wargames. soldiers & strategy - issue 72

7/26/2019 Wargames. Soldiers & Strategy - Issue 72

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/wargames-soldiers-strategy-issue-72 1/84

ISSUE 72

THIS ISSUE: Scourge on horseback: nomadic warriors from the East

Theme Attila and Bledain the Caucasus

Alexander vs. theScythians at Jaxartes

The fall of Samarkand

•

•

•

SpecialsBattle at the Bannockburn

Armour masterclass:

painting the E-100

Let’s play Poor BloodyInfantry (PBI)

•

•

•

...and much more!

W W W . W S S M A G A Z I N E . C O M / / K A R W A N S A R A Y P U B L I S

H E R S

THE GREAT NOMADIC

INVASIONHUNS, MONGOLS AND SCYTHIANS

UK £ 4.20



CONTENTS

4

Publisher: Rolof van Hövell tot WesterierEditor in chief: Jasper OorthuysEditor: Guy BowersCopy editor: Duncan B. CampbellLayout and design: Christianne C. Beall©2014 Karwansaray Publishers

Contributors: Steve Beckett, Piers Brand, Chris Brown, Ken Butty,Richard Clarke, Paul Cubbin, Timmy De Cabooter, Björn ArvidKappe, Eoghan Kelly, Pat Lowinger, Simon Miller, Gary Mitchell,Matt Moran, Martin Onderdonck, Chris Payne, Chris Peers, RickPriestley, Ruben Torregrosa, David Trace, Rossco Watkins

Illustrations: Georgina Pymont-Harmanwww.redfoxillustrations.com

Print: HighTrade BV (www.hightradebv.nl)

Editorial ofcePO Box 4082, 7200 BB Zutphen, The NetherlandsPhone: +31-575-776076 (NL), +44-20-88168281(Europe), +1-740-994-0091 (US)Email: [email protected]

Customer service:[email protected]: www.wssmagazine.com

Contributions in the form of articles, letters, reviews, news andqueries are welcomed. Please send to the above address or use

the contact form on www.wssmagazine.com

SubscriptionsSubscriptions can be purchased at www.kp-shop.com, via phoneor by mail. See above for the address.

DistributionWargames, Soldiers and Strategy is sold through retailers, theinternet and by subscription. If you wish to become a sales outlet,please contact us at [email protected]

The exclusive distributor for the UK and the Republic of Ireland isComag Specialist Magazines, Unit 3, Tavistock Road, West Dray-ton, UB7 7QE, United Kingdom. Phone: +44 01895 433600.

Copyright Karwansaray BV. All rights reserved. Nothing in this

publication may be reproduced in any form without prior writ-ten consent of the publishers. Any individual providing materialfor publication must ensure that the correct permissions beforesubmission to us. Every effort has been made to trace copyrightholders, but in a few cases this proves impossible. The editor andpublishers apologize for any unwitting cases of copyright trans-gressions and would like to hear from any copyright holders notacknowledged. Articles and the opinions expressed herein do notnecessarily represent the views of the editor and/or publishers.Advertising in Wargames, Soldiers and Strategy does not neces-sarily imply endorsement.

Wargames, Soldiers and Strategy is published everytwo months by Karwansaray BV, Rotterdam, theNetherlands. PO Box 1110, 3000 BC Rotterdam,the Netherlands.

ISSN: 2211-503X

Printed in the European Union

HOBBY

CLAD FOR BATTLEPainting 15mm British battledress

BLU-TACK CAMOUFLAGEPainting a ‘Paper Panzer’

62

64

THEME: THE GREAT NOMADIC INVASION

HOW TO CONQUER THE WORLDAn introduction to Mongol battle tactics

SUBOTEI’S RIDE

Gaming the Kalka campaign of 1222-1223THE FALL OF SAMARKANDThe sons of Genghis versus the Khwarezmids

DEFEATING THE SCYTHIANSAlexander at the Battle of the Jaxartes

THE SONS OF THE HUN IN THE SUNThe Huns in Georgia, AD 436

THE GOLDEN HORDEBuilding a nomadic horse army

MAKING A MONGOL DIORAMAThe cover uncovered

HOMES FOR EASTERN HORSEMEN

Scratch-building a Mongolian ger

32

34

38

42

46

52

56

FEATURES

GOING FOR THE JUGULAAn interview with the Studio Tomahawk team

PIKE AND SHEEPAnother bitesize battle

1314 AND ALL THATHow to game Bannockburn

SAVING TRIBUNE REGULUSC-Day, Caesar’s invasion of Britain

PIET HEYN AND THE TREASURE FLEETHis name is short, but his deeds are great

14

16

18

24

28

60

REGULAR DEPARTMENTS

MINIATURE REVIEWSMonks, monsters, motorcycles and more!

THIS GAMING LIFERick goes in further pursuit of the point

THE IRREGULARWhy clubs are essential to wargaming

LET’S PLAY POOR BLOODY INFANTRY Testing the latest rules from Peter Pig

GAME REVIEWSWe look at Donnybrook, Valhalla and more.

UP FRONTUnbalanced scenarios: what should we think?

BOARDGAME REVIEWA review of the new samurai game: Seven Swords

BOOK REVIEWSMore books reviewed by the WS&S team

PARTING SHOTSHints, tips and laughs for the wargamer

8

12

68

70

72

76

78

80

82



EDITORIAL

Luck be a lady

What enables a wise ruler and an able general to attack decisively and to succeedwhere ordinary men fail is foreknowledge… It is not to be found from the measure-

ments of heaven and earth; it is obtained from men …

– Sun Tzu

Wargames can generally be inuenced by clever decisions and good tactics. However,

there are some games that seem to come down to sheer luck. In a recent multiplayer

Black Powder game, Lady Luck simply deserted me. It did not matter what I rolled or

what dice I used, the results were always poor! The game turned into a funny farce,

as no matter what I did, it just didn’t work. A stream of French cuirassiers passed my

position and neither my guns nor my muskets could even put a dent in them. They

galloped past me unscathed, as they attempted to roll up the Prussian centre.

Luck is, of course, an illusion. It is all too easy to ‘buy into’ the idea that luck, good or bad, is real; that you are a lucky or

unlucky person; or that a particular day is going to turn out lucky or unlucky. I believe that ‘luck’ is simply the brain’s way

of trying to explain the unexplainable, trying to make patterns out of otherwise random events. The odds of you rolling a

6 on a D6 remain the same, whether you’ve rolled one 6 or several 6s in a row. They are still 1 in 6.

Luck is where preparation meets opportunity. Use good tactics, practise, and be prepared for all eventualities. Yes, there

will be the odd occasion when you can do everything right and still lose. But, when these moments happen, keep your

perspective. Such moments are eeting; the odds will change. However, your perception of events can change your mood

and cause its own ‘bad luck’ – namely, your loss of good judgement. As it happens, we ended our Black Powder game

with a minor defeat for the Prussians, so my luck averaged out in the end. I didn’t get mad or give up; I carried on playing

to the best of my ability. The most important thing is that the game was fun – win, lose, or draw.

Still, a case of ‘bad dice’ can make for a great story, and brilliant tactics to pull victory out of the jaws of defeat (or atleast a minor victory instead of a thrashing...) may be enlightening for others. They do not always make for entire articles

however, and that’s why we now introduce ‘Parting Shots’, a new section on the very last page of the magazine that will

hopefully provide both a light-hearted look at wargaming via Steve Beckett’s comic and ‘war-stories’, as well as short and

snappy hints and tips for playing, and, in the broadest sense, preparing for your games.

If you have a funny wargaming story or idea that you can tell in 100-150 words, please submit it to our new Parting Shots section,

either through Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/WSSMagazine) or via my email address ([email protected]). It

won’t make you rich, but it might make you famous, and you’ll get a free copy of the issue in which your idea is published!

– Guy Bowers

© G e o r g

i e H a r m a n

IN THE NEXT ISSUE:NOW ON THE WEBSITE:

DIRTY WORK AT THE CROSSROADSNomads, Muslims and Christians ght for the Holy Land

(http://www.wssmagazine.com/wss72_extra)

THE SEVEN YEARS WARThis issue looks at the 18th century’s biggest conict: a

grudge match between the great European powers.



REVIEWS:MINIATURES

8

MINIATURE REVIEWSGERMANS IN OVERCOATSCompany: Zvesda

Size: 22mm ‘foot to eye’ or 24mm tall

Era: World War 2

Price: £2.50 per set

www.zvesda.org.ru

Zvesda has released several new kits for their “Battle for Moscow” game, part of their Art of Tactic series of wargames. For

those unfamiliar with the concept, there are several dozen plastic kits in three scales for the game. The aircraft are 1/144

scale, the vehicles 1/100 scale and the infantry 1/72 scale. Each pack contains a data card to allow the model to be used in

the game. The models shown here are from their new “Germans in winter clothing” set. The figures are made from robust

plastic and slot together like a ‘snap tite’ kit (although glue is recommended). Well-detailed, the models go together easily,with the exception of an odd ‘fiddly bit’ here and there (the ammo feed on the machinegun is an example). While designed

for the Art of Tactic series, separate bases for other wargames are also provided.

MYTHOLOGICAL CREATURES

Company: Relic Miniatures

Size: 28mm ‘foot to eye’

Era: Mythological Ancient Greece

Price: CD$12.00 for the Minotaur,

CD$ 26.50 for Cerberuswww.relicminiatures.com

Straight out of a Ray Harryhausen movie comes the Relic Mythological range. Mike Evans of Relic has sculpted a number of

mythological creatures, a small fraction of which is shown here. The models include the fierce Cerberus (three-headed hound of

the underworld) and the Minotaur (guardian of the labyrinth). Bubo the owl of Athena and the great hero Hercules also make more

down-to-earth additions to the range. Cerberus is made from a exible resin, while the other figures are metal. The casting is

very good; mould lines are almost impossible to spot. The individual monsters have great character; the Minotaur, for example, has

armed himself with a statue. This range will continue to expand with planned additions including the Colossus and Polyphemus.

OPEL BLITZ 3-TON TRUCKCompany: Offensive Miniatures

Size: 1/56 scale

Era: World War II

Price: £22 for the Opel and cargo

www.offensiveminiatures.com

The Opel Blitz was a civilian truck that became the workhorse of the German Wehrmacht. The classic ‘Opel’ model was

a 3-ton truck. This Offensive Miniatures model is made entirely of metal and, like their other vehicles, requires a mini-

mum of construction. Simply add the bonnet and truck cab to the front and the cargo bay to the back of the chassis. Then

add the wheels and rear mudguards and you’re done. The kit comes with a variety of bits to help fill up the back of the

truck. These consist of three boxes of (presumably) ammunition and a set of jerry cans and oil drums. One crewmember

(a driver) is also provided. The back of the truch is roomy, so it could also hold a small gun (some Opels were used as

mounts for light AA guns). This model is an ideal workhorse piece to fill out any German army.



YOM KIPPUR ISRAELISCompany: Khurasan Miniatures


Era: Arab Israeli War

Price: $4.99 for seven infantry or two

support weapons with crew

khurasanminiatures.tripod.com

Khurasan Miniatures is a company specialising in 15mm miniatures. This recent release is a range of miniatures for the Yom Kippur

war of 1973. These include Syrian, Egyptian and Israeli armoured vehicles and infantry. When you look at the picture of the figures

shown here, remember that they are only 15mm tall. Their detailing is very good, with individual weapons and equipment easily

distinguished on the models. The current Israeli range consists of a rie section (seven men with FN FAL ries), a SMG section (fivemen with Uzis), a command section (nine men with light mortar, light machinegun, rie grenades and Blindicide bazooka) and a

heavy weapons section (machinegun and medium mortar). Size wise, these are compatible with most existing 15mm Modern ranges.

No medieval game in Western Europe would be complete without a set of monks. Conquest Miniatures has released a set of

Ecclesiastics under their Robin Hood range, which includes both monks and nuns. There are five basic monks, a monk on a

donkey, a monk bearing a cross and good St Benedict himself (who would make an excellent Abbot). The sculpting is good and

the models are nicely cast, if a little bit well-fed. Each comes with its own ‘slotta’ base, and most of the monks are tonsured.

The monk on the donkey is available for £4.00, or the entire set of monks on foot (including a bonus apothecary miniature) is

available for £18.50. Apart from Robin Hood-style skirmish games, these will have uses in dark age, fantasy or medieval settings.

MONKS AND ST. BENEDICT

Company: Conquest Miniatures


(adults), children slightly smaller

Era: Dark Age and Medieval

Price: £2.50 eachwww.wargamesfactory.com

STATIC GRASS APPLICATORCompany: War World Scenics

Size: From 4mm plus static grass

Era: All – anywhere there is vegetation

Price: £114.99

www.war-world.co.uk

The Pro Grass static grass applicator from War World Scenics is made for covering large areas of terrain with static grass.

It is designed to work with grass that is 4mm or larger. The applicator comes with three different sized filters for the differ-

ent lengths of grass. The operation is simple: fill the container with grass, screw on the filter, attach the grounding wire

to the terrain and switch on. Then sprinkle for effect on an area covered with glue. The Pro Grass applicator can also be

used to make ‘tufts’ by simply putting dobs of glue on a non-stick plastic surface and applying the static grass over top.This is a professional piece of kit, and while certainly not cheap, it is very effective. The WS&S team will be using Pro

Grass for our 12ft gaming board at Salute 2014.



REVIEWS:MINIATURES

10

MEDIEVAL BUILDINGS

Company: Tabletop Workshop

Size: Scaled for 28mm – 11cmL x

10cmW x 14cmH

Era: Medieval

Price: £19.00 for the merchant house

www.tabletopworkshop.co.uk

Tabletop Workshop is a new company specialising in hard plastic wargaming buildings. The range currently consists of medieval

buildings (with a castle promised soon). Each model comes at-packed; the buildings simply ‘click’ together. It took me 30 seconds

to ‘click’ together the house shown here, with half of that time was spent in working out the process. The models can also be

disassembled after each use, providing that no glue is added. Obviously both the internal and external detail is very good: beams

have been sculpted on the bottom of the second oor, interior doors are well-defined and the ground oor has been cobbled. The

finished kit is very durable; there is no danger of these smashing into hundreds of pieces from an accidental drop (unlike resin

terrain). It’s a bit of a pity that a fireplace and chimney are missing, but that’s really nitpicking on an otherwise perfect model. These

buildings would be ideal for medieval or renaissance games, whether for skirimish-sized games or a larger battlefield.

BRITISH NAPOLEONICINFANTRY

Company: Warlord GamesSize: 28mm ‘foot to eye’ or 34mm to

top of shako

Era: Napoleonic

Price: £20.00 for 36 miniatures

www.warlordgames.co.uk

The latest Napoleonic release from Warlord Games is their long awaited British infantry. As with their other Napoleonic kits,

construction is minimal: simply stick the backpack on followed by the head of your choice. Each box contains six metal command

models, consisting of an officer, two standard bearers, a musician, a sergeant and sapper (different command models are provided

for both the Peninsular and Waterloo sets). There are an additional six plastic sprues, each holding five soldiers. Four of these are

line and one is light infantry, with an extra set of epaulettes to make a second light infantry model. The Peninsular and Waterloosets are identical, but have different shakos. All the plastics are in marching pose, with seven different heads on the sprues. The

models are crisp and well moulded, with few mould lines. Size-wise, these will fit in with most existing plastic and metal ranges.

ARMED CRICKETERS

Company: Sloppy Jalopy


Era: 20th Century

Price: £8.00 for six models

www.sloppyjalopy.com

Sloppy Jalopy has just released two sets of armed cricketers, sculpted by Bill Thornhill. The first set, called ‘the gentlemen,’ includes

figures equipped with ries, a batsman armed with a pistol and bat and a wicket keeper with a ball. The second set, ‘the players,’

includes an umpire, batsman armed with a ‘tommy gun’ and a bowler, plus three cricketers armed with ries. All are dressed in

their best ‘cricket whites’ and most sport cricket caps. A few also wear leg guards. The casting is very good, with no mould lines

or ash visible. While designed specifically for a Very British Civil War, they could also be used for earlier periods, if the V-neck

sweaters and ‘tommy gun’ are ignored; perhaps the battle for the Ashes, after the ‘Bodyline’ incident took a more deadly turn?



BSA MOTORBIKES

Company: Sgt’s Mess

Size: 20mm

Era: Interwar to Post WW2

Price: £3.00 per bike

www.sgtsmess.co.uk

Sgt’s Mess has released a 20mm model of the Birmingham Small Arms (BSA) Motorcycle. There are four variants of the bike avail-

able, including a Home Guard version (with optional Bren gun), despatch riders (who would also serve as police), an AA motor-

cycle and a window cleaner’s bike, complete with sidecar and ladder! The AA motorcycle is particularly interesting and even

bears a logo on the end of the side car. The casting is good and construction straightforward. These motorcycles would be equally

at home on a model railway layout or a wargames table. While some have an obvious wargames use (the guard and despatch

riders), the cleaner and AA bike are quirky enough scenery for Operation Seelowe or Very British Civil War games.

SAMURAI PEASANT HOUSE

Company: 4Ground

Size: 28mm scale - 10cmH x16cmL

x14cmW

Era: Sengoku to Edo Japan

Price: £24.00 for large house

www.4ground.co.uk

4Ground has recently released a range of traditional Japanese buildings. The model reviewed here is a traditional Minka dwell-

ing, typical of a richer Japanese peasant family. The kit comes completely painted. The detail is simply exquisite: the reviewer

has added no additional weathering or painting. Each model has a removable roof; the internal detailing is also excellent. The

house even has sliding doors and a fire pit in the centre. This model does require some construction and is rated ‘4’ on the

4Ground difficulty scale. Construction took about two hours, but this was due to unfamiliarity with the kit and the reviewer not

following the instructions carefully enough. A second attempt proved much quicker (as I knew what I was doing). The range

also includes a smaller peasant hut, a labourer’s dwelling, a rice barn and wooden fencing to surround your village. These kits

are lightweight and durable. They will serve your Samurai games well, gamer-san.

ACW ARTILLERY

Company: Perry Miniatures

Size: 28mm ‘foot to eye’ or31mm in kepi.

Era: American Civil War

Price: £20.00 for a box of 3 cannons

and 18 crew.

www.perry-miniatures.com

The talented Perry twins have released a plastic ACW artillery set, which rounds off their American Civil War plastics range very

nicely. As with previous plastic sets, the quality is excellent and priced very reasonably. Each box contains enough to make three

guns and 18 gun crew. Limbers are also included (metal horses are available separately). The guns and crew are excellently

sculpted, with very fine detail. Each of the crew has a bald head (like the other ACW kits), so gamers may add their hat of choice

(be it slouch hat or kepi). The kit comes with instructions on how you can pose your crew in several different positions (moving,reloading and shooting the gun). Various arms are provided for this purpose. The guns themselves fit together well and have a

choice of four barrels (10lb Parrot, Napoleonic, 3 inch Ordnance Rie and 12 lb Howitzer). This set is definitely a must-have

for any ACW gamer, and will probably find use in periods contemporary to the Civil War (such as the Great Paraguayan War).



COLUMN

12

THIS GAMING LIFE

IN FURTHER PURSUIT

OF THE POINTLast time round, I talked a good deal about the role ofpoints values in wargames, and how the use of pointsand army lists affects the kinds of games that we play.I ended with the assertion that points values can’tbe perfect in every situation, but that, on the whole,they can be good enough to be useful and practical. Inmost cases, “what you lose on the roundabouts you

gain on the swings”, as it were; and how do you puta points value on swings or roundabouts, after all?

By Rick Priestley

© G e o

r g i n a P y m o n t - H a r m a n

Reading this, our eagle-eyed editor immediately threw

this question back at me: “Well, exactly how do you

work out a points system? How do you deal with those

swings and roundabouts?” Notwithstanding that the question

was supposed to be rhetorical, it was a fair challenge. And we

all like a challenge, don’t we?

Points values usually go together with army lists. The points

allocated to units and options are a means by which a player’schoice of army is governed. Although that might sound obvi-

ous, it’s worth remembering that this need not be the case. It

is possible to construct army lists without using points values:

“choose one from column A and two from column B” kind

of thing, for example. It is also possible that we might wish

to establish points values in other contexts – for role-playing

games or as a handicap system for skirmish games. However,

I’m going to discuss points values used as a means of choos-

ing armies from an army list, with a view to creating armies of

comparative ‘value’ to pitch against each other. So, when we

talk of a system for working out points values, we are doing so

in the context of choosing opposing forces from a list.

If you were to ask most players why we have army lists, they would

probably tell you it was to ensure that games are ‘fair’ – that armies

chosen to a fixed points value, from officially sanctioned lists,

have equal value on the tabletop battlefield. This is the whole basis

on which most wargame tournaments run. Games fought in the

style of a competition require that different armies have an ‘equal’

chance of success. It might be better to say an equal opportunity

for success, in cases where all players are free to choose their

forces. There is, of course, no guarantee that all players will make

equally wise or effective choices. No points value system can stop

players making see-saw decisions that put them at an advantage

in some situations and a disadvantage in others. For example, aWWII army consisting entirely of anti-tank guns would be great

against an armoured column, but it would be in trouble when

faced with an army consisting of infantry, backed up by air strikes.

Although army lists are inevitably used to generate equally

matched armies for competition-style gaming – in both formal

tournaments and informal battles fought in the same style – this

is not really the key reason we have army lists. Most games

rules will tend to present the army lists as a means of choosing

balanced forces. This gives readers a clear picture of what the lists

are for, and it sounds entirely logical and desirable. However,

the army lists serve a more subtle but fundamental purpose that

most players take for granted. Army lists provide a ready means tostructure and build a collection of models. This is true whether the

army is historical or fantasy. It is more important where the armies

are entirely fictional, because there are no historical forma-

tions to research or duplicate. How many of us have pored over

army lists, imagining which units we will build, which choices

appeal to us, which models we fancy painting, and planning

our purchases accordingly? Army lists, by organizing individual

models into units and units into armies, provide a framework for

collecting that is practical and useful, regardless of whether we

wish to play our games in a strictly competitive style or not. If

we are constructing army lists, we must also be mindful that, in

providing a framework for building a collection, we do not shoot

ourselves in the foot by creating choices that are either ‘must

haves’ or ‘never haves’, as such choices are no choices at all!

When we are dealing with commercial rules and ranges of

models, it is the duty of the army lists to structure forces in a

way that enhances the commercial value of the range, whilst

using the points values and the internal rules of the list itself

to maintain a reasonable balance during game play. This is

the most difficult aspect of list-writing for fantasy games. You

have to respect the commerciality of the list (or livelihoods will

be lost … starting with yours!) but the commercial value of

the whole game relies entirely upon its appeal to the gaming

public. As far as I’m concerned, that means the list has to dealin an open and honest way with choice, points values, balance,

and in-game value. The game has to come first and commercial

opportunities have to work around the game, and not the other



way round. The moment publishers start to manipulate points

values and choice-limitations to sell more ‘such and such’, the

whole thing is pretty much doomed. I call that the Dark Side of

list design! Needless to say, players are no fools and will soon

spot such cynical ploys; and once they do, the whole credibility

of a games system will evaporate as rapidly as dawn mist.

So, how do we go about putting our lists and points values

together? If we are talking about a fantasy game, we know wehave to respect the commerciality of the game, which means

that we have to make appropriate room for everything we

might want to include. If our game is historical, the list needs to

reect actual troop types and compositions, at least in so far as

these are understood. Either way, we need to establish a base

value for a typical element, which might be a single model or

a composite unit, depending upon the game system. In both

cases, I would aim to end up with total values for the army that

are manageable, because it is not very convenient if an army

totals tens of millions of points! Similarly, I would aim for indi-

vidual model values that give a reasonable spread – once again,

because it’s merely irritating if models are 3 4/7ths points and

adding a shield costs 1/3 point. In most situations, I’ve always

found that a base value of 5 for a typical average unequipped

combatant is a good start, as that allows for enough variation

in basic abilities and provides sufficient room for adding on

additional equipment, whatever that might be.

Having placed our first marker, it is necessary to come up with a

rough-cut system for adjusting points values away from the aver-

age. As all games will allocate values or stats to individual pieces

– usually numbers – the obvious answer is simply to allocate a

modifier to each stat value that deviates from the average. So, start

out with your average set of values, then add or subtract along

the line, making an adjustment that feels about right for eachstat. These adjustments are often very small fractions individually,

depending on the game system. If our average stat for ‘shooting

accuracy’ is 3 (corresponding to a 3 in 6 chance of hitting some-

thing in our hypothetical game), then boosting the stat by +1 to

4 increases our chance of hitting by 1 in 6 or +33 per cent of the

average value (50 per cent chance, rising to 67 per cent chance,

rounded up). Maybe we should add + ½ or +1 for that. It depends

whether our game is primarily about shooting (WWII) or primarily

about close combat (Ancients), how much we value the ‘shooting

accuracy’ stat. Of course, in practice, we will have a fair idea of

whether a +/-1 of stat is worth a lot or a little, in terms of the game

system. We can certainly get a useful rough number using thismethod, and further experimentation will establish our values.

Some stats function in a more general way, making units

either overall more effective or less so. This is the case in

games where command and control plays a big part, and

where this is down to a ‘command’ type of stat. In this case,

troops that are easier to activate and control are obviously

better than troops that are harder to activate, but the propor-

tional value depends on how good those troops are to start

with. In other words, the value of a +1 stat will be greater for

really powerful units than it would be for weaker units. Stats

that effectively ‘gear up’ other stats in this way are best taken

into account with an overall percentage boost to the rough-

cut value – lets say +20 per cent per stat increase. Hence, if

a rough-cut value takes us from our basic 5 to 8, then a gear-

ing ‘command’ stat of +1 over average might reasonably add

20 per cent to that (1.6) = 9.6 total. We don’t want to end

up with decimal points or fractions, if we can help it; but for

purposes of calculation, it is necessary to work on this level

and then round off at the end. For example, we might also

treat stats that give survivability as gearing stats, because

anything that allows a unit to stick around longer effectively

gears up its overall effectiveness in a game. So, let’s add a

further 10 per cent for a ‘stamina’ stat of +1 over average,

adding 0.8 to our rough-cut of 8. The total now stands at 8 +1.6 (command +1) + 0.8 (stamina +1), and we have a value

of 10.4, which we can round to 10 or 11, depending on how

we want out system to work. WS&S

The mystical and mysterious world of ‘points’.Pointing up: from cudgel to veteran centurio.



INTERVIEW

14

AN INTERVIEW WITH THE STUDIO TOMAHAWK TEAM

GOING FORTHE JUGULA

By Guy Bowers

The SAGA-rage and Muskets and Tomahawks may be sold by Gripping Beast,but they were actually designed by a three-man French team: Studio Tomahawk.And they are about to unleash another game upon unsuspecting wargamers...

How did Studio Tomahawk come into existence?

Studio Tomahawk was created on 1 September 2011 orthereabouts. It’s difficult to know precisely how it came

about. It was created by two close friends, Alex Buchel

and Fred Machu, one writing rules and the other being

a graphic designer. It was born of a passion between two

wargamers and their common interest in the French and

Indian War (FIW). It’s that desire to publish a FIW rules

set that became Muskets & Tomahawks. After the success

of M&T, we’d had fun making the rules and wanted to

repeat the experience with another set called SAGA.

It simply made sense to actually publish the rules that

we’d taken the time to test, write and lay out. What was

happening in the market (such as the demise of Warham-mer Historical) wasn’t a consideration. Selling the rules

was actually seen as a bonus! It was – and still is today – a hobby

for both of them. It’s what they do when they get back from work,

and it will remain so for the foreseeable future, as I don’t think

either of them wants to simply publish rule sets for a living!

From the beginning, we wanted to involve English-speaking

wargamers, as well. That’s why we have worked from the

start on both French and English language versions of our

games. The rest is history – publication of four supplements

for SAGA, a reprint of both language versions of Muskets &

Tomahawks, and now publication of Jugula, in both French

and English. We simply didn’t expect the phenomenal

success that we experienced in the past three years.

Tell us about the basics of Jugula. What makes

it stand out from all the other gladiator

games on the market?

The gaming market does, indeed, offer

quite a few gladiatorial wargames; some

of them are excellent games in their

own right. Jugula is not a pure gladiato-

rial combat simulation. In fact, it isn’t really

even a game about gladiators! And that’s

what makes Jugula different.

This may sound contrary, with a rule-

book stuffed full of pictures of gladia-

tors, but Jugula is actually a game about the often-forgotten

men who worked in the shadow of the arena to offer the

Roman citizens their fill of bloody games – the lanistae, the

owners of the gladiators, and the schools that trained them

(called a ludus). They were the driving force behind the

games, training up their gladiators and marketing their ludus

and the fights, in much the same way as happens in profes-

sional sports today. That is why, in Jugula, the rules managing

combat in the arena are all about decisions, rather than hit

locations and blade types; and why Jugula provides a whole

system and framework that allows the players to manage the

development of their own ludus.

Once we decided that the game was about lanistae and that

the gladiators were not the main focus, it became clear that

a game pitting just one gladiator against another would be

quite limiting, even if that kind of fight was standard in the

Roman arenas. Opposing a familia made up of four gladia-

tors offered many more tactical possibilities and gave a sense

of structure to the movement in the arena.

The way the Jugula card system works during arena combat

makes the player feel as if he’s standing in the shoes of the

lanista, rather than the individual gladiators. These pointsmake Jugula – according to us at Studio Tomahawk, at least!

– a unique and innovative game. But we’ll let the vox populi

of wargamers decide if that’s true!

From left to right : Fred Machu, Alex Buchel and Alex Verger.

A spot of fishing...

© G e o r g i n a P y m o n t - H a r m a n



Why call it Jugula?

Imagine the scene in the arena – the victor stands tall, the

vanquished crouches in the sand. Rising to his feet, the emperor

listens to the chanting of the crowd. What does the vox populi

say? Is it stanti missi (‘draw’), mitte (‘release him’) or jugula (‘kill

him!’)? It is this moment of life or death that is the most powerfulimage of the world of the gladiator and the decree of jugula! It is

the apogee of gladiatorial combat. What else could we call it?

So, how does the game work? Is it IGO-UGO?

The game runs alternately between players: first, one plays a

card and resolves its effect, and then the opposing player does

the same, and so on. In the standard combat game, you start

with a familia of four healthy gladiators. There are three ways

to triumph in the arena; you must kill two opposing gladiators,

dispatch one enemy gladiator and injure two others, or simply

wound all four of the opponent’s gladiators!

Winning the support of the crowd is crucial in helping your

familia in the arena and the most important aspect to this is

the spectacle: blood must ow!

How do you use the cards in the game?

There are 24 cards in a game deck, divided into two types:

Jugula cards and Prima Jugula cards. The standard cards

form your initial deck. The Prima cards offer more powerful

options to a player and can be ‘purchased’ with Jugula cards

during the course of the game.

At the beginning of the game, each player has five cards in

their hand. This hand can go up to ten, depending upon thesupport received from the crowd. This is represented in the

game by your Vox Populi rating, and an astute player can

raise the popularity of his familia as the game progresses.

Not only does a higher Vox Populi gain you access to more

cards, but it will also grant your men a much needed bonus

to their attacks. Hear the crowd roar!

During your turn, you choose a Jugula card from your hand

and then select one of that card’s effects to activate. These

effects allow you to play the card in one of six different ways:

• for Movement

• for its Vox Populi effect

• for Combat

• for its Draw Cards effect

• for its Ability

• for its Upgrade effect

You’re free to choose which effect to play, with one excep-

tion: you cannot end a game turn with no cards in your

hand. So, if you have only a single card left, you must play it

for its Draw Cards effect. You’ve got no choice. Remember,

choice is everything, but to hesitate is to die!

What sort of dice do you need?Life in the arena is too valuable, and the training of gladiators

takes too long to risk the reputation of your ludus on a die roll,

so there is no need for dice. In reality, each Jugula card has

a Dice Value in the corner. This

number is used to resolve your

gladiator’s attack or defence.

When you need to play the

dice, you again have to makea choice: either select a card

to play from your hand based

on its Dice Value (and thus you

won’t be able to use the other

effects on this card) or you can

leave your fighter in the hands

of fate by drawing the top card

from your Jugula deck and

using the revealed Dice Value.

As you can see from this brief overview, card manage-

ment and in-game decision-making is key. So, in conclu-sion, a clever lanista does not let the Fates ruin the fortune

of their ludus. And remember ... business is business, and

the show must go on!

There will be a range of miniatures as well, won’t there?

The models are made by our partners, Gripping Beast.

The first wave contains four figures plus a huge collection

of extra, alternative or optional equipment. There will be

two more waves of four, and there is talk of some character

packs, too! Each wave will also have an additional pack of

accessories to mix up the possibilities.

Each model is a multi-part kit: body, weapons, head, andshield. Each wave of releases allows you to build various

examples of four different, recognized armaturae (codified

fighting styles and accompanying armour and weaponry –

they loved good rules, the Romans!) and contains extra histor-

ical (and some, err, less than historical) weapon and armour

options. For a sample of just some of the options presented in

the first wave, Fred Machu, Studio Tomahawk’s master figure

painter, made up six different guys.

Why did you choose 35mm?

When we started work on Jugula, we were chatting with our

chums at Beast Towers, and the idea came up to make thefigures bigger than the normal 28mm figures. This way, we

could provide a more detailed sculpt, and also a really exible

multi-part collection, both things that are much easier with a

larger sized figure. We are really, really pleased with the results.

What a joy it presents to choose how to set about your first

gladiator – what weapon, what head, what shield? Pure

delight for figure fans! Then the painting, which at first seems

more daunting, is such a pleasure, because the sculpting is

clear and well pronounced. As you can tell, we love them!

So really, the true purpose behind this scale of figures, just

like why we made Jugula itself, is to treat ourselves to some-

thing we really wanted. But, in doing so, we hope to make

our customers happy, too! WS&S



FEATURE

16

BITESIZE BATTLES

PIKE AND SHEEP

By David Trace

Marston Moor, Lostwithiel, Naseby – all battles that we know helped shape theEnglish Civil War. However, there are very many other battles that don’t get asmuch attention, but which, in their own way, were every bit as important tothe outcome of the war. This scenario looks at one documented skirmish thatoccurred just outside the besieged town of Plymouth, which typifies nearlythree years of siege warfare there.

The town of Plymouth was under almost constant siege,

right through the war. During this ‘on-again, off-again’

stand-off, there was only one serious attempt to break

the defences, in the ‘Sabbath Day Battle’ of December 1643.

Most of the war consisted of Parliamentary troops and civil-

ians sheltering and watching from the double ring of defences

that protected the town from a land assault from the north.

The besieging Royalists typically camped at locations about

two miles away from the outer defences, and throughout the

war, a constant series of skirmishes would occur, as one side

foraged for food or supplies and the other side harried them.

In May 1644, the Parliamentarians at Mawdlyn Fort, one of

the most northerly defensive forts, spotted a troop of ridersraiding a sheep farm to the north of their position. This was

something they didn’t like – lamb being taken off the menu for

the Sunday dinner wasn’t going to be good for morale at all!

The Parliamentarians rode out from the fort, chased the Royal-

ists, and stole back the sheep. This incident wasn’t unique, as

pigs, cattle, chickens – and even pilchards! – were all local

produce that one side or the other would snatch.

In the game that we played at PAW 2014, a cut-down version

of the Witchfinder General rule set was used, but you can use

any set of rules that covers small skirmish battles. We had

four players, each controlling one small team of four dragoons

on foot, and a fifth team of farm workers, controlled by an

umpire, who would rally against any side that was making off

with their animals. We found that a successful skirmish could

be played to a clear conclusion in 60-90 minutes.

TABLE LAYOUTThe tabletop was kept small to force the action, rather than waste

time manoeuvring without any hint of danger or hindrance. The

farm is placed in the centre of the board, with a north-south

roadway running around it. To either side of the road are low

stone-walled enclosures or hedgerows, high enough to contain

the animals, but not so high that a man couldn’t climb over or fire

over. The eastern and western sides of the board are covered inthick woods, so the only way out is to the north or south. Sheep,

pigs and cattle are randomly scattered in the enclosures. Barrels

are stacked by the farm, with large ones representing barrels of

salted fish and smaller ones representing casks of cider!

To force the action, the Royalist force is considered to

have circled the farm, so they enter the skirmish from the

south, but need to drive the animals north to their camp.

The Parliamentarians have also circled around the farm, so

they enter from the north and will try to block the Royal-

ists, or even exit to the south with booty.

Royalist briefing

Your team of 8-10 dragoons have been sent out from your camp

at Efford to raid the farm at Thornhill and bring back any supplies

you can. You ride south-east towards the farm before dismounting

and circling to the east, then south, in order to advance on

the farm and drive the animals back northwards to your

waiting horses.

Parliamentarian briefing

A raiding party has been spotted north of the line at

Mawdlyn Ridge, heading towards Thornhill Farm.

Your small squad of dragoons has been dispatched

to ensure that the enemy doesn’t make off with supplies

you will need. You ride out north, but lose sight of the

enemy. You dismount before circling around to the east, to

block the enemy’s escape northwards.

The Pike and Sheep

board layout.



SPECIAL RULESMovement

Fighting and morale checks are made as per normal rules, but

the following additional rules apply.

Capturing animalsTo capture an animal, roll 1D6 for the dragoon and 1D6 for

the animal, and compare the results. If the dragoon rolls 2+

higher than the animal, he has grappled and has it under

control. If the animal rolls 2+ higher than the dragoon, the

animal has bolted free. If the animal rolls 3+ higher, it has

bolted and the trooper has been wounded for his efforts.

Troops can gang up on an animal, with each trooper

adding +1 to the die-roll, but only a maximum of three

troopers can grapple with one animal. Once an animal

has been captured, it will try to escape. For each turn, roll

1D6. On a 6, the animal breaks free of your control.

Moving/Fighting with animals

Movement rates are halved if dragging an animal with you.

Sheep can be manhandled over walls, but if done with one

man, you will lose control when you manhandle it over.

Pigs and cows are too big to carry, so can only leave the

fields via gates or holes in walls. Barrels of salted fish can

be rolled. Cider casks can be carried.

Any trooper in direct control of an animal, barrel or cask can

defend himself, but with a -1 penalty on defensive rolls, and

he cannot attack unless he releases the item first.

Gunfire and animals

Any animal within 4” (10cm) of a gun firing will try to ee from

the noise. An uncontrolled animal automatically ees; an animal

that is under control must roll 1D6, breaking free on a 6.

The animal will move directly away from the gun; if it meets

an obstacle, it will continue eeing alongside the obstacle.

Animals will panic for two turns. Sheep move up to 6” (15cm)

per turn; pigs and cows up to 4” (10cm) per turn.

Farm workers

Farm workers will watch what is going on, but will onlyattack if an animal leaves the field it started the game in.

Farm workers fight like clubmen, but they are devoted to

their animals, so they will not lose morale in the fight.

Leaving the field of play

Royalists can only leave the field of play by exiting to the

north. Parliamentarians can only exit to the south.

Once a dragoon has left the field or is rendered a non-combatant

(badly wounded, unconscious, or dead), he is out of the fight.

WINNING THE GAMEScore points as follows:

• For each animal captured and removed from the board, a

player scores +1 point.

• For each barrel or cask removed, + 1 point.

• For each enemy unit removed from play (badly wounded,

unconscious, dead, or captured), + 1 point.

Total up the points. Highest score wins.

Observed tactics

Our games were fairly fast and furious, but did throw up

some interesting tactical play. One player invented the

anti-personnel cow-missile by intentionally firing a gun

directly behind a cow, having pointed it first at the enemy.

The panicked cow charged the enemy, wounding two men

and scattering two more. Another player managed to line

up his dragoons to block the paths of an entire flock ofsheep, and then fired guns behind them, so that the entire

flock ran the length of the road in panic.

In one memorable game, both sides hid on opposite sides of

the farm and waited to ambush the other side. After two turns

of nothing happening, a Royalist dragoon climbed onto the

roof with a cask of cider. On the following turn, a Parliamen-

tarian dragoon climbed onto the same roof from the opposite

side and spotted the man shinning along with the cask. The

cask was lobbed over the roof, causing the sheep to panic and

scatter, and both sides subsequently opened fire.

I’m sure you will find other interesting ways of winning! WS&S

This event is included in the book Plymouth’s Forgotten War

by Philip Photiou, which is a gold-mine of ideas for other

skirmishes in the area.

In the game we played, dragoons and farm-hands were

from Warlord Games. Animals were from Irregular

Miniatures, but Warlord now do sheep as well.

The farm building was from Conflix models. Treeswere from Woodland Scenics. Walls were scratch-

built by the players.

FIGURES AND SCENERY

Let me at that livestock!



FEATURE

18

HOW TO GAME BANNOCKBURN

1314 AND ALL THAT!

By Chris Brown

When Robert Bruce claimed the Scottish throne in 1306, there had already beena decade of intermittent war between England and Scotland. Edward I’s invasionof Scotland in 1296 had initially been immensely successful, but the Scots hadproved to be resilient and the Plantagenet occupation only really secured controlover most of the country for a short period in 1304-6. Robert’s campaign did notstart well. Within a few months, he was reduced to hiding out in the Western Isleswith a mere handful of supporters. But by 1308, his situation had improved and

over the next few years, he went from strength to strength, despite having tofight a protracted civil war, as well as dealing with the occupation forces.

In October 1313, Edward II announced his intention to

lead a great army into Scotland to restore his fortunes

there. At that point, his garrison at Stirling was perfectly

secure, meaning that, if he chose to do so, he could get his

army across the River Forth into King Robert’s heartland. In

April 1314, during Lent, a development forced his hand.

Robert’s brother, the Earl of Carrick, laid siege to Stirling

Castle and negotiated a pact with Sir Philip Moubray, the

garrison commander. If they were not relieved by an English

army before 24 June, the castle would be surrendered.

According to the chronicler-poet John Barbour, Robert was

furious, since this was a clear challenge to Edward’s pres-

tige and credibility. However, Robert was aware of Edward’s

intention to invade, so the challenge gave him a clear indi-

cation of Edward’s specific target and timetable. He could

gather his own troops at a location with excellent commu-

nications and train them intensively in the very area in

which they would meet the enemy.

GAMING BANNOCKBURNThere are two big questions for wargamers when they

consider a specific battle: do we have the figures, and dowe have the terrain? In this case, if you have early Hundred

Years War figures, then you’re already home and dry. Some

mi gh t say that Scots wore lighter armour, had

lighter horses, and used smaller

bows than the English, rendering

many figure ranges inappropriate.

However, none of that is actually

true, so we can move on swiftly. Scot-

tish and English men-at-arms and arch-

ers were absolutely interchangeable.

The bill had not yet come into use

among the English, but you don’t

need to worry about that, either –

if you have spearmen, all well and

good; if not, use billmen and simply

treat them as spear-

men. The most you’ll

have to do – if you’re

keen – is to provide

command stands

with suitable banners

to depict the nations,

kings, and perhaps

certain great lords.

Everyone has their own

preference for rules,

so understanding the

qualities of the armies

is significant, if you

are to apply the rules

effectively. The Scottish spearmen should be well-drilled, confi-

dent heavy infantry, and should generally be classed as pikemen

with very high stamina, if you are using Hail Caesar , or ‘Regular

B’ under the old WRG system. Bear in mind that the Scottish

spear units included a high proportion of fully-armoured men-

at-arms, and that the main commanders (Robert himself, theEarls of Moray and Carrick, and Sir Robert Keith) were all very

experienced and skilful officers. Also, confidence was very high,

so troop ratings such as ‘stubborn’, ‘resilient’, or ‘determined’

should be applied where available. Many rule sets specifically

bar infantry from attacking cavalry, so you might have to ignore

that rule, since that is exactly what occurred in the main battle.

For Hail Caesar , use the Feudal Scots from page 65 and the

Plantagenet list from page 73 of the Late Antiquity to Early

Medieval army book. The Feudal Scots medium-long spear

infantry should be ‘Phalanx, Stubborn’ and ‘Tough fighters’.

We’ll be scaling how many actual men a ‘unit’ consists of

to suit the scale of play for each scenario. For the early skir-

mishes, roughly 100-150 men will make a standard unit. For

the main battle, it’ll be 500 men to a unit.

Robert the Bruce.


A Scottish

commander.

© D a v e I m

r i e



The Scottish and English lines contact.

©

D a v e I m r i e

THE TERRAINThe terrain should present no real challenges. All you need

is high ground overlooking a plain, and for the main battle,

two streams that come together in a boggy area at the eastern

edge of the table, behind the English camp.

THE FORCESThe forces are not hard to come by (as mentioned above),

but it’s worth giving a little thought to the articulation of both

armies, since that will help to explain the approach to battle

and the general course of the action. There is no reason

why we should not assume that the 1314 army followed

the general practice of other contemporary English forces in

Scotland, so we should expect the cavalry – in this case,

something in the region of 2500 men-at-arms or ‘knights’ –

to be divided into four commands. One of these should be

under the nominal command of the King and will include the

Royal household; it should be roughly twice the size of the

other three, numbering approximately 1000 men, compared

with 500 in each of the other commands.

The English infantry (probably 12-15,000 men) shouldconsist of three or possibly four formations, each divided

into units of 1000 men under the command of an officer

called a ‘millenar’. These units should consist of a mixture

of spearmen and archers, so that any one of them could be

assigned to a particular task as a balanced force of missile

and close-combat troops. The archers and spearmen might

well be reorganized according to armament when going

into battle, but not when marching. It ’s important to bear in

mind that archery had yet to become a well-drilled battle-

winning item and that, when the main battle started, the

archers and spearmen were almost certainly still in their

mixed units, rather than in separate bodies.

The Scots were organized rather differently from the

English, and chiefly consisted of three formations of spear-

men. Robert intended to have the option of fighting an

infantry action, and a large proportion of the men-at-arms

(including himself) had trained with the spearmen who

formed the bulk of the army. King Robert’s formation was

clearly larger than the other two; so, if we think in terms

of the army being divided into his own command of 3000

men, at most, and two others of 2000, under the Earls of

Carrick and Moray, we won’t be far wrong. Although many

of the men-at-arms served in the infantry, Robert kept 500

of them mounted for the main battle, and had fewer than

1000 archers, perhaps only 500.

THE OPENING SKIRMISHES (DAY 1)Very few medieval battles were spread across two days, so

Bannockburn offers us several separate wargaming options in

each of the engagements that occurred on 23-24 June 1314.

The first action took place at a spot known as ‘The Entry’,

which was a channel of open ground into a woodland hunting

park, where the road to Stirling ran up a slope on the northern

bank of the Bannock Burn. The burn was probably somewhat

broader than it is today, due to drainage developments, but itwas not a major barrier; the leading English formation under

the Earls of Hereford and Gloucester seemed to have had no

difficulty in getting across. Consisting entirely of men-at-arms,

its objective was to reconnoitre the Scottish position and, if

possible, pin the Scots to prevent them slipping away and

avoiding battle. If they could induce panic and simply sweep

the Scots from their position, then so much the better.

While they were crossing the burn and getting ready for an

advance, there was a dramatic individual feat of arms. Sir

Henry de Bohun caught sight of King Robert riding a palfrey

some distance from the Scottish lines. Eager to get his name in

the history books, he charged at the King, who evaded Bohun’s

lance and split his skull as he galloped past. Bohun did get into

the history books, but not quite as he might have hoped...



FEATURE

20

Hereford and Gloucester now led their troops up towards

the Scottish position, but found that the anks of the enemy

had been denied to them by areas of ‘pots’(small pits), which

forced them to make a frontal attack.

In addition to being well-trained and well-armed, the Scots

were also very confident; they had dealt with this sort of

thing before. Before long, the English cavalry realized thatthey were making no headway against the long spears and

were also being subjected to archery from the woods on

either side. With nothing to be gained, they retired from

the fray and made their way to the low, flat ground to the

east of the Scottish positions, where the remainder of the

English army was starting to make camp.

ENGAGEMENT 1: THE ENTRYThis takes place at Position (1) on the map. The English start there

and the Scots are at point ‘B’. The English force under Hereford

and Gloucester consists of 500 Men-at-Arms (‘Knights’, in DBA

terms). The Scottish force under Robert consists of 2000 Spear-

men and 200 Archers – heavy infantry and light infantry respec-

tively, with high morale and training.

This is not exactly the most riveting action for a wargame, though

it is perhaps interesting to run once as an example of the potential

vulnerability of unsupported men-at-arms. However, as a ‘What

if?’ scenario, it presents more interesting possibilities. What if one

of the English infantry formations had been brought into combat?

Would the addition of 500 archers and 500 close-combat infantry

have been enough to change the course of the action?

The Entry – Hail Caesar

Terrain: Open. A wooded hill behind the Scottish deployment,

and the river with bridge behind the English deployment.

English: 1 division of 4 units of English Knights (Optional: 2

divisions of 2 Feudal Infantry and 2 Light Infantry Archers).

Scottish: 2 divisions of 6 Scots long-spear infantry, each with

a small unit of light infantry bowmen.

Special rules: The Scottish can place a 6” square area of

stake-pits on each of their anks. These count as areas of

woods for terrain purposes.

ST NINIAN’S CHAPELThe second action of the day had much the same result,

but the process was somewhat different. One of the English

cavalry commands, led by Sir Robert Clifford and Henry de

Beaumont, had passed to the east of the Scottish positions,

taking the lower road towards Stirling. Like their counter-

parts under Hereford and Gloucester, they were performing

a reconnaissance task to identify the exact position of the

The Scottish schiltron prepares to repel the English.Scottish heavy cavalry.

© D a v e I m r i e

TOTAL FORCES AT BANNOCKBURN

English Force under Edward II

• 1 unit of 1000 men-at-arms

•

3 units of 500 men-at-arms• 10 units of 1500 infantry, each unit consisting of 40

per cent archers (light infantry) and 60 per cent spear-

men (medium infantry)

Scottish Force under Robert I

• 1 unit of 2500 spearmen (heavy infantry)

•

2 units of 2000 spearmen (heavy infantry)• 1 unit of 500 archers (light infantry)

• 1 unit of 5000 men-at-arms



Scots. However, they were also attempting to fulfil the terms

of a surrender pact that had been arranged between Carrick

and Moubray around three months earlier. Technically, they

had achieved this, but when Moray led a force out of the

woods and down onto what the soldier-chronicler Sir Thomas

Grey described as “the good ground” (namely, firm, at

terrain ideal for cavalry), Clifford saw a perfect opportunity.

While he could have made a dash for Stirling or returned to

the main body of the army, Clifford decided to try and deliver

a major blow against the enemy. Sources disagree about the

strength of Clifford’s command (one claims 300, another 800),

but given what we know of the articulation of the English army

and the likely total of the men-at-arms contingent, the middle

course of 500 is probably very close to the mark.

Moray’s force did not consist of his whole command, but only

“men of his own lending”, meaning vassals who owed him

military service as tenants or who formed part of his custom-

ary following through friendship and habit. They were men –

perhaps 500 at most – whom he trusted completely and who

were confident in his leadership. Moray took up a position

near St Ninian’s Chapel and waited for Clifford’s attack. The

charge came, but it ground to a halt in the face of Moray’s

spearmen. A horse can be trained to do many things, but it

will not throw itself boldly onto a hedge of pikes. Despite the

valiant efforts of the English troops, it soon became apparent

that they would make no headway, as long as Moray’s men

held firm. They even resorted to throwing side-arms (maces,

daggers, and hammers) at the Scots, in the hope of forcing an

entry into the formation, but to no avail.

At this point, the English position took another turn for theworse. Having withstood the attack, Moray now started to

advance, pressing his advantage and pushing the English

back towards the River Forth (to the North), where they

would risk being trapped and destroyed. Recognizing

the futility of further action, the English now broke into

two groups; one made tracks for Stirling Castle, while the

majority retired to join the main body of the army.

ENGAGEMENT 2: ST NINIAN’SThis takes place at Position (2) on the map. The English start

there and the Scots are at point ‘A’. The English force underClifford and Beaumont consists of 500 Men-at-arms. The

Scottish force under Moray consists of 500 Spearmen – heavy

infantry with high morale and training.

Clearly, this is a fairly interesting action for a wargame.

There are few examples of a body of infantry putting

themselves in the way of a cavalry attack, fewer yet of

them being able to withstand that attack, and almost none

where the infantry go on the offensive. Besides what actu-

ally happened, there are other possibilities for further

‘What if?’ action.

While the combat was in progress, Sir James Douglas

approached with a body of troops, ready to intervene if neces-

sary. Douglas was probably at the head of some men-at-arms,

but was under orders to take no risks with even a small portion

of the modest Scottish cavalry arm. However, what might

have happened if he had committed his soldiers?

Would a force of 100-200 men-

at-arms have been enough

to prevent Clifford’s with-

drawal and bring about

the destruction of a size-

able contingent of English

cavalry? If so, at what costto the Scots? Would it

have had a major impact

on the main battle?

St Ninian’s – the gateway to Stirling Castle.The English are forced back to the river.

Scottish men-at-arms.



© D a v e I m

r i e



FEATURE

22

St Ninian’s – Hail Caesar

Terrain: Open. The stream is fordable (cavalry take a turn).

English: 1 division of 4 units of English Knights.

Scottish: 1 divisions of 4 Scots long-spear infantry (Optional:

1 division of 2 Scots Knights).

The third action of the day is virtually unknown. A rift between the

Earl of Atholl and the Earl of Carrick had caused Atholl to aban-

don the Bruce party. Instead, he mounted a raid on King Robert’s

stores depot at Cambuskenneth Abbey. All we really know is thatthe raid was successful, so wargamers have a free hand to craft

any scenario they like, but imagining a few dozen men-at-arms

descending on a complex with a handful of defenders seems like

a good start. The raid may have taken place at night, though the

days are very long at Stirling around midsummer. However, the

cover of darkness gives us another potential ‘What if?’

The English army spent the night between the Pelstream

Burn and the Bannock Burn for several reasons. It was a at,

firm area suitable for a camp, with ample running water for

horses, oxen and men. The two burns also provided some

degree of protection against a night attack by the Scots,something that was seen as a real possibility. No such attack

occurred, but there is excellent wargaming potential for a

raid or even a major offensive in the dark.

THE MAIN BATTLEEdward and his commanders, quite reasonably, thought that

they would have to march on the Scottish position and force

battle, so they were deployed for an advance, not to receive an

attack. To their astonishment, the Scots chose to leave the high

ground and force battle on the English. Robert’s army moved

down from the high ground overlooking the plain, quickly

formed a line of three divisions across the neck of land between

the Bannock and the Pelstream with a screen of archers to the

front, and started to advance towards the English.

The archers were quickly driven off by a similar screen of Englisharchers, but by that time, the main body of the Scottish army

was too close to be impeded by shooting, so the English archers

beat a hasty retreat. The Earl of Gloucester gathered his men-at-

arms and made an immediate charge against the enemy, only

to repeat the experience of the previous day; the Scottish spear-

men proved to be quite impenetrable and Gloucester’s troops

were forced back into the ever-diminishing space between the

armies, as the Scots pressed forward. Edward and his subordi-

nates tried to deploy their greater strength, but time was against

them. There was less and less room for the English to manoeuvre

and no opportunity to bring their superior numbers into action.

As the struggle continued, Edward or one of his subordinates

managed to gather a body of archers and sent them across the

Pelstream Burn, where they started shooting at the left ank of

Three Scottish schiltrons.


HAIL CAESAR - BANNOCKBURN

English – Edward II

• 1 division of 4 Knight units

• 1 division of 3 Knight units

• 4 divisions of 2 Feudal Heavy Infantry,

2 Town Militia and 2 Light Infantry Bowmen

The English start the game in marching column. The English

infantry divisions are broken when more than a third of its

units are shaken, have left the table, or are destroyed.

Scots – Robert I

• 1 division of 2 Dismounted Knights and 6 long-

spear Medium Infantry

• 2 divisions of 6 long-spear Medium Infantry with a

small unit of Light Infantry Bowmen

• 1 division of 2 Scots Knight units

The Scots start in battle formation. All Scots spear are

‘Phalanx’, ‘Stubborn’ and ‘Tough fighters’.



the Scottish army. This manoeuvre might have paid divi-

dends, but Robert had taken the precaution of retaining

a reserve of 500 men-at-arms under Sir Robert Keith, the

Earl Marischal. Keith led his men across the Pelstream,

crashed into the archers, and scattered them before they

could make any real impact.

The English army was now in serious trouble;

compressed into an increasingly disorganized mass

of men and horses, they were forced back through

their bivouac area onto the soft ground towards

the conuence of the Pelstream and the Bannock.

Edward fought with conspicuous gallantry, but the

battle was clearly lost and the men responsible for his

personal safety dragged him from the field. Seeing

him depart, the army lost all its remaining cohesion

and was simply steam-rollered by the Scots.

To contemporary observers, the most remarkable

aspect of the battle was that the Scots infantry had attacked

a large army with a powerful mounted arm. They had left

an elevated position to move onto ideal cavalry terrain and

force an engagement. They had chosen a daring option, but

they might not have done so. Robert could have chosen to

remain on the narrow plateau overlooking the plain and wait

for the enemy to come to him, a practice he had followed on

previous occasions, enjoying considerable success.

Alternatively, since his men had won two actions already, he

might have chosen to withdraw into more difficult terrain and

avoid battle completely. Again, he had done this in the past, forc-ing Edward to abandon his offensive due to a shortage of supplies,

money and, of course, the desertion that was endemic in medi-

eval armies. Here we have two interesting ‘What if’s’ to consider.

Edward was eager for battle, so if the Scots had remained in posi-

tion, he certainly would have attacked. In order to do so, he would

have had to approach the Scots uphill through woodland, which

Robert had blocked with fallen trees. In short, it would not have

been an easy proposition under the best of circumstances, espe-

cially as his cavalry were of little use in such terrain. In fact, Edward

had anticipated this eventuality by calling up as many infantry as

he could muster, knowing that the Scots might have to be foughtin areas where cavalry would be ineffective. For a wargamer, the

challenge is to see if Edward could have got his army into action

and overcome a smaller force that had the advantage in terms of

training and motivation. If the Scots had chosen to retire to more

favourable terrain, could he have moved quickly enough to bring

them to battle, or would they have evaded his advance? If they

had withdrawn successfully, could he still have outmanoeuvred

them with his more numerous infantry, thus forcing a battle that

Robert was keen to avoid? If so, would his archers and spearmen

have been a match for a force that, though smaller, was better-

armoured (especially with the dismounted men-at-arms amongst

the rank and file) and better trained?

ENGAGEMENT 3: THE MAIN BATTLEThis takes place at Position (2) on the map. The English start

there and the Scots are at point ‘B’.

Bannockburn has a lot of wargaming potential and few

people are going to recognize the action, simply by seeing

the terrain or even the armies. This means that it can

be adapted for other forces, periods and locations. The

engagements in this article can be fought out with all sorts

of early- to late-medieval armies, and probably many clas-

sical ones, as well. In fact, any period or country where

armoured cavalry and spears/pikes are the dominant

weapons will work, so even armies with early firearms as

the missile element might do very nicely. In terms of DBM/

DBA, for example, the armies could be classed as ‘Knights’ ,

Scottish ‘pikes’, English ‘spears’ and ‘Psiloi’ (as the archerson both sides). Bear in mind for the main battle – if you

are following the prototype – that the English should start

the game in the process of forming up for a march on the

Scots, rather than being deployed for defence.

So there you have it – a series of interesting and colourful

games with lots of potential for a sort of mini campaign,

where each action has an impact on the next one. The

forces committed on the first day were relatively small,

and even heavy losses should have a limited impact on the

overall strength of the English army, but naturally would be

more of an issue for the Scots. Even if both of the Englishadvance parties were completely destroyed, Edward would

still have at least three times as many men-at-arms as

Robert; on the other hand, morale might be more signifi-

cant. If either of the initial actions had resulted in defeat

for the Scots, the confidence of the army as a whole would

have taken a severe knock. WS&S

If you happen to be at the Claymore show in August, do

check out the Thule Gamers table and see if you can do

better than Edward II!

The map for Days 1 and 2.

Most of the miniatures are by Claymore Castings, and

come from the collection of David Imrie. The Scottish

cavalry were painted by the author.



FEATURE

24

C-DAY, CAESAR’S INVASION OF BRITAIN

SAVING TRIBUNEREGULUS

By Simon Miller

The Salute theme for 2014 is D-Day, 6 June. What’s a man to do if he has no tanks,but has a cupboard bulging full of Romans? The answer for myself and the team atWargames, Soldiers and Strategy has turned out to be ‘C-Day’ – Caesar’s invasion ofBritain in 55 BC. A careful investigation quickly established that there were numerousparallels between Caesar’s earlier triumph and the Normandy landings. It was imme-

diately clear that C-Day fitted comfortably within the Salute theme!

By 55 BC, Caesar’s legionaries had conquered

much of Gaul, and later that summer, he found

himself in northern France with a little spare time

on his hands. The energetic general decided to make an

impromptu exploratory raid across the Channel. Britain

was an almost legendary place, lying beyond the “great

river Oceanus” at the very edge of the known world.

Consequently, a landing there would represent a huge

propaganda triumph for Caesar, back in Rome.

Caesar gathered 80 local merchant ships, along with an

unspecified number of Mediterranean-style Roman galleys, at

Portus Itius, near modern Boulogne. The transports had suffi-

cient load capacity to carry just two legions (the Seventh and

the elite Tenth), together with a minimal level of supplies. The

officers embarked on the galleys, and Caesar’s auxiliary Gallic

cavalry followed in a separate squadron of transports.

Setting sail at midnight, Caesar arrived at 9am, where he could

see that his intended landing area was very strongly defended

by masses of British warriors, and that legionaries assaulting the

narrow beach would be peppered with javelins and rocks thrown

from the cliffs above. Thwarted, he sailed eastwards for seven

miles, until he reached the end of the wall of cliffs at Walmer,

where he awaited the arrival of the rest of his eet. Unfortunately

for the Romans, the British chariots had also arrived, having raced

along the top of the cliffs, and were ready to resist the landing.

The beach at Walmer is gently sloping and composed of small

stones. It is extremely wide and chariots would have been

able to manoeuvre very quickly across it. Behind the beach

rise rather lower cliffs, getting lower still as one moves east-wards for around a mile, where they end. The Roman ships

grounded but, because of the waves of British chariots racing

around the beach, the legionaries could not attempt a land-

ing. To force them back, Caesar ordered several of his galleys

to beach on his left ank. The Romans may not have had the

massive naval artillery and air support enjoyed by the World

War Two Allies, but they did have catapults mounted on their

galleys, which were capable of picking off the Celts from well

beyond the range of the latter’s javelins and slings.

This floating battery provided enfilading fire that forced

the Celts to retreat a short distance, and so the way was

clear for the legionaries to attempt a landing. Even unop-posed, this would not have been an easy undertaking. The

Romans did not have anything like the specialist landing

craft employed by the allies in Normandy. The transports

that carried the bulk of the legionaries were high-sided

and of relatively deep draught, which prevented them

from getting in very close to the shore. Jumping over the

bulwarks of these ships into deep water must have been

a dangerous undertaking, as the legionaries were heavily

equipped with armour, helmet and shield. It is possible

that some Romans may have drowned here, as did allied

soldiers in Normandy on D-Day, when the landing ramps

were sometimes dropped too far from the shore.

At first, the legionaries, totally unused to fighting in these

conditions, were reluctant to disembark. However, the A map of the landing site.



A small Roman merchantmen prepares to land.

aquilifer of the Tenth famously and heroically leapt into the

surf, calling out, “Jump down, comrades, unless you want to

surrender our eagle to the enemy!” He was quickly followed

by his comrades and then those in the neighbouring vessels.

The Romans formed up into ad-hoc units and gradually fought

their way out of the surf, under constant javelin fire from

the Britons above them on the beach. The British chariots,

encountered here by the Romans for the very first time, must

have been terrifying. Caesar writes that “the Britons begin by

driving all over the field hurling javelins, and generally theterror inspired by the horses and the noise of the wheels is

sufficient to throw their opponent’s ranks into disorder.”

Caesar used a reserve force in rowing boats and small scout

galleys to support the landing, wherever it was most threat-

ened. Eventually, once sufficient Romans had been able to

form up around the standards, they were able to attack up the

beach (like Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan) and break the

Britons, who ed inland. Fortunately for the escaping Britons,

the Roman naval squadron carrying their cavalry had been

delayed, so the Romans were unable to mount an effective

pursuit. The Britons subsequently sent envoys asking for peace,

although more fighting was to follow in the coming weeks.

WARGAMING C-DAYCaesar’s landing can be recreated either as a full-scale

wargame, as we will be doing at Salute, or alternatively

as a skirmish action. There are many parallels between

Caesar’s landing and the Normandy landings almost 2000

years later. These include:

• Landing from the English Channel – Check!

• Invasion eet – Check!

• Naval fire support – Check!

•

Beach assault – Check!• Counterattack by enemy Panzer Divi-

sions (well, British chariots) – Check!

It’s not strictly necessary to have any Romans ships, as

these could be deemed to be just off the table edge. Ideally,

though, at least one Roman transport ship should be repre-

sented. The transports used in 54 BC were requisitioned

Gallic vessels, high-sided and stoutly built of oak. Such

models are not going to be easy to find, so do feel free to

use whatever substitutes are available, or to scratch-build.

Grand Manner sell an excellent selection of Roman vessels

in resin, including various trade ships and small galleys.

We are using several of these in our Salute game, alongwith other ships converted from plastic kits and commer-

cially available models.

Suitable miniatures are readily available for the invading

Romans, either in 28mm metal from Wargames Foundry and

1st Corps, amongst others, or in plastic from Warlord and

Wargames Factory. The game could also be fought in 15mm,

or in an even smaller scale such as 6mm, where card ships

are readily available from Hotz Artwork’s ‘Roman Seas’ range.

There was a brisk wind on the day I visited Walmer, and

the sea was choppy and looked very uninviting; it was easy

to imagine why the legionaries didn’t want to jump in! Thebeach could be easily modelled, rising from the surf to a

broad pebble-covered plateau, covering most of the battle-

Druids sacrifice to bring a storm against the Roman armada.

Disembarked Romans form up.



FEATURE

26

field. The white cliffs and green trees beyond the beach

provide a pleasing visual contrast and backdrop.

On C-Day, most of the fighting took place in the surf andalong the shoreline. If only a single vessel and a limited

number of miniatures are available, then these could be

used to fight a small section of the landing as a skirmish

action. The rules will also need to take account of the danger

of jumping into the deep water and the difficulties of finding

their feet in the undertow, and forming up into units.

Where sufficient numbers of miniatures are available, the landing

can be fought as a full-scale battle, as we will be doing at Salute.

In this event, the squadron of galleys with catapults should be

represented, and perhaps a unit of reserves in rowing boats. The

Roman ships could be placed some distance from the shoreline,with the shallow water between the ships and the shore counting

as disordering terrain and slowing movement. Only the British

chariots and cavalry will be present at the start of the scenario,

with infantry and other reinforcements arriving during the course

of the battle from the direction of Dover, on the Roman left.

Whatever scale is used, the Roman fear of jumping into the

surf and of meeting the British chariots must be factored in.

FURTHER SCENARIO IDEASBeyond the landing itself, parallels with D-Day can be used

to extend the fighting a little further inland. In the full-scale

invasion, the fighting does not need to end on the beach;

the Roman objective might be to form up, move inland, and

assault a British village, hill-fort or wagon laager. There are

also several good skirmish-scenario possibilities.

”You’re going home in a Roman ambulance!”

The Wicker Man

The Britons have captured a Roman envoy and imprisoned

him in a wicker man, at the top of the cliffs. A party of Roman

exploratores (scouts) must land from a small boat and scalethe cliffs using ropes and ladders (à la Point du Hoc), to

rescue him before the Druids light the barbeque and possibly

summon a storm to defeat the Roman eet.

Saving Tribune Regulus

Caesar calls the centurion of the exploratores to him and

briefs him on a mission. Tribune Regulus has been cut off

behind enemy lines, whilst on a foraging mission. Regulus’

elder brother was killed during the landing, and he is now

not only a senator, but also the sole heir to a vast Italian slave

estate. The centurion must take a contubernium (tent-party) of

exploratores inland, locate him, and bring him to safety, over-coming various challenges along the way. WS&S

With the amount of chariots on offer, it’s no wonder that

people refer to an Ancient British Panzer Division! Minia-

tures from the author’s collection painted by Shaun Watson,

Andres Fernandes, Nick Speller and the author.

• Gaius Julius Caesar, The Conquest of Gaul (essen-

tial reading – one of the greatest accounts of a mili-

tary campaign ever)

• G. Grange, The Roman invasions of Britain (a very

useful detailed investigation of the various Roman

invasions of Britain)

FURTHER READING



FEATURE

28

HIS NAME IS SHORT, BUT HIS DEEDS ARE GREAT

PIET HEYN AND THETREASURE FLEET

By Björn Arvid Kappe

To the Netherlands, Piet Heyn is a national folk-hero and a celebrated naval officerof the ‘Eighty Years War’. His enemies, the Spanish and Portuguese, portrayed himas a despicable pirate. In truth, Heyn was both of these. He was a privateer forthe United Provinces, but he had a reputation as a fair disciplinarian, standingno unruly behaviour from his crews and treating his prisoners with respect. After

several raids on ports and enemy merchantmen, his greatest achievement camewhen he captured a Spanish treasure fleet.

Heyn had spent many years with the Dutch West Indian

Company, raiding the Spanish and Portguese, rising

to the rank of Admiral. In 1628, he was tasked with

harassing the Spanish in the Caribbean. His eet consisted

of about twenty frigates and eleven smaller vessels, and their

strategy was to lie in ambush off the coast of Cuba. Their

target was the Spanish treasure eet, sailing out of Peru on its

return to Spain. The Dutch were at war with the Spanish and

could use every resource to drive their enemy from southernHolland. Thanks to corrupt Spanish clerks, the Dutch knew

that the Spanish eet contained about eighteen ships, heavily

laden primarily with silver. Their route would take them from

Peru to Mexico, then onwards to Spain via Cuba.

Not wanting the Spanish eet to slip by unnoticed, Heyn

had ordered his eet to divide into two squadrons. The Span-

ish treasure eet would, wherever possible, stick to friendly

waters, but it was still possible for them to evade Heyn’s eet.

During the night of 8 September, the Spanish eet was spotted,

fortuitously sailing right between the two squadrons! The Dutch

immediately attacked and captured ten ships. One galleon was

taken after a boarding action; the other nine – smaller transport

ships – were talked into surrender. The other half of the Span-

ish eet, containing mainly larger galleons, tried to escape

and made a run for the Cuban coast. Harassed all

through the night by the faster Dutch eet, the

Spanish tried to reach the Bay of Matan-

zas, presumably to put their ships in a

more defensible position. They did

manage to reach the bay, but in

the chaos, they accidentally

ran aground, thus losing all

hope of putting up a properdefence. In a last ditch effort to

keep the silver from falling into

enemy hands, the Span-

ish tried to get their

precious cargo onto

the beaches. Alas,

in doing so, they

hindered them-

selves even more

in organizing a

proper defence.

After a few salvosfrom the Dutch

ships and a shore

party, the Spanish

surrendered, allow-

ing the Dutch to

capture one of the

biggest war booties of all time. The silver, silk, pearls, and

ebony amounted to an estimated 12,000,000 Dutch guilders

(hundreds of millions, by today’s standards).

PLAYING THE CAPTURE OF THE SPANISH

TREASURE FLEETHere is a three-part mini-campaign, re-enacting one of the

most inuential series of naval battles in Dutch history. There

are a number of good naval gaming rule sets, so feel free to

adapt it to the set of your choice. The Spanish aim is to save

as much of their eet as possible, while the Dutch aim to

capture ships, not sink them. Any rules set should have rules

for boarding and capturing vessels.

THE OPPONENTSBoth admirals were respected and capable seamen. There

should be no major difference in their capabilities. The Dutch

eet, however, also has a capable rear admiral (Witte de With).

Depending on which rule set you are using, consider loweringthe morale of any Dutch ship that sinks a Spanish ship. The

crew involved would realize that sinking a Spanish ship will

hurt not only their chances of loot, but the war effort in general.

Piet Heyn.


Looking for prey.



Ships captured or destroyed in a previous scenario will be left

out of the remaining scenarios.

The Dutch fleet

Piet Heyn had about twenty frigates and eleven smaller

escort vessels at his disposal. On average, the Dutch frig-

ates had between 32 and 48 cannons. The smaller escort

vessels called yachts had between 12 and 20 cannons on

board. All crews are trained or veteran seamen.

The Spanish fleet

The Spanish admiral had nine galleons and nine small

transport ships in his fleet. The armament of the Spanish

galleons at that time varied wildly, ranging from sixteen

to hundreds of cannons, according to some sources. I

would lean towards the higher number, to create a play-

able position for the Spanish, and give these nine galleons

60 cannons each. The smaller transport ships were present,

but would probably have been lightly armed with only

twelve cannons each. While the galleons would have had

good or maybe even veteran troops, the smaller transports

seem to have had average seamen, at best.

SHIPS AHOY!One of the look-outs on a Dutch ship has spotted sails on

the horizon. After closer inspection, it seems that the Span-

ish have finally been found! This is an ambush scenario,

with the Dutch attacking. The wind is coming from the

north-west for the first two turns.

Dutch Player

Deploy the Dutch eet in two equal squadrons and place

them on the anks of the Spanish eet, as shown in the map.

Due to the night-time conditions, the position of your squad-rons, and a desire not to sink the Spanish ships outright,

all ranges for your shooting are halved. Your objective is to

capture as many ships as possible.

Spanish player

The Spanish have

been successfully

ambushed and

they are in no

position to put up

a good defence.

You should deploy

between the twoDutch squadrons,

in any order you

want, but in line

astern (see map). Your galleons are heavily laden with silver

and other valuable goods, which reduces their speed by a

third. Due to your eet formation and the fact that you are

trying to drive off the Dutch, you may fire your cannons at full

range. Your objective is to escape off the eastern edge of the

map with your eet, giving priority to your galleons.

QUICKSILVERAll through the

night, the Dutch

have been pursu-

ing and harass-

ing the Span-

ish eet. Now

they are ready

to capitalize on

their success-

ful ambush. The

Spanish eet has

lost some of its cohesion and seems to be easy prey. This is a

pursuit scenario, with the Dutch attacking.

Dutch player

Place your eet within your deployment zone as you wish.

Your objective is to capture as many Spanish ships as possible.

The Spanish attempt to ward off the Dutch.



FEATURE

30

Spanish player

You must deploy your fleet in three small squadrons. The

galleons have to be divided amongst the squadrons, as

evenly as possible. Your objective is to escape and make

for the Bay of Matanzas. Remember that your galleons still

lose a third of their movement, due to their cargo.

The wind is random from Turn 1.

A PIRATE’S DREAMAfter a full day’s ight, the Spanish managed to reach the Bay

of Matanzas. With a friendly beach at their back and shoals

and reefs on their anks, the Spanish finally have the means

to put up a proper defence.

Dutch player

You must deploy

your fleet in the

lower left cornerof the table.

You cannot sail

across the shoals

with any of your

ships. The reefs,

however, may be

crossed by your

yachts. You have

ten turns before the Spanish finally get the silver ashore

and make a break for Havana. You are allowed to sink

enemy ships, since the water is shallow enough to easily

salvage any valuables from the cargo holds.

Spanish player

Deploy your eet and ward of the Dutch. Either drive off their

eet, or get the silver ashore and transport it to Havana. You

have to hold out for ten turns. The shoals are not crossable,

but your smaller vessels may cross the reefs.

CONCLUSIONUpon his return to Holland, Piet Heyn was declared a

national hero. He famously remarked, “Now they praise me

because I gained riches without the least danger; but earlier,

when I risked my life in full combat, they didn’t even know I

existed”. The amount of silver captured was enough to spon-

sor a full year’s worth of war, campaigning against the Span-

ish in southern Holland. Piet Heyn’s share of the loot was

meagre, less than one thousandth of the haul. After costs

were deducted this amounted to about 7000 Dutch guilders.

Following this most illustrious raid, Piet Heyn, after

an argument with the West Indian Company, broke his

contract and began working for the Admiralty of Holland

(one of the five Dutch navies). His first mission for his new

employers was the capture and sinking of the dreadedDuinkerker kapers or Dunkirk Privateers. During this

voyage, he didn’t find the Duinkerker kapers but another

band of kapers privateers. Heyn was mortally wounded

during the opening salvos, and was buried on 4 July 1629

with honours in the Oude Kerk at Delft.

Arguably, the defeat of the Spanish treasure eet

heralded the overall defeat and withdrawal of

the Spanish from southern Holland. WS&S

“Piet Heyn, Piet Heyn! His name is

short, but his deeds are great.” In the

Netherlands, this nursery rhyme

is still commonly sung by moth-

ers to their children. A rich prize for the Dutch.

The Dutch force the Spanish ashore.



THEME

32

AN INTRODUCTION TO MONGOL BATTLE TACTICS

HOW TO CONQUERTHE WORLD

By Chris Peers

The nomadic horsemen of Central Asia have enjoyed a fearsome reputation sinceClassical times, but their earlier exploits – even those of such noted warriors asthe Scythians, Huns and Turks – pale into insignificance beside the conquests ofthe Mongols. The statistics are well known: in the century after Genghis Khan’stakeover of power in Mongolia in 1206, he and his successors established the larg-

est land-based empire ever known, defeated more kingdoms, killed more enemies – and allegedly left behind more descendants – than anyone else in history. But,strangely enough, exactly how they did it remains obscure. Part of the answer, ofcourse, lies in numbers and organization.

According to their own Secret History , by 1206 the

various Mongol tribes could already muster more

than 100,000 men, and many Uighur, Turkish,

and similar nomadic allies were soon to be added. But, as

we shall see when we come to discuss the Battle of Kalka,

Mongol armies did not need numerical superiority in order

to win. More significant were experience, discipline and

mobility. By the time they were pitted against the Chinese,

the Khwarizmians, and the other great empires of Eurasia,

Genghis’ men had gained experience in a series of wars going

back more than two decades. Their officers were appointed

on merit and not, as in other armies, on the basis of noble

birth. They also possessed a formal command structure, with

each 10,000 strong touman subdivided into units of ten, a

hundred and a thousand, and they were familiar with a set

of standardized deployments and manoeuvres, with orders

communicated by messengers, drumbeats and whistling

arrows. As for mobility, each Mongol had several horses and

could ride them in turn as each one became tired; he alsotravelled light and wore a minimum of armour. So far, so

good. Most sets of wargames rules will allow for elite units

and superior command systems, but what we still need to

do is establish exactly how the Mongol troopers fought once

they reached ‘the sharp end’.

The Mongols were, of course, famous bowmen, and many

commentators, ancient and modern, emphasize the role of

archery, regarding them as heirs to the light horse-archer

tradition of the Parthians, Huns and Turks. We know from

numerous sources how these latter peoples fought – shoot-

ing from a distance, using their speed to evade their oppo-nents’ charges, and only closing in for the kill when their

opponents were disorganized and weakened by volleys of

arrows. As Ammianus Marcellinus said of the Huns:

“As they are lightlyequipped for swiftmotion, and unexpectedin action, they purposelydivide suddenly into scat-

tered bands and attack,rushing about in disorderhere and there, dealingterrific slaughter.”

This would certainly seem an

effective tactic for mounted

archers to use against a less

mobile enemy, but there is

little evidence that the Mongols actually used it. Victories

won by these attritional means, like those of the Parthians at

Carrhae and the Seljuks at Manzikert, usually took a whole

day or even longer, whereas in many Mongol battles, the

enemy were defeated so quickly that their commanders had

no time to react. In 1211 at Huan-erh-tsui, north of Beijing,

the Chinese army was caught with its infantry so close behind

the cavalry that neither could manoeuvre properly, and it was

swept away by a Mongol charge before the cavalry could

advance. At Kalka in 1223, Nicolle and Shpakovsky point

out that the Mongol commander, Subotei, did not wait for his

archers to soften up the Russians before charging, but charged

immediately with his heavy cavalry. In support of this, they

quote a report that a Russian officer riding in the vanguard

was killed with a spear, though they seem still to regard the

tactic as a departure from the usual Mongol methods.

Mongol sources themselves seldom give much tactical detail,

but they emphasize disciplined manoeuvres, rather than “rush-

ing about in disorder”. “Each time they turn”, says the Secret

Genghis Khan.




History , “their ranks are proper”. An admittedly poetic passage in

the same source describes another battle, against the Naimans in

1204, as being decided by bloody close-range combat: “pushing

before them the men with swords, cutting them down and killing

them.” Feigned ights were used as pre-planned manoeuvres to

draw an opponent out of position, but if charged on the battle-field, Mongols stood and fought, sometimes dismounting to do

so. In 1216, for example, the Khwarizmians attacked a Mongol

expedition passing their borders, but were shocked by the ferocity

with which their outnumbered opponents resisted, “giving blows

with the point and edge of the sword”.

This seems inconsistent with the report of John de Plano Carpini,

writing in the 1240s, who says that most Mongol troopers carried

only a bow and an axe, and “if possible ... never engage in hand-

to-hand fighting. They always first use arrows to kill the enemy

and their horses”. But we know from archaeological finds as well

as written accounts that some men had swords, lances, and evenmetal or leather armour for themselves or their horses, though

we do not know how many of these there were or how they

were organized. In fact, our sources are silent on any distinc-

tions of function or armament that there may have been within

the toumans. There was a Khan’s Guard or keshik , but this was

a touman-sized unit in its own right, which accompanied the

khan in person and would not have been split up to provide a

heavy element for other units. Each unit may have contained a

small elite of better equipped and armoured men, forming either

a commander’s bodyguard or a front rank, over which their

comrades would shoot; but this idea is actually derived from the

contemporary organization of the Jurchen in north China, and

its relevance to the Mongols is speculative. More likely, armourand lances were restricted mainly to individual officers and

wealthy individuals, totalling 10-20 per cent of the army. These

men would have dealt the blows with sword and spear that so

impressed their enemies, but there is no reason to believe that,

tactically, their role was any different from the rest.

Following Carpini, most historians still believe that mounted

archery is somehow incompatible with close combat, and so

the Mongols – like, for example, the Parthians – must have

fielded two different troop-types for the two roles. But is this

necessarily true? Modern writers on archery are often obsessed

with long-range performance, but Professor J M Smith (quotedby Amitai-Preiss) has argued for a different interpretation. He

suggests that – in contrast to what might be called the Parthian

or Turkish long-range skirmishing and the stationary shooting

favoured by the heavily-armoured Muslim ghulam cavalry –

the usual Mongol tactic involved “unit after unit galloping at

the enemy as fast as could be, with each man shooting one

heavy arrow from as close as possible; each unit would then

turn away, out of the path and line of fire of the next unit,

which could follow almost on its heels”. A typical engage-

ment range would be no more than 30 yards.

This echeloned attack would have the effect of concentrating

against one part of an enemy line, which would be pinned

and then hit by a succession of charges until it broke. It had

the additional advantage that an arrow discharged while the

shooter was galloping towards the target would have greater

velocity and hence penetrative power than if shot from

the halt or while moving away. Unfortunately, this tactic isnever specifically described for the armies of Genghis or his

generals; but we do know that the Khitans, who ruled north

China before the Jurchens, prescribed a similar succession

of charges, and it seems that, at Hims in 1281, the Mongols

“were organized as squadrons ... and followed one another as

groups”, which may be an attempt to describe the same thing.

This tactic also fits in with Carpini’s observations, as most

of the damage done to the enemy would indeed have been

inicted by archery, though at closer range than was usual.

So, from a wargaming point of view, we need a classification

for cavalry who are primarily bow-armed and highly mobile,

but who habitually fight at close range, and whose attacks cantherefore be as swift and decisive as a charge with cold steel.

(This would make them ‘Cv’ rather than ‘LH’ in DBM terms, for

example.) In my own rules, In Death Ground , I have allowed

the option to treat Mongols as either Light or Heavy Cavalry

(the latter do not all necessarily wear armour, but are classified

on the basis of their willingness to fight at close quarters). I

have also given them a bonus when shooting mounted at close

range only, to encourage decisive action rather than skirmish-

ing. I am usually wary of special rules that might create unbeat-

able supermen; but if anyone in history deserves such a boost,

it must surely be the cavalrymen of Genghis Khan – the most

spectacular conquerors the world has ever seen. WS&S

Arab and Mongol horse-archers exchange volleys.

• R. Amitai-Preiss, Mongols and Mamluks. Cambridge

1995. (Focuses on the Middle Eastern campaigns,

but contains a useful discussion of Mongol battle-

field tactics.)

• F. W. Cleaves, The Secret History of the Mongols.

Cambridge, Massachusetts 1982.

• D. Morgan, The Mongols. Oxford 1986. (Probably

still the best overall introduction to the Mongols

and their history.)

• D. Nicolle and V. Shpakovsky, Kalka River 1223

(Osprey Campaign 98). Oxford 2001.

RECOMMENDED READING



THEME

34

GAMING THE KALKA CAMPAIGN OF 1222-1223

SUBOTEI’S RIDE

By Chris Peers

At the beginning of 1218, the people of eastern Europe and the Middle East wereembroiled, as usual, in their own local affairs. The major powers were the AyyubidSultans in Egypt and the Shah of Khwarizmia, who ruled over what is now Iran andUzbekistan. North and east of Khwarizmia was the Chinese-influenced empire ofQara-Khitai. North of the Caucasus Mountains, the steppes were controlled by thenomad confederations of the Alans and Kipchaks. In the forests beyond the steppewere numerous Russian principalities, mostly preoccupied with internal power strug-

gles. But within two years, the map had changed beyond recognition.

For some years, Qara-Khitai had been under the control

of a warlord named Kuchlug, but in 1218, Kuchlug’s

past caught up with him, when old enemies conquered

his empire and killed him. It is unlikely that anyone in the

Christian or western Muslim lands took much notice – those

savages were always murdering each other. But the eastern

invaders who had thus been brought to the edge of their world

were not the usual steppe raiders. They were a newly united

people called the Mongols, and their leader bore a name that

they would soon know all too well – Genghis Khan.

Shah Muhammad of Khwarizmia was the first to be disil-

lusioned. He rebuffed Mongol attempts to trade, making

the even worse mistake of backing a local governor, who

had murdered some Mongol envoys. Within two years,

Muhammad’s empire had been destroyed and he had ed

to an island in the Caspian Sea, where he died. Two of

Genghis’ generals, Subotei and Jebei, in command of two

toumans (or divisions), chased the Shah all the way across

Iran, and returned with stories of unknown countries further

west. They proposed to mount a reconnaissance in force to

explore the region, and Genghis sent them back with

orders to return in no more than three years. Mongol

troops had reached the frontiers of Europe not as

part of a grand strategic plan, but as a result of a

series of chance events.

The best known battle of the ensuing campaign

was fought on the Kalka River in May 1223; but

in order to understand the battle, it is neces-

sary to appreciate the extraordinary events

that led to it. In the summer of 1222, Subotei

and Jebei fought their way through Georgia,

and, on the northern side of the Caucasus,

found themselves trapped by a hugearmy of Kipchak and Alan horse-arch-

ers. So Subotei resorted to diplomacy,

persuading the Kipchaks that they and

the Mongols were kindred steppe peoples, whereas the Alans

were untrustworthy foreigners. The Kipchak Khan Koten fell

for this and turned on his former allies, only to find that it

was, in fact, his own people who were Subotei’s first targets.

This may have been because the Kipchaks’ eastern relatives,

the Qangli Turks, had earned Genghis’ enmity by fighting

for Shah Muhammad and harbouring the Khan’s defeated

rivals. At any rate, Koten was defeated in a battle near the

Black Sea, and ed for his life into the northern forests. There

he canvassed the local princes for support, arguing that theinvaders would soon be seizing Russian land as well.

In fact, this was not their objective at all. Subotei and

Jebei spent the winter on the steppes, and early in 1223,

turned back for home. But about the middle of May, near

the River Dnieper in what is now Ukraine, they were inter-

cepted by Koten and his Russian allies, led by the Princes of

Kiev, Galicia and Chernigov (all three of whom were coin-

cidentally named Mstislav), with a combined army said to

number 90,000. Faced with this overwhelming force, Subo-

tei resorted to a traditional trick of the steppe tribes – the

feigned ight. On this occasion, though, he elevated it from

a battlefield tactic to a full-scale strategic manoeuvre.

The Mongols retreated eastwards for nine days, luring the

enemy into a reckless pursuit. Then, on the tenth day, on

the open plains along of the Kalka River, they struck back.

The Galicians were in the van of the allied army, as their

commander, Mstislav ‘the Daring’, had pressed on while

the other princes argued about whether to abandon the

pursuit. The Chernigov forces had eventually followed, but

there was still a wide gap between the two contingents,

covered only by Kipchak scouts. The precise details of the

battle are not clear, but it appears that Subotei swept away

the Kipchaks in a sudden charge, took the Chernigov armyby surprise, and drove it back to the river, before attacking

the Galicians from the rear. The Galicians cut their way out,

despite heavy losses, but Mstislav of Chernigov abandonedMounted

Russian prince.



Mounted Mongol

horseman.

his allies and retreated northwards. This did him no good,

as the Mongols later caught up with his army and routed

it. However, it ensured the destruction of the third Russian

force, under Mstislav of Kiev, which was still encamped

west of the Kalka when the enemy surrounded it. After

resisting for three days, Mstislav was forced to surrender,

whereupon he was executed in retaliation for the murder

of Mongol ambassadors. One of the biggest armies Europe

had ever fielded had not only been cut to pieces, but had

been surrounded by a much smaller opponent.

The Mongols did not stay to exploit their victory, but

continued back to Mongolia. The rulers of Europe breathed

a sigh of relief, and even allowed themselves to believe

that their resistance had deterred a full-scale Mongol inva-

sion. Genghis died in 1227, and his sons and grandsons

established themselves in different parts of the empire. But

they never forgot Subotei’s reports of the wealth and mili-

tary weakness of Europe. Though it took them fifteen years,

they would be back.

KALKA AS A WARGAMEThe Kalka campaign is not an easy subject to reproduce on

the tabletop. The diplomacy and strategic manoeuvres are best

played out as part of a campaign; but what I want to concen-

trate on here is the battle itself, and especially the question of

how the Mongols could destroy a superior force so completely.

One obvious point is that the terrain was well suited to their

mobile cavalry tactics – it would not be surprising if Subotei

had chosen it carefully, and deliberately lured his enemies into

it. The exact location is unclear, but Nicolle and Shpakovsky

(in their Osprey Campaign book on the subject) have several

photographs of the general area, which show open, rolling

steppe, interrupted only by the valley of the Kalka and the scat-

tered woods and rocky bluffs on both banks.

The river itself is fairly narrow, less than a bowshot across,

and should be treated as ‘difficult going’ rather than an

impassable obstacle. But it would be enough to slow

the Russian cavalry and prevent it from moving quickly

to support the advanced units, as well as hampering any

retreat. Meanwhile, on the grasslands further east, the

Mongols could manoeuvre without hindrance.

Both armies appear in the lists of

several popular rule sets, but we have

no detailed orders of battle and only very

rough estimates of total strengths. It appearsthat many of the Russian and Kipchak troops

played little part in the fighting; the latter were

perhaps demoralized by earlier defeats, while

many of the Russian Polk (or militia) must have

been on foot and too slow-moving to inuence

the initial cavalry battle east of the river. The

core of the princes’ armies consisted of the

Druzhina or guard cavalry, who wore armour

and fought with swords and spears; Nicolle estimates their

total numbers at between 15,000 and 20,000. The Kievans also

fielded bowmen, both on foot and mounted, including not only

Kipchak allies but mercenary horse-archers known as Chernye

Klobuki or ‘Black Caps’. So the Mongols certainly did not have

a numerical superiority, and may have been outnumbered by

the Russian elite troops alone. Two toumans had a nominal

strength of 20,000, but we know from other sources that units

were often understrength; records from Mongol China mention

toumans as small as 3000 men. However, Subotei’s troops had

been campaigning for several years, while a hard core of veter-

ans may have gained experience in a series of wars going back

two decades. Their officers were appointed on merit and not,

as in the feudal Russian armies, on the basis of noble birth.

This meant that the Mongols could all be considered hardened

veterans, in contrast to the Russians, who had been called up

specifically for the Kalka campaign.

Rather than trying to represent the whole sprawling battlefield

on the wargames table, I would recommend concentrating on

The Russians are finished off by Mongol heavy cavalry.

© F i r e

f o r g e G a m

e s



THEME

36

the decisive initial clash involving the Russian advance guard.

This consists of the Galician and Volhynian cavalry, along with

the bulk of the Kipchaks, who had pushed ahead of their allies

after crossing the Kalka River. Deploy the Russian advance

guard and the Mongol army for a pitched battle in the usual

way, with the Chernigov contingent off-table to start with. To

reect the fact that the Mongols had had time to deploy into

battle formation while the Russians were still on the march, I

suggest allowing them to deploy anywhere in their half of the

table, while the Russians cannot initially be placed within 12”

of either side table-edge. Either both Russian forces can be

controlled by the same person or another player can take on

the Chernigov forces. The Russian base table-edge representsthe River Kalka, which the advance guard has just crossed.

There are no other terrain features on the table that are likely

to have an effect on the battle, though a few ridges and low

hills would look realistic without being too intrusive.

FORCESI have adopted the classifications in the DBM army lists, as

these are likely to be familiar to most gamers interested in

the period, but with some explanatory notes to help with

converting them into other systems.

Russian advance guardC-in-C: Prince Mstislav Mstislavich of Galicia, Irr Cv (O)

Sub-general: Prince Daniil Romanovich of Volhynia, Irr Cv (O)

Druzhina: Irr Cv (O) x 18

Polovtsi (Kipchaks): LH (F) x 16

Chernigov contingent

C-in-C: Prince Mstislav Styatoslavich of Chernigov, Irr Cv (O)

Sub-general: Prince Oleg of Kursk, Irr Cv (O)

Druzhina: Irr Cv (O) x 18

Polk : 16 elements, all Irregular, up to a quarter LH (O), up to

half Ps (O), rest Sp (O)

Polovtsi : LH (F) x 12

(The Druzhina are metal-armoured cavalry with lance and sword.

The Polk are mostly infantry spearmen and archers, with a few

unarmoured cavalry for use as scouts. The Kipchaks (or Polovtsi ,

as the Russians called them) are standard steppe light cavalry

archers. I have assumed that most of the infantry, if present, would

have been left behind with the Chernigov contingent, rather than

keeping up with the rapidly advancing Galician cavalry.)

Mongols

The DBM list allows ordinary Mongol cavalry to be up to half

Cv (O) and the rest LH (S); but, as explained in the introduc-

tory article, I know of no evidence for a tactical distinction

between two different types of soldier. They should there-

fore all be either Cv or LH. What they actually represent is

horsemen with bows plus swords or axes, with most probably

wearing some sort of leather armour, and a minority – say oneelement in five - carrying lances and having metal armour for

men and possibly horses. In DBM terms, the latter could be

Cv (S), without necessarily having to represent guard units.

Although the victory is generally ascribed to the able and

experienced Subotei, Jebei was formally in command and

was, in fact, equally capable.

C-in-C: Jebei, Reg Cv (S)

Sub-general: Subotei, Reg Cv (S)

Mongols: 32 elements, all Reg Cv (O) or all Reg LH (S). If the

former option is selected, up to 6 elements can be Cv (S).

In this scenario, the Mongols are nearly equal in numbers

to the leading Russian force and slightly superior in fighting

power, but they have to win quickly. The Chernigov contin-

gent will remain off-table (representing the western bank of

the Kalka River) until their player dices for them to arrive on

the Russian base table-edge. This needs a score of 6 on a D6,

dicing once per turn after Turn 4. If the advance guard is deci-

sively beaten before they arrive, they will follow the example

of their real-life prototypes and head for home. This is a chal-

lenging scenario for the Mongols, but conquering the known

world was never going to be easy! WS&S

Join the Mongol army. Ride your own horse, see the world,

meet interesting people … and shoot them with arrows!

The two armies face each other.



THEME

38

THE SONS OF GENGHIS VERSUS THE KHWAREZMIDS

THE FALL OFSAMARKAND

By Matt Moran

When Marco Polo visited Samarkand in his journey along the Silk Road, he called it“a very large and splendid city”. But 50 or so years earlier, it had been the scene of abrutal sack by those bywords for brutality – the Mongols.

It all started when the Mongols sent a trading caravansouth, past the Aral Sea into Khwarezmia. With them was

an ambassador bearing the following message from Geng-

his Khan to the Khwarezmid Shah:

“We now have the obligations of neighbours.Human wisdom requires that both sides walk the path of concord and observe the duties of friend-ship. I am master of the lands of the rising sun whileyou rule those of the setting sun. Let us conclude afirm treaty of friendship and peace”.

One of their first stops was in the city of Otrar. Its governor, Inal-chuq, derided the Mongols as “people in felt tents”, declared

them spies, and seized the caravan, killing everyone and sell-

ing their goods in Bukhara. Unfortunately for Khwarezmia, a

camel-driver escaped to report to Genghis Khan. Under subse-

quent inquiry (which tactfully ignored whether there had,

indeed, been spies present), Inalchuq refused to pay compen-

sation for the looted caravan or to hand over the perpetrators.

Understandably put out by this breach of the ‘Pax Mongol-

ica’, Genghis sent envoys to Inalchuq’s uncle, Shah Ala

ad-Din Muhammad II. The Shah shaved the beards off

the two Mongol ambassadors and beheaded the Muslim

ambassador, sending only his body home.

Genghis did not take this insult well. Supported by a newly-

acquired Chinese siege train, he crossed the Syr

Darya (River Jaxartes) in 1219 with 200,000

Mongols, outanked the thinly spread

Khwarezmid border force, and

took Otrar after a six-month

siege. The last month was

a siege not of the city, but

of the citadel at its centre.

Reduced to throwing bricks

out of the windows, Inalchuqwas finally captured alive, on

the Khan’s orders. His greed

and bad manners were repaidMongol warriors.

with a painfully lethal dose of molten silver in his eyes andears. The rest of the inhabitants were put to the sword, except

for those few who were taken into slavery. The Shah ed the

battle rather than submit to the Khan.

While Genghis was attending to Otrar personally, his son Jochi

was leading a third of the Mongol army into the Khwarezmian

north-east, while another wing under Jebe went to the south-

east, in order to complete a pincer attack on Samarkand. Political

schisms and the Shah’s decision to garrison his army across his

empire to prevent rebellions meant that the Mongols, though tired

by their passage through the mountains, were able to defeat the

Khwarezmid armies in detail. There was nowhere for the Shah torun to as his empire was dismantled around him. Not just royal

buildings, but whole towns, territories, and swathes of farmland

were destroyed – a river was even diverted to erase the Shah’s

birthplace. In the words of one chronicler, “not even dogs or cats”

were spared. It was brutal, even by Mongol standards. And at

Samarkand, the stakes were raised again.

The Mongols attacked using African prisoners as body shields.

After less than a week, only a few die-hards still held out in the

citadel. When they surrendered, Genghis reneged on the terms

he’d offered and slaughtered everyone who had carried a sword

against him. The civilians were ordered onto the plains outside,

where they were divided up in the usual way. But rather thanbeing dragged away into slavery, they were beheaded en masse

to make grisly pyramids celebrating the Mongol victory.

After this, the city of Bukhara fell without a fight, though the cita-

del held out for another twelve days. The city elders opened the

gates after the Mongols appeared out of nowhere, having crossed

the seemingly impassable Kyzyl Kum desert to arrive unnoticed.

The skilled craftsmen were sent to Mongolia, and the rest of the

population were enslaved. While the city was looted, a fire broke

out, consuming most of it. When it died away, Genghis Khan

assembled the survivors in the mosque and declared himself the

‘Scourge of God’, sent to punish them for their sins.

The attack on Urgench was the bloodiest battle of the war – a

medieval Stalingrad, where neither side could countenance© Fireforge Games



defeat. After the battle, the entire unskilled adult populationwere massacred and the rest enslaved. In a clear exaggera-

tion, Juzjani states that 50,000 Mongols were each told to kill

24 people. Despite the hyperbole, the sacking of Urgench

is considered one of the bloodiest in human history. Again,

the Mongols diverted a river, ooding the city in revenge by

using the very water that had previously kept it safe.

An empire had fallen in less than two years, its monuments

and people razed from the map, and all because of one

man’s very human reaction to “barbarians” – disdain and

exploitation. The Mongols’ blitzkrieg tactics of mobility

and Schwerpunkt had triumphed again, and in the mostgraphic way. This was the campaign that earned them their

eternal reputation for atrocity.

What of Shah Mohammed? Subutai and Jebe were given two

years and 20,000 men to hunt him down, but he died in

mysterious circumstances in 1221 on a small island in the

Caspian Sea. Whether it was Mongol subterfuge that ended

his life will never be known. Most scholars believe he died

in shock at the loss of his empire.

And what happened to the last of the Khwarezmids? It cannot

be denied that hundreds of thousands died to slake the

Mongol desire for revenge. However, Charles Mackay givesus this summary of their future exploits, tying them into that

other contemporary wargaming period, the Crusades. It shows

that they tried to emulate their conquerors:

“The Khwarezmids, a fierce, uncivilized race, thusdriven from their homes, spread themselves, in theirturn, over the south of Asia with fire and sword, insearch of a resting place. In their impetuous course,they directed themselves towards Egypt, whoseSultan, unable to withstand the swarm that hadcast their longing eyes on the fertile valleys of the

Nile (...) sent emissaries to Barbaquan, their leader,inviting them to settle in Palestine. They came, burn-ing and slaying, and were at the walls of Jerusalem(...) they tore down every vestige of Christian faith.

“The Sultans of Syria preferred the Christians to thisfierce horde, for their neighbours. Even the Sultanof Egypt began to regret the aid he had given tosuch barbarous foes, and united with those ofEmissa and Damascus to root them from the land.The Khwarezmids amounted to but 20,000 men,and were unable to resist the determined hostil-ity. The Sultans defeated them in several engage-ments, and the peasantry rose up in masses totake vengeance upon them. No mercy was shownthem in defeat. Barbaquan was slain.”

SCENARIOSThe strike forces sent out by the main Mongol army provide all

sorts of opportunities for skirmish actions, as do the desperate

urban actions fought during the major sieges – and who else

would have foot Mongols!? Personally, I very much like Games

Workshop’s Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game for small

pre-gunpowder actions. A mix of Easterling or Khandish profiles

could be used to represent the Turkic army of the Khwarezmids,

and the profiles for the Rohirrim could very easily be used for

the Mongols – just give them longbows for +2pts to represent

the Mongol recurved bows. An arban of ten riders could very

easily be put together for a quick game. Even a zuun of 100

might not be too much effort at 1:1 for a dedicated modeller,

although a myangan or tumen of 1000 or 10,000 models mightbe a bit much. Once figure ratios are involved, I personally turn

to Hail Caesar or DBA for large medieval battles.

The Khwarezmid army was very similar to other Turkic armies

of the 1200s (like the Seljuks), and as a whole had a number of

advantages: large numbers of larger horses, superior armour

(both human and horse), and a large manpower pool. If this

is all starting to sound a little bit like ‘France 1940’, you’re

right. They were undone by the Mongols’ superior strategic

and tactical vision, which emphasized manoeuvre as a means

to meet the enemy in a manner of one’s choosing, and by

their willingness, quite singular among armies of light horse,to close in with more numerous troops in better armour.

However, under a general with a better grasp of how to use his

men, Khwarezmia could have put up a better fight than it did.

The massed horde of Mongols.



THEME

40

THE BATTLE OF JANDAt Jand in 1219, around 30,000 Mongols under Genghis’

sons Jochi and Jebe apparently met 200,000 Khwar. It was

a rare pitched battle in a campaign dominated by sieges.

The Mongol line buckled a couple of times under the

Turkic attack, but excellent morale and a flanking move by

Jochi won the day. Despite this, tens of thousands of l ives

were lost on both sides – a Pyrrhic victory for the Mongols,

but one that prevented the Shah from driving them into the

mountains and allowed them to continue molesting the

countryside at will. It was said that 160,000 Khwars died

in this one battle – almost half of the Shah’s 400,000 men.

To play the battle of Jand, I decided to use the ‘Big Battle’

version of Phil Barker’s DBA rules, but with a few tweaks from

Bruce McFarlane. Each base has a limited number of recoils it

can make before it routs – the better the unit, the more recoils it

has. All Mongol bases get four recoils, while all Khwarezmians

get two, to represent their fractured command and low morale.

Mongol Armi(es)

Cav Gen (Jochi), 3 Cav, 9 Light Horse.

Cav Gen (Jebe), 3 Cav, 3 Light Horse, 4 Spears, 2 Psiloi.

Khwarazmians

16 Cav, 18 Light Horse, 3 Bows, 4 Spears.

3 Generals wherever players prefer (probably mounted).

SET-UPThe plain of Jand is mostly bare, maybe with low hills or small

copses of woodland. The board should be 8’ x 6’ for 28mm,

or 6’ x 4’ for 15mm.

Jebe’s Mongols set up within 12” of their side of the board.

The Khwarezmians do the same on their side. Play as normal,

except that when Jochi rolls a 6 on his PIP dice, he may enter

anywhere on the right side of the Mongol half of the board.

When he rolls a 5, he may likewise appear on the left.

Victory conditions are the usual for DBA: destroy more than

half the enemy army, or slay their generals and cause more

casualties than you have taken.

HAIL GENGHIS KHAN!This battle is eminently adaptable to Hail Caesar . The Khwarezmid

should outnumber the Mongols by 3 to 2, so play 3000 points of

Khwarezmids versus 2000 points of Mongols. Play as the DBA

scenario above with half the Mongol force (led by Jochi) entering

the game as a anking force. The Mongol player chooses a turn

number. From then on the anking force may be diced for.

Use the lists out of Hail Caesar: Late Antiquity to Early

Medieval book. The Mongol lists from page 79 should be

used with the addition of two Leadership 9 generals (Joshi

and Jebe). Mongols Light Horse should have +1 attacks

compared to normal to represent their eagerness to close

with enemies in close combat.

The ‘Khwarazmian Persian’ list from page 68 should be used.

In terms of leadership, no Khwarezmid should be above

except the general (at leadership 8). Each Khwarezmid divi-

sion must contain at least six units but is broken when morethan a third of its units are shaken, left the table or destroyed.

OPTIONAL CHANGESThere are several tweaks which could be added to your games.

You could give the Khwarezmids a fourth general (an army of this

size would normally have one). You could make Jochi deploy at

the start of the game. You could also play on a much larger board

to give the cavalry room to breathe and manoeuvre. WS&S

The Mongols were obviously masters of an early version

of the protection racket. “What a lovely city, it’d be a real

shame if it ended up looking like Samarkand!”

Mongol cavalry outflank the Khwarezmids.

Models courtesy of Gripping Beast and Fireforge Games.



THEME

42

ALEXANDER AT THE BATTLE OF THE JAXARTES

DEFEATINGTHE SCYTHIANS

By Pat Lowinger

In 329 BC, the battle-hardened army of Alexander the Great advanced over the HinduKush into Bactria. By May, Bessus, the Persian Satrap of Bactria, had been captured andsubsequently executed. Alexander then turned his army toward the Sogdian-controlledcity of Cyropolis and captured it after a brief siege. All that remained in the way of Alex-ander’s complete control of the region was the submission of the Scythians.

In October, Alexander found himself on the southern bank

of the Jaxartes River, where his crossing was opposed by

an assembled force of cavalry under the command of a

Scythian chieftain known as Satraces. These nomadic horse-

men were renowned and feared for their prowess as warriors

and raiders, mounted upon swift and agile steeds of incredible

endurance; their double-curved bows were deadly accurate.

It was commonly accepted by many ancient tacticians that

nomads such as the Scythians could always avoid destruc-

tion by disengaging from a slower, infantry-based army, while

inicting massive casualties upon the attackers.

Could Alexander defeat the ‘undefeatable’ nomads?

“I am not afraid of an army of lions led by a sheep; Iam afraid of an army of sheep led by a lion.”– Alexander the Great

OPPOSING FORCESWhile history does not record the exact numbers of Scyth-

ians under the command of Satraces, the majority most likely

consisted of lightly-armed cavalry. These warriors would typi-

cally be garbed in traditional clothing, hide jackets and head-

gear. While each carried at least one side-arm for protec-

tion (typically, a sword or axe), their main weapon was the

composite bow, supplied with considerable ammunition.

The objective of the Scythian main force was to harass,

disrupt, and if possible rout the enemy. If that was not possi-

ble, a small but formidable force of shock cavalry attacking

in disciplined formations would be unleashed to destroy the

enemy. This force, composed most often of Scythian nobles,

was well-armed and typically wore leg and torso armour of

metal scales, a helmet, and possibly a shield.

The disposition of the Macedonians consisted of one regiment

of Greek mercenary cavalry, four regiments of Macedonianheavy pike-armed infantry, three regiments of Companion

cavalry, and several squadrons of light horse-lancers, plus

archers, slingers, Agrianian javelineers, and artillery. All told,

the force numbered 6000 men. The Macedonians were hard-

ened professionals. Many had been in service from the time

when Alexander’s army had crossed the Hellespont into Asia.

Each man was the veteran of numerous battles and had with-

stood unknown horrors upon the field of battle.

THE BATTLEThe combined Scythian force held the north bank of the River

Jaxartes and believed they could repel any attempts to cross the

river. Alexander had positioned his army at a narrow point of the

river, directly across from a scalable area of the river bank, but

was still out of range of the Scythian arrows. This would allowhis troops to embark in relative safety before trying to cross.

Alexander first ordered his artillery to be deployed and

engage the Scythian horsemen. After sustaining casualties

and unable to retaliate, the Scythians fell back and regrouped

out of range of the catapults and siege bows. Once the Scyth-

ians were no longer controlling the opposing riverbank, Alex-

ander prepared his boats and issued the following orders:

“Having first got the archers and slingers across,he [Alexander] ordered them to sling and shoot atthe Scythians, to prevent them approaching the phalanx stepping out of the water, until all his cavalryhad passed over. When they were upon the bankin dense mass, he first launched against the Scyth-ians one regiment of the Grecian auxiliary cavalryand four squadrons of pikemen. These the Scyth-ians received and, in great numbers riding aroundthem in circles, wounded them and they were fewin number, themselves escaping with ease. But Alex-ander mixed the archers, the Agrianians, and otherlight troops under the command of Balacrus, withthe cavalry and then he led them against the enemy.”– Arrian the Nicomedian, Anabasis of Alexander

211-12 (tr. E.J. Chinnock)

The auxiliary cavalry and pike deliberately advanced to

engage the Scythians in a direct frontal assault. Alex-



ander knew they

would be enveloped

and encircled by the horse-

men. The advance units were bait

and the nomads took it. Alexander

then ordered a force of mixed light infantryand cavalry to each of the far flanks, entrapping a large

number of Scythians and preventing them from flight. In a

tactical twist of fortune, Satraces and many of his warriors

were themselves encircled by Alexander’s forces. Knowing

that the enemy could not escape, Alexander ordered the

Companion cavalry to charge into the midst of the remain-

ing Scythians and utterly crush them. The remaining forces

of the Scythians then fled to avoid destruction.

AFTERMATHSatraces and 1000 Scythians lay dead upon the battlefield.

Alexander’s forces fared somewhat better, counting only

160 dead, but over 1000 of his men had been wounded.

By the end of the battle, the Scythians had fled and the

Macedonians were too exhausted to pursue them. But

Alexander had once again accomplished what had previ-

ously been thought impossible – he had brought battle to

the Scythians and had destroyed them.

TACTICS TO FIGHT THE STEPPE HORSEMENIt’s not easy fighting nomads. How do you fight a highly

mobile enemy who can just run away? Military historians

and modern-day tactical experts have many fancy names

for various approaches, but let’s keep it simple here.

Suffice to say that asymmetrical warfare is nothing new. Inthe case of the Battle of the Jaxartes, Alexander committed

a portion of his forces as a ‘forlorn hope’ to make contact

and hold the enemy in place. With his force encircled, he

could then launch flanking manoeuvres to cut a portion

of the nomads off from the main enemy body and, in turn,

encircle and destroy them.

Generals and strategists throughout history have developed

parallel or sometimes vastly different tactics for dealing with

nomad armies. Many nations walled their cities to protect

their lands from nomad raiders, the population retreat-

ing behind the city walls until the nomads left. Nomadsaren’t usually skilled at siege warfare; it took the Mongols a

number of years to develop successful siege tactics, mainly

from captured Chinese engineers. Others (including the

Persians and Mamluks)

employed defensive forma-

tions and copious amounts of missile-

fire to drive away the enemy, but this type of

tactic was largely defensive in nature, unless the enemy

could be tricked into a killing zone (such as at Ain Jalut).Building strategic defences, such as fortified narrow moun-

tain passes and linear defensive walls over large areas, had

mixed success (not so effective for China, but worked for

the Sassanids with their ‘Great Wall of Gorgan’). Another

and often less-discussed tactic employed to ward off

unruly bands of nomads rampaging amidst your borders

was to simply pay them off or recruit them as mercenaries.

Although less glamorous, this tactic can prove to be very

effective and expedient; for many years, it served as the de

facto policy of China, in response to Mongol raiders.

REFIGHTING THE BATTLEAs wargamers, I think battles such as the Jaxartes cause

nearly all of us to ask two very important questions. First,

if I had been Satraces, could I have defeated Alexander?

And second, if I had been Alexander, could I have won the

battle as well, or maybe better?

This scenario can be recreated by the use of any rules

system and any miniatures that you are familiar with and

have available. In order to try and represent the units Alex-

ander had at his disposal, your force should likely consist

of the following Macedonian units:

•

1 unit of skirmishers (or other suitablelight infantry)

• 1-2 units of archers

• 1 unit of auxiliary cavalry

• 4 units of pikemen

• 1-3 units of Companion cavalry

• 1-2 units of light cavalry

• artillery

• 1 unit of cavalry, representing Alexan-

der’s unit

As the historical forces of the Scythian army

remain largely unknown at this battle,

an equal number of units matching theoverall strength of the Macedonian army

should be aimed for. No more than 25

per cent of the Scythian army should

The board at the start of the game. Alexander’s

artillery protects the southern riverbank.

One of Alexander’s

Companions.



THEME

44

comprise ‘nobles’. One unit should be designated to represent

Satraces. If the rules you are using have numerical points values

assigned to them, the armies should each have equal points, if for

no other reason than the sake of fun.

TERRAINWhile we don’t know the exact features of the battlefield, we

will make the following educated assumptions. The water is

too deep to be crossed by infantry or cavalry. The banks of the

river, while narrow, are muddy and difficult to move in. The

area north of the riverbank is relatively open and clear. Players

are encouraged to add a few trees or some brush as they like to

add some avour, but the majority of the area should be open.

SET-UPAs a battle scenario, the most common way is to deploy as

if Alexander’s artillery had already allowed for the establish-

ment of a landing area for your forces. As the Macedonian

player, you should deploy your artillery along the southern

bank of the river in the embarkation area. Choose one-third

of your force and deploy them along the northern bank of

the river (but not on the bank itself). If any of these units is

driven backwards, they will enter the area of the river bank.

This first group may not include Alexander or the Compan-ion cavalry. Historically, this would be represented by

deploying your skirmishers, slingers and archers; but today,

you are Alexander, so make your own choices!

Meanwhile, the Scythian player may deploy up to half of

their force at a distance of no closer than one full move

(distance) of the enemy. The remaining units may be placed

anywhere on the north side of the river, but no closer than

two full moves (distance) of the enemy. This is done to repre-

sent the rather uid style of Scythian tactics.

Who goes first?Having secured the riverbank and having landed troops,

Alexander appears to have seized the initiative, so the

Macedonian player goes first. Some players may want to

simply roll 1D6 and allow the winner to go first; other

players may want to use whatever mechanism is prescribed

in the rules they are using.

Crossing the river

For the Macedonian player, it takes a full turn to embark

and cross the river. So, on Turn 3, another one-third of your

army arrives on shore. The unit will deploy as your initial

units, unless there is no room to do so and must deploy

onto the riverbank itself. The last part of your force arriveson Turn 5. If a unit has no room to deploy, they remain on

the boats and cannot engage in combat.

A map of the basic deployment.

Satraces and his nobles charge the Macedonian skirmishers in 28mm.



Both the embarkation area (southern) and disembarkation

area (northern) occupy the middle third of the river. Units

may leave from and arrive anywhere in this area. Place the

unit on the river’s edge, in the mud and muck. The unit

may move normally on the turn it arrives.

WinningThis scenario can be played with a number of different victory

conditions, the most common being that whoever suffers 25

per cent casualties (or units/points) is declared the loser. In

addition, if either side kills the opponent’s general, he imme-

diately wins. If the Scythian player can kill Alexander, they

can also take the bragging rights of killing a living god!

REPLAYING THE BATTLE USING DBA

I myself have experienced hours of fun playing this battle

using Phil Barker’s De Bellis Antiquitatis Version 2.2. Using

15mm or 28mm miniatures, the battle can easily be fought in

a short period of time, normally 30-60 minutes. This can allowyou to have a go (or two) as both the Macedonians and the

Scythians in an evening of game play.

Some things to remember when playing DBA:

1. Turns are called ‘bounds’.

2. Alexander’s force II/12 must include the Art option.

3. The Scythian force I/43 must all be mounted.

4. The river cannot be crossed except by boat, and is

considered impassable.

5. Alexandrian elements cross the river for free, but must

pay 1 PIP each to disembark. Elements will remain in

their boats until a PIP is used to have them disembark.6. The first 2” of the northern riverbank is muddy and

considered bad going.

REPLAYING JAXARTES USING HAIL CAESAR

Of course, there is the danger that any Scythian general worth his

salt won’t necessarily oblige Alexander and will avoid surround-

ing the Macedonian ‘forlorn hope’. This scenario takes place after

the river crossing and assumes that the Scythians have taken the

bait and surrounded the advance guard of Macedonians.

The Alexandrian forces should be chosen from page 45-46

of the Biblical and Classical army lists, Alexander the Great

must be taken. Use the guidelines above under Refighting the

Battle – there should be a good mix of pike, light infantry and

cavalry. The Scythian lists should be taken from page 26 of the

same lists and should consist of all cavalry.

Place the starting forces as suggested on the map. The Scythian

forces are surrounding the Macedonian ‘forlorn hope’ so are

divided 50/50 between the two Scythian deploy-

ment areas. The Scythian general should be

in the deployment zone in between thetwo Macedonian forces. One third of the

Macedonian forces (the pikemen and light

cavalry) should be between the two Scyth-

ian forces while the rest are placed in the

deployment zone by the river. WS&S

Can you do better than Alexander?

Give the Jaxartes a go and find out!

I would like to thank the members of the NHMGS and

Northwest Ancient Games (NAGS) for their continued

support of DBA in the Pacific North-West. In particular,

I would like to extend a special thanks to Paul Hannah,

whose nicely-painted 15mm Mike’s Miniatures appear in

photographs featured in this article.

Alexander and his Companions surprise the Scythians.The first soldiers crossing the river run into trouble.

A Sc ythian spearman.



THEME

46

THE HUNS IN GEORGIA, AD 436

THE SONS OF THEHUN IN THE SUN

By Eoghan Kelly

In AD 434, Rugila, the warlord of the Huns, died having subdued several Romanprovinces and exacted favourable tributes from both the eastern and western RomanEmpires. In particular, he had given the eastern Emperor, Flavius Theodosius JuniorAugustus, or Theodosius II (also known as ‘the Younger’), a particularly torrid time,and had exacted some pretty crippling terms, in order to lift the pressures on the

Constantinople regime. Such was the shadow cast by Rugila and the apparentlyinvincible Hunnic Hordes, that Nestorius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, referred tothe Huns as being “both the masters and slaves of the Romans”.

Rugila died without issue (or, at least, without any he

cared to name as his successor) and so the leadership

of the Huns was passed to his nephews, the brothers

Attila and Bleda. Almost immediately, the brothers put pressure

on Theodosius to honour certain parts of the existing treaty,

especially the return of Hunnic exiles; they also managed to

exact (or extort) even more gold and silver from the empire,

in order to leave it alone. By the end of 435, the Huns effec-tively withdrew from their interference in the empire’s workings

and diverted their attention elsewhere. This was welcomed by

Theodosius, who used this respite to build the massive curtain

of land walls that defended Constantinople for the next 800

years until they were finally breached in 1204 by crusaders.

Whilst the eastern Roman Empire was sorting out its relations

with the Huns, the Sassanid Empire to the east was sorting

out events that were taking place within their own sphere of

inuence. Bahram V (or Wahram) was the fifteenth Sassanian

King of the Persians. He was also known as Bahram Gar . He

assumed the crown on the assassination of

his father, and secured his hold on it in the

teeth of opposition from the machinations of

the grandees of the Sassanid Court, with the

support of the Lakhmid king. In 428,

some Armenian nobles petitioned

Bahram to depose their king,

Artaxias IV, ostensibly because

he was too lenient towards

Christians (despite Armenia

being a Christian state), but

more likely because he was

just a weak monarch and

they saw opportunitiesto advance themselves.

The Sassanid military

occupation of their

client state, albeit through some dubious invitation by part of

the local nobility, led to Armenia becoming a Sassanid prov-

ince ruled by a governor. Artaxias disappeared from the pages

of history, becoming the last Armenian monarch from a line

that had ruled Armenia for over a millennium.

In 436, the Huns launched a speculative invasion of north-

ern Armenia, attracted by the rumoured wealth of the SassanidEmpire and the perceived local instability, but also counting on

the Sassanids being just as vulnerable to their type of warfare as

the Roman Empire appeared to be. It is not known if Attila and

Bleda lead this incursion, but as they were conspicuously absent

from Roman accounts of the period 435-439, it is not unreason-

able to assume they had been involved in this expedition.

Hunnic armies traditionally relied on the formation of mobile

units based around the individual tribe; this allowed for fast

self-contained and self-supporting armies. The reported

numbers involved always need to be taken with care, as the

Romans appear to have enjoyed overinating the numbers

of Huns, in order to justify the many catastrophic defeats

suffered by the Roman legions. However, with this in mind,

it is not unreasonable to assume that a ‘tribe’ (these could

be several tribes grouped under an overall headman) could

field up to 10,000 warriors for a campaign.

The normal Hun tradition was for the forces to be split in half,

with half being the mobile field force and half being used

to defend the tribe’s wagons and camp. Records indicate

that up to three tribes were involved in the invasion and that

these were supported by a number of allied (subject) tribes,

who supplied the foot soldiers of the Hun army. These were

predominantly Goths and Vandals, but also included desertersfrom the Roman legions, as well as paid mercenaries, although

these normally held ‘technical’ posts, such as managing siege

operations. What is interesting is that some records mentionSassanid infantry command.



that the Huns used a similar organizational system as the

Mongols eight centuries later, with the tumen being the basic

unit of ten horsemen and each multiple of ten making up the

bigger units, so that they fielded units of 10, 100, and 1000.

Their version of the Khan, who ranked second only to the

King, was the ‘Commander of Ten Thousand Horsemen’.

The initial invasion went well, with large tracts of the north-ern part of Armenia being laid waste. One army was sent

deep into Sassanid territory, creating mayhem and destruc-

tion as they went, and in a show of overconfidence, the Huns

rejected a peace offer from Bahram, which would have seen

the Sassanids buying off the Huns in a similar manner to the

way the Romans had done for nearly two decades. Rely-

ing on the complacency that had set in amongst the Huns,

the Sassanids launched a surprise attack, routing the Huns’

advance guard and driving them north, back to their own

lands. They even killed the khan of this part of the army and

drove the remains of his army south-east into Hyrcania, pursu-

ing them to utter destruction on the banks of the River Oxus

(a tad fanciful, as this river is deep in present day Kazakhstan

and would have been an astonishing distance for a broken

army to ee whilst still being pursued). The few heavy cavalry

that the Huns had assigned to this invasion were destroyed in

the initial debacle, with the few survivors eeing to the south

and east. The surviving tribes had to do with what they had –

re-enforcements were not forthcoming…..

ENTER THE BROTHERSReorganizing their army, the two warlords, Attila and Bleda,

redeployed their forces, looking to give the Sassanids

a lesson they would remember for a long time. They still

commanded a formidable force of two full ‘tribes’ and asignificant number of infantry. However, they had lost most

of their siege equipment, and without this, there was no

practical reason to continue with the campaign. All that was

left was a matter of honour. They retreated towards the north-

ern border of the Hun-controlled lands and chose their battle

site wisely, deep in the province of Iberia (not to be confused

with the Roman province, this was an area roughly along the

border between present-day Armenia and Georgia).

The Sassanids, commanded by the marzoban (military border

commander) of the Armenian province, had swept forward,

looking to defeat the Hun threat once and for all. His name islost to history, but he proved himself a capable commander of

the varied-quality troops he had under his command.

THE BATTLEThis scenario can be adapted to whatever set of rules you

choose to use. The notes about commanders/troops are not

definitive and include the rules as best reflected by your

rules set of choice. If you find you don’t like a rule, please

feel free to omit it – although I strongly urge you to keep

the ‘Hun rivalry’ rule, or else you will find the battle to be

far too one-sided. I am also including a rough conversion

of units, with a presumed 1:50 ratio of figures, but feel free

to adjust this to suit your collections.

The battlefield is a wide, sweeping plain to the east of Lake

Arpi, with the lake itself forming a formidable anchor to

the Hunnic right flank, and wide open spaces to the east

and south of their position. Atilla’s line bent back slightly

as the Sassanids deployed slightly to the south-east, with

their rear being protected by higher ground and with rocky

outcrops providing broken ground on both of their flanks.

The Huns divided their army into two equal divisions,

each commanded by one of the brothers. As tradition

demanded, the joint rulers were fiercely jealous of eachother’s position, and a certain rivalry had set in between

the two. Attila took up position on the left side of the line,

with Bleda slightly behind, occupying the right.

Huns harass a stranded Roman unit.



THEME

48

The Sassanids, benefiting from a single command,

deployed their army as they normally did, with elite extra

heavy cavalry (under an officer with the rank of varthagh-

nighan khvadhay ) and guard infantry (with the rank of

payygan salar ) in the second line of the centre and held

in reserve. They deployed most of their remaining infan-

try, commanded by a sardar (brigade commander), in front

of the centre, with their heavy, medium and light cavalry

operating on the flanks. Each wing came under a savaran

sardar , with skirmish troops massed all along the front of

their forces, the latter under the command (or as much

command as can be exerted on skirmishers) of the vasht

salar . Their lightning campaign against the Huns had taken

its toll and they could field no more than 10,000 troops of

all types, by the time they encountered the Huns.

The Hun army, wary of the defeats already inicted on them, had

a new respect for the Sassanids, especially their heavily armoured

Hun and Roman light cavalry exchange volleys.

SASSANID FORCES

Marzoban: Superior leader, stubborn, not a risk taker.

Equipped as Heavy Cavalry (not a Cataphract) with a

mounted bodyguard of similar armour.

Varthagh-Nighan Khvadhay: Average Leader, Impetuous,

Extra-heavy Cavalry

Savaran Sardar: Average Leader, Steady, Extra-heavy Cavalry

Payygan Salar: Average Leader, Steady, Heavy Infantry

Sardar (All): Average Leader, Steady, Medium Infantry

Vasht Salar: Good Leader, Steady, Light Infantry

Zhayedan (Immortals): Guard (Elite) Cavalry. Equipped as

Cataphract. 1 Unit of 500 troops (1 x 10 figures).

Cataphract Cavalry: Supe-

rior Heavy Cavalry, Drilled;

helmet, hauberk (Pahlavi

griwban), breastplate, mail,

gauntlet (Pahlavi abdast ),

girdle, thigh-guards (Pahl-

avi ran-ban), sword,

mace, two bows, and

horse armour (zen-abzar ). 2 units of 500

troops (2 x 10 figures).

Medium Cavalry: Arab Medium Cavalry, Average Cavalry,

Undrilled; light armour, mail shirt, sword, bow, javelin,

shield. 4 units of 400 troops (4 x 8 figures).

Light Horse: Khazar Light Cavalry, Average Cavalry,

Undrilled; sword, bow, javelin, ‘Parthian Shot’, Skirmish

Cavalry. 6 units of 400 troops (6 x 8 figures).

Daylami Infantry: Heavy Mercenary (Guard) Infantry,

Superior, Drilled; heavy armour, sword, javelin, shield.1000 troops (1 x 20 figures).

Paighan Infantry: Light/Medium Infantry, Average/Poor,

Undrilled; no armour (one unit may include light armour),

spear, large wicker shield, may form shieldwall. 2 units of

1000 troops (2 x 20 figures). Only 50 per cent of these may

have average morale; the rest are poor.

Kamandaran Infantry: Light Infantry, Poor, Undrilled; bow.

2 units of 500 troops (2 x 10 figures).

Kurdish Javelin Troops: Light Infantry, Poor, Undrilled, Fast.1 unit of 500 (1 x 10 figures). These are fast agile troops, so

they can ignore any terrain effects, such as they are.T he might of Sassanid

noble cavalry.



The Huns raid a border town.

HUNNIC FORCES

Attila, son of Mundzuck: Superior Leader, cautious, lucky,

inspired. Equipped as Hunnic Light Cavalry, with bodyguard.

Bleda, son of Mundzack: Good Leader, rash, lucky, stub-

born. Equipped as Hunnic Light Cavalry, with bodyguard.

Tribal Leaders: Each unit will have a leader who is good

and equipped as per the unit to which they are attached.

Hun Cavalry: Superior Light Cavalry, Undrilled; bow, shield,light armour, spear/javelin, fast cavalry. These can fire arrows

in ranks of up to three. If they do so, then they gain a plus

to shooting at any units of more than two ranks, as the unit

struggles to deal with direct and indirect missile fire. Hun

cavalry were noted for their reluctance to engage in close

combat with an enemy that was not yet disorganized or

broken, so if they are forced into close combat with good-

order units, they will suffer a negative modifier to their mêlée

rating. There are eight units of 1000 troops (8 x 20 figures).

Allied Light Cavalry: Average Light Cavalry, Undrilled;

bow, shield, spear/javelin. These can fire arrows in ranks of

up to three. If they do so, then they gain a plus to shooting

at any units of more than two ranks, as the unit struggles to

deal with direct and indirect missile fire. These were ‘White

Huns’, who were not as skilled in mounted warfare as Atti-

la’s forces. Note that these do not have the close-combat

negative, as above. 2 units of 1000 troops (2 x 20 figures).

Goth Heavy Infantry: Average Heavy Infantry, Drilled;

armour, shield, sword, spear. 2 units of 2000 (2 x 40 figures).

‘Hun’ Foot Archers: Average Light Infantry, Skirmishers,

Undrilled; bow. These were subject tribes who supplied

foot troops to the Huns, and were not Hunnic in terms oftheir riding; they were relegated to providing foot bowmen.

4 units of 500 troops (4 x 10 figures).

‘Roman’ Auxiliaries: Poor Medium Infantry, Drilled; light

armour, spear, sword, shield. These were Huns and Hun

allies who had served with the Roman army and deserted,

for a variety of reasons. As such, they were reasonably well-

trained, but poorly motivated. 1 unit of 1000 troops (1 x 20

figures). Must be under Attila’s command.

Slaves and Servants: Poor Light Infantry, Undrilled; impro-

vised weapons. These were the last resort to ‘absorb’ the

enemy missile fire. Frequently used to shield troops during

sieges, Attila was not averse to using them to divert enemy

fire during a battle. 2 units of 500 (2 x 10 figures).

cataphract cavalry and their use of light cavalry, very much in the

nomad style from which the Huns had come. The two brothers

deployed their troops in a similar way, mirroring each other to

an extent. The heavy Goth infantry occupied the centre (in other

words, on the left ank of Bleda’s division and on the right ank

of Attila’s). Both massed their Hun horse as the effective centre of

their respective divisions, anking the infantry and getting into

position to shower the Sassanids with missile fire and to provide

protection for the foot troops as they advanced.

Finally, on their anks, they kept some more of their lighter

cavalry, although Attila had more to worry about on his

exposed ank, so he also retained some lighter infantry to

support the cavalry, should it be needed. Bleda deployed his

light troops in front of his heavy units, to support the storm

of arrows that the Huns loved to unleash on their opponents.

The Huns had a significant advantage in numbers, fielding

nearly 18,000 troops; they had two charismatic leaders,



THEME

50

and had chosen the ground upon which they

would fight.

SPECIAL RULES:The Hun forces are split evenly between the two

Brothers – with the exception of the ‘Roman’Auxiliaries who were under Atilla’s command.

Weather: Conditions on the day are clear with

no mist.

Turns: The battle lasts for eight turns. At the

end of Turn 8, roll a D6 and, on a 5 or 6, play

one more turn.

Gameboard: Ideally, the board should be 8’ x 5’ for

28mm figures, giving plenty of room to manoeuvre.

Terrain: This is pastureland, so no crops are present

and there are no fences or walls on the battlefield.

There are no trees or streams on the board. The ground slopes

gently up to the Sassanid army, which is deployed to the south

and south-eastern corner of the board, primarily facing Attila

on the Huns’ left ank. This slope is sufficient to give a unit

charging downhill a plus and any unit shooting uphill a penalty.

Hun Rivalry: The brothers were already beginning to

display the sort of rivalry that would alarm an Ottoman,

and so with this in mind, both Attila and Bleda should

only have one eye on the upcoming bat tle and the other on

their potential rival. As a result, each wants to ensure thatthey win this battle without losing too many troops, which

would invite a speculative coup from the other, should

they feel they have a sudden advantage! See ‘Victory

Conditions’ to see how this is reflected.

Fast Troops: Any troops denoted as ‘fast’ gain a movement

advantage over other troops of the same type. This should

normally be about 20 per cent over the normal move rates.

VICTORY/DEFEATMajor Victory

For one side or the other to win, they must defeat the enemyand drive 80 per cent of their army from the field of battle.

Otherwise, the outcome is a minor victory.

Minor Victory

Huns: If the Sassanid’s have not been routed from the

board and the Huns maintain 40% or more of their start-

ing strength (in units), then the Huns win a minor victory.

However there is still the chance that one of the Huns wins

and the other loses. Compare the surviving Hun forces –

the Brother that has more units will win the bragging rights

after the battle. However, if one of them loses 20% more

than his sibling, he is seen as dangerously weakened – the

Brother with more units at this stage is now the sole winner

of the Minor Victory and the other is joint loser with the

Sassanid Player.

Sassanid: If the Sassanid player has not routed the Huns

but they have less than 40% of their starting strength, then

it is a minor Sassanid Victory. However, the Hun Rivalry

still applies and it is possible for one of the Brothers to still

have a marginal victory with just one loser.

Draw

If any other result fails to meet the above criteria, then the

outcome is a draw.

AFTERMATHThe Huns lost the battle due to the overly cautious approach

taken by the two brothers. The Sassanids held off the initialHunnic advances and countered with their heavy cavalry.

Eventually, the shock approach of the armoured troops

forced the Huns to break off their attack. They retired in

good order and made their way back to the Hun lands.

The Sassanids concentrated on destroying the Hun forward

posts to prevent a repeat campaign, and then they settled

down to keep a wary eye on their troublesome northern

neighbours. Attila and Bleda reappeared on the borders

of the eastern Roman Empire in 441 and rampaged across

both the eastern and western Empires. WS&S

Bleda eventually overplayed his hand and died – allegedly at Atti-

la’s hand – after he failed to assassinate his brother, who believed

that vengeance should be forceful and instantaneous! Models

from the collection of Gripping Beast and Dr Phil Hendry.

Deployment for the battle.

The Sassanids had horse-archers of their own.



THEME

52

BUILDING A NOMADIC HORSE ARMY

THE GOLDEN HORDE

By Guy Bowers

The Mongols conquered a vast empire stretching from the edges of Europe to Korea.To wargamers, theirs is a dream army, as it fought almost everybody in the early medi-eval period! The same army can fight the Chinese, Koreans, early Samurai, Persians,Russians, Feudal Europeans, Teutons, Arabs, Crusaders, and of course, themselves!

This time, we have chosen to take a wider look

at nomadic horsemen in general and some of

their opponents. While the main focus is on the

Mongols, it would be remiss of us not to include other

famous nomadic horsemen. As usual, space and time

prohibits us from covering every manufacturer, so we are

limited in giving a small selection, using what has been

supplied in time for our deadline. Measurements of cavalry

are given from base to the top of the head.

What follows should give gamers an idea of what is available

in different sizes and scales.

FOUNDRY 28MM

Range: Fair-Good

Size: 27mm ‘foot to eye’ or 30mm tall, 43mm on horseback

Price: £12.00 for three cavalry

Foundry has two nomadic horse ranges: the Huns and the

Scythians. The Huns have eight packs of cavalry with heavy

and light Hun cavalry, including a looters pack. The Scythi-

ans also have eight packs of cavalry, including nobles, warri-

ors, horse-archers and Amazons.

STEVE BARBER 25MM

Range: Good (Mongols)

Size: 43mm in saddle

Price: £10.50 for four cavalry

Steve Barber has a range of Mongol and Cumans. These includeheavy and light cavalry and some foot figures. While advertised as

25mm, these will fit in with the smaller 28mm ranges.

WARLORD GAMES 28MM

Range: Growing


Price: £8.00 for 3 cavalry models

Warlord Games has a small range of Sarmatians and

Parthians. The Sarmatian range is part of the Hail Caesar

‘Dacians & Sarmatians’ range and consists of cataphracts,

warriors and horse-archers, all mounted.



CURTEYS MINIATURES 28MM

Range: Comprehensive

Size: 25mm foot to eye or 29mm tall, 40mm in saddle

Knights: 26mm foot to eye or 31mm tall, 49mm in saddlePrice: £10.00 for four horsemen

The Curteys Mongol range includes a good selection of

both mounted and foot models. The cavalry includes light

horse-archers and heavy cavalry (barded and unbarded).

The foot include archers, spearmen, camp followers and

prisoners. There are some useful extras, such as pack

camels and horse-holders.

To rival the Mongol Horde, Curteys has Eastern European Knights,

Teutonic Order, Chinese, early Samurai, Burmese, and even

Tibetans. Each has a good range of cavalry and infantry, and theBurmese have elephants. Their European and Teutonic ranges are

taller than the others, but are compatible with comparable ranges.

FIREFORGE 28MM

Range: Growing

Size: 27mm ‘foot to eye’ or 30mm tall, 49mm in saddle

Price: £20.00 for a box of 12 cavalry or 24 infantry

Fireforge has recently released a range of 28mm plastic

Mongols. The current range consists of steppe warriors onfoot and mounted horse-archers. The foot warriors can be

assembled as spearmen or bowmen. The horse-archers have

several options to equip them with hand weapons or bows.

Heavy cavalry in metal are promised soon.

Fireforge has a range of both Templar and Teutonic knights,

all in plastic. Their range consists of dismounted knights,

infantry (which can be assembled as spearmen or cross-

bowmen), mounted knights (cloth barded), and mounted

sergeants-at-arms.

GRIPPING BEAST 28MM

Range: Comprehensive

Size: 27.5mm ‘foot to eye’ or 31mm tall, 48mm in saddle

Price: £9.00 for three cavalry models

Gripping Beast has a pretty comprehensive selection of

nomadic horse, including Mongols, Timurids, and Huns.

Each of these ranges includes heavy cavalry and horse-arch-

ers. The Timurids include Afghan infantry and an elephant!

To oppose the Mongol invaders, Gripping Beast has a large rangeof medieval Russians (including Alexander Nevsky, pictured at

right), Teutonic Knights, and Byzantine, Crusader and Islamic

armies. Each has a good selection of cavalry and infantry units.



THEME

54

OLD GLORY 25MM

Range: Very good


Price: £24.00 for 30 infantry or 10 cavalry

The Old Glory Mongol range includes both heavy cavalry

and light horse-archers. They also have a selection of

vassal troops and even a Mongol bolt-thrower.

Opposing the Mongols, is a good selection of medieval Eastern

Europeans, including Russians, Hungarians, Polish, and Teutons.

Another range includes suitable crusader and Arab opponents.

ESSEX MINIATURES 15MM

Range: ComprehensiveSize: 16mm ‘foot to eye’ or 18mm tall, 28mm in saddle

Price: £3.30 for four cavalry

Essex Miniatures has a comprehensive range of medieval figures,

including Mongol, Eastern European, Ghaznavid, Middle Eastern,

Early Samurai, and Crusader armies. These include both mounted

and dismounted figures. One pose is provided per pack.

LEGIO HEROICA 15MM

Range: Good


Price: €5 per pack of 4 cavalry

Legio Heroica is an Italian company who provide Mongol, Feudal,

Crusader and Muslim armies at 15mm scale for the wargamer.

Their Mongol range includes guard, heavy and light cavalry.

PENDRAKEN 10MM

Range: Good – growing


Price: £4.50 for 15 cavalry

Pendraken has recently released a new range of Mongols in10mm. Their Mongol cavalry range includes guard, heavy and

light cavalry. They also have dismounted cavalry, civilians,

camp followers with pack horses, and a selection of yurts.

FREIKORPS 15MM

Range: Good (Parthians)


Price: £2.70 for 4 cavalry

Freikorps have a range of 15mm Scythians and Parthians

which include suitable horse archers and heavy cavalry.



THEME

56

THE ‘SECRET HISTORY’ OFTHE MONGOL DIORAMA

THE COVER UNCOVERED

By Paul Cubbin

Genghis Khan himself said, “If you’re afraid, don’t do it. If you’re doing it, don’tbe afraid” – which was wasted on his audience, because they all spoke Mongolianand they didn’t understand a word he said. Lucky for him he had such charismaand a fine singing voice or he might not have done so well.

When Guy approached me to make a Mongoldiorama for the WS&S front cover, I shuddered

with trepidation. First of all, I had never painted

Mongols before. In fact, the sum total of my Mongolian knowl-

edge (in order of relevance) could be listed as follows: (1) the

Conn Iggulden ‘Conqueror’ series of books (very good); (2) a

dodgy John Wayne movie (its authenticity slips a tad when you

hear that famous drawl sliding out the immortal line, “You’re

beautiful in your wrath”); and (3) Mongolia on

the Risk board (not very helpful).

Secondly, I had never built any kind of

diorama larger than the two or three

model vignettes I have sometimes

done as command stands.

Thirdly, in that great unwritten rule of publishing, it needed tobe done quickly and the deadline was fast approaching.

Finding the right models proved to be something of an unex-

pected difficulty. I don’t know enough about the subject, so

I was unwilling to buy any ‘make-do’ miniatures of slightly

different periods or nationalities, since I feared the backlash of

enraged enthusiasts. I also wanted the models to be of the best

possible sculpting quality, since

they needed to be photographed

up close. Ebob used to do a

lovely set of Mongol raiders,

but sadly they

The finished diorama, with the figures added.



have since been discontinued. I knew Fireforge were in theprocess of making some multi-part plastics, but these were not

yet available. The choices were few – even fewer, when I very

quickly realized that they had to be of a very high standard of

sculpting, given the nature of the piece.

Eventually, I plumped for Gripping Beast and chose some

unarmoured raiders, since I wanted the scene to look like

an ambush by a small raiding party. The models are good,

decently priced and, although quite large for 28mm scale, this

wasn’t going to bother me, since they were only going to be

photographed next to each other.

I cleaned them up and tried to glue them to their ponies,

but – annoyingly – I then hit the first hurdle in my mission.

They weren’t a great fit on the metal saddles and just would

not stay on. I got around this issue with the rather alarm-

ingly named ‘groin sausage’ approach. (Yes, I did make

the name up, but it has just the right amount of puerile

humour to keep me amused.) The ‘groin sausage’ is just

a little lump of green stuff putty, rolled and shoved into

the rider’s groin, where it’s held with a small spot of glue.

Another little spot of glue is applied to the outer layer of

the ‘groin sausage’, and then it is squished down securely

onto the saddle. If any bits of green stuff form unsightly

bulges, they can be poked back into the hidden recessesor cut away. This is a foolproof way of ensuring a secure fit

that won’t pull away at an inopportune moment.

I then determined to fix another issue that galls me; namely,

‘mitten hand’. When metal models come with a variety of

weapon options, very often you will find them sculpted

with stubby, open fingers to allow you to nestle the weapon

easily into their grasp. The down side of this is that the join

is not a strong one and the subject appears to be suffering an

unfortunate deformity. Again, our friend the green stuff came

to my aid, and I glued the weapons in place before adding

a little more length on the fingers and thumbs. It’s a smallthing, really – probably more to do with my own issues than

any failings on the part of the manufacturer, but it does look

better and slightly improves the bond.

I added strings to the bows, made out of plastic bristles cutfrom an old dustpan and brush set (these are also very good

as radio aerials), and then I based them on some 30mm x

45mm plasticard. Some rough sand and rocks were added for

texture, and then they were undercoated black.

It was important for me to get the whole ‘Mongol pony’ feel

right. This meant I needed to look on the interweb to find some

pictures, and then make sure that I painted them accordingly,

not just as generic horses. I also made an extra effort to put some

life into their eyes, as well, since with this subject in particular, I

reckoned the mount was at least as important as the rider.

When the ponies were done, I tackled the riders, using a cheap

Del Prado/Osprey book I bought online as my guide, and trying

to keep the shades I used fairly rustic but also colourful. Fortu-

nately, I’ve been painting up Vikings recently, and I reckoned these

colours would probably fit very nicely. Plenty of natural brown

and beige hues were also used for clothing and equipment.

I also wanted to get the skin shades correct, rather than just

going for a generic ‘esh’ palette (which seems to mean west-

ern European skin tones, more often than not). By mixing a

butternut shade with the usual esh colours, I was able to get

a good dusky shade that seemed about right.

At this stage, I didn’t paint the bases, but left them black. Why?

Well, I figured it would be a lot easier for me to match the colour

of the individual bases to the colour of the diorama base (using

my large collection of acrylic paints and washes), than the other

way round. This proved to be the case, as you shall see (if you

make it to the end of the article, which I don’t take for granted).

Now to the base itself. I got an old bit of hardboard from the

loft and a couple of pieces of insulation board. The latter is

great stuff that I filch from skips or from around building sites

– the offcuts are just thrown away by builders, and if you ask

nicely (because no-one likes a thump on the ear), they willno doubt be only too happy to let some fool take away their

rubbish, rather than pay someone else to do it for them. It was

cut to around 20” wide by 10” high (or thereabouts, I wasn’t

Tackling ‘groin sausage’ and ‘mitten hand’. The assembled riders. A close-up of one of the finished ponies.



THEME

58

being too specific), with the pieces set at right angles, as you

can see, the hardboard being the base. I used a non-branded,

so-called ‘Ultra-Strong Contact Adhesive’ (the kind where nailsare apparently not required). It was then that I met the next

pitfall on my journey – it had the adhesive qualities of tooth-

paste. I am reminded of the man who wanted to purchase a

budgie in a pet shop and was astounded to see a stag behind

the counter. The sign read ‘You Buy Cheep, You Pay Deer’.

Twisted with disappointment (as you no doubt are at that

nauseating and contrived pun), I then turned to my old

favourite: extra strong wood glue. Yes, it’s quite expensive.

But it really, really works. Once the glue had set and the

pieces were securely stuck in place, I then went about chop-

ping madly to make a small hillside with a section of level

plain to the front. I also wanted a stream in there somewhere

(what a fool I am). Once I had hacked away to my heart’s

content, I then fetched the models and started experiment-

ing with them in various positions (ah, takes me back to my

university days). Having found a composition that pleased

me, I took a quick photo to use as a reference, and then

embarked on possibly the most therapeutic stage – the filler.

Mixing up cheapo multi-purpose DIY powder filler with fine

sand, water and wood glue (I do like it), I got myself a very

lovely paste for dolloping all over the place. (Incidentally, this

is also a great recipe for home repairs.) It smoothed out the

angles of the piece, added some realistic lumps and bumps,and also helped to stick it all together even more securely.

Then I was ready with my secret weapon – the tree bark!

I’d never used bark before to make cliffs, but have always

loved the effect when I’ve seen other people use it. However,

the prices charged for lumps of bark in the model shop

brought me out in a cold sweat and a hot ush – overall, I was

tepid! Thankfully, Mother Nature was kind enough to send

devastating winds to our Sceptred Isle this winter and there

were felled trees wherever the eye wandered (especially if it

wandered onto some felled trees). I also remembered that my

dad was chopping down trees in his garden, so with a gener-ous sample from him and a few examples collected by myself

(one hammer, one chisel, one bucket and a couple of felled

trees were all it took), I had myself a nice collection of pieces.

I dried them in the oven for a couple of hours to stop them rotting

and slow-roast any beasts caught inside, and then I pushed them

rudely into the still-squishy paste on the model ... with morewood glue. This was lots and lots of fun. I also pushed some rocks

from the garden in, as well, for a bit of variety.

When it all set, I brought back the Mongol riders and tried

to place them where I had originally positioned them. Oh

dear, another problem. I hadn’t left enough space on the at

part for them and they just would not sit properly on the

steep slope to the rear. Out came the chisel again. I used it

to level out some areas for those who were not sitting nicely,

and then used it to chisel out a bed for them all to nestle

in. Having drawn around the bases with pencil, it was easy

enough to get the general shape, but it was far from exact. I

would need to do something later to fix things.

When this was dry, I slathered diluted wood glue all over the

place, added some little pebbles to the stream bed, and then

sprinkled sand over all. I did have to go back a few times

with more glue and sand before I got a decent covering. I

also had to make sure I was handy with the dustpan and

brush (which, thankfully, still had a few bristles left), since

all this action was taking place in the living room and I didn’t

want to be exiled to the dog house for leaving a mess.

To paint it, I used a mix of water-based paints bought in

sample pots from the DIY store, poster paints, and ... yes,wood glue. It received a good slathering of a very dark

brown basecoat using a 2” brush, followed by burnt umber

dry-brushing over everything. Then I started to add some

different colours – reds, greens, yellows, blues, greys – to

give the thing a bit of natural variety. This was all dry-

brushed over with a succession of very pale cream and

grey shades to mute it all down.

Nearly done now, the finishing line was in sight, but there

were a few little important details to add. Before start-

ing out on this job, I had looked at plenty of pictures of

Mongolian and Eurasian plains and had already decidedthat I would be using a lot of tufts. For this reason, I didn’t

go to my usual source for these, but to a company called

Tajima1. The price was comparable with other manufac-

The finished riders, waiting for their bases to be completed.



turers, but what appealed to me most was their range of

large, medium, and small tufts in the same shade. I bought

some green, gold and brown tufts and, in the end, they

were absolutely essential. (They were also sold in larger

packs than the ones I normally buy.)

I scattered tufts all over the model, keeping the green ones for

close to the stream and the brown ones for the rocky cliffs, while

the gold (yellow) ones were scattered all over. I spray-varnished

all over the model, and then chucked some orangey, red-brick

coloured chalk-dust (made by crushing up a couple of my daugh-

ter’s play chalks) all around with a big uffy old brush.

Things were looking pretty good by now and I was in that

dangerously confident stage that usually comes just before

a cataclysmic tumble. I painted the model bases a generic

grey-brown and then put them back on the model. When

they were sat in place, it was easy for me to match up thecolours to the base with layers of dry-brushing so that they

looked pretty. The bases still didn’t sit very well in their

little troughs, however, and plenty of base edges were still

on show. This is where those tufts came to my rescue once

more. I just kept sticking on tufts until everything looked

right and I was able to once more suspend my disbelief.

The only thing left to do was the stream. Oh dear, this proved

to be just the fall I had feared. I had bought some yacht varnish,

having read that this was a good water effect. Sadly, the Mongol

figures had to be on individual bases, to allow them to be used

for gaming, so my dreams of having a rider splashing through thestream had to remain unrealized. Still, I didn’t think I had the time

to do multiple layers of varnish and then wait for each one to dry,

so I just merrily poured in the varnish and stood back grinning.

1 2 43

5 6 87

The beginning stages – find-

ing a binding glue!

Landscaping the diorama. The secret weapon – plenty

of tree bark!

Adding the rough texture

with sand and pebbles.

The first stage of dry-brush-

ing up the colour.

The second stage of dry-

brushing.

Adding grass and tufts brings

the diorama to life.

Don’t forget to match your

bases to your diorama.

This was a huge error.

Firstly, it poured out each end, leaving a horrible mess. (Note

to self: block up the ends next time, you eejit.) Fortunately, I

had put down plenty of newspaper, but even so, I was caughtin a never-ending cycle of scooping up the dripping varnish

with the brush and trying to redeposit in back in the stream. I

plugged up the ends of the stream as best I could with some

blue tack and then left it to (hopefully) dry overnight.

Secondly, it took experience’s tough classroom to teach me

what most of you have probably already guessed; namely,

that a deep puddle of varnish will not set – it will form a thin

skin and then sit contentedly underneath until the end of

time. Reduced to poking holes in the skin and trying to make

it reset, I eventually arrived (via a painful road) at the same

destination I would have reached by using a water-modelling

product and then giving it a quick thin layer of varnish.

A few bits of foam were added with cream and white, dabbed

on here and there, and the piece was complete. It was a pleas-

ure, a chore, and a valuable education in one. I always say

that a day without learning is a day wasted, and I think I got

good value for money out of this one. Not bad for a first effort,

and I hope you have taken some pleasure from it (as well as

my pain) and are just a little curious as to how you might go

about making your own little scenes. Have fun! WS&S

One man’s stumbling, error-strewn journey through some

very new experiences – namely, building a medium-scalediorama for the WS&S front cover – with the aid of skips

and salvaged tree bark.



THEME

60

SCRATCH-BUILDING A MONGOLIAN GER

HOMES FOR EASTERNHORSEMEN

By Timmy De Cabooter

Mongolian gers – also called yurts – were tent-like structures used as dwellings by themany nomad tribes of the east. Disassembled into lightweight parts and carried uponbeasts of burden, these structures could be erected within a matter of hours. The gers allowed their users to survive cold, harsh nights on the steppes while still maintainingthe mobility they needed to provide fertile grazing for their precious livestock.

In true Mongolian style, we will make a very lightweight

and easy to construct ger . For the construction, we need

the following tools and resources:

• Small piece of balsa wood

• Couple of wooden matchsticks

• Thick and thin bamboo skewers

• 3cm-thick polystyrene

• Sharp Stanley knife and/or hot-wire cutting tool

• Several sheets of printing paper

• Natural cord

• Hot-glue gun

• Wood glue

• Round-headed pins

• Paints and paintbrushes

CONSTRUCTING THE GER

The first step of the construction is cutting out the poly-

styrene base for the nomad dwelling. I have opted to use

3cm-thick polystyrene, because of the desired height and

the availability of the material. The actual base of the ger

will be constructed out of two identical polystyrene layers,

with the first layer forming the round base of the dwelling

and the second providing the dome of the roof.

This first layer is a round piece with a diameter of 10cm. To

make this section, I first drew the desired circle on a polysty-

rene sheet using a drafting compass, and then cut it out with a

sharp Stanley knife. Note that you will need a razor-sharp knife,

or you will tear the foam, creating a messy finish. If you have

a hot-wire cutting tool, you can use this instead for cutting out

the polystyrene pieces. If this is the case, I recommend that you

cut two cardboard circles to the same 10cm diameter. Attach

these to both sides of the polystyrene as a template.

The second layer will form the slightly conical roof, so typi-

cal of these tent-like dwellings. First draw a line around theoutside edge of your second cylinder, equidistant from the top

and bottom edge (so 1.5cm in). Now cut the top half down

and shape it into a slightly conical roof, forming the dome of

the tent. It’s hard to give much advice, just make sure you don’t

remove too much foam. After you have formed the roof, fix

it on top of the first sheet using some regular wood glue. To

ensure a perfect bond between both layers temporarily insert

several bamboo skewers along the edge with a thicker one in

the middle to serve as tent pole. Finally use the Stanley knife to

create a at surface where we want to place the door at a later

stage during the construction.

After finishing the basic shape of the dwelling, we can now

add the paper layer, which imitates the fabric material used

on real gers. This layer will not only create a smooth, paint-

able surface, but will also create a durable protective layer

to ensure that the piece will survive dozens of battles with

relative ease. By trial and error, I found that it’s better to

tear strips of paper than to neatly cut them using scissors.

By tearing the paper, you create rougher edges, which can

easily be blended with the previously attached paper strips

using some diluted wood glue; you also avoid straight lines

in the finished piece, which would look quite odd. First,coat the polystyrene core of the ger with diluted wood

glue. Then, simply stick the paper in place and cover it with

another layer of diluted wood glue. Continue this process

The perfect home for any nomadic warrior.



until the entire dwelling is covered. You can easily merge

the rough edges of the paper strips using an old brush or

your fingers and some diluted wood glue.

We can now glue on a balsa wood door that has been

scribed with a sharp tool and weathered with a hobby knife.Add the door frame using some wooden matchsticks or, if

you prefer, skewers cut to size. All of these pieces are glued

in place using wood glue and left to dry.

The last step of the construction is attaching some natural

cordage around the ger. I have opted for adding two cords

that are strung around the base. Simply cut some rough twine

to length and attach the pieces in the desired locations using

some round-headed pins. Cover the ropes in diluted wood

glue, and when the glue is almost dry, you can remove the

pins. The ger is now finished and ready to be painted!

PAINTING THE GER

Painting the ger isn’t difficult. I only use a small array of cheap

craft paints for scenery, no need to use expensive model paints

for painting large terrain pieces! The colours you need are dark

brown, light brown, white, and a tan colour, along with a ashy

colour for some nice decorative patterns. Note that I have opted

for a light brown ger , but you can easily create an off-white ger

using a grey undercoat and some off-white and tan shades.

As the piece is fully coated in wood glue, you must take care

to apply a very good basecoat. First, use dark brown paint

diluted with some water. After this initial coat, the piece will

look horrible and you will want to throw it in the bin ... but

keep calm! After the second layer of basecoat, the piece will

already look better and, after the third or fourth coat, it will

be fully covered in a nice rich dark brown.

The second step is to dry-brush the ropes with a tan colour to

bring out the texture. You don’t need to apply this carefully, as

most of the tent will be repainted in a lighter brown to better

imitate an actual ger . During this step, you should also apply

a light brown basecoat to the wooden door and frame.

As mentioned before, you can now coat the entire ger in light

brown, but don’t cover the dry-brushed ropes, and leave a little of

the dark colour around the ropes to create some simple shading.

It is possible that you will need several coats of paint to get good

coverage, but spending some extra time on this step will create a

nicer ger . During this step, you should also highlight the door and

doorframe by layering light brown colours on top of each other.

You can stop painting at this stage, or you can add some

additional dry-brushing to give the ger more variation in

the fabric. You can choose to add interesting fabric patterns

by using an old at paintbrush and a slightly darker toneof the previous light brown shade. You can also add some

nice decorative patterns using blue or red paint, which gives

some colour to the otherwise uniform ger .

The Mongolian ger is now finished, and ready to house your fierce

horsemen of the east. But, as you have probably figured out, you

can also make a variety of other tents using the same techniques

discussed in this article. The process mentioned above could

easily be applied to the construction of colonial, Napoleonic or

medieval jousting tents. If you are feeling particularly creative, it’s

also a great way to create fantasy orc dwellings! WS&S

The construction and painting of this model ger will probably

take around one hour, excluding drying times. That is about

half the time needed to erect the real version!

1 432

Cutting the layers. Gluing the two circular

layers together.

Tearing pieces of paper to

cover the ger.

Covering the ger with layers

of paper.

5 876

Adding the door. Using pins to hold on the

cord while the glue dries.

Undercoated with the ropes

highlighted.The finished ger.



MODELING

62

PAINTING 15MM BRITISH BATTLEDRESS

CLAD FOR BATTLE

By Piers Brand

The aim of this article is to offer a simple method for painting 15mm Britishinfantry for the north-west European theatre, with a good finish, but using arestricted pallet of colours. Not all gamers have access to a vast array of shades,but those selected here offer a good variety and will be useful for many othertasks. The key to the process is to be as neat as possible when painting – a neatand tidy finish will add greatly to the overall effect.

British uniforms of WWII come in a khaki colour, often

quite dark; but at 15mm scale, it’s worth painting the

figure lighter than normal, to make it really stand out

when viewed on the tabletop. This accounts for ‘scale effect’

– where a real colour appears darker on a small model and we

must add extra highlights. In the pictures that accompany this

article, the model may look lighter than you’d expect British

battledress to be, but this is simply to make it stand out during

gameplay. For painting Canadian troops, gamers may want to

use a greener shade, in order to represent the different dyes

used in the manufacture of their uniforms.

In order to speed up the painting process, as much as possible

is painted the same – webbing, gaiters, and helmet are all doneusing the same green, in order to reduce painting time. For vari-

ation, webbing could be painted in other colours, but green

seems to best reect the troops of the period.

The paints I’ve used for this tutorial are all produced by Vallejo,

mostly in their ‘Panzer Aces’ range, but any other brand can be

used and similar colours can be found across many ranges. The

figure used for this article comes from the new plastic 15mm

‘Late War British Infantry 1944-45’ box set from the Plas-

tic Soldier Company. Of course, the same technique can be

applied to any British infantry miniature of any scale.

The figure is first removed from the sprue, and ash or mould

lines are removed with a sharp blade. Then, the figure is stuck

to a base and given a black undercoat.

The first stage is to give the model a uniform base colour. As we

have seen, working at 15mm scale, it is often worthwhile paint-

ing slightly lighter than normal, so it may seem that, at times,

the figure looks lighter than the real uniform would be. So,

for the base coat, I have used Vallejo’s British Tankcrew (317),

applied over the entire figure.

The next step is to give the model an overall covering with a

dark brown wash or ink. For this model, I used Vallejo’s Dark

Brown wash (76514), but the current Games Workshop washes

will work equally well. Leave this to fully dry. Don’t be tempted

to try and work while it’s still wet – if you do, it can lead to

the wash bleeding into the paint and reducing your figure to

a rather blobby finish! A bit of patience is required, so have a

batch of figures being painted at the same time, to further speed

up the process.

For the base highlight, reapply the British Tankcrew (317),

leaving the deep creases showing through to add depth to the

model. This is a key stage and worth taking your time over, to

get a neat and tidy finish, as this will be the stage that sets the

tone and depth of the finished paint job.

For the first highlight, I mixed a small amount of Vallejo’s High-

light Afrikakorps (340) to the British Tankcrew (317) and used

this to cover all main areas of the uniform. This will be the first

of a series of ever-decreasing areas painted with a highlight.

Each time you add a new colour, you should aim to leave part

of the previous colour showing at the edges of your highlight,

once more heightening the sense of depth and tone.

Next, apply a highlight with a 50/50 mix of the two colours,

but reduce the areas covered, so that the model begins to show

increased depth and different tones of the uniform. This stark

contrast will help the finished uniform

colour to stand out when finished.

Using almost pure Highlight

Afrikakorps (340), add final

highlights along the tops of the

creases and raised areas, toreally make the uniform pop

out. You may now find the

uniform looks very bright. A selection of 15mm British infantrymen from Plastic Soldier Company.



This is partly an optical effect, as the light painted areas

against the unpainted and darker areas make the highlights

look brighter than they are. Once the model is finished,

the overall effect will look more subtle.

Now, basecoat all webbing, gaiters, and helmet with Valle-

jo’s German Cam. Dark Green (979). This provides a nice

dark base coat for the equipment.

Next, mix Vallejo’s Afrikakorps Tankcrew (336) into the

German Cam. Dark Green (979) in a 50/50 ratio, for the first

highlight on the equipment and webbing. Use it to almost

block areas in and leave the dark green showing at the cuts

and edges, to emphasize the shape of the equipment.

For a final highlight on the webbing, take the Afrikakorps

Tankcrew (336) and add a drop of Highlight Flesh (342). Don’t

forget to lightly dry-brush the helmet net, to really make it stand

out ready for later treatment. At this point, also use Highlight

Afrikakorps (340) to paint any canvas scrim on the helmet net.

Now, we base-coat the weapon using Vallejo’s New Wood(311) for all woodwork, Flat Brown (984) for the helmet strap

and rie sling, and Gunmetal Grey (863) for the rie metal-

work and bayonet. If you want to add some highlights, you can

lighten the first two colours by adding Highlight Flesh (342).

I also used Vallejo’s German Cam. Black Brown (822) for the

boots, and added Flat Brown (984) for a highlight.

Next, we apply the Dark Brown wash to the weapon,

helmet, boots and rifle sling, to tone in any highlight and

blend the figure together.

The final stage is to paint in the esh. For this,

a simple method is to use the esh triad

in Vallejo’s ‘Silk Color’ range, consist-

ing of Shadows Flesh (343), Flesh Base

(341), and Highlight Flesh (342). Always

try and leave the shadows showing

around the nose, eyes and mouth,

and also between the fingers, to

make them stand out.

Finally, just varnish and base as

normal, and you should have some fine looking recruits for

your British Army! WS&S

It’s hard to picture these as 15mm miniatures, as they’re

better painted than many larger-scale figures out there!

1 2 43

Base coat. Ink wash. Reapply base highlight. First highlight.

5 6 87

Second highlight. Final highlight on the tops. Basecoat on the webbing. Highlight on the webbing.

9 10 1211

Finaly highlight on webbing. Adding the woodwork. Brown wash to blend. Add the flesh.

Finished and ready for battle.



MODELING

64

PAINTING A ‘PAPER PANZER’

BLU-TACK CAMOUFLAGE

By Ruben Torregrosa

Generally speaking, there are two major types of camouflage: blurred-edgeand hard-edge. Since the airbrush creates a blurred effect, we only need toairbrush the paint directly (reducing the pressure and increasing the dilution ofthe paint) for blurred-edge camo. For hard-edge camo, we can use a ‘mask’ –that is, something to help us to create the hard edges we need.

F

or the mask, we could use masking tape or paper, but

self-adhesive putty (such as Blu-Tack or Silly Putty) is

far more useful. This tool is easy to use and we cancreate very complicated camouage patterns. Indeed, while

paper and masking tape hardly cover a surface with plenty of

detail and relief, putty covers it perfectly!

I’ve decided to paint a model of the E-100 German tank – a

‘paper Panzer’ (a design that was never actually completed).

It has enormous panels on which we can easily paint camou-

age. In my case, I will paint a two-tone camouage with

dunkelgelb (‘dark yellow’) and dunkelgrau (‘grey’).

First, we should apply the primer, in order to protect the

paint on the model and to facilitate the application of

subsequent layers of paint. I’ve used a dark yellow primercolour from Ammo of Mig Jimenez, which can serve as the

first colour in the next step.

There are also different illumination techniques: zenithal

illumination, panelling, colour modulation, and so on. You

can decide which one suits you best. In my case, I love

colour modulation, because I enjoy using the airbrush and

because I think we use too much contrast at this small

scale. Colour modulation is an ‘unreal’ illumination, since

we imagine light coming from all directions, instead from

from only one (namely, the sun, which is the mainstay of

zenithal illumination). Therefore, wecan paint each panel with its

own lights and shadows. This

means we can put the

shadow of one panel besides the light of another. (Take

a look at the tank frontal view – the contrast generated is

enormous, isn’t it?) I usually apply 4-5 colours, from theshadow to the highlights, creating a gradual effect.

Now it’s time for the masking. Blu-Tack is like plasticine, but

isn’t oily. We can handle it easily with our hands or tools. For

example, to recreate this streaked camouage, I’ve rolled out

long strips and used the blunt end of a brush to give the final

shape to the stripes. It’s very important to avoid gaps between

the surface and the Blu-Tack. The putty has to cover the surface

properly. And more importantly, we are covering the original

colour. That’s the yellow stripes, which will be overpainted

with the next colour. Design the pattern you want in advance.

Time to apply the second colour – in this case, grey. We shouldfollow exactly the same kind of illumination used during the

previous phase. For example, on a particular panel, if we applied

the yellow maximum highlight at the bottom, now we should do

the same with the grey colour. Try not to ood the paint.

This is the most fun step to do! Now we can remove the

Blu-Tack. We can directly use our hands, although a little

more Blu-Tack can help us.

Removing the Blu-Tack leaves clean lines on the model.

Sometimes, because of traces of oil from the model’s moulds,

when we remove the Blu-Tack, we find that we have lostpart of the paint. No problem! Just repaint the

damaged areas using a brush. If the result is

not identical (because the modulation was

done by airbrushing), don’t worry –

we can solve this problem during

the weathering stage.

Finally, to get more contrast, we

can paint some panels with a red

primer colour. At the end of the

war, the German army didn’t have

enough paint, and some tanks (or

panels on tanks) showed the original primer

colour applied to the metal. It’s a nice resource to

explore in these ‘paper Panzers’! Once more, I’ve used

Blu-Tack to mask, following exactly the same process.

The finished (and

intimidating) E-100.



Before applying weathering effects, it’s a good idea to apply

a varnish layer to our model. I use enamels and oils for

these effects. Therefore, if I apply a gloss or satin varnish,

this doesn’t only protect the model, but also facilitates the

application of these effects, since the varnishes create a

polished surface where enamels and oils spread easily. I’veused a stencil instead of decals on this model. My stencil is

a thin sheet of metal, with (for example) the balken kreuz

cut out. So, we just airbrush with black and we have our

German cross! But remember, after using decals or a sten-

cil, we should apply a protective varnish layer.

ADDING WEAR AND TEARThe first weathering effect will be the application of a filter

with enamels or oils. Filters are very, very diluted paints

that should slightly change the general colour of our vehi-

cle. We can use them to unify the different colours used

in the camouflage and to simulate the smooth, dirty patinaof tarnished metal. We can use ready-to-use filters – just

take the liquid, brush the excess off on a piece of paper,

and then apply soft strokes. I tried another technique by

preparing and applying small dots of neutral oil colours on

every panel. I then dissolve these using a brush moistened

with white spirit or other thinner. It’s also interesting to

apply vertical strokes, since we can also generate some

streaking effects. When this step is complete, the paint

should be allowed to dry at least overnight.

Now we need to give realism to our model by highlighting the

details. We apply a dark brown enamel wash or ‘pin wash’.

Using a thin brush, we apply the wash just in the recesses –

not over the whole panel, as that would darken the whole

vehicle, and we don’t want that! I would recommend using

dark brown rather than black, since black implies the absence

of colour, and we only want to separate the details from each

panel. I use enamels for this purpose, because they are very

easy to use, as you can see in the next step.

After 30 minutes, we can remove the excess wash witha brush moistened in thinner. This is the great advantage

of enamels! We couldn’t do the same with acrylic paints,

since they dry in seconds.

1 42 3

Basecoating the tank. Applying shadows and high-

lights with an airbrush.

Masking off camouflage

areas using Blu-Tack.

Applying the grey camou-

flage stripes to the tank.

5 86 7

Have fun removing the Blu-

Tack mask!

Adding the red primer

colour to select areas.

Varnishing the model before

weathering.

Applying enamel filters.

9 1210 11

Applying an enamel ‘pin

wash’.

Removing excess wash

using thinner.

Adding random chips with

a sponge...

...and a brush.



MODELING

66

To simulate the chipping effect, we come back to acrylic

paints. We can use two tools: sponge and brush. The

sponge lets us simulate accumulated chipping, and inter-

estingly, the small chippings are totally random. With the

brush, we can add new chips and scratches. I usually start

with a light colour to simulate superficial chipping effects.

First, I use the sponge, and then the brush.

Now, using a dark brown colour, we can represent deep chip-

ping effects, which allow the metal to show through. Using

the same tools, we apply this dark colour and try to combine it

with the light colour. Deep chippings should show superficial

scratches around them, giving a deeper effect.

Next, we will once more use enamels to simulate streak-

ing effects. These represent dirt sliding on the panels. Using

different tones of brown, red, and grey, we paint first vertical

stripes on vertical panels (not horizontal ones).

After a couple of minutes, we blur those streaking lines by

applying vertical strokes with a brush moistened in thin-

ner. It doesn’t matter if you lose most of the effect, since

these streaks should be faint. In any case, we can repeat

this step several times and we can always build up more

intensive streaking effects. For example, we can simulate a

streak of rust from a chip by removing less paint.

On horizontal surfaces, we can use the same colour

surrounding the details, like hatches. This effect can simu-

late accumulations of dirt.

The final effect can be mud splashes. To recreate them, we

should first prepare a mix of different pigments and enamels.

I usually use at least three pigments to create a rich mixture

with different tones. We can use some clay to thicken the

mix – but beware, because the clay is white! Then we create

the splashes, using a brush with thick bristles and a stick. The

proper technique is to ick the bristles with the stick; when

the bristles return to their original position, they ick the

mixture onto the model, creating the splash effect. We can

repeat this step as many times as we want.

THE TRACKSFor the tracks, we will follow some of the previous steps.

First, we paint the tracks with acrylic paints. I usually use a

neutral grey tone and then apply a metallic dry-brush. Then,

we apply a general wash across the whole surface with a

dark brown colour. Once dried, we can simulate a dust

effect on tracks by diluting some pigments with thinner.

You should make sure you use the same pigments as the onesyou used for splashing effects, as they would all be caused

by the same earth! The dilution should have a milky texture.

Apply the diluted thinners on tracks and wait until they dry.

Then you can remove the excess using a brush moistened

with thinner, or you can intensify the effect at some points.

Finally, we can add some splashing effects.

And there we have it. The finished E-100! WS&S

Camo with Blu-Tack – who would’ve thought it? At first,

it sounded like ‘tartan paint’ or fine detailing with a 3”

brush! Seeing is believing.

13 1614 15

Adding vertical streaks with

enamel paints.

Bluring the streaks. Using the same technique to

add more dirt.

Applying mud and dust with

pigment powders.

17 2018 19

An initial acrylic basecoat

added to the tracks.

The tracks with a metalic

drybrush and general wash.

Pigments and thinner give a

generally dirty appearance.

‘Flicking on’ extra mud and

dust patches.

E100 model by Heer46 — www.heer46shop.de



COLUMN

68

THE IRREGULAR

LET’S GO CLUBBING!

Recently, I came across an old proverb – “civilization isonly a meal away from barbarism”. Sometimes whenI look at the social side of this lovely hobby of ours, itseems to me that we, too, are only a meal away frombecoming another solitary pursuit in attics and store-room cupboards. I passionately believe that wargam-ing is a social hobby. I also believe that this social sideof wargaming is fragile and needs more TLC. Nothingillustrated this better than the recent rise and fall of anew gaming club in my town.

© G e o r g i n a P y m o n t - H a r m a n By Martin Onderdonck

Recently, with the arrival of a GW store in town and

the tireless efforts of the store manager, a lot of

people finally got themselves organized to start a

fantasy wargaming club. Nowadays, everything starts on a

Facebook page and this club was no exception. A closed

Facebook page grew very quickly, by word of mouth, to 80

members and soon everybody agreed that, if they could

find a suitable space in town and decide on a suitable day,they would start a new club.

It took quite some time to find such a place. If you want

to cater to everybody’s wishes in the group, then you need

a space that is free, can house 30 gamers, stays open till

after 11pm on a suitable weekday, allows 16-year-olds as

well as 56-year-olds, has free parking, has a bus station

close by, with evening buses, and so on. Incredibly, such a

place was found. A local restaurant in the town centre had

a large upstairs room that was never used during the week.

Word reached the GW store manager that the space upstairs

was free for community groups and the mostentrepreneurial of our group went to find

out. It turned out that the two cooks in the

restaurant had Warhammer armies of their

own and welcomed us with open arms.

On the first evening, 30 gamers turned

up with their armies. It was a roaring

success, and suddenly, all those hours

painting away in silence at home, not

knowing whether you would ever see

your soldiers take on another army,

were worth it. The restaurant was

happy, as well, as they had 30customers ordering food and soft

drinks. It was clear that there was

great demand for a gaming club.

It was also clear that the pent-up desire of many gamers,

often young, to find like-minded friends and develop their

gaming and painting skills was equally great. At the end of

the first evening, everybody voted to make this gaming night

a weekly event. In the following weeks, it quickly grew to

40 gamers per night. Out of nowhere, at a stroke, this town

was a gaming club of more than 40 members richer.

But it didn’t last. The restaurant was part of a chain, and we

were too little, too late. It was soon closed down, and in its

place will come another fried chicken place or a betting shop

or whatever. Since then, the club has not found a replacement

venue. Either licensing laws, or rental fees, or background

checks – there always seems to be something that stands in

the way of people of all ages coming together to do something

socially, for non-profit purposes.

If you looked at our hobby as an outsider, what would you

see? Geeks? Toy soldiers? Fancy books full of war and gore?

Oh dear, at first sight, it doesn’t seem that we’re the mostsociable hobby out there, does it? When I buy a hobby maga-

zine (’cause I fancy doing something with my spare time), I

will learn all about the history, the tables of organization and

equipment, the rules set used ... and, of course, I will learn

about the bewildering choice of figures available to recreate

those armies. But will I learn where I can find people like

me? Will I learn that, every week, thousands of people go to

clubs around the country to play war games with friends? I

will probably come across more articles in those magazines

about solo-wargaming than about wargaming clubs. But

wargaming is a social hobby and wargaming clubs are the

backbone of this hobby. Just like Cinderella in the story, they

do all the work and hardly ever get any public credit for it.

I am a member of a wargaming club that has been going for

over 30 years. I have a family, of course, and I do sports, asNo! Not THAT kind

of clubbing!



well; but the wargames club is the only weekly social event

where I can share life and likes with friends, face to face.

And still, there have been so many obstacles that the club

has had to overcome in those 30 years. We must have moved

venue at least five times. Some venue owners price-hiked

us out of their premises; some venues were vandalized and

burnt down. It took us a long time – and a friendly tip from

a neighbouring gaming club – to find a reasonable publicliability insurance. No matter what we said, most insurance

companies actually thought that wargaming involved shoot-

ing people with real guns. Looking at their premiums, I’m

sure they wanted to insure us against the public being hit

by stray bullets! Law changes meant that we cannot allow

anyone younger than 18 to become a member, and so on.

In my opinion, only as a member of a club can you really

appreciate wargaming as a social hobby in full. The advan-

tages of belonging to a club are many. Every week, some-

body is trying out a new rules set or a new game. When we

like a new game, we immediately have five or six armiesallocated. Every now and then, somebody has an attic clear-

out and we grab a bargain from a fellow gamer. The club

buys all the scenery that we use and we go as a club to

shows. We organize demo games at five local shows every

year and I can assure you that traders do a lot more business

to club members than to non-members. We share painting

tips, modelling tips, and source materials. We have a fixed

night at a small community centre with secure storage space,

a kitchen, and plenty of tables and chairs. All of that for

£15.00 per year membership and £3.00 per night gaming.

However, there is more to a club than just the power of

numbers. You meet people and you learn to deal with people.It’s easy to have strong opinions about our hobby on your own,

but learning to have a good time in your hobby with people

who do not share your opinions ... that’s what clubs are about.

Learning how to play is just as much a revelation to many.

How easy it is to make TOEs, battle plans, new tactics, and

apply the principles of Sun Tzu, in your head; now do it against

an opponent, and watch in horror as your hand and your dice

disagree with your head. My most memorable game in the

club was being trashed by the teenage son of a club member

in an ACW game. Thank you for reminding me how utterly

useless I can be on a tabletop with all my book knowledge!

And then there’s life. With the recession, about half our

members have lost their original jobs and have had to find

a new one. Some had their job for only a year, some for 15

years or more. The time spent looking for a new job whilst

having to maintain or contribute to a family is very stress-

ful for most people. I lost my job twice during the reces-

sion, but I can talk about that in the club, because I’m not

alone. Just as there is no shame in losing a game, there

is no shame in confiding to your club friends that you

are only mortal. A club member lost his spouse through

disease a couple of years ago. Apart from the supportat the time, the club and the social side of things have

helped him getting to grips with his loss. When life gets a

bit too much, it’s good to have a place of fantasy to go to,

where you can meet real people.

So, we need more gaming clubs, because our hobby is a

social hobby and wargames clubs are the backbone of every-

thing you see in this hobby. What would happen to shows if

there were no clubs organizing the demo and participation

games? What would happen to all these traders and compa-

nies who bring out these wonderful products if there were no

more clubs where people come together and game? I say to

all wargamers out there: “Let’s go clubbing!” WS&S

No baby seals were hurt during the writing of this article.

New gamers being introduced to In Her Majesty’s Name. Enthusiastic 40k players.



LET’S PLAY

70

VERSION 3 OF PETER PIG’S WWII RULES

LET’S PLAY PBI

By Guy Bowers

Martin Goddard of Peter Pig kindly invited WS&S to attend the annual Peter Pig play-test open day, where the latest version of Poor Bloody Infantry (PBI ) was being triedout. So, with camera and notebook in hand, your intrepid editor (me!) made his wayto the secret rendezvous near Ilchester. Martin had a baker’s dozen of playtesters onhand, all members of his PBI test group … and tea and biscuits!

Peter Pig’s Rules for the Common Man (RFCM) series

has a long history of creating innovative games since1984. The history of PBI itself dates back to the start of

that same RFCM series. Martin assured me that old PBI armies

should still be valid in the new edition.

So, why a new edition? Martin wanted to revamp the rules, to

make PBI simpler and to incorporate ideas he’d developed from

his other games, particularly the new edition of Square Bashing .

The principle of PBI is that any army can play any other, based on

the fact that, while there were great changes in the armour of the

period, most nations were similar at the infantry level. Tanks also

have it hard this close in, so are vulnerable to infantry assaults.

Each side controls a company of infantry. This is not a game

of cherry-picking; there is no glossy list of ‘What wargam-

ers want’, so no wall-to-wall Tigers or armies with ‘bells

and whistles’. Support options are deliberately curbed,

which to my mind makes for a more realistic game. The

scale is 1:1 – a base of three figures represents three men,

and a tank model represents one real tank.

A player has to choose what sort of support he wishes to use.

At most, he’ll have 60-70 infantry models plus two or three

tanks. This is not a game where the infantry offer some token

support to a Panzer division. Likewise, artillery and the like

are off-table support, called in as ‘assets’.

A PBI commander has this choice for forces:

• Foot only

• Foot with towed gun support

• Foot with light recon

• Foot with armour

• Armour only

Each has its bonuses and penalties. An all-infantry unit will

have numbers (up to five platoons) and bonuses to ambush,

tank-hunter and sneak move assets. An all-armour force will

have no assets to call on – theoretically, you could take a tank

company, but they’d get slaughtered, as tanks cannot holdobjectives or buildings. A recon force has advantages in the

pre-game for determining the scenario. And so on.

The maximum number of tanks on the board is determined by a

points-allocation system (you pay for the gun and the armour), so

you can take a larger number of average tanks or a few good tanks

with heavy armour and excellent guns. This gently nudges players

towards that one Tiger versus a couple of Shermans or T34s.

A game of new PBI should last approximately two hours,

which is feasible, given familiarity with the rules. As with any

wargame, your first few games will be slightly slower.

STARTING THE GAME – RECONAs with all Peter Pig games, there is a pre-game to decide

the scenario. This mini-game represents reconnaissance

sections; each takes it in turns to move up a ‘snakes and

ladders’ style board. The difference in scores between two

recon sections determines which scenario is played (encoun-

ter, probing attack, or frontal assault, with the best possible

result) and who has the advantage. The winner can choose to

be attacker or defender, but has an advantage in the number

of units that will start on the table.

SCENERY AND SQUARESThere is no need for fine measurement, templates, or tape

measures; no conversions of scale are required. The standard

board is made up of 6” squares, so the standard 4’ x 4’ playing

area is divided into 64 squares. Different scales can be used

with PBI by simply changing the size of the squares.

Italians vs Finns!



There are always twelve

pieces of scenery in a game

(each player should bring

six). Each piece is on a 12”

x 6” base and takes up two

adjacent squares. Squares consistof ‘closed’ scenery (buildings and

woods), partial scenery (hedges, walls,

and fences), or open scenery (the standard

square, with no significant cover). Scenery

placement is subject to a few rules; for example, all

buildings have to be on a road. The defender places

the terrain, but the attacker can modify it slightly and

then chooses which side to attack from. This encourages

fair play between players. A good board should have enough

terrain with plenty of open spaces.

Once the attacker has chosen his entry point, the defenderplaces three objectives on the table (a Company HQ, a

strongpoint and a road entrance). The attacker may then

dice to see if his entry point changes, representing the

attacker outflanking the enemy. (In our trial game, I was

very lucky and managed to turn up in the enemy’s rear!)

THE GAMEMartin described playing PBI v.3 as onomatopoeic –

“Bang, bang, bang!” – when rolling dice. If you are shoot-

ing a lot, then you roll a lot of dice. The game uses an

alternative-turn system, but there is ‘opportunity shoot-

ing’, if an enemy unit closes to within one square.

Units can be placed anywhere in a square; each player places

his units wherever they look pretty. However, while more than

three units may occupy a square (which is potentially good

for commanding them), there are penalties for clustering your

troops. Indirect fire targets everything in a single square and the

enemy gain bonus dice when shooting at a clustered square.

Company and platoon commanders can motivate sections,

modified by distance and terrain. Each section rolls 1D6 to

determine its action points or actions (tanks roll 2D6). APs can

be spent to move a unit (paying higher to exit ‘closed’ scenery),

to recover from morale or pinning, or to shoot. Units that arenot successfully commanded still get one residual AP to act.

Tanks have directionality – they have to pay APs to turn 45

degrees, so they tend to act like real tanks. In an action, a

tank may move forward one square, turn 45 degrees, and then

move diagonally one square. Due to the ‘Op fire’ rule, they

should be wary of getting too close to infantry.

Shooting requires 6s to hit, with enemy units getting a save (4+

modified by terrain and training). Additional dice are rolled

against targets that are clustered (any square with more than

three units in it). Area fire is directed at a square – no templates

are required. If the artillery strike hits, then all units in the

square are possible targets. Mortars dice for deviation – roll a

1 and the square above has been hit; roll a 6 and the square

below has been hit. Roll two dice per stand in the square.

The Morale system is simple

and requires no record keep-

ing. Simply add up the ‘problems’ a

unit has (number of casualties and prox-

imity of officers); if it is greater than one ‘prob-

lem’, the unit tests morale. Tanks often have to fall

back if they are not supported by friendly infantry.

ASSETSAssets are an important feature that adds character to the indi-

vidual armies. These are exactly like the latest edition of Square

Bashing (see WS&S 63) and include sniper, strongpoint, smoke,artillery, gifted leader, and tank hunter. A late-war German

army, for example, would not have a lot of off-table HE on call.

Each army can choose up to three assets from their appro-

priate list, but only one asset may be called each turn. Roll

a number of D6 from the asset pool: a roll of 6 is a success;

excess 6s are wasted.

VICTORYThe game uses a countdown system to determine game length.

A standard game starts at 21 points. Every full turn deducts 1D6

from that total. When the points count down to 0 or below, the

game ends. This gives an average of six turns of play.

Victory conditions depend on the number of enemy killed,

how far the attacker has pushed onto the board, and the

difference in assets used by the players. The defender gets an

additional bonus for being disadvantaged.

CONCLUSIONIt’s clear that the game had a good set of playtesting groups,

which is essential for good game development. There are

several active groups, each of which feedback to Martin with

advice and comment. I like the fact that markers are kept to a

minimum in the game and it uses the humble D6. Commandand control is very important, as is morale, so having your

commander in the right place at the right time is essential.

There may be a fair bit to learn here for the PBI beginner, but

all the mechanisms work well and give a smooth game. The

fact that it’s primarily an infantry game is a big bonus – infantry

aren’t necessarily at a disadvantage against a heavy tank force.

All the rules are in a single book and are summarized on a

single play-sheet. If you are looking for something different from

the mainstream of WWII rules, then give PBI a try. I had good

fun playing it and there can be no higher accolade. WS&S

PBI version 3 will consist of two books, one with the

rules (£15) and one with the supplements (£15).

The table

divided into

squares.



REVIEWS:GAMES

72

GAME REVIEWSDONNYBROOKWritten by Clarence Harrison

and Barry Hilton

110-page full-colour softback /

Card-based activation with vari-

ous dice / Published by League

of Augsberg / £27.00 + postage

Reviewed by Ken Butty

Donnybrook is the latest offering from the League of Augs-

burg. The rules, as stated on the cover, are for skirmish gamesset in the period 1660-1760 and are written by the well-

known combination of Clarence Harrison and Barry Hilton.

I eagerly awaited the rules to pop through my door. At a first

glance, the large-format, glossy soft-cover book looks very

slick and well printed, with plenty of illustrations. There were

a few pictures that I was sure I had seen before in other peri-

odicals; in fact, you will see a number of reused illustrations

(not a problem, in my opinion). My only real gripe at the time

was with the delivery charge, which seemed excessive for a

standard padded envelope with £2.60 second-class postage.

The game itself uses a system of card activation similar tothose that have become popular in several recent offerings,

such as Dead Man’s Hand, Muskets and Tomahawks and

Longstreet ; but in this case, the activation system is more akin

to that used in IABSM. Each unit has a card dedicated to it;

thus, when their card is drawn, that unit is activated. There are

also additional cards for reloading (any musket-armed troops

are assumed to have reloaded, once they’ve been drawn) and

an End-of-Turn card (which ends the turn immediately and

causes all cards to be shufed into the deck). The End-of-Turn

card is similar to the ‘Tea Break’ card from IABSM. This means

that, in any given turn, not every unit will be activated, and it

is quite possible that they may not reload, either (if the End-of-Turn card comes up before the Reload card).

No cards are provided with the game, and players are

encouraged to produce and customize their own. This is

fairly easily done, whether by using an old pack of play-

ing cards or printing out and laminating your own set.

Besides, the required cards will change from game to

game, depending on the units and characters chosen. The

only cards required for each game will be one of each, for

shuffling the deck and reloading.

Combat, shooting and morale, along with some factors, are

decided by the use of multi-sided dice, from D4 through to

D12, so a number of each will be needed. The ability of each

class of character is represented by the type of die they use;

for example, to achieve a hit where a score of 5+ is needed,

the majority of individuals would use a D6, but depending on

ability, others would use a D8, a D10 or a D12, giving a betterchance of achieving the desired result.

The rules themselves take up about fourteen pages; the

remaining 100 or so describe a number of factions that could

be employed, provide a good set of scenarios, and summarize

the background to a number of wars in the chosen period.

So how does it play? You start by selecting your faction and

building your force around it; initially a 4-point force will fit

on a 4’ x 4’ table, but like Saga, you can build a larger force

and expand the table-size to suit. Again like Saga, you select

units whose size is determined by their ability and, for Donny-brook , the ability dice they will use in action.

There is a comprehensive selection of factions to choose from,

with names like Army, Civilian Mob, Covenanters, Cultists, High-

landers, Outlaws, Raparees, and Tribal, each of which can also

have their own special rules or requirements; where needed, it is

quite easy to use them as a model to build your own faction or, for

that matter, to add allies from another faction, when appropriate.

Each point then recruits one of the following, plus a character

of the same ability as the selected unit:

• 12 recruits or 9 mounted recruits (D6)• 8 drilled or 6 mounted drilled (D8)

• 4 elites or 3 mounted elites (D10)

For a sample 4-point force, this could be 12 recruits plus a

D6 character, two 8-man drilled units plus two D8 characters,

and an elite unit with a D10 character.

Depending on your faction, there are some standard char-

acters that may or may not be attached to a unit, depend-

ing on their type (officer, ensign, standard-bearer, sergeant

or musician), and factions also have additional characters

to choose from, all of which can impart an ability to theunit they are with. I particularly liked the special characters

within the factions. A couple that stood out for me were the

‘Corrupt Magistrate’ who works for the Outlaws by confusing

an enemy unit to reduce its effectiveness, and the Civilian

Mob’s ‘Councilman’, whose effect is determined by throwing

a D6 at the start of the game (careful, though – if you throw a

1, he could be delayed by up to 10 turns before he joins you).

Each force then gets 1 free Hero character (D12). So, for 4

points, your force can number as few as 21 figures or as many as

53. The game plays out well, with the rules being easy to grasp,

and the double-sided play-sheet really helps by guiding you

through and referencing the rule book by page number, when

any clarification is needed. Characters that are injured can have

their ability reduced; for example, the Hero might drop from a

D12 to a D10 or lower, when determining an action.



This is not a game for the type of player who likes every

nuance of the rules laid down in black and white, but it willeminently suit those who like to build a narrative around

their game and are willing to use the rules as a building

block when the more obscure actions need a resolution.

VALHALLA

Written by Paul Brook

40-page A5 full-colour softback

booklet / ‘Bench’-activated alter-

native turn with D6 / Published

by East Street Games / £5.00Reviewed by Gary Mitchell

Dark Age skirmish is big at the moment, what with Saga and all. I

was surprised, therefore, at the recent Call To Arms, to see a new

kid on the block, out to drink with us in the Halls of the Gods.

Valhalla is intriguing for a number of reasons. Firstly, it’s a return

to ‘cheap’ rules, rather than the coffee-table behemoth – £5 for

a full-colour A5 pamphlet with high production values is not

an onerous cash outlay to take a punt on. Secondly, it involvesrecord-keeping by computer, though you can, in theory, use

paper. Thirdly, it’s not linked to any particular range of minis.

Let me explain. As the name suggests, Valhalla is aimed at

Viking gamers, but could equally be used for any Dark Age

theme. I was told by author Paul Brook that it can accom-

modate cavalry, for those who favour stormin’ Normans, so

it will suit Saxons, Russ, Picts … all the usual suspects. We’re

talking about twelve minis for a warband of three ‘benches’

(or squads) on a 3’ or 4’ square table, so it will favour those

chaps who like their individual modelling. Warriors are rated

for Skill, Strength, Range Fighting, Morale, and Stamina. The

latter is key, as it affects the ability to recover from wounds andsustain a fight (those of us who have done even a modicum

of re-enacting will know just how tiring hand-to-hand combat

is). Simply roll two dice under your rating to pass a test. The

rules are straightforward for RPG wargames – three actions per

character, and tactics like ‘shield-wall’ are elegantly catered

for. Thus far, nothing out of the ordinary. You’ll need just a

couple of D6, and the turn sequence is alternate activations

of ‘benches’, which is not unusual, these days. Models are not

graded by their weaponry; what they are armed (or armoured)

with is irrelevant, unless it’s a missile weapon. This is presum-ably taken into account by the grade of warrior, which makes

sense, as the warband leader and his close hjælpere would

usually have first dibs on equipment and weapons. Oh, and

there’s a quick reference sheet on the back.

And then there’s the computer bit. This works thus – you take

a mugshot of each of your miniatures and upload it to a PC

programme that then randomly generates stats for you and helps

create your warband, which you can even tailor to specific

missions (“Not you, Sven. We won’t need your bow for raiding

this monastery”). After the battle, stat changes can be input and

improved, and wounds, defeats, and so on can be recorded toshow progression, ready for your next rampage (a WIP, coming

soon, I understand). Want a game sheet? Simply print it out.

It’s still very much a tabletop game, but with the noble idea of

using familiar Microsoft technology to make bookwork easier.

On the downside, it means that using the internet and taking

pictures of your models is a requirement of the system. There

is, at present, no paper alternative, but it should be possible

to by-pass this by judicious manual dicing (not a bad way to

spend time with your gaming chums and Mr Beer).

Paul says a fantasy supplement is in development, and there’s

no reason why the idea couldn’t work for other periods. We’re

certainly going to give Valhalla a whirl at STaB, as it seems to offermore exibility than the Sagaesque prescriptive battleboards; but

in many ways, it’s at beta-testing stage, so beware of aws.

SANGIN DESPATCHES NO. 1

Written by Colin Phillips, Craig

Watterson and Chris Pooch

172-page A4 full-colour softback

or PDF / Published by Radio

Dishdash / £5.00 for PDF, £12.50

for softback

Reviewed by Rossco Watkins

My friends and I are very familiar with Radio Dishdash’s Skir-

mish Sangin rules set. We have played it extensively and even

demonstrated the game at shows. Its mix of traditional table-

top wargame and role-playing game has delivered an excel-

lent gaming experience that is enjoyable and presents would-

be commanders with a great challenge.

Despatches No. 1 is the first supplement for this rules set and,

as with the parent book, all the action takes place in modern

day Afghanistan. The book opens with an excellent piece on the

weapons most commonly seen on the ground there, describ-

ing them in some detail and outlining how they are generally

As such, they will not suit everyone; but I like them and

believe that I will be playing them whenever I engage in askirmish action in the Horse-and-Musket period. I already

have ideas of just where these games will take me.



REVIEWS:GAMES

74

employed. Although this means little in terms of the game itself, it

is very interesting and due to the game’s RPG element (‘role play’,

not rocket-propelled!). This information can be used to enhance

your game. There could be a big difference in how the game rules

will let your troops use their weapons and how troops on the

ground might really use them. You can choose whether or not tolet this affect how you play your mission. This is one of the nice

touches that can really bring the game to life.

The book adds four new orders of battle (ORBATS) to the game

and introduces us to forces not commonly seen on ‘Modern’

wargaming tables. The addition of Canadian platoons and

German Zugs will appeal both to gamers from those countries

and to those who like to field something “a little different”; ISAF

is made up of many countries and it’s nice to see more of them

represented with their own specific rules. The book describes

how these units are organized and equipped, and gives descrip-

tions and rules for pieces of equipment that may be specific tothem, again furthering the game’s role-playing ethos.

The last two new ORBATS cover forces unique to Afghani-

stan – the Afghan National Police and the ‘611’ Militia. Again,

these are forces we may not commonly see at our clubs. I

personally had not heard of the ‘611’ Militia and found the

description interesting and informative – who doesn’t like the

idea of being able to field a group of international mercenar-

ies? It just sounds unusual and exciting.

The additional rules provided in terms of game-play are

based primarily around the subject of campaigns and expe-

rience; as mentioned earlier, Skirmish Sangin has a strongrole-play element running through it and this section of the

book deals in greater depth than previously with how your

troops may progress from young soldiers, well trained but

fresh to theatre, into experienced veterans with plenty of ‘in

country’ time under their belt. It also looks at how these men

may respond to replacements in their ranks.

Other additions include rules for ‘man’s best friend’, the

dog, which I felt was very fitting and a nice tip of the hat to

these remarkable animals and their handlers. The conict inAfghanistan has really highlighted to the general public how

invaluable dog units can be, and just as in reality, I predict

that many Sangin players will be putting canines to good use.

The issue of ‘Fire teams’ is also dealt with here – a somewhat

sticky issue in the parent book. I feel this is dealt with nicely

and that players who have previously been frustrated by

co-ordinating troops of varying abilities to perform actions as

a fire team will be very happy to see that this is now possible.

In addition to this, players are given seven new scenarios.

These are all well presented, with clear maps that will makeit very easy for you to recreate them on your own tabletop,

an overview of the situation, and a military-style briefing for

each side’s commander. These scenarios can utilize any of

the new ORBATS or can be fairly easily adapted to use the

ones that players already have at their disposal.

The book is well presented with a mix of real photographs

taken by troops on the ground (always a massive draw for me,

personally) and photographs of the game in play. The maps

are well drawn and very clear, and the rules themselves are

made very clear. I think what this book does beautifully is to

add new and interesting aspects to the original game with-

out changing any of the original rules or mechanics, whichmake the game so enjoyable. The price is also very reason-

able for the content. If you enjoy Skirmish Sangin or gaming

in Afghanistan, I would highly recommend this supplement.

CHECK YOUR SIX: STARAND PYRAMID

Written by Scott Fisher

64 page A4 sized black and

white softback / Published byCheck Your Six / $25.00 (£14.50)

Reviewed by Guy Bowers

Star and Pyramid is a scenario and campaign book supple-

ment for Check Your Six: Jet Age. It covers jet combat between

Israel and Egypt during the Six Day War (1967), the attrition

war (1968-72) and the Yom Kippur War (1973).

The book itself is literally stuffed with information. The

campaign history section tells the historical background

to the air war battle and the strategic situation behind the

battles. This in itself makes for fascinating reading. Addi-

tionally, the book contains a staggering 27 scenarios,

which can be fought as five different campaigns. There is

even a painting guide for the opposing forces. The stats for

all the aircraft are provided in the supplement.

Each scenario includes the time, weather conditions, sun posi-

tion and any special rules which apply to that particular game.

Players have the option of using variable rules, which give

random advantages and disadvantages to each side. Theseinclude a possible increase in pilot skill, a different weap-

ons set or poor maintenance (which reduces one aircraft’s

performance). These random factors mean that no two games

will play out the same. Although each scenario is balanced,

there is a section which records the historical outcome of the

engagement. The campaign section allows players to play a

series of scenarios with some bonus ‘special campaign events’

which can be earned as the campaign progresses.

Overall, this is a must for CY6 Jet Age players. It should also be

of general interest to other wargamers wanting to know more

about the Egyptian part of the Arab Israeli air war. Had otherArab nations besides Egypt been covered, I suspect that this

would have been a much thicker book! Now where to order

some MiG 21’s and Mirage III’s…?



COLUMN

76

UP FRONT

UNBALANCED SCENARIOS

There are moments in life when stating the bleed-ing obvious seems, somehow, to hit a note thatmakes you feel like Socrates. The Greek philoso-pher, not the bloke who used to play in midfieldfor Brazil. Clearly, any such event is a rarity forme; so the response to a comment I made duringan interview on a wargaming podcast has beensomewhat remarkable.

© G e o

r g i n a P y m o n t - H a r m a n By Richard Clarke

One of the things that all the wargaming column-

ists I have chatted with have agreed on is that

this is a lonely old job. We often ask for feedback

and suggestions; but, in truth, we tend to get very little

in our mailboxes to tell us whether what we are saying is

avidly consumed with interest or treated with utter deri-

sion. Occasionally at shows, someone will tap me on the

shoulder and say, “Enjoyed your latest column, Clarkie”.

But that’s about it. So the fact that I’d had a dozen emails

within 24 hours of an interview being broadcast on

Meeples & Miniatures is a noteworthy event. Especially as,

to my mind, the comment that was getting the reaction was

about as enlightening as my suggesting that the world was

round or that Wayne Rooney is overpaid.

The comment came about when the presenters, Neil Shuck

and Mike Whitaker, were chatting about the use of scenar-

ios in games. I suggested that providing some context for

a game and balancing that with the use of unequal forces

was a far more satisfying experience than simply turning

up, plonking 1500 points on the table edge, and shouting

“Attack!” And it seems that many of you agree.

That said, it would also appear that agreeing and actually

doing something about it are two different things. The one

comment that came through loud and clear was the fact

that, whilst some of you liked the idea, actually putting it

into practice was not as simple as I suggested. Indeed, a

couple of correspondents said that suggesting using unbal-

anced scenarios to their gaming partners was met with

amazement, and the very mention of the term ‘historical

scenarios’ was sufficient to induce either violent apoplexy

or sneers of derision. All of which seems to be a shame.

Now, I know what some of you will be thinking: here’s

another ‘anti point-system’ rant. But actually, it isn’t. If

you’re used to playing games with point systems, then I am

not suggesting that you hurl the baby out with the bath-

water, but rather that you use it as a stepping-stone, help-

ing you to try something a little bit different, which clearly

many gamers are keen to do.

Firstly, let’s be clear about what I am saying. It is entirely

possible to use a point system in order to provide the basic

structure which will allow you to build a scenario that is not

100 per cent balanced. This is especially the case when one

considers that, whilst point systems can be seen as a guide,

the introduction of other factors, specifically terrain, can

completely change the balance of play, even when armies

with apparently equal point values are present.

Imagine a US column heading through the passes of the

Atlas Mountains in North Africa. Now, envisage this column

bumping into a force of German defenders, who are control-

ling the high ground and are well deployed with perfect fields

of fire. It seems clear to me that, if these two forces were

deployed with equal points, despite the two lists being appar-

ently balanced and ‘fair’, the game would most certainly not

be so, due to the terrain entirely favouring the defender.

This is clearly an extreme example, but we could wheel out

numerous alternatives that are nowhere near as extreme, butwill still inuence the balance of play. A force which must pass

through a single choke point; troops defending particularly

good cover; a force obliged to attack across very open ground

– all of these will affect the balance of play to a greater or lesser

degree. Indeed, almost every tabletop set-up that one sees at a

show or club will hold some kind of advantage for one side or

the other, but rarely is that used in order to affect the scenario

balance in the same way as the point value of forces is.

To my mind, there are two ways to approach this. You can

either attempt to balance the terrain so that neither side gets

an advantage, an approach that usually leads to some very

odd looking and sterile games, or you can embrace the imbal-

ance and incorporate it into the game. For a gamer seeking to

break away from the weekly 1500-point encounter battle, this

can be the first key to doing something different.



Of course, there is always the issue of persuading an intrac-

table opponent that doing something other than what they

are used to doing is a good idea. However, there are ways

to approach this that should allow him to stay in his comfort

zone. My advice would be to let him have his usual 1500

points, but then you take just 1000 points or 750 points,

but with the terrain set up to favour you defending, while

he attacks. Place your terrain as usual, but put two-thirds of

the terrain features at your end of the table in a manner that

actively assists you when deploying your forces. A simple

objective, such as him capturing and you holding a bridge,

a road junction, or a village will always make a game more

enjoyable than a simple ‘line up and kill ‘em all’ option.

One of the comments that came up several times was that

scenarios take time to set up and, on a club night, there just

isn’t time to waste. I am somewhat at a loss to know how to

counter an argument that is, frankly, just wrong-headed. It

takes all of one minute to tell your opponent that his objec-

tive is to take the bridge or capture the village to win. You

can even begin to enhance the scenario by adding the fact

that he knows your engineers are attempting to destroy the

bridge, or withdraw important documents from the townhall by Turn X. With such simple additions, a very basic

scenario can be enhanced to make it even more exciting,

and frankly, that took all of fifteen seconds additional time!

Of course, there is always an element of trial and error

with games set up in this way. You may well find that 750

points is not enough, or that with 1000 points and favour-

able terrain you have too many troops. But like riding a

bike, the time expended on the learning part of the exer-

cise pays unlimited dividends later. Even using our most

basic scenario outlined above, we can add all sorts of vari-

ations by tweaking things like force arrival schedules. Why

not keep your 1500 points, but dice to see which units

turn up on each turn? In that way, the player will have to

fight with what is at the front of his column, rather than

precisely what he’d wish. Or allow yourself a smaller force

and a reserve, which you can call upon if required but will

turn up on a flank to surprise your opponent. All sorts of

small tweaks can be used to replace a simple encounter

with something that becomes more exciting and challeng-

ing, because of the built-in imbalance.

Of course, one of the simplest methods of introducing

imbalance to our gaming is to start from absolute balance,

something that can be achieved wonderfully with campaigns

comprising a series of linked games. Start with your stand-

ard 1500-point armies and fight your first game as a classic

encounter battle. In the next game, both players keep what

is left of their original force; you could even allow them to

recover half of their losses, to reect the return of wounded

men and salvaged vehicles. The winner of the first game will

be the attacker in the next, the loser the defender. Over the

course of several games, you can allow the players to have

a reserve of another 1000 or 1500 points, which they can

commit in 500-point tranches as reinforcements.

What will emerge is a series of linked games where the

imbalance becomes part of the challenge. Simple deci-

sions, such as when to stand and fight and when to giveground and conserve strength, will come to the fore. There

will be games where you find yourself not seeking to actu-

ally win the battle, but simply inflicting as many casual-

ties as you can on the enemy, whilst keeping your force

intact as you withdraw. Yes, it’s a potential no-win situa-

tion, if viewed through the prism of the usual encounter

battle, but the challenge of such an imbalanced game is

whether you can make the best of a bad situation. And

that is precisely the situation that soldiers have faced on

battlefields around the world throughout history. All of a

sudden, our gaming begins to look like wargaming. WS&S

Real warfare rarely consists of two balanced forces, so why

should our tabletop?

Valkyrie versus Vikings - seems fair...



REVIEWS:BOARDGAMES

78

SEVEN SWORDS

FOR SEVEN SAMURAI …

By Chris Payne

Seven Swords is the new game from GenXgames (who made Stalag 17 – reviewedin WS&S 60) and is clearly inspired by the famous Seven Samurai film. It is a twoplayer game only. One player has Samurai, palisades, and villages (houses) facingthe other, who has innumerable hordes of bandits.

The game is simple

enough, the Samu-

rai must prevent the

bandits from stealing the foodand stores (represented by

‘supply tokens’) from the

village. The Bandit player has

to remove these tokens off

the board to score. There are

40 points worth of supplies,

if the Bandits remove more

than half, they win. In addition

the Bandit player scores for Samurai

killed, while the Samurai player scores

for village areas without any bandit

counters at the end of the game. Witha finite game-length of only eighteen turns,

there is time pressure on the Bandit player to

attack and exploit any openings.

Whilst, at first glance, it looks like a relatively standard ‘move

and roll dice for combat’ game, Seven Swords has several

distinctive playing elements. The first is the use of cards to

determine how many ‘actions’ each player gets in a particular

turn. The Bandit player gets one or two cards each turn and uses

the ‘action points’ to recruit, attack, and move Bandit counters.

Recruitment is limited to the available counters supplied, but as

individual bandits are killed, they are recycled back into play.

The Samurai draw cards to give the maximum number of

actions this turn. Each Samurai can perform three actions,

namely movement, combat, and leadership (used to enable

villagers in houses or pali-

sades for ‘active defense’).

However they can only do

each of these once (every

time they do, they gain a

token). Each Samurai card

has a space for one token of

each type of action, and if

covered, then the Samuraicannot perform that action

(until it is removed).The

only way to remove these

tokens is by turning the action card over, which gives fewer

actions for the Samurai, but removes tokens. To illustrate this,

the front side of one card has seven actions; when the Samurai

player has performed these, the card is placed with the reverse

face showing, which has only three tokens, but removes all

combat tokens from the Samurai cards. If he chooses that card

and performs those actions, then he can perform seven actions

again on a future turn. Front sides of cards are stronger than the

reverse, except that only the reverse side will remove tokens.

Not all cards have to be turned before they can be turned back,so the Samurai player has a task of card management.

Bandit counters have three values: move, defence and

attack. Samurai counters have the same three, with an

additional attribute of leadership.

Combat is very simple. The Bandit player rolls one D6 per coun-

ter attacking (targeting adjacent spaces) and this is then totalled,

modified by the token types (a negative modifier of 0 to -2 per

token), and then compared to the Samurai defence skill (a range

of 5 to 8), where equal or higher is needed to score a wound.

The Samurai player, at that point, is faced with a choice: put anaction token on the Samurai that they don’t already have (thus

limiting their options for a while) or ipping to the wounded

side, so that a wounded Samurai that is wounded again is killedThe Bandit counters.

The game ready to play.



(with, obviously, no

chance to take further

action tokens!).

Bandits can also attack

palisades and villagersin houses (which can

attack in the Samurai

phase and are worth

victory points if killed)

or be used to capture

supplies of stores. The

Samurai player rolls

one D6 and adds the

attack value (from 1 to

5); he will kill Bandit

counters equal to or

less than that numberof defence points.

Later in the game, the Bandit player is allowed to discard a

card to kill a Samurai in a particular zone, without needing

to roll dice. However, any Samurai killed in this manner do

not count towards victory points.

The game board is not a true hex map, but a functional zoning

map of interlinked ‘spaces’, each capable of holding either a

Samurai or a Bandit counter. It is important to examine the

board, as spaces are not always linked to what appear to be

adjacent spaces, and there are what I consider to be some stra-

tegic ‘choke’ points. The villagers in their houses are stationaryand can only attack into (or be attacked from) specific squares.

Physical component quality is solid and functional, if not

outstanding. The board is mounted and double-sided, whilst

the Bandit counters are wooden discs and you are required

to place self-adhesive labels on them before play. Houses

and stores (barrels) likewise are wooden counters that require

labels to be applied. Applying the labels took me about 20

minutes before I could play and is a job for nimble fingers.

Take notice that some of the supplied labels (the fuzzy focus

ones) are not used. The other counters are of fairly standard

card stock. The Samurai artwork reminded me of a comicbook style, although it is not cartoony. The rulebook is in

Spanish and English; the English is generally good, with only

the occasional lapse into poor grammar, and the author uses

lots of examples and illustrations to explain things. In play, the

components are language-independent, with no text.

The Bandit player is faced with a number of strategic decisions:

• Where to attack. (Look for the weakest Samurai; but

will they, in turn, have the strongest palisades and

weakest storehouse to defend?)

• Whether to discard a card on the Samurai-kill turns.

With an exponential victory point scale for dead Samu-

rai, giving up on scoring eight points for the sixth kill

and seven points for the fifth, for example, is a tough

calculation; equally, killing one or two Samurai early

on can open up the village to lots of Bandit invaders.

• What units to build, as there is always a trade-off between

quality and quantity (although the discount rules for

multiple veteran Bandits make them popular).

The Samurai player has a number of strategic decisions:

• In the full game, where to place the various resources(for beginners or quick start, a sample set-up is suggested)

• The card choice, and how this interacts with the

tactical options.

Given the basic confines of the subject of the game, replay

value is good. The double-sided map board provides two differ-

ent village layouts, and the variable set-up of Samurai, store

houses, palisades, and village huts means that the Bandit player

is faced with fresh strengths/weaknesses each game. Equally,

with a variety of individual bandits to choose from, the Bandit

player can try different strategies. The first few turns can always

seem like a struggle for theBandit player, as he tries to

find a way into the village, and

all that seems to happen is that

his counters die very easily

and quickly. Eventually, with

enough numbers and the right

dice, the tide starts to turn.

Playing time, as always, will

depend upon your opponent,

and you should expect early

games to take longer because

of unfamiliarity. I suspect

younger players will lose interest before the end of the gameis in sight and may struggle with the ebb and ow of the game

(although, once things start to go wrong for the Samurai, it

seems to snowball, and the sides do seem reasonably matched).

If I had to mention issues with the game, then I’d like a slightly

larger font in the rulebook and a couple of ready-reference

sheets summarizing the rules, with a link back to a numbered

paragraph in the rules. That, however, is a personal opinion on

rules and how they are presented: these ones are functional,

but they are not, in my view, the easiest to assimilate quickly.

In summary, this is a fun – despite a serious time and effortcommitment – two-player game from a small publisher. Released

at the Essen Boardgames Fair in 2013 by a small publisher, I

hope this game gets the wide distribution it deserves. WS&S

The Samurai cards.

Samurai action cards.

SEVEN SWORDS

Players: 2 players

Age: 14+

Playing time: 60-90 minutes

Rules: English and Spanish

Designer: Oscar Arevalo

Publisher: genXgamesGamePrice: around €35

www.genxgames.es



REVIEWS:BOOKS

80

BOOK REVIEWS

This book, coming from the ever productive H&C publish-

ing stables, is another fabulous volume, but one whichreally made me mad!

The book details how to paint WWII figures, but in one of the

‘super’ scales – 90mm and 120mm. That being said, the tech-

niques are transferrable to smaller scales. The book is well

laid out, with lots of useful guides to taking care of brushes,

preparing your paint area, and prepping the figures in advance

of painting. The chapters concentrate on specific areas, such

as painting skin and faces, dark uniforms, leather, and so on.

There is also a guide to designing your own dioramas.

What I do like is that there is a detailed list of the paints

used at each stage; there are also lots of notes about eachstep of the painting and small items that you need to be

aware of when you are painting. However, as this is the sort

of paint standard that I aspire to (but will never reach), it drove

me mad looking at the sublime painting skills on display. If

you wish to have superbly painted WWII armies and are look-

ing for hints about how to start them, this is an absolute must.

— Eoghan Kelly

THE PAINT GUIDE FORFIGURES OF WORLDWAR TWO

Written by Joaquin GarcíaGázquez, translation by KentBrazeau

80 page full-colour softback / Published by Histoire & Colle-tions / £17.50

RUSSIAN SECURITYAND PARAMILITARYFORCES SINCE 1991

Written by Mark Galeotti, illus-trations by Johnny Schumate

64 page softback with colourphotos and plates. / Publishedby Osprey (Elite 197) / £11.99

softback, £9.98 PDF

This follows the usual Elite format of 64 pages includ-

ing eight colour plates and with colour photographs on

most other pages. The author has clearly got access to the

sources that make this book so useful to those, like me,

with little knowledge of the subject.

The book is loosely divided into four groupings: the Police, the

Interior Ministry, the FSB and others. The police get roughly

a third of the book and there is coverage of the OMON

(Special-purpose Mobile Units) deployed to Chechnya. The

Interior Ministry (VV) troops get twelve pages, including

coverage of VV Spesnatz, again deployed to Chechnya.

The FSB is the internal state security service (i.e. a partial

replacement for the KGB) and gets nine pages, mostly

centred on the Alpha Commandos. They are designed to

be comparable to forces such as the British SAS and West

Germany’s GSG-9. Not surprisingly, the number of illustra-

tions on this group is less than on the other groups.

The final grouping encompasses such diverse bodies as military

police, the Federal Protection Service (from uniformed Krem-

lin Guards to Close Protection Officers), Justice Ministry (whonormally oversee the Gulags), and troops from other ministries

(e.g. narcotics prevention, fisheries/caviar protection).

The book covers a brief history of the various forces, details of

UNITED STATES VSGERMAN EQUIPMENT

1945: As prepared forthe Supreme CommanderAllied Expeditionary Force

Written by Uwe Feist

320 page hardback with illustra-tions / Published by StackpoleBooks / £32.50

This is an interesting, detailed comparative review of the

equipment used by the opposing US and German forces in

the period from the Normandy invasion up to the end of the

war in Europe. Now, I know that many books have been writ-

ten on this subject, but this one is different, and markedly so.

This is a collation of the reports, as commissioned by General

Eisenhower, when he asked his senior officers to write this

sort of analysis. All written before the end of hostilities, they

deliver a detailed set of information that most gamers of this

period will find fascinating. The book is lavishly illustratedwith many photos that I have never seen before and some

great notes about the equipment under review.

However, as this is essentially a report written by the victorious

forces, I would question how accurate some of the findings are

– especially the reviews of the medium machine-guns and the

effectiveness of some of the allied armour. That being said, I was

also surprised at the differences in the views that some generals

had, and this seems to be very much based on the theatre they

were serving in. I was especially surprised by the lack of appre-

ciation of certain pieces of equipment in the eyes of both soldiers

and officers, such as the M10 Tank Destroyer. I think this is a bookwell worth owning, if late-war WWII gaming is your thing.

— Eoghan Kelly



COCCARDE TRICOLORI,SPECIALE 6

Written by Riccardo Niccoli,translation by Frank McMeiken

136 page softback with colourphotos and profiles / Publishedby Andrea Press / Italian withEnglish translations / £25.00

Every so often, our illustrious editor hands me a book to

review and I am left scratching my head – and this is one

such book. It is a very focused and detailed account of

the F-104 Starfighter (which was a mid-Cold War fighter-interceptor), but not in its broadest sense as being a narra-

tive of this innovative fighter (nicknamed the ‘Widow

Maker’ in the Luftwaffe during the 1960s). This is one of

the most specific books of a fairly specific subject that I

have ever read. The focal point is the late model F-104 and

its variants, as flown by the Italian air force during the late

1970s through to the early 1990s.

The book is written in Italian with an English translation

on alternate pages. However, the photo captions do not

always have a translation. This is also true of the chapters

that cover personal accounts of F-104s in combat (they

flew during the first Gulf War) and also a description of

them acting in a ‘scramble’ situation, as well as during

displays – these chapters have no translation at all. There

is a very good section on the maintenance and support

that was provided to the squadrons who flew the plane.

The book is well illustrated with plenty of contemporary

pictures of this iconic fighter, and plenty of details and

notes about its variants. At the end, there is a list of all

the individual planes and what happened to them – once

again, however, this section is only in Italian.

This a very unusual book, but if a Cold War ‘What if?’ is your

thing, then this is a must for anyone wishing to game theBalkan Front. Otherwise, you will need to be a real aviation

buff to want to read this level of detail.

— Eoghan Kelly

FRENCH MUSKETEER1622-1775

Written by Rene Chartrand,illustrations by Graham Turner

64 pages (9 full page plates,other illustrations mostly incolour). Published by Osprey(Warrior 168) / £11.99 softback,£9.98 PDF

Getting accurate information about the Musketeers and

the Cardinal’s Guard can be very difficult, especially in

English. The synopsis states that “This title explores the

history behind the legends created by Dumas. Drawing on

a range of fascinating first-hand accounts, the truth behind

this most colourful and flamboyant of units is revealed”.

The author would appear to have a love for the legends and

literature of the Musketeers and accordingly, in the intro-

duction, spends four pages on the real-life inspiration for

Athos, Porthos, Aramis and D’Artagnan. The period covers

the entire existance of the Musketeers from their founding by

Louis XIII (the Dumas setting) to their disbandment in 1775.

Chartrand looks at the topic by subject, with chapters on the

unit, recruitment, training, conditions of service, uniforms,

colours and standards, equipment, battles, and finally the wider

impact, considering imitators and the last musketeer.

The book includes only eight photographs of actual Musketeer

items. The rest is made up of paintings and drawings from the

period, along with the plates. Three of the plates cover the Louis

XIII period. The author states that there appear to be no surviv-

ing artefacts from the Louis XIII era and few from the Louis XIV,

which explains the reliance on period paintings and drawings.

Overall, I feel that the book represents good value, because of

the collected information on a difficult topic. As always, there

organization, training and equipment (from side-arms to helicop-

ters), and finally major operations (generally hostage-rescue) geta few paragraphs. Photographs and plates are used to illustrate

particular aspects or circumstances and are, I feel, well annotated.

The book is a useful introduction to the subject and provides

enough information to paint 28mm and smaller miniatures.

Space constraints mean that it cannot provide details of every

uniform for every rank for every duty within these units. The

bibliography is tiny at just five books, three of which are in

Russian, which I suspect must reect scarcity of information

on this topic. I would recommend this book for gamers who

want information on Russian forces.

— Chris Payne

are hidden gems, like details of the Musketeers at Pas-de Suze

in 1629. I like Graham Turner’s style of illustration, whichgives enough detail for figure painters. In the bibliography,

virtually every book appears to be in French. Whilst I don’t

find this surprising, it shows the value of a work in English

on this topic. I would have liked a little more on the Louis

XIII period and a lot more on the Cardinal’s Guard (who get a

couple of mentions and appear in a few illustrations).

— Chris Payne



PARTINGSHOTS

82

PARTING SHOTSDESERVING A PADDINGTON BEAR STAREMany moons ago I went to watch a game at the local club. There was a special event - a gigantic ‘bring all your models’ bash-

up using Warhammer Fantasy rules. You brought whatever you had, as long as it was painted. There were no heroes allowed, noyers, no dragons, no magic and definitely no giants. It was troops vs. troops, evil vs. good. Of great renown was the epic fight

between a huge unit of twenty-odd treemen and fifty-odd trolls. Down the other ank, two table-lengths away, things weren’t

going so well. Suddenly, opposite a battery of dwarf cannon, one plucky member produced... a giant elephant. This thing was

home-made, close to two feet tall, and festooned with various bolt throwers and other goblinoid devices. “Don’t worry,” he said

gleefully, “I’ve made my own rules for it.” Not surprisingly, there were mostly 10’s on the stat sheet. “But, we said no giants.”

“It’s not a giant, it’s a giant elephant.” I’m afraid the laughter that followed did not put him off one jot. People laughed nervously

and gently tried to point out he was being a eejut, without actually saying so. The subtlety was wasted and he began to sulk. So

with the threat of a full-on tantrum, the protests melted away into heavy tutting and head-shaking. It’s difficult to shame those who

have none. The elephant then rampaged across half the table, ruining the fun of everyone in the area (as it’s stats made it nearly

impossible to harm). In return, we all gained a gem-encrusted anecdote, which is a good enough trade for my blood. – Paul Cubbin

A BUDGET BASE FOR WARGAMINGIf you are like me, the only space

in the house fit for wargaming

is the kitchen table, which may

be too small for a standard 6’

x 4’ setup. This problem can be

solved with a quick visit to the

local big box store: First grab a

large, thin (to keep it light and

portable) MDF panel and have

it sawn on site into three 4’ x 2’

sections. Then purchase some strips of H-shaped plastic profile

that are the right size to fit over the edge of the boards. Cutthese strips into 4’ sections and attach them to one edge of

each board, using glue to make sure they remain in place. You

can then easily make a temporary joint between the panels

by sliding the unfinished edge of one board into the H-profile

glued to another. You can also add plastic capping to the edges

of the boards that you don’t plan to join, just to ensure that

everything is at the same level and doesn’t wobble. While not

a pretty solution, it is effective, lightweight and easy to store

away. It makes a perfect ‘”regulation-size” base for smaller

2’x’2 terrain sections, or grass gaming mats. Thanks to the

H-profile trick, the foundation boards stay neatly together and

let you wargame on an area bigger than your actual table.

RETROFITTING YOUR RULEBOOKSI’ve often found myself wishing that more

rulebooks were spiral bound – like some

cookbooks or how-to guides – so that

they’d stay open for easy reference. As it

happens, changing your soft cover rule-

books into this format isn’t so hard with

the help of your local copy shop. First

have a look at the distance between the

inside edge of the page and the text. As

long as this isn’t too narrow (consult with

a copy shop worker if you aren’t sure), it

should be possible to convert it into a spiral-boundbook. Using the large guillotine-style cutters found at most such

printers, the book’s binding (which is usually glued in place) can

be quickly removed. Most shops will also have a machine for

punching and adding the spiral binding strip to the new edge

of your book. Pieces of thin, clear plastic can also be added to

the front and back of the book for extra durability. Obviously,

we don’t recommend you try this out on your hardback rulesets

(unless you happen to be game for ripping apart covers)! WS&S

Do you have funny stories or short wargaming tips and ideas?

Submit them to Parting Shots! If selected, you’ll get a free copy

of the magazine. Email the editor at: [email protected]

wargames. soldiers & strategy - issue 72

Documents