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.

As a new player, I've been reading a bunch of battle reports lately in order to get a feel for tactics, gameplay, and just how people do things. I've noticed that I've developed a definite preference for a certain style of report and tend to long for certain things that may or may not be present. I certainly don't mean to come off as an authority figure on such things, but I thought it might be helpful to indicate the sort of things I look for in a well-written battle report. Besides, I'm at my in-laws and have little else to do.

1. Pictures, Pictures, Pictures

The single-most important thing for me is the presence of pictures. I will rarely read a report without them. Please make sure they're in focus though. I know the depth of field can wreak havoc on auto-focus, but I've seen so many reports where everything is fuzzy that I have to take breaks to let the headaches and eye-strain subside. Overhead pictures are great, as are a few shots from different angles. Anything that gives me an idea of the gameboard (As well as a chance to drool over your modelling skills!). The Paint pictures I've seen are ok, but only if it's easy to understand what symbols represent what. I don't want to have to refer to a key a dozen times to figure out what's what. Intuitive colors and shapes (Green orks, red berzerkers, giant blocks for vehicles, etc) help tremendously. I still much prefer pictures though. Oh, and for the love of Khorne, please take multiple shots of something so you can get pick the best one. Cameras nowadays have tons of memory and by taking 2-3 shots, you're more likely to get something in focus and easy on the eyes. I will often take a couple of pics with flash and without, just to be safe. The little screen on the camera doesn't always show a good representation of what the picture will look like on a real computer screen.

2. Army Lists

Please post what you've taken, with upgrades and point values, as well as what your opponent has (To the best of your ability). I like reading why you've chosen a particular unit if it's an unusual choice, even if it's only "This is what I own and have painted". Having them seperated into "Troop" "HQ", etc categories is a plus.

3. Turn Reports

Tell me what happened during the turn, but please don't make it a wall-o'-text. Split things into paragraphs as appropriate and try to make it flow naturally. If something unusual happened because of a lucky/unlucky roll, point it out. Most folks tend to do this part well.

The part that I rarely see is insight as to decisions that you made or tactics that you were shooting for. THIS is what helps me the most. I want to know if you had to decide to park your marines on an objective or try to move them to flank a troublesome movement. I want to know what your initial thoughts on a battle plan are (I'm going to try to move my rhino as close as I can using the cover available, deepstrike in some LC terminators, etc). I want to know what works and what went horribly, horribly wrong.

4. Conclusions

Tell me what units worked out well and what units you're thinking about replacing. Reflect on the battle a bit. It doesn't have to be extensive, just a few thoughts here and there.

I don't mind reading well-written fluff, but it's not something I miss if it's not there either.

Just some thoughts on what I think make good battle reports. Many, many authors do a fine job (although they do tend to not expand on their thoughts and tactics as much as I'd like).

Interesting.... Somewhat helpful, but probably should be in the general section or something...

Good idea! Instead of doing a bunch of typing myself, I'm going to quote you and point out what I agree and disagree with.

1-UP wrote:
1. Pictures, Pictures, Pictures

The single-most important thing for me is the presence of pictures. I will rarely read a report without them. Please make sure they're in focus though. I know the depth of field can wreak havoc on auto-focus, but I've seen so many reports where everything is fuzzy that I have to take breaks to let the headaches and eye-strain subside. Overhead pictures are great, as are a few shots from different angles. Anything that gives me an idea of the gameboard (As well as a chance to drool over your modelling skills!). The Paint pictures I've seen are ok, but only if it's easy to understand what symbols represent what. I don't want to have to refer to a key a dozen times to figure out what's what. Intuitive colors and shapes (Green orks, red berzerkers, giant blocks for vehicles, etc) help tremendously. I still much prefer pictures though. Oh, and for the love of Khorne, please take multiple shots of something so you can get pick the best one. Cameras nowadays have tons of memory and by taking 2-3 shots, you're more likely to get something in focus and easy on the eyes. I will often take a couple of pics with flash and without, just to be safe. The little screen on the camera doesn't always show a good representation of what the picture will look like on a real computer screen.

I agree, pics are definitely important to a good battle report, but not essential for me to read one.

2. Army Lists

Please post what you've taken, with upgrades and point values, as well as what your opponent has (To the best of your ability). I like reading why you've chosen a particular unit if it's an unusual choice, even if it's only "This is what I own and have painted". Having them seperated into "Troop" "HQ", etc categories is a plus.

Well, duh.

3. Turn Reports
The part that I rarely see is insight as to decisions that you made or tactics that you were shooting for. THIS is what helps me the most. I want to know if you had to decide to park your marines on an objective or try to move them to flank a troublesome movement. I want to know what your initial thoughts on a battle plan are (I'm going to try to move my rhino as close as I can using the cover available, deepstrike in some LC terminators, etc). I want to know what works and what went horribly, horribly wrong.

Agree here too, I'd like to see what other player's reasoning is, and whether I agree with it or not. Anything to help me be a better player.

4. Conclusions
I don't mind reading well-written fluff, but it's not something I miss if it's not there either.

Here, I get a little picky. I never read fluff in WD, much less player written reports. It's not why I'm reading the article in the first place, I wanna know what actually happened in the game, not a fictionalised narrative of the 'events'. I'd much prefer, if one really wants to add fluff, that they intersperse it with a 'mechanical report' for lack of a better term. A lot of the time I find the actual mechanics to be more exciting and interesting to read than (no offense) amateur authors trying to narrate and create it artificially (I want to know that the Guardsmen's miraculous survival was due to the berserker's rolling all 1's).

EzeKK wrote:Interesting.... Somewhat helpful, but probably should be in the general section or something...

I actually think a post about battle reports actually belongs here.

Pictures can be great but are not absolutely necessary by any means.

G

Different strokes for different folks.

Some people like fluff and a story driven batrep, others don't.

I try to take pictures, but it is hard to take a good pictures in a tournament. You are playing in a timed event, and you just have to snap a quick shot. It is hard to remember to take pictures because you are focused on the game and your strategy. That is why when I am losing I forget to take pictures because I am focused on the game.

Of course if you are playing with your friends it is easier to take pictures since you have an understanding opponent, and time.

I agree in that there's no way I'll read a report without pictures. And to be honest, I find it quite hard to follow without either maps or a map-style overhead shot.

On the other hand, I don't like the dodgy lettering and arrows that you sometimes see added to photos...

I think pics make battlereps way better. Mostly due to our "internet" lifestyle, people hate wading through pages of text with little to look at. Its also hard to envision games being explained... we can't see the cover, buildings, etc. I do love story driven reps, tho I'm poor with em

One drawback to this, often if you go to a tournament, you don't have time to take a lot of pictures. Taking pictures during deployment is easy - if you manage to remember it along with everything else you need to do. As the game gets going, and time becomes a factor, getting later-turn pics taken is usually the last thing on your mind.

Agreed. I think tournament reports get a free pass for not having pictures. I also agree that when possible they need the pics to go along with them. I'm personally a big fan of ArbitorIan's and Panic's batreps with their overhead shots of the field along with their player's eye view shots of the table.

You should also have the balls to post a battle report if you lose.

You can have your fluff, and your game specific report too.

You should also have the balls to post a battle report if you lose.

FACT, very few batreps i see are of the poster losing.

olympia wrote:You should also have the balls to post a battle report if you lose.

Hear, hear!

I know I shouldn't say much as my posted battle reports number zero, but when I was playing EPIC long, long ago I wrote up and posted every battle win or lose. I also posted all my Necromunda fights even though they read more like a guide to killing off your own gangers.

I try and write all of mine up - win or lose. Sometimes I just don't have the time. Here is my most recent - I would love feedback on how I can improve it.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/264788.page

As for pics, I like the eye candy as much as the next fellow (I try and get lots of pics of all the games) but I can't read those at work so I like a mix ;-)

Interesting points you make. I have to agree that different people look for different things in a bat rep. I would like to see two different areas for batreps - one for those who are more interested in army lists/tactics/tourney play and one section for the pic heavy, narrative type (a al Sominicide).

This way people can find what they want quickly and you don't have good reports people have spent a lot of time on disappearing in a few hours because there's been a 'Ard Boyz" tourney on that week. Likewise, gamers who want to comment on the latest mega-build or debate the tactics used in a battle can without wading through fluff and pictures they can do without.

Just my 0.02c

Getting pictures during tournaments is sometimes rough. I've started a few times and found that towards the end of the day I just completely forget about it.

From the other side, maybe I should start a new thread called reading battle reports , I'm guilty of this myself, but you should always post something in someones battle report if you read it, just so that they have a bit of encouragement to keep going.

Warmaster wrote:
From the other side, maybe I should start a new thread called reading battle reports , I'm guilty of this myself, but you should always post something in someones battle report if you read it, just so that they have a bit of encouragement to keep going.

I will absolutely agree with this (and also admit my own guilt). Those things take a lot of time to write up - and not getting any comments is like pshaw, why bother? Not to sound all emo, or anything.

I definitely need fluff and pictures. When Blood Angels keep rolling Rage every turn I shouldn't just be reading that it was because of the bad dice rolls. Maybe they all had an extra helping of Khorne Flakes for breakfast... anything to make it less technical.

You should also have the balls to post a battle report if you lose.

Agree

"I try and write all of mine up - win or lose. Sometimes I just don't have the time. Here is my most recent - I would love feedback on how I can improve it."

Somnicide, all your battle reports rock, you know that.

Thanks for the kind words - I do seriously love (and take if it is appropriate) the criticisms as well as the kindnesses so I really appreciate this thread and seeing what people like - maybe as an experiment I will try posting 2 batreps of my next game - one that is just the facts as they happened, and one a bit more narrative (as I usually do).

I think rule number one should be Terrain - Get some! as most of the reports here show how many people play on virtually empty tables...

H.B.M.C. wrote:I think rule number one should be Terrain - Get some! as most of the reports here show how many people play on virtually empty tables...

Here, do these make you happy?

Those are pretty terrain-sparse by my area's standards.

ph34r wrote:Those are pretty terrain-sparse by my area's standards.

If that is the case then you are playing with too much terrain giving the advantage to assault armies.

We use 25% table coverage. We also have more of a variety of terrain size.

olympia wrote:You should also have the balls to post a battle report if you lose.

There are battle reports where the poster wins?

Actually, I think I have won a few of the WH40K games I've posted, but I know I haven't won any of the Warmachine ones.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Pictures can be great but are not absolutely necessary by any means.

G

Disagree.

Without pics someone can write anything. Pics or it didnt happen...

Maybe views from both sides would help

Tyranid Horde wrote:Maybe views from both sides would help

That is soooo hard. Many of my regular opponents are pretty heavy dakka posters and while I might get commentary in my batrep from them, they will never write up a batrep if I have already done one. Believe me, I have tried.

Blackmoor wrote:Here, do these make you happy?

If you're trying to be cute, don't bother.

I am, of course, talking about tables like these:




In other words, tables that are either mostly empty space, or just have large very flat low-level terrain pieces.