 |
| #2: An old chestnut of a scenario and improvised basing but a brisk game. |
So far that is! Early days yet.
Wednesday, January 15, 2020
The Wheels Are Still Turning
I was stoked for the first game but with each stand being a unit, there were too many units on the table for the mechanisms to flow well and keep up interest and excitement in the game so something had to change.
After rejecting various options as too "gamey" and abstract or too tedious, I remembered that I had at one point contemplated a system where 2 stand units occupied two adjacent 3" grid squares giving an easy way to reflect formations and frontages without complex or confusing rules or excessive empty space to confuse me mid-game or distort the look of the thing. The result feels much more "old school" than the Square Brigadier ever did but with all the convenience of a simple gridded game.
So far that is! Early days yet.
So far that is! Early days yet.
Born and raised in the suburbs of Montreal 7 decades ago. Began playing with toy soldiers at 5 years. Started painting & converting at about 12 yrs and wargaming about 15 yrs. Never really stopped.
5 years in the Black Watch of Canada Cadets, 5 years at the Collège militaire royal de Saint-Jean followed by 4 in the navy. 25 years with CPC in IT simultaneous with 23 years running a boarding kennel. Inherited my love of toy soldiers from my mother's father. Married with a pack of litle Italian Greyhounds and a cat. Prematurely retired and enjoying leisure to game, maintaining our 170 yr old farmhouse and just living.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Great photo, interesting basing convention and I am looking forward to reading more...
ReplyDeleteWell, since I already had 8 figure units and didn't want big squares or to have to manage potential 36 units, it sort of suggested itself for trial.
DeleteIn my 'not quite DBX' games I make a lot of use of 'dummy' elements - one rank doesn't look right so add an extra rank that doesn't count in any calculations for example. Same with separate command groups outside the formation but which are just there to look good.
ReplyDeleteRob - good point
DeleteI did think of something like that if using bigger squares, 2nd rank touching for close order or separated for skirmishers with supports but I'm keeping the idea in reserve for now.
DeleteGoing to a two ‘grid’ formation does bring a need for new rule sections to cover all of those ‘strange’ situations that crop up, single cell formations does avoid all the messy stuff! Not a problem for solo gaming because the solutions are usually stored in the brain ...... but convention games etc may be a bit more testing :-)
ReplyDeleteWell, I can't see me dragging my 54's to a convention any time soon. Too much work and bother. Initial test game has been promising but early days yet.
DeleteReading this posting, I found myself going back over previous postings ... and asking myself some questions. The first, and I've asked it before, is this: 'What is wrong with featuring or factoring in (minor) tactics below the command level of the game? For mine, the answer lies in that when I play, I am not only the army commander, I am the army itself. That does not mean I am every formation or unit commander, but rather the army as a whole.
ReplyDeleteJust as I am not only the mind controlling this corpus delicti, I am this physical being. I am not every finger, every toe, every bone, every cell, but the some total of it all. There are three levels of control: the thinking mind; the conscious physical action, moment by moment, some of it quite trivial, towards a given purpose at any given time; and semi-voluntary (breathing) and involuntary (heartbeat) unconscious actions that keep the thing functional. That is how I see my armies, I think.
That is why, I think, the things many war gamers like to factor out as 'below the grain', I prefer to factor in. In an army level game, I don't want to order shooting, especially: that's generally at the level of respiration. But I do want to factor in skirmish screens: that's at the level of , say, grasping the cup to drink the tea. Command level: drink the tea; below command level, the physical processes that transfer the tea from cup to stomach; automatic level, tasting, swallowing, beginning the digestion process (or coughing and spluttering when it goes down the wrong way).
I have to admit, though, that what I have described are my 'free board' games. My gridded games involve rather more compromises as far as 'what lies below the grain' is concerned. Only when it 'looks' wrong do I examine where and what and how to deal with it.
I have looked at and even discussed on this blog how I might approach units that span more than one grid area (especially squares). I think my own answer was simply not to go there. My ACW and 'Gatonegro' campaigns, involving fairly sizeable units (24-28 figures, say) worked better on a 'free table'.
Mind you I still think I marginally prefer the 'open table'. But what grid systems have done for me is to help get more games in and more variety, too.
That used to be my POV as well and there's nothing wrong with it. A lot of my issues these days has to do with mental and physical stamina but its also that it does distract from the focus.
DeleteThings like skirmish screens to take an example, are the business of battalion and brigade commanders, not division or corps commanders so these days while I like to see them, if practical, now but feel that I should be focusing on the over all battle without control over every detail and let the subordinates do their job with the dice etc showing if they did well or screw up.
To be fair though, regardless of theory, I find that too many individually unimportant details and die rolls get tedious and boring and the games get too long for me. I've slowly learned to appreciate having 'significant things' 'happen' more frequently and have a conclusion come in 2-3 hours. Can't handle the 6-8+ hour games any more! (and doing them in bits over weeks just doesn't do it either)
Very pertinent points. I like 'quick' too. So the 'below the grain' stuff, while present, is not there to dominate proceedings, nor to bog down the action. So, yes, one ends up with weighted criteria - some coming in ahead of others. If certain details slow the game down beyond a certain (fairly arbitrary) point, it's out. That's one of the reasons I never 'order' shooting or close combats. If the enemy is in range, the boys blaze away.
DeleteEvery time I see photos of your 'big' figures engaged in action Ross I think to myself 'you see, it can be done on a modest sized table'. Very inspiring indeed and as always I love the shiny figures :)
ReplyDelete