RE: [Epic] The Hobby

From: Bill Provick <bprovick_at_...>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 11:59:02 -0400

>
>------> Ok, here's where I step back in:
> My question on the NG's at this point was "how many miniature
>rules sets are better than the available boardgames on a given subject?"
>Most of the time, mini rules are a compromise in detail and accurracy
>compared
>to a tight boardgame on the subject. Are there really that many rules
>sets out
>which you would be interested in playing with counters?
> Now with fantasy and sf type games, this is a little less applicable as
>each background tends to be different, but for historical and modern
>stuff, I've
>seen many more quality rules sets for boards than for mini's.
> I think my feeling comes from that "creation" vibe that was mentioned
>in another post: I built this unit, named it, painted it, and all my
>other units,
>and the terrain we're fighting over, and maybe my opponent's army as
>well !
> Sure, I may have some of the same figures or models that another player
>is using, but I'll bet they look quite different, and there's no
>confusion as to who
>did each unit. With counters, you lose that. That said, I'm big on
>boardgames
>too, but they are "different" to me. Even with less detailed rules, a
>battle feels
>different when it's "your" boys in there getting yanked off the table,
>rather than
>T-34 counter "A".
>
>Chris Miller
>
I think the appeal of wargames over boardgames is that you can play the same
way over and over again, you have your force dictated to you, and what you
play for, and what you play on never changes. GW boardgames have done a very
good job at reducing that repitiveness with Space Hulk, and Warhammer Quest.
Other games like Axis and Allies, what is the point of re-creating the whole
war on one board over and over again, when you can fight it battle for
battle in a wargame with your insane friend. (You would have to be to
attempt to fight every battle in WWII)

Tyler
Received on Mon Aug 18 1997 - 15:59:02 UTC