Boots On The Ground: What Maps can never tell you

For me, there is something uniquely fascinating about standing on the ground where history happened. As tabletop wargamers, many of us spend years reading campaign histories, studying maps, painting armies and recreating battles on the tabletop, but how often do we stop and think about what those battlefields actually looked and felt like in real life?

In this latest video, I revisit the Bosworth Battlefield while on a short trip to Leicester with my wife, and the experience led me to an interesting realisation about battlefield visits, historical interpretation and understanding terrain. I first walked Bosworth several years ago during a freezing February trip, and returning in springtime completely changed how I saw the landscape. Features I thought I could identify before (low-lying marshy areas and subtle rises in the terrain) had seemingly vanished beneath tall crops and dense vegetation. The battlefield itself had not changed, but my ability to read the land certainly had.

That discovery sparked a wider discussion about why historical wargamers visit battlefield sites in the first place. Are we trying to understand the topography and tactical challenges faced by commanders? Are we searching for atmosphere and emotional connection? Or are we simply trying to immerse ourselves more deeply in the history that inspires our games and collections? This week's video explores the long tradition of battlefield tourism, dating back to Frederick the Great encouraging officers to walk historic battlefields as part of their military education. Even today, standing on the real ground can offer insights that no book, map or scenario supplement can fully provide. Distances feel different, hills look steeper, lines of sight become clearer, and terrain features that seem insignificant on paper suddenly make perfect tactical sense.

At the same time, battlefield visits come with problems and limitations. Landscapes evolve over centuries due to farming, urbanisation, river changes and climate. Archaeological discoveries can shift accepted interpretations of where battles actually took place. Emotional attachment to a location can also cloud objective analysis, making it harder to critically evaluate popular narratives or accepted history. From a wargaming perspective, though, these visits remain incredibly valuable. Seeing real buildings, roads, fields and terrain layouts can inspire more authentic tabletop battlefields and scenarios. The video also touches on how modern games and terrain makers increasingly recreate historical locations based on surviving structures and photographs, helping bring battlefields to life on the tabletop.

Ultimately, this is a friendly hobby discussion about history, battlefield walks, terrain interpretation, and how we, as wargamers, connect with the past. If you enjoy historical tabletop gaming, miniature painting, military history or simply thoughtful discussions about the hobby, I hope you’ll enjoy the conversation. And as always, I’d love to hear about your own battlefield visits and favourite historical sites in the comments.

The Retreat is Coming!

Every now and then, a tabletop wargaming project comes along that feels genuinely different.

Over the last few months, I’ve had the chance to be directly involved in playtesting Battle Chronicle: The Retreat from Moscow, a new historical miniature wargaming project developed by Paul from the Pazoot channel. Having now spent a significant amount of time with it (alongside my regular gaming partner Ray) I wanted to share why this is a project I’m genuinely excited to support.

This wasn’t one of those situations where I was handed a finished ruleset and asked for a quick opinion. I’ve been involved since the early stages, when the system was still very much rough around the edges. Some of the earliest versions were, to put it politely, enthusiastic experiments held together by optimism and dice rolls. And that’s exactly why I believe in it.

Over the course of months, we repeatedly tested all four linked scenarios, deliberately pushing the rules to their limits. We found balance issues. We discovered mechanics that slowed the game down. We encountered those inevitable “well, that definitely doesn’t work” moments that every game designer secretly dreads. But what impressed me most was the process that followed.

Each round of feedback was taken seriously. Rules were revised, mechanics tightened, unclear interactions clarified, and the entire experience steadily refined through multiple iterations. This wasn’t about forcing a product out quickly, it was about making sure the final result genuinely worked on the tabletop.

What makes Battle Chronicle stand out is its focus.

Rather than being another generic historical ruleset trying to cover every conceivable period and battle, this is a tightly designed narrative experience. Each Chronicle is a self-contained cooperative skirmish mini-campaign built around a specific historical setting.

The first instalment throws players into Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow, placing them in command of desperate survivors struggling against exhaustion, attrition, freezing weather and an automated enemy system designed to create constant tension.

It feels less like playing a standard tabletop battle and more like trying to survive a collapsing historical disaster. For me personally, it’s also done something every good project should do: it got miniatures onto the table.

Ray and I have had Retreat from Moscow figures waiting for their moment for some time, and Battle Chronicle finally gave us the perfect excuse to build games around them, and actually get stuck in.

In my latest video, I talk through the full journey, from those very rough early playtests through to why I now feel confident recommending it.

If you’re interested in historical tabletop wargaming, narrative campaigns, cooperative miniatures gaming, Napoleonic history, or the design process behind new rulesets, I think you’ll find this one interesting.

And if Battle Chronicle sounds like your kind of project, keep an eye out... The Retreat from Moscow is with the printers now, with release expected soon.

Old School Gaming Done Right

In this latest video, I take a closer look at We Want the Gold, a narrative-driven fantasy skirmish wargame by Robert Poynton. Now, as someone who primarily focuses on historical wargaming, stepping into a fantasy system isn’t something I do often—but this one stood out for a couple of reasons. Not only does it come from a designer with a strong grounding in old-school gaming, but it also draws heavily on the shared DNA between early roleplaying games and tabletop wargaming.

What makes We Want the Gold particularly interesting is its clear design philosophy. This isn’t a game about tight balance, competitive optimisation, or exhaustive simulation. Instead, it leans into storytelling, player agency, and cinematic moments. Small warbands clash over objectives—usually involving treasure—while navigating shifting alliances, opportunistic betrayals, and the unpredictable flow of the game.

Mechanically, the system is deliberately lightweight. Using simple D6-based resolution and a randomised activation system driven by chit draws, the game introduces just enough friction to keep players engaged without slowing things down. The result is a fast-paced experience where decisions matter, but the rules rarely get in the way.

One of the standout features of the rulebook is how quickly it gets you into the right mindset. Within a few pages, players have a clear understanding of the game’s intent and tone. The inclusion of the designer’s notes helps reinforce this, encouraging players to treat the system as flexible and adaptable rather than rigid and prescriptive.

Of course, that flexibility comes with trade-offs. The rules are written in a more informal style, which means they rely on interpretation and common sense rather than strict precision. For some groups, that’s a strength—it allows for creativity and fluid gameplay. For others, particularly those used to tightly written competitive systems, it may present a challenge.

Support for the game is relatively light, with limited official resources and a smaller community presence. However, this also reinforces the idea that We Want the Gold is less of a live service product and more of a self-contained toolkit—something you can pick up, adapt, and make your own.

Ultimately, this is a game that knows exactly what it wants to be. It offers a flexible, narrative-first approach to skirmish gaming that prioritises fun and memorable moments over mechanical complexity. If that aligns with what you’re looking for, it’s well worth exploring.

Solo Wargaming Isn't What You Think It Is

Solo wargaming has long carried an unfair reputation within the tabletop hobby, often seen as a second-best alternative to playing against a live opponent. But for a growing number of tabletop wargamers, historical gamers, and miniature painters, solo play has become not just a fallback, but a preferred way to engage with the hobby. In this video, I take a fresh look at solo wargaming and explore why it’s more popular, more accessible, and more rewarding than ever before.

Drawing on real experiences and community feedback, I examine the practical reasons why many players turn to solo gaming. From busy work schedules and family commitments to geographic isolation or the simple challenge of coordinating games, solo play allows hobbyists to stay active and engaged when traditional gaming isn’t possible. But beyond convenience, there are genuine advantages. Solo games offer the freedom to experiment, learn rules in depth, and develop tactical thinking without pressure. They also create opportunities for immersive storytelling and scenario-driven gameplay that can be harder to achieve in competitive settings.

A key part of making solo wargaming successful is the ability to “automate” the opposing force. This video explores a range of methods, from classic rule-based systems like the well-known “Mr Babbage” approach, to the enduring influence of programmed wargame scenarios pioneered by Charles Grant. These systems introduce structure, unpredictability, and narrative tension, transforming solo play into a dynamic and engaging experience.

I also discuss modern innovations, including how newer rulesets are integrating built-in automation mechanics, and how we’ve approached this challenge in Battle Chronicle: The Retreat from Moscow. By combining structured decision-making systems with flexible gameplay, it’s possible to create an opponent that feels responsive without becoming overly complex.

Finally, the video looks at the growing role of AI in solo wargaming. While still a topic of debate within the community, AI tools offer intriguing possibilities for generating decisions, adding narrative flavour, and enhancing immersion. At the same time, they raise important questions about consistency, control, and the role of technology in a traditionally hands-on hobby. By examining both the opportunities and the concerns, this discussion aims to provide a balanced perspective on where solo wargaming might be heading next.

Whether you’re completely new to solo play or already experimenting with your own systems, this video offers practical ideas, inspiration, and a fresh perspective on one of the most flexible and creative aspects of the wargaming hobby.