Friday, November 2, 2007

Current Currents

I'm way behind in reposting stuff to my own blog ... following all the action here was too much fun! But I'll be trying to do it next week.

Meanwhile, I've also been thinking about the recent proxy game, and all the fun it generated, and trying to write a nice "how-to" note, as I honestly feel that our Empire-Elector blog is the ideal and best environment to spark these kinds of thing.
A key element is finding another person on the blog whose "country" is close enough to justify a direct confrontation, yet the gamers can't meet face to face.

Why? How? Come on! We're all running hysterical imagi-nations here ... it's like asking why Stagonian girls don't shave their lower lips too ... Or why Tipple-Bruder cavalry all ride like Mongols, squatting cross legged on their mounts ...
Then, when the potential fight is started, we can recruit volunteers to play with their toys for us ... and given the justified pride several of the other folks here (yours truly completely excepted, alas) have in their figures and their natural desire to show them off ...

Now, I was going to suggest some conflicts based on these maps:

Alas, I also noticed that they are very out of date!
I don't have the skills to upgrade them ... does anybody else ... perhaps including the brave folks who started them???

sincerely out of character:
(after all, the Hurtshog is in a very disturbed state right now! *v*)


Ike said...

So there are really two questions before the Reichstag, then.

Number One, shall we update our maps, assigning everyone, more or less their own place or at least something more conducive to potential campaigning? A sub-question would be: ought some of us work out such a map - not one which binds one and all, just something to use for campaigning amongst those of us who desire such a thing.

Number Two, shall we then continue the proxy battles? I suspect the answer to that is a resounding, Yes! Which may have a sub-question as well, being shall we in some fashion encourage proxy (and other)battles arising from our Imagi-Nations, apart from the manner in which they have arisen? Or, is the present unsystem satisfactory?

MurdocK said...

A mappe is a natural starting point...both for setting a 'place' in our collective minds AND for being a point of 'friction' which can easily lead to the aforementioned battles by proxy.

I think the UNsystem is better since we are all using different rules sets that fit our fancy.

By defining your own troops in as much detail as possible you can then permit the "proxy" controller to 'fit' those definitions into their own game.

Bluebear Jeff said...

I want to particularly salute Murdock -- who went so far as to generate flags (as best he could) for the three "combatants" involved in the last conflict.

Check out his "THE BATTLE OF OFFENBACH" post on his website:

While a few of the figures stretch the period, the overall look and battle report are wonderful.

My personal feeling is that I'm not at all sure that I want us constrained by a map.

For example, I'd like to see Arthur (or someone else) game a Stagonian attack on Tippelbruder. Why? I believe six different blog members have forces committed to the town's defense . . . and I'm not at all sure that many of them are even remotely close to the town . . . .

. . . But "so what"? We are enjoying a game here . . . and to me it doesn't matter if everything could actually work out on a map.

Others may care (there's nothing wrong with that) but I don't. I just want to let the games happen.

-- Jeff

David said...

Yes, indeed, let those beastly Stagonians come to Tippelbruder and get a bloody nose! ;-)

I rather imagine the worlds of the imagi-nations would fit more into a 3D mind map than a 2D real map. So I must agree with Jeff on that...

Once I get my paper armies done (some way off, sadly) I'd very much like to have a go at proxy battles too.


MurdocK said...

Such is the reason why I am calling for a mappe rather than a MAP.

I see the mappe as a starting place, for many just wildly willy-nilly moving about places is not easily done.

I can envision Tipplebruder as ANYWHERE from the Rhine to the Volga from the White Sea to the Mediterranean, but others may not; therefore it can cause confusion.

Thus we are left with such confusions standing in the way of things.

Let us at least start with the mappe...then allow for such 'fuzziness' to enter into the mixture?

tidders said...

I have altered the bubble map once already on 'Whos-Who and Whats-What'. I'm willing to try and squeeze extra countries in if possible.

-- Allan
(on behalf of brother James)

Bluebear Jeff said...

Let us remind people that there is a link to the "Who's Who" site among the "Emperor vs Elector" LINKS. But it is also here:

-- Jeff

PS, Please send updates to Brother James.

abdul666 said...

For me, I'm not sure a MAP would become problematic. 'Our' map(pe) already generated interesting, enlightening and fruitful exchanges (e.g. ), and Murdock's efforts are efficient, pleasant and to be lauded.

There is still room for additional countries (e.g. both Batrachia and, in time, St Maurice, on 'France'). Players meeting regularly already have their countries suitably positioned for their constant mutual aggressions.

As for 'battles by proxies' with multiples contingents, some for very distant countries (e.g. the defense of Tippelbruder by forces of 'six different blog members <> many of them are not even remotely close to the town' as Jeff reminds us), well, troops are allowed free trespassing through friendly, and even neutral, countries; and otherwise they cross nonetheless. I'm not alluding only to a single eye-patched white-clad hussar, nor to a few dragoons in orange uniform: those Gallian mercenaries in Stagonian service at Offenbach, the Dutch mercenaries that entered Hesse-Fedora, came there somehow without difficulties, even almoste being noticed. So no real problem here, imho.

And a map, even imperfect and 'distorted', is an enoyable support to 'see' 'our' Europe, to 'feel' that we all 'belong' here.

Cheers to all,

PS. for Arthur: what about your duplication «Frankszonia + / ≠ Frankfurter»: "Guess I ought to revive that little counter world for my own fun ... but it would have to be distinguishable from our EvE setting ..." I commented upon, then?

2°) I’d enjoy more details about the uniforms of the ‘Black Skirts’, actually of any Frankzonian / Frankfurter unit – perhaps could the noted artiste Dame Edith, with the help of some ‘macro’ lens, record the apperance of your soldiers?

Ike said...

It was not my intention to propose something in a map-with-rules system to replace the present UNsystem (thank you, murdock, for a wonderful word!). Let me briefly outline what I suggest as a supplement to the present UNsystem.

Let the battles be conducted as they are at present, including proxies, and all, with whatever rules suit. Let the campaigns likewise be conducted with whatever rules suit, including this wonderful EvE blog for the narratives, etc.

Let us have several "map instances" of Europe, based upon which rulers of what Imagi-Nations live within "gaming proximity" to one another. For instance, there are several of us here in Texas, USA. So I would propose that we "map" our Imagi-Nations sharing a single mappe of Europe. We can - if we want; if we don't want, we dont - conduct campaign movements etc leading to tabletop battles on that mappe which we can fight out between ourselves or we can farm those battles out via the proxy method that is working so well. Negotiations, threats, embassies, plots, etc would be posted on EvE as now. Difference? If we want to - for those of us who want to - we can have a campaign map useful to ourselves, our subgroup.

Now how can these mappes fit together? Each mappe has borders and at those borders we have - by nature or by design - only a handful of terrain choke points by way of which we can go from the map of "Europe-3" (Texas mob) to the map of "Europe-2" (UK mob). That's how we can improve the factors which murdock was addressing and to which others have alluded.

Required? Not a bit. New rules? Nope. But it gives us another mechanism by which to have fun. My tuppence, thruppence, ha'penny. *smile*

Frankfurter said...

First of all, the wife loves to make pictures of battles .... I haven't been able to talk her into doing a "pass in review" yet (sigh).
The "Black Skirts" are "45 Highlanders with black kilts ...

Now I too endorse the "unsystem" entirely!
Indeed, I'd like to point out that in such an imaginary universe, it's quite probable that several "nations" would seem to share the identical space on a mappe!!!
We could say that this arises due to dimensional distortions caused by social tensions and population density, or mark it up to the ludicrous assemblage of scattered bits that most "nations" of the period were anyway!

And then, if the players want, they could have big battles over who owns which farm, woods, village, mine, etc ...

Bluebear Jeff said...


I hope that you notice that the Tippelbruder battle will have a battalion of Highlander's for your bride's favorites.

But, since it is a different band of Stagonians, your cavalry won't be making an appearance.

-- Jeff

Frankfurter said...

Ah yes, I did catch that last night.
Commented on it then or this morning.

Man, between Koenig's Krieg, SYW, Old School Wargamers, SocDaisy, and these blogs, I'm having a world of fun!

I'd missed the interaction among real wargamers an awful lot when I returned to our homestead ... and constantly trying to create new scenarios for solo play can be difficult and sterile when one is an invalid.

For the first time in years, I actually have more miniature wargaming projects in hand than I can handle and at least 40% of everything is being generated in response to somebody else's imagi-nation!

As I've said elsewhere, it's been a great therapy for both the wife (who suffers more than I do, alas) and myself!

And yes, we do have lives outside of these games still! LOL

Crunching on ....