Wargaming Problems

A rather pointless blog ... a couple of musings really on the trouble with wargames.

• Why do we always fill our tables with figures? The more experienced a wargamer becomes they seem to be only satisfied with a table filled with a multitude of figures. It seems hundreds are need to make a game complete or table realistic. This is playing right into the hands of fig and games manufacturers and certainly reduces the amount of tactics used in any game. Reduces the game to walk forward, fight/roll a dice ... run away.
  
• Why do we need to spend $100 + on rules? We do we need a massive rulebook filled with diagrams and explanations and the ever pointless descriptions about collecting an army, how to paint, model terrain or the dice and tape measures you will need. Added to this are the increasingly specific and detailed army list book which seem to weigh in around $20-$30 each and we only ever use one or two armies from each.
  
• Why are we now measuring ourselves against the ultimate images of magazines and gung-ho internet sites? Perfectly sane gamers I once knew now seem absolutely driven to achieve a gaming table that the gods themselves would weep before. Only the ideal will now do and gamers are prepared to spend years painting an army while only gaming with it on the odd occasion. Surely the game is what matters? Seems I'm wrong these days.
  
• Why can't a wargaming club of any size or regularity exist in Newcastle, Australia? This town seems to be made up of one eyed factions, insular groups and hermits. We're quite a large place that doesn't support any club over 4-8 regular members.
  
• Why do we keep falling for 25 mm scale? Too much time painting, storage a problem, transport a frequent nightmare, cost, ... all for a "big print" version of gaming. Not to say anything about ratio's of figures to battlefield soldiers. An expensive skirmish game ... rarely capable of recreating any historical battle. (Oh and 5mm figs could really be anything ... esp when viewed from more than 1m away.)
  
• Why do we keep playing rules that makes deployment positions the deciding factor of a game? It seems like playing with so many wind-up cars at times. Once in position off they go ... with a couple of formation changes these little beauts are locked on course from the beginning to the end of the battle. Stuff it up, through mistake or inexperience and just go home. Wargame armies are beginning at such close range that a player simply deploys straight into battle formation then closes to fight. All the maneuver is gone .... or never existed in games to my memory. Playing surface is an issue ... but also is the sort of game most rules are creating. A formation change or two and straight into it ... is this it??
• And why am I typing this? I have no idea???
• Should have spent my time on making the next battle report much more detailed!

Major Savage