We also have tools at our disposal that the older generations of wargamers did not have, the primary one being video tutorials and a playthroughs. It really helps to bring things into focus when you can see it being played. There’s also the fact that some game designers these days are active participants on message boards and are readily available to answer questions. And even in lieu of that (or even addition to it), there are other members of the community who are eager to help each other out and answer questions. It’s much easier to overcome rules obstacles today than it was in the 70s-00’s.

As an older war gamer, I see digesting rule books--not to mention playing board games--as just another method of staving off dementia ;) For badly written rule books, there's always KZfaq and BGG.

As someone very new to wargaming, that was exceptionally helpful. Thank you!

Really helpful for those of us who are both a) Newbies, and b) don’t have a group or partner that we’re learning with or from. It’s one thing to have a game taught to you. It’s so much more daunting to just be sitting in front of this huge game with a big thick instruction manual of rules and try to figure out how to play it. No one learns a sport by reading the regulations! But often times that’s the only option available to us with war games… we have the ball, a hoop with a basket, and have to draw out the court based on the instructions before trying to figure out how to dribble based on diagrams and textual descriptions. One thing I would add is that I’ve found it’s very helpful to actually have the game out on the table so you can tinker with it and walk through things on the table as you read through the rules. Or even to tinker with it later (like after you get home) after reading away from home. Today, we have lots of games that come not just with rule books, but beautiful play books that walk you through a game, explaining how the rules are put into practice, decision by decision, phase by phase, turn by turn. There are the rules of play (what are the different game elements and actions… what can and can’t I do when, where, and how?) but then there’s how to actually play (why would I want to do this or that, and how do those rules actually play out on the table). Without a playbook (or video tutorial, or play-through to watch) that actually teaches and shows you the game, I’ve found being able to actually try things out on the table can be super helpful. Sometimes it’s not at all clear why or how a particular rule or procedure is important until you do so. My first go at a war game was Napoleon’s Triumph, by Simmons Games. It’s a beautiful and elegant design, with very tight and condensed rules. You’d think that would have made it ideal as an introduction to wargaming, but no. The black and white text on the page was like trying to reverse engineer how to use a word processing application by examining the source code alone. I would read, get confused, stop. And no matter how many times I read through the same passages, the rules never manifested in mind into a game. I finally decided to set up the game and just start trying things out and it made all the difference. As I did so, eventually I would come to realize how and why rules were there and what those rules were actually doing as far as creating the decision space of the gameplay. Luckily, today we have KZfaq. Video can demonstrate things that words and pictures on paper just can’t do very well. When you get confused, you can often find a demonstration of the specific game mechanism that confuses you, or a play through that reveals how different game systems come together during a game. But… sometimes nothing beats sitting down yourself at the table and …. gaming it out.

Great subject that is rarely talked about. It has been interesting seeing you two go through the learning curve - maturing so to speak. I grew up doing this, starting in the 70s. Here's my technique. First a few generalities. Give up perfectionist tendencies. Just play, imperfect at first. Just try to make the game engine operate. Don't try to evaluate a game design before you know it. Don't assume you know more than the designer. Give them the benefit of the doubt. Reserve your opinion on a game until after you've played it and understand the strategies. Here's my routine... 0. If video tutorials are available, watch a few. 1. Sloppy incomplete readthrough of the rules. Often I skip entire sections. Sometimes I read only about 10-15% (for example I did this with Wing Leader). 2. Punch and setup the game. +Take a close look at the play aids.+ 3. Play the first turn or two out solo. Rely heavily on the play aids. Spend time reading the play aids! 4. Curl up with the rules, and read them through. 5. Play the game solo. First turn or two is usually enough. 6. Browse forums on BGG/CSW/youtube to ensure I'm playing correctly. 7. Profit (you now can beat your friends because you know the rules, and they don't. Usually.

Man I can feel your pain when it comes to learning a lot of games. A well written rulebook really does take a good game to that next level.

Patience is just one of a myriad virtues the Games/Wargames hobby can teach young adults.... something that probably deserves its own topic.... for the benefit of parents looking for ways to develop their children.

One thing I learned from Advanced Squad Leader is read the rule for what it is. Just because a squad can carry a Medium Machine gun does not mean several leaders can get together and carry that same machine gun even though the rule does not prevent it.

As I was the one suggesting this I have to say Jusf two words: THANK YOU!

An important and interesting talk. Thank you!

Just a couple of points: 1. Do you download and read from electronic copies of the rule book? Do you print an alternate copy which you can mark up to keep the original pristine? I try to download an electronic copy to put on my tablet so I can read them on the road, in bed, or wherever. It also keeps my original rule book clean. 2. How to play videos on KZfaq are a godsend in flattening the learning curve. I'm trying to put together an instructional series on KZfaq for Empire of the Sun since I know that fairly well and many people can probably use it. Call it giving back to the KZfaq community for the many times I've watched playthrough videos. 3. Because I have my rule books in my tablet, sometimes I'll flit from one to the other from day to day.....which is a horrible idea! :) 4. I hear you about the older rulebooks with the small font, no diagrams, etc. I used to read that stuff and eat it up when I was in HS. I don't anymore. I get tired easily. Old age?

My procedure is to watch as many reviews and play throughs as possible, then decide if the game is interesting enough to fit my style. There are a couple of game companies that should thank people like Stuka Joe and Gimpy for their excellent run throughs. The last three games I bought were a direct result of pouring through the play throughs and then listening to their final thoughts on not only the rules, but the components, thought process behind the game, and some of the major issues they would like to see corrected. Once I get the game, I read over the rules at least twice before jumping in. This helps me solidify the basic game play. If a problem or question as to if I'm playing correctly comes up, there's always BGG or KZfaq to consult. I try to not focus on being perfect and worrying about strictly adhering to every rule, but rather get a good feeling of what the object is and then fixing mistakes or using any optional rules as I progress. It may sound strange, but I've had games still in shrink wrap for 6 months before popping it open and getting started. It's like putting off Christmas morning and keeping that surprise in place while I really get to know the game.

I've played hundreds of games and rarely play the same game back to back. Do I remember the rules from the previous game? Hell no! But, if I was to go back, a light read of the rules will bring me up to speed. I normally read the rules at night before bed and always digest the rules in small chunks. At that point, I'm not too concerned about remembering everything. This first pass allows me to internalise that a particular rule exists and roughly where it is in the manual, without necessarily remembering the specifics. Next, I set the table up and then follow the detailed turn break down, whilst continually referring to the rules for those that I can't remember (the initial read through allows me to know that a rule exists and roughly where to find it!). After a few turns in, it all becomes smooth! Some games are harder than others though. On of the hardest to read, due to my unfamiliarity and the density of the text was my first OCS game: Tunisia II. The paradox here was that once I got into the game, this turned out to be one of the smoothest and fun game systems I have ever played. That said, the first turn was a nightmare. I set up everything and literally spent an hour just staring at the board wondering what to do! Almost packed the game back up, but then I went slowly through the sequence of play and it all made sense! (In this case the hour staring at the board was analysis paralysis due to the huge number of options the system presents a player with). Other rules, I have played so often, that when I go back, I am rusty, but it's like riding a bike again. For me this would be ASL, and the excellent GBOH games. The best thing about board gaming in this era though, is the internet. Have a question, go to board game geek or watch a You-Tube video - I'm not sure how I got by in the old days! Either way, stick in there and just play! :)

I can 100% good Sir confirm with your reviewing it actually can be a refreshing experience to learn the rules and once you got them (or the main part of it) you can pretty much start to roll

Returning to board gaming after 50 (!) years and this soliloquy brings up very old memories about rule book reading. It is an art unto itself and you have nailed it. Good job!

Thanks again Andrew. You are so kind to share your knowledge.

You made a point early in the video that bears repeating: to get better with rules, you have to read more rules. Reading rules is a skill unto itself and every new rulebook will make you comprehend rules texts better.

What a pleasant surprise this was. "No one's ever read a rulebook... a wargame rulebook, and learned it the first time." That certainly makes me feel better about myself. The first "real" boardgames I bought were Twilight Struggle and Caylus. Twilight was fairly challenging but looking back on it I'm kind of surprised I didn't struggle more. Caylus, albeit a mere 6 pages, was pretty daunting. It's like you said, about being introduced to brand new concepts, such as rounds, phases, actions, etc. I specifically remember being confused about how there were essentially turns nested within a larger turn whereas department store boardgames such as risk, monopoly, scrabble, etc simply had a turn where you do something and then it's the next player's turn. I've since revisited both rulebooks and they're both a piece of cake at this point so I know I've made progress. Oddly, the majority of wargames I own are GMT and those are the rulebooks I struggle the most with. In particular, I have difficulty with exceptions and exceptions to exceptions. When I run into a rule that takes the form "if A then B, unless C or D, then apply E" my mind gets pretzeled. Another issue I have is when concepts or terms are mentioned without being explained on the spot. I've learned that the type of rulebook I prefer is one which only tells you what you need to know and nothing more. I don't like fluff or exposition (after the rules is fine though). I think the biggest mistake I make is thinking that I need to have every rule and exception committed to memory before I even set the game up. And due to my OCD I can fixate on certain rules which open the door to even the slightest amount of ambiguity. Anyway, thanks so much for this and seeing how many comments there are is comforting to me. I'm not alone in my struggle to absorb some of these systems

Great vid. I may be in the minority here but I really do enjoy reading wargame rule books! Have a stack that I regularly cycle through - partly just to keep my mind fresh with the game, when I am not actually playing them.

[1.0] Properly Written Rules (e.g., Case System) [1.1] One thing to always mention: CASE SYSTEM!!!!! I cut my teeth with the old, classic SPI games, when you could always count on a well-organized read, broken out by cases and subcases, [1.11] from the general [1.12] to the specific. [2.0] Poorly Written Rules (e.g., anything else other than Case System) [2.1] After you encounter those hideously edited "breezy, conversational style" rulebooks, that should be enough to drive you back into the loving, comforting arms of the case system.

Thank you so much for this! A perfect topic, and a great relaxing way to end my Monday nite. Wife did call me a nerd tho... That's ok.

Here’s how I handle the rules and learn a game: Step One - I watch a few KZfaq videos to get an idea of the components, game play and whether I really want to purchase the game. Step Two - I pay close attention to the table of contents to get an idea of the rule book format and flip through any pages of interest. Step Three - if a sample game is included this is where I start (I learn by doing) Step Four - after playing the sample game, if included, I go back to the rulebook and focus in on the more intricate details. Step Five - I watch several gameplay videos and Practice, Practice, Practice referencing the rulebook/player aids as necessary.

Thank you for doing this video, this is awesome, I’m a big fan of your channel, you guys really post fantastic content, I absolutely love it, thank you so much 👍

I have a very similar approach to going over rules. Currently going over GMTs Napolianics game and Victory point games ETO. These things can feel very daunting, but if you recognize similar patterns between games it can make it easier.

Great video. Thanks for the advice. For some of the more complicated games I find myself taking notes and then perhaps typing thoose notes up. This may be just how I learn as it’s what I would do at uni(college) and now at work to learn. Maybe others also learn this way.

As a teacher, I would suggest taking notes or even rewrite the rules to suit your way of thinking. I've done this with some Against all Odds magazines whose rules have been hard for me. Either that or create a very detailed POrder of Play with references to rules numbers

I love picking up a new game, grabbing the rulebook, and taking a walk in a park before resting with a good read. I feel I am studying the rules as much as I am just reading through them. Fire in the Lake was my first COIN experience. Its rulebook has been all over my town, if you catch my drift.

Good topic and well done. I think we have a very similiar method. I even bought older versions of new games to see how concepts had evolved to help me understand and see what can and cant be done. At some point during reading, I try to visualize one game turn in action even if it is a very crude mental model. Then set it up and work the details.

Interesting video Alexander. I think you have to accept that if you want to play a complex, strategic game you need to spend some time with the rule book and often the first play-through or 3 you will be referencing the rules. Personally I never read the rulebook beforehand, I always read the first few pages - the introduction, concepts - then set the game up and go through a turn or a few turns until the flow of the game sinks in referencing the rule book as I go and if this takes hours that's fine. Some of the larger, involved games may take a long time to learn but will often repay you with satisfying game play.

Thanks for making this vid. You discuss ZOC towards the end. That's one of the concepts I still have a hard time wrapping my head around in many hex and counter wargames. I've traded away/sold more than a few games because I got so frustrated over trying to understand ZOC.

I like the detail in GMT's rule books. I have a problem with games which are clear, concise, and incomplete. 1844 is like that. There are a bunch of elements to the game which are ignored in the rules. With GMT, and especially the COIN games, I know everything will be in the book or in the playbook. I just need to find it... The rule book which is currently smacking me around is the one (original) for Magic Realm. I played it a lot when young, but that was decades ago!

I started with Avalon Hill. Panzer blitz p. Leader A.I. wars, tobruk or assault on Crete and Malta the list goes on...those games had scenarios that brought you in bit by bit to all of the rules they started off easy and then they got heavier and harder as you went through the scenarios. Never had a problem with them. Not a real big fan of SPI though the armor group South quad is in my opinion the best I've ever played from SPI. I was out of gaming for a while so modern for me is anything I can find from 1990s and newer... First edition panzer Grenadiers rules sucked pure and simple. I've got the 4th edition I haven't read them all but it looks so nice n clear now. I have a few games in my bin of unplayable for whatever reason but mostly rules. Anzio, AH, stupid step counters. May have found away around that hassle. Thank you Poland. So far I loved any GMT n Compass game I've bought. Excellence. Sorry if I got a little wordy here Love your vids keep them up

Alexander... I can understand how confusing rule books can be. Part of the problem is PATIENCE. I know this... when I get a new game, I'm sort of overwhelmed. I'm so blown away by the mini's/cardboard units/maps that I'm already forming some basic strategies and trying to figure out how to jump right in. I would guess that everyone has their own "speed" as to how long it takes to get down the basic rules and tables, THAT I do think is very different per gamer. SO... for better or worse is the way I attempt to learn a game. Thanks to the glut of reviewers, I'll cop out and try and get an overview based upon what my favorite game reviewers lay down. In this, I will look to TPA, Marcowargamer, Stuka Joe ... maybe others, owing to the game. That gives me the "lay of the land" and alerts me to what might have to be read in depth, or worked out down the road. The next step is to lay out the map and begin to find the basic operating rules, so I can start pushing some cardboard around. IF I am confused, or get stuck, then it's time to look for examples. *** I "cut my teeth" on AH coffin-box games and SPI games, back in the 1970's and forward. Trust me, rule books are a lot better laid out now then they were then... pages of mountains of black and white text, bleeding into each other. The "guide" here is that IF I find I can't move forward... it's time to find a favorite beverage and do some serious reading. BUT... you're right, a lot of this is just making one mistake after another , until you've got things well in hand. *** I ran across a woman named Fugiki, who plays war games and is very casual about making rule errors... she makes the same missteps we all do... good channel. In the end, I would guess, grasping the concepts of games comes down to how you wish to climb a mountain... the easy side, the tough side, the miserable side. As always... THANKS so much for the thoughtfulness you guys put into your videos, it is clearly appreciated. *** As a side note, have you reviewed Columbia's "Combat infantry"... are you excited about the new Eastern Front expansion, up on KS this week? Have you played "Warfighter" by DVG? I'm sure both of you would love that game. Keep up the fantastic work.....

Try a micro-armour figure-gaming set of rules. The best way to learn a set of rules is have someone teach you in a game. You may lose, but you will pick up the priorities of what you need. The other way is to write a training manual, training video or an examples guide on the set of rules. The latter is not perfect as this does not teach you priorities, but it does give you an idea a rules exists and were it may exists. It does assist you in memory retention, I normally pick up a euro-game or americ-trash in about 5 minutes and a few games turns, but only because i am forced to read and semi-memorise 50 to 100 page micro-armour figure-gaming set of rules, which takes a lot longer than 10 minutes.

When I get a rule book that is complex, I will grab a few units, put them down on some area of the map, and run thru examples. If the combat system is complex, I'll run thru it with a few infantry. Then I add tanks. Then I'll try with artillery. OK, now I know basic combat. The odd rules (overruns, air support, etc.) are easier to understand, once you know the basics. I learn by doing, and doing tiny examples, breaks up the complex rules into smaller modules. I also like complex games which have a basic version. OK, in this scenario, we will use the basic rules. All the complex stuff is ignored for now. After you have mastered the basic rules, how the complex rules plug into them makes more sense. Warm regards, Rick.

As another "graying" gamer, I have certainly noticed that it is a LOT harder to tackle a **thick** or **dense** rulebook now than it was when I was in high school, 40 years ago. Right now there are two systems that I'm trying to get into, but the conceptual density is making hard slogging of it. Those would be the Fighting Wings WWII system (I've been able to get farther with the modern AirPower rules set); and the La Battaille rule*s* (they tolerate three versions, you know). EotS and all its offshoots also sit invitingly in my game shelf. I've gotten through the rules, but haven't been able to actually get into the game: I found something I wasn't sure how to deal with right after the "special" 7 December turn-let.

Biggest issue with poorly written rulebooks is when the author references a rule that is explained further in the book. It is ok to reference rules that have already been explained but never reference further in the book. The best way to fix that is to follow 1 rule, if a concept is mentioned in your rulebook while you are writing it then it is time to explain that concept. My advice is to read thru the rules, get the rhythm of the game and look for a step by step explanation of what needs to be done in each step. Then just play the game and discuss the rules as you play with someone. Right after I play the game I immediately read the rules again. I love AMBUSH! and I hate the rules too. I also love reading rulebooks, I joke with my friends about how I buy games to read the rules, I am not good at explaining rules, I sometimes think that is my hobby more than playing the games is.

Let me summarize: How to effectively consume wargame rulebooks --- Read a lot of them and you get good at it.

Atlantic Chase (GMT) by Jeremy White did an excellent job with the rulebook with programmed instruction, examples of play, diagrams and player aids. This game is very different from most wargames. Without such an exceptional rulebook it might have failed.

Oh btw try Carrier if you havent (still watching video). It is for me what Ambush is for you. Just having a hard time getting through it.

RPG books can also be massive. Like you said small chunks and reread.

Nice.

Great discussion. Sparks a lot of thought about the overall efficacy of bullet points versus more prose-style rules writing. What are y'all's preference? For me, I find bullet points easier to digest, and easier to avoid overlooking important points.

Surely a double-windsor knot with a thinner tie would have been better with that collar what? Carry on reading rules.

Alexander - for those games which are on the more complex / monster side of wargaming. Which ones in your experience are the more "optimal if you will" in regards to what we might think of as the ratio of Game Experience you get out of playing it vs the (up front) Time Invested in reading the rules to begin with?

As an old grognard reading GMT style is easiest for me. Newer games are more narrative. The ultimate recent example for me is Root (Leder Games) by Cole Wehrle that has two rule books. The conversational is good for the Eurogamer & the Law of Root is better for wargamers. Both work. Find the one that works for you!

I have difficulty figuring out the turn record track.

This.was.quite.helpful..My.problem.is.that.there.are.a.few.things.that.Imust.read.at.the.same.time...I.am.in.a.PhD,so.I.have.course.and.reading.reading.for.my.thesis...Is.your.only.reading.rules?..How.do.you.reccomend.reading.rules.when.there.are.multiple.things.you.have.to.read.simultaniously?

Another reason for wargaming newbs to consider systems. Learn underlying system rules then play various scenarios. OCS, SCS, GOSS, ZOC-bond, GTS, etc.... Choose wisely!

Alexander, any chance GMT can have you rewrite the rules for Fields of Fire, 3rd edition? :)

Thoughts on fields of fire rulebook?

IMHO modern rulebooks are usually better but I think there is an increasing trend towards badly translated rulebooks written in a language which is not the designer's first language. It seems that a rough translation (possibly just using computer software) is becoming more prevalent, or maybe I've just been unlucky? Anyways I've sold three games unplayed because the manual was a badly translated botch job, so hope that designers/publishers will take the time to run them past fluent speakers who have some experience with wargames.

Woah....yer all dressed up. To what do we owe this pleasure? :D

Many rule sets are just not well written and should have had a editor and some playtesting before being published.

This channel does a lot to proliferate the wargame hobby and to make it seem less intimidating to newcomers.