RFCM

I haven't had time to read it properly, but the print version looks very impressive - well done all.

Packaging was also superbly secure - can we have a PP video on how to open it? 🙂

In the days when I was regularly going to shows, I tended to have a quick look at every table then gravitate to anything which invited participants. Some of the demo games were interesting (and very well presented), but the players often seemed to get wrapped up in rules minutiae and it became a little like watching paint dry.

On the other hand, some participative games were also a bit lacking in interest. I remember one occasion when I spent two or three hours waiting for something to wander into range of my lonely Pak 36... on that occasion the game really did feel like the "real thing".

Same here. My browser says the connection is not secure, but eventually the site loads anyway and the icon suggests it is secure.

I had Practical Wargaming but disposed of it during a downsizing exercise.

A well written book with an engaging prose style (and a nice introduction explaining how he got started), his playing rules were interesting and well worth reading / considering but I don't think I ever used them.

Thanks Simon for the reassurance that this is above board. I've seen the message a couple of times and swiftly exited on the basis that (a) I wasn't sure it was legit and (b) I try to avoid anything that uses Captcha on principle. I wouldn't know a "crosswalk" if it bit me on the... you get the idea.

Oddly I tried again a few minutes later and I went straight into the forum no problem so whatever this software is trying to do, it doesn't seem very consistent.

Micro measuring. As in the Airfix Napoleonic rules. Muskets have a fire factor of +3 at 35mm but drop to +1 at 36mm.


I'm ashamed to admit those rules actually impelled me to buy a set of average dice and fire dice.

As we mentioned Featherstone,  did anyone try constructing / using one of those ingenious circular slide rule devices from Advanced Wargaming? I seem to remember there was a set of Western skirmish rules which operated on a similar idea. Even back then I lacked the craft skills and dexterity to make it work properly.

Many years since I last played PITS but it was always enjoyable (main reason for stopping was a house move = reduction in figure collection, and the Sudan figures got culled).

The basic idea was an excellent one which could be adapted to umpteen historical periods. My only small reservation would be around extending the historical period without diluting the period flavour. I'm almost thinking in terms of a modular approach based on a common set of core rules + a supplement or expansion for each period. Less work in the short term, but runs the risk of retrospective amendment to the core rules in the light of new research. Only a thought.

Thanks Martin.

Gah, don't know how many times I read page 84 and still missed the relevant sentence.

I'll start with an apology. It's only now that I have started looking properly at the new PBI rules, so if these have already been answered please just point me in the right direction. In each case I was happy to put my own interpretation on these points, but just in case I do ever make it to a public game I'd like to know the official answers!

Shooting in the enemy turn (1)
Am I right in thinking that pinned squares lose their first hit instead of losing the second hit? I can't find this explicitly stated in the book.

Shooting in the enemy turn (2)
Also, is it correct that the reduction in shooting AP for a pinned unit conducting here they come shooting supersedes the discounting of hits?

Shooting in the enemy turn (3)
I have a vague memory from an earlier version that only "paid for" shooting can yield a pin attempt. Is that still the case?

Removing pinned results
I've assumed that the cost of removing a Pin applies to every base in the square, but I can't see that explicitly stated anywhere.

Thanks chaps!

Thank you Martin and everyone.

A good read with plenty of variety.

This I think points up the paradox of wargame campaigns, the fact that they can often become a mechanism for bringing troops to the table for a set-piece battle, whereas most real-life commanders would prefer only to fight at a significant advantage (if at all).

I lean towards reasonably balanced encounters with some kind of external factor to balance the campaign.

Years ago I drafted a set of campaign rules for an 18th-century imagi-nations campaign which cast players in the role of army commanders but had a set of semi-random events representing the requirements of the national government. Thus the general might win a battle, but if he took excessive losses he risked losing the confidence of the government.

I created several different types of government, including the possibility that a government might be overturned during the campaign and abruptly reverse its strategic aims. It was good fun, but more than slightly chaotic.

I've never participated in a multi player campaign that didn't fizzle out after a few sessions, but many years ago a friend (now sadly deceased) and I successfully completed a two-player campaign using PBI. It was based on the D Day landings and associated events, and as far as I can recall we used a system whereby battles were also taking place off the table, which I think was lifted from another PP set - was it Hey You in the Jail? That was useful as it gave the feeling that there was a bigger context to the on table action and provided a rationale for various special rules and events we dropped in.

For my solo campaigning I've tended to keep things very simple (i.e. not attempting to model hidden movement or excessive logistical detail) but trying to find some kind of "hook" to give me a flavour of the historical period - one of the more ambitious being a chevauchée style campaign which had sieges, martyrs, pretenders and material plundered from Shakespeare's history plays. Not particularly historical, but good fun.

Vas-y mollo.

Undulations would be easy to create if your table was a big tray full of damp sand.

Do you think it would catch on?

The only thing I remember from history lessons at school is being told off for reading Edgar Rice Burroughs under the desk. I think we were doing Henry VIII at the time, so not much difference from the exploits of John Carter.