Counters or toy soldiers?

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

battleground
Posts: 103
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 1:23 am

Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by battleground »

Having gamed since the 60s with AH thru SSI thru Matrix I have seen the hobby mutate
(for a better word) from 'classic' counters (which are often called incorrectly NATO
counters, they have an older pedigree)into miniature figures and tiny tanks on maps
in games. This seems to be the prevalent system now except for Grigsby's games (thank
goodness!)due to a younger generation brought up on axis and allies and such. I find
the 'sandbox' use of toy soldiers and tanks insufficient for me to purchase many games
as they don't to me provide a historical perspective but rather a toy perspective. What
are your thoughts?
User avatar
Zap
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:13 am
Location: LAS VEGAS TAKE A CHANCE

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by Zap »

ORIGINAL: battlegroundvehicles

Having gamed since the 60s with AH thru SSI thru Matrix I have seen the hobby mutate
(for a better word) from 'classic' counters (which are often called incorrectly NATO
counters, they have an older pedigree)into miniature figures and tiny tanks on maps
in games. This seems to be the prevalent system now except for Grigsby's games (thank
goodness!)due to a younger generation brought up on axis and allies and such. I find
the 'sandbox' use of toy soldiers and tanks insufficient for me to purchase many games
as they don't to me provide a historical perspective but rather a toy perspective. What
are your thoughts?


Since the price of the figures are out of many peoples price range I don't see counters ever being replaced.
User avatar
Yogi the Great
Posts: 1949
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Wisconsin

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by Yogi the Great »

Like an argument in many aspects of life perception is more important than reality in games majority now need graphics, glitz and sound to make a game good.

The real judge of a game should be if it is a good game. If a good game I will play with tanks and soldiers or counters. If a bad game no graphics can make up for it. If I were a game company needing prophets though, you at least have to consider impressive graphics. Old Grognards might not care, but too many good games get trashed or have low sales because people need the graphics and glitz or will make no purchase. Having the ability to switch between counters and figures however would still seem to be a good choice.
Hooked Since AH Gettysburg
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by wodin »

Depends on the scale:) If it's Squad scale and heavy weapons have their own counter so there is only 1 weapon type in the unit I'm fine with non Nato COUNTERS\Chits. However operational and above I want NATO. Also NO over size tanks or whatever. If the game has 3d representation and is squad maybe platoon scale then I want the units to scale please! Nothing better to ruin immersion is to have a HUGE Tank or whatever set on the map.

For board wargames I have The Great War which has plastic soldiers but the scale work OK. Really they are two different wargame types. You have your mini's like Flames of War and then you have your chit like World in Flames. So boardgame I don't see wargames all suddenly having mini's..

As for graphics if the wargame has the chance of attracting not just grognards then I do think effort should go into the visuals. That doesn't have to mean though big 3D Tanks..just beautiful maps, beautiful counters, great sounds and great animations etc.
User avatar
wings7
Posts: 4586
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 4:59 am
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by wings7 »

ORIGINAL: battlegroundvehicles

Having gamed since the 60s with AH thru SSI thru Matrix I have seen the hobby mutate
(for a better word) from 'classic' counters (which are often called incorrectly NATO
counters, they have an older pedigree)

What "pedigree" are you talking about? [8|]
Please come and join and befriend me at the great Steam portal! There are quite a few Matrix/Slitherine players on Steam! My member page: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197988402427
User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 13846
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by Curtis Lemay »

TOAW has both counters and miniatures. Why wouldn't we want to attract the miniature crowd if we can? The combination helps both sides (via increased funding), whichever way you prefer it.
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
chemkid
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:02 pm

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by chemkid »

.
chemkid
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:02 pm

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by chemkid »

.
chemkid
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:02 pm

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by chemkid »

.
User avatar
DonCzirr
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 1:55 am

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by DonCzirr »

I prefer (and usually demand) counters from WWI era -> Modern and then prefer Figures for Napoleonics -> and earlier.

I can't see playing FOG etc with NATO counters.

*Hannibal would be scratching his head* - NATO ?

Having the choice is always nice.
Man schlägt jemanden mit der Faust und nicht mit gespreizten Fingern !

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100032812112896
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by wodin »

Isn't HPS decision I can assure you of that.
ORIGINAL: chemkid

...ah, and my thoughts on topic... JTS games are just fine - really dig'em! counters on map - toy soldiers in detail! very nice!
too sad, recent news make a whole lotta mods obsolete or non-functional after hps decision to update through jts - volcano are still working but jison's delightful artwork isn't... [:(]
battleground
Posts: 103
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 1:23 am

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by battleground »

Wings, the pedigree I mention that the pre-WW2 infantry and cavalry symbols represent infantry crossbelts and cavalry's single crossbelt.
The symbols in simpler terms were pre/during WW2 which is pre-Nato. Of course it had to be expanded greatly due to the inclusion of so many
different subunits nonexistent at the time. As a computer gamer I just find comfort in my 'old friends' the symbols rather than tiny men
and tanks as they cannot represent more than a small portion of the total force of the unit represented. I guess I am way too old school!
User avatar
wings7
Posts: 4586
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 4:59 am
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by wings7 »

ORIGINAL: battlegroundvehicles

Wings, the pedigree I mention that the pre-WW2 infantry and cavalry symbols represent infantry crossbelts and cavalry's single crossbelt.
The symbols in simpler terms were pre/during WW2 which is pre-Nato. Of course it had to be expanded greatly due to the inclusion of so many
different subunits nonexistent at the time. As a computer gamer I just find comfort in my 'old friends' the symbols rather than tiny men
and tanks as they cannot represent more than a small portion of the total force of the unit represented. I guess I am way too old school!

Thanks for the explanation and there is nothing wrong with old school, do you have a link so we could view them? [:)]
Please come and join and befriend me at the great Steam portal! There are quite a few Matrix/Slitherine players on Steam! My member page: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197988402427
battleground
Posts: 103
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 1:23 am

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by battleground »

Do a google search under Louisiana Maneuvers map pics. There are some maps showing the common symbols used by the US
prior and during WW2 prior to the war. I believe the US Engineer Corps originally used them but it was easier to find
stuff about the early Army in the 1960s than it is now before all the libraries cleared out all the old books.
User avatar
Fred98
Posts: 4019
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Wollondilly, Sydney

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by Fred98 »

ORIGINAL: battlegroundvehicles

I find the 'sandbox' use of toy soldiers and tanks insufficient for me to purchase many games
as they don't to me provide a historical perspective but rather a toy perspective. What
are your thoughts?


I agree. The "toy soldier" look and the "isometric 3D" look are both a big turn off for me.

My last wargame purchase was in March of 2011.

I too was going to start a thread of this nature.

.
User avatar
CapnDarwin
Posts: 9254
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Newark, OH
Contact:

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by CapnDarwin »

I'm old school too and prefer the use of counters in a game unless you are doing a at scale tactical game in 3D.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
User avatar
Mobius
Posts: 10339
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 10:13 pm
Location: California
Contact:

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by Mobius »

ORIGINAL: battlegroundvehicles
Having gamed since the 60s with AH thru SSI thru Matrix I have seen the hobby mutate
(for a better word) from 'classic' counters (which are often called incorrectly NATO
counters, they have an older pedigree)into miniature figures and tiny tanks on maps
in games. This seems to be the prevalent system now except for Grigsby's games (thank
goodness!)due to a younger generation brought up on axis and allies and such. I find
the 'sandbox' use of toy soldiers and tanks insufficient for me to purchase many games
as they don't to me provide a historical perspective but rather a toy perspective. What
are your thoughts?
I also started gaming with AH during the 60s.
It is only old school in regard to old board game school. As soon as I attended a game convention I discovered miniature gaming and this became my old school and didn't play boardgames as much after this. For the most part in a game a miniature figure represented a smaller number of elements than a board game where a counter can represent an entire division, corps or army. (Of course this might have been designed this way to sell many figures rather than a few.)

As for the miniature theme the younger generation were not brought up on flat maps and cardboard counters but D&D and like miniature games. Some on card games. So they probably relate more to miniature figures than counters.

Computer games try to mix these when they have 3D models on hexes. I'm not overly fond of this when a figure represents more than a company of tanks, or men as it prevents stacking. Then again is stacking realistic giving all units in the stack the ability to attack or defend on all six sides of a hex?
All your Tanks are Belong to us!
panzer
User avatar
sIg3b
Posts: 244
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:46 pm

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by sIg3b »

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

TOAW has both counters and miniatures. Why wouldn't we want to attract the miniature crowd if we can? The combination helps both sides (via increased funding), whichever way you prefer it.

Having both options is ideal, if the developer can afford it.

If having to choose, I go with counters. Because:

-I want the additional information. (Counters without numbers are useless. TotH, I mean you! [:@] )
-3D is bad simply, because it crowds the map, making it more difficult to get all the information at a glance. 2D is more tidy.
User avatar
Fred98
Posts: 4019
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Wollondilly, Sydney

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by Fred98 »

ORIGINAL: Tesuji
-3D is bad simply, because it crowds the map, making it more difficult to get all the information at a glance. 2D is more tidy.


Well said!

.
User avatar
Peever
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2002 7:51 am
Location: Minnesota

RE: Counters or toy soldiers?

Post by Peever »

Counters all the way. On PC looking at a counter should be able to give quite a bit of information that a 3D unit couldn't. Plus the art budget for most war games is pretty low anyway with them going to a niche market so unless the company has some super talented artists working for dirt cheap then stick to 2D. Over time 2D art holds up better than 3D art anyways.
"Sergeant the Spanish bullet isn't made that will kill me," Bucky O'Neil seconds before receiving a fatal shot to the head at the battle of San Juan Hill.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”