War Game Author CONFRONTS Us After A Bad Review

War Game Author Eric Farrington CONFRONTS Mark's Game Room After Our Bad Review of the game Men of Bronze. We get his perspective on the choices he made while developing the game as he responds to our criticism that made him go OUCH!

[@ericfarrington366]

Thanks for the opportunity! I am very appreciative.

[@M_Holien]

Equally well done on the interview and thanks for taking the time to let folk know your design philosophy. Hat's off for taking the time to produce and get the rule set published.

[@jasonphares2483]

I appreciate you taking the time to let the game designer have his retort after your review. It was interesting to see the intentions behind the written rules. Providing the original author this platform shows integrity on your part and respect regardless of your reviews findings. Bravo gentleman, bravo.

[@bigsarge2085]

Good on you for giving the game designer time to offer a different perspective.

[@panthros7395]

That is awesome of him to join the call and give his feedback. It seems as though it might help him to have a developer's commentary pdf or video that someone could read with or have with his book in hand.

[@mpw301]

I loved this video. It would be great if you all interviewed more rules authors. The insight is really interesting. Keep up the great work and content!

[@martinevans9757]

Kudos to both Mark & co and Eric for finding common ground and engaging in civilised debate. Someone recommend this video to Congress!

[@MichaelCorryFilms]

"Othismos" is the technical Greek term for pushing. It added mass to a charge or shoving match. Plenty of historical instances where the deployment was deeper to be the decisive or as a check against better troops. The rank and file depth of hoplite formations are entirely based around that. For example, modern crowd science has determined that an 8 person deep group is enough Crushing power to be fatal. Hoplite phalanx and Macedonian phalanxes are 8 deep and deeper formations are in increments of 8.

[@StatsScott]

I definitely give him credit for going on the record to talk through his rules after the first video’s assessment, and you guys in the club for giving him the opportunity and giving your side. I haven’t played those rules, but the “leader in the center” issue would seem to apply to Hail Caesar as well, and similarly the Base Width as a unit of measurement sounds like DBA. Big battle rules issues often seem to come down to basing choices… The downside of these Osprey blue books is they are so constrained for size that it can limit how much goes in. In general I always enjoy hearing the author’s intent for their design choices as it helps adjudicate edge cases. And if I choose not to use it, at least I fully understand what they were going for, even if I feel it missed the mark or made another aspect of the rules wonky.

[@dowthin5167]

Nice video! the title is a bit misleading however as this seemed like a fair discussion based on a strong critique!

[@gregalbert7778]

Excellent video. I learned so much from hearing the author's response to the MGR to review. The hobby needs more of these exchanges. Thanks to all.

[@michaeldecarlo6945]

This video is a real service to the hobby. Getting the rule set author’s perspective on the decisions he/she made in crafting a rule to achieve an outcome or “historical” result is extremely enlightening- especially when the rule leaves players confused or worse dissatisfied with the rule application, restriction or result. More rules authors videos!

[@charlierichardson613]

I like this. Great interview/ response.

[@mikeelliott2736]

On the subject of hoplite warfare and the "pushing match" I recommend you read "The Othismos, Myths and Heresies: The Nature of Hoplite Battle" by Adrian Goldsworthy

[@jake4753]

Well done gentleman!

[@AndrewSmith-fd3fi]

It would be an interesting contrast and compare if you guys could also review and the further follow up with the Wars of the Republic a companion ruleset to MoB. Tmely run out of a series relating to an upcoming epic historical film. 'Love that Joker'

[@AS-gn7mb]

I agree. I commented on the review video that Wars of the Republic is like a MOB v2 with much of the issues being addressed. There are still some ‘grey areas’ in the rules but this video shows that Eric is up for dialogue and constructive criticism. Well done to all involved, quite refreshing.

[@JohnDoe-ru1nd]

Discussions with the Designer about his intent, and how he created/used a mechanic to put that into the game are great. I applaud your team for doing this with the Designer/Eric and with him willing to come up and discuss his ideas/process. Good stuff.

[@lorddraconum]

This was fun to see the game designer come on and talk about how he though the game should work.

[@theobessiris9681]

Great interview. I haven't purchased Men of Bronze rules yet but after this interview with the designer I definately will. Now my question is when are you going to interview Phil Barker? I know he is ninety years old but it would be a world's first and the scoop of the century.

[@tolemykus4805]

In general, I think many reviews, even if well intentioned, don't always give context. Maybe they would need to express whether or not they are beginner, intermediate or advanced players to give perspective to the reader of the review. Your interaction with Eric shows your needs when trying the rules were different than what the designers envisioned. Not all rules sets are useful to all people or groups. Nice clarification video.

[@andrewfielden5345]

Very interesting video, possibly the most interesting I've ever seen on wargaming and I've seen a lot. I think he hit the nail on the head with the desire for decision making being key to the game. For me a wargame should be a game first but with the flavour of the period.

[@marcharrison5712]

I liked that you followed up with Eric and visited about his game.

[@warhq]

I love that open, respectful discussion is used. It's sometimes hard as an author to completely portray to the reader your design intent and the decisions you made. When you explain it to them and do a demo game, they get it, but cold reading and playing can confuse some.

[@ruckandmaul5018]

Innovation is not over-rated in wargames - it's definitely underrated! But Eric is right that wargamers tend to be conservative - so innovation must always be accompanied by a clear explanation of the design process. Good discussion all round and kudos to Eric on his "right to reply"!

[@doccatface6868]

Historicals tend to have the most mechanical innovation already. When there are dozens of games for every single battle you could fight, the only way these guys can stand out is with incredible or strange rulesets.

[@Michael-ws7rc]

Kudos to you guys for bashing a product and then letting the creator address it. What a classy thing to do.

[@matthewanderson2002]

Excellent to allow the author to speak

[@PatGilliland]

Great pair of videos. Do you plan on replaying the rules now you've spoken with Eric?

[@theairsoftSAWman]

Love your channel and instantly subscribed! Would you be able to do a tour of your game room ever? I love your table and would like to get a closer look at it!

[@FelixstoweFoamForge]

"Greek hoplite warfare can get 'grindy'". Surely that's the whole point? Weather you subscribe to the "othismos" hypothesis or the "individual fencing" hypothesis, really makes no difference. They do appear to either be very grindy, or one side crumbles before contact, i/e., "the tearless battle". The whole point of any historical rule set is to make you feel as though you're commanding a force from that period. And with Hoplites, that means, at least before the Peloponnesian War, you line up, give an inspiring speech, and advance. After that, it's numbers, training and luck.

[@mrookeward]

Really good to have a Q&A with the author - I hope you do more of these "leaders in the middle"???? OMG - FRONT RIGHT FILE!

[@davefielder4411]

Great report, well done.

[@janwillemboots]

I hope this becomes the norm rather than the exception when it comes to rule reviews by any channel. Yes, the opinion and views of the player matter and have to be centre and front. However, the design philosophy of the author may not be as apparent to every player, yet is important for a good review. To put it bluntly: did the player get it? So when doing a review do connect with the author...

[@davidsykes2721]

More of this the thinking behind rules is important for players to tinker with rule sets. My favorite set of rules for napolionic is simple playable Napolionic Wargames from 1987, but i dont use them blindly and have my own modifications stolen from other games to give me what I want from the game.

[@currybr]

Congrats on reaching 5k subs.

[@andyshaw5378]

One of the criticisms with the Osprey books is the limited word count.

[@edackley8595]

Sign of good writing AND editing is conveying information and intent with efficient and economic use of prose. Author himself admits to verbose "ink spilling" in regards to measurement. The Osprey blue books are hit or miss and never a rush to purchase.

[@brooklynwargaming8049]

Such a great video and discussion of designer intent vs player execution.

[@doccatface6868]

Ohohoho! What a great concept! Always kino to hear the designer's angle. That's how TFL got me.

[@craigalexander1191]

This video was excellent. It was nice to hear a designer explain his thinking.

[@andyedwards9222]

It was great to hear the authors point of view, a very grown up discussion. MoB probably suffers from a common problem with Osprey blue books - lack of support (from Osprey, not necessarily from the authors) and overall interest from the publisher.

[@mcreadyrj]

Worst set of rules I bought in thirty years.

[@MourningConstitution]

Thanks!

[@clockmonkey]

There's a limit to what I would expect for £12.99.

[@mgriffioen8503]

next level to listen to dev.😊

[@goforitpainting]

Cool

[@claybass3631]

Classy.

[@mikeelliott2736]

"Hoplite games are kind of grindy" Yeah, that's probably because the actual battles were "kind of grindy" Are there any documented historical examples that correspond to the way the support rules work in MOB?

[@stylesheetra9411]

No there arent any source about any of this, be it the mob way or any other way For sources we need to go to later date, where we know battles are usually short

[@mikeelliott2736]

"A phalanx is not 8 figures" OK, so define your ground scale and your figure scale. If each figure represents say 100 men then you now have a phalanx of 800. Much more believable.

[@M_Holien]

Mike these rules are perhaps not for you? 😉 The author did address the point in the video and has come at the design from a different approach to a lot of rule sets.

[@chesterstevenson]

Fun video, though the title is a little click-baity.

[@LEESS1005]

Damn,it’s toe mar toe’s NOT toe MAY toe’s jeez,bloody amerkans

[@farpointgamingdirect]

Osprey's rulebooks suck. Every. Single. One. These volumes are the worst rulesets written since anything by Richard Berg

[@garde1266]

You must be a lover of Games Workshop or worse, an absolute fan boy of this shitty money machine... The Osprey rulebooks (notably Lion and Dragon Rampant) gave me a taste for wargames again.

[@john-lenin]

"We'd never take that chance." That's wargamers in a nutshell. And it leads to boring micromanaging in games.