Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So when WHFB died i was tired of being unable to play the game at GW even 6 years after it died and GW said it was going to bring it back in some form. I got into 40k but more and more i just feel like there's a lack of balance and i have an itch for rank and file + flanking games that just needs to be scratched. Also after over 10 years with GW i'm kinda sick of the company's prices, business practices and lore changes. Not to mention i feel like these day the "you will not be missed" tag-line is applying to WHFB players, long term players and whatever flavor of the month GW wants to dislike and heap disgust on instead of taking responsibility for mismanagement.

Anyway please let me know if KoW will scratch my WHFB itch. I used to play skaven but dark elves, beastmen and vampire counts also interested me. Does KoW have equivalents to those factions and is the balance between army factions and price per model any good?

KoW is good game and certainly less frustrating than any GW flagship game.

It is a much more streamlined version of whfb with quite a few different features. Reasonably balanced (you can min-max as usual) but nothing feels terrible enough to have a bad experience.
Unlike GW games, there are no "army books" released once every few years for each army (this prevents quite a bit of powercreep). Instead all army lists are within the Rulebook (for armies with Mantic models) or a supplement, Uncharted Empires (for armies without Mantic models). Indeed, KoW has official models but it is very easy to make it model agnostic (use whatever you want as long as it more or less fits the theme).
Mantic models are cheaper than GW's, but less quality and designs vary a lot (newer models are great, old not so much). As regiments use multibases, it is more flexible (example: a Regiment of 20 infantry can be represented with 16 models without an issue).

KoW also has a large amount of armies, all the classic whfb have their equivalent (Skaven -> Ratking / DE -> Twilight Kin / Beastmen -> Herd / VC -> Undead). On top of that, you have a couple of extra cool races like the Nightstalkers. On the Mantic website you have simplied version of the kow rules in case you want to check it out.

Could possibly scratch the whfb itch. If not, there are other r&f games that do (like Conquest: The Last Argument of Kings or Oathmark).

VBS has covered the important points. Just wanted to elaborate on some things that might be of interest to you.

The Ratkin have two army lists, both found in Unchartered Empires. The first is pure Ratkin, thus the closest to Sakven. The second list is what KoW calls a "theme" list. It modifies a Master list, and changes what units you can bring. The Ratkin theme list is "Ratkin Slaves", and the Master list is Abyssal Dwarfs. {Mantic's equivalent of Chaos Dwarfs, which I run.} In Mantic's world, the Abyssal Dwarfs bred Ratkin as slaves, but failed to reckon with their intelligence. There was a bloody revolt, and many slaves escaped. Now there are free Ratkin with their own power base, and a hunger for vengeance (the first list). However, the Abyssal Dwarfs still have Ratkin as slave troops to die in their stead, and that is what the Ratkin Slaves list lets you run. If I had ratmen minis by any manufacturer, I'd give this list a try. It seems solid, and it is thematic: if you have slaves, have them soak damage while you move in for a safe and easy kill!

The KoW Undead list is closer to the old GW Undivided Undead list, which I played back in 5th ed WHFB. Not having played Vampire Counts, I'm not sure what you'd lose (Fell Bats maybe?). There is also the Empire of Dust {not-Tomb Kings}. Mantic does put out models for the EoD, unlike GW which killed that line.

Twilight Kin is a theme list, with the Master List being Elves. While Twilight Kin were originally WHFB Dark Elves, lately Mantic has been trying to make them distinct, and so while they still have "Blade Dancers" and similar units, many of their new units are drawn from the Nightstalkers list. Mantic does make Nightstalkers minis, but since the Nightstalkers are basically creatures of nightmare, there is a lot of room for customization. Reaper Bones has many Lovecraft Mythos monsters nowadays.

The Herd (Beastmen) is a theme list of Forces of Nature. The alignment is Neutral, and some of the more obviously fantastic creatures from Forces of Nature are dropped (e.g. Unicorns, Phoenixes), and the emphasis is on the beast side, so beastmen, centaurs, and untainted werewolves (the corrupted ones are in the Undead list). The Herd can still take Earth Elementals and Forest Shamblers (treefolk/Ents).

While not one of the armies you have an interest in, Brettonians have a home in KoW. Two theme lists, one which uses the Basileans as the Master list (think a fantasy Byzantium with angels and archangels), and the second which uses Forces of Nature as the master list. The second list, The Order of the Green Lady, feels more 5th ed. Brettonian to me. {I had Brettonians in 5th ed, but I rarely played them, so I sold them.} So if you know any disgrunted Brettonian players, tell them about KoW.

There is also a fan-made army builder at https://mantic.easyarmy.com/KingsOfWar

Edit: There is a rules committee, and while they don't always get things right, they do try to keep the game balanced. Fliers were a problem in 2nd ed., and they toned them down. They are still strong, but it is no longer a risk-free tactic to send a Hero on a Dragon into the enemy's rear. Previously, that hero & dragon could dance around, and Fly off if they encountered something dangerous. Now, if they take a single wound in melee, and they are grounded, which means payback time. So it is no longer an auto-take in a list, nor risk-free in the game. That being said, Elves are still strong as they have "drakon riders" as Large Cavalry. Not as strong as pure dragons, but still strong compared to cavalry, and with the speed and manueverability of Flight. Most pre-Covid Elf tournament lists had the hero on a dragon, and at least one unit of drakon riders.

KoW is a very streamlined game that rewards good positioning. A game will look much like a summarised game of Warhammer Fantasy.

It will however, not scratch a WHFB itch. It may scratch a Warmaster itch though.

As someone else brought it up, why not give warhammer armies project a look?

Most of what I'd say has already been said so I'll be brief.

If your itch is simply for " for rank and file + flanking games" and you don't mind more streamlined gameplay then KoW would likely scratch the itch. If you like the granularity of rules and statlines and special rules of WHFB and feel that they give character to the armies you may be disappointed.

I recommend that you play through a game with the figures you have using the free rules.
https://www.manticgames.com/mantic-games-free-rules/
It won't take you long to see whether or not KoW will scratch the itch.

All the armies you mention have equivalents in KoW (you will want the Uncharted Empires supplement) and while balance isn't perfect, it tends to be much better than WHFB.

Model price is lower-per-model for Mantic models, but is also semi-irrelevant since you can use any representative figures you want. An army of WHFB figures you already have is legal in KoW. IMHO, the KoW Miniatures lines are definitely hit or miss so the freedom to pick up a used WHFB army or source figs from another manufacturer is a positive aspect.

Don't consider all this faint praise however. I highly recommend KoW as a very enjoyable and well crafted fantasy wargame experience. It's my preferred ruleset for fantasy battles at the company level.

KoW is a great game, I have played for a few years now, and have practically not experienced rules discussions.

Multibasing is also fantastic for the hobby side, I have two big multibased armies, with a few more in line, and they look so much better than my older single-based fantasy armies.

The only downside is that it sometimes can feel a bit mechanical, as angles and threatranges are super important, so quite a lot of higher level play is adjusting angles and playing with milimeters. Still a fantastic game, the best I have played for pickup or tournament gaming, but not the best game for narrative gaming.

Agree with Illumini about the ruleset being super practical for pickup games or tournaments, making random games with strangers not too dreadful. Rules discussions and "not being on the same page" are rare.
Other more intricate/rules heavy games make me not want to play them outside garage/home (you never know.... and a few not so enjoyable experiences).

That along the multibasing (seriously fun once you try!) are really strong points in favor of KoW.

Multibases really are the best!

Here's another voice in praise of Kings of War. I played WHFB for like 20 years, and I've been amazed at how much fun - and how smooth - it is to play KOW. Great community as well, and the hobbying freedom is amazing. Also once you experience competent internal balance, it's extra obvious how terrible GW is at balancing things.

Thinking about it, WHFB had sort of two things going on: ranks-n-flanks, and random magic / tables / herohammer. KOW and AOS basically split that down the middle, with one having very low randomness (and certainly no tables!) and a fairly strong turn away from hero-driven game play (tho influential characters certainly abound and are integral to the game), and the other having no ranks or flanks but a lot of lip service to narrative gaming.

Anyhoo, give KOW a shot, it's really great, and as inexpensive as you need it to be, especially if you're porting in a WHFB army.

Also if you're looking for the community, it's most active on FB (https://www.facebook.com/groups/403267653139331/) but has some forum presence at https://www.kowforum.com, certainly more than here.

If you have this ran&file itch, you may want to check A Song of Ice and Fire. I see nothing but praise everywhere I read anything about this game(including here, on Dakka) and can't wait to try it out myself (tomorrow!)

Also, if the itch is specifically WFB-related, there's the 9th Age, which seems to be a lot more popular than Kings of War. Here in Poland it seems to be more popular than AoS even. So if WFB, but vastly improved by the most experienced players from around the globe is something you want, look no further. It's free to try out too (all rules online, as befits a fan project)

Kings of War is brilliant, being able to use whatever models you want for it, combined with a huge selection of army lists really opens up the hobby and allows you to have some real fun with making the army that you want.

In terms of gameplay, it plays fast, has a lot more to do with tactics and manoeuvre than picking the OP units from a given army list, it's one of those easy-to-learn, difficult-to-master games.

There are lists that cover all of the WHFB factions and more besides. In terms of price/model, Mantic is great, always affordable and no ridiculous pricing on things like character models.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
So when WHFB died i was tired of being unable to play the game at GW even 6 years after it died and GW said it was going to bring it back in some form. I got into 40k but more and more i just feel like there's a lack of balance and i have an itch for rank and file + flanking games that just needs to be scratched. Also after over 10 years with GW i'm kinda sick of the company's prices, business practices and lore changes. Not to mention i feel like these day the "you will not be missed" tag-line is applying to WHFB players, long term players and whatever flavor of the month GW wants to dislike and heap disgust on instead of taking responsibility for mismanagement.

Anyway please let me know if KoW will scratch my WHFB itch. I used to play skaven but dark elves, beastmen and vampire counts also interested me. Does KoW have equivalents to those factions and is the balance between army factions and price per model any good?

Kings of War is very good. You should definitely try it at the very least.
Mantic is a company that respects your hobby; not always perfect, but at least they want to make a good game.

KoW has equivalents for all the Old World factions (Mantic have not tried to keep up with all the crazy AoS stuff though), but you may have to buy a second book for the army list.
Uncharted Empires is a book of extra army lists that was released to accommodate "Warhammer refugees" and put out some unique ideas.

The models are a moot point; using "third party miniatures" is not even frowned upon.
There are army lists without model lines and most armies have units that you have to find models for.
Mantic's newer models are great and the older stuff is value for money.

From what you have said: KoW will probably scratch your WHFB itch, but there are things that WHFB did that KoW doesn't bother with. KoW has keeping it simple as a design philosophy.
I have found that former WHFB players often think they will miss things but find that the game is better without and KoW plays better than it reads.
It's easier to try playing a few games of KoW and seeing if it you like it than comparing written rules.
You have the models and the rules you need are free.

KoW gives the rank and flank feel of WFB but it's very streamlined and doesn't have some of the more detailed rules for stuff like different psychology, breaking and rallying troops, characters joining regiments, reforming and so on.

But for me it does hit the spot of rank and flank play, trying to set up flank charges and protect your own flanks, movement being important and big blocks of troops on the board.

The balance is also pretty good, sometimes certain units are a bit too powerful but generally all factions can compete and there tend to be multiple viable ways to build an army for any faction, which I think is a great achievement.

If you already have WFB models or any Fantasy models really I can't see a downside to giving KoW a go. It's also got one of the biggest player bases for a non-GW fantasy game, at least where I am.

I have a couple of soft criticisms for KoW.

1. It's very much a movement game, emphasizing positioning and speed. For the armies I prefer, - Dwarfs - such a thing is no bueno.

2. Rules for individual units aren't really as exciting to me as WHFB. This is partially due to the aforementioned simplicity.

While I agree with your criticism, dwarfs in KoW can play the movement game, with brock riders, surging elementals and mounted heroes.

If you like the traditional warhammer dwarf style, and as such don't want any cavalry or elementals, that is going to be harder. You cannot just sit and shoot in KoW, but dwarves can play shooty + infantry fairly well. They have many good infantry units, and artillery has gotten a big boost in V3. You have access to cheap anvils in the 5+/6+ infantry. Hitting power in the shieldbreakers and berserkers. Sharpshooters for scoring good shooters, and mastiffs are also really good for slow infantry armies.

Free dwarf even gives you pathfinder

 Illumini wrote:
While I agree with your criticism, dwarfs in KoW can play the movement game, with brock riders, surging elementals and mounted heroes.

If you like the traditional warhammer dwarf style, and as such don't want any cavalry or elementals, that is going to be harder. You cannot just sit and shoot in KoW, but dwarves can play shooty + infantry fairly well. They have many good infantry units, and artillery has gotten a big boost in V3. You have access to cheap anvils in the 5+/6+ infantry. Hitting power in the shieldbreakers and berserkers. Sharpshooters for scoring good shooters, and mastiffs are also really good for slow infantry armies.

Free dwarf even gives you pathfinder

While I'm not opposed to the cavalry or stuff like the golems, I prefer the traditional style. And traditional Dwarfs are slow. In WHFB, this isn't really a problem as you have units like Hammerers or Longbeards who can both take it and dish it out. But KOW Dwarfs - not counting the more mobile Free Dwarfs - are reliant on those non-traditional elements to compete in a movement-based game.

I think a good solution for at least some of my gripes would be if Ironguard could, like Dwarf Clansmen in the NA list, trade 6+ Defense for 5+ Def/ Crushing Strength 1. This would represent the elite shock troops of the army.

Another solution could be to introduce "Cataphracts" on giant goats or the like, that are slower than Brock Riders and have less Nerve, but have De 5+.

 RaptorusRex wrote:

 Illumini wrote:
While I agree with your criticism, dwarfs in KoW can play the movement game, with brock riders, surging elementals and mounted heroes.

If you like the traditional warhammer dwarf style, and as such don't want any cavalry or elementals, that is going to be harder. You cannot just sit and shoot in KoW, but dwarves can play shooty + infantry fairly well. They have many good infantry units, and artillery has gotten a big boost in V3. You have access to cheap anvils in the 5+/6+ infantry. Hitting power in the shieldbreakers and berserkers. Sharpshooters for scoring good shooters, and mastiffs are also really good for slow infantry armies.

Free dwarf even gives you pathfinder

While I'm not opposed to the cavalry or stuff like the golems, I prefer the traditional style. And traditional Dwarfs are slow. In WHFB, this isn't really a problem as you have units like Hammerers or Longbeards who can both take it and dish it out. But KOW Dwarfs - not counting the more mobile Free Dwarfs - are reliant on those non-traditional elements to compete in a movement-based game.

I think a good solution for at least some of my gripes would be if Ironguard could, like Dwarf Clansmen in the NA list, trade 6+ Defense for 5+ Def/ Crushing Strength 1. This would represent the elite shock troops of the army.

Another solution could be to introduce "Cataphracts" on giant goats or the like, that are slower than Brock Riders and have less Nerve, but have De 5+.

I disagree, but this is not the tread to argue about dwarfs.

True.

To answer the OP's question, I would say KOW is good, but it has its flaws like any other game.

Dwarfs in KoW are build to grind down the enemy and/or hold the line until support is there

and the option for trading Def for CS was removed in 3rd because the 3 units, Ironclad, Ironguard & Shieldbreaker were too similar with it (I miss my "Langbeard" Ironguard with 2 handed weapons and as a universal tool)

but I have to disagree that traditional dwarfs are slow, this is more of a meme of non-dwarf players as they were never slow in WHFB, they were made slower with each edition and some tournaments banned all fast option until dwarfs became a shooting castle in the corner in 8th, but they had their tools to be fast, the same way as Dwarfs have in KoW.


but yes, KoW has its flaws, because it is a R&F game focused on units (not 1 unit or heroes) and makes sacrifices to get this done

First of all I will say try it, and make up your own mind. If you like it, or don't like it, thatbis fine... you are entirely allowed to have your own opinion.

Small bit of background, been playing these sort of games since the 80's, been playing KoW since the beta rules.

When Kings of War first came out is felt fresh and much more enjoyable game from what WFB was morphing into.

My view of the game is different to the ones you are likely to hear, always important to hear both pros and cons. The pros have been covered in depth here. Now we are in 3rd edition I feel like the game has some very bad game design, allow me to go over them.

• IGOUGO. This creates very little player interaction, and a lot of downtime for the player who's turn it isn't. Plus as one army gets to do all of it's attacks without any retaliate from the opponent, it can lead to situations where a player has even less of their force left to deal with that of their opponents, which can and does give an advantage to a player.

• No real force structure. In WFB you had Lord, Hero, Core, Special, and Rare. You had to take a minimum core based on the size of the game, and we're limited to how much o stuff you could again based on the size of the game. Not here, the few rules for force building are very easy to abuse. 4 dragons in 2,000pts... easy with Undead, or how about 9 war engines in 2,000pts, easy with Kingdoms of Men. Now I hope no one ever does create these list, but the game as it is allows for them.

• Bucket of Dice. Do you enjoy rolling 60 dice at a time? Kings of War can do bucket if dice as well as GW Ork's can. With units having a high number of attacks that are doubled for a flank, or tripled for a rear charge it can create situations where 90 dice are rolled. This sheer brute force approach to dice games may appeal to you, but for me it leaves me cold. People say it is fast, what is fast about rolling 60-90 dice and then sometimes re-rolling all the ones?

• Damage does nothing. In Kings of War a unit has 3 states. OK, wavering, or routed. Causing any amount of damage on a unit facilities the rolling of a nerve test. This is 2D6 added to the amount of damage on a unit and comparing to the units nerve stats. Now it can happen that a very small amount of damage is caused and the 2D6 roll very high, and this could at worst see the unit routed, or wavering. The opposite is true, imaging doing a lot of damage in one go and rolling a double 1. The game has a rule that a double 1 means the unit stays ok, if the damage is over its nerve it is reduced. So it is possible to hit a unit very hard, roll poor on 2d6 and the unit in question will be fine, at full unit effectiveness, or do a small amount of damage roll well and the unit is removed. The 2D6 can make it very swingy.

• Characters have forgotten how to join units. Support Characters who would be wise to take protection in blocks of troops instead have to run around the battlefield by themselves hoping that they survive.

• Lack of focus within the setting. In aiming to be everything, it is nothing. The setting is even more of a mess when it comes to technological levels then WFB was.

• War Engine good, bow bad. 3rd edition made non War Engine ranged attacks very lack lustre. They can work, yes... but they feel like an after thought in this system now.

• Perpetual Book Cycle. Do you enjoy buying books, that will be invalidated in a few years time, only to have to buy newer versions of thise books? Mantic are no different to GW at this. 3rd edition has been out a little over a year now I think, and we already have 2 expansion books, and there is a 3rs on the way shortly by all accounts.

With all that said, again I need to stress the importance of playing it for yourself and coming to your own conclusions. Your experience, expectations, and wants from a game will be entirely different. I will say that as of now there are a great many number of rank and file fantasy games to try, so don't rush into multibasing just yet.

A lot of these points are fine as opinions, but the book point is very unfair. You generally "need" to buy one book each year, which is a 20$-ish outlay which gives every army something new or improved, and fixes balance. Shooting for example is rumored to be improved in the upcoming CoK book. You also get access to everything in the book through easy army, so you don't have to buy the book if you are so inclined.

3rd was launched in 2019. The expansion books for 3rd to my knowledge have been:
1: One book with a lot of army lists, including theme lists. Very cheap for the valuable content. Known from the start of the launch that it was coming to fill out the available armies.
2: A campaign book. Totally voluntary purchase.

Maybe I am being a bit unfair on the book point, just sick and tired of games having constant books/editions cycles, what is so wrong with wanting to be able to buy one book and that being enough to play the game? As you said in Kings of War you generally need to buy one book a year.

everything but, KoW is not a bad designed game

if you don't like all the features and/or changed your opinion because the rules are dated now does not make it bad designed

I don't like some features from Oathmark, but this does not make it a bad designed game

similar to Battletech, the classic rules are stuck in the 80ies, once being the fresh new stuff, now that most others have come along they feel old, which they are
but this does not make it bad design

and regarding the books, compared to Codex/Battletome, Chapter Approved or the GHB, those are optional and not needed
if you only have the Core book you are still fine to play against everyone else
I have bought most of the CoK books, but never used them to play games as we were happy with core

 kodos wrote:
everything but, KoW is not a bad designed game

if you don't like all the features and/or changed your opinion because the rules are dated now does not make it bad designed

I don't like some features from Oathmark, but this does not make it a bad designed game

similar to Battletech, the classic rules are stuck in the 80ies, once being the fresh new stuff, now that most others have come along they feel old, which they are
but this does not make it bad design

and regarding the books, compared to Codex/Battletome, Chapter Approved or the GHB, those are optional and not needed
if you only have the Core book you are still fine to play against everyone else
I have bought most of the CoK books, but never used them to play games as we were happy with core

Not a bad designed game you say... have a look at these perfectly legal 2,000pts lists.

Army: Undead

70, Zombie Regiment
70, Zombie Regiment
70, Zombie Regiment
70, Zombie Regiment
260, Wight Horde
260, Wight Horde
315, Vampire Lord on Undead Dragon
315, Vampire Lord on Undead Dragon
300, Revenant King on Undead Great Flying Wyrm
– Brew of Sharpness
265, Revenant King on Undead Great Flying Wyrm

Or

Army: Kingdom of Men

Shield Wall (Regiment) 100
Shield Wall (Regiment) 100
Shield Wall (Regiment) 100
Shield Wall (Regiment) 100
Shield Wall (Regiment) 100
Shield Wall (Regiment) 100
Shield Wall (Regiment) 100
Cannon 100
Cannon 100
Cannon 100
Shield Wall (Regiment) 100
Shield Wall (Regiment) 100
Ballista 75
Ballista 75
Ballista 75
Siege Artillery 90
Siege Artillery 90
Siege Artillery 90
Shield Wall (Regiment) 100
General on Winged Beast 190
- Aegis of the Elohi 15

Those are lists that wouldn't be fun to play against at all, whether they win or lose isn't important, gaming is meant to be fun for all players.

If a system can produce such horrid lists, it is a hallmark of a poorly designed system. Kings of War badly needs a decent army structure like WFB had.

those are not legal armies as there is a restriction for max 3 duplicates at 2k points

that you can abuse list building and you would need adjustments for certain units, well this is were point adjustments or army restrictions come in
hence if there are people who like to make such lists, the solution is to play 1999 points instead of 2000.

 kodos wrote:
those are not legal armies as there is a restriction for max 3 duplicates at 2k points

that you can abuse list building and you would need adjustments for certain units, well this is were point adjustments or army restrictions come in
hence if there are people who like to make such lists, the solution is to play 1999 points instead of 2000.

Those are legal list. No War Engine, Hero, or Monster/Titan has been duplicated 4 times. So it is perfectly legal. Don't believe me, create them in Mantic's Easy Army for yourself... which I where I just created them.

Even with the 1999 points restrictions the Undead one is fine as the heroes are only duplicated twice.

Again, Kings of War badly needs better force composition rules... not for players to add house rules to fix issues. Especially if the game is over 10 years old and has yearly books that are meant to fix issues of balance.

 stonehorse wrote:
First of all I will say try it, and make up your own mind. If you like it, or don't like it, that is fine... you are entirely allowed to have your own opinion.

I feel like the game has some very bad game design, allow me to go over them.

Fair enough, but as I said on the KoW forum; you not liking a game or design aspect does not make it bad.

Kings of War is the game that it is intended to be (which is what I consider good design). If what a game is designed to be isn't your thing then that doesn't mean it wasn't designed well.
I said the same thing about AoS when it was new (my issues with AoS are mainly due to GW business practices).

Kings of War is designed to be a game that keeps the rules simple so that the game plays better and more quickly. That is the core design philosophy.
The design leaves out ideas and mechanics that sound cool or one might feel should be there, but require a lot of rules and complication for little effect on the outcome and/or experience. I will respond to your comments with this in mind.

• IGOUGO. This creates very little player interaction, and a lot of downtime for the player who's turn it isn't. Plus as one army gets to do all of it's attacks without any retaliate from the opponent, it can lead to situations where a player has even less of their force left to deal with that of their opponents, which can and does give an advantage to a player.

Alternating activation is a good mechanic, but it does not fit into the design of KoW.
Turns are short and I spend my opponent's turn figuring out my next moves, confirming my opponent's measurements (so we don't argue later) and reminding them what my unit's stats are.
In games with saves and the mechanics you ask for below (calculating attacks based on damage or taking joined heroes into account), where the turn can really drag out then I get it though. KoW specifically avoids those though.
The main consideration is that chess clock could be used in tournaments, eliminating the age old "slow play" issue.

• No real force structure. In WFB you had Lord, Hero, Core, Special, and Rare. You had to take a minimum core based on the size of the game, and we're limited to how much o stuff you could again based on the size of the game. Not here, the few rules for force building are very easy to abuse. 4 dragons in 2,000pts... easy with Undead, or how about 9 war engines in 2,000pts, easy with Kingdoms of Men. Now I hope no one ever does create these list, but the game as it is allows for them.

This can be an issue, especially if unexpected. Horrible lists are possible in any system though.
KoW favours balanced lists (especially over several games).
It is telling that "netlists" are not a thing in KoW and Master's players consistently say that a list you are familiar with is preferable to a more optimized list (in podcast event coverage).

• Bucket of Dice. Do you enjoy rolling 60 dice at a time? Kings of War can do bucket if dice as well as GW Ork's can. With units having a high number of attacks that are doubled for a flank, or tripled for a rear charge it can create situations where 90 dice are rolled. This sheer brute force approach to dice games may appeal to you, but for me it leaves me cold. People say it is fast, what is fast about rolling 60-90 dice and then sometimes re-rolling all the ones?

I do like rolling lots of dice.
I agree that it become a drag if it happens all the time, but it doesn't happen often.
60+ attacks is a flank charge with the highest attack units in the game, or a rear charge. 90 attacks is a rear charge. Those do not happen often.

It's fast because you read the stat and roll. Not counting models, no figuring out how many attacks included heroes have or separate attacks for the champion. No waiting on armour saves or "look out sir". No rolling differenct saves for each character or command model.

• Damage does nothing. In Kings of War a unit has 3 states. OK, wavering, or routed. Causing any amount of damage on a unit facilities the rolling of a nerve test. This is 2D6 added to the amount of damage on a unit and comparing to the units nerve stats. Now it can happen that a very small amount of damage is caused and the 2D6 roll very high, and this could at worst see the unit routed, or wavering. The opposite is true, imaging doing a lot of damage in one go and rolling a double 1. The game has a rule that a double 1 means the unit stays ok, if the damage is over its nerve it is reduced. So it is possible to hit a unit very hard, roll poor on 2d6 and the unit in question will be fine, at full unit effectiveness, or do a small amount of damage roll well and the unit is removed. The 2D6 can make it very swingy.

See the above point. stopping and calculating you attacks for each combat drags out the game.
The variance is not (statistically) as significant as we remember (because we all have confirmation bias and remember the outliers).
Double 1's for nerve is mechanic that gets argued about. It makes the game more exciting either way.

• Characters have forgotten how to join units. Support Characters who would be wise to take protection in blocks of troops instead have to run around the battlefield by themselves hoping that they survive.

See my comment on your "Bucket of dice" point.
The extra rules and extra rolls in a combat for included characters slows things down and complicates things.
Heroes can work with units; charge with them or hide behind them well enough that the extra rules to join units wouldn't improve the game.

Another point on this:characters have not forgotten anything, WHFB was a different game and KoW is not "Warhammer lite" not it's successor.
Heroes, as in Kings of War, never joined units and really don't need to do anything because WHFb characters did.

• Lack of focus within the setting. In aiming to be everything, it is nothing. The setting is even more of a mess when it comes to technological levels then WFB was.

Really a matter of taste. It's a side effect of including a variety of themes and concepts that seem cool. People want Dark Age raiders, High Medieval Knights, chariots, pirates that go ARR, etc. it is in the interest of the game to appeal to as many of those as possible.
if you want consistent technology and realism there are many historical rulesets.

• War Engine good, bow bad. 3rd edition made non War Engine ranged attacks very lack lustre. They can work, yes... but they feel like an after thought in this system now.

All shooting armies were an issue in 2nd edition and would surely have been one of the list types you are now complaining about.
I'll grant 3rd edition may have over-solved it.

• Perpetual Book Cycle. Do you enjoy buying books, that will be invalidated in a few years time, only to have to buy newer versions of thise books? Mantic are no different to GW at this. 3rd edition has been out a little over a year now I think, and we already have 2 expansion books, and there is a 3rs on the way shortly by all accounts

It's one book a year that isn't expensive to keep the tournament season fresh and tweak the balance.

The other expansion applies to the entire edition. Uncharted Empires is full of extra lists (mostly that Mantic don'r make models for) to accomodate more collections.
It's a positive that Mantic has it. If you don't paly one of those armies you don't need it.

 stonehorse wrote:

 kodos wrote:
those are not legal armies as there is a restriction for max 3 duplicates at 2k points

that you can abuse list building and you would need adjustments for certain units, well this is were point adjustments or army restrictions come in
hence if there are people who like to make such lists, the solution is to play 1999 points instead of 2000.

Those are legal list. No War Engine, Hero, or Monster/Titan has been duplicated 4 times. So it is perfectly legal. Don't believe me, create them in Mantic's Easy Army for yourself... which I where I just created them.
Even with the 1999 points restrictions the Undead one is fine as the heroes are only duplicated twice.

you are right, this change from 2nd to 3rd, that it only applies to special units and not all just never made it to our groups, we all might have been overlocking it as everything still uses the restrictions for all units

Funnily enough, most of stonehorse's points are either pros for me (pure IGOUGO that fully facilitates clock play, very open force design, lots of dice, units more or less functioning at full power until removed, extremely minimal book requirement compared to GW) or meaningless (game setting) But I'm here for a critical voice being leveled at KOW by a person who actually plays it (pretty sure stonehorse has real experience with the game), and not just GW fanboys clinging to Mama Dub's apron strings.

Also re: WAAC lists in KOW, I don't think they're anything at all compared to WAAC lists in any GW game. I've had plenty of experiences in GW games where I know I've lost before dice happen because I've chosen to run Less Obviously Good things. It's very rare I feel this way in KOW ... tho I'm currently running a weak Herd army and let me tell you, I'm feeling outgunned in more ways than one One of the reasons I fell in love with KOW is the internal balance within lists, something that I never experienced within my GW upbringing. I'm happy to say this continues to be true, despite that balance not being perfect (i.e. war engines vs ranged infantry vs 'firebolt' infantry).