Saw these mentioned on Facebook
I am presuming they are WW2. Anyone know any more about them?
http://www.sammustafa.com/honour-forums/future-games/desert-fox/?PHPSESSID=390cfa92360c6f893b0168e088e5bff4
Is probably about everything!
Operational in scale, not limited to North Africa, base size not figure scale is important.
Unless you find the podcast mentioned I think that's it..:
This one is still in the works. Am awaiting with interest.
Quote from: Fenton on 27 November 2016, 12:36:40 AM
Saw these mentioned on Facebook
I am presuming they are WW2. Anyone know any more about them?
Yes. :)
Unfortunately for you, I'm under an NDA. :P
The meeples and miniatures podcast with Sam Mustafa is at http://hwcdn.libsyn.com/p/2/e/6/2e6a7cc982589754/meeplesandminiatures_ep179.mp3?c_id=12805050&expiration=1480242265&hwt=3d1daefaef6549cc651b437ccfa69d32 (http://hwcdn.libsyn.com/p/2/e/6/2e6a7cc982589754/meeplesandminiatures_ep179.mp3?c_id=12805050&expiration=1480242265&hwt=3d1daefaef6549cc651b437ccfa69d32)
Cheers,
Aksu
In a nutshell, it is a large scale WW2 game. The old ruleset Megablitz was aiming to do the same. To quote Sam Mustafa: "The game is operational in scale. You command entire divisions, corps, and even armies. It's about force management, not the relative armor penetration of an 88 versus a 17-pdr. I have no desire to add yet another WW2 skirmish game to this vastly overloaded marketplace. On the other hand, I've always wanted to do a "big-scale" WW2 game, and Rommel is going to be it."
Cheers,
Aksu
Cheers guys
Yeah, reading the thread made me think "Megablitz", which is good as whilst I really wanted to like Megablitz it just didn't work for us.
Lucky bugger, Nick :)
Cheers for the M&M link, Aksu!
If this is a Bloody Big Battles or Great War Spearhead II for WW2, count me in. Count me very in.
I recall Megablitz being 1 stand being a battalion but I might be thinking of another game
Ok, going to be looking for these.
What I really want from an Op game is one that models C&C, planning and Logistics, which is the real part of being a General, as opposed to a Major.
I'm trying to find a way to implement on the table top a Game version of the British Army 1956 rules. I know what I want to achieve - an attack must be planned, and planning takes 1 hour per battalion involved, plus 1 hour per HQ that needs to be involved. Thus a Brigade attack of 3 Bns takes 4 hours to plan - 1 per Bn, +1 for the HQ. A Division attacking with 2 Bdes would take 1 per Bn, +2 (1 for each Bde HQ) +1 for DivHQ. That still isn't actually long enough, but it gives an idea you can get behind the planning curve.
Quote from: Last Hussar on 27 November 2016, 04:44:47 PM
What I really want from an Op game is one that models C&C, planning and Logistics, (...)
I'd like too !
The sound interesting. A divisional or corps level game would be good.
LH - what you suggest sounds possible, though could be tedious to work without an umpire. What I think would be hard Is to model the effects of enemy attacks while you are still planning, and to make it a disadvantage for the player to not just throwing in small scale attacks. I suppose you would also need to model the initial plan - which the units are following unitil ordered to do something different.
All good stuff to model, but much harder to make gamable.
And that's my problem!
As to the small attacks - well, whether that works on the table should depend on whether it works in real life. Remember that the planning time is just that - planning - it isn't the units moving. while small scale spoilers may disrupt, you'd basically be throwing small units at large ones in a defensive posture- while the Majors fight those the Generals keep planning.
I envision that units AUTOMATICALLY dig in - it tends to be first rule for the PBI - if you stop, dig in, don't wait to be told.
When units would be vulnerable is for a turn at H Minus 1: its at that point they are organising from Defence into Attack posture, so getting (in game terms) neither sets of bonuses: That is hard to time!
I hope Sam continues with his accommodating imaginations etc theme. I would love to try some of the more peripheral wars of the era using them: The Chaco War, The Ecuador-Peru War, The Thai-Vichy War as well potential what ifs. Man I am stoked. The last years have been great for the operational art of war! Bloody Big Battles for the 19th Century, WW1 Spearhead for early WW1, and now this!
There are some photos of some playtest games and some of the cards on the Honour games Facebook page
Not sure how to link it here with my tablet
Quote from: Fenton on 17 December 2016, 07:01:05 PM
There are some photos of some playtest games and some of the cards on the Honour games Facebook page
Not sure how to link it here with my tablet
I don't think you can link to them, it's a closed group - others would also have to be members. I think you can link to the group page though, and then if people join, they'll be able to see the pics.
Or you could download and save the pics then put them up here as you would any other, that should work too, but would be a bit labour intensive.
Might do that tomorrow
Is that different to the Sam Mustangs Punlishinf Faceache page? That has a nice picture of a pin up he's using as a placeholder :D
It's the Honour group page or The tabletop commanders forum
Ah, I'll have a pike!
For those interested, there's a new podcast up about Rommel: http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/2017/01/honor-podcast-9-rommel/
A very interesting podcast with Sam providing a pretty in-depth overview of the game, which he hopes to have released around September - has my attention.
Listened to the podcast - clear as mud.
He keeps talking as though it's a tabletop wargame but every description sounds like a board game - colour me confused.
Quote from: Ithoriel on 12 January 2017, 04:27:49 PM
Listened to the podcast - clear as mud.
He keeps talking as though it's a tabletop wargame but every description sounds like a board game - colour me confused.
After seeing some graphics and reading done titbits about it I got the same feeling
There's an interesting looking variant of BBB currently being tweaked about with that's definitely a mini's game :D
Scale is one (large) base is about a regiment.
TBH Sam's description of the square system for Rommel sounds like Peter Pigs similar rules sets - PBI etc. PBI works brilliantly. No reason Rommel shouldn't either. But it's a very "folks that like this sort of thing, will like this sort of thing" experience - like the pod cast says, "some people recoil in horror" when squares are mentioned :D
Having playtested it for quite a while now, it's definitely a wargame. I quite like it too. And yes, it has a similar board layout to PBI - squares to mark the table.
I was sceptical of the squares approach until I played a couple of PP games using it, found it worked decently, and then found for PBI it was brilliant :D
If it works for the game, then it works. I wouldn't dismiss it - f'r instance I thought Maurice would be a really hard sell for one of my groups, with the cards. Turns out they love it, same with Aurelian!
Quote from: toxicpixie on 12 January 2017, 05:03:56 PM
I was sceptical of the squares approach until I played a couple of PP games using it, found it worked decently, and then found for PBI it was brilliant :D
I was sceptical too, but it does work well with Rommel when you consider the scale.
Tbh it might work better - we've tried Megablitz a couple of times but couldn't get over the look of it, when units only fight in contact and you have pike half a dozen models on top of each other it just looks daft. Squares would stop that, even with larger scale figures.
I'm interested in this game. It does seem to have some board game elements.
But the idea you can do all of D-day on a few tables is intriguing.
As I can field a British armoured division at 1 stand = a platoon, I wonder what I can field at 1 to company scale.
Quote from: fred. on 12 January 2017, 06:09:41 PM
I'm interested in this game. It does seem to have some board game elements.
But the idea you can do all of D-day on a few tables is intriguing.
As I can field a British armoured division at 1 stand = a platoon, I wonder what I can field at 1 to company scale.
Everything?
Had a rummage through the figures, and I was clearly mis-remembering what I have, and had forgotten that I had rebased a lot of stuff for CoC as 1s and 2s.
While I have enough tanks for all 3 regiments of an armoured division at 1:platoon scale, I don't have that much infantry.
I pretty much have all the troops for a late war British infantry division, with 3 brigades, of 3 battalions each of 4 companies. Along with AT, AA, Engineer, and MG regiments. Field artillery seems to be represented at 1 stand per regiment, so just need 3x 25pdrs for that.
What I do have left in large numbers are carriers, 3" mortars and 6pdr AT guns - these seem a bit un-needed at company scale.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/OwHOcb5bOCqL0GfOKXY4ViEqjHBCZIB2uLEh12E5VaWqd9ktKPTWgCj6CsQ00CyIK81df-2iybqTDn3IIoyWMQNzJ0dFEJ1PwEQuzowt4FbIKYf_IdYViVmFEkmYLDy-O--lt4-y1xtj3ci6ktpkgf95ZSLWf0KpxSMt76xitnuw9FZMdhgoZVfyC8EXuK03RYm01l3I0NOQpcKsTUXF1q_mw7s89UENApDitm0sOWK1rALERqBODs8j1R9jTvMgVIUtDpKRKUnFIy_frEf0DcK7hWPQ69sqfUeZ_C9alkittlh02MCx8rA9sf7UKB4A2cUE7Yd0gwJzdBDR6ABk6aXw2TdU72GbRw9Wp06i-qFJ97p-s-vC8CLs_h4rcEgkz5FYNhAmoWRyo7p_TW1t_mWr6EMAVQsTujhJA4humAXROQZDeBxdpLrczYmUt7iDjy_PbZ5vWa3W4h8S-Tm10avorJgLZa9z-OGDILmXI7ZOTCoknU4i9TK6aa7Ksw3WgWAzyDUzuEntsQYpRsvQ0MaRc1O_KvNKYS5i-TAilCX4wpO87bdiId3TBATmKtYJ2SPniWSplPmlkUrKUWpXDo7UVij3UrZvZBytNTcbUEfwPDZbGtc0WhQWWD38yw_fR4ySsomuhGpc0bmkra1FS89J8MU86clRwLAZzFHaqg=w1576-h463-no)
On the left is an armoured division, I can easily field the 3 armoured regiments, each of 3 Shermans and 1 Stuart, along with the Motor Battalion. The Infantry Brigade is a problem, would need another 12 infantry stands for this. Then the divisional troops are fine, with Armoured Recce Regt, Armoured Car Regiment, AA, & AT. And 1 SP and 1 towed artillery regiments. Could swap the Shermans for Cromwells to do 7th Armoured Div.
On the right an independent tank brigade. Dead easy with lots of Shermans. Could probably field another of these. But haven't got enough Churchills for a full Brigade.
And at the middle right is an AGRA, with 1x 25pdr, 4x 4.5" guns and a 155mm gun.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/CZHb74mCOupXa-5el4LX4M9ruTJwA_6IRwCUD6gMJniA5eM6E6JInF4M669cA58iKqn_fl_qK73NojnqRNYe3o6IFOqzMkmrHmOThFECEEhh5uc4no7D_BIkWWe_VfDJNInA5181sC0AU-w5YrwVtxDJvU93UMfeBRkfmcd6GQ65hCgiYiCoHy7INKGzMij8dNIZyxS_o4JoA8taBG4xK3-uj3wtchABAHW0Tcs7qPCmVDIYcEm-t06EF33DJTUQG3BFKVviX86N3eC6jymwjUl7T0sIPVtK9LI4BfkF0vKigmGZqljoKXQEoPnrPOgf1yZuuC1RL_2mvVQ8kil7HAAqCgIJXEUkpnOuRgiSR6Brs4XcPJKgYEhzcbEsbM6z26VgmoNv8RSa3HXvk6YgCGmwL2Tkkbt2600UytrBrSJYbY7kubLOtEHBxFEhRKCs1fDyyPo2P-3nboaWiqJRv3V0R4ZwuP3w0h9opE1b6LP-RaGsJ1Q-ZxFqEqo0kCn9jXY8SulK-n1ikv84uwT87imuWgVA4obPN9cF7BawbkIuTn7n8dV0eKcI6hboptd5Y3AUM4eIHHPdEucOJEGTO3pxfUQCNb5PqrAxSJy5eSEFek6c6kiDVwat34wwQNuNCcL24CPMbSSbqNrcEhCVXiQBTfGGjBMm16fkFkX67w=w1534-h1150-no)
Not pictured I have plenty of 79th AD stuff for most likely scenarios.
Also dug out my British and American Airborne
Again both have had in-roads due to CoC, but it looks like I can field a division of each. It also seems that the Arnhem area, from drop zones to the bridge, will just nicely fit on a 6'x4' table at the default scale of 6" to 1km.
British Airborne division - gone for 2 parachute brigades with 3 companies per battalion, and a larger air-landing brigade. AT and Artillery, along with Recce at the top
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/XLFOmG8-SynF1hWoGNWSCbRyjvFBakztjmLRjAsibf44Nv3oajmgVSg125Y4VYHGddV-QQBQPAumGzdIQiKlbuyR7aiCVIplu_LJzt-fDo422WHq74qso9XoiXeAjUkirSs3VoPwD3nQFImxcvOQkkEwF1t7Z3EoVJgWCz8WnVduPbeLTrbWwUlAZXaOackknRRVw5ignaBTmJoIMIJDJrZ5qI82Z0YFUqMl0hb1VMw9jmFmGkV7hgwkNxRlGT153ZDS_lN0qtRtUrbBC1rvXIzPSB3rS0Vp1KUuWXhoFbqyQtehzD9douVksGF4MAjVZODcbOokyfAgoyQZID_Tv1XQppjW4wSqDYZlPALl3C-NZw0a_UEarW2MLpM4pth6p1hAgpd_6-EXyvePjBFQGb2NttfpTQZZpeHQFI-mL5PhYyTe0OzOXfLoE-awlOdNIzMh1dX_PSZFcXmvxRW_V9kuF2qJSVUKxasxRXx4AsH5zJW5GNw2Kh1dAeFQVIsLlY0_MlW_e3fqgZUQ5ky5hnRDIhYAP-M1GcEjpzEGAaTTMynGwpnCXq5EfJC3yJnG5A2mdgg5jIaFD4i9DFa2WtZsivqZX8rvCXwulbXgkJlEs0eCXsluaolaxqom6aCA5j6nlwnIKGNarzVKkMaSyQFAtlfbadsAuqscEBOQHA=w1378-h1150-no)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/kNNfclk9Ki_pXpVG1rRF4BfyxhkLvLb2hhAfoxRFIzAePNdPSCW8_qKKzVcqauI2RFsX50B04IbcVeHyD-JbS_MRBDWOl9lCKMm5mUP1XLI4VOH0UxIYN5qg9hJQEoOj6f680AuYCwQwF__I9ByCgIWigWtR6cVJVNLPQwxiqIxNgdR5jMZdif_Kzp1i6IMMIrjThYDO48W_VQwv6CyE8I4pmy33YUvisuzQkc91N8NQGYO3E3yjYPlFT0hoX0I3CZto9m72v2zQc4iot0bcQULK4l_ptT_HgU7EjkE4oqGbV6TWLPVw9B-JCdmweI5KvM-bxn4KsOy0dxZRW4Wa6EWDymh9X8PN6fCS325zqghLq2Cp4PgwMu4ex0Mz1VG8lX29k4e4YuBzXm-LBTfSO7G41Zp4Ti-mgSLvIJmdylITl1BChQ8YJk6n3QBXh5BxwflLLVfad8BzjnI0mhsjuP9qVIwptiRTgX6CZOyH5vTgu1fjiNkKB_MN_YxHQG8n3FT92AvOMauAmzykV1ifG95hz_bUcTZalP6Bw8gzxbKi0UZzQ1Zdcv55vypzsRFDJqVRwWMlg33xEbO1HQSpBnB6k4SR0I25OnL0ynkqKyEFgEs4CldXx-OI6BDAsDJST8NbioOm47PBtV53TSnayjm1O5U3fjCKpbUCJFuMEg=w1576-h1123-no)
Now that's gonna be a scrap!
Nice collection Fred
After reading more of what Sam Mustafa has said on the Honour site about squares and distances I am drawn to the idea of the game even more
Very nice collection you have
Take care
Andy
:-bd =D> :-bd
In true wargamer fashion I listened to Sam's podcast and immediately wondered if it could be converted to WW1
Try PETER Pigs "Squarebashing" :)
Looks cracking in 10mm!
Quote from: Womble67 on 15 January 2017, 12:49:18 AM
Very nice collection you have
Thanks chaps - does need a bit more basing and finishing off, as these photos show.
Quote from: Fenton on 15 January 2017, 10:20:42 AM
In true wargamer fashion I listened to Sam's podcast and immediately wondered if it could be converted to WW1
Me too.
But I am thinking of Market Garden at the minute - got the books out, looking at maps. Lots of bits of key action happen in the right sorts of areas to be covered by these rules.
So many choices spring to mind. Though Arnhem even though I have played it multi player would be interesting
Hmm, I was hoping for something a bit larger scale than 1km = 6", that's only one up from Spearhead (and not even that with the alternate ground scale!).
Still, company stands is a good plan? Or are they larger - battalion or similar?
Yes, company stands. The scale is down to the size of squares you go with. 6" is the default, and I think based around 15mm miniatures, I think a 1x2" base size is mentioned. If you have smaller figures/bases then you can use a smaller square size and get more geography on the table. I was toying with a 5" square, but it makes little difference on a 6x4' table.
Quote from: fred. on 15 January 2017, 01:58:11 PM
Yes, company stands. The scale is down to the size of squares you go with. 6" is the default, and I think based around 15mm miniatures, I think a 1x2" base size is mentioned. If you have smaller figures/bases then you can use a smaller square size and get more geography on the table. I was toying with a 5" square, but it makes little difference on a 6x4' table.
You can use whatever size squares you want; we've been using mostly 6" squares, whether with 15mm, 6mm or 3mm, but if you have a smaller table and smaller figure, you can cut that down to 3" or 4" squares if you wish. If you want to use 25mm, you could even go for 8" or bigger squares, as long as you have a bigger table.
You can certainly use smaller squares *and* a larger table if you want big epic battles, but you'd probably have to increase the forces used, and add some more game turns in, otherwise you run the risk of hardly getting into contact before the game ends. It will affect the scenario objectives too - more spread out, and the attacker is going to find it harder to take and hold specific sites; it's going to take longer to get off the other end of the table, that sort of thing, so you might have to tinker with other stuff too.
What kind of size does the square need to be in relation to the figures - or probably more importantly the base size of the figures? Or how small a square can you go with before it gets very cramped.
I've been looking at D-Day beaches and they defaut 12x8km is a very interesting size. Any of the beaches easily fit in this size, along with most of the first day objectives. The two most interesting are Sword and Utah where you can get the beach and the airborne landings on the table.
You can stack 3 bases at most in a square, so it depends on what basing you've used. The nice thing about using squares is that basing doesn't matter - you and your opponent can have completely different basing and still play Rommel.
Interesting point about different basing. I've just done some checking with my figures, and can get 3 bases into a 4" square quite easily. Which gives me 18x12km on a 6x4' table, and I can usually get another foot if needed so that would be 21x12km.
My bases are 30mm square, 4 of them fit into a RUB hobby tray compartment, so I could do 3" squares, giving me 24x16.
Or use the 4 trays in a 9 l box as a battlefield on the move for a 6x10 minigame.
My main goal is to use this for 1939-1940. Especially the German Invasion of Poland , what ifs with Czechoslovakia, the German invasion of the Netherlands, France, and Belgium, the Italian-French mountain fighting, the Chaco War, the Ecuadorian-Peruvian War, the Thai-Vichy French War, and the Greek-Italian War. For me the tools to cover these will be the selling point. If Sam does not do it, then off to Bloody Big Battles WW2 mod. But past history of Sams work makes me hopeful.
The podcast mentions that it will be open system, with all the formula you need to create new units. I think it will cover 6 nations within the rule book, across all periods of the war, covering Africa, Europe and Russia. I think Sam has said that it will be expandable to other theatres - I think by players, rather than by him.
Quote from: fred. on 15 January 2017, 06:54:47 PM
Interesting point about different basing. I've just done some checking with my figures, and can get 3 bases into a 4" square quite easily. Which gives me 18x12km on a 6x4' table, and I can usually get another foot if needed so that would be 21x12km.
4" to the kilometre starts to grab my interest a bit more :)
As our WW2 is generally on 30mm bases that'd work out nicely with a bit of wiggle room...
With 30mm bases you could probably do 3" squares quite happily as you can deploy in a triangular formation within the square
Which gives a big area - my WWI stuff is on 30mm squares so this is quite interesting
Yes, that'd work - would look like either one up, two back, or two up, one back battalion formations :)
Presumably with support companies a square back...
The podcast implies that support companies aren't directly represented- they are rolled into the infantry companies.
Ah, using the command post grid to assign extra efforts and resources and assets around?
I suspect I'm thinking Spearhead style still, where your fighting battalions get divisional level assets assigned out by company to them...
So, 25mm squares, 20mm square tokens stacked no more than 3 deep in a square and a 50km x 75km chunk of real estate?
I think you have just described a board game!
Quote from: fred. on 17 January 2017, 06:29:41 PM
I think you have just described a board game!
Quote from: Ithoriel on 12 January 2017, 04:27:49 PM
Listened to the podcast - clear as mud.
He keeps talking as though it's a tabletop wargame but every description sounds like a board game - colour me confused.
Sounds like it IS a board game to me.
Can still be a wargame. All grids do is regulate measurements, a bit like a tape.
Grids seem to be increasingly popular, to the point that the genre can support commercial rules.
Peter Pig has been a long time supporter, but now we also have the To The Strongest for ancients (figures on squares) doing well and there is a good cross-over (figures on hexes) with the Command and Colours series in both ancients and napoleonics.
The Prof Sabin system is also getting represented on the table-top.
I have never understood why a view persists that unless it is figures on an open table, it is not a 'real' wargame.
Seconded, Norm :)
You can always say "proper" wargames are just a board game, with an inaccurate and awkward ruler instead of a decent board. And you have to make the board yourself! That's rude, selling a game without the bloody board, and expecting you to buy separate playing pieces.
Quote from: Norm on 18 January 2017, 06:47:21 AM
I have never understood why a view persists that unless it is figures on an open table, it is not a 'real' wargame.
For me a wargame played on a grid is a board game with 3D counters - don't have a problem with that, I play many of these and have even designed a few for my own amusement. I'm converting "Poseidon's Warriors" to a boardgame because I think it will play better (time will tell!!).
They are not necessarily lesser than tabletop games without a grid where movement options are not restricted by an artificial grid - some are, some aren't - but they are different.
Quote from: toxicpixie on 18 January 2017, 09:46:08 AM
You can always say "proper" wargames are just a board game, with an inaccurate and awkward ruler instead of a decent board. And you have to make the board yourself! That's rude, selling a game without the bloody board, and expecting you to buy separate playing pieces.
Rommel sounds to me like a boardgame where the author has decided that providing the board is too expensive and/ or awkward to provide. If it's a good game system I'd be up for making the board myself. If ...
Listening to the podcast we are looking at a late summer 2017 issue of Rommel. Think I'll wait until then before preparing speculation or armies.
Disregard. I tried posting a picture of the basing scheme I came up with for Rommel but the file is too large. Let me try another approach.
I have moved more towards gridded games, such as Square Bashing, Hammerin' Iron, TtS, To the Last Gaiter Button. I like the system of manoeuvre in these games, but there are times when I think it doesn't work, e.g. I much prefer the RCFM original Regiment of Foote to the new gridded version. In this instance the grid leaves the units looking very unrealistic and visual aesthetics is very important in my games (I also don't like the new pre-game campaign compared to the original, but that's another story).
(http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k509/tomprimrose/20170622_205912.jpg) (http://s1113.photobucket.com/user/tomprimrose/media/20170622_205912.jpg.html)
Finally able to get the image loaded....
Pictured are two battalions of the 36th Infantry plus two Russian T-34s
I'm mounting the figures on 60x30 mm bases which have a magnetic bottom. I then put these on 60x40mm flanged steel movement trays. I printed out the combat information and put these on a 60x10mm magnetic base and attach it to the movement tray. This way I can change the unit information as needed.
I ordered artillery from Pendraken this week and once they arrive and I have a chance to paint them, they will go on 40x50mm bases with a 40x10mm magnetic base for the unit information.
The movement trays and magnetic bases are from Shogun Miniatures.
:-bd =D> :-bd
An interesting basing approach
Would green be a better background colour for the combat information :-\
The white seems to draw my eye away for the good looking models
I tend to use darker colours for the backgrounds of my labels and white writing, that way I can use different colours for different sides YMMV
Paul,
Thanks for the words of encouragement.
I should have mentioned that this is just the first draft of the combat information. I was checking to see if I could fit a unit insignia (36th "Texas" Infantry Division") and combat factors, plus whatever else may be needed, on a 10 x 60mm strip. Between now and when the rules come out I should have time to fidget with the look and finalize a template I can use to create the information on the fly.
Sorry, but I really don't like that strip at the back of the base. Not aesthetically pleasing and one of a number of reasons why I dumped Blucher.
I think they look great and the data strips look fine to me, no doubt by the time you've finished they will look even better.
Nice looking stuff. I recognized Shoguns bases and trays immediately.
Nah....I think I'll stick with no data strip and Wendy houses.
Quote from: Leman on 26 June 2017, 01:50:05 PM
Nah....I think I'll stick with no data strip and Wendy houses.
And why not, Leman, each to their own and all that.
I've come late to this party but publication is getting close so I thought I'd revive this thread...
I'm working on three different approaches:
(1) For really big games (or a small table at home) I'll probably just game with the unit cards.
(2) For my already painted 10mm armies I'll just slip the cards partially underneath the bases.
(3) For new armies (in 3mm) I haven't finally decided. The bases will be big (60mm wide). I might add a strip to the back or produce my own cards which will project under the base at the back. If I don't like the look of that I can add a discreet ID number and use a roster.
Richard
Many moons ago when we first started playing V&B we used roster sheets, then we changed to data strips and markers doing away with the roster sheets. We found it really speeded up play and significantly reduced confusion over the status of units YMMV
I much prefer on-table indicators and I don't mind info strips at the back of bases. However, I wouldn't want to have to replace the info strips after each game because the damage track had been marked off. There should be a satisfactory way round that but I haven't yet worked out what it is...
Quote from: doctorphalanx on 03 August 2017, 08:33:26 PM
I much prefer on-table indicators and I don't mind info strips at the back of bases. However, I wouldn't want to have to replace the info strips after each game because the damage track had been marked off. There should be a satisfactory way round that but I haven't yet worked out what it is...
Cover it in adhesive clear plastic (I just bought 10metres by 45cms for £5 from WH Smith) and then mark off the damage using a water soluble non-permanent marker. You can then wipe it off after the engagement. If you print info strips off onto a sheet of card or paper, I find it easier to stick the adhesive sheet to the card before cutting it up. Hope this helps,
Mollinary
Excellent. Thank you.
Quote from: mollinary on 03 August 2017, 08:49:36 PM
Cover it in adhesive clear plastic (I just bought 10metres by 45cms for £5 from WH Smith) and then mark off the damage using a water soluble non-permanent marker. You can then wipe it off after the engagement. If you print info strips off onto a sheet of card or paper, I find it easier to stick the adhesive sheet to the card before cutting it up. Hope this helps,
Mollinary
There are a couple of posts on my blog with pictures of proposed bases for 3mm miniatures.
This is the original post which envisaged using 60mm-wide bases:
https://doctorphalanx.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/3mm-minis-for-rommel.html
This is a look at 40mm basing:
https://doctorphalanx.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/3mm-minis-for-rommel-part-2.html
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-N__HUEQuKVE/WYSC7IOizeI/AAAAAAAACHY/0O2YoPFckGEfoBnPQfjmyYrBEbVfP9JEQCLcBGAs/s1600/40mm%2Btrial.jpg)
Looking cracking!
Tempting...
Nice ideas
For the Rommel playtest, I often used my 3mm stuff, which are on small FoW bases, with a strip at the back for unit details. They worked pretty well that way.
What websites if any would people recommend to find TOEs etc that would be suitable for Rommel?
Cheers
As each base represents a company you don't really need to know what the organisation was below company level provided you know what that company's basic equipment was, e.g. did it have Panthers or a Panzer IVs. That sort of information isn't too hard to come by and I expect the army list creator in Rommel and subsequent scenarios will in any event be a good starting point though you may have to research which particular tank variants were around at the time.
If designing realistic forces, historical OOBs are probably more instructive than theoretical TOEs. I'm always interested in OOBs and don't mind paying for books within reason, but I've never really hit gold in that area. I have previously bought some Nafziger data sheets for more obscure conflicts (such as the Chaco War) and I believe it may be a (possibly the) major source for WW2. The website is at http://www.nafzigercollection.com/shop/
I've recently been researching the Battle of France 1940 and have found some useful information online. I will dig out the links if anyone is interested in that particular campaign, but I haven't found a general source of information covering the whole war.
I'd go with Nafziger and the Micromark lists on wargamesvault.
On the subject of OOBs, I generally like to base my wargame armies on forces which participated in a given historical battle or campaign. (My SYW armies, for example, are based on forces present at Rossbach and Leuthen.)
The army creator in Rommel will undoubtedly allow you to create a representative force while the historical scenarios will prescribe more rigidly what you should have for a particular battle.
As a basis for either approach my ideal starting point would be to model complete historical divisions. Who could resist the appeal of carrying a whole division in a shoe box?
I came across this site many years ago when I thought about writing my own grid based WWII corps level miniature game:
http://www.niehorster.org/000_admin/000oob.htm
Luckily Sam wrote just what I was looking for :)
This is a good source for the French Army of 1940: http://www.littlewars.se/french1940/oob.html
For the Germans I have the Osprey 'Panzer Divisions: The Blitzkrieg Years 1939-40'.
Bob Mackenzie's webpages at http://www.testofbattle.com/upload/bob/ are very useful indicators even if you're not using the same rules.
Wikipedia is also a good place to start for specific battles.
On reflection the data sheets I referred to must have been MicroMark. Nafziger may be the final word but buying all the books necessary would be very expensive.
The Axis History Forum https://forum.axishistory.com/ also has some links to source material.
Thanks for all the links there all a great help
Been doing some research for my soon to be collected (Claymore 2017 Yay!) 3mm stuff.
Found these links interesting
http://www.kerynne.com/games/britishinfantrybttntoe.html
http://balagan.info/infantry-unit-frontages-during-ww2
http://zesilvaleite.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/WWII%20Army%20Lists
The last one has loads of army lists not just the Japanese one linked. See the side bar on the right of the blog page.
Some brilliant stuff here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160425143250/http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com/General/site_map.htm
Currently archived but rumoured to be coming back.
The PDF version of Rommel is available now. Bought a copy earlier and have been having a good read through.
Like what I see - want to start building some armies, and testing the mechanics - but I'm away for a couple of days so can't yet!