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.

Im sitting on the fence of starting warmachine or probably hordes.

not that many players in my gaming community plays ither warmachine or hordes but im kindof sick as *.#% of GW.
So i was hoping that my fellow dakkaites could gimme the scoop of the game and if it is worth starting.

Like similarities to 40k.
differences to 40k

Is it a big game with gakloads of models or smaller scenario type?
Im mostly leaning towards circle of orboros mostly cause i love the models, (dont know anything about the rules or anything yet)

any help and info will be appriciated.

Regards Ogard

Similarities
They both use Models and Dice

Warmachine and Hordes are usually smaller scale games, 30-40 models for a 35 Point game and league play is on a 4x4 not a 6x4.

Activation throws alot of people off when switching from 40k to WM/H. You move a unit, attack with that unit, onto the next.

There is a little more book keeping than in 40k, but its made super easy with the use of card protectors and dry erase makers. Oh and you need far less dice, it will be rare that you'll ever need more than 4 D6

Warmachine/Hordes (WM/H) has a smaller model count (probably 15-30 infantry and 2-3 'big' models in the more common 35 point games, and another 1-2 'big' models or another 10 infantry in 50 point games) than 40k. It's much more a skirmish style game than 40k or WHFB.

In some ways, WM/H is more similar to an RPG than it is an RTS like 40k. Units generally have a large number of 'options' (like Run, Charge, Attack, Special Attacks) and everything activates individually, in full, versus phases in 40k.

For example, in 40k two tactical marine units are standing side by side. In the movement phase, one remains stationary. The other moves 6". In the shooting phase, the stationary squad shoots 1 shot each at 24". The squad that moved runs d6". In the assault phase, nobody does anything.

Counterexample in WM/H, player turn begins with 2 units of Winter Guard Infantry (standard d00ds) standing side by side. Squad 1 activates. Squad 1 sacrifices its movement to gain a +2 situational aiming bonus. Squad 1 fires its hand cannons 8"; Model 1 shoots at a MechThrall, hits, and kills it. Model 2 shoots at a Mechthrall, hits, and kills it. Model 3 misses the third Mechthrall. Model 4 targets the missed MechThrall, hits, and kills it. Models 5 and 6 combine their fire to gain a boost to hit and damage for a single, more powerful shot and target a Helljack with high armor; they hit and do some damage that gets ticked off of the Helljack's damage grid, crippling its legs. Squad 1's activation is now finished. Squad 2 activates. Squad 2 issues a 'Charge' order, gaining +3 inches of movement and +1 dice to damage in melee, and charges the crippled helljack. Only 5 Winter Guard Infantry can get into melee range of the Helljack, so the 6th is not able to attack. 5 Winter Guard Infantry attack individually, easily hitting the Helljack's reduced Defense because of its crippled legs. Even with the extra die to damage, they only do a few points of damage across several systems, not enough to take out its systems or wreck the helljack. Squad 2's activation is now finished.

So even though you have fewer models, what those models can do is far more complex than 40k, and creating powerful 'combos' is of greater significance than just throwing a bunch of dice. Because abilities and combos can be so powerful, even 'bad' units can destroy very powerful models, so nothing can ever be considered a true hard counter or perfectly safe (unlike, for example, a Land Raider fighting somebody with only S7 weaponry).

For more information, try googling Battle College (a WM/H wiki) or checking out the Privateer Press Forums to speak with the community.

Another crucial difference in Warma/Hordes to 40k is the focus on your HQ. In 40k, you lose an HQ unit and you don't really bat an eyelash, as it doesn't necessarily screw your game. In WM/H, if your Warcaster/Warlock dies, you lose. What makes this really interesting is that generally speaking, your caster is the most powerful unit in your army, so they can do incredible things if you put them in the thick of things, but you have to balance that with the risk of losing them (and thus losing). Another crucial difference in WM/H that you don't see much of in 40k is the importance of synergies. When you think of adding a unit, the first thing you really think of is how will it sync up with another 2-3 units in my army. Far more so than in 40k, your battleplan is really determined by your composition.

More differences are the pace of the games. Warmachine is fast, and the small points scale encourages battles to be over within an hour or so (tops), so you can move onto a rematch or another opponent. This game is about going for the throat, not sitting back until turn 5 or 6 to hop on an objective.

Sourclams did a great job explaining a lot of the versatility of units, but what's really great about WM/H is that virtually every unit has a special ability. One of the things that frustrated me about 40k (I've played 40k for over a decade now) is the redundancy of units. Especially as a guard player, all my units pretty much did the same thing: shoot. They had different ideal targets, but that was just about it. In WM/H, you have guys responsible for buffing, debuffing, attacking, screening, opening charge lanes, temporarily disabling, tanking, etc. All of your units have a role to play, and each one can turn the tide of battle if used correctly. It's really pleasing to me to know that all of my units are important.

The most visible difference you'll encounter in a 40k to WM/H transition is the importance of strategy. Now I'm not saying that 40k does not involve strategy, but rather that the amount required is a fraction of what you need against a good WM/H player. In this game you need to exploit your synergies, you need to be thinking turns ahead, you need to play your deployment well, you need to be thinking of what your opponent is going to do, etc. To a 40k player that might seem like a dumb statement (as in, we already do that), but I promise you in WM/H the comparison is not even close. This game is not forgiving. If you make one egregious error, you will probably lose (but the games are short enough that you won't seriously regret losing). In my experience in 40k with my IG, the game was determined FAR more by who got the first turn than any real strategy. In WM/H, to my knowledge there are no weapons that will be able to shoot something on the first turn, so if you're getting shot it is because you moved into range.

Warmachine and Hordes are balanced, tactical, and intelligent games with a much more adult community. They require a lot of learning and experience to get to a top level of play, rather than just a good army list. You need to know what your units are capable of, and you need to know what your enemy is capable of, or your will be caught off guard. The WM/H fluff isn't nearly as good (not even close, really, IMHO), but everything else is vastly superior. If what I have said appeals to you, I HIGHLY recommend you take the plunge and buy a rulebook and a battlebox. My only regret is that I didn't start playing earlier.

Don't worry about making a decision, soon enough a press ganger will be along and you'll wake up with a headache and really awesome figures you can't remember painting.

Belerephon wrote:The WM/H fluff isn't nearly as good (not even close, really, IMHO)

I'd strongly disagree with that. 40K has a much broader setting, but the Iron Kingdoms have depth. There are actual recurring characters with actual motivation, and an actual advancing plot instead of random character biographies and one paragraph accounts of entire wars.

Laughing Man wrote:

Belerephon wrote:The WM/H fluff isn't nearly as good (not even close, really, IMHO)

I'd strongly disagree with that. 40K has a much broader setting, but the Iron Kingdoms have depth. There are actual recurring characters with actual motivation, and an actual advancing plot instead of random character biographies and one paragraph accounts of entire wars.

I agree. GW *spits on the ground* also has a good amount of years on Privateer Press in their fluff. Warmachine and Hordes has a few things that 40k (specifically, since that's the GW *spits on the ground* game that I play) doesn't:

1. An advancing storyline. Yup. Events actually happen in the Iron Kingdoms. People die (and get brought back, albeit in a more powerful fashion). Old debts are settled, and new ones are forged. The Warcasters and Warlocks actually do things in the fluff - they aren't simply legendary characters in GW *spits on the ground* codices that aren't really all that involved in the fluff, albeit a few paragraphs in the codex.

2. Characters. Again, G... that company's fluff, in the form of the Black Library, has fantastic characters, I'll admit that. I willy happily continue to purchase Black Library books (until we start seeing price rises, or a move from paper to... I dunno, stone? Resin?). But the characters we find in those books are generally absent from the game. In Warmachine/Hordes, the characters you play with actually have a stake in the fighting. It makes your actions a little more personal, if you will. You'll start thinking like them, especially in games where you happen to face your chosen Warcaster's main nemesis.

I can't wait for PP to start producing novels of their own. Perhaps, dare we ask, Dan Abnett?

You guys both make great points about the background. I think what I more meant to say was that, in terms of overall feel, GW has produced a setting which feels far more unique and real to me. This could just be a decade of involvement with their fluff talking, but I feel I know what's up when it comes to the 40k universe. Personally, I think the 40k universe is the best setting of all time in terms of depth and creativity, even more than Forgotten Realms or something similar, so yeah. But I'd rather have the 40k fluff over WM's any day with what I've read so far, but I'm also seriously partial to the whole "grim, dark" thing.

I would totally go full-mast if PP made a Butcher book though. Dan Abnett would have a field day with him.

In the Iron Kingdoms people have motives that aren't neck deep in FOR THE EMPEROR!

Yeah, probably because Ayn Vanar isn't powering literally the only thing that allows the Imperium to exist? The Imperium would go down in flames almost immediately without the Emperor's Astronomicon. And I would say Khador is incredibly similar to the Imperium, actually. Hell, that's why I chose them.

As a matter of interest are there any sites out there that have collected the fluff together for those of us new to the hobby to read?

I have all of the current rulebooks and forces of books for both Warmachine and Hordes but I know that a lot has been published in No Quarter and a lot of history was worked into the previous edition and it's expansions. I don't really want to buy rulebooks for an out of date edition just to read some more of the histories and stories about the characters.

To the OP, as someone who has recently given up on GW the other thing I like is the company itself. Privateer Press actually seem to give a damn about their game and the community that supports it. They regularly post on their own forums and it seems that they take notice of what's said. They constantly produce new models for all of the factions, attempting at least to try to keep things balanced. That kind of attitude has gone a long way to getting me interested.

Belerephon wrote:Yeah, probably because Ayn Vanar isn't powering literally the only thing that allows the Imperium to exist? The Imperium would go down in flames almost immediately without the Emperor's Astronomicon. And I would say Khador is incredibly similar to the Imperium, actually. Hell, that's why I chose them.

That leads to greater dynamism within the Iron Kingdoms overall, though. GW fluff, like GW as a company, is monolithic and relatively backward-looking. There's very little that changes the actual story, and much of the new development in GW background is actually fleshing out of stuff that's already happened (Horus Heresy, Battles of Legend series). It's much like what's going on in movies today, with everybody re-making old stories or sequels within established franchises. And don't get me wrong, I still really like GW stories and buy a lot of black library new releases. But Abaddon is still brooding in the Eye plotting his next nothing-really-happens Black Crusade where a kabillion nameless, featureless d00ds and systems will be destroyed and nothing will really happen.

IK stuff, by contrast, is still a bit bloated with Plot Armor, and although I would like to see a Warcaster/Warlock actually DIE in the fluff and cease to exist (although still be usable in-game), I do get the sense that things are actually happening and that there is an overall campaign taking shape with dynamic, shifting boundaries. Khador owns Llael now. The Skorne Empire is continuing to push further into Western Immoren. Harkevich...has a mechano-ham? Right.

Ultimately I don't think either is better or worse. GW material is much more panoramic, dystopian sci-fi space opera. IK material is slightly more immersive, steampunk sci-western.

40K's greatest strength is its greatest weakness in its story: It is a huge setting, with tons of stuff happening at any given time. The problem is that it is so big that nothing ever changes. In a setting where there are millions of worlds with trillions of people, no matter how many are lost nothing will change. Abaddon can come out of the Eye and kill millions and no one will even really notice. Then there is the fact that all the major characters are more or less immortal...unless we somehow go to Warhammer 50K I don't see anything that really matters changing.

40K used to be interesting in that GW would hold world-wide events, the results of which would supposedly decide what happened in the fluff...until they outright ignored the outcome of the last one they held, and never did another.

The only ways for the plot in 40K to truly move forward is for things to happen that would shake up the Imperium too much for GW to actually do them. The Emperor needs to finally die, or the Void Dragon needs to be released from Mars(and take a significant portion of the Adeptus Mechanicus with him).


Warmachine/Hordes has a much more focused plot. It is a single continent holding a finite number of people and resources, so things are very fluid and constantly changing.

Why i love the Iron Kingdoms fluff:

I have someone to root for. Be it an out and out good guy (Dartan Vilmon), a white knight with tarnished armor (Coleman) or a love story (Sorscha and Vlad/ Kara Sloan's forbidden love affair) or out and out villainy (Gore-effin-shade!).

I like how the future is still undecided.

I like the fact that not everything is so damn Grim.

I like the fact that sex isnt evil or risking calling evil unto yourself.

I like the fact that some surprises are still in store without the risk of destroying everything I love about the setting.

Bakerofish wrote: or out and out villainy (Gore-effin-shade!).

Except, he's really not that much of a villain. While he's definately evil, I'd say he honestly does think he has the best interest of the Iosans at heart, as he's been constantly backstabbing Cryx in his attempt to solve his people's little Soulless problem (which he thinks he has the solution for). He's less an out and out villain, and more an example of what happens when you'll do absolutely anything to save what you love.

I like that the elves in this setting are hardcore motherfethers in stormtrooper armor who are angry at the world.

Bakerofish wrote:
or out and out villainy (Gore-effin-shade!).

I'd say that Gaspy is more out and out villainy than Goreshade.

Having myself come from a warhammer 40K background. I can tell you the key differences that keep me playing warmachine instead of warhammer.

1) Well written rulebook
2) Great tournament format
3) Great rules support forum
4) Balanced Factions (Everything is Awesome)

Below are the things i miss about warhammer 40K

1)Sweet plastic model sets
2)Easier to play very large games (Warmachine has a lot of effects, which are perfectly manageable at its intended scale. Playing very large games hurt my head though)

BryanC wrote:Below are the things i miss about warhammer 40K

1)Sweet plastic model sets
2)Easier to play very large games (Warmachine has a lot of effects, which are perfectly manageable at its intended scale. Playing very large games hurt my head though)

Personally, I don't mind not having as many plastic kits as much (metal is great for infantry, imo, although I love my plastic jacks something fierce), but point #2 is definately true. I do find, though, that using the Unbound rules from the most recent No Quarter makes 200+ point games much more manageable.

Dont get me wrong, I love the Warmachine models. I just think that the 40K plastic sets are awsome as well.

Just think how sweet a multi-part Winterguard set would be.

The best thing about 40K is the hobby perspective. Now the actual game perspective is an entirely different discussion.


Conclusion:
Come to this side of the fence you will not be disappointed.

BryanC wrote:Dont get me wrong, I love the Warmachine models. I just think that the 40K plastic sets are awsome as well.

This is literally the only aspect of the 'game' part of the hobby where I think that 40k is at a significant advantage to WM/H. GW plastics are simply the best on the market, and there is almost no customizeability or poseability whatsoever with PP models due to being metal, while their plastics simply lack detail and 'cleanness' in a direct comparison.

BryanC wrote:
The best thing about 40K is the hobby perspective. Now the actual game perspective is an entirely different discussion.

This is due to the completely different philosophy that GW has compared to PP. GW(and quite a few of their fans) view the "hobby" part(building, converting, painting) as the most important part of the game, who cares about how good the game itself is. PP is more focused on the game. They put out awesome models, but are nowhere near as focused on the hobby aspect, particularly to the point where it is a detriment to the game like GW.

However, I do approve of PP moving to plastic warjacks, because metal heavies are very painful to assemble.

In spite of that, the No Quarter publication has a lot of cool hobby and background type stuff, such as designing and building thematic terrain for different factions and quite good painting guides.

It's almost like PP believes that it can be a game and a hobby all at the same time....

sourclams wrote:It's almost like PP believes that it can be a game and a hobby all at the same time....

What he said...

As along as the Game>Hobby I'm cool with that

I like putting them together and painting as much as the next guy but I want to be able to have fun with them too

sourclams wrote:It's almost like PP believes that it can be a game and a hobby all at the same time....

That is silly talk right there.

Khisanth Magus wrote:

sourclams wrote:It's almost like PP believes that it can be a game and a hobby all at the same time....

That is silly talk right there.

2 things?! Things aren't allowed to be 2 things! What is this, Transformers?!

For perhaps a slightly less biased perspective...

Pros:
-rules releases for all factions in a given game are generally concurrent
-interaction between gaming community and PP seems far less adversarial
-cost of starting and playing meaningful games is cheaper
-the game mechanics feel like a better abstraction of skirmish warfare

Cons:
-the models are generally far behind GW - particularly true in plastics, but also metals, female models are notable examples...this is improving though
-if you're into having books for stuff, you may need to get quite a few (core, faction, mercs, minions, wrath, any new releases...for one army), this is the cost of concurrent releases
-there are no consolidated faqs, just the rules and faction forums - i'm sorry but this is borderline insanity

Overall I like the system, but I don't compare it to GW as far as type of game. It's closer to playing MTG (magic). Don't believe the hype, the factions are not balanced. They're far closer than in GW games though. The game mechanics as published in the core rules only function well for skirmish style games. I think as points go up, it can be a non-linear increase in playing time.

Oh, and don't believe this more "strategic" bs. Neither gamesets are really "strategic". They each embody different ways of looking at tactics. GW games are primarily based around applying force. Movement, deployment, first turn, etc are primary because they exert control over how you apply force. PP games also deal with the application of force, but a significant component of many lists is force modifiers. So it becomes about applying proper force and leveraging the appropriate modifiers. This makes list construction even more vital than it is in GW games. There are no hard counters per se, but they can be functionally achieved in a good list vs bad list scenario.

CurrentlyUnknown wrote:
Cons:
-the models are generally far behind GW - particularly true in plastics, but also metals, female models are notable examples...this is improving though
-if you're into having books for stuff, you may need to get quite a few (core, faction, mercs, minions, wrath, any new releases...for one army), this is the cost of concurrent releases
-there are no consolidated faqs, just the rules and faction forums - i'm sorry but this is borderline insanity

I'm not trying to nitpick but:

When has GW recently released a decent female model?

You don't need any of the books if you don't want them. The only one you may want to call necessary is the main rulebook. The others aren't must buys like codex's.

Theres one up on there website. http://privateerpress.com/warmachine-and-hordes-errata-update The PP forums also give rules answers as well.

-wood elves, bretonnians, dark elves, dark eldar.

-that's why I said "if you're into having books for stuff"

-errata does not equal faq.