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.

BrookM wrote:Have they purged their stock of Ex-illis as well? Now there was a game that did its level best to kill itself from the first release onwards.

Long gone.

lord_blackfang wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
It’s a shame the company botched Arcane Legions like they did. That one was overall pretty good and had some solid potential. I still have all my stuff for it.

Agreed. The rules had great potential, an elegance of design that eludes most GW imitators, and the launch benefitted from probably the industry's first attempt at a semi-professional video tutorial.

It's definitely an elegant design, especially when it comes to attrition. I still have all my stuff too and will play it again the future... I just wish someone could hook me up with the Dragons at a fair price! (There are also the Servants of Thebes undead steampunk sphinxes, but "fair price" for those is something like $200 )

lord marcus wrote:Are they going to lower the arcane legions stuff to $2.50. I'd buy all the infantry then, as I use the shields

Not that we know. Which is weird, since they were willing to sell the Starter with all three infantry packs, three commanders, and a bunch of tiny dice for $7 or less.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stormonu wrote:
It’s a sad thing to see these games go, but nothing lasts forever. And just because the publishing has gone defunct doesn’t mean the game is unplayable - I intend to enjoy my Karen’s for years to come.

Sure. Having bought Arcane Legions, I intend to enjoy them for life. I'm even looking at basing them for unusually-short Kings of War armies without destroying their existing bases.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


So, they tried to make a board game where the resolution mechanics were too complex to be resolved by players during gameplay and so necessitated a computer.

Why didn't they make a video game?

We don't know if it actually was that complex or if it was just a d6 roll off. Iirc they never published the rules despite capitulating eventually and saying that they would. It was a confusing and insulting mess of a business plan. It's a shame because a few of the character minis were nice though.

In the end, my personal belief is that not publishing the rules was just a roundabout way to force people to use their iPhone rules app which mandated that you activate your minis' DRM to add them to your army. Eventually they said they'd allow players to transfer ownership of the virtual minis but it was too little, too late and they didn't get around to actually fulfilling that promise judging from complaints on their forum.

 warboss wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


So, they tried to make a board game where the resolution mechanics were too complex to be resolved by players during gameplay and so necessitated a computer.

Why didn't they make a video game?

We don't know if it actually was that complex or if it was just a d6 roll off. Iirc they never published the rules despite capitulating eventually and saying that they would. It was a confusing and insulting mess of a business plan. It's a shame because a few of the character minis were nice though.

In the end, my personal belief is that not publishing the rules was just a roundabout way to force people to use their iPhone rules app which mandated that you activate your minis' DRM to add them to your army. Eventually they said they'd allow players to transfer ownership of the virtual minis but it was too little, too late and they didn't get around to actually fulfilling that promise judging from complaints on their forum.

That thought did also cross my mind. You'd also think it would be the more likely explanation as well but then you look at the RPGs and board games that have been made with ridiculously complex rules and you're not so sure

I dug out the old Ex-illis thread again, eight years ago or so now and man, it was a painful trainwreck with the various company figures jumping in to defend it, the OP being a poorly disguised company shill, all struggling hard to keep things together.

When you try to sell your game and claim that you can play it without the software, but it would take 8+ hours to play a game, you may need to reevaluate your rules a wee bit.. There was also the insults, elitist nerds indeed!

Speaking of failed mini games, does anybody still have any pictures of those first CORPSEHAMMER figures?

Corpsehammer? Was that the crazy kickstarter where everything looked like it was notebook doodles of what an 8th grader thought would be "metal"? Didn't even realize he got a KSer funded enough to produce anything.

These ones?

Aaaaand...lunge! AAARGH! ME ANKLE!

I remember seeing that KS and thought that they had a lot of detail but that the actual designs were really odd - too much detail in the wrong way that kind of obscured the model and its form and shape. The Gun on that one is an ideal example - it also looked confusing lots of models next to each other as the shapes all sort of blended together to make it very hard to really tell which was which type of model.

I also thought that KS failed unless he got finances from another source of course.


Lots of detail in the designs just not the right design to start with.

 BrookM wrote:
I dug out the old Ex-illis thread again, eight years ago or so now and man, it was a painful trainwreck with the various company figures jumping in to defend it, the OP being a poorly disguised company shill, all struggling hard to keep things together.

When you try to sell your game and claim that you can play it without the software, but it would take 8+ hours to play a game, you may need to reevaluate your rules a wee bit.. There was also the insults, elitist nerds indeed!

You're just not hip to 2010's best idea, Wargaming 2.0! Elitist nerd, indeed!

So wait they came onto nerd and geek sites and advertised a game and then insulted the entire market they were advertising too? Yeah something tells me that game design wasn't their only area of serious weakness in skills!

I mean at the very least if you're going to insult a market segment dont make it the same segment you're advertising too!

 Overread wrote:
So wait they came onto nerd and geek sites and advertised a game and then insulted the entire market they were advertising too? Yeah something tells me that game design wasn't their only area of serious weakness in skills!

I mean at the very least if you're going to insult a market segment dont make it the same segment you're advertising too!

I am not defending that marketing copy at all (using the term elitist is stupid and antagonizing IMO) but is "nerd" really an insult any more? Even in 2010 was it an insult? Nerd culture has been ascendant for almost twenty years now, and being labeled a "nerd" isn't the social kryptonite it used to be.

I get that people in a group don't want "outsiders" using their own terminology against them, but are miniature game creators the out-group on a forum dedicated to miniature games? Aren't they one of us? Can't they use the term nerd just as ironically as many of us do on a daily basis?

 BrookM wrote:
Speaking of failed mini games, does anybody still have any pictures of those first CORPSEHAMMER figures?

'Sup turd cutter?

http://www.hellrangers.com/

He's still trying!

There is a gallery that I stumbled on that is AMAZING. It isn't the Hell Rangers gallery since that is relevant, but it was like random ads for dentists and these strange side-by-sides of a photo of a lion, then the RED ROGERS idea of what a lion is.

They're clearly using the word nerd as a pejorative to advertise their forced early smartphone 2g always online and DRM integration into a tabletop wargame (that they dubbed "Wargaming 2.0" ). I'd have no problem if they had simply used the word normally without the negative connotation. Ymmv.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 Overread wrote:
So wait they came onto nerd and geek sites and advertised a game and then insulted the entire market they were advertising too? Yeah something tells me that game design wasn't their only area of serious weakness in skills!

I mean at the very least if you're going to insult a market segment dont make it the same segment you're advertising too!

I am not defending that marketing copy at all (using the term elitist is stupid and antagonizing IMO) but is "nerd" really an insult any more? Even in 2010 was it an insult? Nerd culture has been ascendant for almost twenty years now, and being labeled a "nerd" isn't the social kryptonite it used to be.

I get that people in a group don't want "outsiders" using their own terminology against them, but are miniature game creators the out-group on a forum dedicated to miniature games? Aren't they one of us? Can't they use the term nerd just as ironically as many of us do on a daily basis?

I wasn't even considering the word nerd an insult but a descriptive term mostly. The insult was the whole commentary on how it was elitist and how their game was going to get out from those evil nasty nerds or some such.



Personally I always saw geeks as people of any level intelligence who like geeky things and had generally good social skills (if a limited friend pool at a local level) like DnD and suchlike; whilst Nerds also liked those same things but were often far more intelligent, if sometimes/often lacking in social skills

 warboss wrote:
They're clearly using the word nerd as a pejorative to advertise their forced early smartphone 2g always online and DRM integration into a tabletop wargame (that they dubbed "Wargaming 2.0" ). I'd have no problem if they had simply used the word normally without the negative connotation. Ymmv.

Are they? They seem to be taking shots at war gaming in general with their references to "exaggerated or cartoony" miniature proportions or the lack of cheating. The entire pitch posted seems like they were positioning their game against the rest of the market. I don't really see it all that much different than Privateer Press' Page 5 during Mk1, where they were differentiating themselves from the "other guys" i.e. GW.

And what is using nerd "normally" mean? It sounds like your issue was with "elitist" which I agree, was a poor, stupid choice of a word to use in that copy. But nerd? Nerd is so benign.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Overread wrote:


I wasn't even considering the word nerd an insult but a descriptive term mostly. The insult was the whole commentary on how it was elitist and how their game was going to get out from those evil nasty nerds or some such.

Yeah, I agree using elitist was asinine. Even if the attempt was tongue in cheek which I sorta think it was, it is hard to avoid ruffling feathers when you trot that gem of a descriptor out.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
These ones?

Aaaaand...lunge! AAARGH! ME ANKLE!

There we go! Just seeing that model makes me mentally add a heavy metal soundtrack to play in the background while someone grunts "COOOOOOOOOORPSE HAMMERRRRRRRRRR" over and over again.

 warboss wrote:
You're just not hip to 2010's best idea, Wargaming 2.0! Elitist nerd, indeed!

Amazing marketing skills for sure, I wonder if certain other companies have taken a page from these guys.

 BaconSlayer wrote:
'Sup turd cutter?

http://www.hellrangers.com/

He's still trying!

There is a gallery that I stumbled on that is AMAZING. It isn't the Hell Rangers gallery since that is relevant, but it was like random ads for dentists and these strange side-by-sides of a photo of a lion, then the RED ROGERS idea of what a lion is.

Ohohohoho, you are spoiling me!

 BaconSlayer wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Speaking of failed mini games, does anybody still have any pictures of those first CORPSEHAMMER figures?

'Sup turd cutter?

http://www.hellrangers.com/

He's still trying!

Why are the humans all so wrinkly? Are they the geriatric division of the colonial marines doped up on steroids and hgh?

In terms of the design of models, Jes ‘reckon we can safely treat his word as gospel’ Goodwin has a really solid article about it in this month’s White Dwarf.

It’s about how you need to include some fine detail, but also blank spaces, and create a sense of dynamism and narrative.

Essentially everything the Corpsehammer one above is utterly lacking. Far, far too much detail, poor posing (seriously, his poor ankle!) and no real hint rod a narrative.

Yup. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

I have zero problem with the marketing approach. We all know what they mean - that minis games should be playable by more than those that love charts and formulae and memorizing dozens of stats. They were trying to be edgy in a ham fisted way, but I think we're a bit overly sensitive as a community to find it insulting.

Maybe I'm more comfortable being an elitist nerd than most, though.

Doing it by computer also means the engine can be much more complicated - it doesn't matter, as all you see is the results. If the system takes something like an 80s naval sim combat resolution system (modifiers based on firer and target's combined velocity, angle to each other, weather, multiple levels of obscurement, and the precise shape of each unit, then allows for dozens of possible hit results, drills down through multiple levels of hit effects (Roll on Chart A, to find out whether to roll on Chart B, C or D ...), then it can do that, because a human doesn't need to laboriously follow all those steps.

It's not a bad idea - it's just let down by bad marketing and implementation. And the fact that lots of gamers like rolling dice.

The thing is if you're using an app to make almost all the choices then the risk is that the average person is going to wonder why they are even bothering with models and not just playing a PC or mobile game.

Nintendo gets the idea in that they will sell you a physical model which will then unlock a digital model within their game that you then play with; but you don't need the physical model around all the time to play.

Some companies have had awkward systems where you have to put the model on the tablet or device to play. Thing with those is that you're left with something that isn't all that fun to play with and loses the advantages of each system.

I remember stopping by the Ex Illis booth at GenCon before it was released and the whole debacle here happened because the inherent wrongness of a table top that required you to simultaneously play it on an app on two connected devices intrigued me.

The biggest red flag was that they kept telling us about how you didn't need all this stuff to play because it was all done on the app, but they also couldn't explain to us why you needed the models at all. The app didn't track anything on the table, so you input everything you were doing there on the app, making the tabletop part an exercise in "it's a miniatures game because we say so". We asked if it was possible to play without the app and were told flat out no, which from watching for a while was pretty much the point every person that stopped walked off.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
Doing it by computer also means the engine can be much more complicated - it doesn't matter, as all you see is the results. If the system takes something like an 80s naval sim combat resolution system (modifiers based on firer and target's combined velocity, angle to each other, weather, multiple levels of obscurement, and the precise shape of each unit, then allows for dozens of possible hit results, drills down through multiple levels of hit effects (Roll on Chart A, to find out whether to roll on Chart B, C or D ...), then it can do that, because a human doesn't need to laboriously follow all those steps.

It's not a bad idea - it's just let down by bad marketing and implementation. And the fact that lots of gamers like rolling dice.

Yeah, I agree. It's not a bad idea. People getting upset that the computer aided game can't be played without the computer are really missing the whole point and all of the advantages the computer brings. But, like you say... gamers LIKE rolling dice.

 Albino Squirrel wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
Doing it by computer also means the engine can be much more complicated - it doesn't matter, as all you see is the results. If the system takes something like an 80s naval sim combat resolution system (modifiers based on firer and target's combined velocity, angle to each other, weather, multiple levels of obscurement, and the precise shape of each unit, then allows for dozens of possible hit results, drills down through multiple levels of hit effects (Roll on Chart A, to find out whether to roll on Chart B, C or D ...), then it can do that, because a human doesn't need to laboriously follow all those steps.

It's not a bad idea - it's just let down by bad marketing and implementation. And the fact that lots of gamers like rolling dice.

Yeah, I agree. It's not a bad idea. People getting upset that the computer aided game can't be played without the computer are really missing the whole point and all of the advantages the computer brings. But, like you say... gamers LIKE rolling dice.

You guys are giving me flashbacks to the Privateer Press Riots of MKIII

"What do you mean the cards are in the app? I can't use an app! What is this smartphone sorcery! I heard about a guy two towns over that doesn't even have a smartphone or an internet connection!"

There are places for an app at the tabletop, mainly for reference and tracking, but even then, that should be possible to be done by the players.

If your game needs one to manage excess complexity in the resolution engine, to me, that means that the engine is overly complex to begin with, and the computer is covering for bad design. The failure to develop and refine a simple, consistent, and transparent resolution engine suggests that there will be myriad other design issues.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
There are places for an app at the tabletop, mainly for reference and tracking, but even then, that should be possible to be done by the players.

If your game needs one to manage excess complexity in the resolution engine, to me, that means that the engine is overly complex to begin with, and the computer is covering for bad design. The failure to develop and refine a simple, consistent, and transparent resolution engine suggests that there will be myriad other design issues.

Uh, no, it doesn't. It doesn't at all mean there is "excess" complexity. That makes no sense. How many people use a computer for their jobs? It would be pretty ridiculous for them to say "hey, I shouldn't have to use a computer for this. If I do, that means the job is too complex and you should make it simpler."

 Albino Squirrel wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
There are places for an app at the tabletop, mainly for reference and tracking, but even then, that should be possible to be done by the players.

If your game needs one to manage excess complexity in the resolution engine, to me, that means that the engine is overly complex to begin with, and the computer is covering for bad design. The failure to develop and refine a simple, consistent, and transparent resolution engine suggests that there will be myriad other design issues.

Uh, no, it doesn't. It doesn't at all mean there is "excess" complexity. That makes no sense. How many people use a computer for their jobs? It would be pretty ridiculous for them to say "hey, I shouldn't have to use a computer for this. If I do, that means the job is too complex and you should make it simpler."

Those people aren't playing board games. A miniatures/board game that requires a computer to play is too complex, especially when the computer renders the miniatures/board aspect of the game pointless.

If you've made a game that requires a computer to play, then it should be a computer game.

 Overread wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
I think every major miniature game has four major facets.

1) The miniatures.
2) The fluff.
3) The game.
4) The cost.

You can probably add at least 1 more point, ease of access including distribution and availability, which is where most KS games fail after the initial run and it is keeping a lot of smaller games from taking off. Maelstrom's Edge, as a semi random example.

I would add local availability/distribution and also local player scene and promotion.

In today's internet age, you can add:

5) Behavior of the company (this isn't just promotion, but their personality/attitude)
6) Frequency of new releases (hype)

Ah, Ex-Illis. I remember when that launched a few of my non-minis-gamer friends were asking me about it. My thoughts then were, "Hm. Well, I think it's going to fail because the thing about minis gamers is we like chucking dice, we like knowing the odds and modifiers and such. I mean, an app for reference is ok, but relying on it for resolving rolls and rules probably won't go over."

In short, I thought the whole concept was flawed because they completely took out most things which make a minis wargame a minis wargame.

 Albino Squirrel wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
There are places for an app at the tabletop, mainly for reference and tracking, but even then, that should be possible to be done by the players.

If your game needs one to manage excess complexity in the resolution engine, to me, that means that the engine is overly complex to begin with, and the computer is covering for bad design. The failure to develop and refine a simple, consistent, and transparent resolution engine suggests that there will be myriad other design issues.

Uh, no, it doesn't. It doesn't at all mean there is "excess" complexity. That makes no sense.

How many people use a computer for their jobs? It would be pretty ridiculous for them to say "hey, I shouldn't have to use a computer for this. If I do, that means the job is too complex and you should make it simpler."

For a board game, 100% it absolutely does, or I wouldn't have written it.

Can you manually iterate through the calculations required for something like EVE in real time? No? How about PUBG? Then the job is too much and requires a computer.

For those jobs that require a computer, again, they are typically real time updates. You can't replicate that pen and paper on a global basis in real time, not at scale, so again, computer required.

But go back to board games, and explain what value a computer adds. I say it's none, and a bandaid for a designer who doesn't know what they are doing.