Reasons NOT to refight historical battles

[John Cook]

The biggest problem with fighting a historical battle is you can't.

All I can say to that is that the military does it as a teaching tool and the people at Little Wars TV do it all the time.

[Ithoriel]

All I can say to that is that the military does it as a teaching tool .....

That would explain why so many armies spend the first part of each war learning just how wrong so many of their beliefs were.

[Chris Pringle]

That would explain why so many armies spend the first part of each war learning just how wrong so many of their beliefs were.

Because they don't realise the rules have changed and they were still using the previous edition.

[Ithoriel]

Oh! I say, Carruthers! Guderian is using BKCIV and we're still on BKCII. Dashed unsporting if you ask me!! :-D

[John Cook]

That would explain why so many armies spend the first part of each war learning just how wrong so many of their beliefs were.

Recent examples being?

[Ithoriel]

The Brits in the late 1930's, Midway, Vietnam, Afghanistan spring to mind. I'm sure there are others.

[Raider4]

The Brits in the late 1930's . . .

And the French. Very much the French.

[John Cook]

The Brits in the late 1930's, Midway, Vietnam, Afghanistan spring to mind. I'm sure there are others.

I asked for recent examples, say, ones in my life time.  I'm not sure any military did much wargaming as a teaching tool prior to the 1960s, except of course the Germans with their Kriegspiel.  The only fully motorised army in 1939 was the British but, as usual, there was not much of it.  It was neither equipped nor trained to fight WW1 over again so that seems, to me, to be a poor example but I don't know how much tactical or operational wargaming was done in those days by the British.  Midway is definitely a poor example and is one where wargaming various scenarios paid dividends.  Nimitz himself said that the so-called 'Fleet Problems' played during the 1930s and as late as 1940, were instrumental in the successful US prosecution of war in the Pacific.  Vietnam and Afghanistan were political defeats, resulting from lack of American political/civilian willpower, they were not military defeats, on the contrary.  The VC/Vietnamese were only able to win when the Americans pulled out.  Exactly the same can be said of Afghanistan.  Recent examples where wargaming paid dividends are the Falklands and both Gulf Wars.  Wargaming historical scenarios is still a tool used for teaching tactical and operational art in most sophisticated armed forces.

[Gwydion]

Agree with that John.

Also in WWII the Western Approaches Tactical Unit based in Liverpool, made a significant, possibly pivotal, contribution to changing and developing tactics in the Battle of the Atlantic. The way they did this was by wargaming the U Boat attacks and Allied countermeasures.

Commander (later Captain) Gilbert Roberts and his team of Wrens also trained around 5,000 officers in anti-submarine tactics at the unit through wargames and the information gathered from wargames.

[mmcv]

Agree with that John.

Also in WWII the Western Approaches Tactical Unit based in Liverpool, made a significant, possibly pivotal, contribution to changing and developing tactics in the Battle of the Atlantic. The way they did this was by wargaming the U Boat attacks and Allied countermeasures.

Commander (later Captain) Gilbert Roberts and his team of Wrens also trained around 5,000 officers in anti-submarine tactics at the unit through wargames and the information gathered from wargames.

Covered well in this video if you haven't already seen it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVet82IUAqQ

[Ithoriel]

I asked for recent examples, say, ones in my life time.  I'm not sure any military did much wargaming as a teaching tool prior to the 1960s, except of course the Germans with their Kriegspiel.  The only fully motorised army in 1939 was the British but, as usual, there was not much of it.  It was neither equipped nor trained to fight WW1 over again so that seems, to me, to be a poor example but I don't know how much tactical or operational wargaming was done in those days by the British.  Midway is definitely a poor example and is one where wargaming various scenarios paid dividends.  Nimitz himself said that the so-called 'Fleet Problems' played during the 1930s and as late as 1940, were instrumental in the successful US prosecution of war in the Pacific.  Vietnam and Afghanistan were political defeats, resulting from lack of American political/civilian willpower, they were not military defeats, on the contrary.  The VC/Vietnamese were only able to win when the Americans pulled out.  Exactly the same can be said of Afghanistan.  Recent examples where wargaming paid dividends are the Falklands and both Gulf Wars.  Wargaming historical scenarios is still a tool used for teaching tactical and operational art in most sophisticated armed forces.

Before we vanish entirely down the rabbit hole.

Recent? I'm currently back to reading everything I can find on all things Sumerian. Recent starts with the Hittites.

Midway. The US and Japan both gamed it. The Americans lucked out, the Japanese allowed senior officers to overrule the their juniors, who were right. The Japanese still only lost "All for want of a ....horseshoe nail scout plane."

All wars lost are political defeats. The military is the combat arm of the political entity. You cannot win the military conflict and lose the political one, they are one and the same. "War is the continuation of politics by other means." - Carl von Clausewitz

It's like saying, of a soccer game, we won more possession, spent more time in the opponent's half and created more corners and only lost because the opposition scored more goals.

You can study a battle and learn valuable lessons but you can also study battles and make wrong inferences from them.

Finally, we are straying in to the wargaming of future events, which, surely, are, by definition, not historical. Indeed, since they are gaming a future event, it might even be considered science fiction.  

We are clearly not going to persuade each other, so my best hope is that we are providing others with either food for thought or entertainment.

[Last Hussar]

In my defence I would point out what the military games is different to what we do.

To make my point, however, please give me a link to the accurate Orbat for the Germans for Market Garden.

[John Cook]

In my defence I would point out what the military games is different to what we do.

To make my point, however, please give me a link to the accurate Orbat for the Germans for Market Garden.

Your point eludes me I'm afraid.  How do you decide that the OB for Market Garden in front of you is inaccurate. 

Coincidentally, HQ NORTHAG conducted a wargame of Market Garden in about 1989/90, one of their annual staff training events.  It comprised a Staff Ride followed by a Tactical Exercise Without Troops (TEWT), which although it didn't use dice or miniatures was hardly different from civilian wargaming.

 

[Ithoriel]

Coincidentally, HQ NORTHAG conducted a wargame of Market Garden in about 1989/90, one of their annual staff training events.  It comprised a Staff Ride followed by a Tactical Exercise Without Troops (TEWT), which although it didn't use dice or miniatures was hardly different from civilian wargaming.

Clearly you and I play very different games if you think that was " hardly different from civilian wargaming."


It's as far removed from what I would consider wargaming as Subbuteo is. If not further. At least Subbuteo is a conflict played on a playing surface with miniatures.

[Heedless Horseman]

"Whisht, Lads, Had yer Gobs... an I'll tell yer's all an ar'ful story!
Whisht, Lads.. Had yer Gobs... an' Ill tell ye 'boot The Worme!"

*1. Young Lord Lambton, he espied..  a Worme of Gruesome size. A'll curled aboot a Hill, he was... with Greet Big Goggly Eyes!
With Lance and Sword, the Brave Young Lord...
fell uopn...  that Monstrous Beastie!

*2. Referencing Tactical training, Lambton instituted an assault combining diversionary tactical movement, covering fire from flanking positions and assisted mobility in the form of Horse transport.
The assault was successful with objective carried.

The Goggly Eyed Worme Ate him in process.

Horses for Courses. Avalon Hill paper map and cardboard counters... or painted Miniatures on scenic fields. Same battle.

(My Profound Apologies to Folklore!).      (And Can't Sing, either!).

[Gwydion]

Clearly you and I play very different games if you think that was " hardly different from civilian wargaming."


It's as far removed from what I would consider wargaming as Subbuteo is. If not further. At least Subbuteo is a conflict played on a playing surface with miniatures.

TEWTs are excellent wargames-which law says a wargame has to have miniatures on a tabletop?
But if you prefer, and Last Hussar wants a wargame of Market Garden with a reasonably accurate Orbat, then the game played at Camberley around the same time as the Northag game should suffice. Large map on floor of lecture hall, loads of umpires (I was one) and those playing the commands of the Allies and Germans in rooms connected by phones and runners. The Orbat wasn't accurate to the last Kompanie perhaps but sufficient to give a reasonably historical set of proceedings and outcome.

PS -  The Lambton Worm Orbat is wrong for the Knight's side - where is the intel section that told him how to defeat it, and the reserve of his father and sacrificial dog?

[Ithoriel]

... which law says a wargame has to have miniatures on a tabletop?

Mine.

If it doesn't it's an RPG.

Which is an excellent form of entertainment and a closely related pastime but still a beast of a different colour.

[John Cook]

Clearly you and I play very different games if you think that was " hardly different from civilian wargaming."
It's as far removed from what I would consider wargaming as Subbuteo is. If not further. At least Subbuteo is a conflict played on a playing surface with miniatures.

I doubt that very much.  In the almost 60 years I've been wargaming I have encountered all kinds of wargames, in a professional and hobby context.  Nowhere is it 'written' that a wargame has to be "played on a playing surface with miniatures".  Often they are not.  The Market Garden TEWT I alluded to involved 1:50000 maps and counters.  It would have been instantly recognisable to any board wargamer.  Board wargames don't involve miniatures, but they are still wargames.

The concept that wargames have to involve miniatures, and dice, is a rather narrow outlook I'd say.  The fact of the matter is that you simply don't need miniatures, which are actually no more than pretty counters, to play wargames effectively. 

Be all that as it may, the fact of the matter is that historical wargaming is a valuable tool for teaching tactics and operational art.  It was used by RMA Sandhurst until the late 80s to my certain knowledge, and you only have to look at the courses run today by staff colleges here in the UK, the US and elsewhere, to see that they are taken increasingly seriously for, among other things, teaching military history.

The difficulty, perhaps, with historical wargaming is that it isn't easy to do well.  That doesn't mean it can't be done.  In order to be intellectually challenging, as well as enjoyable, historical wargames require a lot more preparation and commitment than just a 'Friday night fight' with a bunch of miniatures, a handful of dice and no context, which is definitely comparable to Subbuteo, in my view, and about as satisfying.

Still, different strokes for different folks, as they say. 

[Chad]

Do not necessarily disagree with you John but your Friday night point is often the crux of the issue.

Assuming you meet on a Friday night from say 7pm to 11pm. You have to allow say an hour to set up and then pack up, giving you abou 3 hours for a game. You are then very much reliant on having rules that are capable of running a refight of any historical battle in 3 hours to a satisfactory and meaningful conclusion. If such a refight is not possible then it seems to me that you are left with games that have a reasonably good reflection of the period you are playing and can be completed on a Friday night.

I say this even though, since I started wargaming 50 years ago, I have always been in a position where time was never a constraint.

[sultanbev]

To make my point, however, please give me a link to the accurate Orbat for the Germans for Market Garden.

Probably as good as you are gonna get to date:
https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/3426/MicroMark-Army-Lists/subcategory/5776_5892/WW2-GERMANS?page=5
G544: German 712th Infantry Division, NW Europe, August-September 1944
G545: German 719th Infantry Division, NW Europe, August-September 1944
G546: SS Grenadier Regiment Landstorm Nederlands, Holland, May-October 1944
G547: German 176th Division, NW Europe, August-October 1944 (double list)
G548: German Kampfgruppe Chill, 85th Infantry Division, Holland, 5-8th September 1944
G549: German 6th Fallschirmjager Regiment von der Heydte, NW Europe, September 1944
G550: German 245th Infantry Division, NW Europe, September 1944 (double list)
G551: German 59th Infantry Division, NW Europe, September 1944
G552: German Hermann Goring Panzer Replacement and Training Regiment, NW Europe, September 1944 aka Fallschirm-Panzer-Ersatz und Ausbildungs Regiment Hermann Göring
G553: German Fallschirmjager Division Erdmann, NW Europe, September 1944
G554: German Kampfgruppe Walther, Neerpelt Bridgehead, 17th September 1944
G555: German Kampfgruppes (1) Helle, Weber, Krafft, Arnhem, 17th September 1944
G556: German SS Kampfgruppes (2) Spindler, Harder, von Allworden, Moller, Arnhem, Sep 1944
G557: German 9th SS Armoured Recce Battalion (KG Graebner), Arnhem, 17th-25thSept. 1944
G558: German Unterfuhrer Schule Arnheim, Arnhem, 17th-18th September 1944
G559: German Division von Tettau, Arnhem, 17th-18th September 1944
G560: German Kampfgruppe Knoche, Arnhem, 17th-18th September 1944 (double list)
G561: German Kampfgruppes (3) Koeppel, Walther, von Svobada, Holland, 18th Sept 1944
G562: German 10th SS Panzer Division Frundsberg, Holland, 5th September 1944 (double list)
G563: German Kampfgruppes (4) Brinkman, Knaust, Nickmann, Sonnenstuhl, Holland, 17th-21st September 1944
G564: German Kampfgruppe Krafft, Arnhem, 19th September 1944
G565: German Kampfgruppes (5) Reinhold, Euling, Baumgaertel, Holland, 19th Sept. 1944
G566: German Kampfgruppe Henke, Nijmegen, 17th-21st September 1944
G567: German Korps Feldt (1) zbv406 Division, Holland, 16-17th September 1944
G568: German Korps Feldt (2) Wehrkreis VI, Holland, 16th-17th September 1944
G569: German Kampfgruppes (6) Goebel, Greschick, von Furstenberg, Groesbeek Heights, 18th September 1944
G570: German Kampfgruppe Stargaard, Korps Feldt, Groesbeek Heights, 18th Sept 1944
G571: German Kampfgruppe Becker, 3rd Fallschirmjager Division, Holland, 20th Sept 1944
G572: German Kampfgruppe Hermann, 5th Fallschirmjager Division, Holland, 20th Sept 1944
G573: German Kampfgruppes Jungwirth & Ewald, Holland, 18th-26th September 1944
G574: German Kampfgruppe Zuber, Holland, 18th-26th September 1944
G575: German Kampfgruppe Rink, Holland, 18th-26th September 1944
G576: German Kampfgruppe Helle, Arnhem, 18th September 1944
G577: German Kampfgruppes (7) Bruhn, Shorken, Arnhem, 19th-20th September 1944
G578: German Kampfgruppe Spindler, Arnhem, 19th September 1944
   (contains KG Bruhn, Krafft, Harder, von Allworden, Gropp, Moeller)
G579: German Sperrverband Harzer, Holland, 21st-22nd September 1944
G580: German Kampfgruppe Walther, Veghel, Holland, 22nd September 1944
G581: German Kampfgruppe Huber, Veghel, Holland, 22nd September 1944
G582: German Kampfgruppe Chill, Veghel, Holland, 24th-25th September 1944 (double list)
G583: German Kampfgruppe Walther, Holland, 23rd-24th September

Mark