Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

What rules?
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=8783		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  CyberShadow [ Wed Feb 28, 2007 3:34 pm ]
Post subject:  What rules?
My growing foray into ancients left me wondering...

- who else plays ancient or historical?
- what rules sets do you use?
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:00 pm ]
Post subject:  What rules?
Lots of people do :)
I recomend Warmaster ancients.

And warmaster WWII (blitzkrieg commander).

And warmaster fantasy.

Why? Well if you stick tothe same core mechanics it can make shifting games a lot easier!

Warhammer ancients is popular, but ain't very epic due to scale.
Author:  Cuban Commissar [ Wed Feb 28, 2007 7:56 pm ]
Post subject:  What rules?
I play historicals. Lots of them

dealing striclty with Ancients and Medieval...

Don;t get me started on WWII, Nappys, and other stuff

I love Armati II. ?Quick games, Elegant rules and it covers a huge range of history biblical to Renaiassance. ?May lack some detail but overall experience is good.

I did just pick up Warmaster Ancients. ?Reading through them now.

I own all the Warhammer Ancient Books. ?Overall I just find the suppliments wonderful resources for history, look, and fuction of an ancient army.

I can't comment on the rules because I don't play WFG or WAB. ?Yet! but a new project may change that. ?

I have never played DBA, DBM, or any of it's variations. ?Just never got into it. ?

Any thing else CS I love helping with historicals... :D
Author:  Markconz [ Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:56 pm ]
Post subject:  What rules?
DBM is about to be superceded, but I liked it. The two authors have gone their separate ways after many years of collaboration. The first author is releasing DBMM this month (and I've ordered a copy).  The second is working on Art of War (AOW), which I will also get.

Whatever rules you get, I would base for DBx systems - as you can use this with almost any system out there (including WAB).

DBMM
http://www.caliverbooks.com/Partizan%20 ... dbmm.shtml

AOW
http://www.slitherine.com/artofwar/
Author:  vanvlak [ Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:14 pm ]
Post subject:  What rules?
Mine is the usual collected-but-not-played.
Warhammer ancients has some excellent army books, and the WHFB engine used works well enough. My only bone of contention is that historical battles look better in smaller scales.
i personally enjoyed the 2 single battles of Warmaster I ever played, andWMA is based on these, so it should be ok. Better than WHA, and it gives you some 25 army lists too, with many others on the net.
The DBx split is news to me - thanks Markconz. The rules were quite simple, although I never tried them.
I'd choose the game by choosing the models first - different rules use different base sizes, so don;t commit yourself too early!
Good luck CS.
Author:  CyberShadow [ Wed Feb 28, 2007 10:45 pm ]
Post subject:  What rules?
Hi guys. Sorry, I must not have been clear. I am interested in the systems that people use for their historical/ancients, but I already have my system set.

I own Warrior (very nice and detailed, but complex) and Armati II (which I just dont like). I think that I have some version of DM.. something somewhere, but I dont like it. I also considered Piquet and Warmaster Ancients and Warhammer Historical.

I play Vis Bellica, which is where the 6cm x 3cm bases that I was originally looking for, comes from. I just wondered what people play, and what they like/dont like about their chosen system.
Author:  Cuban Commissar [ Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:16 pm ]
Post subject:  What rules?
CS,

I just keep striking out with you huh. ?We just couln't be gaming buddies we would argue over the rules.  :p

I would interested to know about Warrior. ?I'm looking for a rule set that can handle skirmish to battles (Well larger skirmishes) in 28mm. ?What's it about

Ok let me try this again.

Ancients:

Armati II:

Pro:

I like it because it coveres a wide historical period with fairly simple mechanics. ?Is is east to paly and east to learn and a game will be over withing two hours regarless of size. ?I think there is enough sutiably in the rules thorugh the key units and army division breakouts to make it interesting.

Cons:

Well because it uses the same rules to cover Biblical to Renassance the unit stats and such are the pretty much the same. ?For example there isn't much difference stats wise between a Roman Legion and a bloack of Heavy infantry inm the hundreds years wars. ?Most battles can be won or lost in deployment wihtour much ability to change your fate. ?I find this hsitorical but it can be no fun to know you have loss once seeing deployment.

Warhamemr ancinets:

Pro: ?The warmaster command system is nice and I'm intretsed to see how it plays

Cons: ?Well I haven;t played it.

Warhammer Ancient battles:

Pro: ?Nice army books and really pretty armies. ?The detail per unit is good. ?There is variety now because now it matters if this unit has light armor, throwing spears, heavy throwing spears, great axes, thrusting spears, shields, etc. ?

Cons: ?Well I haven't played Warhammer fantasy battles but sense they are the same mechanics I guess any issues there come here as well. ?There is also the problem of balance when you play armies from different source books. ?They are designed to work with each other and not outside that time slice. ?For example Chinese Han fighting Roman Legions. ?

Napolenincs:

Napoleons Battles II:

Pros: ?Mass battle sysyem. ?A wargame where I can truely say that the quality of the general is more important than the point values, the troops being used, or the dice. ?As an experienced general I could devastate my apponets with miminal lost. ?It plays as I expect a Napoleonic abttle to play out. ?

Cons:

Complex, rules ystem out of print. ?learning curve. ?Takes a very long time to play. ?Was evented when gamers actually palyed all day once a week. ?As oopsoed to having two hours on a weeknight after work.

I also have Grand Armee and General de Brigade. But I haven't played those.

The thought of rebuilding my Nappys armies makes me ill. So many minis....

WWII:

Flames of war:

Pros: ?Nice presentation. ?Good rules that allow you to play games with all the toys; tanks, infantry, artilelry, airpower, etc. ?Despite simplicity still feels right and with good balance between all military arms.

Cons: ?GW rule book producetion with new special rules of the week. ?But if you have simple rules you needs the special rules to add flavor. ?

There is but a few games I aslo have

Spearhead Modern and WWII
Some WWI naval games
WFG (Walt's Fun game) local guy- Skirmish rules from WWI - Modern

How that CS ?:D
Author:  CyberShadow [ Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:18 am ]
Post subject:  What rules?
Interesting. I guess that we would constantly argue about rules. But, then again, my usual opponent and I seem to prefer different things in our wargame rules as well - so we have reached an agreement that we will play anything. If I like a game then it is my responsibility to pick up the rules and at least two forces, and vice versa. It works quite well.

Warrior is an interesting rules set, but not my thing (so you will probably really like it!). It is now in its seventh edition (I think) so a lot of development has gone into it, and is put together by people passionate about historical accuracy and detail. I would not necessarily class it as a skirmish game, in the same way that Armati II is not necessarily a skirmish game.

Warrior is all about command, and supression (as far as I can see). Unit combat is slightly complicated as you calculate unit strength by the number of models and a modifier/multiplier, then the number of 'kills' (although no models are harmed in the calculation of this result) and this is used as a percentage of the unit strength to actually remove models. This means that your unit more realistically represents a lot more soldiers than the actual number of models.

It also uses a realistic messenger system, where the unit must be within a certain distance and/or have line of sight to get their orders. I am sure that, with a bit of practice and learning the particular style of the game, it could be played relatively quickly, and there are 'Fast Warrior' rules at the back of the book which speed play up for initial games. The force lists are very well researched, although the books seem expensive for what you actually get, you are paying for that research.
Author:  Morg [ Thu Mar 01, 2007 4:15 pm ]
Post subject:  What rules?
I have a few DBM armies which were my first foray into ancients. There is a solid player base for this game in my area and the rules provide a nice sense of commanding an army.

I also have Shako in 6mm and I particularly like the relaxed attitude of this game.

And finally I have romans and carthaginians for WMA. I like the command system plus my better half is interested in that game, too.
Author:  Cuban Commissar [ Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:17 pm ]
Post subject:  What rules?

(CyberShadow @ Mar. 01 2007,02:18)
QUOTE
Warrior is an interesting rules set, but not my thing (so you will probably really like it!).

CS,

Thats was funny.

My best gaming buddy here is the same.  We haven;t different views on rules.  I like abstraction simplicity, playbility, and a good feel to the game.

My buddy likes detail, differences, each era to have a unique feel.

So it all works out... :D

Thanks for the review of warrior.  It may not be my thing because I like fast resoultion.  

If we were are the same we would drive each other crazy.   :;):
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/