Age Of Tyrants: A Game Of Combined Arms
September 28, 2015 by crew
Thanks for checking out this article on our upcoming mass combat system. I'm the designer and writer for Age Of Tyrants, and in the following paragraphs I hope to fill you in on the philosophy behind the design, and give you an overview of how the rules work.
Age of Tyrants is a new 6mm scale tabletop wargame, set in Urban War's Draconis Alba universe. It was initially conceived back in 2009 as a spin-off from Urban War. It was to be a fairly light and casual set of rules enabling Urban War fans to play games at the company level, rather than squad based skirmishes.
Since then it's gone through several revisions and grown into a full blown system in it's own right, with a number of expansions planned on top of the core rules. It's also more than just a company level version of Urban War, and we've developed a game with its own identity where legions of men, women and synths fight in the midst of colossal and devastating armour.
A concept that has always permeated the DNA of the Age of Tyrants project is Combined Arms. Combined arms is the idea that different parts of an army should support one another, or act simultaneously on an objective, to achieve a result greater than if they acted independently in pursuit of the same goal.
This is by no means a new idea in warfare, and you can see examples of it from the ancient world onwards (e.g. mixed formations of archers and spearmen with shields), but it really came into its own in the Second World War with the idea of Battle Groups, pioneered by the Germans with their Kampfgruppen, and later adopted by the US army.
To translate this concept into a workable set of rules required really getting into the command structure of these battle group type formations. A single 50mm square base in Age of Tyrants counts as a squad of infantry or a single vehicle. Four of these bases make up a platoon, and the platoon is led a Lieutenant who is represented by one of the bases.
A company is the main formation you play with in Age of Tyrants and it consists of four to eight platoons led by a separate Captain base, for a total of seventeen to thirty three bases per company. The exact number you play with depends on how big a battle you want to have, with each base costing points to add to your army.
If you want to have a really big battle, you can play with more than one company a side on a larger playing area.
Riffing on the battle group idea we have three core companies of four platoons plus a captain for each of the factions. These are either infantry based for light companies, a mixed of vehicles and infantry for mixed companies, or vehicle based for armoured companies.
You pick one of these cores as the basis for a company, then you can add up to four platoons of your choice to customise it to your play style and the battle at hand.
For those not familiar with the universe, these factions are the Junkers' grim Legions of foot soldiers and heavy artillery from the deserts of Ironglass, the robotic armies of the highly advanced Syntha, VASA's intergalactic protectorate forces from icy Vacillus, and the Viridians' Colonial Marine companies from the lush jungles of Viridia,
A typical game is played on a 4x4 playing area, with one player taking the role of the attacker and their opponent the defender. The defender gets to set up the terrain and pick a side of the table on which to deploy, with the attacker taking the opposite side. To balance this advantage, the defender has to deploy all of their miniatures/bases first.
Players then alternate giving an order with a leader. Who goes first is determined by a dice roll. The idea is that the two different ranks of leader activate bases that fall under their command, so Lieutenants can only activate themselves and bases from their own platoon, whereas Captains can activate any base from their company. Each order allows four bases to be activated, and they work together to perform the order.
So for example, a Captain may order a base of infantry to move forward and assault an enemy base, while tanks and artillery pour in support fire. This is the essence of combined arms gameplay and it is all taken into account in the combat results calculation.
Losing in combat or sustaining bombardment damage from artillery causes bases to suffer suppression, which is tracked with special small dice that fit into a slot on the back of the base. Suppression is a mixture of battle fatigue, casualties and morale loss. Too much suppression and the base is destroyed, but before that happens, suppression can affect a base's performance.
Bases with a lot of suppression count as more than one base to activate with an order, so as the battle progresses, it's increasingly difficult for leaders to get all the parts of the army to follow their orders. Thankfully, bases can receive orders to rest up, repair, and patch up casualties, thus removing suppression.
The eagle eyed among you will have spotted that as a consequence of suppression, or worse losing a leader base, you might not be able to activate all of your bases during a turn. Any bases left over may perform what is known as a default action. On its profile, each base has a set of actions it can do that correspond to its current suppression level (e.g. Shoot, Repair, etc.).
When all the leaders have issued orders, players take it in turns to activate single bases that didn't receive orders during the turn. By definition this is less effective than acting in a combined manner with other bases, but at least they still get a go.
After all bases have been activated, end the turn and start again. In the standard game you keep going like this until one side loses 50% of the bases it started the game with. At that point it's over and the other player is declared the winner.
In the advanced section of the rules there are a few other scenarios you can try, each with its own set-up and victory conditions.
Check us out at the following links...
Why not get in on the discussion at...
If you would like to write an article for Beasts Of War then please contact us at [email protected] for more information.
"A concept that has always permeated the DNA of the Age of Tyrants project is Combined Arms..."
Supported by (Turn Off)
Supported by (Turn Off)
"The eagle eyed among you will have spotted that as a consequence of suppression, or worse losing a leader base, you might not be able to activate all of your bases during a turn..."
Supported by (Turn Off)
Due to the scale and suppression rules it’s hard not to want to compare this directly with Epic Armageddon.
EA is my favourite system so I wonder if anyone out there has played both? If so how do they compare?
That was the vibe I got from the rules summery as well, though there are some differences. I’m looking forward to this game more and more. I still have a fondness for original Epic, in all its unwieldy glory, but Epic Armageddon is my favorite of all of GWs systems. If this game can improve upon that, I will be all over it.
I’m gonna ask Mark to wade in with some further analysis on the game, feel free to ask any questions as we’ll be more than happy to answer them, cheers
Gonna see if some of the chaps here have and get back to you
@stusidle Gonna see if some of the chaps here have and get back to you
I Love the junker sculpts, but I can’t wait to see some of the Viridians and VASA troops
Hope to have some painted Viridians to show soon
Can we take this to mean the core set will be Viridians vs Junkers?
Hey zethar, plan is to have 4 factions as part of the initial offerings: Viridians, Junkers, Syntha and VASA. Each faction will have a choice of core infantry and a bunch of specialists as well as mobile artillery platforms, APCs and tanks (2 of each types). If you look at the Junker models here this will give you the basic template for all the other factions. http://www.ageoftyrants.com/index.php/galleries/painted-models/junkers-painted-models This along with the rule book will form the basis of the initial offering on the KS. If we hit our target we will then roll out a series of expansions featuring a… Read more »
I really hope this does well.
Can’t wait to get my mitts on this, looks like a very evocative setting and I think there is definitely a space in the market for a quality sci-fi 6mm system.
Morning all. Cheers for the comments. I haven’t played Epic Armageddon, but I’m familiar with previous editions of Epic. I was at the GW studio when 3rd edition was released, which introduced the suppression rules, however, it would be a stretch to say Epic influenced AoT. The old SSI turn based tank game Steel Panthers was probably more on my mind for what I was trying to achieve, but tbh, I don’t tend to look that much to other games when I’m designing rules, instead I try to come up with systems whose elements play off one-another–so the suppression/damage rules… Read more »
To be clear, I wasn’t suggesting that Epic influenced AoT. I’ve not played AoT, my only experience of it is the above article. From that my mind immediately went to Epic… but having said that it probably would have done the moment 6mm was mentioned.
Do you know if there are any demo games etc online anywhere? I’ve done a quick search with no luck. Seeing it played would be very handy.
Of course, didn’t mean that to come over as defensive, just thinking out loud. We don’t have any gameplay examples posted anywhere yet, but we hope to get a few together with animated diagrams for the website before launch.
Great, I look forward to seeing them.
It’s been a long, long time since I played EA, so these comments may be a bit fuzzy round the edges, but I *have* played both games. Still, I can remember enough to make a couple of general comments that may help someone… EA and AoT both show the grand sweep of battle, with giant war machines of one sort or another, and swarms of smaller tanks and infantry to give a sense of scale. EA doesn’t have a lot of overt command control, and this element is central to AoT, so there’s a bit of difference there. AoT has… Read more »
Cheers Jake 😀 much appreciate the input
like the new vehicles.
I sure hope they introduce the koralon at some point as they are one of the very few SF tabletop wargame alien races that actually do look a bit alien. Exciting to see this game happening at any rate, it’s about time a nice new 6mm SF wargame came out!
hey abstractalien,
Thanks for the support fella, much appreciated.
Well just to add to my earlier message to zethnar, if we hit all the stretches for the new strategic/tactical supplements, the plan would be to move onto more factions, by advancing the timeline in the game we’d bring in First Contact and Blue Eden, so the Koralon would be the first of the new additional factions to the game, beyond that we may even be able to sneek in the Iskandrians too 😉
I saw pictures of this up on beasts of war earlier this year and was fascinated by the scale and aesthetic, it really evoked my imagination. Loving the red troopers alongside huge warmachines going across a wasteland. They make me think of Harkonnens from Dune for some reason. I’m liking the update and information, can’t wait to get into this. Loving this scale of Warfare (roughly) after Dropzone Commander and Firestorm planetfall!
Cheers mage, you really “get it”. There’s a big helping of Dune/Aliens and Star Wars inspired stuff in the mix so not surprising you see the connection with the Harkonnens. All the best 😉
For the ks could I humbly request a good 2 player starter WITH terrain? I’ve not hanged at this scale since epic so have bumsquilch in the way of terrain. Also release date of the ks early as possible to aid in financial preparations please!!! I think January was mentioned? The whole thing looks… Erm… Epic! However I would rethink the deployment and terrain setup rules to be a little less absolute, without seeing the rules it’s hard to judge but I struggle to see how the defender would not pile terrain in their half of the table and just… Read more »
Hmm we didn’t plan to do a 2 player starter set with terrain. We are working with Brigade Models and Deep Cut for buildings and mats respectively for this game, these would be available as add-ons. We will be offering starter core Companies (16 bases) you need one of these a side to play the game. They come in 3 versions: inf, mixed and armour, with the later being the most expensive. However each factions type is the same price point so you can chose which faction you want after the KS. So would you be happy if we offered… Read more »
I don’t know about others, but personally I prefer having the separate starter boxes. Whenever there is a “Starter Set” for something you always wind up with some faction you aren’t interested in. Gates of Antares, for instance, has me interested, but I like the Freeborn faction, not the Concord. The starter set doesn’t work for me, I’d be paying for minis that are just going to end up in a pile, never to be completed. I’d much prefer to be able to select which factions I want to receive as part of my pledge (Junkers for sure, jury is… Read more »
No worries on that front zethnar all factions will have their own starters, in fact there are 3 types of starter for each faction: Inf, mixed or armoured core.
For the twin starter set, that Daniel suggested, we’ll leave it open so that the backer decides which factions they want so you get what you want 😉 They will all be the same price.
Deployment wise the latest draft of the rules you can get here for free:
http://www.ageoftyrants.com/index.php/game/downloads
I will however give Mark the heads up and see if he has anything to say with respect to your comments.
Thanks for the interest 😉
Nice to see these coming along. I was impressed with the C&C rules on the first look at the rules I got.
Very glad to see Brigade mentioned , they are one of my favourite companies and produce some lovely stuff.
As other people have mentioned it l would say my favourite GW set would have been Epic40k,but in the end we just used Dirtside 2 and remodded the GWtanks etc for that
Chaps at Brigade have been fabulous, they are putting together a series of sets of their new buildings to suit each of our terrain environments: desert, jungle, ice world and subterranean. These will tie in with the mats that Deep Cut Studios will make available to us.
In addition we have other partners such as Litko (template and counters), Dice & Games (custom faction dice and custom bases), Renedra (plastic bases), Red Vector (MDF skyscrapper and other urban buildings), Figures in Comfort (carry cases) and Fantasy Print shop (water slide transfers).
@johnrobertson firstly thanks for the feedback! The starter concept sounds good, as long as we can be given a pointer on suitable amounts of terrain for the battlefield, e.g. 5 packs or whatever per 2×4 foot section.
I’ll certainly take a read of the rules, thanks for the link! My deployment comment stems from my own belief that a really good ruleset is tournament friendly, even if it’s not designed for tournament play as such. Create a fair balanced system and people will have fun playing it because at every games club there is ‘that guy’.
Pleasure sir 😉 Yes there are guidelines for terrain in relation to table size as well as force size. As for tournaments I’m a keen on that too and its been one of the aspects we’ve kept at the back of our minds when designing the rules, so I hope it works for you. if however you have further comments on it then please do there is scope to adapt them with customer feedback to some extent. We are on the 4th iteration since we started offering these as downloads so I hope that we’ve got things in pretty good… Read more »
and I know a few of those “guys” 😀
Morning. Thanks for the query. You’ve correctly identified the prospect that defenders might try to hog all the terrain, so attackers get to move 1d6 pieces of it after the defender has finished placing it all (a detail not covered in the article more for reasons of space than anything else).
Hi, been reading the rulebook, thought I’d offer my feedback so far: 1. Still not keen on terrain setup and deployment, feels too weighted in favour of the defender, however the 1d6 moved terrain pieces by the attacker should scale with game size at the very least. Eg on an 8×4 table it should be 2d6 etc 2. Do units HAVE to use their default action if not issued a formal order, or is this optional? 3. Why no multiple scenarios? Just wipe out half of the enemy stands numerically. 4. Clarification on movement fractions moving through cover, say default… Read more »
Great feedback sir 😀
I’m going to leave it to Mark to reply to these, better from the horses mouth 😉
I think we can do the add-ons you request for sure, really appreciate you giving these a good going over mate, free eyes are excellent, cheers
Just to echo John’s comment, loving your feedback here. On to the responses then: 1. I’ve been discussing this one with John, and we are going to tweak it. As a first step, I’m going to change it to say there is no movement of terrain pieces by the attacker, but the attacker is the one who picks a side and deploys on it first. In this way a cunning defender might formulate a strategy based on how they place the terrain, but they can’t control how the attacker approaches it. 2. Yes, they do have to perform this order,… Read more »
Awesome, happy with the feedback. Great communication chaps!
A pleasure fella, and yes we’ll do the terrain quick ref card too, have a great weekend, cheers
Having thought about the r&r situation, I think adding a radius would make the rule simpler on table than maintaining the existing rule. It would reduce the number of line of sight checks required from every stand on the board to only a fraction. Love your deployment proposal though.
I think we’ll leave it as is for now, but let’s see how things shape up over the coming months, cheers 😉
I’m inclined to stick to my guns on this one as it’s about encouraging the behaviour of getting to cover, rather than trying to perform repairs or first aid while potentially under fire, but I will put it to our playtest group to see what they think.
Cheers,