Apologies to all you veterans who already know what I am about to post but I thought I would share my 'discovery' as if this thread was not obvious to me it may not be obvious to other new 10 mm players either.
10 mm gaming was given a huge boost by Rick Priestley's WARMASTER ancients/fantasy/medieval rules which led to supplements specifically for historical Warmaster Ancients and Warmaster Medieval.
Peter Andrew Jones used these rules to develop the brilliant series: Blitzkrieg Commander, Cold War Commander and Future War Commander.
Rick Priestley parted company with Games Workshop - he now has his own website: http://www.ricks-warmaster.com/index.html
which in turn leads to the Warmaster Historical site:
http://games.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/histori...
lo and behold -
Wars of the Roses Commander
Thirty Years War Commander
ECW Commander
Seven Years War Commander
Napoleonic Commander
American Civil War Commander
Franco-Prussian War Commander
Colonial Commander
All variants which can be tacked onto Warmaster core rules - a free download linked on Rick's site.
As Nik has said somewhere - the core rules mean you CAN play any period (in addition to BKC, CWC and FWC) without learning new concepts and playing methods for each period.
At last - one set of rules to rule them all :)
If i were to pick 1 10mm ruleset for ALL periods, it certainly wouldn't be the 'Commander' rules.
Also, i'm very suspicious of rules that claim to cover all periods. They generally suffer from the old adage, 'a man who chases two rabbits catches neither'.
Personally my group uses all sorts of rules, but we're currently gravitating towards the following for 10mm gaming:
Ancients/Medeival = Phil Barker's DBA v3 playtest draft
Horse/Foot/Guns = Fire&Fury / Age of Eagles / conversions of...
'Modern' = Spearhead
Whereas we're rather enjoying the Black Powder/Hail Cheesey family of games, as well as the mighty Volley and Bayonet!
I'm (unsurprisingly) with robert here - it's important to note that the WM 'engine' doesn't claim to be able to capture all periods - but it has proved versatile enough to do so - with enough differentiation to give appropriate 'flavour' to different periods I think.
I think the success of WM (which is still a great game in its original iteration) is that, by design, it is simple, fluid and subtle. It produces a result - and models command and control nicely.
For me, I love the fact that I can essentially remember a single core system - with plenty of additional subtlety and variety for various periods - and don't forever have to reach for rulebooks when I'm playing just to remember what happens next. I've got exceptions which prove this rule for me - but I can list those on one hand (Mordheim, Strange Aeons, Ambush Alley, Empire of the Dead, Maurice).
Cheers Nik and thanks for clarifying that Warmaster does not cover all periods but by using the variants it is indeed possible to do so.
I agree that Maurice is totally different and an excellent game in its own right - for me Maurice is the game of choice for my 28mm 'imagi-nations' but the 'Commander' series and variants
will do very nicely for all 10mm historical and fantasy gaming in any period and 10mm is all I will be doing in future.
Looking forward to meeting you Nik at the Birthday Bash :)
As with most things in life, no-one does everything well and mechanisms that work for Napoleonics don't necessarily read across to Ancients - or vice versa. Add to this personal preference - one man's meat being another man's poison - and you begin to see that the universal set of rules is yet to be written.
If you've found a set of rules you like then stick to them. It's your choice and nobody can tell you you're wrong. ;)
Quote from: Hertsblue on 24 June 2012, 05:45:37 PM
If you've found a set of rules you like then stick to them. It's your choice and nobody can tell you you're wrong. ;)
Although there are those that try...
and I find that if I refer to the 'Pointy Stick Rule' (applied liberally to the eyes/hands/genitalia) they generally drop their claim ;)
Quote from: Hertsblue on 24 June 2012, 05:45:37 PM
If you've found a set of rules you like then stick to them. It's your choice and nobody can tell you you're wrong. ;)
Except those who play Flames of War. They're wrong.
;) ;D
Quote from: Luddite on 24 June 2012, 07:47:05 PM
Except those who play Flames of War. They're wrong.
;) ;D
Yes we are. ;D
Quote from: Luddite on 24 June 2012, 07:47:05 PM
Except those who play Flames of War. They're wrong.
;) ;D
No - misguided, perverse, masochistic, wrong-headed, bloody-minded, disfunctional perhaps - but we're
never wrong. :D
Fancy a game Hertsblue? ;)
Yeah. You're not so far away. PM me and we'll fix something up. 8)
Cool! Might have to wait until my self-enforced paternity wargames drought is over mind! :D
Quote from: robert on 24 June 2012, 10:48:09 AM
Apologies to all you veterans who already know what I am about to post but I thought I would share my 'discovery' as if this thread was not obvious to me it may not be obvious to other new 10 mm players either.
10 mm gaming was given a huge boost by Rick Priestley's WARMASTER ancients/fantasy/medieval rules which led to supplements specifically for historical Warmaster Ancients and Warmaster Medieval.
Peter Andrew Jones used these rules to develop the brilliant series: Blitzkrieg Commander, Cold War Commander and Future War Commander.
Rick Priestley parted company with Games Workshop - he now has his own website: http://www.ricks-warmaster.com/index.html
which in turn leads to the Warmaster Historical site:
http://games.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/histori...
lo and behold -
Wars of the Roses Commander
Thirty Years War Commander
ECW Commander
Seven Years War Commander
Napoleonic Commander
American Civil War Commander
Franco-Prussian War Commander
Colonial Commander
All variants which can be tacked onto Warmaster core rules - a free download linked on Rick's site.
As Nik has said somewhere - the core rules mean you CAN play any period (in addition to BKC, CWC and FWC) without learning new concepts and playing methods for each period.
At last - one set of rules to rule them all :)
Being a new player of Warmaster, I didn't know either, so thanks for that line of enquiry! I had a look at FWC and I really do like the look at that. Do you know if its only a PDF copy thats available or can you get a print copy (I know you can print on demand with the pdf, but just wondered if an actual book existed!)
Quote from: i_am_win on 25 June 2012, 01:24:26 PM
Being a new player of Warmaster, I didn't know either, so thanks for that line of enquiry! I had a look at FWC and I really do like the look at that. Do you know if its only a PDF copy thats available or can you get a print copy (I know you can print on demand with the pdf, but just wondered if an actual book existed!)
As i understand, no. Unless you can pick up a second hand copy. I believe Pete has stopped selling hard copies.
FWC is pretty good, although i know people who reckon that the Cold War Commander version is the best rules wise. Not sure why since i thought they are all pretty much the same.
Given the...um...'abstractions' of the system, i've felt that it sort of 'works' for sci-fi in a way it doesn't for WWII.
Funnily enough, the same happened for me with the original rules. Warmaster 'worked', but the same basic rule system when transferred to Warmaster Ancients/Medieval just sort of didn't.
I'm fully prepared to accept the reality that it was me and not the rules... ;D :D ...since, as others will attest, they are pretty good as achieving what they set out to.
The quirks of the system never really gelled with me though. E.g. the WMA/WMM tactical neccessity of fighting in column (as opposed to a more realistic and satisfying line) never really sat well with me. :(
And given the 'grand sweep' of the rules, and elegant command and maneouvre system, the fiddly combat res and casualty recording never sat well with me.
These problems wetre ironed out in the 'Commander' rules variants though - more due to the type of war being represented than anything.
Quote from: Luddite on 25 June 2012, 01:40:50 PM
As i understand, no. Unless you can pick up a second hand copy. I believe Pete has stopped selling hard copies.
FWC is pretty good, although i know people who reckon that the Cold War Commander version is the best rules wise. Not sure why since i thought they are all pretty much the same.
I suppose then I shall have to put my hand in my pocket and stump up for the PDF then! I just hope my monthy wargaming budget will stretch this month! However, I can see me having to dig deeper in the long run cos as soon as my eldest gets a sniff of them I will have to stump out for extra mini's for him also! (I can see him having to do lots more chores and house work in return ;))
Being a primary Fantasy/scifi gamer the other variants don't float my boat, but the ancients may get a look in eventually when cash and time allow (I can see my lead mountain building up as we speak... :o :D)
Quote from: Luddite on 24 June 2012, 07:47:05 PM
Except those who play Flames of War. They're wrong.
;) ;D
and xxC. They are also wrong.
Pete has found some printed FWCs, so they are available whilst stock lasts :).
Couldn't get him to rustle up a few Cold War Commanders could you? I don't have that one. :(
Ahem.
However, returning to the OP for a moment, and the search for the Rossetta Stone of wargaming, 'the one ruleset to rule them all', so to speak; is it even possible?
Rick Priestley for example has basically been rehashing the same couple of rule sets for decades; a decent, simple skirmish set (that GW continue to insist on ruining), and a mass battle ruleset (the aforementioned Warmaster et. al.).
The Priestly skirmish rules have morphed from a fantasy set (WFB) into a future fantasy set (40k), and has also spawned a variety of others (Necromunda, Lord of the Rings, WAB, Legends of the Old West, The Great War, Gladiator, etc., etc.) The only time i've seen them actually work (since those heady early days of WFB, have been their use as true 'skirmish scale' rules, mainly Necromunda/Mordheim/Legends of the Old West.
They sort of get by at the WAB level but not really...
Ditto with Warmaster, which worked ok as a fantasy set but never really did the business as a historical set. The revamp as Black Powder also singularly failed to 'float my biscuit' too. :(
With another rules set, i loved DBA, DBM, and the fantasy version HotT, but hated the Renaissance version DBR. It just didn''t work. So it seems to be common to most 'stables'.
The Too Fat Lardies stable too, which seems to chuck out endless variations on their rules theme, none of which really work for me.
Do people really think a 'one size fits all' set of rules is possible?
Hi Luddite,
I don't think you will ever find a 'one size fits all' ruleset. I have played a variety of games over the years and have settled on the BKC and WMA stables as the core rules that I really enjoy and come back to time and again. Maurice has been a new edition to my gaming stable as it is great fun to play IMHO. For others these games do not float their boat, which is fair enough. Each to his own.
Of course 'each to his own' applies, but the question stands.
And if you've come to a 'stable' of rules, why? And why that stable?
Surely the same rules can't provide a satisfying game for the frictions and characteristics of Ancient Mesopotamian armies and WWI can they? Or can they?
Or is 'the game the thing', and the pieces used or any notion of simulation really not important? ('This might look like a Tiger II but its got the same stats as Han Chinese heavy chariot so i'm using it as a proxy'...)
I think wargames rules are a highly personal thing. For me I would not get as much enjoyment out of a universal ruleset since I love things to have very specific mechanisms for period flavour. It doesn't mean that I don't enjoy more generic games though. I had a game of BP with Gavin P last weekend and it was great fun - but I probably wouldn't pick it as my regular ruleset of choice for AWI.
When I was RPGing a lot I used to feel the same about GURPS - a good, fun ,well designed game but never quite getting the atmosphere of the specific rulesets
Chaps - please read Nik's post on this earlier - Warmaster is not a universal set of rules - it provides mechanisms which can be adapted for most any period and the historical warmaster yahoo group has files full of
period adaptations.
The benefit is that each period still gets its own flavour but the rules work in the same way - initiative or opportunity moves, command blunders and so on - in this sense it does not matter if its Ancient Mesopotamia or North West Europe in 1944 however Tiger tanks do have different stats to Han Chinese chariots and operate in a somewhat different manner :)
Maurice IS a completely different game and is a stand-alone unique wargame - it is real fun.
Warmaster and its variables will do for me in ACW, AVBCW and WW2 - simply because I only need to learn one core set of mechanisms which can be applied - how to move, how to issue orders, how to shoot, how to resolve close combat - all with their own period flavour.
Try here
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Blitzkrieg-Commander-/300731704911?pt=UK_Toys_Wargames_RL&hash=item460501a64f
Noty a bad price to ( not me selling by the way)
I have to agree with Luddite about Warmaster, there is something that doent fit thoug I am not sure what it is, I find the same with FOG, and in my personal opinion I could never see why anybody played DBM but I am sure people will say the same thing about rules I enjoy
But each to there own I really enjoy Impetus and Vis Bellica and I slowly getting into computer moderated rules, and Maurice will be bought soon
At the end of the day I dont think a stable is possible, Most ancient rules I think try to cover to big a time span and I think its hard to get a mechanic that works for Ancients thats also works for WW2 or Napoleonics especially when it comes to C&C either the rule usually allows to much freedom of movement for ancients or too little for WW2
But if you enjoy what you play then why worry Just glad to see the back of the Newbury Stable and Challanger 2000
I would argue from the Generals point of view combat doesn't change massively until mid 1800's - its still massed men maneovering in dense lines. True Close combat moves from hand to hand to 60 yards/meters or so, but that is still a bloody and brutal all or nothing struggle. Yes, there are muskets, but it is still this close combat that decides victory. I'm not disregarding ranged combat, they weaken, but then did the massed Norman archers at Hastings. The trouble is as wargamers we want to be Wellington, but insist on knowing the effect of every bullet!
"The trouble is as wargamers we want to be Wellington, but insist on knowing the effect of every bullet!"
Agreed, the knowledge that the 3rd man from the right, succesfully saved being hit by a bullet because he had the family bible stuffed inside his jacket is totally immaterial to a General. All a general should know about a unit is, is it advancing confidently, is it wavering or is it retiring or routing. Similarly a General shouldnt have to order units to for example, form square if cavalry are about, thats down to the man on the ground, the commanding Colonel of the battalion. Decent rulesets should always assume that the units are in a formation suitable to their condition but very few do.
Quote from: Luddite on 26 June 2012, 12:35:10 PM
Of course 'each to his own' applies, but the question stands.
And if you've come to a 'stable' of rules, why? And why that stable
I think part of the answer is that wargames rules, being fairly complex entities, take time to learn and absorb. Each time we try another set it involves a learning curve that is sometimes quite steep. How much easier, then, to pick an additional set of rules for a different period that follows the same broad principles and uses much the same basic mechanisms as one already learned? Certain rule-writers have, over the years, built up a following amongst consumers and it's natural that those consumers should stick to what they know.
I think if you like a mechanism you will want to stick with it. Can cause problems - First few games of Black Powder we realised we had be using bits of WarMaster.
Before the release of IABSM v3 we used TW&T to resolve any problems with the earlier versions. The reason IABSM looks so much like Charlie Don't Surf is that CDS is the set Rich was TRYING to write, but was having trouble with the asymetrical nature of Viet Nam. Thus theearly version morphed into IABSM due to the matched nature of WW2.
As others have said there is a lot of personal preference involved in picking a set of rules. My own criteria are:
1. Do I feel the rules gives me a flavour of the period (not an "acurate" representation (:|).
2. Do I get a fun game using the rules (most important) ;D
So for example I like both IABSM and BKC for WW2, they are representing completely different levels of action.
Some rules writen as generic sets to cover a large period can work well for specific campaigns/wars, I like Black Powder for WSS but not for FPW.
You pay your money and take your choice!
Hi All
Just came across a set of rules for WW1 Middle East that has a DBx feel to them rather than the TFL card-driven ITLSU at http://www.atlanticpublishers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/big-table-v6.pdf (http://www.atlanticpublishers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/big-table-v6.pdf). The Foreword says they are purposely written for smaller scales so should be of interest here. I've only had a quick flick through them so I can't say if they're any good or not, but look ok.
Cheers
GrumpyOldMan
Quote from: Luddite on 24 June 2012, 07:47:05 PM
Except those who play Flames of War. They're wrong.
;) ;D
What's the make us who have written and playtested them? :-\ :-\ :d :d :P
Quote from: rexhurley on 28 September 2012, 10:10:33 PM
What's the make us who have written and playtested them? :-\ :-\ :d :d :P
Abominable.
Surely at some point during the writing/playtesting you actually woke up and realised 'hang on, this is rubbish isn't it'...
Quote from: Luddite on 29 September 2012, 10:55:09 AM
Abominable.
Surely at some point during the writing/playtesting you actually woke up and realised 'hang on, this is rubbish isn't it'...
That's a little strong I think? I know that Rex (and at least one other member) were involved in the founding of Battlefront, and they have said in previous discussions that the way the company is now isn't what they had visions of. Whether the rules have changed as much as the company, I don't know, but I doubt anyone deliberately puts out a bad set of rules, it's just that some sets are more Marmite than others. FoW must be appealing to someone, or they wouldn't be as widely used as they are.
8)
Yeah.
But just copying WHK40k couldn't lead anywhere else.
Quote from: barbarian on 01 October 2012, 12:02:27 AM
Yeah.
But just copying WHK40k couldn't lead anywhere else.
I wont get into a slanging match but just a couple of points for all the baggers of FOW.
(a) I never have nor ever will play 40k (neither have most of the Kiwi development team or primary playtesters) so ain't copied, ...also why I have sold my Bolt Action rules as right from Mr Preistley's own voice think 40k V2 and you have Bolt Action...wish i had seen that rpeview before my pre order lols, thems the breaks eh.. :'(
(b) I made a lifestyle choice to join them at the time I did, $80k salary down to $30k move to most expensive city cost of living wise take non working wife and newborn along for the ride.....I enjoyed my time there and can say I did it....unlike many....how many of you would do that to follow a dream?.... :-\
(c) Many people worldwide have contributed and a small dedicated team has put it out there and made it a success, yes GW style with a lot of ex GW Manager's but hey the owner has fronted with a seven figure sum to put it on the map so he wanted results...to be the top selling historical flavoured (notice I say flavour here gents!) game in the world where anyone can walk in with a couple of hundred dollar outlay (not a grand like another established company) and begin to play from nothing....ten years on he has it and a return on his initial investment and patience as we (I was involved with the Dark Ages of Version One)/they grew and learnt.....interesting to see that some initial dream's of Peter's (i.e starter sets and plastics) are now finally coming to fruition and while I chose to leave for personal reasons after a six month stint I have to admire his persistence in seeing the dream through a lot of people would have walked away and left many customers isolated...how many times do you see that in the marketplace?... ;) :-\
(d) The game now dominates numbers wise at most comp gaming events all round the globe so something must be right or why would so many people play it? :o
(e) It's a game (notice I say a game!) that's intention is "i want my toys on the table, I want to push them around and make things go boom" it is not nor has ever intended to be a full on historical reinvention, flavoursome yes, enjoyed by a lot yes, hated by a few yes. ???
(f) So all in all I respect everyone's choice to play or not play, have an opinion or otherwise but please guys lets stop bagging it especially with unknown and unsubstantiated comments that are just hurtful, and respect the fact others may have a different viewpoint. ;)
Take care and have a great week, regards Rex :)
I apologise if I've hurted feelings.
On the other hand, being popular isn't an argument of validity of a set of rules.
I'm a grafic designer and really know that a good art on boxes or well studied packaging will sell.
Just don't know if bringing a market already existent ( 15mm miniatures for WWII plays) to popularity, justify that prices and these rules.
I must admit, if pricing were (really) cheaper, I would have consider buying some. But, that's what lead me to Pendraken...so thank you Battlefront. ;)
Your most relevant point is f)
Quote from: Leon on 30 September 2012, 11:53:21 PM
That's a little strong I think? I know that Rex (and at least one other member) were involved in the founding of Battlefront, and they have said in previous discussions that the way the company is now isn't what they had visions of. Whether the rules have changed as much as the company, I don't know, but I doubt anyone deliberately puts out a bad set of rules, it's just that some sets are more Marmite than others. FoW must be appealing to someone, or they wouldn't be as widely used as they are.
8)
You're right Leon. I'll retract the 'abominable' and issue genuine apologies to Rex et. al. No cause for personal venom; I didn't intend that and apologise for it now.
I will however stand by my contention (with the usual 'personal preference' caveat) that FoW is one of the worst rule sets ever released. Not Mr Lincoln's War bad, but pretty bad.
Popularity doesn't equal quality.
:(
Agreed!!
Otherwise how do you account for that most cringe-worthy set of rules Warhammer 40k still being in existance.
;D ;D ;D Lol's gentlemen and well said it's also a little bit why I had the pokey tongue emoticon out in my post up the top, all cool.
had to laugh last night was reviewing my copy of BKC II again and saw in the acknowledgement section's recognition of My Priestley and the lesser known Paul Goldstone, interesting must drop Paul a line as he is active with developing both sets (BKC II and FOW) which I didn't know.
Anyway's all good and yeh baby love Pendraken 10's the true scale for gaming (especially WWII) their service (first class and not matched by anyone IMO :D ), nice models in all ranges that paint superbly well (now if I could just take decent well lit photos :'( ) and the ability to build nice terrain to match...now all we need is some decent rules and some mates to play!! =) :'( :'(
Just as a matter of amusement, I hate the special rules, I hate the use of characters, I dislike the tendency to change the rules to suit "gamey aka read cheesy " players....... :D :D :D :D
BKC II concepts I like but have to re-educate the brain (I'm old you have to forgive me 8) ) also struggle with small bases representing a platoon. Have thought about maybe going to 60mm squares for something different and making a platoon type of diorama per peice but not sure if that's viable given my current gaming environment, or maybe just using Spearhead scenarios with FOW orgs (wash my mouth out :P ;D ) or FOW orgs, or Rapid Fire orgs with BKC II rules, bah an overstuffed market and too much choice, too much time to analyse and think not enough to paint and game arggjh >:( >:(
thoughts or should we start another thread?
Re rules for 10mm though I reckon anything can work you like and either use the larger base sizes, i.e. 28mm and put more on or do what i am where my main base size now is 30 x 20 x 2mm (8 foot, 4 modern foot or 4 cav) per base commands on 30mm circles and guns on 30 x 40mm with a view to turning up and instead od playing ona big massive table being that one like at railway shows where you go oh ahh at all the large HO scale layouts but the one that also sticks in your brain is that sexy little marklin one with all the detail and spectacular scenery, catenary and setup, that for me is 10mm to a tee.
Have a great day everybody, regards Rex
Ack! What's wrong with Mr Lincoln's War!? (besides being disorganized) I've found that it works well.
I've played 40K and FoW and now I don't play either. They are pretty much the same thing. I'm not buying any more rule books or codexs on a yearly basis for one game.
Found IABSM based on some other comments last night, read their intent and have an order of the way...might just be what I'm looking for...
Problem is the wallet is going to take a hammering all that other nice candy to...Bag a Hun, Kreigspiel (who would have thought), those maps and oh yeah....Pendraken toys to go with it :D Leon you got your casting ladle in hand.... :D
Quote from: rexhurley on 02 October 2012, 10:12:07 PM
oh yeah....Pendraken toys to go with it :D Leon you got your casting ladle in hand.... :D
Ready and waiting!
:D
Rex - don't know where you are but I (and am sure Sunjester) will happily take you through a game of IABSM if you are near Aylesbury/Tring area. It plays different to BKC - word of warning, don't get caught in the open at short range.
Also it can be cheap to do. SJ and myself use 2 bases to a section, with 3 figs per base; our armies are based for other things. Bases therefore represent 4 or 5 men, dependant on army, we mark hits with tiny dice, removing a base at 4 (or 5) hits. However even if you go for 1 fig per man for a US army (10 man sections in the rules) you can get a company (the standard force) for £20 in 10mm. You then throw the support in when you feel you want to. Word of warning - a US armored infantry company costs about £60, due to the 16 half tracks!
(Have just checked, a US army pack would work, assuming Leon keeps the ratio of BAR to rifles reasonable - £18, there you go. Under £40 and you can get both sides. Couple of hundred men - WW2 won't take as long to paint as other periods. Go and buy them now. I'll take my commision please Leon. :d)
Quote from: Last Hussar on 03 October 2012, 12:42:34 AM
Rex - don't know where you are but I (and am sure Sunjester) will happily take you through a game of IABSM if you are near Aylesbury/Tring area.
I'm not sure if it's possible to be further away from him... :D
Quote from: Last Hussar on 03 October 2012, 12:42:34 AM
Go and buy them now. I'll take my commision please Leon. :d)
Only if you ship them to him... ;)
Quote from: Last Hussar on 03 October 2012, 12:42:34 AM
Rex - don't know where you are but I (and am sure Sunjester) will happily take you through a game of IABSM if you are near Aylesbury/Tring area. It plays different to BKC - word of warning, don't get caught in the open at short range.
Also it can be cheap to do. SJ and myself use 2 bases to a section, with 3 figs per base; our armies are based for other things. Bases therefore represent 4 or 5 men, dependant on army, we mark hits with tiny dice, removing a base at 4 (or 5) hits. However even if you go for 1 fig per man for a US army (10 man sections in the rules) you can get a company (the standard force) for £20 in 10mm. You then throw the support in when you feel you want to. Word of warning - a US armored infantry company costs about £60, due to the 16 half tracks!
(Have just checked, a US army pack would work, assuming Leon keeps the ratio of BAR to rifles reasonable - £18, there you go. Under £40 and you can get both sides. Couple of hundred men - WW2 won't take as long to paint as other periods. Go and buy them now. I'll take my commision please Leon. :d)
Bawaa would love to take you up on your kind offer, do you have spare $2500 NZD for my airfare :D :D
Excellent sounds like a plan I have been/will be doing 3-4 men per base or one heavy support weapon so thats great means I can play IABSM or FOW (for the locals of course if they don't convert!), or BKC II cool.
Been chatting with Richard at lardies and apparently he has found some cards and token packs during some renovations so I'm snaffling some tonight, maybe he'll have some left if you want to hit him up.
And yup vehicles are always the killer but hey I'll only spend it on the wife or daughter if i don't so why not indulge :D :D :D
As for painting umm in my time doing commissions or my own and selling them I have done (FOW) six full Soviet infnatry battaliosn with supports, a Lend Lease battaions, snotloads of t34's, 3 Full battalions (yes Battalions) of Germans with support, english and so on so yup know so quick anmd easy ways mate but hey SYW and Marlburians are quick to just need to know the cheats eh. it's more being married with children and a 120km commute by car each way a day thats the time killer versus my days of being a shift worker, still i could always quit and live off the wife for a while :d :d :d
$2500 NZD - Thats about £2.47p isn't it. Not sure you'll be afford the 5 quid subs!
I had my bundle on pre-order, and sweet talked Rich into sending me the PDF early so I could take it on holiday last year!
Quote from: Last Hussar on 03 October 2012, 08:02:41 PM
$2500 NZD - Thats about £2.47p isn't it. Not sure you'll be afford the 5 quid subs!
I had my bundle on pre-order, and sweet talked Rich into sending me the PDF early so I could take it on holiday last year!
LOL's yup order on the way and he threw in their Napoleonics for me as well, couldn't help myself had to download the rules on PDF and oh yeh bang on the money shame some other notorious others seem to have plagarised their good work >:( >:( still I'll not digress.
Great service, great rules now time to draft up an order for Leon :D