"Refights" Topic

In your historical games, how often do stage a refight? A lifted-from-history refight? Orbats, recreated maps, etc.

1. Always
2. Often
3. Sometimes
4. Seldom
5. Never

I never do. I'm inspired by historical events but am not particularly keen on redoing them.

Instead I start with general military objectives (meeting engagement, break through, capture battlefield objective x, hold battlefield objective x) then build plausible forces with plausible terrain and proceed from there.

Often

Often
Tom

Sometimes I take a battle, build the terrain, gather the proper troops, and let the players fight out the battle, to see what they or I would have done differently. Sometimes the battle goes as it did historically, and sometimes the outcome is different.
You can game any battle from history, but the recreation is just that, a "game", and the chance of dice make everything unpredictable. I know people who game battles and do everything the way it happened in the real battle….nice history lesson, but doesn't seem like much fun.I think if you keep everything the same, terrain, OOB, objectives, alot of times the game works out the way it did historically…at least thats been my experience….So long story short, my answer is "often"

4.

2 Often

2. Often

1. Always.

Often. Just ran Queenston Heights and Maguaga from the War of 1812 at Cold Wars. Only thing different is I gave some extra Indians and Canadian Militia for Maguaga to bolster the British. But then again, the Americans thought there were a thousand Indians when they were only facing 75.

Eric

2. Often

Real scenarios have so much more granularity, more detail and flavor, than made-up scenarios. Or maybe I just lack imagination and need the Cliff Notes from history. Who would imagine a detail like the red uniform coat Col. Lewis wore at the battle of Point Pleasant (the 'only uniform in the army'), or the 'beson' medicine bundle that the Indians carried into that battle? I love including that kind of detail in my game scenarios.

4, but would prefer to say 3.

Unfortunately, I find it difficult to have all the necessary ingredients to do it properly. I'm missing a unit, or a crucial piece of terrain, or a big enough table.

4

Often. But then I may have to change a bit, based on what figures I have available.
For one thing, I don't think that Magua's Own Cheveau Legere Cuirassiers were really at Bushy Run. Nor did Bouquet have a Power Fist, but those were the figures I had available.
I was challenged about Mister Franklin's Galvanic Resonnance Jars, but I have full confidnece that my research will dispell that messy lawsuit brought by that whiny malcontent epturner.

Seriously though, I would much rather fight an unbalnaced historical game than an unbalanced fictitious game.

Please include a selection for 'Not a historical wargamer.'

Said whiny malcontent sends his regards (and a folded blue-ish paper that those who follow certain police dramas know as a subpeona to appear before the Great And General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (God be praised!) to explain how such demonic devices could have been created by the hands of one Franklin, formerly of Milk Street, the City of Boston, in the County of Suffolk of said colony…

And if sufficient cause and proof is not given, Magua will eat his heart out next time he dares wander around Shrubbery Run!

Eric

Even when I stray far afield, I find "history" more inspirational than just making it up.
If a scenario is kinda sorta loosely based on Germantown or Chitral or Arracourt or St Foy, it's a Good Thing, and gives the players some sort of "realism" anchor.
Even if a game is only loosely based on the Wyoming Massacre, or Shooting down Yamamoto, it's a good thing to identify with.

I must admit that my scennario for Rescue Demi Moore is not fact-based, but it should be. It's not my fault that there are …gaps… in our historical knowledge.

3. More than I used to and increasing :o)

Please include a selection for 'Not a historical wargamer.'

Even if you are not a historical wargamer, you can still use historical battles as a basis for scenarios.

1. Always.

2. Often

For Volley & Bayonet 2… Often…
Though the new "Battle Generator" in V&B Road to Glory is quite fun.

Joe Collins

For non-historical scenarios, I have recommended to a certain OFM a St. Patrick's Day scenario called "Rescue Roddy McOrkley" as what could be more Oirish than rescuing Greenskins on St. Pat's?

However, there was much murmuring and little liking for such Ideas.

So sad. So very sad.

Eric

The one I have always wanted to do is the Gunfight at the O.K. Corral.

1. Always.

Please include a selection for 'Not a historical wargamer.'

How 'bout refighting a historical battle using fantasy or sci-fi armies. No? I guess that would wouldn't strictly be a refight, then.

How 'bout refighting a historical battle using fantasy or sci-fi armies.

Isn't that what I suggested above?

1 – for any game pre-planned;
2 – for pick-up games

Rick

5

Seldom, but when I do it tends be a grand game for a convention or on a large sand table. I also like the idea already mentioned of reworking a historical scenario for a different period, or for fantasy/SF. I once saw a large (15mm, I think) fantasy battle at Claymore in Edinburgh that looked somehow familiar. I had just been reading about Arsouf, and it turned out that the game was a refight of that battle using Orcs for the good guys and elves and stuff for the invading illiterate smellies.

I was quite pleased that I had spotted this, until I realised it probably made me look like the ultimate nerd…

Isn't that what I suggested above?

Missed that, Margard.

Depends on the time period I am playing and whether I am playing a "tournament" rules system.

So for WWII, very seldom.
For Napoleonics, often.
For Ancients, very seldom.
For Medievals, seldom.

Also depends on whether I am playing in a larger organized game. Most gaming is a one on one get together which requires no refights.

3

Often. Though we have been known to change time periods just to see what happens (ECW Antietam was great fun) or sometimes we'll introduce a "what if" factor (next week we are doing Lomas Valentinos assuming Lopez hadn't squandered half his army on delaying actions).

Even if you are not a historical wargamer, you can still use historical battles as a basis for scenarios.

See, I didn't think that's what the original post was asking after. Else we've all refought Normandy, Stalingrad, the Alamo, Hoth, etc.

Often; sometimes always.

Seldom

2

Seldom and Often.

A lot of the historical battles I stage (as opposed to a lot of the ones I participate in) are skirmishes where detailed force data are not available, so I try to set up good representative forces.

5

But then I only play SciFi or fantasy games.

Often

As much as I possibly can. I enjoy doing the research and it takes much of the decision making out of scenario design – the OBs, terrain and general missions and historical outcomes are all known.

The hard bit is making it into an enjoyable and practical game within the constraints of available time, space and toys and the very hardest bit is coming up with objectives for both sides which encourage a historial course of action but don't lock players into a straight jacket,

It is why I wargame though, 'bringing history to life' and all that, and when it works it is a thing of beauty.

2. Often

Lately, always or not at all. The latter is what happens….