Countdown to Cyriss - Week 12

You thought I forgot about our regular Wednesday appointment, didn't you? I sort of did, but I finally made it! This week DC wrote sort of a capstone to his own Cyriss series, skipping the reveals and instead discussing three "pillars" of the Convergence of Cyriss army design.

I take this to mean that our Countdown to Cyriss is coming to a close. I don't know if they'll be releasing any more weekly content for it, but this may close a series I've honestly had a lot of fun with. As we look forward to Cyriss's release, I'd like to talk about all the things that have me excited about the army, and I hope you guys will chime in with some of your own!

• Unique focus management. While many are waiting for PP's eventual release of a new resource, Cyriss's ability to cycle a single focus between all of its jacks adds more depth to focus allocation and goes beyond what we're used to.
• True battlegroup support. Generally speaking, supporting the warjacks is left up to the Warcaster. While that's usually fine since there's not much to support, the fact that Cyriss is so friendly to its jacks is encouraging. Every release we've seen so typically fell in to 3 categories:
  
  1. Warcasters/warjacks
  2. Tools to boost the battlegroup or shore up its weaknesses
  3. Cannon fodder to deliver the warjacks.
  
  Yes, there were things like the Clockwork Angels that were more specialized, but overall the entire army is built around taking big tough things and making them tougher.
• An army of robots.  Many of us got in to Warmachine in the hopes of controlling a bunch of those big metal dudes we saw in all the artwork. While I wouldn't say that the game has failed to deliver a fun experience, I did feel a tinge of disappointment when I realized that I couldn't run a field of Juggernauts backed by Mechaniks. Cyriss has all the tools in place to truly support a sea of large bases, and it's going to be a whole new way to play from both sides of the table.
• Easy to paint. I'll be honest, my backlog of personal painting projects is overwhelming. I have a selection of Khador left, my Cygnar that I'll likely never get to, Skorne, and Circle. While I have my airbrush to do the grunt work, there's still a lot of brush work to be done, and that's the real time drain. With Cyriss, much of the army will be handled with the airbrush. Whatever's left will be small details or different colors of metal which are considerably easier to paint and highlight.
• Limited releases. What?! This is coming from the guy who nearly bailed on the army because of this? Let me just say that this crow is delicious. But seriously, having this be a small army means that it will be easy to finish and build lists for. I often find that there are fun pieces I'd like in an army, but there's so many other models that are functionally better that they have to wait. With Cyriss, there's not a bloat of models that you may or may not want. You have a limited selection of tools for your army, and you have to make do. Not that the army seems remotely limited, but there's no need for PP to release "fluffy" models that are neat but hard to make room for. We get jacks, units, solos, warcasters, and two huge bases from the get go, and we'll likely get light releases as time goes on.
• Worthwhile big purchases. This remains to be seen, but the battle engine and colossal seem really good. PP seems to have learned from their successes and failures regarding big bases, and these big bases seem to be PP's commitment to making a giant model that looks great and plays well.
• Servitors. Yes this is battelgroup support, but I really do love these things. Single point models that simply have a job on the battlefield is awesome. There's no way to misuse them because they can't really do anything else. Whether their job is to walk forward and explode, make a target easier to hit or damage, or just chump block a charge lane, they are very simple and you'll have a lot of them on the table.
• Warcasters with stated goals. While the army itself is incredibly complex to operate, you'll know going in whether you're playing a melee, ranged, or magic game. Their stats and granted abilities affect their entire battlegroup, and the warjacks needs to be used optimally according to what the warcaster is doing for them. It could potentially get monotonous, but each warcaster is unique enough that simply switching that single model will completely change how a list is played.
• Oooh, shiny. It's the new hotness, and that's always exciting.

That's not all there is to Cyriss, but that's the stuff that really has me pumped to throw money at Privateer Press. The army may not win tournaments in the long run, but they seem very rewarding to play in local games. Look forward to more Convergence of Cyriss content in the future, whether it's discussing more news from Privateer Press, painting tutorials, or just battle reports.

See you tomorrow!

Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways! And now is the perfect time to enter and win a piece of terrain!

Spring Gamers

Is this brilliant? Yes, this is brilliant.

First Impressions of Lego Games

My sister stopped by today to hang out with me and the kids (and the new kitties). When she got home from college she bought Lego Batman 2: DC Super Heroes, and she's been asking me to play it with her. So today I hooked up my Wii to the TV and off we went with her as Batman and me as the Boy Wonder.

I'd never played a Lego game before, but they always get such great reviews that I was really excited to finally try this one out. Things started out well enough, but soon we found ourselves growling in frustration or consulting online guides to get past a fairly simple part that seems impossible because of loose platforming controls, terrible camera control, and graphics that made it hard to tell a simple switch from a random piece of the environment. It's not that we wanted the game to hold our hand the entire time (it did plenty of that), it's just that it felt like I was playing a game on the Nintendo 64, rather than a current-gen system. From a design standpoint that's fine because Lego games are meant to be whimsical, but when the functional gameplay suffers, I take issue.

Now maybe I just experienced a bad game, but from other YouTube videos I've seen I think I got a good taste of the Lego experience. From people I've talked to, the Lego feeling of the games appeals to people who were in to Legos as a kid, which I really never was. Combined with an IP they like, I can understand how people could really enjoy the series. But it's rare when I can play a game and ignore how it plays, and that's all I noticed with Lego Batman 2. Robin was climbing across straight walls and falling for no reason; traversing the open world was unwieldy; jumping across gaps had you falling to your death because you somehow missed that two foot jump for the fifth time.

In all my frustrations with the game, none of it has to do with what Lego games are meant to be. The story is cheesy, the characters are comically over-the-top, the puzzles are simplistic, and there is a LOT of stuff to break and collect (usually in that order). It's not for me and that's fine. Games like Battlefield 3, The Sims, Grand Theft Auto and FIFA aren't for me, but I can acknowledge that they have meritorious gameplay mechanics. But after playing a few demos over the years, and now getting several hours of hands-on time with a Lego game... I just don't get it. The game isn't canon, the graphics are average, the music... exists, and the challenge is relaxed by usually enjoyable.

Now to be fair, the games also have a lot of unique things going for them. As I played I saw things done in ways I'd never seen before. The ability to get different power suits for the characters is great, the ways you solve puzzles is creative, the story is very tongue-in-cheek and pokes fun at the DC universe (at one point a reporter mentions that it may not be a good idea to house all of Gotham's worst criminals in the same location), and way they use Legos throughout the game is creative and even makes me reminisce about the few Lego sets I've owned throughout the years.

I can see how all that stuff would appeal to people because it is fun and lighthearted in an era where all of our games feel so serious. And maybe that's what the Lego games come down to - getting to relive childhood for a few hours. A childhood filled with goofy games like Banjo Kazooie or Sonic where the controls weren't always tight but you had fun with the corny characters and goofy gameplay elements. Personally, when I look back at the days of Nintendo 64 I can't believe how oblivious I was to the controls, something that is a huge factor in my game enjoyment now.

So for you Lego fans out there, what's the deal? Do you agree with these faults in the game? And if you do, how do you overlook them? Does it just come with the territory or did I completely miss the point of playing a Lego game? Or worse yet, did I take a single example of a franchise and incorrectly assume it's a universal experience?

See you tomorrow!


Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

Points of Light vs. Established Settings

As the GM of my IKRPG group (think steampunk D&D based in the Warmachine universe), the burden falls on me to know the story. When I've run D&D games in the past I've always used a "point of light" setting, where the setting was either entirely made up or loosely based on an existing setting like the Forgotten Realms or even Middle Earth. However, the IKRPG has challenged me by having my players be familiar with the world of the Iron Kingdoms, thus making the story come more alive for them if I based it in the world they know. It's the first time I've done this, and I never imagined how difficult it would be.

You'd think it'd be easier. I mean the setting is there, I just have to make up a story that fits the setting. The problem I'm having is that I like my players to take an active role in the world's conflicts, and witness all the big stuff that shapes the campaign. In a game like D&D where players can kill gods that's not so hard. But IKRPG only lets them off the leash a little bit, and so the thought of these heroic characters killing a monstrous dragon like Everblight is laughable because despite the fantasy influences, the Iron Kingdoms doesn't have room for nearly omnipotent heroes.

And that presents another problem. When working in an established setting you are restricted by timelines. My players can't kill Goreshade because he's still alive in the fiction. I can't have the Cryx start invading Llael or Five Fingers because they invaded the Thornwood first. If I'm going to stick to the fiction, I'm also allowing myself to be handcuffed by it. Sure they can take part in things that may have happened behind the scenes, or they can go on adventures that don't clash with facts, but my creativity is more invested on making it fit the story, rather than letting my players take it anywhere they want.

That's what I love about a Point of Light campaign setting. The second campaign I ran went off the rails from an adventure book, and my players had no idea what to expect. They were invested in the world because they knew nothing about it. It had influences of the Forgotten Realms, but I could reflavor a god, kill a hero, overthrow a kingdom, and it woudn't matter because it was our world and not the world of R.A. Salvatore. We weren't just visiting, we were carving out the story with our own hands. I gave them something to do for week 1, and what they did gave me something to do for week 2. It was immersive because everyone was invested in the world.

When I get them together in a few years and make them play one more game with me, you can believe that they will be fighting a deific Kobold Slinger because that's the sort of story they were crafting. In my IKRPG setting, I could have them storm the shores of Cryx and kill Toruk... except that midway through our campaign, a piece of fiction may be released that has Sorscha and Feora taking him down. Then what? We either have to make a choice to go off the rails and ignore the established world we stuck to, or change some story bits and try to keep going.

The good-ish thing about the IKRPG setting is that it takes place in the recent past, so you know what you can and can't do. While that works, it again asks that the campaign story run quietly alongside the official lore, only interfering when it makes sense. It's a hard line to toe - on one hand it lets you take things in lore that are barely mentioned and make them relevant and exciting. At the same time you know that your story simply can't impact the world.

And yes, I realize that GMs have creative liberty. I'm bogging myself down by sticking to "the rules" of the setting. I know other GMs can handle it perfectly well, but I have a hard time making a flexible story without having a flexible world in which it takes place.

That's what I've been struggling with as I've been coming up with story elements. I'm already running off the rails which you can read about if I ever get our last campaign story written up, but I'm trying to tread cautiously because I have some lore buffs in our group that may not appreciate too much deviation from the story. Not that I would fault anyone for feeling that way - if I'm working in an established setting, it's important not to bend the world out of shape and make it unrecognizable. It's just a simple matter of learning how to make an interesting story in a world full of interesting stories.


See you tomorrow!

Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

What Does It Take?

In all aspects of life, we have our breaking points. For things like jobs and friends we need to have stamina because it's hard to let those things go, but with gaming we can be much more petty. Whenever something new is announced for a video/tabletop/card game, you'll inevitably have people standing out on the street corner with their big cardboard sign declaring that the end is nigh. Everyone is quitting the game and the company will go bankrupt, there's mouth-frothing, and if you were new to the internet you'd think it was time to start looking for a new game.

Of course everything turns out fine and people begrudgingly accept that the new addition is great until another announcement is made. Now some of these people just let their passions get the best of them, but some people genuinely fear that their beloved game is done for. Those are the ones who are seriously having to ask themselves whether this change, if it goes badly, will be the death of the game for them.

Major changes in my gaming history that have pushed me out of the game include GW price increases, YuGiOh's catering to little kids (more so than what they did originally, anyway), Legend of Zelda's departure from a normal controller, and Microsoft is pushing the envelope with the Xbox One. However, the one thing these all have in common is that there is usually something I could overlook. If I enjoyed GW's stuff enough I'd pay their premium price; if I could have prevented Link from running around like a terrified moose I'd have beaten the Wii game; and if Microsoft can do enough to outweigh the bad decisions they showed us, I might be debating between XB-O and PS4.

[Beware, unintentionally long psuedo-tirade incoming]

However, there's one thing that will always turn me away from a game no matter what, and that's the community. If I can't tolerate the people I'm forced to be around, I will drop the game no matter how much I enjoy it. I had to quit Halo because I spent weeks without finding a single mature person that owned a mic. I will no longer play competitive games at a gaming shop because anything from Magic to Warmachine (and even D&D!) seems to bring out the competitive d-bags who can't seem to balance civility with competitiveness. Competitive games thrive on the community, and because of that it's the players that can truly be the death of a game.

Fortunately online games have taken measures to cut out the really bad apples with things like online reputation and report functions. But a company can only ban so many players before their bottom line is affected - as sad as it may be, the most unpleasant players in a game are often the more diehard fans.

So then what to do? Sure I could unplug my mic, ignore chat, avoid annoying players face-to-face, but then I'm forced to take away the best part of competitive/team games, and that's getting to play with other people who share an interest with me. Unplugging my mic turns Call of Duty is as entertaining as playing against AI opponents, and only playing Magic with a handful of mature people becomes monotonous. It's not that I'll quit a game because of the presence of bad people, but when pleasant people are put on the endangered player list, it's time to move on.

But that's just me. Almost everyone I talk to about this thinks I'm crazy because they can't see how sucky people could be an automatic deal-breaker. I admire their patience, but I don't play multiplayer games just to compete with a faceless opponent. Generally speaking, a multiplayer game tends to have less pizzazz than a single-player experience simply because game makers understand that the competitive nature of multi-player makes us overlook an otherwise tedious experience.

If you've ever taken part in a "training room" where you can play the multi-player game against computer opponents, you know that the experience is much different simply because you're playing alone, and all you have is a shallow gaming experience. To me, multiplayer games are all about the human interaction. Even if I'm not talking to anyone, successfully working together with - or fiercely competing against - other people is key to my enjoyment. If I have teammates whining, yelling at other people, being over-the-top offensive, etc., I will have 0 fun because the people who are a part of my gaming experience are unbearable. I can take and give jabs and light-hearted trash talk, but if I have an opponent mocking, insulting, or complaining about me or the game, then I no longer care about the game.

I play competitive games to play a fair match against a mature opponent. I don't want to waste my free time on an unpleasant experience. That's my time. I can deal with crappy people in the real world where things matter, but when it comes to my hobbies I simply can't bring myself to find pleasure in a bad experience.

[Ok, you can start reading again]

Whew. This was supposed to be 3 or 4 paragraphs long. I have work to do tonight and you guys got me thinking about all these games that "could have been" if people could have just grown up and played the game! The point of today's post was to ask you your breaking point. You've seen the what and why of mine, so I'm curious to hear yours.

What is one thing in a game that will almost automatically push you out? Cost? Graphic style? Skill requirement? Your favorite army/class/whatever no longer being powerful or relevant? I'm curious to hear how others can walk away from something that they might otherwise be willing to play for years, so be sure to use that comment section down below!

See you tomorrow!


Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

"Tropes Vs Women" Releases Episode 2

Oh hey, look at that:

I'm on my way to work right now, so I'll be watching in-full and commenting further later. For now, have at it:

UPDATE 1: Work was canceled, video watched, comments below the jump:

UPDATE 2: Some vengeful asshats have (apparently) gotten the clip taken down by exploiting YouTube's draconian TOS. A written transcript is still available HERE. Obviously, as soon as I see where it goes back up, I'll repost. People with mirrored links are welcome to post them in the comments until then.





So, then...

In many ways, I feel like this episode was a really solid reaction to the "where's the new substance?" critiques of the first one - much more in depth, much more focused on the "why is this problematic?" aspects, etc. Everything from 22:35 on, in particular, should serve as an answer to the "misandry is just as bad!!!" fools; laying out how patriarchy is also disempowering to men.

Honestly, though? I actually feel like she wasn't hard enough on some of this; particularly the "The bad guy corrupted me and you must kill me to set me free!" thing. What gets glossed-over so often with the Damsel in Distress thing is that the original context of "Save The Princess!" fairytales was rescuing women from having their virginity stolen (via rape or otherwise) by parties who did not have the proper claim on such in an era where virginity was inextricably tied to marriageability and thus the entirey of female worth. "Kill me, I'm a monster!" in other words being a modernization of "Kill me, I am a 'ruined' woman!" It's a fantasy-ization of honor-killing, basically, and that's pretty fucking pernicious.

P.S. Comments will remain enabled on this post until such time as people prove themselves incapable of behaving like grownups. Abusive/trolling comments will be deleted at the discretion of me. People with an issue about the YouTube video itself not having comments are advised to click here and then go get some sunlight.

Starting Them Young - Emma's First Painting Lesson

Some of you may remember when I took my daughter to our FLGS to buy some supplies for her first miniature. Here's the highlights of our first time together!




If you have kids who have expressed interest in your painting hobby I can't recommend this bonding moment enough. She had a blast getting to be like Daddy, and I got to see her do something I honestly didn't think she was ready for. The full video only clocked in at about 26 minutes, and she was ready for more by the end of it! Keep an eye on my Facebook photos - when I get my painting/photo area rearranged I'll be posting her fully painted and based miniature.

See you tomorrow!

Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

My Top 10 - N64 Games of All Time

Oh nostalgia, you've been a constant companion lately. I trust this will satiate your need for attention.



10. San Fransisco rush 2049
While enjoyed the overall destructive and zany nature of the Rush series, 2049 will forever be my favorite racing game. I'm not a racing fan, but cars with jet engines that could explode after too much damage? I was on board. I still remember recovering from the flu for a few days and spending hours in the game's stunt course, ramping and spinning (and gleefully exploding) to my heart's content.

9. Harvest Moon 64
 Did any one else ever play this series? It was the first incarnation of Farmville, complete with giving gifts and faithfully harvesting your crops or else. I would grind this game for hours on end, farming crops, making friends, discovering odds and ends (including researching a crop teleporter that I never finished), and getting fairly upset when the girl I was pursuing fell for Kai. I tried later iterations of the game, but nothing matched the first time I put an addition on my house or won a competition.

8. Super Mario 64
It was everyone's first game so you know I had to add it. I played the heck out of this game, and I even had to replace the cartridge because my first copy up and died on me. I never successfully got all the stars, but I would go to things like the ice sliding level and play them over and over for no reason whatsoever. But hey, I had plenty of those blue, translucent stars!

Also, did anyone ever find Yoshi on top of the castle?

7. Turok (series)
I don't know what it was about this series, but it gave me a savage sort of enjoyment. Exploding arrows and guns and (in the third game) the Cerebral Bore that would make an enemy's head explode. This was the first game where I used fun cheat codes, and by golly I loved my Pen & Ink mode! The later games got a bit ridiculous, and nothing ever matched the simplicity of a man killing dinosaurs that we got in Turok: Dinosaur Hunter.

6. Goldeneye
Again, cheat codes made this game so much fun to explore. Do you remember the level where you had to chase the bad guy through a bunker and fight your way out before the gas canisters exploded? Turning on god mode and fighting a limitless supply of spawning enemies in a room covered in a green haze was awesome. And multiplayer, for as often as I was able to play it, was a great introduction in to my later Call of Duty addiction. If CoD had Oddjob and paintball mode I'd probably still be playing it!

5. Mario Kart 64
If you've played it, there's no need to expound on what made it awesome. It featured characters everyone loved, fun power ups, and was the cause of a lot of yelling and shoving between friends and family. On the other hand... Rainbow Road.

4. Resident Evil 2
Ohhhh buddy, my first horror game and first true introduction to zombies. I still remember the seemingly innocent bus full of dead people, the cop who died and came back to munch on you, and that narrow hallway when you first encountered that fiendish wall crawler with the long tongue. The game sort of fell apart at the end for me (more zombies, less mutations!), but I played through the first half of the game over and over.






3. Ogre Battle 64
 This one flew under the radar for a lot of people, and it's a shame. It was a huge RPG with a lot of unique classes, a stress-free combat system, and a branching story that started with you as a rookie in the army, to joining a resistance, to fighting a kingdom corrupted by daemons. The combat had you controlling an army of units in the open world, and then you'd go liberate cities all the way to the map's enemy.

When you'd engage in combat you and your opponent would have your units on a 5x5 grid and characters would attack whoever was in front of them according to their initiative. You could flank, use terrain to your advantage, and barrel through the opposition or surgically remove everyone. If you haven't played this, download it on the Wii or get a ROM. The game hasn't aged well graphically, but it's just so good.


2. Super Smash Bros
This may be my favorite game series that has spanned multiple consoles. Getting to see familiar and unfamiliar Nintendo characters duke it out was a dream come true. Whether it was speedy Fox, balanced Mario, beefcake Bowser, goofy Jigglypuff, or my favorite electric mouse Pikachu, everyone had a character that suited their playstyle.

I haven't been a fan of how the single player experience has changed. The Wii version featured a painfully long experience filled with a lot of boring platforming. But the original got it right - it had you doing everything you loved in the game, with a few goofy special levels thrown in. I love how the roster has evolved, the stages have improved, and the item selection has stayed fairly balanced. If I were to get a Wii U, it would be to play this series.

1. Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask
Hey, listen! If you heard that in Navi's voice, you can appreciate the influences this game had in your life. Legend of Zelda featured an epic story of a hero rising up to save a world that was corrupted by an enemy he was too weak to stop. Link has always been a favorite hero of many because he lets nothing stand in his way to save Zelda and/or the world. No matter his incarnation, Link is the epitome of courage and sacrifice.

But OoT is where it started for many of us. Despite his 2d iteration, the N64 brought him to life in an entirely new way and is considered by many gamers to be the greatest game ever made. It had unique locations, head-scratching puzzles, intuitive combat, an amazing story with memorable characters, a power-hungry boss you had to hate, and a slew of items that were fitting of the heroic journey you were on.

Majora's Mask took the same style of game and put a dark twist on it. The world was going to end in three days and you had to stop it. In a Groundhog Day-esque twist, you could travel back to Day 1 and better prepare yourself to stop this from happening. Unlike OoT where the cast featured characters full of hope and good, some characters in MM were almost Wonderlandian in their creepiness. And if you ever looked in the sky, the freaky moon creeping ever-closer to earth served as a dark reminder that everything in this game hinged on you finding a way to stop the deranged Skull Kid who was being possessed by the dark artifact, Majora's Mask.


What about you guys? I had a hard time trimming down my list to just 10 items, and I was sad to cut games like Star Fox, Tony Hawk, and the original Star Wars game. What are your memories of the N64? Sound off in the comment section below!

See you tommorrow!



Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

May Blogging Giveaway

Entry is easy, just click here to be taken to the entry page. Winners will be chosen June 8th and the hills will be sent out once they're complete! Make sure you tell your friends because if I hit 25 entries I'll choose a second winner, at 35 I'll choose a third winner, and so on. If we can get to 100 I'll do some sort of grand prize, so get the word out!

See you tomorrow!

What's Your Name?

Whenever a game lets me name a character, I get a bit excited. In my years of gaming, I've always gone through phases in name selection, rather than choosing the same name every time. I have some friends who will use the same name, or a variation of it, for years and never grow tired of it. But you know me, I like my variety!

As a kid I'd name my profiles and characters Ray, or sometimes a random name I thought was cool. Super boring, right? But I wanted to be in the game, so there was that.

As I hit my early teen years I started doing goofy stuff. I don't remember specific ones, but bodily functions (and I'm sure bits of anatomy) were heavily featured. Fortunately I matured pretty quickly, so I only marred a few games with that nonsense.

In my teen years I discovered a limitless supply of fantasy novels, and my mother's unwavering willingness to buy me any book I'd read. Teen fiction being what it is, many names I discovered were over the top or painfully cheesy. Names like John Strongman or Drake Bloodfang made me reel back in my seat and shout "oh man, that's awesome!" Or groovy or whatever kids said in the late 90s. Sadly, despite spending years in college taking many literature and writing courses, these sorts of names still creep in to my games. "Crow," my name for assassin-like characters, has still stuck with me after all these years. What can I say, the movie was weird and the name was cool. To this day I'm still a sucker for any art featuring a black bird.

When the original Lord of the Rings released I dug out my old LOTR trilogy and started working through them. I found myself really loving the naming conventions of Dwarves. And as time went on and I discovered the Warcraft universe, I continued my love of Dwarves. At some point I'd designed a dwarf for D&D or a story I was writing and named him Thoradin Doomshield, and like Crow that name has stuck with me for years and has become my first choice in naming any heavy armor, shield-wielding character I create.

In my later teens I jumped on the bandwagon of using foreign, and especially Eastern, words for everything. I went to Japan when I was 10 so I always felt a slight affinity for the Japanese culture and language, so I started using English to Japanese dictionaries and using those as names. I still have my WoW characters Kankyo (secluded life) and Mikiri (forsaken) on my account from years ago. I've since abandoned that naming convention since it confused the heck out of people, but it did spawn some of my favorite character names.

At one point I inexplicably went through a phase of naming every online character Face_____. It was due in part to my inability to play just one character, and thus people could just call me "Face," but I stuck with this for quite awhile. It affected my Xbox Live name, several forum names, a host of WoW characters, and I even painted it on a coffee mug! My usual one was Face_Stabbity, and while the name itself is a bit immature I still love it. I never use it for character names anymore, but a lot of my current online friends still call me Stabbity instead of my real name, so I guess it's the one that finally stuck.

Lately, for as few games as I'm able to play, I've been trying to stick to a "doom" motif. As I said my paladin is Doomshield, my troll mage is named Voodoom, I made an IKRPG character with the nickname Doomshot... pretty cheesy and I've grown tired of them, but I'm not sure where to go next. The problem with many of my names is that they're often taken, so I'm still waiting to find that one name that I can use universally, and that won't sound utterly ridiculous.

What about you guys? How do you name characters for video games, RPGs, web forums, etc? Do you stick to one name or theme, or do you just name them whatever the heck you want?

See you tomorrow!



Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

The Xbox One Reveal - Brilliant or Catastrophic?

The next generation of Xbox has been revealed, titled the Xbox One. After the hype of the PS4 reveal, people wondered what Microsoft (MS) could do to keep people interested in their system. And as gamers around the world watched or read about the reveal, the entire world slightly shook as thousands upon thousands of shoulder slumped at the same time. The big reveal we'd been waiting for came and went, and it was very hard for people to get excited. The Xbox One fell flat in the eyes of many people, and many think the system will fail. But... was that Microsoft's plan all along?

When I first saw the reveal, I was ticked. I've always had an Xbox, and it wasn't going to be too hard to convince me to jump on board with the next incarnation. But here's basically what we were given at the console's first look:

• Kinect is required for the console to work (grrrrrr)
• They are doing something wonky with the used game market
• It's not always on, but an internet connection is required at least once every 24 hours
• No backwards compatibility
• Full voice control (grrrrrrrrr)
• Many other entertainment features like Skype and live TV
• Various quality of life features

Basically nothing that indicates that this is a gaming console for gamers. Microsoft hasn't been shy about their goal of making this main part of a family's entertainment, but no one expected that this reveal would focus on it. So we were mad that they squandered their big chance on frivolous features. But as I started thinking about it, I started catching on to their plan.

E3, a large gaming convention, is coming up and Microsoft will do a part 2 of their reveal at the event. While many are frustrated that they're waiting until then to give us any more info, I think MS has accepted that they'll catch a lot of hate initially, but it will be for the good of their product. What it will do for them in the long run will keep their momentum going long in to the holiday season.

I'll try to explain what I think they're doing. MS knew that many of their customers wouldn't be interested in many of the features they revealed recently. Some are unpopular (mandatory Kinect) and some are features not everyone would care about (specs). So rather than trickle them between two reveals where no one would remember them, or people would be disappointed that they wasted time on unimportant features, they instead frontloaded all of it.

The result? We get mad and yell about how doomed the system is and that we're taking our money elsewhere. But then we cool down and watch their E3 presentation, and we will be bombarded with everything we care about. System price, clarification of used games, Xbox One exclusives, and big features like Xbox Live changes or new additions no one has talked about yet.

Now Xbox One has nothing but positive PR carrying them toward their system release.  They're giving us the bad news now in the hopes that they have so much good news that we'll forget all about their horrible first showing. People will still gripe, but overall their customers will end this two-part reveal with a positive idea of how much better this system will be over the current generation.

It's also been awhile since Sony has made much noise about their system, so much of that excitement has died down for now. With MS waiting until closer to the system's release it will seem like the only thing anyone can talk about is Xbox One as MS systematically releases more and more info throughout the coming months. I'm sure Sony will do the same, but this extended pause between information may be MS's chance to grab a bit more of the spotlight.

I'm still a bit miffed at MS for their poor showing, as well as the features I simply can't stand (seriously, I hate the Kinect). But now that I've cooled down and cleaned up the ashes of my Microsoft effigy I set fire to... I think we'll all be pleasantly surprised after E3. PS4 may still be the better system,  but I'm confident the giant that is Microsoft isn't capable of failing nearly as much as we're being led to believe.

I have a comment section below, make sure you use it! How are you feeling after the Xbox One reveal? Do you think Microsoft really is a sinking ship, or is this just a clever move to get more buzz at E3?

See you tomorrow!

Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

Countdown to Cyriss - Week 11

It's the moment we've all been waiting for... Cyriss's colossal, aka the Prime Axiom! For as much as colossals are capable of, DC didn't spoil too much this week. However, he made up for it with a terrific sketch!



Before we move on, do so you see that rock? I hope that's included so that I don't have to pin his spider legs to the base. That being said, let's take a look at what we learned today:

• Not something new, but I had forgotten that this is considered a warjack and is therefore affected by battlegroup spells!
• It has drag, allowing it to grab a model from range and pull it in B2B contact. And as you can see from the sketch, it gets to do this twice. Like the Galleon, Axiom gets a free drill vice attack (likely its generic melee attack) on targets it Drags, followed by the ability to purchase more melee attacks. Nothing super special here, but it does let you keep Axiom back, rather than forcing you to charge closer to your opponent's models.
• In addition to drill vice, it has an attack called "accelespiker." Cheesiness aside, we get no word on what this actually is, nor can I really tell where the attack might come from. It has a circle of spikes on its forehead, so that's the best guess unless his drill hands are multi-functional like other Cyriss weapons. I want to hazard a guess that these will be armor piercing, but that might be overkill.
• For stats we have DEF 7 ARM 20. It's one of the better ARM stats for these big fellas, and it's not like anyone really cares about a colossal's DEF anyway. With the sheer amount of support you can pack in a 50 point list, this thing is going to take an opponent's full army to take it down, or it will need to have a bunch of units fed to it to keep tied up and away from the action. It's just too bad about that tow cable!
• Now let's get to the juicy bits... Launch Servitor. If you have been around long enough, you'll remember that in Week 4 I covered a number of servitors. You can guess where this is going... Prime Axiom can place any servitor model within 2" of its base. Once per turn you get to whip out your Swiss Army Knife and respond to any situation your opponent throws at you. You can repair, handle high DEF, high ARM, swarms of models... basically, your opponent will never truly be safe when near your model.
  
  The best part? The servitor activates that turn! That means that you can blow a hole in your opponent's infantry, finish off a Dragged target, or just move forward 6" and block a charge lane. While servitors aren't overly powerful for their 1 point price tag, it does give you greater flexibility in the middle of a game, and also frees up several points for other models. Even if this is Axiom's only ability, it's darn good and will make this model a terror on the table.

So that's it. Nothing too groundbreaking, but the artwork and Launch Servitor are all I needed. It's going to be hard to spend so many points on a single warjack when Cyriss has so much support for the others, but I think this thing will carry its weight with the proper support.

It's hard to believe that we are 11 weeks in and still have much more to see. This is certainly not the shallow release I anticipated, and I think Privateer Press is making a very solid, one shot army. I certainly can't wait to get mine!

See you tomorrow!


Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

OVERBYTES on XBOX ONE

XBox? None.

ALSO: newest episode of the main series is HERE if you missed it.

Tilting Towards a Loss

If there's one thing I've always struggled with, it's playing a good game while being on tilt. In poker, a player is on tilt when something throws them off their game and they respond by playing overly aggressive. They abandon their normal strategy and turn in to the Hulk with a powerful desire to mindlessly smash.

That's me when a plan goes awry. Using a strategy requiring finesse usually requires you to set up a lot of moving parts that, when working properly, are nearly unbeatable. See combo decks in Magic where losing a single card can render your deck impotent; or combos in Mortal Kombat where hitting the wrong button can leave you painfully exposed; or any video game with a class/character that is seen as requiring the "most skill," where messing up a rotation or using an ability at the wrong time sends you from being a powerhouse to a dragon's snack.


That, of course, is the excitement to those sorts of strategies. When things go well, they go really well, and you can be nearly unbeatable because your opponent just can't get the upper hand. But when you're juggling a bunch of plates in the air it becomes very easy for the slightest disruption to send everything crashing down. I can usually deal with minor inconveniences, and in games like Magic you should always have a Plan B should your opponent try to remove a key component to your strategy. But when my opponent really just hoses me over, I don't know what to do and I lose the game.

The problem, of course, is that my opponent hasn't beaten me yet. My plan is ruined, so I give up trying to make it work and instead just go on the aggressive. Despite the fact that most strategies requiring skill don't have a single powerful component that can win a game, that seems like the only option I have left, even though I know that doing so is impossible.

Let me give you an example. When playing Circle Orboros with a friend, the only powerful piece I'd packed was a Warpwolf Stalker, which is basically a giant werewolf with a big sword. The idea was to use my army's movement shenanigans to send him right at my opponent's warcaster when he wasn't able to shrug off most of the damage. My plan required two units of shifting stones (which were used for teleporting), and a unit of Druids who could move enemies around the field and give me a place to teleport my Warpwolf. The biggest problem is that a unit of Stones can only use teleport if all 3 models are alive, so the turn before I was ready to go for the kill, a stone died to some accidental (though very fortunate) blast damage.

What could I do? I could have repositioned my models to make it work next turn, or perhaps adjust the strategy and take out a key piece of his army. Instead my eyes darted frantically across the board, my brain lost all ability to reason, and I threw all my models against his wall of more powerful models, hoping to stall until I could figure out another plan. While my Stalker did a number on his target, the rest of my average models found themselves flailing about helplessly as I tried to make them kill in a way they weren't designed for.

Away from the table, the reaction seems silly. But when you're working through a strategy while trying to counter your opponent, and everything seems to come undone, all I see is red. Finesse goes out the window and I just my things in to their things because it seems like the only thing left to do. Sure, sometimes it may honestly be the only thing left to do, but most competitive games won't be so imbalanced that a single loss will be the end of the game. Clear, rational thinking can turn the game back in your favor, and it almost always leads to a good story later. But I can't do it... I mess up, Hulk out, and there goes the game.

How do you guys do it? How do you respond to an opponent pulling a wire in your intricate machine, making it useless in its current form? How do you keep a cool head when everything looks hopeless? At the age of 27, I still don't know how to recover from a dizzying punch like that, but I think it's time I learned.


See you tomorrow!

Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

Time to Stop Hoarding

My "faction ADD" has become a joke with my gaming group. If you read my Quality vs. Quantity post you know that part of that is because I like seeing all the facets of a game and I don't want to be relegated to a single army. But as I was working on a Cygnar commission today I realized something - I wasn't as keen to play my small Cygnar force as I once was.

For those who are unfamiliar with Warmachine, Cygnar is an army that excels at shooting the opponent before it reaches them. They possess melee, but the main point of the army is to soften up the opponent before finishing them up close. That gameplay aspect really appeals to me because I enjoy all the positioning involved with ranged units, as well as the simple annoyance they are to my opponent. Just ask anyone what they think of my Widowmakers!

So why the sudden change? I think it's because my primary reason for buying Cygnar wasn't to play them, but to paint that awesome looking blue! I still wouldn't mind playing the army, but I feel much more satisfied after painting some blue coats and hats, and my own army has sunk to the bottom of my priority list.

As I started thinking about this, I found it interesting that my reason for buying Cygnar was different than my reason for buying Circle Orboros. In games, I'm a big fan of anything that increases my mobility. It's why I used speed perks in Call of Cuty, why I enjoyed the Empire in Star Wars X-Wing a few days ago, and why my usual RPG class is a spellcaster that possesses a movement spell. Increasing my mobility lets me set the tempo of the game, and I rarely have to worry about being outflanked. I decide where the battle will take place; I draw the line in the sand and leave it up to my opponent to figure out how to get the game back in his favor.

However, I always hated the looks of Circle Orboros. One brand of heavy beasts consists of big magical scarecrows with stone plates attached to them. Their werewolves have bony spikes popping out all over them (huh?), and their satyrs are... well, pretty cool even though I don't own any. Their studio color scheme consists of black, brown, and a really dark green. Also, they're kind of psychotic tree huggers. Nothing about the army appealed to me visually, but how they played on the tabletop was exactly what I wanted to play.

The coolest part of the army is their ability to teleport. There's a unit called Shifting Stones that lets you place any model in their triangle up to 8" away. I can bypass a frontline, block a charge lane, keep key pieces behind cannon fodder... the abundance of possibilities is astounding, and that's just one unit! Even the slower "stone scarecrows" (aka Wolds) can create surprising situations with their ability to cast one of their warlock's spells. And if there's anything that could contend with my love of movement shenanigans, it's my love of being able to conjure things on the battlefield - and Circle does love their forests.

I haven't been miserable while painting Circle models, either. I enjoyed trying to use all washes, and testing different techniques on them. It wasn't like painting my Behemoth, and it probably ranked lower than most commissions I've done. But I'm loving the army because after I painted them, all I had left to do was play them, and although I have to paint my models, it's being able to play them that really excites me about an army.

So I've decided that I'm done hoarding armies just to paint them. My Skorne might see some love on the tabletop, but I'm not so sure about those Cygnar guys. I like the army visually, but their looks are more exciting to me than their gameplay. From now on, I'm putting mechanics first. It worked when I bought Khador despite their goofy hats, it worked for Circle despite... everything; so I think that's just the way to go - buying the army to play it after I paint it, rather than to paint it and having no choice but to play it.

Which is why... I'm buying Convergence of Cyriss!

See you tomorrow!



Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

Star Wars X-Wing - Info and Quick Review

I'm a bad geek - I've never been a fan of Star Wars. I've never found anything wrong with it, it just never resonated with me like it has for... well, almost everyone else I know. So when my friend bought the new Star War X-Wing game that the entire internet has been raving about, I had a lot of reservations. I assumed that people were going crazy because there was a Star Wars game that didn't suck, and not because there was a good game that happened to be Star Wars. As it turns out, the Star Wars license is just extra frill on a very solid and strategically deep game.

At its core, I'd liken X-Wing to a re-imagining of chess. Unlike the miniatures games I'm used to, terrain plays a very small role in the actual game, and the rules of the game are pretty straightforward. You have two sides - the Rebels and the Empire, and a handful of ships controlled by each. The intro games I played pitted my two TIE Fighters against my friend's lone X-Wing. Similar to Warhammer 40k, individual models can be outfitted with equipment that increases the point cost of the model, but makes it much more powerful on the table.

Ships all share a basic set of rules. You have numbers representing how many attack or defense dice you roll, Hull Points (damage the ship can take), and Shields (these are removed before Hull Point damage can be assigned, and can be recharged by special equipment). Each ship also has a unique movement dial from which each player simultaneously chooses who each ship will move on the table. These dials differ based on the ship, with ships like TIE fighters being quicker and more maneuverable.

Once each player has chosen their maneuver for the turn, each ship is moved starting with the lowest  Pilot Skill. Rather than moving in inches, you have maneuver distances between 1 (slow) and 5 (very fast). All maneuvers have a template associated with them, and depending on the ship you can move straight, bank left or right about 45 degrees, or move forward and end 90 degrees from your original facing.

Movement is where the true strategy in the game lies.You can move through ships, but if you top your movement overlapping a base you must stop at the point of contact and lose your action for that turn (more on that later). Furthermore, you have no idea what your opponent is going to do! Are they going to bank left and try to avoid one of your ship, or zoom forward and face the other direction to try and catch you from behind? You have to examine the game in its current state, think about your opponent's best options, and try to move in the most advantageous way possible. It's surprisingly exhilarating to try to out-do your opponent without putting your ship in unnecessary danger.

Each ship needs to have an action assigned to it as soon as it's made its movement. Not all ships can use every maneuver, but the options are Focus, Evade, and Barrel Roll. Focus is the most useful, allowing you to improve your chances on a single attack or defense roll. Evade allows you to automatically ignore one of your opponent's successful hits, which is often the action you'll choose if you have no one in your sights or you don't think you'll survive an attack. Finally, Barrel Roll lets you place your ship to the left or right using the Maneuver 1 template, letting you get slightly better position or try to get out of your opponent's line of fire. Personally, I loved the Barrel Roll as it let me lightly adjust any mistakes I made in my movement phase, allowing me prepare to better position myself for next turn.

The rest of the turn is pretty straightforward. Starting with the highest Pilot Skill ships make their attack, using a rather clunky range checker to determine if the attacker is close (+1 attack die), normal (normal attack/defense rolls), or far away (+1 defense die). You make your attacks and hope for a hit or critical hit on your attack dice. You opponent then rolls their defense dice, hoping for enough evade icons to avoid any damage.

As I said, the game itself is very straightforward. But the movement phase is truly what makes or breaks a turn. If you can get a high Pilot Skill ship withing close range, there's a good chance that you can scrap an opponent's ship in 1 turn. If you can get yourself in the right position, your opponent will need to spend 1 or 2 turns just trying to avoid you, letting you put a lot of pressure on them. I played 2 small games of X-Wing, and both games felt like a true dogfight. We were zooming around the table, both fighting to get a strong position against the other. I had TIE Fighters both games, so I used to speedy, weaker ships to try to take down is slower, more powerful X-Wing.

Despite the seemingly simple rules, the game seems to have a good deal of depth to it. While both of my games broke down in to a dog fight, Game 2 found me using different strategies, and things I tried in Game 1 just weren't working. And that's just a basic game using 3 total ships. When you add equipment, more ships, and use pilots with abilities, the game doesn't seem to be in any danger of becoming stale.

If you are a fan of Star Wars, you probably have this game already. If you want a quick, fair, no-nonsense game of strategy, you should probably get this game right now. Stores are having difficulty keeping it in stock, and there's a very good explanation for that. This game is fun, exciting, and competitive without being too stressful.  So give it a try - you won't be disappointed!

See you tomorrow!

Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

Starting Them Young - Emma's First RPG Purchase

Emma's been asking to help me paint "daddy's guys" for awhile now. I found her a kids version of D&D, so today we took a trip to my local gaming store to get her some much-needed supplies!






See you tomorrow!

Remember to follow me on Facebook. I'm doing a blog post every single day for 2013, and Facebook is a great way to stay up-to-date as well as take part in my monthly giveaways!

What Are You Up To, Nintendo?

Two interesting articles relating to Nintendo have recently come out. The first is a series of tweets from a senior software engineer at EA who didn't have many good things to say about the Wii U. The second is about Nintendo's recent decision to do anything within their legal power to collect ad revenue from YouTube videos featuring their products.


EA
The comments from the EA engineer, Bob Summerwill were harsh, but hardly surprising. For years now Nintendo seems to have been surviving on nothing but a handful of first party licenses (like Mario), its hold on the handheld market, and nostalgia to keep itself afloat. The Wii, despite its popularity with the casual market, didn't have enough steam to compete with the better libraries (and hardware) of Xbox 360 and PS3. Nintendo has always maintained a firm grip on their licenses, and as such the Wii library of games has had a few amazing games surrounded by a mountain of garbage known as "shovelware" that sought to take advantage of the Wii's non-gaming customers who trusted developers to put actual work in to their $40-60 product.

Summerwill critiqued the Wii U on things that may not be apparent to those who aren't tech savvy, like myself, but nevertheless bode ill for the console's future. The most telling tweet was

The WiiU is crap. Less powerful than an Xbox360. Poor online/store. Weird tablet. Nintendo are walking dead at this point.

Harsh, but hardly surprising. The article also features a link where EA, one of the biggest names in the gaming industry, admits that they aren't working on games for the Wii U. While that isn't a red flag for the system, it could serve as an orange caution cone for other developers who haven't fully dove in to supporting the console.


YouTube
If you've followed me for awhile you know how I feel about big companies seemingly bullying the little guy. While a company's actions make sense from a business perspective, at a certain point you need to focus on the long-lasting worth of your company's dignity of the short-term increase in profits. So I was shocked when Nintendo, a company many of us grew up with, decided to take money from people who have been instrumental in promoting their products.

In a nutshell, there are people on YouTube who make series called "Let's Play _____" where they record themselves playing a game while they give commentary over it. Some creators are so popular that this is their full-time income, and they do well with it. This income is generated from a YouTube partnership, where sponsors place ads before, after, or around the videos and YouTube pays the creators money based on views and clicks.

Nintendo is now demanding, as is their legal right, that any advertisement revenue from videos featuring their games, or even images and music, be put directly in their pocket. Someone in the IGN comments said it best when they pointed out that Nintendo is basically asking these creators to become free PR workers for them. Of course Nintendo has a right to protect their property, but these videos are key in people purchasing a game they wouldn't have otherwise.

Indie games like Minecraft, FTL, Terraria, and Binding of Isaac became the hits they are because of Let's Play videos. I know several people who won't play a game until they've seen a Let's Play because it does something that no amount of advertising can do - it shows the entire game, not just the good parts. In 2013 we don't care about the mystery of whether something will live up to its hype - we want to know the value of something so we can determine whether we want to experience it. Gamers are burned out on spending $60 for a game that turns out to be an utter disappointment, and these YouTubers are one of our greatest assets when it comes to smart shopping.

Money Over Respect
This leads to one very important question - what is Nintendo doing? They want to promote an image of family and togetherness, yet don't understand the crowd they're selling to. The Wii U made the first mistake of including the word "Wii," an automatic turnoff for many who considers themselves true gamers. Then they go back to motion control, a concept that wore thin for many. Then they include a weird little tablet that sets one player apart from the others. And to top it all off, they apparently did all of this with outdated hardware and expected it to do well.

Then to further the baffling moves, they strongarm YouTubers in to removing Nintendo games from their Let's Play series. After all, Nintendo wants money for these videos, and the YouTube channels that would net them the most money aren't going to give up their personal income by spending their working hours making free videos. So you'll have small channels doing Let's Plays that will remain unseen by the majority of potential Nintendo customers, while bigger channels (whose opinion people trust) will be forced to promote other games for free to maintain their own income.

I realize that Nintendo has had a hard time moving on. They've made statements in the past that show they just don't understand the changing market, but you'd really think someone would stand up during a meeting and politely point out how ludicrous some of their decisions really are. It's really heartbreaking to see, because I grew up blowing in to NES cartridges to make them work. I busted my butt to save up for a Nintendo 64. And despite everything I still want a 3DS (you know... for my kids).

I love Nintendo, and that's why I, and many others, are upset. Those in charge are hurting the company that turned me in to a gamer, and something needs to change before Nintendo becomes another gaming company that couldn't keep up with the changing times.




See you tomorrow with something a bit more uplifting!

Which Hill Is King?

Based on the results of my Facebook poll, you guys want some custom terrain. I'm ordering a foam cutter as soon as this post publishes, and I figure the classic first for any terrain maker is a hill. However, there are two basic types of hills, and little agreement as to which is the best.

The first is a natural looking hill. In games where realism is heavily encouraged, it seems like this hill would be the natural choice for players. However, what the hill has in realism it very much loses in practicality.

The biggest problem with a "rolling hill" is that it is nearly impossible to measure height. In games that have modifiers based on height, this can cause a good deal of confusion and disagreements during a game. After all, you can't truly measure 1" without doing an unnecessary amount of mathematics.

Another problems is that hills are at an angle, and miniatures don't like inclines. I was a proponent of rolling hills until I tried to run a horde of plastic Orks across one. Pewter models that aren't top-heavy can usually overcome this, but plastic models just down have enough weight pushing down on them to readily prevent them from toppling over. This is incredibly frustrating for me because I try to be very precise in my measurements, and as soon as a model hits the deck I'm unfairly gaining or losing movement.

The best way to circumvent the first problem is to talk to your opponent. In Warmachine, the general agreement is the "toe in" rule, meaning that if any portion of your base is on the hill, the model is at a 1" elevation. Unfortunately, this takes realism out back and shoots it. In Warmachine this means that a model with a millimeter of its base on the hill is more difficult to shoot. It's silly, but I think it's the best way to rule a rolling hill.

The other popular type of hill is more of a ziggurat shape. Unlike the realistic hill, this type of hill trades form for function, making it much more rules friendly. However, it also has its own unique considerations.

As you can see, this style of hill leaves no doubt about your measurements - the first tier is 1", the second is 2", and so on. The biggest issue I have with them is that they more closely resemble low cliffs than an actual hill. I'm not such a purist that I will only play on realistic terrain, but I still can't look at hills like this and not look at them as low-rising cliffs.

Like rolling hills, placement is also an issue with these. Without the ability to create a "toe in" rule, how do you determine when a model is on the hill? The easy solution is to say that if you can stand on it, you're on it. I don't care for this rule simply because it's not universal enough - not all models can have half their base hanging over the edge of the hill, and I believe that no rule should be inconsiderate of any model's dynamic pose. Not to mention the logistical nightmare of what happens when a model's base hangs over the hill and overlaps another model.

So what about saying "all in, or nothing"? This then limits the variation of the hill design. Looking at the image above, a large-based model will have great difficulty maneuvering up there, and would probably find itself rather confined. And if someone is going to be very picky, then a model whose base hangs over one of the gaps left by the hill's numerous vertical ridges would be considered illegal, and that's just asking for silly arguments.

So then what's the answer? Unfortunately both hill styles come with their share of problems. The natural hill with the toe-in rule is simple but hinders realism. Ziggurats that let you be on the hill as long as your base can balance is perhaps the easiest way to handle that, and allows for multiple heights. Personally, I like the second option just because it allows you to deal with a flat surface. Anything that risks knocking over my models, breaking parts, chipping paint, and screwing up my movement isn't terribly appealing to me.

Where do you guys stand on hills (pun mildly intended)? Do you prefer rolling hills, ziggurats, or some other style entirely? Let me know!

See you tomorrow!

Countdown to Cyriss - Week 10

We've made it to double digits on this series! To celebrate, DC gave us a wonderful look at Father Lucant, Divinity Architect.

While many Cyriss warcasters have been about hard-hitting models combined with synergy, Lucant shows how well the faction can play the ranged game as well.

• Clockwork Reinforcement. This feat gives friendly faction models in his 14" control area +4 ARM. In addition, repair skill checks automatically succeed. The first part of this feat is just amazing; +4 ARM to everything is going to do a lot to blunt an opponent's alpha strike, or to let the army dig in and hold an objective. Automatically passing Repair checks may be wasted on an alpha strike, but repairing your warjacks and giving them +4 ARM can practically set your opponent back a turn!
• Field Marshal [Shield Guard] Like all Cyriss warcasters, he grants his entire battlegroup an ability. Shield Guard allows warjacks to be automatically hit by a ranged attack that directly hit a model within 2". While limited in its use, the fact that you can protect key models by placing them near one of your many warjacks further increases your chances of getting key pieces up the table. This is a great way to protect those servitors that have limited range and really want to be near the frontlines!
• Spells: Lucant has Purification that will basically remove all spell effects in his control area. This spell is incredibly powerful, allowing you to wreak havoc on an enemy that was relying on his upkeeps or animi to save him. True it removes yours too, but that's life.
  
  He also has Deceleration to give a DEF/ARM bonus vs. ranged attacks, letting you use shield guard with impunity. Finally, DC mentioned that his spell Positive Charge combines with his MAT 6 to make his warjacks and troops very accurate. I take a few points from this. 1) He's likely a melee caster, which fill let you field melee jacks to better take advantage of his feat. 2) "very accurate" to me says that you can make your jacks MAT 8 or 9. Yummy. 3) he's not selfish with his buffs, and makes his units as potent as his warjacks

Compared to previous spoilers, I feel like we didn't get much here. But it's awesome to see and consider all the different ways to play Cyriss, despite their limited releases!

See you tomorrow!

A Problem with Proxies?

For as long as I can remember, I've had the hardest time using proxies in my games. When talking about gaming, a proxy is a card or miniature used to represent a similar piece in the game. Players will often use proxies if they aren't able to afford the actual piece, or they're test driving a piece before committing to buying it. However, I have a personal and practical reason for my aversion to proxies.


People often give me guff for my refusal to use proxies. I don't care if someone uses proxies for their game because I understand the various cost-effective reasons for it. However, I'm a purist when it comes to games, and I can't enjoy the full experience of a game if I'm not staying 100% pure to the game's pieces.

Let me clarify that this is different from painted models. I like painted models as a preference - I could play bare metal for the rest of my life and still get 99% as much enjoyment from a game. However, playing a game with a stand-in piece just feels wrong. It goes from being an immersive experience to a set of rules arbitrarily assigned to a game piece. I like playing the game as it was designed, with the pieces that were designed for it.

With as cautious as I am about getting the most bang for my buck, you'd think I'd be gung-ho about using proxies. However, I would rather do without than reduce my enjoyment of the game. I'm not saying it's right, because there are several models I'll probably never own just because I haven't seen them on the table, and I won't proxy them to find out how they work.

Now I did use proxies when I played Magic, and it really killed the fun of the game for me. I didn't appreciate the cards I was proxying, and I didn't play them nearly as well as I would when I'd finally buy them. I think the reason for this is the same as why I won't play a painted model that wasn't done by me or painted as a gift - it's because I have no attachment to it. I didn't buy the proxy, I didn't acquire it from a friend or even borrow it from someone to try out. I printed off an image and stuck that piece of paper in a card sleeve along with another card and called it good.

Now don't get me wrong, I won't fault someone for using proxies in their game. I'm understand that proxies don't necessarily break a game, and I'd agree that using a proxy make someone more likely to buy the actual piece. I won't look down on someone for using proxies, although if they're particularly cheesy I certainly won't restrain myself from poking fun at them.

However, sometimes proxies can be detrimental to a game. I've had several occasions where I've experienced this from both sides of the situation. When people are used to a game, they will often glance at a card or model and know everything about it, and without thinking much about it they will play the game as though the model is the original piece, and not the model it's standing in for. When that happens, an entire game can swing because a player will conduct his turn assuming that their opponent's model has an 8" threat range, while the proxy actually has a 12" range. Or they may think the opponent's card is a 2/2 bear when it "actually" has Deathtouch.

When that happens, the game is no longer about strategy and outmaneuvering, and is instead irreparably altered because of one player's thoughtlessness in subconciously assuming at the piece they were looking at is the same one they've played against 20 times. Even if the proxy player allows a do-over for the affected models, it's impossible to have the same outcome had the mistake not been made.

When that happens, the proxy player has likely given themselves an accidental advantage. Their opponent is on tilt because their strategy has to change, or the player is frustrated and doesn't want to redo an entire turn. Those who know me won't be surprised to know that I don't like the idea of gaining an advantage over my opponent by anything that isn't in the rules. So if I'm using a proxy and my opponent forgets what it's supposed to be, I've single-handedly changed the game in an unfair way.

However, I think there are a few ways to use proxies that will ensure your opponent will have an enjoyable game.

• Remind them at the start of every turn. It may get monotonous for both of you, but even if it only reminds them one time, you've made that one time very fair.
• Make a tent from a 3x5 card (or business card for Magic) with the card/model's name, and keep it highly visible to your opponent at all times.
• Find a hard-to-miss way to mark the proxy. Put a Pepsi cap on the card, lay a pen across a models arms... anything that's very out-of-place so that when your opponent scans the battlefield, the strange sight of a large troll with a bright pink feather stuck to his back with Blu Tac will make him actively notice that it's a different model.

What I'm saying is that if a proxy is going to be used in a game, it very obviously needs to be a proxy. The onus is on the user to make sure the game plays just as smoothly as if the actual piece were used. Proxies can save money, but make sure it's not done at the cost of the opponent's enjoyment!

See you tomorrow!

EPISODE 84: "Starving Artists"

New Episode is NOW PLAYING on Blip!

Poké-Auction

I'm not a big fan of art, but there's a charity auction that almost requires me to bid on something.

The auction is called Rare Candy, and it has the coolest premise. They got together 151 different artists and gave each of them a random Pokemon from the first generation (including Mew!). Then each artist was tasked with doing their Pokemon in any style they chose. If you plan on viewing the entire gallery, I highly recommend clicking Bulbasaur, and just hitting the next button to cycle through them. Each piece, good or bad, is definitely worth a look.

[I won't post images because I'm not sure on the legalities, so prepare for a few links.]

Some artists clearly don't get Pokemon, like the artist who drew a woman cosplaying a Rhyhorn. Or the Metapod that's... mid-evolution with Butterfree's wings? I don't even know. Or how about the Rhydon, a rock/ground type Pokemon that is VERY weak to water... surfing.

But then there are some that are, at the time of this writing, rightfully going for several hundred dollars. Misty with Gyarados doesn't even need to be Pokemon to be appreciated, it's just that beautiful. Same goes for Ninetails and Muk. Ponyta and Rapidash are also pretty striking in their own, unique ways.

Not everything is on canvas. There's a great looking 3d Arcanine made from ceramic and foil. Or a Zubat that is plain creepy. And you'd think the guy who drew Pikachu would make something unbelievable, right? I mean he's the staple Pokemon! While the sculptor didn't take creative liberties with Pikachu, it doesn't seem to do justice to everyone's favorite electric rat.

Speaking of creative liberties, holy cow. I loved the starters of the first game, so I was a bit terrified when the first image I clicked had Bulbasaur (that's Bulbasaur, right?) looking like this. But then you have some guys who gave Pokemon a dark tone and did it really well, like this "realistic" Charmander, or the creepy Raticate. Or there's Kingler, which just made me laugh. Want something a little more tough? How about the Tauros who has a surprisingly amazing Southwestern vibe.

And then, of course, are the artists who "get it." Gengar was one of my favorites growing up, and I think his piece is my absolute favorite. That writing beneath him? That's a bunch of Unown, a Pokemon you could catch that were randomly shapes like letters, spelling out "Gengar." Or Cubone, a Pokemon with a heartbreaking story, sitting alone and in desperate need of love. And does anyone remember that Omanyte fossil you'd get? Or the windup Porygon (because you got him as a prize from an arcade). How about Wigglytuff (because it evolved from a moon stone). And if you remember trying to catch a Pinser from the Safari Zone, you'll really appreciate this one.

And of course... Psyduck.

I didn't list everything that stood out to me, though I really wanted to! Honestly I would love to sit here and talk about each piece in this auction. Some are duds, but most of these are amazing, and I love the idea of giving the artists complete control. For anyone who was a fan back in the day, you owe it to yourself to go through each piece in this gallery and remember your childhood. My wife patiently sat there as I talked about most of the pieces, though I did finally excuse her to return to the world of normal people.

I'd really like to hear your thoughts on some of the pieces. What Pokemon were your favorites back then, and how did you feel about the artists' versions? Any that particularly disappointed you or blew you away? Is there anything you want to bid on? Let me know!

See you tomorrow!

If you're new around here, be sure to like my page on Facebook. I post daily blog content and hold monthly giveaways!

Supermom

In the name of festivity, I thought I'd talk about how instrumental my mom was in my love of superheroes.

Like most moms, she encouraged me to read at a young age. When I was really young we struggled financially, so my big gifts were always books, and (I'm told) I loved it. Any good geek should enjoy reading, so making me an avid reader was an important, and seemingly innocent, start to it all.

Fast forward to one of my earliest memories. I was 6 or 7 and we were at a grocery store. They had a magazine rack which hasn't been moved in 20 years, and I remember browsing through it looking for wrestling magazines. I was a fan of Spiderman cartoons, so when I saw a Spidey comic I snatched it up and started reading it as soon as she paid for it. It was awesome, even though I had no clue what was happening in the story!

That started a long, though now dead, obsession with collecting comics. I had no idea what rarity meant, nor did I even collect them in a series for the longest time. As years went by I started choosing comics over wrestling magazines, and we soon discovered my first comic shop, Xanadu Comics. It wasn't near us, but it did happen to be on the way to places we'd visit at least once a month, so I'd often be able to talk her in to stopping there. I still remember the first comic I got from Xanadu... Bishop was on a futuristic motorcycle, and the series had something to do with mutants being hunted in the future. If my box o' comics wasn't buried in my closet I'd dig it out just for nostalgia (and so I could remember the name of the comic!)

At some point Mom made the mistake of talking to me about superheroes. She understood that boys liked superheroes, and she'd asked me about them here and there. She eventually started remembering things about them and could have actual conversations with me. That was all I needed to start chatting her ear off about Spiderman, Fantastic Four, Batman... you name it! She'd watch the older Batman movies with me (and we still argue over who was the best Joker), or she'd sit and read while I watched my TV shows.

Over the years I collected miscellaneous superhero stuff - cards and action figures mostly, but comics are where it's at. I even managed to get the first 22 copies of a Spiderman series (which I think were 2 or 3 comics per book, so let's call it an even 60!). Mom always taught me to be who I am, so I was never shy about my superheroes. I didn't come to school wearing a Superman cape, but people knew who I was and, middle school being what it was, I fell in with my fellow geeks and nerds.

Then 2002 rolled around, and that's when her coolness began its true ascent. She took me to see Spiderman, and like the rest of the world, she truly started to appreciate superheroes. Since then we've watched every single superhero movie together. And as most of you know, superhero movies are just awesome when people ask you to explain more about the heroes and villains of the movies. So at age 27 I will still talk her ear off about everything I know about a superhero. She would still never read a comic, but I suppose I can't hope for too much!

So to my mom - Thank you for helping me discover superheroes. You've proven to me that the strength, mercy, and bravery shown by superheroes don't only exist in fiction. Thank you for being an amazing example, and an awesome mom!

And to the rest of you - See you tomorrow!

"This is why we can't have nice things!"

Like all painters I started with a basic set of synthetic paintbrushes. They got ratty, and the hairs split and fell out, and they just didn't do the job I wanted them to do. And like most painters, I finally caved in and bought a $15 paintbrush made of natural sable hair. The thing is amazing - it holds paint in the brush rather than creating a weird globe of paint in and around the brush, and smoothly releases the paint. I put that thing to work as soon as I got it, and it was definitely worth the money I paid.

However, one day I was cleaning the brush with some Masters Brush Cleaner (if you don't have it, get it), and I noticed that a hair had come loose from my brush. I was horrified, because that's what happened to my GW brushes right before they took a nosedive and became nearly unusable. I carefully finished cleaning the brush and put it away. That was a couple months ago, and I still haven't had the courage to use it again.

It sounds silly, right? I bought a high-end brush that I'm now afraid to use. If I didn't have an airbrush it may have been used once or twice on a big surface, but I've still been trying to make my cheaper brushes work simply because it's not as heartbreaking when they start to die. My Winsor Newton is clearly the better choice unless I'm doing a job where the brush is just too big, but when I go to pick it up I think to myself well, I could just be a little more careful with a synthetic one and try to make it work.

I've been using my GW detail brush almost exclusively, and I really really want to get a Winsor Newton brush of the same size. I've been lucky that this one has been lasting me so long, but I know that if I were to get a size 1 or 0 I'd probably never touch another brush. Still, I think of that hair falling out and how more could come loose if I use the brush again, and I continue using my less-amazing synthetic brush.

What amazes me is that people talk about having their brushes for years without issue. Maybe I wasn't delicate enough, which wouldn't surprise me, but I was babying that thing. I guess a hair or two coming loose shouldn't be the end of the world, since a few hairs may not be properly glued.

It's like my conundrum with buying a single expensive model over several smaller ones. If I buy 3 brushes that do a B+ job, I can afford to lose them over time because the purchases seem smaller. But if I roll all that money in to a single purchase that does A+ work, and I somehow mess up the brush, I will probably snap the brush in frustration.

But I'm getting a colossal, and I feel really good about it. I won't use my huge model all the time, just like I probably wouldn't use a natural detail brush all the time. But when I do use the brush, I know I'll be happy. It's just getting over that fear of breaking it, and I just can't get over that hurdle.



So for those of you with an expensive brush (or any tool, really), how do you get over the fear of ruining a single item that costs three times what you'd pay for a junkier version? The results probably aren't three times better, so why put all your eggs in one basket? If you've used a natural brush before, have your results been worth that extra price? Let me know!

See you tomorrow!

If you're new around here, be sure to like my page on Facebook. I post daily blog content and hold monthly giveaways!

Why Do Painted Models Matter?

Telling people I'm a commission painter is always interesting. When I finally manage to explain to them what I paint, I usually get one of two reactions.

• "Ah... neat."
• "Wait... people will pay to have that stuff painted?"

With the second, my usual response is "Yeah, people like their stuff to look good," and they shrug and find it crazy that people would spend money on it. It's something that can only really be understood by people who are a part of this gaming culture. Still, it does raise a good point. Why do we like to have our models painted?

The first few times I play a painted model, I'm always watching it on the battlefield. I take time to appreciate all the detail, shadows, basing, etc. But after those first few times, especially with infantry, I usually stop noticing. I know the model is there, but the hours I put in to painting it are forgotten. The hour I spent painting Harkevich's eyes, a detail which seemed so important, seems like a waste because I can't even see them with his back to me.

But for some reason I can't be satisfied with an unpainted model. It's not just that I enjoy them being painted, it's that I feel dirty for playing something that isn't finished. I don't prefer to play with painted models, it's like I'm compelled to do it. And truth be told, I have no idea why.

I don't think it's because I want to be praised for it. I don't mind people appreciating my work, but if you knew how behind I was on posting pictures to my Facebook page you'd know that showing off my stuff isn't high on my priority list. Truth be told, I get more satisfaction out of someone being happy with their commission than I am with my own models being praised.

Many people enjoy the immersion of painted models, but I don't think that's for me either. I like to paint with a sense of realism, but when I'm playing a game I'm not paying attention to the aesthetics of the board because I'm lost in planning and strategy. I do enjoy the look of my army sitting lined up, but once those first dice start rolling I don't actively notice the paint job of my models.

I'll admit that I love watching a game with 2 painted armies fighting in some nice looking terrain. So maybe I'm following the golden rule... if I want to watch painted armies, I should bring a painted army to be watched. It's a theory, but I doubt that's it either.

Getting right down to it, I think I want them painted because of what each painted model represents. Some models are the victims of new techniques, some handled with the utmost casre, while others were done in a hurry because I was tired or hated the model (looking at you, Feral Warpwolf). I even get excited to see guys in my group play models I've painted because I have some memory of painting each one.

I've said it before, but painting is what centers me. It lets me relax and focus on something I'm passionate about. I think that's why I don't want to play unpainted models - it's because they mean absolutely nothing to me. And unless it was painted for me by a friend, I wouldn't play someone else painted models because, again, I have no connection to it.

Playing painted models is an extension of my painting process. I paint them and then I play them. I may never play them again, but playing that first game is my last step in painting a model.

And now I'm genuinely curious about the rest of you. If you enjoy having painted models, tell me why! Is it immersion? Do you just like the look of a painted army? Something else entirely? Comment down below!

See you tomorrow!

If you're new around here, be sure to like my page on Facebook. I post daily blog content and hold monthly giveaways!