"Golden Age of Wargaming"….perhaps not?

[soulman 2945xp 0]

Nice chat guys…. i was born 1968… so for me my experience of wargames and RPGS was my local model shop. and from there the first GW shop i remember… so i was a child of the early days….  remember laser burn in 15mm… black and white rule books..like tunnels and trolls…!!!!

[torros 23816xp 1]

Again while agreeing with you Jim I would push your dates to end of 90’s for miniatures rules

I don’t think simple automatically means it isn’t good .I think DBA and it’s popularity has s good tactical depth to it given what it tries to represent

I do think these days too many companies put the quality of the rules behind the figures and as all the tokens and cards you get with the game. Saying that it has happened in the past with Star fleet battles

Maybe the internet is part of the problem. Too many sites and blogs social media show a new game and and start shouting from the rooftops that this is the best fantasy/sci-fi/historical game ever. Well it is since that one they reviewed last Tuesday.

Games seem to have to fight now for their 5 minutes of fame before the next big  thing appears. . There doesn’t seem to be as much slow grow and traction with gamers that games used to have

 

But maybe I’m just getting old but there aren’t to many games out there that I see flashing up before me on the interwebs that interest me at all any more. I’m sure there will be exceptions. I do hope so

 

[volleyfireandyParticipant 2489xp 1]

I think we’re definitely in a golden age of miniature quality. Both in terms of model and the ancillary product such as paints, scenary etc.

For games though, has there ever been a golden age? It’s easy looking back with nostalgia, but there have always been lots of games, but only a select few that appeal to the individuals tastes. We have more exposure to new games now, but individual tastes mean most of those won’t appeal, or they just aren’t that good to begin with. Again, much like it’s always been.

What we have is a golden age of access to information. It’s much easier to find out about a product prior to purchase than going blindly off a magazine advert, and that has to be a good thing.

 

[chaingunParticipant 1939xp 1]

I only had this very conversation the other day.

The term “Golden Age of Wargaming” I feel does not represent the true nature of the statement. When I started in the hobby back in the early 80s, the hobby was full of very little cottage industries. These were guys who went to clubs and designed figures for a particular game the club wanted to put on.

This then led these people to branch out and offer the figures for general release all be it while still maintaining a full time job. Hay, the Perry’s still design figures for there gaming group first and then release these to the public.

As for rules, well, what can I say, these were normally A5 typed on a typewriter, printed on a dot matrix printer or very cheaply printed at a printers. Oh and the only colour you had was the cover, the rest of the booklet was black and white and with no pictures.

Getting terrain was also difficult as mostly you had to scratch build it yourself, Hovels resin buildings were very nice, but they were the GW of pricing back then.

So, with no internet, you had to rely on shows to see the product you wanted, magazines for addresses of these companies and more importantly the snail mail of the postal services (this hasn’t changed, I don’t know about you, but our postal service in our area is pants).

So let’s recap here, you researched the period you wanted to play, you researched who produced the figures and you researched who made the terrain and produced the rules.

 

Now fast forward to today.  First off the internet has opened our hobby up to the world, making it more accessible to all (which it should be, my wife has beaten me more times than I can remember).

The different terrain companies out there is staggering and I’m sure I’ve not seen them all, but the things I have seen blows my mind, I now very rarely have to scratch build a building.

The quality of rulebooks from the cheap little pamphlet to the full hardback production, all full colour with many pictures of lovely painted minis are truly masterpieces in themselves. Rules also has changed, back in the day rules were over complicated to a point you became bogged down trying to understand the writers intension. Rules today I feel to have mostly have got over this and the writing style makes them a pleasure to read (but not in all cases). But I do still enjoy cracking out some of my old rules for nostalgia sake at times.

As for miniatures, now this has seen the biggest explosion in not only materials being used, but the more complete vast ranges and scales available. Once again the internet has helped this by making these available around the world easily. The big issue here again is perhaps we are spoiled for choice and yes it does seem that if your not gaming in 28mm then all other scales are mostly forgotten about.

 

So, are we in the golden age of Wargaming? Well if you compare today with the 80s then yes we certainly are. The choice we have now is like comparing a corner shop to a supermarket and this is also a problem, the fact we have this much choice can lead to people getting swamped and not bothering at all. This is something that I have felt for some time now and I feel that this is only going to get worse in the future.

So perhaps the question should be “Is Kickstarter ruining our hobby”.

[osbad 4279xp 1]

I understand your point of view and would say that for you, this doesn’t feel like an improvement over the late 70’s if the types of models and games you enjoy are less accessible than they used to be.   Whether this means the nomenclature “Golden Age” is misplaced however, in my opinion.

I would argue that there are objectively speaking, many more people playing what can be termed “wargames” now than there were back in the late 70’s when I started.  Also they are more diverse in age, gender, class and everything else.

My understanding from my experience back then was that wargamers were almost exclusively male, intellectual, middle class and white.  There was a homogeneity of outlook that saw the hobby as a branch of historical study and pretended that the “fun” was incidental and only counted if it was the right kind of fun.

Your experience may differ, but that was mine, then.

Along came D&D and that idea of wargaming as being the only acceptable type was distrupted. And the rest is history.

I would say therefore that perhaps you are right that this not a golden age if your definition of wargaming is of the “re-fight” style of gaming.

But for many people, me included, this is not what wargaming is exclusively anymore, and if it was, I wouldn’t be in the hobby any more as I would have got fed up and quit around 1982.

Now that’s not to say I enjoy every trend – I’m not big into abstract board games and I dislike Kickstarter, but I can say ot is easier for me and most of the people I know to find a game and section of the hobby they enjoy and indulge in it to an extent that was unavailable 40 years ago.  Back then we were converting 1/72 aifix napoleonics to get the troop types we wanted with plastascene and banana oil!

I am sorry ypu aren’t enjoying the current era of gaming as much as you would like, but I feel that is a subjective view not an objective one.

[koldanParticipant 364xp 1]

Really nice chat, but I disagree with some arguments, even though I understand  where they come from.

Yes for the some scales you have to search harder then for others. But still nowadays it is way easier then before. Especially the suggested 1970-1980 golden age, that is before the world wide web. Now that is a time when you had to know where to look.

Complexity of the rule sets: The old rule sets still exist, at least if noone used a time machine and erased them from history. And it got even easier in this digital age to find copies of old rules. So the overall number of complex rulesets can not decrease, it just grows drastically slower then the number of simple rulesets. And that just shows that it becomes more natural. Looking at board games for example, you will find more games as easy to play as Snakes and ladders, then games like Go. A broader spectrum of games for the masses, and then with increasing complexity the number of games and players decrease.

I wouldn’t call it a golden age, but right now the wargames grow in a good way. And with the 3d printers becoming better and more affordable, I think we are at the brink of a renaissance of the rarer scales and rule sets.

For me the biggest thing is, that in my generation and older most non wargamers know nothing about it, even warhammer does not ring a bell. But from my experience the younger generations have at least heard of it. At my work I have alot contact with the new employees directly from school or university and if we talk about hobbies, everyone seems to have basic knowledge about it, for warhammer as the big name, everyone even knew at least that much about the fluff that it has two settings. Some wanted to try it, so we had played after work test games in a meeting room. 10 or 20 years ago that would not have happened, I actually doubt I would have mentioned wargames back then

[mousakaParticipant 929xp 1]

It is great to read the thoughts and opinions of everyone on this thread, and I think that you all have good points, especially with regard to your experiences of wargaming and miniatures where you are.

As well as saying that my experiences and  opinions parallel wirh other here, hopefully I can helpful contribute by sharing my experiences as well.

I think the amount of time you have to spend on wargaming may determine how golden it feels.

 

I started playing in 1990 at the age of 12, able to play for day’s at a time, which when I got older could even be for a weekend and allowed me to play several games in the same session.

Zooming to now, I currently only have occasional time to play (weekly for 2 1/2 hours if I am lucky) and find that skirmish games offer me the best chance to complete a game in that time, and that my opponents prefer playing in 28mm, which are my limitations, though the rules used range from fantasy to historical to scifi.

Younger (and much older) gamers have more time I think to enjoy and support the diversity of wargaming, and for them I think it is golden, though it may require some searching to find. I am just glad that my games are socially fun and I see smiles around the game tables, and that I can play against and with male and female gamers.

Thank you for reading my ramble.

 

[maledrakhParticipant 11996xp 1]

I do feel your pain. This is much the same lament we have heard about the really granular, hundreds of fiddly little cardboard square-pieces type board games such as advanced squad leader and the like. I think this is in a very real sense a generational thing, and that those that have grown up with computers and internet simply are not interested in spending the nessecary time to get into such games any more. Hence the simplistic approach to lure them in, so to speak. I think it was really telling that even Warhammer Fantasy Battles in practice turned out to be too much of a barrier to enter the hobby.

Another question that might need to be addressed is if this really is a null-sum game?, in the sense that if 28/35mm/GW-scale and simplistic rulesets have increased in availablilty to the point that it is all you can see around you, does this mean that the other scales are suffering an equivalent decline or is it more that the market for the 28mms has grown far beyond and left the other scales behind? Are the other scales truly dissappearing, or is that more of a perception issue and they are still there, only not in the public eye or in the big shops? Then again: were they really ever in the public eye or in the big shops?

In other words; are there really that much less of the other scales available, or is it more that they are being overshadowed but still have an availablility (but not maybe so much in the “new” online market)?

In other other words: is the niche market they represent not still there? and the 28mm scale just busted out and made itself a larger niche?

And, given the generational thing, if the “big” companies did not take the simplistic approach and thereby getting new blood into the hobby, would not the entire hobby run the risk of extinction with the generation that played it?

 

[cpauls1Participant 8957xp 1]

Couldn’t agree more @oriskany . I cut my teeth on the Panzerblitz and Squad Leader systems, and in roleplaying with Traveler, AD&D, and the accompanying Battlesystem rules that elegantly combined roleplaying and mass combat, something you are now familiar with 🙂 . Those games had their faults, but like you, I just changed any rules I didn’t agree with or rules that were blatantly unrealistic. I expect I modified our house AD&D rules as much as you modified the original Panzerblitz rules, while staying within the same framework.

It’s ironic that the catalyst for those homegrown mods were subsequent rules sets! 2nd Edition AD&D didn’t address the shortfalls in the original system, but was instead an entirely new game (isn’t TSR on 5th Edition now?). It struck me as a blatant money grab, as I had to invest once again in hundreds of dollars worth of books to stay current (GW is excellent at this sort of manipulation), and had to learn a new system — the whole “old dog, new tricks” conundrum. No thanks.

The same applied to Traveler. When Mega Traveler came out I was quite happy with the system, and how it complimented the original books. I was also taken by the accompanying Fire, Fusion, and Steel design book. The design process was a test of endurance initially, but I eventually found that designing ships and vehicles I would probably never use was in itself an enjoyable exercise.

Recently Mongoose came out with a much anticipated update to Traveler, one I had hoped to support through a series of reviews using my near future combat team models, but when I picked up the new equipment design book I was disappointed. Like every other system, it has been dumbed down to accommodate shorter attention spans. I actually bought a mint copy of the old FFS instead, and dusted off my Mega Traveler boxed set. I also picked up a mint copy of the old Striker 15mm sci-fi massed combat boxed set. I’ll stick with that for sci-fi, thanks.

I’ve tried to play both the fantasy and sci-fi versions of the other guy’s games, but found the setup time to be inordinately long, for a very simplistic system. After half an hour of actual game time I found myself counting ceiling tiles at the store.

Shorter rules doesn’t necessarily mean a simple game. Panzerblitz is a perfect example (when I say ‘Panzerblitz’ I am referring to the entire system). It has infinite replayablity, scales up well into mega-games, and can be adapted to any theater, timeframe, or nationality. And it’s something you can really get stuck into, like Chess. Yet the rules are at most a small booklet, as with AIW, which I believe was the last Avalon Hill version of the game. I could be wrong.

For me, the Golden Age of Gaming means collecting all the wonderful miniatures that are out there now, and using them to breathe new life into all the fabulous iconic game systems from the ’70’s and ’80’s that I still play.

 

 

[oriskany 60771xp 0]

Great discussion, everyone!  Here are a few replies:

@torros – I promise, promise, promise I’m not trying to be pedantic here, but in all honesty, I said “simplistic” – not “simple.”  I know it sounds like I’m splitting hairs there, but I guess I’m saying that I completely agree with you.  Simple does not equal simplistic.  Chess is a simple game.  The rules could probably fit on half a sheet of paper.  But I wouldn’t call chess “simplistic.”  😀

@volleyfireandy – It’s easy looking back with nostalgia, but there have always been lots of games, but only a select few that appeal to the individuals tastes.   – Except there are those of us who play these older games right now, every weekend, with players who have never tried these games or even these kinds of games and who are constantly impressed with their realism, historical accuracy, and tactical detail.  So unless we’re being nostalgic for “last Sunday …”

Yes, there are some well-designed game systems out there in recent years.  They are the minority.  They also don’t get as much coverage because they don’t appeal to the broader market as much as *ahem* “other” games.  In previous decades there was much more of an even mix between “good” games and “bad” games.  I can’t really argue about “coverage” because there was no internet back then, so any comparisons we make would be apples vs. oranges.

@chaingun – As for rules … the only colour you had was the cover, the rest of the booklet was black and white and with no pictures. – You’re describing about half a dozen of my all-time favorite games, actually.  PanzerBlitz, Panzer Leader, Arab-Israeli Wars, GDW’s Assault series,  Fire When Ready, Car Wars, Avalon Hill’s Tactics II (okay, that’s more of a gateway tutorial game) … long story short, you’ve made me really nostalgic now!

@osbad – I would argue that there are objectively speaking, many more people playing what can be termed “wargames” now than there were back in the late 70’s when I started.  That really depends on one’s definition of “wargame.”

I am sorry you aren’t enjoying the current era of gaming as much as you would like…  No worries, I’m enjoying it fine.  I just don’t really buy anything, unless it’s from one of the exception games I listed previously.

But I feel that is a subjective view not an objective one.  Absolutely it’s subjective.  And the reverse is not?  When someone says we’re in the Golden Age of Wargaming, that’s not subjective as well?  Pretty sure this whole conversation is subjective.

@koldan – The old rule sets still exist, at least if noone used a time machine and erased them from history.  Couldn’t agree more.  We run them every weekend, on-line with an ever-growing community of other people who expect just a little more from a game system.

@maledrakh  …  hundreds of fiddly little cardboard square-pieces type board games such as advanced squad leader and the like. Man, I love hex and counter games,  especially from the 70s and 80s, but even I can admit that sometimes Advanced Squad Leader (the famous one) was a touch much.  Also, back then publishers were limited by the physical size of the box, which meant the map boards could only be so big, which meant the hexes could only be so big, but the counters couldn’t be too small or you couldn’t read them …

This was (I agree with you) an issue when battles would condense to certain important areas, where players would max-stack assaults and counter-assaults all into just a few hexes … then  you had to get something out of the bottom of a stack you wound up screwing up other stacks, etc …

More modern H&C games fix this with larger map sheets or virtual map sheets and better printing / publishing, where the hexes can be larger and clearer, and counters can fit in hexes with a lot more elbow room, making them easier to handle in high density mapboard areas.

Oh, and small detail … the PUNCH CARDS have gotten 100 times better.  Today’s punchcards the counters just fall out of the sheet, there are no “hanging corner chads” like used to be the bane of small-counter games like ASL.  😀

@cpauls1 – Awesome reply!

It struck me as a blatant money grab, as I had to invest once again in hundreds of dollars worth of books to stay current (GW is excellent at this sort of manipulation) – Oh, they’re not the only one.  Other companies I have in mind that may have done this to a smaller extent, however, have seemed to CORRECTED this in more recent releases.  So I have hope.

I expect I modified our house AD&D rules as much as you modified the original Panzerblitz rules, while staying within the same framework. – I pretty much just took the Arab-Israeli Wars (“third edition”) rules engine and retrofitted it to PanzerBlitz (“first edition) and Panzer Leader (“second edition”).

 Yet the rules are at most a small booklet, as with AIW, which I believe was the last Avalon Hill version of the game – yes, this is the last AH version.  Not really a fan of the more recent MultiMan Publishing attempt at “Panzer Leader Hill of Death.”  Other releases like Tosach Miniatures’ “Tactical Combat Middle East” (Panzer Leader for 1991 / 2003 Gulf Wars) are better.

But I’m not sure AIW is a “short” rules system.  With no charts, designer’s notes, tables, or even scenarios, the rulebook is a smidge over 30,000 words (ran the .pdf through a MS Word word count).   With scenarios this would creep closer to 45,000 / 50,000.  That’s half a novel these days.

Physically the rules feel like a booklet because they triple-columned that shit with font so small a flea would need a microscope to read it.  🙁  Maybe I’m just getting old and I hate putting on reader glasses.  🙁 🙁 🙁

[torros 23816xp 0]

@oriskany  I just re read it all as I typed my comment at 7am this morning and yes we agree

[volleyfireandyParticipant 2489xp 0]

@oriskany That’s kind of my point. The number of games that appeal to the individual, not a specific individual, but the individual in the collective of gamers, largely remains constant. Most people have a type of game they enjoy, and find a set of rules that fits that ideal, and that’s what they run with. Also tastes change, someone getting into historicals say, may start with some of the lite games, such as the Osprey sets, then head into increasingly more hard core, accurate systems too.

The market has become bigger, and more diverse, with more people wanting different things from that market. Good and bad is relative to the individual, and that has to be a good thing for the wider industry.

[phaidknott 7023xp 1]

“Most people have a type of game they enjoy”, yup that’s the crux. But the issue (for me) is that the type of gaming I enjoy has either just faded away or ignored (ie I’m using rules written 25 years ago, and there’s nothing “new” that’s appeared to replace them with anything better).

It’s the dominance of certain types of gaming that also stops any new blood appearing for doing things like refights of battles (at least discovering this type of gaming within their peer group). A suppose the amateur aspect of the hobby (black and white rules with cardboard covers faded away), and everything has become a lot more slick and has actual professional marketing.

But is it this very professionalism I rail against, or do I feel that the manufacturers are telling me the type of gaming I should be enjoying (eg 28mm skirmish)?

Because it seem there’s no other source of gaming news that covers they type of gaming we used to do, I can’t remember the last time I saw a magazine article that published a rules agnostic scenario allowing players to refight a battle in any period (but then again most wargames magazines are dependant of the submitted articles by the readers, so these articles aren’t coming from the readership….that means me…..so perhaps I should do less moaning and more writing 😀 ). The articles that are published featuring a scenario are usually rules specific.

Yet bring a newer wargamer into a game where you refighting a battle, featuring those rank and file armies (usually in 15mm) and they seem to enjoy the game far more than what they’ve been used to. They usually start a 15mm army based on the experience, but have to be pointed as to  where to find things. And it’s that pointing aspect that causes me to grimace. Why is anything not 28mm Skirmish gaming such a dark art needing it’s “cultists” to show the way?

It’s the slick marketing, and the sheer volume of it that seems to swamp out anything else. We’re of the mindset if we game just an evening a week we HAVE to play a skirmish game (yet we used to run games over multiple nights at our club, we just used to do a sketch map of the battle at the end of the meeting with unit positions and status on. Yet this kind of idea doesn’t even come into our minds these days).

But I rabbit on and disgress and disprove my own points like a champion. But “something” feels missing, the hobby doesn’t seem to be in a grand Golden Age (it feels more restrictive in many ways….at least to me).

 

 

 

[oriskany 60771xp 0]

@phaidknott – I cannot disagree with anything in your post.

On this we are of one mind.

You are not alone. 😀

I can recommend magazines like Strategy & Tactics.  They’ve been going for over 50 years (first issue in 1966) and don’t seem to be slowing down any time soon.  In fact, they have expanded two more periodicals, World at War (strictly for WW2) and Modern War (post-1945) with S&T sticking to anything prior to 1939.

Now I confess, this is all hex & counter, zone-based, board games and computer games.  But they roll out a new title every issue (bi-monthly).  So altogether that’s 18 new games a year.   Of course there are some duds in there, too.

I will admit I wish they would cover miniature wargames as well, though.  But with Decision Games, Matrix Games, etc, and designers like Joseph Miranda, Javier Romero, Ty Bomba, etc … they definitely stick to the “crunchy” system-driven releases rather than pretty pictures, overwrought fluff, and “slick marketing.”

[volleyfireandyParticipant 2489xp 0]

But.. Does that type of gaming require marketing? at least in a commercial sense. Surely it’s getting into the historical research side and creating something off  the back of that research. There are always big games, at least at cons in the UK doing historical re fights.

The scenario side is perhaps better served through the access of so much date that’s available either free online, or through cheap books, again all readily available through., and far more so than ever before. As you say, magazines can only print what is supplied, and if people aren’t supply that kind of content, they can’t print it.

I don’t think slickness of game, or lack of it really affects the  people doing historical refits, I’d suspect if you broke it down you’d probably have similar numbers of people doing just that as there’s always been. it’s just eclipsed by the number of people doing other stuff.

 

[Author]

Posts