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,

My friend and I are going to start battle reports soon and posting to Youtube

Wanted to poll the potential audience on what flavour of reports are generally preferred.

Mainly trying to discern if people like:
the summary battle reports that generally range from 15 -30 min
full turn shown (movement, psychic, shooting, assault) including dice rolls - minimum, 1hr.

Second, wanted to know if there was any preference between Eternal War or Maelstrom game types.

Third, wanted to know if fun or fluffy or casual lists were preferred over hardcore, cheesy, competitive or tournament lists.

Thanks

Summary style for me. Neither the time nor inclination to sit through over an hour of a vid. Unless the quality is absolutely terrific (no shakey cam, good sound, well commentated, well produced).

No preference on MS VS EW but since MS seems to be the new meta probably go with that so people can learn how to play it better and adapt to it.

Depends on who you want your audience to be. There are lots of channels doing competitive vids so maybe go casual/fun/quirky.

I much, much, much prefer text and picture reports, preferably with at least a semblance of narrative. The glut of youtube batreps has me largely avoiding this section these days.

Mission type does not matter for me. Generally, summaries tend to work better, though if you're going to do whole turns, do it the way Miniwargaming does it-- by just showing quick shots of the movements and dice rolls on camera while one of you narrates what happened.

I don't mind seeing competetive armies, but I overall prefer non-competetive lists. I generally prefer seeing lists that are inventive or fun rather than the same cookie-cutter builds you wind up seeing in every tournament report ever.

Another cool thing is whe you just summarise each phase. It keeps the video short (and watchable), but is still detailed enough to be interesting.

PS: try to use unconventional lists and games!
Like Zone Mortalis, Cities of death, or stuff like full Kroot, full Scarabs, melee horde guard or Inquisition and Assassins.

 Zefig wrote:
I much, much, much prefer text and picture reports, preferably with at least a semblance of narrative. The glut of youtube batreps has me largely avoiding this section these days.

Agreed, though I do not stray from a good Frontline or StrikingScorpion82 report.

Thanks for the feedback so far!

My personal preference is are interesting lists, narrative games/lists with no preference between EW of MoW game types.

We're playing around with a few ideas
- Playing out campaigns provided in codexes and supplements.
- Developing a DoW style campaigns
- Planetary wide campaigns

Thanks for providing feedback.

The poll results help!

I don't and won't bother watching summary reports. I use battle reports primarily to learn new armies, get used to rules I am not familiar with and I used these games to actually relearn warhammer after ten years away. If just summaries are shown, well, what's the point of bringing new Necrons? I want to know how they play, what rules they have, what dice are thrown when to get what result. I can sit at a table and arbitrarily remove things from it while taking a quick picture every so often, but I call that 'cleaning off the table'. I'm here to see other styles of gameplay and other tactics and armies that aren't included in my area.