HUGE CHANGES! Warhammer: The Old World Movement Phase
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 07. 2024
- Today we look at the latest rules update from Games Workshop around the movement phase for warhammer the old world. There is plenty to get our heads around! Let us know what you think about these changes in the comments section!
Here's the base adapters I was talking about in the video www.greenstuffworld.com/en/sq...
You can see them in action here! How to get your WHFB army Old World Ready! • How to get your WHFB a...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @nineinchcharge
Thank you for watching.
Please leave us a comment and subscribe to keep up to date on our new videos!
Support the channel, become a Patron
/ nineinchcharge
Check out great hobby products and help to support the channel
elementgames.co.uk/?d=10798
www.firestormgames.co.uk?aff=6329be3b06bdf
Head on over to Nine Inch Charge Hobby Hangout Community on Facebook for pictures, tips and hobby advice.
/ nininchcharge
Listen to The Old World Podcast: anchor.fm/nineinchcharge
Instagram @nineinchcharge
Twitter@nineinchcharge
Facebook @nineinchcharge
E-mail: nineinchcharge@gmail.com
Music
'Movie' by Aylex
• 🍿 No Copyright Epic Ci...
#ageofsigmar #theoldworld #warhammer - Hry
Highlands Miniatures make some modular magnetised movement trays you can 3d print. You can print them in sections or individual squares to go under each base, so with those you can change the shape of the tray without needing any extra trays (plus you can reduce the size of the tray as you remove minis from a unit)
Another good option is ModuBase which means you print a mini slotting base that allows you to switch between round, square or he bases easily, and because everything is magnetisable you can do something similar to the Highlands bases, but without any extra width from a tray border (so the actual width of the mini bases only). In this option you'd have minis on different size bases (smaller squares or lines) so you can rearrange the like tetris blocks into shape, but it would require extra under trays of different sizes to match the unit shape.
Thank you for this. I've pinned it so others can find it more easily. I'm a big fan of the Highland's miniatures but now I'll have to check out their trays!
yes thanks , they have a undead one which is very vampire counts but should be ok for tomb kings too, lets see how they print in pla lol
I’ll have to look through the files, I’ve never noticed them. I’m a massive fan of highlands (they sell well in my Etsy shop), their empire range is brilliant.
I wonder if leadership and musicians will play a more prominent part in switching formations, so that in theory you could march quickly to a point and then reform into combat order, but if you fluff your die roll you find yourself vulnerable, it would be an interesting way of representing the way some armies are better drilled than others, and would be another thing they should never have got rid of from 3rd.
I’m pretty sure 8th Edition never actually had a hard minimum on the amount of models that were allowed in a rank, it was just that ranks had to be at least 5 wide to provide a rank bonus. As the marching column stops units from gaining this rank bonus anyway, I wouldn’t look into the number of models in a rank shown too hard.
I get the comments on the movement trays and how it will add to the time spent in the game but even in 8th, many of the best players would often be reforming their units, as the need arose, to get the best tactical advantage from a unit. It is a pain and probably why most players didn’t bother in general.
I also wondered if the swift reform rule is no longer a thing due to the change of reforming using your movement. They are doing a good job with these titbits as I need to see the full rules so I can understand all the interactions!
You could just turn most movement trays 90 degrees to make a column?
12:50 compulsory movement and magical movement "counts as" charging when it brings you into contact with the enemy. So I don't think there is actually any change.
I hope a charging unit which doesn't close the charge (ie doesn't make the distance) becomes disordered in some way.
Otherwise, you could charge every turn with little penalty for an extra gain to base movement (assuming you didn't have missile weapons to fire).
With the shorter charge distances and the longer failed charge distances it sounds like the penalty for failing a charge is going to be being very easily charged in the opposing player's turn. How severe that is is going to depend on the combat rules which we'll get a taster of in maybe a couple of weeks?
the movement seems very similar to Hail Caesar especially with the counter-charge rule however it is interesting to then apply the rank bonus system of fantasy to it. The extra penalty of losing battle resolution when a unit is below half and the 25% strength seems to imply that rank bonus will be particulary important so it is unlikely that larger frontages will be efficient.
That’s possibly as Rick Priestly wrote the rules for Hail Caesar, Warhammer ancient battles and most of the early editions of warhammer fantasy. I’ve not seen the HC rules but it’s likely he drew on some of his earlier rule sets for it.
Seems the more I read about TOW the more I am reminded of 3rd...
Which can surely only be a good thing, right?
@@NineInchCharge To a point, but then... why not just play 3rd? :D
@@michaelstockin1636because no one else will play it. If there's a "trick" that can be used to get people playing this style of game, I'm all for it.
it's a good thing how? GW left 3rd behind and rightly so with 4th and 5th and even that was an overly complex, bloated mess... so they cut the rules down even more for 6th-8th and THAT was a 80 page ruleset (excluding special rules which was woefully unwieldable and overly-dense (not in an "intelligent" way btw) and that KILLED THE GAME. 40K, btw, was always a 18-20 page ish ruleset (excluding special rules) and even that needed the fat trimmed.
You have have a great rank and flank experience without 100 pages of rules. The Game of Thrones mini game is the Warhammer Fantasy rules distilled down to its core elements and a great game; King of War is critically acclaimed. This is just a rehash of a game that was rejected by the people you NEED in order for GW to justify investing more money in it. The game is going to fail.
I hate AoS but I think half of us here could take that 6 page ruleset from when it was released and in an hour modify it to be something better than what Old World seems to be.
Little Jonny is going to be sitting there baffled and angry that he couldn't, when playing Old World, charge his knights into the exposed flank of a massive unit of Orcs because he rolled too low and just COULDN'T make it because when he wheeled to charge it cost him an extra inch of movement... when in reality what SHOULLD matter is that the opponent left his/her flank exposed.
@@NineInchCharge
@@britainbetterthanyou Opinions are like arseholes. Everyone has one. Thanks for sharing yours i guess 👍
Good chat about rules from ppl who actually play.
I wouldn’t stress about the trays for open/closed order as the trusty token or dice can do the trick.
Token hammer…? I could get into that. Maybe that’s not a bad way to keep the gaming moving along instead of a lot. However I feel that when combat looms it might essential to have the units representing their order correctly.
You might go for a charge but forget the unit is in marching Column which could leave you an unfavourable charge because the first file you hit in the flank might not be there.
Just speaking from my experience there. I get way to excited when playing games to pay attention to tokens when I’m in the thick of a good scrap.
So march formation up the flank. Next turn 90° formation change to get into combat formation. Then charge. 3 turns...
Do mounted knights get marching formation?
The more I see the more I like. Definite strong overtones of third, and moving away from the dumbed down "rock, paper, scissors with models" that 6th was. If they could bring back formations like squares, shield walls and testudos, and get rid of the appalling flying/briefly hopping rules from later editions and revert to actual flying my day would be made, but from what I'm seeing they seem to be taking the best from a number of editions.
New to Old World. What happens if i just don't use movement trays?
You can, but when you want to move 20+ models at a time in a close formation it becomes very tedious without a movement tray.
Warhammer without a movement tray is a mistake. One which I made for a long time as a kid.
As a Kings of War enjoyer, I am definitely disappointed that the Movement phase appears to be so complicated. I definitely never expected TOW to go to the KoW Unit Strength/Wounds per unit instead of removing models, but I really did hope that every unit would get a free 90 degree turn at any point in their movement.
I like Kings of War, but the game looks horrible when people are pushing a horde of infantry around with 21 models on it. Also the same when people go overboard with modelling so it looks like they're pushing around a piece of terrain lol
Also I find movement in KoW is so chesslike and unvaried. There's no "hail Mary" charge moments, everything charges a set distance. Wild Charge helped though. Maybe it's because I'm a bad wargamer but I like the RNG crutch... I at least win at Warhammer sometimes, KoW not so much😂
They've entirely misread the room and made all the WRONG decisions. Maybe this was a last minute re-write as this contradicts what the community posts sometimes say.
KoW does a lot right and has a lot of critical praise (unlike Warhammer Fantasy) - but I think a lot of people enjoy seeing their models die as a unit is destroyed though. But the absurd levels of "complexity" TOW team have decided to add as well as demanding players fiddle around re-arranging their models for ten minutes just to get a little extra movement (instead of just handing them a token) is primitive games design.
1% of previous Warhammer players will love this. The kind that still play 9th Age and WAP. But the 99% remaining have moved on and might even, god forbidden, stay with AoS. Game Design has moved on and quite frankly the only reason WFB never moved on was because they needed to keep prev. armies books usable.
@@britainbetterthanyou Where exactly is the contradiction? They've always said the game will be a mix of previous editions with some new elements. Can you link us?
It's not the first time whoever writes the community posts seems to have crossed wires: almost as if he's just handed a pile of notes and told to write whatever.
We were told in the same article it's "modern game in the mould of Warhammer Fantasy Battle, a reimagining of a classic tabletop wargame" but then also told they had gone through older editions and taken out the best bits and also "Here are some of the tweaks we’ve made to the rules" then we were told the game would be "providing new and exciting rules". Sounds to me like the writer was just given a bunch of notes and told to just put something out there. It's not a reimagining or a modern game that's in the mould of Warhammer (at least it seems that way for now): it's literally just a tweaked edition of Warhammer Fantasy.
And what killed Warhammer Fantasy was that they always just tweaked the new editions, rather than completely renew the game and make it better (which was the best they could do given they HAD to make sure past Armies Books were useable).
@@themidnightaristocrat
In a post quite a while back they said they played all the editions and took the best parts of each. As glory as those days were, tabletop rules has evolved and focusing the game mainly on the old rules is a mistake in my opinion. They mostly nailed the modern with classic flair look of their new models, but rules-wise they are stuck in the past. Not gonna measure wheeling in 2024, it's clunky and inaccurate
Marching column is going to be incredibly niche. All special movements are not allowed,in marching column except for a wheel. And that means if you start the game in marching column, you cannot do anything but march and wheel on the first turn. Then, on the second turn, you need to reform you would be better off, just starting in close order and marching twice at the double.
You will not need extra movement trays you will not be constantly changing your files. If a 5 x 4 unit wants to go in March and column you temporarily put four models at the back.
Unless there is a way to reform for free, and also not count as reforming, you probably are not going to see a marching Column even 1 in 10 games
First!
This is just terrible news for those of us - the majority I expect - who want this game to succeed and hopefully surpass AoS.
This might be great news for the tiny minority who liked what some may say was the tedious minutiae of prev. editions. But the bulk of potential players, potential newblood, this is a massive turn off.
Remember the THREE MAIN REASONS Warhammer Fantasy failed was (1) High Prices & High Model Count; (2) Massive Ruleset; (3) GW's failure to support the game.
Reading through the article was honestly pathetic. It's 2023 and they're demanding you count inches as you pivot or wheel. I'm sure that tiny minority enjoy fiddling with wheeling and trying to shift a model here and there to get an extra attack or 2: for the rest of us it's inexplicable. This is complexity for complexities sake: it's not "tactics" or strategy. It's demanding players learn and engage with unnecessary mental load that adds nothing to the game for most people and moves you even further from an actual, real battle. This game isn't dealing with blocks of 100 men: it's dealing with units of 5... 10, maybe 20, trust me, they can run across the battlefield without forming a bizarre column which was only useful for 100s of men marching miles.
No one wants AoS again, but hypothetically the 6-8 pages of rules that came with 1st edition AoS was the CORRECT COURSE OF ACTION: just as shame they blew it when it came to writing the rules.
I can’t say I’m disappointed by the complexity but it does feel like they may have missed a trick or two to remove some of the areas that could cause some disagreement but it is telling that by keeping many of the rules and adding to them it confirms their earlier comments that the game is really aimed at returning/existing players rather than necessarily a newer and younger player base.
We ran a large demo game in Oct at our club show and quite a few kids (8-10ish) came over to watch and a few made the comment that they recognised it as their older brothers played it but they didn’t as found it too complicated. Ok it was a very small sample set but I think it plays more to the transient/simplified nature of what is expected now vs what we would have learnt/expected when we were that age and it will turn off a large portion of younger players who will be needed for longevity. It will make simplified demo games to interest them, all the more needed.
Has GW learned nothing?
I’m legit shocked. I thought FOR SURE that GW would be stealing the awesome groundwork that KoW has set for rules. Instead they went the opposite direction and made them worse.
I will not be playing a game which forces me to change between multiple movement trays. I can’t think of anything I’d rather do less in a game.
As for wheeling, it was always terrible and the worst part of moving. It’s subjective (nobody measures with actual arc), unintuitive, slow and difficult to predict. Now we have even more of it for no reason.
Good job GW. You can keep it. I have four armies sitting on the shelf and ready to go, but I don’t want to play this game.
The more I hear about the supposed good points of KoW, the worse it sounds.
@@Captain_of_NulnI can’t talk to 3rd Ed KOW but played a fair bit of 2nd Ed. The game was fun, very quick to learn and you could easily play (and finish) a game when at the club (something I’d be hard pressed to say about whfb). But I always found that it came with the price of feeling a bit bland. It was still as strategic as fantasy when playing it (just in a slightly different way) but if you like list building and tweaking (which I love) then it was very basic with options and magic and items were slim pickings (though it was increased in 3rd Ed). Overall I found it a fun pick up game but just not for me
@@Knofflesyeah to be fair to KoW I’m sure it’s fine if you want something quick and easy you can play in a couple of hours at a club, but it exists already, why replicate it? I’d far rather see something more complex and satisfying
Legit it's embarassing that these are the rules they went with lmao. Dead on arrival. Designed to fail? Yep. Repeating all the exact mistakes that made the game fail in the first place ? Yep.
Hi chaps, I recall that in the old last 6th edition that the Bretonnian lance charge formation was always 3 across and as many rows behind that.. I stand under correction on that. I don't recall this new wedge formation 1,2,3. Great content and will keep watching as we head to this new game
Maybe it was in 5th edition! Over 20 years in the hobby and sometimes the editions just blend together! Thanks for watching, glad you enjoyed it!