Home Forums Horse and Musket General Horse and Musket Why is there an 18th century board?

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 25 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #6663
    Avatar photoPijlie
    Participant

    I know the Horse and Musket era lasted longer than the 18th century but why have a hundred years as a sub board? The subjects seem to spread evenly (and rather randomly) between the 18th century board and the general board. Isn’t it better to combine them?

    http://pijlieblog.blogspot.nl

    #6664
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    More boards. Lo…

     

    er, hang on

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #6678
    Avatar photoCerdic
    Participant

    I believe it is all about the hats……

    #6682
    Avatar photoPatrice
    Participant

    The 18th century board was a request from some members and is already very busy.

    But things a still a bit confusing; there is a “Renaissance” board – which in its broader sense seems to include the ECW etc – so as there is a 18th century board, a Napoleonic board, and an ACW board, it means that the “General horse and musket” board only includes the late 17th century and 1815-c.1900 except the ACW…

    http://www.argad-bzh.fr/argad/en.html
    https://www.anargader.net/

    #6708
    Avatar photoPijlie
    Participant

    Well, less is more, I always say.

    http://pijlieblog.blogspot.nl

    #6721
    Avatar photoNick the Lemming
    Participant

    The 18th century board was a request from some members and is already very busy. But things a still a bit confusing; there is a “Renaissance” board – which in its broader sense seems to include the ECW etc – so as there is a 18th century board, a Napoleonic board, and an ACW board, it means that the “General horse and musket” board only includes the late 17th century and 1815-c.1900 except the ACW…

     

    The general board also covers topics relating to all of the subperiods.

    #6725
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    The 18th century board was a request from some members and is already very busy. But things a still a bit confusing; there is a “Renaissance” board – which in its broader sense seems to include the ECW etc – so as there is a 18th century board, a Napoleonic board, and an ACW board, it means that the “General horse and musket” board only includes the late 17th century and 1815-c.1900 except the ACW…

     

    The 17th century isn’t generally considered ‘horse and musket’ is it ? More ‘pike and shot’.

     

    Or if you want to be precious ‘ye pike & shotte’

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #6735
    Avatar photogrizzlymc
    Participant

    So we could break H&M into:

     

    Ye pikke and shotte

    Ye Tricorne Hatte

    Ye Shako and bicorne Hatte

    Thes here kepis

    Ye pointie hatte

    #6737
    Avatar photoBilly Fish
    Participant

    Why not just have three boards: Land warfare; naval warfare; air warfare?

    #6746
    Avatar photogrizzlymc
    Participant

    Because although I have a passion for land warfare from 1780-1980, I find pointy sticks and ultra moderns boring and incomprehensible, respectively.

     

    Others may find lining up muskets and shooting each other boring, or the “empty battlefield” (a concept not adhered to by all WWII rules) lacking in majesty and spectacle.

    #6748
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    Why not just have three boards: Land warfare; naval warfare; air warfare?

     

    Why not just have two?

     

    Wargaming

    and

    Everything Else

     

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #6752
    Avatar photoHenry Hyde
    Participant

    Is there anything else?

    Editor, Battlegames
    http://battlegames.co.uk
    Battlegames on Patreon
    https://www.patreon.com/battlegames
    Author, The Wargaming Compendium
    http://amzn.to/leWoNO

    #6754
    Avatar photogrizzlymc
    Participant

    Money, sex, power, booze.

     

    Of course wargaming is not incompatible with one of these and can give delusions of another, but it tends to be antithetical to a third.

    #6760
    Avatar photoBilly Fish
    Participant

    I like your reductionism, Connard. But why not just one board, which, in fact, would mean No board?

    #6766
    Avatar photowillz
    Participant

    Just enjoy posting, all the boards are interesting I like some more that others but I look in most over the week.

    Post and be happy.

    #6770
    Avatar photoPatrice
    Participant

    The 17th century isn’t generally considered ‘horse and musket’ is it ? More ‘pike and shot’. Or if you want to be precious ‘ye pike & shotte’

    Although it’s not called “Pike and shot”, but “Renaissance”.

    (but then I’m biassed, as the strict or broad sense can depend of the context – in English, “Renaissance” seems to include the ECW; in French it would only mean the early 16th century).

    http://www.argad-bzh.fr/argad/en.html
    https://www.anargader.net/

    #6795
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Not Connard Sage wrote:</div>
    The 17th century isn’t generally considered ‘horse and musket’ is it ? More ‘pike and shot’. Or if you want to be precious ‘ye pike & shotte’

    Although it’s not called “Pike and shot”, but “Renaissance”. (but then I’m biassed, as the strict or broad sense can depend of the context – in English, “Renaissance” seems to include the ECW; in French it would only mean the early 16th century).

     

    Mais oui Patrice. Let’s not start further sub-divisions of the divisions though, least it encourager les autres

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #6800
    Avatar photogrizzlymc
    Participant

    Don;t you have to shoot an admiral do do that?

    #6875
    Avatar photoPijlie
    Participant

    No shooting except on the playing table! And to be clear: I advocated one LESS board, not one more.

    http://pijlieblog.blogspot.nl

    #6908
    Avatar photoGeneral Slade
    Participant

    I’m in favour of one fewer; I don’t approve of one less (or one more for that matter).

    #6909
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    Don;t you have to shoot an admiral do do that?

     

    Bingo!

     

    Or rather, Byng-o!

     

    …I’ll get me coat

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #6936
    Avatar photogrizzlymc
    Participant

    #7015
    Avatar photoCerdic
    Participant

    I think that joke could be the wargamers’ equivalent of the Masons’ handshake……

    #7021
    Avatar photogrizzlymc
    Participant

    I have used the phrase “encourager les autres” most of my life.  Only around h&m wargamers does it get recognition.  I would suggest that it is unlikely to raise peaks of laughter in a he shop.

    #8524
    Avatar photoAnonymous
    Inactive

    Why go down this (more or less divisive) route of “discussion” – it brings up memories of the insipid and fruitless burst of self-righteousness found on some forums and never ends well. Post where you like and read what you like, don’t let others dictate (even if it is disguised as a question) the form of the forum or your enjoyment.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 25 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.