Ever Happy?

[Mike]

With the rules you have?

I have of late gone back to the rules I used as a teen as they are familiar and I enjoyed using them.
They may not be the most innovative or streamlined or dare I say it realistic, but I am happy using them, as such I rarely search for new rules.

[Mr. Average]

I like reading all different kinds of rules, way more than I play. I just find rulebooks an interesting read generally. As to whether any one of them ever satisfies the platonic ideal of “game” projecting the shadow of Fantastic Battles or BattleTech or 40K on the walls of my manc ave, I just don’t know. I’ll say this: I feel like I can find things to like in any game, and it is mainly the experience with friends that I remember, better than the rules. Those are the ones I feel most satisfied with, albeit only retrospectively.

[irishserb]

Yeah, pretty much.  They are mostly self authored, a few published long ago, and a few written by a friend.

I’m not big on learning new rules, seeing the process of learning rules as something that happens instead of enjoying the game.  Once I find something that I’m satisfied with, then I can focus on immersing myself in, and enjoying the experience of, the game.

[bobm]

There’s three stages with new rules/games:

1.  You learn the rules, this can last several games
2. You play the rules, again, this can take a few games
3. You play your opponent, if you’re lucky this can last forever

Only stage 3. is really enjoyable.  However so many people either move on to another set or start tinkering before ever arriving at step 3.  Seems such a waste of time and effort, but then some systems deserve to be discarded!

There's 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.....

[Guy Farrish]

I still use the WRG Armour and Infantry 1925-1950 rules from 1973 I used as a teenager. I use other rules as well, but I like these and see no reason to abandon them (apart from imminent physical disintegration – the rules not me).

On the other hand, I have little desire to actually use the 54 men to a battalion style rules with individual figure removal I used for Napoleonics at the same time, although I still read the books for pleasure.

I found Volley & Bayonet by chance on Duncan Macfarlane’s stall at a show in the 90s and he persuaded me they were exactly what I wanted. For once he was right! I was no longer a teenager by a long way, but it shows that finding a set of rules that fits your view of how a game should work need not be based solely on youthful inexperience and rose tinted memories.

On the other hand I’ve played and ditched an almost infinite number of rule sets (including my own) with no heart ache at all.

[Steve Johnson]

I have settled on core rulesets for my favourite periods that I game, after years of thinking that there were ‘better’ ones out there. They work for me and more importantly, I can concentrate on the game rather than trying to remember the rules, which makes a huge difference!

[Alex]

bobm wrote:

There’s three stages with new rules/games:

1. You learn the rules, this can last several games
2. You play the rules, again, this can take a few games
3. You play your opponent, if you’re lucky this can last forever

Only stage 3. is really enjoyable. However so many people either move on to another set or start tinkering before ever arriving at step 3. Seems such a waste of time and effort, but then some systems deserve to be discarded!

I’m at 3 with Konflikt 47 of all games. With my ‘regular’ opponent it accidentally became a weird and wonderful story continued over a couple of years now and it’s one of my favourite gaming experiences ever.

For other games I’ll (try to) persevere with rules where I love the setting (Infinity/Malifaux), or I stick to relatively straight forward rules for historical and generic fantasy or sci-fi. My poor mental health addled brain can’t handle really complex or highly detailed rules.

Alex (Does Hobby Stuff)
practising hobby eclecticism

[Fred B]

As a newbie to the hobby I don’t really have a “chosen system” yet, but  it’s really interesting to read others’ opinions. I do however make up my own rules as I play. It’s similar to how I run my RPGs, just a simple mechanic and rulings and procedures. Because of that I really enjoy reading rules  and grabbing ideas and procedures to use in my own games.

Now I found a copy of the WWII rules Guy mentioned, so I will give those a read 🙂

 

[Shaun Travers]

I was mostly happy with the two rulesets I was using for WW2 (Take Cover!!) and for ancients (Armati II) from 2000-2010.  But then I started playing other rules just to see how they worked and that led me to writing my own.  I have spent the last 10 years mostly tweaking my own rules through various solo playtests.  Having lots of fun so too busy to really look at playing a lot with other sets.  I think FTF I would still go back to Armati II, but for WW2 I do not know what I would use!

[MartinR]

I’m always dissatisfied and on the look out for new rules, which I then mangle beyond all recognition. Fiddling around with rules ideas is one of the things I enjoy about wargaming. Same old figures though, as rules come and go but figures last forever.

Remote gaming has specific requirements, especially for large groups of players, so I’ve settled on a few sets which seem to work OK for that. Many of our regular players still don’t want to meet f2f so I guess we’ll be doing that for a while.

"Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

[Phil Dutré]

You can use a specific ruleset (commercial or houserules) for a long time, but it’s always useful to keep an eye on recent developments.

I use quite  a lot of house rules for different periods. Usually, they are tweaked a bit after every game. But sometimes, there’s a huge rift, and the the house rules undergo a major rewrite. Whether it’s then a new edition or a new set all together is a matter of taste and ego 🙂

 

[Phil Dutré]

I also think one’s taste in rules changes during a wargamer’s career.

E.g. I often observe that younger wargamers like detailed rules, often focusing on army lists and point values as well. This might coincide with a typical ‘my army vs your army’ setup.

Older gamers tend to favour looser rules, and don’t worry that much (anymore) about a specific situation not covered by the rules. Simply decide on the matter as gentlemen. It might coincide with less time available for games, and perhaps scenario-based play ‘just plop some troops on the table and let’s go”. and simply not having the time nor energy anymore to analyse and dissect complex rulesets.

As is usual, this all probably is a gross oversimplification 🙂

[Blackhat]

I have pretty much settled on the rules I am using and have no intention of changing them – I am tired of chopping and changing rules all the time.

Mostly Neil Thomas for various periods and some other rulesets such as Kings of War (LOTR) and FLower of Chivalry (war of the Roses) which give more period flavour.

I will happily play other rules with people at the Guildford Club but have no plans to adopt new rules for my own games.

Mike

[Benjamin Cato]

I agree with Phil Dutre – my taste in rules has changed over time.

I find that I just like rules to be simple and easy to remember. When I was young I would quite happily go into all sorts of detail but now not so much. 🙂

But just to be contrary,  I would also happily play the WRG rules of my youth if I still had any copies.

[Ruarigh]

There are a few rules sets I would happily play to the exclusion of most others (Laserburn, Imperial Commander, Volley and Bayonet, Command Decision: Test of Battle, and a few others). The problem is finding other players who like those rules too. This has tended to mean that I switch rules sets according to whom I am playing, and I occasionally get caught up in the latest fads because there is a self-reinforcing enthusiasm when one club member starts waxing lyrical about the latest ‘DBA 35th edition’ rules or whatever, and suddenly everyone is enthusiastic about them. As someone who moves a lot, I need to compromise to some extent if I am to play others. Of course, I could always just play solo for the rest of my life …

Never argue with an idiot. They'll only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

https://roderickdale.co.uk/
https://emidsvikings.ac.uk/

[Sane Max]

I tend to cope happily with whatever I am being asked to play, there was only one or two rule-sets I never took to that I can think of. That being said, I am always trying new things. I have lost track of how many different Ancient sets I have tried out, I am happy playing them but when I try a new one I think ‘ooh better’

 

 

[Whirlwind]

Happy enough to play them; not happy enough to stick with them regardless of developments, with the possible exceptions of WRG 1925-1950, Nuts! and Five Men at Kursk.

 

[Not Connard Sage]

Benjamin Cato wrote:

 I would also happily play the WRG rules of my youth if I still had any copies.

Must be some on eBay…

 

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Mike]

Is it these you are after?

 

It is the late Bob O’ Brien’s copy he let me have many years ago.

[Not Connard Sage]

Guy Farrish wrote:

I still use the WRG Armour and Infantry 1925-1950 rules from 1973 I used as a teenager.

Very rarely a set of rules appear that capture the essence of what wargaming should be about, emphasis on the game aspect.

Phil Barker managed that with A&I 1925-1950, and his similar Cold War 1950-1985 rules. Push them too far and they’ll break, tinker with them and they’ll break, but play them in the spirit they were intended to be played and they’re great. A model of clarity and simplicity, but not oversimplification.

Pity Barker never produced any army lists for them – I own some third party lists, and they feel cumbersome. It’s also a pity he decided to publish the awful second editions in the late 80s, the best part of those are the army lists.

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Thuseld]

Love this topic.

I have no love for the wargame rules I used for WW2 wargaming in my teenage years (Airfix Guide rules) as they were complex and slow. However, a large part of that was likely due to us playing them with every soldier we owned on a small desk.

As I stepped away for my late teens I decided to try and get some rules from Free Wargame Rules website but never used them. I do still have copies nearly two decades later – they have survived many computers and laptops.

Now, I feel like my rules of choice are fairly set.

Battlegroup WW2 rules give me the experience I think I had been looking for, while A Sergeant’s War is a nice set also for smaller games. I don’t really feel the need to look at other WW2 rules to be honest.

Sci Fi gaming I have Horizon Wars, which I really like, although there are a few things about them that I like less as time goes on (book keeping and morale, although that could be abstracted into the stats). If I want smaller battles, I just use those rules still. If I want individually based figures then I am likely trying an RPG type scenario and while I used to use Starport Scum, I have recently changed over to Five Parsecs from Home, which is amazing.

I cannot see myself actively seeking out new rules as I am happy with what I have now when it comes to what I want to have playing out on my table.

Experiments here: http://inexperiencedmodelmaker.blogspot.co.uk/

Tranquil Stars updates: https://tranquilstars.wordpress.com

[Not Connard Sage]

Mike wrote:

Is it these you are after?<noscript></noscript> It is the late Bob O’ Brien’s copy he let me have many years ago.

Hate to be nitpicky, but they’re Horse & Musket not WWII 😉

 

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Guy Farrish]

Probably best if we ask Benjamin which WRG rules he played in his youth. There’s a lot of guessing to go otherwise!

[Not Connard Sage]

Guy Farrish wrote:

Probably best if we ask Benjamin which WRG rules he played in his youth. There’s a lot of guessing to go otherwise!<noscript></noscript>

Oh ignore me. I’ve been working all night, thinking’s too much of a hassle at the mo. 🙂

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Mike]

Not Connard Sage wrote:

Hate to be nitpicky, but they’re Horse & Musket not WWII

Did not notice he said WW2?

Benjamin Cato wrote:

But just to be contrary,  I would also happily play the WRG rules of my youth if I still had any copies.

What have I missed?

[zippyfusenet]

These days I usually GM for one of the local game clubs, or play in a club game myself. I’m heavily influenced by what my friends want to play. If I like a set of rules, but the gang doesn’t want to play them, they’re no use to me. Often there will be one member who has a strong dislike for a rule set, who blocks its use. Wargamers are the proverbial herd of cats. Sigh.

I’m always on the lookout for a new set of rules that supports my existing ginormous collection of toys, and works well for big multi-player games. Main criteria are:

• 6 to 12 players can have meaningful commands without overcrowding the game table with too many figures and units.
• All players move/act at the same time, or at least all players on the same side act at once. Single-threading a big multi-player game through single unit activations, one unit at a time, is intolerable.
• All the usual stuff that makes a good historical consim rule set: not too many tables, charts or dice rolls, players make decisions that decide the outcome of the game, stuff happens, convincing illusion of verisimilitude, the thrill of victory, the agony of de feet.

The gang has some favorites, currently Check Your Six, Muskets and Tomahawks, and Sword and Spear, that they often ask for. On the other hand, I have a shelf of rules that are excellent for one-on-one games that I rarely get to play, because they’re built around single unit activation. I dabble in a lot of rules, checking them out, but only some reach the table, and few succeed there.

You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

[Phil Dutré]

Not Connard Sage wrote:

Benjamin Cato wrote:

I would also happily play the WRG rules of my youth if I still had any copies.

Must be some on eBay…

The Ancient ones (and a few other) you can simply download: http://www.wrg.me.uk/WRG.net/History/wrg.html

 

 

[Not Connard Sage]

Mike wrote:

Not Connard Sage wrote:

Hate to be nitpicky, but they’re Horse & Musket not WWII

Did not notice he said WW2?

Benjamin Cato wrote:

But just to be contrary, I would also happily play the WRG rules of my youth if I still had any copies.

What have I missed?

 

My last post probably 🙂

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[jeffers]

I still have my original Airfix Guide ACW rules by Terry Wise, although my choice now is a free set from Wargames Illustrated that I’ve tweaked a bit. Other than that it’s Neil Thomas or Rapid Fire all the way. Too busy with real life to do anything complicated.

Mind you, it’s not likely I’ll play again anyway. I could say Cambrai to Sinai and ASL! 🤣

More nonsense on my blog: http://battle77.blogspot.com/

[Mr. Average]

Phil Dutré wrote:

I also think one’s taste in rules changes during a wargamer’s career. E.g. I often observe that younger wargamers like detailed rules, often focusing on army lists and point values as well. This might coincide with a typical ‘my army vs your army’ setup. Older gamers tend to favour looser rules, and don’t worry that much (anymore) about a specific situation not covered by the rules.

Oddly, I’m finding I have more patience for complex rules as I get older: the old Warhammer Fantasy Battles, the Earle editions of BattleTech and Space Marine, etc.

[Mike Headden]

Some rules I buy to play with friends

Some rules I buy to play solo

Some rules I buy to play but never quite get around to it

Some rules I buy only to read, as food for thought and ideas to be plagiarised

I’ll play pretty much anything with the right people.

 

There are 100 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who can work from incomplete data

[Mike]

Mr. Average wrote:

Oddly, I’m finding I have more patience for complex rules as I get older: the old Warhammer Fantasy Battles

Me too, though go back a few years and no way.

[Author]

Posts