Switch Theme:

Top 3 things that annoy you in war/skirmish games.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
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 us
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos






Toledo, OH

My biggest pet peeve in minis is actually something that 40k can very guilty of at the competitive level: simply taking too long to resolve when the broad outcome is not in doubt.

So, I went to a tournament last weekend, only my second in 9th and first in a new city. I'm new to Arks of Omen, I'm new to player placed terrain, and I'm running a slightly janky IG list based on what I happen to have with me. All three games were basically over by turn one, if not by the time we started setting up terrain. All three lists were pressure/melee lists (goffs, bile possessed, blood angels) and in the first two games I deployed terrain poorly, so I didn't have good firing lanes and my opponent could hide. By round three it was the opposite. None of the games went to round five or to time, we simply called them when it became wildly obvious one player would max score. Because the games weren't particularly interactive, especially when I was losing, it was a two hour exercise in watching my stuff evaporate. Was it fun? Honestly, not really. I enjoyed learning, and maybe I'll enjoy it more later, but I kind of felt like I was wasting time.

when I played warmachine, I was pretty mediocre, and when I drew a top player it would usually be over very quickly. I wouldn't say I had a lot of fun with warmachine, but I liked that I dind't feel an obligation to keep playing out a game so my opponent could hit his max scores.

   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 Nevelon wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
 LunarSol wrote:
Personally I'm a big fan of apps when they're done right. Cards are great, but as a game grows I just find I spend way too much energy organizing them so I have what I need to play. Not having to do anything to incorporate errata is also a huge plus in my book. A lot of that is just a result of the way I bounce around games and armies though.

I think the main issue people have with apps is when they're compulsory to play the game - after all, what happens to the game at the point when the servers inevitably go offline? Plus, as has been mentioned, at least a proportion of people like their wargaming to be some of their time away from a screen, and compulsory apps get in the way of that.

I don't think anyone is too bothered if the app is an optional playaid, however.


Exactly this.

I use battlescribe for 40k to build lists. I could go back to pen and paper if needed, but would rather not. But as it’s not required, I could go back and play older editions etc. Not a direct wargame comparison, but my brother and his kids have a car racing game, with physical cars and tracks. Controllers are an app on your phone, which tracks wins, levels up, that kind of stuff. But if they stop app support, whole thing is dead. Not a cheep setup either.

--

I still prefer hard copy rulebooks, but also live a hybrid lifestyle these days. D&D 3.0 with splatbook proliferation and a new iPad changed that. Looking stuff up on a small phone screen is not good, but a tablet (or laptop) give you enough space to read. And when one character might need to reference 3-6 books, you don’t want to lug that to game night all the time. Especially when you often only need a handful of pages from each one. But I prefer to have the core rules on paper.

Lack of digital rules is not at the top 3 things that irritate me, but it’s on the list.


I get it for sure and to a degree I vastly prefer cards. I just find that without an app, after a year or so I start spending more time managing the rules rather than having fun with them and kind of sour on bringing the game to the table in the process. Manual rules upkeep is something I've completely lost interest in and apps take that out of the equation making them far more of a plus than a negative for me.
   
Made in gb
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

I'll extend the comment around apps to "excessive rules management" where you need a ton of rulebooks, cards, tokens or even a laptop to play the game! People spend months of their lives making beautifully crafted tabletops, with miniatures that have taken hours, and then during the game the tabletop is covered in books balancing on top of buildings and the like. It can completely ruin the immersion for me. So any game that does that rules management piece, via either a neat rulebook or easy reference (in just one book!) is always a bonus for me.

Custom dice I don't mind if they are done well. Blood Bowl, X-Wing, Fallout, even Saga, they are an integral part of the game and instantly give you a specified result without having to consult a table (do going off the previous point, one less open book on the tabletop!) They help a little with the imagery too - a POW in Blood Bowl, cool Viking runes, a last moment dodge etc I think can make the game more visceral.

Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
Small but perfectly formed! A Great Crusade Epic 6mm project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/694411.page

 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Shadow Walker wrote:
Give me your top 3 reasons that could make you either be wary of checking the game or even outright skip it.
Mine are:
.


1, 2 and 3:
The local.community playing the game.

Sorry; but if the players are bunch of jerks etc., there's no point going any further.

greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in us
Knight of the Inner Circle






Scorched earth edition change - The company either completely changes the rules or almost all the rules when a new edition came out. Looking at you KillTeam. But I didn't care for how X-Wing was handled either, I don't mind buying a new book for additional units like Necromunda but to get back into playing when the X-Wing edition change happened was a few hundred dollars paywall.

Game Store Thugs - Some games at the FLGS attract people that just kill the game for new and casual players. It's not a certain store or a certain game, but you know very soon that your opponent was free to play for a reason. It's just the type of person that has to win the game at all costs, you all have seen the guy kick your butt and giggle every time you have a bad roll, but as soon as you start winning he becomes mad and either wants to quit the game or act like he is about to flip the table.

Low customization - when some units have no options, I don't need to go custom crazy but it really makes a dud trooper with zero upgrades a "dud".

 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Genoside07 wrote:
Scorched earth edition change - The company either completely changes the rules or almost all the rules when a new edition came out. Looking at you KillTeam. But I didn't care for how X-Wing was handled either, I don't mind buying a new book for additional units like Necromunda but to get back into playing when the X-Wing edition change happened was a few hundred dollars paywall.



Whilst, I'll.disagree about kill team 21 specifically - for us, ts a fantastic wee system.and literally everything we could ask for in a skirmish game - i would agree more or less with your main point.I have seen 'hard resets' and thimgslike that they went down like a lead balloon and killed a game/community.

I font think 'scorched earth' is the right term but i get what you mean - i think 'scorched earth' is reserved for, say, killing the old world in wfb. I think.'edition drift and edition shift' sum it up better. The former represents small changes but keeping the core engine more or less unchanged, the latter represents a bigger and more sudden 'change'.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/19 07:06:49


greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in us
Blood Angel Terminator with Lightning Claws






New Zealand

Subbed, and taking notes for making my TT Skirmish game lol

"The best way to lie is to tell the truth." Attelus Kaltos.
My story! Secret War
After his organisation is hired to hunt down an influential gang leader on the Hive world, Omnartus. Attelus Kaltos is embroiled deeper into the complex world of the Assassin. This is the job which will change him, for better or for worse. Forevermore. Chapter 1.

The Angaran Chronicles: Hamar Noir. After coming back from a dangerous mission which left his friend and partner, the werewolf: Emilia in a coma. Anargrin is sent on another mission: to hunt down a rogue vampire. A rogue vampire with no consistent modus operandi and who is exceedingly good at hiding its tracks. So much so even the veteran Anargrin is forced into desperate speculation. But worst of all: drive him into desperate measures. Measures which drives Anargrin to wonder; does the ends, justify the means?

 
   
Made in ca
Deadshot Weapon Moderati




 Adrassil wrote:
Subbed, and taking notes for making my TT Skirmish game lol


It's certainly some interesting anecdata.
   
Made in us
Blood Angel Terminator with Lightning Claws






New Zealand

Nomeny wrote:
 Adrassil wrote:
Subbed, and taking notes for making my TT Skirmish game lol


It's certainly some interesting anecdata.


Indeed! I like that term anecdata lol

Back OT can only think of one thing for me, bad rules writing. Using too many words to describe a rule or too little etc. Also, rules that are designed to push periphery things like **cough!** measurement devices **cough!** and I'm also not a fan of dice specially made for the game, either.

"The best way to lie is to tell the truth." Attelus Kaltos.
My story! Secret War
After his organisation is hired to hunt down an influential gang leader on the Hive world, Omnartus. Attelus Kaltos is embroiled deeper into the complex world of the Assassin. This is the job which will change him, for better or for worse. Forevermore. Chapter 1.

The Angaran Chronicles: Hamar Noir. After coming back from a dangerous mission which left his friend and partner, the werewolf: Emilia in a coma. Anargrin is sent on another mission: to hunt down a rogue vampire. A rogue vampire with no consistent modus operandi and who is exceedingly good at hiding its tracks. So much so even the veteran Anargrin is forced into desperate speculation. But worst of all: drive him into desperate measures. Measures which drives Anargrin to wonder; does the ends, justify the means?

 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




The early theme against apps is interesting. One of my first encounters with historicals as a young teen was a Napoleonics game which used a computer program to generate combat results, the club giving the demo had dragged along a PC to run the software. It did strike me as clumsy, back then - but I have occasionally wondered if it could be modernised/streamlined.

Tracker apps, on the other hand, can be massively helpful. Especially the likes of the Tabletop Battles app for 40k which supports tracking of objectives, VPs etc.

For me, I don't like card decks, diceless mechanics, or endless churn. The latter is exhausting.

   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




Tampa, FL

1) Use of cards/proprietary dice rather than simple dice. I'll also include playing card-based rules here too. I can't stand these, and it's quickly unsold me on a lot of rules that seemed interesting once I found out they were card-based.

2) Weird/Esoteric "RP-lite" aspects that take away from the fact it's a wargame, not an RPG. I don't need to have charts indicating the personality of my figures for a skirmish game, or additional oddities that belong in an RPG random encounter table.

3) In the context mostly of historical games, rules which are designed for a specific size and don't give any indicator of how to adjust it for other sizes. E.g. if it's written for 28mm because that's what the author used, it should have suggestions for using 15mm/6mm/etc. as well

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/20 11:35:49


- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
Made in si
Foxy Wildborne







Can we add: using shapes to represent distances. Or is that below the belt?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/20 12:29:23


Posters on ignore list: 36

40k Potica Edition - 40k patch with reactions, suppression and all that good stuff. Feedback thread here.

Gangs of Nu Ork - Necromunda / Gorkamorka expansion supporting all faction. Feedback thread here
   
Made in ca
Death-Dealing Dark Angels Devastator





Canada

1) Price
2) Setup Time
3) Cut-apart CAD sculpts so everyone's army looks the damn same! And converting is a bother.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 Genoside07 wrote:
Scorched earth edition change - The company either completely changes the rules or almost all the rules when a new edition came out. Looking at you KillTeam. But I didn't care for how X-Wing was handled either, I don't mind buying a new book for additional units like Necromunda but to get back into playing when the X-Wing edition change happened was a few hundred dollars paywall.


X-Wing 2.0 paid heavily for the sins of its predecessor. It was honestly a perfectly reasonable cost to transfer a faction into the new edition; the problem was that X-Wing 1.0 demanded you purchase every model from every faction, so you couldn't just do that. Like anyone with 3-5 40k factions is paying far more each edition change just to update their rules, but since GW drips them out rather than updating everything at once, people don't realize what they're paying.
   
Made in si
Foxy Wildborne







 LunarSol wrote:

X-Wing 2.0 paid heavily for the sins of its predecessor. It was honestly a perfectly reasonable cost to transfer a faction into the new edition; the problem was that X-Wing 1.0 demanded you purchase every model from every faction, so you couldn't just do that. Like anyone with 3-5 40k factions is paying far more each edition change just to update their rules, but since GW drips them out rather than updating everything at once, people don't realize what they're paying.


The problem with X-wing was that it didn't need a new edition, it needed maybe one 10€ pack's worth of errata'd cards, not redesigning everything for the sake of selling it to us again. It was a blatant money grab, a point where there was nothing new to sell, so they decied to sell the old stuff a second time, and people reacted accordingly.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/20 14:49:47


Posters on ignore list: 36

40k Potica Edition - 40k patch with reactions, suppression and all that good stuff. Feedback thread here.

Gangs of Nu Ork - Necromunda / Gorkamorka expansion supporting all faction. Feedback thread here
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







Cypher226 wrote:
The early theme against apps is interesting. One of my first encounters with historicals as a young teen was a Napoleonics game which used a computer program to generate combat results, the club giving the demo had dragged along a PC to run the software. It did strike me as clumsy, back then - but I have occasionally wondered if it could be modernised/streamlined.

Tracker apps, on the other hand, can be massively helpful. Especially the likes of the Tabletop Battles app for 40k which supports tracking of objectives, VPs etc.


I like to think of this as the BattleTech line because I first saw it when resolving LRM/50's using a laptop in the '90s:
- Using an app or computer program to speed up a process, or take care of the "Keep this information secret until it needs to be revealed" mechanic is acceptable. Tablet vs. dry erase markers and a laminated record sheet is just choosing game play aids.
- If the only way to play is using the app/computer program, you're playing a computer game. And pushing models around when you're playing a computer game is just a chore.

   
Made in us
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos






Toledo, OH

I think that the rising complexity of table top games, which I've heard called "admin" is something that is really stretching the hobby, and not just in miniatures. It seems to be a hot topic in board games as well.

Within wargames specifically, and all gaming more generally, there are tension points between simulation and balanced play, between abstraction and granularity. One argument for computer software is that it can help resolve complex calculations, the immediate response is: why do you have such complex calculations?

the other use for an app is less due to the complexity of any one rule, but rather to serve as a neutral sort of administrator of the game state. You see this is games like Gloomhaven, where the game is so complicated it's hard to remember all the little bits. In that case, the app is also serving sort of as a Gamemaster, since it's a coop game.

I think that while Apps can add a lot to the game, most of the time it would probably be easier to cut back on the mechanics than introduce an app.

   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 lord_blackfang wrote:
 LunarSol wrote:

X-Wing 2.0 paid heavily for the sins of its predecessor. It was honestly a perfectly reasonable cost to transfer a faction into the new edition; the problem was that X-Wing 1.0 demanded you purchase every model from every faction, so you couldn't just do that. Like anyone with 3-5 40k factions is paying far more each edition change just to update their rules, but since GW drips them out rather than updating everything at once, people don't realize what they're paying.


The problem with X-wing was that it didn't need a new edition, it needed maybe one 10€ pack's worth of errata'd cards, not redesigning everything for the sake of selling it to us again. It was a blatant money grab, a point where there was nothing new to sell, so they decied to sell the old stuff a second time, and people reacted accordingly.


X-Wing needed some design space. From the first core set, it always had problems with its dice math and reliance on extremely limited actions to smooth that math out. They did a frankly incredible job expanding on it, but there were a lot of core rules around stress and actions and the like that honestly I didn't think 2.0 went far enough with. For sure though, the real issue with 2.0 is the lack of product to go along with it. Waiting until the GCW stuff was scraping through the barrel to the dirt below meant there was effectively nothing for existing players to look forward to in the new edition.
   
Made in us
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos






Toledo, OH

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The problem with X-wing was that it didn't need a new edition, it needed maybe one 10€ pack's worth of errata'd cards, not redesigning everything for the sake of selling it to us again. It was a blatant money grab, a point where there was nothing new to sell, so they decied to sell the old stuff a second time, and people reacted accordingly.


You're not wrong, but I guess the question is what else should they have done? X-wing mined the license pretty deep, and we all know what happens to games without new content. I think X-wing is more a story of the perils of licensing (and/or using later releases to balance prior ones) than it is about nuking the game and starting over.

This is part of the GW secret sauce: not only does it own it's own IP, and can thus create infinite content, but because the primary product it sells are models, not rules, it has two avenues to selling new stuff. We all know that sales for certain legacy kits spike when they get spicy new rules, but GW sold a shedload of Cadians that updated sculpts (yes, technically the cadians are new data sheets, but nobody really considers them new units )

A huge amount of GW's output, especially for 40k, are updated models.
   
Made in ca
Poisonous Kroot Headhunter





1) Required Aps. Your want to add optional App support, you do you, but I won't play any game the requires them.

2) Hyperfocus on competitive play with limited alternative options. Unless you're an expert of the game or the rules are VERY poorly designed, in a causal setting, most armies of any game can defeat any other army. (I don't mean lists, I mean armies). Constantly tweaking the rules here and there is great for competitive balance, but for people who only get out for a game every month or two, every other game has some new rule you've ever heard about before.

3. Outdated rules still required. In terms of 40k, what I mean is, when you need to have your codex to play, but it's been errated weeks after it's release, which means unless you've memorized all the changes, you can't trust anything it says anymore without constantly checking your other reference material. Kinda ties in to my second point.

17210 4965 3235 5350 2936 2273 1176 2675
1614 1342 1010 2000 960 1330 1040  
   
Made in de
Servoarm Flailing Magos




Germany

 Polonius wrote:
 lord_blackfang wrote:
The problem with X-wing was that it didn't need a new edition, it needed maybe one 10€ pack's worth of errata'd cards, not redesigning everything for the sake of selling it to us again. It was a blatant money grab, a point where there was nothing new to sell, so they decied to sell the old stuff a second time, and people reacted accordingly.


You're not wrong, but I guess the question is what else should they have done? X-wing mined the license pretty deep, and we all know what happens to games without new content. I think X-wing is more a story of the perils of licensing (and/or using later releases to balance prior ones) than it is about nuking the game and starting over.

This is part of the GW secret sauce: not only does it own it's own IP, and can thus create infinite content, but because the primary product it sells are models, not rules, it has two avenues to selling new stuff. We all know that sales for certain legacy kits spike when they get spicy new rules, but GW sold a shedload of Cadians that updated sculpts (yes, technically the cadians are new data sheets, but nobody really considers them new units )

A huge amount of GW's output, especially for 40k, are updated models.


That's a good observation: at some point, a Star Wars player, no matter the system, has all the X-Wings or TIE fighters they'll ever need, and it's not like there will be a radical change in design for Jedi or that Stormtroopers will get noticeably more Storm-troopery with new sculpts. Pretty soon, it's either new rules/cards, pointless scale changes or off to the side stories not that many people care about enough to justify the expenses.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 Polonius wrote:
I think that the rising complexity of table top games, which I've heard called "admin" is something that is really stretching the hobby, and not just in miniatures. It seems to be a hot topic in board games as well.

Within wargames specifically, and all gaming more generally, there are tension points between simulation and balanced play, between abstraction and granularity. One argument for computer software is that it can help resolve complex calculations, the immediate response is: why do you have such complex calculations?

the other use for an app is less due to the complexity of any one rule, but rather to serve as a neutral sort of administrator of the game state. You see this is games like Gloomhaven, where the game is so complicated it's hard to remember all the little bits. In that case, the app is also serving sort of as a Gamemaster, since it's a coop game.

I think that while Apps can add a lot to the game, most of the time it would probably be easier to cut back on the mechanics than introduce an app.



I think a lot of MCPs success definitely comes from finding a good mix of complex abilities that resolve through rules that are streamlined enough to not get in the way. It's kind of interesting to compare to Legion, which is kind of the template of abstraction MCP draws from, and does a ton of things very well, but kind of falls apart into messy nuance when it comes to interacting with terrain for elevation and cover and the like.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Polonius wrote:
You're not wrong, but I guess the question is what else should they have done? X-wing mined the license pretty deep, and we all know what happens to games without new content. I think X-wing is more a story of the perils of licensing (and/or using later releases to balance prior ones) than it is about nuking the game and starting over.


They banked kind of hard on Disney providing them with new toys to sell. You could see things kind of fall of the rails when TLJ didn't have a bunch of new ship designs.
Introducing Clone Wars earlier probably would have helped extend the life of things but kind of predated the kids who grew up on the prequels really pushing their appreciation for them. This is one of the reasons factions are often important, but I imagine removing the requirement of buying everything probably wasn't too enticing.

One interesting modern trend I've noticed and kind of approve of is the general movement away from factions and more towards thematic synergies to encourage theme. It seems to work well for a number of games I play, particularly those with small numbers of models in play at one time. I can see that as something that would work well for X-Wing if it had embraced it. A general Light Side/Dark Side groupings with the ability to mix and match at will, but with some kind of thematic squadron concepts to break the superfactions up a bit into interesting sub themes.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/20 15:33:00


 
   
Made in us
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos






Toledo, OH

Tsagualsa wrote:
 Polonius wrote:

That's a good observation: at some point, a Star Wars player, no matter the system, has all the X-Wings or TIE fighters they'll ever need, and it's not like there will be a radical change in design for Jedi or that Stormtroopers will get noticeably more Storm-troopery with new sculpts. Pretty soon, it's either new rules/cards, pointless scale changes or off to the side stories not that many people care about enough to justify the expenses.


GW has also benefited from two major sea changes in minis production: metal to plastic, and analog to digital modeling. This is why you can sell people the same kit over and over again. Metal cadians, 2002 cadians, and modern cadians are all noticably different in many ways, even if they broadly represent the same unit. X-wing was limited to pretty much different paint jobs.



LunarSol wrote:I think a lot of MCPs success definitely comes from finding a good mix of complex abilities that resolve through rules that are streamlined enough to not get in the way. It's kind of interesting to compare to Legion, which is kind of the template of abstraction MCP draws from, and does a ton of things very well, but kind of falls apart into messy nuance when it comes to interacting with terrain for elevation and cover and the like.


Good game design is not too hard to theorize, but it's tough to get right in practice. I mean, look at work placement euro games. there are literally hundreds of games using the same set of mechanics, but some get them to gel properly, and others don't. Game design is HARD.


One interesting modern trend I've noticed and kind of approve of is the general movement away from factions and more towards thematic synergies to encourage theme. It seems to work well for a number of games I play, particularly those with small numbers of models in play at one time. I can see that as something that would work well for X-Wing if it had embraced it. A general Light Side/Dark Side groupings with the ability to mix and match at will, but with some kind of thematic squadron concepts to break the superfactions up a bit into interesting sub themes.


I think Malifaux went this way, where you pick a crew based around keywords/themes, and while there are factions, the keywords matter more. Warmachine is also going this way, you can't really just play Cygnar, you play a storm legion or trencher force.

I think that there are a lot of ways to do it. GW went the other way with AOS, and spit out a bunch of relativley small but very thematic factions.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 Polonius wrote:

LunarSol wrote:I think a lot of MCPs success definitely comes from finding a good mix of complex abilities that resolve through rules that are streamlined enough to not get in the way. It's kind of interesting to compare to Legion, which is kind of the template of abstraction MCP draws from, and does a ton of things very well, but kind of falls apart into messy nuance when it comes to interacting with terrain for elevation and cover and the like.


Good game design is not too hard to theorize, but it's tough to get right in practice. I mean, look at work placement euro games. there are literally hundreds of games using the same set of mechanics, but some get them to gel properly, and others don't. Game design is HARD.


One interesting modern trend I've noticed and kind of approve of is the general movement away from factions and more towards thematic synergies to encourage theme. It seems to work well for a number of games I play, particularly those with small numbers of models in play at one time. I can see that as something that would work well for X-Wing if it had embraced it. A general Light Side/Dark Side groupings with the ability to mix and match at will, but with some kind of thematic squadron concepts to break the superfactions up a bit into interesting sub themes.


I think Malifaux went this way, where you pick a crew based around keywords/themes, and while there are factions, the keywords matter more. Warmachine is also going this way, you can't really just play Cygnar, you play a storm legion or trencher force.

I think that there are a lot of ways to do it. GW went the other way with AOS, and spit out a bunch of relativley small but very thematic factions.


Several games have gone the sub faction route. Infinity, Malifaux, Warmachine and plenty more all dealt with bloat by making sub factions, but it does risk making it difficult to get people that hone in on one theme new stuff at a regular basis. The newer variation of this seems to be true factionless design, which is wildly risky but has the benefit of everyone potentially be interested in every new release. That MCP has this while keeping a pretty strong sense of faction is kind of a miracle, but I'm sure its been a factor in the game's success.
   
Made in ca
Deadshot Weapon Moderati




Getting the right mix of product design and game design so that players buy more stuff and more people play is certainly the grail. It's a bit 'on time, on quote, or done right' though.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Terminator with Assault Cannon






1. Apps. - If anything coded is required to play the game, it's an immediate hard pass.

2. Rapid change - My time is best spent enjoying all the game has to offer; not keeping up with ceaseless churn & burn.

3. If the game uses an overabundance of symbols to correlate rules and/or stats (e.g Warcry) or needlessly uses symbols for simple things like movement (e.g. Kill Team). It's a no go.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Myrtle Creek, OR

Or if you use symbology to cleverly save money on not printing cards in multiple languages, then:

Don’t make everything a skull icon with three pixels difference between each next symbol

Don’t require users to have electron microscopes in order to see which pixels in this unit’s skull symbol are different from the next

*Hyperbole included in base comment sticker price.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/21 00:20:06


Thread Slayer 
   
Made in ca
Deadshot Weapon Moderati




1. Apps,
2. DICE
3. Janky rules
   
Made in de
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle





Igougo is one reason I lost interest in 40k. Due to strats and improved CC rules it's not as bad as in earlier editions where you could have walked away from the table for half an hour, but overall I prefer more of a back and forth and the ability to react on what the opponent is doing.

Another one is rules changing too fast. And I don’t mean updates or errata but killing off an edition after only 3 years, so at about the time you usually need to build an army, is just too damn fast. But that's an aos/ 40K problem only I think. Looking at other games like X-Wing or Warmachine it seems to be a gamble, though.



   
Made in us
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





Orem, Utah

Deadnight wrote:
 Shadow Walker wrote:
Give me your top 3 reasons that could make you either be wary of checking the game or even outright skip it.
Mine are:
.


1, 2 and 3:
The local.community playing the game.

Sorry; but if the players are bunch of jerks etc., there's no point going any further.


A lot of great games just don't have a local community to play with. Some people have the time and energy to help build up a local community, but that isn't always me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 privateer4hire wrote:
Or if you use symbology to cleverly save money on not printing cards in multiple languages, then:

Don’t make everything a skull icon with three pixels difference between each next symbol

Don’t require users to have electron microscopes in order to see which pixels in this unit’s skull symbol are different from the next

*Hyperbole included in base comment sticker price.



Yeah. Intuitive and distinct icons are great.

Unintuitive icons that are similar to other icons are hard to deal with

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/22 18:04:44


 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: