The temperature turned out to be lower than predicted as it was minus 4C when we got in the car to take the grandkids to school this morning so it was definitely a good call to bring the paints indoors from the Hinton Hut on Sunday!
However, this has not stopped me on my rule-tinkering journey and having put a lot of thought into it, and finally drawing up a useful spreadsheet (I know, I know, Goya was right, don't say it!) I've determined that too much tinkering is a bad thing.
I tried adopting a D6 rather than an average die for morale but strangely this didn't really make any difference. Then I tried amending various melee/morale factors but again it didn't seem to change the outcomes. I also fiddled around with the 'morale results' table but quickly abandoned that too.
 |
| Nice to see the Brunswickers on the table (they don't get out much). The Duke of Brunswick is old school and doesn't approve of tinkering with the rules or war. |
I have made some changes though, the main one being to reduce the morale modifier for winning/losing a melee from 2 to 1 (I felt the +2 to winner and -2 to loser is just too much of a variable). I have also made the 'passage of lines' test easier to pass mainly so that supporting cavalry can more readily replace a unit already engaged to their front.
 |
| The French Guard Lancers have just lost the first round of melee (that's what you get for tangling with the Scots Greys) so they are going to attempt a 'passage of lines' with the supporting Cuirassiers. It went well but then the Cuirassiers lost too. |
Apart from that there are some minor changes mostly sorting out anomalies and adding a bit more clarification to some of the not-so-well written stuff. In the end it has been enough to announce a Version 8 of the rules. If you would like a PDF copy then drop me a line (there is a contact email on my profile).
10 comments:
The results all sound very reasonable.
Sub-zero playtesting is clearly the ultimate umpire.
Just do not take the paints out with you!
Yes please, to the offer of the new version of M&M.
You’re right, tinkering is often a case of diminishing returns and fixing one element can put others out of balance. It’s also important to keep your overall goal for the rules in mind when doing so.
As I understand it you want M&M to be an ‘old-school’ fun set of rules with games lasting no more than eight turns. The first part means accuracy of outcome should come second to fun, and the second that movement should be fairly quick and combat (including shooting) pretty decisive.
I reckon M&M is pretty much there, albeit I have a different set of personal biases for things like dice rolling and columns charging lines. :o)
Thanks Matt, the paints are happy by the living room radiator!
I haven't changed anything drastic so I'm hoping that the fun part is still functioning!
These all seem like excellent ideas, Ian!
That's some seriously cold weather Ian! I don't venture into my shed on winter nights when we have single digit minima. I certainly would not at below zero!
As everyone else has said, it sounds sensible not to adjust too much since the rules are working well. Reducing the impact of the modifiers from an effective '4' to an effective '2' sounds like a good compromise.
I am a bit of a rules collector, when they are of interest, as yours are. The last version that I have saved (from your blog) is 6.1. I have read them, and like them, but not yet tried them and won't be in a position to do so for a little while yet, but I'll ask you for the latest and greatest when I am! :)
Best regards, James
Thanks Matthew, it will need a full size game to properly test them!
Thanks James, I tend to collect rules too but seldom actually play them! Give me a shout when you’re ready as they have changed a bit since version 6.
That is some serious devotion to rules testing! Not that what I do should in any way effect your iteration of the rules, but for the bigger battalion version I have been tinkering with I came to the same conclusion and Vimiero was played with a -1/+1melee loser/winner modifier and it worked very well. Please do send your lates version however as I have been meaning to do a good thorough comparison and make sure my small tweaks are still true to your vision.
Thanks David, I'll send them across.
Post a Comment