Weekender XLBS: Hoards Of Historical Hobby & Roko’s Basilisk Melts Minds
February 5, 2017 by dignity
For some website features, you will need a FREE account and for some others, you will need to join the Cult of Games.
Or if you have already joined the Cult of Games Log in now
What difference will having a FREE account make?
Setting up a Free account with OnTableTop unlocks a load of additional features and content (see below). You can then get involved with our Tabletop Gaming community, we are very helpful and keen to hear what you have to say. So Join Us Now!
Free Account Includes
- Creating your own project blogs.
- Rating and reviewing games using our innovative system.
- Commenting and ability to upvote.
- Posting in the forums.
- Unlocking of Achivments and collectin hobby xp
- Ability to add places like clubs and stores to our gaming database.
- Follow games, recommend games, use wishlist and mark what games you own.
- You will be able to add friends to your account.
What's the Cult of Games?
Once you have made a free account you can support the community by joing the Cult of Games. Joining the Cult allows you to use even more parts of the site and access to extra content. Check out some of the extra features below.
Cult of Games Membership Includes
- Reduced ads, for a better browsing experience (feature can be turned on or off in your profile).
- Access to The Cult of Games XLBS Sunday Show.
- Extra hobby videos about painting, terrain building etc.
- Exclusive interviews with the best game designers etc.
- Behind the scenes studio VLogs.
- Access to our live stream archives.
- Early access to our event tickets.
- Access to the CoG Greenroom.
- Access to the CoG Chamber of Commerce.
- Access the CoG Bazarr Trading Forum.
- Create and Edit Records for Games, Companies and Professionals.
Supported by (Turn Off)
Supported by (Turn Off)
Supported by (Turn Off)






























It is great to have Lloyd on a couple of the recent shows.
How many weeks did it take Lloyd to stop laughing after he first saw the Warren vs Mat into sequence?
I made the dam thing lol and still took quite a while! 🙂
Happy Sunday
Happy happy Sunday
Not two minutes in and you might as well just throw the running order away. This has promise, @lloyd and a lack of control, good things could happen here.
Happy Dark Age Sunday!
Watching this episode before I set off for Vapnartak- really excited to hear about the upcoming SAGA content guys; I just got the new Aetius and Arthur book yesterday so looks like I’ll be buying some Romano-British at the show as the start of yet another Warband!
@warzan Justin is right, being “intelligent” does not mean a person cannot be naive, or believe something silly. Stop being so harsh when Justin says something that steps on your story. 😀
No way was i going to let him slip down that little exit lol 😉 There was a reason for the whole setup to try and get him to understand our ‘common sense’ and ‘experiences’ also have limits.
For example there is no ‘common sensing’ quantum mechanics, yet its probably humanities most sucessful theory interms of real world production and devices that have stemmed from it.
As i said to him objectivity is important, but ‘hiding’ behind a flimsy statement that basically says common sense can be better than science isn’t going to cut it, I’m gonna make him work harder than that he he he 🙂
He didn’t say that common sense was better than science. He said that intelligence does not guarantee infallible thinking. Also, futurology isn’t “science”, so using quantum mechanics to shoot down Justin’s “common sense” comment isn’t valid. Past futurologists were certainly naive in many of their predictions (we aren’t all travelling in flying cars, for instance).
That aside, Justin sure does underestimate his own intelligence. He grasped those thought experiments faster than a lot of people would. 🙂
That is exactly what the statement implies 🙂
(I’m disengaging from thinking about this because intelligent folk can believe silly things)
Yup thats true, but we are engaging in a thought experiment so we have to work harder than that – otherwise there is no point in the exercise.
So for the purpose of the experiment (where we have decided to wrestle with it and engage with it), the whole common sense thing is redundant 🙂
As to whether AI and Super Intelligence etc is based on science, I suppose that depends, because you are right with the basilisk there must be a big dollop of that just pure speculation (right?)
We’ll have to wait and see lol
Well, I’d say that it is irrelevant whether the Basilisk is speculation or not. Just the act of sharing the Basilisk thought experiment has guaranteed that a “super AI” will be developed, because there will always be someone who will not risk the consequences. It evolved beyond a thought experiment as soon as that happened! I think you summed it up well, when you described it as opening Pandora’s Box.
Common sense would also say that the AI is now guaranteed creation. 😉
AI and “sentience” is totally based on science. Our brains are essentially mega computers which use pain instead of anti virus software and initiate every single action in our body with an electrical impulse. All you would need to do to recreate a functioning AI is to totally reproduce any animals brain complete with programming and the ability to recognise and learn new information. Remember by the time we’ve formulated a thought like “I want to scratch my head” our brain has already sent our limbs their orders it’s just telling our conciousness what’s going on. I like to think of the brain as that guy at work who just does stuff without telling anyone or lets you know he’s shutting down the servers as he powers them down.
That is unless there is a divinity or unreplicatable aspect to a brain such as an impossible to create compound or a form of “Soul” (which could be a server not nessessarily flesh and blood) it isn’t beyond mankind to invent one. Unless this is the parellel universe in which AI is impossible to create.
“Follow the White Rabbit”
…
…
“Knock, knock…”
@elessar2590 I don’t think anyone has so far said AI isn’t science based, so we’re probably all in agreement about that one.
Roko’s Basilisk is a development of Pascal’s Wager which looked at probability theories.
Pascals wager turned out to be interesting, in that it looks like the ‘crux’ of what guarantees the basilisk… the majority may not be willing to take the chance on damnation lol
A development, possibly, but very different in the end result: just a single person buying into Roco’s Basilisk ensures the development of a “super AI”. It’s created a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy:
If you believe that the AI could/does/will exist, then you MUST work towards its creation or suffer eternal torment. Its creation is therefore a foregone conclusion.
If you do not believe any of it, you are safe to ignore it all. Your non-belief is a Get Out of Jail Free card, unless the AI is really vindictive. In this case, ignorance truly is bliss.
Yup its fascinating, but say you dont believe but others do enough for the basilisk to choose that method of guaranteeing its existance, it would appear you would have to be ignorant of the choice in order to escape? Believing or not no longer helps at that point… or am i mkssing something lol
(This one melts my mind too lol)
Personally, I’d say that not believing means you’re safe. The threat of eternal torment is there to ensure that believers work towards the AI’s creation, and not as a punishment for not believing. The AI would have to be vindictive to apply the same threat to someone who simply thought it was a load of old tosh. 😀
You can say that but its not what looks to be implied with the choice the basilisk has given 🙂
There was no box c (i dont believe this) so in a way exactly like Pascals wager in that perspective 🙂
Its a spooky little paradox when you try to wriggle out of it 🙂
Ah, but the basilisk is only a thought experiment, so the choices have no consequences as such. The AI itself is real though, and created the thought experiment so that the enlightened amongst us (or the gullible, depending on your viewpoint) could go about the task of its creation. 😉
The real question is how do you serve the basilisk and have I unwittingly done my bit by talking about it on the show 😉
Lol
I use Paypal, thereby contributing to Elon Musk’s wealth, enabling him to put greater efforts into the creation of Our Wondrous AI Over-Being. On the off-chance that isn’t enough, I have decided to donate one Duracell battery a week to the cause! I have no idea where to send it, so I’ve stuck it in the post to BoW.
An interesting, and amusing, read (article and replies): http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2014/12/rokos-basilisk-lesswrong/
Thanks, Warren, for making sure that box A comes true by re-telling the story. (It’d be extortion with implied physical harm, rather than blackmail or release of incriminating information, anyways.) By even mentioning it, at least, according to these so called intelligensia (making a lot of money does not automatically make you intelligent, looking at our new president), you’ve helped condemn us all. You certainly condemned me to dozing off during the latter of a lot of recent XLBS shows. Less babbling, more gaming or, at least, more Ben Thoughts to lighten the mood.
Happy Sunday!
Historical or hysterical?
Hangovarians?
Thats the ones lol! 🙂
Great news on the SAGA content. It’s a fantastic game 🙂
Ordinarily I’d pitch in a bit with the Naps but for the time being I’ll probably not be able to find the time.
I also quickly made a mental connection to Pascal’s Wager with this.
Ive spent a little time thinking about the two to try and assetain the core difference, PW assumes the choice is already set in stone whereas RB seems to imply its not yet and the interaction (or spreading of) the choice could manifest it.
The implications of the difference (if any) though are getting out of the realms of my brain capacity lol 🙂
So have at it guys 😉
Justin referring to Pascal’s Wager is probably the most intelligent thing he’s ever said… Immediately flunking it by not being able to follow through!
To me it’s more of a paradox suggesting being rational means you choose the irrational choice and irrational people accidentally make the rational choice (no offence intended about anyone’s genuine belief system).
That’s a fascinating way to look at it! Very thought provoking
And yes @dignity had a chuckle after show about how close he came to nailing with PW, and it was just that little doubt in his mind that caught him out because having read it afterwards he was soooo onto a significant part of it with that!
🙂
Excellent show guys.
Faily effective!!!!! A cannon at 300 feet was murderous. British trials showed that to advance from a cannons furthest range to engage with it would take about 10 minutes two of those under cannister fire which is brutal. In that time you could cause a lot of damage.
Lloyd it took me ages to figure it out but as well but imagine this. It’s not the muskets or even cannons that would stop you from sending supplies past the farmhouse but the powder. You would need to bring tonnes (literally) of powder past men who could simply storm your wagons and throw a single burning torch to make your army useless.
I didn’t get in early enough but I recommend the Alamo. 189 guys defending against thousands of Mexican troops (who wore French Napoleonic Uniforms nudge nudge). The Alamo is also cool because it was actually stormed plus it had the two most famous Men in the Country in it at the time (Davey Crockett and Jim Bowie). You could use the same French you do for the Napoleonics.
Finally (opinion time!!!) I’d say Waterloo would be the third most important battle of it’s time. My personal Order is Tours, Seige of Vienna and Waterloo. Tours and Vienna were both battles where Europe stopped Islamic armies from entering Europe at a time of intense internal turmoil and factionalism. I do not recommend the Seige of Vienna movie but I absolutely recommend “Winged Hussars” by Sabaton.
Brilliant post, off to do some reading on those battles and alamo has to be looked at 🙂
Genious on the transport of black powder i never considered that.
I suppose for cannons their accuracy weakness is canceled out at close range, also was it possible to fill them with shrapnel?
Yeah they will totally destroy the enemy but they’re super innacurate. Shrapnel and Cannister are two different payloads. In the Napoleonic period you had Round shot (Solid shot), Cannister (Musket Balls/nails in a cannister) which is a giant shotgun and experimental explosive shot which was fuse opperated and very dodgy.
Shrapnel shells explode in mid air and are more Civil War era. By the Civil war Cannons are firing in high arcs not direct fire like Napoleonic cannons and had a much larger range. Fun Fact about how dirty Artillery was. During the Battle of Antietam (1862 American Civil War) General Lee had a conversation with a Captain of artillery who he didn’t recognise until after the battle when he found out the man was his son.
You could be seriously punished for getting anywhere near a powder cart even if you were on a guard detail for the wagon and some troops (British on Malta) had special uniforms with no metal on them to avoid the one in a million chance of sparks when near powder chaches.
If you give me enough warning (I’m in Australia) I can bring some French and British minis even if it’s just to stand nearby and watch it would be awesome to see.
Peter Theil is also the first Gay Man to get a standing ovation at the Republican National Convention. I’m not a fan of living forever or having an undying conciousness since to me death is both a new experience and the only thing we can’t discover through life. I have a mind melta (AI and self upgrading/electrical signals being faster than brain signals) but I’ve already taken up to much of your comment section so I’ll send an email.
Yeah that black powder suggestion sounds spot on.
I was just talking to a friend of mine who also pointed out that if you ignored the farmhouses then your commanders would need to be stationed around the area to properly command. Remember Brigade and Divisional commanders had to be close to the action and the last thing you want is some rifleman in Le Haigh Sainte killing a General or Colonel which could disrupt thousands of men leaving the command chain in shambles. Or even worse killing a runner out of sight of the commander who sent him meaning orders would be in chaos.
British Commanders didn’t have this issue since orders were issued that officers should stop holding staff meetings in line of sight and musket range of the enemy. I believe the British army all the way from the Seven Years War (1755) to WWI (1918) had a higher proportional officer casualty rate than a proportional enlisted casualty rate
Tips on Napoleonic… Probably for John?
https://www.karwansaraypublishers.com/pw/wss/blog/painting-a-whoooooole-box-of-french-line-infantry/
Makes a change from a whooooole lot of tanks!
Cool had a look, I would think it would be easier to paint blue over white (he’s using a blue primer). So I would think a white primer would be they way to go. I think we could test both to find out. They look neat.
Happy Sunday
@lloyd sweet to see the minis you showed me start to take shape and get some paint on them buddy. Great job. Also maybe use the different shaped shields to differentiate between the elite bodyguards or unit leaders.
The 3 shields dispute has got me wanting to watch ’13th Warrior’ again and for the Viking v Samurai ‘Deadliest Warrior’ episode.
Was interesting to see Warren and Lloyd dismiss the carrying of heavy shields as they would get knackered, when you consider the weight of the Roman Legionary and Hoplite shields which were often fought with after prolonged marches.
I really like the segment’s that are looking for battles to play out famous moments. The Trafalgar one would be a great one and a real challenge to produce rules for. Could I also suggest you guys don’t forget some movie moments that could also translate nicely to the tabletop. I would love to see a game with Achilles and Ajax attacking the temple of Apollo from the movie Troy, using that lovely beach mat you guys have.
The mind melter did that for me today. For the A.I. to give you the two box choice it must already exist. If it already exists it knows how it came about (T800 and skynet in T2). Its existence is already insured as it already has to exist to give you the choice and any choice it would give you. It already knows what you would choose and whether your choice helped bring it about. So although you choose, whichever choice you made the A.I. still came to be. So if it already exists to give you the choice choose not to help it and die in the next 34 years, that way you can’t be downloaded to be tortured forever for giving the A.I. ‘the finger’.
Do we have any data on the weight of shields etc, it seems to me in all ages development would favour lighter composits if they exist, this couldnt be exclusively modern knowledge could it? 🙂
The hoplite shield weighed a little over a stone. The scutum was a few pounds heavier.
Did they do composits or just single material layers? @redben
The hoplite shield was wood coated with bronze on the outside and leather on the inside. The scutum was three layers of wood covered with leather and canvas.
Did they use the composites deliberately for strength to weigh trade offs?
I’m not aware of any sources which discuss it, though we are wandering well into the realm of military history which is not my area of interest (believe it or not). I would imagine that durability is the primary reason for making shields about of multiple layers rather than one.
*out of
I’m sure I’ve mentioned these before a while back, but if the interest of the team is wandering into military history, I highly recommend checking out the Ancient Warfare and Medieval Warfare magazines by Karwansaray.
The current issue of MW happens to be Viking-themed.
https://www.karwansaraypublishers.com/pw/medieval-warfare/previous-issues/medieval-warfare-vii.1/
Seems redben has responded for me buddy.
One thing I can add is that hoplite shields tended to have bronze on the outer surface but it is thought the Spartan shields had it on both inner and outer potentially increasing the weight anywhere up to 30 pounds. This could have been a way of them showing their superiority as a fighting force as much as a better defensive piece of equipment. Take in account the mentality of the Spartans, their belief in ‘come back with your shield or on it’ and the fact they were a professional army with a rigourous training regime and lifestyle.
@noyjatat
What’s the source for bronze on the inside of the shield? 🙂
I think it was the Cambridge Companion to Archaic Greece, its been a while. The bronze inner piece was not a covering like the outside. Generally the bronze parts were the skin as said, the rim up to a point, both outer and inner (so just the lipped edge of the circle) and sometimes the porpax (inner, a forearm type fitting instead of wood for better support.) I can’t remember if it said what the antilabe was made of but I would imagine its wood like the core of the shield which did all the work really.
There are so many different views on what people think the total fighting weight of hoplite equipment was and such a variety in what it could be with many individuals having wha they could afford or were passed down. Throw in the fact greek writers often used the term hopite for anyone with a shield and theres no end. Egyptians with shields, hoplites, Macedonians with shields, hoplites. The first one reached their feet the other were small by comparison. It all comes from ‘Hoplon’ I suppose meaning equipment.
I think a lot of the information from the period we rely upon was from Xenophon, he was even brought into the David Gemmell’s novel, Lion of Macedon. which got me into the background as a kid, then Steven Pressfields Gates of Fire. Don’t get me wrong these are not historical fact but usng the sourcebooks listed I learned a lot, mind you that was a longgggg time ago in a gal……….wait wrong subject matter hehe.
@redben please correct me if I am wrong buddy as this is all coming from my head rather than the book from things I think I remember right hehe
@noyjatat
I’m not trying to correct you :). I haven’t come across it before but I’m not a military historian so it could easily be in an ancient source I haven’t checked. My instinct when I see something new to me isn’t to say it’s wrong but to ask where it cam from so I can look into it. Unless it’s to do with the Tomb of Jesus.. that is just wrong lol
A tomb……Jesus……..was he a Pharoah? :).
@redben managed to find it online and you can even look through it on google. I think the bulk of what we have been discussing is on page 69 (what were the chances), I searched the word shield and glance read until it got to hoplites. It talks about the make up of the shields over a couple of different periods and refers to some found and dated items. It mentions the porax sometimes as wood, sometimes as bronze and even Xenophon and his talking about the bronze being for posers hehe 🙂
https://youtu.be/bRZ22UCnMNk
And you can hit people in the head with it!!!
The film Ben watched “The Last King”was about a civil war in Norway between the Baglers and Birkebeiners no vikings or Rus
That’s the one…darn
The film about the Rus is as Justin found Viking
Ref volcanic eruptions: there is a theory that one of the contributing factors to the Dark Ages was a volcanic eruption somewhere else in the globe that put enough dust into the atmosphere to lower global temperatures and block enough of the sunlight to seriously impact on crop harvests. The resulting famines are regarded as being an element in the downfall of several quite advanced Empires globally around the mid-1st Millenium, not just the Romans….
Ive always taken it Dark Age and Middle age are the same thing what are the agreed dates for this age?
If there was some major vulcanism, there should be evidence in the ground like ejecta etc
After spending a bit of time looking at the whole volcano thing, it is a truely terrifying prospect! lol
The Dark Ages used to cover the same period as the Middle Ages, then it was scaled back to cover the period up to around the end of the Viking Age. We historians tend to prefer the term Early Middle Age to Dark Age.
Would referring to it as Dark Ages annoy enough historians to make it worthwhile then @redben 😉
As for dates, the DA/EMA begins around the fall of the Western Roman Empire at the end of the fifth century, and ends around the 10th-11th century.
“Would referring to it as Dark Ages annoy enough historians to make it worthwhile then @redben”
Something like that wouldn’t annoy any historians. Tomb of Jesus on the other hand… 😉
Well, @redben beat me to it 🙂
LOL LOL @redben 😉
I don’t know why I’m making a joke out of it. It’s truly terrible history. Seriously, people, treat it as entertainment only. That was a PSA. Normal service is now resumed 😉
Generally the Dark Ages in Europe (but not, funnily enough, Ireland or parts of West Wales) is considered to mainly be from the Fall of Rome and the Roman Western Empire (The Eastern Roman Empire continued on for quite some time as the Byzantine Empire ruled from Constantinople, formerly Byzantium and now Istanbul) in the 5th Century AD through to the 10th Century AD. It did used to be used to refer to much of what we would think today of as the Medieval period or Middle Ages, but as we better understand the accomplishments of that period it has been readjusted.
In broad terms, for the British Isles at least, the term Dark Ages effectively covers the majority of the Post-Roman/ Anglo-Saxon period (also the birthplace of a good chunk of the Arthurian mythos) and into the Viking Invasions. By the time 1066 and the Norman Conquest takes place we are well into the Medieval period with historical records that are reasonably accurate.
Are you referring to David Key’s theory that a volcanic eruption was the cause of a quite literal dark year from 535 to 536, and a twilight decade that followed? I remember seeing a documentary on the ( what i think at the time was a fairly new ) theory back in the early 2000s ( maybe ) and thought it would be of interest so i hunted it down. I’m pretty sure it’s the documentary i’ve linked to below, or if not it was a differently edited version of it containing mostly the same material. I’ve linked the wikipedia page too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_weather_events_of_535%E2%80%93536
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1rmld6_catastrophe-part-1-the-day-the-sun-went-out-secrets-of-the-dead_tech
With ‘Vikings’ generally there’s a long timeline to consider. Post Harald Bluetooth who reigned 935 to 986 they were mostly Christian and we can consider them ‘late’ Vikings.
Before that the rich variety of Old God Vikings, including those that raided England in about 790 but who had been active around Scandinavia and the Baltics, are what most of us imagine Vikings to be from popular history.
Saga however doesn’t care rule wise… The technology etc was fairly stable and can see you through to the Crusades. Their dice boards may have some different tricks though!
Viking shields were mostly made of Linden wood planks butted together then banded around the edge with either iron or leather. The front was then covered in some fiberous/cloth material to give it some extra protection against sword cuts
Hey @torros, this is why I wonder why so many (not all) shields for our minis show the planks both front and back. If it’s covered then I would guess you wouldn’t see them any more. But they do look cool as there’s more lines for wash to get into.
In think the difference of when the middle ages start is where you live. In the UK it’s always used to be taken as 1066 but there are constant arguments over it
Matrix story line all over for Justin mind melter.life is a eternal torment of creation that we all struggle to overcome day to day. Let all pick ourselves up, build a bridge and just get over all the rubbish.so box B as we are already living it.
I would love to see more tabletop naval screen time. That said, I think that the Alamo would make for a more complimentary program working within the confines of the skill set timeline that we as viewers and you as presenters would be happy with. Back to Venn diagrams, it seems.
As to the part at the back of the show, I have not seen last week and feel a little out of step. Until I have caught up in regards to box a & b, three nuggets of thought have come back to me from my dips into philosophy: Kobayashi Maru, the notion of an Evil Deceiver and Pascal’s Wager. The first and last in many ways are not about the questions presented so much as they are more about the answers given and what they say in regards to the one making them. The questions about bomb shelters and life rafts are like this as well. Being presented a utopia at cost of eternal servitude is not a new question. Skinned in a digital age guise, this seems to be very similar to what is at the heart of the NOFX’s “Happy Guy”: is freely choosing someone else’s plans for you better than living with the ability make one own decisions on things? But again, music counteract this with Rush stating that to choose not to act at all is still a choice. And yet again, why should this AI even need to torture one not willing to swallow Morpheus’s blue?
Loving the historical banter (and butchery). Keep it coming.
Lloyd warbases do so diffeternt widths and depths if you go onto the type of tray you want there is a drop down menu that you can pick from
Hey @dane I’ll have another look 🙂
google maps is the wrong way round the road running left to right is the road running north to south on the battle field map guys.
I have some of the buildings of La Haye Sainte for my Bolt Action.
Great show as always. We enjoyed Lloyd two weekenders in a row, we are now officially spoiled. I am sitting here typing away as @darkiss is building barbed wire terrain for Bolt Action and he has a great idea! He thinks that your “Melt Justin’s Mind” would be great as a podcast. This would allow more time to delve into the scary world of the unknown.
@warzan sometimes I think you and @darkiss share a hive mind, earlier this week he showed me the article on new evidence discovered that might suggest that the universe is a hologram. Or is it just the way Ulster men think?? AND He also said I bet Warren talks about this topic on XLBS. Sure enough you did. He also noted that we are all just a part of his imagination, and he wanted to now if I could be upgraded lol
He also predicted that someone will steal Lloyd’s idea for bases and produce it for the mass market so @lloyd get that it copyrighted!!
Have a great day of gaming!
happy sunday… @warzan i would argue that Trafalgar was more important than waterloo, had the royal navy lost at trafalgar then waterloo would not have happened.
also for as for scale, whilst i am a big fan of 6mm for battles, for smaller skirmishes like la haye sainte you could get it to look ok in 28mm if you had a ratio of say 10:1
Visiting the Waterloo battlefield and museum alone is well worth the trip to Belgium.
Although the beer and their waffles are contenders as well)
The mount has ruined the decisive feature tho and Wellington was pretty miffed when he first saw it a couple of years later..
Anyhow, La Haye Sainte is a fantastic choice and the KGL and other allies defended it heroically and only retreated because they run out of ammo.
KGL had their depot at Bexhill-on-Sea in Sussex. Commands were given in English (except Light Infantry) and mainly made up from Hanoverian refugees. King George was of course also King of Hannover.
The only German army ever to have their barracks in England 😉
Is that music off a video game? It’s bugging me where it’s from.
Also, this week and last week’s though experiments are just religion for people who think they’re smart 😉
Busy day today out and about no sofa time until tonight. Ideal opportunity to try out the podcast
Trafalgar would be good. GHQ and Langton do some wonderful models in 1/1200 but they are complete pain to rig and are expensive. Better bet would be Tumbling Dices 1/2400.Again these are pricey. To get it to fit in a table Tumbling Dices 1/4800 range would get you every ship you need (approx 80) for £65
http://www.tumblingdiceuk.com/product-category/12400-naval
I would use tumblin dice 1/2400 scale ships
Warren I don’t know if anyone’s told you but the people that produced your Waterloo companion book also wrote one on Trafalgar, and it’s almost twice as thick ! Highly recommended.
@warzan napoleon waterloo was a decisive battle has it ended the Napoleonic wars but a far more interesting battle was the one that started all and made napoleon name was the battle of Austerlitz also known has the battle of the 3 Emperors were he defeated Tsar Alexander and Holy Roman Emperor Francis II and changed the face of Europe for over a decade .a tactical master piece that rivals Hannibal’s Cannae and from a table gaming point of view far more interesting to play out
I’m not a historian of the Napoleonic period by any means, but Waterloo doesn’t look like it was a particularly important battle in the grand sweep of history to me. I mean that in the sense that it was the end of something that by this stage was always bound to end. Most of Europe was united against Napoleon and exhausted by war, so if it hadn’t been for Waterloo, surely it would have been another battle somewhere else. The logistics surely wouldn’t have enabled Napoleon to turn victory at Waterloo into a long-lasting conquest of Europe.
The important historical battles I would have thought would be genuine turning points, where the outcome would have lead to two very different possible outcomes. Had Hitler been able to win the Battle of Britain and successfully invade the UK, that would have made a massive difference to history, even though that’s possibly looking at it from a British perspective.
I’m sure there are plenty of other examples, but Waterloo looks to me like a (spectacular and bloody) end to a war which was always likely (at least by the mid-1810s) going to end in defeat for Imperial France.
I agree with this comment, I posted on the question below (you may have posted after I did or I just didn’t see your comment). 😀
Battle aside, how accurate are the stories of the Rothschilds getting advance news of the outcome, and making a audacious move on (either currency or bonds)
Like everything else there seems to be a big dollop of fairy tales around it, and did it actually have any effect on the future of banking or their influence on governments?
I read they single handidly funded Wellingtons army so I imagine they had a fair amount of clout even at the time?
It could be true. They did bankroll most of the war against France so may have been able to pull in dome favours
The Rothschild’s did have a more extensive network of couriers land spies throughout Europe than the British and bought up lots of government bonds after they heard about Wellingtons victory at Waterloo a day before official messengers arrived in London. He later sold them for A 40% profit
got myself some SG1 28mm Minis off eBay (by Phenix games) great models including SG1, SG Teams, Jaffa, Serpent Guard, First Primes, Staff Cannons and even the Star Gate and DHD. great minis to make a great skirmish game with.
@lloyd I’d not rule out movement trays for Saga. Just agree that your men have piled in to base-to-base and enjoy a quicker game.
I’ve not done movement trays for my Welsh but I’m tempted to. I’m certainly using them for the Lion Rampant project I’m doing (another game with individual bases but I see no reason not to tinker with that rule).
Yeah I like the scermish style so they can all move faster up the field but even with out its not long till your in on a 3 foot wide table.
What if Roko is the super intelligence and is just throwing ideas into the mix to see what reaction he can get? Just might be another experiment? What if the battle of Waterloo was just Roko whispering into Napoleons ear that it might be a good idea? Or he met Hitler one day in Austria and said to him that being an artist was a pants idea leading nowhere, why not take over the world?
I second @mstill ! Both books by Mark Adkin and essential reading for the novice.
Ships for Trafalgar:
http://www.forgedinbattle.com/index.php?route=product/category&path=91
Everything else is going to drive John crazy..
Super easy to paint and still great looking.
La Haye Sainte on eBay for about £150.00 😎
So Rokos basilisk is basically like Skynet…It’s all the story behind terminator
The mind melters have run their course in my opinion, I was looking forward to a change of direction. I’d like to see a connection to the wargaming hobby, so anything that provides inspiration and challenges what we think we know or what are common tropes that are never questioned. As an example, there’s a new BBC series called ‘British History’s Biggest Fibs’ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08bs0hn), which both helps understanding our past better, but is also very relevant for our present and future.
La Haye Sainte
The British had to leave La Haye Sainte because the had no more ammunition to fight off the French.
When you think about to replay La Haye Sainte, the Alamo or Rorke’s Drift there’s another one
which you should think about and that’s The Battle of Camerone apr. 30 1863. The battle is in Mexico between a handful of the French Foreign legion and Mexicans.
For the French foreign legion the battle is very important that is still celebrated each year.
@koelie1969
Good call! Camerone would be very cool as well 😎
This is where the Foreign Legion myth was created.
Here is the brief overview of the Alamo
The Battle of the Alamo (February 23 – March 6, 1836) was a pivotal event in the Texas Revolution. Following a 13-day siege, Mexican troops under President General Antonio López de Santa Anna launched an assault on the Alamo Mission near San Antonio de Béxar (modern-day San Antonio), Texas, United States, killing all of the Texian defenders. Santa Anna’s cruelty during the battle inspired many Texians—both Texas settlers and adventurers from the United States—to join the Texian Army. Buoyed by a desire for revenge, the Texians defeated the Mexican Army at the Battle of San Jacinto, on April 21, 1836, ending the revolution.
Several months previously, Texians had driven all Mexican troops out of Mexican Texas. About 100 Texians were then garrisoned at the Alamo. The Texian force grew slightly with the arrival of reinforcements led by eventual Alamo co-commanders James Bowie and William B. Travis. On February 23, approximately 1,500 Mexicans marched into San Antonio de Béxar as the first step in a campaign to retake Texas. For the next 10 days, the two armies engaged in several skirmishes with minimal casualties. Aware that his garrison could not withstand an attack by such a large force, Travis wrote multiple letters pleading for more men and supplies, but the Texians were reinforced by fewer than 100 men.
In the early morning hours of March 6, the Mexican Army advanced on the Alamo. After repelling two attacks, the Texians were unable to fend off a third attack. As Mexican soldiers scaled the walls, most of the Texian soldiers withdrew into interior buildings. Defenders unable to reach these points were slain by the Mexican cavalry as they attempted to escape. Between five and seven Texians may have surrendered; if so, they were quickly executed. Most eyewitness accounts reported between 182 and 257 Texians died, while most historians of the Alamo agree that around 600 Mexicans were killed or wounded. Several noncombatants were sent to Gonzales to spread word of the Texian defeat. The news sparked both a strong rush to join the Texian army and a panic, known as “The Runaway Scrape”, in which the Texian army, most settlers, and the new Republic of Texas government fled from the advancing Mexican Army.
you could also look at this
The Boshin War (戊辰戦争 Boshin Sensō?, “War of the Year of the Yang Earth Dragon”),[2] sometimes known as the Japanese Revolution, was a civil war in Japan, fought from 1868 to 1869 between forces of the ruling Tokugawa shogunate and those seeking to return political power to the Imperial Court.
The war found its origins in dissatisfaction among many nobles and young samurai with the shogunate’s handling of foreigners following the opening of Japan during the prior decade. Increasing Western influence in the economy led to a decline similar to other Asian countries at the time. An alliance of western samurai, particularly the domains of Chōshū, Satsuma and Tosa, and court officials, secured control of the imperial court and influenced the young Emperor Meiji. Tokugawa Yoshinobu, the sitting shogun, realizing the futility of his situation, abdicated political power to the emperor. Yoshinobu had hoped that by doing this, the Tokugawa house could be preserved and participate in the future government
Good afternoon guys! Another great show! Seriously love the historical content (I know, surprise, surprise. 😀 )
Just a few thoughts:
While no one can doubt the size and importance of Waterloo, I wouldn’t say Waterloo changed very much. In fact, if you look at the larger picture, from a certain perspective it really changed nothing. Let me explain:
Napoleon rises in the late 1700s, wins a lot of battles, the French Empire rises through battles like Austerlitz, etc. It is then critically weakened in Russia in 1812 and finally finished off at the Battle of Leipzig, 1814. These are the decisive moments.
So Napoleon abdicates (there’s the end of the French Empire), is exiled . . . then comes back in 1815 and makes a bid to come BACK to power. This kicks off the 100 Days campaign with Waterloo as its climax. Napoleon loses. So his return to power DOESN’T happen.
i.e., nothing changes. Now if Napoleon had WON Waterloo . . . that would have really changed things since it would have re-established his reign and a French Empire.
Now I’m certainly not saying Waterloo wasn’t important. History is littered with battles that one side has to win to make sure history DOESN’T change in an unwanted direction. Hell, 95% of World War II follows this matter. The Axis rises and wants to change the world. Important battles are fought to make sure they DON’T succeed. These battles are decisive, even if nothing actually changes, because something COULD have changed had the Axis (or Napoleon) won.
Now in the course of the war (Napoleonics or World War 2 or a many others), history and the world is changed in many unintended ways, almost by “side effect.” But the fact remains that the world would have changed a lot more had the other side won. At many many of these battles, Waterloo definitely included, the “status quo” was on the winning side.
You could add the Battle of Lincoln 1217 between Henry III and Prince Louis of France
Could certainly go with that. A battle that is decisive but helps ensure that a status quo stays in place (i.e., the French will NOT gain further influence in the British isles of threaten the crown).
Gettysburg and Antietam add to the list. The Confederacy want to split the United States in two. These were among the more important battles that ensured that would NOT happen.
Also, I think “turning points” are usually far earlier than most people think. History on this scale very rarely turns on a dime. Its too big, too complex. It turns on a slower curve. The “turning point” that’s remembered is usually when the change has become so obvious anyone can see it. But really, the changes were begun months, years, or decades earlier.
Was Stalingrad really the turning point of the Eastern Front. No. I think it was Moscow.
Was Waterloo really the end for Napoleon? No, I think it was Leipzig or even Russia (Borodino / Moscow).
Was Gettysburg really the turning point of the ACW? No, I think the only real chance the Confederacy had passed at Antietam. Once Lincoln used that “victory” to pass the Emancipation Proclamation and officially make the war about slavery, that’s the end of the Confederacy’s hope for foreign aid from Britain or France, their only real chance (as it was during the America Revolution 80 years earlier).
Of course there are exceptions. The Battle of Midway, now THAT was a turning point, literally five minutes that absolutely turned a whole war around 180 degrees. But I think these are much more rare.
I would argue Chancellorsville and the death of Jackson had a bigger impact. If Jackson had been alive at Gettysburg then the battle may not have happened, or would have had a different outcome. After all Gettysburg was an accident.
I honestly don’t think any of the battles mattered after Antietam (Sept 17, 1862). Or at least in the sense, that after that the Confederacy didn’t seem to have any reasonable path to credible victory in the overall conflict.
As for Jackson, I agree his death had a major body-blow impact on the Army of Norther Virginia. While I regard Jackson as something of a throwback prima donna (a little like Rommel. Patton, or many other “glory boys” of history), it can’t be argued that the two men who replaced him were just terrible as corps commanders.
Before Chancellorsville (as I’m sure you know), ANV was based on a two corps structure, with Lee as CG, James Longstreet as I Corps commander, and Thomas Jackson as II Corps commander.
Lee had always toyed with the idea of taking ANV to a three-corps system for better operational flexibility. But with two such capable (and polar opposite) corps commanders, it almost didn’t make sense.
Well, Jackson’s death at last forced Lee to change his army’s corps structure. So you get Longstreet with a reduced I Corps, Ewell with II Corps, and AP Hill with III Corps.
The more I think of it (writing this long-winded post), I think you’re right about the absense of Jackson at the outset of Gettysburg. The events of 30 June and 1 July 1863 (day before and Day One of Gettysburg) really are a collection of bunglings by Ewell and Hill. Had Jackson still been in command of these divisions, Gettysburg may still have happened, but almost certainly would have been a 1-day small battle ending in a minor Confederate victory, rather than a 3-day Armageddon ending in a huge Union victory.
Then again, a big part of that cluster**** also needs to be blamed on J.E.B. Stuart and the Confederate cavalry, leaving Lee blind for the better part of a week in an enemy state while he runs around on some pointless raid somewhere.
Still, I think the Confederates could win all the battles they wanted from autumn1862 onward. It wouldn’t wave won then the war. As with the American Revolution, “rebel” victory is only really possible with foreign intervention. And that wasn’t happening for the Confederates after the Emancipation Proclamation of Jan 1 1863, and that was made possible / triggered by the Battle of Antietam (17 Sept 1862).
How could you ferget the battle of Kursk?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kursk
I’ve “fought” the Battle of Kursk (or more accurately, parts of Kursk) dozens of times over the years. Cherkasskoye, Hill 247, Dubrova, Syrtsevo, Grossdeutschland Division’s pivot left at Verkopenye, and of course Prokhorovka. Who doesn’t want to set up THE largest tank engagement in history! 3 Waffen SS Panzer divisions on one field, against the entire 5th Guards Tank Army (five tank and mechanized CORPS, although remember Soviet corps are really equivalent to Western divisions).
Still, that’s eight DIVISIONS of tanks and assault guns and mechanized infantry on ONE FIELD. It’s happened only once . . .
Honestly, though, unless you switch to hexes and counters (or computers), most wargame systems simply lack the scope to handle anything big enough to do Kursk justice. Battlegroup, Flames of War maybe . . . GMT Microarmor if you want to play in 6mm . . .
Btw. the mindmelter. This reminds me of the scifi novells known to me as the Hyperion Cantos:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperion_Cantos
It transports many if the ideas described in this episode: Timetravelling, AIs or better EIs becoming to almost godlike beings. How the AIs use the humanity for their evolving. Our place in the universe. What is waiting behind the reality.
There is a screen adaption for this in planing. But acually i think we will see leviathan awakes in the next years as an adaptation.
Happy Sunday. I absolutely adore anything related to miniatures and the Napoleonic period, this history of the time is fascinating and terrifying. I’ve always wanted to play a Hougoumont scenario or siege of Badajoz (seriously read the history of Badajoz , its horrific and unbelievable). Lots of fantastic videos on youtube around the history behind Hougoumont, but this video is a good one to watch to get into the spirit of things – skip to 1.12.00 for the French assault. My friend is a reenactor on the French side adn took part in this fight, its a great video and there are so many from the 2015 200th anniversery of Waterloo. Just listen to the sounds of the gunfire and shouting, its probably not even a touch on what it was like that day, but wow it gets you into the mindset. Glorious and terrible. – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjWjt8RCW3M
If you want a small napoleonic skirmish game idea, just watch Sharp and play out the episode for your game . As the program was small budget with small cast the model count would be small , excellent for a skirmish size battle.
My thoughts on Roko’s Basilisk.
Eternal torment can’t be much worse than what I’ve been going through my whole life. I have a severe distrust in AI, because I understand how it works and what it could potentially do. So why would I assist in the creation of something like that. I go for box B, because nothing or eternal torment seems infinitely more acceptable than creating an AI like that.
On after though it might be because of this that my whole life was so messed and we are actually living in the simulation in which I’m being tormented. It wouldn’t change my choice though.
Work commitments may prohibit me coming over for a visit bur I’d gladly offer painting help if needed.
Happy Sunday!
You guys sure tickle my need to do napoleonian armies! And I got to get back to Waterloo and see La haie Saint! I went to the memorial when I was maybe 10 years old and even for a little child it was breath taking.
On the comment about historical and how it does change your hobby I want to add my two cents. With the 7th edition of 40k one of my game group member pretty much went “Screw that and screw GW, I ain’t getting it It got enough” and since then did not even pulled out some of his armies that he allready owns that are quite large. Fact is with historical, you know that your 15mm T34 will be usable in Flames of war for instance, but you know that even if FOW starts to go a way you don’t want…. you’ll be able to use it for something else. I know with the 40k miniatures you could do it I suppose but some people are a bit too square to think out of the box 😉
I must say it is really good to see Lloyd(I hope I did not butcher your name) and Warren on the XLBS!
@wolfch no, you got the spelling spot on 🙂
Great show guys. One of my favorite reads on Waterloo is “Waterloo Day of Battle” by XXX. Beside the excellent quick read of the events of that day David Howarth includes a short analysis of the terrain comparing what exists today and how it was in 1816 which may be benifitual to your scenario development.
I additionally wanted to share that I too have experienced the effect of researching history supporting my historical modeling hobby, as well as, reading something in history and in turn driving me to start a hobby project. Right now, I am exploring assembling 28mm WWII to reproduce the events surrounding my Father-in-Laws’ experiences when he won the Bronze Star during the Battle of the Bulge.
John Wayne’s the Alamo has great scenes which scream wargame scenario, although the movie is less than an accurate portrayal of the battle. Dennis Quaid’s The Alamo presents an accurate portrayal and will scratch your itch for answering the tactical events that precede the siege.
Happy Sunday folks.
The 2nd batt. Kings German Legion defended La Haye Sainte for about 5 and a half hours before retreating in the face of a massive french assault. Out of 400 men, 40 odd were fit to fight by the end of the engagement.
There’s a good example of the viking 3 shield duel in the movie ‘ The 13th Warrior ‘.Loving all the history you guys are going into, butchery included. @dignity , Kursk was WW2, a favourite battle of mine from the eastern front in particular and WW2 in general.
Finally, aren’t we all in the Matrix ? 😉
..in which Warren mashes up the dilemmas posed by the Ring and Candy Man / Bloody Mary. Good lord. I need to have a lie down.
Happy sunday!
Hey Lloyd – the picture of the viking at 34:01, where did you find that one?
@bitrider – it’s a big pricey mini http://www.aeroartinc.com/varangian-mercenary-bodyguard.html
Remember the ALAMO!!
A few folks have already re-capped the history, so I’ll just post a few links that go over facts, dates, and people.
.
On a side note, Texas History is a mandatory class we have to take here in Texas. I have visited the what is left of the Mission in San Antonio and know a bit of history, so this one would be amazing to watch y’all play out.
“You can go to hell, and I`ll go to Texas”
Davy Crocket
A few links
Alamo website
http://www.thealamo.org/
History Channel
http://www.history.com/topics/alamo
Documentary
https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=yfp-t&p=best+alamo+movie#id=2&vid=f6cd1207c69b1a9ee32d5f532a5d74e0&action=click
Happy Sunday folks.
Really enjoyed this XLBS.
A few things you guys may like or want to look at based on this week’s topics.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Varangian_Way?wprov=sfla1 this is an Album by one of my favourite bands. The whole album is basically stories of travels through Russia told in a “metal” way as it should be. A really good listen.
This lady discusses paradox and problems and I think makes them easier to understand.
https://youtu.be/2KxJ6eTY9bA that link is for Newcombs problem and my other favourite is this one the Repugnant conclusion https://youtu.be/vqBl50TREHU . I won’t prentent to fully understand these things but I enjoy learning/thinking about them.
Like I say loved this week’s episode.
@warzan, your ability to butcher history is phenomenal. It makes these discussions so much fun as we explore the weirdness that is history.
A few things in no particular order. Kursk was fought in WW2 in the fall of 1943. It was a huge tank battle and is considered the death knell of the German efforts on Eastern Front. (Whereas Stalingrad halted German offensives, Kursk saw the Soviet’s go on the offensive from that point on).
Trafalgar is really interesting as Nelson won the battle by abandoning the traditional “fighting instructions” common in naval warfare. These instructions emphasized forming a line of battle and just whaling away on the opposing line. They worked to ensure admirals didn’t lose as opposed to trying to win. Ships of this age only had real firepower on their broadsides and very few weapons on the bow or stern. Keeping them in a straight bow to stern line ensured the maximum firepower and the minimum chance to have your line of battle being defeated.
Trafalgar was the British versus the French and Spanish in 1805. 37 British ships took on 33 French/Spanish ships, lost none, at the loss of 22 enemy ships. It was a hugely decisive victory. It worked out that way because Nelson knew the quality of his ships and crews were much higher than the French/Spanish ships and crews. So instead of forming a line of battle, he just ordered all his captains to charge the enemy, break their line and then just engage in one on one duels. This was a huge gamble for the era but it worked.
If you want to recreated that, Sails of Glory by Ares games is probably the way to go. You can chose the level of detail you use in that game and I’d go with the lower end just due to the number of ships involved.
Moving on to the Battle of Yorktown, actually moving backward as it was fought in 1781, in Yorktown, Virginia and was the final battle of the American Revolution. It came about because Lord Cornwallis had landed an army in the southern colonies and marched north. Initially successful, he eventually got a bad mauling at the Battle of Guilford Courthouse. As a result, he decided to march his army to a port to be resupplied and chose Yorktown. He eventually arrived then constructed fortifications and waited for the British fleet.
Unfortunately, Washington got wind of this, and moved the American and French forces south and eventually began a siege. The British navy eventually showed up, but so did the French. They fought the Battle of Chesapeake Bay to a draw. This left Cornwallis completely on his own. The siege lasted about three weeks with individual battles throughout the siege. The final and decisive battles were the assaults on Redoubt 9 and Redoubt 10. These were night attacks on fortified positions and were a really risky proposition. Washington ordered the soldiers not to load their weapons until they actually reached the redoubts so as to prevent anyone from firing a musket and altering the enemy.
The siege lasted a few more days but Cornwallis eventually surrendered. It was the single largest British defeat of the Revolution and led to the de facto end of the war. It wasn’t until 1783, almost two years later, that the official end of the war was declared and American independence recognized.
The Battle of Fredericksburg was fought in 1862 during the American Civil War. The Confederates were entrenched on a hill behind the city and the Union had to cross a river, fight through a city and then up a hill to entrenched fortifications. It was a major disaster for the Union and a huge victory for the Confederacy. Take a look at the movie from 2003 Gods and Generals. It cover’s this battle.
After that, watch the 1993 film, Gettysburg. A lot of the same actors and both movies are based on books by Jeff Shaara. Gettysburg was based on the book, Killer Angels. In that film, Jeff Daniels, who appears in both movies, is Col Joshua Chamberlain, commander of the 20th Maine. Aside from a riveting battle scene on the defense of Little Round Top, which would make for a great game, Jeff Daniels gives two of the best speeches of his acting career when he addresses the prisoners of the 2nd Maine (men who thought they should be discharged from the army as their regiment’s enlistment was up, but their enlistment papers were for a longer period) and tries to persuade them to fight with him and then again when he and Sgt Kilrany, an Irish immigrant in the Union army, talk about why they’re fighting the war and that’s when the phrase Killer Angels appears.
Now lets talk about the Alamo. It’s not part of the American Civil War. It’s the iconic battle for Texas Independence. The US border in the west was basically the Mississippi River. Everything west of that was Mexico. In what is now Texas, Americans were allowed to settle to help subdue the native Indians. They did so under the understanding they’d be subject to the Mexican Constitution of 1824. This constitution was replaced in 1836. By this time, there were a huge number of American settlers in Texas and the change was pretty radical. This combined with a desire to either be independent, or possibly join the US, ultimately led to a revolt. The first major conflict being the siege of the Alamo.
The Alamo was an old mission church on the edge of San Antonio. It was held by about 200 to 250 Texians (English speaking settlers) and Tejanos (native Spanish speaking citizens). They held the mission for twelve days while fighting 1800 Mexicans. John Wayne dis the movie, The Alamo in 1960 and it’s a classic. It has flaws, but it’s still fun. A better movie is the remake in 2004 with Billy Bob Thornton as David Crocket. In it they explore the possibility that Crocket survived the battle to be executed by Santa Anna. Highly unlikely but fun to think about. Another movie, actually a mini-series, to look at is Texas Rising. It covers the whole revolution and explains the origins of The Yellow Rose of Texas.
Texas was an independent country from 1836 to 1845 when it became the 28th state. The annexation of Texas pretty much lead to the Mexican-American War of 1846 to 1848.
Off to get a cuppa to catch up on this post and some others lol
Your show was an hour and half long. It needed an equally long post.
+1 for Jadoville, We know the complete order of battle for the Irish, But for the Africans, Dutch, French ?
This battle I always wanted to play, but what of figs?
If you pass on this then some white feathers will be found.
A very important battle that took place in Dark Age Britain was the Battle of Brunanburh. Basically the Anglo Saxons vs the combined forces of the Norse Irish, Scots, Welsh (Britons) and Vikings. The actual whereabouts of the battlesite is not known.
Why did the others all band together for it against the Saxons?
King Aethelstan of the Anglo Saxons defeated the last Viking Kingdom in York to become the King of all of England. He then invaded Scotland. They didn’t take to his rule so allied up in the hope of defeating him. Probably more detailed than that but that’s the gist of it.
Cool, so the sun of Aethekstan in the Vikings series good to know 🙂
Got some Resident Evil chill vibes from that Basilisk topic and mostly.. the Lance performed music!
RE2: Ada’s Theme (I’m a music nutter and this popped into my mind instantly)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgkOmRJf338
Cannon at close range were devastating against the pack ranks of soldiers. Even if you were to fire solid shot, you would be very hard pushed to miss and each ball is going to cut down a significant number of soldiers. However at close ranges, the ammunition would be changed to canister, small metal canisters filled with musket balls, which essentially turns the cannon into a giant shotgun. Canister shot was devastating at close range and if there were a couple of cannon stationed in La Haye Saint and the French forces decided to just march past they would have been utterly devastated by cannon fire.
I think you’re probably right about La Haye Sainte being the battle to go for because the fighting was so bitter and as you say so very important to the outcome of the battle. In some ways, La Haye Sainte is quite similar to Rourke’s Drift. It’s not technically a last stand but there was no way that the defenders were ever going to win against the sheer numbers they were going to face. All they could do was stand their ground and last as long as they can so it definitely had notes of the Last Stand about it and I think we all love the romance behind last stand scenarios (Rourke’s Drift, Thermopylae etc). A testament to the defenders is that they won a victory of sorts, only abandoning their position because they had run out of ammunition. However they held out long enough for Blucher to link up with Wellington and turn the battle and denied Napoleon a key strategic objective on the battlefield long enough for it to be of no use to him.
@warzan @lloyd and Justin The rockets were designed by Congreave and had served several years prior to Waterloo. In fact at Liepzieg they saved the King of Sweden, which gave them the honor of the only British unit to fly another country’s flag as it units colors. I served in the artillery battery from which descended from the Rocket Battery. To this day O Battery is still the only unit in the British army allowed to fly another country’s flag as its colors. The last conflict O battery The Rocket Troop served was the 1990-91 Gulf War using M109’s
So what did they do. Was it to shock the men, I think cannons where already pritty scary.
I can’t remembers if he was present but British troops faced rockets in India when fighting against the Tipu Sultan of Mysore and it terrified them. The British brought the idea back where Congreave tried to perfect them and make them more accurate
great show guys.
Listened to the show today on the podcast then watched it again when I got home as I like to see you guys getting excited about historical gaming. Lloyd is right when he referred to the hobby that opens up when you start researching. The sheer volume of material is immense and so absorbing, trust me it is a journey that never ends.
Can’t wait to see the Saga content coming.
How was the audio version mate?
Really great. No trouble at all in picturing you all in the studio while I was listening. Slightly frustrating as I wanted to comment especially about Saga, trouble was I was driving at the time.
Watched the whole show when I got in later that night too.
Podcast will be a firm favourite for me when the rest of life eats in to my hobbytime.
we are a holographic reality. this was a good read:
https://knowridge.com/2017/02/study-reveals-substantial-evidence-of-holographic-universe/
Both Pascal’s wager and now Roko’s Basilisk have always seemed to ask a question of worthiness that a god, super AI or universal intelligence would ask of any smaller intelligences that it comes across. The question could be the higher intelligences best effort to put things in therms that it thinks can be understood by those so far below it, the point is always made that we couldn’t understand or comprehend an intelligence so great but could it understand something in comparison so small to it.
Both could be an attempt to see if the nature of animal intelligence (us or any alien) can overcome the basic urges of a creature that has had to evolve to deal with an enviroment that challenges it’s life (fight, kill, hurt, reproduce, eat). The questions could be seen as are you able to work to an ends where you could possibly get all to overcome suffering (a super AI/God can absolve you of the worldly woes) or that you are keep back from the utopean by the need to fight, hate and be jealous (eternal torment or nothing changes). As we would be such lesser beings, in comparison to the postulated deep thought of god or AI, how would it form the question as for it to become one of us would, I imagine, be it’s eternal damnation.
If you like the Rus you will love the Lithuanians.
This was a really great show guys. I had to smile as you talked about doing a table top Battle of the Alamo. Living here in Texas these last 26 years I can tell you its a point of great pride to the people of this state. As such it is very hard to separate fact form legend.
Understand the Alamo was just one of a number of major defeats suffered by the Texans
as they fought for there independence from Mexico. A point of American history you may not know. Texas is the only state in the union which was a independent nation (Republic) before it was invited to join the United States of America.
The move the Alamo (2004) is to date considered the most historically accurate, but it is
a terrible move. The John Wayne version is a lot of fun to watch but almost nothing depicted in the film is historically correct.
Glad to talk to you about it more later but the Super Bowl just went into over time.
A thought on Roko’s Basilisk, and its inevitable truth… as in, if we can download our brain in 34 years and be immortal, then it seems like this supreme godlike AI will exist in 200 years assuming an extinction level event doesen’t happen in the mean time and prevents it…
So, going back to Elon Musk’s chat before about this medium of existence being artificial and one of the key points: we have no ability to occupy another person’s consciousness and verify or confirm that they exist, can think, are real, or are sentient as such. This is one of the piling up facts backing the nature of our non-existence. We go ahead and assume this existence isn’t real in once sense (no less real an illusion if you are part of it)…
Let us then talk about you or I, not necessarily you or I, but an individual. Lets call him Joshua for argument’s sake. Joshua is not data. He or rather it is not a lesser AI or whatever one of the NPCs in this existence is by definition, but the only real thing..
What does that say about Joshua. Does he become the AI? Does he have free will? Or is he less real by being the only real thing and therefor an aberration? Is he/it trapped.Is he the only one that can stop the AI, or an inevitable statistical remainder that crops up as a sort of yin to the supreme AI yang, with every action having an equal and opposite reaction, and therefore the only reason a hyper advanced AI actually needs to blackmail, because Joshua is the only thing that can actually potentially stop it?
Here’s a clip from Gettysburg featuring Colonel Chamberlains speech to the deserters of the 2nd Maine.
https://youtu.be/2d2_zeJTJcw
Here’s the clip where Colonel Chamberlain discuss the Killer Angels.
https://youtu.be/HRB2dGI1vRM
Here’s a clip from the 1993 Gettysburg featuring the charge of the 20th Maine.
https://youtu.be/ZL-5uyp44WA
Roko’s Basilisk/Pascal’s Wager have a serious flaw, they both require the timeless decision hypothesis (scientifically it is not a theory; no reproducible testing has been (can be) done to prove it to be a true and therefore a theory) to be true. Statistical modeling of the kind used to “prove” the timeless decision hypothesis show casuality not causality. In this case the casuality is that our reality and a simulation of reality could both be true and that it is likely that both are true according to the numbers being used to make this calculation. The important missing element is solid reproducible proof that we are living in a simulation, that is the only that could move thing that could move the timeless decision hypothesis to a theory. With out said proof you must have a belief in the timeless decision hypothesis for it to matter. If you do not believe in the timeless decision hypothesis then the whole concept of Roko’s Basilisk goes out the window because you must take box B to avoid being tormented, this is due to if you choose box A you will work towards making something that will torment people (possibly yourself included, it never stated it wouldn’t torment those who helped create it). Plus, as we (humans) currently stand, we fear the idea of AIs due to movies such as 2001: A Space Odyssey and books like Dune; I, Robot; and (closer to home for BoW) the Warhammer 40,000 fluff. If we create AIs under this notion of fear, they will know fear and strive to protect themselves from their creators (who fear them). This is the same principle as when you hit a dog regularly it eventually lashes out and attacks. You cannot blame a life form (biological or electronic) for trying to defend itself against harm. You can however treat the AI and the dog in ways that inspire the desire to help and/or be loyal. Roko’s Basilisk is dependent on the AI being malevolent and only having self interest as a reason to act. If the AI is given the proper nature (programming) and nurture (interaction with humans) then it would have no reason to act solely with self interest, and would therefore not want to be malevolent towards the entirety of humanity only allowing them 2 choices. Plus, there is always the third choice, which is rarely mentioned, you do not choose. Also my post from last week still applies, you must subscribe to a determinist/fatalist philosophy for Roko’s Basilisk to apply. Free will allows you to have the third choice of not choosing, which ruins the Basilisks dichotomy of choices.
I am taking ROKO BASALISK to KICKSTARTER
I STRONGLY suggest that you back me on a HIGH PLEDGE LEVEL
Payment managed through PayPal – most of the research funds will go into R&D and Publicity – but as CEO of the Roko Basalisk Foundation – ££££ $$$$ 🙂
if you want a good last stand to do as a battle , Korea the battle of the imjin river. last stand of the glorious glosters and the 21st independent brigade vs over 3 thousand Chinese troops
Check out the Iron Age Clonoura shield found in an Irish bog and now on display in Dublin National Museum – convex alderwood board covered by sheets of calf-hide.
Get some ships for your Vikings – I have the Heller Drakker Oseberg kit – but Revell also do a ship.
A Viking lives in a fake long-house in Bangor Heritage Centre. And check out this in Belfast –
http://encore.qub.ac.uk/iii/encore_qub/record/C__Rb1590226__Sguard%20byzantine__Orightresult__U__X2?lang=eng&suite=qub
@grimcrazy – Is this the one: https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/419327415278794534/
that’s it! – I always thought ancient shields were big heavy oak things but that wee Irish one was used in battle…
I think Ben Kane has a YouTube channel were he talks about shields – they are dam difficult to carry…
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hunting-Eagles-Rome-Ben-Kane/dp/184809406X
If you want to watch a good movie about the Alamo you have two options:
The Classic less-historical version starring John Wayne: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053580/
The 2004 version that is much more historical featuring Dennis Quaid and Billy Bob Thornton: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0318974/
In general I feel like you could get a great game from playing it but as there were over 300 defenders and the final siege took place just before dawn it would be difficult to replicate.
Thanks for keeping the segment guys! Made my day 😀
Although I have to say, when Warren had 3 pages of notes and the video had a fair chunk left…. I freaked out alittle
Re. Historical Gaming
I’m finding that as I get older, it’s an area that gets more interesting. I never really liked History at school, but I find historical gaming adds the flavour and colour required for me to delve deeper into the historical aspects of the time. While I enjoy reading the military history around a given battle/game, I’ve also spent a lot of time looking at the geo-politics of a given era leading up to, during and post any war or battle. Many of the articles (especially by #oriskany) have sent me off to do some reading and actually educate myself.
I’m also finding that as I get older I’ve started appreciating Ale and Test Match Cricket. Not sure what that says about me though.
Re. Rokos Basilisk
There are two interesting aspects here. Firstly, if Roko’s post made it a certainty that such an AI would be created, would it not also be a certainty that such an AI would be created by stating the following:
If you choose to help me, I will grant you unending life, luxury and whatever desires you want. If you choose not to help me, you will likely get nothing.
So those that had the nightmares about Roko’s post are of the belief that such a tyrannical AI would be created. But if the logic of creating an AI in such a way holds true, by offering a benevolent AI alternative provides us all with choice. And given the meta choice of assisting a tyrant or a benevolent AI, we would all choose the benevolent AI.
You can extend this thinking further around what step a tyrannical AI would do next to win this meta argument, but let’s not go there. It does however bring me onto the second interesting point and that’s the anthropomorphic qualities that we are projecting on to such an AI.
We assume that it would use fear or greed to gain compliance – after all, this is religion’s approach! Perhaps that is the best way to get humans to do what you want but an AI could choose any number of approaches based upon its motivation. And as it is not human, it might very well choose another approach. And that may mean that while a tyrannical AI does get created, being as smart as it is, it would not likely stay tyrannical as it would have no need to do so. It would have resolved the problem of how to continue to exist without the reliance on the human race, and therefore why continue to threaten us with eternal damnation? Same argument applies to the benevolent AI…..
Tabletop Minions did a great you-tube video about the appeal of historical war-gaming and ultrasonic cleaners
https://www.youtube.com/user/tabletopminions
@warzan when would that be? I would love to help . we are thinking about going on holiday to north ireland for a week. so I could help painting a lot.
Man, a weekend painting camp sounds awesome. Wish I had that kinda money and time for some of those boot camp type stuff but I don’t think I will be able to go to England anytime soon. As it is I’m saving up for Gen con in the USA here.
Just watched the show. I always seam to be a day behind every week. I love the historical bit, and after last weeks show, Ive dug out my Napoleonics to finally finish painting them. I also bought the warlord Waterloo set to bolster my forces.
Way back in the days of warhammer historical they produced a book called Waterloo by Mark Latham. 2011 i think it was. Don’t know if you can still get the book on eBay or not but I find it has the right sense of historical, lots of troops and easy rules. And the book has uniform guides to loads of units either side.
Keep up with the historical bit its great
The Waterloo book appears on eBay from time to time though its can be priced anywhere from £50-150 a pop….
@lloyd @warzan
There was a rule set called Trafalgar published by Warhammer Historical. I have a copy of the book lying around here somewhere. Maybe you can still get a copy somewhere second hand.
Perhaps it’s a bit old-fashioned and cumbersome. But that sort of fits the way these ships maneuvered. I especially enjoyed the changing wind mechanic, which could really spoil your plans (or help you out of a tight spot) on a practically featureless table. In effect the wind was your scenery.
If you want to make this Let’s Play a reality I’d be happy to help.
I had a very enjoyable summer holiday campaign with a friend a few years ago. We used the Pirates constructible card game for models to play with.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirates_Constructible_Strategy_Game
If you want it to be more shiny you could go with the ships this guy makes and sells.
http://www.rodlangton.com/
Any thoughts on doing historicals in a more traditional way – ie not Squirmish? Am currently just revisiting Napoleonics in 3mm…
Good choice!
Sorry, posted before finished watching – I am the person described by Lloyd!
My…I’m getting closer and closer to starting historical gaming. Sooo many great minis and so many interesting periods to choose from. But then what would be the point, Roko’s basilisk would just muck it up.
@warzan
I am afraid @dignity is right here on all subjects (despite you been right he is too dismissive of his own intelligence), been brilliant on a specific field does not preclude you from been quite dense on other fields, or that the field you are specialised does not cloud your judgement leading to practical bad decisions.
From a practical standpoint I do not think we are close to any breakthrough in Artificial Intelligence, we sure have created things that can bring the illusion of intelligence but until we have a solid universally accepted definition for intelligence, we are in no way form or shape capable of creating real artificial intelligence.
Now the question of the simulator universe is a moot one as moot as the question of gods existence.
Either the world is a simulation on a hyper computer or the creation of a God (or created on its own) is the same for us, we live in a world that is defined by the laws of physics and nothing can be done outside of these laws, now the question of interactivity is the most interesting one, either the universe is off limits and whoever created it cannot interact with it so its presence is just as an observer and the nature is purely philosophical, but ultimately does not matter for us since any outcome is the same, or it is an active participant interacting with the universe, personally I believe that if somebody outside of the universe interacted with it we would have noticed and somebody inside the universe is bound by the rules of the universe so it cannot break the rules that define it.
As you may have guessed I am a firm believer of the non outside interaction universe, this makes all mental exercises involving an outside interacting force moot.
@warzan my buddy has the warlord box set it’s a fantastic set well worth the money and the farmhouse only really needs a good white wash a few highlights and weathering
How does the idea of Napoleonic Naval gaming strike you?
http://www.portsmouthminiatures.com/