"Bolt Action - Bad Participation Game?" Topic

While wandering around Little Wars I saw a fair number of Bolt Action games going on. It occurred to me that Bolt Action makes a rather poor participation game at a convention.

Assuming you have 6 players, each person is only fully engaged when they get a die which, in the end, means they are not busy 5/6ths of the time (83%).

In IGOUGO players are busy about half the time given that non phasing activites (opportunity fire, close combat) are roughly the same.

I've found that convention games are always throttled by the Ref rather then any rules. I've played BA with 6 players before and due to the short nature of each activation it is just as engaging as an IGO UGO game.

Hmm, but wouldn't that be the same for any game of that type, including card driven ones (TSATF, etc.), unless there is some kind of interrupt action/overwatch?

Yeah, each die only represents one activation/action. How long can that take? Not long at all, normally, though sometimes you might have to give a slow player a poke. But that can happen under any system.

I agree with the concept that at a convention, the moderator makes or break a game. First by having too many players. I have seen some real slow skirmish games caused by having 8 or more players playing.

Bolt action like ANY game system goes faster and keeps players involved more at the one on one level.

I think the basic "mind-set" of the rules is for competitive, one-on-one play. However, that doesn't mean a GM/Ref couldn't 'jigger' the rules for the sake of a Demo/Participation game. Rather than pulling one Die at a time, pull two for instance. Depending on the mix of Dice in the pot, you've a fair chance of getting one of either side – until attrition sets in through the course of the game.

When we play large games at home we tend to break the table into zones and each zone gets their own activation card and plays at their own pace. If the action should cross over we just work it out as it happens.

For Bolt Action you could do the same thing. Just divide your table up and draw a die for each section.

I ran a Arc of fire game set in Stalingrad at Historicon last year with 8 players. I divided up the table with a rail line down the middle breaking it up into two smaller games and the players didn't realize they were playing two separate games.
I agree it falls on the game master to keep people engaged and focused. I reminded them they are here to play a game not shoot the and wander about.
Here is a photo of the setup, there were about 80 figures and two tanks per side.

link

I have run BA at a couple of HMGS cons and the "chit pulling" never seem to slow up the game and everyone had fun…

BA on the Russian Front Historicon 2013

SFC Retired

I've run four player games where each player had a different coloured set of order dice, went really well. And at the UK games Expo at the end of May I'll be running a game based on the Bolt Action rules, but only using a single squad per player, this version uses one die per figure.

Your quite correct all "activation" games suffer from this flaw – one player is active and the rest stand around and soon wander off so when their activation comes they aren't ready.

The worst offenders are card activation games where you spend the vast majority of the game watching and waiting for some random card to appear.

These types of games are OK for 1-1 play at home but poor choices for conventions or group games.

Find a system that does Side A move; Side B move; both Fire (stationary first, then moving); take morale checks; Repeat.

Keeps everyone moving and playing since it is always your turn.

TomT

I've run BA games at shows with 6 players; no issues. Just have to keep things moving.

DM

Thomas Thomas, that game description of side A, then Side B, then shoot, is there an actual game that's structured that way? I'm quite intrigued by the simplicity, can you elaborate?

Thanks! Ark3n

Games like BA, well run by a good GM, work just fine at cons. BA is so simple there's not a lot to think about so it should fly right along. And once a player has committed you can pull the next chit.

That said, there's a limit to how many players can be involved in a game like that. More than 8 and it will be too slow even with a good GM i think.

There is no difference between pulling a card from a deck or a dice from a bag, you are still going to have one active player at any point in time, so the same issues can arise.

My own experience has been that games at Cons will often attempt to fit too many players into the game in the mistaken belief that numbers = a good game. This leads to too much down time for everyone, attention wanders and the gamers develop a negative view of rules which are being used to do a job they are not designed for.

Thomas Thomas, that game description of side A, then Side B, then shoot, is there an actual game that's structured that way?

IHMN and LOTR off the top of my head.

What's IHMN? thanks for the response.

I played in one of those games at Little Wars. The table was well laid out, the figures well painted and it had a good scenario. We played for three hours and moved about five times and got no where near to ending the game. Pretty much a waste of time. I hate at conventions when people use cards or bolt action to move one player at a time. I participated in another game there that players moved by a card. had played for two hours and I had moved once. That, to me, it not a GAME or fun.

How many times have we waited for "that half of the table" to resolve their combat phase in IGOUGO games too, with nothing to do? Lots of time it's not the game systems at all, but poorly designed scenarios, or judges putting on games too big for their ability to handle…..but hey, look at all that terrain and those lines of Purdy figures!

Agreed – GM-ing is as much an art as a skill. I've played in Johnny Reb III games on 20' tables with 20 players that ran fast as the blazes because the 3 judges know how to keep things moving. Like, if the south tables are ready for turn 4 go ahead, let the north catch up later. Or knowing all the shooting modifiers so they can get you to Plus 3 in 2.0 seconds or less.

I've seen other games where the GM spent half the time flipping through the rule book.

I like to think I'm a pretty good GM and one of my rules is: make all decisions in 30 seconds or less. Make a note for later but keep things moving.

I once played in an IGOUGO "fast play" game that had loads of figures on the table. A cavalry melee broke out on the 2nd turn that took two hours to resolve. I was awakened every 20 minutes or so to roll dice for the one cavalry regiment I had in the scrum. I've played card-activated games that roared along. Any game that has too many players and/or units will slow down. If a game works well with 12 units per side and you load 36 on each side, expect trouble.

Most of the card or chit games I've participated in at cons have been slow and boring. One in particular comes to mind, 8 players, lots of terrain and nicely painted figures. Dead slow, and once my unit was suppressed it never came back. Not a good rule set.
Our group finds Armati 2 games fast, fun and engaging.
Shako 2 games are high die roll moves first, but watching what your opponent does keep you engaged.
Personally I don't like Bolt Action, it is just too simple for my taste, especially the armor rules.
The rule set and referee are critical to a well run convention game.

Wgmr1 , you said:

"One in particular comes to mind, 8 players, lots of terrain and nicely painted figures. Dead slow, and once my unit was suppressed it never came back. Not a good rule set. "

Was it not a good rule set, of just not a good game? This was my earlier point about Con games. people seem to try to get as many players as possible, as if that is a measure of success, irrespective of what the rules are designed to do.

Take chess. If you played chess with eight players you'd have a terrible time. Does that make chess a poor game? Or does it mean that some idiot has tried to make the game something it is not?

I've run Bolt Action games at conventions and I'd say the maximum numbers of players would be 6. It is up to the GM to keep the game moving. Moving 5 times in 3 hours seems kinda slow to me.

As Mark says, Gming is an art and a skill. I don't pretend to have an abundance of either, but I know enough to engage all the players and move things along.

TSM – I would say the home brew rule set was really designed for a two player game. The Scenario was not good as the action was at two different ends of the table. There was a chit activation and the referee was not on top of the players.
One chap spent an inordinate amount of time potting every move, slowing the game considerably.

As I said once my unit, inside a house was suppressed, it never came back.

>>>And once a player has committed you can pull the next chit.

Agreed. I sometimes penalize slow players. I usually only have to do it once.

>>>More than 8 and it will be too slow even with a good GM i think.

Yep.
DM

Played multiplayer Bolt Action at Cold Wars where the die activated a side, not just a unit. May not sound good to some but it worked fine.

Played Black Powder games where players were mad because they had poor activation rolls and sat half the game.

In both cases I don't see the rule mechanics a problem as much as it is scenario set up and game master management.

The problem I have seen with multiple players and the die activation is the time it take them to decide what to do with their activation. Egg or chess timer took care of this problem.

I ran a World War I game with Bolt Action in our last convention. I sped it up by having an order die randomly drawn from a bag followed by a D6. Whatever was rolled on the d6, I then pulled that many more order die of the same color from the bag and that side got to distribute them as they saw fit.

The game was a blast and it flowed great with four players on each side. They got to share in the decision making process and also got to plead why they may need to be activated sooner rather than later.

In our case, the game still came down to the last turn and the last few order pulls. So I agree that it depends on the GM. You've got to compromise sometimes a little to get a better game. So even though my little change was not really in the rules, it still – in my mind – kept the spirit of the game and the rules.
Larry

when i do demos or large group games i divide the number of dice by the number of players on a side. when i dice is pulled all the players on one side get to activate one of their units. it works great and keeps everyone involved and you still get the randomness.