"What constitutes a 'real' wargame? Speak your mind!" Topic

Chill, please, before you do yourself some damage.

You might have noticed that there are a lot of people who have clearly stated they don't play FoW who have taken issue. It may be because they (like myself) feel uncomfortable with the suggestion that you are either playing 'real' wargames, or are a pimply fanboy.

And just so as we're clear, here's my answer to the post title. I consider any 'game' that has an element of organised conflict represented in some form ('war') to be a 'war-game' or indeed a 'war-themed-game', I see the two descriptions as entirely interchangeable. I'm also quite happy to accept that this can cover a wide range from fast and fun rules to highly complex 'simulations'.

There we go, answered. Toodle-pip!

Please, no off kilts!

I thought I was the one doing the unthinkable by enjoying FoW!

What's a BME?

- Bob

I miss his ranting

War themed. Easy difference.

Now this is getting confusing: earlier on Supergrover6868 defined the difference between wargame and war themed game as being "big difference". Now he is instead defining it as an "easy difference".

Hopefully things will come clearer when somebody with the American Heritage Dictionary will manage to find the definition of a "war themed game" on it.

Griefbringer

My 'Little Oxford Dictionary' doesn't even include 'wargame' so I'm well and truly stuffed!

said--

"I grown up land"

Easily the funniest thing written on TMP in a looooong time!

Now this is getting confusing: earlier on Supergrover6868 defined the difference between wargame and war themed game as being "big difference". Now he is instead defining it as an "easy difference".

Hopefully things will come clearer when somebody with the American Heritage Dictionary will manage to find the definition of a "war themed game" on it.

Griefbringer

So that's hard for you to understand huh? Wow. I don't know how to make much more simple. Is English your first language?

My 'Little Oxford Dictionary' doesn't even include 'wargame' so I'm well and truly stuffed!

Try the AMERICAN Heritage edition then, Govna

"Is English your first language?"

Irony has he EVER offended thee? This guy is funny, albeit totally accidentally!

Chill, please, before you do yourself some damage.

You might have noticed that there are a lot of people who have clearly stated they don't play FoW who have taken issue. It may be because they (like myself) feel uncomfortable with the suggestion that you are either playing 'real' wargames, or are a pimply fanboy.

And just so as we're clear, here's my answer to the post title. I consider any 'game' that has an element of organised conflict represented in some form ('war') to be a 'war-game' or indeed a 'war-themed-game', I see the two descriptions as entirely interchangeable. I'm also quite happy to accept that this can cover a wide range from fast and fun rules to highly complex 'simulations'.

There we go, answered. Toodle-pip!

Tell to the original poster, govna. It was his question NOT MINE.

who have clearly stated they don't play FoW who have taken issue. It may be because they (like myself) feel uncomfortable with the suggestion that you are either playing 'real' wargames, or are a pimply fanboy.

Nobody has said that you have misread things clearly. Or as likely read the interpretation by the oversensitive types like the OP. Some of whom have purposefully modified or mis interpreted quotes.

Those types have spilled their tantrums over at least two if not more threads.

Irony has he EVER offended thee? This guy is funny, albeit totally accidentally!

A few typos vs total lack of comprehension. Keep reaching

Shrug some of us just like FOW others do not.

If everybody else left it at that and not thrown a hissy fit over two threads about it. This would still be the enjoyable civil forum it was before Iron Mike and crew went on their tirade.

Is English your first language?

No. What about you?

Meanwhile, I am still interested to see what is the American Heritage Dictionary definition for the term "war themed game". Or barring that, the definition for it in any other dictionary. Or actually any other attempt to define it.

Griefbringer

Meanwhile, I am still interested to see what is the American Heritage Dictionary definition for the term "war themed game". Or barring that, the definition for it in any other dictionary. Or actually any other attempt to define it.

Your purposefully misinterpreting and twisting words. That may win arguments in the eyes of your pallys. Its just rubbish to me.

Super – unless you provide a definition of war themed game to judge alongside that of wargame how are we to detemrine what you consider to be the difference?

For me you saying a baord game (Stratego) has more in common with a miniatures game (FoW), than FoW has with Crossfire or Rapid Fire seems…. well odd.

Hello all,back from the naughty step :0) the food was passabale but the company left a lot to be desired…and I see he is still throwing his toys out the pram.

So what is a real wargame? Despite a certain persons babbling that only they can decide what is or is not a wargame (I see he is still harping on and contradicting himself at every opportunity) I think,as far as miniature wargaming goes,there arn't any hard and fast rules that can be applied to answer the question.A WW2 game using the great D.F Featherstones ultra simple ruleswith airfix figures on a dining room table,is just as much a real wargame as one for Napoleonics using,say,Empire rules on specially scultured terrain and scaled OObs for Borodino.
It really depends on the desires and interest of the actual player.

I think if you're gaming war, it qualifies regardless of medium or complexity. It's a bit like trying to quantify what constitutes "real" art: The definition varies by individual.

Thinking about Grover's insistence on getting more granular, if we were to use a scientific method of classification, wouldn't it be more like:

Game --- War --- Light/Heavy

Isn't he actually making a case for his 'serious' games to be classified as a sub-species as a branch off the tree at the same level as the 'non serious'?

Do we have any fluent Latin speakers that can help us come up with appropriately important sounding names for these classifications?

Connard Sarge wrote:

If the best form of defence is attack, then grover's winning by a mile

Doesn't the dog have to actually catch its tail to win? :)

- Bob

So what is a real wargame? Despite a certain persons babbling that only they can decide what is or is not a wargame.

Ive never said.

War themeed and Wargame READ THE POSTS!.

I am by fr not the only to classify this game this way. To bad if you don't like it. It doesn't change regardless of your little tantrums.

Posted a definition. Battleship FoW Axis and Allies Stratego and many others don't fit it. War themed. Easy difference. The rampant oversensitivity and hissy fits its caused are the problem of those Like these suck puppet names and all those pitching this hissy fits. TO bad people don't like your silly amge. heres a hanky.

Now as to the rest i will just keep your whiny childish crap on crap ignore. I think Kevin and OP are the two I havent stifled on this thread.

You nasty people, you've gone and upset him now!

I do find the way he keeps contradicting himself rather amusing :0)It's funny how he accuses people of having temper tantrums and hissy fits while bouncing his toys off the nursery walls.

Connard sage you made me spill coffee on my keyboard :0)

He said boobs.

Since I'm apparently stifled, can anyone else work out why FoW is more like Battleships than Rapid Fire?

I'm am, I admit, intrigued…

Fnaar Fnarr!

I'll just keep flagging this harassment and personal attacks. This forum should be cleaned up of this type of sleaze. Pathetic is exactly the word to describe such insane obsessive behavior from you people. Just Like I said

If I remember rightly doesnt DF Featerstone mention Battleships in his Naval Wargaming book? It can be used as a method for sub hunting in a naval game so by extention it is/can be a wargame.

But as i'm stifled too he won't reply to this :0)

as I see it Wargame = game with warfare as it's theme.

This board WAS cleaned up of sleaze, then he was let out of the dawghouse.
Hey super if you don't like it here and we are all such fanboys why don't you go to the "Play with green army men on the crowded beach with the only realistic wargames in existence" boards?

Holy cow, off the rails in 7 posts…

TMP link

Remember kids, Real Wargames don't model communications!

- Bob

I think you meant "Bobs". Maybe not.

it,s a brand new lovely sunny day so I'm gonna click the stifle button and move on down the bus.Was funny but time to move on now.

Stifling is the dark side.

Or perhaps the dork side.

Griefbringer

Not very badger-like of you, now is it?

- Bob

When someone gets so wound up they start a thread about you (which agaaain is full of false accusations and insults) I think its time to leave them in thier own little parallel/fantasy universe and get on with more important things.I'm not a fan of stifling but theres only so much guff one can listen to/laugh at before it gets boring.

Its just a wee bit scary/sad that someone can get so wound up about a hobby which is supposed to be fun and relaxing.It never ceases to amaze me how seriously some people take it.

I've cracked it! Grooverbloke, can only speak in metaphors, like that Star Trek TNG episode; sorta like this

'Groover, his arse unfurled, planks, short, thick as of two.
Fanboys, again and again and again, they speak, he rants. Spelling and grammer, but none, sock puppets, he cries to the skies' etc

I was feeling left out of his stifle list, hey, I want to belong…….

John

So after wading through 5 pages of this dreck, I have come to the conclusion that Squad Leader is not a "real" wargame. Nor are GMT games, SPI or any other map and counter games. "Real" wargame involve tin soldiers.

I guess I'll just stick to playing "abstract combat simulations". Which may or may not be "wargames"

I guess I'll just stick to playing "abstract combat simulations". Which may or may not be "wargames"

They aren't, they're war themed games. :)

Man, I just come here to push lead and roll dice. I don't CARE if it's a 'real' wargame.

And the only sound effects I make are the "Shoomp!" of mortars firing.

And the occassional "Merde!" when playing the French.

I have never played FOW and strongly suspect that it would not be my cup of tea. However, I still don't understand why it should not be considered a wargame.

Here is my two pence (after reading the majority of the thread, I feel I'm entitled to give it):

Wargames cannot simply be divided into "good/real" or "bad/unreal". There is a sliding scale.

The quality of a wargame should be determined by the accuracy with which it models the effect of the actions that players take.

To take an entirely hypothetical example: if you were to take a unit of fresh cavalry and charge them at a unit of fresh infantry, across level ground and with no weather or other considerations, the infantry might break, say, 7 times out of 10. Therefore, on the tabletop, I would consider a wargame to be perfect if, when this scenario occurred, 7 times out of 10 the infantry breaks.

The problem with this is that war does not provide neat probabilities. Even with the most thorough research, a wargame designer will never be able to decompose all of the factors in any particular historical action. So, compromises have to be made, based on the scale, detail, and mechanics used. Then, like it or not, further compromises *have* to be made so that this simulation is fun to play, or else it fails its brief to be a game. However, with compromise comes the chance that unhistorical results will be achieved.

Ultimately, most games will occupy a middle ground, bounded on the left by chess, probably the most abstract wargame, and reality at infinity on the right.

Personally, I don't have experience of FoW but I do with 40K and Warhammer, and I would say they are certainly wargames. They may not be the most detailed, but they still model a war situation. Obviously as they model a fantasy world there is no data to hand, but in comparison to real life, they include what I would consider a good baseline for the effects of movement, shooting, melee, morale and the effects of combat on it, which I would consider the starting points of assembling any wargames rules.

Of course, this ignores the fact that the "reality" that is being modelled in a wargame may be different from the objective historical reality. If you want to have a wargame in which special characters have "plot armour", then your game is still a wargame as you are staying accurate to the reality that you are representing.

Hazkal wrote:

[…] The quality of a wargame should be determined by the accuracy with which it models the effect of the actions that players take.

The only issue I'd take with what you posted is (possibly) a definition of "accuracy". To me, reflecting moderately-plausible results is key, regardless of the underlying mechanisms. If a complex series of calculations of angles, weapon and armor yields a 10% probability of a kill, and a simpler mechanism also yields a 10% probability, they are equivalent in my book. Thus, simply having a simplified set of mechanisms does not equate to "less accuracy". Nor does complexity equate to "more accuracy". At least IMO.

As you state, whatever you wind up with needs to at least be enjoyable to those playing it. No level of accuracy is going to make me want to play a game that's tedious to get through!

- Bob

Actually, bobstro, I agree with you. It doesn't matter what "tabletop" mechanism is used to derive the probabilities, only that these probabilities match the expected probabilities of the effects of the "physical" mechanism (what is supposed to be happening). It might be that a more complex mechanism matches better, but if a simpler one works, then it's as good as or better than a more complex one, depending on things like streamlining the rules and flexibility.

How long before ol' Grover finds this thread again?

He seems to have disapeared.Probobly up his own ….!!!! :0)..God my spellings awful tonight!

I spoke too soon.

I apologise that I just can't be ar$ed to read the previous 5 pages, so some one may have said this already, but surely a real wargame is one that actually happens rather than one that just gets talked about endlessly.

If you can't be bothered to read the previous 5 pages, you're missing out on all the inside jokes. The conversation went off the rails early on, and has only recently settled back down into some semblance of normalcy.

We still don't have a definition of a "wargame" from the instigator of all this, so the merits of your suggestion have yet to be judged by His Righteousness, but I suspect he'll be along shortly.

- Bob

"I have never played FOW and strongly suspect that it would not be my cup of tea. However, I still don't understand why it should not be considered a wargame"

Its in Caricature.

War themed its a game themed from the war. Like another said it give a nod to history, but thats all. So does Axis and Allies CCM. War themed.