Editorial: Defining the Assumptions in Wargaming
Greetings and hello again boys and girls, Unicorns and children of all ages! It’s Brent here again, livening up your Tuesday as usual… except today it’s not really about what I think. Let’s clear up a few assumptions, you and I.
What did the Wargamer say to the Roleplayer? “You’re such a nerd!” What did they say about the Cardgamer? “What a geek!” What did they say to the girl?
Nothing.
Bad Joke: check. Engines are go.
Aren’t stereotypes fun? Look at it this way though, a stereotype is simply an assumption one makes about a group. I’ve never had a problem getting a date…
...that’s what the chloroform was for…
…but how often are geeks labeled as socially awkward? Sure, some of us are, but most of us are pretty normal folks.
In case you haven’t pegged it, today’s topic is assumptions in wargaming.
Over the past year and some, I’ve dropped posts, comments, and articles like turds in a dog park all over the Blogosphere. If you follow the trail back from Bell of Lost Souls, you’ll pass through Blood of Kittens before arriving at my port of call, Strictly Average. Along the way I’ve lurked at Dakka, enjoyed 3++ is the New Black, and ran my mouth way too much at the Big Blue Shark Tank.
If my travels across this strange, electric landscape has taught me anything, it’s this:
Half the disagreements happen because the folks involved didn’t define the argument. Want an example? What’s the difference between Strategy and Tactics?
 |
| This Daemon Prince is moving behind the tank, using it for cover. Is that a tactic or a strategy? Read the definition… does that change your opinion? |
Both are defined as, “The science and art…”
- Strategy: …of military command exercised to meet the enemy in combat under advantageous conditions.
- Tactics: …of disposing and maneuvering forces in combat.
How many times are the words used interchangeably, confusing the meaning and the issue?
Let me be clear, the point of this article today is to start a conversation. I really, truly, honestly want to know what you think about this subject. I’m looking for a consensus, trying to take your temperature on the subject.
*insert bad joke here… cue visual*
Still and all, it’s important to agree on a measure, a standard, so we all know what we’re talking about. For Warhammer both Fantasy and 40K, how about this? Strategy is what you do to prepare for a game, tactics are those things you do when you’re playing.
Simple, concise, accurate… I dig it! I just wish I’d thought of it, but that was my nemesis, Evil Homer.
Moving on, let’s check out some other assumptions. Ever seen this one in articles or posts?
Rule of Thumb: A quarter of the table should be covered in terrain. Assumption: This unit or that should always be in cover.
This is one of my favorites; when talking about Unit X, inevitably someone says something like, “That’s not an issue – that unit should be in cover.” Or, “That unit should always start in cover.”
See this table on my right? What if you were playing on it? This assumption about cover will lead us right in to terrain, momentarily, but suffice it to say we don’t always know what the table will look like.
Rule of Thumb: Shooting is the best way to destroy mech. Orks have inferior shooting against mech. Assumption: Orks are inferior.
This is probably the biggest argument on the ‘Net, the idea that Orks are horrible and can’t win. I’m not going to rehash it, but I’ll say this:
All the talking is done when you hit the table; you still have to utilize tactics to implement your strategy and beat the army in front of you.
If Orks suck, prove it on the board. Frankly, that hasn’t happened often enough for people to retire them, and Orks are still seen in numbers at every major event.
I think that’s the only defense they need! Maybe I did rehash it, some.
Here’s the last assumption I’ll bring up today, then we’ll open up the floor.
How much terrain is required? Take a look at the picture below:
 |
| Let’s use this picture as our example… is this too much or too little? How does it compare to what you see in your local area? Is it important to have many different types of terrain on one table? |
I could go on, but I’ll leave some for you, my chickies!
So, briefly, here are the questions I’m posing for the audience; if you need a recap, scroll through and reread the bold items. Feel free to answer any or all of them, or ask then answer another!
1) Does the sterotype of gamers seem accurate to you? What’s the scene in your area?
2) Does the definition on Strategy and Tactics in Wargaming make sense or am I missing something? Feel free to use the Nurgle Daemon Prince picture as an example if you need one.
3) Would playing on the empty table force you to change your strategy, your tactics, or both?
4) How much terrain is required? Do the pictures on the internet, such as the example picture above, seem like too much or too little?
My belief is the answers will vary enough to force us to reexamine our own assumptions. That can’t be a bad thing, given that old saying about assuming too much…
Thoughts? Opinions? Hugs and gropings?
