Oh man, this is a great discussion.  Let me start with some replies.

@elessar2590 –

“Screw where D Company of the 82nd Airborne was on D-Day+5. Just paint some Paras and throw some dice.”

Eh … “D” Company of the 82nd?  Um … I think you mean “Dog” Company, and what <i>battalion</i> and <i>regiment</i> of the 82nd, please?

Just kidding, of course.  😀

Since most people here are talking about Bolt Action or some similar scale, there really isn’t that big of a problem with strict history.  The scale is so small , as long as you have a squad of Allies against a squad of Axis, aren’t don’t go completely bonkers (Nationalist Chinese vs. Vichy French, hey, that’s Allies vs. Axis) … you should be okay.

I like your “historical research cliff notes.”

<b> … so the Good Old US of A had to come over and kick their butts to save the world.</b>

As an American, I’m not sure if I should be honored or offended by that.  😀  Again, kidding about everything.

American War of Independence: ‘MURICA F**K YEAH!!!

Except we lost 95% of the battles.  🙁

Now go paint some minis.

Or not.  There’s such a thing as wargaming without miniatures.  This is ESPECIALLY true in Historicals.

I only keep bringing it up because we’re talking about the ACCESSIBILITY of historical wargaming – players from other genres can try out something light in hex & counters (Memoir 44 series,  Valor & Victory is FREE to download and print & play for cryin’ out loud) and see if they have a taste for it BEFORE setting off to spend hundreds of dollars / pounds on armies of miniatures.

Now you can do more research eg. Audiobook while painting minis, a lot of podcasts or some great Youtube Channels.

There’s also a Historical Editor at this site you may have hear about, it’s called Beasts of War?  Check it out, this fool takes a perverse kind of pleasure in helping people with their historical grunt work for no compensation beyond a little geek-cred.  Kinda sick, if you ask me.

@mecha82

Many apologies, sir, but I just can’t really agree with some of these characterizations.  I agree with @piers – I don’t feel like a hard-core historical player (or designer, or writer, or all of the above) should be “obligated” to play historically inaccurate wargames.  It’s not disrespectful to the non-historical player.  I don’t feel that makes us “elitists” who make it “unfun for everyone else.”  Maybe I should show up at a 40K tournament with my Star Wars Imperial Army, see how far I get.  Or Cyclons from BSG.  Or Daleks from Dr. Who.  Then, when people start raising eyebrows, I can call them “elitists?”

I realize you might consider these example extreme (looking at your later posts) but I would argue that’s a matter of perspective.   For a historical wargamer, such absurd combinations (eh, sure, they’re all lazer-flashy-blowie-uppie space things that make no scientific sense) are just as forgivable as  … a Sci Fi or Fantasy player might find 1940 Germans vs. 1944 Soviets or Americans (eh, it’s all grays and browns and greens … its dirty and depressing and looks like Band of Brothers … so good enough). 😀

And, eh … I’m not sure that Historical is the least popular genre …

That said, I do fully acknowledge and agree that there are historical wargamers who take it too far, as I said way back on the first page of the thread.  Just speaking for myself, while I would never put German 1940 PzKpfw IIIDs up against 1944 JS-2s … I do keep my WW2, modern, and AWI miniatures “generic” enough to where I don’t have to worry about finer distinctions like say .. Overlord US Paratroopers vs. Market-Garden US Paratroopers.  Or 24th Rgt of Foot at Hubbardton vs. 62nd Rgt of Foot at First Freeman’s Farm.  And if another player wants to play with THAT level of approximation, I’m certainly fine.

I mean, on my latest Kursk article, those Prokhorovka images have two glaring historical “mistakes” in them.  Certainly knew about them before we published, but I left them, in anyway because … eh … it’s fine (SU-85s and British uniforms in the Lend Lease Churchills).  There are acknowledgements in captions and none of the rivet counters have come after me.  We’re really not all monsters.

But when players start talking about putting WW2 “Americans vs. British” tournament style, or pitting two German armies against each other, or tanks slugging it out at 20 paces, I start having issues.

@piers –

I know plenty of overbearing Historical gamers who I would never want to play a game with… and the same goes for 40K gamers too. Its not the genre… its the person that’s the key issue there.

Now that I agree with 100%.

But let’s be honest, perhaps the more unhistorical nature of games also puts people off.

God, yes.

I’m happy to fall into this oddly termed ‘elitist’ group I guess.

I guess I would call myself a “partial” elitist?  At least for me, the trick is to be “elitist” in the many of the games I choose to play or not play, and in the historical research put into my writing, scenario designs, etc … but not to treat other gamers from other genres with that demeanor.

In my interviews, live streams, and article threads, we get comments and questions that are sometimes … rather silly.  Or just flat-out wrong.  But in every post (or wargame) there is <i>something</i> right, something good, something to which we can respond in a positive manner.

Just speaking for myself, I try to focus on that, trying to build up a profile as someone who’s both knowledgeable and inclusive, an authority who’s also helpful to other wargamers.

But again, that’s part of my hobby (helping with the website), and may not be for other people.  😀