After it came up in another thread, I thought it was worth starting a new one.  How does your personal connection to a conflict affect your desire to game it?

For instance, when we released the WWII Pacific and SCW ranges, we saw new customers/orders coming from Japan and Spain respectively, showing that people wanted to game something connected to their region.  Similarly with the AVBCW, is the popularity in being able to customise the game to your own location?  Or alternatively, does a personal connection stop you from gaming certain periods?

I've enjoyed working on the LoA in various scales, because of the Williamite war, which to me is a local subject, though I descend  from the loosing side. Commemoration of that conflict is still a live political issue where I am (when I was at school in the 90s it brought the place to the edge of chaos), but I've never been detered from the history because of cultural baggage, plus more importantly, the hats are cool.
Similarily I've  recently been working on the Irish armies of the 16th Century, and I've enjoyed that; the wars of Elizabeth and The O'Neill and others are really interesting, I think they should get more attention from gamers.
Both examples are not personal connections per se, they are too long ago, but they are immediate to me because their ressonnances are alive and kicking in the present day and would very quickly result in dispute (to put it mildly) if discussed publicly.

Not at all. For instance, despite living at various times in Brno and Bangkok, I have no interest in their armies, especially since 1) Hussites are virtually unbeatable; and 2) Thais are virtually unable to win.
   I resisted doing the Zulu wars for a long time while living in Durban too; when I was eventually lured into the period, I found it lots of fun in a sort of a Harry Flashman way, but have no desire to repeat it. For me it's about the tactical intesrest and the aesthetics; where I am is irrelevant.

Hmmmm ...... Good question Leon!

Certainly that does with VBCW as I've really enjoyed learning my local history and applying it to the game. Other than that I'm not sure. The only conflict I've had really had 'personal connection' with is the Falklands war - only reason I didn't get there was nearly losing my leg in a motorcycle accident (it put an end to any ideas of a military career) and yet I've had little desire to game it ..... Perhaps it's too close.

The main thing that influences my gaming choices are books and films that spark an interest and lead to further research and miniature purchases.

Cheers,

Kev

I've avoided conflicts I had experience in (Gulf, Bosnia and NI) but did do some comprehensive work on a CWC Balkans Conflict listings for Pete

Quote from: Squirrel on 11 March 2012, 08:12:24 AM
Hmmmm ...... Good question Leon!

Certainly that does with VBCW as I've really enjoyed learning my local history and applying it to the game. Other than that I'm not sure. The only conflict I've had really had 'personal connection' with is the Falklands war - only reason I didn't get there was nearly losing my leg in a motorcycle accident (it put an end to any ideas of a military career) and yet I've had little desire to game it ..... Perhaps it's too close.

It IS an excellent question.
Can't speak at all from personal experience...Only from 'heresay'.
So....Going off on a slight tangent.......
Heard an interesting discussion on the radio months (?) ago when (I believe) a new PS game came out regarding the conflict in Afghanistan. (A new Call of Duty ?)
One side of the argument was that it was completely tasteless and far too graphic....The other that it was pure escapism.
The two sides were both 'championed' by men who had served there.
The way the discussion came across, it sounded as though there would be serving members of the forces and their families that would find the game extremely offensive.....But they'd be outnumbered by serving soldiers who would actually play the game......It appeared as though  there were probably more  that wouldn't be too bothered one way or the other. (My interpretation of what was said.)

I guess is that it's completely down to how each individual feels....As the saying goes, one man's meat is another one's poison.
Should be a very interesting thread.

Cheers - Phil.

Difficult one this: Shropshire is where my heart is, hence i have ksli for wwi and wwii,but I live in Bedfordshire now! I have hms Duke of York for wwii, as Grandad was in charge of her post side secondary armament, but all not in ten millimeters scale!
otherwise my love of halflings comes from being a hairy footed food lover! FrancoPrussian because i got dragged along on a Timecast research trip to the 1870 battlefields and loved it!
May do 1982 because of Barrie from timecast being one of my oldest friends, and i have the airpower from Tumbling Dice already!

Quote from: Leon on 11 March 2012, 12:02:52 AM
How does your personal connection to a conflict affect your desire to game it?

For instance, when we released the WWII Pacific and SCW ranges, we saw new customers/orders coming from Japan and Spain respectively, showing that people wanted to game something connected to their region.

I definitely think it can have an effect on one's interest, depending on the game i suppose.  Tournament play for example, for me at least, will see me taking a competitive army (except if its French) irrespective of origin.

Other than that, my interest tends to be led by a wide variety of issues.  Personal connection is rarely one of them.

QuoteSimilarly with the AVBCW, is the popularity in being able to customise the game to your own location? 

This, interestingly is an exception - probably because the basic premise of the setting is that you SHOULD link it to your local area...i an my compatriots have certainly embraced that although not being a native to my current region, i have familiarity rather than personal investment...

QuoteOr alternatively, does a personal connection stop you from gaming certain periods?

No, but i can certainly see how it would.

'We forgive as we forget'.

In general i think there's likely to be discomfort or even possible hostility from certain quarters on gaming particularly more recent conflicts (Iraq, Afghanistan, IRA etc.)  I've recently been doing some Force on Force Afghan gaming.  Its definitely a good tactical game, but it does have an uncomfortable 'racist' element to it (the 'irregulars' re typically a faceless horde to be mown down by the heroic 'western' forces).  I certainly wouldn't put on a demonstration game at a convention, for fear of causing offence...

What I personally find distasteful is those WW2 gamers who are obsessed with the SS, I play WW2 but there are no SS in my German forces, too many atrocities committed to include them in a game.

Playing the SCW would not seem right either, as an ex-girlfriend and her family suffered under Franco. She once took me on a tour of her home town showing me bullet holes in the walls of the place she was hiding after an anti-Franco demo was broken up near the end of his reign. Throwing dice seems to trivialise things a bit.

In AVBCW which I also play, I do have BUF units, but here the fascists are not real, the atrocities were never committed, it is just a fantasy game.

Quote from: Techno on 11 March 2012, 09:46:03 AM
Heard an interesting discussion on the radio months (?) ago when (I believe) a new PS game came out regarding the conflict in Afghanistan. (A new Call of Duty ?)
One side of the argument was that it was completely tasteless and far too graphic....The other that it was pure escapism.
The two sides were both 'championed' by men who had served there.
The way the discussion came across, it sounded as though there would be serving members of the forces and their families that would find the game extremely offensive.....But they'd be outnumbered by serving soldiers who would actually play the game......It appeared as though  there were probably more  that wouldn't be too bothered one way or the other. (My interpretation of what was said.)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/us-soldier-shoots-16-afghan-civilians-including-nine-children-7559098.html

Perhaps it things like this they fear

An interesting comment with regards to atrocities Sandanista. All sides commited atrocities, some more, some less than the SS. It is only now that the Allied atrocities are being 'openly' talked about.

With regards to games, I just play any force or period that grabs my fancy. However, I would find it difficult to play the Japanese due to their history of war crimes, yet I will happily play Russians, some of whom had a very bad reputation to say the least.

Having had very little connection with the military (the school army cadet force was the limit of my experience) I would not say that I have any particular aversion to any conflict or army. My only reservation vis-a-vis bad taste is that I will never paint or use casualty markers. The provision of miniature dead bodies has always seemed to me to lift the experience out of the "game" and into something a little more grim. Eccentric? Possibly, but that's me. 

Good question indeed. Actually there's only one conflict with which I have tangible personal connections. However, I absolutely do not like WW2 wargaming, as I  #@?+' hate this topic and everything connected with it.
Concerning the rest: well, my grand-grandfather was wounded in Italy in 1917, but there's no urgent desire in me to replay the moment when an italian barrage turned his trench into a pile of smoking rubble. I'd rather go for the Eastern Front, because I like Slavic languages and I'm quite often in Poland and I have no connections to it.

Quote from: Techno on 11 March 2012, 09:46:03 AM
Heard an interesting discussion on the radio months (?) ago when (I believe) a new PS game came out regarding the conflict in Afghanistan. (A new Call of Duty ?)
One side of the argument was that it was completely tasteless and far too graphic....The other that it was pure escapism.
The two sides were both 'championed' by men who had served there.
The way the discussion came across, it sounded as though there would be serving members of the forces and their families that would find the game extremely offensive.....But they'd be outnumbered by serving soldiers who would actually play the game......It appeared as though  there were probably more  that wouldn't be too bothered one way or the other. (My interpretation of what was said.)

There was a post somewhere (I can't remember if it was on here or not), and I've also had email conversations with serving members of the forces who are actually gaming the same situations they are facing day in and day out.  It doesn't get more personal than that!

When I do do Canucks in Italy I will certainly do my uncle's regiment.

None at the moment, though.

"What I personally find distasteful is those WW2 gamers who are obsessed with the SS, I play WW2 but there are no SS in my German forces, too many atrocities committed to include them in a game."

These units are a part of history, and the atrocities commited by them should never be forgotten.  I have modelled a SS unit (12th SS) for BKCII because they were the "Big Enemy" my Countrymen faced in Normandy in '44 (I'm Canadian incedently).  If I were to start work on an Italian Front Canadian force it would be modelled on the Princess Pat's, my Dad's old Regt.

My interests are based pretty much on the academic side of things.  I game the eras that I have personally studied over the years.  I personally have not, thank God, had any direct connection to a world conflict.

Nah not me, I game whatever looks pretty 

My great uncle was in the US 1st ID, during the Bulge.  As a result, I've got US infantry and 12.SS as I've been able to pin down my uncles' company to a particular part of the overall battle.

I found all this out years after he passed away; I was at his funeral and saw the color guard, but he never talked about his experiences in the war, IFAIK.

As a second related project, I'm looking ahead to the 30 Years War in the coming months.  It's got a religious connection for me, but I won't go into that here. 

Quote from: GordonY on 12 March 2012, 08:18:02 AM
Nah not me, I game whatever looks pretty 

Yep - pretty much the same for me; I've got a few links - including some contemporary ones in-theatre - but nothing's got in the way of me gaming them...

@Leon: I've sent painted ultra-moderns out to a few guys I know in Iraq / 'stan who've used them to game with on their tours. There's a certain Major Fielder who knocks around here sometimes who's been known to pack figures for painting in his kitbag 

I've gamed some ancient games ... does this mean I'm really old?

Back to the original question: I've never felt the desire to re-create any operations I've been on, mainly because my gaming interests lie in more historical gaming such a Napoleonics, ACW, mid 19th Century. I do play and enjoy 20th century and modern games (the tribal leader Fizwallah was the last victim of US-NATO forces led by my brilliant military genius) but have used my military career mainly for military tourism (thanks Mr Taxpayer much appreciated) e.g. I was on an international exercise in Ukraine and used the opportunity to visit Sevastapol and the battlefield of Balaclava and of course have been to Normandy many times:
http://exmouthwargames.blogspot.com/2007/06/this-is-for-brett-lovely-lovely.html
http://exmouthwargames.blogspot.com/2007/06/d-day-6-june-2007.html
http://www.blitzkrieg-commander.com/Content/Gallery/default.aspx?Page=3