- This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 3 days, 6 hours ago by
nightrunner.
-
Hi everyone,
I received my copy of KOW 4th edition rulebook on the 31st and I have read through all the rules and skimmed through the army lists. Overall I have mixed feelings – maybe because I loved 3.5 ed so much. So I decided to write down my initial thoughts as objectively as possible, even though I have not yet played an actually game.
I will start with the stuff I am not convinced yet, then I will talk about the stuff I am convinced of.
Not convinced:
In 3rd ed, the basing system had an established convention, that was taken purposely from the old Warhammer Fantasy system. In 3rd there was a chart explaining all the bases in one small section of the page. Now Heavy infantry, Monstrous infantry and Titans are now ‘legacy’ bases and are described on a different page (which doesn’t make sense since they are still being used?). Personally, I prefer all units to be on the same frontage, it would be easier (like Midgard). Now it is very ambiguous. The book says you should use the base the unit comes with – what?!? Also, can you now put Orcs on 100mm frontages and still call them Heavy Infantry? In my opinion, they should have kept the same basing convention and kept it in a chart or scrapped it and started over. I understand the simplicity of writing rules for ‘Infantry’, but they should just have said – when we say Infantry we are taking about Infantry and heavy Infantry, and kept everything as it was.
The loss of army selection, in my opinion, has reduced the flavour of the armies. I play Elves and Ogres at the moment. Ogres are fine, but now if you have a Sylvan Kin army (as I do), it just feels like playing elves. I hope things change with the army in the future, but I find that it sucks. The Sylvan kin have lost several units, but the worst for me is the loss of Kindred warriors. Now all the infantry have to be Tallspears, which is a shame. Kindred warriors, was just a weapon option, and it was great for gamers like me who has a lot of elves with swords. Also, Elves are a bit overpowered with the choice of Palace Guard and Critters (excellent chaff units) as Core choices. I hope this army is reworked in the future.
The loss of the 3rd edn combat system particularly hurts (especially the loss of wav/nev mechanism). Now armies are stuck until the combat ends. KOW was always very stylized (more so than other wargames), and that is fine, but now the stylization is even more so. This is fine for the competitive scene, but for gamers who like a more historical-adjacent game, I prefer 3.5edn where combat is concerned.
The one thing that was great with KOW, was that all the rules and armies were in one book – unlike Warhammer or Oathmark. Now we have to buy several books to have all the armies in print. This is mitigated with the army builder – which is a blessing – but I do not like this turn of events. I hope, when all the army supplements are printed out and Mantic have made their sales and money, then they can issue a 3.5 edn like Red Book with all the rules and army lists in one book.
A small nitpick is the lack of a thorough Index at the back or a more complete Content page at the front.
Convinced:
The first thing I really like about the new edition, is the new army building format. I have always had a problem with people coming with an Ogre army made up of Shield Breakers (and I play Ogres) or Elohi for Basileans for example. In fact I only have one regiment of Shield Breakers on purpose. The new army building rules makes armies look more like armies and reduces the gaminess of the system.
The shooting is better in my opinion as it only causes wavering.
The new book format with basic rules section and Advanced section is just better.
I really like the expanded scenario system. This is a really great resource for narrative gamers like myself.
Changing the bases for characters and streamlining them was a great change. It was the first time I actually enjoyed base-changing miniatures.
I never liked the introduction of Legion-sized bases into the game in 3rd ed, so limiting them in the army lists is a pro for me.
Last is the ‘commands’ system. I think they are a better system than the experimental command dice and add more flavour to the armies as they current are.
Final Thoughts
I think 4th ed KOW is overall an improvement for the game where competitive players are concerned. The streamlining allows games to be played faster and more smoothly. Unfortunately, I think the game detracts slightly with the increased stylization for narrative players.
I predict that 75% of my gaming group will simply transition to 4th ed automatically, because they are competitive players and will always play the latest iteration of the rules. I will play 4th edn if I want to play with different people and different armies.
Personally, though, I think I will try to play 3.5 edn where possible – but with the new army construction rules, scenario system and with some small rules changes like for shooting. This will be with more narrative players in my group. We are a minority, just 3 of us, but we can still play an interesting campaign with just 3 gamers.
There it is! That is my initial reaction and thoughts. They my change with time and actually playing the game. In the meantime, if you are a fan of Kings of War, I’d love to hear what you think.
Regards,
NR
After My First Three Games
Yesterday, on Sunday we played our first games of KOW 4th edition. I played in two games with my proxy Ogres and Not Sylvan Kin (or simply Elves). There was also Undead, Orcs, Dwarves and Northern Alliance (I was disappointment to see that Tribesmen are still DE 5+). The Northern Alliance army was originally a Varangur army, but in 4th Varangur (like the Sylvan Kin) were drained of all their flavour and are now just garbage.
I can safely say the game is still – definitely – Kings of War. It feels like KOW and plays like KOW. That much is certain. Everything seems to run smoother. I really like the new shooting changes, that indirectly place the emphasis on combat. Shooting is still important, but as a tool of hindrance rather than one of death dealing.
I still have mixed feeling about combat. There are new rules that make combat deadlier or quicker. One rule, that is very controversial for me, is the wrap-around rule. This allows a unit that is in combat – say to the front with an enemy unit – to move to the flank with a Reform order, opening up space for another unit to engage or charge into combat. That is actually great, and allows for more tactical depth. My problem with it is that if you move to the flank or rear you can attack with double or treble the attacks – I find this stupid. I disagree because it is not an impact attack like a charge, but troops moving with the swirl of combat. It makes combat very deadly, but removes from the skill of maneuvering…and as I said is just stupid. You should not get the bonus attacks in this case. The maneuver is the advantage. Doubling and trebling attacks should only occur with a charge.
I will definitely be house-ruling this and I will not play with my competitive friends if they insist using the rule as is. They can practice their game with someone else. You might think I am an asshole for saying this, but I simply do not enjoy the game with this mechanic in play. It really bothers me.
The new Withdraw order I also find cool as a concept, but I did not find it very useful, unless you use it early in the combat. This is because if you fail the Nerve Test you rout…and that simply means the unit is removed from play. I would have preferred something different, like the withdrawing unit (if you fail the Nerve Test) still withdraws, but is devastated until the unit’s next turn. I understand the reasoning behind the choice of the rule, but because I like ‘pushback’ in historical games – I am not a big fan of Withdraw as it is currently. It does have a place in the game though.
I like the commands, but we found some to be very useful and others not so much. I am a bit worried about power creep, as the new books come out – unless they are well play-tested.
Other than that, all I have mentioned in my first post still stands for me. Mantic, if you read this, bring back Kindred Warriors for the Elves and Sylvan Kin!, and make the Varangur great again. I think, Mantic really need to get their armies back up to form. I think they jumped the shark were the armies are involved, and they should have prepared better for 4th. With the campaign books coming out twice a year, some armies are going to take a few years to get better and more balanced. Competitive players are going to have a field day breaking stuff and Mantic have their work cut out for them!
Regards,
NR
radegast6You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
