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.

So, I know these "new player" threads probably make up about 50% of the total threads on here. But in reading as many of them as possible, I don't think I've seen one addressing what I'm going to bring up. So I thought this might either spark some unique discussion, or you could just flat out tell me to try another game.

I'll start off(so you don't get the wrong idea from the rest of my post), with a bit of my gaming experience. I've never played a table top miniatures/wargame before, the only thing that could possibly be related to it would be Starcraft, which, despite not being very competitive, I got to platinum league decently easy, so I think I at least have some small understanding of strategy in war-type games. I also play Magic, and have no issue with spending hours reading about meta-game, strategies, deck lists, interactions, etc. And I've already spent a number of hours watching Warmachine BattleReps.

That being said, when I play games, I generally have the most fun when I'm being as completely reckless and impulsive as I can get away with, with as little regard for personal safety as is possible.

I'm not terribly competitive, and have zero WAAC mentality whatsoever. Most of my strategies will just involve a win condition that I think would be really cool if I could manage to pull it off, and make for an enjoyable game for both myself and(when it's possible) my opponent as well. Slowly agonizing over every possible move and counter-move 20 steps ahead can make me feel like I'm playing a really expensive re-skin of chess, and be kind of tiresome. Having a big, flashy victory with tons of style points is far more important to me than a steady and consistent win-loss ratio.

Now, I understand a game like this will have a large amount of necessary strategy, and I don't have a problem spending hours watching battreps and doing my homework. But I'm just wondering if there's a place in the game for my sort of preferred play style, and not always requiring strict discipline and adherence to strategies which are the most statistically probable to have a consistently favorable outcome.

So, will I be able to enjoy casually running around a gameboard, smashing my opponents with cool looking miniatures? Or will I just be constantly ground into the dirt and laughed off the table by power-gamers if I refuse to become a try-hard power-player myself?

If so, any advice you could give to me on a choice of faction that would be more forgiving of such reckless, aggressive behavior would be much appreciated. I'll say I'm a bit more partial to the idea of warbeasts, compared to big robots, and the risk-reward of fury, but I'm willing to hear the merits of any faction.
Also, I don't know if it's really relatable at all, but while I normally flip-flop like crazy with factions, classes, colors, specs, characters, etc, in any game I play, in the 16 or so years Starcraft has been around, I've never had a desire to play anything but Zerg, if that speaks to my possible wargame preference at all.

You seem to be a bit of a mix, but overall, I believe you would enjoy Warmahordes. There's plenty of room for casual play in there. Hordes will definitely open up more options for bringing more smashy things.

Legion of Everblight can feel quite zergy in a sense. eThags can do a shredder spam list if you feel like really playing up the zerg angle.

People on here can tell me the opposite is true for their experiences, but in my experience everyone I've met who plays WM/H is super competitive. They care mostly about playing the game in tourneys and usually run ultra-competitive lists. Few of the armies were painted at all, or based. Some people don't like that aspect of the hobby which is fine, I just noticed it much more in WM/H players compared to other systems. Before I saw all this, I was pretty into the idea of Khador, which you might like also. After appearances, the next thing I liked about it is that khador can be a completely reckless and wild faction. Charge the enemy with everything because your jacks are bigger than their jacks. I think the common WM saying is "apply axe to face". There is a youtuber called wargamegirl who runs khador and has nice batreps in my opinion, although they are few. Most people recommend Miniwargaming on youtube for good battle reports. Their older WM/H batreps were narrated over to detail the game, which I liked more than the "banter style". I'm sorry I don't know enough about WM or Hordes to give you more than that, but that is my experience and it's why I've barely played and it's taken a backseat to basically all my other hobby stuff. If you want a lot of competitive play, you'll find it easily.

If you like zerg so much, have you considered tyranids from WH? I've seen a few people who made armies based on zerg units like hydras; pretty awesome stuff. Also you can really swarm an enemy with models playing tyranids. Check out strickingscorpion82 on youtube for a few cinematic batreps involving tyranids and other wh races.

In the end you should consider what people around you play. Do you frequent a game store now for MTG? What do they play over there? Sometimes it's hard to convince others to play a new system.

The post probably sounds pretty contradictory, now that I think about it. It's not that I really have zero ability to be competitive. As I said, I've played platinum league in sc2, and I've also played at gold level in League of Legends, made gladiator in WoW, and was the highest ranked player on my Warhammer: AOR server from launch until I quit. So, while I understand it's a totally different beast, I'm no stranger to picking games apart and exploiting metagame holes.

But I mostly played at those levels because I enjoyed playing with friends, and am more likely to fight tooth and nail when it's for the benefit of said friends. When I'm playing by myself, I'm far less likely to be competitive. Especially when I'm playing face to face with what's (hopefully) a friend, or possible new friend. I won't really enjoy rock-paper-scissoring or pounding my friends into the dirt, so I tend to enjoy being a bit more fast and loose with my tactics.

Generally, I tend to shy away from archetypes where I turtle people into oblivion, or have to be extremely careful about any possible move I could make. If there's an archetype in a game that gives me a bit of leeway when I bite off way more than I can chew, or that rewards me in some form for having no regard for my own safety, or even for hurting myself, I tend to gravitate towards that.

I did look a little into the WH games, but ridiculous entry cost for GW stuff aside, the local area seems to be much more WM heavy. Though there is a GW store very close to me, I've yet to check it out, and have seen mixed opinions on the quality community most people have found at GW stores. As far as shops I go to for MTG, only one game shop has one day a week of 40k/WHFB, but it's also a second WM/H day, which usually sees more of a showing. They haven't had a journeyman league for a while, and despite wanting to make one, have run into issues with actually getting one into action, and don't have any definite plans as of yet. So I think I'd just be jumping into things with established people. I've been assured it's a pretty great group and all that stuff, but I doubt they would be telling me to not come and play games(and spend money) in their store.
I know the most logical thing is just to go and check it out for myself, in person, but socially awkward as I am in situations meeting new people, I thought it'd be best to get as much of an idea of things as I can, before I go and bother people in person.

The best advice I can give you is to get a hold of your local Press Ganger and play a demo game. That'll give you an idea of whether or not you actually enjoy the rule set as well as a look into the mindset of local players. You can certainly get what you're looking for out of the game, and the sort of tricksy skew list you seem to describe can be a blast to play. What will invariably be the biggest influence is the quality of your own local community, and there's no real way to find that out without engaging them yourself.

That makes a lot more sense, I wasn't sure what your experiences were with either WM/H or WHE. Not to advertise Khador too much but you should check out the Butcher. He's a popular caster and gets advantages for going into melee after melee, which can be dangerous since if he dies then you lose. Also I hope I don't start up this argument here but I have seen others argue that the cost of WM stuff is about the same as WH if you consider playing in similar sized armies. WH is just played in larger games usually but they also have a version of journeyman league called escalation league.

I have to agree with the above poster that you are best off going to the store with the WM/H group and asking questions. They'll probably offer to set up a demo game for you without you even asking and they might be able to give you advice on factions. Also the Legion of Everblight might fit you well, as the strategies with Lilith that I've seen are pretty cool in terms of fury risk. If you haven't heard good things about your looking WH group and you're already not comfortable with situations like that then maybe you are best to avoid it and try WM/H first. You always have a backup if you dislike it, right?

Emery wrote:
The post probably sounds pretty contradictory, now that I think about it. It's not that I really have zero ability to be competitive. As I said, I've played platinum league in sc2, and I've also played at gold level in League of Legends, made gladiator in WoW, and was the highest ranked player on my Warhammer: AOR server from launch until I quit. So, while I understand it's a totally different beast, I'm no stranger to picking games apart and exploiting metagame holes.

But I mostly played at those levels because I enjoyed playing with friends, and am more likely to fight tooth and nail when it's for the benefit of said friends. When I'm playing by myself, I'm far less likely to be competitive. Especially when I'm playing face to face with what's (hopefully) a friend, or possible new friend. I won't really enjoy rock-paper-scissoring or pounding my friends into the dirt, so I tend to enjoy being a bit more fast and loose with my tactics.

Generally, I tend to shy away from archetypes where I turtle people into oblivion, or have to be extremely careful about any possible move I could make. If there's an archetype in a game that gives me a bit of leeway when I bite off way more than I can chew, or that rewards me in some form for having no regard for my own safety, or even for hurting myself, I tend to gravitate towards that.

I did look a little into the WH games, but ridiculous entry cost for GW stuff aside, the local area seems to be much more WM heavy. Though there is a GW store very close to me, I've yet to check it out, and have seen mixed opinions on the quality community most people have found at GW stores. As far as shops I go to for MTG, only one game shop has one day a week of 40k/WHFB, but it's also a second WM/H day, which usually sees more of a showing. They haven't had a journeyman league for a while, and despite wanting to make one, have run into issues with actually getting one into action, and don't have any definite plans as of yet. So I think I'd just be jumping into things with established people. I've been assured it's a pretty great group and all that stuff, but I doubt they would be telling me to not come and play games(and spend money) in their store.
I know the most logical thing is just to go and check it out for myself, in person, but socially awkward as I am in situations meeting new people, I thought it'd be best to get as much of an idea of things as I can, before I go and bother people in person.

Turtleing is pretty punished in WM/H. Any given scenario will force you into combat. Even out of scenario, it's no guarantee of anything. Shooting tends to be a support aspect to mainline melee. Agressive play is rewarded and doing goofy things like throwing your opponents heavy jacks right back at their warcaster can pay high dividends. For forgiving factions, trolls is somewhat forgiving for hordes as everything has tough or good defensive stats (with buffs). Legion is forgiving in that it looks at the terrain section of the rules and throws them in the bin. Skorne can play the masochistic route with damaging your own models for buffs. Legion has a few options along that route with incubi and the spawning cauldron to turn out models after your dudes die. Circle isn't quite forgiving and doesn't like to risk things. Tends to be methodical as it's beasts are glass cannons or stone walls.

I've been playing warmahordes since it came out. I don't think I've played a tourney in about 10-12 years, yet I play at least once every couple weeks depending on what game my local crew wants to play that night.

Any miniatures game is exactly what you make it to be. Someone's local meta may be all "Page 5" and take no prisoners. Someone else's maybe much more laid back.

Is the game for you? Find the local Pressganger and run some demos. Hang out and watch some larger point games. Find the local players in your area that play the armies you are interested in and watch them. It all holds true for any game out there...WM/H, GW, FoW, Infinity, Mali.

I think you might like the game, but agree that you should demo first.

Warmahordes works best in a competitive type setting because the rules are most balanced for a steamroller (competitive) type environment. I enjoy that because it means the rules inherently interact really well and even casual play is really smooth. In every tournament I've played I've always had a good time. Hell, I missed my shot at first place once to a rube goldberg assassination that I couldn't even be mad at.

As for reckless type play, any of the butchers as mentioned would fit that bill. Gators too, they're inherently small model count and aren't a 'full' faction, but they're incredibly tough. Plus the flying circus with wraslers is amazing.

I think you would like WM/H. I am far from a power gamer myself. I choose most of my force based on aesthetics, and try to make the best force i can with the models I like. I enjoy it because the game has a great rule set that allows almost anything to happen and the game is never over till the fat lady sings. The thing about WM/H is win or lose the game is usually fun and exciting.

Emery wrote:

If so, any advice you could give to me on a choice of faction that would be more forgiving of such reckless, aggressive behavior would be much appreciated.

Since your background is in sci-fi, I would recommend you look at http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/ instead for the time being.

I play both warmachine and infinity (as well as many, many other tabletop games) and I'm a diamond level starcraft 2 player if that helps.

Warmachine is very, very competitive at it's core. For example, you can lose before the game starts because of army composition.

I suggest widening your options before committing.

 juraigamer wrote:

Warmachine is very, very competitive at it's core. For example, you can lose before the game starts because of army composition.

To expand on this point.

The reason the above is true is because the game is balanced around competitive events, and competitive warmachine formats are where you bring at least 2 lists to the event. There are also 3 list formats as well.

Warmachine list building has an element of Rock-Paper-Scissors, playing list chicken with your opponents, and then the actual playing of the game itself.

So the game is balanced, but only if you build lists which would be competitive. And then playing a one off game can result in you having a bad matchup. Most players, even if they don't personally go to tournaments, still make tournament grade lists just because thats how the game is played.

Largely, its all about player skill. Which includes knowing how to construct a pair or trio of lists which compliment each other, knowing what other faction list combos will likely be, being able to analyze your opponent's list choices, and then drop the best list choice for the possible matchups.

There really isn't such a thing as a TAC list in Warmahordes. Generally, constructing a list pairing is something like taking 1 list which does a few things decently well but has a couple glaring weaknesses as well. Then your second list will be a skew list which has more potential bad matchups, but being very good against what takes out your first list.


Warmachine is also VERY unforgiving. The slightest mistake can, key word: can, mean you just lose. Especially against lists which focus on assassination, or just casters who have a powerful assassination threat. Like you leaving a model who is in eCaine's charge range within 5" of your caster. You basically just handed your opponent the game as Caine charges, Gatecrashes, feats, and shoots your caster to death.

That illustrates the fact you need to know what certain models and key abilities do. Knowledge is power, and the difference between life and death.

Even if your list is a hard counter and/or you are winning the game, its still possible for your opponent to pull a win out of their butt if you make a mistake.


Basically, you need to play like a power gamer. But you can still do that with the casual gamer attitude. Warmachine is basically a game where you play as a power gamer, but everyone has the attitude of a casual player. Even at tournaments. Its a lot friendlier of an atmosphere when you go with the baseline of everyone is going to play to win and do their best. It removes all the pressure.

It's not really rock paper scissors as much as it's Achilles heel. Certain lists such as certain circle of Orboros lists can have major problems against Everblight. So they need to take something that either removes the weakness against the faction or counters it.

 juraigamer wrote:
For example, you can lose before the game starts because of army composition.

I've played this game since 2003 and never, ever, not even once saw this happen.

There are good match ups and bad match ups, bad match ups are in the vast majority due to one or both players using skew lists but I've never saw a match up that was bad enough that the game was un-winnable...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:

The reason the above is true is because the game is balanced around competitive events, and competitive warmachine formats are where you bring at least 2 lists to the event. There are also 3 list formats as well.

There are also single list competitive formats as well and they are just about as common as the 2 and 3 list formats. Go look at Hardcore mode tournaments.

 Grey Templar wrote:

Warmachine list building has an element of Rock-Paper-Scissors, playing list chicken with your opponents, and then the actual playing of the game itself.

This is not true. You can choose and build your lists to have that element of Rock-Paper-Scissors or you can choose to build balanced, TAC lists that simply don't worry themselves about the list chicken part of the process.

 Grey Templar wrote:

There really isn't such a thing as a TAC list in Warmahordes. Generally, constructing a list pairing is something like taking 1 list which does a few things decently well but has a couple glaring weaknesses as well. Then your second list will be a skew list which has more potential bad matchups, but being very good against what takes out your first list.

Again, not true.

A TAC list that has a 50% chance to win against any opposing list is something that almost any faction can easily build. The problem is just that, a list of that type will get you an even chance of winning the game (with player skill and the occasional roll of the dice being the deciding factors), while if you make a skew list, then your chance of whining your favourable matchups will rise to 60 or 70%.

But that now opens up the list chicken problem, because a list that has a 60 or 70% chance to win a certain matchup, will equally have a much higher chance of losing other matchups, making the identification of those bad matchups and the list selection process prior to the beginning of the game have a much higher importance.

And this opens up a strategic dimension to the game in the form of how each player wants to approach this problem. Do you take all balanced lists that don't care about list selection? Do you take a skew list and a balanced list to cover any eventuality that the skew list can't deal with? Or do you know so much about the game that you've perfectly identified every bad matchup that your every list has and so can take two skew lists that cover each others weaknesses perfectly?

None of the major tournaments here are single list formats. You have the option of only taking one list still, but no serious players exercise that.

 Grey Templar wrote:
None of the major tournaments here are single list formats. You have the option of only taking one list still, but no serious players exercise that.

I might be wrong, but aren't there a number of hardcore (single list) tournaments, at least ones attached to major events? I almost always see people talking about tournament results in terms of "So and so won event X, and placed 3rd in hardcore, while some other guy got 2nd in Iron Gauntlet" etc. I agree that two list format is the most balanced, but I am pretty sure single list tournaments happen.

As to balance, the game seems to work pretty well for less than super competitive levels. Most people can't play at that level even if they bring the lists, and in my experience lists count a lot less for success than not making mistakes. And good lord, are there a LOT of mistakes to make in any given game. There are bad match ups, sure, but very rarely does it feel like a 30-70 split if you are playing a well built TAC list. Maybe against some Cryx lists, but that seems to have been toned down a little.

Really for me, M:TG seems like the closest analogue, in that sometimes you are facing an uphill battle, but it almost never comes down to the sharp "run these 4 decks or lose" situations M:TG does. It feels to me a lot more like a high level draft for M:TG, where if you build intelligently, knowing what you want your list to do and having answers to the questions your opponents's lists are going to ask, you will do well and results will tend towards player skill. That said, learning to build is a pretty steep curve, and there is a lot of skill range to master. Expect to get your teeth kicked in for a few months.

Also, maybe avoid Khador. The Butchers are bonkers fun, but most people seem to get in for the big scary jacks, and you won't want more than 1-2 of them in most lists. If you want big smashy things, look to Hordes. Those factions can more reliably handle piles of monsters, especially Skorne.

 Wehrkind wrote:

I might be wrong, but aren't there a number of hardcore (single list) tournaments, at least ones attached to major events? I almost always see people talking about tournament results in terms of "So and so won event X, and placed 3rd in hardcore, while some other guy got 2nd in Iron Gauntlet" etc. I agree that two list format is the most balanced, but I am pretty sure single list tournaments happen.

Yes, that is what I was trying to get at. Most major conventions will have a hardcore tournament, a SR tournament, an Iron Gauntlet tournament and sometimes a team tournament as well (and a Masters just to top it all of).

But what I think Grey Templar was saying was that at the store level, the most common tournament format would be double list SR.

Ahh gotcha. Around here we often do 1 list tournaments, but I think it is largely because the tournaments are smaller (like 12 people) and the gamers are magpies who play every game instead of focusing.

What I'm talking about are Steamroller tournaments. Not masters or hardcore, which are different formats.

Steamroller, the format wm is designed around, is almost always two or three list.

I haven't played Magic in many years (1995?) but from what I hear from Magic players that go to W/H, it is more comparable to Magic than many other games due to the fact that you are building lists that synergize well. I was teaching a friend about how to build lists in W/H as I find it best to ensure you have a specific direction for a given list. For example, you don't just pick and choose random things, you want everything in the army to work together toward a single goal ( I used eVyros' Murder of Griffons list to illustrate that point).

I really like Privateer Press' official forums as well, it is a great place to discuss specifics with people who play your chosen army.