Warmaster play area (table) size? (experienced players)

[grubman]

So while I'm waiting for my miniatures to arrive I'm starting work on my table.  These days I live in the sticks, so it's unlikely I'll be hosting a lot of games at my home, so I'm not even going to bother building a huge game table in my basement.  The most practical thing wound be to make tiles that I can store and throw in the car to travel to venues where I can play.

The rulebook suggests a 4'x6' or 4'x8' table, and goes further to say armies should have 20cm to deploy and have 80cm between them at the start of a game.  So 2' x 2' tiles would be the obvious choice.

However, I'm thinking a slightly smaller play area (for 1,000-2,000 pt. battles) might be more practical for transportation and fitting securely on most tables at game stores and peoples homes.  I'm thinking of going with 1.5' tiles instead.

This would give a typical play area of 3' (about 90cm) by 6' (or 4.5' for 1,000 point games).  So, keeping the 80cm distance between deploying armies, this would only give a deployment area of about 5cm.  In other words, deployment would basically be all units in column lined up one deep along the play area edge, or line units 1 or 2 units deep.

So the question is, from someone who hasn't yet played Warmaster...will this work with a minimum of problems?  Is it a fundamental part of tactical deployment to have a large 20cm deployment area, or do most armies deploy along the front edge of this area anyway, and the 20cm just allows breathing room?  Is the 20cm deployment area just recommended to accommodate much larger armies?  As an alternative, would a 10cm deployment zone and armies starting 70cm apart greatly affect the game?

Minor or major stuff?

Thanks. 

[Major_Gilbear]

I think that for pick-up games (as opposed to narrative scenarios) cramped deployment areas and smaller tables often tend to limit manoeuvring quite a bit.

For example, playing on a narrower board limits the use and value of units which flank, just as playing on a shallower table limits the use and value of units that want to stay back and shoot.

The other thing to keep in mind is that until GW released the Citadel Realm of Battle Board, the studio used 4' x 8' tables (or bigger), and so that's what their games were mostly playtested on. As Warmaster is an older game, I'd suggest that the wider/bigger tables probably produce more balanced and fun games.

Similarly, playing games around the recommended size tends to produce more balanced (and therefore fun) games. Therefore playing at 1000pts may create some unusual issues depending on what units are selected.

If you are not wedded to playing Warmaster, I would suggest perhaps trying Kings of War instead. The rules and core army lists are free (link), and the game scales very well for 10mm games; simply swap Inches for Centimetres (an automatic 60% distance reduction ratio), and scale down unit bases to something sensible (handily, 40mm x 20mm Warmaster bases are almost perfect!). Of course, this also means that table requirements are similarly scaled-down, and the board is therefore just 48cm x 72cm (or ~1.5' x ~2.5') which makes it super-handy for travelling with.

[grubman]

If you are not wedded to playing Warmaster.

Thanks for the reply.  Yes, I am "wedded" to playing Warmaster .  I'm a WFB player from the days of yore, and wanting to return to "mass" fantasy battles have searched through the (somewhat limited) options from the last 30 years or so (including KoW). 

After reading the Warmaster rules (originally via the Warmaster Ancients rules) I really liked them.  What I was attracted to was that it had enough traditional and familiar elements in the areas I prefer them, and enough "different" ideas in places I felt sounded fun, and more importantly, ADDED to the game rather than just being "bells and whistles" in an attempt to make the game different.  I wanted something that gives the "feel" of a real large scale battle, not too removed and abstract or too close and personal.

Also (and the reason I never read/played these rules in their heyday) 10mm is a new scale to me, and I found the idea of delving into this new aspect of the hobby, and the look and feel of a truly "mass" battle very appealing.  It doesn't hurt that with this scale and the game being OOP, I feel absolutely no "guilt" not playing with official miniatures.

Warmaster scratches my nostalgia for Warhammer Fantasy Battles, but also gives me a venue to try something that feels new and fresh to me...instead of just treading ground I already covered.  Also, since there was only 1 edition of this game, I won't run into the same potential problems if I tried to get into an older edition of WFB again (which is what I would have done before toying with KoW...since their are no players for either in my area anyway). 

[Major_Gilbear]

Sorry, my intention was not to offend, nor to dictate anything to you.

Rather, my suggestion was simply for an alternative system that captures the feeling of the "Old" WHFB, and which happens to conveniently scale rather well.

Since you did not appear to have any regular opponents, I didn't think the game system was that critical, and as 10mm KoW and Warmaster happen to basically share basing conventions (well, almost*), it seemed convenient to mention.

There is a long (48 pages!) but very informative thread here on Wargamerau which may be of interest to you. It has lots of modelling and painting, some scenery-making, miniature scale/comparison shots, and explanations of what they adopted for basing conventions and such. It also has several battle reports with pictures, and I think they liked the level of detail vs abstraction for the game at this scale compared to Warmaster.

With respect to Warmaster, it's a fine game, and its rules formed the basis of the later "X" Commander series of rules (which were very well received, and are now owned by Pendraken Miniatures). Oh, and I think people have been using non-official models since its early days, so please don't feel bad about that at all!




* In KoW, a typical "troop" of 20mm x 20mm based models has a unit footprint of 100mm x 40mm. This would scale down to a 10mm unit size of 40mm x 16mm, which is close enough to WM's 40mm x 20mm bases to just use those. Also, in KoW the cavalry would be mounted "wide" on the bases rather than in a "narrow" column as in WM. But really, that's about it as far as needing anything particular goes - so the same models and the same basing could feasibly be used to play both games, giving you more options rather than fewer!

[fred]

I wouldn't worry too much about starting armies 70cm apart, rather than 80cm. The key is to be more than 60cm apart, as that stops cavalry charging with a double order. Wether they are 61, 70, 80 or 90cm apart, cavalry need 3 orders to charge.

A deeper deployment zone helps - as you can keep some stuff back, either fast moving stuff for later game exploitation, or artillery. But often deployment ends up pretty linear.

I posted this photo of a game at WHW recently, the table is 4' by at least 12' But the deployment is pretty narrow



As a set of rules, WM has some overly fiddly bits, but if you are playing on your own, you can choose to interpret these bits as you wish!

Due to the variability of movement due to the command mechanism, the rules cannot really claim to be that balanced, so I don't think reducing the table size a bit will matter too much.  Table size to force size and terrain density does affect the way a game plays. In our group we typically play on 6x4' or 9x6' tables depending on whose house we are at. On the bigger table the troop and terrain density is usually lower than on the small table, and this does give a different feel to the game.

KoW - this is a fun game - but it is a love it or loathe it system. Mainly due to the chess like nature of doing everything in your turn, and nothing in the other players turn. A lot of players really don't like this level of abstraction. But it does play great with 10mm figures, either at cm or inches.

I suspect that with WM if you dropped all the movement and ranges a bit, it would still play fine, as the ratio of movement distance to base size is high. So if you went from cavalry moving 30cm to moving 20cm, and infantry from 20cm to 15cm, it would still work as a game, and you would have more space to play in.

[Major_Gilbear]

With respect to scaling distances, I would probably reduce all of them by the same proportion - say 25%, as the 1.5' board sections are 25% shorter/narrower than the 2' wide board sections.

This would be about in line with Fred's suggestion of infantry moving 15cm and cavalry moving 20cm (although you could perhaps allow light cavalry to be 25cm, since typical cavalry move of 30*0.75 = 22.5cm).

If you were willing to do a crib sheet with the revised deployment distances, speeds, and ranges on it for each of your armies, I think it would be straightforward enough for any players you game with to follow.

[grubman]

Thanks for the reply guys, good food for thought.  This is one of those games where I will most likely be doing all the investing and work...and then searching for opponents.  A lot of it is for the fun of the prep...but playing is the icing on the cake.  Maybe I should just go with 2'x2' from the details go instead of the risk of having to re-do the tiles of I absolutely love the game and want to do larger battles.

Sorry, my intention was not to offend, nor to dictate anything to you.

I wasn't offended at all...and I appreciated the input.  I just rambled on because there is nobody (Well, no die hard mini gamers) in the real world* to listen when I get into something new...Guess I'm excited about the adventure and don't want to get distracted with the rules search again.  When you aren't playing any mini games, it's terribly easy to flip flop through rules looking for the "perfect" game and getting nothing going.

*just moved a while back and haven't found any "compatible" gamers.  I'm kind of a
Grognard and and like a variety of genre and games (board/mini/rpg...and lots of more obscure things).  Most gamers I've found in my new area are younger card gamers, or play the one or two current hot games.  In sure there is a group out there...but it's proving very difficult to find.

[Eric the Shed]

First up welcome to the world of Warmaster - its a great set of rules for mass fantasy battles.

Aside from the insanely biased strength of the Elven Army all the others are well balanced and great fun to play

Having a 5cm deployment line will be fine - if anything I would argue for a greater than 80cm distance between forces as this is a game all about command and maneuver.

All the best...and keep us posted of progress

[Davout]

Also excited to see how you get on with this project. I've been an avid Warmaster painter for years (2000 points of Empire completed with Dwarfs and Vampire counts in progress) but have never actually played the game. I'm hoping to rectify that sometime this year when I get the VC done. I'm sure I can get someone in my AoS group to revisit the Old World in a "big" way.

[warlord frod]

*just moved a while back and haven't found any "compatible" gamers.  I'm kind of a
Grognard and and like a variety of genre and games (board/mini/rpg...and lots of more obscure things).  Most gamers I've found in my new area are younger card gamers, or play the one or two current hot games.  In sure there is a group out there...but it's proving very difficult to find.

I feel your pain.   After living in an urban area with a very active gaming community for 28 years I moved to the middle of Amish country. It has taken me five years to develop a small group of friends who will game with me. I have introduced them to miniature gaming and we now play a variety of games. (Have not introduced them to WM yet   ). The difficulty is that you have to have all the figures and scenery because they have never played. Fortunately for me, that was not a problem.   So I encourage you to play a card game or two and then offer to introduce them to miniature gaming if you persist you'll develop a miniature gaming group.

Now to the question of table size. I think anything can be adjusted so as to make it work. I do believe that the bigger table allows for more realistic tactics. As mentioned by others you don't want to be so close that cavalry can charge right in also artillery and reserves benefit because they can remain secure until needed. I personally think WM is one of the best games produced by GW (I also love epic space marine.  )  ) Large massive armies can be played that would be to cost prohibitive in 28 or even 15mm. Do post pictures once you start painting and playing.
 

[tjgreenway]

There is a long (48 pages!) but very informative thread here on Wargamerau which may be of interest to you. It has lots of modelling and painting, some scenery-making, miniature scale/comparison shots, and explanations of what they adopted for basing conventions and such. It also has several battle reports with pictures, and I think they liked the level of detail vs abstraction for the game at this scale compared to Warmaster.

Cannot express in words how amazing the linked thread is, it's what set me on my way to 10mm gaming  Just a shame that the start of my project also coincides with a move to the other side of the country when there's a whole bunch of keen gamers in this area already - I'm highly doubtful I'll find a ready made Warmaster or KoW epic scale community where I'm heading to, so it looks like I'll be in the same boat of buying two or three armies and roping somebody (probably the wife    ) into playing with my teeny tiny fantasy men  Although, to be fair, I'd probably end up with a whole load of armies regardless of who I had to play against anyway 

In KoW, a typical "troop" of 20mm x 20mm based models has a unit footprint of 100mm x 40mm. This would scale down to a 10mm unit size of 40mm x 16mm, which is close enough to WM's 40mm x 20mm bases to just use those. Also, in KoW the cavalry would be mounted "wide" on the bases rather than in a "narrow" column as in WM. But really, that's about it as far as needing anything particular goes - so the same models and the same basing could feasibly be used to play both games, giving you more options rather than fewer!

Intending to play both games here, too, basing everything as it is in Warmaster - I'll get around the cavalry bases by having two bases side by side represent a troop, so they'll still be 40mm wide, just a little deeper. I figure as the armies will probably all be mine, they'll all be based the same way so shouldn't be a problem 

Reading through this thread has really inspired me to get off my butt and get started on my little Elves this week now, so thanks! 

[Major_Gilbear]

I wasn't offended at all...and I appreciated the input.

Phew, I'm glad!

Maybe I should just go with 2'x2' from the details go instead of the risk of having to re-do the tiles of I absolutely love the game and want to do larger battles.

Is there a reason the board needs to be regular squares? Can a cloth or similarly flexible board work? I'm assuming the issue here is more about transport and flexibility, since you've already mentioned that space at your place is cramped.

Guess I'm excited about the adventure and don't want to get distracted with the rules search again.  When you aren't playing any mini games, it's terribly easy to flip flop through rules looking for the "perfect" game and getting nothing going.

Very true!

Of course, having some options/flexibility also helps, as that way you can use your models with more games if the planned game turns out not to be to you/your opponent's liking.

From what you've said, you might be able to get some games of KoW with the younger gamers, and then perhaps use that to introduce them Warmaster? That would also handily increase your number of WM players too.


Another thought regarding deployment vs board sizes in WM: why not have shallow diagonal deployments instead? This would give some variation to the depth of each player's deployment zone, but still also allow the recommended 80cm distance between the forces. Okay, the thin ends of the triangular deployment zones of each player may not get too much placed in them, and the two armies may be a little offset in their facing toward each other, but I think it could work perfectly well otherwise.

@ tjgreenway:

Well a "Regiment" in KoW would be 40mm x 40mm, so if you prefer to base you cavalry lengthwise for WM, you can still use two side-by-side as a cavalry regiment for KoW.

And that thread is the reason that I have some 10mm elves making their way to me (hopefully) soon... Yes, I'm incorrigible, I know!