RE:[MISC] [OT] Bring and Battle

>On Tue, 22 Sep 1998, Mikko Kurki-Suonio wrote: 

>>On Mon, 21 Sep 1998, Thomas Barclay wrote:
>>Pardon? I don't have a problem with that with SG2. Once you have 
>>experience at the game, and some mission cards, you can eyeball 
>>forces and get a good idea of their relative merits. 

>"Once you have experience" is the operative word here. How many games
does
>it take to learn a system inside out? *Without* a more experienced
>teacher? Let's say I play a game of SG once every three months (typical
>for a "sideline" game in my group). Let's say it takes 10 games to
learn
>the system.

Playing a game once every three months isn't giving it a fair go.  When
I
buy a new game system I commit myself to learning it and playing a
number
of games, up to one every weekend, over the next couple of months.  If I
don't have the time to do this, the inclination, the opponents or any
suitable models to practice with (I was using the micro machine starwars
figures to play stargrunt with for three months before I even bought my
first 25mm SciFi miniature) then I don't buy the rules till I can or am
inclined to do this.

>That's two and half *years* of bad experiences (you don't learn unless
you
>make mistakes) with SG! Honestly, how many people can be expected to
stick
>with the system that long?

I played battletech for two years while at high school before I won
games
with any sort of regularity.  I continued to play cause I enjoyed the
game
even though I had the stuffing knocked out of my mechs every lunchtime.
This is how my brother learnt to play as well, though I like to think I
was
kinder on him than the people I played against at lunchtime were on me. 
If
your not prepared to lose a great number of games while you are learning
a
new system then I guess I really have to ask why did you fork out the
money
to buy it in the first place???

>Maybe it's my (heretical) background in Car Wars, but I *enjoy*
designing
>ships, vehicles, forces etc. and then taking them out for a spin.
>Designing is something I can enjoy about the game *alone*, when it
suits
>me (which is becoming a more and more important consideration). 

Designing scenarios can be just as much fun.  Ask Owen Glover and his
co-conspirators at the WSWA (Melbourne) if you doubt my words.	I'm sure
they got hours of amusement designing that hideously difficult bridge
scenario that I played during their StarGrunt tourney last weekend. 
Next
time I'm going to bring a dam boat and I don't care what they say ;P
(Are
you reading this Owen?)  
>I also *enjoy* the uncertainty of not knowing what your opponent is
>fielding.
>A preset scenario robs me of these pleasures.

If you are playing a scenario that you didn't design and with hidden
victory conditions you will experience this *enjoyment* as well as a lot
of
other feelings as your carefully constructed plan disintegrates into
ruin.  

>I don't have the luxury of a referee (unless it's me). I get to buy all
>the rules, learn them, teach them, buy all the minis and paint them --
or
>there's no game (unless I go play GW).

Hmmmmm.  Read my first paragraph and then contact some other like minded
people through the retail store where you bought the rules from.  Just
cause your current gaming group doesn't play a system doesn't mean their
aren't other people around who do.

>And I absolutely hate cardboard counters...

This is a pity cause playing with cardboard counters is great fun (I
still
use the cardboard tokens that you got with the BattleTech boxed set,
they
beat metal miniatures any day).  It is also a cheap way to find out if
you
want to buy a game system or not.  

I'm going to make a judgement call now and if I'm wrong I apologise to
you
before hand, but it sounds like you have been sucked in by the GW
marketing
people who's only goal in life is to sell their miniatures and as a
result
have corrupted a whole generation of potential wargamers into thinking
that
the only way to play is with officially sanctioned miniatures.	I
suggest
that you might try playing some boardgames like King Maker, The African
Campaign, and other counter based games where the enjoyment comes from
beating your opponent and not from having the most up to date miniature
release.   

>>The issue isn't win-lose, its how well you lead your 
>>troops and how much fun you had. If you play an unbalanced game, but 
>>score enemy casualties out of all proportion, 

>Maybe I should just totally stop playing games I can't play at "pro"
>level?

If you did this then you would never have started to play at all, since
you
are always a novice when you start to play.  

It all comes down to having FUN.  If your not having fun then you
shouldn't
be playing or you are playing the game wrong.  I no longer play 40K
cause I
no longer enjoy it.  I still play BattleTech cause beating the stuffing
out
of mechs is fun.  I'm currently play StarGrunt cause it is also fun
(bridge
scenarios included).

Wayne.

P.S. no offense intended and original message edited for length reasons.