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.

I just picked up the book and I'm flipping through the rules, trying to get a feel for the game.

The points values throughout seem kind of odd to me, but I came across a particularly confusing comparison, and I'm hoping that someone can explain this to me to make these numbers seem less arbitrary and... wrong.

Kindred Tallspears vs. Palace Guard, both basic infantry from the Elf Armies.

Tallspears troops have Phalanx, 4+ Me, and 10/12 Ne.

Guard troops have Crushing Strength (1), 3+ Me, and 11/13 Ne.

They are otherwise identical.

Guard seems *significantly* better. Crushing Strength is helpful in every single combat, while Phalanx is only useful in a single very specific situation (noted: when getting thundering charged from the front, phalanx>crushing strength). +1 to hit is a big deal to begin with, but is even bigger when considering they both have elite. +1 Nerve is nothing to sneeze at. All of that for only 5 more points at the troop level? I feel like I must be missing something, but I don't know what.

And even if that could be explained... then the regiment comparison gets thrown off. The percentage cost of the upgrade from troop-> regiment is higher for guard, even though they gain less attacks than the tallspears. The extra attacks for the tallspears make the points comparison at the regiment level seem closer to being correct, and I could even see taking them if I needed a regiment and I needed cavalry protection, but then it doesn't jive with the comparison at the troops level.

Anyway, I realize this is EXTREMELY nitpicky for a newbie, but I'm used to playing somewhat competitive WFB and 40k. I've accepted that things aren't very balanced in those game systems, but one of the things that tempted me into getting the KoW book was the idea that a simpler ruleset would also lend itself to more balanced gameplay. This one little random comparison kind of gets to the heart of whether I want to get into KoW. So please... someone explain to me why I'm stupid, and what I'm missing

From what I understand Troops die to a stiff breeze. The Crushing Strength will probably be useless as the guard will be shot or charged off the table before they do anything meanwhile Phalanx will come into play more often. Troops in KoW are usually used as sponges to let the regiments behind them get the charge or are flanker.

Based on other armies, any unit armed with spears will gain attack bonuses if they are regiments or hordes. I think this is meant to reflect being able to attack in more ranks than with other types of weapons. But since troops don't really have more ranks to attack with, spears are more or less wasted on troops.

I think Mantic did it this way because they wanted people to take spear units in large sizes and use other types of units for troops.

My recommendation is to never take spear troops if you can avoid it. I never used 10-man units of spearmen in Warhammer Fantasy Battles either.

Fair enough, thanks guys.