Wargames, Soldiers & Strategy magazine issues 130 and 131 have both been corkers. Every now and then I get to thinking that wargames magazines have had their day, then I get proved wrong, usually by WSS. In both issues there were interesting articles, some useful scenarios, and interesting review sections. Oh yes, and some decent maps as well.
I know some of you find the 'think piece' articles, where issues around the way the hobby is developing are aired, a bit uninteresting - too much navel-gazing when we should be thinking about painting figures and playing games. For myself, I find them worthwhile. I spend a lot of my average day thinking about and planning my wargaming, plus the time I actually spend gaming, and I like to try and understand what I'm doing and why.
To cut to the chase, WSS130 contained an article by Richard Clarke (of the Too Fat Lardies, of course) called 'Naked Communication'. As you'd expect, it was well worth reading, and largely contained a lot of common sense. Broadly, it was about the kickback some of the bigger commercial wargaming companies occasionally get when they introduce new rules, new supplements and new figures for reasons that seem to have more to do with increasing revenue than looking after their customers. Of course, if you run and/or own a company, increasing revenue is your job. The problem is that miniature wargaming is largely an amateur undertaking, and ordinary wargamers can react adversely to what they see as commercialism.
This is the crux of Richard's article, and it was a couple of his statements concerning the amateur/professional relationship that made me want to write a response. Let's start with the first quote that made me think I disagreed with him.
"...pleased as we must be that the hobby is more accessible and that products are more available, we somehow retain an odd attachment to the amateur roots of the hobby."
'An odd attachment to the amateur roots of the hobby'. What's odd about being attached to the hobby's roots? Let's check out the definition of hobby:
'An activity that someone does for pleasure when they are not working.' (Cambridge Dictionary)
'An activity done regularly in one's leisure time for pleasure'. (Oxford Languages on Google)
So a hobby is by definition an amateur activity. It's not a job. Which makes that phrase 'the amateur roots of the hobby' rather suspect. Our hobby was an amateur one when it started, and it's still mostly amateur today. There are, of course, professional companies attached to the hobby, and their number seems to be growing. They are also quite often run by genuine and inspirational wargamers like Richard, so the lines are blurred. But that doesn't change the nature of the hobby.
Richard goes on to mention the influence of the internet, which he correctly identifies as massively positive, and the emergence of 3D printing, which he seems less certain about. He states that "it is a direct threat to the large figure and model making companies". In that he is obviously correct, but from the point of view of an amateur wargamer, the picture looks rather different. For me, 3D printing has enabled me to get miniatures I couldn't get from any established manufacturer, or miniatures I could get from an established manufacturer but of better quality for the same price or less. As soon as I became aware of the potential of 3D printing, I realised it would change what I called the 'balance of power' between the main commercial companies and ordinary wargamers. The cottage industry was back (just like the 60s, 70s and 80s), and individual gamers could even print their own high quality figures and models.
Now this is, of course, wonderful news, especially because it speaks directly to the 'amateur roots of the hobby'. To some extent, ordinary, amateur wargamers are taking back control. This is a feature of the influence of the internet as well, of course, although I reckon the commercial side of the hobby has benefited at least as much from the world wide web as us amateurs.
Richard saves the worst for last. He forsees "bigger companies asking, even insisting, that at their events you use their models when using their rules". Flames of War gathered some bad publicity a few years back when they tried this. I guess if a company is actually running a competition and footing the costs, then fair enough. But not something I would like to see becoming widespread. Such are the dangers of 'official' and 'commercial' wargaming.
And then this:
"If we want the hobby to survive, grow and prosper, we need to recognise that the amateur hobby is not one we want to return to."
I intend to recognise no such thing. We've already established that wargaming with miniatures is an amateur undertaking. So we're not really returning to anything, as we never really departed from it. Richard identifies a "vibrant and exciting hobby industry" as vital to the future of the hobby. Well, it's nice to have you guys around, and we all wish you the best, but if you're experiencing a bit of competition, welcome to the world of capitalism. 3D printing is the best thing to happen to this hobby for many years. It promises to set ordinary wargamers free from the commercial pressures suffered by full-time professionals. We can have what we want, when we want it, rather than when it suits the priorities of various wargaming companies. The 'hobby industry' will have to learn how to catch up. I hope they do.
Gamers will continue to protest from time to time about being told we have to do it differently now, because there's a new rulebook out, or a new range of figures. They can, of course, choose to just walk away, which some do. Well done guys. Do it the way it was before. Do it your way.
I should end by thanking Richard for a polite and thought-provoking piece which helped me clarify what the hobby is about and what it means to me. I think I should also say that the Too Fat Lardies have added a lot to the hobby and given a great deal of pleasure to a lot of gamers, including me. Sincere best wishes for the future, gentlemen. But I for one welcome any move back towards the hobby's roots. We can do this move in a modern way, with excellent 3D products tailored to our needs, and home-brewed, self-published rules with professional-level presentation. This is our hobby, where we all choose our own way of enjoying the pastime. This is what we must not lose, and this is what is vital to our gaming future. An amateur hobby is the natural state of things. Long may it continue.
23 comments:
Predictably mendacious claptrap coming from a self-interested source. No surprises.
Just to clarify: Richard Clarke's assertions, not yours.
I sometimes wonder at the nonsense talked about wargames; I remember the brief popularity of the so called "Old School" fad. At the time people came out with nonsense about "New School", "Middle School" and other labels to give themselves!
The OSW approach rapidly descended into definitions about what was "Old School" and wasn't, which rules and figures were "acceptable" and which were not.....
It led to all those blogs of imaginary countries, most of which are moribund....
"Amateur" seems to be a similar nonsensical label that doesn't really mean much.
What wargamers have lost are the need (and thus skills) to convert figures or vehicles, to make their own terrain, do research, write their own rules and in some cases apparently think for themselves!
How many time have you seen the question "what are the BEST rules for...." ?
We have gained much, but sadly lost much at the same time.....
Personally, I enjoy doing my own thing with my own eclectic projects.
Neil
Metal prices are soaring. Mass-produced models are moving to plastic or resin, but plastics have higher setup costs for the moulds. The big manufacturers need to sell significant volumes to be worth producing a new set. We should expect gaps in coverage, even for popular periods. Resin (I hear) is very difficult to convert.
In many ways, 3D printing is the modern replacement for homecast lead figures and conversions as a way to complete an army with those figures that nobody sells.
Ed M - Oooh, harsh!
Neil - You sound very much like an Old School amateur to me.
I second Neil's perspective with reservation. We lose some of the discovery, experimentation, and creativity when all is force-fed to us to a regimented manner.
I think I am basically on the same page as you, Keith - and funnily enough, we share the same "Christian" name!
I think I bought WRG 1925-1985 (if I remember correctly) in the mid 70's in my early teens, and I think that is the only set of rules I have ever bought!
I have played several of the Lardies sets, but other people have bought them - mainly CoC and Sharpes Practice - they are fine (SP is the better) but having played them would not tempt me to buy another of their sets- What a Tanker, for example.
I have a deep-seated suspicion verging on active dislike for Warlord and what I perceive as their business strategy ie to become THE preeminent figure based wargaming supplier and take over or outsell any competitors, then convince future generations that only their figures and their rules are any good - as Games Workshop has done with the fantasy genre. I don't think Warlord figures are bad, per se - I quite like their plastics - but I do think their "Epic" ranges being a claimed 12.5mm or whatever it is, is simply an attempt to create a new "standard" figure scale, and syphon off portions of both 10mm and 15mm from their competitors.
From what you have written about the article, I get the impression the Lard guy thinks having 2-5 large scale, commercially successful mega producers is a better idea that multiple small scale "cottage" industries? I can see the logic of that in some ways, but personally, I would prefer to retain 60-100 small scale operations, all doing their own thing - apart from anything else, if we only had two or three mega companies, there would be little to no competition, and guess what would happen to the prices then?!
So, slightly less harsh than Eds assessment, but philosophically, I think I more or less agree with him - as Mandy Rice-Davies might have commented on the article - "He would say that, wouldn't he?"!
Personally I cannot stand Warlord games or their products. They remind me too much of Games Workshop. I think the owner of Warlord used to work for GW. Epic 12.5mm plastic overpriced pah!
Got to say I am pretty ‘Old School’. I like to see a gloss varnished historical figure with not too much detail in the right setting. However I do like the 7TV and some of the Northstar figures, especially The Silver Bayonet. I prefer metal with some resin figures. I cannot simply stand plastic figure ‘kits’.
I like simple rule sets that give a good entertaining game. Personally I have got to an age where I do not want to read and try to interpret 300 pages of information interspersed with lovely colour photographs. You know the ones, where after a couple of years there is a second or third edition that you must simply buy or be left behind. If you like any edition of a rule set, just play that and save your money for something else.
I think the hobby is mainly the older generation now. The youngsters do not seem interested. I go to shows and it’s mainly grey haired chaps like me. Sometimes I feel,positively sprightly looking at other attendees!
Richard Clarke has been paid to write the article. If that’s his view fine, but it’s not mine. I will do what I want and play the rules I want. Not sure many people read the various magazine now anyway. Simon
rross - Richard is basically defending commercial wargaming companies against the occasional criticisms of 'naked commercialism' (hence the title of the article). He makes some sensible points, but as you can see his comments about the 'amateur hobby' irritated me. He seemed surprisingly detached from what the average historical wargamer might be thinking and doing.
Simon - as you say, the people running Warlord (and Battlefront/FoW) are basically ex-GW senior employees. GW get all sorts of backlash from their customers over their marketing policies, but the majority of GW customers just seem to suck up the new rules and new figure ranges as part of the hobby. Perhaps this is due to the emphasis on competition and 'pick-up' gaming, which tends to mean you have to keep up with all the latest changes. We see this with FoW as well. I have been impressed by the recent Valour and Fortitude rules being made available for free, but on the other hand I see the whole 'Epic' thing as a dead end.
I think there is a younger generation entering the hobby, but my recent visit to the Attack show at Devizes was rather dispiriting - as you say, at 66 I felt 'positively sprightly' looking at some of the other attendees. The bad effects of a sedentary lifestyle were much in evidence.
Thank you for another thought provoking comment Keith. I enjoy these as much as the game reports especially as I read the comment articles is WSS without too much analysis. Sorry I didn't know to look out for you at Devizes - I was one of those who made you feel sprightly although I don't think I show evidence of a sedentary lifestyle!
Hi Jim. Yes, a great shame we missed each other at Devizes. Still a decent sized show but I found some of the games a bit laclustre this year. Probably just a cyclical thing.
Hello Keith,
I also was at Attack Devizes hence my ‘sprightly’ comment. I thought the show has been lacklustre for the last few years. I have also attended Cavalier and Overlord this year, the same ‘sprightly’ comment applies unfortunately. I hope Colours will be better in September. Thankfully I am not involved with the show this year and am attending as a ‘punter’. Footfall is dramatically down for Colours from pre pandemic by around 5-600 people. Post pandemic. With the aging gaming community I am not sure shows will survive. Attack seemed very quiet on the Saturday for example this year as it did last. Quite a lot of traders/companies are no longer attending shows. I know many that will not go to Salute or SELWG now. To be honest I quite understand the Salute non attendance decisions.
Personally I have sold of quite a bit of my collections over the past few years. Basically whilst there is still a market for it. I am buying much less gaming items. This also appears to be a ‘thing’ with others. I am more a collector than a gamer now. My friends club in Somerset folded last year through lack of interest for example. I have not been a member of Newbury & Reading Wargames Society for years, because I just do not like how it’s run. Lots of other members have walked away as well. Simon
A sad tale Simon. It will be interesting to see the results of the current WSS Survey. Last years showed the hobby in rude health, although I seem to remember that our kind of historical wargaming is in a slight decline, at least as a proportion of games played. The decline at Clours has indeed been notable - most people I know who have been to the last couple of shows have remarked on it.
I reckon buying less stuff is not a bad thing for anybody. I only have 3 collections but the ancients haven't been played with for years. Less buying, more playing!
I can’t agree with you on that. Too Fat Lardies doesn’t produce miniatures. We are lucky indeed to have such a huge source of gaming material coming from these companies.
Things simply are what they are and really, for the individual, the only thing that should really matter is what wargaming looks like for your own front room - if you are wargaming and enjoying it, then it hardly matters what is going on around.
I have never understood the thing about hating named companies, someone, somewhere at anyone one time, will likely be enjoying their product and that is all that matters. We easily forget what a niche hobby we are, probably only measurable in the low tens of thousands, so to have so much choice is probably something to cherish.
I’m never really sure what Old School gaming is, but if it has connections to my early years of discovering and broadening my hobby and the raw enthusiasm that went with that, then I like it.
At the moment, I am really enjoying the Soldiers Wargames and Strategy magazine and Warlord’s Epic stuff. The former reminds me fondly of Stuart Asquith’s Practical Wargamer magazine and I don’t know, is the latter just a fun, Airfix type of thing? Either way, I think I am having some nostalgia buttons pressed, but with modern processes.
'I am having some nostalgia buttons pressed, but with modern processes". Sounds good Norm. Just the kind of thing I like as well.
Plenty to get the old grey cells a thinking there Keith. Where to start in terms of replying? No idea so let's give this a go...
The hobby has always been a mix of professional and amateur as long as I can remember, with myself and friends starting off with Airfix figures and their rules from those lovely little magazine guides they produced. Looking through my old Airfix magazines there are plenty of adverts for products aimed at wargamers, even in the late 1960's. So not much has changed, but somehow our rose tinted view feels like it was less business driven in the past, which I highly doubt.
Fast forward to today and of course you have big players like Warlord Games sitting alongside one man bands producing terrain and items that are simply not commercially viable for bigger companies. Both happily sit alongside each other and each enrich the hobby. I know Pendraken produce quite a few loss making ranges to provide as much coverage for periods as they can, but there is only so far they can go. IIRC their Korean War range still has not covered its costs yet and is unlikely to do so. So for them to keep in business they must focus making a profit of course, which leaves space for those 'amateur' one mad bands to fill the gaps.
One would do well to remember that when FoW first arrived, it had a huge knock on effect to the 15mm WWII figures market, with Peter Pig happily riding the wave as it massively increased their sales in what until then had probably been a small part of the market. WWII in general saw an increase across other scales too.
3D printing certainly has been a huge boon for us gamers, allowing all manner of figures, vehicles and terrain to be produced that we could only ever dream of before. At the Partizan show a lot of the terrain was 3D printed with one game having all the figures and terrain done this way. Now being an old and cynical modelmaker, I'm still not sure how durable these materials will be compared to metal, but I cannot fault the quality and variety on offer these days.
Personally I want (need?) that mix of the big companies that can produce rules and ranges that the one man band would simply be unable to even contemplate, as it allows the wider wargaming community to benefit on so many levels. Supplements and new versions of rules are sometimes welcome, other times less so, as again the cynic in me sees it as purely a commercial decision. But honestly if I was running a company and it was my sole income, I would do it too!
Thanks for writing this piece Keith and for some reason this has only just popped up in my Blogger feed. Maybe when we can meet up for a game we can chew the cud more on this and I'll try and leave my cynical side at home...😉
Thanks Steve. A lot of sense there which I could hardly disagree with, particularly when you highlight how commercial companies can complement each other, and spur on us amateurs. I don't want the 'professional' to go away, but Richard's rejection of the amateur nature of the core hobby irked me.
I remember reading that article and thinking 'has he gone over to the dark side....? I didn't twig that he was in part worrying about the effect of 'home' 3D printing, but I get that now. However I would have thought the larger businesses are likely to do their own 3D printed models eventually anyway, they could supply either printed figures or sell the files, so what do they have to worry about? ( and surely someone will come up with 'ready-painted' 3D printing eventually.. )
I am quite cynical about some of the 'commercial' rulesets/games, where there increasingly seems to be quite an expensive ( if glossy ) rulebook, and then of course you 'need' to buy separate stats cards for the tanks/planes/ships; perhaps event card decks; maybe special dice; supplements for scenarios; not forgetting the branded figures and models too. Obviously some people are happy to pay out for all this, but it's not for me. It might be 'professional' to some, but it seems too much like profiteering to me. Richard's seeming endorsement of the 'Flames of War' style 'you can only use our models' approach was pretty disappointing for me. As you say, I am quite happy to be an 'amateur' - sorry if that hits your bottom line, Richard.
Finally it seems to me there is an odd sort of irony to all this, given the other thread that has come up from your commenters, i.e. the ageing of the historical wargames hobby I'm afraid I agree with the comments, at shows it does seem to be quite a 'senior' crowd these days, and maybe diminishing (one exception being 'Salute', which looked to have a much wider age range - however I suspect that is because there is a much bigger emphasis on Fantasy and Sci-Fi there, and the diverse crowd is much more involved in those games ). Is it possible that the goal of a completely 'professional' hobby will be attained, just as the customers all shuffle off?
Thanks for an interesting and thought-provoking post!
Thanks David. I enjoyed reading your reply. A friend who attended a show in the Midlands recently (can't remember which) said he was pleasantly surprised by the age range. So maybe all is not lost.
Interesting you mention FoW Steve - I was there at its birth, more or less, when our mate Mark S at 1866 blog ran the business in Auckland. the original sculptor was a guy called Evan who I met once and (I think) was serving in the RNZAF at the time - he sculpted a new master or two every week and posted them up to Mark in Auckland, who created molds from the masters and a few guys then hand poured resin into the molds and left them to set. It carried on like that, a true cottage industry, for quite some time, and I remember the excitement of them expanding into the US - but also the challenge that they could not produce sufficient models for the scale of demand in this new market.
One of the gamers and people involved in the financial backing of the business was Peter Simonovic, of Simonovic Fisheries in New Zealand - he was already a multi millionaire thanks to the family commercial fishing business - I think he brought in some ex GW guy Jean-Paul or something like that, and the whole thing became more professional and commercially organised, but less fun. Mark eventually left - our gaming mates Paul and Andrew had also worked at the company but also departed, and production moved to a fancy new "factory" on the N Shore and then, a few years later, off shore altogether to Malaysia I think - but once upon a time, I used to go in there for 10-20 hours per week and pack parts into little boxes, paid in kind at the rate of two 15mm models per hour - its why I have three quite large 15mm WWII collections in my possession!
I think it was when they brought in John-Paul Brisigotti (?) who was ex-GW that things really took off as unsurprisingly he followed the GW business model that had stood them in good stead for many a year. Interesting to read how the business grew over the years from its small beginnings to the company it is now. They really had to up their game when Plastic Soldier Company started to release their plastic kits, that were so much better than the FoW ones, leading them to go down the same route. Healthy competition benefited us all in this case!
Post a Comment