The next big thang

[owaincaesarius]

We have returned to playing Wars of the Roses games again using BB.

Generally they are liked at the club by those who like RFCM rules and tolerated by everyone else (which is better than normal).

Hers's what i think (and as I have all the figures and a decent grasp of the clubs thoughts this can be assumed to be a club consensus.

5 x 3 table . Possibly 5x2 table?  =Keep at the current size- we tend to play 6 X $ in any case.
Grids (yes/no)  = Suggest either no or optional. In my group grids are a divisive issue those that dislike them REALLY dislike them. It will be a hard sell trying to get them to play it if they compulsory.
Retention of present motivation system (not sure) =  Keep
AP. Probably.   = Keep
More, smaller units.  =  No, no and treble no......the smaller units in ROF v2 killed it dead for us (and the grids for many folks). We have big armies (well I have anyway), nobody wants to use smaller units and with this period in particular zippy little units are wrong, this wasn't a battle of maneouver IMHO.
5,6 to hit (yes I think so)  = Yep, fine.
WOTR specific  = Yes but I have no objection to including a section about bringing in foreign campaigns linked to it ie, fighting in France, Ireland or Scotland. allowing a few different armies would help spread the appeal- in my group I have large armies already so nobody is interested in raising troops- allowing irish/scots/french etc armies may help.
Pre-game long narrative. This is the events part of RFCM rules of that era. Be nice to retain this. = Yes keep a version of it but the current one in too long winded compared to (say) the one in ROF v1 which we love. In all honesty we like the idea of this in the current BB but have hardly ever bothered with it.

Would like to see a bit about amphibious actions such as the attacks on Sandwich added to the possibilities.

Hope this is of some use.

[martin goddard]

Owain
That is very useful. Summaries like this are very useful.
If i could get ten like that i would be most pleased with the insight. Could you go and join 10 clubs (subtly of course) and get the vibe. Done by end of Feb?

[Smiley Miley 66]

Grids or not ? To change or not ?
Here are my Personal thoughts.....
I love both ideas, i play PBI enough and CWB so I play both systems which I love, to be able to comment hopefully constructive.
I think the more Modern game, with Guns seems to benefit more with squares "grids" espeacially 20th centuary style games.
I think a re worked AK47 will be one that will, as long as we keep it on a "big" table too.
Skirmish type games do qualify too on this front, Longships, this does work very well, as it keeps the various "Warbands" together while roaming the board.
Regiment on Foote does work very well, but the units themselves do help to keep them in Squares ! As these units were quite Rigid in their makeup and formation.But this does give the game a "Boardgame" feel, but using figures instead of card.
But games that require Manovering on the table, CWB, battles in the Age of War and of course the main subject of discussuion Bloody Barons. As these 3 games were based on the same "framework" I personally think these need to be kept on an "Open" table. Part of the Fun and Frustrations is Manovering your forces around even "Chase" other peoples units to get the right angle to Hit your opponent in the right fashion so hopefully you can win the "Assault" rather than just slam in to them face to face, that Squares would make you do ? The chance to be In or Out of "Oppurtunity" fire would be gone as well. As with the more Medieval type games the chance to Envelop your opponent would be "Lost" in the Squares too....
Yes as the years have gone by, the way games are played do change, and Yes we do need to keep up to date. But some game systems lend themselves to be redeveloped but some need just to be refined. I think the above 3 games fit into the refined rather than redeveloped catorgory ? 
We need thse games to work as a "Community" I think we can call RFCM that ? Yes we apperiate that you ( Martin ) need these games to work as a manufactuer. If the game is a success we get to have "Game days" at Entoyment and other places ? PP gets some more sales etc. We are talking about making the 15 mm game systems more popular ? So to upset certain "Factions" in the hobby may be considered a bad thing ? By changing a game to much ?
A quick note: yes BB is a WOTR based game, but maybe in the appendix allowing the game to be expanded outside of "England" maybe a good thing as it allows us at RFCM  and PP to have ideas and at the same time keep in check the Extra rules needed to make the game work correctly.
Like i said at the beginning these are my personal thoughts.....

[Leslie BT]

Done by Feb 2021?

[mellis1644]

Funny I found my copy of the current rules on Xmas day - after they had gone missing in the Spring!

Still the figs for this are way down the painting pile and so I may actually have them ready when the new rules come out. <sigh>

I'd again vote against squares, or make them optional. Some people hate them with a passion - others find them ok/making things easier to play.

My one request is to allow the option for 40 mm wide bases in the rules and mention this. My forces and others around here likely will be done on the 'DBA or Art De La Guerre' style basing. So an option to allow the IMO use of the most common basing format for 15mm figs for the period would be great. I know many like 30mm squares and keep that as the standard for the rules but having an option for the 40mm would be great.

Note, I'll use 40mm wide frontages anyway so having some comment/thought of this from the author of the rules is a nice thing to have IMO.

[Sean Clark]

If the rules do go gridded then base size won't matter 😁

To be honest my usual stance on these things is to trust Martin's instincts. I've been playing his rules for so long now that I'm sure that what comes will be a great game. Plus anyone who doesn't like squares can continue to play the original (If it is that squares become a thing)

[martin goddard]

No worries. I do take account of the input and find it useful.

PP rules tend to be pretty original.  "Original" might be a euphemism for different, whacky, un-orthodox etc.
I have personally really enjoyed playing the recent sets such as SCW, Vietnam and Western.
The forthcoming pieces of eight, goes it's own way too.
The rules will only "please" about 5% of the gaming population and about 70% of the RFCM group. Not a problem.
If the rules please the 70% and myself then I am contented.

The very things that I (and the 70%) like. are often the very same things that drive others away.

My interpretation (subjective of course) of what drives gamers along other avenues  is as follows. Although anecdotal, it is based upon almost 50 years of gaming to excess at many clubs and in other countries!

1. Many gamers play few enough games that the lead player can make up a  scenario that gives a good experience. " Chuck has laid out a great looking table for our twice a year gaming day. Then the six of us sat down for a good meal and some beers""
2. Many gamers don't mind just "playing" along. They do not see a need to be part of the planning, scenery layout, force choice. "I can't paint as well as the lead player, so we use his stuff. Besides they use 300 figures a side".
3. Many gamers are satisfied with gaming the way their group does it. If it ain't broke don't fix it.  We just carry on with the rule set that the lead member brings along. Remember "We can't play this game because we play all our games on a 6x4"
4. Many gamers like the spectacle of the figures and scenery. If the game looks good then the major part of the enjoyment is that. "I can tell it is an awesome game just be seeing the photo."
5. Many gamers want to have the  correct trainers.  "Our club only plays 25mm".
6. Many gamers want to play rules that are well established on shop shelves and magazine articles.  See 5. these same folk have a better chance of getting a game if they play the most popular ones. " I can get a game of 'Blow things up' at my local club/store.

Rules are of course a very personal choice.  So the above might easily be dis-missed.

Here is what i would personally (opinion) require from a set of rules.

1. Narrow historical period.
2. All in one book. No supplements . Although PBI has been an exception.
3. No fudging of decisions. i.e. if players cannot agree then roll a D6.
4. A two sided play sheet that encapsulates the main rules.
5. Plenty of D6 , rather than a single D10 etc for major fights and shoots.
6. Can be played with 150 figures or less.
7. Both players take an equal part in all game building.
8. No umpire needed.
9. Ability to decide on what force to use.
10. Complex victory criteria. No blue flag.
11. Battle plan matters.
12. No pandering to commercial sales targets . Artillery on table.
13. No collectable cards or other tricks to channel purchasing into one figure line.
14. Limited game length by way of countdown or conditions.
15.Table size small enough to allow junk to be kept off table. Also allows the game to be played whilst sitting.
16. Very minimal record keeping.
17. A test of skill not army choosing.

The list may seem fussy, but it is a hobby that allows fussy folk.

In closing.
Let's keep the BB discussion going (nicely). I am enjoying it.
Accept that martin will have a final say. Also expect the game to be as much fun as the other recent ones.  If you have not enjoyed any of  ROF, Vietnam, Western or POE then give up now . You will not enjoy the new BB in any way shape or form. martin is not producing rules for those chaps.

[Sean Clark]

I repeatedly refer to out hobby as being a broad church that should welcome all. As such there are many and varied opinions about how games are played and what figures to use etc. This hobby is probably unlike any other in that there are so many variables in rules, figure size, attitude, terrain, competitive or social....the hobby divides as much as unites.

Choice is a great thing and long may it continue. No one is forced to play in a particular way. What attracts one person or group to a set of rules or figure size or attitude may not suit the next group. Neither is wrong in their choice. Each should be respected. Afterall, people's opinions and needs do change so a gamer who doesn't like the game you're playing now may change his or her mind in a couple of months and be a potential opponent and friend down the line.

If squares aren't your thing that's fine. If you've played them and prefer a measuring tool there is no criticism. Discounting without trying is a shame because you may actually enjoy it and miss out but again that's a valid choice. I was cautious about the move of RoF to squares. But once I got playing my caution turned to enjoyment very quickly. The game looked far more like what my idea of an ECW battle looked like than anything I've seen before.

I do find it interesting that squares seem very much in vogue with not only Martin's rules but also those by  Simon Miller the author of To the Strongest and King and Parliament. Sam Mustafa is using squares for his Rommel game. Of course who ever invented Chess got there first!
J

Whatever comes in the future I know that I for one will be diving in feet first to continue enjoying these games. But please join in the discussion, contribute and be nice.

[Smiley Miley 66]

We here at RFCM normally back how the "New Game" goes.
I just had to have my say earlier. As they were my thoughts that people on here may or maynot agree with ?
We will in due course see the new game, see how it plays and go from there.
It is that simpke and hopefully we can get it to become a hit.

[Leman (Andy)]

Having introduced my group to Square Bashing last year I was surprised at how readily it was taken on, and enjoyed by the club members. A new take on BB using squares would probably be welcomed by my gaming friends, although I wouldn't want the pre-game to change too much as it does give a real period feel to the game. I'd still like to see some WoR heads as well as some Irish and Bretons.

[martin goddard]

Play test copies of BB ideas will be available to forum members in feb for discussion .

[Sean Clark]

Good news Martin!

[Leslie BT]

Go on Sean get a game of Kingmaker in before February, I am sure your daughter will play too!

[martin goddard]

Will get it out to folk this weekend and see who is "in".

[Leman (Andy)]

I'd be up for a bit of BB play testing as the group I play with (5 of us within the Liverpool club) are very open to having a go at different systems.