The Battlegames Blog

Ongoing thoughts from the Battlegames Editor

Archive for September, 2008

A new category for feedback

Posted by battlegames on September 16, 2008

As a short interlude before continuing the Fontendorf game report, I have introduced a new category of posting on the blog for comments received via email and otherwise relating specifically to particular articles in the magazine that I think readers might find useful.

Issue 14 seems to have been very well received indeed, with Bob Barnetson’s calm and reasoned article on figure piracy and Barry Hilton’s suggestions for rapid painting techniques receiving particular praise.

One reader, Steve Burt, went a step further, adding some suggestions of his own:

“I very much enjoyed this (and the whole issue, in fact), but I was surprised that Barry didn’t say anything about undercoats in colours other than black or white, and nor did he mention the best base texturing material.

Some years ago I switched over to a sandy brown undercoat (I use Liquitex Bronze Yellow), followed by a burnt umber wash. Not only does this show detail on the casting in a way not possible with black or white, but it does not dull colours down as black does, and missed areas look like wood/leather so do not stand out like a white undercoat.

Indeed, for Dark Age figures, you can just paint flesh and shields and the figure is pretty much usable on the table straight away.

I notice that Barry seems to favour model paints; I personally find artists’ acrylics better quality and cheaper, especially for things like undercoats. The Liquitex medium viscosity range (now renamed soft body) are fluid, so don’t need to be diluted like the tube paints; they come in little squeezy bottles.

For plastic figures I find that acrylic paint from a tube is perfect; it covers the plastics and shrinks slightly on drying to form a skin, perfect for further paint. It’s much easier than using PVA in my experience.

Finally, Barry should also have a look in an art shop for his basing material. Acrylic texture paste is clear (so can be mixed with whatever colour you wish), dries slightly flexible, does not shrink or crack, and does not cause warping. The plain clear texture gel is perfect for water effects. The various sand textures are great for basing.

Thanks for a great issue, and I hope the tips above are of some use to others.”

I forwarded his comments to Barry, adding:

I am copying this reply to Barry, who I’m certain will appreciate the feedback and excellent ideas, and will find a home for them on the Battlegames website. And, of course, I’m going to try them out myself! I’m sure we have all noticed, of course, the recent publicity by Army Painter who prescribe coloured undercoat sprays, chosen according to the final colour scheme of your army, though it would seem very strange to me to undercoat an army of plastic legionaries with silver! (Though Bob Barnetson, as you will have noticed from his previous article, probably wouldn’t bat an eyelid as he often doesn’t undercoat metal figures at all.)

Barry replied:

Yes, thank you both. Interesting ideas, Steve. I too have experimented with different colour undercoats including blue, tan and grey. My article was mainly focusing on a very pragmatic comparison of a particular figure type and differing production methods so I kept the writing frame quite tight. I suppose if Henry had wanted a few extra pages I may have been able to oblige! Hope the omissions did not spoil your enjoyment too much.

I’m quite certain that everyone realises that a contributor has to focus on one particular aspect when writing and article — otherwise, it quickly becomes a book! I personally found Barry’s piece incredibly valuable, especially since I am embarking on a couple of major projects myself, a view shared by reader (and previous contributor) Ian Allen:

Barry Hilton’s painting article was particularly interesting as I’d recently been agonizing over not painting figures ‘properly’ any more, but my 15mm C18th look good on the table en masse from a sensible distance even though they are just flat painted, no highlights etc. I think that for skirmishing type games, more time should be taken to make each figure look as good as possible, as with my “Thrilling Tales!” collection, but for massed troops and units a simpler approach works well.

Steve Burt then sent a postscript to his earlier email:

Actually I should have said that black is a very good undercoat colour for figures which are mostly armoured, such as cataphracts or medieval knights. I just find brown tones better with most other figures. The ‘undercoat in main uniform colour’ trick is one I’ve used with success for WW2 figures. I did experiment with no undercoat a while back, but was disappointed with the results.

Anyway, if you’ve got any thoughts to add, then by all means leave comments of your own below. I find that there are as many painting techniques as there are wargamers, but that a piece like Barry’s has value in challenging us all to think about why we paint the way we do, forcing us to consider the results we achieve relative to the time and effort invested. I know that I’ll be making some changes! In the final analysis, we have to simply consider whether we are happy with what we achieve, and if so, that’s the most we can ask.

Posted in Battlegames feedback | 6 Comments »

A weekend with John Preece, part 1

Posted by battlegames on September 12, 2008

I managed to rack up something in excess of 1,200 miles last weekend, much of it in less than clement weather. The occasion? A visit to Battlegames columnist and ‘Flanderkin Serjeant‘ blogger John Preece in Tywyn on the North Wales coast, and of course The Other Partizan in Newark on Sunday.

Annie and I actually began our journey late on Thursday night. I had seen the weather forecast predicted a massive band of heavy rain, stretching the entire length of our journey to the Preeces, that was scheduled to hit on Friday morning. So, in an effort to avoid this grim onslaught for at least part of the journey, we headed off at 11.30pm, arriving at a motel on the outskirts of Telford at 2.30am on Friday, after a stint of 217 miles. The average speed was a result of lovely empty motorways!

Friday morning brought the first of the poor weather, but by lunchtime, we were greeted by John and his wife Celia, who gave us a warm welcome and the weekend of fine fellowship began.

After lunch, we took a little tour into Tywyn itself and visited the health food store, where I stocked up on healthy vittles to ensure that my sponsored diet could stay on track! Then it was back to John’s, where I produced a little surprise for him: I had taken the British and Zulus with me so that he could try out the scenario you have all been reading about on this site. There ensued a fun encounter that lasted, as I expected, about an hour and a quarter, in which John managed to achieve a creditable draw against the Zulu hordes. Here’s a photo of him in contemplative mood as Colour Sergeant Barker’s section repels a horde of novice Zulus.

John Preece assesses his chances!

John Preece assesses his chances!

John is one of the most talented painters of miniatures of the ‘non-Dallimore’ camp. His style is very much that of the watercolourist: subtle shades and tones emerge over a white undercoat using techniques based on acrylic washes (and oils for horses), reinforced by black lining where appropriate. The outcome ranges from what you might call pure ‘old school’, seen to marvellous effect on the Holger Erikkson figures he painted for our Sittangbad game, to very effectively ‘realistic’, as seen on some of the stuff he has done for, amongst others, Phil Olley, and indeed on his own Napoleonic figures that you will see featured in the report that follows.

However, it would be fair, I think, to say that this expenditure of effort on highly detailed miniatures is not matched by the terrain laid out for his games. “Minimalist” might be a good, and kind, summary. Those of you who have seen the photos of the previous game I played with him (Baylen — I played the French, and suffered the narrowest of defeats) will already be familiar with John’s approach of green baize cloth over books and bits of wood which have their edges softened with newspapers and carpet. This is, in fact, surprisingly effective. Where even the most hardened old schooler may blench, however, is at the river made from a strip of torn blue shirt! After a great deal of not-so-gentle ribbing about this, John will shortly become the proud owner of some vintage Bellona river sections heretofore owned by a famous Scottish wargaming family, and I very much look forward to their christening!

Now, it’s late, so I’m off to bed, but I’ll leave you with a little taste of what’s to come in part 2 of this piece: the opening dispositions of what we mutually christened “Fontendorf” and played from start to finish on Saturday. This game was actually based on Charles S Grant’s “Positional Defence 1″ teaser from his book Scenarios for Wargames, itself a thinly-disguised version of the battle of Fontenoy. Here, however, we substituted Prussians for the Blue army and French for the Reds, approximately doubling the forces.

the initial dispositions

Fontendorf: the initial dispositions

The table measured 5′9″ (1.75m) x 13′6″ (4.11m). The northwest corner had the River Schild and beside it, the village of Anton. The centre of the Prussian position, roughly halfway across the table width, was hinged on the village of Fontendorf. Between these two places were two redoubts, and a third was located near the northeast corner, beside the Barrywald.

I had 15 battalions of 36 line infantry, 1 battalion of 36 Guard Fusiliers, 2 battalions of 36 Légère, 1 squadron of 16 Chasseurs à Cheval, 2 squadrons of 16 Polish lancers, 3 squadrons of 16 Cuirassiers, 3 squadrons of 16 Dragoons and 4 batteries of 2 guns each. (French total 648 infantry, 144 cavalry and 8 guns). John’s Prussians fielded 1 battalion of 32 Guard infantry, 8 battalions of 32 Line infantry, 2 battalions of 32 light infantry, 2 squadrons of 16 Dragoons, 2 squadrons of 16 Kürassiere and 8 guns. (Prussian total 352 infantry, 64 cavalry and 8 guns.)

The rules we used were pure, unadulterated Charge! as created by Brigadier Peter Young and Colonel James Lawford. Just wait to see the game they produced…

Posted in Game Reports | 7 Comments »

Zulu Wars Battlegames Mini-Special

Posted by battlegames on September 4, 2008

Battlegames Zulu Wars Mini-Special

Battlegames Zulu Wars Mini-Special

Those of you who pay attention to such things will have seen the news that issue 14 of Battlegames has just arrived from the printers and is being sent out to subscribers, retailers and distributors over the next few days. When announcing the content of this issue, alongside Dan Mersey’s “Well of Tarka” piece I mentioned that I would be making my own Zulu Wars participation game rules available for download — and now I have.

I decided to use this opportunity to launch a new format: the Battlegames Special Edition. There will be more news about this range of publications over the coming weeks, but in this instance, as the content is a single article, being given away completely FREE of charge, I have coined the term ‘Mini-Special’. Other Battlegames Specials may take the form of A4 perfect-bound volumes (rather liike the Warhammer HIstorical supplements), special editions in a format almost exactly the same as the magazine, booklets, large PDF files or, as in this case, short works completely free of charge. All of them will be distinguishable by their bright blue covers, to differentiate them from the scarlet covered magazine.

So, without further ado, here’s the link to the Zulu Wars Battlegames Mini-Special. You can also download this from various locations on the main Battlegames website.Have fun!

P.S. I’ve been eliminating typos as they’ve been pointed out to me, so make sure you’ve downloaded the latest version. This proves, of course, that PDF publishing is both a blessing and a curse!

Posted in Colonials | 11 Comments »