Oathmark - Who's Playing?

[Hobgoblin]

Thanks. Hmm ... that has some interesting implications for how units of large creatures and cavalry 'degrade' as they fight. So, for example, a unit of 5 ogres rolls 5 dice. If they lose one ogre after the first round, they still roll 5 dice. But if they lose a second ogre, they're still on 5 dice (CD 3 x 3). And the same if they lose a third ogre (CD 3 x 2). So the unit's combat effectiveness only declines after it's been 80% destroyed.

Similarly, a three-strong unit of cavalry is just as strong in combat as a nine-strong unit (CD 2 x 3, so 5 CD in both cases).

That does seem a bit odd. I rather liked how the wolfriders played out last time with 10 CD for a full rank, but we'll try it properly next time and see how it goes.

[Hobgoblin]

Those who have played Oathmark, or other rank-n-flank games, what would you say is the appeal over skirmish games? Skirmish games tend to play faster, allow for more varied terrain, more unique models and individual character creation.

So, I know rank-n-flank is a different beast, so what would one says it’s gameplay strength is? It looks to take more time to prep and be a it more complicated in general, so share some upsides! Does it _feel_ like a high stakes battle?

Rank'n'flank generally offers more tactical scope. I always find that games of Hordes of the Things (for example) are tenser than skirmish games, because you can achieve more through decision-making, and so each decision matters more. Skirmish games, on the other hand, tend to offer more unpredictable outcomes and comedy (inadvertent or otherwise).

[Historiker]

I would also add that at least in regards to terrain a rank and flank game is easier to set up. Roll out a gaming mat, put two hills or houses or some trees on it and you are ready to go.

Furthermore: Surprisingly I find the assembly line painting highly meditative and relaxing   

[Hobgoblin]

I would also add that at least in regards to terrain a rank and flank game is easier to set up. Roll out a gaming mat, put two hills or houses or some trees on it and you are ready to go.

Furthermore: Surprisingly I find the assembly line painting highly meditative and relaxing   

Two good points! You can certainly have a good game of a good rank'n'flank system without any terrain whatsoever, though it does add interest and tactical complexity. There's a degree to which units, both friendly and hostile, can be the main 'terrain' features in a rank'n'flank game.

[BZ]

Thanks. Hmm ... that has some interesting implications for how units of large creatures and cavalry 'degrade' as they fight. So, for example, a unit of 5 ogres rolls 5 dice. If they lose one ogre after the first round, they still roll 5 dice. But if they lose a second ogre, they're still on 5 dice (CD 3 x 3). And the same if they lose a third ogre (CD 3 x 2). So the unit's combat effectiveness only declines after it's been 80% destroyed.

Similarly, a three-strong unit of cavalry is just as strong in combat as a nine-strong unit (CD 2 x 3, so 5 CD in both cases).

That does seem a bit odd. I rather liked how the wolfriders played out last time with 10 CD for a full rank, but we'll try it properly next time and see how it goes.

I think, that the goal of the maximal 5 dice system is, to have an easier gameplay, without buckets of dice (like elswhere...). I would think of that so, that a full attacking potential of fighter cant be used in closed ranks. And anyway, it is allowed to use more smaller units, or singel miniatures also. But then the rank bonus (after the second full rank) and morale bonus (full ranks) is lost...
And I think, that with more dice, the balance of the game would be destroyed: monsters and cavalry units would be too strong.

[BZ]

Those who have played Oathmark, or other rank-n-flank games, what would you say is the appeal over skirmish games? Skirmish games tend to play faster, allow for more varied terrain, more unique models and individual character creation.

So, I know rank-n-flank is a different beast, so what would one says it’s gameplay strength is? It looks to take more time to prep and be a it more complicated in general, so share some upsides! Does it _feel_ like a high stakes battle?

I think skirmish games are much more about terrain usage (cover and movement paths) and rank-n-flank is more about placement and movement (and blocking movement). There can be a feeling of individualism in both (individual character or individual unit), and composition of the warband/army is important for both.
And especially Oathmark is (I think, because I never played other rank-n-flank games, but I read a lot about them) a pretty easy to use and fast ruleset with a feeling of a big battle.

[Ultravanillasmurf]

I was re-reading the combat rules today and was struck by this line:

"For units that are facing each other, simply take the Combat Dice stat for one figure in the unit and multiply it by the number of figures in the front rank, to a maximum of 5."
 they get to roll the maximum of 5 dice".
...
So one could certainly assume that no unit ever rolls more than 5 dice. But that would mean that three cavalrymen are as effective in combat as five - though you would need multiples of five to get rank bonuses.

The rules are based on the concept of a maximum of five (or four plus champion) dice.
Three cavalry are as effective as five, but not as resilient.
As you say, you need multiples of five (for 25mm based figures) to gain the rank bonus.

[Hobgoblin]

The rules are based on the concept of a maximum of five (or four plus champion) dice.
Three cavalry are as effective as five, but not as resilient.
As you say, you need multiples of five (for 25mm based figures) to gain the rank bonus.

Yes, I realise now that I did get it wrong. It makes quite a difference - not least in encouraging the deployment of monsters and cavalry in very small units. We're going to play a couple more games over the weekend, and we'll do it properly this time.

I do wonder whether certain units will seem drastically underpowered now - wolfrider scouts in particular, which I think now hit only as hard as ordinary goblin infantry (unless in units of three or fewer models). That seems a bit underwhelming given the size of the Oathmark wolves.

[BZ]

Yes, I realise now that I did get it wrong. It makes quite a difference - not least in encouraging the deployment of monsters and cavalry in very small units. We're going to play a couple more games over the weekend, and we'll do it properly this time.

I do wonder whether certain units will seem drastically underpowered now - wolfrider scouts in particular, which I think now hit only as hard as ordinary goblin infantry (unless in units of three or fewer models). That seems a bit underwhelming given the size of the Oathmark wolves.

4x5 goblin soldiers have a fight value of 1+3/1+1+3 (defending/charging), 2x5 goblin wolf riders 2+1/2+2+1, but they are quicker (8 vs. 6), have better armor (11 vs. 9) but less health (10 vs. 20). And the two units cost the same. Why would they be underpowered?
Ranged cavalry generally seems a bit too expensive, but maybe I cant use them properly (or the my battlefield was too small). Cavalry is ok in my opinion.

[Hobgoblin]

4x5 goblin soldiers have a fight value of 1+3/1+1+3 (defending/charging), 2x5 goblin wolf riders 2+1/2+2+1, but they are quicker (8 vs. 6), have better armor (11 vs. 9) but less health (10 vs. 20). And the two units cost the same. Why would they be underpowered?
Ranged cavalry generally seems a bit too expensive, but maybe I cant use them properly (or the my battlefield was too small). Cavalry is ok in my opinion.

I was talking about wolfrider scouts specifically: they're F1 and only Charge (1). Given the size of the official wolves and assuming that the wolf, rather than the goblin, is the main danger (those wolves are massive!), I think they look a bit underpowered. Yes, they can shoot and yes, they're faster, but they don't hit any harder than regular goblins unless they're in units of three or fewer (when they do).

[Hobgoblin]

In fact, looking again at the wolfrider scout profile, I wonder if the downgrading of Charge is an error; the scouts replace Shielding with Aimed Fire, swap out one point of F for one point of S, and cost four points more than ordinary wolfriders (which would account for the ranged attack, I think). With Charge (2), they'd be a fair bit more fearsome.

[Mr. White]

I think one of my two armies is just gonna be mainly skeletons. Perhaps supplement them with some higher point creatures like a dragon, but use a skeletal dragon mini, so I'm not painting hundreds of minis...

We. Are. Legion.





Anyone have tips on painting good looking skeletons quickly?

[Historiker]

I am sorry to say the obvious, but in this case it works:

Contrast Paints from GW.

Undercoat in Grey Seer or Wraithbone and then one or two coats of Contrast Paint Skeleton Horde.

There's your Horde!

[Mr. White]

I am sorry to say the obvious, but in this case it works:

Contrast Paints from GW.

Undercoat in Grey Seer or Wraithbone and then one or two coats of Contrast Paint Skeleton Horde.

There's your Horde!

ha! perfect! I've not really done too much with the contrast paints, and I'm sure i'll wanna add a drybrush or highlight here and there, but this looks to do the trick.  cheers!

[Historiker]

I am already envying your army progress  !