I plan to continue to play WAB as I always have. My main gaming group never bought into the 2.0 version which I was fine with as I did not have any problems with 1.5. I still have my 28mm Spartans, Vikings, EIR, HRE, Burgundians, HYW English and other armies that are in various stages of being primed and painted. I have considered picking up Hail Caesar and Pike and Shotte as I run games of WECW. (btw what is CoE?) and Fields of Glory was never going to get me to switch as I just do not like the DBX system.
As others have stated there have other game companies that have gone away and their games are still played. Yes you will see a diminishing of players over time given that new print runs will not be forth coming. I am looking forward to playing in the WECW tourney at Historicon and I still run convention games using WAB. I might switch to something else over time if it catches my attention but for now I will keep the flame going.
Kim
--- In WABlist@yahoogroups.com, "fabros1" <fabros1@...> wrote:
>
> we're moving over to warmaster historical for our club system but are also
> looking at war and conquest as a route to continue WAB.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ilan Mitchell-Smith
> Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 1:40 AM
> To: WABlist@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [WABlist] My thoughts
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> I am bummed out about Warhammer Historical closing, but I have also just
> finished a really fun biblical WAB event (hosted by Harold), and I am in
> the middle of a multiple day Danes vs Saxons game with a member of my local
> group. Maybe now, like in the past, it is a bit early to call it over?
>
> I plan on playing WAB as much as I can, which includes tournaments at our
> three local cons, and I know a number of people who are planning on doing
> the same. For now, at least, I think we are OK, an there are still a lot
> of WAB gamers out there who seem to be eager for games.
>
> With that said, I also know that it is hard to cling to a system that is
> not supported, and so I wanted to weigh in on some of the options that
> Harold brought up.
>
> My favorite option right now is to keep WAB alive through local gaming and
> Convention events, such as tournaments. In order to aid in this, I think
> it would be great for Hardold to develop a "Wargaming Ancient Battles
> Playing Guide," to help new players learn a game that might get hard to
> find. Eventually, we might just all refer to the Wargaming Ancient Battles
> Guide instead of any previously-published materials.
>
> My second favorite option is to go with CoE or (maybe) War and Conquest
> (seems like it might be good, but I haven't read it yet). The most
> important thing, I think, is for the community (both our SoCal one and the
> larger one involved in this list) to stay connected. If that means all of
> us (or maybe even those of us who organize events at Cons) filling out a
> brief ballot for which system we would all be willing to switch to, then I
> would be happy to play something else. For me, the main things I like
> about WAB is that I know a bunch of people with the same basing, who know
> the rules, and who enjoy building lists according to a system that is
> generally accepted. If we could do this with any other system, then I
> would be happy to switch for most of the gaming that I do or organize.
>
> Ilan
>
> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Harold H
> <haroldlhildebrand@...>wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > We'll I'm sad that WH gave up. I put on the Pied Piper hat over the last
> > couple of years to keep people playing the system in Southern California
> > by
> > running various events and trying to generate interest. In February at the
> > local gaming convention, I had 13 players show up for an AoA 2.0
> > tournament, which I considered respectable. This weekend I ran a Chariot
> > Wars event and I had 6 players, but it did overlap with a WAB event up
> > north, so I was reasonably satisfied.
> >
> > But the truth is that there just isn't enough interest to keep it going
> > without some semblance of support from GW, even if it's mostly illusion.
> > So
> > I have to think hard on what the future might be. I'm going to throw out a
> > few options that I'm thinking about to see what comments people might
> > make.
> >
> > Ignore it; just keep playing and running events. There are more lists than
> > I'll ever possibly build armies for, and house rules can fix any problems
> > that are too terrible to live with. Start trying to "collect" WAB 2.0 and
> > supplements and then resell them to potential players hopefully at
> > reasonable prices. The torrent route is always there but does have a bit
> > of
> > a moral taint for me.
> >
> > Switch to one of the other three most likely rulesets. There is already a
> > bit of a following for COE in Southern California, and to a lesser degree
> > HC.
> >
> > Create a generic rewrite of WAB 2.0. I've often thought I could write a
> > more concise, maybe twenty five page version of WAB 2.0, in my own words.
> > I
> > don't think you can copy write the rules mechanisms, and I'm pretty sure
> > they're not patented, so as long as I stayed away from directly stealing
> > their format and wording I might be within the law. As we all know, GW
> > seems to have more lawyers than creative people, so it would probably have
> > to be a bit of an underground thing. Still I would love to be able to give
> > away a smallish PDF file that has what everybody needs. In my professional
> > world there's Linux that has some remarkable similarities to what I'm
> > talking about. I'm particularly attached to the idea of it being owned by
> > nobody but a community created endeavor.
> >
> > I've also considered writing some kind of "bridge" that would let you play
> > the current Fantasy Battles system with the WAB lists. This would be quite
> > a feat, but there are some strong motivations. The main recruiting ground
> > for WAB players for me, has always been FB players. I think that anybody
> > who is already an historical gamer has tried WAB or will never try WAB, so
> > that isn't a pool that has much viability. I actually like some of the
> > things about 8th edition, although I know that's not universal. But still
> > the idea of a supplement that a FB player could use and build and play
> > historical armies seems like a really good idea. To use another IT
> > metaphor, I wouldn't want to "fork" the current FB, like was done with the
> > original WAB. (in software development a "fork" is when you copy an
> > original set of source code and then modify it so you are no longer linked
> > to the original code, ie changes to the base code can't be integrated into
> > your new forked project) It would be best as a living extension that could
> > be upgraded as FB is constantly changed. One of the things that I think
> > really needs being done is to have a clearly defined point system, that
> > would encourage people to create their own Army lists. I know there was a
> > "methodology for this in WAB, but it's always been somewhat arcane and
> > shrouded. I'd like it to be open and part of the rules. Now once again I
> > think it's hard to handle situations where there are "meta" balancing
> > issues beyond the equation to determine the cost of an individual troop
> > type, but still it would be nice to have. All in all I think that creating
> > a FB supplelment would be the absolute best, but it is probably fraught
> > with compromises and danger.
> >
> > Stop playing ancients. An emotionally charged decision. I consider WAB my
> > main game, but I probably play less than a dozen games a year, where I
> > play
> > a like number of other miniatures games in a single month. I guess I could
> > add a wait and see clause to this statement, to see if there is another
> > discernable current or swell that I could than follow. "follow the
> > gourd,,,no the shoe,,follow the shoe!"
> >
> > Well anyway, I may not be playing WAB in the future, but my single based
> > inch tall friends aren't going anywhere. Oh as a bit of bravado, the
> > Chariot Wars event I organized was entirely with my own figures, since
> > it's
> > not a period that everybody has an army for. I broke up my Biblical forces
> > into eight roughly 1200 point armies. It was pretty cool to see them all
> > out on the table at once. The feeling it generated is what makes me not
> > want to give up.
> >
> > Harold Hildebrand
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Community email addresses:
> Post message: WABlist@yahoogroups.com
> Subscribe: WABlist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: WABlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> List owner: WABlist-owner@...
>
> Shortcut URL to this page:
> http://www.yahoo.com/community/WABlistYahoo! Groups Links
>
Post message: WABlist@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: WABlist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: WABlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
List owner: WABlist-owner@yahoo.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.yahoo.com/community/WABlist
No comments:
Post a Comment