More interesting stuff.....

but not much action!

Real life is imposing some significant pressure so most of my projects are somewhat in disarray. However, new stuff keeps popping up that I am very enthusiastic about and may well result in some deep thinking (really!).

Now, you will recognise the picture above, this is the new Sean Chick Hold the Line variant game now adopted by Hollandspiele. This is the new box art...

Very smart. The reason for mentioning it two posts on the trot is that it is now available on Wargames Vault as a pnp for only $15. I know that this is (extremely) print heavy and not something that most of us would want to build ourselves. However, it may well be worth it just for the scenarios. 

Some free but also very interesting rules are:

• Peter's new Grid Based Sci Fi rules. These feature a refined version of the activation rules that I was so enthusiastic about recently. Rest assured I shall be studying these closely!
• In a similar vein, Norm has just posted his hex based ACW rules. I haven't had a chance to look at these in detail but a couple of interesting features have caught my imagination and I'll be considering these as well.

Well done Peter and Norm for a couple of fantastic rule sets!

I have also come across a couple of new (to me at least) blogs with some great stuff on them.

• Roll a One: A 6mm focussed blog with an example of Pikeman's Lament played with Baccus 6mm figures. Very cool. Even I might be able to paint that number of tiny troops!
• Jozie's Tin Man: This blog features some AWI house rules for Neil Thomas' OHW rules including fog of war cards. Not only is that great but he has done some work on FiveCore Company Command including US and OPFOR QRS.

All of this makes me very happy that we have such a vibrant, entertaining and thought provoking community!

2017 Thinking about........

Rules!

Hmmmh, getting into 2017 is like sliding slowly into a cold bath.....Brexit, Trump, Putin. It ain't fun and it ain't getting any better!

Dangerous places: CTS shooting ISIS drones in Mosul

On that optimistic note I have finally got into gear and done some thinking about what rules I want to play around with this year. As I'm not inclined to play the rules as written I'm looking for stuff that I can tweak and play with.

Old favourites

Having re-read Bolt Action again over Christmas I have put it away again and returned to my old favourites: AK47 in the guise of a modern middle east version (AK74 perhaps!) and Neil Thomas' OHW, especially Peter's AWI version. 

New favourites?

As belated Christmas presents I got hold of a copy of Rogue Stars (because I liked the activation model) and have pre-ordered Pikeman's Lament (because it will be brilliant).

I have been havering about Chosen Men, I'm not sure I'll like it so I'm awaiting reviews. I haven't got enough on my Amazon card either!

I am also very excited about the latest Nordic Weasel production: From Shako to Coal-Scuttle. Ivan mentions Neil Thomas in his write up so that's good enough for me (I also mucked about with the beta version so I'm pretty keen on this one). Out in a couple of days for $10.

A favourite I didn't know I had! 

Yes, I got this last year and immediately shelved it. I now carry it with me wherever I go. It has the world's best wargame model for suppression fire. You can expect me to bang on about this for a whole year, it's great and I probably will play the rules as written (OK, lying but it will be close).

I also have a new project which will take up some time but which I am extremely excited to take part in. Whatever world leaders get up to, I'm hoping for a kind and memorable 2017 and I hope you have one too. Best wishes!

FiveCore Company Command

People's Edition!

There are two reasons for this to be really good news. The first is that this is a major overhaul of the original rules taking account of developments across the FiveCore family. I haven't digested all of the changes but I'm very impressed based on my initial look through.

The second reason is that the upgrade is free if you have already got a copy through Wargames Vault. And even if you haven't, its just $7.99 and well worth it. despite the exchange rate.

Ivan also has a 20th century scenario generator for $1.99 which looks tempting, something for the weekend perhaps!

An interesting list......

new stuff!

Things have been really busy recently so progress on most fronts has been pretty slow. However, I've been going through one of those periods where there is a lot of interesting stuff arriving on my desk. 

Books first....

• The Men Who Would Be Kings (TMWWBK): The latest Dan Mersey rules from Osprey. From what I have read these are very simple and very entertaining. If I was starting Desert Eagle again, I'd start from here. Very interesting.
• Table Top Wargames: By Risk Priestley and John Lambshead (Pen and Sword). The jury is out. I don't think they are giving any secrets away in this one. Some of the key design issues (movement distance vs. firing distance for example) were covered off nicely by Phil Barker in a short article in The Nugget (if I remember correctly) some years ago. 

• Sandbox Infantry Patrols: This is brilliant (and only $2.99 from Wargames Vault). Basically a solo campaign for small scale patrols in Iraq or Afghanistan. Very, very nice. As some of you may have guessed, I don't do rules as written (RAW) but this one really tempts me to just do it as per the book.

  
Golan '73: This arrived very unexpectedly by post a couple of days ago. I had been watching the GMT P500 news on this for a while and had gone so far as to read the e-rules. My chum Pete, who well remembers our battles on the Golan using October War (SPI) in the 1970s, sent it to me as an early birthday present. A very welcome addition as well as being a great reminder of some happy times. I'll definitely win this time round!

In other news:

• CnC Medieval: Check this out. I'm not sure 6/7th century Byzantium counts as medieval but very interesting nevertheless.
• Heroes of Normandie Card Game: I love the boardgame, will this be even better?

• Firestorm Bastogne: I'm a big fan of Firestorm as a concept, this looks great too. 

I'm sure there is lots of other stuff occurring but this is enough for me to be getting on with for the moment!

OPFOR.....

here come the bad guys!

An ISIS fighter with a competency issue

Having survived the back to school period, things return somewhat to normal. My priority is to finish up the Desert Eagle draft and get in some full game tests. I've been doing a lot of thinking about ISIS and have just completed the first draft of the background to an ISIS army list. This is now on the Desert Eagle page. The detailed ratings will follow shortly.

I have also been tempted by a few different things.....

The Men Who Would Be Kings: Yes, I've now got this and its great. It will not cause me to change my direction on DE but I can see other possibilities with it. It is cleaner and more simple than Dragon Rampant so it doesn't hurt my brain. Also, I've got loads of Hat colonials, so who knows what's next!

Tabletop Wargames: A Designers' and Writers' Guide: By Rick Priestley and John Lambshead. On the one hand its seems to be designer's notes for Bolt Action (and you know what happened when I read those rules!) and, on the other, a combination of Fowler's Modern English Usage and Usage and Abusage by Eric Partridge. The only thing I have found useful about this book so far is that it recommends that original historical research should be left to others since you can waste loads of time on it. Sorry, its a first impression, I'm sure a second reading will improve it. I may have missed a semicolon here!

Sandbox: I love the idea of this, especially for $2.99. Something for the weekend I think.

A little light dusting....

and another idea!

I'm waiting to go out to collect one of my kids so have just been doing a little tidying up. I have added a page for my attempt at the FiveCore Company Command hex grid conversion. The rules are on at Wargames Vault at the moment for under $5 so if you don't have them now's the time to invest.

Competent looking ISF in May 2016 near Fallujah. Who are these guys?

The idea....well. Each unit has an activation rating: 2 best, 6 worst. Each side rolls a d6 at the start of its turn. Only units = or < than the score can activate. If one side is on the offensive or has a major advantage give them +1 or 2 on the die roll. If defending, you may have one or more d6 in reserve that you can throw (and use up) to see if you can improve a critical score (i.e. if roll 1 when you need a 4, use your reserve die and see if you can better it). 

Really competent sides might be able to re-allocate a successful roll to a unit that is not activated (e.g. score 2 and your special forces guys are good to go but if you really need a militia unit to move you might re-allocate that success on a die roll). This needs some officers to achieve I think.

Idea brought about by trying to simplify the Rampant rules. Of which I should mention ordering Dragon Rampant on the inspiration of Le Duc. Creatures = tanks? I don't know yet but will give it some thought.

More stuff...

than you can shake a stick at!

1. FiveCore hex grid conversion 

Norm was quick off the mark last night to worry with me his comments on whether the frontal arc is too generous. 

Where is our frontal arc?

What concerns me about this design decision is the point that Norm made a lot earlier around most tactical gamers thinking of "front" as a vertex not a hex side. In fact, when I was playing with photos to illustrate the conversion rules I found myself in some trouble as my mental map is firmly vertex orientated. Also, my hexes don't fit the table if I turn them round (and that's the clincher). Rather than faff about it over the next couple of days I'll have a calm think and get back to it later.

2. Paper soldiers etc

A new book from Peter Dennis and Andy Callan with paper soldiers. Helion & Co £11.65. I understand this is a series, hurrah!

3. Hold the Line: Remastered!!!!

The big one, HTL revisited plus PSC miniatures!

With the FiW expansion as well. I understand that all of the HTL games will be redone in this format. It looks very good. Kickstartering now.  

FiveCore hex grid conversion.......

the next version!

Well, I have had another go and here it is. 

Successful flanking shot on a Tiger, well done!

So far, the Duc has most influenced my thinking on facing. Let's see what people think. I'm still a little uncomfortable and may have to think again.

Face front.....

Pointing in the right direction!

Shoot that way boys....USMC in Afghanistan

Further feedback on the FiveCore hex grid conversion has raised an interesting point about facing. Ivan's view is that:

On facing, I'd be inclined to use the Battletech method: Vehicles face a hex side (which as mentioned fits many hex map roads). The two facings on either side of the front are also (front), the one opposite the front is rear and the two adjacent to the rear is left and right (if that makes sense?)

Norm's view is a little more traditional:

The only thing about using hexsides rather than a vertex to establish the front facing is that flat edges create a forward arc of 3 hexes, which in turn on a small board makes flanking shots and positions harder to achieve.

At the moment, my view is that facing is important for tanks because they have different armoured strengths depending on which part of the tank you may be firing at. This is really important for Panthers because of their relatively weak side armour. Also, tanks with turrets have a 360 degree field of fire for their main armament, but assault guns and similar vehicles have a very limited arc of fire. Use of facing helps to differentiate these capabilities. Therefore, I like the idea of facing but it is not yet in the hex grid conversion.

In the base Company Command rules: 

• Infantry squads do not have a fixed facing and may turn to face any desired target.
• For speed of play, we are not concerned with exact vehicle facing. Players who prefer a more detailed game may upgrade weapons one step when firing at the rear of a vehicle (for example a kill shot becomes overkill when targeted against the rear of the vehicle).

So, including facing is a good thing for vehicles but not, so far, for any other units. I may worry about anti-tank guns at a later date however!

Hex side or vertex? I am going for hex side at the moment as suggested by Ivan. I'm not a Battletech player so I don't have any practical experience in this approach. Like Norm, I usually prefer the vertex solution. My decision here is based on the practicalities of managing more than one tank per hex (max two in the current draft). 

Looking at this picture you can see that a vertex solution with two tanks looks a bit odd. Turn the picture round (in your own mind is ok!) a hex side solution looks a little more usable. I think I can cover off Norm's point about giving a chance to get in flank shots by deciding on how to play LoS. 

Facing and LoS are critical factors in small unit fighting. I don't think civilians appreciate the complexities. As a civvie myself I often turn to US manuals for insight. I have just been reading MCRP 3-11.2 Marine Rifle Squad because I'm interested in what facing looks like for a squad. Looking at direct fire issues:

1. A sector of fire is an area that is required to be covered by fire by an individual, a fire unit (squad or fire team), or a crew-served weapon. It is a pie-shaped area enclosed by two lateral limits and a forward limit (i.e. a vertex solution).

2. A principal direction of fire is a specific direction within the sector of fire given to a flat trajectory weapon and which is designated as its primary fire mission. Within a rifle squad, a principal direction of fire is assigned to automatic rifles. Units are not assigned principal directions of fire.

The sector is assigned if possible but where it is not possible, weapons are assigned PDFs. Although this looks like a vertex solution, if we have multiple squads in a hex my feeling is that a hex side solution becomes easier.

At the end of the day we just need to make a decision now and test it out, so lets go.......

FiveCore Hex grid conversion.......

Even more feedback!

Guys, thanks for your contributions. It is really great to get so much informed feedback. As last time, I'll try to carefully pick through the comments and see where we need to go next. The full comments are at the foot of the last post on this subject so these are edited highlights. Once I have got things straight in my own head I'll have a go at revising the conversion guide. 

Conversion guide or new rules: Duc suggested the guide might be evolving into a new rule set. Longer term this might be a way forward. My concern at the moment is to build on what Ivan is doing already and not to repeat in the guide any of the main rules. I do wonder whether, in future, there might be scope for a "SixCore" version (five core principles and six hex sides!), effectively a simplified, hex based and more gamey version of the main rules. Worth a ponder I think and a discussion with Ivan.

Platoon orders: Ivan's view is that units near each other can activate on the same activation point "So on a hex-map, 3 squads strung out in adjacent hexes could move together, but if you start spreading them out (or they get pushed back), your command/control starts faltering."

Movement rates: Everyone seems cool with the proposed movement rates. Ivan says: "I agree with dropping "slow" tanks to 1 hex. Seems them crawling along at the same speed as the infantry would make sense. (and for things like the Valentine is probably about as fast as they'd go anyways)." Duc's view is: "Spot on with movement - tactical movement is the order of the day. Perhaps allow move x2 when outside enemy range." 

Peter has suggested: "1) all movement where the moving unit can be spotted by enemy units is one hex. This would represent caution forward movement or short stop start sprints between cover. Where unit cannot be spotted then infantry move one hex and tanks, etc move two hexes." I like this, it comes from Tigers at Minsk and relates also to the hesitation roll used in Minden's Retro rules (really obscure Squad Leader territory here). "2) slow units just move or fire, and faster units can move and fire. This way you differentiate between unit movement capabilities." Brilliant!

Obstacles: For obstacles, Ivan's view is that: "if they fail a "crawl' test to cross, leave the die next to them and next turn they cross automatically. Normally, I would be against tracking that but we only have 8-10 squads to deal with, so its not too bad. Alternatively, use the positioning inside the hex to signify it. Place the squad in the middle normally and at the edge when they are half way through." Norm's thoughts are: "I am glad we have had the discussion about rolling to enter a hex, with the issue of repeatedly failing to pass and in effect being stuck. the obvious solution is to automatically allow the movement on the following turn ......... I will now go and apply the 'obvious' rule to my own Tigers design, as my vehicles have to dice to enter woods." Duc suggests: "Perhaps roll for units to 'leave' terrain - meaning they can tend to 'hug' the cover if poorly commanded."

Facing: Not in the original rules but this has now come up. Norm, being very tactical, has told me: "I am just going through my Tigers at Minsk rules and having previously had all vehicles always facing a vertex, I am now dealing with the reality that roads cross hexsides, so a vehicle using the road will actually be facing a hexside and not a vertex. accepting this rather than by attempting to fudge it actually helps, because the new facings generated by hexside facing (only 1 front hex but now 4 flank hexes) makes the vehicle following a road more vulnerable to flank shot and less effective in their own front arc - this feels right." Norm's latest version of Tigers at Minsk can be found here. Duc thinks that: "I always thought facing a corner was simplest and could allow clear flank and rear facings."  For me, the jury is currently out since facing adds complexity but, on the other hand, allows nice side shots at Panthers.

Excellent. I have one more day of the Easter holidays tomorrow and may have time to have another crack at the guide, Further suggestions and feedback very welcome. Cheers.

FiveCore Company Command.....

More conversion issues

I have had some really useful feedback on the CC hex grid conversion. Rather than hide my response in the blog comments I thought it would be useful to talk through the issues here.

I did the work very quickly, because the muse had taken me, and took a few very quick decisions without much reflection on certain issues. Norm, with whom I have an ongoing conversation about these sorts of things, has come up with some really good questions (thanks Norm!) which are worth contemplating:

1. Custom dice: In my original thoughts (link) I talked about D2s. Basically a 50:50 shot usually represented as 4 or more on a d6. D2 is a good short hand way of talking about these sorts of die rolls. There are some really great custom dice available and these would be ideal, for example, to use a d2 for all terrain rolls. That would be nice and simple. But I can't help thinking back to Piquet. For those short of memory (or young) these used a whole raft of different dice including d6, d8, d10 and, I think, d12. A real nightmare for me. In the conversion guide I have therefore reverted to the use of d6 with appropriate rolls rather than custom dice. Longer winded to write about but nice and simple.

2. Movement rates: One of the big problems with hex grid conversions is converting movement rates to hexes. This is largely because movement rates for infantry don't always convert in the same ratio to vehicles. We have that problem here with infantry basic move of 6" (one hex) plus 1d6" if dashing (an additional hex at 50:50 in the conversion). Vehicles, however, have a standard move of 9" and a scramble move of 12". I ended up going with 1 and 2 hexes respectively. Partly because I think that tanks moving tactically with infantry will tend to move at infantry pace (lots of film of Churchills supporting infantry in Normandy have imprinted this in my mind). 

3. Obstacles: Norm makes a good point that the die roll for obstacles crossing might actually result in units getting permanently stuck with rubbish die rolls. He suggests an automatic success after an initial failure and I think this is very reasonable. One other thought occurs and that is that this sort of roll might be better related to troop morale or competence (paras crossing an obstacle might present a different set of odds to some very unhappy conscripts). The current set up in CC doesn't support this but a revised version taking account of the more nuanced Five Men at Kursk rules might help with this.

4. Smoke and LoS: I must admit that it was late and I thought about LoS rules and then decided to see if I could get away without any. Norm has raised an interesting point about smoke and the precise line of sight (where it might not be blocked if only one hexside is "smoked"). This needs some thought.

5. Facing: Are there any facing rules and does this mean there are no flank armour rules? Really good questions. They can easily be added and would make the game even better provided they are kept simple.

More things to ponder:

• Infantry in a hex with tanks will rally quicker because the tank provides the cover for NCOs and Officers to stand up and get their troops moving. An interesting fact that I can no longer substantiate with evidence but which has stuck in my mind because it feels really true!
• Infantry can't assault an enemy tank if it is protected by enemy infantry in the same hex (in the conversion guide). What wider impact does terrain and infantry protection have, especially in respect of the ability of enemy troops to launch close range Panzerfaust or Bazooka attacks? Remember that Panzerfaust attack in Fury? Allied tanks often refused to move without infantry alongside.
• I like the lack of range restrictions on weapons. Although they are more effective the closer you get (within 1 or 2 hexes), the fact that you can be in danger anywhere on the board feels very realistic. Usually movement rates have to be considered in relation to weapons ranges. I think that CC has it right that if the enemy can see you they have a chance of shooting you.  

Prove it

Can we test whether the rules converted to a hex grid remain true to the original rules (which they should as we are not in the business of reinventing them) and can we test if they appear realistic (shock horror)? In my minds eye I do see a line of British or Canadian infantry advancing down a shallow slope through cornfields to assault a farm or village in Normandy followed by a platoon of Churchills. I think it would be good to design a classic scenario on these lines and play both a hex and non-hex version and see what they feel like. Any volunteers to help?

I blame Norm again.....

he asked me a question and then I just.....

In one of the comments on my earlier post Norm asked about difficult choices when converting games to a hex grid. I understood exactly what he meant so I then had to work out what the answer would be. So, here it is, the hex grid conversion guide for FiveCore Company Command. This is a draft and may need some revision. Let me know what you think!

Next grid conversion?

FiveCore Company Command!

Following my last post and some interesting comments from Ivan, Norm and le Duc, I have taken a look at the Five Core Company Command (CC) rules as a potential hex grid conversion. My thought experiments with Bolt Action and Neil Thomas' WWII rules had left me with a sore head. This one, however, is quite exciting.

Here are some bullet points:

• CC table size: 3' by 3'.
• Standard move: 6".
• Dash: 6" plus 1 d6 (say 6" with a 50% probability of another 6").
• Vehicle move: 9" or 12" if scrambling (a bit tricky, see below).
• Squad base: 1.5".

So to my mind, we can use a hex representing 6". My hex grid uses 125mm (5") hexes because I'm funny that way (and it fits my table nicely). Like this.....

My big hexes representing a 3' square table in this picture. Tanks are 15mm (KVs at that), the squad bases are FoW standard and designed for my 20mm troops (I don't mind mixing scales, same as Art of Tactic). The 10p bit is a weapons base but I'll use 2ps in real life. Attachments will be on 1ps. This looks OK to me with a good sized Company Command force. 

• Infantry move: 1 hex.
• Vehicle move: 1 hex or 2 if scrambling. A/C = d2 for plus 1 hex.
• Road: vehicle move = d2 for extra 1 or 2 hexes.
• "Stacking": Four squads or mix of four squads and weapons teams. Squads can have attachments as well. Two tanks or one tank plus two squads/weapons teams.  
• Platoon order: All units in same hex.
• Obstacles: Treat as hexside with a success roll to cross for movement and a fire combat modifier.
• Terrain: Fills each hex. Hexes count as open or cover. Troops to have indicator if they are peeking. 
• Smoke: Completely fills one hex. Might be an issue with smoke grenades (need more than one squad to do this?) but should not be a problem for a light or medium mortar strike.
• Anti-tank fire: Treat as current rules, firer chooses target in hex.
• Anti-personnel fire: Allocate hits to squads first, each target gets a shock dice first then allocate any kills. Apply results at the end of the turn to take account of multiple attacks. Shows need to disperse your troops! 
• Assault: All assaults on one hex to be added together as one large assault.

This is just a first pass but the fact that there are no show stoppers here is great. It fits my table, my base sizes and troop scale thoughts. An identical approach can be used for Five Men at Kursk which would allow 20mm tanks to be used as the scale is tactical. Use 6mm troops and you have Brigade Commander. And all on my kitchen table, brilliant! 

Loads of rules.....

Very sore head!

I spent last weekend with the in-laws in Scotland. I enjoyed a little piece and quiet for a change and was able to do some thinking. The subject of this difficult enterprise was the idea that Bolt Action could be turned into hex based game. This is an idea I have had before but have never thoroughly tested out.

First off I actually had to read the rules. Easy enough I thought, many better people before me have done this and survived. My first issue is that the rule book is 216 pages long, that's a big read even if it does have lots of pictures. 

The second issue is that the infantry game is quite straightforward. Using hexes significantly simplifies a lot of the mechanisms including unit cohesion, line of sight, who can shoot etc. However, when you get to the vehicle bit it looks like a bolt on (sorry). Superficially similar rules actually follow a different path, for example, "down" and "pinned" for infantry are interpreted differently for tanks. Not a surprise in itself but, for me at least, a sign that the underlying mechanics are not holistic. They have been bolted together (sorry again) to make a game. 

The third issue is the army lists. Loads of really boring points led stuff. Tedious in the extreme, great for selling miniatures though.     

The fact that people buy Bolt Action, get the miniatures and have a nice time is great and I don't begrudge that at all. The rules just don't fit the inside of my head.

I then had another look at the Neil Thomas WWII rules from his Wargaming: An Introduction. Firstly, very short. 30 pages including introduction, rules, army lists and scenarios. The army lists are very simple which is also great and give lots of nice options when combined with some nice simple scenarios. 

So far so good. When I started to look at a hex conversion I was struck by the similarities with Bolt Action. Things like unit cohesion and firing ranges etc are simplified by using hexes. I didn't enjoy working out firing dice by range band. I had to do a similar thing for Bolt Action. The numbers just didn't look right in either game and I concluded that range attenuation isn't really handled very well.

I then looked at the tank thing. Again, the NT rules have a separate approach to the tank rules. Tanks don't take morale tests for example. OK fine, in real life tanks are different. But I also know that tanks and infantry in real life are inseparable. They can't do without each other and must have a way of interacting effectively. 

My only other comment about the NT rules is that the 30 pages probably leave out some important stuff, although I think NT trusts us to work this out for ourselves. 

This all sounds a bit depressing. However, both sets of rules show their connections with the origins of the hobby. Neither are revolutionary and both can be linked back to stuff written in the 1960s. Again, nothing wrong with that either. However, I ended up turning to boardgaming back then because I was not satisfied with these sort of miniatures rules.

I still have two further sets of rules to explore: FiveCore and Blitzkrieg Commander (BKC). I'll be pursuing these further. BKC is very interesting because it bridges the infantry/tank game divide by having a conscious combined arms approach. FiveCore is a bit more traditional but has some other very unique features. Wherever this goes, I do keep coming back to the simple army list ideas in the NT rules and will want to keep these in future.

News

Interesting Weasel developments:

• From Shako to Coal-Scuttle: The beta version has been updated following feedback and can be obtained from Wargames Vault.
• Company Command: An updated version of this has been announced for a few weeks time incorporating some of the Five Men at Kursk features. I'll wait for these before doing more work on the hex thing.

And finally....

I have mentioned a potential hex version of Lion Rampant before. An article on a conversion of Lion Rampant to the Napoleonic wars has appeared in the latest edition of WI. This is great and quite exciting, especially if I can fit it to hexes. However, it is called Eagle Rampant whereas I would automatically have called it Dragoon Rampant. Never mind.

Free game and ....

New Weasel stuff 

I keep wanting to do the old joke about the difference between weasels and stoats, luckily for everyone I just can't bring myself to write it down! Hobby time very strictly limited at present but I am keeping myself up to date on a few things which are worthwhile sharing more widely.

Waterloo Squares

A neat little print and play game on a 10 by 10 square grid by Eddy Sterckx covering the whole of the battle of Waterloo. Uses a card system for command and combat. Very nice. Its free and available from BGG here. This was designed for the 2015-16 BGG wargame PnP competition. More information about this year's competition and the games is here.

The Weasel stuff

First up up is a beta set of 19th century rules covering Waterloo to Mons (that sounds like a book I've got). They are described as:

From Shako to Coal-scuttle is aimed at a game with 8-12 units of infantry or cavalry, each 4 stands strong, supported by a few artillery batteries. It should be playable with any figures you already own, whether you are gaming 1815 or 1915.

Its a beta version so unfinished and, as a result, you can get them on a pay what you want basis from here. 

Second up is a really very cool tool for the new Five Men at Kursk rules. It randomly generates missions, forces and even the map. All you need to do is enter some details about the year and combatants etc and there you go. By the way, when I say really very cool I mean absolutely brilliant in case you thought I was being halfhearted about it. Check it out here.

Five Men at Kursk...

Looking very good indeed!

I have commented here before about my interest in the FiveCore family of games from Nordic Weasel, otherwise known as Ivan Sorensen. The latest game in development is Five Men at Kursk. This is, effectively, a second edition of their very first game which was Five Men in Normandy, the precursor of FiveCore Skirmish. Ivan has very kindly let me have a copy of the emerging draft of this game. I have to say that I am quite excited by this so I thought it would be nice to do a brief overview of the rules and include some pictures of the rules in action from Just Jack's very excellent blogs (BlackhawkHet and Cuba Libre!).

Just Jack's latest FiveCore game from his blog Cuba Libre!

Although I didn't get the original Five Men in Normandy, I have invested quite widely in the system:

FiveCore Skirmish Gaming Evolved: A good 20th century skirmish game for 5-10 soldiers a side on a small table (2 foot square). I'm mainly interested in this for modern skirmish games, I have my eye on the Oddzial Osmy 15mm Russian Green Men. I suppose the other rule set that comes close to this is Black Ops, which I have also got. There is an expanded second edition which is also worth getting as it includes vehicle rules etc. It comes with campaign rules and rules for character skills.

FiveCore Company Command: The next one up from the skirmish game with section/squad bases and vehicles covering 1939 and onwards. 5-12 units a side on a 2 to 3 foot square table. I'm looking at using these adapted for hexes for my modern Africa gaming.

FiveCore Brigade Commander: The big one. While the skirmish and company level games can be played easily with 15 or 20mm troops, this one needs 10mm or less. Same foot print (2 or 3 foot square table) and around 10-12 units a side. Not quite a brigade but certainly a battalion a side. I'm as excited about the prospects for using this rule set as I am about Lion Rampant, and that's saying something!

There is a whole lot of other stuff available (and pretty cheap too) and you can easily find out about it from the Nordic Weasel page on Wargames Vault.

FiveCore is based on some core principles (five of them actually!):

• The true mark of a superior force is command and control.
• Soldiers will react to things in their field of vision without being instructed to do so.
• A commander is never able to do everything they want.
• Conversely, the commander can always do something.
• If in doubt, roll a D6 and look for a 1 or a 6.

These all ring true to me. The rules are also almost interchangeable between game levels, skirmish, company, brigade. You can add or subtract as you feel necessary. The various optional and add on rules make this a really modular gaming enterprise.

The other thing is that the games all have a common engine. One d6 is rolled at the start of a players turn:

• 1. Scurry turn: Al your troops can move
• 2-5. Standard turn: A limited number of units/troops can move or fire
• 3. Firefight turn: All your units/troops can fire.

In combat, units/troops roll kill dice which cause casualties and/or shock dice which cause a morale impact. The number and mix depend on unit type and target. These two very simple approaches (which remind me of the Ganesha "Songs of...." rules) are very effective. 

Another photo from Cuba Libre!

The common game engine makes it hang together really well and allows you to scale up or down using the same troops. Play a squad game one day and then zoom out to cover a platoon or company game.

In some recent optional FiveCore rules, Ivan indicated that he was looking to change and further develop the core mechanisms. This is in response to feedback about the all or nothing nature of the basic engine, as well as the general lack of differentiation of troop types (a soldier is a soldier as Ivan says).

In Five Men at Kursk Ivan is implementing a major change. A number of dice are thrown at the start of a turn based on the side's cohesion (command and control). In a similar way to the previous engine, 1s mean scurry, 6s mean fire and 2-5s mean engage (fire/move). The player allocates dice to individual figures which then act accordingly. In addition, we have some clear differentiation of leaders and grunts and also characteristics (skills) for individual soldiers. 

There will also be campaign rules, nation specific rules, solo rules and a whole lot more. The downside is that the rule book is 37 pages at this stage and is likely to end up being very chunky. This is not one of my top features in a set of rules. Having said that, you don't have to use it all. I think this is going very much in the right direction and I will certainly be investing in the final version.   

Another Just Jack visualisation!

You can see from the pictures from the Just Jack blogs above how one man has interpreted and implemented the FiveCore system. His games are very rich and move from continent to continent and skirmish to brigade within a cohesive story. If Carlsberg made a gaming system (and I could interpret it like Jack can) then it would be FiveCore. Nuff said.

Midwinter update....

Weather hot but the news is cool!

I haven't posted for a while due to pressures of the day job. However, I have not stopped thinking about stuff which will now have to go on the list for next year. So, a nice opportunity before Christmas to get my thoughts in order. 

1. Battlefield Hobbies: This is a new wargames store and gaming facility(?). I came across their Facebook page by accident via PBIcandy. A new wargames store is always pretty rare. What's even more rare is that this one is situated only a short walk from my house in Daventry. Simply unbelievable. Judging by the clientele in the photo I'll fit right in. I'll check it out tomorrow and will do a short write up. I'll even take some photos.

2. Airfix Battles: This project is continuing to surprise me. I see that Benthamfish is now engaged in the game design process. You can check his blog here! This looks like it might be very good indeed. 

3. Aurelian: A new game from Sam Mustafa. This looks like Blucher with ancients. The BGG entry reads like this:

Aurelian is a tabletop game about the Crisis of the Third Century, the period during which the Roman empire nearly disintegrated in constant civil war and foreign invasions.Players take one of four roles: a Roman, Germanic, Sarmatian, or Persian commander. Any number of players can conduct a campaign, in which each type of army has a different set of victory conditions. While holding off Rome's many enemies, the Roman players are also trying to defeat each other and ultimately become (and remain!) emperor.Aurelian can be played with miniatures, or with "unit tiles" on any flat surface, much in the same manner as Blücher's unit cards. The centerpiece of the game is the campaign, in which each player manages the fortunes of his character and faction, much in the manner of the campaigns in Maurice and Longstreet. 

Sounds good. I have this vague idea that PSC have been mentioned in connection with this project but can't seem to find the reference.

4. Neil Thomas' Modern Rules: Well, not quite. Brian Cowan has just published his interpretation of Neil Thomas' second world war rules on the AMW Yahoo Group. Brian has done a great job. The rules include army lists for Vietnam, Yom Kippur, Falklands, Cold War Europe, Modern wars in Afghanistan etc. Well worth a look.

5. Nordic Weasel: Well I'm a dedicated Weasel fan. I'm not sure that sounds good, but it is. The Fivecore series rolls on with this really tempting collection of additional and optional rules. Available for very little ($3.99) from the Wargames Vault. Also on my Weasel list are Laserstorm (sci-fi) and War Story (a narrative based game). This is great stuff, mainly because it is very simple (just like me) and completely interchangeable. My Somewhere in Africa game will use all three levels of Fivecore (skirmish, company and brigade). Looking forward to it next year.

Also, the Polemos GNW rules are now re-released by Baccus and also on the Vault for not much. Something else for Santa to sort out (actually that means I have to pay for it and my wife says, "Happy Christmas").

6. Horse and Musket: This is the Hold the Line adaptation in development by Sean Chick. The rules are now available on BGG as well as a Vassal module so you can get to it now. No news about a publisher yet but its definitely on my list when it comes out.

7. Ideas: Yep, still having some. Thankfully, other people come up with them and I play with them. Two important things so far this month:

• Kaptain Kobold has done some more work on his OHW ECW rules. These are very interesting and I may re-visit my ECW hex based interpretation as a result. Dashing cavalry anyone?
• Combat model for Tannenberg: I have really been struggling with this. I've got a map and OBs and a good idea about time and space. However, the combat model is just missing and I have not been able to get excited about it. Never fear, someone else has had a good idea and I'll just nick it. This idea comes from my chum Norm and his published game Anzio. More on this next year but its a real relief that I have finally got to grips with it.

Unfortunately, its back to work now with a lot to do before Christmas. Hopefully I'll post again before the big day. Cheers.