Here Come Demould - Of The Castings

"And will you succeed?

Yes! You will, indeed!

(98 and ¾ percent guaranteed)"

- Dr Seuss

So, the mould having sufficiently cured, I used it to make a polyurethane cast. That part of the process wasn't as fraught as I thought it might be. Whilst there is a limited time to mix and pour the combined chemicals - around two minutes - that's actually plenty, and although the chemical reaction is exothermic, nothing got overly hot. The results are most acceptable.

Here's a comparison with the original model:

Production is fairly quick:

Paradoxically, the fact that it has all worked first time has rather disconcerted me. In my mind I was going to have several attempts at getting the mould right and then a few goes at casting before eventually patting myself on the back for having mastered a new craft. Instead I am pondering what to make with this new not-very-skilful skill, not to mention several hundred grammes of resin. In the meantime I am going to do two things: paint one of the castings, and mould and cast something which is shallow compared to its width, just to see how that works.

Mechanics, Dynamics, Aesthetics

"Oh the places you'll go! 

 There is fun to be done! 

 There are points to be scored. 

 There are games to be won."

   - Dr Seuss

If I was going to sum up the aim of our recent run of Peninsular Napoleonic games it would be to design a set of rules that meet a certain standard of historicity (as we see it) and are fun to play. The second of those concepts is even more nebulous than the first, but I have come across an academic paper (which can be found here) that attempts to provide a structured taxonomy of what that word might mean in the context of games. The paper is well worth reading, and in case you are worried is not very long. Anyone who has played wargames or boardgames (and probably computer games; I have absolutely no experience of these and so can't comment) will recognise the classifications that the authors put forward even if you don't agree fully with all of them.

Not least among the paper's virtues is that, as an illustration, it puts forwards some suggestions as to how one might make Monopoly worth playing, and almost has one believing they could work. Almost.

A statesman speaks

I'm Yertle the Turtle!
Oh, marvellous me!
For I am the ruler
of all that I see!


* * * * * * *


Your Majesty. Please…
I don't like to complain.
But down here below,
we are feeling great pain. 

                   - Dr Seuss

Lasalle de wargames légendaire

“When he worked, he really worked. But when he played, he really PLAYED.”  - Dr Seuss

If there's one thing you know about your bloggist by now it is that he likes to party; and by party I mean play with toy soldiers. It was therefore with great delight that I found myself once again in the legendary wargames room after a gap of some months. The delight was immediately tempered by the realisation that the room was the temperature of an oven; but we played on.

We were playing Lasalle, a game that I had never tried before. The turn sequence is slightly odd, but I have to say was extremely easy to pick up. And the game also moved along quickly enough, taking only two and half hours to arrive at a situation where neither of us could win. Still neither scenario design nor choosing which tactics to adopt are that easy with a new set of rules. My conclusion is that getting stuck in is much better than hanging about, but that gaining an advantage in terms of numbers of units when attacking is important as well. I haven't any advice to give on how one might achieve both at the same time, but there is not much in the way of command friction, so once you've worked it out it should be reasonably easy to replicate. So, I enjoyed them and would like another go in due course.

Tweetle Beetle Bettel Battle

 “I know it is wet and the sun is not sunny, but we can have lots of good fun that is funny.” - Dr Seuss

Whilst I have no immediate plans to play C&C Napoleonics - we will be back in the Holy Land this week - I have taken advantage of the traditional British Bank Holiday weather to set up another game. I had decided to create my own scenario both because there weren't any others on the website featuring the forces that I had available to fight the French (Russians and Prussians) and because I have always found the official C&C scenarios to be unbalanced. It is only logical therefore that the historical episode which I chose was part of the battle of Eckmühl on April 22nd 1809, specifically the action between the Bettel Berg and the village of Oberlaichling. This features Austrians - which I don't have - defending against a much larger French and Bavarian force. The Austrians will on this occasion be replaced by Prussians.

My record on creating scenarios is not good; I have a tendency to over elaborate somewhat. I am hopeful however that by restricting myself to simply translating someone else's scenario for a different ruleset I might have better luck. Thus I have based this entirely on an article in Miniature Wargames in October 2009, which in turn is reproduced from 'Battles for Empire - Napoleonic Wargames Scenarios 1807-1809' by James R. Arnold and Ralph R. Reinertsen, published by Napoleon Books.

The table layout is straightforward enough. The map is in the proportion 8x5 which translates closely enough into 20 hexes by 12, which is a convenient arrangement of Hexon tiles and is close enough to the C&C Epic playing surface (the latter is 20 x 11 hexes) to not require any rules revisions. It includes a double height hill and some woods defended by fieldworks. Neither appear in C&C, but common sense indicates what their effect would be if they did.

The forces indicated in the article are too big for a C&C game and need to be scaled down. After some thought I decided to take as a starting point the use of all the Bavarian infantry units that I own and make everything else proportional. Further adjustments are needed to reflect the fact that Prussian units are smaller than the Austrians were and, being a mix of front line, reserve and Landwehr, some of them aren't very good. I've also allowed for the fact that in C&C Prussian cavalry units are smaller than the French. I shall probably use plain vanilla combat factors for the Bavarians, with no national characteristics, thereby making them, as they should be, inferior to the French.

Defining victory conditions is one area that I have always found odd in C&C, particularly the fact that the target number of victory points is always the same for both sides; regular readers may remember this vexed me quite a lot during the Punic Wars campaign we played a few years ago. In this battle Davout's objective was to cut the Eckmühl to Ratisbonne road. The scenario as published mandates the defenders to counterattack against any unit which reaches the road. I think a better alternative is to offer temporary victory points to the French for any unit they can place across the road at the end of a turn. I'm not sure how many; perhaps a bonus for having units contiguous rather than separated.

How did it get so late so soon?

"How did it get so late so soon?

It's night before it's afternoon

December is here before it's June

My goodness how the time has flewn

How did it get so late so soon?

- Dr Seuss

Better never than late, but here is the roundup of boardgames played in March.

7 Wonders: Duel: I really liked this. I have always liked 7 Wonders (without actually being any good at it) and have been happy to play it. But this is much better and, for the warmongers among you, gives a military route to victory. Boardgaming to me is a social activity and so we don't play too many two player games, but if you're looking for one, this is a cracker.

Archaeology: The New Expedition: Pleasant enough card game loosely set in Egypt, but I enjoyed the original version more.

Code 777: An abstract deduction game in the style of Mastermind except multiplayer and with pen and paper replacing little coloured pegs. I liked it.

Codenames: I was forced to have a go at being spymaster and learned that it can be no fun at all if the words don't fall right.

Deception: Murder in Hong Kong: I'm getting a bit tired of this now. It doesn't work well with larger groups, and its ability to handle larger groups is one of the few reasons for playing it.

Dominion: Hadn't played this in a yonk and rather enjoyed it. I suspect that the two things are connected.

Five Tribes: I'm not at all sure why it's called that, the official explanation clearly being tosh. It's a good game though, another one that uses the mancala mechanic to good effect.

Fuse: Real time cooperative bomb disposal. Yet another co-op game that I like; I must be going soft in my old age. The only link seems to be that one can never win.

Hanabi: Speaking of impossible co-op games that I like anyway.

Isle of Skye: Sort of auction, sort of drafting, but whatever it is it works well. Best played with the full five I think.

Kabuki: Not for me, although I won. It's to do with pattern and colour recognition; really not for me.

Karuba: Bingo (1) meets Tikal meets Carcassone in a solo game played in a group. I liked it a lot.

Lords of Vegas: Close to the end of this game it became apparent that I had been playing different rules to everyone else. I'd like to try it again, but properly before passing judgement. My gut feel is pretty negative though.

Love Letter: I don't know why this doesn't get played more often, it's a very clever design.

Mission: Red Planet: The game is OK, it's me that sucks at it. It's a game in which, essentially, you have to play all of a limited number of cards and second guessing what the others will play is the crucial skill; the crucial skill that I don't possess.

Paperback: It's a fairly simple word game, but I continue to enjoy it.

Power Grid: Nothing like as heavy as its reputation.

Red 7: Enjoyable, abstract, light filler which I've now played more than any other game.

Revolver: You know those two player games that I never find time for? Well here's another one. I won as the Colty gang. No one ever wins as the Colty gang.

Rhino Hero: Ridiculous game.

Splendor: A fine, virtually completely abstract game, and even better now that it was pointed out that we had one of the rules subtly wrong.

A Rufous-vented Chachalaca

Tobago: Ostensibly about treasure hunting, this is a deduction game where what you are trying to deduce (the location of the treasure) isn't fixed until you have finished deducing it. Very clever mechanics; peculiar artwork that would appear to bear no relation whatever to the island of Tobago. I'd play it again.

(1) Did you know that chap who invented the name Bingo (but not the game) was the same chap who invented the name Yahtzee (but not the game)? No, nor did I.