Deep Dive into Age of Fantasy: Regiments

It's not really a review. It's not really a 'how to'. It's not really a flip-through. It's not really a strategy dive. It's equal parts all four.
Get your own copy here: OnePageRules.com

[@dopplebockdunkle]

I love this channel. The rules analysis is great. Keep up the good work and have a Happy Christmas!

[@WargameCulture]

Thank you so much for this kind of deep dive video. I absolutely love how you do these. Personally, I do not like list building games. I just find that they tend to be less fun and more tournament-like, as opposed to narrative battles.

[@TheJoyofWargaming]

The prep work is generally way more effort. Not sure it saves time at the table or adds to the experience. It has a very 80s feel, for better or worse.

[@thel1chking]

Opposite - because of the reactions based on Activations instead of full turns - unlike GW, which has paragraphs of rules where what you build is how you win - with OPR it’s how you use your units, not how you construct them.

[@TheJoyofWargaming]

That is a hard lesson to learn. I find the alternating setup plays a massive role in victory or death, a far greater role than army composition. If you can get the right matchups, the game is a breeze. If you don't, it's a nightmare.

[@deepred6041]

Your One Page Regiments videos have become priority viewing for me. After Christmas I'll be trying these rules out. Thank you for showcasing these, I can see a lot of fun and a lot of learning to come.

[@brendanhewer]

This channel abounds in immense quality. Thank you for the great video.

[@TheJoyofWargaming]

Thank you so much. You're making it hard to keep my ego in check.

[@williamminsinger7130]

A very helpful review, I appreciate the explanation of how the mechanics actually work and what sort of game they actually result in. Great stuff as always!

[@JevousGaming]

Some interesting things to consider with movement. Thanks for running through it so clearly.

[@kirestus]

Regiments is great, I prefer kings of war for rank and flank but regiments is my go to when I’m playing with rank and flank newbies

[@j453]

Great review 👍

[@DeusMachina71]

Longer optional games have always been in the advanced rules.. it doesnt affect balance at all

[@doccatface6868]

Excellent presentation, This is how I'd like games explained to me. Conveys the flavor while outlining the quirks and raison dêtre behind sometimes baffling design choices. Merry Christmas, give Biscotti our regards.

[@marksdicetales]

Would the dragon rampant be m knight shynalan twists when things don't activate?..

[@crispycritter9163]

The game 'as written ' has options to play longer games , you just have to pay a small amount for the extra rules :) I don't think these are great rules for solo play , the alternating activation's are more meaningful with another person making decisions. DRamp etc work for solo due to not knowing if you will get the unit activated , the dice make the decision for you. IMO

[@samguest5760]

Awesome review sir! Very useful.

[@charleslatora5750]

For now, mostly, I am very happy with Dragon Rampant n Fistful of Lead. Have not used my first edition Lion Rampant rules yet but that will happen next year for sure. Just need to finish up some calvary.

[@Bluecho4]

While AoF seems list-dependent when compared to Dragons Rampant, it's by far less so when compared to Warhammer (pick a version). The latter, at least in late WHFB and Age of Sigmar, were highly determined by list-building. There's way less options and hoops to jump through when it comes to building an Age of Fantasy army. There's enough granularity there to make a difference, while still making the in-game tactical decisions the actual deciding factor.

[@martinholden6214]

To solve the range issue, could you adjust deployment range at all? Or is it the fact that cav jst have a massive range? Im jst getting into aofr in 10mm with a friend. Plan to play warmaster at some point to. New to ttg. Hence why OPR is appealing to us. Light and easy rule set. The other thing ive seen alot of people say is to play 6 turns, not sure if thats jst for the smaller scale tho.

[@johnscarr70]

I'll just mention another, naturally free, rule set if I may. Undying Lands, formerly Forces if Light and Darkness. Published by the unfathomable Alienstar games, for free. There's a good amount of troop building, based on physique, arms and armour, morale, etc. to determine a units starting Integrity, which I enjoy. The game itself is dominated by command and control and a hierarchy of orders to keep your primarily - linear formations in check long enough to grind down the foe. It's not everyone's cup of tea, it's one for massed, small scale "vignettes" of troops, but I've always found it a satisfying play, without the insane manoeuvres which I could execute playing Warhammer as a kid, and it being up to me how I want to represent heroes, wizards, etc., if at all.

[@thomaswilliams5005]

It’s a great game for introducing people, like kids to war games.

[@V0IV0DE]

Just to understand about AOF Regiments, are you playing with the Full Rulebook?(the one you get with the Patreon)? I only ask this, because there are a bunch of other extra rules there. The Basic Rules serves as a framework which you can expand upon, you and your opponent can decide on which ones to use on your game. There are rules for Prolonged Battles(until 6th Round), other rules for Phased Battles, Combat Weariness, Extra Actions, Extra Missions, Side Missions, Coffee Table Rules, Small Scales & Multi-Basing and , all those rules were created by the original designer. P.S: I have written the comment and saw another viewer commenting for you regarding these with less details, but I would give it a try to compile the rules that you find more interesting and try another game to see if the same perspective is still there, I've seen another comment of your regarding the 'Turn 0' importance. I'm not here to defend OPR, it's just to give you more arguments to a next video review regarding it, I believe you may find a way to have more fun with it. Nice video by the way.

[@TheJoyofWargaming]

Definitely just the freebie rules. Those extra missions are calling me, tho. I thought the small scale rules were AoF:Skirmish?

[@V0IV0DE]

@@TheJoyofWargaming I think I've expressed myself poorly, smaller scale in therms of miniature sizes(i.e: 6mm, 8mm), instead of scalability regarding battles. And Multibasing would be something like what Kings of War do.

[@martinmeltzer2696]

Hey Jon! Stop tempting me with new rules... particularly around Christmas! Medieval (and hence Fantasy) armies were conglomerate masses of a large number of troop types ranging from ill equipped, but belligerent peasants with bad attitudes to adventurous, opportunistic Nobility.... born to fight and rule. The good leaders were able to get the most out of what troops were available to them... while other, less imaginative ones, just lined everybody up, sounded the charge, and hoped for the best. History has many examples of both types of leadership. Great review of these rules! How is the "Rise Of The Orc Lord" campaign coming along? The Sacred Black Horn of "Blattmore" will be sounding again soon.

[@dartmart9263]

What’s the actual name of the “vanilla” (warband) rule set? Thanks

[@TheJoyofWargaming]

There are three fantasy sets: Skirmish is 5-10 models per side Age of Fantasy is 30-50 models in warband style, similar to Dragon Rampant Regiments is the rank and flank game with 50+ models per side.

[@Bluecho4]

@@TheJoyofWargaming Technically, both Age of Fantasy and Age of Fantasy: Regiments use the same points values, and thus model counts. So you can have a similar size game, regardless of whether you're using rank-and-flank or "free movement".

[@tonys4341]

I think you're missing the point of this game, and others like it. This game just is so stripped down that it's much more obvious. But I find it interesting that when you read articles, or watch videos on these style of games, that there is little or no talk on tabletop strategy. The "strategy" discussed is all list building, how to construct that killer army. The tabletop part is just a quick stress test to compare your list to mine. Things like interesting tactical decisions during the game, or any sort of fog of war, or randomness, just muddies the list building comparison. Obviously I'm a bit biased, because I find the most fun in tabletop decisions and strategies. Heck - a lot of the games I play I randomize the army composition, because it's more fun and interesting and (dare I say it) historically accurate. But that's me. Different horses for courses. Some of the boys at the club love list building games, some really enjoy painting, some detest painting and pay others, some hate new rules systems, others jump to the new shiny flavour of the month...but they're all great fellows. Wargaming is a very broad church! Great insight into the system Jon. Definitely not for me, but I know others at the club seem to like the SF version. And I must admire and applaud the effort and work that the authors and playtesters have put into it.

[@TheJoyofWargaming]

With a few more games under my belt, I'm finding the army setup to be far more important than army list building. That "Turn Zero" really drives the game more than anything.

[@krinkrin5982]

I might not have realized it's such a problem, since I watch almost exclusively actual games, so I get a fair number of play strategy discussions . I've seen two general strategies for list building over the years: 1. Killer blob 2. Counters The first one relies on having a huge unit of the best, most powerful troops the army can field, and using the rest of your points to screen that main unit. Your goal during the game is then getting that unit stuck in combat with the enemy as soon and as much as possible. The second one relies on having units that counter specific strategies the enemy can employ. This then works best in a combined arms strategy, for example, having an anti-armor squad to kill his heavies, while you advance your own heavies in the center, and fast units flank. I think there is little talk about actual strategy in these articles, because the strategy emerges from how you build your list. You have units that pretty obviously perform best at specific tasks and so will naturally want to play into that. There is also the fact that a lot of armies are not balanced properly due to staggered release. Basically, when a company releases new content for a game, they obviously want people to buy it. One option is to have the new army play in new and interesting ways, but another option (favored by GW) is to have the new models be significantly more powerful than what already exists. This creates an arms race (commonly called power creep) and destroys the balance of the game. Interestingly, this wasn't always the case, and in WFB 6ed there are multiple pages in each army book discussing different strategies the player can employ when playing the army.

[@alphanerdgames9417]

Consolidation is 180 now

[@TheJoyofWargaming]

Do I need to download and print up the latest copy of the rules?

[@alphanerdgames9417]

@@TheJoyofWargaming 🤷🏼