"Cheesiest Ruleset?" Topic

It has been said that certain rulesets attract cheesy players. So, which rulesets would you say are the cheesiest (or attract the most cheesy players)?

Any ruleset that has points is going to attract some cheesy players. I would guess that the biggest, most popular ruleset will probably attract the cheesiest players. I'd guess that would be Warhammer 40K then.

I'd guess that Hordes/Warmachine attracts its fair share too.

any rule set that has figures armed with over the top over sized weapons, spike heels and too much cleavage are probably going to be cheesy

I think these rules win "hands down".

I would think any "historical" ruleset that doesn't enforce some kind of historical accuracy, or atleast what is accepted as accurate.
I would put Flames of War as the worst offender. Not to say that it can't be a good game. But without player's restraint it can lead to some wacky, yet rules legal, forces.

Any rules set that has tournaments tends to push the players to tweak their army to cheesiest least balanced most maxed out forces available to dominate their opponent. In my own game life, I had many experiences in 40k tournaments that were fun, but many opponents who were rude, abrasive and had maxed out their army within the rules, but to a ridiculous degree. They would get extra obnoxious when their maxed out army did not dominate the game the way they expected it to. I do not play tournaments any more.

Man, Mousetrap kicked ass back in the 1960's!

Hi Mousetrap is for "pikers" Now which Witch

link

Oh, wh40k or warmachine/hordes definitely

Pictors Studio, most systems use "points" for balancing armies. Are you meaning something other than this use of "points"? Please explain.

On its face, I don't see why that is an issue, but I'm coming from a non-historical viewpoint. I understand that a game where one player takes only the lowest point cost figure (basic infantry man), and nothing else, amassing a veritable horde, faces off against an opponent who diversifies with cavalry (horse, or mechanized), elite troop types, artillery, etc. That is a bit of a wonky game, indeed. Thanks. Cheers!

I remember the good old days when the Warhammer family of games had figures in the army lists with a base points cost of -1, yes, that's right a negative points cost. It's amazing the cheesy army you can build if you have enough -1 pt figures to offset the cost of the good stuff.

There was also some very creative modeling inspired by the Orkish vehicle rules, that stated if the figures could be placed on the vehicle model they counted as riding on it…

There was also the rather cheesy rules for army composition that made it possible to have the situation in which you could have two armies one of which could not be harmed by any of the models in the other, with both being legally constructed armies. Imagine how much fun this made tournament games…

Hold on – let me fix some popcorn.

Tic tac toe

"any rule set that has figures armed with over the top over sized weapons, spike heels and too much cleavage are probably going to be cheesy"

So, Macho Women with Guns then? I agree.

That isn't cheese, it's cheesecake.

Cheese is allowing buttocks of death, kedging, ignoring defensive fire and allowing close combat before the defense can react, giving certain commanders superhuman reaction and command control, artillery that fights like a panzer, superhuman cavalry that can break even the doughtiest phalanx or square, rules that allow the Imp Gd and king tigers to outnumber the line troops, and never having to worry about logistics.

A good definition of 'Cheesy' might be useful!

Some rules are so abstracted that they will feel cheesy, the same with equal pointed and super armies that bear no resemblance of a historical formation. The same with a win by touching an "objective". However these rules do allow a game to be played during a typical games evening.

Tally Ho!

Cheesy or not, as long as you have a laugh it's all good, isn't it?

CHEESY: cheap, unpleasant, or blatantly inauthentic

cheap, unpleasant, or blatantly inauthentic

I would have gone with something along the lines of "Easily exploitable by taking the rules out of the context of the milieu." F'r'ex –

one player takes only the lowest point cost figure (basic infantry man), and nothing else, amassing a veritable horde

a base points cost of -1

- if this made massively overpowered forces and in the milieu forces with large numbers of these types of units were not expected to be fielded.

Or, perhaps cheese would be using a combined arms OOB for a force that doesn't balance their different capabilities (for example, someone who couldn't afford a usable size cavalry or a force that had horses, but mainly used them for transport, not battle).

I suppose that's "blatantly inauthentic".

Based on Bill's definition, Flames of War, Team Yankee, Tank, for me are the Cheesiest. They are games designed brilliantly to sell toys. Not a bad thing mind you as the toys are available to folks who don't play the games.

The emphasis in WH40K on close melee combat seems kind of cheesy. Here we are in the 41st millennium of the far future and teh most effective combat tactic is to get hand to hand? Or maybe shoot with extremely short ranged guns.

Not that it can't be fun. I like a bit of cheese sometimes.

Now we need some "whine" to go with the cheese.

Do we haaaaaaave to?
Awwwwww, man …

Yep ! I'd go with Mouse Trap too! LOL !

I'm lactose intolerant also …

Abandon Ship.

Has more cheeses than Mousetrap.
(And is a blast to play, this is a great quick filler game!)