Big Game vs. Small Game

All the latest and greatest info concerning the constant struggle and strife across Middle-earth!

Which do you prefer, large games or small games?

Poll ended at Sat Mar 01, 2008 8:15 am

Large Games
4
29%
Small Games
10
71%
 
Total votes : 14

Big Game vs. Small Game

Postby knitemare » Mon Feb 25, 2008 8:15 am

I've been thinking a lot about the games I've played. Each time I've played in a "Big Game" it has been fun to join in the camaraderie of having a big team to play with. That seems to be where the fun ends for me. While the games are fun, they take way to long to complete if they are completed at all. It's awesome to see 2000 or 3000 points worth of models per side on the table, but every turn takes a terribly long time to complete. Even with multiple people moving, shooting, and fighting per side.

When I say Small Game, I really mean one or two players per side between 350 (two generals) and 1000 (four generals) points. I could even go for a 1000 point per side game with only two generals. The games are faster paced, tend to finish with a definitive ending (one side meets their goal), and everything is wrapped up in 2 hours or so. There is also the fact that many more rounds are played in that 2 hours, that really makes me more happy playing a small game.

Lately, when I want to attend or plan an event, I don't get too excited when the event is going to be huge. If everyone had entire Saturdays free to hang out all day that would be one thing. Most of the time, people have four hours or so in which to play and everyone likes to see the game actually end.

With the exception of the Bree game, which should take place March 29th and I hope many of you will be able to make it, I will probably keep my gaming to smaller games that can be finished within a couple of hours. I'll show up to bigger events for an hour or two in order to hang out and see everyones cool stuff, but I don't think I'll be going out of my way to play in them.

Like BrentS, I just don't have the kind of time required to play in the larger games due to my family actually wanting to see me. When it comes down to it, I think their happiness now outweighs my desire to play with plastic and metal toys all day. When they are a little older and have their own hobbies and interests that keep them busy all day, I'll play in larger games.

It is for this reason that I really like the idea of the Battle Companies games. Especially if we could do the BC thing in the evening on Saturdays. Being able to hang out with my family all day and then head to the Bunker (or where ever) at 5:30/6:00 and hang out until 11:00 would be really nice.

I'm throwing a poll in this, which do you prefer, large games or small games?
It's only about painting now.
User avatar
knitemare
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 6:46 am
Location: Aurora

Postby BrentS » Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:14 am

As I said after the Helm's Deep game. I've deciced that I don't really enjoy big games. I know that is the GW way of hosting events - let's get as many models on the table as possible and play - but it just takes far too long.

I'd much rather spend the day playing in a tournament and getting 2-4 games in during the same time.
User avatar
BrentS
 
Posts: 6295
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:38 pm

Postby febber » Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:19 pm

I enjoy both but there is an art to designing a big game that can be completed in a reasonable time. Some people focus on how big the game is without realizing that the most important thing is playability. It's not so much about winning or losing, but people do like to have a resolution on these things, and not have to pack up just as the battle gets really intense.

Also I've learned when I hosted or played in these things that some noobs aren't capable of coordinating their efforts, so the battle needs to be designed so that armies can play independently reasonably well.

In the right circumstances -- a team of good players that get along, in a well-designed scenario -- NOTHING is better and some of my best ever memories are of such games. However, they are indeed the minority of such encounters. They do not just "happen," they have to be planned and playtested carefully.
All-time LOTR Grand/National Tournament Record: 92-18-45 (W-L-D), 63 major victories
21 awards in 35 events inc. 5x Best Overall; 2x 2nd Overall (w/o Best General); 9x Best General
2007 National Circuit Champion
2008 National Circuit Champion
User avatar
febber
 
Posts: 1269
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:25 pm
Location: Tampa, FL

Postby Angelos » Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:19 pm

small 500-700 pt games are always more fun to me, big games just never seem to work out that well. But I have had some fun big games.
Image
User avatar
Angelos
 
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:47 am
Location: SW'burbs

Postby Jack Napier » Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:20 pm

First off.. hello everyone. I've been a reader of these forums for awhile, and I finally decided to actually get an account to post things.

I totally agree with everything everyone has said. I live in Orlando and get a chance to play once a month or so with the couple of friends that I have that play. Since I also have a small child that I watch on weekends while my wife works I don't get to the local-ish games in Tampa with out a 2 to 3 month warning due to her job. I did finally get to a RTT in Tampa in Jan and had 1 major win and 2 major losses, but hey I beat Frank so that counts for something :wink:

My favorite size would be about 700 points. It's a good size to have a fully fleshed out army IMO. I do enjoy big games as well, but usually they are better when they can be played with the amount of time they need as to not be rushed.
User avatar
Jack Napier
 
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:39 pm
Location: Orlando

Postby BrentS » Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:25 pm

Welcome Jack!

Jack Napier wrote: I did finally get to a RTT in Tampa in Jan and had 1 major win and 2 major losses, but hey I beat Frank so that counts for something :wink:


No Small Feat!
User avatar
BrentS
 
Posts: 6295
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:38 pm

Postby febber » Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:10 pm

BrentS wrote:Welcome Jack!

Jack Napier wrote: I did finally get to a RTT in Tampa in Jan and had 1 major win and 2 major losses, but hey I beat Frank so that counts for something :wink:


No Small Feat!



Yeah, well, he had Sauron in Contest of Champions . . . :shock:

Come to think of it, I did a brief write-up of that tournament and thought I posted it here. Must have lost it due to the hack job.

However, "Jack" has beaten me like a drum in some of our big game scenarios too. He and I are hosting a big game at Recon in May with a 8-player Second Fords of Rohan battle.
All-time LOTR Grand/National Tournament Record: 92-18-45 (W-L-D), 63 major victories
21 awards in 35 events inc. 5x Best Overall; 2x 2nd Overall (w/o Best General); 9x Best General
2007 National Circuit Champion
2008 National Circuit Champion
User avatar
febber
 
Posts: 1269
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:25 pm
Location: Tampa, FL

Postby Jack Napier » Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:47 pm

BTW my name is Dave. My two favorite things are LOTR and Batman, so I figured I'd try a different name besides Davard, which is what I am on TLA.

And that's my story for today.
User avatar
Jack Napier
 
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:39 pm
Location: Orlando

Postby BrentS » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:27 pm

You should paint up a Morgal Stalker to look like the Joker :)
User avatar
BrentS
 
Posts: 6295
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:38 pm

Postby Angelos » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:30 pm

BrentS wrote:You should paint up a Morgal Stalker to look like the Joker :)


http://store.us.games-workshop.com/stor ... Img=258574

Haha, the far right one has potential!
Image
User avatar
Angelos
 
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:47 am
Location: SW'burbs

Postby prion2001 » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:36 pm

I voted for small games as well. I like the 500 - 700 point game for generally play.

I do still love a good Big Game but I think they have to be handled carefully to avoid the pitfalls that Knitemare and Brent mention. Pellenor Fields went well so I think a big game can work. It probably depends on the scenarios to some extent.

Jamie
User avatar
prion2001
 
Posts: 1328
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: Tinley Park, IL

Postby The Mouth of Sauron » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:46 pm

Big Games work best if you can cut them into smaller games. If you have to keep three or more players per side synchronized then ti becomes a pain to run and play.
The Mouth of Sauron
 


Return to Lord of the Rings News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest