"New ECW rules" Topic

‘Warr Without An Enemie' is a set of wargame rules for the English Civil War developed by the Wyre Forest Gamers group.

The player commands one to three ‘brigades'. Army's are generated randomly but brigades are usually 3 to 6 units, with on average 4 to 6 bases of figures per unit. The players decide how many figures to use per base.

The emphasis on the rules is on command and managing unit disruption caused by battlefield action. Quality of the commanders and units is usually more important than numbers or weapons. Raw units will need constant vigilance to keep them in the action while hardened Veterans will sort themselves out, dust themselves off and carry on.

Infantry are rated in one of 7 categories, I1 to I7. The number indicates the number of muskets and pikes within the unit. I1 means the unit is an all musket unit, while an I7 unit is all pikes. Most units are of course in between these two extremes, two muskets to one pike is an I3 unit for example. All bases fire and melee so there is no need to exactly model the ratio of weapons. When firing you need to roll your I number or higher to hit, while if in melee you need you I number or lower to hit. In this way the mix of weapons within a unit is quickly reflected.

There are four kinds of mainstream cavalry along with lancers and dragoons. The four kinds of cavalry allow the representation of the tactics of the period that is not possible in many other rules and is, like much of the rest of the rules, based on modern research of this fascinating period. The ‘Pistoleers' rely on firepower, while ‘Gallopers' rely on the reckless speed of their charge. The dominant tactics of the war of Dutch and Swedish styles of fighting are more common and rely on combination tactics.

For further details at wfgamers.org.uk/WWAE.htm

Contact us at wyreforestgamers@yahoo.co.uk

A Yahoo group supporting these rules is at uk.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WWAEECW/info

Sounds interesting – PDF purchased!

Mike

I've just submitted an order for the PDF and joined the yahoo group!
Regards,
Arthur

My ECW units are based on three stands, one of pike and two of musketeers. Your units have 4-6 stands. Would this be a problem if using your rules?

Thistledo2: No that will be no problem. The system works on stands, not figures, for combat, etc. The units in the games are random and on average 4 to 6 bases. But you can choose any size really and also often in reality unit sizes varied a lot. In the sample scenario – link – you will see most of the units there are 3 stands.

This is why the rules have lists for various armies and years rather than just a plain Royalist/Parliamentarian army list.

Also often in reality the units are 'battalia' or similar units – i.e. 2 or more smaller units combined into a single unit of a reasonable size. This was particularly true as the war went on. So you could also combine all or part of your units into a single 'battalia' unit if you wish.

Arthur/Mike: Thanks for your replies.

Order for paper copy made, cheque in the post (really!). Wyre Forest have a good record with their stuff on the European Wars of 1859,66 and 70-71, so am really looking forward to receiving these.

Mollinary

Wyre Forest Club are running a demo ECW game at Alumwell show on Sunday, March 9th, using these rules. Come and have a chat and see how the rules work.

alumwellwargames.co.uk

Game will be based on Battle of Montgomery, Sept 18th 1644:

link

I really don't want to be negative and I will probably buy these rules anyway, but the number of grammatical and typographical errors in the attachment (starting with "notabe" in the second line) really doesn't do a lot to "sell" these rules to me, as I am now wondering what sort of errors there may be in the rules themselves.

AussieAndy, which attachment? Is it this one?

wfgamers.org.uk/WWAE.htm

Yes, that one (which someone has now had a go at editing, although there are still errors). The reason why I am critical of these things is that I have paid a lot of money in the past for books that were riddled with typographical and grammatical errors (perhaps the worst example being Partizan Press' Malplaquet, in which, among other errors, the editor's comments had been printed). In both my hobby and professional reading, I have found that sloppy use of the English language is usually a good indicator that there will be sloppy thinking generally.

Or you can look over our clubs set for free ar runtus.org

AussieAndy:

I am sorry that you found the grammar/typo's annoying on the web page. I am afraid we are very much amateurs at this. So much so that the web page was very much a last minute idea.

In any case I take your point, although I am not sure you are comparing like for like. Not that this matters so how about a deal?

Get in touch with us at wyreforestgamers@yahoo.co.uk and I will send you a free copy of the rules. If you like them then you can pay for them. I am sure that there will be some grammar/typo errors but hopefully not too many. Maybe you can even get back to us with some corrections? Not that you need to do either and I suspect we would be happier if you come back and say "What a great set of rules".

New Scenario Added: The Battle of Montgomery, 1644

Hi all. I have added a new scenario for these rules – link

p.s. Simon Moore: If you are reading this can you contact us at wyreforestgamers@yahoo.co.uk using an alternative e-mail account. We can NOT contact you via the original one you used.

We have added a new scenario, http://www.wfgamers.org.uk/images/resources/Southam.htm, more soon.

Hi all,

I have just put online a scenario for the battle of Powick Bridge, 1642 – link

This is a nice early war cavalry scrap featuring Prince Rupert.

More soon.

For those that are interested there is a review of these rules in Miniature Wargames magazine number 374, June 2014.

Bearing in mind the previous messages in this thread I thought I would include a few of Tim Beresford's (the reviewer) words. He said "The rules are well written, with very few typos".

Beresford concludes his review by saying "I suspect that many will enjoy the detailed play and the interactivity of this system – I found it a fun game".

There are also now additional scenarios on the webpage.