"Modelling historical battles" Topic

I've been wargaming historical battles casually with a club for about a year now. My ignorance of military history is a hindrance. Does anyone use miniatures for straight-up reenacting historical battles? I feel like plotting out historical re-creations will help me with creative game-play. Any tips would be welcome. (Don't know if era makes a difference, but ACW is where I'm reading most right now).

It is impossible to re-enact battles with miniatures. Instead I use miniatures 1. because I like to paint and 2. because using rules that conform to my personal prejudices (;-)) help me to understand a little more of various parts of military history. Remember however that battles were fought by educated professionals, while we are just interested amateurs. And like computer programs: wargaming rules are only as good as the people who wrote them. My self I am more interested in "what-if" situations. A recent battle was a fight between Grouchy who did find the Prussian army and had to hold them up in order to keep them from Waterloo, while trying to send his reserves (if any) back to assist the Emperor. Although in this battle he succeeded I have decided to change the scenario a bit because Grouchy seemed to have irrealistic advantage.
For the ACW I saw one very interesting scenario that I have not yet played though: J.E.B. Stuart escorts a large train of wounded with orders to get them savely back to Sharpsburg after the three days of Gettysburg. And for the ACW another point: remember the aims of the two sides: the Confederacy does not need to win a battle, they however cannot afford to loose one. Especially in the election year 1863/64 the Confederate goal is trying to make McClellan win instead of Lincoln. The chances of ending the war with "Little Napoleon" as president would be far greater.

The most difficult part is terrain. You need something very close the the actual one, otherwise, depending on its significance ( but a few meters hiehght can screen from artillery).

Not every battle is interesting, many be biased. After all no general wants a battle the be " equal".
So look carefully at victory conditions.

Things a player will use as a goid position should not be on the edge of the world.

You can ease the disavantages by using events cards, up to a point making reinforcements random.

Use disguized scenarios, sometimes put of period and with different armies, but with care to study their advantages and disavantages, compared to the historical ones.
One of my fondest pride: to have 2 acw players do first Bull Run, mirror sides and table, without one finding out till late, when the Valley troops came. Just mike history! 1863 troops.

Impossible?
You should play with Bruce Weigl 1870, with umpire and hiden troops. Very close to the actual pb, absolutly spot on terrain and simulation.
And a great game.

Not easy to do at all. But possible.
Just like saying no simulation "as just toys" works for the lazy ignorant ones who do not want to bother.
And , well they have a right to do so. Not to say it is imposdible, like an unfounded mantra.

No. Do not start this again, aie..

I'm with JcFrog. Worth keeping in mind that it's very hard to refight battles when the original battle was decided by one side's ignorance of the other's order of battle, or by poor terrain analysis. ("You're not supposed to know that the river is fordable, and that enemy reinforcements are supposed to show up on your right flank about Turn 3.")

But ignorance is a fixable problem. Get yourself a general history of the ACW, then a study of ACW tactics, then a history of a particular campaign or battle--two, if possible, and watch where they disagree. By this time next year, you'll be arguing with the historians.

Thank you for your ideas! Maybe maps and markers, rather than miniatures, will help with what I want to achieve.

Almost all I do is refights historical battles with toy soldiers. I enjoy the research as much as the playing, although for some things a degree of guesswork is involved.

Find out the opposing force compositions, a rough idea of the terrain (abstract is fine, just pick out the major features), and have some idea what each side was trying to achieve. Aim to do better than your historical counterpart and off you go.

I don't do so much now as the guy who organised the games passed away. W re-fought mant battles of the English civil war using DBM very slightly modifioed to mtach the weapons and tactics of the period better. You will very rarely get the same result, as real battles have their own path. However many ran on a supprisingly similar path. This was most often when the tactics were defined either by the "same" objectives and the same terrain. This was not a obvious as it sounds. Terrain is important and you nedd to get it quite close in terms of density and sight lines, the height of hills no so much, provide it limits LOS in a similar manner. It helped when the battle was not annouced, we just turned up and playerd. Afterward the avtual battle was recounted, absolutely facinating. Somtimes the army was deployed as per the original. In some cases this came as a shock when an apprently daft deployment proved to be actually sound.

You do need rules that are not daft dice rolling madness and that can cater for reserves. Nobody is going to get complex battels done with a Featherstone Clone. Fire and Fury for ACW is one I have experience of and at high level it works well. We did do some ACW games scaled down in the same manbner, again terrain is key. No skirmishers in Fire and Fury but that is just a level of detail.

I've refought countless historical battles with miniatures, with many different sets of rules. Luckily nobody told me it was impossible.
It's one of the most fun things you can do in wargaming, but not all battles are suitable. There are a few which always seem to give good games (Plataea, Issos, Raphia, Sambre, Hastings, Marston Moor, Albuera, Quatre Bras, Shiloh)

Followed Martin's approach in our recent Boer War games of Elandslaagte and Silkaatsnek. Got very close historical results. Very satisfying, even for the losing sides!

+1 to Jcfrog.

Without question, the BEST wargame experiences I have ever been privileged to participate in have been re-enactments of historical engagements. That having been said, such results will not be achieved by just throwing a couple of armies on a tabletop. Careful research, manifesting a true fog of war environment, careful scenario planning, and a good umpire ("god") are required.

Some examples -
Leipzig campaign
Waterloo campaign
Jutland
Wilderness campaign
Chickamauga
Port Republic

It's a lot of effort, but the experience is well worth it.

p.s. – If you ever get a chance to participate in a Bruce Weigle event (calling any of his scenarios a "game" is an insult to his artistry) ….. do not miss the opportunity.

B

Also worth remembering there are different ways to run a war-game based on a historical battle eg.

- Same forces and start positions, even same initial orders
- Same forces, setup within deployment area as player wishes
- What-Ifs, eg delayed arrival, additional units that didn't get there in reality, but might have, different choice of ground etc