WL System Discussion (Split from Karkarions)

[smokingwreckage]

Man, I know EXACTLY how that feels.

[flvolunteer]

I've read or at least skimmed everyon'e posts in this thread then took some time to reflect on the state/future of Warlord based on my time playing and running Warlord games ranging from 2-6 players at home and conventions since 1st edition. I'm a huge fan of the game and our local gaming group includes it in our regular rotation. I think that the "generic" nature of the factions and their broad aplicability coupled with the selection of Reaper figs equate to a significant strength. There is a miniature for virtually every race, gender, weapon type, etc... and the proxy rules allow players to take advantage of that fact. The mechanics are simple and though the spells, SA's & states create a bit of a "slow start" for new gamers, I think they enrich the experience of a skirmish level game where individual models are really the focus (i.e. not cooperative units as in WH or WM).

 

All that being said, there is always room for improvement. For our group the regular stumbling block is finding data cards for what we want to field. Notice above I said "virtually" every type of fig/proxy is available and I think this is where Reaper could do two things to really help Warlord out and be within their company's focus:

 

First, offer more models to compliment the existing races/factions. For example, I have a lot of Reven and like to have groups of similar races working together. If I had some beastman archers/slingers I could use the data card for Bull Orc Archers or Goblin Skeeters and have a cohesive looking troop (note: I'm not the best conversion guy). Having a consistent look & feel across different Troops also aids in running larger games and introducing new players. For example, three troops could be run that look wholly different (Orcs, Beastmen and Bugbears), but use the same data cards, so the memorization requirement for the GM is much lighter.

 

Second, reintroduce the generic data card building rules that were in 1st edition. Granted this is something a fan community could technically do on their own, but, as Shak pointed out, the non-public, behind the scenes voodoo is not something they can divulge and that information would go a long way toward making it accurate and playable. Obviously such rules would also be excluded from competitive play, but would help players better design armies for fun and/or convention games. For example, I would love to be able to build cards for a greater variety of pirates to battle my Razig's Revenge troops.

 

Leveraging the flexibility of Warlord allows players to tailor games to their needs. They can use the base rules for competition or build a one-off game to supplement a larger fight in an RPG world of their own design. Either way Warlord has a place in the gaming community and deserves more attention than it is getting!

 

Regards,

flvolunteer

[Girot]

I'd be down for a Warlord Hero Builder rules set.

[joshuaslater]

Yup. I'd dig that.

[Stubbdog]

The main reason a "create your own data card" type thing will not be released is because there is not a simple method to do it. I have almost 2000 hours invested in creating the Warlord costing tables. You have to understand that there are almost 400 different formulas involved in the costing of every datacard because I wanted to try and get the game as balanced as I could possibly get it.. It is not as simple as just saying give this model "SA Mighty" so tack on 5 points.

 

Its more along the line of , since this model is on a large base, and is 4 tracks, and has a starting DV value of 12, along with an SA like Flyer, using a different algorithm, we expect on average this model shall survive for an average of X number of turns in a game, and therefore will be able to use this SA an average of Y number times during a game. Now take those results and see that this model has 2 swings at a starting MAV 5, and go compare it to another different algorithm that says it will get an average of Z hits per battle situation, so the base cost for this SA on this model is ...., now throw in the fact that this model also has SA swingthru, first strike, shock, or any from a sublist of other SAs that have synerrgy affects, and that also has an affect on how much this SA will finally charge the model.

 

I am leaving out another 5-6 calculations that are included in that for the sake of keeping this short and easy to understand.

 

And all of that only gives you the final cost for the SA Mighty.

 

So, I hope you can understand I have created a hugely invested set of formulas that cannot easily or simply be transported into a do it yourself type of set up. And that is why there will not be a make your own....

 

 

 

As for some of the other items on your list, well.... stay tuned...

[joshuaslater]

The main reason a "create your own data card" type thing will not be released is because there is not a simple method to do it. I have almost 2000 hours invested in creating the Warlord costing tables. You have to understand that there are almost 400 different formulas involved in the costing of every datacard because I wanted to try and get the game as balanced as I could possibly get it.. It is not as simple as just saying give this model "SA Mighty" so tack on 5 points.

 

Its more along the line of , since this model is on a large base, and is 4 tracks, and has a starting DV value of 12, along with an SA like Flyer, using a different algorithm, we expect on average this model shall survive for an average of X number of turns in a game, and therefore will be able to use this SA an average of Y number times during a game. Now take those results and see that this model has 2 swings at a starting MAV 5, and go compare it to another different algorithm that says it will get an average of Z hits per battle situation, so the base cost for this SA on this model is ...., now throw in the fact that this model also has SA swingthru, first strike, shock, or any from a sublist of other SAs that have synerrgy affects, and that also has an affect on how much this SA will finally charge the model.

 

I am leaving out another 5-6 calculations that are included in that for the sake of keeping this short and easy to understand.

 

And all of that only gives you the final cost for the SA Mighty.

 

So, I hope you can understand I have created a hugely invested set of formulas that cannot easily or simply be transported into a do it yourself type of set up. And that is why there will not be a make your own....

 

 

 

As for some of the other items on your list, well.... stay tuned...

Get a tech-savvy computer person to build the app. Then kickstart this thing. Do the same for CAV/15mm games too. Even a Luddite like me would buy this thing if it was usable.

[flvolunteer]

Stubbdog,

 

I figured there were some complicated formulas behind the data card cost generation because, well, frankly I tried to reverse enginner the data card formula . Using a few pairings I determined that the formula was much more complicated than it appeared on the surface and your RE has confirmed that fact. I'm also a database programmer and when you say algorithm you get my attention. Perhaps Joshuaslater is onto something?

 

And don't worry, Reaper has my attention for the long haul!

 

Take care,

Eric

[Girot]

I wanted to suggest that Reaper get with Lone Wolf to add CAV and WARLORD to Army Builder.

[wildger]

I wanted to suggest that Reaper get with Lone Wolf to add CAV and WARLORD to Army Builder.

 

No, why should I pay for a program that depends on fans to update the data. Its sole purpose is for 40K and WHFB because GW does not want to make one of their own despite on the money they made.

[joshuaslater]

If Reaper produced it, I would buy it.

[Falke]

There are many pros for Warlord that I really enjoy. For instance two things that have been criticed (the d10 and the initiative system) played a major role in getting me hooked up to WL. I still favor them over most other ways of handling this.

 

On the other hand I agree with some things that have been mentioned here. I understand that Reaper is unable to devote too much ressources into WL, yet I find it disappointing to see that nothing on the homepage has changed since the first edition. If you check Warlord at the Reapermini site Savage North is not even mentioned. I know this might sound superficial, but it leaves one with the impression the game was dead already (even though I know better).

 

The other is the lack of fluff or rather its availability. The 1st version was grand in terms of describing Taltos and I really liked the old army books (or at least the Necropolis one, haven't read the others). Actually Reaper's fluff is not bad at all. Admittedly it is a bit generic, but it offers some genuine ideas as well. I liked the fluff that much that I have been toying around with using Adon as a background for a roleplaying campaign ever since.

 

If there was a way to make at least a bit of this fluff available for new players, it might really help in getting people involved as the "Team Factor" plays an important role in wargames. If you want examples think of people rooting for certain Space Marine fractions.

 

The game certainly doesn't lack originality, nor are the rules overly flawed (even though they are not perfect and certainly aren't everyone's cup of tea), so I'm afraid the issue is support. No wargaming club I visited had heard of WL before, even though some stocked Reaper minis. The websites don't really get updated often and the fluff is hiding in the dark. Obviously Reaper cannot launch a massive ad campaign to boost popularity and we the fans keep a rather low profile, so these seem to be key problems to me.

 

Another issue would be its abscence from the European market. Is anything being done to promote WL outside of the States?

 

[Girot]

 

I wanted to suggest that Reaper get with Lone Wolf to add CAV and WARLORD to Army Builder.

 

No, why should I pay for a program that depends on fans to update the data. Its sole purpose is for 40K and WHFB because GW does not want to make one of their own despite on the money they made.

 

 

They've REALLY evolved over the years! While it started as 40k/WHFB it can support just about anything out there now. While they do accept some help from their hard core foruminions LW does have a real dev team that is constantly adding and updating existing content.

[ObsidianCrane]

Well I'm picking up my Mac this weekend and one of my goals is to learn Ap development and transferring the existing army builder to an ap is one of the projects I'm considering.

 

I also finally placed my order for Savage North so I'll have the rules soon to really get to grips with the game.

[Nocturne]

 

 

I wanted to suggest that Reaper get with Lone Wolf to add CAV and WARLORD to Army Builder.

No, why should I pay for a program that depends on fans to update the data. Its sole purpose is for 40K and WHFB because GW does not want to make one of their own despite on the money they made.

They did make their own. No one cared and just used Army Builder instead.

[Nameless]

I've only played the 1st edition, but I remember I had a love-and-hate relationship with damage tracks. I loved the idea of combat capabilities slowly decreasing with each wound, I hated keeping track of it...

I also like the initiative card deck.

 

and just to add something more to your discussion - I've also imagined the WL should be a true skirmish, combat of fantasy heroes. No grunts, no troops, just true heroes of legends