Comments for AberdeenWargamesClub.com

Comment on Tuesday 31st August 2010 by Duncan

Duncan — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 18:27:46 +0000

Thanks for the comments, Ian. As to photos, well, there would be more if I wasn’t getting blurry photos from my current camera-phone (pah). If I remember, I’ll pocket a stills camera before heading out on a Tuesday evening.

Comment on Tuesday 31st August 2010 by ian471

ian471 — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 22:51:17 +0000

Keep up the good work, Duncan! And more Photos please – even if of my poorly painted figures retreating after a gallant charge.

Comment on Tuesday 23rd February 2010 by ian471

ian471 — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:40:55 +0000

Romans rather than Buy-zantines or Biz-anteens is probably a better way to describe the army Justinian sent to reconquer Vandal Africa. Are French historians to blame?

Comment on Tuesday 16th February 2010 by Carlos P

Carlos P — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 13:41:50 +0000

The El Cid game was an absolute roll over, the Christian army crushed the Andalusian side with only three casualties (1 mercenary javelinman and 2 archers). After 5 turns the Andalusians surrendered with a unit of Caballeros Hidalgos (knights) in their rear and two units of spearmen closing in on the remaining units.
I don’t think Sholto will ever play an Andalusian army again.

Comment on Tuesday 2nd February 2010 by ian471

ian471 — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:16:23 +0000

Hugh and I used Simom MacDowall’s “Shieldwall” rules – not to be confused with the Warhammer supplement of the same name. It was our first outing with the rules, and inevitably we made a few errors. Despite our misunderstandings, these rules seem to be a brave attempt at modelling a potentially fairly bland infantry slog. You can download the rules (and various other interesting bits and pieces) from Simon’s website:
http://legio-wargames.com/

Comment on Tuesday 2nd February 2010 by Ken Clark

Ken Clark — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 11:17:54 +0000

We fought two BI games Fatimids versus Komnenan Byzantines last night. In the first, a very close thing, the Byzantines lost the crucial multi unit cavalry action in the centre and in the second the Fatimids, despite holding up the Byzantine Franks with a mere Berber light horse unit and destroying the enemy left wing with their turkish ghulams lost out in the centre to a rampaging Varangian Guard who destroyed most of the Fatimid foot singlehanded.

Comment on Tuesday 12th January 2010 by Ken Clark

Ken Clark — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:00:24 +0000

The Western Persian Satrapies versus Porus’ Indians was a double strength Basic Impetus battle. This was an incredibly tight contest where the Persians, having lost their left wing completely were one point away from defeat for two or three moves and were saved at the last gasp when their right wing finally triumphed over Porus’ elephants and chariots just as the hoplites in the centre crashed through the Indian longbowmen.

In the post action chat/repartee it was noted that the Indian right had taken so long to get round to attack the Persian centre after thrashing their opponents that the rest of their army had been beaten before they got anywhere near. But elephants arent the fastest of beasts and as ‘Porus’ himself said “we should have put them in the centre”.

A thoroughly enjoyable battle. Next week we are doing a full set of rules battle between Syracusans and Carthaginians – 300 points a side.

Comment on Tuesday 5th January 10 by Ken Clark

Ken Clark — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 11:27:56 +0000

Chris and I tried a big double size BI battle last night. He was Alexander and I was Western Satrapies Persians. I tried out my new cardboard dice tower and it stank – or maybe it was my dice throwing. Five attacks in a row with 5 or more dice in each attack and I threw not one single 5 or 6. Needless to say the Persians got marlmalised. This ain’t the best army in the world at the best of times but it performed really badly last night. Chris and Andy then fought a single strength battle with the same armies and, once again, Alexander thrashed the opposition. I was glad to get to the bar.

Comment on Tuesday 1st December 09 by Ken Clark

Ken Clark — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:01:30 +0000

Two ancients were fought using Basic Impetus rules. In the first Paul’s Eumenes led army trounced Ken’s Komnenan Byzantines but in the second were roundly defeated by Chris’ Warring States Chinese. Both battles were comparative walk-overs compared to the very close (win by one point) affairs we have had in recent weeks. We have been trying out a different deployment system where, once terrain is laid, both players draw their deployment on paper rather than the standard system where the defender deploys first, then the attacker. In both battles last night both sides deployed so that they werent facing the enemy at all forcing everyone to turn at right angles to face up. Something not right about that either.

The other thing we discussed was allowing skirmishers (and light horse) to evade, soething they can do in the full set of rules but which is not available in BI. So maybe the next time we play we can try that out.

Comment on Kirriemuir 2009 by Duncan

Duncan — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:57:43 +0000

Link to the story and photograph from "The Courier"