Reply To: Inaccessibility of Historical Wargaming

[piersParticipant 25489xp 4]

Warhammer Historical would not have dominated any market – even with their own miniatures. A fundamental make up within traditional historical wargamers – They tend to be averse to rules and figure packages in the main back when GW was making historical rules. Plus the whole ethos of Warhammer Historical wasn’t to ‘take over’… it was because so many of the GW designers played historical games that they wanted that involvement… it wasn’t about selling figures, It was, if anything, more a series of vanity projects that were also very good games in the main. The success of FoW and Bolt Action comes from drawing in Sci-Fi/Fantasy gamers with a familiar format more than converting existing Historical gamers to their system. The nearest GW came to any sort of dominance was with Warhammer Ancients and that still never surpassed DBA or DBM.

As for historicals slowly growing… Its been growing for 70+ years. Maybe you mean that’s its growing with those who play other generes, where as previously there was little crossover? Its always been growing to me.

In all my time I’ve never seen a historical re-fight played directly as per its historical counterpart nor have I seen these mythical meltdowns of historical players. I’ve not witnessed these telling off of players for having stuff painted wrong or hissy fits over gamers playing not like their historical counter-part. I must have led a lucky existence in the historical world for the last 30 odd years… Im sure these people do exist, just they may not be as widespread as the tales make out… I also think the idea that historical wargamers spend all their time playing Waterloo while wearing a bicorne is another myth. In all my time gaming, I can count the actual number of historical refights I’ve played on one hand. But again its how you define and term such a thing. I play a lot of scenarios based on actual WW2 engagements for example… But I don’t see these as strict historical replays. They are always a construct of our chosen scale and system… and we are in essence just taking a setting for our scenario. Very few wargames will ever be actual refights of a battle… mainly as its simply very hard to do and to manage. Both 40k and WFB drew heavily on history as their guide in their fluff. Historical games do the same.

Im not even sure what replaying history is… Surely any historical game is replaying history. If you divert from that, and play something that isn’t historical… then by definition you are no longer playing historically?

I don’t see playing WW2 Japanese against Finns as historical. Because its not. Same as I don’t see fighting Cold War battles in West Germany as historical. They are both fantasy constructs using historical based forces. Which is fine. Just not to everyones taste. These ahistorical encounters are of various degrees of separation from historical gaming, and some may not see one as ahistorical, while they might another… again it all goes back to that sticky issue of personal interest and viewpoint. For example, I’d happily play a Cold War battle, but have no interest in fighting Japanese versus Finns on a WW2 battlefield.

I think @horus500 is right in that really, their is little difference between the genres. Its mainly down to personal interest plus perhaps missed placed prejudice and stereotyped myths that are the key elements, coupled with a lack of exposure or contact with the other genre that’s the key. I’ve sat on both sides of the fence since 1984 and in all honesty the player types on both sides are largely the same. In most cases people have just wanted to play games and have fun. The few negative types I have encountered have been equally split from both sides and it was their personality, not their gaming genre, that was the problem.

To me, the people you play with, regardless of the game, are the key factor. I don’t care what I play with my gaming group. Its spending time with my friends and having fun that’s key and the escapism and enjoyment that brings.

 

Anyway… I think that’s enough of my rambling on this thread. Would be nice if in time, a more positive view of historical gaming and its players could emerge. Surely its in the interest of all wargaming to put aside such preconceived notions of a section of the hobby and perhaps try to understand and appreciate what it might offer. For a web site such as BoW, surely being proactive and promoting of historical gaming will only open them up to even more followers as there is a huge market of historical gamers who lack any portal or ‘home’ online. A welcoming and informative historical forum could be a boon to BoW, both from a point of view of the people involved and perhaps in financial return.