"How many of your games refight a specific battle?" Topic

The way I figure it, there's two types of historical game:

The "refight" of a specific historical action (Waterloo) and the "plausible" encounter (A German company in Normandy attacks a reinforced American platoon)

What is your gaming most like?

A: Almost all refights.
B: Mostly refights
C: About even.
D: Mostly plausible.
E: Almost all plausible.

Army-list "tournament" style games count as "plausible".
Scenarios based on a real event but tweaked or including "what-if" elements are "refights".

The ones I run myself are almost all refights.

Not sure how to classify WW3 though, as although it is entirely fictitious, I try and use the correct orbits, maps etc and the campaign is based on the deployment plan for BAOR in the early 80s.

I do allow myself some whimsy with ak47 and funny little wars.

E. Mine are almost all plausible. Usually, 'my battles at home' are part of a wider campaign. So: plausible, non-balanced armies, many kinds of encounters.

E rarely do historic refight.

Depends on the period. AWI for example are usually refights or "what if" versions. WW2 is usually "plausible" but seldom an actual action.

E

D

E.

We've done a similar poll, but it's been awhile.

B. Mostly all my fights are historical battle scenarios.

B. Mostly refights. Of course, if we are playing fantasy or post-apocalyptic games, they aren't historical refights.

C. Probably 1/3 refights and 1/3 plausible.

But I also "refight" a lot of battles with "plausible" scenarios (the other third). There's a lot of history that consists entirely of "X fought Y on day Z around about here" and that's it. Well … I mean there is also the local supplemental history about how the venerated town leader took two hundred and fifteen arrows in the head and still managed to decapitate the seven foot tall, three hundred pound barbarian leader with a dessert spoon given to him by his invalid grandmother before making a forty minute speech while dying himself but saving the town. Don't game that bit often…

Maybe 40/60 historical/plausible. But you don't seem to have an "implausible" category. Setting aside Dwarves and Space Marines, I've seen a good few implausible historical battles, and they weren't all tournaments, either.

I don't pretend to be an AWI "expert", but I am an enthusiast.
So, I will adapt a scenario for, say Cowpens, from an already published wargames scenario for Cowpens.
Then I will change it to suit the rules I play and figures available.
Bear in mind that the published scenario had already adapted the "real battle" to fit on the tabletop with ITS rules!
That's how I do the AWI games I present. I feel real scholarly if I adapt it from Ward or similar.

My NW Frontier TSATF games are "in the spirit of…" games.

And I do games, not "simulations". If history goes off the rails, at least a good time was had by all.

I'd go with A for historical games. B if you include fantasy and sci-fi.

Most

D. Leaning more toward the E lately.

A. Given the stated criteria, almost all of my games are refights of specific historical battles.

About 25% re-fights and the rest highly plausible.

A few years ago one of the guys in my group posted an after action report on his blog written in Greek and "translated". At our next game he reported that his post got picked up by a number of folks who were now seeking more information on this little know battle between two of the successor states. So much for doing plausible games. Much hilarity followed.

E and D, though with skirmish scenarios set in Normandy, we tend to use scenarios which are as historically accurate to the true engagement as we can do on a tabletop.

D. I've done a few refights but "close enough" usually takes place.

A. All historical all the time.

B and E for the rabbit.

Mostly historical refights in recent years. Generally one to two scenarios in the warren every quarter with a third game as a plausible with a strong historical background…. code E. Event the regional convention GM games are historical based.

The only games which fall out of the historical scenario are the group monthly travel games which are all napoleonic era and not based on historical battles or even plausible situations…. the classic "pick up" or "bring what you want to play" scenarios loosely based on points. Typically one, maybe two, of these per quarter.

E. If I do a historical battle, it will almost certainly be switched to another period. Too many heavy readers in my group.

It depends on what rule set we are using:
Armati 2 E
Shako 2 A
Rapid Fire A
Longstreet A
Battles for Empire 2 A

B. Most of my gaming these days is BBB which is historical re-fights.

B. Like KTravlos, BBB and historical scenarios.

C

B.

I only run science fiction games. My scenarios are all plausible in the Traveller universe.

Depends. C, I suppose.

Eric

When Eric and I do a battle, if you squint real hard and have a few beers, you might be able to tell what battle it is. Sometimes.

But really. If I lied and told you it was White Plains, would you believe me?

C probably.

D mostly.

C MOSTLY

B unless we're playtesting rules then we usually throw minis on a table and roll dice.

B

A. All the games I run and virtually all the games in which I play are historical scenarios.