Help support TMP

"Abstracting Models" Topic

3 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the History of Wargaming Message Board

Areas of Interest


Featured Hobby News Article

Featured Ruleset

Featured Showcase Article

World's Greatest Dice Games

A cheap way to pick up on the latest fad and get your own dice cup for wargaming?

Featured Workbench Article

Featured Profile Article

Introducing Editor Katie

Our newest staff editor introduces herself.

Current Poll

Featured Link

490 hits since 6 Nov 2019
©1994-2021 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP06 Nov 2019 7:57 p.m. PST

"I am on record here as claiming that a wargame is a set of interacting models, and I think that this description has some truth to it. We have, after all, a load of scale models in the toy soldiers and terrain. We also have a set of wargame rules of some description or another which, I suggest, are another set of interacting models – models for movement, combat, morale, command and control and so on. These, of course, control the ‘on table' activities of the scale models.

I think I observed a long time ago that, in fact, on the table, there are multiple scales. We might use, say, 15 mm toy soldiers and 10 mm buildings, while the ground scale might be one inch to a hundred yards (I am making these up). We cope with these scale changes with little apparent cognitive effort, except occasionally arguing that this unit is, or is not, in range because it looks right. I often find myself explaining to some of my students that visualisation makes both understanding and explaining something complex much easier, and I suspect the same might be the case in a wargame.

I have just been reading an article by Nancy Cartwright, who is an empirical philosopher of science whose main claim to fame seems to be a book called ‘How the Laws of Physics Lie', which, however, I have not read. The article is…"
Main page


UshCha31 Jan 2020 11:08 a.m. PST

to be honest nothing origial in this. The whole point is simulation at a suitable level. Nwetons law of gravitation is sufficent for most of us. Specila relativity theory is needed for navication of long distances in space. Just horses for courses.

Stress analysis does not need to go into molecular theory as it would add little within normal practical limits not improve the answer. It would however require vastly more effort to define the code and the input.

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP03 Feb 2020 11:57 a.m. PST



Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.