Men Who Would Be Kings Rule Review
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 11. 2019
- This week, the guys at Little Wars TV review "The Men Who Would Be Kings," a 2016 set of rules written by Daniel Mersey and published by Osprey Games. The game is designed for skirmish level actions in the British Victorian era of colonial warfare. We score rules based on five categories, then offer a final total score at the end.
You can learn more about the rules at: ospreypublishing.com/the-men-...
As always, we encourage you leave any thoughts or feedback about the game in the comments below. You can see more scores from members of the club and download our rule adjustments for playing bigger battles at our website: www.LittleWarsTV.com - Hry
I purchased another rule set in the Dan Mersey stable, The Pikeman's Lament, co-written with Michael Leck. The rules were inexpensive and I was able to quickly and inexpensively acquire and paint two 15mm English Civil War companies of 55 men each (including Captain). I found that the rules don't tax the brain, games play relatively smoothly and quickly and, most importantly, are enjoyable. From someone who was 'skirmish game averse' this is saying something. I've since played Dragon Rampant and had a brief leaf through Rebels & Patriots. Each version in this stable of rules are very similar but, thankfully, each also has its differences so it was both useful and interesting to get an insight into this, the Colonial Wars version.
This community needed something like this, you guys are freaking legends, thank you.
Excellent review! Thanks. I have a few of Mersey's rules, [Dux Bellorum, Lion Rampant and Dragon Rampant], and concur with all that you have said. He does a great job of putting out some clear and fun systems to use in your favorite period. Like to plant a seed maybe for a future episode. You touched on it with this review. So many of us that watch these great videos do not have a robust club like you do, and we have to content ourselves to often doing solo gaming. Love to see a video on rules systems that you have or play that might be adapted to solo play like this one [touched on at the end]. Thanks so much again for all that you do!
Thanks for the review. I'm going to buy a copy based on your recommendation. I'm very interested in the solo rules.
The "Mr. Babbage" solo rules are pretty interesting and worth the price of admission for anyone who is interested in solo play for a miniatures game. It's not a rigid flow-chart decision tree and feels much more relaxed. Wish more wargaming rules took solo play into account (admittedly, that's not always possible)
Another great review guys. Keep up the good work.
I enjoyed your video of your Isandlwana game, and appreciate this review. I have added the rules to my 'wish list' so I hope to receive it for Christmas!
I bought this some time ago but have just begun playing with it. I agree absolutely with your review.
I don't have a problem with the wall of guns. Its an interesting looking collection. The safe space comments, however, were pointlessly insulting and divisive. I'm tempted to tell you exactly what you can do with that.
I have to agree, I am not a gun guy but I appreciate the collection. I was thinking what was the point of dog therapy thing. I come here for the cool content and to support your clubs effort not BS politics.
Nice review by the way may have to pick up the rules just to check out the solo stuff. Keep up the good work.
Oh, so I'm not the only one who thought that was weird, gratuitous, and probably deeply offensive to someone, even if it wasn't me. Guessing it's either some group in-joke that doesn't translate well to outsiders or the guy in the hat has had problems at work with service dogs or something similar.
@@richmcgee434 Oh good grief. You all need to lighten up. It was a 'parody' of whats happening in some work places and college campuses. Not everything is political. You guys need to chill.
@@richmcgee434 Most certainly NOT intended as a reference about service animals. It was, as you suspected, an inside joke about some of the comments received on a couple of recent videos. Some of our long time viewers will have gotten that, and unfortunately it may not translate for those watching just this video.
Have to agree as well - came off as a bit heavy handed. I like that LWTV videos aren't political or "meta". The best way to deal with haters is ignore them.
Excellent review. Friends and I have been playing it for a couple of years now. My only addition would be that you neglected to mention, under your Support criteria, the excellent Facebook Group "The Men Who Would be Kings Fan Group". It offers Q&A, different scenarios others have played, scenery tips, etc., etc... Keep up the good work :)
Yes, thanks for highlighting this FB group! We should have mentioned it as an excellent resource!
I have a question for you as a veteran of this rule set. Do you find the morale rules for units - especially attacking units - work well? My limited experience is that it is too easy to blunt attacks by only needing one or two hits on a large unit to give them morale problems. Do you find this isn't a problem or do you have variants to address this? Thanks.
@@Vlad65WFPReviews Most of the games we have played are British vs. Zulu's and, yes, the attacking Zulu's inevitably get stymied unless they catch the British in a disorganized state. The trick is to overwhelm the enemy quickly. Just like in
the old days.
To overcome this we will sometimes have the opposing sides start closer to each other.
I hope this helps.
Totally agree with your comments guys. I played this at my local club, got hooked and bought my own set rules, well worth it.
I use these for 10mm massed battles. It works really well. I also use them for the standard Skirmish game.
Great review thank you. I really like Mr. Babbage and the system can be adapted to other rules like Lion and Dragon with some modification.
Great review. In terms of playability these rules are superb and streets ahead of Black Powder (particularly BP ver 2). The rules are deliberately simple which means that it takes a very generalist approach to the historical, necessary because of the enormous range and variance in the period - its important to note that although its based on British Colonial it also caters for every other major power and colonial opponent - the rules have force lists (24 point starter forces) for French, Italian and even the US 'Old West' and there are plenty of others available through Mersey's online forum. Another advantage this gives is that experienced wargamers can readily adapt these rules for virtually any specific conflict in this period. We have used variations for WWI (early and late war; Western Europe 1914-15, the Middle East (Palestine) 1917-18) and even post war colonial conflicts (1920s NW Frontier etc,). Its a rare rule set that has such a sound game mechanics that it allows for such adaptability. And then there's Mr Babbage - what more do you need?
Enjoyed the review
Great review guys, your Isandalwana game motivated me to pull my hundreds of Zulus and less Brits off of the shelf and onto the table. I used Mr. Babbage but thought it strange that you only roll on the table when any of your own units move. Do you play a scenario or do you move onto the table from the edge to begin? Love the rules and the period feel bit more clarity on Babbage game details would have been nice. I emailed Mr. Mersey but never got a response.
Played this for several years in 28 and 54mm! Great for cooperative play. Mr. Babbage is a tough damned opponent. I've used it for 54mm AWI in a "March to Boston Bridge-Post Lexington and Concord". Used it in a 12 player convention game-"Where's the Mahdi?" Works like a champ. 5 minute learning curve. Simple is good when managing more than one other player learning the rules. Fast is better....why play and finish a game with a fing migraine? Can't beat the price. You should buy and play these rules!
I have not played this set but I have played lion and dragon rampant as well as the pikemen’s lament. All great games using the same engine. I like these rules because they have let me put figures on the table that I haven’t used in a long time without too much trouble. Plus, they are inexpensive:)
Would love to see you review 2nd Edition Pulp Alley.
Any chance of some more pics of those nice 6mm Brit & Zulu armies by Baccus?
I love the channel. The battle reports and reviews are great.
I have the rules and read over them. I may be wrong since I haven't played a game yet. But cavalry seems weak. Less figures and melee score is bad. It seems mounted lancers would be a bit stronger vs tribal infantry. I can understand other cavalry mrant to shoot and flee and shoot again - being lower though.
Thanks for this reveiw. I have been intrigued by this set since I became aware of it.The QRS being useless is disapointing. I have the same complaint with Osprey's "Tomorrow'sWar"
Yes, the Osprey "blue book" series in an interesting mix of quality and consistency. Some of the games are quite well done and top notch, while others seem to have been hurried along without much oversight. Generally, the majority of the ones we've played in our club have been well received.
Thank you for your videos. I LOVE the gun wall! Keep up the GREAT work!!!
Nice review, as always. With many comparisons to Blackpowder, I was surprised not to see any discussion/reference to what many consider to be the benchmark for this period of gaming; Larry Brom's TSATF (series).
Yes. TSATF.
Has anyone uploaded an improved QRS pdf given the bad official version in the book - and if so, where?
The photos were taken by wargamers of their figures and sent into him that’s why the are not studio quality
I'm less than a minute in, and you all are SAVAGE with that therapy dog/safe space. Love it.
I give you a giant thumbs up sir. I really loved your comment below. I was thinking the same thing! Cheers.
Can you provide that quick reference sheet for this game that you keep mentioning? :)
Maybe you need to have a category of 'meets its design philosophy'
Excellent suggestion!
Little Wars TV that really is a good ifwa
We use these rules for WWI Middle East with the Wargames Illustrated WWI mod. I really like them.
Thanks for the tip! We will have to check out the mod, as we have some WW1 28mm figures here.
Little Wars TV google Foch Wargames Illustrated and they come up for free
The rule reviews are nice
Another great review my dudes ! Dab nation
A very fair review I think. This game is far from perfect, but it is what it sets out to be, I think. A simple no frills game that is very playable and I use it to run games with friends who are not big fans of this period of gaming but are prepared to give it a go on a one-off basis.
Good QRS are of major importance to me
Great rule review as usual and fun "Safe space" moment. Double awesome!
As someone living very remotely in Darkest Wales I find the Babbage contribution invaluable - shades of H.G.Wells, Jerome K Jerome and the rest of the late Victorian gang of wargamers! The 'Pig War Gone Hot' was a scenario I had never even heard of until Michael Portillo featured it in one of his documentaries - he is 'the man who would be Prime Minister' (in the UK - early 90s) who went on to retire from politics and make lovely TV programmes about railways.
Regarding QRS I agree that for the price asked a couple of PDF printouts should have been offered. Maybe Little Wars could do these - a potential income stream?
I notice you have, excellent news re QRS. Thanks from me and Mr Babbage.
nice rules just alittle different to rebels and pats...but you could use these instead of them... also black ops is also a nice ruleset too...
Sorry, but did not find YOUR quick reference sheet!
Alejo
We've now posted our revised QRS on the "Free Stuff" section of the LWTV website! Sorry about the delay.
I love the movie. Love Michael Caine in the movie. Love that they trained up a whole army.
Who do you refer to when you say "trained up a whole army", I'm confused?
BazBaziah You should watch the movie then. 10/10 would recommend
@@BazBaziah he's referring to the movie of the same name.
@@BazBaziahthe Connery / Caine movie - The Man Who Would Be King…based on the Kipling story (played by Christopher Plummer in the film).
Greg's scoring system in which 5/10 is average ignores the quality of the average rules set. If someone were to say "this rules set is a 5/10" you wouldn't think it was a average but pretty bad. A 5/10 rulebook would probably never be popular enough to get reviewed on Little Wars TV. Rules good enough to be reviewed would be considered 6 and 7 out of 10 at the low end and 9 and 10 out of 10 at the high end. Therefore an 8/10 rules set would be considered "average" for the kind of rules being reviewed. Accordingly, if Greg thinks a particular feature is average or a little less than average he should give it a 7 or 8. A score of 5 should be considered really low not average. Steve seems to think this way, which is why he appeared shocked at Greg's low scoring.
Every man a king?
ROFLMFAO @ the opening!!!! 😂😂😂
Can I do the Eureka stockade with these rules ? British redcoats vs Victorian gold miners !!!
Yes you can, Ned!
But it would be pretty one sided using historical numbers of combatants lasting - 2 or 3 moves maximum! Unless you used the points system to build up the forces - that would be about 48 red coats v about 300 'miners'.
Are any dice required and if so, how many and what kind?
Just about a dozen d6.
@@samb2052 Thank you very much !
In terms of "Support" there IS a "vibrant community" online - Join us in the Facebook "The Men Who Would Be Kings Fan Page"
what if a good Napoleonic rule book
Two comments: First, have not played TMWWBM; however, have played Lion Rampant (LR) and Dragon Rampant (DR) for Medieval and Fantasy, respectively, and it is obvious this is a follow-on (LR was 2014 and DR was 2015) using the same basic mechanics. One major change is in those first two games - a failed activation test ends your turn, whereas in this game it appears you always get to try to activate every unit. I'd be curious to know if that was something the author did based on the historical period, or if it was more due to criticism of that mechanic from the other two rules. Some people like that type of mechanic to show "command friction", but many people REALLY hate that you can fail the activation of your first unit, and your side is done for the turn. Second, QRSs. It's interesting the QRS in this game is so lacking as compared to the first two, since they came first. The QRSs in LR & DR are not great, but they do seem adequate. In general, I think a lot of times new games have such poor QRSs because they don't want someone to be able to play the game by just downloading the QRS (i.e. and not buying the game) - which is at odds with the premise that you want to be able to play the game with just the QRS, and not have to spend so much time looking back through the rules. I would also add that doing your own QRS is a great way to assimilate a set of rules. You often get a great sense of how really well - or poorly - the rules are written, and can be the basis for a much better initial assessment of the rules than just your typical "read through and ogle at the pretty pictures" review you get on, say, TMP.
That's a good question regarding why the author changed the failed activation approach between these sets. We don't know the answer to that either, but given how easy it can be to fail some of the action rolls, I'm very glad that one failure doesn't end the entire turn! Your theory on why some publishers might purposely strip down the QRS is certainly plausible, though in this day and age of digital piracy, I'm not sure it's worth it. There are absolutely advantages, as you noted, to synthesizing one's own version of the QRS.
Mr Mersey actually explains his reasoning behind his various command and control rules in his rules on his blog.
merseybooks.blogspot.com/2017/03/a-little-bit-about-command-control-in.html
Dan Mersey has commented on the Pikemen’s Lament forum boards that he changed the activation for that rule set (and for TMWWBK) based upon the period.
I'm not into British colonial actions, but love anything to do with the French Foreign Legion. Only saw one brief photo of FFL in your review. Do the rules support actions involving these troops as much as the Brits?
Good question, and yes, the rules do have an army list in the back for the French Foreign Legion, as well as some of their potential opponents. We've not explored much outside the realm of the Anglo-Zulu or Boer Wars with this, but they even have army lists for the Indian Wars of the American West.
I have a 6mm FFL skirmish force for TMWWBK, very much 'movie history' style but ideal for tales of daring do on a 2x2ft board
@@LittleWarsTV Thanks! For only $15 on Amazon, I'll give them a try.
Steve !!!!!!
When’s the Age of Sigmar review coming out?
The commander personality chart results in unrealistic and generally useless forces. Have a single incompetent officer in your army presents a tactical challenge. Having every officer be a drunkard or a shirker or some other trait that increases the likelihood of them failing activation is an exercise in pointless frustration.
The game plays fine without this unnecessary window dressing.
I have tried to sign up for access to your free stuff many times now and never received the password in return for my mail address.
Any help would be most welcome.
You will not receive an email--the password will be provided in a pop up window immediately upon you hitting "submit!"
Oh great, now I have to spend more money.
woh...politics..... nice one guys.....
Wait, I’ve been saying Ospreee not Ospray. Have I been wrong my whole life?
North American vs English pronunciation
Hah, maybe WE have been pronouncing it incorrectly!
I'm North American and I've never heard "ospreee", always had been "ospray".
Then you look at Daniel Mersey's name and have to think on how that's pronounced
@@oneMeVz Yeah, Ospray for North America, Ospreee on the Isle is what I've heard
I would say more 'pray' than 'pree.' ...... "prey" as in bird of prey. I'm a Scot.
Have you guys thought about doing pc wargaming reviews or do you want to keep the focus on miniatures?
We have talked about that recently, but no decision was reached. Many of us in the club do play PC wargames, so it would be a somewhat natural extension...but we do want to keep the channel focused on classic miniature tabletop gaming. So if it happens (not sure if it will...) I think it's safe to say those reviews would be fairly limited in number.
@@LittleWarsTV It makes sense to keep the focus on the core of what you do - miniature wargaming.
Some PC games would fit better than others. The old Talonsoft Napoleonic and American Civil War games are very similar to what you guys do on the tabletop. However, it would tough to match the actual physical games for viewing enjoyment. Commentary over screen captures just usually isn't as fun.
@@bas6601 I play those as well as Campaign Series WW2. They are quite fun. Field of Glory 2 is also good.
1) Nice review fellas! 2) I definitely got the reference about the ridiculous complaints you got on the gun day video and I’m on your side. Just seemed like a heavy case of the pot calling the kettle black coming from someone who is apparently okay with a hobby of recreating and simulating historical conflicts where thousands or tens of thousands of people died by use of arms/firearms (which you have always represented respectfully), but is self-righteous enough to dox you for that one video highlighting another aspect of your interest in military history. Didn’t think your jab here was heavy-handed at all. In fact you definitely pulled your punches.
Anyway, keep on keepin’ on, gents! I love your content!
You are right, but they have could said what you have said and people can argue about that but they have just mocked on the people that fairly comment that (I can be into the strategy side of a wargame, the way of play, the historical flavor, but definitely not feel comfortable with guns around me). And that joke is even worst because that was commented in the video "what can we solve the lack of women and young people", which basically what those women said was: "count on my point of view", " do not patronize me", etc. And then, BUM they ignore and laugh on a comment like that. Definitely they did not understand their own video and it was a completely waste of time.
@@antoniomendoza2682 Apples and oranges, I'm afraid. The "Women in Wargaming" videos discussed how the fact that women are treated differently solely because of a physical difference (being female) might be a reason why there are so few of them in the hobby. In other words, don't reject a a potential gamer just because she's a she.
Here we were responding to criticism directly pointed at our choice of backdrop in a video intro. Certainly the commenter was free to comment about his thoughts, but guess what? We are free to respond. "Being welcoming" doesn't require anyone to refrain from responding to criticism. To put it another way, we welcome anyone, male or female, who wants to come out and game with us. If they walk in the door and immediately want to start telling us what we're doing wrong and how we should change, however ... well, they will be asked to leave shortly thereafter. We've done videos in the past talking about the importance of being open and welcoming to new members, but also understanding that ensuring a good fit is important to maintaining a vibrant club or gaming community -- and that might mean cutting people loose from a club or group. Heck, Veronica in the second women in wargaming video explicitly talked about mentoring those folks who seem like a good fit.
That leads me to the next point -- your summary of what our interviewees had to say ("count on my point of view" "don't patronize me") is a little off. Amanda basically said "don't treat us any differently", Veronica basically said "introduce gaming in front of more females and help those along that fit well with your group" and Becky basically said "call out bad behavior by others." Nothing we did was incompatible with those messages.
I'll finish by saying that it is (as you point out) completely reasonable to both enjoy a wargame and be uncomfortable with guns actually, physically "around you" -- particularly for those who have not been properly trained in their proper handling or use or just haven't been around them much. That's not jokeworthy. Objecting to the fact a channel focused on military history and wargaming displays historical firearms that you are only seeing on a TV or computer screen? Sorry, that's just silly.
@@LittleWarsTV I can agree with you with some points of course. About the "count on my point of view" thing comes from the comment "do not move my miniatures" in the video. Anyway. You are right, you obviously are free of owning and showing anything you want and behave as you please in your environment and nobody should come into your club and tell you how to perform, and if you had said that there would be no problem of course, but what is out of point is answering with that kind of joke. Although, again, you are free to answer to those comments and we are also free to comment respectfully if it was appropriated from me/our point of view.
A channel focused on military history will bring weapons eventually, it is obvious. But if someone do not like it for any reason I do not see how mock on it is any constructive. Because my point are not those weapons (or how some can feel about it), the point is communication how we can interact with you guys.
Anyway. This is just different point of views about an anecdote. I like a lot your channel (actually, it is my favorite wargaming channel by far) and I hope to enjoy it for a long time. If there are weapons standing in a wall... I will try not to cry :P
Thanks for your answers!
😂 funny review
the only thing that makes that space unsafe is the weapons being unloaded. Gun shows and armories seem to be low crime areas :p
sorry i mean what is a good Napoleonic rules
That depends on the "scale" game you want to play. Do you want a skirmish level game? Try Forager. Do you want to command a battalion or division? Consider Lasalle or Black Powder. Do you want to be a corps commander? Age of Ealges is our go-to option there. Or are you looking to be Napoleon and command an army? Blucher, Grande Armee, Volley & Bayonet and Big Bloody Battles all come to mind. There are good choices for Napoleonics at every level of command.
@@LittleWarsTV thank you.and your channel is the best you guys got me in to war gaming.does ed live in the club
@@LittleWarsTV you relay help me
I tuned in for the wall of guns. 😎
Thanks for the safe space!
I want a safe space too :(
Typical review. It should be complex, but easy to learn. It should have lots or variables, yet easy to play. It should be perfect for larger scale skirmish, but not require too many figures. Innovated and new, but familiar and intuitive. Great for the beginner and the long term expert. No game can do it all, you need to figure out what you want and see what's right for you.
That intro was fuckin' rich hot off the heels of the "why no women wanna play??" videos.
You got my LIKE at "safe spaces" 🙃
You felt the need to mock the comments about the wall of guns, but couldn't be bothered to do anything about the infestation of blatant sexism in your comments?
On an unrelated note, does anybody know of other wargaming channels? I can't find one that's any good.
We've manually removed a great number of blatantly offensive comments from our videos about women in wargaming, but only when a commenter openly attacked another commenter. Philosophically, we do not believe in censoring and removing comments from people who may disagree with us, no matter how strongly we find their comments distasteful. Only direct insults to others were deleted. Fortunately, the vast majority of the comments on these videos are supportive and positive for women interested in the hobby.
Honestly, opening bit wasn't funny at all. I don't understand what you hope to gain by alienating those of your viewers you are making fun of from this. You guys have 16k subs and generally get anywhere from 5k to 25k views depending on the type of video. Why do you want to piss off potentially a couple thousand viewers. Not to mention you just spent some time talking about how we need to include more people in the hobby - particularly women - and here you are making fun of some people. You guys are great and I love your videos but just don't act like jerks like you did at the beginning of this video.
Sigh...
As a gamer who's been at this for more than 40 years, I'm out of here...
What why?
May I ask why?
@@@Marcus_McCormick11 I served for 11 years---five years Navy (October 1974-December 1979), six years Army (March 1980-March 1986)---and I'm a rabid 2nd amendment defender who owns small arms and who hunts. I began playing wargames in 1974.
I thought about unsubscribing after the watching the Fallujah video and feeling disquieted by the club's commentary but I stayed around. Now I'm done.
Bye Felicia 👋
@@@acsmith70325... I cry only for the comrades I lost during my 11 years of service and the broken warriors I see as a volunteer at my local VA hospital.
Yeah I heard you guys love to have a safe space. I heard this channel was going Social Justice Warrior, so can we expect to see soldiers with disabilities or gender fluid identity’s or other BS?
You are joking, right?
You most definitely heard incorrectly on both counts.
@@LittleWarsTV Glad to see I've not been left out here to face this bloke alone