New Player- Clan Wars or Trinity or Warhammer
TLDreaming
recommendations of this group. As I do anticipate getting heavily into it, I
am leaning away from Warhammer and leaning towards Clan Wars. However, I see
that White Wolf is selling the Trinity Battleground for about $30, so maybe...
Anyway what do you think of these games? Any recommendations? Thanks.
bra...@en.com
You might want to check out Chronopia by Target Games.
TLDreaming
I plan to buy the starter set and maybe a little more, but that is it.
Thanks.
bra...@en.com
I think that Chronopia is still the game for you. You can get a
rulebook for about 30.00 new, and the minis are sold in units of 4 for
10.00, characters are about 3.50, and warband box sets about 17.00.
You do not need a mint of money to field a respectable force. In my
case, I will spend approximately 70.00 for a full 1000 point Dwarf
army. Not bad when compared with other game systems.
Chris Lowrey
>I think that Chronopia is still the game for you. You can get a
>rulebook for about 30.00 new, and the minis are sold in units of 4 for
>10.00, characters are about 3.50, and warband box sets about 17.00.
>You do not need a mint of money to field a respectable force. In my
>case, I will spend approximately 70.00 for a full 1000 point Dwarf
>army. Not bad when compared with other game systems.
What is the Chronopia game system like?
Will Nesbitt
TLDreaming wrote:
> Any recommendations? Thanks.
You can try Battlestorm Basic for free online at http://www.ralgames.com
Will
Steven Nelson
boxed set is $55 (you may be able to find it on the web for cheaper) and it
includes 17 figures (which is at least 285 points worth of minis depending
on how you configure them - The average battle we play is 350 points per
side, they recommend the maximum size be 500 points per side as anything
over this gets too unwieldy, I've seen scenarios with as little as 150
points per side)
It's a great minis game, very fast paced compared to Warhammer Fantasy
Battle and very flexible. They have also added vehicle rules and will be
releasing a new book around May or June that will add new troop types and
artillery types into the game.
For those of you not familiar with the game it is based on the Deadlands RPG
gameworld which is a Western genre with magic and monsters and mad
scientists with steampunk gizmos and whatnot. The minis you get in the
boxed set are two posses (a posse is 5 minis of the same troop type) of
gunmen (50pts per posse) which can also represent scouts (65pts per posse),
a posse of Walking Dead with guns (65 pts per posse), a gunslinger (50pt
hero), and a huckster (70pt hero). Like I said before posses are 5 models
strong, artillery has a gun and typically a crew of 2-4 minis depending on
the type of gun, heroes and singles are represented by 1 model. Our average
350 pt army usually has between 20-25 models in it, some have had as few as
17 and some have had as many as 28 models though you could theoretically
have more. But that's not a bad amount of minis to own and paint just to
get into the game.
The part I like is how it maintains the western feel by using playing cards
to determine initiative and poker chips to show the whims of fate. Also
people have commented on how much faster paced it is than some of the games
they are used to playing. Our 350 pt battles are usually over (from setup
to cleanup) in 3 hours time at the most. This includes the time we spend
BSing and whatnot during the battle... we're not the most efficient
players...
Anyway it's my favorite miniature game right now and I've put my WHFB Wood
Elves into storage and have taken a break from painting my Flintloque minis
to get my Great Rail Wars armies where I want them. If you're ever in the
Champaign, IL area and want to play Great Rail Wars... look me up.
You can download the express rules for free at Pinnacle's Web Site
www.peginc.com they are enough to get started playing and get a taste for
the game.
Steven Nelson
sdne...@advancenet.net
TLDreaming wrote in message
<19990203101907...@ng-ce1.aol.com>...
Aaron Scott
maybe 6-12 miniatures for a good game. You can use the minis in the box, but they
are plastic. I would suggest buying the metal one sthat you like. You will
probably run around $60-$100 dollars to get enough minis for psion and Abberant
forces and the boxed set.
In March they will release a 152 page expansion book for free on the web. Since it
as been out, they have typically released around 6-8 minatures a month for the
game. It is quick paced, easy to play and you don't need sixty billion minatures
on the table. If you have more specific questions, please ask me.
Aaron Scott
JANoll
it. But I like Asian warfare and specificaly the japanese feudel period. I
also like mass combat wargames. For me, Clan Wars is the best of both of
those worlds. Good Asian flavor and great mass combat game system. BTW I
believe it is the most interactive of the mass combat games. It gets both
players involved throughout the turn, so nobodys just standing around while
the other guy is wacking his troops to death. If you want a more detailed
explination of the game email me.
Keep Gaming,
Joe.
TLDreaming wrote in message
<19990203101907...@ng-ce1.aol.com>...
Brandu
tldre...@aol.com (TLDreaming) wrote:
> I'm thinking about buying a "starter set" and am looking for the
> recommendations of this group. As I do anticipate getting heavily into it, I
> am leaning away from Warhammer and leaning towards Clan Wars. However, I see
> that White Wolf is selling the Trinity Battleground for about $30, so maybe...
>
> Anyway what do you think of these games? Any recommendations? Thanks.
>
You might want to look at Enigma's 'Tactical Strike' if you are interested in
a good Science Fiction Table top game. The Rules are Free at their Web site
and ALL of the rules are there. Also if you have any questions about the
game they are usually VERY fast in replying
Brandu
To Quote Socrates: I Drank WHAT?!?"
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Paul M. M. Jacobus
On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Will Nesbitt wrote:
> You can try Battlestorm Basic for free online at http://www.ralgames.com
>
> Will
I dunno Will, jumping in with a new suggestion to a thread is fine, but
putting yourself in the title...?
JD
Will Nesbitt
I make no apologies for freebies. ;^)
Will
Chris Lowrey
>
>You might want to look at Enigma's 'Tactical Strike' if you are interested
in
>a good Science Fiction Table top game. The Rules are Free at their Web site
>and ALL of the rules are there. Also if you have any questions about the
>game they are usually VERY fast in replying
>
>Brandu
>
Chris
TLDreaming
inconsistent, the enthusiasm and insights are great. Thanks
Thane
The big question is: what are the people around you playing; how willing are
they to try a game you bring to them, etc. Buying a "cheap game" that you
will never get to play may be worse than an expensive game that you will get
to play.
That being said; Chronopia is a nice, skirmish scale system. It gets very
cumbersome if you put more than 25 or so figures per side.
You can almost always find a game of warhammer, but it isn't always fun to
play, especially just using the starter set against people with larger
budgets. It is much less "tactical" than chronopia.
FR! is a nice Army scale game, which has a pretty broad following. It is
fairly tactical.
I'm offering Armies of Arcana; the basic rules are $15, and all future rules
will be posted on the web. It can be played with 15 or 25 mm figures; you can
get a lot of 15mm figures for $80. The downside is that you will have to
drudge up other players; the good news is that everyone who plays the game
loves it.
You can see and buy it at www.thanesgames.com, along with a decent selection
of high quality 15mm figures.
Otherwise, I would recommend Chronopia or FR!, depending on the scale you
prefer, and the people around you. Then WHFB, and then the other games that
few people play. Clan Wars has nice figures, but they are pretty expensive.
Thane Morgan
Thane's Games
www.thanesgames.com
Magnus
>
>Chris
The address for Enigma's web site is http://roguetrader.net/enigma/
The address for the Tactical Strike page is http://www.zoomnet.net/~alice/
Hope this helps,
Magnus
wo...@techline.com
Brandu
so... who's producing Battlestorm now?
Oh, that's right... FASA didn't want it...
And JD is right...
Brandu
Brandu
"Chris Lowrey" <clo...@primary.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >You might want to look at Enigma's 'Tactical Strike' if you are interested
> in
> >a good Science Fiction Table top game. The Rules are Free at their Web site
> >and ALL of the rules are there. Also if you have any questions about the
> >game they are usually VERY fast in replying
> >
> >Brandu
> >
>
> Chris
Here you go...
http://www.zoomnet.net/~alice/
Brandu
>
>
To Quote Socrates: I Drank WHAT?!?"
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Demian Rose
> > > > Will
> > >
> > > I dunno Will, jumping in with a new suggestion to a thread is fine, but
> > > putting yourself in the title...?
> >
>
> Oh, that's right... FASA didn't want it...
> And JD is right...
Come on, guys, this is getting just plain cold. So Will
advertised his free ruleset, big deal. He's obviously not making money
off of it. I'd think most newbies would enjoy the chance to peruse a
system via the web at their leisure. Plenty of other folk post similar
pointers to websites. Changing the name of the thread title to reflect
that doesn't seem too drastic to me.
Demian
who thinks that most of us have no idea why FASA didn't pick up
Battlestorm, any way...maybe they're planning a competing product and
didn't want a conflict of interest.
Brandu
Demian Rose <dd-...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
Okay... First off:
Almost (hey... I said Aamost) every time someone asks about
a game (it doesn't matter what game) Will puts in a plug for
BattleStorm. Then there was the comment (from Will) a while
back that BS, (Gawd, don't you just LOVE that?) was going to
be with Reaper Minis.
Okay... I just came from their site: Nothing, Nada, Nil, Nein,
Uh-Uh, Zip. They already have a game that's pretty good. (Dark
Heaven: Apocalypse)
Now... I haven't cursed or gotten truly ugly like some have on
this newsgroup. I think that JD is right... I also think that
GW is WAY overpriced, (pretty, but not $$$$ pretty) and that
they have 'dumbed down' the game. (I LIKE the old Rogue Trader
and Warhammer Fantasy Hardcovers) I also like Reaper Minis
(Look Good, and GOOD prices) and Enigma's Tactical Strike.
(A COMPLETE game that is free!) Granted, some of their minis
are not the best but some are pretty damn good for the price.
I am not even completely Anti-BS. (I own the BS Rulebook, and
even a couple of those damn d-30's) I also own Demonblade's game
(That should have been given away free, and who's interior art
should be burried or at least put back in the early '80s)
Now.. back to where I was... Will gets up on his Soapbox and
spouts off about BS. A LOT. Okay... he's proud of his game...
Cool.
Is the whole game free now or is it just the bare minimum?
If it's just the Minimum... Who's publishing the Rulebook?
What about the Magic Rules (That ARE NOT in the BS Rulebook)
What about new Army Lists?
Do you see where I'm going here?
Now.. If I had wanted to be 'Cold' I would have commented
on the fact that I am ON the BS Mailing List, and I don't
see a whole lot of mail in my in box... but I didn't. :^)
brandu
David Vance
forum an attempt at getting their product known. However, I myself
refuse to even touch any product which is stated upfront as being
unbalanced and full of loopholes. I am sure BStorm regular is a solid
product, but I don't have the time to waste on watered-down gaming
products.
Thane
> Almost (hey... I said Aamost) every time someone asks about
> a game (it doesn't matter what game) Will puts in a plug for
> BattleStorm.
Duh. Why shouldn't he? Someone was looking for a game, so he suggested a game.
What other avenue does he have to put his game out?
I only say this because I am also trying to sell a game that has gotten very
good review for players, and I am just a person with a dream to defeat GW,
take all of their lands, and have my way with their women(I hope that thing
about British girls having bad teeth isn't true...). Where can small
businesses go to find players?
If he had "spammed" the lists by posting on every thread, or reposted the same
message every day, then you could whine about it.
> Now... I haven't cursed or gotten truly ugly like some have on
> this newsgroup. I think that JD is right... I also think that
> GW is WAY overpriced, (pretty, but not $$$$ pretty) and that
> they have 'dumbed down' the game. (I LIKE the old Rogue Trader
> and Warhammer Fantasy Hardcovers) I also like Reaper Minis
> (Look Good, and GOOD prices) and Enigma's Tactical Strike.
> (A COMPLETE game that is free!) Granted, some of their minis
> are not the best but some are pretty damn good for the price.
> I am not even completely Anti-BS. (I own the BS Rulebook, and
> even a couple of those damn d-30's) I also own Demonblade's game
> (That should have been given away free, and who's interior art
> should be burried or at least put back in the early '80s)
My game doesn't have pretty interior art: so what? Anyone remember AD&D's
interior art? Did it detract from the game at all. If you demand Da Vinci's in
your rulebooks, the price will only increase.
You seem to contradict yourself; you want alternatives to GW, but then you
whine and moan when people offer it.
> Now.. back to where I was... Will gets up on his Soapbox and
> spouts off about BS.
what part was BS?
A LOT. Okay... he's proud of his game...
> Cool.
> Is the whole game free now or is it just the bare minimum?
re-read the message. go to the website.
> If it's just the Minimum... Who's publishing the Rulebook?
Why do you care who's printing it?
> What about the Magic Rules (That ARE NOT in the BS Rulebook)
> What about new Army Lists?
>
> Do you see where I'm going here?
No, I don't. If you want to claim the game is bad, make your claim. Support it
with facts; why else have a web group if not to inform people what's good and
what's not?
I have not played or even seen Battlestorm; I thought it was a variation of
Battlesystem. But, it sounds like he developed an innovative combat system,
which is not as easy as you might think. He has put his ass out on the line;
critisize the rules if you want, but the nerve it takes to do that.
You have no right to expect a rules set to be free just because it wasn't
made by a large company, especially if the rules are better than the large
companies' crap. I would love to give away "Armies of Arcana" like I give
away "Generic Space Combat", but if I can't make any money on it, then I can
never grow my company. I already promise to never force anyone to buy another
rulebook: all future rules additions and corrections will be available for
free; you can buy a bound copy if you want.
> Now.. If I had wanted to be 'Cold' I would have commented
> on the fact that I am ON the BS Mailing List, and I don't
> see a whole lot of mail in my in box... but I didn't. :^)
Well, thank god you didn't do that, because you would have looked like a jerk.
> brandu
Thane Morgan
Thane's Games
www.thanesgames.com
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Will Nesbitt
How's this for a guarantee: If you don't like my free rules, I'll refund triple
your money back?
TLDreaming
plugs came w/ some good analysis of the games I asked about as well. So no
worries.
-Todd
Brandu
Thane <thane_...@my-dejanews.com> attempted to be witty:
>
>
> > Almost (hey... I said Almost) every time someone asks about
> > a game (it doesn't matter what game) Will puts in a plug for
> > BattleStorm.
>
> Duh. Why shouldn't he? Someone was looking for a game,
so he suggested a game.
Read what I said again... I said ALMOST everytime someone
asks about a game, Will puts in a plug for BS.
> What other avenue does he have to put his game out?
Granted.
>
> I only say this because I am also trying to sell a game that has gotten very
> good review for players, and I am just a person with a dream to defeat GW,
> take all of their lands, and have my way with their women(I hope that thing
> about British girls having bad teeth isn't true...). Where can small
> businesses go to find players?
Believe it or not... I wish you luck. I also am trying to write a game
and am currently working with a game company on one of theirs. You do
not see me giving out what game or which company. It is not relevant
to the Conversation.
>
> If he had "spammed" the lists by posting on every thread, or reposted the same
> message every day, then you could whine about it.
You said the word 'spammed' not me... Of course you are not the first
to use the words spam and Will in the same sentence on this NG...
>
> > Now... I haven't cursed or gotten truly ugly like some have on
> > this newsgroup. I think that JD is right... I also think that
> > GW is WAY overpriced, (pretty, but not $$$$ pretty) and that
> > they have 'dumbed down' the game. (I LIKE the old Rogue Trader
> > and Warhammer Fantasy Hardcovers) I also like Reaper Minis
> > (Look Good, and GOOD prices) and Enigma's Tactical Strike.
> > (A COMPLETE game that is free!) Granted, some of their minis
> > are not the best but some are pretty damn good for the price.
> > I am not even completely Anti-BS. (I own the BS Rulebook, and
> > even a couple of those damn d-30's) I also own Demonblade's game
> > (That should have been given away free, and who's interior art
> > should be burried or at least put back in the early '80s)
>
> My game doesn't have pretty interior art: so what? Anyone remember AD&D's
> interior art? Did it detract from the game at all. If you demand Da Vinci's in
> your rulebooks, the price will only increase.
I am not demanding DaVinci's. I was saying that the majority of the
artwork in Demonblades' Shock Force stinks IMO. Note: this is my
opinion and no one elses... I actually do like their game but would
rather have seenthe game produced with NO artwork than what they put
in it.
>
> You seem to contradict yourself; you want alternatives to GW, but then you
> whine and moan when people offer it.
I wasn't aware that I was 'whining'. Moaning...? maybe. bitching...? yes.
>
> > Now.. back to where I was... Will gets up on his Soapbox and
> > spouts off about BS.
>
> what part was BS?
The Game... BattleStorm = BS :^)
>
> A LOT. Okay... he's proud of his game...
> > Cool.
> > Is the whole game free now or is it just the bare minimum?
>
> re-read the message. go to the website.
right... Bare minimum.
>
> > If it's just the Minimum... Who's publishing the Rulebook?
>
> Why do you care who's printing it?
Well... let's see... maybe because some publishers are better
than others? Have you ever seen the BS RuleBook? very hard
to read because of the layout.
>
> > What about the Magic Rules (That ARE NOT in the BS Rulebook)
> > What about new Army Lists?
> >
> > Do you see where I'm going here?
>
> No, I don't. If you want to claim the game is bad, make your claim. Support it
> with facts; why else have a web group if not to inform people what's good and
> what's not?
I have not claimed that the game is 'BAD'. Never did. you keep telling me
to read the posts... read mine again too...
Now... If you want me to talk about the game:
1:Cavalry is REAL strong... Too strong IMO
2: the d30's suck. IMO.
3:The huge ammount of space given to the Critical
Hits section.
4:Have you seen the Magic Rules? "Oh Boy..." these are a mess.
5: Over use of multiple types of dice.
6: No longer backed by Ral Partha.
7: Tried to do many different things at once
the "gladiator section" in the RB.
8: Archer's almost too strong.
Good things:
1: alternate activation of troops.
2: They were backed by Ral Partha
3: I like the way combat goes (but
not all the dice)
>
> I have not played or even seen Battlestorm; I thought it was a variation of
> Battlesystem. But, it sounds like he developed an innovative combat system,
> which is not as easy as you might think. He has put his ass out on the line;
> critisize the rules if you want, but the nerve it takes to do that.
okay... <takes back question about seeing Magic Rules>
>
> You have no right to expect a rules set to be free just because it wasn't
> made by a large company, especially if the rules are better than the large
> companies' crap.
HUH? Okay... where did this comment come from? Hhmm... must be the
comment I made about Enigma or Demonblade.
Primus: I would pay to get Tactical Strike. The game is
pretty damn good and there is a LOT to it. Now... it may
need to be proofread again, and have the web page updated
but I admire the fact that Enigma
has released their game for free and is NOT making it the
driver for their Mini line the way GW has. Let's face it,
GW changes the rules or 'phases out' their games in order to
change them around enough for you to need new minis.
Part Secondus: Demonblade's Shock Force: a simple game.
part of me wants to say too simple but it's simple
like chess. If you're not paying attention it'll bite ya.
Now, the interior art is lousy. flat out up front lousy.
the book is small and I don't know if it was really worth
the price I paid for it, BUT, because I do support the Game
Makers I refuse to photo-copy someone elses, so I bought
my own.
I DO NOT buy any GW stuff except second-hand because I
do not agree with the way that they do business. I much
prefer the 'Old 40k' over what has become a 'Character Fest'
also. Do I think that they have pretty minis? Yes. Will I
pay their prices? NO.
Now after writing this I will be going to your page and
looking at your game. IF I am interested in it, and IF I like
what I see, I will probably order it. If I do get it and it's
good, I will say so. If I do get it and it is worse than Rev. Jim
Baker in a Sailor Fuku, I will say so also.
I would love to give away "Armies of Arcana" like I give
> away "Generic Space Combat", but if I can't make any money on it, then I can
> never grow my company. I already promise to never force anyone to buy another
> rulebook: all future rules additions and corrections will be available for
> free; you can buy a bound copy if you want.
Now thats pretty neat... I will definitely be taking a look.
>
> > Now.. If I had wanted to be 'Cold' I would have commented
> > on the fact that I am ON the BS Mailing List, and I don't
> > see a whole lot of mail in my in box... but I didn't. :^)
>
> Well, thank god you didn't do that, because you would have looked
>like a jerk.
Okay... Now the cheap shot... Hhhmmm... should I lower myself
to the same standard or not... Hhhmmm....
Ehhh... :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P
Nope, woldn't do at ALL to be Childish. ^_~
brandu
To Quote Socrates: I Drank WHAT?!?"
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Brandu
Brandu <bra...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> In article <79hr8u$4mu$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> Thane <thane_...@my-dejanews.com> attempted to be witty:
Okay... been to your website. I like what I see so far...
15mm: haven't played any of that in years...
will look some more... will probably even buy it as it looks
pretty decent. Have to read you B-reports first.
On a side note: this is the first time I've read a posting
by you and seen your web-site. Not a bad site.
Brandu
Thane
> Okay... been to your website. I like what I see so far...
> 15mm: haven't played any of that in years...
Don't have to play it in 15mm, 25's work just as well; you just don't get to
put as many on the table and still get to maneuver.
> will look some more... will probably even buy it as it looks
> pretty decent. Have to read you B-reports first.
>
> On a side note: this is the first time I've read a posting
> by you and seen your web-site. Not a bad site.
Thanks. I don't know HTML very well, so there's a lot I'd like to do with it
but can't right now.
> Brandu
Sorry to make you type such a long response. But if someone is going to
attack a poster, I think they'd better support their reasons for it.
Thane
Paul M. M. Jacobus
On Sun, 7 Feb 1999, Brandu wrote:
> > > Now.. back to where I was... Will gets up on his Soapbox and
> > > spouts off about BS.
> >
> > what part was BS?
>
> The Game... BattleStorm = BS :^)
Gotta admit, that name lends itself too easily to that abbreviation. Game
designers, take note: Once you come up with a greta name for your great
new game, take it to a bunch of sixth grade boys. If there's any insulting
name they can make out of it, they will.
JD
Paul M. M. Jacobus
On Sat, 6 Feb 1999, Brandu wrote:
> I think that JD is right...
JD was also kidding. JD likes razzing company spokespeople online,
especially when he knows they won't take it the wrong way. Like he knows
Will won't.
Despite my other problems with BattleStorm ("The Memo") JD has no
complaint with Will. He's harmless.
JD
PS -> JD does like razzing company men when he knows they will take it the
wrong way, but that becomes a "Roger & Me" type thing, and a completely
different story.
Frederick K. Best
MegaCon'99 in Orlando, FL on March 5 -7. I like to get a list of
players who plan on attending and what miniatures they want to play.
The easiest would to email me direct at fb...@slr.orl.lmco.com
or you can use the contact page at http://www.sunquestgames.com/
and the message will be forwarded to me after about a delay.
The miniature gaming will include:
Warhammer Fantasy Battles
Warhammer 40K
Napoleonics: Column,Line,Square
BattleTech
Crimson Skies
Citizen Bob tm
Seikrieg: World War II Naval Miniatures
Any Game Master or Volunteer who contributes 12 hours or more
get their con fee reimbursed. If you are interested in running an
event, please send the following information by this
Thusday, Feb 11, to get it printed in the Con program.:
Event Title
Event System
GM Name
Recommended Skill Level
(Optional, See below)
Skill Levels:
Beginner-Rules can be taught, entry level game
Novice-Should have at least seen the rulebook and know basics of
game
Regular-Knows the common rules, plays regularly
Master-Would be running the game, but there can be only one
GM per table
Description of event
Special requirements
(players must bring own characters, armies, etc)
# of Tables
(tournaments need multiple tables, etc)
# of Players
(this many tickets will be printed for the event)/# of minimum Players
Requested Times
(See below)
Check out the event schedule PDF file on our web page for examples.
Times basically are as follows:
Track A: 8-12, 2-6, 8-12
Track B: 10-2, 4-8, 10-2
Track C: 12-4, 6-10
As you can see, this allows for a new event to start every two hours.
most events will be held in the main Expo Center, except for Track B,
10pm-2am slot. all events for this late night slot will be held in the
Marriott Courtyard hotel - the official hotel of Megacon.
Example: (for any game)
Title:
Star League Reborn
System:
Battletech
GM:
Joe Mech
Skill Level:
Experienced
Another Inner Sphere noble has delusions of becoming the next
Star Lord. His loyal following has gathered on Ganymede Prime
to defend his claim. ComStar has been called in to quell the
rebellion.
Requirements:
Uses 3025 series IS mechs only. Players must
provide 5000 points of mechs and may be mixed in tonnage class.
Tables: 1
Players: 2 to 6
Times:
Fri, Track A, 8:00am-12:00n
Fri, Track C, 6:00pm - 10:00pm
Sat, Track B, 4:00pm - 8:00pm
GM per table: 1
Frederick K. Best
warp...@demonblade.com
Brandu <bra...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> I also own Demonblade's game
> (That should have been given away free, and who's interior art
> should be burried or at least put back in the early '80s)
There's only so much you can do with line art done by artists who are doing
up artwork that's paid at a rate that's basically a favor. But I thought I'd
point out that even if you didn't like the artwork, you probably like the
artists. Most of the artists in our book have more famous work for venues
like Magic the Gathering, Legend of the Five Rings and Heavy Metal magazine.
But then, look at the artist pool WotC has to pull from and the kind of money
they can toss their way - of course their art is better, even with the same
artists!
And we would have given the game away for free, except we spent eight months
writing and editing it and did have to pay for printing the sucker. $11.95
doesn't seem like too much of a backbreaker and certainly encourages us to do
more, right?
To each his own, I suppose. But if complaints about the quality of the
artwork are the worst complaints we get, I think I'll be satisfied!
--
Aaron "WarpEyes" Overton
----------------------------------------
DemonBlade Games Shock Force
www.demonblade.com www.shockforce.com
Blackheart
>In article <79hihd$u2q$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> Brandu <bra...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>> I also own Demonblade's game
>> (That should have been given away free, and who's interior art
>> should be burried or at least put back in the early '80s)
>
>There's only so much you can do with line art done by artists who are doing
>up artwork that's paid at a rate that's basically a favor. But I thought I'd
>point out that even if you didn't like the artwork, you probably like the
>artists. Most of the artists in our book have more famous work for venues
>like Magic the Gathering, Legend of the Five Rings and Heavy Metal magazine.
>But then, look at the artist pool WotC has to pull from and the kind of money
>they can toss their way - of course their art is better, even with the same
>artists!
>
>And we would have given the game away for free, except we spent eight months
>writing and editing it and did have to pay for printing the sucker. $11.95
>doesn't seem like too much of a backbreaker and certainly encourages us to do
>more, right?
>
>To each his own, I suppose. But if complaints about the quality of the
>artwork are the worst complaints we get, I think I'll be satisfied!
>
>--
I took one look at the game... then asked Captain Pete at the Armory
retail store how much they were paying people to take it....
then I watched some demos at Gen Con... which further proved to me
that no.. you shouldn't be giving the game away... you should be
paying people to take it.... along with the crap you guys call
"miniatures."
Blackheart
Xthulu
>I took one look at the game... then asked Captain Pete at the Armory
>retail store how much they were paying people to take it....
>
>then I watched some demos at Gen Con... which further proved to me
>that no.. you shouldn't be giving the game away... you should be
>paying people to take it.... along with the crap you guys call
>"miniatures."
>
That's unfortunate. I find it to be one of the funnest games out there. It's
got simple rules that work well toghether. With creative use of the troop
attributes you can easily come up with stats for just about any model.
Each to his own.
Harry Morris
AOL Instant Messenger: xthulu
http://www.aol.com/aim/home.html
Blackheart
>>
>>I took one look at the game... then asked Captain Pete at the Armory
>>retail store how much they were paying people to take it....
>>
>>then I watched some demos at Gen Con... which further proved to me
>>that no.. you shouldn't be giving the game away... you should be
>>paying people to take it.... along with the crap you guys call
>>"miniatures."
>>
>
>
>That's unfortunate. I find it to be one of the funnest games out there. It's
>got simple rules that work well toghether. With creative use of the troop
>attributes you can easily come up with stats for just about any model.
>
>Each to his own.
>
>
we were doing that with Warhammer 40K Rogue Trader 8 years ago....
Blackheart
Chris Keil
It's
>>got simple rules that work well toghether. With creative use of the troop
>>attributes you can easily come up with stats for just about any model.
>>
>>Each to his own.
>>
>>
>
>we were doing that with Warhammer 40K Rogue Trader 8 years ago....
>
>Blackheart
Did you make up your own vehicle templates too? How long did it take yoy to
"roll up" an army that you had the models for? I imagine it must have
sucked when you rolled up a heavy flamer when your foe socred a graviton
gun...
Or if he had Vortex missles.
Or robots.
Or a template weapon with following fire.
Maybe those other games suck because they don't have a d1000 chart.
Rogue Trader, as far as rules went, sucked real, real hard. The rules blew
chow. Bit wind. Were incredibly lame.
Floyd and Cynthia Taylor
> because GW has you so brainwashed that you can't see past your nose when a fun,
> easy to play game comes along then so be it. But you should at least try the
> game, before you call it crap. And as far as the miniatures go....there is
> nothing wrong with them, the are affordable, they are a blast to paint, and they
> are sculpted by some of the best sculptors in the business, and if you know any
> names you should recognize; Chaz Elliot, Bobby Jackson, just to name a few.
Floyd
Blackheart the moron declares:
> I took one look at the game... then asked Captain Pete at the Armory
> retail store how much they were paying people to take it....
>
> then I watched some demos at Gen Con... which further proved to me
> that no.. you shouldn't be giving the game away... you should be
> paying people to take it.... along with the crap you guys call
> "miniatures."
>
> Blackheart
Jerry the Slightly Mad
Chris Keil wrote in message <7a0g18$kqd$1...@nnrp02.primenet.com>...
>
>Rogue Trader, as far as rules went, sucked real, real hard. The rules blew
>chow. Bit wind. Were incredibly lame.
>
This describes every GW game ever made. Interesting, they've never changed.
The Rogue Trader rules were sloppy, but they were also meant for aobut 10-20
models per side. They really fell apart when people started playing HUGE
battles with them. Of course, they all far apart now.
Jerry the Slightly Mad...
MikeKix
>>>retail store how much they were paying people to take it....
>>>
>>>then I watched some demos at Gen Con... which further proved to me
>>>that no.. you shouldn't be giving the game away... you should be
>>>paying people to take it.... along with the crap you guys call
>>>"miniatures."
>>>
<--- While I usually prefer GW minis, I have to disagree with you here. Alot
of Demonblades figs are good, especially the Venguquan, goth rats, Deadtech and
Mutants. I'm not a big fan of the org or shockforce, but the factions I like
have great minis. The rules are decent their big point being how simple they
play. If you dont liek that style you wont like the game, but many do.
>>
>>
>>That's unfortunate. I find it to be one of the funnest games out there.
>It's
>>got simple rules that work well toghether. With creative use of the troop
>>attributes you can easily come up with stats for just about any model.
>>
>>Each to his own.
>>
>>
>
>we were doing that with Warhammer 40K Rogue Trader 8 years ago....
>
>Blackheart
>
>
<-- While you might have been making up your own troop types I have rogue
trader and dont remember any formulas on how to do it in the book, at least
ones that would have been "official".
I am glad a company like Demonblade was able to start up and become a success.
I also think their game system is pretty good. Best wishes in the Future Warp
Eyes
>
>
>
Paul M. M. Jacobus
On 11 Feb 1999, Xthulu wrote:
> That's unfortunate. I find it to be one of the funnest games out there.
> It's got simple rules that work well toghether. With creative use of
> the troop attributes you can easily come up with stats for just about
> any model.
I don't understand how you can not get a kick out of a game with Miss
Triss and the Essenemm Cavalry. They're coming out with Roadkill minis,
ferchrissakes!
JD
loves it
Joe Schulte
: On 11 Feb 1999 21:50:20 GMT, xth...@aol.com (Xthulu) wrote:
: >>
: >>I took one look at the game... then asked Captain Pete at the Armory
: >>retail store how much they were paying people to take it....
: >>
: >>then I watched some demos at Gen Con... which further proved to me
: >>that no.. you shouldn't be giving the game away... you should be
: >>paying people to take it.... along with the crap you guys call
: >>"miniatures."
: >>
: >
: >
: >That's unfortunate. I find it to be one of the funnest games out there. It's
: >got simple rules that work well toghether. With creative use of the troop
: >attributes you can easily come up with stats for just about any model.
: >
: >Each to his own.
: >
: >
: we were doing that with Warhammer 40K Rogue Trader 8 years ago....
So? In no way is it anywhere near as smooth as Shock Force.
Not even remotely so.
Chris Keil
Jerry the Slightly Mad wrote in message
<7a1cpt$6i5$1...@news1-alterdial.uu.net>...
The new Epic is nice. It's a microarmor game, with microarmor rules, with
tweaks for SciFi, but we haven't had any real problems yet. Of course,
everyone hates it, soo....
Jerry the Slightly Mad
>
>The new Epic is nice. It's a microarmor game, with microarmor rules, with
>tweaks for SciFi, but we haven't had any real problems yet. Of course,
>everyone hates it, soo....
>
I heard that it borrows somewhat on Dirtside II, which is excellent. I've
yet to try the new Epic.
I tried Necromunda. It was kinda cool until I shot some juve with a shotgun
(which didn't hurt him) and then he fell 3 levels (which didn't hurt him)
and he got up and ran away. To top it off, I rolled a 6 to hit and ran out
of ammo.... HUH???? And how the hell are you supposed to play that game
without fairy sized hands??? I can't reach into the terrain to move guys
without knocking things over. In the end...the game fell into another GW
"KEWL" catagory. I should have expected that.
Bloodbowl: It was kind of fun until they added those stupid cards.
Let's see...my card is a "Pie in the face card".
Your's is "Steal the opponents entire bank roll."
HUH???? That's certainly a balancing game element.
40K2: (or whatever they're calling that monstrosity now)
A "random" STRATEGY card? Need I say more????
Jerry the Slightly Mad....
NEil Phillips
following wisdom:
>I tried Necromunda. It was kinda cool until I shot some juve with a shotgun
>(which didn't hurt him) and then he fell 3 levels (which didn't hurt him)
>and he got up and ran away. To top it off, I rolled a 6 to hit and ran out
>of ammo.... HUH???? And how the hell are you supposed to play that game
>without fairy sized hands??? I can't reach into the terrain to move guys
>without knocking things over. In the end...the game fell into another GW
>"KEWL" catagory. I should have expected that.
Hmm.. well, if you hit someonw with a shotgun and knock htem off the
edge of a building, the likelyhood is that they could have absorbed
the impact and been pushed back. Falling three levels = nine inches =
he's really really lucky now, as in he's survived with 1/3 and 1/6
chances.. or in other words a 1/18 chance of survival. This is indeed
a bit high, but it makes the game more interesting if there is a
chance that anyone can survive..
WIththe ammo rules, it's a common house rule to roll a sustained fire
dice with your roll to hit, and if you get a jam result you take an
ammo chekc, and sixes are ignored. Works much better.
As for te terrain, often yo ucna push figures around withthe rulers :)
it depends on how you set it up basically..
--
NEil (phil...@gwbbs.net.au)
a.k.a. N-ster...
The opinions expressed in this message are not my own,
but rather are those of Microsoft Corporation.
Thrakazog
>>I tried Necromunda. It was kinda cool until
....until you realised it was a G%# D%$@ GW game? I have only had fun with a
very few GW games....and they ended up ruining EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM!
ORIGINAL Blood Bowl. Beer & Pretzels, but good enough for a weekly league.
Then ruined...thanks alot...allow me to draw a card for GW, hmmm it says "you
suck!".
ORIGINAL WHFB "chaos books". Ah a modelers dream; a warband of unique heavly
converted figs. Then ruined, 5 or 6 times...thanks alot...allow me to draw
another card for you guys and GW, ahhh it says "you suck!".
Necromunda and Gorka Morka. Here again, nothing to serious, but good enough
for league games...until, yes you guessed it, they ruined them both....allow me
to draw a card for GW, heyyy it says "you suck!".
Hopefully everyone can see the pattern. If not here it is in a nutshell; which
if GW had designed the nutshell, would be the size of a coconut with spikey
sort of projections and it would cost 10x's the going nutshell rate/without a
stat sheet so it wouldn't be legal for tourneys....
....In no way or any form should anyone with a modicum of good sense support
this company. If you buy it...they will ruin it. GW sucks.
Ray...and if GW reads this...BITE ME YOU BUNCH OF STARFISH LOVERS!
NEil Phillips
>Necromunda and Gorka Morka. Here again, nothing to serious, but good enough
>for league games...until, yes you guessed it, they ruined them both....allow me
>to draw a card for GW, heyyy it says "you suck!".
How did they ruin Necro?
Or GorkaMorka for that matter..
THey still seem pretty fine to me..
You don't have to use supplements if you don't like them..
(I like Outlanders, I didn't buy Digganob..)
>Ray...and if GW reads this...BITE ME YOU BUNCH OF STARFISH LOVERS!
Hmm, nice to see this sort of reasoned argument :)
Blackheart
>>we were doing that with Warhammer 40K Rogue Trader 8 years ago....
>>
>>Blackheart
>>
>>
><-- While you might have been making up your own troop types I have rogue
>trader and dont remember any formulas on how to do it in the book, at least
>ones that would have been "official".
>
page 58 - 60 of the RT book... under the header of "Points Values"
And a group of mature players that could take something and assign a
points value to it.
>I am glad a company like Demonblade was able to start up and become a success.
>I also think their game system is pretty good. Best wishes in the Future Warp
>Eyes
>>
If you call what they do "becoming a success."
Blackheart
"Hope is futile as the missiles strike..."
Blackheart
wrote:
It is when you've read the rules a few dozen times and have played it
off and on for 8 years with mature players who are looking to have fun
more than find every contrived situation where a GW game doesn't live
up to their own hypocritical expectations.
Blackheart
Jay Adan
>
> If you call what they do "becoming a success."
>
Regardless of what I may think of GW I don't know how you could twist it
around to say that they are NOT successful.
- Jay
--
T A N G E N T S
Sellers of the finest in Sci-fi Publications,
Products, and other cool stuff!
http://tangents-sf.com
Mike
Blackheart wrote:
> On 12 Feb 1999 14:39:21 GMT, mik...@aol.comHastur (MikeKix) wrote:
>
> >I am glad a company like Demonblade was able to start up and become a success.
> >I also think their game system is pretty good. Best wishes in the Future Warp
> >Eyes
> >>
>
> If you call what they do "becoming a success."
>
>
Any game company that furthers the "gaming hobby" is successful in my eyes. There
are so many game designers out there working hard to make games to share with
others. Why belittle their efforts? The my game is better than your game argument
is counterproductive. If I said chess and checkers are great, but Monopoly stinks
and nobody should play it, I would sound foolish. I used to play WH40K RT. I
enjoyed it then. I play ShockForce now, among many other games, and I happen to
enjoy it immensely. Many gamers seem to forget that games are for fun.
Mike
Joe Schulte
: thra...@aol.com (Thrakazog) saw fit to share the following wisdom:
: >Necromunda and Gorka Morka. Here again, nothing to serious, but good enough
: >for league games...until, yes you guessed it, they ruined them both....allow me
: >to draw a card for GW, heyyy it says "you suck!".
: How did they ruin Necro?
Depends on what you mean by "ruined".
I have seen people claim that Spyrers were too powerful, though I've never
had trouble against them.
Scavvies, however, were far too powerful. Most of the Outlanders book was
too powerful in one way or the other - Scavvies were over the top, though.
: Or GorkaMorka for that matter..
Don't know, don't care, stupid game.
: THey still seem pretty fine to me..
: You don't have to use supplements if you don't like them..
: (I like Outlanders, I didn't buy Digganob..)
And if you had spend $40 (or whatever) on Outlanders and your friends
decided that they didn't want to use it? I'd be annoyed. Bet you would,
too.
: >Ray...and if GW reads this...BITE ME YOU BUNCH OF STARFISH LOVERS!
: Hmm, nice to see this sort of reasoned argument :)
Yes, that was strange.
Blackheart
wrote:
>Blackheart wrote:
>>
>
>> If you call what they do "becoming a success."
>>
>
>
>Regardless of what I may think of GW I don't know how you could twist it
>around to say that they are NOT successful.
>
>- Jay
>
>--
I was talking about Demon"cheapripofftrash"blade....
Blackheart
Floyd and Cynthia Taylor
David Calderon
Iv played Shock Force and it one of my favorite games. Easy to learn, teach, run,
full of fun and very flexible. You can't beat the price against any other game
system being sold out there. The quality of their minis has satified myself and
many a folks. It a good game made by good people for good gamers..
Oh! Your're Blackheart... So I guess you don't count under the heading of Good..
Blackheart wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Feb 1999 19:06:12 GMT, warp...@demonblade.com wrote:
>
> >In article <79hihd$u2q$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> > Brandu <bra...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> >> I also own Demonblade's game
> >> (That should have been given away free, and who's interior art
> >> should be burried or at least put back in the early '80s)
> >
> >There's only so much you can do with line art done by artists who are doing
> >up artwork that's paid at a rate that's basically a favor. But I thought I'd
> >point out that even if you didn't like the artwork, you probably like the
> >artists. Most of the artists in our book have more famous work for venues
> >like Magic the Gathering, Legend of the Five Rings and Heavy Metal magazine.
> >But then, look at the artist pool WotC has to pull from and the kind of money
> >they can toss their way - of course their art is better, even with the same
> >artists!
> >
> >And we would have given the game away for free, except we spent eight months
> >writing and editing it and did have to pay for printing the sucker. $11.95
> >doesn't seem like too much of a backbreaker and certainly encourages us to do
> >more, right?
> >
> >To each his own, I suppose. But if complaints about the quality of the
> >artwork are the worst complaints we get, I think I'll be satisfied!
> >
> >--
>
> I took one look at the game... then asked Captain Pete at the Armory
> retail store how much they were paying people to take it....
>
> then I watched some demos at Gen Con... which further proved to me
> that no.. you shouldn't be giving the game away... you should be
> paying people to take it.... along with the crap you guys call
> "miniatures."
>
> Blackheart
Blackheart
<dcsy...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>Oh! Your're Blackheart... So I guess you don't count under the heading of Good..
>
yeah... I'm under the heading of "The best damn thing going today."
Blackheart
"What the hell is so special about 'good'?"
Howard Fielding
Or "waste of bandwidth"
Howard
Blackheart
<tzeen...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>Oh! Your're Blackheart... So I guess you don't count under the heading of
>Good..
>>>
>>yeah... I'm under the heading of "The best damn thing going today."
>
>
>And where exactly are you going "damn thing"? And why aren't you gone yet?
>
>Ken
>
if I left.. you wouldn't have anyone to obsess over...
Blackheart
Blackheart
Fielding) wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Feb 1999 04:36:26 GMT, blackh...@hotmail.com
>(Blackheart) wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Feb 1999 02:01:10 GMT, David Calderon
>><dcsy...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Oh! Your're Blackheart... So I guess you don't count under the heading of Good..
>>>
>>
>>yeah... I'm under the heading of "The best damn thing going today."
>>
>>Blackheart
>>"What the hell is so special about 'good'?"
>
>Or "waste of bandwidth"
>
>Howard
no one's holding a gun to your head forcing you to click on my
posts...
Blackheart
Thane
moon...@earth.execpc.com (Joe Schulte) wrote:
> NEil Phillips (phil...@gwbbs.net.au) wrote:
> : thra...@aol.com (Thrakazog) saw fit to share the following wisdom:
>
> : >Necromunda and Gorka Morka. Here again, nothing to serious, but good
enough
> : >for league games...until, yes you guessed it, they ruined them
both....allow me
> : >to draw a card for GW, heyyy it says "you suck!".
>
> : How did they ruin Necro?
>
> Depends on what you mean by "ruined".
>
> I have seen people claim that Spyrers were too powerful, though I've never
> had trouble against them.
They were fine, until the second or third advancement when they were no
longer pinned by hits. Until that point, they could be held down by superior
numbers until someone with a decent weapon got into range. After that, they
became total predators. We saw many games end on the second turn with the
gang losing 3 or 4 guys and the Spryers unharmed.
> Scavvies, however, were far too powerful. Most of the Outlanders book was
> too powerful in one way or the other - Scavvies were over the top, though.
God, that's the truth. And letting an Army take 1 shot flame throwers for
practically nothing hurt a lot, plus the 2 dozen plague zombies I had to face
once. Then they had like 4 new mercenary types, with no limit on how many you
could take; I knew players who cheesed up gangs with 6 or 7 mercs, and maybe 2
gangers; they supported themselves by selling the weapons of captured and
enslaved enemy.
And don't get me started on the Weirds.
Thane Morgan
Thane's Games
www.thanesgames.com
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Blackheart
<tzeen...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>if I left.. you wouldn't have anyone to obsess over...
>
>
>Pffttt. Don't delude yourself troll.
>
face it.. If I didn't post here... you wouldn't have anything to talk
about....
Blackheart
Thane
Avatar seems to enjoy saying 2+2 does not equal 4, and people must be idiots
for thinking 2+2 = 4, and all reasoning showing 2+2 = 4 is flawed, illogical
and made by people to daft to see how great GW is.
Blackheart probably never got much attention at home, and is desperately
seeking it here. I hate to think about how much hand lotion he uses reading
peoples replies to his posts.
The simple, internet solution is to ignore all posts by them; don't reply to
idiocy that obviously has no interest in discussion. There are many reasons
why people don't like GW games, but the number of morons that it attracts is
definately one of the best to find a better game.
People who want to explain why GW games are great and can discuss the pros and
cons rationally are welcome. Fanboys who think GW games are great because they
don't have to think should just be ignored.
Maybe they will talk to each other, or maybe they'll just go away.
Thane Morgan
BatHead207
I really don't think thats' a fair thing to say. Just because *you* don't like
GW, doen't mean they are idiots because they do. They have as much a right to
post here and defend GW as you do to trash it. Granted, some of (not all) their
posts can be abrasive, but, I've seen worse from the anti- GW posters. Let's
not forget people, we are talking about *games* here, lighten up and have some
fun. (that last statement is directed at *both* sides)
Grim Reaper Casting
Maker of "Nasteez"(tm) Fantasy gaming miniatures
Blackheart
wrote:
>Obviously, the GW list has so little to say that some fanboys are migrating.
>Avatar seems to enjoy saying 2+2 does not equal 4, and people must be idiots
>for thinking 2+2 = 4, and all reasoning showing 2+2 = 4 is flawed, illogical
>and made by people to daft to see how great GW is.
>
>Blackheart probably never got much attention at home, and is desperately
>seeking it here. I hate to think about how much hand lotion he uses reading
>peoples replies to his posts.
>
>The simple, internet solution is to ignore all posts by them; don't reply to
>idiocy that obviously has no interest in discussion. There are many reasons
>why people don't like GW games, but the number of morons that it attracts is
>definately one of the best to find a better game.
>
>People who want to explain why GW games are great and can discuss the pros and
>cons rationally are welcome. Fanboys who think GW games are great because they
>don't have to think should just be ignored.
>
>Maybe they will talk to each other, or maybe they'll just go away.
>
ahh yes... the voice of reason... spoken like a truly miffed 10 yr
old....
Blackheart
"High Commander Fanboy"
David Calderon
NEil Phillips
wisdom:
>no one's holding a gun to your head forcing you to click on my
>posts...
That's what *you* think..
NEil Phillips
wisdom:
>face it.. If I didn't post here... you wouldn't have anything to talk
>about....
You ever heard of the line to noise ratio?
This message, for example, is noise.
ANything relevant to the actual topic of the newsgroup is line.
There's plenty of conversation on this newsgroup. The flames you
generate are jsut noise that gets in the way of actual conversation.
The newsgroup was a much easier place to read before you came along.
I apologise for adding more noise to the group..
NEil Phillips
wisdom:
>ahh yes... the voice of reason... spoken like a truly miffed 10 yr
>old....
I guess he just wanted it to come across in a way you could
comprehend..
Will Nesbitt
NEil Phillips wrote:
> I apologise for adding more noise to the group..
Apology accepted.
Ooops ... more noise. I apologize for adding more noise. ;^)
Will
Blackheart
Phillips) wrote:
>blackh...@hotmail.com (Blackheart) saw fit to share the following
>wisdom:
>
>>face it.. If I didn't post here... you wouldn't have anything to talk
>>about....
>
>You ever heard of the line to noise ratio?
>
>This message, for example, is noise.
>
>ANything relevant to the actual topic of the newsgroup is line.
>
>There's plenty of conversation on this newsgroup. The flames you
>generate are jsut noise that gets in the way of actual conversation.
>The newsgroup was a much easier place to read before you came along.
>
>I apologise for adding more noise to the group..
>--
in other words anyone that doesn't bash GW 24 - 7 is just posting
noise.... I see... * laugh*
Blackheart
"What a fucking joke."
Blackheart
<tzeen...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>You ever heard of the line to noise ratio?
>>>This message, for example, is noise.
>
>
>>in other words anyone that doesn't bash GW 24 - 7 is just posting
>>noise.... I see... * laugh*
>
>
>No you moron. This is 'noise' because it has nothing to do with the charter
>of the group - that of discussing miniature games.
>
oh.... you mean like starting a new thread just to flame someone?
If you don't like the fact that I inserted my own opinions into
threads on a PUBLIC UNMODERATED newsgroup you can direct a complaint
to my ISP...
it's ab...@qis.net
if someone brings up the quality of Enigma, demonblade or anyone elses
figures, I'm going to post my opinions on it. If you don't like the
fact that my opinions are different from yours you have two options:
1) deal with it.
2) start a private mailing list ala IGCOM where you can kick anyone
that disagrees with your high and mighty ass.
Now... who's posting the noise?
Blackheart
"One more for the good guys."
gair
>Blackheart
>"One more for the good guys."
Now, I'm not trying to continue this flame thread or anything, but are you
referring to yourself as one of "the good guys"? Didn't you state the other
day you weren't good at all? It's hard to keep track of these things. . . .
--gair
Co-Founder, CEO, and Webmaster, Hamster Liberation Front
http://home.earthlink.net/~gbohon/
Blackheart
wrote:
>Blackheart wrote:
>
>>Blackheart
>>"One more for the good guys."
>
>
>Now, I'm not trying to continue this flame thread or anything, but are you
>referring to yourself as one of "the good guys"? Didn't you state the other
>day you weren't good at all? It's hard to keep track of these things. . . .
>
>--gair
since you just made it obvious that you don't know what the nWo is...
there's no point in explaining that sig to you...
Blackheart
gair
>there's no point in explaining that sig to you...
Oh, the "nWo," eh? I know who they are--they're those performance artists
that come on the TV, aren't they?
--gair
Co-Founder, CEO, and Webmaster, Hamster Liberation Front
http://home.earthlink.net/~gbohon/
"A standing army is like a standing member. It's an excellent assurance of
domestic tranquility, but a dangerous temptation to foreign adventure."
--Elbridge Gerry @ the Constitutional Convention, 1787,
arguing to restrict the U.S. Army to 300 men in peacetime.
des...@my-dejanews.com
"Tzeentch" <tzeen...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>You ever heard of the line to noise ratio?
> >>This message, for example, is noise.
>
> >in other words anyone that doesn't bash GW 24 - 7 is just posting
> >noise.... I see... * laugh*
>
> No you moron. This is 'noise' because it has nothing to do with the charter
> of the group - that of discussing miniature games.
>
>
Stupider?! Of course that was a joke. Right?
Fred
Paul M. M. Jacobus
OK, it's getting out of hand. I'm asking on behalf of the 90% of this NG
that doesn't care about this little flamewar. Please take this to private
e-mail, or some other NG or somewhere else. These threads have nothing to
do with minis anymore, and even when it did, it was about GW minis, which
belong elsewhere anyways.
Please.
Quit posting flames to this NG.
Thank you.
JD
Joe Schulte
: >since you just made it obvious that you don't know what the nWo is...
: >there's no point in explaining that sig to you...
: Oh, the "nWo," eh? I know who they are--they're those performance artists
: that come on the TV, aren't they?
I think the word "artist" there is a bit of a stretch...
BatHead207
In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.990219...@access2.digex.net>, "Paul
M. M. Jacobus" <vam...@access2.digex.net> writes:
>
>OK, it's getting out of hand. I'm asking on behalf of the 90% of this NG
>that doesn't care about this little flamewar. Please take this to private
>e-mail, or some other NG or somewhere else. These threads have nothing to
>do with minis anymore, and even when it did, it was about GW minis, which
>belong elsewhere anyways.
>
Agreed about the first part. However, I vehemently disagree that discussion
about GW minis and their games has no place here. The name of this NG is *NOT*
rec.games. miniatures.misc-exceptGW. Granted, there *is* an NG specifically for
GW, but that does not exclude people from posting about GW here. Blackheart may
be a little abrasive at times, but I think some of the reactions to his posts
speaking positively about GW have been a little overboard. He likes GW stuff
and he has his reasons, just like others don't like GW for their own reasons. I
noticed in one post,(i'm not sure if it was Blackheart or not) the person
stated they didn't care for Battletech in no uncertain terms, and they got
raked over the coals for that. I thought it quite hypocritical ( this was not
the first time I had seen this on the NG), since it seemed it was OK to trash
GW four ways (up, down, sideways and repeatedly), but dare to say one bad word
about their competition, and you were insulted soundly. I think some people
forget that we are talikng about *games* first and foremost, and that what one
likes, the other hates - so bleeping what. People ( and that include Blackheart
- he's not *totally* blameless, but he actually hasn't been as rude as some
have been) need to lighten up. Complain all you want about GW and their prices
and practices, but don't jump on someone just because they happen to like GW
and their stuff.
OK, that's my rant for today, sorry for the length, but I just wanted to vent a
little.
Jim Cowling
>
>
>Agreed about the first part. However, I vehemently disagree that discussion
>about GW minis and their games has no place here. The name of this NG is *NOT*
>rec.games. miniatures.misc-exceptGW. Granted, there *is* an NG specifically for
>GW, but that does not exclude people from posting about GW here. Blackheart may
Actually, it does. Read the charter of r.g.m.warhammer.
-------
Jim Cowling -- Writer/Atheist/Geek -- scow...@home.com
http://www.pacificcoast.net/~scowling
-------
Blackheart
wrote:
"sports entertainment"....
Blackheart
Blackheart
I'll leave the following wisdom of the ages... because quite
frankly.... just about the whole damn lot of ya need to read this at
least 25 more times...
>
>Agreed about the first part. However, I vehemently disagree that discussion
>about GW minis and their games has no place here. The name of this NG is *NOT*
>rec.games. miniatures.misc-exceptGW. Granted, there *is* an NG specifically for
>GW, but that does not exclude people from posting about GW here. Blackheart may
>be a little abrasive at times, but I think some of the reactions to his posts
>speaking positively about GW have been a little overboard. He likes GW stuff
>and he has his reasons, just like others don't like GW for their own reasons. I
>noticed in one post,(i'm not sure if it was Blackheart or not) the person
>stated they didn't care for Battletech in no uncertain terms, and they got
>raked over the coals for that. I thought it quite hypocritical ( this was not
>the first time I had seen this on the NG), since it seemed it was OK to trash
>GW four ways (up, down, sideways and repeatedly), but dare to say one bad word
>about their competition, and you were insulted soundly. I think some people
>forget that we are talikng about *games* first and foremost, and that what one
>likes, the other hates - so bleeping what. People ( and that include Blackheart
>- he's not *totally* blameless, but he actually hasn't been as rude as some
>have been) need to lighten up. Complain all you want about GW and their prices
>and practices, but don't jump on someone just because they happen to like GW
>and their stuff.
>OK, that's my rant for today, sorry for the length, but I just wanted to vent a
>little.
>
thank you very much. It's nice to not be the only one that points out
hypocrisy on this group.
Blackheart
Blackheart
wrote:
>In article <19990219120241...@ngol05.aol.com>, bathe...@aol.com (BatHead207) wrote:
>>
>>
>>Agreed about the first part. However, I vehemently disagree that discussion
>>about GW minis and their games has no place here. The name of this NG is *NOT*
>>rec.games. miniatures.misc-exceptGW. Granted, there *is* an NG specifically for
>>GW, but that does not exclude people from posting about GW here. Blackheart may
>
>Actually, it does. Read the charter of r.g.m.warhammer.
>
uh.... huh... start quoting it bucko...
Blackheart
"And then show me 5 people on RGMW that give a damn about that
charter."
BatHead207
In article <u1iz2.361$fu1....@news.rdc1.bc.wave.home.com>, scow...@home.com
(Jim Cowling) writes:
>
>>Agreed about the first part. However, I vehemently disagree that discussion
>>about GW minis and their games has no place here. The name of this NG is
>*NOT*
>>rec.games. miniatures.misc-exceptGW. Granted, there *is* an NG specifically
>for
>>GW, but that does not exclude people from posting about GW here. Blackheart
>may
>
>Actually, it does. Read the charter of r.g.m.warhammer.
>
>
'Splain it to me - what does the Warhammer NG's Charter have to do with what is
*allowed* (ahem!) to be posted on rec.games.miniatures.misc? And (pardon my
lack of knowledge) just out of curiosity, where can I find this charter?
Joe Schulte
: OK, it's getting out of hand. I'm asking on behalf of the 90% of this NG
: that doesn't care about this little flamewar. Please take this to private
: e-mail, or some other NG or somewhere else. These threads have nothing to
: do with minis anymore, and even when it did, it was about GW minis, which
: belong elsewhere anyways.
Wow. Does anyone else find this posting to be INCREDIBLY
ironic (as well as hypocritical)?
Mark Reindl
people who seem to like GW just as much as you seem to hate it. Two different
sides of the same coin if you ask me (or even if you don't ask!). Personally, I
like playing their games and painting their miniatures, but that's a personal
choice, *not* one that I would try to push onto someone else. I also like a
variety of other games as well, not because they're more "realistic" or require
more thinking or for whatever other reason certain people find GW to be lacking,
but because I have fun playing them. In the final analysis, isn't that the only
thing that really matters anyway? It's stupid to argue this on any other level
than that of fun, which, by the way, is a totally subjective criterion anyhow.
Are the prices that GW charges for their stuff high? Sure. They've actually come
down a bit for certain things, but even if they didn't, I don't find that to be a
valid argument against them either. They'll charge whatever the market will
bear. Besides, hobbies are expensive anyway, just try photography; that'll put
you in the poorhouse very quickly. Now, I realize that trying to reason things
out here will probably label me as a "fanboy", which is fine. But if I'm going to
be called that, I guess I'll just start labeling everyone who doesn't like GW
"whineboys" just so we can easily see who's who.
Mark
Thane wrote:
> Obviously, the GW list has so little to say that some fanboys are migrating.
> Avatar seems to enjoy saying 2+2 does not equal 4, and people must be idiots
> for thinking 2+2 = 4, and all reasoning showing 2+2 = 4 is flawed, illogical
> and made by people to daft to see how great GW is.
>
> Blackheart probably never got much attention at home, and is desperately
> seeking it here. I hate to think about how much hand lotion he uses reading
> peoples replies to his posts.
>
> The simple, internet solution is to ignore all posts by them; don't reply to
> idiocy that obviously has no interest in discussion. There are many reasons
> why people don't like GW games, but the number of morons that it attracts is
> definately one of the best to find a better game.
>
> People who want to explain why GW games are great and can discuss the pros and
> cons rationally are welcome. Fanboys who think GW games are great because they
> don't have to think should just be ignored.
>
> Maybe they will talk to each other, or maybe they'll just go away.
>
> Thane Morgan
Demian Rose
> >people who seem to like GW just as much as you seem to hate it.
> oh geez... now you went and did it... Now they're gonna start all
> kinda of new threads just to call you names...
That's right! I'll start 'em off:
"f*ckin' level-headed bastard!"
"logical wanker!"
"self-actualized gaming low-life!"
you get the point,
Demian
Blackheart
wrote:
>Great, yet another open mind. I find it interesting that you see fit to criticize
>people who seem to like GW just as much as you seem to hate it. Two different
>sides of the same coin if you ask me (or even if you don't ask!). Personally, I
>like playing their games and painting their miniatures, but that's a personal
>choice, *not* one that I would try to push onto someone else. I also like a
>variety of other games as well, not because they're more "realistic" or require
>more thinking or for whatever other reason certain people find GW to be lacking,
>but because I have fun playing them. In the final analysis, isn't that the only
>thing that really matters anyway? It's stupid to argue this on any other level
>than that of fun, which, by the way, is a totally subjective criterion anyhow.
>Are the prices that GW charges for their stuff high? Sure. They've actually come
>down a bit for certain things, but even if they didn't, I don't find that to be a
>valid argument against them either. They'll charge whatever the market will
>bear. Besides, hobbies are expensive anyway, just try photography; that'll put
>you in the poorhouse very quickly. Now, I realize that trying to reason things
>out here will probably label me as a "fanboy", which is fine. But if I'm going to
>be called that, I guess I'll just start labeling everyone who doesn't like GW
>"whineboys" just so we can easily see who's who.
>
oh geez... now you went and did it... Now they're gonna start all
kinda of new threads just to call you names...
Blackheart
Blackheart
wrote:
>Paul M. M. Jacobus (vam...@access2.digex.net) wrote:
*jumps up and down!!!*
ME! ME! ME! ME! ME! ME!
LOOK JOE! I've gotten like 3 thrads names after me this week!
Black"Meridian in training"heart
NEil Phillips
>>You ever heard of the line to noise ratio?
>>This message, for example, is noise.
>in other words anyone that doesn't bash GW 24 - 7 is just posting
>noise.... I see... * laugh*
Did you completely fail to.. like.. actually read the post?
It actually said that GW-bashing is noise, along with people
compleining about GW-bashing, or reckless fanboyism. All that is
noise.
Some days I wish I could be bothered setting up a kill file..
Or getting in touch with someone who could put an end to the
blackheart problem, at least whilst using his current computer..
But I really can't be bothered. And then there's the messy legal
procedings ;)
Blackheart
<tzeen...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>I think the below explains everything.
>
>Sucks to be you eh Joe? :)
>
>Ken
>
>>*jumps up and down!!!*
>>
>>ME! ME! ME! ME! ME! ME!
>>
>>LOOK JOE! I've gotten like 3 thrads names after me this week!
>>
>>Black"Meridian in training"heart
>>
>
>
>
Are you Caliburn's alterego?
Blackheart
Mark Reindl
Demian Rose wrote:
> That's right! I'll start 'em off:
>
> "f*ckin' level-headed bastard!"
>
> "logical wanker!"
>
> "self-actualized gaming low-life!"
HEY! Watch who you're calling logical and self-actualized! :)
Mark
Paul M. M. Jacobus
On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, Blackheart wrote:
> >Actually, it does. Read the charter of r.g.m.warhammer.
>
> uh.... huh... start quoting it bucko...
Basic rule of Usenet: always post to the most specific group. If there's a
stamp-collecting.misc and a stamp-collecting.presidents, and you have a
question about a Hoover stamp, you should post to the s-c.presidents,
since it is more specific, and theoretically, all discussion of
presidental stamps should go on there. Thusly, discussion of GW minis and
stuff goes on in miniatures.warhammer, and not here. This group is for
everything not covered by the more specific miniature groups (.historical
and .warhammer).
And the threads I was complaining about belong on alt.flame, but that's
another story.
JD
should use a car metaphor
BatHead207
In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.99022...@access5.digex.net>, "Paul
M. M. Jacobus" <vam...@access5.digex.net> writes:
>Basic rule of Usenet: always post to the most specific group. If there's a
>stamp-collecting.misc and a stamp-collecting.presidents, and you have a
>question about a Hoover stamp, you should post to the s-c.presidents,
>since it is more specific, and theoretically, all discussion of
>presidental stamps should go on there. Thusly, discussion of GW minis and
>stuff goes on in miniatures.warhammer, and not here. This group is for
>everything not covered by the more specific miniature groups (.historical
>and .warhammer).
>
And when was this *law* passed?Using your example, if you want ask about
presidential stamps, then yes, you should post to that group, as you are more
likely to get a response there. However, there is nothing to prevent you from
posting on the s.c.misc, group, as,since you are talking about stamps,it is
still on topic.
I still say that r.g.m.m. includes *any and all* miniatures games. Show me a
FAQ or charter that says you are not allowed to post about GW here. Misc.,
which I believe stands for miscellaneous, means (sort of ) any and all
miniatures games, which to me means includes GW, whether you like it or not. On
the other hand it seems obvious since the name of the other NG includes the
word "Warhammer", discussions about Fantasy Rules! and Battletech and other
games discussed here would and should not be allowed (unless of course it was
only in passing ) and since the name of this group is *Not*
rec.games.miniatures.everythingbutGW, stop trying to dictate to people that
they are not allowed to discuss whatever miniatures game they wish. Now I don't
know for sure, but isn't there an NG for Chipco's Fantasy Rules!? Are you gonna
tell those who want to talk about that game they are not to post here? I don't
think so.
NEil Phillips
>
>In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.99022...@access5.digex.net>, "Paul
>M. M. Jacobus" <vam...@access5.digex.net> writes:
>
>>Basic rule of Usenet: always post to the most specific group. If there's a
>>stamp-collecting.misc and a stamp-collecting.presidents, and you have a
>>question about a Hoover stamp, you should post to the s-c.presidents,
>>since it is more specific, and theoretically, all discussion of
>>presidental stamps should go on there. Thusly, discussion of GW minis and
>>stuff goes on in miniatures.warhammer, and not here. This group is for
>>everything not covered by the more specific miniature groups (.historical
>>and .warhammer).
>>
>
>And when was this *law* passed?
There are no laws one usenet.
You can say whatever the fuck you want.
There are only guidelines. If you don't follow guidelines, the whole
shemozzle tands to fall belly-up.
Paul M. M. Jacobus
On 21 Feb 1999, BatHead207 wrote:
>> Basic rule of Usenet: always post to the most specific group. If
>> there's a stamp-collecting.misc and a stamp-collecting.presidents, and
>> you have a question about a Hoover stamp, you should post to the
>> s-c.presidents, since it is more specific, and theoretically, all
>> discussion of presidental stamps should go on there. Thusly, discussion
>> of GW minis and stuff goes on in miniatures.warhammer, and not here.
>> This group is for everything not covered by the more specific miniature
>> groups (.historical and .warhammer).
> And when was this *law* passed?Using your example, if you want ask about
> presidential stamps, then yes, you should post to that group, as you are
> more likely to get a response there. However, there is nothing to
> prevent you from posting on the s.c.misc, group, as,since you are
> talking about stamps,it is still on topic.
You're right. I should go to rec.games.misc then, since I'm discussing a
game. And everyone should discuss all their games there. Or hell,
rec.misc. I mean, it all overs the same thing, right? Recreation? Why have
newsgroups at all, then? Howzabout one big room, where everyone posts
whatever they feel like! That makes sense. I mean, it's all related after
all.
> I still say that r.g.m.m. includes *any and all* miniatures games. Show
> me a FAQ or charter that says you are not allowed to post about GW here.
> Misc., which I believe stands for miscellaneous, means (sort of ) any
> and all miniatures games, which to me means includes GW, whether you
> like it or not. On the other hand it seems obvious since the name of the
> other NG includes the word "Warhammer", discussions about Fantasy Rules!
> and Battletech and other games discussed here would and should not be
> allowed (unless of course it was only in passing ) and since the name of
> this group is *Not* rec.games.miniatures.everythingbutGW, stop trying to
> dictate to people that they are not allowed to discuss whatever
> miniatures game they wish. Now I don't know for sure, but isn't there an
> NG for Chipco's Fantasy Rules!? Are you gonna tell those who want to
> talk about that game they are not to post here? I don't think so.
If you don't agree, go ask in news.groups, and they can explain in much
more detail. We have this same issue come up in
rec.games.trading-cards.misc all the time. Usenet always has and always
will fall to a 'most specific' guideline., because it doesn't make logical
sense otherwise. If everyone discussed Warhammer here, what would be the
point of a .warhammer seperate ng?
And for your edification, there is a .historical ng, a .warhammer ng, and
a .misc ng. This is why you don't see historical and WH posts here;
because they have their own place to discuss things.
JD
remembers when they taught this sort of
thing when you got your account
BatHead207
In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.99022...@access1.digex.net>, "Paul
M. M. Jacobus" <vam...@access1.digex.net> writes:
>
>And for your edification, there is a .historical ng, a .warhammer ng, and
>a .misc ng. This is why you don't see historical and WH posts here;
>because they have their own place to discuss things.
>
But that's the point, I do see posts about historical games here all the time,
yet no-one seems inclined to complain about that. The thing is, its not as if
those postings about Warhammer are taking over the board, it's only an
occasional thing, and as you said, there's no law - just "guidelines". Does it
really hurt the NG all that much if a few post about Warhammer? If so, then
those that keep posting about how bad GW and their games are, should stop
posting too. *That's* the problem I have, people keep complaining about the
Warhammer fans posting, yet they feel they should be allowed to trash GW every
chance they get. Get the GW bashers to quit posting then you *might* have case
for keeping the Warhammer fans off the board.
Blackheart
see.. that's the problem... Paul M. M. (Mega Moron?) Jacobus is one
of the resident GW bashers...
it's ok to bash GW here... it becomes noise when someone stands up to
them... kinda like a playground bully... he goes running to mommy when
someone gives him what he deserves ( a kick in the teeth ).
For the home vocabulary class. Look up the term Hypocrisy and send me
a 4 paragraph dissertation on it.
Blackheart
Paul M. M. Jacobus
On Mon, 22 Feb 1999, Blackheart wrote:
> see.. that's the problem... Paul M. M. (Mega Moron?)
Mmmmm, name calling. Very mature
> Jacobus is one of the resident GW bashers...
Um, no I'm not.
> it's ok to bash GW here... it becomes noise when someone stands up to
> them... kinda like a playground bully... he goes running to mommy when
> someone gives him what he deserves ( a kick in the teeth ).
>
> For the home vocabulary class. Look up the term Hypocrisy and send me
> a 4 paragraph dissertation on it.
Here's a better exercise: read my post. I don't care about the GW
crossover traffic. I suggested the pure GW traffic go to .warhammer, which
is the norm for Usenet, since there's a more specific NG. And most
importantly, I suggested all the flamewar threads (like you've turned this
one into a flame on me) be taken to private e-mail, since they have
nothing to do with miniatures.
That's my last post on this or any related thread. It doesn't belong on
the group, folks. Be mature, take it to e-mail.
JD
Will Nesbitt
Tzeentch wrote:
> Maybe we should RFD a rec.games.miniatures.flames group?
>
> Later,
> Kenneth
That's the best idea I've heard in a long time!
Will
Blackheart
<vam...@access1.digex.net> wrote:
>
>
>On Mon, 22 Feb 1999, Blackheart wrote:
>
>> see.. that's the problem... Paul M. M. (Mega Moron?)
>
>Mmmmm, name calling. Very mature
any more so than the pointless GW bashing and the "That argument
doesn't belong on this NG." crap?
especially when it wasn't an argument that -I- started. It's ok for
kids like you to start threads when they bash GW or GW players (
remember Enigma's little "mail the DoJ" blatant troll? )
But then the thread becomes noise and doesn't belong here when
someone stands up to you.
Yeah, you're one to talk about maturity pal.
Blackheart
"Against"
Blackheart
<tzeen...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>see.. that's the problem... Paul M. M. (Mega Moron?) Jacobus is one
>>of the resident GW bashers...
>
>Oohh, how about a one paragraph dissertation on stupidy? Seems you are the
>resident expert.
>
it's "stupidity", junior.
>>it's ok to bash GW here... it becomes noise when someone stands up to
>>them... kinda like a playground bully... he goes running to mommy when
>>someone gives him what he deserves ( a kick in the teeth ).
>
>
>The point is that noise tends to distract from the usefulness of the
>newsgroup. For an example of how noise can kill newsgroups I suggest you
>tool around some groups where that "R*b C*ypher" asshole has totally spammed
>them into oblivion.
>
I read several that he attempted to spam. You mean the "William J.
Levinson is a SPAMMER!" bit? they're all doing fine...
>As to GW who gives a flying fuck? I could care less if someone says they
>love or hate the company -its only a games company for christsakes. I do get
>irate when morons like you make accusations and judgements and then can't
>even back then up.
>
>>For the home vocabulary class. Look up the term Hypocrisy and send me
>>a 4 paragraph dissertation on it.
>
>
>You first.
>
>Ken
>"Blackheart Basher"
where I come from they have a term for fuckwits like you. ( aside from
fuckwit.) it's "Rank Amatuer"
have fun talking to my killfile, kiddo.
*plonk*
Blackheart
"Riegning"