Ambition is a dangerous thing.

Believe it or not, despite four years of serious painting I have yet to Wargame on a real tabletop. Each Redcoat finished brings me one step closer, but I hardly wish to post about identical models week in and out. When I am finished I will have enough figures to play small matches of The Sword and the Flame set in the Northwest Frontier. Somehow painting over 100 total historical figures has been an easier task than 50 Games Workshop ones, go figure. On the topic of numbers, my inexperience with actual play can hardly stop me from theorizing.

Something I notice reading the rules of TSATF is that the point system so ubiquitous in modern wargaming is an optional rule. The force descriptions instead list ratios, with the assumption that the British will appear in that ratio against whichever historical opponent they are paired against. Seeing what would later become a continually tweaked system of balance in such a primordial form is really cool, especially since these ratios are justified as being historically authentic to the conflicts in question. Then, I visualized it:

British 1:1	Egyptian 1:1.25	-
Boer 1:1.25	-	Afghan 1:2.25
-	Dervish 1:2.25	Zulu 1:3

Interesting on it's own, but what if we add an axis? Say, Tactics vs Technology. And we will normalize the ratios to simpler whole numbers:

Advanced Tactics (Formations)	Standard Tactics (Unit Command)	Simple Tactics (Unit Positioning)
British 10	Boer 15	- 15	Advanced Technology (Machine Guns)
Egyptian 15	- 15	Afghan 25	Standard Technology (Non-Bolt Firearms)
- 20	Dervish 25	Zulu 30	Simple Technology (No Firearms)

This axis sucks. The Zulu Empire, to my own knowledge, exhibited much more complex tactics than the Mahdists generally did, and all of these factions used firearms at some level. The Boers lacked significant artillery during the wars covered by TSATF, and the Egyptians were armed close to the British in their own conflict. So now I fix this chart:

Advanced Tactics (Formations)	Standard Tactics (Unit Command)	Simple Tactics (Unit Positioning)
10	15	20	Advanced Technology (Machine Guns)
15	20	25	Standard Technology (Non-Bolt Firearms)
20	25	30	Simple Technology (No Firearms)

Imagine these squares not as factions anymore, but as units. These numbers represent sizes, not points value, but in theory each should be equivalent to any of the others. In this theoretical system, an army of 20 to 40 soldiers could face one of 60 to 120. But why not extend it further? Then it becomes:

ONE AGAINST HUNDREDS

Of course, all I have right now is a 3x3 chart and a rather fetching title. My goal now must be to play as many Wargaming systems as possible, and only then shall I perhaps write one of my own.

Playing a real game remains the first step.