More players

[martin goddard]

I thought I would start a discussion about the hobby of historical miniature gaming. I am excluding talk gaming, card games and boardgames. They are all  really great, but not my focus here. Just historical miniatures.

Whatever we chat about here will make  only a small difference, but we can still do our bit. Not many of us have the time or inclination to go around groups and show the hobby off.

How do we get more players? More includes retaining those already playing.

Some thoughts on why the historical miniatures games are declining (if they are).

1. Fantasy is much easier to understand. The gamebook/film tells you all you need to know. No arguments or interpretations. Orcs are horrible.

2. Building an historical army takes more time to paint than a small group of figures.

3. Scenery takes effort and is often restricted to particular wars/campaigns.
Crusaders, Eastern front.

4. Historical armies cost more money.

5. Fewer compatible opponents for historicals. So many rules and sizes.

6. Abundance of game types encourages frequent game switching.

7. The players who do this hobby section are ageing.



Your thoughts


martin

[Nick]

I think points 4 and 7 are the big issues there Martin.
Compared to board games, or even computer games, this is a more expensive hobby.

Nick

[Moggy]

I think a big element here is that history isn't a subject that is taught well in schools.  They are taught to pass an exam rather than taught the subject. At best its a surface skim at its worst a fabrication to suit a specific fad or agenda. (yes, I have had experience of this with what was taught to my niece about Dunkirk - my grandfather was a BEF evacuee).

If you don't grab their attention and attract to them to history early you will rarely grab their interest in the hobby.

Derek

[Sean Clark]

Reports from Salute were that there were plenty of younger folk there to balance out all of the grey heads of hair.

For those into Game Workshop games, they most certainly aren't cheaper. A single army can cost £400+. But you tend to only buy one, and then play in a shop where the terrain is provided against someone else who has spent £400 on their army.

Bolt Action is huge at my club with around 15 players of all ages. Their armies tend to be cheaper, but still around £200 if buying new. There is a flourishing second hand market where armies can be bought much cheaper.

Scenery is interesting. Years ago I don't think we fussed too much about what period a house was from. Now though I have specific scenery for most of my Peter Pig games. They are lovely but cost money, take time to paint and take valuable storage space. My choice, but a factor to consider.

How we grow the hobby beyond what we do already is a conundrum. Magazine articles are less influential  I think these days. Open days and game days at Entoyment certainly give wider exposure to the hobby, but I don't have any figures for how many people are recruited into historical gaming as a result.

[Bankinista]

Re Cost:

I believe that one of the relevant issues here is that when it comes to Games Workshop stuff the purchasers aren't always the players. If mum or dad has been begged for a Goodjemaflip in plate armour with a vibrosword they will often buy it for young Timmy just to shut him up/show they understand etc. The fact that this is £3 for just one figure is almost irrelevant. The purchaser doesn't know anything about the cost of wargames figures. How many members of this group could give detail on the cost of make-up foundation creams?

The approch to such players will need to be different.

Derek of Cambridge.

[Leman (Andy)]

Ooh, you cheeky sausage! My make-up costs an absolute fortune.

[martin goddard]

Maybe those that really want to miniature game will, but they are a small part of the overall "might" be persuaded play?

martin

[SimonC]

I often have this conversation with my kids and peers, who are all late teens and early twenties. One common theme, is that they are not interested in History at all, and generally have negative view of how history is presented. There is also a limit of exposure - by Historical, they mean Warlord Games (nothing else really exists)

its definately not cost. I think the idea of 'young Timmy' is not really the main spending group. These are young adults with - what seems - large amounts of disposable income. Its not unusual for these folks to spend hundreds on hobby each month.

In the past 10 years , just local to me there are many GW clubs dwarfing the old Historical clubs. The amount of GW tournament is on a different scale. If you were so inclined you could go to a GW event with over 100 competitors every week. London GT and LVO have between 5-700 competitors.

I think the idea that GW gamers migrating to Historical as they get older is a bit naïve. I think if you ask the GW gamers they would expect historical gamers to move to GW hobby as its a better/safer space.

just my experience.

[Forst22]

Our club was badly hit by covid, many members stopped coming.

Since then we have tried to recruit more and we are starting to recover. Most are returnees to the hobby, children are now grown up and they have more time and want to get back to gaming again. Several bring along their children in their early twenties, so there is still some interest at that level. We only have one under 18 who comes with his granddad!

We are about the only one in the area which meets every other sunday, so have time for big battles. Most of the others are evenings, so limited to small battles which are mainly games workshop type.

[JohnWyatt]

Some random pessimistic thoughts:

The problem with history is that there is just too much of it.

In historical gaming terms, this translates to a hobby which is too large and too diffuse for the number of people who practise it. I wouldn't like to speculate how many sets of rules I have tried over the years, but each set has had a small group of fanatical supporters and probably a similar group who despised it. Largely it's been a case of how well the result produced by the mechanics related to the consumer's vision of what running a historical battle should feel like.

GW have been very clever in creating a product which is simple enough at its core to draw people in, and has enough internal consistency to keep people coming back, while continuing to expand and evolve in order to encourage additional purchases. Kind of like a videogame franchise which can produce endless variations on basically the same concept and/or game engine. But it's interesting that even GW pulled back from its "specialist games" line suggesting that diversity may not be the best commercial approach.

Wargaming doesn't have the same luxury of concentrating on a limited product range - too many people have skin in the game (and there are too many divergent opinions on the balance between historical validity and playability).

I suspect historical wargaming will carry on much as it has done for the last few years - a few new people will drift into it more or less by accident, but it will remain a minority interest.

[Sean Clark]

I suspect this has been the case with historical gaming since the 1960's. Its difficult to put a finger on why any one person is drawn to it over and other hobby. I think it's a definite  case of nature over nurture.

As Simon says, GW is just a different beast altogether.  They are a multi billion pound industry that shows no signs of slowing down. As large as the tournaments are each week, there are likely to be many times more people playing in garages, lofts and basements the world over who aren't visible.

Regarding history and the young, my daughter has just chosen history as one of her GCSE options. She was reluctant because she has been told its one of the toughest in respect of workload. But she seems to have an aptitude for it, and more importantly enjoys it. I still can't get her to sit and watch Glory with me though 😂

[Panzer21]

I think the ageing and/or decline in historical gaming is due to the backgrounds of potential players.

There is a generation for whom "gaming" means X-box / PlayStation or PC. They may have flirted with GW but were less keen on the modelling and painting.

Then there are the GW generation - entered the hobby via that route, often pre- electronic games. Experience of painting etc, but also used to GW style games. May have some historical interests.

The smallest category are those introduced to historical wargames by family or other adults.

All can drift away due to work, young family, education etc.

We saw many return to the hobby during lockdown - or at least the painting / modelling side.
Many return when work settles or family grow up.

Little wonder we see many of the GW generation return via Warlord games / rules. Even sticking together plastic figures is familiar.

I do think it will be harder to bring in the computer generation gamers - some will, but building an army is a commitment that will deter many.

Neil

[Ben Waterhouse]

My first foray into club games and wargaming itself, was finding an advert for a local group that said come along, new members welcome. I turned up a beautiful ancients game was being played by six people, I was ignored all evening. I was 13 and it was in 1973..

[Colonel Kilgore]

So, despite that inauspicious start, what brought you back to the hobby, Ben?

Simon

[JohnWyatt]

I turned up a beautiful ancients game was being played by six people, I was ignored all evening. I was 13 and it was in 1973

Same here, except it was the late 1970s and I was already interested... or rather, I had already made my first tentative steps into the hobby (using Donald Featherstone's World War 2 rules and Airfix figures, both derided by older hands as "lacking sophistication").

Demonstration games at shows have often left me feeling slightly uncomfortable; often feels as if the players have turned up for their own benefit, which is fine but it does mean that waverers can be put off. To attract new people (assuming you can get them through the door in the first place) it may be that something slightly less elaborate is required. For me, the ideal show game would be something that includes:

• Just enough scenery and models to look good.
• A rules summary that fits on a single sheet of paper.
• A game that can be played to a conclusion within half an hour.
• Friendly people on hand to explain the game and, if necessary, be a kindly opponent.
• Maybe a small prize for the winner? A figure or something.
• Supported by a discounted starter pack containing rules, figures and maybe other bits to re-create (even if in a simplified fashion) what has just been played on the table.

That doesn't address the issue of potential recruits who won't, or can't, attend shows. I suspect technology may hold part of the key, but leveraging it may be more difficult. If the issue is the complexity of the rules, it should be possible to create an app to manage some aspects of the game. Whether the result strays too far from miniatures gaming is anyone's guess.