I occasionally still use the rules. I adapted the casualty table to enable whole figure removal, by rounding up or down. Works perfectly. Lovely to see this set aired again. Thanks
One of these days I'll have to do a review of Stewarts (the Postie of Posties Rejects) set of Zulu war rules based on this rule set. Next time we have a Zulu war game in the shed-o-war I'll have to twist his arm and do an interview.
Used to love the old Tabletop Games rules. Loved Combat Commander but they would be too stop start compared to modern rules. You are right that the older rules have lots of ideas and info that are useful for inspiration when designing rules.
I've no doubt that modern rules writers do the same research, its just this rule-set has all that 'under the bonnet' stuff out on display. That's what make this so interesting.
That layout reminds me very much of the Challenger 2000 Moderns rules - they had lots of tables too. I don't have a problem with yards. As with inches centimeters or base widths they're just a unit of measurement. Counting casualties for figure removal, that I don't miss at all!
Lovely little ruleset, miniatures and review. I love all these old rulesets, I've loads of tiny cold war stuff and 6mm Napoleonics. Despite what people think nowadays I think it was a golden age for tabletop wargaming.
Have the original rules bought when first published. It was a photocopy, typed on a manual typewriter and some were copied on a Gerstner machine. Great set of rules particularly if you like a good table.
Thanks for the info! I wasn't sure how they were printed. I've always been impressed by the depth and quality of the research that went into these rules.
I do really enjoy looking at how the older rule sets had a lot more maths compared to the newer games. Both have their ups and downs but I do like the detail that used to get put into the rule sets. Some newer games a re a bit bland i comparison. Great review.
I'm not sure I could use these rules to play, but they are a great resource of ideas and well researched data that can be used in other games. Need to know the ranges of period weapons in yards; This book has it. Need to understand the distance over which sound will carry; this book has it. etc etc
Hi Lee; yes, they are definitely a set of the era, but not quite as cumbersome as WRG rules for which you needed to have a degree in higher mathematics. Not to say that they are bad, but show how much research went into old rule sets & the detail earlier gamers (me amongst them) used to deal with. The more modern streamlined rule systems definitely make games more user friendly & easier to play. There is something to be said for both methods - the older for its detail which info is frequently missing in modern rules & therefore gamers miss some of the rationale behind the rules, but the quickplay ease of modern rules is great, particularly for getting newbies interested.
In the 1960s rules tended to be simplistic (Featherstone et al) , into the 70s and 80s a 'need' to make games more like 'simulations' (WRG etc.) prevailed inevitably adding complexity. Now 'playability' seems to be in vogue. I drifted way from wargaming in the early 80s partly owing to the 'simulation' issue (but mostly because I found out about beer and girls) but on retirement am back again with 'playability'.
I occasionally still use the rules. I adapted the casualty table to enable whole figure removal, by rounding up or down. Works perfectly.
Lovely to see this set aired again. Thanks
One of these days I'll have to do a review of Stewarts (the Postie of Posties Rejects) set of Zulu war rules based on this rule set. Next time we have a Zulu war game in the shed-o-war I'll have to twist his arm and do an interview.
Thank you for the lecture! Fascinating history!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Used to love the old Tabletop Games rules. Loved Combat Commander but they would be too stop start compared to modern rules. You are right that the older rules have lots of ideas and info that are useful for inspiration when designing rules.
I've no doubt that modern rules writers do the same research, its just this rule-set has all that 'under the bonnet' stuff out on display. That's what make this so interesting.
That layout reminds me very much of the Challenger 2000 Moderns rules - they had lots of tables too.
I don't have a problem with yards. As with inches centimeters or base widths they're just a unit of measurement. Counting casualties for figure removal, that I don't miss at all!
I did chuckle when I read that section. Way too complicated for my taste.
Lovely little ruleset, miniatures and review. I love all these old rulesets, I've loads of tiny cold war stuff and 6mm Napoleonics. Despite what people think nowadays I think it was a golden age for tabletop wargaming.
Have the original rules bought when first published. It was a photocopy, typed on a manual typewriter and some were copied on a Gerstner machine. Great set of rules particularly if you like a good table.
Thanks for the info! I wasn't sure how they were printed. I've always been impressed by the depth and quality of the research that went into these rules.
I can remember them after 45 years. I bought Heroics and Ross 5mm figures on the strength of them.
Looks like a cracking set of rules
I do really enjoy looking at how the older rule sets had a lot more maths compared to the newer games. Both have their ups and downs but I do like the detail that used to get put into the rule sets. Some newer games a re a bit bland i comparison. Great review.
I'm not sure I could use these rules to play, but they are a great resource of ideas and well researched data that can be used in other games. Need to know the ranges of period weapons in yards; This book has it. Need to understand the distance over which sound will carry; this book has it. etc etc
Hi Lee; yes, they are definitely a set of the era, but not quite as cumbersome as WRG rules for which you needed to have a degree in higher mathematics. Not to say that they are bad, but show how much research went into old rule sets & the detail earlier gamers (me amongst them) used to deal with. The more modern streamlined rule systems definitely make games more user friendly & easier to play. There is something to be said for both methods - the older for its detail which info is frequently missing in modern rules & therefore gamers miss some of the rationale behind the rules, but the quickplay ease of modern rules is great, particularly for getting newbies interested.
Birmingham video on that Rulebook I don't think with my maths I could cope with all that division and whatever a nice looking rule book for his age
It is indeed.
In the 1960s rules tended to be simplistic (Featherstone et al) , into the 70s and 80s a 'need' to make games more like 'simulations' (WRG etc.) prevailed inevitably adding complexity. Now 'playability' seems to be in vogue.
I drifted way from wargaming in the early 80s partly owing to the 'simulation' issue (but mostly because I found out about beer and girls) but on retirement am back again with 'playability'.
Postie's Rejects like big battled with multiple players but if we are to get them done in a day we need playability (even with an Umpires support).
Are those miniatures the Baccus ones?
Yes. All my Anglo-Zulu war models are from Baccus.
I may have bought these in the 80's ................ :)