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.

My group is considering putting together some battle reports just for fun, and so I thought I'd get a read on what you guys all like to see. I'd make it a poll but I figure there will be widely varying answers that wont really cover it.
Do you like fluff around the battle or in the mission itself?
Do you like pre/post game or list analysis?
Are you looking for full breakdowns with movement, dice rolling, and some measuring or a cut and dry tactical layout?
Does points or army size affect your enjoyment? 750 vs Apocalypse
What kind of narration do you like? A more toned down tactical approach to each turn or a semi-narrative style describing the actions the units are taking against the enemy?
What is the usual length you find appropriate or will watch at all? Is 25 too short? 2 hours too long?

I'll also preface this by saying I watch a lot of them, and have a style I like, but I want to be flexible and make something the community can enjoy together.

About an hour is good, and fluff only if the mission is part of a campaign. Otherwise it seems a bit...stilted?

All of the rest is personal preference, to me it doesn't matter much either way. Hope that helped!

Fluff: campaigns yes, exhibition battles no.

List analysis: pregame I just want to hear what's in the list. Post game discussion/analysis is usually neat though.

Amount shown: I like seeing quickly cut unit movements (like show them to start, then cut to them having moved, go on to next unit etc.) The "here's the start and end of our move phase" pictures kind of lose me, and thus my interest.

Point size: Any is fine. I'm usually more excited for the giant battles, but I can get behind a 500 point zone mortalis too.

Narration: A quick note on what each unit wants to try to do as it moves is what I prefer.

Length: I don't bother watching reports shorter than 40ish minutes, and haven't ever found one too long for my tastes. I would say editing them to less than 1:30 would be fantastic, but if I like the matchup or narrative, I'd be along for the whole ride anyway.

1) Either is good. As long as there is a reason for me to care which side wins the battle. Even a little bit of context like "The Dark Angels are fighting to delay the Tyranid Hordes while civilians board evacuation craft" makes all the difference. Just saying "The Dark Angels are fighting the Tyranids" is kind of boring.

2) Some. But for the love of god don't spend 20 minutes just talking about your lists. Put an annotation to skip it if you must.

3) I would like to see a break down of each movement a brief display of the unit actually being moved. It gets kind of confusing when people say "Okay, at the end of turn 3 this unit moved up here and this one there". I also hate it when battle reports show every last die roll. Just show important rolls and for the rest a narration explaining what happened will do. Show the models being removed off the table will help give a point of reference as to how the battle is unfolding.

4) Army size doesn't matter. Just if you can make it interesting to watch.

5) I'd like a hyrbid of the two. I would like the narration to give a bit of reasoning why a player made what play they did with a bit of fluff thrown in. "Brandon runs his tactical marines up to grab the objective as he knows his marines boltguns will have no effect on the monstrous Tyranid creatures".

6)45-60 minutes.

Awesome guys thanks for the input so far. A lot of this aligns with how I was wanting to work these anyways so this is great. A bonus question, would you like visual updates on points scored during the game? A lot of reports simply say it once, but having a
Turn 3:
Dark Angels
4VP

Tyranids
3VP

thing would help with clarity of just add clutter?

IMO Cover Slaves on youtube have the best formula.

Intro
Armies
Table setup
Player 1 Turn 1 overview
Player 2 Turn 1 overview
Player 1 Turn 2 overview
[...]
Post game show (thoughts, discussion etc) - You can skip it if you just want to watch the game.

Whole thing takes no more than 30 mins. I don't have all day to watch someone literally rolling 1000 dice miniwargaming style.

SplinteredShield wrote:
Awesome guys thanks for the input so far. A lot of this aligns with how I was wanting to work these anyways so this is great. A bonus question, would you like visual updates on points scored during the game? A lot of reports simply say it once, but having a
Turn 3:
Dark Angels
4VP

Tyranids
3VP

thing would help with clarity of just add clutter?

In a live batrep, I find the score nice to have so people who come in don't all immediately ask "score? Turn?" Etc.
In a prerecorded batrep, a quick verbal or visual at a turn-change is fine, and leave the screen clear the rest of the time.

A bit of everything is best in my opinion, let us see the odd mistake happen, show the odd unit being moved, go into detail on a unit composition now and again. Just don't show everything.
Length wise I like the longer battle reports, 1 and half hours is good, I listen/watch whilst painting and I tend to paint for longer than this in a session.

I'm really enjoying strikingscorpion82 on youtube right now. His board setups, analysis, and editing out a lot of the things that make battle reports too long is just right.

I like to see interesting battles with good terrain / models / camera work and non annoying people / sound effects.

Things that make it interesting are fair battles and unusual builds that I might consider using myself. I don't care to watch an other "just getting started" toned down version of space marines playing against a typical trukk ork list. That isn't new to me.But I would enjoy watching a ork flier list or an unusual daemon list using the newer rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I could care less for the fluff unless it is very good ( read better then all the other channels out there) . I don't care for post game analysis, I do care for a decent pre game explanation of what is in each army ( not what you are going to do with it just what is in it ), I like them to be no longer then 45 minutes

Unless you're doing a Campaign, leave the 10 page essay on why the armies are fighting at home.

Pre and Post analysis is good. Just try to keep it concise.

Painted figs on a decent board is important. The board doesn't need to be covered in hundred dollar pieces of terrain handcrafted by monks in the mountains, and the models don't need to be gold daemon winners, But at least have three colors and have them fight over more than Shoebox Gulch.

Around an hour is a good length.

The two most important things: Know what you're talking about, and be entertaining. I don't mean going out of your way copying the antics of Dave from MWG, but banter and jokes are good.

I generally watch batreps before I go to sleep, because I find it difficult to sleep in silence and if I fall asleep in the middle of a batrep, It's not like falling asleep while marathoning a show where you gotta rewatch the episode. But there are a few channels that I follow that have Players that Either: Do not understand the rules at all, are just jerks to their opponents, Read a 10 minute short story on why these two armies in this PUG are fighting , or have the personality God gave Grapefruit. Those videos I'll normally skip because none of those things are relaxing in the slightest and odds are, those Players have 2 or more of those traits.

Best Advice: Relax, be yourself, have fun, don't go out of your way trying to impress people. Treat it like a normal game, but with recording gear.

I personally like about hour long ones, and a good mix between narrative and tactical. For example you're panning over the ridge and you can explain there's no night fighting by saying it's high noon or something. Larger armies (1850) is usually preferable because smaller games tend to be more boring imo. I like to see some dice rolling because that's 90 percent of the game, lol. Some good opponents and good screen presence and personality goes a long way too, I don't want to watch a battle report with a TFG against a "this guy" using his fluffy orks list. Make sure they've got good etiquette too, I'm not gonna watch an hour of a guy picking his nose . Good luck with the batreps, will they be posted in the dakka forum?

I prefer seeing the dice rolls and watching the match unfold. If I am pressed for time I can always scrolls forward. Part of watching battle reports is the decisions made on the fly and the players talking through their moves. Much more interesting that just giving a brief re-cap between turns.

One thing that would be nice is some sort of score graphic on screen that keeps track of points.

Thanks for all the input guys! I can tell there's some sway here and there but there does seem to be a general consensus on stuff which is great! I'd love to make a little youtube channel for them, but yes everything will definitely be posted on Dakka as well.
So far format seems to be
Brief pre-game assessing only the list and done quickly and concisely
Little to no fluff, if there is (unless a campaign) its just something to justify the fight not a massive narrative.
It doesn't have to show everything visually, but dice rolls, bits of movement, and visualization of VP are key.
Length between 45 minutes and 1:30, semi-concise but plenty of room to leave in lots of detail
Well painted models and good terrain to make a nice effect
Sound like something everyone would have fun with?

A problem that even larger channels like miniwargaming and tabletop tactics are guilty of is camera zoom. Please for the love of Gork and Mork zoom out and give us a wide shot of the battle every turn. I cannot keep track of model placement if you just do insane close-ups all the time.

Also I am not a fan of some channel's terrain placement, or lack thereof. Buildings on the edges with no LoS blocking in the middle? Everyone just sits in their deployment shooting and tau wins. Every time. Boring. You can have open areas sure, just make sure its not the entire board.

Nothing turns me off a Batrep video more than unpainted miniatures.
I can deal with pretty much everything else. Grey plastic minis? No thanks.

SplinteredShield wrote:
Thanks for all the input guys! I can tell there's some sway here and there but there does seem to be a general consensus on stuff which is great! I'd love to make a little youtube channel for them, but yes everything will definitely be posted on Dakka as well.
So far format seems to be
Brief pre-game assessing only the list and done quickly and concisely
Little to no fluff, if there is (unless a campaign) its just something to justify the fight not a massive narrative.
It doesn't have to show everything visually, but dice rolls, bits of movement, and visualization of VP are key.
Length between 45 minutes and 1:30, semi-concise but plenty of room to leave in lots of detail
Well painted models and good terrain to make a nice effect
Sound like something everyone would have fun with?

Basically. Also, more of a nitpicky thing, but try to bring semi-balanced armies. I hate seeing tournament level lists going up against Joe Schmoe's fluffy Guard list and then the batrep is 20 minutes long.

Sure, we'll strive towards balance, all of us have fluffy silly lists and crazy competitive lists. Also we're not going to start until we have a good set of unique terrain and well painted wysiwyg lists. At least 90% wysiwyg anyways. Perhaps a stray special weapon change here or there but we're close to where we need to be.

If they're words and pictures: look at jy2's bat reps. He has the formula down in my opinion.

For video reps don't shake that dang camera.
And loud background music yhe whole time gets tiresome, also background noise when people film at a busy store. When I start a bat rep like that I turn it off pretty quick.

Best of luck!

I like to see the models up close a lot.

I like to be told each units tactics and goals.

I like some strategy and tactics talk.

Some overview shots are good.

Some dice rolls, but only in the end turns and assaults etc.

Cool boards is good to see.

Cool models.

Introducing units and close ups in the start.

Tabletop Tactics is the premier bat-rep channel, in my opinion, and though the quality is top-notch, the personalities of the usual players plays a big part for me too. Beard and Lawrence are great together, and I always enjoy watching games where they're playing.

I like consistent content, a clear overview of the armies beforehand (even if it's brief) like this is Jeff's 1500pts of Space Marines, and he's bringing this, this, and that.

Sound quality too, I like being able to hear what's going on, banter is fun as long as they don't go overboard with it.

And then painted armies/terrain. One gray model is not a big deal, but I saw the beginning of a Nids/IG battle in which the IG player had no painted models and just didn't watch.

and not a huge deal but make the titles easy to know what the video is about, best thing for this is Point Value/Army1/vs/army2 example, 1850 Space Marines vs Eldar. Those are the type I'll click on, mostly so if there's an army I don't want to see) or a large battle (2500+) I can just avoid it.
Miniwargaming's channel is usually the one I watch, a little tabletop tactics or other ones too.