Reading though the current (latest) GW price moan thread, I keep reading similar points made - "I'm nearly at a point where I'll quit the hobby", "I exclusively buy models from ebay so GW don't get a penny/cent", "I'll only buy new stuff my current 40k army, I won't start any more armies", etc. It amazes me how few people even consider the idea of playing something not made by GW, and I'm intrigued to know why that is.
In the event of multiple reasons please indicate the one major factor (although feel free to post fuller thoughts).
Your poll is terrible. The options are biased, and you don't allow an option to give multiple reasons.
Anyway, for me it's simple: GW is the only company that produces a complete 28mm scifi game with multiple armies, tanks, etc. Other companies either produce a handful of models (usually intended to be used with 40k), or are infantry-only skirmish games that I'm not really interested in. So pretty much it's GW/40k or end up with a bunch of random models and a mess of a house rule system to make everything work properly. IOW, a game that I can only play with a few specific friends, not in random pickup games.
And I know that the "completeness" factor is better for fantasy and historical games, but neither of those genres are very interesting to me.
I would like to try other games, I am very interested in trying Mantic's Warpath, but I am not sure if there are many/any other people nearby who play.
Peregrine wrote: Your poll is terrible. The options are biased, and you don't allow an option to give multiple reasons.
You're too kind. I did actually change the wording before I submitted it because I felt the options were too biased, maybe not enough for some tastes? I can't see anything in there that is, anyway. I also wanted people to give the one overriding reason, maybe I'll go back and make that clearer. Thanks for the input, I guess you can ignore the results!
Anyway, for me it's simple: GW is the only company that produces a complete 28mm scifi game with multiple armies, tanks, etc. Other companies either produce a handful of models (usually intended to be used with 40k), or are infantry-only skirmish games that I'm not really interested in. So pretty much it's GW/40k or end up with a bunch of random models and a mess of a house rule system to make everything work properly. IOW, a game that I can only play with a few specific friends, not in random pickup games.
And I know that the "completeness" factor is better for fantasy and historical games, but neither of those genres are very interesting to me.
Good reason, I meant to put scale of game in and forgot that one... I guess I'll edit that too.
Depends on where I am (School or home). Home, I play near exclusively Warmahordes, because that's whats popular. School, GW games are closer at hand, so I play those. i also tend to play less. I'd be interested in playing other non-GW games, but I can find no-one who plays them.
I play other systems but my main reason for playing 40k is I like the fluff and models. Warmahordes models do not interest me and the fluff is uninteresting.
I do collect some PP models along with lots of other companies, but usually because I like the models and collect them as random 'one off' models which can be used as dungeon monsters.
I like GW's models, the 40k universe and I like the quality of indy 40k events. The only other systems with 'organized play' in indy events which are even close to 40k are systems and models which have zero appeal to me, especially since I dislike how PP people run their events as they often do not require painted models.
I have been getting into Kickstarters and hopefully those may spawn new communities... but no reason for me to blindly quit playing 40k.
I play mainly GW, with dabbling into Warmachine and (soon) Infinity. I do this for several reasons:
1. I have a full-time job and family. Time is restricted. I don't have time to learn a new system, find people that are like-minded, and then buy/build/paint new armies.
2. I started wargaming with GW, and I have lots of options to make every game a little different for my opponent.
3. Skirmish rulesets are less appealing to me than larger-scale battles.
4. Finite financial resources. See my first point
Barring buying rules updates and the occasional new model, I have what I need to play games of 40K with the people I enjoy wargaming with. Pretty much end of story.
How exactly does that work? You like a wargame, but you don't like wargaming?
I was just thinking the same thing. And in response to the question I play 40k, fantasy and warmahordes in equal amounts, but it is harder to play warmahordes at home since my brother seems to think it is the very devil for some reason. I have to find a way to drug him and make him sit there and play a game, I know he'll like it he is just too close minded to even try.
Nonono I wasn't ribbing you. I mean that actually makes sense, as in it is perfectly legitimate. Not everyone on the internet is out to be a dick, sorry if you took it that way.
I understand why people would buy the models an enjoy painting them, I mean, they do have cool models
I didn't see the right option for me up there: I voted for #2 as it fits best, but I'll explain a bit more.
Most people around here (Perth, Australia) were playing GW games but getting increasingly upset about the price. The veterans/club members ordered from Maelstrom/Wayland. After the Embargo to Australia, there was a huge outcry and backlash and for a while many people picked up different games.
However, there wasn't any concerted effort to choose a particular game. And so we went from a club where nearly everyone played 40k, to one where we had a handful of people playing each of Malifaux, Infinity, Dystopian Wars, Dust Warfare, Warmahordes... People literally just went to the games which they personally liked the models and rules of the most.
None of the games attained the necessary critical mass to become mainstream. And so now everyone has gone back to playing mostly GW stuff - we'll bring in our favoured game as well as our standard 40k army whenever we game, but there simply arent enough people around for each system to get regular games.
Collecting models from other systems? Nothing, I already do it. I've got a mean amount of Haqqislam right now.
Playing other systems? Opponents. Right now I have a friend and my brother starting up Infinity, but neither are at the playing stage yet. Asking people at my FLGS if people play Infinity yielded the answer of 'it's on and off, same with Warmachine'. Sells like hotcakes, but not many people play it at the store.
That's always been my experience with non-GW games. Fantastic alternative games with great miniatures that I can never find anyone to have a game against. I'll keep at it with Infinity though.
Peregrine wrote: Your poll is terrible. The options are biased, and you don't allow an option to give multiple reasons.
Anyway, for me it's simple: GW is the only company that produces a complete 28mm scifi game with multiple armies, tanks, etc. Other companies either produce a handful of models (usually intended to be used with 40k), or are infantry-only skirmish games that I'm not really interested in. So pretty much it's GW/40k or end up with a bunch of random models and a mess of a house rule system to make everything work properly. IOW, a game that I can only play with a few specific friends, not in random pickup games.
And I know that the "completeness" factor is better for fantasy and historical games, but neither of those genres are very interesting to me.
My reason for mainly playing 40k (I have starter sets for Hordes and Malifaux I sometimes dig out) is this.
That and I like the models and the background. The lore of Warhammer 40k is top notch.
For me GW have the best balance between their model quality and their utility as gaming pieces and the fluff running through my head as I build and paint an army just capture my attention better than any other. As much as I dislike the prices these days all the other models either look terrible or bore me.
Nothing at all! In fact, I don't play GW games because of my preference to 15mm scale. Now I can put more than a half-dozen vehicles on a 6x4 table and it doesn't looks like a parking lot, and I still get the personality of individual models that you'd see in 28mm.
Voted 3. Have fantasy and 40k armies, and took almost a year off for FoW. Got back into 40k a few months back... and that's all I've been playing since...
My local store has a large 40k group, and a large group of people who won't touch GW (FoW, some other WWII thing, historical gaming...), so I'm lucky with options.
There wasn't really an option that fit me very well.
I have a large FoW army and sort of prefer that to 40K, but you can't argue with the popularity of 40K, I started because the models are cool and I might actually end up having a few games.
Peregrine wrote: Other companies either produce a handful of models (usually intended to be used with 40k), or are infantry-only skirmish games that I'm not really interested in. So pretty much it's GW/40kor end up with a bunch of random models and a mess of a house rule system to make everything work properly.
While it's a skirmish game, Infinity has not only 6 complete ranges of models that are simply getting minor additions now, they have a 7th line that is being built up, and a line of mercanary allies. It also has a rule system better written than Games Workshop could ever hope to acheive, and the best balance any mainstream tabletop game has gotten yet.
But you knew that before lumping it in with 'a bunch of random models and a mess of house rule system', didn't you?
I mean, it's one thing to write off skirmish games because you don't like them, but it's another to just make stuff up about them as a reason.
nkelsch wrote: Terrible poll is terrible... but no reason for me to blindly quit playing 40k.
The poll has nothing to do with quitting 40k or any system, and is asking instead for the main reasons why people don't expand their gaming horizons beyond it (well, GW as a company). As you state, you play other game systems. That makes you option 2 or 3. I guess if you didn't understand the poll I won't take umbrage at your first comment.
Fluff is another excellent reason though. Completely forgot that one. It's a bit late to change it as there are votes all over the poll now, but that is a good one.
snurl wrote: Nothing. I think most GW only folks would be shocked and amazed at how low priced historical gaming can be.
This. I considered starting Flames of War and...wow. Despite the smaller scale, getting 5 tanks for 20€ is so damn cheap. Or, like, 130 soldiers for 20€. The thing with historicals is that nobody can go all donkey-poo on his copyright stuff or sth....every Sherman from '44 looks the same and there's no copyright.
snurl wrote: Nothing. I think most GW only folks would be shocked and amazed at how low priced historical gaming can be.
This. I considered starting Flames of War and...wow. Despite the smaller scale, getting 5 tanks for 20€ is so damn cheap. Or, like, 130 soldiers for 20€. The thing with historicals is that nobody can go all donkey-poo on his copyright stuff or sth....every Sherman from '44 looks the same and there's no copyright.
Even 28mm stuff is cheaper. Look at the Perry Brothers - you can get 40 multi-part, highly detailed British Napoleonic infantrymen for $36.
My gaming buddy refuses point blank to consider anything not made by GW, even if it's made by people who made the GW stuff he loves. He's just funny that way.
As such, whilst I collect other stuff I'm largely reduced to playing 40K/Blood Bowl. I'm starting to get the girlfriend hooked though so expanding there with some skirmish games
I play many games outside of the GW stuff. Only need one or two others at the club to join in and thats enough for me.
Pretty lucky that my local club is open to playing just about any game out there, so theres always going to be someone willing to give a game a go.
GW's strength is in the number of players and available games. That and their (old, none of this new Draigo stuff) background is what keeps an army or two sitting in my games cupboard.
Generally what stops me playing a non-GW game would be the other players of that game (the local WM/H coterie, for example. Their idea of 'teaching' the game involves stomping you into the dirt (fair enough, the game DOES seem to encourage this) - but they don't explain to you WHY you did so badly or suggest ways to not let it happen again. As far as teaching goes, it's a crap method.
I've never felt the need to restrict myself to GW games. I came into the wargaming hobby by way of historical gaming (WW2 20mm) in the 80s, and then discovered 40k. So I've always known there were other things out there.
I play infinity - which hit a growth spurt here after the GW price rise/embargo double whammy a couple of years ago with 20+ players I interact with. That's a higher number of players than the number of local 40k players who play in the local stores (I'm sure there are plenty of locals who play at home, mate's garages, etc - but they don't interact with other groups so as far as stats go, become irrelevant.
I refuse to buy metal figures. GW makes enough plastic and their sculpts are still the gold standard in the industry.
Malifaux has lured me with their siren song now that the Ten Thunders are being done in plastic. Warmahordes tempted me but that plastic/resin stuff they use isn't a whole lot better than metal. The models are as horrid to deal with as the original metals were. :(
I pledged into Sedition Wars, Kingdom Death, Kings of War, DreamForge, and Through The Breach all because of the plastic models they include.
Why the aversion to metals? I agree that plastics are better all round (cost, ease of use, storage), but you're the first person I've encountered that won't touch metals.
I like GW models, rules (in general not the sloppy writing), and the scale of 40K is great.
Don't really want to play skirmish level games (and have played all the GW skirmish games in the distant past)
Also don't really like the aesthetics of many other systems.
40K has been with me since I was a child. Since then I've learned more about the fluff and made my own. I'm used to highly customisable multi-part plastic kits and huge amounts of wargear options.
WarmaHordes tempted me but I ended up turning the warjack I bought into an Ork Warboss' warbike, it felt like a much more worthwhile use of the parts because I turned something relatively uniform in Warmachine into something that was totally mine and totally legal to play.
Infinity tempted me as well because I liked some of the models. Not enough to have identical models to everybody else though.
For me, and I speak only for me, GW make the only wargames. I know there are other manufacturers, but their products don't buzz me. It's probably because GW got me young - hearts and minds and all that.
Herzlos wrote: Why the aversion to metals? I agree that plastics are better all round (cost, ease of use, storage), but you're the first person I've encountered that won't touch metals.
Second here. Metal is the worst thing that exists for miniatures. Modeling / converting is a major pita, same goes for painting, cost...etc. I take Finecast (price aside) over metal anytime.
The only thing stopping me is player base size, most people know of other games, but can't find a group of people willing to play that is big enough to be worth the investment.
E.g. Dystopian Legions, I know many people who have seen the game, but there is not much interest so the player base is small, I'm not going to invest money in a game I will never play.
I don't play GW or non-GW systems at the moment because I'm still holding a grudge over GW's neglect of the Sisters of Battle. The only reason I got Sedition Wars is because someone finally gave women equal treatment and it's so cheap I don't mind selling off all the stuff I don't want.
snurl wrote: Nothing. I think most GW only folks would be shocked and amazed at how low priced historical gaming can be.
This. I considered starting Flames of War and...wow. Despite the smaller scale, getting 5 tanks for 20€ is so damn cheap. Or, like, 130 soldiers for 20€. The thing with historicals is that nobody can go all donkey-poo on his copyright stuff or sth....every Sherman from '44 looks the same and there's no copyright.
Exalted this post.
Slightly OT, but I've always wondered about the copyright regarding mini tanks/cars/planes etc i.e why is anybody allowed to make a world war two tank/aeroplane/ship? surely the US government or General Motors?? still holds the Sherman copyright?
Years ago I used to play all sorts of game systems. Then all of the local shops shut down. A GW store opened up and so I played GW games. Now, the GW has also closed, so I am a free gamer again. It is all a matter of finding a game the community wants to play.
Slightly OT, but I've always wondered about the copyright regarding mini tanks/cars/planes etc i.e why is anybody allowed to make a world war two tank/aeroplane/ship? surely the US government or General Motors?? still holds the Sherman copyright?
There's a long history of debate on this matter in the scale model community. It boils down to this: You can't own history. A scale model of a soldier or piece of equipment from history is by definition an educational representation. One of the major selling points that historical wargaming organizations use when spreading their hobby is the educational aspect of it.
You could do a google search for model kit design copyright and find all sorts of discussion if you want to know more.
Except a couple LOTR games with my daughter I don't play GW games. Way too many great systems and figures out there for all genres. I have 15mm Sci Fi, moderns and WW2, 28mm Colonial, Pirates, Wild West and modern/zombie/gang fighting, some 28mm Scifi skirmish, 15mm Dark Ages, 1:600 modern land forces and WW2 aircraft.
I don't really like the 40K rules, I HATE being told what figures I can buy or put into my army, I dislike points systems...
I do have some Space Marines and Tyranids that get used with other game systems, as well as the Mines of Moria and new Escape From Goblin Town sets (and those figs get used with other systems too).
I had to vote "Other" because there weren't any options that covered the reasons I haven't started playing other miniatures games. I actually have a small list:
1. People to play with. This is a big one. Locally everyone plays a GW game, and even back home the FLGS is all GW games too. Why pay for something that no one plays?
2. Setting. GW has done a pretty good job about setting up a strong background that really interests me. Plus it's a little encouraging to think that humanity could actually hang on long enough to reach the 41st Millennium.
3. Models. This is more of taste thing, but a lot of the models in other companies don't really interest me. Plus if I wanted naked/scantily clad women I'd got look at porn, not break out my hobby case. There are a lot of games that are just hard to play in public because any female models are naked, almost, or look like they're supposed to be strippers with their clothes painted on. Granted some of GW's models aren't much better, but a majority of the female models are wearing clothing and armour.
4. Players from other systems. This is likely going to piss someone off, but frankly I'm a bit turned off by some of the players I've encountered are too aggressive about how great/cheap/better their game is in comparison to the one I'm playing. I see miniatures games like bikes, if your getting what you want out of the game (for me, a good time) does it matter if the bike has 30 gear settings a bell and lights? Not really. And bragging about it doesn't make me more interested in it either.
5. Scale. Most of the other minatures games out there are skirmish games. And that's fine, I've got nothing against skirmish games (I love playing Mordhiem, Kill Team is enjoyable and I want to try Necromunda some day) but when I like controlling 40+ models on the table, and it's a different kind of game than if I were controlling 10-15.
6. Personal taste. I've looked at other games, even read reviews about them but when it comes down to it, I like the feel of GW's games more than a lot of the other ones. Sure it's akin to riding a one speed bicycle compared to some of the other games out there, but it's still fun to play (or ride to continue my analogy).
So yeah, there's my short list why I play GW games exclusively.
CptJake wrote: Where does this idea that "most of the other minatures games out there are skirmish games" come from?
I'm not sure it is a very accurate statement...
Outside of the Historical games a lot of the games we see mentioned a lot (Hordes, Infinity, Warmachine) are small unit skirmish games. Those are the ones I was referring to personally.
I've always played GW games, and spent far too much cash to consider other systems
Our group is firmly entrenched in 40k. The price increases over the past few years have curtailed our spending, but we've all got pretty large armies at this point and enjoy Warhammer 40k.
It isn't just the game at this point. Some of us have a lot of the books and are getting a lot of enjoyment with the setting, both HH and the other BL books, too.
snurl wrote: Nothing. I think most GW only folks would be shocked and amazed at how low priced historical gaming can be.
This is very true. I have a 28mm WWII US airborne platoon (40-odd metal miniatures with a variety of armaments including BAR, M-1 carbines, Tommy guns, mortars, etc.), complete with resin supporting vehicles (2 M4A3, 2 M10, and 2 halftracks) and a couple of anti tank guns. I spent about $100 for all of them.
I play GW games as well as Warmahordes. I'd love to play Infinity, Warpath, Godslayer and SAGA but:
a) No one at the store plays it and
b) It's difficult getting models in brick-and-mortar shops.
I think my reasons for sticking with GW stuff are very much the same as have been posted--I love the background and history of the 40K universe; there's an active community of 40K players at multiple venues I can play with; and I really only have time for one game system..
As it is, I can only get in games of 40K once or twice a month. With the large community of players and range of models, GW is the way I'm going at this point.
That's not to say that these other game systems don't have rich, well-detailed worlds, or communities of dedicated players, or equally good rule sets. It's pretty obvious that they do, and that's awesome. I say everyone should play the game or games that please them, and it's terrific that we're at a point where gamers have multiple, well-done game systems to pick from.
A lot of the time, there's a lot of people interested in a game, but no-one plays it because nobody else plays it--nobody wants to jump first. I've found that setting up some kind of campaign or league (say, a slow-grow) with a public sign-up on the group's forums helps with this a lot.
I play Games Workshop games because that's what the people at my FLGS play, and I like the playing part. Specifically, I play 40k because that's what the people play. I own a small High Elf Army (GW Fantasy) that I haven't put together because there isn't much interest in Fantasy side.
I own a Warmachines Khador army and I own a small Malifaux Crew, I've played one game of each system and really enjoy it. Of all of my non-GW models, only one is painted well enough that I would call it done. Over half of my GW40k models are painted to what I would call table-top quality the rest have been primed and have the large areas painted but details visible from a foot away, like eyes, may not be done. I paint the models to enhance my enjoyment of playing the game.
If there were a bunch of people who played all the games around here, I think I would play a lot less 40k (and would have bought a lot less 40k models). In general, I like the Warmachine models the best. I like how they assemble and the Khador models look really good. I like the Malifaux game mechanic the best of all 3.
So what I need is the guys/gals at my FLGS that play 40k to switch over to playing a game like Malifaux with Privateer Press models.
Though I voted "1", I completely understand those who play GW games, mostly or entirely.
As well as the fluff, models, etc, GW games come with a built in player base, lots of opportunities for sharing the hobby, and a pretty strong guarantee that while there's a small chance of squatification, the game you're playing will not be dying next year.
That's a pretty valuable package of benefits. Though I prefer to pay less and play lots of other games. The reasons above have convinced me to keep my two 40k armies. If my gaming group ever falls apart or I move somewhere less populated, GW might again be my best bet for regular gaming.
CptJake wrote: Where does this idea that "most of the other minatures games out there are skirmish games" come from?
I'm not sure it is a very accurate statement...
Outside of the Historical games a lot of the games we see mentioned a lot (Hordes, Infinity, Warmachine) are small unit skirmish games. Those are the ones I was referring to personally.
I think that's because, due to price and space, most wargamers outside of GW's influence see 28mm and larger scales as 'skirmish' - GW (and now Mantic) are really the only companies that try to push a lot of stuff on a 6x4 table. In 28mm scale, you'll either see other wargames tend towards larger tables, or smaller combat.
Smaller scales - 20mm, 15mm, 10mm, 6mm, 3mm - are generally what people consider 'large action' scales, where you fight the kind of battles 40k and WHFantasy want to be.
IMO, WH40K has its main interest in converting/tinkering with/painting a unique army.
I also like the setting (although the feel is a distinctively different one, now, from the one it was 20 years ago).
Playing-wise, I am quite busy with Infinity and Warmahordes, and various board and video games, and have not much time left or interest in playing the unbalanced dice feast of WH40K.
I don't say that it cannot be fun, I know it can, but the game is not what makes WH40K unique or interesting.
I prefer Battletech, and really enjoyed Vor, but most players I know only play 40K so I am stuck with that. I am, however, getting a few of them to consider Battletech.
I don't like smaller scale games, it being my personal opinion, not saying they are bad.
I look at people playing 15mm Flames of War and I think: sure they are good miniatures, they're painted to correct historical colours and you get tons of them cheaply, but it doesn't do 'IT' for me. You're just pushing basically infantry counters and vehicles and rolling dice.
Go even smaller and there's even less individuality.
So that's leave 'skirmish' scale games. I prefer the slightly goofy, over-the-top look of older GW models. I know the rules aren't great, the editing is bad, the proofreading/testing non-existent, but that doesn't matter. I have fun modelling, painting and playing mostly casual games.
I'm well aware other games/manufacturers might have better sculpts, better rules or better support, but WH40k fills my niche already and I only have so much time/money to support my hobby without branching off into a dozen new game systems/model lines.
Because strangely enough, besides tabletop wargames I also have a lot of other hobbies which need time/money.
Maybe in the future when I'm tired of it I'll try something else, but just as likely I'll pick up some other hobby for a few years and my armies sit in the closet again to await that shiny new 9th edition 40k.
For me it's a combination of the options: I have and do dabble in other games; Warmahordes, Brushfire, Necromunda. However, my friends don't want to start new games, even Fantasy, so I'm alone. Therefore, most of my time is spent on 40k.
As much as I HATE certain elements of GW's systems, I tend to find other elements in other systems MORE annoying. Like, I may dislike flyers in 6th edition, but I LOATHE WarmaHorde's "snipe the HQ to win" gameplay.
I Literally loved almost everything about the rules in that game, still do love the models, and like that they release new models for every army at a decent rate; however HQ-kill win condition, coupled with a 4mm tall model on a round based blocking line of site to a 28mm model on the same size base, drove me nuts!
Looking forward to see the final version of Relic Knights. I hope it ends up great. If it does, I might even thin my herd of GW models a bit. Having said that though, GW also has a really fun story/environment in my opinion that adds to the draw of their game over many others.
Also, like others have said, player base = what gets played often. It's the reason why I play 40k almost exclusively even though I like fantasy just as much.
I tend not to branch out to other games due to a significant issue around ease of entry.
What do I mean?
First.
When I started 40k, it was with a group of four other completely new players. None of us had ANY idea how to play. When we went to game stores, the people playing weren't interested in teaching us, as it would intrude upon their game time. So we had to really slog though the extremely complicated rule set, making tons of mistakes along the way, and generally being confused and frustrated the whole time. Our first few 500 pt games took 8,7,8 hours respectively. If it weren't for the determination of the entire group, I doubt we would have individually suffered through that more than once. With that said, I have had an interest in learning Warmachine, Infinity, and Dust, but all the same things apply. No one at our local gaming stores are interested in teach, since it takes away from their fun time, and I'm certainly not interested in slogging though more horrible new player learning curve games. I doubt I'd go though this for any other hobby, and if I had it to do over, with fair warning, I'd probably not have started 40k.
Second.
Price. Investing in a new army is no small financial feat. Even if it's just a demo army, I'm going to probably drop $50 to $100 just to find out if I like it or not. Sure, my local stores have "demo armies" but what good are those? I still have no one to play against other than my friends who also don't know the systems, and now we are back to my first point. That's only if the store has TWO demo armies. And mine do not.
The truth is, I LOVE wargaming, but I HATE the difficulty to entry. Thus, no new games.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Breotan wrote: I refuse to buy metal figures. GW makes enough plastic and their sculpts are still the gold standard in the industry.
Malifaux has lured me with their siren song now that the Ten Thunders are being done in plastic. Warmahordes tempted me but that plastic/resin stuff they use isn't a whole lot better than metal. The models are as horrid to deal with as the original metals were. :(
I pledged into Sedition Wars, Kingdom Death, Kings of War, DreamForge, and Through The Breach all because of the plastic models they include.
That's why.
And this. I really dislike metals, and the PVC that Warahordes uses. My wargame modeling practically LIVES by polystyrene and plastic cement. When I built a Menoth starter set, and plastic cement didn't work, I almost gave it away. I loathe super glue.
Warhammer 40k has great lore and a really nice scale. Apocalypse looks like great fun! Smaller skirmish games just don't appeal to my inner tank commander. I like Flames of War as a concept but their models are so.. ehhh. Not bad but not good either.
I like the look of Mantic Games but that's about it. My wargame of choice is a sci-fi 28mm all plastic wargame so obviously my main game will be 40k. Also my local GW is 5 mins away but the local FLGS is a train ride away.
warboss wrote: Poll needs an option for "I play GW games because I can't find players for other games."
So... the 5th option?
Nope. I'm not just talking about friends or the local store meta but rather the entire state. I'm talking about not finding complete strangers many miles away for certain games (and not small homebrew ones either).
Peregrine wrote: Your poll is terrible. The options are biased, and you don't allow an option to give multiple reasons.
Anyway, for me it's simple: GW is the only company that produces a complete 28mm scifi game with multiple armies, tanks, etc. Other companies either produce a handful of models (usually intended to be used with 40k), or are infantry-only skirmish games that I'm not really interested in. So pretty much it's GW/40k or end up with a bunch of random models and a mess of a house rule system to make everything work properly. IOW, a game that I can only play with a few specific friends, not in random pickup games.
And I know that the "completeness" factor is better for fantasy and historical games, but neither of those genres are very interesting to me.
Kinda harsh. I agree there aren't many options for 28mm army games but they are out there. Dust tactics has a great rule set with 3 complete factions and more on the way this year. You can get a basic size army (1500 pnt equivalent) for like 100 bucks and they look great. Dystopian legions is new and growing as is Mantic games warpath.
I play all sorts. I've been gaming for over 25 years but only started 40K three years ago. I play Role-Playing Games mainly but also 40K, Star Wars Minis, Heroclix, board games and the very occasional computer game.
Wargaming wise I play 40K because I like it, I like the models and I like GW stores. Amongst my friends there is no this vs that when it comes to gaming, only what do we play tonight?
I've only just came back to GW from a many-year hiatus. Whilst I'm enjoying myself, the fact there are a number of competitors out there that weren't there before, many with a more reasonable pricing, is drawing my eye.
I suspect I'll pick up the War Machine starter set before too long.
I've been playing GW games for 20 years, I'm way too invested in the fluff and spent too much on it to give it up for something else. It'd be like getting a divorce...
I like to dabble with other systems, and am pretty heavily invested in a few.
However, when I start a new game, I don't expect anyone else to pick it up, and I work really hard to get what I need for two forces.
Due to the expense of this, it is no surprise that I prefer smaller games with a lower model count, or smaller scales where you can ge ta decent sized force relatively cheaply.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Gotta agree, the whole "I'm so heavily invested in GW, I can't start other games" is a total fallacy.
I don't totally agree with this. I agree that you could always try a new ruleset with the figures that you have, and playing other games doesn't keep you from playing GW.
Perhaps instead of "can't start other games" maybe it could be "I have no reason to start other games" . After all, if you like the games, already have a ton of GW that you've painted over the years, and people you like playing with, why would you switch?
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Gotta agree, the whole "I'm so heavily invested in GW, I can't start other games" is a total fallacy.
Perhaps instead of "can't start other games" maybe it could be "I have no reason to start other games" . After all, if you like the games, already have a ton of GW that you've painted over the years, and people you like playing with, why would you switch?
Well, you don't have to switch from one at the cost of another, just play both!
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Gotta agree, the whole "I'm so heavily invested in GW, I can't start other games" is a total fallacy.
Perhaps instead of "can't start other games" maybe it could be "I have no reason to start other games" . After all, if you like the games, already have a ton of GW that you've painted over the years, and people you like playing with, why would you switch?
Well, you don't have to switch from one at the cost of another, just play both!
But if your current game already gives you everything you wan't, then what reason do you have to try another one?
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Gotta agree, the whole "I'm so heavily invested in GW, I can't start other games" is a total fallacy.
Perhaps instead of "can't start other games" maybe it could be "I have no reason to start other games" . After all, if you like the games, already have a ton of GW that you've painted over the years, and people you like playing with, why would you switch?
Well, you don't have to switch from one at the cost of another, just play both!
But if your current game already gives you everything you wan't, then what reason do you have to try another one?
Something new? Something Fresh? Variety?
"I like curry, therefore I am only going eat curry from now etc etc"
After 20 years with GW, its all getting a bit stale...............
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Gotta agree, the whole "I'm so heavily invested in GW, I can't start other games" is a total fallacy.
Perhaps instead of "can't start other games" maybe it could be "I have no reason to start other games" . After all, if you like the games, already have a ton of GW that you've painted over the years, and people you like playing with, why would you switch?
Well, you don't have to switch from one at the cost of another, just play both!
But if your current game already gives you everything you wan't, then what reason do you have to try another one?
Something new? Something Fresh? Variety?
"I like curry, therefore I am only going eat curry from now etc etc"
After 20 years with GW, its all getting a bit stale...............
For you and me and various other people, yes, that might be true. Because GW doesn't offer us what we are looking for in mini-wargaming anymore.
But you have to concede that that reasoning might not apply to some other people. For some people GW still gives them all that they wan't from our hobby and there is much to be said about human resistance to change coupled with the comfort of familiar rules / models / universe.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Gotta agree, the whole "I'm so heavily invested in GW, I can't start other games" is a total fallacy.
Perhaps instead of "can't start other games" maybe it could be "I have no reason to start other games" . After all, if you like the games, already have a ton of GW that you've painted over the years, and people you like playing with, why would you switch?
Well, you don't have to switch from one at the cost of another, just play both!
But if your current game already gives you everything you wan't, then what reason do you have to try another one?
Something new? Something Fresh? Variety?
"I like curry, therefore I am only going eat curry from now etc etc"
After 20 years with GW, its all getting a bit stale...............
For you and me and various other people, yes, that might be true. Because GW doesn't offer us what we are looking for in mini-wargaming anymore.
But you have to concede that that reasoning might not apply to some other people. For some people GW still gives them all that they wan't from our hobby and there is much to be said about human resistance to change coupled with the comfort of familiar rules / models / universe.
Very true. I like to sometimes throw down a large 100-150 model army onto the table and blow the crap out of things, sometimes I want to play an elite strike force of 8-10 people going in with a set of defined objectives.
GW only provides the living rules for one of these things nowadays.
I look at people playing 15mm Flames of War and I think: sure they are good miniatures, they're painted to correct historical colours and you get tons of them cheaply, but it doesn't do 'IT' for me. You're just pushing basically infantry counters and vehicles and rolling dice.
Go even smaller and there's even less individuality.
Not all 15mm is created equally.
Spoiler:
[img]http://khurasanminiatures.tripod.com/t3604.jpg
[/img] All the miniatures above are made by Khurasan, direct only
But i do get it. I get something different out of 28mm than I do out of 15mm.
At the very least, I'd recommend any 40k player start taking a hard look at the accessories offered by Puppet's War, Kromlech, Maxmini and other accessory manufacturers. You can get some awesome stuff at great prices that augment your existing collections rather than compete with them. Once Kromlech makes a torso to match their new scifi legionaire legs, I'll probably be making a small squad.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Gotta agree, the whole "I'm so heavily invested in GW, I can't start other games" is a total fallacy.
Perhaps instead of "can't start other games" maybe it could be "I have no reason to start other games" . After all, if you like the games, already have a ton of GW that you've painted over the years, and people you like playing with, why would you switch?
Well, you don't have to switch from one at the cost of another, just play both!
But if your current game already gives you everything you wan't, then what reason do you have to try another one?
Something new? Something Fresh? Variety?
"I like curry, therefore I am only going eat curry from now etc etc"
After 20 years with GW, its all getting a bit stale...............
For you and me and various other people, yes, that might be true. Because GW doesn't offer us what we are looking for in mini-wargaming anymore.
But you have to concede that that reasoning might not apply to some other people. For some people GW still gives them all that they wan't from our hobby and there is much to be said about human resistance to change coupled with the comfort of familiar rules / models / universe.
Well said! I personally have not invested in other miniature wargames for the above reasons. Also some people may not have the time and money in investing into more games systems so stick with one. I am not starting any new games because I have spent so much time on 40k and still enjoying it. Also some people may prefer to buy GW miniatures over other companies.
Very true. I like to sometimes throw down a large 100-150 model army onto the table and blow the crap out of things, sometimes I want to play an elite strike force of 8-10 people going in with a set of defined objectives.
GW only provides the living rules for one of these things nowadays.
There are a number of living rulesets for this sort of combat.
For me it's mostly the fact that the time I'm able to be at the LGS, it's mostly 40k players with maybe one or two tables of FoW and a table of either Malifaux or Infinity.
I'd love to play my Warmachine army (and my DZC skirmish pack), but I guarantee when I get there Friday night, the only stuff coming out of the cases will be my Vulkan Marines.
For the record, there is a pretty good sized Warmahordes crowd there, but they play on a different night (one I'm not able to get there for), and DZC is a game system where (locally) everybody is buying the minis and painting them, but nobody seems to be playing it.
While I've picked up some models for Infinity and Warmachine and the rules for Dust, I haven't played any due to lack of players nearby. So I'm still enjoying 40k, just as much as when I started.
One of the things I love about 40k though is the creativity it allows and the depth it has. No other wargame (excluding historicals) has, to my knowledge, such extensive background written about it. There's so much to explore in the game that it'll never get old. The armies are easy to customize, something not found with the aforementioned Infinity, Warmahordes, and Dust. And the whole genericness of the rules set is great too, it makes it easy to make your own units and scenarios, or use "counts as" and cool conversions. It's really a great game.
One of the things I love about 40k though is the creativity it allows and the depth it has. No other wargame (excluding historicals) has, too my knowledge, such extensive background written about it.
I also like the extent of 40k fluff which is one of the more expansive fantasy universes out there, but Battletech has a cannon of such depth (and a universe that actually progresses) that it makes 40k look like Dr. Seuss.
Of course then you might want to play Battletech and that could only lead to pain and frustration.
I mostly play 40k, but I did pick up way more than I should for Relik Knights on that Kickstarter a few months back. I went there because the games are smaller, quicker, and by getting a few models from that game, I have something VERY different than 40k models to paint. So it was for the variety factor.
I picked up some Hordes models because a friend of mine did, and has nobody to play with. So that was for pitty mostly.
I love the full army feel of 40k, and no other game has given me that yet, and if there was one, I don't know that I would want to buy a whole bunch more models to support it.
Nothing stops me playing almost excusively non-GW games .
I have no issues getting opponents for non GW games .
The argument that you are generally more likely to get a game of 40K is a valid one , but I find this a little sad if this is a main reason , and is self perpetuating .
This is literally the only thing GW games have going for them rules wise that other companies can't or won't match. I can bring the same Tyranid units in 5 different games, and every game have an army that works differently due to loadout changes (points costs notwithstanding). To get that kind of force flexibility in other games, I'd be looking at entirely different units.
This is, however, a double edged sword, because the downside to this customisability is GW's complete inability to balance things properly. Sure, in game 3, I might have taken a Crusherfex brood. In game 2, it was a Dakkafex brood and infinitely more worth its (cheaper) points cost.
In Infinity, sure, I might be dropping entirely a couple of Ghulam Infantry in order to bring an Asawira Heavy Infintry, but neither are bad choices.
So yeah, GW games have the customisability. I love them for it. I love being able to make a Grave Guard unit into either a tarpit with sword and board or a hammer with great weapons, or change a meleefex into a dakkafex. I hate them for it as well, because most of the options on units have a clear better build.
This is literally the only thing GW games have going for them rules wise that other companies can't or won't match. I can bring the same Tyranid units in 5 different games, and every game have an army that works differently due to loadout changes (points costs notwithstanding). To get that kind of force flexibility in other games, I'd be looking at entirely different units.
This is, however, a double edged sword, because the downside to this customisability is GW's complete inability to balance things properly. Sure, in game 3, I might have taken a Crusherfex brood. In game 2, it was a Dakkafex brood and infinitely more worth its (cheaper) points cost.
In Infinity, sure, I might be dropping entirely a couple of Ghulam Infantry in order to bring an Asawira Heavy Infintry, but neither are bad choices.
So yeah, GW games have the customisability. I love them for it. I love being able to make a Grave Guard unit into either a tarpit with sword and board or a hammer with great weapons, or change a meleefex into a dakkafex. I hate them for it as well, because most of the options on units have a clear better build.
Brushfire.
Just about every unit has several options, and the minis actually come with enough of those options to outfit your models however you'd like. It also scales from skirmish to mass battles very easily.
Greenizbest wrote: I don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on models and not be able to find someone to play with.
The great thing about skirmish games like Infinity and Malifaux are you don't need to spend hundreds of dollars. With Infinity, you don't even need to buy the rules!
GW's latest rounds of price increases and the general blandness of the new Chaos book means my time is better spent buying old d20 books for RPGs. I bought the new 40K starter, and had a good time painting the Chaos contents, but I find the value just isn't there anymore.
Buying an odd figure or two for a laugh just can't be justified anymore, you have to collect for an army or you don't collect at all. And the wealth and price of d20 books is so attractive, you'd be a fool not to go in on it.
Very true. I like to sometimes throw down a large 100-150 model army onto the table and blow the crap out of things, sometimes I want to play an elite strike force of 8-10 people going in with a set of defined objectives.
GW only provides the living rules for one of these things nowadays.
There are a number of living rulesets for this sort of combat.
I know, thats why I play them. Infinity tonight, followed by a round robin of 600 point 40K throwdown games!
pretre wrote: Aren't the Necromunda rules still available from GW? Not to mention that there are rules for killteam still available in Battle Missions.
Necro is still available, and as much as I love it and still play, its a pretty dead system. The only people that play necro are the people that played necro, if you know what I mean?
Dunno about battle missions, I'll have to borrow a copy and have a look. Reminds me, I must get pics of my hive table up on the terrain subforum as its grown to stupidly massive levels now............
DarkCorsair wrote: One of the things I love about 40k though is the creativity it allows and the depth it has. No other wargame (excluding historicals) has, to my knowledge, such extensive background written about it. There's so much to explore in the game that it'll never get old.
The Fantasy Flight RPG's scratch that itch for me these days, much more so than the recent codexes did. With the codexes, they have the problem that the lore has to be related to an army, which were almost all detailed years ago, such that new books either restate a lot of familiar stuff, or retcon in new stuff (see: Necrons).
DarkCorsair wrote: One of the things I love about 40k though is the creativity it allows and the depth it has. No other wargame (excluding historicals) has, to my knowledge, such extensive background written about it. There's so much to explore in the game that it'll never get old.
The Fantasy Flight RPG's scratch that itch for me these days, much more so than the recent codexes did. With the codexes, they have the problem that the lore has to be related to an army, which were almost all detailed years ago, such that new books either restate a lot of familiar stuff, or retcon in new stuff (see: Necrons).
Never been an RPG player, but I keep hearing this about them. Whats the best one to start with? People are muttering Deathwatch locally.
The GM will run out of elephants to throw at them.
Start with one of the human-centric ones, and after a few sessions, then throw in a SM antagonist (this will show them the relative power levels) when they are ready for it (level wise).
The GM will run out of elephants to throw at them.
Start with one of the human-centric ones, and after a few sessions, then throw in a SM antagonist (this will show them the relative power levels) when they are ready for it (level wise).
Just remembered that I bought a copy of Dark Heresy many years ago (god knows, must have been an impulse) and it must be in the house somewhere.
I think so much of it comes down to how lucky you are with playing communities, nearby clubs and FLGS, that kind of thing.
I'm extremely fortunate to have both club and FLGS nearby that have a healthy variety of games, from various manufacturers. Usually, regardless of the game you want to play, you can find opponents fairly easily. Of course the Internet has been a wonderful tool for this kind of thing - I'm convinced the rise of Infinity wouldn't have been possible without it for instance, and nowadays I think the 'I can't find anyone else to play' is really not a valid excuse in the vast majority of cases.
With regards to GW games, speaking personally I tend to see a lot more younger players try that one first. But, after they have had a few months of seeing some of the large, toy-like and unpainted flyers (that seem to populate 40k games now) scooting around the table, there attention is drawn elsewhere - two painted FoW armies fighting amongst a small town, fully painted Warmahordes or even WFB armies tend to drag them away. Although even the latter seems to be losing players nowadays, I don't think the consensus is that it's a terribly well written ruleset.
Fluff, I find that only 40k has the most interesting, in depth, and easily attainable fluff out there.
Compared to even fantasy or any of the other stuff thats more difficult to attain, 40k is a click of the button away. I just find that the fluff really fuels my fire, know what i mean.
Funny how so many people seem to have a love hate relationship with GW. Its very much like someone with an abusive partner, the kind of person who says silly things "I know he or she loves me", as they cover a bruise.
They do make damn fine toys though don't they. Something to watch out for, is they will be having another price hike shortly, so get ready for the next wave of moaning topics....
The question I have is "If there was another scifi game available that offered the range of game sizes 40k supports, with a free download of the rules available and some very cool background (tons of fluff) how many people would give it a go?"
Funny how so many people seem to have a love hate relationship with GW. Its very much like someone with an abusive partner, the kind of person who says silly things "I know he or she loves me", as they cover a bruise.
They do make damn fine toys though don't they. Something to watch out for, is they will be having another price hike shortly, so get ready for the next wave of moaning topics....
Well I like the models, their customer service has been stellar, their products are widely available. The only thing I don't like about the company is their prices, I wouldn't call them an abusive partner, just one that hogs the credit card!
I didn't see an option for me so I've ticked other.
Firstly, I do think pricing at the moment is a little high but it's not at a point where I won't buy stuff, I'll just use my local independent for big orders so I get 10-20% off retail. In many respects pricing hasn't yet forced me to other manufacturers or systems
Secondly, I do play other systems but most of the other systems I play cost similar amounts for larger games to GW gaming. A follow on from the point above I guess..
Thirdly, I am always wary of new or other systems due to a number of reasons (some of why have been mentioned above)
a) Will there be a good sized playerbase to get regular games accounting for schedule clashes, illness, work, time etc (My gaming time is limited, I play once a week at a local club.)
b) Is the company likely to give enough factions/models to give a varied playstyle?
c) Does the game have true longevity or is it more flash in the pan with interest likely to peak and drop quickly (hard to predict this one)
Fourthly, historical gaming is an entirely different kettle of fish (imo). Napoleonics are often massively cheaper but the quality is in line with the pricing.
Finally I am part of the problem as are most of us, I suspect. We feel that the models and rules should be cheaper yet we still buy them, and the third party add-on kits and the resin bases because essentially the hobby is worth it to us and as most successful businesses know, what something is worth very much relies on how much someone will pay for it.
Fourthly, historical gaming is an entirely different kettle of fish (imo). Napoleonics are often massively cheaper but the quality is in line with the pricing.
LOL. You do know that you can get Napoleonics sculpted by GW's best sculptors, the Perrys right?
The guy on the left is sad because you think he's a bad sculpt and he only costs £1.50 and is in metal.
The other sculptors out there seem to be doing a pretty good job as well:
These guys are looking grim because they just realized that people are paying way more than the 42 pence each they cost.for no real difference in quality.
Fourthly, historical gaming is an entirely different kettle of fish (imo). Napoleonics are often massively cheaper but the quality is in line with the pricing.
LOL. You do know that you can get Napoleonics sculpted by GW's best sculptors, the Perrys right?
Spoiler:
The guy on the left is sad because you think he's a bad sculpt and he only costs £1.50 and is in metal.
The other sculptors out there seem to be doing a pretty good job as well:
These guys are looking grim because they just realized that people are paying way more than the 42 pence each they cost.for no real difference in quality.
Agreed. I have no interest in historical, but the idea that if you play historical you're limited to crappy looking figs is not true.
There's always been a range of figs from mediocre, to figures that are as good as the best from GW. I grant that you used to have to pay quite a bit for nicer figs, but with companies like victrix and perry doing plastics, you can get napoleonics as good as GW for a fraction of the price.
One reason is that people who have made a large investment in GW games, reason they have to get the best return on their investment , by keeping involved and invested in GW games.
Yet those aware of the wider hobby, seem to be able to swap and change freely between companies products without any sort of 'investment lock in'.
Many gamers are unaware you can use your GW minis in other less 'investment heavy' games...
I have played Malifaux quite a bit & due to how cheap it can be to amass a sizable amount of figs (compared to 40k that is) I've got a decent amount of Guild & Mercenaries figs. However, 40k was the first game I started with at 11 years old & no matter how exorbitant GW's prices may get or how much I may grow to dislike their rules, I stick with them for some reason. Kinda like a battered woman
Though speaking of women, I'd like to see more women getting into 40K, the few I've played against are alot of fun & really good sports. I feel that we, as men, often get too into the competitive nature of it & forget some of the fun of it. Hence, why I don't do tournies a whole lot.
I like GW stuff because i like the looks of the models and the fluff. I also love to paint and get most of my models through trading of my paint service, most of my friends tend to play 40k. I am not a real big fan of the actual gaming community as i prefer to play fluffy cool looking lists but i do manage to get a game in now and then with a couple of friends. I am not opposed to trying out a different system at all. I am actually going to be painting some WM/H guys for a friend soon and will be recieving a legion of everblight army in return. I also have a wife and a toddler and a second on the way so my time and resources are very limited.
I've always stuck with 40k until recently. I just find the prices exorbitant, I can't justify new models or a new army. I've got over 4000k of Wolves/Marines. I can play SW/SM/CSM/BA/DA/BT with what I have. Most of this stuff was bought cheap years ago (three old rhinos, I think you got them in a box for 20 quid etc) with some stuff bought at 25-50% retail price from mates recently. The only things I've 'bought' from GW in the past five years or so was Arjac and some Thunderwolves - both for birthday/christmas :p.
GW paints are quite cheap for what you get - that's the only thing that is as far as I can see.
Infinity is great fun, and I love the constant involvement. The models aren't cheap cheap, but they're lovely and metal, and angry space-scotsmen appeal to me greatly. I've spent 35 quid and have an army. I can't say no to that really.
Never been an RPG player, but I keep hearing this about them. Whats the best one to start with? People are muttering Deathwatch locally.
My own favourite is Rogue Trader. The premise is very original among sci-fi RPG's, suggesting all sorts of plots that wouldn't occur in other genres. The background is fascinating, both for the details of stuff like how ships work, Warp travel, Navigators, etc, and also the relations the characters will have with the wider Imperium, the sorts of places they explore and the society of the Rogue Traders themselves.
Damn you all, you're making me want to play non-GW games. Which would be fine except I know that, like the last three times, I'll get all excited about it, get some models, paint them, and then they'll sit on the shelf because I've got no one to play with. Which that in itself wouldn't be all that bad if I could get the "army building" feel I get with 40k.
The question I have is "If there was another scifi game available that offered the range of game sizes 40k supports, with a free download of the rules available and some very cool background (tons of fluff) how many people would give it a go?"
I 100% would, and if anyone knows a game like this and can point it out to me (besides WFB) then I will love you forever.
You know what I would go for? A well done, none-skirmish game that is stylistically like Warcraft. I love that game's aesthetics and background.
I think the first thing to do is not to change miniature suppliers and get new rules from the new supplier, but to use your existing collection with new rules. And you can even start with free ones like "In the Emperor's Name." That game is making me contemplate building a customer genestealer cult retinue using bitz and greenstuff.
1. Malifaux. Play this more than 40k. Smaller table size, smaller crew, each model is important hat you hire. Even on defense you are actively involved. Plus, something not a D6 system. Low start up cost is great. Ready to be competative under $70.00
2. Dystopian wars legions. These models look cool and it is an in between of Malifaux and 40k.
Games I have stopped or not started.
1. Dystopian wars. I like the look of the ships. I did not like play of the game. Long time to move ships, exploding dice can be ridiculous at times. If you don't have dreadnought ships you will lose. One of the worse organized rule books of all times to.
2. Drop zone commander. Price to start is high. Plus, I hate painting that small of a scale.
Lack of opponents prevents me from playing games like Dust with other people really.
I tried signing up for the local wargaming forums in Western Australia (WestGamers or something) but I haven't receieved any replies. Additionally I have no idea where to go with regards to where people play other systems.
I wouldn't mind playing 40k still, just I'm getting a little bored of half the people at my local GW being kids all the time. I don't have a problem with playing against them, just it gets a little tiring when they so non-nonchalantly try to break rules.
It sucks because I have a Dust Tactics box sitting right next to me, not being played. All of my friends just play D&D and don't like tabletop wargaming at all.
Never been an RPG player, but I keep hearing this about them. Whats the best one to start with? People are muttering Deathwatch locally.
My own favourite is Rogue Trader. The premise is very original among sci-fi RPG's, suggesting all sorts of plots that wouldn't occur in other genres. The background is fascinating, both for the details of stuff like how ships work, Warp travel, Navigators, etc, and also the relations the characters will have with the wider Imperium, the sorts of places they explore and the society of the Rogue Traders themselves.
R3con wrote: I'm so heavily invested into GW models it would be hard to justify starting another system.
This makes zero sense unless you're afraid that you'll like the other system more and sell your GW stuff at a loss.
Trying another system doesn't make your GW stuff explode, nor does it mean you may never play another GW game again.
Playing another companies game just means... you get the option of playing another companies game.
I probably should have been more clear, money is not my issue time is, I have 3 kids and a business to run. My free time is at an extreme minimum so much so that I get 1 game in every month and probably 2 hours to paint every month. Learning a new system that is anything other than a skirmish game is going to be pretty much impossible.
I think you're missing out a few really good reasons.
- They're by far the most popular and therefore easier to find someone to play against, wherever I am in the world.
- I like the 40k background far more than most competing companies, and the 20 year history of the game means that this background is much more fully realised than most competing companies.
Anyway, for me it's simple: GW is the only company that produces a complete 28mm scifi game with multiple armies, tanks, etc. Other companies either produce a handful of models (usually intended to be used with 40k), or are infantry-only skirmish games that I'm not really interested in. So pretty much it's GW/40k or end up with a bunch of random models and a mess of a house rule system to make everything work properly. IOW, a game that I can only play with a few specific friends, not in random pickup games.
This for me.
Plus, perhaps this is heresy to utter here, but I really like and enjoy GW's games. I have no real complaints and am happy to play the system as they are. Having children, and seeing how expensive their LEGO is, I have no complaints about the price, either. I think it's actually pretty fair, and gives me much more "bang for my buck" than my other recreational activities.
Riquende wrote: Those are excellent reasons for wanting to play GW games. They don't really seem to be relevant for stopping you playing anything else though.
Well, then I guess the option I'd like is
- I understand that there are lots of good games out there, but I don't have enough time/cash to play all of them, and I choose the system that allows me to play more often. - I understand that there are lots of good games out there, but I don't have enough time/cash to play all of them, and I like the GW background the most.
Riquende wrote: Those are excellent reasons for wanting to play GW games. They don't really seem to be relevant for stopping you playing anything else though.
Well, then I guess the option I'd like is
- I understand that there are lots of good games out there, but I don't have enough time/cash to play all of them, and I choose the system that allows me to play more often.
- I understand that there are lots of good games out there, but I don't have enough time/cash to play all of them, and I like the GW background the most.
Or put better.
-I just don't want too.
I'm a big proponent of non-GW games, but I think there's nothing wrong with not wanting to play or invest time/effort into a different game.
This discussion usually seems to go like this:
a. What stops you from playing non-GW games?
b. I've got alot invested in GW, and/or like the fluff, and/or enjoy the models, and/or etc, etc.
a. so you like GW games, but why don't you play other games too?
At this point person B can go back to saying why they don't and why they like the game they like, and person A can come back with one of dozens of reasons why they feel someone should try another game....
When all person B needs to say is.
I don't want too.
Surely when it comes to a person's hobbies that' s enough?
Is it really worthwhile to try and convince someone that their way of enjoying the hobby is not enough?
Riquende wrote: Those are excellent reasons for wanting to play GW games. They don't really seem to be relevant for stopping you playing anything else though.
Re 1st point:
If I collect 40k or Fantasy I know that if I go to Brazil, Saudi Arabia, the UK, Singapore or Japan the game will still be played.
If I collect Infinity, Lord of the Rings or even WM, I don't know if that would be the case.
If I ever move countries, I know that I'll have people to play 40k with me if I go to a relatively affluent part of the world. With other games I won't. So if there is a good chance that I will be moving countries a lot, isn't it a sound idea to play the game that is most widely played? There's no point in investing hundreds of dollars into other games if I know that when I move country the purchases may be for nought.
I don't want to because of certain reasons. If I had infinite money and time, or those other games were played more widely, I might play them. I've seen other games that I like the look of, and that I would like to play if I had the time to spare. But I don't.
I don't want to because of certain reasons. If I had infinite money and time, or those other games were played more widely, I might play them. I've seen other games that I like the look of, and that I would like to play if I had the time to spare. But I don't.
Sorry, I think that when it comes to games and hobbies "I don't want too" is a good reason, but I didn't mean to imply that you don't have other good reasons. My fault.
I may have got a bit overboard with my reaction to the choices on the thread and folks who go round and round with ever more reasons why they think folks should try other games.
I don't want to because of certain reasons. If I had infinite money and time, or those other games were played more widely, I might play them. I've seen other games that I like the look of, and that I would like to play if I had the time to spare. But I don't.
Sorry, I think that when it comes to games and hobbies "I don't want too" is a good reason, but I didn't mean to imply that you don't have other good reasons. My fault.
I may have got a bit overboard with my reaction to the choices on the thread and folks who go round and round with ever more reasons why they think folks should try other games.
"I don't want to" still isn't a good reason as it implies there is nothing good but the choice or a stubborn ignorance of alternatives. "I am satisfied with my current choice" is the better reason as it stipulated that your needs and wants are being satisfied and further alternatives are currently a non-interest or non-profitable investment.
"I don't want to" still isn't a good reason as it implies there is nothing good but the choice or a stubborn ignorance of alternatives. "I am satisfied with my current choice" is the better reason as it stipulated that your needs and wants are being satisfied and further alternatives are currently a non-interest or non-profitable investment.
Hmm, I think they're both valid, but I do like the way you say it much better.
Definitely implies a deliberate choice rather than the possible hints of petulance that could easily be read into my version.
I'm the only one in my group that seems to want to try other games. I've gotten people interested in Warmachine, but the interest doesn't seem to stick past the point of buying a starter set.
Most of them are Space Marine players of various colors and really like the background, I can't fault them for that. But when everyone is allying with Guard and buying bits online at absurd prices because GW doesn't give you all the parts, it gets on my nerves. I liked the allies system intially, but the pressure/need to ally with guard bothers me.
I don't get why people that claim to be competitive players (and don't seem to care about background or models) play 40k. It's a terrible rules system for serious play and is meant to just be a fun waste of time (which it can be).
If my group decided to never play 40k again and all started Warmachine, I would be overjoyed. Unfortunately, I don't have the free time to really push a new game and keep people playing often enough. I'm not going to leave my group because I've been friends with some of them for half my life now and it's the only time we hang out anymore. I don't have the time or money to play two different games. Hopefully someone else see's the light soon.
Until then, I'll keep playing my Dark Eldar. Yeah the rules are poorly written, and the game is very unbalanced... but at least my army looks cool.
Sorry for rambling, just kinda vomited out.
TLDR: I hate Imperial Guard. They ruined the allies system.
What stops me personally is the quality of the models. I think Warmachine is probably the closest in quality, but they aren't that close. I also don't like the crowd that plays Warmachine/Hoardes....from what I see, they are the worst of the worst TFG's from 40k. Too competitive and having no fun.
I REALLY like the rules of Bolt Action, but just couldn't make myself buy any of those mini's...they are truly horrible.
If another game came out that had models that were on par with 40k as far as detail and thoughtfulness I'd consider. Right now, most of my time I spend painting......GW models, especially the newer ones, blow me away.
Tabletop gaming to me is mostly about being creative, not about being competitive. I'd probably paint their mini's even if I never played another game. Their competitors IMO are so busy competing with GW's business model, pricing and rule system they don't spend enough time on the mini's.
For me, it is largely about being "too invested" as well.
Now, let me explain what I mean by that. I've been collecting GW games for 16 or so years, starting when I was about 10. Back then, there was little to no other wargames in my area, certainly none that I knew about. I got in to Fantasy because that's what my friends were playing and by far my most active years in the hobby were between the ages of 10 and 16 (now 26).
I know the backgrounds for my various armies as well as partially know the background of other armies, I know the background of the worlds, I know the miniatures, I (mostly) know the rules, I know where I can go to play some games.
These days, I have far less time for toy soldiers, whether it be gaming or painting. To start a new system would take me time researching various systems, time reading backgrounds, time deciding which game worlds interested me the most, time deciding which rules interest me the most, time figuring out if anyone in my area actually plays the game, time buying and painting my first few models. Time that I don't have to spend on the hobby these days.
These days, I mostly just paint a few models here and there, so it's easiest to just walk in to a GW store or peruse their website for a bit, decide which models I like and buy them. Chances are I already have some models from that army anyway. So the "investment" (time, effort, money) for me to continue with GW games isn't as high as it would be as if I started a new system.
Add to that GW games ARE the style of game I like. 28mm, Fantasy or Sci-fi, large armies going head to head (not in to roleplaying or skirmish games as much). Now, they do things that I don't like as well, "hero scale" has become "clown scale" in many cases and many armies have become overly comical, but it's not like if I start another system I'm not going to have some other issues with them anyway.
What don't you like about the minis? There are other producers of 28 mm WW2 stuff as well.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
almostreal wrote: What stops me personally is the quality of the models. I think Warmachine is probably the closest in quality, but they aren't that close. I also don't like the crowd that plays Warmachine/Hoardes....from what I see, they are the worst of the worst TFG's from 40k. Too competitive and having no fun.
I REALLY like the rules of Bolt Action, but just couldn't make myself buy any of those mini's...they are truly horrible.
If another game came out that had models that were on par with 40k as far as detail and thoughtfulness I'd consider. Right now, most of my time I spend painting......GW models, especially the newer ones, blow me away.
Tabletop gaming to me is mostly about being creative, not about being competitive. I'd probably paint their mini's even if I never played another game. Their competitors IMO are so busy competing with GW's business model, pricing and rule system they don't spend enough time on the mini's.
almostreal wrote: What stops me personally is the quality of the models. I think Warmachine is probably the closest in quality, but they aren't that close. I also don't like the crowd that plays Warmachine/Hoardes....from what I see, they are the worst of the worst TFG's from 40k. Too competitive and having no fun.
I REALLY like the rules of Bolt Action, but just couldn't make myself buy any of those mini's...they are truly horrible.
If another game came out that had models that were on par with 40k as far as detail and thoughtfulness I'd consider. Right now, most of my time I spend painting......GW models, especially the newer ones, blow me away.
Tabletop gaming to me is mostly about being creative, not about being competitive. I'd probably paint their mini's even if I never played another game. Their competitors IMO are so busy competing with GW's business model, pricing and rule system they don't spend enough time on the mini's.
For example, I like some of the Infinity lore and quite a few of the models... but many of the rest of it just end up pissing me off or making me roll mye eyes, and I just... can't mentally justify buying many models at the moment.
almostreal wrote: I REALLY like the rules of Bolt Action, but just couldn't make myself buy any of those mini's...they are truly horrible.
The rules aren't tied to any model range, or even scale (within reason; it's a squad level skirmish game so it might be a bit odd in 3 or 6mm, but should be perfectly fine in 10,12,15,20,25,28,32,35,40 or 56mm). You can use any WW2 models in existence to play Bolt Action with
What don't you like about the models or what would you suggest they do to improve them?
Melissia wrote: Money, aesthetics, lore, etc.-- the whole gamut.
For example, I like some of the Infinity lore and quite a few of the models... but many of the rest of it just end up pissing me off or making me roll mye eyes, and I just... can't mentally justify buying many models at the moment.
You only need 10-12 models. I think theres some bad minis in there too, but I just ignored them and bought the stuff I liked.
Melissia wrote: Money, aesthetics, lore, etc.-- the whole gamut.
For example, I like some of the Infinity lore and quite a few of the models... but many of the rest of it just end up pissing me off or making me roll mye eyes, and I just... can't mentally justify buying many models at the moment.
You only need 10-12 models. I think theres some bad minis in there too, but I just ignored them and bought the stuff I liked.
Too many for me to justify getting in to it. I just don't have the money I used to.
solidcroft wrote: I like that the lore of 40k is not overbearing as you can make your own chapter with a backstory.
You can do that in every single game in existence. No one can actually "forbid" you from imagining your own stories in any given fantasy universe...
True, however GW help you put it in your mind that you can. In the rules there are parts that say to name your guys, you look at Space Marines, are not just one army its 19 armys most useing the Space Marines codex. Most of the games make it look like there is only one way to paint and play them.
solidcroft wrote: I like that the lore of 40k is not overbearing as you can make your own chapter with a backstory.
You can do that in every single game in existence. No one can actually "forbid" you from imagining your own stories in any given fantasy universe...
True, however GW help you put it in your mind that you can. In the rules there are parts that say to name your guys, you look at Space Marines, are not just one army its 19 armys most useing the Space Marines codex. Most of the games make it look like there is only one way to paint and play them.
Only if you are talking historicals... I have several sets of sci-fi rules which allow force building or even figure building to use any figures and the games encourage players to make their own backgrounds and paint the forces how they like. I'm honestly not sure where you get your idea from. If anything, GW is stricter on staying within background than most systems.
solidcroft wrote: I like that the lore of 40k is not overbearing as you can make your own chapter with a backstory.
You can do that in every single game in existence. No one can actually "forbid" you from imagining your own stories in any given fantasy universe...
True, however GW help you put it in your mind that you can. In the rules there are parts that say to name your guys, you look at Space Marines, are not just one army its 19 armys most useing the Space Marines codex. Most of the games make it look like there is only one way to paint and play them.
Only if you are talking historicals... I have several sets of sci-fi rules which allow force building or even figure building to use any figures and the games encourage players to make their own backgrounds and paint the forces how they like. I'm honestly not sure where you get your idea from. If anything, GW is stricter on staying within background than most systems.
Mostly agree, but I'd take it one step further. Even most current historical games give you freedom in the composition of your forces. Games like Hail Caesar, Bolt Action and others may tell you exactly what a figure represents, but in most cases you have many variant ways to paint the figures in terms of camo scheme, unit composition, etc depending on what unit and what theater of operations they are from.
GW has more flexibility than games from PP, but that's not saying much, since you are stuck with GW-specific units and you can only change their loadout within certain limits. Sci-Fi games like Tomorrow's War and Future War Commander and fantasy games like Song of Blades and Heroes and Fantacide allow you to create every aspect of the stats, equipment and abilities of a given unit.
I do appreciate the range of options that GW provides, but to infer that most games give you less freedom than GW isn't true.
solidcroft wrote: I like that the lore of 40k is not overbearing as you can make your own chapter with a backstory.
You can do that in every single game in existence. No one can actually "forbid" you from imagining your own stories in any given fantasy universe...
True, however GW help you put it in your mind that you can. In the rules there are parts that say to name your guys, you look at Space Marines, are not just one army its 19 armys most useing the Space Marines codex. Most of the games make it look like there is only one way to paint and play them.
Only if you are talking historicals... I have several sets of sci-fi rules which allow force building or even figure building to use any figures and the games encourage players to make their own backgrounds and paint the forces how they like. I'm honestly not sure where you get your idea from. If anything, GW is stricter on staying within background than most systems.
Even with historicals, before the well documented part (pre-medieval) there's very little evidence as to how units were formed, what uniforms were like etc, so still a pretty huge scope. It's also worth noting that even well documented armies (Napoleonic Guards) were unidentifiable after a campaign, because they deviated so far from dress uniform, so there's plenty of scope for modification.
Beyond re-playing specific battles, historicals still lets you do more or less whatever you want, if you're not too bothered about historical accuracy. You may still get people trying to field more Tiger tanks than the German army ever had, but then in 40K you get games which feature the entire fleets of some chapters, but that's not unique to historics.
I meant that painting up your WW2 Germans with shiney red tanks and bright yellow uniforms doesn't really cut it. Painting up your Old Guard Napoleonics in modern MARPAT cammo would be frowned upon....
I meant that painting up your WW2 Germans with shiney red tanks and bright yellow uniforms doesn't really cut it. Painting up your Old Guard Napoleonics in modern MARPAT cammo would be frowned upon....
PhantomViper wrote:GW has more flexibility than games from PP, but that's not saying much, since you are stuck with GW-specific units and you can only change their loadout within certain limits. Sci-Fi games like Tomorrow's War and Future War Commander and fantasy games like Song of Blades and Heroes and Fantacide allow you to create every aspect of the stats, equipment and abilities of a given unit.
I do appreciate the range of options that GW provides, but to infer that most games give you less freedom than GW isn't true.
Yep. And if you like the 40k or WFB fiction, there's nothing stopping you from using the alternate rules to play in that playground. its strange, but I'm actually happier about my citadel miniatures collection now that I've expanded the range of rules I use them with. They actually feel more valuable than when they were just for 40k/WFB where they only made a tiny portion that was largely irrelevant inside of a larger army (or worse yet, a 30+ miniature block of infantry in base to base). Rules that actively devalue miniatures so you need to purchase more are not my favorite at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CptJake wrote: I meant that painting up your WW2 Germans with shiney red tanks and bright yellow uniforms doesn't really cut it. Painting up your Old Guard Napoleonics in modern MARPAT cammo would be frowned upon....
Well, they do if you are doing alt-history stuff. And wierd-WW2 and alt-history black powder era stuff is becoming more and more popular.
The real reason GW is my primary game-source: their universe. I love the GW universe with its incredible endless possibilities. There are very few restraints as to what you can put into that universe and the rules (so long as your fellow gamers agree) are adaptable to whatever you want. Simply put, you have a whole lot of blank space to fill in with whatever you want because the story arc is so vast that it allows for it. If you want to build a 40k army that's made up of sentient spiders with jetpacks, well you can write up a backstory and grab some rules for some Tyranid units and voila! You have a new army that is completely within the realm of possibility for the 40k universe. No other wargame system really has a storyline as good with as much possibility for growth.
CptJake wrote: I meant that painting up your WW2 Germans with shiney red tanks and bright yellow uniforms doesn't really cut it. Painting up your Old Guard Napoleonics in modern MARPAT cammo would be frowned upon....
Yeah, but that would be so cool. I'd love to see the look on some old grognard's face when you pulled them out of your foam!
I'd kill for a squad level combat game with 40k minis. I really have enjoyed the rounds of infinity I've gotten in and adore the minis, doing that same type of game play with 40k would be cool too.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I'd kill for a squad level combat game with 40k minis. I really have enjoyed the rounds of infinity I've gotten in and adore the minis, doing that same type of game play with 40k would be cool too.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I'd kill for a squad level combat game with 40k minis. I really have enjoyed the rounds of infinity I've gotten in and adore the minis, doing that same type of game play with 40k would be cool too.
Tomorrow's War.
...or In The Emperor's Name.
http://thegamesshed.wordpress.com/2011/07/02/in-the-emperors-name/ I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but if by "Squad Level" and like "Infinity" you mean Skirmish where each miniature moves independently, ITEN is a great system with "retinues" for every 40k faction already stated out and a good campaign system. Also it's free. My wargames club has played it a few times and enjoyed it.
Tomorrow's war is a good system, but it's not going to play like infinity (TW is "squad-based", not "squad-level") and it won't feel like the 40k universe. However, if you want a platoon level combat game with really realistic mechanics, then TW is definitely a good choice. I do recommend it, I just have my doubts whether it's what you're looking for.
Just curious, I've read the Infinity quick start rules and have the full rule book (came this week in the mail). What prevents you from assigning gear and traits from Infinity to your 40k models and using them in the game? Not trying to be a wise ass, honestly curious. I'm not very familiar with Infinity at this point.
It's called proxying and how a lot of people learn the rules before they own the miniatures.
Infinity has three main armour types (on infantry). HI, MI and LI. HI is by definition, powered armour (except for Ariadna, who have gerbils powering it on little wheels or something).
Using an SM figure to represent a HI figure, is not unreasonable.
SM with heavy bolter? Hi with HMG, etc.
MI is the medium armour type and in 40k terms, the equivalent of all those "Carapace" armoured units.
LI is lightly armoured troops like your disposable guard.
I've used this method, and as long as the players could keep what was what straight, it worked.
I mostly play GW (and by that i mean 40K) because most of the poeple in our weekly gaming group only have 40K armies, there are a few now with warmahordes, but mostly GW because thats what most everyone else brings to play.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I'd kill for a squad level combat game with 40k minis. I really have enjoyed the rounds of infinity I've gotten in and adore the minis, doing that same type of game play with 40k would be cool too.
