Tanks in World War 2 Forum Index

Dedicated to the Tanks in World War 2 and World War 2 in general, in association with Panzerworld

Please note, that the forum has moved to a new location. Be sure update your bookmarks for the new Tanks in World War 2 Forum.

This forum will remain closed as an archive.

Game 1 - Sign up and discuss here

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Tanks in World War 2 Forum Index -> War game - Game Discussion Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Blaster
Captain
Captain

Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1687
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Christian Ankerstjerne wrote:
Apparently, all the units have decided to dig in and fade away.


This was such a good idea. Sometimes I get very peeved at the liability of things like this to mass disinterest. For all I know this could die out, and it would be a shame.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stix
First Sergeant
First Sergeant

Joined: 07 Mar 2005
Posts: 940
Location: nowhere
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
This was a very good idea.
I think one of the reasons it fluked though was the team setup.
The allied team had nobody who actually knew squab about the units. :S
Also, I for one was a bit confused as to in what style to present our orders, if we had managed to decide on them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Ricky
Administrator
Administrator

Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 11708
Location: Luton, UK
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Can I make a suggestion or two?

A clearer plan of events etc is needed. Teams are given a map with their units on, and asked to provide orders by a set date. If no orders are received, it is assumed that they are not moving.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
david
Major General
Major General

Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 4911
Location: Dorset. England.
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes.

I was keen, but did not know what was expected of me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Siberian Black
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant

Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 1097
Location: Hunting Panzer IV's
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 9:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
More defined intelligence for sure. And locates for our own forces.


And better communication bewtween team members *glances pointedly*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Blaster
Captain
Captain

Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1687
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 4:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I guess we have a chance of setting this in motion after all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Simonr1978
The Toastinator

Joined: 24 Apr 2004
Posts: 3392
Location: Kent, UK
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ricky wrote:
Can I make a suggestion or two?

A clearer plan of events etc is needed. Teams are given a map with their units on, and asked to provide orders by a set date. If no orders are received, it is assumed that they are not moving.


I can only (belatedly) agree with Ricky here. Any such wargame should be treated as a primary school level story writing exercise, that is you need a Start, Middle and End.

The Start should dictate the units available (However that is decided, a Points Value system, Historically available detachments, an Alternate History scenario or whatever other system is to be used) and limits of deployment.

The Middle should include whatever methods are used to determine the outcomes of the combats and unit movement rates once the game begins.

The End needs to include victory conditions. What are the objectives and timescales? What losses of men or material are acceptable or are these irrelevant in the grand scheme so long as you capture objective A and B?

Unless players know what they have to begin with, where they are supposed to get to and how they are supposed to get there any game will founder. Imagine playing a game of Snakes and Ladders where everyone can start wherever they want, can move however they want (Providing the overseer says it's OK), no-one knows which square they're supposed to get to and no-one knows where the other pieces are. That's what this game looks like from the outside. That might just be down to what I can't see as an outsider though.

I once played a particularly inactive tabletop wargame as a teenager and when I complained that it was spectacularly dull (We actually achieved 4 hours of game movement in 5 real hours!) one member of my group said "War is supposed to be 90% movement and 10% action", I replied "Aren't we supposed to be playing that 10% though?"

If it's a wargame, try and keep it in the "10% action" and the players will enjoy it, but you've got to have a basic system of Start-Middle-End behind it otherwise players wont know what's expected of them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Tanks in World War 2 Forum Index -> War game - Game Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group