Back of Beyond Army List by Peers ... worth buying?

[benglish]

Hey guys.

New to this whole Back of Beyond thing.  So many great ways to game this stuff.  But I'm wondering -- is it even worth buying the original Chris Peers Back of Beyond Army Lists supplement?  Not sure if it's blasphemous to bring such a thing up here on this forum, but from what I've been reading the actual army lists contained in the book are fictitious at best, and a little arbitrary. 

I'm not planning on using the CLA rules to play, either.  Does the BoB book contain scenarios?  I'm just wondering if I could spend my $23 better on something else, like some Copplestone figures.

Are there any scenario books out there, or are most of you just home-brewing scenarios based on books you're reading?

Interested to hear your thoughts.

Thanks
benglish

[Poliorketes]

Depends. I find it's a useful ressource as the lists can be easily used for other systems, but on the other hand it is a little pricey for what's inside.

[janner]

I wouldn't bother 

[Mark Plant]

They are hopeless as a reflection of history, being pure BoB, and I've never quite seen the point of non-historical army lists. If you are going to make it up anyway, why limit yourself?

[Ignatieff]

They are hopeless as a reflection of history, being pure BoB, and I've never quite seen the point of non-historical army lists. If you are going to make it up anyway, why limit yourself?

I agree in most periods. However Chris has done research that most people would find hard to do, and whilst a lot of it isnt 'accurate', at least its a start.  I would strongly recommend the army lists and use CLA to start a bonfire.

[Agis]

  Shameless pointer:
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=20688.0

Maybe it is worth considering...

[Ignatieff]

Shameless pointer:

You said it! ;-)

[Mark Plant]

I agree in most periods. However Chris has done research that most people would find hard to do, and whilst a lot of it isnt 'accurate', at least its a start.  I would strongly recommend the army lists and use CLA to start a bonfire.

They aren't just not "accurate". They are not accurate. No-one expects 100% precision at that distance in time and in difficult languages, but Chris has just made up stuff. (I would mind far less if he was open about it with notes that indicated which items were less than kosher. And I don't understand why he did things like make up some bogus elite "Siberian Rifles" when he leaves out real troops like Kursanty and ChON.)

There's a place for that, of course, because as you say it allows people a starting point. And no real harm done. But I don't think there was a lot of research going on.

[VonAkers]

Hi Guys

Easy to be negative ,but I dont mind the rules ,especially the second Verson,perhaps the Lists are a bit overpriced,and generic.
Still it is not a bad starting point .
 I have the other rules ( not handy) that Agis produces ,but could not see a huge difference between the two(army lists wise) ,if memory serves.
I dont know what "  They aren't just not "accurate". They are not accurate." means exactly ??
Does that mean I know better than most ,but cant be bothered posting the Historical version......
Mark why dont you be more  positive  & put together a more historical and accurate version we can all use if we want,I would like to use a more historical list if available..
Cheers

[Mark Plant]

I have written army lists: http://www.pygmywars.com/gaming/lists/armylists.html

They work on the basis that you don't get much say in what you want, other than in general terms. Adds realism for me, but isn't everyone's cup of tea.

Also I mix troops in reasonably historical amounts (so no platoons of elite with a company of conscripts) and I don't put in non-historical troops (no Cheka). Again not to everyone's taste.

My focus was the main theatres, plus I wasn't prepared to speculate about the more obscure armies. Since then I have learnt quite a lot about some of the Siberian armies, and I suppose I should update them.

They aren't just not "accurate". They are not accurate." means exactly ??

It means that they aren't accurate within the bounds of time and distance. No-one can write truly accurate army lists anyway. But some try harder than others.

[twrchtrwyth]

@ Mark, Is the Cheka completely fictitious?

[Mark Plant]

@ Mark, Is the Cheka completely fictitious?

No. The Cheka was totally real, and it's reputation completely deserved. The issue, from a wargamer's point of view is what was its military value.

The Cheka was one of a number of internal security organisations. Its prime aim was the prevention of internal subversion. For that purpose it had dedicated internal agents, the famously ruthless men in black.

The Soviets defined internal subversion pretty widely though, and so the Cheka was heavily involved in all the internal military fronts. Makhno (once he was inside Soviet territory), Antonov, Kronstat etc and food confiscation at times. These were large operations to be fair, even if outside the scope of most wargamers.

For all these internal purposes the various internal security organs were given soldiers. In quite large numbers too. Its a bit confusing, but as far as I can make out the VOKhR was in charge once things were sorted out, as part of the NKVD (despite its reputation the NKVD is just the Department of Internal Affairs). As part of internal security operations these troops operated alongside the Cheka proper.

They were not elite units raised by the internal security organs, but just ordinary conscripts. I've looked carefully for evidence of their military behaviour, and it mostly seems to have been worse than normal. So from a wargamer's point of view a "Cheka" unit (actually VOKhR) should look and behave pretty much like a regular conscript unit.

Trotsky opposed the large scale use of military units by the internal security forces. Once he was gone the internal security was able to start raising and training its own dedicated units. Hence the situation in WWII.

(The only evidence I have of the later "blocking detachments" was under Tukhachevskii. Again they were just ordinary units. There were never enough proper Cheka to go round to fulfil such a role, and the Red Army at this period was not yet totally in thrall to the security services, as it was later.)

[VonAkers]

Mark
I have not seen your lists before ,WOW..... well done.
I now see what you meant before,I am reading them now..
Cheers

[Remington]

I haven't read the Chris Peers lists but I must say that Mark and cuprum have always been a wealth of knowledge and even their occasional disagreements are very very enlightening! And helpful as can be!

[Dave Knight]

I have downloaded the lists - they look very intersting.  Thanks for making them available

Where would I get a copy of the pygmy wars rules?