Terrain and games, double standards and dire rules - rant warning!

Started by Duke Speedy of Leighton, 02 April 2018, 02:06:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Duke Speedy of Leighton

Gaddzooks!

Some people...

A Sharpe Practise 28mm player of my acquaintance is complaining of how empty Ancient tables are.
Yet he plays with 20-30 figures, how is that supposed to represent a Napoleonic battle, when the average battle was about 20000 a side?
WW2 games routinely have companies of tanks fighting across 2-300m fronts, but these are parts of wider battles. Waterloo and Ligne had front of miles across!
Why have we all started losing our tempers about a game? When did we all become so up our selves?

Time and again we have supplied him with images of ancient battlefield, where ther terrain is scarce to say the least.
With the advent of modern terrain mats, mdf splots for trees to go on, scuplted villages, flexible roads and rivers, tables now look so much better than the 90s, when one person I layer used to chalk on their terrain, but some people...
You may refer to me as: Your Grace, Duke Speedy of Leighton.
2016 Pendraken Painting Competion Participation Prize  (Lucky Dip Catagory) Winner

jimduncanuk

Waterloo was only 2.5 miles wide so it was fairly small.

Sharp Practice games are not meant to be 'battles', only skirmishes.

But I don't really care.
My Ego forbids a signature.

Westmarcher

Going many of the Ancient Wargames I've seen at shows, I can see what your pal is saying. My analogy is that it's not enough to only have trains running around a track on a table. I also want scenery.   :)
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.

sunjester

Quote from: Westmarcher on 02 April 2018, 03:03:19 PM
I also want scenery.   :)

Even if it wasn't really there in the first place! ;)  ;D Given most pre-industrial battles were variations on "Line 'em up and bash 'em" a lot of engagements took place in relatively open terrain.

Seriously Will, tell him to wind his neck in. The amount of scenery on the table depends on the scale of the game, for skirmish games you need a lot, not so much for bigger battles.

Norm

Interesting. I suppose one of the things that we are able to do these days is dabble in a lot of periods and perhaps research and knowledge of the subject gets diluted because of this. Also the 'complete' package is often presented to the gamer, so again cursory knowledge may shape how one plays their game.

Napoleonic cavalry and ACW cavalry were used barely 50 years apart, yet the use and tactics of one in practice differed significantly from the other, yet there are rules and gamers that barely recognise that and certainly in the boardgame world, there are gamers who seem to approach their horse and musket or even ancient games with a mindset of blitzkrieg 1940 manoeuvres.

Perhaps your co-gamer should be given a Greek army, laden with phalanx and then be allowed to set up the terrain on the battlefield as per his fantasy. Then play the game and see whether the penny drops.  

having said that, there is a bottom line that spending your 2 - 3 hours just enjoying yourself is in my humble opinion the only real benchmark as to what we do being worthwhile, so if a gamer wants to blitzkrieg a Roman legion through the Ardennes, or paint the Scots Guards pink, then I suppose it matters not, unless the claim is that they have pursued and obtained absolute realism. There are plenty of games that are 'themed' on reality, rather than actually practicing it, so maybe if he wants big trees and broken ground all over the place, that's okay, plus big foliage does look cool on any table, well obviously not in naval games ..... but then again, who am I to...... :-)

Leman

I think you might have hit the nail on the head with game mats, Lemmy. Just look at the mess caused by one hedge at both Tewksbury and First Newbury. You could show him the clip of Gaugamela from Alexander. Thousands of troops and barely a bump in sight, but played on an arid game mat it would look the biz.
The artist formerly known as Dour Puritan!

Ithoriel

On Gaugamela ...

"Darius chose a flat, open plain where he could deploy his larger forces, not wanting to be caught in a narrow battlefield as he had been at Issus two years earlier, where he could not deploy his huge army properly. Darius had his soldiers flatten the terrain before the battle, to give his 200 war chariots the best conditions. However, this did not matter. On the ground were a few hills and no bodies of water that Alexander could use for protection, and in the autumn the weather was dry and mild" - Wikipedia (my emphasis)

Already flat open terrain (by wargames standards) specially levelled!

There are 100 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who can work from incomplete data

paulr

The individual in questions sounds like the sort of person I would go to some lengths to avoid

Enjoy your games Mad Lemmy :)
Lord Lensman of Wellington
2018 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2022 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2023 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!

Last Hussar

I have neither the time or the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

GNU PTerry

Westmarcher

OK.... (back to what I thought was the subject .... )

Quote from: mad lemmey on 02 April 2018, 02:06:46 PM

A Sharpe Practise 28mm player of my acquaintance is complaining of how empty Ancient tables are.

Example:-
http://prufrockian-gleanings.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/dertosa-with-to-strongest.html

So, what I was referring too specifically are the featureless tables you sometimes see at war-games shows (see above link).

Ancients is possibly probably not a period of interest for me because I just like games with some scenery (well, we're all different). Although I don't know much about Ancient Battles (again, it's not my period), I just can't accept that all battles were fought on a featureless desert or barren piece of ground as often depicted in many games. Whilst it was educational to read that Darius brought along his own groundsmen to prepare the pitch before the game, surely there must have been lots of battles with crops, vineyards, orchards or scrub, the odd hut, roundhouse, hamlet or farm, stream or more ... trees, even? Now the Milvian Bridge (I presume there was a river and a bridge?), Teutoburg Forest (please tell me there were trees) and Adrianople (I think there might be scenery in that one, too?) sound like more interesting battles to portray on the tabletop.

This looks attractive to me ...

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=457971

This doesn't .... (although it at least has a tent) ....

http://blundersonthedanube.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/ad-fortissima-to-strongest-rome-vs.html

.. and that's all I thought Lemmey's friend meant ..... just seemed a bit extreme to ostracise the guy because what he likes is different from everybody else .....

Signed - Sticker Upper for The Underdog.  :P

[probably regret this - the guy might be a real pain in the ar** .......]  ;D
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.

Ithoriel

Very few ancient battlefields seem to have had much by way of terrain beyond patches of higher ground where forces inferior in numbers, training, equipment or morale could attempt to even the odds and the occasional wood or ravine within which smart commanders with well trained troops could could conceal forces for successful ambushes and others could position troops who either took no further part in the battle or sprang the trap too early and got massacred.

Milvian Bridge is a case in point, Maxentius crossed the Tiber, most likely by pontoon bridge since the Milvian had been demolished to stop Constatine crossing it and entering the city, but positioned his army with the Tiber close to his rear. Maxentius lost the battle and much of his army was trapped by the river and were either killed by Constatine's troops, drowned or were captured, Maxentius himself drowned.

In wargaming terms that pretty much "Any unit leaving the table on the edge on which Maxentius' army deploys is counted as destroyed."  No need for an actual river or bridge.

Perhaps Ancient generals were the original creators of "the empty battlefield." :D 
There are 100 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who can work from incomplete data

Terry37

Oh goodie, time for another HOTT plug! In HOTT the terrain requirements are dictated byt the rules, unless you are doing a specific historical scenario. So we never have an issue. Well, that is unless you have no bad going troops or are stuck with Flyers  and your being the attacker the other guy sets the terrain and you find yourself staring at a bunch of woods!!! Yeps, woods are a real problem for Knights, and Flyers. But I like ot ave some of both in my armies if possible because they can cause real damage.

Terry
"My heart has joined the thousand for a friend stopped running today." Mr. Richard Adams

paulr

I agree most ancient battlefields can look a bit 'drab' and players should make some effort, having the Tiber running along a back edge would help for Milvian Bridge, but it is a lot of river if you don't use it much...

Quote from: Westmarcher on 02 April 2018, 10:51:49 PM
..... just seemed a bit extreme to ostracise the guy because what he likes is different from everybody else .....
[probably regret this - the guy might be a real pain in the ar** .......]  ;D
You may be right Westmarcher, but these
Quote from: mad lemmey on 02 April 2018, 02:06:46 PM
...complaining of how empty Ancient tables are...
Time and again we have supplied him with images of ancient battlefield, where ther terrain is scarce to say the least.
make me think your second comment is probably more correct, hard to know without having met the guy ;)
Lord Lensman of Wellington
2018 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2022 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2023 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!

fsn

I've been doing some Punic War reading, and quite a few of Hannibal's victories depended upon parts of his army being in concealment - in folds of the ground, in woods, behind a hill ... which would seem to pont to some tactical use of topography.
Lord Oik of Runcorn (You may refer to me as Milord Oik)

Oik of the Year 2013, 2014; Prize for originality and 'having a go, bless him', 2015
3 votes in the 2016 Painting Competition!; 2017-2019 The Wilderness years
Oik of the Year 2020; 7 votes in the 2021 Painting Competition
11 votes in the 2022 Painting Competition (Double figures!)
2023 - the year of Gerald:
2024 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!

Last Hussar

I have neither the time or the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

GNU PTerry