Recommend
21 
 Thumb up
 Hide
97 Posts
1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 

Wargames» Forums » General

Subject: Does the 'history' matter to you? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Chris B
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Poll
How does historical accuracy figure into your judgement of a wargame?
Historical accuracy is the predominant factor when I judge a wargame
The fun factor is the predominant factor when I judge a wargame
      164 answers
Poll created by Noreaster
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Morris
United States
Raytown
Missouri
flag msg tools
2nd, 6th and 7th Wisconsin, 19th Indiana, 24th Michigan
badge
24th Michigan Monument Gettysburg Pa
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Does the history matter to me? Yes. Does the fun factor matter to me? Yes.

I didn't answer the poll because both are equally important. With so many games out there these days that have historical depth and are fun to play I don't see the need to settle for one that doesn't have both.
53 
 Thumb up
0.04
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim F
United Kingdom
Birmingham
West Midlands
flag msg tools
Who knew trench warfare could be such fun?
badge
Ashwin in front of Tiger 131
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

For me the historical accuracy adds to the enjoyment.
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lucius Cornelius
United States
Rome
SPQR
flag msg tools
badge
Lord Protector of Nothing in Particular
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Historical accuracy is my fun factor.
20 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Leo Zappa
United States
Aliquippa
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with Brian - I can't answer the poll because both are important. Now, perhaps a better way to state is: Are you willing to sacrifice some degree of historical accuracy for the sake of playability? For me, the answer is 'yes'. I will accept some degree of abstraction in order to make the game playable. It's all a matter of degree, though, so I'm not so sure a 'one or the other' question does the subject justice.

One other tangent - I think what is interesting is why people are drawn to wargames in the first place - are they:

a) primarily interested in playing a game, and while they like a 'war/history' theme, the game's the thing, or

b) primarily interested in exploring history via a game, where the game having a solid semblance to the history is the most important thing.

I know these sound quite similar to the OP, but I think there is a bit of nuance between the original question and what I wrote.
14 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
p55carroll
United States
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Don't hang around, 'cause two's a crowd on my cloud, baby.
badge
If I were to hang my head, I'd miss all the rainbows. And I'd drown in raindrops instead.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
History matters less and less to me as the years go by. I still don't like seeing anything patently ahistorical in a history-based wargame. But I'll grant the designer some license to spice the game up, since it's historical fiction in any case (at least after players start moving units around as they see fit).

7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Willows
United States
Woburn
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
There are many ways I enjoy games.

Sometimes I want something light - also known as "beer and pretzels".

Sometimes I want a "brain burner".

Sometimes I want the author's point about history.

Sometimes I want to understand the mechanics.

Sometimes I want to just play with the toys.

The other times it will be some combination of the above.

The poll is too simplistic for me to answer.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris B
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
desertfox2004 wrote:
I agree with Brian - I can't answer the poll because both are important. Now, perhaps a better way to state is: Are you willing to sacrifice some degree of historical accuracy for the sake of playability? For me, the answer is 'yes'. I will accept some degree of abstraction in order to make the game playable. It's all a matter of degree, though, so I'm not so sure a 'one or the other' question does the subject justice.

One other tangent - I think what is interesting is why people are drawn to wargames in the first place - are they:

a) primarily interested in playing a game, and while they like a 'war/history' theme, the game's the thing, or

b) primarily interested in exploring history via a game, where the game having a solid semblance to the history is the most important thing.

I know these sound quite similar to the OP, but I think there is a bit of nuance between the original question and what I wrote.


I agree...clarity is always a must....new poll posted......
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bill Lawson
United States
Rutland
Vermont
flag msg tools
Boston Redsox
badge
New England Patriots!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If its a good game it will be historical and fun. Where did the idea that history and fun are two different things come from?


Spoiler (click to reveal)
Oh thats right this is BGG, forgot for a sec!
whistle
20 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Beaton
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
I have a cunning plan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm more interested in playing the game than "exploring" history, but it's the recreation of history that makes the immersion into the game possible, and that's where the fun really comes in for me.
I learn very little from gaming, but I have a lot of fun "being there".
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bill Lawson
United States
Rutland
Vermont
flag msg tools
Boston Redsox
badge
New England Patriots!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kiraly wrote:
If I want historically accuracy I'll read a book.



My library of military history books is larger than my wargame collection
17 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Morris
United States
Raytown
Missouri
flag msg tools
2nd, 6th and 7th Wisconsin, 19th Indiana, 24th Michigan
badge
24th Michigan Monument Gettysburg Pa
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
aiabx wrote:
I'm more interested in playing the game than "exploring" history, but it's the recreation of history that makes the immersion into the game possible, and that's where the fun really comes in for me.
I learn very little from gaming, but I have a lot of fun "being there".


While I definitely learn more history from reading the games can often provide perspective. Facing the same choice as the historical commander can often times provide interesting insights.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Leo Zappa
United States
Aliquippa
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
billyboy wrote:
kiraly wrote:
If I want historically accuracy I'll read a book.



My library of military history books is larger than my wargame collection


Mine as well.

...BTW - to all:

I would say that I don't think anyone who 'votes' for history wants a game that plays out exactly as history. What would the point be in that - go read a book! The point about history is that I think for those who say that history is 'important' to them in a wargame, what they are saying is:

a) the game presents the situation in a historically plausible manner - i.e. - the Tiger tank has a great gun and thick armor, but is slow, uses a lot of fuel, and is prone to breakdown, and the values on the Tiger unit counter in the game reflects this.

b) the game allows the player(s) to explore 'what ifs'. Maybe the Germans don't go with Manstein's plan through the Ardennes, but instead they stick with the original "Schlieffen Plan II". I'd like a game that allows the players to explore this alternative and produce plausible results.
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Young
Wales
Wellesley
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
And if you never have, you should. These things are fun and fun is good.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Do not look to get your history from a wargame.

Not a knock on any game or designer. Its just that its a game.

Wargames are great at piquing my interest in a subject that causes me to then look for written and visual material on such.

Been looking for a good book on the 30 Years War lately...

devil

8 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Miller
United States
West Jefferson
NC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with Brian and Andy. I didn't answer either because they are both important. I have some historically accurate games that aren't any fun to play and I have some fun games that have no history behind them at all, but my best games are a nice mix of the two.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
"L'état, c'est moi."
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
admin
designer
Roger's Reviews: check out my reviews page, right here on BGG!
badge
Caution: May contain wargame like substance
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mrbeankc wrote:
Does the history matter to me? Yes. Does the fun factor matter to me? Yes.

I didn't answer the poll because both are equally important. With so many games out there these days that have historical depth and are fun to play I don't see the need to settle for one that doesn't have both.
This.

I play games that err on the simulation side over the game side, and vice versa. But I've never played a wargame, ever, that's played out exactly as the history did. Yes, the Germans lose Barbarossa, but how they lose it, that's what's different from game to game. Or take any card driven game where the historical events are on the card, but occur in a different order (what do you mean the Warsaw Pact forms in 1984!).

I play games for fun, and I prefer playing wargames because of the historical underpinnings.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Val Ruza
Canada
Elmira
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
For me it is the history that draws me to the game, but it is the game play (fun factor) that keeps me playing it.








edit: added bracketed text
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Edward Pundyk
Canada
Ontario
flag msg tools
medievalbanquet wrote:
Do not look to get your history from a wargame.

Not a knock on any game or designer. Its just that its a game.

Wargames are great at piquing my interest in a subject that causes me to then look for written and visual material on such.

Been looking for a good book on the 30 Years War lately...

devil



Although it was published in 1938, C.V. Wedgwood's "The Thirty Years War" is still the best treatment of the subject I've read. You should still be able to find it in your local library or a good used bookstore.
2 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trent Garner
United States
Fayetteville
Arkansas
flag msg tools
also Game Developer
badge
Personal LnLT Avatar
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
billyboy wrote:
kiraly wrote:
If I want historically accuracy I'll read a book.



My library of military history books is larger than my wargame collection


Same here, a lot more books than games. Most wargames in my collection were aquired with the idea of exploring the history I've read about, but in a game format. I want to see how things looked on the actual battlefield and have the opportunity to face the decisions the historical commanders faced, but I also want the opportunity to explore the what-if scenarios, to try a different strategy or tactic at a key point in a particular battle. Trying to perform better than my historical counterpart is also enjoyable.

I don't really care about abstraction vs simulation, so much as I care about the subject matter at hand. I own several wargames that cover the exact same subject (N. Africa for example), but each game approaches that subject in a different way. One may be small-scale tactical battles, while another is strategic or operational in scope. Both allow me to explore the subject at hand in many different ways, depending on how the designer wanted to portray the battle or war in question.

Of course, when it's all said and done, I really enjoy playing wargames, about as much as I enjoy reading history books. Both hobbies give me hours and hours of enjoyment, and what's better, they compliment each other! The best of both worlds.
5 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lucius Cornelius
United States
Rome
SPQR
flag msg tools
badge
Lord Protector of Nothing in Particular
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Democritus said: “Everything existing in the universe is the fruit of chance and necessity”
Wargaming complements history reading like Doritos and Pepsi.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Wintz
United States
Mesa
Arizona
flag msg tools
Boo!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sullafelix wrote:
Democritus said: “Everything existing in the universe is the fruit of chance and necessity”
Wargaming complements history reading like Doritos and Pepsi.


er ... don't you mean like "beer and pretzels"?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lucius Cornelius
United States
Rome
SPQR
flag msg tools
badge
Lord Protector of Nothing in Particular
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mwintz wrote:
sullafelix wrote:
Democritus said: “Everything existing in the universe is the fruit of chance and necessity”
Wargaming complements history reading like Doritos and Pepsi.


er ... don't you mean like "beer and pretzels"?
I have more juvenile tastes.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hunga Dunga
Canada
Coquitlam
British Columbia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If there is no history, then there's nothing for me and my wargame buddies to re-write.
18 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I couldn't really respond to the poll. For a game that's at the tactical and often operational level, I expect "historicity" to be a much, much bigger factor for me than in many other games. While it's certainly fun to see if "I could do better," that should be a result of the way I make different choices than simply providing capabilities, units, combat conditions, etc. that don't capture the history well.

But as the game changes in scope, I'm willing to sacrifice what many would consider to be "historical accuracy" for playability. One of my favorites monsters is Empires in Arms, and that definitely compromises some of the history of the period in the interest of a good game. But, in doing so, it still captures the "flavor" of the period in an interesting and fun way.

It's a perpetual balancing act. The game has to capture history right for the intentions of the game. e.g. A simulation has a very different balance to strike than a sci-fi game than a grand strategy game (though all must always be fun enough to play).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Carey
United Kingdom
Worcester Park
Surrey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Patrick Carroll wrote:
History matters less and less to me as the years go by. I still don't like seeing anything patently ahistorical in a history-based wargame. But I'll grant the designer some license to spice the game up, since it's historical fiction in any case (at least after players start moving units around as they see fit).



This. Where once I would have relished ploughing through a 50-page rulebook for a game that tries to be as faithful to history as possible, nowadays I'm more happy with relatively simple games like Friedrich or Maria that make for a fun evening without being too hung up on accuracy. Like Patrick though I would find it jarring if the game jettisoned all of its historical base and made it too easy for historically implausible situations to develop.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.