|
parabolic posted:True, but for both PP and Mantic I hope it's a stage one rocket, soon to be shed as they blast off into hard plastic space. It's what maintains me when I have to clean them. This appears to be increasingly the case for Mantic, where they are using Hard Plastic, Board Game plastic, resin or metal now and on all new releases. The design of the succubus sprue indicates they've learnt a lot of hard lessons from their previous efforts. PP don't know.
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
osirisisdead posted:Some gamers are scared of or dislike working with metal... Probably because they have hamhands and working with cyanoacrylate glue isn't the easiest thing. Not everyone has the dexterity to drill 1mm holes to 3mm deep, clip and insert 6mm of wire, and then drill a matching hole on the other piece... Think about it. That's legit jeweler-quality work on a task that's just a basic part of building any multipart metal model. The larger pieces usually require gap filling with epoxy putty. Hard plastic is easy to work with for any people familiar with standard styrene scale models from childhood, the glue doesn't stick your fingers together, and you can put them together while really drunk without worrying about slipping and putting an extra hole in your body. Also, I do worry slightly about lead dust myself... IIRC there's H&S law in most countries now that mean metals tend not to contain lead, I think.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
FrostyPox posted:Also BoLS dug up an article from Citadel Journal by Jervis Johnson from thirteen years ago that kinda explains a lot: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/08/40k-editorial-rules-rant-jervis-are-you-serious.html This is ridiculous. I got into WH40K back in 3rd ed, and the rules have never emphasized scenarios or campaign play. It's always been straight up points-equal armies on more or less symmetrical battle fields with symmetrical objectives. Campaign rules have at best been tacked on afterwards, and scenarios have been completely absent unless you count some bullshit where the attacker is allowed to take one more fast attack then the defender or something. There's a million ways they could have made 40K and Fantasy scenario driven or or focused on asymetrical gameplay, but they didn't. Whining that the player base plays the game as presented rather than in the unspoken way you would prefer is just plain petty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
spectralent posted:IIRC there's H&S law in most countries now that mean metals tend not to contain lead, I think. Tin, Copper and Antimony
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
Mr. Sunshine posted:This is ridiculous. I got into WH40K back in 3rd ed, and the rules have never emphasized scenarios or campaign play. It's always been straight up points-equal armies on more or less symmetrical battle fields with symmetrical objectives. Campaign rules have at best been tacked on afterwards, and scenarios have been completely absent unless you count some bullshit where the attacker is allowed to take one more fast attack then the defender or something. There's a million ways they could have made 40K and Fantasy scenario driven or or focused on asymetrical gameplay, but they didn't. Whining that the player base plays the game as presented rather than in the unspoken way you would prefer is just plain petty. Even just looking at the default rulebook scenarios for something like Malifaux or FoW you get so much more character than GW ever shat out, (except in the LotR books  )it's unreal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
Mr. Sunshine posted:This is ridiculous. I got into WH40K back in 3rd ed, and the rules have never emphasized scenarios or campaign play. It's always been straight up points-equal armies on more or less symmetrical battle fields with symmetrical objectives. Campaign rules have at best been tacked on afterwards, and scenarios have been completely absent unless you count some bullshit where the attacker is allowed to take one more fast attack then the defender or something. There's a million ways they could have made 40K and Fantasy scenario driven or or focused on asymetrical gameplay, but they didn't. Whining that the player base plays the game as presented rather than in the unspoken way you would prefer is just plain petty. I'm not surprised that the designers don't understand how their own game is played by their own customers. It seems to me, in this light, it's obvious what they tried to do with Age of Sigmar. And they did it in the worst way possible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
Now imagine if Age of Sigmar had been a skirmish-level wargame with non-insane rules set in the ancient Imperial period. Not knights and griffons and wizards, but early iron-age Germanic barbarians just figuring out how to feudalism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
gently caress, it's simple. Want people to play the game based on asymmetrical scenarios? State clearly in the opening of the rules that the purpose of the game is to play out scenarios, present a whole bunch of different scenarios and ways to make your own. Then, at the very end, tack in a bit about how you can also play the game as a straight up fight between equal forces. Bam! Your players are now coming into the game with totally different expectations. You can even add in faction-specific scenarios in each codex, to hammer the point home.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:Tin, Copper and Antimony Yeah, I had a feeling lead was on the way out. None of those metals are particularly bad for you if you're not licking them or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
spectralent posted:IIRC there's H&S law in most countries now that mean metals tend not to contain lead, I think. The Infinity models have a specific warning that "These Products Contain Lead" at least.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
As odd as it may seem, you can't control how players play your game. That's their prerogative. It's even in the name! While it is possible to try to exercise some sort of Derek-Smart-esque level insanity to try to control everything about your walled garden of fun, in general, it's a terrible idea that doesn't work well. The best ongoing games have some level of dialogue between the playerbase and the devs. The devs create, the players play, the players complain, the devs listen, the devs update, the players play, and repeat. Orrrrrrrrrr, the devs create and ignore the players, and the players quit or the playerbase stagnates in a small incestuous community of mutual backpatting that is relatively stable but has limited opportunity for growth. But hey, as long as the latter can keep your company afloat, go for it I guess v  v
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
Mr. Sunshine posted:This is ridiculous. I got into WH40K back in 3rd ed, and the rules have never emphasized scenarios or campaign play. It's always been straight up points-equal armies on more or less symmetrical battle fields with symmetrical objectives. Campaign rules have at best been tacked on afterwards, and scenarios have been completely absent unless you count some bullshit where the attacker is allowed to take one more fast attack then the defender or something. There's a million ways they could have made 40K and Fantasy scenario driven or or focused on asymetrical gameplay, but they didn't. Whining that the player base plays the game as presented rather than in the unspoken way you would prefer is just plain petty. It's not like Jervis has had full creative control over the game, at least since I've been involved. I dig what he's on about there and would have loved to play the 40k and Fantasy like that in the past. I'll probably end up playing Total War: Warhammer and DoW2 to get my Warhammer fix because I'm not going to give GW any more money. I don't trust what they are going to do with it. Cyberpunkey Monkey fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Aug 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
osirisisdead posted:Not everyone has the dexterity to drill 1mm holes to 3mm deep, clip and insert 6mm of wire, and then drill a matching hole on the other piece... Think about it. That's legit jeweler-quality work on a task that's just a basic part of building any multipart metal model. I spent fifteen years building all-metal models and I never pinned a thing. Just superglue, a little putty, and a little tissue paper. I am sure pinning is useful, I have done it on some heavy models in past years, but it's not required for lots of metal stuff. Also GW hasn't had lead in their models since they switched to white metal, iirc. It was part of the reason for the change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
tissue paper?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
osirisisdead posted:tissue paper? Mixed with a little super glue it actually has a use filling in gaps. Not my first choice over green stuff but I've used that technic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
Spiderdrake posted:I really hope Warpath ends up as a smaller scale 40k analogue but it sounds like the people urging Mantic forward want some giant battles ranked nonsense Hi let me assure you that I complain about restic a lot, just not on the internet. I actually prefer the Bonesium blend of whatever to the stuff PP uses, if only because PP's mold lines are usually placed in such a way that you can tell they're meant to be hidden by model details but always end up glaringly obvious on the model when painted anyways. On the other hand PP makes crazy sightless dragon demons to fight giant alligator people, so I just need to grin and bear it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Is there a good sci fi skirmish rule set that's nice and simple? (And the company encourages you to use any minis Try Beyond the Gates of Antares. Free rules right now on Warlord Games website.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 01:37
|
|
) I like infinity but that has a ton of rules and even my anime robot faction models don't look anime enough for it.
|
Mr. Sunshine posted:gently caress, it's simple. Want people to play the game based on asymmetrical scenarios? State clearly in the opening of the rules that the purpose of the game is to play out scenarios, present a whole bunch of different scenarios and ways to make your own. Then, at the very end, tack in a bit about how you can also play the game as a straight up fight between equal forces. Wasn't that the whole point of Inquisitor, the 40K skirmish game/RPG that used to be in the Specialist Games?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
Yeah, but inquisitor suffered from being a different scale with a limited range. Plus, the scenarios were unbalanced in an unfun way. You'd control a single character in multi person games, but you still had a smuggler and an inquisitor in the same party. One got to do badass things, the other missed a lot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
Why are plastic injection molds so expensive may I ask? It just seems like they machine two big pieces of steel.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
http://vpmi.com/tech-molds.htm
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
spectralent posted:IIRC there's H&S law in most countries now that mean metals tend not to contain lead, I think. Rackham actually quite happily still sold lead figures while GW went through their change to white metal. The reason. One company wanted a EU child safe label. The other marketed them as finely crafted figurines not intended for children.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:Mixed with a little super glue it actually has a use filling in gaps. Not my first choice over green stuff but I've used that technic. Yea, basically, this. If you are using superglue on a join and sandwich a little piece of tissue in there it fills and small gaps and strengthens the bond. If you screw up, you end up with some lumpy tissue stuck to your model I don't recommend it, but I didn't have greenstuff when I was a kid, so you come up with what you can to make the difference.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
Mr. Sunshine posted:gently caress, it's simple. Want people to play the game based on asymmetrical scenarios? State clearly in the opening of the rules that the purpose of the game is to play out scenarios, present a whole bunch of different scenarios and ways to make your own. Then, at the very end, tack in a bit about how you can also play the game as a straight up fight between equal forces. This is exactly the sort of thing I say about a different but related problem, the way they seem to want Tyranids or whoever to be the NPC villains for the space marines to fight against. Just make that game if it's what you want. I feel like I'd genuinely enjoy a properly made game about co-op player armies taking on a challenging NPC opponent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
Mr. Sunshine posted:Whining that the player base plays the game as presented rather than in the unspoken way you would prefer is just plain petty. Welcome to the J Files. e: pretty sure Pete Haines used to do the same thing too. ee: Remember in the 3rd edition Space Marine Codex you were allowed to take a special and heavy weapon in a Tactical squad regardless of how many Marines were in it? Jervis wrote an article that the codex allowed you to customise the number of guys in each squad to represent casualties sustained during a campaign and was horrified that people would min-max like that. Tactical Squads changed to only 5 or 10 men in the next codex. I think it took them until 5th or 6th before they figured out they could put the minimum size condition on taking both weapons. adamantium|wang fucked around with this message at 05:57 on Aug 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
As far as lead is concerned, Reaper was still releasing their P-65 until a few years ago, and stopped only because Bones was more capably filling that product niche.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 09:29
|
|
|
adamantium|wang posted:ee: Remember in the 3rd edition Space Marine Codex you were allowed to take a special and heavy weapon in a Tactical squad regardless of how many Marines were in it? Jervis wrote an article that the codex allowed you to customise the number of guys in each squad to represent casualties sustained during a campaign and was horrified that people would min-max like that. Tactical Squads changed to only 5 or 10 men in the next codex. I think it took them until 5th or 6th before they figured out they could put the minimum size condition on taking both weapons. You'll find that this is a commonality in every game from the mid 90s or late 80s. There's tons of rules that are there for theme and they'd get min-maxed every single time so everything was as efficent as possible. Then the designers would have to change it. It's not just board games either, computer games had it too. It seems weird that so many designers come from D&D and etc backgrounds but never met a min-maxer in that time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 10:00
|
|
|
Min-Maxers were mocked and discriminated against in the 80s and early 90s for not "getting it". They were socially kept in check by the metagame among the people that were designing the games but they were then normalized when people started coming to tabletop gaming after being already socialized via computer gaming and bringing that kind of attitude with them in droves. They would get the books and play among themselves. It was a kind of cultural divergence that never really came back together. It's why "grognards" are so mad about the state of tabletop these days and post angry rants on the internet on a regular basis. I posted a Shadowrun character online once and the only comment I got was that I should respec my Magic stat from a 4 to a 6 because I wasn't "strong enough", like every gangland shaman has a 6 magic stat?! Having a 1 Magic stat would be loving amazing! You could summon spirits and maybe heal people by touching them or set things on fire with your mind, and still be a fuckin' miracle worker with a 1. But that shift in the generations from people who played Starcraft, Final Fantasy, or WoW before knowing that miniatures wargames or tabletop RPGs were *even a thing* took the old grogs by surprise and then also, Anyway, back in the day, the rules didn't matter much except to vaguely emulate via a good-enough RNG the characters or fighting forces from the fantasy and sci-fi novels we were all reading along with playing these games. The guy playing the mage didn't "get ahead at equivalent XP levels I like what they are thinking, honestly, but after the trash they released in the past few years, I'm just moving onto other companies who are making better games, but that may be the long-term strategy they are going for. They actually want old grogs to quit. They are going to have Total War: Warhammer, and probably more Dawns of War, and some mom who wants to keep her good, smart kid away from the rich teenage drunken cocaine gently caress parties of the socially decaying American suburbia will take them to the Warhammer store where there are a bunch of other good kids his age to socialize with whose good moms did the same thing. They'll overpay for paints that dry out because they don't know any better and don't quite trust the weird people ranting angrily on the internet, because we're weird strangers. Idk, seems pretty okay, as far as I am concerned. Maybe AoS is going to be the babby-tier game and this next crop of kids that comes out in about ten years after cutting their tabletop teeth in AoS are going to be  dudes who are all ready to play like dudes in the grownup games. Maybe, after the dust settles, this will be a good thing. Maybe GW is going to be the gateway drug, the ditch weed but we have already moved onto harder stuff, the steampunk speedball that is Warmahordes, the space acid that is Infinity, idk, the high fantasy chronic bongload that is Kings of War. We don't get the same kind of high from that old ditch weed anymore. We've found all of these better Cyberpunkey Monkey fucked around with this message at 12:39 on Aug 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 11:06
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:Why are plastic injection molds so expensive may I ask? It just seems like they machine two big pieces of steel. Speaking as a tool&die maker: poo poo is hard, yo. Although, it is a lot easier these days with CAD machining centers and the ability to just make a prototype design in a computer and just push a button and watch as a machine carves it out of a chunk of steel for you. Plus the machinery to inject the plastic is big, complicated and a bit dangerous. I worked with extrusion dies, and one of those setups was about a hundred feet long with the cooling tank. Took about 3 experienced guys to operate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 11:37
|
|
|
osirisisdead posted:whining bullshit grogs.txt is that way --->
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 11:38
|
|
|
osirisisdead posted:"that he could do more DPS than a fighter of equivalent XP"! The example I always think of is in Ultima Online. They made it so anyone could kill anyone and take their stuff because in an RPG (as in a tabletop one) you weren't paticularly likely to just murder everyone you met, why would you? That isn't very nice. But of course killing people was an efficent way of getting money. And making people annoyed was pretty efficent too. So loads of people did it and it started to make people leave. Everyone also expected to max out their characters. This again didn't seem to be something the developers expected. You play in the mid levels in tabletop games, not at max level, why would that all be anyone cared about? It's always interesting to me (I've got a degree in sociology and we studied MMOGs somewhat although it was a decade ago now) how assumptions from the designers coloured all game design so much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 11:38
|
|
|
Taear posted:The example I always think of is in Ultima Online. They made it so anyone could kill anyone and take their stuff because in an RPG (as in a tabletop one) you weren't paticularly likely to just murder everyone you met, why would you? That isn't very nice. The max level thing is a good point though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 11:48
|
|
|
Exactly! The lack of regular social cues and no real risk of permadeath (not being able to play the game anymore) made people behave madly different. I remember in UO, making some ring mail out of bronze or something, and then feeling good enough to wander outside for a little while. Some guy was mining ore and I accidentally poked at his cart and instead of saying something to me, or threatening, or telling me to back off, he murdered me instantly. I came back and said something and he apologized and gave me my stuff back, but yeah... I realized then that the societies that were created in the game weren't going to be based off of Role-Played risk-reward ideas... and in some ways I lost interest. Most of my online role play gaming in my teens was done via that WebRPG java applet rather than MMORPG's, and the only MMO since my level 34 Rallos Zek Wood Elf Druid in Everquest that I've put significant time into was Goonfleet EVE, which was a whole 'nother kinda monster, but even then, I only played heavily for about eight months? Maybe less. MMO's have been a grand social experiment. I haven't wanted to study anything that hasn't finished playing out yet, because I think social things happen over generations and trying to analyze on something as it's happening right now is like trying to pin down both parts of the velocity vector of an electron LOL AMIRITE?! I've stuck to historical social studies and worried about unintended consequences of the rationalization and statisticification of society as I watch them predictably playing out in policy decisions, but anyway. DigitalRaven posted:grogs.txt is that way ---> Yeah, I'm not whining, I'm waxing sentimental about days past. Go back to not posting in this thread. Cyberpunkey Monkey fucked around with this message at 12:16 on Aug 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 11:58
|
|
|
What Jervis wrote in that article is pretty much how most historical war games play. Very scenario/ recreation of a real battle etc. it's only recently with the growth of things such as Flames of War that the hobby has seen a more points driven/ pick up game/ tournament approach and Battlefront purposely aped GW and 40k in their entire approach to FoW. Personally I feel there's room for both approaches but I don't think AoS is going to work for most players.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 12:38
|
|
|
It's not going to work for most of their player-base as they exist right now, but I don't think that's the point. They have been planning some massive strategic changes for at least the past few years. They were hiring a person to do some kind of social/market research at GW stores for a two year contract early last year. That's what makes Kirby's otiose in a niche comment so confusing to me. Maybe that is specifically targeted at standard John Q Public type randomly sampled standard demographic focus-grouping and they aren't doing something that would be considered scientific or valid to a person trained by universities to market products who may be consulting investors and he's trying to explain that? I don't know how the gently caress my posts tonight have turned into GW apology. I'm sorry dudes.  I suspect that Kings of War is an intentional move by people who have back-room social connections with the people who run Games Workshop and the branding moves of GW as the "premium Aristocracy of gaming models and accessories" is meant to be a foil to Mantic's cool-guy rebel-gamer peasantry. I suspect that Kings of War is literally, secretly, 9th ed WHFB and that Age of Sigmar is something totally new that is meant to socialize brand-new gamers into Jervis' old ways before they get their big boy britches. Something similar is happening to 40k with the Unbound poo poo, but I'm not willing to make predictions. Idk about Flames of War, I never got into it because I wanted to play the supported platoon-level skirmish and 25-28mm scale for WW2. I wanted World Warhammer II, basically. I played 40k in 3rd and quit when 4th came out because I turned 21 and started drinking and doing drugs for recreation and entertainment rather than playing with soldier dollies. I could never settle on which WHFB army I liked the most, but I did get 1k High Elves somewhat put together in 2008ish and played a game or two. I didn't really like it all that much. I wanted it to feel like Total War mass battle, but it didn't. It was this weird game where groups of ten were stuck in ranks... I played Warmaster in 1998 or 1999 and loved it, but then that little shop where I played went out of business and I have never since met another person in meatspace that has actually played Warmaster in my presence. I eBayed my poo poo, or gave it away, I don't care to remember at this point, because I hadn't touched in in a year. Hoarding is a mental disorder. Warmaster was loving rad. I had Dwarves and I loved it. That's why I'm so chuffed about the idea of mixing Kings of War with that 6mm fantasy line that I have bookmarked somewhere. I played a few games of Battlefleet Gothic and it was okay, but the XWing/Star Trek Armada/Wings of Glory model seems like a much more elegant way to play that kind of game, anyway, and I'm glad they exist though I don't play them yet. Infinity is currently blowing my loving mind. There are no other games like it. It's legitimately like Ghost in the Shell the tabletop game. These are exciting times for tabletop gaming, and from my perspective, the only change is that I'm buying into Bolt Action, that has some neat gameplay mechanics (the order pot) that address some of the exact things that bother me about 40k, and Infinity, that has some neat gameplay mechanics (literally everything) that are out of this loving world. I don't need to smoke ditch weed anymore. Cyberpunkey Monkey fucked around with this message at 13:15 on Aug 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 13:13
|
|
|
Serotonin posted:What Jervis wrote in that article is pretty much how most historical war games play. Very scenario/ recreation of a real battle etc. it's only recently with the growth of things such as Flames of War that the hobby has seen a more points driven/ pick up game/ tournament approach and Battlefront purposely aped GW and 40k in their entire approach to FoW. Personally I feel there's room for both approaches but I don't think AoS is going to work for most players. Normally when I see people waxing nostalgic about how historical games organized things I find that they misremember or simply have no freaking clue how historical games did it. For instance, a lot of Napoleonic games will in fact impose strict size standards on regiment depending on when you're playing them and impose limits on how much manpower you can bring simply as a matter of historical accuracy. Some of them then extrapolate that into a balancing mechanic for the common "what if" games, which are basically pitched battles that never happened in real life and explicitly are more fair at the outset. So AoS doesn't really give any kind of campaign support, ongoing play or historical-style organizational rules either and thus fails to appeal to even the crowd that tracks the exact platoon size and composition of an army in the North Africa theatre during WW2 - because they track that as an army building mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 13:28
|
|
|
It's not for them, either, especially not for them. It's for 13 year old boys, who probably also listen to metal, to be able to play the game with just the starter box, that isn't significantly more expensive than other GW starter boxes for a similar amount of junk and then if *that* hooks them, they will throw down $50 a few times a year, maybe once a month depending on what their allowance is like (and/or ask for a couple hundred dollars worth of holiday gifts) so that they can fight larger battles or field different stuff.... It's the gateway drug. It will keep them hooked until they realize that sunk cost is a fallacy and then they'll join the rest of us... Would you rather they be socialized via the current Warhammer tournament scene or via something new and different and untried? Cyberpunkey Monkey fucked around with this message at 13:46 on Aug 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
Well of course there's a guide to force composition and unit sizes in historical gaming, I wasn't claiming otherwise. I've been wargaming for 25 years and most of that has been historical ( although the last 18months has mainly been Warmachine and I've even been sucked into tournament scene) so id like to think I'm not misremembering or making poo poo up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 13:41
|
|
|
osirisisdead posted:It's not for them, either, especially not for them. Age of Sigmar isn't "for" anyone
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
It's for angsty 13 year olds whose mom limits their computer time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 13:52
|
|