Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

ramman2004 wrote:
Is competitive player hate prevalent in warmachine too? I'm really wanting to find a war game that competitive players and list are embraced. I basically want competitive play like Magic The Gathering except in war gaming form.

Competitiveness is absolutely embraced. I think the 'hate' you see typically derives from the game being so unforgiving due to the combos and required knowledge of what, exactly, a model can do.

That's actually why I play less of the game than I'd probably like to, and when I do play, it's only with my buddies. I simply don't have the time or energy to put in enough work to even have fun in the "normal" (see: competitive) Warmahordes setting.

WM/H is pretty good but the reason i stopped playing it is that once you get into a competitive environment you can end up fighting the exact same lists over and over again. Happened to me at Warmachine Weekend, carbon copies of a gasby list drained the fun out of it for me.

Sargow wrote:
WM/H is pretty good but the reason i stopped playing it is that once you get into a competitive environment you can end up fighting the exact same lists over and over again. Happened to me at Warmachine Weekend, carbon copies of a gasby list drained the fun out of it for me.

I think it's due to some people and factions being hesitant about actual innovation, as opposed to general imbalances.

It depends on the meta and player group too. In some places, you get some very different approaches. Europe, the us and Australia all seem to approach the game differently, for example. I got tired of winter guard and kayazy a long time ago,,and branched out into other areas that see less play. I'm starting to reap the rewards of cavalry and steelheads for example.

There are other innovators that help to push the communities. Don't despair. the game isn't solved.

Sargow wrote:
WM/H is pretty good but the reason i stopped playing it is that once you get into a competitive environment you can end up fighting the exact same lists over and over again. Happened to me at Warmachine Weekend, carbon copies of a gasby list drained the fun out of it for me.

Funny. I rarely see any lists that are even remotely identical. Even lists which are basically running the same tech.

Deadnight wrote:

 dementedwombat wrote:
Nah, one of the things I don't like about Warmachine is that is is designed from the ground up as a balanced competitive game (isn't that a great complaint, eh?). Moreso that it is designed that way often to the exclusion of a lot of other things: non-existent campaign or narrative event rules, lack of any kind of variety in story driven scenarios (or any kind of variety whatsoever other than "35/50 point Steamroller" with the odd battlebox new player orientation thrown in) such a reliance on exact to the millimeter model placement that any kind of terrain other than squares of colored fabric isn't playable as designed.

You ignore the frequent number of campaigns and historical missions in nq, as well as older campaign materiel in books like apotheosis and escalation.

And how often do people actually use those materials at the average LGS? I can only speak for mine, but the answer to that would be "never". People get surprised when I tell them that there are warjack bond tables in the core rulebook to simulate linked series of encounters where a warcaster gets attached to their jacks.

I love what Warmachine does mechanics-wise. I'm not saying it's a bad game. It's a great game. It's just designed in a style that I'm not the biggest fan of. It can be played other ways, but most people don't seem to want to.

It doesn't really come up in WM/H because the better player tends to win games, there isn't usually a "I'm using a netlist" kind of thing like you find in 40k. Virtually everything is viable and often the most competitive players will try wonky lists with "subpar" units and still win tournaments because they're just that good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dementedwombat wrote:
I love what Warmachine does mechanics-wise. I'm not saying it's a bad game. It's a great game. It's just designed in a style that I'm not the biggest fan of. It can be played other ways, but most people don't seem to want to.

This is something I kind of agree with. Warmachine feels more like a game and less like anything narrative exists, even if it does. Similar to how MtG has fluff but nobody really cares about it. 40k at least feels like you can and should be making your own fluff and building the narrative behind your army; Warmachine just feels like it's straight up competitive game, fluff be damned.

I'll soon be kit bashing my own Convergence caster. (A count as Syntherion) I'll be using a Steel Soul Protector's torso and head with Synth's swiss army knife arms and floaty lower torso.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 dementedwombat wrote:
I love what Warmachine does mechanics-wise. I'm not saying it's a bad game. It's a great game. It's just designed in a style that I'm not the biggest fan of. It can be played other ways, but most people don't seem to want to.

This is something I kind of agree with. Warmachine feels more like a game and less like anything narrative exists, even if it does. Similar to how MtG has fluff but nobody really cares about it. 40k at least feels like you can and should be making your own fluff and building the narrative behind your army; Warmachine just feels like it's straight up competitive game, fluff be damned.

Granted I started to read up on the fluff a bit more. It is interesting, but the competitive game aspect Wayne mentions is a lot more dominating and feels like playing a tabletop version of a MOBA (loosely so to speak). That being said, some of the fluffy theme lists are relatively decent (Yes, I am looking at you Crusaders of Sul).

 Tanakosyke22 wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

 dementedwombat wrote:
I love what Warmachine does mechanics-wise. I'm not saying it's a bad game. It's a great game. It's just designed in a style that I'm not the biggest fan of. It can be played other ways, but most people don't seem to want to.

This is something I kind of agree with. Warmachine feels more like a game and less like anything narrative exists, even if it does. Similar to how MtG has fluff but nobody really cares about it. 40k at least feels like you can and should be making your own fluff and building the narrative behind your army; Warmachine just feels like it's straight up competitive game, fluff be damned.

Granted I started to read up on the fluff a bit more. It is interesting, but the competitive game aspect Wayne mentions is a lot more dominating and feels like playing a tabletop version of a MOBA (loosely so to speak). That being said, some of the fluffy theme lists are relatively decent (Yes, I am looking at you Crusaders of Sul).

Pretty much, it feels like a tabletop MOBA. Not that there's anything wrong with that I Just find myself not really caring that much about the fluff as I did with 40k.

If you aren't caring much about the fluff, you really aren't trying.

I love reading about the fluff. You do kinda need to buy all the books to get the overview since each book has a specific place in an order. The Mk2 army books aren't a rehash of what the Mk1 army books had, they're a continuation.

The IKRPG books also are sort of needed to get more of the general fluff as the army books are more specific.

Fortunately, you can buy all the old Mk1 books on PP digital for like $1 each.

I also think PP does an excellent job of having fluff be in the rules and vice verse. Sometimes its glaring, like a story and the warlock just clearly cast Defenders Ward and then transferred damage.

 Grey Templar wrote:
If you aren't caring much about the fluff, you really aren't trying.

I love reading about the fluff. You do kinda need to buy all the books to get the overview since each book has a specific place in an order. The Mk2 army books aren't a rehash of what the Mk1 army books had, they're a continuation.

The IKRPG books also are sort of needed to get more of the general fluff as the army books are more specific.

Fortunately, you can buy all the old Mk1 books on PP digital for like $1 each.

I also think PP does an excellent job of having fluff be in the rules and vice verse. Sometimes its glaring, like a story and the warlock just clearly cast Defenders Ward and then transferred damage.

It is not that I am not caring much, I just have a lot of reading material for school. So at the end of the day, I get a little reading done on that front.

The fluff really is most excellent. Try "Into The Storm" by New York Time bestselling author, Larry Correia.
But the stories in the fluff I find more compelling because they seem to feel more like actual history and as a hack historian I love it. But also the characters themselves have more complex motivations than Honor or Death to ___.

I prefer the PP fluff over the 40k stuff. I always felt like I was reading nazi propaganda when I read 40k fluff.

That said, I've never let the fluff get in the way of playing my army the way I want.

I love Warmachine. LOVE it.

When I started back into wargaming I fell across W/H and instantly wanted to play, but my small meta was pretty much 95% 40k and 5% fantasy. So I did what anyone who read page 5 would do.

I became a PG.

Within 3-5 months the player base has boomed and is taking over the 40k players. This is not an accident. I see GOOD friends fight REGULARLY over 40k rules. It just doesn't happen in Warmachine.

You will always find jerks in every system, but so far I have to search to find them. In fact, even when I visit a larger meta a couple hours away I don't see the jerks in W/H, I just hear about them on the occasional RARE post.

The truth is, the clean, easy to understand rules are what contribute to the mature dealings you have with other players. I had my face beat in in my very first tournament by one of the guys who was on the winning team for the recent WTC. He was a complete gentleman who went over my game afterward to help me get better.

I do the same with all newcomers and usually lose my games against them because I coach them and try to teach them the game. You just don't see that with 40k,not because the players are worse human beings, but because the game is FRUSTRATING and causes rifts.

So no, there aren't problems with people hating on competitive W/H players. People who AREN'T competitive can still play the game and have fun because they play the same game regardless of their approach to winning. 40k is different in that a newbie can take a netlist and do well since the game is 90% codex/list and 10% actual tactics. If you try to netlist W/H you will get stomped by good players with sub-standard lists. I play Garryth against newbies all the time because of that!

Some people prefer the fluff, or the models, or even simply the company producing one game over another. One area where there is no argument is in how tight and clean the W/H rules are compared to 40k. That, in my opinion, is the root cause of the two attitudes between both games and why you simply don't have the community troubles in W/H that you have in 40k.

One day, a friend and I were fighting over a Warmachine rule...

So we said, wait I'ma make a google it...
Found the answer on the official forums within 15 seconds

About hour later, we fight about something else, tried googling but wasn't able to find anything on our issue

Decided to make an account on the forums and ask the question, had the answer within about 5~10mins

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Surtur wrote:
I have yet to see ANY other game ferment such an attitude towards fellow players over something as simple as the color of your dudes.

Don't go to Mobile. The Swan hate is palpable.

Hey now - don't go hating Swans

I actually have a theory on this issue. I think that a lot of the attitude surrounding Warmachine can be traced back to the decision to use unit cards in the boxes. I understand why they did it this way. The rule cards are really nice for the way the game works and the convenience factor is impressive, but I still don't really agree with it.

It basically made the faction books (where the majority of the fluff is) completely unnecessary. You look online to see what units you want then buy the box to get the rules. The only people who bought the book are people who already wanted to read the fluff.

With the army book model you had at least a minimum baseline fluff familiarity that comes from the "I bought this dang book I'm going to get my money's worth" skim. I almost wish PP had made the books mandatory (maybe a page of punch-out unit cards in the back) for that reason. They already do something very nice by selling hard and soft cover books and letting people pick in that regard, and I bet they do sensibly put together digital versions too (although since I don't use a smartphone or tablet I wouldn't know).

 Swan-of-War wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Surtur wrote:
I have yet to see ANY other game ferment such an attitude towards fellow players over something as simple as the color of your dudes.

Don't go to Mobile. The Swan hate is palpable.

Hey now - don't go hating Swans

*deadnight grows an epic beard and puts on commissar hat*

Ignore this filthy southerner. They cheat and lie and are worthless cowards. The empress demands you hate cygnar. It is every true khadorans patriotic duty to do so unfailingly and unflinchingly.

It is also your duty to grow an epic beard.

Deadnight wrote:

 Swan-of-War wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Surtur wrote:
I have yet to see ANY other game ferment such an attitude towards fellow players over something as simple as the color of your dudes.

Don't go to Mobile. The Swan hate is palpable.

Hey now - don't go hating Swans

*deadnight grows an epic beard and puts on commissar hat*

Ignore this filthy southerner. They cheat and lie and are worthless cowards. The empress demands you hate cygnar. It is every true khadorans patriotic duty to do so unfailingly and unflinchingly.

It is also your duty to grow an epic beard.

May I interest you in a copy of the True Law

As a somewhat aside, I like how with every book release you see at least some shake up of the factions involved.

It's not always meta breaking, but new units (or even just UAs) can really change how certain casters/locks play.

 Grey Templar wrote:

Deadnight wrote:

 Swan-of-War wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Surtur wrote:
I have yet to see ANY other game ferment such an attitude towards fellow players over something as simple as the color of your dudes.

Don't go to Mobile. The Swan hate is palpable.

Hey now - don't go hating Swans

*deadnight grows an epic beard and puts on commissar hat*

Ignore this filthy southerner. They cheat and lie and are worthless cowards. The empress demands you hate cygnar. It is every true khadorans patriotic duty to do so unfailingly and unflinchingly.

It is also your duty to grow an epic beard.

May I interest you in a copy of the True Law

He who pays the coin is the "True Law".

No so good sir. Menoth gives the law freely. Acceptance isn't optional.

I'll put my faith in the empress, thanks!

I have seen only one list I hate, and that is the Triple Earthbreaker list.

And never count yourself out and know what your guys can do. I assasinated pGoreshade with Harkevich because he got overzelous with one model on the board left on my side

I'll put my faith in the Maiden of Gears.

The Dice Gods will rule you all!