Thanks for those informative responses Lordnth and Clown, I tip my hat to you.

But what I was really trying to ask, are wargames that are yet still alive. :)

One the other hand. It slipped my mind, but a couple of year ago WK introduced Mech Hunter ruleset as a bash-and-dash setup for MW. I wonder why it didn't picked up? Ruleset too lame? Complicated? or was it simply that WK failed to rally interest on that area?

So I wonder how different Solaris7 would ever be from Mech Hunter?

I tried to play 'MechHunter' once, it was pretty lame. Aside from that, I suspect another reason it never took off was that WK never promoted it (to my knowledge, they never supported a single 'MechHunter' event).

Who knows what Solaris is going to look like...

I know this'll elict all sorts of howls of "heresy" and other insulting questions about my loyalty/sanity, but I believe that one thing which would facilitate bringing in newer/younger players would be to have a board with a grid of some sort on it, rather than the free-form unregulated "traditional" miniatures format that MW now uses. Personally, because of my board wargaming background I'd prefer a hex grid (uh-oh, shades of CBT here), but I suspect that a square grid would have broader appeal. It's often easier for newbies to the gaming hobby to get their minds around the more structured format of a regulated playing field -- the free-form nature of unregulated play tends to kind of confuse novices. Note that I'm *NOT* advocating shifting the style of normal MW play to a gridded board, but for a simplified/introductory version of the game (Solaris?) a grid might be something to consider to make the game more accessible.

A grid does help for new players, particularly converts from the "no measuring" sort of games. Tiles is another alternative and when Solaris VII featured at the first UK Nats they used the MK:D tiles to construct the arena. Solaris VII in its prior incarnation was OK for escapism and was something new people could just pick up and play. It gave a good alternative to normal MW because "fringe" players don't want to play the same game every day - unlike us fanatics.

I dunno if it's "realistic" to say the game is in its death throes. WK don't have any major MW marketing scheduled for this coming year so it isn't all that surprising that they don't mention it. As soon as the Solaris packs start, I daresay the Solaris game may get a mention but you don't promote something for the sake of it. Mention too much (and mention stuff with a lesser tie-in) and all you risk is diluting your message.

Interestingly enough, I think marketing people are aiming increasingly at the LCD ("lowest common denominator") and just like the "average joe" that person doesn't actually exist. Sure they may not understand X as well as Y but whilst they may appreciate seeing X dumbed-down, they'll be insulted by the level adopted for Y.

For example in the UK we recently had a complex fraud trial. It lasted several months because the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) presented everything in the most simplified form so the jury could understand, not trusting jurors to ask for clarification. The trial was prosecuted successfully but some bad vibes came out. The CPS expressed their suprise that jurors understood the facts so well. Jurors complained that they were talked down to and treated like children throughout the case. The judge, on the other hand, put forward that juries should be scrapped altogether for such trials because they were too complex and were too costly thanks to having to present the data in a form they would understand.

So the CPS thought the jurors were stupid. The judge thought the jurors were stupid. Did anyone (except the media) think to ask the jurors? And when reported, most of the popular media completely failed to report the jurors point of view (that actually they understood it fine and didn't need it diluted to the extent a 12 year old could understand it.

It makes me mad that everyone assumes people are incapable of independent thought and that they should aim for the LCD. I just hope MW doesn't go that way when it's re-released although if it does and it works for WK then I'll be happy for them. I just won't be playing it.

Kotch, I agree completely with what you're saying. Dumbing things down too far (to the LCD level) would be the wrong direction to take the game. What I'm advocating is a simplified/streamlined version of the game that could serve as a way to bring new players, those completely unfamiliar with the conventions of miniatures or 'clicky' style games, into the game. I think the Solaris setting has really strong potential for this sort of thing since it already "simplifies" the game somewhat even if you don't change a thing -- the Solaris setting means you're typically only dealing with one or two figures on your side and you have no infantry/vehicles/VTOLs to deal with (and hence no rules about transports, tank-drop, artillery, formation moving/formation firing, capturing, etc). That alone would be a good start towards an "entry" level version of MW. But I think the process needs to go a bit further, hence my recommendation about imposing a 'grid' playing field -- it's an easy step to drop the grid and have players transition to a free-form battlefield later on. Just a thought...

Yeah, the "Mechhunter" format was supposed to be a simplified entry-level version for first timers to do at cons with a single booster and no prior knowledge of how the game played.

And it wasn't very popular, hence it being discontinued.

Solaris was just about as complex as regular MW with slightly different rules. Abilities didn't quite work the same and the action point system is nice but doesn't carry over to the regular game. This can be very frustrating to a new player.

I understand what you're saying, but having said that, how much interaction have you had with the general public?

I work tech support for a phone/Digital TV/Fiber Optic Internet Co. and the average, (meaning you get smarter and a lot less intelligent customers) customer can barely tie their shoes!

People naturally don't make themselves aware of their surroundings. Most have a mob mentality and act on instinct alone. Commonsense is almost dead. People don't go out of their way to read up on current events and most are so self absorbed they couldn't function in a public forum like a jury or anything much else.

I guess what I am saying is there are a lot of less-than intelligent people out there who have no common sense and are blessed with ignorance and arrogance.

Add in the fact that no can be pleased and no matter what you do someone will be pissed and voice their anger for all to see, why would a company like Wizkids trust their fanbase to handle anything complicated? I sure as hell wouldn't!

I can't tell you how many times I've seen our fanbase demand something now! Then get it and complain that it is not enough material, or it's in poor quality etc etc. "Why didn't they take their time?"

Makes me want to puke!

That's humanity and that's reality...................

Was it even around past GenCon? I remeber Solaris being posted right after GenCon and WK saying they would post the rules, but I don't recall ever seeing the full rules to Headhunter being posted.

So is it WK's fault for HeadHunter not being popular if the full rules weren't even posted?
And then how long has it been since WK took all the copies of S.VII off the internet? Were they holding it just for such an thing? Release it to give a new intrest in the game when there is planned a lull in release schedule?

The full rules were in the MW Tourney rules. http://www.wizkidsgames.com/mechwarr...les_Feb_05.pdf

Wow, you pulled that up quick. Never even saw that in there. Thanks cavingjan.

Sounds like selection bias to me; assuming some significant portion of support calls involve problems that the customer could fix themselves, then presumably those who are more intelligent are better equipped to handle them without ever picking up the phone and calling you. Your "average" customer may be below average in the greater world.

My experience has generally been that average people are of average intelligence. But maybe that's just me.

Gang...

We're all kinda circling the same topic again (i.e. "What can be done to save Mechwarrior?")

First, and foremost, Mechwarrior doesn't need "saving", it needs a better marketing strategy...something to which WizKids seems to have no clue how to come up with. We, the CORE Mechwarrior players don't NEED encouragement to purchase new pieces when they're released, so long as our favorite faction / House / Clan is getting some goodies. What is needed is a way to get more players into the game...and KEEP them in the game, not lose them after a month or two because they're overwhelmed by the choices available (Pre-AoD 'Mech or Post-AoD 'Mech, Which weight-class?, what gear should I use?, which pilot to use?, artillery?, transports?, tank-drops?, etc, etc).

Honestly, even I have trouble putting together a battleforce in less than two or three hours simply because there are so many choices of pieces that I could use, as well as combinations. Do you honestly think a newbie has any chance of grasping even the fundamentals when there is just a massive amount of information to sift through?

We, as Mechwarrior players, have been partly to blame for the game's current crisis due to several factors including power-creep and army-sizes. After all, what is the harm in having a 100-point tank that can blast an opponent at 16" for 5 points of armor-piercing damage with a 10 attack? And why not increase the point-size for the standard army-build from 300 to 450...or 450 to 600...or better yet, why not 600 to 750 (after all, it will let us have so many more variations to have fun with! *Note a little sarcasm here* )

I originally got into Battletech (before it was called "Classic" Battletech) because someone took the time to show me the basics, not the Master-level rules, which most of us play under in Mechwarrior with our standard 600-point games. I wasn't introduced to "Called-shot" modifiers or Death-From-Above attempts until I grew familiar with how the game's foundation played. Yet we're told that Mechwarrior lacks in interested players and can't grasp why, when its staring us in the face.

Wasn't it Jordan Weisman who wanted Mechwarrior to NOT be like Battletech in that it wouldn't take a Rules-Master to remember all the intricacies of the game to ensure against confusion. Didn't he want Mechwarrior to be a game where a 10,11 or 12 year-old could understand it as easily as an adult...and better yet, play a standard game in under an hour? Gang, in wanting more from the game, we're turning it back into what it wasn't supposed to be in the first place: Battletech, with its dozens of manuals and pages upon pages of special abilities, special exceptions and special conditions. Now we've got almost 30 pages in FAQs and Rule Arbitrations to answer all the players who want to push the envelope of the game, and it gets worse with each expansion!

Second, and more importantly, we need to find a way to communicate to WizKids as the Mechwarrior community that we want to be involved in turning the game around, not just being the dartboard they use to throw their "quick-fixes" at in hopes they will revive what they must see as a stagnant game.

Classic Battletech doesn't have weekly tournaments with prize support, and yet it continues to flourish under FanPro's careful guidance, with continuous fan-interaction and support. Why is Mechwarrior's parent game, from which all Mechwarrior pieces have descended, alive and well while the child birthed from its 30-year forebearer struggling? Better yet, what can WE do to help WizKids revive this "downward spiral" that someone earlier referred to?

I'm just curious as to what you all think.

Troy Light

It has less to do with uintelligence and more to do with how self centered and ignorant people are. The first thought process for a customer calling in is, "Those idiot's service sucks, it never works!" They open a conversation with a stranger thinking the world owes them. It's called Customer Arrogance. It's the people who call in saying, "Your service sucks!" Question: "Why? What's wrong?" Answer: "I can't get on your lame internet because my computer won't turn on! You guys having another freaking outage again?" I see these same ignorant remarks from the fan base that knows next to nothing about the business world, but feel confident telling the rest of us what's really going on and who's at fault.

I've worked on a help desk for a major Life Insurance Company. I am a qualified actuary and have developed computer systems and therefore I would say I was above average. It always surprised me that when you get the CONTEXT right, just how much the other person CAN understand.


And your conclusion about shoe-tying you manage to derive from interactions regarding telecommunications technology just how, exactly? To be honest my mum's partner is a telecommunications engineer and he was coaching me on what I was saying last time I had problems with my phone and the person on the other end treated me as if I was stupid. They had their rote they had to go through and they barely listened to my responses and got very frustrated with me saying "done that. done that. done that."

Telephone communication isn't easy and it isn't a great place to start in assessing people's intelligence. The real reason people seem stupid is actually that in most cases, they are not interested enough to make the effort to know. When something becomes relevant (e.g. playing a game, learning poker) you'll be surprised how much their IQ suddenly ratchets up. Don't mistake lack of engagement on something they consider to be dull with a lack of intelligence!!!


Guess it depends where you are.

Mob mentality usually requires something emotive. I'd say that juries were more able to deal with a complex fraud trial (where prejudices will be broadly irrelevant) than a murder or rape trial (where the issues concerned are very emotive and this will certainly tap into the primal instincts of the jurors).


I won't dispute the ignorance or the arrogance thing but I think you are using a broader definition of intelligence than I am. Your definition seems to encompass the ignorance and arrogance. Mine says take those out of the equation. For a game you have to. If all you want to engage and bring into the game are the people who don't want to play, how engaging will that be for the people who actually want to play? I'd say not very!


The problem is, what engages one person won't engage another. The point is, who should WK target MW at?

If they leave it complex they will attract the "gamer" crowd but these people are notoriously fickle as you've suggested. They tend to be "purists" and everything else that makes a PR nightmare. It's because we're such a small population, we're so diverse in our likes and dislikes. As such it is almost impossible to appeal to enough of us to make money on any game that involves high turnover. Fine for small niche products with low production costs but think back. How many games last more than 5 years? (How many even make it at all?)

So if they appeal to the "masses" - erm, just who ARE the masses? Your best option if you want a lot of sales, well ... read Clown's earlier post. You need the "ooh" and "aah" factor and you need to sell through big stores to kids. Because there are virtually NO adults who play games except this small and fickle population that WK are having difficulty with right now!!

The truth is, tabletop games don't appeal to many people. "Normal" people (i.e. not us gamers nor kids) want a boardgame they can pick up and play every Christmas or Thanksgiving and then put back in the cupboard and still remember the rules to when they pick it back out in a year's time.

So WK only have two real potential markets for this game (three if you include Clown's group that just collect the nice robots). The gamers is the market that Wk decided to focus on with AoD. The kids are what they aimed for with Heroclix. If you were Wk and you wanted to keep MW alive, what would your next step be? Based on the evidence of sales, penetration of market and everything else?

Regarding the grid suggestion - I don't think this is a bad idea for new players, and possibly even in tournaments when time is a factor. We run both HC and MW - the grids in HC make it far easier for someone to decide if they can make the attack or not. They also make movement quicker and easier - (if I move to this square, he can reach me next turn, but if I move here he can't)

We also have the issue of people getting pieces back where they started after clicking bases, etc - some players pieces seem to "creep" a lot - one turn they're out of range, then after taking damage they miraculously are in range. Gets frustrating calling them on the issue - and if the other player doesn't catch it, they sometimes get away with it.

I'm not entirely sold on the idea, just wanted to add my thoughts.