Greetings!
In this post I will go through the different phases of the turn and briefly summarize what goes on in each of them and what common misconceptions new-comers might face.
In Kings of War the turns follow a strict "IGO-UGO"-principle, meaning that during your turn, you are the only player rolling dice and moving units and the same goes for the opponent as well.
This philosophy leads some new-comers to shake their heads as they aren't allowed to roll Nerve checks or take reactive actions. This is done in order to keep the game flowing smoothly with zero interference from switching from one active player to the other. While it may feel even claustrophobic at first, the principle leads to very smooth mechanics that don't bog the game down with multiple reactionary decisions. It may not sound like much, but in a larger game a phase that requires the players to switch back and forth multiple times (picking up dice, choosing reactions, moving units that might flee etc.) is notably slower than it is in Kings of War.
Turns consist of three phases; movement, shooting and melee. The names are relatively self-explanatory as to what happens when.
Movement phase
Movement phase is the phase in which all ordinary movement takes place. It is, in my view, the most important phase of the game as victory or loss usually depends on your ability to have your units in the right places at the right times. A combat unit out of place cannot charge and thus is useless, and a shooting unit that can't see anyone diminish in efficiency as they have to move excessively and can't focus on their job. This is the phase in which you make sure that your units can do what you need them to do, so make sure you use enough time when you consider your moves.
Units are given orders one at a time (unless you have multiple units charging the same facing of an enemy unit) and each unit completes their move from start to finish before moving to the next unit. This is important to remember: a unit must complete its entire move before another unit may be moved, so you can't scooch a little to allow another unit to pass by and then continue moving.
Plan your movement phases before you start moving units, because the order sometimes makes a difference!
Your own units can move through each other (except when charging, you can't go running willy-nilly through your own units unless they're Yielding), so movement is slightly easier than in WHFB in that sense. It's best not to lull yourself into a false sense of ease, however, as often your units can't cover the distance all the way over your own units, or the move would take them too far and at risk from enemy units. Again, planning is key in movement, especially in the first few turns of the game (before those insidious dice rolls can mess with your plans).
WHFB-veterans should note that in Kings of War there are no sub-phases, which is to say that you are allowed to declare charges at every point during the phase.
My advice for a starter: start with the clear-cut moves and leave the important units for later, so that you have a clearer view of the board when you get to moving those units in trickier situations.
When you feel like you're ready to move on to the Shooting phase take a minute to go through every unit you have on the board and make sure you've moved everyone you want to move. This is simply to reduce the number of "Oh shit, I forgot to move that unit"-moments.
Once you've done that, move on to the shooting phase.
Shooting phase
Kings of War rolls shooting and magic into a single phase. That means that every spell, fire-breathing dragon, shotgun and noises loud enough to do damage are used in this phase.
A unit that has at least one weapon or spell is allowed to make one shooting attack regardless of how many of these attacks it has. A wizard might have two, or even five spells, but is normally allowed to use only one of them in a phase.
Usually the unit uses its Attack-characteristic to determine how many attacks it makes when shooting. Spells are an exception to this, and they always define the number of dice used in the attack in brackets.
All attacks are resolved one at a time and all damage is marked as it accumulates. Once all attacks are resolved the active player goes through each unit damaged this turn and rolls for Nerve in any order they choose. That means that you generally want to roll Nerve for all damaged Inspiring units first. If they die, they stop Inspiring and that might mean you can deny your opponent that benefit for any further Nerve tests.
The Nerve check that results from shooting damage to a unit is always done at the end of the shooting phase. This is because unit may only take a single Nerve check per phase, and allowing players to roll for Nerve might lead to weird situations where the unit takes some damage, passes a Nerve check and then takes more damage (and mysteriously doesn't care anymore).
Some spells, such as Surge and Windblast can move units in the shooting phase. Both are very straight forward in how they work, but can be used in some sneaky ways I will cover in a later post.
Once all spells are cast, Nerve checks are passed or failed, it's time to move to the Combat phase.
Combat phase
In Kings of War, the combat phase is relatively straightforward.
The active player decides the order in which fights are resolved, attacking with all units engaged against a single target and then repeats this until all fights have been fought. The main difference between melee and shooting attacks is that a unit takes a Nerve check immediately after all attacks against it have been resolved whereas shooting attacks caused a Nerve check only at the end of the shooting phase.
A combat is always fought through completely, from attacks to damage to Nerve checks to after combat movement. This also means that sometimes an unresolved combat right next to the unit wanting to move might hinder its ability to move.
Again, you will want to fight (and possibly kill) Inspiring units first, as that way you can once again deprive your opponent of those precious rerolls.
--
Once Combat phase is completed, the turn shifts to the other player. Battles in Kings of War last for six turn, after which a seventh turn is taken on a 4+ roll. I will deal the with significance of the possible seventh turn in a later post.
This is all for this post. You are of course more than welcome to comment below on my thoughts and perhaps suggest topics I should cover.
Cheers,
AoW
Wednesday 29 August 2018
Monday 27 August 2018
Kings of War - Core Concepts for beginners II
Greetings again,
This is another post that deals with core concepts of the game. I assume you're somewhat familiar with the rulebook so I won't go through the exact rules, only their implications and some rationale that I see behind certain mechanics.
This post focuses on core concepts of army building and different roles for different units.
Army composition
In Kings of War, armies are put together using unlocks from regular regiments, hordes and legions.
Each regiment of infantry, chariots or cavalry can bring with it up to two troops and one of either a hero, a war engine, a monster or a titan.
A horde or a legion of infantry, chariots or cavalry can bring up to four troops and one of each a hero, a war engine and either one monster or one titan.
Regiments of large/monstrous infantry or large cavalry don't need to be unlocked, but neither do they unlock anything. A Horde/legion of large infantry unlocks two troops and two slots for either one hero, one war engine, one monster or one titan. No duplicate choices allowed here.
Some units are marked with * and are called irregular. That means they don't unlock anything
This is a big change for people used to playing WHFB or its derivatives. In that mentality, an army needs a core (which usually consists of mediocre units) that has to be a certain size and all the good stuff is capped points-wise by army composition rules. That leads, in my view, to a mentality of a "core tax" and also often manifests in balance issues as different armies suffer more from the effects of being forced to take "bad" units and having a limitation on how many "good" units you are allowed to bring.
In Kings of War you are allowed to bring as many of the "good" units as you like, or can fit in your army. You can build an all Vampire army, or you can bring all your infantry as the better variety. There is no core tax, and the abilities of units are all expressed in the point costs of units. That means that instead of being forced to operate within point brackets, you have more freedom in terms of how you want to spend your points.
Unit sizes
In Kings of War units come in three commen sizes: troops, regiments and hordes. I'm going to compare these with a (completely arbitrary) three tier system (I-III) in terms of Maneuverability, Power and Resilience
In addition there are single models (usually monsters or heroes) and Legions (which are just bigger hordes).
Troops are small units which are usually relatively frail and have the lowest offensive potential. They are also the cheapest units, and need unlocks from other units in order to be included in the army. Their roles vary from shooters to chaff to decoy deployment drops to token/counter cappers.
Maneuverability II
Power II
Resilience I
Regiments are the first unlockers. They have a larger footprint (usually they are the size of two troops back to back), a little more offensive power and a lot higher Nerve than troops. They cost a little more (usually 30-50% more than a troop). Some weak units do not come under regiment size and some powerful units do not come larger than regiments.
Maneuverability II
Power II
Resilience II
Hordes bring many unlocks, huge improvements to Attacks, Nerve and footprint, but they also cost a lot more and are clumsier than troops or regiments.
Maneuverability I
Power III
Resilience III
So why bring anything else than Hordes?
The logic behind this is, in my view, as follows:
A regiment is stronger than a troop, so it costs more.
Two troops are better than one regiment, so together they cost more.
A horde is stronger than a regiment, so it costs more.
Two regiments are better than one horde, so together they cost more.
One could also add that:
Three troops are better than one horde, so together they cost more.
Choosing what sizes to take your units in is a matter of army composition, as expensive hordes might hinder your army's ability to maneuver so much that it costs you the game, while stocking up on multiple small units might leave you overly vulnerable to enemy shooters and unable to contain their heavy hitters.
Anvil
An anvil is a unit that is used to take a punch and hold the attacking unit in place so that you can bring your own attacker in to kill it. Hammer-and-anvil combos are common and more often than not your opponent will know what you are striving for, and you'll end up trying to line up your units so you can catch your opponent between your anvil and your hammer.
Typically anvils are hordes with high defense and/or nerve.
Hammer
Hammers are your damage-dealers. They are units like knights or chariots that are good at giving a punch, but lose a lot of their effectiveness if they have to take one.
Some Hammers are very resilient, others are called "glass-hammers", which is to say that they are units that really can't take a punch at all.
Chaff
Chaff, in Kings of War slang, is often used to describe units that can't do anything properly and are only good for throwing in the way of your opponent's big units when you need to delay them a bit.
On more general terms, Chaff means units that are often fast, agile and fragile. They typically don't have a lot of punching power and so even a flank charge from a chaff unit is rarely decisive. Light chaff is more of an interfering unit, while heavy chaff can be a middle ground between a throwaway and a serious combat threat.
However, chaff can fulfill a variety or roles. They can indeed interfere with your opponent's Hammers, but they can also go after war engines, casters, support heroes and claim objectives. You will typically want to have some units that can fulfill the role of chaff.
Shooters
In Kings of War shooting is rarely (though in no means "never") able to win the battle alone. Shooters, in my view can fulfill three roles.
Firstly, shooters are a pressure unit. You can use shooters to force your opponent to move to break stalemates, provided that your shooting is more powerful than theirs. It's not very comfortable to sit ildly by while your opponent's war egines are lobbing rocks at you!
Secondly, shooters are Chaff killers. Small shooter units are often able to take out chaff units, given a turn or two to finish the job. You might be able to deprive your opponent of his charge-blockers if you shoot them off the board.
Thirdly, shooters can be area control units. Many spells and "breath weapony" weapons have short ranges, but they hit easily, so they are good for controlling an area and for discouraging your opponent from landing flyers or bringing their chaff to the area, where you can line up a few shooting attacks at it.
Support
Some units, mainly Individual Heroes, fall into the category of Support. These are units whose main role is to augment other units. These can be in the form of melee heroes who bring in that little extra damage to Rout the enemy unit, or they can be spellcasters who Banechant your spearmen or then the simple battle standard to Inspire the units.
If you're coming in from WHFB, you'll notice that most heroes are quite a bit weaker in Kings of War, and they can't take units head on without risk. However, as support units, their role is invaluable in turning the battle to your favour.
Sole Grinder
Some units are tough like Anvils, but also dish out a fair bit of damage. These units are sometimes called Sole Grinders. That means that they are able to take a punch and then grind the opposing unit down alone.
Typically these are units with a combination of good melee power, high nerve and high defense.
--
That's all for this post, hope you enjoyed it and feel welcome to leave more ideas of core concepts in the comments!
AoW
This is another post that deals with core concepts of the game. I assume you're somewhat familiar with the rulebook so I won't go through the exact rules, only their implications and some rationale that I see behind certain mechanics.
This post focuses on core concepts of army building and different roles for different units.
Army composition
In Kings of War, armies are put together using unlocks from regular regiments, hordes and legions.
Each regiment of infantry, chariots or cavalry can bring with it up to two troops and one of either a hero, a war engine, a monster or a titan.
A horde or a legion of infantry, chariots or cavalry can bring up to four troops and one of each a hero, a war engine and either one monster or one titan.
Regiments of large/monstrous infantry or large cavalry don't need to be unlocked, but neither do they unlock anything. A Horde/legion of large infantry unlocks two troops and two slots for either one hero, one war engine, one monster or one titan. No duplicate choices allowed here.
Some units are marked with * and are called irregular. That means they don't unlock anything
This is a big change for people used to playing WHFB or its derivatives. In that mentality, an army needs a core (which usually consists of mediocre units) that has to be a certain size and all the good stuff is capped points-wise by army composition rules. That leads, in my view, to a mentality of a "core tax" and also often manifests in balance issues as different armies suffer more from the effects of being forced to take "bad" units and having a limitation on how many "good" units you are allowed to bring.
In Kings of War you are allowed to bring as many of the "good" units as you like, or can fit in your army. You can build an all Vampire army, or you can bring all your infantry as the better variety. There is no core tax, and the abilities of units are all expressed in the point costs of units. That means that instead of being forced to operate within point brackets, you have more freedom in terms of how you want to spend your points.
Unit sizes
In Kings of War units come in three commen sizes: troops, regiments and hordes. I'm going to compare these with a (completely arbitrary) three tier system (I-III) in terms of Maneuverability, Power and Resilience
In addition there are single models (usually monsters or heroes) and Legions (which are just bigger hordes).
Troops are small units which are usually relatively frail and have the lowest offensive potential. They are also the cheapest units, and need unlocks from other units in order to be included in the army. Their roles vary from shooters to chaff to decoy deployment drops to token/counter cappers.
Maneuverability II
Power II
Resilience I
Regiments are the first unlockers. They have a larger footprint (usually they are the size of two troops back to back), a little more offensive power and a lot higher Nerve than troops. They cost a little more (usually 30-50% more than a troop). Some weak units do not come under regiment size and some powerful units do not come larger than regiments.
Maneuverability II
Power II
Resilience II
Hordes bring many unlocks, huge improvements to Attacks, Nerve and footprint, but they also cost a lot more and are clumsier than troops or regiments.
Maneuverability I
Power III
Resilience III
So why bring anything else than Hordes?
The logic behind this is, in my view, as follows:
A regiment is stronger than a troop, so it costs more.
Two troops are better than one regiment, so together they cost more.
A horde is stronger than a regiment, so it costs more.
Two regiments are better than one horde, so together they cost more.
One could also add that:
Three troops are better than one horde, so together they cost more.
Choosing what sizes to take your units in is a matter of army composition, as expensive hordes might hinder your army's ability to maneuver so much that it costs you the game, while stocking up on multiple small units might leave you overly vulnerable to enemy shooters and unable to contain their heavy hitters.
Anvil
An anvil is a unit that is used to take a punch and hold the attacking unit in place so that you can bring your own attacker in to kill it. Hammer-and-anvil combos are common and more often than not your opponent will know what you are striving for, and you'll end up trying to line up your units so you can catch your opponent between your anvil and your hammer.
Typically anvils are hordes with high defense and/or nerve.
Hammer
Hammers are your damage-dealers. They are units like knights or chariots that are good at giving a punch, but lose a lot of their effectiveness if they have to take one.
Some Hammers are very resilient, others are called "glass-hammers", which is to say that they are units that really can't take a punch at all.
Chaff
Chaff, in Kings of War slang, is often used to describe units that can't do anything properly and are only good for throwing in the way of your opponent's big units when you need to delay them a bit.
On more general terms, Chaff means units that are often fast, agile and fragile. They typically don't have a lot of punching power and so even a flank charge from a chaff unit is rarely decisive. Light chaff is more of an interfering unit, while heavy chaff can be a middle ground between a throwaway and a serious combat threat.
However, chaff can fulfill a variety or roles. They can indeed interfere with your opponent's Hammers, but they can also go after war engines, casters, support heroes and claim objectives. You will typically want to have some units that can fulfill the role of chaff.
Shooters
In Kings of War shooting is rarely (though in no means "never") able to win the battle alone. Shooters, in my view can fulfill three roles.
Firstly, shooters are a pressure unit. You can use shooters to force your opponent to move to break stalemates, provided that your shooting is more powerful than theirs. It's not very comfortable to sit ildly by while your opponent's war egines are lobbing rocks at you!
Secondly, shooters are Chaff killers. Small shooter units are often able to take out chaff units, given a turn or two to finish the job. You might be able to deprive your opponent of his charge-blockers if you shoot them off the board.
Thirdly, shooters can be area control units. Many spells and "breath weapony" weapons have short ranges, but they hit easily, so they are good for controlling an area and for discouraging your opponent from landing flyers or bringing their chaff to the area, where you can line up a few shooting attacks at it.
Support
Some units, mainly Individual Heroes, fall into the category of Support. These are units whose main role is to augment other units. These can be in the form of melee heroes who bring in that little extra damage to Rout the enemy unit, or they can be spellcasters who Banechant your spearmen or then the simple battle standard to Inspire the units.
If you're coming in from WHFB, you'll notice that most heroes are quite a bit weaker in Kings of War, and they can't take units head on without risk. However, as support units, their role is invaluable in turning the battle to your favour.
Sole Grinder
Some units are tough like Anvils, but also dish out a fair bit of damage. These units are sometimes called Sole Grinders. That means that they are able to take a punch and then grind the opposing unit down alone.
Typically these are units with a combination of good melee power, high nerve and high defense.
--
That's all for this post, hope you enjoyed it and feel welcome to leave more ideas of core concepts in the comments!
AoW
Tuesday 14 August 2018
Damage in KoW and rationale for the Nerve mechanic
Greetings,
In this post I'm going to take a moment to explain why I think the Nerve system of KoW is in my view more or less as realistic as removing casualties Warhammer-style. The games (WHFB and it's derivatives, I'm going to use WHFB to refer to those as well) differ very much in both the level and the style of abstraction used in translating fantasy battlefields into a tabletop miniature game. Both styles divide the game into turns and both games use dice to represent uncertainty, but aside from those, many things are different.
Where WHFB revolves around single miniatures (they have distinct locations on the field, they attack on their own, they can be killed and removed), KoW revolves around units as conglomerated wholes (they have a location only as a unit, they attack as one whole, they can be attacked as one whole). This leads to a very different approach to damage and how damage affects units.
WHFB treats damage as a singular event, which can lead to removing models and other effects. Damage, when sufficient, leads to a leadership test to see if that blow is enough to cause the victim to flee. This roll is typically always made against the unit's leadership, which is relatively static and is not affected by the amount of damage taken (aside from combat). Battle fatigue is not represented, and the leadership test is not affected by earlier events (the ninth test is as easy to pass as the first). Damage, as in wounds, is seen relatively purely as physical harm that may lead to other effects in the form of panic tests. Damage and leadership are two different things that are only loosely related. You have to take an LD test without suffering any damage, or you may remove many models without having to pass an LD test.
In Kings of War damage accumulates throughout the game, and thus every Nerve check becomes more and more difficult to pass as damage mounts. Damage, thus, is perhaps not seen as wounds, but as fatigue and loss of cohesion in addition to casualties suffered. Maybe only few soldiers have died, but many are wounded, or perhaps the men are becoming mentally battered by the onslaught of foes. Thus, the tests get more difficult as the troops become more and more battered. Damage and Nerve are closely linked as Nerve is the unit's ability sustain damage, sort of Wounds and LD rolled into a single stat.
Questions I've often heard from beginners (and sometimes from veterans too) include such questions as "why doesn't a unit's effectiveness diminish as it takes more and more casualties?" Why doesn't its footprint change? Why don't the units flee and regroup?
Mostly the answer lies in "because it would add complexity that can be done without", as in adding a mechanic for fleeing would add rules that would be likely to create difficult interactions with other rules and make the game more difficult to balance.
I think one should be careful with statements like "But in a real battle...", because most of those claims are often widely off their mark and often take the discussion off the tracks and straight into the bush.
I'm going to make a statement like that none the less, bear with me and correct me if I'm totally off my mark.
Unless I'm completely mistaken, in a real battle of thousands of soldiers, taking fifty or a hundred, or even a thousand casualties could very easily be ignored if your formations did not lose cohesion. As long as your soldiers are willing to stand in orderly lines and keep their heads cool enough to listen to orders, you don't need all four thousand of your soldiers. You need those four thousand so that you can lose two thousand, not because each of them would be utilized to the maximum from the start.
As far as my understanding of battlefield conditions goes, usually soldiers die when formations break and are caught fleeing way more often than in grinding hand-to-hand combat with the enemy. And as the fighting is mostly done by the first few ranks of troops, it's easy to imagine a unit fighting on with full effectiveness despite having lost the reserve of rear ranks (providing that they're very determined).
In Warhammer taking damage was (and in other variants built on that game still is) represented by removing casualties. This is kind of cool, as you can always see the units grow smaller and smaller as you pound away with magic missiles, but the problem is that armies didn't really lose potency like that. Most units, as far as I understand, would be at full effective strength until they broke, and only very rarely would they fight on after taking immense casualties. So I think you wouldn't really see many heroic lone survivors of units, they'd be running for their lives.
Sometimes more abstraction is more realistic, in my opinion, although Kings of War doesn't really strive for that. If simulating battlefield conditions is a thing you strive for, I'd say marking damage on units that fight until they seize to exist is closer to the reality of a formation being worn down instead of a unit that grows smaller and smaller.
TLDR: marking damage is a good mechanic and simulates contact with the enemy in a relatively satisfactory manner. Removing casualties is fun, too, but might lead to a false sense of realism.
Cheers,
AoW
In this post I'm going to take a moment to explain why I think the Nerve system of KoW is in my view more or less as realistic as removing casualties Warhammer-style. The games (WHFB and it's derivatives, I'm going to use WHFB to refer to those as well) differ very much in both the level and the style of abstraction used in translating fantasy battlefields into a tabletop miniature game. Both styles divide the game into turns and both games use dice to represent uncertainty, but aside from those, many things are different.
Where WHFB revolves around single miniatures (they have distinct locations on the field, they attack on their own, they can be killed and removed), KoW revolves around units as conglomerated wholes (they have a location only as a unit, they attack as one whole, they can be attacked as one whole). This leads to a very different approach to damage and how damage affects units.
WHFB treats damage as a singular event, which can lead to removing models and other effects. Damage, when sufficient, leads to a leadership test to see if that blow is enough to cause the victim to flee. This roll is typically always made against the unit's leadership, which is relatively static and is not affected by the amount of damage taken (aside from combat). Battle fatigue is not represented, and the leadership test is not affected by earlier events (the ninth test is as easy to pass as the first). Damage, as in wounds, is seen relatively purely as physical harm that may lead to other effects in the form of panic tests. Damage and leadership are two different things that are only loosely related. You have to take an LD test without suffering any damage, or you may remove many models without having to pass an LD test.
In Kings of War damage accumulates throughout the game, and thus every Nerve check becomes more and more difficult to pass as damage mounts. Damage, thus, is perhaps not seen as wounds, but as fatigue and loss of cohesion in addition to casualties suffered. Maybe only few soldiers have died, but many are wounded, or perhaps the men are becoming mentally battered by the onslaught of foes. Thus, the tests get more difficult as the troops become more and more battered. Damage and Nerve are closely linked as Nerve is the unit's ability sustain damage, sort of Wounds and LD rolled into a single stat.
Questions I've often heard from beginners (and sometimes from veterans too) include such questions as "why doesn't a unit's effectiveness diminish as it takes more and more casualties?" Why doesn't its footprint change? Why don't the units flee and regroup?
Mostly the answer lies in "because it would add complexity that can be done without", as in adding a mechanic for fleeing would add rules that would be likely to create difficult interactions with other rules and make the game more difficult to balance.
I think one should be careful with statements like "But in a real battle...", because most of those claims are often widely off their mark and often take the discussion off the tracks and straight into the bush.
I'm going to make a statement like that none the less, bear with me and correct me if I'm totally off my mark.
Unless I'm completely mistaken, in a real battle of thousands of soldiers, taking fifty or a hundred, or even a thousand casualties could very easily be ignored if your formations did not lose cohesion. As long as your soldiers are willing to stand in orderly lines and keep their heads cool enough to listen to orders, you don't need all four thousand of your soldiers. You need those four thousand so that you can lose two thousand, not because each of them would be utilized to the maximum from the start.
As far as my understanding of battlefield conditions goes, usually soldiers die when formations break and are caught fleeing way more often than in grinding hand-to-hand combat with the enemy. And as the fighting is mostly done by the first few ranks of troops, it's easy to imagine a unit fighting on with full effectiveness despite having lost the reserve of rear ranks (providing that they're very determined).
In Warhammer taking damage was (and in other variants built on that game still is) represented by removing casualties. This is kind of cool, as you can always see the units grow smaller and smaller as you pound away with magic missiles, but the problem is that armies didn't really lose potency like that. Most units, as far as I understand, would be at full effective strength until they broke, and only very rarely would they fight on after taking immense casualties. So I think you wouldn't really see many heroic lone survivors of units, they'd be running for their lives.
Sometimes more abstraction is more realistic, in my opinion, although Kings of War doesn't really strive for that. If simulating battlefield conditions is a thing you strive for, I'd say marking damage on units that fight until they seize to exist is closer to the reality of a formation being worn down instead of a unit that grows smaller and smaller.
TLDR: marking damage is a good mechanic and simulates contact with the enemy in a relatively satisfactory manner. Removing casualties is fun, too, but might lead to a false sense of realism.
Cheers,
AoW
Sunday 12 August 2018
Kings of War - Core Concepts for beginners I
Greetings,
In this entry I will go through the main concepts that a player will encounter and need to understand while playing Kings of War. This entry will be slightly encyclopedic, with me listing and explaining most of the main concepts and how they work.
Unit
In Kings of war, everything that is on the battlefield is called a unit. Units can be composed of more than forty models or they can be a single monster. In Kings of War everything mounted on a single base is a single unit, regardless of how many models it contains.
Every unit has certain elements that they share, such as arcs, a leader point and footprint.
Footprint
Every unti has a footprint. That means the external dimension of the base the unit should be based on. Most units have a fixed footprint that is the exact size the unit needs to be. As movement and distances are a big part of the game, this is relatively important.
Units such as heroes and monsters may have exceptional base sizes, namely larger than the minimum listed in the rulebook, if they need one to properly fit on the base.
A unit is never allowed to have a smaller base as the one listed.
Arcs
Every unit has four arcs. A front arc, two flanks and a rear arc. These are used to determine things like Line of Sight (from the front arc) and the facings that need to be contacted when charging.
Leader point
Every unit has a command point in the exact center of its front arc. This is used to determine Line of Sight and for centering chargers.
Line of Sight
Line of Sight in Kings of War is drawn according to the rules, not as true line of sight.
In Kings of War Line of Sight is drawn from the leader point of the unit in a 180 degree arc. If a direct line can be drawn from the leader point to any point of the target and that line is not intersected by units with the same height or greater than either the target or the unit itself.
Note that many actions such as shooting, casting spells and charging also require the target to be in the front arc of the unit trying to draw LoS, but that is a separate requirement, not a part of LoS itself.
Orders
In Kings of War units perform action on orders.
Orders for movement include Halt, Advance, Change Facing and At The Double. Some movement orders have effects on what the unit can do later in the turn. A unit may only be ordered to shoot if it did not move At The Double, some weapons require the unit to stay absolutely still in order to be used in the shooting face. A unit moving At The Double also cannot normally move into or through difficult terrain.
In the Shooting Phase a unit that can shoot can be given the Shoot order. Casting spells is done with the same order.
Pivot
In KoW units turn by pivoting on the spot. This is done as a "virtual pivot", meaning that the unit is picked up, pivoted around its exact center (NOT the leader point) and then placed back down. Units may move through enemy units and blocking terrain during their pivot, as long as they can be placed on the battlefield and clear of other units once they are done.
It is important to make sure that the unit's central point stays put. It's fairly easy to slip half an inch this way or that, and it's a good idea to mark one corner of the unit with a few D6's before you pick it up. This way you can always put the unit back to the initial position should the pivot be unclear.
Pivots can be done at any point during the move, and they are limited to 90 degree shifts per pivot during Advance and Charge orders, but can be towards any direction with the Change Facing order.
Charge!
Charging is done in the movement phase by giving a unit an order to charge.
The unit must be able to draw LoS to some point of the target unit (it doesn't have to be the point you are going to contact), and the unit must be at least partially within within your unit's front arc (the visible point can be off your front arc, as you can draw LoS from the leader point in a 180 degree arc).
The distance between the closest point of the target unit must be withing the charging distance from the closest part of your unit's front arc (your unit's speed times two).
The facing you are charging (rear, flank or front) is determined by your unit's leader point. You must make contact with the facing that your leader point is in when you give the charge order.
During your charge, you're allowed on pivot before you make contact, and after your unit comes into contact, you pick it up and place it down flush with the facing you are charging.
Damage and Nerve
Units taking damage and suffering from it is highly abstracted in Kings of War. Damage is simply marked (usually with easily recognizable dice or damage counters next to the unit) and it usually builds up over a couple of turns before it has any effect on the unit.
The effects of taking casualties is represented by taking Nerve checks.
Units have two values for Nerve, shown as x/x. A small, fragile unit might have a Nerve of 10/12, while a tough elite regiment might have a Nerve of 15/17. A brainless Zombie legion has a staggering -/28! High nerve usually means either a large unit (many warriors) or particularly tough warriors, so it's an abstraction of all the ways a unit can be hard to budge.
The first number is the units Waver value. Once the Nerve check, which is a 2d6 roll plus the amount of damage taken is equal to or higher than the units Waver value, the unit is Wavered. It cannot advance or charge or shoot, only move backwards or change facing. This represents the unit loosing cohesion as casualties mount, or simply panicking at the sudden onset of violence. Maybe their leader got a crossbow bolt through the neck and now it takes a few moments before the next in line gets the troops back in order...
Some units have a - instead of a Waver value. That means that the unit can't be wavered and functions normally until it is Routed.
Once a Nerve check equals or exceeds a units Rout value (the second value after the dash) the unit is removed as casualty. The troops break and run or are simply burnt to death by a dragon.
--
That's it for Core Concepts I, I'll be back with more later.
Cheers,
Aow
In this entry I will go through the main concepts that a player will encounter and need to understand while playing Kings of War. This entry will be slightly encyclopedic, with me listing and explaining most of the main concepts and how they work.
Unit
In Kings of war, everything that is on the battlefield is called a unit. Units can be composed of more than forty models or they can be a single monster. In Kings of War everything mounted on a single base is a single unit, regardless of how many models it contains.
Every unit has certain elements that they share, such as arcs, a leader point and footprint.
Footprint
Every unti has a footprint. That means the external dimension of the base the unit should be based on. Most units have a fixed footprint that is the exact size the unit needs to be. As movement and distances are a big part of the game, this is relatively important.
Units such as heroes and monsters may have exceptional base sizes, namely larger than the minimum listed in the rulebook, if they need one to properly fit on the base.
A unit is never allowed to have a smaller base as the one listed.
Arcs
Every unit has four arcs. A front arc, two flanks and a rear arc. These are used to determine things like Line of Sight (from the front arc) and the facings that need to be contacted when charging.
Leader point
Every unit has a command point in the exact center of its front arc. This is used to determine Line of Sight and for centering chargers.
Line of Sight
Line of Sight in Kings of War is drawn according to the rules, not as true line of sight.
In Kings of War Line of Sight is drawn from the leader point of the unit in a 180 degree arc. If a direct line can be drawn from the leader point to any point of the target and that line is not intersected by units with the same height or greater than either the target or the unit itself.
Note that many actions such as shooting, casting spells and charging also require the target to be in the front arc of the unit trying to draw LoS, but that is a separate requirement, not a part of LoS itself.
Orders
In Kings of War units perform action on orders.
Orders for movement include Halt, Advance, Change Facing and At The Double. Some movement orders have effects on what the unit can do later in the turn. A unit may only be ordered to shoot if it did not move At The Double, some weapons require the unit to stay absolutely still in order to be used in the shooting face. A unit moving At The Double also cannot normally move into or through difficult terrain.
In the Shooting Phase a unit that can shoot can be given the Shoot order. Casting spells is done with the same order.
Pivot
In KoW units turn by pivoting on the spot. This is done as a "virtual pivot", meaning that the unit is picked up, pivoted around its exact center (NOT the leader point) and then placed back down. Units may move through enemy units and blocking terrain during their pivot, as long as they can be placed on the battlefield and clear of other units once they are done.
It is important to make sure that the unit's central point stays put. It's fairly easy to slip half an inch this way or that, and it's a good idea to mark one corner of the unit with a few D6's before you pick it up. This way you can always put the unit back to the initial position should the pivot be unclear.
Pivots can be done at any point during the move, and they are limited to 90 degree shifts per pivot during Advance and Charge orders, but can be towards any direction with the Change Facing order.
Charge!
Charging is done in the movement phase by giving a unit an order to charge.
The unit must be able to draw LoS to some point of the target unit (it doesn't have to be the point you are going to contact), and the unit must be at least partially within within your unit's front arc (the visible point can be off your front arc, as you can draw LoS from the leader point in a 180 degree arc).
The distance between the closest point of the target unit must be withing the charging distance from the closest part of your unit's front arc (your unit's speed times two).
The facing you are charging (rear, flank or front) is determined by your unit's leader point. You must make contact with the facing that your leader point is in when you give the charge order.
During your charge, you're allowed on pivot before you make contact, and after your unit comes into contact, you pick it up and place it down flush with the facing you are charging.
Damage and Nerve
Units taking damage and suffering from it is highly abstracted in Kings of War. Damage is simply marked (usually with easily recognizable dice or damage counters next to the unit) and it usually builds up over a couple of turns before it has any effect on the unit.
The effects of taking casualties is represented by taking Nerve checks.
Units have two values for Nerve, shown as x/x. A small, fragile unit might have a Nerve of 10/12, while a tough elite regiment might have a Nerve of 15/17. A brainless Zombie legion has a staggering -/28! High nerve usually means either a large unit (many warriors) or particularly tough warriors, so it's an abstraction of all the ways a unit can be hard to budge.
The first number is the units Waver value. Once the Nerve check, which is a 2d6 roll plus the amount of damage taken is equal to or higher than the units Waver value, the unit is Wavered. It cannot advance or charge or shoot, only move backwards or change facing. This represents the unit loosing cohesion as casualties mount, or simply panicking at the sudden onset of violence. Maybe their leader got a crossbow bolt through the neck and now it takes a few moments before the next in line gets the troops back in order...
Some units have a - instead of a Waver value. That means that the unit can't be wavered and functions normally until it is Routed.
Once a Nerve check equals or exceeds a units Rout value (the second value after the dash) the unit is removed as casualty. The troops break and run or are simply burnt to death by a dragon.
--
That's it for Core Concepts I, I'll be back with more later.
Cheers,
Aow
An introduction
To begin the whole blog-thing, let me say a few words about myself.
I'm a 30-something dad of two from Finland, and I've been doing miniature wargaming stuff since I was 14, which means I've been doing fantasy miniature wargaming for around fifteen years, beginning with the 6th Edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battles. My friends picked up that fun game and I followed suit with a unit or two of High Elves.
I liked the idea of collecting an army way more than I liked painting it up or building one, and the first years of my miniature wargaming career were filled with ghostly grey High Elves losing over and over to my friends finely painted Empire army. Time went on and by-and-by I did get something done. In the 7th Edition I fielded around 2000 points worth of (painted!) Lizardmen, followed by an increasing amount of Orcs and Goblins that ultimately reached over 4000 points fully painted in some five years.
I was happy with my two armies (having sold my High Elves to my friend, who then ungraciously went on to completely smash my Orcs time and again), and things were happy and well in our little group.
We did complain a bit amongst ourselves. The rules were too complex, the support was stupidly slow in coming often disappointing when it did manifest. We never reached out to anyone, we never went to the few tournaments that were held. Why would we? Warhammer kept us nice and cozy in our little dusty student apartments, we had plenty of miniatures to buy and plenty of rules-lawyering to keep us busy. Warhammer was king, and the king was immortal.
And then GeeDubs killed Warhammer.
Age of Sigmar felt like a slap in the face. Why would anyone in their right mind waste time trying to play a game as stupid as that? Not us for one, we read the rules, decided it was an unintentional joke and forgot the whole game. The kingdom that had been living an uneasy decline under the monarchy of Warhammer 8th Edition shattered into bickering groups and suddenly the surety of a game with people to play it with was lost. I spent a long month moping and feeling personally hurt by the company that I had all but sworn allegiance to.
Then one of our little group of gamers asked us to try out this game that was just about to enter its 2nd edition.
What is this, we said, a game from another company? No one plays games from other companies, despite spending hundreds of hours complaining about and trying to interpret rules that made the lamest of attempts to make sense. No one buys miniatures from other companies despite spending oodles of time complaining about the increasing absurdity of GW pricing and the stupidity of monopose figures in a component plastic age.
And then I tried KoW.
At first I was a little baffled. Was it a game at all? I just pushed models on the field and rolled some dice.. Where was the clever rules-lawyering, where were the disputes on how to interpret a phrase depending on the exact place of the comma? Was I supposed to win the game simply by playing it?
To be honest, I wasn't sold on Kings of War at first. It felt too simple, too quick, too mechanic. I was afraid it would simply reduce itself to a few cookie-cutter lists that were simply better than anything else and be a game that, ultimately, could be solved. I couldn't really see how a game could be that simple and still contain depth. The game had so many fewer mechanics than 8th Edition Warhammer. It didn't have reforms, it didn't have characters joining units, nor were there any templates or a separate magic phase. Units couldn't flee, casualties weren't reducing a unit's effectiveness and the spells were weak.
I was also underestimating the depth of the system because my perception of depth was based on a rule set that achieved depth only through complexity and I did not understand how the mechanics of the game alone could create depth.
Now I think a little differently.
All Kings of War players know the parable of KoW and chess; a simple rule set that creates tons of complexity and depth, and I for one tend to agree.
So now, as a father of two kids with limited time, I've been playing this "other company" game for around three years, and in many ways these have been the best years of gaming I've had since I outgrew teenage enthusiasm and the ability to feel child-like elation as I imagined my knights slamming into enemy formations (Okay, I haven't really lost that one completely, that's what keeps me going). I've taken it up to arrange myself to every single event I can travel to, I've taken it on myself to arrange one or two. I'm meeting new people, setting up demo games and promoting the game. In short, I'm trying to build a community out of the people who have the same love for fantasy wargaming as I do.
In this blog I intend to go through some tactics, some modelling, some hobby stuff and my thoughts on how to keep this aging hobby in the books of the living a while longer. If I overcome my fear of sounding ridiculous I might fill this in with a few videoblog-entries as well.
Battle reports, army show-casing and other interesting topics will soon follow!
I'm a 30-something dad of two from Finland, and I've been doing miniature wargaming stuff since I was 14, which means I've been doing fantasy miniature wargaming for around fifteen years, beginning with the 6th Edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battles. My friends picked up that fun game and I followed suit with a unit or two of High Elves.
I liked the idea of collecting an army way more than I liked painting it up or building one, and the first years of my miniature wargaming career were filled with ghostly grey High Elves losing over and over to my friends finely painted Empire army. Time went on and by-and-by I did get something done. In the 7th Edition I fielded around 2000 points worth of (painted!) Lizardmen, followed by an increasing amount of Orcs and Goblins that ultimately reached over 4000 points fully painted in some five years.
I was happy with my two armies (having sold my High Elves to my friend, who then ungraciously went on to completely smash my Orcs time and again), and things were happy and well in our little group.
We did complain a bit amongst ourselves. The rules were too complex, the support was stupidly slow in coming often disappointing when it did manifest. We never reached out to anyone, we never went to the few tournaments that were held. Why would we? Warhammer kept us nice and cozy in our little dusty student apartments, we had plenty of miniatures to buy and plenty of rules-lawyering to keep us busy. Warhammer was king, and the king was immortal.
And then GeeDubs killed Warhammer.
Age of Sigmar felt like a slap in the face. Why would anyone in their right mind waste time trying to play a game as stupid as that? Not us for one, we read the rules, decided it was an unintentional joke and forgot the whole game. The kingdom that had been living an uneasy decline under the monarchy of Warhammer 8th Edition shattered into bickering groups and suddenly the surety of a game with people to play it with was lost. I spent a long month moping and feeling personally hurt by the company that I had all but sworn allegiance to.
Then one of our little group of gamers asked us to try out this game that was just about to enter its 2nd edition.
What is this, we said, a game from another company? No one plays games from other companies, despite spending hundreds of hours complaining about and trying to interpret rules that made the lamest of attempts to make sense. No one buys miniatures from other companies despite spending oodles of time complaining about the increasing absurdity of GW pricing and the stupidity of monopose figures in a component plastic age.
And then I tried KoW.
At first I was a little baffled. Was it a game at all? I just pushed models on the field and rolled some dice.. Where was the clever rules-lawyering, where were the disputes on how to interpret a phrase depending on the exact place of the comma? Was I supposed to win the game simply by playing it?
To be honest, I wasn't sold on Kings of War at first. It felt too simple, too quick, too mechanic. I was afraid it would simply reduce itself to a few cookie-cutter lists that were simply better than anything else and be a game that, ultimately, could be solved. I couldn't really see how a game could be that simple and still contain depth. The game had so many fewer mechanics than 8th Edition Warhammer. It didn't have reforms, it didn't have characters joining units, nor were there any templates or a separate magic phase. Units couldn't flee, casualties weren't reducing a unit's effectiveness and the spells were weak.
I was also underestimating the depth of the system because my perception of depth was based on a rule set that achieved depth only through complexity and I did not understand how the mechanics of the game alone could create depth.
Now I think a little differently.
All Kings of War players know the parable of KoW and chess; a simple rule set that creates tons of complexity and depth, and I for one tend to agree.
So now, as a father of two kids with limited time, I've been playing this "other company" game for around three years, and in many ways these have been the best years of gaming I've had since I outgrew teenage enthusiasm and the ability to feel child-like elation as I imagined my knights slamming into enemy formations (Okay, I haven't really lost that one completely, that's what keeps me going). I've taken it up to arrange myself to every single event I can travel to, I've taken it on myself to arrange one or two. I'm meeting new people, setting up demo games and promoting the game. In short, I'm trying to build a community out of the people who have the same love for fantasy wargaming as I do.
In this blog I intend to go through some tactics, some modelling, some hobby stuff and my thoughts on how to keep this aging hobby in the books of the living a while longer. If I overcome my fear of sounding ridiculous I might fill this in with a few videoblog-entries as well.
Battle reports, army show-casing and other interesting topics will soon follow!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)