Earlier in the year I read some battle report on The Wargames Website (great forum BTW) about a new set of rules based on the old WRG 1950-85 modern rules but for WW2 – 1925-1950. Of course I promptly forgot about them until recently, when I saw them mentioned while mulling over WW2 rules.

First a bit of history of the WRG 20th century rulesets and how these rules which were released in 2025, were based on a 1979 version of the rules.
WRG released a WRG 1925-50 set of rules in 1973 (which were my first set of proper wargames rules I ever played), and later on they introduced a 1988 version which had “modes” (replacing the A-F style orders) and were probably a more realistic game but not as playable. The 1973 version is available online on the WRG website.
In parallel there was a Moderns set which was first released in 1974 covering 1950-1975 and then rewritten in 1979 (covering 1950-1985), followed by a 1993 set (1950-2000) which also had modes. The 1974 Modern version closely mirrored the 1973 WW2 rules, while the 1993 was similar to the 1988 WW2 set, but there was never a WW2 equivalent of the 1979 Moderns set.
That’s where there rules come in, they took the improvements applied the the 1979 Moderns set and adapted it for WW2 by expanding the weapons and armour values and removing things like ATGMs. Otherwise there is very little difference and I understand the author did not intend any sort of rewrite, but there is a better explanation of all this on the lulu page by the author.
As I mentioned, the WRG moderns and WW2 sets were the first set of rules I played and it set me on a wargaming path of collecting and playing with microarmour ever since. I was still playing the WRG moderns rules (1993 version) into the early 2000s and there was a strong group of players, but over time the group diminished, due to flaws in the rules and other shiny rules. Now we play Sabre Squadron (for Moderns and the occasional WW2 game) which seems to be based heavily on the WRG rules but with a number of improvements around mechanics, clearer language IMHO, and the rules reverted back to the A-F style orders used by earlier WRG rules.
So, for me, these rules are a mix of nostalgia and also a desire to find a set of rules I like, which is obviously greatly influenced by my first wargaming adventures. And although there are some glaring holes in these rules such are troop quality and training, the core mechanics of acquiring, moving and shooting, I still find intuitive and easy to follow. My other attempts of finding the “perfect” set of WW2 rules has left me feeling that something is missing or its too complicated, or it just doesn’t sit well. I’ve tried the Battlegroup series (PSC) and IABSM (I ain’t Been Shot Mum), Flames of War, What a tanker and others. Not that there is anything wrong with these rules per se, I guess it comes down to what has influenced me and my own expectations of how certain periods/game sizes should play as a wargame.
So in 2026 I will give these rules a go on the table. I might add some morale and training rules into the acquisition and morale sections of the rules, and maybe a points modifier for Green and Elite troops, but initially I’ll stick to the vanilla rules.
Who knows, these rules may be the set of WW2 rules I have been looking for, all these years, and it could be a back to the future moment!
A most interesting post. The 1973 WWII set was popular down here with games often played using 20mm miniatures. The 1979 modern set produced a number of enjoyable games for me using 1/300th miniatures. Good luck with your planned games.
LikeLike
Yes they were the Nationals set of rules for many years, so I have some fond and not so fond memories!
LikeLike
[…] And in my collection is a lot of WW2 and Moderns armies gathering dust. For WW2 I will try out the new WRG WW2 rules I posted earlier and revisit TGS (Threat Generation System) for solo games. Also if I finish some of […]
LikeLike
I’m not well versed with either set of modern WRG rules but have played both. I agree that the more recent ones are not as playable. The few games I’ve played with the older ones were realistic, a good simulation, but not such a good game.
I’ll get interested in what you think of these ones.
LikeLike
They are definitely of their time. I was surprised how short the rules are and I realised there is a lot of covered in the charts and modifiers. I started with them as a youngster so I am familiar with the core mechanisms and I like those. However they are missing sections like terrain rules, training (apart from a few modifiers) and army lists . I have mixed feelings as I like the main rules but I felt they would need some work to be a good set of rules.
LikeLiked by 1 person