The title is pretty much self explanatory.

At a recent mini FOW tournament I attended, 19 out of 20, yes, that's 19 out of 20 players were armies of the 3rd Reich. In most cases, they were SS lists. The only non-German list was my own - a grenadier guards armoured company with elements of the 82nd as infantry.

Now, I'm the first to admit that German lists are usually good, tiger tanks are fething brilliant in my view, but wherever I seem to go these days, it's all German. Most of the popular WW2 books/documentaries these days are on the Germans.

What's the reasoning for this? Do people want reliable armies to command? Are there lots of closet Nazis out there? Or are we just simply fascinated with villains as we generally tend to be with films and other books - Darth Vader, The Joker, etc etc

Finally, at least I can't be accused of Godwinning this thread!

Thoughts?

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Or are we just simply fascinated with villains as we generally tend to be with films and other books - Darth Vader, The Joker, etc etc

I don't play any WW2 TT games, but the reason I dig the Germans in general is because of this. That simple.

 fishy bob wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Or are we just simply fascinated with villains as we generally tend to be with films and other books - Darth Vader, The Joker, etc etc

I don't play any WW2 TT games, but the reason I dig the Germans in general is because of this. That simple.

I know the Soviet Union were on the allied side, but you could (and I will ) argue that they were pretty villainous, and yet, they don't seem to be that popular (in my experience anyway) when it comes to the mini-wargaming community.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 fishy bob wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Or are we just simply fascinated with villains as we generally tend to be with films and other books - Darth Vader, The Joker, etc etc

I don't play any WW2 TT games, but the reason I dig the Germans in general is because of this. That simple.

I know the Soviet Union were on the allied side, but you could (and I will ) argue that they were pretty villainous, and yet, they don't seem to be that popular (in my experience anyway) when it comes to the mini-wargaming community.

Soviet was certainly villains. They killed more than Nazi Germany. But they mainly killed their own people, and we're fine with that

As for them not being as popular among WW2 gamers... High infantry model count?

Edit: Just for the record I dig Soviet too. Germany, Italy and Soviet are my main WW2 points of interest.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

I know the Soviet Union were on the allied side, but you could (and I will ) argue that they were pretty villainous, and yet, they don't seem to be that popular (in my experience anyway) when it comes to the mini-wargaming community.

Actually the Soviets started out on Germany's side, in the first few years of the war. Stalin and Hitler signed a non-agression pact, which involved splitting the territory of Poland between them and a trade agreement (Russian oil etc). Russia also took the opportunity to invade Finland. It wasn't until a couple years later, when an overconfident Hitler decided to invade Russia in an attempt to seize control of its vast natural resources that the Soviets were forced to join the Allies.


So Russia was initially our enemy, but was forced to join our side when Hitler betrayed them. A fact often conveniently overlooked, among many other things.

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

I know the Soviet Union were on the allied side, but you could (and I will ) argue that they were pretty villainous, and yet, they don't seem to be that popular (in my experience anyway) when it comes to the mini-wargaming community.

Actually the Soviets started out on Germany's side, in the first few years of the war. Stalin and Hitler signed a non-agression pact, which involved splitting the territory of Poland between them and a trade agreement (Russian oil etc). Russia also took the opportunity to invade Finland. It wasn't until a couple years later, when an overconfident Hitler decided to invade Russia in an attempt to seize control of its vast natural resources that the Soviets were forced to join the Allies.


So Russia was initially our enemy, but was forced to join our side when Hitler betrayed them. A fact often conveniently overlooked, among many other things.

I know!

Point is, you don't see that many Soviet lists these days. It was mentioned by an earlier poster that infantry heavy lists would put people off, but at 15mm scale, it's easy to rattle out the infantry squads, and if you run a soviet tank company with Joseph Stalin heavy tanks, then the points will add up. Nah, there's something at work here!

In all war games, people are going to pick the bad guys to play. And from an aesthetic standpoint much of the German equipment is very striking.

To do any type of war-gaming you have to ignore the context a little bit. You don't spend a lot of time thinking about the actual misery inflicted on human beings when the real life thing you are recreating with toy soldiers actually happened. You have to be OK with a certain level of that as a prerequisite for this hobby. On the other hand, I can totally empathize with someone who wouldn't participate in the hobby because they feel the context can't or shouldn't be completely separated. I heard plenty of people express dislike for Battlefront releasing their Vietnam version of Fow. It still hits too close to home for many Americans. It can be a complex issue to parse if you think about it.

But when someone breaks out the their SS army, with their SS token set, their SS dice, and their SS dice bag. Well I HOPE that they're just decontextualizing too much, and not realizing the unfortunate implications. Unfortunately, there are a few of those guys that probably know exactly what they are doing.

I've never seen a 40k army in person using Swastikas.

However, in a WW2 game, it would be completely appropriate.

 kronk wrote:
I've never seen a 40k army in person using Swastikas.

However, in a WW2 game, it would be completely appropriate.

I swear that I've seen a Nazi Guard army on the webz, so I googled, and this nugget came up.



Edit: Sorry, missed your "in person". Well neither have I, but there certainly are some out there.

Edit 2: For what it's worth, I put the image in spoiler tag because precious delicacy.

Seriously a Fow event where the majority were Germans?

I see mainly 2ID, Brit para, US para!

I think the reason FoW has a lot of nazi stuff is that it's set in WW2 and in every theatre they cover the nazi are in it (except rising sun!)

It's economical to be axis as you can use the force on the east/West/Italian/African fronts.

 fishy bob wrote:

 kronk wrote:
I've never seen a 40k army in person using Swastikas.

However, in a WW2 game, it would be completely appropriate.

I swear that I've seen a Nazi Guard army on the webz, so I googled, and this nugget came up.



Edit: Sorry, missed your "in person". Well neither have I, but there certainly are some out there.

Sweet baby Jesus!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CaulynDarr wrote:
In all war games, people are going to pick the bad guys to play. And from an aesthetic standpoint much of the German equipment is very striking.

To do any type of war-gaming you have to ignore the context a little bit. You don't spend a lot of time thinking about the actual misery inflicted on human beings when the real life thing you are recreating with toy soldiers actually happened. You have to be OK with a certain level of that as a prerequisite for this hobby. On the other hand, I can totally empathize with someone who wouldn't participate in the hobby because they feel the context can't or shouldn't be completely separated. I heard plenty of people express dislike for Battlefront releasing their Vietnam version of Fow. It still hits too close to home for many Americans. It can be a complex issue to parse if you think about it.

But when someone breaks out the their SS army, with their SS token set, their SS dice, and their SS dice bag. Well I HOPE that they're just decontextualizing too much, and not realizing the unfortunate implications. Unfortunately, there are a few of those guys that probably know exactly what they are doing.

Good post.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Reaver83 wrote:
Seriously a Fow event where the majority were Germans?

I see mainly 2ID, Brit para, US para!

I think the reason FoW has a lot of nazi stuff is that it's set in WW2 and in every theatre they cover the nazi are in it (except rising sun!)

It's economical to be axis as you can use the force on the east/West/Italian/African fronts.

I agree with this - the fact that the Germans are the main enemy in the European threatre would account for a large number of German lists, but given how cheap and how popular the FOW starter box was, I'm slightly surprised that more people don't run lists based on the Allied contents of the box.

US paratroopers are probably my favourite infantry these days.

 kronk wrote:
I've never seen a 40k army in person using Swastikas.

However, in a WW2 game, it would be completely appropriate.

I have, we had a Jewish guy at my old store that had a Nazi themed army complete with a Hitler Company Command Squad leader. We also had an Iwo Jima themed Imp Guard army when the CCS looked like the flag raising at Iwo Jima when you set them up properly.

I've seen some images on the inter-webs, of course. But I honestly don't think it's that common place to be called "popular", like in this thread's title.

Can we spoiler tag the images with swastikas? Just a consideration of those of use that browse the site in semi-public locations.

I think it's a similar reason to why Romans are popular in ancients and the French in Napoleonics - they have a sense of perceived greater power, they often look visually better (well, moreso than their contemporaries), and their ubiquity across all areas of their respective wars means that there's just more written about them, more interest in them and more models made of them.

I think it also has to do with looks. Their tanks look cool, uniforms look cool, they have those cool trenchcoats and they have skulls. Perfect for any wargame.

I think you're taking anecdotal evidence and trying to generalize it.

That tournament you went to was crazily skewed towards SS. That's very much an fluke - FoW's Late War period is skewed much more towards Americans at the moment. Germans are a little on the backfoot because American rules/lists are so good. If there's any reason I can think of, it's that SS lists in FoW get you Fearless Veteran Germans (in comparison to most German lists which are Confident Veteran) and that the guys at Battlefront seem to believe the propaganda that the SS were superhuman soldiers that got all of the Reich's best material.

The reason why you'll see so many Germans in WWII games is, quite obviously, because the Germans were essentially the ubiquitous enemy of the European conflict. And it's the conflict in Europe/Africa that gets all the cools toys that gamers want - tanks, halftracks, airplanes, etc.

Soviets in FoW at the moment are underpowered - the Hen and Chicks rule really screws them over. Red Bear just had an update that lowered the points cost of Soviet stuff to reflect just how poor the Soviets are doing.

But, yeah - there's a definite population of gamers that looks at SS stuff and thinks 'Oh man, that's so kewl! Gonna have a whole army of that!' I try to avoid people like that. There's a difference between acknowledging you're using SS troops due to a scenario, and thinking they're cool to collect.

I find that people tend to have a romantic view of the German Army of WW2 especially the panzer divisions, I have not only seen this in historical miniatures but in 40K I have seen people make Imperial Guard armies based off German WW2 units but usually they leave out the Swastika. If you look at the Imperium of Man it can easily be seen as a resemblance to Nazi Germany and I think may people have come to that conclusion. With many people who lived through Europe during the rise of Hitler and WW2 and vets from the war many of them have passed away so the impact of WW2 to the future generations would be less than say the older generation and tend to be a little more forgiving of the German forces.

Speaking purely as someone with very little interest in (especially 15mm) ww2 gaming: the German tanks just look that much nicer.

And yes, I am much too shallow for historicals

 Riquende wrote:
I think it's a similar reason to why Romans are popular in ancients and the French in Napoleonics - they have a sense of perceived greater power, they often look visually better (well, moreso than their contemporaries), and their ubiquity across all areas of their respective wars means that there's just more written about them, more interest in them and more models made of them.

Never understood why the French are more popular than the British in Napoleonics when you consider the British success rate against the French. Maybe British people are fed up with being British!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Necros wrote:
I think it also has to do with looks. Their tanks look cool, uniforms look cool, they have those cool trenchcoats and they have skulls. Perfect for any wargame.

I'm the first to confess love for the Tiger tank, but damn it, the British had greatcoats and they had the Sten! Is there a better looking weapon than a Sten or even a Bren? Not in my book!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bolognesus wrote:
Speaking purely as someone with very little interest in (especially 15mm) ww2 gaming: the German tanks just look that much nicer.

And yes, I am much too shallow for historicals

I've always liked the look of Shermans, myself, and that funny looking Italian flamethrower tank. The name escapes me!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Alpha 1 wrote:
I find that people tend to have a romantic view of the German Army of WW2 especially the panzer divisions, I have not only seen this in historical miniatures but in 40K I have seen people make Imperial Guard armies based off German WW2 units but usually they leave out the Swastika. If you look at the Imperium of Man it can easily be seen as a resemblance to Nazi Germany and I think may people have come to that conclusion. With many people who lived through Europe during the rise of Hitler and WW2 and vets from the war many of them have passed away so the impact of WW2 to the future generations would be less than say the older generation and tend to be a little more forgiving of the German forces.

Good post. I do believe that when Rick P et al conceived 40k in the 1980s, the harsh, futuristic Nazi-style universe was what they had in mind, but I'm pretty sure the Imperial Guard were based on Soviet Infantry.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 infinite_array wrote:
I think you're taking anecdotal evidence and trying to generalize it.

That tournament you went to was crazily skewed towards SS. That's very much an fluke - FoW's Late War period is skewed much more towards Americans at the moment. Germans are a little on the backfoot because American rules/lists are so good. If there's any reason I can think of, it's that SS lists in FoW get you Fearless Veteran Germans (in comparison to most German lists which are Confident Veteran) and that the guys at Battlefront seem to believe the propaganda that the SS were superhuman soldiers that got all of the Reich's best material.

The reason why you'll see so many Germans in WWII games is, quite obviously, because the Germans were essentially the ubiquitous enemy of the European conflict. And it's the conflict in Europe/Africa that gets all the cools toys that gamers want - tanks, halftracks, airplanes, etc.

Soviets in FoW at the moment are underpowered - the Hen and Chicks rule really screws them over. Red Bear just had an update that lowered the points cost of Soviet stuff to reflect just how poor the Soviets are doing.

But, yeah - there's a definite population of gamers that looks at SS stuff and thinks 'Oh man, that's so kewl! Gonna have a whole army of that!' I try to avoid people like that. There's a difference between acknowledging you're using SS troops due to a scenario, and thinking they're cool to collect.

Leaping to conclusions without the facts and generalizing things, is par for the course on Dakka. You should know that by know!

But yeah, fair points. Maybe with Japan getting its day in the sun with FOW (no pun meant!) we might see the popularity of Japanese armies.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Never understood why the French are more popular than the British in Napoleonics when you consider the British success rate against the French. Maybe British people are fed up with being British!

Mainly ubiquity. Across Europe, people get together to fight Napoleonic battles, which were usually France vs. someone. So regardless of which theatre of the conflict you're recreating, someone has to be the French!

Also, whilst the British were largely successful against the French in specific locations, for a relatively small period, they would have been unable to fight the French on land across all fronts of the war(s) across the whole 20 year period. This is why France is perceived as the more powerful, as the French were able to compete against multiple foes on multiple fronts for decades.

Some of it has to do with whatever is the winningest at the moment. You see this very often in MMO type games, where a player will quickly jump from class to class depending upon which is the most powerful at the moment. Its the same thing just played out upon on the table top. These players don't care what their character or army is or the history behind it or any of that stuff, they just know its the best right now.

Some of it has to do with the mystique of the villain. I think a lot of it has to do with the perceived overall power that the German army represented during World War 2. I mean after all these are the guys who had to be ganged up on by America, Great Britain, and Russia to be defeated. And they are also extremely iconic - show anybody a picture of an SS stormtrooper and they can tell you exactly what they are looking at.

I don't think that any of it has to do with being a closet Nazi or anything like that.

I've seen similar trends in FoW (our current campaign is about 75% German, mostly Grenadiers though) but it seems to largely be because they are regarded as one of the better in-game armies in exactly the same way 75%+ of 40K players are Marines of some sort.

It works for me though as my US Paras always have an opponent

To be fair, in Flames, when you play Germans and get the minis you have more options than anyone else as to which lists you want to play. There's pretty much a german list in every period that can do anything except for infantry super-blobs.

You also can't forget that FoW is split into different Eras.

Right now the Japanese are all the rage in Early War (and before that the BAR was clubbing everyone over the head before it was nerfed to death).

Mid War is probably the most balanced between the Brits and Germans in Africa and the Soviets and Germans (and allies) on the eastern front.

Late War is dominated by the Americans from the Bulge books.

If I was playing FOW I would probably pick Brits as my first choice and then Germans as my second to appose them.

I think the fact the Germans are quite a strong force to have and that people tend to like them aesthetically probably and that they are in the starter set helps increase the number of people playing them.

From my understanding Axis are a bit disadvantaged compared to Allies at the moment in Flames of War, so if they were attempting to power game they were doing a terrible job.

I think its really a combination of several things...

1. Cool toys: Tiger tanks, assault rifles, jets, V2 guided rockets, and all sorts of other interesting equipment is a well known part of the Germans. That will always draw players no matter the system.

2. People like to play the "bad guys". Pretty self explanatory, although a lot of people forget not all Germans were mustache twirling Indiana Jones villains. Not really much to say about this.

3. Cool looking stuff: say what you will, German uniforms have a lot of variety and styles, and (Disclaimer: I am not a Nazi) the SS ones in particular have a huge amount of cool camo patterns. For people that like to paint, Germans offer a ton of possibilities and options to keep from getting boring. Plus it doesn't hurt that the Wehrmacht have some of the most modern looking uniforms and the amount of tank camo schemes is truly staggering.

4. They want to be "2edgy5u": I honestly think these guys are in the minority, but we've all met that one "Hitler did nothing wrong!" guy. Most German players I've met hate the Nazi imagery and tend to avoid Nazi symbols or markings wherever they can.

I play Hungarians in FoW (Minor Axis power that fought the Russians) and Germans in Bolt Action, so I'm pretty familiar with some of the stereotypes people put on German players. I play Germans because the power struggle and political intrigue the Germans went through is really interesting to read about. that, and the fact that any army could hold out as long as the Germans did with such an incompetent and meddlesome leader had to have some serious skills. I've been reading Grey Wolf (flames of war eastern front axis book) and the amount of meddling Hitler did in his officers' planning is insane.

German tanks look much better than most of the allied tanks IMO - that is the reason I would choose one force over another. Unless I could get a British list filled with Churchill variants

+1 for the gorgeous and monsterous tanks. I play germans for all the amazing looking (although generally poor ingame) toys.

 kronk wrote:
I've never seen a 40k army in person using Swastikas.

I've seen one IG army, but everything with them on it(flags/banners mostly) were swappable to a more acceptable Imperial Aquila.

I played against it in 3rd with my Mechanized Guard and face rolled it. It was a pretty fun game for us both, actually.

There are 2 players at my club who want to collect germans and one who does.

12 year olds comment: "they have the best and coolest looking stuff"

16 year olds comments: "they had a lot of technological advancements and some very powerful weaponry for their time" (he plays a grenadier list so none of the big toys oddly enough)

19 year olds comment: "germans are just so cool though" (has all the big big stuff and when he starts to get FOW he will only play late for all the big toys.)

So in my area (and its something i noticed at college) a lot of the more immature players seem to be drawn to the german armies right off the bat. Of course some have a genuine interest in it and some collect it because they need to balance out the armies at their club but over all in my years of gaming the germans of FOW etc are like the space marines of 40k. Of course there are always exceptions as i know of some german players from other clubs who have genuine reasons for the german army.

In short: big toys, cool looks, glorification of nazi acheivements and a seemingly elite army is what gets a lot of people.

I collect imperial japan in FOW. A very potent force but it takes a lot of work to play them right. My army lacks a lot of what the other german player has access to and a lot of onlookers see this and all of a sudden the germans are getting the spotlight even though i win most of the time (at huge losses though). It just seems their lists are geared towards the general players.

But its not a bad thing here yet and at the end of the day at least people are playing haha.

It's very hard to separate the Nazis from the Germans, and generally it's also probably insensitive and inappropriate to do so.

That said, the American people as a general rule were actually quite sympathetic (Gallup/etc. polling done on a weekly/monthly basis throughout the period of 1935-1945 supports this) to the German people ... in fact, more so than to the British or French or others ... really the only people who came close in our esteem were the Chinese (it wasn't a racial thing, our hatred of the Japanese people ... we loved the Chinese people at the time).

The image of the average German, and of the German Army in World War 2, has always been a little on the rosy side through the American lens. It's really hard to accurately say why ... too many variables and questions ... but it's not really a "new" thing. The problem is always the Nazi connection; no one in their right mind can really empathize with the Nazi worldview (even if you could somehow erase the history of the Holocaust, their entire viewpoint was pretty extreme ... and ... you CAN'T erase that history, so it goes from extreme to utterly horrifying). Lots of people blatantly NOT in their right mind still often do, further confirming the point.

So as time goes on, and history gets fuzzy, and people start to have more of an impression of a subject being less "taboo," you're going to see very long-standing traditional views come out again ... and those, again, are of a very consistent opinion of Germans as being good ... Nazis bad. Even before the Holocaust was revealed, Americans commonly polled as "Germans are great, we like them, but Hitler's a dick ... and the Nazis are a little cray cray." Our opinion about the German people dropped when we found out about the Holocaust, but not as much as you'd think ... it just became more of "Why did the Germans allow this to happen? Did they just not know? Hitler's not a dick, he's Satan ... and the Nazis are both cray cray AND evil." We were as a people unwilling to readily believe the Germans were all evil (and they probably weren't), and generally drew conclusions oriented around the badness of Hitler/Nazi, not the wrongness of Germans in general.

Once you connect the historical facts of Americans' generally positive opinion of Germans with any other subject, such as miniature wargaming, you can see where it might flesh itself out. Then you get two subsets ... those who represent things like swastikas out of a commitment to historical representaiton, and those who do so out of a subtle fascination or obsession with the Nazis themselves. Therein lies the rub of what's appropriate ... but I suppose you have to judge each individual by their motives.

Some people just think it's cool to investigate, or play the part of the bad guy. Some people just want to represent history accurately. Many Americans LIKE Germans, and always have. Since we can be fairly certain that longstanding positive view has very little to do with a love of the party responsible for a horrific war and the murder of millions of innocents ... it's probably just a simple connection of a broad American positive impression of Germans with the miniature wargaming hobby.


Shorthand: Hey Germans, us Americans like you ... and we always have. We just hate Hitler and the Nazis. As long as we can disengage those two things ENOUGH from our playing games with your radical soldiers and handmade (lol) military tech (HANDMADE TANKS RAWR), awesome!

Way to go with the condecending tone there fella (Swastakowey). Good to know that you are an authority on what makes it acceptable to play a faction in a wargame - and just because I`m curious, what is a genuine reason to play germans?

Well you are right i was just trying to word it in a way that didnt look like i was ripping into the german players. When i mean genuine i kinda meant not for all the big toys reason really. Because if i took out all those bits it would simply look like i was generaloising all german players into one catagory which is far from the point im trying to make.

For example i play imperial japs, arguably more evil than nazi germany to put it simply, yet i play them because they arent normal in how they fight, have a flavour totally different to that of any other army in the game and what they lack in equipment and support they make up for with determination and spirit. (game wise im talking) and its reasons like the above that id call genuine. Rather than say i play japs because they look so cool using their katanas...

So i apolagize for the ill wording but genuine as in a thought out reason based on play style, the other players at the club etc not i like the big toys.

 Illumini wrote:
Way to go with the condecending tone there fella (Swastakowey). Good to know that you are an authority on what makes it acceptable to play a faction in a wargame - and just because I`m curious, what is a genuine reason to play germans?

If your crush is dating a Jewish guy.

There is always the risk of glorifying inappropriate "anything" when playing historical battles.

The Germans are the more powerful "go-to" force for FOW much like Tau or Eldar in 40k.

North America people are a little more forgetful of the Germans because they did not bomb here as extensively as in Britain or other UK countries.

We are a society drawn to technology and the Germans were renown for their skills.
They knew their stuff and it would be foolish not to respect the equipment and training they developed.

I have found in my own experience it is easy to make light of something that seems so long ago and was not any part of my personal experience.
I would not say this is appropriate, a reminder of downright evil events in the past can help us avoid similar in the future.

In the end I would say don't read too deeply in people's choice: they usually go for what looks the coolest for models in an army.

To get it out of the way, Not German, Just Live Here.

I'm not interested in WW2 wargaming (find it a bit boring and uninspiring as a period to game in, and also find it a little uncomfortable since some of the participants or people who lived through it are still alive).

However, if you're going to play a wargame based around the conflict, then I don't see any reason why you shouldn't play the Germans or whoever else. Any historical conflict is going to have it's good guys and bad guys. The Second World War is certainly unique in the particular horror of the holocaust, and the terrible racism and discrimination that preceded it, but those racist viewpoints were common at the time. There was anti Semitism, homophobia and disdain for gypsies and the disabled in most countries in the world at that time. Hitler tapped into that and the Germans took it further than anyone else had, but I figure most of the guys in the German army outside the SS were probably pretty normal for their time. Racist and intolerant perhaps, but not that different from the guys on the other side. The inhuman aspect to the holocaust was thought up partially because the psychological impact on the troops of shooting the Jews was too traumatic, as it likely would have been in any other country had they had an insane political movement like that.

Sadly, genocidal movements in other conflicts have proven the Germans to be far from unique in this tendency to demonize and persecute those perceived as "other".

So I guess I don't really get why people find it SO distasteful over and above the entire conflict, which is still near enough to be raw for a significant number of people. I don't think it has to have anything to do with obsession or approval of the Germans. For example, I am beginning a Dark Ages project at the moment, and I'm collecting armies for the Normans, Gaelic Irish and the Vikings. My upbringing and natural sympathies lie with the Gaelic Irish, but in reality that is due to an amount of indoctrination from my education, and I am collecting all of them for completeness sake.

In short, collect what you want, be ready to field some comments and questions from people if you pick something emotive.

 Talizvar wrote:
There is always the risk of glorifying inappropriate "anything" when playing historical battles.

The Germans are the more powerful "go-to" force for FOW much like Tau or Eldar in 40k.

North America people are a little more forgetful of the Germans because they did not bomb here as extensively as in Britain or other UK countries.

We are a society drawn to technology and the Germans were renown for their skills.
They knew their stuff and it would be foolish not to respect the equipment and training they developed.

I have found in my own experience it is easy to make light of something that seems so long ago and was not any part of my personal experience.
I would not say this is appropriate, a reminder of downright evil events in the past can help us avoid similar in the future.

In the end I would say don't read too deeply in people's choice: they usually go for what looks the coolest for models in an army.

To be fair, Germany's bombing is nowhere near the level of bombing we did to them.

 CaulynDarr wrote:
And from an aesthetic standpoint much of the German equipment is very striking.

Boom!

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
To be fair, Germany's bombing is nowhere near the level of bombing we did to them.

To be fair, destroying half of their country enabled them to rebuild with the most modern factories and systems they could, making them the industrial powerhouse of Europe and permitting them to dominate the EU

 CaulynDarr wrote:
And from an aesthetic standpoint much of the German equipment is very striking.

Hugo Boss did design most of their uniforms.

 BrookM wrote:

 CaulynDarr wrote:
And from an aesthetic standpoint much of the German equipment is very striking.

Hugo Boss did design most of their uniforms.

Indeed its true and much of their tanks were designed to be inspiring.

One should not underestimate that the biggest weapon the WW2 era Germany had was the propaganda and they utilized it in every mean or form.

Its of little surprise people get attracted to WW2 German forces, its a testament to the skill and talent of the designers who designed them to look inspiring.

For me I like the style of Germans, in the US the WWII German army is still the standard archtype of what bad guys should be. Everything in the cut of the uniform and helmets was intentionally designed to be imposing (particularly the SS) If you look at "tactical" swat uniforms used by modern police they mimick much of that imposing design. Darth Vader's helmet is a perfect transistion of the geman design made villian. It denotes a sense of threat, power and authority which is why it's attractive as the bad guy element.

I don't want to play German because I agree with their ideals, but all good villians need a strong set of principles not matter how horrible they may be. The random I kill everybody psycho villian is nowhere near as intimidating as the villian that believes in a cause and has a twisted sense of honor and duty. That's because we can usually see some of our own potential in that villian. You can take a person intending to be good and just but if you twist the situation around enough those principles that would otherwise drive them to be hero are what makes them into a villian.

Remember that most Germans embraced the Nazi's not because they wanted to kill Jews or to take over the world, they did it because they wanted to see a strong Germany. National pride in itself is noble cause, but unfortunately it was twisted by the leadership into something horrific. That's part of what makes the Germans so striking and why they are still the basic model for tons of TV, movie, and video game bad guys.

In addition to the darker visual style the fact that they had far superior weaponry is also a huge draw. People typically don't respect a weaker enemy or nation, when a nation is stronger or more advanced than your own it further increases the sense of threat and power that you are facing and at the start of WWII Germany was on the leading edge of the world.


In a simular light I've always preferred playing Rome in historicals or Imperial Forces in the various Star Wars games. Much of their design has echos of the "German bad guy", faceless helemeted goons, ruthless tactics and vastly superior force. If those things weren't as dominant as they were in that setting it'd make the good guys a lot less impressive. A good hero starts as an underdog but needs a very worthy bad guy to challenge him or the story falls flat.



(Before anybody brings it up, yes much of the German WWI design was intentionally patterned after Roman Imerial themes).




.

Plus, it's the Nazi's own fault for using a symbol that makes it look like you have a ninja star on your flag. The swastika would actually be an intriguing symbol on it's own, if only it wasn't coupled with something so bad.

I have some interest in the time of the Nutsies.

I am a WW2 reenactor and I do run around in a forest in a Wehrmacht uniform. I have third reich coins and paperwork in my room. I can sing "Panzerlied" in it's entirety although badly. The reason why? Well, my friend was doing Germans so I wanted to hang out with him. The reason I stayed is because of how fascinating the Wehrmacht is. They have the right mixture of being familiar, evil, mysterious and strong that captivates people. Of course they got their dark green (They're Dark Green uniforms. Not grey. Dark Green) behinds kicked all the way back to Berlin by a superior force but damned if their imagery makes you interested in how they got their asses handed to them.

This imagery, projecting power, mystery and familiarity in equal measure, of course would be latched onto by gamers and writers alike. They're the perfect bad guys. They are both terribly evil and terribly human. You can find yourself fighting and being them depending on how you see things. Of course what they did was vile and one of the worst things ever done to humanity. But it was done by humans and I think that is where they are separated from other villains.

That or mother fethin' Tigers and mother fethin' STG44's.


EDIT: By the, I run Soviets in BA. For the Motherland!

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Plus, it's the Nazi's own fault for using a symbol that makes it look like you have a ninja star on your flag. The swastika would actually be an intriguing symbol on it's own, if only it wasn't coupled with something so bad.

Can you really say that in the face of a Hindu?

Or anybody else who has this symbol in his/ her cultural inheritance or religion the past, lets see, 5 thousand years?

What? we should be thankful they didn't use a plain cross cause Christianity's symbol should be banned?

Swastika is an ancient symbol and the hysteria that surrounds it for the brief time Nazi Germany used it is at least disheartening.

Anecdotally, I was going to make an American FoW centered on Patton's 3rd Army when my friend was thinking Soviet, but then he swapped over to USA so I went German for diversity. Now he dropped out because he cannot see wargaming beyond GW and I'm looking into Americans again. Seriously though, the guy is on a yo-yo attached to Imperial Guard. He's recollected them like 5 times.

They're the ultimate badguy, with a pretty cool ass looking aesthetic (death's head, iron cross, feldgrau, secret police in black leather trench coats, etc etc etc ... jackboots + great coat - it's a badass looking aesthetic. The 3rd Reich had some pretty good designers working for them).

That's pretty much why.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Plus, it's the Nazi's own fault for using a symbol that makes it look like you have a ninja star on your flag. The swastika would actually be an intriguing symbol on it's own, if only it wasn't coupled with something so bad.

Can you really say that in the face of a Hindu?

Or anybody else who has this symbol in his/ her cultural inheritance or religion the past, lets see, 5 thousand years?

What? we should be thankful they didn't use a plain cross cause Christianity's symbol should be banned?

Swastika is an ancient symbol and the hysteria that surrounds it for the brief time Nazi Germany used it is at least disheartening.

While yes, technically true.... didn't they turn it from the Hindu symbol... i.e. the arms are rotating in the opposite direction of the hindu sign ? I was always under the impression that while they ripped off the design, they tweaked it in this way on purpose.

I mean, they totally did steal it, not denying that, but a backwards R and a frontwards R are still relatively different things.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
To be fair, Germany's bombing is nowhere near the level of bombing we did to them.

To be fair, destroying half of their country enabled them to rebuild with the most modern factories and systems they could, making them the industrial powerhouse of Europe and permitting them to dominate the EU

And you're fething welcome for that!

The German Army was probably the most powerful land army in the world at its peak, and German troops were much better trained and disciplined than their western allies. As such they have kudos amongst fans of military history.

Hell the Spartans used to beat their slaves to death for entertainment, yet they're venerated for their soldiering.

Hold on...

How does this:

 Swastakowey wrote:
12 year olds comment: "they have the best and coolest looking stuff"

16 year olds comments: "they had a lot of technological advancements and some very powerful weaponry for their time" (he plays a grenadier list so none of the big toys oddly enough)

19 year olds comment: "germans are just so cool though" (has all the big big stuff and when he starts to get FOW he will only play late for all the big toys.)

Equal this...

 Swastakowey wrote:
... glorification of nazi acheivements...

"They look cool" is a subjective thing. I think the Nazi's had the best uniforms and the coolest looking tanks. That doesn't mean I'm trying to glorify Nazi achievements. Acknowledging that Germany during WWII had a number of excellent technological advances isn't "glorifying Nazi achievements" either - it's just the truth. They did. They had some really effective and advanced things and the allies spent a lot of time playing catch-up.

What i mean is yes they had amazing stuff but the common problem is they didn't have much of it or it wasn't practical. Yes they over came a lot of stepping stones but on the battle field a lot of it wasn't useful or there simply was not enough of it to be useful or effective over all. Yet how many video games and models do you see armed with STG (the assault rifle) for example? tonnes they seem to have access to hundreds of them. that's just an example. The over glorification of their achievements should be ever present on the battlefield etc yet because they are cool they are made easily accessible throughout wargames and whatnot it really increases their cool factor.

The above i am finding hard to explain but if you know what i mean maybe you can expand on it. Im not saying it as in you are proud to bear the nazi forces because they did stuff, im merely saying that a lot of the cool toys and tanks etc that make people play the ww2 germans was hardly common yet you see it in huge numbers frequently in wargaming.

I have one demo game of Bolt Action under my belt. That's the full extent of my WW2 historical wargaming. In that game, I played Americans and we were fighting the Germans. There were no vehicles involved. The Americans had a sniper team and the Germans had a MG42. Regarding ninety percent of the game, as far as I could tell, Germans and Americans were roughly equivalent. The coolest thing in that particular game, however -- at least IMO -- fell into the remaining ten percent; namely, the MG42 was truly fearsome.

Aside from their admittedly striking designs, German arms have a general reputation for being awesome -- whether we're talking MG42s or the dreaded 88s. And the German soldiers, even when considered as "bad guys," have a reputation for being capable, stoic warriors organized into elite formations.

Sorry to go off topic but how is bolt action? given your limited experience in the game id love to hear how good you thought it was. ive been looking at it and maybe try to get some mates into it but im not sure yet.

I had a great time losing so that should tell you something. The order dice are really cool. I also like the scale and the models are not too expensive, either. My buddy who also posts here is running a demo day at our LGS and the store is offering discounts. I plan to get a German and a Soviet starter army ... and maybe also a Japanese army given Warlord is releasing plastic Marines soon.

One point, I have heard here on Dakka -- and my experience confirms it -- that this is a terrain heavy game. So if you get in, plan to get lots of stuff for your men to use as cover.

Im thinking of going after some japs too. cool i might get some then.

They just recently did plastic Japanese so it's a good time. The books, being Osprey, are a tad pricey as are the order dice but those are one-time buys and the miniatures are relatively affordable and the ones I have seen are good quality sculpts with variety. The most striking thing about the game to me was the randomized activation sequence/order dice mechanic. It kept the game fluid (the dice account for everything you can do, making for a great play aid) as well as unpredictable.

 Swastakowey wrote:
What i mean is yes they had amazing stuff but the common problem is they didn't have much of it or it wasn't practical. Yes they over came a lot of stepping stones but on the battle field a lot of it wasn't useful or there simply was not enough of it to be useful or effective over all. Yet how many video games and models do you see armed with STG (the assault rifle) for example? tonnes they seem to have access to hundreds of them. that's just an example. The over glorification of their achievements should be ever present on the battlefield etc yet because they are cool they are made easily accessible throughout wargames and whatnot it really increases their cool factor.

The above i am finding hard to explain but if you know what i mean maybe you can expand on it. Im not saying it as in you are proud to bear the nazi forces because they did stuff, im merely saying that a lot of the cool toys and tanks etc that make people play the ww2 germans was hardly common yet you see it in huge numbers frequently in wargaming.

Panzer IV built: 8,800

Panthers built: 6,000

Tiger I built: 1,347

Konigstiger built: 492

MG42 built: 400,000+ in it's lifetime of '42- '68

Sd.Kfz 251 (halftrack) built: 15,252

Assault rifles were just coming into play and were still new. The more common SMG was widely used on both sides. I don't know about you, but the numbers seem significant enough to warrant their deployment on these advances. You have to remember how fast tech was moving in WW2 and they still shot them out of production and into battle that fast. Germans were making quality equipment, but it was quantity that won out in the end. Too many T-34s and too many Shermans and too many troops for them to handle.

I find it strange that so many people confuse Nazi's and German Soldier's. They are very different animals indeed. The German Soldier fought for his or her country, taking orders, shooting at the enemy and trying to win. Just like a US, Brit, French, Russian or any other Soldier out there at that time.

A Nazi, on the other hand, tended to be an extremist. Members of the Nazi Party were often treated with contempt by the average German Grunt. The S.S were feared and hated in equal measure. People get swept up in the history of WW2, imagining the German's did some awful things to their fellow man. Yes, they did, but certainly no worse than the Russian's did during their advance on Berlin.

The Russian's wiped East Prussia off the map, burning buildings down that could have offered them shelter from the weather (it was January), raping and murdering as they went, drunk or high on dangerous Chemicals and homemade alcohol. There are reports of Russian Tank Columns attacking German Civilians as they tried to retreat form places like East Prussia, mowing them down like cattle. Some of the Russian Journo's attached to the spearheading Tank Columns would write of their disgust at the behaviour of the Russian 'Tankists'.

I guess my point is, why are the Germans treated like the bad guys? During WW2, every Soldier from every country was capable of some disgusting atrocities.

I've been into FoW for about 7 years now, and I've progressively watched it become what it was.

For awhile it was really German heavy, and we used to joke that Battlefront's business was paid for by nazi gold bullion...but as of late the codex creep of allied (and now soviet) toys are really doing the Germans in...which makes them very very very hard to compete if at all.

Basically, it was all fun and games until someone at Battlefront thought it was time for the Germans to pay.

On topic though, I mainly play German themed armies because I have a fascination with the history, and the modeling aspects are nearly limitless.

The idea that Nazi attitudes were contained and especially contained outside of the German armed forces aside from the Waffen-SS is a myth stretching back to the beginning of the Allied occupation. (Notably, only Waffen-SS veterans were denied state-sponsored benefits.) Interrogations of German POWs from across the service branches show that racialism, not only anti-Semitism but perhaps just as much a hatred of Slavic peoples, permeated the German military. For more, see here. Now, I'm not saying German soldiers were by large the slavering fanatic brutes of Allied propaganda but neither was the German military composed of millions of men who secretly despised Hitler and the Nazi regime. Quite the contrary, in fact.

 Panzerwerks_Studio wrote:
Basically, it was all fun and games until someone at Battlefront thought it was time for the Germans to pay.

Quite a few posters have noted similar sentiments, which adds up to a rather dismal review of the FoW rules if I'm honest.

 Haight wrote:

While yes, technically true.... didn't they turn it from the Hindu symbol... i.e. the arms are rotating in the opposite direction of the hindu sign ? I was always under the impression that while they ripped off the design, they tweaked it in this way on purpose.

I mean, they totally did steal it, not denying that, but a backwards R and a frontwards R are still relatively different things.

Clockwise and counterclockwise Swastikas, teraskelion, or however each ancient and present culture names them were and always will be present, straight and at angles.

 Swastakowey wrote:
What i mean is yes they had amazing stuff but the common problem is they didn't have much of it or it wasn't practical. Yes they over came a lot of stepping stones but on the battle field a lot of it wasn't useful or there simply was not enough of it to be useful or effective over all. Yet how many video games and models do you see armed with STG (the assault rifle) for example? tonnes they seem to have access to hundreds of them. that's just an example. The over glorification of their achievements should be ever present on the battlefield etc yet because they are cool they are made easily accessible throughout wargames and whatnot it really increases their cool factor.

The above i am finding hard to explain but if you know what i mean maybe you can expand on it. Im not saying it as in you are proud to bear the nazi forces because they did stuff, im merely saying that a lot of the cool toys and tanks etc that make people play the ww2 germans was hardly common yet you see it in huge numbers frequently in wargaming.

They did have hundreds of Stg44`s, almost half a million Stg44 were made, so some units would have many of them. It is natural that people are drawn to the more interesting formations where you get access to different equipment. You don`t really get huge numbers of the big cats etc either, as they are extremely pts-intensive. Seems you are just suffering from equipment-envy of germans. I started FoW with italians, so I know the feeling of having absolutely crap equipment compared to everybody else, but after having played germans too, you will notice that the big cats are actually a liability most of the time.

Also, your argument on what makes it okay to play a faction is pretty silly. Let`s take it from WW2 to 40k and it becomes: People who choose armies because they like the look of the miniatures are childish and not genuine


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
The idea that Nazi attitudes were contained and especially contained outside of the German armed forces aside from the Waffen-SS is a myth stretching back to the beginning of the Allied occupation. (Notably, only Waffen-SS veterans were denied state-sponsored benefits.) Interrogations of German POWs from across the service branches show that racialism, not only anti-Semitism but perhaps just as much a hatred of Slavic peoples, permeated the German military. For more, see here. Now, I'm not saying German soldiers were by large the slavering fanatic brutes of Allied propaganda but neither was the German military composed of millions of men who secretly despised Hitler and the Nazi regime. Quite the contrary, in fact.

 Panzerwerks_Studio wrote:
Basically, it was all fun and games until someone at Battlefront thought it was time for the Germans to pay.

Quite a few posters have noted similar sentiments, which adds up to a rather dismal review of the FoW rules if I'm honest.

The base rules are good, but there has been "codex-creep". They do have a history of actually fixing totally broken lists however (although going a bit far in the other direction again), so seems they are trying for a balanced game.

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
I find it strange that so many people confuse Nazi's and German Soldier's. They are very different animals indeed. The German Soldier fought for his or her country, taking orders, shooting at the enemy and trying to win. Just like a US, Brit, French, Russian or any other Soldier out there at that time.

Popular myth (though there doesn't seem to be *anyone* in this thread who knows any history, but anyway). There is well-documented evidence that normal, non-SS German soldiers committed warcrimes on the Eastern Front on a huge scale. Here is a random example of German paratroopers murdering Greek civilians in 1941...there are countless others.

For me its their tanks, the fact that they managed to produce the massive beasts like the tiger 2 and jagdtiger.

In the dday books at least, their lists seem more flexible, most lists can take panzer ivs or tigers etc, where as only certain brit lists can take churchills and shermans


Automatically Appended Next Post:

xruslanx wrote:

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
I find it strange that so many people confuse Nazi's and German Soldier's. They are very different animals indeed. The German Soldier fought for his or her country, taking orders, shooting at the enemy and trying to win. Just like a US, Brit, French, Russian or any other Soldier out there at that time.

Popular myth (though there doesn't seem to be *anyone* in this thread who knows any history, but anyway). There is well-documented evidence that normal, non-SS German soldiers committed warcrimes on the Eastern Front on a huge scale. Here is a random example of German paratroopers murdering Greek civilians in 1941...there are countless others.

But then that could be spun the other way, the Soviets and Americans killed a lot of PoWs and I am sure the commonwealth did the same.

There's got to be a reason why German officers tried to surrender to brittish forces above US and soviet

the wermacht comitted atrocities unparelled in scale, it is offensive to even suggest that it was in any way equivilent to those carried out by the americans.

The germans tried to surrended to the western allies precicely because most of these atrocities were carried out on the eastern front. German warcrimes in western europe were fairly rare, but in the East the average German soldier was conditioned into believing that the Russians (and ukrainians etc) really were sub-human, and acted as such.

Unless you're going to argue that russians really are an inferior species, you cannot deny that the german army comitted warcrimes on a horriffic and unparelled scale.

Another thing that people might find interesting about WWII Germany is the Wunderwaffen. The Americans might have had the atom bomb and Britain had Hobart's Funnies, but the Germans seemed to be coming up with a new and wacky invention every week. Jet fighters, rocket fighters, superheavy tanks, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, mechanised infantry, assault rifles...

Daston wrote:
For me its their tanks, the fact that they managed to produce the massive beasts like the tiger 2 and jagdtiger.

In the dday books at least, their lists seem more flexible, most lists can take panzer ivs or tigers etc, where as only certain brit lists can take churchills and shermans


Automatically Appended Next Post:

xruslanx wrote:

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
I find it strange that so many people confuse Nazi's and German Soldier's. They are very different animals indeed. The German Soldier fought for his or her country, taking orders, shooting at the enemy and trying to win. Just like a US, Brit, French, Russian or any other Soldier out there at that time.

Popular myth (though there doesn't seem to be *anyone* in this thread who knows any history, but anyway). There is well-documented evidence that normal, non-SS German soldiers committed warcrimes on the Eastern Front on a huge scale. Here is a random example of German paratroopers murdering Greek civilians in 1941...there are countless others.

But then that could be spun the other way, the Soviets and Americans killed a lot of PoWs and I am sure the commonwealth did the same.

There's got to be a reason why German officers tried to surrender to brittish forces above US and soviet

@ Daston The war against the east was one not of conquest per se but of ethnic cleansing. German officers and troops would rather have surrendered into the tender mercies of the westen allies rather than face whatever retribution the soviets had in store for them. This knowledge of past wrongs is also one of the many reasons that Germany stuck it out to the bitter end.


More On-topic - I like German forces in ww2 based games - It brings a certain amount of what if when playing scenarios and such like, besides, if no one played as the Reich there would be no point in playing.

 Mr. Burning wrote:
More On-topic - I like German forces in ww2 based games - It brings a certain amount of what if when playing scenarios and such like, besides, if no one played as the Reich there would be no point in playing.

Pretty much. If not, people should rip on Battlefront and Warlord etc for selling Germans, not on gamers for playing them.

xruslanx wrote:
the wermacht comitted atrocities unparelled in scale, it is offensive to even suggest that it was in any way equivilent to those carried out by the americans.

The germans tried to surrended to the western allies precicely because most of these atrocities were carried out on the eastern front. German warcrimes in western europe were fairly rare, but in the East the average German soldier was conditioned into believing that the Russians (and ukrainians etc) really were sub-human, and acted as such.

Unless you're going to argue that russians really are an inferior species, you cannot deny that the german army comitted warcrimes on a horriffic and unparelled scale.

That maybe the case however there is a 'but' here...

It was a process that took time to evolve, initially on the Eastern Front the Wermacht did treat the Russians reasonably well. There were more prisoners than they bargained for however, add to this the fact that when the 'state authorities' took control of the rear areas the genocide started. Which began that slippery slope...


on topic:

The Germans had the best tanks, had the best soldiers etc there is no doubting that so people want to play them.

However even though I would like to play WW2 battle in miniature, I'm resistive because of the general feeling that i'm stepping on all of those people who did their duty as well as the fact you could never do it justice really. But that is my opinion...

What also seems to happen is that us brits always get bashed in one way or another, despite the fact we ended up having to 'hang on' until the US got involved. And in Normandy ended up facing the best of the Germans forces at that point, and on that count fought rather well, meanwhile good old Monty caused a lot of trouble, that was a bit silly.

But that is the historian in me talking

of course in the Cold War things were very different, even more fascinating in my view, as you can go 'what if' in many ways- of course eventually someone has to press that Red button

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Daston wrote:
For me its their tanks, the fact that they managed to produce the massive beasts like the tiger 2 and jagdtiger.

In the dday books at least, their lists seem more flexible, most lists can take panzer ivs or tigers etc, where as only certain brit lists can take churchills and shermans


Automatically Appended Next Post:

xruslanx wrote:

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
I find it strange that so many people confuse Nazi's and German Soldier's. They are very different animals indeed. The German Soldier fought for his or her country, taking orders, shooting at the enemy and trying to win. Just like a US, Brit, French, Russian or any other Soldier out there at that time.

Popular myth (though there doesn't seem to be *anyone* in this thread who knows any history, but anyway). There is well-documented evidence that normal, non-SS German soldiers committed warcrimes on the Eastern Front on a huge scale. Here is a random example of German paratroopers murdering Greek civilians in 1941...there are countless others.

But then that could be spun the other way, the Soviets and Americans killed a lot of PoWs and I am sure the commonwealth did the same.

There's got to be a reason why German officers tried to surrender to brittish forces above US and soviet

@ Daston The war against the east was one not of conquest per se but of ethnic cleansing. German officers and troops would rather have surrendered into the tender mercies of the westen allies rather than face whatever retribution the soviets had in store for them. This knowledge of past wrongs is also one of the many reasons that Germany stuck it out to the bitter end.


More On-topic - I like German forces in ww2 based games - It brings a certain amount of what if when playing scenarios and such like, besides, if no one played as the Reich there would be no point in playing.

Oh I am fully aware, sorry my post might not have come across as intended. I was just trying to show that the allies were not the knights in shining armour that they are sometimes made out to be.

Now of course a lot of this will be due to loosing friends and wanting payback. And some could just be a due to them being a crazy person lol.

I am aware that this is nothing compaired to the likes of the ss, and the stuff they did is terrible.

I always thought that part of it was that some people are attracted to the side with fewer victories to see if they could maybe do better commanding that force themselves

 Art_of_war wrote:
It was a process that took time to evolve, initially on the Eastern Front the Wermacht did treat the Russians reasonably well. There were more prisoners than they bargained for however, add to this the fact that when the 'state authorities' took control of the rear areas the genocide started. Which began that slippery slope...

Unfortunately, this was not the case. As mentioned above, the invasion of the USSR was an ethnic cleansing from the start. Read up on the Barbarossa Decree. In the more candid, less self-serving memoirs of German soldiers (such as this one), you can read about the eagerness with which Germany went to war against the USSR.

 Art_of_war wrote:
What also seems to happen is that us brits always get bashed in one way or another, despite the fact we ended up having to 'hang on' until the US got involved. And in Normandy ended up facing the best of the Germans forces at that point, and on that count fought rather well, meanwhile good old Monty caused a lot of trouble, that was a bit silly.

I'll be completely honest here, I always found the Brits a bit boring for some reason, not really sure why. It doesn't really make sense, because the British army pulled off some incredible feats and fought hard, but that's just how I am. Maybe it's the tanks, they always were a bit boxy and bland looking.

Also, Americans have a huge bias against Monty because he and Patton always seemed to be at odds with each other, and as Americans we're going to side with Patton

On Bolt Action, it's a fun, if a bit simple in places. It was designed to be a quick, easy to pick up skirmish game focusing on infantry platoon combat, and I think it captures that perfectly. If you're looking for a super accurate historical simulation you may wish to look elsewhere, but if you just want to reenact Saving Private Ryan and get the feel of being a platoon commander in the middle of a swirling battle, it's a ton of fun. There are some iffy areas of the rules since it's in its first edition, but the designers have been working with the community quite a bit lately to suss out problems and figure out how to best improve the rules.

It's also fairly cheap to get into. A couple of infantry boxes, a support blister or two, and a tank if you feel so inclined gives you a lot of models to choose from and can make a very solid army.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Maybe it's the tanks, they always were a bit boxy and bland looking.

What's wrong with you man!



Kicks the gak out of a T34 anyday

I don't think that there is a fascination with Germans in wargaming. Quite a lot of people play Germans in WW2 games, but then most people have multiple armies (I have 2 german armies for FoW but thats less than half of my total collection). At the end of the day German forces are iconic, virtually everyone in the western world will recognise a Stahlhelm.

 Palindrome wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Maybe it's the tanks, they always were a bit boxy and bland looking.

What's wrong with you man!



Kicks the gak out of a T34 anyday

I don't think that there is a fascination with Germans in wargaming. Quite a lot of people play Germans in WW2 games, but then most people have multiple armies (I have 2 german armies for FoW but thats less than half of my total collection). At the end of the day German forces are iconic, virtually everyone in the western world will recognise a Stahlhelm.

*Tries to disprove British tanks don't look boxy by posting one of the boxiest tanks the British had*

And I agree on the *almost everyone has Germans* thing.

A critical thing you have to remember for FoW is that the Open Fire! Starter box (think Dark Vengeance, except everything is useable and it's a good value) comes with a Grenadierkompanie, and comes with an HQ, two Grenadier Platoons, 2 PaK 40's, and a StuG III Platoon. Those models can be made into a Late War (and even some Mid war lists) for almost every theater the Germans fought in. And since the box is so cheap and comes with so much stuff, a ton of people have a Grenadier army just laying around that they got for dirt cheap.

For Bolt Action, Germans are also included in the starter set, but that's not quite as insane a deal as the FoW Open Fire box.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:


For Bolt Action, Germans are also included in the starter set, but that's not quite as insane a deal as the FoW Open Fire box.

To be fair:

1. BA operates at a reinforced platoon level, where FoW works with a company and regimental/battalion support, so you'd expect less to work with.
2. The BA starter gives you plastic terrain, where the FoW starter has (very nice) flat cardboard terrain
3. The BA starter gives you the hardcover, full sized rulebook, where the FoW starter gives you the paperback, small rulebook that falls apart at the touch of the lightest of breezes.

But, yeah - the FoW starter is a great set - apart from the tanks, which can be a complete pain in the the rear to put together if you don't know they're misshapen.

 infinite_array wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:


For Bolt Action, Germans are also included in the starter set, but that's not quite as insane a deal as the FoW Open Fire box.

To be fair:

1. BA operates at a reinforced platoon level, where FoW works with a company and regimental/battalion support, so you'd expect less to work with.
2. The BA starter gives you plastic terrain, where the FoW starter has (very nice) flat cardboard terrain
3. The BA starter gives you the hardcover, full sized rulebook, where the FoW starter gives you the paperback, small rulebook that falls apart at the touch of the lightest of breezes.

But, yeah - the FoW starter is a great set - apart from the tanks, which can be a complete pain in the the rear to put together if you don't know they're misshapen.

Yeah part of my dislike for Brits might be tied to the horrendous Shermans that came in that box

 Manchu wrote:

 Art_of_war wrote:
It was a process that took time to evolve, initially on the Eastern Front the Wermacht did treat the Russians reasonably well. There were more prisoners than they bargained for however, add to this the fact that when the 'state authorities' took control of the rear areas the genocide started. Which began that slippery slope...

Unfortunately, this was not the case. As mentioned above, the invasion of the USSR was an ethnic cleansing from the start. Read up on the Barbarossa Decree. In the more candid, less self-serving memoirs of German soldiers (such as this one), you can read about the eagerness with which Germany went to war against the USSR.

So we don't go too far down that path...

it is a constant source of debate whichever way you look at it, the decree may have been issued by Hitler, as he wanted the ethinc cleansing to begin, but the question of whether it was actually carried out in full by all concerned is a matter of conjecture, as sure some soldiers and commanders did carry it out, but some also just passed it down the line and left those on the battlefield to deal with it or didn't send it at all... All quite contrary to the orders issued i will stress at that particular time. There were the killing sqauds going aorund with 'assitance to begin with and then it developed into general genocide

That is how i see it personally you must understand, nothing happened instantly on that front it all 'built up' to the picture we all know....


On topic:

Yeah British tanks do look a little 'boring' but the crews make the tanks what they are- the early Cromwell variants could gass the crews if they were not careful

And we developed the tiger killer extraordinare the Firefly it only took a bright spark to realsie what would happen if you stuck a 17-pounder gun onto a sherman tank... as one report sad rather understatedly after the 8th August 1944 'three Tigres in in twelve minutes is not bad business'

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Maybe it's the tanks, they always were a bit boxy and bland looking.

Hm, calling a tank boxy is a bit redundant. Regarding the bland part, I personally think the Valentine is a pretty little tank:

 Art_of_war wrote:
the question of whether it was actually carried out in full by all concerned is a matter of conjecture

Phrases like "carried out in full by all concerned" seem meant to set an impossibly high burden of proof of 100% compliance while the historical fact remains that the German armed forces eagerly committed atrocities. I think this kind of apologetic view of the Wehrmacht (especially characterizing German soldiers as simple patriots) is part of the allure of playing German armies. The romantic idea of the "good German" has appealed to the imaginations in the US, UK, and Commonwealth since the war was still going on (e.g., Rommel).

 Art_of_war wrote:
'three Tigres in in twelve minutes is not bad business'

That's another great thing about playing British WW2 armies -- what a heroic people and all the time with such a droll sense of humor.

In miniature wargaming you are limited to mostly land based units as they are a manageable scale.

WW2 Germans has some of the most visually appealing equipment and it just so happened to be that it also performed extremely well. German armour is quite elegant and meant to be used in small elite units against larger forces with lesser equipment.

If you look at the main forced in WW2, any of them lack a generic appeal:

USA - Many wargamers are Americans who are looking to play a more "exotic" army. Then there is the armour, not particularly great looking - the sherman is a love it or hate it kind of tank.
Russia - For the most part the Russians used crude yet effective equipment and vehicles. The infantry aren't particularly striking, with bland helmets, colours, clothing. They have some cool tanks, but they were known for using massed infantry.
Britain - They played a large role earlier in the war (where the equipment and armour wasn't very exciting). Unfortunately they are often overshadowed due to Russia and the USA dominating the late war period.
Japan - The Japanese ground war was a slow brutal grind that is difficult to portray in wargaming. There wasn't much armour conflict. Japan is better suited for game systems that focus on naval conflicts as that is where they were most impressive (IMO).

There are other armies as well, but it is no surprise that they aren't too popular as they played lesser roles or blended in with the forced mentioned above. Germany just has more cool stuff to show off at the scale used by the popular WW2 game systems - that is why they are overrepresented.

I'm a little late to this thread, but I'll throw in my 2 cents. My group got into FOW last year, and there was never any chance I wasn't going to be my group's German player.

The reason for this? I have a TREMENDOUS respect for the military achievements of the Wehrmacht in WW2. They pioneered combined arms, overran France in 6 weeks, kicked the British off the continent, and reigned as masters of Europe for years.

My admiration of the Wehrmacht does not translate to admiration for Nazism, but I suspect that Nazism is also a huge draw for a lot of people not because they're closet Nazis but because everything about the Nazis sounds like it came out of a movie. 70 years later it's still incredibly difficult to wrap our heads around a regime that made it state policy to commit genocide, overtly segregate people, and encroached upon every aspect of life for the common civilian.

It is my belief that war brings out the worse of everyone and to my eyes both sides committed war crimes and atrocities as it happened in every war in the past, happens to every war happening now and will happen to every war that will happen in the future.

And while the whole discussion of what really happened, from whose point of view one sees it and who was the worse of them all is quite intriguing, I feel it is a discussion for another thread and another topic.

I doubt a significant percentage of players ever play WW2 German forces in any game because they love and aspire the bad and worse parts of the Nazi regime, the vast majority do either because the design was build from ground up to be impressive and catch the eye and/ or because they are military history enthusiasts and Germans of that era are indeed a nice subject to study if nothing else because of the "impressive design" the entire army had.

These things need to be considered together. One shouldn't just admire the Nazi uniforms without considering what the men who wore them got up to. And I think doing so is basically impossible for anyone with even very superficial historical awareness. Therefore, this too must play some part in explaining why people chose Germans, including the matter of apologetics. Your post is only the latest in a long line ITT relativizing German atrocities despite no other belligerents explicitly setting out to accomplish genocide with their armies.

Snappy uniforms designed by Hugo boss aside. I am 2nd generation born in the USA, German American. My great grandfather was a Kriegsmarine serving on a Uboat and my great Uncle served in the SS during WW2. I play Germans cuz it kind of makes me feel like I am playing my forefathers, if this makes any sense. I don’t like the idea of being Nazi armies. My grandfather wasn’t one for sure and till the day he died he cursed Hitler for ruining the father land and taking our family with it. I do like to think that men fight and should be remembered for it regardless of being right or wrong.

I do believe we love a villain and that fact could push many to play the baddies of games.

Side not I play DKoK in 40k. those uniforms are very snappy.

 Manchu wrote:
These things need to be considered together. One shouldn't just admire the Nazi uniforms without considering what the men who wore them got up to. And I think doing so is basically impossible for anyone with even very superficial historical awareness. Therefore, this too must play some part in explaining why people chose Germans, including the matter of apologetics. Your post is only the latest in a long line ITT relativizing German atrocities despite no other belligerents explicitly setting out to accomplish genocide with their armies.

I disagree, if people can say love the product and not the company and it can be acceptable, then love the design, not the regime is equally valid.

WW2 German design on uniforms, tanks, aircraft, was designed, usually consciously, to leave a strong impression and that is what draws most people in and to be frank this is why the design has persisted till modern times in all modern armies and paramilitary organisations.

That's a false analogy. We aren't just talking about uniform style (for example, in the scifi context). We're talking about the WW2-era German military.

Actually we were and then the usual stuff about warcrimes ectr creeped in.

Um, take a look at the thread title: this is a discussion about playing WW2-era German armies ... not whether WW2-era German design removed from its historical context can ever be free of Nazi ideology.

And the response was "with the design effort involved in such an army, from the uniforms to vehicles and tanks, to the overall feel, its hardly surprising, people are attracted to such a strong visual theme."

WW2 era German army was created from a propaganda machine of great skill and the continuation of their work adapted to other armies or the fascination the forms they created inspires even now, is a testament to their skill in this field.

One can really ignore and separate what the regime did and be captivated by a form that is designed to do exactly that.

 Manchu wrote:

 Art_of_war wrote:
It was a process that took time to evolve, initially on the Eastern Front the Wermacht did treat the Russians reasonably well. There were more prisoners than they bargained for however, add to this the fact that when the 'state authorities' took control of the rear areas the genocide started. Which began that slippery slope...

Unfortunately, this was not the case. As mentioned above, the invasion of the USSR was an ethnic cleansing from the start. Read up on the Barbarossa Decree. In the more candid, less self-serving memoirs of German soldiers (such as this one), you can read about the eagerness with which Germany went to war against the USSR.

Yes right, the intention was to go for the East and then on to Russia right from the start. It's right there in Mein Kampfe, the concept of 'Lebensraum' (living space), and Hitler certainly wasn't thinking about sipping wine on the terraces in southern France when he wrote that.

Re. answering the OP in terms of FoW:
- Playing Germans you've technically got the possibility of most opponents; Americans, Brits, Russians, even Italians if we are talking about late war. Although I realise that in practise this isn't often the case (I chose Americans as my first force, simply because so many people were collecting Germans and Brits!)
- The tanks, both in terms of their style and their utility. Stuff like the Tiger, Jagdtiger/panzer, even the humble PzIV look good. They are also often hard-asses in the rules, even if often outnumbered, because of the 'veteran' attribute as much as the tank's stats. Anyone who has ever had a Tiger knock out 2-3 Shermans in a turn from the length of the board (or whatever other 'tiger ace' rule you have) will know the appeal.
- I think also there is a propensity towards 'elite' forces, although of course this also applies to people who like to collect Brit paratroopers and the like. A friend of mine once described Germans as marines and Soviets as orks in terms of the mindset of the players that choose them. While that is a bit of a crass generalisation, I kind of understand what he meant especially when seeing the mass of Strelkovy crossing the table while the few Panzergrenadier's desperately try and defend against them.
- Personally, I've found painting the infantry and tanks much more interesting than the US force I painted previously; camo patterns, even doing research on the net for the correct shade of 'Dunklegelb' (and finding there isn't one!), mixing the camo patterns etc. It feels more like bespoke than production-line, which is a general feeling that most people have when painting anything - not many people prefer hordes!
- Also, perhaps Dreadclaw69 has a point, there might be some attraction in trying to 'reverse history' by doing better than the generals managed in real life. In that sense, the German forces hold a certain fatalistic appeal.

I would think as a final note however, that considering the attention to detail, patience (and to an extent, intelligence) required to collect and play wargames, I very much doubt that there are many who collect Germans because they admire Nazi ideology, or what they tried to do.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
One can really ignore and separate what the regime did and be captivated by a form that is designed to do exactly that.

But we're not separating anything. We're talking about Nazi design in the context of Nazi armies. No one is talking ITT about an army merely influenced by such aesthetics; rather, we are talking about the thing itself or at least its embodiment in table top wargaming decades after the fact. For the very reason that this is a discussion about historical gaming, it is simply ahistorical to pretend one can consider the Nazi aesthetics of the Nazi military apart from Nazi ideology. When people chose to play a WW2-era German army, it is obvious that they are not necessarily aligning themselves with Nazi politics. But it is just as obvious that the decision to collect, model, and game with such a force is made in the context of those politics as a matter of history.

I guess at this point we can agree to disagree.

For me the vast majority of players that will choose to play Germans in a WW2 game will do it either because it looks cool (design aesthetic), or because of the military history behind the army which again is not based on the ideology of the regime.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
the military history behind the army which again is not based on the ideology of the regime

This is an ahistorical concept.

 Manchu wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
the military history behind the army which again is not based on the ideology of the regime

This is an ahistorical concept.

If you say so I will not disagree, but if your definition of historical gaming is so broad, then I believe the vast majority of historical gamers play ahistorical.

The German military enthusiastically attempted to achieve the ideological goals set out by Hitler's regime. This logic made it all the way down to the level of individual soldiers who fought, killed, and died because they believed to a greater or lesser extent in Nazi ideological precepts (which included patriotism, albeit in an inextricably racist form). Does this generally come up in specific instances of war games? I doubt it. On the other hand, don't most people participating value historical war gaming precisely because it is historical? That seems certain.

Even when war gamers are explicitly engaging in counterfactual narrative -- for example, the glorification of the "good Germans" when it comes to Wehrmacht apologetics -- we're still dealing with the realm of history inasmuch as people can only create such narratives on the basis of some historical awareness. This is why I posted earlier that even the most superficial historical awareness makes it impossible to ignore Nazi ideology when choosing to play a WW2-era German army.

 Manchu wrote:
This is why I posted earlier that even the most superficial historical awareness makes it impossible to ignore Nazi ideology when choosing to play a WW2-era German army.

Except of course thats exactly what I did, and I very much doubt that I am alone in doing so. There are also a fairly wide spectrum of 'Naziness', with most DAK units on the good side of the spectrum all the way through to the Dirlewanger bridage and the Totenkopf division on the other with everything else in between. Not all German soldiers were Nazis and while they were ultimately fighting for the Nazi party and its idealogy at the end of the day they were also fighting for their country, just like every other combatant and that many of them were conscripts (even in SS units).

I'm not a Wehrmacht apologist but I do recognize the error in labelling all German soldiers as Nazis or adherents to Nazi ideology.

 Manchu wrote:
The German military enthusiastically attempted to achieve the ideological goals set out by Hitler's regime. This logic made it all the way down to the level of individual soldiers who fought, killed, and died because they believed to a greater or lesser extent in Nazi ideological precepts (which included patriotism, albeit in an inextricably racist form). Does this generally come up in specific instances of war games? I doubt it. On the other hand, don't most people participating value historical war gaming precisely because it is historical? That seems certain.

Even when war gamers are explicitly engaging in counterfactual narrative -- for example, the glorification of the "good Germans" when it comes to Wehrmacht apologetics -- we're still dealing with the realm of history inasmuch as people can only create such narratives on the basis of some historical awareness. This is why I posted earlier that even the most superficial historical awareness makes it impossible to ignore Nazi ideology when choosing to play a WW2-era German army.

I'm not really sure what you are saying here. I think you can certainly separate the ideology of an army from onces choice to play in a war game. Playing as the he South in an American Civil War game doesn't mean you in any way support or condone slavery for example. Your choice to play as that army may entirely be based of aesthetics or tactics and have nothing to do with Ideology.

Of course I may be completely misreading what you are saying and arguing against a point you are not making.

That said I agree that there does seem to be a great deal of apologetics when it comes to Nazi germany. Sure there were good germans, they were not an entire country of monsters but the army still fought for a regime that committed terrible acts of genoside and its very unlikely that the German army at large did not know of this.

It's a bit difficult to ignore the German role in WW2, so I'm not surprised a lot of players have German armies. I don't think the ratio is 95%, though.

As for motivation, most people probably just want a dynamic army that offers a variety of possible opponents.

 Haight wrote:

Swastika is an ancient symbol and the hysteria that surrounds it for the brief time Nazi Germany used it is at least disheartening.

While yes, technically true.... didn't they turn it from the Hindu symbol... i.e. the arms are rotating in the opposite direction of the hindu sign ? I was always under the impression that while they ripped off the design, they tweaked it in this way on purpose.

I mean, they totally did steal it, not denying that, but a backwards R and a frontwards R are still relatively different things.

The swastika is one of the most ancient symbols known to man. It's been known to various European cultures for thousands of years. It appears in ancient European contexts that predate the Indus Valley civilisation meaning it first appears in Europe and not India.
Under christianity the symbol was not so common as the cross became favoured. It wasn't until the romantic ideals of the 18th century brought about an interest in paganism that the symbol started becoming popular again. At the same time, discovery of the Aryans ,this supposed super people who spread out from somwhere in the Russian Steppes to bring civilisation to the world, introduced their word for the symbol into Europe. The Germans called it a Hakenkreuz (crooked cross) but the English and others called it a swastika, the sanskrit word used by the Indians. The word came from India, not the symbol.

As for its rotation, left or right, it can be both and appears as such in ancient European art, and both forms are used in Asia. Swastikas are also to be found in many old Synagogues, especially as part of floor decorations.

Thought this image was interesting as it's from an American car company that existed during the early part of the 20th century. It went out of business while Hitler was still a corporal serving in WWI. The company did export overseas so if the nazis did "steal" their swastika from anywhere, it was from a small car company out of Detroit.

Looks like I've opened a can of worms with this discussion, from the bottom of my heart, I can assure people that this was not my original intention

As I mentioned earlier, I do like tiger tanks, and if you're building on a budget, a late war German army stuffed with panthers is pretty cheap to buy.

Maybe this next bit is OT, but it always surprises me when you see people walking around with hammer and sickle t-shirts, or chairman Mao t-shirts (how many people did he kill?) or Che Guvera t-shirts, and nobody blinks an eyelid, but if you were to wear a Swastika....

I think, from a British point of view, if the Nazis didn't exist, we'd have to invent them. The number of books and tv programmes these days on them is getting silly!

From a war gaming view, my personnel preference is British tanks and American paratroopers (dream combination) but the lack of British armies on my scene is strange - maybe it is a case of people wanting to try something different?

Anyway, loads of good comments, here, keep it up!

As for popularity of the German military, there used to be a lot of WWII movies with British or American soldiers in them. There were comics about the same. Today there is a huge focus on the Germans in terms of movies and computer games, often with a fantasy element but people see the Germans more than anyone else.

They looked good for sure but I think exposure plays a part too, you don't see a lot of movies or tv programmes that are about WWII British army forces.

The interesting part about the swastika is I only see it as a Nazi symbol when on a red flag in a white circle any other time I see it as a Hindu simbol of peace and welcome it all depends on context.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Looks like I've opened a can of worms with this discussion, from the bottom of my heart, I can assure people that this was not my original intention

As I mentioned earlier, I do like tiger tanks, and if you're building on a budget, a late war German army stuffed with panthers is pretty cheap to buy.

Maybe this next bit is OT, but it always surprises me when you see people walking around with hammer and sickle t-shirts, or chairman Mao t-shirts (how many people did he kill?) or Che Guvera t-shirts, and nobody blinks an eyelid, but if you were to wear a Swastika....

I think, from a British point of view, if the Nazis didn't exist, we'd have to invent them. The number of books and tv programmes these days on them is getting silly!

From a war gaming view, my personnel preference is British tanks and American paratroopers (dream combination) but the lack of British armies on my scene is strange - maybe it is a case of people wanting to try something different?

Anyway, loads of good comments, here, keep it up!

Personally I plan to collect British if/when I start playing ww2 games.

Welsh_Furey wrote:
The interesting part about the swastika is I only see it as a Nazi symbol when on a red flag in a white circle any other time I see it as a Hindu simbol of peace and welcome it all depends on context.

If you look at Japanese maps they are full of swastikas as the symbol is used to mark the location of Buddhist temples.

I think I am in the only person in the world who actually wants to play Italians in WWII.

In due time, in due time.

I think that there is an obsessive nature that is inherent in Naziism that appeals to gamers. The Nazis were known for their meticulous order and record keeping. They wrote long texts in the German tradition that are more than a little obsessive.

Many gamers that I know have OCD, and it allies nicely with such obsession and order. You can collect obsessively, paint obsessively, and play obsessively. Rules lawyering and WAAC seems to me to come from a perspective of the game that is distorted by obsession.

Now, of course you can obsess about any force, but with Germans, it fits the fluff.

 Easy E wrote:
I think I am in the only person in the world who actually wants to play Italians in WWII.

In due time, in due time.

I dabbled with the idea, myself, so you're not alone!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 spaceelf wrote:
I think that there is an obsessive nature that is inherent in Naziism that appeals to gamers. The Nazis were known for their meticulous order and record keeping. They wrote long texts in the German tradition that are more than a little obsessive.

Many gamers that I know have OCD, and it allies nicely with such obsession and order. You can collect obsessively, paint obsessively, and play obsessively. Rules lawyering and WAAC seems to me to come from a perspective of the game that is distorted by obsession.

Now, of course you can obsess about any force, but with Germans, it fits the fluff.

My local tax office is known for its obsessive and ruthless nature, as well! It's not just a Nazi thing!

 Palindrome wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
This is why I posted earlier that even the most superficial historical awareness makes it impossible to ignore Nazi ideology when choosing to play a WW2-era German army.

Except of course thats exactly what I did, and I very much doubt that I am alone in doing so.

There is no way to believe such a statement. It's like saying you got into WW2 war gaming without ever thinking about WW2.

 Palindrome wrote:
I'm not a Wehrmacht apologist but I do recognize the error in labelling all German soldiers as Nazis or adherents to Nazi ideology.

I don't think you've actually read my posts. Whether or not most Wehrmacht soldiers were party members, the Wehrmacht was a creature of the Nazi state, directed and operated according to Nazi ideology, and its soldiers were certainly willing and in many cases even enthusiastic participants.

 carlos13th wrote:
Of course I may be completely misreading what you are saying and arguing against a point you are not making.

It seems so. I definitely do not think that anyone who buys WW2-era German toy soldiers is a Nazi or even necessarily rationalizes the culpability of the German people (despite there being a lot of the latter ITT). My point is, when we talk about historical gaming we are implicating actual history. Unlike a plastic Space Marine, a plastic Wehrmacht soldier points to real things that actually happened -- including some very troubling things.

I don't know why but every time I see the whole "All Germans were Nazis argument" I can't help but scoff a bit.

Not every American soldier who served in Operation Iraqi Freedom was a Republican, and I'm sure that for every other conflict in history there were enlisted men fighting who didn't sync up completely with the political party in charge.

Somehow seeing the Germans or even the Soviet army of WWII being 100% committed to their ideals (Naziism and Communism) is just painting them with far too broad a brush.

I scoff whenever I see arguments relying on phrases like "100% committed." What is historically obvious is that the German people generally did not oppose Nazism; what is further apparent from even cursory research is that the German people generally supported Nazism. The "not 100%" style arguments explain nothing about what actually happened, including the widespread atrocities committed by the Wehrmacht.

 Manchu wrote:
The German military enthusiastically attempted to achieve the ideological goals set out by Hitler's regime. This logic made it all the way down to the level of individual soldiers who fought, killed, and died because they believed to a greater or lesser extent in Nazi ideological precepts (which included patriotism, albeit in an inextricably racist form). Does this generally come up in specific instances of war games? I doubt it. On the other hand, don't most people participating value historical war gaming precisely because it is historical? That seems certain.

Even when war gamers are explicitly engaging in counterfactual narrative -- for example, the glorification of the "good Germans" when it comes to Wehrmacht apologetics -- we're still dealing with the realm of history inasmuch as people can only create such narratives on the basis of some historical awareness. This is why I posted earlier that even the most superficial historical awareness makes it impossible to ignore Nazi ideology when choosing to play a WW2-era German army.

I think it's possible to recognise and acknowledge the history of the second world war, and still play the army. I don't really understand what point you are trying to make - are you trying to say that people shouldn't play that army, simply because the actions that army carried out, and the regime they were part of, was so despicable? I guess that's very much a personal thing. I do know people who feel the same way (not just about WW2 and Germans.. about playing any force, in any period of history) and prefer to keep tabletop wargaming purely in the realm of fantasy.

I think it's a tough one.. I've got Jewish ancestry that had to leave both Germany and from eastern Europe 50 years before that. Perhaps in part because of this I've read about the war and its causes extensively, I can acknowledge that the regime the Wermacht fought as part of was horrendous. But, at the same time I don't ascribe to the 'they all knew exactly what was going on' view of their history. It's a conclusion I have reached from reading I've done, of life experience, and because I know that most people by their very nature want to protect their own skins and do their very best not to believe stories of atrocities. I can understand though how, if you didn't view things as I do, it would be very difficult to play as a German force. And in fact how a lot of the time playing any historical conflict could become far too emotive if you're unable to view things with a clinical detachment and understanding of historical, cultural and psychological norms. In my case, it allows me to play WW2 as I imagine it to be.. as a bunch of tired, frightened but brave guys who want to fight for the people stood next to them, a meal and bed to sleep in, for the chance to go back to their loved ones back home. In most cases I think that the combatants on the battlefield, the fight taking place before me at 15mm scale, probably felt the same way regardless of the flag they fought under.

So.. ultimately, I think it's really a subjective thing. Finally, I think it's also possible that while a lot of people know doubt know the context of the games they are playing, a lot of people probably simply don't care. Think how blasé the majority of people are about wars taking place in the world right now, and about loss of life through violence, by extension they will care that much less about a conflict that took place more than 65 years ago.

Well, Pacific, I have been pretty explicit in my posts that I don't think people who play WW2-era German armies are necessarily Nazis or Nazi apologists so it's hard to see how you might even conceive that I'm saying people shouldn't play those armies. My actual point was initially a response to this post:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
And while the whole discussion of what really happened, from whose point of view one sees it and who was the worse of them all is quite intriguing, I feel it is a discussion for another thread and another topic.

The question of WW2-era German atrocities is very much on-topic in a thread discussing why people play them because every single person who has even the slightest amount of education cannot possibly consider the matter outside of the historical context.

Now people respond in different ways. They might be indulging their own racist and authoritarian fantasies. They might rationalize the atrocities away in favor of the "Good German" myth fairly prevalent ITT. Or they might accept what actually happened and mindfully avoid glorifying or justifying WW2-era Germany. Most realistically, there is a combination of all of these things. But the point is, everyone must consider this question regardless of how they answer it.

 Manchu wrote:

Now people respond in different ways. They might be indulging their own racist and authoritarian fantasies. They might rationalize the atrocities away in favor of the "Good German" myth fairly prevalent ITT. Or they might accept what actually happened and mindfully avoid glorifying or justifying WW2-era Germany. Most realistically, there is a combination of all of these things. But the point is, everyone must consider this question regardless of how they answer it.

Or more realistically they might recognise that war itself involves atrocities against civilians and enemy soldiers alike and that their interest is strictly military and not political. Otherwise we'd need to ask why anyone would play tyranids, a lifeform whose sole purpose is to convert all other life to itself. Maybe such people are closet marxists wanting to replace all global cultures and people with one uniformed peasant mass that worships the state. Lots of ways of looking at things, sometimes it's best not to ascribe motives to things like choice of faction in gaming and either play with the person or not, admire their army or not.

Do you really have trouble seeing the difference between sci-fantasy and historical war gaming?

What Manchu won't tell you is that there is just as much primary evidence from German soldiers who were opposed to Nazi ideals as there were from true believers. The idea that all German soldiers embraced such radical ideas is absurd.

WW2 and the Holocaust cannot be explained by the myth that most or even many Germans opposed Nazism.

What I have difficulty with is ascribing motives to players of armies. You'd have us believe that everyone who plays WWII German forces is a closet nazi or is only playing them so that the "good guys" have someone to fight.

The armies involved in the battles were not taking time out to round up partisans, jews or whoever, they were military formations involved in fighting battles. That is what is represened on the tabletop. The day FOW or any other WWII based game brings in the option of using your forces to oppress civilian populations, run concentration camps/gulags, teach propaganda to your population you'll have a point to make. Until then, WWII games are military in nature and not political, as are all other historic wargames at tabletop level.

The point of asking the motivations for playing a faction in a sci-fi game is that it is equally absurd as doing so for an historic one. People do play historic battles to see if they could effect the same results with similar resources of historic generals.
It's also irrelevant why someone chooses to play a particular army if they're good to play against or with.
If a person chooses to play the Soviets because they're a member of the local communist party then so what? If you're anti-communist then have fun trying to beat them.

One of things I find interesting about the German military is how modern they looked for an army from 70 years ago. That probably is part of the appeal too.

 Samurai_Eduh wrote:
he idea that all German soldiers embraced such radical ideas is absurd.

Again with the "not 100%" argument. For people who make this argument, history is apparently as simple as either on the one hand every single German being a card-carrying Nazi or on the other the majority of them opposing Nazism even as their whole soceity was mobilized to prosecute a war to achieve Nazi goals.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

cadbren wrote:
You'd have us believe that everyone who plays WWII German forces is a closet nazi or is only playing them so that the "good guys" have someone to fight..

Or you could read what I have actually said:

 Manchu wrote:
When people chose to play a WW2-era German army, it is obvious that they are not necessarily aligning themselves with Nazi politics.

 Manchu wrote:
I have been pretty explicit in my posts that I don't think people who play WW2-era German armies are necessarily Nazis or Nazi apologists

But nice strawman post.

cadbren wrote:
The point of asking the motivations for playing a faction in a sci-fi game is that it is equally absurd as doing so for an historic one.

Neither question is absurd in the slightest. It is absurd, however, to pretend they are the same question.

Yeah, way to totally ignore what I wrote and you have in no way been explicit about saying that those who play factions like the WWII Germans are divorced from the political background. In fact you keep bringing it up as though it is relevant to a wargame when it is not.

Most of your post is premised on a strawman argument. It's not worth addressing further than that.

As to whether history is relevant to historical war gaming: one should hope the answer is obvious. Clearly for some, it is not.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
To be fair, Germany's bombing is nowhere near the level of bombing we did to them.

I think I was trying to say that being on the receiving end of ANY bombing tends to create a very long memory that is less than friendly.
Also being the victor, a little more destruction occurs on the losing side due to "settling accounts" usually with interest.

The comment does not change the fact that the Germans are not disliked as much by the present generation because they were kind enough to not take the fight to N.A. , to lose, make great angry music, and locally the Oktoberfest is the best booze-up around. More reasons they are awesome:
http://deutschwv.wordpress.com/category/reasons-that-germany-is-awesome/

Just think of war gaming as an abstract affair of "what if" if we have to start playing like "Ender's Game" we need to find less nasty pursuits like paintball.

There's also the matter of the hasty end of postwar Denazification in light of the Cold War.

Manchu, where do you get the impression from that most historical wargamers even remotely care about the political background of their chosen force?

I play a lot of historicals. Mainly Thirty Years War, Napoleonics and Ancients instead of WW2, but still, I don't give a damn about the counter-reformation when I choose to play a Catholic League army in any given battle, I don't ask what Napoleon's master plan was when I play the French and I do not having second thoughts about fielding my Romans because, you know, slavery.

A lot of posters have already tried to explain to you that, believe it or not, when playing a WARGAME even historically interested people might go about chosing their faction just like in 40k: What does the army look like, and does it fit my playstyle in the context of the rules. Insisting that people simply have to have second thoughts about the historical implications leads nowhere when that's obviously not the case for a lot of players.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
From a war gaming view, my personnel preference is British tanks and American paratroopers (dream combination) but the lack of British armies on my scene is strange - maybe it is a case of people wanting to try something different?

The British were taking a pounding due to being in the war from the beginning.
Hard to be perceived as a glorified hero when you get your face kicked in and are grimly holding on.

The Americans were fresh and having none of their industry or infrastructure damaged is not to be underestimated.
I wonder what would have happened if Pearl Harbor was never attacked, when would their involvement started then?

This is why we war game: what if?

 Allod wrote:
Manchu, where do you get the impression from that most historical wargamers even remotely care about the political background of their chosen force?

My impression comes from experience, which is that historical war gamers tend to actually care about the history of the relevant period. Again, can we really feign surprise that historical war gaming is inherently connected to history? Furthermore - WW2, Nazi ideology, and Wehrmacht atrocities are not matters of obscure, remote historical detail as for example the theology of the counter-reformation. Our contemporary society is rich with reflections on those topics in popular media as well as historical study. In light of this, it is simply impossible that anyone approaching WW2 war gaming can do so with total ignorance or indifference.

 Talizvar wrote:
Hard to be perceived as a glorified hero when you get your face kicked in and are grimly holding on.

But that's exactly why wartime British were and still are perceived as heroic.

 Manchu wrote:
Do you really have trouble seeing the difference between sci-fantasy and historical war gaming?

The principals behind both are quite real, the only difference is one has happened the other has not, but on both occasions one playing said army is, by your words, rationalizing or indulging the atrocities the background they bring on the table champions.

I feel you cannot accept that people can and will play wargames, historical or fictional with a light heart and focus strictly on the "good parts" of a faction, be it aesthetics, military achievements and background ignoring the bad that come with it.

I am puzzled by you "good Germans myth" you keep saying, you really believe Germans around late 1930 were a pure breed of evil and malice and not yet another human nation like every other? you really think everybody else involved in WW2 didn't commit atrocities? or that the allies did not have their fair share? it doesn't change the fact that all involved in that war, regardless of sides were simple humans fighting for their countries, if you want conscious evil decisions, you have to go really high on the hierarchy scale, that doesn't change the fact that the common people living and fighting in that nation were simple humans following orders, not a breed of evil minions who followed every command with glee knowing what evil their fighting at the front lines allows to happen "back home".

And if the "good German" myth is the case what are their decedents now?

To continue and get another popular to play army Spartans, does this mean everybody playing them aspires to a totalitarian, slave driven, militaristic society that from era to era even had slave hunting as a right of passage, or they are simply attracted to the strong visual appeal of red and bronze coupled with the Corinthian helm and the big Λ on the shields? or they are simply attracted to the strong military victories they have achieved, ignoring completely what Sparta had behind the glorious frontlines?

The vast majority of wargamers chose their factions, real or fictional for the visual aesthetics and/ or the positive parts of their background, not for the underlining political ideas the faction represented, or the atrocities they committed in the wars they fought.

 Manchu wrote:
Furthermore - WW2, Nazi ideology, and Wehrmacht atrocities are not matters of obscure, remote historical detail as for example the theology of the counter-reformation. Our contemporary society is rich with reflections on those topics in popular media as well as historical study. In light of this, it is simply impossible that anyone approaching WW2 war gaming can do so with total ignorance or indifference

Of course almost everyone will know about it. And I don't think it's a case of not caring about the events of the past, but more that they have an understanding and acceptance at what happened as part of history. And, they can still play and enjoy the wargame despite that, and view it in context.

Sorry if it seems like I'm being a bit slow, but I really don't understand what point you are trying to make here.. .

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
the only difference is one has happened the other has not

Sadly, this is not an attempt at irony.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
you really believe Germans around late 1930 were a pure breed of evil and malice

No and nothing I have posted even comes close to implying as much. In fact:

 Manchu wrote:
Now, I'm not saying German soldiers were by large the slavering fanatic brutes of Allied propaganda but neither was the German military composed of millions of men who secretly despised Hitler and the Nazi regime. Quite the contrary, in fact.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
you really think everybody else involved in WW2 didn't commit atrocities?

Again, nothing I have posted implies I believe that. Indeed, it's completely beside the point except inasmuch as the Wehrmacht was ordered to invade Russia in a war of extermination. That is to say, the German war effort on the Eastern Front was itself inherently a war crime.

The "good German" myth is that very many or even most Germans participated in the Nazi regime at one level or another solely out of a healthy and admirable sense of patriotism and anti-Communism. This image was actively cultivated by the Western Powers after the war.

 Manchu wrote:
My impression comes from experience, which is that historical war gamers tend to actually care about the history of the relevant period. Again, can we really feign surprise that historical war gaming is inherently connected to history?

I don't think anybody is disputing this particular point. People are disputing that this knowledge factors into their choice of a game faction, which you continue to ignore.

For the sake of civilised argument, because I really understand where you are coming from, I'm trying to illustrate my point again: I know an awful lot about Roman history. I certainly don't put on any rose-tinted glasses when thinking about that civilisation. Still, although I picked up gaming in that era because of my interest in it, when I chose an army to collect I thought about the painting aspect and how they would play, and nothing else. For me and any other Ancients player, that time is anything but "obscure", but we don't intend to have a scholarly discussion on the topic, we intend to play a game. It's really no different for a war which many posters' grandparents didn't even see with their own eyes.

So, yes, we can safely assume everybody who plays FoW or Bolt Action knows that the Wehrmacht/Waffen-SS/whatever was not involved in "clean" warfare. But if somebody tells me that he bought a bunch of little plastic men because he liked the looks of the uniforms and the tanks and that's the end of the story, I can relate and see no reason to disbelieve him.

 Pacific wrote:
Sorry if it seems like I'm being a bit slow, but I really don't understand what point you are trying to make here

My point is that anyone buying, building, collecting, and gaming with Nazi armies must, to whatever degree of conscious reflection, deal with the historical reality of Nazism. Different people do this differently and come to different conclusions. That may seem obvious to you (and I agree it should be obvious) but some posters ITT argue otherwise.

 Allod wrote:
People are disputing that this knowledge factors into their choice of a game faction, which you continue to ignore.

I don't ignore it; I dispute it.

Your comparison between ancient Roman history and a worldwide conflict that gave rise to contemporary Western society in so many easily evident dimensions and moreover that only ended less than a century ago is not very convincing.

I really do not get you, what is your point?

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
I really do not get you, what is your point?

It hasn't changed since yesterday:

 Manchu wrote:
These things need to be considered together. One shouldn't just admire the Nazi uniforms without considering what the men who wore them got up to. And I think doing so is basically impossible for anyone with even very superficial historical awareness. Therefore, this too must play some part in explaining why people chose Germans, including the matter of apologetics.

 Manchu wrote:
I don't ignore it; I dispute it.

Your comparison between ancient Roman history and a worldwide conflict that gave rise to contemporary Western society in so many easily evident dimension and moreover that only ended less than a century ago is not very convincing.

If your whole argument rests on the conviction that you are the measuring stick for what people have to find relevant or not, there is really no point in going on with this.

Thankfully, that has nothing to do with anything I've posted.

I think the opposite, there is no solid reason why these things should or even must be considered together.

History itself is the reason.

No, I am afraid not, History for you might be the reason, but there is no solid reason why people should even bother to think about negotiating what they play in a wargame.

You have a very personal and subjective opinion and try to pass it as the opinion everybody should have, that is not the case.

Tigers, panthers, stugs, hanomags, the Germans equipment and kit have a very cool look. Maybe it's easier for today's generation, who may not have anyone they cared about die fighting in the war to just accept that the Germans look awesome.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
No, I am afraid not, History for you might be the reason, but there is no solid reason why people should even bother to think about negotiating what they play in a wargame.

My point is, it's not a choice. People are historical beings. And, in our present culture, almost everyone knows something about the Germans of WW2. It's inescapable.

 Manchu wrote:
There is no way to believe such a statement. It's like saying you got into WW2 war gaming without ever thinking about WW2

Well you are going to have to believe it. We are of course talking about toy soldiers here so I see no reason why I would need to consider a particular units ideology or the political ideals of its supreme command when assembling my little bits of plastic and metal ( I rarely tie my armies to specific real world units in the first place).

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "ignoring Nazi ideology", I have had an interest in WW2 long before I began wargaming in this period so I gave no thought whatsoever to Nazism when I made my first German FoW army, a Heer Panzer Kompanie which was chosen purely on the basis of cost.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Plus, it's the Nazi's own fault for using a symbol that makes it look like you have a ninja star on your flag. The swastika would actually be an intriguing symbol on it's own, if only it wasn't coupled with something so bad.

Can you really say that in the face of a Hindu?

Or anybody else who has this symbol in his/ her cultural inheritance or religion the past, lets see, 5 thousand years?

Or the US 45th Infantry Division.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The title is pretty much self explanatory.

At a recent mini FOW tournament I attended, 19 out of 20, yes, that's 19 out of 20 players were armies of the 3rd Reich. In most cases, they were SS lists. The only non-German list was my own - a grenadier guards armoured company with elements of the 82nd as infantry.

Now, I'm the first to admit that German lists are usually good, tiger tanks are fething brilliant in my view, but wherever I seem to go these days, it's all German. Most of the popular WW2 books/documentaries these days are on the Germans.

What's the reasoning for this? Do people want reliable armies to command? Are there lots of closet Nazis out there? Or are we just simply fascinated with villains as we generally tend to be with films and other books - Darth Vader, The Joker, etc etc

Finally, at least I can't be accused of Godwinning this thread!

Thoughts?

If you set aside for a moment the Nazi death camp and other items, germans were a brilliant military. Tough, hard as nails and very competent. SS units, Wehrmacht, Rommel and other items. People like that and want to replicate it on the table top.

My dust tactics Germans are based on alternate history in which they killed hitler and purged the Nazis out of the wermacht. I guess they are ok since it's not historical.

What wars are off limits? Or just Nazis?

Off limits?

 Manchu wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
I really do not get you, what is your point?

It hasn't changed since yesterday:

 Manchu wrote:
These things need to be considered together. One shouldn't just admire the Nazi uniforms without considering what the men who wore them got up to. And I think doing so is basically impossible for anyone with even very superficial historical awareness. Therefore, this too must play some part in explaining why people chose Germans, including the matter of apologetics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II

Except by that measure, we should figure out what to pin on the Allied factions when it comes to what comes in their Uniforms, such as the Americans who collected flesh from Japanese dead.

If you want to get down to the nitty gritty of it. People did some horrible things on the battlefield, and if you want to make sure we understand what all happened in their uniform, you'll get some horrific people on all sides..

Might want to read that whole article, including down at the bottom under Holocaust denial. But as already mentioned, the subject of Allied war crimes is a red herring ITT except inasmuch as it reminds us of the unique nature of German war crimes. Namely, that instead of being lapses of morale and discipline, German war crimes were in a large part the stated goal of the German war effort at least on the Eastern front.

 Manchu wrote:
Might want to read that whole article, including down at the bottom under Holocaust denial. But as already mentioned, the subject of Allied war crimes is a red herring ITT except inasmuch as it reminds us of the unique nature of German war crimes. Namely, that instead of being lapses of morale and discipline, German war crimes were in a large part the stated goal of the German war effort at least on the Eastern front.

Mmm, fine I suppose, do you feel the same way of the Japanese for their War on their extermination war in China?

Sure, so far as it goes. Japanese war crimes have not been studied as extensively (in English at least) as German ones and there is a good deal more popular ambivalence on the subject in the United States. All I mean is, I think it is far less likely for the average American to have heard of the Nanjing Massacre than to have heard of the Holocaust. Also, I don't think Showa-era Japanese racialism is equivalent to the Nazi variety and I'm unaware of a Japanese equivalent to the Barbarossa decree.

 Manchu wrote:
That's a false analogy. We aren't just talking about uniform style (for example, in the scifi context). We're talking about the WW2-era German military.

Actually, almost *everyone* has either said , in reference to playing germans, some version of "i love the design / aesthetic" or "I like playing the badguy, and nazi's are the ultimate badguy".

I don't think i've seen anyone say "I play me some third reich cuz i love me some Nazi's. Shame what happened to that Hitler bloke, he was really onto something."


Even the 2nd generation german gentleman specifically said "My grandad was a kriegsmarine. I play the Germans because it reminds me of my forefathers. I hate Nazis, btw. "





Regarding Far East genocide, it was not as systematic, but it was just as every bit brutal and ugly. The Nanking Massacre (250k - 300k dead in one relative incident) comes to mind. Bataan Death March is another, and my personal fav - a small level of scope, but huge in the "wow, you guys are evil fething bastards" department - the Bangka Island massacre, where 22 nurses were lined up and machine gunned.

You don't hear about it as much because it didn't quite reach the scope or just... organized systematic automation that the Nazi's pulled off. But i digress, i really don't want to make this thread about wargaming about War Crimes.

Also remember that the reason we know so much about the Nazi's is the sheer ridiculous amount of documentation they left behind. They documented everything.

That's another reason it's discussed and known so much more about.

Anyway.... i did my bachelor's degree thesis on war crimes and international law, so i could talk about this all damn day.

What you posted has nothing to do with what you quoted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Castle_Itter

http://www.americainwwii.com/articles/americans-for-hitler/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Liberation_Army

http://www.feldgrau.com/rvol.html

http://www.2worldwar2.com/german-secret-weapons.htm

http://techzwn.com/2011/08/the-soviet-zombie-experiments/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS_foreign_volunteers_and_conscripts

http://content.wisconsinhistory.org/cdm/ref/collection/wmh/id/36765

http://www.traces.org/americanbund.html

WHY?

Why not?

I dig up things like this for fun. Of course my interests are on a whole nother level then most, but on some subjects- Sometimes the best questions are better left unasked, unless you want to just up and throw anything you thought you knew about something. WW2 is not a pretty pink package tied in a bow. Its history, based on other factors that I won't go into in a minis column, I honestly recommend Osprey in the discussion, and to not just sit around and think that you can say this guy= good, this guy= bad. There are more then enough factors and twists and turns without even trying too hard.

At the time? Hitler was a great guy. He even made Time Magazines man of the year once. That he was a unifier, he rolled with an outright psychotic tempo for a country while at the same time did what he did for that time was not something everyone even on the board wants to get into, honestly WHY should they?

My point here Is that there is more to the world then storybooks and penny dreadfulls.

Its not always about demonizing someone or something.

Sometimes it just is what it is.

Popularity comes with perception.

rose tinted glasses help as well.

OP I think a big part of the appeal is playing as the underdog. National Socialists basically shoved the biggest kid on the block and said 'Do something'. The fact that Barbarossa came so close to success against such preposterous odds shows that it it hadn't been for the whole massive genocide on both sides thing it would be a pretty interesting overconfident underdog matchup. I'm always amazed studying it that the Germans came as near as they did to pulling it off.

I think in school they like to teach that an Allied victory was a foregone conclusion due to our insurmountable industrial advantages (even the wimp of the group industrially, the UK was outproducing the Germans in the key areas of aircraft and ships as early as 1941) but it's pretty chilling and at the same time interesting to see how just a few different things could have turned the tide and completely changed the course of history.

Plus for me... IDK when I play an American force I feel like I'm really loosing my own dudes, you know? And if they are just panzergrenadiers I'm like whatever, some plastic nazis got ventilated.

German Army was the most advanced at the beginning to until the middle of the war and they are the most tactically independent army.

I play as Russians in Dust tactics and bolt action, i just like the bulky tech design of the Russians.

MVBrandt wrote:
It's very hard to separate the Nazis from the Germans, and generally it's also probably insensitive and inappropriate to do so.

This separation was a big part of the reason why I went for DAK as my FoW army when I first got into the game.

 Grot 6 wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Castle_Itter

http://www.americainwwii.com/articles/americans-for-hitler/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Liberation_Army

http://www.feldgrau.com/rvol.html

http://www.2worldwar2.com/german-secret-weapons.htm

http://techzwn.com/2011/08/the-soviet-zombie-experiments/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS_foreign_volunteers_and_conscripts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil%27s_Guard

WHY?

Why not?

I dig up things like this for fun. Of course my interests are on a whole nother level then most, but on some subjects- Sometimes the best questions are better left unasked, unless you want to just up and throw anything you thought you knew about something. WW2 is not a pretty pink package tied in a bow. Its history, based on other factors that I won't go into in a minis column, I honestly recommend Osprey in the discussion, and to not just sit around and think that you can say this guy= good, this guy= bad. There are more then enough factors and twists and turns without even trying too hard.

At the time? Hitler was a great guy. He even made Time Magazines man of the year once. That he was a unifier, he rolled with an outright psychotic tempo for a country while at the same time did what he did for that time was not something everyone even on the board wants to get into, honestly WHY should they?

My point here Is that there is more to the world then storybooks and penny dreadfulls.

Its not always about demonizing someone or something.

Sometimes it just is what it is.

Popularity comes with perception.

rose tinted glasses help as well

This was a terrible post, if it was meant to contradict anything Manchu said earlier. And generally speaking, any post that says 'Hitler was great guy', is to be regarded as suspect at the best of times.

I recommend reading outside of Osprey and internet websites that dress up historical events with Daily-Mail-esque titles.

 Manchu wrote:
Phrases like "carried out in full by all concerned" seem meant to set an impossibly high burden of proof of 100% compliance while the historical fact remains that the German armed forces eagerly committed atrocities. I think this kind of apologetic view of the Wehrmacht (especially characterizing German soldiers as simple patriots) is part of the allure of playing German armies. The romantic idea of the "good German" has appealed to the imaginations in the US, UK, and Commonwealth since the war was still going on (e.g., Rommel).

Something to remember, is that if you were between the ages of EVERY MALE ON THIS FORUM and happened to be born German (or Austrian, etc) and weren't already in a camp for political dissidents, or actually came of age in those war years, then congratulations! You're in the Wehrmacht, now, mein freund. I don't think that's particularly "romanticised". I think that's simple fact.

So what?

I feel that you're essentially just being argumentative here with an I AM RIGHT IF YOU DISAGREE WITH ME YOU ARE WRONG attitude, so I'm going to skip your posts here as they haven't added anything to the discussion for a couple of pages beyond what I just posted.

That's a fine tantrum -- but it's not an argument.

A lot of people were in the Wehrmacht. Sure. There were also a lot of Germans. And yet somehow the Nazis came to power and stayed in power and German armies waged a war of ethnic extermination.

Safe to assume at this point that you're not going to be collecting a Heer/Grenadier force at any time soon then Manchu?

Actually -- quite the reverse. I'm slated to buy a BA Heer starter army next weekend along with the Soviet starter.

The last several pages have seen nothing much from yourself but a childish reiteration of your opinions couched in what is pretty much a "I AM RIGHT YOU ARE ALL WRONG LA LA LA" tone.

You are far too simplistic in your understandings. I'd recommend you spend some time studying history. I mean, actually studying it. Furthermore, your assessments of the motivations of players may be accurate for your own perspective, but at no point in your existence do you get to speak for the reasons that a majority of others make their choices or judge the validity of their reasons for their choices.

Given the vehemence that you're reiterating your couple of opinions, It appears that you're on some kind of personal crusade on this point. Now, I can to a degree empathise with you - as I have an utter hatred of the WW2-era Japanese, and won't collect (I collect 1:6 scale military figures and, obviously, toy soldiers) or play them in any form that doesn't include them in a non-optional, essential component of the game (ie BF1942, War at Sea, Axis & Allies, etc). Even with this as context, I don't pretend to consider myself an arbiter of the reasons why people may or may not choose to play as or collect IJN, etc forces - as everything you have said in regard to the Germans in WW2 can also be applied to the Japanese.

Anyway, from this point on I'm going to skip your posts. Don't consider it a tantrum, because it's quite the opposite. Consider it me not wanting to continue talking to/arguing with you on this topic.

Reading your post, it is evident that you are only arguing with a figment of your imagination. How is you not being willing to play a Japanese army at all similar to anything that I've said, especially since I just said I will be buying a German army in a week?

You could save everyone a lot of trouble by actually reading the thread before posting, although that would put a cap on your self-righteous ranting.

 Manchu wrote:
What you posted has nothing to do with what you quoted.

How so ?

You basically said that we are not talking about just wargaming and design aesthetic, but german actions during WW2. I disagree, as just about everyone has qualified their comments otherwise when falling on wargaming "team Germany".


My further comments were in response to the tangential discussion about war crimes in the pacific rim.


Both seem pretty relevant.

 Haight wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
What you posted has nothing to do with what you quoted.

How so ?

Because you posted this:

 Haight wrote:
I don't think i've seen anyone say "I play me some third reich cuz i love me some Nazi's. Shame what happened to that Hitler bloke, he was really onto something."

 Haight wrote:
You basically said that we are not talking about just wargaming and design aesthetic, but german actions during WW2.

Close. What I have been saying is that historical war gaming is about history and that the historical dimensions of the German military inevitably shapes people's decisions one way or the other when considering buying and collecting an army.

I agree that your comments about war crimes are completely relevant. This whole turn of the discussion began because I said discussion of war crimes is relevant but a lot of posters just assumed I meant "if you play Germans you must love Nazism."

 Ketara wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Castle_Itter

http://www.americainwwii.com/articles/americans-for-hitler/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Liberation_Army

http://www.feldgrau.com/rvol.html

http://www.2worldwar2.com/german-secret-weapons.htm

http://techzwn.com/2011/08/the-soviet-zombie-experiments/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS_foreign_volunteers_and_conscripts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil%27s_Guard

WHY?

Why not?

I dig up things like this for fun. Of course my interests are on a whole nother level then most, but on some subjects- Sometimes the best questions are better left unasked, unless you want to just up and throw anything you thought you knew about something. WW2 is not a pretty pink package tied in a bow. Its history, based on other factors that I won't go into in a minis column, I honestly recommend Osprey in the discussion, and to not just sit around and think that you can say this guy= good, this guy= bad. There are more then enough factors and twists and turns without even trying too hard.

At the time? Hitler was a great guy. He even made Time Magazines man of the year once. That he was a unifier, he rolled with an outright psychotic tempo for a country while at the same time did what he did for that time was not something everyone even on the board wants to get into, honestly WHY should they?

My point here Is that there is more to the world then storybooks and penny dreadfulls.

Its not always about demonizing someone or something.

Sometimes it just is what it is.

Popularity comes with perception.

rose tinted glasses help as well

This was a terrible post, if it was meant to contradict anything Manchu said earlier. And generally speaking, any post that says 'Hitler was great guy', is to be regarded as suspect at the best of times.

I recommend reading outside of Osprey and internet websites that dress up historical events with Daily-Mail-esque titles.

I'm not really interested in Hitler being a great guy, I said at the TIME he was a great guy.

The subjects are out there to be found, and YES= Some of them are gakky, but this is the stuff that Historians know about that the general public doesn't want to be put out as fun and games.

Aside from that, my post was for general examples of why WW2 is not all black and white. I'm not involved with what Manchu has going on, because honestly I disagree with him, but am not engaging his comments in the way that you seem to think you have to do with me.

MINE? I'm saying that People play the german sets just because. Has nothing to do with anything, other then they want to play them.

Oh, by the way, add something to the conversation then just an insult.

I've got more to add, but you being obtuse is making me not want to continue in this discussion.


Its history, chief. I have no dog in the fight.

Here is a parting gift for you to. "Suspect" as you think it is.

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html

 Grot 6 wrote:

Aside from that, my post was for general examples of why WW2 is not all black and white. I'm not involved with what Manchu has going on, because honestly I disagree with him, but am not engaging his comments in the way that you seem to think you have to do with me.

The second world war was somewhat unique in that it WAS black and white. Victory for the Germans would have meant the elimination of *all* Eastern Slavic peoples, my Polish buddies at work certainly wouldn't be here today if he'd succeeded. The fact that the Allies (especially the Soviets) were not whiter than white doesn't mean that the Nazi German regime wasn't the most despicable and evil regime in history.

MINE? I'm saying that People play the german sets just because. Has nothing to do with anything, other then they want to play them.

People do everything for a reason. I like Cadians because they're generic enough for any colour scheme...nobody collects soldiers of the Third Reich just because.

Its history, chief. I have no dog in the fight.

This is a very telling sentence, given how one can *usually* assume that the man in the street found the nazi regime horrific and deserved to have been stopped.

The war was as grey as every war and to throw anything made by humans in black and white is at best naive.

What amazes me is the inability of people to accept that persons can choose to play historical games disregarding history, that people can choose Germans because of the aesthetics, or because their military exploits are quite amazing and not because they are closet Nazis and that they can definitely ignore what the Nazi army did back then, because they do not care as far as their wargaming is concerned.

What amazes me is that people can claim historical war games have nothing to do with history.

It is because you fail to understand that people can see a "historical" war game as a game alone, without all the baggage that comes with it save the very light one and then even if that.

As I have tried to explain, that's not the issue. Of course people can disregard the historical facts (see ITT). But that, too, is a way of considering the historical facts.

 Manchu wrote:
As I have tried to explain, that's not the issue. Of course people can disregard the historical facts (see ITT). But that, too, is a way of considering the historical facts.

Originally I was going to call your last post out as BS because I play Bolt Action and Flames of War and look at them as games rather than historical simulators. For me the draw is fighting during the WWII time period with the WWII technology, and not so much as fighting WWII, but I don't think I can call your last post out as BS because I still play those games because of when they took place.

xruslanx wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:

Aside from that, my post was for general examples of why WW2 is not all black and white. I'm not involved with what Manchu has going on, because honestly I disagree with him, but am not engaging his comments in the way that you seem to think you have to do with me.

The second world war was somewhat unique in that it WAS black and white. Victory for the Germans would have meant the elimination of *all* Eastern Slavic peoples, my Polish buddies at work certainly wouldn't be here today if he'd succeeded. The fact that the Allies (especially the Soviets) were not whiter than white doesn't mean that the Nazi German regime wasn't the most despicable and evil regime in history.

MINE? I'm saying that People play the german sets just because. Has nothing to do with anything, other then they want to play them.

People do everything for a reason. I like Cadians because they're generic enough for any colour scheme...nobody collects soldiers of the Third Reich just because.

Its history, chief. I have no dog in the fight.

This is a very telling sentence, given how one can *usually* assume that the man in the street found the nazi regime horrific and deserved to have been stopped.

I appreciate you opinion, but You haven't looked at my links there or done your homework on this subject.

The information is there to be read, contrary to how people want to spin it their way or whatever.

No, your not looking at the links or even giving yourself a serious chance to find out what was really going on in the world at that time. I know exactly what I said and was insulted for it.

I even went ahead and dug back a few more and for what it is worth, America didn't think anything about Germany. People had issues on both side and the current political opinions at that time were to sit it out. It was called Isolationism.

I'm holding on to the heavy stuff. I'm not even going to go down that rabbit hole. If you want to, go on for yourself. Links that I posted are just a taste. The next one is going to cost you if I have to put on my work pants and do it the way I know I should, but will blow the pants off of the discussion...

One thing has to do with another, friend. It is never in Black and White.

Go on over and look at those links, and ask the question- Is this true, or is the Grotster full of gak and made them all up? Where did he get this info, and can I find three more sources that say something about this?

I'll go right out and say it, The one on the bottom about the SS Foreign Legion regiment is looking like the gak one of the bunch, and I'm removing it.
BUT I'll replace it with something equally tasty.

 Alfndrate wrote:
but I don't think I can call your last post out as BS because I still play those games because of when they took place.

Yep, that's all I mean. Again, this whole thing started because PsychoticShock said we shouldn't even consider atrocities ITT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grot 6 wrote:
I appreciate you opinion, but You haven't looked at my links there or done your homework on this subject.

But nothing you've posted comes close to proving that Allied atrocities are morally equivalent to the Axis atrocities. The Allies got their hands dirty, no doubt, but they did so at least in part to stop something that has no redeeming qualities from a morally sane perspective.

 Manchu wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
but I don't think I can call your last post out as BS because I still play those games because of when they took place.

Yep, that's all I mean. Again, this whole thing started because PsychoticShock said we shouldn't even consider atrocities ITT.

I mean I certainly don't think about the atrocities of Nazi Germany when my opponent's flammenpanzer is rolling down the road towards me (note pick one of these up for your Heer army, nothing says good morning like two 18 inch auto-hitting 2d6 (per flame thrower) flamers that do d3+1 pin markers and force a morale check to even remain on the board.) I guess if we were to "re-enact" the liberation of Buchenwald, then it might cross my mind, but at the end of the day (to me) it's just a game that takes place in WWII.

If you refer to me I think you can refer to me by the forum nickname and not a faux nickname.

And this is not what I said, I never force, in contrast to what you do, what people should or should not do, I did say thought hat many people disregard whatever historical baggage there is behind the armies they play when choosing to play a faction and focus on the aspects they like.

 Alfndrate wrote:
but at the end of the day (to me) it's just a game that takes place in WWII.

"Takes place in WWII" entails a huge amount, however, including the atrocities. When you decide to whittle that down to whatever suits you, you are in fact dealing with history. You're dismissing, sure, but that's still dealing with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
If you refer to me I think you can refer to me by the forum nickname and not a faux nickname.

Just a typo :/

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
And this is not what I said, I never force, in contrast to what you do, what people should or should not do

(1) You're mischaracterizing my statements. (2) You're mischaracterizing your own statements. Here's exactly what you posted:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
And while the whole discussion of what really happened, from whose point of view one sees it and who was the worse of them all is quite intriguing, I feel it is a discussion for another thread and another topic.

 Manchu wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
but at the end of the day (to me) it's just a game that takes place in WWII.

"Takes place in WWII" entails a huge amount, however, including the atrocities. When you decide to whittle that down to whatever suits you, you are in fact dealing with history. You're dismissing, sure, but that's still dealing with it.

Alternatively people simply accept that it is a game, or in other words a crude approximation of historical reality, and as such isn't worth expending energy over worrying about the ramifications of playing Germans and the ideology of their government.

What I described isn't really a matter of expending energy. When you say "people simply accept" that right there is the moment I'm talking about, where people decide what to do about the history.

 Manchu wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
If you refer to me I think you can refer to me by the forum nickname and not a faux nickname.

Just a typo :/

My apologies then

 Manchu wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
And this is not what I said, I never force, in contrast to what you do, what people should or should not do

(1) You're mischaracterizing my statements. (2) You're mischaracterizing your own statements. Here's exactly what you posted:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
And while the whole discussion of what really happened, from whose point of view one sees it and who was the worse of them all is quite intriguing, I feel it is a discussion for another thread and another topic.

I really have an issue in what your statements are, I don't get what you try to say.

And on point b, yes, I feel the topic was and still is why people get attracted to WW2 Germans, if you honestly think WW2 warcrimes atrocities and ethnic cleansing are valid reasons or that people consider these strongly before choosing to play Germans, then I am speechless on what priorities these people have, who did which warcrimes and what atrocities, why they did it and who knew them and accepted them, who didn't know about them and who supported them, I feel are not on topic for this tread.

There is the worry of some that if the dark side of wars is ignored in games we may forget what happened.

For me its all about the history. By definition historical wargaming will always have history in it.

The individual decides how much and how relevant it is to them.

Personally I've always thought that the historical side of historical games was a key part of the interest of playing them.

I don't see why anyone would bother to play a game about a particular period without having any awareness of the actual history.

 Manchu wrote:
What I described isn't really a matter of expending energy. When you say "people simply accept" that right there is the moment I'm talking about, where people decide what to do about the history.

Well I'm sure that some people aren't fully aware while others accept that Wargames are basically WW2: the movie and are designed purely for entertainment and as such don't require any soul searching. Fielding a Grenadier Kompanie in FoW certainly doesn't mean that you have any sympathy with Nazi Ideology.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

I don't see why anyone would bother to play a game about a particular period without having any awareness of the actual history.

Awareness is fine, as is historical accuracy, but that doesn't mean that you need to worry about your chosen force's motivations in the real world.

I think you are right, I dont think people should worry about real world motivations but perhaps they should be aware of them though?

But I guess we must accept that people have differing levels of interest in history, from those who can just just manage to watch a history channel programme to the musty old farts who pour over vehicle returns to get the correct vehicles in their army for the right day... I have come to terms with the fact Im in the latter section.

Each to their own.

 Manchu wrote:

]The Allies got their hands dirty, no doubt, but they did so at least in part to stop something that has no redeeming qualities from a morally sane perspective.

Not entirely true, the US would not have even gotten involved in WW2 on the scale it did had it not been for Pearl Harbor (which, yes, it can be argued was caused by US political and economic belligerence). Had Japan cow-towed to our economic and political belligerence, it is highly doubtful we would have gotten involved in WW2 until such a time that the Axis Powers turned their gaze across the respective oceans they resided on. There's been a number of books and studies on this and related topics. It's naive to think we intervened in the European theater, or even got involved at all, over moral issues. If facts suggested otherwise, why didn't we intervene earlier for our ally, Great Britain

Take Dresden as an example. It's naive to think that the bombing of Dresden was anything more than retribution for the bombing of Cumberland, and the London Blitz etc. Dresden was a retributive atrocity perpetrated by the allies. They weren't prosecuted because they were the victors, and anyone calling bs on that (there's always a couple!) really has no concept of the effective birth of international criminal law in the modern age, vi-a-vis the legal precedent quandries presented by the Nuremberg trials. Ex-post facto trials and the very real spectre of "Victor's Justice" (that only the vanquished were being submitted to prosecution) were very real concerns of Jackson's, Beadle's, and Maxwell-Fyfe's.


I'm not going to argue this point though, because frankly, we're all just throwing words at each other at this point on this topic. And its a forum, you never really change anyone's mind. People just look for their next little snippet to quote-chop into an out of context counter point.


Anyone looking for a superb, and easily digestible book on the international criminal legal aftermath of WW2, with the first Nuremberg Trial as a backdrop should check out "Nuremberg: Infamy on Trial" by Joseph Persico - he wrote the book based on his notes from actually being at Nuremberg during the period before, during, and after the trials. Excellent book, i recommend it to anyone interested in WW2, or international criminal law.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Personally I've always thought that the historical side of historical games was a key part of the interest of playing them.

I don't see why anyone would bother to play a game about a particular period without having any awareness of the actual history.

If it's a good game, people will also flock to it because it's a good gameset with good rules.

 Manchu wrote:
What amazes me is that people can claim historical war games have nothing to do with history.

Name one poster here who has stated that along with the quote proving it.

 Grot 6 wrote:


I'm not really interested in Hitler being a great guy, I said at the TIME he was a great guy.

The subjects are out there to be found, and YES= Some of them are gakky, but this is the stuff that Historians know about that the general public doesn't want to be put out as fun and games.

Aside from that, my post was for general examples of why WW2 is not all black and white. I'm not involved with what Manchu has going on, because honestly I disagree with him, but am not engaging his comments in the way that you seem to think you have to do with me.

MINE? I'm saying that People play the german sets just because. Has nothing to do with anything, other then they want to play them.

Oh, by the way, add something to the conversation then just an insult.

I've got more to add, but you being obtuse is making me not want to continue in this discussion.


Its history, chief. I have no dog in the fight.

Here is a parting gift for you to. "Suspect" as you think it is.

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html

Speaking as an actual historian, this post pains me.

No. Hitler was not a 'great guy' even at the time. Some people may have believed he was a great guy. This does not mean he was a great guy. If it did, that would mean he was a great guy even now, because many neo-facist groups still believe that.

Linking to Soviet medical experiments with regards to detecting brain activity does not somehow prove that WW2 was 'not all black and white'. The 'German Secret Weapons link you posted is inaccurate on several factual points. The fact that nazi's came from many nations to volunteer is genuinely not shocking/surprising/even remotely new to anyone who knows anything about the Spanish Civil War, or even modern day Syria. Borders do not restrict ideologies.

The Germans, Russians, and Japanese conducted war crimes on a level that made what the Allies did generally look like a toddlers scraped knee next to a multi-limb amputation. At least quote Dresden or Napalm bombings if you're going to try and make a serious point.

I've been looking at FoW for a while now, though I haven't gotten into it.

This thread depresses me, because I probably would've started with Germans. But apparently that means I love the Nazis, so now I can't.

I play FOW Germans because simply i want to play them. others want to as well leave it at that

I can't count how many of these type of threads I have seen on wargaming forums. They generally end poorly. I have to say that Manchu and Ketara have given the most mature and reasoned responses I have yet encountered in these style threads. Thank you.

 Seaward wrote:
I've been looking at FoW for a while now, though I haven't gotten into it.

This thread depresses me, because I probably would've started with Germans. But apparently that means I love the Nazis, so now I can't.

For God's sake don't think that!

All of the historical games I have played over the years, in various places, I have never once seen anyone denigrated for choosing to play as Germans. Or, for any force for that matter.

Think Big P's last couple of comments have been a nice concise summary of how I feel about it..

@Haight - I will say there was a fair bit of shame attached to Dresden, even Churchill and Bomber Harris trying to distance themselves from the decisions regarding the bombing there. From what I have read it wasn't seen as 'noble'. I know such a concept in war is faintly ridiculous, but I believe there were a fair few 'whys' asked about it and it wasn't popular.

Looks like I created a monster with this thread!

 Seaward wrote:
I've been looking at FoW for a while now, though I haven't gotten into it.

This thread depresses me, because I probably would've started with Germans. But apparently that means I love the Nazis, so now I can't.

Screw that. Play the Germans.

People suggesting that enjoying playing Germans in wargames is somehow an endorsement of national socialism are being obtuse or trolls.

I mean seriously, it's the height of inanity to suggest that by playing the 3rd Reich in a wargame equates to somehow supporting or ignoring Germany's actions during that era.

Play what you like. Do not let ninnies on a forum dissuade you.

(and i know they won't, i've seen your posts in OT ! )

Yeah, you caught me.

 Pacific wrote:


@Haight - I will say there was a fair bit of shame attached to Dresden, even Churchill and Bomber Harris trying to distance themselves from the decisions regarding the bombing there. From what I have read it wasn't seen as 'noble'. I know such a concept in war is faintly ridiculous, but I believe there were a fair few 'whys' asked about it and it wasn't popular.

Yeah, Dresden was one of those situations that, after the fact, most people involved had a "What have I done?" reactions to it.

At the time the Dresden bombing happened, it had no significant military materiel output (and, mind you this is February 1945 - at this point in the game, the outcome is pretty much a forgone conclusion - the major questions mark is how long it's going to take to button everything up - but by this point both the Reich, the other Axis, and the Allies all know the war in Europe is over, a forgone conclusion - it's just going to take a little bit of time. About the only person of any real import in the equation who doesn't admit this is Hitler, which is why the war lasts another roughly 3 months, and very shortly after his death, Doenitz surrenders nearly immediately. Unlike at other times in the war, this was pretty well known to a level of certainty that military intelligence was satisfied with), and was not a major troop center. It was also of no strategic importance either.

So you had a major population center, with no real tactical or strategic importance aside from having many railways coming into the city, and there's debateable argument about it being a "military communications hub" (the problem with that argument is that there were larger communications hubs and railway centers that did not necessitate 3900 tons of incendiary bombs being dropped over 40 km to destroy.... it's a really thin and paltry argument).

It's widely accepted that Dresden was retribution for Cumberland.

There were lots of "eyewitness" accounts of huge movements of troops into and out of Dresden, but they could never be corroborated, and a lot of them were ex post facto.

Another thing too... which is really horrible... it was a known quanity that the casualties would likely be very highly civilian in nature. It had been decided that incendiary bombing was the way they wanted to approach the raids. In a planning execution meeting, it was brought up that Dresden was known to have an almost non-existent level of bomb shelter system. This still didn't deter either the raid itself, or the vector of destruction they intended to use. It was also discussed that Dresden, and other areas like it, were where civilian evacuees were being moved to as other parts of the country were becoming threatened.

This is basically the very definition of what would constitute a war-crime as decided by the panel of judges for the Nuremberg trials. Dresden is also a MAJOR point that is always brought up when arguing that however well intentioned the victors were, they were still engaging in Victor's Justice.


One note however.... can you provide a citation for Arthur "Bomber" Harris distancing himself from Dresden ? I had never heard of this. I know that when Churchill likened it to an unneccessary terror attack, Harris protested - even going so far as to paraphrase Bismark with his famous quote "The whole of Dresden is not worth the bones of one englishman. At the time of that speech, he claimed that Dresden had been a "Actually Dresden was a mass of munitions works, an intact government centre, and a key transportation point to the East. It is now none of these things."

If he changed his stance later in life, i'd love to read any material on that !


It is interesting too that Dresden helped produce such staunchly liberal writers like Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five (with Dresden as backdrop, and Vonnegut was actually at the bombing of Dresden) and historians like the late and great Howard Zinn (who was himself a bomber in the air force in world war II).



-- Haight

Didn't read the thread, just adding my opinion so feel free to ignore ; ) I love the imagery of WW2 Germany, especially fantasized versions thereof. I despise what they did, what they tried to do, and why they were doing it. I can easily separate the reality of the situation from the fictional side and enjoy the imagery in an army. I see no problem whatsoever in having a full blown Nazi army with swastikas, SS, all of it. Even if you theme the army with similar goals of genocide, racial purity and all that, it's no worse than the Imperiums every day actions of genocide, ethnic cleaning, slavery, conscription and rigid control.

I don't think the whole "it might offend people" argument warrants not making armies like this if you want to. if they don't want to play you, sure that's reasonable if a bit thin skinned perhaps (unless they were directly affected in some way). But everything you do has the potential to offend someone. Someone whose parents were run over by a red car could be set off by a red tank, the common gamer term of "raping your enemy" could set off a sexual assault victim, even a bunch of Orks in melee with guardsmen could make a victim of assault uncomfortable.

Yonan I can almost understand where you are coming from.

But from this sentence onward...

Even if you theme the army with similar goals of genocide, racial purity and all that, it's no worse than the Imperiums every day actions of genocide, ethnic cleaning, slavery, conscription and rigid control.

I cannot take you seriously.

Being historically accurate regards to unit markings and isignia is - IMO - different from theming an army towards racially motivated genocide. Its a different mindset altogether.

 Haight wrote:




It's widely accepted that Dresden was retribution for Cumberland.
-



-- Haight

Cumberland?

Cumberland is a county in Northwest England and a city in Maryland.

Do you mean the bombing of Coventry?

Big P wrote:

 Haight wrote:




It's widely accepted that Dresden was retribution for Cumberland.
-



-- Haight

Cumberland?

Cumberland is a county in Northwest England and a city in Maryland.

Do you mean the bombing of Coventry?

gak, yes, thank you for correcting me. Slip of the tongue. I did mean Coventry.

I think SS units appeal to some people because they are usually fearless veteran. I feel many war gamers are drawn to the "elite" force. I've never seen groups of 95% German players, most people I know actually prefer allies.

Ofcourse this thread descends into the obligatory ethics of plastic soldiers discussion instead.

I'm glad people don't judge me on the morale standards of my Dark Eldar.

 Strombones wrote:
I think SS units appeal to some people because they are usually fearless veteran. I feel many war gamers are drawn to the "elite" force. I've never seen groups of nothing but German players, most people I know actually prefer allies.

Ofcourse this thread descends into the obligatory ethics of plastic soldiers discussion instead.

I'm glad people don't judge me on the morale standards of my Dark Eldar.

I dont judge the Moral standards of your Dark Eldar, just their fashion choices.

Whatever. Skin tight S & M gear is so in right now.

I don't get it either, because if you play a historical game like World in Flames, not a quasi-historical joke like Flame of War, you realize that the Germans a) were in deep crap from day 1 and b) their stuff wasn't that hot on the strategic level. The crappy range on their airplanes was a serious problem compared to the USSR and USA.

“The man who starts a war only gets what he asked for, you know, if he is destroyed. And he can always call for quarter.”

As a point of fact Hugo Boss did not design any of the German uniforms in World War 2. His company was responsible for producing those uniforms but the actual design was done by Karl Diebitsch and Walter Heck.

If choosing an army that has commited atrocities is a nono, then there is much left to play, name me one army that hasn't commited one kind of atrocity or another during their existence.

The French and Americans in Vietnam, The English in south africa/india/china, The Dutch in the their colonies, The Japanese in China, the list goes on and on.

As long as the person that plays a german army doesn't wear an Nazi Uniform and qouts parts from "Mein Kampf" then i am ok with it.

If your chosen faction in a hobby is evil or good is completely irrelevant to your own beliefs and values in the context. I do not endorse Chaos Space Marine behaviour, but I still have an army of them. Same thing with Nazis in my book.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
If choosing an army that has commited atrocities is a nono

The only people who have said this are trolling the thread.

 Manchu wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
Hard to be perceived as a glorified hero when you get your face kicked in and are grimly holding on.

But that's exactly why wartime British were and still are perceived as heroic.

Ummm key word was "glorified" this is what I was getting at: the day-in day-out steady person holding on with no reward are the true heroes (but not typically acknowledged in the common north American experience), coming in at the "last minute" all fresh faced to "save the day" is great and all but seems unearned.
The British army (stiff upper lip, hold the line!) does not appeal to the "lightening strike, win the day" leanings of the N.A. fanboy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
No, I am afraid not, History for you might be the reason, but there is no solid reason why people should even bother to think about negotiating what they play in a wargame.

My point is, it's not a choice. People are historical beings. And, in our present culture, almost everyone knows something about the Germans of WW2. It's inescapable.

True statement but many people decide to throw seriousness out the window and say "yeah, it does not affect me now and they look cool, I am using them".
We watch pirate moves and a hugely successful TV series on a motorcycle gang is out there too.
There is a great deal of evil out there as well as historically.

It almost feels right to make it a "caricature", make it lose it's old meaning and make it harmless.

Better that than to get every true detail down and taken seriously in case it becomes a roadmap for more evil.

Tragedy that happens to people should not be made light of but the role of bad behavior should not be rewarded with infamy but ridicule.

(Wonder how people feel about "Hogan's heroes", fine Tv show...)

Yeah, I understand and accept that some people want to play 'Allo 'Allo the war game -- heck, I'm one of them once in a while ... but that's not gainsaying my point ITT, either.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Welsh_Furey wrote:
The interesting part about the swastika is I only see it as a Nazi symbol when on a red flag in a white circle any other time I see it as a Hindu simbol of peace and welcome it all depends on context.

If you look at Japanese maps they are full of swastikas as the symbol is used to mark the location of Buddhist temples.

Didnt realise it was a Buddhist symbol as well.

Welsh_Furey wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Welsh_Furey wrote:
The interesting part about the swastika is I only see it as a Nazi symbol when on a red flag in a white circle any other time I see it as a Hindu simbol of peace and welcome it all depends on context.

If you look at Japanese maps they are full of swastikas as the symbol is used to mark the location of Buddhist temples.

Didnt realise it was a Buddhist symbol as well.

Buddhism was founded by a Hindu.

That explains that then.