|
What better way of learning about the British Empire than recreating battles or campaigns?
There are myriad companies producing board games and miniatures so that almost any campaign
can be reproduced. Games and figure manufacturers agree that the British Empire makes a
wonderful backdrop for their products. The ranges on offer are constantly improved and updated.
It can be hard to keep abreast of all the developments, but this section is my attempt to bring
together various rules, figures, and boardgames in one place.
Colonial wargaming has a long history. You can go back to H. G. Wells’
Little Wars
or Donald Featherstone’s
Skirmish Wargaming.
Wargaming heritage doesn’t get much better than that. It can be done in any scale from 2mm to 54mm
(and probably larger).
Of course, there are many different periods that can be covered in colonial wargaming. Most people
instinctively think of Victorian-era games, but it can encompass anything from the time of
Sir Francis Drake
to the Falklands War.
The geographical reach of colonial wargaming is possibly the widest of any genre, offering a wealth of choice.
Personally, I like to use 15mm figures and have ranges that cover the
Indian Mutiny,
the Sudan, the Boer Wars, Afghanistan, the North West Frontier, and plenty of Zulus! I find 15mm figures
offer good value for money and strike a balance between skirmishes and larger battles. For huge battles
such as Isandlwana, 6mm is probably the way to go. The advantage of 25/28mm figures is the greater
characterisation and variety available, making them particularly well suited to skirmish games.
An interesting development is the rise of hard plastic figures. These are cheaper than lead figures
and easier to modify or convert. Soft plastic figures have been available for years, but they tend
to flake paint over time. Hard plastic figures do not suffer from this problem, making them a durable
and versatile option for hobbyists.
In no particular order I will start going through the various rules sets that are available to recreate colonial wargames. On the right hand side you can see links for various figures that you might use with these and also I will post accounts of battles that I have recreated.
As for rules, I have to say that I am a huge fan of The Sword and the Flame rules which I have used with students at school and at various conventions. They are not that common in the UK but they are well worth seeking out! They are much more popular in the States where they are easier to source.
For those who prefer more modern rules for the Decolonisation and End of Empire era, Ganesha Games publishes a set called 'Flying Lead' which provides good low intensity simulations. You can read a battle report of one such example from the Borneo Confrontation here and one on the Indonesian Coup of 1965 here.
Heroic Battles of Derring‑Do
Heroic Battles of Derring‑Do is a distinctive and richly characterful ruleset for Victorian and Edwardian warfare, designed by Stephen Luscombe, whose long association with colonial history and wargaming is well known through britishempire.co.uk and the Colonial Wargames group. The rules embrace the colour, unpredictability, and individual heroics of nineteenth‑century campaigning, while offering a streamlined, intuitive system that plays quickly and rewards decisive command.
Heroic Battles of Derring‑Do is a distinctive and richly characterful ruleset for Victorian and Edwardian warfare, designed by Stephen Luscombe,whose long association with colonial history and wargaming is well known through britishempire.co.uk and the Colonial Wargames Facebook Group. The rules embrace the colour, unpredictability, and individual heroics of nineteenth‑century campaigning, while offering a streamlined, intuitive system that plays quickly and rewards decisive command.
Although conceived with the Indian Mutiny, Zulu War, Sudan, and similar small wars in mind, the mechanics adapt seamlessly to conflicts between industrialised armies. The American Civil War, the Franco‑Prussian War, and even hypothetical European clashes all fall naturally within its scope. This breadth is one of the system’s strengths: it captures the feel of the era without tying itself to a single theatre.
At the heart of the game lies the Deck of Fate, a fifty‑four‑card engine that determines which side acts, how many activations a unit receives, and when the turn ends. This card‑driven initiative system creates a battlefield that feels fluid and unpredictable. Units may receive one, two, or three actions, and the sudden appearance of a Joker can halt a turn before a commander has completed his intentions. The result is a game in which timing, nerve, and adaptability matter as much as raw firepower.
The companion Deck of Fortune adds further texture. Drawn only when a Joker appears, it introduces weather shifts, confusion, reinforcements, equipment failures, truces, and other battlefield incidents. These events are scenario‑tunable and can be expanded or reduced to taste. The Deck of Fortune is one of the system’s most atmospheric elements, injecting narrative moments that feel entirely in keeping with the period.
Troop organisation is clear and historically grounded. Western infantry are grouped in sections of ten under a Corporal, cavalry in eights, and artillery crews vary by gun size. Native forces field larger bodies of twelve warriors, with armament varying by culture. Headquarters units are fully modelled, with officers, NCOs, musicians, and standard‑bearers exerting command influence across the field. The command system is elegant: units without leaders cannot advance unless within the Headquarters’ radius, and musicians double this range, reflecting the real importance of battlefield communication.
Formations are handled with care. Western troops may adopt Close Order, Open Order, or Square, each with clear advantages and limitations. Native warriors operate in Mass Order, gaining a wide field of fire but lacking the discipline of drilled troops. Coherency rules ensure units behave as cohesive bodies, and the system for reconstituting formations around the Colours is both practical and evocative.
Movement blends fixed and variable elements. Every unit receives a guaranteed first activation of movement, preventing the frustration common in some card‑driven systems. Additional activations introduce uncertainty without undermining basic manoeuvrability. Terrain effects are straightforward, and the rules for roads, obstacles, and buildings are intuitive.
Ranged combat is one of the strongest parts of the system. Every unwounded soldier fires with a d20, and results range from kills to wounds to recoil effects. The recoil mechanism is particularly effective, modelling the way sustained fire can push units back even without heavy casualties. Cover, formation, troop quality, and range all modify the roll, but the system remains fast and easy to apply. Artillery is handled with clarity, with separate rules for round‑shot, canister, and shrapnel, and the inclusion of Gatlings, pom‑poms, and early machine guns adds flavour without complexity.
Melee is fought figure‑to‑figure, allowing individual exploits to matter without bogging the game down. Wounded men withdraw behind the line, leaders can fall, and numerical advantage matters — but not overwhelmingly. The system produces tense, decisive combats that feel appropriate to the era.
Morale is simple but effective. Units accumulate casualty markers that reduce their fighting ability until rallied, and the presence of officers, NCOs, musicians, and the Colours all influence their steadiness. The rules encourage players to value their leaders and maintain cohesion, reinforcing the period feel.
Perhaps the most appealing aspect of Heroic Battles of Derring‑Do is its narrative focus. The rules actively encourage naming figures, tracking their exploits, and awarding honours. The system naturally generates memorable moments: heroic stands, sudden reversals, improbable survivals, and the kind of battlefield drama that Victorian illustrators loved to depict. It is a game designed not for tournament precision but for shared storytelling.
The presentation is characterful, with period quotations, clear diagrams, and a tone that reflects the author’s deep affection for the era. Despite the flavourful prose, the rules themselves are crisp, logical, and easy to reference. The inclusion of scenarios, siege rules, and a comprehensive glossary adds further value.
In conclusion, Heroic Battles of Derring‑Do is a modern contribution to Victorian and Edwardian wargaming that stands comfortably alongside the classics. It offers faster play and clearer mechanics than many older systems, while retaining the charm, colour, and unpredictability that make the period so appealing. Whether recreating historical engagements or exploring imagined conflicts between European powers, the rules provide a flexible, engaging, and thoroughly enjoyable framework. For players who value narrative, character, and the spirit of adventure, this is a system that rewards repeated play.
The Sword and the Flame
The Sword and the Flame (TSATF), created by Larry Brom in 1979, remains one of the most enduring and beloved rulesets for colonial wargaming especially in North America. Designed primarily for skirmish to mid-sized battles, it is fast, fun, and cinematic. If you want your tabletop games to feel like a Hollywood blockbuster version of history, this is the set for you.
The rules take their name from Kipling’s poetry and are firmly rooted in the “Golden Age” of the British Empire, covering conflicts from around 1830 through to the First World War. Players can command British or European colonial forces, their native auxiliaries, or indigenous opponents such as Zulus, Dervishes, Pathans, Boers, or Egyptians. The asymmetry of these matchups is part of the charm, producing colourful and unpredictable games.
TSATF is designed around 25/28mm figures on single bases, but works equally well in 20mm or 15mm. Units are the core organisational element: infantry are grouped in 20 figures plus leaders, cavalry in 12 figures plus leaders. Europeans can form line, column, square, or open formations, while native forces rely more on mobility, ambush, and massed charges.
The mechanics were innovative and remain distinctive. Normal playing cards determine initiative, with red cards activating European units and black cards activating native units. Movement is randomised by dice rolls, adding unpredictability and drama. Shooting uses D20 rolls against a Fire Table, modified by range, cover, and formation. Casualties are tracked individually, and further cards determine whether hits strike ordinary soldiers, specialists, or leaders. Morale is tested with 2D6 rolls, influenced by casualties, leaders lost, or abandoned wounded.
Weaponry is fully represented: breech-loading rifles, jezails, cannon, Gatling and Gardner guns, alongside traditional spears, swords, and clubs. Native forces must use terrain, ambushes, and sheer numbers to offset European firepower. Ambush mechanics, using numbered terrain markers, encourage scenario play and creative tactics.
The rulebook includes a tutorial scenario, painting guides, and terrain-building tips. Over the years, TSATF has inspired countless expansions and fan-made variants, covering the Boxer Rebellion, French Foreign Legion, James Brooke’s conquest of Sarawak, and even fantasy, Roman, Wild West, and pulp adaptations. Players often add house rules, such as treating wounds as kills to speed play, or allowing Europeans to split into smaller detachments for flexibility.
Perhaps the most famous aspect of TSATF is its ability to generate dramatic, film-like outcomes. Games often feature heroic last stands, leaders cut down at the moment of victory, or improbable survivals that swing the battle. This unpredictability is part of the enduring appeal, making every game memorable.
That said, the rules may feel a little dated now and there are a few oddities in places. Charges take some getting used to, with stragglers and rolls to charge or to “stand and receive” that can feel quite random — usually at critical moments. Some players dislike the individual fighting system and regard it as a bit of a pfaff to implement, although I personally enjoy the feel of individual combat and find it often provides the climax to a battle. In many ways, these rules replicate Hollywood representations of colonial battles rather than the historical engagements themselves — but is that necessarily a bad thing?
The 20th Anniversary Edition is a 55-page black-and-white softcover, illustrated with diagrams and period artwork by Caton Woodville. It includes Quick Reference Sheets and the Sword in Africa expansion for small-unit actions. The bibliography and campaign notes provide historical grounding, while hobby tips add practical value.
In conclusion, The Sword and the Flame remains a classic of colonial wargaming. Its mix of simple mechanics, innovative card-driven play, and colourful asymmetry captures the drama of the period like no other set. Whether you want to recreate Isandlwana, the Sudan campaigns, or pulp adventures with steam contraptions, TSATF offers a flexible and entertaining framework. For colonial wargamers, it is provides the standard by which all other colonial rules sets measure themselves against.
Wars of Insurgency Wargames Rules — A Review
Wars of Insurgency, written by Mike Demana and published by First Command Wargames, is a compact ruleset designed for skirmish conflicts in the post‑colonial world. Its focus is on the turbulent decades from the 1950s onwards, when newly independent nations and insurgent movements clashed across Africa, Asia, and beyond. The rules deliberately avoid naming specific countries, instead presenting generic factions that can stand in for the myriad struggles of decolonisation and its aftermath.
Movement is one of the system’s most elegant features. Infantry move 8 inches per turn as a default, but crossing jungle, barriers, rivers, or entering buildings through windows requires a D6 roll to subtract that many inches. Alternatively, units may move at half speed and gain light cover, representing careful use of terrain and natural undulations. Even in the open, troops can move 4 inches and count as in light cover, gaining an extra save roll in combat. These rules are simple but effective, and ideal for non‑experts or convention players to grasp quickly.
The activation system is equally innovative. Each player assigns numbered chips to their units in the order they wish them to act. Initiative is rolled, and the winner moves their “chip 1” unit, followed by other players’ chip 1 units, and so on. Officers can swap chip assignments for tactical flexibility. This mechanic keeps large multiplayer games flowing smoothly, while also reflecting the unpredictability of insurgency warfare. In practice, it produces tense, chaotic turns that feel true to the nature of post‑colonial conflicts.
Combat is straightforward yet nuanced. Regular troops roll two dice to fire small arms, hitting on 4+ with D6s. Light and heavy machine guns roll more dice. Defenders save by rolling 5+ on 2D6, modified by cover. Commanders, classified as professional, gain an extra die to hit and save (three dice rather than two). This creates a clear discrepancy in troop quality: militia forces are fragile and unreliable, regulars are competent, and professionals are powerful but scarce. That imbalance is central to the rules, capturing the gulf between hastily raised insurgents, tribal militias, and professional soldiers backed by superpowers or former colonial powers.
Six factions are provided: People’s Popular Front, Colonial Power/Settlers, Armed Force of a Nation, Religious Movement, Superpower‑Backed Client Forces, and Tribal Militia. These archetypes map neatly onto the conflicts of decolonisation — from settler regimes and nationalist armies to tribal militias and Cold War proxy forces. Some critics note similarities to Peter Pig’s AK‑47 Republic, but the factions here are broad enough to cover the political and military realities of the post‑colonial world without being tied to specific names or countries.
Campaign rules allow factions to grow from Obscure Movements to Major Power Brokers, gaining special abilities along the way. These mechanics encourage linked scenarios and reflect the trajectory of many real insurgencies, from small bands of fighters to dominant political forces. Special rules such as Fanaticism or Carry Out Atrocities add flavour, though they also highlight the political character of the conflicts being simulated.
On the negative side, melee rules are absent from the core book. The author notes that close combat is rare, but provides a simple fallback: figures roll their base small arms dice for attack and defence, modified by tactical circumstances. While functional, this omission can feel incomplete. Some players may also find the faction system derivative, though others appreciate its clarity and adaptability.
In conclusion, Wars of Insurgency is an excellent choice for representing late colonial, decolonisation and post‑colonial conflicts. Its mechanics are simple, fast, and accessible, making it ideal for convention play or introducing new players. With only 30 miniatures per side required, it is easy to collect and play. The rules capture the asymmetry of decolonisation warfare — the clash of poorly trained militias against professional soldiers, the improvisation of insurgents against the firepower of colonial or client states. While not perfect, the system succeeds in delivering flavourful, engaging games that reflect the drama and imbalance of post‑colonial conflicts. For anyone interested in modern insurgency or the wars of decolonisation, it is highly recommended.
Congo Wargame Rules — A Review
Congo, published by Studio Tomahawk, is a richly produced set of skirmish rules set in 19th‑century Central Africa. The rulebook itself is a handsome 108‑page hardback, accompanied by a bespoke deck of cards, punch‑out tokens, and measuring sticks. It is a game that consciously situates itself in the imaginative world of Victorian adventure literature, drawing upon the imagery of “Darkest Africa” as it was portrayed in the press and fiction of the time. The presentation is lavish, with full‑colour illustrations and miniatures from Wargames Foundry, and it immediately signals that this is a product designed to immerse players in a particular atmosphere.
The system is intended for two or more players on a 6′ × 4′ table, though many find that a smaller 4′ × 4′ surface suffices. Each player commands a “Column” of roughly thirty figures, drawn from one of four factions: White Men Expeditions, the Sultanate of Zanzibar, Forest Tribes, or African Kingdoms. These Columns combine individual Characters, Auxiliaries, and Groups, giving a balance of personality and unit cohesion. Foundry and North Star both provide ready‑made warbands, easing entry into the system, though the investment in miniatures is only part of the overall commitment required.
At its core, Congo is card‑driven. Each turn is divided into phases in which players select and reveal Action Cards, dictating movement, shooting, or influence actions. Initiative values determine order of play, while Totem Cards add unpredictability and tactical nuance. This mechanic borrows from board games but adapts well to miniatures, forcing players to plan carefully and anticipate their opponent’s choices. Stress tokens, rally actions, and the use of polyhedral dice (D6, D8, D10) to represent troop quality add further layers of decision‑making. The result is a system that is both accessible and strategically demanding.
 |
|
|
The scenarios are one of the game’s strongest features. Eight adventures are presented in the style of fictional newspaper reports, complete with maps, objectives, and special rules. These scenarios often include wildlife or unexpected encounters — crocodiles, lions, or even a giant gorilla — reinforcing the pulp‑adventure atmosphere. The effect is to transform the tabletop into a narrative space, where the game is less about simulation and more about storytelling.
Mechanically, the rules are clear and well‑structured. Movement is simplified by requiring groups to remain in base‑to‑base contact, eliminating fiddly coherency issues. Shooting ranges are deliberately short — generally 6″ to 12″ — which ensures tense, close‑quarters engagements but can feel artificially restrictive. Melee and influence actions are resolved with straightforward dice rolls against a target number of five, with troop quality expressed through the type of dice rolled. This system is easy to learn and quick to play, though it does generate a proliferation of counters on the table.
There are, however, several criticisms worth noting. The treatment of buildings is minimal, with most simply classed as obstacles unless a scenario dictates otherwise — a simplification that sidesteps the complexity of urban combat but feels like a missed opportunity. Weapon ranges are curtailed to the point of abstraction, arguably sacrificing realism for mechanical neatness. The insistence on tight group formations detracts from the skirmish aesthetic, producing clumps of figures rather than looser patrols. Most significantly, the game requires a considerable investment in proprietary components: action cards, totem cards, stress tokens, measuring sticks, and assorted chits. While these accessories are beautifully produced, they add to the cost and complexity of entry, and some players may find the reliance on bespoke materials excessive compared to more traditional rulesets.
Despite these reservations, Congo succeeds in its central aim: to deliver a colourful, fast‑paced, and narrative‑driven game of colonial adventure. The armies are small, painting is manageable, and the scenarios are rich with atmosphere. For those seeking a departure from mainstream periods such as Napoleonics or World War II, Congo offers a distinctive blend of wargaming mechanics and pulp storytelling. It is not a simulation of historical African warfare, but rather a game inspired by the adventure fiction and imagery of the late 19th century — and in that role, it excels.
The Men Who Would Be Kings — A Review
Daniel Mersey’s The Men Who Would Be Kings, part of the Osprey Wargames Series, continues his distinctive approach to rules design. Known for Lion Rampant, Dragon Rampant, and Dux Bellorum, Mersey has carved out a reputation for games that blend historical inspiration with a cinematic, “Hollywood” sensibility. This latest work tackles the sprawling field of colonial wargaming, a period that spans continents and conflicts, and does so with a set of design objectives that are both ambitious and pragmatic: quick play, personality-driven leadership, small-scale actions, broad troop types, scenario-driven play, and balanced mechanics.
The rules build upon the familiar framework of Lion Rampant, but they are not a simple reskin. Units activate through leadership tests, yet unlike earlier Rampant titles, a failed activation does not end the player’s turn — it merely leaves that unit inactive while others continue. Each troop type has a “free action” that can always be performed: Regulars may fire, Natives may go to ground. This ensures that units are never entirely inert, though they may not always act as their commander intends. The system also includes provisions for solo play and GM-led scenarios, broadening its accessibility.
Force construction is straightforward. Troops are divided into Regulars, Irregulars, and Natives, with further distinctions between infantry, mounted infantry, and cavalry. This abstraction allows the rules to cover diverse conflicts without drowning the player in detail. Combat resolution is equally streamlined: dice are rolled against unit stats, successes translate into hits, and cover or range modifies the outcome. The mechanics are simple, but they capture the friction and uncertainty of colonial warfare.
There are, however, limitations. The turn sequence is essentially “I go, you go,” which can lead to stretches where one player is passive, merely removing casualties. While the small scale of engagements mitigates this, it remains a structural weakness compared to more dynamic systems. Campaign rules are notably absent, replaced instead by solo-play mechanics under the rubric of “Mr. Babbage.” Given the emphasis on leaders and personalities, a campaign framework would have been a natural fit. Terrain is abstracted to avoid slowing play, and pinning is central: units under fire or defeated in melee may be pinned, leaving them only able to rally. This mechanic is effective, but it can dominate the flow of the game.
Leadership traits are handled more broadly than in Mersey’s earlier works. Each unit has its own leader with randomized qualities, ranging from hapless to heroic. This spreads personality across the force and creates friction without unbalancing the game. Leaders can be killed, further affecting unit reliability. Optional rules, such as limited ammunition and theatre-specific adjustments, add flavour, while the scenario selection provides a solid foundation for varied play.
In practice, the rules shine in smaller, irregular conflicts. They are well-suited to colonial campaigns such as the Anglo-Zulu War, the Sudan, or even less commonly gamed theatres like the Dakota War of 1862 or the Italo-Turkish War. They streamline force selection and achieve Mersey’s stated objectives, but the IGOUGO sequence may frustrate players who prefer more interactive mechanics. Compared to The Sword and the Flame, which offers push-your-luck turn dynamics, The Men Who Would Be Kings feels lighter and simpler which some will like. For those who enjoy narrative-driven play, Congo by Studio Tomahawk offers a different flavour of colonial adventure, with its card-driven mechanics and pulp atmosphere.
Ultimately, this is a ruleset that delivers what it promises: quick, personality-driven colonial battles with minimal overhead. It is not a simulation, nor does it aspire to be. Instead, it offers a flexible, enjoyable framework for evenings of gaming, particularly for those who value narrative and atmosphere over granular detail. For many, that balance will be exactly what they seek; for others, it may feel too light. Either way, Mersey has once again demonstrated his ability to craft rules that are both playable and evocative, ensuring that The Men Who Would Be Kings earns its place on the shelf of colonial wargamers.
Sharp Practice Wargames Rules
Sharp Practice, published by Two Fat Lardies, is often mislabelled as a Napoleonic skirmish game, yet its true strength lies in its adaptability across the entire black powder era. For colonial wargaming, it offers a distinctive blend of unpredictability, narrative depth, and tactical friction. Unlike tournament‑oriented systems, Sharp Practice is designed as a collaborative storytelling experience. Players are encouraged to inhabit the world of literary heroes — Flashman, Digby Geste, or Richard Sharpe — leading their men through missions that are as much narrative as tactical: rescuing captives, uncovering spies, or seizing treasures. In this respect, the rules verge on role‑playing, with leaders acquiring names, personalities, and motivations that evolve as the game unfolds.
The rulebook contains dedicated sections for the French and Indian War, the American War of Independence, and the Indian Mutiny. These provide tailored lists and scenarios that capture the flavour of those conflicts. Yet the system is flexible enough that it can be adapted with little difficulty to most other colonial skirmishes — from the Anglo‑Zulu War to frontier campaigns in Africa or Asia. Its emphasis on leaders, formations, and narrative makes it a natural fit for any setting where small forces clash in the shadow of empire.
 |
|
|
The colonial dimension is particularly well served by the rules’ attempt to capture the two competing dynamics of 18th and 19th century warfare. On one side stand the disciplined ranks of regulars, drilled to deliver volleys and hold ground. On the other, agile skirmishers — irregulars, tribal warriors, or light troops — exploit terrain, ambush, and mobility. Sharp Practice models this tension with elegance: formations are powerful but unwieldy, while skirmishers are dynamic and often decisive. This duality mirrors the historical reality of colonial battlefields, where European fire discipline met indigenous flexibility.
The game’s asynchronous activation system is central to its appeal. Leaders act when their card or chit is drawn, spending command points to move, fire, rally, or form up. This ensures that the order of play is unpredictable, reflecting the chaos of real combat. A clever mechanic allows players to store cards and interrupt opponents mid‑action, creating interactive turns that feel alive and tense. Units accumulate “shock” — a morale measure that gradually reduces effectiveness and can eventually force them from the field. This mechanic captures the psychological strain of colonial warfare as much as the physical.
Sharp Practice is also notable for its narrative emphasis. Leaders are not mere stat blocks; they are characters whose quirks and charisma shape the unfolding story. Minor characters, scenario‑specific tasks, and role‑playing elements enrich the experience, making each game feel like a chapter in a larger tale. Terrain and deployment points reinforce this narrative, allowing troops to appear from hidden routes or ambush positions, echoing the unpredictability of colonial engagements.
The rulebook is not without flaws. Its organisation can feel scattered, with key mechanics tucked away in unexpected sections, and clarity sometimes sacrificed for flavour. Yet once mastered, the system rewards players with a game that is cinematic, unpredictable, and deeply narrative. It is not about “winning at all costs” but about telling stories of leaders under pressure, troops wavering under fire, and the ebb and flow of colonial battlefields. For those who value narrative depth, interactive turns, and the interplay of formations and skirmishers, Sharp Practice remains one of the most evocative sets of colonial rules available.
Battles for Empire II Wargames Rules
Battles for Empire II, 1870–1914 by Chris Leach is a ruleset that captures the flavour of Victorian colonial warfare while remaining accessible and tactically engaging. Unlike many skirmish‑focused systems, BFE2 is pitched at the operational level, allowing players to command medium to large forces without the game becoming unwieldy. Each unit is represented by four stands — a company of regulars or a native clan — giving the tabletop the look and feel of a substantial battle while still being manageable in scope. The scale of roughly 1:25 per figure means that iconic engagements such as Isandlwana, Rorke’s Drift, or Tamai can be recreated convincingly, yet the rules are flexible enough to accommodate fictional scenarios or less well‑known campaigns.
The rulebook covers campaigns fought up to 1914, with tailored material for theatres such as the Zulu War, the Sudan, the Boer conflicts, and the North‑West Frontier. The accompanying scenario booklet reinforces this breadth, offering historical and fictional battles ranging from Khambula and Ahmed Kheyl to gunboat actions in the Boxer Rebellion. This adaptability is one of BFE2’s strengths: while the system provides dedicated lists and mechanics for popular conflicts, it can be applied with little difficulty to almost any colonial setting.
Mechanically, BFE2 combines traditional wargame structures with modern design ideas. The movement system, reminiscent of Fire & Fury, introduces friction into play: limbering, unlimbering, manoeuvring, and firing all require forethought, forcing players to anticipate rather than react. This friction is not a flaw but a feature, modelling the difficulty of coordinating troops under fire. The integrated morale system further enhances realism, as units accumulate pressure and may falter or break, reflecting the psychological strain of combat as much as the physical. Dice rolls can produce dramatic swings — a string of 1s or 6s can lurch the battle in unexpected directions — but these extremes balance out over the course of play, adding drama without undermining fairness.
In play, the rules proved remarkably easy to pick up and flowed smoothly once the basics were understood. Battles moved along at a satisfying pace and conveyed the feel of medium‑to‑large engagements without ever becoming cumbersome. The movement process can feel awkward at first — akin to performing three‑point turns — but that awkwardness adds to the dynamics, reminding players that real commanders faced similar challenges in manoeuvring troops. Limbering, unlimbering, moving, and firing all demand anticipation, and the friction of these processes creates a rewarding sense of tension. The unpredictability of dice results further contributes to the drama, with extreme rolls producing sudden shifts of momentum that heighten the narrative.
Visually, BFE2 works well with 15mm figures mounted on 25mm bases, producing a massed‑battle aesthetic that enhances immersion. The absence of a mandatory basing scheme allows flexibility, and the concise 68‑page rulebook, presented in grayscale with clear charts and diagrams, makes printing inexpensive and practical. While the production values are modest compared to glossy hardbacks, the clarity of the mechanics and the breadth of coverage more than compensate.
Ultimately, Battles for Empire II bridges the gap between skirmish‑level colonial games and grand tactical systems. It allows players to command brigades of regulars while still experiencing the unpredictability of native warfare. The scenario booklet ensures variety, while the rules themselves encourage narrative play and historical flavour. For those seeking a colonial ruleset that delivers medium‑to‑large battles with tactical subtlety, narrative richness, and a satisfying flow, BFE2 is a standout choice. My experiences with the system left me impressed by how quickly it clicked, how well it conveyed the feel of a real battle, and how keen I was to explore it further.
Flying Lead Wargames Rules
Flying Lead, by Rich Jones and Andrea Sfiligoi for Ganesha Games, is a compact, adaptable skirmish system that thrives on friction and asymmetry. It takes the Song of Blades and Heroes activation core and transposes it into firearms, vehicles, and modern terrain without losing speed or clarity. The result is a ruleset that lets the quality of troops, the risk of over‑extension, and the humility of cover do the talking, rather than dense subsystems or brittle granularity.
 |
|
|
Activation is the heartbeat. You choose whether a model attempts one, two, or three actions, roll that many dice, and compare against the figure’s Quality to see what actually happens. Fail twice and your turn ends, which is exactly the sort of gut‑clench that makes cautious patrols feel different from confident regulars. Combat resolves on opposed d6s with weapon and situational modifiers, and outcomes swing from kills and out‑of‑action results to shaken or dive‑for‑cover moments that interrupt momentum without drowning you in bookkeeping.
Movement is measured in short, medium, and long bands; most figures move up to medium per action, with terrain turning clever choices into survival. Overwatch, group activations, sweeping bursts, and vehicle rules (down to motorbikes and stunts) sit in the wings, ready when a scenario needs them. There’s a points system if you want it, but the rules breathe best when you write a scenario and let the table’s story unfold.
This all translates beautifully to late colonial independence and post‑colonial conflicts. Insurgent or militia forces can be numerous, low‑Quality, and terrain‑savvy, while professional or client‑state troops are scarce, higher‑Quality, and better equipped. The turn‑ending risk punishes overreach and rewards disciplined sequencing, so insurgent friction is felt and regular competence matters. You can model raids, ambushes, punitive columns, cordon‑and‑search, or convoy actions without inventing a new rules vocabulary every time.
In play, the most historically sensible choice tends to be the strongest one: close on cover, coordinate fire, and time your bursts when the enemy is exposed or shaken. That holds whether the table shows commandos against recon troops, Mau Mau fighters against settler police, or a tribal militia pressing a roadblock manned by professionals. The rules stay out of the way while making each decision meaningful, which is exactly what these small‑unit wars demand.
There are, however, some criticisms worth noting. The movement sticks, elegant for short and medium ranges, can feel fiddly when you are trying to model the long reach of relatively modern weapons. The constant tallying of pluses and minuses for firing — cover, range, weapon bonuses, quality differences — can become a little cumbersome and laborious, especially in larger games. Grenades and high‑explosive weapons are handled in a rather odd fashion that doesn’t quite capture their real battlefield effect, feeling more like a mechanical workaround than a convincing simulation. These quirks don’t ruin the system, but they do remind you that Flying Lead is a light framework rather than a detailed simulation.
Flying Lead is light but not flimsy. It moves quickly, handles narrative without melodrama, and invites linked scenarios with minimal overhead. The price is modest, the learning curve is gentle, and you can use whatever figures you already own. If you want a skirmish game that lets late colonial independence and post‑colonial wars feel like themselves — asymmetric, tense, and improvised — this is one of the most flexible frameworks you can put on the table, even if you occasionally wrestle with its abstractions.
Death in the Dark Continent Wargames Rules
Death in the Dark Continent by Chris Peers is a substantial set of rules that aims to capture the flavour of late nineteenth‑century warfare in Africa. The production values are impressive, with a hardback presentation, lavish illustrations, and extensive historical notes. The inclusion of comprehensive army lists and quick reference sheets makes the book feel complete and well indexed, and the historical commentary adds depth beyond the mechanics themselves. It is clear that Peers has invested considerable thought into making the rules both playable and evocative of the period.
The system plays in a manner familiar to those who have used Peers’ earlier rules, but the major difference lies in the adoption of multi‑figure bases rather than individual figures. This change shifts the feel of the game from skirmish to small battle, and it allows larger tribal armies to be represented more convincingly. For players reluctant to rebase existing collections, movement trays provide a workable compromise, though the larger bases can cause some confusion in determining line of sight. Clarification from the community has helped: two corners of a base must be visible to the attacker, which is a neat solution but one that requires careful handling on the tabletop.
Morale is the decisive factor in most combats. In practice, units tend to break from accumulated disorder and failed morale tests rather than being destroyed outright. In one of our games only two bases were lost to critical hits, yet morale collapses determined the outcome. This emphasis on morale feels appropriate to the period, reflecting the fragility of forces once cohesion is lost, but it also means that leadership and positioning are paramount. The rules reward players who manage morale carefully and punish those who expose raw or unsteady troops to prolonged fire.
One aspect of the rules that stands out is the sheer number of modifiers. Shooting and melee both involve up to sixteen separate factors, some additive and some subtractive, which inevitably slows the pace of play as players tally the maths. For some, this granularity is a strength, offering texture and detail that reward careful calculation and give a sense of period nuance. For others, the mixture of positive and negative adjustments can feel cumbersome, and a more streamlined approach might improve processing speed and flow. In practice, the modifiers provide depth and flavour, but they do so at the expense of simplicity, leaving players to decide whether they value detail or elegance more highly.
Close combat is handled in a way that some may find counterintuitive. Unit size does not directly affect the modifiers, which means that a small unit can fight with the same effectiveness as a larger one, at least in terms of combat resolution. This feels odd, and it will be interesting to see how native armies fare under these rules, since their advantage often lay in mass and momentum. The abstraction works, but it may leave some players unconvinced.
What sets Death in the Dark Continent apart from most colonial rules is its encouragement of native‑versus‑native battles and multi‑sided campaigns. The extensive army lists and troop classifications allow subtle but important differences between protagonists to shine through. Zulus, Buganda, Ethiopians, Mahdists, and many others are given distinctive qualities that make inter‑tribal wars and complex campaigns engaging and historically resonant. This breadth is unusual in colonial wargaming, which often focuses narrowly on European versus indigenous matchups, and it makes DitDC a richer and more versatile system.
Overall, Death in the Dark Continent is a strong and atmospheric set of rules. It feels more like a variation on a theme than a dramatic improvement over Peers’ earlier work, but its scope and presentation make it a standout choice for African colonial gaming. For those who already own his previous rules and army books, this set may not be essential. However, for newcomers to African colonial gaming, it is an excellent purchase. The inclusion of all the army lists, historical background, and even a bonus set of rules for big game hunting makes it a comprehensive entry point into the period. It captures the atmosphere of “Darkest Africa” with authority and provides a framework that is both playable and richly contextualised.
Black Powder II Wargames Rules (Colonial Focus)
Black Powder II, published by Warlord Games, is a 200‑page hardback rulebook designed by Jervis Johnson and Rick Priestley. While often associated with Napoleonic battles, its real strength lies in its flexibility across the entire black powder era. For colonial gamers, this means the American War of Independence, the French and Indian Wars, the Indian Mutiny, the Zulu War, and the Sudan campaigns are all well within its scope.
The rules are deliberately broad brush, aiming for flowing, entertaining games rather than granular simulation. Units are defined by simple profiles such as type, armament, hand‑to‑hand value, shooting, morale, stamina, and any special rules. This makes it easy to represent colonial regulars, irregulars, and tribal forces without drowning in detail. The distinction between Regular and Irregular formations is particularly useful for colonial settings, where disciplined European battalions might face massed native warbands or irregular skirmishers. Line, column, and skirmish order are all covered, and the rules make clear the strengths and weaknesses of each formation.
 |
|
|
Command and morale are central. Leaders are rated from Military Genius down to Unfit for Duty, and their ability to issue orders drives the friction of the game. One of the system’s most frustrating aspects is the erratic nature of command rolls. Entire brigades can stall or surge unpredictably, which adds drama but can feel capricious. In practice, cavalry sometimes achieve three consecutive moves, allowing them to charge further than artillery can fire, a bizarre outcome that undermines historical plausibility. These quirks mean that while the game flows well, it does not always feel historically accurate.
Morale and shaken status are decisive, reflecting the psychological strain of combat. Units often collapse from morale failure rather than annihilation, which feels appropriate to colonial warfare where cohesion was fragile and sudden routs common. Yet troop types can feel generic, with limited differentiation between forces unless scenario books are used. The supplements help mitigate this by adding flavour and period‑specific rules.
For colonial theatres, the Advanced Rules add flavour. Battalion squares, mixed formations, and brigade squares are included, making it possible to recreate the classic defensive postures of British forces in India or Africa. The Arsenal section introduces howitzers, rockets, and early machine guns, all vital for Sudan or Zulu War scenarios. Optional rules such as Bloodthirsty or Determined Charge can be applied to tribal forces, giving them the ferocity and unpredictability that characterised many colonial battles. Buildings and terrain rules allow for scenarios around forts, villages, or mission stations, adding narrative depth.
Where Black Powder II excels is in enabling large, colourful battles to be fought in a reasonable timeframe. Zulu impis clashing with British squares, mutineers storming colonial garrisons, or French and Indian skirmishes in wooded terrain all play out with cinematic flow. The rules avoid clutter, relying on simple markers for hits and disorder, and the emphasis is always on fun and spectacle rather than bookkeeping. The jovial tone of the rulebook reinforces this ethos, reminding players that enjoyment is paramount.
Colonial scenario books for Black Powder include Zulu!, which covers the Anglo‑Zulu War of 1879 with scenarios such as Isandlwana and Rorke’s Drift, Dark and Bloody Ground, which covers the French and Indian War with detailed scenarios and campaign rules, Last Argument of Kings which details the Jacobite Rebellions and Seven Years War battles of the 18th Century and Rebellion!, which covers the American War of Independence with nineteen scenarios, army lists, and detailed uniforms and tactics.
In conclusion, Black Powder II is not a detailed colonial simulation, but it is a versatile and engaging framework. For those who want to recreate the drama of colonial warfare, whether the disciplined volleys of redcoats, the massed charges of tribal warriors, or the improvisation of irregulars, it provides the tools to do so. Its breadth across the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is a strength, and while some may wish for more period‑specific nuance, the system’s adaptability and supplements make it a valuable choice. For colonial wargamers, it offers a flowing, entertaining way to stage battles from the American frontier to the African veldt, with just about enough flavour to capture the essence of the era.
A Gentleman’s War Wargames Rules
A Gentleman’s War by Howard Whitehouse is a 112‑page rulebook that consciously evokes the spirit of H.G. Wells’ Little Wars while modernising the systems for today’s players. Designed for large‑scale figures (40mm or 54mm), it aims to deliver a pleasant, relatively quick game with a neo‑Wellsian aesthetic. The book includes rules, scenarios, army guidelines, colonial adaptations, and designer’s notes, all presented with charm and accessibility.
The central conceit is to capture the toy soldier feel of Wells while introducing more variety and unpredictability through the use of cards. Activation is handled by a deck, with each side assigned a colour. Units activate one at a time, but face cards allow multiple activations, aces permit re‑activations, and jokers reset cycles and reshuffle the deck. This creates a fluid, non‑turn‑based rhythm that feels both whimsical and tactical. The hold card mechanic adds further drama, allowing players to interrupt sequences, bolster charges, or respond to attacks in unexpected ways. This card‑driven system is a clear modernisation of Wells’ original dice‑and‑movement approach, injecting narrative variety into colonial battles.
Movement is dice‑based, echoing Larry Brom’s The Sword and the Flame. Infantry in line typically roll two dice, while light cavalry on the charge may roll five. Formation changes, shooting, or facing adjustments reduce movement dice, abstracting terrain and command friction into a simple, memorable mechanic. Fire combat uses handfuls of d6s, with saving throws based on cover and troop type. The expected outcomes mean units endure for several turns, reflecting the ebb and flow of colonial firefights rather than sudden annihilation. Melee is more involved, with tables cross‑referencing advantages, troop types, and outcomes, but the results are varied and colourful, reinforcing the toy soldier aesthetic.
Morale is integrated into melee but also checked at casualty thresholds. Results range from “run away” to “carry on,” with states of being “bothered” or “disconcerted” guiding outcomes. This light‑hearted terminology reinforces the Wellsian flavour while still providing meaningful game effects. Engineering rules, cameo roles, and whimsical additions such as mascots or civilians add further charm, encouraging players to use odd miniatures and inject narrative colour into colonial scenarios.
The colonial section is particularly strong. It provides guidelines for the great powers’ colonial armies, introduces troop types such as porters, tribal infantry, tribal cavalry, and obsolete artillery, and scales tribal units larger than regulars to reflect their massed nature. This allows players to stage asymmetric colonial conflicts with flavour and historical resonance. Optional rules for earlier periods (flintlocks, needle guns) broaden the scope, while cameo roles add humour and unpredictability. The result is a system that encourages native‑versus‑native battles, imperial expeditions, and multi‑sided campaigns, all in keeping with the Wellsian spirit of imaginative play.
Experiences at conventions reinforce this charm. At NJCon, players reported the sheer delight of gaming with glossy old toy soldiers under Howard Whitehouse’s guidance. The rules were easily grasped after a couple of turns, and the activation mechanism proved engaging, though one flaw was noted: when a force has been heavily attritted, a player with only one or two units can cycle them repeatedly while the opponent must wait to activate all their units. This imbalance is not fatal but does highlight the need for a house rule or adjustment. Despite this, the system was praised as an improvement on earlier old‑school sets like Charge! or McDuff, retaining their nostalgic feel while adding modern clarity and variety.
Philosophically, the book emphasises fun over simulation. It is not intended to be a rigorous colonial simulation but rather a flowing, entertaining framework that captures the spectacle of toy soldiers clashing across the veldt or the frontier. The quick reference sheets, included at the back, ensure accessibility, though some players may wish to tweak them for clarity. The rules are solid, the initiative mechanic is engaging, and the overall package succeeds in marrying nostalgia with modern design.
In conclusion, A Gentleman’s War is highly recommended for colonial wargamers seeking a blend of H.G. Wells’ original aesthetic with contemporary mechanics. It allows for immediate use with existing collections, supports whimsical and narrative play, and provides enough structure to stage satisfying colonial battles without excessive mental effort. It is a charming, neo‑Wellsian set of rules that celebrates both history and imagination, and it has proven itself in convention play as both fun and memorable.
AK47 Rules
AK47 from Peter Pig is another set of rules well suited to the decline‑of‑Empires era – the decolonisation wars of the European powers from the 1950s through to the early 1980s. It is not a complex system, which makes it fast‑paced and suitably haphazard, with troops appearing unpredictably and objectives shaped as much by political considerations as by battlefield necessity. The result is a game that embraces the chaos, improvisation and uncertainty of post‑colonial conflict. It is designed for their own range of 15mm figures and utilises group bases but as ever with a bit of initiative you could adapt it to any suitable scale.
The original edition was a modest spiral‑bound booklet with simple d6 mechanics, alternating movement and a wonderfully erratic random events table. Army creation – with its fictional states, governments and wildly uneven forces – gave the game much of its charm. Many long‑time players still prefer this first edition for its chaotic simplicity, immediacy and the sheer exuberance it brought to the tabletop, and it remains widely played despite later revisions.
 |
|
|
The second edition attempted to expand the system, adding more granularity to troop types, more detailed modifiers and a broader range of situational rules. While this increased the sense of tactical nuance, it also made the game noticeably more complex and slowed the pace. Some players appreciated the added depth, but many felt that the extra layers diluted the anarchic energy that defined the original. As a result, the second edition occupies an interesting middle ground: ambitious, more detailed, but ultimately less beloved than either the first or the third.
The third edition is a complete rewrite. Presented as a full‑colour, 146‑page spiral‑bound volume, it replaces free movement with a 60‑square grid and introduces a more structured Action Point system. Units roll for their AP allowance each turn, spending points to move, shoot, rally or assault. This creates a rhythm of opportunity and constraint that reflects the friction of modern small wars while keeping the game accessible.
Troops fall into nine generic types, which define their movement and shooting capabilities. Shooting uses handfuls of d6s with saving throws based on cover and troop quality, and the interaction between weapon types creates a convincing “rock–paper–scissors” dynamic. Technicals, tanks, recoilless rifles and infantry all have clear strengths and weaknesses, encouraging players to think in terms of improvised combined‑arms tactics rather than rigid formations.
Close assaults are decisive but costly, with both sides striking simultaneously and most troops losing their saving throws. Morale is handled through accumulating “problems”, which can quickly snowball into collapse if a unit is pushed too hard. The constant threat of reactive fire keeps both players involved throughout, and the game rewards careful timing and opportunistic play.
Two mechanisms add further flavour. Pre‑battle “events” determine attacker and defender, with different armies gaining bonuses that reflect their political character. The “Communications” system allows players to request reinforcements or air support, though success is never guaranteed and varies by army type. These additions help differentiate forces without overwhelming the core mechanics.
Victory revolves around eliminating enemy troops and seizing ground. The emphasis on the quantity of terrain held works mechanically, though some players may prefer more focused objectives. Overall, AK47 remains a fast, engaging and characterful set of rules. It is not a historical simulation, but it captures the feel of improvised warfare between fragile states with mismatched forces and unreliable logistics. The third edition offers clarity and structure, while the beloved first edition retains its following for its anarchic charm. Between them, they provide a distinctive and highly enjoyable take on late decolonisation and early Cold War small wars.
|
