*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 06:13:23 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 1686613
  • Total Topics: 118113
  • Online Today: 757
  • Online Ever: 2235
  • (October 29, 2023, 12:32:45 AM)
Users Online

Recent

Author Topic: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate  (Read 4274 times)

Offline Kommando_J

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1217
The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« on: November 27, 2018, 01:15:08 PM »
Got a notification in this morning that Empress had released some new freikorp minis...which as usual being by Paul Hicks were top notch. Looking at the packs it said in the command pack that the two officers were based off historical figures (Franz Ritter von Epp and Ernst Roehm) while lovely miniatures I couldn't help but feel a slight twinge of disappointment that the minis weren't more 'generic' as I prefer to envision my own characters rather than be constrained by historical personalities.

...All of this got me thinking on the subject of ''your dudes'' and I was wondering how everyone else felt? Do you prefer historical battles with ''real life'' combatants or fictional characters and a looser feel?

Below the pic for reference.





Offline Daeothar

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • Galactic Brain
  • *
  • Posts: 5746
  • D1-Games: a DWAN Corporate initiative
    • 1999legacy.com
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2018, 01:59:14 PM »
Overall, I prefer to put 'my own dudes' in my lists, envisaging my battles as part of the larger historical narrative, where untold nameless men played their role. mine are just some of those nameless dudes.

Should I put historical characters in a list, it eventually boils down to the same, since whatever battle we're playing, is now alternative history: I've never played a single historical scenario that turned out exactly like the real deal; more often than not, they ended up radically different!

I'm not role playing a famous general after all; I make my own decisions on the battlefield, conditions turn out different than they were back then, because we're randomizing everything, so it remains a game instead of a blow by blow recap of the original conflict.

So whatever historical characters we put into our lists, they will extremely likely not act like their real life counterparts, because of dice rolls, card draws and being moved around by a different general (with different training, insights, experience, mindset etc, etc).

I don't mind historical characters in my lists or those of my opponent, but I never expect them to actually reenact their historical role...
Miniatures you say? Well I too, like to live dangerously...
Find a Way, or make one!

Offline robh

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 3380
  • Spanish offworld colonies
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2018, 02:34:47 PM »
If you are actually playing a "historical" battle you not only need the actual historic characters but the historical tactics and overriding national characteristics too.

I recently saw an "Agincourt" refight where the French player dismounted most of his noble cavalry and advanced behind a screen of infantry and crossbowmen.  When asked about this the player said something to the effect of ".....well I can't win if we play it properly".

I would dispute that this game was "Agincourt" despite having the correctly named and painted characters.  It takes more than that to make a game "historic". Unless you are looking to closely recreate a very specific event in history having the right names on the army lists is irrelevant.

Offline Codsticker

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • *
  • Posts: 3276
    • Kodsticklerburg: A Mordheim project
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #3 on: November 27, 2018, 03:52:36 PM »
I like a mix; I have no problem playing with actual personalities but also enjoy the nameless leadewrs that played important roles on the field.

robh: that stuff doesn't bug me so much.  To some degree, what is the point of re-fighting a battle if you are going to do everything exactly the same as the Real Life commander?

Offline jon_1066

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 909
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #4 on: November 27, 2018, 03:57:39 PM »
If you are actually playing a "historical" battle you not only need the actual historic characters but the historical tactics and overriding national characteristics too.

I recently saw an "Agincourt" refight where the French player dismounted most of his noble cavalry and advanced behind a screen of infantry and crossbowmen.  When asked about this the player said something to the effect of ".....well I can't win if we play it properly".

I would dispute that this game was "Agincourt" despite having the correctly named and painted characters.  It takes more than that to make a game "historic". Unless you are looking to closely recreate a very specific event in history having the right names on the army lists is irrelevant.

An interesting scenario could be bought about by having the bulk of your nobles leave in disgust or even have some go over to the other side for such a slight.  Can you now defeat the English with the few lords you have left and your Genoese crossbowmen?

Re the dudes - It really depends on the period and battle.   WW2 tactical combat doesn't matter either way, recreating Agincourt without Henry V, probably not.

Offline carlos marighela

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 10762
  • Flamenguista até morrer.
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #5 on: November 27, 2018, 07:30:03 PM »
I must admit, I’m in two minds about the inclusion of Roehm. A thoroughly unpleasant man who went on to head Hitler’s SA.

Still, as the avatar for barely repressed homosexuality amongst nazis he would produce interesting talking points in any game and would cause a degree of discomfort for those who really enjoy playing the Freikorps.

Excellent sculpts, as ever. Roehm is well portrayed but then the facial scars make it an easier than usual figure to spot.
Em dezembro de '81
Botou os ingleses na roda
3 a 0 no Liverpool
Ficou marcado na história
E no Rio não tem outro igual
Só o Flamengo é campeão mundial
E agora seu povo
Pede o mundo de novo

Offline Arlequín

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 6218
  • Culpame de la Bossa Nova...
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #6 on: November 27, 2018, 07:33:12 PM »
Overall, I prefer to put 'my own dudes' in my lists, envisaging my battles as part of the larger historical narrative, where untold nameless men played their role. mine are just some of those nameless dudes.

That's my feelings in a nutshell.

Offline Ultravanillasmurf

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 9305
    • Ultravanillasmurf
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2018, 09:12:20 AM »
I have to agree with Carlos about real life characters.

On the other hand, if they do not look like Carmine Russo, I would just use them as generic officers/objectives/targets.

Online Charlie_

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1514
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #8 on: November 28, 2018, 05:42:56 PM »
Oh yes, I definitely prefer having my own anonymous characters rather than real historical figures.
In a medieval context, I'm not interested in playing out the famous big battles like Agincourt, and painting up all the heraldry for Henry V and all the other nobles who were there.... Then what do you do with them? Refight Agincourt? And then.... refight it again?
Instead I like to find a specific war that makes for a great 'sandbox' setting, allowing for all sorts of smaller scale conflicts - skirmishes, sieges, raids, ambushes, small battles, etc.... and I design my own heraldry for commanders, doing enough of them so that I can switch them around and not have the same match-ups for every game.

Offline has.been

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 8235
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #9 on: November 28, 2018, 06:23:57 PM »
I have purchased the 'Oliver & Hardy' mortar from Empress. As I want a second
mortar I am preparing some head swaps. No big problem & I love the originals.
That's another fine mess you've gotten me into!

Offline Arlequín

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 6218
  • Culpame de la Bossa Nova...
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #10 on: November 28, 2018, 07:12:32 PM »
Then what do you do with them? Refight Agincourt? And then.... refight it again?

You can't. Not only do we as individuals have 600 years of military innovation stored mentally, but every medieval historian, armchair general and his dog Spot, have dissected the battle in print too. Oddly the French usually win the re-fights.

Offline Battle Brush Sigur

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1537
  • Brush-for-Hire
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #11 on: November 29, 2018, 04:37:35 PM »
You can't. Not only do we as individuals have 600 years of military innovation stored mentally, but every medieval historian, armchair general and his dog Spot, have dissected the battle in print too. Oddly the French usually win the re-fights.

...because Longbows are totally underpowered in the current meta, I'm telling you! I have posted a blogpost in which I explain in excruciating detail and based on the findings of many youtube videos why they should do 5 points of damage rather than 3!!!  ;)


That's an interesting question. In games in which personalities and their little stories make for much of the enjoyment of the game (to me), like Chain of Command, and similarly granular games, I like to have my own characters.

In larger scale battles I think we're detached enough that we don't really have a direct relationship with the characters. Of course you take the role of General Lee or Napoleon or something like that, but usually their direct well-being isn't in danger with these. Apart from that these figures usually have so much myth around them anyway that they are more 'personalities' than 'persons'. On the other hand, with games featuring much less distance between the player and the guys on the ground things like some NCO sitting in the trenches and getting wounded do feel much more personal and at that level especially I would't like having a name and a photograph attached to this miniature.

It's one of these very subjective things, and as always I think it's also a matter of historical (and possibly cultural?) distance. But with WW2 especially, or maybe anything on which we have very exact information about a person's biography, and possibly a photograph of them, things get tricky.

I've written a fair share of WW2 battle reports for our Chain of Command campaign. When writing these I ran into an interesting problem: Each of us players has a set platoon of soldiers and a Lieutenant whose role we take on more or less for the run of the campaign. Of course for narrative reasons and for presentation reasons you want to have a picture to go with this person, but I instinctively found myself opposed to the idea of using some person's photograph for that. I found it hard using photos of people for these battle reports in general. I don't view it as constricting (history rarely is. It's usually more interesting and gives more good stories than fantasy backgrounds or anything made up anyway), but rather as a matter of 'not being right' at that level. Again, on the level of proper battles - sure, I'll have Pappenheim's Corps here, and there's Holk's command over there, and all of that. Because these are well known historical characters. I think to me it's a matter of the amount of role-play involved in the game and what person we're talking about (ie if it's just some poor dude or one of the historical bigwigs who have been interpreted a billion times in literature and research).


As for Röhm - yeah, I wouldn't have that guy in a game, but that's another matter. However, nothing stops you from just renaming the figure and using it anyway of course. :)

Offline levied troop

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1451
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #12 on: November 29, 2018, 04:56:18 PM »
...All of this got me thinking on the subject of ''your dudes'' and I was wondering how everyone else felt? Do you prefer historical battles with ''real life'' combatants or fictional characters and a looser feel?

Can I have option C - both?  Why stick with one approach, I’d cheerfully alternate.

And Agincourt - why stick with the battle exactly as it was fought?  That’s one way, but a variation on it using the plan the French wanted to use (but were too disorganised to) would be interesting as would a totally different approach where the French player used any tactic to see if he could overcome the winning English tactic.

The League of Gentlemen Anti Alchemists
(We Turn Gold into Lead)

Offline FramFramson

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 10681
  • But maybe everything that dies, someday comes back
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #13 on: November 29, 2018, 08:03:12 PM »
...because Longbows are totally underpowered in the current meta, I'm telling you! I have posted a blogpost in which I explain in excruciating detail and based on the findings of many youtube videos why they should do 5 points of damage rather than 3!!!  ;)

omg Warlord plz buff.


I joined my gun with pirate swords, and sailed the seas of cyberspace.

Offline Arlequín

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 6218
  • Culpame de la Bossa Nova...
Re: The Great ''Your Dudes'' Debate
« Reply #14 on: November 29, 2018, 09:47:59 PM »
I suppose you could use part pseudonyms. I could go for a character like Tony Röhm, the jaded down to earth ex-cop turned Freikorps leader. No?