Back in Undefeated #1, we reviewed individual miniatures and box sets. It's been a while and we're thinking of doing it again. The question is, how much can we really say about a single figure? Plus, for games like Warhammer 40,000, the stats are already known so, what are we really reviewing? Lastly, is the current review system even set up to handle rating miniatures, or is it too strategy-centric?
Sorry. Tradable minis are covered already, because they're released in large sets. I'm talking about the small, sporadic blister and box releases for hobby miniatures games, such as Warhammer 40,000, WARMACHINE, Confrontation, and the like.
Sorry. Tradable minis are covered already, because they're released in large sets. I'm talking about the small, sporadic blister and box releases for hobby miniatures games, such as Warhammer 40,000, WARMACHINE, Confrontation, and the like.
Hmmm... I think strategy still holds up here, but another important thing with these types of minis is the painting. Perhaps some tips on painting... and I don't necessarily mean professional level painting tips. It could be something as simple as possible color schemes or very basic pointers on detailing.
I don't know... this question might be better asked in a forum like http://www.minirealms.com.
(sorry can't figure out how to do links in these posts... I tried using a standard HTML anchor tag, but it didn't appear to work when I previewed it... Here's another attempt <a href="http://www.minirealms.com">Mini Realms</a>)
Anyway... just a thought... I don't actually play any of those games, but I love the look of the Confrontation minis. They're beautiful. :)
--sam
As primarily a HeroClix player, I get the most out of Team Strategy articles.
You sort of provide "mini-reviews" of individual pieces during the explanations of why which clix made the team.
And articles like the one in issue #4 (?? I think) in which you did one team for each "label" (DC, Marvel, & Indy) was really helpful. Plus the explanation of the "Practical Accelerator" tactic, with the graphics was very welcome.
Sorry. Tradable minis are covered already, because they're released in large sets. I'm talking about the small, sporadic blister and box releases for hobby miniatures games, such as Warhammer 40,000, WARMACHINE, Confrontation, and the like.
O.K., after re-reading the thread, I'm a little confused.
Can you give some examples of "the small, sporadic blister and box releases for hobby miniatures games" besides the trademark?
I mean, your "wargames" article a issue or so ago that had several different Warhammer 40K armies was a good read. It showed the differences in play style for the different faction (?? Is that the right phrase?) like the Tau, and those "Aliens" looking Gene-stealers, etc.
Are those the kind of reviews you mean?
Or, are you talking about like the Warmachine article you guys did, where you scrutinized several Warcasters, and made recommendations about building up an army around them?
That's not too much different from "team oriented" strategy articles. (My opinion.) It not only shows baldly a unit's abilities/powers, but gives context on best use within a team, and gives hint on how to react to (or prepare for) specific threats to the character.
This really is more a question about figures for Warhammer, WARMACHINE, WarGods, and so on. The figures come out at different times, but the stats are centrally located in sourcebooks. So, when the figure comes out, its stats are already common knowledge. Is there any value in reviewing something like that, when the only real new quality is the miniature itself?
This really is more a question about figures for Warhammer, WARMACHINE, WarGods, and so on. The figures come out at different times, but the stats are centrally located in sourcebooks. So, when the figure comes out, its stats are already common knowledge. Is there any value in reviewing something like that, when the only real new quality is the miniature itself?
Hmmmm.... Well, then, since the stats appear in the source material and -- presumably -- on-line as well, maybe a different VENUE for the review is required.
A special section of the Undefeated portion of this site.
When you announce the debut in the print magazine, and give an overall review of a new release, or one of your strategy articles focusing on that game, play up any "reviews" of specific pieces for the game as being available on this website.
That way, you don't tie up any expensive print-space, you quite possibly generate more traffic to this site, and you still provide focused, informative "brainfood" for all parties interested in that game/brand/product.
Is that viable?
Say we do review individual figures as they're released; do you want the figures reviewed on the quality of the figure itself (sculpt, cleanup required, ease of construction) or the stats that figure adds to the game (even if those stats have been out for a while)?