The Marvelous Miscellany of MMcV

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Nice plan!

[fred.]

The WWI range is very good - the late war stuff is probably nicer / newer than the early stuff. 

Will be interested to see how the supreme littleness trench works come out. I decided to cut my own from foam, as I wanted a more gradual ramp up to them. To try and make them a bit more trench like rather than ramparts. 

[mmcv]

The WWI range is very good - the late war stuff is probably nicer / newer than the early stuff.

Will be interested to see how the supreme littleness trench works come out. I decided to cut my own from foam, as I wanted a more gradual ramp up to them. To try and make them a bit more trench like rather than ramparts.

Yeah, I think they'll work quite well for the skirmish level stuff but not sure how well they'll work for big battle, will need to build some up and see. Slightly frustrating they are using a 25mm base size when most games favour 30mm bases, but fairly sure I can get away with 25 without issue.

[mmcv]

Last Royalist foot regiment for the moment, the Lifeguard of Queen Henrietta Maria, led by Lt Col Rhys Thomas.

[paulr]

...
Will be interested to see how the supreme littleness trench works come out. I decided to cut my own from foam, as I wanted a more gradual ramp up to them. To try and make them a bit more trench like rather than ramparts.

Yeah, I think they'll work quite well for the skirmish level stuff but not sure how well they'll work for big battle, will need to build some up and see. Slightly frustrating they are using a 25mm base size when most games favour 30mm bases, but fairly sure I can get away with 25 without issue.

Hi Fred & MMCV

They work very well for big battles, we use them for ITLSU
IMG_2591

You can blame ITLSU and me for the 25mm base size
A few years ago I worked with the very helpful Michael, from Supreme Littleness Designs, to come up with the concept which he executed brilliantly.
He's added a few more components since then.

We decided to not add backs to the trenches to:

• reduce cost
• make it easy to move units in the trenches
• allow for a range of base depths & sizes
• make it clear which way the trenches were facing

Although if you are really keen you could use two sets of trenches to do the front and back.

All my infantry is on 25mm bases but my dismounted cavalry is on 30mm bases and because the trenches are open at the back they can still line the 'ramparts'

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Cool Lifegaurds!

[paulr]

Lifeguard of Queen Henrietta Maria    

[mmcv]

Hi Fred & MMCV

They work very well for big battles, we use them for ITLSU
IMG_2591

You can blame ITLSU and me for the 25mm base size
A few years ago I worked with the very helpful Michael, from Supreme Littleness Designs, to come up with the concept which he executed brilliantly.
He's added a few more components since then.

We decided to not add backs to the trenches to:

• reduce cost
• make it easy to move units in the trenches
• allow for a range of base depths & sizes
• make it clear which way the trenches were facing

Although if you are really keen you could use two sets of trenches to do the front and back.

All my infantry is on 25mm bases but my dismounted cavalry is on 30mm bases and because the trenches are open at the back they can still line the 'ramparts'

Ah that's fantastic. In truth I had initially planned to use 25mm regardless (and 20 or 25 rounds for skirmish) but my only concern was if that would give enough space for labels.


I've not really bothered with labels in the past, as I'm mostly playing solo so I know what's what but with the scale that Great War games are at its probably useful.

Can I ask what size of label you're using? 10mm? They look reasonably readible even on the 25mm bases.

Are you doing two men to an infantry base? I'm between two and three, three looks a little better but might be squished with a label on and given I'll likely need hundreds of bases that extra figure can add up. Though I'm hoping they'll paint up quickly enough.

Need to work out my basing material strategy as need something I can repeat pretty consistently and my flocking mix won't look quite right in these. Think I need a more textured earth look with a few bits of grass.

Cool Lifegaurds!

Lifeguard of Queen Henrietta Maria    

Thanks, she was an interesting character, nice to have made a good bit more progress on this project.

[paulr]

...
I've not really bothered with labels in the past, as I'm mostly playing solo so I know what's what but with the scale that Great War games are at its probably useful.

Can I ask what size of label you're using? 10mm? They look reasonably readible even on the 25mm bases.

Are you doing two men to an infantry base? I'm between two and three, three looks a little better but might be squished with a label on and given I'll likely need hundreds of bases that extra figure can add up. Though I'm hoping they'll paint up quickly enough.

Need to work out my basing material strategy as need something I can repeat pretty consistently and my flocking mix won't look quite right in these. Think I need a more textured earth look with a few bits of grass.
...

We found labels really useful, they help keep track of units and identify special weapons etc.

We use 5mm deep labels with three coloured boxes to indicate the Brigade, Battalion and Company (the company is the tactical unit in ITLSU) and Rifles, MG, HQ, Bde HQ... to identify the type of stand

For Pierre the Shy's early war project we used khaki backgrounds for the British labels and green for the German. These blended with the terrain but clearly showed who was who.

For my desert forces I used a desert background for the labels and used blue text for British, red for Turks, grey for Germans and green for Arabs. If I were to do them again I would use more saturated colours for the text, I printed them a little too desaturated making them not easy to read at times

We used 2 figures per stand which gives an extended line look and the third figure per base really would add up

We used flock for Pierre the Shy's early war project as the ground hadn't really been churned up much before Christmas



More pictures, unfortunately with photobucket overlays, in this long painting thread https://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10195.msg124706.html#msg124706

[mmcv]

Those look great. I'm planning to try both ITLSU and Great War Spearhead and both have a company as the tactical unit so that should work well. The two men units look the part when all lined up right enough.

That's a good point on the ground being less churned but I think I'll want to use them for 1915 too, I'm thinking of working towards Neuve Chapelle. So want something a little more of a mud and grass mix.

[Raider4]

Last Royalist foot regiment for the moment, the Lifeguard of Queen Henrietta Maria, led by Lt Col Rhys Thomas.

These are wonderful, love them.

[Techno 3]

Same here !
Cracking job, Matthew ! 

[sunjester]

Really great painting!

[fred.]

That latest ECW unit is good - you are turning these out at a good rate. 

Back to WWI 

Paul - I thought I recognised the trench works - and I agree with just modelling the front side. Otherwise to get based figures in you end up with some very wide trenches. It is a judgement between something that gives the models cover, or as one of my gaming mates has done you go with basically flat terrain pieces, that show a birds eye view of the trenches, which is in the correct ground scale, but isn't in the figure scale. 

ITLSU gives a great game, so well worth trying that. It's perhaps not the clearest written set of rules - but enough of us on here play it, so you should get assistance with any bits that aren't clear.  I've tried GWSH a couple of times but struggled with it - perhaps its too detailed, and not having played spearhead I didn't get the basic concepts of the rules that well. But the same figures work well for both games - though for GWSH you are likely to need far more artillery!

[mmcv]

Thanks for the kind words all. Been working on the last two royalist horse while the primer dries on my WW1 test models.

ITLSU gives a great game, so well worth trying that. It's perhaps not the clearest written set of rules - but enough of us on here play it, so you should get assistance with any bits that aren't clear.  I've tried GWSH a couple of times but struggled with it - perhaps its too detailed, and not having played spearhead I didn't get the basic concepts of the rules that well. But the same figures work well for both games - though for GWSH you are likely to need far more artillery!

Yeah I own both rule sets. For the skirmish level stuff I plan to use the Lardies' rules too, so ITLSU should fit in nicely. There's a few small scenario games available for GWSH that I plan to try out and see how I like them, but I agree to play most scenarios it requires a lot of bases and a lot of table space!

[paulr]

One approach I've seen with the bigger GWSH scenarios is to use the casualties from the first wave of the attack to make up the units for third wave...

We play a lot of Spearhead and Modern Spearhead but just couldn't get into GWSH. We much prefer ITLSU and also the more mobile parts of WWI. I'll be interested to hear how you find both. And as Fred has said happy to answer questions

[Sean Clark]

Timecast make great trenches that follow the same format of the 2D ones mentioned above. Bases sit on top of the Trench rather than in them, but they are lovely pieces that look just like the aerial photos of tench systems from the war.

As for GWSH, obviously it's horses for courses. There's a big following for the rules and lots of supplements with at least 2 more on the way prior to a 2nd edition of the rules.

For me they recreate the elements of FWW combat that I enjoy. They are grand Tactical for a start so players are manouvering Corps on the table. The order system means that once an attack is launched its difficult to change path. The artillery was king during the FWW, and this is reflected in the rules. Scenarios such as the Thiepval 1st July one in the rulebook are tough for the British, but worthy of playing to try and do better than they did historically.

If you want a game at a more Tactical level where youre in charge of a brigade, or division at most, there are other rules more suited to the work.

[paulr]

A good summary of GWSH's strengths Sean

[mmcv]

For me they recreate the elements of FWW combat that I enjoy. They are grand Tactical for a start so players are manouvering Corps on the table. The order system means that once an attack is launched its difficult to change path. The artillery was king during the FWW, and this is reflected in the rules. Scenarios such as the Thiepval 1st July one in the rulebook are tough for the British, but worthy of playing to try and do better than they did historically.

If you want a game at a more Tactical level where youre in charge of a brigade, or division at most, there are other rules more suited to the work.

Yeah that's the impression I get. I like the idea of the attack plans and timed orders. My only thinking is how well that works out solo but have some ideas on how to make it work, such as making a couple of plans and picking one at random, or getting someone with a passing interest to propose a general plan then I act it out.  I've still a lot of working out to do with both sets of rules, I usually like to watch a few videos on the games online but neither rule set is well resourced being a bit older (I found a few intro videos by the author for GWSH but not on gameplay and nothing on ITLSU). I plan to use Through the Mud and the Blood (or the Chain of Command varient of it) for skirmish in the period so I'm not sure if that'll work for or against another Lardies' set for the bigger battles. Time will tell. The first small intro scenario for GWSH has a couple of batallions on each side with supports attacking/defending a bridge crossing. That should be achievable pretty easily to put together and would probably work out for a small scenario for ITLSU too as a comparison.

On the timecast trenches, they do look good on an overhead view and fit nicely with 2-6mm troops but thought they might look a little off with 10mm compared to ones they can actually use, but might prove problematic for bigger battles.

[fred.]

If you are playing solo, then you can probably have the defender fairly pre-programmed.  With perhaps some triggers where you roll for reinforcements to be released. 

The Lardy games with their card decks also allow for triggers for this kind of thing. Either through the use of the blank card coming out a number of times. Or by adding defender activation cards to the deck at certain points.