Help support TMP


POLL: Gallopingjack on Ancient Generalship


339 votes were cast.


Back to POLLS home page


Mapleleaf Inactive Member writes:

Wargames , particularly the DBx variants, are a lot more like Chess then actual warfare. Chess was considered to be a training ground for war, not in how to fight, but,in how to use the brain.

Good chess players know the rules and the winner is the one that knows how to set a good strategy and then be able to change that stategy as it goes along.

You can see this in actual warfare. I would argue that Hannibal and possibly Alexander were the type of general that could set out an outstanding battle array with a plan to best use their troops and the terrain for that battle. However once the battle started they lost control – Alexander particularly who usually was in the first rank – and won their battle because they had the better plan.

Julius Caesar on the other hand won many battle because he could adapt as the battle went on – using the extra rank at Pharsalus, German cavalry charge at Alesia .

This probably explains why certain people are good at gaming and others not so good. Sometimes in a game like real warfare your plan works but most of the time it does not or only a part works so you quickly have to adapt and change.


Back to the Homepage



2,351 hits since 20 Aug 2007
©1994-2017 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

If you were a member of this website, you could participate in website polls. Would you like a free membership?

VOTING RESULTS
AnswerVotes%Chart
strongly agree
129
38%
bar of chart
agree
86
25%
bar of chart
I see his point
80
24%
bar of chart
not sure
3
1%
bar of chart
I don't see his point
13
4%
bar of chart
disagree
13
4%
bar of chart
strongly disagree
6
2%
bar of chart
not an Ancients gamer
9
3%
bar of chart
POLL IS CLOSED
POLL DESCRIPTION

In commenting on a TMP news item, Mal Wright Fezian Inactive Member wrote:

Competition games disregard all the real problems Generals have to face and be able to deal with. Difficult ground, retiring from a battle in good order, passing though defiles, deploying in an encounter, dealing with ambush, and any one of a dozen other things a good General had to be able to perform with his army. I am not aware of many battles having been fought on Golf Course's. For that reason I do not believe that competition wargaming shows any particular skill other than knowing how to work the rule mechanics better than the other player.

Real Generalship is being able to handle and manouevre an army, as well as knowing how to fight it. The first problem was to get it in a position to win. So I say that competition gaming is not real generalship. Most of the "champs" I have encountered were far better at waving the rules than waving a sword.

Do you agree or disagree?