Quote from: toxicpixie on 12 May 2014, 01:43:44 PM
4) Nope, not for anyone But we are coming back to Spearhead & Rhys Batchelors excellent scenario generation system after playing BKC for ages.

Really good game, stalwart French defense nearly saw the Yanks break as their green troops took a real pounding from the experienced and motivated French Colonials despite massive materiel superiority! If our tanks hadn't been like chaff to the reaper of the Yanqui Panzers...

I think you mean Keith McNelly's scenario generation sysytem, which Rhys, I, and several others tested up to and beyond its limits 

Sounds like a very fun game with some different troop choices

Good Ghu you're entirely right

Altar of Freedom. Really need to get my head around the army level scale of these rules, but they were great fun nonetheless.

1. Black Powder
2. SYW - Austrian and Prussian
3. Reasonably comfortable with rules but it's frustrating trying to find the nitty gritty of the rules amongst all the periphery text and eye candy pics.
4. Third time of using them and have already re-set (typed, I'm an ex-compositor) them to make them easier to use.

I think BP gives a very good game, but you are right about all the flummery. In our club we have produced short summary sheets for the SYW to great effect, although the Austrians still keep getting battered. Couldn't even win Kolin.

1. If the Lord spares us
2. WW1 France 1914 - Germans v British
3. Totally new to rules, definitely interesting, will develop new QRS
4. First game with them

See http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10029.msg119676.html#new for more thoughts

Quote from: Dour Puritan on 24 May 2014, 07:55:37 PM
I think BP gives a very good game, but you are right about all the flummery. In our club we have produced short summary sheets for the SYW to great effect, although the Austrians still keep getting battered. Couldn't even win Kolin.

Which would suggest that the rules aren't that good in fact. First rule of thumb for any set is "do they generally duplicate historical results?" Unless you're writing fantasy, of course.

Unnecessary exception. If they don't produce something resembling reality, they're no good. In all cases.

As my wife remarks, you can't play "The Awful Green Things from Outer Space" twice in one year. And that was after winning.

The Pike & Shotte rules produce very in keeping feeling games, but when we tried Black Powder for Nappies it wasn't great - units had too much speed, & felt too easy to manoeuvre. They are billed as a tool kit, and your supposed to tinker a bit for detailed feel and flavour, but whilst we play P&S quite a bit (with some specific tweaks across the periods!), we shifte back to Shako for Nappies.

1) What ruleset do you use in your last game?

DBA v3 - together with a campaign ruleset we found on the interweb. 
Basically we're playing a sort of boardgame for the strategic moves, interspersed with DBA battles when the armies come out to fight.

2) What armies were confronted?

Punic Wars, so Rome and Carthage.
In the campaign setting we're playing, it also means that the forces you have in each battle can vary in size and constitution depending on previous losses, what core and allied troops you've managed to raise, and so on.

3) Did you feel comfortable with the ruleset?

DBA – certainly.  We've been playing DBx for many years and are quite familiar with them.  The tweaks to the latest version of DBA have created a very good ruleset that reproduces historical engagements very well.  We've played a few historical battles so far, and they's played out very similarly to what we know about those battles for real (although not always with the same results!)

In the two campaign battles we had last session, Carthage attacked Roman Sicily with superior numbers and the Roman army was beaten and forced to withdraw to Brutia, and a large Roman army marched out to attack a small Carthaginian army that crossed the Alps and was steadily recruiting local Gallic tribes.  Hannibal wasn't at the battle though and the Carthaginians were forced to retreat with great loss.

That said, Carthaginian armies are now marauding around Rome while the Senate adopts a Fabian policy...they do have a small Roman force in Hispania though, steadily trying to capture territory off of Carthage to replace the lost lands in Italy!

As for the campaign rules we're using – very good.  They're producing historical frictions and giving a seriously tense and historically accurate campaign so far.

4) and... was the first time do you use the ruleset?

Nope. 
Played DBA, DBM, DBR, and HotT for many years.  Great little set of rules.
Haven't tried DBMM in anger though.

Quote from: Luddite on 27 May 2014, 10:07:34 AM
1) What ruleset do you use in your last game?

DBA v3 - together with a campaign ruleset we found on the interweb. 

Luddite - been out of the DBx loop for several years now, are the DBA v3 rules published? Can't see anything online to say they are, just endless "coming soon" messages.

I'm not sure Ithoriel.  We have a 'test' version (available online) which is the latest version (as far as we can tell).

It fixes all the little problems with the old DBA rules and pushes it past HotT as the best in the DBx stable.  The DBABB ('big battle') variant works especially well and gets near the old DBM games without the mind-melting fiddliness (which i rather liked).

Quote from: jchaos79 on 08 January 2013, 05:21:07 PM
That's the question.

1) What ruleset do you use in your last game?
2) What armies were confronted?
3) Did you feel comfortable with the ruleset?
4) and... was the first time do you use the ruleset?

1)FogA/M Medieval battle. 15 mm. To help a mate practise for Brit con.
2) later medieval Spanish vs Later MedievalScots!
3) not to start with, but after a while it did.
4) yes! Lost 6 to his 1....

1. Black Powder
2 . 1866 - Prussians vs Bavarians
3. No. It was a test game of actual engagement.
     Bavarians won test. Back to the drawing board!
4. No used them for other periods

Quote from: FierceKitty on 25 May 2014, 10:38:18 AM
Unnecessary exception. If they don't produce something resembling reality, they're no good. In all cases.

As my wife remarks, you can't play "The Awful Green Things from Outer Space" twice in one year. And that was after winning.

To be honest I am a rubbish wargamer and seldom win. I don't blame the rules here. Anyway what on earth would be the point of wargaming if the rules engineered a historical result despite the skills, or lack of, of the players.