"History, Period, or Genre, Why You Game What You Do?" Topic

The popular one I didn't tick was 'to have fun': I find games that are designed to be fun often aren't – players who set out to have fun frequently don't (and/or can spoil games for other players looking for more) …

Conversely, games that set out to tick lots of other historical and play boxes, played by players happy to follow the designer's/umpire's direction usually are immense fun.

For me, 'fun' in a wargame comes from a good design, really strong narrative and players giving it full value (rather than maybe just playing for laughs) …

Great games are the most fun

Phil

I like to play with toy soldiers.

I play historical periods that I am already interested in, but if the game isn't fun I won't bother.

I play to have fun and have interest in somewhat obscure periods-sometimes to the detriment of getting the club interested in playing.

It's the puzzle. Actually, it's two levels of puzzle. First you have the immediate historical one--well, what would have happened if
--Howard had used his last division to protect his right?
--Napoleon had attacked early, mud or not mud?
--Custer had kept his command together?
And so forth.
Second, there's the deeper and more generic puzzle. Were the Peninsular Spanish/the 1940 French/the 1942 Italians just doomed, or were they poorly employed? COULD the Peninsular French have won? That sort of thing gets you to studying the history of small and partial successes, doctrines and equipment--and it will lead you to the wargame table even if you didn't start there.
Might be a third level. I have great hopes of attempting the day of Bosworth this fall or next spring, trying to see what combinations of starting strengths and maneuvers will deposit cannonballs where they're starting to be found. We shall see.

I like the idea of a puzzle. I get that feeling more from board games I think, but I've definitely felt it.