I've gamed since very young and I like the play as much as the competition. I'm very competitive none the less. Even as often as I do win, and though I play hard to win, I certainly can't always win every game.
If we count when I learned to play chess I'd say I started gaming around 7. I'm not that good at chess but I still managed to drive away all the available opponents by winning against all comers at the time. Now of course, some of those 7 year olds can trounce me at Chess. Around age 13 (1969 give or take a bit) I was introduced to wargames by school friends and have enjoyed that since.
I'm a serious addict of games based on the Battle of the Bulge. I have at least 36-38 titles on the battle, and wouldn't be too hard to sell more to. At the moment, clearly my favorite is Ardennes '44 (GMT) for the principle reason it feels more correct than any other bulge title that can be played in a day.
My wargaming preference is WWII, 20th Century, Civil War & Napoleonic Wars. I prefer land battles over naval conflicts, though Fire in the Sky and Deluxe USN are favorites. My scale preference is operational. This varies from game to game.
There are a number of games in my list that are not in my Wargame preference. Anyone who thinks the genre specific delineation is so distinct you can exclude some genres completely is possibly incapable of compromise in other situations as well. All games in my house are for playing, not for collecting or on the expectation of discarding after the kids are of an 'age'. As you peruse my collection, remember even if I favor wargames, other titles are not being rated down out of spite.
There is generally some friction between non-wargaming, and the wargaming communities. Such needless frictions tend to be petty and judgmental on either side. It does seem somewhat silly for grown ups to argue about though.