We Broke our own Ruleset

Designing a new tabletop wargame ruleset sounds exciting, and it is, but the real magic happens during playtesting. In this video, I talk through my recent experiences helping develop The Battle Chronicle, a brand new historical skirmish system set during Napoleon’s Retreat from Moscow. Rather than focusing purely on the finished product, this discussion explores the messy, fascinating stage where ideas are tested, broken, repaired, and slowly shaped into something genuinely fun to play.

Playtesting is where theory meets tabletop reality. Mechanics that look perfectly reasonable on paper can behave very differently once players start experimenting. Balance issues appear, unexpected rule combinations crop up, and the flow of the game becomes much clearer. Some rules turn out to be more complicated than they need to be, while others don’t deliver the tension or decision-making they promised. This process isn’t about chasing perfection; it’s about making sure the game creates an enjoyable experience that feels right for the setting.

Because The Battle Chronicle is rooted in a very specific historical moment, narrative tone matters just as much as mechanics. The retreat from Moscow is defined by hardship, attrition, and desperation, and the rules need to support that atmosphere. Playtesting helps reveal whether those themes come through naturally in play or whether certain elements undermine the intended feel. A good historical game should tell stories that make sense for the period, not just produce balanced dice exchanges.

Another key part of the process is clarity. Designers often know what they meant when writing a rule, but new players only have the text in front of them. Watching others interpret the rules highlights unclear wording, inconsistent terminology, and assumptions that need to be explained. Fixing these issues early makes the finished ruleset far more welcoming and easier to learn. Beyond mechanics and wording, playtesting also reveals practical improvements: when tokens would help, where reference sheets are needed, and which parts of the game benefit from simplification. These small refinements can dramatically improve the overall experience.

In the video, I share why this stage of development is so important, what it has taught me about rules design, and why thorough playtesting builds confidence in a finished product. If you enjoy tabletop wargaming, historical settings, or thoughtful hobby discussion about how games are made, this behind-the-scenes look at the design process should be right up your street.

More Soviet Infantry, Tank Hunters and a T26/M1931

I narrowly missed last week’s submission to the Analogue Hobbies Painting Challenge, literally by a matter of hours, so this week turned into a bumper offering.  

First up is another twelve-man Light Machine Gun Squad, the nearly finished unit that never quite made it onto the blog last time. All that stood between them and glory was drying basing and a final layer of snow, but time ran out. One of my quietly declared New Year’s resolutions was to stop saying yes to every new project that wanders past. That resolution has already collapsed in a heap, leaving me busier than ever. Not necessarily a bad thing, but it does add another tick to the ever-growing “suspected ADHD” column.

Next on the bench is another tank for my Soviet forces. This time it’s a T-26 Model 1931, the distinctive twin-turret variant armed with machine guns. Unlike my previous T-26 from Rubicon, this one is a 3D print from Danger Close Studio. Aside from some minor clean-up around the tracks where the supports had been, it’s an excellent print and blends in seamlessly with my other vehicles. Historically, the T-26 Model 1931 was heavily influenced by the British Vickers 6-Ton and was intended as an infantry support tank. Its twin turrets, usually mounting DT machine guns, offered impressive firepower on paper, but in practice proved awkward to command. That complexity eventually saw the design abandoned in favour of more practical single-turret models.

Finally, there’s a Tank Hunter team. This unit consists of two men armed with the 7.62mm PPD 1934/38 submachine gun, a design based on the Bergmann MP18/1 and fed by either drum or box magazines. They’re supported by two riflemen, with the NCO hefting a Molotov cocktail. The Molotov was a small conversion, using a plastic piece from the Warlord Games Soviet infantry sprue that recently appeared as a giveaway on the cover of Wargames Illustrated, which couldn’t have been better timed. On the tabletop in Bolt Action, Tank Hunters are nasty little specialists, with rules that allow them to double their attacks in close combat against vehicles, making them a serious threat despite their size.

In short: a delayed update turned into a productive one, with a finished LMG squad, a characterful early-war Soviet tank, and a converted Tank Hunter team all joining the ranks. Progress may be chaotic, but it’s definitely moving forward.

Don't Throw That Away!

Most tabletop wargamers don’t realise they’re throwing away perfectly good terrain every week. In this week's podcast, I dive into one of the oldest and most satisfying traditions in historical wargaming: turning everyday household rubbish into terrain, scenery, and useful hobby tools. Cardboard packaging becomes ruined buildings and bunker walls. Plastic food containers turn into industrial tanks and silos. Bottle tops, jar lids, broken toys, and old electronics quietly transform into battlefield details, objectives, and atmospheric clutter that give a gaming table real character.

This isn’t just about saving money, although that’s certainly a bonus. It’s about creativity, confidence, and learning to see potential instead of products. Scratch-built terrain made from recycled materials often looks more believable than pristine kits because history itself is messy, improvised, and uneven. Real battlefields were full of reused materials, rushed construction, and expedient solutions. Exactly the qualities that rubbish-based terrain naturally captures.

Introducing Battle Chronicle: The Retreat from Moscow

 

Last weekend marked the beginning of a brand-new miniature adventure, and it feels good to finally lift the fog of war just a little.

I’ve been working with Paul from the Pazoot Channel on a project called The Battle Chronicle. Paul has been deep in rules-writing mode, while I’ve been handling playtesting, staging the games, and—alongside my mate Ray—capturing plenty of photos and footage as the project starts to take shape on the tabletop. What you’re seeing in the pictures here is our first big playtesting session, where ideas stopped being theory and started becoming desperate little struggles in the snow.

So what is a Battle Chronicle? Each one is designed as a self-contained narrative skirmish mini-campaign. Inside a single booklet, you’ll find a complete skirmish ruleset, four linked scenarios, and a tightly focused historical theme that drives the action forward. The goal is to create something that feels like a story unfolding, not just a series of disconnected games.

The first Chronicle is set during Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow. The focus is on survival: stragglers clinging together, shattered formations, collapsing morale, and constant hard choices. It’s built as a cooperative experience, with players working together against an automated enemy system. In play, that has already led to some wonderfully tense and unpredictable moments—exactly the kind of drama this period deserves.

For Ray and me, this project has also been the perfect excuse to finally put our Retreat from Moscow collection on the table in a proper, story-driven way. Instead of one-off encounters, we’re seeing units carry their scars from game to game, and decisions in one scenario ripple into the next. It feels closer to history than a casual pick-up game ever could.

If you’d like a quick glimpse of how it looked in action, I’ve posted a YouTube Short showing moments from this very session. And next week, I’ll be releasing a longer video where I talk in more detail about the playtesting process, what we learned, what broke, what surprised us, and why playtesting is such a crucial part of building any set of rules. There’s plenty more frostbite, panic, and last-stand heroics to come.