What do we enjoy about miniature wargaming?

I realised a couple of days ago that the release date for Warmachine and Hordes Mark 3 (June 29th) had managed to suddenly creep up on me. The third version of Privateer Press' flagship sister wargames had been announced back in April, and they've slowly been drip feeding out information about changes to the game over the past couple of months. I'm going to take the opportunity to reminisce  on my experience with Warmachine and Hordes Mark 2 and how this lead me to think about the different demographics within miniature wargaming.

I first started playing Hordes back in 2010 just as Mark 2 was releasing. I picked up a Legion of Everblight Battle Group, mostly because I quite liked the aesthetic of the warbeasts (this is my usual rule for any new game; pick the one I like the look of). I learned most of the rules and over the next few years managed to amass a fair amount of models; enough to play a reasonably large game (although that rarely happened). The game offered the most tactical depth found in any skirmish level game at the time; every model was important, every move was an exercise in precision, every attack and spell cast had to be timed perfectly. The smallest mistake could spell disaster.

Then an interesting thing happened. I discovered that my enjoyment of the game was inversely proportional to how many games I played; the more I learned, the more stressful the experience became. I was constantly trying to play as best I could; I wanted to avoid mistakes and play as efficiently as possible. This isn't to say that I won a lot of games, quite the contrary; I lost most of my games. Losing wasn't the catalyst for my lack of enjoyment however, it was the acknowledgement that this type of game simply wasn't clicking with me. This leads me into another trail of thought: Why do we play games?

Video gamers are traditionally grouped into three camps: casual, core and hardcore. It is difficult to make a direct approximation for traditional (analogue) games, especially wargames; they appeal to a number of different dispositions: competition, narrative and hobby (as well as others, but I shall distil it down to these three).

• Competition appeals to those with a desire to win, to be the best they can be at their chosen game and to prove play against opponents of similar calibre. 
• Narrative appeals to those who care about the world their game takes place in, the story that it tells and the characters and events found within, either in a historical or fictional context.
• Hobby appeals to those who enjoy building and painting miniatures; this either means they want to make their army personal and unique to them, or desire to assemble and paint their models to the highest standard. Again this can be found in both historical and fictional contexts.

These three aspects are not mutually exclusive; most gamers will fall somewhere in between the three whilst some will be found at the extremes. A dedicated competitive gamer will be found attending tournaments, building the most optimal list possible, will study the rules and will paint their miniatures to the minimum standard required, if at all. A dedicated narrative gamer is more akin to a role player; they will immerse themselves in the game's world, research it deeply and theme their miniatures to a very specific style. Dedicated hobbyists share a similar world to scale modellers; they will be found honing their craft to the highest degree, entering painting competitions or building beautiful terrain.

These demographics should not be thought of as static, an individual wargamer may find themselves concentrating on different aspects during different periods of their gaming lifetime. Thus it should be though of as more of a malleable spectrum.

So where do I currently fall on the spectrum? I would personally describe myself as 40% Hobby, 40% Narrative and 20% Competitive.

My favourite aspect of the wargaming hobby is researching and building new armies. I love picking up a new game and researching the different models available, the background therein, the types of armies you can build and attempt to put together something I will enjoy building. For a historical game this translates to researching and learning about the time period the game is set in, the key events and eventual historical outcome. My love of speculative fiction is great in this context; wargames are the best medium for exploring it. I'd go as far as to say all historical wargames are forms of speculative history.

The small 20% competitive component boils down to my appreciation of rules sets. I find great pleasure in learning and understanding game mechanics; to study the cogs and gears that make the wheels turn. This doesn't unfortunately translate into a desire to actually play any specific game for any length of time, as described above in my experience with Warmachine and Hordes. I like to know how the car works, not race it around the track.
 
With Warmachine & Hordes Mark 3 on the horizon, I'm sure I'll build a new army, paint it to my liking, read and understand the rules, but not play too many games.

I'd be interested to know where my fellow wargamers think they fit in the demographic triangle.

Let me know what you think.