Hey guys...

I finally decided it, i will not keep myself at a system that i think is flawed, managed by a company who dont want to sell to me (but to 13 year old boys). Im quitting 40k.

But i still like wargames, and i want to keep myself at the painting and playing of the hobby, so i will take another game and play it...

Right now, im beetween Infinity and Warmachine, other player at my area are starting and will migrate too, more or less to what i decide.

I pretty know infinity (never played a game, but made extensive researchs and such).

What i want to know is more about Warmachine: how the company deal with costumers? Do it direct the products to old AND new people? The rules are balanced and dont tend to help newer armies? There is some type of codex creep?

And the main point, do those systems really work with low model count army? Its just i dont see myself assembling and painting big units, and i really wanted a more "skyrmish-like" game...

Thank you guys in advance...

Infinity is inherently a low model count army, being a skirmish game. Even big games typically have under 15 models per side.

Depends on what people play around your area

would suck to buy one thing but find out everyone else plays the other but as you posted, id ask your group to see what they like as both games have different aesthetics.

I vote Warmachine. Head on down to the Privateer Press forums and you'll get a some good tips to starting out.

Privateerpressforums.com

Infinity is, in my opinion, a superior game, but you'll likely have many more potential people to game with if you go the Warmahordes route.

If you're all selling off your 40k armies, you should have enough cash to get a force for both and perhaps enough left over for some Malifaux...

Really depends, the 3 facets are: Game quality, Miniature appeal, available opponents.

If you can't get all 3 to a level that appeal to you, then why bother.

Personally, Miniature appeal is my number one need. So I can't play a game if I am not interested in the Minis.

Others want a tight ruleset with real balance and tactical significance.

Others simply want someone to play against.

So see if you like the models, if you have available opponents then find a game you enjoy.

There's also the potential for looking at getting into the Beyond The Gates of Antares kickstarter. It's made by Rick Priestley, the guy who created 40k in the first place, in conjunction with Warlord Games, headed by Paul 'Fat Bloke' Sawyer - the guy in charge of White Dwarf back in the good old(ish) days.

On that note, Warzone is coming back, and what they're showing us thus far looks pretty damn good. If you're coming from 40k you might want to keep an eye on that one.

Infinity's rules are online for free so you can all try it out with no outlay. Then if you like the rules you can get the models - most of which I think look fantastic

Personally I don't like the look of warmachine models at all so I never even got as far as looking at the rules.

My vote goes to Infinity. The ruleset comes packed with a lot of stuff to learn and keep track of (expect your first few games to be composed of "wait, you mean that model can do WHAT?), but it's wonderfully written, very well balanced, and great fun all throughout. Additionally, the models are fantastic, some of the best in the industry.

Warmachine/Horde's models tend to be a notable detractor for me. Some are good, but a lot are awful. The ruleset itself is decently written (certainly better than the 40k rulebook), but it suffers from the same issue Infinity does of simply having a lot to keep track of. However, unlike Infinity, a lot of those rules feel like they're more convoluted and complex than they need to be.

Try both. I play warmachine and recently got into Infinity. They scratch entirely different itches.

Infinity is my sch-fi skirmish game.

Warmachine is my competetive beat down game.

Privateer Press is great to their costumers. Easy replacement parts, releases are great but not overpowered or mandatory to be competitive or fun. A lot of support in league form for new plays (journeyman), expereinced players (steamroller and leagues), and true high level players (Hardcore, Masters, etc).

I can't say I've noticed any power creep at all. Some will argue differently, but the game is as balanced as I've found out there.

You really can't go wrong with either system.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
If you're all selling off your 40k armies, you should have enough cash to get a force for both and perhaps enough left over for some Malifaux...

This.

Personally I think Infinity has some of the best mechanics of any wargame, and I love the interaction they have with the community. That being said, horses for courses and all that, I would go with the one you like the concept and imagery of the most (and of course, as Nkelsch says, player group is very important also).

id go with infinity first since its so much cheaper, warmachine is too but not as low as infinity

Both are great companys, looking to get young and old alike into the games.

Now Infinity is a "First Person Shooter", where real world tactics, such as hugging cover and shooting the guy in the back are important.

Then there is PP press games witch are "MtG or Yu-Gi-Oh", where you are trying to pull off the killer combo to finish there "life points" or as PP calls it Warcasters.

Two totally different play sytle, both alot of fun. I play both, but would vote for Infinity as the better of the two any day.

I have a stronger preference towards Infinity primarily because I love the models and find the rules to be more towards my preference.

Warmachine is, essentially, a very combo-driven game. You exploit the synergies between units to be best of your ability and you have tons of static and triggered abilities. It's not bad, but it somewhat feels like you're playing Magic: the Gathering with miniatures. Much of the game really is like 40k in that positioning only really matters for the sake of whether or not you're in range of something.

Infinity, on the other hand, does NOT have a lot of strict synergy between models and units. Most of the synergy is created by tactical placement and position on the board. Positioning matters exceptionally and even the most mediocre unit can be useful. Additionally, there are a ton of actions each model can perform and the majority of them are shared, common, and explained in the main rulebook. Additionally, most attacks are very lethal and most models have only one "wound".

Of the two, I definitely prefer Infinity.

Then again, it depends on the type of games you like. What about 40k's gameplay did you not like?

Infinity is really fun and very low cost. Warmachines is good and isn't too high on cost so no reason you couldn't do both.

 Absolutionis wrote:

Warmachine is, essentially, a very combo-driven game. You exploit the synergies between units to be best of your ability and you have tons of static and triggered abilities. It's not bad, but it somewhat feels like you're playing Magic: the Gathering with miniatures. Much of the game really is like 40k in that positioning only really matters for the sake of whether or not you're in range of something.

Are you having a fething giraffe? Whilst Warmahordes may very well be behind Infinity in the "tactical detail" stakes (no idea, never played Infinity) it is in no way like 40k in that respect. 40k is just "cinematic" dice rolling. Warmahordes is nothing of the sort. You could not be more wrong. Positioning and distance matter massively in Warmahordes, backstrike, assassination runs, trampling, allocating focus, leaching fury. The list goes on. To prop up this strawman to make Infinity look better just makes you look petty.

Both are great, but I'd recommend a demo before committing to either. Personally, I enjoy warmachine more, and think it's more "analogous" to 40k in terms of the type of game. Infinity is a true skirmish game and you're going to be using 10 models in most games. In Warmachine you can use a lot more than that at 50 points...

Something that I failed to mention and apparently a lot of people have as well, is about power creep.

In Infinity, frankly, it doesn't exist. If you're playing, say, Haqqislam, those old-ass Ghulam from the ranges beginnings are still great backline defenders. Those Naffatun are still great at lighting things on fire. Those old Jannisary models are still tough as nails heavy infantry. They're all still very viable.

Infinity has a fan motto of 'it's not your list, it's you'. Basically, anything can work, as long as you have a clear goal in mind when you make your list and know how you want to play it.

It's often recommended with Infinity, for people starting, to just buy the models they think look cool. That's a very common thing to do with new players, which ends up biting them in the ass because the models they bought, while they look cool, might not fit into a legal army or work well as an army. With Infinity, it's what you should do, because as long as you can make a legal army out of the cool models you bought, you can make them work on the table.

 -Loki- wrote:

It's often recommended with Infinity, for people starting, to just buy the models they think look cool. That's a very common thing to do with new players, which ends up biting them in the ass because the models they bought, while they look cool, might not fit into a legal army or work well as an army. With Infinity, it's what you should do, because as long as you can make a legal army out of the cool models you bought, you can make them work on the table.

Exactly the same can be said for Warmahordes. I told this exactly thing to several people who were just starting out. Though you'll hear a lot of the more experienced players talking about combos and synergy, it seems like a lot to digest and can be intimidating. I told them to ignore that aspect of the game and just get whatever models they thought looked cool, then move onto synergising etc. later on.

No one talk about Heavy Gear or Flame of War...

IMO, Read the books first, find the gaming system you like and play it. If you play a game because you like the minis and you hate the game system,,, that useless.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

It's often recommended with Infinity, for people starting, to just buy the models they think look cool. That's a very common thing to do with new players, which ends up biting them in the ass because the models they bought, while they look cool, might not fit into a legal army or work well as an army. With Infinity, it's what you should do, because as long as you can make a legal army out of the cool models you bought, you can make them work on the table.

Exactly the same can be said for Warmahordes. I told this exactly thing to several people who were just starting out. Though you'll hear a lot of the more experienced players talking about combos and synergy, it seems like a lot to digest and can be intimidating. I told them to ignore that aspect of the game and just get whatever models they thought looked cool, then move onto synergising etc. later on.

The thing about that is I still play with all my Infinity models, becouse there no, I need this model to pull off this combo. While, not a lot mind you, but there are PP models I have and really like that never see the table top, becouse they just are not worth playing. Like I said I like both, but you can end up with wasted models/money by just buying, for no other reason than i don't syngergise with your other models. I relly think with PP you need to know what combo you want to beable to pull off then buy thous models. Not saying you should plan your Infinity buys too, but that with Infinity I can change 1-2 models and my force will work just as well, PP you likely have to change your whole list idea.

hellpato wrote:
No one talk about Heavy Gear or Flame of War...

That would be because the OP didn't ask about those games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

It's often recommended with Infinity, for people starting, to just buy the models they think look cool. That's a very common thing to do with new players, which ends up biting them in the ass because the models they bought, while they look cool, might not fit into a legal army or work well as an army. With Infinity, it's what you should do, because as long as you can make a legal army out of the cool models you bought, you can make them work on the table.

Exactly the same can be said for Warmahordes. I told this exactly thing to several people who were just starting out. Though you'll hear a lot of the more experienced players talking about combos and synergy, it seems like a lot to digest and can be intimidating. I told them to ignore that aspect of the game and just get whatever models they thought looked cool, then move onto synergising etc. later on.

But I'm not talking about just learning the game. Infinity is based around winning through superior battlefield tactics. Warmahordes, while playable without looking into the synergy behind units, it still based around that synergy. At higher levels of competition, even amongst friends, poorly thought out army lists will struggle against better thought out army lists. The game can every much be won at the army list stage.

Infinity is a lot more flexible. At tournaments, you won't see 'builds', because there are none. While there are some built in combos (Remotes need Hackers, for example), none of them are critical to winning. If you bring a hacker, you're not hamstringing yourself by not bringing remotes. If you fight someone with a TAG and thus a smaller order pool, while you have a lot of heavy weapons and a bigger order pool, they can still out play you just as easily as you can out play them on the table.

Any two experienced players can build an army in Infinity out of any combination of troops, as long as it's legal, and have to out play each other tactically on the table, without worrying that their opponent built a better 'combination'. They just need to know how to use the models they brought.

Something like this just doesn't happen in Infinity.

Hm, im more and more inclined for Infinity...

The situation is more or less like this around here: i always liked miniatures, but only decided to start with 40k some 3 years ago, but no one around wanted to play it (people actually dont even know it existed), so my only option for a couple of games where going to a far city (4-5 hours driving), where even them would be a handfull of people...

Now im quiting 40k for the said reasons, and i hope people in my city will like a skyrmish game with lower model count more than 1 time i heard "so what i need to start in that miniature game you play", and just forgot about it when i said "with 100 dollars you start a 700 points army, and them scalate it until 1500 points" (wich would turn in a bigger problem now, that the entry cost is 150 dollars, and regular game size is 2000 points).

Actually, my friends like the ideia of wargaming, but the cost just make them forget it. But, if Infinity is like what people say, them those guys who "just want to have the fun", can buy a starter set for 50 bucks (even less) and still enjoy the game very well (even if the community turns into something hardcore).

When i come to 40k, i was quiting Magic (the TCG), tired from the constant change, and the increasing costs (lets call it "collection creep"). I thought 40k would be diferent, but there is a codex creep (not like magic i know, but it is still there). Aparently warmachines is not so great, because casual players (or tactical geniuses casual players) will not have the possibility of just grabing some cool looking miniatures and "work it out".

Also, those guys at the far city actually play Infinity, almost like the "secondary game" (after 40k). While 2 of them have warmachines armys, but dont play anyway...

Thank you all people, i think i made my mind

PS: the comic just remembered me of my magic times. Ocurred half the time with me on those days.

With Infinity costing all of $50 or so to play, I don't see why you wouldn't go for both if you were considering both. There should be plenty of cheap starter forces around made up of the factions from the two warmahordes starter boxes, as well.

Rules for both are free on the web.

 Grimtuff wrote:
Are you having a fething giraffe? Whilst Warmahordes may very well be behind Infinity in the "tactical detail" stakes (no idea, never played Infinity) it is in no way like 40k in that respect. 40k is just "cinematic" dice rolling. Warmahordes is nothing of the sort. You could not be more wrong. Positioning and distance matter massively in Warmahordes, backstrike, assassination runs, trampling, allocating focus, leaching fury. The list goes on. To prop up this strawman to make Infinity look better just makes you look petty.

I understand, but comparing the two, Infinity cares much more about ranges.

Warmachine is comparable to WHFB/40k in that it's a very binary you're in range or you're not. You say your unit is shooting, measure, and then if you're out of range, you miss; if you're in range, you roll dice. There are also several concepts like control areas and special abilities/spells that enact rules across a certain area (That Menoth jack that turns control area into difficult terrain), but ultimately they're still a binary you're affected or you're not. Arc Nodes exist for the purpose of extending the range of abilities.

Infinity, usually works in bands of information. Even the most basic rifle is mediocre at ranges 0-8", positive modifier to hit at 8-16", negative from 16-24", and very negative from 24-48". Different weapons will have different bands and modifiers; notably shotguns have positive modifiers at short ranges (rifles have no modifier at short), combi rifles have positive short AND medium ranges, sniper rifles have large bands (0-12 / 12-36 / 36-52 / 52-104). Depending on which range band your target falls in, you have different modifiers, and different weapons have different ideal ranges.

Both Warmachine and Infinity care about facing, and that is a significant step up in complexity from 40k. However, Infinity's core mechanic focuses on the reaction. Positioning is really EVERYTHING. If your opponent performs an action (move, shoot, etc) within sight of your models, you get a reaction such as shooting at them. Ideally, you want to position your models in such a way as to make it very risky for your opponent to move/shoot/etc in sight of many of your units. Not only this positioning matters, but you have to keep in mind the bands of distances your weapons are most effective; that guy with a shotgun isn't going to be doing very well protecting a 16" long corridor. Your opponent, on the other hand, will be doing their best to position themselves so they minimize risk to themselves while maximizing effectiveness of their attacks.

 Grimtuff wrote:
(no idea, never played Infinity)

Also, apparently you need a macro/meme image nowadays to be right, so here you go; I'll distract from your main point as well.
I raise your muscular burly thespians making faces and give you Spiderman fighting against your case:


So you, sir, are the giraffe. Here is an image of Spiderman fighting against you:


DOUBLE IMAGE MACRO Q.E.D.

(to be honest, I'm shocked there really was an image a spiderman and a giraffe)

 Absolutionis wrote:


So you, sir, are the giraffe. Here is an image of Spiderman fighting against you:

Spoiler:

DOUBLE IMAGE MACRO Q.E.D.

(to be honest, I'm shocked there really was an image a spiderman and a giraffe)

Mate, don't waste your time with Grimtuff. He has me on ignore because he once addressed me in the same aggressive, pithy manner, and when I retorted in kind he got very upset, cried like a girl and now doesn't see anything I type.

Like several posters he can give it but he doesnt like to take it. I suggest you don't waste your possibly hilarious retorts on a bloke who soon wont be able to see them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
If you're all selling off your 40k armies, you should have enough cash to get a force for both and perhaps enough left over for some Malifaux...

Wait until the price rise in April and you will be able to buy a jet-ski, a helicopter, 4 racehorses, a yacht and legions of hookers. You might as well feth war gaming off altogether.

I'm shocked as well, how long did it take you to find that picture?

I play both, and so should you!

It all depends on what you want from your games. Infinity has a low model count, but most of the time and money saved will go into building terrain, in my experience - Infinity has really heavy terrain demands. If there is a local Infinity scene but no WM/H scene, that weights in Infinity's favor (unless you want to build your own community - I am currently writing an article series on Community building on the Datasphere forum: http://datasphere.codestrike.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=96). Also, what models you like should matter. Both systems give you the opportunity to play pretty much any army you like without missing out on competitiveness, if that is your thing.

The two games are very different. One of WM/H's main selling points as a system is that it has the clearest, most concise rules out there at the moment, and that the learning curve isn't nearly as drastic as Infinity (which sometimes reminds me of this Eve Online comic: http://bit.ly/YJbciz (post 2) ). WM/H runs on a I go, You go basis, Infinty has an integrated reaction system that means that while you get the real work done in your active turn, you still get to have some impact on the game in your reactive turn. Despite many claims to the contrary, experienced Infinity players can noob-stomp with the best of the experienced WM/H players, in what often seems a very one-sided manner. This can also happen with more experienced players - I play perhaps once a week now and have played for two years, and the turn 1 or turn 2 losses and wins with no casaulties to the winner still happens now and then (for different reasons, though: Infinity can get really swingy sometimes due to the D20 roll-under-but-higher-but-crits-autowound system. When I lose a WM/H game, even the games where I get diced feel close. Last week I lost my entire Nomad force to a single model, which walked into overlapping fields of fire from a group of 6 models total, taking 4-6 dice against his 4 - 2 of the rolls unopposed in the first 3 orders - with every Order with only slightly better to hit odds, and still plowing through them all due to a lot of crits and bad to hit/armour rolls on my part). This wednesday, a player lost on scenario in turn 1 as the opponents Engineer skipped through his defensive fire and succeeded on two critical WIP rolls after getting a lucky objective designated as the important one.

As with any system, it is best to start off against players of equal skill.

Infinity is probably the best game for campaigns and scenario play in a "cinematic" mode. It sometimes feels like a tabletop RPG game, with the models providing a lot of "personality". WM/H's tournament scenarios are very well-balanced, but are definitely designed for tournaments and competitive play. The Paradiso Campaign ones for infinity can be extremely fun (even if you cannot just bring whatever you want to them, as our Cossack-focused Ariadna player is currently finding out - his lack of hackers is really hurting him) and it is a lot of fun to play self-designed scenarios. WM/H is definitely best for tournaments, and not just because of the rules - again, Infinity's terrain demands are extremely heavy. We can put up 3 Infinity tables now, after a year of building with a small group. A month ago I held a 20-table WM/H tournament where we built all the terrain in half a year.

That being said, I recommend starting both. They are very different and give me very different experiences when playing. You can start small with both games - you'll easily get a dozen games out of a WM/H battlebox and as many out of the Infinity starters (although I recommend using these starters: http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/downloads/rules/[en]QSR-A4.pdf instead of the official starter boxes). If one of the systems don't strike your fancy, you can drop it. In my local group, there are a lot of players who play both - or even other systems.

I've tried to like Warmahordes as one of my best gaming buddies now plays exclusively, but I just don't like the aesthetic and I'm not crazy about the rules either. I suspect there are also flaws in the system that haven't really been exposed yet as the game is still growing, chiefly the paper/scissors/stone nature of some of the combo armies, I suspect in time the constant treadmill of needing new models to maintain any level of competitiveness will feel a lot like 40k.

Infinity however, I'm really excited about. I've only just taken an interest, and have yet to play, but the rules are flexible, the models are great and as others have mentioned, the balance is almost total, so I would very much urge you in this direction. Of course, as the rules are free and a starter is a playable force, you'll lose nearly nothing if you try it amd it's not for you.

 -Loki- wrote:
At higher levels of competition, even amongst friends, poorly thought out army lists will struggle against better thought out army lists. The game can every much be won at the army list stage.

Yeaaaah... no.

This is just as true in Warmahordes as it is in Infinity. In high level play, you will have to give considerations to stuff like hackers, TAGs, RMLs, Infiltrators, Combat Jump, Linked Teams... If you don't have an answer to those things in your list, you WILL loose the game just as handily as you would in Warmahordes!

And in both cases, you can give an inexperienced or tactically inept player the most badass list you can find on the internet, and that player will loose every time to a better player. In both games list building is important, but the player behind the list is what really matters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azreal13 wrote:
I've tried to like Warmahordes as one of my best gaming buddies now plays exclusively, but I just don't like the aesthetic and I'm not crazy about the rules either. I suspect there are also flaws in the system that haven't really been exposed yet as the game is still growing, chiefly the paper/scissors/stone nature of some of the combo armies, I suspect in time the constant treadmill of needing new models to maintain any level of competitiveness will feel a lot like 40k. .

Yes, you are right, the game has only been around for 10 years with thousands of competitive players world wide trying to pick it apart, I'm pretty sure that there are glaring flaws in the system that haven't been found yet!

And for the last time, there is no such thing as a combo army! Having synergies between units is allot different from having "combo armies", you guys don't even know what you are talking about...

What, so using Warpspeed to benefit from the Feral WW's many attacks and then using the Stalker to use his higher P+S then using Kaya's Spirit Door to pull them back to her to avoid damage isn't a "Combo"?

Considerably less a combo than using an Interventor to mark an enemy model with the Hacking Device Plus supported by an EVO Repeater model through the Moran's repeater, possibly alongside other hackers in a coordinated order, and then firing autohitting Guided Missiles at the model with a GML Zond...perhaps similar to dropping smoke grenades in front of an MSV2 model before proceeding to waste models without MSV2-3 standing on the other side of the smoke without them being able to react.

 azreal13 wrote:
I've tried to like Warmahordes as one of my best gaming buddies now plays exclusively, but I just don't like the aesthetic and I'm not crazy about the rules either. I suspect there are also flaws in the system that haven't really been exposed yet as the game is still growing, chiefly the paper/scissors/stone nature of some of the combo armies, I suspect in time the constant treadmill of needing new models to maintain any level of competitiveness will feel a lot like 40k.

I really don't think you understand the game. Like, at all. The whole 'competetive treadmill' doesn't exist. Not sure where you're getting that idea from. MKI Prime units/casters are still in heavy rotation. The 'Rock/Paper/Scissors" mentality also comes from builds for the most part, not armies.

Infinity however, I'm really excited about. I've only just taken an interest, and have yet to play, but the rules are flexible, the models are great and as others have mentioned, the balance is almost total, so I would very much urge you in this direction. Of course, as the rules are free and a starter is a playable force, you'll lose nearly nothing if you try it amd it's not for you.

You haven't played it, but it's totally balanced?


As someone who plays both games, the amount of mysticism and strawmanning going on in here is breathtaking.

Yes, but there would be other things you could do, whilst it would make a lot more sense to do charge the Warjack/Beast using the combo I just mentioned.

Anyway, that wasn't the guys comment.

For Infinity, because the rules are free, why don't you just proxy some 40k models to see if you like the game? If you do, then get the CB minis, but if you don't, then you haven't lost a single cent!

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
What, so using Warpspeed to benefit from the Feral WW's many attacks and then using the Stalker to use his higher P+S then using Kaya's Spirit Door to pull them back to her to avoid damage isn't a "Combo"?

You aren't making any sense.

Warping a Feral Warpwolf for Speed isn't a combo since its an ability of the model itself (combo implies at least 2 moving parts).
Using a Warpwolf Stalker to attack something because he has higher strength, again isn't a combo since you are using a single model.
Using Kaya's Spirit Door spell to pull a Warpwolf out of combat can be considered just as much a combo as a Sorcerer in WHFB casting Steed of Shadows on a mellee character (forgive me if this isn't possible anymore, I haven't played WHFB since 7th ed.), or a Myrmidon throwing a Smoke Grenade so that the Deva can fire without generating ARO's in Infinity! Its called unit synergy and every decent miniature wargame in existence has it...

LOTR doesn't, and I'd argue that it's the best on the market (that I've played, Hail Caesar or Saga looks intriguing . . .)

But anyway - this is what's described as a combo by good ol' Wikipedia:

In video games, a combo (short for combination) is a term that designates a set of actions performed in sequence, usually with strict timing limitations, that yield a significant benefit or advantage.

So what I said could be considered a combo - you're doing all these actions in one turn (time), you're doing a set of actions performed in a sequence and it yields a significant advantage.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
LOTR doesn't, and I'd argue that it's the best on the market (that I've played, Hail Caesar or Saga looks intriguing . . .)

But anyway - this is what's described as a combo by good ol' Wikipedia:

In video games, a combo (short for combination) is a term that designates a set of actions performed in sequence, usually with strict timing limitations, that yield a significant benefit or advantage.

So what I said could be considered a combo - you're doing all these actions in one turn (time), you're doing a set of actions performed in a sequence and it yields a significant advantage.

Cool, so moving and shooting a ranged weapon in LOTR is using a combo according to your definition since you are performing a set of actions in a restricted sequence that yelds a significant advantage that you wouldn't have if you didn't perform a part of the sequence (if you didn't move then you probably wouldn't be in range to fire and if you just moved but didn't fire then you wouldn't have killed the enemy model)! Hey a combo in LOTR!

Like I said, you guys don't have a clue what you are talking about and are resorting to spouting things you heard as if they are facts.

That's stupid. That's the action of one model. The example I gave involved three.

Kaptajn Congoboy wrote:
perhaps similar to dropping smoke grenades in front of an MSV2 model before proceeding to waste models without MSV2-3 standing on the other side of the smoke without them being able to react.

Slight derail - but the model being shot at IS allowed to react, but only if it survives the attack. The shooter gives away his position when it shoots. The AROing model still gets the -6 modifier to shoot though.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
That's stupid. That's the action of one model. The example I gave involved three.

No, it actually didn't.

The example you gave of the Feral Warpwolf was the action of a single model.
The example you gave of the Warpwolf Stalker was the action of a single model.
The example you gave of Kaya involved two models and like myself and other people have demonstrated is not unlike several synergies that exist in almost every miniature game, your own definition of "combo" doesn't state that a combo has to involve more than one model, it only states that the actions performed have to be in sequence, usually with strict timing limitations, that yield a significant benefit or advantage. Like you've noticed, that is a description that applies to almost everything done in a miniature wargame.

Also, I don't know enough about LOTR, but I find it really odd that there isn't a situation in the game where synergy doesn't even exist...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KoganStyle wrote:

Kaptajn Congoboy wrote:
perhaps similar to dropping smoke grenades in front of an MSV2 model before proceeding to waste models without MSV2-3 standing on the other side of the smoke without them being able to react.

Slight derail - but the model being shot at IS allowed to react, but only if it survives the attack. The shooter gives away his position when it shoots. The AROing model still gets the -6 modifier to shoot though.

Yes, I know and I'm willing to bet that Kogan does as well. We were just simplifying things a bit since the odds of surviving a shooting attack without any reaction in Infinity aren't that great...

You're using the three models in a row against a single model in order to kill or disable it. Each model probably couldn't kill the model by itself and so each one used its abilities in a timed sequence in order to kill it.

LOTR doesn't really use much synergy. Well, there may be certain hero actions that work better with certain models (you wouldn't use a heroic shoot with shield-wall Minas Tirithians nor would you use a heroic move with Uruk Hai Crossbowmen) but otherwise there isn't that much. Each model generally looks after itself.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
You're using the three models in a row against a single model in order to kill or disable it. Each model probably couldn't kill the model by itself and so each one used its abilities in a timed sequence in order to kill it.

So now, using attacks from more than 1 model to kill another more powerfull one is a combo?! You can do that in EVERY SINGLE GAME IN EXISTENCE... EVER! I've played dozens of miniature wargames, from Confrontation to Star Wars to Battletech, I haven't seen a single instance of a game where you couldn't combine attacks or abilities from more than one model to kill another more powerfull model... ever... you can even do it in chess FFS! And I would be VERY surprised if you couldn't do it in LOTR as well.

A better example: I move my Argus up to the enemy and Doppler Bark an enemy warjack and thus reduce it's defence (IIRC, it may be armour) and its speed. I then use another warbeast to bash the other model to pieces. Finally, Kaya pulls everything back to within her control range.

Is that not a combo? If it's not, then elaborate on what you think a combo is.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
A better example: I move my Argus up to the enemy and Doppler Bark an enemy warjack and thus reduce it's defence (IIRC, it may be armour) and its speed. I then use another warbeast to bash the other model to pieces. Finally, Kaya pulls everything back to within her control range.

Is that not a combo? If it's not, then elaborate on what you think a combo is.

I don't think anyone is debating that Warmachine lacks combos, I think they're debating the fact that Infinity and other systems DON'T have combos.

Edit: I'm new to Infinity (thinking about getting back into WarmaHordes in spite of hating the caster system). Some basic noob questions that others who aren't familiar might be interested in:

Infinity miniature scale?
Is there paintline good or do they have one? Or are these pre-painted?
Edit 2: Material?

I think folks are getting a bit muddied on what is the question here te OP is just looking for suggestions on what people like, not which game is better. Asking which game is better is like asking which fruit is better? Apples or oranges? They are two completely different flavors and good in ther own ways.

Infinity - Every army can pretty much do everything, just in different ways. Their unit options, asthetics, and point costs is what gives each faction it's own flavor. The game is more about tactics then combos and franky combos such as the afore mentioned are just cheap parlor tricks. The downside of Infinity is the population is still new so you have to grow it in your area which can be tough and a bit of work at times.

Warmachine - Positioning is king. I have played a few games and the feeling I got from it was MTG meets chess. That is not a bad thing though. The rules are solid as a rock and a versed player could literally quote you the order of mechnics like a legal document. You won't find any of the GW vagueness there.



Since I know Infinity in deep depth let me address the combos thing a little more in depth. Guide Missile Launcher + hacking device plus is the most well known among them. It hurts bad the first time you face it, but it's nothing more then a parlor trick. You move a guy into position wih a repeater or marker (2-3 orders), attempt to mark the target (1-2 orders), and launch a missile (1 order). Assuming there is no hackers or ECM stopping your missle and your target fails it's saves you just spent 4 to 7 orders killing 1 guy. If the repeater is in range of another guy you can spend 2-3 more orders to kill another.

It is easily slowed by a hacker and nearly stopped cold with a hacker + evo. (Which nearly evereyone has in the offical missions) Worse yet it is very fragile. If you lose the GML bot or hacker you are done and both are squishie.

On MSV2 plus smoke, if you left you dudes out in the open by themselves then you deserve that one lol. It's easy to combat with zero vis smoke, camo, or proper use of cover.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
A better example: I move my Argus up to the enemy and Doppler Bark an enemy warjack and thus reduce it's defence (IIRC, it may be armour) and its speed. I then use another warbeast to bash the other model to pieces. Finally, Kaya pulls everything back to within her control range.

Is that not a combo? If it's not, then elaborate on what you think a combo is.

Why is that a combo? How is that different from the Infinity GML + Hacker plus example? How is that different from a sorcerer in WHFB reducing a units WS before another unit charging in? How is that different from having artillery pinning an enemy before your infantry charging in in FoW? How is that different from an Alp reducing a target Wp value before Pandora uses Self Loathing on it (Malifaux)? How is that different from having a Chaos Predator lascannon blow up a chimera before your Berserkers charge the Guardsmen that were inside in 40K?

Heck, I did a search on GW site and got this:

Gandalf is a mighty wizard and Aragorn is a mighty warrior, but some monsters like the Balrog are far mightier than either of them. To save Aragorn from a grisly death, Gandalf could Immobilise the Balrog with his magic, leaving Aragorn safe to attack it without fear of being hit back

How is that not a "combo" according to your definition?

No one ever takes Aragorn and Gandalf in the same army, hence it never actually happens. Even if someone did, it wouldn't make much sense to do that. Immoblising a monster still allows it to attack.

PhantomViper wrote:

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
A better example: I move my Argus up to the enemy and Doppler Bark an enemy warjack and thus reduce it's defence (IIRC, it may be armour) and its speed. I then use another warbeast to bash the other model to pieces. Finally, Kaya pulls everything back to within her control range.

Is that not a combo? If it's not, then elaborate on what you think a combo is.

Why is that a combo? How is that different from the Infinity GML + Hacker plus example? How is that different from a sorcerer in WHFB reducing a units WS before another unit charging in? How is that different from having artillery pinning an enemy before your infantry charging in in FoW? How is that different from an Alp reducing a target Wp value before Pandora uses Self Loathing on it (Malifaux)? How is that different from having a Chaos Predator lascannon blow up a chimera before your Berserkers charge the Guardsmen that were inside in 40K?

Heck, I did a search on GW site and got this:

Gandalf is a mighty wizard and Aragorn is a mighty warrior, but some monsters like the Balrog are far mightier than either of them. To save Aragorn from a grisly death, Gandalf could Immobilise the Balrog with his magic, leaving Aragorn safe to attack it without fear of being hit back

How is that not a "combo" according to your definition?

Just stop making sense, you're wasting effort.

The GML trick is essentially what in WM/H is termed a "Rube Goldberg Machine" - a complex long chain of events that all need to fire if you are to get full use of it. But it IS a combo, which was the point. Warmachine and Infinity are both essentially about tactics in the essence of positioning and manouvre.

Can I get an answer to my question on scale/miniature size/and material, as these seem like relevant things to consider for potential new players of infinity (like myself).

 BlueDagger wrote:
I think folks are getting a bit muddied on what is the question here te OP is just looking for suggestions on what people like, not which game is better. Asking which game is better is like asking which fruit is better? Apples or oranges? They are two completely different flavors and good in ther own ways.

Don't get me wrong, I never meant to imply that WMH was better than Infinity or vice-versa, I play them both and love them in almost equal ways!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lucasbuffalo wrote:
Can I get an answer to my question on scale/miniature size/and material, as these seem like relevant things to consider for potential new players of infinity (like myself).

Infinity is 28mm true scale AFAIK.

All miniatures are metal and supplied unpainted.

PhantomViper wrote:

 BlueDagger wrote:
I think folks are getting a bit muddied on what is the question here te OP is just looking for suggestions on what people like, not which game is better. Asking which game is better is like asking which fruit is better? Apples or oranges? They are two completely different flavors and good in ther own ways.

Don't get me wrong, I never meant to imply that WMH was better than Infinity or vice-versa, I play them both and love them in almost equal ways!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lucasbuffalo wrote:
Can I get an answer to my question on scale/miniature size/and material, as these seem like relevant things to consider for potential new players of infinity (like myself).

Infinity is 28mm true scale AFAIK.

All miniatures are metal and supplied unpainted.

Thanks!

 gunslingerpro wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
I've tried to like Warmahordes as one of my best gaming buddies now plays exclusively, but I just don't like the aesthetic and I'm not crazy about the rules either. I suspect there are also flaws in the system that haven't really been exposed yet as the game is still growing, chiefly the paper/scissors/stone nature of some of the combo armies, I suspect in time the constant treadmill of needing new models to maintain any level of competitiveness will feel a lot like 40k.

I really don't think you understand the game. Like, at all. The whole 'competetive treadmill' doesn't exist. Not sure where you're getting that idea from. MKI Prime units/casters are still in heavy rotation. The 'Rock/Paper/Scissors" mentality also comes from builds for the most part, not armies.

So I used the term armies rather than builds, you took it to mean factions, but you appear to concede that the point is still valid, so why argue it?

Infinity however, I'm really excited about. I've only just taken an interest, and have yet to play, but the rules are flexible, the models are great and as others have mentioned, the balance is almost total, so I would very much urge you in this direction. Of course, as the rules are free and a starter is a playable force, you'll lose nearly nothing if you try it amd it's not for you.

You haven't played it, but it's totally balanced?

Firstly, i qualified it with almost, i didnt claim it was totally balanced. Secondly having been in wargaming for a quarter century I'm pretty well placed to judge whether a system is solid or not, coupled with a large number of long term Infinity players consistently saying that there aren't really poor model choices just poorly used models, again, to me, I don't feel I've said anything that is really in debate.

As someone who plays both games, the amount of mysticism and strawmanning going on in here is breathtaking.

It's difficult to strawman anything when you're not arguing a point but stating a personal opinion. One that seems to have offended you for some peculiar reason.

It makes me wonder whether you've understood my point, like, at all?

Calm down lad, you're seeking conflict where there currently isn't any.

Sorry lucasbuffalo yes Infinity is 28mm truescale so they look smaller and "more realistic" then Warhammer models.

They are made of metal and are much more difficult to assemble, but the end result is well worth the pain. No plans to move to any other materials and Corvus Belli as clearly stated they are a metal miniatures company. They like the medium.

Infinity is increadibly balanced and pretty much any model is as good as any other. Some options are a little more lack luster then others because they are meant for a sectorial option, but overall there isn't any other game that I have seen that has the level of internal balance it does. Flat out, there is faction stronger then another.

 azreal13 wrote:
So I used the term armies rather than builds, you took it to mean factions, but you appear to concede that the point is still valid, so why argue it?

Well, I argued the first part because you're 'treadmill' statement is patently false. I also do not concede the rock/paper/scissor point. I stated that the mentality comes from specific builds. Yes E-Haley Stormwall beats bane spam, bane spam beats jack spam, jack spam beats stormwalls, etc etc etc. But this comes from very specific lists that are feared and debated on the internet, but exist much less often in the wild. There are competetive lists and scenarios that can be difficult for specific builds, but this fear of 'combo' play is off base. Thats my point.

Firstly, i qualified it with almost, i didnt claim it was totally balanced. Secondly having been in wargaming for a quarter century I'm pretty well placed to judge whether a system is solid or not, coupled with a large number of long term Infinity players consistently saying that there aren't really poor model choices just poorly used models, again, to me, I don't feel I've said anything that is really in debate.

You made several statements about a game, having only read the rules, not played it. Hmm. I respect your experience, but general experience /= specific experience when making statements about a game.

It's difficult to strawman anything when you're not arguing a point but stating a personal opinion. One that seems to have offended you for some peculiar reason.

It makes me wonder whether you've understood my point, like, at all?

Calm down lad, you're seeking conflict where there currently isn't any.

Perhaps strawman is the wrong word. You make broad, un-based statements about one game, and then secondhand experience based statements about another.

I have your point well in hand, good sir. I seek no conflict, only clarity. I'm not really the excitable type.

 azreal13 wrote:

Secondly having been in wargaming for a quarter century I'm pretty well placed to judge whether a system is solid or not,

A quarter century vet basing his judgements on second hand opinions is plain absurd. If you haven't played the game you cannot have an educated judgement about it.

As for the OP:

Oi cara! I collect both systems because they both fill different gaps... If you like anime/manga scifi you go with infinity but if your are more into Cartoony/ steampunk fantasy you go with Warmachine/ hordes. For me visuals are 75% of the deal and both offer a very good package.

I don't know about these games being available in Brazil? but both do have good customer support. ( privateer press does seem to struggle a bit with stock levels)

 NAVARRO wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

Secondly having been in wargaming for a quarter century I'm pretty well placed to judge whether a system is solid or not,

A quarter century vet basing his judgements on second hand opinions is plain absurd. If you haven't played the game you cannot have an educated judgement about it.

Let's actually review what I said shall we?

Infinity however, I'm really excited about. I've only just taken an interest, and have yet to play, but the rules are flexible, the models are great and as others have mentioned, the balance is almost total, so I would very much urge you in this direction. Of course, as the rules are free and a starter is a playable force, you'll lose nearly nothing if you try it amd it's not for you.

What in this statement is offending people so much that they feel they can try and attack what is my opinion and therefore doesn't need to be objectively qualified?

I have read the rules, the scope and potential of these rules, something that my time spent in wargaming qualifies me to assess with a fairly discriminating eye, has me excited to start playing. The same experience, along with reading of the rules and the opinions offered by people who have played the game for a long time leads me to conclude that the balance of the game is really very good.

Coupled with the low entry cost, I felt that the OP should give it a go, just as I am.

I don't need to jump off a cliff to know the landing is gonna suck, I don't need to play Infinity to appreciate it's a good game and encourage others to get involved.

azreal13 What attack and what offense are you talking about? Like you I'm just expressing my opinion on what I read in this thread. Besides I just quoted and replied to you more as side note since if you are going to talk about game balance etc you better play it first and talk later ( as a vet you should know this). The main reason I posted was to express to the OP the visual appeals of both games.

It's the second time you act way to defensive on this thread, take a step back man there's no one here interested in attacking you.

Well, by accident or design you called my opinion, and therefore, by extension, me, plain absurd.

Now you may not feel that's inflammatory, but I take that as a negative comment and will react accordingly. Especially when you're somehow trying to claim I couldn't form at least an idea of how the game plays and be excited by the prospects, which is all I claimed on my own behalf, which insults my intellect a tad.

with no surprise really I strongly suggest Infinity, its a game with great models, fluid rules and were choosing the models you like ( assuming they make a legal list) usually make a valid list, the power is not in combos, special rules or weapons but in knowing how to sue the models you have fielded.

That been said, the charm of skirmish games (beyond my all time favorite table space to maneuver) is that with less money you can have multiple armies or even game systems, so why not try both, I have not played WM/H, but its a solid system with its own good points.

I am going to go with Infinity on this one. I only played Warmachine one time but i did not enjoy it at all. Plus I like SF better.

I played warmachine for about 2 years and only payed infinity for 1 *game*

Infinity is 'infinitely' better (ho ho!)

Warmahordes is good if you want to do MtG style combos where each new set is better than the last.

Infinity is good if you want to play tactically, respond in your turn and low model count. Also not expensive where warmahordes is pricey despite the low model count.

 Spyral wrote:

Warmahordes is good if you want to do MtG style combos where each new set is better than the last.

That is simply untrue though. You can make a force from the units only in Prime and they'll do just fine. Some of the best casters in the game (pVlad, pDenny, pKreoss to name a few) are from Prime

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Spyral wrote:

Warmahordes is good if you want to do MtG style combos where each new set is better than the last.

That is simply untrue though. You can make a force from the units only in Prime and they'll do just fine. Some of the best casters in the game (pVlad, pDenny, pKreoss to name a few) are from Prime

Yeah, I'm going to agree with that. PP are good at making sure that the new stuff isn't wildly better than the old stuff. I'd like to see where the company is in 20 years, though, if they continue with that.

 Spyral wrote:
I played warmachine for about 2 years and only payed infinity for 1 *game*

Infinity is 'infinitely' better (ho ho!)

Warmahordes is good if you want to do MtG style combos where each new set is better than the last.

Infinity is good if you want to play tactically, respond in your turn and low model count. Also not expensive where warmahordes is pricey despite the low model count.

i strongly disagree. most of the prime casters are still doing heavy rotation. on the PP boards there is a term known as the "doom cycle" which is quite funny.

PP introduces new shiny addition to the game (eg cavalry, gargssals, battle engines etc)
COmmunity apploaudes apprehensively. segments of the community then starts to moan as to how the new shiny will break the game (without seeing any rules of course) and how everyone will need to build lists around said new shiny to be competitive.
New shiny is released and... the sky doesnt fall down. playerbase gets its hands on said new shiny and start playing games. new shiny finds its place amongst everything else, niether eclipsing things, nor being eclipsed.
Doom cycle starts up again as players start to moan as to how the new shiny isnt game breaking, and better than what came before. old hands laugh.

seriously spyral. look at the most recent released. 3pic casters, battle engines, gargantuans/collossals. none of which are mandatory. PP have a reputation for balancing their game extremely well.

the whole "combo" thing has been done. you call them combos, i call them synnergies, and every game has them. heck, martial arts has combos so i fail to see the negative side of it

Now, i play both games. Infinity and Warmachine.

I will not say pick one or the other. do both. free rulebook for infinity, and cheap to get into. and i think its a great game. it really is. it scratches a lot of itches for me in terms of gorgeous models, gripping gameplay etc. however, the player base needs building up. that said though, it has its issues. its a spanish game, so we're dealing with the translated version. and the rulebook is a PITA to go through - i find the writers make the game out to be more complicated and comvoluted than it actually is. the rulebook also lacks decent gallery pages (like warmachine/hordes primal does) and you really do need a hugely excessive amount of terrain to make it work. but on the whole, any gripes i have with infinity are very much small ones.
I also play warmachine/hordes, and in a lot of ways it is my main game. i spend most of my time/money from my gaming budget on warmachine. its bigger, and it has a style and an attitude all of its own. as much as i love infinity, a ressurrected william wallace leading an"army" of 8 angry scots-in-space in infinity. you just cant argue with 10-ton smoke belching fantasy warmechs with battle cannons that should be on battleships. i find WM to be tactically engaging, and varied. it also has an older IP, and therefore more fluff, and more depth to the game universe. also, PP do an excellent job of supporting the player base with yearly/quarterly leagues, excellent tournament support, other trophies and other examples of support. also, the greater community is probably bigger.

Now like i said, i dont see this as an either/or. FOr me, infinity compliments my PP gaming in a very nice way. sometimes you dont want to play a 50pt game. maybe you dont want another game of steam powered fantasy. why not switch it up for a game or two? so yeah, play both.

Hey guys...

I finally decided it, i will not keep myself at a system that i think is flawed, managed by a company who dont want to sell to me (but to 13 year old boys). Im quitting 40k.

But i still like wargames, and i want to keep myself at the painting and playing of the hobby, so i will take another game and play it...

Right now, im beetween Infinity and Warmachine, other player at my area are starting and will migrate too, more or less to what i decide.

I pretty know infinity (never played a game, but made extensive researchs and such).

What i want to know is more about Warmachine: how the company deal with costumers? Do it direct the products to old AND new people? The rules are balanced and dont tend to help newer armies? There is some type of codex creep?

And the main point, do those systems really work with low model count army? Its just i dont see myself assembling and painting big units, and i really wanted a more "skyrmish-like" game...

Thank you guys in advance...

I think a lot of us have been forgetting about the OP!

He knows about Infinity.

Warmachine does involve painting a lot more models than Infinity. Infinity is a lot lower model count. Warmachine doesn't feel like a skirmish game (it's too rigid) so Infinity may be the way you want to go. It is lower count than 40k, however, for most armies.

PP caters to both new and old players. There's the quickstart rules online, so you could proxy some Dreadnoughts and have a beginner game to try it out. Rules are well balanced and new factions for the armies come out all at once, which does kind of mean that if you want the backstory for some units, then you need to buy several books.

So I'm assuming it doesn't really matter about player numbers if players will migrate to the game you will pick up?

.....psssst...

Malifaux.

Just sayin...

An explanation of Malifaux may be in order?

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
An explanation of Malifaux may be in order?

Another awesome game made almost entirely of awesomeness is my best description for it!

Being a new game and worth a spin. Maybe try Warzone?

 Breotan wrote:
.....psssst...

Malifaux.

Just sayin...

It is indeed an awesome game, but OP seems convinced that he wants Infinity or Warmachine.

I have a bit more time now so I can give a more detailed reply, even though the OP hasn't shown a specific interest in it.

Malifaux is a skirmish game with a Victorian sci-fi / horror theme. The game is played almost always with under 10 models on each side and is almost more an action RPG than a miniature game in each every model, even the lowliest trooper will have several abilities to choose from during its activation. There are currently 6 different factions to choose from if I'm not mistaken.

The game plays with alternating activations with each player activating a miniature at a time before passing on to his opponent.

The biggest difference to other skirmish games though, is that a deck of playing cards is used to replace dice! With the number on the card representing the number that you "rolled" and the suit of the card triggering critical effects. Its a mechanic that makes the game take on another tactical aspect that is very interesting IMO.

Malifaux is very unique and requires a good bit of thinking as well as a good deal of luck. The downside is you just about need to have each player sort their decks out in front of them prior to the game to ensure nobody is cheating.

I've seen decks short their low cards, or having extra high cards. Like Hmm I'll just take out the 2's, 3's, and 4's, and replace them with an extra set of 8's, 9's, and 10's. Tee-hee

Other than that it is a great game.

Love the warmachine models watched some games and it totally killed my interest in the game. It's too much like a card game plus dice and no ability to modify anything.

IE where 40K I can take a commander and give him X, Y, Z. In Warmachines each model comes with a card, and that is that. That is why you get combo's/synergies/whatever and when I read tournament after action reports the top 3 placers are always playing the top 1 or 2 "synergies" of units. Doesn't seem to allow for a lot of creativity in list making.

Infinity looks cool but I haven't been able to spark a local interest in it. A game with nobody to play against sucks.

By far Flames of War is still I think the best of the bunch at the moment. They don't care what models you use as long as they're the right model, and the right scale. IE If flames has T-34 tanks at $11 each, and Ole Glory has them at $4 you can field all the Old glory you want and nobody not even the Flames company cares.

However it depends on the person. I've seen a lot of 40k players jump over to Flames of War only to want to pull their hair out game after game because they find themselves unable to use any real tactics beyond their list.

I've also seen Malifaux totally befuddle players. So really it boils down to what kind of game YOU want to play.

Hence why there is such a big divide between people who play 40K and people who play Fantasy.

I am going to go with saying try them all, even the ones you didn't mention.

Before I got in to Warmachine, there was little, to no, community in my area. I was determined to get in to it because I liked the setting and the rules...now, two years later, there is a community and some LGS who got gruff with me about even asking if they would let Warmachine on their tables do so. I am always busy so I have been unable to play but I am glad to know I helped get it started in my area.

Sometimes you have to create the community and if it means you have to be the only one who has the models at first, then so be it...but you already know this.

I am going to point out Warpath - the rules are free, and you can use your human and ork WH40K models if you have any.

The Auld Grump

Wagguy80 wrote:
Malifaux is very unique and requires a good bit of thinking as well as a good deal of luck. The downside is you just about need to have each player sort their decks out in front of them prior to the game to ensure nobody is cheating.

I've seen decks short their low cards, or having extra high cards. Like Hmm I'll just take out the 2's, 3's, and 4's, and replace them with an extra set of 8's, 9's, and 10's. Tee-hee

Other than that it is a great game.

I really, really, really feel sorry for your gaming group if you genuinely have to do this to ensure that people aren't cheating...

Also I find incredibly funny that you say that you don't like Warmachine because:

Wagguy80 wrote:

It's too much like a card game plus dice and no ability to modify anything.
IE where 40K I can take a commander and give him X, Y, Z. In Warmachines each model comes with a card, and that is that.

When Malifaux is exactly the same thing! Each model in Malifaux comes with its own stat card and you can't change anything about it!

Priceless, absolutely priceless!

Wagguy80 wrote:


IE where 40K I can take a commander and give him X, Y, Z. In Warmachines each model comes with a card, and that is that. That is why you get combo's/synergies/whatever and when I read tournament after action reports the top 3 placers are always playing the top 1 or 2 "synergies" of units. Doesn't seem to allow for a lot of creativity in list making.

aye, and of those hundreds of potential builds to give your commander, how many of them actually hit the table top? Face it, there are only a handful of good builds in a handful of good codices in 40k. the rest is just faff, and wasted ink that offers nothing.

as to the top three players taking the rop 1 or 2 "synnergies", i have to disagree. what tournament were you watching? what were their factions? What were their lists? Im sorry, but there is information out there relating to a lot of tournaments, and the simple fact is this: no faction or "build" dominates, whether its warmachine, or hordes. No single caster, or list wins. as opposed to 40k where the same handful of builds from the same handful of lists dominate consistently for whole editions at a time.

there is plenty creativity within the lists. simply changing a caster changes the entire way an army functions.

Sorry for the tangent OP, but i just had to correct this.

It amuses me how many posters are saying something along the lines of 'I like/didn't like game x because of y reason' and then somebody else responds by saying 'well my experience of game x is different, so you're wrong'

These are opinions here people, not arguments, by all means put your point of view forward, but stop trying to correct other people's!

 azreal13 wrote:
These are opinions here people, not arguments, by all means put your point of view forward, but stop trying to correct other people's!

Unless they're actually provably wrong.

That's as may be, but as someone on the fringe of the game, I share the same perception (that combo lists dominate and it's all rock, paper, scissors) as that poster.

Now the facts may not currently support that idea, but I've got that perception from somewhere, and several of my gaming buddies are huge Warmahordes fans, so aren't going to propagate a negative attitude towards the system. So where have I got that idea from if it is a totally baseless concept?

Anyway, we digress.

 azreal13 wrote:
Now the facts may not currently support that idea, but I've got that perception from somewhere, and several of my gaming buddies are huge Warmahordes fans, so aren't going to propagate a negative attitude towards the system. So where have I got that idea from if it is a totally baseless concept?

Side effect of having stat cards, IMO: It makes people think of Magic, so that when the game is described to have units working together to a much higher degree than in GW games, they think of the "Channel, Fireball, win" combos card gaming is famous for. While there are combos in game, they boil down to "take this caster, this unit, and this support solo to make them hit harder than normal/be harder to kill," not "Do these four things with these three models and win the game automatically."

Every caster is going to synergize differently with their army, leading them to want different types of models, which will make a lot of lists using the same caster superficially similar: Kraye will use a lot of high RoF ranged warjacks and a Stormclad or two, while any of the Nemos will have a fairly ridiculous number of jacks on the table and a fairly . Then you'll have casters like Caine2 whose army is something of an afterthought, there mostly to punch a hole to the enemy Caster for him to exploit. However, changing stuff up within a list can drastically alter the way it works: Kraye with Defenders and Sentinels with Ranger support works a lot differently than Kraye with a Stormwall and Hunters.

The rock-paper-scissors concept comes primarily from a few highly focused lists: Butcher2 with Doom Reaver spam will fare poorly against Caine's lawnmower of a feat, while a Rahn army focused entirely on spell slinging will cry when faced with a Skorne or Cryx force that entirely shuts down spell casting. Balanced lists rarely run into match-ups that they can't handle, but then again, won't run into very many match-ups that they stomp either. Combined with Steamroller's 2 list tournament format, this often leads to people bringing a pair of unbalanced lists.

i like these threads.


Both are good games.


Your going to get openions here, thats about it.

I prefer Warmachine.. But thats me.


What is your local community play ?

What models do you like ?

Then you can start either one for $50 and try it.

PhantomViper wrote:

Wagguy80 wrote:
Malifaux is very unique and requires a good bit of thinking as well as a good deal of luck. The downside is you just about need to have each player sort their decks out in front of them prior to the game to ensure nobody is cheating.

I've seen decks short their low cards, or having extra high cards. Like Hmm I'll just take out the 2's, 3's, and 4's, and replace them with an extra set of 8's, 9's, and 10's. Tee-hee

Other than that it is a great game.

I really, really, really feel sorry for your gaming group if you genuinely have to do this to ensure that people aren't cheating...

Also I find incredibly funny that you say that you don't like Warmachine because:

Wagguy80 wrote:

It's too much like a card game plus dice and no ability to modify anything.
IE where 40K I can take a commander and give him X, Y, Z. In Warmachines each model comes with a card, and that is that.

When Malifaux is exactly the same thing! Each model in Malifaux comes with its own stat card and you can't change anything about it!

Priceless, absolutely priceless!

that's true however Warmachine is stat cards + dice. Malifaux has a completely different mechanic using playing cards instead of dice which allow me to overlook the lack of customization.

 Spyder68 wrote:
i like these threads.

What is your local community play ?

What models do you like ?

This. No point in getting into a game that no one else plays, or that you don't like the look of.

Wagguy80 wrote:
Love the warmachine models watched some games and it totally killed my interest in the game. It's too much like a card game plus dice and no ability to modify anything.

C'mon, if you haven't played the game there's no need to talk about it. The ability to modify things in the game comes from using models to give boosts to other models.

"Hmm, my Warjack needs a 10 to hit with 2D6. That's quite a gamble. I'll activate this guy and throw a bomb at him, that will bring his defense down by 4 and make it only 6 to hit. Still risky. I'll use this other Warjack and slam the model. Now it's knocked down and he can hit automatically!"

Infinity is a really cool low model skirmish game, though you will need quite a bit of terrain to play a decent game. Best of all it doesn't have rabid fan boys defending it/Attacking all other gaming systems. I've only played 1 game but I really enjoyed it. The lack of a fan base is the biggest issue with the game.

WarMachine/Hoards is ok, you can play small games or larger ones, the game does become dominated by combo cards in the larger game. The models are very nice, a bit pricey but nothing compared to 40k thought if you want to be able to play various lists you will end up roughly shelling out the same about.
It plays a lot like WHFB, terrain doesn't effect the game much, deployment can lose you the game if your models aren't in the right places to get off your combos.

The biggest issue with WarMachine/Hoards is the fans, most are just jerks epically if you let it be know you play 40k/WHFB. They have a strange sense of superiority because they play a lesser know War game, which is more or less like MtG so you have a lot of cross overs from that crowd.

 Nakor The BlueRider wrote:
Infinity is a really cool low model skirmish game, though you will need quite a bit of terrain to play a decent game. Best of all it doesn't have rabid fan boys defending it/Attacking all other gaming systems. I've only played 1 game but I really enjoyed it. The lack of a fan base is the biggest issue with the game.

WarMachine/Hoards is ok, you can play small games or larger ones, the game does become dominated by combo cards in the larger game. The models are very nice, a bit pricey but nothing compared to 40k thought if you want to be able to play various lists you will end up roughly shelling out the same about.
It plays a lot like WHFB, terrain doesn't effect the game much, deployment can lose you the game if your models aren't in the right places to get off your combos.

The biggest issue with WarMachine/Hoards is the fans, most are just jerks epically if you let it be know you play 40k/WHFB. They have a strange sense of superiority because they play a lesser know War game, which is more or less like MtG so you have a lot of cross overs from that crowd.

Could you troll a little bit harder, I don't think you are quite there yet...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azreal13 wrote:
It amuses me how many posters are saying something along the lines of 'I like/didn't like game x because of y reason' and then somebody else responds by saying 'well my experience of game x is different, so you're wrong'

These are opinions here people, not arguments, by all means put your point of view forward, but stop trying to correct other people's!

That is not how things work I'm afraid.

If people say that they don't like the game because of how the models work, or how the players in their area are or some other subjective reason, then you would be right, that was just their opinion.

But if people say that they don't like the game for reasons that are patently false and can be proven as such, then someone will come along and correct them, You don't get to claim falsehoods and then just hand wave them away as "just your opinion".

Wagguy80 wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

Wagguy80 wrote:
Malifaux is very unique and requires a good bit of thinking as well as a good deal of luck. The downside is you just about need to have each player sort their decks out in front of them prior to the game to ensure nobody is cheating.

I've seen decks short their low cards, or having extra high cards. Like Hmm I'll just take out the 2's, 3's, and 4's, and replace them with an extra set of 8's, 9's, and 10's. Tee-hee

Other than that it is a great game.

I really, really, really feel sorry for your gaming group if you genuinely have to do this to ensure that people aren't cheating...

Also I find incredibly funny that you say that you don't like Warmachine because:

Wagguy80 wrote:

It's too much like a card game plus dice and no ability to modify anything.
IE where 40K I can take a commander and give him X, Y, Z. In Warmachines each model comes with a card, and that is that.

When Malifaux is exactly the same thing! Each model in Malifaux comes with its own stat card and you can't change anything about it!

Priceless, absolutely priceless!

that's true however Warmachine is stat cards + dice. Malifaux has a completely different mechanic using playing cards instead of dice which allow me to overlook the lack of customization.

And 40k is book + dice. Do you have a real argument or do you just like spouting half formed ideas?

let's tone it down a bit please people.

It's really not worth getting too upset or angry over.

Thanks.

The most important aspect to any game is community. You can love everything about a game, rules, minis, fluff, etc and if there is no one playing it in your area, then you are screwed (I'd like to make a personal toast to Warhammer: Epic at this point)

That said, if you live in a decent metro area you should be able to find a community of 40k, WH, and WM/H with virtually no problem. Flames of War likely follows up those, but those gamers might play at odd times, or places, like someone's home. Infinity, and Malifaux are quickly growing but can be hit or miss.

For me I have to fall in love with the mythology of the game, i have have to see it and get excited and have my gears turn and feed my imagionation.. Warhammer 40k is about the only game currently on the market that does that.... So go with your guts and interest!

I gotta say, I've played a few games of infinity and I absolutely love it. Both players are always playing, so there isn't any "whelp, it's your turn now, so I'm going to go get a soda and be back in 5 mins while you're moving your stuff" like 40k. I can also say that the miniatures look awesome.

Plus, you can try it out as no cost to you. Proxy 40k models and play a short game with a buddy. That's what I did. The mechanics sold me more than anything else. The rules are free to download.

Never played Warmachine though, so I can't comment on that system.

I will chime in on the warmachine PP side. just because the OP mentioned customer service.

I buy a lot of my models through ebay, and have had on few occasions received a box with a missing piece, or wrong card etc. Shoot off an email and in 4 days I have for no charge, no questions the parts or cards that were missing.

Absolutely some of the BEST customer service i've ever seen.

DaPreacherMan43 wrote:
I will chime in on the warmachine PP side. just because the OP mentioned customer service.

I buy a lot of my models through ebay, and have had on few occasions received a box with a missing piece, or wrong card etc. Shoot off an email and in 4 days I have for no charge, no questions the parts or cards that were missing.

Absolutely some of the BEST customer service i've ever seen.

That's not good service, that's the minimum you really should expect as the company does manufacture the product.

If you're buying 2nd hand then that is a bit above and beyond, otherwise it's just good business keeping a customer happy for a tiny investment on the business' part.

That's not to say other companies don't fail spectacularly at this, but it's really nothing to single them out for praise for.

What i want to know is more about Warmachine: how the company deal with costumers? Do it direct the products to old AND new people? The rules are balanced and dont tend to help newer armies? There is some type of codex creep?

*Customer support is top notch, I've had no issue getting free replacement parts on orders that went arwy from vendors who do things like punch a giant hole in the bottom of the blister and all the parts fall out. It sometimes takes a bit but it always gets here.

*The Developers & Writers are highly active on the forums. In fact you ask a fluff question chances are ol' Doug Seacat might just show up to give you an extensive answer:
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?137749-Question-for-Seacat-in-regards-to-souls&p=1820265&viewfull=1#post1820265

That's the lead writer for the game going out of his way to answer a player question on how souls work in the universe. This is very typical in the community. The people they have working for them seem very dedicated and passionate about the product. Which I suppose makes sense (they do make a living off all our sweet, sweet nerd money after all). Still they do the extra mile to be invovled and that's great.

*Their rules gurus are accurate, prompt and can speak directly to the developers. Compare the PP rules question form to the 40k YMDC over here and you'll get the picture fast.

*They have great starter boxes that (for the most part), tend to contain relevant pieces you'll use later. A few are duds but nothing is wholly useless.
*They have lots of event support for events that cater to casual players, new players, old players, hardcore players. Even some fluffy stuff.
*Rules are balanced. New pieces are not inherently better. In fact a great deal of the "Top Tier" stuff has been around since the initial prime release. New stuff is still useful though, for the most part. There are always a piece here or there that is above the curve (Stormwall) or below the Curve (Mountain King). But nothing is ever really a "Must Have".
*See above, no "Codex Creep" analogue. You can expect any piece you buy to remain as relevant as the day you bought it, for the most part.

And the main point, do those systems really work with low model count army? Its just i dont see myself assembling and painting big units, and i really wanted a more "skyrmish-like" game...

You can run low model count with certain armies, and it'll work. However you are going to need a lot more models than infinity. My typical 35 pt list will have:
1 Small based warcaster
1 unit of between 6-10 small based models.
1 unit of between 4-6 small based models.
1 Medium-based Warjack.
2 Large-Based Warjacks or 1 Large-Based Warjack and 1 Huge-Based Model.
2-4 Small Based Solos.

Granted this is my way of running things, some folks might spam infantry and go more 'Jack heavy. However I tend to run pretty middle of the road. So you're looking at ~20 models for a run of the mill list at 35pts. Maybe 30ish at 50. Less if you're going beast/'Jack heavy, more if you're spamming cheap infantry.


All this said, Infinity looks like a great game to me and may be a better fit for someone who wants a minimal model count. The rules look solid but the translation (at least in English) was cumbersome enough to keep me off the game.

Instead of telling you which one to go to, Ill share a little tale:

A friend and I were about to get into 40k. He has some GK units, but no rulebook, codex, templates, etc...and could use some more units to get a full army. I have nothing but a Tau codex. Needless to say we need a lot of stuff, so we went to a LGS (an hour away) to get a better idea of what it was going to cost to get us going.

So we got to the LGS and got to looking...and wow the prices. Just a rulebook, codex, templates & dice was pushing $150. Then theres finishing his army and me building a whole army.

On the other side of the aisle was the Warmachine stuff, so we got looking at that. Well, the price is much better, to say the least. He knew nothing about it, so I got to telling him a bit about the factions, how the game works, the generally good balance of the rules, etc. I dont know a lot about the game, but enough to get the general idea. I also told him about how it was taking customers from GW like crazy.

We decided to go over to the tables and see what people were playing. There was a card tourney going on, but there was also some mini gaming on 2 tables. Turned out that it was 4 games of Warmachine & Hordes. No 40k at all.

All things considered we were sold. We both like the GW minis and fluff, but the crazy prices and terrible rules really turned us off. Everything that is wrong with 40k is done right with Warmachine.

Hes going with Menoth and its Cygnar for me.

The drawback to Warmahordes is that the models can sometimes be rather frustrating to assemble as my own experience shows. Still, there does seem to be more people playing Warmahordes than either Infinity or Malifaux.

My advice, wait for the June/July annual sale (PP does this when GW jacks up their prices) and get your starter then.

 Breotan wrote:
The drawback to Warmahordes is that the models can sometimes be rather frustrating to assemble as my own experience shows.

Oh, yeah, the metal Cyclops. Those were a royal pain in the hindquarters. I ended up converting one of them rather heavily instead of using the stock pose. They're in plastic now, by the way. I don't know about the Savage, but the Raider fits fine...although you want to change its pose from the current groin cannon position to one where he is aiming.

The plastic ones are still a pain. The parts fit perfectly now, but there's a LOT of pieces to the arms, and to get them lined up properly you pretty much need to put them all together at once. The experience is something like trying to make and maintain a smiley face out of marbles in your palm with only the hand holding them.

Luckily, the Cyclopes are pretty much the most annoying sculpt they have (never seen the problem with Nyss myself), and if you can assemble them everything else is smooth sailing.