Now, these are from the same stable as 'Seven Days to the River Rhine' and 'Iron Cross', so activation is a thing.
A nice set, with some nuances and differences related to how machine guns work and companies thereby activate - though an interesting set.
None of these today ...but they were in the box
Two things struck me as memorable :
Stands are companies, so formations are battalions- always a good thing for BIG battles.
I was particularly interested in using the rules for East Africa stuff. I do like this segment of the period, and Peter has done some excellent work here with his own version of One Hour Wargames rules and some great scenarios and period feel.
A lot of discussion on rules interpretation, but the game was very entertaining nonetheless.
Miniatures used are 10mm Pendraken (I think) from 'da bruvaz' ' excellent collection(s).
French infantry in late uniforms sans les red trouseuuursss...
German infantry in late uniform mit keinen spikey helmets!
Linear deployment, but do not let that obscure the degree of move / counter-move that is coming
German guns
A German battalion deployed - complete with MG company, which can detach, pivot, or fire straight ahead
Movement on the French left
A lot of chits being used. There are slight differences in activation.
French guns
French moves in the centre as they are forced to cover from German fire on their left.
Moving troops take to cover as MG and Artillery fire start to take their toll. There are nice reserve rules to exchange lost units for fresh - which can really tip the odds when required for the losing player
Hill assault
Not at the battle...but in the box...
In the box...it'd just be rude not to take a pic...
We didn't get the game finished, but the rules were fascinating, for a period / genre which should see more interest. As I'd mentioned, the East African theatre does hold a lot of interest for me here.
Thanks Steve. I also have a 7dttrr report to put up - it is a very nice game once you get used to it. Also have more VnB in the offing. We've also been talking at length about modern rules - so Dunn Kempf and Contact are under examination right now, also with 7 days and the 2nd edition WRG being checked out. We did also look at 1st edition WRG, but no one's eyes are young enough to read the tables any more :)
Darren, I find Iron Cross suffer slightly with having to re-read rules to be sure I have it right and feel that just two more pages or so would have helped the rules breathe a little more ….. is it the same with 1914?
I have to say that it is Norm. There is a lot of stuff there, which (1) is answered on the the blog/facebook site or (2) still raises too many questions. I didn't say anything above, but that sort of thing is most unsettling. With 7dttrr - the modern set - they seem to have hit a lot of the issues 'inside' the rules and moved away from the need for constant querying - and so the game is playable out of the book. Not so much with 1914. Personally, I see a lot of this too with the 'too fat lardies' stuff.
There is a definite interest in these rules from several blogs. Perhaps after a few more playings, you will find these work well for your East Africa project.
Thanks Jon. Yes; now one thing not mentioned above, since we had no cavalry in the game, is that mounted troops are quite versatile on certain battlefields with the rules, and are thought to add an edge, both in terms of tactics and playability. This also made me interested in their use in said East Africa project. Aussie light horse, Turkish dug in mg positions, even camelry - I think these rules would work with the right tweaks; and again, the fact that a stand is a company really works to that end in my view.
Good to see some WW1 figures on the tabletop, along with a quick look at the tank and plane models. It will be interesting to see an East African campaign.
Thanks Peter. Your work in this regard is absolutely inspiring. I am still torn on the rules though. The dynamic of what you have been able to do, campaign wise, with simple yet not simplistic rules, is a real appeal. I begin to wonder if I could be a**ed with 1914's queries though.
Nice looking game. My main gaming opponent has recently introduced me to these rules, having previously played a few games of Iron Cross. I like both sets although I find the seeming absence of melee/close combat rules in 1914 quite perplexing....are the authors saying hand to hand fighting wasn't "a thing" in WWI?? We have used 1914 for RCW, by the ay, and they work fine with 28mm figures, if you just double all the ranges.
Thanks Ross. Aye, we had quite a few valid queries. It does concern me that reasonable questions, surrounding use of MGs, have to be answered on the web. I never sure if it points to playtesting, rule-writing, or publishing date pressures.
I have these rules and a ton of 10mm WW1 to boot. Guess I should get painting! Reminds me, too, I need to play more Iron Cross. Great report sir!
ReplyDeleteThanks Steve. I also have a 7dttrr report to put up - it is a very nice game once you get used to it. Also have more VnB in the offing.
DeleteWe've also been talking at length about modern rules - so Dunn Kempf and Contact are under examination right now, also with 7 days and the 2nd edition WRG being checked out. We did also look at 1st edition WRG, but no one's eyes are young enough to read the tables any more :)
Darren, I find Iron Cross suffer slightly with having to re-read rules to be sure I have it right and feel that just two more pages or so would have helped the rules breathe a little more ….. is it the same with 1914?
ReplyDeleteI have to say that it is Norm. There is a lot of stuff there, which (1) is answered on the the blog/facebook site or (2) still raises too many questions. I didn't say anything above, but that sort of thing is most unsettling. With 7dttrr - the modern set - they seem to have hit a lot of the issues 'inside' the rules and moved away from the need for constant querying - and so the game is playable out of the book. Not so much with 1914. Personally, I see a lot of this too with the 'too fat lardies' stuff.
DeleteThere is a definite interest in these rules from several blogs. Perhaps after a few more playings, you will find these work well for your East Africa project.
ReplyDeleteThanks Jon. Yes; now one thing not mentioned above, since we had no cavalry in the game, is that mounted troops are quite versatile on certain battlefields with the rules, and are thought to add an edge, both in terms of tactics and playability. This also made me interested in their use in said East Africa project. Aussie light horse, Turkish dug in mg positions, even camelry - I think these rules would work with the right tweaks; and again, the fact that a stand is a company really works to that end in my view.
DeleteGood to see some WW1 figures on the tabletop, along with a quick look at the tank and plane models. It will be interesting to see an East African campaign.
ReplyDeleteThanks Peter. Your work in this regard is absolutely inspiring. I am still torn on the rules though. The dynamic of what you have been able to do, campaign wise, with simple yet not simplistic rules, is a real appeal. I begin to wonder if I could be a**ed with 1914's queries though.
DeleteNice looking game. My main gaming opponent has recently introduced me to these rules, having previously played a few games of Iron Cross. I like both sets although I find the seeming absence of melee/close combat rules in 1914 quite perplexing....are the authors saying hand to hand fighting wasn't "a thing" in WWI?? We have used 1914 for RCW, by the ay, and they work fine with 28mm figures, if you just double all the ranges.
ReplyDeleteThanks Ross. Aye, we had quite a few valid queries. It does concern me that reasonable questions, surrounding use of MGs, have to be answered on the web. I never sure if it points to playtesting, rule-writing, or publishing date pressures.
DeleteGood to see the WW1 stuff being used.
ReplyDelete"A lot of discussion on rules interpretation" ah but is this not half the fun !!?? :-)
Aye, but sometimes the rules queries are fairly fundamental. We never get these issues with FoB ;) ... ?
Delete