The Loose Association of Wargamers

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

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.

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

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

valleyboy wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:28 am 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

A very odd game it would be too!

ochoin wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:38 am 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.

BaronVonWreckedoften wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 9:20 am

ochoin wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:38 am 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....

BaronVonWreckedoften wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 9:20 am

ochoin wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:38 am 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