WAAAGH Tuska

“Make sure you gets all d'ere teef” The warboss barked. 

All around him were the remains of many daemons. Daemons of Khorne, the bloodgod, who had died as their deity had wanted. This day, they had also died just as Tuska, the Daemon Killa, the warboss, had wanted. How many days Tuska and his boys has been imprisoned here, Tuska couldn't recall. Not that an ork of his position and stature could count much past the number of axes in his hands. That's what gretchin were for, counting, smacking, and grabbing the teeth after a battle.

“Oi that's a right big one” one of Tuska's many scarred and cut followers remarked regarding the bloodthirster under Tuska's iron plated and well worn boot. 

“Get back to lootin and stop yew babblin afore I stomps your 'ead too!” Tuska roared. 

It had been a long battle. For as long as he could remember Tuska had awoken at the foot of the mighty fortress only to find him and his boys surrounded by daemons of unspeakable horror. Unluckily for them, orks don't default to speaking when surrounded. Tuska and his boys would battle their way up the already bloodied slopes of the battlements and into the keep. Tuska watched his boys die gruesome deaths, organs spilling out on top of friend and foe alike as corpses gathered on the floor. In the end it was always Tuska, with his axe in one hand, power klaw in the other, that stalked into the throne room. Soaking in blood, looking like some kind of grotesque half living, half dead abomination with nothing but rage in his eyes. Tuska wasn't angry because his men had died and he wasn't angry that he'd lost an ear, an eye, some fingers. He was angry because it was his nature and it was the nature of this place. He was angry, and he wanted blood. He was angry and he wanted skulls. He was angry and he wanted to kill. Tuska still remembered roaring and charging the blood thirster, letting the rage take him, letting the fearsome ork warcry of “WAAAAAAAGHHH” echo off the walls as they shook under the cataclysmic impact of warboss and blood thirster. Tuska fought hard but he was wounded, he was tired, he was mortal. In the end the blood thirster landed a fatal blow. With his dying breath Tuska cursed the blood thirster. 

The next thing Tuska could remember was waking up, back on the bloody ravaged plains outside the keep. His boys were all around them. He knew the humans had some fancy word for a situation like this, when they experienced something familiar. Tuska didn't need any fancy words. Tuska only needed revenge. For days, weeks, months, years, maybe even eons Tuska and his boys awoke to the same horrific plain. Each day they fought and died. Sometimes more died, sometimes less. In the end though, Tuska always made his way, dripping with blood, into the throne room. Missing a hand, missing a leg, skull exposed, it didn't matter how terrible his injuries or how many daemons assaulted him, Tuska fought his way back. Tuska fought hard and Tuska died. If he had been a lesser being he might have given up, he might have let the daemon win. Tuska was not a lesser being however, he was an ork. He was not any ork, he was the Daemon-Killa, a name he had earned outside the warp time and time again. More than that, Tuska was mad, he was furious, and he wanted blood. 

“Boss, there's a hole in 'da air” Deadpanz, the groups Wierdboy remarked. “I'm sure there's more things for crumpin on the other side”. 

“Gets the teef and 'da loot and then we'z gonna see about all that” Tuska said stomping down on the toothless skull of the blood thirster. 

Maybe Khorne underestimated Tuska, or maybe this was his plan all along. Tuska didn't know, Tuska didn't care, and he certainly didn't give it anymore thought than what to do when the portals leading back to the materium appeared. Tuska was still angry and he still wanted blood. Tuska wanted skulls. Tuska picked up the flaming crown that had fallen from the blood thirster's head and roared out to the orks

“Boyz, we gots killin ta do. We'z fighting for blood and skulls. We'z fighting cuz we'z orks.” He then turned and thought very, very, hard for an ork. He felt the presence of some stronger, more vicious being in the back of his small mind. 

“You can haz da skulls, but da teef is mine” He mumbled towards the distant horizon.

40k League

This coming Sunday, March 2nd will jumpstart our Tuscaloosa 40k slow-grow League.  The emphasis of the 40k League will be on narrative and hobby progress: everyone in the League is encouraged to post on the blog about painting progress, battle reports, and perhaps even narrative events, if we can swing together a narrative from our games. The 'goal' of the League is to encourage everyone to build personalized, painted 2000 pts lists.  To accomplish this, we'll have monthly 40k days on the first Saturday of every month starting on April 5th with 500 pt lists.  Each month thereafter we'll increase the points total of armies by 250. If this pace is too slow for everyone we can speed things up.

This Sunday, though, is the appetizer: Kill Team, 200 pts, following the newest GW rules (which you can find from Black Library).  The gist is this: 200 pts from one codex, including up to 0-2 troops, 0-1 elites, and 0-1 fast attack choices.  Lists must include at least 4 non-vehicle models, can't include any models with 2+ saves, and can't include vehicles with total AV greater than 33.  A few of your models get to select special rules, and there's a warlord chart for your squad leader.

For Kill Team and for the rest of the League, everything in 40k is considered fair play: codexes, supplements, Escalation, Stronghold Assault, data slates, etc. We're going with a few small rules tweaks to try to balance the playing field.  These are subject to change based on how things progress:

1. Any rerollable save of 2+ only succeeds at the reroll on a 4+.  
2. Ignores Cover applies a -2 modifier to cover saves.  This applies to template weapons.
3. Hit and Run no longer confers to the entire unit: every model in a unit must have Hit and Run in order for the unit to be able to Hit and Run.
4. Destroyer (D) Weapons are all str 10 ap 1 with Ignores Cover.  This replaces all normal D weapon rules. (In general, it's more sporting to only play Super Heavies when your opponent also has Super Heavies in their army).

I hope that these rules tweaks encourage fair play in a League where everyone will be building their lists from the ground up. As always, comments are encouraged.

Monthly Review: February 2014

Mordikaar the Void Seer Versus Jeremiah Kraye

Gaming Theory: Threat Analysis

This is going to be an article dedicated to discussing some gaming theory ideas between various wargaming systems. The main two topics are threat analysis and some talk about "dicing out" games. So threat analysis is going to simply refer to what kind of things I consider when I'm playing different wargames (what is a threat, how do I threaten them, what do I need to avoid, etc.). "Dicing out" is a term that I've heard used a lot in the warmachine community. Unlike warhammer, there usually aren't rolls made for saves during an opponents turn. Similarly, I think there's usually a focus on removing key models and carrying out a plan to scalpel out parts of the enemies army. "Dicing out" seems to encapsulate two key principles. The first is taking lots of tough troops, which are the one kind of save in warmachine. On a 5 or 6 the troop model isn't destroyed. These troops are usually taken in large numbers, which equates to a wave of bodies and many dice rolls. All these dice rolls mean, as the second portion of "dicing out", that your turns will usually run the time length in competitive play. This means that rather than rely on a decisive victory you can rely on the game being ended by time rather than scenario. So you're relying on rolling lots of dice and averages to expand your model's lifespan and then for said rolling to take up as much time as possible. 

To start with, I'm going to continue the trend of talking about warmachine. Below you'll find a diagram I'm going to be referring to. There's a key at the bottom to help you identity what the scribbles mean. I'm going to start discussing these diagrams from the left and move to the right. So positioning is a big part of warmachine, as is protecting your caster. That's why you'll notice the ranged units might try to get around the warbeast and shoot at the caster. The warbeast could move up and engage some of them to attempt to prevent it or the caster could retreat into the woods to block line of sight. You'll also notice the infantry on the right side could be blocking the advance the of the warbeasts as well as preventing each other from running past. While there's a range of possibility that exceeds what this drawing can express, it's basically here to show that each model has a purpose and the positioning of them can be used to tie up enemy models even if they aren't out to destroy them. There's also a lot of interaction between models and terrain. The end goal is to tie up enemy models, try to get to their caster, and prevent your models from ending up exposed or in unfavorable matchups. The best way to prevent a bad matchup is to compare either the accuracy of the enemy with your defense or their power with your armor. The larger the difference, the less likely you are to take damage. Terrain can be used to modify this, as can spells. However, there are no saves. This means if a model ends up in a bad position, there's nothing to keep the enemy from punishing you quite handily for it.

This diagram is for warhammer 40k. The first thing I think you'll notice is the much larger scale of the drawing. Eighteen inches is a rather long threat range in warmachine but a relatively short threat range in 40k. In this system the way I analyze a board has a lot more to do with the longer ranges of pieces. You can look for locations where you either can'e be seen (the black dot on the left) or recieve cover (dot 3, behind the hill). You also have to consider the range of your guns. In essence, I think 40k is all about balancing the number of models you can shoot, the saves you will get, and the number of models that can shoot back. Let's take a second to break that down mathematically. If I can put a model where it can see 100% of the enemies models, that's a pretty good position but that likely means it can be shot back. You'll notice how many of the black dots are moving towards an area where they are in the minimal number of ranges of the red dots. Let's say however, that dot 2 is a unit of terminators with storm shields. They now have either a 2+ or 3+ save against any shooting attacks. This means they have to be much less concerned about removing themselves from danger, especially since they need to be as close as possible to attack the enemy. Unlike warmachine, I think an abundance of saves can often replace the need for exact positioning. While there are "bad matchups" for units with 2+ or 3+ saves, these units can shrug off an immense amount of punishment before they die.

Finally, we have Warhammer Fantasy. In this system, combat is done by units in bock formations. Redirecting is also a much larger deal. Unlike in warmachine and 40k, you can choose to block the charges of units or flee from battles you would rather not fight. This can also mean forcing enemy units to take charges that put them in a compromising position . You'll notice how many of the charges either player might attempt in this one contradict the charges or movements of the other. The smaller units are probably either going to flee or get in the way rather than simply charge in. Also, the building on the right blocks movement, this means that while the two right most units might want to charge one another, they simply can't. In warmachine single models can be used to stop advances however, in this system units are more commonly used. The addition of re directors to force your enemy to expose a flank and fleeing units to entice them to purse means that you have the chance to actively lure your opponent out, rather than place models as scapegoats as you might in the other systems. You'll also notice that models for blocks and aren't spread out. This means they can't move between each other freely and instead form battlelines. If a unit is in a bad place, it  can be very difficult to extricate it because of the other large formations around it. 

In summary, it seems to me like there are few concepts that dictate how engagements are handled across these systems. Warmachine is about positioning my models where they need to be, preventing them from being exposed, and killing key models of my opponents. The goal is not to have to sacrifice my models in order to gain a tactical advantage. In 40k, the goal is to avoid the range of weapons that I don't feel like my saves can accommodate for, and bring my own weapons into range. Some units I can expose and some I need to simply avoid the range of my opponents guns with. In Fantasy it is all about getting my combat units into units I want to fight by fleeing with others or forcing my opponent to charge less optimal targets. In particular, this system has a very intricate, moving pieces kind of feel where units can flee at any time. I think one of the most interesting concepts of all this is the way units being threatened is conceived of. In warmachine it is very bad for a unit to be threatened. The goal is to avoid allowing your models to be put in a position where they can be threatened because once they are there your opponent can punish them with usually little retaliation. In 40k however, some units don't mind being put into the cross hairs depending on their saves. The extreme ranges also make it difficult to simply remove models from threatening situations. In fantasy, some models or units are intentionally put into harms way. This is because they are either expendable or they will be able to flee and escape danger. 

So what does this have to do with dice? Well in Warmachine, models that are put into danger don't get saves, all they can do is rely on your opponent to roll well below average to save them. The exception to this is when you put a model with high defense or armor in a position where only units with low accuracy or power can attack it. This means that on average they will be unable to harm it very much. In 40k however, you may choose to put units into harms way not because your opponents units are incapable of dealing with them, but because their rate of "saving" wounds done to them is high enough that they have little to fear. I think this concept is fundamentally different. You aren't relying on the ineptitude of your opponents models, but the power and averages of a dice roll to save yours. The likely hood and/or ability of your opponent to do something about it is slightly different. I think the second can be much harder to mitigate and much more frustrating. Here are two statements

"You need to roll a 7 or better on two dice to me and then a 10 or higher to damage me" (essentially a 1/2 change and a 1/3 chance, together that becomes a 1/6 chance of success)

Now compare this to the following:

"Ok, you've hit and damaged my model, if I roll a 2 or better it doesn't take any damage" (a 1/6 chance)

The second seems much more frustrating an unfair. It sounds as though I am negating your success. In the first example you can make your attempt and if you succeed that is the end of it. In the second you have almost succeeded at something but I am preventing it. This can be even more frustrating if there is not a system like Fantasy's flee/redirect where I can attempt to control where the engagement happens. In sort, I think there is a continuum of strategy and averages. In some gaming systems you want to take advantage, while in others you want to attempt to simply avoid engagement. I think the strategy aspect is a much harder art to master than "dicing out" an opponent. One last example to illustrate this. If I can avoid situations where saves are needed or I can be hit, the rate at which I do so is a sort of success rate. If you are simply unable to fight or shoot something due to certain restrictions though, it is safe and only a fault in my planning or execution will result in it being otherwise. If I am relying on being able to roll a 2 or better however, one sixth of the time that will fail. I think some game systems allow for more of one than the other and I don't think either is inherently better, just different. In any case I do think the method by which we perceive threats and avoid them is a vast, illusive, and divisive topic in wargaming. Before you judge a game as being unfair or having bad mechanics, take some time to compare it to other systems and see what they do that you like more or less. I think being able to conceptualize and articulate the differences between game mechanics is will make you a better player and will help you to dig deeper into why you love the game. 

Fantasy Escalation Day 2

This weekend, Sunday the 23rd will be the second games day in the warhammer fantasy escalation league. We'll be playing at one thousand points. I think playing a bunch of small quick games can help people learn the rules and also help more experienced players focus on some fundamentals and view the game from a different perspective. Feel free to come on out and get a game in. In the near future we'll be looking for a date to play some Triumph and Treachery as well.

Warhammer Fantasy Video Batrep

2500 points
Beastmen Versus Empire

Blood, Sweat, and Tiers

The rallying cry of gamers everywhere "that's so over powered" or "that's broken and you know it you filthy cheese head". As someone who plays a variety of gaming systems I'd like to take a minute to talk about how I view the ideas of power-gaming and gaming meta. I think Fantasy is probably the system where I'm the most familiar/the most prominent discussion of tiers tends to go on. A lot of people throw around lists that look something like this:


Top
Dark Elves
Skaven
Ogres

Empire


Upper Middle
Daemons
High Elves
Vampire Counts
Warriors of Chaos

Lower Middle
Brettonians
Dwarfs
Lizardmen
Orcs
Tomb Kings

Lowest
Beastmen
Wood Elves


While I don't completely agree with the list, I think the ideas present in it are pretty solid. Up top we have some armies that do a multitude of things very well and also have something they do very very well. For example, Skaven have shooty elements, solid magic, some movement shenanigans, and some half decent combaty units. What they excel in is bringing the most bodies to any given game along side some really power single models like hellpits and doomwheels. Middle tier armies have something they do well, but aren't as well rounded. Warriors of Chaos are probably the best melee oriented army in Fantasy, but when it comes to shooting they're virtually non-existent. Lower tiers struggle to do one thing well. While Wood Elves may be centered around shooting, one could easily argue that Empire has a better shooting phase.


Having played Skaven for a long time I understand some of the reasons why playing against them can be frustrating or seem unfair. I also play Beastmen a good bit of the time and I think the challenge to play against higher tier armies is sort of fun. In a way limiting your tool box to only the essentials (or even less than that) really challenges you to learn how to maximize your strategic decisions. Beastmen are an army that need their general to make lots of smart decisions and have a few moments of sheer luck. On the other hand, I would argue that anyone could learn to play Skaven in a few minutes. They are very forgiving and can easily compensate for bad strategy with the armies natural strengths.


I think this idea of tiers is present in other game systems and from now on we'll be talking more exclusively about what is good and what is not. Recently I played in the Finals for the Alabama Cage Match, a 40k tournament. I brought a list that was Dark Eldar Primary with Eldar (and Coteaz) Allies. While I think the list I brought was fairly strong, I don't think in terms of overall crunch that it's comparable to lists like Ovesa star with 4 riptides, the Ravenwing banner spam, or Flying Circus. This is to say that we don't see a lot of Dark Eldar Primaries finishing in top spots in tournaments like NOVA or the Las Vegas Open (where seer council with 4 waveserpents won). Sure some armies have elements of Dark Eldar in them but I think on the whole its safe to say that other armies are "Stronger". I played against a ravenwing list and won, necron air and won, but lost to the Daemons flying Circus. Some of this is just due to not having tools to deal with it. It's also due to luck and the fact that I played some very competent opponents. I think it indicates that if you bring an army that isn't top table, while you may win some games, you might not have the tools to deal with every opponent that you play.


To jump to one final game system, I also play Warmachine Hordes. I'm very conflicted about what to play in Hordes. I started off as a Skorne player and I still own the most models for them, as well as probably spending the most time playing with them. I do own just enough Legion of Everblight to have 2 50 point lists and one small 35 point (with some re-usage of models). I picked up a single caster and battlebox to paint because I thought they looked cool. After playing a few games I was instantly hooked on their play-style. In place of a grinding, militaristic game plan like I used with my Skorne, here was an army that rewards brutal alpha strikes and some cunning manipulation of special rules. On paper, a comparison between a faction built around solid stat-lines and some synergy against one wrought with special rules and game altering special abilities seems unfair. I think the common opinion is that Legion is a much more powerful faction that Skorne, but I don't think I agree with that. I think Skorne is a faction that is as much about overcoming one's self as it is the enemy. Sure the fluff supports such a distinction, but I think in terms of overall game-play Skorne requires a player to not only be methodical in their dealing with the enemy, but with their own units.


I think in the ideal world all game systems would be balanced and there wouldn't be contest between factions in terms of which is the "most powerful". Everyone wants to see the models they spent money on and time to paint do well. Nobody I know write a losing narrative for their armies while dreaming about how cool a "real" battle between them and their nondescript enemies would be. Sure some people like to play the Underdog army, but I think its more than that. I think some people come to the table with the mentality that they are going to try and play a better game than they did last year. Perhaps even more far-fetched is the person who comes to the gaming table knowing they they could have bought a new army, a better army, but instead they chose to play with models they love and have shown love to. Even in a tournament setting I think there is room for someone to make the best of what they can and realize that while it may not win tournaments, it may not even win games, playing the best game you can and hoping for that little bit of luck goes a long way. I've made the conscious effort to attempt to be a better general, a better sport, and to realize that the person with the overpowered army might just love their models for fluff, for their looks, and for things other than the deep seated rage they make me feel about game balance and I hope you will too.

Judging an Event

So this past weekend, the Alabama CAGE Match was held at the Crimson Castle. Lots of fun things happened, lots of games of 40k, lots of cool armies and models, and of course lots of players. I get a slightly different view of things, being the head judge.

I like to think I look this regal.

I really enjoy serving in this position, but it is very different than being an attendee. Being a judge consists of making a lot of tough calls, mainly because things come from unexpected quarters. You are expected to know all the rules, and you make people angry. You will be accused of being biased, openly or not. But all of that is just a minor portion. Rules are easily dealt with by using rulebooks and common sense. It is also critical to have a viewpoint of how things should go, or at least a theory of how you think 40k should be played. This helps inform your decisions when faced with uncovered rules questions, which are inevitable in this game. 

About as inevitable as the nerd rage.

But still more important than this, is that the judge is a key contributor in ensuring the happiness of the attendees. While every person is ultimately responsible for themselves, proper judging techniques can go a long way toward helping with enjoyment. Monitoring players throughout their games for their moods and behaviors. Many players exhibit their frustration long before it spills over, and the presence of a judge either nearby or directly at the table can mitigate poor behavior. Judges can also check in verbally to help decide on player attitudes and possibly provide uplifting comments. I find this helps the most when a less experienced player gets beat squarely by a seasoned veteran. Pointing out the veterans past achievements can usually help the newer player put his loss in context. Finally, making it clear that your decisions are final, while providing room for explanation and conversation on the rule. Most people at least want to be heard, so take the time to listen. After listening, make the call, and only consider additional discussion if new information is provided. Once this is done, I like to immediately walk away from the table, as this makes it clear that my decision is final. I will swoop back by that table to check in with the players again within five minutes or so. People get angry about rules, so checking back in is necessary, but they often need time to calm back down after a ruling.

Knowing your army

I am not talking about just knowing your codex. I meaning actually knowing your army.

For me, I love the background of Warhammer 40,000 a lot. I used to do a lot of narrative campaigns with my friends, but time changed that. I don't feel like I know my Eldar as well as I did my Orkz or Space Wolves. It is through those really fun narrative games that you play with your friends that you get to know your army. It is like you know what your commanders have been through in addition to any backstory you may have given them. I believe it is a very important aspect of the game. It makes those made up campaigns more memorable, and even makes your commanders more fun to play with as well. For me, my warlord is myself embodied in a miniature. It is who I see myself as in that particular army.

I really believe this is why I struggle with my Eldar and almost lost interest in them. I do not yet have that connection to my Farseer yet. Yes, he is named, but he hasn't made a name for himself. For example, the very first game I played with my Orkz, my warboss was in close combat with my friend's Necron lord. He looked as if he was reaching for the resurrection orb. From then on, he became known as Grazdreg the Shinysnatcha' after beating down that Necron. My whole theme for my Ork army came from that one memorable moment. Or that one Blood Claw that killed a Carnifex on his own and eventually became my Wolf Lord through what he did on the tabletop.

Maybe it was because I was in such a rush to prepare a list worthy of CAGE that I missed on the opportunity to develop the background needed for me to really enjoy my Eldar. With another year to prepare for CAGE, my goal now is to make memories with my Eldar and make sure to give my Tau that chance right from the beginning.

Fantasy League: Chaos Warriors Month 1

So, Riptide here. As I am sure Scar3crow3 will talk about more in depth, we have a Fantasy slow grow league going on at the Castle. I chose to play Warriors of Chaos.

Games have gone extremely well so far. I mean I am 0-3 in the league, but they were fun games. My month 1 list (750 points) was:

Heroes:

Chaos Sorcerer - 185

Level 2 Wizard, Mark of Tzeentch, Dispel Scroll

Core:

Chaos Warriors - 234

Hand Weapon and Shield, Mark of Tzeentch. Aspiring Champion, Musician, Standard Bearer, 9xWarriors

Chaos Warhounds - 35

Mutant Poison. 5xWarhounds

Chaos Warhounds - 35

Mutant Poison. 5xWarhounds

Special:

Chaos Knights - 255

Ensorcelled Weapons, Mark of Tzeentch. Doom Knight, Musician, Standard Bearer. 2xChaos Knights.

Total: 744 points

So as you can see I have a bit of a Tzeentch theme going. And as we all know, Tzeentch is the most fickle of the Chaos gods. And quite honestly, my dice were fickle during my games. My whole first turn against the dark elves saw a single warrior die to all their shooting. Of course the second turn saw the complete destruction of my doggies, and my knights panicking away from the opposing army. The dark elves just shot me to death for the rest of the game.

Against the ogres, I actually managed to make combat. So games were getting better. Of course these combats really occurred to the ogres liking, as the the sabretusk kept running over and killing my units. My knights performed a little better this game, as they managed to run down a small unit of the ogres that carry cannons (I think that was what it was at least). But since that was all I had left, and I was facing the wrong direction, the rest of the ogre army just had to bide its time before it would kill me. 

Finally my game against the lizardmen was probably my best when it came to positioning my army. Of course I made terrible decisions, but hey, what you going to do. My doggies got quickly shot to death by skinks. Then my knights lost a couple to other skink shooting and panicked off the board. Finally my warriors successfully charged the big block of saurus warriors and promptly lost combat. But, hey I got them there. 

So I learned a lot from my three opening league games. And while I joked that it was because of dice, honestly my issues arose more from my own lack of skill. Fortunately, I can already say that I am a better player, not a good one, but a better one.

So for month 2 this is what I am looking at.

Lords:

Chaos Sorcerer Lord - 250

Mark of Tzeentch, Lore of Metal

Core:

Chaos Warriors - 385

Hand Weapon and Shield, Mark of Tzeentch. Aspiring Champion, Musician, Standard Bearer w/Standard of Discipline. 17xWarriors

Chaos Warhounds - 35

Mutant Poison. 5xWarhounds.

Chaos Warhounds - 35

Mutant Poison. 5xWarhounds

Special:

Chaos Knights - 290

Ensorcelled Weapons. Mark of Tzeentch. Doom Knight, Musician, Standard Bearer w/War Banner, 2xChaos Knights.

Total: 995