"IMAGINARY COUNTRIES" Topic

Just a query. Some ardent gamers who are VietNam Vets do not play VietNam games or the more modern wars. For my own tasts I am always edgy about WWII as I don't like playing on the side of one of the two greatest moral evils ever to befall mankind. (Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany). Granted I could do the allies but somebody still has to be the Germans or the Japanese (another racist-fascist regieme). Therfore I do most of my gaming in the interwar period and use mythical imaginary countries— Fahrvergnuggen or the 7 3/4 Reich or the Workers Winter Wonderland of Freeland (guess who), are just two. Do any other gamers have a similar reticence?

I can't say I have any reticence on the matter. I and others have done moderns and other periods over local terrain mostly because maps are easy to get and you can actually go and look at it.

And since they cancelled WWIII, if you want to do large scale symetrical modern warfare, you have to make it up.

I guess for pulp gaming liberal sprinkling of imaginary countries would plenty of flavour: how about rescuing the crown jewels of kingdom of Arbusia, or chasing after the agents of Bulvania?

Griefbringer

Do not forget the country from the peter Sellers 50s movie 'The Mouse that Roared'.

Plenty of imaginary countries from the comic books of that era.

History is history, while you may have an aversion to the evil countries of WW2, other gamers may have the same feeling toward the evil Naploenic France, etc. or the bad guys depend on your location.

I know one ACW gamer who fights the 'Americans' vs the Yankees?

So I do not have such views. Honoring history is just that.

We used to do this sort of thing a lot in my old school wargames club. We generally took an existing part of the world, often an island or archipelago (so that we could use existing maps) but rotated the map 90 or 180 degreesand then ut in our own borders and names. We had some interesting campaigns using quasi-napoleonic and WW2 forces over Australia, Ireland and Indonesia (plus a WW2 Russian Front campaign transplanted to the area just North of Dorking!)

"Granted I could do the allies"

Actually, I feel precisely the opposite. I can't play WWII with the Western Allies precisely because I want one side to win rather badly, on an emotional level.

However, if I play eastern front WWII then I don't care which side wins, because they were as bad as each other IMO. (It was probably good for the west that the Soviets won, but it might have been even better if they had won more slowly, thereby allowing me to not get too fretful about a Nazi victory.)

A Nazi victory in a game that is, not an overall victory.

When I watch a movie I don't assume that the actor portraying the villain approves of his character's action. I don't see how a game (no matter how serious you are about your history, it's still just a game) would be any different.

link

Ahh.. sweet Freedonia…. Land of the Spree… and the Home of the Knave…

I always rather liked the idea that Poland (they were fascist-istic after all) rises to dominance in Europe and does a tsunami move(can't say Blitzkrieg…German word) on Germany, France, CZ (can't spell it), Bulgaria, etc. Only to face the combined might of Spain, Finland, and Italy (aided by the USSR). have the UK switch sides a couple of times, add in a Carribian war with the US; shaken-not-stirred. Voila! you have a a new world order.

oops forgot something:

Republic of Backwatastan

Union of Outbackofbeyondsia

Confederation of Nevahedavitabia

Free State of Yougottabnutzandia

What figures do you use and rules for your "7 3/4 Reich"?

PJ

We once had a Cold War era campaign that involved a civil war in the Peoples Republic of Brutislavia. It started with a nasty revolt on the parade ground during the May Day celebrations.

Actually, the Baltic countries of the inter-war period offer a lot of variety with a little bit of research. They have distinct uniforms, Latvians used mostly old style coal scuttle German helmets (a smattering of Adrians as well, usually in the artillery corps), Estonia seems to mostly used peaked caps similar to the W.W.I Russian design, and the Lithuanians used Adrian helmets. Of course, they all had cavalry corps with hats of national origin. They used a myriad of artillery and machine guns from all nations, and best yet heavy W.W.I tanks left behind by the British after the Russian Civil War as well as lots of Renault tanks and several other designs.
If you want to get a feel for the period, check out ebay in the "Postcard: Military" category and punch in Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia in the search box. I have found better information on ebay than any other source out there.

I believe (and you may correct me on this) that in the wargaming book "Battle!" the author mentioned about what "country" to play in a game, and he said one gamer used a fictitious country called "Myopia". But how is this country equipped with Shermans, T-34's, or Tiger tanks? Easy: the fictional country is in a lend-lease program with the country that supplied the weapons.

"When I watch a movie I don't assume that the actor portraying the villain approves of his character's action."

True. But presumably you would have a bad taste in your mouth if the villain was to come out on top.

If I was to play WWII US vs Germans and lose, I would not hold anything at all against the player who played Nazis (unless he went on about how cool the SS were). But I would still have a bad taste in my mouth, because the "good guys" lost. It would detract from my ability to enjoy the game, and nothing at all against the gamer.

I used to have a similar compunction but that actually led me to play the Germans when I was first starting – the rationale being something along the lines of "heck, if I lose (very likely) the good guys win." I got out of that rather quickly. One thing that might help is to use the opportunity to figure out the REAL strengths and weaknesses of the various factions(as opposed to the game-imposed ones) and then you can appreciate how close run the war really was.

In case you can't wrap your mind around that concept, here's a couple of other real life scenarios you might prefer:

USSR vs. Japanese in late 1930's in Manchuria
USSR vs. Japanese in 1945 (all of about 5 days)
USSR vs. PRoC in the 60's (USSR won that with either a nuke or a massive fuel-air bomb depending on who you listen to)

Of course, you could just revert to the various nations' previous names, such as Albion for England.

While I'm at it, have some fictional countries:
Brungaria
Elbonia (Dilbert)
Ratznestistan
Erehwon (extra points if you figure it out AND the source)

Wyatt

I don't have a problem playing any game and any side, even for modern games. I prefer playing Allies in WW2, but it doesn't bother me playing any side. That being said, I can certainly understand that some people are a lot more sensitive about that kind of thing than I am, and so when I run modern games, I'm just as happy to set them in Myanalasia rather than Myanamar or Malaysia.

Rob

From Wikipedia (ah, the joys of Google!)

Erehwon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Erehwon is common mis-spelling of Erewhon, Samuel Butler's satire on Victorian society. It is the direct reversal of the word 'Nowhere' and is often used to denote an unspecified generic place in much the same way that 'John Doe' is used to name an unspecified person.

In the preface to his the first edition of his book, Butler specified

The author wishes it to be understood that Erewhon is pronounced as a word of three syllables, all short — thus, E-re-whon.

This intended pronunciation would have been clearer if Butler had chosen the direct reversal, E-reh-won. Nevertheless, with either spelling the word is still occasionally pronounced with two syllables as 'air – one'.

Erehwon is also the name of a planet in David Weber's Honor Harrington book series. [Note: Which is from where I recognized it.]

Jim

Erehwon

Isn't it also a reference to either one of the lands or one of the "fixer" wizards in the Fafhrd & The Gray Mouser series? This is just off the top of my head, mind you, so, yeah.

If I was to play WWII US vs Germans and lose, I would not hold anything at all against the player who played Nazis (unless he went on about how cool the SS were). But I would still have a bad taste in my mouth, because the "good guys" lost. It would detract from my ability to enjoy the game, and nothing at all against the gamer.

I dunno… meaning no disrespect, Mark, but I can't help but think if you can't disassociate yourself from the subject matter enough to not be left feeling somehow unsettled by a simple loss, then perhaps you shouldn't play the period.

Personally, I can play anything, and any side, down to and including Nazi Germany, the KKK, or some private army under the thumb of some David Koresh/Jim Jones analogue, or play against the same, and win or lose, the game'll still be fun (provided the game has the potential to be fun- the best setup in the world can be tedious with the wrong opponent). I guess I just don't get people taking it so… personally. I approach my gaming from a borderline roleplaying standpoint- was a roleplayer before I was ever a wargamer-, so it's not that everything's so abstracted that I'm completely divorced from any sense of value to my troops, and so forth, either.

It's just… well… a game, is all.

And as a third incoherent, rambling ur-point, I think I'd be most likely- and in fact, very likely- to use madeup countries in pulp/colonial games, or near future games (where I tend to replace nationality with corporate loyalty)- world wars, major interwar actions, and anything from WWII onward, real countries're my preference.

- Monk

I'm not a vet so I have no personal trauma about it but I can't imagine playing Vietnam games. Our various recent desert adventures, however, wouldn't bother me. WW II land and air fighting do not interest me except for a strange interest in the assaults on Eben Emael and Crete. I also prefer to see Axis, especially Germans, lose in WW II games. I think it's the obssesion so many have with their equipment and uniforms.

The country from "the Mouse that Roared" and "The Mouse on the Moon" is The Duchy of Grand Fenwick.

I've sometimes imagined two small eastern-european states that had a wide range of foreign equipment in their armies (often made by swapping turrets around on tanks etc) The first one was a German client-state Dictatorship, the other was neutral, then joined the allies.

I have been working on something along those lines.

Using the Eastern European country of Ruritania from the novels Prisoner of Zenda and Rupert of Hentzau. They are vaguely Slavic with a German overtone. Was looking at doing early 1939 with a German backed Aristocratic Freedom group vs a Russian Backed workers force. Early German and Russian armour etc etc.
Thought I would use the books descendants as principal characters.
I have even considered using the characters Grandparents as the background for an 1805 French/ Austrian campaign in the obscure Austrian province of Ruritania,

Dear PJ Parent
and all.

The rules I use are my own concoction called "The Shattered Century" and the figures are standard 20mm plastic and metal Revell and various makers all in a melange of what I like. The game was designed as a tactical set to be used as a campaign game and take the war from a rather bizarre point of view.

Most modern (well WWII era) games view the action as a "stop-action movie" where the table top is like a movie in that set and the figures and vehicles have a real relationship with the tactifal prototypes they represent. Thus the commander of one or both sides is a commander of a combat command or battalion to brigade etc. The scale of the game I use is larger. The tabletop represents not a section of a battlefield, but in fact— a table top— a tabletop in a chateau somewhere 25 miles behind the lines where everyone around it is a general or field marshall and the only colonel in the room is the guy who takes the coffee order. The figure stands and vehicles are pushed around by nattily dressed WACS with long croupier- sticks and the only connection you have to the muddy-bloody reality of war in the trenches is the distant rumble of the guns over the horizon. You use stands and figures and vehicles, but as I said, it concentrates more on the strategic operational game as generals-field-marshalls would see it.

Unfortunately I still can't afford the nattily dressed WACS so that has to be left to the imagination. Then, at 5 pm, you punch out and go to have dinner at your world-dominating table with an excellent view of the stage at Nikita's place.

The other countries in the campaign game are (you can amuse yourself with filling in the blanks) …

The Newnited States
Hungland or the Brutish Empire
The 443rd (for now) Flouce Republic.
The Fascist Monarchy of Fanabla
The Grand, Holy, Autocratic, Socialistic, Democratic Anarchic Monarchy of Putzland (God Bless Marshall Soapsudski)
The Empire of Terramasu
The Empire of Chun-Boo-Hoo and chain of Chinese Restaurants
The Republic of Bandrika
The Republic Bannanos (ruled over by a famous movie star who made her claim dancing with a basket of fruit on her head).

I should note that one of the chief constituents of my unease at this is that being of Austro-German heritage I find the whole of the third Reich especially distasteful, and as , due to Hitler and the Nazi's we will be apologizing and making amends for the atrocities till crack of doom, I prefer to to game with them in any way shape or form. Put it down to being a kid at a time when to be of that heritage was considered automatically being a Nazi. I got over that, but then the History channell turned into "The Nazi Channell" and that put the frosting on the cake for me.

Finally, I am a historian out of love (not avocation). I remember once winning an East front WWII game rather neatly (many many years ago) and I was congratulated by the GM. We took the village, but I couldn't help asking myself — "Yes and what will happen in that village tonight when the Sonderaktion team shows up."

But hey, that's just me.

The resort to imaginary, whimsical countries is that I know that after the battle between the 7 3/4 Reich and the WWWF, no Sonderaktion team will show up, nor will Stalin shoot the losers.

I usually just play historicals anymore, but from time to time, I will alter into a fictional world with made up countries loosely based on the real thing.

For instance, We had a set of games once that was a mix of late medieval europe, English civil war, with a small dose of steam punk for fun on some 16th century European maps.

For example, the not holy, nor roman, nor an empire has been having a series of small actions against the Frankish kingdom ruled by King Louis the XXX. Due to the occupation of some of the Dutch coastal ports by the Franks and the resulting loss of trade, the English have sent a small army led by Lord Biteme, Earl of Chutney to help the armies of the Empire regain the land ruled by the house of Hasbeen.

I have landsknechts, swiss mercenaries, English Civil war carbine and pistol armed cavalry, Heavy knights with lances, Matchlock muskets, cannon and archers all in the same battle.

I even played a game with my old WHFB steam tank charging into some Gendarmes. It blew up.

I also will from time to time play WWII with fictional countries. It makes it more a game and less a re-creation.

Slabosylvania gets my vote.

In historical board games such countries were found in 'Warlord', Original 'Soldier Kings', 'Borderlands, Ah Blitzkrieg' and SPI 'Strategy I'.

Of course fantasy games are loaded with them

*Freedonia* and *Sylvania* from DUCK SOUP are my imemdiate favorites. From my own notes I continue to play around with the idea of an Atlantean continent in the mid-Atlantic circa 1920s that uses rather familiar technologies in the wars between the various nations that occupy said continent. Besides the two aforementioned countries, we also have the Republic of Dyspepsia, the Dementian Free State, the Marxist Berzerklian Soviet Socialist Republics (BSSR), and the Grand Duchy of Inter Fagoe.

Cheers!

Leland R. Erickson
Metal Express
metal-express.net

Well as far as playing historical armies I have a weird thing for playing the losers of wars (Darius's persians, harolds anglo danish, ECW royalists, ACW confederates, WW2 germans etc etc)I think its because I like the idea of changing history. Of course this does leave me looking a bit of a crackpot with a love of "bad guys" (if such a silly term can be applied during wartime). However I would point out that history is written by the winners and the losers are always cast as the " bad guys". I must admit that I don't play made up countries (unless you count WFB) but I have had an inkling to do a mythical darkest africa campagian for some time all I need is the figures, rules and scenery And I'm off. Now were did I put that spare £500.00 GBP ……

No problem for me to play any historical period/army.I do like to use fictitious names for countries/cities/planets in my solo gaming.

Some examples:
-breakaway former Soviet republic of Turkturkistan,with its renamed capital Mohammedgrad (for AK-47 and various modern rules)
-planetary system New Edinburgh,site of NAC Fleet Fighter Training Command (Full Thrust)
-Gamma Serpentis,star system containing NAC colony on edge of ESU space (Dirtside II and Full Thrust)

Just my way of making wargaming a little more fun.

Keep those fictitious names coming please as they are hilarious.

MD

PS—Iron General,mind of I borrow Backwatastan for my solo gaming??? That's a good one!

I prefer to play historical period, without moral conflicts if I play with Germans or Soviets. In other periods exist a thin line between who are the "evil" and who the "good guys". History isn't a continuous struggle between good and evil, this sentence seems very infantile.
Who are the evil in Vietnam War? Who in the continuous campaigns in India in XIX century? Who are the evil in the Thirty years war? And who in the Peninsular War (Guerra de Independencia española)?
I think that there's not good and evil, except in very few exceptions.

Dear Big Joe

So you are saying that neither Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia were "evil?" You seem to be implying that "good" and "evil" are relative— and hence a matter of opinion.

nemopholist,
I agree with you about the consideration of evil regime for Nazi Germany and Soviet Union (the Stalin's USSR), they are in the few exceptions I say in the last post.
I'm sorry, my english is very awful! ;)

Dear Big Joe

No need to apologize, English is no different than any other language in that sometimes it is unclear all on its own.

Thanks

Otto