What is Wargaming

Peter Guilders Wargames Holiday Centre 1984 

A recent post on TMP prompted me to consider just what are we all trying to achieve, and what is the best way to go about it.   The question asked why do most rules have what he called “myths”.   For example on the table cavalry move about twice as fast as infantry, though in real life they can move many times more.   This type of question has been raised for many years, and is an attempt to justify Wargaming as a serious attempt to recreate real battle.      

I started Wargaming  in 1969 when I found a copy of “Charge, or how to play wargames” in the local library.   This was long before the age of the internet, so I have no idea how other wargamers felt, but I assume that like me they just accepted the rules without question.

At the same time I discovered Don Featherstone and Wargamers Newsletter.   I bought each of his books as they were published, plus any other books available in England.   I guess I was about as informed as most wargamers.   I particularly remember Don writing something along the lines of “wargames can never be the same as war – it is a game”.   This idea has had a long lasting effect on my approach to Wargaming.   Not just because Don has served in the army in WW2, but because it just seems so obviously true.

WRG rules was the first attempt to turn our playing with soldiers into recreating history.   Very complicated rules requiring pages of charts to add or subtract from a dice throw attempted to cover every situation encountered in warfare.   They overlooked the fact that as soon as you use a dice you abandon any attempt to recreate warfare.  I used them for many years, but they were long winded and created not very enjoyable wargames.

It has always seemed obvious to me that if you want to refight historical battles they best way to do it would be using a board game.   This is similar to the military Wargaming, which was used extensively to test battle plans, however not with any great success.   I served in the military and was well aware of expression “the best laid plans are discarded when the first shot is fired”.

I suspect that most of us are drawn to Wargaming by the visual spectacle of large numbers of well painted model soldiers on attractive terrain.   However that is the diorama effect, not the wargame itself.

All wargame rules must compromise with historical fact to be playable.   You have only to consider that most of us play on a table 6x6 foot or less.   Those of us who use 28mm figures are faced with the most serious compromise.   If we wish to have any space to manoeuvre we must  restrict each army to about 300 figures per side.   The obvious answer is that we would stick to skirmish style games, but most of us really want to be Napoleon or Wellington.   Attempting to fight Waterloo on a 6x6 foot table with 28mm figures in never going to end well!

Wellington v Soult on my table 2024 

It is however possible to enjoy multi corps Napoleonic wargames with 28mm figures on such a table, but you have to accept that to do so you are playing a game – not recreating Waterloo itself.   I have done so for more than 20 years, and continue to do so.   I enjoy my Wargaming, but consider it a game of chance, with a pleasing visual effect.

I suspect that those who try to justify Wargaming as a serious attempt to refight historical battles are trying to convince everyone else that they are not just playing a complicated game of toy soldiers.   If they really wanted to recreate the tactical problems encountered by Wellington and Napoleon they would do so using computer or board games.

Trying to justify wargame movement rules for cavalry and infantry movement is never going to work.