"Goodbye to simple attack-defence" Topic

OK, not really – of course I'll still fight such conventional games – but I want to fly a flag for more unconventional situations. This week at the club there were two games that produced unusual tactical challenges and both culminated in super-exciting close finishes. One was a colonial battle in which a column tried to make it from one corner of the table to the other while fending off huge numbers of Mahdists. The other was a delaying action/fighting withdrawal in which the defender had to gauge along the way how much of his force he could afford to extract, as against how much to leave behind and risk it being 'bagged' by outflanking enemy forces. A brief photo-report on these two games is here:
link

This is a subject that really merits a "Reflections on Wargaming" essay. See the existing list of these here:
link
As I don't have time to write such an essay now, let me invite your comments. I suppose the questions to which I'd be interested to know the answers are:
- how often do you use or devise a scenario or situation which is different from a simple line-em-up attack/defence?
- what are your favourite unconventional situations for producing unusual challenges and exciting games?

Most of my games are something other than attack/defend. I find gaming more interesting when you give players tactical puzzles.

Another fun one I've pulled a few times: Player A is invading via drop ships / helos whatever. So game starts and there are 3 or 4 drop ships spewing bad guys, while the good guys desperately try to contain them. I roll a die and declare: reinforcements! Then I ADD A TABLE to the game space. The entire game changes as there are new forces and new terrain!

Most of my games are disguised as attack/defend to recruit players, but actually something else.

My big kick for the last half dozen years has been linked games, where the start of one is influenced by the results of a previous game in the series.

We have used mostly attack-defend for our SYW games but our TSAFT games tend to more complex – we usually have multiple players with different sets of objectives (e.g. destroy as many foreign devil units as possible, secure the arsenal grounds, exit the board with as many units as possible) – has made for some interesting games

Nice ideas, thanks, all.

@Extra Crispy: one of my 'Reflections' essays is about 'Changing situations mid-game':
link
Your 'ADD A TABLE' seems like a prime example of how to make that happen!

@Yellow Admiral: I like it. That's actually the approach I use in the BBB campaigns: you still get to fight the historical battle, but whoever won the previous one gets some ~5% advantage (extra troops, low ammo, adjusted reinforcement arrivals, or whatever).

@Frederick: I guess SYW linear warfare does necessarily push towards conventional attack-defence line-outs more often than not. The multiple players with different objectives approach, verging on roleplaying, is certainly a nice one. Mark always does that for us with his wonderful Xmas specials:
link

Not sure if that is what is meant… but an additional 'Table' for part of an action… in more detail… can be VERY useful… but will considerately add to Game time! Maybe solo or long club time… or more players!

Easier in games where you either can have lots of space or simple terrain that can be moved (desert).
Needs lots of scenario thinking as it can be botched in the end.
But yes, when done right, a joy!
Your site is full of interesting posts.

Merci, M Frog, very kind of you to say so.

6mm figures and a suitable ground scale are a good way to ensure lots of room for maneuver and therefore enough grand tactical options to make for interesting games.

Yes, scenario design can go wrong. On my blog I've reported the occasional playtesting debacle. But truly duff games are very rare in our group. Most often, when designing a historical scenario, if we get the historical terrain right and the historical troops right, we will get a decent game and it will usually just be a case of fine-tuning the victory conditions.