Pinned Discussion

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • loving the batreps and the feedback!

      and yes, i agree that focussing on one faction & exploring different playstyles can teach you a whole lot - much more than jumping from one faction to the next. for example, if you didnt like warhounds much so far, you can play around until you find a niche for them. personally, i think that paying 150pts to have Adv 8" with swiftstride and two ranks can make for some terrifying flank charges. imagine your wargs or kraken are suffering because they're locked in combat with a multi-rank (steadfast) unit. a few dogs come in and...


    • loving the batreps and the feedback!

      and yes, i agree that focussing on one faction & exploring different playstyles can teach you a whole lot - much more than jumping from one faction to the next. for example, if you didnt like warhounds much so far, you can play around until you find a niche for them. personally, i think that paying 150pts to have Adv 8" with swiftstride and two ranks can make for some terrifying flank charges. imagine your wargs or kraken are suffering because they're locked in combat with a multi-rank (steadfast) unit. a few dogs come in and...
      They definitely have uses, but they are far from being a must-pick part of the army. Ultimately, you need to be able to get enough strategic value out of them to justify the fact that you're feeding your enemy free points by taking them. The lists I've made so far haven't needed them; but I will likely need them if I decide to run a super high-mobility list.
    • calcathin wrote:

      As promised, here's the winner DH Armylist. This time with points and ready to get your first games in!

      Disclaimer: this Armylist is being released public at the same time it is released for our internal playtesting. This is due to having just concluded the final DH Armylist once the poll finished. Usually we would release public (still alpha) after internal playtesting, but in this case we thought it would be nice to be able to share it with straightaway with you just after the poll!

      Please let us your feedback (or if you spot any typos) in here: Essence of War // Discussion
      and if you play Essence of War games with this DH Armylist let us know here Essence of War // Battle Reports

      We hope you enjoy it! and please remember it's early Alpha for this DH Armylist :)


      @RHworldbuilding @ThatMusicWriter for your upcoming games ^^

      The post was edited 1 time, last by calcathin ().

    • Awesome stuff calcathin! :D

      The only problem is... looking at this, I actually already have the minis to put together at least 1000 points of DH ...

      But I'll need to paint more of them all first ofc! Arrrgh. This is very distracting from my core OG painting passion! :D

      Essence of War Team

      Product Search Team

      Social Media Team

      My gaming website: Agoners | | My gaming twitter: Agoners Gaming | | Contributor at: Collecting Green
      Sheffield, UK | | Essence of War - Give Us Your Feedback!! |
    • personal preferences aside... the best way to showcase T9A is with a match-up between... 54

      The result is only visible to the participants.

      hel-lou people!
      long time no see, huh?
      no worries, the work continues behind the scenes.

      today i come and bother you all to ask for a bit of advice. imagine you were to show EW to someone who has never played T9A before. can be a total newcomer to the world of miniature wargaming, or can be someone who used to play LoTR, KoW and WHFB - we wont make this distinction here. my question for you is...

      which two factions would you choose to showcase the game?

      and no, i dont mean which one you like the most... difficult as it is, i mean "in absolute terms". what do you think is best to... show the variety of aesthetics, the variety of playstyles, the simplicity of the rules, the depth of the game? do you think some Patrols are better than others, for an all first game of EW:Basic?

      maybe i will bring the game to the Spiel convention, or i'll release a free-to-play videogame adaptation, or maybe we'll add some chapters to the EW rulebook, so... dont hesitate to let us know your thoughts!
      cheers,
      f


    • Voted MA & HE. Makhar for the bold orientation and a faction/culture that is quite underrepresented in other games - so it generates interest through its singularity - and HE as their counterpoint, being a directly recognizable fantasy faction (elves!) with a well-rounded patrol and a strong magic.

      This should look pretty good on the table with infantry, cavalry and beasts - and either or both factions should resonate or intrigue prospects enough to let them try the game... Is it to showcase at a coming (physical) event?

      Tsuandan Warring States
      Cathay for T9A!
      ----------
      :totems: BH Homebrew :totems:
      Beastly Beasts without PI!
    • I voted O&G and Empire because they're the most allround armies to me. All just very basic troops, no monster single units.

      But if you want to represent t9a more you should go for armies that already have a gold book. There's not really a fluffy matchup there thought.. Maybe Sylvan Elves vs. Warriors, although I can't image that matchup would be very fun for both players.
    • thanks guys, keep 'em coming.

      idum, i agree with you - choices change based on whether it's for physical or digital, whether it's for novice or experienced, so to do things properly we'd need to have various separate polls ...and hundreds of answers for each. which is difficult to achieve, so for now im just asking for very generic (technically generic) impressions.

      i think even in this "reduced power" scenario, we're already getting useful answers. quite some attention to familiarity (WH, LoTR), uniqueness (theme or miniatures), maturity (LABs)... but not much emphasis yet on gameplay constraints, like very different base sizes or simplest gameplay.

      hopefully we'll hear from more and more people around! : )


    • I think most people are voting based on faction-in-general rather than the specific Patrols in EoW...
      But it's the actual Patrols that are important here!

      For example, I think OnG are the hardest Patrol to play with in the whole of EW Basic (or at least tied with a few others as the most difficult to play with!) - and I specifically never recommend them for new players for that reason, as they are very likely to make big mistakes with them and lose quite badly & have a bad experience feeling like they didn't have a chance.

      You can see this in multiple batreps I've made & games I've watched.

      They are also one of the more random Patrols to play with, as they cap at Dis: 8 which isn't THAT unusual for a Patrol, but they also completely rely on the General being in the right spot to get that Dis value, and they also often rely on being Steadfast to grind out a combat win over time with their weaker but bigger units, but then you end up relying on that Dis:8 check otherwise everything falls apart.. (spoiler alert this may have happened in one of my recent EoW battles that I hope to finish a batrep video for soon!).
      Those kind of swings can be fun ofc for some kinds of players, but maybe not to everyone's taste.

      I actually don't know who to vote for here as I suspect the best newcomer matchup is Patrols I haven't played that much... maybe something like DE vs SA? But I'd really have to have played way more to really say that with any confidence :)

      But I also really agree with jirga that interesting miniatures for physical play is the most important thing tbh. Whilst I don't think the Patrols I've painted personally are any of the "best newcomer matchups" for example - having a wide variety of minis from super-old to super-new and mix of GW and non-GW I have always found has got people interested in dicussion with me at game club nights - and having all the minis painted to a fair standard definitely helps too I think!

      Essence of War Team

      Product Search Team

      Social Media Team

      My gaming website: Agoners | | My gaming twitter: Agoners Gaming | | Contributor at: Collecting Green
      Sheffield, UK | | Essence of War - Give Us Your Feedback!! |

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Remy77077 ().

    • agreed - i find that playability is quite important.
      i also have a soft spot for patrols that play "one fewer phase", for extra simplicity (i.e. do not bother about shooting).
      and i often think that a low body count is also a big plus.

      based on that, i kind of like the Warriors, with their 13 models on foot, 3 on horse, and 0 shooting weapons.

      if i think of base/look variety and simplicity of phases,
      i like Makhar - Cultists on one side, and Warriors - Dwarves on the other.

      i get why Orcs - Elves makes sense too, but the double "2 infantry + 1 cavalry" setup is a bit of a killer for me.
      probably Ogres would be a great fit too. i mean, we do have them on the cover art, after all, no?

      Ogres - Daemons?
      checks in for base sizes differences + fun miniatures potential... but maybe it's a bit on the high miniature count side. and im not sure we should have non-standard combat resolution mechanisms used in the very first games. also, Know Thine Enemy would feel a bit meh. nah.

      dunno, probably Warriors against Ogres. or against Saurians (but new LAB soon). or against Asklanders (but same parent faction (but maybe for older players that's actually a GREAT thing...)).


    • When one of the factions is the DH Patrol, I always notice how much it speeds up the game in my demo games to remove one of the Magic phases entirely!

      WDG can be a bit swingy I think (one early unlucky Dis 8 fail can ruin their game too I feel, even if it is less likely to happen to them than OnG imo!), and if both players are VERY new and simply "run at each other" the Warriors will win almost any straight up fight which might feel a bit bad to the player on the losing end perhaps (although if they had a shooting unit, it's a pretty easy tactical grasp to hold back and shoot a bit at least!).

      OK seem to have good potential as an all-rounder Patrol (although I've never played as them, it is a Patrol I plan to build eventually - but using extremely non-standard minis :D I already have some of the ones I want to use...). I think SA, DE and maybe VS might fit into the "all rounder" bracket too (Both HbE and SE have the 'one mega unit' thing moreso than DE for me, which is why I like the DE Patrol more).

      Obviously I am focusing entirely on most fun playability matchup here only...

      Essence of War Team

      Product Search Team

      Social Media Team

      My gaming website: Agoners | | My gaming twitter: Agoners Gaming | | Contributor at: Collecting Green
      Sheffield, UK | | Essence of War - Give Us Your Feedback!! |

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Remy77077 ().

    • thank you all for your answers, guys!
      seems like OG is a big favourite - and i understand why! familiar to all fantasy-heads, visually rich, entertaining and/or scary. i agree with Remy that it has more gameplay depth than meets the eye, but that's not necessarily a bad thing in itself - it can actually help for demo games!


      assuming OG is to be picked, then going down the list, i see HE and DH. my first reaction would be to discard HE, because they have the same "2 infantry + 1 cavalry" setup. varied base sizes are quite important to me. i know that HE Lancers are very different from OG Raiders, and that a HE Mage is something else from an OG Shaman. still, we want things to "look varied" even for someone who hasnt looked into the rules yet. note that there's also plenty of variety from the hobby perspective. miniature companies have been producing dwarves and orcs for quite a while.


      plus, i like the idea of a large OG patrol, with 46 models, and a small DH patrol, with 23 models. different body counts are a good idea, both from the perspective of buying budgets, and from the intrinsic epicness of an unbalanced matchup! i mean, it's only unbalanced from the visual point of view - cos on the battlefield i think there's no clear winner. plus, it kind of automatically teaches the notion of eliteness, which is very important within and across armies.


      another interesting thing in this matchup is the opposed playstyles. as said above, OG can be challenging and are quite interactive. DH on the other hand might be a bit more friendly, since they are both more forgiving (high Dis, Res, Arm) and less complex (no magic). id say that on the tactics-strategy continuum, they are as far as patrols can be. another good teaching point.


      plus, as already mentioned, that's quite an iconic matchup for fantasy lovers. the factions feel familiar, look different, and usually elicit strong emotional responses - that love/hate feel that's so important to draw people to the game...


      i know, i know, it sounds like im trying to talk myself into this choice. i still see the problems - for example, it doenst paint a particularly original picture of T9A. those factions are available in practically every fantasy wargame! someone might also argue that the unbalance in required skill might be a turn-off for some types of players. and that the lack of magic could be seen as a drawback, rather than a deliberate choice. but hey, there's too many dimensions to take into account, and no single matchup will score 3 stars on all of them. so, let's rephrase the question...


      ...do you guys see any particularly strong reason NOT to use DH-OG as a prototypical matchup?