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.

I stumbled onto this in a completely unexpected place- a thread about gamebalance in Confrontation 3/3.5.  Here's some pasting of the relevent discussion (I've tried to colour code the posts to avoid confusion and I've also edited the posts of non-family friendly words):

Razhem Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:33 pm
<table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"> <tbody> <tr> <td>Setherial wrote:</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote"> <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"> <tbody> <tr> <td>Father Tork wrote:</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">look at it from rackhams point of view, if they don't keep releasing strong and interesting figs, why would we keep buying them...</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

that is a very painful but very true point.</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

Bull*pucky*.
Warmachine has 3 expansions and some of the most powerful things are from the first book, wich doesn´t stop anybody from having interest in the newer stuff.
*here the poster added some argument pertaining to Confrontation*

Nuromonkey Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:25 am

*The poster had a bunch of Confrontation stuff here*
I think Rackham has done a good job in costing there minis.

I seriously dissagree with

"look at it from rackhams point of view, if they don't keep releasing strong and interesting figs, why would we keep buying them..."

I think they have everyone buying the minis that they want by making then look fantastic. I don't think they have to resort to the GW and PP game of power creep to bump up the sales. Most of the people I know go into C3 and 2 by collecting fine looking minis first the gaming came latter.

Lastly this aint the place for it but I simply could not resist.

"Warmachine has 3 expansions and some of the most powerful things are from the first book, "

Sure, yes, riiiight.


Razhem Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:30 pm
<table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"> <tbody> <tr> <td>Nuromonkey wrote:</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">
Warmachine has 3 expansions and some of the most powerful things are from the first book,

Sure, yes, riiiight. </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

Zealots, Choir, Revenger, Kreoss, Sorscha, Vlad, Haley, Skarre, Deneghra, longgunners, trenchers, bile thralls, bonejacks, juggearnaur, Eiriss, destroyer, and those are the ones that come from the tip of my mind. Make a comment when you play the game

Nuromonkey Wed Nov 22, 2006 8:55 am   

Zealots, Choir, Revenger, Kreoss, Sorscha, Vlad, Haley, Skarre, Deneghra, longgunners, trenchers, bile thralls, bonejacks, juggearnaur, Eiriss, destroyer, and those are the ones that come from the tip of my mind. Make a comment when you play the game.

Seeing as how I um... Got the retailers in Auckland to stock it, organized the first Warmachine club, Warmachine gaming nights, organized, ran and participated in the first Warmachine tourni in the city of sails, Been the official rules guy on all things Warmachine for more then a year. Hell I even made rulings on the PP Forum. I think I can say whatever the DAMN HELL I WANT!

NotYetSane / Locust.

But if you want me to lay in to the argument.
Guardian vs. Crusader No contest.
Slayer vs. Death Jack! You have got to be kidding me!
Centurion vs. Iron Clad Riiiigth.
Epic Casters by definition are more powerful then there counterparts, that’s why the points have gone up to 750 for the standard game.
Paladin of the Wall vs. Seneschal. nice and hopeless vs truly broken.
Defender vs Revenger. Insanely good vs. repulsing rubbish!
Biles before the nerfing good after the nerfing not so good.
I could go on but like I said this is not the place.

In not so short.
Stats have gotten bigger, special rules have gotten longer and the cheese factor has gone through the roof. The game is a mess of conflicting rules that gets worse with every new release. Re-mix will attempt to fix the system but it's going to fall apart 6 months down the track there is even a week in review on the Q & A for rules and clarity issues that grows with every passing day, it's far worse then what is going on here with 3.5.

Heck! I still carry the books in my car just incase I get asked to make any snap calls at game stores and clubs. Despite playing the game maybe once in a blue moon to hang out with my friends. I've found C3 and while she has some problems it's a far more cohesive game then what that pretends to be.

Come back and yap once you forget all the rubbish PP spouts and you can think for yourself. There's your page 5 for you buddy.

Now "Go suck a pair of lemons"


Ok, so what do you guys think?  Is Warmachine really unbalanced as this guys claims?  I'm interested to hear what people think about something negative that's not GW related

I have to say that I stopped playing WM because it became too hard to keep up with all the special rules & new units. Some people have the time and interest to examine, analyze, and memorize each new monthly release, but I don't have the time or interest in doing so. A typical game usually ends, "You should have known to avoid unit X's ability and not come with Y distance!" Sorry, I need a game with more generic rules and abilities.

Despite this guy being "all that" for his local community (ie: getting a store to stock it, helping demo games and answering rules), he really doesn't seem to know that much.


Going through his list piece by piece:

"Guardian vs. Crusader No contest." Hello? 126 points vs. 93 points? You pay for the difference, and I wouldn't really say that the Guardian is better than the crusader.

"Slayer vs. Death Jack! You have got to be kidding me!" 154 points vs. 110 points. Unfair comparison, given the points difference... you pay for the extra rules, and the Slayer is still one of the best jacks in the game.

"Centurion vs. Iron Clad Riiiigth." only one that is actually close in comparison, but the Ironclad is still cheaper, and a decent mainstay warjack.

"Epic Casters by definition are more powerful then there counterparts, that?s why the points have gone up to 750 for the standard game." I don't understand the problem here? Also, from what I have seen, 750 isn't the norm yet.

"Paladin of the Wall vs. Seneschal. nice and hopeless vs truly broken." seneschal 'truly broken'? How about... no. Powerful yes, but certainly beatable if you simply leave him last to be killed.

"Defender vs Revenger. Insanely good vs. repulsing rubbish!" Think he might mean Devout instead of Defender? Even so, the Devout is not really "better" than the Revenger and serves a different role. I would NEVER call the Revenger rubbish. How can you complain about a 76 point light warjack that is ARM19, has a shield that pushes back attackers, has reach, AND an Arc Node?

"Biles before the nerfing good after the nerfing not so good." Biles still quite good.

I think Warmachine HAS gotten better, and more special rules are introduced as the books go on, but Prime is still good as mentioned, and I don't really see Warmachine as being cheesy or broken in the later books. Nearly all choices in Warmachine can be made to work, and every army list has a counter... it is simply up to the player to find that counter, rather than sucking on their thumb whining, "thats too powerful."

I have not found very many conflicting rules in Warmachine, that can't be quickly rectified by visting the FAQ, or by using common sense, nor have I noticed the "cheese factor" going through the roof. I am a fairly new player, that has been beaten into the ground by the "latest and greatest", and I'm still here, not complaining about cheese.

When I brought my all melee Menoth army up against Irusk, did I complain about Inhospitable Ground, the Behemoth, the Destroyer, the mortar crews, or the Uhlan Cavalry? No. He outmatched me in every respect, and yet I took my beating, and got up, shook his hand and said "good game." I didn't complain about the "cheese", or how "unfair" it was, becasue neither of those things were true.

I am by no means a PPS fanboy. I don't follow the "they can do no wrong" mentality that some people do, but I do think they make a damn fine game, and have come to realize that it is some of the most fun I've ever had with a tabletop wargame.

This guy is full of BS.

The original argument is that the game has jumped the shark and so the newer
expansions and rules make the old things obsolete and pointless.

Deathjack vs. Slayer... The Deathjack is unique. So only one on thetable, ever,
no matter how many points you play. It also costs more and boy does that bad
boy not like your own army very much, too.

Guardian vs. Crusader... Guardian to support infantry and Crusader when you
want a melee jack with no frills. I like to field Amon and run both.

Centurion vs. Iron Clad... Sure the Centurion can tear apart the Ironclad, but
the miniatures don't exist in a 1v1 vacuum (a criticism I have of posters who try
to make army comparisons between Tac Marines and Guardians, for example). A
player who puts his Ironclad in front of the centurion unsupported will cry. Like
that guy.

Epic Casters
750 is a variation of the game. Just because you can play doesn't mean you have
to. And if your friends always insist on higher point games...find new friends.

Paladin of the Wall vs. Seneschal.
Paladins are nice. Their defensive stats are only ever good in an objective mission,
but the fact that PP releases rules and models that enhance Prime rather than make
units from PRime obsolete turns the argument against the original poster. paladins
were a nice buy for 20 points, whereas I usually had to pare something down to fit
a Seneschal. With Vilmon in the mix, they're even more of a consideration for army
play.

Devout vs Revenger.
Um...you could play Severius with 4 devouts buy why would you? The poster
must be playing in an Amon area or against Harbinger players. Our little arc node
is cheap and fierce, and can stop enemy attacks cold.

I only ever faced Biles once.

I've got to agree that keeping up with all of WMs & Hordes' rules is a major pain in the rear. I started playing it when there were only the starter boxes and we were waiting for Prime to be released. Then I stopped for awhile right around Escalation and coming back and having to learn all of the new units' rules at once was a nightmare! I compare WM and Hordes to a CCG with mini's. I'm really beginning to wonder when they'll have to stop releasing new units for a lack of ideas, since PP has said over and over that they won't make older stuff obsolete with new rules. We'll see. The games are fun, though.

As for the power creep- a lot of people point to how good Prime stuff is and use that as an example of how things haven't gotten more powerful. My response is that Prime is overpowered compared to the rest of the game. A good chunk of the prime units, casters, and feats are too good compared to what you see in Escalation and beyond. Take Haley for example: ~58 points for one of the top 4-5 warcasters in the game. The other top casters are in the 70-80 point range. Scorsha's feat- when the company has to start introducing special rules to defend against something (like they did in superiority) then thats my cue that the feat is too powerful. I'd say the same for winterguard. They're ok on their own (and yes I've used them many times) but not as good as Iron Fangs for just a few points more. Winterguard only become solid choices when paired up with the new unit attachments from Superiority or with Epic Scorsha. Again, that tells me that they weren't balanced to begin with. Some of the Cryx heavy jacks are the same way, or some of the Menoth jacks....Most of the warcasters who came out afterwords were far more subtle and required far more thinking to use well. Face it, Prime is a little overpowered compared to what's come after.


SteveW

WM and Hordes is a gaming system geared for more advanced players, IHO. No army is cookie cutter. Every army is usually different. If people want an easier game, play GW games or some other mini game. Want a horribly easier game yet incredibly hard to master, play Go!

Prime isnt over powered. All of the three EXPANSION books can't by nature be OTT since all the factions received "pushes" in their respective weak areas.


I read this thread and thought to myself, geez another lame "this game sucks, or this game is better than that game, prices are too high...blah blah blah"

Drake, WM and Hordes isnt perfect. No system is. Is the game balanced? Yes in the sense that every Faction has its "broken" aspect to it. The fun part is to out wit your opponent to get your ace through and strike the mofo down!

Considering this game is designed by former Magic The Gathering guy, it seems to be following the very same 'trend' in powersliding around.

I remember as a wee lad picking up my first ever cards for this new game that was coming out. There were forks, moxes, lightning bolts... man those heady days were lovely! Birds of Paradise soared and Sol Rings were 4-a-deck!

Combinations were simple and effective. VERY powerful at times...But from this initial release the desingers discovered that sometimes abiities should not fit all situations. Sometimes because something is straightforward and powerful it can at times feel wrong.

And so the released expansions. They weren't BAD.. they were just different. The made you work to unlock their potential.. they didn't do it on their own.

That's where I feel Warmachine is going. The Prime stuff is very straightforward. Boom... my feat knocks you down. Gak! My feat knocks 2 off all your stats. Zot! My feat gives me and my friends and extra damage dice.

I'm using Feats as an example as they're one thing you can notice changing and developing the most in later expansions. They become less direct and more situational. No more A makes B. Not to say Feora's feat isn't awesome! Hell... it lights you on fire! But it isn't as unilaterally effective as say, knocking down or freezing models. Why? Because Fire won't dent things like high armour jacks. Feora's feat doesn't serve to do much in a game against Darius.. except to scrape off the halfjacks (which is, mind you, useful in the extreme). Take Sorcha's feat however... it freezes ANYTHING... and you'll always benefit from using it. Likewise Kreoss (some notable exceptions of people not being able to be knocked down... but they're much more rare than say; Warjacks and high armour targets).

Lets give the internet pundit at least a bit of credit however; he may simply be a bitter guy. Bitter people lack perspective sometimes. Having been playing this game since it was prerelease I can honestly say that the releases FEEL different now. They feel like more work to unlock their potential. I think it's one of the interesting things that keeps me coming back to Warmachine. I just KNOW I can make that model useful in a list if I swap out A and B and try to set up C on the table.

It's like trying to build the best Magic Deck. Fancy that eh? And I haven't played that game since Ice Age when I was like 14....

Hold on now Fabulous- my intent was never to make one of those "this sucks" threads! It's just a matter of my reading that posters comments on the Rackham boards and not having enough knowledge of WM or Hordes to really be able to effectively evaluate his comments. So I thought it would be fun to toss the question up over here and see what response it gets.

Thanks to everyone that responded I got the feeling that guy was full of it and I guess my instincts were on target.

I think there are some seeds of truth under the bitterness, even if a lot of it is off-base.

There are an increasing number of units out there, and there are a lot of special rules on them. It does take a pretty large amount of time and effort to learn those rules. While one of Warmachine's strengths is the ability to change the way your army plays just by changing the caster leading it, that same feature makes it virtually mandatory to memorize the abilities of most of the casters if you want to play competitively.

The large number of special rules, the many tactical options available to different units (can you say Power Attacks?) and the importance of activating units in proper sequence to create combinations mean that the game has a lot of tactical interest even at lower points values. But it also means that the game tends to bog down a bit at higher points values as you have so many more combinations and sequences to consider. I've had 500pt games of Warmachine which took longer than many 1500 or 1750 games of 40k I've played. I haven't played 750 yet and I'm not very excited to due to this trend. Some of this is no doubt just a matter of practice, but some of it is just the game design.

Is the real conversation here what sells Rackam minis and what sells Privateer Press minis?

I don't speak french and so I find the Engrish Confrontation rules almost impossible to follow. It has some good aspects, all kinds of spells and abilities, but there are hiccups during gameplay, so much that Rackam's models have become a simple collect and paint hobby for me.

Warmachine offers a relatively simple and straightforward game. Yes, the new minis bring new special abilities but with four books, I don't understand how hard it is to keep up. You put thirty dollars down every year and you have all the new rules for that year. And it is so easy to identify a model you've never played against and simply ask your opponent for the card, "Oh wow, that's an interesting ability!"

Regardless, Privateer Press sells me on the strength of their games. Yes, the models are good, too (most of them) but Confrontation, the game is greek to me. I buy Rackam's models because they're pretty. And they have their lemons, too.

And saying the Devout is better than the Revenger shows the OP's ignorance. The Revenger is easilly one of the best light 'jacks in the game. Tough as nails, reach, powerful charge, Repulsion is a great special ability and the thing has an arc node. Win.

--

In the end, I really don't see the relevance of the transplanted posts.  It's exactly like every other pro-Privateer Press and counterpoint discussion on every bulletinboard.  It even has the classic troll go-to 'appeal to a false authority' argument in it.  I think we had a similar flame up in the Prime Remix thread.

What surprised me is that no one picked up on the change in arguement. One guy lists all the intensely powerful things in Prime, and the response is to take the weaker things in prime and compare them to the powerful things in other expansions.

The reason is because you CANT say that the powerful stuff in prime isnt still strong. I field all prime lists on a regular basis and it still decimates my opponants.

As far as some of those Jack comparisons, most followers of WM have noticed a shifting away from Jacks and a push towards infantry. Were all very sad about that. Most of us got into WM because we could use big effing robots. How cool is that? New rules have been added to help with that (trample, Necrovent, that flaming menoth Jack) but heavy infantry lists are still strong. As a Cryx player, I only use Arcnodes anymore. As much as I love my slayer, it is over costed for what it does in the extreme. For that cost I can take a full unit of Satyxis and kill Jacks, infantry, and hurt the Caster.

I do agree that "Keeping up with the Joneses" is difficult, but if youre serious about your tactical wargaming, it's no trouble at all, youre already spending too much time at work making army lists and playing games in your head. If youre more casual, play with others who are as well and share the experience.

The game is getting more complex, and I worry that too much is coming out, but it appears that the release schedule is slowing somewhat. The truth is, a game company needs to stay fresh to keep a steady income. Its a vicious circle, inspiring the best and worst things to come out of the industry. We just need to remember that its the nature of the hobby, just as sure as dice and measuring are.

If you dont like it, go play Chess. Though I hear Queens are really borken.

Sigged!

There is indeed a seed of truth under the complaints.

The possible problems I fear are the endless expansions and a sense of power creep. The strength of Prime helps to keep this in check, but the fear still nags at the back of my mind that unless I can continue to dump money into PP over the years (and even if I do), my existing stuff will all become useless at somepoint.

Thats why my crate of MTG cards sits in the closet. I played before going off to college, but now there is no way I could catch up without scrapping what I have and starting all over. There is simply too much new stuff for an old deck to compete.

I don't see any of this as a problem right now, but I do sense that there is the potential for the same sort of thing to happen here.

Vareity is good, but not to the detriment of the core. A pure Prime list should always be able to compete with any other list. When this is no longer possible, a problem has developed.

<<Ok, so what do you guys think?  Is Warmachine really unbalanced as this guys claims?  I'm interested to hear what people think about something negative that's not GW related >>

Me thinks so. I only want to play 750pt games so I can run epic casters specifically (and since I only play menoth) eFeora. Lets try this Kreos vs Epic Feora. If I do things just right eFeora is so much more powerful than Kreos. Most everyones post is about ripping the original guys poor comparisions. Guardian vs Crusader? um how about this they both suck just run the three wisemen.. Devout Revenger Redeemer. But his point is clear, PP clearly ups the Ante with each expansion, not for every faction and with they way they do their release schedule you are forced to use alternative units until the one you want is released. I'm using flameguard cleansers in place of my temple flamguard until their standard bearer attachment is released. But some of these releases compliment older offerings, the monolith bearer and as previously mentioned the flameguard temple stnadard bearer. So you are encouraged to buy lots of stuff. But the game appears relateively balanced between factions, just not balanced between me and my pocket book. But thats the same with any successsful businesss. Why else are harlequins only 22pts a peice when fully decked out but they can tear up a genestealer, and a unit is the most powerful h2h squad in the game but undercosted for all their abilites (its because they want you to buy certain models or more of whatever they decide they need to sell) its all power creep. GW being the worst but you can see it in PP and other games even if you dont look too hard. I can't say anything about Rackem or Confrontation I don't play them, but I'm sure to an extent they are similiar.

Thats why my crate of MTG cards sits in the closet. I played before going off to college, but now there is no way I could catch up without scrapping what I have and starting all over. There is simply too much new stuff for an old deck to compete.

In one single release of Magic The Gathering, there are over three hundred cards.  Each card has its own specific rules that bend and warp the primary rules of the game.  Magic is often praised for the near infinite ability to produce creative combinations and strategies.

In one three month cycle, I have to digest hundreds of cards if I want to play Magic competatively.  Yet people are going to complain about the eight or so warcasters or the dozen or so warjacks I can put in a list.  This is -not- a lot of material to swallow.  There are a lot of combinations, yes, but there isn't necessarilly 'creep' as new models come out.  They can expand the options available to an army without necessarilly replacing old models.

Further, PP has shown a precident for releasing new models that improve original Prime models.  Raiders, Flameguard, Paladins, Iron Fangs, and Trenchers are all examples of this.  They're not phasing out Prime models, there is an appearant and active attempt to make the original Prime models better.

Yeah that's what I've noticed too.

About the only thing that has really creeped powerwise is solos. The new solos are the main source of creep (pistol wraiths, seneshals, character solos, kovnic MoW, etc). Its pretty minor for troops and jacks. However, Prime casters are still the most powerful with few exceptions and its telling that he didn't compare casters at all (except for epics which is laughable to think of them as more powerful).

Not to put too fine a point on it - but "this guy" is an idiot. His post betrays a total lack of understanding about how Warmachine plays.

Prime stuff is absolutely better than the rest. I chalk that up to a) designers being less adroit at balance when they created Prime and b) designers deliberately wanting to keep Prime era stuff relevant.

Anyway legit complaints about WM:
- some stuff too cheap for what it does (Haley, Sorscha, etc)
- some stuff just plain worthless (mechaniks)
- jacks not worth much in competitive environments (due to giving up VPs when the caster goes down.)

Epic Casters by definition are more powerful then there counterparts, that’s why the points have gone up to 750 for the standard game.

I call shennanigans on this one.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, it is a flawed argument to counter the claim that much in Prime is still extremely powerful by picking many of the weaker models and comparing them to things that are much more expensive.

But I quoted the most horrendously unaware statement above.  The consensus is that almost none of the Epics are as powerful as the original versions.  Furthermore, Privateer Press has stated multiple times that the Epics are not intended to be more powerful than their original versions.

Gotta agree with the trend that this guy is mostly full of it, but probably had some valid complaints before bitterness destroyed his rational side :-)

WM definitely has some of it's most poweful stuff in Prime. Anyone who thinks Denny, Sorscha, Kreoss, Haley, Biles, Redeemers, JWCs, Destroyers, etc. are not top knotch are bonkers. Sure, later releases had some tough stuff, too. There is powerful stuff in all the books. And there is some crappy stuff....

My problem with WM is that is a very "Oops, you got an inch too close, my combo works, you lose" game with many lists. Also, the layering special rules can lead to unforeseen (but often foreseeable) problems and interactions. The Focus mechanic also encourages very anal play, as 1 difference in a hit roll, etc. may require a totally readjustment in plan, or cause it to fail utterly. Again, it tends to be very all or nothing. (As an aside, I really prefer the Hordes Fury mechanic as it encourages more flexible, aggressive play).

The game does have balance issue. Some casters are generally better than others. Some units clearly outclass others. Particularly within factions, this is annoying, since some models then are, essentially, useless in a competitive environment. PP seems to address this in subsequent releases with add ons, attachments, etc. (See TFG and TCG.) Likewise, the drift in feats has been downward in power, and making them more support or situational instead of near insta-wins. (Racing to see who can pop the feat first FTW isn't a very fun game IMHO).

Overall, it is a fun game, though, I prefer Hordes.

for about a month now, I seem to have lost interest in 40k. somehow WM is much more tactical and fun. your units really work together, boosting themselves in some way and not only shoot the same target as they would in 40k.
I'm not so sure about what's more powerful, I buy for the looks most of the time.

Unfortunately, there is way too much rock paper scissors for my taste. More often than not, if you bring the wrong army or set up wrong against an opponent, you will find yourself on the wrong end of a 1st or 2nd turn caster kill.

With a dedicated gaming group that all is familiar with the factions and rules it can be alot of fun, but with one off games there is just too much room for a 1 turn game, which is no fun for either side. Why even pull your figs out.

As bad as I am, I haven't had a 1 turn game. What does it take to pull it off?

How do you get a one turn game?  I've never seen it done.  As for 2 turn games, "Fool me once, shame on you... fool me twice... shame on me".

I've been playing this game since it came out, I've only had one game end in two turns (and that required a terrible blunder on my opponent's part).  How on earth does this happen often?

I've heard the scissor rock paper analogy applied to almost every wargame I have ever played.  I'm not particularly gifted, but I am yet to play a game where one of the armies was configured in such a way as to be worthless.  Please give me an example on this one as well (that does not require one army to be slowed on purpose).

 

I would argue that the exact opposite is true- balance problems stem from models that are too versatile (IE against High ARM AND high DEF, 'jacks & infantry, good DEF/ARM). Then these tend to get fielded disproportionately and subsume other choices. Why play a Repenter, for example, when a Redeemer is better against infantry (ROF) and 'jacks (longer range)? Why put Winterguard on the table when IFP are a bigger threat to 'jacks and kill infantry just as well for a similar cost? Why drop a Hammersmith when there is the Centurion?

Similarly, some spells and abilities never see use and some get spammed like crazy.

Turn one games require you to do something really really really really stupid. It's possible but generally it's because your opponent doesn't realize you can do something terrible (e.g. they advance their warcaster right up the middle with nothing in front of it, not realizing Darius can catapult a Centurion something like 22 inches).

As far as the rock paper scissors thing goes - in tournaments this is why you have two lists. In friendly games - if you see that your list obviously is going to get crushed, change your list. I'll usually ask my opponent what caster they're taking (if I simply don't ask them to take something in specific because I want the practice).

So run 12" up, and get whomped on by AD or something equally silly?

I brought two lists to my first steamroller...but only played one.

I'll ignore the fact that you are all passively calling me stupid and reiterate the reasons why I don't like the game. Too many one or two turn games due to a bad deployment. If your opponent has no idea what you are bringing, its easy.

And yes, we can say all day long, oh well I'm bringing darius ok? And if the other person hasn't read through every page of his book to figure out that Darius + Centurion catapult = bad news, he's going to fall for it.

As for the fool me once...etc, there are plenty of ignorant combos in there to keep people always guessing whats going on and nail them with their pants down, especially if someone plays multiple factions or has a big army.

I've never seen a game of 40k that was over in turn one by the way. It might have been bad news for one side by turn two, but never where the game is actually OVER on turn two.

AND, I never said I hated the game and never play, and I always have my Circle with me when I go to the game store, I usually end up in a game of 40k rather than Warmachine/hordes. Your mileage may vary.