Thursday, 4 July 2019

Post of Honour - Napoleonic

I have a project that I've been spending quite a lot of time on recently -  developing a set of rules for the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (1792-1815) based on my Post of Honour - Seven Years War rules.

The idea of Post of Honour was to write a genuinely simple set of horse and musket rules that still gave a real historical flavour. Starting with the SYW seemed logical as I had built up a good knowledge of that conflict. Then, never having properly wargamed in the Napoleonic period, and given the huge popularity of those wars amongst wargamers, I decided it might be a fun challenge to learn about the period and see if a version of Post of Honour could be created to cover them.

I have indeed learnt a lot and have enjoyed a great deal of interesting reading, including reading through established rule sets. One thing I became more and more aware of was that the popular sets were all significantly more complex than I preferred, so in developing a simple set maybe I was doing something worthwhile - assuming of course that others might think along the same lines as me. 

To give some well-known examples, I have looked at Black Powder, General de Brigade and most recently Over the Hills. All of these are successful sets, but I was looking to produce something at least an order of magnitude simpler than any of them. It was checking out Over the Hills which eventually inspired me to share my project in this particular post.

My Paradox
In my more reflective moments, I will usually maintain that you shouldn't make up your mind about a set of rules until you've played a few games with them. But on the other hand, my personal experience is increasingly telling me that I know whether I'm going to be interested in a set of rules after one quick read through. Indeed, I have often rejected a set of rules by about page 5 and just skimmed the rest.

This was my experience with Over The Hills. Well, 'rejected' is too strong a term. The rules are obviously created by people who know and love the period. They are sensibly structured - a basic game, extensive optional rules to add to the basic game, and a good selection of historical background and army examples. The book is also well laid out. My only real criticism is the extent of the grammatical and punctuation errors, which are very common but usually don't stand in the way of making sense of the text.

I got my copy cheap from Caliver Books as a second edition is on the way This is in itself a tribute to this publication - certainly, all the online reviews I have seen are positive. My conclusion that I would never play the rules was based on one simple assessment - level of complexity. Which brings me back to where I started.

Post of Honour - Napoleonic

I finally feel it's time to get these rules of mine out there and see what people think. At the moment, there are only the basic rules plus some notes. I intend to produce a historical periodisation which will point out the variations in tactics and army quality of the various nations which occurred as the period  unfolded.

So, how to 'get the rules out there'? When Honours of War was being playtested, I successfully used Yahoo Groups to gather comments, suggestions and criticisms. It would appear from online feedback that Yahoo Groups has since gone rather downhill, and tends to be full of glitches and issues. I discovered this straight away when I found I was unable to load a photo for the group cover. Therefore, I have gone for a Google Group. The format of the latter is not quite so well suited to my purpose, but it is free and very easy to set up. If anyone has other suggestions for a playtesting forum, I am all ears.

So, Napoleonic fans, please visit;

Post of Honour - Napoleonic (Google Group)

Membership of the group is subject to approval (keeps out the riff-raff and spammers) so you will need to click the 'Apply To Join Group' button. A short message from you would be much appreciated. Let me know of any problems.

Maybe we can get something started here.

Friday, 14 June 2019

Seven Years War Rules - Post of Honour

First, two links to version 3 of Post of Honour. The movement modifiers table is slightly changed, making formation changes in particular just that bit slower to better represent linear warfare. Plus the usual tweaks here and there - check the melee section in particular if you already have a copy of the rules.

You know how it is - you see a link in a comment but it's not live - you can't just click on it. Oh, the frustration, the senseless anger.

Fortunately I happened upon this simple explanation of how to put live links in blog comments. I've used it and it works. Long live the revolution!

Gotta run. See you again soon!

Tuesday, 28 May 2019

'The Ancient Battle of Ardea'

It's no use looking up this battle in your history books, as it is entirely fictional. It was fought as a celebration of the conclusion of my ancients project.

The battle was a very basic set-up so I could get all the figures onto the table and give King's of War Historical a good shake out. I went for a 'classic' ancient wargame look - flat terrain with just a few palm trees for background, and the armies set out on opposite baselines.

I had belatedly realised that my S&A Scenics 'Dried Earth' felt battle-mat needed some scenic scatter to give a little more texture and colour. The look is definitely improved, but I reckon adding a bit more green would be a good thing. 

In the photo above you see the forces of Latium on the right, with Paphlagonia to the left. In total (that is, including both sides), I appear to have assembled around 320 infantry, 60 cavalry, 8 chariots, 4 elephants and 4 war engines. A modest enough collection by some standards, but a very pleasing achievement after about 2 and a half years of what I originally called 'The Trimsos Project'

It all started with a game at Stuart's house, transformed itself into a rules-writing project which failed to be taken up by Osprey (they were right - I have abandoned those rules now), and has finally resulted in a collection of figures which give me great pleasure, along with the discovery of a rule set which I am happy with - Kings of War Historical. So much for the usual advice about 'sticking to your goals' - in this project I have just followed where my instincts led me and have wandered well off the path of Mr Featherstone's rules and his original 1962 battle.

With hobbies, it is best to follow the advice of Buddhist meditators - 'do not crave your goal, but allow the process to unfold'. This seems to produce maximum relaxation and pleasure. It is instructive to reflect on the stage I had reached in January 2017, and remember that the test game I played on a 3' x 3' table with mostly unpainted figures was nevertheless an absorbing and enjoyable couple of hours, and as much a part of my hobby as any games I will play with my full collection:

But back to the present. 'Ardea' was a solo game to get me back in the ancients groove after many weeks poring over the history of the Napoleonic Wars (of which you may hear more at a later date). The photos below give a flavour.

Latium - The King's War Elephants lead the centre.
Paphlagonia - the central phalanx is protected by missile troops.
Coming to grips - the Pahlagonian archers make little impression on the elephants.
An overview as the elephants crash in, whilst two Paphlagonian warbands attempt to
fold around their phalanx and delay the Latium main battle line.
The fighting between the two flanks turned out to be a sideshow, with honours broadly even and
neither side able to use any advantage to affect the main fight in the centre.
A to-and-fro melee between the elephants and Blue and Yellow Shields took place.
End game. The elephants have done very well, and now allow the Latium main battle line forward to finish the job.
Overview at the end of the battle, with Latium triumphant.
Interesting to see how many units have been removed from the table

As I mentioned, I am still liking the Kings of War rules. In this battle, I noted that the elephants were rather too powerful and I will be reducing their melee ability - a simple matter of changing a melee factor of 3+ to a factor of 4+. And I will be adding a home-grown 'stampede' rule to make them entertainingly unreliable.

It now remains only to get some games in with wargaming friends and enjoy the social part of the hobby. Of course, in our hobby as in any other, the Fat Lady never really sings and it's never really over. But I don't feel any great need for more in this section of my wargaming. In particular, I've had quite enough of painting figures, and the expense of acquiring ready-painted figures will provide a reassuringly restrictive influence. 

'Til next time!

Wednesday, 24 April 2019

Victrix - Legionaries & Velites

The availability of hard plastic models from Warlord Games and especially Victrix has made creating my modest ancient armies so much easier - and cheaper. 

An excellent case in point is the box of Republican legionaries and velites from Victrix. Sixty models for just under £30 - that's 50p each, in other words. Victrix win out over Warlord Games in that you invariably get command models as well, which is not always the case with the Warlord sets. However, in fairness Warlord do commonly include shield transfers in their price.

However, when it comes to legionaries the phrase 'shield transfers' tends to send a shiver up my spine. Fiddly, fiddly, fiddly. The transfers for my Macedonian Pikemen were bad enough. This is one of the many areas where creating an imaginary army is advantageous. The Victrix figures are being used to form units from what I have called 'The Black Legion'. These fearsome characters fight for the army of Latium, and Roman Imperial red is replaced by black. The unadorned, menacing black shields are a particular aspect of their appearance on the battlefield, and purely by coincidence this avoids me having to test my patience with shield transfers or fancy painting.

These characters are based for Kings of War Historical, so they are 8 to a base in my slightly slimmed-down units (the rules go for basing in tens). For the Velites I experimented with just 7 to a base to get a more skirmisher-like effect, which I think worked out. Plus I saved on painting 2 extra figures - well worth it.

For the record, I used Vallejo acrylics with no undercoating - another advantage of plastic figures. So there's just a single layer of paint and a coat of varnish. Bases are made from a double layer of 1.5mm cardboard.

It's All A Fantasy
I normally count myself as very much an historical wargamer. However, creating imaginary nations for my ancient wargaming has reminded me how important it is to remember that really we are just playing with toy soldiers. In a recent edition of Miniature Wargames (no.432), editor John Treadaway summed it up thus: "It's all non-historical gaming. It's just a question of degree". A few years back I might have challenged that statement, but now I think it is fundamentally correct. Once you step into the world of miniature wargaming with model soldiers, you are in a hobby world and have left the arena of 'simulation'. The late Paddy Griffith came to this conclusion decades ago (see this post).

This doesn't lessen our hobby, it just shows it in its true light. I believe myself to be very much at the 'historical' end of wargaming, but in the end it is indeed just a game of toy soldiers. I think that anything else would be rather too warlike for my personal taste.

'Til next time.

Friday, 15 March 2019

Mr Wesencraft and the Battle of Blenheim

At this time of year, it's easy to find a quiet corner in the delightful grounds of Blenheim Palace.

Well, what a fool I've been. Since I moved to my present job 6 years ago I've visited Blenheim Palace many times. How did I miss the diorama of the battle in the museum area, with its thousands (yes, thousands) of 6mm miniatures? Whilst kicking myself and admiring the work, what did I see in the bottom right hand corner but the nameplate in the photo below:

Hmmm. I seem to recognise that name...
Yes indeed, the Charles Wesencraft. Wanting to know some background, I did what one does these days and searched the internet - which duly came to my aid. The diorama was created in 2003-4 almost entirely just by the man himself for the 300th anniversary of the battle. That's 6000 6mm Baccus figures painted by one man in well under a year. Crikey. He tells the story HERE.

The battle is depicted as it was at 5.15pm. This is Oberglau, viewed from behind the British lines.
Blindheim/Blenheim assaulted by the British.
Between the two towns.
A close up of some of the cavalry figures.
Oberglau again and the cavalry contest to the west.

Intentions must have changed since the display was installed, as it has remained in the historical exhibition located in the old stables, and has not moved to the palace as Charles mentions in his story.

A further treat is in store for anyone hanging around outside the gents toilets (as I often do; it's all entirely legal you know). But let me put it another way. In the lobby area outside the rest rooms there is a fine display of models from the National Collection of the British Model Soldier Society. My photo shows figures from the wars of the 18th century. Some beautifully painted flats can be seen on the lower shelf. Surprisingly, many people seem to hurry past without even noticing the treasures on display!

Anyway, if you've never looked into it, Blenheim Palace is a fantastic visit on many levels - as the birthplace of Churchill, as a glorious piece of architecture, as the location of extensive and beautiful grounds which can be explored at will, and as an historic building linked to one of the most famous battles in history. Visit if you can, and allow all day.

I'll be back with some wargamey stuff, asap!

Friday, 8 March 2019

The Engagement At Fontoney

Only yesterday I saw a copy of Charles S. Grant's Scenarios For Wargames available from Caliver Books at £60. I'm not calling that a rip-off - you can pay the same on Amazon. I guess I did well a couple of years ago to buy a copy of the book for £20 at the Colours show - I knocked the seller down from £25. 

The book is a classic, and why it hasn't been re-printed is a mystery to me. The copy I bought did have a few pages at the back stuck together. Maybe it was owned at one stage by the kind of misguided gamer who describes our hobby as 'exciting'. I mean, the book's a classic, but it's not that good. I separated the pages carefully and the final few scenarios could still be read.

Anyway, I have been remiss in failing to use the many excellent ideas contained in the book to enhance my wargaming. Apart from being clever in concept, the scenarios score by mostly using quite small forces, which means they are easy to stage and can be played comfortably in an evening. Of course, it has to be remembered that Mr. Grant uses 48-man infantry battalions, so perhaps in his case the battles aren't as small as they seem to be to me. Whatever the case, recently I started at the beginning and took up scenario 1 as a try-out for my Post of Honour rules. Even better, the stars briefly aligned and I would be able to play the battle twice in less than a week against 2 separate wargamers, both of considerable experience. So I would play Paul in game 1, and Steve in game 2.

My table size was 6' x 5'. The scenario maps are sized for a 7' x 5' table.

The map for the scenario, taken from the book, is shown above. Any Horse and Musket wargamer worth his salt will see straight away that the source is the Battle of Fontenoy (1745). Hence the slightly altered names of places, which are my own additions.

The defenders of the line B-A-C (in my case, SYW Austrians) number only 4 infantry units, a light infantry unit, 2 units of heavy cavalry and 4 guns. The attackers (Prussians) have to form up on the line X-Y and have 8 infantry units, a unit of light infantry, 2 units of heavy cavalry, 1 unit of light cavalry and 4 guns. Basically, the Prussians need to control 2 out of the 3 positions A, B and C, or make the Austrians suffer sufficiently to flee the field, in order to win. The defenders must set up first, allowing the attackers to deploy in full knowledge of the defender's positions. 3 of the 4 defender's guns are required to be in the 3 redoubts.

I thought giving the Austrians 4 guns was a little generous, but I was proved wrong (and not for the first time). To even things up a bit (as I thought), I made 2 of the Prussian infantry units grenadiers, and hence 'superior' quality in my rules. I also intended to to use my 'pre-game bombardment' rules which would allow both sides to use their artillery to soften up their opponents before the first turn.

So now, let's look at how the 2 games proceeded.

The Engagement at Fontoney (1)

The defender sets up first, then the attacker responds with his set up. Paul (Prussia) concentrated
all his infantry in his centre and right, leaving the guns on the left with unhindered lines of fire. 
An Austrian battalion plus artillery in Fontoney.
The Prussians concentrated on cracking open the centre of the Austrian position
by assaulting Fontenoy in overwhelming numbers
They are completely successful - the defenders are driven out and what remains
of the Austrian line are considerably outnumbered.
On the other flank the Austrian gun positions in redoubts 1 and 2 were
eventually wrecked by the concentration against them of all 4 Prussian guns.
A conclusive victory - the Austrians are notable by their absence
in this shot at the end of the game
Redoubt "C" remained in Austrian hands, although harassed by Prussian jaeger.
On the opposite flank, Angoint remains in the hands of a unit of Croats -
but their position is untenable and they will have to leave quickly.

A fairly straightforward victory for the Prussians, mainly due to Paul doing all the right things. I decided to add in another Austrian battalion for the second game.

The Engagement at Fontoney (2)

Another day, another costly assault. With the Prussians now under my command, and the Austrians
fielding an additional infantry battalion, things might not go as well for the forces of Frederick.
Once again Fontoney was the key to the position.
The assault is well under way. The Prussian battery in the distance pounds Fontoney,
supporting the infantry advance.
Oh dear. Two Prussian battalions appear to be routing! That wasn't supposed to happen. 
Unfortunately the Army Commander was killed at the same time - the gold counter marks the position 
of his demise. With luck his subordinate will reappear in the next move to take over.
My clever little flank move isn't having much success either.
Artillery from the redoubts sends cavalry and infantry running for their baseline.
About here I decided it was all up. I have a toehold in Fontoney,
but not much to back it up. Plus the town is being reinforced already.
The desperate struggle in Fontoney.
My flank moves had resulted in Angoint being disputed, but the attacking
battalion was on its own. They would have to retire.

So I lost the second game as well. It was obvious that the key to this scenario was partly following the British tactic from the real battle - channel all your forces into the relatively weak sector east of Fontenoy/Fontoney - but with the addition of a strong attack on Fontoney/Fontenoy itself. My flanking foray in game 2 was just a waste of resources. So I lost both battles but had 2 really good games, both completed in around 2.5 hours. Thanks for coming over guys.

Post of Honour
I was pretty pleased with how the rules played, but in the second game in particular some confusion occurred when multiple units were retreating in bad morale, and we were trying to work out how they affected each other. So I got to thinking about simplifying the morale rules with some inspiration from Kings of War Historical. There will be a new version of Post of Honour available soon on the HoW website, with the new ideas incorporated.

Check out Steve's thoughts on Game 2 here.

Until next time!

Friday, 22 February 2019

Cotswold Wargaming Day 2019

When the 2018 Cotswold Wargaming Day went so well, it was no-brainer to have another go in 2019. There was clearly plenty of scope for the event to expand, and this is what I want to happen this year.

The winner of last year's Stuart Asquith Trophy for Best Game - 'Talavera in 20mm'.

Cotswold Wargaming Day 2019

10.00 - 17.00
Sunday 1st September 2019
The Westwoods Community Centre
Bassett Road
Northleach GL54 3QJ

The ethos of the event is a friendly and informal meeting of miniature wargamers, to chat, relax, exchange ideas, and play games. There are no traders. There will be the chance to bring books and gaming items you want to exchange, give away or sell - but not a formal bring and buy. Last year we had 5 games set up, this year I want to double that if possible, but that means more attendees will be needed. So this is an open invitation to come along, and invite your wargaming friends. You can apply to put on a game if you fancy it.

The venue is a modern, light and spacious local community centre, with a main hall, a side room and a decent kitchen area for getting teas, coffees and biscuits (which were provided free last year). I requested £5 a head in 2018 just to cover costs, and I will doing the same this year. If you missed the 2018 event, check these links to see what went on:

It is helpful for me to know how many to expect, so if you think you might want to come and are not already on the mailing list, leave a comment with your email address if you are comfortable doing so. If not, go onto the Honours of War website and leave me (the administrator) a private message. The same applies if you want to put on a game.

If you need more info, I can answer any questions via the 'comments' facility for this post..

I hope to see some of you there!

Sunday, 10 February 2019

Kings Of War Historical - Playing & Discussing

The rules a wargamer will use are a very personal thing, and this state of affairs has always been a fundamental part of our hobby. Donald Featherstone noted in his 1962 book War Games that "there are almost as many rule books as there are war gamers". 

The choices made may simply involve which commercial set you use, but depending on the type of wargamer you are they may extend to personal amendments applied to a commercial set. Those unsatisfied with commercial sets may go further and write their own rules. The latter course is one of the most creative choices a gamer can make in what is, at its best, a creative hobby.

Thus I was very pleased to be contacted by my friend Roy, offering to try out a Kings of War Historical game with myself and Stuart C, the leading light in the Cirencester Wargames Club. The three of us could pool our ideas and opinions and I could increase my understanding of the rules. Stuart plays Fantasy games with the original KoW rules and also plays the Historical set, so he would be able to shed some light on the background to the rules as well as their strengths and weaknesses.

Roy kindly acceded to my request to bring over my own newly re-based figures for the try-out. Re-basing of some sort is an issue for KoWH, as they have a simple but fairly uncompromising basing scheme (see my first post on this subject). However, some sort of  collective or 'sabot' basing seems to be the answer - in my case done permanently, in Stuart's with temporary bases which allow him to continue to use his figures for Armati.

As we all know, ask 3 wargamers their opinions on a rule set and you'll get at least 4 answers. Stuart had delved into the background of the rules and was sensibly keen to use them pretty much as written for a basic playtest. This we did, and Stuart was obviously content to accept some aspects which seemed a bit unhistorical, whilst adapting his play to the possibilities of the rules. In other words, he accepted the rules as a game to be enjoyed. I was enjoying the game as well, but constantly looking at what amendments might be made without bending the rules completely out of shape. Roy cheerfully went along with the game but it was obvious he too had his doubts about how the rules represented ancient warfare.

I suppose using 2 imagi-nations to test out the rules could be seen as adding a further layer of confusion, but my imaginary armies are built from a set of historical units which I simply imagine to be acting together - so Legionaries are real legionaries, Companion cavalry are considered to act as their historical counterparts, etc. Anyway, a fun game resulted and I learnt a lot:

The initial set up. We used one of the scenarios from the rule book.
Stuart's elephants start to break through my lightly held centre.
The bolt thrower prepares to play the role of 17pdr anti-tank gun against the elephantine Tiger tanks.
Now That's What I Call A Melee - 1. My right flank meets Stuart's left, under Roy's command.
Now That's What I Call A Melee - 2. Heavy chariots vs. elephants.
I think I heard an historically-inspired 'Harumph!' from Roy at this stage.
I should acknowledge here that Stuart and Roy won decisively. The really interesting thing for me is that, having thought carefully about Stuart's explanations and information, I decided to rudely ignore his approach of leaving the rules alone and enjoying them as a game, and continue with my own amendments exactly as before. That's wargamers for you.

Another Day, Another Game...
To give my thoughts another run out, I set up a solo game at home shortly afterwards. This was based on a scenario contained in Wargames, Soldiers & Strategy 75, called 'A Fickle Flanking Force'. The author, Steve Jones, publishes scenarios in various magazines from time to time and invariably comes up with something interesting. Using this scenario was part of my determination not to have my ancient games fall into the rut of just lining up the armies opposite each other along opposing baselines, usually with little or no terrain.

The clever part of this scenario is that one ends up having 2 games going on at the same time, each linked to the other. As the first photo shows, the table is divided by a river. The 'main' battle is seen in the background of the photo - one side holds a ridge against a slightly superior attacking force, tasked with breaking through their line. On the near side of the river, allies of the defenders are advancing through a wooded area with the intention of crossing the bridge and attacking their comrades' tormentors in flank and rear. This flanking force is in turn about to be ambushed from the woods on each side of the road. 

Overall set up. 
Battle for the ridge - opening positions. The Paphlagonian army is in the foreground,
with infantry from the army of Latium holding the ridge
The ambush - opening positions. Light forces from Paphlagonia haunt the woods.
The flanking force is made up of cavalry, elephants and a carro-ballista.
The Paphlagonians hurry forward to attack the ridge.
Chariots try to outflank on the right, with heavy cavalry and warband going to the left.
The ambush is in full swing. The Paphlagonian ambushers are being dealt with,
but time is ticking by.
The Paphlagonian pike phalanxes reach the ridge and desperate hand-to-hand fighting commences.
Meanwhile, back in the woods...
The ambush is almost entirely overcome, but a significant delay has been imposed.
The hoplites of the Latium 'Kingdom Infantry' are putting up a stubborn defence,
but can the flanks hold?
The various melees swing back and forth,
but those outflanking chariots are becoming a real threat.
Eventually, the brave defenders crack. A couple of moves later and the ridge has been swept clean of defenders,
although the Paphlagonian Companion Cavalry have been lost in the process.
Too little, too late. The Latium flanking force crosses the bridge, led by the Auricomus cataphracts,
only to find their comrades have already been routed.
For me, this was an enjoyable solo game which confirmed that the amendments I was using at least worked, whether or not anyone else would agree with them. At the moment, I am getting considerable pleasure in solo games, which I can set up when I like and play at my own convenience and speed. Doubtless I am turning into an anti-social old bugger. I never bother with any particular refinements to make my solo play more sophisticated. In the words of George Gush, I am one of those players "who play mainly for the interest of seeing the battle unfold before them" - so I find simply alternating between playing one side and then the other from move to move perfectly satisfying.

Changes To The Rules
I should start with 2 points - firstly, KoWH has a very limited online presence and I have a suspicion that it may not be very widely played. I hope any of those who do play it may be attracted here, but I accept I may be broadcasting to thin air. Secondly, when I have actually paid for a set of rules, I prefer to play them as written. In the case of KoW I have departed from that principle, but I have at least tried not to alter the spirit of the rules.

In this respect, then, I felt the strict IGO-UGO concept needed to be retained - but with one important exception. I couldn't in the end resist putting in a simple 'evade' rule, as without one I felt period feel was significantly compromised. Evading is available to skirmishers, individuals, and units with the 'nimble' special rule. Such units are allowed to move away when charged. 

Other gamers find the IGO-UGO format rather too restrictive - check the comments from Jim Webster on the Society of Ancients forum if you are interested in alternative ideas.

I have also added a simple command and control mechanism, based on the old 'command radius' idea. Units out of radius of their generals need to roll to make moves towards the enemy. I have also restricted the 'double move' idea - these can only be made when no part of the move comes within 12" of enemy units. Charges are also altered in a similar spirit - in this case, rather than charging a double move, single moves plus a 'charge bonus' are mandated, the bonus being 2" for infantry, elephants and cataphracts, 4" for everyone else. Difficult terrain and obstacles are now crossed at half speed.

A few new Special Rules have been introduced. Most heavy infantry (particularly hoplites and pikes) suffer from the Inflexible Charge rule, which prevents them from pivoting during a charge move. This seemed like common sense. Before the KoW forum was taken down, there was some discussion about the rather over-powerful nature of elephants, and I agree with this view. I have therefore introduced a Stampede rule for elephants, which sees them having a chance of charging off randomly if they are 'wavering' or 'routed'. I have also tweaked down the 'nerve' values of elephants, making them easier to waver or rout.

On the subject of tweaking stat values, this approach is both a blessing and a curse. It makes for a simple and flexible way of adjusting the effectiveness of units in accordance with one's historical views, but the rules lack any background on the basis for the various stats. Altering the points values of units as you alter the stats is tricky for the same reason - the method for deciding points values is not given and the process is completely opaque (not to say rather incomprehensible when various points values are compared).

I think the fighting of melees is a strong point of the rules. However, whilst you can attack a single unit with more than one of your own units, you can only engage one enemy unit at a time - so if your attacking unit overlaps a second opposing unit, this has to be 'nudged' aside. In the first battle described above, the heavy chariots fighting the elephants were in 2 units of 2 chariots each. The 4 attacking elephants were in one unit, and therefore could concentrate all their attacks on half the opposing force, destroy them, and then move on to the other half. This doesn't make much sense to me. Stuart tells me this was done for simplicity in melee calculations, but I am prepared to accept one or two more simple sums for a better representation of combat. In my amendment therefore, if you charge and contact more than one enemy unit, you have to fight all of them.

There are a few more changes in my lexicon, but I think that will do for the moment. As I mentioned, I have a strong suspicion that these comments will have a rather limited audience.

That's All Folks!
Apologies to those for whom KoW Historical are of no interest. I am enjoying playing them immensely, and I am hoping that some players of the rules may be attracted to this blog when they search the rules title. If that is you, please make contact in the comments section.

'Til next time!