A while back I reported on Field Commander: Rommel which was first in the Field Commander Series from Dan Verssen Games. I had a very favorable opinion of the game with the exception of the difficulty (it is still a damn hard game) and the clunky nature of moving the enemies around the map. And even though Rommel and Alexander were separated by over 2,000 years the Field Commander System holds up very well and Field Commander: Alexander is, in my opinion, an improvement upon the system.

Alexander differs in many was from Rommel particularly in scale. Time frames are longer, distances are greater and the number of men a counter represents has increased and for me Alexander has a greater strategic feel than its predecessor. But as I don’t want to dwell too long on comparing the two titles I’ll just sum it up and say that Alexander improves on what was already a great system.

The Field Commander Series are solitaire games that have the goal of distilling some of the great strategic minds of history into a playable format and in that regard Alexander is a success. I’ll admit that going into the game I knew very little of Alexander the Great and coming out of the game I now know enough to make me dangerous as in I have some interesting trivia knowledge but could find myself wrong a lot of the time if discussing his life. But the point of the game isn’t a deep analysis of the tactics that he used in particular battles, but his overall strategy on how to conquer and subjugate a region.

There are many decision points for you as the player which is great because often I find that solitaire games sometimes get a feeling of playing themselves as numerous charts are referenced and dice rolled. After a region is conquered you have to decide if you’ll govern the area which creates a steady income and has some positive effects later in the game or you can raze the land for a large and immediate cash bonus. You get to pick and grow your pool of personal and trusted advisers and who to pick and when will have long term effects during the campaign. How large of an army to muster and march around the land will often be dependent on the health of your treasury. Many aspects work and balance together creating a wonderful narrative as you work through the campaign.

The campaign game is where Alexander really shines though. The game includes four scenarios to play as a linked campaign which starts off early in Alexander’s career as he conquered the land around Greece and then moved south and east through the Middle East towards India. How well you do in the campaign will determine for how many years Alexander’s name will be remembered and his exploits told. Though each scenario is based on the same game system, as Alexander matures and grows in experience, as his pool of advisers expands and as various tactical “Insights” are gathered the scenarios feel and take shape differently. There are also a few special rules for some of the scenarios that help expand and grow the variety within the game.

What I find most impressive though is just how playable the game is. Alexander with the larger scale means the enemy isn’t moving on the map and due to that the administrative work for the enemy is very minimal. That means most of the time playing is making decisions for what you plan on doing with your forces. Which is very refreshing compared to other solitaire games that I’ve played where it feels more time is devoted to figuring out what the game’s AI will do during a turn than you actually take for your turn.

The only thing that I would complain about is now that I’ve worked through the few campaign a number of times I tend to find myself falling into similar patterns. I like to start with X Adviser, I like certain types of troops over others, I like to spend my money in certain ways, because I’ve found some patterns that work better than others for me and my play style. The game does do a good job with mixing thing up and presenting you with different challenges each time, but there is only so much that can be put in before the ease of play becomes cluttered and clunky. With solitaire games I’ll take ease of play over historical accuracy or a cumbersome game AI any day of the week. And even though I find myself falling into patterns I’ve found asking “What If?” sometimes forces me out of those patterns which allows the game to present different challenges for me to overcome.

As it stands this is a game that I feel will be staying around for a long time. The full campaign of four scenarios takes me about four hours to play and I am a slow gamer who likes to get up, walk around and contemplate decisions. If someone other than me were to focus from start to finish I could see it possible to play the entire campaign in around three hours. That means the campaign is perfect for a lazy Saturday or Sunday afternoon or a week night where you have no plans. Additionally if you only find yourself with an hour to an hour and a half then a single scenario is perfectly playable in that time.

Production is very nice though there are a few things that my anal retentive nature cringes at, but they aren’t even worthy of note. The only thing that I can see on the production end that did fall a little short of my expectations are the mounted map boards. They just don’t lay flat as they have warped a bit, but it isn’t a big deal to me personally and I’d take the mounted map boards over the paper maps in Rommel every time.

In closing Field Commander: Alexander is one of just a handful of solitaire games that I’d recommend to people because there are so many things that are going right in the game. The common pitfalls I’ve experienced solitaire gaming are burdensome game AI, repetitive, long, minimal decision points as well as a few others. Alexander has none of those traits, it is just as the system intends: To make the lives of histories great leaders playable in an accessible game format.

‘Til Next Time - Happy Gaming
LvT

Filed under: Field Commander, Games - Wargames by LordVonTush
No Comments »

I’ve always liked Warmachine by Privateer Press.  I mean, how can you beat a bunch of steam-powered machines pounding the hell out of each other?  But alas, I dropped out of the game a long time ago when the Warjacks were reduced to the role of mere support, and the game basically became focused on swarms of infantry.  This was lame - so I left. 

Now Warmachine has been re-released, with rules that bring ‘Jacks back to the front of things - where they damn well should be - and thus, I have taken a very serious interest in the game that hasn’t graced my table in years.  I dusted off my Khador models, got the new rules (which I will review later), and picked up one of the new plastic Warjack kits that Privateer Press has released.  At first I was a bit weary - plastic?…  ‘Jacks?…  Warjacks are supposed to be heavy metal - not light plastic!  Not only that - but each kit costs 35 bucks!  But because each kit lets you make your choice of 4 different models, complete with stat cards, I thought I’d at least give this new kit a day in court.  But to be realistic - if you want to make this kit worth it’s cost - get some magnets. (I’ll post a tutorial on that later as well.)

Upon opening the box, you’re greeted with this…  What - no sprues?  No clipping?  No trimming?  Now this is something I could get used to!  And check out those nice stat cards!  So far so good. 

After unwrapping all the parts, you end up with this lovely pile of bits.  Everything you need to make any of the four jacks shown on the box.  You’ll notice right away if you have some of the classic metal ‘Jacks, that many of the proportions are quite different.  I mean, check out those heads!  Looks like some head hunters got to them or something.  Other than that - So far so good.

Then I start to look closer…  What the heck is with this torso piece!?  First off, it’s completely smashed and crooked - slanting down the right.  There’s a big friggin’ vent tab front and center - getting that off should be fun.  Then I flip it around - and notice that all the smoke stacks on the right side are all crumpled in and shitty looking.  Wow, look at that boiler!  Looks like they used a 3-part mold here, so naturally, you’ll have to trim of 50% more flash!  Of course, they ran the mold lines right over the rivets.

Then I find this piece of shit staring me down…  What am I supposed to do with that?  All the fingers of this hand are all screwed up, and have a nice mold line across the details as the cherry on top.  Hey Privateer Press - this is “unusable”.  You need to do better, or go back to metals.  Some of the other bits were great as well - like the cannon arm that looks like it’s giving birth, and a head so thin and tiny, I thought the blade on top would snap if I looked at it too hard.  (no I did not squash that pic.)

OK - so now lets see if Privateer Press has a good replacement service - seeing as how their “request form” offers up no confirmation of delivery, and since as of yet I have got no response, my guess would be it’s about worth as much as the “Fist o’ Flash” up there.  I’ll let you know if I have any luck.

So here’s the rub.  I can’t recommend this kit - especially at 35 bones.  35 dollars should buy you an all metal starter with a caster and 2-5 jacks, not one plastic model.  If you manage to get it magnetized, so you can field any of the 4 Warjacks as you see fit, then maybe it’s worth the scratch - but not at this quality.

Privateer Press- this isn’t going to cut it - stick with what you know, and that’s kick ass metal figures.  And for the love of god, don’t pull the classic metals and leave us with this garbage.  And while you’re at it, stop trying to be GW’s mini-me.  You must know that people flee from these prices and into your waiting arms everyday - you’re begging for them to bounce right out just as fast if you start gouging them.

-

DEACON

Filed under: Games - Wargames, Warmachine by DEACON
10 Comments »

Over the years, I’ve been getting into the world of solitaire gaming. We’ve all been there at some point where you find yourself with an hour or two to fill, an itching for a game but no one is around or available to game with. With my game group my schedule is the most flexible of the bunch so I find myself with those conditions fairly often. In the past I’ve talked about games like Silverton and more recently BlackBeard (which I did forget to mention it allows for solitaire play albeit with “Dummy” Players which I’m personally not a fan of). Both of which are fine games in their own right and do provide a satisfactory solitaire game experience but lately I’ve been looking for games with more of a historical flare.

Ah Wargames: The ones with paper maps, hundreds of little cardboard counters and must be played under Plexiglas. There’s something about these games that just draw me to them and a whole new world of gaming had been opened up to me once I’ve started to explore this genre. Many of these games are well suited for solitaire play, but many of them feel like playing chess solitaire where you play as both sides of the engagement. But a small subset of the whole new world of gaming is the solitaire game. Publishers like Victory Games, Avalon Hill, GMT Games, 3W and more recently DVG have all published solitaire titles at some point in their company’s history. With the rise of the computer in our daily lives, many of these games have become “obsolete”. Rulebooks which are dozens of pages referencing you to the various charts and tables have been replaced with 0’s and 1’s allowing an engagement in the Pacific to be fought over a few hours instead of a few days.

In today’s world, these games for the most part have lost their place. Of course there are always a few exceptions like Field Commander: Rommel by Dan Verssen Games (DVG). Dan Verssen designed the “Leader Series” of games, which are fairly simple (when compared to a game like Carrier by VG), yet highly enjoyable solitaire games published by GMT Games in the early 90’s. Recently Verssen come out with a new series called “Field Commander”. The first game in the series deals with three major battles which Erwin Rommel really made his name with. The second in line, which should be released fairly soon, is Alexander. Field Commander looks to be the start of a series of solitaire games which are easy to learn (even for non-wargamers), play quickly and are highly enjoyable.

(In the interest of full disclosure I went into this game with negative feelings due to some things that I’d consider a problem with the DVG ordering system, so I went in wanting to not like the game so I didn’t feel the need to order FC: Alexander, but those feelings were quickly dashed aside)

The components to the game I’m a little mixed on. With one hand the artwork is excellent, the counters are easy to read and everything from the artistic side is exceptional. The other hand questions the materials used in publishing. Everything is satisfactory, but just feels cheep. Everything has a very glossy texture and the best way I can describe it is it feels fake because of slightly different production methods and materials compared to the industry standard. Other than that though, that is the only thing that I’ve found which I’m logging a complaint on…The game play is really what matters after all!

The game play itself is very, very fun, and difficult. I will admit at this time that I have just played the first scenario (and for the record have gotten my ass handed to me each time) but I keep coming back. Perhaps it is the masochist in me, perhaps out of all the solitaire games I’ve played (and I haven’t played them all) this one I find very enjoyable. FC:R is an operations level game using area movement. On your turn you move your units which will attack this turn, perform the attack, do non-combat moves and then use the supply action to refit and purchase new units. This provides the player with a lot of options at their disposal and removes some of the “game playing itself” problems that some solitaire wargames have (for example B-17 Queen of the Skies).

Enemy turns follow roughly the same order and the order system and activation system but the chart rolling is very limited. At times it does seem like the enemy is not making logical choices, but overall the game is stacked against you so the illogical choices are needed just to give you a fighting chance. It also gives a feeling that you are playing against someone though because your logical choice may not be your opponent’s logical choice and you never know what is really in their head and this feeling is conveyed through game play. There are also a few instances where you are presented with two or more options for the enemy player and you get to decide the outcome. This provides you with a very slight control over what the enemy does. So in a way during the course of the game you can make some slight decisions to adjust the difficulty level of the game.

Overall the game isn’t perfect. It doesn’t really give you the historical accuracy which many other solitaire games attempt to recreate (which I think is part of their flaw with large rulebooks and tons of charts). The game is good fun, albeit frustrating at times, which provides you as the player a lot of choices and the AI system is pretty straightforward but offers you quite a challenge. For anyone looking for a solitaire game or an introduction to the wargame genre, I highly recommend the game. One other perk about this game is it doesn’t require that much space and can easily be played on a coffee table or desk and with an hour or two for playtime; it doesn’t need to be kept setup for extended periods.

Rating: 4.25 out of 5

‘Til Next Time - Happy Gaming
LvT

Filed under: Field Commander, Games - Wargames by LordVonTush
No Comments »

Gamers looking to get into fantasy naval games don’t have much of a choice these days being limited to the highly praised, but long out of print Man o War (MoW) from Games Workshop (GW) and the new kid on the block Uncharted Seas (US) from Spartan Games (SG). US recently launched and feedback has been greater than anticipated from the publishers for many a good reason and much to be expected US is being judged by the bar which MoW set. The question is though: Does US raise the bar, or fall below it.

I will admit that I am an avid MoW player and for those of you who follow my postings I recently ranked it as my top GW game. Today I’m going to try to put that bias aside and look at various mechanics and mechanisms comparing the two games because with such limited selection in fantasy naval gaming, it was bound to happen.

PRICE:
US wins this one hands down for obvious reasons. Being out of print for more than ten years, MOW is very pricey to get into. Base sets of just rules, counters and templates needed to play go on eBay (just about the only source for the game) in the range of $60-100 and this doesn’t include a full fleet (just some ’sample’ ships). Compared to the $30 rulebook needed to obtain all the materials needed to play US there isn’t much of a comparison. Obtaining a fully functioning fleet in MoW will run between $60-200 depending on the fleet and how much flexibility you want. And then let’s not forget to mention the two expansion sets for MoW which will add another $50-90. US will set you back $30 for the rule book and a starter fleet which is enough to get you going will run between $30-60 where just getting into MoW will run a few hundred dollars to get what you need for two fleets and game pieces.
POINT - US

COMPONENT QUALITY:
This one is a tough one to call but again I have to give the point to Uncharted Seas. MoW was released with paper rulebooks which are black and white thru-and-thru, well outside of the hand oils which have accumulated over the years along the spine giving the cover a brown tint. It is also a matter of time before the first pages will break free from the staples holding the book together which was typical of GW releases back during this period. The US book is full glossy color front to back and has a glued spine. The ship quality also goes to US. The ships for US are just stunning. Being about twice the size of the typical MoW ship they look beautiful on the table with detail able to be picked out from a distance. The metal sails also do wonders for the game compared to the paper sales that MoW was published with. MoW does offer a wide range of variety with their ships with many of the fleets posessing their own characteristics, but judged by today’s standard they do look a little archaic.
POINT - US

VARIETY:
Here we finally have a point which goes to my beloved MoW, though at this point it is a little unfair since the only things available at this time form the foundation and backbone to US. As it currently stands, MoW averages about four or five choices per fleet and ten fleets to choose from. US only offers three ships to choose from with four fleets currently available. Seeing what SG has planned though the various fleets for US will soon have more choices than any fleet in MoW. So at this point the point is awarded to MoW, but with US being a supported game with many fleets still in the production stage this point will swing to US given time.
POINT: MoW (for the time being)

GAMEPLAY:
So up until this point there really isn’t much to dislike with US, is there? US is cheaper, it has better looking ships and will quickly surpass MoW in variety. But it really doesn’t amount to a hill of beans until you look at game play. Since there isn’t much in the way of variety when it comes to Age of Sail naval games (move, shoot, magic and boarding) it really wasn’t a surprise that both games are structured very similar. So I will break game play down to those components and compare the games on those merits.

MOVEMENT:
Both games utilize a turning template which represents a ships inability to turn on a dime and the lumbering nature of large ships on the water. MoW uses one template for every ship and basically the rules break down to, if a ship wants to turn, it is able to do so but for every turn it must move two inches and can turn up to 45 degrees. US does something that I really enjoy though and utilizes different turning templates for different size ships so the smaller frigates are able to turn much tighter radius compared to a larger battleship. These look like a half circle with the sides cut flat to one inch increments. Smaller ships use the smallest “circle” and larger ships use the largest “circle” to perform turning maneuvers. This allows frigates to dart around the sea and are more agile than their MoW counterparts. One major difference between the two games though is the other movement options available for MoW ships. With many fleets in MoW utilizing paddle wheels or oars as ways of propulsion, ships in MoW are able to turn in place, back up or sit still. On one hand I really like the different turning radiuses that US uses but the movement modes in MoW add other tactical layers and options to players.
POINT: MoW

COMBAT:
Here is where the games greatly differ. US utilizes a system where a handful of dice are rolled and successes tallied then the number of successes are compared to the armor and critial ratings on the target ship. This amounts to a one roll system. Damage affects the ship as a whole and is very clean overall with minimal book keeping. The effects on the ship are very simple and the amount of damage, in game terms, equates to a number of dice modification on attacking or ramming/collisions. My one complaint about the system is how smaller ships have little to no chance of damaging larger and more heavily armored ships. MoW utilizes a two roll system as well as ship templates which damage specific portions of the ship causing variable results (loss of speed, loss of weapons…etc.). The first roll combines the success of the shot (if it hits the target or not) and if it hits the location that the ship is hit. The target ship is then allowed a saving throw to see if the shot does damage. The result of the MoW system is a lot of book keeping which does bog the game down. What it does add though is a more detailed narrative. Different parts of the ship can be damaged which can impact the ship in many different ways and towards the end of the game, individual ships in a squadron could have damage causing them to act very differently from one another. So on one hand there is a very clean and simplified system and on the other there is more book keeping and more narrative. I personally prefer the narrative aspect, but this topic really does boil down to personal preference therefore:
POINT - MoW

BOARDING ACTIONS:
Again here US uses mechanics which creates a very clean system. Boarding actions are worked out very much like combat with successes and failures working out in the same method as combat and the number of dice rolled determined by how much crew the ship has. MoW uses a system where one d6 is rolled and modified by the number of crew as well as grapeshot from the ship being boarded. The main difference between the two is US is a fight to the death with neither side able to pull away until one crew is dead and could also result in both crews being eliminated (that outcome is possible in MoW but unlikely). Here I am again in favor of the more narrative feature of MoW. I like that one side, if winning, has the chance to go back to their ship, cut the lines and push off. I do not like US and the fight to the death mechanic.
POINT - MoW

MAGIC/ADD-ONS:
This aspect is my largest gripe with MoW. There is such a discrepancy with how magic is handled between the fleets, with the original fleets having a system which detracts from much of the character of the game. All the fleets from the base MoW box (exception Dwarves who have no magic) use the same magic deck and work in the same way. This creates a very bland system. More character is added with the Plague Fleet MoW expansion by offering different magic mechanics for the fleets introduced in that expansion but it makes the original system seem even blander. US has the upper hand here because it was created all at once. With the way the fleet decks work (yes granted technically not everything is considered “magic” but it sure feels that way) there is much more variability and character added to US, in fact this is what adds a large portion to the character to the fleets. The US system is clean, very fun and well balanced between the races.
POINT: US

As I was driving home from work last night I realized that while putting pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard if you will) I forgot one of the categories that I thought while driving to work, so here it is:

BALANCE
MoW has balance issues. Some fleets have little chance against others: I.e. Norse vs. Slaanesh. There are also a slight power creep, as mentioned above with the magic introduced in Plague Fleet, as well as the fleets in Plague Fleet containing lots of special and “fun” rules added whereas the fleets from the base game are pretty clean and minimal when it comes to special rules. Not to mention the flyer rules introduced in Sea of Blood are often a waste of points when compared to adding another squadron to the fleet. Overall, with MoW it feels like the parts of the whole MoW game, Plague Fleet, Sea of Blood and the base game, have a disconnected feel. When all three parts are added together they end bringing the whole package down. With US I’m having a very difficult time deciding exactly which fleet I want to play on a regular basis. It seems like every time I turn around one of the other fleets appeals to me from what I thought was “locked down”. Perhaps I won’t be happy until I own them all, but truth be told I’m the same way with MoW. Now I’ll admit that haven’t played all the fleets in either game, but from what I’ve seen I am confident in saying:
POINT: US

So for those of you keeping score, it comes to a 4 to 4 tie. But with me holding the tiebreaker, writing the article and all, I maintain MoW as the better game but only by the smallest of margins. And with it being so close, if you were to say US is better, I really couldn’t argue with you.

Overall the games really do offer two different experiences. US is a very clean and streamlined game but when boiled down it really lacks the character which I’ve come to love in MoW and other games. Ultimately, it comes down to personal preference. I personally can deal with more book keeping (and 1/3rd of the table covered in record sheets) and more fiddly rules for the addition of character and narrative, so MoW is still the top fantasy naval game in my book, but I will admit that US does come in a very close second (and much closer than I anticipated) because the cleaner rules and more streamlined nature of the game which creates a tighter tactical experience. That said though with MoW being as difficult as it is to get into, US does offer a very satisfying fantasy naval gaming experience and it looks like it only can go up from here. So US hasn’t reached the bar that MoW had set, for me at least, but everything points to that bar being raised by US. In due time there will be two fantasy naval games which at worst will be able to stand side by side on their own merits.

FINAL SCORE:
PRICE (US) - No questions or debate on this
COMPONENT QUALITY (US) - This one is a little more subjective, but with the early product from SG looking as good as it does, they already are looking better than any MoW ship
VARIETY (MoW) - At the time US has a lot of catching up to do in terms of variety, but with everything that has been mentioned on the boards it is only a matter of time.
MOVEMENT (MoW) - Though the turning template adds a lot to US, it doesn’t add enough to outweigh all the different methods of movement in MoW
COMBAT (MoW) - This really is the swing vote and is really the point which people should consider when deciding what game is for them (assuming price is of little concern), for me the narrative feel is something that I love in games and that is why my point went here
BOARDING ACTIONS (MoW) - Grapeshot and being able to end combat (not a fight to the death) gives MoW the point
MAGIC/ADD-ONS (US) - US is nice, clean and balanced where MoW is boring and a mess at times
BALANCE (US) - GW was never a company that put balance high on the list and yes, historically most battles were not balanced, but in a game setting there needs to be balance so the players are confident that the better player won and currently US is balanced and looks to be balanced in the future

MoW: 4 / US: 4

‘Til Next Time - Happy Gaming
LvT

Filed under: Games - Wargames, Uncharted Seas by LordVonTush
31 Comments »

Ah Warmaster - such a great game.  And currently, I’m heaping all of my attention on my Orc and Goblin army.  Today I’d like to go over the units available to the Orc and Goblin General, and my personal thoughts on each.

Anyone looking at the Orc and Goblin army list will immediately notice that they have the largest list of all the armies.  They have ten units to choose from - five character choices, and two mount options.  Obviously, this list brings plenty of options. 

Orcs are an army of dishing out the pain, but they can’t take it very well.  Every unit in the list aside from the weedy Goblins and their war machines pack four or more attacks in combat.  However, on the flip side only 3 units - the black Orcs, Ogres, and Giants bring more than 3 hits to the table.  Couple that with the fact that the highest armor save in the army is a 5+, with the average being 6+ or nothing at all, and you can see what I’m getting at.

Orcs also suffer from a low leadership - the lowest in fact, with the general only bringing a command value of 8 - Orcs are tough to boss around!  However, the list does allow the Orc player to field a whopping 7 characters per one-thousand points, so you can have plenty of underlings to help push the green tide along - hopefully.  That being said - Let’s check out what the list has to offer, you can view the official Orc and Goblin army list here.

Orc Warriors- You can’t have an orc army without Orcs!  You are required to take 2 units of basic Orc warriors per one-thousand points in the army, and they pack a pretty nice stat line.  4 attacks, 3 hits, with a 6+ save for 60 points - not too shabby for a basic unit.

Goblins- Your second required basic unit - you’ve gottah take 2 units for every 1k.  Goblins basically suck - 2 attacks, 3 hits, with no armor save - yikes.  But they only cost 30 points per unit.  Coupled with the Orc Warriors requirement, the Orc general must take 4 units for every one-thousand points that total 180 pts. - this leaves plenty of points for all the other great units available to the Orcs - but watch how you spend, you don’t want your break point to be too low.  Speaking of which, goblins are an excellent choice for increasing your army’s break point - every 2 units boosts the break point by one for 60 points.  This is a great way to add staying power to your force. 

As you can see, you may have quite a few of these buggers running around - so keep them brigaded with more powerful units, and use them as a supporting force - but keep them to the edges of your brigades.  You don’t want them in the middle where concentrated enemy fire can wipe them out or confuse them, thus screwing up the entire group’s ability to be commanded.

Black Orcs- These guys are tough - packing 4 attacks, 4 hits, and an armor of 5+.  They’re as good as Ogres in combat, and make a fine hammer unit for any brigade.  You are limited to one unit per one-thousand points.  They cost 110 points, so yer basically paying close to double the cost of a standard Orc warrior unit for +1 hit and +1 armor save - but its worth it.

Ogres- Ogres and black Orcs have an identical stat line - but they cost 5 point less.  This is because they have a taste for human flesh - so when fighting a human army, they must use their initiative to charge.  This isn’t a problem at all if you’re facing armies without humans, so they are an awesome alternative to black Orcs in these cases.  You are limited to one unit per 1k, but with the black Orcs, you should be able to have one of these powerful units in each brigade of standard Orcs and goblins.

Trolls- Trolls are powerful units - 5 attacks, 3 hits, with a save of 5+.  They cost 110 points like black Orcs.  Basically, they get +1 attack at the cost of -1 hit.  They have an awesome ability to regenerate damage - basically they regenerate 1 hit after every round of combat - this is awesome.  However, they are as dumb as a bag of hammers, and this means that they are at -1 to command - this sucks.  Oddly enough, you can take up to three of these units per one-thousand points, so perhaps a brigade of these baddies would be a nice choice, where their command penalty would only effect them, and not an entire brigade.  Orcs have a hard enough time as it is commanding their troops!

Boar Riders- Boar riders are Orc warriors with a cav classification.  This also has the added bonus of squeezing all those attacks onto the short side of the base which makes for a really hard hitting unit.  They ring in at 110 points.  Brigade them with other boar riders or wolf cav for a fast moving, effective flanking front.

Wolf Riders- Wolf riders are goblins with a cav classification - unlike goblins though, they enjoy an armor save of 6+.  Like goblins, they have short bows, allowing them to shoot 15cm.  This can make for an effective harassing unit against infantry - moving to the side and rear flanks, pelting with arrows, and then finally charging, where they can run away if they fail in combat - with infantry unable to pursue. 

Don’t make the mistake of using wolf riders like the boar riders - you can’t use them as a brute shock trooper cav unit.  Wolf riders only ring in at 60 points though - making for an exceptionally cheap cav option.

Wolf Chariots- Wolf chariots pack 3 attacks, 3 hits, and a save of 5+.  They only cost 80 points which is awesome for a unit that is just as powerful as boar riders when they manage to land the charge.  Used in tandem with cav units, wolf chariots can provide a devastating flank charger on the outskirts of the battlefield.

Rock Lobber- Rock lobbers provide the only shooting in the Orc and Goblin army outside the short bow fire that goblins can muster.  This makes them somewhat useless unless used in pairs.  Unfortunately, you can only take one per 1k, so these rarely show up in my armies.

Giant - Arguably one of the best big monsters in the game.  This bastard brings 8 attacks and 8 hits to the table, but with a 5+ save.  This means that on the charge this guy is rolling 10d6 attacks!  Be careful not to throw him out on his own though - if he takes 4 hits, his effectiveness if halved for the rest of the game.  Giants can’t be brigaded with non-giant units, so you have to reserve a command roll just for them, and when you’re dealing with low command characters, this can really suck - especially because failed orders can send a giant into an uncontrolled frenzy against friend and foe alike!  But for only 150 pts, how could you not take one!?

That concludes the units available to the Orc and Goblin army, but how do the characters measure up?

General- Everyone has to get one, unfortunately the Orc and Goblin general only has a command value of 8.  On the plus side, he only costs 95 points. 

Orc Hero- Fortunately, Orc heroes also have a command value of 8 for 80 pts.  You can take two of these guys for each 1k, so make sure you have one or two to support your general.  I like to keep a single hero touching my general - this basically forms a command base that is the equivalent of your command 8 general being allowed to fail and single command before the command phase ends.  Let the Hero issue orders like he’s the general - once he fails, let the general take command - its all the same command 8 roll.  The Orc Heroes are really what keeps the Orc and Goblin army going.

Orc Shaman- These are the wizards of the army.  Orc spells are pretty good, but don’t rely on these guys to lead anyone - they have a command of 7.  They should only command units as a desperation move.  If it’s magic yer after, go with the goblin shaman - he’s cheaper and just as good at casting spells.  If you want to go magic heavy, get both!  Orcs and Goblins can get 2 wizards per 1k, more than anyone else aside from the tomb kings.

Goblin heroes- Pretty worthless as commanders, goblin heroes only have a command of 7.  Unless you’re going goblin heavy for theme purposes, I don’t get the point.  They add +1 to any combat they’re in, so they can be used as a little 45 pt. buff to units in combat - but you’d be better off buying a good magic item and another unit of goblins for the same points.

Goblin Shaman- As mentioned before - if it’s a wizard yer after, get this guy first.  He’s affordable at 30 points - that’s cheap magic support.  He’s got a command of 6 though - no self respecting Orc is going to take orders from this weakling. 

Wyvern- A pretty nice dragon type mount.  It’s only 80 pts. which is cheap for this type of mount.  It’s cheaper because he grants +2 attacks rather than 3, and lacks a breath weapon.  It still flies and causes terror though.

Placing a goblin hero on a dragon is a nice idea.  Goblin heroes don’t command well - but on a dragon you get a flying character that grants +3 attacks to any combat he joins as well as effecting the enemy with terror.  This will ring in at 125pts. though, so make sure you have the points to spare.

Chariot - A chariot simply adds +1 attack to any character that’s in it.  Basically a 10 pt upgrade to any character. 

The Orc and Goblin army provides anyone who takes it up with lots of opportunity, and plenty of challenges to overcome.  They can be incredibly rewarding when things go right, or terribly frustrating after multiple failed commands - but in either case, the right player always finds the Orcs and their antics entertaining.

-

DEACON

Filed under: Games - Wargames, Warmaster by DEACON
1 Comment »