Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Seon wrote:i prefer Warmachine over 40k as it requires a ALOT more Skill to play,

Really? I've played WM and it's about the same, just with fewer minis.

Not even close.

My eight year old son is competently playing 40K already after a year.

He isn't even close to beginning to fully understand and see the potential for combo building, synergy, army tuning, and importance of the order of unit activations needed to play Warmachine competently.

Both are great games that I enjoy very much. That being said 40K is checkers to Warmachine's chess...

I'll attest to that. I was able to read the 40k rulebook in a day and have the rules memorized and ready to play.

After leafing through the Hordes pdf, I've come to the conclusion that it'll take a lot longer to understand everything. At least the character cards are very simple and easy to understand, unlike GW's codecies ("for information on this special rule, see page x, which will redirect you to page y").

If he can't understand that, then how is he playing 40k competently? It's not like 40k doesn't feature combos, synergy, tuning, or conditional sequencing.

JohnHwangDD wrote:If he can't understand that, then how is he playing 40k competently? It's not like 40k doesn't feature combos, synergy, tuning, or conditional sequencing.

40k does contain these to some degree, just far less than WM. You want to make this a contest and it isn't. Doest make 40K a worse game just a different (and less complex) game. get over it.



Lets take an example:

Take a squad of tactical marines. What are my choices with them?

1. I can stand still or I can move up to 6".

2. I can then shoot if a target is available and in range or I can run; shooting is either rapid fire or regular; heavy weapons only if I did not move( I must shoot everything at same target)

3. Lastly depending on if I ran, fired rapid fire weapons, or fired heavy weapons i can assault if a target is in assault range.

4. rinse and repeat

All of the above is based upon basic rules mechanics of the game and the stats/abilities/equipment of the unit itself. It is all self-contained and predictable. The unit always hits on the same number (3+), always has the same ranges (12" or 24" depending on fire mode), etc.

With very few exceptions nothing external modifies any of the above to any great degree or with any frequency.

Even an average or new player can quickly evaluate what is the best and sometimes ONLY thing a tactical squad can do each round based upon the specifics of the condition of the table.


Now take a unit of Cygnar long gunners (riflemen):

For starters I can chose to assault or shoot as I see fit int he order I choos ein Warmachine. I can assault with one unit then shoot with another, then go back and run this unit then assault with this one, etc. Sometimes I need to assault and kill something tying one of my units up so that that unit now freed from combat can shoot, etc. This all adds to the tactical complexity of Warmachine.

1. I can choose three types of movement: advance, charge, run, or I can stand still and claim an aiming bonus which increases my ballistic skill. I can then make my ranged attacks or assault attacks (just as in 40k)

2. However When i shoot I can have each guy shoot at a different target or have groups of guys do "combined ranged attacks" in any combo i choose to increase my ballistic skill and strength of the attack for each group I form. The best way to do this is to access threat level of possible targets and figure out how my fire must be broken up/grouped/directed. Firing everything at the same target as a default is often not the best choice. Again tactical choice of fire allocation supersedes what is present in 40K.

3. Now before I shot with this unit I can use spells, abilities and feats from other models that i activated prior to do any number of things such as increase my units range, allow me to ignore my targets cover, increase my ballistic skill, double my rate of fire, make my attacks magical so i can hurt targets otherwise immune to normal fire, and a host of other things. The role of my unit, the specific characteristics of it attacks, and event he number/range/accuracy of it's attacks can all be consciously and selectively altered to benefit me tactically base upon what is happening on the board, what targets present themselves, and based upon what outside resources I can afford to spend on this unit at this moment. It requires you to get multiple units in the right position and the right distance from each other to benefit from said buffs, and to activate units in very specific order to gain certain buffs and synergistif combos that apply multiple buffs to your units.

Nothing like this exists in 40K to the degree that it does in WM. In Warmachine this sort of planning and application of combos and spells/abilities is a regular occurrence every round, with both sides jockeying to be in position to apply their combo's and abilities or negate or prevent their opponent's. This is the chess aspect of Warmachine that i alluded to. Warmachine plays very much like a CCG in miniatures form in this regard.

Most people can look at a unit in a 40K game and pretty easily predict what it will do each turn since the 0ptions are so limited and the obvious choices based upon the role of that type of squad and the limitations imposed by the mechanics of the rules.

The ability to predict such a thing in Warmachine is no where near as reliable due to the sheer numebr of spells, feats, abilities and so forth that any given player might choose to apply to any given unit at any given time.

As I said before both games are great and offer something different, though I know people that are "fans" of one game or the other love to make any such duscussion into a fanboy war.

40K isn't a lesser game because it is less complex tactically then WM (which it is without a doubt). 40K's strength is that it is a hobbiest's game that offers you the ability to personalize armies, and that it has a great setting and fluff, and the simplicity of it's rules allow you to fight massive cinematic battles with scores if not hundreds of figs. It's simplicity is it's strength givent he form and function of it's game type (massed battles).

WM is a skirmish game in which the tactical mind games and varied ways to utilize models (especially in combos) are the key focus of the game play.

Chess to checkers...

I dunno, because all of what you describe is in 40k, and it's what separates a good player from a bad one. For those Tacticals, you need to decide at the top of the turn if you're going to Run, Shoot, or Assault. If you were playing Eldar or WFB, you'd have similar issues with Doom / Fortune or Magic. And those Tacticals even have the option of staying put and Going to Ground to improve their cover saves.

The idea that 40k is checkers just doesn't hold for me. The only real difference is that 40k places structure around it, and things in place to helps make things simpler to start (SMs, AoBR). Yes, WM has more special rules on each unit, like in 40k2, but I don't think that defines the game so much. If you give your kid a "one of" Eldar Aspect army to play for 40k, I think he'd have more challenges with it compared to his SMs.

Anyhow, I agree that neither game is "better" or "worse", and that they're different games. I do think that characterizing WM as "chess" and 40k as "checkers" is pretty silly.

Another reason to defect is because of the price of the miniatures - they are for lack of a better term - extortionate.

PP models are the same price? I mean yeah, you need less of them, but they aren't less expensive.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I dunno, because all of what you describe is in 40k, and it's what separates a good player from a bad one. For those Tacticals, you need to decide at the top of the turn if you're going to Run, Shoot, or Assault. If you were playing Eldar or WFB, you'd have similar issues with Doom / Fortune or Magic. And those Tacticals even have the option of staying put and Going to Ground to improve their cover saves.

The idea that 40k is checkers just doesn't hold for me. The only real difference is that 40k places structure around it, and things in place to helps make things simpler to start (SMs, AoBR). Yes, WM has more special rules on each unit, like in 40k2, but I don't think that defines the game so much. If you give your kid a "one of" Eldar Aspect army to play for 40k, I think he'd have more challenges with it compared to his SMs.

John: You are overly fixated on the specific examples within the systems and not the core systems themselves. There are three major structural differences between the 40k ruleset and the WM/H ruleset. (I've specifically not talked about vehicles, warjacks, focus etc, as they are a factor of game setting.)

1. Sequenced unit activation vs dedicated move/shoot/assault phases.

While superficially, every unit is able to move, assault and shoot in both rulesets, in the sequenced unit activation system, it is possible to clear paths for other units movement-wise, or dig other units out of an assault before those units activate. This is not possible using the "phased" system. The phased system that 40k uses permits units to both shoot and assault, which can not be done outside of special rules in WM/H due to each model's limit on one action per turn. Units may however run to engage enemy models in WM/H (while performing no combat action). This is not an option in 40k.

2. Targetting by model vs Targetting by unit.

WM/H alows units to split attacks, and while this is alowed to an extent in HTH in 40k, this is not typically allowed during shooting (unless modified by a special rule). While as stated above, units may shoot and assault in 40k, they may not split the targets of their shooting and assault. WM/H provides no such restriction as long as the unit does not break formation while performing their action. Different models in the same unit may shoot if unengaged, even if their squadmates are fighting in HTH, unlike in 40k where they are locked and can perform no other actions than fight. WM/H also gives the option to shoot into or retreat out of combat, with a very steep penalty. This is specifically disallowed in 40k. It is also possible to target FRIENDLY models with attacks in WM/H. This is also prohibited in 40k.

3. D6 to hit/wound/save vs 2D6/3D6 to hit/wound

Without getting into another pissing match about statistics, I will only say that 2D6's greater outcomes per roll alow for a wider range of effective statlines, and a more gradual progression of effectiveness. In 40k, there is a huge difference between SV3+ and SV4+, where as in Warmachine, there is less of a difference between say, ARM14 and ARM15.

Considering that in both example 1 and 2, by design of the ruleset, models within a unit in WM/H have access to a diverse range of actions - I do not see how you can assert that 40k provides a similar level of flexibility (run/shoot/assault). While 40k and WM/H both provide unit-unit interactions, WM/H provides extra options through managing the activation sequencing that is inherent in the WM/H system.

I see those as compeletely trival mechanical differences when talking about play "skill" required.

It's like how people talk about WFB block movement requiring "more skill".

40k goes "vertical" because it has Transports and other Vehicles. Along with Deep Strike / Reserves / Outflank.

The games are different, but not requiring more skill.


But if we want to be simplistic in explanations, perhaps the better way to put it is that WM is like chess and 40k is like go.

I feel like I should endorse something...

But if we want to be simplistic in explanations, perhaps the better way to put it is that WM is like chess and 40k is like go.

Warmachine is chess, 40k is magic the gathering. Army construction and deployment is vastly more important than the game play itself. There is certainly a less extreme case of rock paper scissors going on in WARMACHINE. Lets not be coy, 40k is a simple game with very few tactical choices that don't just play themselves for you. Anti tank weapons shoot tanks and high value targets, the little dudes run at and punch eachother, unit facing is meaningless, line of sight obstructions are relatively meaningless, but special rules inherent to army choices make the game. There is no nob biker army or all mech force in warmachine, there is far less threat of having your army be totally invalidated by the opponents choices. A game of 40k can be played almost on autopilot.

I prefer 40k, though I would love to have it be a bit more complicated in it's method of play. Adding simple things like Going to Ground helped a lot, though they could certainly go considerably farther (range modifiers would be nice for one, as would the removal of the whole "one dude moved so the whole squad moved" BS).

It cost 74.98 for the boxed set of AOBR.
34.98 for a squad of space marines
21.98 for a box of boyz
29.98 for a truck
29.98 for a rhino

191.90 sans tax.


32.99 for a box of Khador
29.99 for an extra Destroyer
32.99 for a woodsman box set
10.99 for a woodsman blister
10.99 for another woodsman blister
47.99 for a box of Boomhowlers company
15.99 for a blister of 2 trollkins
15.99 for another blister of trollkins
22.99 for Herne and Arquebus Jonne
9.99 for a manhunter


230.90 sans tax


Either game you want to play, you are paying the piper.

What is the price in YOUR area?

I don't even know what the prices at the new hobby shop are like. The only thing I bought there was some glue and a box of Chaos Terminators for my dad's Christmas Present.

However, they're looking at stocking Infinity which has me SUPER excited!

I just bought hundreds of dollars of Tyranids. No way I'm switching!

I'd say that if one's angry at GW, it'd be a far better thing to buy into a hobby that lets one channel that anger into something useful, such as squash, rugby or lacemaking.

@Grot: The SM army you listed is under 750 points even with a very generous helping of wargear. The Ork army is even less. While it is true that you can start playing with such small forces, most organized play seems to be 1000 and above, with 1500 being an average size.

Your Khador army is still 700+ points by MK1 and probably enough to play a 50 point game in MK2. Considering organized play typically starts at 500/35 points (MK1/MK2), a more accurate comparison might be:

Cygnar Starter: $50
Cygnar Long Gunners: $30 + $20 to make full squad
Eyriss Mage Hunter of Ios: $9

Total: $109.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Agamemnon2 wrote:I'd say that if one's angry at GW, it'd be a far better thing to buy into a hobby that lets one channel that anger into something useful, such as squash, rugby or lacemaking.

1 vote for basket weaving.

It's also good to keep in mind that not everyone wants to play Marines or Orks, which takes AoBR out of the picture, making the comparison far different.

Agamemnon2 wrote:not everyone wants to play Marines

You lost me

Why play mariens when you can be one?

http://www.marines.com/

on topic. the more i see of PP the more i like it, as well as infinity witch is growing here like weeds. if i were to finally go out and buy a small army for Cygnar and Khador to run against each other what would you say would be the best way to go. i have the widows box, and the Cy starter. and was hoping to get trenchers case they look so awesome... whats next?

PP prices in the UK seem to be pretty high, at least when I was playing (granted that was about 6 years ago).

And notice that they have altered the points values, and from what I've heard online (may be wrong) the rules now allow larger games to be played, much as 40k once did...

That is the only reason Warmahordes requires fewer models, it's relatively new. When creating a game, you have finite resources available for your range, so you start small. No point making the rule set itself for grandiose battles, so stick to Skirmish.

Then, once people have been playing for a while and the game is established, their collections will grow, and they will naturally wish to play larger games. And every game system I've encountered has a sort of upper limit at which it ceases to be well paced. So you streamline. LotR and WotR are another good example here.

Though I do hope to see more companies that have survived the first few years ala PP streamling, I also hope that unlike GW, they don't make the previous rules unavailable. Always nice to have options, no?

@MDG: You mean for keeping the old (obsolete) rulesets in production indefinitely?

For PP, that's a minor problem, because they use stat cards and bundle them with the minis. It'd be like getting a brand new Hellhound or Fire Prism with a 2E Datafax enclosed.

Mad doc:
one thing you failed to mention about price is the cost of supliments and books that change every few years.
regardless of the cost of the minis, the actuall rules to play the game come in real cheep on PP's side. actually if your looking at owning all the codex and main rules your looking at a sum thats unbeliveable compared to PP. and lets not forget that as soon as you buy all codexs 2 to 3 will become obsolete in the next 12 months. with the actual rules also becoming obsolete in less than or around 5 years.....
WoW, thats alot of Money. so tell me again how PP is comparitively more expensive than GW 6 years ago??

(and yes PP comes out with suplements too, but no where near as expensive and generalized as GW. the cost of a couple of codex a year more than covers PP)
and lets not forget GW prices will rise again like bad Chilli, around january or the end of if rumor is correct.

so back to my question on PP. any ideas on a build?

Bit of wire crossing going on here matey.

The 6 years was only about PP's length of 'service'. Might be 7 or 8, not sure.

But when 40k first came out (21 years ago, which is kind of scary!) they had a similar structure to PP in terms of supplements, content and indeed model range. No more than a handful of models required, the core rule book had more than enough to get you started in terms of lists, and the supplements likewise seemed more generalised. As time ticked on, and more models were produced, the same of course happens with rules. Then 2nd Edition hits, and we have Codecies for 40k, and around 4th Edition Fantasy, Army Books.

Not saying PP are going to go down the same route, just using a timescale to put a slightly different perspective on things.

i see your point now. thanks for clarifying.

No problem dude. I have a history of muddling my posts!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JohnHwangDD wrote:@MDG: You mean for keeping the old (obsolete) rulesets in production indefinitely?

For PP, that's a minor problem, because they use stat cards and bundle them with the minis. It'd be like getting a brand new Hellhound or Fire Prism with a 2E Datafax enclosed.

Perhaps not indefinite production, but certainly available. I mean since GW started upscaling the games, the Interwebs have been born, so it should be easy enough to keep the original page layout PDF's online for those want a nostalgic kick. Sadly I'd imagine the original 40k and Fantasy stuff would have been printed the old fashioned way with Plates and that, which are generally sent to be recycled once they have expired, or are no longer necessary.

Cryonicleech wrote:Games Workshop, over the course of its lifespan, has made plenty of mistakes. White Dwarf is pretty bad as it is, the new website is a tad rubbish, prices climbing, etc.

However, which company hasn't? I'm not asking you to not quit, or to love GW heart and soul, but the company is obviously trying. Now, trying and failing, now that depends on your point of view, but at least they try.

More thana few dont go out and do stuff that intentional antagonizes its fan base. Those arent mistakes. Those were deliberate.

The only other company that I recall that has done that was WOTC during the the 4E lead up to release where some of their hype they pretty much bad mouthed 3.x and its fans. But even once the release happened that all stopped.

GW? Seems to do stuff that annoys its fan base over and over and over again. They only thing the company is trying is many of its fans patience.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fateweaver wrote:I guess I'm not really seeing how you MUST spend X amount of dollars on a 40k army to enjoy it.

40k in 40 minutes can be played with 400 pts and depending on what you buy won't cost much more than the starter box for WM.

Good luck, overall, finding people that will want to play consistantly at a 500pt level. Just eth same as findinging people to play battle boxes. Someone might want to play once and a while, but most people want to play with many options in the codex. Which is why Apocolypse is very popular. People want to play with lots of models majority of time.

I liek 40k in 40 minutes. But you couldnt get me to play it over and over and over again.

"@Grot: The SM army you listed is under 750 points even with a very generous helping of wargear. The Ork army is even less. While it is true that you can start playing with such small forces, most organized play seems to be 1000 and above, with 1500 being an average size.

Your Khador army is still 700+ points by MK1 and probably enough to play a 50 point game in MK2. Considering organized play typically starts at 500/35 points (MK1/MK2), a more accurate comparison might be:

Cygnar Starter: $50
Cygnar Long Gunners: $30 + $20 to make full squad
Eyriss Mage Hunter of Ios: $9

Total: $109."


???? And your point?

GW- I noted a 2 starter armies and a taste. For PP I noted 1 battlegroup and 12 man merc contingent. And as to the basic out of the box set, you have already alluded to, and I have experienced- that people do not play skirmish games of warmachine. My small force was my forey back into the PP "Hobby."

Contrary to popular belief, Warmachine is not cheaper for the buck. We'll find out what happens with the plastic jacks, but if what I expect is going to happen, they will pull a few more pages out of GW's book and try to claim some sort of ace in the hole excuse as to thier price increase like GW did.

Either- I have to buy a new kindey. I have to pay for the plastic injection machines, ( Or my old ladies plastic mams) The Economy. ect.ect.ect.

Make no mistake about it, I really don't give a damn about the price. I knew excatly what I was getting into when I picked up the Khador box and the others, If price was that much of an issue to ME, I would have taken that boxed set and thrown it across the store with a pouty pout pout face and kicked sand.

My whole thing is that-
Just make sure that when someone tells you "To Hell with GW, I'm going back to Privateer...." And then tries to claim it is because of cost knows that they are only fooling themselves. It doesn't MATTER how much a minis game costs.

THEY ALL COST. Its just a matter of how much you are willing to pay.

Okay, outright question to shine some final perspective on the GWvPP ongoing, mind numbing price debate.

How much, at current prices, have you spent on your PP collection, and how much on your GW collection. Break it down to the actual amount as well.

Then do the same for your usual army. That way we get a decent comparisson, nes pas?

both hobbies are expensive. go with what you like. im off 40k atm, just so sick of the game, but im still painting it. im playing warmachine alot right now though, and really enjoying it.

Mind numbing?

Its not that big of a deal to figure out.

I broke it down to a basic get in the door to it, it is just as I wrote, minus state tax on my end... Where I live.

Where you live it breaks down to how much is one basic army cost. I mean basic as something you can build up and put right on the table.

I used the basic of the basic for my comparison.

the AOBR, which gives you a good start on 2 armies, Orks and Space Marines.

And

a Khador box of 2 jacks and a caster, and additional jack, a ten man unit, a solo, and a couple of attachments (The Mercs.)

Now thats not accounting for discounts , specail deals, percentage drops per area, state and local tax, country tax, etc. Thats just how much it costs in my area.

Unit for unit, cost per cost, you can look at it in different lights.

Cost is relative to the one who wants to pay.


Put it another way-

If you were to walk into your LGS, decide out of the blue that you wanted to invest yourt ime, money and energy into a game system, there is more to the issue then the simple angle of monitary cost.

See I don't think thats a fair comparisson.

Fantasy for instance, really comes into it's own around 2,000 points (though I'm enjoying 2250 at the moment) as you get enough slots to really get the toys out, but still lack the points to get absolutely everything.

I'll kick off with my latest army, Skaven.

Skaven Army Book - £15
2 Screaming Bell Kits (One is a Plague Furnace) £70
2 Skaven Stormvermin Boxes - £60
3 Skaven Clanrat Boxes - £60
2 Skaven Plague Monk Boxes (I only use 30 of them though) - £36
1 Carnosaur, 1 Necromunda Caller, 1 Watcher In The Water Tentacles (to make my Hellpit Abomination) - £60 all in
1 Doomwheel - £20

So all in, thats £321 straight from GW, if my addition is up.