After Show Report: The Men Who Would Be Kings at Hereward Wargame Show

[guitarheroandy]

I was lucky enough to play my first game of MWWBK with one of the play testers yesterday and was very impressed., as a long-time 'colonial buff'. The troop classification system is very flexible and the game mechanisms, while simple, are not simplistic and give a great game (sic) albeit in Hollywood style.

Already wondering how these rules will look and play in 15mm with 1 stand of 3-4 figures substituting for a single 28mm: should look impressive with Dervish 'rub of 50-60 figures each.

Only one thing that didn't seem quite right, maybe we were doing something wrong: the Zulu Married units were incredibly resilient: even after suffering 80%+ casualties, the veterans kept passing their Rally tests, unpinning and coming back for more - there are no modifiers for accumulated casualties on a unit that I can see? What's your experience of that, Andy?

Yeah, there is nothing to account for accumulated casualties. One trick we found is that sometimes it's best to keep pouring fire onto pinned units, as multiple pins reduce their chance of rallying (subtract one for each pin marker). Of course, this depends on the situation in the game as you may have multiple targets and may not be able to simply target one. Overall, we haven't found it an issue in our NW Frontier games. If the rules had adopted the Lion Rampant model, accumulated casualties would count - once a unit becomes 'battered' in Lion Rampant, it's hard to rally it. You could use that mechanism with TMWWBK but I think it would make it so hard to rally, esp for tribal units in games where all-tribal forces play all-regular forces, that the game balance would be affected. Perhaps it's best to view the actual game mechanism as another 'Hollywood-esque' aspect of the game...

[john Hollyoak]

Do you think these would be suitable for Darkest Africa, either regular v native or native v native?
John

[sjwalker51]

Oh yes, the British certainly had multiple targets! :-)

Which meant in practice that they found it difficult to inflict multiple pins on a single unit. The Zulus were able to overwhelm a couple of companies by first pinning them with short range fire (throwing spears and poor quality firearms) from one unit (which absorbed much of the British firepower as they advanced within range) and then following up with a full-blooded charge by a second full-strength one - which seems a pretty accurate representation of the tactics used during the end-game at Isandlwana.

I like the 'close order' rules, and must try out the optional ammunition supply rules next time around.

I think the rules will work best with time/objective driven victory conditions rather than a straight 'slug it out to the last man' game - but it looks as if there will be multiple scenarios included in the rules.

There are some draft 'Darkest Africa' force lists in the rules, alongside others for French Foreign Legion and U.S. Plains Wars, so plenty of opportunities to add to the lead pile I fear .

[danmer]

Sounds like you were playing it right to me.

As Andy says, there is a need to keep pinned units pinned, so they can't do anything. It's a fine balance working out which units pose you the most threat. Pinning is the key to the tactics of regular units against larger native forces.

Of course, if a unit has taken 80% casualties and still makes it into melee! it's probably not going to be that powerful by that point! with only 4 or so models.

[sjwalker51]

That's true, and in practice I wanted to keep those units out of harm's way, to avoid the Pinning tests on other units within 12" when they eventually routed or were swept away by British volley fire.

I'm thinking these rules could do for colonial gaming in the 21st century what TSATF did (in the USA at least) in the past - certainly hope so!

[Argonor]

I'm thinking these rules could do for colonial gaming in the 21st century what TSATF did (in the USA at least) in the past - certainly hope so!

Well, I just got IHMN and the HVF supplement to be able to start playing some games after painting just a small amount of Zulus ad Brits, painting an Impi each of Unblooded and Blooded (both unmarried), and Veteran (married). Then I'll expand on the Zulus to be able to use them as proxies in God of Battles, and so on, and, hopefully, I'll have about enough for at least a 12-point game when this comes out.

Oh, and a 'regiment' is called an Ibutho, whereas Impi refers to any armed body of men, I know, but Impi is the term used for a 'Company' in IHMN.

[sjwalker51]

IIRC, the correct term for a 'company' would be 'Ivoyo', which would be made up of several 'Ikhanda', each of around 50-60 men.

As you say, the regiment was 'Ibutho' although this could refer to anything from a company-sized unit (especially amongst the more elderly Married regiments) to something akin to a brigade.

There's a reprint available of an excellent contemporary booklet issued to British officers in 1879, and the Farnworth guides available on the Wargames Factory website are very informative:

http://www.naval-military-press.com/zulu-army-and-zulu-headmen.html
http://www.wargamesfactory.com/_literature_53136/Farnworth_Zulu_Painting_Guide
http://www.wargamesfactory.com/_literature_46777/Zulu_Army_Article