Feedback wanted!

I've pretty much finished the WWI Germans. However, I'm not sure if I'm completely satisfied with how they look.

One of the final steps was adding static grass to the bases. I used a light blend of grass, and now I am wondering if it is too light. What do you all think?

 

If we decide that the final effect is satisfactory I'll post pictures of the whole army. If not, I'll wash away the static grass and try again...

Just to show I can paint, some Germans with mustaches...

Here are a few of the WWI Germans I am working on.  I am just finishing them, and am in the process of putting "mud" on the bases.  I'll follow this up with some static grass and call the project finished.

I've painted ~190 figures (plus two tanks) to this standard.  I'll post some pictures of the whole army once it is finished, but I couldn't resist a preview picture...

Pick a scenario...

One of the things I have learned through experience is that it helps to have something specific in mind when you start a project. There is nothing worse than drifting from unit to unit, never completing enough to field an army and ending up with figures you’ll never use. For example, a few years ago I built and painted a huge pile of Flames of War 15mm WWII Germans. The army started out as an infantry company, then I added halftracks to make it into a Panzergrenadier company, then I added different types of tanks from different stages of the war, and somewhere along the way I picked up a bunch of Fallschirmjägers. Obviously I was unconsciously emulating Speer’s methods of production; it took me a lot longer to build a playable army than it would have if I had just picked a single unit and stuck with it until it was finished before starting the next one. The army looks good now, but I built it in a very inefficient fashion. I don’t want to repeat this mistake.

Initially this Napoleonics project was intended to cover the battle of Quatre Bras, one of the clashes that took place immediately before Waterloo itself. This was an encounter between the Anglo-Dutch army and Ney’s I and II Corps of the Armee du Nord over a crucial road intersection. Quatre Bras provides a lot of interesting opportunities for “what if” scenarios and it features some of my favorite units, specifically the 42nd (Black Watch) and the 92nd (Gordon Highlanders).

However, there were drawbacks to wargaming Quatre Bras. First and foremost, the scenarios in the Waterloo rulebook do not use British cavalry. There are Dutch Hussars present – splendidly uniformed troopers, to be sure, but not British cavalry.

More pragmatically the Quatre Bras scenarios require a lot of troops. The scenario which uses the British infantry units I want field also requires three allied infantry brigades and an allied cavalry brigade. While I am not opposed to painting more models, that is a fairly steep barrier to entry. It would take over 370 more infantry models (plus supporting cavalry and artillery) to fill the Allied ranks. I still want to play some Quatre Bras-based games in the future, but I need a more manageable initial project.

Fortunately I have an alternative. There is a scenario in the Waterloo rulebook which has what I want – it has the British infantry, the British cavalry, and requires less figures. This is Scenario 7, “Cavalry Attack.” This order of battle is perfect for what I want to build and play; it has exactly the troops I want and cover and it portrays a very interesting and compelling event.

The British infantry is Sir Dennis Pack’s 9th Brigade of Sir Thomas Picton’s 5th Division. This consists of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Regiment of Foot (Royal Scots), the 2nd Battalion, 44th (East Essex), and, of course, the 42nd (Black Watch) and the 92nd (Gordon Highlanders). This brigade has a Foot Artillery battery in support.

The Allied infantry consists of two battalions of Dutch Militia and a battalion of Belgian Line. Despite the (unfair, in my opinion) poor reputation these units have been given, particularly in Bernard Cornwall’s popular account of Waterloo in the Sharpe, I will be proud to paint and field them.

The final selling point is the British cavalry. This scenario uses Sir William Ponsonby’s Union Brigade, represented here by the 6th (Inniskilling) Dragoons and the 2nd (Royal North British) Dragoons – the famous Scots Greys.

The Scots Greys are one of my favorite units of all time. I will describe what they did at the battle of Waterloo – their famous charge – in the future. Suffice it to say that this scenario covers a very dramatic event in their history, and the presence of the Scots Greys alone is enough to make me want to play this scenario. Historically they missed Quatre Bars – I won’t repeat that shortcoming!

So there we have it; I have picked a scenario and set a goal. I will cover how I will fit that pile of figures pictured below into this order of battle in an upcoming post.

Trench Terrain Diagram

I know I haven’t posted any updates lately. I’ve started a new job, and it is keeping me busy. This is a good thing, but it has cut into my modeling and painting time.

My WWI Germans are almost finished. The project has taken entirely too long, but the end is in sight. Painting is completely done – I painted their tiny mustaches last night – and I’m in the process of basing machinegun teams. Once they’re finished I’ll take a break from drab uniforms; feldgrau gets really boring after a while,which may explain why this project has taken so long. Then I'll start serious work on the Napoleonics. I’ll also describe what I’m going to build in more detail.

But I can’t quit the trenches entirely. I know I’ve mentioned working on a terrain table before, and as promised I whipped up a quick diagram of 2’ x 4’ a trench board "module" in AutoCAD.

The trench will be deep enough for a 28mm figure to stand in.  Each will be wide enough for a 2-man team on a 40mm base.  There will also be "fire steps" in each bay, and three "weapons pits" for either mortars or machineguns.

I think the proportions look about right. Measurements are in inches. What do you all think?

So why Murat?

On gaming message board I frequent a friend posted the following regarding the title of this blog:

“Murat's closet and Lady Butler's painting of the Scots Greys, surely a mismatch.”

Indeed it is. Murat was, after all, one of Napoleon’s Marshals, a member of the new nobility of France – about as far from a British trooper as you can get. So why “Murat’s Closet?”

I’ve found that miniatures wargamers tend to identify with their armies. Hex-and-counter and computer-based wargames come with “both sides.” You punch out the counters (or click the mouse) and select who you are going to play as when the game starts. Sure, you may well have a preference, but there isn’t as much commitment to an army.

Building and painting a miniatures army requires dedication. They’re pricey, even in these days of plastic line infantry. And, more to the point, building and painting them takes a large amount of time.

When I set up this blog it was my intention to build a French army. Back in the day my 15mm Napoleonic army was French. I’ve painted more than my share of mustachioed Guardsmen in my time, so why switch?

Making that jump from French to British wasn’t a lightly made decision, but my main opponent had already started his French army. Thus I started picking up books about Wellington’s army and investing in tiny redcoats.

I haven’t posted much about the progress of my British lately because I’m still cleaning horses. I’ll have some visible results soon, once I start basing them and airbrushing them. But as of now I’ve sunk a lot of hours into my cavalry, with nothing to show for it but have bare metal horses which are not exactly exciting to look at. (And, of course, I’m still finishing up those WWI Germans, painting tiny bayonet knots in appropriate Kompanie colors…)

But even though I’m working on the British I still can’t turn my back on Joachim Murat entirely. He’s such an interesting and colorful character that I had to keep the blog’s name. Murat seems to sum up the flair and style of period perfectly.

He was a seminary student who was so enamored with military pomp that he dropped out of school, beginning his military career in 1787 as a common trooper. He was almost immediately expelled after a scandalous affair; he claimed that he was discharged because he had displayed too much revolutionary zeal. But luck was on his side; he soon reentered the army and was the man who brought Napoleon the cannon on 13 Vendémiaire. After this Napoleon appointed him as his chief aide-de-camp, and his place in history was assured. He soon became Napoleon’s brother-in-law and in 1808 he was crowned King of Naples and Sicily. Throughout Napoleon’s campaigns he had moments of glorious triumph as “The First Horseman of Europe,” but he also experienced dismal failure, leading Napoleon to refer to him as a “bewildered idiot.” After Waterloo he attempted to regain the throne of Naples through insurrection. King Ferdinand IV put a price on his head, and he was caught and executed on October 13^th, 1815.

For all his flamboyance, personal courage, and ability to lead men, Murat was by no means a great military commander. He was too selfish, too impetuous, and too treacherous to be trusted, and only really performed well when Napoleon had him on a very short rein. – Quarrie, Napoleon’s Campaigns in Miniature, p. 130.

If there is one thing that Murat is remembered for by wargamers, it is his sense of sartorial style. Murat was an outrageously flamboyant dresser in an age known for excess. During his military hiatus in 1789 he worked as a haberdasher’s clerk at Saint-Ceré. He later designed his uniforms himself, and some of his creations were astoundingly outlandish. Here are three portraits, the first two by François Pascal Simon Gérard, the third by Antoine-Jean Gros.

So even though I’m building a British army, I can’t turn my back on Joachim Murat’s sense of style. Those British redcoats seem dour and drab in comparison…

Projects lead to projects…

 One possible problem I’m facing is finding a convenient place to play. Denver used to be blessed with two really excellent game shops that had open tables, “Valhalla’s” and “Attactix.” You could bring an army and play whenever they were open as long as they were open. Sadly, both closed last year.

There are still a couple of good venues in the Denver metro area, but none is close to my house. I don’t particularly like transporting miniatures, as I always seem to break something in transit.Sure, I use foam-lined "Sabol" cases, but there's always a broken bayonet or two no matter how careful I am.

I hate playing on bad tables. I know this is silly, but a huge appeal of wargaming is how it looks; playing on a table-tennis table with soda cans and books for terrain just doesn't work for me.

And, let’s face it, playing on a well-built table in my own basement (or backyard, weather permitting) could be great. There’s a refrigerator in my basement for snacks and beer – you can’t beat that for convenience. And nothing beats a game on a sand-table in the open air.

So I’m tossing around ideas for construction projects, working on possible set-ups in AutoCAD.

I think the way to go is to use modular boards. If I use relatively little permanent terrain I could use them for Napoleonics or other eras, like Ancients or WWII. After all, an open field is an open field. This would also give me a chance to build my own terrain over time, perhaps a couple of hills, some trees, and perhaps a farm house or two for the troops to fight over.

I think the way to go is with 2’ by 4’ sections. I’m thinking in terms of building four “open” boards for field battles and two “trench” boards that could work for WWI. By making the boards so that they all can match up with each other I could come up with many different configurations. I could set up three boards lengthwise for a 6’ x 4’ Flames of War or Warhammer table, four for a 4’ x 8’ table, and I could swap in the “trenches” into either set up.

I’ve been looking over materials at the local hardware stores and I think that the way to go is to have a ½” think MDF/fiberboard base for each section. I’ll put 1 ½” foam over this, with plenty of screws and "liquid nails" to keep it in place, then sculpt the top a bit for some terrain relief. I’ll also cut trenches into two of the foam boards with a foam-cutter. Dress up the top with a thin layer of spackling compound for texture, paint, and I’m done enough to play. I can always go back and add detail, particularly in the trenches. It won’t be quick work, but once I’m finished I’ll have a great table.

Any comments or suggestions on building a terrain board are welcome.

Storage is a consideration, but I have room in my basement to stack them on their sides on shelves in my furnace room – most of my wargame stuff is stored in there anyway.

But first I have to clean out that room. If I tidy up and reorganize I’ll have enough space to start construction. So guess who is cleaning out the basement this weekend?

So, why Napoleonics?

That is, why is the Napoleonic era popular with wargamers, and why would I recommend it to others?

I’ll admit up front that it is an era I am only recently re-entering. I’ve played games based in the Napoleonic era in the past, but haven’t in a while; my attention has been elsewhere. But I find myself dragging out my history texts and starting an army.

It’s a subject that has maintained a hardcore following with wargamers over the years while others have faded. Here are a couple of my theories as to why this is.

1: There are lots of participants. From France, England, and Russia, to tiny city-states and even the USA, there are plenty of "factions" to choose from. Back in the hex-and-counter days a wargamer didn’t have to invest much time in an army, you’d just punch out the counters and play. In a miniatures game you need buy the models, then sink a lot of time into building and painting them. As a result, you’d better select an army that appeals to you. In the Napoleonic era there are plenty to choose from.

2. An intriguing strategic situation as a result of the above.

3. A sprawling war that lasted from 1792 to 1815 (although most games start in 1805), so you aren't stuck just focusing on a single campaign or battle.  This may seem an odd assertion as I am focusing on Waterloo, but the point is that this is not a limitation of the era – you can cover anything from Valmy to Austerlitz to Borodino.

4. Tactics that are easy to understand but hard to master. From the rock/scissors/paper interactions of infantry/artillery/cavalry to "line vs. column" it is possible to learn the basics quickly, but it is still a challenge to pull off a good plan and win a game against an opponent.

5. There are lots of cool and interesting units, from Hussars and Highlanders to Cuirassiers and Cossacks.

6. None of the nations involved are the clear bad guy. No one gets stuck playing as the Nazis. Even the Revolutionary fervor of the French had dimmed considerably by the time Napoleon took over.

7. Uniforms that are colorful and fun to paint. How can you say no to this?