Please try the game I made !

[SgtRock]

Ok, I'm going to be frank here, you call your game a wargame but, when I go to your web site, I don't see anything I recognize (tanks, ships, aircraft, or troop types for any era). Is it Scifi, fantasy, I have no idea what I'm looking at, and yes, I have a very preset idea of what a wargame is. I know what I like and expect certain things in scifi, fantasy, wargames and I just don't see anything familiar here. I can tell just by the screen shots this isn't a game for me, sorry.  As far as on-line games go, of the 20 + on-line games I've tried over the years, there are only 2, I like (World of Tanks & Guild Wars 2), and only one I continue to play (Guild Wars 2). World of Tanks seems to have run out of new ideas/content and become stuck in a rut of (Nerf, Tweak, & Repeat).

[carnator]

Ok, I'm going to be frank here, you call your game a wargame but, when I go to your web site, I don't see anything I recognize (tanks, ships, aircraft, or troop types for any era). Is it Scifi, fantasy, I have no idea what I'm looking at, and yes, I have a very preset idea of what a wargame is. I know what I like and expect certain things in scifi, fantasy, wargames and I just don't see anything familiar here. I can tell just by the screen shots this isn't a game for me, sorry.  As far as on-line games go, of the 20 + on-line games I've tried over the years, there are only 2, I like (World of Tanks & Guild Wars 2), and only one I continue to play (Guild Wars 2). World of Tanks seems to have run out of new ideas/content and become stuck in a rut of (Nerf, Tweak, & Repeat).

Okay, I grew up playing warhammer 40k (sci fi) and warhammer fantasy battle (fantasy), both of which I consider to be wargames...do you disagree?

[Philippe]

Yes.

[magnus]

 I think most of us grogs think " historical wargame " when the phrase wargame is used.

I know I have never used the word wargame to describe a fantasy or scifi game, even if it technically fit into the wargame category.

Let's use the name Age of Phasers. While yes it would be a wargame. It just doesn't warm the heart like Age of Rifles.

[LongBlade]

I think most of us grogs think " historical wargame " when the phrase wargame is used.

I know I have never used the word wargame to describe a fantasy or scifi game, even if it technically fit into the wargame category.

Let's use the name Age of Phasers. While yes it would be a wargame. It just doesn't warm the heart like Age of Rifles.

I don't want to get too bogged down into definitions but IMHO wargames aren't just games with some kind of conflict (i.e. "war"). Instead wargames make some kind of attempt to simulate battle, either historical or contemporary. I suppose we could stretch the definition to include sci-fi games, and under that definition I'd include games like Star Fleet Battles. No, we don't have starships battling about in space at the moment, but Star Fleet Battles makes a good attempt to create what we think such things might look like, including the power management, life support, shields, engines, and weapons systems.

What isn't a wargame? Call of Duty. Empire: Total War. Great games. Not wargames.

That said, y'all are free to call Warhammer a wargame all you want. But if you want a grog's definition, that's my

[carnator]

I think most of us grogs think " historical wargame " when the phrase wargame is used.

I know I have never used the word wargame to describe a fantasy or scifi game, even if it technically fit into the wargame category.

Let's use the name Age of Phasers. While yes it would be a wargame. It just doesn't warm the heart like Age of Rifles.

I don't want to get too bogged down into definitions but IMHO wargames aren't just games with some kind of conflict (i.e. "war"). Instead wargames make some kind of attempt to simulate battle, either historical or contemporary. I suppose we could stretch the definition to include sci-fi games, and under that definition I'd include games like Star Fleet Battles. No, we don't have starships battling about in space at the moment, but Star Fleet Battles makes a good attempt to create what we think such things might look like, including the power management, life support, shields, engines, and weapons systems.

What isn't a wargame? Call of Duty. Empire: Total War. Great games. Not wargames.

That said, y'all are free to call Warhammer a wargame all you want. But if you want a grog's definition, that's my

IMO 'wargame' is a general term, which includes Warhammer, Battletech, etcetera.  Historical and contemporary wargames are subsets of the wargame genre.    "Wargames are generally categorized as historical, hypothetical, fantasy, or science fiction. Historical games by far form the largest group."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargaming                                       Clearly grogheads are fans of historical wargames and  historical wargames come to mind when they hear the word 'wargame'...    Anyway.  Just Tactics is a turn based tactics game.  But, no one really ever uses the classification turn based tactis "tbt", they just call it turn based strategy, but I think turn based strategy is way to loose of a definition (lots of games call themselves tbs, when they really don't have any strategy, they just have tactics).  So, I thought, hey, Just Tactics really plays kind of like a table top miniature wargame, except that is on a computer, so I was calling it a wargame.  BUT.  I will stop if that makes you happy.  Turn based tactics.  I'll even take 'wargame' off the website when I get around to it.  Now, want to give it a shot?  NO.  :(

[Bison]

Heh.  I didn't even start the not a wargame debate this time.   Cool.  8)


P.S.  I don't know what Just Tactics is about and have no position on whether it is or is not a wargame.   

[Zulu1966]

I think most of us grogs think " historical wargame " when the phrase wargame is used.

I know I have never used the word wargame to describe a fantasy or scifi game, even if it technically fit into the wargame category.

Let's use the name Age of Phasers. While yes it would be a wargame. It just doesn't warm the heart like Age of Rifles.

I don't want to get too bogged down into definitions but IMHO wargames aren't just games with some kind of conflict (i.e. "war"). Instead wargames make some kind of attempt to simulate battle, either historical or contemporary. I suppose we could stretch the definition to include sci-fi games, and under that definition I'd include games like Star Fleet Battles. No, we don't have starships battling about in space at the moment, but Star Fleet Battles makes a good attempt to create what we think such things might look like, including the power management, life support, shields, engines, and weapons systems.

What isn't a wargame? Call of Duty. Empire: Total War. Great games. Not wargames.

That said, y'all are free to call Warhammer a wargame all you want. But if you want a grog's definition, that's my

IMO 'wargame' is a general term, which includes Warhammer, Battletech, etcetera.  Historical and contemporary wargames are subsets of the wargame genre.    "Wargames are generally categorized as historical, hypothetical, fantasy, or science fiction. Historical games by far form the largest group."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargaming                                       Clearly grogheads are fans of historical wargames and  historical wargames come to mind when they hear the word 'wargame'...    Anyway.  Just Tactics is a turn based tactics game.  But, no one really ever uses the classification turn based tactis "tbt", they just call it turn based strategy, but I think turn based strategy is way to loose of a definition (lots of games call themselves tbs, when they really don't have any strategy, they just have tactics).  So, I thought, hey, Just Tactics really plays kind of like a table top miniature wargame, except that is on a computer, so I was calling it a wargame.  BUT.  I will stop if that makes you happy.  Turn based tactics.  I'll even take 'wargame' off the website when I get around to it.  Now, want to give it a shot?  NO.  :(

Look, if you want some honest feedback - from a "Wargamer" (historical mostly but like a bit of sci fi and fantasy now and then) - for me what puts me off is the abstractness of your units and environment. If you made them identifiable to real world concepts (which is what makes things like Battletech and Warhammer so successful - ie they may be fantasy but can still identify with the "real world") then I think your game would have much more appeal. Make the battle on a planet with woods and rivers etc and the units into say mechs or some other "Real World" sci fi and I would be much more likely to play it. I dont mean this in a derogatory way but you have some pretty funky units in the game. Things like this work if to get people to attch to it - and for me at least I am not going to attach to what I see there.

Switching media - one reason why game of thrones was so successful (at least in series 1 and 2 ) is that it was sword and sorcery but very light on the sorcery part and was essentially a medieval tale with fantasy bits stuck on.

Thats just my take - and likely a lot would disagree - but I think what you have created is excellent its perhaps the skin which would turn people away ....

[Grimnirsson]

Well, actually this debate comes up once in a while as we all know too well and I am always wondering why some grogs do not just use a clear set of definitions and instead use what they like to see in a game to define which game is a wargame and which is not.

On our HFC site we have this entry in our glossary:

Wargame

A game in which players put military units in direct conflict with each other. The goal of these games is either annihilation of the opponent's units or the attainment of certain strategic conditions. These types of games will often have high thematic content and a varying degree of abstraction. (see also Miniatures Game)

The term is also used to describe a subcategory within wargaming itself and then it means games on the lower complexity scale as opposed to consims. (see Consim, Simulation)

Co(n)sim

Abbreviation for Conflict Simulation, the more accurate term for what is usually called Wargame. Within wargaming as a whole, it's a subcategory related to those games with more details and more "realism", i.e. games that do portray historical events as close as possible in a game. The opposite would be a "Fun-Wargame", i.e. a game that it's more about fun, simple gameplay etc..

Fun-Wargame

A term sometimes used for very simple wargames. The opposite of a simulation (see also Consim).

http://wargamecenter.wordpress.com/wargaming-glossary/#W

And to have a clear definition for our website, regarding reviews and such we chose to define it this way:

Wargames

Wargames, as defined by HFC (only), must meet the following requirements in order to be a "on-topic" game:

the game must deal primarily with a combat, battle, or military operation
the combat or military operation must be situated in a realistic (historical, current or hypothetical) or alternative (fantastic or futuristic) setting
the rules and mechanics must be based on historical, current or hypothetical data which support the setting
tactical and strategical behaviour will result in a representation of events which are congruent with the setting
two or more opposing parties must participate in the setting (historical, current, realistic, fictional, abstract)
by conducting the military operation the game will eventually result in a winning and a losing side

So in this view of course Warhammer is a wargame, a tactical wargame, a squad level wargame whatever, it will depend on the scale. And even Call of Duty is a wargame, you are playing a soldier in a semi-realistic setting and you try to survive and win a match that is supposed to happen in a sort of war. If you would have the options avaialable to you in CoD in a traditional board game, where you are playing a single soldier in the form of a counter and you try to fight on the board while running from hex to hex, I suppose nobody would object calling it a wargame. That you have the same experience but closer to reality by using modern digital gaming sorcery doesn't change the core experience. Even in video games there's the differentiation between levels of wargames. So you have CoD on the wargame side, Battlefield more towards the sim experience and ArmA actually being a sim.

[Grim.Reaper]

I think it really doesn't matter what textbook definition of a wargame is since regardless a person still may not like the "type" of wargame.  In this case, I think several people have stated they dont enjoy a fantasy/sci fi setting, same as me, so it can be called whatever you like but isn't going to change whether people like it or not.

[bayonetbrant]

While an interesting sideline discussion (and perhaps one for another thread), I don't know how much arguing about 'what is a wargame' is necessarily helpful.  I'm a serious GrogHead.  Grew up on the ModQuads, Red Star White Star, PanzerBlitz/Leader, and Squad Leader.  Love playing 7 Wonder, Civ V, Carcassonne H&G, and Dominion alongside Tank on Tank, Manouevre, the Warfighter Series, and just about anything from VPG.

Let's try to focus the discussion on improving Carnator's game, rather than chucking rocks at it for what we think it's 'not'.  If you don't think he should market it as a wargame, that's fine, but that doesn't help him improve the game.  Discussing the application of a better 'theme' and backstory is more helpful.

[Nefaro]

I found something..

[Grimnirsson]

I think it really doesn't matter what textbook definition of a wargame is since regardless a person still may not like the "type" of wargame.  In this case, I think several people have stated they dont enjoy a fantasy/sci fi setting, same as me, so it can be called whatever you like but isn't going to change whether people like it or not.

The point I was referring to was not whether some folks like Carnator's game or not, based on its theme etc..

So, I thought, hey, Just Tactics really plays kind of like a table top miniature wargame, except that is on a computer, so I was calling it a wargame.

So he said why he thinks it's a wargame and then people said no it's not a wargame because it doesn't have tanks in it, it's too abstract, is not in a historical setting, I don't like it etc.. One doesn't have to like it and for my taste it's indeed too abstract, but I thought he's right that it can be called a wargame - and i gave my reasons for it :)

Let's try to focus the discussion on improving Carnator's game, rather than chucking rocks at it for what we think it's 'not'.  If you don't think he should market it as a wargame, that's fine, but that doesn't help him improve the game.

Well, I suppose Carnator thought the wargame community a good place to get people interested in his game, so this side discussion what defines a wargame might indeed help to improve it because it may change how people see the game or it may change the game to bring it closer to what wargamers expect to find it interesting.

[spelk]

If it's going mobile/tablet anytime soon, pitch it to Pocket Tactics - plenty of mobile strategy fans over there!

Also, look towards joining gaming communities who have sizeable strategy game populations, GamerswithJobs, IdleThumbs/Three Moves Ahead etc.. You'll get more exposure and more comments on design/improvements etc.

[LongBlade]

The units in Just Tactics are a mix of recognizable units and not-so-recognizable units. The mobile artillery piece is recognizable instantly to anyone who's played something like OGRE/GEV and/or WWII/modern era games with tracked, mobile arty.

Other units are something of a puzzle and shoot energy/beam weapons. Regardless, it's worth checking out. I liked what I saw.