Why You Should Try Wargames and What You're Possibly Missing Out On (Part III)

[Gerald]

In my previous article, I started talking about the rules of a wargame being one of the hurdles that needs to be overcome.  And let's face it, most good wargames have a complex set of rules.  There's no going around it.  Its long and is often written in a way not familiar even to the most hardcore euro or AT gamers.  If you prefer to play games with the complexity of Jenga, then there's really no helping it... wargames just aren't for you.  But if you've played any decent eurogame, then I'll assume that complexity is not a deterrent, but more a nagging worry.  A worry that resounds in the back of your head that wargames are just that much harder.

At this point, I would like to give another culinary illustration.

Flour, water, salt and yeast.  These are all the ingredients you really need to bake bread.  This is why bread has been a staple for centuries.  Its easy to make, the ingredients are fairly easy to acquire and since there's only four ingredients to remember, even the dullest of bakers will find it difficult to forget.

The flour, water, salt and yeast represent the basic rules that every wargame (at least every wargame I know of) is bound to have.  In every wargame I've seen and played, you have to MOVE, ATTACK and do BOOKKEEPING (my simplified term).  These are staples that are part of every wargame, good or bad, long or short, old or new.  They've been described in a lot of different ways using a lot of different terms, but it boils down to these three essentials.

Move is self-explanatory.  You move your units within the confines of the game map.  Sometimes you're allowed to move all your units.  Sometimes you're allowed to move only a part of your units at certain times.  But, one way or another, you're going to have to move.  Also, moving, as simple as it may sound, is one of the key aspects to winning or losing in a wargame.

Attack is when you attempt to defeat your opponents units.  There have been various ways over the years on how to simulate combat.  Sometimes you use a CRT (Combat Result Table).  Sometimes you just flat out roll the dice and compare your results.  Sometimes you use cards.  Sometimes you're counter-attacking or reacting.  There're even wargames that have diceless and cardless combat.  So there's something to suit everyone's taste.

Bookkeeping is when you check if your units are in supply, when you bring in reinforcements or strengthen your troops that are already in play.  Its when you check for weather conditions or when you draw events that can affect you positively/negatively. 

Now, the ratio of ingredients, the eggs, the butter, the sugar and everything else in between are just additions to tinker with the texture, firmness and final taste of the finished product.  Its what determines if you're making a brioche or a baguette or a sweet dinner roll. 

The eggs, butter, sugar, etc., are equivalent to "chrome" in wargames.  Chrome, as defined by BGG is a superfluous mechanism or components added to a game to add a feeling of theme.  Like the chrome on a car -- chrome really isn't necessary, but it may make the game more fun. So basically, chrome is additional rules that help add historical and thematical flavor to wargames.  This can sometimes be shown by something as simple as adding special units specific to a certain era/period.  Or it can sometimes be reflected thru specific rules that apply to a certain era/period. 

But at the end of the day, you can't make bread without flour, water, salt and yeast (specially yeast).  And you can't have a wargame where you don't move, attack and do bookkeeping.

Taking these things into account makes it easier to delve into a wargame rulebook (or at least it did for me).

Now, the final hurdle for me is one that's extremely hard to overcome.  Its disinterest.  If people just don't like complexity, historical themes, battles or just war in general... then there's really no helping that.  I would like to say that disinterest can be reversed simply by sharing one's knowledge with another... but we all know that's not always true.

So now that we've discussed the hurdles, I think its about time I go into why you SHOULD play wargames.  Hallelujah!  Its about time you got to the point Gerald!  Took you long enough!

You SHOULD play wargames because they are an engaging way to learn and expand your knowledge. 

When you sit down and play a wargame, you start feeling like an armchair general.  You start seeing not just the facts, but also the problems that were presented to various commanders over various times.  The landscape, the food, the fuel, the morale, superior/inferior numbers.  You get put in a position that furthers your understanding of what simply used to be a date and a name to memorize for a test.  You see the Japanese's dilemma about fuel in the Pacific War.  You feel Napoleon's pride in his triumph at Austerlitz.  You taste Washington's desperation as he gets pushed back by Howe.

This is specially true for me, because playing wargames just made history come to life for me.  What I found so boring and mundane in high school and college textbooks, suddenly seemed more colorful and relevant.  This does not mean that I revel in killing and destruction, but rather playing wargames has given me new appreciation to certain historical events.   

You SHOULD play wargames because they scratch a different itch compared to the multitude of euros/AT games in the market.

Let me repeat that I love playing euros.. and this is in no way a knock to euro or AT games.  Wargames provide a different challenge to a player that is seldom (if ever) rivaled in even the best of euro or AT games.  The open endedness (yes, I realize that's not a real word) and bountiful yet meaningful decisions can and often will almost overwhelm you.  You rarely feel that the game is shaping your choices, but rather your choices are shaping the game.  Every decision is important.  The game hardly ever plays you.

When you sit down to play a wargame, the mindset you need to have is often different from one you'd have when playing a euro or AT game.  The "logic" often used in euros/AT is different compared to the "logic" used in board wargames.  You often have to expand your mind to encompass all the things that are simultaneously going on.  This is not to say that its hard... merely different.

This is where I'll be wrapping up the third part of my article.  I apologize for the delay, as I've just recently returned from a short vacation.  The fourth and last part should be out in the next two or three weeks.  I hope you will find this article as fun to read as it has been fun to write. 

This is a repeat of what I've already said, but, I realize I have left a lot of things unsaid.  This is because I'd like our other, more notable and esteemed wargamers to chip in if possible and help fill-in the blanks.  So please, chip in, let the ideas flow, kindly discuss the merits of what has been written and what you think can be added to it.  I've tried to use more simple terms as well, to ensure that the reader doesn't necessarily need to have a boardgame background to understand what my twisted mind is trying to express.

Also, and I will reiterate this in every article I write... there're a lot of seasoned wargamers (heck even newbie wargamers like me) who're more than happy to teach you how to play.  Don't hesitate to approach them and talk to 'em.

Until the next article!       

[Mark Humphries]

These articles are truly excellent Gerald, I really can't think of anything to add. 

[paenggoy]

I think it's safe to say that many good games (not just wargames or even board wargames) have a complex set of rules.

[zhenxiao]

You know, I just remembered, I actually have a very simple wargame that was free to download (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/28109/malaya-v-mail-postcard-game-1).  It's for two players, and I forgot I actually played this with a non-gamer friend.  My friend isn't too keen on games that have a lot of rules (his favorite game is Trump: Cars), and  it surprised me that we was willing to try this.  Not that the rules are long for this game, it's just not what he typically would enjoy.  Surprisingly, he really got into this (but he is keen on history, so I felt that had something to do with it).

I enjoyed it too.  The hardest part for me was making sure he didn't block my supply routes, but over all, it was very simple to play and combat was quick and easy.  I think this would make a great introductory game for those that don't normally play these kinds of wargames. 

[Gerald]

I think it's safe to say that many good games (not just wargames or even board wargames) have a complex set of rules.

Agreed.  But, this also works vice versa... meaning there're also many good games that don't have a complex set of rules.

I'm sorry if it came off that I was insinuating that complex rules make for a good game... because it doesn't.  I was merely stating that in general, rules for board wargames tend to be a little longer and slightly (sometimes not so slightly) more complex than the usual euro or AT game, and that its partly because of this, that some people MIGHT get turned off from wargaming in general.

[Talismanic (Mark)]

Nice set of articles Gerald! Definitely BGG Material.

Just to chime in, I have only really played "war games" on the PC, mostly SSI titles- Panzer General I and II, People's General, Fantasy General- mostly the "beer and pretzels" type. Similarly, I have played a lot of squad based tactical PC games too-Jagged Alliance 2, X-Com, Fallout Tactics (And they use depleted uranium as a bullet casing, though Osmium is the densest matter on earth, though I have a suspicion its actually the second densest).

The only actual war game I own is Phantom Leader which is a solitaire title. And while I do enjoy watching documentaries on History and Nat-Geo about WW-II, ( A result of my dad having a largish collection of Time-Life books on WW-II, as well as a book on a possible World War III with lots of details on troops and military equipment in the cold war), as well as watching films and mini-series; The Pacific, Band of Brothers, Apocalypse Now, Hamburger Hill, Full Metal Jacket, Longest Day, etc, etc, I find that my itch is really to play fantasy based or sci-fi based games, and more recently, euros.

I guess my enjoyment of the "material" or "substance" that war games has to offer is restricted to learning about history or seeing it dramatized, rather than simulating it in cardboard.

   

[Mark Humphries]

Here's a flashback to the 1970s , the SPI infomercial 

[zhenxiao]

wow...the times, they are a changin', huh?  I watched that SPI commercial and, while I found it interesting in a nostalgic kind of way, realized why war games have so few players these days.

It seemed to scream "Geek", and being a geek in the 70's and 80's was completely uncool.  I think the association has stuck, and people don't want to appear "uncool".

However, I did notice the one black brotha, playing a 2 player game (along with several packs of Marlboros).  Perhaps that is what the wargame niche needs, a new image.  Perhaps of slim sexy women and muscle bound men scantily clad enjoying themselves over a hexmap of Europe.  Throw in a few fruity alcoholic drinks and some exercise equipment in the background, and you've got the makings of what "cool" people do when they aren't watching Jersey Shore, or clubbing, or picking on geeks.

*shrug*  I don't know... I'm pretty sure DnD wasn't just a popular game because of its mechanics or theme..I think it has something to do with  pictures of scantily clad elven maidens and such randomly inserted through the books.

maybe something like this to spice up those pages of rules that often accompany wargames:



Note:  I, too, wear glasses and consider myself a geek.  I say all this in partial jest, but do think that to attract players, the game needs a way to shake the "geeky" image. But then again, I like the fact that I may appear geeky and have geeky hobbies. 

Also, I'm not completely sexist.  I'm just saying...something to give the game some spicy images.

[Gerald]

Take a look at this forum topic in BGG.  Great insights!

What Do Wargames Offer You That Board Gamed Do Not

If you have the chance, take a peek at it!

[zhenxiao]

I think I would generally enjoy a good wargame, and for all the same reasons mentioned in that thread.  Although, I may have to call out the one guy who claimed that he felt wargamers were more fun. ha ha!  I know lots of gamers that don't play wargames that are a great deal of fun to play with.

The thing that I saw that struck me the most was a few people were making comments like "The egos and smug self-satisfaction in the community are great, too" or "That comes from knowing we're right, rather than just thinking we're right" or "I get to "set up" beautiful maps, of strange and exotic locales, with diverse Units constituting many unusual peoples, and then DESTROY those!" 

Now, I'm sure those guys are nice players, but this lends to the idea that those that play wargames are not a friendly sort.  One of the reason I refused to play a certain table top mini game that I won't name was for this very reason.

I think not only have wargames been labled as "geeky" to the general public, but also have a bad rep with the general board game groups.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but reading the thread, I get that impression from a few of the posts that were made.  Not all, just a few. But enough to give me an impression. 

[Mark Humphries]

wow...the times, they are a changin', huh?

Oh ya Brother!

A major reason why Wargaming was so popular back then, and was the first of hobby boardgaming genre to take off, was that there was a general fascination and insatiable appetite for learning about and understanding war and the history of war, especially amongst boys and young adults males. The Baby Boomer Generation had fathers or uncles that had fought in Korea or WW2, and grandfathers had fought in WW2, some WW1. The Cuban Missile Crisis, the Vietnam War, and the Arab-Israeli War were within recent memory. The Cold War was threatening to go hot any minute, World War 3 and nuclear Armageddon were considered very real possibilities. We grew up immersed in the topic with war books, magazines, comics, model kits, documentaries, and movies.

There wasn't yet competition from other gaming genres. Computer  games and RPGs were in their infancy. CCGs, Nitendos, Euros, and Ameritrash weren't around yet.

[zhenxiao]

That makes sense, Mark.  It was the perfect time for wargames to be popular.  Another interesting point in the little infomercial was they showed not just historical games, but i believe some futuristic games.  And not all based on the possibilities of the cold war coming true, but some real sci-fi stuff in there.

But I really got into hobby gaming in the 80's with my purchase of DnD Red Box, and that was on a whim, cause it looked interesting to a 13 year old who was hooked on Tokien and the like.  I just never took the chance to pick up a wargame.

I suppose it was because I felt I had had enough history in school to last me forever, and knew there was more to come.   Maybe it was just because I was to into my fantasy stuff to really give wargames any more thought.

But now that there's History Channel, National Geographic, and Discovery, I find that I'm more interested in history than I ever thought I would be.  That puts wargames in a new light for me.  I simply find it fascinating what could have happened if different choices were made during both ww1 and 2, as well as other wars that have taken place.

This then gives me the interest to try a wargame to find out.

[Mark Humphries]

I think I would generally enjoy a good wargame, and for all the same reasons mentioned in that thread.  Although, I may have to call out the one guy who claimed that he felt wargamers were more fun. ha ha!  I know lots of gamers that don't play wargames that are a great deal of fun to play with.

The thing that I saw that struck me the most was a few people were making comments like "The egos and smug self-satisfaction in the community are great, too" or "That comes from knowing we're right, rather than just thinking we're right" or "I get to "set up" beautiful maps, of strange and exotic locales, with diverse Units constituting many unusual peoples, and then DESTROY those!" 

Now, I'm sure those guys are nice players, but this lends to the idea that those that play wargames are not a friendly sort.  One of the reason I refused to play a certain table top mini game that I won't name was for this very reason.

I think not only have wargames been labled as "geeky" to the general public, but also have a bad rep with the general board game groups.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but reading the thread, I get that impression from a few of the posts that were made.  Not all, just a few. But enough to give me an impression. 

Why not  judge for yourself by playing with some of the local wargamers? The personalities are as varied in wargaming as they are in other boardgame hobbies, you might very well find some of us off-putting, but then again some of us may turn out to be compatible gaming partners for you.

[Gerald]

Why not  judge for yourself by playing with some of the local wargamers? The personalities are as varied in wargaming as they are in other boardgame hobbies, you might very well find some of us off-putting, but then again some of us may turn out to be compatible gaming partners for you.

Ditto.

[Mark Humphries]

That makes sense, Mark.  It was the perfect time for wargames to be popular.  Another interesting point in the little infomercial was they showed not just historical games, but i believe some futuristic games.  And not all based on the possibilities of the cold war coming true, but some real sci-fi stuff in there.

But I really got into hobby gaming in the 80's with my purchase of DnD Red Box, and that was on a whim, cause it looked interesting to a 13 year old who was hooked on Tokien and the like.  I just never took the chance to pick up a wargame.

I suppose it was because I felt I had had enough history in school to last me forever, and knew there was more to come.   Maybe it was just because I was to into my fantasy stuff to really give wargames any more thought.

But now that there's History Channel, National Geographic, and Discovery, I find that I'm more interested in history than I ever thought I would be.  That puts wargames in a new light for me.  I simply find it fascinating what could have happened if different choices were made during both ww1 and 2, as well as other wars that have taken place.

This then gives me the interest to try a wargame to find out.

There's always been a significant subset of wargamers that were mainly into Sci-Fi topics, Star Fleet Battles for example pretty much became a hobby onto itself.

Your early hobby experience sounds typical of the early 80's. By that time the winds had already changed, History was out, Fantasy was in, and RPGs were all the rage and took in all the new blood, at least until MTG became the rage.

I hope we get a chance to meet and play sometime soon. 8-)