|
Post by hocestbellum on Feb 12, 2019 22:38:23 GMT
I've been at team tourney this weekend and met new player who just played against double Judis three times in a F-ing row. I'm sure he'll stay in the game after having such meaningful tactical experience! I've also met newbie who was brutalized by both Iona and Anamag. Pagani, if you're reading this: you had one job and messed it completelly. If someone who knows Pagani is reading this, please deliver him this message. - And Judicator. Oh, boy, Judicator. Of all Gargossals they could go braindead it had to be the ugliest one by a large margin. You know how people get hooked by looking at beatiful minis at scenery of the table - except this game with flat terrain and double derp Duplo models that look like made from paper-mache. During this tournament I saw the Trident and the Railless Interceptor for the first time...and what a disappointing sight it was! Really tiny for a model which is supposed to be formidable and huge. In addition - featureless, boring design. Other BE's can look so epic and impressive - Animantarax, Supreme Guardian or the Legion Throne are pretty cool, if costly. But would be incredibly disappointed if I got a sad, cheap toy like the Trident or Interceptor after paying through the nose for it. Could be worse; it could be the Blockhouse
|
|
|
Post by challenger on Feb 13, 2019 3:19:24 GMT
On an unrelated note: i think one myth needs to be dispelled which is the myth that Warmachine is only competing with Warmachine sized games. It's a fairly common defense of the price gap that i've seen, which is extremely convenient way to handwave the flood of smaller skirmish games on the market. At the end of the day, if it's hitting the same "decision making, tactical buzz" while also being a mini game that lets you have cool models you enjoy working on and talking about and rolling some dice with friends it's competing with Warmachine. People only have so much time and money for a hobby, if everyone had unlimited time and unlimited money then we wouldn't have to choose. Consider someone has $100 a week they want to spend on their miniatures hobby divided out into their paint, models and accessories, and they have one to two nights a week they can play for a few hours. What is more likely to win out if the same itch is being scratched anyway, the more expensive one or the less expensive ones that come with better quality models? (<-- Let's not joke, PP's models are pretty bad quality on the scale of minis) That's just talking price-wise, there's some much more specific personal arguments on *why* you'd prefer WMHs lore/models/gameplay to another game however. No, that's not a myth, though. Might as well say that if you're a fan of basketball, you're a fan of golf. They're both about people putting a ball in a hole. Most of the size comparisons have been with Warhammer, not with Infinity or Malifaux, which is the exact opposite direction.
There was an "introductory price" post which compared WMH to Infinity, but that, too, was improperly comparing two levels of product purchase. In almost the same breath, he tried to compare to a sports board game, too. Nor was it dismissed as not using the hobby dollar and time of the purchaser.
In short, your "myth" is a straw man, at least for this forum. It may be a reason used in your local group, but it really doesn't fly here.
I don't think you've understood my post at all. It's gone right over your head. I'm not saiyng that someone who is a fan of basketball must be a fan of golf, i'm saying that someone who would be interested in both will have to choose between them.
I included that bit at the end about specific personal arguments too because that covers stuff like if you like the fluff of a sci fi battle (40k, infinity), fantasy battle (malifaux, warmachine) or a bloody sports battle (blood bowl, guild ball). This is talking about the fact that ultimately mini games aren't that different to each other mechanically. you get nice models and you do hobby things with them, then you meet with other players and interact with your minis on a board.
You develop "soft skills" that are very easily transferred from one mini game to another the more mini games you play as evidence that they aren't all that different.
Ultimately when a player would enjoy option A and would enjoy option B as well they have to make a choice between them. For example, i'm sure i'd enjoy 40k if i played it casually with friends. I'm sure some things about it would make me annoyed, and some things would be extra fun. Recently i've been choosing between Warmachine and guild ball, the rulesets they use are even very very similiar (Warmachine was an obvious inspiration) and Guild ball is just so much more cost friendly to a player that it leaves me with enough money to experiment with other mini games too instead of trying to pay for extremely expensive WMH armies
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Feb 13, 2019 4:26:46 GMT
No, that's not a myth, though. Might as well say that if you're a fan of basketball, you're a fan of golf. They're both about people putting a ball in a hole. Most of the size comparisons have been with Warhammer, not with Infinity or Malifaux, which is the exact opposite direction.
There was an "introductory price" post which compared WMH to Infinity, but that, too, was improperly comparing two levels of product purchase. In almost the same breath, he tried to compare to a sports board game, too. Nor was it dismissed as not using the hobby dollar and time of the purchaser.
In short, your "myth" is a straw man, at least for this forum. It may be a reason used in your local group, but it really doesn't fly here.
I don't think you've understood my post at all. It's gone right over your head. I'm not saiyng that someone who is a fan of basketball must be a fan of golf, i'm saying that someone who would be interested in both will have to choose between them.
I included that bit at the end about specific personal arguments too because that covers stuff like if you like the fluff of a sci fi battle (40k, infinity), fantasy battle (malifaux, warmachine) or a bloody sports battle (blood bowl, guild ball). This is talking about the fact that ultimately mini games aren't that different to each other mechanically. you get nice models and you do hobby things with them, then you meet with other players and interact with your minis on a board.
You develop "soft skills" that are very easily transferred from one mini game to another the more mini games you play as evidence that they aren't all that different.
Ultimately when a player would enjoy option A and would enjoy option B as well they have to make a choice between them. For example, i'm sure i'd enjoy 40k if i played it casually with friends. I'm sure some things about it would make me annoyed, and some things would be extra fun. Recently i've been choosing between Warmachine and guild ball, the rulesets they use are even very very similiar (Warmachine was an obvious inspiration) and Guild ball is just so much more cost friendly to a player that it leaves me with enough money to experiment with other mini games too instead of trying to pay for extremely expensive WMH armies
Yet, it was presented that there is always going to be competition between them, and that only applies in narrowing cases, such as your meta providing equal time to the competing systems.
However, the issue is that while there may be aspects between them that are enjoyable, the rest may be a complete turn off. Guild Ball could be a competitor, but I have zero interest in playing a sports game on tabletop. Sports are only enjoyable to me because of the rapid real-time flow, so even the crazy antics of Blood Bowl carry little interest for me.
Competition will come and go, and vary wildly from person to person. Warhammer was great for me because of its crazy epicness, but their shoddy rule design and communication with it became a turn off for me. Infinity is interesting, but between their Order system, how their Face Off system operates (not the idea, but the mechanics of it), their tiny model design (I have fat, shaking fingers which get glued together building a freakin Titan!), and the local club mainly playing on Sunday when I'm with my family, makes it difficult for me to consider it seriously. Malifaux's models and factions are interesting, but I absolutely SUCK at card games (seriously, cards have it in for me, the dice are at least apathetic).
But to consider them as not competitive in hobby time and cash for many different people who enjoy those aspects? I don't know of a single person who would actually propose that. That is the part that is not a myth, because I'm not aware of anyone who would actually believe it being a thing. My hobby time and money is currently mixed up in WMH and PC gaming. So it is always on MY mind.
|
|
|
Post by cainuslupus on Feb 14, 2019 18:51:58 GMT
During this tournament I saw the Trident and the Railless Interceptor for the first time...and what a disappointing sight it was! Really tiny for a model which is supposed to be formidable and huge. In addition - featureless, boring design. Other BE's can look so epic and impressive - Animantarax, Supreme Guardian or the Legion Throne are pretty cool, if costly. But would be incredibly disappointed if I got a sad, cheap toy like the Trident or Interceptor after paying through the nose for it. Could be worse; it could be the Blockhouse There was blockhouse too. It's not bad, rather... Pathetic is the only word that comes to mind. For this price they could do much more. Tbh there was limited edition anniversary stand for butcher3 that looked way, way better than this. I could render myself and print better thing on home plastic printer.
|
|