Waterloo

It was the final meeting of the Tyneside club on Saturday, and as is now tradition we put on a big participation game for as many club members as wanted to play. This year we went for a refight of Waterloo in 6mm using Grande Armee.

Michael and Dave supplied the French, with Dave being Napoleon and Michael Ney. Stu provided the Prussians but graciously allowed Paddy to be Blucher. And as I supplied the Anglo-Dutch army I had the distinction of playing Wellington. In total twelve players took part in the game making it a good collective festive bash.

I won't go through the history of the battle as there are plenty of sources out there who will do the battle a much greater service than I ever could so will instead reflect on the game itself.

Let's start with the most important thing, the game was a cracking good laugh - helped no doubt by the generous amounts of port being consumed. Thankfully the Prussians arrived early so there were plenty of commands for everyone to get involved and thanks to some superb dice throwing by Kieran as Picton the British line withheld the first French assaults to make a good game of it.

In short, the early arrival of the Prussians meant the French moved the Cavalry Corps across to meet this threat reducing the pressure on the British line which although buckling under the force of the Old Guard managed to hold with the commitment of the British reserves.

When fighting it next time I'd shrink the table slightly. We used the map from the scenario in the Grande Armee rulebook which works to 12" squares but forgot to adjust it for the small 6cm bases we use. The result was that the British had to spread out further to cover the same distance and both La Haye Sainte and Hougoumount were to far from the line. It also meant the Prussians had further to march when entering the field to reach the battle.

This game has re-enthused me for Grande Armee. It really showed what the system can do, allowing full Corps to be engaged, withdrawn, rallied, and reengaged within the time available. Sadly I got too caught up in the battle to remember to take photos as it progressed but thankfully Andy was one of the twelve and better photos can be found on his blog.

Imperial Ambitions

I have three weeks over Christmas and plan to spend a lot of the time painted a 28mm Early Imperial Roman Army for the Impetus Tournament circuit next year - that is when I can escape family commitments. For inspiration I have just finished reading Anthony Everitt's biography of Augustus and I'm moving onto Frank McLynn's bio of Marcus Aurelius.

I decided on the army following a few games of Hail Caesar (HC). I didn't want to replicate the Marian Roman army I have in 15mm in another scale, and the rules for line relief in Republican Roman armies in Impetus put me off that option. Thankfully these rules have been improved in Extra Impetus 4 but I have already invested in Imperial Recruits.

You will have noticed that I plan to use the army in two different rule sets. While Impetus will remain my primary ancient ruleset I have enjoyed the alternative of HC and hope to find time for both. The problem this brings is basing. HC, and other rulesets, require some individual basing of figures where Impetus relies on unit bases. I have therefore went with basing units for HC and creating unit stands to place them on for Impetus.

The army composition is still to be finalised. I am split between taking more infantry or more cavalry. There is a requirement to have at least four units of Legionaries/Auxiliaries and I also want at least two units of medium cavalry and one light. The decision is between an additional two units of Legionaries/Auxiliaries or an additional two cavalry units.

In the long run I plan to paint up enough figures to deploy either army but I need to make a decision for preparing the army for the York tournament on 5th February. At present I think I will stick with the tradition of the Roman army at the time being an infantry army and go with the extra Legionaries/Auxiliaries.

For the Legionaries/Auxiliaries I am splitting the units 50:50 between heavy (FP) Legionaries and light (FL) Auxiliaries. This split gives the option of deploying in two battle lines and allowing as FP and FL can interpenetrate.

All of the figures are Warlord Games. I have found their plastics a lot easier to assemble than Wargames Factory but their metal miniatures tend to need a lot of tidying up. The models to look great with the main frustration being that the Legionnaires are clearly smaller than the Auxiliaries.

So far I have painted one unit of Legionaries and one of Auxiliaries. For the Legionaries I am basing six figures on a 6cm x 4cm base. Two bases together will form on Impetus unit and three a unit for HC. Having three bases for HC will allow the unit to change between column, line and wedge formations easily. The Auxiliaries are based individually with seven  being magnetised to a 12cm x 6cm base for Impetus. The single basing allows them to be deployed either formed or in various degrees of skirmish for HC.

Getting Back on Track

It's been months since my last post. Other aspects of life came to dominate including relocating back to Newcastle and completing the final project of an economics course. Thankfully my wargaming did not come to a standstill but I have lost the focus I had at the beginning of the year. 

I plan to do some more in-depth posts over the coming weeks but thought a nice short one would get me back into the swing of it.

Possible new projects

Over the past few months I have seen/played a number of new rulesets for different periods some may become projects for the new year. In summary:

• Force-on-Force - played a Vietnam game after watching several others. Though not my period I do like the mission approach to the game and may get myself some forces. Forces are small and easy to paint but you do need a lot of terrain which could be expensive as I'm no modeller.
• Le Feu Sacre - the lads in Newcastle have starting using this for 15mm Corps sized Napoleonic games. It looks interesting but need to read the rules and play a few games before I seriously consider rebasing by figures again.
• Might and Reason - lads in Sheffield have put together a few 10mm Seven Years War armies for another Sam Mustafa ruleset. I originally turned this down with having too much else on but it looked good and I have game booked in for two weeks time. Looks like this will be a popular period in the next years following the release of Argument of Kings and upcoming release of Maurice.

Immediate Projects

I have three weeks off at Christmas and plan to complete a 300 point 28mm Imperial Roman Impetus Army for the tournament circuit next year. We are focussing on the ancient period following the release of Extra Impetus 4 last month and the luck I had with my Normans at the beginning of the year ran out at Derby where they were beaten in all three games. They will have their final outing for the year at Smoggycon next weekend.

I also need to do some bits and pieces on my 15mm Napoleonics for a large game of Lasalle between Christmas and New Year.

Washington's Wars

Last night I played my first game of Washington's Wars by GMT Games. I spotted this a few months ago and decided to pick up a copy to potentially use for AWI campaigns once (if?) I get my army painted up. Fi kindly indulged me by agreeing to play the Americans.

The game mechanics are based closely on those of Hannibal which is an excellent game and seemed to be used in a number of GMT games. The Board takes the form of a point-to-point map covering the original 13 colonies and Canada. Each turn corresponds to a campaign year during which each player is dealt 7 strategy cards which they play to either control their armies, influence the political situation, or initiate historic events. The skill of the game is to strike the right balance at the right time between military and political concerns.

We managed to change the course of history with the British holding onto America by 1882. The British launched a southern campaign straight away gaining a strong base of support in the South that they never lost. And, despite some successful campaign in Canada by Washington, including the capture of Montreal, the Americas were never able to chase the British out of the North East and eventually the British moved in to secure the central states.

It was an enjoyable game for our first run through. The main thing I wanted to discover was how the rules taken from one period, the Punic Wars, would feel in another and found they worked well. There are a number of changes to the rules that give players different challenges to deal with. These cover elements the placement of political counters to the system for reenforcements. The biggest change however is battle resolution which is through an adjusted dice throw rather than the card system in Hannibal.

While for Wargames I like a different set of rule mechanics for each period I am more willing to consider the same mechanics at a strategic level. While battlefield tactics have changed between periods through changes in weapons, population, theatres and cultures, strategically the challenges remain the same. You need to get armies in the field, maintain them, and use them and other means to influence the political situation to bring victory.

I found that the changes to the rules give the game a different feel and represent the historic challenges each side faced based on my current understanding of the war. However, it does feel heavy stacked in favour of the British player as they have a good advantage in combat (as they did historically) but this makes it difficult for the Americans to bring the French into the war as they need nine victories baring other events.

I look forward to taking on the challenge of being the Americans the next time we play the game.

Hail Caesar

Over the past month at the Sheffield club we have been play testing with Hail Caesar. While not unhappy with Impetus I have started to find it limited when trying to refight scenarios and the flexible nature of Hail Caesar appealed to me. I did plan to write a series of postings reflecting on the different game elements but I’m really busy at the moment and know I won’t get round to it.

We have fought three battle. Two medieval including a refight of Tewkesbury and one ancient, which was a refight of the Battle of Bibracte. I forgot to take photos of the first two but scattered throughout are photos of Bibracte.

Hail Caesar is an ancient version of Black Powder. The one game of Black Powder I played put was enough to put me off it so I didn’t have high expectation for Hail Caesar.

I didn’t like the command/movement system in Black Powder. The idea of having to tell my opponent my orders before I know whether they have been carried out didn’t sit well. If the orders fail then they know my intentions and can react to them. While the same command system is in operation on Hail Caesar, I don't have as big an issue with it as the orders are generally a direction of travel for the troops as formations are more set in ancient battles. In the horse and musket period the formation of the troops determines their firepower and I didn’t like telling my opponent where I planned to line up.

The movement system is interlinked with the command system and is the most flexible of any set of rules I have played. Basically you say where you want your troops to go and then throw against their commanders rating and depending on how low you throw they will either not move or move up to three times. There is no measuring for wheels or about faces you simple reposition the troops. This makes the movement very dynamic but does leave it open to exploitation.

Rick Priestley declares up front that this is a set of rules that he plays with like-minded individuals based on their interpretation of history. The rules are able to be loose because they all know each other and tend to play with an umpire so disagreements are easy to resolve. This makes the rules impractical for tournaments and I fear for most wargamers who vary opponents regularly, without a shared understanding (right or wrong) of how ancient battles were actually fought, there will be disagreement.

The combat system is alright. There are a lot of dice and a range of factors to build in. Basically each side throws to work out the number of hits, then each side makes saving throws, the side that inflicts the most hits wins. A friend of mine once made the only favourable argument I have found convincing for WAB: "it tries to represent the different weapons and fighting styles of the different troops." This is also true of Hail Caesar. In comparison to rules like Impetus where as many of the units fighting characteristics are forced into a single value, its VBU, Hail Caesar allows are much greater diversity. This is something I like in principle but where Impetus represents different factors by the number of dice thrown, Hail Caesar modifies the score needed to hit. This gives the modifiers a greater impact on the outcome which, while the historical accuracy can be debated, players moving from one set of rules to another may find difficult to swallow.

The flexibility of Hail Caesar does make it easier to write and play historical refights. Playing scenarios normally requires some deviation from the written rules and the principle of adaptation runs throughout Hail Caesar. However, the first army list book is due out next month and I fear that once that is released it will restrict appetite for historical refights as players will be able to see which side has a points advantage.


Overall, I prefer the command and movement system to Impetus, I am on the fence about the combat system but lean slightly in favour of Impetus. I like the flexible nature of the rules but feel that this will be lost once the army lists are released.

Tea anyone? Starting The American War of Independence

When I first started playing Lasalle nearly a year ago I wasn't swept off my feet. Having fallen instantly in love with Grande Armee (GA) I found Lasalle a little tame and lacking an element of fun. Since then I have been turned around on Lasalle but at the time I decided to go looking for another horse and musket period to fulfil a desire to fight smaller actions than GA.

Since first playing Columbia Games War of 1812 many years ago I have maintained an interest in this minor war during the Napoleonic period but decided against it as I would be limited to Lasalle basing if I used by existing British. Sticking with the theme of North American I decided to move back in history and settled on the American War of Independence (AWI) knowing that several players from the North Tyneside club already play the period.

As always when I start a new period the first thing was to get a good overview of the history. My holiday reading therefore became Robert Middlekauff's The Glorious Cause. This was an excellent read, striking a good balance between political, social and military history. Starting at the end of the French Indian Wars and running through the wars until the signing of the American constitution.

Choosing a set of rules for the period was easy. I had a copy of British Grenadier (BG) lying around from God knows where and within a few chapters I had decided to go with this. BG has received good reviews wherever I come across it and I am looking forward to playing a game with a written orders element to it as it has been while since I used one. I also love the scenarios books which provide order of battle for most (if not all) of the engagements. Recently I have been finding the limitations of pick up battles very repetitive and scenarios are the obvious cure.

Mentioning my interest in the period at the Sheffield club raised the interest of a few members who are willing to do up armies. Within a week Paul had already painted an American battalion so I agreed to make a start on the British.

Having enjoyed painted Peter Pigs Wars of the Roses range I was going to use their AWI range but saw the Blue Moon figures at the Triples show and they looked so good I couldn't resist. The figures are large, 18mm, and I don't think my painting can do them justice. The photos throughout this blog show my efforts over the past month to paint the 33rd regiment.

I have decided to mainly use the 1768 warrant uniforms. Although they were not the practical uniforms most British wore during the wars, they are distinctive for the period and can easily be used for French Indian Wars and other conflicts during the period.

They did take me longer to paint than I hoped and I may try both Peter Pig's and Essex's ranges to see if I can turn them out faster. Either way I doubt I'll be in a position to have a game until nearer the end of the year so maintaining motivation will be a challenge.

Mid-Year Review

The past month I've been distracted with work, study, and my hard drive packing in, so I haven't managed much gaming. The next few weeks are looking better so hopefully I'll get back into the swing of it. As we approach the mid-point of the year the pause has given me time to think about the projects I'll be working on for the rest of the year, including some new ones! But first a recap on progress to date: the labels down the side will bring up any relevant posts.

Normans - In January I painted a 300pts Impetus 28mm Norman Army for use at the York competition in February. Following success in that competition and the following week down Didcot I had planned to do another 28mm army for the competition at Derby in October but give up on this as the Normans have remained in the box under the bed as I mainly play 15mm.

Wars of the Roses - By mid April I had painted the Lancastrian forces at Towton for a demonstration at the 550th anniversary festival. This proved to be such a success that the Battlefield Society asked us to attend an event last weekend to run the demonstration again and to look at future events perhaps covering other battles. The army currently stands at nearly 400pts for Impetus and I have bought the additional figures to take it up to 500pts which I hope to complete before the end of the year. I was supposed to run a campaign at the club but have yet to get this off the ground. This is still a hope for this year but will depend on other projects.

Lasalle - By the end of April I had completed a French Empire core plus Dragoons support which I took to Trev's tournament. Since then I have purchased another four battalions worth of painted French Infantry and continued to rebase my British. The plan is to continue to build these forces this year with the aim of running a Peninsular campaign next year. A possible 1812 campaign means that adding options to the French may take precedence over finishing the British. There is also the option of starting to build a Spanish Force.

Ancients - I have made no progress on my ancient Impetus armies this year beyond playing half a dozen games. This is a real disappointment being my favourite period, and unfortunately I doubt I'll be picking it up again this year.

Over the past few months I have began two new projects which will take priority for the rest of the year.

American War of Independence and the Great Italian Wars (1494-1529)

Both are in their infancy and I'll expand on them in future posts.


This is the first time I have tried a more project-based approach to wargaming. The results are impressive, my painting rate is quicker than it has ever been, I have completely painted two Impetus armies and have constructed two Napoleonic armies through a combination of painting myself and purchasing painted figures.

While having clear aims has helped, I think the main driver has been external deadlines imposed by tournaments and demonstrations. In the weeks running up to these events I have been able to drive myself to paint up to rates of nearly 30 figures in a day to a good standard. These intense bursts do take it out of me, and I tend to flatline for a few weeks following the event.

Anyway, I'am looking forward to the coming six months with the following priorities.

1) 15mm British American War of Independence army
2) Make by Wars of the Roses army up to 500pts
3) Start an army for the Italian Wars
4) Finish my British Lasalle army

Brushes at the ready!