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.

Wot Augustus said. Except I would be less eloquent.

Interestingly, in the world of Ancients players there is quite a divide between WHAB fans and (to exaggerate a bit) everyone else.

Broadly speaking the Ancient and Mediaeval wargaming world is divided into people who like WRG, some of whom like or dislike DBMM or FoG, and people who dislike WRG, who tend to like WHAB and other non-WRG systems such as Impetus.

Augustus wrote:
Artillery? Infantry get 4+ saves for being obscured by, foilage?

foliage only grants a 1 in 6 chance of surviving a nuclear holocaust, similar to the protection against explosives afforded the infantryman by a line of barbed wire in 40k. in order to get the 4+ you have to be standing behind a tree. i agree that neither game is particularly realistic but 40k just seems more fun for me. also, as i said earlier, i go through the trouble of painting my figs. i'd be pissed if i painted 20 guys in order for only 5 of them to do the real work while the rest do jumping jacks and pushups behind the front line.

Indeed, numbers aren't worth jack. The only difference between a unit of 25 and a unit of 50 in WHFB is the 50 is twice the cost (in points and dollars) it affords typically no other advantages once you get numbers and ranks, 26 is just as good vs 25 as 100 would be, that's absurd...

I thought your point about frontages representing the discipline and killing power of a unit was really good. I had never considered it before, probably because I don't do historicals.

Another thing I don't like about Fantasy is that sometimes the game becomes one giant Mosh-Pit Combat. This is rare, but when it happens, it's pretty lame.


But for all that, I play WHFB.

@ JohnHwangDD: Oh Dear God, Goldswords and Silververmin, Oh My!

Cryonicleech wrote:Wait wait wait, if the Dwarf Player is MOVING up the damn field, then he's not playing correctly (Unless he's running one of those "Oh look, offensive Dwarfs List)

If you mean me, the dwarf player who can't win, then usually no.

I didn't when I started because "Fantasy is for Lame D&D'ers. Also, everyone in 40k has a gun of some kind"

Now it's "There are no older Fantasy players, and all of the young uns are terrible sports and whiners who would cheat in plain sight if they could get away with it, and often do"

Also, I am poor.

I started playing 40k and can't afford Fantasy yet. As soon as I've polished off my Guard and Eldar I'm dying to start Fantasy. I love the fluff and I've already read so many of the novels.

bravelybravesirrobin wrote:

Cryonicleech wrote:Wait wait wait, if the Dwarf Player is MOVING up the damn field, then he's not playing correctly (Unless he's running one of those "Oh look, offensive Dwarfs List)

If you mean me, the dwarf player who can't win, then usually no.

Ooohhh...

sorry 'bout that.

BTW, Dwarf's shouldn't move up the field. Just field so much shooting that to the Dark Elf Player, it's like walking through a sea of lead. Painful, crappy, and never fun.

Cryonicleech wrote:Painful, crappy, and never fun.

I reckon that's bravelybravesirrobin's description of playing Fantasy.

I play 40k and LOTR SBG.

The main reasons I don't play Fantasy are:

• Don't have the money

• Don't like the way the game works

• All the armies look a bit "cartoony" to me

Commander Gree wrote:All the armies look a bit "cartoony" to me

QFT big time. Cannot bring myself to like a lot of what's going on overall. A lot of the individual models (at least the newer ones) are a bit more captivating, however.

The cartoony-ness works fine in Blood Bowl.

Cryonicleech wrote:

bravelybravesirrobin wrote:

Cryonicleech wrote:Wait wait wait, if the Dwarf Player is MOVING up the damn field, then he's not playing correctly (Unless he's running one of those "Oh look, offensive Dwarfs List)

If you mean me, the dwarf player who can't win, then usually no.

Ooohhh...

sorry 'bout that.

BTW, Dwarf's shouldn't move up the field. Just field so much shooting that to the Dark Elf Player, it's like walking through a sea of lead. Painful, crappy, and never fun.

Back when I did play my regular opponents and the ways they beat me were;

Vampire Counts - take a ton of damage, none of which they care about, charge me with uber blooddragon knights and magicked zombies, I lose and run away and die.

Brettonians - guns bounce of the blessing, charge me with uber knights, I lose and run away and die

Southlands Lizardmen - Take a ton of damage from shooting but don't care about it due to having roughly a billion models and almost as many characters, pass all their ld checks despite being low ld due to jamminess and cold blooded, charge me, not so uber but still bloody jammy character kills me, I lose and run away and die

High Elves - Magic plus dragon princes = some variant of they charge me before I even get to bloody shoot them most of the time, I lose and run away and die.

Chaos - Arhcaon and hundreds of chariots charges me, and I lose and run away and die.


When I move back to the U.K. I'm thinking of taking up Fantasy again but just completely dropping missle troops entirely and taking nothing but warmachines and as few hard as nails rank and file units as possible. Like maybe 4 of them, 3 for core and an iron breakers unit with maybe some slayers on the flank. All my units will have either the lord or some tooled up rune priest with an uber weapon in them. Then I'm just going to fling rocks and bolts at them until they decide to charge me and hopefully just for a change I won't break on the first turn of cc.

I actually have had some fun matches, and a few draws. I've just never ever won.

I play both, but 40k is quicker, more balanced and more fun fluff.

40k has a lot more players. I can go to just about any LGS and find a game of 40k.

I prefer sci fi settings to fantasy ones.

I like the increase in ranged abilities in 40k. Fantasy has much less shooting then 40k does. I prefer the mixed army style anyways.

Extreme power creep compared to 40k.

I have noticed a lot of fantasy players in my area, all 5 of them, have a tendency to belittle 40k. I will walk up to watch and one of them will look at me and say "fantasy, a game that actually requires tactical skill, unlike 40k". Oh, cool story bro, I could tell by the ranks of unpainted elves what game it was. How about you play an army other then horde orks in 40k, some armies require actual tactics when played. I think that while fantasy requires more skill as far as moves are concerned, its not really any more impressive then 40k tactically. Simply different. Armies in 40k move much faster then fantasy ones. Fantasy armies have nothing that can compare to eldar for example. And the increase in shooting.

That is by no means a blanket statement on all fantasy players. But the ones in my area seem to have a serious case of small penis syndrome. I cant just watch a game without listening to one of them comment on the vast superiority of their game to 40k. So the player base of people who are incapable of shutting their cock holsters about how Fantussee are bestest really turns me off.

Augustus wrote:I can't stand artillery in WH40k, also I made a city board, and ranges of man weapons get a bit wonky then, essentially most things shoot about 2 blocks, it looks pretty funny too. But then, if we are talking about effective ranges, under combat conditions, well I can see that's reasonable.

Well, really, the problem is 40k is a skirmish level game, and bringing artillery to a skirmish is just asking for trouble. I mean, if you tried to model it "realistically", you'd end up with the actual gun in the game store parking lot, and be just as likely to actually hit the next table over as the spot you're actually firing at. And such a kerfuffle it would be if the fellows at the next table over were playing WHFB...


Anyway, to get back on topic...

I play 40k over WHFB because it's more fun. I have 2500 points of Lizardmen in various states of assembly, but every time I seriously get started on finishing them, I see people playing WHFB at the local store and they just don't have as much fun as the people playing 40k.

Fantasy just largely seems to be one complicated core system (ranked infantry movement and combat) accompanied by a series of army books that all render said core system obsolete in one way or another. That and in every serious WHFB group I've seen, if you run any list or overall strategy that doesn't devolve to "get a bunch of ranked infantry into a huge melee in the middle of the board" someone will whine like you get victory points for it.

40k, in large part due to the simpler core mechanics, just has so many more options on the tabletop, and 40k players are much more likely to be prepared to deal with unusual strategies (and thus provide a better game with less whining) than WHFB players.

Fantasy also lacks transports, which is probably my favorite game mechanic in 40k.

But YMMV, and I'm only speaking from experience of 40k vs. WHFB groups in two states.

Eidolon wrote:I will walk up to watch and one of them will look at me and say "fantasy, a game that actually requires tactical skill, unlike 40k". Oh, cool story bro, I could tell by the ranks of unpainted elves what game it was.

QFT. I lol'd.

My experience as well.

Cryonicleech wrote:

bravelybravesirrobin wrote:

Cryonicleech wrote:Wait wait wait, if the Dwarf Player is MOVING up the damn field, then he's not playing correctly (Unless he's running one of those "Oh look, offensive Dwarfs List)

If you mean me, the dwarf player who can't win, then usually no.

Ooohhh...

sorry 'bout that.

BTW, Dwarf's shouldn't move up the field. Just field so much shooting that to the Dark Elf Player, it's like walking through a sea of lead. Painful, crappy, and never fun.

If the maxim of "WFB is won or lost in the deployment phase" is half correct, it's very true for the Dwarfs. Their slowness does not allow for mistakes in deployment.

My few victories in WFB however, were against defensive Dwarfs who stood and shot. I got massacred by mobile Dwarfs who advanced with covered flanks (units that don't flee from combat). Even Dwarfs must manoeuvre, or the opponent just picks his battles at will. If you want defensive dwarves, you need march-blockers (miners, rangers, gyrcopters), counter-offensive units and perfect deployment (the weighed/refused flank works very well for dwarfs, keep the edge/terrain on one flank, an unbreakable unit on the other and advance to fight). Now they have the Strollaz special rule (?) in addition to Relentless, why should you not advance and take the fight to the enemy?

And Dwarfs can only successfully advance if they're perfectly deployed to do so, so ace the deployment phase.

Shooty dwarf is very hit or miss (haha). If your dice are bad and you only stand around shooting, you lose. Strolling Dwarf takes more ability rather than just dicing around with bullets and quarrels. Defensive dwarfs need march-blocking and holding units, screw up the enemy's advance and you get more shooting to do.

I haven't found that kind of snobbery, though when Fantasy was a better game than 40K (back in 4th edition and before 7th was broken) people might have said "I think fantasy is a much better game". These days opinion has shifted to "They broke it with Demons" and "5th Edition is fun!".

I would probably like Fantasy more if they hadn't done so much wierd stuff with the new books. Back when O&G, Empire and Dwarves had been released, and even up until High Elves, I was having a great time playing with my O&G. Then it just hit a point where a lot of my units weren't viable anymore and I had to take certain ones to have a good chance against certain foes. It's gotten worse with time. I don't like it when codex creep limits how creative I can be with my army and still have a chance.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:I have been looking at the Perry twins samurai range and working out how to create an empire army built from them...

What a splendid idea, but I hope you paint faster than me...I've been aiming toward that for about two years now!

There's a lot of armour lacing on those bad boys.

In the mean time I've used them as Wood Elves and have finally painted enough this year to start using them as Dark Elves.

I went for Li clan (the Red Devils) as I find it easier to paint a uniform force and they have a fairly simple Mon, it's basically just #

My Avatar is one of the cavalry I've managed to paint so far.

Da Boss wrote:I haven't found that kind of snobbery, though when Fantasy was a better game than 40K (back in 4th edition and before 7th was broken) people might have said "I think fantasy is a much better game". These days opinion has shifted to "They broke it with Demons" and "5th Edition is fun!".

I would probably like Fantasy more if they hadn't done so much wierd stuff with the new books. Back when O&G, Empire and Dwarves had been released, and even up until High Elves, I was having a great time playing with my O&G. Then it just hit a point where a lot of my units weren't viable anymore and I had to take certain ones to have a good chance against certain foes. It's gotten worse with time. I don't like it when codex creep limits how creative I can be with my army and still have a chance.

and you shouldn't be! before 3d edition 40k was more complicated, and the psychic powers were not as "balanced"/developed as the spells in warhammer at the time (though it had some freaks too). All the cards and sheets involved, every model an individual but still in a unit for coherency or something like that.

I found 40k as interesting as fantasy, but picked fantasy because I preferred the "medieval" version, and 40k wasn't widely played in my area. 2nd edition 40k could be very expensive too, most models were metal, at least, the nicer models. Imperial Guard only had stormtrooper plastics... ehm... that was rather absurd. basic guardsmen squads were very expensive to buy but the elites came as a cheap 6-pack.

More LFGS tournaments for fantasy too.

I used to play Fantasy and 40K back in the crazy power card days, and Fantasy was a better game back then in a lot of ways, but it was also crazy at times.

My lizardmen never lost a game though, and I wasn't even a great player.

I put my 10kish WoC army in the attic due to the fast that I got tired of a game where one would spend half the pts in an army on a few heroes and they would run or fly around and kill everything in the opposing army.

Indeed, I'll never forget the Dark Elf game I played with a Black Dragon where it literally scared away an entire Ork and Goblin army, and there weren't even any melees.

What's the story with the alleged Warhammer 7.5 release Summer 2010? How is a mere update supposed to fix the problems already identified in this thread?

Who knows.

I am hesitant to call them all problems, codex creep, etc. sure, but my big list of things, well, I think are really design issues.
I'd be surprised to see any of those things change, for example, no matter what happens in future releases I don't think warhammer will ever adopt formations like formed loose and skirmish and I don't think they will ever be able to fix the frontage issue either because of the way the minis are sold and for historical considerations...

I wonder what the new version might tinker with? I hadn't heard of that.

I suppose if some command rules started popping in, or possibly some missions my opinion could change pretty rapidly! Even with the above...

I have over 5000pts of WoC and I have given up on WHFB in anything but friendly games. Since the release of the DE and Daemon codices the game balance is out the window. If you look at the top placings and winners of the most recent tournaments you would think the only three armies out there are DE, VC, and Daemons.

I made the jump to 40k about 9 months about now, and have never regretted the switch. The arguments that come up over "wheeling" units alone have caused me more than one gray hair, and that is just the tip of the iceberg of problems with that version of Warhammer.