Write your own?

[fsn]

Does anyone use their own rule sets, or does everyone use a commercial set?

I'll confess to using my own set., It's a multilayered thing that I use for all periods and all scales. I treat everything as a block - be it a bit of a ACW battn, a WWII tank or single hero. They all move and have various abilities to cause damage to various things. Morale is a human concept, so can also be common, which just leaves command and control. That is where technology makes a great change, after say 1860-1900.

Bit of local colour (French WWII tanks penalised for a single man turret) and Robert is the gentleman who visit's your mother when your father's away.

What I lose in detail, I gain in universality.

*Waits for howls of disbelief*.

[Genom]

Not quite the same as using your own set but with a few exceptions me and a friend tend to stick with the Warmaster model these days as it covers most periods of history (and Fantasy).

Warmaster for Ancients, medieval and ACW (Though I've not tried it yet)
BKC for WW2
FWC for Scifi

Primarily this is because we don't game with each other very often so it makes it a lot easier to remember the basic rules of what we're doing.

[ronan]

Does anyone use their own rule sets, or does everyone use a commercial set?
(...)

Both.
I do use some home made rules, but we also play with official rules ( BKC2, FoF, SBH ..)  AND we change some minor rules in this books.    

[Hertsblue]

I mainly use my own rules - it's the only way I can cater to my various biases. Have a look here:

www.rulesdepot.net

I have been drawn into commercial rules from time to time, usually at the behest of regular opponents.

[Steve J]

Commercial rules largely based around the Warmaster concept, as I like the way they handle command and control.

[petercooman]

Warmaster rules here too, as it's easy to remember.

I will however be looking in to the USE ME line for skirmish battles and for phil's the new zombies off course   

[sixsideddice]

Always my own... far more rewarding I think ))

[ronan]

I like to learn how some authors see the past period.
It's not always my taste, but it's interesting.

[General Greenman]

I have probably spent as much time reading and researching to produce rules as painting and playing over recent years .
I have to admit I do get a lot of satisfaction from playing with rules that I have had some part.in.  A friend and myself are still developing realistic cavalry combat rules which reflect first hand historical accounts.
Many first hand accounts do make one question the large casualty figures quoted officially as men tend to shy away from actual combat with greater emphasis on the role of officers spending more of their time stopping troops routing ad opposed to leading

[Hertsblue]

I have probably spent as much time reading and researching to produce rules as painting and playing over recent years .
I have to admit I do get a lot of satisfaction from playing with rules that I have had some part.in.  A friend and myself are still developing realistic cavalry combat rules which reflect first hand historical accounts.
Many first hand accounts do make one question the large casualty figures quoted officially as men tend to shy away from actual combat with greater emphasis on the role of officers spending more of their time stopping troops routing ad opposed to leading

Indeed. See Duffy's description, taken from the Prince de Ligne, of cavalry combat in the Seven Years War in his The Army of Maria Theresa (P100).

[ronan]

(...)  A friend and myself are still developing realistic cavalry combat rules which reflect first hand historical accounts.
(...)

it sounds interesting !
Do you plan to share it ?

[General Greenman]

First hand accounts suggest that cavalry would charge at each other and pass through with limited casualties possibly increasing only with the degree to which they become unformed and the choosing to engage in separate combats if their morale remained intact , probably the only casualties of the firstpass coming as the last ranks came through as these would be forced to slow down due to the press of horses.

A good read is Warhorse by Philip Sidnell whom writes as an ex cavalry officer

[Nirnman]

as a newbie to this forum and having been inactive as a wargamer for over twenty years I have noticed the growth of commercial rule sets in the interim. That's not to say there weren't commercial sets available back then. WRG produced some especially ancient rules. however the group that I wargamed with tende to produce our own inhouse for the periods we covered probably using a generic base tweaked for the period. I recently found a folder containing a lot of the rules in the form of what today is known as QRSs. and foe the life of me I had difficulty recalling just how they operated so much ws not written down just the salient points. I look at some of the commercial sets available today and find there is so much to take in Flames of war is a case in point a 294 page rule book which basically expands on the set presented with their open fire introduction set. it seems to me that rule writers are trying to cover every eventuality and trying to recreate the conditions of the periods they are writing about, something that is neigh impossible on a table top. only re-enactors wearing the clothing of the period ,provided it made from the same materials available then and not modern synthetics can come close to experiencing some of the conditions that soldiers did. Their attempts also appear to remove a lot of the fun from the table top actions. and I feel they have forgotten it is only a game (the hint is in the title ...warGAME)

All this being said it is interesting to see how different authors attempt to emulate; some try to provide rules covering a large  period of time, some a set specific to a particular war/campaign or even battle. Some take a broad brush view others pay a microscopic attention to detail.  Ignoring logistics, something I have rarely seen covered the basics of any rule set should be command and control, troop quality and control and Morale, everything ,movement firing and casualties can be reduced to statistics. These all apply from army level down to platoon/ individual skirmish level. The proverbial holy grail of rules, the elusive set contained on the back of a post card will never be achievable,why?  I remember that when I began wargaming I posed a simple question; what is the best set of rules? I still remember the answer... get two or more wargamers discussing rules and you will end up with more sets that persons present for everyone has their own take on how things should work EG I have watched programmes disparaging the longbow as simply an area effect weapon and not a particularly effective ne at that, the experts promulgating these views blithely forget or ignore that at its peak the archer had been practicing from childhood and used a more powerful bow than many modern re-enactors could draw, that he could hit a target at ranges and with a greater rate of fire that surpassed smoothbore firearms. So while yes it was an area effect weapon its effect was, in the right hands devastating.  Then that is only my opinion. blimey just realised how much I've sprouted better stop and go have a cold shower lol

[General Greenman]

There are references to draw weights of Upton 450 lbs if you read the Great Warbow that looks at the bows found on the Mary Rose n..

[Nirnman]

that's what I mean modern archers are lucky to be able to draw weights of 200 - 250 lbs