Why use models for wargaming???

BeansNFranks · Post by **BeansNFranks** » Fri Apr 30, 2010 7:38 pm

To preface I'm a fairly good painter, enjoy painting and modelling in general.

So I have been away from wargaming dealing with life for the last six months or so, and now I'm getting back into it and teaching an old buddy of mine how to play. As I have sold off most of my lead I did not have anything to teach him with in period for my current armies so I just took some of the wasted Litko bases I had and printed out the name of units and glued them on.

This really caused an epiphany with me as I honestly think this works better than models from everything but an aesthetic perspective.

Pro's
Cheap
You don't have to paint it yourself
Makes it easier to get people into the hobby
Makes it simple to do one time scenarios and to get new people into the game
Can base up 10 armies in an hour
Transport is easy
There is no confusion about what the opponent is fielding
Don't have to worry about little bits breaking off
Don't have to worry about trying models with projecting parts (lances, spears, pikes) getting tangled up with enemy units
Makes maneuvering simpler

Cons
Not pretty...

Now I don't ever see myself dropping lead entirely as again I really like to paint, but when I look at how many wargames don't even paint their own crap anyhow I really wonder why we waste all this time and money on models.

Now the BIG question is, do people have to actually play with 15mm models or does text on bases make a "legal" FoG army.

I know I'm thinking outside the box on this one, and delving into the boxed game world, but would love to see other's thoughts.

batesmotel · Post by **batesmotel** » Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:14 pm

You could always try FoG PC which uses laser scanned images of figures on your computer screen.

In the end, I do think the real argument for figures is pretty much the aesthetics. To my knowledge people who are playing FoG with any frequency are using figures although they may not be 15s. This is not to say that text on bases isn't legal (if agreeable to your opponent) or a good way to try out the rules or a new army before making the investment in figures. I think there are also sites on line where you can find over head images of figures ready to print and use on bases for trying out armies and rules. (I think they may have been primarily been produced for DBM but would certainly work as well for getting into FoG.) I have a URL for one of these around some place but not immediately to hand.

Chris

rogerg · Post by **rogerg** » Fri Apr 30, 2010 9:26 pm

One really big plus with models is that you can see what things are. With an sort of counter, picture or symbol, you are forever having to look at it to remind yourself what it is. This makes a very big difference to the pleasure of playing the game.

(Of course the models are really nice to see as well, but the above is the practical advantage, (apart from not blowing away in the draughts))

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Fri Apr 30, 2010 9:58 pm

I feel that your listed con is a bit of a show stopper

As someone who plays my fair share of baordgames I still like to see nice figures on the table.

gozerius · Post by **gozerius** » Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:23 pm

People like me got into the hobby by first creating an army on counters and then filling them up with figures. Its a good way to start practicing the rules. Ultimately, though, the look of two well painted armies on the table, with well done, realistic looking terrain is the easthetic draw of the hobby. I and many others have adapted boardgames to use miniatures for this reason.

dave_r · Post by **dave_r** » Sat May 01, 2010 9:12 am

There is no confusion about what the opponent is fielding

I once played Chess with only markers instead of proper pieces. It was a nightmare to work out which piece was which. After one game I decided I would never play this way again.

I suspect the same would be the case with FoG - It would be immensely difficult to work out which BG's are what and therefore work out where you wanted your BG's.

gozerius · Post by **gozerius** » Sat May 01, 2010 10:01 pm

Really? You couldn't figure out a picture on a chit? I'm sure that there are many who at a glance can't distinguish figures representing elite vs superior vs average vs poor hoplites in a Classical Greek army. They are all guys with big shields and poiny sticks. So there are advantages and disadvantages to either style of gaming. Playing with labeled bases is a good inexpensive way to introduce someone to the game. Not as easthetically pleasing as having museum quality painted 28mm figures traipsing across diorama style terrain, but functional. Its a good way for beginners to get started while they get their figures painted. Probably not tournament legal without special dispensation from the organizer, though.

dave_r · Post by **dave_r** » Sun May 02, 2010 2:05 pm

Nobody argued it wasn't a good way to introduce people to the hobby. Better to just lend them an army though.

To answer your question, yes, I did have difficulty with words on a chit, it took ages as the visual representation is much easier to assimilate. If somebody tells me a particular unit is Elite and others are Superior I can note the difference and then take that into account. Words on a piece of paper would be akin to asking my opponent every time which were the elite and which were the superior. It is quicker and easier to look without asking or reading, there is one less step to do.

BeansNFranks · Post by **BeansNFranks** » Sun May 02, 2010 6:36 pm

I'm pretty sure if u can't read words printed on paper u are not qualified to play a wargame...

Besides not all painted armies look good, are remotely historically accurate, or even representing the correct armies.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Sun May 02, 2010 6:46 pm

BeansNFranks wrote:
Besides not all painted armies look good, are remotely historically accurate, or even representing the correct armies.

A standard that is not exceeded my printed out pieces.

If the honest idea is to have quicker produced armes I would suggest mybe 6mm armies on half size stands, half size board. Its quick easy and gives some modelling allure without being excessive.

Personally last week I had the 28mm out on the board and it looked great.

mellis1644 · Post by **mellis1644** » Sun May 02, 2010 11:34 pm

My group has been using counters for FoG Nap (the people who are no the play test list) and more generally for Lasalle games (a Napoleonic rules set well worth a try BTW). This has been done with great success. This is while we paint up real armies and has got more people painting and playing while this occurs. As a way of getting into the period and trying out rules without a huge amount of investment it has been a great idea.

As I'm trying to get people more into FoG counters are definitely something I'm thinking about to get more people playing ancients. Once people play a few games and like them it's much easier to get them to invest in painting an army. Getting different matched armies in period is hard and takes time while counters can make this much easier to happen.

The counters can be quite pretty/informative if you want to spend a little bit of time with a laser printer, glue and foam board.

Mehrunes · Post by **Mehrunes** » Mon May 03, 2010 12:05 am

Heresy!!!

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Mon May 03, 2010 12:35 am

Burn them.

The players, not the markers.

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Mon May 03, 2010 1:08 am

you ever gonna put some clothes on!!??!!

marioslaz · Post by **marioslaz** » Mon May 03, 2010 7:18 am

BeansNFranks wrote:I know I'm thinking outside the box on this one, and delving into the boxed game world, but would love to see other's thoughts.

Did you consider paper armies? Some years ago a friend of mine showed me an army made of illustrations photocopied, cut off and glued on bases. If you put these figures on bases with an angle of 45 degrees (near) you can see them from front and side. You need to find good illustrations of warriors in your wanted army, but then you can easily duplicate them by photocopying (at present this is even more easy with computer graphic) so you can prepare a sheet full of figures ready to be cut off. The hardest point is you normally get only illustration of front view of a warrior, but even if you have not a great drawing skill, it's quite simple to make the back view: you need only to mirror the illustration (quite easy with a PC) then adjust only some particulars (just for example, you should draw hair in the place of a face, and so on). Anyway, if you start this process with a big illustration, then you reduce it to fit 15mm size, many particulars will not be so evident and the overall result will be fine. Best of all, when you are satisfied with an illustration, with just a scanner and a free software you can create a sheet full of warriors ready to be cut off and glued on bases.

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Mon May 03, 2010 10:13 am

Blathergut wrote:you ever gonna put some clothes on!!??!!

Indeed. What seems to be particularly perverse is that, whilst otherwise naked, he seems to be wearing a pair of nylon stockings. Kinky.

ShrubMiK · Post by **ShrubMiK** » Mon May 03, 2010 1:44 pm

I originally got into Ancients at school, where we had nowhere to set up and leave battlefields full of figures. The solution was to use simple figures drawn on paper, within rectangles of the correct size for the bases, photocopied, stuck on balsa wood, and then cut up into the individual bases. The scale was half of whatever the official scale was at the time (not sure which ruleset this was exactly...WRG somewhere prior to 4th ed.) This allowed us to reasonable sized battlefields drawn in chalk on the inside of large drawers in the classroom used for the wargames club, with a bit of blu-tac on the bottom of each base to stop units displacing as the drawer was opened or closed.

These drawings were not works of art...a rectangle for the body, with a line drawn across at belt level. A circle for the head. The top half of the circle blacked in to represent a helmet. A rectangle, circle, or triangle at the side for a shield (the most important factor for representing troops of different nationalities

). Some sort of coloured thing on top to represent a crest or plume. Stick arms and legs. A long stick for a spear, shorter stick for a sword, curve for a bow, short line with triangle on the end for an axe. etc. etc. And then colour in the various rectangles, circles, triangles etc. to help differentiation between armies and their constituent units.

Did it look great? Not really, but it did the job. And in fact I still have a load of similar stuff I made for myself for home use, but drawn on cardboard instead.

To cut a long story short:

I have no problem with people using whatever they want to represent armies. Better stick men than just words though, this is supposed to be tabletop gaming not boardgaming. And really it should only be with consent of the opponent. So do it while learning, or on special occasions to try out new armies...or if you are really too poor to afford to be able to put together a "real" army. But don't be surprised if you turn up for a game with a new opponent and they are less than happy at seeing your counters on the table. And anybody prepared to undertake the expense of entering and travelling to tournaments has no excuse for not providing a reasonable army IMHO.

BeansNFranks · Post by **BeansNFranks** » Mon May 03, 2010 2:41 pm

Yes, but what is unreasonable about an army that is printed words on regulation sized bases? What does a being on a tabletop have to do with anything? If u had said it was miniature war gaming I could understand your point.

To make sure u are getting me here I have painted armies, and will continue to collect and paint armies. I'm discussing an idea here, not saying I'm going to only play with counters.

ShrubMiK · Post by **ShrubMiK** » Mon May 03, 2010 8:26 pm

Well I would have called it "miniatures wargaming", except that

a) that would have ruled out any form of pictorial army, which I've already admitted to using in the past (and may still do in future when solo wargaming)
b) it actually specifically says "rules for tabletop wargaming" on the front of the FoG rulebook

"Tabletop" is normally taken to mean much the same as "miniatures" though...from wikipedia: "Games with miniatures are sometimes called tabletop games, tabletop wargames, miniature wargames, or simply wargames."

Ultimately, I guess it comes down to the fact that a significant part of the playing, for me, is that armies on the table look something like a scaled down version of an army.

I suppose there is also another factor...the amount of effort I have put in to be able to field various armies that interest me is quite large. And ever continuing. If my opponent can field whatever army he (or she!) likes simply by writing a few squiggles on some bits of cardboard, of course it is going to be aggravating! At the very least do me the courtesy of putting some effort into drawing (or printing out) pictorial representations of the soldiers, it might make me feel a little better

Now if there are two or more people who are perfectly happy playing with words on counters, I have no problem with what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes... (or clubs)...

EDIT: meant to say...funnily enough I have played something like miniatures gaming with words on counters before. It was a game called "Micro Ancients", ironically from a company called "TableTop Games". It was not very inspiring, I didn't play it very often, so I can at least claim to have some basis for my opinion.

mellis1644 · Post by **mellis1644** » Mon May 03, 2010 8:43 pm

There are multiple aspects to the hobby. For those how want to game then counters would work and I see no issue in that. For those who want to paint never play with their toys then again no issue.

For people with real lives and multiple hobby projects using counters till you can get armies painted up, especially when trying to introduce a new period/set of rules to a club makes sense. Like playing with people with half painted armies - as long as progress in getting to a final finished armies is being made then that's good for club/friendly games. Well that's my view. I'd prefer to play counters than no game at all if those are the options!

However playing with toys makes it more fun and visually appealing.

Now for tourneys etc I agree painted armies should be a requirement - but the effort and expense of those is different than normal club/friendly games.

Why use models for wargaming???

Why use models for wargaming???

Re: Why use models for wargaming???