"Why do Yanks and Brits not play the same games?" Topic

Im agreeing with Allen here (and that hurts!)
I think its a false perception that the two great wings of the Anglo Saxon world are different in this case.
Its just a matter of tending to use your local product because its available.

I just recently got GdB, because the main online store I use finaly got one in. I realize that postage on a book alone is not that bad, but you tend to use what is familiar. I would certainly love to get Perry metals to go with thier plastics when I finaly get them, but havent found a good US source for them. And 18% postage is a real bite on top of thier expense anyway. Same with front Rank.

Anybody know of a good set of
german game rules that have been translated? When I lived over there I found almost no napoleonics, but some WWII stuff, mostly 1/48 and 1/87. Not sure why that was, and my german was not that great, so long conversations on the nature of things was right out.

There are an awful lot of skewed perceptions in this thread, from both sides of the Atlantic

From the title of this thread, I expect no less.

Is the it very different style of writing (Yanks like things legalistically precise and enumerated like a technical manual… Brits prefer a narrative, and one that's vague enough to improvise…)?

Is there any sets of rules more "legalistically precise" than those from the WRG stable? Whether or not they succeed in their mission, I will leave as a rant for the student.

Greenryth:

Its simple….Americans are statto's. This is not an insult but every American I have ever known when it comes to wargaming loves table after table in their rules. I mean, have you ever read the rules From Valmy to Waterloo. I have never read anything so over engineered, so complex and completely unplayable in all my life!!

You've obviously never seen Chef de Battalion. That one had something like 180 different charts. The "quick resolution sheet" was a 16 page booklet, longer than some whole rule sets such as Volley and Bayonet.

[You've obviously never seen Chef de Battalion. That one had something like 180 different charts. The "quick resolution sheet" was a 16 page booklet, longer than some whole rule sets such as Volley and Bayonet.]

And let's not forget the Clash of Arms naval games, where you have to leaf through ten pages of tiny-print tables and then do something like sophomore calculus just to fire a torpedo…

…and THAT was supposed to have been a "streamlining" from games like SEEKRIEG.

Just to spot something, there are 12 tables, which then give you a value to plug into the "visibility variation table", which modifies the "spotting table…" Oh, wait, you're an airplane? Sorry, wrong chapter…

And these aren't ancient 1980s or 1970s games. All this stuff was written in the mid-90s, as was Valmy to Waterloo and Chef de Battalion.

Somebody pointed out earlier, that Americans really pioneered role-playing games… And have you ever seen anything with more charts and tables than a role-playing game? In AD&D there were tables to roll on (percentile dice, of course) to see what kind of beer your character just drank!!

lol I own Chef de Battalion and I totally know whre you are coming from. A friend of mine keeps joking, he needs a paper bag close by when he opens that book!

How about tables for playing poker in a Western RPG?
Did it ever occur to them to just actually play poker?

Now you know why I turned down the chance to publish D&D (and lost the chance to make a million $).

"How about tables for playing poker in a Western RPG?"

And why do you need rules for drinkin', consorting with ladies of the evenin', and gunplay? Seems like it would be a whole lot more fun to just actually…

Allen

And why do you need rules for drinkin', consorting with ladies of the evenin', and gunplay? Seems like it would be a whole lot more fun to just actually…

Allen do you actually know any gamers?

Well… I know *me*, and I know Murphy…

Allen

Diverse hobby, diverse sets of rules, UK is a smaller Geographical unit than US, on the other hand US is, in Wargaming sense, more or less a unit – so local rules, local preferences re periods, etc. I would say it is convention attendance that matters most – same groups of people selling their wares in UK, but not US. In US, different group selling their games – and thus different demonstration games, so different sales patterns. Advertising, in other words.

Used to be, UK wargaming 5 years ahead of US wargaming, US RPG 5 years ahead of UK, so we followed US RPG trends, US followed UK Wargames trends, doubt if that is the case now. Blame it on GW for getting the two mixed up – works for me.

carne68 wasnt chef de battalion published by emperors press and written by scott bowden….who is an american?

I have just dug out my copy of chef de Bataillon and I forgot how funny it was…There are actually 124 tables and rule for Lunging at the enmy if you fail your charge distance, then fail a follow me order and still want a third attempt at making contact…its priceless. Has anyone actually played a game with these rules?

badger 22

"Anybody know of a good set of
german game rules that have been translated? When I lived over there I found almost no napoleonics, but some WWII stuff, mostly 1/48 and 1/87. Not sure why that was, and my german was not that great, so long conversations on the nature of things was right out."

There is a recent new translation of the 1862 Kriegspiel available from Toofatlardies. Not sure if that is what you had in mind.

During the 80s/90s there was a bit of a move to simplification – the "One Brain Cell" approach and others.

This may have led to more streamlined rules and fewer tables etc.

I can only speak of my UK based experience and I think I observe some trends towards simple play rules with more focus on the command decisions by the players. There remains a perfectly valid collection of more detailed rules.

What would be interesting to know is whether the move to simplification has found it's way into the US?

Totally unscientific sample. Recent games: WAB using Hannibal & the Punic Wars (international authorship), JR3 (US authorship), LFS (British authorship). I did not enjoy the last game. I am British.
I think, as has already been noted, that the trend towards quick, small scale games is because a lot of gaming over here is done in clubs and there is limited time available. That said, this year I've played Cowpens on 1:5 scale over 10 hours with 6 players and last year I played a massive multi-player game of Austerlitz – so you can't generalise.

"WAB using Hannibal & the Punic Wars (international authorship)"

I'm international? Somebody get me a new passport!

Allen

I wonder if the theory advanced that American Rules tend to be "precise" is a result, unconscious or otherwise, of living in a society where bringing lawsuits seems as natural as breathing and thus having "airtight" rules for everything becomes the norm?

Or perhaps the Yanks are just smarter than us Brits? 8-)

The US has more lawyers than the rest of the world combined, or at least 10 years ago they did. As noone has issued any hunting licenses for them I doubt the number has decreased.

I am glad to see that I am not the only one to look through Chef de Battalion, and give it a pass.

I dont mind complex as long as it makes sense. I play both Seekrieg and Starfeel battles, both of which have plenty of charts and tables. But they are laid out so as to make sense, at least to me. CdB did not.

Or perhaps the Yanks are just smarter than us Brits? 8-)

Well, YOU said it, not me…

I don't think lawsuits have anything to do with it.

Yank gamers of a certain age grew up playing Avalon Hill games. If they became Total Immersion Nerds, they soon heard of Strategy and Tactics/Simulations Publications. (At least, that is the route that I followed.)
SPI/S&T published rules that tried to nail down EVERY contingency. This was partly a reaction to the fact that AH games could offer a variety of interpretations. Add to this that AH games were played in tournaments, and by mail. Unofficial bodies offered pages of interps, in much the same way that WRG Ancients tournaments in the 80s had "Rules Interpretation Seminars" the night before the tournament got under way. "I got a letter from Phil, and he says…"
Anyway… The first S&T games were kind of AH clones, until "Bastogne", a misbegotten bloated behemoth if ever there was one. I magine a game that "simulated" (I still hate that word) traffic jams, and the designer was proud of it.
S&T then thought that that was what the gaming world was crying out for, and the rules just became more and more "precise" and "legalistic". I leave it to the jury to decide how well they succeeded.
Other companies followed suit, leading to Starfleet Battles and Advanced Squad Leader.
Fun for some. For others, not so much.

So, I think we can attribute a great deal of what you perceive as the "American style" to S&T/SPI and its heirs.
For my part, I always hated that kind of legalistic monster game, even though I embraced it whole-heartedly when the same approach reared its head in Ancients gaming.
I always played WRG loosey-goosey, sticking to the basics, and leaving the arcane minutae to those who actually cared about it.

Don't feel smug about Brits having a "friendlier" style of gaming rules. Repeat after me: "WRG, Newbury Fast Rules, Shock of Impact…"

Hang out at a redneck bar on a friday or saturday and you will revise your estimate of US intelegence downward. Sharply. Below monkeys and perhaps above pigs. Maybe.

[Yank gamers of a certain age grew up playing Avalon Hill games. If they became Total Immersion Nerds, they soon heard of Strategy and Tactics/Simulations Publications. ]

That's a very good point. We often forget that for some (many?) people, those incredibly complex games are "fun." Otherwise, they wouldn't have been written, bought, and played.

There's a Sci-Fi / Fantasy roleplaying club on our campus. I occasionally see some of those kids sitting together at lunch, hunched over reams of tiny-print charts and tables (and one kid, invariably, has written some software to "simplify" it and he's clicking on his laptop). They are barely able to contain themselves, they're so excited. To the untrained eye, they probably appear to be Accounting Majors on speed.

[I wonder if the theory advanced that American Rules tend to be "precise" is a result, unconscious or otherwise, of living in a society where bringing lawsuits seems as natural as breathing and thus having "airtight" rules for everything becomes the norm?]

I'm an American and a game-writer, and I can tell you that when I write rules, I generally do so with as much care as possible to prevent them from being "bent" or "broken" by a devious mind. And then I take them to a club or convention setting, and watch the players figure out the 148 loopholes that I didn't catch the first time around.

This is why rules get long and sometimes tedious. It's not really over-complication, since it's not adding steps or time to the actual process of playing. But it is important to get very specific – VERY specific about absolutely everything, or else you will get bombarded with emails (I get 200-300 per year) questioning and challenging every application of the rules.

For instance, you might have a rule that says your unit can't do X if there is an enemy within 8" of its flank…

Seems perfectly simple and straightforward, right? Okay….

Have you defined "flank?" Is there at least one illustration showing precisely where the flank is, where it begins and ends? What portion of a unit has to be within this area to qualify as being "on the flank?"

Have you defined "within?" Does it mean measured from any point to any other point? Or some sort of portion of the unit?

Have you defined "enemy unit?" Does that include broken units? All kinds of units? Units in all formations? Officers?

Have you defined 8" ? Does that include measuring across impassable terrain? Does it matter if the units can't see each other? Does it matter if they're not facing each other?

Have you specified WHEN the enemy can't be within 8"? At any point of the turn? Only at certain points?

I always crack up when somebody says, "I've got a great set of Napoleonics rules that's only three pages long!" That might work for you and your three buddies in the basement, after a few beers. But if you're going to publish the set and let it loose in the world, then if you don't spell out all of these things in excruciating detail, you can expect to be roasted alive on the internet and bombarded with emails.

In my experience yanks and Brits DO play the same games. Our sales are pretty well split equally between the two.

"But if you're going to publish the set and let it loose in the world, then if you don't spell out all of these things in excruciating detail, you can expect to be roasted alive on the internet and bombarded with emails."

I have published on the internet a set of rules for army level ACW that are only 7 pages long. I have not been roasted alive or bombarded with emails.

[I have published on the internet a set of rules for army level ACW that are only 7 pages long. I have not been roasted alive or bombarded with emails.]

Then I wish you much success!

How many copies has it sold?

If my experience is anything to go by, then after sales pass the 1000 mark, you will get about 1 email or chat-site question per 10 buyers.

I know some people who are much more successful than me, whose games have sold tens of thousands of copies, and who get 100+ emails per day (!)

I generally get 4-5 per week. Not all of them are rules questions, of course. Some of them are suggestions, requests, proposals for variants, people just musing about this or that, etc. But you get the point. If the game becomes popular, then you will start getting lots of questions. So it helps to have written them as clearly and comprehensively as possible, anticipating at least a majority of those questions.

All that this has proven is that fat bloated legalistic rules exist on both sides of the pond, as well as simple ones.

"For instance, you might have a rule that says your unit can't do X if there is an enemy within 8" of its flank…

Seems perfectly simple and straightforward, right? Okay…."

This exactly shows the difference between the US and UK mindsets.

"Have you defined "flank?" Is there at least one illustration showing precisely where the flank is, where it begins and ends?"

Call yourself a wargamer and you don't know where the flank of a unit is?

"Have you defined "within?" Does it mean measured from any point to any other point? Or some sort of portion of the unit?"

Personally, I would have worded your rule above as:
"Your unit can't do X if there is any part of an enemy unit within 8" of its flank"
but seeing as these clarifying words are missing this would be the default meaning anyway.

"Have you defined "enemy unit?""

One that will shoot at or attack my unit given half a chance!

"Does that include broken units? All kinds of units? Units in all formations?"

Since these are unspecified the answer must be yes.

"Officers?"

Officers are not a unit.

"Have you defined 8" ?"

Um .. that's 8 imperial inches or 2/3 of an imperial foot (preferably measured with an imperial ruler …)

"Does that include measuring across impassable terrain? Does it matter if the units can't see each other? Does it matter if they're not facing each other?"

Does it matter? You tell me.
We in the UK use such things as inherent military probability, common sense and gentlemen's agreements. It seems that some of our cousins across the pond find these concepts difficult to grasp.

"Have you specified WHEN the enemy can't be within 8"? At any point of the turn? Only at certain points?"

This depends on the game sequence and unit activation sequence, presumably defined elsewhere in the rules.

"How many copies has it sold?"

Sold? It's available free! I have no idea how many copies have been downloaded (and I really don't care).
How could I possibly charge for something only 7 pages long?

I remember reading several years ago that Australia per head of population has more war gamers than any other country on earth. I cannot remember where I read it but several war gaming suppliers over the years have commented in various places about this phenomenon. Aussies it seems are veracious war gamers spread from one end of the country to the other. Luckily for us we will use most sets of rules out there regardless of where they came from.

However, from my groups perspective, at least, American designed rules seem much more flamboyant and marketed well while British designed rules tend to be more conservative and marketed less towards mass sales. The American rules are usually all glossy and pretty which catch the eyes of many gamers, if the book or box looks good it must be good…

But I can honestly say that there are great systems from both sides of the Atlantic and neither would have an advantage or better than the other overall. Main difference I see is that the British rules systems tend to ignore the War of 1812 while American systems make sure it is included.

This is just our group's observations over the years.

Shane

"However, from my groups perspective, at least, American designed rules seem much more flamboyant and marketed well while British designed rules tend to be more conservative and marketed less towards mass sales. The American rules are usually all glossy and pretty which catch the eyes of many gamers, if the book or box looks good it must be good…"

That's possibly because the US market is geared toward selling products in your FLGS. Presumably the same in Oz? We don't have FLGSs any more in the UK (well very very few). Most people in the UK buy rules and stuff at shows or by mail order or on-line. A mate's recommendation is far more important to us than a flashy cover!

All that this has proven is that fat bloated legalistic rules exist on both sides of the pond, as well as simple ones.

But we knew that already.

Didn't we?

[Sold? It's available free! I have no idea how many copies have been downloaded (and I really don't care).]

*Please* believe me when I say that I'm not trying to make any sort of value judgment here, or get into some sort of comparing contest…. Honestly.

But there is a difference between a small set that is given away for free on the internet, and large set that is sold around the world in 1000s of copies.

In the former case, it is possible, simply, that very few, people play it. In the latter case, people have paid money for it, and thus feel entitled to customer support. So they are going to contact the author on every conceivable matter. I've gotten emails from people who wanted me to give them a free copy because their spiral binder came undone when they packed the game in their suitcase on an international flight! (I'm not joking.)

And I get emails dissecting every possible rule from every imaginable angle.

I haven't done any sort of demographic study to determine whether the majority of the "technical" sort of rules questions are from Americans or not… And such a study would be difficult simply because I don't know how the sales have broken down by nationality, anyway. If membership on the Yahoo site is anything to go by, then about two-thirds of the buyers are Americans.

But… Getting back to the original topic… I do think it's more than just anecdote to observe that British games are more likely to be played in Britain, and American games more likely to be played in America. And that there are very obvious differences in writing style and organizational style between the two.

"large set that is sold around the world in 1000s of copies."

What are your rules named then?

"In the latter case, people have paid money for it, and thus feel entitled to customer support. "

And that's another difference between the US and the UK. In my experience UK gamers tend to fudge things and apply house rules rather than demand "customer support". The only time I've seen any significant "appeal to the author" is in the case of Phil Barker and WRG. And most of those queries to him came from US gamers …

Just because I've bought something doesn't entitle me to any customer support (at least not under UK law).

What are your rules named then?

Grande Armee and Might & Reason at a guess. Which thinking about it are the first sets of US rules I/we have ever been really happy with…

I really don't think those claiming major societal/psychological differences down the Atlantic are on to anything, particularly with regard to competiveness etc. Surely that would affect other activities equally? What I do think is important is the space availible.

A good friend of mine recently emigrated to Canada, from UK, and trebled the size of his house in the process. So he went from having to play club games, where people follow the club trend, to having his own permanent set up in his 'Man Cave' where he plays the rules he chooses to develop with those of his neighbours who are gamers.

So, generalising wildly, Brits tend to have to go with whatevers popular, and quick, whereas Yanks and Canucks have more freedom to use the rules they want to, cos they can exist independently of the club scene…

No-one involved in competition wargaming in the 70s in the UK would make the mistake of using words like 'friendly'

"Grande Armee and Might & Reason at a guess. "

If that is true then he too has written rules given away free on the Internet – Fast Play Grande Armee.

"Yank gamers of a certain age grew up playing Avalon Hill games."

Some did. Some (and we're not that far apart in age, old fellow) had been exposed to Young and Lawford, Grant, Featherstone, Lowry, Vietmayer and Tucker before ever picking up a board game.

For me, AH and SPI were a momentary aberration on entering the Army. It soon became clear that military boardgamers were utter nutcases. I subscribed to S&T for a few years, always hoping to find the perfect campaign generator (which is why I still buy Clash of Arms games), but I haven't wasted any good painting time on board gaming for more than thirty years.

If anyone is responsible for my world view of miniature gaming, I suppose it's our own Don Lowry, for starting the Toy Soldier shop and advertising such a wide range of wonderful-sounding rules and figures in his catalogs; to Pete Rice for keeping the shop going over the years, providing a place to "go back home to"; and folks like TMPer Chris Parker ("Day of Battle") for showing me early on that it's not necessary to be tied to commercial rules, but that fiddling with your own until you're happy with them is a laudable pastime in itself.

After that, there were two "schools" which further developed my tastes. One started in the "Courier", and continued in "MWAN": a constellation of authors too many to list, but including Sam, Howard, Paul Koch, Brother Aelred, and so many more--again reinforcing the idea that's it's not necessary to buy into the commercial world of gaming too deeply.

The other "school", I eventually came to realize, turned out to be all members (at one time or another) of Wargame Developments, on the other side of the water: Paddy Griffith, Bob Cordery, Martin Rapier, Martin Goddard… again, too many to list, and many of them TMPers. Add Phil Barker in there, too, I suppose. Again, they showed that there are as many approaches to gaming as there are human minds, and like their US counterparts that influenced me, showed that there is no end to creativity. That I didn't turn out to be as creative as any of them isn't their fault!

Having said that, I can't forget that "Charge" was the first rules I ever encountered, and so whenever things get too serious, it's easy to remember that all else considered, we're playing games with toy soldiers. Those are the games I play: neither US nor UK…

Allen

The more I think about it, the more I think the difference, if any, dates back to the Montgomery/Patton thing in 1944

To be honest, after looking at Field of Glory and a host of other British rules, I really think it is the language. We have been seperated long enough now to be speaking almost two different languages.

I have plenty of rules written by Brits, but they just sit on the shelve to be honest. My favorite rules are all written by Americans.

"The Sword and The Flame" for Colonials by Larry Brom
"Tactica I and II" for Ancients and Med. by Arty Conliffe
Anything by Sam Mustapha, but mainly his 7yw and Napoleonics. The man can write rules that are clear and well indexed.
And for WWII it is "Disposable Heroes" by Keith Stine and Chalfant Conley

Simple and easy rules, well written and most important, I can understand them. Plus not one has any tables that require an advance math degree to figure out. If I need a calculator to play a game, it is no longer a game but work.

Ah, another controversial "National Characteristics" thread rears its head!

I'm with the camp that says there is less of a geographical difference than some people may think. Among my favourite commercial sets have been The Sword and the Flame and Koenig Krieg (US), as well as General de Brigade (UK). And, although some individuals may (uselessly) damn me to perdition for it, Flames of War (NZ).

The Internet has been a great leveller, and from the conversations I've had online with many people, it seems that any "divide" concerning complexity or what have you stems less from national predilection and more from what is available locally and what rules seems to be 'hot" at any given time or another. I think availability and local gaming "tradition" may have a lot to do with it as well.

One one side of the watery divide you can get something like Empire at one end of the spectrum and the Sword and the Flame at the other. Across the Atlantic you can find rules ranging in complexity from WRG Ancients to one of the Warhammer derivatives. Each seem to have their followers.

Doesn't the price of the miniatures needed to play the game make a big difference? A skirmish game is considerably less expensive to participate in than a 28/30mm Corps level game at a 1 to 20 troop ratio, …as is playing in 6mm scale on the kitchen table.

Most of the UK games I've participated in used public venues where space wasn't a problem. Many, but not all, of the US game groups I've played with play at one of their members home(s) or they rotate locations to ease the "wargamer in the house" burden on the host. I/S

'That I didn't turn out to be as creative as any of them isn't their fault!'

Allen, knowing you as I do that is simply not true! These days creativity is rarely something that is just the result of one person's efforts. It also involves the input of others … and as someone who took part in a memorable session at COW (Conference of Wargamers) where we not only tried Chris Engle's POLITICS BY OTHER MEANS with a Sudan Campaign scenario but then spontaneously all agreed to try the basic structure (with a few tweaks) for 'modern' Africa, you took your place amongst the 'creative' talent around the table that day.

Mind you, the look on your face when you found that your T54 tanks were so badly maintained by your 'mechanics' (a very strong argument I thought!) that most of them could hardly move or fire was a picture!

Oh, that was an excellent argument, Bob!

Allen

They also serve who's tanks break down.

Yes, but tankers don't only stand and wait. They rest up under a nearby tree with a beer from the external toolboxes that have been packed with ice.

Or tea, if they're British.

Allen

I cut my teeth gaming Napoleonics in the UK. Mostly Quarrie in the beginning, starting with his 'Airfix' rules. Shortly after I got a copy of 'The Wargame' and tried those with my Napoleonics. Not purist, but a helluva lot of fun.

Once I found Grand Manner, the charts from Quarrie seemed nauseating. Each turn/bound dragged out way too long. I must have been through every rule set imaginable on both sides of the Atlantic.

A couple of years after I moved to Texas, I ordered 'Struggle for the Peninsula' rules from Redoubt. That was it for me. I've modified them a zillion times, but kept the flavor.

A while ago I found GdBde. Much of it I like and gleaned much of that also

As I typiclly construct French infantry in 24's, Brits in 20's (30/1 scale), I frequently find I'm mixing units to reach the 20/1 scale of GdBde. Fortunately I have similar units that allow me to do that.

On both sides of the Atlantic, I've played with all sorts of rules. Perhaps I'm blind, but I've found folks on both sides wanting simple, others wanting huge complexity. Regarding characters of players, I haven't found much difference there either. On both sides I wanted to rip the tonsils out of someone, but most I'd drink a beer with anytime.

Again, maybe I'm just oblivious, but rules and character of players just seem to mesh – the water in between isn't an issue.

By the way… Chef de Battalion. I bought it, read about half way through, then put it up on ebay. Took the loss… never played it. Seemed to me I'd just be staring at my battalions and seldom move them after falling asleep with the charts. Then again, the rules still sell…

"Sundance: I wouldn't agree and in fact I would have guessed it is the other way round. I regularly go to 4 UK clubs and it is years since I last saw a 25/28mm game at any of them. You see 25/28mm at shows but not for real games."

Oh!….I must have imagined every game I've played for the last 20 years…