The LAF Games Workshop Discussion Thread

[Streetline]

I've always thought the hit/damage/save split existed so that the opponent had something to do (rolling saves) in the turn - otherwise you spend 20 minutes watching and then take 2 figures off.

JDE

[OSHIROmodels]

I don't mind hordes of figures on the board, I just don't like hordes of figures on a six by four...

cheers

James

[Major_Gilbear]

I've always thought the hit/damage/save split existed so that the opponent had something to do (rolling saves) in the turn - otherwise you spend 20 minutes watching and then take 2 figures off.

Well, that's part of the game design too.

Do you have a back-and-forth between players' units (alternating activation), or let each player have their full turn (the I-go-you-go system)? Likewise, what level of interference or tactical planning can be achieved by each system?

Warmachine-style games need the I-go-you-go system in order to orchestrate their models properly for all the spells, buffs and such to work. Malifaux or Infinity style games are fine with alternating activation systems because there are very few models per side.

Some games permit the opponent to take actions in response to your actions (as in reactions, not just armour saves), which is definitely more interesting, but can slow games down a lot (not only the extra time resolving these interrupt actions, but also the analysis paralysis it can induce in the active player).

[eilif]

Scurv,
    I actually think that Warengine works really well for the size of game it is representing, but I do have a pronounced preference for streamlined systems.  The combat system is fairly simple, but the special rules give just enough flavor to the various units for me.

Its all about the scale. RT & then 40K was a skirmish game... But it just isnt any more.
Wether driven by sales targets or bigger shinny shinny syndrome, somewhere between the 4th and 6th incarnation, its lost its way and its roots.
Perhaps a split is needed. A small scale set of skirmish rules ( inquismunda? ), and the huge 'throw everything on the table' set that it now seems to have become.

Would be great, but probably isn't going to happen. The whole GW model now is to get folks buying ALOT of figures.  If it's any indication, note that the "Apocalypse" rules encourage folks to use those same rules -that are as detailed as skirmish rules- for games including hundreds of minis and formations of vehicles without any streamlining of the rules   

Interestingly there was some talk of Mantic doing this. The first version of Warpath was basically Kings of War in space. Extremely streamlined and fast playing and worked best with alot of figures.  We used it several times with our 40k armies which are well represented by the various army lists.  The 2.0 is a more detailed game. Nothing so complicated as 40k, but still a ruleset that would bog down a bit with huge games.  2.0 hasn't been released in paper yet, but there was some talk about having both rulesets in the same book.  It's a good idea, and one I'd like to see.

For my part, I still like the 1.0 rules and have them all saved on my computer.  We break them out once in a while when we want to cram as many 40k minis as possible on the table. In fact, I'd like to use 1.0 rules to play an apocalypse-sized game someday.

[Major_Gilbear]

Interestingly there was some talk of Mantic doing this.

I think Ronnie Renton acknowledged in a video that the intention would be to have two scales of game. Basically 40k2E size and 40k7E size. I'd be very happy with that, but would desperately like to see a detailed core ruleset that's simple, fast, and flexible before I committed to a game like Warpath (and I would also like to see it get a new name...).

For my part, I still like the 1.0 rules and have them all saved on my computer.  We break them out once in a while when we want to cram as many 40k minis as possible on the table. In fact, I'd like to use 1.0 rules to play an apocalypse-sized game someday.

Silly question, but have you thought about using the Epic rulesets for 40k-scale Apocalypse games? The nearest divisible unit 40k infantry model would represent one infantry stand in rules terms (so 5 Marines = one stand, and 3 Tyranid Warriors = 1 stand), and everything else scales one model = one model.

[eilif]

Silly question, but have you thought about using the Epic rulesets for 40k-scale Apocalypse games? The nearest divisible unit 40k infantry model would represent one infantry stand in rules terms (so 5 Marines = one stand, and 3 Tyranid Warriors = 1 stand), and everything else scales one model = one model.

I actually have, but never tried it out.  I've never played Apocalpyse size games (I think 3000 points was my max), so I haven't had a chance yet. One concern is that I'm not sure we have quite enough vehicles to make Epic work for our games.  I get the feeling it works best with LOTS of tanks.  Still, it's something to consider. Most every time I see a giant apocalypse game report that says something like "The game took 10 hours" or "We were unable to finish the game and stopped on turn 3," I think to myself "Why didn't they just use Epic?"

I think the problem is partly that 40k players are so immersed in the way that the rules and codex entries (for better or worse) represent the various 40k units and characters with almost RPG-like detail and precision.  I'm not sure if they would be open to a system that streamlines and abstracts in order to be more appropriate for battalion-level games even if it results in a game that plays with much  more fluidity.  So they persist in using mechanics that are best suited for platoon level or lower.

Epic is definitely something I want to read more of at some point, but for our club, the appeal of Warparth 1.0 is strengthened by the fact that most of us who have 40k armies that we'd use with it also are fans of Kings of War, so it's a system we're very used to and one that could easily cover the size of games that we' would likely play.

[Major_Gilbear]

One concern is that I'm not sure we have quite enough vehicles to make Epic work for our games.

If you have few vehicles and lots of troops, then one troop = one infantry stand, so that you have enough "units" to move to have some reasonable semblance of manoeuvre tactics. Otherwise, I'd expect it works fine.

I think the problem is partly that 40k players are so immersed in the way that the rules and codex entries (for better or worse) represent the various 40k units and characters with almost RPG-like detail and precision.  I'm not sure if they would be open to a system that streamlines and abstracts in order to be more appropriate for battalion-level games even if it results in a game that plays with much  more fluidity.  So they persist in using mechanics that are best suited for platoon level or lower.

Spot on.

Epic 40k and 40K3E were loudly decried and hated on for being more streamlined. Which is a pity, as they were both excellent versions of their respective game (at least, in terms of having a decent set of game mechanics that enabled you to finish a game before you went senile with age).

[Argonor]

@ Argonor & Scurv:

I think you might like the Warmachine / Hordes mechanics more if you haven't already tried them.

I just had to go look at my rules shelf, and I actually have 'Warmachine Prime', and was given a set of Cygnar Jacks and a Warcaster back 8½ years ago for my 40th birthday.

What put me off about it was not its mechanics, but the fact that the game revolves around some very powerful models. I prefer games with 'normal' troops, rather than a clash of titans.

It may have changed a bit with later editions, though.

[eilif]

@ Argonor & Scurv:

I think you might like the Warmachine / Hordes mechanics more if you haven't already tried them.

I've heard that there are similarities between WM mechanics and Gruntz. Can any one confirm this and explain?

[Major_Gilbear]

I also think you need to separate the ideas person from the person who turns ideas into rules and they would be two very different personality types. The sort of person who can dream up an amazing and compelling background is rarely the same sort of person who is good at all the hard logic and math that goes into a good set of rules mechanics.

Finally you need the art person. You really really really need the art person. I can't impress enough how some sexy pics of battle stuff in your cover will sell a game.

and you need a layout/clarity person so the rules which the math head will make which will usually be quite stiff (good mechanics but poorly written) flow well.

Some people will be able to wear another hat or 2 but not them all.

You've pretty much just described Privateer Press and their two flagship games - Warmachine and Hordes (which are excellent games). Yet, it has been unable to even remotely give GW a run for it's money. Why?

At the other end of the scale, you should check out the rules for Bob Naismith's old game - Cobalt 2, a completely unplayable mess.

I just had to go look at my rules shelf, and I actually have 'Warmachine Prime', and was given a set of Cygnar Jacks and a Warcaster back 8½ years ago for my 40th birthday.

What put me off about it was not its mechanics, but the fact that the game revolves around some very powerful models. I prefer games with 'normal' troops, rather than a clash of titans.

It may have changed a bit with later editions, though.

Sounds like you have the WM Mk1 - the new edition is Mk2. However, as a basic level (especially with only Warcasters and Warjacks), the rules are pretty much the same.

The game is actually really good fun, and the only really "monstrously powerful" model is your Warcaster - a hybrid of general and mage who has the rare gift of being able to magically direct the minds of Warjacks. It's rare for even big games to have more than two or three Warjacks as they don't really shine unless you assign Focus to them.

Focus is a limited resource (effectively Mana points) which each Warcaster assigns each turn (any leftover from the previous turn is lost). However, Focus is also used to cast spells, buy additional attacks with your Warcaster, make the attacks and spells of the Warcaster do more damage, and if left unspent and unassigned, can improve the toughness of your Warcaster. Thus Focus is a super-limited and super-valuable resource that you have to manage, and if you lose your Warcaster, you lose the game.

Much of the game revolves around trying to improve your own odds of success with magic and buffs, reducing your opponents odds by the same means, and keeping an eye out for any opportunity to assassinate the enemy Warcaster whilst keeping yours safe.

However, at a basic starterbox level, it's more like steampunk Titans controlled by warrior-wizards bashing the snot out of each other.

If you have the book and two starters, I'd definitely give the game at least a few concerted tries. 

I've heard that there are similarities between WM mechanics and Gruntz. Can any one confirm this and explain?

I have no idea, but would suddenly be more interested in Gruntz if true! 

[eilif]

Scurv,
   That sounds about right, but I wouldn't write off Warpath just yet.  Much like the Kings of War was for several years, it doesn't yet have a print rulebook.  The next KS is rumored to be a Warpath KS which will greatly expand the range and provide a print rulebook.   KoW also has/had some real stinker models, but seems to do pretty well now that it's in print. 

I'm really looking forward to the KS, though probably mostly as a way to get the book. I've already got a few sci-fi factions, most of which have a large stock of unpainted reinforcements waiting for me, so I don't think I'll be investing in a new army.

[Diakon]

Fallout 3 say no more. look at all the proxies.

Fallout miniatures game would sell like hotcakes.

[eilif]

another somewhat random thought is, getting back to the don't reinvent the wheel concept. I think if you can get your game tied to a film or other popular franchise like comics or computer games then it most certainly helps.

If there was an official line of GoT figs and rules it would be doing rather well I think.

I think that's the best IP to get for a full on wargame.  If it was more family friendly, I think GW would have tried to get it.  It has the best potential for a company to sell both lots of expensive characters and lots and lots of line troops.  Georgie boy has certainly provided enough factions to support many years of game growth.

As it happens there was plans for a GoT Wargame.  A friend of mine has actually seen some of the prototype models.  I believe this was before the show came out, so I'm not sure if that had anything to do with the cancelation of the project.

[Major_Gilbear]

another somewhat random thought is, getting back to the don't reinvent the wheel concept. I think if you can get your game tied to a film or other popular franchise like comics or computer games then it most certainly helps.

Hmm, depends on the franchise. Star Wars? Yes. Mass Effect? Sure. Starship Troopers? Erm, we know how that went...

If there was an official line of GoT figs and rules it would be doing rather well I think.

There is an official line of figures put out by Dark Sword Miniatures. Aside from that, games would basically be medieval?

Fallout 3 say no more. look at all the proxies.

Lots of proxies, sure, but not much scope for a wargame... A skirmish at best, and even them you have the likes of Eden, Neuroshima Tactics, Dark Age Apocalypse, etc to fill that niche.

If there was a space hulk like game of gears of war fighting in the grub tunnels it would of done well a few years ago.

Fantasy Flight did a Space Hulk -ish game based on Gears of War. Linky.

The other option is something in the vein of. An Iron Sky like game of space nazis fighting near future troops would be close enough to the film and firmly fit in the space nazi trope. Doesn't have to fit in with anything specifically out of the movie as long as the trope is recognisable.

Don't all the Weird War games currently out address this?


I actually think that the problem isn't getting good material/premise, it's making an attractive and fun game for a reasonable price. Somehow, very few wargames have achieved all three in a way that's quite accessible to most people (i.e., open box -> read rules -> play)

[Vermis]

What Scurv said about Mantic. +1

As mentioned, Mantic is going gangbusters with small skirmishes and dungeon crawls etc., but I wonder if, besides filling a different niche that GW abandoned, they just couldn't compete in the mass battle stakes. And IMO because they did put out a range of fantasy minis that range from weird (stick insect elves, hammerheaded dwarfs*, chopstick-legged trolls) to downright execrable (drakons, battle sisters, chopstick-legged trolls...). I struggle to grasp just why they greenlighted half of this stuff, but I guess it's for reasons Scurv already stated: For the former they're just too concerned about making the minis look like special little snowflakes rather than not-GW (forgetting that most of GW's look didn't spring fully formed from Zeus' head), and for everything, they seem to be a throwback to old sculptors, old plastic tech and even an old attitude of minis as just-tolerable game counters.

Now it's all stalled in favour of Deadzone and Dwarf King Holds and things. I hope they'll bring some of those improved aesthetics back to KoW if they ever pay attention to it again, but somehow I'm not hopeful.

*Back on topic, I went into a GW shop and paid full retail for a box of LotR dwarf warriors. I still feel a wee bit ripped-off, but I think they're far superior to KoW plate-armoured Ram-Men and GW's own WHFB kneeless Hagars, let alone most other dwarf minis I've seen. On the flipside, I very much like the quality and dark age theme of Hasslefree's Norman dwarfs, but building more than a token skirmish band out of them? No sir. Disregarding material for a while, I think the LotR dwarves are the best compromise between aesthetics, and price and army building. I've gotta say I think the same of a lot of their plastics (not all) though I much prefer to go snooping on ebay for 'em first.

Also, the Belfast shop isn't so bad for this normally, but whoo-ee the gamer funk had riz today...