 Editor in Chief Bill   | 26 Jun 2017 4:19 p.m. PST |
Do you play (and replay) historical battles, by yourself, so that you can learn more about the history, the battles, and the rules? |
| rustymusket | 26 Jun 2017 6:01 p.m. PST |
Sounds like a good way to appreciate the difficulties commanders have. |
robert piepenbrink  | 26 Jun 2017 6:55 p.m. PST |
Oh, yes. Sometimes it tells you a lot about the battle. Of course, sometimes it just tells you something about the rules. |
| KSmyth | 26 Jun 2017 7:59 p.m. PST |
If I want to learn more about the histories and battles, I read. Don't really have enough space to run a solo game of any size in my house. I depend on getting together with others to suss out the rules. |
| clifblkskull | 26 Jun 2017 9:10 p.m. PST |
I do it all of the time
Really helps if learning a new set or period
Clif |
| gavandjosh02 | 26 Jun 2017 9:16 p.m. PST |
|
| Grelber | 26 Jun 2017 10:08 p.m. PST |
Yes, I gamed the ACW battle of Mill Springs solo. I realized that Zollicoffer's brigade badly outnumbered the Union regiments it faced, and should have swept them away. That didn't happen, which led to search for why that was the case and what did happen. Grelber |
| advocate | 26 Jun 2017 11:04 p.m. PST |
|
| Green Tiger | 27 Jun 2017 1:41 a.m. PST |
Yes I do – I would say this is the main slant of my gaming though I do 'gamey' games with other people as well. |
| Shaun Travers | 27 Jun 2017 4:05 a.m. PST |
Yes, very much so. I even blog about it. Trying to do them in chronological order based on the Peter Sides scenario books. I have slowed down a bit in the last 6 months (was never fast to start with!). Blog page with links to AARs: link |
| Joes Shop | 27 Jun 2017 5:44 a.m. PST |
|
| zoneofcontrol | 27 Jun 2017 8:22 a.m. PST |
Yes, playing out a battle is a great supplement to reading accounts, watching videos and even visiting the battlefields. I also enjoy watching others play the game or reading a good AAR here or on some other site. |
| axabrax | 27 Jun 2017 8:39 a.m. PST |
I do it with board games. Not so much with minis. |
| Oberlindes Sol LIC | 27 Jun 2017 11:22 a.m. PST |
I haven't done it recently, but I used to do it a lot, but only with map-and-counters games (mostly SPI and Avalon Hill games). Maybe I've played through all of my games solo enough times. I have not limited this activity to historical games. I have played miniatures games solo, not to play out historical situations, but to get an understanding of how particular rules work. |
| 14Bore | 27 Jun 2017 4:35 p.m. PST |
Trying to have a go at a historical battle sort of, same oob just changing the weapons. |
| Col Durnford | 28 Jun 2017 11:10 a.m. PST |
Did Gettysburg as a game reenactment. Things turned out much like the orginial. Set up for the third day and ended there. I saw no reason for all that dice rolling for the same historical result. |
| Old Contemptibles | 28 Jun 2017 2:16 p.m. PST |
Just to learn the rules. I have a contingency plan to play any game of mine that no one shows up for as a solo game. Take photos of each turn and post them to our group site and don't tell them it was done solo. Haven't had to do it yet. |
 McLaddie | 29 Jun 2017 7:11 a.m. PST |
Certainly, to learn the rules. As for learning something about history, that would depend on the quality of the game content and play dynamics. Garbage in, garbage out. Gamers have 'learned' some pretty awful history lessons as well as good ones. |
| Forager | 29 Jun 2017 6:24 p.m. PST |
|
| Great War Ace | 30 Jun 2017 7:23 a.m. PST |
Yes, we used historical battles as our main engine for playtesting. And that included solo games, a lot of solo games. But I haven't played a solo game in years, much less a historical battle. Iirc, the last historical solo game was Hattin. The wind shifted, allowing the crusader infantry to keep good morale. They reached the water sources and avoided being defeated and relieved Tiberias. History was forever changed. |
