Switch Theme:

Does the world need another Sci-Fi 28-32 mm army-scale miniatures game?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Do you believe there is a need for a new/alternative army-scale Sci-Fi miniatures game?
Yes
No

View results
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in ru
Sacrificial Lamb




Russian Federation

Dear Dakka,

For several years I was only a mere reader here, without registration or a single post. Now the time has come for me to ask your opinion.

After 11 years of 40 K I found myself in a situation when I crave for something new (especially since the Warhammer of the year 2015 lost the majority of fun that I used to have from it), but the market simply cannot offer a competitive 28-32 mm army-scale alternative. There are many, many beautiful skirmishes and tactical games (like Infinity or X-wing) but not a single of them offers me an opportunity to move around 50+ soldiers/monsters/etc. DZC is cool, but that's 15-mm, too small for my tastes.

Hence, the question that bothers me. Am I alone? Do the people actually share my wishing for a new sci-fi army scale miniature game? Or does 40 K satisfy all and every need as it is?

It would be great to know your opinions. After all that I read here I can say that almost all of them are smart, logical and valuable.

I also ask all this since I am also a game rules designer that participates in a couple of projects, and it would be great to know if a system mentioned above could be viable in these difficult times, and it creation of it may be an option for investment of money and time...

Best regards and thank you!
Pavel

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/15 21:32:52


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







Honestly, there are some important things to keep in mind:

1. You need to be able to answer the question "Why would I want to play this instead of 40k?"
2. The answer to the first question isn't the same as the answer to the question "Why should I play your game?"
3. Economic viability of a 28mm army scale game is the result of mass hysteria and/or collective hallucinations.
3.5. From an investment perspective, it's one of those "I have money and it pleases me to throw it away investing in something I want more of" bargains, not one of those "I invest this money with a plausible expectation of getting rich" bargains.
4. You're more likely to see a game designer claim "We're pretty sure the game system will scale up to using 50+ models on the table" rather than "The games designed for 50+ models" because of the buy-in cost. Because of point #3, and the fact that the smaller the buy-in cost, the smaller the hysteria and hallucinations required to get going.
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA


Have you tried Warpath yet? That's at least one more army scale sci-fi 28mm gane that currently exists.

IMHO, the problem is that it is extremely cost prohibilitve for players to collect an army of that size, and even more time prohibitive to get that many models built and painted.

Remember that 40K didn't start out as a game of the size it is today. It used to feature much smaller model count armies and only built up that size over the years as existing players had added more and more models to their armies. That's why, besides the massive cost, it is so hard to get new players into 40k, because it is incredibly daunting to start a new army from scratch knowing how long it will take to make.

As much as I love how a 28mm army game looks on the table, it really is so much better suited for smaller model scales, like 15mm or less.


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in gb
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?





UK

I certainly wouldn't be averse to more being done with that scale/scope in mind. While I'm still in the camp that 40k does it's job and does it well, variety is always a good thing.

Warpath 2.0 is the closest out there at the moment, and while it's decent enough, various rumours about its next/first 'proper' edition hint at it losing some detail in favour of per-unit rules, rather than per-model-in-a-unit. Oddly, I'm fine with this for fantasy/historical games in the scale, but in Sci-Fi I find a more fluid and detailed system is more appealing. What I love about 40k that no other ruleset (that I know of) offers is the per-model details when it comes to placement/movement/equipment. I love the feeling that even within a squad, Dude X functions differently to Dude Y, and that my exact choice of which one I place in cover/shoot with first ect makes a difference. I know there are many who see that as unnecessary, or even a flaws in games this size, but to me it's near the top of the list of reasons I love 40k.

 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 Paradigm wrote:
I certainly wouldn't be averse to more being done with that scale/scope in mind. While I'm still in the camp that 40k does it's job and does it well, variety is always a good thing.

Warpath 2.0 is the closest out there at the moment, and while it's decent enough, various rumours about its next/first 'proper' edition hint at it losing some detail in favour of per-unit rules, rather than per-model-in-a-unit. Oddly, I'm fine with this for fantasy/historical games in the scale, but in Sci-Fi I find a more fluid and detailed system is more appealing. What I love about 40k that no other ruleset (that I know of) offers is the per-model details when it comes to placement/movement/equipment. I love the feeling that even within a squad, Dude X functions differently to Dude Y, and that my exact choice of which one I place in cover/shoot with first ect makes a difference. I know there are many who see that as unnecessary, or even a flaws in games this size, but to me it's near the top of the list of reasons I love 40k.


I totally concur. 40k does not get nearly enough credit for handling the incredibly tricky balance between being a game about units, but making sure every model's characteristcs and gear matter (for the most part).



I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
Painting Within the Lines





CO

Personally, if you want a skirmish sized game, you load up on detail and individual models' stats, equipment, rules, etc. If you want a mass-combat, 100+ models a side kind of game, things need to be abstracted a bit to allow scalability and ease of completing a game. Also, at 28mm scale, you really have to rely on table space to give that scope of the game where it's just not line -em and and gun it out. Smaller scale models obviously better support larger sized battles.

Basically, it boils down to action resolutions - how long does it take to resolve a given action by a unit/vehicle/flyer/ship/etc, multiplied across a dozen or more units, multiplied by number of players in the game per side, multiplied by how many turns it takes to resolve a game to its conclusion. The more actions that can be resolved quicker, the better the game will scale upwards for larger conflicts, as more and more actions can be performed while still providing a meaningful resolution.

If any one action takes longer than a minute or so to resolve, whether that be looking up special rules, rolling multiple dice multiple times between different sides, referencing multiple charts to get a resolution, and so on, then suddenly it's taking 20-30 minutes for one player/side to complete their turn, and the game slows down in the minutia when it's trying to simulate a large scale conflict. If there's ten models in a unit and I'm constantly having to worry about where each model is placed with respect to the rest of the members of that unit, and the game has repercussions based on the exact placement of these models, then it will slow down gameplay as I strive to make sure I can benefit from each model - this flies in the face of a mass-combat game, where I'm more concerned with what happens to units as a whole versus the individuals composing them.

Sure, rules can reflect special or unique characteristics of units, but I'd want a level of abstraction in place that would allow me to fire my special trooper's weapons if the unit can hit a target, not whether 4/7 guys in the unit can, and he's one of the 3 that are out of range. That's a skirmish-scale ruling, which would be fine if there's only 7 models per side and exact model placement, ranges, and so on mattered. 40k has too many skirmish-style rules (true line of sight being one, WYSIWYG another, blast templates, ) that bog it down when there's more than a dozen units a side - abstract those concepts for the sake of speeding up play, and it becomes a game system that can support larger games.

Essentially, I'd want a sci-fi game that plays as quickly as Warmaster does for mass-fantasy battles.

Just my thoughts.

~iPaint

iPaint's Workbench - a blog for all of my painting endeavors
Currently painting: 20mm WW2, 28mm Zombicide
In the pipeline: 28mm Reaper Bones, Dwarven Forge Game Tiles 
   
Made in us
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos






Toledo, OH

The hobby doesn't need another game like 40k, it just needs a good version of 40k.

I have very little interest in building a 40k style army from scratch, with a new company's models, which will almost certainly be less appealing to me than GW's top notch minis. I have a lot of interest in playing my 40k armies in a system that's smoother and better balanced, but there's no money in creating just rules for a game.

Stripped down 40k is actually a pretty good game. If you took the best bits from the five "modern" editions of 40k, you could mix up a really great game. The hard part is balancing 16 armies, with models that range from Grots to Titans in power level.
   
Made in us
Brigadier General






Chicago

If by game you mean package of rules fluff and figures meant to play at the same size game as 40k, I'd say probably not. However, I'd like to see a new too-many-minis sci/fi ruleset.

As for the unique scope of 40k (50-100 figs plus vehicles on a football pitch), it's not done by many other companies mostly because such a concentration is patently unrealistic and most game designers would prefer to write something at least a bit more realistic.

40k size games have been tried in the past and while they were successful for a while (Void and Warzone) they eventually died and nothing has really stuck since then. Warpath 1.0 was the same size as 40k, but Mantic pulled the plug and redesigned 2.0 as a bit smaller game. 1.0 is still available online (at warseer) and 2.0 could probably be played at 40k size without much difficulty.

Chicago Skirmish Wargames club. Join us for some friendly, casual gaming in the Windy City.
http://chicagoskirmishwargames.com/blog/


My Project Log, mostly revolving around custom "Toybashed" terrain.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/651712.page

Visit the Chicago Valley Railroad!
https://chicagovalleyrailroad.blogspot.com 
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut




I think the simple reason you do not see any 28mm large scale games for the most part is because the game scale you want does not work well at 28mm scale, 15mm and smaller is were that scale of combat can be better represented and works simply much better. Dropzone commander is actually 10mm not 15mm btw . Its simply too costly and time consuming to do a 28mm large scale game, you have to invest into a large amount of miniatures just to get two playable sides let alone more than that for factions.

28mm skirmish gaming is really the sweet spot for 28mm you can have a large diversity in miniatures , races and unit types and with the lower costs to start the game you can produce a fully function range and game from the get go. The games allow for more diversity than large scale games can simply by production costs alone. For large scale games I myself refuse to play them in 28mm , I find 15mm is good for a few platoons worth in force sized games, larger games I prefer 6mm and 10mm is pretty nice as well. It just feels a lot better in game play and size of the battle field at the smaller scales , in 28mm the table becomes crowded and it simply begins to become goofy with the size of units and the short distance they are from each other, let alone you quickly lose any form of mobility. Skirmish scale games can also be played on a smaller board which allows for more games in a FLGS which means less space taking up and more chance for players to get a few games in a day. Skirmish games also play quicker usually and this is far as I can see is what the majority of consumers want is a game that does not take 2 - 3 hours to play through but to get several smaller games in.

I am assuming you are looking at starting up your own game system and miniatures range? if so I would highly recommend going skirmish for 28mm or if you dead set on a larger scale game , then going with a smaller miniature scale.

http://ufwg.weebly.com/

http://ufwg.weebly.com/shop.html 
   
Made in us
Krazed Killa Kan





SoCal

Platoon sized seems to be the upper limit for me in 28mm or bigger.

40K only works because of the super space fantasy element, and their rules are all over the place.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







I think the point that 40k didn't start out in the the modern size is an important one.

There was, to a certain degree, the cycle of:
1. Buy small collections and play the game.
2. Buy bigger collections, and start complaining about the rules not scaling well.
3. The Rogue Trader to 2nd edition transition; and then the 2nd edition to 3rd edition transitions where the game went from "squad sized" to "army sized" encounters.

That's not really an act that someone's going to be able to come along and copy feasibly. It was 12 years from Rogue Trader to 3rd edition, after all. And then 12 more years to "Super heavy vehicles are totally normal to play with". Someone starting out probably doesn't want to commit to a 25 year game development plan to get to the game they want.

   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





I think 28mm is so inherently problematic for large scale battles, it feels less like a "niche" and more like a design flaw (to me at least). There certainly was a time when I dreamed of huge scale battles with titans and thunderhawks, but over time I have come to the conclusion that less really is more. The issue is perhaps not with the game, but with myself: I only have a finite amount of attention, and the more it is divided, the less I am able to care about (and thus enjoy) each separate component.

I think how we divide our attention is going to end up looking and feeling similar regardless of scale. For example: we will probably have a unit that will be our "biggest killy unit". At apocalypse scale it could be a titan; at killteam scale it might be just a dreadnought. In both cases it will dwarf everything else in the game, and our opponent will do everything they can to bring it down (it will play and feel very similar). We might have a number of other units that are strategically important, or that we care about... But at a certain point we stop caring. In a game of titans and battleships, am I really going to give a feth about guardsmen #215? ... No, he might as well not be there. I no-more want to move 300 guardsmen in a game of apocalypse than I do 300 nurglings in a game of Necromunda, or read a story padded out with 300 generic "fodder" characters. I think it would be far better to just have a handful of "characters" that you enjoy, and have the entire story (or game) focus on them. The physical size of the models is probably more a question of practicality than enjoyment. Though I certainly don't believe 40k scale titans are the most "practical" sized game pieces (YMMV).

Having said all that... 28mm is still the scale that I enjoy collecting and painting. I would probably collect 28mm even if there was no game at all, and I certainly have collected more than I will ever use in a single game. So perhaps there is still room out there for a sci-fi game that can bridge the gap between large collections and practical games. But I think to do that you would need to solve the problem of moving large numbers of models as though they were one unit. Fantasy does that pretty well with the movement trays, but it would be hard to get something like that to work in 40k.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/16 09:36:19


 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






 Smacks wrote:
I think 28mm is so inherently problematic for large scale battles, it feels less like a "niche" and more like a design flaw (to me at least). There certainly was a time when I dreamed of huge scale battles with titans and thunderhawks ...


So did I, so I bought Epic. Same goes for the new Warlord titan from Forge World; looks nice, but I'd rather have a battle group of three of them in Epic, where I can actually make meaningful tactical decisions with them.

[b]iPaint[/i], did you ever play AT-43 or something like Disposable Heroes? That does what you're talking about. The former even streamlines things more by reducing ranges to bands of 10cm.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






New Orleans, LA

32mm is the only way to play.

DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
 
   
Made in us
Brigadier General






Chicago

As stated above I totally agree that the scope of 40k compared to the size of table played on is problematic and it has had a long time to grow to that size.

However, I would put forth that it might have been inevitable. Look at the art and fluff that was published consistently (at least from 2nd edition on) lots of massive armies clashing at close range. Pretty much indistinguishable from WHFB art except for the preponderance of firearms. So perhaps the game was always destined to become "fantasy in space" in scope as well as style.

Chicago Skirmish Wargames club. Join us for some friendly, casual gaming in the Windy City.
http://chicagoskirmishwargames.com/blog/


My Project Log, mostly revolving around custom "Toybashed" terrain.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/651712.page

Visit the Chicago Valley Railroad!
https://chicagovalleyrailroad.blogspot.com 
   
Made in no
Terrifying Doombull





Hefnaheim

No the market is drowing in games, and thus dose not need another one. And as mentioned before, there are other far more appealing scales than 28 mm
   
Made in us
Tough-as-Nails Ork Boy





All other games suffer from a lack of Orks.

To put it more clearly, nothing else has the history, the setting, the detail; or to put it more bluntly, no other game has had the time to accrue as much stuff as Warhammer has. As bas as GW can be, their game just has more than the competition. More fluff, more units, more armies, more on the table, more choices...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/16 17:22:51


 
   
Made in gb
Lieutenant Colonel




I think the world may need a GOOD rule set for battle games using 28.32mm minatures.

When you start with 3rd ed WHFB skirmish rules and tweek them for a WHFB in space skirmish game they sort of cope .(But are quite complicated.)

However, when you push the game into the territory of large battle game , which all about UNIT interaction.
Trying to use detailed rule for each minature leads to some horrid swapping between micro and macro management.
This can cause severe breaks in the game narrative .(WTF moments.)

Looking at the current game size , and spread of units.it would be possible to write a rule set SPECIFICALLY for this .

However it would mean throwing away all the resolution methods and game mechanics from 1970s Napoleonics .(WHFB.)

And use some thing more modern and in synergy with the background of 40k.
A rule set where all units are equally valid, and tactical options are broad enough to allow balance in armies and across the whole game.

Plenty of great battle games in 6 to 15 mm have good rules sets for battle games.
Using ideas from these games for 40k would make more sense than WHFB !


Just to be clear each model in a unit is important , but the game uses UNIT based resolution.
(I may need to explain that better?)

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/04/17 16:21:54


 
   
Made in gb
Posts with Authority






Norn Iron

I'll add my vote to the 'huge 28mm battles with hundreds of little guys and big awkward models are a tad unwieldy' camp. And I'll echo Andrew in that that's what Epic was meant for, and still is. Still pretty viable. I've said it often before, but after a little culture shock, Epic: Armageddon opened my eyes to what an actual elegant battle game looked like.

And I know there'll be complaints like 'but nobody makes exactly the right modeeels' and 'but you can't see the skulls and grimaces because the models are tinyyyy' and 'but you can't encrust them with all that fiddly wargeeaaarr...' Well the first situation you can thank GW for, though it's cancelled out by the second to some degree. I don't need the precise teeny-tiny fleur-de-lys or upside-down-omega details on Onslaught Sisterhood or Troublemaker Novan Elites, for instance. Like most games with tiny model scales and large battle scales, it's more about the general effect than individual soldiers.
And that's the overall answer to those kinds of complaints, that people forget or don't get. Big-battle games are and should be about the bigger picture, abstracted and streamlined. All the heroic, cinematic stuff by individual characters and small bands of brothers, and all the attendant, quasi-rpg grit and fiddle, that's what 40K was meant for. And despite GW themselves forgetting that and dumping the Space Marine/Epic legacy in favour of cramming more, costlier 28mm models on tables, you're going to run into trouble when you try mashing that micromanagement together with a sweeping panorama. The two games were better apart, and complemented each other fairly well.

Gragga Da Krumpa wrote:All other games suffer from a lack of Orks.

To put it more clearly, nothing else has the history, the setting, the detail; or to put it more bluntly, no other game has had the time to accrue as much stuff as Warhammer has. As bas as GW can be, their game just has more than the competition. More fluff, more units, more armies, more on the table, more choices...


This, to me, sounds partly like what I just mentioned: confusing sheer granularity with 'character'. But mostly it sounds like another thing I often notice: confusing the background with the game. Or more specifically, confusing the background with the rules. (Though I suppose the two concepts aren't a million miles apart) Seems to happen too often with these all-in-one package games. This mini has to be used with this rule has to be used with this fluff has to be used with this mini has to be etc. etc. etc., so on so forth.
I'm in danger of contradicting myself and what I said about small granular games vs big abstract games, but I think granularity can be carried a little too far for the sake of marrying an official set of rules to a proprietary miniature to keep a hook in a gamer's wallet; and relied on a little too much by the same gamer. But the way I view it is like this, to use an orky example. A shokk attack gun works by teleporting snotlings, hoovering them up and shooting them through the warp, to rip targets apart as the snotlings rematerialise inside them. Right? My old ork codex (fifth ed IIRC) devotes a whole page to describe how the shokk attack gun works.
But the thing is, most of that is fluff, even in the boxed-off half of the page that deals with it's rules. Most of it is just what you imagine in your head as you position your static model with X inches of other static models, measure the distance, and roll a couple of dice. If you strip all that out you barely have enough for a quarter-page, even with a lot of fancy formatting. In reality, the shokk attack gun has a statline like any other mundane gun in 40K, and a chance to 'do damage' like any other mundane gun in 40K, and a few extra, randomised chances to measure again and roll more dice, depending on how you rolled that previous pair.
Granted, the little random extras might be a little difficult to replicate or find analogues for, if that's the kind of thing that floats your boat*; but given that the shokk attack gun basically acts as a gun within the confines of 40K's rules, and that you don't actually watch your shokk attack gun scoop up snotling minis or watch your opponent's plastic army men explode when you read off the dice result... would it be so difficult to take a set of sci-fi platoon rules that is generally and reasonably compatible with 40K minis (like, say, Victory Decision: Future Combat ), pick a weapon with stats that reasonably compare to the shokk attack gun's firepower in 40K, apply that weapon's stats to your shokk attack gun model, and apply the shokk attack gun's fluff to this interesting new mini+rules combo? Folk seem able to perform a similar graft with little grief, combining GW rules and GW fluff with minis from Scibor, Hitech, Raging Heroes, Victoria Miniatures etc. Or use GW minis and GW rules with their own personal fluff, even if within the same setting: homebrewed chapters, clans, hive fleets and the like. Snotlings can still fly through the warp with other rules, as much as they ever did!

*Given that the author of the aforementioned ruleset example is open and eager for discussion on the Lead Adventure Forum, I'd say you might not have much trouble bodging together an 'official' random effects table to satisfy that itch, if you were inclined to check it out.

Umpteenth edit: Ah, there was an original topic, wasn't there? I vote yes.

This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2015/04/16 19:56:51


I'm sooo, sooo sorry.

Plog - Random sculpts and OW Helves 9/3/23 
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

In my view 50+ models a side is not an army game, it is only a large skirmish. 50+ individual soldiers is nothing more than a couple of platoons. A real "army" game should have at least 200+ individuals on each side to bring it to company level and this obviously is far too difficult using 28mm individually mounted models.

Therefore I stand with the people who advocate using 15mm or 6mm on multi-figure bases.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Infinity is basically the only thing out there for us Hard Sci-fi fans, and it is EXPENSIVE. Almost 40K Forgeworld expensive.

But... As I have always said... I care not how expensive it is, as long as it is of the highest quality.

And Infinity fits that bill.

If another game came out that was of sufficiently high quality, then I would be all over it.

But what we really need is a 10mm/15mm game like FOW for Sci-Fi.

MB
   
Made in au
Hissing Hybrid Metamorph





'Straya... Mate.

Yes I said, more options as a consumer is better!

 
   
Made in ru
Sacrificial Lamb




Russian Federation

Wow!

Thank you very much everyone! That is a TON more feedback than I ever hoped for.

Economic viability of a 28mm army scale game is the result of mass hysteria and/or collective hallucinations.
- do you mean that this scale implies a too high entry cost and thus prohibits non-heavily drugged/delusive people from trying it? I know that WH is currently too overpriced, both 40K and FB, however this is IMO a result of GW policy for lowering point prices for encouraging larger purchases.

From an investment perspective, it's one of those "I have money and it pleases me to throw it away investing in something I want more of" bargains, not one of those "I invest this money with a plausible expectation of getting rich" bargains.
- we agree on that, its a matter of trying to do something that we like more than our current jobs, and we do not expect it could allow us to swim in golden pools while naked top models twerk all around... A cool setting btw. To summarise - it it beats our salaries at least a little on a monthly basis - that would be enough.

Have you tried Warpath yet? That's at least one more army scale sci-fi 28mm gane that currently exists.
- Didnt Mantic forget about Warpath in favor of Deadzone? Its latest KS campaigns all revolved around Deadzone, And the last one had horrible models...

it really is so much better suited for smaller model scales, like 15mm or less.
When choosing the scale we though about several things. 1) Its hard to make distinctive, unique models in a small scale - details will simply be too miniscule. 2) small scale tends to remove "individual" feeling of models, placing them on stands a-la AQotMF (btw that game is neat) or DZC. Does this not bother you?

losing some detail in favour of per-unit rules, rather than per-model-in-a-unit
Is it possible for you to throw me a link? It sounds like they are making it a copy of the KoW Unit rules.

Dropzone commander is actually 10mm not 15mm
thanks, my bad

I find 15mm is good for a few platoons worth in force sized games, larger games I prefer 6mm and 10mm is pretty nice as well
Do you enjoy painting infantry at that scale? I personally find it hard to do, not enough space for individualization...

I am assuming you are looking at starting up your own game system and miniatures range? if so I would highly recommend going skirmish for 28mm or if you dead set on a larger scale game , then going with a smaller miniature scale.
A thing to think about for sure... I wonder, what do you understand under "Skirmksh". Is 30 minies on a table + a couple of tanks "Skirmish" for you?

Someone starting out probably doesn't want to commit to a 25 year game development plan to get to the game they want.
- and that is completely true! We do not wish to directly compete with a monster that is GW in its field - we will be smashed, raped, and eaten alive. In any possible combination. We want to try some other ideas though...

Just to be clear each model in a unit is important , but the game uses UNIT based resolution.
- seems pretty clear to me, thanks =)

Big-battle games are and should be about the bigger picture, abstracted and streamlined. All the heroic, cinematic stuff by individual characters and small bands of brothers, and all the attendant, quasi-rpg grit and fiddle, that's what 40K was meant for. And despite GW themselves forgetting that and dumping the Space Marine/Epic legacy in favour of cramming more, costlier 28mm models on tables, you're going to run into trouble when you try mashing that micromanagement together with a sweeping panorama. The two games were better apart, and complemented each other fairly well.
- what I see here is that a good setting could easily have a 28mm Skirmish game and a 10-15mm Army game while keeping the general principles together, just like GW had with Epic and 40 K, and even BFG (oh I loved that one) on the battleship scale...


Infinity is basically the only thing out there for us Hard Sci-fi fans
Infinity seems like a sweet game, but personally I dislike the "order pool" mechanics and the extra anime fan design of earlier models... New werewolves they released are cool though, reminded me of Confrontation (RIP sweet prince).

To summarise - dear Dakka, thank you once again. In a couple of days I got MANY great ideas. What I think may be a cool idea to think over now: a setting that could allow for easy branching into different scales, with the default skirmish 28 mm, widened 10-15mm army scale. This will also allow to have a core system that will be changed in particular sections when it deals with a particular scale (i.e. switching from individual model/fireteam approach to platoon/squad level interaction).

Any aditional ideas or views will be highly appreciated =)

   
Made in us
Brigadier General






Chicago

BeAfraid wrote:
Infinity is basically the only thing out there for us Hard Sci-fi fans, and it is EXPENSIVE. Almost 40K Forgeworld expensive.

But... As I have always said... I care not how expensive it is, as long as it is of the highest quality...


Do you mean the only "Package" game that is available for hard sci-fi fans? Because while they may not have the same circulation or figs/fluff/rules-in-one-package as infinity, there are alot of great rules and minis for hard sci-fi. Have you played Tomorrow's War or 5150 Star Army? Great rulesets and there are also many companies with amazing figure lines that are far more "hard-sci-fi" than anything in Infinity's figure lines which are beautiful to be sure, but still have all the unrealistic anime traits of boob-armor, bare midriffs, open cleavage and oddly short pants/skirts, etc on what are supposedly combatants.

BeAfraid wrote:
...But what we really need is a 10mm/15mm game like FOW for Sci-Fi.
MB

Planetfall, Grunts 15mm, Dropzone commander, Future War commander, etc….

Many of these options require a bit of out-of-the-box acquiring of figs and vehicles, but Infinity is far from the only game in town.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/17 13:35:01


Chicago Skirmish Wargames club. Join us for some friendly, casual gaming in the Windy City.
http://chicagoskirmishwargames.com/blog/


My Project Log, mostly revolving around custom "Toybashed" terrain.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/651712.page

Visit the Chicago Valley Railroad!
https://chicagovalleyrailroad.blogspot.com 
   
Made in gb
Lieutenant Colonel




Just to clarify a '28mm sized minature battle game' should base its rules on 10 to 15mm battle games.IMO.
Then ADD DETAIL to scale the game up to suit the larger minatures.

Rather than start with a detailed skirmish game, then have to hack great lumps out of the rules to speed things up.Then have to patch up the holes left in the rules with a lots of counter intuitive additional rules.(So the rules end up far more complicated than the skirmish game they were based upon!)

   
Made in gb
Posts with Authority






Norn Iron

Have a couple of exalts, Eilif and Lanrak.

Alchemist1422 wrote:
it really is so much better suited for smaller model scales, like 15mm or less.
When choosing the scale we though about several things. 1) Its hard to make distinctive, unique models in a small scale - details will simply be too miniscule. 2) small scale tends to remove "individual" feeling of models, placing them on stands a-la AQotMF (btw that game is neat) or DZC. Does this not bother you?

I find 15mm is good for a few platoons worth in force sized games, larger games I prefer 6mm and 10mm is pretty nice as well
Do you enjoy painting infantry at that scale? I personally find it hard to do, not enough space for individualization...

Big-battle games are and should be about the bigger picture, abstracted and streamlined. All the heroic, cinematic stuff by individual characters and small bands of brothers, and all the attendant, quasi-rpg grit and fiddle, that's what 40K was meant for. And despite GW themselves forgetting that and dumping the Space Marine/Epic legacy in favour of cramming more, costlier 28mm models on tables, you're going to run into trouble when you try mashing that micromanagement together with a sweeping panorama. The two games were better apart, and complemented each other fairly well.
- what I see here is that a good setting could easily have a 28mm Skirmish game and a 10-15mm Army game while keeping the general principles together, just like GW had with Epic and 40 K, and even BFG (oh I loved that one) on the battleship scale...


One of the first things that really drew me towards the idea of Epic was an old WD article talking about campaigns that involved 40K, Epic 40K, and BFG all together, with each one having an impact on the other (use 40K to capture a spaceport, use BFG to capture the optimal orbital area for that spaceport, be able to land more Epic troops, etc.) Unfortunately I never tried anything like that... yet.
And, yeah, what you said is how I feel about it, anyway. I quickly got used to Epic: A and was wowed by how smoothly it played, and the tactical options it allowed. I gave up on 40K and WFB not long after, even before Apocalypse and 8th ed ramped up the model count, because of how fiddly and reliant on listbuilding I found them. (specifically, 'does it really matter if I give these ogres ironfists or extra hand weapons, when they basically do the same thing and there'll be a bunch of them on the table...?') I also feel obliged to trot out my friend's anecdote, about setting up a game of Epic: A at a club, playing it and putting it away again, while a game of Apocalypse at the next table was still on turn one. That would kill me. All the little details and variations and phases and steps that need to be addressed and resolved that drag the thing out before you can move onto the next unit, let alone the next turn! It's just unnecessary and frustrating, and not the only way to represent 'character', or faction strategy and tactics, on the tabletop.

On the topic of smaller mini scales, and the other couple of quotes I included above: I like 10mm Warmaster minis. I think they look good because they don't try to cram in loads of detail, but concentrate on representing what's there with good, tidy sculpting. (Still reasonably detailed, tho) I've had daydreams about sculpting my own 10mm fantasy minis to complement or even partly replace that OOP range. (Another thing to get off my arse about) But when I held a little poll about scale, a while ago, the results came out a little different.
15mm is becoming more popular, and I think because it offers a kind of compromise between the detail and 'character' of 28mm, and the lower price and greater scope of even smaller scales. That's one of the reasons I've seen anyway. I've even seen players use 15mm for skirmish games. And while I don't own too many 15mm minis myself, my own small experience of mid-quality napoleonics (not the most character-oriented of themes) doesn't disagree. But if you still don't think 15mm can be detailed or characterful, go see the kind of thing Tom Meier's done for Khurasan Miniatures. Granted, that's at one extreme end of the bell-curve, but not a bad example, eh? But still, I don't think it's a bad idea to seperate big-mini, character-oriented games from small-mini, army-coordination games.

That said, I still don't know if I should tell you that you should make two mini ranges at different scales. Not to start with, anyway. I wouldn't mind, but I'm only one guy on the internet. It depends on how eager the market is, but if this topic's responses are anything to go by, it sounds promising.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/04/17 19:26:14


I'm sooo, sooo sorry.

Plog - Random sculpts and OW Helves 9/3/23 
   
Made in us
Anointed Dark Priest of Chaos






 Eilif wrote:
As stated above I totally agree that the scope of 40k compared to the size of table played on is problematic and it has had a long time to grow to that size.

However, I would put forth that it might have been inevitable. Look at the art and fluff that was published consistently (at least from 2nd edition on) lots of massive armies clashing at close range. Pretty much indistinguishable from WHFB art except for the preponderance of firearms. So perhaps the game was always destined to become "fantasy in space" in scope as well as style.


Well 40K isnt supposed to be "hi-tech armies shooting at each other from miles away". Nor is it supposed to be a game of tactical maneouvering and cat and mouse tactics. 40K represents a snapshot of what happens when two forces collide at close range. The maneouvering and so forth has already been assumed to have happened. One can imagine that the action depicted on your tabletop is a zoomed in view of part of a much larger conflict that is taking place over many sectors, across a world, etc. So while all kinds of fancy tactics and aneouvering might be happening on a larger scale, the camera has zoomed in on a part of the conflict to view the two forces finally coming together.

That claustrophobic "massive armies clashing" feel evidenced in 40K art is showing you what warfare is meant to be like in this setting. It is key to the feel of 40k which is "fantasy in space". Shooting guys and killing them across the table isnt really that heroic or epic, guys crashing into each other with chainsaw swords and energy gauntlets while wearing massive suits of battle armour most certainly is.

40K isnt about realism, its about creating a certain mood and aesthetic (grimdark dark ages combat with lasers and aliens added for effect).

Just my 2 cents.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/04/17 19:34:17


++ Death In The Dark++ A Zone Mortalis Hobby Project Log: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/663090.page#8712701
 
   
Made in gb
Posts with Authority






Norn Iron

And that works alright for John Blanche paintings, but is as boring as all get-out for a tabletop miniatures game.

I'm sooo, sooo sorry.

Plog - Random sculpts and OW Helves 9/3/23 
   
Made in us
Anointed Dark Priest of Chaos






 Vermis wrote:
And that works alright for John Blanche paintings, but is as boring as all get-out for a tabletop miniatures game.


Luckily you have plenty of other choices for how you can spend your free time.

Isnt life great?

++ Death In The Dark++ A Zone Mortalis Hobby Project Log: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/663090.page#8712701
 
   
Made in us
Brigadier General






Chicago

 CT GAMER wrote:
 Eilif wrote:
As stated above I totally agree that the scope of 40k compared to the size of table played on is problematic and it has had a long time to grow to that size.

However, I would put forth that it might have been inevitable. Look at the art and fluff that was published consistently (at least from 2nd edition on) lots of massive armies clashing at close range. Pretty much indistinguishable from WHFB art except for the preponderance of firearms. So perhaps the game was always destined to become "fantasy in space" in scope as well as style.


...That claustrophobic "massive armies clashing" feel evidenced in 40K art is showing you what warfare is meant to be like in this setting. It is key to the feel of 40k which is "fantasy in space". Shooting guys and killing them across the table isnt really that heroic or epic, guys crashing into each other with chainsaw swords and energy gauntlets while wearing massive suits of battle armour most certainly is.

40K isnt about realism, its about creating a certain mood and aesthetic (grimdark dark ages combat with lasers and aliens added for effect).

Just my 2 cents.


I actually think we completely agree.
My statement was an extension of my earlier post which was answering the OP's question as to why we don't have more 40k-scope rulesets. The answer being that such a rulest only works within the framework of a grimdark-fantasy-in-space 40k universe. Outside of that universe, 2 armor-reinforced company's battling on a soccer pirtch just doesn't make any sense, and there aren't presently alot of folks looking to create a 40k-ish universe to game in. Most folks writing sci-fi games are using at least some measure of "realism" (though of course it varies widely) in their rulesets and that pretty much eliminates a 40k size game.

Mantic Warpath 1.0 is a notable exception and I play a massive battle with those rules a couple of times a year with friends and our now-rarely-used 40k armies. Gives me my 40k universe fix in half the time and without dropping another 200 smackers on rules.

Chicago Skirmish Wargames club. Join us for some friendly, casual gaming in the Windy City.
http://chicagoskirmishwargames.com/blog/


My Project Log, mostly revolving around custom "Toybashed" terrain.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/651712.page

Visit the Chicago Valley Railroad!
https://chicagovalleyrailroad.blogspot.com 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: