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.

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.