This would assume that /tg/ knew anything about any of these. A bold assumption sir.

FFFFFFFFFFFF NOSTALGIA RUSH

/tg/ only likes Warhammer 40K. There are no other games here, miniature or otherwise, save Warhammer 40K.

I'd be interested in other games as well, but there is only Warhammer here.

If you pick any of them up, be prepared to have to teach other people how to play.

>>6442379
>assumptions go in greentext

It turns out Stoop Kid's aggressiveness was just an outlet for his insecurity.

there are SO MANY

FUCK YEAH HEY ARNOLD

Why isn't there a Melonhead: The Hey-Arnolding?

Hey.
HEY.
LISTEN

>>6442406
well I a few mech games, as well as necromunda and mordheim mentioned sometimes.

I'm just surprised there is all this shit I've never heard of. Surely not all of them can be so bad they aren't worth mentioning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_role-playing_games_by_genre

So I check this out, and there is a whole world of role playing games other than D&D, Dark Heresy, and World of Darkness.

Does anyone else find it odd that under sci-fi there's no listing for Battletech, yet there's one for MW: Dark Age?

And I could sit here and tell you about how fuck awesome AT-43 is but the trolls will just come out of the woodwork and go "hurr durr, pre-painted so it doesn't count hurr durr". Sometimes, I fucking hate this place.

>>6442455
OP here

I've been to that page, it's why pdf folder is fucking massive, and full of obscure titles like pendragon, a song of ice and fire and don't rest your head. Thought I'd give tabletop wargaming the same treatment.

>>6442397
>>6442397
>>6442397
>>6442397
>>6442397
>>6442397
>>6442397

Other Games I've played: Alkemy - it was a decent as a squad-based game but way too expensive, Monsterpocalypse - awesome game, but I got tired of the collectiblity aspect, Arcane Legions - my buddy picked this up recently and it seems pretty fun for casual play

cool, I like hearing about what you've experienced with other systems

I play Infinity, Full Thrust, a bit of Flames of War, I know the rules for Alkemy and Anima Tactis a bit, so if you're intrested in any of those, ask away.

>>6442379
LIAR LIAR LIAR

>>6442652
sure, tell me about them. Which ones pull off more complex rules, and which more streamlined? Do they have large potential for customizable army lists and the like? I think I'd find a lot of choice combined with a reasonably meaty ruleset to be more appealing.

>>6442652

I've looked over the Anima RPG - It seems like it's full of arcane mechanics and the backstory is atrociously bad. How's the table top version stand up?

>>6442718
Logical that Anima is shit.

Have you seen the artwork?

Where's the god damn time-travel war game! I demand to lead legions of steam-punk Romans against the bio-tech Aztechs in a bid to conquour 21st century cyberpunk africa!

>>6442718
The game's all about pulling off combos, a bit like Warmachine with only solos or warcasters, but the main rules are dead easy-roll d10,add stat, check if it beat the enemy's stat, apply effects.

>>6442698
All of them are, if not streamlined, then reasonably easy to understand, although Infinity is probably the most complex due to the sheer number of skills a model can posess. Full Thrust is a spaceship game, so it's simple in that the only interactions tween models is shooting, and moving is also simple due to erm...well, void isn't really known for having dense forests and such. It is not simplistic however, due to the fact that your models can't just turn on the spot and stop moving, your ship always moves the same speed it moved the turn before, unless you change it by using the engines to slow down or accelerate(so you're well fucked if your engine's hit), or to manouver. What's really cool is that both sides first write down their movements, and then move all at once, so you must try and calculate where the enemy is likely to be this turn, or just guess. There are "official" army lists, but it also has complete ship-designing ssystem, so you can stat out any fleet or ship within reason. Best thing? It's free to download from Ground Zero's site. There really isn't also any issue with "proxy", a ship is a ship is a ship, so you can even mount a boiled egg on a stand and use it as one fo the official ships, or just stat it out yourself.

>>6442798
what I found just a little off putting about warmachine was it's cult of personality in the leader units and solos. Feels anything but custom.

>>6442875
>What's really cool is that both sides first write down their movements, and then move all at once
That's cool. Sounds like it could result in a real clusterfuck though.

>>6442892
Well, every guy in Anima is a named hero, so the only customizablity is in the equipment cards(simple really, you buy equipment for your heroes from you rpoint allowance, usually one card per hero only, to boost said heroe's abilities or heal him or whatever).

>>6442911
I don't hate it per se. Sometimes I am in the mood for adopting the position of already done characters, like novels and videogames and stuff, so this isn't all that different.

>>6442698
A bit about infinity-It's SF skirmish game, and it's got some very nifty rules, that can put some people off however. It's all about ARO and FTF rolls, which means that a) every enemy model that sees your model acting can try and do something about it in reaction(most usually, try to blow your brains out). FtF means that if two models are directly influencing each other with their action and reaction(let's say, I am shooting your model B, and as a reaction, models A and B are shooting at me. Model A is not a target, so he just rolls normally, but me and model B are in direct opposition here, so we both roll at the same time, and whoever wins gets to do his action to the enemy, in a very simplified explaination). Due to this, the field is very dynamic, and changes quickly. Your entire army gets order pool that you can spend however you wish, one order allows one model to make 2 short skills or 1 long skill, and the list of avaliblie skills is extensive-shooting, moving, jumping, swimming, hacking, healing, exploding and so on.
Game's very much biased towards shooting, close combat is in most cases a last-case option if you somehow managed to sneak close enough to the enemy or simply can't do anything else to the enemy.
The army lists are offering little in way of limitations, as long as you have enough points, SWC points(models with special equipment cost SupportWeaponCost in addition to normal points) and AVA(each model can be taken as many times as his AVA allows, regardless of the weapon profile) you can take whatever you like, provided one model is the commander.

>>6442981
okay cool, thanks for the info

>>6442981
Each unit type has listed weapon choices you can buy, they're often associated with additional skills a model armed thus posesses(for example, a guy with sniper rifle may have sapper skill to allow him to dig in, while the same model with just a rifle won't have it).

The rules and army lists are also completely free to dl from the company's site. The models are expensive one-to-one, but the usual number of models per side runs to about 7-10, so it won't be quite as expensive as getting hundreds of IG or Orcs on board in the long run. Anyhow, you're getting what you paid for, the sculpting of those models is really, really good, and they're reasonably well cast, with miniscule mouldlines and little flash.
>http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity_ENG/
is the site for the game
>http://www.groundzerogames.net/
is the site for Full Thrust(You'll be needing Full Thrust and Fleetbook 1 since it introduces vital changes to the game system)

Oh where to start... Simple games, games anyone can play, even little kids, senior citizens and us fatguys too.

1) Rapid Fire, for mid-20th century conflict. They are "club rules" that were in use for a long time before actually being published, so they're very well developed. See their page at

http://www.rapid-fire.uk.com/

Picture related, game played at Kublacon this last spring. I took the picture - that's not me there with the proper fatguy beard.

2) Ancient and medieval combat, at large scale (not man-to-man but formed units): the magnificent DBA is the game for you. The battles can take as little as a half hour to play; so multi-player campaigns are possible that can resolve in an afternoon. Picture highly related, my six armies on display

>>6443068
That guy's facial hair intimidates me. The cross between mutton chops and neckbeard is too much for my brain to handle.

Also, Blitzkrieg Commander. Nice (can be used with anything from 2mm to 20mm) WW2 wargame based on heavily modified warmaster rules.

Here's a DBA game, in progress. Recognize the beard?

>>6443068
hehe nice little sidecar bikes and WHOA NICE BEARD

The Ground Zero games (Dirtside, Stargrunt, Full Thrust etc) are all designed to work together. Imagine a science fiction game with integrated air-to-ground and air-to-air rules.

>>6443152
I tried to read both SG and DS rulesets, but they seem a bit too different from your usual gaming systems for me, esp. the whole deal with chits and different dice.

Alternative to DBA thats easier to learn and has more character for the units: Impetus and Basic Impetus. Seems to be gaining a lot of converts recently, probably because Basic Impetus is free and not lacking much from the full version.

>>6443126
hmm, a straight line set up? I expect widely differing movement values to see some interesting and/or tactical gameplay ensuring, right?

>>6443152
>integrated air-to-ground and air-to-air rules
beautiful, will definately check out

>>6443176

Is... is that a motherfucking Spanish tercio?

>>6443190
I prefer to call it stationary target

>>6443218

Enjoy getting your cavalry torn apart by pike and shot in square formation.

Viva España!

>>6443176

Hey, as long as the bases are the same size, 40mm wide, I'll play anything. DBM, DBMM, Fields of Glory etc. But no rebasing - no rebasing - no rebasing.

PS Beautiful Tercio there - That's right around the break between DBA and DBR, which is another wonderful game with the best army lists ever. Ever.

>>6443228
Enjoy being flattened by the charge, like the Swede was back at Kircholm.

>>6443177

Kinda sorta. There are differing movement values, but the biggest limiting factor on movement is actually limitations on Command and Control.

You get a random number of Initiative Points each turn for your commander to issue orders. So if you're not careful, your battle line will get all out of whack.

>>6443241

Swedes are not Spaniards. Silly Swedes, trying to fight the Poles.

>>6443247
initiative points, I see. Kind of like activation points?

Anyways, I'll be back in three hours. Hope this is still here. Looks to be interesting.

>>6443260
But they begin with the same letter, how can they be different?

sum more random FT pic

Have some "Darkest Africa" figures. They are Foundry and Copplestone miniatures, strangely enough I've only ever used them in D&D and 40K games...

>>6443447

The white guy in the middle looks like a god damn tele-evangelist.

>>6443270
Pretty much. The points are expended based on where the troops are in relation to the commander. Greater distances use more points, going through difficult terrain uses more points. Basically, things that would obscure signal smokes, flags, slow down runners, etc. will limit how many troops get orders each turn.

>>6443177

I once complained about "realism" in a game where the armies are bought with equal points - the rebuttal clearly stated that the ancient or medieval commander did not offer battle unless confident of victory - that meant both sides of course. So historical battles tended to be fairly even.

As for the set up, well, yes, straight lines are what you're going to get - both in DB and historically.

The reason there are so many wargames out there that most people here on /tg/ don't know about is for two reasons.

1. Most of the loudmouth trollish people on /tg/ are young. They have not lived long enough to have been exposed to these other games, most of which were created in the early 80s and published in the mid 80's to early 90's, and automatically assume that because they've not heard of it, it must suck, and therefore they shout down any mention of these other games.

2.The older people on /tg/ get fucking tired of the younger posters mouthing off about games they don't know about, have never played, and would rather spend their time playing said games than arguing about how they do NOT suck.

Also, most of the people that play these other wargames are usually not interested in "omfg HUGE bolt guns" or in how to abuse the rules set.

Fuck, many of them don't even have unit point costs (Microarmor for example) and rely on the players being sportsmen and honorable at the table when selecting their forces. Imagine if you tried that with 40k. I mean seriously, imagine if you removed point costs from the game completely, and instead relied on your opponent and you coming to an unspoken agreement where you select your forces and he selects his, and both players trust that the other is fielding a balanced and fair force.

But somehow, older neckbeards (myself included... though I am clean shaven) pull this off all the time when playing historical wargames.

>>6443567
>elitist baaawing

>>6443218
>>6443241

Haha! Sirry Europeans, the Gorden Horde wirr fratten you good with our arrow and horses. NO ONE CAN STAND AGAINST US! ARR HARE THE MONGORIANS!

>, most of which were created in the early 80s and published in the mid 80's to early 90's,

I dare say so, we see today more new games being released then ever before, at least in SF and Fantasy departament. Even Historicals are seeing plastic multi-part kits for 28mm, and quality printed books like Cold War Commander or Flames of War.

>>6443585

Bump to piss off this guy.

>>6443603
KHAAAAAAAAAN!

>>6443567
>Ifuritasfan
pointlessly pompous assbreather detected

>>6443585

OK so what is your explanation then?

And what is the opposite of "elitist" - "prole"? something definitely not elite, anyway, how about rabble? swarm? the great unwashed?

>>6443567
Wow that chip on your shoulder is pretty telling.

The reason there are trolls on /tg/ is that IT'S FUCKING 4CHAN. Age may be a contributor but by virtue of it being a board on Moot's domain it's already going to get trolls. And your first point is a fucking baseless assumption. "I haven't heard of it, it must suck, etc etc?"

What the fuck is that?

And your second point is flawed too, based on stereotypes and/or more baseless assumptions that the big wargames are NO FUN ZONES TOURNEYFAGS ONLY FINAL DESTINATION. You know why that attitude exists? Right. Tourneys.

Once someone starts hosting Microarmor tournaments with prizes with actual monetary value you can bet your fat arse that neckbeardy powergamers will emerge from the woodwork.

You're pretty informative when it comes to painting, casting, and the like but you really need to stop crying about dem kids walking on your lawn.

>>6443585
Yes yes... and here we see the perfect example of what I was talking about. It's not being elitist to require people to be civil to each other and had a code of conduct. Most kiddies don't understand this, so they label other as "elistist" when they aren't allowed to join their game and disrupt it.

Oh well, discussion is pointless, pictures only from here on

>>6443692
Namefag or not, he's still right.

This here is Dana Lombardy with a magnificent ACW game. Also Kublacon, this last spring

>>6443751

Yes, he is not wrong. Now, more Kublacon picts

>>6443699
Someone that doesn't arbitrarily lump everyone he doesn't like as "kiddies" and instead strawmans people's motivations rather than try to give an HONEST debate.

Oh yeah, such a great code of conduct.

Guess what, the last three "kiddies" I've seen pick up 40k at the LGS didn't do it because of "omfg huge bolt guns" or "grimdarkdarkgrim hardcore", they wanted to paint figures and play games. Of course, this being anecdotal it's hardly all-encompassing but unlike Ifuritas, I'm not acting like my personal experiences are everything.

Also while not singing his own praises with the other breath "oh look at me I am the ideal player. What is this we play games without points costs truly I am a god among proles!"

>>6443775
>"oh look at me I am the ideal player. What is this we play games without points costs truly I am a god among proles!"

Oh shit! A differing opinion, time to RAGE!

>>6443775

Dammit now you're starting to make sense. But look, how would it appear, a bearded fatguy like myself trying to recruit new gamers from among the kids at the store? I know full well what that looks like so stick to my own group for games. If this means that the younger generation is not exposed to my kind of game then oh well, sorry about that. That's also why we attend conventions, to show off our crap and maybe, just maybe, find new people for our group.

>>6443775
You care too much about what people say on the internet.

This is the third picture of this game I have and I still have no idea what game it is. It sure looks good, the fellow with the pith helmet is apparently the GM.

>>6443843
How do you do it? Play your game. Invariably you get someone interested.

That's how I got a BFG league going locally (inb4 "well of course it's 40kids shit"). Me and two other guys played, the only people in an hour's radius. So what did we do? Go down to open game night and play.

People watch. People ask questions. Rather than worrying that people will "join their game and disrupt it" (see >>6443723) just answer the questions and keep playing.

Let them play a game or two with your models (of course keep an eye out for the less scrupulous).

It took 6 months to get the league going but now we have about 8 regulars and double that in on-and-off players.

As for "bad" players, you invariably get some chaff with the wheat, but that's better than nothing. I'd rather get 4 players and have two turn out bad and ignore them than chase them all away for being potentially bad and having no new players.

No one has mentioned the best game of them all, Hordes Of The Things... Until NOW.

Hordes Of The Things is a DBA variant that covers... everything

>>6443820
Fine, I'll summarize his first post for ya.
>Young people don't know about older wargames. I'll make a baseless assumption that they then call them shit so they can avoid looking dumb. I am not young therefore I am exempt from this assumption.
>Young people all have stupid reasons for getting into wargames. Fortunately, I am not young so I am except form this stereotype as well.
>There are wargames where there are no points costs. I will assume this concept is beyond the grasp of people I do not like, but within that of people I do like. I will then make them look better by claiming that only sportsmen and honorable people can play these games. I play these games, therefore I am a sportsman and honorable.

>>6443854
I'm on fucking /tg/, that's a given.

>>6443706
>>Wow that chip on your shoulder is pretty telling.
Chip? Dude, I've hosted tons of wargame tourney's for FLGSs. This is experience talking. 90% of the time the problem children at the games are young gamers.

>>The reason there are trolls on /tg/ is that IT'S FUCKING 4CHAN. Age may be a contributor but by virtue of it being a board on Moot's domain it's already going to get trolls. And your first point is a fucking baseless assumption. "I haven't heard of it, it must suck, etc etc?"

Dude, I've posted a number of threads about lesser known wargames and rpgs and it's the same old shit every time, which is part of why I've not been posting them lately. You get a half dozen people involved and then you get a flood of people that make the assumption that because "they" haven't heard of it, and because it came from the 80's and isn't played by them that it must automatically be "overly complex" and therefore must suck. Have these people played it? No. Have they read the rules? No. They think "The 80's and early 90's games were all gamist and simulationist, and therefore are tooo fucking hard. You gotta be some sort of accountant or something to play that shit" and they state as much.

>>And your second point is flawed too, based on stereotypes and/or more baseless assumptions that the big wargames are NO FUN ZONES TOURNEYFAGS ONLY FINAL DESTINATION.

(cont)

Needs more pikes.

>>6443980
Or maybe it's because you're not the shining paragon of wargames and the savior of the hobby, you overzealous overly defensive whiny bitch.

>>6443980
Dude, you're the one claiming that they're "no fun zones" not me. Historical wargamers have a ton of fun playing their games. What I'm saying is that historical wargamers behave very differently from your typical 40k gamer. They are usually older, are less inclined toward being asshats to each other, and can be trusted not to be rules abusers. Just look at the 40k threads here on /tg/ about how to build the most "effective" armies in 40k by abusing the rules. The nob biker damage allocation cheat is a perfect example of this. Do you think that a typical microarmor gamer would even think of trying that sort of shit? If he did he'd soon find himself not being invited to games any longer.

>> You know why that attitude exists? Right. Tourneys.
Once someone starts hosting Microarmor tournaments with prizes with actual monetary value you can bet your fat arse that neckbeardy powergamers will emerge from the woodwork.

Well, it's a good thing that we don't have that sort of thing go on then and never have. As it stands most historical wargamers just enjoy playing because they like fun games and it's a great excuse to drink beer or soda around a table with friends while pushing little miniatures around on a table without playing against some asshat powergamer.

>>You're pretty informative when it comes to painting, casting, and the like but you really need to stop crying about dem kids walking on your lawn.

Whatever, man, whatever. Tell you what. Go start a thread on... let's say... General de Brigade, or Battalions in Crisis and see what sort of response you get from /tg/
These are games that aren't designed for 10 year olds and have some genuine complexity to them. The second that anyone in the thread sees that, you'll immediately here to outcry of "too hard! it's unplayable shit" in direct conflict with the fact that they're very popular and widely played in historical wargaming groups. It's just designed for a different set of players

More pikes!

Pikes!

>>6443914
>>6443933

Why, thank you dudes. Another game I've bookmarked besides Brikwars because it could be fun to play with lego.

>>6444061
Dang, those are some beautiful minis and flags.

Still from Kublacon?

STOOP KIDS AFRAID TO LEAVE HIS STOOP!
god dman nostolgia.

Good store for all sorts of historical wargames.

http://www.thepanzerdepot.com/

>What I'm saying is that historical wargamers behave very differently from your typical 40k gamer.

So I assume by this response that anything not historical is being automatically filed under "40k" because fantasy and SF games don't usually force you to check wind speed before firing a single rifle in a brigade level game?

>>6444198
bah, their discount on Flames of War isn't even as good as the Warstore's

>>6444249
That's because FoW isn't a real historical wargame, you can actually learn the rules in one go, and it has point cost system, which is apparently anathema to Real Historical Wargamers.

>Well, it's a good thing that we don't have that sort of thing go on then and never have. As it stands most historical wargamers just enjoy playing because they like fun games and it's a great excuse to drink beer or soda around a table with friends while pushing little miniatures around on a table without playing against some asshat powergamer.

>>6444049
http://www.hamburger-tactica.de/tactica/img/fotos_2008/11_Pavia/pavia.html :)

>>6443706

see
>>6444287
&
>>6444232

IF does seem to have a point here, tripfag or not.

There are people on /tg/ that love to distort shit, pretending that older games are too complex or unplayable (like that windspeed comment) or just acting like cocks to try and not look dumb because they don't know about some obscure game.

It's easier to tear it down than to just admit not knowing about it I guess.

>Dude, I've posted a number of threads about lesser known wargames and rpgs and it's the same old shit every time, which is part of why I've not been posting them lately. You get a half dozen people involved and then you get a flood of people that make the assumption that because "they" haven't heard of it, and because it came from the 80's and isn't played by them that it must automatically be "overly complex" and therefore must suck. Have these people played it? No. Have they read the rules? No. They think "The 80's and early 90's games were all gamist and simulationist, and therefore are tooo fucking hard. You gotta be some sort of accountant or something to play that shit" and they state as much.

Y'know I think because you're so scared of those disruptive new players, you've clammed up into a little shell with your normal gaming group and don't actually talk to other people in the gaming community anymore (perhaps with the exception of a like-minded few).

That's the only reason I can think of that you're using /tg/ as a base support your generalizations about an entire generation of gamers.

>>6443360
>>6443289
>>6443152
Full Thrust sounds and looks pretty cool, what are it's pros and cons?

>>6444402
You do realize the former of the two posts you linked is a reaction to the tripfag's earlier claim that people who play games without points costs are superior, honorable people, right?

>>6444413
Pros:
cheap(unless you decide to buy FW/GW ships from BFG a sizeable fleet will cost you 50GBP and give you plenty ships to play with, you can start playing "full" games with as few as 3-4 ships), you only need a flat table, no terrain
The rules are easy to learn and fun to play
The "official" fleets are balanced against each other
It's the "benchmark" game for space gaming, everyone heard about it if not played.

Cons:
Unless you're very lucky you'll have to get someone else to play with you, it's not a genre with great following.
The game's practically not updated, it doesn't really need FAQ's and such, but it's very "old school" in this regard, with print-and-forget philosophy.

>>6444413
Aww come on, no one wants to sell me on it? It looks really cool.

>>6444497
God dammit. :/

Thanks though!

>>6444397

Pavia. its just one of those battles that just keeps on giving.

>>6444497
Doesn't sound like a bad idea to get the 2 fleet starter pack. I've got some friends I can talk into trying it with me.

>>6444553
It's definetely a good way, either the big 2player pack for 45 or the small Intro Pack for 25GBP.
I personally quickly switched to another company's ships, but GZG models are good. Just make sure you're not buying the old sculpts(but they're now in separate category, so you shouldn't really have problems with that).

To those of you who want to play Historical Wargames, enjoying cheaper mini-prices, etc but don't want to learn another set of rules, why not try Warhammer Historical? Tons of supplements and spin offs allowing p to play everything from the Battle of Cannae, to the Battle of Naseby, to the Gunfight at the OK Corral.

I play WH: ECW, personally, but also play DBA (Ancient Britons and Welsh), Urban War, Chosen Men as well as stuff like 40k (Combat Patrol) and Battletech.

ENGLISH CIVIL WAR

>>6444797
Oh that's awesome: 1930s British Fascists fighting regulars. What rules were used?

>>6442406

>but there is only Warhammer here
>In the grim darkness of /tg/, there is only Warhammer.

I always recommend Contemptible Little Armies to people asking for rules.

I have never played Contemptible Little Armies.

>>6444835
Warhammer

>>6444409
Dude, I think you need to re-read what I was saying.
The OP commented about there being all these wargames he never even knew existed and wondering why he'd not heard of them on /tg/. Then someone commented that the reason /tg/ doesn't know about them is because /tg/ only focuses on warhammer and the like.
Saddly, if you bring up a game on /tg/ that isn't currently "in favor" or which noone has ever heard of you generally get a shit storm of people talking it down.
The thing is, generally the only people that know about these older games are people that gamed in the 80's and 90's when they came out. So by definition they're in their 20's 30's and 40's now. Whereas the people that haven't heard of them are almost exclusively younger players, and yes, it's usually these younger players that pull out the smack talk about these old wargames on /tg/.
I mean it's pretty cut and dry, man. You just don't generally have 30 and 40 year old gamers acting up like that, do you? So who's left? The shit posts come from someone, they don't just appear out of the ether.

So, wasn't taking the behavior of /tg/ as being anything more than indicative of how /tg/ acts

Now, about the other comment, about shelling up...No.
I take a very active role in bringing new and old games to the attention of players regardless of their age. Case in point, a while back I brought a few epic armies to the game store, booked a table and put up a sign reading "Like 40k? Why not try Epic 40k? Demo games every hour, sign up and try it."
Donated a complete boxed rules set with Ork, IG, SM, and ELdar armies to the game store's community gaming chest so people could play it whenever they want.

>>6445090
While that might serve to answer your age concerns, I notice you have yet to respond to clarify your claims about historical wargamers being a superior breed.

No siree, it's not like I can't get pictures of the locals sitting around painting Warmachine (or "kiddy" game of your choice) with a bbq fired up outside and a cooler stocked with beer. It's not like they don't do this once a month or so, or just have chill games on Wednesday nights while drinking a few.

Clearly that's historical gamer territory only. No, they must either be frothing powergamers or people who enjoy playing against frothing powergamers.

>>6444413
One great thing that other guy forgot to mention, is the game has official unit builder, so you can modify your fleet as you see fit.

Instead of "points system", it would be better to leave armies open, but take a penalty for larger or more lavishly-equiped armies (no air support, slower movement, more vulnerable morale)

>>6443914
Holy fuck, is that entire army made of foodstuffs?
ARE THOSE BEARS MADE OF CHEESE?
FUCK YES, DEATH IS FINAL. ALL FIGS WILL BE EATEN BY THEIR CONQUERORS.

>>6445427
Yeah, but it`s impossible to do that outside of those few historicals, could you even imagine this setup, say in warmachine?

>>6445518
I SHALL FEAST ON YOUR FLESH!

>>6445427
I agree.

The only problem is, some people feel that without a point base system that you can't quantify whether the loss of that advantage counterbalances having more or better units.

Case in point. Let's say you're playing a game that uses WWII tanks and troops.

Your opponent is playing Russian, you're playing german in october of 1943
In1943 a soviet tank brigade consists of
1264 troops
21 t-60 or t-70s
44 t-34/76
3 armored cars
125 trucks.

He opts for no air cover.

What do you field to counter this to make the fight "fair"? How many tanks is worth air cover? What about artillery.

How much is being the defender worth? If one side the agressor and the other the defender? If so, the defender will be in hulled down and likely pre-spotted (for artillery shots) positions, all this goes beyond a point systems utility in most cases. A good game referee helps out too.

>>6445736
Sure, but it wont do if you both want a balanced game and if it`s just for fun and nothing else why even bother with such rules?

>>6445538
Why do you say it's impossible? Seriously.

microarmor player have been having battles that don't use point systems for decades. They just negotiate a little between each other, and have an impartial referee step in when they can't agree on something.

Why can't you have a scenario where one side starts off in an ambush position, all units in cover or dug in, and they fight the other side with an advantage like that... only they pay for that advantage by having less troops?

Unfortunately a points system can't be built to accurately reflect something this complex. But with a little negotiation between the players it can work just fine.
Maybe do it like the blips in old Space Hulk.

>>6445826
Well, that`s the first half of the problem: The need for actuall referee. Most wargames these days tend to be self sufficient, without the need for wargaming MG. I`m not saying the idea is stupid or something, but still, it`s far less convienient. Besides, well thought out point system seems much quicker and while it most certainly can`t guarant balance in scenario games it`s still best to use in pitched battles that most people seem to play.

>Why not? Like I was saying, for the longest time war gamers didn't have point cost values for units in a lot of games.

Sure, and for the longest time wargamers were using photocopied leaflets for rulebooks, with badly-drawn scribbles for art. They'd also use roughly-hewn models that look like blobs compared to modern minis. It was a dark time, but now we're in the safe lands of high production quality books, with finely sculpted models and point costs for almost any game. Sure, you can insist on going backwards and spend first half of the day discussing shit and then another to play the game, or you could prepare the list in minutes, play two games in the same time slot, and still have time for beer and pizza in the meantime.

>>6445802>Sure, but it wont do if you both want a balanced game

Why not? Like I was saying, for the longest time war gamers didn't have point cost values for units in a lot of games. They would sit around and build armies that weren't custom designed to squeeze the rules, but which were what they felt were roughly equal. They'd present them to either each other and bargain back and forth till both sides felt it was fair, or would have a referee rule on balance. (with the ref or players taking the player's role into consideration.)

Things like heavy artillery being presetup, machine gunners already in position in pill boxes or fox holes, Tanks being hulled down and pre-arranged to have fields of fire that the opponent had to get past to engage them.

Strangely enough, this also forced people to talk to each other and socialize. Points systems have even been blamed for actually removing the necessity of social interaction and negotiation from the game play.With one you don't need to even talk to your foe to get a game going.

>>and if it`s just for fun and nothing else why even bother with such rules?

Exactly. There's perfectly valid arguments in both directions. For points systems and for non-points based.
Why bother with a points based system if you can negotiate or have a referee rule it for you.
Why bother with a referee or negotiating player to player when a points based system can do it for you? Everyone can be prepared right off and get right to the game without all the fuss.

Both have their strengths and weaknesses. But with non points systems you have to both be willing to negotiate fairly.
Only, the words "powergamer" and "negotiate fairly" rarely go hand in hand.

>>6446171
One mistake you`re making is assuming that people who wouldn`t like doing away with points based systems, must be pg`s. These things were meant to speed setting the game up, sometimes you`ve got whole day, and sometimes you don`t.

Besides, all this rulebending and maximising only happens in games that are poorly balanced to begin with like 40k.

Anyone play this?

>>6446021
>>6446021Massively incorrect assumptions.

Wow... seriously, just wow. And here people is precisely what I'm talking about in /tg/. Some people immediately jump in claiming that modern "high production quality games" are automatically better, without even looking at the older games, and likewise automatically ASSUMING that all "old games" were photocopied pieces of shit with bad art.

You wanna talk mini quality. Go check out GHQ and CinC minis. They've had quality minis that make the finest that GW and Forgeworld could sculpt look like utter and complete shit in comparison.
http://www.ghqmodels.com/pages/military/modelguide.asp
I love GHQs company bi-line. "The best damn wargaming products -- since 1967"

Dude, back in the 1980's GHQ and CinC were releasing minis of unbelievable quality even by today's standards

They have had minis with eyepopping detail and quality that far outstrips GW or Privateer for decades.

You make the massive ASSUMPTION that all older games "suck" and were of "shitty production quality" without even thinking about it, and That right there is precisely the reason that people that DO know about these other wargames don't want to talk about them on /tg/. Because they get tired of dealing with people like you.

>>6446021

too bad you won't have any money for that beer and pizza after you get done buying your models and associated rulebooks.

>>6446449
Great nitpicking at his post, but why don`t you address the actuall point of it?

If you have to bargain for hours before you can even start deploing your minis, you have to waste half a day for a single game.

>>6446286One mistake you`re making is assuming that people who wouldn`t like doing away with points based systems, must be pg`s.

If I have been implying that people that use points systems are automatically power gamers, let me correct that right now. I'm not saying that at all.

What I am saying though is that games without point systems are like garlic to a vampire for power gamers.
It drives them off. Without a point system a powergamer has nothing to powergame with.

>>These things were meant to speed setting the game up, sometimes you`ve got whole day, and sometimes you don`t.

Entirely true. And a fine argument in favor of points based systems.

>>Besides, all this rulebending and maximising only happens in games that are poorly balanced to begin with like 40k.
Very true as well.

>>6446511
I don`t know, maybe by not being whinny teen and actually earning enough to not give a shit about a few bucks more or less?

>>6446524If you have to bargain for hours before you can even start deploing your minis, you have to waste half a day for a single game.

Force selection takes at most 10 -20 minutes, not hours like you're implying. Less if you have a referee.

Usually it's a matter of a few pieces here and there. Then deploy your forces in alternating groups.

Don't try and mischaracterize it as being some day long negotiation and counter negotiation.

>>6446538
Powergamers are a strange group, because they appear most everywhere. I don't think it's so much the problem of the point buy system, but more a problem with the persona of the powergamer them self.

>>6446538
See, from my experience, it`s mostly tournaments themselves that draw pg`s and tourneyfags. Of course, people who prefer point based games tend to be more competetive, still, most of them are something in between, meaning that while they want to keep the competitive aspect of the game, they wouldn`t go to any lengh, just to win at all costs.

Myself, I`m quite keen on winning, still I`d rather lose in a friendly game than win in a rulebook biblefight. And I play some obscure(at least by /tg/`s standards) games like full thrust myself, bah, I`m universaly known as a big GW hater, it`s just that historical aren`t really my thing, exept for FoW.

>>6446602 Powergamers are a strange group, because they appear most everywhere. I don't think it's so much the problem of the point buy system, but more a problem with the persona of the powergamer them self.

Can't argue with that. But I put it to you that power gamers don't do well when they are forced to step away from their rules and negotiate.

Case in point, we had this guy that kept trying to field german 88mm anti tank guns on the table, with troops manning them, but refused to also field the trucks apcs, and supprt troops that would have had to be required to put them in place. i mean come on, you can't have 2 guys haul an 88 mm gun into place with ammo on their backs. And when he'd be told, fine, field em, but you gotta also field the transport, trucks, and troops to go with them he'd explode in a red faced rage of "WELL! if you're going to be THAT way! You're just trying to sabotage me"
You see, those trucks and troops counted toward victory points (each killed vehicle had value) and they were easy to kill.
People would point out "Look, Steve, you're being unreasonable. You can't have everything be your way." And he'd go off on another tirade about how we were forcing him to play with a handicap.
The funniest thing that happened after that was he clustered all the trucks and stuff way off in the corner of the table, as far as possible for them to be and out of the line of fire, thinking he was being clever.
A guy who knew the dimensions of the table called in an artillery strike (you called it in by declaring X inches by Y inches from the corner of the table) and dropped it right on top of the trucks all in this big cluster. Destroyed all of them in one turn.
First time I'd ever seen a powergamer actually cry. I mean it, big boo hoo tears.

>>6446801
Wow, got what was coming to him, but that is one reason I prefer hacing my army lists clear and set about what I can and can`t possibly take, call it primitive, but it somehow fulfills my estetic sense.

> http://www.ghqmodels.com/pages/military/modelguide.asp

> They've had quality minis that make the finest that GW and Forgeworld could sculpt look like utter and complete shit in comparison.

ADVANCED SQUAD LEADER , FUCK YEAH!

>>6446801 88mm anti tank

Fuck! Just looked them up on youtube. Fuck! those things are monsters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v1wwVj5H70&NR=1

>>6442875
>>6444497
I want to know even more about Full Thrust. You say you use a different company's miniatures and we shouldn't buy the old sculpts. Why do you buy other ships, and what is the reason we should avoid old sculpts?

>>6447000
FUCK YEAH GHQ

>You wanna talk mini quality. Go check out GHQ and CinC minis. They've had quality minis that make the finest that GW and Forgeworld could sculpt look like utter and complete shit in comparison.

You know, it's funny, because as it happens I do have some GHQ models. The vehicles are pretty nice, I'll give you that, but I was talking about miniatures, that is, human(or humanoid at least) models, which, with all due reverence to the past of wargaming, suck compared to the models currently availible.
>all older games "suck"
No, they do not, but as it happens, I did have a peek at the ones that were left in our LGS, including the dreaded MicroArmor. While I don't doubt they were realistic, or at least micro-management accurate, they also struck me as terribly...uh, unfriendly in layout and wording.
I'll be frank with you, I am not some hardcore neckbeard with a massive hard-on for accurate front plate penetration of Panzer IV or details of Napoleon's guard's O'dB. I want to get my models on reasonably well looking table, roll up some scenario maybe, and spend a few hours moving my tiny soldiers around shooting other tiny soldiers. That's all there is to it, and all those disgusting things like point values or army compositions allow me to do it easily and quickly. I'm sure there are some old wargames like that, but most of them do look more like srs bsns than something you'd like to play for kicks.
And just to be clear-I do not play GW's games, nor do I play Warmachine.

>Because they get tired of dealing with people like you.
And I get tired of reading condescending pricks like you, who assume their way is better because it is or because they enjoy it this way. As a matter of fact, I do not regularily go and spit on micro armor players in our club, while all too often I read internet version of it on different forums or boards, where it inevitably boils down to "you kid's don't play real wargames, you're having FUN!"

>>6447182
I buy other ships because I prefer their aesthetics, simple as that.
And you shouldn't buy old sculpts because, well, they're old, and the moulds they come from are wearing down badly, and the new versions are simply miles better.If you prefer the old sculpts from GZG you can still buy them, but they'll require more work to get into shape.

here's the unpainted ships in question, made by Zandris IV.

>>6447182
Not the guy in question, but with avoiding the old sculpts, it`s simple, newer ones are much better. Of course it`s just a matter of design, if you like old stuff more, nobody`s gonna have any problem with you fielding them.

>>6447242
Those are nice looking ships, all right. How are the rules? Easy to learn? I'm browsing Zandris IV now at your recommendation, and I'm wondering if there are multiple producers of these models, like all the companies that make alt sculpts for Warhammer?

>>6447000
Actually, yeah, they are pretty fucking incredible.
Here's a group of 1/285th scale tiger Is with 2 kubelwagens and 2 kettenkrads.

The amazing thing is, those little jeeps, they're about as long as 2 grains of rice.

So, yeah, pretty fucking amazing detail and extremely high quality.

>>6447294
Shitton of them! http://www.star-ranger.com/Minis.htm just check this list.

As for the rules, they definitely need some time to get used to, unless of course you`re familiar with starship games. Anyway, after you get used to movement idea, the rest is simple.

Still up! Nice work, good morning!

>>6447294
about models, you have to remember that most space war games, except for very specific ones like BFG(and even then it's dead easy to proxy), are practically freeform. You have the rules, you have some fleets statted out, and what models you use to represent them is entirely up to you. there are dozens of small companies producing sculpts of anything, from completely crazy crap to not-StarGate ships or not-BattlestarGalactica ships.
>http://star-ranger.com/
this site is full of spacewarfare goodness.

As to FT rules, as I said, some ideas(like movement that doesn't "zero" after the end of turn) take some getting used to, but in it's own it's dead simple and dead easy. Remeber that while the Rulebook is the core, FleetBook 1 introduces multiple changes to how the game works, including a better, more complete ship design system, and literally everyone plays with "full thrust 2,5" rules(that's how Full Thrust 2 rulebook+FB1 is called coloqially). There's a unoficcial(but blessed by the owner of the game) rulebook called "Full Thrust Remixed" which brings all these rules together for smoother reading.

>>6447294
My favorite ships for FT come from http://www.ninjamagic.com/. They're very detailed and just as inexpensive as the other manufacturers

play song of blades and heroes. 5 bux from ganesha games, and it comes with a creature builder spreadsheet.

>>6447417
So wait, you don't even have to play with the given factions? And what's the best way to get into the game? If I don't intend to buy GZG minis, should I even bother with the fleet packs? I ask because the website is so hard to navigate

Confrontation has the best minis, but American kids only play games that they can shoplift from local stores.

>>6447486
I'd have to disagree with you there. My store had a big Confrontation population, with the store owner having every single faction, but a lot of us just didn't like it. I for one hate the sculpts.

>>6447472
No, you don`t have to and if you don`t want to use their models, you can just download rules and that`s it.

Holy #$(%*&$ I went back to work for a few hours and came back to a beautiful thread full of home-brew and club-rule historical miniatures stuff.

Solid work /tg/.

Also, HAIL MCBEARD BEARD THE BEARDY.

>>6447472
Should you wish so, and should the opponents agree, you can create your whole fleet from scratch stats-wise, but it's easier to take one of the pre-made fleets from FleetBook 1 and 2(alien races in this one), and just "fit in" the ships you have to the classes statted out there. Let's say you have a ship from company X, and you fancy the fleet for Russkies from FB1. You see what class of ships the model is closes too(usually the ships have names like "Slut class frigate" or "Cockmongler class Dreadnought" given by the company that sells them, so it's some guideline), and use it as such. let's say the model you bought, Slut class frigate, fits roughtly with the stats of Ural class destroyer from ESU fleet. There you go, your brave Slut is now Ural class in game.

If you do not wish to collect any of the GZG models, well, find the models you like, and buy a bunch. A good mix of escorts and main ships will be good( some frigates, some destroyers, some cruisers of all types, maybe a carrier and one or two heavier ships like battleships or superdreadnoughts), even as few as 5 models per side will be enough for an entertining game.

>>6447486
Confrontation is dead as doornails, unless you mean the glorious rubber toys they sell now?

Reading this, I have the courage to leave my Stoop

Anybody ever play Warmaster? What are the pros and cons?

>>6447576
>>6447550
I... but... what? How does the company make money? Also, any Homeworld-esque models? :P

>>6447446
>a creature builder spreadsheet
tell me more about this. Plenty of options?

>>6447431http://www.ninjamagic.com/
Those are some really nice minis.

Full thurst is actually a really good game and I highly recommend it.

GZG's dirtside rules are awesome too if you're looking for a 1/285th 6mm scale mini wargame.

>How does the company make money?
GZG? By selling the models, wide majority of people DO like them. If I ever did a second fleet, I'd choose the new ScanFed, since they're very nice.

What I really like GZG for is the non-combat ships, they have the widest range of merchants, auxiliares and that kind of things anywhere.

>>6447663 I had some friends in Cali (before I move up to seattle) that were getting into warmaster.

Basically it's to Standard Warhammer what Epic is to 40k.

It's a larger scale (meaning bigger battles with smaller minis) sort of war game where the table top situation develops without the IGOUGO mechanism.

From what I heard (never played it myself) you bought your troops in detachments (not buying from the store, I mean buying them for play) that were on cards. Then players would move one detachment, then the other side would move one of theirs, back and forth. That way the battlefield developed more "naturally"

I'd heard from them that it was an awesome game. But I was already heavily invested in epic 40k, microarmor, and other games. So I couldn't justify adding warmaster to the list.

>>6447677
It's not really a creature generator as much as a "pick a mini and give it special rules that fit how it looks", although it's pretty easy to make a ridiculously game-breaking creation. there's only 2 statistics, it's the fuckton of special rules that give your creatures flavor, shit like causes terror, making it tough, fearless, or a leader. points-based, skirmish cheap as hell fun. win win fucking win.

>>6447767
Not really, it was kinda nice, but too random in the most important aspect. to move a unit(or a brigade formed by 2 to 5 units for the period of one turn) you needed to order it. to order it, your commander(or General) needed to pass a LD test, with modifiers for distance or terrain. If you failed the check, the unit could no longer be given orders, and the commander could no longer give orders this turn. If General failed, no more orders could be given. A bunch of bad rolls and your entire line is in tatters, or stalled completely, and there was no way to stack the odds in your favour(that is, to get "over" the LD for better chances). So, one poor roll, and the whole plan goes to fuck itself kindly automatically.

has anyone played that computer assisted one, Skull Cleaver? That and Mageknight sound interesting.

>>6447684
Those do look good. I see that there's a lot of factions, with four or five main ones, and they all look sort of different. Do they play differently as well? And are the players typically against using, say, ScanFed ships for a NAC fleet?

>>6447730
Noncoms? What do they do? Like, objectives or something?

I'm asking a lot of questions that sound like they could be answered by the rules. Where can I download it, if it's free?

>>6447663
Warmaster is fanfastic!

Hard to find a group to play it with, and the minis can be pricey just because you need a pretty sizeable force.

However, mechanically, it's elegent. Everything is based on passing leadership tests, which are modified by distance and the number of orders given so far that turn, to move the troops into position.

The attacks are typically 4+ to hit, some amount of armor, and are very easy to keep track of.

However, the most important thing in this game is that positioning, flanking, and distrupting the enemy attack is the real heart of the game and 90% of this is based on how well you use your commanders to lead the troops.

If you're interested in playing the game on the cheap, there's a wonderful Yahoo group that supports both Warmaster Fantasy and Warmaster Historicals using print-and-play counters.

I use foam core for the pieces and glue the counters to the foam core.

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-warmaster/

why do some of the pictures on ground zero games not show up. I want to see what Im buying

>>6447912

they just don't have pictures. It's pretty gay.

>Do they play differently as well?
All the factions have different ship design philosophies, so yes, they do play rather differently. They can sometimes overlap a bit, but never too much. IN case you wanted to know, the armies not descriped in FleetBooks(Japs, Jews, Muslims and Oceanians and so on) have their own beta-test rules posted on StarRanger site, so you can play them too-they usually have some crazy-ass equipment to differentiate them from other factions, like the anime-esque transfroming fighters of Japs or stealth systems the jews have.

I can only say for a limited group of people, and I have no doubt there is somewhere at least one group of assholes who do insist of hardcore WYSWIG, but no, as long as one model isn't suddenly both a frigate and cruiser most people have no problems.
Pic related, the new-sculpt Germans.

>>6447912
The older models just don't get pics, the whole shop is something straight from 90's sadly. You just have to fish around the net to find the pics usually, or download the catalogue off their mainpage, which has line drawings of the models.

>>6447943
>stealth systems the jews have.

theres subtle raceism in there I know it.

>>6447994
When FT does jokes, you see them from miles ahead, not subtle things like that.
race these ships belong to? They're called Phalons.

>>6448020


suddenly DICKS EVERYWHERE

>>6448036
Something like that. The owner said he named them after seeing the sculpts.

here's a shot of the Ninja Magic ships, Keikoku fleet(kikoku? something like that)

>>6448131
That's real nice. Damn but this makes me want to play. I'm already heavily invested in WHFB, 40k and Warmachine, but I guess one more game couldn't hurt...

>>6448249
of course it wont, it's just one tiny game, what could it do,all on it's own?

>>6448131
帰国艦隊

>>6448249
Well, the rules are free and most ships cost between 2 to 5 pounds with a full fleet of 16 costing 30. Compare that to something like BFG and it's cheap as chips.

>>6444128

Aha, those weren't my pics.

Just went off line for five hours to play a 2000 point 40K game, which I lost rather badly - my Mordian IG versus some mystery-craftworld eldar. I too am amazed to see this thread still alive and will keep posting Kublacon pictures. Example: Man-O-War, a fantastic game abandoned by GW and now kept alive only by dedicated fans.

>>6448409
Of course, I'm American, so factor in conversion rates and shipping costs and the price rises quite a bit

There are space fleets where "defensive shields" or "black globe generators" make using Ping Pong balls for models, perfectly appropriate. Just mount 'em on bases and your fleet's ready to fight. Cost = Almost Nothing

Also, here's the pirate/ravagers fleet: 12 ships for 12 pounds. Of course you don't really need minis; tokens would work.

I was looking through the support ships and found this; the 'Glow-worm' Class Light Trader.

>>6448511
FUCK YES YOU ARE THE BEST COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT EVER.

Man-O-War Slaanesh battleship.

Wargods of aegyptus and olympus are good for those of you who have a mythology fetish

>>6448511
At first I was looking at the ship with the left side as the cockpit and thought "That's not that accurate, I don't see-"

Then I turned it around...

>>6448511
They've got tons of potential lawsuit on their site; like the 25mm 'Red Head Magic User Slayer'.

>>6448552
good game, terrible company

"I know, let's release Olympus and add a bunch of new armies without producing models to complete the existing Aegyptus forces!"

>>6448640
Doesn't GW do that too?

>>6448588
Dude, miniature companies steal from each other all the time.

Check out Avatar of War sometime.

>>6448667
right, but this is entire unsupported forces - when I looked at it Typhon didn't have any minis

seriously

So the rules are free? why does the full thrust cataloge say 8 pounds next to each one then

>>6448588
>Red Head Magic User Slayer

I don't know who that is, at least not from that clue.

Do I have to turn in my /tg/ card now?

>>6448737
Not really. They've got an entire line called Pandemonium which is full of weaboo characters. Said description refers to a 25mm Lina Inverse from Slayers.

>>6448724
It`s a price for printed version, pdf version is free. http://www.groundzerogames.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=9&id
=29&Itemid=50

>>6448776
Goddamn it, that crossed my mind.

But I read it as "Magic-User Slayer" rather than "Magic User, Slayer" and was wondering what redheads specialized in killing crotchety old wizards.

>>6448724
Cuz it's ooold? Seriously, all the pdf's are in the download section of the site(the main site, not the webshop), free.
>http://www.groundzerogames.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=9&am
p;id=29&Itemid=50

>>6448776
It's so fucking old it's not even funny, they just keep it around in case someone's really intrested in it, all they do these days is FT and 15mm SF, the rest is there just because they did it at one point.

>>6444797

That's... magnificent.

>>6448804
I wondered where someone got this mini from; I thought it was a homemade sculpt.

>>6449149
I'll field her in a 2000 pt game.... as the entirety of my army. A blast marker measured in feet should be impressive.

Anyway, as much as I love my 40K, this thread makes me want to get into some other games. Figure I will download the Infinity rules and a few others. I love weeaboo shit, scifi, and badassery, so any other games that have that tell me. Also, I love free rules, but I assume alot of games have that.

Anyone know how the Starship troopers game was, rulewise? I think I'll buy a few minis if I can find them regardless.

>>6448511
Not only do they rip off popular franchisses, they also rip off incredibly obscure ones.

rolled 20945 = 20945

>>6448424
Actually, Americans don't have to pay VAT. Removal of the vague addition to total usually covers shipping easily, and still leaves you with a bit of a discount, as VAT is included in the store prices.

>>6449149

Most probably from Ground Zero Games. They have a line of stiffly-posed true 25mm anime characters.

>>6449640
Do you mean the starship troopers miniature game? Or the really old board game?

The really old game is on rapid share, but I've been looking for the rules to the mini game (without luck)

I read that it was done by Andy Chambers who was one of the people that created the original WH40k Rogue trader (WH40k version 1.0) So it's probably pretty fucking cool .

>>6449149
Looks like maybe a female Judge from the GW Judge Dredd game from the 80s.

rolled 13198 = 13198

>>6448724
That's if you want them to ship a paper copy to you. .PDFs of all 4 books are free on their site, just poke around a bit.

>>6448511
I don't get it, what's this supposed to be? It just looks like a ship to me, where is it ripped from?

rolled 28782 = 28782

>>6450529
It's a Firefly transport, or more accurately, a copyright infringing copy of one.

Now go watch Firefly. it is excellent, and the first 4 episodes are on hulu.

>>6449640
Mongoose Publishing SST? It's an alright system, but the models really let it down; you need superglue for the plastics, the MI nearly impossible to pose properly and fiddly as fuck. But as a Heinlein fan, it's pretty fun.

http://www.edinburghwargames.com/Journal%2039.htm

>>6450519

Read:

>>6448776

Seconding the Firefly watching thing. It isn't hard to find Torrents or even streaming. Then there's Serenity.


this thread is now about Firefly.

>>6450598
God, those models look amazing.

>>6448511
It's a tribute, lighten up,

>>6450636
Hey, I just posted it because I thought it was cool.

>>6447446

Just saw these for the first time at Origins this past year. Awesome!

>>6450636
>>6450636
>lighten up
>light

oh you

>>6447663
>Anybody ever play Warmaster? What are the pros and cons?

Pros-- great game

Cons-- can't find someone to play with!

>>6450588
Sounds interesting enough. Should I just check ebay if I want to get my hands on any of the minis?

How widespread is Babylon 5? I ask because Mongoose Publishing produced a line of space sim miniatures based on B5 until April of this year, and if I wanted to use the models as stand-ins for Full Thrust ships I want to know that people won't be like, "That's an Apollo class!"

>>6448131

Kikoku. Saw them at GenCon 08, they were working on game called With Hostile Intent. Saw them again at GenCon 09. Now they have minis for fleets, torpedos, everything, but still no rules set.

>>6450699
B5 is pretty well known as far as I know.

I noticed earlier on a lot of love for historical wargames. I found that strange, since I am put off by the non-fantastical elements.

>>6451086
I wonder if there are rules for historical skirmish.

play Flames of War. It's the gateway historical miniature game.

Next thing you know, you'll be spending $120 to import about 4000 6mm Wurtenburg Napoleonic Dragoons so you can spend 6 months painting them to perfection and then use them once.

>>6451120

Best be trollin, nigga.

9001 historical games. Lots of historical Skirmish. Any particular time period you're interested in? I could suggest a couple, probably.

Also, define "skirmish". Company level, individual basing? Squad level? Platoon? Brigade, with a few to a base? Or what?

>>6451160
Join a historical wargaming league
advicegrenadier.jpg
Get yelled at for painting your canteens the wrong color

>>6451173
Individual or squad level. Almost small raids so a variety of scenarios can be done (take the tower, kill engine crew, climb fortress choke, etc)

>>6451274
Oh yeah probably ancient and early medieval.

I am so going to make models for Full Thrust out of Legos

post limit?

>>6451173

Skirmish = Man to man

Each player might run one to five figures, depending on how complicated the rules. The most complicated skirmish rules ever were called "Once Upon A Time In The West" and were never played by anyone except the designer and his group.

Our group enjoyed Call of Cthulhu miniatures, using the Hills Rise Wild rules.

rolled 18219 = 18219

>>6451325

>>6444014

>Just look at the 40k threads here on /tg/ about how to build the most "effective" armies in 40k by abusing the rules. The nob biker damage allocation cheat is a perfect example of this. Do you think that a typical microarmor gamer would even think of trying that sort of shit?

No, because he doesn't have a point-buy, limited option army list: he has a historical TO&E.

>>6444014
>These are games that aren't designed for 10 year olds and have some genuine complexity to them.
Yeah, fuck your shit too, troll.

>>6447334

Jesus fuck, microarmor. What kind of autistic obseesive can paint *anything* at 1/285?

Play 25mm: it's big enough so you cn actually see the people, you can get terrain & scenery from any model railroad kit, and you can use your snotty kid brother's 28mm D&D/Warhammer minatures without them looking fuckhueg.

>>6451942
It's actually 1/250, back when people were much smaller.

>>6451611
Goddamn that's awesome! Sauce? Instructions?

Usually I oppose cluttering Suptg with needless archives, but if ever a thread needed to be saved it's this one. I can't get the website to load for me, though. Can anyone else?

>>6451942

Heh. 1942 get.

>>6452020
You can't get Wikipedia to load for you?

>>6452063
no, I can't get Suptg to load. Just, someone save this thread

rolled 28468 = 28468

>>6451986
sadly, i only have it because it was in an earlier thread about Full Thrust...

I'm so glad I asked about Full Thrust...
>>6451325
And you are a fucking genius.
I've downloaded the rules and couldn't make up my mind about the ships, but you've just given me the answer!

>>6452417
>>6451986
>>6451611
>>6451325

Found these searching for fleet on brickshelf.
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=fleet&stype=fi

wonderful thread