Welcome to my wargaming blog,
I'm Dave and live in Morpeth, Northumberland in the UK.
This may or may not be a regular thing, we'll just have to see how it goes.

I am a painter/collector of figures first and a wargamer second. My thrill in this great hobby of ours is to place that final well researched & painted unit into the cabinet. The actual gaming with the figures is an important but secondary experience, we all like to win, but it isn't the be all and end all of it, being with good friends and having fun is.
Hope you will enjoy reading this blog as much as I will writing in it.
Just to remind the visitor to scroll down the various pages and click on 'older posts' to see more.

Tuesday 12 December 2017

Blucher rules

Having bought Sam Mustafa's Blucher rules almost one year ago Neal and I finally got round to giving them a try a couple of weeks ago. Now I have played a game at the club once before and though it was ok there was something missing.
The game at the club was played with 10mm figures on a very small table and was to be fair the only way the guy who brought them to the club could game in his house because of limited space, good for the lad, he has utilised a set of rules to enable him to game a limited engagement on a 3' by 3' table ending up fighting a head to head battle between in Blucher terms a Division per side. Don't get me wrong, one does what one can with the resources available but it didn't feel right.
There was no grand majestic sweep and manoeuvre of troops that I was looking for in this level of encounter. I wanted a corps level re fight of, if I wished the battle of Borodino with units representing either brigades or divisions, not battalions, unlike a brigade/Division level encounter that can be re fought in say General d'Armee rules.
10mm figures were used at the club game, but one group of figures just didn't give the impression of a brigade or division, it looked like a battalion, you could tell yourself it was a brigade but it just didn't 'feel' right. Again the mechanics of the rules themselves played out ok but there was something missing.
So with that experience under the old belt what now. I still wanted to game a corp level game but didn't want to use maps and counters, each to their own but that don't rock my boat. Hence as has been shown in previous posts Here a decision to go with one base representing a Brigade or Division depending on what scale one is playing, I have made sure that there is more than one 'unit' on each base so that it at least seems to represent a formation rather than an individual battalion or whatever.
The newest additions to the armies can be seen below:

So, slightly disappointed though I was with the Blucher game at the club both Neal and I felt a good bit better about it when we had a go at recreating a Salamanca re fight with each base representing a division. The rules were pretty easy to pick up (though the rule book could do with a better index), the game flowed and 'felt right'. Simultaneously I played out a larger knock together game solo at my place using the unit cards purchased in addition to the rules which enable you to get straight into it without painting figures:

As can be seen the British force got their outnumbered arse kicked, listening Neal!
This isn't a detailed set of rules, subtle but not detailed. You do get the feel that you are manoeuvring with corps, battering the weak point in the enemy's line with your mass artillery and exploiting the gap thus created with your heavy cavalry reserve, sixes hit, fives if you have an additional trait but it does somehow all add up with the feeling your fighting a battle, not an encounter.
I still think it will feel better when I eventually get enough figures done to put them on the table rather than the cards you see above (it's not aesthetically pleasing I have to admit) with maybe a bit more terrain, unnecessary in the rules but visually better.
With a table of the size I have to play on this would be the only set of rules that I have personally encountered which would me to re fight large battles and I'm prepared to make compromises to allow me to do that, add to that the Scharnhorst campaign rules in the book which I have yet to try out and I think we're onto a winner.


  1. Blucher is a great game, really captured the sweep and feel of a massive, full on engagement for us. Good write up:)

    Scharnhorst is brilliant - it takes two "equal" armies and makes an asymmetrical, realistic feeling game out of them. It's possible to screw up though - if one side is very good and/or unhelpful, or both sides are rubbish at it, you can end up with such an unbalanced table top game it's barely worth it. That's not likely after a couple of run throughs, mind, and at ten mins to do you can always scrub one try and have another if it looks too bad.


    1. Looking forward to trying Scharhorst out Nathan.
      P.S. How did you get to 'Toxic Pixie' - brilliant!

    2. Scharnhorst is really good - brilliant way to generate a historical feeling and interesting battle with a bit of issues for both sides!

      Toxic Pixie is because I was small and wired and drank too much :D


    3. Classy bloke I was, in my long buried youth :D

      These days rolling a few dice with a small beer is about the limit of my rock and roll lifestyle!


    4. Tell me about it Nathan, I'm going to have to update my age to 56 in the profile on here on Saturday. For fecks sake!!!

    5. I'm a bit shy of that yet, but I know the feeling. 1992 was like a year back, right? Twenty five years since the new version of Temple of Love was released, jibbers crabsticks!

  2. You are more than welcome my friend

  3. Will follow with interest as Blucher seems to be growing in popularity at our club with the lads seeking a bigger expanse of a game.