"Niche Vs Mainstream" Topic

Over on another thread, my Bronze Age naval rules were described as "niche."

Fair enough — but it got me thinking.

Wargaming itself is a niche hobby, yet within it we clearly have a "mainstream" (WW2, Napoleonic, Medieval, etc.) and everything else somewhere along a spectrum. Most of my own gaming sits in that mainstream, though I occasionally wander off into things like Bronze Age seaborne antics.

So here's the question:

Is "mainstream" in wargaming defined by popularity, or by how easy a period is to put on the table?

For example, ECW seems well-supported and recognisable — but is it actually more "mainstream" than something like Late Antiquity, which sits awkwardly between Ancients and Dark Ages?

And a slightly cheeky thought:

Is "niche" just shorthand for "someone else's period"?

At my club I am known for putting on "niche" games, mostly to do with Canadian subjects such as The Northwest Rebellion or the Fenian Raids. I'd like to do the Mackenzie Papineau rebellion but availability of suitable figures in 28MM is spotty. I also do the War of 1812 and French & Indian War which are less niche. Further afield I put on niche games of the Boshin War of 1868 and Darkest Africa 19th century, The Northern Crusades in the 13th century Baltics. My current project is the Portuguese in 16th century Africa… niche enough for you? :) I also do want I would consider non-niche subjects, 19th century Sudan and Afghanistan Dark Ages and ACW.

Is "niche" just shorthand for "someone else's period"?

That's exactly what I meant.
It's not Napoleonics, ACW, or WW2, The Big One.

I'm taking time out from my Comanche vs Spanish in Mexico project to work on SYW Kleine Krieg, or Petit Guerre.
Also on my table are Zombie Pirates and Moby Dick.

Heck, even AWI or SYW could be considered "niche".

Because of GW, I think it's fair to proclaim today that miniature wargaming is no longer "niche". It's not the most popular hobby (far behind computer games and card games, for instance), but it's still popular enough that John and Jane Doe have likely heard the word "Warhammer" and probably think they know what it means.

However, historical wargaming with miniatures is definitely a niche of miniature wargaming. In the US, there are literally millions of Warhammer players, but probably only thousands of miniatures gamers who prefer or exclusively play historical topics.

Naval wargaming is a niche within that niche. I have a subset of players interested in my naval games, and it's a very consistent cadre. There are about 4 major periods that come close to "mainstream" naval gaming (Napoleonic naval, WWII naval, WWI naval, ACW ironclads), one or more of which non-naval gamers will have tried, but the people who show up for other periods of naval games are a definitely minority.

Ancient naval wargaming is a niche within a niche within a niche. I have trouble getting even other naval wargamers interested in galley battles. It might help for a while to have some kind of big pop culture event bringing galleys to the public consciousness again, but

Bronze Age naval wargaming is a niche within a niche within a niche within a niche. Even scholars don't know much about the topic, and there's no oeuvre of miniatures, rules, or standard mechanics for playing it.

- Ix

I'd say roughly "mainstream" in miniature wargaming terms means a choice of casting sources, scales and rules. When you start talking single sources, conversions or needing to write one's own rules, you're into "niche" territory.

One thing I'm not sure we can rely on is visibility.

We see what gets played at clubs, shows and posted online — but we've no real idea what's being played at home on kitchen tables, in garages or solo by non-posters. Who knows how many thousand games of the Mackenzie Papineau rebellion are played in the privacy of people's garages or sheds?

So saying a period is "mainstream" because we see a lot of it may just be a visibility bias.

There's also a geographic angle. ACW, for example, is very visible in the US, less so elsewhere. ECW feels strong in the UK but not globally.

So are we really talking about "mainstream"… or just what's mainstream where we happen to be looking?

If that's the case, then "mainstream" becomes a pretty slippery concept — and we may be back to:
"niche" = anything outside your local scene??

Is a factor how quickly a non-gamer recognises it?

I do like the "recognition" angle.
If you stopped a random non-gamer and said:
*Napoleon
*Hitler
*Roman legionary – you'd possibly get instant recognition.
But say:
*ECW
*Late Antiquity
*the Maori Wars – and you probably get a blank look.

So does that make the first group "mainstream" in a way the second isn't — regardless of how many rulesets or figures exist?

If so, then "mainstream" might actually be about cultural footprint, not what we as gamers think is well-supported or even frequently gamed?

I would base it on how many rule sets are there for it (WW2 has tons of them) how many figures, and in how many scales, the period has and how many people seem to play it especially at conventions. Again, Naps, ACW, WW2 ect dominate. They are mainstream.