Let's read ... Practical Wargamer #3 (Spring 1988)

I am encouraged to continue this series by the comments given by the readers of this blog. Somehow, looking at the magazines of yesteryear brings back fond memories for many of you, or simply taps into our desire for nostalgia.

Anyway, let's take a look at the Spring 1988 issue.

I really like the cover, but that's perhaps because there's always room for more medieval knights with nice heraldry. Those always stir my interest. The figures do look somewhat crudely painted by today's standards, and have been given a coat of gloss varnish, but they have a certain charm. I wouldn't say "no" if I could get them (for free :-) ) as part of my collection. 

The editorial discusses whether a "general" magazine should focus on one specific period in a single issue, discussions that probably are still valid today. Also, Stuart Asquith says the reactions to Practical Wargamer so far were positive. I tried to look up whether I could find something in the issues of Miniature Wargames or Wargames Illustrated from late 87, early 88, but couldn't immediately find a review or comment. I will delve into my archives some more.

The Campaign of 1141 is a historical article and describes complex twists and turns of 12th century in England and the rebellion against King Stephen in efforts to dislodge him from the throne. The article contains some wargaming suggestions, but these are very general, more a description of what you could do to wargame the period rather than ready-to-play scenario as we might expect these days.

The Old Wild West zooms in on the conflicts in 19th century America between the US Forces and Indians. The article is very general in nature, describing some characteristics of the period and the organizations and weapons of both sides. A little attention is given to the "cowhands", although no big mention of possible gunfights as wargaming scenarios. Figure recommendations list Britains Deetail figures, some of which I actually do have in my 54mm figure collection.

Leaders & Generals is a very interesting article and provides some rules mechanisms on how we can realistically portray leaders and commanders in combat. Not by simply giving them a "+1" on some die roll, but actually define victory conditions for different types of leaders, and to give them actions that the real leaders would do. E.g. for medieval battles, warriors would start out as a mob, but it was up to the leaders to form them into battlelines, and at the same time raise their aggressiveness before sending them into combat. It certainly gave me some ideas about how specific actions can be defined in the rules such that leader figures can do "leaderly things" rather than simply providing a dry "+1". 

Thoughts on Modern Skirmish Games is all about modern skirmish gaming and small unit warfare, and discusses how one should set up games for this type of game. One example: enough terrain features, such that individual figures can hid or go prone behind all sorts of obstacles. It's somewhat ironic to realize that the current trend in wargaming is almost nothing else but small warband-type games, as opposed to the "big battle" games that were prevalent during the 80s.

Plancenoit 1815 gives some useful hints on how to turn a side event during the famous battle of Waterloo into a wargame. Mostly historical facts, and some fairly high-level description on how to turn the battle into a wargame, but again, no ready-to-play scenario. It's interesting to read general design comments such as "... there ought to be a fair selection of gardens and yards enclosed by walls and hedges in order to break troop movement and to give the French something to defend", but at the same time see very detailed information such as "The game should last a maximum of 14 moves", without mentioning any particular ruleset apart from "game moves of 15 minutes each". Compared to today, the wargamer really still had a lot of work to do himself. Whether that's good or bad hing, is perhaps worthy of a good discussion. But anyway, it's always nice to look at the pictures and study the "visual style" of games from so many years ago.

Soviet BT5 is a modelling article, on how to (scratch)build and paint a Christie BT5 tank.

In Sluys 1340, the medieval theme of the issue is continued, with a look at the naval engagement between France and England. Mostly historical facts, but also some nice colour drawing of the various types of ships of the period.

Late Feudal Rules discusses the specifics of medieval warfare, and how to design rules that reflect the period. No rules as such are given, but the article lists varies points to consider. E.g., the force of charging knights is discussed, or whether or not firing into melee should be allowed.

Gunboats on the Danube looks at the military importance or rivercraft in 17th and 18th century Europe. Lots of historical context, with some wargame suggestions near the end, but which copme down to some modeling tips and "there is little point in listing firm rules for boats ... it is probably best that the wargamer designs his own." :-) As for scenario suggestions: "The best actions to recreate are probably attempted landings and attacks on bridge building." It remains interesting to see how the style and content of article has changed over the decades.

Then there's a 2-page spread showing painted figures by Kevin Dallimore. 

Your Own Wargames Campaign by Charles Grant is an interesting read, and describes mechanics such as map movement, keeping a diary, casualties, the weather, finances, etc. It reminds me very much of Tony Bath's Setting Up A Wargames Campaign (the article references this book as well). During the past years, Charles Grant has written quite a lot about his wargaming philosophy, so in 2025, this article doesn't contain much I didn't know already. But a nice touch is a small diagram of the "campaign journal", as described in many other publications by charles Grant.

Stirling Bridge 1297 by Charlie Wesencraft is an account of how a diorama involving this bridge was constructed.

Ancient Cavalry by Terry Wise (this issue seems to have articles by a lot of the then-well-known wargaming personalities) deals with the evolution of cavalry as a serpeate fighting arm. History mostly, little wargaming content.

ACW Combat focuses on the (tactical) role of cavalry and artillery during the ACW. Written by Paul Stevenson, this is always useful, and being an ACW enthusiast, I always pick up something new I might use in my own rules.

Next we have an article (Against All Odds) that deals with warfare in South-America duting the 16th century and the campaigns of Cortez vs the Aztecs. Again a lot of history, before we come to the paragraph dealing with wargaming. It is stated that no currently available rules will do, so the wargamer has to write his own! There are a few nice pictures showing Ted Naismith's Aztec figures.

Action on the Coa (written by Don Featherstone - yet another wargaming celebrity!) is an article that deals with this specific battle during the Napoleonic Peninsular theatre, with a few suggestions enar the end what to look out for when you want to transfer this battle to the wargaming table.

For the advert, I selected Prince August. These adverts do bring back memories, because I once saw casting one's own figures as the sign of a "serious" wargamer. Reminds me, I still have a bunch of fantasy Prince August homecasts lying around somewhere!

Overall, another good issue, although I would prefer to see some wargaming content. As I said earlier in this series, I understand wargaming magazines before the internet did have a lot of historical background, but when we look back on them in 2025, it's the wargaming ideas we are mostly interested in.

Issue 4 is already on my reading list! 

Let's read ... Practical Wargamer #2 (Winter 1987)

The first post in this series received some nice feedback, with people saying how great PW as a magazine was. So that was enough encouragement to go on. Hopefully I can cover all the issues that were ever published.

The cover looks nice, although I would have chosen another color for the yellow font on a light-blue background. But that's a minor detail, and I'm not sure how difficult or easy it was to change this sort of thing in 1987.

 

So let's take a look at the table of contents and the editorial. Stuart Asquith is asking for articles, but also gives advice about how to get hold of your copy with your local newsagent, or subscribe! I guess nothing much has changed? There is a promise of more articles in the pipeline, "with several how-to articles which will offer ideas and suggestions for varying aspects of wargaming mechanisms." That sounds good, but that's of course for future issues.

 

The First Frontier describes the historical setting of settlers and native Americans (or Indians as they are still called in the article) in North America during the 17th century. It's an article full of historical information, describing various weapons, organizations, buildings ... with a little "wargaming paragraph" attached at the end. It's understandable back in the 80s, when during the pre-internet days this sort of information was difficult to find for the average wargamer, so magazine articles focused on the historical background, rather than the actual wargaming. But it feels somewhat strange in 2025. Nevertheless, a fine article.

Spicheren 1870 also gives the history about this particular battle in the Franco-Prussian War, but gives much more wargaming info. I do like the historical map as well as a possible conversion to the wargaming table. As a historical wargamer, who really likes good scenarios inspired by real battles, I welcome such examples since they really show one doesn't have to mimic the a map in all its details, but rather capture the essentials such that a similar tactical challenge is recreated.

 

Tchernaya, the "other" battle in the Crimean War (the "others" being Alma, Balaklava and Imkerman) goes back to the history perspective only, perhaps typical for wargaming magazines of the era and for which magazines sometimes got some bad rep.  

Solo War Chess is very interesting. It's the type of article I still like today, focusing on wargaming mechanisms, and not being afraid of deviating from well-trodden paths. The mechanisms are presented as belonging to the traditions of "War Chess". Although the article is a bit vague about it, but in the history of wargaming, the term "War Chess" can indicate many designs over the centuries. The article zooms in specifically on some mechanisms for playing wargames on a grid, combined with drawing cards for providing variable movement and firing factors for units, hence introducing uncertainty for the solo wargamer. The visuals are interesting too, I always like to see what games looked like back in the day.

 

 

Robert The Rampant Rides describes a nice little scenario, a raid from Lithuania into Poland. However, no map, so that makes it a bit difficult to imagine what the scenario can look like. A nice suggestion: "I think it's a good idea to name commanders, and it's also an idea to give them names that remind you it's only a game, and not to be taken seriously."

The Nature of ACW Combat, is written by Paul Stevenson, a household name for ACW wargamers. It describes various ACW deployments and how they went into battle. Great stuff for an ACW wargamer!

Then we have nice photo-spread of some Foundry miniatures, probably very new at the time!

Random Thoughts on Random Movement, written by still-active designer Andy Callan, gives us some mechanisms for ... you guessed it, random movement! One involves rolling dice for determining movement distance, another suggests using maps for an aerial bombing raid game (gridded for the umpire, ungridded for the players), such that accuracy will start to deviate on the player's map. As someone who likes to experiment with various mechanisms in my games, I love this sort of article, although I already do use random movement in my own games ;-)

Then another photo spread showing the work of miniature painter Bill Brewer. His work was featured a lot in the wargaming magazines of the day, and served as an example for many figure painters.

The Influence of Technology on Wargaming is written by Don Featherstone. Apart from some historical context on how technology determined warfare (and the other way around), the article has a nice idea, fighting wargames with the same armies throughout a campaign that was fought during let's say 10 years in reality, and adapting the rules slightly over different games to reflect the changes in technology (weapon ranges etc.) as the campaign progresses.

Airmobile Vietnam has some good ideas for fighting games set in the Vietnam War, with the suggestion to fight games as a "multi-player solo", i.e. various players taking one squad, and the enemy played by the umpire, "rather like an rpg". Such a setup seems trivial to me now, but was apparantly still something of a novelty in 1987? 

Battle of the Nile ... an account of the battle of Aboukir Bay, but with little actual wargaming information ... except a mention to Skytrex for where to buy your ship models.

Wargame Demonstrations is an article written by Charles Grant. A lot of advice on how to plan your game, how to set it up, how to run it during the con, how to engage with audience ... To be honest, such articles always seem a bit overanalyzing the issue to me. I have run games for over 20 years at various cons, and the only advice I can give is "talk to the people who come to take a look at your table." No plan survives first contact! Nevertheless, a good photo of Stuart Asquith running a game. Wargamers smoking pipes were once a fashion statement, or so it seems. I also notice a lot of individually-based figures. Must have been a nightmare to move those units!

Kriegsspiel is written by Bill Leeson, who is known for having published a translation of the well-known Prussian game. He gives a good account of the history and various versions of Kriegsspiel, and his adventures on how to track down original publications of Kriegsspiel in libraries. Interesting read!

Sons of the Desert is the last article in this issue, and as the title suggests, gives some historical context of the French Foreign Legion in North Africa, along with some (text only) suggestions for scenarios and figures. Interestingly, the figures listed are Timpo and Britains Deetails, plastic 54mm toy soldiers!

And for a nice advert from yesteryear, here's "Scotia Micromodels", a steady supplier of various ranges, and still in business!

Overall, another good issue, and still entertaining to read 38 years later!

I finally played Commands & Colors Ancients

When it was first published, almost 20 years ago, I bought a box of Commands & Colors: Ancients. Although I did apply  the stickers to the wooden blocks, I never got around playing it, and I sold it at some point. I have played variants of the C&C system (Memoir 44, ...), but never the Ancients version.

Last Friday, my wargaming pal Wim invited me to his club, HQ Gaming Club. They have a large gaming area, with several tables. After some chatting we ended up playing C&C. I was familiar with the overall framework of the game, but not all individual little optimization about what unit is best attacking what other unit etc. Since it also had been some years since Wim played the game, we decided to play the intro scenario - no terrain, and only some basic units present.

I played with the Carthagians, against Syracuse. What can we say? A sound 5-1 victory, after I pushed strongly in the centre battle line of the Syracusans.  Let's call it beginner's luck :-)

Let's read ... Practical Wargamer #1 (Autumn 1987)

I am very much a wargaming magazine collector. I cannot resist buying old copies of various magazines when I see them at a Bring&Buy at wargaming shows, and it is my ambition to somehow preserve and chronicle the history of our hobby this way.

So I decided to start a new series of articles on this blog, going through some magazines of yesteryear. And what better way to start with Practical Wargamer, of which some people say it was the best magazine of the 80s and 90s.

 

The first issue of Practical Wargamer was published in late 1987. The cover says "At Last! The NEW magazine for ALL wargamers!" It probably refers to some discussions that were present in the hobby back then, but my guess it might have to do with the inclusion of fantasy and science fiction. Perhaps some older wargamers can shine a light on this. But more interesting, the launch of Practical Wargamer meant there were now 3 "glossy" magazines published in the UK: , Miniature Wargames (started in 1983), Wargames Illustrated (issue 1 dated September 1987), and Practical Wargamer. Strangely enough, Wargames Illustrated and Practical Wargamer seem to have been launched at the same time?

The table of contents seems promising, but more interesting is the editorial by Stuart Asquith. He refers to previous publications by ARGUS, one of these a booklet called Wargames! of which he says it's now a collectible item! Luckily I have a copy, so let's keep that for a next post. Stuart Asquith (1946 - 2019) is of course a well-known name in wargaming, and a good overview of his contributions to the hobby can be found on Keith's Wargaming Blog or on Henry Hyde's Battlegames.

Now, onto the articles!

The Ancient Period gives a nice overview of how to approach the period in wargaming, and has an extensive list of rules and figures, dated 1987!

Conflict in the East is an historical article, the type of article which was common in pre-internet days, and focuses on the Turks in Eastern Europe in the 16th century.

Trouble at' Mill is a nice skirmish scenario, in which raiders have to destroy a flour mill to break the siege of Marseilles in 1536. It is suggested the game is played as a roleplaying game, although with miniatures on a proper map.

Colonial Rules gives an overview of the colonial period, and cntains some interesting terrain generation mechanism, in which the native player has the advantage of placing terrain that would obscure his troops so he can close in over closed terrain.

Arbeia Reconstructed by Charlie Wesencraft (another well-known name) builds an old Roman fort, which is followed by an article by John Treadaway how one can build a medieval castle. Both interesting articles, but of course somewhat oudated w.r.t. tools and brands of materials used. 

The Franco-Prussian War gives a good overview of the period. I guess this sort of "overview" article was easy, but useful, content for a first issue of a new magazine. The American Civil War does the same.

Painting the Model Horse gives useful hints and tips on how horses can be painted. Always useful to know, and the topic is reiterated every so many years across many magazines! Enamels were still the paints of choice!

Sepoy gives an historical overview of the wars on the Indian subcontinent during the late 18th and early 19th century. The photograph below shows how "empty" some of the wargaming tables were back then. But perhaps nothing has changed?

 

Raid on Vesta is an article by Charles S. Grant, describing a mini-campaign between his well-known imaginations, the Vereinigte Freie Stadte and the Duchy of Lorraine. It is in the typical "Table Top Teaser"-style for which the Grants became well known. A photograph shows his famous Spencer Smith figures. I recognize that figure on the bridge from somewhere, but going through several of Grant's books in my collection, I haven't identified him yet. So any help would be appreciated.

Edit: A recreation of the "Raid on Vesta" mini-campaign can be found on the "Not Just Old School Wargaming" blog.

War Chariots is another historical article, with an overview of the use of chariots during the ancient period.

The Battle of Bywater gives a scenario based on The Lord of the Rings, and is of course set in the Shire.

 

Computers! is by now of course completely outdated ... mentions of the famous ZX Spectrum hobbycomputer on how to use it for wargaming! 

Then we have 2 more historical articles, one focusing on the naval battle at the Falklands in 1914, and one listing TOE for British Reconaissance units during WW2.

A fun aspect of browsing through old magazines is to look at old adverts. I picked out one, for "Plastiform" figures. I never had any of these figures, but we can still see them on the Lost Minis Wiki.

Overall, a nice selection of articles. The "wargaming" articles containing scenarios are still very much usable and inspiring today. The "history" articles are of the type we don't see anymore in wargaming magazines ... all superceded by looking up that information on the internet.

Two new rulesets

So, what does a wargamer do, preparing for the family vacation while the SO is packing the suitcases? Important things, such as making sure we have some shiny new pdf rules with us!

That's why I ordered 2 rulesets: Midgard and Baron's War.

 

Midgard I ordered because I'm always interested in fantasy games, and Baron's War because I have a significant collection of medieval knights dating back to my Warhammer days more than 30 years ago.

I'm not sure whether we will actually play these rules, but stealing good ideas from rulesets and use them in one;s own houserules is a long-standing tradition in miniature wargaming! 

 

Playtesting

In the latest issue of Wargames Soldiers & Strategy (issue 136), Rich Clarke of Too Fat Lardies has some interesting thoughts to share on playtesting wargaming rules. I will not repeat the entire column here (buy the magazine!), but one thing struck me in his opening paragraph.

 

He describes the setup in which rules dynamically evolve over many gaming sessions, and the master document after each game is updated to reflect the experience and insights from the last game. As such, the rules are a "living document", slightly morphing each time. 

It struck a chord with me because that's precisely how I develop my own house rules. I've always been a fan of developing one's own rules, rather than using commercially published rules (although I of course also do the latter!). But it's  an approach that only works in a closed gaming group, with one person clearly in control of the rules.

After each game in which our house rules are used, we usually have a short debriefing session. What worked? What didn't work? What's unnecessary chrome? What is missing? Etc. Over the years, we have evolved towards rulesets that fit our preferred playing style perfectly. But it is a moving target ... rules we were in favour of let's say 5 years ago might not work anymore due to changes in gaming preference, influence from other rules, changing types of scenarios, etc.

Nevertheless, it's an approach that works well. Rather than casting the rules in stone, wargaming rules should be a dynamic. It's completely in sync with the DIY ethos in miniature wargaming. 

The Battle of Neutralville (5)

As I've explained before, after each battle, I do some upkeep for the various units and commanders that were involved. I keep track by using playing cards from an old ACW card game, and add some post-it note to write down the changed characteristics.

First of all, each commander that took part in the battle is rolled for on a table of additional abilities, mishaps, or possibly death.

Union:

• On the right flank, Irvin McDowell was in command, and gains a +1 bonus for movement order.
• The left flank was commanded by Robert C. Schenk,  but he doesn't seem to have picked up additional experience.

Confederacy:

• The right flank was under the command of Jubal A. Early, and he also doesn't gain additional experience.
• The flank that attacked the hill was led by Philip St. George Cock, and he gets a bonus when commanding infantry.

For each side, a unit can be recommended for an additional ability.

• I decided that for the Confederacy, the 2nd Old Dominion Dragoons would receive a bonus, since the took the lead in the cavalry action on the left flank near the hill. The 2nd Old Dominion Dragoons had the "increased unit strength" ability before, but all abilities are lost when a unit is routed., which happened during the Battle of Freeburg (and hence they were reborn as the 2nd of their series :-)). I rolled on the unit advancement table, and funnily enough, they receive the same "increased unit strength" ability again.
• For the Union, the 2nd Old Forest Fusiliers drove off the Confederate cavalry twice, came back, even countercharged, and were boosted by a random events card. They now also receive the "increased strength" bonus. 

 As for routed units, they increase their "number". It fits nicely with the ACW theme, and thus we have:

• 4th Virginia Volunteers
• 2nd Bayou Bourbon Brigade
• 2nd Buffalo Trace Brigade
• 3rd Rebel Oak Infantry

and ...

• 2nd Wild Turkey Volunteers
• 2nd Knob Creek Cavalry
• 2nd Chivas Regal Cavalry

Below you see the updated cards. Sometimes I simply add some marks to the post-it note, but if it becomes too much of a mess, I simply use a new one.

The stars on the officer's cards indicate how many battle they fought in.

The Battle of Neutralville (4)

 The battle continues. Both sides are more or less engaged at close distance now, so the game is devolving into a "continuous" combat mode without too much manoeuvring and movement. So I will just post some additional photos with some comments, spread out over several more turns.

The situation as seen from the Union right flank. The right flank is threatened bu cavalry, while the Confederate troops are still firmly positioned on top of the hill.

The same situation, but as seen from the Confederate side. The southern cavalry is making progress, advancing through the woods.

Disaster strikes for the Confederates, with several units routing!

 

 

This is an opportunity for the Union to advance on the village.

 

Back to the Union right flank. The Confederate cavalry has regrouped somewhat and is ready to roll up the right flank.

However, there is some fierce resistance!

 

In the village, the Confederate troops are still holding on, but the pressure from the Union becomes really severe.

 

Some more action near the Union right flank (as seen from the enemy's side), with Union infantry routing.

 

... and another Confederate unit is routing as well. Units have become so low on morale and strength, that any failed morale test quickly results in a rout.

 

A general overview of the battle.

 

Another general overview.

 

And another one :-)

 

The situation at the end ... 

At this point, I decided to stop the game. Near the village, the Union had succeeded in driving off the Confederacy, but near the hill, the situation was more or less the opposite. However, making an extrapolation based on remaining unit strengths, I concluded that the Union would probably prevail, so they get the moral victory! 

The Battle of Neutralville (3)

 Turn 6:

 The battle continues. In the village, the Union infantry is trying to get a foothold while the COnfederates are still involved in a firefight with the last of the villagers.

On the hill, the Confederate cavalry has countercharged and has routed one of the Union cavalry units.

 Turn 7:

Don Featherstone is quitly watching the wargaming battle ... 

On the hill, the Confederate Cavalry have now completed routed the Union cavalry. It seems the south will capture the hill and therefore win the battle. But we're not there yet. The Union infantry has reorganized at the foot of the hill on the other side, hoping to combine a tremendous amount of fire power.

In Neutralville, the last villagers have been chased away by the Confederate infantry, but the Union is setting up a firm line of troops to capture the village.

Another view of the situation on the hill. The onfederates eem to be in firm control, but the Union still have three fresh infantry units left.

 Turn 8:

A complete overview of the battle. The Confederates are now establishing strong position on the hill.  

As seen from the Confederate side. They have also occupied the windmill, establishing a firm anchor point in the middle of the battle line.

A view on the village, with both sides occupying some of the buildings.

Another view on the hill, with the Union firing line shown on the right.

The Battle of Neutralville (2)

Since I play this game solo, I don;t really want to "win" the game. I rather play the game as an exploration, to see how the battle unfolds.

As neither side could yet see the other, due to the central hill and village, both sides wanted to move forward as soon as possible. Due to our rules, in which one has to roll for unit activation, and then roll for movement distance, the speed at which troops can move during a give turn is variable.

At the end of turn 1, the situation is as follows:

The Confederates have moved the cavalry on their left flank forward, hoping to dash quickly for the hill. The infantry is following at a slower pace. On the right flank, not much progress has yet been made. Note that Napoleon (the Lucky General token) already has switched sides.

The Union moves forward as well, also leading with the cavalry.

A general overview at the end of turn 1:

Let's see what the situation is at the end of turn 2.

The infantry units at the Confederate right flank are moving forward through the corn field. Difficult ground, so they advance slowly. 

The Union Infantry on all flanks have made progress. The Cavalry has taken up position in a small wood.

The Confederate left flank is moving according to plan. The cavalry are well positioned behind the hill, and the plan is that 3 infantry units will occupy the hill such that they can establish a defensive position there.

 

Turn 3:

 The Confederates are reorganizing somewhat at the foot of the hill, while approaching the village. The villagers now roll for alliance, but the die roll says they remain neutral and will take shots at whoever is closest.

The villagers flee in one of the houses. Note I replace a house with a little floorplan to make room for the figures.

The Union infantry sees the villagers, decide they're in the way, and take some shots ...

Turn 4:

The  Confederate infantry has started moving on the hill ... slowly but surely.

On their right flank, the infantry is involved in some firefight with the villagers. The villagers count as a light unit, so should be eliminated quickly (but you never now, they shoot back!)

A close up of the fight in the village. The Rebel Oak Infantry has taken an adjoining house.

The view from the Union right flank. Not their cavalry has come out of the woods, and has swung to the left side of the hill, ready to charge over the top if needed.

The Union left flank is getting organized to take the village.

Turn 5:

The  firefight in the village continues. The Union has also occupied one of the houses.

A view on the village from the Union side.

On the hill the Union cavalry has charged, ans has driven back the Confederate infantry.

Another view on the hill, with an event card played by the Confederate side.

Another view on the village:

Another view from the Union left flank:

To be continued ...