MarescialloDiCampo | 19 Jun 2011 5:34 a.m. PST |
I'm in a balmy 120+ degree (f) weather with 30+ wind gusts in southern Iraq. There are a number of real impacts like movement – ability to move (slow), no aerial assets, dust and lowered visibility (1 mile). Just moving a vehicle increases an unbelievable dust plume. Also in Winter training last fall (in snow) also showed a decrease in weapon efficiency, movement, and fatigue. Just wearing winter clothing slows movement and reaction time. |
Florida Tory | 19 Jun 2011 5:56 a.m. PST |
Sometimes, but rarely. Weather modifiers just seem to have fallen out of favor with the group. Probably the main factor was an aversion to modified visibility rules that were counter-productive to the goal of painting & playing with miniatures on the table. Rick |
Pictors Studio | 19 Jun 2011 5:58 a.m. PST |
I don't use it as a random modifier most of the time as when I've tried I've found that it is too random, it goes from calm to tornado in three rounds, which *can* happen but happens too often for my tastes. Usually, if the battle had significant weather then I modify for that. If there was the possibility of weather then I set a time when we do start testing for it. The exception is that there is usually some randomness in my age of sail naval games for weather and wind. |
x42brown | 19 Jun 2011 6:01 a.m. PST |
For battles in campaigns yes for stand alone battles not really. x42 |
Henrix | 19 Jun 2011 7:06 a.m. PST |
I prefer to have the conditions set in a specific scenario. But I have used random weather, and wouldn't mind using it again (providing the effects aren't outrageous). The DBM rules seemed rather good when I used to play that. (If a little weird in their randomness – weather changes were more frequent if you had fewer commands.) |
Ron W DuBray | 19 Jun 2011 8:00 a.m. PST |
no very much, but I like smoke and fire doing their thing at times. |
Allen57 | 19 Jun 2011 8:39 a.m. PST |
Use it more in naval games, some in air combat, and little in land games. |
Grand Duke Natokina | 19 Jun 2011 8:55 a.m. PST |
We don't probably because it would slow the game too much. But Last night we did discuss this very topic. And decided we might like to try a Russian winter battle. |
Uesugi Kenshin | 19 Jun 2011 9:24 a.m. PST |
More so in Medieval & Ancient (up to 1600's) than Moderns or Sci-Fi. |
21eRegt | 19 Jun 2011 9:30 a.m. PST |
Very rarely unless it is replicating a historic engagement where the weather was influential and highly variable. |
Mako11 | 19 Jun 2011 10:06 a.m. PST |
Mostly for naval, and occasionally for air. Only sometimes for ground troops, and fog is the usual event. |
Sundance | 19 Jun 2011 11:23 a.m. PST |
Sometimes, when it's pertinent. |
Martin Rapier | 19 Jun 2011 11:26 a.m. PST |
I tend to use it in operational games, usually determined on a daily basis. V. important as it affects stuff like the availability of air, artillery observation, non tactical movement etc. For tactical games it is usually based on the historical weather. |
J Womack 94 | 19 Jun 2011 11:43 a.m. PST |
It depends. Sailing rules, yes, as a sudden change in wind direction or strength can be decisive. Most other games, rarely. |
Scorpio | 19 Jun 2011 12:40 p.m. PST |
Half the time, yeah. Makes scenarios more unique. |
The G Dog | 19 Jun 2011 6:11 p.m. PST |
Sometimes. If its a historical game, I'll model the initial conditions as best can be determined, then add appropriate random conditions as desired. It adds a degree of randomness that adds to the chaos of the game. |
richarDISNEY | 20 Jun 2011 8:05 a.m. PST |
Sometimes
Usually for movement or 'to hit' accuracy.
|
53Punisher | 20 Jun 2011 12:51 p.m. PST |
I do only when a scenario calls for it. |
Apache 6 | 23 May 2017 2:05 p.m. PST |
I've used it as a scenario event when the weather conditions were used to neutralize certain aspects of one forces capabilities. The weather over the airfields is so severe that you don't get air support. |
etotheipi | 23 May 2017 3:23 p.m. PST |
Psuedo random. Weather should have a logic that you can understand, but not predict. I put such a system in one of my QILS modules. It does depend on the scenario. Sometimes you choose to fight in crappy weather. Sometimes you choose not to fight in crappy weather. Sometimes crappy is the only weather you can expect. In harsh weather environs, sometimes there is a differential effect for natives and "visitors". |
Fergal | 24 May 2017 8:03 a.m. PST |
I'm not a fan. I have to move heaven and earth to get a game in. I'd be disappointed to show up to a game and have it be a muddy slog with very little maneuver and very little visibility. Now if a scenario was designed to take that into account and still be interesting, then that's different. So no to randomness. I've never played a campaign that used it, but I'd be up for it in those conditions. |
UshCha | 26 May 2017 3:39 a.m. PST |
Virtual never. We have complex games the aim being a test of our ability to plan and execute the plan. Our games are already complex, adding a random factor to the simulation adds nothing. It may be realistic but puts the game out of the set of interesting games as the forces could become unbalanced. We do use restricted visibility at times but it needs to be relatively predictable otherwise the game could become uninteresting. |
Rudysnelson | 26 May 2017 12:09 p.m. PST |
I d veloped a current weather table as an option in the 1981 Guard du Corps Napoleonics system. |
USAFpilot | 26 May 2017 4:07 p.m. PST |
No, there are already enough random factors in war gaming. The more random factors you put into a game, the more the outcome of the game comes down to luck as opposed to skill. If I wanted to play a game of luck I could play CandyLand. |
GreenLeader | 26 May 2017 11:11 p.m. PST |
I have written in 'sudden thunder storms' into my Boer War rules. Though this would perhaps be silly for games in other parts of the world, a couple of battle of the Boer War featured violent storms which blew up out of no where and have a significant impact on events: A thunder storm at Elandslaagte greatly helped the Imperial attack. At Willow Grange, two Boers were killed by lightening – a happenstance which the God-fearing General Joubert took as a sign from the Almighty that their invasion of British territory was wrong, and thus called off the push on Durban (it's pity for all concerned that the Almighty didn't intervene before Kruger started the war). Definitely worth giving thunder storms the off-chance of occurring, I feel. |
Ottoathome | 29 May 2017 2:08 a.m. PST |
Yes, it's part of the event deck. |