Border Reiver Project 4: First wash

The next step was to apply an overall light wash - light in colour and light in thickness. Washes are easy to apply and gentle on brushes. I use a GW Wash Brush. In this case the wash is a light yellow-brown (Coat d'arms 228 Buff ) appropriate to the predominant 'uniform' colour which in this case are the jacks with which most of these figures are kitted.

Coincidentally, brown is also the best colour for leaving in the shadows although most of that will be contributed by the final stain. Brown is also the main colour of clothing, hair, and weapons, though I will probably be using additional, different browns to pick those out. Humble Border clothing was typically a dark 'hodden grey', but that was actually more brown than grey.

Now, I could have mixed brown into the gesso undercoat, replacing two jobs with one. The brown wash, however, brings the figures into relief and gives them more definition and this will make the detail easier to see. That's the theory. I'm not entirely convinced it's very significant. The initial wash is very light in colour because I want to be able to add other washes over the top of it.

As with the white undercoat, I go through the figures again to touch up the wash. I don't want to discover any white patches or specs at a later date. This is a good time to review the forces.

Reivers. Front row: Reiver Household (two units as Forlorn Hope). Dog handler with bloodhounds (personality figure). Mounted Reivers. Back row: Reiver Retainers (two units as Clansmen). March Warden (who should really be with the forces of law and order in the next photo).

Garrison and Militia. Front row: two units of Bows (as Shot). Second row: light gun and two units of Shot.  Back row: three units of pike.

Animals, Civilians and 'Tudor Rebellion' figures. Front row: sheep and shepherd, cattle and cowherd, assorted and pitiable Border civilians. Second row: Gentlemen Adventurers (including a Lady Adventurer), Rabble.

Some of the figures weren't quite dressed for the Borders so the project has grown into the area of 'Tudor Rebellion' - Protestant against Queen Mary or Catholic (or unprincipled opportunist) against Good Queen Bess. When playing Tudor Rebellion rather than Border conflicts, the Garrison troops will be split between a Royalist force and defecting militia throwing in their lot with the Rebels.

Classifying Irish pikes in Rebels and Patriots

Battle of Vinegar Hall

My 1798 Irish Rebellion project may not reach the table before next year, but I’ve been doing some research on Irish pikemen which has led me to think again about how they should be classified for Rebels and Patriots.

The Irish pikes of 1798 were typically 8-12 feet including the head, and while sometimes referred to as "half-pikes" because they were shorter than the lengths that had been used during the Civil War and earlier, they were nevertheless pikes and used in the same way. (My model pikes will be 60mm, i.e. about double the height of the foot figures.)

Rampant rules typically have an infantry type equivalent to Lion Rampant's Fierce Foot. In Dragon Rampant it's Bellicose Foot and in The Pikeman's Lament it's Clansmen. In RAP there are Natives, but these are more like skirmishers.

This suggested that I might have to invent a new unit type to accommodate charging pikemen, but putting aside the question of firearms for the moment, contemporary sources (see below) have convinced me that the closest unit definition is in fact Line Infantry.

While it might be assumed that Irish pikemen were a wild mob of uncoordinated warriors fighting as individuals, and while they may have been poorly trained and disciplined, they were drilled to manoeuvre and fight as close order infantry and could and did see off cavalry.

The Irish leader Joseph Holt left memoirs in which he wrote: "My pikemen were the most difficult to manage. I had to teach them to step in time, to face about, countermarch, wheel about, but particularly to disperse and form rapidly, and to march in quick or double quick time."

Contemporary illustrations depict Rebels
with mixed weapons.

Now to the question of firearms. They were scarce but preferred to pikes if they could be obtained. Civilian blunderbusses were supplemented with stolen civilian pieces and captured muskets.

It makes good military sense to organise differently-armed soldiers into separate units, and there were separately organised firearm skirmishers such as the famous Shelmaliers with their long-barreled fowling guns and sharpshooter reputation.

However, it also seems likely that Rebel bands would randomly accumulate a proportion of firearms without being reorganised on a rational basis, and this is how they are depicted in contemporary illustrations.

The memoirs of the Irish Rebel, Myles Byrne, specifically refer to small mixed units. Byrne says that they had nothing to fear from the Yeomen, "for twenty pikemen that kept together, with two or three with fire-arms, was quite sufficient to keep the best of those corps at a respectful distance."

All in all, the references to close order drill and the concept of pike units with mixed weaponry would, I believe, justify the definition of Irish pikemen as:

Line Infantry, Aggressive, Poor Shooters, Green @ 3.

This keeps them within the standard rules and distinguishes them from their Militia opponents who I would define as:

Line Infantry, Green @ 3.

If you wanted to discount firing altogether, then you could define a new unit type with no firing and, maybe, a cost of 2, but I personally prefer to avoid house rules if at all possible.

REFERENCES

The Irish Pike

G. A. Hayes-McCoy
Journal of the Galway Archaeological and Historical Society
Vol. 20, No. 3/4 (1943), pp. 99-128

https://www.jstor.org/stable/25535242

Methods of Using the Pike in Ireland: 1798-1921

https://outofthiscentury.wordpress.com/2017/10/19/methods-of-using-the-pike-in-ireland-1798-1921/

My Salute 2019

I went to Salute this year with a more positive attitude and came home with some 28mm Otherworld fantasy figures for Dragon Rampant, some Blood and Plunder Buccaneers/Spanish for The Pikeman's Lament and a few bottles of paint.

I also said hello to Dan Mersey and Michael Leck whose Rampant games are currently my favourite wargaming activity.

I took only a few photos but here they are:

Michael Leck's spectacular Rebels and Patriots game featuring the last stand for the Swedes in Swedish Pomerania as the French land to attack a fort outside Stralsund.

.

Battle of Aughrim using Maurice presented by the Crewe and Nantwich Wargaming Club.

A Batman-themed game presented by Thor's Hammer Gaming Club. I took this shot of the scenery for future inspiration.

Rebels and Patriots - same scenario, different war

My second game of Rebels and Patriots was against my most frequent sparring partner, Ian. It was the same scenario as in my first game, 'First Clash at Lament Ridge', but set in the American Civil War.

Ian is a strong believer that rules covering an extended time period should nevertheless deliver a satisfying degree of period specificity. In his words:

"Do these rules really work in letting you believe that one week you're playing AWI and the next ACW? For me, not having played twice, the answer was "yes" because I realised, as a result of what you said, that the key lay in army creation and that's the important point. If you remember, we talked about the possibility of creating silly armies which would still be legal under the rules, but serious players like you and I can create period specific armies which would look and play quite differently from each other."

I couldn't express it better myself so I won't.

Once again I've got limited figures so I drew up the Company lists in advance.

Rebs

Veteran Line Infantry, Aggressive, Poor Shooters 6
Veteran Line Infantry, Aggressive, Poor Shooters 6
Veteran Line Infantry, Aggressive, Poor Shooters 6
Skirmishers 2
Skirmishers 2
Skirmishers 2
24
   
Yankees

Green Line Infantry 3
Green Line Infantry 3
Green Line Infantry 3
Green Line Infantry 3
Medium Artillery 6
Light Cavalry 6
24

Ian's Officer got Fortuna Belli giving a reroll of any set of dice once per game. I got Army Engineer which allows you to put one unit in breast-works if Defending.

Ian explained his strategy:

"I chose tactics that I would use in any game - the bulk of my forces looking to seize the objective, cavalry watching one flank, artillery in the best place I could find for covering as much of the battlefield as possible, leader in the centre to maximise coverage."

My strategy was to press forward behind a protective screen of Skirmishers and, as far as possible, to avoid the enemy artillery. Ideally I would Attack to close quarters as my Confederates were Aggressive but Poor Shooters.

It was a close-fought game that could have gone either way. Ian's Officer's unit was routed and Ian hit 50% casualties, but he controlled the objective for two turns to my one, so Ian was judged to have won. However, this game was a little rushed in some respects and we missed certain tests and factors owing to lack of familiarity with the rules. Had we properly played by the book I think the outcome of the game would have altered to the detriment of the Union side, so there's probably not much point in tracing the course of the battle in detail. The pictures show the general flow.

A number of observations might be made. In no particular order:

• In comparison with my first game, this one involved much more use of Close Order
• I began to appreciate the fundamental importance of Disorder and Rallying.
• Green affects Activation etc but not the actual Firing/Fighting factors. So as long as they obey orders, Green troops can be pretty deadly.
• I didn't make a determined effort to charge home, but I wonder if I would ever have made it. Perhaps the target needs to be Disordered first. This could be quite a challenge for Poor Shooters.
• Officers are vulnerable. You really don't want to lose a unit, lose your Officer and lose 50% of your Company at the same time.

 

Prior to starting and given the use of so many Skirmishers,  we spent some time at the beginning wondering whether my Line Infantry could charge through my Skirmishers, a common tactic in other rules. First of all there would need to be a gap that allowed the formed unit to see the target, but what happens if the charge falls short?

Border Reiver Project 3: Undercoating

Gesso undercoating: straightforward enough.

My basic painting approach for 28mm figures is to undercoat, wash, block paint, and stain. Finally I make the bases and flags look as good as possible so people don't look too closely at the figures.

The washes and final staining create light and shade and substitute for not using a 3-tone paint effect. The only problem with this approach is that you can’t see how it’s eventually going to look until you apply the final stain.

For this job I'm undercoating with undiluted white gesso. White spray paint would be quicker but it's not the right time of year and I have had a very bad experience with spray paint.

I prefer using a white undercoat. I've used black in the distant past but it's hard to see the detail, more so as you get older.

Although neat gesso looks quite thick while being applied, it seems to shrink tighter as it dries. I don’t want to discover any bare bits of metal later on so the next step is to touch up the gesso, a job best done in good light.

Some pike block figures drying off. Those North Star pikes are lethal.
I'll have to warn people about them when they're put on the table.

My first two games of Dragon Rampant (last year)

This is a belated report of my first two games of Dragon Rampant fought in March and April of last year. While planning my own Dragon Rampant armies, I showed the rules to my friend Ian who includes Games Workshop’s Warhammer Age of Sigmar amongst his many game interests. He already had a lot of Warhammer armies and was keen to design some DR Warbands to try out the rules.

As those who know will know, Dragon Rampant is essentially the same as the Medieval Lion Rampant set, but with the added magical dimension. I have no great experience of Fantasy so I can’t compare these rules with others, but they have all the advantages of Dan Mersey’s elegant rule mechanics coupled with immense army design flexibility. At this point I had not yet played Lion Rampant (or The Pikeman's Lament) though I had played the Colonial variant, The Men Who Would Be Kings.

First Game (March 2018)

The armies we played with are known in GW terms as Sylvaneth and Brayherds. For those not familiar with the GW fantasy world, the Sylvaneth are treemen on the side of Order, while the Brayherds are satyrs on the side of Chaos.

The Sylvaneth comprised a Witch (Summoner), a Tree Lord (Greater War Beast) and two units of Dryads. The Brayherds had a Shaman (Spellcaster), Bestigors (Heavy Foot), Gors (Light Foot), and Ungors (Scouts). Forgive me if I get any of this wrong.

We went for a straightforward 'set-'em-up and kill' game but the terrain determined that there were decisions to be made.

My warband: Gors, Bestigors and Ungors with a Shaman Leader behind.

My Bestigors and Gors move up. The Gors have seized the hill. They are facing Dryads and a Tree Lord, the tall character in the back left of the photo.

My Gors move off the hill in the hope of achieving a quick victory on the right flank. Another unit of Dryads can be seen in the fenced enclosure at the top left.

The first Dryad unit is eliminated but my Gors are weakened in the process.

The second unit of Dryads is summoned to replace the first.

My Ungors inflict missile losses on the Tree Lord assisted by some thunderbolts from my Shaman.The Tree Lord is vanquished. Things are beginning to look very good.

My Gors were taken out, but thunderbolts from my Shaman despatch the second Dryad unit. It's time to go after the Witch who is cowering in the wood but not for long. Total victory is mine.

Throwing thunderbolts about is not the most imaginative use of spellcasting, but it's like having artillery and an easy option for those steeped in historical gaming.

As expected, the rules played well and were great fun. Having not then yet played Lion Rampant this game was also something an introduction to that rule set. One thing I learnt was it's beneficial to have a mixture of different troop types including humble missile troops. This gives you more options and allows you to strike at the enemy when you might not otherwise be able to do so.

I’m essentially an historical player, but I belong to a club which has been attracting more and more fantasy players, so I thought it was handy to have a game sharing Rampant mechanisms that fantasy players might be interested to play. Since then, the whole idea of DR armies has grown on me so much that I'm finding it hard to resist the temptation to plan more and more of them.

Second Game (April 2018)

Unfortunately, my second game was followed by last year's break in wargaming and I didn't make any notes. It's now difficult to remember much about it, but I did take some photos...

.

The armies were again supplied by Ian. I chose the army of Beastmen (Brayherds and Minotaurs) because I like animals while Ian commanded Blood Seekers - fantasy Vikings. This time it was Ian's turn to win. Herewith a few random photos...

Border Reiver Project 2: Basing

2p coin bases: stable, stick to magnetic sheets
and only 2p!

I've written a lot recently about using 2p steel coins for basing individual 28mm figures, so I'll just add that my glue of choice for sticking the figures to them is the contact adhesive UHU Power which can be found in your local Pound Shop for £1.

You need to apply it sparingly, let it dry to the touch (about 10 mins), and firmly press the figure and coin together. I do a batch of about two dozen at a time. Once I've applied glue to the last figure and coin, it's time to start pressing the first pair together.

If done properly the figures and coins will remain stuck together. If you rush it they will come adrift as soon as you start to undercoat them and that can be very inconvenient.

Plastic milk-bottle tops have many uses and I've
collected them for years...

I use the coins tail down as that creates a smoother and more adherent contact with the magnetic sheet in the storage boxes. The bases will be textured etc at a later date.

For painting I then mount the figures temporarily on plastic milk bottle tops using Blu Tack. I've more-or-less given up drinking cows' milk as I've come to believe that's strange and unnatural and possibly carcinogenic, but I have a good stock of the tops.

Rebels and Patriots - first game

I have lots of Rampant AARs to post, but I will start with the latest - my first game of Rebels and Patriots - as this new set of rules is the most topical.

I chose the 'First Clash At Lament Ridge' scenario for my first game of RAP using my recently acquired American War of Independence companies. We diced for choice of sides. I won and chose the British. My opponent Chris took the Continentals.

I had already drawn up two army lists optimising use of the figures I have. The British had a small elite force of mostly Veteran units, while the Revolutionaries had a lot of ordinary Line Infantry and a unit of Skirmishers. The companies totaled 27 points each rather than the default 24 but as this increase was only marginal we stuck to the 4' square battle area.

Lobsters
Veteran Shock Infantry (Grenadiers) 8
Veteran Line Infantry 6
Veteran Light Infantry, Small 7
Medium Artillery 6
TOTAL 27

Yankee Doodles
Line Infantry 4
Line Infantry 4
Line Infantry 4
Line Infantry 4
Line Infantry, Large 5
Skirmishers, Sharpshooters (Riflemen) 6
TOTAL 27

It was a classic match-up of quality vs quantity. In most wargames I put my money on quality, but after reading another RAP AAR I had an inkling that quality came at a price that might not be rewarded.

We threw for Officer Traits. Mine was Wheezy while Chris got Musketry. There was no rough ground so I wasn't affected. Chris used his re-roll in due course to inflict yet more casualties on me.

In comparison with other Rampant games, RAP is the same but different. Activation is simpler, but I got confused between the factors affecting the score to hit and the factors increasing the hits needed to cause a casualty. I've since brought these factors into my homemade QRS.

First turn and the British are racing for the hill, Grenadiers on the left and Line Infantry with Officer on the right. My gun plays on the third American unit from the left.

My Grenadiers manfully marched to within 3" of the objective, and then halted in the shelter of the hill in true Wellingtonian fashion. Although this protected them it was probably a mistake.

The large American unit veers away from my gun so I shoot up Chris' Rifleman, his most valuable unit, instead.

Disaster! My Line Infantry unit is decimated by fire from multiple opponents and my Officer is wounded and forced to withdraw from the field. More anon. Quality indeed proves no match for quantity.

The Line Infantry are almost wiped out. Although my Grenadiers were doing their job, they were not contributing to the demands of linear warfare. By keeping them out of the conflict, I had effectively reduced my army.

With the Line Infantry routed and the Grenadiers isolated and with threatened flanks, I took them out of Close Order and occupied the objective more directly. This was also a mistake. By this stage it was unlikely that the Revolutionaries could have held the objective longer than me before the scenario ended.

My Light Infantry do some damage to the unit opposite them which keeps that unit at bay. At least somebody knows what they are doing.

The Grenadiers were also decimated and forced to retreat. But they are still under fire from American units to their right and rout.

I committed the Light Infantry, again a waste of time, but the scenario ended so they were saved from destruction. It was now time to count the Honour points.

I got +3 Honour for controlling the objective for the most turns. Chris got +1 Honour for causing 33% casualties and +2 Honour for taking less than 33% casualties. To that extent the game was a draw. However, I got +1 Honour for the Honourable wound which made me the winner!

The question is...why did victory look and feel so much like defeat?

What's the point of game reports?

From my refight of Gettysburg using Bloody Big
Battles! I played the Union and got walloped. It was
an interesting exploration of alternative history.

I've published a few detailed game reports (AARs) and I have a few more in the pipeline, but I'm wondering just how interesting or useful they really are. They are certainly very time-consuming to write in comparison with other posts.

I can think of the following positive justifications for game reports:

1. They show what a particular set of rules is like to play. This is especially relevant for relatively new rule sets. They may extend to discussion of detailed rule issues, like the problems I had with Dux Bellorum.
2. They relate to historical scenarios which may interestingly be compared with the outcomes of the real battles or the experiences of other gamers. This is particularly relevant to games like Bloody Big Battles!
4. They illustrate good or bad generalship.
5. They have attractive photos which are nice to look at. Don't knock eye-candy!

Maybe there are other positives that can be suggested.

I'll try in future to make sure that my own game reports can be justified on one or more of the above grounds, and are not merely blow by blow accounts for their own sake.