*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 10:25:27 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Recent

Author Topic: Swordpoint?  (Read 3369 times)

Offline Gracchus Armisurplus

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 275
Swordpoint?
« on: November 23, 2016, 02:00:11 AM »
Anyone picked up the book yet? I'm keen to find out how the game plays.

Offline mhsellwood

  • Assistant
  • Posts: 24
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #1 on: November 23, 2016, 02:20:57 AM »
I have got a copy on its way from merry old england to these benighted colonies, so I was planning to pop up some info on it when I received it.

I would be keen to hear from anyone who actually has a copy though.

Offline Codsticker

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • *
  • Posts: 3276
    • Kodsticklerburg: A Mordheim project
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #2 on: November 23, 2016, 03:39:18 PM »
Meeples and Miniatures interview the game designers in one of their podcasts. I listened to it while driving so I don't remember many details except thinking I would be happy to play it :).

Offline A Lot of Gaul

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 325
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2016, 04:51:01 PM »
I am still waiting for my copy to arrive, as well. From Meeples podcast 182 and the review in WS&S 87, it does sound as if Swordpoint will tick just about all of my Ancients wargaming boxes.

Cheers,
Scott
« Last Edit: November 23, 2016, 05:00:59 PM by A Lot of Gaul »
"Ventosa viri restabit." ~ Harry Field

Offline Nord

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 970
    • Nord's Painting Saga
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2016, 05:25:50 PM »
Still don't know much about this game, a few teases but nothing concrete. Not even seen a page sample.

Offline Charlie_

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1513
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2016, 06:20:10 PM »
I've heard that podcast, it's got a really long interview with Gripping Beast, about both the company and Swordpoint. They give a pretty thorough overview of the rules and the thoughts behind it, more than a few pages of a magazine (WS&S and WI) can do.

Very interesting. It sounds like a good game!!!!

Doesn't seem to have anything in the way of potentially irritating unit (non)activation systems, when you see most of your army failing to do anything because of a few unlucky rolls. It seems like a pretty solid set of rules for multi-based ancient and medieval era games, with some nice ideas and re-thinks of old concepts. Not bogged down with special rules and such for every type of unit. Seems to have a system of 'momentum' counters you can earn during the game, and deciding when to use them to your advantage can be a big decision.

There's some army lists available for free on the Gripping Beast website - interesting that it does seem to have a few concepts left over from WAB in terms of weapons (halberds, double-handed weapons, light and heavy armour, etc) which personally I consider unnecessary. I did notice one really silly one - English archers can be armed with 'hand-and-a-half swords', which 'count as halberds'. That's what I consider silly WAB logic - a type of soldier was known to often use a certain type of sword, which by it's definition is apparently not quite an exclusively two-handed sword, and the game has a category for two-handed weapons, and one for halberds which are apparently similar in role but not as extreme.... thus archers have 'halberds', which presumably improves their combat potential significantly.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2016, 06:23:19 PM by Charlie_ »

Offline Gracchus Armisurplus

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 275
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #6 on: November 24, 2016, 12:21:21 AM »
Do we know if the game features model/base removal during the game?

Offline Charlie_

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1513
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #7 on: November 24, 2016, 12:23:36 AM »
Yes, it has base removal - bases are 40x40mm, with recommended 4 models per base for close formation infantry.

Offline A Lot of Gaul

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 325
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #8 on: November 24, 2016, 01:11:53 AM »
To remove a base in a round of shooting or close combat, a unit must suffer a number of unsaved hits equal to or greater than its 'base strength,' i.e. 4 figures per base for close order infantry, 2 figures per base for cavalry and skirmishers, etc. Sufficient numbers of unsaved hits can also cause a unit to become 'discouraged,' or require a 'cohesion' test to see if the unit flees.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2016, 01:29:08 AM by A Lot of Gaul »

Offline Harry Faversham

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 3980
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #9 on: November 24, 2016, 01:39:51 AM »
"Wot did you do in the war Grandad?"

"I was with Harry... At The Bridge!"

Offline Gracchus Armisurplus

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 275
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #10 on: November 24, 2016, 07:46:46 AM »
To remove a base in a round of shooting or close combat, a unit must suffer a number of unsaved hits equal to or greater than its 'base strength,' i.e. 4 figures per base for close order infantry, 2 figures per base for cavalry and skirmishers, etc. Sufficient numbers of unsaved hits can also cause a unit to become 'discouraged,' or require a 'cohesion' test to see if the unit flees.

So to play I would basically need a bunch of 40 x 40 bases, effectively precluding the use of figures on 25mm rounds?

Offline A Lot of Gaul

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 325
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #11 on: November 24, 2016, 12:11:32 PM »
So to play I would basically need a bunch of 40 x 40 bases, effectively precluding the use of figures on 25mm rounds?

The other thread linked in one of the posts above has a full discussion of this same topic. There are always ways to accommodate your figures without needing to rebase, if you just apply a little positive creative thought to the situation.

For example, if your figures are based on 25mm rounds, you can place 4 of them on a 50mm x 50mm close order infantry movement tray, making 50mm x 50mm the 'standard' base size for your Swordpoint armies. Alternatively, you could place a single 25mm-round based figure on a 40mm x 40mm close order infantry base, and simply declare that it actually has a 'base strength' of 4.

To cite another example, my own miniature armies are all comprised of 18mm figures, with 6 figures per close order infantry base. Even so, I can still play Swordpoint with no problem, simply by assigning each base a 'base strength' of 4, regardless of the actual number of figures mounted on it. Job done!

Cheers,
Scott
« Last Edit: November 24, 2016, 12:13:30 PM by A Lot of Gaul »

Offline Charlie_

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1513
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #12 on: November 24, 2016, 05:18:59 PM »
The other thread linked in one of the posts above has a full discussion of this same topic.

Yes, I'm starting to get a sense of deja vu here!!!!

Andrew_McGuire

  • Guest
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #13 on: November 24, 2016, 07:05:16 PM »

There's some army lists available for free on the Gripping Beast website - interesting that it does seem to have a few concepts left over from WAB in terms of weapons (halberds, double-handed weapons, light and heavy armour, etc) which personally I consider unnecessary. I did notice one really silly one - English archers can be armed with 'hand-and-a-half swords', which 'count as halberds'. That's what I consider silly WAB logic - a type of soldier was known to often use a certain type of sword, which by it's definition is apparently not quite an exclusively two-handed sword, and the game has a category for two-handed weapons, and one for halberds which are apparently similar in role but not as extreme.... thus archers have 'halberds', which presumably improves their combat potential significantly.

If true, that sounds like an alarming tendency towards making some types of troops and armies excessively powerful, which was an affliction of ancient wargaming from the various WRG old-style rules to DBM and its ilk. It's also nonsense from a historical point of view, as hand-and-a-half (or 'bastard') swords were used by men-at-arms, not archers, who had cudgels and knives as their secondary weapons.

Offline Charlie_

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1513
Re: Swordpoint?
« Reply #14 on: November 24, 2016, 07:22:10 PM »
If true, that sounds like an alarming tendency towards making some types of troops and armies excessively powerful, which was an affliction of ancient wargaming from the various WRG old-style rules to DBM and its ilk. It's also nonsense from a historical point of view, as hand-and-a-half (or 'bastard') swords were used by men-at-arms, not archers, who had cudgels and knives as their secondary weapons.

Well I think it refers to the professional, well-equipped archers of the mid-to-late 15th century, who most certainly would have swords (and bucklers), not just knives and cudgels... (and often notably good armour, and horses too). And 'hand-and-a-half' and 'bastard' swords are really just modern terms for types of longsword, which these archers would certainly be capable of owning and using.

So archers with longswords, sure!!!!

But giving them a special rule that makes said archers better in combat because their swords are perhaps slightly longer than the swords of 100 years before, and could be effectively used with two hands? No, that's just daft!!!!!!!

But in balance, the rest of the army lists seem fairly sensible. It's a bit odd, units just seem to have two 'stats', D and C (I know the latter is cohesion, not sure what D stands for though). And a few are noted as 'superior fighters' or 'inferior fighters', which suggest just three levels of combat effectiveness - 'normal', 'superior' and 'inferior'. This I like!!!!
So in that context it seems a bit odd to then go into the unnecessary detail of light armour, heavy armour, partial plate armour, shields, spears, halberds, 2-handed weapons, etc.......

Though I should clarify, I have not read the rules or played the game. What I've just talked about is just down to having read a couple of army lists and drawn my own conclusions. I may have completely misunderstood the situation!!!!

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
100 Replies
21690 Views
Last post March 12, 2017, 05:06:18 PM
by Tordenkuglen
6 Replies
1439 Views
Last post October 13, 2017, 09:57:31 AM
by Phil Portway
7 Replies
1984 Views
Last post October 27, 2017, 08:47:18 PM
by grubman
36 Replies
4785 Views
Last post February 22, 2022, 01:14:59 PM
by Atheling
6 Replies
751 Views
Last post November 02, 2021, 02:27:22 PM
by Atheling