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.

Rather than risk threadcrapping the other thread, I figured I'd start this thread for the alternate point of view.

Personally, I like the large blocks of troops maneuvering around the battlefield, and how the acts of heroes can change the course of battle. That, and a facination with melee combat.

1. Fewer kids play the game, but often the ones that do are usually pretty smart and nice, 40k kids not soo much.

2. The visual presence of an entire fully painted fantasy army is far more impressive than a 40k army of equal quality.

3. It is not a game of "my gun is bigger than your gun".

4. I have plenty of outlets for my sci fi needs thru video games and WoW (and more recently Dragon Age: Origins) is pretty much the only fantasy video game worth playing.

aerethan wrote:1. Fewer kids play the game, but often the ones that do are usually pretty smart and nice, 40k kids not soo much.

2. The visual presence of an entire fully painted fantasy army is far more impressive than a 40k army of equal quality.

3. It is not a game of "my gun is bigger than your gun".

4. I have plenty of outlets for my sci fi needs thru video games and WoW (and more recently Dragon Age: Origins) is pretty much the only fantasy video game worth playing.

no instead its my magic is bigger then yours, I like fantasy because i have to think more then in 40k

Haha, I love the blatant stereotyping!

Preface that with: "in my experience," because, obviously, your 4 points don't hold true in all cases or even in most cases, and some of it is purely subjective.

I like Fantasy a lot, I like the maneuver, and the fantasy setting, but the game is so unbalanced right not that it is hard to knock 40K out of my top spot.

Reecius wrote:
I like Fantasy a lot, I like the maneuver, and the fantasy setting, but the game is so unbalanced right not that it is hard to knock 40K out of my top spot.

QFT. Fantasy has traditionally been my favorite, but when 5th edition 40k came out it changed alot. 40k immediately gained a huge strategic element that it had been lacking and the game acheived a solid balance with a few exceptions. This gives me hope that the new WHFB edition will provide a similar fix and re-establish it as my preferred system (and allow me to play my daemons in Fantasy with out feeling like a beardy git.)

I agree. I really like Fantasy, but right now the game is so weird. Magic and shooting and death star units dominate. I honestly like to play fantasy more right now, with no magic! It just isn't fun when the other guy has 15 power dice and you can do NOTHING to stop it, no matter how you build your list.

Fantasy should be about setting up the right charges with your units.

Hopefully they overhaul Fantasy to get it back on track because I really do enjoy the game. 40K is just a lot more fun right now, IMO.

aerethan wrote:2. The visual presence of an entire fully painted fantasy army is far more impressive than a 40k army of equal quality.

3. It is not a game of "my gun is bigger than your gun".

Both somewhat true, although the latter point can be accurately rephrased as "my Army Book is bigger than your Army Book".

That said, an Apocalypse-sized 40k force is something to behold - WFB has nothing on 40k's superheavies & bio-Titans!

The look of an army is purely subjective, no one can make a definitive statement that one looks better than the other as it depends on the person looking.

every last one of these threads is about subjective opinion.

Army balance is subjective, and you are right, model presence is subjective.

He asked why I prefer fantasy, so I gave my answers.

Why is it that so many people on Dakka have this motto that opinions are all wrong and thus not valid?

What is more funny is that most of those people play mostly or solely 40k.

I didn't say 40k was bad or not fun.

Aso for the" my army book is bigger" or the "my magic is bigger" arguments: Not all armies rely on magic to win, and in fact for some armies magic is too weak to take and yet they can still win.

As for army balance, I've seen Empire battalion armies destroy VC and Daemons, so the book is not all that matters.

Empire isn't a pushover army.

How about you use Ogres for your example? Or old Beastmen.

Painting the figures are a more enjoyable exprience for me. I gues I got tired of the Tau and Space Marine armour. The fur and details on my chaos figures are a joy to detail.

Guess I restate what I said in the other thread. I like both systems.

Fantasy is a good thinking game.

40K is a faster, more lively experience.

I haven't played Fantasy, so I don't know. I really want to start either Vampire Counts or Dark Elves though.

WH pretty much edges 40k for my favorite game, despite the current army book imbalances.

Mostly I love it because it feels more like a game of armies, and the maneuver game has a lot of cool intricacies and depth. The visual side is really great, too.

I love 40k, especially since 5th edition helped with balance, but it's still more of a skirmish game.

Fantasy just feels more intense I guess. Perhaps it's the restricted movement, or just the sheer spectacle of ranked up units, but I always get more involved in the game!

Oh, yeah, if WFB were played with Warmaster minis, I'd be *much* happier with how it looked as ranked minis.

But is that why you prefer WHFB to 40k?

As for army balance, I've seen Empire battalion armies destroy VC and Daemons, so the book is not all that matters.

Anecdotes are not statistical evidence. I have seen a Tau firewarrior kill Bloodthirster, that doesn't mean they are equal in combat.

I'm not attacking you, just pointing out a common fallacy people make in argument.

It has actually been proven, statistically, that Fantasy is less balanced than 40K. It is fact, not opinion. And the reason most people on Dakka don't put much faith in opinions is because they are not based on factual evidence. People here tend to be numbers guys and gals more so than on other sites.

Although Dakka has gotten SO much nicer over the past two years. When I first started posting, if you said something untrue or silly, you got flamed like crazy. It is a pretty soft place here now in comparison.

Got a link to your proof skip? Not calling you out, just saying it seems a bit daft to mention solid proof and then not offer it up for our delectation.

Fantasy as a game is still generally far more about how you use than what you take. Sure, some lists are filth and bypass this, but there are few cases of 'auto-win'. Especially outside of the competitive circuit, as people tend to run with models they like, rather than what is 'optimal'. At least in my experience.

Mostly just that Daemons, and to a lesser extent DE and VC, have been running roughshod over the GTs for the past (nearly) two years. Some of the UK heats have had 50-80% daemons in the top 10. And it's not just the usual cry of codex escalation, because the other new books haven't been as nasty.

tomb kings and skaven. my two favorite fantasy races ever, possibly because the writer in me feels the "vibe" they are accompanied by.

also bretonnians, because crusader knights are cool looking.

Got a link to your proof skip? Not calling you out, just saying it seems a bit daft to mention solid proof and then not offer it up for our delectation.

Haha, you're not calling me out....skip?

Hey it's cool, if you are going to call me out, then don't be shy about it. I don't take things on internet forums seriously.

I do not have the link to back up my statement, but I will try and dig it up. I saw it on a blog about GW hobbies and the guy did an exhaustive statistical analysis of both systems and showed that fantasy had armies that were less in balance to one another than 40K did.

I don't even think it is a question up for debate, really. Play 10 games of Daemons or Vamps vs. Ogres or O&G. Take two equally skilled players, and let them play out all 10, then switch armies and let them play another 10. I would bet real money that the player with the tier 1 army wins more games by a large margin in both instances. Skill, of course, plays a big part in it, but when you have a system where one army gives a huge benefit, that sucks.

Beyond the skewed amount of the big three in tournaments (and now Lizzies as well) you have the tier system. Haha, why have it if the game is balanced? It clearly is not.

It sounds like in your experience you play friendly games against people who don't optimize their lists, which means your experience is probably not indicative of the game system on the whole....skip!

Mannahnin wrote:Mostly just that Daemons, and to a lesser extent DE and VC, have been running roughshod over the GTs for the past (nearly) two years. Some of the UK heats have had 50-80% daemons in the top 10. And it's not just the usual cry of codex escalation, because the other new books haven't been as nasty.

2009 US Ard Boyz finals were Daemon-heavy, both as competitive entries and top 10 placings.

I like WFB because there's no "Marine" Team and Marines are flooding 40k. And frankly it's boring to play against. Beat one marine, you beat'em all.

Yeah, because Spaz Marinse are *completely* unlike the current Daemon-heavy WFB metagame

Quite frankly, there is still alot of diversity in terms of armies, be it just half of them are popular picks, ie daemons, vc, sometimes WoC. Not as compared to 40k where in tournies, there is just ALOT of space marines. And in every tourney, its always gona be more SM players than xenos players.

I would agree that per capita there are not as many Daemon players in wfb as there are Space Marines in 40k.

I suppose balance also matters subjectively as to who and how you play.

If you care for tournament play then sure, balance would be an issue. Not everyone plays in tournies and not everyone plays against people who "play to win" or who pick flavor of the month armies.

While I cannot speak for others, I myself have never picked an army based on it's ability to win. I paint far more than I play and thus model selection means far more to me than the strength of an army.

For instance, I purely despise nurgle models and armies, and since the dismantling of the single god chaos armies, a Daemon player is virtually forced into taking nurgle units. That alone is enough to move me away from them as an army choice, despite my love for Tzeentch and Slaanesh.

Here you go gents, asked and delivered. Convincing statistical evidence of the imbalance in WFB.


http://confoundingblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/is-warhammer-balanced/

Reecius wrote:Haha, I love the blatant stereotyping!

Preface that with: "in my experience," because, obviously, your 4 points don't hold true in all cases or even in most cases, and some of it is purely subjective.

I like Fantasy a lot, I like the maneuver, and the fantasy setting, but the game is so unbalanced right not that it is hard to knock 40K out of my top spot.

Behave, now. I didn't come over to your thread to knock 40K, please don't come her to knock WFB.

In short: If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Reecius wrote:Here you go gents, asked and delivered. Convincing statistical evidence of the imbalance in WFB.


http://confoundingblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/is-warhammer-balanced/

I won't argue that this is correct, because clearly it is. Otherwise Ogres and Orcs wouldn't recieve 500-700 points to be competitve against Dark Elves, Vampire Counts, and Daemons.

But that doesn't answer the question I posted, now does it?

Behave, now. I didn't come over to your thread to knock 40K, please don't come her to knock WFB.

In short: If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all!

Fair enough, but this is Dakka! We are supposed to be rude and snarky! Man, when did this place get so tame?

I agree with you in principle, and in person I am very polite, but Dakka was always the place to throw niceties out the window and talk brass tacks. This place has changed a lot over the years.

Oh well, I don't want to ruffle anyone's feathers that takes these conversation too seriously.