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.

Greetings. I've been on hiatus for awhile but now recently a grip of friends and I have decided to try a return to 'the golden age' of WHF. Only thing is, what was the golden age?

Our general consensus is that 7th edition with 6th edition army books provided the best gaming experience that we remember. The ABs were amazing and the core rules solid. However there are always tweaks that can be made and now that those annoying FAQs and GW is out of the picture we're looking to do just that!

So, if you could return to an earlier period and tweak just a few things what would they be? Feel free to mention anything from 8th as well and/or include what you feel we're the major downsides to 7th edition.

I started playing in 5th edition, and stopped playing at the start of 8th.

I think I would go back to 6th/early 7th edition. That was my favourite time in Fantasy, when things were reasonably affordable, the rules were tight and tactical, and the model lines were becoming better and better with time.

I love the 6th edition Beastmen for example, they were an amazingly fun army to play small skirmishes with. I regret selling mine off when I moved out of Ireland.

Seige, the campaign system that was out then, the style and background in the Army Books, it was all top notch.

8th had some good points, but on the whole I found it a bit unweildy to play and I think it encouraged several playstyles I didn't enjoy. At the same time, GW started going for the "Big Centrepiece" method of marketing the game and I found this to be a turn off.

Downsides to 7th? Poor army book design later on in the edition. Especially the VC, Daemon and Dark Elf books. Particularly the Daemons had shockingly poor internal and external balance and made playing balanced games very difficult.

Thanks for the response. Myself and my gaming buddies agree the 'big 3' were a huge unbalancing problem during those times so we will be sticking to 6th edition ABs regardless of core edition.

Any thoughts on specific rules that you liked or would change/add/delete in 7th?

Step up seems like a valuable rule. One of the main criticisms of 6th was cavalry just charging in and obliterating the front rank of a unit so they couldn't fight back.

8th had some good ideas - pre-measuring, step up etc but the magic quickly proved broken beyond belief.........

Terrain didn't matter
Scenarios were dull

it was a bit better than previous editions but had serious balance issues

Step up is a good one to consider, I'll add that.

Was also thinking about the implications of pre-measure although we kinda liked the skill of eyeballing ranges.

Shooting in 2 ranks and random charge distances is another I just thought of. thoughts on these?

Random charge is very controversial, some like it and some hate it. I thought it was a reasonably good addition, because it meant it was viable to play slow moving armies like Dwarves offensively, as you could sometimes actually get the charge.

That and Step Up made slow moving armies much more viable overall. I think adding Steadfast on top pushed things too far in the direction of infantry though. It's a difficult balance to strike.

 Da Boss wrote:
Random charge is very controversial, some like it and some hate it. I thought it was a reasonably good addition, because it meant it was viable to play slow moving armies like Dwarves offensively, as you could sometimes actually get the charge.

Agreed. M+D6 or 2M+D6 would have been find for Random Charges, but I think the M+2D6 was a little too much. And so long as pre-measuring is in the game, random charge ranges add spice to the game. But this was a hard swing of the pendulum.

 Da Boss wrote:
That and Step Up made slow moving armies much more viable overall. I think adding Steadfast on top pushed things too far in the direction of infantry though. It's a difficult balance to strike.

Yeah, GW knows how to swing that pendulum with vigor. They either don't really swing it with intent, or they really throw their back in to it. Step Up and Steadfast were both fixes for the Cavalry issue. One alone would have been sufficient (Step Up the better), but both together (along with the very random Charge range and the over the top spell lists that ignored all Saving methods) really hurt the game for the players around here.

Aye, I stopped playing after getting a Pick Up Game in a GW where I spent ages deploying my dudes due to the inflated model counts, and then pretty promptly packed them all away again as a magical vortex got shot down my lines and ate my units.

I was also unimpressed by the lack of value in the army books in eighth edition - my Orc army book cost me a lot of money and yet it had pretty much 5 paragraphs of new material in it.

It is a shame, because I'd been an avid Fantasy player for years.

Random charge is very controversial, some like it and some hate it. I thought it was a reasonably good addition, because it meant it was viable to play slow moving armies like Dwarves offensively, as you could sometimes actually get the charge.

That and Step Up made slow moving armies much more viable overall. I think adding Steadfast on top pushed things too far in the direction of infantry though. It's a difficult balance to strike.

Agreed on all accounts. Dwarfs and non elven infantry in general is why I think random charges will make it into our changes. Steadfast was a horrible rule, IMO of course. That won't be making the cut.

Auto break from fear/terror is out too now that I'm browsing the material.

Keep em coming guys this is great.

One rule I really liked was March Blocking - I think it made MSU play much more viable and encouraged diversity in force creation and the avoidance of Deathstars.

Either 7th or 9th. 7th if you got less models, 9th if you want to stay with the times.

6th edition with the Ravening Hordes armylists. Not much flavour, but balanced against each other.

The real Golden Age of Fantasy was 6th edition before GW started to overdo it with certain armybooks (Skaven comes to mind as one of the tipping points).

7th didn't look too bad in the beginning (despite obvious money-grabbers like "now you need five models to form a rank"), but then Elves and their ASF struck, and finally The Ward appeared and daemon-finished the job.

8th provided a few good ideas, but overall it was an absolute failure and in the end it drove Fantasy to its death.

 Da Boss wrote:
One rule I really liked was March Blocking - I think it made MSU play much more viable and encouraged diversity in force creation and the avoidance of Deathstars.

Yes good call. I forgot how much the newer editions had changed.

Either 7th or 9th. 7th if you got less models, 9th if you want to stay with the times.

We're past caring about the times honestly. Just here to steal a few rules from the new additions.

I always preferred 8th

 Korinov wrote:
6th edition with the Ravening Hordes armylists. Not much flavour, but balanced against each other.

The real Golden Age of Fantasy was 6th edition before GW started to overdo it with certain armybooks (Skaven comes to mind as one of the tipping points).

7th didn't look too bad in the beginning (despite obvious money-grabbers like "now you need five models to form a rank"), but then Elves and their ASF struck, and finally The Ward appeared and daemon-finished the job.

8th provided a few good ideas, but overall it was an absolute failure and in the end it drove Fantasy to its death.

I enjoyed 6th quite a bit but skirmishers we're pretty OP'd iirc. 7th saw them toned down a bit. 4 model ranks were cool, 5 isn't a deal breaker though. Basically we wan't to avoid the OP or contraining stuff like ASF proliferation, 40+ blocks of steadfast infantry, uber magic phases and so on.

Keep it coming!

7th edition was extremely competitive and the most tightly balanced version of WFB that GW did.

It had a lot more problems than 8th did if you were actually trying to play something that resembled a medieval styled fantasy battle.

The biggest problems were that shooting was more effective that close combat, it became very Kurasawa rock paper, scissors, and MSU ruled the day.

Shooting units, especially things like cannons were ridiculously cheap and could wipe out entire units. Doom divers, Volley Guns, and other units could end entire games. 8th had this problem too, but it was much more toned down and random.

Like that scene in the Seven Samurai where the one samurai concedes before the duel even starts, the game became extremely predictable. There were certain match ups that could guarantee an army a decisive win long before any dice were rolled. This became especially true at higher level tournament play which I was unfortunately embroiled in. I had many games that weren't even worth playing in both the win and loss category. 8th didn't have this problem nearly as badly because again, it could be more random.

Taking large ranked units in most of the armies was a recipe for instant loss. Most of the best lists consisted of a ridiculous amount of small units. I can't tell you how many five man dog units I watched bounce around the table. It made for a game that wasn't really a fantasy battle.

So you have to ask yourself, what kind of person are you. Are you super competitive and enjoy the precision and predictability of chess?

Or do you want to see two armies that actually look like armies heroically clash on the table?

I am in the throws of a similar decision, but I have definitely gone with 8th because 7th was utterly miserable for me. I'm just not that kind of person, though I knew an entire club of people who were.

 Kasrkinlegion wrote:
7th edition was extremely competitive and the most tightly balanced version of WFB that GW did.

It had a lot more problems than 8th did if you were actually trying to play something that resembled a medieval styled fantasy battle.

The biggest problems were that shooting was more effective that close combat, it became very Kurasawa rock paper, scissors, and MSU ruled the day.

Shooting units, especially things like cannons were ridiculously cheap and could wipe out entire units. Doom divers, Volley Guns, and other units could end entire games. 8th had this problem too, but it was much more toned down and random.

Like that scene in the Seven Samurai where the one samurai concedes before the duel even starts, the game became extremely predictable. There were certain match ups that could guarantee an army a decisive win long before any dice were rolled. This became especially true at higher level tournament play which I was unfortunately embroiled in. I had many games that weren't even worth playing in both the win and loss category. 8th didn't have this problem nearly as badly because again, it could be more random.

Taking large ranked units in most of the armies was a recipe for instant loss. Most of the best lists consisted of a ridiculous amount of small units. I can't tell you how many five man dog units I watched bounce around the table. It made for a game that wasn't really a fantasy battle.

So you have to ask yourself, what kind of person are you. Are you super competitive and enjoy the precision and predictability of chess?

Or do you want to see two armies that actually look like armies heroically clash on the table?

I am in the throws of a similar decision, but I have definitely gone with 8th because 7th was utterly miserable for me. I'm just not that kind of person, though I knew an entire club of people who were.

Thanks for the response. I do remember MSU being dominant.
So in your opinion what changes would help to balance out 7th while still keeping to that core system?

8th was the most balanced and best set of Warhammer fantasy battles rules.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
8th was the most balanced and best set of Warhammer fantasy battles rules.

Please elaborate and contrast if you wouldn't mind.

Everything had a purpose.

In 6th and 7th you would get armies based completely around death star cavalry units that contained nothing but beatstick characters in the front ranks. As soon as they charged, the characters would just wipe out the enemy front rank and there was nothing they could do about it because you didn't have the step up rule so no one could fight back. Then they would break from combat because there was no steadfast rule.

That was the reason no one took any infantry unless they came with the stubborn special rule.

Infantry also couldn't outcharge cavalry because charging was a fixed value. This created a vast "no mans land" in the middle of the board because everyone can see the difference between how far infantry can charge and how far cavalry can charge. So you had a mexican stand off between two opponents who didn't want to move up because they knew it would put their units within charge range.

Initially I was against random charge distance but after playing a few battles it seemed much better.

Steadfast allowed basic infantry the ability to at least hold up the enemy for a turn or two before you could hit home with one of your hammer units.

Step up allowed units that strike last to be able to fight back after getting mercilessly slaughtered by faster opponents.

Anybody that thinks that cavalry wasn't good in 8th wasn't paying attention. They used to be able to run a train on pretty much anyone, now you actually had to think tactically about what to charge. It was a decent balance between cavalry and infantry.

People complain about the uber spells in 8th a lot, and some of them needed to be toned down for sure. But those people also forget about the 24+ power dice casting Tzeentch Daemon armies or the fact that both Infernal Gateway and Dreaded 13th were both 7th edition spells that completely deleted units. I can count on one hand how many times an 8th edition uber spell won or lost a game for me. Conversely I've had units Gateway'd off the table many times in 7th ed.

Was 8th ed. perfect? No.

Scenery rules could have been done better
Cannons were too powerful (In my experience this was not the case, and I've never even fielded a Cannon)
Some spells should have been toned down
Skirmishers could have been better
Magic Resistance was implemented poorly
And by the end (like all editions) some stuff was blatantly overpowered.

However, I've never seen an edition of a game where everything was on more or less an equal footing. Almost every unit had a purpose and could be useful in some way, and taking something that was fluffy wouldn't completely loose the game for you.

Thanks for the lengthy response . so how would changing 7th to include step up and random charges effect your perspective considering the 6th edition army books not newer books?

dominuschao wrote:
Thanks for the response. I do remember MSU being dominant.
So in your opinion what changes would help to balance out 7th while still keeping to that core system?

Like what others have said, I think the best change that came with 8th was the rule where units that get charged don't automatically die. Units fighting in initiative order made the game a lot more interesting. It made the game feel like warfare, not like a board game. Random charges were silly. That change alone could make 7th a much more playable game for people who aren't chess players.

8th had a far superior magic system that took emphasis away from magic. This was ruined by the spells being ridiculous unit ending nukes, but toning the spells down could make 8th's magic mechanics worth adopting. 7th ed. was so heavily dominated by magic and was very uneven in terms of how it affected different armies. This also fluctuated greatly as different army books got released. Tzeentch magic was insane until the 7th ed. Chaos book neutered it.

But just allowing every model in a close combat to fight instead of losing attacks like in standard 7th ed. would probably be enough.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and one other horrendous rule in 7th was fear causing troops auto breaking units. That made 7th miserable unless you were playing one of the OP armies that got to use it.

So heres what I've come up with so far lemme know what you say..

7th edition + 6th army books
(maybe a 7th edition AB exception or two? Edit- what I mean is are there any books from 6th that completely stand out as unplayable or OP'd where a 7th edition counterpart might substitute)

Additions/changes:

-Step up in combat
-Random charge lengths of move + 2d6" (address flyers, address frenzy?)
-Remove auto break/failed charge from fear. Terror stays same.



Considerations mentioned elsewhere:

-strikes last + strikes first = initiative order?
-Same init = simultaneous strikes?
-Evaluate some form of volley fire?
-Evaluate swift reform
(again evalute these in the context of 7th with 6th ABs)

Anything I'm missing here?

Probably.

Personally I would use an edited version of 8th with 8th ed. army books as I think those army books are some of the best.

Problem is, at least for us, the 8th edition books lacked the flavor, the unique magic items selection etc, and it still has sooooo much power creap, even being toned down in some instances (DE, VC, DOC). And the core rules we're written to support huge blocks of infantry which while great pretty much pushes out softer support units. Also the rules moved to things like vanguard and the proliferation of ASF and so on. Much easier for our purposes to adapt 7th then overhaul 8th. Just our consensus.

I concur with the 6th edition books having more flavor. This is especially true of Warriors of Chaos. The only thing that saved the 7th edition book was 8th edition rules making Chaos Warriors gods. The 8th ed. Warriors of Chaos ruined this and made it all about demon princes and Skullcrushers.

6th edition Warriors of Chaos book was by far the best.

 Kasrkinlegion wrote:
I concur with the 6th edition books having more flavor. This is especially true of Warriors of Chaos. The only thing that saved the 7th edition book was 8th edition rules making Chaos Warriors gods. The 8th ed. Warriors of Chaos ruined this and made it all about demon princes and Skullcrushers.

6th edition Warriors of Chaos book was by far the best.

What 6th Edition Warriors of Chaos book? It was Hordes of Chaos at the time 7th Edition launched, and they were Daemons and Warriors combined at the time with abilities to mix with the Beasts.

I liked the ability to mix the armies, it was one of the things that first attracted me to Beastmen actually, but the 6th Edition books did lack the relic and Character options that 7th Edition brought in, for all the armies.

Charistoph wrote:

 Kasrkinlegion wrote:
I concur with the 6th edition books having more flavor. This is especially true of Warriors of Chaos. The only thing that saved the 7th edition book was 8th edition rules making Chaos Warriors gods. The 8th ed. Warriors of Chaos ruined this and made it all about demon princes and Skullcrushers.

6th edition Warriors of Chaos book was by far the best.

What 6th Edition Warriors of Chaos book? It was Hordes of Chaos at the time 7th Edition launched, and they were Daemons and Warriors combined at the time with abilities to mix with the Beasts.

I liked the ability to mix the armies, it was one of the things that first attracted me to Beastmen actually, but the 6th Edition books did lack the relic and Character options that 7th Edition brought in, for all the armies.

That's the book that was used during 6th edition. The fact you could still mix all three Chaos armies together alone made the book superior to the first Warriors of Chaos book that was released in the middle of 7th. The only thing that made that book not suck was 8th edition making Chaos Warriors the utter beasts they should be. For the first time ever you could field a large number of actual chaos warriors and have the list be viable in tournaments. Then they released the 8th edition book which made the only good lists all Daemon Princes and Skullscrushers. Actual chaos warriors took a backseat again.

I'm trying to recreate the glory that was the 7th edition book used during 8th edition. Easily my favorite time playing WFB. People cried about Chosenstar and Hellcannons, yet you didn't see those lists regularly break the top 10 in the larger regional tournaments. Unlike Flying Circus Bretonnian type lists. I had so much fun throwing large blocks of chaos warriors at people and my army actually looked like a chaos army on the table.

OK after some discussion and tweaks heres what we're gonna start off with:

WARHAMMER ‘LEGACY’

Core rules:
The 7th edition rulebook will be used with the following additions/changes:

-“Step Up”. So long as a model is in base contact with an enemy model when it is their turn to strike the model may attack. This replaces the combat section rules that state: models that are stepping forward from rear ranks to replace casualties can’t attack that turn.

-Random charge length. All charges will instead be resolved by adding the result of 2d6 to the charging units base movement value. Flyers remain unchanged.

-Remove “auto break” and failed charges from fear. Terror remains unchanged.

-Units armed with missile weapons fire in 2 ranks.

-If a model has both the Always Strikes First rule and the Always Strikes Last rule, the two cancel out and neither applies so use the model's initiative.

Armies:
The following army books will be used:

-Beasts of Chaos 6th edition
-Brettonia 6th edition
-Dark Elves 6th edition
-Dogs of war 6th edition
-Dwarves 7th edition
-High Elves 6th edition
-Hordes of Chaos 6th edition
-Lizardmen 6th edition
-Ogre Kingdoms 6th edition
-Orcs and Goblins 7th edition
-Skaven 6th edition
-Tomb Kings 6th edition
-Vampire Counts 6th edition
-Wood Elves 6th edition
-Demons of Chaos 7th edition (Tentative, pending heavy restrictions forthcoming)

Regiments of Renown:
ANY single Core, Special or Rare unit choice, chosen from your army’s coinciding 8th edition army book may be selected as a 0-1 Rare choice aka a “Regiment of Renown”.
All characteristics, equipment, costs, upgrades etc will be used exactly as written in the 8th edition army book. Any Magic Items will instead be selected from the 6th (or 7th) edition army book listed under “Armies” above. Where a Core special rule is included, such as ASF, Hatred, Scouts and so on, the 7th edition rules will instead be used.