I think it would look so much cooler and more epic in 15 mm, like an really epic battle with a big amount of bases and Miniatures! Spartan games also have 15 mm Tabletop systems available (e.g. Planetfall, halo ground battles, Dystopian Wars).
It fits so much more for a mass battle game than 28 mm and of course the Miniatures would be much cheaper to I think.
10 minutes ago, Fomorian said:I think it would look so much cooler and more epic in 15 mm, like an really epic battle with a big amount of bases and Miniatures! Spartan games also have 15 mm Tabletop systems available (e.g. Planetfall, halo ground battles, Dystopian Wars).
It fits so much more for a mass battle game than 28 mm and of course the Miniatures would be much cheaper to I think.
I probably wouldn't play it at 15mm
11 minutes ago, Taki said:I probably wouldn't play it at 15mm
I personally wouldn't care, i have a bunch of Dropzone Commander miniatures and they are quit good to paint always thought those small things are hard to paint, but of course in 28mm you get more out of your minis in terms of looks.
But if you really want to go crazy, these guys do a lot of 3mm stuff, who doesnt't want a cute and tiny tank? 
With today's technology you can get some fine quality at the 15-20mm scale.
21 minutes ago, Taki said:I probably wouldn't play it at 15mm
I wouldn't play it either. 15mm has never appealed to me on any level.
On 2.2.2017 at 10:43 PM, jek said:I wouldn't play it either. 15mm has never appealed to me on any level.
I think its really a matter of personal taste in that case. A smaller scale also has some crucial benefits for playing such kind of mass battle, rank and file tabletop system.
Furthermore some people like to paint 28 mm miniatures more and other prefer smaller ones.
For the look onto the table, the 15 mm scale would be much more epic, because of a lot more miniatures you can put onto the movement trays. Another benefit for "lazy" painters is, they have less to paint, because of the smaller scale of the miniatures.
Thats just my opinion and i see so much 28 mm tabletop games on the market, but rarely ones with a smaller scale, which are common in the tabletop scene. The only exeption are Flames of War and some systems from Spartan Games, which makes me a bit sad. I really like those oldschool systems in the past e.g. 40k Epic, Warmaster, Demonworld to name a few. Only the historical tabletop scene has more, smaller scale tabletop systems.
I hope this will change in the future sometimes, so that developers/publishers will try to make some great sci-fi and fantasy tabletop systems in a smaller scale *prey*.
Independently, of course i will play Runewars :D! ...
18 minutes ago, Fomorian said:I think its really a matter of personal taste in that case. A smaller scale also has some crucial benefits for playing such kind of mass battle, rank and file tabletop system.
I understand completely the it is a matter of personal taste. I'm just saying that I definitely prefer the 28mm scale. I'm sure there are some really great 10 or 15mm systems however I just don't think i can every bring myself to play them. In the same vein of preference a HUGE draw for me to Runewars is the lack of rolling 1000 dice only to have 3 do anything. I like 28mm Streamlined systems I suppose...lol
You might wnat to check out Dropzone Commander and Age of Tyrants (not yet released though)
Yes, VERY dissapointed in the scale. 10 - 15 mm would have been perfect for this genre, but "marketing research" shows that people like bigger models... (facepalm) What you haters don't realize is that 28mm+ is unwieldy for anything above skirmish scale. I used to play Warhammer Fantasy Battle and Warmaster - the latter was WAY more practical.
10-15 mm could be played on a 3' x 3' surface, same as x-wing, not to mention ease of transport. Not sure if pre-painted would be cost:profit viable, but could make it less daunting. Point is that smaller models allow for larger game-scale.
Anyone that doesn't like smaller scales, google "warmaster" and have a look at the painted armies people made, then think of how much better they'd look with current technology...
My hope is that they'll have an Armada equivalent for this genre..
8 units at 200 points is on a par, unit count wise with WHFB armies at 2500 points with a not dissimilar individual figure count as well.
This game seems to scale easily and isn't out of sync army size wise with other similar games.
Honestly, it seems to me the only things increasing the scale adds is a visual effect. If you apply the same scale increase to everything, it's functionally the same game. Doubling unit size results in double damage which is ok because the opponent's army size has doubled and so on. Nothing changes except the visuals.
That said, you can do whatever you want with your game. I'm sure there will be an epic format coming. But for tournament play I don't think I want the game to cost twice as much to produce/buy just so I can play the same game with 2x minis on the field otherwise.
16 hours ago, Dicewarrior said:Yes, VERY dissapointed in the scale. 10 - 15 mm would have been perfect for this genre, but "marketing research" shows that people like bigger models... (facepalm) What you haters don't realize is that 28mm+ is unwieldy for anything above skirmish scale. I used to play Warhammer Fantasy Battle and Warmaster - the latter was WAY more practical.
10-15 mm could be played on a 3' x 3' surface, same as x-wing, not to mention ease of transport. Not sure if pre-painted would be cost:profit viable, but could make it less daunting. Point is that smaller models allow for larger game-scale.
Anyone that doesn't like smaller scales, google "warmaster" and have a look at the painted armies people made, then think of how much better they'd look with current technology...
My hope is that they'll have an Armada equivalent for this genre..
Thanks for sharing.
15 hours ago, Dicewarrior said:Yes, VERY dissapointed in the scale. 10 - 15 mm would have been perfect for this genre, but "marketing research" shows that people like bigger models... (facepalm) What you haters don't realize is that 28mm+ is unwieldy for anything above skirmish scale. I used to play Warhammer Fantasy Battle and Warmaster - the latter was WAY more practical.
10-15 mm could be played on a 3' x 3' surface, same as x-wing, not to mention ease of transport. Not sure if pre-painted would be cost:profit viable, but could make it less daunting. Point is that smaller models allow for larger game-scale.
Anyone that doesn't like smaller scales, google "warmaster" and have a look at the painted armies people made, then think of how much better they'd look with current technology...
My hope is that they'll have an Armada equivalent for this genre..
Are you referring to a skirmish by FFG's explanation as a 100pt army or are you using your own opinion as to what a skirmish is to you? Because this game at the 200pt value is in no way unwieldy. Also at a smaller scale this game would be very different, wound system would not work unless you are removing each individual little dude or you have a few dudes on each of the base...which then would be even hard to differentiate and mark for the multi wound models. Now you also have a teeny tiny and less impressive ardus running around the board all tiny and crap...and in the topic of scale are we saying that the little guys actually represent a single soldier or the whole each guy represents 10 or 20 guys that seems to be sooo common in the 10mm game model.
I feel like the people upset about this game's 28mm scale are just wanting it to be a different game because honestly I don't think RMG would be anything similar to what it is now at a different scale, and what it is now is a **** fun rank and file game.
And yes I am a hater of smaller scale games because no matter what you show me they never look interesting, the Drop Zone and Drop Fleet games are the only exception but then I only find the non-infantry stuff in DZ interesting again. So other than me and people who share this opinion being haters, I think referring everyone with a preference that doesn't correspond with your own opinion as a hater is kind of a jerk move, most people prefer 28mm because it is what they are used to and don't really care one way or another about the other scales.
And finally they do have a tiny scale Armada type game, its called Armada...
It's definitely a catch 22 if you want to play competitively.. 'scale the game to whatever you want! It's ingenious because you CAN scale it up and down!' This is great.. but when you want to play competitively and the standard is 200 and you've been playing 300+ armies.. odds are you are going to be way out of your element compared to those who have been playing at the strict 200 point level. So I guess the short answer is, if you want to play competitively 200 is as good as it gets, if you want to play for fun then focus on scaling to 'epic' levels.
It's like in IA, I like to play double army size on the 4 player map, but this really throws me out of whack for the tournament legal army size/maps and completely changes how you would approach a mission with only half the troops. If I was playing it at a very high competitive level I would want to avoid the 'epic' games or just use them as a rare one off opportunity. Now if this is how I WANTED to play the game it creates an unfortunate situation where my competitive play dictates how I play the game as I'm stuck between a rune and a hard place (see what I did there? )
8 minutes ago, FrogTrigger said:It's definitely a catch 22 if you want to play competitively.. 'scale the game to whatever you want! It's ingenious because you CAN scale it up and down!' This is great.. but when you want to play competitively and the standard is 200 and you've been playing 300+ armies.. odds are you are going to be way out of your element compared to those who have been playing at the strict 200 point level. So I guess the short answer is, if you want to play competitively 200 is as good as it gets, if you want to play for fun then focus on scaling to 'epic' levels.
It's like in IA, I like to play double army size on the 4 player map, but this really throws me out of whack for the tournament legal army size/maps and completely changes how you would approach a mission with only half the troops. If I was playing it at a very high competitive level I would want to avoid the 'epic' games or just use them as a rare one off opportunity. Now if this is how I WANTED to play the game it creates an unfortunate situation where my competitive play dictates how I play the game as I'm stuck between a rune and a hard place (see what I did there?
Well, the game is balanced around 200.
There are war games out there that play to many different pts levels. Most of them are wildly unbalanced.
I play FFG because of this difference.
If people really need the giant battle itch scratched, there are plenty of other games to choose from.
unless we get some really expensive units to add in i think 200 is fine.
The board is reasonably packed with 400pts of models on the table. You cant leapfrog units in this game, or shoot through them (without a specific upgrade), so having too many walls of units would be a problem.
You might be able to get away with 250 and not really have a problem but i think if you went to 300+ and didnt increase the board size you'd constantly collide with your units.
3 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:unless we get some really expensive units to add in i think 200 is fine.
The board is reasonably packed with 400pts of models on the table. You cant leapfrog units in this game, or shoot through them (without a specific upgrade), so having too many walls of units would be a problem.
You might be able to get away with 250 and not really have a problem but i think if you went to 300+ and didnt increase the board size you'd constantly collide with your units.
i would say 300pt armies would be the max you could easily maneuver with out the game becoming RuneWars: The bumper car experience. Though really with heroes and upgrades you could probably scale past that with some clever list building
I for one totally love the smaller size compared to larger WFB games. Although to be honest, back in my WFB days I played Chaos (then Chaos Warriors when the army was split in 3), High Elves and Skaven. 2/3 of my armies were very low model count, especially if I used a Dragon or back in the days of Herohammer, when my Hero of Khorne with a Hydra Blade devoured entire units and my Chaos Knights with their 1+ armor save were functionally immune after the charge.
Anyway, aside from Skaven I don't think I've ever fielded more than 100 minis, and usually far less, if I'm remembering correctly usually in the 50-75 range. You may call that a skirmish instead of a full battle, but the fact remains that this game is at the higher end of minis per army among the big name games right now.
Additionally, I think smaller armies are also supported by the lore. The Runebound universe always struck me as very high fantasy, where one heroic warrior could literally change the world. Add to that the feeling I get that the Baronies and Free Cities are scattered and isolated, surrounded by VERY dangerous areas, and smaller forces seem to be the name of the game.
Waiqar may have near limitless reanimates, but he does have a limited supply of champions and generals.
Elves are...well elves. Small forces and limited numbers are always a thing for them in most settings.
The Daqan are explicitly stated in the lore guide as having nowhere near the numbers or might to take on the Uthuk if they returned in the same numbers they used to have, and also in the lore guide, Alcaran makes a really big deal over having 40 soldiers at his disposal in the watchtower. Rune Golems are also unique and irreplaceable resources. I'm not sure a barony or city (beyond the Citadel) could feasibly field a force larger than a couple hundred soldiers, and that would leave everything else totally defenseless.
It seems to me that the only army that could really field true hordes would be the Uthuk, and there are plenty of reasons that could explain why they can't. Maybe they are still recovering from their defeat, maybe they use portals to get here and only a certain number can go at a time, but one thing is for certain, in the lore book, a hundred Uthuk Warriors was an apocalyptic sign of something to come.
3 minutes ago, FatherTurin said:
Additionally, I think smaller armies are also supported by the lore. The Runebound universe always struck me as very high fantasy, where one heroic warrior could literally change the world. Add to that the feeling I get that the Baronies and Free Cities are scattered and isolated, surrounded by VERY dangerous areas, and smaller forces seem to be the name of the game.
Waiqar may have near limitless reanimates, but he does have a limited supply of champions and generals.
Elves are...well elves. Small forces and limited numbers are always a thing for them in most settings.
The Daqan are explicitly stated in the lore guide as having nowhere near the numbers or might to take on the Uthuk if they returned in the same numbers they used to have, and also in the lore guide, Alcaran makes a really big deal over having 40 soldiers at his disposal in the watchtower. Rune Golems are also unique and irreplaceable resources. I'm not sure a barony or city (beyond the Citadel) could feasibly field a force larger than a couple hundred soldiers, and that would leave everything else totally defenseless.
It seems to me that the only army that could really field true hordes would be the Uthuk, and there are plenty of reasons that could explain why they can't. Maybe they are still recovering from their defeat, maybe they use portals to get here and only a certain number can go at a time, but one thing is for certain, in the lore book, a hundred Uthuk Warriors was an apocalyptic sign of something to come.
Even Waiqar doesn't have unlimited reanimates.
They grind the bones of fallen Deathborn and use them to make more reanimates. They can make a few thousand from each Deathborn, yes, but every few thousand reanimates comes at the cost of an incredibly potent warrior with hundreds of years of experience under his belt.
4 minutes ago, FatherTurin said:I for one totally love the smaller size compared to larger WFB games. Although to be honest, back in my WFB days I played Chaos (then Chaos Warriors when the army was split in 3), High Elves and Skaven. 2/3 of my armies were very low model count, especially if I used a Dragon or back in the days of Herohammer, when my Hero of Khorne with a Hydra Blade devoured entire units and my Chaos Knights with their 1+ armor save were functionally immune after the charge.
I, personally, don't understand whatever gratification people get from fielding armies with an insane number of troops. I get nothing from trying to re-create the more absurd CGI sequences from the Lord of the Rings. I prefer my individual units mean more, and my decisions carry more weight.
Moreover, I'm baffled that people look at a game built to a certain scale and complain that the game wasn't made personally, with them in mind. Those games exist. Go play them. Stop trying to make all games your game.
I really could have gone either way with model size. I've painted 28 mm for Imperial Assault and 15 mm (I think) for Runewars (boardgame). I just finished my neutral Runewars (boardgame) figures over the weekend. The painted 15 mm guys look fantastic when painted. I'm super excited to play another game of Runewars (boardgame) and think it could have been just as exciting using those models for armies in this game. But I'm not disappointed with the 28 mm scale, either. As long as I'm getting tactical miniatures combat in the vibrant realm of Terrinoth, I'm good.
3 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:the vibrant realm of Terrinoth
It's just nice to read these words. Seems like all I hear is "hurr durr generic fantasy", as if the vast majority of fantasy everything doesn't conform to certain tropes.
Personally, I think Terrinoth has a lot of potential, and a good flavor.
10 minutes ago, Tvayumat said:It's just nice to read these words. Seems like all I hear is "hurr durr generic fantasy", as if the vast majority of fantasy everything doesn't conform to certain tropes.
Personally, I think Terrinoth has a lot of potential, and a good flavor.
As a new to the world player I find it interesting and different enough, I feel like a lot of people just hear elves/dwarves/undead and think well this is tropey, without looking into the meat of lore, and it really doesn't take that much lore starting to make it unique...just the few darknesses/wars and the creation of the runes made this world unique enough for me to find it interesting, but that may be after growing up on a bunch of books written about a variety of DnD campaign settings you just learn that there is a lot more the a world than just the basic visuals.
On 1/31/2017 at 2:51 PM, Obscene said:Oathsworn: Formation 1: 5 ppm Formation 2: 4.25 ppm Formation 3: 5.5 ppm Formation 4: 4.89 ppm
Rune Golem: Formation 1: 17 ppm Formation 2: 14 ppm Formation 3: 12.5 ppm Formation 4: 12.3 ppm
Spearmen: Formation 1: 2.25 ppm Formation 2: 1.875 ppm Formation 3: 1.67 Formation 4: 1.63 ppmCarrion Lancer: Formation 1: 15 ppm Formation 2: 13.5 ppm Formation 3: 11.5 ppm Formation 4: 11.3 ppm
Reanimate Archers: Formation 1: 2.25 ppm Formation 2: 2 ppm Formation 3: 1.875 ppm
Reanimates: Formation 1: 2 ppm Formation 2: 1.625 ppm Formation 3: 1.458 ppm Formation 4: 1.388 ppm Formation 5: 1.333 ppm
Oathsworn not getting cheaper is pretty interesting. Probably has to do with they are pretty hardcore damage/toughness wise.
I think you're paying for the upgrade slot.
i get more of a satisfaction fielding a giant model than i do fielding a ton of models....
The few times ive put my Ta'unar on the table for 40k i had a massive grin on my face the whole game lol...such a big model
On 1/31/2017 at 10:34 PM, Muz333 said:
18 points for two trays of archers.
34(I think) points for the two trays of cavalry.
2x1 = 20 points
2x2 = 34 points
2x6 = 66 points
3x3 = 88 points
Man, I really must get started painting, it looks so good!
