Відео

Good overview. That's a nice upgrade over the original pamphlet rules.

Have you considered usig the For King & Parliament Montrose campaign supplement for your Scottish ECW?

Excellent. These models are beautiful. I've been sorely tempted to get some Thirty Years War going.

Great scale and your brilliant miniatures.

Thanks for the video. Nice work and it is good to know that Victrix matches in well with Warlord.

thanks for sharing

A very nice set of rules. I don’t know whether they did a 2nd edition, but on the company website, there is errata to update the vehicle stat sheets.

I am new to Black Powder. For artillery Shooting Overhead the rule book says the gun or the target must be on higher ground. In the video they are both on flat ground. Is this a difference between 1st Edition and Second Edition?

Great stuff! I'm looking to start my foray into Napoleonics starting with some polish regiments and this certainly is inspirering!

What would you say your favorite miniature game is?

Those T-72 in Iraq weren't Soviet Tanks, just produced in the Soviet Union! If those Abrams had to face fully equipped T-72B and T-80B or even T-90's things would probably have been more than a bit different. Especcially that the Iraqi Tanks had no Thermal Sights or Barrel Launched ATGM's, not even stabilizers for that matter.

The cobras can still be used for Team Yankee but they have a different canopy to the Vietnam era ones.

Really cool project and figures.

They look really good bud thanks for sharing

Hi unclethulu i am loving the gone hot series so far as i do this period in both 20mm and 15mm scales enabling larger or smaller battles, i too love the battlefront books but not the rules so much but i am trying to find the perfect set (have not found it yet) incidentaly the reason Ak mags are painted orange is because it eases ammo ressuply in real life as there many ak varients some requiring different ammo, so its a recognition feature and all your infantry should have the same color mag and i think the orange mag is for the more widely availible 5.45×39mm the standard infantry cartridge, looking forward to more. love to all.

Those are really nice, I think I need to use a couple of regiments of my French for Brunswick. Thank you for posting

Picked some of these figures up for an oriental adventures game. Pretty decent.

Cool stuff. Since you mentioned alternative history ideas, I thought I would mention the original backstory/history for the Twilight 2000 setting. The game itself is set several years after the war starts, and the battles are much smaller than what you're interested in here, I think. What you might be interesting in is the initial phases of the "Twilight War," which starts with the GDR Army seeking to take advantage of diminishing Soviet power the mid 90s (this was written in the 80s, before the Soviet collapse) to conspire with the West German government for reunification. The East German forces mutiny against the Soviets, and (as previously arranged) the Bundeswehr intervenes, driving Soviet forces back. The US supports the Germans, but the French and Italians refuse, since this isn't seen by them as collective defense. Poland and Czechoslovakia side with the Soviets out of concern for the possible territorial ambitions of a reunified Germany. As I recall, the British don't participate in the initial fighting, but do join in against the Warsaw Pact once the counter offensive reaches West German territory. The newer Twilight 2000 history is different, and has Sweden more involved (since it's by a Swedish publisher). Another fun options might be to track down an old copy of Revolt in the East, which was a small, quick play game SPI put out, that has the Soviet player trying to put down a series of Warsaw Pack uprisings before NATO can intervein. The revolt table is random, so it could work to decide who fights who in Pact on Pact games. Or, you could just play through the game and then play the 'Key Battles' out, like a campaign system. Just some thoughts.

Huge fan of the channel, used to be named SGKtube. I would like to know what you think would be better to get into. Is team yankee or Nam’ a better game? I prefer the Vietnam setting but I’m not sure what plays better

This is a frustration era to try and game. It ramps up all the scale issues you already have with WWII. Looking forward to what you guys figure out. For what it's worth, when I was in an Armored Brigade in the early 90s in Germany, the GDW rules Combined Arms (the 'modern' version of their Command Decision system) were used by one of the Armor Battalions to play through tactical situations for Tactical Exercises Without Troops. The US Army had its own Micro Armor rules in the 80s, and the general sense I got was that the tankers thought Combined Arms was just as good or better, and more up to date for the 90s. BTW, it looks like you can actually get a copy of the Dunn-Kempf rules (the 'official' US Army rules in 80s) these days for pretty cheap.

I've have the Northag and Seven Days to the River Rive so another shout to look into 7DTTRR. Also TY has a few Firestorm campaigns from Battlefront, maybe free or a pack for like a fiver, and there are some scenario packs PDF & Books on Wargames Vault, and if playing the Russians get Red Army by Ralph Peters, and the Third World War by John Hackett which I think TY was kinda an Americans interpretation off. So there's some supplemental resources to look into maybe helpful :) I would agree the TY books are great for background detail.

me loves NORTHAG from PSC or Seven Days to the River Rhine. later is more arcadey, but fun AF

Team Yankee / Flames of war has sort of been Hijacked by tournament / competition players where you have clumps of units lining up and rolling off against each other ( okay if you want a fast game on club night ...but can leave you unsatisfied ) ...unless the other player is willing to play a more realistic game an idea is some sort of campaign as I know in some of the later TM books their are linked scenarios which look interesting as you carry over the damage from the previous battle and theirs other tweaks too. As for CWC and BKC their designed for mass battles and I know a number of players who are not keen about BKC late war as the king tigers are indestructible. As for Battle group Northag ? I wonder if it's related too the ww2 battle group series I've never played them but I have met people who like them.

CWC and TY and Northag are different scale of rules. CWC is scalable from section to platoon to battalion level and is flexible. As you say, Warmaster based. Have played CWC and BKC extensively in 10mm and 6mm and like them for bigger battles. Have played test games with TY in 6mm and if you insist on following real life tactics, they are workable, if not you get clumps of tanks crossing the battlefield. Have Northag, but not played them. Not a fan of the Battlegroup WW2 rules they are based on, but they may play differently. I would add another set to the mix, Seven Days to the River Rhine by Great Escape games, which suits smaller unit actions. I also use a set of rules from an old Miniature Wargames magazine from 30+ years ago that concentrate less on the technical side and more on organisation, command and control and morale.

Just a note on NORTHAG/CENTAG they are set in 1983 , so some options in the BF box sets might not be usable for them .

Never played this but it has my interest, love the hat too

I really Like the battle front starter sets as they really are good value for money with great detail for 15mm though some don't come with infantry. ...as for rules that's a MINE field good luck finding a set that Pleases everyone at the club....I've no problem with flames of war or team yankee as they give you a fast club game circa 2 hours but some gamers find them too abstract , have fun

I was planning on getting these on pre-order until I saw the middle ranks. I get the reason why the did it but for me it was a massive let-down. I think I will stick to the napoleonics and maybe later the ACW

Great army, are they on 20x40mm bases? As I was typing you said my use case, I am thinking of also using these for warmaster. Would be a good list?

Samurai are looking great!, any chance we could see an update on your epic battles waterloo if you've made progress?

That's a very cool looking army

Wonder why Warlord games didn´t choose to make Roman figures from the time of the emperors, with rectangular shields and standard helmets against gallic barbarians etc. The Roman figures in this set are rather disappointing. The Celts are better looking with plenty of action moves.

Holy cow what a great looking set

Well one of the founders of what we recognise as wargaming Brigadier Peter Young I think one of WW2 most decorated UK soldiers I wonder if he left a response to this question anywhere. I remember as well a Little Wars TV episode covering Iraq War with one of the Veterans of that battle. I think as well there's a growing distinction between a political war and one that challenges societal norms such as WW2 Germans and ACW Confederacy with its own recent flag controversy. Political Wars, even were its Epire Building like Anglo-Zulu war seem more accepted than some of the wars with participants more questionable views on why they are fighting.

Kalistra have free rules that work with their wargame figures. They do Japanese as well

I have no issue with any period being played, including current conflicts. We play wargames, which are not real war in any shape or form. Personally, I don't play anything post WW2 not because it may tigger me as a veteran. Just it is of little interest to me, and I prefer to play other historical periods. But, I would play post WW2 at the club with someone elses models. It is a good question, and I fully understand some peoples reasons for not playing modern conflicts.

Claymore was definitely a little smaller this year.

It's actually really easy to get to Edinburgh College by public transport as it's on several of the main bus routes from the centre of town out to the north west of the city.

Nice video. I love the idea of these figures but the yari are way too fragile. I've been wrestling with them all weekend and it feels like they break just by looking at them!

I came down to Claymore from Shetland, cost a fortune but its a once in a while kind of trip. It seemed quiter than it was a couple of years ago. The bring and buy was a lot quieter, but so much easier to mooch about.

My view to all historical war games including current conflicts is keep the politics out of it. Focus on the equipment and troops, it's the politics that's disagreeable. All soldiers in history for the most part are subject to the whims of the leadership. Just play to the tactics and strategy like a chess match. WW2 Eastern front to me is a good example. What I would argue are 2 evil sides but we have to pick one to play. The average soldier through all of history is just trying to survive. We can respect the past without getting personal. Having said that, I do prefer to play union is American Civil war as I had family in that war. Great vid mate.

I have no interest in anything after the 1960's. But as the saying goes 'War is Hell'. No war is better than another in terms of humans doing brutal things to each other.

Gaming an ongoing conflict can be seen as tasteless, but to paraphrase HG Wells in Little Wars "How much better would it be if all the princes and warmongers were placed in a temple of war, with all the toy soldiers and terrain that could ever need and let them play the hideous game of war there and leave the rest of us in peace. Of course it should be remembered that "wargames" were developed essentially to plan contempory wars (kreigspiel etc)

I feel like your friend does, nothings off limits, BUT, I think there's a duty to do it responsibly and with respect and a degree of sensitivity. Invasion of Ukraine is an interesting and yeah, exciting period to wargame, but id just ge mindful wherei played it. E.g. if you took it to a public show, I think you'd get complaints, and if the Russians won in the game, even more so., but in most clubs people "get" that you're not glorifying war etc. So it would be fine

I think wargaming a current conflict is good. It helps you to better understand the conflict and the challenges that are being faced. Certainly if your group has differing feelings on the conflict, set them aside during the game. I would play it an environment that is not exposed to others outside of the gaming group though.

I personally would find an ongoing conflict to be a bit tasteless- but I have no real interest in wargaming anything post- 1900 anyway. But each to their own is my view

My personal opinion comes down to the word War Game. It's just a game! As such I would say anything is fair game.

Great topic. For me its anything currently on going I'll probably not do, but everything else I am fine with. Just finished painting that PACT starter set myself.

Well to this day in this community you'll always get the few who say we shouldn't paint German soldiers from ww2,so as long as you are happy to paint modern or historic stuff it shouldn't matter

Great job, impressive details and superb colors!