
"Battle report posted: French vs. Prussians" Topic
9 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Remember that you can Stifle members so that you don't have to read their posts.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Napoleonic Battle Reports Message Board Back to the Napoleonic Discussion Message Board
Areas of InterestNapoleonic
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Profile Article We're on to version four of our popular second music video.
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
| tshryock | 12 Aug 2009 7:38 p.m. PST |
I've posted my latest battle report. Ney takes on Yorck in a corps-sized action. link Thanks for looking! |
| McLaddie | 12 Aug 2009 8:04 p.m. PST |
What rules were you using? |
| Dave Gamer | 12 Aug 2009 8:12 p.m. PST |
Knowing tshyrock (not personally but from his posts) I'd say he was using the Piquet:Field of Battle rules. It also looks that way from the pictures (the curled paper unit ID markers (the only thing that detracts from the otherwise nice setup) have two numbers on the right hand side (like in the 7th or so picture, the 4/22nd Line has what appears to be "D12 D6" (or maybe "D12 D8". The D12 is the unit's combat die-type and the D6 (or D8) is the Defense die-type. |
John Leahy  | 12 Aug 2009 10:24 p.m. PST |
Liked the AAR. Lots of clear bright pictures. The poor French had a bad day. Sorry for the loss to your family. Take care. John |
Frederick  | 13 Aug 2009 4:53 a.m. PST |
Great report and pics – also, interesting analysis |
| tshryock | 13 Aug 2009 8:28 a.m. PST |
Dave Gamer is correct -- Piquet: Field of Battle are the rules, though I use a couple of bells and whistles of my own design. The labels are a necessary evil. I don't like them in the photos -- though in the one shot it was meant more as a funny item more than anything else -- but they greatly speed up play. I didn't want anything permanent on the units because I often have to substitute when I don't have enough of something. In this case, I had to make some adjusted labels because this was a follow-on battle to my previous report and some units weren't as effective due to losses. The original labels I printed on cardstock, while the new ones were on paper. I game in the basement where the humidity is always a constant fight. After the set up, I came down a few days later and found the new paper ones completely curled up and the cardstock ones slightly curled. When they lay flat, they are not that noticeable, but on this day, they weren't cooperating. |
| Widowson | 14 Aug 2009 5:08 p.m. PST |
Hooray for the use of casualty figures to represent – CASUALTIES! I try to use them the same way. One casualty figure for every two figures taken as casualties. With 1/72 plastics, casualty figures have to be made from regular figs. It's time consuming, but cheaper than lead casualty figures. I like being able to track the battle action by the dead on the field, and they look great after all the "live" figures have been removed. There ought to be some victorious staff figures surveying the field after action. Nobody can argue the relevance of casualty figures after viewing this battle report. Good work, Bill |
| Widowson | 14 Aug 2009 5:09 p.m. PST |
Riderless horses are also good. You have to use horses with the saddles on them (rather than cast to the riders), like Minifigs. But they add a nice touch. |
John Leahy  | 18 Aug 2009 7:56 p.m. PST |
I do the same thing for my FOB games with the unit labels. However, I use sticky tac on the back of a stand to attach the label to the Command stand. Works great and is very unobtrusive. Thanks, John |
|