3mm 1940 for Eisenhower

It was in 2013 that I first mentioned my interest in doing 3mm French and German armies for the Battle of Hannut in May 1940. This developed into the Rommel project before being abandoned, but I've recently been mining the lead mountain and am now processing a fraction of the accumulated Oddzial Osmy 3mm kit for use with Eisenhower. 

The photo shows the entire armies for Hannut: two German and two French armoured divisions. Although historically the largest tank battle then fought, it's small for a game in which there is normally a minimum of three formations (divisions) a side. Each base represents a battalion of tanks or motorised infantry. The German tank battalions were of mixed type. Although the obsolete Panzer Is and IIs predominated, I’ve modelled them as Panzer IVs (the cutting edge) as this makes them more useful for later campaigns.

Eisenhower: reviews, toys, basing and grid sizes

My 10mm WW2 armies may yet get an outing.

I was expecting a little more reaction to Sam Mustafa's Eisenhower, but perhaps it's early days. The most significant coverage I've seen to date is this excellent Storm of Steel walkthrough on YouTube.

Eisenhower is such a high level game that model playing pieces are token in the extreme. But toys do add a bit of atmosphere and attract other players.

Discounting my 28mm Ardennes and 15mm Stalingrad armies (which have few AFVs), I have two potential sets of toys.

I have painted (but never used) 10mm Normandy armies, and I have the 3mm Battle of France armies I bought for Sam Mustafa's Rommel but which are still in their packets.

The 10mm Normandy vehicles are on 30mm x 60mm bases and the infantry on 30mm x 30mm bases which will fit 3-abreast in 4" squares.

If I get round to the 3mm armies, I'll put the AFVs 3-up on 40mm x 30mm bases, which will also fit 4" squares (2-up and 1-back). I thought about mounting them singly and using even smaller squares, but 3mm doesn't have a lot going for it unless based dioramically.

As regards scenery, I'll take a similar approach to what I did for Blucher. That is very flat scenery which the bases can sit on. It will be more-or-less in scale for 3mm but not for 10mm!

Not being a great hardware expert or rivet counter, I have to say it's very refreshing to be sorting out 'basic' armour and infantry without having to go into too much organizational detail.

Painting 3mm gear will also be quicker and easier than larger scales, and probably my preferred way forward were I to expand into other campaigns.

Fastest to table

Lancers. 2mm is now my way to go for mass armies.

I might have written something like this before but no matter as it is a topic that demands revisiting. I often wonder what miniature wargames I would do if I was starting from scratch now. Obviously I would do games that appealed to me historically, but, more generally, I would do games that could be brought to table as quickly as possible. This is partly because I lack time to paint but also because I'd like the fruits of my labour to end up on the table rather than in the lead mountain.

At one end of the spectrum I would focus on skirmish games like Dan Mersey's Rampant series for which 28mm figures have the most appeal. Somewhere in the middle are games that are 'compact' or otherwise economical on figures like Crossfire, Irregular Wars or DBA. For these I would use 15mm, 10mm or 6mm, and these scales would satisfy the aesthetic appeal of playing with toy soldiers.

Any games featuring mass armies, however, would have to be base-orientated so I could use 2mm or 3mm models, and thìs end of the spectrum would satisfy my desire to play large historical battles. I think this is the way I will now go with Bloody Big Battles! if and when I get round to it. The other advantage of these small scales is of course that they put less pressure on storage and carrying.

This  is not an entirely futile speculation as it should also help me to regulate what to do in future. I feel sure I've written that before as well. The difficulty is remembering it.

Rommel: Maximum base sizes for 4" hexes?

I thought I'd better test my 40mm square basing idea more rigorously in order to ensure there is enough wiggle room when the surrounding hexes are occupied.

These are actually 40mm x 25mm bases which were surplus from another project. I'm not intending to use these as they don't have enough depth. When more than one Company occupies a hex and they attack a neighbouring hex they can easily be placed in column and pushed across the hex edge to distinguish them from non-attacking companies. There is plenty of room.

40mm x 30mm bases. Still enough room IMO.

40mm x 40mm. These are too crowded.

That conclusively establishes that if using Hexon I need to aim for 40mm x 30mm bases for optimum effect. Now the bases...

40mm x 30mm steel, 40mm x 25mm MDF. The exposed steel area on the back is for mounting a removable magnetic plastic or other label. The MDF is the old mechanically-cut variety. I would now of course use laser-cut MDF.

3mm hex terrain for Rommel

My epic indecision about what base sizes and grids to use for Rommel has come down to a trade-off between the attraction of multiple vehicles on big bases with a 6" square grid versus the attraction of using Hexon with necessarily smaller model bases possibly featuring only one or two vehicles.

Other than the Hexon itself, the game requires BUAs, woods, bocage, soft ground and rivers. In this post I am looking at BUAs and woods.

The heading picture (top right) shows a mock-up of a 4" hex BUA using a Hexon forest template and some Brigade Models 2mm buildings from the English Village and Terrace sets. I think these are fine for Belgium but Northern France and Low Countries sets are planned and those will be even better. The buildings are roughly the same height and the bases will sit on top of them when the hex is occupied. If I add taller buildings like churches and factory chimneys, these will have to go at the centre or close to the edges. The 4" hex is economical on buildings and looks 'neat' IMO.

For contrast, the next picture shows a 6" square with a very Roman street pattern. It requires quite a few more buildings and doesn't look very organic. Perhaps I could have arranged the buildings more imaginatively, but there is an inevitable tendency for squareness to beget squareness. Put a few of these on the table and it begins to look like a chess board. Of course, you don't have to make the towns square just because they fit into a square, but given that I will be placing the units on top I need to have the areas filled to give even support.

Finally, we have a mock-up of a hex wood using Woodland Scenics Underbrush of various different colours.

I think the combination of these pieces with Hexon flocked tiles will begin to look quite realistic in a hexed sort of way.

Although using smaller model bases is disappointing, I think the game will look good overall. It also provides a very fitting purpose for all that Hexon I've accumulated...

Rommel: 6" grid or Hexon?

40mm square bases on Hexon hexes

I like the aesthetic of depicting a whole platoon of 3mm miniatures on a large base, but I'm still weighing up the practicalities. I now have the rules in my hands thanks to Caliver Books and I got a PDF copy as well for study when I am out and about. I see the conversion to hexes in the Advanced Rules is straightforward, or, at least, left to the player.

It prevents use only of the 'Gaps in his Lines' rule, but Peter Hunt (Bertie on TMP) has suggested the following: "We just made it that if a unit is in the ZOC of two enemy held hexes it cannot move into a vacant hex that is in the ZOCs of those same two enemy held hexes unless it is using "Gaps in his Lines." So you can use the rule for what is intended: going around or through a loosely held enemy line."

So what are the pros and cons of switching from the default 6" grid to 4" Hexon hexes?  First the pros:

• I already have Hexon (including hills) and thus a ready-made battlefield. Rivers are easy to add on the hex edges using felt strips.
• It would allow me to use a much more compact playing area or play a much larger game in the same space.
• Hexes look less grid-like than squares and this carries through into the shape of BUAs, wooded areas and river courses.
• Hexon is going to look better than any alternatives I'm likely to end up with.
• BUAs would require much fewer buildings.
• Smaller (40mm wide) unit bases would be more compact to store and transport.
• Hexes eliminate the distance distortion on the diagonal which could affect artillery in large games.

The cons:

• There would be a loss of aesthetic appeal to the unit bases. The AFVs would be and look closer when going head-to-head.
• Full platoons would be a bit overcrowded on a 40mm wide base, but not impossible.
• Hexon is bulky and heavy but when needed I would have the option of substituting a 4" hex cloth like the European Fields one from Hotz. Another cloth would give me a desert option.

Anyway, I don't have to decide now. My first game will be with counters and then my existing 10mm armies.

3mm minis for Rommel Part 2

Any intentions that I declare in this blog should never be taken too seriously. When it comes to wargaming I often change my mind or fail to pursue things!

Original 60mm x 60mm bases

It occurred to me that the infantry stand shown in the last post had enough Laffly trucks to carry 30 men but only 10 men were depicted on the base! There isn’t room to add another 20 figures, so it would seem sensible to reduce the trucks to just one, thus making the vignette more realistic. This would create an anomaly in that the tanks would be a platoon while the infantry would be only a section. Is that something to lose sleep over though? I also thought of mounting all artillery in pairs so that SPGs could be readily distinguished from tanks (mounted in threes).

40mm x 40mm bases

Before making any final commitment to a particular base size, I thought I’d better revisit 40mm x 40mm basing. This will allow use of a 4” grid or Hexon. It had always been my intention to use Hexon for a game like this. One of the main downsides is the smaller label which might be difficult to read in a dimly-lit wargames hall. I could increase the size of the label but then the base would be more cramped, especially if I start doing later war armies with bigger tanks. A relatively bigger label would also begin to overpower the models.

But there are pluses. A big advantage of a 4” grid rather than a 6” one is that I will need a lot less buildings to depict built up areas. This may be disappointing news for Brigade Models but there you are. I will be able to use my Hexon scenery of which I have quite a bit. I will be able to game at home with models. Bigger battles with models will be easier to accommodate on club nights. Storage will be more compact.

Rather empty 40mm x 40mm bases

The cheapskate option: single models rather than multiples. If the model is just an icon this approach is logical, and it’s what many people will be doing with 6mm models. It’s a possibility but with 3mm models it looks a bit thin. Don't take too much notice of the labels - the content is just filler for layout purposes. More specific identification of the hardware for future reference (not required for the game) will be on the underside of the bases. Thanks to advice on the Pendraken Forum, I would cover the labels with plastic film so the track could be marked off with a water-soluble pen and cleaned afterwards.

3mm minis for Rommel

With Sam Mustafa's forthcoming Rommel in mind, I finally got round to ordering some 3mm Oddzial Osmy minis which were very promptly supplied by Fighting 15s.

These are the first samples that I've actually been able to see at first hand and I am delighted by the crisp castings and the detail on the vehicles and even on the infantry. I won't necessarily be painting this detail but it's nice to know that it's there.

1940 French tanks, infantry and artillery.

While eagerly awaiting publication of the rules, I've been thinking a lot about the use of unit cards, rosters, and base labels (or some combination) to carry the unit data and damage track.

Unit data cards create table clutter but I find them very convenient in play. Rosters are straightforward but take your eye off the table. Base labels would need to be quite big and the tracking part would need to be replaced after each game or this would require some workaround.

A related question is how big to make the bases. After a considerable amount of thought I'm currently favouring 60mm x 50mm bases that will sit on cards. The cards will be 60mm x 60mm so that a 60mm x 10mm strip will exposed at the rear with essential data and the track. The cards will be expendable and different sets can be used for different scenarios etc.

The 60mm x 60mm bases would fit 2-up, 1-back on a 6" grid, and if I want to use a smaller grid at home or portray a very big battle I can just game with cards. If using models it's worth making them look good, and I think that big bases look best. The tanks, for example, are spread out more realistically. And while I'm only an average painter of models, I'm quite good at doing bases!

Sam Mustafa's Rommel

Erwin Rommel

As long-term readers of this blog may have noticed, I don't get much time for wargaming in the warmer months, and I've had even less time this year owing to pressure from other interests and commitments. I have, however, been keeping my hand in by exploring Great War Spearhead thanks to Robert Dunlop who has kindly been setting up games and teaching me the rules.

I haven't, however, been pursuing anything on my own initiative until I was recently reminded of Rommel, Sam Mustafa's forthcoming set of WW2 grand-tactical rules. Sam's reputation for analytical logic and extremely well-written, user-friendly rules is enough to persuade me to buy them as soon as they become available in the UK, but whether I will actually prefer them to Bloody Big World War Two Battles or any other alternatives will depend in large part on how well  they cover historical scenarios.

As I said previously, the appeal of the grand-tactical for me lies particularly in replaying historical battles. Having said that, Rommel has a neat army creation system for pickup games.

There are podcasts and downloads about the game on Sam's website. It's played on a grid of squares and doesn't need miniatures.  If using a 6' x 4' table the squares are 6", i.e. the grid is 12 x 8 squares. The game will also convert to hexes. Some will regard it as more of a boardgame but the approach suits me. I like grid games and the game can easily be tried out with cards or counters with the option of adding 3D toys and scenery later.

Four possible approaches have crossed my mind:

1. Just use the unit data cards on an improvised grid which could be drawn onto butcher paper or just marked out with counters. This is the minimalist option, but should be perfectly adequate for playing purposes. 
2. Make 30mm game counters and use them on a 3" or 4" grid or Hexon. This will make the game compact enough to fit a small table. (The grid squares need to be large enough to hold three bases which is the 'stacking' limit.)
3. Use my 10mm Normandy armies on the default 6" grid. This will look like a proper game to people who think wargaming must involve miniatures. I would be short on artillery but can borrow some field-guns from my WW1 Square Bashing armies. 
4. Raise some new 3mm armies for use on a 3", 4" or 6" grid or Hexon.

There's no point in using models unless they are aesthetically attractive. I've thought about / planned WW2 armies in 3mm for literally years. IMO AFVs are going to look best if mounted at least 3-up on reasonably wide bases, i. e. at least 40mm. That pushes the grid size and is probably too large for Hexon. Some of the grid squares also need to contain scenery, e.g. BUAs and woods, but I would make these fairly level so the stands can sit on top of them.

Thirty Years War in 3mm?

My interest in the Thirty Years War periodically resurfaces, and I started this article some months ago the last time it did. I haven't taken things any further, but I thought I'd post it anyway.

I was waiting to see Impetus Baroque at the time, but at the Cavalier show last year (February 2016) I caught sight of the Liber Militum: Tercios rules. The rules emanate from Spain and the English-language version is not as good as it could be. Nonetheless, it appears to be easier to follow than some rules allegedly originating in English.

Suggested 15mm basing on full-size bases.

Basing follows the Impetus precedent of being quite large - 120mm wide for pike-and-shot units, 80mm wide for cavalry and 40mm wide for artillery. Regardless of figure scale, I immediately thought of reducing the base sizes so that a game could be played on a compact 48'' x 32'' playing area. A 120 mm base would become 80 mm, an 80 mm base would become about 53mm (say 60mm) and a 40 mm Base would become about 27mm (says 25 mm).

My campaign for open-handed pikemen in 10 mm or 6 mm didn't get too far, so I began to consider the Magister Militum 3mm figure strips. These do not look clipable, so I needed to see how complete strips would work on the desired base sizes. With the strips being 20mm long, this exercise may also applicable to unclipped Baccus strips.

Tercio Square, Classic, Reformed and Modern
 formations using  Magister Militum's 3mm strips.

Tercios has four types of pike-and-shot unit: Tercios, Classic, Reformed and Modern. I've played or looked at a number of Renaissance rule options over the years. These definitions seem to be a good as any and better than many.

There is some disagreement as to whether the distinctive Tercio formation with shot at the corners was actually used in the TYW. As I understand it the Tercios were not entirely inflexible, but capable of various arrangements. If the shot on each flank were to close up a Tercio would present a simple pike block with sleeves of shot, albeit a large and deep one.

The illustration above shows suggested basing for 15 mm figures. The diagrams (right) show how I would do it with 3 mm strips in a way that would best reproduce the relative numbers and proportions of the 15mm figures.

The iconic T formation for the Modern (Swedes) was my own idea. It may not have been commonly used but it's distinctive and a convenient way of arranging the strips.

I'm not sure of the exact depth of the strips. If they are deeper, then the Tercio square in particular may look better than the way I've depicted it (i.e. squarer). In principle the strips seem to work.

Anyway, this was an entirely cart-before-the-horse exercise as I still haven't even read the rules properly, let alone played them. And I do have some reservations. I'm a bit wary about committing to a rules set that uses bases with different frontages. And I don't think Magister Militum's 3mm range yet has all the required figure types.

Two other developments have also recently occurred. Firstly, I've bought a copy of the new edition of Twilight of the Sun King (more anon) and learnt that a TYW/ECW version is also planned for this year. Secondly, I've seen the first releases in the new 6mm TYW/ECW range from Baccus. Notwithstanding the cast pikes, these are superb figures...

Baccus: Fragile cast pikes but very nice effect.

Bloody Big Battles of WW2

WW2 at grand-tactical level on Bob Mackenzie's
website. 

I was always intending to have a crack at the 1940 campaign in France using Megablitz, or, more likely, the hex-based Hexblitz variant, using 3mm models. Now there is a new option for WW2 grand tactical/operational rules in beta, Bloody Big World War Two Battles, an extension of Chris Pringle's 19th Century Bloody Big Battles! It will be interesting to see how well a set of 19th Century rules can spawn a WW2 derivative. At this operational level with its inevitable abstractions I see no reason why it shouldn't.

The big advantage of something coming from the BBB stable is that it will be driven by historical scenarios. The provision of OOBs and maps will save months of research that would probably never be adequate anyway. Are historical scenarios obligatory for an operational level game? Well, they're not going to be possible for depicting the 'Cold War gone hot' because it never happened, but in general historical actuality does seem to go hand in hand with grand tactical wargaming.

BBWW2B uses 3" bases and a ground scale of 3" to the kilometre at the regimental level or 6" to the kilometre at battalion level. Bob Mackenzie, who is developing this WW2 variant, uses existing 6mm models on sabots which is not merely decorative but apparently allows for removal of casualties.

Bob Mackenzie's website has some some BBWW2B scenarios including battle reports and photos. Click on What's New to find them. Further details can be found on Chris Pringle's blog and the BBB Yahoo Group.

The cast-pike controversy

15 mm mediaeval Florentine spearmen. All my 15 mm and
25 mm pikemen/spearmen have been re-equipped with
wire/pins, but I wouldn't want to do that with 10 mm figures
unless they come open-handed.

Doing the Thirty Years War with 10 mm Pendraken or 6 mm Baccus figures has been on my wishlist for a long time. For someone in Britain brought up on an Anglocentric view of history, doing the TYW rather than the English Civil War appeals to my offbeat tastes.

However, I am completely put off large pike armies by the prospect of bent and broken pikes or the effort required to replace cast pikes with pins or wire. Replacing 10 mm cast pikes is very tedious and time-consuming, and not always successful. Replacing 6 mm pikes is probably not even an option.

Maurice in lead: 10mm Seven Years War

My first job is to sort out the figures into units
and bases. These are improvised but efficient
 sorting trays created from milk
bottle tops and parcel tape.

I was keen to do 3mm Seven Years War armies for Maurice but was put off by the modelling of the artillery so I finally opted for 10mm Pendraken figures. The SYW offers a good balance of arms within each army and a good balance between armies.

I have chosen to do Prussian and Austrian armies, an interest that goes back to the launch of Phil Barker's Horse and Musket Wargaming Rules 1685-1845 (1979). I never played them as it was a project I never got round to, but I remember being inspired by an article in some wargaming magazine referencing the folk song 'The cruel wars in High Germany'.

Ready for figures to be dropped in. I'll then put the trays
into A4 boxes with paper or card between the layers.

In accordance with my new doctrine, the figures will be based before painting and used in games as the painting proceeds. Painting will generally follow the approach I took with my 10 mm American Civil War armies, but I need to be more ruthless in leaving the internal areas 'in shadow' while lightening the external edges so the uniforms look clean and bright in keeping with Eighteenth Century standards. Wish me luck with that.  It might be an issue.

At last: 17thC and 18thC in 3mm!

Pikemen

The recent expansion of Magister Militum's 3mm figures into the pike-and-shot and horse-and-musket eras has greatly advanced the probability of my starting two new projects: Seven Years War armies for Maurice and Thirty Years War armies.

I will probably get some sample figures to see how they base up, but a few more troop types (e.g. grenadiers and cavalry in hats respectively) will be needed before I can do complete armies. Richard at MM has confirmed these are planned, with the grenadiers coming rather sooner. I suspect that some other missing troop types (e.g. grenzers) might be recruited from the Oddzial Osmy Napoleonic range.

2015 projects and options

Portuguese/Dutch for Irregular Wars

Enumerating last year's wargame-related achievements reminded me that retirement has not provided the expected increase in spare time, but, rather, the opposite. Accordingly, and contrary to every wargamer's natural instincts, I really must learn to maximise the time I do get by concentrating on completing current projects and making use of existing armies before moving on to anything new, especially if that carries a significant painting burden. I may have said that before, but it's a mantra I need to repeat. My main immediate priorities are thus to finish at least the first batch of ships for Galleys & Galleons and the Portuguese and Dutch armies for Irregular Wars.

Just In Time Wargame Armies

I'm just working up to a trial game of Maurice. Having decided to dispense with national characteristics I found myself a few units short for a 100-points-a-side game. Earlier this morning I printed out some more labels and mounted them on MDF. Job done. No difficult uniform research that someone might well fault at a later date, no ordering expensive figures, no months of painting and basing.

If I ever do get some proper wargame armies for Maurice, they will either be second-hand ready-painted ones or 3mm ones if Oddzial Osmy ever does them.

Thoughts on scale and basing preferences

1/72, 1/76, OO or 20mm. Call it what you will, it was a
common starting point for most people of my generation.

Why do different gamers favour particular scales? The more I think about it the more I feel that personal preference is probably outweighed by model availability, 'because the rules stipulate it', or because of pressure to conform with other players if you don't want to be left playing solo.

Historical wargamers tend to be of a certain age and they began with what was available at the time. My first schoolboy armies were 1/72 Airfix figures and vehicles and some somewhat smaller Roco Minitanks though that didn't really bother me at the time. When I came back into wargaming in the later 70s I was mad for Ancients and gave away the 1/72 AFVs I had rescued from from parental disposal. This effectively broke my own connection with 1/72 but this seems somewhat untypical. (I should point out that when I use the term '1/72', I mean the ranges variously made and described as OO, 1/72, 1/76 or 20mm. Let's not be pedantic.)

Plans for 1940 high level game in 3mm

A Belgian civilian and a German soldier look
at an abandoned French Char B1 in the village 
of Ermeton-sur-Biert near Namur sometime 
after 14 May 1940.

Doing a high-level early WW2 game in 3mm has been on my hit list for a long time, and I've recently been researching the Battle of Hannut where the French 2e and 3e DLM met the 3. and 4. Panzer Divisions in May 1940.

The forces will essentially be organised on the 1 base = 1 battalion scale used in Tim Gow's Megablitz, but following my career towards grids and hexes I will probably be using Bob Cordery's Hexblitz variant or something similar. Bob has recently been working on Hexblitz II. I have also been looking at his even higher-level game, Operational Art. If none of these are to my liking I can do some sort of mash-up. Doing something original is also a possibility, but I feel I need greatly to improve my understanding of game mechanics not to mention my military education.

I intend to stick with the 4cm wide bases which Megablitz/Hexblitz players use for 1/72 models, but I'll be decorating them with multiple 3mm models. I may make company-size units (e.g. Recce) smaller, and transport units narrower and longer, but 4cms x 4cms will be the standard. (If I progress to doing later war Eastern Front, it seems I should be doing Russian Regiments on larger bases.)

I will be using felt for roads and rivers but may make up some hex-shaped woods and BUAs for placing over the Hexon hexes. Woods and BUAs will need to have a fairly even surface as the unit bases will sit on top of them.

Hexon plans

Hexon bound

I've ordered a box of Kallistra Hexon II  hexagon tiles which I will be picking up at Salute for use with three upcoming projects. I went for the two-tone-green-and brown finish. I've also ordered a few small hills. The projects are:

• Martin Rapier's grand-tactical Rifle and Kepi  rules using, initially, my Mah Jong tablets. I'm indebted to David Crook's A Wargaming Odyssey blog for inspiration on the tablet front. Alternatively, I could use my 10mm ACW armies if/when I finish them. They were always intended to be usable at different levels.
• A high-level (1 base = 1 battalion) 1940 game using 3mm models and Hexblitz  or a similar Megablitz variant. More anon. In the meantime I could use my Crossfire 15mm SCW armies and I have already started planning a representation of the Battle of Jarama Valley which would fit nicely on the area covered by one box of Hexon at a scale of 3cm = 1km.
• My own platoon-level WW2 rules for my 10mm British and German 1944 Normandy armies. These are yet to be written but I've developed some general principles, if not the actual rules.