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.

Hello Everyone. Do you guys prefer squad/unit based or singe model based miniature games? What I mean is that in squad/unit based games, models generally act in groups. Examples of games like this are Warhammer Fantasy, 40k and Warmachine. Single model games are were models act by them selves, examples of games like this are Malifaux and Infinity. I have been in the process of making my own miniature game and I would like to know what different people like and why.( I hope I have explained my question enough.)

Depends entirely on scale. For a skirmish game, say 5-25 guys on the table, you need to activate every model individually. For anything involving full scale battles you should not be using 'units' (ie squads and platoons) as single activations.
That's really the meat of the question.


As a side note I'll say that I think 40ks unique mix of skirmish (measure movement, and LOS from each individual model despite the fact they are in a unit) is terrible. It needs to be changed so that everything is measured off the sergeant or something, if he can see the unit can, if he is in range everyone is, ect. Acting as a unit should mean acting as a unit, not moving 10 individual models at once.

Its all about abstraction, when you introduce a "unit" in game, your players will identify it and expect it to behave as the thing they identified it.

When that "unit" is an individual, it is expected to have more detailed rules and behavior because an individual is identifiable and one expects more micromanagement on that level, when your unit is a squad, the player can expect a level of abstraction because they are a group of things and groups are more abstracted.

There is really no right or wrong on a skirmish level game on how you can handle your units, the main issue I encounter is how a game handles the vital space of the table, 40k is the biggest infraction on this subject as it crams so many models in a 4x6 table that there is little or no real space for maneuvers, other systems are more sensible on the subject.

You can make a skirmish game of units and it will behave well but you must understand the following for an example at a 10 model count per battle game all been individual you give the payer 10 choices and 10 things to decide for, at squads of 2 its 5 respectively and at squads of 5 its just 2, regardless of how great the game system is designed and the fact that the model count has not changed the players will feel more content on the 10 or 5 interacting things than the 2.

I like large-scale games, so I prefer squads.
imho, I think Malifaux and Infinity are absolutely horrible games. How can a game be fun with so little models?
I much prefer FoW.

Although I love squad based games, skirmish gaming with individual models scratches my itch.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I like large-scale games, so I prefer squads.
imho, I think Malifaux and Infinity are absolutely horrible games. How can a game be fun with so little models?
I much prefer FoW.

Try and you will find out.

For me "large scale" games are firmly planted on 15mm or smaller scales.

The concept of 'units' is an illusion.

You see 60 space marines. Is that 60 units? Nope. It's 6 with 10 hitpoints, and a vaguely varying coverage area. A 'unit' is a discrete entity that has full control of it's possible motions and choices. So in a game like Infinity, it's each individual model. In 40k, it's 1 tank or each squad. Hybrids are those games with individual model control, but collective model restrictions (ie, Warmachine, Dystopian Wars)

Most games only have 6-12 units for a good reason: That's the maximum a human mind can track with a degree of fine control. This is a number that's repeated through all sorts of human organizations.

Honestly, 'individual model' unit games, or 'small groups of models' unit games can be easily superior in terms of design space for gameplay, as the gameplay does not suffer from needless sacrifice to tablespace. However, it does not visually translate well for a number of game types, such as those featuring block regiments.

60 space marines is a quantum state of been six unit and 60 individuals at the same time, but this is a flaw of the undecided 40k rules set that cannot choose what it really wants to do and behave accordingly, but if a unit of many models behave as a single entity as for example in the mantics rule set units of many models behave, then they are indeed just 6 units of variable area coverage indeed.

I did not really understood the last part of your post, could you further explain this?

Replies so far are great! Lets keep this thread going. I think it's time I shared my opinion.

There are things I like about both single model and squad based systems. In single model systems the rules can be more detailed for each model, and each model is more important and rarely expendable. It feels like you are controlling a tight knit team of soldiers. A thing I like to do to make it feel even more like a team is giving names to each of my human soldiers, and designations to everything else. It makes each model feel like an individual.

Things I like about squad based games are that you can have some very memorable moments (you can make memorable moments in single model games to, but squad based memories are more memorable). For example, when I was play testing my game using squads, my opponent had a squad of six soldiers surrounding a general. They were running to the middle of the board to capture it. While they were doing this I had a squad that faced their front, and two squads that faced their side/back. While they ran to the point all of the squad eventually got killed, except the general. In a last ditch effort to keep the general alive my opponent had the general retreat behind a building, so he wouldn't get killed.

I have found though, that solo models like sniper's, assassins and heavy weapon users are easier to make useful in single model based games. Solo models in squad based systems generally have to be treated with care, because they can get destroyed when encountering a squad face to face.

A good example is 40k vs WM/H squad mechanics. Both involve units of up to 10 activating at once.

A 'unit' isn't necessarily just a distinct game entity. For example, both Warmachine and 40k have units in the form of say, 10 man squads. But there's a greater degree of 'sub unit identity' in WM than 40k, which leads to a greater range of design space for what a unit can do.

In 40k, models do not have individual physical presences for LOS purposes, individual physically targetable identities (ie, I cannot shoot the third marine on the left specifically). Additionally, each model was constrained in it's position (2 inch coherency), it's target/maneuver options (all units must fire at the same unit, all units must assault if any do, heavy weapon can't fire if one other guy moved a nanometer). These reduce the resolution of what a model sub-unit is, and thus limits design space somewhat in what you can have a unit do.

In Warmachine as a counterexample, an individual Long Gunner could stand still and fire twice, another can move 5 inches away from his mates and melee something, another can shoot once and block LOS with a move. This is a greater design space by having more unit resolution.

Complexity also factors a great deal into how many options one can give a player. If each individual model on a 40k battlefield was it's own solo-type unit, with say, a Malifaux-style power list, the game is unplayable. Malifaux gets by with huge individual power lists, because you have only 5-10 units at a time, and most of them are of the same type (ie, 3 troopers of the same type).

---

As an aside to the talk of unit identity in how they behave, physical unit size affects how terrain works. Area terrain is the ONLY terrain really in 40k, since units themselves are indistinct areas.

In Warmachine, Terrain is a little more finely resolved, as you can have short walls that protect only 3 or 4 members of a squad, but not the others.

In single model games, resolution on what constitutes terrain increases dramatically. Such as in Infinity, where a trooper can take cover behind an individual soda machine, where 40k would have treated the whole building as the smallest increment of cover.

I prefer squad based, since they seem to be a bit more forgiving.

Each scratches an itch for me.

I don't play at less than 20mm for infantry games (eyesight isn't what it was) though.

I play WHFB to get a break from my infinity - and infinity scratches my SF itch in a way that 40k had stopped doing.

You seem to have squad and platoon level rulesets covered but have you looked at any actual individual model rulesets like Normandy Firefight. Its quite detailed so not really suited to more than 5-10 models per side but well worth a look.

I really think the choice should be based on which is better suited for the kinds of rules you are writing.

As has been pointed out, single model games often benefit from more detailed mechanics (though Song of Blades proves that this is not always the case) whereas the larger the game, the more must be abstracted to keep play moving. It sounds like you've already gotten a ruleset written. Take a hard look at how long your games are taking and the level of complexity. That should tell you what you need to know.

I enjoy Different Scope's of games and different mechanics.
For Warband Skirmish (Single model) I have Song of Blades and Heroes, Blasters and Bulkheads (mixes squad and individual), In The Emperor's Name
At the Platoon Level (Squad mechanics) There's Tomorrow's War or WarEngine/Shockforce
For Company Level (Squad Mechanics) There's 40k or Warpath, Kings of War.
For Large Company and even Battalion play, Panzer 8 Sci-Fi, Alpha Strike

and many others...

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I like large-scale games, so I prefer squads.
imho, I think Malifaux and Infinity are absolutely horrible games. How can a game be fun with so little models?
I much prefer FoW.

I can't speak to the current Malifaux rules, but the 1st edition rules were fantastic and fun.