Home Forums General General Systems you think are good but you do not think you would enjoy playing

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #63987

    Are there any rule systems you believe are good, but which you do not think you would enjoy playing because of certain mechanisms or scope (even if you consider the mechanisms proper for the scope)?

    For example I think Great War Spearhead II is an exceptional system, very well researched. However I believe some of the mechanisms (order system) and the scope (company as the basic unit of analysis) would not work for the type of gaming experience I want. That has not stopped me from buying the rules and scenarios, and even working on ideas for scenarios for it, even if I am unlikely to play it. It just seems such a solid work.

    What about you?

    "Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?"

    Axel Oxenstierna

    #63991

    another example? Ken Burnisde’s Saganami Island and Attack Vector. Both  are for me , hand downs some of the best representations of their subject matter. But after one try of Sganami Island, I knew it would not work for me.

    "Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?"

    Axel Oxenstierna

    #63999
    McKinstry
    Participant

    I certainly agree about Saganami Island/Attack Vector. Clever and brilliant way to simulate space combat but way more than I want.

    I feel the same way about Fear God and Dreadnought and Seekreig V, good systems but at a level of detail I have no desire to game.

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by McKinstry.

    The tree of Life is self pruning.

    #64014
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    D&D 4th edition was a very tightly designed game (and gorgeous) that absolutely failed to interest me due to the change in how the game felt.

    I personally don’t like games with written orders and it tends to push me away even though the rest of the game can (and often is) fantastic.
    Spearhead was the exception where we felt the order system was easy enough to play, and added to the game.

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #64029
    kyoteblue
    Participant

    I also have Great War Spearhead 2  but after reading the rules it seems like it’s a board game with miniatures.

    #64031
    MartinR
    Participant

    I think there are quite a few, generally with interesting mechanisms and some clever ideas but I just know I’ll never actually get around to playing them with my gaming pals as they are just too complicated and our gaming time is limited.

    I enjoy reading them though. A few which spring to mind are BKC, Fireball Forward, Krieg Ohne Hass, BBB. I often solo play rules, and sometimes even get as far as working up my own QRS, but then I think of the looks of dismay as I have to explain how all this stuff works…

    I have managed to get my pals to play both modern, WW2 and great war Spearhead by pretending it was something else, especially once I dropped the written orders and just asked them to describe what they wanted to do.

    "Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

    #64039

    I won’t go into naming examples.  I think it is better to say that I do not like most modern game designs.  While I think that most games these days are pretty well designed, I do think most of them are also over engineered.  Too much detail for the level of operation they portray.  Many systems also boast a “command and control” system.  More often than not, these systems have less to do with actual command and control and more to do with generating friction in a game.   Some larger scale systems will allow you to command a corps and leave you to maneuver battalions/regiments.  In a corps level game, you should be concerned with Brigades as you basic unit.  Finally, games these days boast “elegant and innovative” game mechanics.  This is nothing more than marketing speak for “fiddly”.  It’s all about statistics in the end.  The rules should be make you more concerned with maneuvering your troops than the actual game mechanics.

    John

    "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

    --Abraham Lincoln

    #64044
    PatG
    Participant

    Flames of War – Huge following so they must be doing something right but having watched a few games it leaves me cold.
    D&D 4th – D&D “superheroes” As others have said very well put together and well supported but somehow just wrong.
    Fields of Glory – Looks beautiful very polished rules but very expensive compared to other systems.
    Car Wars 5th edition – I get where they were going but I didn’t want to go there. I’m a Car Wars classic guy.
    Advanced Squad Leader – I loved Squad Leader but ASL wound up over chromed (and expensive).
    Anything to do with Superheroes – there are some very good systems out there but the whole genre leaves me cold. The only system that interested me at all was TMNT because it locked into the rest of the Palladium series.

    I should probably stop here lest my grumpy old man completely take over 😉

    #64045
    Mike
    Keymaster

    The only system that interested me at all was TMNT because it locked into the rest of the Palladium series.

     

    Mutants Down Under!

    #64090
    Sane Max
    Participant

    DBM. it’s clearly one of the best systems when it comes to representing actual ancient battles. But I really don’t think I would enjoy it. It takes the rather elegant simplicity of DBA and adds just enough additional troop-types to baffle my increasingly limited powers of cogitation.

    Pat

    #64093
    PatG
    Participant

    DBM. it’s clearly one of the best systems when it comes to representing actual ancient battles. But I really don’t think I would enjoy it. It takes the rather elegant simplicity of DBA and adds just enough additional troop-types to baffle my increasingly limited powers of cogitation. Pat

    I love DBM’s  offspring DBMM which informed the redesign of DBA3. The troop types aren’t so bad once you realize you only need to know the details for those armies on the table. However, it is written in Barkerese which some people find hard to digest for some odd reason. 😉 Played at the 100 point level, DBMM plays like a more subtle DBA without the 12 base limitation.

    #64102
    Mr. Average
    Participant

    I tend to gravitate towards Systems I like to read but not play, but I definitely have this “Not bad but not for me” vibe in reference to boardgames all the time.

    I’ve been called upon to appreciate what a sublime gaming experience  Strike of the Eagle supposedly is, on a number of occasions.  But while I’m sure people who like that sort of thing find it to be the sort of thing they like, I have never had any feeling I’d enjoy it. I played one game which ended in a string of “You Can’t Do Anything And I Automatically Win” cards played by my opponent and that was pretty much the only chance I felt like giving the game. Can’t fault it for visuals or components, just not what I enjoy.

    I have a feeling I might enjoy Streets of Stalingrad, but a 50-phase turn just was something I couldn’t get my head around, as I could never understand what the stakes were at any given point of decision.

    #64103

    DBM. it’s clearly one of the best systems when it comes to representing actual ancient battles. But I really don’t think I would enjoy it. It takes the rather elegant simplicity of DBA and adds just enough additional troop-types to baffle my increasingly limited powers of cogitation. Pat

    Element-wise, you can break it down as having 6 times the variety of DBA.  With DBA it’s just blades, spears and so forth.  With DBM, they get graded on experience and drill.  They are Irregular and Regular.  They are Superior, Ordinary and inferior.  So 2X3X1 = 6 types per element…ignoring Some elements can be Fast and there is an exception element that breaks the norm.  Looking at it in this structured way, DBM is not that bad.

    Where DBM falls down for me is with the rather impenetrable uncontrolled pursuit rules.  DBR has no such rules and is otherwise DBM for the renaissance.  The only reason I’ve not played DBR is because I don’t have the minis!

    John

    "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

    --Abraham Lincoln

    #64116

    I tend to gravitate towards Systems I like to read but not play, but I definitely have this “Not bad but not for me” vibe in reference to boardgames all the time. I’ve been called upon to appreciate what a sublime gaming experience Strike of the Eagle supposedly is, on a number of occasions. But while I’m sure people who like that sort of thing find it to be the sort of thing they like, I have never had any feeling I’d enjoy it. I played one game which ended in a string of “You Can’t Do Anything And I Automatically Win” cards played by my opponent and that was pretty much the only chance I felt like giving the game. Can’t fault it for visuals or components, just not what I enjoy. I have a feeling I might enjoy Streets of Stalingrad, but a 50-phase turn just was something I couldn’t get my head around, as I could never understand what the stakes were at any given point of decision.

     

    Oh I do love Strike of the Eagle, but I get your point.

    "Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?"

    Axel Oxenstierna

    #64118
    Mr. Average
    Participant

    Some people find it fun to play a game where a single false move or random event spoils everything, but it’s just not for me. Beautiful game, nice pieces, great artwork – just not a game I can or want to play. I’m constantly called upon to appreciate its sophistication and elegance by members of my club who adore it, and I’m sure that it has those, but it just feels like an exercise in frustration and annoyance in actual play. And when I’m told that “that’s the point,” well… That’s just not an experience I’m interested in. Can not, will not.

    #64127
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    Hm, that’s a good point.

    I do tend to prefer games that are more “forgiving” or allows a greater degree of back and forth, but I’m not sure if it’s a deal-breaker or not.

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.