'The history of a wargame design ...'

'... is not unlike the history of a ball. Some designers may recollect all the little events of which the great result is the rules that are written, but no individual can recollect the order in which, or the exact moment at which, they occurred, which makes all the difference as to their value or importance.'

I do hope that the Duke of Wellington will excuse me mangling his quote* about the Battle of Waterloo, but it is rather appropriate at the moment.

This quote came to mind when I began work on the PowerPoint presentation that I am preparing for the forthcoming VCOW2021. I wanted to start with a short explanation about how the whole PORTABLE WARGAME concept came about ... and then realised that it was not as straightforward as I had thought that its was.

Looking back through my past blog posts, I began to realise that the rules evolved as a result of the coming together of several separate strands. The first of these was my desire to emulate the gridded wargames illustrated in both Donald Featherstone's and Joseph Morschauser's books.

In the latter's case, he was strongly influenced by Professor Gerard de Gre, who ran the wargame club at the college that Joseph attended as a student.

The second was Ian Drury's RETURN TO NEW STANHALL game at COW1998(!). This led directly to the development of SCWaRes (Simple Colonial Wargame Rules), which in turn was developed into WHEN EMPIRES CLASH!

At about the same time, I 'rediscovered' Joseph Morschauser's book and bought a copy of Richard Borg's MEMOIR '44 ...

... which eventually led me to buy both the first ...

... and second edition version of his American Civil War game, BATTLE CRY.

I did develop my own take on MEMOIR '44, which I entitled MEMOIR OF BATTLE, which in turn led to MEMOIR OF BATTLE AT SEA and MEMOIR OF MODERN BATTLE.

All the strands were now in place, and all it needed was a catalyst to start the process that led to the final development of the PORTABLE WARGAME.

The catalyst was an old, boxed chess set that was then stored in our conservatory. The heat and sun in the conservatory had not treated it kindly, and the wooden chessmen were warped and cracked. The edge of the board had become detached as the glue had dried out, and my wife gave me an ultimatum to either find a use for the chessboard or to throw it away.

I was loath to throw it away, and decided that it might make the basis of a simple, portable wargame. I began experimenting with ideas that I had garnered from my previous wargame designs ... and this eventually led to the creation of the PORTABLE WARGAME.

---

* The original quote is:

'The history of a battle, is not unlike the history of a ball. Some individuals may recollect all the little events of which the great result is the battle won or lost, but no individual can recollect the order in which, or the exact moment at which, they occurred, which makes all the difference as to their value or importance.'

It was written by the Duke of Wellington in a letter to John Croker, dated 8th August 1815. Croker was an Irish Member of Parliament and a longtime friend of the Duke.

Gerard de Gre's Ancient Wargame Rules ... as modified by Charles and David Sweet

I finally managed to finish transcribing these rules (including the special rules and Army Lists) this afternoon, and they can now be downloaded via the link from this blog's Free Downloadable Wargame Rules page.

I have also added a link to Gerard de Gre's Napoleonic Wargame rules (as modified by Charles and David Sweet) from the Free Downloadable Wargame Rules page.

Gerard de Gre's Ancient Wargame Rules ... as modified by Charles and David Sweet

I had the potential to waste quite a lot of my time today waiting for our new washing machine to arrive. The delivery 'window' was 7.00am to 7.00pm(!), as a result of which I was up by 7.00am waiting for the delivery truck to arrive. I waited ... and waited ... and waited. I did not want to start anything that I could not stop doing immediately, and so I could not do any painting or modelling, and fighting a wargame was just not possible. In the end I decided to do something that I could leave and return to once the washing machine had been delivered and I had installed it. My choice was to transcribe the Ancient rules used by Charlie and David Sweet.


Some time ago Dick Bryant – the former editor and publisher of THE COURIER – had sent me scans of the Ancient rules that had been devised by Gerard De Gre and modified by Charlie and David Sweet. They had been published in THE COURIER back in the 1970s, and like their Napoleonic counterparts they had been 'lost' to the general wargaming public for many years.

Dick had already given me permission to re-publish them via my blog, and I have spent time today transcribing them. Unfortunately the scans that Dick sent me appear to be incomplete, and until I have the missing pieces I will not be able to make them available in a downloadable format that potential players can print off for their own personal use.

The rules are interesting in that they use small catapults to simulate the fire of their ancient full-size equivalents and dice to adjudicate the outcomes of light infantry 'fire' (i.e. javelins, bows, slings, etc.) The melee system is very similar to that used in the Napoleonic rules and uses six alternative melee deployments (Melee Deployment Indicators or MDIs), each of which has different strengths and weaknesses.

So in the end my day was not a total waste of time. I feel that I managed to achieve something, albeit incomplete. And for those of you who might be interested, the washing machine was finally delivered at 4.45pm, and I finished installing it by just after 5.00pm.

Latest draft of the Portable Wargame: Modern rules now available to download

In the light of the recent play-test I have made several changes to the existing draft of my PORTABLE WARGAME: MODERN rules. The latest draft includes:

• A turn sequence that uses playing card tiles to determine the order in which Units are activated.
• Changes that enable Artillery Units to 'hold their fire' if they are firing at targets that are (or are likely to be) in direct line-of-sight and at a range of not more than 4 grid areas. (This concept was 'borrowed' from Gerard de Gre and Charlie Sweet's Napoleonic wargames rules in which Artillery can 'hold fire' if they intend to use canister later in the turn.)

I have used the opportunity to make a few cosmetic changes to the layout of the rules and have included a range of optional rules including:

• Air-to-air combat rules
• Air-to-ground combat rules
• Ground-to-air combat rules
• Rules for Cyclist Units
• Rules for Ski Troop Units
• Rules for Tank Riders
• Rules for Gas attacks

These 'one side of a piece of A4 paper' rules have now become seven pages long ... but in my defence I would like to point out that the last three cover Special Rules, Definitions, and Optional Rules.

The latest draft can be downloaded in PDF format from here.

Gerard de Gre's Napoleonic Wargame Rules ... as modified by Charles and David Sweet: the downloadable rules

I have reformatted and tidied up my original transcription of these rules, and they are now available in PDF format here.

Gerard de Gre's Napoleonic Wargame Rules ... as modified by Charles and David Sweet: the rules

RULES FOR A NAPOLEONIC WARGAME
Originally by Gerard DeGre
Modified by Charles and David Sweet

1. GENERAL
The game is played on a board divided into 4” squares which determine all movement, firing ranges, and melee involvement. Except for retreats, measurement or movement on the diagonal is counted as 1.5 rather than 1.

2. MOVEMENT
A. Opponents move alternately. The sequence of a turn is as follows:

1. Both sides fire artillery (except held canister).
2. Both sides fire musketry.
3. Attacker moves.
4. Defender fire held canister.
5. All melees are fought.
6. End of turn, next turn begins with the attacker becoming the defender, and vice versa.

B. No unit, once formed, may separate or reform, except artillery, light infantry, or light cavalry. Commanders may join or leave any unit.

C. No two different units of one side may be in the same square, except artillery may form in any way, as long as there are no more that 2 guns, 1 supply wagon, or 6 crew stands in one square, and commanders may join any unit with a limit of 1 commander per square.

D. A move begun, travelled entirely upon, and ended on a road is lengthened by one square.

E. No unit may move through enemy units. If two enemy units are diagonally adjacent, the space between them may not be moved through.

F. A gun must have at least 1 stand of crew to move it. Anyone may move a gun. In case of conflicting speeds the gun moves at the slowest rate.

G. Attacker may limber, unlimber, or face in any direction freely at any time. Defender may not limber or unlimber, but may face around +/- 90° if in square adjacent to a melee contact square. After a melee, both sides may face around in any direction freely. Every unit must at all times face in one direction towards one side or corner (exception – see squares).

3. ARTILLERY FIRE
A. All guns of both sides can fire on a given turn, even if destroyed on that turn. Any other stands destroyed on a turn may not fire back.

B. To be able to fire, a gun must have 1 stand of artillery men and be unlimbered.

C. Each foot battery has 3 shots per turn at the beginning, 2 field guns and 1 howitzer. If 1 gun or the supply wagon is lost, the battery has two shots per turn, 1 field gun and 1 howitzer. If 1 gun and the supply wagon are lost, the battery has a choice of 1 field gun or 1 howitzer shot per turn. If both guns are lost, the battery has no shots per turn.

D. Each horse gun has 1 horse gun shot per turn.

E. A gun may not fire at an angle greater than +45° from the direction it is facing, up to its maximum range. Squares occupied by friendly troops adjacent to a gun screen it and keep it from firing in that direction. Friendly troops two or more squares away do not screen. However, a hit on a friendly stand destroys it.

F. To fire a field or horse gun, place the model gun to the rear relative to the intended target. Platforms may be used at the same elevation of guns on hills. The gun is fired and a 1” radius circle is placed with its center on the tip of the Q-tip where the Q-tip came to rest. Any one stand which has any part of it within the circle is a casualty. To destroy a gun or wagon, the tip of the Q-tip must be touching it. If a gun or a wagon is destroyed, its crew (1 stand) is destroyed with it. If the tip of the Q-tip comes to rest over water, the shell is presumed to have landed in it and does no damage.

G. To fire a howitzer, proceed as in G, but use a catapult, flipper or other arching weapon, and measure the circle from the center of the projectile. A howitzer cannot be screened.

H. Canister – A gun may fire canister instead of its normal shot into any adjacent square within +/- 45° of the direction it is facing. Canister cannot be fired into a square containing friendly troops. To fire, call the target square and roll 3 dice for each field gun or howitzer shot, 2 for each horse gun shot. Kill as per musketry at the proper range. Canister may be fired with the rest of the artillery, or held until enemy units pass within range. But if held, no other shot can be fired, and if the gun is destroyed, of if no enemy units pass within range, the gun cannot be fired at all.

4. MUSKETRY
A. Musketry is simultaneous, after artillery fire but before movement. Any stand destroyed by musket fire which has not fired may fire back if otherwise possible.

B. Firing is by units. Line infantry may fire straight ahead only. Any other musket-firing unit may fire straight ahead +/- 45°. Any units in the way at any distance screen and prevent fire by either side at the screened units.

C. Each stand throws one die when firing. If the unit firing is a Guards unit, it adds one die. If a Commander is present, the unit adds one die. Any unit after the first firing at the same target adds one die. Dice may also be subtracted if the target is in a protected square (see Protection).

D. To fire, roll the correct number of dice and refer to the table below:

E. Each hit destroys one target stand. If more than one type of unit can be destroyed, firer gets his choice.

5. MELEE
A. A unit must move into a square occupied by the enemy to make a melee. This square becomes the contact square. Units in adjacent squares may face around to support (remember attacker may face any direction, defender may face around only +/- 90°). They are able to support in any direction of the contact square if the first table says “yes”. However, if a defending cavalry unit cannot support an infantry or artillery unit at the beginning of the turn, it cannot wheel to do so. Units able and willing to support are included in the melee (a unit does not have to support if it does not want to). All supports must be indicated before the melees are resolved; attacker does so first, then defender. A unit may fight in only one melee a turn.

B. Except for a commander, a unit must consist of more than one stand.

C. To resolve a melee the value of each side is totalled. Each side then chooses a Melee Deployment Indication (MDI) and the result is determined (see table at end of rules). Fight as follows:

EQUAL DEPLOYMENTS – If unequal numbers, weaker and stronger sides each lose value equal to ½ the strength of the losing side. Weaker side then retreats 2. If one side is more than 3 times the strength of the other, the remainder of the weaker side is destroyed rather than retreating. If numbers are equal, each side loses ½ and retreats 2.

UNEQUAL DEPLOYMENTS – Inferior deployment lose 1 for the first superior 1, 1 for each 2 superior remaining. Superior deployment loses 1 for each 2 inferior casualties. Weaker side then retreats 2, of if the numbers left are equal, then the inferior deployment retreats 2. But if one side is 3 or more times the strength of the other, the remainder of the weaker side is destroyed instead of retreating.

D. If withdrawal (MDI) does not succeed, treat it as an inferior deployment. If it does succeed, all withdrawing units retreat 2 without loss taking their equipment with them.

E. The first stand destroyed in a melee is in the contact square. Thereafter destroy in a clockwise circle, spreading kills as evenly as possible among all the units involved.

F. Because units have different values, the exact number as specified above, cannot always be destroyed. Therefore follow the rules as closely as possible, flipping a coin to settle a dispute if necessary. The opponent’s sense of fair play is to be relied upon. EXAMPLE: A has 2 line infantry and 2 guards cavalry stands and is to lose 3.5. He loses 1 line infantry and 1 guards cavalry stand and flips a coin with B to see whether or not he loses a second line infantry stand.

G. For retreats only, diagonal moves are counted 1 instead of 1.5. Retreats toward the rear for defender, or toward the direction the unit came from, for the attacker. If enemy units are in the way, the retreat skirts them but goes as much as possible in the correct direction. If retreat is impossible (enemy units and/or impassable terrain cut retreating units off), the retreating units are destroyed.

H. Superior deployment (unless destroyed) captures all equipment. If deployment equal, stronger side captures all equipment. If everyone dead, equipment remains in the open, belonging to neither side.

I. All remaining units at the end of a melee may face freely in any direction.

6. PROTECTION
A. Any square containing rocks, trees, houses, etc. is called a protected square. For artillery (except canister) to destroy units in a protected square the tip of the Q-tip or other projectile must be in the square and be within 1” of a stand; otherwise no stands are destroyed. One die is subtracted from each gun firing canister or each unit firing musketry into a protected square. If the contact square of a melee is in a protected square, the attacker destroys one less the he normally would.

B. Before each game, special rules for restrictions on movement, extra protection, etc. for forts, hills, and other large terrain features may be agreed upon.

C. Bridges are not considered protection.

D. If the tip of the Q-tip or other projectile is touching a tree, house, bridge, or other inflammable object, roll 2 dice. If one 1 shows, the square is burning and all units must retreat 1 out of it. Thereafter it is impassable. If double ones are thrown, the square burns up and everyone and anything in it are destroyed. Thereafter the square is considered normal and may be moved through, etc. as usual. A burning square screens as unit normally do.

7. COMMANDERS – support in the same way as the unit they accompany. However, if acting independently they support as shown in the first table.

8. SQUARES
A. Any number of line or guards infantry units may form a Square. To form a square, or to break one voluntarily, takes one entire move, Long rectangular “squares” are not allowed. A Square must have at least 1 stand per square of frontage facing forward, backward, left, and right or it is not a Square legally.

B. A Squared is the only formation which faces in more than one direction. Squares cannot move, but they may fire and support in any direction as per the ability of the units which form them. Cavalry cannot melee an unbroken square. Since all melees are simultaneous, for cavalry to melee a Square it must be broken before any movement begins.

C. A Square is broken when 1 or more sides fall below the legal limit of 1 stand per square of frontage. Defender must immediately face every stand of each unit in 1 direction, which he can choose. Broken Squares receive none of the unbroken Squares advantages.

9. RETREAT – As soon as a unit is down to one stand, except light infantry, on each of its turns it must retreat 1 full move backward until it is destroyed or retreats off the edge of the board. The stand may face in any direction, and fire and fire and support if possible, but it cannot advance or attack. All artillery stands are considered 1 unit together. Guards infantry and cavalry are exempt.

10. If a unit retreats off the board, it is set apart from the destroyed units. It fights no more, but still counts for points at the end of the game.

11. Either side may destroy any of its equipment at the end of any turn.

12. Games last until 1 side surrenders or is destroyed, or after an agreed number of turns. If the last case occurs, the cost points of each side (including units retreated off the board) are totalled, and the highest total wins. [ED. NOTE points could be awarded for capturing certain objectives].

MDI

MDIs are 6 cards, 1 set to a side each card marked with one of the possible deployments. The deployments and their value are described below:

COLUMN is superior to FLANKING and PINCERS
LINE is superior to COLUMN and SQUARE
SQUARE is superior to PINCERS and COLUMN
FLANKING is superior to LINE and SQUARE
PINCERS is superior to FLANKING and LINE
WITHDRAWAL succeeds against LINE and SQUARE
WITHDRAWAL fails against COLUMN, PINCERS and SQUARE

THE FIRING GUN – An actually-firing gun of plastic is used to represent field or horse gun fire, and a homemade catapult for howitzer fire. The field/horse gun shell is a Q-tip dipped in paint and allowed to harden, while the howitzer shell is a small square of plasticine whose centre has been marked, so no troops are hurt by this method. We also feel an element of personal skill is introduced into the game (certain players of this game are renowned for their accurate artillery). The realism of windage, faulty charges, crosswinds, and other spoilers of aim is simulated by the bouncing and rolling of the shells. In addition, with this method the artillery commander can make the classic mistake and fire at his own troops. The guns are reasonably accurate at short ranges, much less so at longer ones. Not only is the method realistic, but the game is thereby speeded up and much dice rolling is eliminated.

ORGANIZATION – Our organization is a compromise one between the various nations. We have a tendency to mass elite units. However, our games turn out realistically for the most part if a little on the bloody side. They are decisive and allow skill to triumph over luck.

Each line and guard infantry, and guard cavalry unit consists of 4 stands. Each light infantry and cavalry and line cavalry unit consists of 3 stands. A foot battery consists of 4 foot crew, 1 mounted crew, 2 foot guns, and 1 supply wagon. A horse battery consists of 1 mounted crew and 1 horse gun.

GUARDS – This is our designation for elite, heavy infantry and cavalry units which are not always strictly guards. For instance, the 42nd foot was not called guards by the British Army, but since it definitely was an elite unit which was distinct from and better than normal line infantry regiments, we designate it as a guards infantry unit.

Our armies usually consist of several basic divisions apiece. Each division contains:

3 line infantry units
1 guards infantry unit
2 light infantry units
1 line cavalry unit
1 light cavalry unit
1 guards cavalry unit
2 foot batteries
1 horse battery
1 division commander

Gerard de Gre's Napoleonic Wargame Rules ... as modified by Charles and David Sweet

Dick Bryant – the former editor and publisher of THE COURIER – has sent me scans of the Napoleonic rules used by Charlie and David Sweet. They are based upon those used by Gerard de Gre, and were published in THE COURIER back in the 1970s. As far as I know they have been 'lost' to the general wargaming public for many years, and I think that their 'rediscovery' will be of interest to quite a few wargamers who may have heard of them but who have never seen them.

Dick has given me permission to re-publish them via my blog, and I have spent most of today transcribing them so that this will be possible … hopefully later today. If and when time allows I will also turn them into a downloadable format that potential players can print off for their own personal use.

The rules are a very interesting combination of the old and the new … and I can definitely see a linear development from Gerard de Gre’s original ideas – as modified by Charlie and David Sweet – to those used in Joseph Morschauser’s rules. Likewise there are links back to H G Well’s rules in that all artillery fire is conducted with small toy cannons (for field and horse artillery fire) or catapults (for howitzer fire). It also has what I believe is a unique method for resolving melees that is somewhat akin to the traditional ‘scissors, rock, paper’ game many of us played as children.

Charlie Sweet: another pioneer of gridded wargames

A few days ago Jim Duncan - one of my very regular blog readers - sent me a link to a blog that featured an entry about Charlie Sweet. I have just got around to visiting it ... and I must thank Jim profusely for pointing me in this particular direction!

I had heard of Charlie Sweet but knew little about him other than that he was an early wargamer and that he knew and had wargamed with Gerard de Gre. As a result of this link, I have discovered that he was also one of the pioneers of gridded wargames.

Of particular interest to me is the reconstruction of Charlie's Ancient wargames rules, especially as I have had several requests to produce an Ancients version of my own PORTABLE WARGAME rules. I hope to spend some time over the next few days reading this blog entry and the other blog entries that it is linked to ... and I suspect that they will give me a few ideas.

More Morschauser ... by post!

Whilst I was on my recent cruise, Tim Gow sent me some photocopies of articles from editions of the old 'Wargamer's Newsletter' that were written by Joseph Morschauser.

These additions to my growing collection of Morschauser's work include:

• GRIDDED WARGAMES (Wargamer's Newsletter Yearbook 1966/7): This describes the way in which Joseph Morschauser was going to use his gridded wargames board to fight a Colonial campaign in the mythical Sultanate of Hauser and a series of World War II air battles similar to those that took place during the Battle of Britain.
• GRIDDED WARGAMES (Wargamer's Newsletter No.62 [May 1967]): This has a complete description of Morschauser's 'Frontier' rules.

Re-reading the latter has made me realise how elegant and simple the original rules were, and that I should go back to them again before moving forward with my current draft of my PORTABLE WARGAME rules.

Tim also included a copy of an article entitled WARGAMER OF THE MONTH - PROF. GERARD DE GRE (Wargamer's Newsletter No.85 [April 1969]. This was very helpful as I cannot find the copy of this article that was sent to me some time ago by another regular blog reader.

More thinking about COW

I have had a chance this morning to have a long think about what I want to offer by way of a session at COW2010 (Wargame Developments annual Conference of Wargamers 2010), and decided that it will be a heavily Morschauser-biased session.

I intend to start with a brief description of Joseph Morschauser and his rules. This will include a bit about his time gaming alongside Gerard de Gre, but will concentrate on the rules he published in his book as well as the Ancient rules that used a 1-inch squared grid, and – most importantly – on his 'Frontier' rules. As far as I can find out, it is games played using these rules that are featured in the famous series of photographs that Donald Featherstone included in his book ADVANCED WAR GAMES.

I will then describe the basic elements of his rules, and if time permits (and I don't think that that will be a problem) I hope to stage several battles using his 'Frontier' rules. These will probably be done using 15mm figures, but if I can find larger scale figures that will fit the bill I may well use them instead.

I also hope to take along the current version of my Morschauser-inspired Interbellum rules for attendees to try out.

Thinking about COW

The Wargame Developments annual Conference of Wargamers (COW) will be taking place in early July and I have volunteered to run a session. I had originally decided to cover the development of WHEN EMPIRES CLASH!, and then to follow that with a couple of short games that would give the attendees a flavour of the rules. The problem is that I have actually done no development of the rules since before Christmas.

I could take the easy way out and to do what I originally planned ... but my thinking has moved on since then as a result of the work I have been doing to develop my own versions of Joseph Morschauser's rules.

I have therefore asked myself the question 'What should I do?'

At the moment I think that I will:

• Start with a short presentation about Joseph Morschauser and his rules (including some references to the earlier work done by his mentor, Gerard de Gre).
• Have a series of small games set up that use some of Morschauser's rules so that attendees can try them out or
• Have several small games set up that would enable attendees to try out my variants/developments of Morschauser's rules.

I am not quite sure which of the latter options I will choose, although I could do both. The decision that I make will depend upon how much time, effort, and money I will need to expend to prepare for the session.

Watch this space for further developments!

Running before the wind - Further thoughts on naval wargaming by Gerard de Gre

Another dip into Donald Featherstone's NAVAL WAR GAMES has revealed a further contribution by Gerard de Gre. It concerns the effect of wind on the movement of sailing warships.

1. Direction of wind to be determined after both fleets have been placed in position. This may be done with a dice roll (eight-sided) or by drawing from a deck of ‘Wind Cards’ (eight) to determine from the N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W or NW.
2. Each commander has the option prior to his move to roll a regular six-sided dice to give one of the following effects: (a) 45° clockwise (b) 45° counter-clockwise (c) 90° shift clockwise (d) 90° counter-clockwise (e) No change (f) 180° shift of wind. New wind direction prevails until changed by dice roll of one of the commanders.
3. Ships are given a standard mobility factor such as one square or 6 in.
4. Ships may turn only at the beginning and/or end of their move, and neither turn may exceed 90° to port or starboard. Moves are in straight lines only after making initial turn at beginning of the ship’s move.
5. Ships may not sail directly into the wind; mobility factor times zero.
6. When beating into the wind, that is, when the wind is coming into the ship at approximately 45° of the bow, the mobility factor is multiplied by one.
7. When reaching into the wind, that is, when the wind is coming in at 90° perpendicular to the beam, the mobility factor is multiplied by two.
8. When on the broad reach or sailing directly before the wind, that is when the wind is directly behind the ship or at 45° of the stern, the mobility factor is multiplied by three.
9. These relationships of wind direction to the ships’ mobility may be represented diagrammatically (as in drawing).

Gerard de Gre has also devised rules for broadsides of guns that give slightly more latitude than most rules thus:
We determined the effectiveness of broadsides on the basis of the relative bearings of the ships to each other. For example, if one ship had another directly on its beam it could fire a full broadside, while it opponent had its target only on the quarter-beam, then it could only fire one-half of its broadside. You will notice that the wind rules and broadside rules operate best for a gridded sea.

Squidge and Squop - Gerard de Gre's gunfire system for Naval Wargame Rules

The following naval wargames rules were written by Gerard de Gre and published in NAVAL WAR GAMES (by Donald Featherstone) in 1965. John Curry has recently republished this book, and I recommend that anyone who is interested in naval wargaming and who has not got a copy should get hold of one whilst it is still available.

When we resort to dice rolls, fire-tables and matrix systems for gunnery, something goes out of the game – the satisfaction of skilfully placing a well-aimed shot on our target. The MGC (Note: MGC is the abbreviation for the Model Generals Club) Research Centre therefore dutifully set itself to work on the problem – to discover a method of missile fire which had to cope with range, and which would permit of a development of accuracy through practice and at the same time would not damage our model ships. We believe we have found the solution – Tiddly-winks! They permit for firing with beautiful trajectories, they allow for development of skill in gunnery, they are readily and cheaply accessible, and, above all, they do no damage.

Equipment required: One set Tiddly-winks, preferably with ½ in. diameter winks and 1½ in. tiddles; one firing platform for each player. The ones used for the experimental series were made of ⅛ in. balsa cut in squares, 2 in. by 2 in., on which we cemented 2 in. squares of felt.

Method of fire: The firing platform is placed within 6 in. of the ship (but never forward of it). If the battle area has been divided into squares the rule is that the firing platform may be placed in any adjoining squares to the rear or side of the gun, good form calling for the effort to fire the wink if possible along the line of fire of the gun.

Determination of hits: Targets are designated prior to fire. If playing on a squared-off board, hits are obtained if wink lands in the square occupied by target. (This is the method employed in the experiments.) If battle takes place on an un-co-ordinated surface, then a hit is registered if the wink falls within, say, 3 in. of the target. An alternative method of fire is to place the tiddly-wink cup within 3 in. of the target and attempt to score hits by landing the wink directly into the cup (this last method is recommended for players who have become quite skilful in firing their winks!) In intercollegiate Tiddly-wink matches, all shots landing on targets are referred to as ‘squidges’.

Silencing of guns (squop): Ships may not return fire if a shell (wink) has landed in the square which they occupy. (If board not co-ordinated, then ships are silenced by winks landing within 3 in. of any part of them.)

Destruction of guns: Ships are destroyed if previously designated as targets, and cumulative effect of hits is equal to value of ships. Ships damaged by hits may not fire for one turn. (Hits are registered in usual manner.)

Range of guns: We have allowed entire battle area for ranges, differentiating between types of guns only on the basis of the amount of damage they cause when hitting target areas.

General rules used in experiments: Players alternate each turn as attacker or defender. Only attacker may move his ships, although defender may wheel in position to return fire.

1. Firing takes place after attacker has made his move.
2. Defender fires first with precedence, followed by attacker’s fire (unless the latter’s fire has been stopped by squop or hit).
3. One round (wink) fired for each gun in action, target announced beforehand.
4. If a defender’s wink lands inadvertently in a square occupied by an enemy gun, the attacker may not return fire (squop).
5. Artillery hits destroy equipment in target square which they have landed in ratio to size of gun. If specified target square is missed, missile has no effect in other sectors in which it may land, except for squops on attacker’s guns (See note below)
6. Ships may fire in support of their own forces into squares occupied by them.
7. Guns have range of entire battle area.

Note: Optional rule: #5: Shells (winks) landing on unspecified targets have only half effect, and in the case of protected targets no effect except Heavy Guns which have quarter effect.

Gerard de Gre – A ‘lost’ pioneer?

My request for further information about Gerard de Gre – both on this blog and on THE MINIATURES PAGE – has led to some very interesting facts coming to light.

Mike Elliott was able to send me the text of the article from WARGAMERS NEWSLETTER that accompanied the original image of Professor de Gre playing his wargame; Allen Curtis pointed out that there was a mention of Gerard de Gre in George Gush and Andrew Finch’s book A GUIDE TO WARGAMING; and ‘Cheriton’ sent me the text of an article about Gerard de Gre that was written by Muriel de Gre and which was printed in the May 1965 issue of TABLE TOP TALK.

From this wealth of material – plus a long trawl through my collection of wargames books – I have been able to glean the following information about Gerard de Gre:

• He was probably the first ‘modern’ hobby wargamer to advocate use of written orders by players – ‘Military Kriegsspiel had from earliest times employed simultaneous movement, thanks to the presence of an umpire, who received both sides’ written orders and worked them out on a map. Some early players in the hobby field no doubt followed suit, but the first suggestion of this in modern times seems to have come from Gerard de Gre of the USA.’ (A GUIDE TO WARGAMING, page 109);
• He used tiddly-winks to simulate gunfire – ‘One extreme is the physical method, involving such missiles as the dreaded matchstick hurled by Wells’ Britains 4.7 naval gun … or even tiddly-winks as advocated many years ago by Gerard de Gre.’ (A GUIDE TO WARGAMING, page 117);
• Further mention of this method of simulating gunfire is made in Donald Featherstone’s NAVAL WAR GAMES (pages176 and 177), where an entire set of experimental naval wargames rules devised by Gerard de Gre are included;
• Gerard de Gre was the driving force behind the creation of the MODEL GENERAL’S CLUB, which he ran (and paid for) almost single-handedly (TABLE TOP TALK, May 1965);
• Gerard de Gre wargamed with the young Joseph Morschauser, who was a student at the college where de Gre taught (TABLE TOP TALK, May 1965);
• He – and not Joseph Morschauser – may have been the first wargamer to advocate the use of the ‘unit system’ of mounting several figures on a single base or stand (TABLE TOP TALK, May 1965).

I think that this shows that Professor Gerard de Gre had quite an influence on the development of wargaming in its formative years, and that he – and what he did – should be remembered.

Table Top Battles - An early edition? - Wargamer identified as Professor Gerard de Gre

Thanks to some excellent research by Mike Elliott, the gentleman in question has been identified as being Professor Gerard de Gre. In his email to me Mike wrote the following:

The photograph appears on page 19 of issue 85 (April 1969) of WARGAMERS
NEWSLETTER.

The caption reads: Prof. Gerard de Gre of Waterloo, war-game hobbyist, checks the range of the French batteries at Chatelet in the simulated battle of Waterloo.

This is followed by an article:

WARGAMER OF THE MONTH – Prof. Gerard de Gre

Prof. Gerard de Gre, a University of Waterloo department head has been a wargamer since the Second World War and finds his hobby completely absorbing.

He credits his instruction in working out tactical problems to his training as a naval officer in the United States Navy, and to LITTLE WARS by H. G. Wells with sparking his interest in wargames as a hobby.

Prof. de Gre now owns more than 5,000 miniature soldiers as well as other battle equipment: ships, planes, Egyptian war elephants used in 1000BC. He has as well a large collection of books on the history of battles, uniforms worn during particular periods of history and many, many books on rules of wargames.

Thus far he has discovered about six other wargamers in his area and spends a couple of evenings a week playing wargames with them. Prof. de Gre maintains the wargame is similar to chess, but in chess the entire game is pure logic, whereas in wargames there is logic plus an element of chance.

Prof. de Gre has miniatures to simulate battles from the time of Cleopatra to the Arab-Israeli war. He says, that if he does have a favourite period, it is probably the late 18th and early 19th century. It was during this period that the highest degree of professionalism was reached.

Recently, Gerard de Gre wrote to the Newsletter: "We have an action group at Waterloo. On Monday this week we re-did the Battle of Waterloo in sixteen moves. Napoleon won only by a small margin, being stopped by Uxbridge and Hill when practically in Waterloo and the road to Brussels. (Four players took part)"

Mike, many thanks for this information. I hope that Professor de Gre is still alive and enjoying his wargaming.

Table Top Battles - An early edition?

Whilst waiting for the final coat of matt varnish to dry on my third set of terrain boards, I spent some time looking through one of the many files of wargames 'clippings' that I have accumulated over the years.

I found one from an old WARGAMES NEWSLETTER about wargaming South American Wars which caught my eye, and I took it out of its protective plastic cover to read. Imagine my surprise when I realised that on the back of the article were several images entitled 'Other People's Wargames No.1', one of which showed a setup that looked remarkably like those illustrated in TABLE TOP BATTLES.

The image (a copy of which is shown below) does not have a caption, so I have no idea who the wargamer is. If anyone out there knows who the wargamer is and when the photograph was taken, I would be grateful if they could share that information with us. In the meantime let us hope that the image is an inspiration to other wargamers to try using a gridded tabletop.