Please Change my Mind and Point of View

[bubbles15Participant 2298xp 2]

@panzerkaput You said ‘the rules suck, in my opinion…’

Leaving aside the sentence construction categorically the rules DO NOT ‘your word’. YOU don’t like them. You have that right to that perspective, but wouldn’t it be far more positive if instead of saying you dislike something to say you prefer something else? Such as the Infinity ARO feature, or the combinations for Warmachine?

There are petty, nasty people who cannot do, but think they have a right to criticise what others can do. People whinge and whine about Workshop – sometimes rightly, and without question when they hype something and you want it, but can’t get it it’s bally dim of them – but behind the invisible facade there are people who genuinely care about their work, as we all do. They should be respected and valued, not rubbished because you (in the plural) don’t like something.

Apologies, I think your post hit a nerve that’s been building in me for a while. Perhaps I am getting old. Perhaps I’m tired of seeing such relentless spite, bile and misery coming from spoiled, arrogant 14 year old twonks simply so they can stroke their own ego and feel vindicated in their malice and derogation.

[panzerkaput 33931xp 0]

@bubles15 I know what you mean about hitting a nerve and actually I only have an issue for the rules as it is really but my cup of tea, though the background and figures are nice. I wasnt trying to bash GW, just using it as an example.

 

[bubbles15Participant 2298xp 1]

@oriskany – which genre have never been discussed?

We’ve had board game, card games, war games from sci fi to fantasy to historical (all sorts of different ages), early, middle, late war, naval ship games (WW2 and much earlier).

What’s missing?

[oriskany 60737xp 1]

Fair question, @bubbles15 .  Before I reply, let me roll out my disclaimers.  😀  Nothing here is a critique on the OTT team in any way.  In fact, when it comes to “what’s missing,” the team has often earnestly (and admirably) tried to “broaden the church” – but the community usually hasn’t followed along.

In summary, aspects of wargaming that don’t often get a lot of traction in the community include pretty much the whole “consim” wing of the hobby.  Dozens of titles are published every year by manufacturers like GMT, Matrix, Decision Games, Multiman Publishing, GDW, Compass, Hexasim, etc. … and designers like Ty Bomba, Joseph Miranda, Brian Train, Michael Benninghoff, Frank Chadwick, and Jim Dunnigan (off the top of my head).  That last man basically invented modern-market tactical wargaming, he didn’t win “Game Designer of the Millennium” for nothing.  In fact he now has his own award named after him, I suppose this is what happens when they run out of awards they can give you.  Yet I would wager that in this community, one person in a thousand has heard of him.  Yet we all know Rick Priestly.  (??)

The Strategy & Tactics publications (S&T, World at War, and Modern War) each publishes six issues a year each, and every issue highlights a new game.  That’s eighteen titles a year, or 126 in all in the seven years since I joined this community.  Not one has been mentioned, and that’s from one of dozens of publishing houses (although admittedly S&T is probably the biggest one).

Now, certain titles in this “wing of the hobby” in fact HAVE been highlighted by the OTT Team.  Examples include GMT’s Twilight Struggle, which I know is a favorite of Warren’s.  Warren also had me write an article series on the Heroes of Limanowa Kickstarter, and the team was fantastically supportive when I published World War 2.5, and even awarded me a Golden Button when I published Darkstar.

So the team has certainly tried.  😀  But broader-base community response on these examples (with the possible exception of Darkstar) was negligible at best, outright zero at worst.  This is why I am distinguishing between the “team” and the “community” vis-à-vis this topic.  The team has tried.  The community by and large does not.

At the risk of sounding repetitive, this perfectly fine.  I would never presume to instruct the community where they should focus their interest.  You won’t see Stargrave or Billion Suns on Consimworld or Sitrep Podcast, either.

I brought up this angle earlier in the thread to contest what was being said about how we “shouldn’t exclude people” … when myself and others who appreciate these deeper “consim” mediums of wargaming are in fact the ones often being “excluded”  (or at the very least marginalized) by the community, even when the team has earnestly tried to “broaden the church.”

Thanks for the great question.

[crazyredcoatParticipant 13642xp 1]

I think the line (for want of a better word) there comes at the point that ‘miniatures’ are no longer needed or practical. I’d probably classify the games @oriskany is discussing as being ‘Grand Strategy’ and at such levels it’s not always practical to represent, say, an armoured division with a stand of minis and often such games reduce that aspect to a token. I have a friend who loves that style of game and has a whole bunch that relate to the War of 1812 (or Anglo-American War, as it’s sometimes referred). In that sense, these types of games lack one part of what we think of as the hobby as a whole; the physical minis.

Perhaps that is where this divide in popularity comes from. From a personal point of view, I find these styles of games to be less interesting because of that reason, but others find the opposite (one of those ‘this is why there’s no such thing as a perfect game’ points). I’d guess that the majority of the community here is firmly in the mini camp and even when it comes to board games here the more popular things you will see are board games that involve minis such as Warhammer Quest and games of that ilk. People like their tiny fighting men and that may be a bigger divide than people realise. From my own point of view if you were to say ‘the hobby’ to me I would have a very specific view and that view would always include a miniature of some kind and not wooden or cardboard tokens to represent units. That’s obviously personal to me and I’m sure Jim would see the hobby differently as I’m sure a lot of people here would. Perhaps that’s a gap we haven’t really considered. I’ll be honest, it only really occurred to me when I looked through Jim’s last post here.

[admiralandy 1642xp 1]

I think this is more to do with community preference than resistance in the main, and were maybe back to more simple questions. Ok so you want to get someone into hex based card board gaming, where’s the gateway game?

Firstly there are some tactical rather than grand strategy variants around, but they don’t have the avenues of engagement and advertising that ruleset & mini producers can tap into. Is that due to the companies producng those not able to help grow there own market more proactively?

Is it also due to the fact that kind of gaming is not as suited to casual fun play and requires more commitment to trawl through a badly laid out and maybe even flawed system rulebook? Essentially your asking a wargaming and likely Boardgame/cardgame player to learn a new mechanic and style of play cold.

Whilst ther have been 1 or 2 exceptions, if it wasn’t Alessio behind it, would Quelle Affaire have been showcased? A one of hit with no real follow up to grow an interest is not a broad church.

 

As regards what the OTT Team might consider, maybe I blinked and missed it but there are to my mind 2 or 3 options that could highlight these:

Showcasing some Block games, such as Hammer of the Scots?

Command & Colours is a successful series but are there any features on this?

Also when talking Hex based, one of the oldest Wargames, 40+ years and still going gets zero, nadda, zip, coverage is Star Fleet Battles and its inumerable spinoffs. There has been a move to a miniature side, but it has a gateway version, something they definately took steps to develop and I don’t think can be entirely unrelated to there longivity.

But the way I look at it is, trying to get someone trying something new is only possible if they get introduced to it. Its like someone always walks home the same way, always gets fish and chips for a Friday Tea and have never tried any other fast food ever (its a hypothetical bare with me). But if they went home a sligtly different way just once, they’d find a pizza takeaway. Whilst not the same its still nice munchy junk food, and they can like it just as much, but in a different way.

 

Also in the modern age, people tend to make there minds up very quickly and stick with what they know (swipe right), so if not done before @oriskany maybe a 5 part series focusing on the features of Hex based play gaming (and its not just historical).

 

 

[oriskany 60737xp 1]

Thanks for the replies @crazyredcoat and @admiralandy .

I would agree with Andy that “consim” games are on all “Four Levels of Wargaming” – tactical, command tactical, operational and strategic.  Examples:  Battletech started as a hex-driven game on the tactical scale.  Command Tactical is anything from Valor & Victory to GDW Assault (literally thousands of titles here).  Operational could include Napoleon’s War: Hundred Days, Overlord, Gribsby’s War in the East, or Waterloo … and Strategic could include Middle Kingdom to rise and Decline of the Third Reich, and hundreds of others.

Nor do consim games exclude miniatures.  GHQ Microarmor is a miniatures game, and tactical (Level Two).  Fistful of TOWs is probably another good example.  The aforementioned Napoleon’s War: Hundred Days is an operational game that comes with 3D pieces, that I see some players enjoy painting to enhance their set.  To be fair, such games do not exclude miniatures, minis are never the primary focus.

It’s just a different philosophy, or emphasis, where the game, the tactics, the strategies, the units, the history (or other lore) are the primary focus, not the miniature.  Players who enjoy this kind of game seek something else, a depth and immersion that the rule sets of miniature games just don’t (or can’t) support.

“People like their tiny fighting men …” Actually, not all of us.  This was a big reason I was so happy when Beasts of War became OnTableTop, it seemed to signal the broadening to all kinds of wargaming.  Again, the “team” tried, the “community” didn’t follow along quite as much.

“Is it also due to the fact that kind of gaming is not as suited to casual fun play and requires more commitment to trawl through a badly laid out and maybe even flawed system rulebook?”  I agree and disagree with this in equal measure.  Yes, I would completely agree that this kind of gaming does not suit “casual” play.  But I wouldn’t consider casual to equal fun.  To me, casual games not fun.  They are often aggravating and I find them a waste of my time.

Also, the rule books for these games are not badly laid out.  In fact, I find the reverse to be the case.  Companies that crush out quickly-produced rule books simply to get you to buy their miniatures, and which have way more annoying and obstructive fluff than … oh, actual rules … THOSE are the ones that are badly laid out.  If we need proof, just look at how many miniature rules sets are offered for free.  I don’t think most companies will spend much time refining a component product from which they will drive no revenue.

Again, not better or worse … just different.  Consim games are all about the GAME.  100% of the development, testing, marketing, packaging, and delivery is the GAME.  Minis would only be a distraction.  So their rules books are usually much better.  Of course there are some stinkers out there in any gaming medium.

The rule books are much longer though.  I’ll definitely cede that point.  😀

“Quelle Affair!” was definitely fun.  Although to be fair it’s pretty much a remake of Jim Dunnigan’s (yeah, that guy again) “Napoleon at Waterloo” from Avalon Hill in 1971.  Nothing new under the sun, and all that.

Star Fleet Battles was definitely awesome.  I played Star Trek Tactical Combat Simulator myself (not a video game, despite the confusing title), but I have many friends who were SFB fans as well.

Anyway guys, I definitely appreciate the replies and the ideas.  If a certain type of game is not popular on a certain website, there are other websites where the reverse is true.  It’s all fine.  I only brought this up earlier to cite examples in making a counterpoint on the whole “exclusion” thing.

[admiralandy 1642xp 2]

@oriskany Glad my ramblings made sense.

I had totally overlooked Battletech which is almost as old as Star Fleet Battles, and whilst a root of hex gaming has also reinvented its game play over the years and as I recall when you ran a feature on it a few years back it was one of the most successful forum posts ever on BoW.

Whilst I agree there is a quite differing gaming philosophy between boys and there toys and Hex n play. But I’m with Warren on this, if thats your hobby its not for someone else to marginalise your passion or you in doing so, and you have quite a broadchurch in how you promote gaming which is always great to see.

Also as with anyboardgame I agree that even if not part of the original components there’s normally scope for pimping a boardgame into 3d realm.

Rulebooks we could debate all day I’m sure, but I agree there are turkeys and gold in whichever side of the gaming church you look, and some of the most professionaly produced are some of the worst, and some of the flimsy and free can hide some of the most engaging.

As  a last point is those games don’t always have to live exclusively, it was certainly not unknown for Wargame Magazines in the 80s and 90s to run a feature on how a boardgame could be a platform for a wargame campaign. Adapting Kingmaker to cover the Wars of the Roses certainly got a hit or two in that regard as a for instance.

I’m sorry to hear there’s some giving you a rough time when just trying to enjoy your hobby, but I would certainly miss your input on this site, as I think would others. Anyway Take care in these trying times as I hope also can Panzerkaput who raised some issues from his perspective initially.

 

[blinky465 17024xp 2]

I must admit I only understood about one word in five in this post, but had to smile at “casual games are not fun, they are aggrivating and a waste of time.”

I was taught mancala by a visiting student from Guatamala a few years ago. He plays the “african variant” (I can’t pretend I fully understand what that means) but it includes a rule that says if you can take a turn that prevents your opponent from playing next (ie you can “win”) you must play differently. “Casual” games exist solely to waste time. It sounds like mission accomplished!

[jamescutts 6838xp 3]

Nice to see the more positive spin this discussion evolved into.

Speaking of things that are feel a bit excluded I’d say the whole realm of actual “digital” games, though that’s potentially a bit controversial and worthy of its own topic (which i might create). Its great to see Beasts Of War open up more too board games rather than just the traditional miniature based games but I’d love to see a bit of inclusion from the digital side too. The likes of TableTop simulator, remote D&D etc. over lockdown has shown we do not need to be shacked to a physical table, the Sitrep Podcast does some fantastic games that are almost always played digitally by people around the world.

There’s some fantastic “games” out there that cover a huge variety of rules sets and styles, for me there’s quite a lot of crossover between the two, particularly when your getting into tactical, strategic or historical mindsets. Some of the more popular are covered more in general/gaming media but some don’t really have any specific home and it would be nice to see some discussion on there from time to time.

Some great examples though by no means an exhaustive list: the likes of hex based Gary Grigsby’s War in the East/West, Panzer corps, Command, Wargame, almost anything by slitherine, a whole range of paradox games such Heats of Iron/Crusader Kings/Europa Universalis and even Stelaris right through to the likes of Total War. There’s even a fantastic BattleTech Game.

I think the wargaming community generally looks down on these for the most part, I’m not exactly sure why, maybe its the “games stole people from the hobby of toy soldiers”, or “its not proper wargaming” mentality? For me there’s a real opportunity for crossover. Gary Grigsby’s games are very daunting (personally) but fantastically detailed and I think you’d struggle to play a similar scale and depth of game physically.

The Total War Warhammer series has been a huge hit and there’s a real opportunity to exploit that crossover in my view, in fact I can think of a few more mainstream games outlets that have played those games and covered or crossed over into Warhammer miniatures but I can’t really think of any “miniature” based media covering it in reverse other than the odd article?

Right, I think I’ll go make this into its own topic now…

 

[Author]

Posts