Arthur Harman rules - OK?

I recently picked up a copy of the current issue ( no. 457 ) of 'Miniature Wargames' magazine, and was pleased to see an article by that most  'old reliable' of authors, Arthur Harman. 

don't judge a mag by..

 

Entitled 'Fighting Toy Soldier Battles: For Shame - Simple Horse and Musket Engagements',    I'm not sure where the 'For Shame' bit has come from - an editor's gag ?   [ no, it was just too clever for me - see comments below, where  Martin S has enlightened me! ]  It describes "a simple toy soldier battlegame, that you may be able to persuade your families to play to relieve the tedium of being 'confined to barracks' during the Coronavirus crisis, while you are unable to visit your club or regular opponents".  It is  presented as a very simple child-friendly game, but  having read through it, I think there is slightly more than that going on 'under the bonnet'  ( or shako? ) , so to speak.

The game uses a square gridded battlefield ,  'the sides of the squares should be equal to the frontage of a battalion/ musketry range'  - a nice feature,  as you can fit your grid to whatever size of unit you fancy,  or fit your units to your grid (  I think my units will fit a four-inch grid quite nicely ).  The units have two important attributes :  Troop Quality  (basically Elite, Regular or Raw ) and Combat Value,  which is a sort of  combination of strength, quality and morale. When the CV is reduced to zero, the unit has to start to retire from the battle - another neat touch, perhaps, as they will not simply be swept off the table, but slowly retreat from the action (and may subsequently be forced into ignominious rout ) .  

don't try to read this - buy the mag !

 

In combat,  units roll a number of 'tactical dice'  based on their Troop Quality ( with possible modifiers adding or subtracting dice ). The dice are ordinary D6s ,  but they are treated rather like 'Commands and Colours' dice, with each number signifying a particular type of 'hit' such as officer casualty, artillery  or close combat.  Most interesting of these is the 'Falling Flag' hit   -  the number of those rolled  is compared to the 'Troop Quality' score of the target unit, with variable effects on morale. The dice also contribute to the effect of charges - the attacker rolls first, and the number of  'Sabres' and 'Flags' rolled has an effect on the steadiness of the defender, another clever idea. I also like the mechanism for cavalry vs. cavalry charges - if neither side breaks,  two units charging each other may pass through, turn around and  'have at it' again, which seems to capture quite an authentic detail in a nice simple way.

 

There's a simple Move/Fire/Close Combat turn sequence, 'first player' decided by dice, and there are rules for  Generals and ADCs, foot and horse artillery, and skirmishers. With an eye on involving children in the lockdown household, it's suggested that the general's portraits be drawn,  (an optional bonus combat dice for the best portrait..), and marked with any wounds incurred!  The whole thing occupies just  six pages of the magazine - really only four pages of text - but there are lots of interesting ideas in there. I hope I can  give them a try sometime soon -  subject perhaps to some small tweaks for the Seven Years War - and I think they may well be both fun and maybe rather intriguing.

The article is illustrated with pictures by editor John Treadaway, which are nice,  but clearly not of Arthur's  actual game - they are of a Vienna 1683 game from the Bovingdon show in 2018 - I guess in lockdown, John has to raid his archives.  In fact Arthur suggests you could use the figures from  a 'Risk' set, if you are keeping it simple and don't already have 'horse and musket' armies ( Maudlin Jack Tar, I'm looking at you.. ).  His pieces are always worth a look, and I do like his 'keep it simple' ethos - I remember an article in 'MW' a few years ago in which he encouraged us to field Napoleonic armies in as  'basic' a paint job as possible, shall we say - posh painters went a bit ballistic, but I was with him all the way.     And Arthur has of course been doing this a long time - the oldest article I have by him is from Issue 9 of Miniature Wargames, published around Xmas 1983. That was a 'Bird's Eye View of the Wars of the 19th Century' - in which players emulate the crew of an observation balloon over the battlefield, while the actual commanders sit well back from the table,  and rely on written messages from the aeronauts. Splendid, if eccentric stuff !  Here it is : notice how magazine styles have changed.. (and Duncan MacFarlane was noted for lavish illustration!), and also something of a classic article by Mr Callan on the next page..

Those were the days

 

Which brings us to the subject of the current incarnation of 'MW'  - and actually, I think this issue isn't bad at all.  It felt a bit thin, on picking it up, and the Fantasy-theme cover picture is not my cup of tea, but there's a decent selection of articles. Conrad Kinch is still in there, with an interesting interview with 'Dave Walker of MS Paints', who is painting and gaming despite Multiple Sclerosis and is clearly a top man ( and we think we are suffering in  a little lockdown? )  and example to us all.  Dave Tuck has a Battle of the Boyne scenario which gives a nod to Grant and Asquith's 'Scenarios for all Ages' ,   suggests simple ammunition supply and weather rules and admits to using positvely old-school large units and figure removal for casualties.   Jon Sutherland's 'Command Decision'  features Narbonne, 436AD , Romans vs Visigoths and refreshingly does not prescribe a particular rule set , and there are lots of book reviews - ooh, Chris Duffy 'Instrument of War', very temptmg... ( and reviewed by Arthur Harman, as it goes!) .  A couple of large fantasy/sci-fi articles I'm afraid I skipped, but I found that from 52 pages of editorial , there were 37 that I will most likely read. They seem to have ditched the 'Darker Skies' middle-pages insert that appeared after Henry Hyde departed, so we are back to a more straightforward fomat, I think, and that's all to the good.   BUT the price - was £5.99.  Six quid for 52  pages of reading, hmm...     

It's intersting to compare with the other leading magazines - my most recent copy of 'Wargames Illustrated' ( issue 399 ) was £5.25 for 106 pages.  ( 19 of which were advertising ), and Wargames Soldiers and Strategy' ( no 113 ) was £4.95 for 82 pages ( 17 advertising ).    By my calculation that's 11.5p per page of editorial in 'MW',  7.6p per page in 'WSS' , and 6.0p per page in 'WI'.  Quite a difference, and I wonder if  a large part of the reason for that is the larger amount of advertising ( and therefore income ) in the other  two mags,  which perhaps allows them to keep both the price down and the number of pages up.  But you pays yer money and takes your choice, and on this occasion I've bought a set of Horse and Musket rules from a veteran and interesting  'game designer' (sorry, Arthur!) for £6 - if they work out well,  that's not too bad a price?

Now I need to find  myself a simple square-grid game mat or board, and give these rules a go! In the meantime, keep safe, and well, everyone.