RE:[MISC] [OT] Bring and Battle

On Wed, 23 Sep 1998, Wayne wrote:

> Playing a game once every three months isn't giving it a fair go.  

Tough. It's becoming much harder for new game systems to make an
impression. Maybe they learn the lesson boardgame designers have known
for
ages: The game has to accessible.

> I played battletech for two years while at high school before I won
games
> with any sort of regularity.	

Winning is not important. Learning to play fluidly (i.e. without
consulting the rulebook) is. Learning to set up interesting, balanced
games is. 

> 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???

How can you know if it's any good if you don't read (buy) it? 

I buy maybe 10-20 game systems a year. I guess I collect them. I read
them
through, if it impresses me we try it out a couple of times. If it
really
impresses us, it might get to be the "focus" game, played biweekly or
so.
If not, it's off to the reference book department.

Which is just a fancy word for dust collection duty.

> Designing scenarios can be just as much fun.	

Yeah, that's why I GM our RPG sessions. I love scenario and world
building. But I like to actually get to *play* every once in a while. 

> 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.  

Who's going to write it? Ok, I *might* get one off the net that fits my
figure collection. Who's going to referee it? You, over CU-SeeMe? It can
be fun, but it's not the same thing. It's not *my* tank battalion, it's
the scenario designer's battalion.

> 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.

I have a clue for you. Check the .sig. Check the address. Where do I
live?
Is there a gaming club I could join? No.
Does the local shop (note: singular) have gaming nights where I could
meet
new opponents? No.
Does the shop have a notice board for players? Yes.
Does it have notices from anyone besides pre-pubescent teens playing GW?
No.
How many copies of FT are sold in Finland (entire country)? Half a
dozen,
maybe.
How many are regularly used? Mine, it appears.

I play with the people in my gaming group because we're friends and
enjoy
the same kind of games. They just don't feel like devoting quite as much
time, money and energy into it as I do. Plus the old "I can't paint"
excuse. 

> 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).  

Yeah, if I could tolerate counters, I'd probably still be playing Squad
Leader. 

> It is also a cheap way to find out if you
> want to buy a game system or not.  

Cheap? I'm going to use my minis with the game anyway. I do appreciate
the
effort though.

> 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.  

If you had followed my postings for any length of time here or on
r.g.m.m.
you'd know you couldn't be farther off the mark.

> 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.   

I don't need to win to have fun. I just need to have a fair chance of
winning. I don't mind being beaten by a better opponent. I don't even
mind
losing due to pure chance. But I do mind losing due to never having a
chance to begin with.

(And I'm talking about winning the *game*, not the battle here)

> 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.

Hey, we agree.

-- 
maxxon@swob.dna.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio) 	   | A pig who doesn't
fly
+358 50 5596411 GSM +358 9 80926 78/FAX 81/Voice   | is just an ordinary
pig.
Maininkitie 3C14 02320 ESPOO FINLAND | Hate me?    |	      - Porco
Rosso
http://www.swob.dna.fi/~maxxon/      | hateme.html |