Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Super Jag

General: Misperceptions?

Recommended Posts

At the risk of getting backhanded by Reaper folks... I'm very curious what other's perceptions are with regards to the following discussions... and I EMPHASIZE that I'm NOT trying to be negative in any way, but I do have some perception concerns regarding Warlord and R.A.G.E. in general.

 

1. Any one else frustrated with the fact that the BEAUTIFUL Warlord book is available, but so many of it's corresponding models are unavailable? I think back to the game of Chronopia and that company (Target Games) did the same thing and in it lost them over a dozen players in our small town area alone.

 

2. More and more I'm starting to get the impression that the Warlord rules/mechanics were written TOO simple and/or lack sufficient explanation of intention.

 

3. Who else is having difficulty coming to grips with the 2 action phases (variable depending on which troop model acts out which type of action) per initiative card? I guess there's a reason why most games have a system whereby the model has one action which is INCLUSIVE of the ability to both move and conduct activity (combat, etc.).

 

4. As much as I greatly appreciate being a CAV2 beta tester, I've found it somewhat difficult/discenchanting to maintain interest in proofreading and testing it. Some of it can be chalked up to it being a new system and having to change my existing knowledge of the game, however, for a system (R.A.G.E.) supposedly being easy for transference, it honestly seems overwhelming. When judging how easily one could go from Warlord to CAV2, I just don't see it being as easy as suggested. So, then multiply this concern by the other planned games for the future in R.A.G.E.

 

5. Is Reaper trying to follow in the footsteps of Games Workshop? Admirable if they are, however I have my reservations because of the fact that many of us appreciate some of the qualities that makes Reaper, Reaper: unique, affordable, community, etc. If I wanted to play Games Workshop style I'd get a second job to pay for it and stop spending time with my family...

 

I know these opinions are actually shared by others, but I'm curious just how far it extends and hopefully others have a more rationalizing twist on these perceptions. Feel free to elaborate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. yes everyone is frustrated at that also which is where patience comes in.. im a dark spawn player while others have an army to choose from i have only 8 minis that are actually darkspawn.

 

2.they are written in a simple format cause many dont have the patience to learn hard and difficult rules of play... plus they are designed to be one set of rules for all there games so that it wont be difficult to change from one to the other.

 

3. nope they are easy and simple and much better then having one set of steps that have to be done in a specific order. (magic the gathering, AD&d etc.)

 

4. Where you are compairing warlord and cav to warhammer 40k... which i myself never cared for.. i AM however an extremely devoted player of FASA's Battle tech (dont even get me started on that wiz kid successful attempt and butchering the greatest game ive played for 15 years) try playing battle tech now thats a difficult game to learn but fun as hell game to play.. this is why im not to fond of CAV but it was fun to play as well. but i love warlord also....ok im wierd what can i say

 

5. na cause i couldnt get the jist of games workshop stuff.. so i gave up .. warlord made much more sense..

 

 

i doubt any of this made sense but in my oppinion i enjoy warlord and there for i have the patience to wait for the figs that i badly want... the game is what you make of it.. make it fun for you and it is fun... make it suck and you wont wanna play it ever again.. :B):

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll chime in on #2. Yes, I think Warlord is too simple at times. But that means it has lots of space to expand into. I'm hoping these faction books give us some much needed extra abilities and special rules. Warlord as it stands is a great game. I feel it needs some extras to make it my favorite wargame of all time. Oh, who am I kidding, I hated WFB and 40K. Warlord wins already.

Things I want to see: more spells, more abilities, more equipment/upgrades...just more in general.

 

Warwick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the game is what you make of it.. make it fun for you and it is fun... make it suck and you wont wanna play it ever again

Hah! Thanks for your input. I gotta chuckle because your responses remind me of what I and many others used to say at your level of postings. Seems the more involved we become the more challenging it is to maintain that enthusiasm.

 

Believe me, as a Black Lightning Officer I too publicly maintain a positive and enthusiastic attitude (and unlike others I know, my personality exudes it anyways).

 

However, that doesn't change the natural development of certain perceptions, from us BLO's or gamers in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Be patient.

 

2. I find this insulting.

 

3. No, I have no problem coming to grips with the two phase action. And Warlord is not most games, it's better.

 

4. No comment.

 

5. No, they are not trying to follow in the footsteps of GW. They have made an awesome game which is nothing like any GW product in mechanics, look, or cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll chime in on #2. Yes, I think Warlord is too simple at times. But that means it has lots of space to expand into. I'm hoping these faction books give us some much needed extra abilities and special rules

 

Yes... that's my concern addressed in statement #4. Too many different extra abilities & spells that pertain to certain models or situations... multiplied by all the different ones for different R.A.G.E. games seems like it's getting away from the objective of the system.

 

As well, extra special abilities and spells are "advanced" or basically still function on what seems to be CORE mechanics that are perhaps too simple and/or not fully explained. What's the use in advanced rules if the CORE is faulty?

 

5. No, they are not trying to follow in the footsteps of GW. They have made an awesome game which is nothing like any GW product in mechanics, look, or cost.

I am referencing the R.A.G.E. system concept, which is to say ONE system, MANY games. That's the similarity to GW.

 

I REALLY AM A HAPPY REAPER FAN & SUPPORTER... In case anyone wasn't clear on that!!! ::D:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hah! Thanks for your input. I gotta chuckle because your responses remind me of what I and many others used to say at your level of postings.

im sorry what do you mean by my level of postings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hah! Thanks for your input. I gotta chuckle because your responses remind me of what I and many others used to say at your level of postings. 

 

 

im sorry what do you mean by my level of postings?

 

Not that I've reached a posting number of monolithic proportions, but I remember when I had posted my first few dozen topics/responses and virtually all my energy was on the good.

 

It's GREAT to see you post POSITIVE support!!! Please continue... it was meant purely as a compliment. ::):

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm rather new to the game but I'll put in my two cents.

 

1.) It is a bit of a let down that not all the models are out, but at least you can proxy the models you can't get without taking any guff.

 

2.) The rules are pretty simple, but I think it has a good balance of realism (which tends to require extensive rules that slow down the game) and time it takes to play a game. I'd rather forfeit some complexity and be able to play a game in an hour rather than play a really complex game that takes half the day.

 

3.) I never had any problem accepting the 2-action rules. It could be because it's fairly similar to other systems I've played (D&D 3.5 comes to mind), so maybe it's just me.

 

Well, that's my opinion anyway. For what it's worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the risk of getting backhanded by Reaper folks... I'm very curious what other's perceptions are with regards to the following discussions... and I EMPHASIZE that I'm NOT trying to be negative in any way, but I do have some perception concerns regarding Warlord and R.A.G.E. in general.

 

1. Any one else frustrated with the fact that the BEAUTIFUL Warlord book is available, but so many of it's corresponding models are unavailable? I think back to the game of Chronopia and that company (Target Games) did the same thing and in it lost them over a dozen players in our small town area alone.

 

2. More and more I'm starting to get the impression that the Warlord rules/mechanics were written TOO simple and/or lack sufficient explanation of intention.

 

3. Who else is having difficulty coming to grips with the 2 action phases (variable depending on which troop model acts out which type of action) per initiative card? I guess there's a reason why most games have a system whereby the model has one action which is INCLUSIVE of the ability to both move and conduct activity (combat, etc.).

 

4. As much as I greatly appreciate being a CAV2 beta tester, I've found it somewhat difficult/discenchanting to maintain interest in proofreading and testing it. Some of it can be chalked up to it being a new system and having to change my existing knowledge of the game, however, for a system (R.A.G.E.) supposedly being easy for transference, it honestly seems overwhelming. When judging how easily one could go from Warlord to CAV2, I just don't see it being as easy as suggested. So, then multiply this concern by the other planned games for the future in R.A.G.E.

 

5. Is Reaper trying to follow in the footsteps of Games Workshop? Admirable if they are, however I have my reservations because of the fact that many of us appreciate some of the qualities that makes Reaper, Reaper: unique, affordable, community, etc. If I wanted to play Games Workshop style I'd get a second job to pay for it and stop spending time with my family...

 

I know these opinions are actually shared by others, but I'm curious just how far it extends and hopefully others have a more rationalizing twist on these perceptions. Feel free to elaborate.

1) doesnt concern me.

2) yes the whole lacking explanation of intention got to me on first reading but now im over it. The simplicity i dont mind at all.

3) nope dont have a problem with that.

4) no comment.

5) in terms of cost, yes sort of... its still much cheaper than any gw game overall but its been going up in price and here in aus we can get 3 warhammer grunts for almost 50% of 3 warlord grunts... (yes i know the warlord ones are larger)

 

Personally im more concerned about reaper not putting any info about the game on their website besides the old sneak preview... If you look at say warhammer there is a page about the game and then a page for each race clearly showing pictures of all the characters/troops... without something like this its difficult to introduce new players... i mean if someone asks me "whats warlord?" theres nothing i can really refer them to except the painted showcase showing a very limited selection of minis... please reaper, in this respect, try and follow in the footsteps of gw!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the risk of getting backhanded by Reaper folks... I'm very curious what other's perceptions are with regards to the following discussions... and I EMPHASIZE that I'm NOT trying to be negative in any way, but I do have some perception concerns regarding Warlord and R.A.G.E. in general.

 

1. Any one else frustrated with the fact that the BEAUTIFUL Warlord book is available, but so many of it's corresponding models are unavailable? I think back to the game of Chronopia and that company (Target Games) did the same thing and in it lost them over a dozen players in our small town area alone.

 

2. More and more I'm starting to get the impression that the Warlord rules/mechanics were written TOO simple and/or lack sufficient explanation of intention.

 

3. Who else is having difficulty coming to grips with the 2 action phases (variable depending on which troop model acts out which type of action) per initiative card? I guess there's a reason why most games have a system whereby the model has one action which is INCLUSIVE of the ability to both move and conduct activity (combat, etc.).

 

4. As much as I greatly appreciate being a CAV2 beta tester, I've found it somewhat difficult/discenchanting to maintain interest in proofreading and testing it. Some of it can be chalked up to it being a new system and having to change my existing knowledge of the game, however, for a system (R.A.G.E.) supposedly being easy for transference, it honestly seems overwhelming. When judging how easily one could go from Warlord to CAV2, I just don't see it being as easy as suggested. So, then multiply this concern by the other planned games for the future in R.A.G.E.

 

5. Is Reaper trying to follow in the footsteps of Games Workshop? Admirable if they are, however I have my reservations because of the fact that many of us appreciate some of the qualities that makes Reaper, Reaper: unique, affordable, community, etc. If I wanted to play Games Workshop style I'd get a second job to pay for it and stop spending time with my family...

 

I know these opinions are actually shared by others, but I'm curious just how far it extends and hopefully others have a more rationalizing twist on these perceptions. Feel free to elaborate.

I'm still learning the game but here's my 2 cents.

 

1. I agree, Chronopia is a great game but lack of figures killed it. Reaper would have been better off releasing a equal amount of figures per faction. I'm also disapointed over Razig and the other pirates being produced and yet not even being mentioned in the rules. A pirate group is what got my attenton to the game I've always thought it would be a cool army to do. I'll just have to be patient and see if they will be suported.

 

2. The game mechanics are pretty good and they have alot of room to expand. My only gripe is the draw deck, I've played a few games with average sized armies and a few with very large forces, every now and then the deck just wasn't shuffled very good leading to a frustrating game.

 

3. I like the two action phase, it makes things more realistic and sets the game apart from the others out there.

 

4. Can't really comment on the RAGE system until I play CAV 2.

 

5. It would be incredibly hard to be like GW, Reaper doesn't seem to be going that way, they atleast like thier customers and retailers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.) Nature of the business man. It's easy to crank out a ton of canned, low detail models, but it takes time to develop and cast the great level of models that Warlord possesses. I would also point out that if I were releasing a new game system, I wouldn't want to commission, cast and distribute 150 models without knowing if the game was going to be profitable. Releasing everything at once not only has logistic challenges in time requirements for the casters and sculptors, it has financial challenges too.

 

2.) Are they too simple? Heck no. Have you read through the Urban Stunts section? Do you get the concept? Matt once told me that R.A.G.E. is like a modular computer program. In programming you write a function, and they you write a piece of code to call that function. That is what stunts are all about. You can expand the game simply by writing a stunt to do anything you want, then use the Invoke Special Ability, to perform that Stunt, much like calling a function. This extensibility, if you will, makes Warlord and R.A.G.E. in general very flexible.

 

3.) Not I and neither has anyone I have played the game with. Honestly, not a single person has had a problem with this.

 

4.) Sounds like a personal problem, and I mean that sincerely. Not everyone is cut out for playtesting. It is at times VERY tedious and not everyone finds it fulfilling. Nothing wrong with that, it just means it's not for you.

 

5.) Depends on what you mean? If you are talking about one system for all the games, I wouldn't call it going the route of GW. If this is what GW tried to do, they did it VERY poorly. Unique, affordable, community. How are these things going to change? The only thing that may not be unique is that the core rules are shared between multiple systems. Big deal, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.) Sounds like a personal problem, and I mean that sincerely. Not everyone is cut out for playtesting. It is at times VERY tedious and not everyone finds it fulfilling. Nothing wrong with that, it just means it's not for you.

Good observation. Actually, I've got a great eye for detail and finding discrepancies. However, recent priorities have deterred my time budget from putting as concentrated effort on beta testing as I'd hoped. Even ReaperMatt has been very supportive in the notion that "real life comes before gaming." Since I don't want to be a lazy, hang around the house, mooch off my wife bum, I've been working my butt off to improve my life despite being a currently unemployed teacher. Gaming has taken a back seat.

 

However, that still doesn't change my "perceptions" on the overall system. I sincerely hope it's just a product of an unrefined, always developing form.

 

Some good points being made... keep 'em coming y'all. ::):

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand and empathize with Super Jag. After playing CAV one way for so long it was a little depressing to see the game we know and love going away in the not-to-distant future. But, I try and soothe those feelings with the knowledge that the rules change is happening for reasons other than to try and make us buy a whole new edition of a game we're already playing along with the associated accessories. From what I saw, Reaper was very honest and open in regards to the change and I firmly believe that they mean what they said about all the miniatures still being playable after the conversion. Unlike some companies out there who shall remain nameless, that want you to constantly re-purchase new versions of old stuff. I've been at this long enough that I never bought another D&D anything after Gygax left. I got sick of TSR's guff years and years ago. Anyway...

 

Transferring CAV to R.A.G.E. hasn't been an easy process and I too have had trouble maintaining enthusiasm for it but that's why we're Beta testers. To work out the kinks and try to make the conversion as painless as possible. If this stuff was easy, everyone would be doing it. ::):

 

 

As far as frustration over unreleased miniatures goes.. Yeah I share your pain. But we could be among the unfortunate who's favorite miniatures are plastic and come already painted. :upside: I'm willing to be patient for mini's that kick butt rather than get mediocre miniatures tomorrow.

 

 

I think that Reaper is trying to follow in GW's footsteps. But they're listening to and acting like they actually like those of us who buy their product. And miracle of miracles, they seem to operate on the premise that we're *gasp* honest.

 

 

 

Just my .02 peso's worth. ::):

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Many people around me seem to have the same concern. But I think at the one year anniversary of the book release, all or almost all models will be on the shelves. It's on par with or better than most other games.

 

2. It fills its own niche. Some people like it simple and fast. In all honesty I'm finding I prefer some complexity and am looking for more options. Indeed I hope the faction books will bring more variety to the game. For instance, I'm not too fond of the fact that every mage and cleric has access to the same base set of spells. On the other hand, it means people will more easily be able to familiarize themselves with the abilities of their enemies. It's a difficult compromise.

 

3. I have no problems with it. Most people I explain it to, also didn't seem to have problems. Sometimes I do have difficulty explaining the freedom it gives though. People are used to move and attack. Attack, then move feels foreign for some reason. Once I tell them to think of this more as an rpg mechanics and less as wargame mechanics, I think they have an easier time (at least for those familiar to both). What's most difficult to explain is that charge bonus is a movement bonus, and an attack at the end of it is not required. That's pretty alien to any other system, but once you get used to it, it's just another tool in your arsenal.

 

4. No clue...

 

5. No. I'm pretty sure Reaper is following in only Reaper's footsteps. If at any time it seems they are copying another company's lead, it's merely because both companies saw an opportunity in an area, and grabbed it. It's a matter of supply demand. Example: GW knew people always complained about not being able to unscrew those stubborn paint pots, so they changed their bottles to flip tops (and not for the first time). If they were listening to what painters have to say, they would realize a majority of painters prefer dropper bottles. What did Reaper do? They listened to their client base, and for the MSPs, they went with the dropper bottles. Copying another successful company is neither right, not wrong. Whatever steps you take, you just have to have your reasons straight. Clearly all companies not excluding Reaper make mistakes, but nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...