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.

The title is a bit in jest, as the number of younger people attending the big Historical Cons has grown considerably since COVID! However, it is a bit of an old chestnut that historical wargaming was for older gents who used to be sci-fi/fantasy gamers.

However, I ran across this "Beginner's Guide to Historical Wargaming" and thought I would give it a share. It might be of interest to some folks here.




So, hopefully some of you younglings out there might consider Historical Wargaming?

I've got a Hinchcliffe English civil war army from the 80s, which is buried in the pile of shame.

One day, by the time I've finished painting them all, I'll be geriatric enough to play with them.

Weirdly, it’s something I’ve never been terribly interested in taking part in.

I love to see a game being played with painted models on a board with handmade scenery of course.

But to actually collect a force, whether or not I want to paint it to historically accuracy? I’m afraid not.

I'll admit, historical gaming was how I first became interested in tabletop wargaming, as I saw it in a few hobby magazines and stuff. But I've never done any historical stuff really, not even things like Bolt Action or Flames of War, much less anything crunchier and more realistic.

One thing I was once tempted by was huge lot on eBay where a seller was selling a huge collection of Romans, from various companies and all new in box. And it was a huge variety of stuff, including niche things like camel cavalry (who knew Romans had such a thing? I sure didn't!). The lot cost a lot more than I had in my pocket at the time so I had to pass, but it was such a cool collection and the price was good for such a large lot. For something like that I'd have to find a good ruleset and get in touch with any local historical gamers who play ancient stuff (I'm not sure there are any in my area).

For now though, I'll stick with my fantasy/sci-fi stuff.

I don't remember if I have ever seen historical models that screamed at me "we are going to be a cool painting project". In my experience they are normally mediocre quality, have uninteresting poses and details and are plagued by goofiness (weird proportions, oversized trousers or round featureless faces of the good soldier Schweik). Not far from plastic green army men. Not worth my hobby attention.

I am sure nicely proportioned, dynamic, detailed and interesting models for such games exist, but it's never the case when I actually see such games in action or pictures of products.

Also, discussions online convinced me that historicals are very old fashioned designs, more interested in burdening players with lots of admin and randomness (" 'cause it's realistic!!!&!&") while not offering many tools for engaging decision making and creative problem solving which are the sources of satisfaction I get from gaming. In other words operating the game is complex while game states are simplistic, when it really should be the other way round.

Cyel wrote:
I don't remember if I have ever seen historical models that screamed at me "we are going to be a cool painting project". In my experience they are normally mediocre quality, have uninteresting poses and details and are plagued by goofiness (weird proportions, oversized trousers or round featureless faces of the good soldier Schweik). Not far from plastic green army men. Not worth my hobby attention.

I am sure nicely proportioned, dynamic, detailed and interesting models for such games exist, but it's never the case when I actually see such games in action or pictures of products.

Also, discussions online convinced me that historicals are very old fashioned designs, more interested in burdening players with lots of admin and randomness (" 'cause it's realistic!!!&!&") while not offering many tools for engaging decision making and creative problem solving which are the sources of satisfaction I get from gaming. In other words operating the game is complex while game states are simplistic, when it really should be the other way round.

Ironically, that seems a reasonable description of historical wargaming about 20/30 years ago... My impression of a lot of mainstream sci-fi gaming (e.g. most GW stuff, plus things like Infinity) is they're going in the direction of unnecessarily complex and administratively heavy game design for little gain.

There are some absolutely fantastic historical rulesets out there which do a great job of balancing friction with decision-making/problem-solving, with a reasonable level of abstraction. Chain of Command is one of my favourites, but at the more abstracted end games like Seven Days to the River Rhine / Iron Cross have really straightforward to pick up ruleset but with really interesting activation mechanics, which makes for really interesting decision-making challenges. You also have Bolt Action and Flames of War/Team Yankee, which I'm not a huge fan of these days but are very much "GW" style of games, so in their own way also not the stereotype of historical gaming.


My own experience is strangely full circle, so kind of speaks to the age thing - ish..! I started with 40k back as a teen and started to drift away from "the hobby" in my mid-20s around when 7th/8th edition (I think) meant I lost interest; until my cousin persuaded me to give Bolt Action a go (it took some persuading - always been a history nerd, but it had never really appealed from a wargaming perspective). I got the bug quite quickly and I went from BA deeper into the historical sphere, finding Chain of Command, etc and I spent a long time just playing historicals (starting with 28mm and then branching out into 15mm), before getting back into fantasy/sci-fi after the pandemic with Titanicus and MESBG (the latter of which I still had a pretty big collection of metals from my youth which helped lol), then SW Legions and Stargrave, among other things.

So I now play and build/collect, a mix of sci-fi and historicals. I think one of the liberating things about historicals is realising that your model collection and rulesets can be independent of one another - my 15mm WW2 models have been used to play Flames of War, Iron Cross, Chain of Command, O-Group and Battlegroup at different times. And I've brought that mindset back to the non-historical gaming - I can use the same models for LI as for EA, the same models for Necromunda and Stargrave, etc - I've even bought some new Tyranids with the specific intention of using them for playing Doomed (primarily - would also like to give OPR and Xenos Rampant a go at some time). I've also deliberately collected a Scarif themed set of SW Legion models which I've only used for playing Chain of Command with...

There is only one wargame I've always wanted to play, but I can't find anyone to play it... due to some minor issues.

1. Its reputation for extreme length (up to 1,500 hours).

2. Complex rules, with a rulebook hundreds of pages long [ie. such as the rule regarding Italian troops' water for pasta.]

3. While nominally a two-player game, the rules recommend dividing ten players into two teams of five, with each player holding a specialized command role.

4. The game includes a 9.5-foot (3-meter) long map board, and 1,600 cardboard counters

It's called the The Campaign for North Africa: The Desert War 1940–43.

Doesn't it sound like fun?

Funny thing, this perception that you have to have kind of grown out of the silliness of fantasy or sci fi gaming before one is ready for the serious business of historical gaming. I started with the historical stuff when I was 12. I had grown up on movies like A Bridge Too Far, Midway, The Longest Day, Kelly's Heroes and TV shows like The World at War. Sci fi was barely a thing. We had Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, and Space 1999, but few games. Star Fleet Battles was about it. That game would make modern gamers weep. Probably still does. WHFB didn't exist yet and 40k was still a few years off.

I started with Avalon Hill classics like Panzerblitz, Panzer Leader, Jutland, Wooden Ships & Iron Men, Victory at Sea, Tobruk (Dice at Gazala) and the crown jewel of Squad Leader. The discussions around those games, carried out in the pages of The General magazine, were always about realism vs playability. One faction wanted maximum detail. The other wanted a game that didn't take a weekend to play one scenario.

Is DBA not a thing anymore? Is no one getting their DBM on? What about Warmaster Ancients?

I'm generally interested in antiquity and WW2/ Cold War era, but there's no interest for historical gaming in my group. There are nice models for these eras which I could use for Oathmark/ OPR respektively, but so far there are enough other projects going on. I do build and paint some Warlord and Fireforge Ashigaru for my Human Oathmark army this year, though. They're auxiliaries to my Lotr Easterlings.

What I'm totally not getting is the obsession with the Napoleonic era. There are loads of minis for that era and they all look the exact same in the exact same pose, I'd never buy into that and can hardly imagine interesting tactics for that era.

So, overall I'm not into historical gaming, but there are far more historical miniatures I like than, say AoS, Infinity or Warmachine miniatures.

I'm interested in Bolt Action mechanics but I'm not interested in historical accuracy.

Some players I feel will lambast you over having your minis painted in the wrong colors.

I started as a historical wargamer (95% WW2).

Years & years before I came across GW but have been hooked on into once I did. Also play a range of scifi/fantasy games, zombies, WW2 again, ancients and more...

I hate to say it but that presentation made me FEEL old and had I not already been into gaming would have put me off. Sorry!

I've got some historical rulesets I like and a bunch of Vikings and Celts I'm planning on painting up. Haven't played a game yet, but I've been working on it for years at this point, just picking away at different aspects between fantasy and sci fi projects.

I want to explore the period in Irish history when you had Gaelic Celts, Hiberno-Norse viking descendants and Normans all fighting each other in my local area.

I'm certainly old enough, but I just don't have the interest. I am interested in Weird World War 2 and have a couple armies for K47, but I just have little impetus to game actual war. I think I understand the interest though. Even if the armies aren't flashy, the depth of "fluff" is absolutely unmatched compared to fantasy and sci-fi. Even the massive amount of background of Warhammer or Battletech can't compare to the depth of source material, stories, and detail of actual historical events. I am also glad if indeed more youngsters are getting into the hobby. That can only be a good thing as far as driving the success and development of that area of wargaming.

I do think that some of the stereotypes about historical wargaming being poor figures and stodgy rules (which might never have really been true) are based in looking at the 1980's/90's and fails to realize that fantasy and sci-fi gaming were stodgy then also. Regardless, today, there's a ton of great minis and modern rulesets for all genres of historical wargaming. I've seen some really nice fantasy human armies based mostly around historical figure lines. You can do a darned impressive Brettonian or Empire force almost entirely with recent production plastic figures, and at a small fraction of the GW price.

I almost did a fantasy army with Essex Medievals, but eventually sold off the project and used Runewars miniatures. The idea still appeals though...

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
There is only one wargame I've always wanted to play, but I can't find anyone to play it... due to some minor issues.

1. Its reputation for extreme length (up to 1,500 hours).

2. Complex rules, with a rulebook hundreds of pages long [ie. such as the rule regarding Italian troops' water for pasta.]

3. While nominally a two-player game, the rules recommend dividing ten players into two teams of five, with each player holding a specialized command role.

4. The game includes a 9.5-foot (3-meter) long map board, and 1,600 cardboard counters

It's called the The Campaign for North Africa: The Desert War 1940–43.

Doesn't it sound like fun?

That isn't even a miniature wargame, it is a board game. Pfft.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
Well, if that presentation was boring, maybe try Little Wars TV or Mark's Game Room instead. Here are some recent examples....



This one is based on Warmaster rules.....



This one is more freeform Kreigspiel style with miniatures thrown in for the key actions.

Of course, these are "big battle" games. There are also a lot of skirmish games with 1:1 scale games and Unit vs Unit games too.

 Easy E wrote:


Of course, these are "big battle" games. There are also a lot of skirmish games with 1:1 scale games and Unit vs Unit games too.

There are historical wargames at every era, scope and scale. Further, Historical gamers generally try to size the miniatures to be appropriate to the size of the game (though often there's also a one-figure-equals-X-soldiers) Unlike 40k that plays out a nearly company-sized engagement on what in 1/56 (28mm) would be a tiny patch of ground, historical games will scale accordingly and larger battles will often be in smaller scales: 20/15/10/6/3mm.

This isn't something I'm likely to get into. I've never really been able to get into games based on real conflicts. I just have trouble getting into the fun of stuff real people fought and died over. Stuff like Call of Duty has never really clicked with me for similar reasons.

 LunarSol wrote:
This isn't something I'm likely to get into. I've never really been able to get into games based on real conflicts. I just have trouble getting into the fun of stuff real people fought and died over.

Not even the Franchise Wars that lead to Taco Bell being the sole restaurant?

 Ahtman wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
This isn't something I'm likely to get into. I've never really been able to get into games based on real conflicts. I just have trouble getting into the fun of stuff real people fought and died over.

Not even the Franchise Wars that lead to Taco Bell being the sole restaurant?

I always assumed the losers ended up as the meat at future Taco Bell.

But if they made a wargame based on Said Franchise Wars, I'd give it a shot.

Just as long as I get to play as Captain Ds.

 Ahtman wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
This isn't something I'm likely to get into. I've never really been able to get into games based on real conflicts. I just have trouble getting into the fun of stuff real people fought and died over.

Not even the Franchise Wars that lead to Taco Bell being the sole restaurant?

You can see veterans of food service and retail by the scars carved deep in their souls.

 mattl wrote:
I'm interested in Bolt Action mechanics but I'm not interested in historical accuracy.

Some players I feel will lambast you over having your minis painted in the wrong colors.

That too. I rarely if ever go for default assembly and studio colour schemes on my models, preferring them to be unique and ones of a kind with lots of conversions, scratch-builts, unusual colour schemes and counts-as models.

An army that looks like one on the box cover would be a failure for me as a miniature painter as artisitic creativity and uniqueness are paramount for me.

Being told what colours or types of models I MUST use is an instant turn-off.

 mattl wrote:
I'm interested in Bolt Action mechanics but I'm not interested in historical accuracy.

Some players I feel will lambast you over having your minis painted in the wrong colors.

This happened to me - I got 'hassle' from other players because my DAK wasn't 'historically accurate' (despite being a legal list). That army ended up on eBay...

beast_gts wrote:

This happened to me - I got 'hassle' from other players because my DAK wasn't 'historically accurate' (despite being a legal list). That army ended up on eBay...

The gatekeeping of button counters strikes again.

"Hey, man. Your desert troops are the wrong shade of tan and those guys didn't have that style rifle in 1938."
"Yeah, I'm out."
"Hey buddy that plays the exact same way I do, which is the only correct way. How come we don't have any other players in the area?"
"Dunno. People are just chumps."
"Yeah."
"Yeah."

I'm in my mid-50's, and the Horus Heresy is about as close as I'll get to historical gaming.
Just don't appeal to me.

 kronk wrote:

beast_gts wrote:

This happened to me - I got 'hassle' from other players because my DAK wasn't 'historically accurate' (despite being a legal list). That army ended up on eBay...

The gatekeeping of button counters strikes again.

"Hey, man. Your desert troops are the wrong shade of tan and those guys didn't have that style rifle in 1938."
"Yeah, I'm out."
"Hey buddy that plays the exact same way I do, which is the only correct way. How come we don't have any other players in the area?"
"Dunno. People are just chumps."
"Yeah."
"Yeah."

This seems a common occurrence across Horus Heresy, FoW, BA, and Classic BattleTech.

I haven't experienced that with HH, to be honest. I've been playing HH at Adepticon since 2015.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

 kronk wrote:

beast_gts wrote:

This happened to me - I got 'hassle' from other players because my DAK wasn't 'historically accurate' (despite being a legal list). That army ended up on eBay...

The gatekeeping of button counters strikes again.

"Hey, man. Your desert troops are the wrong shade of tan and those guys didn't have that style rifle in 1938."
"Yeah, I'm out."
"Hey buddy that plays the exact same way I do, which is the only correct way. How come we don't have any other players in the area?"
"Dunno. People are just chumps."
"Yeah."
"Yeah."

This seems a common occurrence across Horus Heresy, FoW, BA, and Classic BattleTech.

Which confuses the heck out of me when applied to BattleTech. Yes, there were regimental 'parade colors'. But even in elite units with those colors, not every 'mech in the regiment was in those colors. Per previously published material, in some units you'd have not even HALF the 'mechs in the unit painted in regimental colors. And yet, you will get people arguing that you MUST - not should, MUST - use the regimental paint scheme or it doesn't count.

Even after I smack them with my copy of Sorenson's Sabres...

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

 kronk wrote:

beast_gts wrote:

This happened to me - I got 'hassle' from other players because my DAK wasn't 'historically accurate' (despite being a legal list). That army ended up on eBay...

The gatekeeping of button counters strikes again.

"Hey, man. Your desert troops are the wrong shade of tan and those guys didn't have that style rifle in 1938."
"Yeah, I'm out."
"Hey buddy that plays the exact same way I do, which is the only correct way. How come we don't have any other players in the area?"
"Dunno. People are just chumps."
"Yeah."
"Yeah."

This seems a common occurrence across Horus Heresy, FoW, BA, and Classic BattleTech.

Wait, battletech. There are like Five or so units out of like 200 where that could possibly apply. That’s crazy!

But I also think it’s come up a few times with historical, where people will be like that isn’t accurate, when you show them history that’s relevant. Only to be told it doesn’t count for what ever reason. But i actually do think that’s outside the norm. Most here are actually really cool, and when something unusual comes up they really want to hear all about it.
The big thing I find is it is difficult to really find a group if you are interested in Historical gaming outside any of the big ones.

I was hit by BattleTech era play.

It wasn't that my units were painted incorrectly, it's that I invested heavily in the Dark Age & Republic of the Sphere Eras.

Here, they don't play those eras, so my mechs sit on the shelf, unable to be played.

(I was a servant of St. Jerome Blake and and follower of Devlin Stone)

I find nearly every aspect of wargaming and its genres to be interesting, so I have played Warhammer since 3rd edition and WH40K since it was Rogue Trader as well as historical miniatures for WW2, ancients, ACW, and the Napoleonic Wars.

All are good in different ways for different reasons.

Historical rule sets are confusing to newcomers and vary widely in scale and detail.

Historical rules and miniatures are nearly impossible for modern day FLGS to stock. There is simply too much variety and too little profit. So most gamers never see them.

Many historical rules and groups promote learning the history of the conflict as much as learning the rules so uniform and weapon accuracy can be important. However, it is common to use brighter shades of colors on smaller miniatures so they "pop" a bit more.

It isn't wrong to dislike a particular ruleset or type of wargaming. Find what you like and play it.