My computer died this morning. Well, to be exact the msgina.dll failed to load. Obviously, the first thing I did was go to Microsoft support and look the problem up. Their nifty 2 part, 3 steps per part solution did not work. Of course. I did a little digging around the web and discovered that this particular dll failure is a near show stopper. Long story short, I've already begun planning on getting a USB Universal Drive Adaptor and delving into a serious data retrieval operation.
Rest assured, this isn't a "the dog ate my book" post. But it is a setback.
I've been doing a bit of a deathbed watch on this particular computer for several months now. It's an old computer and the main reason I liked it was because I'd optimized it for what I needed. It was stable and, until now, reliable. Sure, the software wasn't the latest version. Sure, the video card was beyond obsolete. Sure, there wasn't enough RAM and it would take a long time to do basic tasks, especially if I was working in my Adobe suite. But it was a tank whose very age (I originally bought this computer in 2001 with a couple of guts swap-outs over the years) enabled it to bypass many headaches, especially in regards to OS, program and driver conflicts. Back around the New Year I noticed that the hard drive was becoming really noisy. I took the panel off and gave things a giggle and a rescrew a couple of times but inevitably the wheezing and rattling would return. Things got more worrisome a few weeks back when Service Pack 3 somehow downloaded and wanted to be installed. I was shocked by this as SP3 for Windows XP is hardly new and it was a surprise when it showed up in my automatic update queue. I tried load it but it failed. Every now and then it would try to load again and would fail again. I tried to boot up this morning and this error appeared for the first time. It must have tried to load again (maybe during start up?) because from what Microsoft says on its support page, my problem comes from a failed security update.
This is where we get to the setback. Due to my worries about potential hard drive failure I bought a nice, new, 250GB external hard drive for backing up. Unfortunately, the last backup I did was in mid-May. I've been doing some good work on Volume 2 in the last couple weeks and none of this was included in the mid-May backup. In fact, in one of those synchronicity moments that I've learned I ignore at my peril, before Sharon and I headed out last night for a summer evening stroll and gelato I thought about backing my South American files up but held off. I had been doing some work yesterday and felt good about the admittedly scattershot nature of my progress (I had been alternating between listings for Royalist units in the "Armies and Leaders" section and the 1809-1812 Ecuador listing for the "History" section) and figured I'd continue on today and then let it back up overnight tonight. Oops.
So what that all means is that in the next couple of days I'll either have recovered what I lost or I'll have to go back to the last mid-May version and pick it up again. Not a killer by any stretch but a bit frustrating...just enough that I figured a blog post vent was in order.
In other (good) news on Volume 2 a coworker of mine who does animation, including terrain, is working on doing up a 3D version of the Boyaca battlefield. I'm very appreciative of the attempt and he's spent a lot of time getting detailed USGS data so I'm not saying anything as I don't want him to feel pressured. Nevertheless, I can't wait to see what he comes up with and I'd love to have 3D maps at least for Boyaca, Carabobo, Pichincha and Ayacucho in the next book...if not all the scenarios! Now, I'm not promising that these will end up in the book; it will depend on how good this test comes out, how my friend feels about doing any others and how long it takes to generate each example, but it's just one more way I'm trying to make this book better than the last.
Next, if you're in the central Texas region please support Great Hall Games in Austin. Rob Smith and I have been in contact and he told me that some of his customers have been talking about Liberators and he's looking into the range. Of course, as a business owner it really only makes sense if there's some profit in it for him. Why not put on a game at his store or drop by and say hi. I've had a lot of orders from Texas, it would be nice to develop a base where everyone can gather to enjoy our period. Rob mentioned that there's a convention in November, maybe someone could host an event...
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Scenario Design
Kubla Con has come and gone. 2 weeks ago, in fact. I had a nice time; good to see Bob Burke again and do some recreational gaming. No Liberators but plenty of fun.
As I've mentioned, I've been working on the next book. Today I was shaping up the order of battle for the Battle of Araure in December 1813. OBs are always a nightmare for me; sources conflict and inevitably I have to make some choices that I'm not entirely comfortable with. Here's an extreme example: in the 1st Battle of Carabobo in May 1814 most sources say the Royalists had somewhere between 5,000 and 6,000 men. Unfortunately, you'll never find what we call a true OB. Just 5,000 to 6,000 men. If you dig, you'll find some unit names. The sole source that I have ever found detailing the Royalist army is Mariscal de Campo Juan Manuel Cajigal's memoirs. Cajigal was the Royalist commander at this battle. His OB, which goes to the battalion level, is roughly 2,000 men (depending on how you count the detached cazadore companies, Cajigal is a little unclear on this point). Bolivar's army is usually given as 5,000 men. So what to do? Cajigal could have been understating his strength to explain his defeat, or a later author may have decided to exaggerate the Royalist forces to heighten the importance of Bolivar's victory. Maybe a little of both. All I know is the one primary source I can find, the general who commanded the army in the field, says the Royalists had 2,000 men. Now, if I'm doing "history" I'd be tempted to cite Cajigal's numbers and look at the battle through the prism of a 2-1 Patriot advantage in numbers. If I'm doing a "game" then I should probably ignore Cajigal and assign 5,000 men for an even match. If I present both I'll guarantee I'll get emails for years asking which one is correct (and it'll screw up the page layout of the book).
And so it goes.
The other difficulty, which I have mentioned before, is that specific numbers are extremely difficult to come by for the pre-1819 battles. I've gotten pretty good at culling numbers from my sources but, given the difficulties mentioned above, the cumulative effect are OBs that can be less than certain. With Araure I am lucky that I have a source that gives a very detailed order of battle. It is also one that is different from most others out there. So again, I had to make choices: do I go with the standard, less detailed OBs or do I go with this somewhat unique but very complete OB? In this case I chose the complete order of battle if for no other reason than I would later be able to point to the source and simply say "it's the most complete OB I've ever seen. If you want to use another, feel free".
I've assembled a playtest version of the Battle of Boyaca in August 1819 that I'll be sending out to a couple of people to see how it goes. One element of scenario design that I'm paying a lot more attention to in this book is placement and arrival of each side's army. In the first book I would go with whatever was shown on the map, which is almost always the start of the "main combat". With Boyaca that would've meant a situation where Bolivar had already driven back the Royalist vanguard and achieved a strong "central position" deployment with the Royalists divided in two on opposite flanks. If I did that for the scenario it would make for a very unbalanced game. Instead, I took the clock back an hour to when the two vanguards first began to skirmish and the main armies were just coming on the field. Hopefully the playtests will bear out my intent to deliver a much more balanced game: a meeting engagement where things can play out any number of ways and one side doesn't find itself hamstrung from the first die roll.
I have a couple of days with no work so I hope to knock out one or two more scenarios before the end of the week. I'll keep you posted. As always, comments are welcome!
As I've mentioned, I've been working on the next book. Today I was shaping up the order of battle for the Battle of Araure in December 1813. OBs are always a nightmare for me; sources conflict and inevitably I have to make some choices that I'm not entirely comfortable with. Here's an extreme example: in the 1st Battle of Carabobo in May 1814 most sources say the Royalists had somewhere between 5,000 and 6,000 men. Unfortunately, you'll never find what we call a true OB. Just 5,000 to 6,000 men. If you dig, you'll find some unit names. The sole source that I have ever found detailing the Royalist army is Mariscal de Campo Juan Manuel Cajigal's memoirs. Cajigal was the Royalist commander at this battle. His OB, which goes to the battalion level, is roughly 2,000 men (depending on how you count the detached cazadore companies, Cajigal is a little unclear on this point). Bolivar's army is usually given as 5,000 men. So what to do? Cajigal could have been understating his strength to explain his defeat, or a later author may have decided to exaggerate the Royalist forces to heighten the importance of Bolivar's victory. Maybe a little of both. All I know is the one primary source I can find, the general who commanded the army in the field, says the Royalists had 2,000 men. Now, if I'm doing "history" I'd be tempted to cite Cajigal's numbers and look at the battle through the prism of a 2-1 Patriot advantage in numbers. If I'm doing a "game" then I should probably ignore Cajigal and assign 5,000 men for an even match. If I present both I'll guarantee I'll get emails for years asking which one is correct (and it'll screw up the page layout of the book).
And so it goes.
The other difficulty, which I have mentioned before, is that specific numbers are extremely difficult to come by for the pre-1819 battles. I've gotten pretty good at culling numbers from my sources but, given the difficulties mentioned above, the cumulative effect are OBs that can be less than certain. With Araure I am lucky that I have a source that gives a very detailed order of battle. It is also one that is different from most others out there. So again, I had to make choices: do I go with the standard, less detailed OBs or do I go with this somewhat unique but very complete OB? In this case I chose the complete order of battle if for no other reason than I would later be able to point to the source and simply say "it's the most complete OB I've ever seen. If you want to use another, feel free".
I've assembled a playtest version of the Battle of Boyaca in August 1819 that I'll be sending out to a couple of people to see how it goes. One element of scenario design that I'm paying a lot more attention to in this book is placement and arrival of each side's army. In the first book I would go with whatever was shown on the map, which is almost always the start of the "main combat". With Boyaca that would've meant a situation where Bolivar had already driven back the Royalist vanguard and achieved a strong "central position" deployment with the Royalists divided in two on opposite flanks. If I did that for the scenario it would make for a very unbalanced game. Instead, I took the clock back an hour to when the two vanguards first began to skirmish and the main armies were just coming on the field. Hopefully the playtests will bear out my intent to deliver a much more balanced game: a meeting engagement where things can play out any number of ways and one side doesn't find itself hamstrung from the first die roll.
I have a couple of days with no work so I hope to knock out one or two more scenarios before the end of the week. I'll keep you posted. As always, comments are welcome!
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Kubla Con
I'll be heading up to Kubla Con in San Francisco this weekend. I'll be there the 23rd and 24th. I'm not going to be running any Liberators games; instead I'm looking forward to a couple of days of just drifting from table to table, seeing what other folks are up to and joining in whenever something looks good. My friend Chris will be there running his Ragnarok game for his upcoming Trial By Fire games release so odds are good you'll find me hanging around there.
Things here are progressing at their usual leisurely pace. I've been working on maps for the next book. I'm currently working on the Battle of Boyaca in 1819. I received a lot of feedback regarding the maps in the last book, which I'm trying to incorporate into these maps. Key among those comments were a desire for a consistent terrain legend and clear notation of scale. I'm also trying to improve the look of the maps, given my limited graphic skills.
Just last night I was over at UCLA where I stumbled across a couple of sources for Ecuador; including a 3 part article on the 1828-1829 war between Peru and Gran Colombia that peaked with the Battle of Tarqui and a descirption of the Battle of Miñarica in 1835, which was part of an Ecuadoran civil war. Neither will appear in the upcoming book but both will be presented when I move to the immediate post-Independence wars.
There's been no progress on the rules lately. Simply put, there hasn't been time in my real life schedule. I'm hoping to get some designing done at Kubla Con, or at least some good ideas flowing over a couple of beers! It would also probably be a good time to sit down at the lap top and sort of codify/solidify the notes I have scattered across various binder notebooks and legal pads.
On the miniatures side of things Mike is about to begin work on non-uniformed infantry. I'm still struggling with what to call these guys. My first thought, "Peasant Infantry", has a nice ring but implies a certain levy quality that may or may not apply. "Non-uniformed Infantry" is descriptive but boring as hell. "Civilian Dress Infantry" is close to it but doesn't sound martial enough. Any suggestions? These figures are important for a couple of reasons: they are needed for the upcoming War in the South supplement and they are the first batch of figures for the War in the North book. While I hope to have them sculpted and delivered by end of June I'm planning on doing a coordinated release with the new written material so don't expect to see them on sale immediately. It is nice to be moving into the next phase of the Liberators! project and I'm hoping that progress in each element; books, rules and figures, spurs progress in the others.
Things here are progressing at their usual leisurely pace. I've been working on maps for the next book. I'm currently working on the Battle of Boyaca in 1819. I received a lot of feedback regarding the maps in the last book, which I'm trying to incorporate into these maps. Key among those comments were a desire for a consistent terrain legend and clear notation of scale. I'm also trying to improve the look of the maps, given my limited graphic skills.
Just last night I was over at UCLA where I stumbled across a couple of sources for Ecuador; including a 3 part article on the 1828-1829 war between Peru and Gran Colombia that peaked with the Battle of Tarqui and a descirption of the Battle of Miñarica in 1835, which was part of an Ecuadoran civil war. Neither will appear in the upcoming book but both will be presented when I move to the immediate post-Independence wars.
There's been no progress on the rules lately. Simply put, there hasn't been time in my real life schedule. I'm hoping to get some designing done at Kubla Con, or at least some good ideas flowing over a couple of beers! It would also probably be a good time to sit down at the lap top and sort of codify/solidify the notes I have scattered across various binder notebooks and legal pads.
On the miniatures side of things Mike is about to begin work on non-uniformed infantry. I'm still struggling with what to call these guys. My first thought, "Peasant Infantry", has a nice ring but implies a certain levy quality that may or may not apply. "Non-uniformed Infantry" is descriptive but boring as hell. "Civilian Dress Infantry" is close to it but doesn't sound martial enough. Any suggestions? These figures are important for a couple of reasons: they are needed for the upcoming War in the South supplement and they are the first batch of figures for the War in the North book. While I hope to have them sculpted and delivered by end of June I'm planning on doing a coordinated release with the new written material so don't expect to see them on sale immediately. It is nice to be moving into the next phase of the Liberators! project and I'm hoping that progress in each element; books, rules and figures, spurs progress in the others.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Playtest
Last Friday I conducted the 1st playtest in what *might* turn into the new Liberators! Miniatures rules system. As I mentioned in my last post, I had been talking with my friend Chris of Trial By Fire Games (who'll be running a version of his upcoming Ragnarok game at Kubla Con in San Francisco on May 23...hint, hint) about the first hand accounts I had been reading of the fighting in South America and how to get the same feel in a game. He ran with it, applying some ideas he's been working on for the last several years and we sat down at the kitchen table. While it had all the roughness befitting a 1st playtest, it was also very encouraging. It was simple, elegant and distinctive. I wanted a game with a focus on morale and movement and it was a good start in that direction. I'll keep you posted as things progress.
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Artillery are available. Core Southern range is complete!
It is with great pleasure that I can announce that Argentine, Chilean and Royalist artillery crews are now available for sale at the webstore. I also have 2lbr mountain guns, 4lbr (short barrel), 4lbr (long barrel) and 8lbr field guns and 6lbr howitzers.
With this wave of releases the Southern range of Liberators! Miniatures is officially complete. I set out to release a range of figures that, complemented by figures from AB Miniatures (or here for the USA) and/or Warmodelling/Fantassin, would enable you to play any of the scenarios in the book. That has now gone from dream to reality. A million thanks to Mike Broadbent for sculpting and casting such a superb range of 15/18mm figures. They are, quite simply, some of the best Napoleonic era figures available anywhere. I am also especially grateful to Mark Ryan for his support at a key moment when I was seriously considering ceasing the line. I also want to thank everyone who has bought a pack of LIberators! Miniatures and those stores and distributors who have stocked the range. It really is a proud moment for me and having people enjoy the period as much as I do was the single goal when I started this project way back in 1997.
Having said that, time to tell you the next step. Mike's next batch will be non-uniformed, or "peasant" infantry. I'm really excited about this batch for a couple of reasons. First, they will look like no other figures ever released anywhere. In addition to your basic soldado carrying a musket there will be figures armed with slings, clubs, lances and even bows! Second, these figures will lead us in to the transition from the south into the long awaited northern campaigns...aka, Bolivar!
It's been a long time in coming and, quite frankly, I am years behind the schedule I initially envisioned for this project but even as you read this I am finally organizing the scenarios for "Liberators! Napoleonic Wargaming in South America, Volume 2: The War in the North". At this point the following are in the book: Araure 1813, 1st Battle of Carabobo 1814, 3rd Battle of La Puerta (aka El Semen) 1818, Boyaca 1819, 2nd Carabobo 1821, Bombona 1822, Pichincha 1822 and Ayacucho 1824. There are several others "on the bubble", the most likely of which is Mosquiteros 1813. As I have mentioned repeatedly, the uniform plates are in hand and much of the text is written.but it feels really good to have this piece in transition from the back burner to the front burner.
Of course, if there's one thing you should know about me by now it's that if one project is overwhelming my time and financial resources you can bet I'll pile a couple more projects on top of it! Even as I'm working on The War in the North I'm preparing a second supplement for The War in the South. This supplement focuses on the various campaigns in Alto Peru and Northern Argentina between 1810 and 1821, aka Gauchos! It also addresses some of the fighting in the Banda Oriental, today known as Uruguay. This theater has been overlooked thus far and it's introduction into the mix is long overdue. Finally, it hints at a period that has really caught my eye...and that I want to explore in depth once I finish War in the North...the period of Argentine Civil Wars. The period of the civil wars starts in 1815 and goes all the way into the early 1860s but I'm thinking of focusing on the period from 1820-1840. It's a project for down the road but it's definitely in my thinking.
On the rules front, I'm going down to San Diego on April 17 to try a playtest with my friend Chris. Chris is a lifelong gamer who I've known for almost 20 years. He's starting his own company, called Trial By Fire Games, but has been involved in the Liberators! project from Day 1. I had been doing a lot of testing with another friend and we had made really good progress on shaping the Quick Play rules while at the same time keeping them recognizable to those of you who own the first supplement. However, deep down they weren't satisfying me. They give a good, entertaining game but they weren't capturing what I was reading in the period accounts. Discussing it several times with Chris we've opted to try a radically different approach. The Quick Play rules are based on fire and melee; we're moving to a system based on movement and morale. I'm also looking to heighten the interaction between players. In Quick Play I did this with the opposed rolls. For this new system we're working on using cards or other "side modifiers" that players can use to gain an edge. Finally, I've received numerous emails of people asking for "starter armies" or wondering if there are standard unit sizes, etc. I'm in the rough stages of building army lists so that players can build their own representative armies, complete with variations for Patriot, Royalist or Caudillo (who can be Patriot or Royalist), geographic location of the army and year the army is engaged. Within that list I'm also considering providing specific unit attributes and possible special abilities so that players can modify and customize their forces while still retaining the historical feel of the period. All in all, when a rules set finally does emerge from this process the odds are good that it will look considerably different than the Quick Play rules they started out as. Of course, I will keep the Quick Play rules available because, as I have always said, the idea of Liberators! is that you can use any tactical level rules set you want...my goal is simply to attract your attention to and, hopefully, interest in this fascinating period of history.
With this wave of releases the Southern range of Liberators! Miniatures is officially complete. I set out to release a range of figures that, complemented by figures from AB Miniatures (or here for the USA) and/or Warmodelling/Fantassin, would enable you to play any of the scenarios in the book. That has now gone from dream to reality. A million thanks to Mike Broadbent for sculpting and casting such a superb range of 15/18mm figures. They are, quite simply, some of the best Napoleonic era figures available anywhere. I am also especially grateful to Mark Ryan for his support at a key moment when I was seriously considering ceasing the line. I also want to thank everyone who has bought a pack of LIberators! Miniatures and those stores and distributors who have stocked the range. It really is a proud moment for me and having people enjoy the period as much as I do was the single goal when I started this project way back in 1997.
Having said that, time to tell you the next step. Mike's next batch will be non-uniformed, or "peasant" infantry. I'm really excited about this batch for a couple of reasons. First, they will look like no other figures ever released anywhere. In addition to your basic soldado carrying a musket there will be figures armed with slings, clubs, lances and even bows! Second, these figures will lead us in to the transition from the south into the long awaited northern campaigns...aka, Bolivar!
It's been a long time in coming and, quite frankly, I am years behind the schedule I initially envisioned for this project but even as you read this I am finally organizing the scenarios for "Liberators! Napoleonic Wargaming in South America, Volume 2: The War in the North". At this point the following are in the book: Araure 1813, 1st Battle of Carabobo 1814, 3rd Battle of La Puerta (aka El Semen) 1818, Boyaca 1819, 2nd Carabobo 1821, Bombona 1822, Pichincha 1822 and Ayacucho 1824. There are several others "on the bubble", the most likely of which is Mosquiteros 1813. As I have mentioned repeatedly, the uniform plates are in hand and much of the text is written.but it feels really good to have this piece in transition from the back burner to the front burner.
Of course, if there's one thing you should know about me by now it's that if one project is overwhelming my time and financial resources you can bet I'll pile a couple more projects on top of it! Even as I'm working on The War in the North I'm preparing a second supplement for The War in the South. This supplement focuses on the various campaigns in Alto Peru and Northern Argentina between 1810 and 1821, aka Gauchos! It also addresses some of the fighting in the Banda Oriental, today known as Uruguay. This theater has been overlooked thus far and it's introduction into the mix is long overdue. Finally, it hints at a period that has really caught my eye...and that I want to explore in depth once I finish War in the North...the period of Argentine Civil Wars. The period of the civil wars starts in 1815 and goes all the way into the early 1860s but I'm thinking of focusing on the period from 1820-1840. It's a project for down the road but it's definitely in my thinking.
On the rules front, I'm going down to San Diego on April 17 to try a playtest with my friend Chris. Chris is a lifelong gamer who I've known for almost 20 years. He's starting his own company, called Trial By Fire Games, but has been involved in the Liberators! project from Day 1. I had been doing a lot of testing with another friend and we had made really good progress on shaping the Quick Play rules while at the same time keeping them recognizable to those of you who own the first supplement. However, deep down they weren't satisfying me. They give a good, entertaining game but they weren't capturing what I was reading in the period accounts. Discussing it several times with Chris we've opted to try a radically different approach. The Quick Play rules are based on fire and melee; we're moving to a system based on movement and morale. I'm also looking to heighten the interaction between players. In Quick Play I did this with the opposed rolls. For this new system we're working on using cards or other "side modifiers" that players can use to gain an edge. Finally, I've received numerous emails of people asking for "starter armies" or wondering if there are standard unit sizes, etc. I'm in the rough stages of building army lists so that players can build their own representative armies, complete with variations for Patriot, Royalist or Caudillo (who can be Patriot or Royalist), geographic location of the army and year the army is engaged. Within that list I'm also considering providing specific unit attributes and possible special abilities so that players can modify and customize their forces while still retaining the historical feel of the period. All in all, when a rules set finally does emerge from this process the odds are good that it will look considerably different than the Quick Play rules they started out as. Of course, I will keep the Quick Play rules available because, as I have always said, the idea of Liberators! is that you can use any tactical level rules set you want...my goal is simply to attract your attention to and, hopefully, interest in this fascinating period of history.
Sunday, February 08, 2009
A Quiet Week
This week was spent doing the mundane things that go with Grenadier Productions. I had a nice order from Scale Creep Miniatures, one of the distributors of Liberators! Miniatures as well as a few website orders. You'd be surprised how much time it takes to assemble and package figures! I sorted out some new cardstock for another printing of the package labels and struggled with how to improve the layout of the small label sheet to see if I could cram one more row onto the sheet and also to make the final sheet easier to cut. I did some inventory and managed to squeeze in a little bit of research, going through "Anzoategui: Visiones de la Guerra de Independencia" by Fabio Lozano y Lozano; typically I skim through a book like this looking for info and then I go through it again with a closer eye on sections of interest. In this case it looks like a lot of material lifted from Vicente Lecuna's "Cronica Razonada de las Guerras de Bolivar" but there were a few original bits, especially about the llanero way of fighting. I also sorted through some photos and put together some information for Wargames: Soldiers and Strategy magazine only to find out this morning that Liberators! Miniatures were heavily featured in the news section of the January issue. That's very cool and I encourage everyone to buy the issue...I know I'm going to!
I confess that it's kind of frustrating to be so busy and yet to not be regularly releasing new material for you. I suppose that just comes with the territory of being a sole proprietor business...anyhow, I thought you might find it interesting to see how much activity goes into a quiet week.
I confess that it's kind of frustrating to be so busy and yet to not be regularly releasing new material for you. I suppose that just comes with the territory of being a sole proprietor business...anyhow, I thought you might find it interesting to see how much activity goes into a quiet week.
Monday, February 02, 2009
Southern Range Almost Finished
Since I last wrote the Liberators! Miniatures range has expanded dramatically. Generals, Gaucho cavalry, Infernales, Royalist dragoons in helmets, 3 versions of Universal cavalry and Militia cavalry have all worked their way in to circulation. I'm pleased to announce that Mike is currently sculpting artillery. There will be Royalist, Chilean and Argentinean artillerists to crew at least 4 different calibers of guns, including mountain guns!
I've been doing quite a bit of conceptualizing and play testing on the next generation of the rules. I want them to remain simple and fast but they are definitely moving in the direction of a dedicated rules system designed to address the specific training, tactics and troop types found in South America. I plan to use this blog to keep you informed on where the rules are going and to solicit your feedback and ideas.
Also, look for some articles in upcoming issues of various wargame magazines. I'm doing an article on the Battle of Gavilan for Historical Miniature Gamer and I'm going to put another article together for Soldiers and Strategy. If I can stay disciplined I might just put one or two in the queue to be ready upon request from anyone else.
As always, feel free to write or comment, either here or at the Yahoo! Group
I've been doing quite a bit of conceptualizing and play testing on the next generation of the rules. I want them to remain simple and fast but they are definitely moving in the direction of a dedicated rules system designed to address the specific training, tactics and troop types found in South America. I plan to use this blog to keep you informed on where the rules are going and to solicit your feedback and ideas.
Also, look for some articles in upcoming issues of various wargame magazines. I'm doing an article on the Battle of Gavilan for Historical Miniature Gamer and I'm going to put another article together for Soldiers and Strategy. If I can stay disciplined I might just put one or two in the queue to be ready upon request from anyone else.
As always, feel free to write or comment, either here or at the Yahoo! Group
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
