Theoretically, GB is easier to field than AoS
. You bring your team, you pick captains, mascot, players, go. There's very little crunch on that end. Figuring out an "even" army without some common metric requires a fair bit more effort to get it right.
That there is where a lot of players get hung up and miss the point of points. They provide structure, but don't determine the game. If you don't care about getting it exactly right, don't stress. An extra 10 points probably isn't going to decide the game. A subpar unit isn't likely to determine it either. People get way too hung up on optimal units as the path to victory and fail to appreciate how much wiggle room there is outside of say, the top 8 at a major convention.
Is this in response to my post about AOS
? I don’t want to go off topic with a reply in thread, so let me know if you want to take it to PMs
I feel it comes down to whether one perceives a tabletop game more as a sport or a leisure activity.
Essentially. Not really arguing the point. You can see it as both depending on the setting. I've had plenty of matches where I help an opponent make cool things happen and one of GBs strong points is the ability to make some really exciting plays when you see how it goes together. The one issue with the system itself in this regard is how you have to allocate your entire turn from the beginning, which can make it hard to coach as it creates a situation where knowing what they want to do gives you a lot of ways to stop it. That's probably the one area of the game in which you can't "just play" the way you can in IGOUGO
My point is that GBs system is actually really easy to put whatever you want in action because everything is pretty interchangeable. It's one of the reasons I really love low granularity point systems, as it makes it pretty easy to throw models on the table you want while also having that generic guideline for what the game should look like. An accessible points system is in my mind, enables more of a "put your toys down and play" culture than what AoS
tried. GB has that better than almost any other game and while it has always had players better than others, there's been few so bad that you couldn't fill a slot and play them. Most of GBs "casual" issues have more to do with how punishing some of the interactions in the game can be. Automatically Appended Next Post:
Otherwise you end up with casual board gamers sat in a pile of paint, sprues and glue, with their fingers marking 8 different spots in a rulebook, vowing "never again."
I feel very fortunate that Heroscape existed to bridge the gap for me have a decade or so of trying to scratch the itch with things like Final Fantasy Tactics.