Title for Rules

moswin · Post by **moswin** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:48 am

The key to the title must be to create a brand that is attractive to the youth gamer and newbies - established hobbyists will know from their fellow gamers and their own experiences what these rules are about irrespective of the title. It is cracking the youth and newbie market that can provide real growth in the hobby (read more opponents and variety) and more profits for businesses involved in the hobby. Companies like Games Workshop are astute players of this market. So, I believe the title must be snappy and well packaged as an eye catching brand.

I'll stick my neck out now and suggest 'GLORY' or 'FIELDS OF GLORY' (acronym FOG) - with the word Glory appearing on a Roman legion eagle. Yes, I know the title and even the eagle bit (aka Warhammer) have been done before, but the point is that it is eye-catching, exciting, intriguing. If Glory sounds a bit fuddy duddy, substitute 'HONOUR' (HONOR for our American cousins) or 'TRIUMPH'. Hell, you can even call the rules DOMINATE.

As much as it may grate with established gamers who just want a set of rules, some examples and some army lists, the youth/newbie market is going to require that a big portion of each volume be dedicated to the models, painting and basing, and collecting armies.

Each Army List for example could have a large picture or photo and a glib intro like...'if you like fast light chariots with bright colours supported by infantry then the New Kingdom Egyptians could be just your ticket...' or similar. Each army's background should include names of illustrious commanders and their greatest moments, a painting guide, and recommended reference books and websites.

Food for thought I hope

davek · Post by **davek** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 6:35 am

Field of Battle

Simulation of Conflict in the Age of Spear and Bow

If I win can I hvae a copy of the rules and lists?

endakil · Post by **endakil** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 2:48 pm

I would preffer some latin/greek name; it gives an historic flavour and can be properly used no matter what's your mothertongue.

Strategos Autokrator
Ludus Belli (which means "wargame", very appropiate)
Polemarch
Victoria (easy to remember)
Casus Belli
Ars Bellica (Art of War in latin)

plewis66 · Post by **plewis66** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:05 pm

endakil wrote: Ars Bellica (Art of War in latin)

I suspect calling any product any name with the word 'ars' in the title is going to be a marketting non-no

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 5:23 pm

plewis66 wrote:
endakil wrote: Ars Bellica (Art of War in latin)
I suspect calling any product any name with the word 'ars' in the title is going to be a marketting non-no

True,

Also I think there is already a set by that name

riddcowler · Post by **riddcowler** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 10:32 pm

davek wrote:Field of Battle

Simulation of Conflict in the Age of Spear and Bow

If I win can I hvae a copy of the rules and lists?

Already a Field of Battle wargames rules set I'm afraid.... doesn't seem many titles are left...even been beaten to 'The rules With No Name'!

Ridd

alexbeer · Post by **alexbeer** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 3:08 am

Since the rules are built from the top down,I think the title should indicate that this is a game for generals. Therefore I like Lords of Battle.

gfawcett · Post by **gfawcett** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 10:27 pm

The First Generals - A simulation of Ancient to Medieval Leadership for the Tabletop

killerhobbit · Post by **killerhobbit** » Sat Mar 24, 2007 10:30 am

Stay with Art of Wars

It is easy to remember and the name is already known to many wargamers.

If you ??ll come up with a new name you give up the exsisting advantage of a brand.

ars_belli · Post by **ars_belli** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:46 am

killerhobbit wrote:Stay with Art of Wars

It is easy to remember and the name is already known to many wargamers.

If you ??ll come up with a new name you give up the exsisting advantage of a brand.

Unfortunately, that "brand" name is already being used by several other products, including an established set of ancient/medieval miniatures rules, as well as a supplement for a much better-known miniatures system. I still maintain that it would be preferable to establish a unique "brand" identity, rather than one that has already been established by and for other competitors.

Cheers,
Scott K.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:24 pm

The confusion is really only likely to be with the WAB supplement, the other set of rules is hardly known - in fact I suspect that this AoW has given it more exposure than it has ever had since it was written

killerhobbit · Post by **killerhobbit** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:47 pm

ars_belli wrote:
Unfortunately, that "brand" name is already being used by several other products, including an established set of ancient/medieval miniatures rules, as well as a supplement for a much better-known miniatures system. I still maintain that it would be preferable to establish a unique "brand" identity, rather than one that has already been established by and for other competitors.

Cheers,
Scott K.

Oh I didn??t know.

Then I suggest

Antaresy

Antares is a red star in the sign of scorpion
This star was considered by the greeks to be the rival/ twin of ares/ mars (god of war)

Beside that

Antaresy is in german the short form of

AN tikes
TA bletop
RE gel
SY stem

Sorry
in english it would have to be Antarusy

ars_belli · Post by **ars_belli** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:28 am

nikgaukroger wrote:The confusion is really only likely to be with the WAB supplement, the other set of rules is hardly known

Well, "hardly known" in the UK, perhaps. It is in fact pretty well known to those of us in the US who frequent TMP, thanks to the tireless promotional efforts by one of the rules authors there.

nikgaukroger wrote: in fact I suspect that this AoW has given it more exposure than it has ever had since it was written

That's rather the point, isn't it? Will this new rule set continue providing free exposure for already-existing competitors, or would it be preferable to establish a unique "brand" identity of its own?

Cheers,
Scott K.

ars_belli · Post by **ars_belli** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:35 am

My favorite alternative titles thus far (none of them my own):

Ancient Battle Commander
Barritus
Lords of Battle

Subtitle for any of the above could be:

Miniature Wargaming Rules, c. 3000 BC - AD 1500

Cheers,
Scott K.

lentulus · Post by **lentulus** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 12:08 am

I expect that in most groups the title of the rules will be used for the first half hour. After that, they will be called "The Osprey Rules" Why not start there?

killerhobbit · Post by **killerhobbit** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:40 pm

today I got a new rule system

WARLORD
by Trevor Halsall & Richard Harper
so one good title less

I remember that I once heard of the word OORLOG.
I guess it is of dutch or ancient anglo-germanic origin.

bryan · Post by **bryan** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:36 am

Still no decisions, eh?

The Ways of War

or should it be

The Way of Wars

Either way you get to call it WoW

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:53 pm

bryan wrote:Either way you get to call it WoW

World of Warcraft?

nicofig · Post by **nicofig** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 8:35 am

I think the Art of War is a good name

riddcowler · Post by **riddcowler** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 8:06 pm

How about 'The Ancient/Medieval Rules with No Name as opposed to those Other Rules with No Name'

Title for Rules

Title for rules