Basically i am fully aware of the short comings of Games workshop but i know nothing about the games produced by Privateer Press. Not really intersted in playing their games, because i don't like the art style/not entirely convinced by the setting, but some of the models are wonderful. I was just wondering what Fans have to say about Warmachine and Hordes etc. Are their games fun? Are the models too expensive? Are PP attentive to their fans? etc...

Boring games, not enough dice being chucked around, and an extremely patchy (not to mention repetitive 'oh look. Another giant monstery thing') model range.

Not for me ta.

I prefer my grand battles to Skirmish, and when I do do Skirmish, I like development through experience, and as far as I'm aware, PP games don't have experience trackers. Plus, what with the fixed characters, it's akin to a game of top trumps in my eyes.

I like their games and their models. My biggest problem is I just don't have the time to focus on another game when I have such a huge investment in GW and so many models still on deck to paint.

My suggestion would be to get someone to give you a couple of demo games, play it and see if you like it. It will be a big help if your local game shop or club has a lot of players who can help you get into it, but if you're the only one in your club trying a new game it might be tough to get new folks into it when you are barely into it yet yourself.

Mr Mystery wrote:Boring games

False. Very much a nail biting and tactically challenging game with lots of carnage and battling of player wits.

extremely patchy (not to mention repetitive 'oh look. Another giant monstery thing') model range.

Two words: Space marines

fixed characters, it's akin to a game of top trumps in my eyes.

Sort of like the special characters used rather heavily now in 40k...

I play both companie's games and am a fan of each for vastly different reasons:

40K: lots of models/mass combat, campaign/story potential, cool conversion/hobby options

WM: Easily the most strategically challenging miniatures skirmish game on the market. It is all about combos, synergy carnage and being aggressive.

40K is a hobbyist's game.

Wm is a Gamers game.

Note: WM plays a lot like M:TG in miniatures form. It is about the list building and the combos. IF ultra-competitive play does not interest you this might not be the game for you.


Also: You'd be much better served going to the Privateer Press forums and asking about the game there as opposed to going to what is essentially home turf for the biggest rival game. You are going to get the same reaction here as people do that ask about 40K there, and that isn't a good thing.

Ah yes. Clearly not enjoying the games makes my own personal opinion invalid.

Sorry, forgot I was on the internet for a second.

Seriously, I find the games a tad dull, for the very reasons CT Gamer enjoys them. Horses for Courses and all that.

One upswing to this of course, is that the boxed sets come with 'pick up' rules, keeping initial outlay relatively low. Quite a bonus there, as for the price of a handful of models, you can get some idea of whether you'll enjoy the game. Get two or three and you should have just enough variety to get others to try it.

Me, tried it, didn't like it.

Warmachine and Hordes are much more sophisticated games than 40k is. Not sure about fantasy; never played it. Because you're not just throwing lots of dice around, each decision you make is that much more important, doubly so with all the available combos in the game.

I've come to appreciate both games for different reasons after being pulled in hard by Warmachine. 40k's a more relaxing, just messing around game, where you have to think during a game of WM. I still highly prefer WM over 40k, but an occasional 40k game's okay once in a while.

Mr Mystery wrote:Ah yes. Clearly not enjoying the games makes my own personal opinion invalid.

He asked for opinions. You gave yours and I offered counterpoint.

Yes, I think that IS how the internet works...

Cheers

I love 40K. However, I, find WM/H to be more tactically challenging than 40K. You can tell at certain points in a 40K game that you're screwed and might as well call the game. I've never done that when playing WM/H. PP pays more attention to and interacts with their fans than does GW, but that can be said of almost any miniatures company these days. You'll occasionally find the higher-ups at PP on the official PP forums and they do a lot of podcast interviews.

Price wise PP is a little cheaper than GW with most comparable minis and a lot cheaper with a few others. For example, GW retail on a 5 count box of plastic Space Marine Terminators is $50. PP retail on a box of 10 plastic Trollblood Fennblades (comparable size but with more variations in poses and greater detail) is the same price. So twice the models for the same price. But all that means squat if you don't like the game.

7 years ago I started playing Warmachine. 7 years ago I stopped playing 40K.

I enjoy the game immensely. You have much more options available to you, both in actions and game mechanics (Look, i can walk in or out of combat!). I enjoy the fact that you're not rolling tons of dice and hopping to just roll better than your opponent.

In my own opinion, Warmachine/Hordes is like chess, and 40K is like checkers. Both are fun, but I enjoy the complexity of Warmachine/Hordes better.

As for the company, I also enjoy PP more than GW. They just did a complete overhaul of their systems, releasing a book a month so that everyone had updated information, and not one model was removed from play. Even though it's MKII, the core rules from MKI carried over.

Is it for everyone? No. But for me, it's the best choice out there.

Just started playing WM/H about two months ago and I am just about ready to sell off all of my 12 years worth of 40k stuff. The game has a similar amount of army flavours, but each army can be played in a ton of different play styles and win, unlike 40k. The depth of a single army's range of models feels about as big as owning half the 40k range in terms of what you can do with it (at least for the factions I have played with so far Khador, Cryx, Mennoth, Mercs).

The rules set allows for a lot more strategic and tactical play, in my opinion. And like some have stated before I have yet to end a game early due to knowing it is over. There is always some thing I can come up with to make yet another attempt at winning the game.

But I can understand where some people are upset that they don't get to use their entire brick of dice each time they roll. Some people have an odd affection for their dice and they will likely enjoy the 40k mass rolling over the 3-4 dice rolling of WM/H simply because of this obssession.

I'm a big 40K fan.
I'll still play with my Chaos and Bikers, but all my thoughts these days are Warmachine.

Gameplay: more risk, more reward, it just plays like a more advanced version of 40K.

Models: more dynamic than alot of the GW mnis IMO. Converting is strict... this is both a blessing and a curse, much like anything else really.

You can skirmish when you want to... 40K does not do this very well. Kill team and Combat Patrol tried to do this, but it's not great.

Rules set is tighter than 40K... there are few black holes.

My main reasons:

**I LIKE EVERY FACTION**
Each caster/faction is overpowered to the point where it's balanced most of the time.

"Play with a Pair"... you are encouraged to play aggressively and competitively, no grey area/elitism.

You can win at all times even the worst of times.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
40K is like an addiction for me...Warmahordes has pushed 40K into the back of my mind. I don't even feel like converting stuff for 40K.

Mr Mystery wrote:Ah yes. Clearly not enjoying the games makes my own personal opinion invalid.

While your view is no less valid than any other posters - your inital post contained a number of general statements such as "boring" or "patchy model range" which could, depending on POV, be applied to ANY miniature game. This is exacerbated due to your decision to not elaborate as to why you feel that way, making your post appear more trollish than constructive.

Just to put it out there: I love GW for the models - and I love PP for the gameplay.

I find PP's games great as I love to tinker with army lists and PP's caster/feat system offers lots of flexibility in both list building and gameplay value. While I agree that a number of their models are somewhat lacklustre, for me, gameplay trumps this. The ruleset rewards agressive play and there is no stigma with bringing the hardest list you can muster. Most hard lists will have an equally hard counter. Some of these are not intuitive as they will fall outside the normal meta, but they are there. While reviled by many of PP's detractors, having caster kill (commander kill) as an option in most games alows the chance that even the most decimated forces can still mount a late game comeback.

From a monetary POV, on a per model basis, you're looking at comparable cost to GW, though careful spending at around the $250 mark will afford a fairly robust core where swapping warcasters will drastically change gameplay.

As a modeller, I was initially frustrated by the lack of flexibility in PP's system to customize weapons or drastically rework model appearance - however, I've rediscovered simple reposing is often just as satisfying. While I like the newer dynamic sculpts, I am also a fan of some classic sculpts as PP's newer sculpts are going the GW route of "bling overload". PP's bits service offers prompt delivery and easy access to parts, but their international shipping is CRIPPLING. PP's P3 paint line is excellent (minus some issues with metalics). Think foundation paint coverage expanded to cover the entire GW line. They are cheaper than Citadel paints and come in proper sealing pots.

Corporate wise, think back to when GW was young. Their magazine contains fluff articles, modelling help and preview rules for upcoming models. Their FAQ is actively updated with frequent errata issued. Their customer-service for missing parts is almost as good as GW's. Fluffwise - the plotline in the setting is advancing as opposed to being stagnant in the 40k-verse. Models are issued in "waves" where every faction gets an update.

Thanks alot for the contributions, I actually kinda want to play a game of it now or at least get a look at the rules. Cheers for responding to a thread to basically feed my curiousity. I have that classic Nerd compulsion to know a little about everything. So i think the common consensus is a better game but not as much scope for hobby creativity.

Not for everybody, but you're more likely to find a game of Warmachine/Hordes than any other non-GW game out there. I personally don't like most of their models. The sculpting quality is solid, but the designs don't do it for me. Even I have a limit on how ridiculous I want my shoulderpads to be.

I found the models to be OK - some I like a great deal, some I like less so.

I have found their quality control to be very poor. I got around 6 kits from them. 1 of them was normal. 4 of them had an extra piece (not a different option, an actual extra piece). No complaints there. The last one had a missing piece. I emailed them, waited 2 weeks, got no response. I emailed them again, got a response a few days later and the replacement part about a week later. I'd suggest, if you can buy them locally, maybe checking the pieces before you buy them. Your mileage may vary.

The actual models were well cast and had a minimum of cleanup prior to priming.

The paint is very hit and miss. I tried about a dozen, and I found some to be exceptionally good (hammerfall khaki), some to be average at best (khador red), some to be sup-par (khador red/orange highlight), and some to be horribly bad (Pig Iron, Quick Silver). Additionally, all of the paints appear to have a random amount of paint in them.

The brushes I found to be excellent.

The rulebook I found to be well organized and written. Disclosure, I still have yet to actually play a game, so can't speak to the rules.

I have been a 40k player, off and on, for 17 years. Now, dont get me wrong, that hardly puts me in the rabid fanboy base. I just enjoy the game, I'm not blind to it's faults.

In the past 8 years I have expanded out into a number of other games and enjoyed damn near all of them.
Tried HordesMachine. Have got quite a bit of enjoyment out of it. Hate the whole caster kill concept. Yeah, it HAS been toned back some in MkII, and I know it doesn't HAVE to be played with that in the mission. Doesn't stop me from hating it.

I am also no huge fan of the combos. The whole problem with them is that in order to be truly competitive, you have to know all the different combos your opponent might throw at you, so that you can plan to be able to shut them down. Which is all right and fine, I just don't have the interest to go reading up that much.

I DO agree with Mr Mystery in that PP does seem to have their own version of codex creep in play, except its with every new model they release. Admittedly, I have been VERY much out of the loop with MkII, it may not be near as bad as Mk I. I know, especially with the Superiority release for Mk I. people were crying about balance. I am hoping Mk II has fixed a lot of that, and by the sounds of it it has, however they are making their new releases still more powerfull on a point for point basis than their older pieces. I understand why they do it, but its somethign a new player should be aware of. You are now aware.

To be perfectly honest, I "grew up" in my gaming with 40k, and that is probably th biggest reason I stick with it. Had I started out with HordesMachine, I might very well feel very differently. But at this point, I enjoy 40k, I enjoy HordesMachine, and can get pickup games with either.

Really, as has been said before, you should try to get some intro games and pickup games with HordesMachine. I play Legion and Khador, and in general I enjoy them very much. Hopefully, if you give em a go, you will too. It makes a nice change, and helps to have ot think a bit differently. Thats a good thing.

It's all about personal preference.

Some years ago I got some khador, never played a game and never painted because I had my hands full with other projects... I eventually donated all my khador to a friend... had not much interested in another system or collection and was also with the opinion that modelwise PP is a hit and miss...

People around here restarted the Warmahordes thing and I looked into it again... I was surprised that I can buy some trollbloods and convert them to play other skirmish fantasy games since if you stick with CC wepons kind of models they are very generic... converting is ok as long as you dont change the weapons... so you can sculpt say a smaller more realistic axe instead of the one mini comes with, you can also repose and since its all metal its going to take it more time to do it right. Price wise is comparable with GW modelwise but since game is skirmish and not mass battles you save there.

In short not all models are cool but you can find some gems there, and you can convert things as long as main attributes are still visible... in my case I can use them on other skirmish games and thats a big thing for me.

Give it a try.

Look for your local press ganger. They're volunteer events coordinators (Devilsquid and
I both do this) and game promoters for a given area. Press Gangers can give you a demo
kind of how red shirts are supposed to, but since we don't work for the company you
shouldn't be getting a hard sell from us. What we can do is start you off by explaining
how a faction looks, feels and plays.

I know that this might not seem like a strength for some, but I got into Warmachine
and Hordes because I didn't have to paint the same kind of model over and over
again. The faction I initially chose let me paint a unit of dudes in robes with
grenades, dudes in robes with crosses, and dudes in knights' armor on foot all in the
same army. I hardly ever get bored painting for this game.

The flipside to having a diverse faction model range is that it's not a very friendly
game to learn how to paint with. It's not like 40k where you can have your "early days"
crappy Eldar Guardians and progress through the years until you learn how to paint
your Guardians "properly" and you can either hide crappy models in a sea of better
painted ones or you can simply send the badly painted minis to their deaths early in
the game and have your nicely painted Guardians fill in the lines.

Basically i am fully aware of the short comings of Games workshop but i know nothing about the games produced by Privateer Press. Not really intersted in playing their games, because i don't like the art style/not entirely convinced by the setting, but some of the models are wonderful. I was just wondering what Fans have to say about Warmachine and Hordes etc. Are their games fun? Are the models too expensive? Are PP attentive to their fans? etc...

The games are fun, for the same reasons described above.

Models are expensive. GW set the price point and PP is up there with them. In the
case of PP (actually in either case) I don't mind paying the price for models because
that money goes to a company that continues to develop models and miniatures for
games that I enjoy. If GW had new models for Eldar and Wood Elves every other year
instead of every five to seven I'd probably still be buying more stuff from them.

PP is attentive to their fans, almost too much so. The tone on their forums sometimes
gets a little shrill as people expect instantaneous and immediate responses from the
company. Think of the difference when people fatalistically post about GW; no one
really ever expects news or rumors to come directly from GW, even though they themselves
set themselves up to be the only source of straight information on their products.

That last paragraph is not offered as a criticism of either company but just as an
observation about how the company's interactions with its players affects its players.

I'd like to mention that you can get the quick start rules for warmachine here: http://privateerpress.com/warmachine/the-game and for Hordes here: http://privateerpress.com/hordes/the-game

For free of course! If you don't have someone in the area that plays take the quickstart rules and try out some games with your friends, that's how I got into the game about two years ago. I have to say I am so glad I decided to step outside Warhammer and see what was waiting in the outside world.

I am also no huge fan of the combos. The whole problem with them is that in order to be truly competitive, you have to know all the different combos your opponent might throw at you, so that you can plan to be able to shut them down. Which is all right and fine, I just don't have the interest to go reading up that much.

How is that different from 40K?
The only thing I can see where it's 'easier' to deal with in 40K would be to throw dice at it until it's dead...which isn't exactly a selling point and not too different.

I mean, when you see Molik Karn on the other side of the table, you know something is up regardless.
There is a reason PP has a card system. It's easy to hand over and allow the opponent to read through it...(just a little easier than a whole codex).

In addition, you have the 2 list system for tourneys were you can play the meta.
You can go with a list you are comfortable with against certain opponents and then go with a list that focuses on denial vs. casters you are unfamiliar with, etc.

In addition, Warmahordes is as transparent as 40K in regards to rules and special abilities.

Ouze wrote:I emailed them, waited 2 weeks, got no response. I emailed them again, got a response a few days later and the replacement part about a week later. I'd suggest, if you can buy them locally, maybe checking the pieces before you buy them. Your mileage may vary.

Emailing the front desk at PP works, but slowly. For best results, you should call them. I've had excellent service every time I've called to follow up on an email. Shipping took a week - which for me, is very fast as shipping from the US to Canada sometimes takes up to 2-3 weeks depending on mode of shipping.

I don't have much, only 66ish points of stuff.
No problems yet, only warped blades and spears and such, totally expected though.

Worse warping were:
-Blood Witch blades
-Bokur Spear
-Bane Night Lance

That's about it for me.

One thing I wish PP would do though is just combine warmachine and hordes into 1 game. I mean, I know they work together and it's the same rules and all.. and I understand the difference between warlocks and warcasters.. but I'd rather see it just as one big game in 1 big rulebook. All they gotta do is say... "warcasters control jacks and work like this" and then, "Warlocks control monsters and work like that".

I think it's fine keeping them seperate.
Though thers is overlap, the story itself is pretty different and the mood.

Beast and steampunk are fine by itself. Honestly, it's a side bonus that they can interact well with each other.

Also remember that by having as two seperate games, it's easier to 1) release new books, 2) release new models. If it was one game, with their current system of "everything for everybody" in new releases, you'd have 11 factions that you'd have to release new things for all at once. Add to that new models to support those new things.

And they are two different games. Yes, the core rules are very similar, and the story line does cross over, but the general "feel" for the two games is quite different.

CT GAMER wrote:

Mr Mystery wrote:Boring games

False. Very much a nail biting and tactically challenging game with lots of carnage and battling of player wits.

False. There is nothing like an opponent punching you repeatedly in the face while you do nothing(boring). Cuz thats what I would allow someone do to me. "Its cool bro punch me a couple more times, then I will punch you." It's a boring game of Rochambeau. What so tactical about that?

Cheers

i once tried to play warmachine
was boring as hell
and models dont look interesting to me

Edit: The grammar Nazi in me took over. Sorry, guys.

_Tim?

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:Don't mean to be a jerk-wad,

ok then, jerk

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote: WHY you don't like the game?

it was boring as hell

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote: WHY you don't like the models

i simply dont like their look

and i do what the hell i want with my bandwith

Just cause you prob. like rolling a boat load of dice .
I like it because it doesn't focus on mass dice. It focuses more on positioning and making the few dice you do have better at accomplishing your goals.

As for the models...I can somwhat agree, but as a converter, I make it mine and be interesting at the same time, so YMMV alot there.

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

Devastator wrote:i once tried to play warmachine
was boring as hell
and models dont look interesting to me

Don't mean to be a jerk-wad, but could you possibly try typing intelligently? Oh, and those 16 words really don't communicate WHY you don't like the game, or WHY you don't like the models. Try elaborating on your point.

Please try and post intelligently, people, otherwise you are wasting bandwidth.

_Tim?

Maybe English is not his first language, Dakka is worldwide.

kinghammer wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Mr Mystery wrote:Boring games

False. Very much a nail biting and tactically challenging game with lots of carnage and battling of player wits.

False. There is nothing like an opponent punching you repeatedly in the face while you do nothing(boring). Cuz thats what I would allow someone do to me. "Its cool bro punch me a couple more times, then I will punch you." It's a boring game of Rochambeau. What so tactical about that?

Cheers

The tactical part comes from getting to the kill, not the kill itself.

this thread is temporarily closed while it is reviewed for reports of flaming.

Reopened with private warnings given. Lets keep it polite people.

Necros wrote:One thing I wish PP would do though is just combine warmachine and hordes into 1 game. I mean, I know they work together and it's the same rules and all.. and I understand the difference between warlocks and warcasters.. but I'd rather see it just as one big game in 1 big rulebook. All they gotta do is say... "warcasters control jacks and work like this" and then, "Warlocks control monsters and work like that".

Game wise I cant say much but appeal/ concept wise for me Hordes is quite diferent since its more fantasy and less steampunkish, for me it made all the diference in the world. If they made everything inside the steampunk vibe I would probably not be on board right now.
Big warkjacks and steam machines dont really get my attention anymore and are a bit limited if you intend to use other fantasy settings and games with your PP minis, as for Hordes its pure fantasy specially if you cut down one steam leg or steam weapon

Dont know how to explain it but its like a totally diferent setting for me.

I watched a Warmachine Demo (did not play) once and investigated the game. I decided not to get into it.

1)Tactics/strategh: The "Plays like a CCG" seemed farily apt. There seems to be alot of "combo" making to the rules, in a somewhat more pronounced way than GW games. It felt like a list-building game. I've already got a list building game (40k) so this didn't appeal to me. Gameplay strategy is different than 40k, but 40k'ers speaking poorly of the tactical content of the game is a bit of pot-calling-kettle-black, IMHO.

2) General gameplay. Fewer miniatures on the table, but didn't seem significantly faster play than 40k. Seemed to be alot of counters and tokens involved.

3) Minis: I liked the style of the figs, reminded me of elements of warzone and 40k, and the Warjacks are a pretty cool hook.

4) Investment. Not much less expensive than 40k. "Another use-our-miniatures-and-they-aint-cheap" game.

5) Background: seems pretty rich, especially for a game that's not that terribly old. Though not as expansive, the quality of the fluff and art seems on par with GW stuff.

In the end, the CCG qualities really turned me off, and the other aspects of the game didn't seem different enough to make me want to invest in this game. Now I should point out that I don't want to be into more than one big-investment game, so my previous involvement in 40k worked against Warmachine.

Were I looking for another big-name game, or just starting, I'd definitely take the time to play a few demo games of both 40k and Warmachine before picking one. The Warmachine game community isn't as large as 40k, but there's enough demo'ers that there's no excuse for not at least trying the game out if you're even remotely interested.

Give it a shot, maybe you'll love it.

I hate the arrogant Page 5 crud. Enough already. Oh and the hypocrasy of their metal miniatures hype followed by a swap to plastic. Metal, plastic, I couldnt care, but when they make an issue about it and talk tough they just come across as annoying ----pots.

There are one or two points costs brainfarts, but by and large the game is good. My only lasting problem with the rules is the use of 2d6, which prevents the bucket of dice approach to gaming and slows down the turns. CRA offsets this to some extent, but it takes all day to resolve a unit of Zealots, and many players who take them take twenty or thirty.

Franlly I wish it was d10 based and slightly tweaked to account for that.

Zatsuku wrote:I'd like to mention that you can get the quick start rules for warmachine here: http://privateerpress.com/warmachine/the-game and for Hordes here: http://privateerpress.com/hordes/the-game

For free of course! If you don't have someone in the area that plays take the quickstart rules and try out some games with your friends, that's how I got into the game about two years ago. I have to say I am so glad I decided to step outside Warhammer and see what was waiting in the outside world.

Good call Zatsuku. Between that and the way they figure model size for LOS purposes (each piece rules wise is such and such diameter, such and such hieght), proxying up a game should be most easy. Suprised no one thought of linking this before, good work.

Sanctjud wrote:

I am also no huge fan of the combos. The whole problem with them is that in order to be truly competitive, you have to know all the different combos your opponent might throw at you, so that you can plan to be able to shut them down. Which is all right and fine, I just don't have the interest to go reading up that much.

How is that different from 40K?
The only thing I can see where it's 'easier' to deal with in 40K would be to throw dice at it until it's dead...which isn't exactly a selling point and not too different.

I mean, when you see Molik Karn on the other side of the table, you know something is up regardless.
There is a reason PP has a card system. It's easy to hand over and allow the opponent to read through it...(just a little easier than a whole codex).

In addition, you have the 2 list system for tourneys were you can play the meta.
You can go with a list you are comfortable with against certain opponents and then go with a list that focuses on denial vs. casters you are unfamiliar with, etc.

In addition, Warmahordes is as transparent as 40K in regards to rules and special abilities.

Oh, it's not that it is different, really. It's that it's additional. I study all the time. I teach myself a lot of things, play with some computer languages, learn different languages, and for my job I am constantly having to stay on top of the latest literature, new tools that come out, etc... I have to study a lot. It's merely that I am already about as familiar with 40k as I feel I need to be, and just dont have the motivation to obtain a similar level of familiarity with HordesMachine. Weeeeell, I DO find that the synergy is a bit more important in HordesMachine than in 40k, and that aspect IS less attractive to me, but the big thing is that if I were to pick up an additional system it would need to be somethign I could pick up and put down for quick, fun games with a minimal of overhead in time. Basically, I just have too much else going on to really stretch out to dedicate the time. Maybe if 40k had pissed me off to that point, but it hasnt yet. Again, what it comes down to is personal preference. I really, really recommend you follow Zatsuku's advice and DL the rules, proxy some cool stuff up, and see how it rolls for you on the table top. That's your tactical nuke from orbit in this case; it's the only way to be sure.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Orlanth wrote:I hate the arrogant Page 5 crud. Enough already. Oh and the hypocrasy of their metal miniatures hype followed by a swap to plastic. Metal, plastic, I couldnt care, but when they make an issue about it and talk tough they just come across as annoying ----pots.

Yyyyyyeah, have to agree here. I am not 13. I dont need someone to try and hype me all up. Between the cartoony artwork and the whole childish "Play like you gotta pair" bs, it's really unappealing. But, I realize that I am not their target demographic. Indeed, my children are just about into their target demographic. So I realize that if I wanna play my little toy soldiers and monster games, I will have to wade into, what is for someone as old as me, a bit of the shallow end of the marketing pool, if not the warm shallowness of the kiddie pool altogether. If you wanna play, you have to live with the whole community. It's a package deal, and given the quality of players in my area, it makes it a bit easier to tolerate. So, I dont bitch, because my friends who play are good folks, and we have a good time with it. That is what's important to me.

Eilif wrote:1)Tactics/strategh: The "Plays like a CCG" seemed farily apt. There seems to be alot of "combo" making to the rules, in a somewhat more pronounced way than GW games. It felt like a list-building game. I've already got a list building game (40k) so this didn't appeal to me. Gameplay strategy is different than 40k, but 40k'ers speaking poorly of the tactical content of the game is a bit of pot-calling-kettle-black, IMHO.

Personally, I hate the CCG annalogy that people make with WM/H. It seems to stem from the fact that you have cards on the table, but it's never really made sense to me. Of course it's a list building game. All wargames are list building games, but the thing that I like about Warmachine/Hordes is that it's more what you do with what you bring, as opposed to just what you bring. The game is better designed to let you use the tools you bring, as opposed to punishing you for not bringing certain choices.

Orlanth wrote:I hate the arrogant Page 5 crud. Enough already. Oh and the hypocrasy of their metal miniatures hype followed by a swap to plastic. Metal, plastic, I couldnt care, but when they make an issue about it and talk tough they just come across as annoying ----pots.

You do realize that Page 5 is completely tounge in cheek? It's not intended to be seriously taken at all? It all boils down to: "This is a game, someone is going to win, someone is going to lose, have fun with it, and don't be an ass." Anyone who takes it for anything more than that is looking for depth where it doesn't exist.

As for the change to plastic, they did that for the customers (and themselves, of course), because of the fluxuating prices of metals, etc, etc. Of course, there were people who complained that PP sucked because there were no plastics, and now that there's plastic, people complain that they're not all metal. Can't please all the people all the time.

Personally, I don't care what the models are made of. Do I like the way they look, and do they suffice for playing the game?

grizgrin wrote:Good call Zatsuku. Between that and the way they figure model size for LOS purposes (each piece rules wise is such and such diameter, such and such hieght), proxying up a game should be most easy. Suprised no one thought of linking this before, good work.

Just wanted to clarify, LOS is all about the bases, and if you can draw a line from one to the other. The 'volume' rules for models only apply if you can't see the base due to terrain issues (behind a hill, in a ditch, etc). Aside from that, it's purely base to base LOS.


Warmachine/Hordes is not for everyone, just like 40K isn't. I played 40K for about 10 years, and now I play Warmachine. My tastes change as I grow older, and someday there may be a game that I prefer of Warmachine/Hordes.

However, the real shame is players who bash other systems, and don't know anything about it. If people don't want to try PP, for whatever reason, that's their choice, of course. Likewise, people who want more than what 40K has to offer, they're free to look elsewhere as well. Let's just try and avoid calling each others games crap out of hand.

I played 40k for 15 years, I now only play Warmahordes. It's a better ruleset and it feels to me that there is more supense and excitement.

Devilsquid wrote:

grizgrin wrote:Good call... good work.

Just wanted to clarify,... base to base LOS.

What he said. DS is far more knowledgable about it than I.

Devilsquid wrote:


Warmachine/Hordes is not for everyone, just like 40K isn't. I played 40K for about 10 years, and now I play Warmachine. My tastes change as I grow older, and someday there may be a game that I prefer of Warmachine/Hordes.

Werd.

Devilsquid wrote:

However, the real shame is players who bash other systems, and don't know anything about it. If people don't want to try PP, for whatever reason, that's their choice, of course. Likewise, people who want more than what 40K has to offer, they're free to look elsewhere as well. Let's just try and avoid calling each others games crap out of hand.

Certainly wasn't trying to call the game crap, DS. May have been a bit expressive about my personal lack of appreciation for some aspects of it, but overall I have had a lot of fun playing the games.

Nah, wasn't aimed at you personally. i've seen a lot of trash talking about each game from both sides, and that really irks me because at the end of the day, we're all moving little toy soldiers around going 'pew pew' while we roll dice.

People don't have to like the other games, but there's no point in trash talking it beyond "It's not for me."

I play both games. I play them for completely different reasons.

Apples and oranges really, neither is a substitute for the other.

Both games do however share a few things as this thread has demonstrated: fanbois and haters.

I've heard a lot of good things about WM, my personal issue is a dislike of the model range, well mainly the Jacks if I'm honest.

They are just not my style sadly otherwise I would have probably tried it by now.

The card idea would sit fine with me as well, as I've tried Confrontation, well what was Confrontation before the bad times.

Hordes has tempted me a few times mind, but other things have popped up and got in the way of me giving the system a go.

Eilif pretty much summed up my feelings in his post. I looked at the models, I read the starter rules online, I listened to a few people's reactions and... not for me. That's not to say I wouldn't like the game, at all, simply that it doesn't seem enticing enough to actually start collecting and playing. The combo/synergy aspect is definitely a turn-off, for me. These concepts aren't absent from list building in 40K, as some PP fanboys are quick to assert, they simply don't manifest in such a tangible, M:TG "deck building" sort of way. I like that I can spend months tweaking and tailoring a 40K list, or I can simply play with what I have or what looks cool and I can still have fun, either way. WM seems more like Magic in that you get punished rather severely for ignoring the combos. There doesn't seem to be a "casual mode."

CT GAMER wrote:I play both games. I play them for completely different reasons.

Apples and oranges really, neither is a substitute for the other.

Both games do however share a few things as this thread has demonstrated: fanbois and haters.

Exactly my thoughts, and while I find the irrational hate that the players of one game have for the other to be odd, it's greatly amusing and easily exploitable.

I'm not personally a fan of WarMachine (just not crazy about the models, mainly...) but it seems like it really suffers from the syndrome where a 'beginner' list vs. a pro-list is really insufferably boring and not-fun, which could make early games and demos less interesting than they could be.

Most games with a list-building aspect have this to an extent, i guess, but it seems like the discussions I see WarMachine has it worse than others due to the WarCasterspecial abilities and unit synergies.

I've heard a range of opinions on the Mk II rules. Seems like some like them, some can't stand them. I like that I've heard they've helped to rejigger the game so it focuses on WarJacks over infantry a bit.

I am a competitive gamer. My goal playing games is to play to win, because that is what's fun. My opponents are people who have the same mindset; we don't play to set models up on a table and make cool cinematics, we play to kill the other guy's models and win the game.

I played 40k for 3.5 years and I've got 'Ard Boyz tickets from each of those years. I've collected 7 40k armies, and I've got thousands upon thousands of points' worth of 40k models bought for thousands of real dollars.

I haven't touched them since I discovered Warmachine/Hordes. The rules are tighter. There's almost none of the ambiguity that 40k players are forced to live with, stuff like debating how Deffrollas can/can't Ram.

Games are far more tactically involved than in 40k; models/units in WM/H have more options in-game, and limited resources to do so. Planning matters a lot more, and execution of your plan is far, far more complicated with order of operations being significantly important. In 40k, I don't think I have ever changed my entire strategy for the game mid-turn as a result of a single die roll. In 40k there tends to be some sort of redundancy or forgiveness built into good lists; the same can be said for good WM/H lists but overall the structure is far less forgiving.

In general, no single unit or model is 'bad'--not nearly to the extent of internal imbalances in 40k codices. There's some standouts that hardly ever see play time relative to other models, but overall there are very few equivalents to Ogryn, or Flashgitz, or lascannon Devastator squads, or Skyclaws, or Tigurius....etc etc etc. You can buy models that you like the look or feel of and not be punished by poor list building choices in-game.

In short, WM/H is a thinking person's game. It doesn't have to be, but whereas I can make an UBBARLIST in 40k and give it to a newb with a few basic instructions and expect that newb to do relatively well (we've done this, in tournaments, and it's panned out), if I give an UBBARLIST to a newb in WM/H, then even against just an average player that newb is probably going to get his/her clock cleaned.

If you're a casual sort of gamer, 40k and WM/H are both enjoyable and will fill distinctly different gaming niches and it'll just depend on whether you want space marines or warjacks hitting the table.

If you're a competitive sort, though, I don't see how you can even compare WM/H and 40k. One is a competitive game set, one isn't. I think GW is starting to get a little bit better in its treatment of rules disputes and ambiguities, but PP is 'already there' for catering to a competitive gamer mentality whereas GW is just starting the journey.

Edit: One more thing... PP tends to be more egalitarian in its content updates. All the factions tend to get new models at roughly the same time, and no faction gets the 'Dark Eldar/Grey Knights' treatment where they languish for a million years without any content.

sourclams wrote:IIf you're a competitive sort, though, I don't see how you can even compare WM/H and 40k. One is a competitive game set, one isn't. ... PP is 'already there' for catering to a competitive gamer mentality whereas GW is just starting the journey.

I hadn't heard this spelled out quite so succinctly, but that does seem to jibe with the WM games/gamers I've seen. It's cool that PP has a product that captures that type of player so well, but this in itself would be enough to steer me away from WM/H.

Devilsquid wrote:
Personally, I hate the CCG annalogy that people make with WM/H. It seems to stem from the fact that you have cards on the table, but it's never really made sense to me.

Clearly I'm not the most qualified to make the annalogy, but it wasn't the cards that gave me the ccg vibe, it was the explainition I recieved of "this-boosts-this which makes this more powerfull" that seemed to me to be a parallel with CCG games.

Devilsquid wrote:
Of course it's a list building game. All wargames are list building games,

I most vehemently disagree, and it's this attitude that turns me off about many games/gamers.
Of course nearly every game has an "army list", but many games/gamers do not focus around the crafting of an army list. Many games/gamers focus around senario and narrative based gaming, and further, there are many games that do not even have strict points values. Games like stargrunt and battletech rely much more on the players to mutually agree on what forces to bring to the table based on senario, competetive equality, or other parameters.

WM is ok, but its a lot like mtg with toy soliders that happen to look nice while you do your ubar combo stuff. It's highly build orientated - I know the internet is obsessed with 40k builds/lists but it's not as big a factor as in Warmahordes. Minis' are nice as is the fluff. Minis a bit pricy but decent, slightly cheaper than GW. You need less. Not much dice and most of the dice based things are pointless as you spend focus to minimize luck.

Eilif wrote:

sourclams wrote:IIf you're a competitive sort, though, I don't see how you can even compare WM/H and 40k. One is a competitive game set, one isn't. ... PP is 'already there' for catering to a competitive gamer mentality whereas GW is just starting the journey.

I hadn't heard this spelled out quite so succinctly, but that does seem to jibe with the WM games/gamers I've seen. It's cool that PP has a product that captures that type of player so well, but this in itself would be enough to steer me away from WM/H.

You can play WM/H uncompetitively and still have fun. You probably cannot play WM/H uncompetitively against a competitive player and still have fun; in 40k you're guaranteed at least 5 turns of models blowing each other up and your army doing at least something to the enemy, no matter how badly you get your clock cleaned in the end.

In WM/H there is a distinctive combo/buffing/synergy dynamic and the game is over as soon as your 'HQ' model dies. In a tournament I played in last weekend, one of my opponents got exactly 1 turn before my combo killed his warcaster and it was time to pack up the models. I felt bad about that he really didn't have a game and it's definitely a knock to your pride to get utterly crushed in 5 minutes. That's the sort of unforgiving that you can encounter in WM/H; games can end with a single model dying (that's actually the objective in many cases).

I have to reiterate, WM/H is a great game system for fun play, and the models are for the most part fantastic with great steampunk-ey background material. The game system is overall more refined than 40k and you get the feeling that the game company as a whole is more responsive to gamer attitudes and desires.

But there is a distinctive element that caters to ultracompetitive gamers like myself, and this element appears to be much of what attracts ultracompetitive gamers to the game, at least in my area. And I imagine that if you want to involve yourself in it to any extent, you'll eventually begin to run into people like me. There is a $250 or so buy-in to build a couple army lists and if the possibility of game over on turn 2 is something that is a big deterrent to your approach to gaming, then you might want to save yourself money and frustration.

And again, great game system, absolutely love it. I fully endorse what PP has achieved with WM/H. It is absolutely possible to have gentlemanly 'funsie' games, and gentlemanly 'competitive' games. If a funsie gamer and a competitive gamer end up facing off, though, and don't understand where each other are coming from, then the game structure isn't very conducive to fun for anyone involved..

I'd like to add to Sourclam's post:

1. The fact that the creators of the game are catering to competitive players means that there are very few sub-par models in the range. Many seemingly terrible units are very competitive when given the proper support.

2. While it sucked - I am sure the player who had their HQ killed by Clams on turn 1 won't make the mistake of putting their HQ in the same predicament in future games.

I'd like to also add that while most "kill" combos are very powerful, the risks are enormous if you miscalculated and failed to finish your opponent. While I don't know what Sourclam's combo was - from my own experience, I'm pretty sure that if he whiffed it due to poor die rolls, Sourclams would have been placed in a poor position.

3. Casual gaming does exist in the Warmahordes community and is the mechanism by which most players experiment with new unit combinations, hone their timing* and practice with situational models. YMMV, however - from my experience as a 40k and Warmachine player - casual Warmachine will definitely feel more cut throat to the casual 40k player due to the common use of combos.

* Further to the above - the one unit at a time "activation" that Warmachine uses (activation = movement + action) rather than the phased system (movement phase, shooting phase, assault phase) that 40k uses is one of the biggest changes that a 40k player moving to Warmachine has to get their head around. This sequence of activations means that the order in which your units are activated is of paramount importance to how the army plays as units activating earlier can clear (or block!) charge lanes, buff/debuff or provide support. Two armies built and deployed the same, but with units activating in a different order can drastically change the outcome of a turn.

Played it when it first came out, had 3 WM/Hordes armies at one point.

Gave up and went back to 40k a little before Mk.II beta. It was just too much studying, I'd be out of the loop for half the year (school) come back and have to learn the new hot units and builds. With 40k the releases roll around about every other month so it was just easier to manage on my limited time (again school).

For me, I started 40k because I got tired of showing up at game stores and having no one to play (BFG was the only game I played at the time). I picked 40k for a couple of reasons:

1. It seemed to be the most popular nation wide, which would help ensure I would always have some one to play This is a big consideration since I'm in the military, and have moved 3 times in the last 4 years. It has certainly panned out that way; while there were tons of War Machines/Hordes players in the Seattle area and San Diego, they seem to be much harder to come by here in Northern Virginia. 40k, on the other hand, was pretty popular in all three places.

2. Background: I was already somewhat invested in the 40k background through BFG.

3. Models: Honestly, I look at the War Machine / Hordes models, and they just don't get me that excited. I like the concept of giant steam-powered war jacks being magically controlled by casters, but the looks of it all just don't get me there. I'm a tank guy, hence my IG mech army .

I am still intrigued by the game, and I'm not above trying it out if someone offered me a demo, but right now 40k scratches the gaming/collecting itch for me.

Im kind of amused by the way people are looking at different games systems as a sort of black or white choice. Good or bad based solely on the system and miniatures.

In my experience, regardless of the system the fun factor comes from who you are playing with more than how many dice. Nice easy rule and cool figs do make that easier, but back in the day when some games had card stock minis still have some of my best gaming memories.

I've played 40k since 2nd ed. And WM on & off for several years. Since they revamped and balanced the system with MkII my 40k stuff has been collecting dust while I paint up my mercs GW has sorta lost me with the storyline that never changes, unless its to fit in new models.

PP has put out a good game that different than 40k, its nice to have a different option available if you're looking for a different flavor of gaming.

Aye, I play B5 Wars using card tiles now, partially because the metal figs are pretty rare and expensive, I've played other games that way as well.

That's 100% fine and I agree that games with stock models can be amazing fun.

However with WM I would be expected to play with the model range, as you would expect someone to use proper figs in 40K.
So the style of the models is an important factor in my decesion to play the game. If I really don't like the design I'll skip the game.

Thats more of a pity mind, rather than any kind of a vindication, I'm just not willing to spend serious money on models I can't stand.

It was the minis that drew me to Warmachine as I wanted something very different from my Imperial Guard army to paint up.

I've read through the rulebook and I like that it seems pretty tight and well throught through and I enjoy the way PP seems to engage with the fanbase.

My opinion, I like 'em.

kinghammer wrote:Maybe English is not his first language, Dakka is worldwide.

Ignorance is no excuse. Maybe he should've paid attention in his English classes if he wants to communicate intelligently. I will, of course, follow the forum rules with regards to conduct towards other users..

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Devilsquid wrote:Personally, I hate the CCG annalogy that people make with WM/H. It seems to stem from the fact that you have cards on the table, but it's never really made sense to me.

Don't be absurd. WM gets called CCG-like not because it uses cards but because winning gameplay is always reliant on combos and optimization. Heck, WM tournaments I've seen force you to use 2-3 different warcasters over the course of the rounds just to stop it being a cookie-cutter mirror match all over again.

Ahh, so that's it? Because the game has combos and synergies in it?

Huh. Ok.

And really..."absurd"?

Personally, i like the fact that there are combos and synergy in my armies, because then it feels more cohesive as a whole, and not just a collection of units wandering around, their idea of working together shooting the same unit.

I can see how the combo thing might turn some people off, because you will get snookered by some interaction you haven't seen before. And I like that. The game keeps me on my toes because I can't predict what's going to happen all the time.

Warmachine/Hordes does have a steeper learning curve, something that I warn new players about. You will loose the majority of your first games, as you learn what your forces can do, as well as what your opponent can do. It's one of the reasons I like the non-customizable models: I see a caster, I know what it does, period.


And if I may, a word on competativeness: WM/H has much tighter rules, and it is an agressive game. Sitting back will cause you to loose, period. But to me, this is a happy medium. It's not the "Balls to the walls, KILL KILL" that some people associate with being competative, nor is it the "Eh, whatver" some people associate with friendly games. It's both: It's a competative game that you play friendly in.

As someone posted on the PP forums: "The objective of the game is to win; the point is to have fun."

Devilsquid, I've been trying to track down the source of that quote. It's usually
attributed to German game designer Reiner Knizia.

How is 40K different?

Vulkan + Bikers combo, whoa...
Hellions + Hemmy first turn, move hemmy away, pain token on hellions combo, whoa...
Logan Grimnar + Long Fangs combo, whoa...
Combos are in both.

Optimization... that exist in any game system when one plays competitively.

WM tournaments I've seen force you to use 2-3 different warcasters over the course of the rounds just to stop it being a cookie-cutter mirror match all over again.

You could have mistaken the intent of the tourney.

WM/H tourneys LOVE to mix things up.
-Hardcore settings.
-Highlander
-Mangled Metal
-Escalation
-Iron Man
-Alternating Casters
-Etc.

Certainly, you could be correct that the Tourney wanted to mix things up with casters, but I do not see that as a 'con' when it could very well be a legitamate and 'known' type of tourney in that area.

I say it is a strength when you can have a tourney that doesn't just name a points value and press go.
I don't see it very often when tourneys vary the FoC slot for 40K...

malfred wrote:Devilsquid, I've been trying to track down the source of that quote. It's usually
attributed to German game designer Reiner Knizia.

The original speaker of that quote? No clue, but I think Not Dice is the one who's used it a lot on the PP forums.

I called the notion absurd because I've never heard anyone call WM CCG-like just for the fact it uses cards, there's always been something else brought up whenever that accusation has been made. And heck, almost all non-GW games use cards these days: Hell Dorado, Malifaux, Confrontation (rip), etc.

Sanctjud wrote:How is 40K different?

It's not very different, GW has gotten to the point where its army lists include significant synergy between their components. Go back four, five years into 4E days and it was a lot less so. I don't know if their improved design can be attributed to looking at the success of Privateer's, but certainly if you go back the timeline, then 40k armies definitely used to be just "a collection of units wandering around".

In the end, it's all a matter of perceptions. Like how some WM players perceive 40k players as little babies who can barely add up double digits, and some 40k players perceive WM players as neckbearded elitists who don't even want new players to come in and "pollute" their metagame. I've seen a few people call it a war between American and British wargaming ideologies, which is an interesting way of looking at it.

Theres no place for war in wargamming Aga Cant we just do it for the fun instead?

Sanctjud wrote:How is 40K different?

Vulkan + Bikers combo, whoa...
Hellions + Hemmy first turn, move hemmy away, pain token on hellions combo, whoa...
Logan Grimnar + Long Fangs combo, whoa...
Combos are in both.

Optimization... that exist in any game system when one plays competitively.

40k does have model combos, but they're passive in nature; Logan gives LF relentless/tank hunter just by being there. Vulkan twin-links meltas and flamers just by being there. I can activate Vulkan in his Land Raider or the Land Speeder with melta or vice versa and there's no impact, at all.

If Makeda leashes Molik Karn, feats, casts Road to War, charges 9", Molik Karn advances 3" immediately with Leash, Gladiator casts animus on Karn and pushes him an additional inch, and then Karn charges up the table a total of 16" from where he began the turn standing, that's a combo. If I try to interrupt that order of operations, it's no longer a combo.

So I agree with you that combos exist in both games, but in 40k the combo is a function of your list. In WM/H the combo is not only a function of list, but also of tabletop execution. You just don't have that in 40k.

Similarly, in 40k, there's no opportunity for Vulkan to charge Lysander with a flying headbutt, knock him down, and let a Land Raider slam Lysander 6" into a Predator, killing both. The equivalent happens in WM/H all the time.

I do like that Warmachine and Hordes seems to try to concentrate on books that have something for every faction whenever possible. I heard they went against this for the MkII stuff, but that's supposed to be the exception, not the rule.

Balance wrote:I do like that Warmachine and Hordes seems to try to concentrate on books that have something for every faction whenever possible. I heard they went against this for the MkII stuff, but that's supposed to be the exception, not the rule.

Just to clarify: For MKII, the released the Army Books just to have everything previously released available in one area. So, for example, I buy the Khador Army Book, and I have everything Khador with current rules up to this point. Next year, when Warmachine: Wrath is released, it will have something for all 6 Warmachine factions (caster, character jack, unit, etc). The Army books were just a way to get everything updated in one place.

They did a book a month this year. 12 books in a year (with Retribution last year). Gah!

Agamemnon2 wrote:In the end, it's all a matter of perceptions. Like how some WM players perceive 40k players as little babies who can barely add up double digits, and some 40k players perceive WM players as neckbearded elitists who don't even want new players to come in and "pollute" their metagame. I've seen a few people call it a war between American and British wargaming ideologies, which is an interesting way of looking at it.

Two good points:

1) People are possesive of their choices. If I spend a large sum of money and time on a hobby (or even an aspect of a hobby, like WM vs 40K, vs RPG, etc), then I would inherently be opposed to agreeing that something else may be better than what I chose. This is where I feel that players of the respective games become vehement in their opposition of each other games, because if your game is 'better' than mine, then I made a bad choice.

2) Americain vs British is a very good way to sum it up. Americains play games for competition, while the Brits play it for recreation. (this is also true of my british friends who play Warmachine. Their approach to it is much different than mine).

Agamemnon2 wrote:It's not very different, GW has gotten to the point where its army lists include significant synergy between their components.

As someone who has played both, I really have to say that they are completely different. In scope, execution, and play style, they are completely different.

I would honestly like to see you break down the similarities to me in more than just a superficial way. 40k is a large scale skirmish game with streamlined and distinctive phases and linear progression. WM/H is a small scale skirmish game with amorphous phases and dynamic progression. It honestly doesn't similar at all to me except that both games have models and dice.

I've seen a few people call it a war between American and British wargaming ideologies, which is an interesting way of looking at it.

I have no idea how to begin breaking down gaming ideologies. Both can be played for fun. Both can be played competitively. WM/H is easier to play competitively. Players at the furthest end of the spectrum can ruin it for anyone closer in.

Devilsquid wrote:

Just to clarify: For MKII, the released the Army Books just to have everything previously released available in one area. So, for example, I buy the Khador Army Book, and I have everything Khador with current rules up to this point. Next year, when Warmachine: Wrath is released, it will have something for all 6 Warmachine factions (caster, character jack, unit, etc). The Army books were just a way to get everything updated in one place.

And for additional clarity, unlike a codex you don't even need the army book to play. It's a nice reference for your faction, but each model you buy comes with it's own stat/rule card. The army book is great for fluff, art and to have all the stats in one place, but it's an entirely optional purchase.

One of the things that I don't like about Warmachine/Hordes is that you really, really, MUST be very knowledgeable about every model your opponent is bringing to the table.

To me, that is the one thing that reminds me of CCGs about these PP games. Not being aware of one combination or synergy set in your opponent's army will cost you the game. This requires someone who wants to be even a moderately successful player to spend a lot of time not just reading every book, but studying every book.

While the need to know something about your opponent's force is true in every game, Warmachine has a tremendous ability to completely dominate a game with the right combination of abilities, if one player is unaware of that combination.

Other than that, I actually like the game.

I don't believe that you NEED to know everything about all the factions. It is helpful though.
I got smoked in 2nd turn in 2 separate games at Adepticon because I hadn't played Vs Hordes.
I saw both the Molik Karn speed train, and the Typhon charge+spray.

But if you know your own force backwards and forewards, you are in a good position to deal with most situations.

If you are playing a friendly game at a buddy's house and he wins in a turn with something you haven't seen, you set up and play again.
Also, being your friend, he is more likely to give a heads-up before-hand.

I think WM/H is a game where experience counts much more than in 40k.
There are so many more in-game decisions.
Do I Charge, Trample, Slam, or Throw?, Do I use spell A, B, C, or charge and use the focus for more attacks?

You can play a mirror match, and have two players use thier armies in drastically different ways.

Saldiven wrote:One of the things that I don't like about Warmachine/Hordes is that you really, really, MUST be very knowledgeable about every model your opponent is bringing to the table.

This is true, but it's also true for any game. If you don't know what Nids can do, or Eldar, or Blood Angels, you're going to get snookered. But the counter for that in Warmachine is that it's 100% open knowledge. Just ask to see the card of whichever unit/model you have a question about, and all their rules are right there on hand.

I'd say it's much more true for WM/H than most other games... especially WM/H in relation to 40k.

If you're IG playing Marines, no matter those are CSM, BA, SW, or SM, you're going to try to shoot them before they get close.

If you're Cygnar fighting Legion led by Lylith+Ravagores, you are going to be forced to play completely differently than Legion led by Thagrosh+Carniveans.

Or at least, if you don't play those games significantly differently, you're probably going to lose.

I used to buy quite a lot of their stuff for a while, and I have to say Privateer's management really has a great attitude towards their customers.

However at a certain point the quality of the sculpts, among other things, started to take a dive, their prices started to become higher and generally less attractive compared to for example GW's product, I got tired of all the metal models, their game started to lean towards troop heavy while that was exactly what I did not want, and I am convinced some of the armies get favored over others rules-wise because they happen to be the favorite of certain staff members, causing things to be unbalanced (*cough* Legion *cough*). On top of that all three of the local non-GW gamestores dropped their product range because it hardly sold.

When the new edition also came and I had to buy all of the army books all over again, and I didn't really like the actual game in the first place, I decided it wasn't worth it, and now I only occasionally buy a miniature for it's sculpt.

Another thing, while Privateer's interaction with their fans is a positive, it also causes a way too large % of their fans on their forum to be sheepish cheerleaders who seem to be in a "sucking up to the staff" competition, from statements like "OMG WOWZERZ I'm gonna buy so many of those just because I absolutely LUV U so much thank you Privateer!!!!" all the way up to grown-up neckbearded fatguys getting into heated debate about who baked Matt Wilson the best cookies at the latest tournament. While this is amusing it is also kind of sad.

Yeah, you lost me past the first sentence.

Sooooo, what I got out of the last page is that people are quoting damn near the same things at each other, that combos are significant to both games.

Can we look at something else now?

If that's all you come away with you've missed all of the finer points.

Go learn both systems if you really want to see the difference.

I wish someone would bake me some cookies at a tournament

grizgrin wrote:Sooooo, what I got out of the last page is that people are quoting damn near the same things at each other, that combos are significant to both games.

I'll use my favorite metaphore, though I'm sure it'll irk some people. The difference between combos in Warmachine and 40K is like the difference between combos in Chess and Checkers.


What it really boils down to is personal preference. Each game is not for everyone. Some folks want a fast and friendly game of rolling lots of dice, some people want a more involved game with deeper mechanics. It's your time/money, so you decide how you want to spend it.

Necros wrote:I wish someone would bake me some cookies at a tournament

There is a Press Ganger in North Carolina who brings cupcakes with the faction symbols on them.

Sorry sourclams, that post was a bit tongue in cheek. I was trying to inject some lightheartedness into a discussion that seems to have devolved into people just restating their opinions, which does nothing to push the dialogue forward.

I can also play a 35 point game of Warmachine in about an hour and get in another game or two or get in on a board game. 40k, that ain't happening at any tournament point level.

Fair 'nuff, fair 'nuff.

These games are completely different, and you just don't get an appreciation for the scope until you have immersed yourself in both. I'll leave it at that.

For me, if I wanted a skirmish, I'd go for Warmachine (which is the point).
For larger fights, I think I'm more comfortable with 40K...you know, like the Apoc. level of cool.

I'll stil invest in both though... so I think I'm in a losing position with being involved with both .

In an attempt to move things along (dugga dug, dugga dug), does anyone have questions about the mechanics of Warmachine/Hordes?

I have a question that I believe was touched on a couple times earlier, but I would like to address in a more direct fashion; paritally for my own benefit and for OP.

When I played HM, mostly in Mk I, I noticed much to my chagrin that the newer pieces seemed to be more powerful/less points cost than the older stuff. I wasnt the only one noticing this. First off, did anyone else notice this trend, and second off is this trend still in existance in this brave ne Mk II world?

This would have a LOT to do with me playing more HM, since I have pretty extensive, pretty dated collections. I dont really like the thoguht of someone sidelining my armies with the latest and greatest.

DS? Sourclams? Beuller?

Near the end of MK1, with Legends and Metamorphosis, there was some serious model creep. There were a lot of "Why would you NOT take this?", mostly with the newer things.

With MKII, it gave them an opportunity to reset the baseline of power for everything all at once. Granted, there are still choices that outperform similar choices, but usually at more of a point cost.

Now, it's a lot more balanced, and having seen the new character jack rules, while they're "better", they're not "omfg" better. They're one off unique jacks that perform diffferntly than their kin.


So yes, at the end of MKI, there was a lot of stuff going over the top. With MKII, that's been scaled back a lot (though there are some 'power combos' that once you learn, will need to keep an eye on, like the Molik Kharn bullet, the Typhon Spray and Pray, and Ravyns Snipe+Feat=Win).

One of the things I enjoy about Warmachine is learning new tricks and combos, because if you bring the same combo over and over again, people will see it coming a mile away, and it'll start to fall flat.


So, to recap: Yes, crap was starting to get broken at the end of MKI. MKII has rebalanced the playing field, but there are still strong options out there you need to watch for. EDIT: Wrath and the new Hordes book will be the true test for 'power creep'. Since everything is being revamped this year, they're all at a near common baseline. With the new books coming out next year, that's when we're going to see how things shake out.

Cool. Sounds like my Khador and Legion forces shall be getting the dust and rust blown off. Thanks.

Actually, Khador and Legion are two armies that I have, so let me expand:

Khador changed the 'least' from MK1, because as a faction of Stats, they weren't impacted as much when abilities and special rules were changed. They still have High MAT and ARM and POW. There were some tweakings to the casters (Noticibly Vlads), but they're still strong.

Legion is no longer the "Make hateful friends" faction. A lot of the crap that Legion got a (rightfully) bad rep in MKI for has been changed/moved/erased. They're still an alpha strike glass cannon army, with lots of offensive strength and movement schenanigains, and Eyeless Sight is still strong (Man, the Carni is a nasty beast), but they're no longer the "Oh, you play Legion...uh huh" faction.


Well, not as much.


The real trick to 'beating' legion is play scenarios, like from Steamroller, etc. Legion can rock the casterkill, but holding objective points is something they hurt at.

Devilsquid wrote:Yeah, you lost me past the first sentence.

You get lost quite easily then.

I don't know much about PP. I have seen their minis and I only have one suggestion for them...

USE MORE PLASTIC!

The sight of their top-heavy abominations made of metal makes me cringe...

I have a question! I have the khador starter pack, the older metal one, 1 box of widowmakers and 1 full unit of winter guard. I've never, ever played with them. Is that a decent start to an army? What would be worth adding to get it up to a common points level and be a decent and fun army to play?

TBD wrote:

Devilsquid wrote:Yeah, you lost me past the first sentence.

You get lost quite easily then.

Which also does nothing to advance the dialogue.

Devilsquid wrote:

So, to recap: Yes, crap was starting to get broken at the end of MKI. MKII has rebalanced the playing field, but there are still strong options out there you need to watch for. EDIT: Wrath and the new Hordes book will be the true test for 'power creep'. Since everything is being revamped this year, they're all at a near common baseline. With the new books coming out next year, that's when we're going to see how things shake out.

It will be interesting indeed. I don't think that it will reflect badly on PP if the new models aren't quite as balanced, but it will show whether a truely open playtest is necessary for a truely balanced game.

Anyway, back on topic I play both WM and 40K. Choice of game on a particular week at my local club depends on a number of things; How many models I want to field, whether I want to have one game (40K) or a couple (WM), if it's been a mentally taking week at work I might prefer 40K as WM is more of a mental workout. I also find 40K satisfies my creative juices a bit more, as I have my own chapter, characters etc- so I create my own background, but the flip side is that in WM you're more in an overarching storyline that PP provides for you.

At the end of the day, it's all swings and roundabouts. Variety is good though. Most of the people that burn out of the hobby do so because they only play one game and eventually get bored.

TBD wrote:

Devilsquid wrote:Yeah, you lost me past the first sentence.

You get lost quite easily then.

Neither of these comments really adds anything useful to the discussion. Let's keep it civil, folks.

40k player since codex Armageddon. Now a definite Privateer press convert.

Why? I was thoroughly impressed with the whole concept of going from Mk1 to Mk2 rules. Complete with active player participation to re-balance the game and bring about a new metagame more focused on the warjacks and warbeasts than the old almost all or all infantry armies.

I've won or lost games by a movement decision. 1/2" can make all the difference. You don't see this level of specificity in warhammer 40k.

And I find the 2d6 +stat vs def to be a much better and more averaged bell curve for statistical results.

so to sum it up, I think the game is more balanced, PP's attention to addressing rules concerns outstrips GW by a wide margin, and the models are very cool aesthetically. So I play that instead.

My 3500pt ork army is still up in the swap shop

NaZ

insaniak wrote:

TBD wrote:

Devilsquid wrote:Yeah, you lost me past the first sentence.

You get lost quite easily then.

Neither of these comments really adds anything useful to the discussion. Let's keep it civil, folks.

Beg to differ. DS was indicating that the initial post in question was not understandable. Which invites the poster to restate in order to have effective communication. Directly related to keeping the conversation on track and rolling.

grizgrin wrote:Beg to differ. DS was indicating that the initial post in question was not understandable.

That's not actually how it reads to me. Or to TBD, presumably.

So consider it a lesson in actually explaining what point you're trying to make, rather than leaving cryptic clues.

Yeah, ok. Sure thing.

Necros wrote:I have a question! I have the khador starter pack, the older metal one, 1 box of widowmakers and 1 full unit of winter guard. I've never, ever played with them. Is that a decent start to an army? What would be worth adding to get it up to a common points level and be a decent and fun army to play?

If I remember rightly, the old metal starter set was Kommander Sorscha, a Juggernaut Heaavy Warjack and a Destroyer Heavy Warjack - according to Forward Kommander (a free online tool for the construction of armies for WM/H), that would work out at an 11 point core of a list.

Adding your Winter Guard and Widowmakers takes you to 19 points, and gives you some reasonable ranged potential.

Please take any suggestions with a grain of salt, as I'm not a Khador player - however, if Devilsquire resurfaces, he may be able to give better advice.

If we aim for a 35 point list (one of the tournament standard sizes), and ignore theme forces entirely (which the Widowmakers mean we are, anyway), one solid way to go would be to build what is called the Winter Guard Death Star - add Kovnik Jozef Grigorovich (who buffs your Winter Guard), expand the WG unit to full, add their unit attachment, and three officers. This Death Star is very dangerous, though even more so with Epic Sorscha. Adding these would take you to 28 points, leaving you with 7 points to spare.

Your options are fairly open here - you could add some Mercs for different abilities that you wouldn't get within Khador, or increase your melee presence. I'm going to suggest expanding the army to do that, so I'd suggest adding a Manhunter solo, and the Great Bears of Gallowswood (a character melee unit). Other in-faction options would be a minimum unit of Iron Fang Uhlans (cavalry), a minimum unit of Kazayzy Assassins with Underboss or a unit of Doom Reavers with a War Dog bodyguard for Sorscha.

However, as I'm not a Khador player, I'm not sure what would be best for you.

Paging Kommander Devilsquid.....

Winterguard Deathstar with UA and Kovnik Joe is a great addition as Khador jacks, being slow, generally need some sort of screen to protect them from being charged by other heavies.

Drakhun is always a solid choice. He's about twice as fast as most Khador stuff and can bring some terrifying melee muscle to a fight for 5 points with 'two lives'.

The Winterguard Mortar + Sorscha's feat can get pretty disgusting. Hitting an immobilized target on a 4+ is buckets of fun with an AOE 4 POW 16. You can follow that up with the Destroyer's POW 14 for double the fun.

Beast-09 and Spriggan are jacks that work very well with Sorsha as she can give them +2" Mvt and Pathfinder. With Reach that puts their threat radius at 11" on the charge.

Iron Fang Pikemen + UA are an all-around resilient and effective melee screen that can hit quite hard in close combat.

That is a very decent starter army. Perhaps add the wardog of kovnik joe, but you should head to the warmachine section of the forums for this type of discussion.

Perkustin wrote:Basically i am fully aware of the short comings of Games workshop but i know nothing about the games produced by Privateer Press. Not really intersted in playing their games, because i don't like the art style/not entirely convinced by the setting, but some of the models are wonderful. I was just wondering what Fans have to say about Warmachine and Hordes etc. Are their games fun? Are the models too expensive? Are PP attentive to their fans? etc...

Hello,
I haven't played very often and it sounds like you see the game pretty much like I do. I don't like the background and the style isn't my cop of tea. Don't really find the miniatures very appealing but some are nice (I like the trolls personally). So I played a five times in the last couple of months and I had a good time with the game. I think the game is pretty fun and the people I played with were fun to be around and not just all out trying to wreck shop on me.
So in short I am planning on getting a small force and playing when I don't feel like playing GW games. It isn't horribly expensive and is worth trying if you ask me.

If I'm intersted in starting Hordes, but want to go all (or at least mostly) plastic, is there a faction that would fit the bill? Or do they all still have mostly metal models?

Btw I read the whole thread... thanks for the info on this game . There is an independent store near me where it's super popular (Dream Wizards) so I could actually get a game if I started it!

Would also be interested in hearing if there is a Warmachine all or mostly plastic faction, although Hordes catches my eye much more...

Edit: Well, from my own research all-or-mostly plastic doesn't seem possible. Those trollbloods do look sweet, though!

fire4effekt wrote:That is a very decent starter army. Perhaps add the wardog of kovnik joe, but you should head to the warmachine section of the forums for this type of discussion.

Sure is, or at least was in Mk. I when the game first came out, lol! I say that simply because that's the exact box I started out with, and had a hell of a lot of fun with. Back before Sorscha got "in LOS" added to her feat wording. Good times, good times. Since everyone seems to be saying Khador is still a very solid choice, I can only assume that this box still makes a great hard nucleus about which to form your Khador forces in time of war.

RiTides wrote:If I'm intersted in starting Hordes, but want to go all (or at least mostly) plastic, is there a faction that would fit the bill? Or do they all still have mostly metal models?

I really am not sure, but you may want to check out Retribution of Scyrah. Elves. Really wierd "jacks", they kinda have a Wraithlord/Wraithguard look to them, kinda; and I BELIEVE they are in plastic but not sure. Damn, I really didnt help you out at all there, did I? My bad.

RiTides wrote:
...Those trollbloods do look sweet, though!

Yeah they do, most of them. With some green stuff into the joints, like you have to do with just about any biological model as opposed to most robots and the like, they come out really sweet. My first comission work ever was with trollbloods. Client was irate that a previous vendor has jerked him around and turned in some shoddy work. Into the stripper and havin a go. Managed to get them painted up to table top quite fast, really were a dream to paint. I usually hate painting models of living things but these really went easy. Even got to paint my family tartan on them (after 6 generations in the US we're about as Irish as General Tso's Chicken, but client had no suggestions and left me to my own devices) which was kinda cool. Overall a very enjoyable painting experience. Painting my khador models has always been a similarly enjoyable experience. Part because of model quality (although I hear that took a dive later and that makes me very sad), part because the models I was painting weren't quite past my own personal Cartoony/Suspension of Disbelief threshold of comfort (Your Threshold WILL Vary, lol!), and part because they were such big clunky pieces of metal. A lot easier to hold steady with some heft to them. Kinda like target practice, using heavier pistols or match barrels.

Dysartes wrote:

Necros wrote:I have a question! I have the khador starter pack, the older metal one, 1 box of widowmakers and 1 full unit of winter guard. I've never, ever played with them. Is that a decent start to an army? What would be worth adding to get it up to a common points level and be a decent and fun army to play?

If I remember rightly, the old metal starter set was Kommander Sorscha, a Juggernaut Heaavy Warjack and a Destroyer Heavy Warjack - according to Forward Kommander (a free online tool for the construction of armies for WM/H), that would work out at an 11 point core of a list.

Adding your Winter Guard and Widowmakers takes you to 19 points, and gives you some reasonable ranged potential.
...

Again, I dunno about the current game, but Widowmakers used to really change the way your opponent focused on your army. If you ever wanted to run a distraction to keep your opponents attention off the important parts of your army, then Widowmakers were it. Eyriss was good for that too. Neither of which could ever really be ignored in favor of going after other targets, they ALWAYS felt they had to go for the Widowmakers or Eyriss. Only downside is they got used by a lot of players. If you liked playing a unique list (and I do), then these would possibly detract from that.

I really am not sure, but you may want to check out Retribution of Scyrah. Elves. Really wierd "jacks", they kinda have a Wraithlord/Wraithguard look to them, kinda; and I BELIEVE they are in plastic but not sure. Damn, I really didnt help you out at all there, did I? My bad.

Pretty much the only thing in Ret that's plastic is the heavy warjack kit, and literally every Warmachine faction has those (along with a plastic caster, if you buy the new starter boxes). The older factions also have plastic light kits, although it's not a multijack. Out of all the factions, Protectorate boasts the most plastic models, with the Exemplar Bastions and Cinerators being plastic.

If/when the Hordes factions get plastic starter boxes, Trollbloods will have the most plastic in Hordes, due purely to the fact that they have the Fennblades.

Again, I dunno about the current game, but Widowmakers used to really change the way your opponent focused on your army. If you ever wanted to run a distraction to keep your opponents attention off the important parts of your army, then Widowmakers were it. Eyriss was good for that too. Neither of which could ever really be ignored in favor of going after other targets, they ALWAYS felt they had to go for the Widowmakers or Eyriss. Only downside is they got used by a lot of players. If you liked playing a unique list (and I do), then these would possibly detract from that.

The change to how unit commanders work in Mk2 kinda nerfed Widowmakers a bit, but they're still a great way to pick off a reliable 4 infantry or solos a turn. Just don't expect them to cripple units the way they did in Mk. I.

Sure is, or at least was in Mk. I when the game first came out, lol! I say that simply because that's the exact box I started out with, and had a hell of a lot of fun with. Back before Sorscha got "in LOS" added to her feat wording. Good times, good times. Since everyone seems to be saying Khador is still a very solid choice, I can only assume that this box still makes a great hard nucleus about which to form your Khador forces in time of war.

As before, Sorscha got nerfed a bit (again ), with Wind Rush somewhat less effective than Mk I, and the ability of warjacks/casters to shake off Frozen and Knockdown making it more of an offensive ability than an "I win" button. Still, she's brutally effective, and the two jacks in the box are very solid choices.

Sorry for the absence, I normally check this from work during the week because it gets through the firewalls.

1) Yes, that's a good start to a Khador force. Add a few solos, another unit if you like, and you can make yourself a solid 20-25pt list to get your feet under you. If you don't like Scorcha, you can pick a caster that you do like and go with them instead.

2) There's a smattering of plastics out there, but nothing full line at the moment. Most of the WM heavy jacks are plastic, and the Trollbloods have the felblades, as well as the Bastions for protectorate. Actually, with the Bastions and Heavy Jacks, you can have a 'mostly' plastic Protectorate army.

3) Dreamwizards is an excellent shop. I swing by there whenever I get a chance to when I visit Maryland. Their stock was a bit low last I looked, but Thursdays has a good WM/H crowd.

4) I wasn't "lost" past the first sentence, i just chose to ignore the rest of the post due to the tone and language in it. My appologies for not adding anything constructive in my following post.



Will check in again tomorrow!

thanks I'll give that a shot. For me though I got into the game more for the jacks than for infantry. I have about 1000 different infantry models with GW stuff from the last 18 years. So I definitely would like a more jack heavy force. I liked the looks of the khador jacks the most. I like Beast 09 and was thinking of getting him. I have a full unit of winter guard (1 box and 2 blisters) but none of the add ons yet but I'll look into them

I really like the game but it's tough to find games. My group doesn't really want to get into it because like me they all have so much invested in GW stuff and so little time to focus on anything else. A couple of em got in FOW for a bit and recently sold pretty much all their models since they never got to play it. We only meet once a month and that's pretty much all for GW games.

RiTides wrote:. Those trollbloods do look sweet, though!

Irresistable if you ask me I was quite surprised with the Trollblood range, very solid and if you go for a non ranged weapon theme it really fits any Fantasy game you want to play with them.

Necros wrote:thanks I'll give that a shot. For me though I got into the game more for the jacks than for infantry. I have about 1000 different infantry models with GW stuff from the last 18 years. So I definitely would like a more jack heavy force. I liked the looks of the khador jacks the most. I like Beast 09 and was thinking of getting him. I have a full unit of winter guard (1 box and 2 blisters) but none of the add ons yet but I'll look into them

I really like the game but it's tough to find games. My group doesn't really want to get into it because like me they all have so much invested in GW stuff and so little time to focus on anything else. A couple of em got in FOW for a bit and recently sold pretty much all their models since they never got to play it. We only meet once a month and that's pretty much all for GW games.

Beast 09 is a nasty jack, especially with Scorcha. Butcher and Karchev are good jack casters as well, if you like either of them.

I hear you with the games. My LGS is mostly 40K players, though a few are interested in starting the game. I just sit and paint my models, slowly corrupting them to my dark ways.



MWAHAHAHAHA!

NAVARRO wrote:Irresistable if you ask me I was quite surprised with the Trollblood range, very solid and if you go for a non ranged weapon theme it really fits any Fantasy game you want to play with them.

You're right! I only just discovered them, and am pretty sure I'm going to spring for it... lovin' the trolls!

Thanks for the tips on what kits are plastic, guys

Devilsquid wrote:I just sit and paint my models, slowly corrupting them to my dark ways.

Das Devious Devilsquid.....

PP also has a one up with No Quarter.
More interesting than White Dwarf for me.

Just the fluff sections are a huge draw for me in No Quarter.
_____________

Trolls are a characterful bunch.
I esp. love Grim...there's a trick firing his gun .
Impalers and the Axer look cool...which makes the starter kit a great buy....Ranged Slamming and a thresher rusher!!!! And a Gerlick Slaughterborn Warlock....damn, I'm on Trollblood wishlist week.

I only played a couple games with the cygnar battle box, and I loved it. However my friend said "...*sigh* you went from playing space marines in 40k to playing space marines in war machine..." hahaha.

Me: "Yeah, these are Cygnar, the 'main' kingdom, and the most technologically advanced force out there..."
New Guy: "They're blue, so they're like Ultramarines, right?"
Me: ".....not quite."

Devilsquid wrote: But the counter for that in Warmachine is that it's 100% open knowledge. Just ask to see the card of whichever unit/model you have a question about, and all their rules are right there on hand.

As a relatively newbie Cryx player, I have to say I hear this from time to time and I think it's only partially true. Sure, everything is out in the open - but the danger doesn't come from one set of rules, but the synthesis of those rules across the entire army. That possibility space - all the possible interactions - is what's so daunting, and it's my prime de-motivator to play more often.

It seems like you really have to be passionate about all of the armies (WM & Hordes both) to be a semi-competitive player. Like Malifaux, it seems to be a demanding mistress, expecting alot of time spent on contemplation. That's not necessarily a bad thing, per se.

It's definitely got a bigger learning curve, especially because of the synergy between the models.

Personally, that's one of the things I like about it. There's a bit more depth to it than who's a better shooter or assaulter.

Devilsquid wrote:There's a bit more depth to it than who's a better shooter or assaulter.

Sure, I'm not trying to take away from that. I'm just pointing out that handing someone a card for a model they've never seen isn't an immediate reveal.

I got my butt handed to my from an Epic Stryker who jumped something like 15"+ across the table and smashed me dead. That's a case where I could have read the card and figured out what happened. But the combo chains like Moluk Tarn (sp?) aren't as easy to pickup until you get nailed by it at least once

Re: Getting stomped by a combo: Fool me once... shame on you. Fool me twice... shame on ME.

Over all.. Warmachine / Hordes is a much better game and system.

As for models.
I prefer GW.

Seems like alot of haters in this thread though...

GW Rules - bad, terribly written, so many loopholes and misworded rules.

PP Rules - Mean what they actually say.

I play both, both are fun, if i get tired of GW, i play the other. or a mix of both.

Both games can be "Boring as hell"

Play both, have fun. its a game.

Gonna be hitting my FLGS on friday to take advantage of the black friday sale if I can get there early enough

So, what's all in this Winter Guard Deathstar thing? I already have the 10 regular winter guard, so what else do I need? How many add ons can I add on and what's good? I was thinking about getting some rocketeer guys. But what about the field gun or mortar or standard bearer?

Just wanna know what I still have to buy. Also planning to pick up a Beast 09 if they have it and the MK2 rulebook. Already have the Khador book and the updated cards.

The Death Star is a full unit of 10 Winter Guard Infantry (not the Rifles), plus a trio of Rocketeers, the Standard Bearer & Officer, and Kovnik Josef Grigorivich.

k thanks.. a rocketeer is just 1 in a blister right? will it be 3 of the same exact sculpt? I've only seen the one beardy lookin guy

Necros wrote:k thanks.. a rocketeer is just 1 in a blister right? will it be 3 of the same exact sculpt? I've only seen the one beardy lookin guy

That is the case, yes.

I've never played any PP games so all i can comment on is the models, which I've seen, and the setting which has been described to me by fans. both seem pretty lackluster to me
1. all metal models=zero conversion
2. anime/cartoony looking characters
3. no grimdark
i mostly play 40k and necromunda, both of which appeal to me mostly because i enjoy the setting. theres nothing in any of the PP games that pulls me in the way the 40k universe does. dull generic anime/fantasy setting+a brilliant ruleset does not equal a game that i would want to play.

Maledictus wrote:I've never played any PP games so all i can comment on is the models, which I've seen, and the setting which has been described to me by fans. both seem pretty lackluster to me
1. all metal models=zero conversion
2. anime/cartoony looking characters
3. no grimdark
i mostly play 40k and necromunda, both of which appeal to me mostly because i enjoy the setting. theres nothing in any of the PP games that pulls me in the way the 40k universe does. dull generic anime/fantasy setting+a brilliant ruleset does not equal a game that i would want to play.

Thank you for an arbitrary opinion based on wrong information and hearsay justifying a conclusion that is not represented in your preferred game system.

Great post. <--- not a leadership test

I have played both WM/H in the MKI editions and initially I was excited about the game. The minis seemed cool and well made, some sculpts were bad but overall they were improving and still are today. Yet both times I tried getting into the games once for WM and once for Hordes my interest just fizzled. I have narrowed it down to a few reasons that I lost interest.

1- Scope/Scale just wasn't big enough for me. Story wise yes countries embroiled in was on many fronts, with foreign invaders form all sides really cool. Lead an army with one of the nations best at its head (the war caster) AWESOME! Then you actually play the game..... No big army just 3 - 8 units sometime more but usually not. Just another skirmish game, ho-hum.

2- Game play, There is just to much focus on abilities for every unit. You have to know how other armies play better than you know your own army.

3- The other players, where I gamed every WM/H player hated GW games. They expected you to drop those games and play exclusively PP- press gangers indeed.

Maledictus wrote:I've never played any PP games so all i can comment on is the models, which I've seen, and the setting which has been described to me by fans. both seem pretty lackluster to me
1. all metal models=zero conversion
2. anime/cartoony looking characters
3. no grimdark
i mostly play 40k and necromunda, both of which appeal to me mostly because i enjoy the setting. theres nothing in any of the PP games that pulls me in the way the 40k universe does. dull generic anime/fantasy setting+a brilliant ruleset does not equal a game that i would want to play.

1. No, they are not all metal. And no, there are conversions... plenty. You should really look at the Painting/Conversion section on the PP site....hell, look here:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/321316.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/327012.page

2. So? Orks do cartoony as well, Nurgle has comical models as well...TAU much for the anime part? Edward and Jacob Marines pass cartoony into the realm of comedy.

3. Sure...but GW has had a longer head start mind you. In addition, the Grimdark has become a joke. Skorne is pretty hardcore, and the fluff they have is much more exciting than Blood Angels and Necrons giving each other a slap on the ass.

I agree that Necromunda is awesome... just not as great when the company ignores it.

Pael wrote:3- The other players, where I gamed every WM/H player hated GW games. They expected you to drop those games and play exclusively PP- press gangers indeed.

I had this problem in my area. They didn't just hate GW games, they would sit off to the side and talk crap about the people who played them, over generalizing until every one was an unwashed, untalented neckbeard. It's why when I first made a start into Warmachine, I converted my Cryx figs into Necrons, just to troll them. It worked quite gloriously and garnered much quality rage for awhile. Over this past year it's greatly calmed down, they don't have that level of hate anymore. A couple of the GW players now play Warmachine, and one of the staunchest GW haters, the guy I heard most bashing it and it's players, now owns Tau, Bretonian and Skaven armies.

Maledictus wrote:I've never played any PP games so all i can comment on is the models, which I've seen, and the setting which has been described to me by fans. both seem pretty lackluster to me
1. all metal models=zero conversion
2. anime/cartoony looking characters
3. no grimdark
i mostly play 40k and necromunda, both of which appeal to me mostly because i enjoy the setting. theres nothing in any of the PP games that pulls me in the way the 40k universe does. dull generic anime/fantasy setting+a brilliant ruleset does not equal a game that i would want to play.

1. Your first point is funny and wrong. If you been in the hobby longer than 5 minutes then you've had no choice but to learn how to convert metal models. Plastics were rare in the beginning. It is a skill I recommend learning to get the most out of your hobby.

2. You've been misled on the background story. If you don't like fantasy steampunk, that is okay, but the story is not lackluster at all. The Warmachine background is more complex than 40k's. Each of the factions has a legitimate reason for pursuing the goals they are.

3. And better for it. 40k has jumped the robot shark on its cardboard grimdark. The 40k universe has all the depth of the Heavy Metal album cover it is based on. And this is coming from someone who plays 40k more than Warmachine.

I love how someone isn't even allowed to have an opinion anymore.

Everybody's allowed to have an informed opinion.

By Maledictus' own admission, his isn't.

bs. Everyone is allowed to have an opinion. Choosing for it to be informed or uninformed is a right as well. Informed doesn't change the fact that sometimes, you just look at something and go, "That's fething ugly.", either.

The OP did specifically ask for the opinions of WM/HD fans, so making an uninformed
opinion in the context of this thread isn't really helpful.

Truth. I was OT.

I think Grizgrin just wants to get to 3000 posts , I kid.
_____________
I was not interested in podcasts for 40K, but after trying Warmahordes, I jumped right into 6-7 of them.

In general, I feel the atmosphere of friendly competition more than in 40K games where you almost 'have' to settle if the game you are playing is friendly or competitive...at least in my area and on the net.

That's what I've been attracted to- it seems that there's not such a rift between friendly/competitive as there is in warhammer. Where I play fantasy, there's 2 scenes (friendly and competitive) with almost no cross-over... well, other than myself (imho, of course)

After reading this thread and others, I decided to dive into Hordes. Just got my first demo game in last night (thanks to the guys at Dream Wizards for running it!!) and am going to be ordering some models this week

I think that's because competition is basically built into the WM/H ruleset; the assumption is that you play to win, and the books all seem to exhibit, more-or-less, internal and external army balance.

You can build yourself a bleeding edge competition list, or you can build yourself a funsy 'I like these models list', and the disparity is going to be a lot narrower than in 40k.

In 40k there's no crossover because if player skill is roughly similar, the former will facestomp the latter.