I have been a gamer for over twenty years, and have seen much come and go in this unusual hobby. Scales preferences change, rules become very complicated, and then return to simplicity, painting skills grow, and game tables become more 'realistic.' But somehow, we seem unable to get free of the person who would reveal "Truth" for all, based on personal likes and dislikes. Well, there are some of us who do not believe the truths stated in the aforementioned article to be so self-evident, so I will enter two cents worth. I will give little shrift to the opening remarks as they are basically an indictment of the very article itself.
10). The reality is as much based on periods as anything else. In more modem periods, the premier problem is getting units to take action or move, as advanced communications and the increased lethality of our weapons systems make the battlefield more dangerous. In the ages before radio and telephone, the added problem of stopping an advance is a viable consideration, but most rules sets I have used make some consideration for this problem. I know that there are sets that don't, but if you look around, you can avoid these.
9). Most 15mm figures today are very well cast, as good or better than many 25mm figures and superior to every example of the old 30mm figures of long ago. The fact of cost and storage were completely ignored in the article, but these are very important to most gainers, especially those with families and houses to support. And the old saw of increase of ratios will bring on two man battalions, and that might draw fire from one of our mentors across the Atlantic (what would the young ones perceive, don't you know). I have never seen the red/grey blobs mentioned nor poor painting quality on 15mm figures, but I have seen spray painted 25mm forces, and at conventions no less! I use both scales to achieve different purposes in my own gaming, and they work well.
8). The point of total agreement in the article. Well put, and succinctly stated. There are too many dice rolls in most rules sets.
7). I agree that orders of battle have questionable strengths, but no less "realistic" than an American Civil War Union Division where each regiment is the exact same strength. Whichever method is used is of value to the persons using it, if it makes them satisfied. It is not the responsibility of one gamer to set the parameters for others. I do wish more thought was given to Command Level in rules construction, a game based on army level should not deal with the formations of a particular battalion, nor with artillery sections!
6). I agree, except that fantasy people aren't writing more interesting rules, but are using the advertising so viciously attacked later in the article. There IS, on the other hand, a tremendous difference in Wargaming and Roleplaying, and this is what is usually thought of in the ongoing and very tiring battle between Historicals, and Fantastics.
5). I am deeply saddened by the fact your experiences with Big Games has been so dismal. I have participated in many, and the vast majority were fought to a conclusion, the food was good, and cold pop was close at hand. I do fail to see what the lack of alcoholic beverages has to do with one's enjoyment level of gaming. It seems somewhat odd that one would want to imbibe a substance which serves to cloud one's ability to think coherently, and comprehend events quickly, in an atmosphere where those are important qualities?! Unless the real purpose is to drink, and the game is merely a device to cover this desire.
4). The aforementioned revilement of well presented material, which is the primary reason fantasy sells well. The figures stated for the total Historical gamers is undoubtedly low (my own estimation is perhaps 3 to 4 times greater, but no certain figures are available). Having worked in the distribution industry for 9 years, I can with certainty refute the statements on the stores and distributors sitting on the vast majority of rules sets. Those that don't sell are returned to the publisher after a time, and so very little sits around. Store owners may not be gaming experts, but they know what happens to a store filled with non-moving stock. And classy presentation does not mean a poor content, i.e. Tactica, Napoleon's Battles, Command Decision, et al.
3). Conventions can be great places to play wargames, as well as buy new stuff, and learn new techniques. It is up to the gamer to select interesting games. And the "guy with a beet red face, pulsing temples under a blonde crewcut" (Blonde jokes?) glaring at you, can if handled correctly, be a source of great amusement, especially if you do win.
2). The correct translation, according to a friend who is French and a professional military researcher, is "The battle goes to the STRONGEST battalions." Napoleon was shorter than any of his foes (Czar Paul! !!, the Czar's name was Alexander, and he was over six feet tall, referred to as a giant by some!). As for your challenge, if that was not enough, George Washington (another giant in size) was consistently defeated by shorter foes. Geronimo was also shorter than most of his enemies, as was Sitting Bull. Tallness, like uniform color, race, or evolution has little to do with military operations.
1). The gamer should feel, hopefully, that his rules are realistic enough and accurate enough for his tastes. While no rules set will ever be truly "realistic and accurate" (no actual death and maiming, or nation left ruined), they must have some comparisons to be at all functional. A Napoleonic game using laser rangefinders is less historical than one which doesn't. A system allowing smoothbore muskets a range of 500 yards is not accurate (but I have seen such).
It has been my personal experience that it is not the rules sets which are most expensive which produce article after article, and letter after letter praising themselves and berating others, but the less expensive, more poorly organized and presented sets which have been around for ever until challenged by the newer sets.
So here is presented the REAL Top Ten Truths, and "I Don't Know's On Third."
Any connection between items and persons mentioned in this article and any item in existence and any person or persons living, or otherwise, is purely coincidental.
Back to MWAN #63 Table of Contents
Back to MWAN List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Magazine List
© Copyright 1993 Hal Thinglum
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com