*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 09:13:09 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Recent

Author Topic: The saddest table  (Read 13151 times)

Offline Cubs

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4914
  • "I simply cannot survive without beauty ..."
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #60 on: May 22, 2018, 09:10:02 PM »
Many a true word spoken in jest.
'Sir John ejaculated explosively, sitting up in his chair.' ... 'The Black Gang'.

Paul Cubbin Miniature Painter

Offline Gibby

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2352
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #61 on: May 22, 2018, 09:44:13 PM »
Are you now a platitude bot, Cubs?  lol

Offline Norm

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • Mastermind
  • *
  • Posts: 1177
    • Blog for wargaming in small places
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #62 on: May 22, 2018, 10:37:30 PM »
Thank you Rich H.






« Last Edit: May 22, 2018, 10:43:29 PM by Normsmith »

Offline FramFramson

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 10681
  • But maybe everything that dies, someday comes back
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #63 on: May 23, 2018, 12:36:29 AM »
Are we having a go at hexed tables now? perhaps we need some kind of guide so we know which is 'the right way' to wargame.

I thought he was just having a go at any sort of table with a plain grid.

EDIT: Ah, I see this has already been covered. Pesky new pages.


I joined my gun with pirate swords, and sailed the seas of cyberspace.

Offline Red Orc

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2601
  • Baffled but happy
    • My new VSF blog:
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #64 on: May 23, 2018, 07:53:13 AM »
It's not so much about the wrong way to wargame: I've played games where we've made terrain from books and bare polystyrene and toilet-roll tubes and anything else to hand. But that was at home and we weren't charging people to play on it. What consenting gamers get up to in the privacy of their homes is no-one else's business - but at a public event with an admission fee, those tables are pretty shocking.

To me that's the big difference. At an event where you're charging people to turn up and play I'd expect at minimum that the scenery would be painted and held together properly. It's impossible to be absolutely certain but it looks like some of those foam ziggurats are just balanced rather than firmly stuck down.

I don't care about the fact that they're all the same layout and that layout is mirrored - wargames are somewhat abstract and arbitrary anyway, I don't have a problem with the organisers saying 'what we need is some stepped terrain and some LOS-blockers and some terrain to impede troops and some to impede tanks' - or whatever the criteria are that they're going for, that's fair enough I think. So what if that means one player can't exploit advantages another player might not have? Different armies work differently anyway, some are shooty, some are hitty, some are fast and some are durable, some are troop-heavy, some are vehicle-heavy or have a few 'big hitter' models - so players should be exploiting those terrain elements differently anyway.

Offline Cubs

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4914
  • "I simply cannot survive without beauty ..."
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #65 on: May 23, 2018, 09:23:44 AM »
Are you now a platitude bot, Cubs?  lol

If the cap fits, wear it.

Offline Malebolgia

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 3762
  • Lost in Cyberspace
    • Paintoholic
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #66 on: May 23, 2018, 09:50:05 AM »
Sad? Probably not from the gamers' perspective. They are looking for practical, fair and non-random tournament tables and they come to an event with a certain mindset. It's about the optimal game experience in the hardcore sense. Having played Warmachine competitively for years I know that these types of tables are great for competitive play where it's all about playing the best game. It's playing wargames as a "sport" and not just as a hobby to sit around the table, chat and have some general fun. If you're deep into the game you don't care about the aesthetics of scenery. You want it to be practical and you want to be 100% sure how it works. So different mindset, different way of enjoying a game. Is it wrong? No, it's just different. To each his own. As long as everybody has a good time, enjoys their free time the way they want to, then hooray!
So sad? No. Not sad.
“What use was time to those who'd soon achieve Digital Immortality?”

Offline Captain Blood

  • Global Moderator
  • Elder God
  • Posts: 19311
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #67 on: May 23, 2018, 11:36:20 AM »
There are two extremes to the wargaming hobby. Those for whom the aesthetics and narrative of a fun and beautiful looking game are primary; and those for whom the rules / a competitive game are the be all and end all. Almost two different hobbies to be honest. That's why we're always going to get these kinds of discussions.
There are of course, also a lot of people somewhere along the continuum in between these two poles.
I do think it's worth pointing out that the history of LAF is rooted very firmly in the aesthetic 'adventure' end of the spectrum (hence the name), not at the competitive - sometimes including unpainted figures on vestigial scenery - end.

Perhaps newer members who aren't so fussed about the look of things, could overlook the occasional outburst from more longstanding members like me, who fondly remember when LAF was largely about great looking figures, models and terrain in games which were fun and cinematic in feel.

Of course, nothing ever stays the same :)
But it's really not about telling people how to enjoy their hobby or dictating a right way or a wrong way. It's just not what some of us are used to, or what this forum was about in its first few years. But yes, LAF is now a broader church. So be it.
I'm sure it's a discussion that will come round again and again...

I'll spare you a complete re-run of my treatise on why it's nonsensical to claim 'it doesn't matter what it looks like' when it comes to an inherently visual form like miniatures wargaming. If it didn't matter, we wouldn't bother playing with toy soldiers at all, we'd just use chits and maps. But that's a whole other thread. Or ten...  :D

Offline Red Orc

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2601
  • Baffled but happy
    • My new VSF blog:
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #68 on: May 23, 2018, 11:42:10 AM »
... or perhaps, we'd sit on opposite sides of a table shouting numbers at each other until one player holds up his/her hands saying 'you win, you have better numbers than me'.


Offline Etranger

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 917
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #69 on: May 23, 2018, 11:51:36 AM »
... or perhaps, we'd sit on opposite sides of a table shouting numbers at each other until one player holds up his/her hands saying 'you win, you have better numbers than me'.

That's Numberwang...  ;)
"It's only a flesh wound...."

Offline Plynkes

  • The Royal Bastard
  • Elder God
  • Posts: 10212
  • I killed Mufasa!
    • http://misterplynkes.blogspot.com/
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #70 on: May 23, 2018, 12:56:46 PM »

Perhaps newer members who aren't so fussed about the look of things, could overlook the occasional outburst from more longstanding members like me, who fondly remember when LAF was largely about great looking figures, models and terrain in games which were fun and cinematic in feel.


But you seem to forget another key part of the LAF ethos in the early days, that all are welcome, no matter how rubbish they are at this kind of thing. If I had been told my tables were "sad" and my painting was shit (which it was) by Alex when I first came here, I probably wouldn't have stuck around to try and get better.

Never mind that some people don't have the time, inclination or storage capacity to make gorgeous new boards for every game - some people don't even like those kind of tables. Myself I find the unsightly gaps one finds where the boards join to be just as much an aesthetic turn-off as some people do a cloth mat "golf course" battlefield. Not to mention that on many such boards half of your time is spent trying to reposition figures so they won't keep falling over on the lovingly-detailed (but hard to stand up straight on) groundwork. So it isn't always just a battle between "Excellence at all costs!" and "I just can't be bothered." Strangely enough, not everyone shares the same aesthetic preferences as the custom board-building set.

The Michelangelo sculptures vs. chits and counters thing again? It's a false dichotomy. There are a world of options in between. Shame on you, Richard! lol I could just as easily say if appearance is so important why spoil it by making it into a game? Surely it would look better as a diorama? You wouldn't have all those pesky individual bases breaking the illusion by making it look unrealistic for one thing.

It seems we have to drag this old chestnut out every few years to pick it to death, but never mind.  Captain Blood says his lines and I say mine, neither changes the other's mind and so we go on. As long as it remains a healthy discussion between friends and doesn't descend into petty name-calling then it's all good, I suppose. Shall we do it again in another two years? Is May 2020 good for you, Richard? :)



With Cat-Like Tread
Upon our prey we steal...

Offline pixelgeek

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2026
    • Zac's Gaming Blog
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #71 on: May 23, 2018, 01:28:59 PM »
I would suspect that the key issue wasn't funding for terrain but time to prepare it. That seems like a lot of tables to create terrain for and a pretty spectacular screw-up even if you are just going to do basic terrain for each table. Why plan on 50+ tables if you can't build

I would never try to do terrain for an event like this because no matter what you do there is always some group that complains about how this building or that hill screwed up a table and lost them a game. Can't really satisfy that crowd.

Also, whoever brought the multi-car pileup of a basilisk platoon to a game really needs to be smacked


Offline Cubs

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4914
  • "I simply cannot survive without beauty ..."
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #72 on: May 23, 2018, 01:39:32 PM »

Offline JamesValentine

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 523
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #73 on: May 23, 2018, 01:47:56 PM »
... or perhaps, we'd sit on opposite sides of a table shouting numbers at each other until one player holds up his/her hands saying 'you win, you have better numbers than me'.
...I thought that was 40k...but replace shouting with rolling.
Highest numbers and most dice win.

Offline Captain Blood

  • Global Moderator
  • Elder God
  • Posts: 19311
Re: The saddest table
« Reply #74 on: May 23, 2018, 01:55:53 PM »
Captain Blood says his lines and I say mine, neither changes the other's mind and so we go on. As long as it remains a healthy discussion between friends and doesn't descend into petty name-calling then it's all good, I suppose. Shall we do it again in another two years? Is May 2020 good for you, Richard? :)

Oh sooner, surely...  :D
(I didn't start it this time).

But you seem to forget another key part of the LAF ethos in the early days, that all are welcome, no matter how rubbish they are at this kind of thing.

True, that was what Alex always said - but that wasn't actually reflected in the majority of what was shared on the forum. Unless my glasses have become excessively rose-tinted (I'm sure you think they have!) I think most projects / games / figures shown on the forum back then had a degree of care and attention spent on making, painting and presenting them, which is not the case with some of what we see on here these days. Just my impression.

The Michelangelo sculptures vs. chits and counters thing again? It's a false dichotomy. There are a world of options in between.

I did say that Dylan :)
Completely accept there are many shades of grey along the road between the 'dioramic' wargame and the 'unpainted figures with no attempt at scenery' wargame.

But the chits and counters thing is a simple point. Some wargamers say 'it doesn't matter what it looks like'. I don't think most of the people who say this truly believe that. I think they prefer to maintain that fiction rather than admit they don't have the time, money, aptitude etc to make their games look better. Although I do think there are a few at the really competitive 'it's all about the rules' end who genuinely don't care what it looks like. But them not caring is not the same as claiming 'it doesn't matter'.
Like any visual medium or art form in which people are creating things to represent or look like other things, plainly it DOES matter what it looks like, or we wouldn't bother attempting to visually represent those things at all.
That's my theory and I'm sticking to it.
We shall no doubt remain mutually unconvinced! ;)