Monday, March 13, 2017

Flames of War v4 Test Run



Tom and I got together yesterday to try out the new version 4 of Flames of War.  Actually we played what we are locally calling v3.5 which is the EW/LW free rules.  But we committed a terrible heresy by playing these rules with our mid-war armies.  This was done because we really wanted to get our old stuff back on the table but Tom has Italians and I have British Infantry, neither of which are playable with the proper mid-war v4 rules.  We figured that since most of the special rules are covered in either EW or LW lists there should be no reason that the MW lists would not work.



We played 1500 points of infantry heavy forces but with a balance of tanks and artillery.  Neither of us had air support so we did not get to try those rules.  In the interest of full disclosure neither of us have actually read the entire rule book so there is a slight chance that we did something wrong.  In fact it is almost a certainty.

British tanks and carriers move into the village in the center of the battlefield.

This post is not a proper battle report but really just a collection of thoughts about the game.  So first and foremost this is really 90% Flames of War.  There are some differences but I was really surprised and please this this is still the game I love.

British dug in on a ridge with mortars in support.
The first set of differences are the changes to the artillery and indirect fire rules.  The thing many people were concerned about before the release was the limit to the number of FO on the table.  My British army has 4, 1 for the 25 pdr battery and 3 for the 6 tube mortar platoon.  Now you can only take one.  The others are redundant teams and are not used at all.  I must admit I though this would be a major issue but in practice I did not find this all that limiting.  The fact that the formation HQ can spot as well as the battery self-spotting really meant that it is rare that you can't get a barrage off.

Italian infantry company takes up a position in a palm grove.
Another change with artillery is the aim point.  In v3 you aimed at a team but in v4 you aim at any point on the table.  This resulted in changing how ranging in works.  Since you no longer have to target a team you roll the range in against the spotter's skill level.  Once ranged in you then roll to hit based on the target's skill level.  This actually makes this consistent with how other types of shooting are resolved.   Since this is really the reverse of v3 it does take some getting used to.

Semoventis taking hits but only one would be lost the entire battle.
 Lots of players were concerned with the general increase in fire power that artillery particularly mortars received in the new edition.  The fear is that infantry will just be slaughtered by artillery and being dug in and attempting to hold ground will be suicide.  In our game I did not find this to be the case.  The first consideration is that increased fire power only plays a part after the target has failed their save and that is the same as last edition.  This means that infantry in the open are in no more danger than ever and are really only in slightly more danger when dug in.  The part that really stands out, however, are repeat bombardments.  Now all batteries can repeat as long as the FO still has LOS to the original target point and did not move.  These repeat bombardments are devastating in that the target must re-roll successful saves.  It is the combination of increased FP and repeat bombardments that will be the true bane of infantry.  Even with this improvement I spent three consecutive turns shelling an Italian infantry company that was dug and and I was not able to do enough damage to destroy them but they did take a pounding.  I really think this change is going to be a good one for the flow of the game.

British hold the town but AT fire is pounding the carriers and Matildas.

The next interesting change, and one that gave Tom and I fits, is the new target allocation method.  Gone are all the complex allocation rules from 3rd edition.  Now the shooter picks the primary target and resolves the shooting.  The the shooter allocates the hits to the primary target and then all eligible targets within 6".  The defender can then attempt to reallocate.  That is it in a nutshell and it is much quicker and much easier.  So easy, in fact, it was actually hard to do as we were both stuck in the old way of doing things.  Once we get this down it's a whole new game.

Matildas coming out on the loosing end of the gun duel.
 The change to movement may be the area where you feel the biggest change from v3.  There are now 4 different kinds of movement each with their own movement rate as well as 3 movement orders or tactics.  At first this seems like a lot, and to be honest I am still trying to digest it, but it actually not that much different than the old system. In v3 there were different movement rates based on the type of terrian you were passing through and then there was the at the double move.  Now you have a tactical move rate that you can use at any time and then you have three different dash moves depending on if you are dashing through terrain, cross country or on a road.  Gone is the at the double move and the silly double hits penalty!  The new movement system is going to take some practice but I see that this will change the tactical aspect of the game in a huge way.

The fight for the village rages on...
 The movement orders are Blitz (which is ironically named), Shoot and Scoot and Dig In.  Obviously the Dig In order is the same as last version but the other two are new.  Blitz is used before the Movement phase and if a skill test is passed allows the unit to move 4".  Since this is outside the Movement Phase the unit will still count as stationary if they do not move in the Movement Phase.  This is a pretty handy order and I used it with great success in our game.  The Shoot and Scoot order allows a unit that did not move in the Movement Phase to make a 4" move after shooting upon passing a skill test.  Again, a pretty useful order.

The Semoventi platoon would make good use of the Shoot and Scoot rule.
One big change that I think will really help mid-war and early war armies is how v4 handles guns listed as No HE.  In v3 No HE (High Explosives) was a very limiting attribute for a gun.  I basically meant you can only shoot the main gun at armored targets and never against guns or infantry.  This was a brutal limitation and didn't do a good job in representing how a tank like the Matilda would have been used in combat.  In v4 this limitation has been removed and replaced with a +1 to hit modifier.  This allows those 2 pdr guns to engage the enemy AT guns with something other than the machine guns.  This is especially helpful when the target is dug in or behind a gun shield as the main gun will have a better fire power rating.

Italian troops advance on the village after destroying much of the British support units.
 Next lets look at the new in command method for v4.  In the old version determining if a team was in command involved looking at the skill level of the team to get the command distance and then making sure that the team was within that distance from another member of the unit.  This could and often did result in units that were spread wide across the table.  This wide configuration really added to the complexity of the game without really adding anything to the playibility or historical 'accuracy' of the game.
Italian troops break cover and advance in the open.
 Version 4 changes this to a simple command distance for all units based on their size and is measured from the unit commander.  As an example, a 7 stand unit of infantry has a command distance of 6" so all teams must remain within that distance from the unit leader.  Units with 8 or more stands have a command distance of 8".  This forces the units to be tighter on the table than the old edition.  There is some concern that the tighter formations, particularly for infantry, will result in greater danger from artillery.  I found that this really didn't make a difference with how I usually play the game.  I never really used the full command distance allowed in v3 and I tended to run units closer together than say a regular tournament player.  Ironically most people ran their tanks fender to fender in the old edition even though tanks had 2" greater command distance than infantry. This will not change with v4 - tank parks will live on.  I the end this change will not really change how I play but others may find this extremely limiting.
Matilda platoon presents their side armor to the Semoventi platoon in a very foolish move that would cost me the platoon.
 I really like how in v4 most of your motivation testing will happen at the star of your turn and only happens once a turn.  The only exceptions I saw where tests for counter attacking in assault.  Version 3 had lots of testing and these tests could happen in any phase of the turn.  It was also possible that a unit would need to test several times a turn.  Now is it basically only once.  Additionally, the threshold for unit break tests is much lower than the previous version.  In v3 you tested for break at under 50% but now it is based on a minimum number of stands still in command.  This actually means that at times units are more resilient than the previous version and sometimes thes might actually be less resilient depending on how well you have managed to keep them in command and how your opponent allocated hits during shooting.

Italian troops prepare to swarm the village.
Well, that is all I can think of now after only one game and an incomplete reading of the rules.  Hopefully, everything I have discussed turns out to be things that we did correctly.  I will need to really digest this new rule book very carefully and certainly get in many more games before I feel fully comfortable ith how this game plays.  My first impressions are very positive at least as far as the rules are concerned.

Thursday, March 9, 2017

German 7.7cm FK96 guns for Flames of War Great War


This past weekend Tom and I got WWI back on the table after a several month break.  Knowing we were to play I felt inspired to pull out some models and paint another unit or my Germans.  This is the Battlefront pack GGE570 7.7cm FK96 n.A gun.  It is a two gun blister pack with the command.  You will never use the command unless you field this as a 4 gun battery.  As a two gun detachment the command stand is not used.  I do have another pack so eventually I could field the 4 gun battery but at 1500 points I doubt I ever will.  These were fun models to build and they might make it on the table for our next game, whenever that is.

Friday, March 3, 2017

Frostgrave Skeletons

With my interest in Frostgrave slowly increasing I decided it was time to get some of the encounter creatures collected and painted.  The fluff in the FG rules says that skeletons are the most common creatures encountered in the city (even though that is not realy reflected in the encounter table).  I decided this was the place to start.  Actually, this is just an excuse.  I have always wanted skeletons and I have never had a reason to do them until now!  These models are built from Games Workshop skeleton bits I have collected up over the years.  They were super fun and easy to build and paint.







I am having a little bit of an OCD attack around this project.  You see I only have 19 skeletons...19...that will not do.  My friend Tim is bringing me the legs and torso for one more skeleton so I will have a more calming number.

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Chancellorsville May 3, 1863

A couple of weekends back my friends and I finally managed to get in the second game of what is turning into a Black Powder Chancellorsville campaign.  More than a year ago (actually nearly 2 years ago) we played the first battle which represented Jackson's flank attack against the Union XI corps on May 2, 1863.  This first game was a huge success and we were all sure we would get this back on the table quickly.  Well, that was not to be.  A few months ago we decided to get serious about putting on another game so we got to work to make it happen.

The Scenario

My vision for this was to continue with the Chancellorsville theme and this time tackle the May 3rd attack by A.P. Hill's division against the 1st Division, XII corps astride the Orange Turnpike.  The Union forces for this battle where better led and better prepared than XI corps had been the day before.

The objective for the Confederates was to breakthrough the Union defenses and capture the point where the Orange Turnpike exited the table.  This would be a long haul for the Confederates and success would hinge on a timely breakthrough.

The Union objectives are to hold as long as possible to allow the rest of the army (not modeled in this game) to withdraw and not be cutoff by the advancing rebels.  In game terms this was determined by preventing a Confederate victory within 10 turns.

Each game turn represents 30 minutes of battle.  With a 10 turn limit the Confederate have 5 hours to complete their breakthrough.

Long view of the table from behind the Union line.

The Rules

For this game we would be using selected special rules from the new Glory, Hallelujah! supplement from Warlord Games.  The conventions we used are as follows:

1. Charges - Charges into HtH must be a specific order to an individual unit.  The charge must happen within a single move distance (12").  No initiative charges are allowed nor brigade order charges.

2. Pass through - We used the unit pass through rules from the GH book to limit the ease of passing through lines.

3. Formations - We only allowed infantry units to be in Line, March Column or Attack Column.  Attack Column does not confer any combat or morale save bonuses.

For this game all woods and trees are for decorative purposes only.  In future games we will be looking at the enhanced rules from GH.

Confederate regiments in the deployment zone.

The Armies

The Confederate force is A.P. Hill's Light Division Commanded by Henry Heth.  The division was actually very large, between 5-6 brigades (the histories I referenced a little vague on the exact composition of the division for the battle,  Most map references indicate 5 brigades but the OOB is 6 with an artillery battalion.).  For this battle we went with 6 brigades split among 4 players.  The Confederate forces were as follows:

A.P. Hill's Division (Commanded by Heth)

Heth's Brigade (Commanded by John M Brokenbrough)
40th Virginia
47th Virginia
55th Virginia

Lane's Brigade (Commanded by James H, Lane)
7th North Carolina
18th North Carolina
28th North Carolina
33rd North Carolina
37th North Carolina

Archer's Brigade (Commanded by James J. Archer)
13th Alabama
1st Tennessee
7th Tennessee
14th Tennessee

Thomas' Brigade (Commanded by Edward L. Thomas)
14th Georgia
35th Georgia
45th Georgia
49th Georgia

McGowan's Brigade (Commanded by Samuel McGowan)
1st South Carolina
1st South Carolina Rifles
12th South Carolina
13th South Carolina
14th South Carolina

Pender's Brigade (Commanded by William D. Pender)
13th North Carolina
16th North Carolina
22nd North Carolina
34th North Carolina
38th North Carolina

Walker's Artillery Battalion
Brunson's Battery
Crenshaw's Battery
Davidson's Battery
McGraw's Battery
Marye's Battery

The artillery was divided up among the brigades leaving one brigade with no battery attached.

A view down the line of the Confederate deployment.

The Union force was considerably smaller but they held the advantage of prepared positions.  The 1st Division, XII Corps (William's Division) would be the adversary in the battle.  Their force consisted of the following units:

1st Division, XII Corps (Commanded by Alpheus Williams)

1st Brigade (Commanded by Joseph F. Knipe)
5th Connecticut
28th New York
46th Pennsylvania
128th Pennsylvania
1st New York Light, Battery K

2nd Brigade (Commanded by Samuel Ross)
20th Connecticut
3rd Maryland
123rd New York
145th New York
1st New York Light, Battery M

3rd Brigade (Commanded by Thomas H, Ruger)
27th Indiana
2nd Massachusetts
13th New Jersey
107th New York
3rd Wisconsin
4th United States, Battery F

All unit quality and special rules, as well as the commander ratings for both sides were determined randomly using some hand charts my friend tom provided.  We have used this random quality for our plast several games and they produce some very interesting units.  In this case the best unit on the field for the Confederates in the actual battle was Pender's Brigade and when I rolled up this unit using our random charts it was by far the best unit.

Union troops defending the works.  Reserve regiments in the upper right.

The Table

This game was played on a 12'x8' table which is the largest table we have used to date.  It did pose some challenges but it was really the right size for the battle (I think the Confederate players would have loved to cut off one or two feet from the length).  The Orange Turnpike rand diagonally across the table.  The Union works ran roughly perpendicular to the road on the other diagonal.  Other than some decorative items the only real terrain on the table is the line of Union defenses.

View of the Union center/left with reserve regiments in the background.

Union troops holding the line.

The surgeon has a lot of work to do.
The Battle

The battles begins at 5:30am (game time).  The Confederates are packed into their deployment zone and fill the line of more than 8' of troops.  The plan is to send troops to attack the Union left and right in order to pin the flanks in  place and then to hit the Union center with overwhelming force.  The plan is sound there are some major challenges that will need to be overcome if it is to work.  The Confederate left wing brigade will need to cross more than 6' of table to make contact with the Union right but the Confederate left has only 2' before contact.  This difference in distance could complicate the plan.

In what turned out to be a fortunate turn of events the Confederate center was extremely slow in launching their attack.  History might say this was all just part of the plan but the reality was that the center brigades were just not motivated to get into the fight.  This slowness did allow for both wings of the Confederate army to make contact with the Union works but they were too far away to really benefit from their heroic actions.  Both Confederate flank actions would be repulsed with huge losses. Pender's Brigade, the best in the Confederate force, made their charge and were pushed back, the brigade broken.  But these sturdy troops would rally only to be battered by Union fire.  Again they would rally.  In the end these fine troops were squandered in a futile attack.

Pender's Brigade charges in!

Lack of coordination between the Confederate brigades slows the attach costing precious time.

After misunderstanding an order a Union regiment leaves the works and charges the enemy.

Union reserves are brought up in support of the center of the line.
After an hour and a half, 7am, McGowan's Brigade would finally make their advance and they moved swiftly.  This rapid and aggressive movement seemed to inspire the rest of the Confederate center to launch the main assault.  The full weight of McGowan's Brigade would strike home not on the Union center but closer to the left where they managed to get 3 regiments in a single assault against a single regiment of Union troops.  This fight would last nearly an hour but they succeeded in breaking the Union troops.  McGowan's Brigade pored through the gap followed closely by troops from Heth's Brigade.
McGowan's Brigade breakthrough but they take a brutal beating and the impetus of the attack is lost.
The Union reserve troops, including some untested raw recruits, were re-positioned to block the advance rebels and pored a murderous fire into them.  This fire proved to be too much for McGowan's Brigade and they broke.

Union reserves have been committed to the center but the breakthrough comes to the Union left.  The quickly shift to stop the Confederate advance.
It was at this point with only one hour left (2 turns game time) to meet the timetable for the attack the Confederates conceded the battle.  The loss of the breakthrough brigade and the lack of supporting units in the breach meant that they could not achieve their objective in time.  Union pulled of a victory by the skin of their teeth.

Final Thoughts

This game was a blast and my be the best game we have played.  We had real concerns about the field works and how to rate them.  For our test game we used a +2 morale save modifier.  This made the Union unkillable.  I thought that dropping this to +1 would make it too easy to make the breakthrough.  Since there is nothing between +1 and +2 I was at a loss.  In the end we decided to randomly determine the morale save for the works and the Union lucked out and got the +2.  Had this roll gone the other way I do not think the Union would have been able to hold on.

I was not real sure about the Glory Hallelujah special rules at first.  This game was our first real use of them and I think the ones we used actually worked great.  Much better, in fact, than I was expecting.  The only one we did not use was the Rebel Yell which seems over the top to me.  I am sure we will try it at some point.

Our next game will take place sometime later this year.  Probably in September or October.  I am planning to run the Salem Church battle from the GH book.  I think we will need more Union troops for this game so expect to see some painting progress this summer.

Saturday, February 4, 2017

US Vehicles for TANKS

Last year I finally obtained a copy of the GF9 TANKS game.  My friend Mike demoed the game for me months earlier but the game was basically unavailable for many months after.  I have been gradually adding models to the three tanks that come in the core game.  Below are the Americans that I have painted and collected so far.  The models are all plastic Battlefront models that are the same sprues as their Flames of War models.


The starter set comes with two M4A3 Sherman tanks.  These kits can be built as either 75mm or 76mm gun turrets.  In fact, there are enough parts to build both turrets so you can switch back and fourth as needed for the game.




I purchased the M36 expansion and was pleasantly surprised to find that the kit will actually build either the M36 or the M10 and there are cards included for both vehicles.  Like the Sherman models there are enough parts to build both turrets allowing you to easily play either tank just by swapping the turrets.  I initially decided to just build the M36 turret as I already have several M10's in my collection but now that I am done I think I will go back ans build the M10 turret so I can keep all my TANKS models in one place to make getting in games easier.

Sunday, January 29, 2017

British Tank Troop - 4th County of London Yeomanry

These are the first completed model for 2017!  Not a very quick start to the year but nice to finally have something to talk about.  This is a troop from the 4th County of London Yeomanry, 7th Armored Division as they would have appeared about a week after the Normandy invasion.  I built and painted these for my friend Tom as part of a trade deal.  These will see the table in a couple of months for our big Point 213 Bolt Action Tank War game.  All the models are plastic kits from Warlord Games. They are VERY nice kits!







Wednesday, January 4, 2017

The Great Carnac - 2017 Game Edition


Time again for the nearly fruitless endeavor of attempting to predict the future of my gaming hobby.  Without further adieu I shall now hold the envelopes to my head and predict their contents.

Flames of War - WW2

For the last several years I have started off my predictions with Flames of War WW2 and this is because every year this is the game I hope to do the most with.  The last few years have seen this game slip in its number one spot but I expect this year will be different.

Starting things off in March of this year will be the new edition.  Fourth edition will start in North Africa and see a return to mid-war.  This is exciting to me as mid-war desert is where my FoW gaming began and it is a popular era with several of my friends.  The introduction of new plastic models in support of the new edition is also very exciting.  I can see this being an area of purchases this year.  Even though I have looking forward to this I am also a bit apprehensive as well.  You see, I really like the current edition of the game and I really feel in only needs a few tweaks but 4th edition will be an almost entire redesign based on the successful Team Yankee rules.  I have not played TY nor read the rules but I know enough to say this is not an evolution of the game as much as a revolution.  I willing to keep an open mind, however, and give this a shot.

My immediate plans for FoW will be to paint my 2500 points (3rd Ed) US Marine force.  I purchased this army last year and have completed all the assembly last year.  I have a couple of friends who will be working on Japanese forces for this theater and I hope to have this on the table this year.  It is possible that we may need to keep using 3rd edition rules as I am not sure how Battlefront will address the Pacific with 4th edition.

This year might also see the completion of one of several other army painting projects I have waiting in the wings - late war Panzer company, LW British Airborne, MW 11th Panzer Co, EW French Infantry.  All of these projects are complete model-wise and are just in need of painting.

Flames of War - Great War

I have really enjoyed playing this period over the last year+.  I want to keep this on the table for 2017 and expand my forces.  I have several units to add to my existing German and British armies.  I have also acquired the US army starter army and would like to paint this up and expand it as well.  Ideally I will at least acquire the models for a French army.  I am a bit concerned with how the new edition of the rules will impact this period.  As of yet BF has not commented on how this will be changed.  I hope this does not mark the end of support for the period from Battlefront.  Either way, I will keep using 3rd edition if I have too.

Flames of War - Fate of a Nation

This period has finally gotten rolling for me and this year I hope to keep the momentum.  My Israeli army will be in need of some serious upgrades this year.  So far my experience has be all bad but I think I just need to work on the army composition a bit.  I would also like to start work on an Egyptian T-55 tank battalion this year.  If I can just acquire the models I will be happy.  Maybe there will even be viable plastic options this year.  Rules-wise, this may be another period that stays at 3rd edition.  No word yet on how this will be addressed with 4th edition's release.  Some say that this may migrate to Team Yankee rules.  Since I am not sure what the differences are, or will be, I can't comment on if this will be a good thing.  Time will tell, I guess.

TANKS

I dabbled in this game a little last year and I think it has lots of potential.  This seems like a great use of my existing 15mm tank and terrain collection.  My friend Mike initially thought this would be a cool set of rules for 28mm tank battles but I kind of poo-poo'ed that idea, but now I think he might be on to something.  All it would take is a double sized movement stick.  Hmm, lots of potential here...

SAGA/Crescent and the Cross

SAGA has been a staple game for a couple of years now and that is not going to change this year.  Our group is looking at running an Age of the Wolf campaign sometime this year.  I have plans to paint a Rus army, an Anglo-Saxon army and to complete my Normans.  For Crescent and the Cross I have an Arab army I would like to get painted and on the table.  Last year I want to get some themed terrain built but that didn't pan out.  I will keep that goal on the list for this year.

Kings of War

This game has been slowly building momentum with my friends and I expect this year to he a big year.  I have been using my old WAB Norman and Saxon armies for KoW as Kingdoms of Men.  It has been working out great and helped motivate me to rebase and otherwise cleanup some old, well used miniatures.  For 2017 I would like to add a purpose built KoW army to my collection.  I have had my eye on Undead for a couple years and this year I would like to at least purchase the models.  I would also like to purchase the historical supplement and maybe try some historical forces.  Expect good things from this game this year.

Black Powder - American Civil War

This year should start strong for BP ACW as we have a large game planned for February.  This will be the second of our Chancellorsville battles.  If things go well I would like to get in another game later in the year.  That one will be Salem Church and will complete a nice Chancellorsville battle trilogy.  As for modeling and painting I have a couple small Union regiments on the paint table now that I need to finish.  I would also like to paint a couple regiments of Union cavalry and the dismounted cavalry.

Black Powder - Napoleonic

This period really have me excited.  Last year we finally got our models on the table for a small teaser game.  It was more an excuse to put the models on the table than a proper game but it was still very inspiring.  This year I would like to paint a couple of Swiss battalions to add to the French collection as well as an entire brigade of Italians.  I think I have enough figures for this and I also have some really sweet flags.  If I can do this I will rate the year a smashing success!  If I get replaced by a figure painting alien I might paint a unit or two of Middle Guard and maybe a unit of Hussars.  I have so much I can do with this.  I would like to get another game on the table for late spring.

Frostgrave

This game had so much local interest and promise when it came out a couple of years ago but it kind of went DOA.  I still hold out hopes that this will get on the table this year.  I have a painted war-band and I have collected all the supplements.  This year I would like to add more encounter models and scenario specific terrain.  One of the problems with this game is the requirement sot have some much extra models and very specific terrain to properly play the game.  This prep work I think has been a big roadblock to getting this going.  If I can play one game I will call this a win.

Infinity

This year my be the "shit or get off the pot" year for this game.  I spent a LOT of money on this last year but only managed one little demo game.  I now have the rules and enough figures for a viable force.  Time to get painting and get playing.  Fortunately there is a large local community and several of my friends are interested.  If this does not get a proper playing as well as a a completed painted force this year than I will rate it as a failure!

Bolt Action

This game has been a pretty steadily played game since its first release 4+ years ago.  With the release of the 2nd Edition rules I expect that interest in this game will pickup.  I have really been getting the itch to return to 28mm WW2 gaming and the new rules should help drive that in 2017.  We are planning a large Tank Battle game for March/April which I expect to really light the fire of interest.  This year I want to finish collecting and paint my 28mm US Marine collection and get in a few games set in the Pacific.  Our large tank game requires a lot of Normandie style terrain and I expect that once that game is over we will play more games set in that theater.  I picked up the Pegasus Bridge set last year and I would like to get that built and painted.  I have put off terrain purchases for 28mm WW2 for a long time and I think this lack of nice terrain has helped keep this game from taking off with the group.  I need to change that this year.

Victory at Sea

Several of my friends and I have been kicking around the idea of doing some WW2 naval gaming, using these rules, for some time.  I really want to do some battles set around Guadalcanal set in 1942.  I think this year I will try and collect some models to start a US fleet.  I think we will use the GHQ 1/2400 scale ships as these are likely the easiest to acquire and the most cost effective in the long run.  Stay tuned on this one.  It is pretty low on the list so I am not sure I will get to it.

Other Stuff

Since I lack a laser focus there is always the possibility that something new and unexpected may pop up over the course of the year.  This might be some thing like Rogue Stars or maybe Sword Point.  It might be something that hasn't been released yet.  There might even be an old game or two that might come back into vogue, like Lord of the Rings, 40K or Necromunda.  Oh, oh! What about Muskets & Tomahawks..?

On the blogging front I really want to get back to regular posts and improving the quality of the posts.  For the last year+ I have done lots of work in progress posts have moved to Twitter.  I need to stop doing that and just post that stuff to the blog.

This year I need to keep making progress on the terrain particularly for 28mm games.  My 15mm WW2 collection is pretty good but most of my 28mm stuff is old and generic.  I need to look at projects for Pacific and projects that can be used for Infinity.  I don't have any specific ideas yet.

Parting Thoughts

This year I need to be more sensitive to just how fortunate I am to be able to spend so much of my time and resources on playing with toy soldiers.  I also need to make sure I show my gratitude to my friends and readers that share the same interests.  I really am a lucky man to be able to pursue my hobby.  I hope everyone has a fun and happy New Year!