Desired scans : Rank and File supplements Harpoon 3 & 4 supplements Force on Force supplements Hind Commander At Close Quarters War and Conquest Modern Spearhead
Isaiah Baker
August the 30th in military history:
1282 – Peter III of Aragon lands at Trapani to intervene in the War of the Sicilian Vespers. 1363 – The five-week Battle of Lake Poyang begins, in which the forces of two Chinese rebel leaders (Chen Youliang and Zhu Yuanzhang) meet to decide who will supplant the Yuan dynasty. 1799 – The entire Dutch fleet is captured by British forces during the War of the Second Coalition. 1813 – First Battle of Kulm: French forces are defeated by an Austrian-Prussian-Russian alliance. 1813 – Creek War: Fort Mims massacre: Creek "Red Sticks" kill over 500 settlers (including over 250 armed militia) in Fort Mims, north of Mobile, Alabama. 1862 – American Civil War: Battle of Richmond: Confederates under Edmund Kirby Smith rout Union forces under General Horatio Wright. 1896 – Philippine Revolution: After Spanish victory in the Battle of San Juan del Monte, eight provinces in the Philippines are declared under martial law by the Spanish Governor-General Ramón Blanco y Erenas. 1914 – World War I: Germans defeat the Russians in the Battle of Tannenberg. 1917 – Vietnamese prison guards led by Trịnh Văn Cấn mutiny at the Thái Nguyên penitentiary against local French authority. 1918 – Fanni Kaplan shoots and seriously injures Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin, which along with the assassination of Bolshevik senior official Moisei Uritsky days earlier, prompts the decree for Red Terror. 1922 – Battle of Dumlupınar: The final battle in the Greco-Turkish War ("Turkish War of Independence"). 1942 – World War II: The Battle of Alam el Halfa begins. 1945 – Hong Kong is liberated from Japan by British Armed Forces. 1945 – The Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, General Douglas MacArthur lands at Atsugi Air Force Base. 1945 – The Allied Control Council, governing Germany after World War II, comes into being. 1963 – The Moscow–Washington hotline between the leaders of the U.S.A. and the USSR goes into operation.
Jacob Long
It is 654 years since the start of the battle of Lake Poyang, one of the final battles fought in the fall of China's Mongol-led Yuan Dynasty. There were at this time a number of rebel groups who sought to topple the reigning dynasty; the three most powerful were the Ming, the Han, and the Wu. The relieving navy of the Ming, under Zhu Yuanzhang, met the Nanchang-besieging Han navy on Lake Poyang, China's largest freshwater lake.
Though at a numerical disadvantage, the more nimble Ming fleet, and their tactic of employing fire ships to attack, achieved the upper hand over the heavier 'tower ships' of the Han, destroying their armada. The ensuing Ming victory here ensured Zhu's ascending the throne as Hongwu Emperor when the Yuan Dynasty finally fell five years later.
The battle began as an amphibious siege by the Han against the Ming-held town of Nanchang. The city defended itself well and resisted. A Ming messenger managed to break through the Han fleet's blockade, getting out a call for help to Zhu Yuanzhang. The majority of the Ming forces, in particular its ships, were occupied at the time in fighting the Wu Kingdom elsewhere, but Zhu nevertheless arrived with what force he could muster. These ships were, on average, smaller than the Han ships, which meant a disadvantage in size and strength, but also great advantages in speed, maneuverability, and viability in shallow waters. The summer sun had already caused the lake's water level to drop considerably, to the Ming's advantage. They sailed for nine days from Zhu's capital Nanjing to Nanchang.
By the time the Ming fleet arrived, Chen Youliang, the Han commander, realised that Nanchang was not going to surrender soon, and so he redirected his focus on defeating the arriving Ming fleet. Knowing that his own fleet was suited more for siege than for naval combat, he hoped to finish the battle quickly, before the water levels sank any further.
Cooper Jones
The Ming fleet divided itself into eleven squadrons, with the heavier ships at the centre; a number of their warriors disembarked to bolster the Nanchang garrison. Following the Ming arrival, both fleets dropped anchor for the night. The fighting commenced the following morning, on 30 August.
The core of the Ming fleet made a frontal assault on the Han ships, while some of the other squadrons moved to positions from which they could launch trebuchets, fire ships, and other explosives and the like. Though they managed to set more than twenty Han ships alight, their own flagship was set aflame by the Han. Zhu rushed to extinguish the flames as the Han fleet concentrated all their attacks on his ship; the situation quickly grew worse for Zhu as the ship hit a sandbar and got stuck. The Han circled around and continued to attack with arrows and fire. However, the Ming fleet quickly came to the rescue of their commander, the waves created by their very movement shaking the flagship free.
The lighter, smaller Ming ships became grounded several times more during the battle, due to their attempts to encircle the Han ships and to board their enemies' ships; the Han intentionally kept to the deeper waters and made no attempts of boarding attacks.
That night the Ming ships were sent downstream a short way for repairs and regrouping. Zhu's plan had failed, but the battle was not over yet. The following day involved the creation and launching of fire ships by the Ming. Small rafts and fishing boats were loaded up with bales of straw and gunpowder, set aflame, and launched toward the enemy fleet. Dummies with armour and weapons were placed on the fireships as well, to aid in confusing and tricking the enemy. Due to a favourable wind, and the tight formation of the Han fleet, the fire ships were very successful, and many Han ships were either destroyed or suffered extensive damage.
David Martin
After spending more than a full day repairing their ships, both fleets returned to battle two days later on 2 September. Seeing the consequences of a tight formation, Chen Youliang tried a more open formation. But this only allowed the Ming to execute their originally-intended grappling and boarding attacks.
News came to Zhu around this time that his ground forces had relieved Nanchang from the siege. The Ming fleet began to retreat to the mouths of the Yangzi and Gan Rivers, their defeat of the Han being all but complete. However, rather than retreating entirely, the Ming fleet remained for a month, blockading and watching the Han fleet. Neither commander wanted a war of attrition, and so there was little or no combat action for a month. On 4 October the final elements of the battle played out. The Ming employed fire ships once again, and at one point in the conflict Chen Youliang suffered an arrow through his skull and died. The Han surrendered shortly afterwards.
Medieval Chinese warfare usually recieves little attention from Western gamers, but this massive scrap is just begging to be played. DBM could work; Book IV has Han and Ming lists, with extensive naval options; they can take up to six tower ships as Irregular Ships (Superior) with a full complement of troops. Alternately appropriate medieval naval rules would do, but I doubt there's a set covering the variety offered by this. There is also the weirdness of fighting on a lake as well; pretty rare historically, it would making manevoure even more important than ever.
>Sadly true that. I think it's due in part to a lack of unbiased information on both sides. Osprey is a hell of a lot worse when it comes to spreading misinformation,which unfortunately seeps its way into miniatures and rule sets.
there are plenty of games which specifically place smoke markers to signify units which have fired, so I think it's entirely possible that you might find 2 players willing to do such a thing.
Lake Poyang was at times as large as 6000 square kilometer (although now it is only half as large as it used to be), almost as large as a small sea.
Robert Cruz
To the user who uploaded Battlefield Evolution to the folder - thanks a lot mate!
And on a slightly relevant topic: anyone played these rules back in the day? I seem to stumble upon the good Mongoose rules some 10 years after their glory days. Also, if anyone happens to have the expansions, please upload them somewhere.
Henry Green
New book for Skirmish Sangin focusing on special forces stuff. Not yet ready for the exact details but it's on the larger side for supplements.
Right now its a four way tie. If it stays that way till Friday, then we might have a runoff. So if you haven't voted but care, then vote!
Isaiah Gomez
damn, she's cute
Justin Kelly
Osprey blows dead bears when it come to historical accuracy, but what I referring to is the fact that a lot Chinese historical records haven't been systematically studied like elsewhere. That means it's either accepted at face value or dismissed as fables/propaganda.
It would be like never having checked Herodotus against various other sources, archeological finds, etc. and then either dismissing his work entirely or credulously accepting it.
Isaac Miller
I hope "second rate troops" win, I'd have to purchase things otherwise.
Alexander Jones
What do yall think of Chain of Command?
Noah Williams
Remember to Pokemon Go to the polls lads
Adam Brooks
Thanks for the Osprey
Lincoln Lee
BRDM
Samuel Long
thank you
Isaiah Rivera
>but what I referring to is the fact that a lot Chinese historical records haven't been systematically studied like elsewhere. This is categorically false,there are plenty of books that cross check archaeological works(accounting records,slips) with secondary compilations written by court bureaucrats.
Using Han ferrous metallurgy as an example,archaeologists have proven the number of excavated iron offices(90+) exceeds the number given from the Book of Han(49).
The main issue is that primary/secondary Chinese sources remain inaccessible to a Western audience with the piss poor Osprey's acting as a conduit.
>That means it's either accepted at face value or dismissed as fables/propaganda. The only problem you run into are taking numbers at face value,later periods have the luxury of determining whether these numbers were inflated for a political smear. The Book of Ming's claimed that the Ming lost hundreds of thousands of men in the Imjin War vs what really transpired in the Summary of the restitution of Korea by the Military Commissioner.
"Qin had a million man army" was viewed as rhetorical devices though some people do take Sima Qian's words for granted. There is alot of indirect evidence that the Chinese mustered far more men than their contemporaries i.e. universal conscription,high population derived from censuses,ironworks monopoly,textual evidence of military inventories,remnants of extremely wide roads etc.
John Martinez
Moving on from the veracity of ancient Chinese sources,there just isn't a following as let's say Sengoku period Japanese.
There are very few miniature ranges that stay faithful to the source material such as John Jenkin's oop Qin Chinese,Khurasan's 15mm Chinese from various eras and some of Foundry's 28mm Imperial Chinese.
You are out of luck if you are seeking historically accurate miniatures for 28mm post-Tang to early Qing.
Ian Phillips
OT-65
Easton Jackson
>The main issue is that primary/secondary Chinese sources remain inaccessible to a Western audience with the piss poor Osprey's acting as a conduit. And the fact that China is so large that information gained from even serious study may only reflect only that particular area instead of China as a whole.
And sometimes historians seem to prefer records from other side as opposed to Chinese sources.
eg1. studies of Qing-Burmese war almost refer Burmese records exclusively (or dismissing Qing records)
eg2. Claimed Vietnamese victory over the Mongols (Mongol record mentions no such thing. More importantly, contemporary Chinese/Song Dynasty, which were hostile to the Mongol, ALSO didn't record such event, even though they had all the reasons to record and spread the news of Mongol defeat)
Brandon Johnson
mommy
Andrew Martin
>Claimed Vietnamese victory over the Mongols Specifically, first Mongol invasion, not the other two.
Landon Sanchez
>And the fact that China is so large that information gained from even serious study may only reflect only that particular area instead of China as a whole. Maybe if your only sources of information are drawn from local gazetteers,the 24 histories are biased in the sense that they are compiled by court historians/private individuals after the fall of the dynasty.
This doesn't mean they are without merit or that the Chinese are unable to contextualize,criticize or compare their historical texts which other forms of evidence.
>And sometimes historians seem to prefer records from other side as opposed to Chinese sources. If the historian favors a non-Chinese source for a specific time period then that's his own business.
There is nothing special about Chinese sources,they have their own interpretations and bias. The veracity of a single piece of Chinese literature should reflect on itself not Chinese history as a whole.
You can see this during the Imjin War where the Chinese/Koreans/Japanese exaggerate the numerical disparity of the foes as well as the number of enemy casualties.
Zachary Torres
>OT-65 Also known as the D-FUG!
Doughnut Dollies must have been a very welcome sight out in the boonies Given the popularity of Vietnam wargaming you'd think someone did a mini of one, but I can't find any
Liam Scott
>You can see this during the Imjin War where the Chinese/Koreans/Japanese exaggerate the numerical disparity of the foes as well as the number of enemy casualties.
Yeah it's really not fucking helpful when *every god damn side involved* does it. It is however goddamn funny.
Carter Wilson
>Yeah it's really not fucking helpful when *every god damn side involved* does it. It is however goddamn funny. It's human nature,Ming generals exaggerated enemy casualties to avoid getting lambasted while they had trouble figuring out the total number of Japanese forces due to the incompetence of the Korean court.
The Japanese took Shen Weijing's bluffs seriously and the clan records wanted to show off their martial prowess i.e. 100,000 Ming cavalry in the Battle of Byeokjegwan when there was only 5,000.
John James
That's a nice mini, is that historically accurate for Imjin War?
Ryder Sanders
schwerpunkt scenarios. really rough scenarios. designed by a group of guys who are hyper aggressive in their game play. scenarios almost always require quick blitzkrieg tactics and keep moving on. no room for delays.
irritating as i tend to be a bit more cautious of a player.
Carter Jenkins
>That's a nice mini, is that historically accurate for Imjin War? Yeah,it's a close enough proxy for border cavalry forces to the Imjin War,though this particular example is from the northwestern garrisons. The miniature is based on a victory parade scroll made around 1575(17 year gap). bennosfiguresforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=18191&start=140
Apart from brigandine,cotton,mail and lamellar was also used to some extent.
Cooper Baker
Got any pics of reasonably accurate infantry?
Grayson Wood
>If the historian favors a non-Chinese source for a specific time period then that's his own business. It will be a problem if said historian's view become accepted by the majority + common folk, which, given that systematic studies on China history are few enough as it is, tend to paint an incredibly skewed picture and usually unfounded bad rep on the country's past.
Juan Campbell
Speaking of Sengoku Japan while there are good miniatures and skirmish rulesets are there any good modern big battle rules?
I've bought quite a few and they fall into two groups. Generic rulesets which cover the whole world, everyone fights the same and the naginata is probably treated as a halberd. The second are more specific Sengoku rulesets like Killer Katana, Taiko and Battles in the Age of War. They do a better job of capturing trappings of Sengoku warfare but still don't do the Sonae, a mixed formation containing ranged infantry, melee infantry and cavalry, well or at all which really should be the building block unit for any ruleset trying to cover large battles.
I can understand that it is hard finding information on Sengoku tactics and formation while there is a lot of good information on weapons and armour. In the end it probably comes down to trusting Turnball vs random people on the internet who claim to have read Japanese books. Hopefully Nate from the Samurai Archives will succeed as a historian and write some good accessible books on the subject.
Hunter Gonzalez
>Turnball Is Stephen Turnbull.
Leo Allen
At 4PM UST, voting is going to be ending. If you haven't voted and want to participate, vote now!
Asher Perry
>Got any pics of reasonably accurate infantry? Depends on where the contingent originated,the Ming are fairly diverse on this end. Infantry from the border garrisons would look like their mounted counterparts save for the armguards and maybe a different helmet decor such as a horsehair tassel(probably dependent on the garrison).
The figure I've attached has armor based on the capital garrisons which contain ceremonial elements not found on regular troops.
Keeping this in mind,a battlefield version would often be left undyed(yellow),sleeveless,and replace the sash with a belt(or a cummerbund and a belt) while the multicolored bottom trim wouldn't be used.
Poorer soldiers would use puttees and shoes while some helmets lack aventails altogether or have armored aventails like the cavalry figure. Auxiliary equipment such as scarves,Song style "waist cushions" and circular/square cloth back patches would depend on personal taste/local regulations.
>It will be a problem if said historian's view become accepted by the majority + common folk This would depend on whether readers accept Western historians as the leading authority.
>given that systematic studies on China history are few enough as it is, tend to paint an incredibly skewed picture and usually unfounded bad rep on the country's past. It could be an issue if your only exposure to Chinese primary sources are from Western critiques of faulty works such as the Book of Yuan(which is also criticized by Chinese scholars).
Personally,I don't have any difficulty reading modern Chinese publications that deal with historical texts so this is a non issue. I have more of an problem with historical anachronisms such as "ethnicity" or projecting a unified "Chinese" identity on past polities.
Ethan Peterson
Sorry. I forgot to attach the relevant image.
>Speaking of Sengoku Japan while there are good miniatures and skirmish rulesets are there any good modern big battle rules? I haven't really studied the period well enough to comment on Sengoku armaments or tactics.
One thing I do know is that I have yet to see a ruleset treat Japanese "cavalry" as mounted infantry rather than shock cavalry.
Turnbull doesn't exactly have the best scholarly reputation but he's the next best thing for someone like me who can't read Japanese.
Mason Johnson
Good for you that read Chinese/Korean, for me the only source for...lets say Imjin war, are Hawley and Swope, and even I can see both are incredibly flawed.
>This would depend on whether readers accept Western historians as the leading authority. My impression is that many non-Western studies tend to be treated as biased/propagandic/patriotic (especially if came out from China) and thus dismissed out of hand.
Asher Gonzalez
>Good for you that read Chinese/Korean, for me the only source for...lets say Imjin war Unfortunately,you probably have to master all three languages if you want a true understanding of the conflict. Classical Chinese at least gets you past Ming/Joseon primary sources.
>lets say Imjin war, are Hawley and Swope, and even I can see both are incredibly flawed. I haven't read Hawley's work in its entirety but like Turnbull he lacks the linguistic mastery to decipher the primary sources. Swope can read the primary source material but he seems to fudge basic facts. ijkh.khistory.org/upload/pdf/18-2-03 Nam-lin_Hur.pdf
>My impression is that many non-Western studies tend to be treated as biased/propagandic/patriotic (especially if came out from China) and thus dismissed out of hand. From what I take of it, even if the scholarly work is overtly political you can still make your own conclusions based on hard data.
As for negative attitudes towards Chinese scholarship,I feel this is more based on repudiating its current leadership rather than tangible means.
Requesting PDF scans for SPI's Universe Gamesmaster's Screen, Company War and Psycho Raiders.
Adrian Butler
Interesting!
Jayden Peterson
Thank-you, user!
Jaxson Nelson
>are there any good modern big battle rules?
I was gonna say Banzai Age of the country at war 2nd edition but for some reason it has disappeared off of wargames vault. Closest thing I can find that might explain it is the dev is working on the 3rd edition but that was a while back. The reference sheets are still up at least. No idea if there's a copy in the folders. Either way that game as all about the mixed formations and battles.
For now, Impetus or Basic Impetus 2nd edition would be the go to, though plain old Impetus is due to have it's second edition at some point soon too...
Carson Stewart
>One thing I do know is that I have yet to see a ruleset treat Japanese "cavalry" as mounted infantry rather than shock cavalry
See as Banzai~ actually does that.
Ian Evans
I had a look at the reference sheet for Banzai. Since it listed individual weapon types unless there is a specific mixed formation I'm missing out on it's no quite what I'm looking for.
I would like the sonae to be my smallest unit. If the rules are breaking it down into weapon specific units then it's too small scale for me.
Julian Cruz
Ah so you want blob warfare. You'll probably need to go to the boardgame end of things then for that.
William Jackson
Charlie's arsenal has grown as I finished another PT-76 tank, which will serve Ivan just as nicely.
Gavin Ortiz
>of excavated iron offices(90+) exceeds the number given from the Book of Han(49). What are iron offices and what does it mean that there were more then the Book of Han mentioned?
It sounds interesting but my google-fu is weak.
Camden Sanchez
Vietnam? Do you have infantry pics?
Oliver Brooks
No, or at least not yet. I want to finish them entirely before taking pics. I've made extensive conversions with the old Esci plastics.
Jeremiah Gomez
Can someone explain to me the reasoning behind putting (what I assume to be) sword infantry in front of a wall of spears? Doesn't that neglect their advantage a little bit?
Carter Campbell
I don't know what it means by standard unit but given sword only units are not really a thing, especially with the lack of shields going on, I don't think they're that.
Perhaps it's standard as in banner units? There's a specific flags unit between them so maybe it's the guards. Fucked if I can confirm anything though.
Wyatt Rivera
>sword infantry
Come on, user. They're standard bearers. The picture is that of a single formation/century/squad. You get the nobles (samurai) standing in the back around the head honcho, the ashigaru troops they levied from their lands are then the soldiers in the front and the lucky ones get to manage the supplies in the back of the formation.
These formations then form an army like so.
Carson Flores
That looks great user, what scale?
Jacob Richardson
1:72
Joseph Morales
Please user, do you have: About Bonaparte (Caliver) Scum of the Earth (Nordic Weasel)
Nathan Barnes
Who/what are the golden mane masked folk in the red? Looks neat.
Angel Sanders
Want to find some rules represent Air-ground coordination in WW2
every scale is good
just checked FoW rule, while it's aircraft often have infinite movement range due to the scale it's not what I want tho
want to control the planes more detailed with some ground unit in the game
Jose Phillips
Iroquois Ritualists in Corn Husk masks.
Connor Lopez
>false face guardians >husk face society Neat.
Eli Myers
The natives are very neat, friend.
Isaac Ross
Any recommendations for decent historical reading on iroquois/huron conflict? I'm browsing the ospreys from op but I'm under the impression osprey isn't very reliable.
John Adams
New Skirmish Sangin supplement was announced. Focusing on tier 0 super secret operators in operational operations. Written by our very own chargeblog guy.
Kayden Thompson
I tried to push for it to be called Skirmish Sangin: Operators Operating Operationally but it got turned down :v
The writing is done, now waiting on the graphics side. Excited to see what everyone thinks of it once it is out
Christopher Gray
Damn shame, looking forward to the release.
Cooper Flores
chargeblog guy is a fa/tg/uy? I never knew.
Brandon Reyes
I'm just very quiet and enjoy lurking. Don't really want to be "that guy who just posts to link his blog". Always enjoy it when other people post up my stuff.
Meanwhile on the blog the train never stops
Jose Russell
>Any recommendations for decent historical reading on iroquois/huron conflict? I'm browsing the ospreys from op but I'm under the impression osprey isn't very reliable.
Start your searches with the phrase "mourning wars" and avoid Osprey like an AIDS riddled whore.
Landon Thomas
What the hell did I just watch?
Connor Miller
>I'm browsing the ospreys from op but I'm under the impression osprey isn't very reliable. They're fine for painting your army mens but don't going basing your PhD on it or anything
Grayson Lopez
Tactics
Luis Ramirez
Faggotry.
Brayden Scott
>switch to your sidearm, it's faster than reloading.webm
Brody Myers
Perhaps Lacquered Coffins? it's mostly aircraft but involves ground targets with AAA defense. Its all about the interaction of air and ground - with Stukas being just as important and Bf 109s. Its an air combat game though, so the ground forces don't actually move or do anything beside getting bombed and attacking air targets with AAA.
The problem with air + ground forces both being on the same table is you have some movement scale issues. Games tend to focus on either controlling land or air, with the non-focused element more abstracted or simplified.
Nathaniel Sullivan
The last thing a terrorist ever sees.
Kayden King
Random yes, but I found it going through my ASL stuff, so I set it free.
Any other hex & counter lovers out there?
Leo Campbell
The shield looks very Korean to me, and the scabbard looks like Qing period design, not Ming.
And I am not sure on the veracity on the spear+ shield loadout.
Josiah Mitchell
>The shield looks very Korean to me I agree,Lirui probably based it on extant examples from a Korean musuem. The Ming inherited Song cavalry shields and rattan shields could be painted over as well.
> and the scabbard looks like Qing period design, not Ming. I haven't really seen many extant Ming scabbards so I'll defer to you on this one. The image attached is from an early Ming waist worn saber.
>And I am not sure on the veracity on the spear+ shield loadout. Definitely ahistorical,though some polearms were paired with an Ai Pai. I used his example mainly to show how a kettle helmet was paired with body armor. greatmingmilitary.blogspot.com/2015/04/ai-pai.html
