Jonathan Bruton
United Kingdom
Bordon
Hampshire
-
I have had this for a week now and demoed it over the weekend at UK Game Expo. Managed to keep hold of the demo copy. I was initially unsure whether I wanted it seeing the game was coming out. I have not read the books and own Battle Cry, Memoir 44 and Battlelore. My worry was it would be just a tweak to the system in a setting which was not a draw for me. The fact I was very keen to keep the copy is testament to the quality of the game.
I will structure this write up to focus on the components, the rules and then gameplay impressions.
The Components
Very good, not as good as Battle Lore but still excellent. The figures are detailed, very few spears or lances were not straight, and having Lannister as red and Stark white makes identifying who owns which units a breeze. It is also nice to have more variety of units (Lannister has two different flavours of infantry plus archers for example). Unfortunately, there is a note in the box saying some figures may need glueing. After a nightmare first play with bases constantly falling off I ended up glueing all 138 figures to their bases! The thick card of the banners was also peeling in some cases. The board has subtle centre dots in the hexes to aid LOS and the two sides have slightly different orientation of the hexes. Counters are Fantasy Flight plentiful and good thick card. The cards are good quality, but older viewers did complain about the small text on a few. Rules are standard Fantasy Flight quality although the layout is not as clear as Memoir or Battle Lore. There is even a section on craeting your own scenarios a bit like a cut down Call of Arms for Battle Lore. Overall, the game looks excellent and gripes are minor.
The Rules
The game is now a round based game with orders issued by tokens or commanders via cards - no flanks or centre. The game is round based with the following structure:
1 Rally Phase
Determine advantage (who plays the first order each turn) - set initially by the scenario, it is then decided by whoever had the most command unused from the previous turn. Early in the game it is unlikely to change, but later when there are less units and going first can be vital there is scope to tussle for this.
Refresh Commanders - retrieve command tokens from commanders
Rally Units - Ready units for the turn. When units are ordered their flags are rotated to show they have been used. In this phase flags need to be reorientated for the new round. This was so fiddly, we found it easier to place a token by each unit that was ordered and remove the tokens in this phase.
2 Marshalling Phase
Receive order tokens - Each scenario specifies a number of dice to roll. Order tokens matching the faces rolled are obtained. The dice have three green, two blue, one red, one gauntlett (valour) and one morale faces. Thus you can see the tokens will be skewed to give more orders to green and blue units. They are also used in combat, so green units are also easier to hit.
Draw Leadership Cards - Each scenario specifies a number of cards to draw. A deck is formed for each house in set up of ten base cards and five cards specific to each commander being used in the scenario.
A single Leadership card and order token can be saved from a previous round in addition to the roll/draw.
3 Command Phase (players alternate orders starting with the player with Advantage)
There are three choices - Use an Order Token, play a Leadership Card or Pass
Use an Order Token - Play a coloured token to order a unit of matching colour banner. The gauntlett (valour) token or two identical tokens can be used to order a unit of any colour. The unit ordered can be anywhere on the battlefield. The morale token is used to increase a House's morale, or at a cost of one morale, can rally a unit (allow it to be ordered again in the round. The morale tokens can be crucial and should be used wisely.
Play a Leadership Card - These are more powerful than the tokens but have more restrictions. Typically, they order two or more units and some have additional 'tactics'. These tactics are condition specific and can be very useful. The restriction in the cards is that they have to be played via commanders. Each commander has a number of command points and as these are used command markers are added to the commanders card. Commanders have a zone of command of two hexes and any units ordered by cards can only be within this zone. The effect of this is that units tend to move on mass or regroup to stay within a leader's ZOC. There are also cards which allow all units to rally within a ZOC, this is powerful but you need to be careful that having rallied them there are still orders available. Some cards have two commands on them which requires two markers placed on the commander.
Pass - once you have passed your opponent continues playing orders until they also pass, you cannot make any further orders.
Ordered units all move then all attack like the previous games - I will detail combat later. They are marked to show they are inactive for the rest of the round unless rallied.
4 Regroup Phase
Resolve status/Score Victory Points/Check Victory Conditions - Get points, has someone won?
Discard Excess Resources - Discard down to one Order Token and oneLeadership Card.
Recover Morale - Some Morale can be regained for free. Morale is on a single scale and is affected by losing units or playing tokens. Some of the tactics cards depend on morale conditions. It can also be a victory condition.
Advance Round Marker - the scenarios are played over a set number of rounds.
Combat
This is very similar to the other games, roll a set number of dice and hit on coloured symbols which match the targets banner (and normally gauntletts), flags cause retreats. Line of Site is the same, as are terrain restrictions. There are three main changes. The distribution of the dice changes the value of units, stronger ranks are proportionally harder to hit as well as rolling more dice. The units have key attributes and units with a commander gain the commander's attributes in addition. Bold is now called stalwart and it is possible for single units to be stalwart. Commanders can only be killed once the rest of the unit has been killed and need to take multiple hits in a single attck to be captured themselves. The biggets change is down to engagement rules. A unit which attacks an enemy becomes engaged with that unit. This is marked with a token of the attacking house's colour. If there is no token on either unit this is straightforward. If there is a token already between the two it is replaced with the attacking house's token if necessary. If the defending unit is already engaged with another unit and has a token of its colour between them, the token is removed and replaced with a token of the attcking players house between the attacking and defending units. If there is a token of the attacking players colour between the defending unit and another unit, the attack becomes a flanking attack. Flanking attacks are allowed to reroll misses of one symbol to try to obtain more hits. This rule was one of the hardest to unpick from the rules! Disengaging to move away or attack a different unit allows the unit being disengaged from a free attack. Another interesting point is that counter attacks are not provoked from archers firing from an adjacant hex, only melee units.
Gameplay
Battles of Westeros takes the simplicity of the previous games and completely overhauls the order system. This gives, in my opinion, a slightly more complex but much more satisfying experience. I ahve onle played the first scenario so far - having played or helped others for ten games. The results have been five wins for each house, with all the games very close. There is much more control of what you want to do but still has the charm of the draw of the cards and roll of the dice for possible orders. The commanders are strong and give more flexibility, they all have special abilities plus a once per game ability. Battles seem to flow and there is never the sight of units sitting isolated on the board because there were not the cards to order them or it was not the best move to do so. Because the game is more about objectives and plays over a set number of turns there seems much more focus. In the first scenario Stark has 8 units to Lannisters 9 and has to prevent Lannister advancing to hold two positions at the end of the fifth turn. Early on it is much about maximising your orders (three cards and four dice rules per round), later it is about quality as the units are eliminated. There tends to be a rolling battle between Lannister's supporting cavalry and Stark's reinforcements. This is while Stark's archers try to stem the advance of Lannisters blue infantry nearer the objectives. Although no official multiplayer rules there was much discussion about how a commander could be taken each, allowing up to four players.
I cannot really comment on how well it fits the books but will give my impressions of the commanders in the first scenario.
Rickard Karstark - a tank! His unit is the rallying point for Stark and hard to eliminate.
Maege Mormont - solid, dependable and tough. Brings up the reserves and links well in the later game. Not as influential directly as Karstark.
Addam Marbrand - Brings in the cavalry. His best ability is his sneaky use of terrain to take unexpected moves. He can win a game without your opponent seeing what is coming.
Kevan Lannister - Solid and inspires other units to huge acts of bravery. He is key to inspiring the massive attack.
Overall, the game is great - it has overcome my scepticism and takes a well deserved place in my collection. I have rated it an 8 (my average game rating on the Geek is 6.11, and I have rated 62 out of 640 games rated 8 or higher)
-
Sean
United States
Bothell
Washington
-
Thanks for this decently thorough-yet-brief report. Like you, I have never read the books. This doesn't seem to have affected your appreciation of the game. Would you predict this would be typically true for everyone who hasn't read the series?
-
Ed Browne
United States
Terre Haute
Indiana
-
Harrelson wrote: Thanks for this decently thorough-yet-brief report. Like you, I have never read the books. This doesn't seem to have affected your appreciation of the game. Would you predict this would be typically true for everyone who hasn't read the series?
I can predict that. It is a great game on its own. Being familiar with the characters from reading the fiction is just icing on the cake (or fodder for those who will want to argue for/against their favorite/least favorite leader).
-
Leo Zappa
United States
Aliquippa
Pennsylvania
-
Good review of a highly anticipated title - thanks. One thought - do you think it fair to assume that the issues you experienced with the components (e.g. glue required for the bases, peeling of tokens) is primarily representative of yours being a demo copy versus a final commercial copy that one might buy once the game is fully released?
-
Mike Siggins
England
Cambridge
-
I wish I had spotted you at Expo. Wanted to try this one.
Were you at Esdevium?
Thanks for the write up. Very useful.
-
Geoff H
United States
Durham
North Carolina
-
Could you tell us how many scenarios came with the base game?
Thanks,
Geoff
-
-
thanks for the great review - can you update it with thoughts from the other scenarios as you get a chance to play them?
-
Jonathan Bruton
United Kingdom
Bordon
Hampshire
-
I was part of the demo team for Esdevium. Battles of Westeros was out between the delve in the dwarven forge dungeon and K9 and the Tardis. Shame, I would had loved to have had a chat with Mike Siggins!
-
Jonathan Bruton
United Kingdom
Bordon
Hampshire
-
The copy I have is a release copy. The note about figures in the box I suspect means bases are probably going to be iffy in a number of sets.
-
-
Thanks Jonathan for your great review.
What is the average game time for this scenario?
-
Jonathan Bruton
United Kingdom
Bordon
Hampshire
-
Each time I had to explain rules - game time was about 60-75 minutes after explanation.
-
-
It seems reasonable for an intro scenario.
Another question (sorry to bother you, but I think is the price for being so a lucky owner  ). Are the different levels of the units so decisive in combat? In other words: with the eight sided dice, are the red units harder and more valuable than in Battlelore?
-
Jonathan Bruton
United Kingdom
Bordon
Hampshire
-
It is much harder to hit the units as they progress in rank. Blue units are noticably more valuable than green for example. Infantry ignore all gauntletts against cavalry rather than just the first in Battlelore. This makes green cavalry stronger than they otherwise would have been
-
-
jonathan bruton wrote: Infantry ignore all gauntletts against cavalry rather than just the first in Battlelore. This makes green cavalry stronger than they otherwise would have been
Any infantry? I think spear, pike and polearms infantry should have an advantage over cavalry. Don't they have got any bonuses vs mounted?
-
Barry Kendall
United States
Lebanon
Pennsylvania
-
Harrelson wrote: Thanks for this decently thorough-yet-brief report. Like you, I have never read the books. This doesn't seem to have affected your appreciation of the game. Would you predict this would be typically true for everyone who hasn't read the series?
I just finished the fourth book in the series, and have yet to see a really detailed battle description. One gets a fair sense of various characters' leadership abilities on the battlefield--only fair, mind you--but there are no detailed tactical accounts of entire engagements.
For those familiar with a comparison, Terry Goodkind's "Sword of Truth" series has a number of battle depictions that are far more thorough in describing unit organization and equipment, tactics, battle maneuvers, rallying, etc. than anything in Martin.
I plan to buy BoW, but not because of the thematic tie-in. I like Richard Borg's system and think the command developments in BoW look interesting as a set of mechanics for a playable medieval board-battle system.
No one who hasn't read the books will be deprived in the matter of enjoying BoW, unless one really wants to know the details of this or that Leader's background, and although some "special units" are included to represent various Houses' characteristics (Lannister Heavy Infantry, Stark wolf master), clearly in some instances (Starks, in this case), these units are more gestures to book "flavor" than reflective of that House's Order of Battle.
Thanks for a good preview/review.
-
Jonathan Bruton
United Kingdom
Bordon
Hampshire
-
Infantry do not hit as well against cavalry. As units have abilities, this may change with the expansion. Currently there are units with the Battle Lore medieval tactics, also units which melee or attack at short range if they do not move, and units which can start fires!
-
Sean
United States
Bothell
Washington
-
Barry Kendall wrote:
I like Richard Borg's system and think the command developments in BoW look interesting as a set of mechanics for a playable medieval board-battle system.
Yes, this is my interest in the game also and why I asked my question. It also makes me wonder if FFG will apply this new (quasi-BattleLore) system to other contexts - fictional or non-fictional.
Per these discussions I'm beginning to feel confident that I'd like BoW despite the books. But I'm also pretty sure I'd like this new system applied to other settings I'm more familiar with even better, e.g. Middle-Earth or historical medieval warfare.
-
Peter Pariseau
United States
Tulsa
Oklahoma
-
Very nice review, I feel like I understand how the game works and how it differs from Battlelore. As I wanted to know more about both of those aspects, thanks for writing up the review!
It sounds that this is a better representation of medieval combat and battle than Battlelore, though it lacks the magic/warcouncil aspect, which we've found adds some silly fun.
My problems is that I don't care for the Martin series, the setting, the characters, the whole shebang. I'm annoyed that I invested the time in that I did, and I won't buy anything with that theme. My point is, if this had the 100 Years War setting added to it, or even any late-15th century historical setting (Wars of the Roses, Italian wars, etc.), I would be all over it after reading this review.
Cm'on, FFG, gives us something real to play at!
Edits:
It occurs to me that if FFG did the remake of Battlelore based on this system, I'd re-purchase it in a second! Or an expansion for this one that adds the historically-based BL scenarios might get me to overcome my scruples and buy both this one and the historical an expansion.
-
-
Peter Pariseau wrote:
It occurs to me that if FFG did the remake of Battlelore based on this system, I'd re-purchase it in a second! Or an expansion for this one that adds the historically-based BL scenarios might get me to overcome my scruples and buy both this one and the historical an expansion.
You could probably just download the rules once the game is out and implement most of the changes in battlelore yourself.
eg:
* get a few eight sided dice and add the colors/symbols to them
* ignore the Left/Right/Center limitations on sections and treat all "section" cards as if they were "inspired leadership" cards
* make some markers to use to activate units that aren't next to a leader
etc.
-
Nils Ropertz
Germany
Aachen
Nordrhein Westfalen
-
gheintze wrote: Could you tell us how many scenarios came with the base game?
The base game contains 10 scenarios.
UlyZed wrote:
Funny, I wouldn't even be looking at this twice if it was otherwise-themed.
Then I fear you're in for some disappointment because the theme is paper-thin in my opinion. I don't even recall many of the leaders and unit types in this game from the books (Stark using war dogs in combat etc.). And let's be frankly, the books weren't about the battles. Like the Wars of the Roses, which the books are based on, the battles were mostly decisive and one-sided, or only recalled in a brief notion without much detail. So really nothing to create a fun game around. While my first impression of the game was positive, I never thought "Man, this feels just like the books". So if the theme really is the only thing that makes you look at this game, have a play before buying.
-
Franklin Turner
United States
Fultondale
Alabama
-
To get the feel of the books (with their focus on geopolitics) you should look at the other FFG games A Game of Thrones and A Game of Thrones: The Card Game
-
Michael Denman
United States
Katy
Texas
-
I suppose FFG could have gone with other themes, but Westeros seems to be the smart move right now. Besides it's built-in audience, the TV series will hit HBO this fall and having a lot of product connected to that would seem to be good marketing.
-
Michael Denman
United States
Katy
Texas
-
tech7 wrote: Trump wrote: I suppose FFG could have gone with other themes, but Westeros seems to be the smart move right now. Besides it's built-in audience, the TV series will hit HBO this fall and having a lot of product connected to that would seem to be good marketing. I did not like the game. But imo the Westeros theme fits, imo, much better than Battlelores Uchronia.
I should hope so!  They aren't the same game. BoW is more into tactics and leadership. The Westeros theme matches up to that well. But Westeros limits them as far as adding high fantasy elements. Perhaps they're considering another related line tied into the Runebound theme so that they can cater to the fantasy elements more.
-
Björn Fink
Germany
Münster
-
Well there are Dragons and Undead and the "others"...Fantasy enough for me...
-
-
SpaceButler wrote: gheintze wrote: Could you tell us how many scenarios came with the base game? The base game contains 10 scenarios.
Does anyone know what the 10 scenarios are that come with the game? I'm curious to see if they're all from "the game of thrones" or if they're mixing it up with events that happen before the books start or if they're using other books events. If they're all from "game of thrones" then i'd guess we'll see a "clash of kings", "storm of swords", etc expansions as well as additional houses being added.
-
|
|
Posted Mon Jun 7, 2010 11:32 pm
