$30.00
Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
49 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Wargames» Forums » General

Subject: Map Art in the GMT Russian Front Game? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
United States
Apex
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The sample artwork is:


It's not bad...but that's about all I can say for it.

I'll still get it, of course, but I'd love to see GMT break this boring color palette a little.

It's not unreasonable to think that a highly readable and functional map can be achieved without the "GMT Look & Feel."

So many great game maps have been shared in this (and other) forums over the past year or two ... so why is GMT still "stuck" for the most part? They have notable exceptions like Operation Dauntless, Red Winter, and many of the CDGs...so does it just come down the predominant map artist or do folks actually prefer this map style and color palette?

What do others think?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Gillispie
United States
Chamblee
Georgia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you dig around, you can find a view of the whole new map; it's either in theThe Russian Campaign BGG forum or the one on CSW, can't remember which.

My current TRC3 set is worn enough that when I laid it out last year, I couldn't read the set up letters on the counters; this is one of my all time favorites, so I'm getting it. I think the graphics here are fine; maybe someone else can compare to the fourth edition set.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pete Belli
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
designer
"If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
There is a lot to like about that map. The color selection for the various unit types is actually too "busy" so if the map was more colorful the counters might be lost in the kaleidoscope.
22 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Juan Valdez
msg tools
I prefer minimal maps, this one looks fine to me.

18 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Apex
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When people posted their favorite map designs though, very few were this minimal. So while an individual may have a specific preference for what constitutes the subjective "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" it seems like when large groups judge patterns tend to emerge which didn't include maps like this.

Again, I don't think it's a showstopper by any means. GMT has far worse (MBT...looking at you...) as do other companies!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Gillispie
United States
Chamblee
Georgia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you want to see what the map as a whole looks like, go to Consim Press's timeline on Facebook and back up to June 26.

Y'know, maybe it's old school, but it is a forty year old game...
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Apex
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It is an amazing upgrade over the original map art to be certain! lol
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant Linneberg
Canada
Calgary
Alberta
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I loved the simplicity of the old map, so this one is ok to me. Maybe a little too busy

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is not a GMT publication. You need to talk to John Kranz of Consim Press.
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Wilbeck
United States
Lincoln
Nebraska
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Map I can live with, but those counters are going to make it a tough sell for me and my color blindness.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Stuart
United States
Los Alamos
New Mexico
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The map looks fine to me.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
gamesontables wrote:
When people posted their favorite map designs though, very few were this minimal. So while an individual may have a specific preference for what constitutes the subjective "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" it seems like when large groups judge patterns tend to emerge which didn't include maps like this.

Again, I don't think it's a showstopper by any means. GMT has far worse (MBT...looking at you...) as do other companies!


It's quite possible that the people that cared enough to post their favorite maps are the ones impressed by glitz and glam. My favorite map would be any random Combat Commander map.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kev.
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
Read & Watch at www.bigboardgaming.com
Avatar
gamesontables wrote:
The sample artwork is:


It's not bad...but that's about all I can say for it.

I'll still get it, of course, but I'd love to see GMT break this boring color palette a little.

It's not unreasonable to think that a highly readable and functional map can be achieved without the "GMT Look & Feel."

So many great game maps have been shared in this (and other) forums over the past year or two ... so why is GMT still "stuck" for the most part? They have notable exceptions like Operation Dauntless, Red Winter, and many of the CDGs...so does it just come down the predominant map artist or do folks actually prefer this map style and color palette?

What do others think?

Look at the number of artists....there is a hint.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hunga Dunga
Canada
Maple Ridge
British Columbia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: counters - do I see three shades of green and two shades of brown?
11 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evgenii
United States
Minneapolis
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hungadunga wrote:
Re: counters - do I see three shades of green and two shades of brown?

Indeed. That's just crazy..
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christina Kahrl
United States
Unionville
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I kind of like that, I'm less thrilled with the electric Bavarian blue of the Luftwaffe field divisions and the white silhouettes for armor -- c'mon, just put the tank there, why doncha? And yes, I know they'll also provide NATO-symbol counters, but if you're going to put tanks on a counter, put the tank on the counter.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim F
United Kingdom
Birmingham
West Midlands
flag msg tools
Where the heck did this interest in WW1 come from?
badge
Ashwin in thoughtful mood
Avatar
mb

I'm not that keen on the Op Dauntless and RW maps, a bit busy for me. I prefer the simplicity of this map.

Not so keen on white silhouettes either though. Look a bit washed out on the light background.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gilles Daquin
Japan
Tokyo
Tokyo
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like the map. Not bare but not overdone either. Very pleasing actually.

The different shades for the axis are insane thoughshake
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Canada
Ottawa
Ontario
flag msg tools
mb
Ashiefan wrote:

Not so keen on white silhouettes either though. Look a bit washed out on the light background.


Not just the silhouettes. Using white as the standard foreground text colour on the counters isn't working for me for some reason. It could be there's too little contrast for visual comfort especially on the lighter green Axis counters. My eyes tend to prefer black text for legibility with exceptions of course for really dark background colours. (I went shopping for a sports watch not that long ago and "negative display" Casio's were all the rage. I immediately noticed they had lousy readability in comparison to a normal dark on light display).
4 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hipshot wrote:
Look at the number of artists....there is a hint.

Again, this is a Consim Press publication, not GMT.

Todd Davis is the graphic designer for TRC5. Out of the ten games he gets artist credit for on BGG, GMT published one.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Gillispie
United States
Chamblee
Georgia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When this thread started, I was confused because I wondered why GMT would publishRussian Front - I hated the board artwork in that game; I've read a number of people's opinions that they preferred RF's system, but my board was so muddy and impossible to read the city names that I never even punched the pieces.

Blowing up the example picture so that the counters are 5/8 inch - I don't think I'll have a problem with visibility; I assume that the reason for the negative color is to allow the use of darker background colors. I like some variety in color, so that's not a problem for me - when the TRC system was adapted to Fortress Europa, that was one change I liked.

You can tell how many people are really found of this game, given the strong opinions on what it should look like. I mean, two different versions of armor counter artwork? Really? (I'll go for the NATO symbols, cause that's what I'm used to.)

On the mounted map - Yes, I would pay a few bucks extra for that.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Apex
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
scottgillispie wrote:

You can tell how many people are really found of this game, given the strong opinions on what it should look like. I mean, two different versions of armor counter artwork? Really? (I'll go for the NATO symbols, cause that's what I'm used to.)

On the mounted map - Yes, I would pay a few bucks extra for that.


Agreed on both accounts. The NATO symbology takes only a handful of minutes to learn, is expressive through logical combinations, and reads well on nearly every size of counter for wargaming.
1 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Kuhn
United States
Garner
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think folks are missing the point just a bit. These decision were meant to bring the game back closer to the original (yes, down to the multi-hued greens of the Germans). They made a few decisions to "modernize" here and there, but they seem to be going for the classic look.

I think that is entirely appropriate. As to why they are doing it, I'm glad for that too. While the L2 version was great, it was getting to the point of jumping the shark with its "deluxe-ness." It was straying pretty far form the original, which was getting lost, not to mention the price. It just didn't seem right for what should be a more or less intro-to-intermediate wargame.

For a lot of people, myself included, TRC is one of the first, if not the first, foray into the wargaming hobby. Having a simpler, inexpensive version readily available is absolutely fantastic news. I really like the decisions they've made here. A lot. Especially pulling in all of the contributions from players over the years. It's going to be great.
14 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Apex
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What you're saying doesn't ring true with what's publicly available from official sources at this point.

* They kept the relative pricepoint exactly the same as the 1974 release ($12 in 1974 is ~$58 now and this sells for $60 MSRP).
* They significantly changed the original map.
* They went from a mounted map to a cardstock map.
* The counter artwork, across the board, has been significantly changed.

But to say that changes were made "here and there" or that this is an "inexpensive" version doesn't ring true based on what's on the P500 or CSW page.

Heck, even the CSW page says, "The Designer’s Signature Edition of The Russian Campaign includes numerous rules changes by leveraging the expertise and experience of today’s leading experts and world renown players who have organized numerous TRC tournament events and online support sites."

They're clearly pulling back the rules to resemble something far more familiar and evolutionary to the original design, but it's hardly cheap (falling right in line with what most wargames cost nowadays) or touched only here and there.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Kuhn
United States
Garner
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
gamesontables wrote:
What you're saying doesn't ring true with what's publicly available from official sources at this point.

* They kept the relative pricepoint exactly the same as the 1974 release ($12 in 1974 is ~$58 now and this sells for $60 MSRP).
* They significantly changed the original map.
* They went from a mounted map to a cardstock map.
* The counter artwork, across the board, has been significantly changed.

But to say that changes were made "here and there" or that this is an "inexpensive" version doesn't ring true based on what's on the P500 or CSW page.

Heck, even the CSW page says, "The Designer’s Signature Edition of The Russian Campaign includes numerous rules changes by leveraging the expertise and experience of today’s leading experts and world renown players who have organized numerous TRC tournament events and online support sites."

They're clearly pulling back the rules to resemble something far more familiar and evolutionary to the original design, but it's hardly cheap (falling right in line with what most wargames cost nowadays) or touched only here and there.


I disagree. The "rule changes" reflect how the gaming community approached this game over time. There were some flaws in the original, which slowly came out, as is evident by the simply enormous body of work published in The General and other mags on this topic. Due to the fact that this game was played extensively in tournament competitions, many popular tweaks were proposed. But I would classify them as tweaks. YMMV, and that is fine.

Also, the price, that is about the going rate for wargames. Much as $12 was back in the 70's. The L2 version was almost twice this edition's price at retail when it was available, and is now going for several hundred dollars if you can find one at all. So, yes, it is safe to say "inexpensive," in my opinion.

Can you point to the map changes? They have stated that the map is close to the original, but it does have an overlay for the Lvovs. The map looks very similar to the original to me.

Anyway, in my view, one need only look to the fact that the original designer is the driving force behind this edition to know that the intention is to get back more to the roots of the game. Here is the rest of that quote that you snipped:

Quote:
Consim Press has embarked on a special journey and partnership with the original game designer, John Edwards, to produce this unequivocal, beautifully-rendered, new edition that honors the elegant design approach of the original creator and pays tribute to one of the finest games ever published. Reflective that this goes far beyond a simple reprint effort, this all-new edition has been in the works for more than one year as the aim is to present the ultimate “final say” of this design as John Edwards intended.


The emphasis is mine, but that bit you left out is a key indicator of their intent, as plain as day.

It seems you have already made up your mind, which is fine. My purpose is not to change it, but to point out that there are other ways of looking at this.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.