wishing
Junior Strategist
Posts: 353
|
Post by wishing on Apr 6, 2017 12:03:38 GMT
The one point I didn't raise is that it can be boring to always be exposed to the same game-plan/play-style/faction over and over. Ultimately though, there is no right way to enjoy this hobby. If you enjoy playing one or two people, go for it. If you're competitive, then you're not wrong either. Certainly. I was just responding to a comment that said "Wargaming is very much a hobby where you need a community revolving around it". I think that is probably true for some people - I see lots of posts by people that don't want to play a game unless there are other people in their local area that also play it. Not the case for me though. I live in a capital city with loads of other local people that play a variety of games, but I have no interest in any of those scenes. I have a small handful of friends that I play a range of games with, and I am very content with that, and I have no interest in the greater community. My friends are up for trying any game I suggest. As for it being boring to play with just the same people, that's going to depend on the people I figure. My friends are amazing and we always have a great time when we play. And we always have a range of forces and models available, so we can switch up the pieces we play with all the time, and scenarios, and terrain, etc. Even though I play with the same few people all the time, no game need ever be or feel the same.
|
|
|
Post by Gorbad Ironclaw on Apr 10, 2017 14:06:19 GMT
Blood Bowl? Possibly the best GW game and the new 'version' haven't really done much more than update the component. The rules are effectively the same they have been for years (that's a good thing, it really didn't need a big change) and while I'm not a huge fan of the plastic throwing template the bigger squares on the board means you can actually fit big guy players onto it reasonably well. And it's one of those games that always seem to have a big reserve of players. We have been doing a loose league at my club and there is up to a dozen players involved. Fairly impressive when we see maybe 20 players an evening and generally play everything.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Apr 10, 2017 14:36:15 GMT
SO...anyone have any good examples of current GW side games with tight rulesets? I am interested if this attempt will succeed, at least the approach seems different to regular GW "forget strategy, roll some dice and see what happens" style : www.warhammer-community.com/2017/03/23/shadespire-unveiled/
|
|
Xarlaxas
Junior Strategist
Hoards models more than he plays.
Posts: 192
|
Post by Xarlaxas on Apr 11, 2017 22:35:58 GMT
Sooooo, bringing things a bit more back towards GW:
We're getting a new rulebook for Shadow War: yay!
But the tokens, dice, and templates will not be available, neither the cool (massive savings) box-set: boo.
Apparently, the tokens will be at the back of the book for photo-copying and printing out, but that's not quite the same. :/
A nice plus though, is the addition of Inquisitor Warbands and Sisters of Battle, which, along with the PDFs that were released, will be added to this new rulebook, giving every faction something that can play in the game.
Guess I'll have to hunt up some of the tokens on the 2nd hand market or something. . . .
|
|
Xarlaxas
Junior Strategist
Hoards models more than he plays.
Posts: 192
|
Post by Xarlaxas on Apr 12, 2017 16:57:04 GMT
They have a set of "universal templates" which I believe will work with Shadow War, and I *think* their dice cubes still have a scatter and an artillery die, and they say that you can photocopy the back page of the new rulebook to get the tokens, but I'd prefer the proper cardboard ones, or, even a PDF of the tokens so I could get them printed out professionally or something. . . .
GW continues being mysterious.
|
|
|
Post by cainuslupus on Apr 13, 2017 0:00:05 GMT
Sooooo, bringing things a bit more back towards GW: We're getting a new rulebook for Shadow War: yay! But the tokens, dice, and templates will not be available, neither the cool (massive savings) box-set: boo. Apparently, the tokens will be at the back of the book for photo-copying and printing out, but that's not quite the same. :/ A nice plus though, is the addition of Inquisitor Warbands and Sisters of Battle, which, along with the PDFs that were released, will be added to this new rulebook, giving every faction something that can play in the game. Guess I'll have to hunt up some of the tokens on the 2nd hand market or something. . . . Is this "Brag about your copy of 'SW:A'" thread? Because mine is waiting for me at the store Yes, the value is insane. One thing I miss is old "GW" quirkiness.
|
|
Xarlaxas
Junior Strategist
Hoards models more than he plays.
Posts: 192
|
Post by Xarlaxas on Apr 13, 2017 0:22:39 GMT
Is this "Brag about your copy of 'SW:A'" thread? Because mine is waiting for me at the store Yes, the value is insane. One thing I miss is old "GW" quirkiness. If I had a copy I would! I just want the actual tokens and templates, or a PDF so I can get them cut out in wood/plastic/cardboard instead of having to break the spine of a 200 page hard-cover book to photo-copy them, as GW has (so far) suggested. Also, I'll need loads more terrain to run it it seems. . . .
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Apr 13, 2017 14:10:17 GMT
Blood Bowl? Possibly the best GW game and the new 'version' haven't really done much more than update the component. The rules are effectively the same they have been for years (that's a good thing, it really didn't need a big change) and while I'm not a huge fan of the plastic throwing template the bigger squares on the board means you can actually fit big guy players onto it reasonably well. And it's one of those games that always seem to have a big reserve of players. We have been doing a loose league at my club and there is up to a dozen players involved. Fairly impressive when we see maybe 20 players an evening and generally play everything. I like the game of Blood Bowl itself, but it's got the same flaw that all GW side-games have; the campaign mode is far too luck-based, and has a bad case of "rich get richer, poor get poorer".
|
|
|
Post by pangurban on Apr 19, 2017 14:00:48 GMT
I miss the days when this discussion was on topic.
Not to be a jerk, but threads like this is part of the reason why PP got rid of a chunks of their forums.
Why would PP want to pay for hosting forums where there are discussions drift off into arguments about competition? Yes, yes, I know that this started off as a discussion about GW and that we can talk about whatever we want here on this forums. But it has drifted into discussion about other RPG games, gotten into disagreements, and even brought in mention of video games.
Why would PP want to pay for hosting these arguments about competition when new players are constantly filtering in to take a first look?
Not exactly a lot of threads about GW on the official forums pre-reorganisation either, as I recall. Moderation took care of the excesses too. And part of the reason to host forums can be to let people show they're passionate about the game, that there is a large and vibrant community, that the game is doing well. Quantity really can be its own quality in that sense. More to the point, I don't think it was going off-topic that made PP decide to nix General and the faction forums. It was the negativity that made up their minds on that. New Players Discussion, the closest thing to the old General Discussion forum, currently generates like a handful of posts per day on average. A good percentage of which could/should even go in other sections of the boards, but there's no point in being sticklers about that. If I was a new player checking in, I doubt I'd stick around for more than a week on the forums now. I don't see the point. Even catching up on game-related news is done elsewhere (a very fragmented and inconvenient elsewhere too).
|
|
spideredd
Junior Strategist
Summer Gamer
Posts: 588
|
Post by spideredd on Apr 19, 2017 16:58:34 GMT
How about we compare the fall of TSR to how GW generally treat their customers? Would that satisfy you Cyel?
Coincidentally, the fall of TSR was complicated and can be attributed to several, avoidable problems. Some of which I can see GW making, most notably the lack of market research.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Apr 19, 2017 17:25:40 GMT
How about we compare the fall of TSR to how GW generally treat their customers? Would that satisfy you Cyel? Coincidentally, the fall of TSR was complicated and can be attributed to several, avoidable problems. Some of which I can see GW making, most notably the lack of market research. Well, 20-15 years ago I've been a firm believer in all those online prognoses about GW imminent fall. And yet, here they are, as strong as ever. After all those years I am - with a lot of proof over the years - believing that they damn well know what they are doing, profit-wise. And that all those prognoses from disillusioned former die-hard fans are nothing but wishful thinking, ignored by GW for the greater good of the company doing well and making profit. I don't play their games, I dislike their style of writing rules for games. I thought killing WFB for AoS was an enormous mistake. And still they keep proving me and my experienced-vet-point-of-view wrong. I appreciate that they can hit their target audience like a power maul and milk it dry, despite all the net echoing "But this doesn't make sense! This business model is doomed to fail very soon!"
|
|
Xarlaxas
Junior Strategist
Hoards models more than he plays.
Posts: 192
|
Post by Xarlaxas on Apr 19, 2017 18:15:36 GMT
They seem to have found a way of getting enough fresh blood to make up for any lost veterans definitely.
It certainly helps that they actually have their own stores all over the UK, usually in very prominent places, so they advertise themselves very well.
I think their "gateway drug" system of board games they've been releasing recently has been a really good way to get people into the hobby, and, also, their simplified 40K box-sets that you can get at *GAME* in the UK, so that gets the video game-playing crowd onto the miniatures too.
|
|
Xintas
Junior Strategist
Posts: 824
|
Post by Xintas on Apr 19, 2017 18:59:03 GMT
I have to agree, anecdotally, that the more self-contained games are great at making me think, "well maybe...". The price point has always been a bit of an issue and there didn't seem to be much to do with the models outside of the main game. Lower price point + side games + the return of online sales....#dontcallitacomeback?
|
|
Xarlaxas
Junior Strategist
Hoards models more than he plays.
Posts: 192
|
Post by Xarlaxas on Apr 19, 2017 19:18:03 GMT
Yeah, exactly, the prices are especially good in the UK: the Scouts vs Genestealers set is 35 quid (about $45 right now) so that's a steal for the minis on their own, not including the tiles and such.
|
|
Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Apr 20, 2017 0:04:07 GMT
Well, they did fall. Their stocks dropped, their popularity dropped, stores started closing up all over (it went from something like 5 stores locally to 1 store), and dozens of other wargames sprung up in their wake and started claiming all their former players.
It was probably folly to assume that they would just continue to perpetually free-fall and not realize it was happening, however. They did, and they changed some of the stuff that was a problem, and now they're stabilizing because of it. To actually completely fall, they would have had to screw up royally, and then proceed to do nothing about it for however long it would have taken for them to go bankrupt or get bought out or whatever. I guess not even GW can pull that level of negligence.
|
|