As in letting you all know I've not abandoned this blog - or this hobby. Just a very busy time especially with a new household member (not a little bundle of joy but she's a fun addition, so far).
Latest project underway is 120 deciduous trees, painted and ready to base and then on to adding the ground foam. That's all for now.
Where playing with toy soldiers is the whole point - and sharing the joy of doing so. And keeping a record of what's been done and what is still awaiting completion. A note of caution for those unfamiliar: this activity can be remarkably addictive and take over your free time. Well, now wait a minute, it's so much fun that shouldn't be a problem. Oh, that's right. It's not! (title with asterisk in bar below is newest or most recent modification to a Page topic)
Wednesday, August 20, 2014
Saturday, July 19, 2014
Arrrghhh!
And, no, this isn't about my pirates. Just a quick expression of frustration at life being so danged busy the last few weeks that I haven't had time to take the photos of my rebased French and Indian War figures, ten military units and two 'units' of unarmed civilians. Yeah, that busy.
My wife and I are soon to have her niece living with us (one week from today, actually) as she finally has gotten everything together to immigrate to America.
And legally, damn it!
I'm sick to my eyeballs of the molly-coddling of the illegal immigrants. I'm married to an immigrant so I have no problem with people coming to America. But do it legal. Took ten years to get my niece here and she will have a job the moment she lands and be a productive participant in society and surely one day a citizen.
If those illegals get any path to legality, then put them all at the far back end of the line. Behind everyone else who is doing it legally. If that means they can't be here legal for twenty years, tough bananas, you've already demonstrated disrespect for American law by coming here illegally. And, yeah, I know all the arguments about economics and politics. But, really, 75,000 kids seeking political asylum - I actually heard some twit making that argument - all show up in a small time window? Hardly. 99.99% percent are here for money, plain and simple.
Yeah, this is a hot button issue for me and if you were in a room with me during this topic you'd get an ear full, certain sure.
Oh, and the ironic bit is that as more immigrants come here we are slowly sinking into a less competitive place on the world stage; no way can we stay so high up against the rest of the world in a globalized economy. Plain fact.
My wife and I are soon to have her niece living with us (one week from today, actually) as she finally has gotten everything together to immigrate to America.
And legally, damn it!
I'm sick to my eyeballs of the molly-coddling of the illegal immigrants. I'm married to an immigrant so I have no problem with people coming to America. But do it legal. Took ten years to get my niece here and she will have a job the moment she lands and be a productive participant in society and surely one day a citizen.
If those illegals get any path to legality, then put them all at the far back end of the line. Behind everyone else who is doing it legally. If that means they can't be here legal for twenty years, tough bananas, you've already demonstrated disrespect for American law by coming here illegally. And, yeah, I know all the arguments about economics and politics. But, really, 75,000 kids seeking political asylum - I actually heard some twit making that argument - all show up in a small time window? Hardly. 99.99% percent are here for money, plain and simple.
Yeah, this is a hot button issue for me and if you were in a room with me during this topic you'd get an ear full, certain sure.
Oh, and the ironic bit is that as more immigrants come here we are slowly sinking into a less competitive place on the world stage; no way can we stay so high up against the rest of the world in a globalized economy. Plain fact.
Saturday, June 7, 2014
Progress Report #3 - Trepidation Evaporates
Spent some time last evening working on rebasing my French and Indian War figures. What was three "battalions" in my mind is now three companies. Why? Well, a little organizational redesign has occurred.
Now, instead of a battalion of 42 figures based individually and divided into three "companies" of 12 figures each plus two command groups, higher command and lower command - the latter usually being the standard bearer group, and the four attendant casualty figures, the new structure results in two platoons of seven stands, three figures per stand, with the higher command part of one platoon and the lower command part of the other platoon. The great intended benefit is 14 stands to move around on the table instead of 42. While it probably won't change, I'm thinking about having two casualty figures on one larger stand (and with a 'bead post' for a status indicator - which will happen) instead of all casualty figures individually based; originally had four casualties per unit to have one for each company plus one for the command groupings but with only two platoons now I only really need two casualty stands per unit. So, either 18 or 16 total bases per foot unit once that last is decided versus 46 before. That ought to make for much faster flowing game play - and that is always a good thing.
(If that doesn't seem a good decision to you then weigh having 28 foot units to put on the table and move around - that is 1288 stands! Only 448 stands to move instead sure seems better, if still quite high.)
But what about the evaporative effect, you ask? Well, since the French and Indian War is so often thought of as a small scale skirmish period for wargaming, there was an element of trepidation, significant in proportion, within my psyche about making this change. However, once I saw that first unit glued to the new basing system, instant poof and little cloud of intellectual moisture floating harmlessly away. I really like the multi-figure basing system; so much so that I realized the individual basing scheme was one part of what had been slowing down the completion of this period! (Not that life in general, being married in particular, and the size of the units themselves weren't all factors).
And, why oh why, is it that the French and Indian War got consigned into that skirmish only mindset? Not entirely, of course, if you look at rules like Habitants and Highlanders or Drums Along The Mohawk but it seems most people in this period gravitate to that situation. There were plenty of line of battle actions, albeit on smaller scales than the great European battles of the era, besides all the skirmishing.
I suppose you can say my collection travels a middle ground since I think of my figures, now, as representing a one-to-one ratio of one figure equals one man (or woman or child with the civilians and villagers). On the other hand, my basing allows me to form units quite easily into line of battle formations - for most, not all. The Native Americans and certain Europeans, Rangers and Coureur du Bois specifically and a few others, are all based in 'skirmish' style on 1" x 1" bases as opposed to most of the figures being based on 1/2" by 1 1/2" bases three abreast.
One more decision to note here. Like I plan to do with the American Revolution - maybe all periods, really - I am developing a fictional geographic space in which to conduct fictional actions. The purpose behind doing this is to scatter to the winds the challenge common to historical miniature battles of some or all of the players bringing hindsight to the table top. Sure, I can still play historical events when desired, but I like the idea of players stumbling blind into an unexpected situation.
Don't know if I will wait until the new bases get textured or not, I'm thinking not, before taking and posting some photographs of these troops. Such photos will be posted on the French and Indian War page, though. Probably will wait until several more units get rebased. I figure it is long past time I provided more visual evidence of the figures I own.
Now, instead of a battalion of 42 figures based individually and divided into three "companies" of 12 figures each plus two command groups, higher command and lower command - the latter usually being the standard bearer group, and the four attendant casualty figures, the new structure results in two platoons of seven stands, three figures per stand, with the higher command part of one platoon and the lower command part of the other platoon. The great intended benefit is 14 stands to move around on the table instead of 42. While it probably won't change, I'm thinking about having two casualty figures on one larger stand (and with a 'bead post' for a status indicator - which will happen) instead of all casualty figures individually based; originally had four casualties per unit to have one for each company plus one for the command groupings but with only two platoons now I only really need two casualty stands per unit. So, either 18 or 16 total bases per foot unit once that last is decided versus 46 before. That ought to make for much faster flowing game play - and that is always a good thing.
(If that doesn't seem a good decision to you then weigh having 28 foot units to put on the table and move around - that is 1288 stands! Only 448 stands to move instead sure seems better, if still quite high.)
But what about the evaporative effect, you ask? Well, since the French and Indian War is so often thought of as a small scale skirmish period for wargaming, there was an element of trepidation, significant in proportion, within my psyche about making this change. However, once I saw that first unit glued to the new basing system, instant poof and little cloud of intellectual moisture floating harmlessly away. I really like the multi-figure basing system; so much so that I realized the individual basing scheme was one part of what had been slowing down the completion of this period! (Not that life in general, being married in particular, and the size of the units themselves weren't all factors).
And, why oh why, is it that the French and Indian War got consigned into that skirmish only mindset? Not entirely, of course, if you look at rules like Habitants and Highlanders or Drums Along The Mohawk but it seems most people in this period gravitate to that situation. There were plenty of line of battle actions, albeit on smaller scales than the great European battles of the era, besides all the skirmishing.
I suppose you can say my collection travels a middle ground since I think of my figures, now, as representing a one-to-one ratio of one figure equals one man (or woman or child with the civilians and villagers). On the other hand, my basing allows me to form units quite easily into line of battle formations - for most, not all. The Native Americans and certain Europeans, Rangers and Coureur du Bois specifically and a few others, are all based in 'skirmish' style on 1" x 1" bases as opposed to most of the figures being based on 1/2" by 1 1/2" bases three abreast.
One more decision to note here. Like I plan to do with the American Revolution - maybe all periods, really - I am developing a fictional geographic space in which to conduct fictional actions. The purpose behind doing this is to scatter to the winds the challenge common to historical miniature battles of some or all of the players bringing hindsight to the table top. Sure, I can still play historical events when desired, but I like the idea of players stumbling blind into an unexpected situation.
Don't know if I will wait until the new bases get textured or not, I'm thinking not, before taking and posting some photographs of these troops. Such photos will be posted on the French and Indian War page, though. Probably will wait until several more units get rebased. I figure it is long past time I provided more visual evidence of the figures I own.
Friday, May 23, 2014
A Great Leap Forward
First, head over to the AWI page link above and check out the post at the bottom of the page (May 23, 2014).
Resolve grows stronger still. It is certain that the AWI, the Old West, and The Steeplechase will stay in my collection. The French and Indian War isn't leaving and still is priority one for getting painted this year. The Mountain Men are going to be folded into the Old West and stick around since it is a pretty small group of figures. After that, everything is on the table. Most likely I will scavenge through all of the other periods for items I want to keep for one reason or another but primarily because it is useful in the periods I am keeping. And then, at some point, much of the rest will get sold off. Still possible some of the other periods will stay. But going forward the periods listed earlier will get all of my miniature hobby focus. It feels good to have settled on this decision. The only thing still swirling around undecided is what period to keep that relates to the Steeplechase to some degree, most likely that will be the Boxers since it is a relatively small collection.
On the still to buy front - a bunch of fences from Musket Miniatures, some roads from the former Scenic Effects (under a new company now), some more rail cars from Peter Pig through the local store to round out my Old West trains. One more order from Blue Moon to finish off the Mountain Men. And, maybe - big maybe, an order for some stuff from Donnington for my castle, if it stays. Robin Hood and the Musketeers are the most likely periods to hang around as "distractions."
So, what is in the good-bye quay: Vikings, Pirates, Indian Mutiny, American Civil War, Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, and French Foreign Legion. The ACW and Pirates have lots of painted figures so have higher value than the others. That big sell off is out there in the future at some unknown point - just in case.
Resolve grows stronger still. It is certain that the AWI, the Old West, and The Steeplechase will stay in my collection. The French and Indian War isn't leaving and still is priority one for getting painted this year. The Mountain Men are going to be folded into the Old West and stick around since it is a pretty small group of figures. After that, everything is on the table. Most likely I will scavenge through all of the other periods for items I want to keep for one reason or another but primarily because it is useful in the periods I am keeping. And then, at some point, much of the rest will get sold off. Still possible some of the other periods will stay. But going forward the periods listed earlier will get all of my miniature hobby focus. It feels good to have settled on this decision. The only thing still swirling around undecided is what period to keep that relates to the Steeplechase to some degree, most likely that will be the Boxers since it is a relatively small collection.
On the still to buy front - a bunch of fences from Musket Miniatures, some roads from the former Scenic Effects (under a new company now), some more rail cars from Peter Pig through the local store to round out my Old West trains. One more order from Blue Moon to finish off the Mountain Men. And, maybe - big maybe, an order for some stuff from Donnington for my castle, if it stays. Robin Hood and the Musketeers are the most likely periods to hang around as "distractions."
So, what is in the good-bye quay: Vikings, Pirates, Indian Mutiny, American Civil War, Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, and French Foreign Legion. The ACW and Pirates have lots of painted figures so have higher value than the others. That big sell off is out there in the future at some unknown point - just in case.
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
Moving Forward by Stepping Back
So, here is my current thinking on the whole reducing the miniatures collection:
One primary period, two smaller subsidiary periods, and two or three considerably smaller 'disctraction' periods.
Picking the primary period is really easy - American Revolution. The other periods are a bit harder but if I use something I mentioned many posts ago then Old West certainly is on that short list based on how often I've posted on that page (even more than on the AWI but the revolution wins because it allows line of battle games which I've recently realized is my core interest). Then comes the Steeplechase under that method of selection. The big down side here is that none of the figures for those three periods are painted yet. The upside is that the two subsidiary options provide a wide range of scenario diversity.
Of course, if I start selling stuff off then the painted stuff has the best return value. Selling the ACW, while a little heart wrenching, is realizable - I love to read about the battles but I got into gaming it based on groupthink rather than real personal choice. I do have to consider, however, that ACW is the other strong line of battle period I own. Pirates was a spur of the moment idea that grew to absurd proportions. However, it is certainly a possible distraction period where I would select a certain portion of the collection to keep and sell off the rest. The other large group of painted figures is for the French and Indian War and that is a solid interest but too large for a distraction period - and is supposed to be this years primary miniatures focus that has been seriously interrupted by an AWI redesign that started with the Polly Oliver re-release. Maybe, just maybe, this can be considered a sub-set of the AWI since it is so closely allied in time and many of the figures are interchangeable to one degree or another.
Continuing with the number of posts per period's page, there are four contenders for distractionary periods - Robin Hood, Musketeers, Indian Mutiny, and Boxer Rebellion. If I hold hard to the number of figures in the collection then that leaves the first two but, naturally, I can keep just part of a collection rather than the whole.
Other considerations are period and geographic diversity. As in, to select for other periods of history and other geographic regions? Or, do I plumb for as much homogeneous time and geography as possible to allow easy exchange of figures from one period to another?
For certain sure, decision time draws closer and closer. If I make it to the one major, two subsidiary, and three minor periods that means I cut the number of periods I have in half. And that, over time, means more use of what I choose to keep.
One primary period, two smaller subsidiary periods, and two or three considerably smaller 'disctraction' periods.
Picking the primary period is really easy - American Revolution. The other periods are a bit harder but if I use something I mentioned many posts ago then Old West certainly is on that short list based on how often I've posted on that page (even more than on the AWI but the revolution wins because it allows line of battle games which I've recently realized is my core interest). Then comes the Steeplechase under that method of selection. The big down side here is that none of the figures for those three periods are painted yet. The upside is that the two subsidiary options provide a wide range of scenario diversity.
Of course, if I start selling stuff off then the painted stuff has the best return value. Selling the ACW, while a little heart wrenching, is realizable - I love to read about the battles but I got into gaming it based on groupthink rather than real personal choice. I do have to consider, however, that ACW is the other strong line of battle period I own. Pirates was a spur of the moment idea that grew to absurd proportions. However, it is certainly a possible distraction period where I would select a certain portion of the collection to keep and sell off the rest. The other large group of painted figures is for the French and Indian War and that is a solid interest but too large for a distraction period - and is supposed to be this years primary miniatures focus that has been seriously interrupted by an AWI redesign that started with the Polly Oliver re-release. Maybe, just maybe, this can be considered a sub-set of the AWI since it is so closely allied in time and many of the figures are interchangeable to one degree or another.
Continuing with the number of posts per period's page, there are four contenders for distractionary periods - Robin Hood, Musketeers, Indian Mutiny, and Boxer Rebellion. If I hold hard to the number of figures in the collection then that leaves the first two but, naturally, I can keep just part of a collection rather than the whole.
Other considerations are period and geographic diversity. As in, to select for other periods of history and other geographic regions? Or, do I plumb for as much homogeneous time and geography as possible to allow easy exchange of figures from one period to another?
For certain sure, decision time draws closer and closer. If I make it to the one major, two subsidiary, and three minor periods that means I cut the number of periods I have in half. And that, over time, means more use of what I choose to keep.
Monday, April 14, 2014
One not missing anymore!
I have been following closely the re-emergence of a range of figures that disappeared for a time. It is the 15 mm American War of Independence range from Polly Oliver. The figures are now back in production and an ordering page is up on the internet. The link to the left goes directly to that page. I, for one, will be ordering from them - and I've invited another local gamer with a similar interest to join in to create a slightly larger order. Now, I'm off to sort out exactly what I want to order.
Oh, before I go, it is worth noting that you can learn more about my purchase choices in general for this period by visiting the appropriate page link above.
Oh, before I go, it is worth noting that you can learn more about my purchase choices in general for this period by visiting the appropriate page link above.
Saturday, April 12, 2014
Who is missing?
As in for the links to the left of here, what key manufacturers of 15 mm historical miniatures does not have a link listed? USA links get pride of place and the rest of the world gets listed further down. I'm sure I'm missing some, Essex and MY Miniatures immediately come to mind (I think). Will have to attend to this sometime soon. For now I'm off to visit a couple of links - which is what caused this little post, reviewing the links prior to going for a visit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)