The essence of miniatures

17 posts ยท Apr 13 2000 to Apr 21 2000

From: Mikko Kurki-Suonio <maxxon@s...>

Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 13:05:43 +0300 (EEST)

Subject: The essence of miniatures

I guess I should explain a little more.

Again, this is an opinion piece.

IMHO, simply having miniatures does not a miniatures game make. Others, I
know, have far more relaxed view of things...

You could put a finely painted Gordon Gecko on the table, but it would have no
real effect on the Stock Trading Game. How close to the coffee machine was he
when United Humbug fell? Who cares?

Take the carrier example: All the interesting choices the ships can make
(where to search, how much CAP, what to launch etc.) have absolutely no
bearing with the miniatures on the table. And when the strike comes, your 30
knots vs. their 300 makes you a sitting duck. Your choices are to fire AA
guns, or perhaps you could fire AAA. Hey, how about firing some flak instead?
Reaaaaaally interesting decision making there...

Mind, you could make a fine miniatures game out of the *air-to-air*
combat
-- it's just that the strategic hide'n'seek isn't really evident from
the airman's point of view. Thus you'd PSB the search stage away and just
assume there's a strike coming in (otherwise, it's not much of a game
eh?)

The function of the miniature is to show the exact position of a game unit in
relation to its environment and other units.

The whole point of hide'n'seek games is that you DON'T know the exact position
of an enemy unit in relation to its environment and your units.

Having miniatures in a hide'n'seek game is like giving a blind man (sorry,
sight-impaired) a VCR. Sure, he can listen to the soundtrack, but who'd
venture to say he got the same value out of it as the rest of us?

You could, ofcourse, play out the hide'n'seek stage IN SOME OTHER WAY, and
THEN transfer to miniatures game. But that doesn't make the hide'n'seek stage
a miniatures game. And even then in some extreme examples
one-sided
detection pretty much means game over anyway, degrading the miniatures
battle into an excercise in futile dice-rolling.

I hope I made my point clear.

P.S. If you haven't read Greg Kostikyan's piece "I Have No Words & I Must
Design", do so. It can be found at
http://www.crossover.com/~costik/nowords.html

From: Adrian Reen-Shuler <saltpeanuts73@y...>

Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:32:38 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

> The function of the miniature is to show the exact

I always though we played miniatures games because they're so much
aesthetically pleasing than board games.

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:45:44 PDT

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

And I was under the impression that, given the difference between ground

scale and miniature scale, a miniature only gives the APPROXIMATE location and
zone of control of a particular unit....

Brian Bilderback

----Original Message Follows----
From: Adrian Reen-Shuler <saltpeanuts73@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:32:38 -0700 (PDT)

> The function of the miniature is to show the exact

I always though we played miniatures games because they're so much
aesthetically pleasing than board games.

-Adrian

From: Donald Hosford <hosford.donald@a...>

Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 02:16:48 -0400

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

I always thought that we played games using miniatures...just so we could keep
on playing with our toys...and have a justifiable reason.   8D

Donald Hosford

> Brian Bilderback wrote:

> And I was under the impression that, given the difference between

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 08:04:04 PDT

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

SHHHH!!!! Don't reveal the secrets of the sect!!!!!

Brian Bilderback

----Original Message Follows----
From: Donald Hosford <Hosford.Donald@ACD.net>
Reply-To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 02:16:48 -0400

I always thought that we played games using miniatures...just so we could keep
on playing with our toys...and have a justifiable reason.   8D

From: Nyrath the nearly wise <nyrath@c...>

Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 08:33:09 -0400

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

> Mikko Kurki-Suonio wrote:

Just to be a smart aleck...

Did you ever see an old SPI game called "The Plot to Assasinate Hitler?" (it
was a cardboard counter game but it could be adapted to miniatures) Each
counter represented a specific personality, but the map was *not* a physical
map of Europe. It was more like an abstract "political space". The positions
of the counters was more to show various political alliances instead of
showing geograpical location.

> The function of the miniature is to show the exact position of a game

From: JRebori682@a...

Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:46:28 EDT

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

In a message dated 4/16/00 8:36:41 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
nyrath@clark.net writes:

> Agreed. I've heard that one of the best "fog of war" games

Sounds like Columbia's block games. Lots of fun. Anyone ever thought of how to
use that in a strategic space game?
Hmm, sounds like a new project for me. Like I need a new one. :-)

From: Nyrath the nearly wise <nyrath@c...>

Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 12:16:00 -0400

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

> JRebori682@aol.com wrote:

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 13:13:35 -0400

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

> In a message dated 4/16/00 8:36:41 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

No, but at least I remember what you're talking about. I believe it was an
Avalon Hill product but I wouldn't swear to that.

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 19:57:02 -0400

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

> JRebori682@aol.com wrote:

Describe? I'm thinking of a game that used cubes as playing pieces. One face
of the cube was marked on each of the four edges for effective strength; as
the unit took damage, you'd rotate it so the correct strength is up. Your
opponent wouldn't
know what the strength was--he couldn't see your side of the
cube.   I presume the progression was not necessarily 4/3/2/1,
ie it might be 4/3/3/1 or 4/1/1/1 (or 7/6/4/3, who knows).
That's all I remember about it--don't recall subject of the game
or anything. At the time I saw it there were no opponents anywhere near, so
"fog of war" systems were pointless investments.

> Anyone ever thought of how
:-)

No problem. Use them as fleet markers. Scale = 1 hex per system. Your opponent
would know (through intel activities)
that there was _something_ in the system, but not necessarily
exactly what.  Is that fleet a 4/3/2/1, or only a2/1/1/0?  When
two fleets are together in a system you can transfer units, but you can only
split off new units at designated bases (admirals don't grow on trees).

Either buy dice and paint them, or buy little wooden (or acrylic) cubes at a
craft store.

From: JRebori682@a...

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 00:01:33 EDT

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

In a message dated 4/16/00 8:41:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> laserlight@quixnet.net writes:

> >JRebori682@aol.com wrote:

That's how Columbia's games work. There are several out covering from Napoleon
thru WW2 and a generic WW2 style. They use a feature for the naval portion
where the marker could be a capitol ship, or a unit of escorts. I think that
might be a better style then just a straight fleet strength. Should make it
easier to shift to the tactical game and back.

From: Donald Hosford <hosford.donald@a...>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 01:18:25 -0400

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

At my local hobby store, I found they carried blank 6-siders.  (He said
that teachers used them for something in class...he didn't know what.) Just
use markers or stickers, ect. and your set!

Donald Hosford

> Laserlight wrote:

> >> Anyone ever thought of how

From: Nyrath the nearly wise <nyrath@c...>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 21:23:10 -0400

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

> JRebori682@aol.com wrote:

I've always heard that as
        "Think of it as being in a target-rich enviroment"

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 21:28:16 -0400

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

> Don't think of it as being outnumbered

I've always heard it as "Uh-oh..."

From: JRebori682@a...

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 23:20:49 EDT

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

In a message dated 4/17/00 9:32:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> laserlight@quixnet.net writes:

> >> Don't think of it as being outnumbered

Actually, I had heard it both ways, but when I went to set it up to go
automatically, I couldn't remember the other, and now its just to much of a
pain to change. :-)

From: Michael Brown <mwbrown@s...>

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 07:27:29 -0700

Subject: RE: The essence of miniatures

Remember, "there I was, no SH%%" is the past tense of "OH SH%% HERE THEY
COME!!"

From: Popeyesays@a...

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 15:59:39 EDT

Subject: Re: The essence of miniatures

In a message dated 4/21/00 10:06:53 AM Central Daylight Time,
> mwbrown@veriomail.com writes:

<< Remember, "there I was, no SH%%" is the past tense of "OH SH%% HERE THEY
 COME!!"