"Rules with Square Grids" Topic

Hello,

I have been playing with the idea of running DBA/HOTT using a square grid system. This got me thinking of what other games/rules use a square grid systems as their basis.

(The first person that mentions Chess gets a virtual stare from me =) )

I think the new WWII game Rommel works on a grid. What are the others.

How do these type of games handle diagonal range/movement, or do they ignore it completely.

Just looking for ideas.

Thanks

Poor Bloody Infantry (PBI) by Two Fat Lardies -- WW2 company sized actions.

You're allowed a maximum of one diagonal jump when moving or measuring range -- note that the squares are pretty big, about 8", and serve to sort of localize what forces are where on the map. Terrain is also somewhat abstracted, with squares being open, partially closed, or closed, to indicate how much cover, movement hindrance, and command/control issues they cause.

To The Strongest uses a square grid. And, they are great.

They handle movement by order of difficulty – so moving diagonally is more difficult than straight forwards. The rules are for ancients to late medieval so range isn't an issue for most stuff as ranges are only a square or two anyway.

Also see Phil Sabin's "Lost Battles" rules for Ancients. I don't remember how he handles diagonals (read, not played these).

Bob Cordery uses orthagonal measurement for movement and weapon ranges when using square grids. See his Wargaming Miscellany blog and his books, The Portable Wargame and Developing The Portable Wargame.

"Poor Bloody Infantry (PBI) by Two Fat Lardies -- WW2 company sized actions."

MHoxie, PBI are by Peter Pig, not TooFatLardies. None of the TFL games use a square grid.

See the new printing of Joseph Morschauser's "How to Play Wargames in Miniature." There are several articles on use of a gridded board not in the original edition.

I used to do all my games on a square grid. I did this for simplicity for development.

The diagonal difficulty vanishes when you just lump it and say a square is a square. That is you stop trying to think in inches and just think in squares. A target six squares away on the diagonal is the same as six squares on the orthogonal.

No problem at all.

Worked great for years. I only went to hexes because I wanted to use the hexes as terrain bases.

Yes, many (most? all?) of Peter Pig's are grid-based. I am only familiar with PBI and Regiment of Foote (ECW).

Games have long been done with square or hex grids. Lou Zocchi in his 1970s battle of Britain game used a brick pattern which won him an award. However all designers back then were rushing to the hex system.
Squares were common in naval games since the represented a section of water. The Ship of the Line miniature rules used this system. When they were redone by battleline, they went to a hex grid and became Wooden Ships and Iron Men.
Currently Heroes of Normandie skirmish system uses a square grid. No big issue depending on whether movement and shooting mechanics are based on area (the square) or linear (edges).

Not all of Peter Pig rules use squares. As mentioned PBI and RoF do. (The old RoF did not).

Square Bashing (!) a WWI set obviously uses squares, as do Conquerors and Kings (ancients), Longships- Wrath of the Vikings (Dark Ages), Bayonet and Ideology (SCW) and and The Men of Company B (Vietnam).

I find squares really simplify games by not requiring lots of awkward rules for flanking, make terrain look a lot better, obviate the need for rebasing, remove such oddities of being a centimetre out of range, speed play up by not requiring measuring and, for higher level games like Rommel or Square Bashing "feel" like a grand tactical game, in that you are not concerned with such lower level issues like unit tactical positioning.

As mentioned, PP handle squares, mostly, by only allowing to count one diagonal for ranges or moving. Also, in some systems, only orthogonal edges count for opportunity fire. Diagonals sometimes are more difficult to fire into, and sometimes LOS is blocked if both diagonal squares are "closed" terrain.

I've been playing Peter Pig rules for a long time, and have absolutely no qualms about playing with squares at all. (The other rules "engine" that drives most of his other sets of rules, like Washington's Army or Civil War Battles, are more conventional, but also are great for different reasons, IMHO).

I swear that someone converted DBA to a square system years ago. No idea who, or where it went!

Oh, and Bloodbowl. That's played on a grid, but I guess one could argue endlessly about tabletop miniatures games vs board games, and end up with – who cares? It's a game.

By the way, my google-fu came up with this DBA square variant. It wasn't the one I was thinking of, but you may wish to take a look.

link

Bob Wall's diceless tounament gridded game.

I'm helping my friend develop a sword and shield game using squares. It costs 2 action points to move straight, 3 to move diagonally.

Napoleonic Quick March was a Napoleonic rule set using squares. So too is "Cold Steel and Cannister."

There are loads of grid based rules, some not mentioned so far are Square Bashing and Battles of Empire (both have period variants too), Kreig Ohne Hass and I'm rather partial to Marston Less. There are also grid based variants of commercial rules eg V&B.

For linear periods, I would suggest ignoring diagonal movement. DBA works very well on a grid, avoids All that tedious micro measuring.

D'oh! Apologies to Peter Pig and the TFL. Both good companies.

With squares one can count diagonals as costing 2. In my Boer war games I sometimes deny less flexible British regulars the ability to move or shoot diagonally.

Another vote for Peter Pig and squares. Their new Spanish Civil War rules are also square based on a 5'x3' table.

Interestingly their old ACW rules were square based on the original Square Bashing using 12" squares. New Square Bashing (and all subsequent rules) are 6" squares. Regiment of Foote for ECW is also now on squares.

The major criticism for squares is the look of the game. I'd challenge that as games can look rather splendid

I quite agree. But my, that's an attention-getting tablecloth!!!

I was suspicious of games using square grids. Then I game Raphia using To the Strongest, in Salute 2017. It was an eye-opener.

GOBS offers the option of squares, which is actually my favored approach to the game (and I'm the designer). But of course, it's a spaceship combat game, so terrain, etc., aren't really an issue.

My home brew "beer & pretzels" AWI game uses an offset grid pattern (a "brick" pattern), but the square represent large areas or "zones" which can contain multiple forces of both sides and multiple terrain elements. Movement is highly abstracted; as a movement action, a unit may move into a square OR into/out of a terrain element on the unit's current square. Position in a square is either up to the moving player, or, if enemy forces are in the square, position/formation is pretty much dictated by the needs of combat. Range is in squares. Plays very quickly, and there's no need for measuring or disputes over a millimeter of difference; a unit is either in the square or it's not. I've written a similar approach for Warmaster, using a standard square grid of broad zones to replace measured movement, but really haven't tested it at all.

I use offset grids which is essentially a "flattening" of hexes so it handles diagonal movement easily.

who makes a wargames mat with squares?

Dealer that was what Zocchi called the brick system.

For Asterix

link

I would also check Coresec.

Louie N, thanks! I'm off the Big Red Bat's site with an order right now. Thanks again.

link

Checkers?

Chess?

;>]

B

Some at runtus.org

Fred Janes Naval Game was played with miniature ships carved from cork placed on a grided sea scape.