Well its about six months since the release of Armati and for a non-WRG produced set I think there has been a lot of interest and support. I must first say that I am totally biased toward Armati. I playtested the rules for a year and got to know Arty and his concepts very well. As I have stated in other articles this was a great experience and it continues as he runs up the flag pole ideas for new optional rules and possible new lists with me. I think you will find that this set of rules rules provides you with a different game than DBM and WRG. I am not casting disparaging remarks towards those two systems, I'm just saying that Armati provides a different game that I enjoy more. Apart from mechanics that are very easy to master, I really like the feeling of tension that is present in each game. Tides ebb and flo if both players are pretty evenly matched and don't make any radical or really dumb mistakes (at times I think I've become a real expert at the commission of the latter!).

No set of rules is a pancea and Armati is no exception. There are some army lists that I think are very weak (i.e.: Britons) and there are some mechanics that appear very strange at first. But all in all the rules provide a great game. Arty has addressed the question of the limited movement capabilities of some units with two new optional rules. These rules allow units to perform a large wheeling move if no enemy are present to their front within 15" and allow heavy units to about face if now enemy are to its front within 6". These two rules, along with a surprise fire rule, are in an accompanying article. Arty also has a lengthy article in the latest COURIER explaining his premises and design ideas. This is well worth reading if you're interested in how and why he put the rules together the way they are.

My biggest worry and/or complaint about Armati is that they will be used strictly as written concerning the generation of games. This involves the rolling for terrain and using the strict deployment area rules. I would consider it a devolution if they were played in this format only. While I give full credit to the impact that WRG and Phil Barker has had on ancient/medieval gaming. But that system seems to have taken the initiative away from the gamer when generating a game. Scenarios with preset terrain and objectives, seen in other periods gamed, seem to be very absent in ancient/medieval games. I continue to promote the use of scenarios and will host a game at Historicon this year based on a scenario rather than rolling for terrain.

Interest and questions have been put forward regarding additonal lists. Right now there are plans to release additional lists but the timeline is a bit vague. I told Arty I would be working on some 30 Years War lists (one of my favorite periods) and English Civil War list requests have been coming in. Remember though that Arty put a lot of effort into getting the rules published over twoyears and they have been on the market for only six months. So he wants to see how things are going with the present configuration before making additions. I know I wouldn't want to see the inane proliferation of lists as witnessed in WRG. Things there got really out of hand .

For those people looking to get into the period or for those looking for a change I hardily recommend Armati. Good generalship is rewarded (even with the Britons!). Scenarios are easily accommodated without affecting mechanics. One of my favorite adaptations is the use of armies at 150%. I take 50% more of each type of unit, with 50% more divisional points and break points. Really spectacular looking games result.