What is the most over-rated wargames period? I'm torn between Napoleonic and twentieth century, but interested in what other gamers think gets too large a slice of the cake.
  Come to think of it, twentieth century; the gamers who hog half the available tables to play games that all look the same anyway.

Quote from: FierceKitty on 08 October 2010, 01:24:14 PM
What is the most over-rated wargames period?

I don't understand how a period can be over-rated. A ruleset or a particular model brand can be over-rated because it doesn't meet certain general requirements. Even a scale such as 28mm or 2mm can be over-rated in cartain ways depending on one's preference (impractical in the first instance, lack of detail in the second).

But a historical period? 

Cheers,
Aart

I think Fierce is refering to periods that get too much Pendraken design love at the expense of other (more interesting) periods.

Gordon

WW2, totaly overrated, a second rate war war all the way, cowardly soldiers using guns with magazins, hell they even use automatic weapons, totaly unsporty

Anybody using guns with more then 1 bullet in it, should be disqualified and left of the bench for the rest of the war.

Chariot wars, Napolionics & ACW send me to sleep

I wasn't just commenting on Pendraken, actually. Some periods are just grotequely over-represented and overplayed, out of all proportion to their merits or historical importance.
  I am actually pleased that our hosts are doing so much SYW stuff. No other war has shaped our world as much.

Two "actually"s in one post. I must step up my medication.

Quote from: FierceKitty on 08 October 2010, 03:57:04 PM
Two "actually"s in one post. I must step up my medication.

It's fine - they avoided placing themselves in the same sentence 

It's a good question...I think I'd have to go with zombies - or Early Imperial Romans vs the Barbarian hordes...

Ancients - its just blokes with pointy sticks...

Quote from: FierceKitty on 08 October 2010, 03:54:54 PM
Some periods are just grotequely over-represented and overplayed, out of all proportion to their merits or historical importance.

Aha!!

Now i can comment.  I was struggling as there were no frames of reference to make an assessment.

OK, first up, i'll defend the two periods knocked off.

Napoleonics
This period is really THE wargaming period - oddly, despite decades at the table, a period i've never really played.  However, i don't think its overrated or overepresented.  It defines wargaming, providing grand tactical battles, combined arms operation (infantry/cavalry/artillery).
The merits and historical importance are difficult to argue against.

WWII
Again, this is a defining period, advancing the combined arms and tactical capacity into the modern way of war.  Very popular and again i'd suggest difficult to see it as overrated or overrepresented.
The merits and historical importance are difficult to argue against.

I think i'll ave to veer off on a tangent here and say that i think two 'periods' are good candidates;

Fantasy and Science Fiction gaming.

Both are seriously overrated having very little historic value (obviously), and often very little merit.  They are also massively overrepresented - undeniably so given that the only wargames company to maintain an international high street presence specialises in fantasy/sci fi...

Quote from: FierceKitty on 08 October 2010, 03:54:54 PM
[...] out of all proportion to their merits or historical importance.

I think this explains why members find it hard to take your question serious. The historical importance of Napoleonic and WII periods overrated? That's like saying rockets are overrated as a means of space travel.

You complain a lot that your fav periods or genres are underrepresented in today's model ranges. I can understand that. But I think the proper way to change this is to make people enthusiastic about your favs, not to constantly question or even bash other peoples' preferences.

Cheers,
Aart

REVERSE PSYCHOLOGY

Falklands - massively over-rated

Does this add any votes to that period getting done?

People play games about the periods they know about.  And which periods get the good movies and TV shows?

Now, I am not sure that Napoleonics or WWII are over-represented in terms of their importance in shaping their importance in shaping the modern worlds.  If, that is, you insist on gaming wars.  If games were played in proportion to the historic importance of what they represent, games that represented social systems, politics, economics, and industrial development would be all the rage -- most wars only express the final results of those processes anyway.

The accepted wisdom among the cognoscenti is that rockets ARE over-rated as a means of space travel. They hardy get us out of our front door. And even there the "space elevator" idea has been an obvious improvement at a conceptual level for decades.
   Rockets as a means of breaking up formations of attacking Japanese pikemen are another matter, of course.

Quote from: lentulus on 09 October 2010, 12:42:00 AM
People play games about the periods they know about.  And which periods get the good movies and TV shows?

That's kinda the point I'm making. It's like a mediocre actor like Roger Moore playing James Bond with no talent or charisma for more movies than several far better candidates just becaue he was familiar and had been hyped a lot.

I dont understand SCW period and the overhelming engagement of Pendraken crew in it. (Although I imagine fighting communists can be funny  )
When I see so brilliant new SCW figs released, I cry ...that they are not new SYW stuff

Quote from: FierceKitty on 09 October 2010, 06:02:53 AM
The accepted wisdom among the cognoscenti is that rockets ARE over-rated as a means of space travel.

Only among the "cognoscenti" of sci-fi games. Games which are neither here nor there when it comes to historical importance. Personal preferences do not speak to historical importance anyway. The point being that people play games that fire their imagination. You want to change their preferences? Appeal to imagination, not to snobbery.

Cheers,
Aart

Those for whom combat begins and ends with Waterloo and Stalingrad may not have very active imaginations to appeal to. Of course, I say this as one arraigned, judged, and convicted of snobbery.

The popularity of periods often reflects their importance, e.g. Napoleonics and WWII, but they also have to have decent sources available in English (for anglophones at least). They have to present something "gameable" some wars aren't best suited to this; WWI for example (not that its ungameable, its not as dynamic as its sequel). Interesting armies help, as do those with at least a chance of winning.

I myself like the slightly more obscure side of things, or less familiar spins on mainstream stuff. I've always been into LoA, but that's only really become more noticed in the last few years.
Sometimes I am baffled by a lack of interest in facinating periods. Chinese history is a great big goldmine of wargaming stuff, yet we only tend to skim it in the West (lack of  reading material in English is probably the culprit). I hope its a bit like chinese cinema; ten or fifteen years ago it was only really noticed by enthusiasts, now they produce some great epics which hit the main ciinemas here.

Almost totally down to the scarce books on the subject is the lack of interest in the Imjin war, with all the Samurai armies there are out there, you'd think people would be clamouring for opponents that weren't other samurai.
Desperate seiges, Korean monks, multi- rocket launchers, chinese artillery, turttle ships; what's not to like?!

Quote from: clibinarium on 10 October 2010, 11:54:19 AM
The popularity of periods often reflects their importance, e.g. Napoleonics and WWII, but they also have to have decent sources available in English (for anglophones at least). They have to present something "gameable" some wars aren't best suited to this; WWI for example (not that its ungameable, its not as dynamic as its sequel). Interesting armies help, as do those with at least a chance of winning.

I myself like the slightly more obscure side of things, or less familiar spins on mainstream stuff. I've always been into LoA, but that's only really become more noticed in the last few years.
Sometimes I am baffled by a lack of interest in facinating periods. Chinese history is a great big goldmine of wargaming stuff, yet we only tend to skim it in the West (lack of  reading material in English is probably the culprit). I hope its a bit like chinese cinema; ten or fifteen years ago it was only really noticed by enthusiasts, now they produce some great epics which hit the main ciinemas here.

Almost totally down to the scarce books on the subject is the lack of interest in the Imjin war, with all the Samurai armies there are out there, you'd think people would be clamouring for opponents that weren't other samurai.
Desperate seiges, Korean monks, multi- rocket launchers, chinese artillery, turttle ships; what's not to like?!

Now there's a post that's bound to pique peoples interest. Maybe the Ancient Chinese wars will become more popular when computer game developers discover them as a source of plots and eye candy. I have been an active player of the Total War computer games for many years, starting with Shogun Total War, a brilliant game by the standard of 1998. I believe Shogun TW played an important role in popularising samurai culture and history. TW fans have been clamouring ever since for a China Total War game. Let's hope it happens. I will probably never play it (or Chinese tabletop wargames) but I can see why it fascinates people.

Cheers,
Aart