Home Forums General General Gaming as Modellling

Viewing 21 posts - 1 through 21 (of 21 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #96176
    Don Glewwe
    Participant

    Play or Game?  led to this old (for me) nut.

    Whatever the term/word used, the activity around/on the tabletop is…what?

    I think it is modelling the action.

    I’ve spent the past 50+ years modelling (sometimes getting paid for it!).  Figures, buildings. things, stuff…it’s all a matter of getting things to pass as things they aren’t.

     

    Games are the same.  Stuff that isn’t being passed off/accepted as stuff that was/is/may be.  This is basic, I know, but I think the idea that the stuff isn’t as important as the what happened (or will happen, or what might happen) is lost in the representation on the tabletop.

     

    wow…this is icoherent. Can you guess that I’m a model builder and not a wordsmith?

     

    umm…delete?   dunno.    I’ll let it sit for a bit, and we”ll see.

    https://brawlfactory.net/

    #96178
    Etranger
    Participant

    It’s modelling in the sense of representing an event/events in a modelled real (or imaginary) setting, with various degrees of abstraction and assumption built into the framework and mechanisms used to create that model in the first place. It’s like (& sometimes is) a computer or mathematical model.

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Etranger.
    #96181
    MartinR
    Participant

    Yes, Games are models of reality, with varying degrees of abstraction and accuracy. The main limitation is that unlike e.g. economic or scientific models, they also need to be fun to play!

    "Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

    #96182
    Not Connard Sage
    Participant

    I just play wargames. I even do naval gaming.

    I don’t do navel gazing. Life’s too short to analyse everything we do.

    "I go online sometimes, but everyone's spelling is really bad. It's... depressing."

    #96184
    Ruarigh
    Participant

    Life’s too short to analyse everything we do.

    And yet, here we are! 

    The Polemarch blog had a series of posts about games as models. I found it interesting, but then I am somewhat prone to a spot of navel gazing.

     

    Never argue with an idiot. They'll only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

    https://emidsvikings.ac.uk/
    https://roderickdale.co.uk/

    #96185
    Mike
    Keymaster

    This is basic, I know, but I think the idea that the stuff isn’t as important as the what happened (or will happen, or what might happen) is lost in the representation on the tabletop.

    I suspect it always will be.
    The amount of factors and variables would be phenominal.
    Given that people are flawed so are their actions and they can all have a knock on effect.
    The blacksmith was in a mood and didn’t notice the flaw in the sword he made, this as it happens means that in the 236th blow the future sword owner strikes causes it to fail.
    But then the guy he is fighting has just heard they may not be paid, so he is tempted to desert.
    His officer would have him killed for this of course, but his severe hayfever allergy is acting up and he may not even notice, so maybe that chap will do a runner, he will have half an eye on trying to escape the battle.
    But what if those clouds roll in, that will lessen the effects of the hayfever.
    Not to mention the obvious problems with fighting in the rain.
    etc etc.

    Given I am not interested in this level of modelling of the variables, I chose to model just a few, I leave all the other variables up to chance, the dice rolls.

    Once you have any rules for your games, it is a model, it may not be a robust model, but it is a model never less by the very nature you have factors that determine the outcome?

    #96195
    grizzlymc
    Participant

    I just play wargames. I even do naval gaming. I don’t do navel gazing. Life’s too short to analyse everything we do.

     

    Do you do naval gazing?   Don’t tell us about your navel gaming.

    #96197
    Thomaston
    Participant

    My take on it is, there is simulation at the top of the scale and there is game at the bottom of the scale. I view them both as a form of simulation just different purpose. To me games are abstract simulations with narrower focus. Being an armchair general and thinking up the repercussions to world events is gaming, simulations would need so many variable it’ll be the matrix.

    The word play to me comes in when the goal is not the result of the simulation but fun.

    Tired is enough.
    R-rated narcissism

    #96199
    grizzlymc
    Participant

    The tradeoff between simulation and fun is not as linear as you imply.

     

    I think good wargames rules simulate through elegant mechanisms and are thus great fun.  A fun game does not have to resolve naval combat like Waddington’s buccaneer.

    #96200
    Mike
    Keymaster

    Whilst not aimed at any particular thing here, I have seen online, a lot of players saying they don’t like heavy rules based games, they say they like lite rules because they like to have fun.
    I feel it important to point out that fun is different things to different people, I would not have fun playing Rolemaster for example, but others would, to say one is not fun (period) is to fail to understand what other people like.
    Loads of charts and angles, and mods and stats and stuff is fun to some people and not to others.
    I am wary of people poopooing what other people like as it does not fit in with their own perception of fun.

    Interjection over.

    😀

    #96201
    irishserb
    Participant

    Hi Don, greetings from a fellow career model builder.

    For me, the miniature modelling on the tabletop in part contributes to a “feel”.  It is an effort to produce or reproduce an environment, and like a movie set, contributes to an atmosphere or “flavor” that if achieved, helps the players step into the environment with the proper “spirit of the game”.

    The rules mechanisms, similarly model or allow the modelling of actions, and again, if successful, will also contribute to this environment, further contributing to the players envelopment into the spirit of the game.

    And probably the most important aspect, is the willingness and ability of the player to be caught up in the process, to immerse one’s self, and act as a fluid that can steered successfully through this environment, such that they cohesively contribute to the atmosphere and spirit of the game.

    If all three aspects come together, the game takes on a more realistic “life”, each element acting as a catalyst, promoting each other component to become a more natural element of the game, such the players forget that that it is only a game with toys, and the experience becomes more a living memory of events that took place.

    The varying scope and purpose of games, and the varying approach and intent of the players, makes achieving this easier or harder, but to some degree, I think that it is true, or potentially true, for every game.  If successful, I come back to the example of the movie, the game collectively becomes the production process, with the memory of it more fluid in its composition, like the movie compared to the production.  No single aspect of the production will necessarily overshadow any other.

     

    #96202
    grizzlymc
    Participant

    Mike, do you mean that there is no proper way to play with toy soldiers?

    #96205
    Mike
    Keymaster

    That’s the fella!

    😀

    Or rather there is no incorrect way.

    #96207
    Not Connard Sage
    Participant

    That’s the fella! 😀 Or rather there is no incorrect way.

     

    Oh thank gods. I’d hate to think I’d been doing it wrong for the last 48 years 🙂

    "I go online sometimes, but everyone's spelling is really bad. It's... depressing."

    #96208
    Not Connard Sage
    Participant

    I just play wargames. I even do naval gaming. I don’t do navel gazing. Life’s too short to analyse everything we do.

    Do you do naval gazing? Don’t tell us about your navel gaming.

     

    It’s all fluff Grizz 😉

    "I go online sometimes, but everyone's spelling is really bad. It's... depressing."

    #96213
    Mike Headden
    Participant

    Growing old is mandatory, growing up is entirely optional!

    #96219
    Patrice
    Participant

    the miniature modelling on the tabletop in part contributes to a “feel”. It is an effort to produce or reproduce an environment, and like a movie set, contributes to an atmosphere or “flavor” that if achieved, helps the players step into the environment with the proper “spirit of the game”. The rules mechanisms, similarly model or allow the modelling of actions, and again, if successful, will also contribute to this environment, further contributing to the players envelopment into the spirit of the game. And probably the most important aspect, is the willingness and ability of the player to be caught up in the process, to immerse one’s self, and act as a fluid that can steered successfully through this environment, such that they cohesively contribute to the atmosphere and spirit of the game. If all three aspects come together, the game takes on a more realistic “life”

    Agreed.

    There has been very long threads on wargame forums, discussing if wargames are a “simulation” or not.

    OK, it’s not what scientists really call a simulation (as in technology, or with computers, etc.) but as long as it simulates/emulates the flavor of the true thing in the players’ minds, it’s OK with me. “Jeux de simulation” is a term we still use here to describe what we do, also including RPGs, LARPs, etc.

    I am a bit uneasy with the term “modelling” which for me is strongly linked to models not used for gaming (“maquettes” in French) but that’s probably a language difference. Once or twice a year my gaming group displays a gaming table in some “Salon de la maquette et du modèle réduit” in nearby towns, they like us and they invite us because the public likes to see something …moving and with some adventures in it…  amongst all their models on shelves, but they don’t really consider us – and neither do we – as “maquettistes”.

    http://www.argad-bzh.fr/argad/en.html
    https://www.anargader.net/

    #96228
    MartinR
    Participant

    I originally trained as an economist, so I’m very comfortable with the idea that models can be as simple, complex, precise, vague, focused or general as needed to deal with the particular problem in hand. There is no single model of the truth, it all depends what perspective you are coming from.

    Everything we do in our hobby can be described mathematically, so can be described as models of reality, but really who cares? It needs to be fun to play and inspire those particular individuals playing it at that particular time, and there are lots of different ways of doing that for different people, which is why it is endlessly entertaining. Vive la difference and all that.

    "Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

    #96257
    grizzlymc
    Participant

    Oh, that sort of modelling!

     

    I thought you were referring to the sartorial elegance displayed by the average wargamer.

    #96258
    Etranger
    Participant

    Oh, that sort of modelling! I thought you were referring to the sartorial elegance displayed by the average wargamer.

    Glamour modelling it isn’t….

    (From Boardgames Geek…)

    #96354
    Don Glewwe
    Participant

    Whatever…

    Late to the game…apologies and all that…

    The physical representation of the battlefield, that’s the idea I was aiming at: the terrain pieces and any other sort of physical reresentation of elements (including, but mostlly concerned with base size) that depend on the base of the figures involved in the game.

    https://brawlfactory.net/

Viewing 21 posts - 1 through 21 (of 21 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.