On battle reports and the appreciation thereof.

On battle reports and the appreciation thereof.


I don't know about other people out there in the wargameblogging world but one of the great pleasures for me in following other people's blogs is being able to see when they've posted a battle report, and then being able to read it.

I will read pretty much any battle report that I see. I'm not really much of a sci-fi man, but I'll even read sci-fi reports on occasion, which might give you some idea of how much I enjoy themand appreciate the effort that goes into making them.

I enjoy them for many reasons. It might be a good story, it might be lovely figures and / or terrain, it might be written in a stylethat grabs me, it mightuse a rules set I play or am interested in, it mightexplore a period I know, or a period that is new to me. It might be that I like the blogger personally (or as well as you can virtually) andam glad to see them writing; it could be for anynumber of other reasons I have not yethadoccasion to think of.

But one thingthat I do not likeis any attempt to prescribe a formatthat battle reports must follow. Therehave beena couple of articles posted on various sites over the years -most recently on theminiaturespage.com* -about what the authors expect from a battle report and I must say that while I respect their right to a point of view I don't think that what one fellow likesneeds to be turned into a list of commandments for others to follow.

It's hard enough to write a battle report as it is withoutsomeone creatinga list of things that are supposed to be ticked off before a battle reportcandeserve the name. You put a bit of yourself into any report youwrite, and I think that needs to beappreciated and respected. It's all very well for someone with 100 followers and lots of mates down at the club tofeel that they have a handle onwhat a report should be, but they don't have a mortgage on it, and everyone with100 followers starts outatzero, and that can be a daunting place tobe. Why make it harder?

Wargaming is a big hobby and there is room for all of us. I would not like to see the wonderful variety of individual approaches to after action reports being stilted by some kind of imaginary consensuson what makes a 'good' or 'bad' report.

So, write what you like, enjoy writing it, don't follow anyone else's idea of what a report should or should not be, and don't be afraid to share what you've written. If people don't like it they'll stop reading; if they do like it they'll carry on and, if you're lucky, leave a comment telling you so. Either way,all that really matters is that you've enjoyed yourself in the process.

*Edit: the chap on TMP has since said that he was not intending to lay down any hard and fast rules and was only saying what he likes to see in a report.I may therefore have been wrong in my impression he was being prescriptive.