Pretty sure blast was already in KoW, I know devastating made it over. It is a shame the skirmishers rule didn’t make it over. KoW sadly has no way to represent small skirmishing units well.
Yeah, Devastated (ranged brutal), not blast - but you seem to know what I meant!
With a distinction now between Mighty and Yielding individuals, could see Skirmishers being more workable than they were (which was a bit silly and needed various tweaks to make event usable).
I liked the KoW historical book, but more as an intro book for people into wargaming than something you are really going to play historical battles
because it was covering such a big time period, had easy to learn rules, worked with different scales (no problem using 10/15mm models) and it had points for easy army building
much easier to start than something like Black Powder
yet I don’t see the need for something like this within the historical community, and because one of the biggest requests for a 3rd Edi Historical was that it is balanced with the main game, it is more like to make a KoM theme list than a standalone book
and in this case the one unit I miss (as already said) is a rifle regiment/horde with phalanx
for historical theme lists I just see minor changes, like restricting on units but adding a hero on chariot, or an Elephant regiment/Horde (so removing options that don’t fit the time period/setting and adding only 1 new unit)
What I really miss for historical wargaming is the Skrimish level game for Early Modern Period/ Renaissance and
late medieval settings
And I would rather see a historical version of Vanguard than a 3rd Edi update for KoW historicals
2 Likes
For me I want to see historical flavor more than historical accuracy in KOW. If I wanted a truly realistic historical experience, I would probably look for a historical wargame.
The KOW Historical book was a good idea poorly executed. The master list of units was great. But the individual factions were a real mess. Someone mentioned Romans already, but also things like the Egyptian list covering ancient Egyptians of Ramses period AND the Mamluk period of Saladdin and Baybars thousands of years later.
I think that a Historical, perhaps fanmade supplement is best because otherwise Kingdoms of Men would become so bloated with units and become a big mess.
For me historical armies are defined by their limitations as well as their strengths. Removing units or moving them to and from core can help define a historical faction, without changing the rules that much.
The Kingdoms of Men list very much is a best fit for Traditional European style Fantasy Armies and so can feel like an odd fit sometimes. I could make a Celt list…but would have very little bar fanatics.
There are historical armies it suits well and others that would go better with lists like the Herd as the units mostly have pathfinder, which might represent wilder more flexible forces.
I myself am using the Herd to represent Fantasy Mongols as they have units that could represent mythical beasts - Beast of Nature as Giant Eagle, but also core missile cav in the centaurs.
For organizational purposes adding more units in but divided by time periods would work very well. I envisage a bundle of theme lists which all use Kingdoms of Men as a core but add a couple of units, special rules or upgrades.
2 Likes
Agree.
the RC did a wonderful job to create a list that has cannon and rifles in the same list as chariots and war elephants along with fantasy elements such as giants and griffon riders.
That said, I think KoM perfectly covers a number of historical (or historical inspired) armies such as renaissance italy/germany but also the roman empire. Other historical armies are dependant on just a few unit choices (Mongols for instance, using mostly mounted scouts/sergeants or 18th century musket focused armies) and will not transfer well.
In these cases, the armies simply will not do well in kings of war, unless the owner is willing to make some adjustments.
For instance, playing mongols using the KoM army using only scouts/sergeants will not do well. According to Wikipedia, the mongols did use siege weapons and (chinese) infantry. Using this setup, one can build a more balanced army. Adding fantasy elements (generals on pegasi, for example) will round up the roster quite nice.
Alternatively, if you want the army to feature around cavalry, there’s also the option to play t hem using the elf list. In that case, focussing on stormwind and silverbreeze supported by battle cats (supporting war animals such as dogs?) will do quite well. Alternatively, the Brothermark or Green lady lists lets one build a mounted force with more variations, though one will lose the horse archers in that case.
3 Likes
Brothermark is a good option as well and suits late dark age and crusade armies or knightly orders
Teutonic or Hospitaler work best with Brothermark rather than KoM.
there are enough options that fit the various themes, but it misses the guidelines, like “for imperial romans use list A with unit x-y, for Celts use list B with units w-z”
1 Like
Great points. I have expanded my Mongolians beyond just cavalry. Got 10 warmacines, 20 crossbowmen, 20 pole arms, and a ‘giant’ to paint up. The KoM list does have a lot of flexibility, wish it had an Ogre sized unit that could be upgraded to have flying or other things. Would allow me to add in more mythological things.
I agree that some historically themed forces would be better using lists other than KoM. However I personally think using a non Human list for Human models is taking things a bit far. I don’t mind other people doing it as they are your models, but it is something that I just can’t justify myself doing.
3 Likes
The idea of using the elf list for a human army (just rename your units and make sure your opponent understands what’s going on) seems unorthodox but it could work. Dragons might be a different beast, etc. But I suppose that if you’re doing that you’re playing with house rules so tweaking KOM would be possible how you like anyway.
1 Like
Actually, this is completely valid witin the rules and an accepted practice in many environments. For instance, these beautiful painted samurai use the elf list. My own “swamp things” army use the rules for abyssals but use a variety of miniatures from Mantic’s and GW’s other ranges. For instance, my lower abyssals use ghoul models from GW and Mantic.
I’ve seen plenty more such cases and frankly as long as:
a) the bases sizes are correct
and
b) it’s clear which unit is which (cavalry represents cavary, the dudes with massive weapons have CS, etc)
I have no objections and will gladly play against you. Especially if it’s a beautifully painted army.
I draw the line at proxies that only match base size (Orc “harpies”) and empty bases with the unit type scribbled on it.
3 Likes