As regular blog readers will have noted, I seem to have real problems with keeping on track with regard to developing sets of wargames rules. I start to develop a set of rules, take them some way … and then get sidetracked. The ‘push’ to complete an existing set of rules vies with the ‘pull’ of writing a new set … and the new tends to supplant the old.
Sitting in my car in today’s snow-bound traffic jam gave me time to think about this situation. Over the past few years I have designed a series of rules for the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. I have been influenced by the work of:
Only time will tell.
Sitting in my car in today’s snow-bound traffic jam gave me time to think about this situation. Over the past few years I have designed a series of rules for the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. I have been influenced by the work of:
- Richard Brooks and Ian Drury (the developers of the RED SQUARE games, which led to REDCOATS AND NATIVES and RED FLAGS AND IRON CROSSES);
- Mike and Joyce Smith (who wrote an published TABLE TOP BATTLES - TABLE TOP WARGAMING WITH MINIATURES, which led to WHEN EMPIRES CLASH!);
- Donald Featherstone and Lionel Tarr (whose modern wargames rules influenced the development of RED FLAGS AND IRON CROSSES – TARRED AND FEATERSTONED);
- Joseph Morschauser (author of HOW TO PLAY WAR GAMES IN MINIATURE, which led to several un-named sets of rules for fighting wargames set in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, as well as influencing certain very important aspects of MEMOIR OF BATTLE and MEMOIR OF BATTLE AT SEA); and
- Richard Borg (whose BATTLE CRY and MEMOIR ’44 have led in part to the development of MEMOIR OF BATTLE and MEMOIR OF BATTLE AT SEA);
- The use of terrain that is divided into squares or hexes (and, as a consequence, the measurement of movement and weapon ranges in squares or hexes);
- The use of simple combat resolution systems that either use normal D6s (with a minimal number modifiers) or specially marked D6; and
- Some form of card-based activation system.
Only time will tell.
Bob, as someone who has experienced that push-pull himself, i hope you do reach a period of rest and satisfaction if only because it will offer me hope!
ReplyDeleteActually I have 2 sets that have reached a fairly stable state for some eyars now but both are collaborations with some one less given to tinkering and thus a positive force for stability.
-Ross
Ross Mac,
ReplyDeleteI must admit that before today I had been feeling a bit dissatisfied with the way I seemed to keep chopping and changing between one set of rules I was working on and then the next ... but this period of reflection has left me feeling that I have actually made much more progress than I had realised. Looking back this evening over my blog entries for the past few years has reinforced that, and I feel much happier and much more positive.
I think that I am actually getting somewhere.
All the best,
Bob
Bob, I've enjoyed your Bundock Rules over the past five years. I run them for my 28mm Sikh Wars games. The rules work, well and the guys at my club enjoy playing them. So, don't feel you haven't finished a rules set, these work just fine.
ReplyDeletedon
Brigadier Dundas,
ReplyDeleteMany thanks for your kind comments.
On reflection, they were not too bad a set of rules, and I am pleased that you - and others - are still using and enjoying them.
All the best,
Bob