The Blogging Effect on Battle Reports

Yes, the Palouse Wargaming Journal reaches "Lucky" 13 years on the blogging front.  For stats, PWJ is up to 335 Followers (a number that rarely changes), 1,808 Posts, and 56,964 Comments.  For me, these anniversaries often bring up a time of reflection on what has passed before.  

The blogging landscape has seen change over these past thirteen years.  When PWJ began in late 2012, the wargame blogging community was already in full bloom and quite active.  I likely arrived late to the party and, perhaps, unfashionably so.  Still, I pressed on even as trends began to show a shift from blogging to other forms of social media.  Over these thirteen years, wargaming blogs came and went with the balance tipping in favor of those leaving the platform.  After thirteen years, I continue to press on.  How much longer?  Well, that is a good question to occasionally ask myself.

These reflections often bring up a number of lingering questions that regularly circulate through my mind.  One rumination (of many) on this anniversary brought me back to the post I wrote more than two years ago on how battle reports are read (see Reporting from the Front: How are Battle Reports Read). 

Blogging our individual, wargaming journeys can enrich the hobby by documenting research, painting progress, and battle reports, providing community feedback and camaraderie.  Battle reporting, while only one facet of wargame blogs, has become a significant weapon in the blogging arsenal.  For the PWJ, battle reporting focus can be quantified by the number (and frequency) of battle reports chronicled here.  Yet, as I remarked in my post in the link above, "Almost always, the chronicling of the battle report takes longer than actually playing the game".  This raises potentially troubling questions about priorities: are we playing games to enjoy them, or to create content?  Prioritization takes on added importance when many self-confessing readers simply skim or entirely skip a featured battle report.

When the creation of content becomes more time-consuming than the activity itself, we must question whether the tail is wagging the dog.  For some bloggers, playing may feel more like a chore or performance rather than a rich narrative journey.  On one hand, sharing battle reports and game narratives online expands the hobby’s community and can provide motivation for getting figures to the table.  On the other hand, some might argue this sharing encourages a "sound bite" culture, where quick posts, highlights, and visual snapshots overshadow deep engagement and storytelling.  

Does the desire to chronicle our games diminish the lived experience of playing by encouraging players to focus more on photo-ready moments and quick, digestible content rather than deep, immersive play?  Does the pressure to document and share experiences fundamentally alter how we approach gaming?  Are we optimizing battle reports for easily digestible sound bites and visual moments geared toward online consumption rather than personal enjoyment and narrative development? 

This shift toward brevity may reflect broader changes in human attention patterns.  Blogging and social media have played a role in this evolution.  The desire to frequently post crisp and brief highlights may overshadow the contemplation in immersive play and narrative building.  In effect, the attention span of even committed and engaged readers may be shortened unintentionally.  Nonetheless, a number of blogs I regularly visit emphasize detailed battle reports and nuanced storytelling, suggesting that the value placed on the journey is still alive, at least among certain circles.  Personally, this journey value is especially true for those hosting a game wherein players have the flexibility to concentrate on strategy and tactics while the umpire handles the mechanisms of game play, adjudication, and the writing of an unbiased battle account.