I think it is a little from column A a little from column B, i.e. “both and” not “either or”.

BA is a perfectly fun game enjoyed by loads of people who also love history. Me for instance!  Not everyonwho enjoys history is all that bothered about extensive “realism” in the rules that they play.  Having a game that plays well and accomodates the mix of units that I want to model up may in my view be worth more than “realism”.  I possess the Chain of Command rules and will get round to tryimg them some day, but haven’t yet as whenever we get around to  WW2 game we tend to break out BA because that is the ruleset we know and most of the time it gives us an enjoyable evening’s gaming. I understand the ranges thing and to be honest we just have a laugh about it as we couldn’t care less.  It just makes for an amusing absurdity that is quickly passed over.

Being told (or having the perception of being told) that the game you enjoy is inferior to the game someone else enjoys is irritating.  Because the simple truth is we all enjoy games for different reasons.

Now I’m not saying your friend was being unreasonable, but even starting that conversation is a risk. And I would say that most of us actually don’t like receiving un-asked-for advice, however well meant.

Far better to engage someone from a different “tribe” on something positive we share – such as complimenting them on the painting or enjoying a sculpt together rather than coming over all condescending.

Now we also all know those mono-system HW fanatics who can’t accept that there are different ways of doing things out there and are dismissive of other companies.  But the reality is they are content in their gaming niche and good on them.

Just because we enjoy one aspect of the hobby – such as realism, or even painting our models – doesn’t mean others we are talking to will, or should .  The old “you’re doing the hobby wrong” syndrome is all too prevalent .  I suspect it is a feature of the type of folk who are attracted to gaming, if the stereotype is true, that communication isn’t necessarily a common strength…

Of course historical gamers are not alone in possessing the trait.  All of us in whatever niche we enjoy are prone to it. It just perhaps manifests itself over different issues to realism – as sci-fi/fantasy ard less bound by appearing to adhere to it.

To my mind there is mothing more impenetrable than a group of 40k or AoS fanatics, but that’s just my perspective.

I think the problem with historical gaming is that there is just too much damn history to choose from

As for the gaming side I don’t think any game is truly realistic and in every ruleset something has to give to make the game playable whether this be weapons ranges,C&C or something else.

I am not sure where the accuracy above all attitude came from. If you look at rulesets by Bath, Featherstone or Grant they always wanted to put playability first over complete accuracy.

My thought is let people play what they want to play. If after playing a game of BA on Pegasus Bridge and one of the players feels motivated to pick up a book and read what actually happened then it’s job done

As mentioned above, people like different games for different reasons. I agree about the immersion thing, and it affects me too, if something is possible in a game that would be either impossible or very unlikely in real life. The issue here, I think, is whether we value a game higher based on how good a simulation it is or how good the mechanics are.

In my experience with regard to tabletop gaming, the games that have solid and fun mechanics are the games that most people will enjoy playing. Bolt Action is very much an example of this. The game got some glaring flaws in regard to what it tries to simulate and the designers did a very poor job in regard to fleshing out the point values for some of the units. But when it comes to the mechanics, they are solid and fun, and that is what make people keep playing it. In many ways I see Bolt Action as a “gateway game” – to use a term used for board games that describes games that are fun enough to get people hooked on gaming. For those who have played 40k, Bolt Action is a gateway game into historical gaming. This means that there is a unique opportunity to ‘convert’ Bolt Action players, who is developing an interest for history, into trying out other historical based games. But one must be clever about it. The chance of conversion is greater if you praise the game you would like to introduce for its merrits instead of criticising the game your buddy is already enjoying.

“You’re doing the hobby wrong.” This is not only a syndrome, it is the greatest imaginable nonsense, it is almost a contradictio in eo ipso. Hobby means having fun, and if I have fun, it is right, mission accomplished.

Doing something you do not like and doing it wrong, how dumb is that? If YOU do YOUR hobby, YOU can´t be wrong.

If historical accurracy is your thing, go for it. If the mere fun is your thing, have it. If you have problems with the range of a weapon, change it. If you find the rules for side/front armour “just not right”, change it. But if you don´t like something, then please behave like commodorerob, just don´t play it any more and let the ones still playing have their fun. Be a gentleman or gentlewoman.

Anything that spoils your gaming experience and the fun has to be avoided, including following rules at all costs, not changing something if you want to. rivet counters and know-it-betters, not being flexible enough to try out something new and, most importantly, ruining and spoiling the fun of others.

If anybody told me I was doing “the hobby” wrong, I´d be furious and feel insulted. Since I´m 6´ something tall that rarely happens 🙂

As for accessability of historical wargaming, this is like a house. Open the door and look around. In the hall there are doors, choose one end enter. You just need to step through. If you like it, cusiosity may lead to other rooms, if you dont like it, go to the house named sci-fi wargaming. But remember, the ding is not only dong, it is your choice where and whether you stay and how many rooms you search.

No one will deny you  access or make it difficult, but you.

I’m with Limburger here a bit of this and a bit of that. I am OK with Bolt action, Prefered Disposable heroes, hate the TOE of some of the armies in BA so combined the two we have some great games locally. So for newbies we have the ease of 40K WWII and something for the old boys.

Great discussion buys, and thanks to @commodorerob for bringing it up.

The “inaccessibility” of historical wargaming is indeed an unfortunate perception at which we work hard to disassemble at Beasts of War.  Not to “shill” for myself here, but this literally this weekend we had a 45-minute interview on (just as an example) – Top Five Tips for for Gaming in the Great War.  Not this battle or that campaign, general so-and-so, such-an-such a date.  But really how to help players who may be interested in the Great War and may want to try a game in that setting.

I bring it up because, yes, the inaccessibility of historical wargaming is a very real and very unfortunate perception out there, and unfortunately it’s very true in some ways.  The good news is that it doesn’t have to be.  But it takes deliberate effort, and will always require such effort, to continue to reduce.

What makes it inaccessible?  Sometimes the players, unfortunately.  I can freely admit this because I used to be one of “those” gamers who enjoyed historical wargaming to the point where I looked down on other kinds of gaming and even worse, PEOPLE who enjoyed these games.  Historical enjoys certain “advantages” in gravitas, reality, perceived respectability, etc,  which sometimes … yes … goes to the head of historical wargamers.  Not all of us, but some of us.

This, needless to say, is something we have to work against, both in an online community and face-to-face in gaming clubs, etc.  Support between historical community members here on the site has always been a little low.  I used to go to every historical forum thread and offer at least a word of congratulations or encouragement, until I realized that only about 1% of this ever came back my way to one of my threads or, even worse, between other historical players.  New people who venture in from fantasy or sci-fi are sometimes (not always, but often enough) treated a little roughly.

“Hmppf, haven’t your read so-and-so’s works on this-and-that?  You mean NOT in the original Hungarian?  Well, my young friend, this is a grown-ups table  here, kindly have fun with your Star Wars or 40K or Infinity or whatever …”

*patronizing pat on the head, etc.*  😛 😛 😛

Clearly I’m having a little fun here, but everyone here probably knows what I’m talking about, has heard such conversations, been subjected to such conversations, or at least in my regrettable case, even inflicted it on others in years past.

The point is, this is where the perception of the inaccessibility of historical wargaming seems to come from.  The games aren’t any harder or more expensive, etc.  The inaccessibility is fallacious, but the perception of it is not and represents a real problem which we fortunately have the power, and responsibility, to reduce at every opportunity.