wodin -> RE: I have enough wargames (11/29/2019 1:16:46 PM)
|
No, never enough, same with money, never enough. I've still yet to play a tactical wargame that has EVERYTHING I want be that board or digital. Until then I will always be on the look out. Edit: I've had more than enough cookie cutter seen it done it wargames (though I think x4 type games are the worse for it). We need innovation like DC Barbarossa, Radio Commander, Second Front (possibly), Burden of Command (again hopefully), Stalingrad game by Desert War crew (fingers crossed), Shadow Empire and the likes. Even my little brain can think of a few new mechanics\features in Wargames that think abit outside of the box. On the whole I still think digital wargames are rooted in one degree or another to the old board wargame mechanics. I'd like to see some designs that forget board wargames ever existed and tackle it solely from a digital angle. Even those that take the traditional way shall we call it annoy me when it feels that design choices that had to be made because of the formats restrictions rather than by choice are carried on into the digital format, which usually removes those restrictions totally (calculations, book keeping etc). If the game is a straight board game conversion I get it, if not it kind of baffles me. For instance a wargame gets a negative mark if it uses some kind of abstract percentage when dealing with strength and casualties etc. I want men and equipment counted. This annoys me no matter the scale. I suppose more so in tactical games. No need for a game using say squad size counters to only have full squad and half squad..again a restriction imposed by the boardgame format. With the PC individuals should be counted, only Squad Battles and STeel Panthers I can think of have done it this way. I'm rambling...hehe Anyway maybe if alot of people feel the way you do MrsWargamer it could be just because digital wargames are feeling abit stale? New ways of doing things are needed. Exciting and innovative wargames. That's what's needed.
|
|
|
|