Despite my recent purchase(s), and a backlash in some quarters against slick overproduced wargames rules with nice graphics and must-buy supplements, I fall somewhere in the middle ground. I'm not so extreme that I want to to back to Charge! or Charles Grant (I still find Don Featherstone useful though) but I do have a soft spot (some would say 'penchant', well they would, wouldn't they?) for the good old WRG rules. I mean what's wrong with a little complication and precision? Some examples of the might of WRG from my collection (in historical order):
|Ah, the 6th edition. Anyone one still play it? I never did - I just include it for reasons of completeness.|
|George Gush's classic set of rules. Beats Tercio into a cocked hat. Probably.|
|What's not to like?|
|I should have persevered with this one more that I did....|
|I bought this after playing Operation Flashpoint and ARMA on the computer. It's a bit more complicated though.|
WRG buffs will note that I've not mentioned DBA, DBM and DBR although these I think are of a later vintage and we've had many a good game with them too. But, things have moved on and it looks like my line up of favoured rules is shaping up like this:
- Regimental Fire and Fury (and Fire and Fury) - so popular it must be good (the RF&F book is lovely)
- Black Powder - for 18th and early 19th century - ditto.
- WRG 1685-1845 - old habits die hard.... and the turn sequence seems perfectly logical to me...
- Principles of War 2nd edition - never played it but I really like the command system.