Re: [GZG] Question: What's in a name - WYSIWYG or not?

I'm comfortable with mixing and matching; however, I like having the
same figures across scales. It is hard to get the same figure at 15mm
and 6mm so when I find something like that I get really interested.
With space ships, I mix and match all the time. Scale is much less
important there. The ship's look matters more, but I've found that you
can find many ships in many lines that complement one another nicely
(painting helps here).

Honestly, the real value of having something labeled ESU or NAC or NSL
is that you have a common stylistic theme across the whole line. With
NSL, for example, you get blocky, solid designs. If there's only one
option for a "wheeled" chassis, then you get a lot of uniformity on
the table. I say this even though I like modularity.

So I guess what I'm saying is that from a fashion perspective, I think
that having a faction in mind when you design a vehicle is a good
organizing principle for the figure's overall look.

On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 4:59 AM, Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com> wrote:

> I posed this question on TMP the other day, and thought it was worth
> repeating here:
>
> If a mini (say, a vehicle or starship) is described as belonging to a
> specific power or faction in a specific game system, is that going to
> make you any less likely to use it with a different force or in a
> different game system than if that same mini was described in very
> generic terms?
> If I named something as a "UNSC Marines MkVII "Piranha" Light Grav
> Tank", would you ONLY think of it in those terms, or would you still
> think "hey, cool tank, that'll do for my Peoples' Republic of New
> California Revolutionary GuardŠ"?
> And, if you DID use it for your own army, would any of your little
> gaming buddies grumble that "that's a <xxx> tank for <xxx> army/game,
> you can't use it for your PRNCŠ."
>
> What prompted this thought was the fact that while our Stargrunt
> infantry figures have always been named for particular powers within
> the game background, the vehicle ranges have always been kept fairly
> generic rather than being specifically tied to a faction, and we've
> always encouraged people to use them for whatever forces they like;
> but I'd be very interested in any opinions either way on thisŠ.
>
> Related to this, do folks like to see vehicle types NAMED, even if
> they are not specifically tied to a force or faction? Do you think of
> the V15-01 as a Cougar, or just as a tracked MBT...?
>
> Reactions to the thread on TMP so far seem to suggest that most folks
> are happy with using stuff for whatever they wish, with only a couple
> of people going with the other view; It'll be interesting to see what
> the GZG ListMind thinks!
>
> Jon (GZG)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l mailing list
> Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
> http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
>

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l