Sunday, 6 March 2016

Insurgency problem

      This is something I never thought I would be blogging about, let alone modelling, modern wargaming. When I first got back into wargaming after uni I had a handful of rules I didn't want to break; I didn't want to play anything in living memory, I don't like leaders that are too ostentatious compared to their troops (unless historically accurate and even then it makes me nervous) and I didn't want to play anything where I knew the real names of the men involved compared to which models they would be, I like my games to be more vague forces fighting battles set in a period rather than definitive units facing other known units in a particular battle. With my gaming moving into WW2 with Bolt Action I have broken both of the first two, with the last is still being my sticking point, breaking into ultra-modern gaming is making these rules look a little daft.
      So, here is my modern force, Afghani Taliban. This is my initial starting 600 point force. In real life, the clothing of your average Taliban member seems to be a mix of pure white to beige, with a mix of jackets and hoodies of various colours, but I wanted to have some kind of colour code and uniform even if one shouldn't exist. The scheme will be more obvious when I have painted up more in the way of numbers but in the future, pure white will be a novice, coloured jackets will be a regular, or higher, and green jackets will be body armour.





       The aim in the future is a set of different leaders, or as my opponent keeps calling them; high-value targets, but for the moment the guy on the phone is my only leader. Next to him are the first two RPG's I've painted and a sniper.


       The next two groups are my first batches of normal troops. I am going to need a whole lot of these as time goes on.



Thanks for reading.
Posted by at
Labels:

6 comments:

  1. Anonymous7 March 2016 at 09:50

    Yes, it does seem strange that we (as gamers) want to game an on-going conflict, especially given its brutal nature and religious and politic implications. [Not that I've anything particularly against it, I'll stress.]

    I've got ultra-modern stuff, mind. One method I've used, to distance what I'm doing from reality, is to set it in an Imagi-Nation, away from all the baggage that comes with current wars. US supplied and trained national army, facing off against an insurgent force (secretly) supplied and supported from a neighbouring state, who is trying to destabilise a border region.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mike C7 March 2016 at 09:56

      As long as my opponent doesn't settle down and work out exactly what section from regiment I should be ok - mine as just generic, random Taliban.

      Delete
  2. Michael Awdry7 March 2016 at 11:45

    Always an interesting dilemma, but we happily watch movies based on modern or current conflicts and I think your approach of keeping things generic should make for some exciting games - these are certainly an excellent start.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mike C7 March 2016 at 13:17

      Thanks Michael. That's partly why I can round - noticed a lot of my views are fairly hypocritical now so I might as well go with it.

      Delete
  3. Ant Master7 March 2016 at 13:01

    28's? What rules? Lovely vehicle, tempted myself

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mike C7 March 2016 at 13:20

      Isn't it? Empress models - very nice kit (might have 3 of them . . .). 28mm and planning on using Sangin Skirmish but also got black ops or fighting season ready to go if we don't like it.

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)