A Tiny Crusade

[Chris]

Gents,

Here is the "title card" along with the introduction to a battle report that may or may not be of interest to the members of this forum. Thanks in advance for taking the time.


A TINY CRUSADE



Drawing an appropriate amount of inspiration from the two-part video of a friendly Triumph! wargame played over Zoom which featured Later Crusaders versus Mamluk Egyptians (please see https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIMiqEZjn1w43ZN1ox_JXWw), I decided to attempt something similar. My derivative battle would be larger as well as smaller. It would also be atypical or non-traditional, in that it would follow the "radical philosophy" espoused by what I have taken to calling "the Perkins School of Wargaming." [1] My imitation scenario would be larger in that I would field armies three times the size of those traditional miniature forces employed in the Zoom meeting/wargame attended by two remote player-generals and umpired by a fellow who set up the battlefield and troops (under the direction of the distant commanders), rolled the dice, and moved the various units. This knowledgable and talented gentleman also acted as audience, providing commentary and remarks as the wargame progressed. My fictional engagement would also be smaller in that the universal frontage of my representative bases, stands or units measured just 25.4mm or one inch. This modification of the listed base widths and depths provided in Appendix A of the rules allowed me to set up on a tabletop measuring 60 inches by 30 inches. Given the unusual size of the representative formations, there was more than enough space left over. As an additional bonus, this particular table was in a spare room, so I could wargame the engagement at my leisure without worrying about having to clear the tabletop for other uses. Anyway, let me move onto a brief description of the terrain and a somewhat longer description of the orders of battle as well as opposing deployments.



Link to blog post

https://nopaintingrequired.blogspot.com/search/label/A%20Tiny%20Crusade


Comments, questions, and constructive criticism welcomed.

Cheers,
Chris

[Jon Freitag]

Chris, very entertaining and thoughtful post!  Great to see you back at both table and keyboard.  We are all better for your efforts. 

While I seem to fall into the camp of the Far Right, I accept and enjoy wargaming across the entire spectrum from gaming with card counters, Wofun 2D plexiglass, wooden blocks (such as Commands & Colors), as well as 3D metal and plastic figures. 

To me, it is all wargaming.
 

[Erpingham]

IIRC, the original Kriegspiel used blocks on a map.  Does this make the Prussian General Staff far left?

I read an interesting blog post recently where a remote game was played but instead of a single board, each player had his own board and camera.  Screen shots were provided of both sides.  It was interesting, in that one player used figures and model terrain, the other coloured blocks and cut out 2D terrain.  The latter was massively clearer.

I will also say the two-table approach was greatly facilitated by a grid based system (I know that will make Jon happy  ).

[Jon Freitag]

I will also say the two-table approach was greatly facilitated by a grid-based system (I know that will make Jon happy  ).

Perhaps I am too predictable...

Both open table and gridded tables have their place and adherents.  I find that playing on a gridded table makes so many tasks and decisions easier especially when playing remotely.

[Imperial Dave]

I love grids!!!

[Erpingham]

I love grids!!!

Really?  Who'd have thought it 

[Imperial Dave]

Er....um

Busted

 

[Chris]

Cheers Gents,

Thanks for taking the time to read and weigh in. Much appreciated.

Specifically, very kind as well as humbling to read the compliments offered by Jon.

It appears that I have unintentionally politicized (politicised?) wargaming . . . It was not my aim. I was simply trying to "chart" or "graph" the variety of approaches to the hobby.

Chris

[Imperial Dave]

And very useful it is too