*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 10:32:40 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 1686641
  • Total Topics: 118117
  • Online Today: 777
  • Online Ever: 2235
  • (October 29, 2023, 12:32:45 AM)
Users Online

Recent

Author Topic: TMWWBK first encounter  (Read 3333 times)

Offline FifteensAway

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4608
TMWWBK first encounter
« on: April 09, 2023, 05:56:41 AM »
Finally played in a Men Who Would Be Kings game today, drove over a hundred miles one way to do so (and play with old gaming friends).

The Verdict.  A bit of 'blah' I'm afraid.  Lots of very cool ideas in the rules but some 'mechanical' elements that just didn't seem to work right for me.  And one element in particular that, at least for me, was a thorough failure.  I hope I understand the intent of the 'activation' process, remove the 'god'like player control which is good.  But every unit, every turn (excepting, of course, the free actions) having to pass an activate roll greatly reduced the 'enjoyability' factor of using the rules.  I don't think a unit with no threat or obstacle before it and no damage done to it by its opponent should end up 'dead in the water' for multiple turns based on a die role.  That defies both logic and historicity in my opinion.

This doesn't mean I didn't enjoy the game, I did.  But I think the rules missed some key marks and that has turned by attention back to Fistful of Lead: Bigger Battles as my leading contender as an alternative rule set.  So, I guess I need to give those rules a try in a colonial setting which is what today's game was.

Sadly, this was not my opinion alone but a general consensus, for varied reasons, that the rules had issues - and this from more experienced players of the rules than myself.  Not that they can't be made to work with some Significant Adjustments.  And none of the issues were a result of the game master and his tweaks of the rules.  It was core elements of the rules as written that presented problems.

Oh, well.  At least I got to game with people I haven't seen in a while but have gamed with off and on for decades.  And a couple of new faces, too.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2023, 11:14:17 AM by FifteensAway »

Offline fred

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4360
    • Miniature Gaming
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #1 on: April 09, 2023, 06:54:58 AM »
Activation rolls - seems people either like the concept, or really really don’t like it.

In TMWWBKs the activation roll lottery is massively toned down due to all units having an automatic pass activation. Compare this to all the earlier period Rampant rules where everything is an activation roll.

I assume that Warmaster, BKC / CWC, or Black Powder / Hail Caesar aren’t part of your gaming history?

Can I ask what size of game you played, as your comment about units unaffected by the enemy, doesn’t really tally with my experience of TMWWBK games, as they normally start with everyone pretty close together. So even if no firing has occurred the presence of the enemy is known, and that can cause units to hesitate and spend time observing and planning (things that failed command rolls can mean are happening to me)
« Last Edit: April 09, 2023, 06:57:01 AM by fred »

Offline FifteensAway

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4608
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2023, 11:22:22 AM »
It was a larger game.  Five players, several units per player.  One side assaulting a walled compound.  But except for the first few inches onto the table, the attacking units were in range of opponent fire.

This activation issue for me - in this and other rules - always seems to be a 'fun' subtractor.  Yes, of course, in 'real life' it can happen that a unit fails to advance.  But as a player in a game when too many of your units too often fail to advance, the fun disappears.  And that was the most strident complaint - it just wasn't fun.  Part of that was the scenario but that wasn't the issue for me, the scenarios design - one or two small tweaks for a very easy fix.  It was the activation issue.  And it wasn't all of my units all of the time.  I actually inflected the most damage on our opponent inside the compound until the last turn or two.  But it happened so often to all of the players, on both sides, that it just spoiled the enjoyment.

Another part of the rules I'm not sure I like is the Pinned mechanism but that is a reserved judgement - it didn't 'spoil' the fun but it definitely did not improve it, almost seemed like all it really did was slow down the action. 

In its favor was that, overall, the game did play fairly fast, even with so many players running so many units, probably had over 30 units on the table through the course of the game.  So, its not that I wouldn't play the rules again - but I would opt for other games with other rules if that was an option, say at a convention.

Offline fred

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4360
    • Miniature Gaming
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2023, 12:13:44 PM »
The chance of failure with activation systems I think it the really hard bit to get right.

With Warmaster and the Rampant games it can often be 40-50% chance of a failed command roll. Other games such as For King and Parliament and To The Strongest, its about 10% chance of failure for a simple order. Our home-brew fantasy rules have a base 10% chance of order failure, with around 40-50% chance of getting 2 orders off.

I don’t recall finding the activations a problem with TMWWBKs, I think as the auto-actions help a lot. We did find them quite fun, and chaotic games, and seemed to give the natives a fair chance. The Pinning mechanism is certainly something that a lot of people mention, the author’s view is that it is intended to allow the Europeans a chance to stop the attacks by fragmenting them.

Offline sjwalker51

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 368
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2023, 06:18:10 PM »
While I recognise and understand the points you raise, can’t say they’ve really spoiled any of the many games (of all sizes) of MWWBK that we’ve played.

We have adopted a few house rules in respect of both Activation and Pinning, some in general and others theatre-specific to mitigate the effect without removing the uncertainty of a failed roll at a critical moment - such as when your Zulus are testing to Attack the British line.

For example, we give Fierce units (and any others whose primary tactic is to engage hand to hand) an additional +1 dice modifier when testing to Attack. Similarly, units Moving on a road also get a +1 modifier and, if part of a column, only the lead unit has to test in order for the whole column to move.

We assume that Tribal Infantry automatically Go to Ground when Pinned (usually renamed Shaken) and some troop types are allowed to withdraw a half move before testing to Rally, giving them a better chance of getting out of range/sight of the enemy.

Small tweaks like this don’t add to the complexity of the rules but do make for a more balanced game.

Offline FifteensAway

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4608
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2023, 07:17:28 PM »
"I assume that Warmaster, BKC / CWC, or Black Powder / Hail Caesar aren’t part of your gaming history?"

Except for Black Powder - which I dislike - I have no contact with any of those other rules. 

Another element that I didn't like when reading TMWWBK was the fistful of dice but that wasn't as bad as I thought - especially using dice rolling trays so the dice weren't all over the place.  But, generally, seemed like excessive dice rolling in the system.  I like the random element dice bring to miniature gaming - used judiciously.  Maybe a bit too much here.

I do recognize a lot of people seem to like the rules but it doesn't feel like they took off to a high degree.  Not sure if it is in second place to Sword and the Flame for colonial gaming or has edged them out a bit.  Another rule system that has good points and drawbacks.  Personally, I really dislike the melee mechanism in TSATF while others think that is what makes the system. 

So, as said, I will either lean into Fistful of Lead or maybe just use Rank and File for "larger" colonial games.

I will at least, if the best available option, give TMWWBK additional tries. 

« Last Edit: April 18, 2023, 04:09:53 AM by FifteensAway »

Offline sjwalker51

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 368
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #6 on: April 09, 2023, 08:40:14 PM »
I look on MWWBK as a good starting point for colonial gaming - robust core mechanics that allow you to tweak them to better represent your understanding of the particular period you’re playing without adding undue complexity.

We’ve had great fun with them, especially playing large American Plains War and Zulu War games with hundreds of figures per side - Boxer Rebellion will be the next ‘new’ project though we’ve still got several more Zulu refights planned (Khambula, RD and possibly Hlobane as well as a rerun of Isandlwana)

I quite like the ‘buckets of dice’ approach rather than endless tables of modifiers, and I’m with you on the melee system in TSATF which is inevitably dated in its approach, however much they’re loved.

Offline Jack Jones

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 205
    • Sands of Soudan
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #7 on: April 09, 2023, 08:45:17 PM »
Hi All

Today I played my first test / get to know the rules game against Mr Babbage. Babbage deployed two spear and sword armed Hadendowa bands (each 16 warriors) in front of two units of Naval Brigade and a Gatling gun.

Mr B didn’t get around to deploying any more units (I got too wrapped up in the mechanics of the unfolding action), while the Hadendowa got pinned and, unable to rally, one band routed and the other was gunned down at long range really quickly – even though the Gatling crew failed an Action test, and only one of the Naval Brigade units opened fire. (All of which was quite good for me, as I got the hang of the rules.)

But, it left me thinking: should a tribal unit that gets pinned be allowed an option to go to ground? It seems to me that this is likely behaviour. Perhaps on a roll of the dice? Would this be a factor of leadership? (Seems to me it would be more about the desperation of self-preservation.) Also, I notice that pinned units ‘do not block line of sight’.

So I found this interesting:

We assume that Tribal Infantry automatically Go to Ground when Pinned (usually renamed Shaken) and some troop types are allowed to withdraw a half move before testing to Rally, giving them a better chance of getting out of range/sight of the enemy.

I posted my thoughts (above) on the TMWWBK Facebook group, where it was suggested that giving pinned units additional cover, requiring three hits for each casualty, may be a remedy, reflecting going into cover, while allowing the pinned unit to continue to be targeted at long range.

I think the half move withdrawal is an interesting idea too, and seems likely behaviour.

I liked the action / activation for the most part, although I wondered why a crewed weapon wouldn’t have firing as a free action. I liked the ‘buckets of dice’ too.

I am going to have another couple of small games tomorrow, with different unit types (itching to deploy my 19th Hussars).

Cheers
JJ
« Last Edit: April 09, 2023, 09:05:14 PM by Jack Jones »

Offline fred

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4360
    • Miniature Gaming
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #8 on: April 09, 2023, 08:57:54 PM »
:

I liked the action / activation for the most part, although I wondered why a crewed weapon wouldn’t have firing as a free action. I liked the ‘buckets of dice’ too.

I am going to have another couple of small games tomorrow, with different unit types (itching to deploy my 19th Hussars).


Sounds like you had a good test game. I think crewed weapons don’t get firing as an automatic action as they are fairly complex and slow to reload (at least compared to rifles of the period). And certainly Gatling Guns and the like were notorious for jamming.


Offline Jack Jones

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 205
    • Sands of Soudan
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #9 on: April 09, 2023, 09:03:30 PM »
@fred

I did enjoy it … and I learned quite a lot really quickly.

Since machine guns have the possibility of jamming when throwing the dice for hits I am wondering about skipping the activation for them, but keeping it for artillery pieces.

Cheers
JJ

Offline sjwalker51

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 368
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #10 on: April 09, 2023, 09:41:56 PM »
Jack,

Amongst our (many) rule tweaks, we’ve given Artillery ‘Fire’ as a free action (for the reasons you give - it’s what they do) but also add limber/unlimber as a (tested) action. We still make heavier artillery test to Reload (representing possible delays) but give them larger crews and/or more dice per crew depending on the theatre.

Early MG’s also have to test to Unjam, it’s no longer automatic but we make it more difficult for later ones to jam in the first place.

As I said, the rules are a great ‘toolkit’ for adding a few house rules to the core mechanics to bring out a bit more of the unique character of particular campaigns - our ‘tweaks’ to the American Plains War ran to 3-4 pages (posted to the MWWBK FB page and, I think, here in a previous thread) and really added to our enjoyment of relighting Little Big Horn and Rosebud.

Offline Jack Jones

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 205
    • Sands of Soudan
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #11 on: April 09, 2023, 09:52:55 PM »
@sjwalker51

Ah! Yes! Limbering and unlimbering. I have modelled Jack Tars hauling a limbered Gatling gun, so this would be a good one to include.

I haven’t modelled a dismantled screw gun on mules or camels yet … and here the assembly / disassembly is a factor.

How does your testing for limbering/unlimbering work?

Cheers
JJ
« Last Edit: April 09, 2023, 10:33:46 PM by Jack Jones »

Offline Old Contemptable

  • Librarian
  • Posts: 171
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #12 on: April 10, 2023, 12:05:36 AM »
This discussion confirms my use of TSATF. Why anyone would bother with another set of colonial rules is beyond me. We just had an eight-player game of the TSATF variant TSINA. TSATF and its variants are very flexible and give a fun game and best of all no activation.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/59568506@N02/albums/72177720307223054

Offline Jack Jones

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 205
    • Sands of Soudan
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2023, 06:25:52 PM »
Hi All

I have a question concerning Mr Babbage’s deployments:

When a unit appears on the table is that all it does, or can it undertake an action too?

That is, is deployment the end of the turn for that unit?

In my second test game today I had two tribal (Charger) units deploy within short rifle range and Speed value range of two KRRC units. I immediately played these as having Actions (from Table 2: Native  Actions), and both charged home. The KRRC units (in close order) were severely mauled in the ensuing mélêe.

If deployment was all that could be achieved, the KRRC units (in close order) would have Volley fired, and likely stopped any attack.

I suppose another question is are Close order units allowed Volley fire on enemy units that are close enough to charge to contact?

Questions! Questions!

Cheers
JJ


Offline sjwalker51

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 368
Re: TMWWBK first encounter
« Reply #14 on: April 10, 2023, 09:38:09 PM »
JJ,

Regarding limbering/unlimbering: it’s simply another (tested) action (we also apply the same principal to screw guns etc that have to be unpacked and assembled).

Limbered Artillery can move more quickly than man-handled (we usually say 10” for simplicity but heavy artillery not usually seen in games is limited to 6”) but timing when to unlimber or limber up in the face of the enemy is nerve-racking sometimes.

We allow Babbage-controlled units to take an action as usual in the turn they deploy, for the reason you give - in your example, the units have ambushed the advancing Imperials before they could react - and there’s always the risk of them failing the Attack test and being hit by the KRRC volley fire in the following bound.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
1498 Views
Last post October 31, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
by LordSpode1879
6 Replies
1347 Views
Last post December 03, 2016, 05:24:42 PM
by Bryanbowdell
8 Replies
1408 Views
Last post August 04, 2017, 09:45:17 PM
by LordSpode1879
4 Replies
1219 Views
Last post August 08, 2017, 04:42:31 PM
by Sunjester
11 Replies
1190 Views
Last post October 26, 2022, 03:19:52 PM
by fred