| Rudi the german | 18 Jun 2016 2:12 p.m. PST |
Many of the veteran TMPers will recall that I have raised this question if that is possible in the past. In my decade long quest for smooth rules I finally solved this problem. So for everyone of you who is tired of discussion and dispute at the wargame table and just wants to have fun with his tin soldiers in action, should take a look at this upcoming book. link To be continued… Greetings
Rudi |
79thPA  | 18 Jun 2016 5:14 p.m. PST |
Never underestimate the ability of someone to complain. Nice pics; it could be interesting. |
| Ironwolf | 18 Jun 2016 9:38 p.m. PST |
I'll second the 79th. I believe some gamers want to argue over such mundane things just to hear themselves speak. lol |
 etotheipi  | 19 Jun 2016 5:26 a.m. PST |
Not without dispute if it's written in English. German or Japanese would be closer to indisputable, but still they are languages of human communication. Lambda calculus is probably the closest you could come. It would be a provably internally unambiguous rule set (like that in any formal mathematical system) and I think lambda calculus would be the best for being as complete as possible. Are the rules written in lambda calculus by any chance? |
| alexjones | 19 Jun 2016 7:05 a.m. PST |
Many wargamers start complaining about any given set of rules only when they are losing! When things are going to plan the rules are are no longer at fault. Strange that. Not all wargamers are childish but a significant proportion are which takes the fun out it a bit. |
| Samurai Elb | 19 Jun 2016 7:56 a.m. PST |
I had the honor to do more then 30 games of "Tin Soldiers in Action" as a playtester and can only testefy that the system of the rules combining the use of squares with clearly defined rules of sight and terrain do prevent any discussions about measuring distances, beginning and ending of terrain and sight-of-lines. This is speeding up the game very much. You can do even great historic battles in some hours having fun instead of long lasting rule discussions. Besides of it the rules considers military changes and technically weapon devolopment at the epochs for which it is made – from about 1680 to about before the mass battles of the first World War – without the need of learning spacial rules for each weapon. Surely this is only the prvate meaning of a gamer who regularly do wargames (both boardgaming and miniature games) since about 1972. Please execuse any errors english is not my native language. |
| kallman | 19 Jun 2016 11:27 a.m. PST |
I'd concur that some players are going to find fault with X rules not matter what. I work to find a group a people I enjoy gaming with that are seeking to have a good time and enjoy the company as much as the aspect of pushing toy soldiers around the table. It is a hobby. It should bring you joy, relaxation and fond memories. Not the opposite. I look forward to seeing the rules as I have found that as I age that less really is more. |
| Rudi the german | 19 Jun 2016 12:21 p.m. PST |
Dear all, FirstBrigade is right! It is a pychological fact that failture is attributed to external factors and success always to own performance. The rules engIne is written that this human habbit is not destroyed or untrue..i.e. The rules blaim the turn sequence or the dice in case of failture ….On the other hand can good performance always be linked to the masterplan of the gamer himself. That was a design principle inorder to replay historical battles many times and to pich uneven skilled players against each other without hindering the system with extra handicap rules. So every player, winner or loser , will never lose his face in a game with these rules. Very important…. Greetings and have fun
Rudi |
| (Phil Dutre) | 20 Jun 2016 3:16 a.m. PST |
Discussion and dispute at the wargames table has not so much to do with the rules, as with the attitude of the players involved. |
| Ottoathome | 20 Jun 2016 5:19 a.m. PST |
Wish I could have read it but I don't do facebook. |
| Weasel | 20 Jun 2016 6:46 a.m. PST |
People will moan about anything but using squares does seem to cut down on certain peoples moaning. |
| Rick Don Burnette | 20 Jun 2016 2:30 p.m. PST |
Rules questions are best left to the playtesters, the developer and designer. And yet even after much playtesting, there are still gaps or questions of the rules, much of it from the style of play even if the rules were clearly written and thuroughly playtested. And there are games whose first edition works well yet the following editions not so much as more special rules are added complicating things. And much of the new complications comes from gamers with an interest in the new special rules |
| Ottoathome | 21 Jun 2016 6:54 a.m. PST |
Disputes? Simply make a sign and hang it over the war game table. "When I'm at your house I play by your rules." Or, if you always use an umpire, as we do, "The umpire, is the umpire, is the umpire" which means whatever he says -- goes. |
