Angel Barracks | 21 Oct 2010 1:54 p.m. PST |
I know this has been done to death, so apologies for dragging it up again. However I think this is slightly different. What level would you say a game that matches this description is: The basic unit is a company. A company is made up of 8 bases of 12 figures each.
It is expected that the player will have enough companies in play to field a battalion and then have some extra companies as support/misc. I would think of this is a company level game, though others may think it a battalion level game. Looking at the TMP definition it is a skirmish games as the figure ratio is 1:1 Your thoughts on what level game this should be classed as. Michael. |
Only Warlock | 21 Oct 2010 2:11 p.m. PST |
When I talk of "Levels of Play" I usually refer to the size of the entire force one side is fielding. For instance, If I am playing a "Company level" game it usually means I am fighting my Company of Waffen-SS Panzergrenadiers (For example) against Bill's Company of Zombie Stewardesses. |
Stoelzels Structures | 21 Oct 2010 2:13 p.m. PST |
When someone says "the basic unit
" to me means the smallest independently movable element, so having multiple bases throws me off immediately. If it's multiple bases, and they add up to a company under each players control, I would say the "scope of play" is at the level of company, or maybe say company level. If each has multiple companies, than I agree, Battalion level seems good. Not sure how it could be 1:1. TMP definition aside, every one differs, but to me a skirmish game is 1 stand represents 1 person (not one element), AND each stand is independent, or at least most stands are independent. |
Angel Barracks | 21 Oct 2010 2:17 p.m. PST |
In this game a company is shown by having around 100 figures per company, which is made up of 8 bases. Thus a battalion of say 10 companies is about 1000 figures, which is about 1:1 That is what I think of as 1:1, 1 figure represents 1 man. Does that make sense? |
GildasFacit | 21 Oct 2010 2:26 p.m. PST |
To me it is a skirmish game – let me explain why
If you were fielding a force this size (1000 or so) in Saxon England it would be a 'battle', in Vietnam the same but in Napoleonic times 'battles' were fought by divisions, not battalions so it is a 'skirmish'. Size is thus relative to the warfare of its time. Also, again in my mind, it isn't 1:1 because each figure is not moving as an individual, but as an integral part of the base and its actions are restrained by that base being part of a unit that training only fits the bases to work together in specified and limited ways. Also I'd say anything that is too small to employ all the arms (Inf, Cav, Art etc) in the manner appropriate for the time is a skirmish. WW2 & after gets complicated because, even at 1:1 that is both possible and tactically feasible so I'd tend to fudge that one. Probably why I tend to prefer bigger games where I'm commanding armies or significant parts of them. |
bgbboogie | 21 Oct 2010 2:31 p.m. PST |
Great idea I do this in 15mm and 1 to 1 in 28mm. |
CPT Jake | 21 Oct 2010 2:38 p.m. PST |
What role does the player take? If he is a BN CDR I would consider it BN level rules. |
Angel Barracks | 21 Oct 2010 2:40 p.m. PST |
To me it is a skirmish game – let me explain why
If you were fielding a force this size (1000 or so) in Saxon England it would be a 'battle', in Vietnam the same but in Napoleonic times 'battles' were fought by divisions, not battalions so it is a 'skirmish'. Size is thus relative to the warfare of its time. I agree on that 100% I would however argue it is 1:1 ratio as the ratio of figures to men is 1:1 but I would not argue tonight as I am tired! :)
Great idea I do this in 15mm and 1 to 1 in 28mm. Is that you Martin? |
Angel Barracks | 21 Oct 2010 2:41 p.m. PST |
What role does the player take? If he is a BN CDR I would consider it BN level rules. Mostly yes, I have never seen a game where a player has enough figures to do more than 1 complete battalion. But if someone did have say 4000 miniatures
?
|
quidveritas | 21 Oct 2010 2:53 p.m. PST |
The figure/scale representation has nothing to do with it. Using the 1:1 argument, FOW is a skirmish game! Sorry, nothing could be further from the truth. To call such a game a skirmish game is misleading. The level of the game should be fixed by the 'functional unit'. D&D is a skirmish game. NUTS is a skirmish game. Each figure is individualized and acts as in individual. Games that use a squad as a functional unit are small unit games. It doesn't matter if a single base represents the squad or if 10 individual figures represents a squad, the functional unit is the squad or fire team. The squad moves, the squad issues fire, the squad makes morale checks. Rules of Engagement is a small unit game. Flames of War pretty much has a 1:1 infantry representation but these guys are based as 4-5 man half squads. They all operate together as a platoon and are commanded by a platoon command stand -- in my experience. Platoons issue fire, platoons take enemy fire as a single entity, platoons make morale checks -- this is a platoon level game. mjc |
Angel Barracks | 21 Oct 2010 2:59 p.m. PST |
I am not sure anyone said that a 1:1 game is a skirmish game did they? I am tired but am sure no-one has? Tony and I think that the game in question is a skirmish as 1000 troops in Napleonic terms is no where near proper battle sized. It is just a small tiny battle, a skirmish in fact.. |
Lion in the Stars | 21 Oct 2010 3:12 p.m. PST |
It is expected that the player will have enough companies in play to field a battalion and then have some extra companies as support/misc. That's a battalion-level game by my standards. I define the 'level' of a game as what the player is supposed to be in charge of. Saying that the basic maneuver unit is a company spread across multiple bases (hey, that's Flames of War if you're playing Russians or a few others) is a useful reference, but I'd define your rules in terms of what the player is supposed to be commanding. Since there's so much difference of opinion in what a level of play is, I'd market the game without using that company-level or battalion-level description at all. Just say that the player is in charge of an Infantry Battalion or Cavalry Regiment with some supporting companies and be done with it. |
Angel Barracks | 21 Oct 2010 3:14 p.m. PST |
Since there's so much difference of opinion in what a level of play is ain't that the truth!
|
Lentulus | 21 Oct 2010 4:21 p.m. PST |
I think that you have explained your level perfectly in your introduction to the question, and if you insist on explaining it in one word followed by the word level you should be taken out back and quietly mind-wiped. Nothing personal, but the "level" meme needs to be culled now before it causes deep damage to the brains of our youth. It's a slippery slope -- next it will be "6mm scale" and from there on it's a fast road to perdition. |
Stoelzels Structures | 21 Oct 2010 6:15 p.m. PST |
Nothing personal, but the "level" meme needs to be culled now before it causes deep damage to the brains of our youth. God, if someone could have handed Gary Gygax a thesaurus 37 years ago
.. |
Angel Barracks | 21 Oct 2010 11:12 p.m. PST |
Thanks for the replies. It has given me a thought: TMP link
|
1968billsfan | 22 Oct 2010 4:39 a.m. PST |
I don't see the sense of having a company being 8 bases. The smallest unit which operated independantly was a company, which usually was composed of two sections. Rarely would a unit be in less than a section front, except for manevuring through very restricted terrain. Making each section from two stands, the front 3-4 files and two ranks and the rear one a single rank, would give a good appearance of a linear line (wide and thin) and allow you to take casulties or skirmishers from the 3rd rank. |
matthewgreen | 22 Oct 2010 4:56 a.m. PST |
The problem is depth. When playing at this sort of level you soon notice how unrealistically deep a conventional wargames base is. When trying to reproduce compact formations, like close columns, solid squares or even just British-style squares you can end up in deep trouble. 8 bases means you have less relative depth. I work with about four bases on average – and that's enough trouble (though admittedly with quite narrow and square bases). To me skirmish wargames imply individual movement – so these aren't skirmish games – even if the combat reproduced is often referred to as a "skirmish". Matthew |
Martin Rapier | 22 Oct 2010 4:58 a.m. PST |
If the player is typically commanding a battalion, then it is a battalion level game. Obviously it may stretch to a brigade, but in the main they are commancing battalions. The rules themsleves might stretch to brigade or even division level engagements, possibly with multiple players. One of my pals has two ECW armies in 1:1 at 6mm. 10,000 figures each. They are on quite large bases:) |
Lion in the Stars | 22 Oct 2010 10:09 a.m. PST |
Yes, when your groundscale is 1"=50yards, a 1/4" deep base (~12.5yd) is an awful lot deeper than 2-3 ranks (3-4yd). The problem really lies with the fact that minis are bigger than groundscale. You can't really get the formation as tight as it would be historically, and it's going to be deeper by at least 50% anyway because of how the cast-on bases (don't) fit together. @Angelbarracks: I'm assuming 3mm figures? You'd need a basketball court or a football field for 15mm troops at 1cm=1m groundscale (cannon range would be 10m, musket range 1-2m). For 6mm, roughly 1"=6-10yd, you'd still need a table over 100" deep (which isn't playable, you can't reach the center of the table) to keep out of cannon fire. You'd have to get all the way down to 3mm figures to have a reasonable table-size (not more than 6 feet in the short dimension). With Horse&musket games, I don't see the problem with compressing the figure count to match your groundscale, just for playability. When someone says "the basic unit
" to me means the smallest independently movable element, so having multiple bases throws me off immediately. Genji4, you didn't play any warhammer growing up, did you? For me, I'm used to games where you are moving multiple bases as a single unit. |
Angel Barracks | 22 Oct 2010 10:32 a.m. PST |
For me, I'm used to games where you are moving multiple bases as a single unit. Me too. I spent the first 15 years or so of my gaming life not knowing what a multiple figured base was.. More than one figure on a base? How do you take off the dead ones?! 6mm, the figure ratio is 1:1 not the ground scale, but yes you will almost always start within cannon range.
Best hide behind something or get a shift on, or get a bigger counter battery! Its not a "serious" Napoleonics game, as the fact the basic unit is a company would suggest. Each to their own though.
:) |
bgbboogie | 23 Oct 2010 6:00 a.m. PST |
I am debating weather to ACW in 6mm at 1 to 1. The focus would be the Devils Den areas, mad yes but will look great. As to movement I find 6mm sit on felt well, hold well, and do not move that much so I move large blocks easily. Angel barracks we have to get together sometime, chat & game maybe. |
Angel Barracks | 23 Oct 2010 7:51 a.m. PST |
Yes, drop me a mail, I owe you money anyway! |
MichaelCollinsHimself | 23 Oct 2010 10:10 a.m. PST |
Michael, The player`s command level would be battalion – or at a stretch brigade? The figure scale is something different to the organisational level that the game goes down to; and that would be a 10 man unit. Skirmishing and the represenation of it is not really about a specific figure scale. But if the figures do not come individually, or if you do not have a basing option to represent 10 men skirmishing in some way perhaps, then you just have a large formed unit being represented. Regards, Mike. |