"How many Wargamers STUDY their subject period?" Topic

The US Army uses the PEMISI (political, economic, military, information, societal, and intelligence)factors to study. How many of you actually look at these or other factors?
Or just don't care cause I'm a gamer…

I read about most of the time periods I game, I would not call it study though.

I try to, then give up and ask my fellow TMPers who never, ever fail to
inform me!

I read about most of the time periods I game, I would not call it study though.

+1

It's a hobby, not a job. It's not an undergraduate course either.

Study? Sounds like work. I do, on the other hand, enjoy economic and social history and am well read on a couple of periods -- but not all the ones I play. Emphasis on play.

I do a bit of research into the period, but I would not say I study it.
Just the basics really.

There is professional research required of a bona fide registered licensed historian holding a commission, and there is recreational research that a fan indulges in. I do the latter.

Come on now. "I'm a gamer" does not let you off the hook. You have to know SOMETHING, even if it's superficial.
If a tyro comes to play an American Revoilution game and says right off the bat "The Americans won because they hid behind trees and the British wore red and stood in line", I do not get upset. At least they paid attention when the ignorant teacher was pontificating, and that counts as minimal research.

Wargamers have a different perspective on history than the pros. We consider some "facts" to be much more important than they do.
I doubt a lecturer at West Point really gives a hoot about the facings color of the 11th Connecticut, but we do.

I might also point out that we do not require that you know what you are talking about to bloviate on TMP. In the professional world of academe, sometimes you do.

Please include a selection for 'not a historical gamer.' Because while I read up on lots of superhero comic books, I don't think that's what you're looking for when you say 'study.'

I read up on the subject. But, like the others, I wouldn't call it 'study'!

If a period really interests me then I'll read around the subject quite widly.

But not to undergraduate level – more to "could write an osprey on this" level.

Very little for minis.
LOTS for rpgs…

Well, I like to read, so I tend to read a lot about the periods I game

"Study" like in grad school, not

I do have a wide range of interests when I read about the periods I game, though

Depend on the period. I've read more about the Byzantines and the Crusades than the Seven Years War.

I doubt a lecturer at West Point really gives a hoot about the facings color of the 11th Connecticut, but we do.

This is why I like to make the distinction between military science (knowing the thickness of armor plate on a Panther front hull and the cuff color of the 11th Connecticut) and Military History. Lots of gamers think they study military history when they memorize uniform colors or military technology…

Military History is more concerned with how and why armies fight and the how the results shape human history. Unless the cuff color was important to that, it is just memorization of data masquerading as knowledge.

When it comes to whether I study my periods of interests. It depends on a lot of different things.

When I do most of my WWII scenarios, I do as much first hand primary source study (within my limitations of time, money and resources) as I can. I read, for example, the U.S. Army records of actions, compare them to accounts I can find, look at photos of the area both from the period and today (Google Earth), and try to put together a plausible and accurate scenario. This naturally involves all of the work considered to be "academic study" (as well as that most academic of pursuits…educated guessing). Edit: This is because I think it is fun, and I enjoy the end result.

Sometimes for periods I am less interested in, a cursory reading of the popular material and some basic reading up on a specific action will get me motivated enough to look up some uniform pics, get some forces painted, and throw them on the table, research be damned.

Sometimes I don't care at all and just want to put together a battle that looks neat.

Sometimes I don't know a damn thing and a friend at the club will hand me a unit to push on the table.

So…depends?

The US Army does a lot of things, doesn't mean I have to.

If the US Army jumped in a lake am I supposed to do that too?

I buy both the Men-at-Arms series AND the Warrior series!

I studied once…

…once.

The horror… :)

Like the others, I'll read up on a period I like, but it's not a detailed academic study

I have studied various of my wargaming periods to varying levels of academic attainment. I also read a lot.

I acually find the reading a lot more useful (and up to date) for game design and wargaming than the studying bit, game theory and applied maths apart.

I have done studying using the PEMISI standards for some of the areas I game,( ACW, War of 1812, WW2 ) and in some areas I do not game ( Roman Britain, Dark Ages WW1) including graduate level courses as well as individual study.

IMHO my "studying" is an add on to the gaming or vice versa as I use little of my detailed information in gaming. For example having read detailed biographies and critiques of George McClellan will not make me act like him on the tabletop I am still my own general.

As Iron Ivan points out there is a difference between Military History and Military Science.

Isn't "Studying" involving a test at the end?

P.

Study is study, whether for recreational purposes or for academic purposes. When it comes to playing a period that I have interest in, there are two things that I do.

One, I plan to have my own figures in the game. I don't mind loaning my figures to other gamers, nor do I mind being allowed to use someone else s figures until I can paint up a bunch of units.

Two, I read about the period that I chose to game. Just asking another gamer, without reading about the period, has never fared well with me, as I later discover their information bias. I know authors are bias, but then I don't stick to just one author.

The later is still study, but an enjoyable study, something that is fun.

I was trained as a historian in college. I have done research for papers, but for gaming My research is more limited. When did the US first use the 57mm Reckless Rifle?
was the last item I cked. Operation Varsity in Europe. Okinawa in July of 45 in the Pacific. In case you were wondering.

Don't know if you consider it studying – I just read a lot. I don't generally take notes. I don't memorize stuff. And I don't write papers. Anymore. I just read.

No, life's too short.

I like in depth historical reading. If I start a new army for a period/culture that I don't already have covered in my library, I'll pick up at least one solid academic book on it, and the more comprehensive on the culture and general history, the better.

With the relative quickness and ease of building DBA armies, this has led to a fair amount of home library expansion.

I've got a history degree so I've studied many of the periods I game. However, I don't study the periods to the point that I feel I need to write a dissertation on them either. Several books with a basic over-view and a few with an in-depth history of the period work for me. If I want to do a certain battle for a convention game I read more to get down to the nuts and bolts of the campaign. If there is an Osprey about the period I will generally read them just to see how they depict the armies involved, whether I agree with them or not.

"The Americans won because they hid behind trees and the British wore red and stood in line"

Curiously enough, a Quebecois interpreter at Louisbourg last summer told me that we won the war of 1812 because the Quebec militia who were defending their colony knew to hide behind the trees, while the ignorant Americans stood in the open. It's a persistent meme

It's how you separate the Good Guys from the Bad Guys.

William Tell had much the same idea.

I will only game in a period that I have enough of an interest in that it would cause me to read and study that period of history -- period! In fact all of the periods I game began with reading and study --then collecting and gaming.
Regards
Russ Dunaway

It's a hobby, not a job. It's not an undergraduate course either.

That all depends actually….

I enjoy reading alot of sci-fi and fantasy but I don't consider it studying.

Yes, I do study military history. Its what got me into the hobby. For those of you who write rules, what do you base them on, fantasy or a study of the actual history? Yes, we look for different things than the military at times, so what?

It appears to me that the word "Study" is a negative word that we only associate with school work. But, in reality, is not study is something that we do all our lives but we are gathering information?

When I was short on money and needed to fix my car, I did one of several things, purchased a repair book, asked questions of my friends, or relied on the knowledge gained by watching others. Was I a mechanic? No, but to accomplish what I needed to accomplish I still used the same process that I used to accomplish my course work in school.

The same applies to wargaming. If we read books, search the internet, and ask questions of others knowledgeable on the subject, we are studying. Our goal is not to gain some degree or become a historian, but to better understand the period in which we game or to at least give us ideas for scenarios to game. The reason that many of us don't consider this studying is that we now enjoy it because we chose to do it.

"Study" is a negative word that we only associate with school work

I'm not sure negative, exactly, but for me the word brings a connotation of application, and some test of acquired knowledge through application. My reading on renaissance social history and banking has no application (even in my gaming) so I do not consider it study, even though I am fairly well read on the subject. My recent reading on rocket science for SF gaming might be considered study since I am at least applying it to hobby purposes. But that's a very week "might".

Lentulus, in may not be negative, but you still have placed it within an academic setting.

I will still maintain that study is something that we do on a continuous bases in life. At the time, what we study may appear to have no application or involve some test. But, the minute you engage in a conversation and use some part of the knowledge gained, have you not now applied the application. The response of the person to whom you shared your knowledge will either affirm what you said or offer a counter statement, which is in essence a pass or fail on an oral exam.

But, the minute you engage in a conversation and use some part of the knowledge gained, have you not now applied the application. The response of the person to whom you shared your knowledge will either affirm what you said or offer a counter statement, which is in essence a pass or fail on an oral exam.

Or they may have no idea WTH you're talking about, and very little interest in your pearls of wisdom. In which case your 'study' is wasted.

I don't treat life and my interactions with others as an exam.

I usually spend a year or so in learning about the period, peoples, and things like uniforms and such before I start a period (I usually do both sides). That lets me order troops, paint them, and get rules that all make some attempt at accuracy.

The key question is, of course, interest in the first place. It is interest that translates into fun for me.

Most periods I've started gaming in have always been historical favourites of mine.
Since my hobby includes interest for both political and military history, castles and fortresses, uniforms and heraldry, modelling and painting, I'm mostly well prepared before I start assembling an army and cfeate scenario's.

If I choose to game a lesser known period to me, because I like a change or support my wargaming friend, I still do some research before starting.

However I think the degree of knowledge you want to acquire on a gaming-period will always be a personal choice. That wil depend on whether you are gaming just for fun, or to recreate history on tabletop, or anything that is in between.

However in case you want to participate on wargame shows and promote the hobby and/or a certain period, it will serve you when you are able to talk with other interested people about what you are presenting on the wargame table in some more then average depth.

Le Duc.

It's primarily the study of the subject that leads me to want to game it.

Connard Sage

"I don't treat life and my interactions with others as an exam."

Then, I take it that you have never called someone an idiot, or a fool, or some other term that basically states that they have failed in some way or another in a conversation in a conversation with you.

I don't see either study or exam as negative terms, because we are tested every day on what we know and don't know. Run a stop sign and try an tell an officer that you didn't know what it meant. Learning or studying is part of life. You don't learn, you make the same mistakes (fail a test) over and over again. Even when we game, we study what we are doing if we wish to do well.

Then, I take it that you have never called someone an idiot, or a fool, or some other term that basically states that they have failed in some way or another in a conversation in a conversation with you

I try to apply nuance in real life. It oils the wheels. Confrontation, even with fools and idiots, is not the only way.

Run a stop sign and try an tell an officer that you didn't know what it meant. Learning or studying is part of life.

You appear to be confusing social and life skills with academic study.

I enjoy reading history the way other people enjoy reading novels.
My interest in gaming is often driven by my interest in history.
My interest in history is occasionally driven when a really nice range of models is released.
I find descriptions of battles tend to be less interesting to me than the surrounding events and circustances.

You appear to be confusing social and life skills with academic study.

It appears that the educational system does the same thing. All my children had to take a wellness classes through out High school to pass. Basically, they are classes that teach social and life skills in as part of the academic study. My son in college has to take a wellness class to graduate, and again it is social and life skills class in an academic setting.

Study is study, an academics is only one facet of study.

"You appear to be confusing social and life skills with academic study."

Wait, what? They're not the same thing??!

Dammit, I KNEW my mother was lying when she said hot chicks loved history geeks in thick glasses!!!

:-)