There was a Iittle relevant information on the first page but after that, except for a slight lapse on the second page, it was unrelieved story -- and a violent one at that -- which will have probably confused those who know the Western Gunfight Rules but have not yet seen our Colonial Skirmish Rules, and mystified those few individuals who haven't seen the Gunfight Rules or even heard of Individual Wargaming.
Possibly I should, therefore, start at the beginning. It's all Steve Curtis' fault -- really! He is (and he admits it) a "Western nut" and his enthusiasm and persistence draws unsuspecting individuals, like Mike Blake and myself, under his evil influence. Originally, he wanted to do the OK Corral with 54mm cowboys and Britain's buildings no more, no less. We would write rules for that game alone and that would be it. Since then we've published three sets of rules, both Mike and I have come near to losing our wives, and we' ve started (or rather helped to precipitate) a move towards Individual Wargaming.
Individual wargames are games fought between two or possibly three sides with the number of players regulated only by the number of figures on the table. As each figure on the table represents one man and, in battle terminology, is effectively a "unit", one player operating one "unit", with about six "units" on each side, is a definite possibility, which we have tried with hilarious, yet effective and realistic, results. But normally one or two players command each side which can consist of anything from one to about twenty-five figures (although we have successfully used seventy figures on one side).
The games played represent close range engagements, clashes between scouts and natives, heroic last stands, shoot-outs, section-level combats - the possibilities are as endless as the players' imaginations. They take place over a very short period of time - unrealistically short periods of time - but provide a good and exciting game.
The most important aspect of the game is that one figure on the table represents one man and that each man is given individual characteristics. In the Western Gunfight Rules a man's abilities in fighting and firing shoulder arms and handguns are represented. In the Colonial Skirmish Rules it is his meleeing and firing abilities that are represented. Each man is also classified as either a Professional /Veteran, an Average, or a Novice. This rating represents his experience. In the Gunfight Rules it determines his speed at drawing a gun and reloading; in the Colonial Rules it determines the speed of his reactions to certain circumstances.
To emphasise the level of individuality achieved, each man is usually given a name, Capt. Jones, Pte Peter Smith, but ignorance of languages usually leads to native forces, eg. Zulus, being given, rather unceremoniously, different numbers, to aid identification.
In essence, although we were not aware of this at the outset, the rules used to play these games, are a time and motion study of what a highly athletic man can do when the adrenal in is flowing! All movements and actions possible to man had to be covered and of necessity the time scale had to be considered in terms of seconds.
At first we had a time scale of one game move representing two and a half seconds, the time a single action revolver could fire three snap shots. This explains why that two and a half seconds was split into three phases in the Gunfight Rules. Initially we anticipated that a figure would carry out only one move rate in the game move, but, as we began to realise that it was a time and motion study with actions flowing from game move to game move, this changed and the phase became all important. Thus the fixed three phase game move began to prove clumsy and led to situations which sometimes stretched the rules beyond breaking point. Hence in the Colonial Rules we have moved to a one phase game move (a phase represents a very short period of time, just over a second) and the player has to indicate what each man is doing that game move. This has to be carefully recorded if the game is to work. To some this may sound clumsy and time consuming, particularly to Ancient wargamers who have never fought anything but Research Group rules, but it is in fact, standard practice in almost any wargame and, with the one phase game move, these instructions are rarely more than walk/double/ walk & draw gun/aim/fire, etc.
The introduction of a percentage system in the Colonial Rules also necessitated a one phase game move. As anyone who has bought or seen the first and second editions of the Western Gunfight Rules will know, we have constantly been searching for a way to achieve casualties as simply as possible. The Gunfight system was based on a graph scale of Firing Factor v Target Factor, modified by a dice throw. The system works but it is a Iittle bit too predictable and is time wasting as it involves working through shopping I ists of factors to gain the final result.
Percentage/Decimal Dice eliminate this. There is a basic percentage chance of hitting certain types of target and a man's actual chance of hitting is determined by his ability and the type of firing he is using - aimed or snap firing. Once he has his actual chance, the player has only to throw the dice to see if his man misses, or hitsand if so where. The chance is a calculated one and the 20sided dice give no bias to any numbers. So it is a real chance throw. Moreover, it is a lot more simple and, from a purely practical point of view, the possibility of throwing 1 to 100 has enabled us to enlarge the number of wounds and introduce different severities of wound.
For those who have not seen an individual game, I should possibly explain. Just as a unit in a battle game suffers casualties and men or figures are removed, so our "units" (one man) suffer casualties but they incur wounds which will prejudice their firing and fighting ability and possibly put them out of the game for a few phases at least. As such, casualties are a lot more important and so the greater the variety of results, the better. Thus the wounds can range from dead to a slight head wound.
One thing the rules don't lay as much emphasis on as other battle rules is morale. The surrender rules in the Colonial Rules do try to impose some morale effect but on the whole it is ignored. There are no tests to see if men charge or whether they rout. This is because the game time is so short, rarely more than one minute, that few individuals get time to react in the morale sense. If men were going to run away they would probably have done it before the game! In practice, we have found that the players themselves inflict morale on their figures. Their own personalities are reflected in the way they use their men and the game is so personalised that this comes out through the figures on the table. For example, a British player, who has a novice private, with a low melee ability but average firing ability, as the sole survivor on a section of wall which is being attacked by Zulus, will, unless the situation is really desperate, desert the wall and fall back on a main redoubt which needs as many men as possible to defend it.
As the British are invariably better at shooting Zulus (or any tribesmen) than actually fighting them, the intelligent British player spends his time avoiding melee at all costs and withdrawing to get yet another shot in. As it takes three phases to reload and Zulus cover thirteen and a half yards in that time (one inch represents one yard) one can appreciate the tension of any withdrawal.
A further reason for not imposing morale tests is the difficulty of assessing how an individual will react to the myriad situations which can occur in an individual game. In a draft set of rules we did try to impose morale but the rules for this alone ran to eight pages and imposed ridiculous reactions at the wrong times. In the interests of playability we decided to drop them and the games are certainly much better without them.
The major problem, in making rules of this type, is in maintaining playability whilst trying to attain a high level of realism. Wargames are just that and, when the game comes to a point where it is so difficult and unenjoyable that it cannot be played satisfactorily, then it ceases to be a game. Thus, while we tried to make the rules as realistic as possible, we were constantly playing games to check the playability aspect. We found, for example, that there was, in colonial games, a fine balance between the Europeans' rate of fire (which depends on the speed of reloading) and their survival. So, reloading rates were reduced to the fastest possible time in the interests of the game.
Similarly, delay would, in reality, have occurred but we make no provisions for imposing delay on the players. Delay is possible in games if both players decide to be cautious -- in one of the Convention finals I umpired there was more delay than play -- but most players rush their men around I ike supermen and get shot for their pains. Our only attempt to build in delay in the Colonial Rules is in the reaction to circumstances and this makes novices a real liability (as you' ll be aware if you re-read the battle report).
The Colonial Rules and the Western Gunfight Rules, both use an order system similar to that used by the Research Group, but they also contain an opportunity for direct verbal orders, instructions, or exchange. In such a personal ised game speech cannot be ignored and the battle report shows how important a role it played in that game. Realistically, we should have estimated how many syllables could be spoken in a second but its easier to say three words. Similarly we don't force native troops, eg. Zulus, Chinese, Apaches or Afghans, to use their native tongue in verbal exchanges! However, in a recent Napoleonic skirmish between British and French, we were able to transmit to the British player the orders being shouted by a French sergeant, in French!
Individual fighting, particularly in the final stages of a conflict, is much the same in any period. The weapons may change but the men are the same. Ted Herbert once fought a Colonial 20mm battle (reported in the Newsletter) with the Research Group Ancient Rules on the basis that natives were essentially barbarians and Europeans were regular. In reverse the Colonial Skirmish Rules, covering the period 1850-1900, include a large range of melee and firing weapons, from club to fixed bayonet, sword and lance, or bow and spear to matchlock, musket and breech loading, bolt action rifles. With them we have fought, besides many colonial conflicts, an American War of Independence skirmish (French and Indians v Rogers Rangers); a Western; and a Napoleonic skirmish.
The latter used the 54mm "Action Pack" figures (which paint up nicely) but could equally well have been fought with ordinary 25mm troops or, ideally, the new Minifig 30mm Napoleonic troops. In that game, a force of eleven Imperial Guardsmen and a I ine gun and crew assaulted a ruin (the excellent Airfix "Strongpoint" suitably converted) held by six valiant Coldstream Guardsmen. With men taking eighteen phases to load it was a case (as it was historically) of moving up, firing, and then, in with the bayonet. The final melee was a bloody affair but the French were triumphant.
It should not be impossible to do Ancient, Medieval and Modern skirmishes with only slight modifications to the rules and this is what we are working on at the moment. Then it will be possible to do a Pictish attack on a Milefort or a jungle encounter between Japanese and Australians. Moreover, as Britains are producing 54mm Turks (14th-15th century) the mind runs riot. We believe that with the Colonial Skirmish Rules, we have found a very simple system (despite initial appearances it is ridiculously simple) and we hope to use it as our basis for other rules.
A final point - why fight skirmishes? The immediate reaction is - why not? They are as much a wargame as any other, including manoeuvring, firing and fighting, but on a more personal scale. The games can be very quick and can be played by any number of players. They need minimum capital outlay since twenty figures a side is a big game! Even the most reluctant painter should be able to produce a force and he can fight in either 20, 25, 30 or 54mm scale. Two boxes of Airfix figures, say Arabs and Foreign Legion, provide more than enough figures for a game (one box of Foreign Legion does, as a matter of fact, provide three "armies" and there' s still a surplus).
For the individual who likes to dabble at conversion but abhores the prospect of doing the same conversion twenty-four times, this type of game is perfect, as ideally, each man should be different. Finally, for those who have never tried it, it makes a nice change, it' s different and, above all, enjoyable.
Back to Table of Contents -- Wargamer's Newsletter # 133
To Wargamer's Newsletter List of Issues
To MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1973 by Donald Featherstone.
This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com