"Mayhem: Mass battle edition, rules review" Topic

This is another set of rules by Brent Spivey, some of you may remember the name since I reviewed his modern warfare rules "The Battlefield" while back. Mayhem is surprisingly enough not an expansion to those rules or even anything within that genre but instead this is a fantasy warfare game mainly written for 6-15mm scale engagements but which can be played up to 28mm as well. The rules have units based on squares and rectangles of various size depending on scale, the playing area also ranges from a 24" square for 6-10mm miniatures, 24"-48" square for 15mm and at the very least an 36" square for 28mm miniatures. The playing area can be expanded as desired and by as much as players see fit.

I instantly, at the very first page of the rules in fact, noticed the "overdrive" mechanic that was part of the core rules in The Battlefield. Mayhem, just like The Battlefield uses a command point system. Units cost 1 CP to activate and they are allowed to perform 1 action doing so. What overdrive does is to allow a unit to perform multiple actions, but at an ever increasing cost of command points. Activating the same units starts out costing 1x CP (1 command point) and following activations of the same unit would begin to pile up to 2x, 3x, 4x, etc the amount of command points, each increasing upon the previous cost so it will be very hard or very expensive to activate a unit too many times.

So far the game is similar to The Battlefield, however where The Battlefield only used D6 dice, Mayhem uses D4, D6, D8, D10, D12 and D20! (Don't worry you will not be rolling buckets of dice so a couple of each will be more than enough).

Check my blog for the full review:
link

Thanks for this – its a good overview and I feel like I understand the game reasonable well, unlike a previous review which left me quite confused.

How do magic and fantastical creatures work in the game?

Thanks

Magic is not yet included, monsters such as dragons, giants etc cause terror, hit with extra dice and are harder to kill/rout than regular units.

The rules seem sound, and intriguing (I have a copy, but have not played them), but they need editing (though not the typo sort). I found them quite irritating to read.

And was quite teed off by the "illustrations"', which lend nothing whatsoever to the atmosphere, but only serve to away my precious ink.

My reaction has been similar to The Beast Rabban. I found the game's presentation very disappointing and amateurish.

Thanks for the review Anatoli!

The rules seem sound, and intriguing

Well that's the most important part- right? I think that you'll find that the gameplay, interactions, army builder, and mechanics are tight. I'm truly sorry that you and religon are not fans of the interior. As a one man show, I'm constantly learning and honing the various aspects of the craft. As I said though, I completely stand behind the design of the game.

@religion
If you'll give me your email address, then I'll send you a comp copy of my other game 'The Battlefield'. I want my customers to be satisfied, and I feel like you would be pleased with the layout and presentation.

How do magic and fantastical creatures work in the game?

In addition to what Anatoli mentioned, those creatures have other traits like breath weapons and poison that allow them to behave differently than typical units and cause various effects on troops.

From Anatoli's review – I have purchased the game this afternoon, and run through a couple of small solo games.

There are some interesting concepts in the rules – and some hidden depths I feel.

I do rather agree with the other two posters that the order of the rules doesn't help too much. I seem to have to keep flicking back and forwards.

I don't think that I would describe it as amateurish though – thought has gone into the setup and layout – though it doesn't always quite work.
A couple of suggestions – make section breaks (eg Melee, Shooting, bigger, and make sure they are completely under an image (which I quite like). eg the top of page 8 has a bit of ranged stuff, above the image, which is visually before the start of the ranged section (due to the way the columns have flowed)
Get rid of the gothic font for headings – its too hard to read.
I do think the order of the sections needs reconsidering – though I can't give a quick suggestion on how to do this.

I've a couple of rule queries if you wouldn't mind?
Charges – can a unit charge directly to its left or right by making a 90 degree pivot first?

Also with charges if two blue units are side by side, and the left hand one is charged by a red unit, and survives, then in their turn can the unengaged blue unit charge the red unit in the flank, or does it count as already in contact with the enemy by the corner?

Spears – does their Hard Counter vs Cavalry etc count if they are flanked?

I'm interested to see what the stronghold supplement brings, as my group would need war engine and magic rules to consider these.

Also how well does the command system work with big armies, it feels that you will run out of CP quite quickly if you go much above 200 pts?

@Brent,

While I appreciate the offer, I do not game in the period addressed in "The Battlefield." I understand from another review that the presentation of "The Battlefield" is much better than this game.

Cheers,
Robert

I've a couple of rule queries if you wouldn't mind?
Charges – can a unit charge directly to its left or right by making a 90 degree pivot first?

I don't mind at all. Yes, a unit may charge after making a 90 degree pivot first.

Also with charges if two blue units are side by side, and the left hand one is charged by a red unit, and survives, then in their turn can the unengaged blue unit charge the red unit in the flank, or does it count as already in contact with the enemy by the corner?

It can perform the charge. Although you would normally be making a danger roll for the charge, in this case, you would automatically make it since you are technically in contact [but not engaged]. Remember, in order to be engaged, the units have to be squared-up.

Also, if you wanted to move the blue unit away instead of charging, then you wouldn't have to pay any additional costs.

Spears – does their Hard Counter vs Cavalry etc count if they are flanked?

Yes. A unit on the flank would have the advantage of rolling an additional die in melee to counteract this though.

I'm interested to see what the stronghold supplement brings, as my group would need war engine and magic rules to consider these.

The expansion will definitely has rules for warmachines, siege engines, and magic. Additionally, there are rules for garrisoning troops, new unit designations, and a few surprises.

Also how well does the command system work with big armies, it feels that you will run out of CP quite quickly if you go much above 200 pts?

Above 200 crowns, you will need to make use of the 'Standing Orders' rule in the General's Compendium. The rule is considered standard in the STRONGHOLD expansion.

'Standing Orders' allow you to set your entire army [or part of it] in motion at the beginning of the game and then focus on different areas of the battle while the bulk of your force trundle on. For example, you might Overdrive some cavalry units wide on an enemy's flank, set-up a new trajectory, and then give give them another 'Standing Order'. Now you can return to some of your ranged units on the next turn for some focused volley fire on the enemy lines. All the while, your army continues to march across the table. It makes for a nice ebb and flow and gives the feeling of trying to wrangle and command a large army.

I'm around if you have any other questions.

-Brent

Thanks Brent

I hadn't got on to the advanced rules – so hadn't seen the Standing Orders option.

In my post above when I asked about charges I was using the term to mean move to contact, not the advanced Rule Charge. But I don't think this changes your replies.

Another question about pivots – if two units are squared up (eg benefiting from Advance rule). If one of them is given a separate move order, can it pivot before it moves – even though it would interpenetrate the friendly unit next to it?

Is there a special ability to protect against auto death on a one? similar to how Heavy Armour protects against disruption?

I was struggling to make a horse archer profile that seemed to work? Is there a light cavalry template, that looses Impact but gains move in any direction for 1CP?

Have you thought about adding d16 to the dice, it would give a nice step between d12 and d20?

In my post above when I asked about charges I was using the term to mean move to contact, not the advanced Rule Charge. But I don't think this changes your replies.

You are correct sir.

Another question about pivots – if two units are squared up (eg benefiting from Advance rule). If one of them is given a separate move order, can it pivot before it moves – even though it would interpenetrate the friendly unit next to it?

Technically, rules as written, no. This is done to keep things clean and remove complications in situations where the unit is sandwiched in between two friendly units which would result in multiple instances of interpenetration. That said, if you want to allow it in your games, then it will have no effect on game balance. Definitely give it a shot, and use it if you like.

Is there a special ability to protect against auto death on a one? similar to how Heavy Armour protects against disruption?

Not for standard infantry units. Only units that use the damage trait are immune to auto-death on natural 1s.

I was struggling to make a horse archer profile that seemed to work? Is there a light cavalry template, that looses Impact but gains move in any direction for 1CP?

The rule for fast cavalry is that they can pivot 90 degrees before AND after movement, fire to the flanks at no additional cost, and are a soft counter to cavalry and chariots. They have another rule and interaction that is specific to units and situations that arise in the STRONGHOLD expansion so they were left out of the first book to prevent confusion with too many forward references. Feel free to use the rules above [same cost as standard cavalry].

Have you thought about adding d16 to the dice, it would give a nice step between d12 and d20?

That's a subject that was discussed many times during playtest. It absolutely would make the perfect step to smooth out the curve. In the end, it was decided that the d16 still isn't considered a 'standard' die and not in most gamers' collections nor as readily available.

Thanks for the further answers Brent

Another question about pivots – if two units are squared up (eg benefiting from Advance rule). If one of them is given a separate move order, can it pivot before it moves – even though it would interpenetrate the friendly unit next to it?

Technically, rules as written, no. This is done to keep things clean and remove complications in situations where the unit is sandwiched in between two friendly units which would result in multiple instances of interpenetration. That said, if you want to allow it in your games, then it will have no effect on game balance. Definitely give it a shot, and use it if you like.

I think, I will stick to RAW – as I think being able to pivot out of a line does give advantage. As Cavalry can benefit from the Advance order to move together, then wheel out of the line to charge off to their sides

An "avoid death of a 1" special rule (with a better name) would be good, as its possible (even quite likely) to get a few lucky kills as the defender. Even if the special just transmuted the death into a disruption it gives a bit more survivability?

I like the Fast Cavalry rules.

I thought that might be the answer for d16s

A further thought – Volley Fire seems very good (especially against less good troops) – pushing them back is good, but if you are shooting at an angle then you can often push them back into friends which causes auto-death. Did you try that push back into friends just causes disruption?

I think, I will stick to RAW – as I think being able to pivot out of a line does give advantage. As Cavalry can benefit from the Advance order to move together, then wheel out of the line to charge off to their sides

You get the intent of the rule exactly! It puts the pressure on the owning general to properly use command points to pull off advanced maneuvers like the one you mention. To use your example, if you had 3 cavalry units in formation, then you would have to move the center one forward [with either a danger roll or multiple Overdrives] to make room for the units on the sides to maneuver and wheel out. I creates a neat looking wedge effect when you pull it off properly too!

An "avoid death of a 1" special rule (with a better name) would be good, as its possible (even quite likely) to get a few lucky kills as the defender. Even if the special just transmuted the death into a disruption it gives a bit more survivability?

I think you'll find that if you play against a small elite army with high leadership that those routs and eliminations by natural 1s are needed due to the ability of these units to rally very effectively [especially with a musician in the ranks]. You can always use the Behemoth profile, and a little abstraction, to represent an especially tough infantry unit.

I like the Fast Cavalry rules.
I thought that might be the answer for d16s

A further thought – Volley Fire seems very good (especially against less good troops) – pushing them back is good, but if you are shooting at an angle then you can often push them back into friends which causes auto-death. Did you try that push back into friends just causes disruption?

Causing disruption was an option in early testing, but it essentially turned ranged units with volley fire into 'killers', instead of 'disruptors and controllers', as they could attack the same unit again for the same effect. The goal is to have non-warmachine ranged units be useful in the right situations but not overpowered.

It looks like I do need to tighten up the explanation for drive backs from shooting just a bit. The intent is to have the unit be driven back to the opposite side that it received fire from. So, unless it was an extreme angle [which would mean a longer shot], then most early shooting would cause the units to simply break ranks but not be destroyed unless another unit was very close behind.

Perhaps I wasn't as clear about Volley Fire as I intended.

I am quite happy with the standard effect of Volley Fire being drive back – as this is pretty powerful.

But what I had found was that it was quite easy to shoot at a unit in a way that drove it back into friendly units. For instance if 3 units are squared up, then shooting at the middle one, when the shooter is just a couple of inches off centre of the 3 enemy units, will drive back the centre unit into one of its friends. Even if just slightly so.

My suggestion was that if a unit is driven back into a friendly unit, then it is disrupted, rather than destroyed. If driven back into enemies or terrain then destroyed seems a fair result.

It may be that I am mis-understanding directly away from the firer – I was reading this from a Warmaster perspective – i.e draw a line between the closest points of the two units to determine the direction of drive back.

On a separate point, do you have an ETA for Stronghold?

Perhaps I wasn't as clear about Volley Fire as I intended.

No, you were clear. I just got sidetracked answering the wrong question!

It may be that I am mis-understanding directly away from the firer – I was reading this from a Warmaster perspective – i.e draw a line between the closest points of the two units to determine the direction of drive back.

This is what I was addressing as needing to be cleared up with tighter language. Your interpretation was correct RAW. I need to change it to read 'directly away from the firer OR towards the units rear'. This would, for the most part, eliminate the situation you originally described.

However, I am open to the idea of a distruption/damage token being added as an option in addition to the language change above.

On a separate point, do you have an ETA for Stronghold?

Soon! I don't have an exact date for you yet, but it shouldn't be too long. Right now it's really a matter of tweaking some of the siege rules so they behave properly and continuing to edit down the magic. We had a great playtest session today focusing on sieges. The warmachines, new unit designations, and additional traits are ready to go.

Thanks Brent!

You're welcome!

Hi Brent do you have some basic starter armies drawn up?
The creation rules you have drawn up are fantastic however a starting point would be fantastic.
Im sure im not the only unimaginative soul here who would buy an army list supplement.

Sorry to "piggy back" on this, I just figured it was better than starring a whole new thread…
Anyway, I just got my rules from Amazon, I'm thoroughly enjoying them and the army building…
Is there a pdf Quick Reference or cheat sheet, as I didn't appear to get one with my book.
Cheers.

Thanks for taking the time to make the review Anatoli..