A 1940 scenario using Rapid Fire Reloaded

 WWII gaming was never an easy sell in my group.  It seemed that a few of us wanted to play and we collected huge armies - I have about 400 hundred 20mm/ 1:72 vehicles alone -- but finding a set of rules that people would be excited to play was near impossible.  Spearhead was tried and is a great set, but felt 'stretched' in 20mm.  Battlefront WWII is a well designed and easy game to play but suffers from the fact that a result is very difficult to arrive at in the 2-3 hours we have to play.  We tried BKC and I really liked it...most didn't.  The activation rolls meant too many players were left doing nothing too often.  

I had collected all of the Rapid Fire books over the years and even had a typed set of the rules before RF (1) had been published.  The books are pure delight and inspiration.  But for some reason I never tried playing RF. On reading the rules they seemed strange.  On the one hand there were rules for every imaginable operational function -- even aircraft carriers...yes in 20mm -- but all of that lovely abstraction seemed to be dovetailed with rules for throwing grenades as in a skirmish game!  None of the rules were difficult although RF1 and RF2 still used a casualty table that put off many of the fellows in my group.  It did seem old fashioned and frankly seemed like the rules were not the product of a design concept but more along the lines of a development process that responded to need in an almost ad hoc fashion.  I couldn't see my guys playing this game.

Well, fortunately one of the group suggested, after yet another teeth-pulling WWII game, that we try RF. It was designed for 20mm models and we had all the books...and it did look quite easy to play.  I am so glad we did.

After years of playing RF now, and yes, weathering the frustration of the casualty table, Colin Rumford and Richard Marsh have developed Rapid Fire Reloaded (RFR) and it is fantastically simple to play, has no tables and is fun. In fact, I had developed a simplified casualty system that anticipated RFR precisely.     

Is RFR nuanced and "realistic?"  Probably not.  But I would say any rule set can be ruined by creating silly scenarios and any game can be played with a sense of realism if done in the right manner.  And frankly, WWII gaming is particularly stretched anyway by the 1000-foot general syndrome regardless of the rules played.

So, RFR has kept us entertained for years and will continue to do for many more years to come.  I have valued the very long range relationship that I have developed over the years with Colin, helping doing the odd-bit of editing and have continued to build layouts for the game.  One day I will manage to play all of Juno and Omaha.  I have modelled everything but don't have the 16' table to accommodate it all at once.

Recently we played a scenario from their latest Blitzkrieg book.  Here are a few shots courtesy of my buddy Thomas:

An irony....

 It is an irony that the more work I am doing on BFE and other gaming projects the less time I have to post updates. This has the effect of making it look like I am not doing much!  In fact, there is a load of things happening behind the scenes.  The ACW game is now developing fast and I have continued work on the book rules (as opposed to simply up-dating the play-sheets).  This is very positive.  We have been playing variations of this BFE-based game for many years, but it is far more stable now.  It is amazing how long this process can take when you only play the period occasionally.  Fortunately I have a group in Italy playing the game too and their initial feedback has been very useful.

BFE3 is in a hold pattern. Until the ACW game is done I am not sure how deeply BFE3 will be a revision or a tidy-up.  There were definitely some things that I needed to add/rewrite for clarity.  Things like the siege rules and large buildings sections had gaps that I have now filled.  The basic game however didn't need much revision - just textual corrections and precision.  We will see.  Doing any of these projects "off the side of your desk" is not the best way to get things done.  But play-testing is also a very slow process and I want to make sure my games are well tested before they go out there for consumption.

I have also designed an ancient to "renaissance" (early modern) grid-based game.  This is going really well. The mechanics are, like most games, familiar, but conceptually it is very different from anything I have seen.  The grid is such a wonderful simplification and cleans up so many vagaries in play.  Now, I would not use a grid for many period or levels of play, but for large battles set in pre-modern wars I think it works really well.  To the Strongest clearly shows what can be achieved with a grid but is a game that did not fly in my group.  So I wrote my own.

Sorry for the lack of pictures.  I know that the people who visit the blog seeing just text is a turn-off, but I wanted to get a new post up.  Pictures will follow.