I think both the new book and new models of WoC are the biggest disappointment of all WHFB time, what do you think?

When GW decided to do OK as a new army instead of something interesting like Cathaty or Ind, I think that was the worst possible release.

The new WoC book is certainly far from the worst army book released. Among current books the beastmen and tomb kings are much worse than WoC. I would say demons also are worse because a lot of players do not appreciate the random game mechanics forced on them. There are army books like WE, Brets and Dwarves that are presently worse but they really dont count because they were not so bad when they were released.

If you played undead in 4th and most of 5th the first vampire count book really sucked because you were then left with a partial army and a lot of unusable models.

If you had a combined army of beastmen, demons and WoC when those armies were split you went from a solid army to parts of three different armies.

The Chaos Dwarf army book is perhaps the lamest army book ever because it wasnt even a real army book project, it was just a compilation of reprinted articles from the white dwarf magazine.

JWhex wrote:
When GW decided to do OK as a new army instead of something interesting like Cathaty or Ind, I think that was the worst possible release.

The new WoC book is certainly far from the worst army book released. Among current books the beastmen and tomb kings are much worse than WoC. I would say demons also are worse because a lot of players do not appreciate the random game mechanics forced on them. There are army books like WE, Brets and Dwarves that are presently worse but they really dont count because they were not so bad when they were released.

If you played undead in 4th and most of 5th the first vampire count book really sucked because you were then left with a partial army and a lot of unusable models.

If you had a combined army of beastmen, demons and WoC when those armies were split you went from a solid army to parts of three different armies.

The Chaos Dwarf army book is perhaps the lamest army book ever because it wasnt even a real army book project, it was just a compilation of reprinted articles from the white dwarf magazine.

OK a mistake? Take a look around these forums OK is huge, they are a very competitive army and everyone loves the flavor and fun of big ole fatties, breaks the 20mm/25mm small infantry, who doesn't like OK?

Also Chaos Dwarfs? They have their own army book now in the Tamaurakan or however it is spelled and yes they are very very competitive.

Agreed. OK was a nice compromise to bring in an eastern army without putting in another human based faction.

The decision to split Chaos in three different factions - Warriors, Daemons and Beastmen.

I really loved the old dynamic which really captured how a Chaos should work i.e. Daemon general = Daemons as Core and Warriors/Beastmen as Special. Warrior General = Warriors as Core and Daemons/Beastmen as Special etc

Now the caveat to this is that I really like the new direction for Beastmen and having become their own animal (excuse the pun), they don't really fit into the old Chaos dynamic anymore.

However, this just makes it even simpler to reintroduce the combined Warrior/Daemon army book.

Hargus56 wrote:

JWhex wrote:
When GW decided to do OK as a new army instead of something interesting like Cathaty or Ind, I think that was the worst possible release.

The new WoC book is certainly far from the worst army book released. Among current books the beastmen and tomb kings are much worse than WoC. I would say demons also are worse because a lot of players do not appreciate the random game mechanics forced on them. There are army books like WE, Brets and Dwarves that are presently worse but they really dont count because they were not so bad when they were released.

If you played undead in 4th and most of 5th the first vampire count book really sucked because you were then left with a partial army and a lot of unusable models.

If you had a combined army of beastmen, demons and WoC when those armies were split you went from a solid army to parts of three different armies.

The Chaos Dwarf army book is perhaps the lamest army book ever because it wasnt even a real army book project, it was just a compilation of reprinted articles from the white dwarf magazine.

OK a mistake? Take a look around these forums OK is huge, they are a very competitive army and everyone loves the flavor and fun of big ole fatties, breaks the 20mm/25mm small infantry, who doesn't like OK?

Also Chaos Dwarfs? They have their own army book now in the Tamaurakan or however it is spelled and yes they are very very competitive.

Yeah I definitely rate OK as the biggest mistake ever, a missed opportunity. I never said they werent competitive. People like them (not everyone though) for what they are which is fine, I hate their background and do not like the models at all, I think the whole fattie aspect is ridiculous.

The fact that there is a chaos dwarf list in the Tamaurakan book has absolutely nothing to do with my comments about the original chaos dwarf army book.

Have to say I don't agree either that OK was a disappointment. I'd rather have them than another human based faction as choices for an army book.

As for the OP's question. I think the last Beastmen book was disappointing. Overpriced rares and most of the specials helps severely limit their viable competitive choices.

Yeah, them's fightin words buddy. OK is the most awesome army ever!

I think at first glance the Beastmen book is disappointing but in the hands of a true believer they can and have made it work. Sure the rares are overcosted when compared to other recent monsters but you play beastmen for the beastmen not for the rares and overall it is tough to beat for the cost 50 AHW gor with the 206 in there, every other comparitive priced unit in the game will eventually go down to it. I'd take WS4 and T4 over a 5+ armor save any day of the week and we laugh at Lore of Metal.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Yeah, them's fightin words buddy. OK is the most awesome army ever!

Only when you use minotaur models for counts as fat/stinky/stupid/repulsive/obese/gaseous/ridiculous ogres!

I dunno. I like the aesthetic they gave Warhammer Ogres. Makes them different to other Ogres, at least.

Indeed, their aesthetic is pretty darn attractive and unique. The Ravenous Hordes really are the Ravenous Hordes.

I really like DoC but they probably shouldn't have ever made them a stand-alone army. It just doesn't work thematically.

The greatest thing a WoC general can aspire to is to be an immortal Daemon Prince. Kill like a bazillion guys over 300 years and you got a chance. The most nauseating nurgling zit-creature is an immortal Daemon.

It's hard for mortals (us) to get behind the sensibilities of gods. Orcs are at least orcs. Beastmen have a primordial purpose. But DoC is all kinda like, Grand Game. Convert the world. They're just too meta. Too big. It's fine to have them behind the scenes or have a unit or two here or there in armies. But if your TZ army ever succeeded and converted the world into TZ-land, then TZ would cease to exist because there would be no one to fuel him.

Unless there's the rest of the universe/dimensions they hint at sometimes (hint, because they didn't really define it either), in which why care about the world? Again, when you're an immortal god-thing, it's tough to find motivation.

Vampires are trying to survive. TK are trying to reclaim their kingdom. Slann are trying to enact the Great Plan (and can't have Slann-babies so they're all dying out). But Daemons can just wait. Go to sleep for a billion years and come back and kill all mutant creatures who got contaminated from the giant radioactive holes in the universe that exist in the north.

But I think Beastmen is a really bad book. They tried to make it work, but they're just too real. Orcs and Ogres are pretty dumb, but they're also kind of silly.

Don't know about worst but with the prices the HE one is shaping up to be the most disappointing for me. I was really excited about the shadow warriors until I learnt they are going to be in the same price bracket as the WoC Forsaken.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Indeed, their aesthetic is pretty darn attractive and unique. The Ravenous Hordes really are the Ravenous Hordes.

Ravening Hordes!

.Case closed.

Seriously though, I get why they did it but RH was just lazy. Be grateful for your sub-par army books

 jonolikespie wrote:
Don't know about worst but with the prices the HE one is shaping up to be the most disappointing for me. I was really excited about the shadow warriors until I learnt they are going to be in the same price bracket as the WoC Forsaken.

I understand from the rumours they will be core but they are in the elite group price range. I pity anyone starting this game now unless they have deep pockets of cash.

DukeRustfield wrote:
I really like DoC but they probably shouldn't have ever made them a stand-alone army. It just doesn't work thematically.

The greatest thing a WoC general can aspire to is to be an immortal Daemon Prince. Kill like a bazillion guys over 300 years and you got a chance. The most nauseating nurgling zit-creature is an immortal Daemon.

It's hard for mortals (us) to get behind the sensibilities of gods. Orcs are at least orcs. Beastmen have a primordial purpose. But DoC is all kinda like, Grand Game. Convert the world. They're just too meta. Too big. It's fine to have them behind the scenes or have a unit or two here or there in armies. But if your TZ army ever succeeded and converted the world into TZ-land, then TZ would cease to exist because there would be no one to fuel him.

I really agree with this post, very well expressed. While some of the daemon models GW makes are cool, I think they are much better off as choices in a mortal army, like the old 40k rules let you summon them in to a CSM army. If daemons are terrifying things that appear on the battlefield at times of utmost despair (ie because things are already going on) it's a very cool idea. Having them be the main event, and therefore fitting into the structure of an army, core troops, leaders, support etc, is a bit weak. I feel they lack the individual character that would make me collect an army, and I'm not even that keen on them as adversaries. Obviously it's not my job to say they shouldn't be in the game or anything, more power to anyone who plays them.

DukeRustfield wrote:
I really like DoC but they probably shouldn't have ever made them a stand-alone army. It just doesn't work thematically.

Not liking something thematically is fine because it is a matter of personal taste, it is indeed my reason for not liking the ogre kingdoms. The demons at least were in whfb from at least third edition though. I did not like the splitting of the chaos armies but on the other hand demons were a faction that really did not work very well rule wise in 4th and 5th edition.

The one good thing that resulted from splitting the armies is a greater diversity of units and models. I think the three armies should remain but return to the system were units from books different from your general were special choices.

 Flashman wrote:
The decision to split Chaos in three different factions - Warriors, Daemons and Beastmen.

I really loved the old dynamic which really captured how a Chaos should work i.e. Daemon general = Daemons as Core and Warriors/Beastmen as Special. Warrior General = Warriors as Core and Daemons/Beastmen as Special etc

Now the caveat to this is that I really like the new direction for Beastmen and having become their own animal (excuse the pun), they don't really fit into the old Chaos dynamic anymore.

However, this just makes it even simpler to reintroduce the combined Warrior/Daemon army book.

I agree with this it destroyed my chaos army (never really recovered) as did the same with undead split into tomb kings/vampire counts.. and why the heck cant vampire count undead use catapults and archers?... lol....guess there are no vampire count undead longbowmen and such

lomax wrote:
I think both the new book and new models of WoC are the biggest disappointment of all WHFB time, what do you think?

I havent seen anyone I know even pick up that book or the new models yet. I barely even remembered that release. It was a big dissapointment

Being a big disappointment hardly makes it the 'worst WHFB release of all time! of all time!'.

It just makes it a disappointing release. Plenty of armies have those.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Spacewolfoddballz wrote:
and why the heck cant vampire count undead use catapults and archers?... lol....guess there are no vampire count undead longbowmen and such

There is a fluff reason, though it's not explicity spelled out. Vampire Counts make their armies on the move. They march over a field that has a lot of dark energy pooling in it? Invoke the dead to rise. March. See a particularly interesting Barrow? Invoke them to rise. March.

They don't really bother with organising them into regiments, they're just put into regiments for ease of play. A Vampire Count army really is the stereotypical shambling horde of dead. They don't bother trying to separate them into skeleton/zombie swordsmen, skeleton/zombie archers, etc. Skeletons and zombies are really just one big amalgamated horde.

Tomb Kings, on the other hand, are organised into the armies they were in life. That archer regiment was an archer regiment in life, and is reanimated as an archer regiment in death, with the purpose of still actually being an archer regiment. Same with war machine crews.

 Color Sgt. Kell wrote:

lomax wrote:
I think both the new book and new models of WoC are the biggest disappointment of all WHFB time, what do you think?

I havent seen anyone I know even pick up that book or the new models yet. I barely even remembered that release. It was a big dissapointment

Its quite popular here. There was a local tournament last week with about 24 - 26 players. There were no fewer than 4 WoC armies. While I think it is far from the worst book ever, I do own enough models to field a WoC army but I passed on the book because it just did not really inspire me to play the army instead of some of my other armies. If the book was about half the price it currently is I would probably buy it.

JWhex wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
Don't know about worst but with the prices the HE one is shaping up to be the most disappointing for me. I was really excited about the shadow warriors until I learnt they are going to be in the same price bracket as the WoC Forsaken.

I understand from the rumours they will be core but they are in the elite group price range. I pity anyone starting this game now unless they have deep pockets of cash.

I meant money. $50 USD for 10 ($70 AUD).

JWhex wrote:

Not liking something thematically is fine because it is a matter of personal taste, it is indeed my reason for not liking the ogre kingdoms.

I like DoC. But they are 2-dimensional.

They are kinda like modern zombie movies except you have to play the zombies. Saying blood for the blood god is about as compelling as saying Brainz. If you're immortal and a daemon, you really have no wants. What does a Keeper of Secrets daydream about? Having a really awesome nudie bar? That seems unlikely.

It's like the snippets of the Liber Mortificus(sp?) that detail a guy walking through the Realm of Chaos is neat from a human's perspective, but it's really boring from a Daemon's perspective. Just like any classic literature of hell. Like Dante's Inferno. If you're seeing souls be tortured, that's scary. But if you're the Bloodletter who is simply torturing the same souls for thousands of years, that's really dull.

So DoC are interesting because they are unstoppable, evil forces. But being an unstoppable evil force isn't interesting. Because you're doing the same thing over and over for eternity.

Beastmen, it was poor when it was in 7th, and it is even poorer in 8th.

Actually though on daemons, they do have their own thoughts and the like. The problem is the only people who will get to talk to them, is those who summon or bind them, so we can't exactly learn much from them. Even the basic bloodletter can think. (Even nurglings, if we go by Ku'gath and the like ) So yes, they can have dreams, they can have aspirations. They just happen to fit more like what their god would desire.

The book makes it clear stuff like nurglings are pretty mindless and Core are very close to mindless. A GD has a personality, but it's a fixed personality. They are all basically 2-dimensional psychopaths. You always know the 3 different emotions or states of being for a Lord of Change. Which is what I said. They don't, paradoxically, change. Something that is immortal and never changes, or even has the possibility, is dull. A LOC is never going to give up the change business and become a fruit vendor in Altdorf. He's just going to be a fragment of his boss--and his boss, the very gods themselves, are just fragments of mortals.

As scary as Khorne is, he's probably got a 15 word vocabulary that is very skull-heavy.

7th edition DoC. Mat Ward singlehandedly shot down game balance and competitive play in Warhammer Fantasy. He then wrote 8th edition, making competitive play officially impossible.

 Kroothawk wrote:
7th edition DoC. Mat Ward singlehandedly shot down game balance and competitive play in Warhammer Fantasy. He then wrote 8th edition, making competitive play officially impossible.

In fairness it seems to be the goal of GW and the design team in general that are crapping all over competitive play in 40k and whfb. They used to support the idea of competitive play maybe they will change back. They are a bunch of hypocrits and even Jervis doesnt deserve any of the respect from people he once had.

"7th edition Daemons broke game balance. This is good news, as you can now concentrate on narrative games!"

lomax wrote:
The worst release of all WHFB time?

WHFB 8th edition.

PhantomViper wrote:

lomax wrote:
The worst release of all WHFB time?

WHFB 8th edition.

Back under your bridge, and be sure to finish licking the windows before coming out again please.

I'd have to say the 7th edition Daemon book, as it really demonstrated everything that was bad about power creep. Other than that, I'd have to say the Skullcannon. The rules, fluff and model just make no sense to me really, and it's the most blatant release in a while that has been shoe-horned in to try and sell expensive new kits.

"Of all times" is way too broad to be viable...I'd say WHFB 8th magic rules / BRB lores. And the facerolling cannon of Khorne.

 Sigvatr wrote:
"Of all times" is way too broad to be viable...I'd say WHFB 8th magic rules / BRB lores. And the facerolling cannon of Khorne.

this minus the cannon thing.

7th Edition Demons: That book for a long time was the easiest argument for comp.

Although I must say some of the Lore do need to be toned back a bit. Purple Sun is a bit Ridiculous when it goes IF.

 tmarichards wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

lomax wrote:
The worst release of all WHFB time?

WHFB 8th edition.

Back under your bridge, and be sure to finish licking the windows before coming out again please.

If you don't know how to conduct a civilized discussion without resorting to name calling, I suggest that you don't take part in one.

There was no name calling. And because 8th edition is widely viewed as the most balanced edition GW has released ever saying its horrible really does smack of trolling, either that or you are a butt hurt 7th edition power gamer.

 Grey Templar wrote:
There was no name calling. And because 8th edition is widely viewed as the most balanced edition GW has released ever saying its horrible really does smack of trolling, either that or you are a butt hurt 7th edition power gamer.

There wasn't? So calling someone a troll and telling him to go lick windows isn't insulting where you come from?

I also find it funny that the "most balanced edition GW has released ever" has coincidently marked a general decline in the popularity of the game... In my country we've gone from 20+ players monthly STORE tournaments to general tournament cancellations due to not even an 8 person minimum being reached... We've gone from bi-anual 60 people nationals to anual 12 person tournaments...

I find if funny that the "most balanced edition GW has released ever" as shown WHFB dropping from 2nd place to 4th in ICv2's ranking system for NA.

And no, I'm not a "butt hurt 7th edition power gamer", I've played WHFB since 4th edition and if you ask me, the best rules edition was 6th, but even 7th was miles ahead of 8th edition as a core rule set. Daemons broke 7th edition, but that was a problem with the army book, not with the general rules.

Note in between 7th and 8th currently something has gone on to make the poularity of WHFB trail off the introduction of WarmaHordes has drained the playerbase as has GW price increases which push away older players rather than new. So actually everything you've said could be attributed to that. Also at my local store we lost half of our Fantasy old bloods because of Life Changing events (Child, New Job, and going back to school dropped something like 6 guys out of our fantasy pool.) These were then replaced by people who put 40k on the back-burner because it is fracking boring now.

Also Seventh was Terrible don't try and say anything else cause it just ain't true

This thread is full of sweet innocent children, who do not remember the 1990s.

Perfect Organism wrote:
This thread is full of sweet innocent children, who do not remember the 1990s.

Pfft, the chaos dwarves with their epic hats ruled the day!

Perfect Organism wrote:
This thread is full of sweet innocent children, who do not remember the 1990s.

I've seen the army and i want those Magnificent Hats

PhantomViper wrote:

lomax wrote:
The worst release of all WHFB time?

WHFB 8th edition.

8th is definitely better than the herohammer of 4th and 5th edition.

8th is a better game by far than third edition but it really is not a meaningful comparison because the changes from 3rd to 4th were really vast.

Comparing 8th to 6th and 7th edition reveals that they are indeed different but with different flaws and different strengths. I would say that the magic system has always been flawed and that they would just about have it right were it not for a handfull of OP spells.

The step up rule was a great idea but the inability to disrupt steadfast with rear and flank charges is really bad. Comparing skirmish rules from 7 to 8, they are just different and require different tactics. Cannons are too powerful but the way you move and determine charge success or failure is a great improvement over 7th.

Some people may not like the rules as a matter of personal taste but if you have played a lot of games in all the editions it is very obvious that there have been pros and cons to each edition. The worst thing about 7th was not the core rules at all but the incredible range of power among army books.

Too just make the blanket statement that 8th is the worst edition ever suggests to me that you have not really played a lot of games in all the editions and reacting emotionally rather than logically.

PhantomViper wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
There was no name calling. And because 8th edition is widely viewed as the most balanced edition GW has released ever saying its horrible really does smack of trolling, either that or you are a butt hurt 7th edition power gamer.

There wasn't? So calling someone a troll and telling him to go lick windows isn't insulting where you come from?

I also find it funny that the "most balanced edition GW has released ever" has coincidently marked a general decline in the popularity of the game... In my country we've gone from 20+ players monthly STORE tournaments to general tournament cancellations due to not even an 8 person minimum being reached... We've gone from bi-anual 60 people nationals to anual 12 person tournaments...

You were trolling no matter how much you try to backpedal now, your initial post was textbook 'bait' claiming the entire current edition is the worst thing ever with absolutely zero actual worthwhile content, to then claim being called a troll is offensive just makes your little attempt even more obvious. Now you're citing what's happening in your little meta game as proof of a worldwide downturn in WHFB, it says you're from Portugal? Maybe your country bankrupting itself has more to do with a decline in recreational spending than the release of 8th ed.

MarsNZ wrote:
it says you're from Portugal? Maybe your country bankrupting itself has more to do with a decline in recreational spending than the release of 8th ed.

This forum is definitely the place for macro economic discussions.

I believe the Euro has made steadfast all but necessary. But if China doesn't stop pegging its currency to the dollar it's clear Wood Elves are forever going to remain UP.

If that was a joke it wasn't a very good one.

It was kinda funny

The story of WFB falling off in popularity is also true here in Glasgow, from speaking to the FLGS manager and observing the lack of events compared to what I hear from a few years back. I suspect that we will see some surprisingly big changes in 9th as GW try to win customers back.

I hate to say this but here in Bulgaria there's only the six guys who play in the campaign we run that i've played fantasy with lately.

8th edition magic lores annoy me more than anything else, and that stupid skillscannon (yes I know that is not its proper name)

Magic was the main reason people dropped 8th in here. Magic and dumbed-down movement. Most switched to 40k as their main system and WHFB is really barren more or less..of 10 tournaments in my local area, 9 are 40k and the WHFB tourneys only got like 7-12 people playing compared to 30+ in 40k.

8th fantasy magic did ruin the game around here as well. Most of us are 40k with fantasy to jack around. Our LGS has put almost everything they have for wood elves and beastmen on clearance. The last time they sold a full price beastmen box was over a year ago and wood elves over 14 months ago. Fantasy was killed by 8th, around here.

lomax wrote:
I think both the new book and new models of WoC are the biggest disappointment of all WHFB time, what do you think?

fat chance the WoC book is much better than the Beastmen book. One viable build and defecating on everything.

I actually saw an increase in Fantasy with the release of 8th Edition. I don't think that the movement rules were dumbed down at all, true, there are some things that could change that would make it better, but overall it's a lot more fun.

But as far as the worst Fantasy release ever? Splitting up Chaos into three different factions. THE MOST obvious money grab GW has ever done.

Splitting Chaos was terrible. Both in 40k and Fantasy.

Anyone that left fantasy for 40k is now stuck in 6th. I think 6th is by far the worst set of core rules for 40k since second edition.

JWhex wrote:
Anyone that left fantasy for 40k is now stuck in 6th. I think 6th is by far the worst set of core rules for 40k since second edition.

I agree that sixth is pretty bad. The new books seem to be helping, but the trend around here seems to be moving away from 40k to fantasy.

Perhaps that's their strategy... Bounce people from one game system to the next... Ninth will send all the fantasy players back to 40k!

Perfect Organism wrote:
This thread is full of sweet innocent children, who do not remember the 1990s.

Two words: Marauder Miniatures. My gorge rises still, just typing that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JWhex wrote:
When GW decided to do OK as a new army instead of something interesting like Cathaty or Ind, I think that was the worst possible release.

The new WoC book is certainly far from the worst army book released. Among current books the beastmen and tomb kings are much worse than WoC. I would say demons also are worse because a lot of players do not appreciate the random game mechanics forced on them. There are army books like WE, Brets and Dwarves that are presently worse but they really dont count because they were not so bad when they were released.

If you played undead in 4th and most of 5th the first vampire count book really sucked because you were then left with a partial army and a lot of unusable models.

If you had a combined army of beastmen, demons and WoC when those armies were split you went from a solid army to parts of three different armies.

The Chaos Dwarf army book is perhaps the lamest army book ever because it wasnt even a real army book project, it was just a compilation of reprinted articles from the white dwarf magazine.

OK are the most blatant pandering to noob, OP money grab in the history of Fantasy. Oh, you're brand new and can't paint? Here's an army that has 1/4 the models as any other, and they're all really big so you don't have to worry about painting tiny faces! And they're super durable too, so you don't have to worry if you suck, you can make mistakes all day and still stay on the board!

MakesKidsKill wrote:


Two words: Marauder Miniatures. My gorge rises still, just typing that.

I think some of the old Maurader beastmen were decent, especially for the time. The Maurader dwarves range had many models that were characterful and are sought after today.

MakesKidsKill wrote:
OK are the most blatant pandering to noob, OP money grab in the history of Fantasy. Oh, you're brand new and can't paint? Here's an army that has 1/4 the models as any other, and they're all really big so you don't have to worry about painting tiny faces! And they're super durable too, so you don't have to worry if you suck, you can make mistakes all day and still stay on the board!

There are armies I would never get in a million years because I literally can't paint them. Not everyone is a watchmaker. And while there is skill involved that comes with practice, if you don't like painting tiny faces you're not necessarily a "noob," you're a person who drinks coffee and at the end of a day doesn't want to paint something using a microscope and a single rat hair brush.

DukeRustfield wrote:

MakesKidsKill wrote:
OK are the most blatant pandering to noob, OP money grab in the history of Fantasy. Oh, you're brand new and can't paint? Here's an army that has 1/4 the models as any other, and they're all really big so you don't have to worry about painting tiny faces! And they're super durable too, so you don't have to worry if you suck, you can make mistakes all day and still stay on the board!

There are armies I would never get in a million years because I literally can't paint them. Not everyone is a watchmaker. And while there is skill involved that comes with practice, if you don't like painting tiny faces you're not necessarily a "noob," you're a person who drinks coffee and at the end of a day doesn't want to paint something using a microscope and a single rat hair brush.

I know man, I'm just old and bitter and currently painting 70+ derpy faces on Empire Greatswords & State Troopers. I really didn't mean to impugn anyone.

DukeRustfield wrote:

MakesKidsKill wrote:
OK are the most blatant pandering to noob, OP money grab in the history of Fantasy. Oh, you're brand new and can't paint? Here's an army that has 1/4 the models as any other, and they're all really big so you don't have to worry about painting tiny faces! And they're super durable too, so you don't have to worry if you suck, you can make mistakes all day and still stay on the board!

There are armies I would never get in a million years because I literally can't paint them. Not everyone is a watchmaker. And while there is skill involved that comes with practice, if you don't like painting tiny faces you're not necessarily a "noob," you're a person who drinks coffee and at the end of a day doesn't want to paint something using a microscope and a single rat hair brush.

Duke has a good point but that was still a nice rant about the OK. Its a bit fuzzy to me now but were they really that good when they were introduced? I dont remember them dominating at all locally like they have in recent months.

They weren't, they we pretty meh in 6th, downright terrible in 7th, and 8th edition made them decent.

Not to mention not really out of place, they were originally Dogs of War units that got expanded, the only people I honestly could remember that disliked them was those that wanted their own DoW to become expanded out into an army. (Most likely Cathay, or brought back Kislev)

Which I enjoy, a full MI army is honestly pretty cool.

Yeah I have to say the general idea of splitting up all Chaos was a poor decision. Also I am still not happy about how they went about Beastmen. If they are no longer of Chaos(which doesnt really make sense, but anyway)then they should at least have Marks of The Beasts or something, instead of Marks of Chaos. Although I like seeing all the armies as their own, I don't think it was such a good idea in the long run. Hordes of Chaos was better in my opinion. It still had all the Chaos and a pure Daemons, Warriors, or Beasts army could still be had.

Did GW ever give an explanation why they decided to split up Chaos?

I assume they did it to sell more models, but just curious is there was an official statement.

aclive wrote:
Did GW ever give an explanation why they decided to split up Chaos?

I assume they did it to sell more models, but just curious is there was an official statement.

I dont recall, but the initial split occured with the reboot of all armies in 6th edition. The Ravening Hordes army lists for 6th is when they were split. This made some sense because everything had to be rebalanced so splitting them made that chore easier I presume. Also it was kind of an evolutionary step from the 5th edition book where you had warbands of each of the three factions led by a leader of one of the factions. When the sixth edition books came out the factions were partially reunited because you could take choices from books other than your general's book as special choices.

I think having three books is really good, but the failure happened when you could no longer mix and match units from the books in the 7th edition lists.

Sadly I dont think whfb has ever recovered from the big 6th edition die off. The core rules were a great advance in the game but so many people left because the ravening hordes list for their army was just sparse. For a fact in my local area whfb has never been as strong as it was during 5th edition. We used to have two or more tourneys every month in a 30 mile radius, now we have maybe 2 per 3 months if someone can be found to run the event. There are just a ridiculous number of 40k tournaments in this area with 5 or 6 stores having tourneys in about a 45 mile radius all connected by good interstate highways and easy traffic.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Magic was the main reason people dropped 8th in here. Magic and dumbed-down movement. Most switched to 40k as their main system and WHFB is really barren more or less..of 10 tournaments in my local area, 9 are 40k and the WHFB tourneys only got like 7-12 people playing compared to 30+ in 40k.

Wait, they didn't like simplistic movement and crazy powerful magic, so they went to 40k.....which has simplistic movement, and crazy powerful psychic powers?

Mr Mugguffins wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Magic was the main reason people dropped 8th in here. Magic and dumbed-down movement. Most switched to 40k as their main system and WHFB is really barren more or less..of 10 tournaments in my local area, 9 are 40k and the WHFB tourneys only got like 7-12 people playing compared to 30+ in 40k.

Wait, they didn't like simplistic movement and crazy powerful magic, so they went to 40k.....which has simplistic movement, and crazy powerful psychic powers?

When 8th dropped, 40k was in 5th edition. By 'simplistic movement', people generally refer to random charge ranges. 5th edition had all fixed movement aside from running. Charging especially was still fixed, so in general, you knew if you were 12" away from an enemy at the start of your turn, you would definitely be able to assault. Psychic powers in 5th edition were also incredibly weak.

6th edition brought Fantasy type random charges on top of random running with a side order of powerful psychic powers (but with none even approaching the likes of Purple Sun/Mindrazor/Pit).

Random charges, in MY D6 roll-for-every-action-you-possibly-make game? You don't say.

Random movement fixed a lot of bugs IMHO. Dwarfs being able to not be a gunline. And similar other armies being stuck in certain modes. It allowed pre-measuring, which was a dirty not-secret in the game. But now that every component had a random element, you could measure all you like. It speeds up the game. If everyone can measure, every single move is going to be perfectly coordinated so you're 1/2 inch away from the enemy in every direction. You can still do that, but there isn't the same need to be surgically precise because it's random.

Although I believe that 8th edition did a lot of good things to the game as a whole, there is barely anyone left playing the game at my FLGS because of the increase of unit sizes combined with the cost of GW models. Now, the only Fantasy players I see at my store are my dedicated group of 3-4 players. Even the owner of the store scoffs at us and generally asks "why do you still play Fantasy anymore?". Most everyone at our FLGS plays Flames, Warmahordes, or 40k, and I even find myself playing more games of X-Wing and Starship Troopers than I do Fantasy. So, on the basis that I simply can't find anymore games of Fantasy at my FLGS, and the fact that any games I do play will be with the same 5 armies, my vote has to go to 8th edition.

Then again, I am a relatively new player to Fantasy, only starting when the old High Elf book was released, so this is merely based off of my limited experience.

JWhex wrote:
Anyone that left fantasy for 40k is now stuck in 6th. I think 6th is by far the worst set of core rules for 40k since second edition.

Yeah I quit 40k, couldn't get into it.

 Doomsday B wrote:
Although I believe that 8th edition did a lot of good things to the game as a whole, there is barely anyone left playing the game at my FLGS because of the increase of unit sizes combined with the cost of GW models. Now, the only Fantasy players I see at my store are my dedicated group of 3-4 players. Even the owner of the store scoffs at us and generally asks "why do you still play Fantasy anymore?". Most everyone at our FLGS plays Flames, Warmahordes, or 40k, and I even find myself playing more games of X-Wing and Starship Troopers than I do Fantasy. So, on the basis that I simply can't find anymore games of Fantasy at my FLGS, and the fact that any games I do play will be with the same 5 armies, my vote has to go to 8th edition.

Then again, I am a relatively new player to Fantasy, only starting when the old High Elf book was released, so this is merely based off of my limited experience.

I only jumped on with 8th but from what I am seeing in my local area since 8th there has been steady growth, but that growth is not nearly enough since 8th basically killed fantasy around here. We are back up to tournaments with 30 players and 4-8 regulars with fantasy on club nights but we were apparently seeing 80+ player tournies before that.
The game seems to be an improvement from what I have heard of 7th, and most people that played it in my area seem to agree, but there is no one left to appreciate it for the very reasons you listed I imagine.

Which I find very strange.

If you have been playing Fantasy for an extended period of time(3-4 editions) you probably have a steady income, and so can afford to increase your army size.

There is also no point in throwing your army away/selling it. and refusing to play is just childish, especially when the rules really are a marked improvement over the past stupidity.


Furthermore, its called Warhammer Fantasy Battles. Not Warhammer Fantasy Skirmishes. 3-4 units of 20 guys is not an army. 3-4 units of 50+ guys is an army, kinda.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Which I find very strange.

If you have been playing Fantasy for an extended period of time(3-4 editions) you probably have a steady income, and so can afford to increase your army size.

Unless you had just the absolute minnimum of models for 7th you probably did not really need to buy anything for 8th. Maybe a couple of boxes of infantry. If you want to be competitive then you may need to buy stuff when your army book is renewed every 4 to 10 years but even then the MAJORITY of your models will still be very useful.

 Grey Templar wrote:
There is also no point in throwing your army away/selling it. and refusing to play is just childish, especially when the rules really are a marked improvement over the past stupidity.

I dont think you can say the 8th rules are definitively better than 7th. Both versions have flaws and advantages. Sadly we are definitely going to see a disparity between army books as TK and Demons suck compared to VC, OK and the HE. Beastmen will also have a crap book for all of 8th as well and probably WE too.

Don't see what this thread is about. 8th and the new books are some of the best things to have happened to WFB in a long time. The new books are all fairly balanced (relative to each other) with very few WTF items in there. The playing field is more level than ever at the top and it's just the old books that cause issues. The best thing though is that the new books all allow various builds to be made, there is no single right answer or power build.

 John Rainbow wrote:
Don't see what this thread is about. 8th and the new books are some of the best things to have happened to WFB in a long time. The new books are all fairly balanced (relative to each other) with very few WTF items in there. The playing field is more level than ever at the top and it's just the old books that cause issues. The best thing though is that the new books all allow various builds to be made, there is no single right answer or power build.

The thread is about the worst whfb release of all time it is not restricted to releases since 8th.

Whether the new books are all fairly balanced or not, as you have asserted is very much disputed. In general no one that is active in competitive play would claim that the OK book and the TK books are evenly matched. The DoC is likewise very weak compared to OK, VC, and WoC in a competitive tournament environment.

JWhex wrote:

 John Rainbow wrote:
Don't see what this thread is about. 8th and the new books are some of the best things to have happened to WFB in a long time. The new books are all fairly balanced (relative to each other) with very few WTF items in there. The playing field is more level than ever at the top and it's just the old books that cause issues. The best thing though is that the new books all allow various builds to be made, there is no single right answer or power build.

The thread is about the worst whfb release of all time it is not restricted to releases since 8th.

Whether the new books are all fairly balanced or not, as you have asserted is very much disputed. In general no one that is active in competitive play would claim that the OK book and the TK books are evenly matched. The DoC is likewise very weak compared to OK, VC, and WoC in a competitive tournament environment.

Daemons of Chaos are likely even worse than Tomb Kings right now if you're being honest with yourself...

I mean, the dusty ones at least have the likes of Khalida for a big poison brick, Sphinxies which are quite tough outside of cannonballing, (but cannons kill everything big and always have been the bane of monsters, so no surprises there!) There's snake surfers and access to the lores of Death & Light - which is godly on Undead!
Sure, they're still not going to stomp the tournament scene or anything, but at least you can put something workably competitive together...

Daemons just got the royal shaft at every turn on the other hand...
Again, you can throw something workably competitive together, but then 1 bad roll can ruin the entire army on Turn 1 as well. Reign of Comedy is so gakking bad compared to it's 40k counterpart. At least the Warpstorm is overall beneficial to the Daemon player!
Not to mention the other huge gaffs;
- Khorne & Tzeentch being mostly worthless junk
- Gifts being a joke compared to 40k's version
- General & BSB stupidity
- Heralds & locii abilities being probably the most overcosted things in the entire game
- Skillcannons being auto-includes every single time
- The rest of the chariots in general being horrifically overcosted, while the Blood Throne is gob-smackingly bad.
- Nerfs that made no sense... (looking at you Bloodcrushers!)

Compared to the 40k book, the Fantasy Daemon book is a bad joke. It pretty much got the 7th ed Orc & Goblin treatment with their new 8th ed book.

the highelf 2+ ward against all magic including attacks.

Experiment 626 wrote:

JWhex wrote:

 John Rainbow wrote:
Don't see what this thread is about. 8th and the new books are some of the best things to have happened to WFB in a long time. The new books are all fairly balanced (relative to each other) with very few WTF items in there. The playing field is more level than ever at the top and it's just the old books that cause issues. The best thing though is that the new books all allow various builds to be made, there is no single right answer or power build.

The thread is about the worst whfb release of all time it is not restricted to releases since 8th.

Whether the new books are all fairly balanced or not, as you have asserted is very much disputed. In general no one that is active in competitive play would claim that the OK book and the TK books are evenly matched. The DoC is likewise very weak compared to OK, VC, and WoC in a competitive tournament environment.

Daemons of Chaos are likely even worse than Tomb Kings right now if you're being honest with yourself...

I mean, the dusty ones at least have the likes of Khalida for a big poison brick, Sphinxies which are quite tough outside of cannonballing, (but cannons kill everything big and always have been the bane of monsters, so no surprises there!) There's snake surfers and access to the lores of Death & Light - which is godly on Undead!
Sure, they're still not going to stomp the tournament scene or anything, but at least you can put something workably competitive together...

Daemons just got the royal shaft at every turn on the other hand...
Again, you can throw something workably competitive together, but then 1 bad roll can ruin the entire army on Turn 1 as well. Reign of Comedy is so gakking bad compared to it's 40k counterpart. At least the Warpstorm is overall beneficial to the Daemon player!
Not to mention the other huge gaffs;
- Khorne & Tzeentch being mostly worthless junk
- Gifts being a joke compared to 40k's version
- General & BSB stupidity
- Heralds & locii abilities being probably the most overcosted things in the entire game
- Skillcannons being auto-includes every single time
- The rest of the chariots in general being horrifically overcosted, while the Blood Throne is gob-smackingly bad.
- Nerfs that made no sense... (looking at you Bloodcrushers!)

Compared to the 40k book, the Fantasy Daemon book is a bad joke. It pretty much got the 7th ed Orc & Goblin treatment with their new 8th ed book.

Well all the demon nerfs you listed are true but I can find a way to win with demons in fantasy except perhaps against HE but I cannot forsee bothering with demons in 40k because I think the 40k demons are more flawed.

A nurgle build is pretty good in fantasy and some people have success with slaanesh but I dont like the low str. Tzeentch is just trash all the way around. The skullcannon is awesome but 8 is easy to roll on winds of magic so it will take a lot of wounds from the reign of comedy table. A unit of ambushing flesh hounds can be fun but their movement is so good it is almost a waste to ambush with them. For the most part khorne is sitting this edition out along with tzeentch.

Playing nurgle all the time is pretty boring and that is the real crime of the book, it leads to very limited army lists.

+1 for the new Daemons of Chaos being the worst release ever. What an atrocious army book it is.

 lordofthegophers wrote:
+1 for the new Daemons of Chaos being the worst release ever. What an atrocious army book it is.

It may be bad, but the current beastmen book is worse.

JWhex wrote:

Well all the demon nerfs you listed are true but I can find a way to win with demons in fantasy except perhaps against HE but I cannot forsee bothering with demons in 40k because I think the 40k demons are more flawed.

A nurgle build is pretty good in fantasy and some people have success with slaanesh but I dont like the low str. Tzeentch is just trash all the way around. The skullcannon is awesome but 8 is easy to roll on winds of magic so it will take a lot of wounds from the reign of comedy table. A unit of ambushing flesh hounds can be fun but their movement is so good it is almost a waste to ambush with them. For the most part khorne is sitting this edition out along with tzeentch.

Playing nurgle all the time is pretty boring and that is the real crime of the book, it leads to very limited army lists.

Lol! Too bad I'm a die-hard Tzeentchian devotee and thus won't touch Nurgle even with a Realm of Chaos spanning pole on sheer principle alone!
Well, unless I can make those options into a suitable Tzeentchian 'counts as' variant, which at least gives me Firewyrms (aka Beasts) and Changebringers (aka Plaguedrones)... But that still leaves the most important unit in the Fantasy book - Plaguebearers as a "WTF can I make these into?" problem...

40k Daemons on the other hand work fairly well, outside of;
- Durp Knights with their broken codex vs Daemons
- Runes of Win... which is going to get changed up by the end of the year at the lastest
- Rune Priest spam... which can be om-nom'ed with turn 2 assaults
- av12 Flyer spam... which no one really likes so isn't so much a problem of the Daemon book lacking!

But overall the whole way the random was worked in to the 40k book was pulled off much better:
a) Reign of Comedy vs Warpstorm. Reign happens on the Winds of Magic roll which instantly breaks it due to how the results are tallied up. A bad roll for Winds when you're a Daemon player is a simply a double-whamy of potentially game-ending shinanigans, becuase not only do you get a sub-par magic phase, but you can lose whole chunks of your army, your wizard or else bone your saves.

At least in 40k, it's in the Shooting Phase. (granted, there is no 40k 'magic phase') But this simply re-inforces the issues of how badly implimented it is in Fantasy!
The Magic Phase is long enough. Now we're adding in a psudo-shooting phase as well with the 4 most common results, or else adding in potential army-wide Instability checks, which tends to simply distract from what's supposed to be going on normally, ie: Magic casting & dispelling!
Put it in the shooting phase where it honestly belongs and won't double-screw the Daemon player with it's bad results. (or even potentially break the enemy wide open should their Wizard pop into a Herald and thus ruin their magic defenses!)

Then there's the biggest farce of all: 40k gives the Daemon player some control over the 4 average results, Fantasy doesn't and for no reason at all beyond sheer lazines.
Instruments in 40k can be used to protect your army from opposing Gods ramaging across your own units by giving you re-roll. Would it really have been too much to add such a mechanic onto Fantasy Musicians?! (ie: Each Slaanesh Musician gives a single re-roll the D6 to The Dark Prince Thirsts result and thus can stop it from crushing your Skullcannon in almost every single game...)

b) BSB vs Icons. I do admit I like the fact we've got the whole rivalry of the Gods bit going on again as it does add to the overall feel of the army in general and keeps things true to the backstory. But again, it's so piss-poorly implimented compared to 40k's Icon mechanics!
BSB's are critical in 8th edition, and especially so with rules like Daemonic Instability that can auto-pop whole units. Having such a critical mechanic only ever effect 25% of the army's total available units is crippling.
At least in 40k, non-matching Icons still have their uses by reducing scatters down to a single D6. (though I still say Khorne Icons should not work at all for Slaanesh units for example and vice-versa. Ditto for Tzeentch/Nurgle) But at least you're not handi-capping yourself by mixing Gods and you're not all but shoe-horned into mainly mono-builds just to keep your BSB/Icons relevent.

It's especially fustrating because our Heralds are so damn squishy unless you go for a Palanquin Herald... If our BSB is going to give-up the bonus VP's so easily, then why can't we at least gain more than a 25% army-wide benefit from it?!

c) Daemonic Gifts. They're simply a mess in Fantasy... Each level is written like a grab bag with "a little bit of everything" thrown in. (ie: a defensive upgrade, some 'be more killy' upgrades and a disruption upgrade) Then there's the fact that some gift results are outright useless! (Unholy Sacrifice is laughable - kill your own 500+ pts General! Cleaving Blow is situational at best and Sorcerous Loadstone will explode horribly in your face!)

Again, at least in the 40k book, things are better organised and you can buy roughly what you want... For example, the Lesser Rewards give cheap and effective weapons, and if you want protection, then Greater Gifts give you an outright 66% chance at getting some good protection.
Plus, there's really no outright useless/waste of pts results in any of the 3 tables. While Lesser Rewards for example may be 'meh' in some of their results, at the very worst it's always a cheap ap2 close combat weapon!

d) Loci Abilities. I don't even think this one needs explaining really...
For their cost and how horrific Heralds in general are in Fantasy, there's maybe 2-3 you'll ever even consider using since they're so halariously overcosted. (probably the worst costed stuff in the entire game!)
40k makes your Heralds true force multipliers and almost all the abilities are usefull. (Tzeentch kinda being the loser again, but I have had some very hummorous results lately with S5/6 Pink Horrors + Prescience doing things they honestly shouldn't!)



And this is before you even look at the individual units themselves!

While it's true that 40k Daemons still aren't roflstomping the tournament scene, they are doing alot better overall than the Fantasy crap-shoot... They have the tools to viably take-on most anything your opponent can put across the the table from you, (Durp Knights not withstanding - but that's the GK codex's fault for being a pure hard-counter), and they only get super stuffed by the current flyer problem everyone else faces, or older out of date rules that can screw over mainly Tzeentch-heavy builds.

Yeah, if you hate nurgle and like Tzeentch then you are pretty much hosed this edition for fantasy.

JWhex wrote:

 lordofthegophers wrote:
+1 for the new Daemons of Chaos being the worst release ever. What an atrocious army book it is.

It may be bad, but the current beastmen book is worse.

I dunno, outside of the horrendously overcosted rares, its not all that bad. At least they get access to BRB items. And dont forget, when it was released 8th wasnt out, so their own ambush rule made sense too.

Not saying its great or anything, but certainly not bottom...


unless we have to count Pumba.

Yah you can't say TK have Khalida and forget Doc have nurgle. And slaanesh isn't bad. Nurgle doc is damn powerful.

DukeRustfield wrote:
Yah you can't say TK have Khalida and forget Doc have nurgle. And slaanesh isn't bad. Nurgle doc is damn powerful.

Tzeentch says Nurgle doesn't exist in his armies and is simply a figment of some random Herald's imagination, reflecting off of that upsidedown colodiscopic disco ball in the Impossible Fortress, that's hanging from the ceiling in the main dance hall up the third staircase to your opposite right and then make a virticle turn at the 9th door to find it!



All kidding aside, I'm not a huge fan of Nurgle, and I shouldn't be forced to go out and buy a bunch of crap I really won't enjoy building/painting just to stay competitive.

DukeRustfield wrote:
Yah you can't say TK have Khalida and forget Doc have nurgle. And slaanesh isn't bad. Nurgle doc is damn powerful.

Yeah I have completely tabled or nearly tabled the most competitive bst builds in the three games against them with Nurgle. In one game I broke and ran down a bestigor horde, chariot and gor horde in my turn 2 and the Epidemius tally was at zero buffs.

We have been testing a friends bst army for an upcoming GT and the nurgle epidemius build just absolutely overpowers the beastmen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 japehlio wrote:

JWhex wrote:

 lordofthegophers wrote:
+1 for the new Daemons of Chaos being the worst release ever. What an atrocious army book it is.

It may be bad, but the current beastmen book is worse.

I dunno, outside of the horrendously overcosted rares, its not all that bad. At least they get access to BRB items. And dont forget, when it was released 8th wasnt out, so their own ambush rule made sense too.

Not saying its great or anything, but certainly not bottom...


unless we have to count Pumba.

I would rate the bst book as middle tier. It can and has done well at some big tournaments. I like the army and have a huge collection. I can probably put about 4k of painted metal beastmen models on the table.

The army just has so few good builds though it gets boring to play, same thing with DoC and the Nurgle builds.

JWhex wrote:

The army just has so few good builds though it gets boring to play, same thing with DoC and the Nurgle builds.

I think that this is always the deathknell for any book; not when it is not powerful, but when it is boring. I find that my TK book isn't all that - certainly the writer seemed terrified that our constructs and buffing characters would do too well, so ringfenced them with terrible rules - but it has options, there are a number of ways that I can build my army. I've seen gunlines with dual catapults and snakesurfers protecting the archers, tombguardstar bricks, armies with 6 sphinges, people either swearing by or at the stalkers, etc.

But from what I've seen, Beastmen are basically mono-build. So are Bretonnians to an extent. And poo to that. Any list gets dull after a while. You want variety.

Yeah I've been doing really well with my TK, and I really enjoy the way that they play. Sure it sucks when my Hierophant jumps into the warp and my entire army evaporates in a couple turns, but such is life.

As for worst release, I'd have to throw my weight behind the Chaos split as well. The Realm of Chaos boxed set was such an awesome and flavour-fileld edition. I don't really understand why they felt the need to split it up. With my other armies I generally stop at around 150% of the units I need to field my 2,500 pt list, but with Chaos I just kept going and going to try out all the book's variety. I spent more money on that army than I'll ever spend on an army again.

 Uzi Toting Monkeys wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Indeed, their aesthetic is pretty darn attractive and unique. The Ravenous Hordes really are the Ravenous Hordes.

Ravening Hordes!

.Case closed.

Seriously though, I get why they did it but RH was just lazy. Be grateful for your sub-par army books

Winner winner chicken dinner. This was the worst thing the ever did, especially for WE players like me that had to attempt to use a 4 page codex effectively for 4-5 years. I won a lot of games with it, but it still was a pile of lazy crap rolled in lame and covered with unnecessary nerfs.

Worst release... Skaven, but that's my personal hatred for the verminkin as i think the whole army concept and fluff is stupid. But for an actual all out bad release i would have to say removing the different bloodlines from the VC. I so enjoyed the different flavors of Lahmia, Von Carsteins or the Blood Dragons. The Nosferatus were ok too, but did not play them ever.

Meh, I always thought the vampire were a little too pronounced and the necromancer made into servants, which i feel was unwarranted. Let the Rise of Heinrich Kemmler begin!

I would like to toss out there that the worst WHFB of all time is actually the latest Skaven book! Now it is not because the army sucks, because they do not. They can do just about part of the game fairly well. But that book is so poorly written, that it takes an FAQ so big, that it might as well be another army book to play. But as far as game play goes, I do not think there has been a bad army book. Sure some are more tournament compatible, but then those armies in general do not have the same love and following of some of the more Fluffy Armies, Just as someone who still shows up to a tournament with Wood Elves, Dwarves , TK, Beastmen and to some extent Brets and O&G, If they truly think they have a shot at winning, or if they are playing because they love the army. Each of the aforementioned armies has a list that can win games, sure. But they have a list maybe two, that give them a 50ish% chance of winning, Where some of the other armies show up and expect to be in the finals, because well on the table top their best builds are just a that much better than some of the others, We all know who they are. There is a tier for comp for a reason. Change is good, It makes you think, If you can not change you thinking and adabt, then maybe you should find something else to do.

But that aside, The BRB is and always will be a way for GW to “MAKE MONEY”. They can talk all they want, but they are a business first. You change the rules, the mechanics, how you create your army, to force people to buy new models, otherwise they would go out of business. It truly is that Black and White; do they put some effort into balancing things? Sure Lord of the Rings is a great example, the Game system is very balanced, and one of the best I have ever played. Sure it is limited, most think it is marketed toward Kids, but that is just how GW sold it. 8th Ed Fantasy (WMD spells, Steadfast to name a few, has its flaws, but with a little house rules that can be fixed. It has its Shenanigans, but every system does.