Would you like to submit opinions?
https://gws2021.paperform.co/
Done.
Only 3 periods? Who can pick only 3 periods?
Done.
Though given the number of sections where the true answer was all of these but you had to pick 3 I'm not sure I've added much to the sum of wargaming knowledge.
Also "what do you mostly ..." When? Last week, right now, next week? I'll guarantee the answers will be vastly different!
"How much do you plan to spend this year" - I suspect "How much did you plan to spend last year", "How much did you actually spend" and "How much did you tell your SO you spent" might be more revealing :)
Filled and will be interested to see the results.
As usual, a crap survey, sounds like the composer hasn't been a wargamer for long.
Done. I suspect it's been kept fairly general. Seemed to be the main topic was around return to clubs/conventions. Interesting didn't really have an option for anyone who hasn't been to one before, just assumed everyone had...
I wonder who collates and analyses all the returns, and what they do with the results?
i think its just a method of advertising their news letter.
Did it yesterday, Could have ticked far more than 3 periiods as well John.
Done. Since this is an ongoing survey, there are previous years to benchmark against and I imagine that a change in wargaming behaviour due to covid might give quite a telling result.
I appreciate their 5 Euro voucher and have downloaded two early PDF issue of their magazine (adding 2.90 Euros to get the pair), which are chock full reads.
Frankly, anything that keeps wargame magazines relevant or topical in the modern internet wargame world is welcome and for them no doubt necessary and so here we are talking about WSS, well done them. :)
I think it gives a guide to magazines and manufacturers which periods, scales/sizes etc are more popular than others. Jonathan Freitag does some excellent analysis of the data over on his Blog, which I find an interesting breakdown.
Done
Wot they sed ;)
To be fair they do do some interesting analysis:
https://www.karwansaraypublishers.com/wss_gws/
I remember last year there being discussion on collection size vs scale choice and they do a post on that.
Filled it in with push for 10mm over that 28mm nonsense. I mean if you are going to build skirmish forces instead of armies, have the decency to do it in 54mm. :P
Quote from: DecemDave on 03 August 2021, 07:28:48 AM
Filled it in with push for 10mm over that 28mm nonsense. I mean if you are going to build skirmish forces instead of armies, have the decency to do it in 54mm. :P
Dave's a lieutenant now, but he'll make a fine general one of these days.
Must admit I found the three periods thing a bit limiting and also found separating out pulp, Warhammer, 40k and fantasy a bit of a laugh. Just call all of it figure gaming, because it certainly isn't wargaming.
Quote from: Steve J on 03 August 2021, 06:28:39 AM
I think it gives a guide to magazines and manufacturers which periods, scales/sizes etc are more popular than others. Jonathan Freitag does some excellent analysis of the data over on his Blog, which I find an interesting breakdown.
We have a winner!
I hope you al took the opportunity to demonstrate that there's life outside 28mm.
Quote from: FierceKitty on 03 August 2021, 07:35:12 AM
Dave's a lieutenant now, but he'll make a fine general one of these days.
I doubt it's possible to paint the necessary 15,000 casualties in 54mm.
QuoteIt takes 15,000 casualties to train a major general.
Ferdinand Foch
Quote from: Leman on 03 August 2021, 08:29:32 AM
. . . separating out pulp, Warhammer, 40k and fantasy a bit of a laugh. Just call all of it figure gaming, because it certainly isn't wargaming.
What a completely ridiculous statement to make.
Quote from: Leman on 03 August 2021, 08:29:32 AM
Must admit I found the three periods thing a bit limiting and also found separating out pulp, Warhammer, 40k and fantasy a bit of a laugh. Just call all of it figure gaming, because it certainly isn't wargaming.
Quote from: Raider4 on 03 August 2021, 09:37:22 AM
What a completely ridiculous statement to make.
No, I agree with Leman it's ridiculous to separate them out. Whether you are pushing around models of Das Afrika Korps, Caesar's Legions, the Grenadiers of the old Guard or 1st Company of the Utramarines, Warjacks or an Orc hordes it's all fantasy when you get right down to it. Similar rules, equally pretty figures - not enough room to slide a sheet of paper between them.
Quote from: mmcv on 03 August 2021, 06:43:59 AM
To be fair they do do some interesting analysis:
That's what I would call processing; assembling the information into some kind of order so that it can be analysed. More importantly though, who asked for the survey to be done in the first place, and for what purpose? How were the questions arrived at? If it was the wargames 'industry' with, presumably, the intention of informing it in the context of business development, it doesn't answer the simple question 'so what?'. I don't see much analysis to be honest.
Phase one: collect underpants
Phase two:
Phase three: profit!
Done
Done and I'm with Leman on this one.
Cheers Paul
Questioning the 'Do you think of yourself as...' question in the survey on a Facebook wargaming group yesterday got me into enough trouble for now. I think I'll let this year's survey pass... :D
Cheers,
Rob
Quote from: Ace of Spades on 04 August 2021, 11:33:08 AM
Questioning the 'Do you think of yourself as...' question in the survey on a Facebook wargaming group yesterday got me into enough trouble for now. I think I'll let this year's survey pass... :D
Cheers,
Rob
Ditto...
I did the survey, but agree the questions were poorly thought out.
While I would not lump all fantasy in with Warhammer 40k/Age of Sigmar I do feel these two are the same.
Also what is the relevance of "How many Painted miniatures do you have". Initially I thought it might be to tie up with spending patterns, but we have an occasional visitor to the Tring Wargames club who when he was collecting Mechwarrior spent very large amounts of money, and must have hundreds if not thousands of miniatures - He only ever painted a few dozen of them. So that does not work.
Perhaps i will look at the analasys at some point
Quote from: Orcs on 04 August 2021, 04:18:49 PM
Also what is the relevance of "How many Painted miniatures do you have".
Two. No, wait, five.
What do I win?
Quote from: Orcs on 04 August 2021, 04:18:49 PM
"How many Painted miniatures do you have".
15,566. Lead mountain currently 5,556. Current Lead Mountain movement -138 (i.e. I paint 138 figures more than I buy every month.)
Estimated completion of lead mountain 30th June 2024.
Quote from: fsn on 04 August 2021, 05:35:02 PM
15,566. Lead mountain currently 5,556. Current Lead Mountain movement -138 (i.e. I paint 138 figures more than I buy every month.)
Estimated completion of lead mountain 30th June 2024.
I think mid-November 2024 (based on data provided), although my math skills have been slipping of late.
=D> =D> =D> =D> =D>
I wondered if anyone would check.
The Lead Mountain (i.e. those I want to paint) is actually 4840.
5556 includes those bought but not intending to use. Spares if you will.
Quote from: d_Guy on 04 August 2021, 06:36:44 PM
I think mid-November 2024 (based on data provided), although my math skills have been slipping of late.
In my case its probably around 2087, by which time :-
I will be 123 years old
You will buy your miniature's 3d printed in the correctly coloured uniform.
American spell checkers will have learnt how to spell Colour and Armour
Techno will be entering his sixth Millenia
Leon will be a great Grandfather
The Netherlands and Disneyland will be underwater (but if you sail across the place Disneyland used to be, you will still here " Its a Small World" 24 hours a day.
The EU will have ceased to exist.
Germany will be planning a 6 lane autobahn through Belgium to make invading France easier next time.
The worlds population will be under control due to population reduction caused by Flooding, Covid 26,35, and 50.
The middle east problem will have been solved - they will have annihilated each other.
The electric car will never have taken off and will have ben replaced by the Hydrogen combustion engine
King George Vll will be on the throne provided we have not be come a republic or the 53rd American state.( Not sure which of these is worse)
IF any of this fails to come true you can write to me via snail mail with a handwritten note of complaint. :)
Quote from: fsn on 04 August 2021, 07:24:27 PM
I wondered if anyone would check.
Until I saw your projection, I was preoccupied with trying to calculate the muzzle velocity of a .22 caliber long rifle with a 40 grain load fired through a 15 foot barrel. Yours was more interesting! ;)
Spares are good. I have many but not with the original intent of them being spares. I commend your industry. :-bd
Quote from: Orcs on 04 August 2021, 08:37:05 PM
In my case its probably around 2087, by which time :-
I will be 123 years old
You will buy your miniature's 3d printed in the correctly coloured uniform.
American spell checkers will have learnt how to spell Colour and Armour
Techno will be entering his sixth Millenia
Leon will be a great Grandfather
The Netherlands and Disneyland will be underwater (but if you sail across the place Disneyland used to be, you will still here " Its a Small World" 24 hours a day.
The EU will have ceased to exist.
Germany will be planning a 6 lane autobahn through Belgium to make invading France easier next time.
The worlds population will be under control due to population reduction caused by Flooding, Covid 26,35, and 50.
The middle east problem will have been solved - they will have annihilated each other.
The electric car will never have taken off and will have ben replaced by the Hydrogen combustion engine
King George Vll will be on the throne provided we have not be come a republic or the 53rd American state.( Not sure which of these is worse)
IF any of this fails to come true you can write to me via snail mail with a handwritten note of complaint. :)
This all seems most prescient to me. Should you hold a holo-seance in 2087 to celebrate your correctness I shall endeavor to put in an appearance. Failing to make a full manifestation I will at least hum “The Star Spangled Banner” so you’ll know it’s me. :D
You forgot to add:
* there will have been a devastating holy war between supporters of 10 mm and supporters of 9.5 mm scales. Both sides will have claimed victory.
* China will be attempting to coordinate resistance to the Australian Imperial Army occupying the Asia Pacific from Cairo to Kobe; they will also be claiming to have invented democracy.
* the USA will almost have a woman president, but will have chosen a failed used-car salesman and TV sitcom support actor when she was discredited for having kissed a boy at summer camp.
* Her Holiness the Pope will have expressed regret about overpopulation (not apologised or accepted responsibility, naturally).
* Oxford will have heard of the Enlightenment.
* Scotland will have won the World Cup
More serious seerness. :-bd
But I take my hat off to this one:
* there will have been a devastating holy war between supporters of 10 mm and supporters of 9.5 mm scales. Both sides will have claimed victory.
Quote from: fsn on 04 August 2021, 07:24:27 PM
=D> =D> =D> =D> =D>
bought but not intending to use
The road to lead mountain is paved with "intentions" to use. Your approach dooms us further. ;)
Quote from: Orcs on 04 August 2021, 08:37:05 PM
King George Vll will be on the throne provided we have not be come a republic or the 53rd American state.( Not sure which of these is worse)
The current PoW apparently wants to be George VII, not Charles III, so his grandson will end up being George VIII.
Judging by the bizarreness of that family he probably is a prisoner of war, and certainly a prisoner of pompous, irrelevant traditions. I love it when our king trolls around without a tie looking completely at ease. Personally I don't think even England will exist in 2087, having split up into the Peoples Republic of Northumbria, The Mercian and West Confederation, and the other bit with that city in it. I see you still can't leave the World Wars alone. Jeez, feckin sad. Get over it and come and join the rest of us.
Quote from: Raider4 on 05 August 2021, 08:11:32 AM
The current PoW apparently wants to be George VII, not Charles III, so his grandson will end up being George VIII.
Not being a fan of royalty I rarely read anything about them , so missed this one.
I would rather we called him Charles lll and sent him the same way as Charles 1.
I know all the arguments Royalty v President, but if you get a President who is an idiot you can vote him out in 4 years. If you get Royalty that are idiots you are stuck with them for life now days.
Quote from: Orcs on 05 August 2021, 08:51:08 AM
you get a President who is an idiot you can vote him out in 4 years. If you get Royalty that are idiots you are stuck with them for life now days.
Just make sure Royalty have no poilitical power, you can't always get rid of Presidents - Trumpo is still making noises, and some eastern European and African incumbants have been in power for 20-30 years.
Presidents are nasty, brutish and expensive...
i filed it in yesterday, wasn't a pretty sight!
Almost nothing happening game wise here, and not having games is making me put all painting on hold. First year of ockdowns was pretty productive, but that has caught up with me this year.
And the distinction between warhammer- fantasy and warhammer40 k - science fiction is probably pretty important. A lot of players/painters enter this hobby through Games Workshop, at least that is what they say. Maybe that' s why they like to separate them out to get a 'real' idea of the non-gw fantasy and SF players
And if people on the one side keep calling those players on the other side out because they are not ' proper' wargamers, it is no surprise the fantasy-SF side has more succes attracting new players.
We paint minis, we play games. it's all the same. Can we please just stop the hate. it's pretty stupid...
Why does differentiating things equal hate?
I have no problem with people playing Fantasy and SF games.
I don't see them as 'war'games, because, for me, the point of a wargame is it has some basis in real world conflict, physics and culture.
So I would distinguish them but as I don't see wargames as the pinnacle of gaming achievement I really don't see why that distinction can't be made or why if I do make it, it means I am denigrating SF and Fantasy.
I'm not.
I'm glad there is a crossover between all these gaming styles but I don't see why either side should be precious or defensive about being different. Not better or worse; different.
And for me - no they are not, and cannot be, all the same.
Not stupid and no hate.
Quote from: Gwydion on 05 August 2021, 11:52:21 AM
Why does differentiating things equal hate?
Because it's creating "out groups."
And that rarely ends well.
No matter how "accurate" your historical figures are, if you are not playing a historical action then your game is fantasy. If you are playing a historical event and it doesn't go exactly as the historical event then that's fantasy too because we know how it all ended.
Of course, it is possible that in another iteration of the multiverse things went exactly the way your game did ... but then isn't that Science fiction? :)
For the record, I'm not suggesting people are obliged to play Sci-Fi or Fantasy any more than they are The Great Northern War or The Wars of the Roses.
I am suggesting that creating artificial divisions does the hobby a disservice.
As Ithoriel says, we should not tolerate splinter groups of fantasy players. They can't help being what they are, and should just be given a painless injection for the good of the hobby.
Quote from: FierceKitty on 05 August 2021, 12:49:23 PM
As Ithoriel says, we should not tolerate splinter groups of fantasy players. They can't help being what they are, and should just be given a painless injection for the good of the hobby.
Absolutely!
The sooner these weirdos playing their fantasy games with their Franks and their Ayyubids are anaethsetised, for the greater good, the better!
:P :d :d :d :d :d :d ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Now now Children play nicely. I play almost anything, got Historical from M1's to EAP, in scales from 28 through 25, 20, 15. 10, 6 mm, 2mm, aircraft in 1/200th, 1/.300, 1/600th, shipping in 1/300, 1/6 or 700th, 1/1200, 1/3000th and indeterminant - Distopian Wars.
Quote from: Raider4 on 05 August 2021, 08:11:32 AM
The current PoW apparently wants to be George VII, not Charles III, so his grandson will end up being George VIII.
Unless little George decides to be Charles III, Edgar III, or Harthacnut II.
Quote from: Ithoriel on 05 August 2021, 12:32:36 PM
Because it's creating "out groups."
...
I am suggesting that creating artificial divisions does the hobby a disservice.
Not out 'groups', 'different' groups.
The division isn't 'artificial' to me.
Which 'hobby'?
I can't see why differentiating between games based on real world physics, chemistry, human psychology and anthropology, and those based on non existent powers and species and imagined technologies is a problem.
That's not excluding anyone from anything meaningful.
Play all by all means, but to me they aren't the same thing.
Quote from: Gwydion on 05 August 2021, 02:35:11 PM
I can't see why differentiating between games based on real world physics, chemistry, human psychology and anthropology, and those based on non existent powers and species and imagined technologies is a problem.
If you think Fantasy and Sci-Fi aren't "based on real world physics, chemistry, human psychology and anthropology" then you have a different view of Fantasy and Sci-Fi than I have.
Is "what if folk tales were true" any more fantastic than "what if the Germans had managed to launch Unternehmen Seelöwe?"
I have long decried the fact that Fantasy games tend to be "Ancients with Dragons" rather than looking at how warfare would be changed by the use of magic or the existence of dragons and giants. Not that it stops me enjoying such games.
It's all miniature tabletop gaming to me.
Don't understand why some people have to sneer at others for doing something they have no interest in.
I'm honestly not trying to have an argument but I think we probably do have different ideas of what Fantasy and SF are.
I don't see how Fantasy and SF can be based on ' real world physics, chemistry, human psychology and anthropology.'
They are imaginary worlds designed to avoid real world scientific constraints.
Some types of SF may be closer to current reality but the harder the tech element, the less testable against real world effects we get.
The games may be very true to the source fiction but until someone shows me the real world penetration table of a sixth level mage's anti-armour spell I'm going to remain sceptical about the relationship between Fantasy/SF gaming and wargaming.
Not better, not worse, but definitely different things.
I'm really glad you enjoy Ancients and Dragons, and want Fantasy to be more than that. I wouldn't want to stop you for the world. Nor to stop you calling it whatever you want. I don't see it
as a divisive issue at all.
But for me I can't see it being a 'war'game.
@Raider - who's sneering?
Quote from: steve_holmes_11 on 05 August 2021, 01:37:35 PM
Unless little George decides to be Charles III, Edgar III, or Harthacnut II.
As long as he doesn't decide to be Wayne or Kevin.
Quote from: Ithoriel on 05 August 2021, 03:10:29 PM
I have long decried the fact that Fantasy games tend to be "Ancients with Dragons" rather than looking at how warfare would be changed by the use of magic or the existence of dragons and giants.
That's an interesting point that I'd never considered before, we impose historical tactics onto a Fantasy game when the approach could have been entirely different if your infantry are backed up by a fire-breathing aerial demon. And how much command control would a leader have had over a sentient beast? Our vision of massed infantry ranks would have been a perfect target for a blanket fire weapon, or a well-placed fireball from Gandalf, so would they adjust into pockets of smaller, manoeuvrable units that could employ almost guerilla tactics against a larger individual?
Quote from: Leon on 05 August 2021, 04:47:12 PM
That's an interesting point that I'd never considered before, we impose historical tactics onto a Fantasy game when the approach could have been entirely different if your infantry are backed up by a fire-breathing aerial demon. And how much command control would a leader have had over a sentient beast? Our vision of massed infantry ranks would have been a perfect target for a blanket fire weapon, or a well-placed fireball from Gandalf, so would they adjust into pockets of smaller, manoeuvrable units that could employ almost guerilla tactics against a larger individual?
So many things to consider. What's the recharge rate on a dragon's fire breath? Can it breathe flames at will with no more effort than we put in to breathing or does it get one good blast and then need to sleep for a decade to recharge?
Can a wizard's largest fireball engulf a single target, a squad, an army?
What about the undead? Can you damage them with normal weapons or do you need magic or divine assistance? What is the airspeed of an unladen demon with a Supersoaker full of holy water? :)
How much faith can we put in penetration charts calculated from firing range tests or hit rates from muskets fired at unit sized bedsheets? ;)
Hi
For me 'wargaming' is and has been for the last 60 or so years intrinsically linked with the military history side of things.
I particularly like the old Miniature Warfare (magazine) 'strapline' (yes, I'm that old):
"The magazine for those who those who wish to recreate the tactical ability and weapon capabilities of armies of a chosen period".
The fact that I'm refighting Gettysburg with rules that allow me to use the tactics etc. of the time and the result doesn't follow the historical events as they happened does not mean I'm playing 'fantasy', in my book anyway.
I have absolutely nothing against 'fantasy', 'Sci-Fi' etc. they just do not fit into my definition of wargaming.
Cheers Paul
Quote from: Leon on 05 August 2021, 04:47:12 PM
That's an interesting point that I'd never considered before, we impose historical tactics onto a Fantasy game when the approach could have been entirely different if your infantry are backed up by a fire-breathing aerial demon. And how much command control would a leader have had over a sentient beast? Our vision of massed infantry ranks would have been a perfect target for a blanket fire weapon, or a well-placed fireball from Gandalf, so would they adjust into pockets of smaller, manoeuvrable units that could employ almost guerilla tactics against a larger individual?
Indeed. The whole "closed ranks" business, persisted until the 19th century precisely because we had no serious area effect weapons.
Once Krupps and Armstrong got to work on quick firing breachloading artillery, all the formation keeping reas relegated to the parade ground.
Now think about a world where Merlin and members of his order can lob fireballs or cause ricks to splinter into shrapnel.
What's the impact on the shieldwall formations of the age?
Do infantry start entrenching prior to every engagement?
I like the history stuff.
Some bits of history more than others.
I like a bit of the fantasy stuff.
But much of it leaves me cold.
It is therefore helpful that hobby suppliers, figure manufacturers and rule writers have split the hobby into categories by period and genre.
I really don't see that as formenting out groups any more than librarians classifying books by subject type.
I can't believe that the 'is fantasy part of wargaming?' discussion is still happening - can we leave it back in 1985?
The Ancients with Dragons question is a much more interesting one. I have said that our home brew fantasy rules feel more Napoleonic than medieval or ancient. As Ithoriel says a lot comes down to how your fantasy creatures behave - and another key bit, of how common they are?
If the fantastical creatures are rare or if the fantasy creatures eg orcs don't really bring anything different tactically, then battles are more likely to be as historical ones.
But if flying creatures are common, then formations and fortifications could be very different. Watch towers would be much more likely to have some kind of roof or overhead cover to protect the occupants, whilst still providing the more traditional functions. Battlefield formations could change to cope with flyers - this might be quite minor - like having light cavalry in a 'sweeper' role - or totally breaking up battle lines to minimise the impacts of top attacks!
Hi
As far as I am aware I'm allowed to comment on what I want to comment on (politics excepted). As to what is 'interesting' and what is not, is purely a matter of opinion.
Cheers Paul
If Fantasy and Science Fiction are just another genre like Ancients, WW2 or Napoleonics then I have no problem with that but the idea that they somehow aren't "proper" wargaming is ludicrous and frankly a little insulting. Not least because when I mention wargaming as a hobby to people (as I do more often than I probably should) the reaction I get most often is,"Oh! Like Warhammer. I/ my sibling/ my kids/ my friends play/ played that."
However, it is clear there are two camps here that will never convince each other so I acknowledge and defend your right to your own beliefs .... however misguided :D
Ta, I'm more than happy to defend your right to be wrong also! :D
Oh! As for firing muskets at bedsheets and apfds etc at various armour plate on test ranges - don't use the results as a basis for battlefield rules. Take them as a start to work out why close range firefight went on half and hour and hardly anyone got shot and then start thinking about people's reactions in combat, loading and not firing repeatedly, firing high, firing low etc and built that into rules outcomes. Same with armour penetration charts.
But the bits of discussion about wizards' abilities to 'recharge', width and depth of spells etc are very interesting and looking at things like that can make it a good game instead of just ancients and dragons. If we accept that magic is effecting change at distance using energy, and if we accept laws of thermodynamics apply and you can't create or destroy that energy but only change its form, you can build a model of how that wizard accesses that energy, where from and how it affects him when he uses it. Like historical games, you don't need to bung all that into a set of rules, but having a theoretical model makes it a better game and can explain why some spells in your rules may be more effective but only useable infrequently, while others may be used easily and often but don' t do that much in the bigger scheme of things.
I don't have any belief that these things aren't 'proper' - they are good games, just not wargames. Like chess - great game but not a wargame (though it may have started out trying to be one!)
Meanwhile: Happy misguided gaming :D
I've got lots of questions now! If we accept that a dragon is a high-intelligence creature then how motivated is it to perform in battle? Can they be hired as a mercenary in exchange for gold, but then how long will they fight for you before deciding they can't be bothered? Is a unit of wraiths psychically tied to your general and controlled mentally, so they become a non-feeling battering ram that will never fail a morale check? Is there an element of self-harm to Trolls or large beasts where they could just as easily turn on your own troops?
Leon you should just worry about sell lots of small model dragons ;)
Dragons are, according to folklore, well armoured, smart and capable not only of breathing flame but of generating wind storms with their wings capable of knocking troops flat and added to all that they have teeth, claws and a powerful tail. Some are supposed to be excellent mages.
They are also incredibly avaricious and powerfully territorial. And susceptible to flattery.
"Hey Mr. Dragon, sir! Wouldn't want to worry you but Bad King Boris is coming with his army to gain wealth and glory by killing you and looting your hoard.
I know you are clever and powerful and, no doubt, capable of dealing with him yourself.
However I am outraged by his naked banditry and am happy to bring my army to help you, in a show of solidarity.
What say you, Sir Dragon?"
<sotto voce> "Now, for the sake of all the gods, nobody let on Boris is coming for us!"
Feel equally free to feel insulted. Fantasy gaming is tosh!
Quote from: Leman on 06 August 2021, 12:35:16 PM
Feel equally free to feel insulted. Fantasy gaming is tosh!
A belief which you are entirely entitled to hold.
Though, if the world is round, no amount of belief will flatten it :)
Quote from: Leman on 06 August 2021, 12:35:16 PM
Feel equally free to feel insulted. Fantasy gaming is tosh!
Tosh - presumably meaning out of contact with reality and making no effort to match it. Mmmm, the word isn't solely a matter of opinion here, I submit with characteristic humility and deference to others.
Quote from: Leon on 06 August 2021, 11:14:14 AM
I've got lots of questions now! If we accept that a dragon is a high-intelligence creature then how motivated is it to perform in battle? Can they be hired as a mercenary in exchange for gold, but then how long will they fight for you before deciding they can't be bothered? Is a unit of wraiths psychically tied to your general and controlled mentally, so they become a non-feeling battering ram that will never fail a morale check? Is there an element of self-harm to Trolls or large beasts where they could just as easily turn on your own troops?
I've always worked on the basis that Dragons are:
1) extremely long-lived
2) devious and manipulative
3) greedy for gold or other items that corrupt a mans heart (a fair maiden, precious jewels, rare talismans etc.)
4) generally quite large
5) come in either the fire breathing or non-fire breathing variety (Cold Drakes)
6) come in the flying or non-flying variant
7) are never to be trusted unless you have some hold over them
They are also - if human legend is to be believed (barring Game of Thrones - 'spit') - cowardly by nature.
I suspect that this is probably linked to the long-lived aspect - the longer you might live, generally the more precious you probably are about your own life.
And oh yes ... I nearly forgot ...
8) they are mythical :D
It is of course well known that Trolls are much cleverer in cold climates - the closer to freezing the better.
Quote from: FierceKitty on 06 August 2021, 01:53:35 PM
Tosh - presumably meaning out of contact with reality and making no effort to match it. Mmmm, the word isn't solely a matter of opinion here, I submit with characteristic humility and deference to others.
From Merriam-Webster
tosh noun
ˈtäsh
Definition of tosh: sheer nonsense
I think we need to reign this in a bit Gents. This part of the discussion started by discussing the genres of games in the Great Wargaming Survey. It has now degenerated into a slanging match about whether Fantasy gaming is part of wargaming.
I personally do not give a Monkeys *&*^ if you think wargaming does or does not include fantasy games, or what that type of game looks like. Be it Age of Sigmar, Zombie Duckmen, or New Kingdom Egyptians Vs Byzantines.
The industry including our hosts Pendraken make a reasonable income by selling all sorts of figures. The revenue from fantasy figures has almost certainly helped to fund the industry and the production of Historical figure ranges.
A persons choice of what type of game to play does not give them the right to degenerate other types of game . If you don't like it - don't play it. but please do not insult those who do.
Lets keep this forum on a respectable level of communication.(Unlike others out there)
I'm prepared to put money on it that anyone in this slanging match is very willing to have a drink with any other participant.
Quote from: FierceKitty on 06 August 2021, 01:53:35 PM
I submit with characteristic humility and deference to others.
Hmmm - a Kitty with humility, never met a feline that didna know it were the best. Humble ones - no
Quote from: FierceKitty on 06 August 2021, 02:46:03 PM
I'm prepared to put money on it that anyone in this slanging match is very willing to have a drink with any other participant.
I'll drink wit almost anybody !
Wot e sed^^^^^^^^^ :)
But I didn't think anyone had been slagging anyone off. Maybe some were a bit vigorous (on both sides).
I'd happily play a game with anyone involved in this discussion - historical wargame or otherwise and certainly would not denigrate the game or the players (as long as I won :D)
Quote from: FierceKitty on 06 August 2021, 02:46:03 PM
I'm prepared to put money on it that anyone in this slanging match is very willing to have a drink with any other participant.
I would agree FK, this forum does generally behave itself , but when one party is referring to another's preference as "Tosh" we are getting a little close to the line
Quote from: Lord Kermit of Birkenhead on 06 August 2021, 02:47:38 PM
I'll drink wit almost anybody !
We know, especially if they are paying :)
I have to say that I don't see a slanging match, just two opposed views being defended with passion and vigour.
How does one truly know what one believes until one is forced to defend it?
If my liberal splattering of posts with smiley emojis has not adequately indicated the grin on my face or the tongue in my cheek on occasion as I hit the "post" button then I apologise.
So, for the record, not only happy to share a drink but also to get the first round in!
Mines a pint of Krugg then...
This argument, in my opinion, is about as gratuitous as they come, not least because, if the point of an argument is to change others' points of view, it has next to no chance of succeeding. Be that as it may, the English language is a most expressive, dynamic and wonderful thing, superior to all others, such that I think we all understand the meaning of 'Fantasy', 'Science Fiction', 'Historical' and 'Wargame', without looking for definitions in the Oxford English Dictionary, the single authority on the English language. ;) It seems to me that all are concerned with war, to one degree or another, and all are games. I don't care for 'science fiction' or 'fantasy' games, but that is neither here nor there. I've also never understood the attraction of Tolkien, Heinlein et al, as literature or film. Lots of people do but as far as I know it isn't mandatory.
My 2 OWG* worth:
Fantasy wargaming is not an oxymoron. A game of a fantasy war is a fantasy wargame.
Any wargame (fantasy or not) may or may not be tosh aka nonsense.
A fantasy wargame that takes some fantastical premise as a given (eg that dragons exist, or that wizards can cast spells) can still have sound internal logic that means it is not nonsense. Dragons and other monsters can have stats that fit in the same logical structure as other troop types and enable them to interact in logical ways. Magic can be powered by magic points that are acquired and spent in logical ways, there can be logic to spell effects, and again these can interact logically with the troops and monsters. Such games are fantasy but not necessarily nonsensical.
A wargame that purports to represent a historical battle may or may not be nonsense. When people get the terrain or order of battle grossly wrong, that's tosh.
Chris
*Official Wizard Groats
Well I would bet on my Chieftain against any number of wizards, dragons etc. who were able to turn up! ;) :)
(and buy them a drink afterwards).
Cheers Paul
Quote from: Lord Speedy of Leighton on 06 August 2021, 03:25:55 PM
Mines a pint of Krugg then...
Krug Grande Cuvée 169ème Édition, Krug Grande Cuvée 168ème Édition, Krug Grande Cuvée 167ème Édition or Krug Grande Cuvée 166ème Édition?
And no chugging it down like a yard of ale!
:D :D :D
167em. Merci
Quote from: T13A on 06 August 2021, 04:24:05 PM
Well I would bet on my Chieftain against any number of wizards, dragons etc. who were able to turn up! ;) :)
Casts
Rust . . .
Well I used my voucher to buy a couple of WWS back issue pdf's, which only cost me £1.50 after said voucher applied :). I must admit the older of the two issues was much more interesting that a more recent one, the latter trying to cover too much ground IMHO, where the former was themed for most of the issue.
I'll have a tosh and soda, please.
Hi
Well, I would still back my Chieftain against anybody in a pointy hat, jumping up and down waving a stick and shouting "Cast Rust" or "Heat metal"! :)
(https://i.imgur.com/h8yhD0T.jpg)
"Tango One Three Alpha, Out"!
And 120mm solid should put paid to any dragon
"Sabot - LOAD LOAD LOAD"
"Loaded"
"Lase"
"Range 2000"
"On"
"Fire"
"Firing"
"New Target Dragon Right 2 o'clock"
Etc.
See Grunts by Mary Gentle to see what happens when T-55s meet Orcs...
FIFY
Quote from: Lord Kermit of Birkenhead on 07 August 2021, 01:56:30 PM
"Sabot - LOAD LOAD LOAD"
"Loaded"
"Lase"
"Range 2000"
"On"
"Fire"
"Firing"
"Sir, Sir, it's flipped the shot right back at us!"
"INCOMING!!!!!"
Etc.
Cue "Thunder Child" by Jeff Wayne
Hmmm.
Seems to me by "fantasy" we just mean magic and monsters. Given Arthur C Clarke's 3rd Law "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic", we can lump the majority of SF into the fantasy category by analogy, where technology and aliens take the place of magic and monsters.
Thereafter, the lines get blurry. Many Conan stories involve neither magic nor monsters, just humans fighting with swords and spears. Similarly if one gamed "Journey to the Centre of the Earth" then one would simply be joining two historical periods - Victorian and pre-History. One could argue that "A Very British Civil War" is fantasy, as it is not a historical period. "1946" was also a period of interest for a while in which one could field the Maus and the Ratte. Is that fantasy?
While we're at it, let's look at the term "wargame". Hopefully we can agree that all the the activities are "games", but what is a "war"? Would a Norse raid upon a Saxon village be a "war"? What about the "Troubles" in Northern Ireland? The exploits of Captain Kidd? The Oxford Online Dictionary describes war as "a situation in which two or more countries or groups of people fight against each other over a period of time." That covers the mob wars of 1920s Chicago, and my playground in 1969.
In the most basic sense, Chess is a Wargame*. It has elephants and chariots and horsemen and infantry; and figures to represent them - somewhat stylistic I grant, but more representational than a square of printed cardboard.
I'm not a "fantasy" fan in the traditional sense. I'll never field an army of elves, but I do appreciate the freedom of just picking a paint scheme I liked and nobody can say otherwise. Whereas I may get picked up for the inaccuracy of my Bavarian "Cornflower Blue", if my elves wear purple and orange there's nothing that says they can't. There's a freedom in Fantasy and SF that is not usually afforded to historical gamers. They appeal more to the realms of the imagination. I can design a space ship using the "High Guard" rules of "Traveller", but I don't know of any rule set that allows you to design your own 1939 battle cruiser.
Just as I won't game "fantasy", the Seven Years War holds no interest for me, not the American Revolution, nor the Gulf War, nor anything that happened South of Texas.
My Dragonhead game (which I've just realised I didn't finish off) pitted an Alien against a Centurion tank, and zombies against Flodden men at arms, with characters from 1960s TV series thrown in for good measure. It was very silly, and chaotic and great, great fun. The atmosphere of Dragonhead was totally different from when I refought the American Civil War battle from the Blessed Featherstone's "Wargames".
So what am I saying? Our hobby is not one hobby. It is many. There are bits that interest me, and bits that don't. I'm not interested in computer wargames nor board wargames, and yet I shall not disparage someone who refights the American Revolution on a screen. Ultimately it is a set of activities that is to give us pleasure. If you want to do that with orcs and wizards, that's fine. If you want to use Chieftain tanks then ... (remind me, which war did they fight in?) ... that is also fine. A set of "Dragons and Chieftains" rules could be the new best seller.
*Someone, possibly the Blessed Featherstone, described wargaming as "the Chess of A Thousand Pieces".
Well said Nobby
Stop being so eloquent!
Quote from: T13A on 07 August 2021, 01:14:10 PM
Hi
Well, I would still back my Chieftain against anybody in a pointy hat, jumping up and down waving a stick and shouting "Cast Rust" or "Heat metal"! :)
(https://i.imgur.com/h8yhD0T.jpg)
"Tango One Three Alpha, Out"!
Heat Metal
Choose a manufactured metal object, such as a metal weapon or a suit of heavy or medium metal armor, that you can see within range. You cause the object to glow red-hot. Any creature in physical contact with the object takes 2d8 fire damage when you cast the spell. Until the spell ends, you can use a Bonus Action on each of your subsequent turns to cause this damage again.
If a creature is holding or wearing the object and takes the damage from it, the creature must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or drop the object if it can. If it doesn't drop the object, it has disadvantage on Attack Rolls and Ability Checks until the start of your next turn.
At Higher Levels: When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 3rd Level or higher, the damage increases by 1d8 for each slot above 2nd.
Not to mention the odds of stowed ammo cooking off, or the BV malfunctioning (A real disaster).
Quote from: Lord Speedy of Leighton on 07 August 2021, 09:35:17 PM
Stop being so eloquent!
Yeah maan, why do you keep lifting us up like this.
Computer chess is the nearest I get to gaming. :(
Trouble is...I just can't set an enjoyable 'level'....Up to a certain point it plays like a total dork...Tweak it in the slightest and it then plays like a grand master.
Cheers - Phil. :)
Quote from: T13A on 07 August 2021, 01:14:10 PM
Hi
Well, I would still back my Chieftain against anybody in a pointy hat, jumping up and down waving a stick and shouting "Cast Rust" or "Heat metal"! :)
(https://i.imgur.com/h8yhD0T.jpg)
"Tango One Three Alpha, Out"!
Wouldn't you first have to roll D6 on the Chieftain Reliability Table?
1-3 = Won't start
4-6 = Breaks down
(I'm sure that in any fantasy universe with coherent internal logic there are equivalent tables for wizards and dragons ...)
Is it WRG 5th or 6th which had the fantasy appendix - on a roll of 6 the Wizzard disappears in a cloud of smoke leaving a strong smell of sulpher !
Chris,
6th - p.55
But... no 'wizzards', though some lizards, :) and the Magician doesn't do much - 'can add or deduct score of 1-6 die' (?) from reaction of friendly or enemy body within 150 paces and not within 100 pces of unfriendly saint or relic.
Regrettably no sulpher/sulphur is produced by this mage (who does not appear to disappear).
There was talk of a separate version of these 'Fantasy Adaptations' - whether they ever materialised and whether that had the sulphurous disappearing Wizzard I cannot say. :)
Quote from: Techno II on 08 August 2021, 06:44:16 AM
Trouble is...I just can't set an enjoyable 'level'....Up to a certain point it plays like a total dork...Tweak it in the slightest and it then plays like a grand master.
I have the same problem with human opponents :D
Hi
QuoteWouldn't you first have to roll D6 on the Chieftain Reliability Table?
1-3 = Won't start
4-6 = Breaks down
In my regiment they only ever seemed to break down next to a Gaststätte and the BV
never broke down! ;)
Cheers Paul
Quote from: Lord Kermit of Birkenhead on 08 August 2021, 09:56:00 AM
Is it WRG 5th or 6th which had the fantasy appendix - on a roll of 6 the Wizzard disappears in a cloud of smoke leaving a strong smell of sulpher !
That'll me last night's Vindaloo.
Quote from: Gwydion on 08 August 2021, 10:12:09 AM
Chris,
6th - p.55
But... no 'wizzards', though some lizards, :) and the Magician doesn't do much - 'can add or deduct score of 1-6 die' (?) from reaction of friendly or enemy body within 150 paces and not within 100 pces of unfriendly saint or relic.
Regrettably no sulpher/sulphur is produced by this mage (who does not appear to disappear).
There was talk of a separate version of these 'Fantasy Adaptations' - whether they ever materialised and whether that had the sulphurous disappearing Wizzard I cannot say. :)
I think WRG had the Wizards figured out.
Sure, there are all the old and obviously exaggerated stories about shooting lightning, flying and turning water into wine.
But all the modern examples have rather limited powers.
Geller: Bend one fork, but can't help England score a penalty.
Cooper: Multiply glasses and bottles (useful), but has a notoriously high fumble roll.
Daniels: Hides ladies in cupboards (haven't we all been there?). Handy in games involving drawn cards.
Wizards in general:
King: Summon me a fearsome beast that will terrify my enemies.
Wizard: Alacazam - behold sire.
King: My enemies are not afraid of rabbits.
Wizard: Give me 5 minutes....
King: What is that supposed to be?
Wizard: Unicorn.
King: That is the queen's riding pony with a rolled up scroll attached to its head. Guards!! Throw this charlatan into the moat.
Chris?
My apologies - Ian.
Can't write straight on a Sunday morning. :-[
Nay ;probs
In other words: that Chieftain may be faced by a Milan or a Merlin. Both have a range, and a to hit and an attack value.
Quote from: fsn on 07 August 2021, 04:27:26 PM
If you want to use Chieftain tanks then ... (remind me, which war did they fight in?)
Used by Iran during the Iran–Iraq War 1980-88 and by Kuwait during the Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait in 1990. :)