Historical accuracy in wargames

[kemmo]

Think he was referring to Sir John Seeley,wrote sometime in the 1800's about how it was Englands destiny to 'civilize' the world.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: kemmo

Think he was referring to Sir John Seeley,wrote sometime in the 1800's about how it was Englands destiny to 'civilize' the world.

warspite1

Okay thanks.

[kemmo]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: kemmo

Think he was referring to Sir John Seeley,wrote sometime in the 1800's about how it was Englands destiny to 'civilize' the world.

warspite1

Okay thanks.

You're welcome

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: kemmo

It also helped having the most advanced guns of the time,that along with better training enabled Royal Navy ships to fire nearly twice as fast as other crews,the effect on moral meant Royal Navy crews went into action expecting to win.

warspite1

Interesting stats from the first 10 years of the revolutionary wars 1793-1802. Losses to enemy action in that period saw the Royal Navy lose 56 ships. In that period the French lost 378, the Spanish 76, the Dutch 97 and the Danish 15; thus the RN inflicted 10 losses on her enemies for every one suffered.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Revisionist history. The colonists didn't arrive in the New World and set to slaughtering the Indians. Rather, they arrived and were slaughtered. It was somewhat like gouging out an amphibious lodgment in WWII.

The first organized war was Powhattan's War in 1619 (that's before Plymouth Rock, by the way). It was initiated with a sneak attack that killed 1/3 of the Jamestown settlement's population (men, women, and children). (To put that in perspective, it would be like 9/11 killing 100 million people.) The colonists didn't bring genocide to American - they learned it from the Indians. The Indians were just fine with it - it was SOP for them. They just wish it had turned out the other way.

I am confused why you picked the war of 1619. Why not the First Anglo-Powhatan War of 1610? And why begin with an organized war? Before that there had been combat with the Indians.

I also wonder why you compare it to an amphibious lodgement? Is it because you see the colonists as an invasion force?

I've never heard of the First Anglo-Powhattan War of 1610. Nor do any of my references mention it. So, I doubt it was much of a war. I you wanted to, you could even go back to the Roanoke colony - the one that vanished forever in 1580. Regardless, Powhattan's War (which was a real war with all the trimmings) illustrates what the colonists faced (it was actually 1622, not 1619 - my bad). Colonizing was like an amphibious landing in that the first waves were slaughtered or otherwise died and it took multiple waves of reinforcements to finally establish a lodgment.

Thank you for the explanation. [:)]

[SLAAKMAN]

If you want to see historical accuracy then come to this topic and review the sinister history of.....(drumroll)...the Illuminati!!!!
[:'(]
tm.asp?m=2959208&mpage=31&key=

[pmelheck1]

Not to high jack this thread but on historical accuracy I look to have the tools that the original leader had at his disposal along with any units arriving at the time they did in the past. What happens during the battle to said units should be due to how well or poorly i use them. If a unit performed exceptionally well is should reflect in unit stats some how. If the unit did poorly it should also reflect. A game can only be historically accurate until you run the first turn. after that the only historical accuracy should only be times of reinforcements.

Any alteration of OOB or map would be a what if and are valid games as games just not historically accurate games.

[Anguille]

An interesting video on Germany's loss of WW2


http://youtu.be/5agLW7fTzBc

[wodin]

A fantastic program on TV a few months ago about the British Empire..and for a change was all about the good influences it had on the countries and how many of these countries have benefited and where left in a far better condition than when the British first went there.

Not everything is black and white..infact very few things are.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: wodin

A fantastic program on TV a few months ago about the British Empire..and for a change was all about the good influences it had on the countries and how many of these countries have benefited and where left in a far better condition than when the British first went there.

Not everything is black and white..infact very few things are.

warspite1

Was that How Britain made the modern world? Excellent series [&o]

[altipueri]

I like games where I can set the difficulty so I have about 50% chance of winning.

As I've got older, and older, I see luck - both good and bad - having an ever greater role in life.

For instance - re start of WW1 - assassination of Franz Ferdinand. If his chauffeur hadn't made a wrong turn on leaving the hospital where he was visiting the victims of an earlier failed assassination attempt he wouldn't have driven past the man who did shoot him.