Discussion Thread: The All Too Common Misunderstanding or Misinterpretation of the Word “Wargame”

A few months ago, I started a new feature on the blog called Discussion Thread where I plan to pose a question or a share a situation and seek your input and comments on the issue to gain greater understanding and to encourage thoughtful feedback. The response to the first post about In-Game Retribution was positive and there were a lot comments and opinions shared followed by a not so successful post on Zones of Control. I now wanted to do another post in the series and focus on the all too common problem that non-wargamers have with the word Wargame and misinterpreting or misunderstanding what it actually is.

The most common misconception about a board wargame is that it is simply a casual, luck-based mainstream game such as the likes of Risk or Monopoly, that cheapens or treats lightly the historical period covered and those who participated in the event and who fought and gave their lives. Conversely, some people hold that wargames are an inaccessible, dry academic simulation meant only for hardcore military personnel or history professors. Many non-wargamers assume that “wargame” simply means moving plastic armies around a world map and rolling dice to conquer territories. But in reality, traditional board wargames, such as hex and counter games, prioritize historical operational mechanics, logistics, supply lines and terrain modeling over casual social dice-rolling. They also do a credible job at attempting to recreate the outcomes of these battles by ensuring that various elements are accurate including terrain features, weather, commanders and the make-up and skill of troops involved. Finally wargames are a serious matter. No one who plays them takes them lightly nor do they not consider the history covered.

So the reason for me writing this post came from something that I experienced last weekend while attending the Gaming the American Revolution Camden 250 Event in Camden, South Carolina. At this event, which was sponsored by GMT Games, about 100 gamers showed up to play games on the American Revolutionary War from GMT Games including titles such as Washington’s War, Liberty or Death, the upcoming announced Common Sense and the various games from the Battles of the American Revolution Series. As a part of the convention, which was held at the Revolutionary War Visitor Center at Camden, there was a 4-hour tour set up that took participants to see the Camden battlefield, located about 8 miles out of the city limits, and the Hobkirk’s Hill battlefield located in Camden. This tour was expertly lead by the South Carolina Battlefield Preservation Trust Executive Director Rick Wise who was very knowledgeable and entertaining to listen to. You could really feel his passion for the American Revolution as well as the role that these battles in South Carolina and the Southern Theater held in the wider war and the eventual surrender of Lord Charles Cornwallis and his army at Yorktown, Virginia.

But, when he spoke on a few different occasions he brought up the fact that we were wargamers and that we were gathered to “play” games. This statement is not incorrect as we are all wargamers and were there to play games together. He also said that we needed to understand and keep in mind that there were soldiers who fought, bled and died to win independence and establish the great American nation. I felt like he was really preaching to the choir here with this group as everyone was there for the gaming and the recognition of the history tied to that gaming. Also many attendees were former military and had also served. Finally, I think almost every one in attendance participated not only in his 4-hour guided tour, but also walked the grounds of the Camden Visitors Center to take a look at the redoubt there as well as the Kershaw-Cornwallis House that was used by Lord Charles Cornwallis and Lord Francis Rawdon as an active HQ during the occupation of Camden from 1780-1781. In addition, many attendees came to South Carolina early to visit other battlefields in the area such as Cowpens, King’s Mountain, Waxhaws and Eutaw Springs. I bring this up because of Rick’s tone, and I am not sure that it was valid or necessary in speaking to this crowd, was assuming that as wargamers we were trivializing or taking lightly the gravity of the history involved in the games we were playing. I know that he was not trying to offend or belittle us and our focus but simply wanted to drive home his point of the sacrifices that were made and that we were playing out in a game with dice.

Well, I want to point out a few things about these wargames. They are not trivial but are focused on the actual historical details of the period and the battles involved. Wargames are built upon a few stalwart truths…the people who participated and the terrain upon which they fought and died. These are both hallmarks of every single wargame that I have ever played. The designers take these battles seriously and do hours upon hours of research and investigation to make sure that they have the details correct. For example, with the Orders of Battle or OOB’s, they find the names of each formation, typically named after their commanding officer, and in smaller scale games the names of actual soldiers who were there. These details are listed on the counters and have an impact in the game play itself. But, sometimes the names don’t have an impact and are just added to bring the battle to the view of the players and to hammer home the human element. The designers want players to understand who was involved, how they fit into the larger battle, who their leaders were and even adding in small historical details to make the game grounded in the history. The Battles of the American Revolution Series does this exceptionally well.

The detail about the makeup of the soldiers involved, as well as their relative strengths and weaknesses, are on full display and are central to us as wargamers gaining insight into the conditions under which they fought, the issues that they would have experienced and the challenges that their commanders would have dealt with in directing their efforts. I like that one of the more interesting parts that is included in this makeup typically is a unit’s morale or their willingness to continue fighting in the face of mounting casualties and fatigue. Numbers are typically assigned for things like morale by designers after reading the histories and taking into account the performance and standing of these troops. More veteran troops typically have higher morale than green or relatively less experienced troops. These factors and attributes are all based on the history and are typically designed as a simulation of the event, or at least as the most realistic and plausible recreation of the event that can be made. And that is the appeal. Understanding the situation from the participants point of view and seeing how it turned out and why. I have played dozens upon dozens of wargames and have always thought about the soldiers and their sacrifice. How did they do what was done? Where did their bravery come from in the face of overwhelming odds? How could they have possibly held up to the better trained and better equipped professional armies of the British? For me, the soldiers are the reason that I play these games. And I assume the same for many of you.

I understand why the average person doesn’t understand wargaming and I get that the word “game” is found in what we do. To the average person, the word game is associated with lighter fare such as Risk, Trouble or Sorry, which are games where you can laugh and joke about things and focus on having a good time and experience with your family and friends. But wargames are more than that…they are a look into the past. A look that includes the gory details, the challenges and the difficulties….and they are made as an homage to the past. Just as books are written to commemorate and outline the details of these battles, wargames are made to serve a similar purpose. To teach, to instruct, to challenge and to test the meddle of players to see if they can meet or exceed historical outcomes or even flip the script and turn history upside down with a totally different outcome. And they are made to be enjoyable but in a different way to the games I mentioned earlier. I love playing games with friends, being with them for hours upon hours, getting to know them, better understanding them and better understanding the history. I would deign to say that I even enjoy playing wargames and do have a good time with them. But I always do keep in mind the history and the soldiers and their sacrifice.

What are your thoughts on this topic? Did I miss the mark in my response? Am I being too sensitive? Thanks for reading and for sharing your thoughts. I will come up with a few more of these posts to share and I hope to see lots of comments and reaction.

-Grant