<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: The Great Big Modern Wargaming Rules Comparison	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/</link>
	<description>Adventures in Wargaming</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2021 02:00:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Michael Charge		</title>
		<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1361</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Charge]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Apr 2017 23:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/?p=4952#comment-1361</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1360&quot;&gt;Nick A&lt;/a&gt;.

Glad you liked the article!

So I only play in 28mm and all of them great in it. Also in most case, they scale pretty well (I know that Skimish Sangin has been played in 15mm and works very well) 

I may look at adding that information but I know Force on Force plays very well in 15mm and there are details for scaling in the box. The Ambush Alley guys are very good at making their rulesets scale agnostic]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1360">Nick A</a>.</p>
<p>Glad you liked the article!</p>
<p>So I only play in 28mm and all of them great in it. Also in most case, they scale pretty well (I know that Skimish Sangin has been played in 15mm and works very well) </p>
<p>I may look at adding that information but I know Force on Force plays very well in 15mm and there are details for scaling in the box. The Ambush Alley guys are very good at making their rulesets scale agnostic</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Nick A		</title>
		<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1360</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nick A]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Apr 2017 21:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/?p=4952#comment-1360</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Great article. Would also be good to know which scale is best for the rules? Danger close is probably 28mm, but would Force on Force work in 15mm?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article. Would also be good to know which scale is best for the rules? Danger close is probably 28mm, but would Force on Force work in 15mm?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Michael Charge		</title>
		<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1359</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Charge]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2017 10:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/?p=4952#comment-1359</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1358&quot;&gt;David Maxwell&lt;/a&gt;.

I haven&#039;t done much of this stuff as I normally focus down on individual battles or more narrative campaigns. I think that the upcoming ruleset Fighting Season from Too Fat Lardies might have rules for a larger campaign with events in missions affecting the ongoing campaign.

It&#039;s something I&#039;d love to write for myself but it&#039;s a case of finding the time for all the research I&#039;d want to do.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1358">David Maxwell</a>.</p>
<p>I haven&#8217;t done much of this stuff as I normally focus down on individual battles or more narrative campaigns. I think that the upcoming ruleset Fighting Season from Too Fat Lardies might have rules for a larger campaign with events in missions affecting the ongoing campaign.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s something I&#8217;d love to write for myself but it&#8217;s a case of finding the time for all the research I&#8217;d want to do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: David Maxwell		</title>
		<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1358</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Maxwell]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2017 10:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/?p=4952#comment-1358</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Great articles but I have an outstanding question. I am keen to see how one or another set can be used in a strategic campaign. Not just a linked set of missions with a score or experience points to spend upgrading your men in a unit but a full on counter insurgency or conventional war campaign with propaganda, public opinion, media, supply, fatigue, attrition, etc. How would you link these rules or are there expansions coming in the future for this type of thing or maybe there is a counter based boardgame you would suggest to link these games in to?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great articles but I have an outstanding question. I am keen to see how one or another set can be used in a strategic campaign. Not just a linked set of missions with a score or experience points to spend upgrading your men in a unit but a full on counter insurgency or conventional war campaign with propaganda, public opinion, media, supply, fatigue, attrition, etc. How would you link these rules or are there expansions coming in the future for this type of thing or maybe there is a counter based boardgame you would suggest to link these games in to?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Napalm Death		</title>
		<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1357</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Napalm Death]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2016 08:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/?p=4952#comment-1357</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Very nice article, thanks. I love force &#038; force but some other games looks quite interesting.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very nice article, thanks. I love force &amp; force but some other games looks quite interesting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Stephen Luscombe		</title>
		<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1356</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stephen Luscombe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2016 22:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/?p=4952#comment-1356</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1353&quot;&gt;Michael Charge&lt;/a&gt;.

If you do get a chance to use them these are some mods I add to streamline and make them more interactive. They won&#039;t make much sense without the main rules though :-) 

The key mechanic is that you can choose to roll 1, 2 or 3 d6 per figure per turn to try and activate them. It depends on their quality level modified by commanders nearby. If they fail 2 dice in a turn then your turn ends and play passes to the opponent. It is actually a fun system  and surprisingly interactive and free - flowing: Feels like a real firefight with mini bursts of activity in certain sectors and initiative being all important.

 Flying Lead Mods

1.	Advanced interruptions

a.	If a model fails a quality die roll then the opponent can roll that failing die to try and activate one of his own figures.

i.	Activation transfer is like for like – eg trooper to trooper or CO to CO

ii.	Opponent’s action is before the ‘active’ player’s actions.

iii.	Can only activate the same figure once during an opponent’s turn (i.e. you can’t keep activating the same figure again and again).

2.	Range bands

a.	No effect in first range band then -1 to hit for each successive range away. Eg 4x range = -3 to hit, 6x range = -5 to hit

3.	Cover

a.	Soft cover = -1

b.	Hard cover = -2

c.	Fortified cover = -3

d.	Hidden/obscured  = -3

i.	Can begin game hidden/obscured 

ii.	Obscured if stationary in dense terrain or moving v.slowly (1 single base per action of movement)

4.	Grenades 

a.	1 action to prime, 1 action to throw, range up to 3 medium sticks

b.	Effect – short stick diameter only

c.	-1 to Quality if target out of line of sight (eg over a wall from prone), -1 if throwing over 2 medium sticks distance (cumulative)

d.	+2 to combat effect if thrown into enclosed space

e.	Quality roll

i.	3 successes – on target – Combat 3 attack

ii.	2 successes – on target – Combat 2 attack

iii.	1 success – misses – short stick moved by defender Combat 1 attack

iv.	0 successes – misses – medium stick moved by defender Combat 1 attack

f.	Roll of 1 on first combat damage dice roll = run out of grenades (always roll even if template empty to see if grenades run out)

5.	Claymore

a.	3+ Quality Check

i.	3 successes – Goes off – Combat 3 attack – Medium stick diameter

ii.	2 successes – Goes off – Combat 3 attack – Short stick diameter

iii.	1 success – Goes off – Combat 1 attack – Short stick diameter

iv.	0 successes – Misfires – No Effect

b.	Soldiers can declare search for Claymore – takes 2 actions and requires 2 or 3 quality check successes – takes one more action to deactivate.

6.	Mortars

a.	Range 2 – 6 long bands – Treat as grenade for effect

7.	Artillery

a.	Artillery can be requested by radio – requires two actions to attempt – requires 3 quality successes. Place aiming point and check for accuracy. Anybody in target zone must be prone at end of attack regardless of result.

b.	3+ Quality Check

i.	3 successes – On Target - Combat 4 attack – Large stick diameter

ii.	2 successes – On Target – Combat 3 attack – Large stick diameter

iii.	1 success – Off Target – Combat 2 attack – Medium stick diameter – opponent moves medium distance in any direction

iv.	0 successes – Off Target – Combat 1 attack – Medium stick diameter – opponent moves long distance in any direction

8.	Direct HE Firing at Buildings

a.	Roll to hit then roll to damage – Base damage is cumulative – eg if shoot at same spot strength reduced by one each turn it is hit.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1353">Michael Charge</a>.</p>
<p>If you do get a chance to use them these are some mods I add to streamline and make them more interactive. They won&#8217;t make much sense without the main rules though :-) </p>
<p>The key mechanic is that you can choose to roll 1, 2 or 3 d6 per figure per turn to try and activate them. It depends on their quality level modified by commanders nearby. If they fail 2 dice in a turn then your turn ends and play passes to the opponent. It is actually a fun system  and surprisingly interactive and free &#8211; flowing: Feels like a real firefight with mini bursts of activity in certain sectors and initiative being all important.</p>
<p> Flying Lead Mods</p>
<p>1.	Advanced interruptions</p>
<p>a.	If a model fails a quality die roll then the opponent can roll that failing die to try and activate one of his own figures.</p>
<p>i.	Activation transfer is like for like – eg trooper to trooper or CO to CO</p>
<p>ii.	Opponent’s action is before the ‘active’ player’s actions.</p>
<p>iii.	Can only activate the same figure once during an opponent’s turn (i.e. you can’t keep activating the same figure again and again).</p>
<p>2.	Range bands</p>
<p>a.	No effect in first range band then -1 to hit for each successive range away. Eg 4x range = -3 to hit, 6x range = -5 to hit</p>
<p>3.	Cover</p>
<p>a.	Soft cover = -1</p>
<p>b.	Hard cover = -2</p>
<p>c.	Fortified cover = -3</p>
<p>d.	Hidden/obscured  = -3</p>
<p>i.	Can begin game hidden/obscured </p>
<p>ii.	Obscured if stationary in dense terrain or moving v.slowly (1 single base per action of movement)</p>
<p>4.	Grenades </p>
<p>a.	1 action to prime, 1 action to throw, range up to 3 medium sticks</p>
<p>b.	Effect – short stick diameter only</p>
<p>c.	-1 to Quality if target out of line of sight (eg over a wall from prone), -1 if throwing over 2 medium sticks distance (cumulative)</p>
<p>d.	+2 to combat effect if thrown into enclosed space</p>
<p>e.	Quality roll</p>
<p>i.	3 successes – on target – Combat 3 attack</p>
<p>ii.	2 successes – on target – Combat 2 attack</p>
<p>iii.	1 success – misses – short stick moved by defender Combat 1 attack</p>
<p>iv.	0 successes – misses – medium stick moved by defender Combat 1 attack</p>
<p>f.	Roll of 1 on first combat damage dice roll = run out of grenades (always roll even if template empty to see if grenades run out)</p>
<p>5.	Claymore</p>
<p>a.	3+ Quality Check</p>
<p>i.	3 successes – Goes off – Combat 3 attack – Medium stick diameter</p>
<p>ii.	2 successes – Goes off – Combat 3 attack – Short stick diameter</p>
<p>iii.	1 success – Goes off – Combat 1 attack – Short stick diameter</p>
<p>iv.	0 successes – Misfires – No Effect</p>
<p>b.	Soldiers can declare search for Claymore – takes 2 actions and requires 2 or 3 quality check successes – takes one more action to deactivate.</p>
<p>6.	Mortars</p>
<p>a.	Range 2 – 6 long bands – Treat as grenade for effect</p>
<p>7.	Artillery</p>
<p>a.	Artillery can be requested by radio – requires two actions to attempt – requires 3 quality successes. Place aiming point and check for accuracy. Anybody in target zone must be prone at end of attack regardless of result.</p>
<p>b.	3+ Quality Check</p>
<p>i.	3 successes – On Target &#8211; Combat 4 attack – Large stick diameter</p>
<p>ii.	2 successes – On Target – Combat 3 attack – Large stick diameter</p>
<p>iii.	1 success – Off Target – Combat 2 attack – Medium stick diameter – opponent moves medium distance in any direction</p>
<p>iv.	0 successes – Off Target – Combat 1 attack – Medium stick diameter – opponent moves long distance in any direction</p>
<p>8.	Direct HE Firing at Buildings</p>
<p>a.	Roll to hit then roll to damage – Base damage is cumulative – eg if shoot at same spot strength reduced by one each turn it is hit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Michael Charge		</title>
		<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1354</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Charge]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2016 20:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/?p=4952#comment-1354</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1350&quot;&gt;Nick Pendrell&lt;/a&gt;.

Thanks. Happy to hear your thoughts on the rules!

Don&#039;t worry, part 2 will include my personal thoughts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1350">Nick Pendrell</a>.</p>
<p>Thanks. Happy to hear your thoughts on the rules!</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t worry, part 2 will include my personal thoughts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Michael Charge		</title>
		<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1353</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Charge]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2016 20:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/?p=4952#comment-1353</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1349&quot;&gt;Stephen Luscombe&lt;/a&gt;.

Thanks! I&#039;ll have to take a look at those rules and see what they are like - building a list of new rules to take a look at.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1349">Stephen Luscombe</a>.</p>
<p>Thanks! I&#8217;ll have to take a look at those rules and see what they are like &#8211; building a list of new rules to take a look at.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Nick Pendrell		</title>
		<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1350</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nick Pendrell]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2016 19:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/?p=4952#comment-1350</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Absolutely super article!  Very well done in writing such a useful and comprehensive piece.  I would love to see a more opinionated piece from you giving pros and cons and saying which one(s) you prefer and why.  Here are my thoughts (although they are all theoretical as I can&#039;t find an opponent interested in playing any of them).

Black Ops; A bit too Hollywood for my tastes.  Also suffers, like most Ospreys, in that the author has a very tight word count to fit into 64 pages with a lot of art and so it looks as if a lot of useful content had to be cut.

Danger Close:  Too simplistic.

Force on Force:  I loved the d6-d12 mechanic.  But no points system makes this game a non-starter for me.  I have searched in vain for someone who has added their own points system to the game, but with no luck.  It&#039;s a real shame.

OSC:  Not heard of this ruleset.  Looks very promising once part two has been released.

Skirmish Sangin:  I love the realism here and it is probably my favourite from those I have read.  The lack of proof reading in the rulebook drives me up the wall though (but maybe I am a secret grammar nazi!))

Spectre Operations:  I only read the Beta PDF.  From what you have written about the final version, this looks very promising and I will definitely check it out as soon as they release a PDF version of the final rules.

Keep up the great work!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Absolutely super article!  Very well done in writing such a useful and comprehensive piece.  I would love to see a more opinionated piece from you giving pros and cons and saying which one(s) you prefer and why.  Here are my thoughts (although they are all theoretical as I can&#8217;t find an opponent interested in playing any of them).</p>
<p>Black Ops; A bit too Hollywood for my tastes.  Also suffers, like most Ospreys, in that the author has a very tight word count to fit into 64 pages with a lot of art and so it looks as if a lot of useful content had to be cut.</p>
<p>Danger Close:  Too simplistic.</p>
<p>Force on Force:  I loved the d6-d12 mechanic.  But no points system makes this game a non-starter for me.  I have searched in vain for someone who has added their own points system to the game, but with no luck.  It&#8217;s a real shame.</p>
<p>OSC:  Not heard of this ruleset.  Looks very promising once part two has been released.</p>
<p>Skirmish Sangin:  I love the realism here and it is probably my favourite from those I have read.  The lack of proof reading in the rulebook drives me up the wall though (but maybe I am a secret grammar nazi!))</p>
<p>Spectre Operations:  I only read the Beta PDF.  From what you have written about the final version, this looks very promising and I will definitely check it out as soon as they release a PDF version of the final rules.</p>
<p>Keep up the great work!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Stephen Luscombe		</title>
		<link>https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/2016/11/21/the-great-big-modern-wargaming-rules-comparison/#comment-1349</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stephen Luscombe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2016 08:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hntdaab.co.uk/blog/?p=4952#comment-1349</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve gone through all these myself but I have found that tinkering with the &#039;Flying Lead&#039; rules by Ganesha Games gives me the best modern gaming experience. Especially if you incorporate their advanced reaction rules from Advanced Song of Blades and Heroes (the original engine if you like). Highly recommended. http://www.britishempire.co.uk/wargames/borneoconfrontation.htm]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve gone through all these myself but I have found that tinkering with the &#8216;Flying Lead&#8217; rules by Ganesha Games gives me the best modern gaming experience. Especially if you incorporate their advanced reaction rules from Advanced Song of Blades and Heroes (the original engine if you like). Highly recommended. <a href="http://www.britishempire.co.uk/wargames/borneoconfrontation.htm" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.britishempire.co.uk/wargames/borneoconfrontation.htm</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
