I'm a wargamer, and favor historical units.  I wouldn't turn down a non-historical game, but non-historical is definitely less interesting/satisfying, to me.

Favorites include Field of Glory, Chainmail, Avalon Hill hex/chit games, et cetera.

I played a bunch of the Avalon Hill and SPI wargames.  I had dozens of the SSI wargames for the Apple II.  Played the holy hell out of Ogre and SFB.  I never did any 15mm minis wargaming.  Played 40k and Necromunda and still do on occasion.

Not a wargamer, though I certainly tried. Played risk once or twice, played the Melee/Wizard microgames, played (and still own) an SPI game (StarForce, I think it was called.) Didn't really enjoy it.

But then, I can say the same about most types of games. I am into D&D and a smattering of other RPGs, but I'm not an omnivorous "gamer".

Quote from: Old Geezer;743694So 'wargame' equals 'big and complex'?

Frankly, I disagree strongly.  Terence Wise's book Medieval Warfare has a perfectly viable miniatures wargame in only 10 pages.

For that matter, nobody argues that CHAINMAIL isn't a wargame, and yet the core historical 1:20 rules of CHAINMAIL, including the "Historical Characteristics (Optional)" but not including sieges or man to man...

are 13 5 1/2 x 8 1/2 inch pages, plus one chart the same size.

You can play 1:20 CHAINMAIL historical battles to your heart's content in those 13 pages.  Everything else is an add-on; sieges, man to man, fantasy.

I think there may be a distinction for some people between the scale of the combat rather than the complexity. I you are controlling one mecha it feels like like a "wargame" than one that has a dozen such things under ones control. So its not a matter of complexity. We used to play minis combats with a set of move costs and a simple roll to kill and range for missiles the whole rule set would fit on a single side of A4 but it was a wargame. I have just created a star ship combat system as a module for my heartbreaker that if I wrote down all the rules would come in at a dozen pages but it doesn't really feel like wargame so much.

So is there a distinction between large scale strategic games and low level tactical skirmishes?

I was mainly a roleplayer back in the day.  Oh I had Warhammer first edition at one point but who ever had twenty miniatures, let alone a hundred?  I played Starfire and Car Wars and Saga and Battle Tech though.

I went on to buy and never play a long list of Warhammer alternatives like, Kryomek, Vor The Maelstrom, Void, Fantasy Warriors, Fantasy Warlord, Battlesystem.  I've got a very broad and unusual miniatures collection to show for it.

Eventually I broke down and got into Warhammer but the only edition I ever really liked was Sixth which was very tactical and troops oriented.  It's been slipping back to the absurdist monster fest ever since.  40K was always just out of reach, I'd finally have enough stuff to play and the new edition would come out and change the list up so I couldn't use what I had anymore.

At this point I'd fire bomb the studio with the designers in the building, so, I guess I'm a little over wrought about it.

I play a fair bit of Bolt Action and Kings of War these days.  They sell well for my little store and are fast playing and fun.  I want to move into moderns and will probably do so with Force on Force and Empress Miniatures.

Quote from: jibbajibba;743718So is there a distinction between large scale strategic games and low level tactical skirmishes?

Only "large scale strategic games" and "tactical skirmish games."  That is, the names.

GDW's Drang Noch Osten and Michael Korns' "Modern War in Miniature" are both WW2 wargames.  One is the Russian front on a divisional scale, the other is 1 player controls 1 man.

I never heard anybody say that one or the other wasn't a wargame.

I'm a whore, I'll play anything. Wargames, mini-games, miniatures, collectable card games, trains, RPGs, etc.

Favorites include Stellar Conquest, Civilization, Illuminati, King Maker, Rail Baron, Empire Builder, Midway. Heck, half the games in my closet I've never played but want to.

Someday when I get my life back on track...

Quote from: David Johansen;743722Car Wars

Good god, how could I forget Car Wars.  Did a fair amount of Battlesystem in the AD&D days, too.  Battletech, Mechwarrior and Heavy Gear were pretty fun on the tabletop as well as PC.  Tried a few of the other space wargames like Full Thrust and Starmada, but haven't tried any of the Call to Arms series.  I expect I'll play the hell out of the Shadowrun skirmish game if it's any good.

33 years of wargaming!

I am not a fan of historical games. It's a bit "misery tourism" for me to re-enact battles where dumbass peasants from Side A were marched into a blender against dumbass peasants from Side B on the orders of some rich assholes.  

But anything fictional? Bring it on.

Quote from: Old Geezer;743694So 'wargame' equals 'big and complex'?

Frankly, I disagree strongly.  Terence Wise's book Medieval Warfare has a perfectly viable miniatures wargame in only 10 pages.

For that matter, nobody argues that CHAINMAIL isn't a wargame, and yet the core historical 1:20 rules of CHAINMAIL, including the "Historical Characteristics (Optional)" but not including sieges or man to man...

are 13 5 1/2 x 8 1/2 inch pages, plus one chart the same size.

You can play 1:20 CHAINMAIL historical battles to your heart's content in those 13 pages.  Everything else is an add-on; sieges, man to man, fantasy.

The basic 1:20 core is 13 pages.  A hell of a lot smaller than most "modern miniatures games," whatever they are.

The majority of the wargames I cut my teeth on were the microgames of Car Wars, Ogre, and Warpwar. Each one of those has a set of rules that was less than 12 pages. You don't have to be complex to be viable, in fact simple and elegant rules work wonderfully for most games.

I mostly play historical miniatures these days.  That said, on New Years' Day I had a WHEE of a time with Battletech, and I'd play Starfleet Battles or Ogre or Rivets or Alien Space or FASA Starship Combat or any of a number of other games in a heartbeat.

So I'm mostly historical, but not gonna turn my nose up at nonhistorical wargames.

Does Blood Bowl count as a war game? I admit to really liking that game.

Hrm.  Y'know, I ought to change my vote.  I voted for "mostly historical," but some of the responses have reminded me of others.  I was heavily into SFB at one point, and like Jeff, I did a lot of Microgames.  I ran a WarpWar online campaign for some time, and I *loved* Car Wars.  Heck, I refereed a scenario at UMass that proved so popular I was asked to run it over and over again, about once a month, for two years.

To wit: there are three full scale large maps, covering UMass-Boston (which is stuck out on a peninsula in Boston Harbor) and the arterial highway feeding it.  You each have your budget vehicle.  It is 8:20 AM.  Your first class of the day starts at 8:30 AM.  And there is only one parking space left on campus.  Have at it.

Quote from: Marleycat;743750Does Blood Bowl count as a war game? I admit to really liking that game.

I'd say so. There's plenty of combat in it.
I guess I have a pretty loose definition of 'wargame'... just that there needs to be some simulation of direct conflict.
I've always wanted to try the really detailed, heavy games like Star Fleet Battles and Advanced Squad Leader... but never knew other folks who had the patience/time/interest... so generally floated closer to the 'beer and pretzels' variety.

Not a tabletop wargamer these days.  Nothing against them; played Car Wars and Battletech aplenty 20-30 years ago.  It's just that I need something that really trips my trigger, and folks to play with that aren't shit-heels.  The former is easy; the latter is difficult.  Also, more of a chit/counter type than minis.