A friendship out of “conflict”
By Mike | November 20, 2009
Back in 1979, when I first became involved in board wargaming, the world was a very different place to what it is now. I had never heard of board wargaming and my only knowledge of wargaming was that it was something played on a large tabletop using lead soldiers with the participants being curmudgeonly old retired Major Generals arguing why Ney could never seem to understand an order from Napoleon at Waterloo.
The hobby, in the UK at least, did not have much in the way of publicity so the majority of people were unaware of board wargaming, the games were only sold in specialist retailers and there were very few of them about in 1979. Back then there was no internet, email or mobile phones and trying to find an opponent was pretty much an impossible task. My friends and colleagues either were not interested, cowed by the rulebook, or were “far to grown up to play boardgames” so I was on my own and usually ended up playing “solo” i.e. playing both sides impartially. It worked for a while but what I wanted was someone to play against.
My wife worked part time as a librarian in our local library at that time and one day brought home a book that became a firm favourite with me, it was titled “A Comprehensive Guide to Board Wargaming” and was by a guy named Nicholas Palmer. This book was a lifeline to me as, at last, I became aware of what was out there. Nicholas Palmer gave an insight to the wargaming hobby and did reviews on numerous games such as Fulda Gap which became one of my favourite games and is still in my collection albeit a bit battered and worse for wear. I became aware of game manufacturers and companies like SPI and Avalon Hill became part of my life. I loved this book so much that when the hire period expired my wife just renewed it and it remained in my house for over three years. Then, one fateful day as my wife was at the library check out desk, a guy came over and asked if the library had a copy of “A Comprehensive Guide to Board Wargaming”. My wife was a bit taken aback and said “yes we do but it is out just now, I can put your name on it for you if you wish.” The guy said that that would be good. My wife asked if he was a local and a wargamer and he replied that he was. Then my wife told him that it was her husband who had the book and that he might like to meet you. The guy took a note of my address and said he would pop round in a couple of days. When she told me about this encounter I was pretty interested in meeting the guy however I felt a bit of trepidation about losing my book to another person.
About two nights later the guy appeared at my door and introduced himself as Tim or, as my mates call me, “Moth”. He seemed a decent enough guy and was about 8 years younger than me. We got chatting and agreed that he would nip round the following week for a face to face. The day arrived and he appeared with one of his games “SINAI”. After explaining the rules we got started and it was an amazing experience for both of us as we had both been playing solo until then and we both agreed that face to face was much better. We made a regular date at my place or his and we played, over the years, many games but the most enjoyable had to be the Squad Leader series by Avalon Hill. We are both pretty competetive and we used to get a bit niggled when we lost but, after a cup of hot coffee and the obligatory nip of whisky, war was forgotten about for another week at least.
Well that friendship has lasted for 27 years and although we don’t get time to play now we still are close friends. Tim has converted to miniatures which are not really my cup of tea however last Monday Tim nipped in for a quick chat and we got talking about our wargaming past and we have said we should get together again for some serious face to face so, hopefully we can get together once more.
I suppose the subject header may seem a bit dramatic but, it is a friendship from out of “conflict” even though the conflict is between “cardboard soldiers” and it is a friendship that has lasted almost three decades. Who said this hobby was for losers?
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
The History of Wargaming
By Mike | November 1, 2009
Wargames are nearly as old as organized warfare itself. Evidence has been uncovered that indicates the use of games to simulate war in ancient Egypt. Some of these games underwent an abstraction process that resulted in their transformation into board games such as chess and go.
In 1780, Helwig, Master of the Pages for the Duke of Brunswick, invented a game strikingly similar to the modern commercial wargame. It was played on a board of 1666 squares, color coded by terrain type. Players used pieces representing units of various types with different movement rates expressed in terms of squares-per-turn. In 1795, Georg Vinturinus, a military writer in Schleswig, developed a more complex version of the same type of game that used a map based on an actual piece of terrain (between France and Belgium).
In 1824 Prussian Army Lieutenant von Reisswitz published an elaborate wargame system designed to be used in actual military training and planning. The game, a development of an earlier design by the lieutenant’s father, made use of military maps, an umpire, probability tables, and detailed rules. Although it received a mixed reception in the Army (in fact jealous officers harassed von Reisswitz to the point of suicide) the game inspired the formation of a wargaming club and the publication of the first wargaming magazine, the Kriegspieier Verein. Eventually, the wargaming concept became a generally accepted tool in the German Army, and when later in the 19th Century the Germans won their stunning victory over the French in the Franco-Prussian War, many other nations (rightly or wrongly) attributed much of the success to the German’s use of Kriegspiel in preparatory training and operational planning. American Army officers, W.R. Livermore and C.A.L. Totten, each designed their own versions of the German Kriegspiel, which met with the same sort of resistance from the military establishment. Totten’s game had the unique feature of appealing to civilian garners as well as military professionals.
Wargames were used by many of the major powers shortly before and during World War I. For the most part, the games suffered from the preconceptions of their users as to what was possible and not possible. So, for example, the use of such biased strategic gaming to test the Schlieffen Plan failed to indicate the likelihood of a stalemated Western Front very early in the war. During World War II, the Germans made very good use of operational level games to plan precisely major attacks. In particular, the swift march through the Ardennes, out-flanking the Maginot Line, was thoroughly wargamed in advance. The invasion of the Soviet Union was intensely wargamed, and this contributed greatly to the speed and magnitude of the opening German victories.
One of the best known anecdotes about World War II wargaming concerns the Japanese simulation of the Battle of Midway. In this very elaborate game, the Japanese Naval officers playing the role of the Americans launched an attack on the Japanese carrier force and inflicted devastating losses on it. When a number of the Japanese carriers were sunk, the umpires were told to cancel the result (in effect, the Japanese cheated at their own game) and ‘re-float’ the ships. The game then went on to indicate the victory at Midway that the Japanese felt was inevitable. In the real event, the Japanese carrier force was struck almost precisely as indicated by the game and with even more disastrous results. This is but one of the more remarkable instances of an all-too-typical behavior pattern evident in the military use of wargames as stochastic devices: when the result isn’t what the planners expect, the temptation to cheat can be overwhelming.
In the post-WWII era, the military use of wargames became increasingly sophisticated and widespread. Much of the advance in sophistication was connected with the advent of computer technology. The computer allowed large amounts of data to be stored and manipulated, freeing the human players from the tedium associated with highly detailed manual simulations. The ultimate in computerized gaming came about with the development of mathematical models of conflict situations that are entirely played by computer without human intervention. There is some debate concerning the usefulness of such computer simulations. The amount of data generated is so great that it can overwhelm the user, thereby undermining the very reason for the simulation. As part of an attempt to deal with this problem, the military (in the US) has been examining the various wargaming techniques used in commercial games. In 1976, the US Army contracted SPI to produce a tactical level game as a training device - the identical game is also sold to the civilian market as FireFight.
Civilian/Commercial Wargaming
For as long as model soldiers have existed, wargames have been played. However, it was only shortly before World War I that such informal gaming began to take on structure and substance with the publication of H.G. Welles’ Little Wars, the first widely used rulebook for the use of miniatures in war-gaming. Since then, many such rules systems have been published, but all have been in essence derivatives of Welles’ original work.
In 1953, Charles S. Roberts produced and distributed the archetype for a new type of commercial wargame. It was called Tactics. Its modest success encouraged Roberts (in 1958) to form the Avalon Hill Company to produce adult games (including wargames). The first titles were Tactics II and Gettysburg (the first commercial wargame on a truly historical subject). The company grew rapidly up until 1963 when it. ran into an economic brick wall and almost ceased to exist. Basically it had overextended itself plus it was caught in the grip of a dislocating shift of buying from retail to discount stores. The company was taken over by its major creditor, Monarch Services. For a time it was internally dormant (so far as producing anything new) while it was reorganized. Essentially, it divested itself of its design staff and began a conservative program of producing one or two wargame titles a year, all of which were designed by freelancers.
In 1966 while the hobby was slowly growing, Christopher Wagner, then USAF Staff Sergeant in Japan, began publishing Strategy & Tactics Magazine as an alternative to Avalon Hill’s house organ, The General. Many of the people who are now ‘names’ in the hobby first became associated with each other via S&T. Wagner endeavored to produce a quality magazine to give shape and substance to the hobby. After struggling valiantly for two years, Wagner felt that he had to give up in his virtually single-handed effort to give the hobby a voice. Casting about for someone to assume the liability of the remaining subscriptions, Chris contacted Jim Dunnigan (who had written for S&T). Reluctantly, Dunnigan agreed - primarily to have a vehicle through which to test a series of experimental games he and some friends were developing. As S&T shifted its base to New York, Redmond Simonsen agreed (also reluctantly) to involve himself once again in S&T. [In the previous year Simonsen had been working with Wagner to professionalize the magazine.] After struggling through its first New York produced issues, S&T underwent a transformation into the format it more or less maintains to this day: a military history magazine with a simulation game in it. At first, both Dunnigan and Simonsen thought of S&T as a temporary venture. But the admittedly ‘rough’ games that Dunnigan had designed brought a freshness to the hobby that it sorely needed. Plus in one stroke, they doubled the number of game titles available to hobbyists. As Simonsen began to professionalize the ‘look’ of S&T and SPI games, and as the two men took a team approach to game design, the pace of the hobby began to quicken.
In late 1970, Simonsen and Dunnigan incorporated as Simulation Publications. Via a program of advertising, S&Ts circulation began to build and sales of SPI games to its readers began to take on serious proportions. By 1972, SPI was growing exponentially and became a substantial competitor to Avalon Hill, which until SPI’s advent had been the only ship in a very calm sea.
The innovations that SPI brought to the hobby are in large part responsible for its present vitality. The production of a serious history magazine containing a full-fledged game; the constant surveying of garners to discover the titles they wished to see produced; the quantum jump in the rate of game production; the multiplicity of new game systems; the multi-talented in-house design staff - all these elements and others have made SPI a major force in the rapidly growing field of civilian wargaming.
SPI’s success has encouraged the formation and entry of other companies into the field, and the resultant competition and diversity has benefited the hobby greatly. SPI, Avalon Hill, and the other publishers are basically friendly rivals with a common interest. All the major and most of the minor companies now participate in an annual convention and show attended by thousands of garners.
The number of wargamers in the country has been variously estimated at from 100 to 250 thousand although the potential exists for a much greater audience. The typical American wargamer is a college-educated male in his middle twenties. No more than one percent of garners are women, but this is changing as women in general diversify their interests and activities. Hobbyists offer a wide spectrum of reasons for playing such complex, time-consuming games, but most say that wargames afford them a unique approach to historical information as well as a highly challenging, involving source of entertainment and competition.
From its origins as a court curiosity to the highly developed sophisticated manual simulations of the seventies, wargaming has undergone a remarkable evolution. There are now hundreds of wargames in print and the list is growing by several dozen each year. The level of innovation and production is several orders of magnitude greater than it was only a decade ago. Just ahead lies the era of electronic wargaming as the personal computer explosion impacts in the US. It’s a safe prediction that the next ten years will be at least as fascinating as the last ten.
Redmond A Sirnonsen
From: Napoleon of Waterloo, 2nd Edition, December 1979.
© HexWar Ltd. July 2007
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Figure Versus Board games
By Mike | October 26, 2009
When fighting out battle on the table top generated by board games, I realised there are tremendous differences between the way board games and figure gamers see war. These are a few of the differences.
1. Board games use the nebulous concept of zones of control. This implies that units sort of spread out from the hex they are in and occupy the surrounding 6 hexes or cover them by fire. In figure battles, the only way you stop the enemy moving through areas is to be in them.
2. Defenders in figure campaigns always dig in given time. Whether they use stakes, wire, redoubts, trenches or just bundles of sticks, time multiplies the defensive potential of a position. Few board games allow units that do not move to entrench.
3. In figure games, combined arms attacks are crucial. In Napoleonic warfare the ideal attack involves infantry, cavalry and artillery. Some board games use a combined arms multiplier, most do not. It is not just the strength of the units attacking, it is the combination that is crucial.
4. The relative position of the units in the attack is crucial. In board games, the key is usually to get the most strength points into the assault by placing in adjacent hexes in any order. In figure games it is often important to get the units involved to attack from the right direction, in the right order.
5. Some of the combats resolved in board games just never happen on the table top. Infantry armies cannot bring mechanised forces to battle, if the more mobile defenders trade space for time.
This raises some fundamental questions about the nature of figure and board games. Are board games gross simplifications of warfare? Could board games be made more realistic by use of modifiers such as +1 for combined arms, units stationary for two turns get +2 defensive bonus (some do). Why do board games modelling the same campaigns at identical scales all have different modifiers? (e.g. compare games on two of the most popular topics, Battle of the Bulge or Waterloo board games). Are figure games inherently superior?
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
WARGAMES VS. WARGAMING INTERESTS
By Mike | October 26, 2009
There are wargames and, then, there is wargaming ! In my opinion, the two are definitely related but in no way synonymous…. Invariably, wargames are marketed by publishers and are conceived of and developed by various types of specialists. Wargaming is what hobbyists ACTUALLY DO with published wargames.
As far as I am concerned, a wargame is essentially an ABSTRACT MODEL focussing on armed conflict the specific implementation and features of which allow certain types of wargaming to take place within its confines.
In the last 40 years or so, three broad classes of wargames have made their successful debut: miniature, board and computer/console ones. Computer/console wargames have inherited many attributes, outlooks and approaches historically associated with their other two, somewhat older cousins…..
Wargaming comprises quite a few types of hobbyist interests in many combinations and varying proportions. Here are the main ones:
1) MILITARY HISTORY is an old standard bearer here. Depictive, representational and, even, symbolic fidelity to the dicta of historical research are the key concerns of the professional as well as amateur military historian.
2) STRATEGY is another oldie interest. Competitive, interactive play to WIN (or, not lose) is the definite focus here.
3) IMMERSIVE EXPERIENCE (and content) is a relatively new kid on the block or so we believe. Role playing and audio-visual effect “fests” rule the roost here but not to the exclusion of many other things…..
There has been a long standing feud between military history and strategy focussed wargaming. This has led to the appearance, adoption and use of labels such as “strategy wargamer” and “historical wargamer”. To their credit, the more thoughtful and consistent “historical wargamers” have abandoned all references to “warGAMING” in favour of “SIMULATING war(fare)” or “SIMULATING conflict”. These hobbyists have come to the realisation that “strategy gaming” considerations are a direct threat to the main purpose of military history focussed wargaming, namely, the accurate re-enactment of historically recorded armed conflict and, perhaps, the “scientific modelling” of carefully chosen, “realistic”, BUT historically counterfactual (”what if”) armed conflict variations.
Unfortunately, quite a few “historical wargamers” (i.e., “grognards”) appear to be using the term “wargame” as being synonymous with “historically accurate war(fare) simulation”. Similarly, the term “wargamer” is viewed by them to be synonymous with “historically accurate conflict simulationist”. “Grognards” tend to frown upon just “historically inspired” wargaming. Furthermore, they are very very much into “historical accuracy” AND “historical realism”, terms that they use interchangeably….. Finally, they consider “strategy gaming” considerations to be subordinate to “historical concerns”, YET they do not want to do away with such “gaming” completely. Unless one is, himself, a “grognard”, it is virtually impossible to effectively communicate with many such hobbyists….
In general, wargames reflect market and marketing realities. I am NOT going to second guess here the economic efficiency of the underlying markets and the economic signals that wargame purchases send to the various wargame producers/developers. However, it may be a good idea all around NOT to discuss wargames (particularly the ones exhibiting some connection with historical warfare) “in toto” but rather from one or more particular HOBBYIST points of view…. Many misunderstandings can be avoided if hobbyists are sensitised to the fact that a wargame by itself is a BIG NOTHING. It is only particular human interests that render such models interesting, even entertaining !!
Let us face it gentlemen ! Hobbyists whose consistent, primary interest over time is to accurately SIMULATE historical warfare are NOT gamers. They are NOT really interested in “playing” or “gaming”. They are historical warfare simulationists aiming at historically accurate re-enactment….
On the other hand, competitive strategy gaming is, fundamentally, an intensive and expansive intellectual activity that knows of no historical boundaries…. Invariably, prevailing over a skilled (human ?) opponent requires considerable creativity and pushing the “game system” to the limit. Ahistorical or historically counterfactual results tend to be the rule rather than the exception much to the dismay, even horror, of pure historical simulationists who seek re-enactment rather than intellectual victory over another (human ?) player….
To conclude, I would imagine that quite a few of you would tear SSI’s original Panzer General (DOS) to shreds as far as historical warfare simulations go. I mean, there would be a long litany of historical fidelity shortcomings associated with both the title’s engine and the 38 scenaria native to the game. Fair enough ! BUT, the same engine COULD be utilised within the context of custom scenaria that are specifically designed for all-human play and not for easy victories against the hapless “programmed opponent”…. The intellectual challenge could be considerable provided one wears the hat of a “strategy wargamer” rather than that of a “historical conflict simulationist”.
Gentlemen, I believe that “strategy wargaming” and “historical warfare re-enactments” just CANNOT be conceptually and procedurally reconciled and better be left as separate hobbyist approaches (possibly utilising the VERY SAME wargames, nonetheless) !
Ok, then, next time someone tells us something about wargame X or Y it would be nice to expand into the kinds of WARGAMING that he thinks these wargames are well suited for, right ?
The author, Panos Stoucas, is a long time all-human strategy wargaming enthusiast and is currently the “Facilitator” of the PG (DOS) PBEM RESEARCH CENTRE. He can be reached at pstoucas@istar.ca
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Battle of Corinth - SPI Publications
By Mike | October 23, 2009
Well, I am looking for a bit of help here. I have the SPI game of The Battle of Corinth and Jackson at the Crossroads (Cross Keys & Port Republi c). This is a double game in one box that I bought many moons ago from a second hand games dealer at a games fair in Edinburgh. The guy selling it did make me aware that the game was incomplete and it turned out that all the components are there for both games except the mapsheet for Jackson at the Crossroads. I have played the Corinth game on a number of occasions but can’t play the Jackson game.What I would like to know, is there is anyone out there in cyberspace who might have this missing map perhaps in a game that you no longer play and would be prepared to let me have it. I am happy to pay a reasonable price including postage if you are happy to sell it to me.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Deryck Guyler - Wargamer
By Mike | October 17, 2009
I suppose that there won’t be many who will remember the well loved actor Deryck Guyler, especially outside of the UK. Well, he was a very accomplished comedy actor who was popular just after the second world war and who went on to become one of our best loved characters in a number of sitcoms namely, Sykes, where he played the part of Constable Turnbull (alias Corky) which ran for 20 years from 1960 and in the TV series Please Sir! where he is probably best known for being the cantankerous school caretaker Norman Potter. Claiming to be an ex- Desert Rat, Potter would often complain about class ‘Five C’ and their ‘dreadful behaviour’. He also had a starring role alongside the Beatles in A Hard Days Night. He passed away at the age of 85 in 1999 after emigrating to Australia.
Well, for those of you who do remember him there is one thing that you may not be aware of and that is, he was an avid wargamer. He was not a board wargamer but a miniature gamer and had a huge collection of model soldiers. He was a founding member of the Society of Ancients, a group of wargamers specialising in the Classical Era. Very active in the society in its early years, being elected its first president in 1966, he was later made an honorary life president of the society. Well I thought I would share that little snippet with you in case you may be interested.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Absent Without Leave
By Mike | October 17, 2009
Once again I have failed my readers by being off site for quite a while and I offer my apologies. Life for our family has been hard the past three years as we lost my Father-in-law in February 2007 and had all the trauma of trying to deal with my Mother-in-law who was suffering from dementia and was in a nursing home. Very sadly, after a bad fall that resulted in a broken hip, she passed away on 6 June this year. It puts things into perspective when you lose somebody so special and blogging and playing wargames fades to insignificance. But, as they say, life goes on and although the pain and grief remains it’s time to move on and get back to what I enjoy and my enjoyment is boardwargaming.
In a previous blog I reported that I had set up an old favourite, FULDA GAP, however, after set up, things just got in the way and I never started the scenario and ended up putting it back in the box unplayed. I am starting to get my motivation back and plan to set up another game soon so will let you know how things progress.
Sorry for my absence to those who take time to read my pages, and I know there are a huge number especially in the US and I appreciate your interest.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Historical Games & War Games - Can You Change History?
By Mike | December 6, 2008
What if you were in charge of the American Army during World War II? What if you were rebuilding a small city in the town of Carcassonne, France? How would you build it?
Historical gaming has always fascinated gamers because of the concept of recreating a moment in time and changing history. We all know we can’t actually change history, but we can recreate exactly what the opposition faced. We can see what hardships and strategies they used? We can also learn what they could have done differently.
There are some great games out there that teach a little history while you play. There are some things you learn as you play these games that you would have never know unless you played them. One of my personal favorites is Memoir ‘44. This game comes with nine different scenarios, so the game can change each time you play. It’s still a game, so there is a lot of fun and strategy, but it makes me appreciate the odds the opposing team faced as I play the corresponding scenario. Most the times I have played, I carry the scenario with me in my head thinking about the “What if’s”. I can honestly say I have never walked away from Monopoly and said “Wow!” afterwards.
Win or lose I always have fun playing historical war games. Try and find something that you like. Here is a list of war games I recommend you try.
- Memoir ‘44 - Staged in World War II for 2 players. The game lasts about an hour. It does take time to set up the scenario, though.
- Tides of Iron - Also a World War II game, but a little more depth. The tiles can be changed to play different games.
- Axis and Allies Miniatures-Battle at Sea - You select your battleships and roll the dice. Although there aren’t any scenario-based games here, you learn about the strength of the ships, the advantages of having heavy armor vs. speed. Or see how even a wounded opponent can get a good shot in.
- Risk - There are many different varieties available, but the concept is the same: Where do you place your armies to prevent being overrun.
If you are not into the idea of a large war game, but like the idea of historically-oriented board games, here are more ideas on the lighter side…
- Carcassonne - This game is more fun than historical, but the town forms as players try to capture Castles, Farms, and Roads. It is a very good and light introduction to Historical gaming. You might even decide to use Google and find out a little about Carcassonne, the famous town.
- Settlers of Catan - The core game does not have scenarios, but understand how the resources of wood, iron, bricks and food, affect settling the countryside. Another fun element is that you can trade resources with other players, which is what I imagine settlers actually had to do.
- Ticket to Ride - Build railroad lines from one US city to another. The further the distance, the more points you get. Other railroaders may even try and block you. This is a great game for geography. It also introduces very light strategy, which all ages can play. There are many varieties of this game, (Europe, Switzerland, Germany, and a US Card Game) to learn about other countries as well.
- Puerto Rico - You encourage the growth of the island based on your role, which changes every turn. You need to incorporate the development of goods, build manufacturing plants to turn those goods into products, and then you actually have to sell those goods for a profit. And you can’t do this without workers, so you need to get them also. Oh, and your opponents are trying to outsmart you while they develop their own version of the same island. The most productive Governor wins.
Written by Charles Cabell
Topics: Wargame Reviews | No Comments »
Posted Missing in Action
By Mike | September 18, 2008
Well I have been missing from the site for a while, I believe the last post was around May 2008. I could give a number of excuses for my lack of activity by saying that Summer has intervened but that would be a lie as Summer has not really arrived this year or last year either for that matter. This year had to be the worst on record with huge quantities of rain falling. Where I live in Central Scotland we had 200% above the average rainfall from May until now, this resulted in little outdoor activity.
I suppose I should come clean and say that I have become hooked on a computer game, not anything to do with wargames but a game produced by SEGA and called Football Manager. For my American and Australian cousins by football I mean soccer. The game puts you in charge of a football team anywhere in the world and you can manage a lowly little team to the biggest names in football such as Real Madrid, Manchester United to name just a couple you can also manage a national side and try and qualify in the World Cup if you want. The game is amazing and, being a big football fan myself, I have become addicted to the game. It all kicked off on Christmas 2006 when I got Football Manager 2007 and then last Christmas I received an upgraded version, FM2008, since then all else has been forgotten. I will get FM2009 this year and will no doubt will be hooked again but I have promised myself that I will get back to blogging this site and be less neglectful to my main love that is board wargaming. I must say though that I am not a great fan of computer games however this game does appeal to my wargaming phsyche as it is very strategic and as a manager you need tactics and planning to achieve success.
And so, back to this awful weather, I suppose, for us less fanatical wargamers, Summer is probably “close season” and we don’t really get back into the hobby until early October but it looks like Autumn / Fall has arrived a month early so I will be happy to get the blinds drawn and bring down an old and trusted friend from my upstairs cupboard and get set up for another campaign to while away the long dark Winter nights. I have chosen an old favourite, Fulda Gap by SPI, and have to admit that I felt very sad to see how I had abused the game. After the Nato / Warsaw Pact era collapsed in 1989 the game was relegated to the loft and stayed there for a number of years. With other stuff getting put up there the box took a bit of damage and was rather squashed damaging the corners. Inside the game is pretty marked and smells a bit musty however with a bit of TLC it will recover and bring back many fond memories. I have also considered Next War but it is a true monster game and my wife will not be too happy with this being left in situ as we are currently in the throws of decorating the upstairs rooms. Well I suppose it looks like Fulda will get a bit of action with the Russian hordes swarming over the borders to take Frankfurt.
I might give a report from the “front” in my next visit which I promise will not be too long away.
Topics: Currently Playing | No Comments »
The Golden Years
By Mike | May 19, 2008
For me at least, the golden years of board wargaming were from 1979, the year I first discovered board wargames and probably 1991 when the bottom fell out of the board game market.
I believe the writing was on the wall for the hobby with the advent of Dungeons and Dragons in the late seventies and early eighties. This spawned a number of other fantasy type games and some companies sprung up that further enhanced the fantasy role play genre such as Games Workshop. I have to admit that the fantasy genre does not interest me in the slightest and it is hard enough to get people to accept that at 60 I still play wargames without adding that I am interested in playing an elf or dwarf etc and fight dragons.
The first major casualty was SPI who, after many years of producing great and not so great games and challenging the best namely Avalon Hill, became bankrupt in 1982. I have such fond memories of SPI and own a couple of their classic and much sought after games namely Next War and Art of Siege. These have given me a great deal of pleasure down the years and it is sad that companies like SPI are still not around. Also Avalon Hill eventually sold out and after that the hobby went into freefall.
I suppose in some ways the demise of board wargaming meant that I saved myself money as there were so few retailers around especially near where I live in east of Scotland and eventually these few outlets also closed. When I attend conventions such as Claymore it is mainly miniature gaming on display and although these are esthetically pleasing I personally do not have the space or time to devote to miniature gaming as it is even more expensive and the effort taken to have to paint model armies is just not for me.
Over the past few years I believe the boardgaming industry is beginning to revive and I am pleased to see that some of the old timers from Avalon Hill are now with GMT Games notably Roger McGowan. GMT are without doubt my favourite company now and I have bought a few of their titles such as 3 Days of Gettysburg, Men of Iron, Borodino and Wellington, all of these are very good quality and the sales service is second to none. Also of note is an increase in quality boardgames from a number of independent companies such as Worthington Games, Decision Games and Clash of Arms to name a few so the future is now looking brighter however, my bank account and visa bill are starting to take on a rather worrying aspect. I suppose it’s not too much to pay for the huge amount of pleasure the games give me also it keeps me out of mischief and keeps my failing mind active.
I do hope that the revival is not shortlived as I intend to be around for a long time yet.
Topics: General | No Comments »
« Previous Entries