Some more 6mm reinforcements.

I’ve been busy expanding my 6mm Cold War collection again.

First up we have a very mixed bag for my Americans: M60, M109s, M551 Sheridans, A battalion’s worth of troops in HMMWVs, some recon and anti- tank HMMWVs and finally some leg infantry.

DSCN1244

The models are unknown for the M60, Heroics and Ros for the Sheridans and M109s and Scotia for the HMMWVs. All of the infantry and HMGs are from Irregular.

 

Moving onto the Russians we have a handful of vehicles: a ZSU23-4 and 4 MTLBs, 2 portee-ing the ZSU23-2 AA gun and 2 the Vaselik auto mortar.

DSCN1248

The ZSU23-4 is from Irregular and the 4 MTLBs are Scotia models.

Finally lots of infantry and support weapons (HMGs and mortars).

DSCN1280

DSCN1282

All from Irregular this time.

 

I’ve based everything for use with Nordic Weasel’s 5core: Brigade Commander rules. I use a 50mm square base for a company stand and a 30mm square base to represent a platoon sized attachment.

 

Cheers,

 

Pete.

21 comments on “Some more 6mm reinforcements.

  1. Faust says:

    Pretty cool, looks like some of your shots got taken outside? Maybe on a street?

    I think the base tiles you are using are nice. They remind me a bit of a 3d version of the chits that originally came with most wargames.

    • Pete S/ SP says:

      Thanks Faust. The outside shots are taken on the step by my back door. If often use it for photos if the weather is good.

      6mm often ends up being a bit ‘bumpy counters’ at times but I like that are good for higher level games. Gives a different experience to the low level plation actions I usually play with my 20mm stuff.

      Cheers,

      Pete.

  2. Looking good. I have loads of Heroic and Ross WW2 American and German sitting in boxes. I must do something with them.

  3. Marvin says:

    Cold War era is an interesting period to cover. Looks really impressive. Nice basing too – I like the addition of vehicle tracks. 6mm is definitely a smaller scale than I’m used to, not sure how I’d ever get my brush around those!

    • Pete S/ SP says:

      Cold War is pretty interesting, I can just about remember the tail end of it. Given (thankfully) it never came to an East v. West war on the German plains you get to exercise your imagination as a gamer being able to mix in history with a bit of fiction and ‘what if?’ stuff too.

      6mm is easy to paint really- go for mass effect rather than trying to paint each figure individually.

      Cheers,

      Pete.

  4. Nice bases mate. Such tiny minis. You must have 20/20 vision

  5. You could use those 30 x 30s for Bush Horizon !

  6. Dave Whitehouse says:

    Hi Pete
    Trying to get into these rules. I am unsure about terrain. You have used the type of terrain I would set up for a 1:1 scale micro game.
    Does this approach work with these rules? I don’t understand the no bonus for road movement for example, making the control of road networks unimportant.
    I would really appreciate your thoughts
    Thanks
    Dave

    • Pete S/ SP says:

      Hello Dave- thanks for your comment. Your raise some interesting points. The way I approach the rules is that as I play on a small table the game represents the actual fighting part of the game where all the units on the table are moving tactically as they are either in, or expecting to be in sight or contact of the enemy. As such the increased movement advantage that you would get by being road bound for the duration of the move is largely negated. Further to that I think the advantage that road movement would give would be of most benefit to wheeled vehicles and they are yet to play much of a part in our games- especially trucks/ lorries that would have a poorer cross- countrey capability than say a BTR80 or a LAVIII.

      As an aside I was reading a set of rules recently that has been made by the British Army using their research that larger tanks have better cross country performance than lighter tanks as their increased momentum powers them through obstacles better than a light model.

      As for the terrain: the bits I put on the table are only what I consider big enough to hide/ conceal a full company of troops. So when you see a house it is just representative of a whole cluster of them. It is the size of the template that it is sat on that is important. When the unit occupies the spot I just remove the house and keep the template in place for the unit is sit on. Same for trees/ woods too.

      When you say 1 to 1 are you referring to the figure scale or ground scale that you are using? Weapon ranges in 5core: Brigade Commander are really short anyway. 4 foot square is usually enough for any of our games.

      Hope that helps. Any more questions please ask away.

      Cheers,

      Pete.

      • Dave Whitehouse says:

        Hi Pete

        Thanks for your speedy reply.
        I have done the same with terrain.

        I added fields with crops whereby a unit can go into cover if stationery for a turn to qualify for the concealement rating. They also stop at the edge for difficult terrain.

        I also gave the Chieftains a range of 18 to simulate the Stroud Laser system, I can’t see it being outraged by a T72.

        By 1:1 I meant each tank model represents one and a base of infantry a section. I used Challenger rules for years then Spearhead but the later aren’t suitable for solo gaming that I have to do nowadays.

        I will carry on with Brigade Commander for a while. I see the advantages for solo games.

        All the best
        Dave

      • Pete S/ SP says:

        Hello Dave. I like your idea for fields with crops. I may have to try something similar myself. I know what you mean about the ranges. NATO should always be able to out shoot WP stuff (their guns were not sighted for anywhere near the same distances). The assests that each side can have access to I transfered to cards that players can use on the game- I added my own allowing NATO to add 1 kill dice to shots to represent limited high quality ammunition. That helps balance things too.

        Not played either Spearhead or Challenger. Not tried Playing 5core solo. Do you play both sides or yse an automation type system to run one of the sides?

        Cheers,

        Pete.

      • Dave Whitehouse says:

        Hi Pete
        Nice idea about the ammo.
        I don’t know of others that play this around here. Local club very competition orientated.

        I enjoy solo. I just try to ensure it’s a decent scenario. For example forcing a river crossing followed by exploration. Or typically for the Soviets a time pressured advance. Nothing special.

        In my past I played out these things for “interested persons” so got used to making things up!

        If you have any other refinements I would be interested to hear them.

        Cheers
        Dave

      • Pete S/ SP says:

        Hello Dave,

        If you want I can send you the cards I made? There are a few extra ones I created too. They are sized to fit inside standard card sleeves. They could do witha graphical revamp really but they are functional at least.

        When it comes to solo play I guess the standardised Soviet tactics means that they are largely preprogrammed in both the attack and defences given that at the levels that the game represents Commanders didn’t have or at least weren’t allowed to show much initiative. Makes it easier to come up with a flow chart of Soviet options for play and then you can concentrate on making the ‘fun’ decisions for the NATO side.

        Cheers,

        Pete.

      • Dave Whitehouse says:

        Hi Pete
        Cards would be great!
        Soviet drills are easier to replicate but they need proper supporting assets to work.
        The secret is to set up a scenario whereby they are not too predictable. Hope that makes sense.
        Dave

      • Pete S/ SP says:

        Hello Dave- I’ll send them to the email address that you are using for this if that is OK with you?

        Good job that there is so much info onthe Soviet way of war out there that you can get an idea of how the Soviets would have acted. The difficulty is balancing that with player agency: too much and it becomes unbelivable, too little and the player will feel like they are in a straight jacket… always a tough call to make when designing a scenario.

        Cheers,

        Pete.

      • Dave Whitehouse says:

        Hi Pete
        They certainly were more constrained. What I do it work out three battleplans, similar to orders with the Modern Spearhead system. Basically arrows for each battalion on a map.
        I then deploy the NATO troops.
        I then dice for which plan I will use. This I then try play through. Not perfect but keeps my interest up.
        I would live to get your cards!
        Email to this is great.
        Thanks
        Dave

      • Pete S/ SP says:

        Hello David- I like the sound of that. Having not got a copy of the MSH what do the orders cover? It is clever that you have a rough idea of the Soviet intentions but not full info.

        Look out for my email- just sent it now.

        Cheers,

        Pete.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s