Reply To: Is it better to have one army for many games or many armies for one game?

[phaidknott 7023xp 2]

Problem these days with so many rule systems, types of basing, scale of miniatures etc meaning finding an opponent who playing the same rules, in the same scale, and the same period almost impossible (unlike back in the 80s for example where if you played Naps it was usually 15mm and using Newbury Quick Play rules as there was simply not a lot of choice out there).

So these days we gamers have to provide the whole game rather than just one side (particularly with historical gaming), so I’d say it’s best to have many armies (well at least two) for one game. One army for many games is less of a slog when it comes to painting as “new” always inspires creation, but alas you’ll probably find these armies just end up in storage.

Even with the club scene it’s almost impossible to get two players choosing the same period to buy and collect the same rules, minis etc. We all seem to run off an do our own thing these days (due to the sheer amount of choice), it may be the “golden age of wargaming” when it comes to availability, but it’s not been without it’s negatives.