In praise of loooong games

[ChrisBBB]

I usually play short 3- or 4-hour games. Here are some ruminations on the virtues of much longer-format games:

https://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.com/2022/01/in-praise-of-loooong-games.html

Along the way, AARs on:
- Battle of Tai'erzhuang, 1938
- Battle of Nagysallo, 1849
- modern naval fictional Chinese vs Indian action around the Nicobar Islands

[Elbows]

I like a mix of all lengths of games.  Sometimes I'm in the mood for several quick 45-minute skirmish games...other times I enjoy a decent 3-4 hour proper game.  I enjoy campaigns linking games, and I'd probably be fine with a larger game broken over a couple days ---- I find the main obstacle is simple; people.

People are either too busy, or don't share the motivation/passion on the same level as the people running it, etc.  I feel like finding someone who's on the same wavelength as you are...is the holy grail of gaming.

[FifteensAway]

"I feel like finding someone who's on the same wavelength as you are...is the holy grail of gaming."  Amen and hallelujah to that, brother. 

And the next best thing is someone who loves to paint figures but doesn't have any of their own to paint so offers to paint yours - gratis - and does a good enough job to keep you happy enough to keep him/her supplied with figures to paint!

Dreams are such wonderful places to spend a day.

30 years ago I often played in 5-6 hour games, almost monthly, sometimes twice a month.  Now I am lucky to get 4 games a year.  Time marches along its relentless road.  At least retirement beckons and I know several local gamers already retired. 

[ChrisBBB]

Wise words, comrades, thank you. Yes, time spent in the company of good friends on the same wavelength is wonderful and the hours fly by. Definitely a key ingredient of the HQGE! qv:
https://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-quest-for-high-quality-gaming.html

[Easy E]

I do love me an afternoon of gaming with friends, but lately that has been more RPG focused rather than wargame focused.   

There is something about a more leisurely paced game that really matches the "old school gamer buddy" ethos often highlighted in Rick Priestley and Jervis Johnson written games/articles. 

Club/pick-up games seem to lack this "attitude(?)" for lack of a better term.

[NotifyGrout]

I tend towards games that take two hours or less these days. It's rare when I feel like I have the time for a full afternoon of gaming, and even when I do, we usually want to try multiple games out that day.

I respect people at cons who can enjoy longer games- while I'm trying to sample as much as I can, they're dedicating several hours to one game.

[ChrisBBB]

Thanks for yet more interesting comments.

On RPGs: I do a bit of that too, and actually that's where I think a long session really can provide exponential levels of reward. If a gamemaster has written a rich and complex scenario that provides half a dozen of us with a full weekend of gaming - especially if it is building on previous related scenarios and involves characters that have developed over years or decades of play - that's hard to beat. A one-off evening session, wargame or RPG, really can't compare.

For a wargame of a single battle, though, I think I prefer it to fit in a single evening (under four hours) if possible. Perhaps that's because I am most interested in higher-level command decisions by generals, and games that distil a battle down to that length are best for highlighting that level of decision-making.

Consequently any game longer than that means incurring 'opportunity cost': if I have a choice of one long nine-hour game vs two or three 3- or 4-hour games, the latter meaning I get to make twice as many significant general's-level decisions, I'll take the short games, thanks.

It was back to short game business as usual last week
http://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.com/2022/01/back-in-bohemia-trautenau-1866.html
and again this week (AAR to follow).

Chris
Bloody Big BATTLES!
https://groups.io/g/bloodybigbattles
BBB on FB:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1412549408869331

[Elbows]

I think a big part of that is people simply not adjusting the depth of the game to suit the bigger/longer battles.  Games themselves don't just magically get better if they become larger.  Many games are simply not designed to be played at 2-3x the size of their "normal" size.

A game frequently does not become more interesting because more toy soldiers are placed on the table.  Doing the same dice rolling...just more of it doesn't translate into a more "epic" experience.

That's where a game master or scenario design really need to come in.  You want to play a "massive" game for Generic Game X...then there better be a lot more involved.  Reinforcements arriving unexpected, a change in the scenario mid-game, perhaps an evolving story line.  You may want a table with more differing "action areas".  Scenario objectives may need to be involved with bringing on more units (vs. all of them starting on the table), etc.  There should always be a developing story or risk/reward that is keeping the players interested. 

Also, people seldom remember to take a break.  If you're going to run 6-8 hours of a game...take a break in the middle.  Go grab a beer and lunch and just take a load off.  It helps prevent burn-out.  It's much easier to play two 4 hour sessions with a break for chat and grub in the middle than pretending you're on an endurance marathon.

[Codsticker]

Also, people seldom remember to take a break.  If you're going to run 6-8 hours of a game...take a break in the middle.  Go grab a beer and lunch and just take a load off.  It helps prevent burn-out.  It's much easier to play two 4 hour sessions with a break for chat and grub in the middle than pretending you're on an endurance marathon.

100% agree here.

[Golgotha]

It does often surprise my how, myself included, most wargamers will happily paint for hours on end but then when it comes to a game want it over very quickly...

But as many have already pointed out it depends some longer games can be good but finding the time is a very real difficulty in this day and age especially with work, family and other commitments.

If I could I would game for hours every day but alas this is not possible.

[NotifyGrout]

It does often surprise my how, myself included, most wargamers will happily paint for hours on end but then when it comes to a game want it over very quickly...

But as many have already pointed out it depends some longer games can be good but finding the time is a very real difficulty in this day and age especially with work, family and other commitments.

If I could I would game for hours every day but alas this is not possible.

I would play a few times per week if I had the option, but it'd be a bunch of different games.

I have respect for people who can play long games, or can just focus on one to the exclusion of others. I don't have the attention span (I'm very much a "play all the games" type).

If a game runs too long I usually start thinking about what to play next 

[Daeothar]

The past eight or so years, I've almost exclusively played skirmish games that play in a couple of hours. Our problem is that we never seem to be able to play a game through in the time as stated by the manufacturer!

A wargame marketed as being playable in two hours? We do it in three and a half (at least)! A skirmish game that can be finished within half an hour? We need at least two hours. We tried to identify this; yes, we chat a lot during game play. We often require looking up a rule here and there, but we don't get sidetracked to the degree that we are totally out of it.

It made us wonder how the creators envisage people playing their games. Because when you set up like a mad man, don't speak unless required for the game, take no time to think your moves through and know all the rules by heart, yes; you'd probably be able to finish a game within the stated timeframe.

But games are... (wait for it) meant to be fun. They're games after all! And games, at least in my neck of the woods, are meant to be enjoyed, which means interaction with the opponent; friendly banter, rules discussion, joking around, and no time pressure!

It's one of the main reasons I stopped going to GW's grand Tournaments (or any tournament for that matter). Because those meant 2 days of non-stop gaming. 4 games a day, each with a time limit, and a short break in the middle for lunch.

It was exhausting. In the end, I had lower back pains from bending over the (too low) tables, my voice was hoarse from talking louder than usual over the constant (battle)din and the dry air, and my head hurt because of the above and the constant concentration required. Not to mention the frequent friction with fanatical knife-on-the-table type of players (and even cheaters!).

Such fun...

To be fair; it certainly sounds enticing; an entire weekend of gaming, surrounded by likeminded people, playing with miniatures. But the reality was that it was quite the slog, especially towards the end of the first day. The second day, I usually started in the bottom half of the field, and people were a lot more relaxed, (and also tired). The most enjoyable games during those tournaments were inevitably the ones on day two that didn't get all the way to turn six within the alotted time, because we were discussing modeling and armies and fluff or even the weather...

This carried over to how I see playing games at home with mates as well. We no longer play Apocalypse type games (or 40K at all, for that matter), because those tended to take all day. We often gamed those from the morning into the evening. And even though I always enjoyed those long games (because we only were able to once or twice a year), I don't know if I would today.

Why? Well, time restraint is as good an excuse as any. Having a (functional) family life really takes up a lot of the time left over after a full-time job. Add in other leasure activities such as sports, other hobbies and of course painting and modeling, plus a social life outside the gaming circle, and there's precious little time left to actually game.

So when we do get to it, it needs to be fast and furious; it's a weekday after all, and you need to get to work on time the next morning. So better make this a quick couple of hours game, to fit into the schedule.

I find it's a sentiment we see all around. Not just in gaming, but everywhere in modern society. It might just be me getting old, and the world moving faster than I was used to, but I do think there is a noticable trend there.

Everything needs to be consumable in ever decreasing chunks. Take a look at entities like Tiktok, basically taking already bite-sized Youtube content and making it even shorter. And it's not that I blame Millennials or Gen-Z's for this; I, as a typical Gen-Xer am just as much grabbed by this phenomenon as they are, and I'm certain that I'm not the only one.

And the entire trend of smaller, shorter games very likely ties into this same race towards ever decreasing content size, to cater to ever decreasing attention spans. Get them before they butterfly off to the next shiny thing (something we as miniature hobbyists have long been very familiar with of course ).

So yeah; I suppose I need a conclusion now.

Well, let it be this then; even though the trend is to move to ever decreasing game sizes, parallel to what's happening to entertainment in the outside world, we might do well to sometimes ponder about why we are no longer able to play the longer games we did decades ago. Maybe we should, even if it's just for old times sake, every once and a while plan the time to actually play a longer day-long game. Just make sure that the enjoyment factor is there. It should not be a race to finish this massive game (because they're waiting at home with dinner), but rather perhaps playing a (what used to be) standard game, with lots of extra time to spend outside of the actual moving lead and rolling dice. You know; enjoying the game...

[Easy E]

TL,DR....   


Just kidding.  I think you make a good point about other entertainment time spans also getting shorter.  The exception of course being movies!  They keep getting longer! 

Perhaps, a counter-gaming culture will begin as a blowback to short, quick tourney/pick-up style games as the demographics of a persons standard play group also changes? 

[Daeothar]

TL,DR....   

Case in point 

I figured a thread about TLDP games, needed at least a TLDR post, right? 

I think you're right about countermovements; one usually crops up eventually. But I also think that in this case, it'll be a very niche affair, since most of us have been spoilt rotten by all manner of shorter games and won't be looking back.

A mate of mine has been really drawn to napoleonics for years now, but has been put off by the sheer amount of work involved in building the required armies, but I'm sure that the fact that typical nappy games take whole weekends to complete has something to do with this as well.  Enter Sharpe Practice, or even Silver Bayonet, and that itch can now be scratched more comfortably and (more importantly) faster.

The time when skirmish games were a gateway to the 'real' games is well and truly over; they've become their own entity. In a way, I find that lamentable, but on the other hand; they at least keep me gaming (and thus give me a reason to paint)...

[ChrisBBB]

Really good discussion, thanks, chaps! Your thoughtful comments have provoked me to further musings, this time on how much it matters if we don't finish the game. New LAF thread here:
https://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=135562.0
New blog post here:
https://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.com/2022/02/at-that-point-we-called-it-who-cares-if.html