วีดีโอ

That sounds like a great idea! We've spoken about doing a crusades book covering them all in one go, so keep an eye out for that ;)

Glad to see you liked it! You're right about those berserkers, one day they'll do well for me...

@@philRminiatures thanks Phil! 😁

@@BLACKHYDRAWARGAMING yep this is our own. “On Bloody Ground” is the name of the rule system, and we’ve made 4 different books, covering different periods, up to this point. The miniatures are from different manufacturers, the Spanish from Perry miniatures, crusader miniatures and Wargames foundry. The Almoravids mostly from Gripping Beast. Hope this helps 😁

@@bloodyswordsvids4463 glad to hear that! I’ll be doing a Norman Conquest battle report next time so I might do a classic match up of William vs Harold! 😁

@@martinbrennan2183 thanks Martin, very glad to hear that! 😄

@@joeconte8475 thanks, they’re a mixture of Wargames Foundry and A+A Miniatures

Thanks for the kind words Phil!

Thanks John, glad to hear you liked the other videos too.

I know it looks like it, but they definitely are just the bare legs! 😁

@@wipgamesandminiatures That is weird! A very nice mini, but that just doesn't look right to me.

@@peezebeuponyou3774he just has big thighs, we do plenty with greaves too 😊

@@wipgamesandminiatures It's the calves and the knees, tbh.🙂

@@Edward-Plantagenet thanks for commenting and letting us know what you think we can improve on. We do have videos on the basic mechanics of the game on our channel so I decided not to overly explain those things in the game to make the report a bit shorter. However, I think you’re right in the fact that I could have explained it at least once so everyone knew what was happening, so I’ll apply that to the next report I do. If there are any other glaring things that you think could have been showed better let me know and I’ll try and highlight that in the next report. Hopefully things will become much better over time! 😁

@ Enjoyed watching the video up to a point but, not being familiar with the rules or the mechanics it was all a bit of a blur. IMO it’s important to understand how and why units did what they did, not just that they did it.

@ understood. Next time I’ll explain what units can do in the early stages of the game so I don’t have to keep explaining it later on. That’ll make it easy to understand what’s happening in the game from the start, without dragging the report out for too long and repeating what I’ve said again and again.

Glad you liked it. A battle can always change at any point so never take anything for granted! We'll be doing a report like this at least every month from now on, so keep an eye out for them :)

@@stefan-georgfuchs9618different formation types in army building. We found that we didn’t want to put massive restrictions on what formations you could make as there is always a battle where a commander made his unit fight differently to what you would have expected. However, the weapons themselves almost denote on their own what formation you would want to be adopting. For example, a unit with hand weapons can fight in 2 ranks, and you’re paying the price for that advantage, so you may want to have those formations fight in only 2 ranks, and that is fine. The other side to that is you may want them to have some staying power, and infantry formation get up to +3 bonus in combat for ranks, including the first, so you may want the formation to be 3 ranks now, or maybe even 4 so that you can suffer casualties and still keep the bonus. The other main weapon in this ruleset is what we call a thrusting spear. We understand that all spears are used for thrusting but for the purpose of the effect we have called it that because there are lots of spear types. The thrusting spear allows you to fight in 3 ranks, and again, you pay the extra points in the profile for this effect, so you’ll want to be using the weapon to grant you as many attacks as possible whilst taking less back. So you could have a formation 5 wide and 4 deep with thrusting spears, being a very defensive unit, dishing out 15 attacks, and a similarly sized unit with hand weapons could only attack you back with 10, or if they deployed 7 wide and 2 deep, 14 attacks, but each time they lose a model they lose an attack and you have to lose 5 models before you lose an attack. Just by this very nature, units start to already become a size that you would expect to see in the historical setting, and the weapons each of the units have options for are historical and are represented well in game.

@@1970samo thanks Tony. I know a few people aren’t a fan of painting skin over metal/cloth. Either way, a few different armour types in a phalanx always looks good! 😁

@@leadbelcher7248 Thanks! We have a maximum unit size of 15% of the total army points you are using to build the army lists to stop everyone having hordes of very powerful troops. In our standard game we play with 2000 army points so the max size per unit is 300pts. You can make the width of your units whatever you wish depending on their weapons and how you want them to perform. I usually go for wider units when I’m playing aggressive and deeper when I’m using a defensive unit. 🙂

​@@wipgamesandminiaturesI suggest you put a definive cap on unit's width for clarification..otherwise you might enter into "Linehammer" like issues. I'd say: no more than 10 Infantry and 6 Cav wide..something along these lines..

@@stefan-georgfuchs9618 hi Stefan, thanks for the comment. Your worries about a ‘line hammer’ type game are well founded but in our game you can only fight in base contact, that includes corner to corner, and no more besides extra ranks behind depending on weapon. We found that most of the largest formations were about 8 wide, and there are some that could reach 10 wide for infantry, these would be poor troops with limited weaponry and bad stats to hit and wound. As for cavalry, most formed units can only go up to 12 cavalry in size and tend to be deployed as 6x2 or 5x2 formations. Because each unit is limited in size to 15% of the total army points, you would tend to want all that could use their weapons to fight in the combat/shooting phase. There certainly is a point in which there are diminishing returns in having a wide formation, most of them being not getting full use out of the weapons you have armed your troops with. Likewise, some formations in history were considered to have always fought a certain way (Greek Hoplites for example) but in some battles were used completely differently and so that is the choice of a commander (you or me) to use them that way in the game. The other thing to consider as well is static combat bonus for ranks. This makes a lot of difference to who wins the combat and gets momentum in the end. Infantry can have up to +3 total as long as they have 5 models in a rank, which includes the first, and cavalry can have +2 but need at least 4 models in a rank. I hope this helps give a better view as to why we have no restrictions on width and depth, but only a total number of models in a unit 😁

@@wipgamesandminiatures Thanks a lot for the clarification. This helped indeed. I am going to order all your books by begin of November when I will be back home. Thanks to most of my historic miniatures are on single bases ( 20x20 and 25x50mm) , I am free to arrange them on movement trays as necessary. The cap on unit points is quite helpful to avoid those "Deathstar-Uberunits". It seems, all comes down to smaller Elite-forces of 15-18 Infantry-Models , Standard-Units of 18-24 Infantry-Models / Archers/XBowmen, 10 Skirmish Infantry with ranged weaponry , 10-12 Cav in Ordered formation and maybe 5 - 10 Cav in Skirmish formation..so not too different from my Hail Caesar basing and many of my Warhammer Fantasy units. Looks good to me. What I'd love to see would be a 100 Years War Supplement. Another era of interest is the Age of Charlemagne ( Total War : Attila for reference ). All the best to you @ WiP

Fantastic, and you’re very welcome, we hope you enjoy it!

Hi, the combat can have multiple rounds of combat, even more than 3 sometimes. In the situation in the video the combat would have played out all in one go. This is because the loser kept failing their stand fast test and that is what initiates another combat. Once you lose 3 times your unit is destroyed. If, however, the loser passed their stand fast test the combat is over and you wouldn’t fight again until the combat phase or the next turn, depending on when your combat is being fought

@@paintandplayminis1997 Thank you for clarifying. That sounds interesting, no doubt allows for the push and shove of an army's battle line!

@@Gibius1 that’s exactly it. It makes it even more important for you to decide when you may want to spend some command points to keep a unit around and stop your lines from being pushed back too far

We’re glad you like it, we always thought it was a ‘feel bad’ mechanic. There’s nothing worse than putting your miniatures on the table and not actually being able to use them!

Yep you’re right. For this example, we thought there was no need for us to do a video for both infantry and cavalry units, as the distance of the charge move was more important. This video is more to explain how you are able to pivot your unit before a charge roll is made to allow you to avoid terrain, but if you don’t roll high enough to go in the preferred direction, but can complete the charge via a more direct route with the dice rolled, then you must do so.

We’re glad to hear you’re enjoying them!

Thanks! Every rule we’ve made is meant to feel like it makes sense in real life terms. Some things are simplified, but that doesn’t make for any less of a tactical game

Fantastic, we hope you enjoy them when you do. If you have any questions shoot us a message. Also, you haven’t already, join our Facebook group too for all the latest updates and everything else to do with OBG: facebook.com/groups/2739106046226902/?ref=share_group_link

Movement is definitely simplified but we have aspects of realism where you’d expect it most. Units in shieldwall can’t manoeuvre at all for example (without breaking out of formation) but can instead shift forwards, backwards, left or right. The basic mechanics of games should be simple for anyone to understand, the complexity is in the list building, where to put your commanders, where you want your units to be placed, as well as lots of other factors that shouldn’t put off either seasoned or new wargamers to the period

That’s right, it just makes the game flow more rather than having to calculate multiple things just to move back for example. Some units may have more restricted or fluid movement but that will shown in their keywords.

Thanks Grant, it’ll be great to play someone that’s more of a challenge! The reason we chose a singular central pivot is so that it removes minute movements when moving any units. Keeping track of the central point of unit is also easier than wheeling units multiple times.

@@wipgamesandminiatures So you all went with slightly easier for play over more historically accurate. Deffinetly makes it esier for entry level players.

@@Wyndehurst_Productions that’s right, some formations like phalanx troops or more manoeuvrable units will have different mechanics to give more historical accuracy feel to the game.

@@wipgamesandminiatures that’s fair enough, I like the central pivoting mechanic.

Great flip thru - the hands to me say "I'm getting a spear and I'm going to gut you like a trout!" which is fitting for the period. haha!