- 09/11/2014 at 16:50 #12319JohnParticipant
As a younger member of the wider wargaming community, I am one of the children of the digital age. I have watched as more and more of leisure activities are transferred from holdable, contactable forms into digital versions. Of course this is not a bad thing but the typical conversation /argument I have with my friends is whether the new interpretations of strategy gaming really count as wargaming in the full sense. One thing that comes up a lot is the time that ‘conventional’ ( normal ) wargaming takes to set for a game, whereas the computer games (such as the immaculate Wargame series by Eugen Systems ) can have a game easily set up, and full out battles which can only remain the pipe dreams of the normal wargamers for sometimes a margin of the price. Considering my less than abundant funds, they are a cheaper solution ( it means I can fight the battle of Waterloo, and be able to see each man without hiring an army of painters and the school sports hall)
But what do you think? I can see why some people might not really call them a real wargame, but they are very,very pretty.
To model the effect of Nuclear weapons on the wargaming table, apply jerry can of fuel to board, light match and stand well back.09/11/2014 at 17:31 #12323kyoteblueParticipant
I am old, and like playing with 3-D toys. I do know that someday I will be too frail to do that and will then jump into Computer War Games. So yes I do think it is war gaming.09/11/2014 at 17:53 #12324Not Connard SageParticipant
It’s the only way I’ll play Field of Glory…
"I go online sometimes, but everyone's spelling is really bad. It's... depressing."09/11/2014 at 19:09 #12335SpuriousParticipant
I’ve played a lot, well probably about a thousand hours in multiplayer, of Eugen’s Wargame series (though not Red Dragon, was in for the closed beta part and it completely turned me off from it with the incredibly badly implemented naval aspect, re-jigging the deck system and failure to fix problems from previous games) and I think they wear the title well. They were directly inspired in part by games such as Cold War Commander (at least one of the developer team is a confirmed microarmour wargamer).
Ultimate Generals: Gettysburg is another modern title that I think could quite happily be counted as a wargame with it’s approach. Easy interface, decent campaign consisting of various scenarios, multiplayer and so on. Playing it I’ve found rather akin to a wargame but in realtime and hiding the dice rolls. Matrix/Slytherine do a lot of wargames, straight up hex&counter stuff mainly, though I am not really sure I can call them an affordable alternative given their pricing on a lot of them.
Overall though I am happy to call a lot of computer games wargames, or at least akin to tabletop wargames. I don’t find they can really replace them though as for tabletop stuff there’s the creative hobby and direct social interaction aspects to it. But the computer stuff sure can help scratch a gaming itch and sustain or inspire interest in genres/eras.04/01/2015 at 19:36 #14970Ivan SorensenParticipant
Unity of Command is a straight up board-game style computer game (and fantastic to boot)
Nordic Weasel Games
https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse570104/01/2015 at 23:50 #15004John D SaltParticipant
Fossicking through strata of accumulated junk in an attempt to put my life into boxes or bins preparatory to moving house, I came across the first computer program I ever wrote: it was a combat resolution routine based on the one from SPI’s “Tank!”, but using a 1-10 instead of 1-6 random number. The program was written in Algol-60, and recorded on a deck of punched cards; I wrote it in 1976. It wasn’t until 1980 that the computer wargaming hobby got going properly, and I didn’t play my first computer game on a general-purpose computer (as distinct from standalone video games such as Missile Command) until about 1986, when I got an Amstrad 6128. But it isn’t exactly a new branch of the wargaming hobby. I can see no reason not to see them as “proper” war-games, unless one is a member of that verkrampt band of miniaturists who maintain that the one true path is to play one-on-one full-information battle games with 25mm metal figures against an opponent called Ian, Dave, Steve, Bob or Chris.
The saving on space and setup time is certainly a huge advantage. While it might seem a solitary activity, social groupings do form around some of the very best games. I went to the wedding of a friend I met through playing “Combat Mission”, and one of the wedding photos showed him with his Combat Mission friends — three Brits, two Germans, a Swede and a Frenchamn, I think we were.
Most computer games are complete rubbish, but that is no surprise; Sturgeon’s law applies in all aspects of life. However, it does seem to me that a much greater proportion of computer games are on SF or fantasy themes than is true of either miniatures or boardgames. Decent historical computer wargames are few and far between, I suspect because very few organisations can find sufficiently strong expertise in all three of software development, game design, and military historical research. Of these three, I’d say software development is much the most straightforward.
All the best,
John.05/01/2015 at 04:42 #15015grizzlymcParticipant
I would argue that computer games have a much better chance of offering a simulation which is playable as a game. C3I problems which require great finesse in a game of toy soldiers are trivial; indeed the default in a computer game.
However, whilst I would agree with John that online freinds are real, it is easier to get drunk with the ones on the other side of a dining table and there is a certain pleasure in pushing toy soldiers around a fake piece of Kent which neither computer game nor boardgame have ever given me.
Despite the obvious advantages of piloting a plane on a PC vs making a workable set of wargames rules, my heart keeps straying towards hexmats, TV aerials and 1:300 scale planes.
It is also unsatisfactory to make your own sound effects when the real thing is assaulting your ears in quadrophonic 64 bit sound. As improtant as pushing toys around is the boom of cannon, the vroom of engines, the crrrump of artillery and the dakka dakka of machine guns.
Don’t get worked up about it and have fun.11/01/2015 at 15:39 #15528WhirlwindParticipant
I like both and I think both types can happily co-exist.
I wonder if the grognards here think that the creation of gigantic computer wargames (War in the Pacific, Hearts of Iron, 12 o’clock High etc.) have killed that area of the boardgame world?
https://hereticalgaming.blogspot.co.uk/11/01/2015 at 22:26 #15547Not Connard SageParticipant
I like both and I think both types can happily co-exist. I wonder if the grognards here think that the creation of gigantic computer wargames (War in the Pacific, Hearts of Iron, 12 o’clock High etc.) have killed that area of the boardgame world?
Who the hell has got the space to leave a monster game set up for months at a time? And the time to play it FtF with real people? I suppose there’s a mad, sad, bugger somewhere in the Home Counties who still lives with his mum and has ‘Wacht am Rhein’ on a (large) table in the loft that he and his mate Malcolm, who he’s known since they were at school in 1973, play once a week…
Massive computer wargames are fantastic. Go online, play turn, save. Job jobbed. And the dog doesn’t eat the counters.
Now, if only someone would design a computer driven version of GDW’s ‘Europa’ series.
"I go online sometimes, but everyone's spelling is really bad. It's... depressing."11/01/2015 at 22:29 #15548Ivan SorensenParticipant
We love board games and play Advanced Squad Leader pretty regularly but if it can’t be finished in one day, no dice.
Nordic Weasel Games
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.