Reply To: Inaccessibility of Historical Wargaming

[limburger 21708xp 2]

@elessar2590  : I think that is an example of someone with a genuine interest in a historical event/battle.
At that point you’ve already ‘converted’ him and the community is friendly enough that he dared to ask such questions.

However I’ve seen plenty of arguments on forums where anyone daring to ask questions about which rules/game to use would result in a holy flame war (never ask which console is ‘the best’ in any forum … ). As a result I’m glad that there are communties out there (and BoW certainly is one of them) where everyone is made to feel at home and where such flamewars simply don’t happen.

I’m pretty sure more than a few people had to take a deep breath when @warzan did his ‘Nachtwulfen’ when they first started with Flames of War : for the win (excellent series btw).

As such I see two possible ways one can become a historical gamer :

1. Traditional method  : start with an interest in history and get into gaming as a way of experiencing the event.
   This is something most historical gaming communities have lots of experience with and probably are at their most friendly.
2. The gamer first / history as fluff / ‘gaming in the gaps’ approach …
   This is the one that can result in hostile responses in communities that don’t take kindly to ‘stupid’ questions.
   This is also the target demographic that would feel most at home with ‘starter sets’ and all the kind of stuff that non historical wargames take for granted these days.

I’m guessing that historical groups tend to focus on battle/theme over rule set, so they don’t have this tendency to start flamewars as other more hobbies do where brand loyalty is an actual thing ?