Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

Scenario Driven Gaming vs Points Driven Gaming.

 Post subject: Scenario Driven Gaming vs Points Driven Gaming.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 6:25 am 
Offline
Master Sergeant
Master Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:52 am
Posts: 1713
Location: Right Behind You.
So I have this dear friend of mine that plays historical miniatures games religiously and very sparingly plays a sci-fi/fantasy game.

He detests points driven gaming, and because of this he has a venemous hatred of "Flames of War". He states that "Points driven games throw realism out the window and encourage rules-lawyers and power-gamers to min-max and number crunch every game!"

He believes that in order to properly represent combat you need to have a scenario that realistically represents a given military battle and having the troops armed appropriatly for the situation.

So if a force is about to assualt a heavily fortified position, they shouldn't have balanced forces, and they should have several limited choices based on the given scenario.

Personally, I agree with him for the most part. I think the idea of points driven games have screwed things up a bit in the miniatures community. Now every one expects a "fair game" every time.

I know that GW has attempted to balance these things out and still give players a fair chance by limiting troop choices, however, it should really be up to the players to police themselves. (Unfortunately most of them don't.)

_________________
"Kindness is nothing but hypocrisy in disguise. It is a human deception. Man enjoys the suffering of others - it gives him something to be thankful for, something to feel good about, something to feel superior."
<a href="http://www.the-n.com/games/quiz/3290"><img src="http://www.the-n.com/media/quiz/badges/evil_quiz/scary.gif" border="0"></a>

Nemo Me Impune Lacessit (colloquially translated as No one f**ks with me**)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 2:17 am 
Offline
Gunner
Gunner
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 12:10 pm
Posts: 131
I'm personally for the points driven games. Now don't get me wrong, I love a good scenario as much as the next guy, but you can still get a fair game and a good scenario out of a game that relys on points.


Also, you're not as restricted as you are when playing the historical games (which lets face it are all scenario driven), where you are more or less forced to re-enact historical battles (at least that has been the case in my experience).

And if it throws realism out of the window? Well, that's kinda the whole point...plus they're all more interesting... :P

cupcake

_________________
:twisted: I am the cupcake. I like blue. :twisted:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 2:54 am 
Offline
Master Sergeant
Master Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 7:44 am
Posts: 1675
Location: Australia
With a game that uses points, you can always discard the points or force selection guidelines/restrictions, in favour of playing purely scenario-driven games.
But with a game designed to be purely scenario driven, the reverse is ot true if you decide you want to play an evenly matched, competitive game.

Personally, I've always been interested in playing battles with my hand-picked army, using the units/models that I like. Having my force and the scenario dictated doesn't appeal to me.

_________________
Warhammer 40,000 5th edition
The least worst rules for 40K.

The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity.
With a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog, behind which halftruths and untruths can frolic and procreate unmolested.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:35 pm 
Offline
Sergeant
Sergeant

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 2:40 pm
Posts: 773
I came to minatures gaming from a background of RPG's. The first mini game I got into was Necromunda. Necromunda is heavily scenario driven, and doesn't really make any effort to ensure that fights are balanced. But it works, because winning and loosing fights are not the only, or even most important, aspects of the game. Necromunda does use points, but more in the way a role palying game does, to create equal balanced potentials and compare progress / power levels.

I'd like to see something similar in other wargames, but I guess it just doesn't work without a campaign setting / ongoing investment in the forces involved.

Maybe there could be a sort of "bidding" system, though. Say a game was 2000 points max, but if one player's list was 10% lower than the other persons, they automatically got to choose the mission, table edge, who goes first, or some other condition of the game? What point value would YOU make your army list for, in that case???


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron

Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group