"Rant against Black Powder" Topic

I've liked everything I've read so far, except how the authors refer to the War of 1812.

Had a little rant on my blog

tyler.provick.ca/?p=831

I think you may be taking the comment too seriously. The whole book is tongue in cheek. At least they mention 1812!

oooh touchy!

i really think you are being a little oversensitive, it's completely in tone with all the rest of the authors tone through out the book,

regards

jim

What happened in 1812?

Napoleon invaded Russia,Wellington won at Salamanca,anything important that I've missed?

There might have been some bother at sea with some colonials or something.

"What happened in 1812?"

War of 1812 between America and England.
link

Could someone post the comment? It's difficult to know whether the rant is justified without it.

1812, a family squabble? I suppose you could look at it that way if you consider the English speaking peoples one big family. In many ways I would suppose we are.

One big happy family??

Cayote,

I understand your feelings. Just consider the authors fitting into the category of 'nobody is perfect', like the rest of us.

Take care!

Craig

1812 a "family squabble"? Nah, that would be that little dust-up we had here in the 1860's a bunch of good ole boys in borring, drab uniforms, that was a familly squabble.

1770's – that was the third or there abouts) English Civil War.

1812? Well did happen in Tyler and my backyard, well along the fence between our yards to be more precise. Really the closer for the tiff that ended in '83.

Besides who wants play wargames about changing diapers? I mean is't that why they call it "Nappies"?

NB the above is tongue in cheek satire.

I think the lads acros the Pond may be lowing it of a litle lightly. But they only like the Pretty Boys on the Continent, need the gool old US of A to hal their bacon out of the fire when things get serious and all that what?

Phillius 07 Nov 2009 3:45 p.m. PST
One big happy family??

Cane and Able revisited more like. 1812 was the aftermath of the AWI, which in many respects was a British Civil War set in a colony. The Portuguese had something similar happen to them, with Brazil the centre of a royal family quarrel, just after the Peninsular War.

1812, the one where the Canadians kicked our hineys…

Well, YOUR hineys, my people didn't come over from the old country until the 1840s (my mom's side) and 1890s (my dad's side), respectively.

I still rmember the LONG argument we had in a nautical history class the week we were discussing Rev War and 1812 shipwrecks. It was a Portuguese professor, a Portuguese student, me from Hawaii, and a Canadian girl, trying to convince the lone southerner that yes, there was indeed a war with Canada, and the US lost it…

For real US bias, though, the history of the US Navy they teach to new sailors is simply astounding in its jingoism. As a former Marine, I can say we just did not get the same level of "our service has always been the best of all the world" that the squids get.

Full-disclosure – we did get plenty of "our service IS the best of all the world" propaganda, just not as much glorious history stuff.

I agree with the Field Marshal's comment. Taken into the context of the slightly silly tone of the rules as a whole (from the sections I have read), I think it a fairly innocuous comment.

Mwahaha! I am aware of the tongue-in-cheek nature of the book. I think the strangest thing is no-one disputes my theory that an American victory in 1812 would have resulted in a Nazi victory in WWII.

Black Powder is an excellent book throughout and fully recommended. Those that thought I was over-reacting are correct.

>"What happened in 1812?"
>War of 1812 between America and England.

*Ahem* England? I think you mean Great Britain. The Irish, Scottish and Welsh have to take their share of the blame/credit.

I think the way the original poster's blog refers to Canada annexing anything is kind of funny. Canada (or all the constituent parts of it) was a fully integrated part of the British Empire. I mean if we are going to get all bent out of shape about someone's satirical remarks for being disrespectful of the historical signifigance of the epoch, let's get ALL of the facts straight.

" I think the strangest thing is no-one disputes my theory that an American victory in 1812 would have resulted in a Nazi victory in WWII."

I do…but I can't really be bothered.

Thank goodness Christot, I was starting to get worried.

"What happened in 1812?" – War of 1812 between America and England.

Oh! You mean President Madison's cunning plan to bankrupt the United States?

Silly me, forgot all about it! :o)

It is a silly remark. I'm a Canadian and not that interested in the War of 1812, but others are. I try not to diss anyone's interest in any period as long as they're playing with miniatures!

Can't understand any offence being taken. It is completely in keeping with the tongue in cheek pre-war imperial tone. I suspect the authors and their friends would enthusiastically play any period, the family feud of 1812 included.

Many historical gamers take the realism and fact based balanced design concepts very seriously. They want games without a slant, "tongue in cheek or otherwise", as that can be viewed as an attempt to hide a prejudious (there or not) in the rule design concept.

This may be the problem some people see with the 1812 American War comments.

IMO, There is no place for 'tongue in cheek' comments in a set of rules. Rule and their concepts including national force rating have to be viewed as done by a neutral designer with no slants of preference.

Judging by how seriously some people have taken this flip comment, perhaps there needs to be more tongue-in-cheek humour in rulebooks.

Crikey guys, we are only playing a game with toy soldiers! Lighten up, develop a sense of humour, or whatever!

As long as the humor doesn't distract from the comprehension, then why not.

I've read some rulebooks where every freakin line has to have some lame joke or pun, though, and that's a drag.

I'm just starting to digest Black Power. (That sounds like some 1930s cold remedy, doesn't it…) My only gripe has to do with the annoying little spelling errors, like the difference between "it's" and "its," or forgetting the periods in abbreviations like "ie" instead of "i.e.", or the difference between "Monsieur" and "Messieurs".

That's just my little hobby-horse, and I'm going to ride him.

I have but one link to give for my country!

YouTube link

arghhhhhhhhhh this is why I often wonder why I like wargamers :)

colinjallen 08 Nov 2009 11:26 a.m. PST
Crikey guys, we are only playing a game with toy soldiers! Lighten up, develop a sense of humour, or whatever!

*NJH: We have no sense of humour in America, however, we have a great sense of humor.

I'm just starting to digest Black Power. (That sounds like some 1930s cold remedy, doesn't it…)

Not without the 'd' it doesn't, it sounds more like a 1960s…we'll stop there.

RudyNelson: The comment occurs in a sidebar in a section which is giving brief overviews of many of the wars covered by the rules. There aren't really national characteristics, so no worry about a bias. This is also far outside of the rules section of the book.

Oh Wow, I guess nobody else saw that wonderful not-so-Freudian slip!

I no longer have enough hair to look convincing, but I raise my fist in salute nonetheless!

>>> My only gripe has to do with the annoying little spelling errors, like the difference between "it's" and "its," or forgetting the periods in abbreviations like "ie" instead of "i.e.", or the difference between "Monsieur" and "Messieurs".

The horror!

By the way, are you Monsieur Smith, or Monsieur Carlos?)

Allen

Rick P has already said the one misplaced apostrophe is really annoying him the way it sneaked past them – one out of the whole book has to be a record for most books not just wargame rules. In common English now ie instead of i.e. is very common usage and is now seem in the publishing world outside of academia as being correct.

As to the Monsieur and Messieurs – who cares :-)

Rich

Quick get the pitchforks!

A new nicely produce set of rules is on the market… We must find all the faults with it and denigrate it!

I found an 's' missing at one point in a sentance!

Not going to play it now as a spelling mistake like that must mean its useless.

Incidently the 's' was missed off the word 'Staff' thus leaving 'taff' in the sentance.

Im also outraged at the use of the word 'taff' but I dont know why yet…

Relax, guys. I said it was the "only" thing that raised my eyebrow, not that I hated the game. It's a good book, it looks like fun, and I'm sure I'll play it.

I also admitted that good editing – especially spelling – is my own personal hobby horse; my little obsession. It's important to me. I realize it's not important to most other people, otherwise the OFM would run wargaming.

"1812? Well did happen in Tyler and my backyard, well along the fence between our yards to be more precise. Really the closer for the tiff that ended in '83."

I've seen many comments from Americans about Madison's War along those lines, that somehow it is connected to the War of Independence.
I thought that the AWI was a struggle by some of the inhabitants to gain "liberty" from an oppressor, as they saw it. (Liberty for everybody except the native peoples and Black people, of course.)
Whereas I thought that the War of 1812 was a war of aggression by the US, which began with the Americans invading Canada, with an aim to seizing territory.
I can't see that a war for "Liberty" can be linked to a war of aggression against a neighbour!

"Whereas I thought that the War of 1812 was a war of aggression by the US, which began with the Americans invading Canada, with an aim to seizing territory"

Yeah, funny that, so do a lot of people, even some Americans!

Hey Sam (PaM)
You do realise that this means we will be scouring your new rules for any sort of typo :-)

Mind you a good set of large battle rules followed by a good (I know it will be) set of smaller encounter stuff rules means I may not get to play any other periods for a while, and there is me with a painting table of WWII Pacific stuff!

Rich J

[You do realise that this means we will be scouring your new rules for any sort of typo ]

I already found an award-winning one. It's awesome because it's a spelling error in the introduction, in the sentence right before I thank the proof-readers! The only thing better would have been to misspell "proofread."

A lot of gamers in the past didn't consider the War of 1812 for gaming. There was a lot more to do with what was going on in Europe. That trend is now changing. Because the battles that happened here in North America are considerably smaller in scale than the huge European ones, more gamers are reconsidering 1812. Basically if you can build your armies for the Battle of Lundy's Lane you can practically do any other battle in that war (numbers wise). At Lundy's you're dealing with 3,000 to 4,000 for each side.
One other reason some American gamers don't do 1812 is because of the mediocre performance of the US Army. Yes there were exceptions to this like Chippewa and the Siege of Fort Eire where US forces stood their ground.

Seriously, why would I want to game one of the most embarrassing actions of the US Army (in it's entire history), when I can game some of the most glorious actions of the US Navy.

Full Disclosure: I was a Sailor in the USN.

USN Frigate defeating RN frigate looks pretty good doesn't it!
However, a comparison of the actual size and strength of the frigates makes the victories look slightly less glorious.
For example:
USS Constitution, armament 30 × 24 pdrs, 20 × 32pdr carronades, 2 × 24pdr carronades and about 120 more men than those of each of her opponents.
HMS Guerriere was an elderly captured French 38. Armament 16 x 32pdr carronades, 30 x 18pdr guns, 2 x 12pdr guns
1 x 18pdr carronade.
HMS Macedonian was a 3 year old 38. Armament 28 long 18pdrs, 16 32pdr carronades, 2 12pdrs, 2 9drs, 1 18pdr carronade
HMS Java was a 7 year old captured French 38. Armament 28 x 18pdrs, 2 x 12pdrs, 18 x 32pdr carronades, 1 x 24pdr carronade.
In all of these cases, the scantlings of the American ships were significantly heavier than those of the British ones.
The only frigate action where there was near parity, between the USS Chesapeake and HMS Shannon, was won by the Shannon.
USS Chesapeake:
340 crew, 29 x 18-pounders, 18 x 32-pounder carronades
2 x 12-pounders, 1 x 12-pounder carronade.
HMS Shannon:
330 crew, 28 x 18 pdrs,10 x 9pdrs,16 x 32pdr carronades.