NinthMusketeer wrote: ...Understand that in US culture the sentiment is often the opposite--the goal is to win, the only way to have fun is to be winning, and losing reflects badly not just on you as a player but you as a person. Now this isn't some mantra chanted by the crowds, but it is a very broad and very consistent subtext across almost everything that can be defined as competitive.
I don't think that's the case. Even in very competitive environments I find players who try and help each other play better; some of the most positive experiences I've had playing Warmachine were with opponents who stomped me into the dust and talked me through what was going on and how to do better in the future during/after the game.
BUT, I still stand by the fact that Themes do help for focusing an army's build through that Theme and do it better than what we had before. While not quite as characterful as the Mk 2 Themes, they are now more consistent across the Themes.
The main issue is just that they made too many themes that stretched the game thin, both in the sense that too many of them didn't have enough options to be a fleshed out army without spamming one unit and that they just have more than they can effectively manage. The latter issue is probably the one that really demands consolidation. I think getting everyone down to 3-4 tops would go a long way towards finding a middle ground where we can have the benefits themes provide while being easier for both PP and players to manage.
For example, Khador has 7 themes curently? It would be pretty easy to reduce that to 4:
Winter Guard Kommand+Jaws of the Wolf
Legion of Steel+Warriors of the Old Faith
Armored Korps
Wolves of Winter+Flames in the Darkness
BUT, I still stand by the fact that Themes do help for focusing an army's build through that Theme and do it better than what we had before. While not quite as characterful as the Mk 2 Themes, they are now more consistent across the Themes.
The main issue is just that they made too many themes that stretched the game thin, both in the sense that too many of them didn't have enough options to be a fleshed out army without spamming one unit and that they just have more than they can effectively manage. The latter issue is probably the one that really demands consolidation. I think getting everyone down to 3-4 tops would go a long way towards finding a middle ground where we can have the benefits themes provide while being easier for both PP and players to manage.
For example, Khador has 7 themes curently? It would be pretty easy to reduce that to 4:
Winter Guard Kommand+Jaws of the Wolf
Legion of Steel+Warriors of the Old Faith
Armored Korps
Wolves of Winter+Flames in the Darkness
You can't actually merge Warriors or Flames with anything, they're theme forces available to multiple factions. I think you could pretty reasonably merge WGK and Armored Korps and Legion with Jaws though. Wolves is pretty hard to justify merging with anything.
BUT, I still stand by the fact that Themes do help for focusing an army's build through that Theme and do it better than what we had before. While not quite as characterful as the Mk 2 Themes, they are now more consistent across the Themes.
The main issue is just that they made too many themes that stretched the game thin, both in the sense that too many of them didn't have enough options to be a fleshed out army without spamming one unit and that they just have more than they can effectively manage. The latter issue is probably the one that really demands consolidation. I think getting everyone down to 3-4 tops would go a long way towards finding a middle ground where we can have the benefits themes provide while being easier for both PP and players to manage.
For example, Khador has 7 themes curently? It would be pretty easy to reduce that to 4:
Winter Guard Kommand+Jaws of the Wolf
Legion of Steel+Warriors of the Old Faith
Armored Korps
Wolves of Winter+Flames in the Darkness
You can't actually merge Warriors or Flames with anything, they're theme forces available to multiple factions. I think you could pretty reasonably merge WGK and Armored Korps and Legion with Jaws though. Wolves is pretty hard to justify merging with anything.
Sure you could. Add Iron Fang to Warriors and cut Legion of Steel. Likewise, I'd probably say remove Flames from Khador but incorporate the Mercenary elements of it into Wolves.
BUT, I still stand by the fact that Themes do help for focusing an army's build through that Theme and do it better than what we had before. While not quite as characterful as the Mk 2 Themes, they are now more consistent across the Themes.
The main issue is just that they made too many themes that stretched the game thin, both in the sense that too many of them didn't have enough options to be a fleshed out army without spamming one unit and that they just have more than they can effectively manage. The latter issue is probably the one that really demands consolidation. I think getting everyone down to 3-4 tops would go a long way towards finding a middle ground where we can have the benefits themes provide while being easier for both PP and players to manage.
For example, Khador has 7 themes curently? It would be pretty easy to reduce that to 4:
Winter Guard Kommand+Jaws of the Wolf
Legion of Steel+Warriors of the Old Faith
Armored Korps
Wolves of Winter+Flames in the Darkness
You can't actually merge Warriors or Flames with anything, they're theme forces available to multiple factions. I think you could pretty reasonably merge WGK and Armored Korps and Legion with Jaws though. Wolves is pretty hard to justify merging with anything.
Sure you could. Add Iron Fang to Warriors and cut Legion of Steel. Likewise, I'd probably say remove Flames from Khador but incorporate the Mercenary elements of it into Wolves.
Aside from the fact that iron fangs make no sense at all in warriors, you'd then have to test them in both factions extensively. Removing a theme force from a faction is a highly dangerous thing to do short of making an entirely new edition, and honostly the morrowan and thamarite priests and church working with the insane depraved inmates chained to orgothian relics doesn't work either.
I think you're understating 1) how much balance testing would be required to make this okay and 2) how big of a no go this would be from a lore perspective.
Warriors already has Iron Fangs. Specifically the ones on horses, but Iron Fangs. It would make more sense to add Pikemen than it does having Fenris and arguably the Drakkun in there. Iron Fangs really have zero chance of breaking Warriors. That theme is completely dominated by Menoth options (it's my #1 Khador list) and pikemen are kind of terrible. Nothing lore wise stopping it either really, not to mention the lore was created for the theme (though admitted Vlad, Champion of Menoth is a very long standing aspect of the game).
Flames is a lot weaker of an argument, I just find its Khador implementation redundant and kind of tacked on. I'd rather it just be Cygnar/Mercs and let them play with Zerkova for all it matters.
And yes, consolidating theme forces doesn't "just happen"; I just think it "should happen". There's way too many of them for PP to manage. It's not some precarious balance in place; there's just like maybe 10 across the whole game that see play the rest are hoping they might get a CID in the next 5 years to see play.
BUT, I still stand by the fact that Themes do help for focusing an army's build through that Theme and do it better than what we had before. While not quite as characterful as the Mk 2 Themes, they are now more consistent across the Themes.
The main issue is just that they made too many themes that stretched the game thin, both in the sense that too many of them didn't have enough options to be a fleshed out army without spamming one unit and that they just have more than they can effectively manage. The latter issue is probably the one that really demands consolidation. I think getting everyone down to 3-4 tops would go a long way towards finding a middle ground where we can have the benefits themes provide while being easier for both PP and players to manage.
Well they used to before Oblivion came about. With Oblivion came the cross-faction Themes. If you cut out those, you have most of what you're asking for. Keep in mind that one of my armies was Skorne. They have a Theme that only can take 2 units, one of which is the ubiquitous Beast Handlers (who are kind of needed everywhere due to how the Warbeasts are set up). The only thing to change with that Theme has been the addition of 2 Warlocks to the faction and a Battle Engine, and yet it is now the strongest Theme for Skorne.
LunarSol wrote: For example, Khador has 7 themes curently? It would be pretty easy to reduce that to 4:
Winter Guard Kommand+Jaws of the Wolf
Legion of Steel+Warriors of the Old Faith
Armored Korps
Wolves of Winter+Flames in the Darkness
Cut out the cross-faction Themes and how many do you have?
For my Mercenaries, I have NINE Themes to work with. NONE of them allow all of the Warcasters in the "faction" and all of them have a limited list to use. Mercenaries also have 3 different types of Warcasters who cannot use the other types of Warjacks or Monstrosities. Of the 9 Themes, 4 include units from other factions (2 of which are classic), and 2 of those stop being Mercenary Themes if another non-Mercenary Warcaster is put in charge of it. And I haven't even started talking about how much Riot Quest has been affecting these Themes.
So if you want to talk about confusing the customer, Khador is easy mode by comparison.
But even with all that, I can still pick a Theme, and have my shopping list taken from EVERYTHING down to a small list that is much more focused in what it does. Could the Themes be paired down, especially the cross-faction Oblivion Themes? Maybe, but as a Mercenary player I find the concepts fun.
The other theme that needs to be cut for everyone is the Jack/Warbeast theme. Those all made sense back when you needed to put points into specific things, but now they're largely redundant and capable of being removed as far as I'm concerned.
Mercenaries are a bit of a special case of course, since they've always been the "limited faction faction" since before PP decided to release limited factions. They're one of my favorites, but I think they could still use some trimming. Llael, Steelhead, Flames, Irregulars and Kingmakers have a LOT of overlap. Smushing them into one probably wouldn't work, but I bet it could be two easy enough. I also think it would have made a lot more sense had Strange Bedfellows crossed with Cephalyx, fwiw. Particularly since those two factions have sort of a yin/yang in the fluff.
And yes, I build a lot of Skorne armies for a friend and as cool as Immortals are, I wish it wasn't just.... take immortals and Guardians go.
LunarSol wrote: The other theme that needs to be cut for everyone is the Jack/Warbeast theme. Those all made sense back when you needed to put points into specific things, but now they're largely redundant and capable of being removed as far as I'm concerned.
Funnily enough, both Mercs and Skorne had theirs changed.
Irregulars was always a combined arms Theme, but it made it less punishing with the Requisition change. It still likes Jack Marshals a little too much, though.
Skorne lost theirs and it was shifted to Disciples of Agony, which became really interesting when their Warlocks could take Minion 'Beasts. It is still capable of being the Minion Theme for Skorne, though.
LunarSol wrote: Mercenaries are a bit of a special case of course, since they've always been the "limited faction faction" since before PP decided to release limited factions. They're one of my favorites, but I think they could still use some trimming. Llael, Steelhead, Flames, Irregulars and Kingmakers have a LOT of overlap. Smushing them into one probably wouldn't work, but I bet it could be two easy enough. I also think it would have made a lot more sense had Strange Bedfellows crossed with Cephalyx, fwiw. Particularly since those two factions have sort of a yin/yang in the fluff.
I was kind of surprised that Cryx could work in Bedfellows, but not Cephalyx. The real sad part is that most of Cephalyx just can't be used anywhere by their Operating Theater. I honestly think that they and the Rhuls would be better served by being converted to Limited Factions and let run.
Currently Soldiers and Kingmakers have the closest associations, as you can literally play the same list and only the Theme's benefits would really change. However, Trenchers is what makes it interesting, especially if you don't have a lot of Llael models for Resistance, and the ability for the Resistance to take Khadoran or Crucible units definitely makes it have an interesting flair.
Most of Irregulars overlap with any faction is the solos, though the Precursors are the only "common" unit it shares with any Merc Theme since Steelheads were taken out. As annoying as Irregulars losing the Steelheads is, it was the right call to make when Soldiers did the job of bringing Steelheads in and Kingmakers is still a possible (though not always the most effective) option.
I've just seen Death Archon and rules on PP website. What a disgusting, cynical piece of power-creep for cash :( I hope players will vote with their wallets against contaminating the game like this.
Cyel wrote: I've just seen Death Archon and rules on PP website. What a disgusting, cynical piece of power-creep for cash :( I hope players will vote with their wallets against contaminating the game like this.
Comp players will vote with their wallet and buy the FA for the Death Archon upon release....
Cyel wrote: I've just seen Death Archon and rules on PP website. What a disgusting, cynical piece of power-creep for cash :( I hope players will vote with their wallets against contaminating the game like this.
I'm reasonably certain the death archon is either the second or third worst of the bunch actually.
Cyel wrote: I've just seen Death Archon and rules on PP website. What a disgusting, cynical piece of power-creep for cash :( I hope players will vote with their wallets against contaminating the game like this.
I'm reasonably certain the death archon is either the second or third worst of the bunch actually.
I'm comparing it to solos I alrady own for PoM and Cryx - Darrag Wrathe (9pts), Tartarus (7pts), Gravus (8pts), Vilmon (6 pts). I don't compare it to Archons, as I haven't bought any - they are the epitome of disgusting powercreep that has been plaguing the game for some time and I have no intention of supporting or encouraging this process.
Honing my skills with a friend, can't wait to start doing Brawlmachine with Wartable support during the weekday and Brawl Machine on the tables at the hobby store.
hotsauceman1 wrote: What do we mean exactly by the social contract?
Not being a dick about the game or what?
Loosely. In this context I'd interpret it as "if you find a thing that breaks the game/renders it unfun don't play that thing".
So. Much. This.
That’s all that it requires and all that it takes.
Understand that in US culture the sentiment is often the opposite--the goal is to win, the only way to have fun is to be winning, and losing reflects badly not just on you as a player but you as a person. Now this isn't some mantra chanted by the crowds, but it is a very broad and very consistent subtext across almost everything that can be defined as competitive.
US and Canadian culture aren’t that different my friend.
We are much the same, except with a lot more apathy from Canadians.
I was also a PG for many years. I promoted the painting and hobby aspect the most.
I ran regular learn to play and paint days every week. I encouraged casuals and ran monthly events for them.
And you know what happened once the competitive crowd came in?
I had a great thing going with a regular influx of new players, with a community that had 20+ players showing up for any given event. On paint and play days I would normally get 3-5 new players every week.
Once the focus was lost on the casual scene and the hobby, it died.
So whether or not you think this is a cultural thing or not, my anecdotal evidence supports the fact that a healthy casual crowd is what keeps a company sustainable. Focusing on the whales and the competition is what kills the game.
Hyper-competitive attitudes do not help grow or expand a player base.
Ghool wrote: US and Canadian culture aren’t that different my friend.
We are much the same, except with a lot more apathy from Canadians.
I was also a PG for many years. I promoted the painting and hobby aspect the most.
I ran regular learn to play and paint days every week. I encouraged casuals and ran monthly events for them.
And you know what happened once the competitive crowd came in?
I had a great thing going with a regular influx of new players, with a community that had 20+ players showing up for any given event. On paint and play days I would normally get 3-5 new players every week.
Once the focus was lost on the casual scene and the hobby, it died.
So whether or not you think this is a cultural thing or not, my anecdotal evidence supports the fact that a healthy casual crowd is what keeps a company sustainable. Focusing on the whales and the competition is what kills the game.
Hyper-competitive attitudes do not help grow or expand a player base.
Being competitive and being hyper-competitive are not the same thing. I always thought MK 2's Page 5 listed it the best. Basically bring the best game you could, but don't a donkey's anus about it.
When a casual player can't get a game because "we only play Steamroller here", it is a good way to kill the chances of any decent community being developed. Even as a casual player, I try to win as best I can, because that is what brings a good game. I only hold off in situations where I know someone is brand new to the game and still getting their feet wet.
hotsauceman1 wrote: What do we mean exactly by the social contract?
Not being a dick about the game or what?
Loosely. In this context I'd interpret it as "if you find a thing that breaks the game/renders it unfun don't play that thing".
So. Much. This.
That’s all that it requires and all that it takes.
Understand that in US culture the sentiment is often the opposite--the goal is to win, the only way to have fun is to be winning, and losing reflects badly not just on you as a player but you as a person. Now this isn't some mantra chanted by the crowds, but it is a very broad and very consistent subtext across almost everything that can be defined as competitive.
US and Canadian culture aren’t that different my friend.
We are much the same, except with a lot more apathy from Canadians.
I was also a PG for many years. I promoted the painting and hobby aspect the most.
I ran regular learn to play and paint days every week. I encouraged casuals and ran monthly events for them.
And you know what happened once the competitive crowd came in?
I had a great thing going with a regular influx of new players, with a community that had 20+ players showing up for any given event. On paint and play days I would normally get 3-5 new players every week.
Once the focus was lost on the casual scene and the hobby, it died.
So whether or not you think this is a cultural thing or not, my anecdotal evidence supports the fact that a healthy casual crowd is what keeps a company sustainable. Focusing on the whales and the competition is what kills the game.
Hyper-competitive attitudes do not help grow or expand a player base.
OMG Ghool! You're still alive? What ya been up to buddy?!?!
My experience as a PG has been much the same. Started up four groups, and every time the Win At All Costs competitive crowd rolled in, it killed the group. Phase One: New players and vets getting together, playing battle box games, painting, playing wild, wacky lists. Phase Two: Start running the occasional tournament or League. One or two competitive players creep in looking for fresh meat and to win tournaments (even the tournaments with no prizes) and sweeping Leagues but never painting anything or adding terrain to the League (Yeah, that used to be a thing!). Phase Three: Start losing new players ("Game is too hard!", "I never win", "I don't want to be curb stomped all the time by XXXX", "I really don't want to buy models X, Y, and Z and play a warcaster/warlock that I hate just to win a game", "All they want to play is Steamroller"), but more competitive players, vets from wherever that stopped playing, come back. No more Leagues. Steamrollers all the time, every time. Phase Four: All the fresh meat is gone, what's left are a bunch of jaded, competitive players that endlessly talk about PP and the game in general.
We play games to have fun, and if you are not having fun, what's the point? I've never understood the WAAC crowd or the hyper intense competitive crowd. Winning != fun.
My current local scene? Well, before the Pandemic that is... Anyways, current local scene is 4-8 guys, show up every other Tuesday at an out of the way FLGS, and play Steamroller. Barely any paint, and what is painted, is "painted" in the loosest of terms. Like "This tournament requires painted models, so..." All the terrain is neoprene or paper cut outs. I stopped playing when two things happened: #1. Guy argued with me about 1/4". And another guy said "Nice looking army, too bad its not competitive and you'd get smashed in a Steamroller".
I have to say I tried out a local MTG group one time when I had a random moment of wanting to get back into it. Sadly it turned out that the basic game evening was scripted around a big competitive event each week. Basically mini-tournaments each week.
Thing is if you're not at the top end your'e at the bottom end where its less fun because you're mostly there because you're losing. Thing is whilst you can learn and improve there's a time and investment aspect and - like you say - sometimes you just don't want that in every game you engage with.
Plus I think that its not just a case people don't want to learn or improve, its the disparity and amount they have to improve by. That is to say if you take a group with the same level of experience and gradually encourage them to learn they will all advance their game; some slower and some faster, but they'll all generally improve somewhat.
However when you inject some very experienced people on top they can dominate because the difference in skill and understanding is very big; which leads to a huge disparity. The skilled can't easily "dumb down" and the less skilled can't just speed up their learning.
In the end the best thing is big groups that can soak the competitive and the casual into their own sub-groups.
With wargames I'd say the main issue is that the games take so long its hard to keep both subgroups (accepting many will cross over both) happy and content when you might only get one core focus each week. So yep I can well see that if tournament style play took over as popular for a while it can dominate and drive out the newbies.
I also have to say that, not in person but online, I've seen communities get key skilled individuals who are exceptionally hostile to new people. Even when they want more people to take part they resent/dislike newbies looking "for a free ride" or "wanting to be told it all" etc... This is "more" an internet than in person thing but it can happen and its painful when its a skilled person who, in theory, should bring value to a group.
NinthMusketeer wrote: ...Understand that in US culture the sentiment is often the opposite--the goal is to win, the only way to have fun is to be winning, and losing reflects badly not just on you as a player but you as a person. Now this isn't some mantra chanted by the crowds, but it is a very broad and very consistent subtext across almost everything that can be defined as competitive.
I don't think that's the case. Even in very competitive environments I find players who try and help each other play better; some of the most positive experiences I've had playing Warmachine were with opponents who stomped me into the dust and talked me through what was going on and how to do better in the future during/after the game.
It is absolutely a sentiment and a trend, not a rule. Individuals cannot be defined by the highest point on a bell curve, and I want to be very clear that I am not expressing otherwise.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ghool wrote: US and Canadian culture aren’t that different my friend.
We are much the same, except with a lot more apathy from Canadians.
Oh I don't mean to say the US is unique or that other places to not also struggle in the same way, I just won't speak for other cultures because I do not know them well enough. I feel that being aware of a cultural push towards toxic competitiveness is a key part of fighting it. To narrow on WMH specifically, PP should have known that the "play like you got a pair" page (5?) would not be interpreted as 'real competitors aren't donkey-caves' but rather 'real competitors can be donkey-caves'.
I was also a PG for many years. I promoted the painting and hobby aspect the most.
I ran regular learn to play and paint days every week. I encouraged casuals and ran monthly events for them.
And you know what happened once the competitive crowd came in?
I had a great thing going with a regular influx of new players, with a community that had 20+ players showing up for any given event. On paint and play days I would normally get 3-5 new players every week.
Once the focus was lost on the casual scene and the hobby, it died.
So whether or not you think this is a cultural thing or not, my anecdotal evidence supports the fact that a healthy casual crowd is what keeps a company sustainable. Focusing on the whales and the competition is what kills the game.
Hyper-competitive attitudes do not help grow or expand a player base.
In my own personal experience, I tended to play with a local group that had a war machine as a side game. Most of us were casual players and rarely played at the FLGS.
The times I would go into the store to play, I would ask around and get a game set up on the normal nights they played. Most would be classified as hyper-competitive.
I would do okay in the games until the magical "gotta" moment and normally ended with me getting curb stomped. The other player acted like he needed a cigarette afterwards.
I'm not a win at all cost type player and my lists usually experiments in motion. But it's no fun when you have trouble remembering certain rules, while the store players
is reciting his chain attack verbatim from the rule book.
This was multiple players at the store, no all was that way. The PG was a great guy but he was usually off hosting painting or something else on the games nights. Never
discussed his feelings on the local meta. Moved on to Kill Team, it still had a few "speed bump" players. You played them and got past the game and forgot about it. But It wasn't every week with them.
At this point, I am not sure what Privateer Press could do to bring me back. Once the pandemic passes they need to go full steam in getting players interested in playing again.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I honestly think they need to AOS their game almost.
With how few players are left and how hard it is, they need to rethink the entire game
I'd rather they Code One their game (release a stripped-back intro version with a subset of the content) than burn it down and release a terrible replacement with all-new minis that has nothing to do with the old one except that the stats are still named the same things.
Having GW-level prices for not-GW-level miniatures is crippling. GW gets away with it because they have the immense momentum of being the biggest name (by a huge margin). When GW was at its worst it was pricing less model for more money than PP and with much worse rules quality to boot. Warmahordes did well. But that was the early 2010s, which feels like it was about 20 years ago in more ways than one.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Having GW-level prices for not-GW-level miniatures is crippling. GW gets away with it because they have the immense momentum of being the biggest name (by a huge margin). When GW was at its worst it was pricing less model for more money than PP and with much worse rules quality to boot. Warmahordes did well. But that was the early 2010s, which feels like it was about 20 years ago in more ways than one.
PP's always been more expensive per model for most of the small stuff (though since GW started doing $50/5 models kits and $30-40 blisters the pendulum has swung back again), the advantage has been that you could have a full army ready to go for ~$200 instead of $600-1000.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Having GW-level prices for not-GW-level miniatures is crippling. GW gets away with it because they have the immense momentum of being the biggest name (by a huge margin). When GW was at its worst it was pricing less model for more money than PP and with much worse rules quality to boot. Warmahordes did well. But that was the early 2010s, which feels like it was about 20 years ago in more ways than one.
The counter i would give to that is that for 40K you need rulebooks, about 5 different faction and army supplements, objective and strategy cards, buckets and buckets of dice all of which are sold at premium GW prices. At least, in theory, all the rules and cards etc that you need to play WM/H are available for free.
However in practice, cost is a real issue. Im looking at what id need to buy to bring my army up to a level where its worth putting on the table in anything other than a friendly kick about with friends and its stomach turning. And for the cost of one model I can get a whole crew for something like Malifaux which is my other game, and probably going to be my main going forward.
WM/H used to be able to boast superior rules as a counter to some of its issues with model quality. But to be honest, it can't do that any more when there are so many other games on the market with good and tight rules. WM/H today just seems like "push it all into the central zones and the persons with the most recent CID and/or expensive models tends to win". The game and mechanics are old compared to things like Malifaux, infinity, Wild West Exodus, Moonstone etc etc.
its like a really nice stately home or castle here in the UK. Great for a visit with friends to marvel at it and appreciate it and its history. But i wouldn't want to live in it or have to maintain it without a complete and total gutting/overhaul/modernisation. Sadly, it doesn't look like it will be continuing much at our club post lock down.
Tamwulf, I’m still around and never went anywhere!
I just moved my hobby scene to YouTube instead.
Once they killed Hand Cannon I didn’t really have anywhere to post stuff so I started making videos instead.
Mostly it’s board games and stuff and the occasional PP model. Still using P3 as long as I can find it (and that seems to be changing around here as well).
Ghool wrote: Tamwulf, I’m still around and never went anywhere!
I just moved my hobby scene to YouTube instead.
Once they killed Hand Cannon I didn’t really have anywhere to post stuff so I started making videos instead.
Mostly it’s board games and stuff and the occasional PP model. Still using P3 as long as I can find it (and that seems to be changing around here as well).
I had no idea that you'd been stranded when Omnus deleted HCO - we would love to host any articles you're interested in writing, I've been a huge admirer of your content for years.
hotsauceman1 wrote: IDK how you can poaint with P3, I can never get a good solid basecoat with mine.
But they aibrush like no ones business so i do love them for that.
You have to work out which ones are for basecoating and use those. I paint mostly with P3 since I do a lot of glazing and the transparency works well for me, and the trick is to pick something like Frostbite or 'Jack Bone that gives you a bright opaque base, then shade and add colour.
Ehh not to go too off topic, but i have mostly switched to vallejo and GW, mostlyout of ease of getting it. no one carries p3 anymore and i prefer to get my paint that day.
Jack Bone is one of my favorite colors however.
Ghool wrote: Tamwulf, I’m still around and never went anywhere!
I just moved my hobby scene to YouTube instead.
Once they killed Hand Cannon I didn’t really have anywhere to post stuff so I started making videos instead.
Mostly it’s board games and stuff and the occasional PP model. Still using P3 as long as I can find it (and that seems to be changing around here as well).
I had no idea that you'd been stranded when Omnus deleted HCO - we would love to host any articles you're interested in writing, I've been a huge admirer of your content for years.
Then check out my channel. https://www.youtube.com/c/GhoolsWorld I haven’t written any articles for a long time as it’s much more expedient to record it on video.
I was blindsided by the deletion of HCO. But I’m not really surprised, as I was the only one posting any content for the last two years it was around.
I love P3 but my LGS has stopped carrying PP products.
Charistoph wrote: ...Distributors either don't want to carry them or can't. I don't know the politics there, but there is some shenanigans going on...
SKU bloat and minimum volumes. Demand crashed, distributors couldn't move the minimum orders, and stopped stocking the minis.
I also heard that PP tried to get them to pay full-price, arguing that their products will "drive traffic", but how much of it is true and how much someone being salty at PP? The sad part is, I could see them try it, even if it's a lie.
PP burned through a LOT of good will while doing very little change with the changing market. I've seen people not pick up Warcaster purely based on "page 5 cringe" that PP is still associated with. Heck, I don't want to give them a second chance either, because they've proven to be just...not fun.
I picked up Warmachine Prime back in the day when the game was starting to trend up. Then I started reading the book.
I read Page 5, put the book down and ultimately never played the game.
What would PP need to do to get a player like me to pick it up? That is a good question? I honestly do not know the answer to it.
I guess they would need to convince me that there were interesting themes and stories I could tell on the tabletop with their miniatures and world. I am pretty sure that is far out of the realm of what PP is interested in.
Ultimately what sold me on pp, or more specifically the iron kingdoms was the lore.
The lore is a crucial aspect of any wargame I play. For years when I had no time for gw games, the lore and the setting always appealed.
It was the same for me with pp.i dived in completely at the start of MK2 (but had dipped my toes in at the dawn of mk1). I was done with gw at the time but felt the hobby itch again. Anyways I decided if I was gonna get back into a game, I'd need to be serious about it, and if I was serious about it I'd need to be grabbed by the lore.
So que an exhaustive search for all the old dnd material, back to 2001s 'witchfire trilogy'. I have it all. I dived in. I read. I literally got lost in the world. I could hear the clanking of metal. I could hear the hissing of steam. I could smell the coal burning. I could feel the heat of the furnace. I got lost in thousands of years of extremely well written gritty and grim lore. The history felt real. The nation's and cultures were linked and fed off of each other. The art was great. The mythologies were breathtaking. The familiar fantasy tropes, but inverted and reimagined were engrossing. The cities cry out. Corvis. Five Fingers. Trenton Crag. Korsk.
It was a fantastic setting and I genuinely felt this was a world i could dive into. It really was and is a magnificently crafted setting. For that alone, it was worth investing in.
Even if I never play wmh again, the setting will always grip me.
I do love the setting. Steampunk with a lot of the Victorian trappings stripped out for more raw industrialism. It's nations have great history that makes for conflicts that are easy to get behind. The Hengehold scrolls are far and away the most exciting thing that PP has done in this regard and I'm really looking forward to see what happens when they make good on this post apocalyptic setting they've built to. I just get the impression everything is in maintenance mode until they can work out the future of the franchise.
What would PP need to do to get a player like me to pick it up? That is a good question? I honestly do not know the answer to it.
I started playing WM&H ~6 years ago, having been increasingly dissatisfied with how silly and nonsensical WH40K was rules-wise. Even though after these years I have a dozen things I would like WM&H to do better, it's still BY FAR the best wargame I have ever played and one of the best games in general.
I absolutely love how the game presents you with a huge menu of viable choices for every situation, and the more experienced you are, the more and the better solutions you can see. This game rewards creative problem-solving in a way that I find immensely satisfying. For exactly the same, difficult situation a total newbie will have no solution whatsoever, he'll be stuck. A beginner will find a single, mediocre solution. An experienced player will find a few ways out and will be able to determine which is the best. But a truly talented (not just experienced!) player will solve the problem in a way that will make everyone watching the game go "Wow! That was awesome!". And whenever you do something like this it gives this wonderful sense of intellectual achievement! "Damn, I'm smart!"
It's a bit like with those chess-riddles which say "white check-mate in 4 moves". You look at them and can't find a solution and then some chess veteran comes and does it in 3 moves You want to be such a player and in some games you get to be one.
WH40K feels like playing with toy soldiers doing pew-pew and vroom noises in comparison. Can't find much gripping in a game like this, relative irrelevance of my decisions makes me emotionally divorced from both the outcome and the game itself.
WH40K feels like playing with toy soldiers doing pew-pew and vroom noises in comparison. Can't find much gripping in a game like this, relative irrelevance of my decisions makes me emotionally divorced from both the outcome and the game itself.
Well it is good to have a variety of game that all play differently. 40K used to be the fun "lore inspired" rule set game for fast simpler play, after 5th edition it almost completely lost that. (which is the reason many of us have gone back to playing old editions) by the same token alt activation games like dust and infinity are both very good in their own ways but also play very different. much like WM/H many of the games i play have far more complex rules interactions which can be fun but sometimes you need a break from that.
I purposely try to avoid going overboard with focusing on one game system. i have had mostly the same units for WM/H, infinity, and battletech that i have had for years. even my 40K collection for normal scale play has basically been "done" for many years with no interest in buying anything new as i do not need it to play any variety of the game.
I play what i enjoy with like minded players. for WM/Hs that is MKIII 50 point or less non-steamroller games with 3d terrain, or 5th edition for 40K, or classic battletech (not quick strike) etc...
Easy E wrote: I picked up Warmachine Prime back in the day when the game was starting to trend up. Then I started reading the book.
I read Page 5, put the book down and ultimately never played the game.
What would PP need to do to get a player like me to pick it up? That is a good question? I honestly do not know the answer to it.
I guess they would need to convince me that there were interesting themes and stories I could tell on the tabletop with their miniatures and world. I am pretty sure that is far out of the realm of what PP is interested in.
Just curious, but when you say 'interesting themes and stories', what do you mean by that?
Easy E wrote: What would PP need to do to get a player like me to pick it up? That is a good question? I honestly do not know the answer to it.
I guess they would need to convince me that there were interesting themes and stories I could tell on the tabletop with their miniatures and world. I am pretty sure that is far out of the realm of what PP is interested in.
Well, they exist and have been provided for years. Unfortunately, the loudest in the market only care about themes and stories if it can get them a leg up in a tournament. That isn't to say that there aren't a lot of players who do like the stories and themes, its just that it's been hard to hear them over the Steamroller-only crowd. It's starting to rise a little with Brawlmachine, but until people are playing together regularly again, it's hard to say what level of impact it will have.
Privateer Press has been incorporating story in to the game for years. There used to be Themes based on the Warcaster and what they would normally bring. This was expanded so that there were Themed forces in the army which one could incorporate a Warcaster in to. There have been quite a few campaigns run in the last few years, with Oblivion being the latest one to be presented. There has also been narrative scenarios presented in their magazine when it was live. However, purchasing power from the customers has been limited in those veins, so even if you have a group in your area, they probably haven't been playing them.
So Privateer Press has done their part on that front, but aside from restructuring their supply and getting it popular in local stores, there isn't much else they can do.
I think WM and Hordes are actually really good at telling stories at that warband level the game is great at (you know, a leader, his beasts or jacks, a couple of units and a cool solo). I never felt a clash between the mechanics and the story at all.
I also had the Iron Kingdoms books (the ones for 3.5 D&D) and they were really cool. The mechanika stuff was really poorly balanced and the Warcaster class was not suitable for the system at all (just way too powerful) but the setting was piles of fun to mess around with and I really enjoyed myself running a campaign in that world.
I stopped playing after Mk2, because I don't really like themes. Themes force you to play with certain set models, and PP's models are far too variable in quality for me to want to be forced into using certain ones. I like the ones I have, and what I loved about Mk2 was that they were pretty balanced and I could make a workable list out of my stuff that could do well in games without worrying too much about the listbuilding phase. I feel they built more of a listbuilding phase into Mk3 but even more restrictive than it usually is, and that was just really offputting to me.
Mk2 was a brilliant game though. Really satisfying to play and rewarded knowing and using your guys really well. That connection with the big beautiful models that came from learning them in and out was really nice, and I miss it. I am sad that the game is pretty dead in my region and that I would have to do a lot of work to get engaged with Mk3. I have fully painted Trolls and Minions, and a half painted Everblight force sitting idle.
Ah well. The models always get incredibly positive comments when I bust them out for my RPGs.
Honestly, one of the best parts of the game is just how thematic and varied some of the better warcaster designs become. Casters like Butcher 3 who can charge in and pull a huge crowd into a thresher feels fantastic. Borka2 and his army of ambushing bears. Haley3 and her time echos, Caine's gunslinging, Gearhart's big game hunter ol'sport style, Gaspy's flailing horrors.
There's few games that allow a character to bring as much character to an army as Warmachine. I think that's one of the big things the community loses out on when it focuses on just the single best pair of casters at the moment, but when PP really puts their heart into a caster, they make armies with more character than anything out there.
Da Boss wrote:I stopped playing after Mk2, because I don't really like themes. Themes force you to play with certain set models, and PP's models are far too variable in quality for me to want to be forced into using certain ones. I like the ones I have, and what I loved about Mk2 was that they were pretty balanced and I could make a workable list out of my stuff that could do well in games without worrying too much about the listbuilding phase. I feel they built more of a listbuilding phase into Mk3 but even more restrictive than it usually is, and that was just really offputting to me.
Mk2 was a brilliant game though. Really satisfying to play and rewarded knowing and using your guys really well. That connection with the big beautiful models that came from learning them in and out was really nice, and I miss it. I am sad that the game is pretty dead in my region and that I would have to do a lot of work to get engaged with Mk3. I have fully painted Trolls and Minions, and a half painted Everblight force sitting idle.
The funny thing is the Themes in Mk 2 were far more restrictive than what's available in Mk 3. However, most felt only encouraged to use those Themes rather than forced, even though some Warcasters and Warlocks were only really useful when in their Theme (Xerxis' Fist of Halaak, for example). The ones who stood out were the ones who were great in their Theme or out of it, like Haley2.
Mk 3 Themes did go overboard with the initial forms of Requisition, though, I'll grant that.
LunarSol wrote:There's few games that allow a character to bring as much character to an army as Warmachine. I think that's one of the big things the community loses out on when it focuses on just the single best pair of casters at the moment, but when PP really puts their heart into a caster, they make armies with more character than anything out there.
I think Malifaux and Infinity do a pretty good job at it (I admit that I haven't played them, though).
It seemed to me from my investigations and talking to my friends that Themes are basically mandatory now? Like you get lots of free points and stuff. Back when I played Mk2 basically nobody used Themes so I never worried about them, but it seemed that Themes were basically a big part of the game now. I dunno, I don't like that. I liked being able to use my core set of models that I really liked without feeling like I was being penalized by the system.
It's like how in Age of Sigmar you can use factions or a grand alliance army, but the GA army, whilst it can use any model in a grand alliance, has weaker allegiance abilities.
Only for PP they have used it on armies rather than collections of armies so it feels rather rough and odd.
It is being forced to use specific combinations that I don't like. Like if I don't go buy a certain unit or solo to use with a certain warbeast, then this warcaster is really negatively impacted. And some of those models might be really fugly, or not fit with what I want in my collection. But due to the points deficit, I can't just make it work, because I am losing out on too much.
Seems really weird to me and removes freedom from the game.
It's mostly just splitting things into subfactions. Once they got rid of the points threshholds for free solos and replaced it with requisition, I've found there's far fewer problems with needing specific models to fill points. I don't feel like they have near the impact on a collection they did early on, at least assuming that if there's models I want, I want more aesthetically similar models.
Da Boss wrote: It is being forced to use specific combinations that I don't like. Like if I don't go buy a certain unit or solo to use with a certain warbeast, then this warcaster is really negatively impacted. And some of those models might be really fugly, or not fit with what I want in my collection. But due to the points deficit, I can't just make it work, because I am losing out on too much.
Seems really weird to me and removes freedom from the game.
I play in a casual gaming group. we don't do steamroller and we usually play at no more than 50 points. i have the same models i have always had that i got for my army because i liked them. in fact the warcaster i use is the opposite of what most players do. i didn't build the army around the caster i build it around the models i wanted to use namely clam jacks and the gun carriage then found a caster that would help them.
Nobody i play with really care about themed forces in the sense of list building requirements. theme for us is based on the overall look of the army. one guy has a circle army that is all about wolves he has skin walkers, warp wolves and the like because he likes wolves in real life and thought it was cool to be able to build an army around it.
The game still works fine without the comp players/theme list requirements.
Da Boss wrote: It is being forced to use specific combinations that I don't like. Like if I don't go buy a certain unit or solo to use with a certain warbeast, then this warcaster is really negatively impacted. And some of those models might be really fugly, or not fit with what I want in my collection. But due to the points deficit, I can't just make it work, because I am losing out on too much.
Seems really weird to me and removes freedom from the game.
Aside from a few instances, like Warcaster/Warlock Attachments not being universally available (but still only restricted from one or two Themes), it's not as common as you think. The Themes are set up more as a cohesive group that were in that part of a battle rather than being more ramshackle. They tend to synergize better, for the most part, so it's not so bad. I think the worst situations are like Cephalyx only being allowed in a single Theme, or Skorne where "combined arms" means having Beasts do the job the allowed units can't.
Groups can deny Themes in their interactions if they want to, of course, but they tend to be only in one off situations like Who's the Boss. So they have been well received by the ones who have kept playing, especially once Requisition changed to army size as opposed to army makeup.
LunarSol wrote:There's few games that allow a character to bring as much character to an army as Warmachine. I think that's one of the big things the community loses out on when it focuses on just the single best pair of casters at the moment, but when PP really puts their heart into a caster, they make armies with more character than anything out there.
I think Malifaux and Infinity do a pretty good job at it (I admit that I haven't played them, though).
Certainly any small model count game is going to do a pretty good job of it. Malifaux certainly and particularly with M3E where they focused crews more around the master than previous editions. Infinity I think a little less so, but that might just be that it has more of a simulation feel to me than something designed to express personality out of its characters. Two of my favorite games for sure though.
I suppose what makes the difference for me in Warmachine is probably the size of the game itself. I just find that when the game is at its best, whole armies have this sense of identity you don't find in other systems. I listed off some of my favorites already, but the game is just full of mechanically interesting pieces that do so many interesting things with positioning and movement to make the most of their attacks. Characters like the first Sorscha or Wyrmwood or Madhammer just come together to give the armies you put them in so much identity. It's part of why I'd really love to see PP work on consolidating themes and casters. They've gotten stuck over the course of MK3 trying to make things "fair" but as much as I want it to be balanced, the more I get off the competitive treadmill, the more I realize the game's appeal is in its ability to create mechanics that result in these wild and memorable effects on the table.
LunarSol wrote: Certainly any small model count game is going to do a pretty good job of it. Malifaux certainly and particularly with M3E where they focused crews more around the master than previous editions. Infinity I think a little less so, but that might just be that it has more of a simulation feel to me than something designed to express personality out of its characters. Two of my favorite games for sure though.
I would think that the cheer-leading system would favor characters. Admittedly, characters are of a very small number in Infinity, which is why it isn't as much as Malifaux with their crew leaders or WarmaHordes with their Warcasters and Warlocks. A really good model can lead the game without being a character.
For those who don't know, cheer-leading is Infinity's interesting interesting system that allows models to giver their activations up for another.
LunarSol wrote: I suppose what makes the difference for me in Warmachine is probably the size of the game itself. I just find that when the game is at its best, whole armies have this sense of identity you don't find in other systems. I listed off some of my favorites already, but the game is just full of mechanically interesting pieces that do so many interesting things with positioning and movement to make the most of their attacks. Characters like the first Sorscha or Wyrmwood or Madhammer just come together to give the armies you put them in so much identity. It's part of why I'd really love to see PP work on consolidating themes and casters. They've gotten stuck over the course of MK3 trying to make things "fair" but as much as I want it to be balanced, the more I get off the competitive treadmill, the more I realize the game's appeal is in its ability to create mechanics that result in these wild and memorable effects on the table.
WarmaHordes does lend itself to games of larger scope in which you can see the army running around. Infinity can get close at times, but most often numbers more like a Brawlmachine event. I've only seen Malifaux played with crews about double what on can get in a starter.
GW can't seem to find that balance. Either it's Lordhammer, Monsterhammer, or, Unithammer, and it would be easy for non-Monster characters to get lost in the crowd if GW didn't bling them up.
As a side note, with the closest I ever got to painting a full 40K force, I differentiated the Characters of my Marines with a different paint scheme. It was sort of inspired by the Dark Angels' Inner Circle and ran with it. I never did get a picture of all I painted of that force, missing out on a Devastator squad and Vanguard Squad. I did get individual squad shots of them, though.
Themes in mk3 ultimately split my local community into two groups.
The larger casual group who just wanted to field our armies of models we loved and liked fielding together (Having my Trollkin champions supported by trolls lugging heavy machine guns? aww hell yeah!!!)
The smaller themes only group which whilst fun to play, only played themes saying "Its in the rules, you're gimping yourself by not taking a theme to get max free points!"
Sad to say, Warmahordes has basically dried up to about 4 players who complain on the FB group no one else wants to play them. mk3 just got less fun, the CID was so much to keep up with and 2d terrain tournaments used sucked terribly.
What does it need to be salvaged? Burn parts of it to the ground and either commit to being a skirmish level game and reduce required model count or abstract some more and be a squad level game. Currently Warmahordes doesnt do anything I think another war game does better with a larger available player base.
CID was a balancing dream, but in the end it was a computer game style level of continual change that just doesn't easily translate to a wargame hobby environment. It devalues physical rules components which in turn meant that they were pushing more and more for app use, abstracting the physical game. Furthermore I think when that was coupled to fewer and fewer rule and lore books they lose the fluff connection. Like it or not the codex/battletome system for GW works fantastically well as a joint product. Sure the rules can fall out of date with updates and long term fans "don't see the need" for the fluffy side. But in the end ever so many GW fans come back to the game purely because of that fluff and all the new gamers get hooked on it.
As for wargame vs skirmish - do BOTH.
Start by going back to the original oldest models and revamp a skirmish steam of infantry, leader and warjack/warbeasts for each army. Then promote a new skirmishing focused game that gets back to the games roots and core - that you promote heavily because its for new and existing customers. Alongside you also promote a new larger scale wargame style game which lets you put far more models down onto the game board.
This you promote a little later than the skirmish and its designed to be the big game for existing fans, but also new fans getting into the game fast.
HECK GW found that by splitting the rules into two separate books that not only could you profit off both, but also you had an easier time promoting and marketing both systems. Skirmish/Killsteam is nothing new - its been around for years in the back of the big rule book. Splitting it off to its own game system allowed it to be a little more developed, but at the same tiem also meant that when GW was marketing it they could market it and have direct products on the shelf to sell to people.
I think MK3 for all its gains, is a dead duck for PP and they need a big revamp and a big reason to make a lot of noise. Redesigns mean that they can perhaps rebox things into fewer boxes (put a few warjacks/warbeasts together in teams etc..); but also means they can release new products for old and new gamers whilst not bloating the game either in sku nor in rules elements. That's how GW has lasted for 30 odd years; many of their core models have been redesigned many times over those years (we are what, 5-6 different versions of marines now? At least 3 full design approaches to Tyranids). Heck the massive popularity and update to Necrons is half new models have redesigns. Meanwhile things like the several new psychic units are just the old mode variation rules split out into their own models instead of one model with various options.
I would think that the cheer-leading system would favor characters. Admittedly, characters are of a very small number in Infinity, which is why it isn't as much as Malifaux with their crew leaders or WarmaHordes with their Warcasters and Warlocks. A really good model can lead the game without being a character.
For those who don't know, cheer-leading is Infinity's interesting interesting system that allows models to giver their activations up for another.
Getting a little off topic, but I find Infinity such an interesting system. Once I finally really got into it, I realized it does so many things differently that a lot of my assumptions about how it plays based on individual mechanics don't pan out over the course of a real game. Some of that is a result of the mission system, but cheerleading/ramboing doesn't work out on the table the same way you'd assume if you view it from the perspective of something like "this solo sacrifices its activation to let this colossal activate again".
The ARO system turns so much of what you do on your head its really hard to appreciate, even in a demo. I think the main thing to consider is that whenever you activate a model, your opponent's reaction has a chance to succeed and kill it. It might only be like 20%, but it becomes something of a push your luck system where if you keep spending orders on one model, sooner or later the dice aren't going to go your way.
The other big element of the system is just how its often not about stopping your opponent but making them spend orders inefficiently. If you hide everyone in the back and send one model out to do all the work, you find yourself spending a lot of orders trying to get into a position where you're not at a huge disadvantage (3 on 1 kind of encounters) or just that after your rampage your opponent is able to take the board very easily if your own models aren't in a position to fire back. Stopping your opponent is often less about killing them and just making them run out of orders. It might take 2 orders to reach and complete an objective, but 2 cheerleaders, even if they don't really threaten a dedicated combat piece, might take 3-4 orders to safely clear. Stuff like that makes cheerleading not really work the way it seems like it would and the ARO system makes cheerleaders important combat elements even if they're mostly acting as NPCs during the opponent's turn.
Easy E wrote: I picked up Warmachine Prime back in the day when the game was starting to trend up. Then I started reading the book.
I read Page 5, put the book down and ultimately never played the game.
What would PP need to do to get a player like me to pick it up? That is a good question? I honestly do not know the answer to it.
I guess they would need to convince me that there were interesting themes and stories I could tell on the tabletop with their miniatures and world. I am pretty sure that is far out of the realm of what PP is interested in.
Just curious, but when you say 'interesting themes and stories', what do you mean by that?
Great question, and I will try to answer as best as I can.
I like a big sandbox world where I make up what is important in it. For example, I have played 40K since Rogue Trader until 5th edition or so. To me, what made the 40K wargame "great" was not mechanics or personalities but the fact that I could build my little corner of the galaxy and play games set there. The high point for me for 40K was really the Eye of Terror campaign and the Medusa V campaign. There was so much to be a part of and so many people doing really cool and creative things related to it.
Since, I have drifted from 40K "official" stuff and just do my own thing but the themes and ideas of 40K still resonate with me. Things like what is "good" and what is "evil" in this setting? What makes the heroes "heroic"? Are my heroes actually heroes? Do the ends justify the means? Is the life of one worth that of thousands? How about 1 planet versus 100's of planets? The scale can be intimate or huge depending on what you want to do with it. These were ideas and themes driven home by fellow hobbyists, authors, and the works themselves.
I never got the same feel from Warmachine or its fans. I only heard about the "tactics" and tournaments. If I wanted that, frankly I would have turned my attention to Chess. I didn't want that. I wanted to play in the sandbox with a game system on the tabletop. I wanted RPG-lite and free form world building-lite. I wanted a cooperative wargaming experience. War Machine NEVER promoted that, and so I knew it was not for me.
40K still promotes the idea of Cooperative gaming as do many other wargames and systems. In a sense, I wanted the "British- Model" of Wargaming over the "American-Model" of Wargaming. Therefore, I stuck with games that focus more on that British Wargaming feel. I wanted friends getting together to enjoy a gaming experience together more than I wanted to get together with friends and see which of us was the "best friend".
So, for WM/H to interest ME, it would really need to expand its base appeal beyond "A really tight tournament game" which is probably asking FAR too much of it (or any niche game really) to do.
LunarSol wrote: Getting a little off topic, but I find Infinity such an interesting system. Once I finally really got into it, I realized it does so many things differently that a lot of my assumptions about how it plays based on individual mechanics don't pan out over the course of a real game. Some of that is a result of the mission system, but cheerleading/ramboing doesn't work out on the table the same way you'd assume if you view it from the perspective of something like "this solo sacrifices its activation to let this colossal activate again".
The ARO system turns so much of what you do on your head its really hard to appreciate, even in a demo. I think the main thing to consider is that whenever you activate a model, your opponent's reaction has a chance to succeed and kill it. It might only be like 20%, but it becomes something of a push your luck system where if you keep spending orders on one model, sooner or later the dice aren't going to go your way.
The other big element of the system is just how its often not about stopping your opponent but making them spend orders inefficiently. If you hide everyone in the back and send one model out to do all the work, you find yourself spending a lot of orders trying to get into a position where you're not at a huge disadvantage (3 on 1 kind of encounters) or just that after your rampage your opponent is able to take the board very easily if your own models aren't in a position to fire back. Stopping your opponent is often less about killing them and just making them run out of orders. It might take 2 orders to reach and complete an objective, but 2 cheerleaders, even if they don't really threaten a dedicated combat piece, might take 3-4 orders to safely clear. Stuff like that makes cheerleading not really work the way it seems like it would and the ARO system makes cheerleaders important combat elements even if they're mostly acting as NPCs during the opponent's turn.
Yeah, AROs (Automatic Reaction Order) combined with how deadly everything is definitely takes a lot of teeth out of the cheer-leading system. Currently Infinity is in their 4th version of this setup and from what I have read it gets more efficient at making cheer-leading be more strategic than about pushing a Rambo (which was really bad in their first edition).
WMH has forms of AROs with Counter-Blast, Counter-Charge, and Free Strikes, but the latter is avoidable (if not ignored on some models), and rather rare for the former two. Even with as rare as they are, there is a lot of stuff that can easily absorb those interactions which is hard to do in Infinity.
Da Boss wrote:It is being forced to use specific combinations that I don't like. Like if I don't go buy a certain unit or solo to use with a certain warbeast, then this warcaster is really negatively impacted. And some of those models might be really fugly, or not fit with what I want in my collection. But due to the points deficit, I can't just make it work, because I am losing out on too much.
Seems really weird to me and removes freedom from the game.
While I get your point, I do somewhat disagree. With respect, not taking certain things with certain other things and coming up to a disadvantage is an aspect in pretty much every wargame I've ever played. Same with being forced to take ugly models.
Thing is though, I found most things had a place and creative players would and could make it work. Don't get discouraged by those of us who relied on crutches.
Easy E wrote:
Great question, and I will try to answer as best as I can.
I like a big sandbox world where I make up what is important in it. For example, I have played 40K since Rogue Trader until 5th edition or so. To me, what made the 40K wargame "great" was not mechanics or personalities but the fact that I could build my little corner of the galaxy and play games set there. The high point for me for 40K was really the Eye of Terror campaign and the Medusa V campaign. There was so much to be a part of and so many people doing really cool and creative things related to it.
Since, I have drifted from 40K "official" stuff and just do my own thing but the themes and ideas of 40K still resonate with me. Things like what is "good" and what is "evil" in this setting? What makes the heroes "heroic"? Are my heroes actually heroes? Do the ends justify the means? Is the life of one worth that of thousands? How about 1 planet versus 100's of planets? The scale can be intimate or huge depending on what you want to do with it. These were ideas and themes driven home by fellow hobbyists, authors, and the works themselves.
I never got the same feel from Warmachine or its fans. I only heard about the "tactics" and tournaments. If I wanted that, frankly I would have turned my attention to Chess. I didn't want that. I wanted to play in the sandbox with a game system on the tabletop. I wanted RPG-lite and free form world building-lite. I wanted a cooperative wargaming experience. War Machine NEVER promoted that, and so I knew it was not for me.
40K still promotes the idea of Cooperative gaming as do many other wargames and systems. In a sense, I wanted the "British- Model" of Wargaming over the "American-Model" of Wargaming. Therefore, I stuck with games that focus more on that British Wargaming feel. I wanted friends getting together to enjoy a gaming experience together more than I wanted to get together with friends and see which of us was the "best friend".
So, for WM/H to interest ME, it would really need to expand its base appeal beyond "A really tight tournament game" which is probably asking FAR too much of it (or any niche game really) to do.
Fair. I don't think it was the game holding you away, I think it was the players you came across. There's no reason those things were not possible. Back home when I first started playing, the guy I played against most had some truly inspiring and inventive scenarios. Wmh had campaigns, home brews, narrative scenarios, fun scenarios (I remember a halloween special where you had one caster against limitless spawning thralls), painting comps, conversions (Google the khador gun carriage to airship conversion) etc. The hobby was what you mad of it.
The iron kingdoms is very much a sandbox, the characters, goals, and storylines of nation's both nuanced and ambiguous. See the relationship/storyline between Caine and Magnus for the perfect example or the tortured monster that is the Butcher. I will give pp many criticisms but one thing they could do brilliantly was great characters and background. see my previous post - I challenge anyone to read the d20 material or the gavyn Kyle files in no quarter and not find it enthralling.
I will say, i personally loved that in WM/H you where using names characters at the center of your army. Narratively it felt like every battle you where having was important, and not just some random skirmish.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I will say, i personally loved that in WM/H you where using names characters at the center of your army. Narratively it felt like every battle you where having was important, and not just some random skirmish.
True but the system starts to break a bit as the armies get bigger and bigger. The assassination moment gets more muddled and becomes a hyper focus; the number of big warjacks/beasts you can bring gets more limited and in general it becomes a trickier system. The game needs to have a really nice complex skirmish mode where the caster is central; then a larger wargame mode representing a larger battle which is no less important, but where there's more support options to run more jacks/beasts and where the single caster general isn't the critical linch-pin of the entire army - ergo ok you've killed their leader, but the army is still there and its still going to beat you up etc..
hotsauceman1 wrote: I will say, i personally loved that in WM/H you where using names characters at the center of your army. Narratively it felt like every battle you where having was important, and not just some random skirmish.
True but the system starts to break a bit as the armies get bigger and bigger. The assassination moment gets more muddled and becomes a hyper focus; the number of big warjacks/beasts you can bring gets more limited and in general it becomes a trickier system. The game needs to have a really nice complex skirmish mode where the caster is central; then a larger wargame mode representing a larger battle which is no less important, but where there's more support options to run more jacks/beasts and where the single caster general isn't the critical linch-pin of the entire army - ergo ok you've killed their leader, but the army is still there and its still going to beat you up etc..
We played that as a version of WM and it was actually quite fun for a change-
50 point game-no warcasters, no warjacks unless you have a jack marshal to run them.
It plays to the lore of the universe that says warcasters are extremely rare and gifted individuals who are not going to be in every generic battle where the rest of the regular army actually does all the fighting.
aphyon wrote: We played that as a version of WM and it was actually quite fun for a change-
50 point game-no warcasters, no warjacks unless you have a jack marshal to run them.
It plays to the lore of the universe that says warcasters are extremely rare and gifted individuals who are not going to be in every generic battle where the rest of the regular army actually does all the fighting.
Sounds like fun.
I've kind of wanted to run an event where everyone was on the (huge) table at the same time, but had objectives to complete, like saving/enslaving/eating villagers. There would be faction goals and player goals to keep it interesting. I don't think I ever thought about having them not bring Warcasters, though.
Funny thing, they did an alternate-history version of a few characters a while back, and the numbered listing is *name*-1. Things like Stryker being a Mercenary Warcaster due to the Lion's Coup failing, Alexia Ciannor joining the Skorne to gain control of the Witchblade, everyone's favorite Witch Hunter Eiryss being corrupted by Everblight, stuff like that.
Well, Cygnar's version was The Vinter Raelthorne, the psychotic target of the Lion's Coup. He held the same position as Warcaster in the army, but... I'll just steal LoS's description, "Vinter is not a warcaster. He has no spells, feat, and cannot have a warcaster attachment." He amounted to being a very powerful, but technically free, solo. I imagine he would be disallowed, honestly, but he'd make for a crazy counter-Archon, I think.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I will say, i personally loved that in WM/H you where using names characters at the center of your army. Narratively it felt like every battle you where having was important, and not just some random skirmish.
It's funny, that is something I have always hated about WMH. I hugely dislike that every battle has named characters because we know from the story that those battles didn't happen (bar re-enacting), there is no forging a narrative because they already have one that dictates yours didn't happen. There is no coming up with backgrounds for your warcaster, because they already have one.
aphyon wrote: We played that as a version of WM and it was actually quite fun for a change-
50 point game-no warcasters, no warjacks unless you have a jack marshal to run them.
It plays to the lore of the universe that says warcasters are extremely rare and gifted individuals who are not going to be in every generic battle where the rest of the regular army actually does all the fighting.
Sounds like fun.
That pretty much is Company of Iron.
Well, Cygnar's version was The Vinter Raelthorne, the psychotic target of the Lion's Coup. He held the same position as Warcaster in the army, but... I'll just steal LoS's description, "Vinter is not a warcaster. He has no spells, feat, and cannot have a warcaster attachment." He amounted to being a very powerful, but technically free, solo. I imagine he would be disallowed, honestly, but he'd make for a crazy counter-Archon, I think.
The MK2 version if Vinter was pretty brutal due to his magical equipment. I don't really know how he'd hold up in MK3 but I think he was designed to pretty much be able to take out a 25 point army by himself. He had multiple attacks (with reach), self centered aoe, free counter attack, could self heal and really high armor (17) with a 15 def and a huge health track closer to a warjack. Really would be fun to play in some narrative event.
Easy E wrote: The high point for me for 40K was really the Eye of Terror campaign and the Medusa V campaign. There was so much to be a part of and so many people doing really cool and creative things related to it.
I actually ran a map-based campaign for Warmachine based on a similar premise. It was open for everyone and proved to have better attendance than local tournaments. We played all sizes of games from little more than battleboxes, to 150pts and 2 casters per side.
Info in these two threads is obviously in Polish, but any decent online translator should do good enough job for you to understand what the rules were and what was going on in the campaign:
TBH some of the most fun I had with WM/H in recent times was running the oblivion campaign in our group of mates (before Covid stopped it). It game us a reason to run models and caster we wouldn't normally plan and as the early games are entirely non theme force games, you got some funny combinations. The scenarios were more narrative and fun and we were including some of them in the mix during our normal game nights, mixing it in with SR.
It kind showed that WM/H can still be narrative etc, but the group has to want to do it. And where we are "the wider meta" has 0% interest in any of that.
It's funny, that is something I have always hated about WMH. I hugely dislike that every battle has named characters because we know from the story that those battles didn't happen (bar re-enacting), there is no forging a narrative because they already have one that dictates yours didn't happen. There is no coming up with backgrounds for your warcaster, because they already have one.
Who says the battles didn't happen? Do you have a day by day itinerary for every caster in the game? There's no reason these battles couldn't have happened and thats true for every wargame- marneus calgar hasn't turned up to every battle he has appeared on the table top for, but he could have.
And you can create your own casters using the named ones as a template. There was a guy here's whose caster was a female version of Caine - riza Hawkeye Caine. I made a female kommsndant based on a conversion of sorscha 1/2 and using irusks rules. And here's the thing. You don't need to focus on the caster as the focal point of your lore. Casters might dominate in the lore and be the movers and shakers in the setting. They're like primarchs. Naming them makes functional and narrative sense, especially when warcasters in the setting numbered in the dozens. If you are insistent on making your lore, transfer your gaze to your army itself. Name your sergeants. Name your force. Mine was a part of the fifth border legion, originally from korsk. List their battles etc. Regimental rosters are littered through the game. No reason you couldn't do your own.
NinthMusketeer wrote:It's funny, that is something I have always hated about WMH. I hugely dislike that every battle has named characters because we know from the story that those battles didn't happen (bar re-enacting), there is no forging a narrative because they already have one that dictates yours didn't happen. There is no coming up with backgrounds for your warcaster, because they already have one.
As someone whose first Tabletop game was Battletech, I agree with you. Being able to create your own characters is one of my favorite things to do. Warhammer was also pretty good at this, too, though not nearly as robust. Right now the only customization that one can officially do is adding Attachments. There is another method, but I'll get in to that down below.
aphyon wrote: We played that as a version of WM and it was actually quite fun for a change-
50 point game-no warcasters, no warjacks unless you have a jack marshal to run them.
It plays to the lore of the universe that says warcasters are extremely rare and gifted individuals who are not going to be in every generic battle where the rest of the regular army actually does all the fighting.
Sounds like fun.
That pretty much is Company of Iron.
Just without the cards which I don't have, and it didn't look like they separated out each unit in to complimentary solos.
Monkeysloth wrote:The MK2 version if Vinter was pretty brutal due to his magical equipment. I don't really know how he'd hold up in MK3 but I think he was designed to pretty much be able to take out a 25 point army by himself. He had multiple attacks (with reach), self centered aoe, free counter attack, could self heal and really high armor (17) with a 15 def and a huge health track closer to a warjack. Really would be fun to play in some narrative event.
He did take down Makeda when they first met, and he didn't have Focus to power a shield with or Warbeasts to transfer damage to. It really is rather amazing that he lost the Coup.
Sunno wrote:It kind showed that WM/H can still be narrative etc, but the group has to want to do it. And where we are "the wider meta" has 0% interest in any of that.
This is something I bring up every time someone says that there is no narrative play in WM/H. PP has done their part, but one needs to have a group willing to play it.
Deadnight wrote:And you can create your own casters using the named ones as a template. There was a guy here's whose caster was a female version of Caine - riza Hawkeye Caine. I made a female kommsndant based on a conversion of sorscha 1/2 and using irusks rules. And here's the thing. You don't need to focus on the caster as the focal point of your lore. Casters might dominate in the lore and be the movers and shakers in the setting. They're like primarchs. Naming them makes functional and narrative sense, especially when warcasters in the setting numbered in the dozens. If you are insistent on making your lore, transfer your gaze to your army itself. Name your sergeants. Name your force. Mine was a part of the fifth border legion, originally from korsk. List their battles etc. Regimental rosters are littered through the game. No reason you couldn't do your own.
There is also something called "Caster Draft" where you literally build your Warcaster/Warlock from stats to spells to feat. I don't know all the details, but it can be quite extensive.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I will say, i personally loved that in WM/H you where using names characters at the center of your army. Narratively it felt like every battle you where having was important, and not just some random skirmish.
True but the system starts to break a bit as the armies get bigger and bigger. The assassination moment gets more muddled and becomes a hyper focus; the number of big warjacks/beasts you can bring gets more limited and in general it becomes a trickier system. The game needs to have a really nice complex skirmish mode where the caster is central; then a larger wargame mode representing a larger battle which is no less important, but where there's more support options to run more jacks/beasts and where the single caster general isn't the critical linch-pin of the entire army - ergo ok you've killed their leader, but the army is still there and its still going to beat you up etc..
We played that as a version of WM and it was actually quite fun for a change-
50 point game-no warcasters, no warjacks unless you have a jack marshal to run them.
It plays to the lore of the universe that says warcasters are extremely rare and gifted individuals who are not going to be in every generic battle where the rest of the regular army actually does all the fighting.
I agree. I think WMH has a reached a point where all the tools offer different formats to play. I think this would be cool, probably justify a PP book of just the different formats caster/skirmish/no caster/full devestation and terrain destruction etc.
Easy E wrote: The high point for me for 40K was really the Eye of Terror campaign and the Medusa V campaign. There was so much to be a part of and so many people doing really cool and creative things related to it.
I actually ran a map-based campaign for Warmachine based on a similar premise. It was open for everyone and proved to have better attendance than local tournaments. We played all sizes of games from little more than battleboxes, to 150pts and 2 casters per side.
Info in these two threads is obviously in Polish, but any decent online translator should do good enough job for you to understand what the rules were and what was going on in the campaign:
Campaign wise, when PP has its global campaign with map that tracked wins/losses on the map was the best time for narrative play. Really felt like your games matter to the scheme of things and you could see it play out.
Well it’s official, my LGS is no longer stocking PP. The paints are running out and the corner where PP used to be is empty save a few KS starter boxes of Warcaster.
I’m having to switch my paints to Citadel as a result, and which I am not too thrilled about.
My LGS not stocking PP is telling - they stock anything and everything in print.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Why not use the internet to get p3 paints?
I also hear war colors are similar.
When outside temperatures can drop to -50C here, I’m not taking the chance on my paints being frozen.
I will only buy local after having so many paints come up duds after being frozen.
The LGS even has the same problem.
So unless you’re in a temperate or warmer climate then mine, ordering online is out of the question.
And with the way things are going, I don’t see paints I need getting here in a shorter time period than a couple of weeks.
When I need a colour I can’t afford to wait weeks or months for it to arrive.
I have a channel I need to run with a weekly release, and I can’t depend on delivery services to get me what I need when I need it. If I need a black now I have several options that will get me one within an hour.
It might not be P3, but I think it’s more PP’s problem then mine. I’ll just spend my money elsewhere.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Why not use the internet to get p3 paints?
I also hear war colors are similar.
I have both P3 and Warcolours, and can say they are in no way similar. Warcolours are a gel based medium, much more akin to Scale 75. However, for me, Warcolours have become my main go-to line of paints as they work really well for my preferred techniques (wet blending, glazing). I do still have most of my P3 tho, and still use them, but honestly haven't bought any in years now.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Why not use the internet to get p3 paints?
I also hear war colors are similar.
When outside temperatures can drop to -50C here, I’m not taking the chance on my paints being frozen.
I will only buy local after having so many paints come up duds after being frozen.
The LGS even has the same problem.
So unless you’re in a temperate or warmer climate then mine, ordering online is out of the question.
And with the way things are going, I don’t see paints I need getting here in a shorter time period than a couple of weeks.
When I need a colour I can’t afford to wait weeks or months for it to arrive.
I have a channel I need to run with a weekly release, and I can’t depend on delivery services to get me what I need when I need it. If I need a black now I have several options that will get me one within an hour.
It might not be P3, but I think it’s more PP’s problem then mine. I’ll just spend my money elsewhere.
I meant no disrespect for that. I didnt know paint can freeze!!!!
hotsauceman1 wrote: Why not use the internet to get p3 paints?
I also hear war colors are similar.
When outside temperatures can drop to -50C here, I’m not taking the chance on my paints being frozen.
I will only buy local after having so many paints come up duds after being frozen.
The LGS even has the same problem.
So unless you’re in a temperate or warmer climate then mine, ordering online is out of the question.
And with the way things are going, I don’t see paints I need getting here in a shorter time period than a couple of weeks.
When I need a colour I can’t afford to wait weeks or months for it to arrive.
I have a channel I need to run with a weekly release, and I can’t depend on delivery services to get me what I need when I need it. If I need a black now I have several options that will get me one within an hour.
It might not be P3, but I think it’s more PP’s problem then mine. I’ll just spend my money elsewhere.
My issue is the exact opposite. If I leave them out in the car from April through October, they may dry out. Average summer temp is about 46-47 C (115 F or more) here and is often dry as a bone. Inside a car's cabin it can easily reach from 77-82 C (170-180 F). Does interesting things to plastic.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Why not use the internet to get p3 paints?
I also hear war colors are similar.
When outside temperatures can drop to -50C here, I’m not taking the chance on my paints being frozen.
I will only buy local after having so many paints come up duds after being frozen.
The LGS even has the same problem.
So unless you’re in a temperate or warmer climate then mine, ordering online is out of the question.
And with the way things are going, I don’t see paints I need getting here in a shorter time period than a couple of weeks.
When I need a colour I can’t afford to wait weeks or months for it to arrive.
I have a channel I need to run with a weekly release, and I can’t depend on delivery services to get me what I need when I need it. If I need a black now I have several options that will get me one within an hour.
It might not be P3, but I think it’s more PP’s problem then mine. I’ll just spend my money elsewhere.
I meant no disrespect for that. I didnt know paint can freeze!!!!
Yep. The first set of scale color I ordered had froze on the flight from Spain. It turned into a thick mushy foam after it had defrosted.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I will say, i personally loved that in WM/H you where using names characters at the center of your army. Narratively it felt like every battle you where having was important, and not just some random skirmish.
Honestly, that's one of the main reasons I disliked Warmachine/Hordes and one of the reasons I'm looking into Warcaster.
It just feels less special/personal when people can look at who your caster is and automatically know what kind of list you're running, which is only exacerbated by themes and the hyper competitive nature of the scene. Back when I played Warhammer/40k, there was really nothing stopping you from fielding off the wall strategies like "Chaos with Range" Orcs or "Slightly less chaotic Skaven" with Goblins just by picking up the Greenskin book.
Unlike something like MTG Commander, where you can just pick a Legendary and build a deck completely separate from that, in WMH the Caster is too important to not try to focus on since losing them means you lose the game.
Most of the stores in the larger metro areas in my area all have dropped WMH, or they have reduced their inventory and the location to such a degree that it's a negligible presence.
Ghool wrote: Well it’s official, my LGS is no longer stocking PP. The paints are running out and the corner where PP used to be is empty save a few KS starter boxes of Warcaster.
I’m having to switch my paints to Citadel as a result, and which I am not too thrilled about.
My LGS not stocking PP is telling - they stock anything and everything in print.
Sounds like the distributor is not carrying them or the LGS is not wanting to work with PP retail. I see this happening with alot of games that not publically owned. Basically if you are not GW, Asmodee sub, CMON, WoTC in regards to miniatures, distributors are starting to filter you out. Saller companies like PP, Mantic, Wyrd do carry direct retailer support but the will to use that support has to be there.
Which is sad, means hobby boom of early 2010's with many different games will be even harder to pull off. I don't see PP, Wyrd, Mantic, or Corvis Belle going anyway, but I don't see any other games breaking in either.
Who knows perhaps distributors dropping more and more middleweight games iwll cause a gap in the market that a new distribution team will rise to fill.
Both Matt Wilson and Chris Burch (from Modiphus) were talking about distributors over the summer in different interviews. The jist of it is there's too much stuff coming out every week. Distributors no longer act as a warehouse to store and ship orders outside of a small selection of very popular items, they only care about new preorders for most things and several were going to go under pre-COVID (Diamond is an example here in the US and why DC joint with some other comic companies to make their own distribution network) and we could see a large number shut down due to COVID as most had to furlough most of their staff or running on skeleton crews as they're not essential in some places.
Sounds like Privateer really wants to get away from them but stores don't like having to have multiple billing accounts so they rarely do even though they'll get better prices. Reaper has this same issue as many stores cannot get older Bones and some of their line as Distributors just won't carry them even if they sell well.
If distributors fail Chris's thoughts are a lot of FLGS will shut down as stores will loose customers to ordering directly due to the FLGS not able to get anything in as only a small % of game companies are capable of direct sells to stores. That also means you'll have a collapse of the gaming market which is over crowded right now. Both Chris and Matt weren't sure where things will be in 2 years as everything is so volitile.
It's a worst case scenario brought on by uncertainty around COVID. Remember, these were given in July. But I do think they're right we really won't know how the economic landscape for the hobby will look like post COVID and Diamond likely won't be around in 2 years and they're a big player.
Which is sad, means hobby boom of early 2010's with many different games will be even harder to pull off. I don't see PP, Wyrd, Mantic, or Corvis Belle going anyway, but I don't see any other games breaking in either.
So, as i think iv mentioned a few times on this thread, I also play a lot of Malifaux by Wyrd games. And apart from a period of about a month at the launch of the 3rd edition, getting product in the UK has never really been an issue. Have stock levels been unlimited? No. have i been able to get what i wanted when i wanted it? Pretty much.
My job involves a lot of travel in the UK and i find myself staying overnight in lots of major and minor towns and cities all over the country. Being a 30 something year old geek i often look to see if there is a hobby/FLGS in the area and go to it, just to burn some time in the evenings. So iv spoken to a number of games store owner and staff.
The difference between PP and a company like Wyrd is that, in instances where a store had to set up a direct relationship wit the company to get stock, the stores wanted to continue their relationship with Wyrd. Malifaux sells and the company has a stock of goodwill with most stores and a good relationship with retail in general. So when things got a bit tricky, they were able to "spend" some of that goodwill to sort our their supply issues.
My understanding is that in the UK there is now a import/distro company that deals specifically in all the "not GW" companies which has allowed PP, Wyrd, Mantic, Corvis Belle to get onto UK shelves with a little more ease. But even with that, the demand and goodwill for PP stuff just isn't coming in from the smaller FLGS and only some of the bigger UK B&M/Online stores.
It’s interesting because my LGS has cleared out a large section of their miniatures games just recently. They got rid of almost all PP product, except for the KS bundles of Warcaster. They also dropped Batman/DC from Knight Models, most of Wyrd, and there’s a few other smaller ones I missed.
I think the pandemic is hitting a lot of game stores and companies really hard, and it appears my LGS is liquidating all their slow moving stock. With the inability to play games with others (and yay for another lockdown here) I think we’re going to find fewer and fewer games and companies around by this time next year.
Because let’s face it, nothing is going back to normal until at least the summer, maybe even later. We’ll see who survives.
We might actually see games take a boom. Whilst clubs are shut down many customers are more used to ordering online and are building and painting. So there might well be that once things settle back toward normal we could see a big update in clubs running.
It's one thing to drift away from the club on choice; its another to be told you can't go at all.
So we might see a resurgance, if a bit hit and miss as different regions unlock and come online and people get confident at going out.
The real trick is surviving that long. From what I can see many of the game manufacturers should be ok - its the middlemen stores that are at greatest risk.
Seabass wrote: Most of the stores in the larger metro areas in my area all have dropped WMH, or they have reduced their inventory and the location to such a degree that it's a negligible presence.
It's pretty sad to see it go.
This is a pretty big shock to me! The reason is in my area, most stores only carried GW and WM/H. Then there was a token section of other stuff which was usually about 4-8 feet max. Maybe FFG took another 4 foot section depending on the store.
With WM/H gone, what are they going to put on the shelf instead? That was taking up 8-16 feet of space in most of the stores I went to.
Granted, I haven't been in an FLGS in a while due to COVID and lack of interest in GW and WM/H so I am left wondering what FLGS even sell for miniature games anymore?
If distributors fail Chris's thoughts are a lot of FLGS will shut down as stores will loose customers to ordering directly due to the FLGS not able to get anything in as only a small % of game companies are capable of direct sells to stores. That also means you'll have a collapse of the gaming market which is over crowded right now. Both Chris and Matt weren't sure where things will be in 2 years as everything is so volitile.
The problem is that distributors are failing the minis industry, but they're not really failing themselves or FLGS. The main problem is just that FLGS's just can't compete with online sales outside of the first week or two of product release where they have the advantage of convenience. The idea of keeping a miniatures line in stock just isn't practical for most stores so its easier to stay in business fulfilling preorders on new releases and.... honestly there's enough new releases every week these days they don't really need to take on the risk of back stock. There's always a new shiny to sell. MInis are just bad business. That's no small part of why GW has adopted this limited edition box set model. It works well within the current FLGS model.
Seabass wrote: Most of the stores in the larger metro areas in my area all have dropped WMH, or they have reduced their inventory and the location to such a degree that it's a negligible presence.
It's pretty sad to see it go.
This is a pretty big shock to me! The reason is in my area, most stores only carried GW and WM/H. Then there was a token section of other stuff which was usually about 4-8 feet max. Maybe FFG took another 4 foot section depending on the store.
With WM/H gone, what are they going to put on the shelf instead? That was taking up 8-16 feet of space in most of the stores I went to.
Granted, I haven't been in an FLGS in a while due to COVID and lack of interest in GW and WM/H so I am left wondering what FLGS even sell for miniature games anymore?
My LGS still has quite a few smaller lines. They've just culled the stuff that's not moving.
Frostgrave is still very popular in these parts.
As is Infinity and Arestia.
Marvel: Crisis Protocol is the next big hit.
Warlord games has a big section still in my LGS.
Song of Ice and Fire Mini game is doing well also with a section just for it.
Battletech is still selling better than WM/H, and still has half a wall.
There is still plenty of selection and variety. I think we'll see things shift, and churn once folks can get back to gaming with each other.
Sunno wrote:The difference between PP and a company like Wyrd is that, in instances where a store had to set up a direct relationship wit the company to get stock, the stores wanted to continue their relationship with Wyrd. Malifaux sells and the company has a stock of goodwill with most stores and a good relationship with retail in general. So when things got a bit tricky, they were able to "spend" some of that goodwill to sort our their supply issues.
True. Out of 2 FLGS and about 6-7 smaller LGS in my metro area (I think, a few have opened up in the last 3 years, including 2 nearby), I think only one has any PP stock. The reason for this is because the owner played Warhammer with some of PP's organizers back in college and still has a line open with the company.
The unfortunate parts are that I moved to the other side of the metro area 3 years ago, and I had a player in that store literally say, "We only play Steamroller here."
Ghool wrote:It’s interesting because my LGS has cleared out a large section of their miniatures games just recently. They got rid of almost all PP product, except for the KS bundles of Warcaster. They also dropped Batman/DC from Knight Models, most of Wyrd, and there’s a few other smaller ones I missed.
I think the pandemic is hitting a lot of game stores and companies really hard, and it appears my LGS is liquidating all their slow moving stock. With the inability to play games with others (and yay for another lockdown here) I think we’re going to find fewer and fewer games and companies around by this time next year.
Because let’s face it, nothing is going back to normal until at least the summer, maybe even later. We’ll see who survives.
The pandemic isn't hurting these game stores as much as the lockdowns and panic-mongering. When the government doesn't let you operate because you aren't as "essential" as a liquor store, it's hard to survive. I know plenty of people around here who are quite willing to take proper precautions for their game time, but many of the stores have a lot of restrictions.
Easy E wrote:
Seabass wrote: Most of the stores in the larger metro areas in my area all have dropped WMH, or they have reduced their inventory and the location to such a degree that it's a negligible presence.
It's pretty sad to see it go.
This is a pretty big shock to me! The reason is in my area, most stores only carried GW and WM/H. Then there was a token section of other stuff which was usually about 4-8 feet max. Maybe FFG took another 4 foot section depending on the store.
With WM/H gone, what are they going to put on the shelf instead? That was taking up 8-16 feet of space in most of the stores I went to.
Granted, I haven't been in an FLGS in a while due to COVID and lack of interest in GW and WM/H so I am left wondering what FLGS even sell for miniature games anymore?
Two of FFG's Star Wars games are pretty hot here, and have been for a while, so that has been taking up a lot of space. Secondaries would be Infinity and Bolt Action. This is aside from GW's Warhammer monsters, of course.
For my FLGS the biggest sections for miniatures & miniature games are
.GW/40KAOS (of course)
.reaper
.warmachine(being literally an hour or so away from the company HQ and the fact some of the staff come in to play at our store sometimes might have something to do with that).
.star wars attack wing
.star wars armada
.star wars legion
.flames of war
.DnD
battletech used to have a huge section but restock issues with the distributors had made it hard to get anything but new releases and the stock has dwindled.
Infinity was never really carried in large amounts
we also have some small sections for
.DUST
.malifaux/the other side
.micro scale armor and naval
.DBA (micro scale historicals)
.drop zone commander
.deadzone
.hero clix
.axis and allies
.monpoc
.star trek attack wing
.the other star wars infantry min game before legion (rebel assault i think)
If distributors fail Chris's thoughts are a lot of FLGS will shut down as stores will loose customers to ordering directly due to the FLGS not able to get anything in as only a small % of game companies are capable of direct sells to stores. That also means you'll have a collapse of the gaming market which is over crowded right now. Both Chris and Matt weren't sure where things will be in 2 years as everything is so volitile.
The problem is that distributors are failing the minis industry, but they're not really failing themselves or FLGS. The main problem is just that FLGS's just can't compete with online sales outside of the first week or two of product release where they have the advantage of convenience. The idea of keeping a miniatures line in stock just isn't practical for most stores so its easier to stay in business fulfilling preorders on new releases and.... honestly there's enough new releases every week these days they don't really need to take on the risk of back stock. There's always a new shiny to sell. MInis are just bad business. That's no small part of why GW has adopted this limited edition box set model. It works well within the current FLGS model.
I don't know how much I'd agree with "they're not really failing themselves or FLGS" as I guess it's what are they supposed to be? Right now they really only just act as pre-order coordinators to get the newest stuff to the stores. But I think that's fine with MTG and Boargames maybe? Matt and Chris's companies both are more Wargame/RPG which that model doesn't solve. And they complain about it a lot in their interviews.
But you are correct that they fail wargaming, and RPGs are in a similar boat but at a smaller scale, but it's also one of the biggest flaws with a wargame that gets popular and has a lot of growth. Who expects anyone to carry everything and how do you deal with slow selling items. With most boardgames you have the corebox and 1-3 expansions. So if someone wants game X, it's easy. One choice. If someone wants to get into Warhammer what of the 20 different starting points do you take? As a store owner you really never know what will sell when.
I don't think either business model serves each other very well. I think Wargames, and to a lesser extent RPGS, would be better suited by the club model where you get together to play (with a monthly membership to cover cost) and then you just do direct orders to the manufacturer yourself or via a club discount service.
The whole distributor problem is why Infinity did Code One, with stripped-back rules and about a third of the models in four factions rather than nine and a bit factions with as many as five sub-factions each.
From my experience at my FLGS there are a significant number of people willing or even happy to pay a little bit more to buy product in-person. Wanting to support the store as a place to play is a common reason. But I also think there is an appeal to physically browsing items, being able to buy them right then and take them home to work on right then. Even 1-day shipping can't compete with that experience. And we are of course assuming free shipping, otherwise that discount largely evaporates.
But I see all of that as very secondary on PP's list of problems; my flgs can't sell its remaining PP stock at 70% off.
hotsauceman1 wrote: So, could it be said that, the industry actively growing and being strong, is weakening the industry in some sense?
Yes as the industry infrastructure hasn't matured to handle the influx of growth.
Another issue is there are so many things available but that the player base is spread thin so it's much harder for companies not named WoTC or GW to really pick up steam and make an impact. Outside of those two companies no one else really has the income and budget to bring in new players via traditional means (advertising) so GW and WoTC can continue to grow and not see their market share hurt as they are the main source of new players for tabletop games. Other games are left with everything else and that there's such amazing number of games fighting for that dollar that you rarely see things grow past a certain size. And when they do, Infinity for example, Distribution can't handle their SKU size causing issues getting products to stores. A store could order lots of a sku but this is dangerous with wargames as people really don't know what will be popular after the initial release and you could be left with a lot of unsellable stock.
Another thing that drives this point is Matt Wilson in the same interview, I believe, talked about how the first Warcaster KSer brought in better sales to more people then doing a traditional GENCON and then store release would have (but they made a little less per model sold). That was only 2,330 backers.
That being said there are lots of small games making enough to keep the lights on, and even several that have gotten to a pretty decent size, as the prevalence of options and the internet really allows someone to find that game just for them and become pretty dedicated. That's despite game stores and distributors in a lot of cases as you don't need to go to a store to find a community that likes what you like. But for the most part a new game is announced, makes a bit of a splash, gets their initial fans and then kind of just hovers there. Not grown much, but not shrinking much (just from casual observation).
Another issue is there are so many things available but that the player base is spread thin so it's much harder for companies not named WoTC or GW to really pick up steam and make an impact.
Funny you should mention that
the outer circle channel just did a video on this very problem
it's pretty in depth since he has a background on the manufacturing side of the hobby.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I would much honestly prefer the club model.
I legit hate feeling guilted into buying every single thing from my LGS.
Thing is your club will likely need to take money from you to pay for facilities. So either way you'll end up dipping into your pocket to support it.
Shops also tend to have the benefit that if the manger and staff are good; then they want customers. So they will be a very active 5-7 day a week recruitment system. That can't be underestimated, many clubs struggle with even the concept of advertising themselves; let alone drawing in people totally new to wargaming/models/geekstuff in general. Having a store with staff; shiny products on the shelf and at least half decent footfall to get noticed - that can bring in more people than a club that meets once a week on an evening. Which is another element - if the store has enough room they can offer demos and games all day they are open - its one thing to buy a box of models; its another to get a short game; a short intro and more all in one experience in the moment. No going away, forgetting and letting it drift. Heck have you ever seen a GW store that didn't at least have one table setup and ready for demo games - its clearly a huge element in drawing in customers.
Clubs, of course, have other benefits, they aren't tied to specific stock and can be more experimental in what they play. A store has to work with profits in mind as well and might well want people buying Magic or Yugio cards instead of wargames; whilst the hobby club might well just go with whatever is popular and has more potential scope to branch out.
It's definitely hard to draw in people in without a public presence. For the better part of 6 years I played WMH at the only little store we had in town, ran regular 20ish player tournaments, etc etc with essentially no competition outside Magic.
Later on I learned there were 2 maybe 3 GW clubs in town that mostly met by setting up games in basements not even really aware of one another. 8th and a new larger store really helped bring them out of the shadows but the main form of new players is still someone seeing product on the shelves of the new store and asking if anyone plays due to not having a strong public presence.
Exactly, private clubs can be fine but so many form around a school based friendship group and rarely manage to grow much beyond it.
Active recruitment, advertising and marketing isn't easy nor simple and it takes time and money to achieve. A store does most of that as standard (at least a good store); meanwhile a club might well just not have people with the skill sets or time to devote to such activities. As a result a club can really find it hard to grow itself.
I'm also led to understand that in the USA particularly, its much harder for clubs to gain viable access to things like community centres or church halls and such to rent for a game night. So if its happening in Dave's basement/garage that already hinders expansion of the club beyond a small group because you've just not the space for more people and more tables.
There's also a financial challenge period where a new growing club has to make the choice between a free garage or renting space that might let them expand, but which might mean one person (or several) dipping their pockets hard for the first year or so whilst they grow to enough numbers that a modest fee can support the groups upkeep.
I am glad we have a well established FLGS to play it as it does bring in new blood on a regular basis. i have resisted suggestions of playing at private homes for much of the same reasons mentioned above....and i also volunteer there so i get to keep much of my personal terrain in my own area for use on game nights. it is a serious benefit considering how much stuff i transport just in the form of minis, books, and game aids for the 6 games(DUST, 40K epic 40K, warmachine, infinity, B5 wars) i regularly bring armies for.
I don't know. Board games are strictly "play at home-maybe in a club" and they thrive in a way wargames can only dream of. With zero need for "increasing visibility/awareness" or "community building".
But tbh I believe that public groups playing wargames are only a tiny fraction of the entire playerbase with the HUGE majority playing at home, never even thinking of looking for new opponents.
Overread wrote: Shops also tend to have the benefit that if the manger and staff are good; then they want customers. So they will be a very active 5-7 day a week recruitment system. That can't be underestimated, many clubs struggle with even the concept of advertising themselves; let alone drawing in people totally new to wargaming/models/geekstuff in general. Having a store with staff; shiny products on the shelf and at least half decent footfall to get noticed - that can bring in more people than a club that meets once a week on an evening. Which is another element - if the store has enough room they can offer demos and games all day they are open - its one thing to buy a box of models; its another to get a short game; a short intro and more all in one experience in the moment. No going away, forgetting and letting it drift. Heck have you ever seen a GW store that didn't at least have one table setup and ready for demo games - its clearly a huge element in drawing in customers.
Maybe it's different in the UK but all the stores I've ever seen here in the US the staff rarely runs game demos while on the clock unless there's no other work to do (never been to a GW shop in the US so cannot comment there but it makes since as it's focused on one game) and I travel a lot (my wife's hobby is much more expensive then mine) so I use to like to visit local stores until I realized they're all pretty much the same. It's all volunteers, who get pretty much nothing in return for working for the store for free that run demos. The owners expect the community to come and do all the marketing and organization themselves. If the stores did actually run games/demos/organize events then things like the Press Gangers would have never existed. And no one would complain that PP got rid of them helping cause a drop off of popularity of the game as the stores would have been doing all of that. But they don't. So game creators have to find ways to encourage fans to do that work.
I'm sure this is the exception but the largest chain in my state use to be pretty abusive on this and would treat volunteers like employees. Good friend of mine use to run organized D&D probably back in late 3.5 early 4th (so quite a long time ago) and after about 6 months of running things they just stared scheduling him to come in and "work". He'd get calls asking where he was and why wasn't he in the shop -- there were customers that wanted to play D&D. It took them about a month of him constantly telling them he doesn't work for them, he does this for free, for fun, and the schedule they originally agreed upon was when he'd be there for him to just cancel the whole thing as they refused to accept that the store couldn't just schedule new games for him to run (especially as they never called and asked if he could). Think he was banned there for several years because of it.
One of the reasons I stopped going to game stores for the most part is whenever I did and was looking for something and talking about what I played it always turned into "why don't you come run games for us (with my own stuff) and if you get enough people interested we'll start carrying stock." Every single time at pretty much any store. If I do ever have to go in one I refuse to talk about anything outside of what's needed for my purchase.
There are advantages to stores for sure. But that's diminishing as online buying and quick delivery are becoming more the norm.
Overread wrote:Exactly, private clubs can be fine but so many form around a school based friendship group and rarely manage to grow much beyond it.
Active recruitment, advertising and marketing isn't easy nor simple and it takes time and money to achieve. A store does most of that as standard (at least a good store); meanwhile a club might well just not have people with the skill sets or time to devote to such activities. As a result a club can really find it hard to grow itself.
Maybe it's just the places I've lived, and again I mentioned above there are a ton of stores in my county. Way more then the population density would suggest sustainable so they're quite popular. I've never, ever, ever seen a local game store advertise before. They all survive off of word of mouth and google searches for "Local places to buy magic". I doubt a single one pays a cent for adds. None of them sell online either (that I'm aware of).
Cyel wrote:I don't know. Board games are strictly "play at home-maybe in a club" and they thrive in a way wargames can only dream of. With zero need for "increasing visibility/awareness" or "community building".
But tbh I believe that public groups playing wargames are only a tiny fraction of the entire playerbase with the HUGE majority playing at home, never even thinking of looking for new opponents.
Pretty much this. Stores are necessary for a game's growth and survival is often claimed while ignoring all the larger, more popular tabletop game types that manage to do just fine without one being the focal point. I think it's more how the games are sold to the consumers buy the manufactures. Look at promo images of people playing board games or RPGS. Always at the kitchen table or some place similar. Look at ones for wargames, almost always something that looks like a game store. I think we're conditioned to expect wargames to be a "game store thing".
Wow. This thread really took a tangent just because of my Game Clubs comment. Interesting discussion though.
Gaming clubs aren't really a thing in the US like they are in the UK. It isn't a concept people buy into, it isn't part of the culture. In the US a flgs is the lifeblood of a wargaming community. No flgs generally means no wargames community, beyond maybe a small circle of friends meeting in someone's garage.
And what about gaming cafes ? I think they are perfect, as cafes are already places designed specifically for social interaction. For example, my favourite in Warsaw looks like this : https://www.facebook.com/pg/ParadoxCafe/photos/?ref=page_internal , they have board games, wargaming tables, people play RPGs, they hold a LARP once in a while.
Out of the different places where people tend to play (home, clubs, cafes, stores) stores have always been the least attractive for me, the least comfortable and convenient.
NinthMusketeer wrote:Gaming clubs aren't really a thing in the US like they are in the UK. It isn't a concept people buy into, it isn't part of the culture. In the US a flgs is the lifeblood of a wargaming community. No flgs generally means no wargames community, beyond maybe a small circle of friends meeting in someone's garage.
I think the largest I ever got going for about a year playing infinity was 8 at my house. It's a lot of work, and we really only played maybe every 6-8 weeks depending on the time of year. But do you really need a large local community for the game to be successful? I don't think so. But I've never been a competitive player so I guess it matters what you want out of a wargame. I think clubs could be more of the culture but it would require a shift in how companies themselves present their game. Meaning, actually admit people play at home and other places then game stores.
Cyel wrote:And what about gaming cafes ? I think they are perfect, as cafes are already places designed specifically for social interaction. For example, my favourite in Warsaw looks like this : https://www.facebook.com/pg/ParadoxCafe/photos/?ref=page_internal , they have board games, wargaming tables, people play RPGs, they hold a LARP once in a while.
Out of the different places where people tend to play (home, clubs, cafes, stores) stores have always been the least attractive for me, the least comfortable and convenient.
There's at least one gamer café closer to the larger of the two collages near me always wondered how often they had to replace their games due to the menu . $5 per person to play, less if you order food and/or have a large group. A guy in my gaming group has gone there a few times pre-covid (as it wasn't far from his office) and said it was surprisingly decent. It's kind of a club as you can even buy a monthly unlimited play membership and being not to far from a university probably helps quite a lot.
I think there's a lot of promise with the model just because if you can provide good food you have a main source of income that has a wider appeal. But who knows now with COIVD. The restaurant industry will surly change as people really seam to like delivery and curb side pickup.
The main issue with cafe's are just the rules around starting an eatery can complicate things significantly; doubly so if they want to serve alcohol. With tabletop spanning a pretty large age range it can get tricky depending on local state laws. I do think there's a lot of potential but the risk is very high and depends on a different kind of business expertise than most people who want to start a game store have.
I think the board game comparisons miss a few major aspects. Primarily, board games have a much lower barrier to entry. There's no hobby elements, the purchase price per player is dramatically lower, only one person generally makes that purchase and its still probably lower for them. Games have a variety of playable player counts and are generally easy to invite an "outsider" into.
Hobby games demand an invested community of people willing to stay invested. A lot of their variety also depends on the varied collections of a number of players. That said, I think basement groups are woefully ignored by a lot of the industry; I just also know they do little to help someone looking to get in a game that isn't already a part of one.
LunarSol wrote: The main issue with cafe's are just the rules around starting an eatery can complicate things significantly; doubly so if they want to serve alcohol. With tabletop spanning a pretty large age range it can get tricky depending on local state laws. I do think there's a lot of potential but the risk is very high and depends on a different kind of business expertise than most people who want to start a game store have.
I think the board game comparisons miss a few major aspects. Primarily, board games have a much lower barrier to entry. There's no hobby elements, the purchase price per player is dramatically lower, only one person generally makes that purchase and its still probably lower for them. Games have a variety of playable player counts and are generally easy to invite an "outsider" into.
Hobby games demand an in're vested community of people willing to stay invested. A lot of their variety also depends on the varied collections of a number of players. That said, I think basement groups are woefully ignored by a lot of the industry; I just also know they do little to help someone looking to get in a game that isn't already a part of one.
I will 100% disagree on the bolded and underlined point.
The hobby aspect can be as much or as little as one wants.
Just go take a look at BGG at how many mini painters there are (the Miniature Painters Guild has almost 2600 members), and how many others build and craft tokens, boards, terrain and more.
To say that there is NO hobby aspect to board games is downright false.
The reason we see them on the upswing is likely why I prefer board games myself - a complete set for 2-4 in one purchase with no more required.
At this point in time, board game minis are just shy of 'proper' wargame minis. When I can get a game that has some hobby elements, allows my son, wife, and daughter to play as well for around $100, then I'm very reluctant to invest in any strictly speaking, 'Mini Games'.
If I cost out a small force for just myself and my son for WM (not buying second hand, call me a snob or whatever), it's double or triple that for us to have say 25 points in WM/Hordes.
I think this is the reason we're seeing more complete boxed games (expandable of course) from GW, and why Hasbro has been reinvesting into Avalon Hill - board games are better value, provide as much or as little hobby projects as you want, and require no further investment to 'play the full game'.
The hobby is aspect is why I have mainly switched to board games. When PP started using PVC plastic and charging the same price as metal is when I figured it was probably just as good, and cheaper to switch over to board games. And I fill my week with 40 hours or more of hobby projects based on board games alone.
True. There are definitely models to paint. I mostly meant that those models generally don't require assembly or painting to play the game and such, the hobby elements that exist don't create a barrier to participation. Even then, a lot of the most popular games out there don't have any minis at all, particularly among the top of the BGG pile.
I think the board game comparisons miss a few major aspects. Primarily, board games have a much lower barrier to entry. There's no hobby elements, the purchase price per player is dramatically lower, only one person generally makes that purchase and its still probably lower for them. Games have a variety of playable player counts and are generally easy to invite an "outsider" into.
So maybe the way to go is not to try to make the effort to compensate for these barriers existing, but rather to remove them ?
That's basically what Guild Ball tried. They repackaged the game into a very board game style. Godtear is sold in a very similar manner. Clearly that wasn't a huge success for the former but the latter feels more built to support it so I suppose we'll see.
Personally, I find the static sculpts of pre-built PVC pretty limiting in this regard. I don't hate it all that much, but Guild Ball's move to boy band poses definitely dulled my interest compared to the original sculpts that conveyed a lot of motion. Godtear is a little hit or miss but the larger figures work better outside of swords and other thin pieces.
LunarSol wrote: The main issue with cafe's are just the rules around starting an eatery can complicate things significantly; doubly so if they want to serve alcohol. With tabletop spanning a pretty large age range it can get tricky depending on local state laws. I do think there's a lot of potential but the risk is very high and depends on a different kind of business expertise than most people who want to start a game store have.
Oh for sure. I wasn't implying that it would become the defacto game meet up place replacing clubs, game stores or people's houses but I think you'll see more of this business model in the years to come is what I meant by 'a lot of potential'. Running a restaurant is much harder then a lot of other businesses but I think if you can manage running one well it could be a good way to prop up the game store/club side of things where maybe running a standalone game store wouldn't normally make business sense.
LunarSol wrote: That's basically what Guild Ball tried. They repackaged the game into a very board game style. Godtear is sold in a very similar manner. Clearly that wasn't a huge success for the former but the latter feels more built to support it so I suppose we'll see.
Personally, I find the static sculpts of pre-built PVC pretty limiting in this regard. I don't hate it all that much, but Guild Ball's move to boy band poses definitely dulled my interest compared to the original sculpts that conveyed a lot of motion. Godtear is a little hit or miss but the larger figures work better outside of swords and other thin pieces.
Just quoting this part but replying to the whole thread of yours.
Again I think it's what you want out of it. How many people who play wargames actually bother to ever do anything more the assemble the miniatures and prime them a base color? I don't know if we've ever really seen a good polling but it's at least half. How many people care if the parts are a bit bendy? I doubt many as well as back when I did frequent stores more often there sure where a lot of people with minis missing parts, having broken detail (as one drop and it can be done for). I know there's people that clearly care about painted armies and good looking casts but I do believe they're just the vocal minority in the community but they're more what the game manufacturers target as that group is the most likely to switch and start a new game and start word of mouth but it limits growth in the long term as there's a limit of who you can reach catering to that crowed.
I don't think what killed guildball was it's move to more static poses (though I can understand why you didn't like them) and I personally don't think easy to assemble pvc that's more dynamic would be that much of a barrier to a lot of people especially if it was just "glue this leg on" or, you know, they could just be assembled at the factory like Reaper Bones are for smaller things. It's all stuff that can be worked around, but SFG clearly just went the cheaper route (though I really like their PVC line and have it all). But I'm also not unaware of the huge upfront cost to release anything in PVC.
Maybe because of the cost of plastics and how metal and resin are so much more affordable to produce (and lower risk financially) and those inherently cater to a smaller group of people we really can't see a broader breakout of wargames until there's a 3dprinter that cheap enough, fast enough to replace the other means of production which could break that barrier to entry but still appease the hardcore wargamers that love the more hobby aspect. That might not be for say 20-30 years when maybe you can just buy all your minis pre-painted and pre-posed (how you want) and custom printed for not much more then we pay now. I do think the eventually future of the games (if they don't move 100% to AR) is a heroforged like system where you choose the character model/unit. Pose and choose equipment from what they're allowed to use and then order and you get them a few days later. Where a game store will fit into that I don't know.
LunarSol wrote: True. There are definitely models to paint. I mostly meant that those models generally don't require assembly or painting to play the game and such, the hobby elements that exist don't create a barrier to participation. Even then, a lot of the most popular games out there don't have any minis at all, particularly among the top of the BGG pile.
I have been way more motivated to build my minis that i need for a game than my general display models that never leave the house.
I am finally getting around to finishing all of my gundam mastergrade and SD (less than 10) kits i have had for nearly 20 years. in that same time i have built and finished/painted a SOB army, nid army, tau army, deathwing army, ravenwing army, salamanders army, 2 BFG fleets, a heavy gear army, dozens of battletech minis, 5 epic 40K armies, a large infinity army, 3 dust armies, and a gaggle of terrain.
i think you can see where my priorities were driven.
LunarSol wrote: That's basically what Guild Ball tried. They repackaged the game into a very board game style. Godtear is sold in a very similar manner. Clearly that wasn't a huge success for the former but the latter feels more built to support it so I suppose we'll see.
Personally, I find the static sculpts of pre-built PVC pretty limiting in this regard. I don't hate it all that much, but Guild Ball's move to boy band poses definitely dulled my interest compared to the original sculpts that conveyed a lot of motion. Godtear is a little hit or miss but the larger figures work better outside of swords and other thin pieces.
Just quoting this part but replying to the whole thread of yours.
Again I think it's what you want out of it. How many people who play wargames actually bother to ever do anything more the assemble the miniatures and prime them a base color? I don't know if we've ever really seen a good polling but it's at least half. How many people care if the parts are a bit bendy? I doubt many as well as back when I did frequent stores more often there sure where a lot of people with minis missing parts, having broken detail (as one drop and it can be done for). I know there's people that clearly care about painted armies and good looking casts but I do believe they're just the vocal minority in the community but they're more what the game manufacturers target as that group is the most likely to switch and start a new game and start word of mouth but it limits growth in the long term as there's a limit of who you can reach catering to that crowed.
I don't think what killed guildball was it's move to more static poses (though I can understand why you didn't like them) and I personally don't think easy to assemble pvc that's more dynamic would be that much of a barrier to a lot of people especially if it was just "glue this leg on" or, you know, they could just be assembled at the factory like Reaper Bones are for smaller things. It's all stuff that can be worked around, but SFG clearly just went the cheaper route (though I really like their PVC line and have it all). But I'm also not unaware of the huge upfront cost to release anything in PVC.
Maybe because of the cost of plastics and how metal and resin are so much more affordable to produce (and lower risk financially) and those inherently cater to a smaller group of people we really can't see a broader breakout of wargames until there's a 3dprinter that cheap enough, fast enough to replace the other means of production which could break that barrier to entry but still appease the hardcore wargamers that love the more hobby aspect. That might not be for say 20-30 years when maybe you can just buy all your minis pre-painted and pre-posed (how you want) and custom printed for not much more then we pay now. I do think the eventually future of the games (if they don't move 100% to AR) is a heroforged like system where you choose the character model/unit. Pose and choose equipment from what they're allowed to use and then order and you get them a few days later. Where a game store will fit into that I don't know.
It's definitely a curious thing to consider. You definitely see a good chunk of people that don't paint, but I'm not sure that means that model quality is unimportant to them. I've just not seen games without mediocre sculpts really take off (with perhaps the exception of Clix) but you see people playing games with gorgeous models and terrible rules all the time.
I think it comes down to inspiration. Even if you're not the best painter in the world, a good sculpt still tells a subconcious story that your imagination can more than make up for, particularly if you've seen a studio paint job on it. More than anything, new exciting releases seem to drive the hype cycle that determines what's hot. Even if its not for your faction, a big exciting release for a game seems to invigorate players into playing and buying more. The low hobby releases just haven't pulled that off with the exception of X-Wing.
Thinking on it, I'm curious how much that is a result of these games not having sculpts that excite players or whether it might have to do with release schedule logistics of outsourced manufacturing. It really seems like companies that go the PVC route in particular just don't have enough control over manufacturing timelines to be able to schedule new release hype.
It's definitely a curious thing to consider. You definitely see a good chunk of people that don't paint, but I'm not sure that means that model quality is unimportant to them. I've just not seen games without mediocre sculpts really take off (with perhaps the exception of Clix) but you see people playing games with gorgeous models and terrible rules all the time.
I think it comes down to inspiration. Even if you're not the best painter in the world, a good sculpt still tells a subconcious story that your imagination can more than make up for, particularly if you've seen a studio paint job on it.
This is an interesting point as it's very true. Well except the Clix don't have good sculpts, most of their sculpts are very good but painted very poorly and possibly translated poorly to the plastic being used. I can go back to some I have from 15 years ago and they look pretty good if they were painted decently. Which leads me to wonder how much is good sculpt needed as opposed to the overall marketing presentation of the model where it's generally painted really nice. Sometimes shown with scenery and such. Maybe people get that impression stuck in their head and see that even if they don't paint up their figure. They know what it should look like, surely everyone else does too so there's no need?
A common phrase up in the infinity news thread, you'd be familiar with but for others that don't know, is "it looks odd but I need to wait and see it painted" as many of the grays we see from pre-release announcements for that line really put off a number of people but once it's cast up and painted generally the opinions in the thread shift from slightly negative/neutral to somewhere along the positive.
More than anything, new exciting releases seem to drive the hype cycle that determines what's hot. Even if its not for your faction, a big exciting release for a game seems to invigorate players into playing and buying more. The low hobby releases just haven't pulled that off with the exception of X-Wing.
Thinking on it, I'm curious how much that is a result of these games not having sculpts that excite players or whether it might have to do with release schedule logistics of outsourced manufacturing. It really seems like companies that go the PVC route in particular just don't have enough control over manufacturing timelines to be able to schedule new release hype.
It's really hitting CMoN hard and I know SFG had issues with it. Even Reaper, who don't even have a wargame anymore, have trouble keeping some items in stock to the point they finally shifted some production to the us--but they have a bigger market reach then a lot of wargames being the biggest "generic, use anywhere" set of figures company out there. This is the real reason GW does most(all?) of their plastics in the UK in their own factories, as if something misses a date it's 100% their fault and something they can fix.
Honestly if I didn't get to build and paint my minis I wouldn't be in wargaming. One of the biggest things that hit me when I tried TTS was that; they weren't my miniatures anymore.
Monkeysloth wrote: This is an interesting point as it's very true. Well except the Clix don't have good sculpts, most of their sculpts are very good but painted very poorly and possibly translated poorly to the plastic being used.
An interesting comparison is X-Wing versus Star Trek Attack Wing. Most of the rules are similar as WizKids got permission to use the core rules of X-Wing to create it, but they still used their Star Trek Clix with literally zero change at all. So the X-Wing ships look fresh and amazing while the STAttack Wing ships looked more like a MicroMachine knock off for quite a few years.
Monkeysloth wrote: A common phrase up in the infinity news thread, you'd be familiar with but for others that don't know, is "it looks odd but I need to wait and see it painted" as many of the grays we see from pre-release announcements for that line really put off a number of people but once it's cast up and painted generally the opinions in the thread shift from slightly negative/neutral to somewhere along the positive.
Interesting point is that FFG recently did their news announcements for Lando and Kallus in Legion. They provided one painted alongside with greys of the other build options. I think it is an effective strategy for this type of sculpt, even with "well known" characters.
Meanwhile, PP gives art promos and 2D images as pre-sculpt promo material.
Legion actually started with painted models, but the paint jobs really let the sculpts down. (I was STUNNED when I realized how badly the Han sculpt had been butchered by the studio paint job)
I do think shorter release windows are more effective these days. 3 months is a looooooong time for people to get hyped and get lured away by newer shinies before they have a chance to spend money.
After building and painting so many minis over the years i am pretty well tired of that side of the hobby. i still knock out the epic scale/battletech stuff pretty fast but as far as 28mm goes the only thing i am currently building up is a DUST FALLSCHIRMJÄGER army but i decided to go the premium route of fully assembled and painted. the quality is surprisingly very good. some of the facial features could use a little bit more work but overall it is top notch including textured bases and weathering/paint scoring.
aphyon wrote: After building and painting so many minis over the years i am pretty well tired of that side of the hobby. i still knock out the epic scale/battletech stuff pretty fast but as far as 28mm goes the only thing i am currently building up is a DUST FALLSCHIRMJÄGER army but i decided to go the premium route of fully assembled and painted. the quality is surprisingly very good. some of the facial features could use a little bit more work but overall it is top notch including textured bases and weathering/paint scoring.
For me it's assembling and prepping minis for painting as I really enjoy that part but man, I just hate wasting time putting things together. There's several models I wanted to paint this year but just the thought of assembling, greenstuffing areas where connections don't fit just kills my motivation.
If anyone is interested, we've gotten a number of questions lately about what we're doing in the next year. This article attempts to answer those questions with a bit of a look behind the curtain at what Line of Sight has planned for early 2021. We are excited to share them with you, thank you for the tremendous support this year!
I love map-based campaigns (have run plenty of them in WM&H* and WH40K) and board games like Twilight Imperium or A Game of Thrones are amongst my favourites, so Diplomachine is right up my alley
My current Polish Brawlmachine league was almost a Mordheim-like event with extra rules (too little interest in such a twist from the players, unfortunately) so I am interested in seeing your ideas in that area too.
If you create a ruleset for using WM&H models on rectangular trays from ASOIF too I'll have all my wargaming needs satisfied by a single collection of miniatures
*-a link to my WM&H one is a few posts back, if you're interested in my solutions.
marxlives wrote: I am pretty excited about the narrative leagues and Frostgrave-ish, Fallen Corvis that LOS is going to release for next year.
Well then you'll probably be happy about this:
If you're excited about Fallen Corvis, the new skirmish campaign based game we're developing set in a post infernal Corvis, then you might want to check this article out!
Welcome to the Beta Rules for Fallen Corvis, the Skirmish, Narrative Campaign game set in the Ruined City of Corvis! Come build a custom Warband, build up your equipment and abilities, accept Infernal Contracts to stave off death, and much more!
We also have some exciting news to share with everyone. In 2021, the Line of Sight family is expanding! We are excited to welcome Malorian Weekly with Malorian, Charge and Spike with Luis and Jay, Midnight Monpod with Garrett, and Vicarious Competition with Michael!
As part of this, we will be interviewing all of our content creators on the Line of Sight podcast over the next two months! Expect to hear from Tyrone and Ryan from Blightbringers, Emanuel from Field of Fire, and all of our new friends mentioned above as they come on to chat with us about their specialties.
ALSO, please sign up for the Fallen Corvis beta test if you're interested in being part of the future of narrative play in the Iron Kingdoms! Registration closes on January 8th.
In a way it's pretty sad that the "state of Warmahordes" boils down to the fan community doing (what looks to be good) work because PP isn't.
I thought this was discussed earlier as PP kind of doesn't do these things due to worry about angering the hard core base that doesn't think there should be anything but Steamroller. Hungerford did an interview last year kind of hinting at that when asked about Brawlmachine. But he also said that he did provide some feedback on Brawlmachine to the group making it. So PP could be helping out with some rules feedback for these new game modes too.
They're basically trapped by a base that only wants the game to be a narrow thing but they're also the people they buy the product. If they try to expand to bring in new people that base has expressed displeasure and PP isn't large enough atm to buck them since they're the companies main source of income. I think that's why they're doing other games too. That base really doesn't care that Riot Quest exists but does seam to care if more casual game modes are supported for Warmahordes. I've stopped trying to really keep track of all the ways the game is in a hole to be honest.
In a way it's pretty sad that the "state of Warmahordes" boils down to the fan community doing (what looks to be good) work because PP isn't.
I thought this was discussed earlier as PP kind of doesn't do these things due to worry about angering the hard core base that doesn't think there should be anything but Steamroller. Hungerford did an interview last year kind of hinting at that when asked about Brawlmachine. But he also said that he did provide some feedback on Brawlmachine to the group making it. So PP could be helping out with some rules feedback for these new game modes too.
They're basically trapped by a base that only wants the game to be a narrow thing but they're also the people they buy the product. If they try to expand to bring in new people that base has expressed displeasure and PP isn't large enough atm to buck them since they're the companies main source of income. I think that's why they're doing other games too. That base really doesn't care that Riot Quest exists but does seam to care if more casual game modes are supported for Warmahordes. I've stopped trying to really keep track of all the ways the game is in a hole to be honest.
I think it's more that the competitive ones have sufficiently driven off most of the ones who are more interested in lighter avenues of the game such that when PP did introduce lighter aspects like Company of Iron or the Oblivion campaign, they weren't there to buy it in sufficient strength to justify pushing it farther, and that includes the content in No Quarter.
Of course, the other part of it is Line of Sight isn't selling it (yet), while PP took GW's route and sold those products, either directly like Oblivion, or indirectly through their periodical. PP never had the base that GW has to justify utilizing their more predatory practices would absorb.
I think PP's best move is to use Warcaster to grow a fresh market and then release Warmachine MK4 off the back of Warcaster. Certainly some things - like summoning units into battle -really works well and would be a boon for a game like Warmachine where you've a lot of units and variety and might help settle some of the desire to have more variety without bloating the game with specific niche build systems etc...
Certainly I think PP needs to end MK3 and have a big reviaval MK4 perhaps even going back a step away from the online system and going back toward books, cards and a steadier more stable rules system that blends hobby, lore and wargaming. Rather than their current system which seems to cater only toward the highly competitive crowd.
Must make a note to keep an eye out for the Iron Kingdoms KS - I enjoyed their Warmachine and Hordes art book and rpg books are often very neat lore and story and art books in their own right
Kanluwen wrote:Looking Ahead to 2021 article. There's some really cool stuff in there, and I like the "Cadres" for Warcaster.
Is there anything similar in Warmahordes currently?
It largely depends on what "cadres" end up being.
If they are a group of models one could end up building a themed army build, like say the Protectorate's Knights Exemplar or Cygnar's Trenchers, then yes, they exist.
Until more information comes out, though, it is hard to say.
So far, what we've seen with Cadres:
Marcher Worlds:
Spoiler:
Aeternus Continuum:
Spoiler:
I think you might be right on it being THEME FORCE! Warcaster though:
Elsewhere, across the universe, a new war storms across the Thousand Worlds of the Hyperuranion. The third Kickstarter campaign for Warcaster: Neo-Mechanika will kick off mid-year with expansions for all four of Warcaster’s Factions, introducing new Cadres into the game for the first time. Each Cadre will consist of an assortment of elite models as well as a special centerpiece to expand the armies of Warcaster with new powers and abilities.
Something I've been wondering; how does a battle between 6-10 individuals even matter to a setting with 1000 worlds and presumably hundreds of billions of people?
As for those previews, the longer I go the more tired I get of the 'supermodel with skin-tight plating' look. But I get that I am in the minority. Like that first one though. Have my eye raised for the cloak on the third one as it has the look of a piece that will look like a lump of wet dough in person.
I read it as theme forces from the text as well, but the concept art specifically names the model Air Assault Cadre, which implies its more a new unit type than an army construction concept.
Looking at other firms one way they've achieved smaller numbers of boxed sets on shelves is battle teams within armies.
So rather than what Warmachine has which are whole armies of Themed Forces, which can sometimes have a starting box ,but which the numbers make them very expensive. Instead having perhaps 4 or 5 models of different types that are sold in the same box and deployed in the same group to the table.
My impression is that Warcaster, at least at present (and for the next few years at least) focuses more on the idea of summoning in what you need from a faction pool rather than building from a faction limited subgroup to start with.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Something I've been wondering; how does a battle between 6-10 individuals even matter to a setting with 1000 worlds and presumably hundreds of billions of people?
Each individual operation might not, however, one might want to look in to the affect 6-10 individuals had in Pakistan one night almost 10 years ago. That had a bit of an impact.
It may not have the impact across 1000 worlds, but it might for a local community. Not everything needs to be world shaking to be important.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Something I've been wondering; how does a battle between 6-10 individuals even matter to a setting with 1000 worlds and presumably hundreds of billions of people?
Does it have to be explained? The game works mechanically for such number of pieces hence the size of the game. In Pandemic you have only up to 4 people fighting a global outbreak, in Brass there's no more than 4 businessmen competing for money and in Warcaster you have only small groups of soldiers fighting. Once you have the mechanics you can easily bolt on any theme/rationale for the game taking place and sometimes there's no explanation for an abstraction other than "it works".
NinthMusketeer wrote: Something I've been wondering; how does a battle between 6-10 individuals even matter to a setting with 1000 worlds and presumably hundreds of billions of people?
Same way a gang battle in Necromunda matters; it's just a bunch of drudges shooting each other up, no biggie - and then the victorious Orlocks blow up a Delaque pipeline, causing massive delays and crippling their ability to fulfill their business obligations to House Ulanti.
Just imagine that it's either a zoomed-in view of a small part of a much larger battlefield, or it's a tactical strike against a high value target while everyone else is duking it out over there.
Maybe those 6-10 individuals aren't fighting over the fate of 1,000 worlds and hundreds of billions of people. They could be fighting over money, or information, or who gets to drive the spaceship, or who ate the last hotdog. Just because it doesn't matter to hundreds of billions of people doesn't mean it doesn't matter to someone.
Well look at the modern world combat. It's shifted drastically from huge armies to small insurgent operations. Same as how Infinity fights have an effect on the great scheme of things in that setting.
Smaller fights don't meant they aren't as important. Plus these fights might be the small components that happen during major battles or before or after them. Ergo you might not be marshelling the full army, but your contribution is still important.
I would say due to the reliance of gate travel to move between worlds and those gates those gates no being open all the time, small battles are probably more significant in Warcaster than in any other setting.
You are inhabiting a galaxy overflowing with the essence of Cyriss. So travel between stars is not feaseable, too dangerous. Travel is done through gates and they are not open all the time. Some gates are reliable so they close and open at regular astronomical intervals. Others are erratic or open briefly and do not open for hundreds of years or longers. So gate pathways are not well charted (some open but do not lead to the same place and no one knows why)
This makes trade, travel, communication and war over resources...interesting. This is why the ISA (Iron Star Alliance) is so totalitarian and has resemblances to Protectorate of Menoth with references to the True Law. If you want to run a top down interstellar empire in such conditions you have to make sure every social process is regimented that you could lose connection with a colony for a couple hundred years and when you returned for trade they would still be an ISA colony.
The gate conditions also make it so when one opens everyone kind of rushes in to take care of business as soon as possible before it shuts behind them.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Something I've been wondering; how does a battle between 6-10 individuals even matter to a setting with 1000 worlds and presumably hundreds of billions of people?
Isn't this a general miniature game "problem" for 28-32mm. I mean, all 28-32mm battles are tiny in pretty much any setting, even the not-so-high-tech ones. It is particularily silly in very large-scale setting like 40k, where armies routinely number in the millions but where the very largest battles perhaps involve...i dunno? 100 models to the very largest armies? The only way it really works is to think of the battles are small special operations affairs, or the crucial breakthrough action in a much larger battle.
Jeez, I play 3mm off-brand Epic, and we perhaps field 2-3 batallions in a fairly sizeable game. Regular 6mm Epic seldom fields very large forces.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Something I've been wondering; how does a battle between 6-10 individuals even matter to a setting with 1000 worlds and presumably hundreds of billions of people?
Isn't this a general miniature game "problem" for 28-32mm. I mean, all 28-32mm battles are tiny in pretty much any setting, even the not-so-high-tech ones. It is particularily silly in very large-scale setting like 40k, where armies routinely number in the millions but where the very largest battles perhaps involve...i dunno? 100 models to the very largest armies? The only way it really works is to think of the battles are small special operations affairs, or the crucial breakthrough action in a much larger battle.
Jeez, I play 3mm off-brand Epic, and we perhaps field 2-3 batallions in a fairly sizeable game. Regular 6mm Epic seldom fields very large forces.
That is a good point. In BattleTech with Alpha Strike ruleset is 6mm battles where you can have subs and battleships and when you have fixed wing you can't even play on the standard board. You have a sideboard map where the 6x4 is a small rectangle in the middle of radar circles to depict those battles above the battefield.
Did you know that the Line of Sight discord is home to one of the largest populations of new and learning Warmachine and Hordes players in the world? We have a special channel set up there where people who are new to the game can get direct access to more experience players who are handpicked for their experience as mentors. We added five new mentors today to accommodate the influx of new players, and we'd love to have that need again soon!
If you are a new player, come join us! When you introduce yourself to get posting rights, ask to be added to the mentoring channel and a moderator will get you sorted. If you know a new player, don't hesitate to send them our way!
You can find our discord here: https://discord.gg/gWYFqeD
about 
You want to be such a player and in some games you get to be one.
