Talk:Final Round - WWII miniatures wargame

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Notability

I worry that this article currently reads like an advertisement (though for a free game) and that it might not be a notable game (I happened across the article when it showed up in the Wargaming article today.) --Habap 18:25, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it's the second time it's been there. The first time it was a direct link to the website. This time, there's at least this article. But, even if this turns out in time to be a quality, respected game, it's waaay too early for that notability to have happened yet, considering it sounds like it's effectively still under development. :P

If you've got any good ideas for a short notable list of miniatures games, have at it, my knowledge is generally on the boardgaming side, and I'm still trying to force myself down to a shorter list for that. -Oh! and put in dates, we seem to have unofficially adopted a chonilogical approach. --Rindis 03:43, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Some of the more popular miniature wargame rulesets include the Games Workshop powerhouses Warhammer 40K (sci-fi) and Warhammer Fantasy Battles, Privateer Press Warmachine (steampunk) and Hordes (fantasy monsters), Rackham's Confrontation (fantasy), Flames of War (WW2), and the CMGs such a Wizkid's Heroclix line. --James 11:29, 29 September 2007

Well, go to Wargaming#Notable wargames and write a couple things about those then. We've got Warhammer Fantasy, but the main contributors since the refresh of that section pretty much know nothing about that side of things. Just keep it short, sweet, and linked. ^_^ Try to keep the number of entries down (I think we're overshooting on the board game list already), but don't be afraid to put in things that important for the development of the hobby as opposed to currently popular. --Rindis 16:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I was a board-gamer also, so only have the vaguest idea of what rulesets are in use. (I haven't had the opportunity to play a board or miniatures game in.... like 10 years, I think. Sigh.) So, I would have to defer to others also. --Habap 13:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Writing as a Wikipedian, rather than a strategy gamer...this reeks of "vanity article" to me. The admin of the game's website is named Alex (no last name given); the originator of and primary contributor to this article is named Alexander K. Possibly a coincidence, but I rather doubt it. In any case, the tone is not at all in keeping with the objective, encyclopedic format required for Wikipedia. Unless someone can make a case otherwise, or rewrite the article in a less fannish tone (and justify its notability), I'm inclined to recommend this article for deletion. Greenie2600 01:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advantages

What really puzzles me is how they can consider "vagueness" in the rules an advantage and how the lack of some kind of point system to determine an equal fight is an advantage. I mean, won't both lead to more arguments before and during games? --Habap 13:29, 8 July 2006 (UTC)