It is so early in the process right now! Plus it really isn't a commercial thing...if I get it done to satisfaction I'll put it out there.Right now it is just a matter of which miniatures type rules am I grabbing from where and how am I modifying them. I really am just looking at an ideal design for my tastes for the period. I'm not a pro like you guys! I'm not good at designing my own tables etc...math was never my strong suit:)

As for the ATS module, it really is just a new module for an existant game at the small unit scale.

Absolutley true! If you want to see up close memoirs of how it worked "Lieutenent in Algeria" and Jules Roy's "War in Algeria" are both superb! The entire nexus of both is that the war had to be won politically...truly hearts and minds stuff! And ther French had some wonderful success with that approach.

I call that phase "shutting off the water"! :) But in the mean time you need the GRUNTS to clean up the puddles and plug the leaks. My concept is to put you into their shoes.

I am looking forward ti your design as it captures the big picture in Algeria better than any effort yet!

I am involved in desiging a ATS module for Algeria.

I am also trying to put together a set of rules for small unit combat in these types of wars at the one man per unit scale. I have yet to see a set of rules that is quite ideal for me so I am looking at various miniatures approaches to the concept as well as more conventional ones. A facet that I want to capture is a system that REALLY works solitaire. I think that these wars are IDEAL for this! Particularly from the counter insurgent side. A system that allows for a fog of war by hidden units that pop up almost out of no where really captures the feel! And when those units do appear the fact that they are robot units also captures the difference in caliber in forces. But this is compensated for by the fact that a large goal of the guerilla is just to escape and survive not really to slug it out toe to toe with you unless you REALLY FORCE them to. They are stealthy and have a lower tier for victory, you MUST eliminate as many of them as you can one way or another and they must just escape and drawing whatever casualties from you as they can is a bonus. Hence the player has the better "brain", the "robot" has an easier objective, if he just gets x number of guys through he has done ok. Plus the insurgent has less worries, a casualty for the counter insurgency force counts for more as there is more loss politically for them with a high casualty list (insuregents could press gang replacements) and the men are better trained and thus it is less easy to get a new man in who is nearly as good as the predecessor as fast. Insurgents also never gave a darn about civilian casualties and leaving wounded on the field was never as much of an issue as they had no real way to transport them and they would just slow them down. So the robot has a advantages in his "decisions". You have the better troops and a more agile mind but less information and more rules of engagement. The key word is uncertainty. There is no position to hold nor are you fighting regular units in the conventional sense...you may not even really accurately knwo their strength. I like to compare this sort of warfare with trying to catch water in your hand, the water is no match for you excpet for one thing, so much of it slips through your fingers in the end! It can be frustrating! I also will add in the chance to be the insurgent for some sorts of action where the conventional force more or less has limited choices...convoy ambushes for example. And maybe one form that you can play either or both sides in a base camp assault. It is a project I have pecked away at...