"Realism & the Renaissance of Ancients" Topic

Given the number of minis out there with new ones being added, I would say it is already here!

Agree!

Jim

No more using Airfix's Robinhood for everything not a Gaul or a Roman, lol.

I think that while the trends come and go, basic 'ancients' has remained a pretty constant and popular staple of the hobby wargamer.

Within ancients, there are certainly trends to look out for. I can't believe how many sets of 1/72 plastics there are now … and for the manufacturers making them, there must be evidence of (a) demand, and (b) given the funky poses are out and the wargame poses are in, wargamer demand.

Phil

This is ridiculous, as I reject the premise of the question. The popularity (or not) of fantasy and science fiction was not and never will be some sort of detriment to any form of historical gaming, as such things bring new people into wargaming, many of whom who then acquire an interest in historical periods and explore those games as well. In fact, I suggest that is exactly what has happened, and that historical products have increased alongside F/SF products. (Keep in mind that the entire Warlords historical game line is based on a rules system derived from the 10mm fantasy game, Warmaster. So the latter drove the creation of the former.)

It's a question of confusing "appearance" and "statistics." I have no doubt that at conventions and game stores, et al., that old time historical gamers witnessed an increase in F/SF players coming in over the last forty-odd years, but it's rather like noticing there are more people in your favorite restaurant ordering other things on the menu. It doesn't mean there are fewer options on the menu for you, or that you can't sit down and eat. In fact, it typically results in the opposite— an increased menu for you, and an expanded restaurant. So at the conventions there were and are more F/SF games happening, but that didn't mean there were or are fewer historical games happening. Maybe it used to be 8 historical games and no F/SF, and then there were 10 historical games and 5 F/SF, and then there were 12 historical games and 10 F/SF, and then there were 14 historical games and 20 F/SF, and so forth. The latter was increasing more, but both were increasing.

Has there been a shift so that now the historicals are increasing at a greater rate than the F/SF? I don't know. I haven't actually measured. And I'm betting the writer of the article hasn't actually measured either.

So, if there is a "renaissance" of "realism" and "ancients," I would suggest that it's not because of any sort of fall-off in interest in fantasy and science fiction (however clearly desired by the author, for reasons which are as illogical as they are inexplicable), but rather simply the expanding interests of those who began in one area and have decided to try other areas as well.

So I conclude, again, "This is ridiculous."

While there may be renaissance of the genre, I reject the author's premise regarding the reason.

Parzival +1.

It's a question of confusing "appearance" and "statistics."

Yeah! Who wants to base their information on actual facts? Down with statistics! (Especially the ones they didn't have in 431 BC).

historical wargaming was rather put in the shade since the 80's by the fantasy genre which I suspect – perhaps – is beginning to get a little tired now.

I disagree with the premise of this statement. Anyway, we're talking about gaming, right. (I have a secret for you, shhh, they are all just games.)