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
Longtime Dakkanaut






1. Required aps (optional fine)

2. Required cards/cardboard tokens (everything should be in the rulebook so you don't have to worry about keeping track of individual cards and chits and such)

3. buff/debuff auras (when a crucial part of the game is keeping track of where models are so you can be in range of various effects for maximum effectiveness)


All the above said, I love MCP (I feel like it really gets the superhero theme done right), but will be really cheesed whenever they update editions and invalidate lots of existing stuff. They've already had one release that is just updated cards, and they wiped out all the pre-existing Crisis cards recently, but at least the new ones are free-online. I hate having to have the physical cards for official events. I'd be far less interested in it if it was any other setting or IP.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/23 03:53:30


 
   
Made in gb
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
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.


I think GW are definitely the biggest offender in that regard. But, it's part of their business model, and they've succeeded where other manufacturers have struggled. Lots of collectors seem to still just lap up each new rules edition and codex, while something like the last edition of Flames of War (which did seem a little forced) went down like a lead balloon.

Cruellest is the invalidating of miniatures with a new edition of the rules. I can't get my head around people spending dozens of hours, hundreds of £, and pouring all of their efforts into a unit and it then becoming 'illegal'. Some pretty egregious examples of that with the new HH edition.

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 pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




 bbb wrote:


3. buff/debuff auras (when a crucial part of the game is keeping track of where models are so you can be in range of various effects for maximum effectiveness)

.


Ha! It's funny how tastes differ and to how many tastes the designers need to cater

For me
-the spatial puzzle of perfect positioning
-mitigating and manipulating probabilities
-dealing with order of activation issues
-*
are exactly what wargame gameplay is about

And while I wouldn't say range dependant buffs are a mechanism I have special feelings for, they certainly tick all these boxes (that's unless their ranges are huge in which way using them is not a satisfying challenge but a boring point and click solution on a platter)

*-and the visual spectacle of painted models on a beautifully modelled table, but it's not rules-related

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/23 19:46:29


 
   
Made in ru
Death-Dealing Devastator





 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. No premesuring allowed.
2. Use of the ordinary playing cards.
3. Custom dice necessary to play the game.


I'm not sure I can name TOP 3 exactly, so I will list three of the most important things in no particular order.

1. Bad game design. This is a broad term, but I'd say that it largelly falls into either excessive complexity or absolute lack of testing. Swordpoint was a drag to play, and Father Tilly was so convoluted we gave up even before trying it out on the table. After playing a single game of Flashing Steel both me and my opponent were having thoughts: "Did these guys, like, tried to play what they've written?".

2. Way too many tokens and proprietary dice or cards. I've played Mortal Gods, and after some time excessive amount of cards, tokens, trackers, bags and counters piling on the table became incredibly annoying. Either B&P (a single deck of cards per player) or Horizon Wars (a table with tokens to track the units' stats) approach is the most preferrable to me.

3. The game system being excessively gamey. SAGA is an excellent ruleset from mechanical and decision-making points of view, but it's one of the most cartoony wargames I've ever played. It feels almost like an RPG where you have to activate your skills in particular order to win, and these magic abilities are often absolutely absurd if you try to imagine them in-universe.


I guess that miniatures and background being bad may also present a problem, but, come to think of it, it's been a long time since I've played games with set world description or miniature line. All the rulesets I've been actively using for the last year or two (Zona Alfa, Age of Fantasy Regiments, Horizon Wars - I don't mind the setting for B&P, so that doesn't count) allow you to make up your own stories, which is exactly what we've been doing.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Pacific wrote:
Sgt. Cortez wrote:
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.


I think GW are definitely the biggest offender in that regard. But, it's part of their business model, and they've succeeded where other manufacturers have struggled. Lots of collectors seem to still just lap up each new rules edition and codex, while something like the last edition of Flames of War (which did seem a little forced) went down like a lead balloon.

Cruellest is the invalidating of miniatures with a new edition of the rules. I can't get my head around people spending dozens of hours, hundreds of £, and pouring all of their efforts into a unit and it then becoming 'illegal'. Some pretty egregious examples of that with the new HH edition.


as someone who invested considerable time and not inconsiderable money in Flames V2 then Flames V3 the transition to "Team Hitler" of V4 left me cold, and at the local club more or less killed the game (not entirely the rule changes, some of which make sense, some of which are for the sake of changing things etc). the killer being the anaemic lists initially then the bandaid of "command cards" which were apparently always part of the game to the extend the rulebook never mentioned them.

and then they made the cards "optional" to the extent that you have half the game without them and a lot fewer units

combined with a revised point system, invalidating huge chunks of peoples armies if not the entire army for quite some time, the way unit contents was changed quite obviously based on what they wanted to put on a plastic frame, the initial "unit stat cards only come with models", which to their credit they changed course on

and yes, you always know a new game edition has gone down well when a company closes their own forum site after banning half those who post there and deleting most of the comments left[/]i so good was its reception

but then they also hit a huge issue with games, one that really grinds gears

[i]not being able to actually get hold of it


Battlefront are terrible at it, Catalyst are similar with Battletech where the mech boxes are either the ones no one wants or are out of stock, or the way GW make the reference cards a splash release...

*shakes fists while shouting at clouds*
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





leopard wrote:

but then they also hit a huge issue with games, one that really grinds gears

not being able to actually get hold of it

Battlefront are terrible at it, Catalyst are similar with Battletech where the mech boxes are either the ones no one wants or are out of stock, or the way GW make the reference cards a splash release...

*shakes fists while shouting at clouds*


Pretty much every one of these comes down to "3rd party manufacturing print runs are horribly for long term support"
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 LunarSol wrote:
leopard wrote:

but then they also hit a huge issue with games, one that really grinds gears

not being able to actually get hold of it

Battlefront are terrible at it, Catalyst are similar with Battletech where the mech boxes are either the ones no one wants or are out of stock, or the way GW make the reference cards a splash release...

*shakes fists while shouting at clouds*


Pretty much every one of these comes down to "3rd party manufacturing print runs are horribly for long term support"


for a lot of it certainly, though "we are a victim of our own success!" becomes tedious as an excuse, a game can be amazing but if by the time its back in stock everyone has moved on, well thats that.

also battlefront do have their own factory (though not printworks), they are very able however to point a gun at their foot after carefully loading it when it comes to trying to have a range too large to support - the older metal stuff may have been more labour intensive but at least you could get hold if it for the most part.

in some ways its why I find the best games tend to come from people not pushing a specific range of models to go with it, they focus on a decent game and usually write around the idea of "use what you already have"
   
Made in ca
Deadshot Weapon Moderati




What's kind of interesting is just how many people use 3rd party miniatures with GW game products. I mean, typically the opinion is that their games aren't great but they're good enough to do something official with the models rather than the other way around.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Myrtle Creek, OR

A lot of that may be inertia. If everyone is playing warcry but they are okay with you using mantic figures, it may just be easier to play warcry.

I just thought of another peeve. PDF pricing. Unless you’re Osprey- and even they have significant discount sales sometimes- you are fooling yourself with a $20 pdf price point. Might even be doing it at $15 or even $10.

Thread Slayer 
   
Made in jp
[DCM]
Incorporating Wet-Blending





Japan

I only have one pet peeve: skimping on editing and/or proofreading. By the time any ruleset goes to market, someone besides the creator needs to check for typos and clarity.

Now showing more Samurai Marines, Bad Squiddo Amazons, and an Oldhammer Chaos Thug!

Painting total as of 3/28/2024: 21 plus a set of modular spaceship terrain

Painting total for 2023: 79 plus 28 Battlemechs and a Dragon-Balrog

 
   
Made in us
Incorporating Wet-Blending






> Personally I'm a big fan of apps when they're done right.

I'm a little surprised that, with the pandemic, there aren't more apps for solo or coop play. With coop boardgames, FFG has some "apps as GM", such as Mansions of Madness, Journeys of Middle Earth, Descent (not that it was done well), etc.

With PvP wargaming, apps as game moderators can add fog of war effects, secret play (eg. turncoats, spies), partial information, false information, players sent as sacrifices (no-win situations) and other *real* aspects of war that isn't present in "omniscient, omnipotent, and fair" wargaming. Then again, I think most gamers play wargames for fun, not to simulate real world conditions.

Crimson Scales and Wildspire Miniatures thread on Reaper! : https://forum.reapermini.com/index.php?/topic/103935-wildspire-miniatures-thread/ 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




When we started playing Gloomhaven I was initially against using the helper app for all the traditionalist reasons.

I was very wrong. We used it only for tracking initiative, enemy HP and their activation cards and this alone was a huge weight of our shoulders. We could spend more time on actually playing the game instead of manually cranking its engine.

I think all those games that are gameplay-light but upkeep/resolution-heavy (looking at you, Games Workshop) could benefit from an app that does at least part of the tedious chore of operating their sluggish engine, letting players concentrate on decisions and choices.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




Tampa, FL

 LunarSol wrote:
leopard wrote:

but then they also hit a huge issue with games, one that really grinds gears

not being able to actually get hold of it

Battlefront are terrible at it, Catalyst are similar with Battletech where the mech boxes are either the ones no one wants or are out of stock, or the way GW make the reference cards a splash release...

*shakes fists while shouting at clouds*


Pretty much every one of these comes down to "3rd party manufacturing print runs are horribly for long term support"
TBH most of battlefronts problems can be summed as "we want to be the GW of WW2 wargaming" and treating it like 40k not a historical wargame. Everything they do is basically imitating daddy GW but in a medium where it's not respected or desired.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/26 14:19:21


- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
Made in us
Utilizing Careful Highlighting





Honestly, I think my main opposition to apps is "will this still be here and able to run on my phone in 10 years, when I actually get a game in?" I play Battletech, and it is very much helped by playing it on megamek, especially SRM boats, and TiTerminal is pretty nifty for Adeptus Titanicus, but if I literally can't play the game without the app, given the speed of things like phone updates and exploits, is this gonna be so much pretty wasted paper in a few years, especially if it doesn't catch on and the company goes belly up or stops supporting it, like that Golem Arcana game?
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Vejut wrote:
Honestly, I think my main opposition to apps is "will this still be here and able to run on my phone in 10 years, when I actually get a game in?" I play Battletech, and it is very much helped by playing it on megamek, especially SRM boats, and TiTerminal is pretty nifty for Adeptus Titanicus, but if I literally can't play the game without the app, given the speed of things like phone updates and exploits, is this gonna be so much pretty wasted paper in a few years, especially if it doesn't catch on and the company goes belly up or stops supporting it, like that Golem Arcana game?


If you had bought the Golem Arcana game would you be able to find an opponent for it even if there was a way to play?
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Myrtle Creek, OR

A buddy and I were discussing how great it would be if rules writers had a repository of generally accepted conventions for things like LoS.

He showed me a new mecha game with a crazy LoS wording. The author is essentially saying if the attacker doesn’t have the target completely in the attacker front arc, you don’t have a valid target. But it’s written super convoluted.

Innovation is great but complexity for complexity’s sake just doesn’t make sense to me. Especially from veteran developers.


Thread Slayer 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 privateer4hire wrote:

Innovation is great but complexity for complexity’s sake just doesn’t make sense to me. Especially from veteran developers.


I've been finding more and more that for a lot of these things making them simple really beats out making them precise, though this gets more difficult the more you abstract out other rules like units and the like.
   
Made in us
Keeper of the Flame





Monticello, IN

1: Win At All Cost players (WAACs)

2: Competitive At All Cost players (CAACs)

3: Narrative At All Cost players (NAACs)



As a pick-up game player, I hate these more than anything rule wise...

www.classichammer.com

For 4-6th WFB, 2-5th 40k, and similar timeframe gaming

Looking for dice from the new AOS boxed set and Dark Imperium on the cheap. Let me know if you can help.
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Its AoS, it doesn't have to make sense.
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Wayniac wrote:
 LunarSol wrote:
leopard wrote:

but then they also hit a huge issue with games, one that really grinds gears

not being able to actually get hold of it

Battlefront are terrible at it, Catalyst are similar with Battletech where the mech boxes are either the ones no one wants or are out of stock, or the way GW make the reference cards a splash release...

*shakes fists while shouting at clouds*


Pretty much every one of these comes down to "3rd party manufacturing print runs are horribly for long term support"
TBH most of battlefronts problems can be summed as "we want to be the GW of WW2 wargaming" and treating it like 40k not a historical wargame. Everything they do is basically imitating daddy GW but in a medium where it's not respected or desired.


100% agree on Battlefront
   
Made in ca
Grumpy Longbeard





Canada

-Special dice/cards/thingamajigs and even minatures.
-Extra books that I need to play (extra books with more options that I can skip if I want to are different).
-Nested rules.

There are enough good games that I can play with what I already have that I have a hard time justifying getting anything that I'll only use for a specific game (other than a rulebook).
I started with historical (DBA) and I like (and have gone back to) being able to expect that I can play a new ruleset with my existing collection.
If I enjoy and value the game I'll find a way to support the company (as with Mantic).

*Gaslands is so exceedingly accessible and DIY that I give it a pass though.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/04/13 03:44:01


Nightstalkers Dwarfs
GASLANDS!
Holy Roman Empire  
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




further point on the special dice, noted before they are ok when they actually add something.

the way Star Wars Armada has symbols for results but different colour dice have a different mix of the symbols is an example where this is decent. SAGA dice are perhaps less so as that could easily be a single D6 lookup table.

found recently with 02 hundred hours another way to make it work, similar dice, two colours, one for stuff thats "loud" one for stuff thats "quiet", different actions roll a mix of the two - again symbols with a different mix of them (and one symbol unique to each colour)

totally agree on needing many books, Test of Honour when it was under Warlord was a terrible example of this, rules scattered across various miniature boxes. now its back with the creator its one book. fine with the idea of an army book, a main rule book and many be a scenario/campaign book but thats the limit really, needing half a dozen books to use a single page from sucks

   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





leopard wrote:
further point on the special dice, noted before they are ok when they actually add something.

the way Star Wars Armada has symbols for results but different colour dice have a different mix of the symbols is an example where this is decent. SAGA dice are perhaps less so as that could easily be a single D6 lookup table.


On the flip side, I DESPISE lookup tables. I've kind of warmed to specialty dice as developers have started using them to do more interesting things though. I'm not sad to see game design no longer twisting itself to accommodate the limitations of the standard D6.
   
Made in ca
Grumpy Longbeard





Canada

chromedog wrote:#1 deal breaker: Ugly models. For reference purposes, when it comes to "ugly" only MY opinion will count here, since it will be me buying them. Other people can love them. Nagash is still hideous and not even his mother loved him.

The rest aren't important.

If I don't like the models, I won't want to paint them after I buy them. If they aren't going to get painted, then there's no way in hell they are going to get played with.


ccs wrote:1) The models - do I like the models?
I don't buy & don't use minis I don't like. And, commissions aside, I certainly do not waste time painting such things. So if I don't like enough of the models to form a working force then there's no reason to play the game.

This mindset seems crazy to me.
I get that companies like to sell games as a system where you buy all the things from them, but it's your hobby. Why isn't your hobby on your own terms?

If you're already picky about which games you play, why not take it a step further and play miniature agnostic game that let you use the models you like?

To be clear, I'm not saying you're wrong, just because I don't get it doesn't make it a bad idea.

Dolnikan wrote:1) Gaminess. I know that it's a weird term but I like it if it feels like what's happening is telling some sort of story and that it makes sense. I don't like evenly distributed objectives for every game, predetermined terrain setups that don't look like any kind of realistic place, and things like that.

Agreed. If I want to play a game in terms of game pieces and rules I would play a board game.
I'm wargaming because I want to represent a battle (albeit loosely) and think in terms of troops and tactics.
A rule of thumb I've heard from historical gamers is to pay attention to how people talk about a game.
Is the discussion about rules and were exploited or does the discussion refer to discussion refer to troops and strategy?
Wayniac wrote:
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

Definitely, for ancients a rulebook that doesn't allow for multiple scales and base sizes is not getting a look.

Nightstalkers Dwarfs
GASLANDS!
Holy Roman Empire  
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 LunarSol wrote:
leopard wrote:
further point on the special dice, noted before they are ok when they actually add something.

the way Star Wars Armada has symbols for results but different colour dice have a different mix of the symbols is an example where this is decent. SAGA dice are perhaps less so as that could easily be a single D6 lookup table.


On the flip side, I DESPISE lookup tables. I've kind of warmed to specialty dice as developers have started using them to do more interesting things though. I'm not sad to see game design no longer twisting itself to accommodate the limitations of the standard D6.


a point I can see, SAGA sort of get it right in that you do get the lookup table so can use normal D6, its really just a dice with one symbol three times, one symbol twice and a third a single time.

it is good to see games branching out though
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





For sure. There was a time when I was super keen on having a single toolkit for my games. Tape measure, D6, tokens that worked for a bunch of games etc. After a while though I just found I was working too hard to accommodate that one unique feature and found it was just easier to have a little set for everything.

It doesn't hurt that stuff like the MCP set of dice/tokens/measurement tools/etc is just really snappy and fun. It's probably the best case for what can be done if a game is designed entirely around bespoke game aids.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 privateer4hire wrote:
A buddy and I were discussing how great it would be if rules writers had a repository of generally accepted conventions for things like LoS.

He showed me a new mecha game with a crazy LoS wording. The author is essentially saying if the attacker doesn’t have the target completely in the attacker front arc, you don’t have a valid target. But it’s written super convoluted.

Innovation is great but complexity for complexity’s sake just doesn’t make sense to me. Especially from veteran developers.



The trick is, while you can't copyright a concept for a rule,(say, LOS), but you absolutely CAN copyright the way YOUR wrote it, and anyone copying you is in violation of your copyright.

After twenty or thirty different companies write their own rules to describe a basic concept like LOS, if you want to do it in your new game the wording might need to get convoluted just to avoid copyright issues.

That was part of the issue with WOTC's OGL. When it truly was open, it provided just that sort of shared rules language across all OGL users. When WOTC threatened to revoke that access, now you've got to reword the rule to avoid their literal words... even if they said it in the most clear and concise means possible and any change you can make will just obfuscate meanings.

CHAOS! PANIC! DISORDER!
My job here is done. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Myrtle Creek, OR

Good point. In essence, an OGL of sorts is what we are wishlisting.

Thread Slayer 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




from the games today I think the thing I dislike the most with skirmish games is how completely and utterly hopeless I am at playing them

and the thing I like the most is still enjoying it
   
Made in gb
Worthiest of Warlock Engineers






preston

1: Reasonable model prices/no fixed 'set' model line

2: No proprietary gear outside of the books

3: Decent and in-depth rules, none of this AoS cloning (looking at you Turnip 28)

Free from GW's tyranny and the hobby is looking better for it
DR:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Pww205++D++A+++/sWD146R++T(T)D+
 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka







 master of ordinance wrote:
1: Reasonable model prices/no fixed 'set' model line

2: No proprietary gear outside of the books

3: Decent and in-depth rules, none of this AoS cloning (looking at you Turnip 28)

...these are things that annoy you?

2021-4 Plog - Here we go again... - my fifth attempt at a Dakka PLOG

My Pile of Potential - updates ongoing...

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.


 Kanluwen wrote:
This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.

Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...

tneva82 wrote:
You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something... 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: