Reading other people's blogs helped raise my spirits

Today has been one those days that one is glad to see the back of when it is over.

This morning was spent waiting for an engineer to arrive to fix a faulty clock on the gas boiler that warms our central heating and water. The visit was booked several days ago, and I asked for the 'first call' of the day ... a service that I have to pay extra for.

At 8.00am I was washed, dressed, and waiting for the engineer. I was still waiting at 9.00am, ... at 10.00am, ... and at 11.00am, ... but of the engineer there was no sign. At 12.15pm the engineer finally arrived, looked at the faulty clock, ... and announced that he did not have a replacement with him. I think that he sensed that this was not something that I wanted to hear, and he telephoned other engineers who were in the area until he found one who had a replacement clock. He then went and collected it from his colleague, returned, and fitted it ... and at 2.30pm my wife and I were finally able to leave home in order to visit my father in his care home.

I have not been able to visit my father for some time because the car home he lives in has been ‘off limits’ to visitors due to an outbreak of Norovirus (AKA Winter Vomiting Virus). This is highly contagious and can be passed on by touch. The care home is now ‘clear’ of the virus, and the local doctor has finally been able to call to see my father, who is suffering from several medical conditions in addition to his dementia.

My wife and I spent some time with my father this afternoon, and somewhat longer talking to the care home manager. It appears that my father is going to have to have a number of medical tests in the hope that this will help identify the best way in which to treat the medical conditions that are afflicting him. This means that I will have to ferry him to and from the local hospital so that he can have a chest X-Ray and, depending upon the results of the tests, I might have to repeat this several times if he requires out-patient treatment.

On the way home we got delayed by a traffic jam on the M25 at the Dartford Crossing, and by the time I got home I was feeling depressed, angry, and frustrated. After having a drink I sat down at my computer to catch up on the various blogs that I follow ... and this was a tremendous boost to my flagging morale. In particular Steven (and Spike) Page's 'Halloween Special: All's Wells ...' blog entry on their Adventures in Portable Wargaming blog and the follow-up 'Halloween Special: ... That ends Welles' blog entry on their Old Admirals blog did much to raise my morale, especially as they were using some of my rules to fight their battles.

So the message to all the bloggers whose blogs I follow is a big 'Thank You!'. You have assisted me get through a very trying day and helped raise my spirits no end.

Errors and Omissions!

One of the problems that arises when one writes and checks ones own work is the number of errors and omissions one makes. You read what you THINK that you have written and not what you HAVE written.

The latest draft of my BIG BOARD PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN rules are a case in point. Several people have already queried one or two things that I seem to have inadvertently changed, mistyped, or missed out entirely. I have looked at each of these queries ... and there definitely were some errors and omissions on my part.

I will correct these as soon as I can ... but in the meantime several domestic and family problems have arisen that are going to need my reasonably urgent attention, and this may mean that the time I had hoped to spend undertaking wargame-related activities may be limited for the next week or two.

Latest draft of the Big Board Portable Wargame: Modern rules now available for download

I have finished the latest draft of my BIG BOARD PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN rules (BBPW:M) and they are now available to download here.

The rules are five pages long. The first three pages cover ground combat and the last two pages contain optional ground and air combat rules. The latter are based on my earlier INTERBELLUM rules, but have been modified to make them compatible with the ground combat BBPW:M rules.

All I need to do now is to play-test the rules thoroughly ... but first I have to make or acquire a BIG BOARD!

More about the electronic version of the Portable Wargame

Back in early October I wrote a blog entry about the work Peter Maller had done on an electronic version of my PORTABLE WARGAME.

Well Peter has been in contact again, and has sent me both an image of an electronic version of my recent 'Aggressor in action!' blog entry ...

... and a link to the online electronic version of my rules.

I have tried a few moves out with the latter ... and found that it is both simple to use and works very well indeed.

Slow progress

I had hoped to have finished the next draft of my BIG BOARD PORTABLE WARGAME RULES: MODERN ... but life has been getting in the way today.

My wife wanted to collect the photographs of our most recent cruises from the branch of Boots the Chemist that is located in the local shopping centre. The problem was there were 1,700 of them ... and that was what she had selected from the 6,000+ that we had taken! The reason there were so many was that we had not had any photographs printed for nearly two years ... and pile of unprinted photographs had just grown larger and larger.

Whilst we were out my wife also took the opportunity to talk to our travel agent (whose shop is located next door to Boots) about a special offer we had received from P&O Cruises. We had been offered a ten-day cruise to Belgium, Norway, Denmark, and Germany for less than £50.00 per day each ... and it was very tempting ... so tempting, in fact, that my wife booked us on the cruise. This will be our thirty sixth cruise (!) ... and I already know that she has booked numbers thirty seven and thirty eight.

Our shopping expedition ended in a shop that specialises in selling electronic goods. The retailer was having a pre-Christmas sale, and it so happens that our current flat-screen TV is not working properly (the integral DVD player works when it feels like it ... which is not very often). The cost of the repair was greater than the cost of a newer flat-screen TV, so I ended up carrying a large bag of photographs and a 24" flat-screen TV back to the car. Needless to say I spent a couple of hours setting the latter up whilst my wife began the process of sorting all the photographs out before they are put into their albums.

It is now almost midnight ... and I have managed to do about half an hour of work on my rules. I need to spend at least another hour (or possibly two) on them before the draft is finished. All I can hope is that tomorrow will not be quite so hectic.

PS. My day might have been busy, but my thoughts and prayers go out David Crook (an old wargaming friend and fellow blogger), whose family has had a very traumatic couple of days. If you don't know what I am going on about, read this and this.

British Battleships of World War One

Back in May I bought a copy of R A Burt's BRITISH BATTLESHIPS 1919 - 1945 (Seaforth Publishing [2012] ISBN 978 1 84832 130 4).

At the time that I bought it, I also pre-ordered a copy of the same author's book entitled BRITISH BATTLESHIPS OF WORLD WAR ONE (Seaforth Publishing [2012] ISBN 978 1 84832 147 2) ... and it was delivered today.

The book follows the same pattern as his earlier book (and is, in fact, a revised edition of a book that was originally published in 1986), with individual chapters devoted to the design and service histories of the battleships that were in service with the Royal Navy during the First World War.

I have so far only managed a quick glance through the book, but it appears to be every bit as good as the earlier volume written by Mr Burt.

Nugget 256

The editor of THE NUGGET emailed the latest issue (N256) to me this afternoon, and I have already printed off the original copy that I will take to the printer. I intend to do this early on Monday morning, and I hope to be able to collect it from the printer and post it out to members of Wargame Developments by the end of the week.

This issue is the first of the new subscription year and I have already sent re-subscription forms to all members of Wargame Developments. I note that several regular members have not yet re-subscribed and I would like to take this opportunity to remind them that they can do so via the link on the Wargame Developments website (click here).

Big Battle ... or Big Board?

I have had a suggestion that a better title for my BIG BATTLE PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN rules would be BIG BOARD PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN.

On reflection this actually makes more sense, and henceforth BBPW:M will stand for BIG BOARD PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN.

Encouraging feedback ... generates some more work!

The first draft of my BIG BATTLE PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN rules seems to have generated quite a bit of interest amongst some of my regular blog readers, and the amount of positive feedback I have had is more than a little encouraging. As a result I am now about to start work on an updated draft that will correct some of the 'errors and omissions' (and typographical errors!) that I have found in the original draft.

In addition to these corrections I intend to add some more optional rules and some air support rules. This will turn BBPW:M into a much bigger set of rules than originally intended (i.e. the wargamer's Holy Grail of a set of rules that will fit onto one side of a piece of paper!) but it will hopefully make them a much better set of rules.

The first draft of the Big Battle Portable Wargame: Modern rules is now available!

Despite being very busy, I managed to get a couple of hours work done on the first draft of my BIG BATTLE PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN (BBPW:M) rules ... and they are now available to download here.

They now cover just over three sides of A4 paper, but this is because of the changes I have incorporated. Besides some of the changes I outlined in a previous blog entry, these include:

• A table that shows the Strength Point values allocated to each type of Unit.
• A limitation on the number of Units each side can activate each turn. (This has been included because of feedback I have had from some players who don't like the idea that each side can move as many Units as it likes each turn. Please feel free to ignore it if it is not to your liking, and use the existing mechanism from PW:M.)
• A simplification of the Artillery fire rules. (There is now one system for both direct and indirect fire, and there is no automatic hit when direct Artillery fire takes place. All Artillery fire is subject to a degree of inaccuracy, but direct fire and indirect fire that is being controlled by an Artillery Spotter is more accurate.)
• Most Units now have increased survivability in Close Combat.
• The outcome of hits has been changed so that Units that are hit are not automatically destroyed or forced to retreat. Instead a hit can cause a Unit to lose a Strength Point from its value or a Unit can 'trade off' a retreat against the lose of a Strength Point from its value, thus allowing Units to make a stand and fight to the last bullet ... should they wish to!

BBPW:M is not a perfect set of rules, but users now have the ability to 'go large' if they want to ... and I suspect that some of the changes I have made will end up being incorporated into the next draft of PW:M.

Progress is being made with the Big Battle Portable Wargame: Modern rules

Despite being very busy over the past two days, I have made some progress with drafting the BIG BATTLE PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN rules.

The progress so far includes:

• Mountain Artillery has been added to the weapons that are available.
• The indirect fire has been made less accurate:

• Die score = 5 or 6: Artillery fire lands on the target square.
• Die score = 2 or 4: Artillery fire lands in the square immediately in front of the target square.
• Die score = 1 or 3: Artillery fire lands in the square immediately behind the target square.
• Increase the D6 die score by 2 if an Artillery Spotter or a Commander has a direct line-of-sight to the target square.

• The wording of some of the Artillery Fire rules has been changed to accommodate the fact that some Units can be co-located in squares with other Units.
• All movement distances have been increased by 1 square.
• Transport Units, Artillery Spotters, and Commanders can start or end their moves in the same square as another Unit.
• Infantry Weapons have been renamed Infantry Small Arms.
• Infantry Anti-tank Weapons have been added and they can destroy Tank Units.
• Mortar Units may only fire at targets that are in direct line-of-sight or are in direct line-of-sight from friendly Units that are in orthogonally adjacent squares or from Artillery Spotters or from Commanders.
• The wording of the procedure for non-Artillery Unit fire has been amended to allow for more than one Unit to be in the same target square.

I have yet to re-draft the Close Combat section of the rules, but I am giving serious consideration to the points raised by Ross Mac in his recent comment about the draft of PW:M that I sent him.

With a bit of luck (and a long enough block of spare time) I should finish the first draft of BBPW:M by the weekend ... and then the play-testing can begin!

The Portable Wargame goes large!

The feedback I have had from various blog readers who have used the latest version of the PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN rules has been extremely positive. One of the interesting factors is that most of them are finding the 8 x 8 grid a little too constrictive, and are going for larger grids ... and are modifying the rules to get the most out of the greater available space.

This has led me to the conclusion that there is a need for a 'Big Battle' version of the basic rules ... and developing this concept is where my efforts are going to be directed over the next few days.

Some things are very clear. The new BBPW:M (BIG BATTLE PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN) will be a lot less portable ... but should be a bit more challenging and fun. It will probably include the following changes:

• Unit Attrition (this will probably utilise individual figure removal as used in MEMOIR '44);
• Longer weapon ranges and the ability for all non-Artillery Units to move and fire (again as in MEMOIR '44);
• The introduction of Infantry Anti-tank Weapons;
• Restricting Artillery so that it will only being able to fire indirectly if a friendly Unit has line-of-sight to the target (thus allowing the possible introduction of specialist land or airborne Artillery 'spotters').

This is the way my current thinking is going. BBPW:M will not be a replacement for PW:M; it will be its bigger brother, and will share almost all the same game mechanisms.

Mussolini's Navy

I have been away for the weekend, but before I left on Friday the Post Office delivered a book that I had ordered some time ago. It is MUSSOLINI'S NAVY by Maurizio Brescia.

The book has just been published by Seaforth Publishing (ISBN 978 1 84832 115 1) and is extremely well illustrated. Its chapter headings are:

• The Regia Marina from 1861 to 1939
• Dockyards, Naval Bases, Ports, Shipyards and Coast Defences
• Fleet Organisation and Operations
• Ships in Service 1940-5
• Surface and Underwater Assault Craft
• Naval Aviation
• Italian Camouflage in the Second World War
• Flags
• Uniforms, Ranks, Insignia and Decorations
• 'Who's Who' of the Italian Navy in the Second World War

I am looking forward to spending many hours reading this book. The Italian Navy has always held a fascination for me ... and now I have a single reference book that covers almost everything that I will need to know about it.

Aggressor in action!: a Portable Wargame: Modern play-test

I finally managed to set up a play-test of my PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN rules this afternoon. I used my trusty vinyl chessboard as the basis of my terrain, along with some wooden houses, some hills made of cork, and several trees. For troops I used what was closest to hand, namely some Essex Miniatures 15mm-scale US Army figures and some tanks from the range of 1:100th-scale vehicles produced as part of the Axis & Allies Miniatures range.

As the tanks and figures were all American (I counted the Sherman Firefly as a US tank for the purposes of this battle!) I decided to identify one side as being forces from the Aggressor Army and the other as the Defenders. (N.B. Aggressor [or The Circle Trigonists] was the name given to the OPFOR troops used by the US Army for training purposes during the 1950s and 1960s.)

The Aggressor Army

• 3 x Tank Units (all rated ‘Average’)
• 5 x Infantry Units (all rated ‘Average’)
• 1 x Machine Gun Unit (rated ‘Average’)
• 1 x Self-propelled Heavy Artillery Unit (rated ‘Average’)

The Defender Army

• 1 x Tank Unit (rated ‘Elite’)
• 1 x Infantry Unit (rated ‘Elite’)
• 2 x Machine Gun Units (rated ‘Elite’)

The Starting Positions
The Aggressors lined up on their start-line with their Tank Units (each carrying an Infantry Unit) in the centre, flanked on the right by the Self-propelled Heavy Artillery Unit, an Infantry Unit, and the Machine Gun Unit, and on the left by an Infantry Unit.

With the exception of one Machine Gun Unit, which was deployed forward atop a hill, the Defenders were concealed in the local town.

Turn 1
The Aggressor Artillery fired at the opposing Machine Gun Unit on top of the hill … and missed. The Defenders won the initiative, but chose not to do anything, thus allowing the Aggressors to move forward.

Turn 2
The Aggressor Self-propelled Heavy Artillery Unit fired yet again at the Machine Gun Unit … and missed again … and almost hit some of their own troops! The Aggressors won the initiative, and began by opening fire on the Defender Machine Gun Unit with their left-hand Tank Unit’s gun after the latter had moved forward. This time they were on target, and the Defenders were forced to fall back. The remainder of the Aggressor force moved forward.

The Defenders chose to do nothing, as they were waiting until the Aggressors began to move into the built-up area where their superior numbers would count for less.

Turn 3
The Aggressor commander felt that using his Artillery would endanger his own troops, so he refrained for firing. The Aggressors won the initiative again, and began their advance into the town … and into Close Combat with some of the Defenders.

All the Units involved were hit … but the ‘Elite’ status of the Defenders ensured that the survived the encounter (on e Unit was forced to retreat) whereas the Aggressors lost a Tank Unit and the Infantry Unit they were carrying and the other Tank and Infantry Unit were forced to retreat.

Turn 4
The Aggressor Self-propelled Heavy Artillery Unit fired at the Defender Machine Gun Unit in the town, and destroyed it. The Defenders had the initiative this turn and moved their Units into what they hoped would be more advantageous positions.

The Aggressors responded by dismounting their Tank-borne Infantry Units (one of which was immediately engaged in Close Combat was a Defender Infantry Unit) and moving their other Infantry Units forward.

The Close Combat was drawn, and neither Unit had to retreat.

Turn 5
The Aggressor Self-propelled Heavy Artillery Unit had no obvious targets to fire at so the D6 die was thrown to see which side gained the initiative. The Defender won … and engaged the enemy! The Defender’s Tank Unit moved forward and its fire destroyed the Aggressor Infantry Unit on the left-hand flank

The Defender Machine Gun Unit on the hill now attacked the flank of the left-hand Aggressor Infantry Unit in the centre …

… which it destroyed. It then followed this attack up back attacking the other Aggressor Infantry Unit in the town …

… and destroyed that as well!

Not content, it advanced yet again and forced one of the Aggressor Tank Units to retreat!

At this point the Aggressor Army was down to 50% of its original strength, but before it withdrew it tried to fight back. Its two remaining Tank Units fired at the Aggressor Machine Gun Units that had caused so much trouble, and destroyed it.

The Defenders were now also down to 50% of their original strength, and the battle was drawn … although it could be argued that the Aggressors were likely to gain control of the town if the defenders were not reinforced in the very near future.

Comments
This was very much a ‘spur of the moment’ play-test, but it proved that the rules work and produce reasonable results. This battle took longer to photograph and write about than it took to fight … and I look forward to using these rules again in the near future.

One or two tweaks are needed to clarify some of the rules (for example Infantry cannot move and fire in the same turn but this is not obvious when you read the rules), and the ‘house rule’ that I wanted to try out (the use of Tank Units to carry Infantry Units into battle) seemed to work fine.

Another Portable Wargame enthusiast!

Steven Page recently became a 'convert' to the PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN rules and sent me the following battle report, which he has given me permission to post on my blog.

The battle report is interesting as it pitches a force of Russian tanks ... without any escorting Infantry ... against a partially dug-in and Artillery-heavy German force.

Now read on ...

The Opposing Forces
The Germans, defending the western end of an 8 x 12 squared grid, had a force of 1 Command, 1 Machine Gun, 4 Infantry, 2 Anti-tank Gun, 2 Infantry Gun, and 2 Flak 88s (Heavy Artillery) Units: all were rated ‘Average’, except the 88s, who were rated ‘Poor’, to represent their size and vulnerability. Several of the German Units were entrenched.

The attacking Soviets had 3 T-34s (‘Average’ tank), 7 T-26s (‘Poor’ light tank) a KV-1 (‘Elite’ tank) and a KV-2 (‘Elite’ Heavy Artillery SPG) Units.

The Battle
The first artillery phase saw the 88s force the KV-1 back, and destroy a T-34. The KV-2 retaliated by knocking out the southernmost 88. The Russians began their advance, while the Germans shifted units to cover the gaping hole left by the smoking flak gun.

Turn two saw the artillery continue to do damage, as the 88 destroyed a T-26, (there was no better target in range) and the KV-2 took out an anti tank gun, again on the southern flank. The light tanks now closed the range to the German line with the T-34s and lumbering KV right behind. Again the Germans shifted units to the right flank.

Turn three saw the German Artillery cut a swath through the Russians, with the 88, both Infantry Gun and the remaining Anti-tank Gun Units destroying Russian tanks. The KV-2 knocked out the southern Infantry Gun Unit, leaving the right flank held by Infantry only. The T-26s and T-34s now fired on the entrenched Infantry, forcing some of the troops to fall back. The northern Infantry Gun Unit was also taken out. German Grenadiers began the difficult task of moving into position to Close Assault the Russian armour.

The KV-2 had now closed the range to duel with the remaining 88, and destroyed it, while taking a hit that forced the monster back. The last Anti tank Gun Unit wrecked another T-26 before being knocked out by a T-34. The German Infantry now launched a series of assaults that saw the turn end with three Units of Grenadiers remaining against the KV-2 and a T-34.

The KV-2 began a progression of "fire and fall back", either destroying the enemy or forcing him out of Close Assault range. The T-34 kept the other Germans at bay. The surviving German Units, facing the unstoppable, fell back to their start-line.

- o 0 o -
I think that you will agree that this sounds like it was an exciting little battle, with no obvious forgone conclusion as to who would win.

Steven currently has a blog devoted to his naval wargaming (it is called OLD ADMIRALS and it is well worth visiting just to see the photographs of his home-built model warships!) and he is thinking of starting one devoted to his PORTABLE WARGAME battles.

I hope that he does. In the meantime I must try to set up my own play-test of the PW:M rules as soon as possible!

Warbases ... and hexes

In answer to a query from David Crook as to what the various Warbase bases that I recently bought looked like on Hexon II hexes, I set up the following photograph.

Doing this made me wonder what the bases would look like on some of my other hexed terrain, so I set them up on one of my MEMOIR '44 terrain boards ...

... and then one from Zvezda's ART OF TACTIC: OPERATION BARAROSSA game.

I then began thinking about how some of my 15mm-scale figures would look if they were placed on the Warbase bases ...

... and I must admit that in many ways they looked better than their 20mm-scale 'bigger brothers'.

This exercise has given me some things to think about.

Firstly it is obvious that the four and three-figure Warbase bases will not 'work' on the MEMOIR '44 and ART OF TACTIC: OPERATION BARAROSSA terrain boards, although the two-figure base will.

Secondly the 15mm-scale figures seem to 'look' better on the Warbase bases than the 20mm-scale ones. This may be due to the fact that one expects World War II era infantry to be more spread out, and that 20mm-scale Colonial figures (which one expects to fight much close together) will look just as good on the bases. I don't know yet if my thinking about this is correct or incorrect ... but I hope to find out soon!

Warbases

One of the things that I bought at the recent SELWG show was a number of pre-cut MDF bases from Warbases. The company produces a wide range of different bases, and I was particularly interested in the ones that took figures mounted on one pence pieces.

This morning I had the opportunity to see what the two, three, and four figure bases looked like with some 20mm-scale figures on them ... and I think that look very good indeed!

I can envisage using the four-figure bases for COMMANDS & COLORS-style games (including BATTLE CRY, MEMOIR '44, MEMOIR OF BATTLE, and MEMOIR OF MODERN BATTLE), a slightly larger version of the three and two-figure bases for MEGABLITZ, and any or all three of the base sizes for the PORTABLE WARGAME, depending upon the size of the grid squares/hexes.

I think that by going down this route I will be able to both have my cake and to eat it. In other words I will be able to have single figure bases and multi-figure bases available to me as and when I need then and will no longer need to have several different collections of figures for the same period mounted on single and multi-figure bases.

Soldiers of the Queen (SOTQ): Issue 150

I have been a member of the Victorian Military Society for some years, and I always look forward to receiving my copy of their magazine every quarter.

The most recent copy of SOTQ (Soldiers of the Queen) was delivered yesterday, and I finally managed to read it this morning.

The articles included in this issue are:

• The War Hidden from History: The Anglo-Boer War 1838-1842 by Hugh Rethman
• Rebellion in 'The Great Lone Land': Canada 1855 by Geoffrey A Pocock
• Turkish Contingent uniforms of the Crimean War era by Chris Flaherty
• Octavius Skinner Burton (1823-1895): Cavalry Staff Officer and Police Inspector by Andrew Kilsby
• Sacking in the South African War by Dr Rodney Atwood
• Book Reviews

This was a particularly interesting issue for me. Having just returned from Canada, I found the article about the Riel Rebellion made much more sense to me that it would hitherto. The article about the sackings in the South African War did give me cause to 'harumph' at one stage when the writer described Sir Charles Warren as 'irascible and tactless', as my own researches indicate that this was a attitude that was usually only exposed towards superiors or equals whom he felt were not doing their own jobs very well. That said, Sir Charles did deserve to lose his command after the Battle of Spion Kop, when he failed to take any decisive actions or make timely decisions throughout the day.

I have been to ... SELWG 2012

I have not been to one of the SELWG (South East London Wargames Group) shows for a year or two, but this year I decided to make an effort and go.

The show is held in part of the Sports Hall at the National Sports Centre, Crystal Palace, which is itself located within Crystal Palace Park. The entrance to the park takes you past the platform upon which the Crystal Palace was re-erected in 1854 after it was moved from its original location in Hyde Park.

Today the site is dominated by the main television transmitter for the London area.

The entrance to the Sports Hall is on the First Floor of the building, and is reached by a walkway.

The show is spread over the balcony and concourse ...

... (the latter also being the location of the extremely busy 'bring and buy') ...

... and the main hall.

There were a number of wargames 'on show' at SELWG, and a selection of them are shown below. (I hope that I have identified the groups and battles correctly, but there did seem to be a degree of discontinuity between the layout in the show programme and the actual layout in the hall.)

Society of Ancients: Battle of Trebia (218BC)
This wargame was being overseen by Professor Phil Sabin (of the Department of War Studies at King's College, London, and the author of LOST BATTLES: RECONSTRUCTING THE GREAT CLASHES OF THE ANCIENT WORLD [2008, ISBN 978 0826430151] and SIMULATING WAR: STUDYING CONFLICT THROUGH SIMULATION GAMES [2012, ISBN 978 1441185587]) and used the rules published in his LOST BATTLES book.

Streatham and Tooting Wargamers: High Minarets (1973) Arabs vs. Israelis

South London Warlords: Scarlet Thunder

Southend Wargames Club: Battle of Benfleet

CTK Wargaming: World War I Battle

Loughton Strike Force: The Battle of Aspern-Essling

Deal Wargames Club: Danger in Denmark (1940)

South East Essex Military Society:The Restless Dead

Tunbridge Wells Wargame Society: The Battle of the Yellow Sea

Shepway Wargames Group: Romani ite domum (Romans go home)

North London Wargames Group: The Battle of San Giorgio (1859)

Peter Pig: Patrols in the Sudan

GLC Gamers: The Battle of Sagriajas 1086

Crawley Wargames Club: Brave Little Belgium (1940)

Pike and Shot Society

Maidstone Wargames Society: Operation Deadstick (1944)

Essex Warriors: ACW Battle

Redhill Gamers: First Carlist War

Garage Gamers: Battle of Otford (775)

Scarab Miniatures: Qadesh

Staines Wargames Club: 'Climb Mount Nitakak'

What I like about going to shows like SELWG is the fact that it gives me the opportunity to meet and talk to old and new wargaming friends. This show was no exception, and I managed to have chats with Phil Sabin, Ken Smith, David Crook, Phil Steele, Mark Ashby, Pete Grizzell, Nigel Drury, and Nick Huband.

My acquisitions at SELWG were limited to some bases from Warbase (which I have bought as an experiment) ...

... and a special 'Posties Rejects' dice from The Angry Lurker!

This may have been a small gift ... but being given it really made my day! Many thanks to all of 'Posties Rejects' for the kind thought.