1:1 land wargame: position of the figure plotted within one square metre or so (usually).
That seems quite small. That would mean a ground scale of 1″ = 1m ? I guess I don’t understand the amount of space you feel a figure occupies on the tabletop. Regardless, my issue is with the amount/type of movement represented in a game, which (I think?) you addressed with:
So, to my mind, it looks like in the land wargame that the game emphasizes accuracy of position rather than stance (which makes sense – humans can change stance very quickly compared to position); whereas in the aircraft game the design emphasizes “stance” (which makes sense – aircraft change position very quickly relative to their attitude).
Agreed. The stance of the land fighter is not shown/controlled but that of the air fighter is. My exploration asks ‘why?’ The stance of each can (and is) altered constantly in response to both offensive and defensive objectives within the range (both time and space) of combat.
A land fighter can quickly dodge a punch aimed at his head, as can an air fighter dodge a maneuver (equally quickly relative to the attack) intended to bring the opponent’s guns to bear – but it is only the latter move that gets detailed/controlled/displayed in a game setting. I’m just wondering if -since it doesn’t seem to be necessary to include such detail in land games- it is possible to exclude it in air games.
I’m not trying to assert that hand-to-hand and aircombat are exactly the same, only that they share enough characteristics to allow similar gaming mechanisms to represent them.
All this is fine, until you add in a third or more aircraft – unfortunately then, position becomes nearly as important as it does in the ground game.
I’m not sure I understand this. I think an extra combatant messes up an air game no more than it would in a land one? Dunno.
- This reply was modified 4 years, 6 months ago by Don Glewwe.