Blocks, Cards and Points.

[bob48]

For now real reason, other than personal idiosyncrasies, or maybe that should be 'idiot-syncrasies', I have never been able to bring myself to like games that use blocks rather than counters, or card driven games, or those that use point-to-point systems. In the same way, game that use 'miniatures' whereby the scale of the unit playing pieces is not deemed as being important - so you get large infantry figures with small model tanks for example.

Now, I'm by no means implying that some of these games are not very good, and there are a lot of block games which are extremely popular, as is the case with card only games, so I have no doubt that I may well be, in some way' 'missing out' somewhere. Why this is the case, I do not know, especially since I have no such problems with area movement games, for instance.

What, in some ways, makes it more annoying, is that I know for a fact that there are a few games that fall into my dislike list that are designed for solo play, and thus would normally just the job, and don't think I haven't looked at them, and read a few very good AAR's, but still, at the end of the day i remain unconvinced.

As with many things, of course, its all very subjective.

Does anyone else have similar views, or is it just me?

[bayonetbrant]

I've had issues with any of the variety of bits and (uh...) bobs that you've listed above, but none of them are a showstopper for me if the game turns out to be fun.

Outside of the COIN games, I've not fiddled with any wargames that have generic "blocks" but I have played games like the Columbia block series where you essentially have "standing counters" and those don't feel terribly different than normal wargames to me.  If anything, I think the area/point-to-point aspect of those would be the bigger hurdle on them.

My bigger problem with the CDGs is the finite number of possibilities in the deck, and that those possibilities continually shift with each new card drawn, rather than a full array of all possibilities available each turn

[JudgeDredd]

All I can really say is I've had misgivings about different kinds of game mechanics on the past and ended up loving them.

I came from Memoir '44. I loved it. Played it loads and scoffed at those boring looking hex and counter games. Why would you want to play one of them when you can have little tanks and soldiers.

Then I bought Conflict of Heroes I think and I totally changed my mind on those boring counters games. I started my purchasing...all hex and counter.

Then at some point I was looking for a Korean era wargame. Someone mentioned Fields of Fire. I checked it out and laughed...alot. No way was I playing a card game. Especially one with cards for the terrain...no map? Seriously?

I bought it. I played it. I loved it. But hex and counter games and card driven games were not what I initially expected.

Then there was area maps. No hexes? Say what? Seriously?

Then I got Mrs Thatchers War. What a fantastic little game.

Anyway...I think the point I'm trying to make is I've had certain negative thoughts about different game mechanics. Each time I've stepped out of my comfort zone to give them a try, I've enjoyed them immensely.

My advice to anyone would be to not close their mind off to other gaming options. Don't judge a book by it's cover.

As Brant said...if it's good, what do the mechanics matter. If you're enjoying the game, why let the mechanics big you down.

I saw what Brant said also about CDGs specifically. I don't look into gaming in much depth if I'm honest. I have quite a short memory so the limitations don't really show for me.