WSS Game

Started by Shutuphippie, 15 September 2016, 06:37:12 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Bodvoc

That is a seriously good looking game.
'If I throw a six I'll do my happy dance'!

2016 Painting Competition - People's Choice!

Duke Speedy of Leighton

What a superb looking game, seriously cool.
You may refer to me as: Your Grace, Duke Speedy of Leighton.
2016 Pendraken Painting Competion Participation Prize  (Lucky Dip Catagory) Winner

fsn

Quote from: Ithoriel on 15 September 2016, 11:47:20 PM
Is that considered unusual in this day and age?

Roughly a third of my current gaming companions/ opponents are female.
Really? That's encouraging. Wonder if it's just in your area? Be nice to break the middle aged male ... I was going to say stereotype, but is it a stereotype if it's true?

Bit of brightness to start my day.

Whatever happened to Marie?
Lord Oik of Runcorn (You may refer to me as Milord Oik)

Oik of the Year 2013, 2014; Prize for originality and 'having a go, bless him', 2015
3 votes in the 2016 Painting Competition!; 2017-2019 The Wilderness years
Oik of the Year 2020; 7 votes in the 2021 Painting Competition
11 votes in the 2022 Painting Competition (Double figures!)
2023 - the year of Gerald:
2024 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!

Orcs

Lovely looking game.  What make are the buildings?

The cynics are right nine times out of ten. -Mencken, H. L.

Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well. - Robert Louis Stevenson

Techno

Totally agree, FK.

That DOES look rather special !  :-bd
I'm most impressed.....and not the tiniest bit jealous !  :^o :^o :^o :^o

Cheers - Phil

fred.

Buildings look to be Total Battle Miniatures - available through Pendraken
2011 Painting Competition - Winner!
2012 Painting Competition - 2 x Runner-Up
2016 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2017 Paint-Off - 3 x Winner!

My wife's creations: Jewellery and decorations with sparkle and shine at http://www.Etsy.com/uk/shop/ISCHIOCrafts

Norm

Every time I rationalise why I should not do big bases, I see something like your game and want to do them. have you come across any disadvantages during your play with BP that would argue against the big base? You have a fine looking set of armies.

Westmarcher

Great game - quite spectacular, in fact!  :-bd

Quote from: Norm on 16 September 2016, 11:22:24 AM
Every time I rationalise why I should not do big bases, I see something like your game and want to do them. have you come across any disadvantages during your play with BP that would argue against the big base? You have a fine looking set of armies.

My question is, if you only have one base per unit which is, say, in Line, how do you represent other formations? On the one hand, I suppose, you don't have to worry about formation changes(!) which, in one sense, may simplify the game but, on the other hand, this might be slightly restrictive regarding movement because you are always subject to what you can and can't do when in Line.  To represent different formations, it seems to me you will need specialist markers. In photos 16 and 20, presumably the black marker represents disorder? If your units consist of multiple bases, you won't need such a marker - you simply re-arrange the bases in a disordered manner.   I used to have 'battalion' bases for Maurice (2 per brigade) but after a few games using other rule sets I missed not having the flexibility to form my units in March Column so that they would fit and look better on a road. I also thought less bases would mean faster shifting of units on the table but actually I haven't noticed any difference since I changed to 4 bases per unit. 4 bases enables me to represent Line, Attack Column, Square, March Column, Skirmish Order and Disorder without markers. So, personally, I recommend you don't do big bases.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.

Ithoriel

I guess it depends what level your game represents.

For me a base should represent the smallest unit that would manoeuvre independently in a battle of whatever size is being represented. So individual figures for skirmish but battalion or even brigade for large encounters.

If I'm a general I don't care what formation a unit is in (and the rules shouldn't either IMHO) that's what majors and colonels (and captains if things are going badly!) are for. So I don't feel the need to base things to represent that.

For me it's about focussing the player on the decisions made by commanders of the rank they are portraying.

It may or may not save much time during the game but my experience is that it saves a great deal in set up and tidy up.
There are 100 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who can work from incomplete data

Zippee

Lovely looking game.

I think the base question is a bit moot for WSS - any troops in march formation should be well back from the table and squares, columns and such are decades into the future. besides I likes large unit bases - assuming the rules work with them. That said just about the only troops that aren't on large units bases for me (bar skirmishing singles) are my Napoleonics, precisely because I have a nerdy OCD need to change formation. . . although Blucher and BBB are breaking me of that compulsion  ;D

Westmarcher

Fair comment, guys. Bottom line is, each to their own. As Mike says, its down to what level you are trying to represent so, if you get it into your head later that you wish to war-game at a lower level (or try a different rule set), I would advocate multiple bases as these give me more flexibility than that big base look I used to think was so cool.   :)

P.S. By the way, I meant to say Might & Reason for the 'battalion' bases' - I now use my 4 base units for Maurice - knew it was one of Sam Mustafa's rules!  :-[ And Zippee - I think I'm OCD too!   :-[ 
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.

Zippee

Quote from: Westmarcher on 16 September 2016, 07:28:16 PMBy the way, I meant to say Might & Reason for the 'battalion' bases' - I now use my 4 base units for Maurice - knew it was one of Sam Mustafa's rules!  :-[ And Zippee - I think I'm OCD too! [/size]  :-[ 

You're right I forgot I also have my SYW/FIW stuff on 20mm squares so that they work with Maurice as well as BP and HoW

My Napoleonics are either (6mm) based for LFS or (10mm) for Lasalle

There's a strong Mustafa thread here - we should blame him, yeah it's Sam's fault we're not using big bases, that's right (err Grande Armee; Blucher? no that doesn't work - dammit!)

[I thought most people used two 60mm x 30mm bases for AoR units?]

jchaos79

such a display of color! well done

PERKY

Hi Guys ,
                We did think long and hard on base sizes. The outcome was when units got to the point of trading punches (because of the new introduction of the flintlock and socket bayonet . Fire power became a major thought in most military thinkers). The line was the preferred fighting formation. As already noted attack columns,skirmish/light infantry where years away. Infantry regiments where confident if handled well to drive off any approaching horse with controlled musketry so a square was only used if the battalion was totally unsupported in the open. Cavalry again use the line to attack but most attacked at a fast trot firing pistols/carbines before closing (French and most continental horse). British and Dutch cold steel only.

Zippee

I'm not prepared to accept this until I hear corroborative evidence from PINKY

one can only hope he's not in a shallow grave / indiscriminate BBQ