Inaccessibility of Historical Wargaming

[captainventanusParticipant 4776xp 1]

Battlefront and Warlord have been very good in my view at putting out starter sets that are accessible and manageable for someone coming into the games to build and paint (or just build :).

I know people have issues with Flames of War 4 and Bolt Action, but I don’t and think they are great games to get people who have little knowledge into the period.

In its own little way FoW has been a great way to explain some of the battlefield aspects of WW2 to to the Mrs. who has absolutely no background in military history. I wouldn’t exaggerate this too much either, but as a result when we occasionally get around to playing its good fun.

[noyjatatParticipant 16145xp 0]

Campaigns thrive in a Historical environment. With so much lore and often the results of the games needing you to delay, target specific units or any number of other objectives it will rarely come down to wiping everyone out. In some ways I think this is where it tends to fall down a little with a lot of the miniatures companies rulesets. They tend to be built around scenarios for a single run out the minis. Maybe some well thought out campaigns with linked scenarios and a sliding scale of points available in those scenarios for both sides would be a good place to start. @oriskany has done some great work using this in the past for Boot Camps and other projects. There are plenty of examples in and around the site from years gone by.

I think it needs a dedicated campaign based around an army. I have some ideas on how to do this but am interested to hear other peoples thoughts. I would also suggest that instead of limiting the units available to those that were there historically you bring logistics into the campaign and have that as part of the between game strategy. Essentially the post game rewards and experience gains.

There is likely a ruleset like this already out there and fingers crossed someone on here knows it and can point us in the right direction.

If not I could make this a pet project of mine if people are interested?

[torros 23802xp 1]

Both Blucher and Grande Armee by Sam Mustafa for Napoleonics has shirt campaign system included

[oriskany 60736xp 2]

Thanks for the mentions, @limburger and @noyjatat .

I realize I may be in the minority here, but for me some kind of campaign setting is absolutely critical and in many ways the most important part of any wargame.    Without some kind of campaign structure, and this can very very very simple, I’m honestly not really interested.  It may sound like heresy, but wargaming just isn’t THAT fun, to pour in all that work and energy into what will be a one-off scrimmage game.

That said, this campaign game can take any number of forms and can be extremely simple.  Even when I’m running one-off games for an article series, the article series itself is the “campaign” in a weird, meta-kind of way.  Put differently, I don’t usually enjoy wargaming for wargaming’s sake – it’s gotta be building into something larger.

Needless to say, I’m usually not very much fun at tournaments.  🙂

Sadly, very few tactical games have GOOD campaign systems built in.  It’s understandable why, there are just too many directions that a truly free-flowing campaign could possible go, especially once the players get through a few games.  So you usually have either a scripted series of scenarios, where the results of each game may give the winner a few extra units or options in the next game … or a simple scoring system “Play these five games, and whoever wins more games wins the campaign …” maybe with the last game counting double for climactic effect or some such (or to avoid the campaign from being decided too early).

While there’s nothing wrong with these systems, they’re very simple, a little too “on the rails” for my taste, and not really campaigns.

This video talks about a few very simple ideas (holy hell, was I too heavy in these videos … ) 🙁

There’s also the idea of a “multilevel game” where players use tactical mini wargames to play out engagements that are taking place in a larger, operational-level context:

The Four Levels Of Wargaming Part 5: Multilevel Games

This is the “full monty” was of doing a campaign game, and may the gaming gods bless anyone who’s brave enough to try.  Just please be warned that these campaigns are a LOT of work, and my experience has shown that it’s absolutely essential to have some kind of “shortcut” system for when players can’t get together, or when there just isn’t time to play out EVERY tabletop tactical game that the campaign map may be requiring at a given juncture.

 

 

[torros 23802xp 1]

I think the trick for campaigns it to shop around there are many companies producing campaign packs for no particular system. They need a bit of work sometimes in terms of bathtubbing or expanding but they are out there

[piersParticipant 25463xp 1]

Most of our Battlegroup books tend to include a campaign… either a narrative linked campaign or a map based location campaign.

[solariabsg39Participant 94xp 0]

My own viewpoint is that I’m playing games to have fun.  If I’m playing Bolt Action against a German army and they field a unit that my guys will never have encountered, unless we’re playing specifically part of a historical campaign as part of historical lists then no problem.  But I have seen someone pack up and go home rather than allow their opponent to use the “wrong” infantry.

[koraskiParticipant 1981xp 1]

Surely 40k is old enough now to be considered “Historical”…

[limburger 21534xp 0]

@piers :

There is nothing wrong with doing research … if that is your thing.
The ‘problem’ / challenge is that wargaming can cover a lot of ground (even if you’re not doing historicals!) :

• researching the subject (sons of horus/40k or 101st US Airborne/WW2 or any other unit/period … )
• building the armies in the physical domain (as either miniatures or counters for strategic level games)
• building the terrain
• creating a campaign system
• playing the game
• applying the results of that game to a campaign

Not everyone has the time or resources to spend on every level.
Not everyone the interest required to want to spend time at every level.
And every single step is optional in the grand scheme of things (although the ‘playing the game’ step is kind of critical for a gaming hobby ;)).

That’s why there is a need for shortcuts so people can skip the ‘boring’ stuff and get to the bits they like best.

And that may be why non-historical wargames can be (more successful), because they already offer those shortcuts out-of-the-box. It’s also why many systems then add background for those wanting to do reseearch (the various novels for 40k are an example of ‘history in reverse’ as they add background after the game)

I love the fact that people have done the job of doing a lot of the research already.
That doesn’t make live any easier though. I still end up buying gaming materials across multiple systems, but that’s more because I like to see what the various systems show in ‘game ready’ format.

As an example … I’ve got books that cover Market garden for Flames of War (3rd), Battlegroup and (soon) Bolt action.
I’ve yet to collect a force or play a game, because I’m ‘stuck’ at the research level already with the help of these ‘shortcuts’.

From a hobby/community perspective this is kind of ‘bad’, because I’m not helping to grow the community as I’m too busy just reading that I don’t get any actual games in …
And I kind of think that games need to have people out there actually playing instead of merely talking about background (as fun though it may be) in order to lower the barrier to entry.

[piersParticipant 25463xp 0]

@limburger but surely thats your choice? To spend time reading and Preparing?

The games dont make you have to do that… you can pick up a cooy of Bolt action and, if you have figures, play a game?

You also dont have to persue your hobby with the quest of growing the community. My hobby is mine…

Time… well time is entirely up to you what you invest in your hobby. Its a personal choice, but we all decide that, and its not really effected by the genre we choose. I have a job and a family it has to fit around.

Perhaps its not the games but the genre thats the issue. Perhaps its peoples perception and unfamiliarity with the genre thats the key. Not the access as such. Lack on familiar concepts, terms and mechanics, not too mention new manufacturers will dazzle a new recruit to any genre.

For me, I’d see something like 40k as far more inaccessible… because I have no familiarity with it really.

 

 

[piersParticipant 25463xp 1]

“But I have seen someone pack up and go home rather than allow their opponent to use the “wrong” infantry.”

 

So?

Its their hobby time. If he dont want to spend it playing against the ‘wrong’ Germans, thats his choice. Nothing wrong with that either.

If you are happy to accept using things ahistorically, then you have to accept that some may not want to do that.

Their hobby… their choice.

[elessar2590 18201xp 2]

I think this goes back to what I said early.

Screw where D Company of the 82nd Airborne was on D-Day+5. Just paint some Paras and throw some dice.

Sure once you’ve had a few games you can add the “History” into it but don’t think you have to have it all at the start.

How many people make “Accurate” Ultramarine Companies as their first 40K Army and only play games from campaigns in the Official Lore of 40K after reading half the Horus Heresy Novels? It’s about having fun.

That’s part of the reason I’m a huge fan of Sharp Practice/Muskets and Tomahawks. You can play things that did happen but didn’t if you know what I mean. Yes at one point during the French and Indian War some Indians with a Few French Regulars raided a farm in the Wilderness, we don’t need to know when/where we can just “Game in the Gaps” as our ever beloved overlord @warzan likes to do.

I agree with @piers don’t worry about “The Community” just Hobby and have fun and before long you’ll fit in where you fit in. Don’t worry about upsetting/disappointing/annoying/doing it wrong just paint minis and roll dice. Some guys like to build ultra accurate Army’s and only play games on Museum Quality tables, some people like to play Points Match games of Flames of War on gaming mats with books for hills.  Jump right in and do what works for you.

Stagger your entry, you don’t need to know it all right away. Here’s all the research you need for:

WWII: So these BAD GUYS called the GERMANS invaded a bunch of Countries so the Good Old US of A had to come over and kick their butts to save the world.

Napoleonics: So this guy called NAPOLEON was like totally running around starting all these fights so the British had to go into Spain for some reason and fight his General’s then even though they totally smashed him hardcore he came back for round two and got beat again.

American War of Independence: ‘MURICA F**K YEAH!!!

Ancients: We’re the Greeks/Romans and these other people are Savages that need Civilisation so we’re giving them the gift of Civilisation.

Apologies to the Historical Guys who just had brain aneurysms/screamed at their computers.

That’s where I started, then you slowly build on your foundation and before you know it you’re researching things for fun.

Now go paint some minis.

Now you can do more research eg. Audiobook while painting minis, a lot of podcasts or some great Youtube Channels. Then you can build on/revise your knowledge. Star with a Skirmish game like Bolt Action or Sharp Practice or Saga or any of the Osprey Games.

I think when people see the “Grognards” chatting about stuff they think that’s the norm when it’s not, most of us are very excited when someone new comes along since it means we can expand out own Hobby. That’s the vibe I’ve had in my group anyway.

[mecha82Participant 10037xp 1]

@piers Problem with people like that is that those are people that keep those of us that might be interested from historicals away from it. While it might be way they are of doing things at same time those elitists make it unfun to everyone else and on they own way make sure that historicals will never become even nearly as popular as all other genres. Then again maybe that’s way they prefer it.

[elessar2590 18201xp 1]

@mecha82 I don’t think @piers is saying he approves or disaproves of their behaviour just acknowledging that it exists.

Just like there are 40K or AoS Players who won’t play against people using non-GW Miniatures or people who won’t play on tables that don’t have “proper” terrain.

I think we can learn a lot from the Simpsons.

“Well Animals (Wargamers) are a lot like people Mrs. Simpson some of them act badly because they’ve had a hard life or been mistreated but like people some of them are just jerks”

If your local group are jerks then that sucks but maybe you can be the first non-jerk and see who else is keen. Depending on where you live there’s a ton of wargaming clubs/groups out there.

As for trying out new games/learning to play games check out “Tabletop Simulator” on Steam. You can play wargames with people all around the world without needing to go out and spend any time or money on an army. See if you like it and go from there.

[piersParticipant 25463xp 2]

@mecha82

Maybe it is the way they prefer it… Certainly is for some I know, but I’ve seen that attitude in all genres of gaming to be honest. I know plenty of overbearing Historical gamers who I would never want to play a game with… and the same goes for 40K gamers too. Its not the genre… its the person that’s the key issue there.

But its their prerogative to be ‘elitist’. Cant have it both ways… Cant be inclusive to the man who wants to play with his pink Waffen SS against his mates turquoise Japanese Marines and then rail against those who only want to play ‘historically’.

It works both ways. They are both valid if it makes them happy and they have fun.

I understand what you mean that such behaviour may put people off… but lets be honest, perhaps the more unhistorical nature of games also puts people off. Again it goes both ways. There are several popular WW2 based games that I would never try due to the games ethos. It just doesn’t work for me.

The point is… that should be fine. People should be allowed to game how they want without labels being applied.

If their game is un-fun to everyone else… Who cares? Its their game… and I presume fun for them, which is what counts. I don’t play games for them to be perceived as fun for others. I make them to be fun for me and those I play with…

If those people put you off historicals, then look for others that play it in a way that is more appealing to you.

Im happy to fall into this oddly termed ‘elitist’ group I guess. Its my hobby, I game with a group that feels the same and we are unlikely to get any new members anytime soon… If we did, we would soon have them brainwashed to count rivets anyway. Its the way we want to do things. My other hobby is military history, so that impacts on how I play games. Yes… I do have five different German armies for WW2 so they look right if they are fighting in Normandy, Ardennes, Africa, Greece etc etc… My terrain is themed to locations too… my Holland tables have buildings made on actual structures in the region. For me its all about recreating history in a visual manner combined with a game that we enjoy playing. I get to tick off my two inner-nerds at the same time… Gamer Geek meets Historical Book Worm.

But… again, you don’t have to play games that appeal to other people. You can only play in the manner that appeals to you…

Trying to ‘hobby’ in a way that doesn’t suit you personally is a folly.

 

 

@elessar2590 couldn’t agree more.

[Author]

Posts