Surrounded by a load of Shine!

 Its been a good while since I did a post about my "Shinyloo" project. Its been a while since I painted any . However I thought I'd see exactly what I had so  since I needed to do a photo shoot anyhow here are some shots of the current finished collection. Not large by any means but still growing a tiny bit at a time when I fancy painting a Stadden or a Minot - or even the odd Peter Gilder Foremost figure of which I've added a few to the unpainted pile..
 So here are some pictures of the shiny dudes.

Scots Greys set about the French!!

British Infantry and Rifles

The Duke of Shinyboot (in the Bluefrock) orders the lads about

Chasseurs of the Guard come to the aid of the hard pressed French Line.

  There are now about 70 or so figures painted with plenty more to do in between more"work- related" projects such as actually trying to undertand the jargon in a recntly aquired copy of Pike and Shotte- which looks very very pretty but I actually haven't found any rules yet but then I've only had the book for an hour.
 More shinyloo soon- I've some Polish Lancers on the  painting table. 

Is it me or ......

Parliamentarian Dragoons- Colonel James Wardlaws regiment- fought at Egdehill .

 There are lots of things about this hobby that leave me completely  cold. Competition playing being only the most obvious- though it was not always thus. The actual mechanics of  gaming being another, I know that some of you get an adrenalin rush from the actual game play - but I for one now very rarely approach the actual dice rolling with anything more than mild interest. Yet there are chaps out there who view the dice rolling as a life or death experience- Oooh- ing and Arrgh- ing over every 6 or 1  by gum its  positively childish - come on chaps you aren't ALL  6 years old. all of the time
 Mind you the whole of life is starting to look like that- witness the "we're gonna make 'em squeal" from some recently elected Republican Bimbo gracing our TV screens as we in the UK suffered the US mid-terms. Is that kind of triumphalist nonsense the right way for a "serious" politician to behave? Not that she was unusual- just a tad extreme- you get the same here - just a bit more muted thank God. Yet the overplaying of emotion is now the norm in many places, it is as if we are supposed to behave like  spoiled brats    therefore many do.
  That - as far as "popular" culture is concerned  over emotionalised over hyped  light-minded fluff  is now expected to take the place of actual thinking has been the case for some years. The idea that fads and fashions are more important than actual progress in any direction is now something we live with in most walks of life-
 Witness Professor Brian Cox  highlighting the change in the broadcasting of science programmes on TV  in the 1970 and 80 with such giants as Prof Bronowski (The Ascent of Man- I still have his fine book)  and James Burke or Carl Sagan  with thier 13 episode series  and the 3 or 4 episodes more likely in a series of today.(Not to mention that shazam-kapow  special effects often take the place of  the actual points being made)  The public attention span- even of those actually interested is shorter it seems or it is perhaps the attention span of the programme commissioners- who want to do another X-factor for the ratings war(Gawd 'elp us).

 Parliamentarian Siege guns. Formerly in the Peter Gilder collection . Part of the load I bought from DC. They have recieved a little TLC-mostly dust removal and a few repirs.

 In our world-  Witness the number of "games" that are now out there. We are no longer it seems supposed to call them "wargames rules" or rules for a given period  - they are "games" even when they are not "wargaming lite"  . This of course means that when you catch 'em out with some piece of poor research or  crappy army lists they can whine "Well its only a game" as their ultimate- and perhaps only defence. However I do not altogether blame the "Games Corporate Dudes" for this. As so  often we do this to ourselves. or is it " the public wants what the public gets " -  I'm never sure . but it does seem that many are  more secure about their hobby the more lightweight and brain free it is.
 This I really don't get at all .
WANTING to be thought of as  thick and or childish ????
 Give me a break !!
It is as if I'd be better off reading the ladybird book of Cavaliers and Roundheads rather than say Reid or Young  or Woolrych or- perish the thought- actual sources from the actual period . Has the mainstream become so lightweight that this is now the norm- or as I suspect is there no real mainstream anymore. As the hobby becomes more diverse the public face- and yes this is about public face is no longer the "best" but merely the loudest or most currently fashionable that is seen  to be the "in thing"  hence the popularity of WW2 currently - around a third of the games at Donnington from  6 years of Military History- most of that third actually form 2 years.- albeit a rather crowded 2 years !Or the number of assorted GW- a Like "games" you see at  shows- all looking very very similar except perhaps for the logo of the "Not GW at all" outfit running the game. the accent being on game- therefore in theory more "accessable" - read more sales potential . An incident at Donnington brought this into focus- Daddy had brought young Tarquin to the show  they were observing the rather fine Vietnam game put on by my mates of the Border Reivers club . Daddy in hs wisdom opined that the "Good guys"  had to catch and kill the "terrorists" . and that was wht it was all about- lets go and see the Space Orcs ... . Now Daddy hadn't been around when Vietnam was  going on and had obviouly been asleep when as a young lady once of my aquaintance puut it "We did that in History"   so like any good father he  spread the BS but it did make me wonder. People just seem to take less notice of the world than they used to and have less desire to know . One is forced to wonder why this is. .
However back to the plot- if there is one ....

Close up of the battery- the gabions are mine from vaious sources. The cavalry behind the guns are Hichliffe- from the Gilder collection . These were a bit battered and needed a couple of hours work  but you'd be a bit battered at 40 !. The Old Glory Dragoons are only a bit bigger and I can live with the size differential as both ranges have movement and style.  Unlike so much of todays stuff.

 Lets face it GW  has everything the  teenage boy of any age could want- especially if he is 47 and  still lives in his mothers attic and has no real life to go to . It has blood and torture and nastiness and more blood- even a bit of cannibalism ...all very juvenile Check out - if you can be bothered- I was "relatived" into this- the painting tutorials- now the chap is a very  good painter no argument  but what a smug  self satisfied git he looks ... "Don't forget to shake the paint !" - with hand motions yet ! . At this point my laughter was unrestrained ! - I assume you don't need a picture !
 It would be sad if it wasn't all so bloody samey-  like the recent survey in WSS- Robbie Roddiss has commented more fully on this  but is less cynical than I- after all we are now supposed to call the Renaissance "Pike and Shotte"  after the overpriced warlord set so the thickies will know what it is- "Old West" is now a proper period but the Dark Ages has disappeared - subsumed perhaps into medieval  to boost the popularity of that period-  so now Henry V and  Jean Le Bel are the same period as Ragnar Hairy -Breeks- a mere 400 years and an awful lot of culture  separateing them  from each other. whilst such murderous thugs as William Bonney and Harvey Logan (Billy the Kid and Kid Curry)  get a period of their own and are sanitised   and made  the heroes they were not. . This is doubtless the influence of movies - and perhaps "historical Novels" which is highlighted in the survey and which to be honest I found  less than wonderful .
 Can't think of a single movie that has made me want to game a period- and yes I'm a bit of a movie buff . The nearest would be the 2 verions of Henry V- but then I was already a medievalist who loves Shakespear so how much did that obtain,? Likewise historical novels- I have a few of the classics- Mist over Pendle springs to mind and of course Rosemary Sutcliffe but much of the modern stuff just leave me cold Cornwell gets samey after a dozen Sharpes and Scarrow is simply Sharpes Romans- I droppes out after 3 . They are just so wearisome and samey. The Matthew Hervey novels are significantly better- the language  is more precise and period for a start and Matthew Herey is no superhero but even they are getting a bit repetitive.
 No  apparently we must simplify to make it easier for the proles to understand. This is at  best patronising at worst downright insulting- but again we do this to ourselves. You keep buying the mags . Enough of you subscribe - and do it loudly - to the army list and points value crap.  Its your fault.  you ask to be spoon fed. .
Yet having said that the survey did point out that a good proportion of the readership  did still like to research their chosen period  so it's by no means all bad news. There are still blokes out there who subscribe to the "Compleatt Wargamer" idea(apologies to Isac Walton)  I was pretty pleased by this .
This is GOOD NEWS.
Perhaps we'll see the results of some of this research in the pages of the glossies instead of more droning on about how to roll a dice  or tedious scenarios for rules I've never heard of ......

Next up from Drabant.

 I have recently recieved this picture from Nick at Drabant of the new Norman Crossbowmen set . Well up to the standard you expect from Drabant

Not really anything else to say here  except that I'll be getting stock in as soon as I can along with re-supply of otrher Drabant models in both 40mm and 28mm

Older than many wargamers ....

 There is a lot of twaddle talked about the ageing of the hobby - as if we are all shambling into our dotage - usually by blokes who have already decided that they are  dotards with their bloody flasks, meat paste sandwiched and sodding cardigans !! !  Cobblers !  Not dead yet by a long chalk - still to much to do .
 So with the new website building going on apace - and these things always take longer than you think they will I thought I'd show a couple of pics  of a unit that is older than many in this hobby and differences
  in historical information notwithstanding still looks just as tasty as it did since it first saw the light
 of day  sometime in the mid seventies. The unit was certainly present when "Battleground" was filmed in 1977and appears in the Osprey Wargames "Naseby"  book of 1979 . so its pushing 40  and looks none the worse.

The Kings Lifeguard of Foote - 1643 or 1977  whichever you prefer.

 Its interesting how knowledge and perceptions change over the years .

 Close up of the same unit - nice and shiny .

The more modern unit ???

My "Other" Kings lifeguard look very different based upon the knowledge I had when I had them painted in the late 1990s- see the picture on the opening page of this blog . The more "modern" unit wears no armour- there are no known  records of armour being issued to the Kings Infantry - and most of the men wear montero caps - which were issued and  mostobviously there is hardly a buffcoat in sight- nor a musket rest .
 So which is "right" ?
 Quick answere both by the standards of the time they were made.

Scattered fragements of different Eras ...Cries of "We're DOOMED !!!"

40mm ECW  troops on round bases placed in trays 8 to a tray . Its a small company of 24 figures

 So Barry Hiltons short piece on the future of the hobby makes a few waves. Surely that was its point. But as I consider the Scottish referendun like fallout I wonder if we are not rather putting the cart before the horse. Times change , ttastes change,  the hiobby is not what is was even 10 years ago.  While for some this is a "Golden Age " for others it is merely the onset of Doddering Old Age..
One of the things that we HAVE to get used to is that this is not one homogenous hobby. We go on and on about Broad Church and all inclusivity but how true is that?  There are a few common elements perhaps but how close is some chap who plays a single specific game - be it Flames of War or DBM  or Void or Warhammer Fantasy or WH40k  to a "period player" who studies his chosen era and builds his armies to fit them as he sees it then chooses his rules to fit his vision ..
 At one extreme the dyed in the head FOW player will ONLY  buy the overpriced and not always accuate Battlefront gear in the same way a Workshop junkie won't look at any other kind of Sci- Fant models- better and cheaper though they may be. Now as always there are shadings so for example I sell lots of WW2 stuff to chaps who use FOW  but don't like Battlefront at the other end of the spectrum are those who only  buy or even have made the figures that fit their particlar favourite period and style and the  choose rules that fit in with their idea of how the 3rd Slobovian War was actually fought.
 My point here is that these innumerable shadings are more like a random collection of potsherds in an arhaelogists trench than a single homogenous hobby . The different sherds come from subtly different pots- some pretty similar but others not and some not fitting this pattern at all- but perhaps THAT one over there in a different trench..
 That some games outfits want to make us all dig the same trench and olny use the pots they "allow"  is simply part of the normal commercial hurly - burly  and organising a "single voice" would only aid that wish - even assuming such a monumental imposition was even possible let alone desirable.
 Lets be honest here and pull no punches most chaps just want to do what they do they way the do when they do without interference from anyone- and indeed most do.
 Bad shows should wither on the vine- nobody forces you through the door with a cattle prod. I've told you my personal solution. I'm down from a high of 26 shows a year in the mid 1990s  to a mere 10 now and a couple of those may be in jepordy. Since the 90s costs have rocketed- Trade Stand Fees  Van Hire Hotels  Food Beer. the cost of doing even a small local show  would be around £300-400 ,  .A Weekender further afield and I've kissed a grand plus goodbye before a soldier has gone over the counter, so I pick my shows carefully  and if they don't cut the mustard they are gone.
 However Chaps want shows to be local  - witness the number of small local club shows in the small ads  or even simply on the net I can think of loads of shows I no longer do- either because they were poor  or because they are no longer being run  but that doesn't stop new ones in the same mould sprining up  all over. I've been to some God-Awful shows in my time both as trader and displayer. Some where the traders outnumbered the punters and where the little old Ladies wanderedin looking for the White Elephant stall !
 I can remember a show where the organisers offered free entry and still no-one turned up. At another one- one of the bad mannered organiser shows.. another trader- no longer trading made a hlf - hearted attempt to run over one of my team in his poxy knackered old van - possibly because Jim had commented on his well ...stink...  he was one of the most unwashed fellows ever !
 so shows are much better now in many respects  especially if you choose wisely.
 Now on to diversity- todays PC buzz- word!
 In our small and unrepresentative group none of us do exactly the same periods in the same scale Jim and I do AWI- me in 28 he in 15mm  Jiom also does SYW in 10mm I no longer do Andrew and I both do moderns- different bits in different scales Jeff is mainly Naval - though does 15mm WW2 , Napoleonic and some 15mm Ancients and has other armies but usually only 1 side- a hangover from his competiton days .
 I have 25mm ECW. I'm the only one in the group who does except perhaps new chap "Theatre" Dave- to distinuish him from Farmer Dave( lots of stuff see his Northumbrian Wargamer blog)- who has some as well as a bundle of 28mm Ancients. As far as I'm aware no-one games fantasy- thoug both Jim and I may paint the odd fantasy figure as a painting excerise.
 I'm the only one who has a sci-fi collection - and that pretty modest.
 So even  in  our tiny group  the diversity is considerable- none are now competiton players and all  are to a grater or lesser extent "period players" rather than points and armylist types.. By comparison to some g larger clubs I suppose we are pretty homogenous !!!
 So are we doomed - no I don't think so  changing certainly evolving perhaps- though when you see some of the 1970s unwashed brigade ...  but I'm not  joining the nay- sayers and  Prophets of Dooms (or should that be profits of doom??) 
 As always if you can't take a joke you shouldn't have joined

Not holding back ....

 My copy of MW378 dropped on the mat this morning  and to be honest  I wasn't keen. This is not a criticism of the magazine but merely an observation that- in this issue there wasn't much in it for my personal interests.
 I don't do Ancient - well not much nor boardgames nor Normandy nor teeny tiny Napoleonics nor really Medieval Skirmishing - which happens to be a pet hate despite the fact that I like and study Medieval Warfare  , I have plenty of trees so non of the articles grabbed my attention - though Hery's photography article  pointed up a couple of things I'd forgotten- not having read my "Manual of Photography" for a while.

The foregoing merely shows you how deceptive first impressions can be ....

The teeny tiny men- actually a fine article on the refighting of the Battle of Vittoria on a dining table was the star piece. Some consdiderable though had  gone into this  "top down" refight of the battle. these lads knew their stuff and kept to the plan - the idea of Dinign Table Napoleonics is not one I'd choose but that didn't stopthe piece being of interest.
 the 2 pre-gunpowder articles whilst on the surface very different were actually quite similar - both  being fior skirmish games  of a very limited nature- the medival being  based around the famous "Combat of the Thirty" during the Hundred Years War- actually during one of the Truces - and the other  being Horatius at the Bridge- anyone who had to suffer Thomas Babbling Macualeys "Lays of Ancient Rome" might well shy off at this point  victorian doggerel not being to all tastes . Whilst both game might be fun to play once or twice and might suffice as entry level  the lasting appeal wwas pretty much nil.. One might comment upon the current  fashion for  light "post prandial " games . Like Western Gunfights or Gangster Brawls  none have any deep  or lasting interest
 Conrad Kinch "send three and Fourpence" column hightlight those chaps who just HAVE to win and will go to any leangths- you know- cheats ! Bad cess to 'em . This is something that simply doesn't happen in our group- the Umpire would not allow it and the rest of the lads wouldn't tolerate it and at bottom franlky its simply too childish - if your life is so pathetic  that you have to cheat  then go and be pathetic somewhere else . Nuff said
 then we get to Barry Hilton piece on the future of the hobby "Staying Alive"- Apaarently he's "not holding back- the Editors word not his .... .
 Well now  I can't actually disagree with this  but its all been siad before- not least on this Blog and Robbie Roddis' . I might take issue with the idea that the hobby needs a single "voice" and I've been to enough US and Eurpean shows to know that they are not that different to British ones- except perhaps that some of the European ones are more over run with GW crap that ours are so far. That some shows are poor is obvious but so is the solution- don't go to 'em . I've dropped out of shows that I didn't like for whatever reason - not always simply for  commercial reasons  . I can think of one show where the decider - the straw if you like was the smell of Jockstraps and wee wee and another where the ill- manners of the organsiers was the final clincher,
 Mr Hilton comments upon the commercial scene and product duplication are interesting to say the least - especially as he is in the biz himself and has contributed to the product duplication to an extent as in a way has anyone who has produced a range for a period that is already covered by somone else. Now currently we have more different product in more sizes from more makers than ever before so I'm not sure what his point is here- that some companies are seeking to dominate the market Workshop like with a limited number of products is - again obvious especially as those companies are run by ex-Workshop staffers who were handed the welly  BUT and its a big but there are plenty of other outfits- mine included - who do not follow that path. One wonders if Mr Hilton should broaden his out look just a tad.
 Likewise his views on the ageing of the hobby . Now for the record I don't own either Cardigan or Tartan Flask- or any of their aged derivitives. Despise meat paste sandwiches. God knows what kind of "Care Home Wargames Soeciety" Mr Hilton belongs to  but  ours isn't like that. I see more youngsters at shows that in former years- though by youngsters I don't just  mean children but rather twentysomthings and thirtysomething- most often  ex GW drones who have "woken up " . Even in our small and unrepresentative group  we have memebers under 40 So  we are not shambling to our dotage or  ready for the knackers yet by a long way
 That some shows need to sharpen their act is unarguable- but then so do plenty of wargamers- I'm in total agreement with Mr Hilton over the nay -sayers and the socially challenged - and especially the hygenically challenged- again see earlier posts on the blog - "In Vogue"  for instance..
I can go on about the hobby's public image  and indeed have -  on this blog and have said many thimes that we do this to ourselves. By propagating the nerd image Mr Hilton does not help (though I doubt propagation was huis intent ) I'm not sure the constant obcessi0n with the kiddy market is to the point either -  aim later Kids are too  young for much of this.  BUT no more friggin' meat paste sandwiches or flasks  burn your bllody Cardigans. Equally get rid of the awful T-shirts which might have been cool in 1975 but not now Oh and some of you- have a wash once in a weekend and when you - stand closer to the soap

Victorian Steel -A review.

By Gum -Another review! Will Wonders never cease.!!
 Now as it happens I've had an interest in Colonila warfare almost since the beginning of my wargaming- indeed the first set of rules I EVER  wrote for myself were for the Indian Mutiny- that would be around 1972 when all the troops were Airfix conversions and nearly everything else was made from Cornflake packets.  Well thanks Goodness we have moved on .
 Now my library of books on various British Colonial Campaigns is pretty exstensive and contains a goodly number of comtemporay sources but I've always had a bit of a problem with Colonial games- somehow they never quite "feel" right.

Blue Moon Fuzzy- Wuzzies- Hadendowdah Tribesmen

So Gentle Reader when a copy of "Victorian Steel- Wargames Rules for the Colonial Era" arrived in the post I was somewhat intriguged.
 First the introductions, these rulesc are by Dave Tuck of the Grimsby club- and he knows his stuff. If you need proof see his articles in MW on the Boxer Risings in China.
These rules ostensibly cover the whole Victorian  Colonial era   but the accent seems to be on sizable encounters so I'm not sure if these rules would quite fit say the various Cape Frontier Wars in Southern Africa or the Maori Wars in New Zealand which were rather dominated by smaller individual actions
 However  they will fit admirably into the Sikh Wars  Indian Mutiny, The Sudan Campaigns  The Zulu War various NW Frontier Campaigns ,French Conquest of Algeria  The Boxer Risings  and even Spanish American War without too much bother.Oh and of course I have binloads of tasty troops in both 28 mm and 15mm for  many of these campaigns ...
The mechanics are simple- but not simplistic  even the mathematically challenged shouldn't have a problem here  Representation is basically 1 stand = 1 Company / Troop . for regulars or a similar sized body of around 100 men for the Tribal forces A single stand  can have as many or as few figures as you like and basing is not to the point of the game as long as both sides use a commonly agreed and understood system. The Rules say a 3 inch square base "if Starting from scratch" (and using 25/28mm) but make it clear that this is not mandatory.
 I'm tempted to use these for the Sudan in 15mm
 My only negative here is a personal and historical one and a quibble with the organisational nomenclature not with the rules .
 Apparently 4 or 8 or 12 "companies" make up a "Brigade "- So what happened to "Battalion " or indeed "Regiment" for the regular forces . Is accurate period language too difficult or complicated for today's Wargamers?

Old Glory 25/8mm British Command group. I'd use these to command a Battalion of  several companies.

 For much of the period a British Battalion would have 8 companies so 4 companies is technically a "wing"  and yes such a formation could and did fight  independently- though usually as part of a larger formation  for a distinct operation
 A cavalry regiment would usually have 2-3 squadrons each with  2-3 troops  and again Squadrons could be and were used singly. In a sense the rules have missed out the intermediate command level  but unless you knew this and actually care   then it won;t affect the "mere gaming" and its no big deal to build it into your scenarios  in the way you organise the troops for the game.
 So in conclusion a fine effort and definitely recommended for those chaps who fancy a bash at the Colonial ere