This is true confessions time for your new ancient editor. In spite of the thousands of painted figures on my shelves (in boxes actually) and the hundreds more unpainted figures lying around, I have not played an ancient game in more months than I care to remember. And it is not just me, I might add. Just a few years ago we had an active group of ancient wargamers here in Lincoln, Nebraska. As many as 15 or 16 players were participating in several campaigns, and there were still others on the fringes who played in occasional games. This is not to mention the contingentof Omaha, Nebraska, garners (led by none otherthan Ken Bunger) who intervened from time to time. Tournament play was neverreallyvery popular in this area, although there were always participants in the local game convention tournaments. Now there are very few ancient games being played, if any. My friends and I have been playing mostly American Civil War and Napoleonics with home grown rules during the ensuing months. Why, you might ask? The answerwas and is simple. We are having fun in these periods and with these rules. On the contrary, we were no longer having fun with ancients. Despite attempted campaigns, the other garners and myself had simply lost interest. The games were perhaps becoming too predictable, too uneventful, too boring, and most importantly no fun any more. We had been using WRG Sixth Edition (and before that the fourth and fifth editions) up to this point. We, and myself especially, were never really satisfied with these rules, but we never found anything that we liked better. A few of us tried promising sets such as the "Hoplite and Hellenistic Warfare" rules, "Marathon to Manzikert", and the "Newbury Fast Play Rules", either solo or in small groups. While full of great ideas, these were never quite satisfying either and not really worth the effort to master them. WRG Seventh Edition was likewise a big flop in this area (at least it generated no interest among my friends). In short, ancient wargaming here in the midlands seems to be stagnated. The players are in a malaise, although interest in the period still remains, but the fun of gaming has been lost. The real problem seems to be the lack of an enjoyable and acceptable set of rules. I am hopingto be able to shake a few of us loose with some homemade, and hopefully, fun ancient rules, and then to reinstate a campaign for added interest. I have sensed a similar demise in interest in historical ancient wargaming across the country. True, the competitive element is very active, a group in Denver is conducting campaigns, and Terry Gore (SAGA) seems to generate interest, but consider these other facts. The number of articles in wargaming magazines on ancient topics has declined, and more importantly, the number of new figure releases has been small compared to the renaissance of a few years ago, the Thistle and Rose and Chariot Miniatures excepted. I also detect similar sentiments from conversations with players from other parts of the country, and from other countries. Perhaps it is not fair, but WRG rules seem to catch a lot of the blame for this lack of interest. It would seem, primarily from letters in various magazines, that some interest has been revived with WRG Seventh Rules, although this hardly appears to be universal despite Phil Barker's assurances to the contrary. For example, here are a few representative sentiments expressed in recent VOLLEY FIRE contributions: 1. "I emphatically endorse Jim McDaniel's letter on WRG. There are other ancient rules out there; WRG is most certainly not the last word on the subject." 2. "I agree with Jim McDaniel. I don't play ancients and after 15 years of reading skirmishes with Phil Barker I don't care ever to play ancients with that system [WRG], and possibly any other." 3. "Personally I do not need to see another letter from Phil Barker telling ancient players how he is a better historian than them or how his rules (in their seventh version mind you) are the best in the hobby." 4. "I agree with Jim McDaniel in "Dispatches" - there is an obsession with WRG Seventh. I am a solo wargamer who has found these rules too difficult to deal with. I'm not prejudiced against WRG - their 1685-1845 [rules] are very good for solo horse and musket." 5. "Stretching 'On to Richmond' to include ancients is a bit much -19th Century combat would seem to be vastly different from first Century - I, too, find WRG somewhat hard sledding - our group has found 'Newbury's Fast Play Ancients' to be a good set - distinctly 'ancient' flavor, yet manageable mechanics." 6. "Glad to see that there were not any more 'How to manipulate WRG 50th edition ancient rules" type articles. Let's keep those kind of articles in the SLINGSHOT where they belong. (P.S. Don't take the above comments to mean I don't like historical ancients articles.)" Likewise, I also enclose some paragraphs from a recent letter to THE COURIER from Fred Ellsesser in Seattle, Washington: "Just the same, I fully sympathize with your desire to find a quick and simple set of ancient rules. As a side issue, what are 'ancients'? What year do we cut them off? WRG includes handguns in the same rules setforuse in a game, pitting Assyrians against Hittites. Should we not perhaps be dividing up 'ancients' in subdivisions much as we do with the 18th and 19th centuries?" I played "Chainmail" and I have a couple of other rule sets that I have not used (e.g., "Coeur de Lion"). The set we've played the most is Newbury's FAST PLAY ANCIENTS. Although not particularly fast, they are at least comprehensible. They require that orders be written for units (game orders); they limit the immediate influence of the player and morale - the unit's reaction to the overall tactical situation in its area - plays an important part. What still concerns me is the attitude that seems prevalent in America: i.e., WRG is the only rule set. Phil Barker's introduction to the Seventh Edition imparted this attitude very well; I found the intro slightly offensive, though I think I like the rules. In England, they don't seem to have the WRG fixation. Even the Society of Ancients is not solely devoted to WRG play. Does anyone out there play anything besides WRG? Are there any ancients rules written here? (I remember BRONZE, IRON AND BLOOD by Jim Birdseye. He had some good ideas, especially about basing.) Even "Chainmail" was fun half-way through a six pack. I wonder if anyone can come up with a simple set of rules that will still reflect those unique aspects of ancient combat. The visual appeal of ancient armies is certainly attractive to new players; the amount of work involved in gaming them is not. Perhaps THE COURIER can take a leading role in exploring these questions and coming up with "Dick Bryant's Fast Play Ancients". Neither these comments nor this article is intended to be an indictment of WRG rules or Mr. Barker. They are, however, symptomatic of an image and interest problem with ancient wargaming that extends from an apparent one dimensional and narrow focus that at least appears to dominate many of those wargaming this period of history. That focus is an abstract fixation upon one particular system and set of rules often to the exclusion of any real historical perspective. This I suspect is what turns many historical gamers away from this period. If that is true, I would suggest to them that they not judge ancient wargaming so hastily. Ancient wargaming can be and is much broader in scope. Maybe I, and these others, are wrong about the current status of ancient wargaming in the United States. If so, please let me know. Maybe this is only a local phenomenon, even though my indications are that it is much wider spread. How healthy is ancient wargaming here in the U.S.? What can be done to improve its overall image, and to promote a resurgence of interest in wargaming in this period of history? Please write me directly and let me know your thoughts. I will share them through THE COURIER. Since writing this, my friends and I have played a few games with our homemade rules. Not only is our interest in the period renewed but we had fun and the results looked and felt good. We are now planning a campaign, but more on this later. Back to Table of Contents -- Courier Vol. VIII No. 5 To Courier List of Issues To MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1989 by The Courier Publishing Company. This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles covering military history and related topics are available at http://www.magweb.com