RULES PUBLISHED IN WI

[eBob]

www.wargamesillustrated.net/Shop.php

[tombombadilo]

I wont be able to buy this magazine what should I do?

[eBob]

why are you not able to?

[fatty-bolger]

i think it is as he lives in Australia and shipping would be the price of the magizine its self.

but im hoping to pick this up tommorow or saturday.

[eBob]

Well, not sure its in the shops yet - you might not get it in the Shops until 14th Feb.

[cadian]

i got the rules today and what i read they were good

[fatty-bolger]

im hoping to pick them tommorow so i can read them on my car journey. but from the sounds of it sounds great and i can't wait D:

[grimatt]

Picked up my copy today, so far the rules seem very good.
Have you considered adding a dice pack to your range, with all the apropriate dices.
Maybe two special packs:
-English
-Scots

Again, cant wait for the next issue.

[eBob]

I have.. and I could do, but I have to buy quite a lot of dice to get trade discount, so it's a bit of an investment/gamble for me - and not a lot of profit for the effort. It's probably better to leave dice to the dice people that specialise in reselling such stuff. Otherwise I spend all my time packing little dice into little bags for all of 50p profit.

[scarandy]

when is part 2 of the rules out?
many thanks

[longshanks]

According to Wargames Illustrated their next issue (No. 234) will be published on Thursday, 15th March & should include part 2 of Ebob's rules.

[longshanks]

Just got April's edition of Wargames Illustrated & the second part of Ebob's rebelion rules are great. I'm looking forward to the full set of rules being published, either as a book or pdf available from Ebob's web site.
That said, I do feel there are some inconsistencies in the base profiles;
1) The skill level of the Scots Brigand is one higher than the
English Infantry - Why?
2) The Scots Brigand gets a shield for zero points - Why?
3) William Wallace has such a high skill level - Why
From the historical research that I have done on this period there seems to be no real difference in the skill level in either sides infantry. Likewise the English forces were at least as well equipped as the Scots, if not more so. As regard to wallace I can't find any historical documentation that boasts of his great fighting prowess. The books that do seem to have been written hundreds of years after his death.
Are the three points above due to the profiles being based on a certain film, ie Braveheart, rather than historical fact, tho I'm sure some Scots would disagree.
That said, the game mechanics so far are great & I will certainly buy the complete rules when they become available

[eBob]

1) because the Scots are more highly motivated. The English have often had to walk for many weeks, they are tired, unmotivated and lacking supply. Much of the 13th cent English force also consits of levies (not full time soldiers). In game terms, the higher skill balances with English forces higher defence.

2) Because the shield is included in their base profile - notice that despite having better armour the English cost 1pt less.

3) Because he is the leader of the Scottish force - and yes, in my view, he was better than Moray. But his skill is only 1pt more - hardly 'such a high level'. There will be other equivalent named leaders on both sides later - such as The Bruce, De Thweng and others.

The English are better equipped - they have chainmail.
All stories of Wallace boast his fighting prowess - he frequently despatches 3 or 4 opponents even when he is unarmed himself!
There are no books written at the time (that I am aware of), only scant records and speculation - but at the end of it all this is a game - and if the English were equal or better and better equipped and in greater numbers - they would simply win all the games. The fact is however, that Wallace beats the English frequently, not least at Stirling with an inferior force - no cavalry and half the nos. of troops.

Wallace is a hero, of that there is no doubt - names do not go down in history and legend because they were average leaders.
Wallace is much more than an average leader - by any stadards he is one of the greatest leaders of medieval times. In game terms this is refelcted with superior skill, tactics and luck.

In contrast few people could name the leaders of the English armies of the time.

From play testing I reckon that about 9 Scots is equal to about 12 English - which is a nice balance. It means you can have a larger English force but have a fair fight - and that is what you want because invariably, the Scots were greatly outnumbered, but used superior tactics to balance the odds.

Rebellion isn't designed to reinact any of the battles accurately. You'd need a strategic system like DBx and 6mm miniatures to do that. Rebellion is an enjoyable system that will deliver an exciting and balanced game.
When I introduced it to the players at the Kauzenberg event in January, they stopped what they were doing - played Rebellion, and litterally didn't stop for 24 hours! we played through the night and into the next day - stopping only for beer and breakfast - and much rules discussion of course!

The rules for cavalry and archery will add greater dimension still.

[cadian]

i read the rules and i will try and get a game at my local club next week.

and going off topic why is the english banner model supplied with a 25mm base not a 50mm base

[longshanks]

Thanks Ebob for the detailed reply, I don't necessary agree with what you've said, but it would be a boring world if we all thought the same. I fully understand the enthusiasm which the players at Kauzenberg greeted Rebellion, the games a great idea & the figures are beautiful. I myself was waiting yesterday morning outside WH Smiths to get hold of the latest Wargames Illustrated to get the second part of your rules. I hope you have more articles published by them.
That said I do feel the need to reply to some of the points you made in your reply

1)You said that the Scots have a higher skill level because they are better motivated, I thought this was better reflected by the fact that you have given them a higher courage value. As regards tiredness & lack of supply this is better reflected in the troops morale, because when battle is joined & the adrenalin starts pumping these things are forgotten about (re-enactment experience has taught me this).
As both forces operated a feudal system, both sides would have levies in their forces. It could even be argued , that the English skill level should not only be equal to the Scots but should be better, because so many had had experience fighting in Edward's Welsh Wars & his ongoing wars in France.

2)I thought that the reason that the English had one lower point cost, despite better armour was because the Scots had both a higher skill value & a higher courage value.

3)I agree with you about Wallace, he is a leader & for gaming purpose should be good, but there should be quite a few others who should be at least as good if not better. As regards the stories about Wallace they are just that stories, that get more fanciful each time they are told, before long Wallace will have won the battle of Stirling Bridge single handedly. As for an unarmed man beating four armed & armoured men, all I can say is that me & three of my re-enactment friends are happy for anyone to try. The trouble is that most of the stories about Wallace were told by Scots to important & powerful fellow Scots, were it was important & prudent to venerate ones national hero. When studying history at University we were always told to ask who had written the document, why had they written the document & to whom was the document for.

As regards the forces involved they were fairly evenly matched in numbers at Falkirk & especially at Stirling Bridge. A lot of authors have fallen for the fact that people exaggerated the numbers when they win to make the victory all the greater & exaggerated them again to explain why they lost, instead of researching the facts for themselves. Its a all to common problem nowadays of authors not bothering to do historical research for themselves but just copying others works & repeating the mistakes of their predecessors. There are a few books that don't follow this genre, one of these published by osprey is "Stirling Bridge & Falkirk 1297-98". Which is an easy read & seems to be fairly well researched, I would recommend it to anyone interested in this period as a starting point.

In gaming terms I had thought of Rebellion more of skirmish game rather than large scale battles (I could be wrong). Were isolated English garrisons were out numbered in a mostly (but not exclusively) hostile countryside awaiting supply & re-enforcement.

Anyway I'm Sorry for such a long rant, its the historian in me thats always wanting the correct facts, & the historical inaccuracies of Braveheart & other Hollywood films are a pet hate of mine. I don't mean any of the above to be taken as criticism, I just wanted to put a different point of view across.
I look forward to your ever expanding range of figures & intend to buy the whole range, but please slow down on the release of new figures (only Joking), as you seem to be able to sculpt them faster than I can paint them. I'm also looking forward to the Full Rebellion rules when you publish them.
Keep Up The Good Work