Silent Pool | 03 Aug 2015 7:49 a.m. PST |
For any/all enquiries, thoughts, ponderings that concern aspects of war over many, or a few, different periods in time? A. Yes B. As above |
Mute Bystander | 03 Aug 2015 8:00 a.m. PST |
Yes but I am unclear where the line between General Warfare and other sub-forums lies. |
Griefbringer | 03 Aug 2015 8:08 a.m. PST |
|
skippy0001 | 03 Aug 2015 8:12 a.m. PST |
But then I'd want a tactics, operational and strategy board. |
RavenscraftCybernetics | 03 Aug 2015 8:12 a.m. PST |
no, it will rapidly dissolve into political and/or religious baiting. |
etotheipi | 03 Aug 2015 8:22 a.m. PST |
I agree with Griefbringer. Already covered. |
John the OFM | 03 Aug 2015 8:26 a.m. PST |
No. I almost always support specific Boards, but not yet another general bs board. We have plenty of them. |
Maddaz111 | 03 Aug 2015 8:54 a.m. PST |
what about the lower ranks.. Colonel Chaos, Captain Crunch, Corporal Punishment, |
Silent Pool | 03 Aug 2015 9:17 a.m. PST |
Griefbringer, a joy to receive your reply (what's in a name anyway ), I don't agree because they both say 'wargame related' and the nature of the question might not lead to wargaming or be intended by the OP. For example, I just asked a question on TMP about naming the last sovereign nation to decisively defend itself from an invader without outside assistance. I kept it between 19C and UM boards as a reasonable guess but it may transpire that the answer goes even further back in history – can't tick all periods can I (no, because I get frozen out and the post doesn't load!), hence my general warfare board question. Thanks. |
ColCampbell | 03 Aug 2015 9:45 a.m. PST |
And don't forget about Private School and Major Headache. Jim |
Griefbringer | 03 Aug 2015 11:13 a.m. PST |
Griefbringer, a joy to receive your reply (what's in a name anyway), I don't agree because they both say 'wargame related' and the nature of the question might not lead to wargaming or be intended by the OP. People have posted general military history topics without a strong gaming focus to the "Historical Wargaming" board in the past, and IMHO it has worked fine. I might be a bit partial though, since I have posted a few of those myself. But feel free to go there and post a few topics (eg. "Greatest military leaders in history") and see how it works out for you. That said, I can see your point in that the current name suggests that it is primarily gaming focused, but historical wargaming by its very nature is strongly connected to military history. That said, would it help if that board would be renamed as "Historical Wargaming and Military History"? |
Brownbear | 03 Aug 2015 12:10 p.m. PST |
|
14Bore | 03 Aug 2015 3:07 p.m. PST |
|
Griefbringer | 04 Aug 2015 6:12 a.m. PST |
I would like to add that all of the period specific boards, from ancients to moderns, are described as being dedicated For discussion of anything related to [period name] miniature wargaming Yet people are perfectly happy to post in those boards threads related to historical warfare in the period in general, and not only dedicated to purely wargaming. And this does not seem to be a problem to the TMP membership, and especially not to our esteemed editor(s). [At some point, there was a separate board dedicated to Napoleonic history (in non-wargaming sense) but that got eventually discontinued).] |
Joes Shop | 04 Aug 2015 7:22 a.m. PST |
|
Mute Bystander | 04 Aug 2015 7:49 a.m. PST |
|
basileus66 | 04 Aug 2015 9:37 a.m. PST |
Yes, why not? It is not like we would run out of space for new subfora anytime soon. Honestly, I don't get the whole "not necessary" discourse. What's the problem by having more subfora? If you don't want to see them in your front page you can just check off the relevant boxes in your settings. |