The BrikWars Forums

So I've played a number of games that just did not go well at all. One particularly glaring example was "The War on Poverty", in which Big Oil and The Man faced off against the Hurricane Katrina Refugees in the flooded ruins of New Orlenes. It wasn't nearly as fun as it's offensive name might lead you to believe. There were too many people playing, it was taking forever, no one was ready to start on time, and by the third turn, nobody cared. Basically everything that could go wrong, did.

Have you ever played a brikwars game that just sucked?

Yeah i faced an army of random rubbish unequipped old fig's and my army kicked but sinsanely then with my opponent down to three figs he surrendered ok i won but it was a hollow victory and when i look back the battle just was me kickin but with no real retaliation.

I never get bored of BrikWars games when there are few teams, even if they're huge, and I control both of them. The problem is, when you have lots and lots and lots of big teams, it can be totally kickass, but playing it alone makes it unfunny...as I've said, playing BrikWars around here is hard, so I am trying to take my fellow LUG members to play with me on a big exhibit we're going to have.

NatalyaAF wrote:...that sounds like the best game ever. IT HIGHLIGHTS ALL OF OUR SOCIETY'S PROBLEMS

You'd think that, right? Despite all of the awesome and politically incorrect implications of the game (such as Andrew Carnegie killing people by his heroic featp of dropping a library on them). I even built station wagons loaded with boxed and crates for the Katrina Refugees.

The problem was, it just wasn't fun. The timing was bad (it took all afternoon to get ready, since nobody but me prepared), there were tons of distractions (the TV, people in the room who weren't playing, dinner, etc...), and no clear objectives other than "kill each other". I think "kill each other" works best with 2 players, any more than that and you'd better make darn sure that the teams are even.

personally, I voted for lack of interest in finishing the game. while it can be annoying if there is a lack of prep, it is incredibly annoying when other players either start quitting or their boredom ruins the aura of fun.

Atomsk wrote: The problem was, it just wasn't fun. The timing was bad (it took all afternoon to get ready, since nobody but me prepared), there were tons of distractions (the TV, people in the room who weren't playing, dinner, etc...), and no clear objectives other than "kill each other". I think "kill each other" works best with 2 players, any more than that and you'd better make darn sure that the teams are even.

All of these have been problems with my games. The biggest problem I've had, though, is that it takes forever to roll the dice for a single attack. My house modifications to the core rules mostly involve ways to reduce the number of dice you need to roll.

Try building the battlefield and armies the day before, getting everything nice and organized. Then you'll be waiting until the next day and get excited about it.

During the game just try to make things simpler when it can be. If you need to move all your guys, put them in squads so you don't have to move every single one, or just guess. I personally don't even try to bring up situations where certain time consuming rules would have to happen (collisions, aiming, shooting while moving, etc.) unless it will make it more fun.

Theblackdog wrote:

Atomsk wrote: The problem was, it just wasn't fun. The timing was bad (it took all afternoon to get ready, since nobody but me prepared), there were tons of distractions (the TV, people in the room who weren't playing, dinner, etc...), and no clear objectives other than "kill each other". I think "kill each other" works best with 2 players, any more than that and you'd better make darn sure that the teams are even.

All of these have been problems with my games. The biggest problem I've had, though, is that it takes forever to roll the dice for a single attack. My house modifications to the core rules mostly involve ways to reduce the number of dice you need to roll.

If you ever need to reduce more, most dice can be reduced to just a number without too many implications.

1d4 = 3 (best to just roll this)
1d6 = 4
1d8 = 5
1d10 = 6
1d12 = 7
1d20 = 11

OneEye589 wrote:Try building the battlefield and armies the day before, getting everything nice and organized. Then you'll be waiting until the next day and get excited about it.

Oh, I always am. It's the other players that are not prepared. Tis the hazard of playing with others I suppose. I've even built armies from them on several occasions, but that sort of takes out the fun of getting invested and attached to your men before getting them killed.

IVhorseman wrote:

Theblackdog wrote:

Atomsk wrote: The problem was, it just wasn't fun. The timing was bad (it took all afternoon to get ready, since nobody but me prepared), there were tons of distractions (the TV, people in the room who weren't playing, dinner, etc...), and no clear objectives other than "kill each other". I think "kill each other" works best with 2 players, any more than that and you'd better make darn sure that the teams are even.

All of these have been problems with my games. The biggest problem I've had, though, is that it takes forever to roll the dice for a single attack. My house modifications to the core rules mostly involve ways to reduce the number of dice you need to roll.

If you ever need to reduce more, most dice can be reduced to just a number without too many implications.

1d4 = 3 (best to just roll this)
1d6 = 4
1d8 = 5
1d10 = 6
1d12 = 7
1d20 = 11

The rules I came up with involve grouping multiple weapons into "clusters" which can be treated as a weapon with a single accuracy roll and a combined damage roll. For example, most of my tank killing vehicles are equipped with clusters of 2-4 MKII guns, while my infantry killers use clusters of 2-3 miniguns or MKI guns. I needed to lower the use ratings of the larger guns somewhat (because you only get one chance to score a hit) but it seems to work well. I also made a rule limiting smaller vehicles (<12") to 3 weapon clusters, and larger vehicles to 6 weapon clusters. The actual number of weapons on the vehicle is still determined by vehicle size.

i posted as lack of interest in finishing the game, but in reality its when parents arrive to pick us up and the inability of any of us of trustings friends with our bricks (me and my friend tend to do a lot of one way trading without the other person noticing )

Huge games are fine, but lack of interest in finishing kills. I think what helps is to use as many dice as possible at the same time, even for different use rates, then match rolls to weapons, as this assures that the biggest guns almost always hit.

jifel

My brother says I'm cheating when I break out the complicated rules. {squads, combined attacks, countering/parrying, even sprinting} He never read the rulebook, so he's not much fun to play.

Explain him the Rule of Fudge.