History and wargames

[Phil Dutré]

Most people know Germans were the “bad guys” and the allies were the good guys and that a Tiger tank – even if they don’t know what it actually looks like – are scary.

Ok, but I would not call that history. That’s comic-book-level-stuff.

I sincerely hope that most Europeans who are alive today know that WW2 was fought between what countries and why.

[Sane Max]

In the UK I woud guess
– Germany, Britain – 99% – thanks to The Sun
America too – 80%.- thanks to Saving Private Ryan
Soviet Union – 70%
Italy – 70% thanks to ‘Cowardly Italian’ jokes
France – 50% thanks to ‘cheese eating surrender monkeys’ jokes
Holland? Belgium Denmark etc? Not many.
Finland? Good luck!
Japan? Oh yes, that’s right.
Brazil? Thailand? Hhahahaha you are having a laugh. Brazil? isn’t that the ‘2 Brazilian Soldiers killed today’ Joke?

as to ‘WHY’? well that’s easy – ‘Hitler only had one ball dinne? or something like that. To stop the holocaust?’

My wife enjoyed the TV mini series ‘Rome’ and was very, very upset when I revealed Julius Caesar gets killed at the end. I went out with a girl who asked me ‘who won WWII?’ in all seriousness. And a Male Work Colleague was startled to learn we were on the same side as the Soviet Union, refused to believe it, went away to look it up. And all of them are in the upper educational percentiles.

[Phil Dutré]

Sane Max wrote:

In the UK I woud guess …

Ok, but I sincerely hope the wargamer who claims to be interested in history knows a little bit more about history than what he has read in the FOW books.

Statements such as “The Germans were the bad guys and the Allies the good guys” are true at the kiddie-level, but I do expect some deeper insights from wargamers.

[Angel Barracks]

Phil Dutré wrote:

Statements such as “The Germans were the bad guys and the Allies the good guys” are true at the kiddie-level, but I do expect some deeper insights from wargamers.

All wargamers or those interested in WWII?

[paintpig]

I am an historical miniature gamer because I love history and this is just another activity which I learn more about it. I wish I had a degree

I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel
Slowly Over A Low Flame

[Not Connard Sage]

paintpig wrote:

I am an historical miniature gamer because I love history and this is just another activity which I learn more about it. I wish I had a degree

 

Careful 😉

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Sane Max]

I wargame so I get to pretend to kill people. As a fully qualified Psycho I have always been a keen student of killing people, and find those games that best simulate the act of blowing a gaping hole in sombebody, or thrusting a foot of naked razor-sharp steel into their cringeing* flesh the most rewarding.

For this reason I sneer at games which are lacking the crucial factors in this simulation and have decided the only way to play such a game is to become a Government Minister.

*Back when I lived in at the restaurant i would sometimes get peckish at 3am, and wander down into the kitchen and make myself something. Until one has wielded a lethally sharp butcher’s knife while stark naked, one will never understand the fundamental point of even the crudest armour.

[Angel Barracks]

pack it in you lot, I know what you are doing!

<waves fist>

[Sane Max]

What?, no one told me there was a camera on this thing!!!???

Oh, the OTHER thing we are doing? sorrr-eeee.

I will take this opportunity to advise anyone who thinks of buying and using a cut-throat razor in a hip retro way to NEVER shave in the shower, however proficient you become. Drop it while shaving your chin, and if you are lucky enough to be overweight you will only gash your protruding belly. Otherwise…… 🙁 🙁 I didn;t learn that from a wargame. I learned it from a horrified A&E Nurse.

[Not Connard Sage]

Angel Barracks wrote:

pack it in you lot, I know what you are doing! <waves fist>

 

He started it

 

*points at Sane Max*

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Mike]

Let’s keep on topic and not turn TWW into some other site please.

[Sane Max]

contrite nod

[Not Connard Sage]

Sorry boss

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Noel]

Angel Barracks wrote:

Phil Dutré wrote:

Statements such as “The Germans were the bad guys and the Allies the good guys” are true at the kiddie-level, but I do expect some deeper insights from wargamers.

All wargamers or those interested in WWII?

 

Perhaps all historical wargamers.  Anyone that takes an interest in studying any part of history knows that, when you delve deeper than canned or popular histories, there are not many cases of good guys versus bad guys.

[Guy Farrish]

Assuming wargamers all play ‘historical’ games because of the history, then maybe they have insight.

But I bet a lot of gamers play wargames because of a film or a tv series they’ve seen or a novel they’ve read, because it’s a game their friends play/ed, because they had some toy soldiers lying around doing nothing and/or because it was something to do on a wet Sunday afternoon. (lets leave aside all the quasi-psychological stuff for now).

Complete package games – with the potted ‘history’ background in them, provide all you need – no research required. So you can just learn the rules and play. Now that probably doesn’t give any insight into history.

That sound like old fogey time doesn’t it? – ‘we had go and do the original research into the Battle of Yellow Ford when I were a lad’ etc etc. I honestly don’t mean that ‘kids nowadays’ should have to do that (or that we ever did) but I suspect you can play ‘historical’ games with no historical insight at all if you want.

(Not trying to drag Max into any more trouble, but his comment was spot on – historical wargames do of course miss out on the main impact on the human psyche of battle – some ****** is trying to kill you and you are expected to kill them back, and everything is a bit messy to say the least. You don’t get that psychological effect throwing a D6.)

[A Lot of Gaul]

Put me firmly in the ‘two facets of the same diamond’ camp. When I first began wargaming with miniatures back in the 1970’s, it was on the fantasy side, with armies from Chivalry & Sorcery and Tekumel. I enjoyed putting a great deal of time and effort into researching, painting, basing, and using appropriate tactics for my miniature armies.

Later on, I switched over to historical miniatures wargaming, with armies of Caesarian Romans, Gauls and Germans. I still enjoy putting a great deal of time and effort into researching, painting, basing, and using appropriate tactics for my miniature armies.

Obviously, one type of wargaming is based on actual past events and the other is based on fictional settings. But in terms of the hobby-related activities involved, I can see little discernible difference between the two. To me, its all ‘miniatures wargaming,’ an immensely pleasurable leisure-time activity. If that means I am not a ‘proper wargamer,’ then so be it. 

"Ventosa viri restabit." ~ Harry Field

[John D Salt]

Sane Max scribed the following scribings:

In the UK I woud guess
– Germany, Britain – 99% – thanks to The Sun

I would be profoundly disappointed if 99% of the UK population read that appalling rag.

Soviet Union – 70%
Italy – 70% thanks to ‘Cowardly Italian’ jokes
France – 50% thanks to ‘cheese eating surrender monkeys’ jokes
Holland? Belgium Denmark etc? Not many.

Eh? What? You think that countries that were invaded by the Nazis have managed to forget about WW2, when there are memorials to their dead littering their countryside, and a national celebration of liberation or victory every year? They might not bang on about it interminably the way Anglophones do, and might not play games about it with quite such widespread enthusiasm, but then they didn’t get to bury their battle dead in somebody else’s country.

All the best,

John.

[Guy Farrish]

No doubt Max can speak for himself if he feels so inclined John, but I think if you read it again – he was talking about UK perception of those countries participation in WWII, not perception of WWII in those countries.

Slight difference.

(the clue was in the ‘cowardly Italian’ jokes and the ‘cheese eating surrender monkeys’ reference)

[John D Salt]

Guy Farrish wrote:

(Not trying to drag Max into any more trouble, but his comment was spot on – historical wargames do of course miss out on the main impact on the human psyche of battle – some ****** is trying to kill you and you are expected to kill them back, and everything is a bit messy to say the least. You don’t get that psychological effect throwing a D6.)

Well of course you don’t. That’s why the old WRG rules made you roll 2d6 or 3d6 for reaction tests. 😉

All txhe best,

John.

[John D Salt]

Ah well in that case apologies to Max for underestimating his Sanity.

All the best,

John.

[irishserb]

“but his comment was spot on – historical wargames do of course miss out on the main impact on the human psyche of battle – some ****** is trying to kill you and you are expected to kill them back, and everything is a bit messy to say the least. You don’t get that psychological effect throwing a D6.)”

I think that depending on the approach, you can gain some sense of this from gaming, and of other psychological aspects relating to combat.  This is based on my own personal experiences of being shot at and hunted, and my own reactions to these events.  Obviously, it is not ever quite the same thing  (i.e., gaming vs real life), but may not be equally removed for all gamers.

 

[Oh no….]

” Germany, Britain – 99% – thanks to The Sun”

Well, I can only say I’d rather use my finger and put it in the hole in the wall…………

[Guy Farrish]

John D Salt wrote:

Guy Farrish wrote:

(Not trying to drag Max into any more trouble, but his comment was spot on – historical wargames do of course miss out on the main impact on the human psyche of battle – some ****** is trying to kill you and you are expected to kill them back, and everything is a bit messy to say the least. You don’t get that psychological effect throwing a D6.)

Well of course you don’t. That’s why the old WRG rules made you roll 2d6 or 3d6 for reaction tests. All txhe best, John.

Is that what that was for?! Explains everything now. Thanks!

[Ivan Sorensen]

If the comments section on pretty much ww2 video on youtube are to be trusted, WW2 was fought between the heroic Nazis and the dastardly Communists (which includes the warmongering British and American War-criminals).

In other words, complete ****ing garbage.

Less depressingly, any school kid in Denmark learns about the occupation, the resistance, the horrors of Nazism and such but we don’t tend to do much with the actual war otherwise. I recall spending more time on 1864.

[Shaun Travers]

I had to look up 1864 and Denmark as I did not understand the reference.  I have learned something new today.

Does this count as learning history from wargaming?

Come on, you have to give it to me…at least indirectly 🙂

[Ivan Sorensen]

Hah, sure, we’ll count that one 🙂

[Ruarigh]

Should have watched ‘1864’ on BBC4, Shaun. 🙂

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

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

[Shaun Travers]

I am in Oz and it is yet to hit any of our TV channels; there is a good chance as we have a multicultural channel that include continental European shows.

[Ruarigh]

Ah, Ok. Hope it turns up with you. I really enjoyed it.

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

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

[Sane Max]

wasn’t that the one with the cow? 🙁

Oddly, I have been doing a bit of reading on the 1864 recently – The parabola was an odd one. At school I learned about the Schleswig-Holstein question. Specifically, I learned there was one. The end.

Then ‘1864’ was on tv but I was TV’d out so I missed it. But it piqued my interest

Then there was a TV show on a few weeks ago about Scandinavian art, in the course of which I learned more about 1864 than in the rest of my life added together. Only then did I go away and start reading up about it.*

So, does Wargaming Teach History? Not in this case. I learned about History thanks to a documentary about Danish Art.

*seriously, Denmark, what were you smoking? ‘Prussia and Austria? We can take them both, in order to absorb a region that is mostly German speaking! Top Idea!’

[Chris Pringle]

I think a few of us got some historical insights from wargaming last Sunday:

Bloody big Battles Bash Day 2016

http://wwiiwargaming.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/bloody-big-battles-bash.html

 

[Ruarigh]

@Sane Max: I don’t remember the cow, but it might have been. I’ve slept since watching it, and my memory is not what it used to be! I do remember finding the series much more interesting than most television. I watched it mainly because I had an interest in the period and the drama brought elements of it to life.

I had no interest in the Slesvig-Holsten problem back in the 80s when I was first exposed to it at university as part of a Scandinavian history module. All I wanted to study was Vikings, and the module began with the Kalmar Union, because the lecturer was not interested in anything earlier. I was most miffed. These days I wish I had paid better attention because I am now interested in Slesvig-Holsten and the Great Northern War, both of which were covered. Oh, the follies of youth! At least wargaming has encouraged me to expand my reading about history beyond the narrow range that is my main focus of interest.

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

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

[Ivan Sorensen]

Sane Max wrote:

*seriously, Denmark, what were you smoking? ‘Prussia and Austria? We can take them both, in order to absorb a region that is mostly German speaking! Top Idea!’

We were banking on either France, England or Russia interfering like they eventually had in 1850.
I haven’t read on it for years so I don’t know if that was a reasonable expectation or not.

There was also some general over-confidence. “The spirit of 48”. If you believe enough then surely you can overcome breech loading rifles 🙂

Turns out no, you can’t 🙂

As a follow-up, due to the territorial changes around 7000 Danes (or something like that) ended up serving in the Imperial German army in WW1.

[William Jones]

I used to be a history only snob. Fortunately I outgrew that and now have more orcs than Soviets now. Fantasy and Sci-Fi can be much more liberating than historicals, and no one can say you used the wrong shade of green on the pom-poms.

[Bandit]

Angel Barracks wrote:

that talks about how wargaming encourages study of history, and that without understanding history you can’t ‘get’ wargames.
Tosh I say, wargames can be fantasy too.
You don’t have to study history to be a ‘proper’ wargamer.
Wargaming is not the sole domain of the historical gamer.

Are they saying that though? Some are, I’m sure. But many others are likely talking about historical wargaming when saying this. I think that context is important in individual cases but the greater problem though is one person telling another person what their hobby should be. I believe that is ultimately what you’re talking about.

I have encountered that. On this forum in its early days, in other forums, in person, at conventions, etc… It is easy to come across, wargamers are a very opinionated bunch and many, many are contrarians. If you say you are looking for a system that does XYZ, you’ll easily find someone who says that is the wrong way to do it (which is fine) and that you’re an imbecile for seeking to do it that way (which is not fine).

Years ago there was a category of games that sought to simulate history through wargames. Those systems gained an often deserved reputation for being highly complex and cumbersome. That eventually caused a schism between gamers who separated into pro-complex and pro-simplistic. The word ‘simulation’ became known to be equal to “overly complex and cumbersome”.

People argued a lot about which method was the “right and true path”. I’m sure many people here are fairly familiar with this history.

The sad thing to me is that while game design has changed, products have changed, communication has changed, sentiments haven’t. The people who wish to play games that simulate systems – in complex or simple ways – are often ragged on by people who favor games that don’t have seek to simulate anything and just function as games. Historical gamers are a niche inside a niche, told by fantasy and sci-fi gamers they play the “boring games”. Fantasy and sci-fi gamers are similarly ragged on by historical gamers and it goes on.

For my part I am rather negative about Flames of War as a historical wargame. However, I am also very respectful of its excellent business model and its coherence as a game. A coherent game is difficult to create and whether *I* like a given game or not, coherence is something to respect. I believe I must be able to accept a game can have value independent of my preference for it.

I think that is really the core of what you’re talking about, people who are unable to accept that “your hobby is right for you”.

We would be better off as a gaming community if we accepted these are personal preferences and not the right or wrong way to practice the hobby.

Cheers,

The Bandit

[Angel Barracks]

Bandit wrote:

Historical gamers are a niche inside a niche, told by fantasy and sci-fi gamers they play the “boring games”. Fantasy and sci-fi gamers are similarly ragged on by historical gamers and it goes on

That attitude I feel, needs to stop, but alas that is human nature, so probably never will.

 

Bandit wrote:

I think that is really the core of what you’re talking about, people who are unable to accept that “your hobby is right for you”.

Alas not really.
I have been told I am not a wargamer because I play sci-fi.
People simply saying that sci-fi wargames are not allowed to be called wargames, because they are not based on history.

Not that my sort of wargaming is wrong; but that I am not even a wargamer..

 

 

[Bandit]

Angel Barracks wrote:

Not that my sort of wargaming is wrong; but that I am not even a wargamer..

The one is just a logical extension of the other though Mike. “What you’re doing isn’t valid, therefore you are not valid,” is just a harsher version of “you’re doing it wrong, therefore you are wrong.”

It is, however, just silly. Especially in the context you’re experiencing it. Because sci-fi likely dwarfs historicals, fantasy certainly dwarfs historicals. Thus, I guess I would not challenge why you feel as you do, but I would discourage you from giving their criticism much weight as it makes so little sense.

Perhaps things are different in the UK scene. Here in the US historicals have to fight to get any visibility what-so-ever compared to fantasy and sci-fi, forget board gaming and card games which have seen huge upticks in the last couple decades while miniatures have had a slow decline that sometimes stabilizes.

Cheers,

The Bandit
thewargamingcompany.com

[Author]

Posts