Let's Talk: Wargame or Not

[LongBlade]

But that's not the point. No one here is claiming to be the ultimate authority on what is or is not a wargame (for my money, World of Tanks is entertaining but NOT a wargame), we are simply debating what a wargame is to us. It's about as harmless a debate as asking if you prefer chocolate or vanilla.

FWIW I consider this site to be the authority on commercial entertainment-grade wargames. We may not agree, but this body of gamers is probably as close to you'll get as an "ultimate authority" on the topic  8)

[Steelgrave]

But that's not the point. No one here is claiming to be the ultimate authority on what is or is not a wargame (for my money, World of Tanks is entertaining but NOT a wargame), we are simply debating what a wargame is to us. It's about as harmless a debate as asking if you prefer chocolate or vanilla.

FWIW I consider this site to be the authority on commercial entertainment-grade wargames. We may not agree, but this body of gamers is probably as close to you'll get as an "ultimate authority" on the topic  8)

I'll go you one better and say that we could do a better job of running the country than the idiots in charge. Well....we would have to find an important sounding but ultimately meaningless position for SoM just to keep him out of our hair while we strip mine and dig oil wells 8) But I'm sure we can think of something.

[LongBlade]

But that's not the point. No one here is claiming to be the ultimate authority on what is or is not a wargame (for my money, World of Tanks is entertaining but NOT a wargame), we are simply debating what a wargame is to us. It's about as harmless a debate as asking if you prefer chocolate or vanilla.

FWIW I consider this site to be the authority on commercial entertainment-grade wargames. We may not agree, but this body of gamers is probably as close to you'll get as an "ultimate authority" on the topic  8)

I'll go you one better and say that we could do a better job of running the country than the idiots in charge. Well....we would have to find an important sounding but ultimately meaningless position for SoM just to keep him out of our hair while we strip mine and dig oil wells 8) But I'm sure we can think of something.

LOL

Then it's settled. He'll be Vice President.

[Steelgrave]

^SNORT! Awesome, just awesome.   8)  But ummmm......live long and prosper, President Longblade.

[jomni]

Anyway as I stated on my very first post in this thread:

No matter what the type of game is,  as long as a majority of grogs approve (for whatever inconsistent reasoning) then it is a Wargame.

[GDS_Starfury]

We may not agree, but this body of gamers is probably as close to you'll get as an "ultimate authority" on the topic  8)

and boobs.

[W8taminute]

But that's not the point. No one here is claiming to be the ultimate authority on what is or is not a wargame (for my money, World of Tanks is entertaining but NOT a wargame), we are simply debating what a wargame is to us. It's about as harmless a debate as asking if you prefer chocolate or vanilla.

FWIW I consider this site to be the authority on commercial entertainment-grade wargames. We may not agree, but this body of gamers is probably as close to you'll get as an "ultimate authority" on the topic  8)

Bravo!  I am proud to be a member of that body.

To me a wargame is a cardboard map with hexes printed on it with square counters that represent panzer divisions or motor rifle brigades.  The setting of course is the eastern front during world war 2.  The paper bound rulebook must be 100 pages or more and there should be text in it discussing LOS, out of supply conditions, unit dispersals, etc.  One must reread the terrain effects modifiers sections many times and still not understand them until the errata sheet gets mailed to your house.  One must be able to derive extreme joy out of separating the counters from their sheets (and those counters need to have panzer divisions on them) or it is not a wargame. 

Earning a STEAM achievement on a computer for winning a game with a female civilization leader or sailing around the world first in a rickshaw is not a wargame. 

[Bison]

The endstate of what is a wargame is not necessarily to identify a strict specific definition of "This is a wargame...This isn't a game...because of x,y, and z factors".  That being said, I don't think it's as ambiguous as saying any game someone wants to call a wargame is a wargame. 

If someone starts to ask about wargames and recommendations, what are the first questions you start to ask?  I think therein lies the basis of what is or is not a wargame.  Here are some questions I know that I'd ask right off of the bat.

What era of conflict are you interested in the most?
Do you like turn based games or real time games?
What level of war most interests you? 

[LongBlade]

The endstate of what is a wargame is not necessarily to identify a strict specific definition of "This is a wargame...This isn't a game...because of x,y, and z factors".  That being said, I don't think it's as ambiguous as saying any game someone wants to call a wargame is a wargame. 

If someone starts to ask about wargames and recommendations, what are the first questions you start to ask?  I think therein lies the basis of what is or is not a wargame.  Here are some questions I know that I'd ask right off of the bat.

What era of conflict are you interested in the most?
Do you like turn based games or real time games?
What level of war most interests you?

That's a fine start. I'd also toss in that, depending on the forum, it could be electronic, board game, or minis.

[Cyrano]

Three games, one question.

Is each a wargame?  Why or why not?  Twitter answers only, i.e., 140 characters or less.

Friedrich:  http://www.simmonsgames.com/products/Friedrich/index.html

Battle Cry:  http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/551/battle-cry

Axis and Allies:  You know what I'm talking about.

This discussion covered an entire trip from Milwaukee to GenCon a couple years ago.  It seems to me that these three are as good a test as any for a proposed "wargame"/"not wargame" taxonomy.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

[bayonetbrant]

I don't know the first well enough, but the other two I can do, and I would consider them wargames:


Battle Cry: combat-focused mechanics that require battlefield success to win, and do no focus on 'platforming' individual abilities for continued success later in the game

A&A:  Although the economic components are necessary for continued battlefield success, victory is not possible without winning in combat


To me, the real 'acid test' is Diplomacy.  Do you consider the 'combat mechanic' of that game to be a sufficient measure of "winning a battle"?

[Barthheart]

Axis & Allies = wargame

Diplomacy != wargame

How about Twilight Struggle? For me it's like Diplomacy in that combat is not the main winning ingredient so not a wargame.

[Bison]

Battle cry = tactical level wargame
Axis and Allies = strategic level wargame

A couple of issues that seem to crop up are the mechanics a game uses and the complexity.

[Barthheart]

I don't think complexity should way in on wargame or not.

LnL's Tank on Tank is a very simple game but is definitely a wargame.

Mechanics of the game I think are a component on what makes up a wargame.

[Bison]

I don't think complexity should be a driving factor either, but there are those who view it as a break down in creating accuracy.