"Salute - ok." Topic

Well put arthur1815

The 'Drop the Bridge' game I played this year used good quality but functional terrain including a well modelled bridge. It has not appeared on many of the photoshoots of the show. However it was an excellent game which I thoroughly enjoyed and on reflection was my highlight of the day.

The great thing about this hobby is that there are many different ways to enjoy it. I do get a bit annoyed sometimes by people who think that there is 'only one true way' and who want to impose restrictions. If eye candy is your thing then great, Salute will provide that in abundance. If gaming is what is wrong with that?

By the way I don't mind people saying what they like and what they don't.

It is the idea of imposing restrictions that I don't like.

The Salute "Jason" game used a cloth base….

As did the Salute (ie Warlords) Slammers Route 66 game link

As someone who – on his time on the Salute team – had a fair degree of input into judging categories for games (including 'best presented game' as a gategory) it's something I care deeply about.

For me, there are cloths and there are cloths. The one's under the Slammers game were hand dyed and painted by Roger and – within any sensible, affordable and transportable parameters – were the only way we could cover more than a scale kilometre (over 11 metres on a 1/100th game) table. But I think that it's what you do with a cloth that matters, as much as anything else.

However, when you make some nice scenery in carved foam or whatever, I think that there's little as sad as seeing it just plonked on top of bare wooden tables. It's like putting fine china on a bare fold up tressle table: you'd chuck a table cloth over it before you sat down to dinner!

When people bring solid, modelled terrain it's a very good idea, I think, to bring three or four cloths (preferrably all the same colour) as well: they're great for packing around fragile scenery and – more importantly – you chuck them on the table first. That then hides the (very) ugly rented tables plus it hangs down over the side and hides some of the sea of coats and rucksacks loitering under said table.

Then you stick your scenery on top of that!

But it takes all sorts (the last few Warlords games I've been involved with):

Here's Slammers this year (cloths with stuff on top)

Here's Scarlet Thunder from last year (Pink foam scenery over cloths to hide the tables)

Tomb of the Cybermen from 2011 – MDF and resin custom boards over cloths

link

SF3D from 2010 – foam boards and scratch scenery over cloths

link

1/10th scale Star Trek – big totally custom scenery over cloths (with built in web cams) from 2009

werelords.com/boldly_go.htm

So, all I'm saying is, the game is important as a game in itself, and if you want to make custom scenery, and that's possible, then that's all good too.

But – from when I used to judge the games at the show – it was obvious to me who had made real efforts in one of the many different categories that have prizes awarded (scenery, armies in use, presentation, innovation, participation, demonstration etc) and who had just phoned it in.

There are lots of different routes through to an excellent game at Salute and building a set of criteria would be really, really hard.

John T

I would – as I have said repeatedly – sooner see participation than display/diorama/static/ club games etc.

I thought the frothers and TFL at salute were excellent.

I would – as I have said repeatedly – sooner see participation than display/diorama/static/ club games etc.

Me too, as it happens: all of the above bar one were Party games.

John T

What worries me ( and is possibly connected) is the rise of the 'built by professionals' and the display game as part of a trade stand. Both not in the spirit of the hobby as I remember that spirit but I suspect I'm way out of date and part of the pre GW generation. Im turning into Victor Meldrew as we speak!!!!
L

Only thing that worries me about that is those with more resources get to push their product more.

I think its called Capitalism.

Like it or not, Salute is as much, if not more, a market place as a hobby show. As to a lesser extent are all the 'majors'.

Arthur – thanks for the kind words on Wallenstein
John – Ha – I didn't even notice Slammers WAS on a cloth … I was so taken by the whole thing and all the details that it just slipped my eyes!
Leon – I don't mind the "professional" games – I think they add a great amount of eye candy to the show and I can always take some ideas away from them …
What I would perhaps not enjoy so much is if the whole show had to be at that level
Like I say – I enjoy the eye candy, I enjoy the participation games and I quite enjoy the "club level" games [mainly as I feel I can achieve that! I know I should improve my level of presentation … :-)]
Luckily [or perhaps it's good planning and years of experience] I feel Salute, along with most wargames shows, get a good balance
And personally, I think it's important to maintain that balance
Like I say – just my 2p worth

John – Ha – I didn't even notice Slammers WAS on a cloth … I was so taken by the whole thing and all the details that it just slipped my eyes!

That was the idea Gary!

And personally, I think it's important to maintain that balance

And I couldn't agree more Gary.

John T

Beasts of War did a video. link

Its a bit odd, more of a ramble round manufactures than covering some of the more fun things at Salute (like the slammers and yes the zoids game).

I went, first time in ages, first time seeing it at excel as well. Got to queue for a while to get in (turns out turning up a mere 15 minutes early doesn't cut the mustard), wandered round about half, ended up seeing people hadn't seen in years and suddenly it was closing time…

Spent very little, far less than I expected. There was very little there that grabbed ma as has been mentioned elsewhere the prices couldn't really match local shops/online sellers.

I too am not a fan of dioramas, I feel they add nothing to a wargames show. Nor for that matter non participation games. Saying that even cheap games can be fun. The frothers I think (and note to organisers, family show, so the f'ing frothers signs not really on) Zoids game was great. Not only did it have my favourite childhood toy but printed out datapacks stuffed into empty card sleeves to convey the stats and enable the game to skip merrily along. It may have even lacked a cloth and had very little scenery.

Another vote for the game not the scenery – a couple of years ago I played in a Battle of Shrewsbury game (Wargames Developments I think ran it) – this hardly had figures and the terrain was sparse in the extreme.

And yet – it played out in a completely believable way, with troops reacting in the ways that they would seem to have done from contemporary written sources. So it was a GREAT game. Looked like nothing at all.

"Another vote for the game not the scenery…" Here's a vote for balance…you need both. Depending on the period and scale you can get away with more or less scenery. When the unit size is regiment or brigade the terrain can be very abstracted but when you get down to skirmish the terrain means alot. There is nothing more ludicrous than watching a WWII skirmish game played on a flat table devoid of any really terrain. For my WWII games most of my vehicle is filled with boxes of trees, buildings, hedges, etc. and two small plastic containers with figures. It takes me an hour to put out the terrain and 10 minutes to bring out the figures.

Terrain snobs…you bet, sign me up.

db

Gary Flack,
Nothing wrong with some eye candy but it being there because someone happens to have the ability to fork out a few grand to have a pro model making company do the work isn't my idea of the way things should be done. Would be even more so if I was going for the best scenery prize ever again!
I know I'm a dinosaur and the phrase 'the way things should be done' just deosn't do these days.
L

Leon
Ahh now that's an interesting thought …
Should you be able to "buy" your way to a prize …
Hmmm – how would you be able to distinguish from those clubs / games that have genuinely talented folk in them
[& I'm thinking of the Hornchurch Club here who had a member, Colin Short, who is just fantastic at it – & I'm sure there are others – but it's the club I used to play at]
and those who use a "professional" service?
What about figures painted by painting services?
What about figures painted by a professional painter for his own club / self?
Good luck with that one
[I'd hope in my naive way that folk who'd "bought" their games would decline any prize]

What I think would be a shame is if a show was either full of "professional" display games or full of "little effort and imagination" plain cloth games

I still think a healthy mix is the way forward – enough eye candy to make some folk aspire to greater heights, enough more "obtainable" games for us mere mortals to come away enthused clutching a mass of new purchases and a desire to play

But that's just my 2p worth as always

Gary Flack,
Yes indeed your quite right a mix is what we need but if something is done by 'pros' it shouldnt be judged in the same contest as club efforts, of which there many that are stunning indeed.
As for professionaly painted figures thats an impossible one to referee but its not quite what I was thinking of.#
L

Ditching clubs which have set up a "less-than-standard" game seems like a self-destructive policy.

How do you think those club members will feel about your show the following year? Do you think they will still come and spend money?

You will only alienate existing clubs, and it might be hard to attract new folks still willing to put all the time and energy into setting up a good game.

I've run demo/participation games for at least 20 years at various shows across mainland Europe (and even have won some awards for best_of_show). I do this driven by love for the hobby, and to show others what can be done. Some years are better than others, because yes, real life issues interfere. And in those years, the game might be sub-standard. But if I knew I would be judged on my efforts whether I can still contribute the year after, I would say "F**k you!".

It's a hobby, not a job!

Well said Phil. The hobby needs that attitude far more than the professionally built show layout of manufacturers.

And Gary – stop sitting on the fence, the splinters will get up your a…. You and I both know that you LOVE the eye candy when we are at shows

Gary and Leon

The points you've raised are certainly something I took (and take) very seriously. When I was judging games at Salute (or, to be more specific, when I spent a decade and a half organising the judging of the games and taking part in it) I had a couple of strict policies.

1) I personally chose judges, eventually exclusively from other clubs with a good track record at the show (thereby avoiding the 'wargames personality' judge syndrome, which I hate*). If that judge from the small team (there were only 4 of us in the teams) had themselves brought a club game to the show, they were not allowed to vote on it themselves but the other three judges scores were all increased by exactly one third to compensate.

2) The judges were chosen on the basis of their particular skill set. This meant I always chose a good painter and a good 'game-putter-oner'. I also chose at least one to have an historical gaming background and another to have a specifically non-historical background. This all ensured a good mix of opinions** and – more importantly – skills.

3) When judging, we always had a conversation with the contenders along the lines of "this is excellent scenery – where did you get it?" to deduce whether they built it or bought it ready-done. We didn't talk with everyone (it wasn't possible) but – if you were in the top five or so – that's the conversation we had with those putting on their games.

This meant that – on my watch – to the best of my knowledge, no club who won a prize for a painted army/scenery got it on the basis of the springyness of their credit card, but on the basis of their actual groups ability to paint and build. We even took into account whether the game used scenery they'd bought (say, resin buildings) and then painted themselves, or if they'd actually scratched the whole shooting match on their own.

I even introduced a category "most completely created game" for games that are very much made entirely by the club (rules, scenery, converted figures etc), though I'm not sure if the Warlords still award a prize for that…

I've not been on the Warlords committee for 5 years so I'm a bit out of touch :)

John T

* The only time I tried to go against this was when one 'Wargames personality***' (and I use the term as losely as possible) whinged so much about the result of the judging one year (in a column he was writing for Wargames Illustrated) that I offered him the chance to be a judge the following year. "I don't do solutions, I do problems" the pompous 'gentleman' said while declining…

** We all know what opinions are like: and yes we all have one and yes they all stink… Fortunately, the internet allows us all to make them public! :)

*** You know the sort: the type of 'monday morning quaterback' that has something to say about everything but never actually puts on a game, paints a figure to be judged or in some way puts his money where his mouth is. Except in print.

Can anyone tell me where the SF3D minis came from?

The link shows a lot of great stuff but does not tell me where the minis are from.

Thanks!