More Thoughts on MSU: Elite Armies and MSU vs MMU

It's apparently been over 50 games and like, nearly two years since I've sat down and pontificated wildly about the MSU style of play. I am still no expert, but do have some more thoughts to share.

MSU vs MMU

A little over two years ago, I revisited the old Cost vs Unit Size Debate for MSU play, and came down on the side that unite size should "gatekeep" this style of play for Kings of War. A horde of Zombies is cheap at 115 points, but has a large unit footprint, so the don't fit the MSU criteria well. An MSU list shouldn't be running hordes or legions, and I started awkwardly describing my play in this space as "regiments-maximum" MSU. How clunky.

Kings of War has distinct unit sizes, so I am ready to go a step further and assert that MSU is not a great term for, nor way to play Kings of War. The small units in Kings of War are troops. You are paying a huge premium for them most of the time; similar to when you run regiments instead of hordes. The troop-sized units can't unlock, so you can't make an army with just those small units like you can in other games.

I think MMU (Multiple Medium Units), clunky as it was for something like Warhammer, is a much better terminology fit for Kings of War, since we do have these more precise unit sizes. The Medium-sized units in this game are are regiments. Regiments unlock and one can definitely build lists around them too, like I have been. Running hordes is often still cheaper and easier, but MMU (alternatively "Regimental Spam") seems to be a more fitting way to describe this general style of play for Kings of War, where you ignore hordes and legions, and are using the smaller-sized Troops and Regiments units to multi-charge and take down enemy units. I think MMU will be my main descriptor for this playstyle going forward, with Regimental Spam likely creeping in when appropriate (such as when I take no troops at all). .

Elite Armies

I think like many wargamers coming from GW games, I was introduced to MSU primarily through reading the reports of the Outcast, Swordmaster himself, who used clever positioning and small units of very elite elves to secure wins back in the days of Warhammer Fantasy. My elite Warriors of Chaos lists could do MSU pretty well in the end; but my middling quality Empire troops could not. The stats just weren't there. and the Empire needed larger unit sizes with extra bodies and more ranks to win their combats, which wasn't how MSU worked. I think that trend holds for Kings of War. 

Kings of War gives you a discount for running larger units, so if the units you take are maxing out at the regimental size, you are getting them for the best cost you can, , and not putting yourself at any additional list-building points disadvantage. Elite units tend to top out at regiments to prevent "death star" units in the game, so armies with elite regiments are probably a good avenue for exploring this style of play. This elite-approach has been highlighted in some recent games, like Battle 059 where some Abyysal regiments went up against some very sturdy Imperial Dwarfs, and did manage to secure the win. So far this method does seem like a good path to further explore the playstyle, and I'll continue along it.

More thoughts are still swirling around here, and I definitely need to get some more games in to explore this newer perspective. This isn't as detailed or exhaustive as some of the other checklists I've explored, but teeing up some additional thoughts for these future games, I think a good MMU army for Kings of War will need to have have:

1. Good chaff. Either cheap stuff or speedy stuff but ideally both, so you can protect the things that you are relying on. Gargoyles obviously come to mind, but stuff like Abyssal Ghouls or Varangur Draugr could fill this role too.
2. Good regiments. Regiments provide unit strength and are how you hold ground, carry tokens, and win games. These units don't have to top out at the regimental size (like Abyssal Guard, Flamebearers and Succubi, to stick with the Abyssal examples), but I think that criteria helps identify armies and units that could be worth exploring. 
3. Good support. As-always, your Inspiring sources should be doing more than just looking amazingly pretty. We want stuff with good bonuses, like Healing or Auras, or other things. The Abyssal Harbinger is an amazing example, with Very Inspiring, a small innate ranged attack, a Rampage Melee 3 aura, and all that for just 65 points, so its easy to grab up some items for even more versatility, like the Lute or the Tricker's Wand.
4. Good monsters. If regiments are holding the line, I think monsters are how an MMU list deals the damage and wins the scariest fights. I unfortunately think these are going to be a must more often than not, to the prevalence of high-defense lists (like Dwarf Ironguard spam, Twilight Kin Impaler spam, or Ogre Siege Breaker spam, and to deal with other monsters, who often have Def5 and good Nerve). Lists these days really need a few things that can smash through heavy armor, and one's own monsters tend to do that nicely.

Unfortunately, I do think you need a few monsters around these days, as most infantry struggle to get high CS on their own. fortunately, most monsters are around 200 points, and the ubiquitous Giant is only 225, so monsters aren't prohibitively expensive. You also still need one unlocking regiment per fancy pick though, which in most cases, should still keep regiments numerous on the field and actual units as the primary factor in games, which is a fun way to play and differentiates this from a more "Monster-Mash" style of list. 

That's the latest and greatest swirling around my in my noggin regarding MSU, now MMU play for Kings of War. I'm still bouncing between armies, and many seem to need hordes to function well, but I'll hopefully put some of this theorizing into practice soon!