2025 review

A furious cavalry melee. From a Maurice 
War of Spanish Succession game with 
18mm Wofun standees.

My main areas of focus this year have been Eisenhower, Maurice and collecting Wofun standees.

I've had to ration computer use because of migraines so posting blog articles has suffered, but I did manage some gaming, collecting and even some modelling/painting.

Eisenhower gave me the incentive to base and paint some of my 3mm 1940 French and German armies originally bought for Rommel.

Maurice has been a welcome return to another set of Sam Mustafa rules. I do have 10mm SYW armies for this but never got round to painting them. I now have 18mm Wofun War of Spanish Succession armies as indicated in the photo here.

I also accumulated Wofun 18mm English Civil War armies, but haven't yet used them, and have now started to collect Wofun 18mm Peninsular War forces.

I also relabelled my ceramic blocks for playing later 19thC Bloody Big Battles! again though I would prefer to use Wofun Peter Dennis 18mm Franco-Prussian War standees if they ever appear. 

I'll post separately about my plans for next year...

Hannut for Eisenhower

The Germans have taken one Objective
but they are Worn and time is running out.

Ian and I are working on the Hannut scenario I converted from Rommel to Eisenhower.

Having only two Formations a side worked perfectly well. Fellow players will note that the forces were spread thinly in comparison to other Eisenhower scenarios, but that's the way it was.

The German advantage in Ops, Stockpiles and starting with the Momentum was augmented by banning the French defenders from starting Prepared. That was to reflect the historical Belgian failure to build the expected defences, but as the two forces are more-or-less identical, this is a tough job for the attackers who usually enjoy more points. 

If the Germans fail to take one or more Objectives early, it becomes impossible for them to win the game.

Of course, a scenario doesn't have to be balanced. For competitive purposes you can swop sides, play a second game and add the scores together, but we are working on ways of giving the attackers more of an advantage, including Barrage cards and forcing some of the French to arrive as Reinforcements.

Once it's more developed, I'll post the map, OOBs and further details.

DRP 3mm 1940 forces for Eisenhower - completed

Four complete divisions in
a shallow A4 Tuff box.

I completed my 3mm armies for Eisenhower. Painting is now getting quite difficult for an old chap like me, so this is probably my first and last 3mm project. I had two main precepts: to make the vehicles and figures 'pop' and to avoid oversize base texturing.

Whereas the aim in real life would be to camouflage men and vehicles and to blend into the background, that would be totally counter-productive for such tiny models. The colour scheme needed to be lighter, contrasting and simpler than in real life. I also wanted to avoid using sand or static grass in a way that would be out of scale with the models.

The bases were intended to be dioramic, so my first step was to arrange and stick the models down. Here I made a mistake. I should have put slivers of card under the vehicles so they were of a height with the infantry and I could then have applied filler between the models to hide the base edges and level everything up. By putting filler only around the infantry, I ended up with a lumpy effect.

I attempted to disguise this problem by adding irregular areas of sand to represent scrub. This was a partial success, but the end result looks more like bramble patches on Wimbledon Common than Belgian fields.

With the models, filler and sand added, I gave everything an overall wet brush of dark brown. I then dry-brushed the vehicles using light versions of the historical base coats with no attempt to add secondary camouflage colours. I block-painted the infantry in 2 or 3 colours, but one would probably have done. This approach was essentially the same as I've used for larger scales that I've based before painting.

On the plus side, I think my decisions to restrict the colours and make the models 'pop', and to avoid out of scale texturing, were correct.

On the minus side, I should have pre-based the vehicles to match the infantry as explained, and then I wouldn't have had to add the scrub. I should also have chosen a less vivid green for the grass and dry-brushed it.

Eisenhower: markers and terrain

 

 

Picking up paper markers without long finger-nails is extremely awkward so I printed the designs from the SHAEF document onto self-adhesive labels and stuck them to MDF bases. The objective markers are flipable between Allied and Axis and the unit status markers between Worn and Exhausted.

 

 

For Prepared positions I created some 3D markers using 10mm resin sandbag emplacements from ScaleFiend. I need to get more of these. I'll be using them as markers for 10mm, 6mm and 3mm armies, though they are obviously only in scale with the largest of these.

 

Finally, I made some 4" square Bocage markers using strips of pan scourer. This one is a prototype and a bit messy. It's not quite finished but basically there. I don't intend to paint them. As with the low-relief BUAs and woods I made for Blucher, they're symbolic rather than realistic and the units will be sitting on top rather than 'within' the features. They will look best with 3mm models but will do as markers for 6mm and 10mm. As based, 3mm, 6mm and 10mm models will all fit within 4" squares which gives a nicely compact table, but 6" squares definitely look better aesthetically. Keeping these markers to 4" means I can use them with both sizes of grid.

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.

The missing months

I didn't have time to post much to the blog last year or to do any painting, but I did keep up the gaming. I won't go into too much detail at this remove, but feel compelled to make some sort of report to appease the god of completeness (if there is one).

Following an initial game of The Men Who Would Be Kings, my friend Ian wanted to try out 1914 by Great Escape Games. This was far too gamey for me for an historical game, but it did inspire me to revisit Square Bashing. We played a lot of games and I even dug up, reorganised and based my 10mm Chinese Warlord Era armies.

A 1918 Square Bashing game.

After that we moved on to Dead Man's Hand Redux by Great Escape Games which was a refreshing diversion. This is inherently gamey, but that's more acceptable to me in this cinematic, fun context. Ian has a huge collection of Old West figures and buildings to draw on, not that you need much for this boutique game.

A tense moment in Dead Man's Hand Redux.

Later in the year we returned to Xenos Rampant in order to prepare for a demo game at Cavalier 2025. With the Cavalier plans sorted, Ian agreed to explore Eisenhower which is where we are now and on which I've already posted.

 

Operation Crusader: Eisenhower using Ian's 6mm
North African forces.

 
Our focus on Eisenhower was interrupted last week which gave me a chance to join a game of Crossfire kindly organised by club member Hamish. I was severely over-exposed to Crossfire in 2014 when preparing the Crossfiregrad demo game for Cavalier 2015 and haven't wanted to play it since. I can hardly believe that's ten years ago. But time heals and last night's game piqued my interest again.

I commanded two platoons of German veterans fighting off three platoons of British supported by HMGs, heavy mortars and a Churchill tank. The British didn't cover their attack by properly smoking or suppressing me and were thus convincingly seen off. I destroyed two platoons and the Churchill.

One of the many great things about Crossfire is that a good game can easily be staged within the 3-hour window of a club evening.

Eisenhower: First game impressions

Surrounded German lorried infantry

Although I hadn't expected to be able to play it so soon, my good friend Ian agreed to give Eisenhower a try. Although it's too big for a first game, I wanted to play the Operation Epsom scenario as I have the appropriate kit. We didn't use the advanced rules.

Terrain is very simple at this scale and straightforward to lay out on a grid. I got some pan scourers to represent  bocage but hadn't had time to finish them properly. The felt rivers didn't bend along the 4" squares and will need to be rethought. If using a 6" grid I have rubber rivers which should fit, but I'll keep the bocage to 4" squares so everything fits in.

I grabbed some wooden blocks to act as ‘Prepared’ markers but they were much too big and clumsy and need to be replaced with something more discrete matching the unit base frontage, probably a little row of sandbags.

The 4" grid worked fine, kept the game compact and left room round the edges of the playing area for game paraphernalia, which was convenient but unsightly. A 6" grid would look less like a car park, something that always struck me about playing Tim Gow's Megablitz with 1/72 models. I am, however,  indebted to Tim for the original inspiration to game at the 1 base = 1 battalion scale.

Anyway, we diced for sides. I got the British/Canadians and Ian the Germans. Epsom is a very crowded battlefield and Ian's deployment was well considered, pretty much wall to wall and reinforced by utilising bocage and rivers. The Germans are veteran and the British only trained except for the Canadians (which I could and should have used more aggressively).

I had plenty of mediocre infantry to attack the German infantry in the bocage, but as the Germans were all Prepared that would allow them to fire first rather than simultaneously.  Worse still was the prospect of attacking the Superior German armour in the open, some behind a river. When attacking across a river, you have to throw for Friction which means some units may drop out or even suffer a step loss.

Given the daunting prospect of trying to break through, I placed the 11th Armoured Division - my only decent armoured formation  - on the right flank, and they succeeded in sweeping around that flank. By the end of the first day I had eliminated three German infanty battalions and taken two objectives. The German lorried infantry in the bocage (top photo, ringed) lost a combat and were exhausted, but their mandatory retreat was blocked so they effectively surrendered.

On the second day I surrounded two Panzer battalions that would have been isolated by the close of that day and suffered damage (ringed units in the lower photo). I decided to attack them as well using the Shermans behind them but this just resulted in all the units becoming worn.

Surrounded German Panzers

However, attacking anywhere else looked suicidal. At the very least it is would have required successive waves of fresh troops and would  have been very attritional. The Germans also had strong forces in reserve, so although I was pleased with the initial British success, I think the game would have turned in the Germans' favour if we had continued. I'd be interested to hear from anyone else who has played this scenario.

Anyway, the important thing was not so much the detail of this particular game, but to see how the rules worked and what the game felt like. In about two-and-a-half hours, including setup, we got into the second day. This slow progress was mainly down to unfamiliarity, procrastination (especially mine) and the size of the game. We both felt the game worked well and enjoyed it. The mechanisms were simple and elegant especially the use of artillery and we didn't encounter any unresolved issues.

With regard to the absence of reconnaisance functions, raised by Neil Patterson in the comments on the last blog post, we felt that this didn't matter in a game where everything is apparent and there are no hidden units to be discovered. Recce units, if represented, become just another battalion. The vast majority of tabletop games I’ve ever played have shared this Godlike visibility, while the small number featuring hidden deployment have often proved unsatisfying. There is no point in using model soldiers if they are not actually placed on the table. At the end of the day it’s a game not a simulation.

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.

Eisenhower vs Rommel

I haven't had time to keep up this blog or to do any painting, but I am still gaming reasonably regularly. I may summarise my activities at the end of the year.

The reason for breaking radio silence now is that I've just purchased Sam Mustafa's Eisenhower, a high-level (1 base = 1 battalion) WW2 game. This looks like the game Rommel was supposed to be before it was (allegedly) hijacked by playtesters and pushed in a more tactical direction.

Notwithstanding my huge respect for Sam as an imaginative game-designer and eloquent rule-writer, I was hugely disappointed with Rommel. I've written enough about that, so I won't say anything more.

It may be a few months before I get to play Eisenhower, so I'm not going to review it. Sam's explanatory videos  capture the main character of the game. It's described as a miniatures game but that's abstract in the extreme. I quite like using models even at this very token level but I'm probably going to approach it as a boardgame so as not to raise any false expectations amongst potential fellow players.

Some will feel that this level of game lacks flavour. For me the flavour lies in historical scenarios. I wouldn't use it for pickup games, except as a learning exercise.

I've already expressed, in relation to Rommel, the reasons for favouring this sort of game. They still apply, so getting the game was a no brainer. 

 I might have had reservations about possible lack of scenarios and needing to write my own, but at this level it should be much easier than for Rommel.