Is bigger always better?

I was once told by another wargamer that he thought that only battles fought with at least a thousand figures per side were 'proper' wargames. His basic premise was that unless there were loads of figures on a huge tabletop that was covered in 'realistic' scenery, your enjoyment of the experience was considerably reduced.

I am sure that there are a lot of wargamer out there who would agree with these sentiments ... but I am not one of them. In fact, over the years I seem to have found that I am gravitating towards fielding fewer figures on a tabletop that is limited by the size of my toy/wargames room. (My table can be extended to cover an area of 6' x 4' [180cm x 120cm] but is usually set up to be 4' x 3' [120cm x 90cm].)

Yesterday's battle is a case in point. A total of sixty three figures were fielded on the tabletop, alongside four cannon, a machine gun, two gunboats, two passenger steamers, and three sailing craft. The terrain fitted comfortably onto my 4' x 3' tabletop and was put together from Hexon II terrain hexed tiles, some Hexon II mountains, a Hexon II fortification, three wooden native huts (from a toy Safari set), a resin quay bought in a souvenir shop in Croatia, and a load of Sugarcraft palm trees that began life as cake decorations. The bases for the trees were made from Fimo™.

I thoroughly enjoyed fighting the battle and – judging from the comments I have received – quite a few people enjoyed reading the battle report I wrote about it.

I suppose that I could have fought the battle using more figures on a larger tabletop, and that I could have spent hours – if not days or weeks – preparing a far more detailed terrain over which to fight ... but would I have enjoyed it more? I doubt it ... just as I doubt that I would ever have got round to fighting that battle if it needed all that pre-battle preparation.

It is my personal opinion that what makes for an enjoyable wargame is the story that unfolds as the battle is fought. Donald Featherstone advocated what he called 'narrative battles' in a chapter in his book WAR GAME CAMPAIGNS, and this is what I try to achieve in my games. The scenario should make sense and should explain why the battle will take place. It should also lay down the constraints under which the protagonists are going to have to fight. Having set the scene, the battle then unfolds in an understandable context ... and it is here that I think a major part of the enjoyment comes for me. I feel as if I am creating history, even if it is a fictional version of history ... and that is not dependent upon huge model armies and super-realistic terrain; it is dependent upon my imagination.