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.

So... miniatures comparisons in a rules thread.

I'd recommend Infinity over 40k to anyone looking to get into miniature gaming. They are very different games, but I find the high model count combined with the contained IGOUGO turns means that playing it means I'm asking my opponent to spend a lot of time waiting. I find contained IGOUGO turns start failing at around 20 models a side. I generally don't mind it in Warmachine/Hordes but find it totally unacceptable in 40k, WFB or Flames of War. Of those games though, Flames of War works better than the others at lower points values, though it is just 40k in WW2.

 frozenwastes wrote:
So... miniatures comparisons in a rules thread.

Agreed. There are plenty of places to argue about miniatures. This is most assuredly NOT the place for it.

 frozenwastes wrote:

I'd recommend Infinity over 40k to anyone looking to get into miniature gaming. They are very different games, but I find the high model count combined with the contained IGOUGO turns means that playing it means I'm asking my opponent to spend a lot of time waiting. I find contained IGOUGO turns start failing at around 20 models a side. I generally don't mind it in Warmachine/Hordes but find it totally unacceptable in 40k, WFB or Flames of War. Of those games though, Flames of War works better than the others at lower points values, though it is just 40k in WW2.

IGOUGO seems to be a factor in alot of rules decisions these days. I think pure IGOUGO is a rather old mechanic that mostly has it's place in games like Song of Blades and Heroes where it actually adds to the tension rather than being a lag in the action for one player. Mostly this is going to be smaller games, but oddly I think it works very well for KoW, though that is a very fast playing system, so you don't wait too long for your turn.

 frozenwastes wrote:
So... miniatures comparisons in a rules thread.

That's what happens when the Infinity fanbase gets going...

PhantomViper wrote:


Ok, I keep hearing about this game and I need to know more about it! I have a bunch of Confrontation Wulfen sitting pretty in my shelf that I wan't to plop on a table for any reason...

Are the rules for this in a physical book or are they PDF only? And is the game really as customizable as people say? Could I, for example, build a gang from my Wulfen to use with these rules?

Sorry for the late reply, I don't find myself browsing Dakka Discussions very much. weeble1000 already answered the PDF question.

You could absolutely play a game with your Wulfen. There are no Werewolf rules in the basic SBH pdf, but you could always make your own. They have a forumula specifically for making your own units. If you don't want to make your own rules...they have Hyenamen, so you could use them also if you want... pretty close I reckon.

 Eilif wrote:
IGOUGO seems to be a factor in alot of rules decisions these days. I think pure IGOUGO is a rather old mechanic that mostly has it's place in games like Song of Blades and Heroes where it actually adds to the tension rather than being a lag in the action for one player. Mostly this is going to be smaller games, but oddly I think it works very well for KoW, though that is a very fast playing system, so you don't wait too long for your turn.

Kings of War seems to play like a lower model count game. So does WFB, to a lesser extent. It's definitley the movement trays that help cut down on the biggest short comings of IGOUGO-- wait times.

You're right about SoBH though. The tension of a possible end of turn and the gamble to risk that to get more done definitely improves upon the IGOUGO turn structure.

My favorite example of that is probably Company Commander. It's a free WW2 to near future game (you have to join a yahoo group here). It uses a "go until you fail" IGOUGO structure. if you fail to at least pin an enemy with a shooting attack, get pinned by reaction fire or fail to rally your troops, your turn ends. It's not for everyone though as it is punishing to tactical blunders and you need to leave a reserve to reinforce failing positions and most players prefer to try to maximize how many of their own pieces can engage the enemy. If anyone has ever heard of or played Crossfire by Arty Conliffe (which has finally just been reprinted), they'll recognize many common elements in the game.

The main problem with both Crossfire and Company Commander is that if someone is coming from a 40k background, there's so much that needs to be unlearned that I'd say the games will initially be unplayable for that person. Even more so than Infinity.

 frozenwastes wrote:

 Eilif wrote:
IGOUGO seems to be a factor in alot of rules decisions these days. I think pure IGOUGO is a rather old mechanic that mostly has it's place in games like Song of Blades and Heroes where it actually adds to the tension rather than being a lag in the action for one player. Mostly this is going to be smaller games, but oddly I think it works very well for KoW, though that is a very fast playing system, so you don't wait too long for your turn.

Kings of War seems to play like a lower model count game. So does WFB, to a lesser extent. It's definitley the movement trays that help cut down on the biggest short comings of IGOUGO-- wait times.

KoW effectively is a much lower "model" count game from the perspective of the way the units work. I wrote up a 600pt KoM list for a friend to use in a multiplayer game I'm hosting this weekend, and counting the blocks of troops as single "game tokens" made of a bunch of models each, it's only a 6-token army (despite rather a lot more models being involved). Without removing individual models a la WHFB, or changing formation, frontage, etc, it's even faster in play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 frozenwastes wrote:

My favorite example of that is probably Company Commander. It's a free WW2 to near future game (you have to join a yahoo group here). It uses a "go until you fail" IGOUGO structure. if you fail to at least pin an enemy with a shooting attack, get pinned by reaction fire or fail to rally your troops, your turn ends. It's not for everyone though as it is punishing to tactical blunders and you need to leave a reserve to reinforce failing positions and most players prefer to try to maximize how many of their own pieces can engage the enemy. If anyone has ever heard of or played Crossfire by Arty Conliffe (which has finally just been reprinted), they'll recognize many common elements in the game.

The main problem with both Crossfire and Company Commander is that if someone is coming from a 40k background, there's so much that needs to be unlearned that I'd say the games will initially be unplayable for that person. Even more so than Infinity.

Not really. I first played a demo of Crossfire when I was 18 or so, and I understood that the way the game played was much more about ebb and flow. SBH on the other hand, seems to have some units that are nigh on pointless due to poor leadership - like trolls. Though I haven't played much SBH, so it's possible I missed something important there..

I think the turn sequence is the make or break of a good system. Of course their are many different ways to do.

I happen to like Action/Reaction systems similar to Force-on-Force or Infinity. Those work great on skirmish games.

However, many modern larger battle games are using modified IGOUGO right now.

Red Viper wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:


Ok, I keep hearing about this game and I need to know more about it! I have a bunch of Confrontation Wulfen sitting pretty in my shelf that I wan't to plop on a table for any reason...

Are the rules for this in a physical book or are they PDF only? And is the game really as customizable as people say? Could I, for example, build a gang from my Wulfen to use with these rules?

You could absolutely play a game with your Wulfen. There are no Werewolf rules in the basic SBH pdf, but you could always make your own. They have a forumula specifically for making your own units. If you don't want to make your own rules...they have Hyenamen, so you could use them also if you want... pretty close I reckon.

Song of Blades could definitely handle Werewolfs/Wolfen,etc. The basic SBH has enough special rules to get you there. Check the Ganesha Games Website (scroll down the left side) to find the free online unit creation program. It does all the calculations for you to create custom creatures and tally your warband. Our club uses it alot.

It is notable also that there is a "Were" special rule in the Song of Gold and Darkness supplement, if you wanted to use your Wulfen as this sort of thing. It allows your "normal" character to transform in certain circumstances into a "were" version upon being killed in combat. SGD is also a great supplement if you want to use SBH for dungeon-crawling.

One note about the PDF's. They are almost all B&W, so you don't miss much by printing them yourself if you choose not to buy the hardcopy. All my Ganesha titles are the PDF's and it's nice to have them all in one binder for easy access.

frozenwastes wrote:
Kings of War seems to play like a lower model count game. So does WFB, to a lesser extent. It's definitley the movement trays that help cut down on the biggest short comings of IGOUGO-- wait times.

IMHO, Kings of War is a 6/10/15mm "element" game that has simply been written into 28mm. Almost everything about the game, from the streamlined turn sequence, to the lack of casualty removal (element games usually having multiple figures on the same base) feels like it was made for tiny miniatures. I don't see that that as a bad thing. I think it's a natural acknowledgement of how silly it is to have a Company or Battallion level (I hate the term "Mass Battle") game with a depth of rules that are as detailed and crunchy as most skirmish games.

Imagine how much fun a game of Apocalpyse would be if the rules were as fast moving as Kings of War. (How I miss thee, Warpath 1.0...)

Azazelx wrote: SBH on the other hand, seems to have some units that are nigh on pointless due to poor leadership - like trolls. Though I haven't played much SBH, so it's possible I missed something important there..

SBH requires that you back up your poor "Quality" units like trolls with Leaders or some other way of increasing their chances of getting into combat. Leaders and group moves are the most common way of doing this. Better Quality troops are notably more expensive, so if you can get them into combat, low Quality, High combat troops can swamp your opponent.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I think CB now makes the most detailed, imaginative, animated and beautiful miniatures out there. (And they can make females look like females.)

Well...Infinity does have a bit of 'Anime Ass' syndrome. Fully dressed women, sure...with round, sexy anime asses and painted on pants.

That's not all female models CB does, but 'women looking like women' is pretty darn relative. I mean, CB doesn't make a single model that looks anything like my mother, or like women in modern battle dress for that matter, under which women look like...well...like a human underneath layers of gear, ballistic fabric, armor plates, and ammo.

weeble1000 wrote:


Well...Infinity does have a bit of 'Anime Ass' syndrome. Fully dressed women, sure...with round, sexy anime asses and painted on pants.

That's not all female models CB does, but 'women looking like women' is pretty darn relative. I mean, CB doesn't make a single model that looks anything like my mother, or like women in modern battle dress for that matter, under which women look like...well...like a human underneath layers of gear, ballistic fabric, armor plates, and ammo.

Actually...

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/5th-minutemen/

She's a gurl!

Yea, so's she:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/acontecimento-regulars-2/

And her, 'cause why not:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/orc-troops/

And these gals:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2013/miniatures/dire-foes-mission-pack-dark-mist-2/

And this lovely chica:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/tiger-soldiers-2/

She's having a nice time out at the mall with her giant machine gun. Military chic is really in this season!:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/metros-2/

And that's not even plucking the low-hanging fruit...Which would have been unfair:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/caledonian-volunteers-2/

You get those bad guys honey! I love it when you walk away to war...

Infinity isn't a terrible offender or anything, but CB aint no stranger to cheesecake, and likes a lady with certain...proportions. CB likes a nice, tight, round anime ass and a tiny waist. Credit them with putting clothes and armor on the ladies, but what I was most interested in was the 'real women' bit.

 frozenwastes wrote:


... if someone is coming from a 40k background, there's so much that needs to be unlearned that I'd say the games will initially be unplayable for that person. Even more so than Infinity.

Oh god, I can attest to this. I'm assuredly a far worse Infinity player than I otherwise would be had I never touched 40k

Rather than trawl through the thread, I figured I'd ask here - what do you guys think of Malifaux and X Wing? I've heard good things about both, but whats more useful to a potential gamer is hearing the bad too

Edit: And Relics too I guess. That "stichpunk" game. Preamble looks good, but... why the hell are all the dudes puppet things?

X-Wing is well worth the punt. The starter set is mega cheap (less than a Leman Russ Battle Tank) and genuinely contains all you need. The rules are concise and you can go from shrink-wrap to full gaming in 20 minutes (skimming the rules and trying out the first turn). Very intuitive.

We split 2 starters between us for a bit bigger games (2x X-Wings Vs 4x Tie Fighters).

To illustrate it; my die-hard GW fan (who skips the convention tables that don't have GW and refuses to consider anything non-GW) fell for it immediately and it's now our go-to game. Try it.


Malifaux is a bit different; slightly more expensive to get started since you need more mini's. It's about £10 for the mini-rules, £6 for the stat cards and about £30 for a starter pack, so you're looking at £50 (inc optional card deck - you can use a standard poker deck) to get started for 1 player Vs £30 for 2 with X-wing.

Starter gives you about 6 models (Master + crew), everything you need to know is on the stat cards, the core rules are pretty concise, and whilst it's simple to get started there's a lot of tactical depth. It's good fun but it's also a very thinky game, I often feel like I've had a mental workout when playing games of it (because there's so many tactical options and synergies). It seems pretty balanced with the stragegies; I've rarely had a game where I've felt like I've had no chance. I'd heavily recommend it too.

Yeah, for X-wing I recommend two starter sets to build a solid start. The rules are very intuitive and easy to learn. However, the mastery is a bit harder. Honestly, I don't think the mechanics are all that innovative, they are mostly rehashes and repackaging of previous air combat games only without being able to change altitude since you are in space.

Now, onto the downsides. The Starters are great price and value but getting new ships is a a bit pricey. Getting a pair of ships is really wasteful since they have all the same cards so as you get multiple ships the value for money goes down a lot. This is a disatisfier for me since I like to field pairs.

There are really only two factions, Imperials and Rebels. You need new scenarios and ships to keep it from getting stale. basic dogfights are kind of boring unless you have some objectives to fight for.

I think the squadron building has fallen into some set "net-list" good/bad patterns. Nothign as bad as 40K but it is still present. Your local Meta may vary.

Finally, it could really use some campaign rules to build up your rookies/Academy pilots into Aces. These may have been added later in some supplement (I really don't know) but right now each game is stand alone.

All that being said, this is a great game to get people into the idea of Miniature wargaming. It is almost more of a boardgame/wargame hybrid product so it is a nice gateway drug. No paitning needed either. Despite what I said above I actually like and play X-wing when I can.

Never played malifaux.

Herzlos wrote:

 anyeri wrote:


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?

I playe dsince the begining, play until mmm dont remember the expasion, but was whern they begin to use aditional cards as perks and battleground cards, that create some effect all over the map, at the begining it was a fresh way to play but tings get complicated because some perks card make some broken things with the right models, so in a turn a human torch can make a pulsewave attack with a renge of 10 making 4 clisks of damage, so people use like three human torch and others with that perk card, your whole team was whipe out the moment the torchs where close enought.
From then on the ring system disapear, and there was only one model per character o different models with different abilitys of the same character, on the colector side it was a good, no more tons of the same model but with different base, but on the other side everyone wanted and played the mos powerful character, then the ability cards and a new "color" abaility, a colorless square as a unique power for that character only, the power was described on the card.
The game change from an easy and fast game to a complex, slow and messy game, like chess on aesthetic (you alwas see the same models, always the "rarest" superman, batman etc etc etc) nobody venture to try different builds, and the models, sadly they when from right to pretty ugly, some look great, specially the team bases (two characters on the same base) and the rarest models, oh and the giants and colosal figures, they look good but with zero details.

Oh that's a shame, it sounds like it's lost most of the simplicity that made it brilliant :(

Most of the games I would mention have been mentioned.

I'd also throw in Firestorm Armada. There are some fiddly bits around launching small craft fighters and stuff. But the core mechanic is great (that is rolling a set number of dice at different range bands). The idea of optimal range bands (which are sometimes different between fleets) means maneuvering for position isn't forced or awkward, and instead becomes critical, tactical, and fun. The turning template simplifies arcs and angles and remedies not using hexes. Overall it captures big space ships duking it out very well, with massive broadsides and slow turning capital ships being circled by smaller ships.

The other game would be Star Wars Edge of the Empire from FFG. It's a bit different from a "traditional" (ie: D&D) RPG, but so far has done the best job I've seen of capturing what it'd be like to be a Star Wars character. And as was mentioned early on, I think a ruleset that achieves what it sets out to do is a great ruleset. By having players gain and spend "Advantages" the system really lends itself well to descriptive, thematic combat. Instead of "Oh I get +2 damage because I surprised the enemy" you can instead have the player startle their foe, knocking them off a walkway, where their falling body hits a generator that explodes and takes out some goons down below. The players are eager to add their own descriptive flair as well, so the game naturally bleeds into cooperative story telling, instead of an "us vs GM" mentality.

 bosky wrote:
Most of the games I would mention have been mentioned.

I'd also throw in Firestorm Armada. There are some fiddly bits around launching small craft fighters and stuff. But the core mechanic is great (that is rolling a set number of dice at different range bands). The idea of optimal range bands (which are sometimes different between fleets) means maneuvering for position isn't forced or awkward, and instead becomes critical, tactical, and fun. The turning template simplifies arcs and angles and remedies not using hexes. Overall it captures big space ships duking it out very well, with massive broadsides and slow turning capital ships being circled by smaller ships.

The other game would be Star Wars Edge of the Empire from FFG. It's a bit different from a "traditional" (ie: D&D) RPG, but so far has done the best job I've seen of capturing what it'd be like to be a Star Wars character. And as was mentioned early on, I think a ruleset that achieves what it sets out to do is a great ruleset. By having players gain and spend "Advantages" the system really lends itself well to descriptive, thematic combat. Instead of "Oh I get +2 damage because I surprised the enemy" you can instead have the player startle their foe, knocking them off a walkway, where their falling body hits a generator that explodes and takes out some goons down below. The players are eager to add their own descriptive flair as well, so the game naturally bleeds into cooperative story telling, instead of an "us vs GM" mentality.

I've been curious about the Edge of the Empire RPG as I've been on a Star Wars kick lately.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I've been curious about the Edge of the Empire RPG as I've been on a Star Wars kick lately.

Well maybe it'd interest you You could try picking up the beginner box set before taking the plunge into the full core rulebook? Edge of the Empire focuses more on scoundrels / Han Solos / Firefly type characters. FFG is going to release two other rulebooks focusing on the Rebels vs Imperials, and then Jedis and the Force. My understanding is they are all standalone RPGs using the same system, so you can focus on whatever part of the Star Wars universe interests you most. I'm lucky in that I care little for Rebels or Jedi and instead like the idea of a motley crew aboard a rundown ship hopping around a well fleshed out Star Wars galaxy, so Edge of the Empire fit that very well.

In case you wanted a bit more detail on the system itself, it's dice pool based, but with custom dice (think fancier versions of the dice in X-Wing Miniatures). Your character has various skills and stats, and from those you build a dice pool depending on the task at hand. Say you have 3 Agility and 1 rank in Ranged Weapons and want to shoot someone with your pistol. You'd start with the positive dice of 2 green D8s and 1 yellow D12. Then you add in negative dice based on the difficulty of the task at hand, and the situation around you. So let's say 2 purple D8s. And maybe it's stormy weather outside so you get a black D6 setback die too. Then you roll all the dice, check the various symbols, and figure out if the task succeeded. But not only can a task succeed or fail, but it can do so with Advantages or Threats. That's where the real spice comes in, since you can "convert" Advantages into story elements (like your shot hitting their blaster and knocking it out of their hand), likewise Threats could be bad too, like your gun jams or the shot ricochets and you fall over dodging it, etc. Building and reading a dice pool can be daunting at first, but becomes second nature by the end of the session, at least from what I've seen.

There are plenty of other neat aspects to the system.

The character generation and specializations have been varied and interesting enough to let us players create whatever we want so far. In our current party we have a Human pilot on the run after betting his pod racer and losing, a Droid assassin who had a memory wipe and now thinks he's a pilot, another Droid doctor who has a sick fascination with becoming human, and a Rodian melee expert who is obsessed with the hunt.

Each character and party will have Obligations, which are codified debts, vices, or obsessions that can come up in play and help drive story telling.

There are a pool of Light/Dark points generated at the start of each session, basically like Fate Points from other games, that let you influence the story.

And so on and so forth.

From my previous careers of kicking down doors, room clearing and moving in squads, Infinity is by far my favorite rules set. I like it because I can ask myself "what would I do?"...and it's usually a pretty good idea. The rules are tight and balanced and really portray tactics in a realistic manner. Plus I can use US Army Rangers, SAS and Spetznas against cyborgs and aliens....awesome.