War and Conquest - any opinions?

[ochoin]

I’ve recently finished a close read of the wargame rules, ‘War & Conquest’ (WaC) – reading a chapter a night, before bed.
As I had two exam supers + a staff meeting today, I had plenty of time to turn my mind to the topic. The WaC rules are excellent. No doubt. More complex than I thought though.
But as the only possessor of the rule book, it will take me some time to teach them to my pals. Don’t get me wrong, I like umpiring but actually commanding a side is nice too. Using WaC would mean many games of umpiring.

Then, a REVELATION! Why not use WaC to improve my existing LA rules, “A Tribute of Spears” (ToS)?
We last used them for this game:
https://hat.freeforums.net/thread/1065/ ... ty-wargame
The game went well & quite quickly. My gripe about my rules largely lies with shooting & combat, which are clunky.

ToS is not unlike WaC already – individually mounted figures and the same troop types. The army list I’ve worked up for WaC could be simplified (ie each unit will only have stats for Combat, Shooting, Armour & Morale).
The WaC shooting, combat & Morale mechanisms use the same mechanism &, I think,be easily simplified & added to ToS.

There are other additions, including should the SIP (strategic initiative points) system but not too much.

So, instead of asking them to buy and read a 200 page book, I supply a booklet running to <20 pages which I’d hope they'll read before a game. As I am not going to make ToS a commercial project & as I did buy a rule book, I think it's OK to do this.? I'll put an acknowledement in my rule book but, of course, we'll be the only ones to read it.

donald

[FreddBloggs]

Hey, that is more than fair, and it means that should a hankering for a slightly more intricate set come down the line, you are away, that and likely any army lists etc already done for WAC can be used by you and the group.

[ochoin]

I spent a number of nights integrating WaC into my rules. I've been running a number of small exercises & things seem to be working.


SAMPLE: A 10 figure Gothic archer unit with a SA of 3, is shooting at a charging unit of Late Roman armoured cavalry at Long Range.
The archers throws 10d6. They add the SA of 3 to each dice score, -1 for a charging unit & -1 for Long Range. Thus, they need 6s to score hits (ie total of 7 or more is needed to hit.)
They score an amazing 3 hits out of the 10 dice thrown. The cavalry then throw 3d6 for armour saves. They cavalry have an AV of 2 (mounted + light armour) so add + 2 to each score & need to get 5s or 6s to save any of the 3 hits.(ie for a total of 7 or more). The cavalry save 2 hits & thus lose 1 figure. If the archers’ side wins Initiative the next turn, they’ll get a Close Range volley in, If the cavalry win Initiative, they should ride the Archers down.

You may notice I've taken a final "Kill" roll out of the mechanism. This final roll seems excessive and, so far, doesn't seem to be necessary. In general, I'm trying to simplify the bits of WaC I am using. I plan on a couple of solo games before I unleash it on my pals but so far, so good.

donald

[valleyboy]

Do you think you should be factoring in Brendan's legendary dice rolling prowess?
Just make a table and on the bottom line in small print....
So your name is Brendan? - Minus 7

[ochoin]

Do you think you should be factoring in Brendan's legendary dice rolling prowess?
Just make a table and on the bottom line in small print....
So your name is Brendan? - Minus 7

They obviously handicap in horse racing, the Stawell Gift, various other sporting events and being English is quite a handicap when you're playing cricket.

If wargaming were in any way a serious past time, handicapping would be a consideration. I, for example, should probably get a +1 on any dice roll, be allowed to deploy second, replace any Event card I didn't like and get my dubious interpretation of key rules accepted without challenge. With such a handicap, I might even win the odd game....

donald

[FreddBloggs]

A very odd game it would be too!

[BaronVonWreckedoften]

If wargaming were in any way a serious past time, handicapping would be a consideration. I, for example, should probably get a +1 on any dice roll, be allowed to deploy second, replace any Event card I didn't like and get my dubious interpretation of key rules accepted without challenge. With such a handicap, I might even win the odd solo game....

FTFY

Not sure the Kiwis would agree with the cricket bit, though.

And whilst I appreciate VB's intercession on my behalf, as someone who has managed to obtain not a single hit (3-6) despite being superior (re-rolling 1s) and having a general attached (re-rolling 2s) with 12 dice, including four re-rolls, twice in the same game, I think even divine intervention would still see me struggling.

[Etranger]

If wargaming were in any way a serious past time, handicapping would be a consideration. I, for example, should probably get a +1 on any dice roll, be allowed to deploy second, replace any Event card I didn't like and get my dubious interpretation of key rules accepted without challenge. With such a handicap, I might even win the odd solo game....

FTFY

Not sure the Kiwis would agree with the cricket bit, though.

A kiwi coach and captain seem to have made all the difference to England....

[ochoin]

If wargaming were in any way a serious past time, handicapping would be a consideration. I, for example, should probably get a +1 on any dice roll, be allowed to deploy second, replace any Event card I didn't like and get my dubious interpretation of key rules accepted without challenge. With such a handicap, I might even win the odd solo game....

FTFY

Not sure the Kiwis would agree with the cricket bit, though.

Latest results would suggest otherwise.

donald