AAR Styles

[Recky]

I had a quick search, and couldn't find anything on this - if I've missed it, then please feel free to beat me over the head with the nearest blunt instrument .

Something I've noticed when looking through these AARs is that there are so many different styles people use. From what I've seen, some of these sytles are:[list=1][*]Yanking the contents of the history from the save file & posting, unedited.[*]Yanking the contents of the history from the save file & posting, edited.[*]An account narrated by the chief character.[*]Diary.[*]Describing the events as if they were part of a history book.[/list=1]
All the above are perfectly valid, and it is of course said that variety is the spice of life, but is there any single style which you (yes, you) prefer to read? Do you like to see piccies, or are they invariably just a waste of bandwidth? Do you want detailed AARs. complete with exact dates, numbers of casualties and named treaties (eg "On 25th August 1419 we sign the Peace of Courland, gaining the provinces of Wielkopolska, Masovia & Kustrin; a just reward for the sacrifice of 259,046 of our sons on the field of battle"), or do you like things to be a little more general (eg "August sees Poland on the receiving end of another defeat, losing Wielkopolska, Masovia & Kustrin")?

Over to you .

[EaglenDC]

My preference is to see the account seen through the eyes of the central character. Providing some details helps, but is not necessary. I guess that part would depend on how well the author is able to keep track of such things.

[Lord Durham]

warspite conducted a similar exercise way back when on the EU I board and made it into a poll. I've taken the liberty of finding it and giving the thread a gentle 'bump' for those of you interested in seeing what methods earlier writers employed. You just have to jump over to EU I.

If I could add one:

6. Narration from multiple POV's (i.e. crude novelization)

[shawng1]

recky,

I prefer the more novel/narrative style AAR's to simple log AARs. I simply don't have the patience or care about what happens in the whole wide world outside the nation the AAR is supposed to be about. Just detail the major nations that are close to you, or REALLY significant events elsewhere.

As for screenies. They are great on an occasional basis to help you keep things organized. But they can't hide sloppy writing, IMHO.

What makes an AAR great is:

1) Good writing that gets you involved in the AAR and lets you know everything you need to know. Not necessarily every detail of everything that happened even to your nation, but enough to know WHY every major event happened the way it did.

2) Novel spins on what to do as the nation.

3) Good solid gameplay in accomplishing your goals.

Give me those, and the AAR will be at least a 4 star.

[Sharur]

Gotta add one more category:

7. RPG AAR: the finest of them all (in my opinion), because it involves the reader not just through great writing, but by allowing them to roleplay within the game. Kudos to warspite and Lord Durham for the best RPGs.

However, I view RPG aars as seperate from the rest, because they don't concentrate on a country, but on characters. So for the best non-RPG aar, I pretty much agree with Shawn's characteristics. Interestingly, his aar is one of the best at those I, too, have trouble reading logs, and would much rather focus on the nation at hand. If I don't know that Russia and Pskov have arranged a RM, well, so what? I also agree with him about screenshots. I love maps, and don't like to have to try and visualize all those provinces in my head. But good writing must accompany them. Kudos to Lord Durham in the screenshot category as well: not only does he provide screenshots from the game, but when describing battles, he often provides pictures of the battle layout, the troop movements, etc. Great stuff.

[Shaytana]

My favorite aar style consists of a main character narrating the whole affair, and letting his personality shine through, while saying something worth reading, be it wise or funny. Log AARs bore me due to the fact i can always play a hands-off game and voila there's a log aar. But on here I think log aars can be more succesfull than narrative rpgish ones, even if the rpgish ones are way more thoughtfull or interesting(imho). Probably The Glory of Dulkadir will be the last rpgish aar i do since it seems to me people are more interested in cold facts than personality.

[Sorcerer]

I like the narratives best, especially when accompanied by screenies. What makes an AAR great in my eyes is the mixture of history and gameplay. When you forget that the events described are just a result of gameplay, and you can imagine that everything told could have happened historically, that's AAR-writing at its best.
So I have to recommend shawng's AAr once more, it's a very good example for this. Of course, LD's narratives are jewels, too, but they even would fit in a softcover and stand on a bookshelf...

[Avocado Aguila]

I like my own AAR style - a Slideshow with comments !

Check the link on the bottom for an example.

Best regards,

Avocado

[Bismarck]

Well, I use a combination of history textbook and fictional quoting (what this famous writer said about the Scottish empire a hundred or more years after the events I am describing).

I am starting to get more into the scope of what an aar can be... but I'll never be able to do the same kinds of AAR's that Lord Durham does.

Frankly, I get bored reading my own game logs... and so it would be very unlikely that I'd read someone else's unedited ones. Maybe a tightly edited one would get my attention.

M

[Gaijin de Moscu]

I personally like all AAR styles, apart from the history logs.

I find it fascinating to see how the story unfolds in real time.

As to some comments about quality of writing... I don't agree. Many AARs are actually close to being masterful.

[Anibal]

I like AARs with not-to-long installments. If I see one with a huge chapter or something, I simply don't read it. I know I did those mistakes on the first installments of my portuguese AAR but, as I was starting on this AARt, I don't blame myself.

I love AARs with interaction between characters, but not too much characters. And like a good background history also.

[DanielMcCollum]

I am a personal fan of an AAR which reads like a history text, including qoutes from other famous personalities in that time line. On the negative side, I'm not a huge fan of 'comedy' AARs for some reason. From reading the qoutes on here, it appears that the history style seemes to be the least popular of those done here but *shrugs* its mine and I like it :P

[Alexandru H.]

I like Havard's Knight AAR.....it had two distinct styles, tied together briliantly, an historical overview and special narrative chapters with a chief character that gives life to special episodes like the Almeida death in the Rhodos siege....

The Great Game Redux is one of my favourites, because it had a superb background story, which was supported by the gameplay and the excellent storyline

[TreizeV]

I don't associate myself with any specific style. But as long as its creative and attention grabbing, its good, whether it be novel form, game form, history log form etc.

I'm planning an AOR soon (my first one), novel style, don't knock it till you tried it

[MrT]

Moved from the EU2 AAR forum. I wonder if our preferences have changed...?