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.
2014/06/23 19:55:15
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
Oh yeah....there are 2 Army List books: Biblical - Classical, and Late Antiquity - Early Medieval . The second book(Late Antiquity - Early Medieval) has four Byzantine army lists:
Early Byzantine
Thematic Byzantine
Tagmatic Byzantine
Comnenian Byzantine
That's....just beautiful.
I don't even know where I'd begin. Themes....Comnenian dynasty action....(passes out.)
Another fan of the Byzantine era? Say it ain't so! I find their empire to be fascinating. Basil the second is the man though, comnenians are wimps
I might have to invest in this book as well. And basically... What you said!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/23 19:55:35
2014/06/23 20:01:59
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
Just so you know, the main Rulebook would be necessary to play the game...the Army List books don't have the core rules at all....pretty much just a crapload of army lists (with a recap of Special Rules from the main Rulebook)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/23 20:10:36
2014/06/23 23:03:50
Subject: Re:What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
Another fan of the Byzantine era? Say it ain't so! I find their empire to be fascinating. Basil the second is the man though, comnenians are wimps
Count me in that category as well.
My Nikephorian Byzantine army is one of my favorite Field of Glory options......and being much more effective under the latest version of the rules does not hurt!
Former Kommandant, KZ Dakka
"I was Oldhammer before Oldhammer was cool!"
2014/06/23 23:27:21
Subject: Re:What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
Another fan of the Byzantine era? Say it ain't so! I find their empire to be fascinating. Basil the second is the man though, comnenians are wimps
Count me in that category as well.
My Nikephorian Byzantine army is one of my favorite Field of Glory options......and being much more effective under the latest version of the rules does not hurt!
I want a thrown together scrappy band led by Alexios Komnenos I!
Of course, Basil was a Bad A__. You don't get the name "Bulgar Slayer" for being super special nice to everyone.
On my history blog my fake co-host is Anna Komnene.
So, it's official. I need to get the rule book and the army book.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
2014/06/23 23:56:25
Subject: Re:What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
I really can't speak too much about Hail Caeser as I'm heavily invested in Field of Glory (my current prefered Ancients rules set of choice) and have never tried it. But I've been involved in the tournament style Ancients scene since the early '90s and Byzantines are among my favorite armies. Nikephorians are probably my favorite flavor of Byzantines, but I've had lots of success with my Komnenian army as well. Western knights, Varangians, and asiatic horse archers is a rock hard combination.
TR
Former Kommandant, KZ Dakka
"I was Oldhammer before Oldhammer was cool!"
2014/06/24 04:34:51
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
Infinity is solid but super fiddly and can be very hard to learn.
It's not that it's 'fiddly' though. Infinity has a beautiful, sublime and extremely elegant rules system. I find it a joy. Probably my favourite mechanics from a technical standpoint. I think they're simply beautiful.
I'll agree with you though, but with a caveat. What makes it tricky to learn at times isn't fiddly rules. Largely, It's the fact it's a translation of a Spanish rules set. The actual writing of the rules makes it seem a lot more complicated than it actually is, in my mind. And that's down to translation and 'undisciplined' or over flowery writing as well as issues from not being native English speakers. There is a lot 'more' writing than strictly neseccary, along with poor use of diagrams and some questionable layouts.
I played a demo game, and it seemed quite complex, even with the "noob" switch on and more complex rules not used (hacking, stealth, cloaking, etc). It reminded me more of a Tactical RPG game using miniatures more than anything else, but quite complex as well. Perhaps comparable to something like X-Com. Having also glanced at the free rules and thumbed through the printed rulebook, it's not something I'd be willing to really spend the time learning without regular games with someone/others who know the rules well and have the time to teach me... while it seemed good, I wouldn't' call it "elegant" - I'd call Kings of War "elegant."
The main problem with it is you need to unlearn a lot of conventional wargame mechanics while learning it. But I definitely agree it's not for everyone.
I think X-Com as a tabletop game nails it pretty well though.
2014/06/24 05:50:21
Subject: Re:What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
And, as I said on the last page, this is due to Corvus Belli re-editing the English translations. After they specifically send them to an English translator to translate properly.
2014/06/24 07:20:36
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
Yes, I'm hoping that the new book will be written by someone who has English as a first language. As good as the English is in the 2nd edition book and Paradiso, you can still tell that it was written by someone who isn't a native speaker.
-Loki- wrote:It took me a good 5-6 games to 'get' Infinity.
The main problem with it is you need to unlearn a lot of conventional wargame mechanics while learning it. But I definitely agree it's not for everyone.
I think X-Com as a tabletop game nails it pretty well though.
Definitely agree. I've found it easier to teach the game to someone who has no experience of wargames, in terms of how they pick up the concepts in a game. "I'm hiding my guy behind this wall and crawling along there" "I want both my guys to run round here at the same time etc." People I've shown who have come from a (later edition) 40k background especially have to be told that the miniatures have that extra level of freedom of action, and also seem to be more prone to make the classic mistake of running down the centre of a road blasting with their gun. Those who haven't done that in other games no intuitively that that's a bad idea!
Azazelx wrote:Oh, I'm not saying that it's bad by any means. Just not elegant...
I suppose it depends on the definition of 'elegant'. I was watching two extremely good players at a tournament, both countering with different moves and pulling off some really impressive tactical manoeuvring. It was great just watching the game play, and you could appreciate the skill level involved.
I certainly wouldn't say 'elegant in its simplicity', but you can definitely have an appreciation for how the mechanics of the game function and interact with each other to bring to mind a well-oiled machine... (struggling for metaphors here! )
-Loki- wrote: And, as I said on the last page, this is due to Corvus Belli re-editing the English translations. After they specifically send them to an English translator to translate properly.
Oh yeah, that was very interesting (seriously), and also /facepalm. But not what I personally meant. I meant it seemed way too complicated and detailed to be called "elegant". - Which isn't to say that it's not a very good game, because it seemed very good from my limited trial of it.
Azazelx wrote:Oh, I'm not saying that it's bad by any means. Just not elegant...
I suppose it depends on the definition of 'elegant'. I was watching two extremely good players at a tournament, both countering with different moves and pulling off some really impressive tactical manoeuvring. It was great just watching the game play, and you could appreciate the skill level involved.
I certainly wouldn't say 'elegant in its simplicity', but you can definitely have an appreciation for how the mechanics of the game function and interact with each other to bring to mind a well-oiled machine... (struggling for metaphors here! )
I can absolutely see that - I think we're just disagreeing on definitions - and not on Infinity being one of the better current rulesets out there. I'd be tempted to see how it could work with tactical RPG rules... I could actually see it working amazingly well as a combat system for something like Rogue Trader or Death Watch, if only characters were easily convertible.
-Loki- wrote: And, as I said on the last page, this is due to Corvus Belli re-editing the English translations. After they specifically send them to an English translator to translate properly.
Oh yeah, that was very interesting (seriously), and also /facepalm. But not what I personally meant. I meant it seemed way too complicated and detailed to be called "elegant". - Which isn't to say that it's not a very good game, because it seemed very good from my limited trial of it.
Well the difficulty comes down to the translation and how CB write. They write in a very flowery way, and like to prattle on when it's not needed. This translates into their rules. An example I saw on the official boards is Climbing Plus.
The skill itself lets you move along vertical surface using your full MOV attribute, and perform any actions from any point, and is considered 'hanging' if it stops on a vertical surface, which related back to falling damage i it is knocked unconscious while hanging. The wiki page has 3 FAQ questions.
It could be summed up with 'Climbing Plus: This model treats vertical surfaces the same way as horizontal surfaces. If it is moved to Unconcious while on a vertical surface, it takes falling damage from its current height'.
The game itself isn't too complicated. Once you wade through CB's writing style and spotty translation, it's actually a neat system, and not too complicated.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/06/25 03:35:43
2014/06/25 08:51:08
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
-Loki- wrote: And, as I said on the last page, this is due to Corvus Belli re-editing the English translations. After they specifically send them to an English translator to translate properly.
Oh yeah, that was very interesting (seriously), and also /facepalm. But not what I personally meant. I meant it seemed way too complicated and detailed to be called "elegant". - Which isn't to say that it's not a very good game, because it seemed very good from my limited trial of it.
Well the difficulty comes down to the translation and how CB write. They write in a very flowery way, and like to prattle on when it's not needed. This translates into their rules. An example I saw on the official boards is Climbing Plus.
The skill itself lets you move along vertical surface using your full MOV attribute, and perform any actions from any point, and is considered 'hanging' if it stops on a vertical surface, which related back to falling damage i it is knocked unconscious while hanging. The wiki page has 3 FAQ questions.
It could be summed up with 'Climbing Plus: This model treats vertical surfaces the same way as horizontal surfaces. If it is moved to Unconcious while on a vertical surface, it takes falling damage from its current height'.
The game itself isn't too complicated. Once you wade through CB's writing style and spotty translation, it's actually a neat system, and not too complicated.
The good thing is that Corvus Belli does recognize this problem as they mention it as a primary focus of the third edition - making a good English translation. It reminds me a lot, actually, of Confrontation. The first couple of editions were spotty French to English translations, but by third edition they had a good english translation.
Personally for me, as to the game itself, Infinity is a great game. It really comes down to how you play versus just random rolling of bucket loads of dice. Multiple strategies can unfold during a battle. Neither player is ever sitting "waiting" a half-hour to an hour for their turn. You are both engaged all the time whether the active (moving) or reactive (non-moving) player. I also enjoy the depth of play - straight out shooting, hacking, sniping, minelaying, camo, etc. - that a typical game offers.
Here is another the great thing about Infinity, it rarely is about your list and you never have the feeling at set up that you are going to be steamrolled. Yes, you may run into tactics that are frustrating when first encountered (I'm looking at you Forward Observer and Guided Missile Launcher), but once encountered, you eventually learn how to deal with it without necessarily having to change your army. However, I have either participated or seen games where it looks certain one player is going to lose and the right smart tactic, played at the right time, can completely tip the scale of the battle.
I also find the fluff enjoyable. Two things I really like. First, Infinity sees warfare the way it most likely is in the future, with large scale warfare conducted from orbit raining death down on planets. However, critical missions - like rescuing a key prisoner or stealing a vital piece of information or technological development, are still best left to elite teams of troops to conduct (and this is what you play in the game). Secondly, the story line is moving along. Yes, we have the forces fighting each other in the Human Sphere (much like they do in the real world today), but then the arrival of the alien Combined Army run by the EI (evolved intelligence) begins to change things. Humanity has realized they are not alone and the CA poses a big threat. So the AI, that controls the Sphere, now builds the Aleph (synthetic cyborgs and robots) to counter the CA. Things seem to be balancing now until the discovery of an advanced alien species, the Tohaa, who also is at war with the CA. Are the Tohaa friends or foes? What is their real motivation? This is great fluff, and it is moving forward as the game grows (rather than remaining almost the exact same as 40k has done for 20 years).
Heh. Everyone seems to brag about making the "best" miniatures in the world, and it's a subjective claim anyway. Never mind Infinity in 2014, look at Rackham/Confrontation in 2004 or earlier.
But then, how many pizza places can claim to be the "Best in the West?" (answer: All of them, apparently!)
I've read that John Blanche has some Infinity minis in his collection actually.
As a motorbiking fan, I don't think it's terribly subjective...
Spoiler:
OK I'm being disingenuous with this one (although I actually used to think the miniature was quite cool, and always provoked a laugh when used in a game.. !)
Cool, but I wouldn't want to make a turn in the road with one of those..
But, compare them to..
and Penthouse, my favourite mini from last year. Absolute work of art
I do think, of late, CB have been hitting a very high standard with most of their releases. Although, I agree it's horses for courses, they appeal in different ways to a lot of the more recent GW releases.
Oh come on - you're better than that. Taking a, what? 17 year old GW bike design that's 85% ripped off from a Judge Dredd Lawmaster anyway - and comparing it to a figure that's just been released and one that's all of a year old (if that).
I've actually got an unpainted Doomrider somewhere. My plan was to carve him up and his bits would be part of several other, less gak looking chaos marines. I think now, though, I'll find him and just give him a decent paintjob and let him coast on being an old, not-so-cool model...
but, you know, there have been "better" models out there for many years is my point...
Spoiler:
...but GW's stuff still holds our attention better than all of the others apparently, and they do have some real hits, and always have - throughout the years. They also have a huge variety of styles, as opposed to a singular one.
And frankly, despite Dreamforge's success, GW does large models really, really well. You can talk about how amazing the Japanese multi-coloured Gundam kits are, but maybe that's where WGF/DFG and others need to go next, because it seems that GW has no plans at this stage.
I actually think Doomrider probably suits the current miniature releases more now than he did when he was first released, a miniature ahead of its time!
Agree though, the only person that could say categorically that GW makes 'the best' miniatures has obviously had a limited experience within the industry. GW have made some extremely fine miniatures, but they sit in amongst many other wonderful examples of art in this great hobby of ours.
Actually, I'm surprised that GW claim to make 'the best', because that actually implies that there are other companies out there doing the same thing. Treading dangerously!
Lord of the Rings ( ). Simple enough to pick up relatively quickly and not having to pick up the rule book the whole time, yet with enough in depth mechanics and special rules to really engross you in your characters' battles, and with quite small armies, every model is a hero in his own way! Of course there are the odd issues, but depending where you look at it from, every game system has an issue...
I have had many a fun evening waging war across the lands of Middle earth: both a fun and casual system to play.
I also second X-wing, I managed to pick up those rules without having to look at most of the rulebook (with some help from Youtube!)
"Show no mercy, show no restraint! Feel the Emperor's fury flow through your veins and let it fuel our whirlwind of gore!"
Pacific wrote:Infinity - the game mechanics and balance within the game are outstanding, I would go as far (without getting wrapped up in hyperbole ) as to say it is something beautiful.
X-Wing; incredibly fast to pick up and play, you can have a great laugh with it within 30mins of picking up the rulebook.
Dreadball; not without its faults and frustrating at times, but a fine, fast paced (and very fun) sports board game for the modern age.
I'd list 40k as well, just because despite the problems it is really one of the best out there. I will not go hide to avoid the backlash.
No need to defend yourself! If it's something you enjoy, then it's something you enjoy. Don't think anyone should criticise anyone else for their own choice!
Tell that to the guy down
weeble1000 wrote:
Paradigm wrote: 40k (braces himself) is very good, for what it is. As a fun, casual, Saturday afternoon game, it's absolutely fine. It's the Action Blockbuster equivalent of games, good for a laugh and a couple of hours' fun with some friends.
Just because you personally enjoy playing it doesn't mean that it is an objectively "good" system. Most any rule set on the market could be described in exactly those terms.
Fun, casual, Saturday afternoon game. In other words, don't take it too seriously because the system doesn't really work very well. If you ignore the problems it has and only play with friends it's entertaining.
But what actually makes a game "casual?"
Personally, I don't think 40K is very "casual" at all. The rule set is byzantine and clunky. You would be hard pressed to teach the system to someone over a game and have them walking away from the table proficient in it's use. Many games slow down or grind to a halt because a rules issue comes up, even among die-hard veterans. Most games at the recommended point values take far more than an hour to play. Reference materials for the game are spread across multiple different formats, are difficult to access, and are filled with typos and ambiguous language.
None of that says casual to me.
Dreadball is an example of a casual game. Whether or not one 'likes' the system, it is very simple, easy to learn, doesn't require much, and plays quickly.
If you can walk up to a table with a beer in your hand in the middle of a game you've never played before and jump right into the middle of it, that's a casual game.
Take board games, for example. Eclipse is a great game. But it is the antithesis of casual. On the other hand, Firefly: The Game is very casual. BANG! is very casual. Cards Against Humanity is the epitome of casual. Your eighty year old grandmother can roll up to a game of Cards Against Humanity, get dealt in, and be laughing about Obama eating gak out of a bucket in ten minutes.
That's casual.
It's casual mostly because the rules aren't just simple; they work. There's no confusion. The system functions without a hitch. That isn't any game that GW produces.
In 40K, players mostly have fun despite the rules, not because of them.
Heroclix use to have some pretty solid ruleset, but with time thing get out of control, well to begin i dont know if heroclix could be considere here
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/29 09:42:57
2014/06/29 16:22:35
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
I've been playing Battlegroup Overlord a ton recently. I enjoy it's force org restrictions and think it covers the feel of the period quite well. The Battle Rating system is quite clever as well.
After reading this thread Ive become rather interested in X-Wing and Infinty.
2014/06/29 19:50:16
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
Heroclix use to have some pretty solid ruleset, but with time thing get out of control, well to begin i dont know if heroclix could be considere here
I used to play Heroclix about 10 years ago (when they were doing the judge dredd stuff) and it was great. I thought the whole system was really elegant and intuitive (with the rookie/experienced/veteran models and with the stat wheel so you got weaker as you took damage). I can't remember any rules questions beyond trying to remember what the colours/symbols meant since we played across 4 sets. Has it become overly complex now?
2014/06/29 22:58:26
Subject: Re:What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
GW does make some fine miniatures, but I can't say they're the best. They have become inconsistent lately. I think CB now makes the most detailed, imaginative, animated and beautiful miniatures out there. (And they can make females look like females.)
Someone said it wasn't fair to compare old (though still used) minis to new ones. Ok.
Here's an Infinity TAG. (And I LOVE that pilot.)
Spoiler:
Here's...well. You know.
Spoiler:
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
2014/06/30 00:49:48
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
I find GW's strength in miniature making in their Fantasy department and in general their large models.
Their Fantasy ranges over the last few years have crossed that line into absolutely gorgeous territory. It's just a shame they're dead set on making it the biggest money sink they possibly can. I'd play it if I didn't need to buy another 100 skeletons for my army just for Core.
Their big models have always been great, but then they're really the only wargaming company making them. Sure Dreamforges Leviathan is fantastic, but then I look at the rest of the industry and I just don't see the push to large models. Everyone else is happy making yet more infantry. But GW can still do a great large model - the Knight is a good example. When I saw one painted in a display case I wished 40k was a better and more affordable game, because I'd jump on one of those if I had a reason.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/30 00:50:01
2014/06/30 01:03:53
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
-Loki- wrote: I find GW's strength in miniature making in their Fantasy department and in general their large models.
Their Fantasy ranges over the last few years have crossed that line into absolutely gorgeous territory. It's just a shame they're dead set on making it the biggest money sink they possibly can. I'd play it if I didn't need to buy another 100 skeletons for my army just for Core.
Their big models have always been great, but then they're really the only wargaming company making them. Sure Dreamforges Leviathan is fantastic, but then I look at the rest of the industry and I just don't see the push to large models. Everyone else is happy making yet more infantry. But GW can still do a great large model - the Knight is a good example. When I saw one painted in a display case I wished 40k was a better and more affordable game, because I'd jump on one of those if I had a reason.
I wouldn't say the ONLY one....
[/spoiler][spoiler]
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
2014/06/30 02:15:23
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
I think lord of the rings was the best system GW made recently, it was easy, accessible and made sense. Really good heroic skirmish game.
As far as 28mm goes I also like bolt action, it feels like the 28mm game I wanted to play as a kid but got roped into 40k instead
Finally, (and this might get me some hate because dakka inexplicably hates spartan games) but I think dystopian wars deserves an honourable mention for making naval wargaming accessible. Because every rule set I've read was just so bizarrely complex that it doesn't even bear mentioning.
We're watching you... scum.
2014/06/30 02:44:41
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
-Loki- wrote: I find GW's strength in miniature making in their Fantasy department and in general their large models.
Their Fantasy ranges over the last few years have crossed that line into absolutely gorgeous territory. It's just a shame they're dead set on making it the biggest money sink they possibly can. I'd play it if I didn't need to buy another 100 skeletons for my army just for Core.
Their big models have always been great, but then they're really the only wargaming company making them. Sure Dreamforges Leviathan is fantastic, but then I look at the rest of the industry and I just don't see the push to large models. Everyone else is happy making yet more infantry. But GW can still do a great large model - the Knight is a good example. When I saw one painted in a display case I wished 40k was a better and more affordable game, because I'd jump on one of those if I had a reason.
I wouldn't say the ONLY one....
Spoiler:
Right, I forgot about those.
But they're still one per faction. Plus one of the other big ones they did per faction.
GW does multiple very large models per faction these days, through large vehicles, large monsters, large walkers, large aircraft. GW really push those size models. It's what they do, and their plastic technology lets them do it.
2014/06/30 05:16:56
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
Personally I'm glad the rest of the wargaming world aren't taking part in the giant model size creep. I don't mind the occasional centerpiece model but I'd hate to have an army of the things. If I want to play with giant robots I'll drop the scale down to like battletech
2014/06/30 08:30:08
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
-Loki- wrote: I find GW's strength in miniature making in their Fantasy department and in general their large models.
Their Fantasy ranges over the last few years have crossed that line into absolutely gorgeous territory. It's just a shame they're dead set on making it the biggest money sink they possibly can. I'd play it if I didn't need to buy another 100 skeletons for my army just for Core.
Their big models have always been great, but then they're really the only wargaming company making them. Sure Dreamforges Leviathan is fantastic, but then I look at the rest of the industry and I just don't see the push to large models. Everyone else is happy making yet more infantry.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/30 08:38:46
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
2014/06/30 10:46:22
Subject: What are the best current (2014) rule sets?
MWHistorian wrote: GW does make some fine miniatures, but I can't say they're the best. They have become inconsistent lately. I think CB now makes the most detailed, imaginative, animated and beautiful miniatures out there. (And they can make females look like females.)
Someone said it wasn't fair to compare old (though still used) minis to new ones. Ok.
Here's an Infinity TAG. (And I LOVE that pilot.)
Here's...well. You know.
It's still cherry-picking, as well you know. Why not try a good large robot suit instead of being silly about it and using centurions as your example?
Spoiler:
And GW have always been inconsistent. Not lately. Since their inception. They have always had a mixture of brilliant, good, decent, passable, mediocre and awful sculpts. I believe it's a by-product of having so many sculptors and such a large and extensive range of models.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
-Loki- wrote: I find GW's strength in miniature making in their Fantasy department and in general their large models.
Their Fantasy ranges over the last few years have crossed that line into absolutely gorgeous territory. It's just a shame they're dead set on making it the biggest money sink they possibly can. I'd play it if I didn't need to buy another 100 skeletons for my army just for Core.
Kings of War. With WHFB models (and anything else that takes your fancy). It's the answer.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/06/30 10:55:27