Battle Among the Tombs

With all of May and June travel and visitor hosting in the rearview mirror, time to return attention to bringing up a game.  Having enjoyed the four-game series of Montebello, I was very tempted to move directly on to Marengo.  However, a change of pace and period seemed good too, so I switched gears to something different.  Since the Feudal Japan collection has seen no action in a very long time, I figured bringing those armies to the table would provide another series of enjoyable challenges.

I needed a scenario, though.  The search for a suitable scenario was not long in the offing.  Scrolling through the Commands & Colors Samurai Battles website brought up the 1615 Battle Among the Tombs.

The problem with this battle is that two Imperial tombs are present on the field.  I needed to make something to denote these distinctive battlefield features.

A quick order to Brookhurst Hobbies provided the required Peter Pig Torii Gates.  I must say that the turn-around time from Brookhurst Hobbies was impressive.  The package was posted the same day ordered.  The impression of tombs was fashioned from several Litko bases.  The results are simple but effective additions to denote these BUAs on the battlefield.

My interpretation of Samurai Battles' battlefield deployment is shown below.  The situation shows the action after the Tokugawa had already driven the Osaka back from the river.

Battle Among the Tombs

First trial of the scenario is set for Monday with QRS and Battle Briefing sent out for review.  Rules of Engagement will be my version of Basic Impetvs played on hexes.

Return to Marathon

In a last-minute invitation to join into a game, Scott convincingly drew me away from domestic duties to make the drive to Coeur d'Alene to join he and Dale for a gaming session and lunch.  I am glad that I accepted!

After a brief catch-up as we awaited Dale's arrival, we descended into the game room to see the Battle of Marathon laid out on the table.  Scott and I refought Marathon back in September (see A Marathon Marathon).  Hard to believe that this was our last miniatures game together.  More surprising that the battle was still on Scott's table!  As expected, the rules of engagement were Command & Colors Ancients (CCA) using Scott's beautiful 28mm armies. 

CCA Marathon

Since today's offering was a first for Dale, Scott and I played Game #1 to give Dale a feel for the game and its mechanisms.  In this game Scott commanded the Greeks while I headed the Persian Army.  Banner count needed for victory is six so first commander to eliminate six units wins. 

I find commanding a lightly armed Persian Army a difficult task when facing the heavy Greek infantry.  When the Greek heavy infantry make contact, they can cut wide swathes through the Persians.  The Persians are not without hope, though.  In this first game, however, my Persians fell decisively to Scott's Greeks 6-3.  Not a horrible showing for my Persians but I never managed to truly bring the Persian firepower to bear.

In Game #2, I faced Dale in his maiden test with Scott ably assisting.  While the battle got off to a good start for the Persians with a successful playing of the "Darken the Skies" card, the Greeks came roaring back to lay waste to much of the Persian line.  Still, the Persians managed to pick off a few weakened Greek units to eke out a 6-5 victory at the last minute.  Hoorah!

Scott at the head of the Greek Army.

In Game #3, I faced the cunning maestro, Scott, as we swapped sides in a rematch.  Scott commanded the Greeks while I headed the Persian Army.  In a tense but quick game, my Persians overpowered the Greeks in a 6-3 victory.  There were anxious moments for the Greeks, though.  Scott successfully brought his cavalry across the river to cut up the Greek center badly.  Hoorah for a second victory!

With three games in the books, we broke for lunch.  After lunch I needed to return home while Scott and Dale continued with a game of What a Tanker.  Scott and Dale played the rules at the recent Enfilade! con in Tacoma in May and were anxious to bring that enthusiasm back home.  While I could not participate, Scott sent along a couple photos from that game.  Perhaps I will get to give these rules a try sometime?

For me, having spent a week away tending to family, this invitation for a half-day session was most welcome.  Now, back to catching up on domestic duties.

  

Thanks, Scott and Dale!

EDIT: A second post delayed from appearing in blogroll feed by about 20 hours!  This makes two posts in a row.

Russian Grenadier Regiment 1799

Output from the workbench continues with the FRW theme.  Today’s installment focuses on another Russian regiment from Suvorov’s 1799 Switzerland and Italian campaign.  

Marching out from the painting desk is a grenadier regiment of two, thirteen figure battalions.  As a reminder, Russian grenadier regiments featured soldiers wearing a SYW Prussian-like fusilier shortened mitre hat.  Actual grenadiers in these regiments wore Prussian style tall mitre hats.  Grenadiers were pulled out of the grenadier regiments to form combined grenadier battalions.

These fellas march out as the Tuarica Regiment in their orange facings.  Figures are AB Miniatures.  Fine figures and another tick against emptying The Lead Pile of Russian figures for this project.  While I have not made a final tally, I suspect that enough Russians are now present under arms to begin thinking about bringing this army to the table for a game. 

First, though, I plan a return to Feudal Japan in a series of upcoming battles.  Details on these battles to follow once an order from Peter Pig arrives with bits to construct a couple of Imperial tombs.

EDIT: Post delayed from appearing in blogroll feed by about 20 hours!

Painting Seasonality

I have been bemoaning my lethargy at the painting desk since the arrival of spring.  Painting production has fallen off from the respectable start in the first three months of the year.  Looking back at earlier analysis on my own painting seasonality and routine, I began to consider that this recent perception may not be anything out of my normal cyclical efforts at the workbench.

Let's see what the data suggest.

Grabbing the data from the Painting Log and loading them into my favorite data analysis software, I set to work.  Long time readers may recall that painting results have been diligently tracked since late 1995.

First place to start, here, is a tally of painted figures in the first five months of 2026.  The figure below shows actual counts of figures painted by month.  Reaching 100 painted figures in one month is always a stretch goal for me.  Rarely happens but noteworthy when it does.  Notice that the very respectable (to me) output in March was followed by a less than stellar count in April.  This pattern happens regularly.  I reckon I experience some painting fatigue after a big month and then back off time spent at the table in the next.  

Actual Painted Figure Counts in 2026

Raw figure counts can distort actual effort, though.  To compensate for the mix of figures and figure sizes painted, the counts are adjusted by figure size.  To make this adjustment, I use The Analog Hobbies Painting Challenge Painting Points conversion.  The graph below shows these raw counts converted to Painting Points.  Notice how January and February surpass March's totals when factoring in figure size.  January and February must have seen more 28mm figures cross the table than did March.  April totals still look anemic no matter the scheme used to count.   

Adjusted Painted Figure Counts in 2026

Back to my initial question regarding painting cycles, seasonality, and whether this year is an anomaly or fits into standard operating procedure.  The graph below shows monthly totals in Painting Points from 1996-2025.  That's thirty years of data!  The solid line super-imposed on the bar graph denotes the trend for monthly painting points.  Notice that production has fallen off from the more productive years of 2010-2020.  "TOTPOINTS" are painting figure counts adjusted for Painting Points.

Monthly production and trend in Painting Points.

For seasonality tests, I use times series decompositions to separate the various components of the Painting Log time series.  I stick to examining adjusted figure counts which are adjusted by Painting Points.  I skip over the intermediate steps to series decomposition but provide a graphic showing these seasonal decompositions in the graphic below: 

Seasonal decompositions by Painting Points

A bunch of squiggles for the various components.  Can a seasonal component be found herein?

Seasonal Painting Tendencies 1996-2025

Looking at the seasonal painting tendencies graph, above, my painting does exhibit some seasonal tendencies.  The decomposition suggests a clear yearly seasonal pattern in figure-painting output with the strongest positive seasonality in late fall and early winter and weaker output in spring and early summer.  In other words, my painting productivity appears to rise and fall in a repeating annual cycle rather than moving randomly.

This seasonality looks like a low-in-summer, high-in-winter painting pattern.  One plausible explanation is that I finish more figures in the colder months.  Since I live in the northern hemisphere, indoor hobby time increases in colder months and competing outdoor activities decrease.  The late-year surge is strong enough that it is unlikely to be a small random fluctuation.

What does the graphic suggest for each month's output?

• January.  Slightly above the average (Monthly Mean).  A decent start to the year, but not a major peak.
• February.  Still a little above average.  Productivity holds up before the spring dip.
• March.  Clear drop below average.  The beginning of the low-output season.
• April.  Still below average, but not as weak as March.  A partial recovery, not a full rebound.
• May.  Another dip below average. This is one of the quieter months in the cycle.
• June.  Less negative than March, April, and May.  Productivity improves a bit, but it is still not strong.
• July. Another weak month.  Summer still looks like a trough for figure painting.
• August.  Back above average.  This is the first noticeable turn upward after the summer slump.
• September.  Falls below average again.  The recovery is not smooth yet.
• October. Strongly above average.  This looks like the beginning of the peak season.
• November.  Very strong output.  The seasonal upswing continues.
• December.  Highest point of the year.  This is the clearest peak in the cycle.

While my 2026 painting output follows a similar trend to the seasonality study, May 2026 was up as opposed to down from April.  May only outpaced April this year due to a very last-minute push to get some figures across the painting table before month's end.  So far, the seasonal pattern appears mostly intact for 2026.  Now, June may see a different turn, however, since painting time may be at a premium.

The seasonality offers a strong enough pattern that these data could be useful in planning hobby goals. How so?  If planning painting goals around this annual cycle, aim for the biggest output in late fall and winter.  Treat spring and summer as lower-intensity months for smaller projects or preparation.

Perhaps I am not such a slacker but a prisoner of my own tendencies?

Austrian Cavalry Batteries

A small update from the painting desk today.  Begun under the shadow of the four-game series refighting Montebello, two Austrian cavalry batteries muster out from the painting desk.  Too late to participate at Montebello, these artillerymen will be ready for service when they are next called into action.  Still pondering bringing Marengo to the table but other games are in the queue before returning to the FRW. 

The two guns and eight artillery crew are all from AB Miniatures.  As always, fine sculpts.  Sticking with the FRW theme, a Russian grenadier regiment may be next out of the blocks.

On the gaming front, Richard hosted a remote game featuring the 1870 Prussian Guard Corps' assault at St. Privat.  I will have something to say about how my French were roughly handled another day, probably once Richard posts a battle recap.  Until then, a teaser from our game...

I may have been thumped in this one but I look forward to giving the French a better outing next time.

Syrian Archers

Sitting down for meaningful work at the painting desk has posed a real challenge the last two months.  May productivity was looking rather grim until I managed to get in some quality time at the workbench this week.  Besides sticking together a bunch of Perry WotR plastic figures, these Syrian archers emerge from the production line.

Out from the desk today march 22 Syrian archers spread across three BMUs.  Two stands comprise massed archers and the third musters out as a skirmish stand.  Figures are 28mm Newline Designs.

These figures have languished in The Lead Pile for a very long time.  Finally, I decided to pull them from the bin and push them into the painting queue for a change up in period.  Glad I did.  I really like these sculpts and painting them was enjoyable after having produced a number of 18mm units.  Still more 18mm FRW units in work but this was a welcome change.  Seeing these Syrians emerge makes me want to push some more Biblicals into the painting queue.  First, though, I have my eye on WotR and Reconquista figures.

With these fellas coming out of the production line, thoughts turn toward bringing Biblicals back out onto the table.  Before that happens, I expect a return to Samurai battles. 

An Opponent Desert

Today, we consider a follow-up question in Wargame, Soldiers, and Strategy's The Great Wargaming Survey (GWS), 2025 edition.  In a previous installment, I examined the question of opponent availability at a high level (see Do You Have Enough Opponents?).  From that analysis, I concluded that wargamers, often, find themselves isolated from available opponents mainly by disconnects in discovery and compatibility.  Plenty of opponents may be out there, but these barriers can prevent or frustrate meaningful gaming connections.

Can any other insights into gamer behavior be deduced by examining a handful of respondent attributes?  For this exercise, I single out five attributes from the survey for further study.  The selected attributes are Group Size, Game Venue, Population Density, Travel Time, and Location.  Each of these attributes will be compared in two settings.  One, for those saying that they have enough opponents (Opponents are Plentiful).  The other, for those gamers stating that they did not have enough opponents (Opponents are Few).  For those with few opponents, I give them the label of living in an "Opponent Desert."  Let's see what the survey says.

Group Size: Few

Group Size: Plentiful

When respondents state opponents are few, nearly 80% report a Group Size of four or fewer (25.1% for solo and 52.3% for groups of between one and four).  Comparing the "Plentiful" group, solo gaming drops to 8% while groups larger than four players increases markedly.  Not surprisingly, gamers with larger existing groups tend to be more likely to feel they have enough opponents.

Survey results on group size may suggest that once a player becomes part of an established gaming group, opponent scarcity diminishes.  Gaming isolation can be a self-reinforcing deterrent, though.  As smaller groups struggle to grow, there are fewer introductions, fewer games, and less scheduling flexibility.  In this case, group discovery and compatibility is more important than raw population numbers.

Game Venue

Gaming Venue: Few

Gaming Venue: Plentiful

Players reporting plentiful opponents appear more likely to play in clubs, stores, conventions, or organized venues.  Isolated players rely more on solo or private gaming either at home or at a friend's house.  As mentioned in the introduction, public venues may act as discovery engines to help bring wargamers together.  Having regular meeting places helps overcome the friction of finding compatible players.  Visibility through association matters.  That is, gamers often cannot find nearby gamers until a dedicated venue or group connects with them.  The survey supports the notion that opponent deserts are often networking failures rather than demographic failures.

Population Density

Population Density: Few

Population Density: Plentiful

Urban and suburban gamers are more likely to report plentiful opponents than do rural gamers.  More densely populated areas naturally create more overlap between potential members of a niche hobby like wargaming.  Geography still matters.  The gap between urban and rural gamers, however, is not absolute.  Some players in urban areas still feel isolated.  Proximity alone does not create gaming communities.

Travel Time

Travel Time: Few

Travel Time: Plentiful

Not surprisingly, gamers with plentiful opponents generally report shorter travel times.  With the exception of solo gamers, gamers reporting fewer opponents tend to tolerate longer trips.  Results suggest that there is a limit to the number of minutes spent in travel, though.  A travel time of between 30 and 60 minutes seems a common limit to both groups.  Even when a wargaming group exists nearby, a long drive and frequent participation become unrealistic.  Travel cost (in time, effort, and cost) increases with age, family obligations, and scheduling.  This result may help explain wargamers fracturing into small regional or local clusters.

Location

Location: Few

Location: Plentiful

The pair of gamer location charts suggests that outside of the UK/Ireland and US/Canada, there is not significant variation by geographic region between the "haves" and the "have nots."  For the UK/Ireland and US/Canada, the former seems more likely to have plentiful opponents while the latter tends toward more isolation.  The problem appears broadly structural rather than tied to one country or region.

Conclusion

Survey results suggest that “Opponent deserts” often present as discovery, compatibility, logistical, and social challenges rather than true population shortages.  In other words, many gamers are not alone geographically.  They are disconnected socially.  Wargaming communities may fail more from fragmentation than from scarcity.  How to overcome a fragmentation into small disconnected "tribes?"  Survey Results hint at a networking effect.  That is, once a wargaming group reaches a certain size and game regularity, the group becomes self-sustaining.  Failure to attain that threshold often results in the group struggling to gain momentum. 

These results present a useful insight not only for the wargaming community, but for many niche hobbies and local-interest groups.  Is tabletop wargaming more akin to a social network rather than a consumer market.  I reckon that it may be.  "Opponent deserts” may actually be "Coordination deserts."