"Simulationist or Gamer?" Topic

I'm a wargamer.

More precisely, I am a military modeler who wargames with my models.

"Gamer" is a term I don't like as it connotates to me (my opinion, your milaegae may vary of course!) someone who doesn't give a darn about taking pride in their work, ie, just buys stuff and plops it on the table, at best has had someone else do the painting for them. Again, just my opinion of the term.

"Simulation" makes me cringe. I've had some involvement in real computer simulations (red on blue tank battles and NATO Rference Mobility Model) and the amount of detail in a real simulation would simply be no fun on a table top, believe me: "hey! you measured the field of view from the left driver's persiscope incorrectly!" "What's the cone penetrometer reading for that scale square foot?" No thanks.
--
Tim

Probably more of a painter than anything else, but most certainly a gamer – we use simulations at work (a lot) and they are way too grim and serious for recreation

25% Simulationist, 75% gamer.

Love gaming – decided that most games don't simulate the real world the way I want (bit anal or OCD – not sure which) – tried to write my own simulation – found it an exercise in futility as there's no way to write down a rule for EVERY stinkin' possibility – went back to being a gamer and accepting the fact.

But there are different ways to simulate, so in the end, I think it's a matter of what level of detail/realistic control/decision making/etc. you want. The more detail, the less control the player should have IMO (no squad leader can control the actions of his 10 men, let alone a company commander controlling the actions of his 150 men). At the same time, I've come to realize that detail is not necessarily the key to realistic simulation – the range of outcomes based on the input action/decision is. Difficult thing to simulate due to the wide number of possibilities. Simplest answer is to roll the die and if it's odd, your side wins, and if it's even, the other side wins. ;oP

Situationist and gamer. I'm more of a gamer, but enjoy reading and researching the background info, real outcomes and situationism.

I'm always intrigued by the fact that there seems to be a percieved conflict between game and simulation. Personally I want a game that is fun to play but at the same time I want what happens on the tabletop to mirror what could/did happen in real life; not just as a final overall result, but at every stage of the game. If I achieve the latter then surely that is, in some way, shape or form, a simulation? As such I'd say I'm both.

In fact, thinking about it, were I to play a game that did not simulate warfare in at least a reasonably accurate manner, one where the players were constantly saying "but that just isn't right" or "that simply could not happen in reality", then that for me would not be an enjoyable game as it would be a pointless exercise. Does that make me a "simulationist" or just a wargamer, as opposed to a gamer per se?

Plausible gamer

Attempts for games to simulate everything in a given scenario are pretty pointless, but I like a degree of simulation, more in terms of recreating "the feel" of a period rather than a lot of nonsensical "detail". Having said that I think there is a tendency for a lot of rulesets to almost say "hey! we've ignored quite a lot we didn't like/understand/too lazy to research/think won't sell, so now this is an inaccurate pile of dog-do, but isn't it FUN!!!??!" Which is just as bad as some tedious pseudo-simulation.

I like the role playing aspect of games. So I don't like games that blur the different command levels, and games that are such poor simulations that they have no feel for the issues of the day.

It is why I have loved the few campaign type miniature games that I have been involved.

The Editor

Perhaps you can provide definitions of each title?

I am a Gamer. Reality is only suggested by the rules. These are just guidelines. If the the impossible happens because of good/bad dice rolling; the more fun it can be. (for me)

Toy soldiers are just plain neat.

"Perhaps you can provide definitions of each title?"

Simulationist: "But is it accurate?"
Gamer: "But does it give a fun game?"

Extremes exist for both.