Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Aldramelech wrote:Just as well then because I'd rather not rub shoulders with people who don't take the hobby seriously.

I have never said this before on Dakka but GTFO of here. It's a hobby, you are not a soldier and I wouldn't recommend it. There is difference between playing with models, and dressing up like a mentally ill person that has found a costume box, and then getting another bunch of similiarly wierd people to dress up and then pretend you are back in time fighting a conflict. That is very mental and I cannot take that seriously.

You can dress it up as History, but 99% of population will think you are crazy. It's one thing being extra's in a film or a professional group for films its another just to run off into the woods and run around like a bunch of nutters. Imagine what a third party from another country would make of it?

I remember at my University, I walked down through the Campus on a Saturday and was accosted by a Medieval Dress guy with a Claymore demanding I pay him for passage. I told him "To get F*thed", he looked crestfallen and he was later arrested by armed Police when Campus security spotted him harassing people.

WTF are you on about matey??????????

I don't dress up as anything, I'm a historical wargamer, how does that involve me dressing up and running around in woods?

And as to "you are not a Soldier" how would you know?

To quote President Merkin Muffley: "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"

I think Aldramelech is just stating the position in his gaming group, while mwnciboo takes a more relaxed approach. Aldramelech's position isn't unusual in historical gaming, so it's a fair warning for the OP about what they might encounter, while mwnciboo's position probably reflects a fairly common approach. As I said in my last post, I can see issues for this game as it expands in popularity -as most of you know, the arguments between the competitive gamers and the 'fluff' gamers in WH40k are as heated as ever.

Tailgunner wrote:To quote President Merkin Muffley: "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"

Aldramelech's position isn't unusual in historical gaming

I would go further then that and say that it is the norm, we are legion

My problem mwnciboo post is that for some strange reason he seems to think I'm an historical re-enactor, which I can assure you I am most certainly not! I think he is under the mistaken impression that I was responding to his tirade against re-enactors when in fact I was responding to George Spiggott's question "Are you being Ironic".

Most historical gamers regard serious re-enactors as odd balls too.

As to the statement "You are not a Soldier" he's right, I'm not but how would he know. I am in fact an ex Soldier and my group counts among its members several other ex servicemen as well as two serving Royal Marines.

I love history, its my major in college and i plan on teaching it when i get done. Having said that, historical wargaming has no intrest for me if it has to be well historical. The way i read this Aldramelech is that the historical clubs have to be 100% true to history. To me that isnt fun, you already know the result of the battle, seeing as there can be no deviations or it isnt historical. Granted im interested in FoW and my paint job will be accurate, but lucky for me my FLGS isnt a historical club, where it seems your not playing a game, but reenacting a battle with minitures.

I have to admit that I am historical re-enactor (mostly 15th century and occasionally WW2, but WW2 here is more state financed - blank rounds, gasoline etc.). I also do play 40K. Does this make me a weirdo type of person?

This is what we did last summer.
http://youtu.be/PY7Q2vZNsB0

I'm going to have to agree with Aldramelech here. While I may not have a problem seeing Americans and Brits duking it out in the middle of the Russian steppes, I'll personally try to avoid that kind of situation. Most of my FoW games have been played with the D-Day supplements. I also have 2 armies - British and German - so I can play either side. And the Germans are especially useful since they can be used on either front in Late War.

The same thing goes for historical accuracy with paintjobs. Go ahead and paint your Shermans red with flames, or pink with little bow ties. But don't get offended when people chose to question your paintjob, or outright refuse to play against you.

Reaver83 wrote:I say go for it - your models your choice and if historical obsessives have a fit ask them to prove there were no red shermans...

I'm with him... I say there are yours and you paint them however you want.... If it annoys some "history" person, then oh well. Not to mention, if you were in a tourney for it, and the red and pink tanks annoyed them enough, they would probably mess up at something.... consider it a psi-op. he he he

caledoneus wrote:

Reaver83 wrote:I say go for it - your models your choice and if historical obsessives have a fit ask them to prove there were no red shermans...

I'm with him... I say there are yours and you paint them however you want.... If it annoys some "history" person, then oh well. Not to mention, if you were in a tourney for it, and the red and pink tanks annoyed them enough, they would probably mess up at something.... consider it a psi-op. he he he

Sorry, but that's the kind of '****you mentality that crept into WH40k some years ago, and which WH40k players seem to be bringing to FoW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CainTheHunter wrote:I have to admit that I am historical re-enactor (mostly 15th century and occasionally WW2, but WW2 here is more state financed - blank rounds, gasoline etc.). I also do play 40K. Does this make me a weirdo type of person?

Probably. Which one were you? I dunno - it's a very thin line between playing with toy soldiers depicting SS men and dressing up as them. I'd rather not cross it myself, but you guys obviously put some effort into doing it 'properly'. Right down to executing prisoners...

Realistically, I think games should be inclusive, which puts me int he mind of 'allowing' extreme paint jobs.

However, on the other hand, there is something to be said for being true to the 'feel' of a game. This is wildly different by game, of course.

40k is somewhat 'anything goes' but there are limits. For example, a Rhino painted with variations on rennasaince art is definitely in the 40k feel, especially if it's converted to have Imperial elements (the emperor, space marines, bolters, whatever) involved. 40k is very open, with little importance placed on camo (even for IG, there's room for units in 'parade dress' designed to motivate the troops more than stay stealthy).

On the other hand, a Rhino with Nascar-inspired paint jobs might be a little harder to pull off. Corporate entities are minimalized in the setting, so blatant advertising seems a bit odd. However, this kind of paint scheme might work for some other Sci-Fi settings, maybe some factions of Infinity.

back to Flames of War, I'd consider anything based off real-world historical to be valid, and there's a lot of room to stretch that around.... FoW has a pretty big 'What If?' feel going as-is, I see no reason to discriminate against real world paint schemes taken through a couple more evolutions. This is, after all, the same war that gave us the Dazzle camouflage (albeit for ships, not tanks).

Do I really need to state my preference?

I despair at the day when FOW 'codexes' are regarded as historical research data.

Historical wargaming does generally find a home with those who have a leaning in that direction. I lectured on Military History for a while so for me the history side is as important as anything else, thus I try to get things as right as I can within my own limitations.

Historical wargaming is obviously historical... It would be fantasy otherwise. This doesnt mean that the engagements are all based upon fact, and I have great interest in counter-factual and fictional gaming within a historical setting - Hence my Cold War 1984 project and my Cold War 1946 games. But the vehicles in use in those two imaginary settings are painted as per their historical counterpart. In the same way, some of my Seven Years War French occasionally show up supporting the filthy Yanks in the AWI. They may have slightly less than upto date fashions for their coats but they look the part. Their is always a compremise to be reached... Red Baron style Shermans not included.

While their are plenty of anal types, most historical wargamers are fairly laid back (as is Aldramlech who isnt as much a Grognard as he likes to make out) but part of the joy for them is the historical element of the game and its something the 40k rejects will just have to get used too... We have been around longer than any GW games Im afraid.

However I do have different marks of Panther dependant on the theatre, unit and part of the war I am portraying in a game because;

A - I want it to look right

B - I love the historical research and the satisfaction of modelling an actual vehicle

C - Im getting to be a bit of a rivet-counting anal in my middle age.

To be honest I was pretty much 'Historical' when I used to play 40k and would try to build armies that match the background not the points lists.

All that said...


Turn up with red Shermans and my club, and I'd tell ye to feck off.

Just as well then because I'd rather not rub shoulders with people who don't take the hobby seriously. A large part of historical wargaming for the vast majority of historical gamers is, wait for it................ HISTORY.

If history is not your thing, if your not interested in researching your chosen period and getting your miniatures right then I would suggest 40k, Warmachine, Secrets of the Third Reich and the host of many fine games out there that allow your imagination run riot.

I spend alot of money and time on my hobby and so do the people I game with and we expect certain standards at our club.

I don't play against people with unpainted figures either, so now you can call me a painting snob as well if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Take the stick out of your behind and see that there's nothing to take seriously. I've spent as much or more time and money on things like my gaming systems and games, and Magic Cards and I didn't take them seriously. Do you know why I didn't take them seriously? Well because the're hobbies, designed to take up time and money in exchange for having fun. I have enough to get serious about when I look at my bank account and the bills each month or when I'm studying for an exam, I don't need some neckbeard leaning over the table and checking tiny badges on my fake soldiers when I try to get in a game.

As for research that isn't it either. It's easy to be a google or wikipedia hero these days or to find some pre-done unit histories and OoB's for the most common units anyway. So if people do something major ahistoric they might find it *gasp* to be more fun that way.

On the money front I know a ton of gamers who've shelled out for consoles, games, accessories, and online subscriptions who don't take games seriously. Some do, but they tend to be the types who think they can be the next big thing in e-sports or try hards who live in their parents basements. In Magic the serious types tend to be the grognards who won't talk about anything else even when you overtly try to change the subject. No I don't care what battle honors your fake soldiers have, get them on the table so we can roll dice and play a game.

Your snobbery knows no bounds. How do you expect to grow the hobby if somebody can't buy some models and get a starter game in before they listen for tips on painting and where to find the paints that best match their chosen unit? Heaven forbid they do their homework and buy a paint that they think will match but is a few shades off, the shock to your poor eyes might cause a dizzy spell!

In short, see a doctor about that stick and remember that it's just a game.

Tailgunner wrote: Probably. Which one were you? I dunno - it's a very thin line between playing with toy soldiers depicting SS men and dressing up as them. I'd rather not cross it myself, but you guys obviously put some effort into doing it 'properly'. Right down to executing prisoners...

I am in the RKKA I am putting together Germans in FoW for some kind of balance

You crack me up P

As usual just what I wanted to say but alot better.

Do I really need to state my preference?

I despair at the day when FOW 'codexes' are regarded as historical research data.

Historical wargaming does generally find a home with those who have a leaning in that direction. I lectured on Military History for a while so for me the history side is as important as anything else, thus I try to get things as right as I can within my own limitations.

Historical wargaming is obviously historical... It would be fantasy otherwise. This doesnt mean that the engagements are all based upon fact, and I have great interest in counter-factual and fictional gaming within a historical setting - Hence my Cold War 1984 project and my Cold War 1946 games. But the vehicles in use in those two imaginary settings are painted as per their historical counterpart. In the same way, some of my Seven Years War French occasionally show up supporting the filthy Yanks in the AWI. They may have slightly less than upto date fashions for their coats but they look the part. Their is always a compremise to be reached... Red Baron style Shermans not included.

While their are plenty of anal types, most historical wargamers are fairly laid back (as is Aldramlech who isnt as much a Grognard as he likes to make out) but part of the joy for them is the historical element of the game and its something the 40k rejects will just have to get used too... We have been around longer than any GW games Im afraid.

However I do have different marks of Panther dependant on the theatre, unit and part of the war I am portraying in a game because;

A - I want it to look right

B - I love the historical research and the satisfaction of modelling an actual vehicle

C - Im getting to be a bit of a rivet-counting anal in my middle age.

To be honest I was pretty much 'Historical' when I used to play 40k and would try to build armies that match the background not the points lists.

All that said...


Turn up with red Shermans and my club, and I'd tell ye to feck off.

I respect the effort you put into the hobby, your AAR's are wonderful, but somebody painting their tanks red isn't some vast affront to history, it's somebody who wanted their models to stand out on the table.

Canadian 5th wrote:

Just as well then because I'd rather not rub shoulders with people who don't take the hobby seriously. A large part of historical wargaming for the vast majority of historical gamers is, wait for it................ HISTORY.

If history is not your thing, if your not interested in researching your chosen period and getting your miniatures right then I would suggest 40k, Warmachine, Secrets of the Third Reich and the host of many fine games out there that allow your imagination run riot.

I spend alot of money and time on my hobby and so do the people I game with and we expect certain standards at our club.

I don't play against people with unpainted figures either, so now you can call me a painting snob as well if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Take the stick out of your behind and see that there's nothing to take seriously. I've spent as much or more time and money on things like my gaming systems and games, and Magic Cards and I didn't take them seriously. Do you know why I didn't take them seriously? Well because the're hobbies, designed to take up time and money in exchange for having fun. I have enough to get serious about when I look at my bank account and the bills each month or when I'm studying for an exam, I don't need some neckbeard leaning over the table and checking tiny badges on my fake soldiers when I try to get in a game.

As for research that isn't it either. It's easy to be a google or wikipedia hero these days or to find some pre-done unit histories and OoB's for the most common units anyway. So if people do something major ahistoric they might find it *gasp* to be more fun that way.

On the money front I know a ton of gamers who've shelled out for consoles, games, accessories, and online subscriptions who don't take games seriously. Some do, but they tend to be the types who think they can be the next big thing in e-sports or try hards who live in their parents basements. In Magic the serious types tend to be the grognards who won't talk about anything else even when you overtly try to change the subject. No I don't care what battle honors your fake soldiers have, get them on the table so we can roll dice and play a game.

Your snobbery knows no bounds. How do you expect to grow the hobby if somebody can't buy some models and get a starter game in before they listen for tips on painting and where to find the paints that best match their chosen unit? Heaven forbid they do their homework and buy a paint that they think will match but is a few shades off, the shock to your poor eyes might cause a dizzy spell!

In short, see a doctor about that stick and remember that it's just a game.

Did that go as well as you hoped?

Aldramelech wrote:Did that go as well as you hoped?

I didn't hope for anything. I typed that while I sipped some tea and ate breakfast and I'll forget all about this when I'm in class in less than an hour.

I think I would have more of a problem with the "wrong shade of green" person we can encounter.

Personally I'll try my best but to get it right but if my Paras gaiters are wrong and someone wants to complain about it they will get short shrift from me.

I would view red tanks as only slightly above unpainted models (at least you could imagine they were red-oxide straight off the production line ). I wouldn't refuse a game in either case (seems rather churlish if you are somewhere looking for a game anyway), but I would have a definite preference for something painted.

Obviously there are different norms for tournament and organised club environments. Personally I'm a bit too relaxed (read forgetful!) to get all bent out of shape on the details, especially when you consider that half the time there seems to be conflicting information on allot of the issues discussed anyway!

If you follow this line of thought you get into the realms of August 1944 forces vs October 1944 forces, that’s a level of detail I just don’t have time for, figuratively or literally.

notprop wrote: If you follow this line of thought you get into the realms of August 1944 forces vs October 1944 forces, that’s a level of detail I just don’t have time for, figuratively or literally.

And we could speak in terms of money as well .

Canadian 5th wrote:

Aldramelech wrote:Did that go as well as you hoped?

I didn't hope for anything. I typed that while I sipped some tea and ate breakfast and I'll forget all about this when I'm in class in less than an hour.

Good for you son. Of course you have made yourself look like a complete tw*t, but nevermind. Myself and Big P have said exactley the same thing and yet I have a stick up my arse but you respect him?

Your a bit of a nob arn't ya

Aaahh... But I said it with wit and irony.

You just hit them over the head with how we feel... I preferred your approach to be honest.


Worng shade of green feckers are even worse... Cant stand them. If you aint gonna match your paint to the correct RAL paint chip samples then whats the point in playing?

Whats really ironic is that I did have to ban a guy from our club last year...

Because he was too historical and uber-anal. Was a bit win at all costs too, and a little angry when he didnt... No good for the atmos.

My point is that just cos you want to be anally historically accurate, it dont make you a knob-jockey. They exist in all templates. Plenty of 40k gamers have that personality type sown up... But there are also plenty who are normal, decent chaps, just like most historical gamers.

I will welcome anyone in to our club for a game, as long as you respect other peoples toys, have a good sense of humour and wiil try any game once. If you are an arse, you wont last.

Same goes for red Shermans... Though Im more likely to steal them and return them repainted in the correct colours the following week out of frustration!

Ifurita wrote:This discussion raised another question in my mind. What about people who just paint poorly? It might be less noticable in WWII historics, but in the fantasy and sci-fi games, I've seen some truely horrible paint jobs. Would you rather play against well painted, but historically inaccurate figures, or against a horrible attempt at historical correctness?

The problem here is that nearly anybody can paint a historical scheme to a reasoanble extent. I mean, for nearly all tanks it can be base + wash + dry brush.

These are 15mm models with a lot of texture. There is little reason to have them painted too horribly.

there is a subset of people who seem to find some of the basic elements of this hobby pure anathema. "Why should I base my models?" "why should i paint them?" Why should i assemble them at all?" "Why should i do anything remotely related to WW2 in a WW2 game?" Granted they don't all occur in the same people (I hope), but I do wonder how some of them ever get into this in the first place. "A game or collection of games that consists mostly of things I hate to do? feth yeah, I'm IN!"
Is it the pretty dice or something?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And i mean the WHOLE 'hobby', not just FOW/WW2...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

George Spiggott wrote:I once refused to play one guy who painted the stripes on his aerials too far from the end. Some people just take the piss.

You're just peevish because you never mastered 'stripes'.

Big P wrote:Aaahh... But I said it with wit and irony.

You just hit them over the head with how we feel... I preferred your approach to be honest.


Worng shade of green feckers are even worse... Cant stand them. If you aint gonna match your paint to the correct RAL paint chip samples then whats the point in playing?

Whats really ironic is that I did have to ban a guy from our club last year...

Because he was too historical and uber-anal. Was a bit win at all costs too, and a little angry when he didnt... No good for the atmos.

My point is that just cos you want to be anally historically accurate, it dont make you a knob-jockey. They exist in all templates. Plenty of 40k gamers have that personality type sown up... But there are also plenty who are normal, decent chaps, just like most historical gamers.

I will welcome anyone in to our club for a game, as long as you respect other peoples toys, have a good sense of humour and wiil try any game once. If you are an arse, you wont last.

Same goes for red Shermans... Though Im more likely to steal them and return them repainted in the correct colours the following week out of frustration!

Subtlety never was my strong point

Holy cow, some of you guys are making me reconsider getting into FoW. If the general FoW crowd is as uptight as some of you, like Aldramelech, I may just forget about FoW. I want NO part in a game in which the players won't play a game with you unless you models are painted right and are from the correct time period. That just sounds like hell.

_Tim?

War's hell son.

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:Holy cow, some of you guys are making me reconsider getting into FoW. If the general FoW crowd is as uptight as some of you, like Aldramelech, I may just forget about FoW. I want NO part in a game in which the players won't play a game with you unless you models are painted right and are from the correct time period. That just sounds like hell.

_Tim?

As with any new game, evaluate the group you will most likely be playing with. What are the norms of the group? Will they let you participate in any of their games so that you can learn the rules before you buy? At the end of the day, everyone just wants to have fun (I think), though everyone has a slightly different standard of what is fun.

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:Holy cow, some of you guys are making me reconsider getting into FoW. If the general FoW crowd is as uptight as some of you, like Aldramelech, I may just forget about FoW. I want NO part in a game in which the players won't play a game with you unless you models are painted right and are from the correct time period. That just sounds like hell.

_Tim?

FOW players, in my experience, are all over the map.

You need to understand the context of a poster's experience before thinking that it will be similar to yours. Aldramelech is a member of a club, where it sounds like there are no tournaments, or even casual "pick up" games, but rather planned and negotiated games.

FOW tournaments do try to run as Axis v. Allies, but you need to pair people up.

That said, it's a historical game, and people tend to take the history somewhat seriously.

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:Holy cow, some of you guys are making me reconsider getting into FoW. If the general FoW crowd is as uptight as some of you, like Aldramelech, I may just forget about FoW. I want NO part in a game in which the players won't play a game with you unless you models are painted right and are from the correct time period. That just sounds like hell.

_Tim?

"Time Period" is fairly well pinned down by the EW/MW/LW system. Generally the forces used are broadly from the right period. The dispute appears to be more about "Theater", and generally its not very hard to think of a reason why two forces might face each other, even "blue on blue". (No WW2 army ever went on a training exercise?)

Me, I use 15mm WW2 as an ongoing research tool, so I like to at least try to get stuff as close as possible.

As Polonius sad, welcome to historical wargaming. There are certain... well, I guess the word is 'expectations' of people when getting into historicals. One of those is that, most of the time, you'll paint your miniatures with as much historical correctness as you can. My Redcoats should have red coats (unless they're green... or blue... or, well, you get the idea), and my Shermans (or, more correctly, my Cromwells) should be a shade of olive drab.