Greetings from N. Ireland

[mmcv]

Thanks Rick!

Thanks! I was thinking of the "Tilly's Very Bad Day" free rules, but was put off by playtesting with a friend prior to lockdown - it uses multiple D6 rolls to hit with a 6 usually required. A lucky hit basically wiped out units.

So, been developing my own rules which suit well for the enforced solitaire gaming we all have at the moment! I'll upload them at some point - I think this site has that facility.

Kerpob, a bit late myself, missed this comment previously. I've seen Tilly's but can't say I've read much on it. There's a few other ones like Tercio's and Baroque which I've briefly looked at but not quite been drawn to. FK&P/Twilight of.. are ticking boxes for me these days, but I'm not beyond homebrewing rules too. Have a few different rulesets for other periods I've been working on myself. What's your approach to brewing upr own rules? It's really been making me look closely at what I like in a rule set and how I inject some flavour and mechanics to suit the period.

[kerpob]

Thanks Rick!

Kerpob, a bit late myself, missed this comment previously. I've seen Tilly's but can't say I've read much on it. There's a few other ones like Tercio's and Baroque which I've briefly looked at but not quite been drawn to. FK&P/Twilight of.. are ticking boxes for me these days, but I'm not beyond homebrewing rules too. Have a few different rulesets for other periods I've been working on myself. What's your approach to brewing upr own rules? It's really been making me look closely at what I like in a rule set and how I inject some flavour and mechanics to suit the period.

Haven't logged on for a while - something I plan to remedy. So sorry response is quite late.

My rules principles - in rough order of priority:

1. Realism - If the rules cannot recreate a historical battle then they are no good. Equally, the ground/time scale needs to be correct for movement rates, formation size (bases) and ranges.
2. The bell curve - I try to use probability generation that will give a bell curve of probabilities so that there are common results and rare results. 2D6 will give this - a 7 has a 1 in 6 chance, but a 12 has a 1 in 36 chance. Similar for  oppositional dice (I roll D6, you roll D6 and the difference between them determines the outcome). However - you don't want the extreme results to ruin a game, so they need to be justified if they happen & may be better removed as "chrome".
3. Agnostic units. The unit of measurement used in the game is notional -  you can adapt it to your own figure scales. So if a formation has to be 1 unit wide, that unit can be an inch, 2cm, whatever works - and this "unit" is then used for all movement/ranges etc.
4. Keep the chrome separate. I try to write the rules as basic as possible. Then complexities and edge cases ("chrome") can be added as separate bolted on elements that you will only need in a specific scenario. Examples: terrain, lancers, mortars, etc. This very much helps with learning rules and keeping the game moving so it actually completes in an evening's play!
5. Player interaction. I also try to keep the players involved throughout the game, so that one person is not sitting for a long time waiting. This can be done by limiting unit activation, but also by alternating player's actions within a turn.

The toughest thing I think to put into rules is command and control. This element can ruin a set of rules by either making the player too "god like" able to move whatever they want with no restriction, or it can add an onerous layer of rules that kill a game's fun/playability (e.g. tracking couriers with orders).

All of this is obviously just my preferences. Others may love randomness or else prefer highly complex rules. There is no single solution as the proliferation of rules available demonstrate!

[mmcv]

Haven't logged on for a while - something I plan to remedy. So sorry response is quite late.

My rules principles - in rough order of priority:

1. Realism - If the rules cannot recreate a historical battle then they are no good. Equally, the ground/time scale needs to be correct for movement rates, formation size (bases) and ranges.
2. The bell curve - I try to use probability generation that will give a bell curve of probabilities so that there are common results and rare results. 2D6 will give this - a 7 has a 1 in 6 chance, but a 12 has a 1 in 36 chance. Similar for  oppositional dice (I roll D6, you roll D6 and the difference between them determines the outcome). However - you don't want the extreme results to ruin a game, so they need to be justified if they happen & may be better removed as "chrome".
3. Agnostic units. The unit of measurement used in the game is notional -  you can adapt it to your own figure scales. So if a formation has to be 1 unit wide, that unit can be an inch, 2cm, whatever works - and this "unit" is then used for all movement/ranges etc.
4. Keep the chrome separate. I try to write the rules as basic as possible. Then complexities and edge cases ("chrome") can be added as separate bolted on elements that you will only need in a specific scenario. Examples: terrain, lancers, mortars, etc. This very much helps with learning rules and keeping the game moving so it actually completes in an evening's play!
5. Player interaction. I also try to keep the players involved throughout the game, so that one person is not sitting for a long time waiting. This can be done by limiting unit activation, but also by alternating player's actions within a turn.

The toughest thing I think to put into rules is command and control. This element can ruin a set of rules by either making the player too "god like" able to move whatever they want with no restriction, or it can add an onerous layer of rules that kill a game's fun/playability (e.g. tracking couriers with orders).

All of this is obviously just my preferences. Others may love randomness or else prefer highly complex rules. There is no single solution as the proliferation of rules available demonstrate!

No worries, good to hear from you!

Interesting, sounds quite similar to my own preferences. I've been developing my feudal rules a fair bit recently, particularly focused on Feudal Japan (though the core concepts should transfer to other periods with the appropriate chrome/flavour and unit changes). I use 2d6 for general tests to give that bell curve effect and 1d6 for quick and dirty tests to give a bit of variance. Dynamic player turns and some simultaneous actions (e.g. melee) keeps the interaction going (though only played them solo so far). I'm reasonably happy with the command and control system. Not all commands may get activated in a turn but when they do they all get a free action, then any further actions require using up special command points or else accumulating fatigue (which can then trigger morale/loyalty tests). That way if you try and push your units too hard and fast they'll be considerably more likely to fall apart and means you have to think carefully about which commands to activate and how to expend your limited resources on them. Feudal Japanese command structures were particularly fragile (especially in earlier periods) so straying too far from your commander or his banners, or losing the commander, can be pretty devastating. This should encourage the use of historical tactics and formations for the period. I've some ideas and drafts for other periods too, particularly the Crusades for which I have a good size collection but haven't really settled on a set of rules that gives me all that I want from the period. I suspect I'll toy with some "post-feudal" rules at some point too, as many of the core principals would work pretty well, though would need to make some changes around the command structure.

For me, the biggest balance is keeping the simplicity while also allowing for advantages and disadvantages for various situations. The number of modifiers has changed quite a bit over various drafts. I'm trying to keep it as streamlined as possible, few enough and sensible enough that you should be able to remember them without checking the QRS too often, but still provide enough that it gives interesting tactical decisions for the player to make.