Allen57 | 02 Dec 2016 12:43 p.m. PST |
This is what war games used to look like.
I am not nocking the beautiful tables I see today but I have to say that the new ultra detailed look is sort of driving me off the hobby in much the same way that the huge overly complicated board games drove away from board war games. How many of us really game on the types of ultra realistic tables I see so often? |
Green Tiger | 02 Dec 2016 12:48 p.m. PST |
I'm with you…this looks fine to me! |
Lucius | 02 Dec 2016 12:58 p.m. PST |
For the time, this WAS an ultra detailed table, compared to masking tape roads and rivers on a ping-pong table. This was a custom painted table. A lot of effort went into it – certainly more than my current tables, which consist of me throwing a beautiful Cigar Box mat down over plywood hills. |
Extra Crispy | 02 Dec 2016 1:02 p.m. PST |
Realistic tables are the main reason I like the hobby in the first place. If I see a game with masking tape roads and two lone pine trees on a patch of felt as "forest" I find something else to do. |
Pictors Studio | 02 Dec 2016 1:05 p.m. PST |
I'm with Extra Crispy more or less. I could do the masking tape roads and felt patches but if I do I don't want the figures to be painted, unpainted plastic 20mm figs would be fine for that. If I have fully painted figs then I want some really nice terrain to go with them. |
Grignotage | 02 Dec 2016 1:06 p.m. PST |
I think that's a fun looking game. Nothing wrong with simple, clean terrain. |
Wackmole9 | 02 Dec 2016 1:13 p.m. PST |
I can see both sides, but I like nice terrains. |
Big Red | 02 Dec 2016 1:14 p.m. PST |
This looks more than fine to me. I believe all those beautiful Cigar Box and Deep Cut mats are a direct response to those unattainable, ultra detailed gaming tables. With these type of mats you can have a very nice if not ultra detailed gaming space that is infinitely variable without all the cost, effort and storage problems. So bring on all those beautiful demonstration tables and sensual photo spreads in the magazines. Not only are they nice to look at but I believe they are driving innovation to provide better looking and more practical gaming tables for the rest of us. |
McKinstry | 02 Dec 2016 1:27 p.m. PST |
I believe terrain can look good and still be simple and functional for gaming without breaking the bank. As others have said, good looking mats that drape well and very good and affordable water features, forests, roads and buildings are more available now than ever. |
Schogun | 02 Dec 2016 1:42 p.m. PST |
My joke is: "The game may suck but the table looks good!" |
Oberlindes Sol LIC | 02 Dec 2016 1:54 p.m. PST |
I prefer a richly detailed, believable, environment over a sparse, plain, table. |
14Bore | 02 Dec 2016 1:55 p.m. PST |
Better than I get so I wouldn't complain |
Wargamer Dave | 02 Dec 2016 2:14 p.m. PST |
Wargame as diorama is what I aspire to. The more detail, beauty, etc. the better the game. I think BigRedBat is spot on about the mats too – it's an inexpensive and easy way to add some oomph to your visuals. The Kickstarter with the MDF jigs to make modular hex terrain is a pretty nifty happy medium between the two. With a little effort anyone could have a pretty, customizable play space. |
Bashytubits | 02 Dec 2016 2:15 p.m. PST |
I am firmly in the Extra Crispy and Pictors camp. Also, it is not that hard to have a "nice" looking table for not much money. |
20thmaine | 02 Dec 2016 2:26 p.m. PST |
I'm not a huge fan of gridded tables – although they can be good – but i wouldn't be at all upset to play on the table shown in the OP. |
Toronto48 | 02 Dec 2016 2:28 p.m. PST |
I like to think that there are two types of games Private and Public. Private are the games you either put on yourself or share with friends Here you decide what is acceptable and the main aim is to enjoy yourself.You determine what is nice The second public games are those put on at clubs. cons or elsewhere These games should be as detailed as possible as in many cases you sre selling the hobbye as much as playing a gameThe better a game looks and plays the better the chance of a positive response |
Saber6 | 02 Dec 2016 2:29 p.m. PST |
I like my GeoHex. I also like a terrain heavy table that does not get in the way of playing the game. So a matt or templates with features that can be moved if needed. Above all I have to be able to pack in in the car. |
BTCTerrainman | 02 Dec 2016 2:36 p.m. PST |
I am in the ultra realistic looking camp. The key is to have strong, durable realistic terrain that can be reused over and over. For me the game is all about the look and recreating tactical situations to be overcome on each battlefield. Rolls in the land are so important to every battle so I try to recreate this in my games. I have often enjoyed a bad scenario or rules because the terrain and figures were very satisfying. I cannot say the same about a great game with poor terrain/figures. To each their own…… |
Mako11 | 02 Dec 2016 2:37 p.m. PST |
Looks okay. Probably much better in color. He should have made those grid lines a lot less obtrusive though, e.g. very faint lines, instead. |
Mister Tibbles | 02 Dec 2016 4:32 p.m. PST |
Realistic is great, but storing all the custom boards, trees, hills, and buildings is a major pain in the posterior especially in 28mm and even in 25mm. (I enjoy skirmish games.) I only have so much storage space available, especially with a family. So I must compromise. No fancy tables for me. :-( |
Ceterman | 02 Dec 2016 6:06 p.m. PST |
I'm with everyone who likes a great set up. That's what got me into gaming in the 1st place also. |
wrgmr1 | 02 Dec 2016 9:17 p.m. PST |
I agree with most, the look of the game is what it is all about. That and comradeship, fun, laughter and a good game. Ligny at Enfliade last year. [URL=http://s219.photobucket.com/user/tjm3/media/Ligny%20and%20Waterloo/Plancenoit%20204.jpg.html]
[/URL] |
warwell | 02 Dec 2016 9:48 p.m. PST |
it is not that hard to have a "nice" looking table for not much money For some maybe, but not for me. Thus I prefer simple, representative rather than realistic terrain But then, as I discussed in a prior blog post ( link ) I am far more of a gamer and not really as interested in the modelling aspect of the hobby. |
Calico Bill | 03 Dec 2016 12:16 a.m. PST |
Agree with Warwell. If the game is good, you don't have the time to notice the figs and terrain much. If the game is bad, well painted figs and terrain won't save it. |
ZULUPAUL | 03 Dec 2016 3:19 a.m. PST |
I like nice terrain but in the end playing the game with friends (mostly my brother) is the primary thing. I've played with felt roads & plastic forests & with very nice terrain my brother makes but in the end I consider being with him enjoying the game the real important part. |
Andy Skinner | 03 Dec 2016 6:15 a.m. PST |
I'm happy with both. I like some board games, I like pretty miniatures games, and I'd be happy with things in between. I've just hexed my Geo-Hex to have an overlaid 4" hex (dots on corners and center of edges). I"m hoping I won't care when I'm not playing a hexed game, and will benefit when I am. If it turns out I hate the hexes, I've got a lot of work to do to cover them up again! Oh, and I don't think I see it as complication. More terrain definitely helps some games, but doesn't necessarily make things harder or more complex. andy |
Ottoathome | 03 Dec 2016 6:57 a.m. PST |
Do it both ways. Presently I use a fairly detailed and sculpted table for my pre modern games. I use terrain modeled on 12" hexes of luan plywood. Makes a good modelling base and with clever design you can have a lot of super-detailing which can be "protected" by structural members so it isn't broken or crushed. I use porcelean candle houses for the buildings which look fabulous. The woods are also super detailed and you can actually hide troops in them. The system is not a hex based system, it's free movement. The modern game IS a hex based system but the hexes are very spare and simply "hexes" made by printing them out in a regular laserprinter, with roads and urban areas and buildings forests, etc., in two dimensions. Hills are in contour lines so the whole table top looks like a map, or a table in a chateaux where the generals stand around watching the course of battle as the units are moved by nattily dressed WACS using croupier sticks. I haven't managed to get the WACS out of the laser printer yet but I'm trying. That one is a hex based system. I once used a gridded system almost exactly like Moreschauser's, or later Henry Bodenstadt's Franco-Prussian War set up only it was 12 by 12 and we used that for English Civil War and Renaissance. It doesn't matter. The game is the game, you can pitch it however you wish. Each game can have a style and a look and can be aesthetically pleasing. Grids work fine, hexes work fine, open tables work fine. The excellence of a game is not to be found on the table top but around the table top. If you have a bunch of guys who aren't argumentative and want to have a good time and enjoy each others company the worst, dumbest, most horrid junk pile of rules will do just fine. If you have a bunch of toxic players, rules lawyers with overblown egos and petty mean spirited little minds, God himself couldn't write rules that will work and in all, the table is unimportant. |
The G Dog | 03 Dec 2016 9:31 a.m. PST |
My joke is: "The game may suck but the table looks good!" That's no joke. It's a common reality. It's tough to balance. The hobby is a blend of modelling skills and game. If you are attempting that detailed diorama of the real world – have at it. If you want to push toy soldiers around – do it. And it's not a binary solution set – it's a continuum of results. I remember when masking tape was the best we could manage. We had some great games with that. Conversely, I've had some very unsatisfying games played on gorgeous tables. |
Gone Fishing | 03 Dec 2016 10:32 a.m. PST |
I happily play on either, but must say as I've gotten older I prefer a more toy soldier style to things – the sort of figures Stevenson or Wells might have played with: 54mm, glossy, rigid poses, rosy cheeks galore(!), with children's blocks or stacks of books dragooned in for terrain; a few Bully or Playmobil trees and we're set. I actually prefer this look these days. It is almost a Zen thing. But it is certainly a minority view. There are times when I think it's almost another hobby. Very interesting reading everybody's take on this! |
doug redshirt | 03 Dec 2016 10:45 a.m. PST |
I would rather play a fun game with friends using red and blue plastic figures on a ping pong table then any soulless crappie realistic game. |
Who asked this joker | 03 Dec 2016 11:47 a.m. PST |
Depends on what you want out of the hobby I suppose. You either need deep pockets or a lot of time (or both!) preparing a top notch table. As mentioned already, you also need the space to store the stuff. |
Lucius | 03 Dec 2016 12:05 p.m. PST |
I've got to ask – am I the only one who noticed the cigar ashes about to shower down on the table? Maybe THAT'S the reason the guy went with the terrain that he did. I've never been a smoker, but not setting down your cigar, even when you are measuring for a critical shot, is a level of cool that you just don't see in the 21st century. |
ordinarybass | 04 Dec 2016 8:37 a.m. PST |
When I started into gaming in the early 90's, my refference was 40k books and magazines. I thought Wargame tables should look like this.
This was what attracted me to wargaming. I remember seeing pics like that in the first post in the only wargaming books I could find at the library. They were nice, but they weren't what got my imagination going. It took over 20 years but I've finally reached the point (along with my other club mates) that every terrain layout (my figs aren't painted quite as nice) looks almost as good as (occasionally better than) the White Dwarf pages that first got me into gaming.
Clearly my Photography skills haven't gotten there yet! I got into wargaming for the "Spectacle of Painted Armies clashing over beautiful terrain". A bad set of rules is a bad game, but even a mediocre game is redeemed for me if I get to push around my painted toys over a lovely terrain setup and a crappy ruleset with good friends and great terrain is a fine evening for me. All that said, what folks consider "Ultra Realistc" can vary, but I admit that virtually all our gaming is done on a flat board with mat, hills, buildings, etc placed on top. Sculpted game boards are just a bit beyond what I'm willing to take the time to build and store. Or maybe it's just one more symptom of my initial inspiration being the style of terrain pictured in 2nd edition 40k… |
IUsedToBeSomeone | 04 Dec 2016 9:33 a.m. PST |
I find it odd that people would rather play a poor game on great terrain. I'd go for the great gaming experience every time regardless of terrain quality… Mike |
HammerHead | 04 Dec 2016 10:01 a.m. PST |
I think making an effort sets the scene for our games. Our hobby is one where we still make a lot of our own scenery despite masses of choice on the market. I've seen home made base cloth that look horrible, but once every thing else is on the table blends right into the whole look of the game. I`m on the make an effort side. |
ordinarybass | 05 Dec 2016 1:22 p.m. PST |
Agreed about the cloth. Alot of it depends how well the rest of the terrain is done and how well it all works together. Despite my obsession with terrain building, I've got very simple base cloths. My urban one is just a piece of vinyl tablecloth fabric with a bit of drybrushing and my ground cloths are just two different green wool army blankets. However, when all the terrain is added they look great. Of course I do like to have ALOT of terrain… |
Clays Russians | 09 Dec 2016 9:04 a.m. PST |
Ottoathome and Gdog are in agreement with me. I have gazed on wonder on eyecandy. (No not that "establishment" in Bupapest).😬. But, anyway- have seen the bored, the disenfranchised and the dispossessed wearily seated around a model of the fields of ZYX with well painted regiments, cohorts, lochoi, etc, but being ineptly managed by a bloke who doesn't know the rules well enough, or the rules are as clunky as a three wheeled Edsel. Poor bastard…. Started playing commands and colors, Moreschauser would be right at home here. I think it's a good bridge between board and miniature systems, old school table top (1960s) and the newer impulse type command restrictive type game-rules. |
grahambeyrout | 10 Dec 2016 10:51 a.m. PST |
I am surprised very little has been said about the detritus one sees on tables. I like a detailed realistic table, but frequently I see pictures of beautifully crafted landscapes and superbly painted figures, and of dice, measures, rule books, coffee cups, markers, baubles used as disordered or shaken tokens, and labels telling me that I am looking at is the 13th foot, or the commander of the left wing. I wonder what is the point of detailed landscape, if it is hidden under a pile of dice |
Part time gamer | 05 Feb 2017 2:00 p.m. PST |
Allen57 ..the new ultra detailed look is sort of driving me off the hobby.. I for one would love to have that table. As I get older I find myself looking more/more at 54mm games, (perhaps its the simple days of the "Green Army Men" still in mind). I dont mind a grid-mat as a rule. IF they dont "Jump Out" like red & black on a checker board. *Mako11 "more faint lines", Exactly. Yes, they take away from the over all look, but movement & Rng are simply; "count the sqrs/hexes". ZULUPAUL …in the end playing the game with friends (mostly my brother) is the primary thing. THAT is my real reason to have 'anythng' to do w/ the hobby. Granted, 'Make An Effort', when it comes to painting and terrain (if the $ allows). Lets face it you PAY for that "ultra detail". Many times I had to choose, really cool terrian piece and skip the extra mini's. I'd go w the 2 or 3 old 1in. wooden boards sprayed green, save $ for more mini's every time. My Painting Rule: "flesh look like flesh, metal like metal, etc" and Im happy w it. |