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.

Guys, if you have any more mantic related questions let me know and i'll pass them on to either ronnie himself or chris (i email them occasionaly).

@ Death the zombie horde deal you mentioned is up for preorder.

niceguyteddy wrote:I know a guy who knows a guy and the rules Alesso is working on will be free.

Rules + Allesio + Free = rejoicing on hold for now!

Arctik_Firangi wrote:It's not like you couldn't NOT download them if they weren't. See what I did there?

I do.

Don't do it again.

Duncan_Idaho wrote:Actually the WHFB rules allow less tactical and strategical gameplay because of their complicatedness. Complexity does not mean thousands of rules.

Sounds like Rackhamspeak!

That's actually what everyone with some understanding of rules will tell you.

There is a reason why KISS is the mantra of every good game designer.

E.g. you could simply cut down the dice-rolling in both GW-games without losing anything and even make the game way more interesting on a tactical level. Look at FoW, originally it was based on GW-rules and every edition they minimize the amount of core rules and the game gets better every time they do it. Just think about why Chess or Go are played after all that time, do you think complicated rules would have allowed to stay. Even W/H is easier to learn, OK, you need to memorize the abilities, but the core is quite simple and it takes just 15-20 minutes to learn them.

And while we are on Rackham, they did many things the wrong way, but one thing they got right: Confrontation got too complicated. With several thousand cards interacting with each other noone, not even the designers, was any longer able to keeo such a system stable. The decisison to simplify it was the right one and it was not the one that caused problems. For the same reason W/H Mk II came out (Though they will have too put out Mk III faster than it took MkII if they keep up their monthly release level.)

GW adds layer after layer and even if they remove an old layer there are still layers that are more than 8 years old. Don`t tell me such a system is balanced or can be brought into balance without an total overhaul of all the rules.

fynn wrote:Well, going by the interviews on Beast's of war, the idea behind the free rules is a Public beta, to get feed back and ideas to improve the rules from us the gamers, will be buying and playing the game. Its a pity GW didnt think of that idea of a public beta, but then it would get in the way of makeing money.........lol

Sorry you're using a term I'm not familiar with... "improve rules"?

I always heard that miniatures rules were perfected in the mid-80s and since then all that remains is to tinker with them to make sure the newest models are the most powerful.

I find the GW rulesets just... lack. Sure the 8th edition of Warhammer is a neat hook to throw into the community, something to stir the fanbase and add focus where the designers want, but it is still the same old Warhammer World. Full of the same tired copywriting that has been there since I first got the 5th edition box the year it came out. I just can't see GW impressing me with creativity anytime soon. Even when something BIG happens (Albion, Storm 'o Chaos), no appreciable difference.

Mantic's world is seemingly not made yet! I kind of like the sound of a fantasy frontier. In the recent Beasts of War interviews, Ronnie said he wanted big tourney victories to be held as major victories in the game world, and for that to effect the timeline. I also get the feeling they'll be very friendly to fan-made rules and characters, not pretend like they do not exist.

Keep in mind I've been on the sidelines of GW's games for years, watching the switch from metal to plastic, the ever increasing costs, the perpetual bellyachin' (I do it too)... frankly, GW has lost their chance to convince me they're special. As someone who never invested much in GW, I'm very willing to give Mantic a chance.

I have the same feeling about WHFB. I have been playing it a small amount for a few years but it's never really had a huge attraction to me. I can understand wanting to keep the balance of power, but the way GW are doing it makes the whole thing seem a bit empty, at least imo. I also find some of the rules can lead to very slow, complex turns with little happening. I fully welcome a new (and cheaper) game.

As long as it avoids exploding 6's, 'wacky' resolution charts and other assorted nonsense...

...maybe!

But what about the dark Gothic "Everything either eats your hope and turns into bile projectiles or kills you for being in the way/alive/open to alternative viewpoints" atmosphere?

SilverMK2 wrote:The only problem that "free rules" sometimes suffer is lack of updates and support.

Hard to be any worse (re lack of support) than the GW rules we pay for................

As they will be releasing rules for units as they make the models the rules should stay up to date.

Duncan_Idaho wrote:Just think about why Chess or Go are played after all that time, do you think complicated rules would have allowed to stay.

The surest way to make me avoid a game is to make it more like chess or Go.

Simple rules do not automatically make for a better game. They make for a certain kind of game. A game that is often highly abstracted. The strategies may be more intellectual, but that doesn't nessecarily make them more strategic. I find highly abstract games extremely difficult. Not because I have any weaker of a brain or because I'm bad at strategies, but because I don't deal with mathematical abstractions well. When I was a kid and used to play chess I used to spend half the game maneuvering every piece into a realistic-looking battle formation. And then I'd lose. Because chess isn't about realism. I like games where my cavalry moves like real cavalry, because I'm good at studying real world things like how real horses move. I'm interested in reading about how Alexander the Great used the mousetrap to deal with chariots, because there's real stuff there I can wrap my brain around. I don't think a game that has more rules to reflect that is inherently any less strategic than a game where the horse moves in an L shape that can jump over pieces and don't think about why that is because it just doesn't matter now make your move, rookie.

I like this news from Mantic. I wonder how long it will be though before we hear the "GW = Porsche!" crowd come out claiming that Mantic products must automatically be inferior to GW products because GW products are more expensive because GW is the Porsche of gaming and therefore more expensive products are better products.

TTs with an overabundance of rules tend to go into a certain direction and its not one people seem to really like. Historical TT with too many rules were good at recreating certain battles in a way that was very similar to the original, but failed abysmally when applied to other Battles of their time.

You can observe this also with WHFB which in addition uses a rules system that could really have an overhaul of its basic mechanics and not only the bells and whistles.

A good system has a few straight rules on which modules can be docked on. And astonishingly such systems are very capable of depicting realistic battles (maybe not exactly the one big battle eaxctly the way it turned out, but this one big battle might have gone into a whole different direction if a general had decided to do react differently, and that's where it is good at: allowing for realistic battles with the real outcome being one of the possible outcomes, but not necessarily the only one posssible).

FoW is avery good example, basicly it was a varaiation of the WH rules and it turned into a really good system. What did they do? They stripped of the unneccessary layers streamlined the dice roles and went for a flowing game. Exactly what Mantic is aiming at.

@Chess
Chess is of course an abstraction, but not of western battle patterns but eastern ones (hence the "Schah eh mat") and this is reflected by the movements.

Duncan_Idaho wrote:TTs with an overabundance of rules tend to go into a certain direction and its not one people seem to really like.

And TTs with overly-simplified rules are no better. It's not a case of "simpler is better", there is a sweet spot that will differ from player to player somewhere in between.

@Chess
Chess is of course an abstraction, but not of western battle patterns but eastern ones (hence the "Schah eh mat") and this is reflected by the movements.

I'm pretty sure nowhere in the world were there battles with queens and kings in the army with pawns and knights, where for some reason the queen could outrun everyone in the army except for the castles. It's still an abstraction, no matter which culture it came from. You're welcome to enjoy that abstraction, as many people around the world do. But it is not the end-all be-all of gaming. I for one hate it.

While simple is good, as it means the game flows easier, it still needs to have enough rules to make it realistic. While many people enjoy very simple games (e.g. chess) many wargamers also like game that are realistic and have lots of options. You can't say that chess isn't tactical, but that doesn't mean everyone finds it interesting.

Most of the wargamers have met enjoy wargames for being able to get involved with the game, even the competitive players play for the complex and realistic rules. The ideal game has enough rules to be in depth and allow the players freedom, while simple enough to be easy to learn and quick to play. That is why Alessio's idea of simple makes better worries me.

Don't forget that the names we give the chess-pieces differ from the original ones. The queen was rather a field marshal in ancient times and his duty was to "race around" the battlefield and give orders in time, so the qeen piece still reflects the original situation on the battlefield.

Besides noone ist talking of dumbing down rules. The core-rules of KoW are still 12 pages. But there is no arguing that WHFB rules have become bloated. Nearly everyone at this years ETC can verify this. Even the judges had problems with the many contradictions in the rules. A trimming here and there to make it more compact wurd not only make the job for the judges easier, it would also increase use of more unconventional tactics. Complicated systems like WHFB or the late Confrontation 3.x tend to make people go for the safe way. There were hundreds of possibilities in Confrontation, but only a few were used because they were idiot-proof. The other options were discarded mostly because of their ambigous wording which caused problems during nearly every tournaments. And the same happened during this years ETC.

BTW, if you think WHFB is complex you have never played CoSims with their big ringbinders. That´s really something to swollow.

Also don´t mix up complicated with complex. KoW will still be a complex system, but not an complicated one.

Also the Queen's ability to move an unlimited number of spaces was a modern addition to the game. If you look at mediaeval variants of chess, the Queen often had a more limited range of movement to the King.

[/obscure knowledge]

Personally, I can't wait to have a read of what Mantic comes up with. Is something available to look at now or do we know when it will be?

If Mantic manage to take the rules which make games successful and trim them down then this could be a very good game. What lets WHFB down is unneccessary rules and bad wording. If a few of the complex rules were dropped (simplify movement, make moral more streamlined, and remove some of the more stupid special items) it would be a much better game.

Chimera_Calvin- I think the first rules come out in august however I think these may be a test rather than the real thing. For some reason mantic think listening to their customers is a good idea, no idea why

Ooh! this month! Time to dust off my GW dwarfs (who won't see WHFB 8th anyway) and have a go.

If I like it I'll sell the GW stuff and use the proceeds to buy a Mantic army twice the size...

Hopefully Mantic gets their rules to be something closer to WFB vs. Confrontation.

WFB = popular, big seller, here to stay (for now!)

Confrontation = Not so popular, big seller at closeout, almost gone?

Though honestly, I think the majority of Mantic's sales go to WFB players looking for affordable alternatives.

Wait sorry about that I had a brain failure moment it's meant to be october.

I certainly would not mind picking up some Dwarfs to augment my GW ones. The only possible issue is that in a lot of the tournament literature I've read you must use GW models. Granted it has been several YEARS since I last did a real tournament so things might have changed. But we'll see. I'm all for more competition for GW to maybe drive down some prices.

Well compare the number of the official tournaments to the number of gamer-organized tournaments....

Hello Brothers

What i think would be a great thing is a "magic the gathering" aprouch of rules...

There is: a simples funny set of cores rules, the type you just get used over the third game and so keep goying on. And lots, and lots, and more lots of special rules.

Im wainting for the beta rules to start poking on it, and post my opinion on this or that on every forum i found, just because i know that the designers would read something of it...

And i really dont want complicated morale/psicholoy tests.

Their minis are tempting. I hope one day they can produce a sci-fi game.... maybe then I can break myself free of this 40k addiction.

I had a chat with the guys about the rules. Here's how it went.

When you made him derp you went overboard, putting too much caricatures on 1 character blows it away. The concept was good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

aka_mythos wrote:Their minis are tempting. I hope one day they can produce a sci-fi game.... maybe then I can break myself free of this 40k addiction.

This

Mmm mantic rules free? sounds interesting. I could totally buy 2 of their undead battleboxes! $130 and a ton of models!

kenshin620 wrote:Mmm mantic rules free? sounds interesting. I could totally buy 2 of their undead battleboxes! $130 and a ton of models!

For another fifty you can get one of their army deals. Currently they have a deal for each army with about 160 models, including some metals, for $179.99US, 99 british.

Bad conversion rates, the current rates translate 99 pounds to 152$US. Moral is : pay them in pounds.

They charge in pounds. It only shows once you complete a transaction though.
At least that's how its been the 3 times I've ordered from them.

They must have to manually adjust the widget on the site.