What rules are people using now?

[simonw]

Big battles - TACTICA 2
Skirmishing - Lion Rampant

Latest game was Caesarian Romans v British

[John GL]

Wasn't there a survey of members a little while back and the results were posted in Slingshot?
I'm away at the moment so can't check.

Slingshot 345, pages 27-28.  DBA and Art de la Guerre seem to be the most popular among SoA members at present.

[CarlL]

Oh mighty "Persia" such diplomatic storms you bring....

I am pretty "common" and like quite uncommon rules like DBA3, Armati2, DBMM, various Portable Wargame variants (for fast play grid games).... and Never mind the Billhooks is fun (War of the Roses period) ruleset. And much before that so has Dux Bellorum been fun, and I have played variants of that 'Arthurian'/Dark Age rule set that stepped back in time to the armies of the mighty Darius of Persia, and those up-start Greeks and Barbarian cousins from Macedonia (all said with tongue in cheek just in case our Greek and Macedonian members are consulting their lawyers...)

I hold the opinion that the "competition circuit" may speak loudest but not necessarily hold long to anyone rule set for ancients (or medievals) and much fashion has come and gone since DBM3 held sway...

The key is twofold: find something you enjoy playing and that at least one other person enjoys too!! (Or take up solo wargaming ... if so I suggest you look up 'Lone Warrior' magazine where lots of solo ideas get aired and many related to our 'period' for example El Cid campaign game recently!

CarlL

[vexillia]

The issue is two fold:

[1] Who plays what within easy reach?
[2] Do you like what, and how, they play?

The competition circuit is a good way of answering the first question as are demonstration games at shows put on by clubs. 

As Carl suggests, competition popularity does not always translate to quality.  It does however indicate the presence of a "lowest common denominator" of acceptability.

It may also allow you to avoid the "tweakers".  I define the latter as those who use house rules to fit with their (fixed?) ideas of what rules should be like. Of course this may be ideal if their ideas match yours.

[vexillia]

I hold the opinion that the "competition circuit" may speak loudest but not necessarily hold long to anyone rule set for ancients (or medievals) and much fashion has come and gone since DBM3 held sway...

In the Northern League there's been 3 rules sets (DBMM, FOG & ADLG) since the demise of DBM in 2007.  Not bad in 16 years.  Hardly flavour of the month.

Tim Porters piece mentions DBA, MEG & TTS nationally .  Only the last two are recent additions.  DBA pre-dates DBM; both of which are still active.

[Persia]

Thanks all. I had a read of DBMM today and quite like the stratagems and so on. Coincidentally, I have 5 of the armies with brilliant generals! ADLG is on order, so I'll see what they are like, too. I might report back on some test games with the two rulesets.

Duncan, your mention of 6th edition still being in use made me nostalgic for the days when my Galloglas rolled up 3s and 4s and vapourised triple-armed Late Romans! 

[Erpingham]

I think that Martin makes a good point.  If you want the "club" experience, being aware of popular games on the competition circuit is a good way to be aware of the trends. Again, as he says, many sets can be in local clusters (e.g. you may fancy ADLG but if everyone locally is invested in MeG, you may want to go with the flow).  It is probably an interesting study to see how a local group migrates from one dominant set to another - the external factors, the group dynamics etc. but doesn't really help in the situation of trying to get a game locally in the near future.

Unlike Carl, I'm not sure there is a diplomatic storm in this. The Society is a broad church in terms of rules preference and gaming styles. Competition gaming is quite a lively part of that but it by no means the only one.  We have clusters of social gamers with their own gaming passions, we have the rules collectors and tinkers, the solo players and many more.

Incidentally, we do have people well invested in on-line table top gaming. If you can't find something local you like, it may be possible to hook up to a game elsewhere in the world - though, obviously, one plays the host's prefered rules.  I know Jon Freitag often hosts folks from across the globe in his online games.

[Jon Freitag]

I know Jon Freitag often hosts folks from across the globe in his online games.

Aye, that I do!  These remote games have given many a chance to game where they otherwise had no opportunity for a variety of reasons.

[Jon Freitag]

Incidentally, we do have people well invested in on-line table top gaming. If you can't find something local you like, it may be possible to hook up to a game elsewhere in the world - though, obviously, one plays the host's prefered rules.  I know Jon Freitag often hosts folks from across the globe in his online games.

I do, indeed!

[simonw]

The likes of DBM (and subsequent variants) alienated me from Ancients wargaming for several years. I was brought up with figures and unit-based rules systems like the old WRG5th, 6th. These had faults but I enjoyed preparing and fielding 'units' of troop with officers and musicians and of differing sizes and assembling armies composed of these..

However, many modern rulesets employ stand/element-based game mechanics which PERSONALLY, I find rather soulless; no matter how 'accurate a simulation' they are considered to provide.

Consequently, I don't play any rules other than Tactica 2 these days for big battles and Lion Rampant for skirmish games.

I really depends what kind of games you fancy. If you are into big battle simulation and complexity, then DBM(M,X. etc), Art  de La Guerre and the like may be good for you. These also enable you to fight 'out of period; and in competitions. Something I don't do any more.

If however, you wish to field armies composed of units of figures imbued (notionally) with specific character (in your own mind) then you may prefer rules systems like Tactica 2.

Then there are the 'square-bashing' rules systems like To the Strongest which have attractions as well.

I have been gaming for 50 years and my toy soldier collection has grown over that time so that I can field reasonably large armies of 25/8mm scale in historically matched pairs (the intent behind Tactica 2). I am lucky to have friends who will play such games with me on a regular basis provided I supply both armies, usually but not always..

Finding opponents is also a prime requisite.

So you pays your money and makes your choice.

I attach a few random photos of some of my Tactica 2 games.

Good luck and happy gaming!
Cheers
Simon

[Persia]

Just a DBBM question. I've been reading the rules and army lists and it doesn't look like the DBM restrictions on troop types and numbers for allies are there anymore. is this correct?

[Duncan Head]

Look at the introductory page to each army list volume, under the heading ALLIES.

[Ade G]

Play ADLG for larger battles but a home-brew version of Lion/Dragon Rampant for smaller actions.
Recently developed a hankering for early DBA and HotT and for some reason DBM 3.1 but yet to plunge into the latter

[Imperial Dave]

I am definitely liking On Bloody Ground but am doing a few rounds with Three Ages of Rome for comparison

[simonw]

I prefer rules that use 'units' of varying sizes, qualities and character. that's because that's the way I was brought up; WRG 4th. 5tgh, 6th. I now play Tactica 2. The standardised 'element-based- rulesets leave me cold. They may provide a good 'simulation' but personally, I like more 'character' to my games.You cannot view this attachment.You cannot view this attachment.You cannot view this attachment.