Thinking Cap: Reeves of Orboros

I know what you're thinking. Anyone who's played with Circle has probably looked at Reeves, thought they were neat and then laughed when they saw the cost of the unit. Furthermore, anyone who's actually played with the unit will probably even agree that they are difficult to use effectively at best or lackluster at worst. They have some neat tricks with War Wolves but the synergy can be a bit off (if a War Wolf charges a target that you shot at, you'll have a hard time shooting that same target again to get another War Wolf in there to trigger Gang Fighter). Indeed, even the UA doesn't seem to offer much as Ranked Attacks is not as helpful when a ranged unit is the one that has the ability. To top it all off, they're pricey and if you really want to max out all of their synergies you're looking at 17 points (full unit + UA, 3 War Wolves, and the Reeve Hunter). That's a lot of points for a bunch of models which will still have a hard time. So I got to thinking and I may have found someone who could make them far more effective: epic Morvahna.

Thinking Cap: Initial thoughts on the Woldwrath

I think I inadvertently creating a shooting list with eBaldur.  I got to play with the Woldwrath for the first time a couple of weeks ago against a Cryx player at the Battle Standard.  He usually doesn't play in tournaments much but it was my first time with the Woldwrath anyway so I have no allusions that it's OMG BROKEN or anything but I do want to share my brief insights on the model.  I wanted to try out a 50 point game because Templecon is coming up soon and I need some practice.  I crafted a 50 point list for eBaldur a while ago but I finally got to try it out and so I need to share my findings.

The "Counter-Punch" playstyle

This article was inspired by a couple of comments exchanged with someone on a Bell of Lost Souls review of the Woldwrath.  I thought that the review was pretty solid (although without much play experience) and I generally like the Warmachine/Hordes writers for BoLS.  In the comments I mentioned my experiences with the Woldwrath for some additional feedback and I had an interesting exchange there discussing Circle's playstyle.  In fact, I've had similar thoughts from reading Lamoron's articles on his experiences with Circle over on his blog.  I've always been interested in Circle and they're my first faction since Mk. II (although it might have been Cygnar if they had released the Firefly model sooner for that eNemo theme list).  I'm not going to suppose that I'm an expert on the faction or that others are incompetent, but the purpose of this article is to try to explain the playstyle of the Circle Orboros and why many find the faction to be so challenging outside of just a handful of warlocks.  I believe the best way to describe this playstyle is something called "Counter-Punch".

Thinking Cap: Farrow

I've been going to The Battle Standard in Manchester CT for a couple weeks now and I've had some great conversations with the guys there.  One of the topics that has come up is Dr. Arkadius - one of my favorite warlocks.  Unfortunately, the good doctor has some serious drawbacks and problems and I've discussed them before, notably what he needs to compete with Carver.  Any competitive player will see that Arkadius - and the Farrow in general - have some challenges that need to be overcome in order for them to be successful in a tournament setting.  I've already discussed in the past what Dr. Arkadius needs to make himself a little more competitive, but today I want to look at some ways of giving an edge while still keeping them unique on the scene.  First, we need to discuss what makes Farrow interesting and different from other factions.

Thinking Cap: Feralgeist

I've been working on a secret project for the last couple of days so I've been having a tough time coming up with suitable articles.  My secret project has also distracted me from finishing the Prezi Battle Report for my recent battle using Mohsar against Zaal (it's coming!  I promise!) so what am I going to write about today?  Well I've given some thought to my recent article defending the Mountain King and I made a stunning realization the other day.  While I admit I made some errors in my initial report on the Mountain King (he's DEF 9 instead of 10), I did forget about a key solo that could make the Mountain King a bit more frightening.  I want to talk about the lowly Feralgeist.

Thinking Cap: In Defense of the Conquest

There’s been a lot of hate out there for the Khadorian Colossal.  There are many who feel like it is the least useful of the Colossals and many will argue that the Stormwall is hands-down the best Colossal out there.  While I will not disagree that the Stormwall is fantastic, I think it’s power is perhaps exaggerated by the fact that Cygnar previously lacked something that had both raw offensive output and damage resiliency.  Indeed, one of the Stormwall’s greatest attributes is that it will be effective in the hands of nearly all of the Cygnarian warcasters since it has both raw melee potential and some effective shooting.  Why then, is the Conquest viewed by Khadorian players with such disappointment?  Let me share some insights I’ve had about the Conquest and why I think it will be equally – if not more welcome – than the other warjacks that Khador can bring.

Thinking Cap: Privateers

I love my pirates and now that the local Warmachine/Hordes league is winding down, I'm really excited to get back to painting these guys (although I have to finish grading first...).  Lately I've been poring through the Mercenaries book trying to find some hidden gems that I might not have noticed before.  My studies have been focused particularly on building synergy for my Fiona list, to see if there are any ways in which I can tweak it and make it stronger.  Ideally, I'd love to use this list in a tournament but character restriction makes it difficult for me to take models that I might want to take in another list instead, and that has made decisions more difficult.  One of the reasons is that the privateer models are notorious for their potential synergy with all of their solos.  Each solo is respectable on their own but the fact that they all offer some benefit to other models is what makes the pirates competitive.  However, I've brought up before in my list building that I think that Press Gangers are superior to Sea Dogs in many ways and today I want to illustrate why, by looking at some of the synergy 'packages' offered to them.

Thinking Cap: The Stormwall

By now if you haven't already heard, Privateer Press released the cards for the Cygnar Stormwall and we get our first official peek at a Colossal!  We now know a lot about the direction Privateer Press took with these large models and they aren't the crazy unkillable machines that some initially thought.  In fact, the Stormwall has less ARM than Ol' Rowdy.  So, naturally, I want to jump right into designing a list around such an awesome centerpiece model, and now that we have the cards, we can actually start planning - making some assumptions of course about how the rules will work for these guys.  So let's break down the rules for the Stormwall and look at which warcasters would make the most of a giant robot with lightning fists!

Thinking Cap: The Minutemen

I recently ordered some stuff on eBay and the store I ordered from accidentally sent me duplicates of the same order.  So instead of only having 2 Minutman light warjacks, I now have four.  While I certainly got my money's worth out of the deal, it has left me scratching my head.  When would I ever need to use 4 of these guys?!  Today I want to look at the implications of spamming these warjacks in order to make them more viable and the considerations that need to be made it taking them.  Like anything else in the game, spamming is not really as great as it might seem, so I face a unique challenge in getting these guys to work.

Thinking Cap: the Scarsfell Griffon

With yesterday's reveal of the Scarsfell Griffon by Privateer Press, I figured that today would be the perfect day to discuss this model in more depth.  The model looks great (a near perfect match for the concept art) and is definitely a unique take on the typical griffon trope seen in various fantasy settings.  I'm pleased that he looks far more humanoid (like the warpwolves) than animal, as it really fits Circle in both aesthetic and playstyle.  The Griffon will certainly be a welcome tool for particular warlocks and today I want to discuss both what he offers to Circle's warlocks and what you should be thinking when using him or thinking about using him in a list.

Thinking Cap: Kaya and the Celestial Fulcrum

All of this week I want to plug the facebook page for Steam-Powered Gamer so that you all can go there to get updates on the latest posts.  You'll also note that with this blog I try not to just repost the latest releases by Privateer Press, because I figure you can get that everywhere.  I laugh when some new model comes out because the Iron Agenda Blogging Network explodes with reposts.  Well, when those releases do come up, I'll instead share them on the Facebook page so that whenever you come here, there will be a quality article to read.  So head on over because I think you'll "like" what you see!

Lately I've had some thoughts about one of my favorite and underrated warlocks: Kaya the Wildborne.  While her epic form often gets a lot of attention for being really powerful, I tend to actually think that pKaya has a lot of potential to be a really effective warlock.  I've played around with her a lot since I started playing Mk II and I've found her to be quite effective, but she does have some weaknesses, and my recent thoughts have centered around mitigating said weaknesses with a particular model: the Celestial Fulcrum.

Thinking Cap: The Underdogs Part 2

Yesterday we discussed the advantages of looking at the often underrated models/units in each faction.  While I often will look for these underdogs to a fault, playing with them can be a valuable exercise for keeping one fresh in their gaming skills.  Today I want to look at some examples of underdogs in each faction.  Naturally, they can find their way more easily into some lists than others, but are found less often than some of their counterparts in the same faction.  Also, consider that these are my observations based on the tournaments I've attended, the reports I've read from tournaments, as well as personal observations in the game clubs that I frequent, but your meta may vary (of course).

Thinking Cap: The Underdogs Part 1

I've always been supportive of the "underdog", regardless of game or genre.  This affiliation of mine with the under appreciated could be seen as a fault occasionally, but I see it as an advantage.  Regardless of what game you play (miniatures or otherwise) the player base is always capable of discovering the most 'optimal' tools at their disposal, it's part of being human and wanting to win.  I believe, however, that trying to make units or models which are generally considered 'sub-optimal' is a great exercise for a number of reasons which I wish to share with you all.  Today I'll discuss the benefits of playing with these underdogs and what you should be looking for in order to make them work.  Tomorrow, in Part 2, I'll discuss some of the most under-appreciated underdog models/units and reasons why you should reconsider trying them out and making them work for you.

Geomancy vs. Gallows Groves

With the release of the Circle Gallows Groves, a question has come up in my mind about whether or not the Gallows Groves are all that spectacular.  Don't get me wrong - I think the models are great and I'm pleased to see a cheap 1-point filler option in Circle, but I look at the Geomancy ability and wonder whether being able to channel through the Gallows Groves is really all that spectacular.  Today, let's look at these two options in-depth and try to consider not which one is better overall, but discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each.  Lastly, I will look at the collection of Circle warlocks and make recommendations on which I think is the better choice (if at all) for each.

Is Randomness Necessary? A 40k case study

I swore to myself that I would keep this blog Warmachine/Hordes focused but there's been something brewing in the miniatures gaming community that is so appropriate to my discussions a couple of days ago: a leaked version of the 40k 6th edition rules.  I stopped playing 40k because I was disappointed with the ruleset and the overwhelming cost of the game.  I felt like I was being mistreated and that I was in an abusive relationship.  Now with a new edition of core rules for the most popular sci-fi miniatures game on the market looming over our heads, there has been lots of discussion out there regarding what we can expect to see.  In two of my previous articles where I discussed if randomness is necessary (Part 1, Part 2) I discussed how randomness affects games and whether miniatures games can replace randomness with uncertainty.  What's interesting about the major leak of these 40k 6th Edition rules (legitimate or not) is that they represent a departure from randomness and a move towards uncertainty and a player's decision-making ability, as I discussed in my articles.  How?

Thinking Cap: Is Randomness Necessary? Part 2

Warning!  Wall of text/deep philosophical content ahead!

Recently I've not had the opportunity to play Warmachine/Hordes, but instead I've been playing other games and I had a thought: is randomness really necessary for a game?  Yesterday, in Part 1, I started by looking at the kinds of mechanics that exist out there in various game formats that incur randomness.  Today I will look at a couple of games where there is limited - if any - randomness to see if we can answer the question that I've posed.  Lastly, I will share my thoughts about how a miniatures game could be fun without incorporating randomness.  I would first like to clarify that randomness is not the same as uncertainty.  Randomness can change your desired action after the decision has been made, while uncertainty will affect your decision before you make it.

Thinking Cap: Is Randomness Necessary? Part 1

I've had the opportunity for the last couple of weeks to play lots of board games instead of my usual fill of Warmachine/Hordes.  While I certainly am starting to feel the "itch" to play some Warmahordes, it's been great experiencing other kinds of games that are fun in different ways.  Playing these games got me thinking - are dice necessary for a good wargame?  While Malifaux tried to remove dice from a miniatures game (by using a standard deck of cards instead), randomness and luck still play a significant role in the game.  My thought is whether or not it's possible to make or play a miniatures game in which randomness is not featured in the game mechanics?  In Part 1 I will share some of the mechanics out there and in Part 2 I will look at games that are out there that are fun without relying on high degrees of randomness or luck.