Seven Days to the River Rhine - First Play Through

A week last Saturday saw the assemblage of a small twattery at our usual venue, The Commercial, for a first time play through of Seven Days to the River Rhine. The Cold War is my favourite historical period and these rules, in a similar vein to Team Yankee, aim to provide a suitable game for the 1980's period.The rules themselves are not that expensive and, as noted in a previous post, it's not the usual model catalogue that some companies release under the guise of a rule set.

Joining me were Andy with his modern's and Shaun with his rather significant collection of modern French and Soviet's. With his focus on Africa, this meant a ton of T-55's and BTR-60's. Before I go on, I will point out that the photographs taken of the game are not of the best quality, the lighting being of particularly poor quality and I've not had the time to play around with them in an editor.

The scenario was a return to H'irraq, our regular modern location. UN forces were watching the border between H'irraq and H'irran, securing local oil facilities and the nearby town from H'irranian backed militia and any formal attempt by H'iranian forces to annex some territory.

Hill One to the left, Two to the right.

The British were leaving their border posts, having been replaced by a company of French infantry with some armour support. The British occupied a town at the far end of the table (3 x Challengers, 3 x Warriors, 6 x infantry stands). The French held the two hills separated by a valley that was the main axis to the Oyston Oil facility in the middle of the table and the main road that led to the town. The French were split pretty evenly between the hills, a total of five AMX-10P's and eight infantry stands, whilst three AMX-10RC's covered the gap and six AMX-30S MBT's split into two three-tank units were further back. As these were mostly Shaun's toys, he got to play with them.

Skulky McSkulkface...

Andy was the opposition and started the game with one stand of militia which he placed in some handy cover behind the French front line. Unfair, I know, but the plan was to begin with an uprising and see how Shaun reacted. Once the uprising had started, then Andy would get more gear on the table in the form of 10 militia T-55's, 6 BTR-60's and 24 infantry stands to add to the initial rabble of 10 Skulking Militia. As I was the umpire, I accepted the role of being a twat and didn't tell Andy when he would get the additional troops, or Shaun that there were more British due once the word got out. Nor was Andy told when the regular H'irranian forces would arrive. The goal of the uprising was to take the oil facility and the town. Very asymmetric to begin with but I hope you can see what I was trying to do in simulating limited effective communications between forces in the heat of battle.

As you may have noticed, this was not the traditional Seven Days scenario and there was a smidge of umpire decision making throughout the game but since the first play through of a rule set is to ascertain if the mechanisms themselves are usable, that wasn't much of a problem. It did, however, mean that the tactical advantage cards were unused on this occasion.

Charge!

With everything set up, off we went with the first initiative dice roll. This went to Shaun who, with nothing much to do, handed this to Andy. The Skulking Militia opened up at the nearest group of three AMX-30S's and killed one, giving a second tank a morale marker.

Turn two saw Shaun deal with the morale issue but using up a number of command points in doing so. Returning fire on the Skulking Militia saw morale markers on two militia stands whilst a tactical withdrawal was made to get out of range of the effective RPG fire. He also reversed two AMX-10P's on Hill One and scored two more hits on the Skulking Militia.

Those 8-inch shell splash markers do come in handy...

Andy, however, having kicked off the fight, now had his militia armour to play with and a sudden charge to the base of Hill One with a total of six T-55's and three BTR-60's. Shaun failed in his reaction rolls from Hill One but supporting fire from Hill Two saw a dead T-55 and a dead BTR-60, whose infantry managed to de-bus but with maximum morale markers. Shaun also moved the British Warriors up from the town to support the engaged AMX-30 unit and the AMX-10RC unit moved towards the gap between the hills to cover any move there.

All is not well on that hill...

Turn three saw the 10RC's reach the gap and the Warriors stop to engage the now extremely Skulking Militia. It was on Hill One that most of the action happened. Andy managed to crest the hill with two T-55's whilst his infantry de-bussed from the surviving BTR's and advanced. French fire from Hill One was ineffective with no armour penetration on the T-55's from infantry LAW fire, whilst an AMX-10P was taken out by a T-55.

It was then that Andy used four of his militia T-55's to try and take out the advancing French "tanks". Note, gentle reader, that he called them tanks. It mattered not to Shaun that the three AMX-10RC's were little more than an engine wrapped in tin-foil with a 105mm gun. Nope, he was just happy they had been called tanks! Well, as the umpire, I was looking forward to see what would happen here. It would the sign of a "good game, good game" for Andy if he neutralised the French reaction force (You'll see what I mean in a minute!). The 10RC's required a 5 or more to be hit, so Andy started rolling. A 1. Next dice: higher than a 1? A 2! Next dice: higher than a 2? A 3! Final dice: higher than a 3? A 4! Much laughter ensued but as you can clearly see, Andy was not playing his cards right! Not that it mattered, as the French reply was equally as bad and some truly bum dice rolling was seen. The support fire from Hill Two was also a swing and a miss, whilst continued French fire on the Skulking Militia added another morale marker.

1, 2, 3, 4... Damn it!

Turn four saw the climax of the battle (and it was getting quite late in the afternoon). The militia finally took Hill One but not before losing a T-55 to a flank LAW shot from the retiring surviving French infantry whilst the 10RC's finally paid the ultimate price but not before killing one of the attacking T-55's. A cheeky T-55 shot from the hill even took out an AMX-30S near the oil facility! The advance elements of the H'irranian army were added to the table whilst an additional British Challenger unit also entered the town.

Les braves Chars, ils sont morts!

I called the end of the game as a draw as, whilst one of the hills had been taken, the other hill remained resolutely in French hands and there was much more support coming up. Publicly, the H'rranians were never there whilst the UN forces had been given a bloody nose. Of the game itself, it was nice to have a game where equipment wise, everyone was pretty much even. I am sure that if the Challengers had arrived, it would have been a bit more one-sided. A note on accessories. We had no markers specific to the game so some 8-inch shell splashes were used to denote hits, with dice used to show morale markers. The usual trees and buildings were kindly supplied by Andy but sadly he forgot to bring hills. The solution? Well, as we were in a pub, there were several handy bar trays that sufficed as ad-hoc terrain under the cloth. We didn't even have to pay for the hire! As always, Eric and Jean sold copious amounts of Consett Ale Works' Consett Pale Ale and the ever-beautiful Beef Butties and Chips (with peas this time, a lovely addition!).

That last T-55 was a bit cheeky!

So, about the rules. I like them. They play quite freely and there didn't seem to be anything majorly wrong with them. The initiative system, which I had my doubts about, works well enough but is far better suited to games that use smaller sized units, company size and smaller. The potential change in initiative in each turn does limit grand scale thinking, though as noted in the rules, the game is suited to a large number of players with set overall commanders and if we had the numbers, the initiative swapping could work out better. I have no doubt these will come out to play again and, given a Cold War hot scenario (I am thinking Steve's excellent 20mm collection here), the tactical advantage cards will be added to the mix. There was some discussion about how you would add troop quality to the game (aside from the cards) and minor amendments to the number of command points handed to each commander would suit that. In this game, that would have meant the militia and French each getting their assigned number of points with the French gaining a few more because of training and doctrinal advantages. How many points? Well, that would be decided by creating a table for each of the forces you can play in the game but it's something that we'll look into. Overall, I am happy with the set and pleased I picked up a copy.

Big Dumb Action Films

My good lady and I have managed a couple of cinema visits recently for a pair of action films that weren't superhero based - this can be quite difficult to avoid given Disney's hegemony, but manage it, we did.
The first film was Fast and Furious presents: Hobbs and Shaw. A spin off from the increasingly silly but ever so watchable Fast and Furious series, Hobbs and Shaw sees Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham team up to save the world in a cheese-tastic Big Dumb Action Film. Having a plot isn't really essential for this kind of flick but the basics are that Statham's on-screen sister (played by the excellently cast Vanessa Kirby) is set up as a rogue agent after her MI6 team is killed on a black-op (very Mission Impossible - 1995) to prevent a nasty virus from being stolen. In order to stop the villain (a motorcycle riding Idris Elba), she injects herself with the virus and off starts a 72 hour countdown before she infects the whole world (very Mission Impossible 2 - 2000).
Now, it is a universal truth that action film plots tend to be generic or derivative, but that has never stopped the likes of Bond or the aforementioned Mission Impossible series from achieving considerable success. Hell, the MI series, for me, dipped in quality on its second outing and has improved with each subsequent entry. Whilst Hobbs and Shaw has a cut and paste story, it is the performances that make the film. The on-screen chemistry between Johnson and Statham was obvious in the most recent  F&F film and Hobbs and Shaw takes that up to 11, with some great banter between the two, some of it literally head to head. There is a self awareness here that cuts through any misgivings you might have and the film truly wears its heart on its sleeve. There is action galore and you can see where the $170 million budget went. True, you have to suspend disbelief to the point of handing it to the Montgolfier Brothers and waving it goodbye but ever since the F&F series reinvented itself from number 6 onwards, you know pretty much what you are going to get.
So, high points of the film are Johnson, Statham and Kirby, who deserves her own action film based on her performance here. Elba is good but one dimensional which is a shame considering how great an actor he is - and to be honest, this is probably as close as he's going to get to a Bond style film - I think he is just a tad too old for the role once Daniel Craig hangs up the Walther. The action is well framed and action-y, and the overall tone is rather light, especially with the hilarious cameos from Helen Mirren and Ryan Reynolds. It is nice to see a light touch to the F&F series as the presence of the leaden and stilted Vin Diesel often kills such an approach.
Downsides? Well, the film's internal logic and treatment of time and distance are patchy at best. Elba is  wasted, as noted above, and the bit part actors are serviceable at best - even the ever reliable Eddie Marsan struggles with his Russian accent. The Reynolds cameo is a hoot but, and I say this as a fan, his Deadpool-like shtick is starting to wear thin through overuse. We're not quite at peak snark just yet but we're getting there. Then there is the issue of Statham and Kirby's age difference - no way are they siblings of a similar age!
With the set up of the inevitable sequel, Hobbs and Shaw is a bit of a change from the usual F&F template and one that has found success at the box office (over $740 million). Films like this are  never going to be high art but there is always a place for Big Dumb Action Movies.

The second film we have watched is Angel has Fallen, the third entry in the Fallen series and once again, Gerard Butler fights his way through bad guys whilst battling that most sinister of foes - the American accent.
Olympus has Fallen was a decent mid-budget action film ($70m) that offered Butler a good action role that mostly worked, slightly dubious CGI included. That success was followed up with London has Fallen, a $60m that moved production from the US to Britain and Bulgaria. Again with dubious CGI and what came across as a very nasty streak of racism, it did well enough for this latest entry to be green-lit. Following the law of diminishing returns, the budget for Angel was $40m and yet it still offers more than enough action to satiate most films buffs. Considering that Hobbs and Shaw cost over four times more than Angel, it was interesting to see the effects of the budget disparity.
First up, though, the story. Butler plays an aging and injured Mike Banning, a Secret Service agent entrusted to protect President Trumble (a returning Morgan Freeman who, despite his advancing years, peppers the scenes he's in with the usual "twinkle" in his eyes that feels like he's reveling in every detail). After catching up with a former Army colleague (Danny Huston, showing once again that men of a certain age can still give it some welly in action films) who runs a private military training firm, a drone attack on Trumble and his detail on a fishing trip sees Banning framed for the attempted assassination. Add to  that some political shenanigans with the Vice-President, a domestic angle with Piper Perabo as Banning's wife and a woefully underused Jada Pinkett Smith as an FBI agent and you have quite a bit in the mix. Oh, and Nick Nolte.
The plot of Angel has Fallen seems like it wants to be a political thriller as well as an action movie, yet the handling of the conspiracy side and the identity of the villains is ham-fisted at best. The film practically shouts out the identity of the bad guys from the first reel, subtlety be damned. However, you know all will be well with the world once the final credits roll. It's still quickly paced and the near two hour running time certainly does not feel that long.
Cast-wise and it's the usual from Butler, who is aging a bit and looks a bit more jowly than usual. His struggle with the American accent isn't as bad as some of his films and there is less speaking from the side of his mouth that has plagued other projects. He does bring a physicality to the role and a sense of humour when required - even if he is approaching Superman levels of invincibility by the film's climax. Piper Perabo isn't given much to do as Banning's wife, whilst Huston is believable and Freeman very good value - plus he has that voice! Tim Blake Nelson tries his best with the under-written role of the Vice-President and Lance Reddick is his usual cool and collected self as the head of the Secret Service (if you've seen Fringe or any of the John Wick films, you'll know what I mean). This leads me to Jada Pinkett Smith and Nick Nolte. Pinkett Smith is good enough (though she has done better) but the film builds up her character and then, well... no spoilers but there isn't much of consequence here, with off-hand explanations abound. It's very much a let down. Then there is Nolte, looking every bit of his 78 years and then some more. He plays Banning's father and is the funniest thing in the film, not only with the biting comebacks and kooky behaviour but also with a lot, and I mean, a lot of high explosives.
Filming primarily in the UK and Bulgaria, it just doesn't feel as though it was made in the US, with the look and feel just being that little bit off. That is probably me overthinking it but once you notice it, you'll not forget it. Watch this as a popcorn film and you'll probably enjoy it as much as I did. But, given the relatively meagre budget, you can see where the corners have been cut, especially with the CGI. Some of it is passable, some of it is dire! Glaring examples include Marine One, a sniper on another helicopter and the climactic roof top fight that was blatantly filmed in a studio.
For all of that, these faults can be forgiven. Angel has fallen does change the Fallen formula and is better for it. The smaller scale action is well directed and feels more more personal and visceral than the slick Hobbs and Shaw. Despite the differences in budget, both are enjoyable films for different reasons, if aimed at different audiences and, if Mr Butler wishes to tackle that accent again, my good lady and I will be there to witness it.

Border Reiver 2019

Border Reiver was the first war games show I ever attended. Indeed, for many years, I had attended that show and many others around the country as part of a crew and not as a member of the general public. A move to Gateshead International Stadium several years ago was quite welcome (a shorter distance to carry the gear) but a few years back saw the show drop off my radar. Having some time off last weekend meant a trip to the most recent show was on the cards so, on Saturday morning, my good lady and I ventured into deepest, darkest Gateshead to see what Border Reiver 2019 could offer. Oh, and this was her first trip to a wargames show!

As you can see, there was lots of space.

So, first up, it's in a Sport's Hall. This means sodium lighting and hard floors. I have seen quite a few blog posts and commentators actively detest venues with such qualities through the years but let's be honest here. How many other venues have space and access for both traders and the public? Some old shows (Scarborough, for one, and the Partizan's when they were at Kelham Hall - a horrid building for access, despite the so-called "atmosphere", whatever that means) offered something different but in reality, any trade based show with a display/demo element requires space and access, and sports halls/dedicated showground facilities are the best compromise. It is generally true that the trade stands pay for the venue so there should be some give and take on both sides of the venue discussion. In any case, a couple of hours in a Sports Hall for a show is not going to be the end of the world for any member of the public.

But there were people there.

Anyway, back to Gateshead and the door charge of £3.00 was very reasonable especially when you consider the rather nice 28mm metal figure of a March Warden to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the show. Dues paid, we were quickly into the thick of it. Except, it was quite thin.
Now it wasn't the fault of the organisers that Colours had changed their show date this year to match Border Reiver and, for some traders, a choice had to be made. Unfortunately, the north-east show missed out. Some traders did, however, have the ability to attend both shows and that has to be congratulated. True, there were some rather large gaps in the hall and that could not be hidden but I was pleasantly surprised as to the names who had made it. I must also add that whilst it was pretty obvious some of the traders could only just manage a small selection of stock as their main stand was at Colours, I don't think there are many in the industry who could do a double header and it demonstrates how small (and almost cottage like) the hobby actually is. Sadly for me, there were no book stalls so whilst my heart dropped, my bank balance did not.

A small section of the lovely Napoleonic game

That brings me on to the next topic - spending at the show. I admit to not spending a farthing outside of the door charge. Why? Because there was nothing there that caught my eye and I will not buy for the sake of buying. I realise that does contradict previous posts on wargames shows about spending to support traders and the show itself - traders need to make money to continue attending - but I just couldn't see anything I needed. Is that the traders fault? No. Neither is it the show organiser's fault. It's just the way things were.

There was quite a busy Bring and Buy/Flea Stall/Games Workshop graveyard (delete as applicable) which was worth a perusal, just to see how much GW stock makes it onto such stalls, but the games put on for the show took up most of my interest. There was a strategic level Barbarossa game that I'd seen at other shows that  looked rather nice, a long, narrow 28mm Napoleonic game that had a ton of figures and really looked fantastic, and a couple of Wings of Glory games that mildly caught the interest of my good lady. The demo game that really caught my eye, and purely for eye candy, was of a piratical theme with a fantasy twist, packed with lovely little details and displayed with an irreverent sense of humour. Not to everyone's taste, I grant you, but very well done and the effort was plain to see. It also helped that the gentleman who had put the game on was very willing to talk about it and his approach to his hobby. Not something that can be said for many demo games/gamers at quite a few shows I have been to.

Pirate Demo game

So, Border Reiver 2019 - the 25th Anniversary. A good show? The clash with Colours was outside of its control and certainly hurt the number of traders and the breadth of stock for some of those who did attend. As for punters, well, we rocked up around 11-ish and there were enough people around to describe the footfall as brisk, but not packed. Even the lighting didn't seem as orange or harsh as memory recalls. It would be more than a tad harsh to judge the show from this visit alone. I was curious to see how the show had changed (if at all) after several years of non-attendance and I think the fairest thing I can say is that the jury is still out. As to whether we will attend next year, well, that's a question to be answered closer to the time. Certainly there were things that my good lady found of interest, even as a non-wargamer, so it is definitely a case of wait and see.