Another slice of wargaming history from that selection of rules I managed to
obtain a few weeks ago.. complete with typed text and hand drawn diagrams..
but in summary...
- like the ECW rules these are also a game for friends but, although they have no date, I get the idea that these may be a slightly later period.. a far more coherent set of rules overall, and very much in the vein of those from "Wargames"
- Interestingly - when I began to read them - I noticed that the pages had been stapled together for time immemorial in the wrong sequence.. there's no page numbers so I guess you wouldn't know!
-
No basing is mentioned - so I suspect that as there is casualty removal, and as the rules allow for individual outcomes (eg. morale outcomes and 'overwhelming numbers' outcomes allow for figures to have individual results)
- No specific figure scale, but he stipulates 20+2 for infantry regiments, and 13+2 for cavalry (the pluses being officers)
-
No move sequence... but it seems to be moving then firing (some
types can move and fire), and IGOUGO based on comments in the melee section ("general moving first") - so one side moves and fires (and their opponents takes any morale checks required), and then the other side does the same.. any shaken or routing units need to be tested before they can do any normal move/fire.
-
Infantry firing is per group of 5 in two ranks so units of 20 make
sense, artillery firing uses the burst pattern shown on the front of
"Advanced wargames" so that would date the rules to 1969 or just after..
he gives a "plus one" to infantry firing from hard
cover which is interesting... oh, and saving throws are allowed..
- The morale rules are detailed... interestingly there is a morale check when other units around it are breaking.. shades of WRG?
-
I like the overwhelming numbers mechanism not sure I've seen that before - very good
-
Melee is also very detailed and puts the lie to my understanding of the move sequence since the rules allow/insist the other side fire in the movement to contact. So maybe each side can fire in both "phases"? I read the rules twice but still have no clear idea what triggers a surrender test..
-
The rules for ambushes in the Colonial Wars section are just glorious....
Based on my experience of playing rules from "Wargames" in the last few years, Don's rules aren't as complete and consistent as one might like. To be fair, this is 50 years ago, and a lot of water has flowed under the bridge since then.
ReplyDeleteHi Trebian - yes indeed... wargames rules are like tanks and fighters - the pilots of 1918 would have no comprehension of the changes in a mere 100 years, and these wargame rules are over half that in age.. I like them.. you read the accounts of the wargamers at the time and even Don admits there was a fair amount of argument so yes, certainly not tournament friendly, but they are just so "enthusiastic" it is difficult not to enjoy them..
DeleteCompletely agree. The early period wargamers argued vociferously, if the stories are to be believed (at least one was said to be able to start a row in an empty room). You are right that it's the boundless energy in them that is infectious. And they could get away with more, in a way. There isn't some troll on Facebook or TMP whose never written a single set of rules waiting in the wings to rubbish your work.
DeleteNot that that's ever happened to me.
Lovely to see them Steve, and very nostalgic as we all played rules like these back in the day. Funny you mention arguments breaking out, I can remember lots of 'disagreements' over rule interpretations at SELWG where I was mostly a spectator, still at school. I am told by reliable sources that even Peter Gilder was something of a bad loser, sacrilege I know! Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteHiya Lee... the pages of the Newsletter had many accounts of the Don getting engaged in one argument or another - it seems to have been de rigeur for the time!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI have at least 2 variants of those- One in a book- Wargames Newsletter Wargames Rules- published by Terry Wise in the 80s and again in John Curry's Featherstone Unfinished Tales. Ihave played some of the Rules from the various books as recently as 3 years ago-well actually I umpired. With an Umpire the rules flow quite easily. Mind you said Umpire needs to kow his period and have reasonable players about him.
ReplyDeleteHi Andy - yes of course - I should have checked/remembered! I have an old copy of the compendium set of Newsletter rules that Athena printed in '87, and my claim to fame is that the rules in "Lost Tales" originated in a scan of those I sent John Curry.. :o) Your comment re. umpires is also well made, my impression is that umpired games were more prevalent back in the day..
Delete