Trapped Like a Fox - 1866 rules

[Leman]

These rules have replaced Real Time Wargames original 1866 rules and are priced at £21.50, as they now include a full campaign for all theatres of the war, including two sets of maps for each side. The campaign is well thought out and the tabletop rules use the 10" square equals 1 square kilometre system. I like these rules just as much as their Last Gaiter Button FPW rules. However there is one massive niggle which this company seems unable to tackle and that is the lack of proof reading before publication. In order that the rules make sense I will have to go through them again with Tippex and fine-nibbed pen and sort out the many and varied grammatical errors, missing words and punctuation problems. This is a great pity because I really like the concepts behind these rules, but the various errors make them very difficult to grasp on a first, or even a second, read through. The concepts are quite straightforward so why not proof read before publication? I now own three sets of this company's rules and have had to attack all of them with the Tippex and pen. What this does mean is that I can now explain the concepts clearly to my fellow club members so that we can have an unambiguous game. I think this should be done at source (but try to avoid DBX legalistic jargon).
DP

[mollinary]

DP,  rarely have I agreed more with all aspects of a post.   The rules, both of them, are great, innovative, fun, challenging, and tremendous value for money.  They include simple mechanisms, which are well thought out and thoroughly tested, which model and reproduce complex and difficult interactions. Big games fly by, new players pick up the rules in minutes, there are fewer examples of disputes than under any other system I have played, and they have, for me, an indefinable "feel" for the period.    BUT.  there are places where you just have to sit down, wrap a towel around your head, and read, and re-read, and re-read, until you are sure you have got it right.  I don't have them with me now, but the first time I read the 1866 set I remember trying to get to grips with what was meant by "non-Austrian Storm Columns"   Does it mean storm columns used by someone other than the Austrians, (Hessians, say) or does it mean anything that isn't an Austrian Storm Column?  Now my relatively simple mind leapt easily to the former. I assumed the author had information that meant others did the SC thing better, but eventually I became convinced it was the latter, which seemed to fit play better, and if it wasn't the latter, what factors were in use against lines?    I spent a lot of time reading through the rules for close combat, and failing to understand fully until (I think) discovering that a rather crucial "not" was missing.  There are other examples, but I would never suggest allowing such things to put people off buying the rules, because they really are WORTH BUYING!

Mollinary

PS.  DP -  I assume the title is ironic?!

[nikharwood]

PS.  DP -  I assume the title is ironic?!

ah - I just fixed that...if it was ironic, I'll put it back to 'Tapped' 

[Leon]

We sell a few of the Real Time rulesets at the shows, but to be honest I've never had more than a casual browse through them.  Forum member Bernie is part of the writing team as far as I know.