Fooling around with 6th Edition WRG

[anton ryzbak]

My group is still waiting for a good replacement for 6th Ed. WRG.  We are still actively playing it, it's great to get a ton of minis out and see a table full of them slugging it out. Recently my Nikephorian Byazantines ran into a bunch of Chinese; needless to say it didn't go very well for my tiny elite cavalry force against his teeming masses of crossbow-armed foot.
 


Next time I get to know in advance which army my buddy gets to use! https://antonswargame.blogspot.com/2022/07/a-surprise-for-anton.html

[Johnp4000]

Great to see 6th back on the table. It was the first set I played not sure I ever mastered than but they gave some unpredictable games. My Early Imperial romans had several loses to a Sarmatian horde. Reluctantly agreed to another game when one Sarmatian cavalry unit failed a morale test and somehow caused 3 units to rout off the table. Nice revenge for the Romans!

[Psychlic Bob]

I played from 4th Edition but the 6-man Legionary Reg B HI HTW/JLS wedges in 6th took a bit of swallowing...

[john Hollyoak]

Blimey that takes me back. Played tons of 6th when I first started 'proper' gaming. My main two armies were Carthaginian (that was a challenge) and a Han Chinese using the very same Hinchliffe figures that you are using.

[Otto1485]

Really enjoy 6th WRG, still the definitive rule set for me.

Wish I was able to play more often.

Great to see that others feel the same as I do.

[vodkafan]

Blimey this must go back a few years. Wasn't DBA developed as a simple set because of the complexity and problems with WRG rules? You obviously stuck with them.

[SteveBurt]

The problem with 6th and earlier editions is that they are basically big skirmish sets. Look at the huge missile ranges. 7th was an attempt to do a big battle set but it was very complex and geared to 15mm figures. DBA and DBM and DBMM are big battle sets, and get good results with much less complexity

[Johnp4000]

I vaguely remember reading old articles in the SOA slingshot magazine, and I think Phil just experimented with new concepts and came up with the element ideal beloved by the DBx series. I don't think that 6th edition was complicated especially when compared to 7th. 6th was mainly popular with the 28mm crowd who generally liked 10/12 units representing an army, I can't ever remember seeing DBM played with anything but 15mm and then just the tournament crowd, vaguely remembering the numerous arguments I never had the impression that DBM was better written than 6th, just had a different set of exploits to be abused by the rules lawyers.

[Psychlic Bob]

I vaguely remember reading old articles in the SOA slingshot magazine, and I think Phil just experimented with new concepts and came up with the element ideal beloved by the DBx series. I don't think that 6th edition was complicated especially when compared to 7th. 6th was mainly popular with the 28mm crowd who generally liked 10/12 units representing an army, I can't ever remember seeing DBM played with anything but 15mm and then just the tournament crowd, vaguely remembering the numerous arguments I never had the impression that DBM was better written than 6th, just had a different set of exploits to be abused by the rules lawyers.

I played from WRG rules from 5th Edition and the intricacies put me off competition play until DBM came along and I played competitively (although not particularly successfully) until DBMM came along when I bailed. Never had much of an issue with other players interpretations of the rules in all that time. Play ADLG now which is great for getting toys on the table. My attitude has always been "socialising first" so I may have missed some of the rules-lawyer attitudes

Played Phil in the first iteration of DBM at the SoA Conference before release and everyone seemed quite happy with his ideas. DBA was the revolutionary set IMHO

[SteveBurt]

I vaguely remember reading old articles in the SOA slingshot magazine, and I think Phil just experimented with new concepts and came up with the element ideal beloved by the DBx series. I don't think that 6th edition was complicated especially when compared to 7th. 6th was mainly popular with the 28mm crowd who generally liked 10/12 units representing an army, I can't ever remember seeing DBM played with anything but 15mm and then just the tournament crowd, vaguely remembering the numerous arguments I never had the impression that DBM was better written than 6th, just had a different set of exploits to be abused by the rules lawyers.

Since my ancients stuff is all 28mm, that’s what I used for DBM, and I only ever did historical refights and scenarios, for which DBM is very good. I did play in one tournament, but found the whole thing a bit dull, and some of the geometrical tricks used were just annoying. DBMM is better, but it is a complex set of rules; not something you can pick up again quickly if you only play it once or twice a year

[Johnp4000]

Steve,

I remember someone at Warfare DBM competition, several years ago telling the bystanders to keep quiet while he was playing his game! No one was sure whether he was joking which of course increased the background noise. But viewing was like so dull, as most of the players were so serious especially as there was a popular sitting in the corner tactic( Castling) to force a draw .This was mid 1990's and I remember there was still a regular 6th edition competition being run , does anyone know if that comp still runs?

[Atheling]

My Early Imperial romans had several loses to a Sarmatian horde.

Now there's an army that one doesn't see in many rulesets nowadays; a "pure" Sarmatian list. I think Hail Caesar have one? (I can't really comment on LDLG and MeG)

[macsen wledig]

a lot of the issues with 6th can be eradicated by the use of grids

great set and yes it had its issues but the rules are quite simple in reality its just they were written in Barkerese!

Am still playing it and although ruleset design has come on since then including reduction of overlylong factor lists, some of the mechanisms are very clever and well thought out. Whoever came up with the idea of opposing dice rolls for combat and shooting as well as the averaging dice concept for regulars was genius...

[fastolfrus]

not tried 6th at all, I still have 4th

[macsen wledig]

I must admit I didnt try 4th. I was introduced to 6th in the early 80s and then went back to 5th later but not 4th!