Variety is the spice of life

[olicana]

I don't just play horse and musket games. I like a bit of variety. I've just done a blog post on a few games played at my place recently. I've linked it here because it does feature a Peninsular game using my new Spanish units and this is where I most regularly post but (warning) it does contain other types of games.

http://olicanalad.blogspot.com/2023/07/variety-they-say-is-spice-of-life.html



I'm just wondering how many others mix up what they play to keep things fresh.

[vodkafan]

Oh yes for sure. Mostly has.been and I switch between Sci Fi with Galactic Heroes, ACW using  Rebels and Patriots, or DBA Ancients, but sometimes other periods too. When he plays with some of the other lads (I can't always get to their games now) they tend to go for Wild West or Modern.
 

[SJWi]

We always mix things up.  Ancients with "To the Strongest", "Strength and Honour" and "Dux Britanniarum". ECW with "For King and Parliament", and SYW with "Honours of War" . Multiple periods of Sharp Practice. WW2 using Chain of Command and Battlegroup, and Moderns with NORTHAG. Throw in some diversions into naval and air gaming and my group's problem is actually remembering any one set of rules.

[fred]

This seems to be the modern gamers curse, too many periods too many rules!

[SJWi]

Fred, indeed. When I started back in the '70s there were ancients, ECW, Napoleonics, ACW and WW2. Many gamers in my club at that time collected forces for only one or two periods, and there might be 2-3 sets of rules available per period. I like the variety but it does mean that some of my expensively assembled armies only see the table once or twice a year . If my wife knew the truth I'm sure she would question my inevitable next purchase, which just happens to be a 15mm Seven Years War British army. 

[ChrisBBB]

I'm just wondering how many others mix up what they play to keep things fresh.

Yes and no. Maybe 10% of what I play is forays outside my staple diet of big 19th-century battles. But within that staple diet, there is such a huge variety of wars, armies, weapons and tactics that we play very different games each week but with the same ruleset. That means we aren't wrestling with unfamiliar rules and fighting our way through rulebooks all the time. The rules don't get in the way, so we can focus on tactics and enjoying the game.

Our recent Bash Day convention illustrates some of that variety:
http://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.com/2023/07/bash-day-iv-brief-report-leeds-2023.html
It had Napoleonics, Sikh Wars, ACW, Austro-Prussian, Franco-Prussian, and Zulus.

For my other 10%, it could be anything - modern tank battles, WWII skirmish or corps-sized actions, AWI, air combat, naval, SF or fantasy ... (might draw the line at ancients though).

Chris

[vtsaogames]

Hmm, DBA, Post Of Honour (SYW), Bloody Big Battles, Shadow of the Eagles (Napoleonic), Crossfire (WWII), Looking at Vauban's Wars, and seeking the right set for WWI. Oh yes, French colonial and Arabs in 28mm (Men Who Would Be King) and small fight with Rebels & Patriots.

Seeking the right rules for 1/2400 age of sail...

Stop me before I start a new project. Hmm Highlanders of the '45? War of 1812? Chaco War?

[SJWi]

Vtsaogames,  I completely forgot "big Napoleonics". We are trying to find a decent set of Napoleonic rules for the forces we built up when Black Powder was released and we then decided we didn't like them. I have a copy of "Soldiers of Napoleon" but can't get my mates enthused! 

How do you find "Post of Honour"? I see they are a by Keith Flint who wrote "Honours of War", and he references HoW in PoH. Any idea why he wrote them and what the difference is?     

[BeneathALeadMountain]

Vtsaogames I can recommend Post Captain by ODGW. It’s complicated enough to get sailing feeling right (or at least familiar) but simple enough you can enjoy ship on ship up to big battles without burning yourself out with record keeping and 8 day long games (which I’d love  ). I also enjoy Wooden Ships and Iron Men by Avalon Hill, even though it’s a hex and chit it adapts easily to tabletop (might of originally been a tabletop miniature ruleset iirc).

Balm

[vtsaogames]

Vtsaogames,  I completely forgot "big Napoleonics". We are trying to find a decent set of Napoleonic rules for the forces we built up when Black Powder was released and we then decided we didn't like them. I have a copy of "Soldiers of Napoleon" but can't get my mates enthused! 

How do you find "Post of Honour"? I see they are a by Keith Flint who wrote "Honours of War", and he references HoW in PoH. Any idea why he wrote them and what the difference is?   

I quite like Post of Honour. This is a simpler, faster set of rules than Honours of War. Close combat is determined by which side is in worse shape post-combat instead of who got the most hits. This means a fresh unit is highly likely to beat one that is shot up. Where's that reserve when I need it?

Shadow of the Eagles is the progeny of Post of Honour, popular in my group. We use if for divisional fights and will bath-tub up a level or two. Larger than that, we use BBB for Napoleonic battles. Only changes made is a plus modifier for good cavalry. And Napoleon gets to add his command bonus on top of a subordinate's.

Edit: I'm listed as a play-tester for Shadows of Eagles, so might be a tad biased.

[vtsaogames]

Vtsaogames I can recommend Post Captain by ODGW. It’s complicated enough to get sailing feeling right (or at least familiar) but simple enough you can enjoy ship on ship up to big battles without burning yourself out with record keeping and 8 day long games (which I’d love  ). I also enjoy Wooden Ships and Iron Men by Avalon Hill, even though it’s a hex and chit it adapts easily to tabletop (might of originally been a tabletop miniature ruleset iirc).

Balm

If I've got say 7 or 8 ships of the line per side, will I get a resolved game in 3 hours or less? That's kind of my bench mark. It's hard to get guys here for 3 hours, what with travel delays, kid's schedules, and the other obstacles posed by Real Life.

[Aethelflaeda was framed]

I don’t play just H&M but I do find the Napoleonic period the most interesting tactically, but also for spectacle and splendid uniforms to paint.  I gladly play any period of history except Dreadnought period or later naval, and most lot of sci-fi space gaming.  I would say my miniatures collection is fairly balanced between Napoleonics land and naval  and fantasy/horror, but ancients and medieval all have very strong showing.   Currently have a hankering to do WotR if just to paint all that livery, and i really want to up my steam punk/sci-fi units.

[FifteensAway]

I am with ChrisBBB - lots of periods but minimal rulesets.  Rank and File so far has covered French and Indian War, Seven Years War, American Revolution, and American Civil War for me.  Same rules will be used for other 18th and 19th century periods and maybe even a little into the 17th century and a little into the 20th century (German East Africa).

Most likely other rules will be Fistful of Lead and FFOL: Bigger Battles.  FFOL especially for smaller style games like Robin Hood and Three Musketeers - and maybe even Prehistoric Stone Age. 

Variety is great but a plethora of rules is a 'pain on my brain'.  I prefer to put that additional brain power into other efforts, including creative activities beyond this hobby.

[SJWi]

Interesting, mention of "Rank and File" reminds me that I have a copy somewhere. I picked them up going cheap at a show many years ago. I might just give them a go with my Napoleonics as we are still struggling to find a "simple" set of rules for them. Our problem as a gaming group is finding rules that we can use in multi-player games where not everyone is that "expert"/interested in the period, just wants to roll dice and push troop around the table. We've settled on "To the Strongest" for big ancient/medieval games and "Sharp Practice" for small unit Black Powder but are finding mass-battle Black Powder rules somewhat elusive.   

[FifteensAway]

SJWi, I think you will find Rank and File will fit your group's needs very well.  The one 'regular' complaint I've heard about Rank and File is lack of a command and control system but I've added my own for when we want it - but still plays fine without it.  I do recommend using the author approved modification of using a d8 for morale/rally checks rather than a d6. 

One element of the rules I really like is that they don't allow units at half strength or below to rally anymore so no incentive to play to the last man standing.  Fun and easy rules with a decent Quick Reference Sheet - but some folks have reworked the QRS to add some stuff in the rules but not on the sheet that does help, like Leader Casualties.  Not that hard to find in the rules - pretty well organized - just makes it easier.

You might, at first, find the turn sequence a bit 'different' but once you get used to it and understand it, I think it works very well.  Sure, of course it is a game, but the rules structure avoids a lot of non-sensical gameyness that is built into many rulesets, even otherwise okay rules.  A for instance, a nearly intact unit with good morale doesn't get knocked down to fragility for most of the game the first time it gets fired at but can recover quite rapidly and 'stay in the fight' unless there are really bad dice rolls over several turns.  It can go bad but much less likely than in other systems where it is virtually guaranteed.

I'd say the rules just play more like 'history' within the 'unrealistic game' of toy soldiers - if you get what I mean.  Just fun and easy to learn, by turn three of first game majority of gamers pretty much understand how it works and rarely need rules or game master.