Conan! What is Best in Gaming?
By Michael Rafferty
One time I almost played Harpoon.
I was at Fall-In 2021 (which was also Historicon) where I met a lot of great guys, including Mitch Reed who recruited me to write. It was a great time and unlike everyone else, I kind of liked the casino. Back in 2019 I won a couple hundred dollars betting on the Browns, one of the few times the Browns have ever won anything for me so I have fond memories there.
Rambling aside, I saw there was a Harpoon game scheduled and it was run by the creator, Larry Bond. What joy! I’ve been wanting to try Harpoon for awhile since I’ve wanted a good set of rules for modern naval combat. Naval wargames may be my favorite type of historical wargame and I wanted something when I could launch missiles at Soviet ships. This was perfect.
The game started around 5pm. When my friend and I entered the room, we dropped the average age several decades. No worries there, historical gaming is an older crowd anyways and a lot of these guys probably have great stories. My first note of concern was the map. It was a very large map, probably 6” by 6” if not larger. The map was blue with grids and had two small American ships.
The scenario was two American Littoral Combat Ships (not the weird tri-hulled version as several people mocked) being attacked by three to five Fast Attack Craft with anti-ship missiles. In theory, this was the exact attack the Littoral Combat Ship was meant to defeat.
They were running this game to test this.
Harpoon has been used as a learning tool by the Navy, so this was interesting. The fact that we had a giant board and a couple of small models was a bit concerning. Then, the discussions about helicopter status started. After 20 minutes where they had finally figured out the optimum fuel load for the Seahawks and moved on to emissions status. We were around 35-40 minutes into the game time and hadn’t started turn one. In fact, turn one seemed a distant prospect. I thought about it for a moment, looked around, and got up and left.
As it was, Harpoon was not the right game for me. I knew it was a simulation game, but I didn’t realize what that meant until I experienced it myself.
Someday, they will get to be used
If I’m going to track all the minutiae of combat, I’d rather play a computer game where I can automate some of that. I play Hearts of Iron IV, I like staring at maps and spreadsheets. With wargaming, and specifically historical wargaming, I’ve always thought that there was a spectrum for games.
This ranged from Gamey (something focused on the rules and play over historical accuracy) to Simulation (focused on accurate representation over play). A game like Harpoon is far down the simulations side, whereas something like 40k or Blood and Plunder would be more on the gamey side.
This is no judgment on these games, I think it’s important to understand where a game falls on the spectrum so you can manage your expectations. That’s what I didn’t do and I had a bad time.
This brings me to the main point of this article: managing expectations. When I went into Harpoon, I expected something accessible. It really wasn’t and I wasn’t interested in trying to learn its intricacies.
At the same time, when I go to play Team Yankee, Flames of War, or Victory at Sea I’m not expecting a historical simulation. I know there were precious few battleship engagements in World War II and the carrier rendered them all but obsolete, but man are battleship encounters fun to play in Victory at Sea.
I sacrifice some realism for fun. I also sacrifice some realism to give players a fighting chance. Maybe you give one side a few extra ships, or come up with a crazy scenario for the British to help the Japanese in the Pacific so their combined battleline has a chance against the American one.
My goal is to have an enjoyable wargaming experience with my friends. I want it to be informed by history and have those discussions with my friends, but I don’t want to sacrifice fun for it. In this, I prefer games that are more gamey than simulations.
The Czech have captured Santa Claus for the Warsaw Pact, a historical outcome
These are my preferences, yours may vary.
Some people enjoy a six-hour game where you get to control one ship down to every little detail. Some people want to move tank regiments around at 15mm. This is all fine. If you’re having fun, you’re doing it right.
When people are expecting more from a game that doesn’t provide it, they get upset and it ruins their and everyone else’s fun. Specifically, I’m thinking of Team Yankee and Flames of War. These are historically skinned games, more on the gamey side versus the simulation side. They’re also meant to be a points-balanced tournament game, so allowances are made for game balance’s sake.
This means that not everything will behave in a historical manner. Team Yankee is a great example of this. Looking at a Dutch TO&E, there is very little Anti-Air. The air defense is combined at the corps level and would be parsed out as needed. The 1st Netherlands Corps had 27 PRTL 35mm anti-aircraft guns for the entire corps.
How many would be expected in a standard Team Yankee game? Since they’re very good, apparently most of them. Most Dutch lists have at least six, if not more. This is fine! They’re a great unit and people want to bring them.
Is it realistic? No. Is it gamey? Sure, but that’s what the game is. Gun anti-aircraft is really good and it pays to maximize it in your list. I brought VADS and LAV-AD in my last armored cavalry list and they tore things up. I was also playing in a tournament and was bringing a list to be good, not necessarily be historically accurate.
In this “realistic scenario,” the Soviets tried to capture a Norwegian Taco Bell
What does this all mean? What is the point of these ramblings? Start managing your expectations for games.
If you expect thoroughly historically research lists, rules, and game play, then maybe Team Yankee isn’t for you.
I’ve proposed that Soviets should have to roll for sobriety at the start of the game but apparently that would be unfair for them. Realistic? Probably, alcoholism was notorious in the Pact formations. They were also a fully conscript army with little to no professional soldier class. If anything, most of their ratings should be lower than they are.
However, this would be poor from a gameplay perspective.
Keep these ideas in mind when you pick up a game. If you want to tweak a game, go for it. Before version two came out, I had modified all the ships from Victory at Sea to be more how I thought they would behave in reality This worked for me, but I also explained what I did before running any games to get the buy-in of my players. If you want to modify a game, do it! However, it may impact your ability to play pickup games or tournaments.
Join me for part two: why you need to balance your event games. I get it may be historically accurate, but do you really want one side to get totally wrecked in exchange for the accuracy of your scenarios?
Also if anyone has any suggestions for modern naval rules that don’t require an Academy tour, let me know.