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.

Okay, having taken some time to digest the rules (haven't had time to proxy anything yet, so this is all theoretical); So, what's my verdict so far? It looks good, but...

The question is, what kind of a game are you looking for?

Warpath is not a squad based game where you use a few lavishly converted and painted models; Warpath is a game with stonking great units of men and machines where you throw buckets of dice at your opponents.

frozenwastes wrote:Not liking what I'm hearing so far. Looks like it'll be a high model count game where you roll a ton of dice while your opponent stands there and waits for your turn to be over.

From what you're saying, you're looking for a small scale game that's interactive in both players turns; this is not Warpath (though I have heard good things about others...)

I'm going to be rather coy, as I don't want to spill too much that's for the Alpha testers;

-There are rules for Infantry, Heroes and Monsters, Artillery (Ordinance), Armor (which includes almost all types of vehicles, including transports), and flyers (which are different enough they merit a special section).

-Flyers seem very interesting, and I think are much better thought out then in 40k (no silly things like a mob on foot charging a supersonic fighter).

The game is built around the concept they mentioned in the Turn 8 report from last week; a game meant to be played with a chess clock. That informs a lot of how the game is built.

-Stats are very simple; a unit has a single characteristic that governs their ability to hit in melee and at range (so yes, a unit that shoots well also hits accurately in CC), there is no reactive "armor" roll, only units that are more or less difficult to damage.

-You do not remove models from units: there are several stats that will be vaguely familiar to 40k players, and so far a stat that seems to be a "king stat" is Nerve. Nerve is what governs if a unit runs or stays; a unit with a high Nerve stat doesn't run easily (and with unlucky rolls can soak a hideous amount of damage). Until the Nerve test is failed, however, a unit stands and fights with the same capacities regardless of damage done to it. This on the one hand seems counter-intuitive, but in the context of a game meant to be played fast, it means you don't have to keep track of anything to determine how a unit works. If it's on the table, its stats are its stats.

-It is, in a way, very much like complicated chess: during your turn, your opponent does... nothing. Like I said, there is no armor save for the inactive player to take, and the Nerve test is actually taken by the person who inflicts the damage.

-Again, as above, one consequence of this is that in CC, units do not strike back; neither, however, do they lock with other units. If you charge a unit, the charged unit will either stand, falter or be swept, but nothing will happen to the charging unit. Again, this is a concession designed to speed play.

-There are only 2 tables in the main rules, and they just go to explain what numbers correspond to the results of your Nerve checks (one for infantry, one for Armor; yes, armored units can, and will, lose "their nerve" and run... sorta).

Okay, that's probably pretty vague, but I hope it answers some questions, or at least gives enough of the flavor to understand what kind of a game we're talking about here.

Warpath is: loads of dice, fast turns, streamlined rules. While quite different then 40k, the rules currently clock in under 20 pages (with the army lists 2 pages so far), and pretty intuitive.

Warpath is not: a skirmish level game, or a game where you have to scrutinize the rulebook. The recommend table size is 6'x4', and you better not bring a 6 pack of casino dice to play, cause you'll be rolling for a looooooong time...

Hmm by the sounds of it, it is quite similar to Kings of War. A bit obvious I suppose

Yep. It is exactly what you'd expect given Kings of War.

It isn't what I'm looking for. I don't want 100 models a side. I don't want to have a turn structure where one person does nothing for extended periods of time.

Hopefully lots of other people do.

I'm still looking forward to the miniatures though. That's the best part of Warpath becoming a reality.

So, Mantic's strategy to kill 40k is ... to release a 40k clone? I hope their models are up to snuff because the ruleset sounds ill-conceived and stillborn.

Well, probably they want to churn out the the better 40K out, the way it was intended to be and not the one the management turned into a monstrosity.

Agamemnon2 wrote:So, Mantic's strategy to kill 40k is ... to release a 40k clone? I hope their models are up to snuff because the ruleset sounds ill-conceived and stillborn.

Sounds good to me, I want a game where I can use the 40K models that I already have, and supplement my existing forces with affordable new models.

Agamemnon2 wrote:So, Mantic's strategy to kill 40k is ... to release a 40k clone? I hope their models are up to snuff because the ruleset sounds ill-conceived and stillborn.

It's not a 40k clone.

Did you actually read the post at the top giving us a brief run down of the rules?

It's NOTHING like 40k apart from set in space...and I think plenty of games companies do that!

Agamemnon2 wrote:So, Mantic's strategy to kill 40k is ... to release a 40k clone? I hope their models are up to snuff because the ruleset sounds ill-conceived and stillborn.

I'm not quite sure what you mean: if by "40k clone" you mean a large scale Sci-Fi table-top game, then yes. Otherwise, the rules are very, very different.

"ill-conceived and stillborn"? How so? I'm holding the rules in my hands and while they are still somewhat rough, they are, at even the first read through, a clearly more streamlined and comprehensive product then the rules for 40k.

Also, Alpha rules.

frozenwaste wrote:It isn't what I'm looking for. I don't want 100 models a side. I don't want to have a turn structure where one person does nothing for extended periods of time.

Remember, this game is being designed to be played in timed matches; everything is designed to speed play, and the suggested time is 2-3 minutes per 500 points of game value, so a single turn in a 2,000 point game is suggested to take 10 minutes. Is that slow for a turn of Infinity? Sure, but it doesn't sound particularly long for a 40k turn. And that's what it's meant to "replace", if you will; full on battles, not skirmishes.

Again, these aren't even the beta rules, and I'm being purposefully vague, but that said, it's quite clear that on a model-count basis, Warpath will play much, much faster then a similar scale game of 40k.

I don't want to say that Warpath is be best thing since sliced bread, but if I have any major problems with it, so far they are related to scale, not quality. I'm not entirely sure I care to continue playing these large scale games, but if I were, the more familiar I become with these rules, the more inclined I am to consider them favorably over their obvious competitor.

Edit: I just wanted to add that, to paraphrase Ronnie and Allessio, if you are waiting for your opponent to finish their turn before you start thinking about what you are going to do in your turn, you're doing it wrong. Your breathing time is your opponent's turn; when you are active, everything should be motion, something happening, because every moment you pause is another moment you are giving your opponent to get one step ahead of you.

So, while Warpath is designed with only one person moving models at a time on the table, it's a far cry to say that only one person is doing something at a time.

gr1m_dan wrote:It's NOTHING like 40k apart from set in space...and I think plenty of games companies do that!

Actually, it's a lot like 40k. Mantic even did the same thing 3rd edition 40k did, and replace the Move/Speed stat with special rules.

Then lets hope GW wont send C&D on Mantic :3

Sounds interesting. Though I am still not pleased there are midgets in space.

a game meant to be played with a chess clock. That informs a lot of how the game is built.

I thought as much from what Frozenwastes said.
Am not a fan of I do everything, and you hang around while I potentially decimate your army and clocks
Wish Mantic well but if they proceed to develop the game based on this system I will pass.
Just a personal preference and hope you guys have fun.

Slightly disappointed as I won't have much use for my GW 40K models now.

The chess clock thing is something Alessio is a big, big fan of.

I've never played a timed table top game BUT it is something that I think would help certain games.

I.E Flames of War - I play a regular opponent whose favourite tactic is to pretty much dig in from the start and just not move and wait for you to come. If you do the same it ends up a stalemate and VERY boring. Even objectives don't make him move.

Playing with chess clock is optional but adds a lot of sweat to the game and makes you feel like a real general .

And if your opponent wnats to play on time he only deducts it from his time.

(This is a Warhammer/KoW comparison, since Warpath looks incredibly similar to how KoW plays, I decided to roll with it.)

KoW at least isn't built around timed games, it's built to be able to incoporate them without any faffing around. The use of timed games might be getting advertised more, but it's not a necessary part of the game system, and playing untimed games won't affect your gaming experience unless you're really unable to wait for a few minutes.

That said, anyone who has played Warhammer (WHFB mainly, but 40k will do) should easily be able to cope with untimed games. As a player of both 40k and WHFB, KoW plays a lot faster.

Combat is simple (there's no supporting attacks etc. you just look at the unit's profile and add bonuses for flank/rear attacks (simply doubling/tripling) and the 5 (10 for horde) if you have Phalanx), shooting is simple (again, look at the unit profile), magic is simple (no picking spells, no casting totals, they're just shooting attacks with different effects).

Movement is the same, but there's no much you can do to make it different.

In the time you've spent in WHFB moving your army, rolling for Winds, choosing your wizards, choosing which spells to use, rolling to cast, waiting to dispel and resolving the spells, then shooting, then calculating combats and removing casualties, you've already taken a lot longer than a KoW turn, possibly even a whole KoW game turn has gone into a single WHFB player turn.

Since Warpath rules look very very similar to KoW rules and how it works, I just thought i'd throw out a small comparison based on my experience with KoW and Warhammer. Basically, if you've played Warhammer, then you should easily be able to play KoW without waiting for excessive periods of time as Player A moves his umpteenth thousand models, and if you can play KoW without waiting, then Warpath will be the same.

Well I've downloaded the rules and am looking forward to trying them out. I know they're not going to be everyone's 'cup of tea' (what wargame is?) but in the end all I want from a wargame is a fun way to get practical use out of my, reasonably priced, models.

My main problem with 40k is that it's detailed, yet not logical/detailed enough (not being able to split fire even with tanks, no real coherent design, no generic rules to create your own vehicles and characters, grenades that don't hurt anyone, standard weapons that seem to be Strength 4 AP5 no matter for their 'fluff' etc). IMO 40k is still confused between being a skirmish and mass battle game, although I enjoy my games it is usually the dice that offer that fun - even the background is not that miraculous to me anymore, especially once you begin to deconstruct it.

TBH the whole 'grim-dark' thing is getting old and stale for me - I just can't take it that seriously anymore. I'm looking forward to trying out something that's fresh, has a sense of humour (rather than dumping that on Orcs/Orks) and that is not ridden with complication - so long as I find it just as fun, and I may not, but I'm willing try.

Sounds interesting. Though I am still not pleased there are midgets in space.

That's discrimination!

Not impressed. Units not dropping in performance until they rout was kinda okay in KoW since in a regiment only the front rank fights anyway. But in a skirmishing squad of dudes with guns this level of abstraction is inappropriate.

Buzzsaw wrote:Okay, having taken some time to digest the rules (haven't had time to proxy anything yet, so this is all theoretical); So, what's my verdict so far? It looks good, but...

The question is, what kind of a game are you looking for?

Warpath is not a squad based game where you use a few lavishly converted and painted models; Warpath is a game with stonking great units of men and machines where you throw buckets of dice at your opponents.

frozenwastes wrote:Not liking what I'm hearing so far. Looks like it'll be a high model count game where you roll a ton of dice while your opponent stands there and waits for your turn to be over.

From what you're saying, you're looking for a small scale game that's interactive in both players turns; this is not Warpath (though I have heard good things about others...)

I'm going to be rather coy, as I don't want to spill too much that's for the Alpha testers;

-There are rules for Infantry, Heroes and Monsters, Artillery (Ordinance), Armor (which includes almost all types of vehicles, including transports), and flyers (which are different enough they merit a special section).

-Flyers seem very interesting, and I think are much better thought out then in 40k (no silly things like a mob on foot charging a supersonic fighter).

The game is built around the concept they mentioned in the Turn 8 report from last week; a game meant to be played with a chess clock. That informs a lot of how the game is built.

-Stats are very simple; a unit has a single characteristic that governs their ability to hit in melee and at range (so yes, a unit that shoots well also hits accurately in CC), there is no reactive "armor" roll, only units that are more or less difficult to damage.

-You do not remove models from units: there are several stats that will be vaguely familiar to 40k players, and so far a stat that seems to be a "king stat" is Nerve. Nerve is what governs if a unit runs or stays; a unit with a high Nerve stat doesn't run easily (and with unlucky rolls can soak a hideous amount of damage). Until the Nerve test is failed, however, a unit stands and fights with the same capacities regardless of damage done to it. This on the one hand seems counter-intuitive, but in the context of a game meant to be played fast, it means you don't have to keep track of anything to determine how a unit works. If it's on the table, its stats are its stats.

-It is, in a way, very much like complicated chess: during your turn, your opponent does... nothing. Like I said, there is no armor save for the inactive player to take, and the Nerve test is actually taken by the person who inflicts the damage.

-Again, as above, one consequence of this is that in CC, units do not strike back; neither, however, do they lock with other units. If you charge a unit, the charged unit will either stand, falter or be swept, but nothing will happen to the charging unit. Again, this is a concession designed to speed play.

-There are only 2 tables in the main rules, and they just go to explain what numbers correspond to the results of your Nerve checks (one for infantry, one for Armor; yes, armored units can, and will, lose "their nerve" and run... sorta).

Okay, that's probably pretty vague, but I hope it answers some questions, or at least gives enough of the flavor to understand what kind of a game we're talking about here.

Warpath is: loads of dice, fast turns, streamlined rules. While quite different then 40k, the rules currently clock in under 20 pages (with the army lists 2 pages so far), and pretty intuitive.

Warpath is not: a skirmish level game, or a game where you have to scrutinize the rulebook. The recommend table size is 6'x4', and you better not bring a 6 pack of casino dice to play, cause you'll be rolling for a looooooong time...

I'm really surprised. I did not think they would stick so rigidly to the KoW rules because I didn't think the abstract representation of a 'unit' in KoW would fit very well for a sci-fi game.

So you're saying that exactly like KoW there is literally no reason to actually have all the models on the table for a unit? Just like KoW the models in a unit are not even removed when the unit suffers damage...so technically you could just play the game with counters marked 'Unit A', 'Unit B', 'Unit C', etc?

Or have they added some rules to Warpath to make the actual models within a unit matter for something?

Because it is just so strange to me to have a game designed for you to put TONS of models on the table, but then does not actually utilize those models for really any part of gameplay...that's at least how KoW seemed to me and it sounds like it is the same for Warpath.

I'd love to read the rules, but I'm totally against sites forcing you to pay to join in order to get something. If Beasts had given this out for free and asked for people to join Backstage as a kindly return I would have done it in a second, but I don't personally care for it being done the other way around...so sadly I guess I have to hear about these rules second-hand.

lord_blackfang wrote:Not impressed. Units not dropping in performance until they rout was kinda okay in KoW since in a regiment only the front rank fights anyway. But in a skirmishing squad of dudes with guns this level of abstraction is inappropriate.

How? Damaging =/= killing. It makes a lot of sense considering that it's sci-fi, and armour and shielding would be better. Also take into account that Nerve isn't like Leadership. Where a 5 man space marine unit will have the same Ld as a 10 man, a 5-man unit in KoW/Warpath will have about half the nerve of a 10 man unit, which will in turn have about half that of a 20-man unit.

The amount of damage rarely gets silly (only strings of snake eyes on nerve tests can cause it, and that is very rare), and bearing in mind that in Warpath, it's going to be harder to damage something in the sense of penetrating shielding and armour and hitting flesh, i'd say it's perfectly fine.

All you have to remember is that damage =/= kills, as opposed to Warhammer, where damaging a model enough means it's out of the fight. Warhammer assumes each wound to a single wound model is a killing blow or a life-threatening wound, KoW/Warpath simply suggests it buried itself into armour, missed any important body parts or struck an area that wouldn't have much effect on fighting perfromance.

DONT compare Warpath to 40K.....then you dont have any preconceptions, but its easier to naysay and slag somehting off than give it a chance.

people are so entrenched saying I cant use my GW minis.....good , branch out , get some variety in your life...I havent looked back since I played warmachine.

Hi Synthetik

When I referred to not using my GW minis it is because I will be unlikely to play Warpath. I was hoping that the mechanic would be interesting enough for me which at present does not appear to be the case.
The reason being that there are already enough alternative fantasy games to keep me occupied in modelling and gaming.

For me to invest in another system, there needs to be a realistic chance that I will have sufficient opportunity to utilise it.

I see no reason why GW models will not be able to be proxied.

We have to be careful here, as the rules have just been released for Alpha playtesting. Although can't see Alessio drastically changing the overall mechanics there is still the potential that things could be altered.

Edit:
Actually I think that the decision to enable large scale battles is a good one, as there are already a number of excellent skirmish level games. Nothing really offers an alternative to 40K.
Cue long list of such viable alternatives!

I'm really surprised. I did not think they would stick so rigidly to the KoW rules because I didn't think the abstract representation of a 'unit' in KoW would fit very well for a sci-fi game.

So you're saying that exactly like KoW there is literally no reason to actually have all the models on the table for a unit? Just like KoW the models in a unit are not even removed when the unit suffers damage...so technically you could just play the game with counters marked 'Unit A', 'Unit B', 'Unit C', etc?

Or have they added some rules to Warpath to make the actual models within a unit matter for something?

Because it is just so strange to me to have a game designed for you to put TONS of models on the table, but then does not actually utilize those models for really any part of gameplay...that's at least how KoW seemed to me and it sounds like it is the same for Warpath.

I'd love to read the rules, but I'm totally against sites forcing you to pay to join in order to get something. If Beasts had given this out for free and asked for people to join Backstage as a kindly return I would have done it in a second, but I don't personally care for it being done the other way around...so sadly I guess I have to hear about these rules second-hand.

I just had this discussion over at Beasts. I think any miniatures game can be played with counters instead of models, after all that's all a 'gaming' miniature really is - a pretty counter for a game and Mantic still haven't developed their background enough that their models/units don't have the same air of 'personality' as 40k or Warhammer units - if you care for your Toy Soldiers to have a personality beyond how they look. I also think that LOS plays a part in keeping models on the table. The way everything is worked from the Leader's POV and how coherenecy works at this stage (within 1'' of each other, no more than 5'' away from the leader - max 20 models in a unit) will mean that units won't become smaller so as to be of a tactical advantage while maintaining the same unit stat. If they wanted you could remove models and then reduce the stat line once within a certain percentage of the lesser unit size etc, but then that won't scale down all the way.

I also think that it's a shame that a unit I have spent many hours painting can get wiped out easily in the first turn or two in 40k, this way your painting and modelling gets a lot more 'game time'

I think the main problem with how KoW and Warpath seem to have is with people's 'instinct'. That they are based on units rather than individuals, which for people who have only known individual stats is something different and less detailed (it is for me but then 40k isn't detailed enough) - which people may like or not. The rules also follow Mantic's idea of 'Building Big Armies' - KoW and Warpath are all about Apocalypse scale battles which is where I think the rules will come into their own, as well as being able to scale down for smaller games which they do by offering a minimum of 5 models to a unit.

As for the Beasts of War Backstage charge, I've happily paid it as I know they will cover a lot more stuff and have faith that the money will be put to good use, they've done everything from their own pockets to this point. They've already moved to bigger servers and I'm sure they will continue investing in stuff to make their output better. I agree that they could have sweetened the pot a bit more for people but ultimately Warpath will be entering the truly free open Beta in a few weeks/months.

Synthetik wrote:DONT compare Warpath to 40K.

Seeing as though no other game bar 40k is on the same scale as Warpath in terms of game-size, it's going to be hard to find a way of saying how it differs from other games when the only other one it's competing with isn't a good comparison.

People from a 40k background who are interested in Warpath but concerned about how it plays will be looking for comparisons and asking for them; are we to supposed to tell them not to compare it? Since there's no other game to compare Warpath to, how will people decide whether or not to invest in it as opposed to 40k?

There are also things that Warhammer players are used to that Mantic games do not have, such as wounds and casualties. People from a Warhammer background see rolling to hit and rolling to damage, and they wonder why the models are not removed, because that is what they are used to; the only way to show how in Mantic games, damage does not mean a life-threatening hit has been taken, is by comparing it to Warhammer, where it's assumed that a model that has taken an unsaved wound is, for all intents and purposes, dead.

Looks different. Metagame seems to favor more units, though.

You get stuck in with a good base of fire, your going to be sitting there slogging it out for the game. Fire and manuver seems to favor the fire.


I'm still not convinced with the thundercat tanks, and am hoping that that was just a distractor, and not the last word on real units.

Good assesment of the game, might give people a change of pace in that your not just setting the game up, and then taking units off every 2 minutes, just to put them away again.

How about people stop trying to second guess something based on some second hand rumours and tit-bits from some alpha testing rules.

Seriously, why does everything have to be compared, contrasted and argued about to the nth degree? Can we not just wait at least until the beta rules are released before going into the analysis?

40K and Warpath do not have to be mutually exclusive. Yes, Mantic want to take GW's business but that's not to say they don't envisage the two games co-existing happily. Just because you play one does not stop you from playing and enjoying the other. No-one is asking you to swear undying fealty to a games system. Live a little, try some things and enjoy the variety and revel in the different game mechanics. Rather than write something off at face value, have a go - you never know, you might enjoy it.

Grot 6 wrote:Looks different. Metagame seems to favor more units, though.

You get stuck in with a good base of fire, your going to be sitting there slogging it out for the game. Fire and manuver seems to favor the fire.


I'm still not convinced with the thundercat tanks, and am hoping that that was just a distractor, and not the last word on real units.

Good assesment of the game, might give people a change of pace in that your not just setting the game up, and then taking units off every 2 minutes, just to put them away again.

Am I the only person who liked the Thundercats?

Nah, I like 'em too!

OT - this game sounds less exciting the more I hear.

It sounds vaguely AT-43ish, the whole less is more approach usually ends up with less really being... less.

If I hear any mentions of 'exploding 6's'... ugh.

Well on the bright side it would be a lot less of a hassle to go from KoW to Warpath. Unless of course they completely change the rules.

Theres plenty of other 28mm sci fi skirmishy games out there anyways, I think mantic is adamant in their gaming style

Only if there are explosives and balance sensitive detonation of dice for exploding sixes.

Anything less just won't do!