Showing posts with label Skirmish. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Skirmish. Show all posts

Saturday, 30 May 2026

The Retreat From Moscow Is HERE!

After months of writing, playtesting, and rewriting, our rulebook is officially launching today!

This project has been a fantastic collaboration between Paul Brooks (the man behind the Pazoot Wargaming channel), me, and my long-suffering mate Ray (from the Don't Throw a One blog).

I won’t ramble on too much—I’ve already shared several videos and posts tracking our progress, and the reception from the community so far has been incredibly positive. 

Paul has been working incredibly hard on the website, and we are ahead of schedule, so the rules are available today. If you want to grab your copy ahead of the crowd, head over to the store right now: 

πŸ‘‰ Order your copy here: www.pazoot.com

But wait, there’s more... To say a massive thank you for all your support, you can use the code BIGLEE10 at checkout to get 10% OFF the cover price!






Friday, 8 May 2026

The Retreat is Coming!

Every now and then, a tabletop wargaming project comes along that feels genuinely different.

Over the last few months, I’ve had the chance to be directly involved in developing and playtesting 1812 The Retreat from Moscow: A Battle Chronicle Wargame, a new historical miniature wargaming project developed by Paul from the Pazoot channel. Having now spent a significant amount of time with it (alongside my regular gaming partner Ray) I wanted to share why this is a project I’m genuinely excited to support.

This wasn’t one of those situations where I was handed a finished ruleset and asked for a quick opinion. I’ve been involved since the early stages, when the system was still very much rough around the edges. Some of the earliest versions were, to put it politely, enthusiastic experiments held together by optimism and dice rolls. And that’s exactly why I believe in it.

Over the course of months, we repeatedly tested all four linked scenarios, deliberately pushing the rules to their limits. We found balance issues. We discovered mechanics that slowed the game down. We encountered those inevitable “well, that definitely doesn’t work” moments that every game designer secretly dreads. But what impressed me most was the process that followed.

Each round of feedback was taken seriously. Rules were revised, mechanics tightened, unclear interactions clarified, and the entire experience steadily refined through multiple iterations. This wasn’t about forcing a product out quickly; it was about making sure the final result genuinely worked on the tabletop.

What makes Battle Chronicle stand out is its focus. Rather than being another generic historical ruleset trying to cover every conceivable period and battle, this is a tightly designed narrative experience. Each Chronicle is a self-contained cooperative skirmish mini-campaign built around a specific historical setting.

The first instalment throws players into Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow, placing them in command of desperate survivors struggling against exhaustion, attrition, freezing weather and an automated enemy system designed to create constant tension.

It feels less like playing a standard tabletop battle and more like trying to survive a collapsing historical disaster. For me personally, it’s also done something every good project should do: it got miniatures onto the table.

Ray and I have had Retreat from Moscow figures waiting for their moment for some time, and Battle Chronicle finally gave us the perfect excuse to build games around them and actually get stuck in.

In my latest video, I talk through the full journey, from those very rough early playtests through to why I now feel confident recommending it.


If you’re interested in historical tabletop wargaming, narrative campaigns, cooperative miniatures gaming, Napoleonic history, or the design process behind new rulesets, I think you’ll find this one interesting.

And if Battle Chronicle sounds like your kind of project, keep an eye out... The Retreat from Moscow is with the printers now, with release expected soon.

***LAUNCH UPDATE***   The rules should be available from the 1st June here and if you use the code BIGLEE10 at checkout you can get 10% off the cover price 

Monday, 4 May 2026

Old School Gaming Done Right

In this latest video, I take a closer look at We Want the Gold, a narrative-driven fantasy skirmish wargame by Robert Poynton. Now, as someone who primarily focuses on historical wargaming, stepping into a fantasy system isn’t something I do often—but this one stood out for a couple of reasons. Not only does it come from a designer with a strong grounding in old-school gaming, but it also draws heavily on the shared DNA between early roleplaying games and tabletop wargaming.

What makes We Want the Gold particularly interesting is its clear design philosophy. This isn’t a game about tight balance, competitive optimisation, or exhaustive simulation. Instead, it leans into storytelling, player agency, and cinematic moments. Small warbands clash over objectives—usually involving treasure—while navigating shifting alliances, opportunistic betrayals, and the unpredictable flow of the game.

Mechanically, the system is deliberately lightweight. Using simple D6-based resolution and a randomised activation system driven by chit draws, the game introduces just enough friction to keep players engaged without slowing things down. The result is a fast-paced experience where decisions matter, but the rules rarely get in the way.

One of the standout features of the rulebook is how quickly it gets you into the right mindset. Within a few pages, players have a clear understanding of the game’s intent and tone. The inclusion of the designer’s notes helps reinforce this, encouraging players to treat the system as flexible and adaptable rather than rigid and prescriptive.


Of course, that flexibility comes with trade-offs. The rules are written in a more informal style, which means they rely on interpretation and common sense rather than strict precision. For some groups, that’s a strength—it allows for creativity and fluid gameplay. For others, particularly those used to tightly written competitive systems, it may present a challenge.

Support for the game is relatively light, with limited official resources and a smaller community presence. However, this also reinforces the idea that We Want the Gold is less of a live service product and more of a self-contained toolkit—something you can pick up, adapt, and make your own.

Ultimately, this is a game that knows exactly what it wants to be. It offers a flexible, narrative-first approach to skirmish gaming that prioritises fun and memorable moments over mechanical complexity. If that aligns with what you’re looking for, it’s well worth exploring.


Monday, 27 April 2026

The Battle of Fort Dan (French Indian War)

The Posties Rejects gathered in the Shed-o-War for only our second face-to-face game of the year. Illness has played havoc with everyone’s schedules, but (touch wood) we may finally be turning a corner. If Sunday’s game is anything to go by, it was well worth the wait.

Richard summed it up perfectly on his blog: “This was a very convivial occasion with lots of chat, mickey-taking and laughter amongst friends. Well done to Postie for his superbly rendered table. He always manages to produce a visual feast.” Hard to argue with that.

The game itself was a fictional encounter set somewhere in North America during the French and Indian War (1754–63). For those less familiar, this conflict saw Great Britain and France clash, alongside their respective Indigenous allies, and is generally considered part of the wider Seven Years’ War. Stuart (Postie), never one to think small, laid on a table worthy of the setting: a sprawling 6' by 12' battlefield packed with dense forest, a settler village, and a British log fort guarding a river crossing. And yes, there were trees. A lot of trees. Possibly enough to qualify as managed woodland.



Dan, Surjit, and I took command of the British forces, supported by Provincials and allied Indigenous troops. Opposing us were Richard, Ray, and Colin, leading the French and their own Indigenous allies. The scenario opened with a sizeable French force advancing along the main road, while additional elements—represented by blinds—moved unseen through the forests on either side. Our Provincials formed a thin but determined line across the road, buying time for a chaotic column of settlers, wagons, and livestock to make their escape towards the dubious safety of the fort.





We also had a unit of Rangers and another of Indigenous allies to deploy as blinds in the woods. In a moment of optimism (or tactical overconfidence), we placed both on our left flank. This would later prove… educational.

Along the road, the Provincials conducted a steady fighting withdrawal, delivering volleys before falling back, always keeping just ahead of the French advance. It soon became clear that not all the French blinds were empty. Colin’s troops appeared on the French left, while two units of Indigenous warriors emerged on their right—uncomfortably close to my concealed forces. When the blinds were lifted, it became apparent that I was slightly outnumbered.


At that point, discretion suggested retreat. Unfortunately, speed favoured the enemy, and withdrawal likely meant being run down anyway. So, in the finest tradition of questionable battlefield decisions, I chose aggression instead. Fortune favoured this moment—we had the initiative (a recurring theme throughout the game)—so I pushed forward and opened fire, hoping to thin their numbers before the inevitable melee.


Meanwhile, the main action on the road continued much as before: the Provincials trading space for time, picking off French troops while staying just beyond charge range. A cow did make a break for it into the woods—clearly unimpressed with the chain of command—but most of the civilians kept moving. Dan advanced two units of British regulars along either flank, and by turn five or six, they were nearing the fight, poised to significantly increase our firepower.



Back in the woods, things became… less orderly. My Rangers and Indigenous allies collided with Richard’s warriors in a brutal, swirling melee. Over three turns, both sides tore each other apart in close combat until, eventually, there was almost nothing left. The few survivors staggered away, leaving the forest eerily quiet once more.


The French still had one more move to make. Reinforcements arrived by canoe along the river. Four boats carrying indians equipped with ladders, clearly eyeing the fort as their objective. Unfortunately for them, they may have left it a little late (perhaps the upriver rapids proved more troublesome than expected). The British garrison, ever cautious, had kept a strong force inside the fort, ready to receive them.





At this point, the French commanders made the sensible call. Their advance along the road was closing in, but fresh British troops were arriving on both flanks, threatening to more than double the firepower facing them. With mounting casualties and objectives slipping out of reach, discretion won out over valour. The game was called, and we retired indoors for the far more pressing objective of tea.



Credit to the French players, they were hampered by some truly dreadful initiative rolls, winning it only once or twice all game. That allowed the British to dictate the tempo, maintaining the fighting withdrawal while steadily wearing them down. Dice can be cruel, and on this occasion, they were firmly wearing red coats.

Once again, Stuart delivered a beautifully presented game, rich in atmosphere, full of visual detail, and a joy to play on. And, as Richard noted, the day was as much about the company as the combat: plenty of laughter, terrible puns, and the usual good-natured mickey-taking. As is tradition, the battle ended not with recriminations but with handshakes, congratulations, and plans for the next encounter. Now, if we can just keep everyone healthy long enough to actually play it…

Friday, 27 February 2026

Battle Chronicle: Playthrough

This week’s video is a full playthrough of The Barn at Dawn, the introductory scenario from Battle Chronicle: Retreat from Moscow, which is a cooperative Napoleonic skirmish game focused on survival, isolation, and hard decisions. Set during the catastrophic 1812 retreat, the game strips away grand tactics and sweeping manoeuvres. There are no lines of infantry trading volleys, no elegant battlefield choreography. Each miniature represents a single exhausted French straggler. These men are cut off, freezing, and desperately trying to escape enemy territory while Russian patrols close in.

The first scenario is played on a compact 2x2 table using six French figures and a reinforcement pool of twelve Russian line infantry. The Russians are controlled by an automated system. They do not “think” in the human sense; they follow simple behavioural rules based on distance and line of sight. Beyond that, they advance relentlessly. Reinforcements arrive twice per Russian turn, meaning the longer the French linger, the worse their situation becomes.


The tension in this game does not come from complex mechanics. It comes from decision-making under pressure. Each French character has three actions per turn: move, shoot, search, or fight. An aimed shot costs two actions. Loot can be discovered at designated points across the table, but searching takes time, and you do not have time. Food, firewood, and bandages may save a life later in the campaign, but stopping to search could mean being overrun.

This first game is intentionally simple. It introduces movement, survival, reinforcement mechanics, and the automated Russian response system. Later scenarios expand the table size, increase complexity, and introduce additional narrative twists. But even here, the pressure is palpable. Reinforcements recycle through the pool, so while only twelve Russians may be on the table at once, the French can face far more over the course of the game.

If you are interested in historical tabletop wargaming, Napoleonic miniatures, cooperative skirmish systems, or narrative campaign design, this playthrough demonstrates exactly how the rules function in practice. More importantly, it shows how a game can create tension through meaningful choices rather than mechanical complications.

Friday, 20 February 2026

More Retreat from Moscow Testing this weekend.

More playtesting has been underway this week, with even more sessions lined up for the weekend and into next week as we hammer out the final refinements to Battle Chronicle: The Retreat from Moscow.  Each game nudges the system a little closer to where we want it. Tight enough to hold together under pressure, but flexible enough to let the story breathe. 

The system will be a co-operative narrative skirmish campaign booklet, built around small groups, hard choices, and consequences that carry forward. Every playtest has thrown up something useful: a rule that needs tightening, a mechanic that sings, a moment of unexpected drama that reminds us why we’re doing this in the first place. That’s the quiet magic of playtesting, because it exposes the cracks and the gold in equal measure.

We’re keeping our powder dry on a release date for now. There’s still work to do, and we’d rather get it right than get it rushed. But with each session, we’re getting closer to a system we genuinely believe people will enjoy putting on their tables. In the meantime, here are a handful of photos from the latest playtest session—small glimpses of a project steadily taking shape.






Friday, 6 February 2026

Introducing Battle Chronicle: The Retreat from Moscow

Last weekend marked the beginning of a brand-new miniature adventure, and it feels good to finally lift the fog of war just a little.

I’ve been working with Paul from the Pazoot Channel on a project called The Battle Chronicle. Paul has been deep in rules-writing mode, while I’ve been handling playtesting, staging the games, and—alongside my mate Ray—capturing plenty of photos and footage as the project starts to take shape on the tabletop. What you’re seeing in the pictures here is our first big playtesting session, where ideas stopped being theory and started becoming desperate little struggles in the snow.


So what is a Battle Chronicle? Each one is designed as a self-contained narrative skirmish mini-campaign. Inside a single booklet, you’ll find a complete skirmish ruleset, four linked scenarios, and a tightly focused historical theme that drives the action forward. The goal is to create something that feels like a story unfolding, not just a series of disconnected games.




The first Chronicle is set during Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow. The focus is on survival: stragglers clinging together, shattered formations, collapsing morale, and constant hard choices. It’s built as a cooperative experience, with players working together against an automated enemy system. In play, that has already led to some wonderfully tense and unpredictable moments—exactly the kind of drama this period deserves.





For Ray and me, this project has also been the perfect excuse to finally put our Retreat from Moscow collection on the table in a proper, story-driven way. Instead of one-off encounters, we’re seeing units carry their scars from game to game, and decisions in one scenario ripple into the next. It feels closer to history than a casual pick-up game ever could.





If you’d like a quick glimpse of how it looked in action, I’ve posted a YouTube Short showing moments from this very session. And next week, I’ll be releasing a longer video where I talk in more detail about the playtesting process, what we learned, what broke, what surprised us, and why playtesting is such a crucial part of building any set of rules. There’s plenty more frostbite, panic, and last-stand heroics to come.

Sunday, 3 August 2025

Small Battles Big Appeal: Skirmish vs. Big Battles: Do You Have to Choose?

In my latest YouTube video, I take on one of the most common—and often divisive—questions in miniature wargaming: are skirmish games the ideal starting point for newcomers, and do they have long-term appeal for experienced players?


As someone who absolutely loves playing big historical battles, I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t a little wary of the growing dominance of skirmish games. There’s something majestic about commanding vast armies across a sprawling tabletop, and I’d be sad to see that fade away. But the truth is, skirmish games offer something incredibly valuable to the hobby. They’re fast to get into, rewarding to play, and provide a manageable entry point for beginners and veterans alike.

In the video, I explain how I’ve come to see skirmish games not as a rival to large-scale battles, but as part of the same journey. I even suggest using 6mm bases to represent single models in skirmish rules—an approach that lets you start playing quickly but gradually build toward full-scale engagements. Over time, those few bases become a full army. You’re playing from day one, but you’re also growing something much bigger.

Most importantly, I argue that there doesn’t need to be a divide in the community. Skirmish games and big battles aren’t competing. There are different ways to enjoy the same hobby. And in many cases, one can lead naturally to the other.

Whether you’re just starting out or thinking of a new project, I invite you to watch the video and share your own views. What do you think—are skirmish games just a stepping stone, or are they the future of wargaming?

Sunday, 1 December 2024

Skirmish Wargaming vs Roleplaying Games

Are Skirmish Wargames and Roleplaying games with an element of combat just the same thing? Or are they two sides of a different coin?


 

Sunday, 21 April 2024

A Changing Hobby? Small Skirmish Games vs Big Battles

Is the Tabletop Wargaming Hobby shifting away from Big Battles towards small skirmish games? This subject arose during last week's SALUTE 51 and was even discussed in at least one of the panel sessions. But is the hobby changing, or is it just that this type of large trade show attracts companies that want to demo their new game-in-a-box?



Wednesday, 3 June 2020

Rebasing WW2 US Infantry for CoC

Many of us employ the phrase "a wargames butterfly" when describing our gaming interests. I'm realising that also applies to me, now more than ever, as I have recently purchased Chain of Command by the Too Fat Lardies. This isn't the first TfL games I have used - the other being What a Tanker - and indeed the first in some ways influenced the choice of the second. I have an abiding interest in the Normandy campaign and I have a lot of 15mm terrain for this Theatre, so it made sense to utilise it for two rulesets rather than just one. I am also a growing fan of the Lardies rules so when choosing a suitable infantry ruleset for the period I started by giving serious consideration (and eventually picking) of Chain of Command. 

Now I have a bit of a head start in the project aided by the fact that I used to play Flames of War for the same period and theatre of war. I sort of fell out of love with that ruleset, and I sold much of my figure collection (something I regret bitterly) but I still had some figures in storage. I dug them out recently and was inspired to re-use the models for a different game. The result has been a week of intense rebasing from teams to individual basing suitable for CoC. I've completed my US troops and later this week I will be starting on some Panzergrenadiers. Hopefully, I will be able to start playtesting the rules to learn them within just a few weeks of buying the rulebook.


Some of the US Infantry based for Flames of War. These and others were earmarked for rebasing. I had more than enough figures to make a Platoon for CoC but decided to rebase them all. 

First I needed to remove them from their bases. The plaster I had used broke away fairly easily and it was then easy to get the metal figures off the plastic base.

Once I had cleaned up the metal base of the figure I had to decide how to rebase them. In the end, I decided on individual infantry on 10mm round bases. Leaders on 15mm bases and weapons teams (or at least part of them) on 20mm bases. 

Here's the 60mm Mortar team with five crew. Two crew are based with the mortar on a 20mm base and the rest of the team are based individually. 

With the figures glued onto the MDF bases, the long process of adding new plaster began. I have run out of the dark wood filler I normally use (more is now on the way, so I used a medium brown version. This wood filler is pre-mixed, is easy to work with a wet brush and dries quickly. 

All the exposed 'earth' was painted dark brown (the colour my normal plaster comes in!). 

The final stage, application of static grass, tufts, flowers and stones. 

The finished Platoon

The HQ and HQ Squad with a Bazooka Team

One of two infantry squads

One of two MG Teams

The whole platoon -  There are a lot of spare figures not in this shot, enough to make an additional squad for support if necessary. 

Next on the table for rebasing are some Panzergrenadiers. Once I have these done I can start some playtesting to help me learn the rules. I'm hoping that by the time the German figures are rebased I will have received delivery of some new figures from Peter Pig (some support options for the US troops) but more on that in a later post.

Monday, 16 March 2020

Panzerfaust Teams in What a Tanker

So over the weekend myself and fellow Rejects Ray and Stuart headed down to Sidcup for one of our regular game shows. It's a small affair based in a school and usually features a handful of demo games and traders. We usually make an effort to attend, especially as it's only a short run in the car to get there for us three at least. Several times we have said we should run a demo game here and a few weeks ago Ray suggested it again. I blithely said, "I'll run a game of What a Tanker" without doing the math in my head...I had less than three weeks to throw together a game! Well, the show is over, the game was a success and we had a blast. I think we may very well be doing this again. 

I wanted to run a 1944 game of What a Tanker set in the Normandy Bocage country as I had a lot of terrain ready for use, and most of the vehicles I would need. However, I also had an idea for a 'special rule' to use Panzerfaust Teams in the game. The rules don't include infantry teams but I really wanted to give the Allied player several things to think about, not just "where is that blasted Tiger"! The following rules were the result. I did a bit of playtesting before the game but the real test was on the day and I think they added a new element to the game that was very interesting. 



The German player can deploy two Panzerfaust Teams on the table. For each team, the player will be given three blinds/tokens, only one of which will be marked to confirm this is the team and the others are red-herrings.

Movement - 6”
Range - 6”
Strike Factor - 6

When an enemy vehicle comes within 6” of a token the Allied player can roll to see if he has spotted anything. However normal target acquisition rules on arcs of visibility apply. When ‘buttoned up’ the visibility arc is 60° to the front of the vehicle plus 60° to the front of the turret if it is pointed in a different direction. When a vehicle is ‘unbuttoned’ the commander and crew have 180° visibility to the front of the vehicle plus 60° to the front of the turret. If the Panzerfaust team is outside the visibility arc of the Tank Commander and his crew it does not have to be revealed unless the controlling player wishes and can continue to move as hidden until spotted. Alternatively, the German commander can choose to reveal the token and commence an immediate attack.

When a Panzerfaust token comes within 6” of an enemy tank - and if it is in the visibility arc of the Commander or Crew as described above - then the allied player rolls 1d6 to spot the enemy team.


  • 1,2,3,4 “Must have been an animal” - The Tank commander sees nothing. The token is revealed and if it is a Panzerfaust Team the German player makes an immediate attack roll.
  • 5,6 “Enemy Infantry!” - The tanks MG’s spray the area with bullets. The German player reveals the token and if it was a Panzerfaust team, it is destroyed.
  • Tank commanders that are ‘unbuttoned’ get a +1 to the roll because their visibility is better.

When a Panzerfaust team is revealed, if it is not destroyed, it must make an immediate attack against the closest enemy tank. Consult the Attack rules and treat just like any other shot on target. Note the following:


  • Panzerfaust teams attack with a Strike Factor of 6.
  • They are automatically considered to have Acquired their target, are Aimed and are Loaded.
  • As the range will be 6” or less the to-hit number is 6 on 2d6 with the usual modifiers as stipulated in the shooting rules.
  • Panzerfaust teams that are in contact with an obstacle ignore that first obstacle for the purposes of modifiers, just as a vehicle would.
  • These are one-shot weapons so when the attack is completed (successful or otherwise) remove the team



The effect of this simple bolt-on rule was to give the Allied player an interesting tactical conundrum. 'Buttoned up' they have a better chance of survival against the Tiger but have less chance of spotting a Panzerfaust team sneaking upon them. The Panzerfaust has the potential to destroy a tank like a Sherman but its more likely to cause some damage that could prove crucial later in the game. Its a balancing act that gave the allied player plenty to think about. It also made the game more interesting for the German player as he had to move his tokens to bring them within the very short range of 6". 

Anyway, I commend these rules to the community, hope you find them useful. 

Sunday, 15 March 2020

Spring Skirmish - Rejects go on a Tiger Hunt

Somewhere in the tangled lanes and tiny field of the Normandy Bocage, there is a Tiger Tank on the loose. Reports have come in of allied vehicles being destroyed and bad weather has made aerial recon impossible. This one tank (let's hope it is just one tank) could hold up the entire advance in this area. It needs to be rooted out and destroyed and a British tank commander has been given the unenviable task of dealing with it. It doesn't help that there are also reports of German Panzerfaust teams lurking in the countryside... this mission is going to be rough. 

Just three weeks ago the Rejects decided we would put on a demo game at the Skirmish wargames show in Sidcup, and somehow I got volunteered to put together a game. I'm still not sure how that happened, but despite the short preparation time, I think we were able to put on an entertaining game and a visual spectacle for visitors. I already had pretty much everything I needed for the layout and thankfully the What a Tanker! rules are easy to play. My main task (aside from a little painting) was to come up with a twist that made this game a unique and interesting element both for players and visitors. I wanted to bring in some infantry, namely Panzerfaust teams, to give the allied player something extra to think about. I'll publish these rules on the blog tomorrow, and I have tried as far as possible to keep them simple and in keeping with the basic ruleset. 

As usual, I took a lot of photo's but let's start with a few shots of our Demo Game before I move on to more general pictures of the show.

The Setup was planned with my available terrain in mind. As usual, we did a handout and table sign for anyone that was interested. 

At least two of the four British tanks had to start on the two roads. 

Airbourne troops have been here before...but none of them are around now. 

Several woods dot the area...any one pf which could be harbouring a Tiger!

The Big Cat is finally exposed when it opens fire, destroying a Sherman M4 with one shot in its side armour. 

It was mid-day and I still hadn't even looked at the other games! 

A burning Sherman and several half-tracks litter the battlefield. 

Postie won both games and poor ray could only look on and photobomb!

In between running the game we also found time to look at the other demos on display. There is always an eclectic mix here with Skirmish games next to full wargames and historical battles cheek by jowl with sci-fi. Not everyone's cup-of-tea, but I like it. 

Rainham Wargames Club were also playing What a Tanker, but they stuck to the brief and set in in 1940. 

Their game features a Char B1 and some Panzer Mark I & II's

Next to them were the guys from Skirmish Wargames. I did take one of their excellent handouts but try as I can't find it! Sorry guys! 

The Camera Team captures it all from above. 

The Privateers of London running their game Operation Catapult. 

Maidstone Wargames were using another Lardie ruleset, Chain of Command. Very impressive terrain...I was taking notes!

28mm looks really good with all this terrain. 

Milton Hundreds Wargames Club run a game called Enter the Zone

Nicely done chaps. 

Gotta love a bit of Star Wars. 

The Young Padawan would have loved this... it's her own fault for not coming to the show with me. 

The Old Guard

The Painting Demonstrations

Tunbridge Wells Wargames Society


There are only a handful of traders at Skirmish, with a bit of a lean towards model builders and toy soldier collectors. Having said that I always find something to buy and this time was no different. In particular, I made a special request of Debris-of-War and they made me a couple of packs of their winter tufts so hats off to them for being so customer responsive. I ended up going back to their stall and buying more stuff (yet more resin terrain). The Magazines were freebies being given away by the show organiser. Very nice, I'll enjoy looking at these. 



I think we will definitely run more games at Skirmish. Maybe next time we can get Ray to run a Donnybrook game? That is, of course, if it goes ahead. It looks like many of the larger wargames shows could be impacted by the growing Coronavirus crisis (not to strong a word now I think) an Skirish may be the last show were get to for some time. Let hope things have settled down by the Autumn when this show is back on in September.