Section by section

Your bloggist likes a good talk/lecture. Apart from those that I've already written about I have fairly recently been to a number of others on subjects as diverse as Sir Walter Ralegh and Georgia O'Keefe. So I was a bit embarrassed and annoyed that I have only just discovered that The Royal Armouries runs a series of free lectures once or twice a month, especially as I lived literally next door to the place for a year. Now, if there is one type of talk that Epictetus likes above all others it's one for which he doesn't have to pay and so I took myself off to listen to the latest, given by Dr Alexander Shaw and entitled 'Band of Brothers'.

It was a comparison of the tactics employed by British rifle sections of the Second World War with those used by their German equivalents. This really isn't my area of expertise so I won't try to pass on his conclusions, beyond the general one that, for all the technological advances during it, victory in that war was still dependent on small groups of isolated men killing or being killed. It was a comprehensive run through explaining how things changed during the war and how, in the case of the British particularly, these tactics were adapted for the desert, the jungle and for urban warfare. It was fascinating stuff and I learned a lot, admittedly from a low base. Did you know that a 3" mortar could fire 60% more HE a minute than a 25pdr? Perhaps you did, but I didn't.

I'm afraid it didn't stimulate any long suppressed desire to wargame it. It's all a bit too close to home for me, a bit too recent. And let's be honest, re-fighting Sidi Rezegh one hundred and thirty seven times did nothing to endear the period to me. Nor am I really interested in small scale actions. But, I hear you say, what about gaming WWI with Through the Mud and the Blood? Well, interesting as the few games we had were, I don't sense any appetite from any of us to play it any more. And it is actually, despite one figure representing one man, at a somewhat higher level than what was discussed here. One of Dr Shaw's points was to illustrate the changes in British tactics between the wars, with the specialist sections of the Great War (rifle, Lewis gun, rifle grenades and bombers) being replaced by four homogeneous rifle sections each with a Bren gun.

England batting collapse

That headline has not been at all uncommon during my lifetime and I woke up to it again this morning, along with the smell of fish; I cooked some halibut last night and the aroma has been a bit persistent. Anyway, it has seemed to me that I haven't been very informative in the last few blog posts - unless of course you were using this a very slow way of following the progress of the cricket. In which case Australia won by 120 runs.

Having stumbled into doing the Great War by accident I started small (platoon level trench raids with the Two Fat Lardies), then decided to aim big (a division a side with Peter Pig) and so, inevitably enough, thought why not split the difference and do something at battalion level or thereabouts. I really didn't want single figure removal, nor to worry about looking at individual models to see what weapons they were carrying. I bought a copy of 'Crush the Kaiser', which are at the right level and are full of good stuff, but still - oddly and annoyingly - do both those things.

What was needed, it seemed to me, was a rules root stock onto which I could graft the bits I liked from existing sets plus the bits that I thought others had overlooked. I thought about Piquet, but life is too short frankly. I didn't want a grid game particularly as whenever I get round to it Square Bashing is one of those. We've been playing a fair bit of Black Powder recently - Pike & Shotte to be precise - and they crack along quite quickly to a conclusion so I thought they would be a good place to start. I especially like the blunder rule; it's always easier to represent units not doing what you want than it is to represent them doing what you don't want.

There are however a number of differences between the Great War and the Renaissance ["No shit, Sherlock?"] including not comprehensively and in no particular order:

• Relative homogeneity of troop types
• Open formations
• Importance of cover and therefore indirect fire
• Ongoing melee not being appropriate
• Distance not being the prime factor in command difficulty 

On top of that I rather like an element of meta-gaming (think the opposite of 'play the period, not the rules') and have for example often wondered what sort of game Piquet would be if you knew what sequence the next few cards were going to come out in. The shared tableau of cards in the newish 'Epic' rules for C&C Napoleonics is also the sort of thing that I'm talking about; do you take the card you want, or the one you think your opponent wants?

I have therefore been experimenting with all of the above, so far only with basic infantry and medium support weapons. If it works - judgement reserved at the moment; it's easy playing games when you can just change the rules on a whim; are you listening James? - I shall add artillery plus chrome such as German Stormtroopers and, as I suppose I must, tanks. There will be no gas; it might seem an odd line to draw given the overall subject matter, but nevertheless there it is. If it makes the chemists feel any better there won't be any aircraft either.

Crap chariots redux

I confidently predicted last week that we would be playing Italian Wars in the legendary wargames room until the show at Derby. It will therefore be no surprise to anyone familiar with my forecasting track record that we shall be in the wargaming annexe at the Casa Epictetus for a game next week. I have rather fallen out of love with the Great War, or at least with Through the Mud and the Blood, so have had to cast around for something else to do. The timely receipt from my erstwhile bandmate Don of some much improved Quick Play Sheets for To the Strongest! which he has prepared tipped things in that direction, with the added benefit of giving me an incentive to finish off the chariots which have been languishing half painted in the cupboard under the boiler for far too long.

Apparently he fell off when he did this while in motion

That reminds me of a recent post on the Palouse Wargaming Journal blog which not only featured some very nicely painted Assyrians, but also posed the question as to which looked the best: more chariots or more chariot units? I have no hesitation in plumping for the former, but then 20mm plastic are somewhat cheaper than 28mm metal. So the scenario will feature, for the first time, five chariot units at two chariots per unit. At the moment that's the entire plan; possibly more thought is required.

The odd uneven time

That was how Sylvia Plath described August, and this year at least she was proved right. It's probably easiest to sum it up by saying that my blogging muse disappeared for a while.

There was some wargaming however: mid-eighteenth century in the legendary wargames room using Black Powder. I continue to enjoy the rules, although the effect of broken battalia seems a bit odd to me. I will no doubt return to this in due course; I bet you can't wait. I have also been trying to work out how I feel about 'Through the Mud and the Blood' now we have had a few games and, finding that I wasn't coming to any conclusion, have decided to put the period on the back burner and do something different next time we are in the annexe.

Your bloggist walks it off

Cultural life always takes a dip at this time of year, but there have been events in places as diverse as Keighley (Ayckbourn) and Salzburg (Mozart funnily enough). Conversely there has been a fair bit of walking and visits have been made to Bracken Ghyll, the Seven Arches and various other places. And I can't leave without alluding to the very funny goings on at the relaunch of river boats on the Wharfe in Otley, although the same political considerations which stopped the local paper printing the photos also preclude me from providing details.

The Hun is at the Grate!

One of the unimportant things that has been bothering me about the Through the Mud and the Blood scenario which we have just played, is the nature of the papers that the Germans were so intent on burning that they couldn't simply get up and go. I have come to the conclusion that they were probably sets of wargames rules, whose ambiguities, inconsistencies, gaps and errors had driven them to such levels of despair that they would rather be caught by the British than leave the publications in existence. In the event they had nothing to worry about because, in a first for us, the Germans won; and that despite the handicap of me not bothering to put the token for one of their sections in the bag for at least two turns.

The game ebbed and flowed a bit - as games need to - but suffered from a long gap since either of the players had used the rules, although I, as umpire, had played them a couple of weeks before. We are, of course, still in the 'training' section of the scenario book and so would expect to be still getting to grips with both rules and tactics and I think one could say that neither part worked particularly smoothly on the night. Points of note:

• For the first time we used the mechanism for close assault against buildings and, more specifically, it became clear how not to do it.
• We also used the sniper rules for the first time, but not for long. Peter rolled a double on his first shot and that was that. Still, the Lewis gun never jammed.
• Ironically, having complained about the underwritten nature of the scenario, I should have been much more specific about terrain definitions.
• This might be stating the bleeding obvious, but the game is all about the Big Men, whereas, as a generalisation, most other games are about units. A mental adjustment is necessary if one is to make it work properly.
• The blind mechanism increasingly seems more trouble than it's worth - at least for attackers. I'm still keen to try it for defenders in a situation where they could be anywhere in the scenery. The process apparently adopted in Chain of Command has been recommended as an alternative and I shall give it a butchers.
• One suggestion that came out in discussion which we shall try is that the British bomber section should be represented on the table by a rifle section until they start actually bombing.

The British prepare for a futile gesture

We might skip scenario 4 for now. We have a work around for the tanks required (I don't currently have any), but am rather put off by the need for seventeen British big men compared to the very small German force involved. I rather think it would all take a long time for not much game. Scenario 5 is a small German stormtrooper attack on a bunker. I can almost do it - with British defenders replacing the French in the book - and just need the addition of a couple more figures (German light machine guns) and a bunker.

In the meantime I continue to very slowly paint up more Great War figures with the eventual aim of playing some Square Bashing.

Scenario 3 one more time

 These are the scenario notes for our game this week. I promise that I will now shut up until we have actually played it. Note that I have changed the layout of the drainage ditch slightly. The spotting rule below refers to hexes, which is just for simplicity. Each hex is actually one twelfth of the the distance between the table edge and the sentry line.

British forces:

• The British will enter the southern edge of the table on six blinds in any formation and place they wish. As usual there are no limitations as to how the Big Men may be allocated between blinds.
• The rifle grenadier section will operate as riflemen
• Each of the two rifle sections will have one scout each
• ·        When blinds containing scouts are deployed these may be placed up to the command distance of the relevant Big Man away from the group, but not closer than 12” to any German forces.

Terrain:

• All of the land enclosed by the drainage ditch is light cover for spotting and saving throws, as is the area to the south of the ploughed field. Neither have any effect on movement.
• The ditch itself is free to jump into, but costs one movement dice to exit. Movement along it is in single file, counts as heavy terrain and offers medium cover against being fired at. 
• The ploughed field is heavy terrain for movement, medium cover for spotting and light cover for shooting. 
• Areas containing trees are medium cover for both spotting and firing.
• All fences, walls etc. take one movement dice to cross.
• Entering or exiting an unoccupied house uses one movement dice.
• The occupancy limit for defenders in each house is 12 men;  they count as medium cover.

Sentries: 

• There are six sentry blinds already placed out.   
• The German player will mark which two contain the sentries. 
• These blinds cannot move and do not activate on the German Blinds token. 
• The British cannot attempt to spot the sentry blinds.

 

Spotting:  When the Sentry token is drawn, or the Time for a Snifter token if that is drawn first, the Germans roll 2D6 adding 1 for each hex from the southern baseline that the furthest British blind has moved plus a further 3 if any of the blinds are on the road. On a roll of 14 or more the arrival of the British has been noted and the alarm sounded:

• The British remain on blinds, needing to be spotted or deployed as normal.
• The actual German sentries are now put out and the blinds removed.
• The main German force can now be activated (see below)

Sentries (slight return): The German sentries now act as per the core rules. Note that after leaving their post they move on the Snifter token and not the Sentry token.

German forces:

• There are eight German blinds at the start - one per house – which never move.
• The German player will secretly mark which house is the command centre.
• When the alarm is raised by the sentries the German Blind token is added to the bag and the Germans are allocated four extra blinds to be placed anywhere subject to neither being nearer to the British than either sentry nor being with 12" of the British.
• The German player now marks which of the twelve blinds represents which sections, with a limit of one per blind. The German officer is not placed on a blind.
• The four new blinds can now move as normal on the German Blind token
• NB after this point any section allocated to one of the original eight blinds must deploy in order to leave a house. 
• The German officer’s token is also added to the bag. When it is drawn he may be – but does not have to be - deployed anywhere. That uses one of his initiative points and he can then use the other two in that turn. Subsequently to being deployed he acts as per the core rules.

Victory Conditions:

• Either side win if they force the other to leave the table
• The British win if at the end of any turn they have uncontested control of the command centre; the two non-combatants burning documents do not count for this purpose.

Just like that

It occurred to me some time ago that the secret of blogging is to never mind the quality, but to feel the width. In other words to stretch out one's material, however weak, across a number of posts. For example, that is why you have not yet had the full details of the incident involving me, the Rev. Ian Paisley and the giraffe, nor indeed the camels and the missile test in the desert. ["It is strange," says the Rhetorical Pedant, arriving from nowhere after a prolonged absence "how many of these supposedly entertaining stories of yours involve even-toed ungulates.". To which my reply must be that the universe is full of odd coincidences, at which we can only stare in wonder.]

"No surrender!"

In the spirit of the above paragraph I am therefore going to return to the clear the village scenario for Through the Mud and the Blood. Peter has drawn my attention to the fact that the rules for Scouts, such as they are, would be of great use in a situation where an attacker not on blinds approaches a defender who wishes to remain on blinds, whereas all our games so far have been the other way round. This is a fair point, and leads to the obvious ambition to see if I can incorporate that situation in the scenario. In the style of most wargames bloggers I shall simply say that I have some ideas and shall have to ponder it further.

"Don't play the rules, play the period. Aha ha ha!"

It doesn't however change my opinion that the core rules are overly vague on this issue as on others. As an illustration of exactly what I mean, here's a joke from Tommy Cooper:

"A blind bloke walks into a shop with a guide dog. He picks the dog up and starts swinging it around his head. Alarmed, a shop assistant calls out 'Can I help sir?'. 'No thanks,' says the blind bloke 'just looking.'"

In which I am once again a Mexican cowboy

On re-reading yesterday's post it has become apparent that I am guilty of the same thing of which I am accusing rules and scenario writers: lack of clarity. For the record I know perfectly well that the victory conditions in Scenario 3 of Stout Hearts must by default be that the British have to drive the Germans out of the village or that, far less likely to happen I think, the Germans have to rebuff the British attack. My point was really that the writers should just have said that instead of making one infer it from a load of guff about the conflagration of unspecified archives.

Anyway, while I am on the subject, let me record my thoughts so far on the rest of it:

• British formation. The Lardies are fond of showing off their knowledge and have used the scenario to describe 'artillery formation'. However from our extradiegetic perspective we know that there isn't going to be any German artillery falling. We shall therefore assume that just at the point that they enter the table the British have switched into the formation in which they will move to attack the village.
• Sentries: The German sentries will probably have chosen to stand somewhere sensible rather than out in the middle of a field. Furthermore, this is not a commando raid under cover of darkness, this is thirty odd squaddies walking across country during the day. We shall exclude the possibility of the British spotting the sentries before they themselves are spotted.
• Spotting: There needs to be two levels of spotting: the recognition that the British are coming in the first place and then the normal spotting to identify and be able to fire at individual groups. 

"Hmm, seems sensible stuff to me."

•  It doesn't seem very satisfactory for the Germans to be able to deploy anywhere they like when the alarm is raised. Taking literally the scenario's assertion that they believe the British to be an hour away and also making it winter, we will assume that the Germans are putting their feet up and having a smoke inside, and we shall further assume that each section is doing so in a separate house.

I shall return anon with the specific mechanics.

Beyond Comprehension

"If you can't annoy somebody, there's little point in writing." - Kingsley Amis

I'm pretty sure that Amis père had novelists in mind, but sadly wargames rules writers seem to have taken what he said to heart. Every single set of rules seems embarrassingly badly written, and now I find scenario books are the same; but more of that later.

We finished the latest run through of Garigliano last night, and had a fine game which even the difficulty of navigating through Pike & Shotte could not spoil. James has been speaking to a wargaming lawyer (as in a real lawyer whose hobby is wargaming) who plays P&S regularly and who also had to admit that he found it almost impossible to make head or tail of it all. I trust that James will provide an illustrated write up of the game in due course, but for now let me just say that the French were badly let down by the Swiss; I suspect that a bung from the dastardly Spanish was involved somewhere along the line. I am pleased to say that although the attackers crossed the bridge in front of Formia they were eventually thrown back across the river; a small crumb of comfort in defeat.

It's back to the annexe for next week when we shall be moving to the third scenario in the Lardies' distastefully titled Stout Hearts etc. I was able to put on the first two without much problem, but sadly the third is a rather shoddy piece of work; 'underwritten' is probably the best word. The conceit is around the Germans having to burn confidential documents before the British arrive and it introduces two rear echelon types 'of no military worth, but capable of burning paper'. And then nothing; it's never mentioned again and there are no victory conditions at all, let alone any mentioning the capture of secrets. Much else is also ambiguous: Are the British obliged to enter in 'artillery formation'? Do all the Germans except the sentries really start in the same building or is that just poor writing? Are the sentries 'posted on the edge of the village' or may they 'deploy wherever the player wishes'? I could go on, but as you have guessed I'm not overly impressed. 

The same things happen quite a lot in the core rulebook as well. For example, there are supposedly rules for scouts, but actually there aren't; there are simply a couple of notes to the effect that they exist to, in some unspecified manner, probe enemy defences for weaknesses. Still, we've always found that overall the main mechanisms work OK, so I shall make some executive judgements regarding the details and hopefully we shall get a good game out of it.

Не тихий дон

One of the companions of my youth  - in wargaming, follow-spot operating, bad rock and roll playing (and I mean bad), excessive beer drinking, and unsuccessful womanising (the last two possibly being connected) - duly arrived for a brief visit.

We first had a try at Through the Mud and the Blood and, as anticipated his familiarity with general Lardie concepts meant that he quickly picked it up. The British always win the first scenario in the book, but their task was made easier because I forgot the 'wait for it' rule thereby denying the Germans a first shot at the time of the attackers' deployment.

We then visited the legendary wargames room for, as is often the case these days, a bit of Gargliano. James has already written about the evening so I shan't add anything except to agree that Don's dice rolling was uncanny. At one point he rolled a saving throw of five dice and got five sixes.

Note the crap chariot in the background

The following day it was back to the annexe and a run through of To the Strongest!, a game that I hadn't played for a while - which showed. It all came back to me eventually and we had an enjoyable and very close game which Don as the Celts won in a deciding melee; the loss of a Roman commander at a crucial moment being probably the factor that swang it. 

A good time was had by all and Don learned two hard life lessons: never take James' advice when it involves attacking and, at TtS!, never use your commander to replace a 9 because you will inevitably draw a 10. Hopefully, he'll soon have another chance to avoid these mistakes.

Let's see action

You may recall that I got back in touch with a wargaming partner from my (our) formative years, who had also returned to the hobby. Well, I am pleased to say that he is going to be visiting for a couple of days. Those of you who remember me mentioning that we were also members of a truly terrible band can be assured that we shall not be playing any music; though we shall certainly be playing some wargames. First up will be Through the Mud and the Blood and I have set up the opening scenario in the Stout Hearts etc book.

I have changed it a little bit from the previous run though of the same thing in that I have shortened the trench somewhat and the British will start a bit closer. Don hasn't played Mud and Blood before, but he has played other Lardies games - including with Richard Clarke no less - and I have forgotten everything that I ever knew about it, so he won't be too disadvantaged.

We shall also be off to the legendary wargames room for yet another go at Garigliano (it's actually an interesting scenario and gives a good game), which will be an opportunity to try Pike & Shotte with multiple players on each side, and then back in the annexe the crap chariots will be pressed into service for To the Strongest!. Unfortunately the latest trio of chariots haven't progressed beyond the undercoating stage and will not be taking part.

Markers anew

The first rule of wargaming markers is that when you go to get the ones you need you find that you either have far too many or not quite enough. Notwithstanding the fact that we have played C&C several times and that line infantry are always A, that's the letter of which I was short; which is why I have been making some more; current status second coat of PVA drying. The last time we played I didn't have enough 3s.

I have also been pondering the look of the thing. It seems to me - and I've never discussed it with him - that in making markers James goes for invisibility at a distance (a). In other words, close-to the markers clearly indicate whatever they are meant to, but when one stands back they rather blend in to the background of tabletop and figures, becoming inconspicuous. I went down a similar route myself when making casualty markers for 'Through the Mud and the Blood' and for 'To the Strongest!' early Imperial Romans and Celt. However, I think for C&C the opposite is more appropriate.  While the look of the original boardgame is improved by playing with figures, the whole aesthetic is nonetheless the opposite of naturalistic. There is no attempt to deny its roots in cardboard map tiles and wooden blocks; rather the contents of the box are simply replaced with better looking (and, by the way,  better to handle) surrogates. In my view the very obtrusiveness of the markers acts to reinforce that rather than pretend to be something it's not.

(a) the exception to this are the markers for ancient galley warfare - grappled, fouled, raked etc - which are very distinctive.

Dust my trench broom

The lower Wharfe valley's well-oiled wargaming machine has sprung back into action after a short outbreak of real life. We rendezvoused in the wargaming annexe for a run through the second scenario from the Two Fat Lardies' Stout Hearts and Rude Acronyms. It is a bit of a point of principle that we should leave sufficient time between games of the same rules for the details of said rules to be forgotten; and so it proved. We had to have a bit of a do over following the first exchange of fire because we got it completely wrong. Still, I at least am the sort of sad person that gets enjoyment from puzzling my way through the ambiguities and omissions of the average ruleset, which is helpful because in this case the early scenarios are designed precisely with that in mind and lack a certain something as games; balance for example.

I forgot to take any photos so the one above is the position at the end. The British have gained the first trench and despite taking heavy casualties from the heavy machine gun have defeated the defenders in melee. By that point sheer weight of numbers meant that the Germans had no chance and so we called it a night. We did, I think, increase our understanding of both rules and tactics and a couple of elements came into play that hadn't when we had tried the first scenario, specifically hand grenades and close combat. I think we almost got the latter one right. We are also edging towards our first house rule; none of us care for the everything can fire on the Snifter card. I'm leaning towards two such cards and when the second is drawn that's it, turn over.

It will of course be a while before we can try that out. Firstly of course we have to let all understanding of the rules fade from our memories. But in addition the third scenario in the book requires a village of eight houses, of which I currently have, in round numbers, none. Peter and James are very keen to spend my time and money on acquiring some, but I have my reservations. Anyway, no imminent decision is required: there's a rumoured revisit to Sidi Rezegh (supposedly a different day of the battle to last time) using Blitzkrieg Commander two and a half, and I myself shall be turning my attention to the latest C&C Napoleonic expansion.

Oh, What a Lovely War

Posting has been restricted for a few days, not just because of the two bob bits, but also because of intermittent problems with my broadband. I have finally tracked down the cause of the latter to sun shining on to the router; anyone who has ever lived in the north of England will forgive me for that not having been one of the first things that I thought of.

I have now had the chance to play the newish Great War version of Quartermaster General, and was very impressed. Indeed, I think I preferred it to the original, which is high praise. This game requires precisely five people as opposed to the previous need for exactly six, with players representing Russia, Germany, the Austro Hungarian/Ottoman Empires, France/Italy, and the UK/US. Players representing two participants have one deck of cards - although individual cards are only playable for one force - but separate armies and navies. It is the way these cards are used that makes the difference. Some are played directly from hand and some can be saved for playing later, but each can be used in one of three ways: to cause special events, for carrying out attrition (essentially reducing another player's capabilities, but at a cost to oneself) or for supplying reinforcements to a battle in progress. To succeed the last of these one must have prepared in advance better than one's opponent. The emphasis on planning before acting is what, to me, improves the game. On top of that, the fact that many cards are used other than to cause the special event on them - or simply discarded due to attrition - will surely mean that each game plays out very differently. Our game went the whole way, rare in the original, and resulted in a very narrow victory for the Central Powers notwithstanding the fact that we had run out of cards and could do nothing for the last two turns. Recommended, chaps, highly recommended.

In other WWI news, I have set up the scenery for the second of the Through the Mud and the Blood scenarios:

One minor problem with representing trenches in this way is that line of sight isn't as intuitive as it might be. The machine gun pit just visible in the centre of the rear trench actually commands the whole table. Subsequent to taking the photo I laid the forces out and discovered, inevitably, that I didn't have quite enough troops after all. Cue the longbowmen being muscled to one side on the painting table by half a dozen British bombers. I've also had to rush through a couple more Big Man bases.

And to wrap up action here regarding 1914-18, having read Square Bashing I think that they will do nicely as an alternative way of using the same figures at a different level of game. I have therefore ordered some field artillery plus a few sabot bases to check how the infantry will look.

Blitzkrieg bashing

I have enhanced further my growing reputation as the grumpy old man of wargaming. We had a crack at Blitzkrieg Commander II last week and when my tactics didn't work I may possibly have complained a bit. My irritation drove me to re-read the rules, searching for confirmation that I had been wronged by our errant interpretation thereof. Instead I found that what I had done was not just ineffective, but was actually specifically forbidden. As anyone who remembers our (many) refights of Sidi Rezegh can testify I have never pretended to be an expert on the Second World War. Anyway, expect James' blog to contain much ranting about artillery drift, about which he is prone to carry on like a drunk in a pub looking for a fight. Speaking of which, whilst we were en route to Vapnartak he regaled Peter and I with amusing and colourful stories of his life as a young man in the Channel Islands.

The organisers of the show have apparently made the decision to switch from demo games to participation games, the net effect of which was that there wasn't a great deal to look at. I'm rather partial to having a go at participation games, but there wasn't time as it was a flying visit; Peter being keen to return in order to muck out his horse. There was some meeting and greeting of those others who had made the journey from Ilkley - epicentre of wargaming in the lower Wharfe Valley - across to York, and I was somewhat impressed to be introduced to the author Angus Konstam; certainly more impressed than he was to be introduced to me. As it happens I have been reading his new book on The Barbary Pirates, and very interesting it is too. I have some half baked ideas for games based on their raids on southern England using my small fleet of Zvezda medieval life boats; none of which have seen the light of day so far. But then again I have all sorts of projects in hand, and my shopping reflected that. I picked up some pre-ordered trench sections for the next trench raid scenario, some MDF bases (admittedly with multiple possible applications), some ladders from Irregular (for the Siege of Constaninople, a game that you will remember I couldn't make work and actually packed away) and a copy of Square Bashing (with the intention of using my existing stuff to game at a different scale). Add in the wish to test the new C&C Napoleonics rules and rewrite the Romans in Britain rules and it's a bit of a long list. You won't surprised therefore to hear that I continue to paint 15th century English longbowmen, which address no item appearing on it.

Pot63pouri

"Time is a circus, always packing up and moving away." - Ben Hecht

I have been pottering along here at the Casa Epictetus doing nothing very much. I am not retired and yet I don't work. I am in what Dorothy L. Sayers referred to as 'that time of life when a man can extract an Epicurean enjoyment even from his own passions - the halcyon period between the self-tormenting exuberance of youth and the fretful carpe diem of approaching senility'.

There has been a low level of wargame related activity. I have established that with a couple more trench sections - junctions specifically - I can play the second scenario from the Stout Hearts book. I have come to two conclusions: that I can't be arsed to build them myself and that the first game was successful enough to warrant the investment of a few quid more, and therefore I shall place an order for said trench sections to be collected at Vapnartak. On the painting front I have completed more casualty markers for To The Strongest and quite a few light infantry and Commander/Hero figures for the Ancient Britons that I don't actually need. I also did a couple of the druids from the Hat Gallic Command pack which inevitably led me to consider whether it was time to revisit the Pony Wars rip off rules and convert them to hexes. I don't currently have enough Hexon hills to put on a game, but I don't think they are going to find their way into this order.

On the music front I've watched quite a few local bands in pubs ranging from the blues of the ever reliable Dr Bob & the Bluesmakers, the excellent soul covers of the Solicitors, the poppy folk originals of the Ale Marys and the zydeco of Bayou Gumbo. The last of those seemed to rather misjudge their audience. The lead singer introduced one song with a joke that made perfect sense if you were familiar with 'À la recherche du temps perdu'. The Frenchness so eagerly embraced by Otley in the days of la Tour de France has obviously dissipated, and the Tuesday night crowd in la Jonction had clearly not got round to reading their copy of Proust's masterpiece quite yet.

Speaking of reading, I have been doing quite a bit. I have just started on Jonathan Sumption's history of the Hundred Year's War. It's a big book (and that's just the first volume) and so it's left at home rather than being taken about with me. That's probably for the best because of course he is one of the members of the Supreme Court hearing the appeal about triggering Article 50, and presumably when the judgement goes against the government even the sight of his name on a book cover will be sufficient  to provoke anger in the streets. When I do venture out I rely on my kindle. Recently I have read Priestley's 'Bright Day' (which, given my love of coincidence, I was pleased to see includes a trip to a thinly disguised Malham) and McBain's 'King's Ransom'. The latter has found a place on the - very short - list that I keep of books where part of the plot turns on a cost accountancy issue. I accept that this is perhaps a niche interest, but it appeals to me. Should you wish to read them, the others in this limited category are 'The Rise of Silas Lapham' by William Dean Howells and 'Angel Pavement' by, coincidentally again, J.B. Priestley. I omit Eli Goldratt's 'The Goal' and Roger Jones' 'The Carpetmakers' for reasons which I'm sure will require no further explanation.

And finally I was sorry to hear of the death of former cabinet minister Jim Prior. As I think I have mentioned before he was the only Tory MP or former MP that I have ever met. I had dinner with him twenty years ago in Abu Dhabi while we were both selling weapons of mass destruction to Johnny Foreigner. He was very, very drunk. We discussed a number of relatively trivial things including the recent giant killing exploits of Brentford (my team) over Norwich (his team) in the 3rd round of the FA Cup, but I can remember that we also touched on one of the big political issues of the day -  the proposed third runway at Heathrow; plus ça change.