Bell of Lost Souls - Latest Comments in REVIEW: War of the Ring

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Pete Mancini — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:50:42 -0000

Very good review! I like the way you interleaved the photos with the game review. I was not a big fan of Warhammer fantasy but I do like 40K. I've always been interested in Middle-Earth but I never bought into the strategy game until this came out. I've been picking up painted armies somewhat cheaply on ebay (though the amount of damage on the typical army got that way will turn you off to that approach pretty quickly) and I am gearing up to do Osgiliath. When I first saw it in the films I knew I just had to do the Fantasy Stalingrad!

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

fedupN — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 12:58:32 -0000

Always been a large Tolkien fan. The game, however, never grabbed me. Too much focus on heroes, too few models out there, and I didn't like the way the turns played out and how you moved units and such. Also, we know how the story ends! ;) Also...TINY TINY models....so very tiny.
In the end, it was simply not enough to justifty an investment of time and money.
This new game and the review though, has kindled my interest. A slimmed down Warhammer Fantasy movement ruleset? Sounds like potential to me.
I hope to see it played, maybe borrow an army and give it a whirl. Thanks for the review!

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

abwoopwoop2 — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:12:36 -0000

been playing SBG since their strategy battle game sin middle earth...i look forward to using my hundreds of goblins, uruks, orcs, MTs and Rohirim...SBG is a good game, never understood why people said it was bad...Anyway, WOTR'll show them what they've been missing

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

abwoopwoop2 — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:08:26 -0000

they are grouped in. Rare formation, but turns into legendary with angbor in it. Seems pretty good value for two handed weapons and furious charge, at 30/per company...

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Reinholt — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 14:20:48 -0000

The allies thing also eliminates one of the major problems that plagues both 40k and Fantasy:

Flavor of the Month power lists. Even if the armies have incremental books that come out later detailing them further, as long as you can take 25% from somewhere else, you're in great shape. In short, if your list has weaknesses, you can cover them with other units from other lists. More so, a lot of those choices are at least decently reasonable with regards to background.

I think it's an extremely smart move from a game design perspective, and also a good way to sell a lot more miniatures.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

wobin — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 02:25:35 -0000

I went to my local store today. Talked to a few chaps about war of the ring. This game looks really good. I never delved into LoTR miniatures before but i really want to now!

It is really cool that you can pick a force and can have 25%(?) of allies. That means that if there are some models you like you can take them in your army even if they are mordor instead of isenguard or whatever. That, and the everything in the one book makes this game a very appealing option. Throw in fast and exciting gameplay, awesome models and you really can't go wrong can you?

Not to mention it looks relatively cheap to build an army... c'mon saturday!!!!!!

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Crisis_Core — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:36:51 -0000

This game looks absolutely amazing, and I'm glad I decided to stay with LOTR:SBG from the beginning because it's really worth seeing the impact that it'll now have on the GW gaming community.

The great thing about WOTR is that now none of the WOTR players have an excuse to not try out SBG - they have all the mini's they need to play! Get the main rulebook, a supplement for the race your playing in WOTR, and perhaps Legions and your set!

Once again, there are some fantastic LOTR sites out there at the moment:

one-ring.co.uk - the site has been revamped and is looking better than ever, and has added a WOTR sub-forum to cater to all you WOTR players. It has an excellent community, not to mention an awesome painting compeition, and a huge amount of articles for gaming, terrain, and painting.

thelastalliance.com - been there since the start, not much has changed round there though, no WOTR section yet, but some useful info there all the same.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Rob — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 20:20:18 -0000

Don't worry they're in there under the realm of Gondor, and holy crap are they good. They're basically knights with lances, but on foot, lol.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Desert Rat — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:54:55 -0000

Lamedom is classed under the fiefdoms in SBG, and so pretty much under Gondor. Haven't seen the WOTR book though, so I'd assume with quite a bit of certainty that they'd be grouped with Gondor.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Brother Armand — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:02:19 -0000

Anybody have a clue if the forces of Lamedon are represented at all would they just be lumped in as generic Gondor/Arnor?

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

LEGION3000 — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:09:42 -0000

I second Thelastilliance.com Great website that I have been visiting since the beginning.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Forhekset — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 05:55:20 -0000

Well, we had Epic, BFG and others before, so it's not like they havn't already been there and done that and given up.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

bill&ted — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 19:41:51 -0000

Once again - one-ring.co.uk

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Herbalicious — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 19:40:52 -0000

Um, yeah, that's not it.

one-ring.co.uk is the site you are thinking of.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Angelic Despot — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 19:19:52 -0000

There are two ways around this I think:

One is to play 'counter-factual'. Pick a story event and assume that it something different happened. And then work out with your opponents what would likely have happened then. That will give you a lot of fun opportunities.
For example: Borromir wins the arguement, and the Fellowship decide to go south, around the Misty Mountains, through the gap or Rohan and Saruman's territory instead of through Moria. That could have changed everything. Yout then just have to work out interesting scenarios to play.

You could also do this at the height of the war: Assume Gollum captured the ring from Frodo some time while they were going through the marshes. No-one else knows this. Gollum runs away and hides. There are still going to be a lot of big battles, and the outcome is not going to be certain at all.

The other way is to pick a time after the Lord of the Rings. Say, 60 years after the Return of the King, one of the other 'nameless horrors' in the depths of the world raises an army, manufactures some orcs etc.

I really do know what you mean about being put off by the story. But with a bit of effort, you can create a whole new story to tell, and battles to fight.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Angelic Despot — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 19:11:24 -0000

"a once in decade opportunity to start a new core game from scratch, with a clean slate. The results are impressive."

"you get EVERY ARMY in the game in the core book. You just buy this one book, and add minis."

For me; these are the two most important things about this game. I love the setting, and I love the 40K setting. But I get really tired of ropey rules.

Having the game developed almost from the ground up (there are clear influences from the SBG - which is a good game, just not for massed combats), and most importantly; having tested the game rules with all of the troops and armes avoids the major problem that has always aflicted 40K: constantly changing rules.

Even when the 40K core rules stay stable for a while, they are constantly being affected by new codices. Some have a bigger impact on the game than the others, but the overall effect is to cause rules chaos: hardly anyone knows all the rules, and recent developments seriously unbalance previously written rules / army choices.

I've only played this new game once, and watched a couple of other games. But as with the SBG; you really have to give it a go. You watch it, or read the rules and think 'this is so simple, where is the strategy?' But you play it; and then you see. You don't worry about nuts and bolts of rules, you _just_ have to worry about strategy.

I've seen people ask several times about the random turn element and ask where the strategy is in that. The answer is not just in might points giving you options to over-ride the turn sequence. The answer is partly that this _is_ where the stragey comes in. As in battle, not everything is guaranteed. You have to plan for multiple eventualites. You have to try to stack up the odds in your favour, but you can never guarantee that things will go the way you hope.

Something that strikes me as odd about games like 40K is you can have units moving into the open on one turn 100% confident that they will not be shot because the game is about to end. Or they can leave cover within charge range 100% certain that they will not be shot before they reach their opponents. This strikes me as playing to the rules of the game, rather than to the feel of the game. Nothing in war is that certain. You can maneovre well and minimise the chances of being shot. You should never be in a position of _knowing_ that you will not be shot simply because 'it's my turn next'.

The WotR rules seem very playable. I'm really looking forward to this game's general release, and I really hope lots of people give it a try.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Joe Wright — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 19:02:21 -0000

Well, that is kind of the beauty of SBG and War; you don't have to if you don't want to. Middle Earth is a big place, and there is plenty of opportunity for the forces of good and evil to clash.

I mean, just the other day, I had a battle involving morannon (heavily armored orcs) against arnor and gondor armies, and my army was led by the Mouth of Sauron.

Never happened in the source material, but damn me it was fun!

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Angelic Despot — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 18:57:08 -0000

www.thelastalliance.com

Is also a really good place. Very friendly and helpful forums and lots of good painting and modelling guides.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

Gazuk — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 18:38:52 -0000

try onering.net - awesome painting guides

also for painting/scenery, try getting hold of some of the later (issue 25 onwards) of battle games in middle earth

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

ThePrecious — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 18:29:27 -0000

Hmm.

I posted a response here too.

The best LOTR/WOTR sites are
one-ring.co.uk
and
thelastalliance.com

Both excellent, and have been there from the very beginning.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

ThePrecious — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 18:28:46 -0000

That's weird. I posted a response to this, but all of my posts have disappeared.

Weird.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

no_to_co — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 17:07:25 -0000

Thank you. I priced out to see how much a 2000 points army would run and it's at least $350 to $400. Ouch! Yes, the plastic rank and file models are around $1.25 each, but the metal command and character models run from $5 to $15. Still, this is somewhat doable.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

intellectawe — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 16:37:53 -0000

I can see what you mean.

But thats still doesn't make them a vet. So what? They were playing one game for 8 years, that doesn't make them a pro at another game lol.

Yeah I am a vet at RT, 2nd, 3rd and 4th, but I have no clue wtf is going in 5th lol.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

ThePrecious — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 15:38:48 -0000

Actually, this is one of the best parts of the LOTR/WOTR game.

You really have to think about "What if my opponent gets the initiative? What then?" You need to have a hero around for a "Heroic Move", and the rest of the plan.

Not at all like 40k, where the ONLY chance to get the initiative order changed is with a "6" at the beginning of the game.

Re: REVIEW: War of the Ring

ThePrecious — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 15:35:06 -0000

The best LOTR forums that have survived the years are:

one-ring.co.uk
thelastalliance.com

Both will offer excellent LOTR/WOTR advice and tips.