I've had 'The Men Who Would Be Kings' rules for many a year, but have never actually played a game with them. To be honest I can't remember why I bought them, but most likely it was just to have them in the 'Rampant' stable, for possible use in the future. Colonial games have never really piqued my interest, so they have sat on the bookshelf more or less neglected since purchase.
But with the aim to get more games in this year, now that I have the dedicated games room, I dug them out along with 'Xenos Rampant' and 'Rebels & Patriots' to see which one I wanted to use for some quick games to get back into the swing of things. R&P I was heavily involved in the playtesting of and XP could wait until my 'Aliens' were ready, so TMWWBK it was.
After a few quick read throughs and some rough forces knocked up, I set up a really simple table for a vanilla 'Encounter' type scenario, just to really get a handle on the mechanics, troops types etc. I wanted to use my mid-19thC ImagiNations forces, so all of the aforementioned was largely governed by this.
I didn't take any notes of the action and only a few photos, with my thoughts on the game etc to follow:
 |
The table with a nominal objective in the centre. The 'Germans' are on the left, the 'Italians' on the right. |
 |
Standard Line Infantry on the 'German' side. |
 |
Old ruins and a supply train make up the nominal objective. |
 |
Irregular Cavalry and Mounted Infantry (Dragoons) on the Italian left. |
 |
Irregular Infantry on the 'Italian' right. |
 |
Boths sides advance in skirmish order. |
 |
The 'Germans' close in on the ruins. |
 |
"We're not retreating, we're advancing in another direction". The 'Italian' Line Infantry take devastating fire and break having suffered massive losses. |
 |
The 'Germans' whose volleys saw the demise of the 'Italian' Line Infantry. |
 |
Depleted Irregular Cavalry charge the 'German' Line Infantry and are repulsed with losses, leaving them hors de combat. |
 |
A poor Rallying roll of a double 1 leads to the loss of another 'Italian' Line Infantry unit. |
 |
The rules used and considered. |
Post Game Thoughts
Even though I had never played TMWWBK before, I'd say 90% of the mechanics seemed very intuitive as they share a lot with R&P and others from the 'Rampant' table, which made the game pretty easy to play. This certainly makes chopping and changing between the periods covered by Dan Mersey's rules very easy to do, which is a big bonus for sure. Anyway, some more detailed observations as follows:
- Previously I've played these sort of games on a 2' x 2' table and with half measurements but, having read the rules, Dan mentions that 15mm looks good on the standard sized table. So I thought I'd try a 3' x 3' one and it worked a treat. Moving forward I'm sure I will try this with the other rules too and possible on a 4' x 4' one as well.
- Both games were very quick and brutal, due to some excellent dice rolling to hit, some rubbish Rallying rolls and the odd minor mistake with the rules. I found that once a side had got fire ascendency and had opponents units pinned, then it was very hard for them to recover from that, which made it a bit one sided.
- Each game lasted about 30 minutes as it was all about the mechanics, but normally I'd reckon an hours play would see any scenario being played wrapped up, certianly when playing solo.
- Whilst the rules are OK for a simple battle like this, they really need a good scenario to make them work as, as can be seen from the above. So for my next games I will look for a scenario that I fancy playing to see how things go.
- For this game I kept the Leadership values at 6+ ( agood commander), but even then in the first game the 'Germans' just didn't get moving and got shot to bits as a result! Neither did I really explore the options for weapons and skills, but did note that the modern rifles as the default ones for Infantry were rather devastating due to their range. Obselete rifles might have been more in keeping with the period feel I'm after.
- Cavalry doesn't have much use it would seem, certainly when facing good Line Infantry, but against hordes of Tribal troops, they could be useful I'm sure.
- I think for Colonial games TMWWBK certainly fits the bill as one would expect, but I'm not sure they are giving me the feel I'm after. So next up I'm going to run some games on the same table with R&P that I'm much more at home with and spend some time of on force selection and scenario choice.
Thanks for reading and commenting too, as it's always greatly appreciated!
TTFN.
Good to get your thoughts on TMWWBK Steve! I played a few games with my occasional opponent Andrew several years ago and found them quite enjoyable...but we were playing Colonial large skirmish games...they generally lasted 2 to 3 hours
ReplyDeleteThanks Keith! I've just refreshed myself with R&P and they certainly look more likely to give me the game I want for mid-19thC Europe. For 'The Great Game' which I sort of want to do at some point, then TMWWBK certainly will be the rules of choice for small games.
DeleteInteresting - I too bought those rules but have never used them, I think part of the motivation was to look at the 'Mr Babbage' solo rules section. Last year at a couple of shows the SEEMS club used them for a Franco-Prussian war game, having also sussed that there's nothing to stop you pitting 'Modern European' armies against each other rathern than against colonial 'natives'. I liked that lateral thiinking!
ReplyDeleteI think Mr Babbage may have been a factor now you mention it David. For say 1866 games onwards, I would probably use these rules, with R&P for before that. Nice to have the choice:).
DeleteTMWWBK is also in my pile of collected rulebooks. I haven’t played the rules at all, just scanned ‘em for ideas I can “borrow”.
ReplyDeleteCheers,
Geoff
It seems we've all had the book in our collections, but haven't really given them a run out. All of the scenarios can easily be ported fro mone set to another, which is of course a good thing.
DeleteInteresting read and good to hear your thoughts on the rules, not a rule book I have but they certainly seem to work very well for a decent game.
ReplyDeleteThanks Donnie:). I find the 'Rampant' books much easier to pick up and play than say the TFL rules, which require a lot more time and investment to get the most out of them. From my perspective they give fun games that can easily be played in an evening, even a mini campaign if you could sort the terrain out easily enough...
DeleteWell you've certainly started the New Year running hard with a great batrep of an interesting game! I've never played any colonial games but have a hankering to do the Sudan at some point after reading Col Snook's 'Beyond the reach of empire'. So your thoughts on rules are very illuminating, as is the way you make smaller scale minis look so good...
ReplyDeleteThanks Sparker! Funnily enough I watched 'Khartoum' earlier this month and it did pique my interest in the Sudan, but frankly too many other projects on the go. 'The Great Game' is probably as far as I would go on the Colonial front, but you never know...
DeleteHandsome setup as always, Steve. Add me to the list of readers who have the rules but never played them. My purchase was more to satisfy curiosity having played R&P many, many times. I am really not much of a skirmish gamer but maybe I could make this work for small scale (in number of units) actions set in SAW or the Great Game?
ReplyDeleteThanks Jon:). I'm sure they could work for the SAW and the book has suggested lists for the 'Great Game'. I'm not much of a skirmish gamer these days and haven't been for many a year now. However I see these rules being used as part of a campaign, with small actions along the border etc leading to a wider conflict. That's the aim here and I have several plans sketched out as to how this might play out...
DeleteFine looking table and lovely figures representing the 'nationalities' Steve. I especially enjoy the little 'extras' and vignettes that you include.
ReplyDeleteI guess that the increase in table area was beneficial for the range of the small arms (and artillery)?
Regards, James
Thanks James and I'm trying to add more vignettes etc to my collection to decorate the table more. The larger table size was just a trial to see how it looked, and actually I like it a lot, as on the 2' x 2' table, it all seemed rather cramped.
DeleteI'm not a fan of the Osprey stable of rules myself, much better sets available in my opinion. The little chaps look grand in action though on your tabletop battlefield!
ReplyDeleteDan Mersey's rules just click with me, unlike say those from the TFL chaps, but then we all have our own likes and dislikes etc. Like you I'm a fan of Black Powder II, whilst others are rather lukewarm about them. Glad the small chaps are ticking the boxes for you David:).
DeleteA good looking game and report. Have to confess that I don't have them nor am I likely to. However, the Rejects have played an excellent foreign legion game with them.. though Lee did make a couple of tweaks to the rules.
ReplyDeleteThanks Richard! Dan Mersey is quite clear for us to tweak his rules to suit our own tastes, interpretations etc, which is good to hear. I know I tend to tweak many of the rules I play, to suit my own solo style of play.
DeleteA nice report - great idea to use the ‘imagi-nations’ fellers for a colonial clash…I’m another big fan of Mr Mersey’s output- he always comes across as a gamer with a well balanced approach to wargaming:- fun and workable rules but with a decent nod to historicity (if that’s the word???).
ReplyDeleteThanks Martin:). I completely agree with your assessment of Dan's approach to gaming.
Delete