The launch of our new rule set for Colonial warfare

[dhtandco]

Today I took delivery of our Victorian Steel rules which are based on Company stands fast play and fun, covering all the usual stuff plus heatstroke, hidden movement, ambushes, gunboats, railways, engineering works, leader qualities and fatigue and supply issues. All main areas of the rules are covered by worked examples illustrated with real wargame figures. The natives if used correctly can and do win! I actually prefer to play the natives under these rules check them out at Victorian-steel.com
The covers and photos are by nevermore  cheers Malc!

[FifteensAway]

Rules sound interesting but are they more of the 'conversational style' or more like the 'american' style?  I realize that is a challenging question for English rules writers but still an important question.  I have several sets of English written rules and have yet to find any of them playable, some good ideas but not really something I would play.  Certainly, to some extent, that is a personal idiosyncratic thing but not entirely.  However, having said that, I am on the lookout for alternative colonial rules.  The Sword And The Flame has its advocates but it is hardly the best rule set out there.

[Atheling]

Rules sound interesting but are they more of the 'conversational style' or more like the 'american' style?  I realize that is a challenging question for English rules writers but still an important question.  I have several sets of English written rules and have yet to find any of them playable, some good ideas but not really something I would play.  Certainly, to some extent, that is a personal idiosyncratic thing but not entirely.  However, having said that, I am on the lookout for alternative colonial rules.  The Sword And The Flame has its advocates but it is hardly the best rule set out there.

Well, I can't answer your comment directly as I've only seen the rules being played but the playability of the system seemed very good and everyone enjoyed their game. It was a demo game at Durham Wargames Convention and extensive pics can be seen on my blog below (unembarrassed plug that it is!):

http://justaddwater-bedford.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/durham-wargames-show-interlude.html

By the way, I'm not sure that there's really such a distinction between Eurpoean (conversational style) and 'american' style? It all just feels a little well, bit of a steryeotype to me. I'm sure that you didn't mean it to be so (?).

Darrell.

[Conquistador]

Well, I can't answer your comment directly as I've only seen the rules being played but the playability of the system seemed very good and everyone enjoyed their game. It was a demo game at Durham Wargames Convention and extensive pics can be seen on my blog below (unembarrassed plug that it is!):

http://justaddwater-bedford.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/durham-wargames-show-interlude.html

By the way, I'm not sure that there's really such a distinction between Eurpoean (conversational style) and 'american' style? It all just feels a little well, bit of a steryeotype to me. I'm sure that you didn't mean it to be so (?).

Darrell.

Well I know there are several continuum * commonly existing in reality when trying to describe rules - the Most Extreme Organizationally is something like the old SPI board games structure and the other end is (no names) the "Rambling Conversation/Dissertation" style that is half "Look at How Smart (or Funny) I Am Monologue" and half "Unindexed Draft" in structure.

*  a continuous sequence in which adjacent elements are not perceptibly different from each other, although the extremes are quite distinct.
"at the fast end of the fast-slow continuum"

Even if it is a stereotype (not always a bad thing when used correctly) it would be useful to know what the two styles meant in this case.

Gracias,

Glenn

[Atheling]

Well I know there are several continuum * commonly existing in reality when trying to describe rules - the Most Extreme Organizationally is something like the old SPI board games structure and the other end is (no names) the "Rambling Conversation/Dissertation" style that is half "Look at How Smart (or Funny) I Am Monologue" and half "Unindexed Draft" in structure.

*  a continuous sequence in which adjacent elements are not perceptibly different from each other, although the extremes are quite distinct.
"at the fast end of the fast-slow continuum"

Erm.... I really don't mean to be rude at all but that sounds a little patronising  . Many of us on this forum also attended uni or such like 

Even if it is a stereotype (not always a bad thing when used correctly) it would be useful to know what the two styles meant in this case.

(Well, I certainly agree about stereotypes if used within the proper context). Anyway, for me it's the feel of the rules when played that matters be they WRG or WAB for example.

Darrell.

[Conquistador]

Another example of the continuum is rules that try with varying levels of failure to cover hundreds of years (ancients) or decades (colonial) in one set (Volley and Bayonet or DBA) versus ones (like Tactica) that establish firm limits on where the lanes in the road exist for the rules.

A third example are rules that are specific to one war/campaign (ACW) versus those very generic rules who try and cover "all war" in some large lump of time ignoring specific cultural or technological differences (or have optional rules to differentiate between smooth bore linear warfare and the machine/technological armies that became obvious after 1913.)

Gracias,

Glenn

[Conquistador]

Went to Victorian-steel.com web site and despite the FFL assertation in the front page it appears to be extremely Anglo-centric (I will definitely pass in that case) in both the  rules coverage and in the future scenario books mentioned (reinforces the first.)

The Flag sheets (nicely done) are also pretty much Anglocentric in subject matter.

There is some potential on the rather empty (it is new so that should be expected) forum in developing beyond the "Colonials are British versus the native peoples" vibe (talk about freaking stereotypes!)  currently.

Gracias,

Glenn

[Conquistador]

Rules sound interesting but are they more of the 'conversational style' or more like the 'american' style?  I realize that is a challenging question for English rules writers but still an important question.  I have several sets of English written rules and have yet to find any of them playable, some good ideas but not really something I would play.  Certainly, to some extent, that is a personal idiosyncratic thing but not entirely.  However, having said that, I am on the lookout for alternative colonial rules.  The Sword And The Flame has its advocates but it is hardly the best rule set out there.

Not disagreeing - especially about TS&TF - but can you give a specific example (or even start a  thread to keep me from hijacking the thread anymore) of this phenomenon?

Gracias,

Glenn

[Conquistador]

Erm.... I really don't mean to be rude at all but that sounds a little patronising  . Many of us on this forum also attended uni or such like 

(Well, I certainly agree about stereotypes if used within the proper context). Anyway, for me it's the feel of the rules when played that matters be they WRG or WAB for example.

Darrell.

Well many did attend college but it would be patronizing to assume every one did.   

And while I think I know what you meant by WRG versus WAB stylistically I think a further detailed discussion would be hijacking (which I already did - posting right after waking up not a great idea obviously) the thread.

Gracias,

Glenn

[dhtandco]

Im not sure I understand your reference to Anglo centric rules and scenario book.
Half of the colonial world was governed by Great Britain and therefore is bound to dominate the period and we also fought some of the most interesting and formidable races on the planet ( often without cause) which is why the Sudan, Zulu wars, Sikh wars Boxer rebellion ,Indian Mutiny and North west frontier generate so many nice figure ranges, The scenario book covers the Boers v the Zulus (2 scenarios) the Zulu civil wars (2 scenarios) The Boer civil war (1 scenario) and the remainder The Anglo Zulu war and First Boer war so I have tried to spread the net. Our future releases include battles between the Germans and the He He tribe and we play tested them with French v North African tribes and Italians and Abbysinians  Because the rules allow you to categorise between regular and tribal forces and four classes from elite to levy it is possible to fit most forces in there somewhere
Where would you place the emphasis if not on the forces of Queen Victoria ( god bless her!)?

[Conquistador]

<snip "All great and wonderful" stuff>
Where would you place the emphasis if not on the forces of Queen Victoria ( god bless her!)?

Which has been done, done again, and over done.  

But it sells well.       Especially to Brits and Anglophiles, less so to Anglophobes or those who have no interest in the hijinks of Imperial Britain.  Just stating my opinion/response to your announcement.  

Where should you put your emphasis?

Put it where it interests you.  Put it where it sells in your market area.

However, I won't buy the rules until I

1) try them out at a convention or

2) see multiple independent 3rd party AARs/BatReps/reviews that tell me what I want to know, mechanics, results of the play, and strengths and weaknesses.  

and

3) see the rules expands beyond the limitations of Britain's Imperialism (there are so many flavors of Imperialism including Spain, Portugal, Germany, France, Belgium... and the hypocritical We are Not an Empire" of the USA.)

I wish you success but right now you won't get a penny of my money because of the focus of your rules.

Gracias,

Glenn

[fastolfrus]

I didn't go to university, but I'll pitch on with this simple thought.

Write scenarios & lists for figures that are currently available first.

Picking "Old Glory" as a representative manufacturer, for the simple reason that they are US & UK based, that would give:
Indian Mutiny
Boer War
Zulu War
Sudan
North West Frontier
Boxer Rising
Maori Wars
Sons of the Desert
Lost African Tribes
Sikh Wars

[fastolfrus]

Now by my simple count, that gives 10 distinct possibles, 7 of which feature the British as the colonial power.
As for other colonials from this list you'd get French (or possibly Spanish) for North Africa, and everyone and his dog for China, although the British did play some part in that one too.
OG don't list any particular forces to oppose the Lost Africans, but Zanzibari slavers might make a good choice.


Personally I like scenarios that have obscure exotic groups, but in the end, they'll probably only get played through using the figures that I have already got in the cupboard.
Fair enough, that includes paint conversions of Perry plastic zouaves (to Moroccan or Zanzibar infantry) and Perry plastic Ansar (using spare musket arms from zouaves) as native militia/askaris, who have in the past been drafted into Indian Mutiny games too.
We have a Hudson & Allen Alamo, but it rarely gets used in a Texan setting, although it has been used for the Indian Mutiny, North Africa, the Sudan and even Harad (!!).

Anyway. Good luck with the new rules, we'll probably order a set when we see what we are doing next term.

[FifteensAway]

First, my apologies to dhtandco!  I certainly did not mean to so derail the debut of your rules here.  I guess that's what I get for posting so late when I should really be sleeping.  And I must also correct myself, bad gaffe - my number one go to rules now actually come from England.  The rules?  Rank and File by Crusader Publishing.  Again, too late in the day.  I simply wanted to know the style of the Victorian Steel rules, conversational versus a more 'organized' style.  I guess I need a neon bright embarrassed emoticon here.

So, can we all please keep the focus on the rules in question rather than semantics about what I wrote.  I really do have a genuine interest in the rules and just want to clarify to make an informed decision, that's all.  I do buy rules sometimes just for ideas.  I'm sure the authors of the rules would appreciate it.  Thanks folks.

And, again, my apologies to the authors.

(Atheling, no, I certainly didn't mean to imply a stereotype, just an observation about different styles of rules - and thank you for keeping your post focused on the rules.)

Oh, and for the record I'm neither Anglophone nor Anglophile.  Just a Yank, California transplant variety.

[sjwalker51]

Order placed - it's one of my favourite gaming periods, I've been inspired by some of the Grimsby club's games (and downloaded free flags in the past) so, whatever the exact mechanisms used, it's worth 15 quid to support a new venture and there are always fresh ideas that can be 'borrowed' - and I'd rather make up my own mind about the suitability of the the rules for the sort of games I want to play, based on what I've read and understood about the campaigns in question.

And I'll do the same when the new version of Peter Gilder's famous Sudan wars rules are released later this year - but I am a rules hoarder!

And of course the initial launch will focus on the best known (all British) colonial campaigns of the 19th century - heck, even TSATF did that at the beginning! Falstolfus sums it up quite nicely - what other campaigns, widely supported by existing figure ranges in both 15mm and 28mm, immediately come to mind? IIIR, an excellent work on the Herero wars was released recently, so why cannibalise that? And other wars, such as the Indian Plains Wars (another favourite of mine) has such a unique style of warfare in scope, scale and tactics, that it warrants a completely different approach rather than trying to adapt the core mechanisms.

Wishing the writers every success

Simon
(Definitely an Englishman, whose great grandfathers fought in both the second Boer and Boxer Wars - oh, and at Jutland, but that's hardly 'colonial' !)