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.

 AegisGrimm wrote:

It is so creeply how GW has indoctrinated the rules-churn. I shake my head all the time when people claim that unsupported games are unplayable. They are exactly as playable as when they were in print! If you had fun with them back then, you can have the same fun with them now, as long as you have everything you need to play, which you obviously should if you played them in the first place.

People claim they are dead because noone plays them anymore so they can't find a group, but I have that same problem with everything currently available, lol.

Your second comment shows how fundamentally you(and, historically, folk like Vermis) misunderstand(willfully or not) the "unsupported" argument in relation to GW. It's not specifically about the fact it's unsupported, it's about the way the network effect makes products being actively supported by big(relatively) companies so much easier to play.

Not everyone lives in a city. Not everyone has a thriving local club/store with a broad product range. A lot of folk don't have a huge amount of free time to spend on their hobby. Such people, entirely justifiably, see value in a product that is ubiquitous and standardised. And then they get shat on by people on forums who talk about them like they're deluded cultists who just need to open their eyes and wake up SHEEPLE to realise how wrong they are to prefer a product, flaws and all, which actually gives them a chance to get a game in without wasting half their play time negotiating and without requiring them to put in months of work building a local following for the game themselves.

I've been playing "unsupported" Specialist Games for years now because I really enjoy them, warts & all, but you know what? I was fething overjoyed at the prospect of GW reviving them even in a potentially limited "boxed game" format, because these days I spend more time trying to persuade people to play the games than actually playing the damn games.

Not everyone wants their hobby to be a full-time job as an unpaid game promoter, they just want to buy the things, paint the things, and play with the things, no muss no fuss.

I see that KoW is inherently a block game that encourages giant miniatures for whatever size, to pick up the GW contingent, rather than blocks that might match the ground scale. The vast majority of ancients through Napoleonic games actually should be played as block games, along with pretty much all fantasy games that emulate ancients-type play. I don't see the problem with that.

SF games have a bit more leeway, not being as grounded to the real world.

Battlelore with sculpted terrain and painted minis is just beautiful.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:

It is so creeply how GW has indoctrinated the rules-churn. I shake my head all the time when people claim that unsupported games are unplayable. They are exactly as playable as when they were in print! If you had fun with them back then, you can have the same fun with them now, as long as you have everything you need to play, which you obviously should if you played them in the first place.

People claim they are dead because noone plays them anymore so they can't find a group, but I have that same problem with everything currently available, lol.

...
Not everyone wants their hobby to be a full-time job as an unpaid game promoter, they just want to buy the things, paint the things, and play with the things, no muss no fuss.

I would like to subscribe to your organization's newsletter.
Gamevangelist is about 31 flavors of annoying for both the seller and the sellees.
Nothing like having to buy both sides of a game because nobody plays it yet or possibly ever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I see that KoW is inherently a block game that encourages giant miniatures for whatever size, to pick up the GW contingent, rather than blocks that might match the ground scale. The vast majority of ancients through Napoleonic games actually should be played as block games, along with pretty much all fantasy games that emulate ancients-type play. I don't see the problem with that.

SF games have a bit more leeway, not being as grounded to the real world.

Battlelore with sculpted terrain and painted minis is just beautiful.

Agreed on pretty much everything---except for me painting BL2.
Battlelore 2nd, in particular, is very well executed.

 jorny wrote:

people are moving towards a freer attitude where you play with the models and rules you like (which of course is nothing new really) and are less stuck in the one company, one ruleset, one miniature line, one paint line attitude...

What do you think? Is there a paradigm shift in miniaures miniatures gaming on the way? Write 500 words and hand in by monday.

Yes... Only been going on for.... ever in historical 'tabletop miniatures gaming'.

40K figures don't remotely match the ground scale. In fact, there isn't really any attempt at realism in the various scales of 40K. Figures, ground, time, height, it's all arranged to cram a lot of large, cool-looking models on to the table.

Yodhrin wrote:Not everyone lives in a city. Not everyone has a thriving local club/store with a broad product range. A lot of folk don't have a huge amount of free time to spend on their hobby. Such people, entirely justifiably, see value in a product that is ubiquitous and standardised. And then they get shat on by people on forums who talk about them like they're deluded cultists who just need to open their eyes and wake up SHEEPLE to realise how wrong they are to prefer a product, flaws and all, which actually gives them a chance to get a game in without wasting half their play time negotiating and without requiring them to put in months of work building a local following for the game themselves.

I've been playing "unsupported" Specialist Games for years now because I really enjoy them, warts & all, but you know what? I was fething overjoyed at the prospect of GW reviving them even in a potentially limited "boxed game" format, because these days I spend more time trying to persuade people to play the games than actually playing the damn games.

Not everyone wants their hobby to be a full-time job as an unpaid game promoter, they just want to buy the things, paint the things, and play with the things, no muss no fuss.

This is a very good point. I'm lucky enough to be able to find a few like-minded folks in to play the games I like, but one of the reasons I keep my painted 40k armies even though I don't play 40k anymore (besides liking the figs and nostalgia) is that I know that if my group were to implode or I had to move somewhere less populated, I'd still be able to scratch my gaming itch with some 40k action. I hate the prices and don't really like the rules, but if it was that or not gaming, I'd slap down my $150 or so for the required rulebook and codes with little hesitation.

Kilkrazy wrote:40K figures don't remotely match the ground scale. In fact, there isn't really any attempt at realism in the various scales of 40K. Figures, ground, time, height, it's all arranged to cram a lot of large, cool-looking models on to the table.

In truth, most games don't remotely match ground scale or 1:1 proportions of the forces involved. It's just part of wargaming. Even at 15mm, most napoleonic wargamers aren't operating at strict 1:1 forces or proportional ground scale. Unless you're going to play 28mm with a single squad (maybe up to one platoon) of troops on the table you're not likely going to have accurate ground scale or 1:1 forces.

To be sure, 40k takes it to an extreme, but if you're willing to accept the primacy of close combat in sci-fi wargaming then you've already suspended disbelief far beyond worrying about the accuracy of ground scale. When I play a sci-fantasy game like 40k or WarEngine or Warpath, I don't care a whit for ground scale, I'm just hoping to put on a battle that evokes this...

Yodhrin wrote:
Your second comment shows how fundamentally you(and, historically, folk like Vermis) misunderstand(willfully or not)

Oh look, I've been mentioned. It's such a warm glow of... begrudgement and recrimination.

Not everyone lives in a city. Not everyone has a thriving local club/store with a broad product range. A lot of folk don't have a huge amount of free time to spend on their hobby.

What makes you think I do?

privateer4hire wrote:Nothing like having to buy both sides of a game because nobody plays it yet or possibly ever.

I think Big P's response also applies here.

Big P wrote:Yes... Only been going on for.... ever in historical 'tabletop miniatures gaming'.

I have two obvious choices for gaming: a half hour trip to a club that meets once a month, or a hour's trip once a week, or so. Further from where I know there are a couple of LGSs with any kind of product range. No, it's not terribly convenient either.

The difference is, as said, I know I can get a good game. People are willing to play games I like or suggest, and in return I'm willing to play games they like or suggest. Including a couple of the big all-in-one games. I've borrowed their minis to play games against them (seems like they buy more than two sides of the popular games anyway) and I've hosted an occasional game with my own books, minis and terrain.
So I hope you won't misunderstand when I say I'm not convinced it's all about the 'network effect', or annoying 'gamevangelists'*, or that sticking to only a small handful of the most hyped games is the only way for someone without much gaming time or travel budget. The type or attitude of the gamer has something to do with it too. If the gamers round your way refuse to deviate from that little handful, and you sneer at the idea yourselves, I don't wonder you find it impossible. I do wonder what fostered that attitude, though...

*one of those hyped games I've played is Malifaux, and whatever level of popularity it has round here, I'd say a good chunk of it is down to one guy I used to play against, who travelled to clubs all over the province to 'gamevangelise' it. I went with him a couple of times. Granted, he was a Wyrd Henchman, and compensated to some extent through that. But I'll bet it's more clubs and less familiar faces than you two guys might have to wheedle.

A lot of stuff said but not really much I haven't heard before or that I'm not familiar with. Sorry guys, the Princess is in another castle.

A lot of historical games match the ground scale fairly well, actually. There are some exceptions, to be sure, for example WW1 and WW2 naval usually compresses the scale 2:1 as otherwise it's impossible to fight a battle with weapons with ranges of 10 to 20 miles. However in general, mass battle games try to give a fairly accurate representation of time and distance, although the figure ratio scale is of course abstract.

The point of skirmish games is partly to take advantage of the one man = one figure to be able to use realistic scales for everything. 40K fails this pretty badly, IMO.

Let's not get side-tracked into game design discussion here though.

Big P wrote:

 jorny wrote:

people are moving towards a freer attitude where you play with the models and rules you like (which of course is nothing new really) and are less stuck in the one company, one ruleset, one miniature line, one paint line attitude...

What do you think? Is there a paradigm shift in miniaures miniatures gaming on the way? Write 500 words and hand in by monday.

Yes... Only been going on for.... ever in historical 'tabletop miniatures gaming'.

Historicals are doing this quite well for me. Diversify that plastic portfolio. Have I ever mentioned the soft, voluptuous, and welcoming nature of a rule set known as Battle Group?

 Vermis wrote:

Yodhrin wrote:
Your second comment shows how fundamentally you(and, historically, folk like Vermis) misunderstand(willfully or not)

Oh look, I've been mentioned. It's such a warm glow of... begrudgement and recrimination.

Maybe if you didn't make essentially exactly the same sneering, belittling series of posts every time something resembling this topic came up?

-snip *sneering belittlement* -snip-

Oh well, maybe next time.

So... I started this thread and then got hit by pre christmas work crunch. So I have not really been able to participate.

A lot of good points have been raised in this thread. For those who have to rely on pick up games a unified product is often the best option, that is understandable. But it seems like Kings of War is playing an intersting role right now by both offering a unified ruleset while at the same time allowing other manufacturers miniatures "officialy". This does not of course change anything for those of us who never played where this mattered, but it I think it might help change attitudes in the long run.

An interesting side note is what Mantic just posted on their blog:

Just to let you have an insight into what has been going on, we have shipped 4 times more Kings of War rulebooks in the last 4 months than in the whole 3 years of the first print run – in fact nearly as many copies of Uncharted Empires have been sent out in 3 weeks as the KoW 1st edition!

Go Mantic!

I really enjoy Mantics mindset, just the organized play ruleset they have provided (for free) on their website just shows that they are making a game and want that game to be used.
And on topic yes, at least in my community there have been a great shift (at least for some). KoW have drawn many of the fantasy (and inspired those were not) miniature creative types in my community.

 Yodhrin wrote:

Not everyone lives in a city. Not everyone has a thriving local club/store with a broad product range. A lot of folk don't have a huge amount of free time to spend on their hobby. Such people, entirely justifiably, see value in a product that is ubiquitous and standardised. And then they get shat on by people on forums who talk about them like they're deluded cultists who just need to open their eyes and wake up SHEEPLE to realise how wrong they are to prefer a product, flaws and all, which actually gives them a chance to get a game in without wasting half their play time negotiating and without requiring them to put in months of work building a local following for the game themselves.

I've been playing "unsupported" Specialist Games for years now because I really enjoy them, warts & all, but you know what? I was fething overjoyed at the prospect of GW reviving them even in a potentially limited "boxed game" format, because these days I spend more time trying to persuade people to play the games than actually playing the damn games.

Not everyone wants their hobby to be a full-time job as an unpaid game promoter, they just want to buy the things, paint the things, and play with the things, no muss no fuss.

Exalted for great truth.

And another factor is learning the rules. I learn new systems slowly, and a barrier for a new game system is that I know I'll have to spend a few games flailing around, learning through trial and error. I don't want to do that over and over before I can actually feel like I can actually use tactics and plans rather than "dunno, guess they'll move here and attack those guys.....what do I roll for that?"

Definitely think we are over the hill and on the path to a paradigm shift, as the juggernaut begins to stumble and is nipped on all sides by competition! I don't think this is necessarily a good thing though, even as a game designer myself. I think there is a tendency to think that, just because someone is 'indie' and small, they are automatically something radical and exciting. Not so if they are just mimicking or watering down what came before them. We have to be critical and discerning of everyone, big and small, in order to produce a true meritocracy where the best games get played and praised, and the not-so-good is filtered out of existence!