|
Post by tiger6 on Jan 15, 2019 15:17:44 GMT
Are there still groups of people still playing 2.2 in the US or even 2.2+ for that matter? If still playing 2.2, have you made any changes?
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jan 15, 2019 15:43:04 GMT
Are there still groups of people still playing 2.2 in the US or even 2.2+ for that matter? If still playing 2.2, have you made any changes? I'm not aware of any. 2.2+ was never played here. I am the only person to run test games of it that I know (in this area). Joe Collins
|
|
|
Post by jeffreythancock on Jan 16, 2019 0:08:28 GMT
I gave up DBA when 2.0 went out of fashion! I thought about returning, but the 2.2+ disagreements ruined it for me. But 3.0 brought me back, and I credit Fanaticus with keeping me interested and getting me back with 3.0. Are there still groups of people still playing 2.2 in the US or even 2.2+ for that matter? If still playing 2.2, have you made any changes? I'm not aware of any. 2.2+ was never played here. I am the only person to run test games of it that I know (in this area). Joe Collins
|
|
|
Post by Cromwell on Jan 16, 2019 8:00:18 GMT
I played 2.2 and then moved to 2.2+. I resisted 3.0 for sometime but not really sure why. I then took the plunge and 2.2+ became a thing of the past.
|
|
|
Post by paulhannah on Jan 16, 2019 9:29:21 GMT
Here in "NAGS" (our modest, local DBA group in Seattle), Eric Donaldson & I certainly bleed Purple, but we're in the minority. The others still prefer DBA 2.2. But we all get along; each of us is willing to both versions.
As for V-3 renovations, as I bring my IV/30 Teutonic Order back "online" this week, it will be my 76th "Purple" renovation.
|
|
|
Post by cleopatra2 on Jan 16, 2019 17:39:08 GMT
I see tournament notices for 2.2 in Midwest USA events. The plus game evolved into its own version so I don’t know why that would still be played.
I admire your flexibility, Paul, being able to move back-and-forth between 2.2 and 3.0. I could never go back to earlier versions. For me it would be like trying to use a typewriter versus a computer keyboard :-)
|
|
|
Post by paulhannah on Jan 16, 2019 18:43:20 GMT
I admire your flexibility, Paul, being able to move back-and-forth between 2.2 and 3.0. I could never go back to earlier versions. For me it would be like trying to use a typewriter versus a computer keyboard :-) It's a community I enjoy. We've been gathering twice-a-month since back in 2002, but it's also a small group, so it's in all our interests to play both versions. But, yes, it does feel a little weird to... - Rearrange my battleline while moving ahead,
- Claim to be in Bad Going while 99% of my element is in Good Going,
- Pull a 2nd rank of Pikes out of a melee to provide an overlap,
- And have ties almost always be "No Result". (Where's the fun in that?)
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Jan 21, 2019 18:59:39 GMT
The best way to ease 2.2 folks into 3.0 is just agree to play their game if you play my game (so they play both versions). I think in the long run (after the emotional issues drop away), they will see the advantages of 3.0. But you must induce them to play and that means swapping systems. Fortunately my gaming group is all about innovation. They expect a new experimental rule every gaming session. After coming out of DBA 3.0 playtesting we just never stopped innovating. (They all believed 3.0 was much to conservative - I could not convince them that it had actually generated this wave of negative vibes amongst old players.) The group just keeps expanding as we one by one knock off their DBX objections. For a while we were barely holding off the French game.
Even the authors of 2.2+ don't play it anymore. They have their own game system.
TomT
|
|
|
Post by pvt64 on Jan 24, 2019 20:51:09 GMT
I still use it for my Lord of the Rings.
|
|
|
Post by paulhannah on Jan 24, 2019 22:56:06 GMT
The best way to ease 2.2 folks into 3.0 is just agree to play their game if you play my game (so they play both versions). I like it. I think I've been too acquiescent in agreeing to play V-2 games with others in our group, when I really prefer "Purple". Your suggestion of being more intentional about playing both versions makes good sense, on several levels.
|
|
|
Post by mdsand on Jan 25, 2019 4:54:10 GMT
There still is a group of us in the Kansas City and Omaha areas who still play 2.2 exclusively. It is unlikely that we will change.
|
|
|
Post by jeffreythancock on Jan 26, 2019 2:27:53 GMT
Change is not easy or necessary if you are satisfied with the status quo. Play what you like, be it 2.2, Triumph, or 3.0!
|
|
|
Post by vodnik on Jan 26, 2019 6:26:38 GMT
...till now i did 3 games of DBA2.2 & 2 games of Triumph & also 2 ADG this year. But i got also my 25% order from Museum for more projects...
|
|
|
Post by wjhupp on Jan 26, 2019 14:11:31 GMT
Our group plays Triumph! and 3.0 (and Lion Rampant and TtS and C&CA and ....). We don't play much in the way of 1:1 tournament style games, prefering historical scenarios.
It's whatever game the organizer wants to put on, the same as the rest of the games we play.
For us its history, toy soldiers and rules in that order of importance.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Jan 29, 2019 21:59:12 GMT
Its hard to appreciate the advantages of 3.0 without playing it. That's why I urge 2.2 to try it - and do so over several games. Its particularly good for games set in the latter middle ages (not as good as D3H2 and way not as good as Knights & Knaves but still better than 2.2 if you like refighting historical battles).
TomT
|
|