|
Post by Richard on Jul 28, 2014 13:00:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mike1956 on Jul 28, 2014 13:39:43 GMT
Richard
Great find.
Mike
|
|
|
Post by tim on Jul 28, 2014 20:25:12 GMT
Beautiful terrain by that chap but very impractical for the general wargamer IMHO. A lot of work for one off battles. Good find and good reading tho' well done Richard.
|
|
|
Post by moosedontbounce on Jul 29, 2014 2:22:30 GMT
I saw Bruce's terrain at cold wars a couple of years ago. It's very impressive. Also, he uses H&R figures so that's a plus.
|
|
|
Post by marcost on Jul 29, 2014 15:50:43 GMT
Beautiful terrain by that chap but very impractical for the general wargamer IMHO. A lot of work for one off battles. Good find and good reading tho' well done Richard. Hi Tim, Being in the process of creating one myself in Bruce's style, I would say that actually the boards are more flexible than just for one-off battles. You are stuck with the topography, roads and rivers but apart from that, the forests, buildings and hedges etc are all moveable/removable. I will certainly be using my board for more than just 'Waterloo'. The visual appeal of the battlefield is more important to me than flexibility and Bruce's terrain is indeed beautiful! Regards, M
|
|
sebpalmer
New member
Posts: 18
Favorite army: La Grande Armée
Favorite battle: Waterloo
|
Post by sebpalmer on Jul 31, 2014 9:51:18 GMT
I'm with Richard on this: the visual aspect is, for me, of paramount importance. I want a game that's like a beautiful movable diorama, if poss!
I saw a Weigle Franco-Prussian game at the last Triples, in Sheffield, and chatted with Bruce. He was very friendly and helpful.
His battle on that occasion (can't recall the name of it) used Heroics & Ros figs, and looked superb. He makes all the buildings and trees himself as well.
When I do mine, I think I'll want both of the latter somewhat larger in relation to my figures than his. Adler & Baccus are bigger than H&R, but I also want to be able to do street fighting, etc.
|
|