Do we want background/fluff?

[shotgun-toting chipmunk]

One of the things thatt I find makes a great wargaming experience is having background information. The coolest minis don't really mean much if there's no story behind them. Look at the success games such as WH40K and Battletech have. Personally, I put it down to a combination of enticing rules and background. Battlefield:Evolution has a fantastic ruleset, IMO, but lacks for background. The reasoning that I've gathered is that since it's near-future, Mongoose wants to leave it open-ended.

I'm all for the opportunity to act out potential real-life scenarios, but I'd also like to have a storyline to follow, maybe even have it affected by the players (like what WizKids does with MWA). At the very least, some stories to flesh out the various factions. Does anybody else feel this way?

 

[Hiromoon]

Fluff helps...it seriously does!

 

[Valen is my name]

i like reading about all the different races and their ships in ACtA, so it should also be done in Battlefield Evo.

 

[Chiwie]

bring on the fluff.

that said im making my own (god bless Chewmerica! :lol: )

 

[cordas]

Fluff is always nice, I carry on hoping that MGP will produce more editions of the Global Times as I really enjoyed the issue they released to hyp the game (certainloy a lot better than that garbage produced for AT-43).

Maybe they can write some stuff off the back of the tournaments and pop it into S&P, it would make a pleasent change from all that SST fluff they have been dumping in there..... SST needs steak and they insist on feeding us more sizzle, whilst BF could really benefit from some more Sizzle.

 

[Meliadus]

Yes most definitly adds to the flavour of the game with good background info.

 

[lastbesthope]

You want some good Mongoose fluff that could be worked into thwe future of BF:Evo???

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/home/detail.php?qsID=1317&qsSeries=4

A most excellent novel. Bit heavy on mech stuff to suit BF:Evo for now though.

LBH

 

[emperorpenguin]

A most excellent novel. LBH

argh I'm having Bill and Ted flashbacks! :lol:

 

[vitalis6969]

Fluff rules!!!! Bring on the Fluffers!!!!!

-V

 

[Captain_Nemo]

Fluffage like ruffage helps things to be smooth and, reduces crankiness.

Yes for fluff.

 

[Rob_A]

A most excellent novel. LBH

argh I'm having Bill and Ted flashbacks! :lol:

I couldn't EVER see LBH quote Bill and Ted.

 

[BuShips]

A big thumbs up for the fluff and stuff. :wink:

 

[lastbesthope]

I couldn't EVER see LBH quote Bill and Ted.

Dude! I totally quoted that Bil and Ted film dude!

LBH

 

[Sgt. Brassones]

I would love to see something like the Global Times be a regular feature.

 

[Xorrandor]

I'm firmly in the "not sure" camp. On the one hand, yeah, fluff helps sell games and it would be fun to have out there. On the other hand, I'm not sure I want to deal with the arguments about the fluff reasons that the US pissed off the English enough to cooperate with the French (or any of a dozen other potential controversies). On the third hand, have you seen how many products Mongoose has on the front page? If you're going to have fiction, it should be good fiction, and I'm worried they might get spread too thin. And on the Forth hand, having heard all the complaints about Forth fluff, do you want them doing USMC fluff?

 

[Mr Evil]

trouble is fluff could be out of date between time of writing and print with such a close time scale game, unless MGP go down an alternative time line slightly.

 

[Secesh]

I like fluff with other games but with BEVO Xorrandor is right:

I'm not sure I want to deal with the arguments about the fluff

A while back I came up with a hypothetical "what if" Australia sided with the US against Britain over her weapon sales to Indonesia and some clowns went berko. Using factual fluff provokes just as much controversy, if not more, than using fictitious fluff. Either way there will be arguments.

We're starting up a 4 player campaign with a USMC/EFTF alliance against a MEA/PLA alliance in Sudan. The Sudan Intervention Force (SIFOR) is comprised of a USMC landing on the Red Sea coast, combined German/UK task force crossing the border from Ethiopia and a French force protecting refugees and preventing escalation on the border with Chad and CAR. The French are there for colour at the moment, they won't take part until the 6 player campaign. SIFOR is engaged against the Sudanese arab government currently committing genocide against the black Africans in Darfur and China who is funding the genocidal regime (along with stymieing foreign intervention in the UN) in return for oil mining rights.

Even though this is based on fact (not SIFOR of course) you'll still have morons coming out from under their rocks saying "bad guys" is subjective. The way that posts are deleted around here there won't be any forum left.

 

[The Old Soldier]

I'm one that doesn't want to be tied down to any one fictional version of events. While I love more Global New type stuff from MP, I don't want too much fluff. Rather make my own. Mine involves both a Jordanian/Palestine scenario and a Central American conflict, with PLA backing against the USMC, this includes both local militia forces, Cartel, and local government forces that are allies of the USMC and the PLA backed South America.

 

[cordas]

And on the Forth hand, having heard all the complaints about Forth fluff, do you want them doing USMC fluff?

I think the majority of the fluff complaints regarding the Forth are more to do with people wanting actually game stuff, but instead being given more and more fluff.

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

trouble is fluff could be out of date between time of writing and print with such a close time scale game, unless MGP go down an alternative time line slightly.

I don't see anything wrong with that