"Do you use "hidden" scenarios?" Topic

I've done a few battles, mainly those that are very iconic, where I've tried to hide the scenario from the other participant. I've done Gettysburg set in the FPW, Minden in the American Revolution, etc. Today I'll be starting "Waterloo" but set in 1760 with the Russians defending, Prussians attacking, and, hopefully, Austrians arriving to aid the Russians. My brothers pretty knowledgeable about history in general so I'm guessing he'll see through the ruse but maybe not! Figures are 28mm Front Rank, rules are Might & Reason. I use 15mm buildings as the scale of a brigade per unit makes 28mm buildings inappropriately sized. I put the buildings on a 3" sabot per the rules so that the model can be removed when units are occupying a built up area (someday I really need to flock the sabots…)

There's a scenario in the second Age of Reason scenario book with New Orleans being done between Prussians and Austrians.
We did it many years ago. I forget which side I was on, and who won. 😄🤷
But, since we were killing lead, a good time was had by all.

Not that I know of.

I did the FPW battle Froeshwiler but set it in Missouri for an ACW battle. The Union played the French side and the CSA was the Prussian.

I once did Trafalgar with pre-dreadnoughts.

I am planning on doing Gettysburg in France with the French in the Union role and the Prussians as the Confederates. I just haven't decided which Confederate Corps will be the Bavarians and Wurttembergers. Ewell's or Hill's? I just couldn't do that to Longstreet.

Lovely table BTW.

I haven't but I'm aware of the practice & it is appealing. Please tell us how SYW Waterloo went.

Yes I have and plan to do more.

I'm with Shagnasty.

Normally I've heard them called "disguised" scenarios. I've rarely done it unless you count Sittangbad. My regular opponent was too likely to spot the battle.

I do it all the time, mostly just because a good tactical scenario should not be wasted on one period, but also occasionally to get people into a situation they wouldn't go to if I used the correct period.

I have on occasion.

i have

I have played a few, but I've never set one up. I prefer to play the actual historical battle.

I do use scenario books a basis for some games, and some of those are based on historical battles so I guess they are 'disguised' indirectly. eg I ran a game covering Grossdeutschland at Kursk a few years back, and the basic scenario bore a suspicious resemblance to Fontenoy, but it was never intended as a disguised scenario. The original scenario just gave a good model for a wave assault on a fortified position.

I often take an interesting situation from an historical battle and use it as a scenario for my Red and Blue ImagiNations armies. I'm not trying to recreate the original, just have a pleasant game.

I did, still trting, but no big trouble nowadays as it is mostly solo;)
My best success was 1st Bull run all reversed, right left , yand ks and reb, with players who had some ideas about the ACw. Not os easy to fool. The "rebel" complained when the reinforcements arrived and just afterwards understood the trick.
Waterloo did not work; too obvious. Did a disguidsed 1849 hungarian thing for napoleonics. he had no clue about this war. The adaptation is not always easy. Did Napoleonic Antietam, but the cavalry makes awkward. The 1870 mutations are even more difficult has one have to adapt shooting ranges. Overall an interesting gimmick.

Two years ago my friend Richard ran a Star Wars game based on Rorke's Drift at Bayou Wars.He had about 16 players and 3 of us helping him out.
Great time was had by all who participated.

For our club's last 'Christmas Special', Mark ran a brilliant disguised scenario of Little Big Horn, set in the Sudan. It was a great way to allow players to make the same historical mistakes. I reported it here:
link