The Relief of Fort Ookinall - A TMWWBK solo campaign

[TWD]

To pass the tme I've started a short solo campaign in the furtest northest westest of the NWF, the province of Ilkestaan.
Where Captain Mickelwhite must fight off the wily Al-Bhabij to relive the remote garrison at Ookinall.







Words and more pictures here:
https://tomstoysoldiers.blogspot.com/2019/03/the-relief-of-fort-ookinall-1.html

[armchairgeneral]

A nice looking game and a fun read 

[FifteensAway]

Looks like fun. 

And - and nothing against your work at all, of course - but I finally realized why I've never been too fond of those 'sabot' bases, du'uh!, they look like portable crater fields.   

Will be back later to read your full post on the blog.  Love the concept.

[TWD]

Yes the movement trays need a little highlighting and some tufts adding. And a terrain cloth more in keeping with mountainous NWF. Perhaps then they'll blend in a little better.
I also don't like the big ones once the casualties start to pile up so I think more groups of four so they leave the board more discretely

[guitarheroandy]

Stirring stuff!

[FifteensAway]

TWD - it isn't your presentation of the bases that was the issue, it was me realizing why I've never cared for them from the first time I saw them.  Finally figured out the why is all.  Now think how long they've been around and I finally figured it out...

[TWD]

I understood you, no offence taken
I think I was agreeing in part - the big bases with lots of empty holes don't look great (a bit like just outside Ypres in 1917!).
On the other hand I'm far too lazy to move even just 12 models as individuals

[Munindk]

A compromise could be "based" bases without models on them to plug the holes.
Or perhaps casualties on bases?

[Kitsune]

How did you find the solo play rules? I’ve considering something myself, but with a drastically reduced amount of models per side

[italwars]

I understood you, no offence taken
I think I was agreeing in part - the big bases with lots of empty holes don't look great (a bit like just outside Ypres in 1917!).
On the other hand I'm far too lazy to move even just 12 models as individuals

In fact not only your minis are really well painted but you ve done the best possible job on the multi base to let them blend with the landscape but ...sorry..it doesn’t work at all..it spoils the very essence of tabletop game..which is a sort of active diorama...with that fashion of moving trails and even those ugly MDF bases we risk to transform a tabletop wargame in a board game ..I still use cardboard heavily flocked..in some few cases , for tribesmen, a tray made out of CD..but by TSATF rules allow me mass formations of 20 castings that almost shade the thin CD surface

[TWD]

In fact not only your minis are really well painted but you ve done the best possible job on the multi base to let them blend with the landscape but ...sorry..it doesn’t work at all..it spoils the very essence of tabletop game..which is a sort of active diorama...with that fashion of moving trails and even those ugly MDF bases we risk to transform a tabletop wargame in a board game ..I still use cardboard heavily flocked..in some few cases , for tribesmen, a tray made out of CD..but by TSATF rules allow me mass formations of 20 castings that almost shade the thin CD surface

I disagree that "the essence of a tabletop game is an active diorama". That might be how you play, it isn't how I play.
Movement trays are a compromise between simplicity of moving troops and aesthetics.
I'm happy with that compromise.

[FifteensAway]

I strive as much as I can within my talent level for the best diorama game I can achieve - and then adjust to make it as playable as possible.  So, I'd say both of the above approaches are valid.  And, for me, that means simple, fast rules! 

Also, I don't object to movement trays in general but I do think they should be blended with the terrain as best as is possible but there is always the challenge of a great table has varied terrain and every base can't blend with every bit of terrain. 

One of my personal pet peeves are thick bases.  Don't like them intensely but some people swear by them.  To each our own.  Or Bondily, live and let die (the miniatures, folks, just the miniatures - until the next game, of course!) 

[Antonio J Carrasco]

Brilliant game! And the bat-rep is very entertaining.

May I ask how do you intend to translate the casualties in the game into the campaign system? Will you do roll for walking wounded/grievously wounded/killed? Or every lost figure will become a casualty?

PS: By the way, in my opinion sabot bases are a great compromise; particularly for colonial games, where you will need your figures to double as skirmishers and formed troops. Either you have a lot of money, time and space, or sabot bases are the way to go. I use them myself, and glad I do.

[TWD]

Brilliant game! And the bat-rep is very entertaining.

May I ask how do you intend to translate the casualties in the game into the campaign system? Will you do roll for walking wounded/grievously wounded/killed? Or every lost figure will become a casualty?

Thank you

I'm still playing a bit with the balance.
I don't want any bookkeeping for the Pathan forces, so they're always returned to full strength for each game but they are a smaller force than the relief column.
Likewise to keep bookkeeping to a minimum for the British casualties are either dead, wounded (miss next turn) or full recovery.

Just played the next few campaign turns, not much happened for two days, but just as they were hoping to reach the fort unscathed another Pathan ambush has been sprung (game to play out this weekend - Mother's Day permitting)

[TWD]

So, somewhat later than advertised the second game of the campaign.

Just as the relief force is about to arrive at Fort Ookinall the wily Pathans under Al-Bhabij spring another ambush.





Head over to the blog to discover the outcome:
https://tomstoysoldiers.blogspot.com/2019/04/the-relief-of-fort-ookinall-2.html