"Looking for the Holy Grail of Ancient Rules" Topic

I need the help of the TMP Sages to help me find my next ancients ruleset.

I am a long time ancients player. I started out with WRG and the purple airfix guide way back in the 1970s. I followed the crowd and moved on to DBX, Armati, Tactica, Stategoes, Lost Battles, CCA and Impetvs. These rulesets are beginning to feel all the same (to a greater or lesser degree) to me.

While I enjoy them all I am looking for something a little more crunchy. I would like to have the fate of a unit decided by more than one die roll and a few modifiers.

I am open to any suggestions. My only requirements are I would like to be able to play either solo (usually not too difficult regardless of the rules) or face to face and I would like to finish a decent sized battle in 3 hours max. While I am not a big fan of card activation systems I am willing to listen. I am also not a fan of figure removal (only because I painted the figures, I want to look at them) but I can always use a roster to get around that.

What say you TMPers? What are other ancient rulesets are people enjoying and why?

Well, it uses cards but I and my local gamers are big fans of To the Strongest rules by Simon Miller. It's really fun to play, easy enough to learn but makes you think hard as you constantly are making decisions. It does not use figure removal and games should finish in 3 hours unless your armies are huge. Given the way it works, the game is definitely playable solo as you do not have complete control of your armies.

I have put on games of this at three different conventions with different groups of players almost each time (a few signed up more than once after they played it first time) and have yet to find someone who did not enjoy themselves.

You can buy the rulebook or download the rules (I did the latter) and Simon provides all army lists for free and is adding to them all the time.

Since I've played then bought these rules, I no longer have an interest in looking for any other ancients rules sets. I'm a very happy camper.

Not played it, but have the rules, but To The Strongets does look very good fun, straight forward and enjoyable

Another vote for To the Strongest. I first played it at an intensive weekend at the Wargames Holiday Centre put on by Simon. Since then I have got to know Simon, and helped him put on games at a number of shows, most recently Magnesia at Crisis in Antwerp. As above, the games have all been great fun, completed in about two and a bit hours, and I too haven't met a single person who didn't have a blast! The mechanisms are simple and elegant, quick to learn, but produce plausible results. As a general, you are faced with lots of decisions, and it makes for an absorbing game.

Mollinary

Terry Gore's Ancient Warfare?

If you can get by with the cards Piquet Pulse of Battle might be just what you are looking for. I write this as someone who played WRG and then DBM and DBMM for a very long time.

We like To the Strongest but if you are looking for something with a little more grit at the sharp end you might want to take a listen to some of the following.

Some of the new rules that you might find interesting are reviewed, including interviews with the authors, on the Meeples & Miniatures podcast.

Gripping Beast & Swordpoint

Meeples & Miniatures interview and review:

link

Mortem Et Gloriam

Meeples & Miniatures interview and review:

link

There are also podcasts about Sword and Spear and To the Strongest listed in the podcast archives.

Hope this helps.

I know what you are saying – despite appreciating the new and nifty advances in streamlined game design, I also miss a bit of the "crunch" derived from more in depth mechanics. Writing for either approach is hard to do well, but there is a playable middle road.

A tried and true set of rules that is more on the traditional/crunch side is Might of Arms. There are tables full of different combat factors that nevertheless play quickly, and the fatigue/morale system for units usually plays out over a few turns but is decisive.

A newer game that is billed as fast play but incorporates some more traditional steps in the process is Ancient and Medieval Warfare by Neil Thomas. It's pretty streamlined, but combat at least recognizes offensive differences (usually number of dice rolled), a step for defense saves, and a morale mechanic that can tip the balance in multi-turn combats (pass morale or lose an extra stand). It is also very open to adding more crunch via house rules.

Cheers,

Christopher

While I enjoy them all I am looking for something a little more crunchy. .
…… I would like to finish a decent sized battle in 3 hours max.

I assume by crunchy you mean more detailed. The trouble is, with a ruleset with more detail you are unlikely to complete a game in the time you want. In general the more complexity and detail, the longer the game will take to play.
Many modern rules streamline play by cutting out unnecessary detail and complexity.

I would like to have the fate of a unit decided by more than one die roll and a few modifiers

What would you like the fate of a unit decided by then ?

I am open to any suggestions. My only requirements are I would like to be able to play either solo (usually not too difficult regardless of the rules) or face to face and I would like to finish a decent sized battle in 3 hours max. … I am also not a fan of figure removal

Sword & Spear (of which I am the author) fits these requirements. You can find out about the game and read reviews here:
link

And according to this review they are the Holy Grail of ancients rules :
link

Lost Battles.

But then your Holy Grail may not be my Holy Grail …

Tactica II--it's out there…somewhere. Legends and careless talk speak of it. Few have seen and fewer have bought a copy. It makes men whine and cows give little individually wrapped cheeses….

My advice: Having played a bit of Sword and Spear – avoid it.

But then your Holy Grail may not be my Holy Grail …

Nice one and so true.

Scutarii currently on sale from hoplite research link

morale driven combat. does not use card or random unit activation. units fate is not resolved in one round of die rolls large battles resolved in a few hours. usual result is morale failure of one army. a smaller army of higher quality units can defeat a much larger army. There is also a Yahoo group with additional support, reference sheets and markers.

raphia
link
asculum
link

pharsaluslink

other battles on blog Hydaspes, Bibracte, Calinicum, Marathon.

I would advise looking into "To The Strongest". Units are only required to fit into grid. Give great flexibility in basing like Impetus.

I'd ignore Ghecko's comments on Sword and Spear. He seems to have a grudge against the rules. Sword and Spear does sound like it would fall in the Armati, Impetus, CCA camp though. So does To the Strongest.

Have you taken a look at Warrior, the updated WRG 7th? It does have quite a bit of crunchy, is fairly subtle and does not have figure removal.

I have to tell you……. Of all the Ancients-period rules I have played these past near 50 years, I have come to embrace WAB 1.5, Basic Impetus, Impetus, and Dux Bellorum.

I have tried others but keep coming back to these. No figure removal. Easy rules, but plenty of optional ones to add more "chrome"if that's your thing, and lovely large bases to make, if you like, into vignettes.

WAB, of course, has individual figure removal, but it's still easy enough to play with larger multi-figure trays or bases and a bit of roster keeping.

I really don't need any other rules systems, and that comes from having played many others.

These are my choices, and I wish you well in your search for what best suits you. In the end, that's what it comes down to. It's our armies, our tables, and our time. We get to choose what we like to play.

…just don't pick the big gold one. ;-)

Aren't we all!

My favourites:
Sword and Spear (definitely ignore Ghecko's moan)
L'Art de la Guerre
Dux Bellorum
Saga

Of course, as the Holy Grail has never been found, good chance you won't find your ideal, but all of the above give good fun games, although not sure about playing Saga solo. There is the alternative of writing uour own, of course.

I'd ignore Ghecko's comments on Sword and Spear. He seems to have a grudge against the rules.

Sword and Spear (definitely ignore Ghecko's moan)

Correct – because after 40 years of gaming, and many sets of rules played, I came to the conclusion that they are a poor set of rules… and for all of the reasons outlined in my previous post.

By all means try them and waste some valuable gaming time, but don't say I didn't warn you.

I enjoy both

Dux Bellorum
Basic Impetus

A bit in left field, but my search for the holy grail led me to convert GMTs Simple GBoH board game to miniatures. I'd played dozens of the more than 60 battles available in the various board game modules and think the board game runs fast and i find the rules easy, no doubt one of my favorite all time board game systems. Lots of unit differentiation. Conversion to miniatures takes next to nothing'. I'm using it as my model for my Raphia project but my basing let's me do most other new sets. If you want things slightly more crunchy then using the non-"Simple" version still gives a not too difficult game. Well playtested system.

Correct – because after 40 years of gaming, and many sets of rules played, I came to the conclusion that they are a poor set of rules… and for all of the reasons outlined in my previous post.

Ghecko, you made some interesting comments about the rules but I also thought others, including the author, raised some valid counterpoints. It is one thing to say that S&S isn't your cup of tea, another to say the rules are a poor set in the absolute. I love Impetus, others don't, fair enough. Same with S&S.

Ghecko – you might not like sword and spear but many others do – as I said to your comments before it would be a shame if someone didn't try sword and spear just because you don't like it – have you posted yet what rules you do like?

Well, you can also say why try a set of rules just because someone said to, especially if they are the author? It could also be a shame if they waste their money and time on certain rules. Doesn't it work both ways?

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, they should not be blasted because they don't like a set of rules that someone else likes.

The rules I like are rarely recommended, but I like them. I recommend them, but I don't think anyone listens, and that is fine.

I would recommend Hail Caesar Rules. Hope it helps.

Take care

Andy

There's a big difference between saying "I've tried rules X and didn't like them" and saying "rules X are rubbish".
It's also helpful in the any case if you say *why* you didn't like them, or if you are recommending rules, why you like them.
One play may enjoy the chaos caused by random command rolls, another may hate it. Some players like the use of cards to regulate game play, pothers don't.
If someone just says a set of rules is good or bad without saying why, they can safely be ignored :-)

DukeWacoan is spot on in my opinion. Simple Great Battles of History ported over to miniatures is a wonderful rules set.

I have always thought Simple Great Battles of History (SGBoH) would be great for miniatures, but never attempted it. Just curious, do you use two stands to represent double hex units?

I am using 60mm frontages for single-hex units, 120mm frontage for double-hex units. So they will move around on the table on one movement stand/tray. My deep Egyptian Phalanx for Raphia are 120x180mm and look really nice. I've based my elephants 120mm wide with escorts on the base. This means I will have 1/2 the elephants for Raphia that are in the GBoH game, but I will still have 17 total, which is a bunch.

I recently wrote out a summary of all the rules needed to play Simple GBoH via miniatures, and surprisingly they are very short. With Raphia there is no terrain other than Clear, so movement and facing rules are about 2 lines. I've converted to "adjacent" to "within 1" for purposes of other rules.

I converted 1 hex = 2 inches (should really be more like 2 1/2).

I am going back and forth between the regular set of GBoH and Simple GBoH. Since I am going to play multiplayer, I am going to have to modify the command system for both. I like the pre-Shock TQ Checks of the regular game.

Complexity-wise, I think it is a snap. And having played dozens of scenarios over the years in the boardgame, I cannot see any reason a direct port over to miniatures will not work just fine. The games are fast, easy and balanced. Plus they have the rock, paper, scissors aspect of unit differentiation that I am looking for.

Again, my struggle at the moment is how to translate the command/unit activation system to a 4-8 player game, allowing each side to have multiple players active at the same time. Should not be too hard to do, and I already have a few ideas.

If someone just says a set of rules is good or bad without saying why, they can safely be ignored :-)

Pardon? I did post a detailed post on July 24th, 2106 as to what I thought was wrong with the Sword and Spear rules thus:

theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=427381

It generated 32 posts by 15 authors… and has apparently has been deleted by the editors for reasons unknown.

Why did you assume that comment was directed at you?

Probably because it was – either directly or indirectly. Regardless Dexter – others here have said similar anyway. I have played 15 games of Sword and Spear so far and stand by my analysis in the post that has conveniently vanished. If you want I can re-post it.

Forty five years of gaming dozens upon dozens of different rule sets gives one an insight into what rules play well and what rules don't play well. My humble opinion is that the Sword and Spear rules don't play well for all of the reasons given "in the post that has conveniently vanished".

It hasn't vanished – it's been moved to the rules forum.

Why so defensive?
The comment wasn't directed at you.
I'd already read your list of reasons – which are still all there on the rules forum.