Turn on or Turn off

[Gracchus Armisurplus]

WHFB failed almost directly as a result of it's push for larger units and larger armies.

New players were utterly daunted by the cost and workload of putting out a 2,000 point army (at a minimum) and old players already had all the models they needed. No one was buying anything, so they rebooted the game (and the world, and a big fuck you very much to Games Workshop for their efforts) into AoS.

Skirmish games appeal to people for a lot of reasons. They're typically over more quickly, with less set-up and tear-down time, and they often require less models in total than you'd find in a single unit for a mass battle game. This allows players too buy a force and get in on the table without taking out a second mortgage and spending six months painting. It also means players can easily pick up second or third factions.

Part of the problem with some massed battle game rules is that, like others have noted, you just push your models forwards and roll some dice. There's very little actual decision making about when to engage, or whether to try for a flank, or to feint and flee or try and ambush or anything. And frankly, it's boring.

Massed battle games do particularly well when they appeal to people who might already have large collections, allow people to pad out units with fillers or regimental basing techniques, and when they avoid the 'walk forwards and roll dice' problem by allowing and encouraging maneuver and choice. Kings of War is a great game because of this, but it really needs to be careful going forwards that it doesn't fall into the same trap that WHFB did.

IMO, the best 'system' is combined systems. Like a SAGA style game where you have a handful of models, which steps up to a Rampant style game where you have small units, which steps up to a Hail Caesar style game where you have massive units. In an ideal world each game would be supported equally and they would all be popular.

[eilif]

I'm get very inspired by big spectacles, but I really resonate with this:

What normally inspires me is fellow gamers...
...Trends in wargaming only effect me when they hit my local club. 

I drooled over pictures of big battles on the internet for a decade or so but in those 15 years I only put together two modest 40k armies. By comparison most of my hobbying and my biggest projects have all been in some way related to the gaming group I helped form just 6 years ago.

Maybe I'm just not that self-motivated, but the chance to get something on the table with my fellow gamers is probably my biggest motivator.

I still like big battles though!

[Vermis]

WHFB failed almost directly as a result of it's push for larger units and larger armies.

And - critically, IMO - larger prices. I think the daunting nature of big armies just gets insulting when some of the mass-produced plastic minis you need are reaching £3 a figure and beyond.

Part of the problem with some massed battle game rules is that, like others have noted, you just push your models forwards and roll some dice. There's very little actual decision making about when to engage, or whether to try for a flank, or to feint and flee or try and ambush or anything. And frankly, it's boring.

I think part of the problem of feints and ambushes is the 'godlike view' of wargaming tabletops. Difficult to lure a target unit in when your opponent can see the big unit full of rough fellows brandishing sticks-with-nails-in, lurking right there and waiting to pounce. Of course there are workarounds like blind markers, keeping hidden units in reserve etc., but I haven't seen too much of this in mass block games.

Massed battle games do particularly well when they appeal to people who might already have large collections, allow people to pad out units with fillers or regimental basing techniques, and when they avoid the 'walk forwards and roll dice' problem by allowing and encouraging maneuver and choice. Kings of War is a great game because of this, but it really needs to be careful going forwards that it doesn't fall into the same trap that WHFB did.

I think KoW has it's own problems in that regard, but maybe that's another topic.

[Keith]

I've been lucky enough to play both, and my preference nowadays probably sits somewhere in the middle - grand skirmish if you like. Preparing weeks in advance for huge games that eventually deliver very little ranks amongst my gaming lows, but when the effort pays off it can be a wonderful experience. I know, however, that this isn't something I'll aim for any time soon.

I like pretty toys and a good story more than anything, so for my own hobby I'm guaranteed to phase out with anything where there is so much on the table the quality of individual figures is lost.

[Redmao]

Big battles can be spectacular and impressive, so I doubt that they're discouraging, but as someone who grew up in the late 70's and 80's, I was inspired by the small teams and lonely heroes against impossible odds, so skirmish games are more for me than huge deployments.

[Gracchus Armisurplus]

I think KoW has it's own problems in that regard, but maybe that's another topic.

Maybe, but you've piqued my curiosity. What problems do you mean?