PDA

View Full Version : Cities of Death...a brief review



cailus
06-06-2006, 10:37
I got the Cities of Death boxset today.

It's a nice book with some nifty rehashed artwork. There's some outlines of sieges which are also rehashes to a degree - the Armageddon stuff is pretty much word for word from an existing article - yawn. Then there's Nimbossa (really getting sick of this one) and the assault on the Astral Claw's fortress (cool as I really like this particular plot - it's almost unique).

I liked the "Dheneb Capitalis" (p.54-55) and Cityfighting in the 41st Millennium (p. 4-5) art - they were kinda Rogue Trader looking and reminded me very much of the Warhammer Siege book published too many years ago featured a Siege Supplement for Rogue Trader.

The rules for Cityfight seem simple enough and in fact there are no real new additions to the existing standard rules.

Overall the old City Fight rules were more complicated with modified coherency, blast and template marker and line of sight rules. This is really just a clarification of standard rules.

It is cool you can obliterate buildings - very 2nd ed. :p

The suggested building number for Alpha and Gamma level missions is rather pathetic - Alpha has 2-3 ruins on a 4X4 table while Gamma has 4-6 ruins on a 4X4 table. So according to this book, I have been playing City Fight missions all along as I usually use this amount in a normal game. The pictures representing the Alpha and Gamma level tables are very sparse indeed. In fact even the Omega table looks sparse.

The custom terrain featured in the book is pretty awesome though and represents what everyone of us should be aiming for - a table so full of terrain that your brain can't understand what your eyes are communicating to it so it caves in.

The Ork settlement is also cool but not exactly City Fight terrain to me either.

The stratagems are a nifty little idea and I can see them adding a bit more depth to a game.

There's 11 new missions though I cannot comment if they are any good as I haven't played them yet. It's also got some instructions and hints on how to design a mission.

The suggested Cityfighting army was a bit boring - Marines with heavy bolters, flamers and even a multi-melta (holy fricking poo!). It's nicely painted but is Marines so meh? The Tau army was also a tad boring - they make a big deal over the fact that instead of a Hammerhead, they're using a Sky Ray and that Vespids are groovy for City Fighting. One would've also thought that carbines might be the order of the day but all the Firewarriors have pulse rifles. I s'pose given that you are not fighting over too much terrain as GW recommends, then pulse rifles are a much better choice.

Also not many pics of Vostroyans and also I am yet to see a mention to Medusa. But then I s'pose that Medusa hasn't been decided yet.

So overall not a bad book. I just wish those slack gits at GW would write some new fluff and maybe get some new artwork.

nevermore
06-06-2006, 10:53
City's of Death has lost a huge opportunity to base a section on the Gaunts Ghosts novels, The Tanith are themed towards city fighting and so deserve to have a new upgraded army list in the book.

Mojaco
06-06-2006, 11:35
Really now... An army list for an army consisting of 8 different models. What other armies should be in there? Genestealer Cults, Underhive Gangs, Ordo Xenos?

Please don't think that something you'd like to see from a fanboy point of view is a missed oppertunity if not done. The Gaunts Ghosts have a brilliant army list; the IG Codex. Everything is in there they should ever need.

They're not doing those 4 army-lists-in-one-book anymore, and all the better too.

Nice review, although I'm happier with the book then you seem to be. The strategems form the core of this book and you barely mention them :)
And the cover... That cover alone makes me wanna play it.

bratbag
06-06-2006, 11:57
I have only played one of the new missions so far (firesweep) deciding to fight a few 'standard' Victory point games first just to work out any niggles with the rules.

Basically firesweep requires you to 'raise your flag' over as many ruins as possible by occupying them at the end of your turn. If you move away from the ruins they remain yours, but are free to be occupied in return by your opponent.

This mission is fantastic :cool: . My friends and i devided my table in half into two 4x4 tables and played multiple games of it gamma level (with a damn sight more terrain then was reccomended, the OP got that right) at 750pts.

It was a pritty standard fair against my two loyalist marine opponents, with my own Word Bearers making good use of the terrain to get rendering possessed and daemons in where they were needed, but when i came up against my imperial opponent it all went a bit wrong.

He maxed out fully on infantry with a smattering of special and heavy weapons....it was a slaughter. With his massive number of units compared to my own 4 i just couldn't capture enough ruins. I ripped him apart in CC as expected...but he still held more ruins then myself by the end (i think this may be the reason for the low number of reccomended ruins).

In any 'capture the ruins' type of game IG are going to be a tough force to fight against :eek:

MrInsomniac
06-06-2006, 12:20
I agree with Mojaco, I was very happy with this book. The strategems are really very nice, the details of being able to park a tank on a sewer is brilliant. I love the Firesweep mission, very fun to play. I also like the scenery it shows, the double page diagram on pages 54 and 55. Certainly a nice book.

Mojaco
06-06-2006, 13:04
Yea, played a firesweep aswel. I completly powned my opponent, but it wasn't untill the last turn I reaslised I was losing! His meagre little force was all but dimished, but his flags were all over the place. All the units I send didn't count as scoring anymore, so I couldn't replace them by my own.

Still won, barely. But that was very cool. Despite having just one scoring unit, he did have 3 out of 7 ruins.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
06-06-2006, 13:12
Having perused the book for a while now, I can see myself playing nothing BUT Cityfight! I like dense terrain, and these rules just add to the atmosphere...

Ironhand
06-06-2006, 13:16
I am very pleased with the book. I think they've managed to add substantially to the game without making it more complicated. The stratagems in particular I think are going to be a lot of fun.

wilsonian
06-06-2006, 13:17
Forgive my stupid question but are there any army list amendments or extra squads?

Mojaco
06-06-2006, 13:25
No, nada. One of the things that makes it good.

swamp_slug
06-06-2006, 15:05
Good thing too.
I love the Cities of Death book, I bought it to read through and give me some inspiration for a table I want to do this summer and now I have a really big itch to play a cityfight game, just need to get buildings.
I have to agree with cailus that the example armies are a bit lacklustre, but the modelling ideas are great and have inspired me to model strategem counters, and the stratagems are what this book is really about.

darren redstar
06-06-2006, 18:07
Sounds like lots of happy people with their cities of death box sets:(
but not me:mad:
pre ordered but no box:cries:
whats the point of pre ordering when they have already sold out- come to that how can they take an order when they know theyve sold out grrrrrrrr.

Ironhand
06-06-2006, 19:43
The example armies may be lackluster, but one of the main points of Cities of Death and the Stratagems is that you don't have to go on a mad buying/converting spree or build a whole new army to play. All of the urban warfare quirks are covered by the stratagems so you can take your existing army and dive right in.