working on clarifying and upating some still ambiguous aspects of WRG. Hopefully by the end of this year, we will have the foundations set (again responding to a very vocal demand for better defined rules) and can move on to other aspects of the hobby (much in the way the UK ancient wargaming community evolved.
Dick Bryant is right on the money when he asks people to submit articles that explore other facets of ancient wargaming. But even ifyou like playing a "tournament style" battle, it doesn't mean you are in the Neanderthal times of wargaming. If more of us stopped bitching and started contributing to the hobby maybe our focus would change. So, take an active part in the hobby, join the NASAMW, join the UK Society of Ancients, go out and get as many points of view as you can to broaden and hopefully increase your enjoyment of the hobby.
SIMPLE ANCIENT RULES DIFFICULT TO WRITE
In reply to Jim McDaniel (Dispatches, VII-6), if your perceptions of ancient warfare differ from mine, then "arguing with Barker" may not be such a waste of time. I am actually quite easy to convince IF you have the evidence. That is how new editions come about! And by all means try other peoples' rules or writing your own. Hopefully it may make you appreciate ours more.
The sad fact is that it is very difficult to write a set ofancient rules that are both simple and realistic, unless you limit yourself to a single very short historical period and location. When this is done, the resulting rules are so bland as to produce an unsatisfying game, so the designer is forced to complicate them up again. Look at some of the period specific rules being published in Slingshot as an example. I bet you can think of ways to simplify the mechanisms, and I also bet that you wouldn't then play with the result very much.
To the virtues of simplicity and realism, we have to add a third, which by analogy with computer visual simulations I call "texture". Basically, this means that the player mustfeel that he is in a battle, not a game. This is a quality not always in demand among competition players, who like to deal in certainties, hence their dislike of weather and fondness for rule commentaries. Some think these erring brethren should be excommunicated to the other darkness with expressions of loathing. I prefer to wean them gently by tempting them with new editions, even though a few jibe at the taste of the medicine. To this end, any set of rules I produce will be useable for competition gaming. As I am not myself a competition gamer, they will also be simple, realistic and textured enough to suit me.
Changing the subject, there was a rather puzzling reference in K.G. Madison's article to what seems a very implausible feature in "The NASAMW's revised list 64". Has this body been amending my lists without telling me? I would appreciate information
Back to Table of Contents -- Courier Vol. VIII No. 2
To Courier List of Issues
To MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1988 by The Courier Publishing Company.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com