Yellow Admiral | 17 Mar 2016 7:15 a.m. PST |
I just got a look at the Enfilade PEL last night, and there is not a single Jutland game on it. Plenty of naval games, including ancient galleys, ironclads, pre-dreadnoughts, modern naval, and even a couple hydrofoil racing games – but no Jutland refights, Jutlan what ifs, or even WWI naval. What gives? I know there are a bunch of naval gamers in the Enfilade watershed, and at least one or two posting right here in this very forum. Where is everybody? - Ix |
David Manley | 17 Mar 2016 8:55 a.m. PST |
None at Salute in the UK either |
Dark Knights And Bloody Dawns | 17 Mar 2016 11:13 a.m. PST |
|
Blutarski | 17 Mar 2016 1:19 p.m. PST |
Absolute travesty and outrage. B |
Yellow Admiral | 17 Mar 2016 4:10 p.m. PST |
Maybe it's just too big Of course it's too big! Why should that be a deterrent?
|
yarkshire gamer | 17 Mar 2016 5:20 p.m. PST |
I think it may be down to size. I have posted in the Jutland thread but 28 1/2400 Battleships on 12 cm bases plus gaps between ships and squadrons is over 15 ft, that's before you start moving and adding the BC AC CL DD and Germans. We have committed to do the game at the Royal Armouries Leeds in November now so I'm going to have to work something out. Regards Ken yarkshiregamer.blogspot.co.uk |
tsofian | 17 Mar 2016 5:25 p.m. PST |
The WILL be a Jutland game at Portsmouth! It will be at Action Stations at the Historic Dockyard actionstations.org |
Yellow Admiral | 17 Mar 2016 5:58 p.m. PST |
The whole battle would fit on a single (big) table with 1/6000 scale miniatures. Figure an average of 2" per BB/BC, the Grand Fleet in line will be about 5 feet, maybe 6 if the gaps are big. This is my personal preference for the way to refight the entire battle. I don't think the battle is refightable in 1/2400 without moving it onto a pretty big floor area, or maybe some really clever mechanics (e.g. using multiple tables and just measuring the changing gap as a constant). Except for a few unpainted Queen Elizabeths, I am already prepared to refight the opening BC action in this scale, and I think it will work brilliantly. - Ix |
Who asked this joker | 17 Mar 2016 6:32 p.m. PST |
Hmmm….yeah….100 years ago, you would think someone at the UK shows would have something right? |
yarkshire gamer | 17 Mar 2016 6:58 p.m. PST |
"I don't think the battle is refightable in 1/2400" Challenge accepted ! TBH it won't be easy, we have been promised as large a table as we want for the display so there will be some "clever" tricks involved, I'm just not sure what they are yet. Multiple tables with walkways is the only way I can see to start getting round the problem. 1/6000 would be ideal for a game refight, not sure if it would be right for a public display though and I have committed to 1/2400 so there is no reversing from here. We are in a slightly different situation where we are looking at a display for people interested in military / naval history who may not be gamers. Regards Ken yarkshiregamer.blogspot.co.uk |
warren bruhn | 17 Mar 2016 7:11 p.m. PST |
Yellow Admiral, will you be at Enfilade? If so, will see you there! You know my name, so you can look for me when I present a pulpy skirmish game: Island of the Crocodile God. It was my plan to do something to celebrate the anniversary of Jutland at Enfilade this year. I issued that challenge on these boards in December of 2014, and bought a lot of WTJ models and lots of bases. I was finally painting up 100 German TBD's last fall,… and then I got derailed by a personal matter. Sadness! I was trying to drum up some kind of Jutland campaign outside the convention with 3 other guys that are WW1 naval enthusiasts, but didn't get anywhere with that. One of the naval enthusiasts in the Pacific NW did try to present a Jutland sized game at Enfilade in 2014 using 1:6000 scale. Trouble was that it ground on for several four hour gaming periods and didn't hold the interest of the players who were distracted by all the other eye candy at the convention. I think players want more eye candy, meaning bigger models, and don't want to commit to more than two of those four hour gaming periods back to back. There have been many naval wargames at Enfilade. This year on Sunday there will be an ACW naval game. And I noticed two pre-dreadnought games on the list so far. Maybe a WW1 naval game will be added. It's certainly easier to transport a naval game than a game that needs a lot of terrain. I'm thinking that one way to present a 1:2400 scale or even 1:1250 scale game would be to do away with the idea of maneuvering the ship models on the table. Put the players behind screens or in separate rooms with their bigger models in front of them. A team of game masters could place little cards in front of the players that show the players what they can actually see of the enemy, which may be a misleading view! The actual maneuvers could be on plot sheets. Players can order fire and torpedo attacks at what they think they are seeing. Fog of war, except that the players have their own bigger models right in front of them. Problem is, I haven't worked out how to do this yet! |
Blutarski | 18 Mar 2016 5:48 a.m. PST |
Strictly my opinion here, but I consider Jutland to simply be too big to be treated as a single game. From the moment of first sighting, the main bodies were something like a hundred miles apart; the battle itself consumed more than eight hours. The only way to conduct such an ecercise would be on a micro-campaign basis, which is not practical in a convention milieu. As a commemoration of the battle, I would suggest breaking it up into several select vignettes – Run to the South, Scheer's pursuit of the BCF, Hood's encounter with 1st and 2nd Scouting Groups, destruction of Defence, some representative portion of the night action. Not sure how interesting any historical representation of the battlefleet encounters on the tabletop would be received by gamers. FWIW. B |
David Manley | 18 Mar 2016 6:30 a.m. PST |
York, we used 1/6000 for the 80th anniversary refight at the National Maritime Museum and they looked ok, but the 1/3000 "early Jutland" at Mortimer looked better. We will be using 1/3000 for the refight at NMRN too. |
Yellow Admiral | 18 Mar 2016 7:15 a.m. PST |
One of the naval enthusiasts in the Pacific NW did try to present a Jutland sized game at Enfilade in 2014 using 1:6000 scale. Trouble was that it ground on for several four hour gaming periods and didn't hold the interest of the players who were distracted by all the other eye candy at the convention. This is exactly why I haven't planned anything so extravagant. I don't know how to keep 178 ships moving without 2-3 players doing most of the activity (where the shooting and torpedo runs are active) and a crowd of other people standing around bored and waiting to move another 18cm. There is a small cadre of us who might tolerate a really long-playing game of that sort, but convention gamers generally won't. 1/6000 scale miniatures make barely any more impression to onlookers than boardgame counters, so aren't really much of an attraction at a convention. A sprawling, multi-hour, multi-stage 1/6000 naval game will really only appeal to hardcore naval gamers. - Ix |
Yellow Admiral | 18 Mar 2016 9:00 a.m. PST |
I think Blutarski straddled the target: the best way to game Jutland at a convention is as a series of smaller scenarios, each representing an interesting phase of the battle. I was hoping to find somebody doing at least a little of this at a West Coast convention, but alas, no joy. Since nobody else is doing it, I'm planning to run the BC action using FAI (with my usual streamlining to speed up play). It's a relatively even fight and a good sized convention game that it will fit on a single (large) table with my scrolling sea surface. I plan to use squadrons of DDs, CLs, and Evan-Thomas' Queen Elizabeths as a way to manipulate the game balance rather than stick to history, to throw in as rebalancing reinforcements. When I'm ready to end the game, I can use the lead squadrons of either the Hochseeflotte or Grand Fleet the same way. - Ix |
Yellow Admiral | 18 Mar 2016 10:46 a.m. PST |
One problem with conventions is the usual pattern of player recruitment: players come looking for a good time but without specific plans, so play whatever looks best or best matches their preferences. A game must look appealing, be easy to learn, and play quickly to appeal to such gamers. Alternatively, tournament players go looking for a particular game, and expect to play it for an entire day or even multiple days. I've also seen board gamers play "monster games" at conventions with this same approach. This is probably the right way to play out huge, sprawling, slow-playing, deeply involved naval battles, with a few specific adjustments:
- Recruit a group of gamers who will commit to playing out the entire battle at an upcoming convention they can all attend; instead of everybody going to the con to play whatever looks fun, we all go to play the "big game" together and only play other games in the breaks between sessions.
- Split the labor into tasks and delegate them. With a dedicated cadre of like-minded gamers, it doesn't have to fall on one person to do all the painting, printing, organizing, etc. like a typical convention game.
- Run the map search phase before the convention. Map-based games are slow and paperwork intensive, so not good at conventions, but between dedicated players looking forward to setting up a good convention game, might add sufficient excitement to actually get to a conclusion.
The map search phase can be done with only 2 players if necessary, which should be easy enough to arrange with a dedicated group of hardcore naval gamers larger than that. It would be better with an impartial referee, and probably more interesting as a 4-player map search with 2x BC players, 2x BB/C-in-C players, and a house rule that tethers the BCs to a very short maximum separation from the BB fleet (I've had several map campaigns go completely awry when each player just steamed off into the distance without regard for mutual support…). If more players want to participate in the map game, auxiliaries like the zeppelins, the submarines, the Engadine and other seaplanes, the Harwich force, etc. can be split out as independent commands. The important principle being that each command should be something that would actually behave independently. Personally I would be more inclined to treat these forces as non-player forces subject to the extreme whims of luck (or GM manipulation, if there's an impartial referee). Of course, all players have to agree on the rules (tactical and operational), which can be a big hurdle to cross in any collaborative effort. I haven't had the energy, discipline, organization, or inspiration to carry out this plan yet this year. - Ix |
yarkshire gamer | 18 Mar 2016 12:08 p.m. PST |
It's interesting to read the US players discuss this issue and it shows how radically different gaming shows are run compared with in the UK. The very fact that you are recruiting players for a "participation" game makes the requirements completely different. As part of a UK gaming club with say 40 active members you have a pool of "willing" volunteers who can be pressed into service. We also have more demo games which are put on as a show off rather than a join in. The thought of MOP handling my GHQ stuff with there fiddly masts fills me with dread. It's not helping me decide what to do with it but man power is not an issue. Regards Ken yarkshiregamer.blogspot.co.uk |
Yellow Admiral | 18 Mar 2016 4:33 p.m. PST |
It's also hard to generalize about the US. The density of historical miniatures gamers seems to be much higher in the upper East Coast, but in the American West we seem to be thinner on the ground. - Ix |
warren bruhn | 18 Mar 2016 6:38 p.m. PST |
Yellow Admiral, like your little speed ups to Fleet Action Imminent. The 1:6000 scale game at Enfilade in 2014 also dropped the move plotting aspect. I also dislike aiming torpedoes when I'm the squadron admiral or flotilla leader! A friend of mine has cardboard pieces for torpedo attacks that feature a top down images of 1, 2, 3, or 4 torpedoes and their wakes. Nice touch. We should correspond about Enfilade. Want to play in and/or help with your FAI "Run to the South" game, and I don't want to select the same game period to present my pulpy jungle game. What size ship models will you use? I recommend staying 4 nights. Much more relaxing that way. |
warren bruhn | 18 Mar 2016 6:49 p.m. PST |
"We also have more demo games which are put on as a show off rather than a join in. The thought of MOP handling my GHQ stuff with there fiddly masts fills me with dread." – yarkshire gamer Yes, our philosophies and type of enjoyment at a miniature wargame convention are very different. I recall an article in Wargames Illustrated about that very topic, sometime back around 2004 to 2006 I think. I spend part of my time at the convention shopping and looking at games that I'm not playing in. But most of us do want to play in several games during the convention. In some respects, the convention that I attend is like a big club, only most of us only see each other once a year. And some of us correspond during the year and plan games for the convention with far away friends. Panzerschiffe without masts is a great solution for letting anyone besides the owner handle ship models! I still feel bad about breaking off a yardarm on a big beautiful 1:000 scale model for the 1866 Battle of Lissa a few years ago. It was tac welded I believe, and flexible, but still delicate. |
Yellow Admiral | 19 Mar 2016 1:03 p.m. PST |
I'm currently trying to figure out if I can go to Enfilade. For years I've been ambivalent about Kublacon (the local Memorial Day convention), but it's an expensive trip to Enfilade, and I have to leave budget for Historicon and Navcon. - Ix |
Bozkashi Jones | 23 Mar 2016 3:35 p.m. PST |
You'll have to keep us posted about the Royal Armouries in November Ken – I'd definitely make the trip from Lincoln to see that one. And the RA is free – bonus! Nick |
Yellow Admiral | 29 Mar 2016 10:36 p.m. PST |
It's decided, I'm trekking up to Enfilade. I'll roll into town Friday morning and leave Monday morning. Should be a fun weekend. Today I submitted a game proposal to run the Jutland BC action; hopefully there's still room to accommodate that game. We'll see what time slot I get. My first preference is Sat 7pm, second is Fri 7pm, then Sat 2pm and Sun 10 am. I'm short a few CLs and a bunch of DDs, so I ordered the missing items last night. I hope that works – the last few orders I placed with C-in-C and WTJ took weeks to process. - Ix PS: While shopping for cruisers I got totally sidetracked by 1/2400 scale RJW ships. I feel a resurgence of pre-dreadnought fever coming on… Perhaps I'll pull something together for Navcon in October. |
138SquadronRAF | 30 Mar 2016 8:03 a.m. PST |
It's interesting to read the US players discuss this issue and it shows how radically different gaming shows are run compared with in the UK. It's what stuck me most about US conventions. UK Conventions are trade shows to shop and watch games put on by others for inspiration. In years of going to shows I played in one participation game. The US scene is much more about trying to fit a number of games into your day that someone else has organised. |
warren bruhn | 30 Mar 2016 12:32 p.m. PST |
Yellow Admiral, which cruisers and destroyers do you need for Enfilade? I've got some painted and based. I've got a lot of others that aren't painted or based yet. I'm going to be running a 28mm "Island of the Crocodile God" pulpy micro-skirmish game on Sunday at 10am. If your game is a different period than mine then I would be able to help out. |
Yellow Admiral | 01 Apr 2016 4:26 p.m. PST |
I'll find out the time period this coming weekend. As for missing ships, well, there's a list… I've ordered everything I need, but we'll see if they arrive in time to make a difference. I may be in touch in a few weeks. :-) A catch: I don't base my 1/2400 scale miniatures. I may reverse course and start basing the DDs if I find a way to do it that pleases me (WWI DDs are pretty danged small), but I may never base the cruisers and larger ships. - Ix |
warren bruhn | 02 Apr 2016 4:27 p.m. PST |
Well, you could issue tweazers to all the players to handle their destroyers! |
Yellow Admiral | 05 Apr 2016 1:02 p.m. PST |
I have a standing "no sneezing" house rule. Destroyer commanders are chosen from the less-allergic players present. No ground pepper allowed at the table. - Ix |
A C London | 08 May 2016 8:22 a.m. PST |
Yellow Admiral, I'm with you 90 percent of the way on bases. They get in the way. Unlike figures in land games, ship models tend to be as large or too large for the ground/ sea scale without them. Also, rectangles of sea, 20 or so scale ft above the rest of the ocean and, oftentimes, rougher and a different colour from it spoil the look of things. However ….. I mostly play ironclads, at 1200 scale. When properly rigged the models are robust-enough to take little damage in transit or play. Distinctive shapes and colours make it hard to muddle one with another. I'm just starting some 1:3000 WWI models and wonder if I can get away without bases? Problem being that there were so many in each class and each class looks so much like the last class. And they were all grey. Thinking particularly of the RN, were there visual clues to help tell a ship from her sister? Prominent funnel stripes would help. Something like turret tops painted in different colours for air-recognition would be even better. Clutching at straws, Alan |
Yellow Admiral | 09 May 2016 7:15 p.m. PST |
Carrying the basing question to this new thread, mostly so other people can find the discussion. - Ix |