Jump to content

What if Lee had taken Little Round Top?


Recommended Posts

Well boys and girls, we've been debating gameyness for what seems like eons. As seen in many threads around here (my favorite being the Oregon Thread ;) ) gameyness is a hot topic that gets people more riled up than a night out with the Dahm Triplets (if you don't know who they are, you're hopeless anyway). We have varying opinions on what is gamey, and I being a person who prefers historically accurate force selection, am no different. I am however not here to debate the merits of flamethrower ambushes and towed guns with no trucks, but to analyze this at a higher level.

"What if Lee had taken Little Round Top?" is a question that has to be asked. The relevance is simple: If I'm playing the Confederacy in a recreation of the battle of Gettysburg, well I'm going to try to win. If I then win, that is no longer historically accurate. We seem to have described gamey as anything that deviates from historical accuracy. So if A=B and B=C then...you get the picture.

Many here seek a faithful recreation of the multitude of conflicts fought during the second world war. To that end, they have a myriad of reference books - a cherished library of first and third-hand accounts of battles, TO&E, geography, topography, and decisions that shaped the world. They've studied and discussed and argued. They've lambasted WWII movies for their woeful lack of accuracy and praised the veterans they meet while extracting every last scrap of information from them. They've relived the battles infamous and unknown over and over in their heads and now they've got a tool to recreate them: CMBO!

So they set about creating the battleground according to maps they've gathered from the 1940's. They meticulously place each and every unit - in accordance with the proper TO&E and the commanders diary. The map is perfect. The units are perfect. The weather is perfect. He's even got Magua's terrain so the look is perfect. He sets out to re-create his favorite battle in the history of warfare and...

Lee takes Little Round Top.

Those boys from Alabama marched all day long without a drop of water and then went straight across the wheatfield, over the Devil's Den, up the steep slope and did mortal battle with a bunch of stoic boys from Maine - attacking and attacking and attacking - and just when Chamberlain pulled his sword and called for Bayonets he was shot in the throat and gurgled the command into the dirt before bleeding to death.

No charge.

The line falters and retreats.

Alabama begins to roll up the flank taking Pennsylvania and New York down. At this time, a bunch of rowdy Texans reinforce the Alabamans and they drive the Union line sideways, causing them to retreat back toward Cemetary Hill, trying to find good ground to stand on. They can't retreat North as Ewell is still up there, they can't go West as the whole Reb Army's over there, they're being driven back from the South, so the move East seeking high ground, demoralized and defeated.

Well. That doesn't sit well. It seems that something gamey has certainly taken place.

Historical accuracy is great, but it is still a game. When we talk gameyness let's take into account that the reason we play isn't to redo everything that's been done, but to try our own hand at history. By necessity we have to play out an alternate history. Sometimes that alternate history invloves burning down houses before the enemy can fortify them. Sometimes it may even involve a kamikazee in a jeep sacrificing himself for his unit.

Lee didn't take Little Round Top, but I may be able to, and if that's gamey then so be it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...