First Test of Honour Batch Done, More to Go

I finally finish a few Test of Honour models. And it occurred to me that these are the first of ANY models I have work on and consider done (I still need to matte finish the models but otherwise they are done). There are lots of things I would like to improve on them but nevertheless I'm happy to actually have something done. Given that I have a convention to go to tomorrow, I still have a lot of work to do. I just wanted to show off my current progress now. I will talk more about them in the end of the month review.

These are my spearmen group and sergrant. The tray and bases are meant to invoke a battle aura. The empty tray is for my bowmen group that I'm still working on. I'm happy with how the colors came out. That was pretty much exactly what I had in mind. The poses and some of the details, not so much.

*edit* And they are all broken! I applied matte finish to them and while they were drying a high wind blew them apart. One of the bases have disappeared. Very disappointed but I'm also running out of time. Will post updates later.

Bows Vs Muskets: Test of Honour

I've probably played between 20 and 30 games of Test of Honour so far and in the vast majority of those games I used bows over muskets. I did play one game with muskets and I quickly saw the advantages and disadvantages of them. If you are interested in getting into Test of Honour but are unsure which range unit to make, I will give you my recommended base on what role you want your range guys to fill.

Before I can start my comparison, I need to go into the odds of success for 2 dice pools. I don't like it when people try to break down tabletop games like its a math problem to be solved. But in this case I think knowing the odds is a must to understand the trade offs between bows and muskets. Especially since the game uses unique dices. Again to succeed at any test in the game you need to roll 3 swords. The game uses 6 sided die which has a single sword on 2 sides and 2 swords on a third side. With a pool of 3 dice you have a 33% or a 1 in 3 chance of succeeding. With a 4 dice pool your chance of succeeding is 52%. Assuming my calculations is correct.

The first thing I want to say in my comparison is that I'm not including other units that can affect the efficiency of range units such as the Sergeant of Archery and the Oda Nobunaga special character. The stats of commoners are quite similar. In fact the stats of single non commander commoners are exactly the same. There is a little difference between commoner groups but for the purpose of this discussion I'm going to consider them the same. So with the men having the same stats, the difference between the two range units is in the stats of bow and muskets themselves. The bow has a range of 24 inches and 3 dice for damage up to 12 inches away, 2 dice more than 12 inches. Muskets has a range of 20 inches and 4 dice for damage. Muskets also need a turn to reload after every shot.

The way I see it, range units can be used in two ways: suppression and sniping. Suppression is used when targeting units that has not acted yet. This will (assuming you hit) force the enemy to lose actions by dodging. Sniping is when you target units that has already acted with the purpose of taking them out. Between the two I prefer using range units for suppression. With commoner groups being exceptionally hard to take out and samurais having multiple actions and good chances at dodging, trying to reduce your opponent's actions comes up more often and therefore is more useful than trying to snipe an unit. If suppression the goal, then bows are superior to muskets in achieving that goal. The reason for this is because you want to hit as often as possible. Bows longer range and ability to be use every turns makes them ideal for this. Muskets only advantage over bows is better damage. Single commoners have 3 dice to hit their target. That means Musketman only has a 1 in 3 chance to hit something every other turn. That is a really bad ratio for trying to deny your opponent actions and too unreliable to count on musket's damage as a backup. Granted bows has the same lousy hit chance with bowman but they has the benefit of being every turn. Commoner groups has 4 dices to hit, making them much more likely to land shots. With commoner groups, musket's higher damage has some worth. Bows do not have the power to reliable to take out units unless the target has a few light wounds. Still, for the reasons given above I prefer bows, in particular bowmen groups. And its the reason why both Tracy and myself have almost exclusively played with bows.

As I've said, suppression is one of two ways I can see using range unit. While suppression seems like the better option to me and fits my play style more, I haven't played enough to know if one style is truly better. If your goal is to snipe, then muskets are the better option. With 4 dices, muskets has a better than a coin flip chance at taking units out. It is almost laughable the number of times I've seen someone hit with an arrow and survive. If you want to use muskets then I would suggest trying to pack as many commoners into your list. Increasing the total number of commoner actions in the game will raise the chance your musketmen will a reload turn. You also need to play around targeting issues and get as many clear shots as possible. Range units can not shot if a friendly model is hindering (in the way) their view. A tactic I was thinking about involves using melee units to charge in and remove actions so the muskets can finish the target. Samurais would be ideal as they would have the extra actions to then move out of the way in the same turn. I don't know how viable this will be but in my mind to proper use muskets would require some aspect of this.

It is almost becoming a standard that as I write these articles on tactics, I think of something new to add that never occurred to me when I started. I came to this topic thinking it was an either/or choice. When making a list in Test of Honour, I figure you would either have bows or muskets for your range options. And if someone took more than one range unit, I just assume would be the same type. It now occurred to me that you could take both, bows to remove enemy actions and muskets to finish them off. I would caution against investing in too many points in range if you decided to get both. Melee units are useful because melee weapon's critical success abilities are stronger than range ones and they can quickly change the flow of battle. Having a mix of both range and melee units will give a list the flexibility to deal with whatever the opponent has to offer. Of course everyone play style is different so to truly find out what is for you is to test out the various options yourself. I am sure I will revisit this topic as there are many things I still want to try in the game, I want to play against a wider range of play styles and there is new expansions on the way. For now I hope I was able to offer something of value to you. Thanks for reading and see ya next time.

Topic of the Week - 40k 8th Edition and You

With the newest edition of Warhammer 40k around the corner, Vince decided to do a Topic of the Week on our feelings on 40K itself. Whether you have left the game a long time ago and are considering coming back to it now, or you are a current fan and have thoughts on the new set or you never played it but you are thinking about starting now, Vince wants us discuss which camp we are in and why. For me, I was already considering coming back to 40k before I even heard of the new edition. Now I'm thinking it's a pretty good time to come back.

I've started my war gaming hobby with 40k 4th edition. While I left sometime in 5th edition, I still have fond memories of playing both editions. In fact I still remember a big event at my local gaming store at the time. The plan was to have a megabattle, including any player who showed up (I think about 30 or 40 people did), that starting with using the 4 edition rules and later switching to 5th edition at midnight. Things did not go to plan and frankly it was a mess. Nevertheless it was an enjoyable experience for me. Eventually I did leave 40k for Warhammer Fantasy. I think what separates me from others whom left 40k is the fact there was nothing about 40k itself that push me away. I didn't hate the new edition at the time (I think I was pretty neutral towards it) nor was I upset at Games Workshop and decided to boycott 40k. I simply enjoy fantasy more than science fiction and a group of players brought Warhammer Fantasy to my attention. I had limited resources so I put all my effort into the fantasy side and quietly quit 40k.

Though I gave up playing the war game, I didn't leave the setting itself. Part of the reason for this was that in Fantasy I was only playing a single army, Chaos. From time to time I would browse other army lines in both Fantasy and 40k to look for stuff I could convert into my Chaos force. In addition to that, I got into a pen and paper Deathwatch game. That game lasted over a year when it got disbanded for other reasons. I also continued to constantly hear about 40k from one friend whom kept playing the war game and another friend continued to collect the 40k RPG books. For all these reasons my thoughts never left the setting for long. There was even a time where I very briefly return to the war game. I played 2 games in 6th edition but I had no enthusiasm in it. It was more of an choir than fun so I gave it up again. I didn't put much thought into why I had no interest in 40k anymore. I suppose at the time I chalked it up to be not wanting to get up early Saturday morning to play as that was the only time those friends could play. Reflecting back on it now, I don't think that was the reason. Instead I think it was the same reason I cleanly quit 40k the first time, a reason I didn't know about until now.

There were 3 armies I was interested in when I first played 40k; Witch Hunters/Sisters of Battle, Eldar and Blood Angels. I had limited funds but I had pick up something in all 3 armies during this time. I had to proxy whenever I played Sisters of Battle because I never own enough models. I was fortunate to have a friend whom own over 5,000 points of Eldar so I could almost play anything I want using his model. He has since moved on with his life and I no longer have access to his models. Blood Angels was the one army I could play without proxying because I brought a large force from another friend. They are beautifully painted, far better than what I can do. Yet I have rarely used them. I think because they were not my vision of what I wanted my Blood Angels to look like, I subconsciously didn't want to use them. It took a long time coming but eventually in fantasy I got to the point where I could play a large game without proxying and only using models I put together myself. The first time it happen I was almost overwhelm with pride. It was never something I thought would matter that much, but it did. And it was something I never had in 40k. More than anything else, I think that is what pushed me away from the game.

That said, if there is one thing I really miss about playing 40k then its the Sisters of Battle. I still like Eldar and Blood Angels but my level of interest in them isn't enough to compete with my current projects. But Sisters is a different story. Even when I had no interest in coming back to 40k, I sometimes consider picking up a few Sisters of Battle models to paint up just because. But the true trigger has been my friend Phil whom being trying harder than ever this year to get me to come back to 40k. He has provided me with the resources to learn how Sisters currently work and introduce me to local players who are more knowledgeable to answer my questions about the state of the game and Sisters of Battle. He talks about the Kill-Team scenario which allows you to play with very few minis. I tried to resist at first because I figure I just had too many other games I'm currently trying to play. Yet Phil knew exactly how to provoke me and the handful of unassembled Sisters of Battle models I still own in storage were calling to me. My willpower eventually vanish and I started looking into how to get back into 40k. And as if right on cue Games Workshop release Adeptus Custodes and Sisters of Silence, two mini-forces that I've been interested in their fluff and never thought they would ever have actual models. Adeptus Custodes have a history with the creation of Sisters of Battle, and the Sister of Silence have a theme similar to the Battle Sisters. Sisters of Silence were also briefly in "Faith & Fire", the only Warhammer novel that I own. Given that 40k now allows you to mix armies together, (I know this is old news, but it wasn't around the last time I played) making a Sisters of Battle/Sisters of Silence/Adeptus Custodes army would make sense thematically.

And it is at this point I first heard about a new edition! For me this comes at the best possible time. I have no connection to the current rule set so any rule changes won't bother me. I'm mostly okay with the Age of Sigmar rule system so having 40k changes to be more similar to it is a positive. With a new edition means a new meta that everyone will be learning at the same time. That will put me in the same position as everybody else. Despite not knowing many details, I am quite excited about 40k 8th edition. It will have to get in line as I have committed myself to playing Team Yankee, Test of Honour, Age of Sigmar and Relic Knights. However one thing this hobby and even this year have taught me, priorities can change quick!

Topic of the Week Video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMt-yykKcLI

Progress Review #3

I will make this one quick. In April I got a few Test of Honour models done, a little more than half of what I'm planning on using at the upcoming tournament. What I got done is a group of bowmen, a mounted archer, sergeant of archery and Widow Takeda Naoko special character which I'm using as a normal mounted samurai. Naoko was glued down but she was dropped in my first game with her and broke off. I haven't repaired her yet because I'm thinking its going to be easier to paint her like this. My progress slowed during the second half of the month when I had trouble deciding on what to do about the bases. I dislike terrain on bases but at the same time I don't want plain or unpainted bases either. Now that I have an idea on what to do, I can finish my tournament force and maybe start on my Oda force. I'm not going to make any predictions on what I will get done this month as I seem to be bad at them. What I can say is that I'm planning on getting a lot done this month, what exactly is kind of up in the air.