Be the change you want to see in the world, posts generate more traffic on the topic That said, I’ll try to help with some posts in the near future.
I also have no Facebook. I deleted my account entirely about ten years ago in response to one of their updates to further infringe on their user rights. The process that took me more than a month if I remember correctly. If you accidently logged in it cancelled the deletion which had an absurd timer. So you had to make sure you were logged out everywhere and/or avoid the website completely for a month or so. I still get strange looks when I tell people (particularly from job recruiters) that I have no Facebook.
I want to quit Facebook entirely but have a business instagram page with 15k followers, and you can’t access Instagram data analytics without a linked Facebook account. It’s really frustrating how they lock you in. But I don’t maintain any personal presence on Facebook for many of the reasons listed above. I like this forum because I can participate and segment off my life. Facebook wants to mix and match and put everything altogether, and I don’t necessarily like all aspects of my personality publicly available for anyone to see.
On the topic of creating more Vanguard content - I think at least 80% of the more recent posts in the Vanguard section are me mainly rule queries though!
I have just two more models from my daughter’s Forces of Nature warband left to paint, so I might post that sometime in the next month (yes I am that slow at painting…)
I’ve got about 4 Warbands that I still want to paint as well … right after I finish my Elf army … right after I’m done I sure will … i.e. same thing I thought last year
They best way is to make some to attract more Vanguard players to the forum.
Battle reports are popular, something that can be shared of Facebook to get people on the forum.
As far as I understand there isn’t as much overlap as you might expect.
KoW players generally (as far as I can tell) find Vanguard has too many layers of complexity
nothing wrong with that, keep it up and others will come. I’ve most of the Vanguard warbands to work through but that is a project for next year as I don’t have the time or opponents before then
I think yu’re right about the lack of cross-over. On the complexity side I would say that, given my 8 year old can play it, it’s not too complex (and my six year old plays too with quite a lot of help!) More seriously, I do think it takes a few games to get into, but once you’ve played a few games most things come pretty naturally, especially if you typically play with the same warband(s). I only play very frinedly games, so I am not sure how it would hold up to more serious play (e.g. tournaments).
As for battle reports, maybe one day in the future!
The responses above overall show less crossover with Mantics’s other games than I was expecting. I would have thought more people would play Vanguard - using spare minis from KoW units for a low buy-in. I suppose there’s a lot more options for skirmish games, than ranks & flanks.
On Facebook, my local garden centre lost out as they were using Facebook rather than their website to say what plants were in, and I avoided choosing a dentist as they had no website, only fb. My understanding is that young people are less likely to be on fb than they were (seeing it as more for their parents), so groups/companies might be missing more than just the refuseniks.
You would be surprised. Children are incredibly capable when it comes to learning new complex systems.
I took one look at my VG kickstarter book and figured that I couldn’t be bothered. I also remember an old interview with Rick Priestly where he talks about how any dumbing down of Warhammer that they did was mostly to help the adults.
This is interesting (though not KoW-relevant). As a person working in communications, my impression is that young people do use FB as a news channel, they just don’t post anything there, ever. The reason is, as you say, because their parents and grandparents are present as well.
I suggest you give Vanguard another look. The basics are actually very simple and the “complexity” comes from two sources (IMO):
The layout of the rulebook, which makes sense once you are referring to it occassionally when playing but doesn’t make much sense if you are just browsing through it
The special rules - but these are warband specific so if you are using the same one(s) fairly often they quickly become second nature
My son catches me on rules occassionally, so he has definitely taken it in!
I’ll take another look at it if I find people who already play it. But for the guys I mostly play with these days, Erehwon serves our purposes well enough, and is (in my view) easier to get into. (I also remember that I got slightly annoyed that there were no bow option for KoM and no palace guard for elves).
You can buy a bow for any unit with a Ranged stat for 2 points I believe. The elves definitely need an update of the list though. I am hoping for League of Infamy as a Xmas present (if I have been good) and plan to make an elven warband from those models as a start, so I had a look at the elf list. “Needs an update” was my conclusion!
Matt and Rob said that they were considering a themed list based on the LoI elves when I was interviewing them. Something separate from the elves rather than a replacement for the list.
I don’t mind palace guard not being there, these are meant to be skirmishing forces ahead of a main army, so the elites staying with the main body makes sense to me thematically but also for balance.
It’s not that it’s complex and hard to learn; more that there are too many layers to keep track of and they detract from each other.
The issue seems to be that KoW would like a light game they can casually play with their extra minis (kind of like what I hear about Armada), but Vanguard is more complex than Kings of War!
The rules templating could be better.
Have similar thing work the same way.
Having slight differences or different mechanics makes it harder to remember.
To be honest I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one (which is fine!)
I find the “layers” of rules a good thing. I certainly think that it isn’t for everyone, but then I like the balance and set up of it and wouldn’t want to see simplification. I enjoy the added “complexities”
It’s not a “better or worse” thing (I don’t think), just a preference thing that probably does explain (as you rightly point out) why there isn’t as much cross over as there might be.
No disagreement here, definitely a preference thing.
KoW players play KoW because we like the simplicity, so Vanguard is less appealing to KoW player is all.
Interesting. I always envision the scouts and skirmishers to be elite troops rather than line-troops, so for me palace guard and gladestalkers makes more sense than spearelves, archers and seaguard.
Vanguard could be v good but the competition for table top and hobby time is generally quite fierce. Kings probably leads the field in what it does (blocks of fantasy troops clashing), while Vanguard is up against Frostgrave, Warcry etc that are more established/better known skirmish games. I reckon most people get into KoW as a general fantasy game, and only later the specific Pannithor IP. Vanguard doesn’t benefit from the clout of Star Wars or GWs IP. I’d have a tougher time pitching it to players than some of the alternatives.
That said, I’ll try to help with some posts in the near future.
mainly rule queries though!
