Far too many troops/units for the space available and the terrain is very second rate by today's standards.  Unimpressed.

Show us how it's done then...

Why should he have to?

You don't have to be Constable to appreciate good art.

The volume of work here is impressive, very impressive, but the overall effect and look of the game is rather uninspiring - that said it's not a display game it's just some mates having a game, so I don't think it needs be measured against anything more than the general (rather shabby) quality of your average club game. In that regard it's perfectly fine and probably slightly above par.

I suspect that the photos do not really do justice to such a grand endeavor

Quote from: Zippee on 03 February 2018, 09:28:52 AM
Why should he have to?

He said it was second rate by today's standard. I didn't know we had predefined standards in our hobby. That's why I ask. I'd like to see what that standard is.

Everyone can set standards, but if 90% is 'under' the standard, it is by definition not a "standard".

I for one can say that I like the scenery. The buildings look great.so I want to know if I'm under the standard.

From what I've seen of your efforts Peter, definitely not below 'standard'

I don't recall seeing any of John's efforts

The group seem to enjoy their really large games so good on them

The effort is impressive, lots to commend and the sheer scale is worthy of praise. However, for me I am left a little cold by the thought of playing this at first look. There is no manoeuvre and it looks like a Games Workshop Car Park game with the most dice winning. This is the Battle of Marmite.

Quote from: paulr on 03 February 2018, 06:40:51 PM
From what I've seen of your efforts Peter, definitely not below 'standard'

I don't recall seeing any of John's efforts :-

The group seem to enjoy their really large games so good on them

I'd be surprised if you had.  I have never posted any pics of my games on the forum or anywhere else.  There are, nevertheless, hundreds of pictures posted by individuals of their games, and taken at shows, of terrain that is streets ahead of this.   A quick Google, or with the search engine of your choice, and you will see for yourself.

wow, that's a seriously impressive figure painting effort (although i think they have the wrong button colour on the lead battalion  )

I agree about the table size, but if that's all that is available then the desire to get all that effort on to the table would be over whelming.

Terrain wise, its okay and serves its purpose. With the sheer scale of the figure painting task I doubt there was much scope for 'show' level scenery.

Also......looks like Mad Lemmey's crown of most prolific painter is challenged.... don't let us down mate

Redstef, I thought I was the only one that noticed that. Did you also notice that some of the figures have the numbers on their buttons for regiments that were not at that battle! Man, that's just shameful. I always make sure my regiments button numbers match to regiments that actually fought at the battle I am doing.



Terry

Quote from: John Cook on 07 February 2018, 11:18:39 AM
I'd be surprised if you had.  I have never posted any pics of my games on the forum or anywhere else.  There are, nevertheless, hundreds of pictures posted by individuals of their games, and taken at shows, of terrain that is streets ahead of this.   A quick Google, or with the search engine of your choice, and you will see for yourself.

That still doesn't make it "the standard". The standard for me is cot-efective and easily storable and transportable terrain, and I'm guessing I'm not the only one.

There will always be others with more time/money/dedication to spend on these things. That does not put someone's efforts 'below standard". Just a different approach 

Am I theonly one who would get 54,000 figures on the table and then say ... "nah. I've gone off the idea"?

Quote from: fsn on 07 February 2018, 07:23:31 PM
Am I theonly one who would get 54,000 figures on the table and then say ... "nah. I've gone off the idea"?

No you are not.

Quote from: petercooman on 07 February 2018, 06:14:37 PM
That still doesn't make it "the standard". The standard for me is cot-efective and easily storable and transportable terrain, and I'm guessing I'm not the only one.

There will always be others with more time/money/dedication to spend on these things. That does not put someone's efforts 'below standard". Just a different approach 

Then we disagree.

Would appear so wouldn't it 

Quote from: petercooman on 07 February 2018, 06:14:37 PM
That still doesn't make it "the standard". The standard for me is cot-efective and easily storable and transportable terrain, and I'm guessing I'm not the only one.

There will always be others with more time/money/dedication to spend on these things. That does not put someone's efforts 'below standard". Just a different approach 

Agreed

Quote from: John Cook on 07 February 2018, 10:48:36 PM
Then we disagree.

Agreed