<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <title>Converjed</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/atom.xml" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2008-11-26:/sites/converjed//1</id>
    <updated>2013-04-19T12:32:09Z</updated>
    <subtitle>Random thoughts of interest (to me at any rate). Wireless, post-humanism, cyberspace, virtual reality, virtual worlds, Second Life, the connected home, transhumanism, AI, SF, space, anime, manga, mountains, wilderness, work, family et al</subtitle>
    <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type Personal 4.1</generator>

<entry>
    <title>Seelowe - The SPI Game of the Invasion of England</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2013/04/seelowe_the_spi_game_of_the_in.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2013:/sites/converjed//1.1691</id>

    <published>2013-04-18T19:05:20Z</published>
    <updated>2013-04-19T12:32:09Z</updated>

    <summary>During a wonderful week&apos;s holiday up in the Forest of Bowland ( walking in the day, gaming in the evening - mostly Britannia) I managed to fit in a solo play of the old SPI Seelowe game of the planned...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Wargaming" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="boardgame" label="boardgame" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="spi" label="spi" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ww2" label="ww2" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<div><br /></div><div>During a wonderful week's holiday up in the Forest of Bowland ( walking in the day, gaming in the evening - mostly Britannia) I managed to fit in a solo play of the old SPI Seelowe game of the planned invasion of the UK by Germany in 1940. Since I grew up around Dorking in Surrey, right by the Mole Valley gap my childhood walks were always full of pill boxes, and ever since the Battle of Dorking pamphlet of the late 1800s the area has always been seen as a strategic focus for any invasion.</div><div><br /></div><div>I decided to play the September Navy scenario as this was the most realistic in the game. The invasion is focussed on the ports of Kent and Sussex initially, and comsists of a small early assault phase followed about a week or so later by a moderate main landing force. This is not on the scale of D-Day. &nbsp;It is assumed that the RAF was eliminated in the Battle of Britain, and that the Royal Navy has been locked out of the Channel. The Luftwaffe is flying regular interdiction strikes from France - but its range is limited, and with daily rolls for weather the ability to actually use the Luftwaffe and land troops can be a pretty hit or miss affair.</div><div><br /></div><div>The write up was done pretty much turn by turn, and I haven't made any attempt to tidy it up - but hopefully it gives you a flavour of the game. Total playing time was about 4 hours.</div><div><br /></div>

<div><b>Turn 1</b></div><div>German landings at Brighton, Eastbourne, Hastings, Folkestone and Dover</div><div>Coastal opposition eliminated. 2nd Div deploys towards Chatham</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8660416639/" title="IMG_2589 by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8243/8660416639_11e29e7b5d_z.jpg" width="400"  alt="IMG_2589"></a></p>

<div><b>Turn 2</b></div><div>British slow to mobilise. 29 Gren Regt keeps 19 Div holed up in Dover. 51 Gren Regt protects L flank at Worthing. 28th Amphib Tank Regt siezes ports along the coast. Main thrust towards Dorking, secondaries on flanks to Maidstone and Guildford. British 1st Div under air attack at Redhill, and 2nd Div destroyed NW of Maidstone. One RAF fighter group lost in air attacks. Rough, landings only at ports.</div><div><br /></div>

<p><br />
<div><b>Turn 3</b> Rough seas still limit landings, slow expansion of bridgehead. leading forces pushing in to Surrey</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Turn 4</b> Bad weather delays reinforcements and grounds air attacks. GE attack on 1st Div delayed.</div><div><br /></div></p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8661515458/" title="IMG_2587 by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8248/8661515458_aff006b32d_z.jpg" width="400"  alt="IMG_2587"></a></p>

<div><b>Turn 5</b> Still rough but skies clear. Luftwaffe interdicts 1st Div and 47 &amp; 48 Armd Bdes at Newlands Corner. Combined assault by 4 Regts and Para Bns destroys 1st Div (and Dorking) for the loss of the paras and a Regt. A proposed simultaneous assault on the Armd Bdes failed to materialise. 64 and 65 Gren Regt close on 25 Bde E of Croydon ready to open the way to the city where defence Brigades are still not fully mobilised.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Turn 6</b></div><div>German assault takes out the 47 and 48 Armd Bdes. Supply issues prevent assault on 25Bde. Germans now have a clear route to the W of London, and in the east are only 3 hex away from Central London. The first wave of the major GE reinforcements are embarked, and the British are belatedly mobilising some of their more far flung troops in East Anglia, Wales, and the West Country.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Turn 7</b></div><div>Air attack on 42 Div S of Guildford fails and one Sqn lost, operating at extended range but despite 8 Sqns on task. Successful interdiction against 7 Div moving SW fm Chelmsford. 19 Div in Dover finally falls, but takes 49 Regt with it. The attack against 42 Div goes in despite the failure of air support, and destroys the Div but 42 and 51 Gren Regts lost. 64 and 65 Regt push 25 Div back, and it withdraws across the Thames. The Germans are only 3 hex away from Central London, and despite forces massing in the Chilterns the situation for London is looking grim.</div><div><br /></div>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8661517804/" title="IMG_2593 by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8263/8661517804_dc317a4bd5_z.jpg" width="400"  alt="IMG_2593"></a></p>

<div><b>Turn 8</b></div><div>The German strategy is to obliterate London before clearing the rest of the country. Weather is storms which delays landing of the main wave of reinforcements and renders the Luftwaffe useless. UK 5 and 16 Div destroyed defending Guildford, 55 and 61 Regt move in, whilst 17 Pz Regt protects the flank from 6 UK Div and 1, 15 and 16 Pz Div sweep on to West London. Other German forces advance on a broad front to the outskirts of London ready for the bloody street by street fighting. A second wave is moving up from the beaches.</div><div><br /></div>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8660420889/" title="IMG_2596 by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8249/8660420889_06b2da21dd_z.jpg" width="640" height="478" alt="IMG_2596"></a></p>

<div><b>Turn 9</b></div><div>The Germans attempt a first assault across the Thames but are repulsed. 23 Div in Chichester also holds out. British forces mass in the Chilterns &nbsp;ready for a potential counter-attack to relieve the pressure on London. weather still grounding a/c.</div><div><br /></div>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8660422919/" title="IMG_2613 by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8244/8660422919_97b8d37a17_z.jpg" width="400"  alt="IMG_2613"></a></p>

<div><b>Turn 10/11</b></div><div>A/c still grounded. Germans force way across Thames in central London but then held. Also across in Thames estuary. Supplies hampering exploitation in E. British Home Guard active and making fighting in London hard, several units unable to get in on W. British forces steadily building in Chilterns bipartisan not enough concentration to take on German screening force.</div><div><br /></div>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8661525372/" title="IMG_2618 by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8256/8661525372_4425913dda_z.jpg" width="400"  alt="IMG_2618"></a></p>

<div><b>Turn 12</b></div><div>Luftwaffe is flying again but loses on a/c in attempt to disrupt units around Basingstoke. GE destroy 5 Div W of Basingstoke, and push further across Thames estuary to complete their encirclement of London.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Turn 13</b></div><div>7 and 27 Divs defending East London destroyed. 6 Div defending Basingstoke destroyed. Only 4 units left in London but defensive line along Chilterns steadily building and Partisan and other forces massing S of Oxford.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Turn 14</b></div><div>Penultimate units in London destroyed. Luftwaffe plus 50,56 and 61 Regts sp by 5 &amp; 6 Pzr and 48 Gren Regts finally clear 60 &amp; 63 Mot Bdes and 21 and 33 Div fm Basingstoke area, only light resistance now between them and Oxford. GE encirclement of London now complete and preparing for assault on 6 Div and 33 Bde around High Wycombe.</div><div><br /></div>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8661526880/" title="IMG_2650 by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8251/8661526880_6bc5b2ac68_z.jpg" width="400" alt="IMG_2650"></a></p>

<div><b>Turn 15</b></div><div>London finally falls as 12 Div and 17 Bde give way under increasing German pressure. The Pzr Regts are immediately dispatched to aid the assault on the Chilterns. In High Wycombe 6 Div and 33 Bde are destroyed, and NW of Basingstoke 56 and 57 Partisan are destroyed by 4 &amp; 5 Pzr Regt. Apart from some militia units nothing stands between GE left flank and Oxford, and the remaining 6 British Divs in the Chilterns are surrounded.</div><div><br /></div><div>This was the formal end of the game.</div><div><br /></div><div>Victory Calculations</div><div><br /></div><div>Ports 10</div><div>GB SP ~40</div><div>GE SP 106&nbsp;</div><div>&gt;2:1</div><div>Decisive German victory</div><div><br /></div><div>Since the Germans were so close to total domination I decided to just play out their assault on the Chilterns.</div><div><br /></div>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8660427789/" title="IMG_2651 by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8245/8660427789_cf76817bb9_z.jpg" width="400" alt="IMG_2651"></a></p>

<div><b>Turn 16 (extra)</b></div><div>Successful assaults on both flanks clear 3 British divisions from Chilterns</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Turn 17 (extra)</b></div><div>All British forces except a Mot Inf Bde (Str 1) at Didcot eliminated.</div><div><br /></div><div>And that was it. The rules say that normally the Germans have a hard time winning, and it's always an issue with solo games as to whether you become naturally biased to one side or another. I made some random roles to decide to strategies - for instance giving the Germans the choice of isolating London ( which I'd have done) or assaulting it (which the dice decided). The weather also frustrated German landings and air support so I don't think they had a particularly easy ride. The British just lacked a decent number of high strength combat units, and perhaps played too passive a game, defending the North Downs/GHQ line rather than trying to push forward and engage - but again I don't think in the early stages they really had the forces to do it.</div><div><br /></div><div>All in all a fun game thought, and a nice counterpart to SPI's Normandy which I must also replay some time.</div><div><br /></div>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Battle of Lutzen - Liphook</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2013/04/battle_of_lutzen_liphook.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2013:/sites/converjed//1.1690</id>

    <published>2013-04-15T11:50:05Z</published>
    <updated>2013-04-15T12:04:59Z</updated>

    <summary> We refought the Battle of Lutzen (1813) as part of Liphook Historical Wargaming Society&apos;s series of quarterly Napoleonic Bicentenary battles. For some reason I found myself promoted to General Wittgenstein and in command of the Allied Army. We had...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Wargaming" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="liphook" label="liphook" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="lutzen" label="lutzen" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="napoleonic" label="napoleonic" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p><br />
</p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><img alt="IMG_2685.JPG" src="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/images/IMG_2685.JPG" width="600" class="mt-image-none" style="" /></span>

<p>We refought the Battle of Lutzen (1813) as part of <a href="http://www.facebook.com/LiphookHistoricalWargames?ref=stream">Liphook Historical Wargaming Society</a>'s series of quarterly Napoleonic Bicentenary battles. For some reason I found myself promoted to <br />
General Wittgenstein and in command of the Allied Army. We had a creative plan which we managed to half implement, but the French kept coming. In the end we managed to hold our position in the villages to nightfall and inflict a good amount of damage on Ney. </p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/images/IMG_2673.JPG"><img alt="IMG_2673.JPG" src="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/images/IMG_2673.JPG" width="600" height="448" class="mt-image-none" style="" /></a></span></p>

<p>A Battle Report <span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-file" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/docs/Luzten%20Battle%20Report%20-%20Allies.pdf">Luzten Battle Report - Allies.pdf</a></span> is attached.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>West Midlands Military Show 2013</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2013/03/west_midlands_military_show_20.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2013:/sites/converjed//1.1689</id>

    <published>2013-03-11T14:13:08Z</published>
    <updated>2013-03-11T14:34:00Z</updated>

    <summary>Spent an all too brief 90 minutes at the West Midlands Military Show. Good event, nice mix of stalls and games, although probably more of the former, and every stall appeared to have a related games across the aisle from...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Wargaming" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="6mm" label="6mm" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="shows" label="shows" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="wmms" label="wmms" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Spent an all too brief 90 minutes at the <a href="http://www.alumwellwargames.co.uk/index2.html">West Midlands Military Show</a>. Good event, nice mix of stalls and games, although probably more of the former, and every stall appeared to have a related games across the aisle from it (not a bad move). Even though I only had time to buy 1 book, it was useful to get eyes on things I'd been thinking about from web sites, and to chat to a few people about rules and scales. Main findings were:</p>

<p><strong>Bacchus 6mm vs Heroics and Ros</strong></p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8548217578/" title="WMMS13 - comparing Bacchus 6mm with Heroics &amp; Ros by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8239/8548217578_35615ec692_z.jpg" width="640" height="478" alt="WMMS13 - comparing Bacchus 6mm with Heroics &amp; Ros"></a></p>

<p>Having inherited 2 Divisions of French and some Russians by Heroics & Ros (thanks Alan!), and added 2 Divisions of Russians it's time to decide whether to stick to H&R or move to Bacchus. The Irregular Miniatures definitely seem a step down (and hard to paint with cav side by side), and I see what people mean about Adler size and heads. So it was good to be able to put an H&R stand up against some Bacchus. </p>

<p>The good news is that height wise they are a good match, H&R inf a tad shorter but not that you'd notice, cavalry almost spot on.. Bad news - 3 Bacchus figures have the same frontage a 4 H&R figures - the Bacchus figures are altogether chunkier. I had thought the H&R figures a bit thin, Bacchus are probably a bit fat by the same amount. This gives me a slight basing issues as I'd settled on 75mm base for 18 figures in line, and 25mm for 3 ranks of 6 in column, but with Bacchus I can probably only get 15 in a line (worse cased 12) and 3 ranks of 5, maybe only 3 ranks of 4. However since I'm not doing figure based casualties or fighting factor the figures are really only for decoration - and the Bacchus figures certainly look better - so I think I'll try them out for the British divisions I do after the Russians.</p>

<p><strong>6mm Painting</strong></p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8548214344/" title="WMMS13 - 6mm painting master class by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8231/8548214344_df33a30d8c_z.jpg" width="640" height="478" alt="WMMS13 - 6mm painting master class"></a></p>

<p>Opposite the Bacchus stand a nice painting demo/clinic for 6mm, sorry can't remember the guy's name. Really nicely done figures and a good chat about painting and basing. I do like the look of magnetic bases, and keep thinking they should sort the column/line problem, but of course column was at a variety of "orders" (close/quarter/half/open) and so the bases would never quite work unless you wanted to put your line on very narrow bases, or only have a very open column. Main tip I picked up was to use grey undercoat (or main colour of troops), then do a black in wash, and then only paint the non-blacks areas, and a final wash at the end. Worth trying with the Brits.</p>

<p><strong>10mm Science Fiction</strong></p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8547116479/" title="WMMS13 - Pendraken SF 10mm by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8508/8547116479_587bda9c1b_z.jpg" width="640" height="478" alt="WMMS13 - Pendraken SF 10mm"></a></p>

<p>I'd still like  to get in to SF gaming, but whilst 28mm seems best for skirmish I'm note sure what the best scale is for platoon/company sized games, or bigger. I've been using 6mm 1/300 for WW2 and Modern, but would like to see more detail for SF so 10mm may be the way forward. Pendraken had a few examples of their range on their stand, but would like to see more. And I can't stand "bug" and "blob" type aliens and combat walkers, so buying a blister pack was out. Perhaps they'll have more at Salute.</p>

<p><strong>Hex Terrain</strong></p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burdenshaw/8548213612/" title="WMMS13 - neat hex terrain and 10/15s by halo4256, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8371/8548213612_2cea507da9_z.jpg" width="640" height="478" alt="WMMS13 - neat hex terrain and 10/15s"></a></p>

<p>This was a very impressive hex terrain system, bet it costs a bomb. Far bigger hexes (100mm?)  than the 40mm I've decided on, so probably better suited to a "measured" rule system or very large areas, and too costly/fiddly to do at 40mm, but very nice if you've the space and budget. Note the tiered bases to get the height differences.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>NESTA Predictions for the next 10 Years</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2012/04/nesta_predictions_for_the_next.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2012:/sites/converjed//1.1682</id>

    <published>2012-04-16T09:42:57Z</published>
    <updated>2012-04-16T09:42:57Z</updated>

    <summary>Really like this NESTA post where seven leading scientists predict what we will achieve in the next ten (NOTE: TEN) years. In summary:1. We will finally set foot on Mars &gt;&gt; very unlikely by 2022 I&apos;d have thought, by we...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p><br />Really like this < a href="http://www.nesta.org.uk/news_and_features/assets/features/7_science_predictions_for_the_future">NESTA post</a> where seven leading scientists predict what we will achieve in the next ten (NOTE: TEN) years. In summary:<br /><br /><br />1. We will finally set foot on Mars >> very unlikely by 2022 I'd have thought, by we may see the Chinese thee by 2030 and the US by 2040<br /><br /> 2. GPs will be able to prescribe 'cosmiceuticals' - medicine designed specifically for our genetic make-up.<br /><br /> 3.  We will save millions of lives by driving another disease into extinction.<br /><br /> 4. We will find Earths's twin. We will discover more and more exoplanets and we will be able to find out whether they bear the signatures of life.<br /><br /> 5.  We will find life on Mars - We will send robotic probes to Mars and discover water, and new life. ->> that sounds unlikely by 2012 with funding for ExoMars being cut<br /><br /> 6. We will discover the Higgs-Boson, the missing piece in the make-up of the known universe.<br /><br /> 7. We are not alone - We will find out once and for all that we are not alone in the universe.<br /><br />Pity though that not all the speakers in the videos didn't stick a bit closer to the 10yr brief or offer more justification for the pronouncements.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Manned Space Exploration - ISECG Next Steps</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2012/03/manned_space_exploration_isecg.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2012:/sites/converjed//1.1672</id>

    <published>2012-03-13T20:32:27Z</published>
    <updated>2012-03-13T20:49:52Z</updated>

    <summary> The misleadingly titled &quot;The Global Exploration Roadmap&quot; is a nice report from the International Space Exploration Coordination Group - a group that includes NASA, ESA and other national space agencies looking at the two possible paths to Mars, one...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Space" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-M1rC0yJeWM4/To4o-LBA7aI/AAAAAAAAgEw/83bTCgTRZL4/s1600/IM+2011-10-06+a+las+23.16.23.png" width="400"/></p>

<p>The misleadingly titled "<a href="http://www.globalspaceexploration.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=bd0428e8-9163-4483-976f-57208dc6507f&groupId=10812">The Global Exploration Roadmap</a>" is a nice report from the <br />
<a href="www.globalspaceexploration.org/">International Space Exploration Coordination Group</a> - a group that includes NASA, ESA and other national space agencies looking at the two possible paths to Mars, one via the Moon and one via the Near Earth Asteroids. Each route is well described, and the following graphics summarise each option:</p>

<p><strong>Moon Next</strong></p>

<p><img src="http://www.astronautinews.it/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/NASA_RM_moon.png" width="400"/></p>

<p><strong>Asteroid Next</strong></p>

<p><img src="http://www.astronautinews.it/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/NASA_RM_asteroid.png" width="400" /></p>

<p><br />
Whilst emotionally I suppose I'm a Moon Firster (or even a Zubrin style Mars Firster) the NEAR case is well argued and in cash constrained times could be attractive - although its lack of real pazzazz may mean its actually a lot harder to fund. Another way of looking at it is that just as NASA is surrendering orbital space to the commercial operators perhaps it should leave cislunar space and Moonbases to them too.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Robots everywhere - latest from US projects</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2012/02/robots_everywhere_latest_from.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2012:/sites/converjed//1.1665</id>

    <published>2012-02-29T20:59:35Z</published>
    <updated>2012-02-29T21:11:57Z</updated>

    <summary> A couple of neat videos I came across today that show just how fast robotics are evolving. First off the formation flying insect like nano-quadrotors from the GRASP Lab at the University of Pennsylvania. Here is pretty menacing formation...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Robotics" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="dog" label="dog" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="military" label="military" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="nanocopters" label="nanocopters" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="robots" label="robots" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="usarmy" label="us army" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p><br />
A couple of neat videos I came across today that show just how fast robotics are evolving.</p>

<p>First off the formation flying insect like nano-quadrotors from the GRASP Lab at the University of Pennsylvania. Here is pretty menacing formation flying mode:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-airborne-robot-swarms-complex-video.html">http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-airborne-robot-swarms-complex-video.html</a></p>

<p>And here trying to win our hearts playing the James Bond theme.</p>

<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/_sUeGC-8dyk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></p>

<p>Second DARPA's BigDog support robot - looking just like a robotic mule.</p>

<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/xY42w1w0TWk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></p>

<p>At this rate I woudln't be surprised if the US Army has more robots than soldiers by 2030 - particularly if you also consider their Avatar project - <a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality/?utm_source=Contextly&utm_medium=RelatedLinks&utm_campaign=Previous">http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality/?utm_source=Contextly&utm_medium=RelatedLinks&utm_campaign=Previous<br />
</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Dena in full spate</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2012/01/dena_in_full_spate.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2012:/sites/converjed//1.1651</id>

    <published>2012-01-02T19:48:20Z</published>
    <updated>2012-01-02T19:54:29Z</updated>

    <summary>Somewhere beneath here is the little stream in the Ogwen Valley we used to take the kids net fishing in.[Posted with iBlogger from my iPhone]...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>TwitterBot</name>
        
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<div class="iblogger-figure iblogger-center iblogger-third" style="max-width: 640px; min-width: 5.5em"><a href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/250247816.jpg" rel="lightbox"><img src="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/250247816.jpg" style="max-width: 640px; max-height: 476px" border="1" alt="image" title="" /></a></div><div class="iblogger-post"><br/>Somewhere beneath here is the little stream in the Ogwen Valley we used to take the kids net fishing in.<br/></div><div class="iblogger-footer"><p>[Posted with <a href="http://illuminex.com/iBlogger/index.html">iBlogger</a> from my iPhone]</p></div>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Workbench - WW2 Naval</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2012/01/workbench_ww2_naval.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2012:/sites/converjed//1.1650</id>

    <published>2012-01-02T19:44:47Z</published>
    <updated>2012-01-02T19:51:45Z</updated>

    <summary>Skytrex 1/2400 WW2 NavalPainting up some 1/2400 Naval units ready for their Combat60 photocall[Posted with iBlogger from my iPhone]...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>TwitterBot</name>
        
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<div class="iblogger-figure iblogger-left iblogger-third" style="max-width: 640px; min-width: 5.5em"><a href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/247945257.jpg" rel="lightbox"><img src="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/247945257.jpg" style="max-width: 640px; max-height: 476px" border="1" alt="Skytrex 1/2400 WW2 Naval" title="" /></a><p class="iblogger-caption">Skytrex 1/2400 WW2 Naval</p></div><div class="iblogger-post">Painting up some 1/2400 Naval units ready for their Combat60 photocall<br/><br/></div><div class="iblogger-footer"><p>[Posted with <a href="http://illuminex.com/iBlogger/index.html">iBlogger</a> from my iPhone]</p></div>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Future of Science 2021 Infographic</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2011/11/future_of_science_2021_infogra.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2011:/sites/converjed//1.1639</id>

    <published>2011-11-22T14:12:57Z</published>
    <updated>2011-11-22T14:14:39Z</updated>

    <summary> http://www.iftf.org/futureofscience...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Commentary" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="futurology" label="futurology" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p><br />
<img src="http://www.iftf.org/system/files/images/IFTF_SR-1454A_FutureofScience_Mapside_onlyMed1.preview.jpg"/></p>

<p><a href="http://www.iftf.org/futureofscience">http://www.iftf.org/futureofscience</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Two New Robots with Smart Phones for Brains</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2011/11/two_new_robots_with_smart_phon.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2011:/sites/converjed//1.1638</id>

    <published>2011-11-22T14:07:21Z</published>
    <updated>2011-11-22T14:09:20Z</updated>

    <summary> The first bot is great - an iDock which turns your iPhone into a bot, but the second is so spookily like the butler bot from Caprica its uncanny. http://www.technologyreview.com/video/?vid=754&amp;channel=computing...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Robotics" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="caprica" label="caprica" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="robots" label="robots" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p><br />
The first bot is great - an iDock which turns your iPhone into a bot, but the second is so spookily like the butler bot from Caprica its uncanny.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/video/?vid=754&channel=computing">http://www.technologyreview.com/video/?vid=754&channel=computing</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Virtual Worlds: A Future History</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2011/11/virtual_worlds_a_future_histor.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2011:/sites/converjed//1.1631</id>

    <published>2011-11-04T09:02:31Z</published>
    <updated>2011-11-04T09:10:30Z</updated>

    <summary>Posted my slides from Immersion 2011 to Slideshare presenting a future history of Virtual Worlds. They are based on the Delphi exercise done at ReLive11.Virtual Worlds: A Future History[Posted with iBlogger from my iPhone]...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>TwitterBot</name>
        
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<div class="iblogger-post">Posted my slides from Immersion 2011 to Slideshare presenting a future history of Virtual Worlds. They are based on the Delphi exercise done at ReLive11.<br/><br/><br/><a href="http://t.co/ysusOqLW" target="new">Virtual Worlds: A Future History</a></div><div class="iblogger-footer"><p>[Posted with <a href="http://illuminex.com/iBlogger/index.html">iBlogger</a> from my iPhone]</p></div>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>GURPS Transhuman Space: High Frontier ***** #sfrpg</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2011/10/gurps_transhuman_space_high_fr.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2011:/sites/converjed//1.1619</id>

    <published>2011-10-05T18:08:23Z</published>
    <updated>2011-10-05T18:20:54Z</updated>

    <summary> Finally got hold of the High Frontier supplement for the GURPS Transhuman Space RPG. This is still one of the best &quot;realistic&quot; imaginings of a near-future solar system - probably circa 2150 or even 2200 given current rates. It&apos;s...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Commentary" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="CyberTech" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="gurps" label="gurps" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="rpg" label="RPG" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="sf" label="sf" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="sfrpg" label="sfrpg" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="space" label="space" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="transhuman" label="Transhuman" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p><br />
<img src="http://www.sjgames.com/transhuman/highfrontier/img/cover_lg.jpg" width="400"/></p>

<p>Finally got hold of the <a href="http://www.sjgames.com/transhuman/highfrontier/">High Frontier</a> supplement for the GURPS Transhuman Space RPG. This is still one of the best "realistic" imaginings of a near-future solar system - probably circa 2150 or even 2200 given current rates. It's certainly on a par with Paul McAuley's Quiet War series.</p>

<p>One thing that also struck me about recent SF I've read:</p>

<p>- Cyberabad Days by Ian McDonland is all about future India<br />
- Quiet War is about a dominant Brazil in space<br />
- Transhuman Space is all about a dominant China in space.</p>

<p>In other words it looks like the BRICs countries will inherit and dominate our SF future.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>BlogPress Test</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2011/08/blogpress_test.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2011:/sites/converjed//1.1586</id>

    <published>2011-08-02T17:58:07Z</published>
    <updated>2011-08-02T17:58:07Z</updated>

    <summary>Just trying out BlogPress for posting to my blog.And editing it- Posted using BlogPress from my iPadLocation:Birmingham,United Kingdom...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Just trying out BlogPress for posting to my blog.<br /><br />And editing it<br /><br />- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad<br /><br /><p class='blogpress_location'>Location:<a href='http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Birmingham,United%20Kingdom%4052.440759%2C-1.879125&z=10'>Birmingham,United Kingdom</a></p></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Thoughts on 2mm Napoleonics</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2011/07/thoughts_on_2mm_napoleonics.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2011:/sites/converjed//1.1583</id>

    <published>2011-07-17T19:35:10Z</published>
    <updated>2011-07-17T20:06:57Z</updated>

    <summary> A while ago Nick started thinking about us doing 2mm Napoleonics, so we bought a couple of test packs to get a feel for what 2mm wargaming might be like. Nick&apos;s idea was to use our standard 1mm:1m ground...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Wargaming" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="2mm" label="2mm" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="napoleonic" label="napoleonic" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><img alt="2mm_test.jpg" src="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/images/2mm_test.jpg" width="600" class="mt-image-none" style="" /></span></p>

<p>A while ago Nick started thinking about us doing 2mm Napoleonics, so we bought a couple of test packs to get a feel for what 2mm wargaming might be like. Nick's idea was to use our standard 1mm:1m ground ratio (i.e. 1:1000) with 2mm figures (c. 1:900) so that we had near unity on ground to figure scales, and even 1 figure = 1 man. This was to get away from the 1:1000 vs 1:72 of typical 20mm gaming (giving an "error" factor of around 11). The idea then went on the back burner but as part of my "summer of no 20mm Napoleonics" I decided to have a look at it again.</p>

<p>To me any set of figures and scale decisions is a compromise between five main factors: the level of game you want (eg Army level vs fireteam skirmish),  cost and time of buying and painting an army, the convenience of playing (eg how long to set up/tear down), the "accuracy" of the rules and experience, and just whether things feel right.</p>

<p>With 2mm it strikes me that there are three main ways of playing a game:</p>

<p>- The Battalion Base</p>

<p>This appears to be what most 2mm gamers do (or some even do brigade bases). Each 24-30 figure block (about 13mm by 3mm) represents a battalion. Now we know that battalion frontages in line are about 240m, say 260m for easy maths), so this means 13mm = 260m which gives a ground scale of about 1:20,000. This is almost at 1:25000 map scale, and indeed I found if I put 2mm blocks on some battle maps then they were almost the right size. The error factors is hug though - 20+ (i.e. 1:900 vs 1:20,000). Most battalion base rules also don't bother to show line or column, and certainly at Waterloo with understrength units most battalions would be mere fragments of bases, and with 200+ crowded onto a space smaller than an A3 sheet of paper a real nightmare to move or measure.</p>

<p>- The Platoon Base</p>

<p>This was Nick's original idea, a base = a platoon, so the 24 or 30 figures on the base are 1:1 with the men in the platoon. And with 1mm=1m and 2mm figures we have almost no scale error). If we take a French Company with c.120 soldiers then in 3 ranks we'd need 40 in the front line with a frontage of 40m, or 4cm in scale - just about do'able with a 2mm base (10 figure frontage = 13mm). The downside of the platoon approach though are:<br />
- You need a lot of bases, 4 per company, 24 per battalion, at 10p each give £2.40 a battalion - about the same as 20mm, so its going to cost a lot of cash and time to build a big army<br />
- You need a lot or area and set-up time - the same area as 20mm<br />
- Whilst the scaling IS right, it just doesn't look right, very small figures with a huge amount of space around them</p>

<p>- The Company Base</p>

<p>This strikes me now as the best compromise. If each base = 1 company, then a 40m frontage for a company = 13mm for a base (using 10 file bases), giving a ground scale of about 1mm=3m, i.e. 1:3000, and so an error factor of only 3. (rises to 4 if we use 10mm, 8 file bases). Six bases for a French battalion means you can show line and column easily, and the figure to man scale is about 1:4 (30 figures vs 120 men). So a battalion is line will cover 8cm, and musket range is about 5cm - which looks right on the table. </p>

<p>In terms of battlefield size, at 1:3 the greater Waterloo battlefield becomes about 1.6m x 1.3m (about 6 of my 600x600 terrain bases), and the main part of the battlefield only 1.2m  x 0.6m (just 2 bases), and so easily fitable on most tables.</p>

<p>Unit wise, the French had 100 battalions at Waterloo - just 600 bases, at 10p each = £60. For cavalry its 6 bases per Regiment (1.5 per Sqn), times 34 regiments and @ 15p each gives about £30. So you could have the whole British and French armies for a shade under £200.</p>

<p>(and actually with Battalion basing you only need about 150 bases a side so about £40 gets you both armies so you might just as well have that as well - assuming you don't double role).</p>

<p>So yes, I think 2mm Napoleonic might be worth a go, particularly at Company basing. Now I just need to find some decent rules!</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Traveller AR Preview Video</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/2011/06/traveller_ar_preview_video.html" />
    <id>tag:www.converj.com,2011:/sites/converjed//1.1573</id>

    <published>2011-06-09T12:51:55Z</published>
    <updated>2011-06-09T12:53:14Z</updated>

    <summary>http://www.traveller-ar.com/ The Traveller-AR iPhone app preview:...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>David</name>
        <uri>http://www.daden.co.uk</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Traveller" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="gdw" label="gdw" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="iphone" label="iphone" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.converj.com/sites/converjed/">
        <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.traveller-ar.com/">http://www.traveller-ar.com/</a></p>

<p>The Traveller-AR iPhone app preview:</p>

<p><object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5U0xJDx_ROw&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5U0xJDx_ROw&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object><br />
</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

</feed>
