FAQ

Discuss the game from Mantic here

Moderators: Lord Marcus, Baragash, Keepers of the Peace

johnbailey
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:20 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

FAQ

Postby johnbailey » Tue Sep 29, 2015 7:05 pm


User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: FAQ

Postby Nibbles » Thu Oct 01, 2015 1:35 am

Good stuff otherwise, but it is sad to see Mantic having to bow down to the worst of the proxy culture with first forbidding Treemen representing Orclings and then allowing two chariots to represent 10 knights. This is a huge can of worms as they did not state clearly what made the distinction in this example.
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

The Nick
Posts: 1457
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 9:36 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: FAQ

Postby The Nick » Thu Oct 01, 2015 2:18 am

This is just an awesome little piece of literature.

Of particular interest is the company's ability to understand the difference between a frequently asked question and an errata.

They seem to hint at the definition of proxying: the proxy should act as the same sort of role or look. Proxying isn't an excuse to just exchange anything and everything willy-nilly. It 'feels' like a couple big chariots or a slightly larger group of knights slamming into something would fit together, whereas a group of orcs/orks and a few huge giants are totally different kinds of creatures with vastly different roles.
Sleboda wrote:POOPOOPOOP

User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: FAQ

Postby Nibbles » Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:14 pm

Or it could be that chariot units have horses and armoured dudes riding them just like knights, taking up the same space is not the issue here as there are Treemen on same bases which Snotlings/ Orclings use.

And therefore we could have living tree models that are covered in a swarm of little green goblin things, on bases that are appropriate. These models could just as well represent Treemen or Orclings swarming a magical tree.

Furthermore, the Orc army has both chariot units and cavalry units. Following their example, a unit of two chariots would be a boar cavalry unit, while a unit of three chariots would be a chariot unit. The army could have multiples of each, so that it would appear as a chariot themed army.

They've enabled very negative things with this ruling. They should have said that proxying chariots requires at least some kind of chariots taking up the same space, and likewise for knights you need to have the same sized unit of at least some kind of cavalry.

The idea of multibased units having MMC and PMC is a good one, and if people would stick to multibasing with this chart it would be okay, since the footprint of the unit is of appropriate size and helps seeing whether the unit is a Troop, Regiment, Horde or a legion.

But I am sure that this practice has already spread to units on individual bases and there it is going to be part of the metagame. 11 models does not look like a Regiment and will not often register as a Regiment when people are hurrying through the fast turns. Mistakes will be made and some peple will be counting on that, this is just another bit of extra edge to them.
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

User avatar
MillerXL
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 10:26 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: FAQ

Postby MillerXL » Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:33 pm

AT ALL TIMES, it must be clear to your opponent what the unit actually represents.


If someone shows up with an army and says 'these chariots are boar riders, and these chariots are chariots,' I'd say they've pretty well violated the above directive.

That's good enough for me.

Also, there is no mistaking a Troop with a Regiment, or a Regiment with a Horde on the table, no matter what is standing on the movement tray.

User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: FAQ

Postby Nibbles » Fri Oct 02, 2015 2:39 pm

MillerXL wrote:
AT ALL TIMES, it must be clear to your opponent what the unit actually represents.


If someone shows up with an army and says 'these chariots are boar riders, and these chariots are chariots,' I'd say they've pretty well violated the above directive.

That's good enough for me.

Also, there is no mistaking a Troop with a Regiment, or a Regiment with a Horde on the table, no matter what is standing on the movement tray.


Yes, and quite often you see the excuse with these sort of armies that "I told my opponent at the start of the game what everything was, don't be a [bip] and let people use them creativituhness, hurr durr!" Then they turn around so that you don't see their troll face. It's simply about doing whatever they can get away with that grants them that bit of extra edge.

And while there's less room with confusing unit sizes when they are properly multibased like the FAQ explicitly tells, when these practices are used on units with individual bases the line between Troops and Regiments gets way more blurry. I have seen high tier tournament players hide extra models and tokens behind the last rank in very creative ways before, this WILL occur in the KoW scene as well.

If only the FAQ was obeyed and MMC & PMC used only with multibasing, there would not be a problem. But since it is a very convenient way to get more units on the table with less costs & effort, there's no chance this practice will be used only with multibasing.
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

Snake1311
Posts: 1832
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:11 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: FAQ

Postby Snake1311 » Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:12 pm

Surely the movement tray is a massive indicator, even if its not filled with bases?

This kind of thing is very rarely (i'd even say never, but thats too sweeping) about edge, and generally about cost savings or cool factor.


I've never seen "high end tournament players" do any of the things with hiding extra models or tokens you describe either, and I've been to a lot of really competitive events :?

Hristo Nikolov
ETC WHFB Bulgaria 2012-16

User avatar
Shyanekh
Posts: 421
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 11:22 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: FAQ

Postby Shyanekh » Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:48 pm

Personally I'm a fan of the more open ended approach.

To my mind, the negatives of this approach are far outweighed by the benefits. I was always somebody who put more effort into my unit fillers than the rank and file troops, so the open approach suits me well. It also allows wiggle room for some bigger models. For example, my forest hunters are GW dryads and 11-12 as a regiment looks crowded enough (I actually struggled to rank them up in places, so no fear of empty trays here). Also my eagle riders are represented by swarms of faeries crowding a tree. To my mind, the profile fits the models perfectly, seeing as eagle riders are fast, flying and fragile. I also compensated for the height 3 by having quite a tall diorama base and varied sizes on the faeries themselves. I've put a monstrous amount of time into these units and would hate to see that go to waste because of a more hard-line stance on modelling.

That said, I generally take a relaxed attitude to what my opponent fields and even some of the more outrageous proxies don't really bother me. To my knowledge, none of the people I've played who used proxies were doing it to try for an unfair advantage.

Obviously I'm not claiming that my own stance on this is necessarily the right one, it comes down to taste at the end of the day. I'm a huge fan of people pushing the limits with insane conversions and proxies. To me, a unit's profile is basically a guideline for the size, strength and skill of a unit rather than a description of a specific creature. If somebody feels that the profile of an orc regiment is ideal for their scratch built mutant dwarfs, I say go for it! I know other people prefer orcs to be orcs. I also know at least a couple of people who prefer to see models purely as game pieces and like the look of mono-pose figures painted in the colour scheme on the box. Both those viewpoints are totally fine, I just happen not to share them.

Grim1
Posts: 97
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 7:57 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: FAQ

Postby Grim1 » Fri Oct 02, 2015 6:34 pm

I would just hope that the person looking at the scratch built unit of chaos dwarfs, proxying in the opponents orc list that he is not very familiar with, doesn't find it too hard to relate the unfamiliar statlines to the out of character miniatures.
I mean everyone knows what gargoyles look like, and GW harpies look much the same as mantic gargoyles don't they. But if someone plays some proxy chaos dwarfs in an orc list in a competitive match, I think that's not acceptable unless someone is just starting out their miniature collection in a friendly game. It's a bit too confusing and makes it harder for the opponent.
when he ain't lying to you, Grim1 is the most honourable guy you'll ever meet.

my feedback thread; viewtopic.php?f=68&t=118970

User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: FAQ

Postby Nibbles » Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:02 pm

Snake1311 wrote:Surely the movement tray is a massive indicator, even if its not filled with bases?

This kind of thing is very rarely (i'd even say never, but thats too sweeping) about edge, and generally about cost savings or cool factor.


I've never seen "high end tournament players" do any of the things with hiding extra models or tokens you describe either, and I've been to a lot of really competitive events :?


I have been to smaller events where people end up getting away with outright cheating because TO's are too afraid to give proper penalties. Since those people might not come to the next event at all then.

I honestly do speak from my own experience, a lot of the Warhammer tournament scene in my country was really rotten. It was different when tournaments easily got 20+ attendees, back then I saw people appropriately get their points stripped from them and sometimes even receiving bans when caught cheating. But the smaller the circles get, the more desperate the competition gets(because everyone knows everyone else's playstyle and armies) and people start using all sorts of dirty tricks because "they're one of the guys" and no one wants to cut off their friends. Because then they don't have anyone left to play these games with and cannot run events anymore.

Movement trays would help, yeah, if they were of the appropriate size. But these people will not use such things, they'll get away with it by simply relying on their "come on mate, really?!! Really?!" lines and laughing at those who question their methods.

Cutting down the required number of models is not at all far removed from cutting down the proper size of the trays. "Not everyone has the resources for full units" "Not everyone can get appropriate movement trays in time for the event" "let's have a more relaxed event where we don't follow the FAQ to the letter with these model count things". These are all things that I see people saying.

And it will leave a precedent. It will form a permanent basis for the practices of the KoW scene as well. Not everywhere of course. The larger scenes will stay the most healthiest as always.
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

Sceleris
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:15 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: FAQ

Postby Sceleris » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:20 pm

Don't have a real problem with the ruling - just possibly with the way people are taking it.

The ideal model number is great in my view for those who want to make units which fit the rules (troop, regiment, horde etc) on the right sized overall base/tray (call it what you will) and make it thematic or different.

Th point made above about modelling trees with loads of orclings in is OK. You have modelled orclings so find to use - whack down random treemen and use as count as notso sure.

Right size unit base is a must - as is not having same models be different units in game

User avatar
MillerXL
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 10:26 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: FAQ

Postby MillerXL » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:38 pm

I don't see the cause for concern.

No rule is useful if it's not being applied properly, which seems to be Nibbles' actual concern.

I don't think it will be a problem.

As an aside, I'm grateful for not having to rebase my Marauders to use them as Varangur Warbands. 4x3 on 25mm bases is just barely above the minimum model count for a Regiment of infantry, and fits the footprint (with a 5mm spacer to be used).

User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: FAQ

Postby Nibbles » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:45 pm

Yes, these sort of rules about correct equipment on models, correct number of models and correct footprint of the unit are frequently discarded as not being that important.

It is a problem because it affects the quality of the gaming scene and is one of the things which repulses those gamers who also want to be true collectors. True collectors are the shiniest edge of the blade which glints in the morning sun, calling others to join the battle.

No one is ever motivated to join the hobby due to seeing half assembled units, unpainted models and proxies after proxies. These are the marks of the ruinous powers and decay.
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

jvesal
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:19 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: FAQ

Postby jvesal » Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:16 pm

Keep in mind equipment options in KOW aren't a thing. Units have stats and thats it, the stats reflect the equipment. So there is no need to know what a unit is "armed" with.

Second due to the more generic style of units, you can easily understand what things are on the battlefield since the scope of unit rules/differences is small. All you have is 4 stats per unit basically and universal special rules. It's very easy to understand and keep track of. there is no confusing units/stats with other units/stats since the rules are so elegant.

I play Varangur (WoC) and I am glad I can use my chariots in units of knights since the list doesn't have any chariots.

Frederique
Posts: 1109
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:53 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Norway

Re: FAQ

Postby Frederique » Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:54 pm

You are right for the most part, but there are some units with option to switch their kit.
Fred

2013-2015 WHFB ETC Head Ref & FAQ team
2015- KOW player
________________________________
- Check out "Fred the Referee" (channel) on YouTube!

User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: FAQ

Postby Nibbles » Tue Oct 06, 2015 3:26 pm

Yes, equipment options are a thing in KoW. Not on all units, but I think most armies(if not all of them) have units that can swap their equipment.

It would be really, really nice to see spears, two handed weapons and one handed weapons with shields represented correctly.
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

Grim1
Posts: 97
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 7:57 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: FAQ

Postby Grim1 » Sun Oct 11, 2015 8:57 am

If proxies are to be used, I prefer clarity in the opponents force, eg for dwarfs, I like it when one set of ironguard with great weapons and one set of ironguard with shields are represented by hammerers and ironbreakers respectively.
I wouldn't like it if someone used ironbreakers to represent ironguard with great weapons and another unit of ironbreakers to represent ironguard with shield. That'd get confusing during the battle in my mind, and lead to questions which one is which when it came to choosing where to deploy my archers etc.

A lovely addition to any unit to demonstrate magic items is a much appreciated demonstration of good sportsmanship and modelling. eg cotton wool to represent the fog, a filler with a barrel of Bugman's to represent dwarven ale etc. Mastiff counters and similar for other unit upgrades are included by mantic and indicate in my mind the vibe they are going for "proxies are good, but customisation of miniatures is better" (hence the dioramas that a lot of people are producing).

It makes the game easier to play if both players care as much about the models used as the army list designed.
when he ain't lying to you, Grim1 is the most honourable guy you'll ever meet.

my feedback thread; viewtopic.php?f=68&t=118970

lordgoober
Posts: 401
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:45 pm

Re: FAQ

Postby lordgoober » Mon Oct 12, 2015 9:18 pm

Heh Grim1, I do end up using Hammerers and Ironbreakers in the way you're talking about. If I had the couple Doomseekers I actually have painted up, I'd probably use those as Mastiff tokens. As it is I'm using Slayer Pirates.

On your example of the upgrades, I have on order to grab when I see a particular vendor at a con I'm going to in a week and a half a couple bases of the Stakes that were in with the Brettonian Peasant Archers for that one magic item that gives the unit Phalanx.

User avatar
Baragash
Posts: 235
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 10:08 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Watford/London, UK
Contact:

Re: FAQ

Postby Baragash » Tue Oct 13, 2015 7:36 am

Doomseekers make great Berserker Lord models too if you're inclined to field them (despite their low De, they are a b****r to shift).
Mantic Kings of War & Warpath Rules Committee Member
"The Emperor is obviously not a dictator, he's a couch."
Starbuck: "Why can't we use the starboard launch bays?"
Engineer: "Because it's a gift shop!"


Return to “Kings of War”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest