"Great Ancients Rules that no one seems to play." Topic

So are there published rules that your group played
and really enjoyed but never seemed to catch on elsewhere?
Or a good set of Ancients rules that you thought had potential
but couldn't get anyone else to play?

Tactica feel into the latter for me. I loved it but could never get more than one or two guys in the club to try it.
On the other hand everyone liked Medieval Tactica but I never saw it played anywhere but our club.

Might of Arms. I always enjoyed it but could never get anyone else to play.

Armati 2, similar to Tactica.
We play regularly, but there does not seem to begs lot of others doing so.

Vis Bellica – I thought they were really clever in how they handled deployment, manoeuvre and a command structure.

In a way Vis Bellica has been superseded by Impetus. A great concept but not brilliantly executed.

Armati and Tactica

Rally Round the King is my favorite rules for ancients, but since they were marketed as a fantasy set first, it has been hard to get others to play them.

Armati

I'll second Rally 'Round the King!

I'll go third with RRTK but I'm a solo

player so it's hardly an issue.

Comitatus first edition. Great set of rules.

Civitates bellantes. It is great, it is cheap, it is easily available. Why everyone is not playing I don t know

Clash.

Might of Arms. Its a bit dated now but it's an enjoyable, easy game to play

Armati.

Arty Conliffe deserves a medal for his role in dismantling the stifling, inexplicable monopoly that WRG had on ancients rules, back in the day.

I wouldn't describe Armati as a set that no one seems to play … (there are still 5 or 6 tournaments a year in the UK with double-digit entries) … and Lucius's comment would hardly apply if nobody played them

Phil

Armati II – no one around where I am (except one friend) that I could ever get interested in it.

Third Might of Arms. Probably my favorite element-based ancients wargame…

Damon.

I will also praise Might of Arms. Not played around here but I've enjoyed it tremendously at conventions.

I've only used Might of Arms for Wars of the Roses, but it worked very well.

Might of Arms is the only set of ancient rules I have ever played. Only ever played twice though due to lack of an opponent. I think the rules are well written and after a couple read throughs one is able to wrap their head around them, so to speak. Although I like the layout and the logic of the rules, playing them seemed a little dry for this novice player but will have to give them another try. For comparison I bought Hail Cesaer because it looked cool and wanted to see what else was out there. I thought those rules were kind of a mess. To be fair, I have never actually played Hail Cesaer, but can't imagine a coherent game after giving it a quick read. I'm more into gaming then figures so it struck me as a rule set for people more into figures and dioramas then an actual competitive game.

I seem to be in good company – I've always liked Simon McDowall's rules (especially Comitatus) as well as Might of Arms.

But if there's so many people who are playing them who think that no one else is playing them … does that mean that they are actually (stealth) popular? ;)

Cheers,

Christopher

Comitatus is a super set of rules- worth buying for the pictures, alone! His Late Romans are the finest I've seen.

"Once Upon A Table"

Nice set of rules,if a bit complicated. Easy to play once you get the hang of it.

Our group liked DBA so much, we never tried anything else.

Rally Round the King is my favorite rules for ancients, but since they were marketed as a fantasy set first, it has been hard to get others to play them.

RRtK was the fantasy upgrade from the original Warrior Kings. We've made the 140+ historical Army Lists free to cover historical and fantasy.

link

For comparison I bought Hail Cesaer because it looked cool and wanted to see what else was out there. I thought those rules were kind of a mess. To be fair, I have never actually played Hail Cesaer, but can't imagine a coherent game after giving it a quick read. I'm more into gaming then figures so it struck me as a rule set for people more into figures and dioramas then an actual competitive game.

As someone who has enjoyed playing Hail Caesar enormously since it was published in 2011, I have to say that I couldn't disagree more with the sentiments expressed above. Granted, the rules are written in an easy-going, narrative style that may not appeal to Ancients wargamers who prefer different mechanics or a drier, more technical approach. So, if "after giving it a quick read" the HC rulebook does not appeal to you, fair enough. "Different strokes for different folks," and all that. But judging by the many posts here and on other wargaming sites over the past five years, it is obvious that Hail Caesar is a set of "Great Ancients Rules" that a large number of people have both understood and taken a great deal of pleasure in playing.

I'm inclined to agree about Hail Caesar. The rules themselves are solid, but they are written in a very conversational style which for an experienced wargamer could be taken as teaching them to suck eggs. A few times while reading through them I found myself muttering "get on with it" under my breath. Some of the bonus content, like the history excerpts, pictures of artifacts, the snails recipe(!) add to this overall effect.

But I also think that that's partly deliberate. It's clearly not meant to be a "srs bsns" wargame (a point reiterated throughout) and makes an effort not to be seen to be taking itself too seriously. But underneath all that, the rules do actually work well – and while not designed for tournament-style play, could probably function fairly effectively as such with only a couple of minor tweaks.

I would also add the reading through a set often doesn't really gain one a good perspective on how the rules work. I gave Impetus a quick read through and decided it wasn't for me. Only in desperation did I go back to them a year later and read them through carefully and begin playing them with a friend. After half dozen games I began to really appreciate them and 5 years later they are still going strong for me and my group.

I would also add the reading through a set often doesn't really gain one a good perspective on how the rules work.

So true, especially if you're an "experienced" gamer.

Thanks for the kind words on both Comitatus and Civitates Bellantes. I guess in order for rules to 'catch on' they need to be heavily marketed and tied into the big distributors. For my part I am just happy that other people can enjoy the same sort of games as I do and I am not trying to make a business out of them. Both are available through my website link alongside some free downloads.
I would also like to put in a good word for Simon Miller's To the Stongest.
Simon

Not to hijack the thread, but… Simon, as a Civitates Bellantes player I think two things would be helpful for improve its diffusion.

First, to provide some sort of army lists, with "core" mandatory units and additional units that players can choose to add – with limits. See the Armati lists for example. You already have units points so it would be very easy to do for you. Say, for example, "Cartaginian army, first punic war".

Second, some more clear guidelines for the number of commander an army can use. In our "Cartaginian army, first punic war" list you could say, 1 leader for each X points. this is very important because it's not that easy to decide how many commanders an army could have. It's all up to the player but sometimes some more strict guidelines are easier to do.

These simple things would make it a lot easier to set up a game. The scenarios you provide on the website are excellent but are really BIG! These two points you could also add them to your website step by step, putting on line a couple of opposed army lists when you have time.

and congratulation again for this game which I think is great!