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'll chime in my 2 cents for what it's worth...

The thing I love about Warmachine and Hordes is the fact that PP does a really good job keeping units viable, unlike GW.

I agree with Malfred in that I really feel like creep comes with point values. I tend to play 40k at the 1500pt level, I feel like people want to up the point value mainly due to the fact that they can't squeeze in as many land raiders in their list, or some other great cool unit/idea etc.

With PP, I see unit attachments as a way of keeping units viable and competitive. Usually people think winterguard suck, but when you add in Kovnik Josef and a rocketeer UA, the unit shines. If you add them in with Epic Sorcha, then they really shine. If you play the Iron Rain list, then they can be disgusting. But you have to pay for Josef and the UA. Also they are limited.

When I look at GW, whatever they make a new model for, they create a killer set of rules to sell said unit. I don't mind that too much, what I do mind is when they say "opps, we made X unit a bit too good, well with the next rule set, we'll nerf it back down to nothing." I have seen that time and time again with GW.

Off the top of my head I am thinking about Tyranids and the Godzilla army. It was a great way to sell the new plastic carnifex kit, but when the zilla army became top dog, well they nerfed the list with the new rule set.

Eldar harlequins are another unit. When the rules were released every Eldar army list out had all three Elite slots filled with the new unit, with the pretty new models.

I used to love GW, and I still have 1 fantasy army, the rest of my stuff I sold. I have a few 40k armies in various stages, but overall I am loving Warmachine/Hordes more and more.

Cost wise, sure PP stuff has had a price increase, but at least they did a really good job with cost charts to show why, not just "we a big corporation and we want tons of cash, that you seem to get from GW." I would have thought that plastic kits would make the hobby a bit cheaper, but it hasn't.

With PP though, if you stick with one faction or even two, then it becomes much more manageable in terms of collecting. I have Khador, I have quite a bit of Khador, but the great thing is, I only have to buy a few things here and there, unlike GW, when they release a new Army Book or Codex and you feel forced to buy a whole new army. I also have troll bloods and Legion, again with a few key buys, I can have several 500pt army combination's.

I just prefer WM/Hordes right now. I enjoy the game and have had lots of fun playing it at my LGS. I have had my minis since the game first came out but only recently I have begun to play. Out of the games I have played, I lost the majority of them, but that's ok cause I am having a blast.

I also enjoy the fact that PP has given each unit a specific role, which I feel GW is lacking. Take the new codex for example and the Sternguard. Why would you want to take a normal tac squad when you can play Kantor and have 3 scoring units of Sternguard with the crazy I can do all things ammo they have. I love the fact that PP (IMHO) does a better job marrying the rules and the fluff. I think this is one area that GW falls short on.

Sorry for being long winded, time to maybe break out some paints and get back to my Army brown Khadoran army or my Green trolls =D

Chappy P!

The other with about WM, more than Hordes, is that most of the factions can field a lot of different types of lists. Anymore, most can field a list based around assassination, heavy melee infantry, skirmishers, cav, or ranged combat. Some factions do it better than others, but most have field some sort of list focusing on one of those aspects.

oomiestompa wrote:

malfred wrote:Some day I'm going to make my own "Codex" by tearing up my books. I shall
use the souls of latest opponent to bind the pages together and it will be good.

Don't you have to actually win to claim your opponents' souls?

Have you even read the rules?

I don't have to win. They just have to lose.

Muahahaha...

malfred wrote:Yair, I was wrong about my earlier post. The Sword Knights UA does in fact make Sword
Knights "not run away." I missed it because the text didn't say Fearless.

Red

The creep isn't so much power creep as text creep. Because units that only had
one trick to them weren't really being used due to their situational nature, I think
they're starting to give units more situational abilities rather than less. And how
do you deal with the new abundance of situational abilities? You give new models
even more situational abilities.

I'm not complaining though. I like the mechanic even if I don't like trying to read the
text. Some day I'm going to make my own "Codex" by tearing up my books. I shall
use the souls of latest opponent to bind the pages together and it will be good.

Nah, don't worry. I was being hyperbolic earlier anyway.

Having said that, I've been okay playing Hordes at 350 and 500, but I haven't played 750 yet. Perhaps I don't know there's a problem?

I've found that at 350 it's a bit too easy to run all your beasts hot and just rip the heart out of the enemy force.
It's not bad really, it's just a different style of play.

Da Boss wrote:I've found that at 350 it's a bit too easy to run all your beasts hot and just rip the heart out of the enemy force.
It's not bad really, it's just a different style of play.

This is one issue.

It's also maniacally difficult to recover when warbeast x pops warbeast y in 350 pt. games. In
500 and 750 points, the player on the receiving end has more ways to cut losses.

I also like the characterful units of Warmachine/Hordes, and 350 pts doesn't really
let me run both heavies and the number of units that I like (my Skorne list only
really allowed for Paingivers, for example). I like having room for things that aren't
"auto includes" and "must haves", and since I play Protectorate it's really hard to
get some good synergy going without more stuff on the table. That and their armies
tend to be very attrition heavy. It's hard to make attrition work for you in 350 pts.

I agree with you on the warbeast thing. I enjoy 500 point games, and I'm looking forward to trying 750 when we get our forces up to that level.

I like 350 level for the replay factor. 20 minute games...if you lose you just set up and go again! At 500 you get some more room for toys and models that synergize(sp?) AT 750 you start to feel spoiled for points and stretched on fury. Keep in mind I play trolls and have limited fury management other than my Lock.

750 in many of my lists finds me upgrading my light "melee" beasts to heavies and filling out my units more. So I guess 750 Hordes should be called the fat version.

WM Creep seems more to me a complexity of "special rules/ability" mechanic. The sheer amount of specials is getting to the point where the print on the back of the cards is so small it can hardly be read without the aid of reading glasses. The feel of the creep reminds me of two little kids shouting back and fourth as they play things like "you can't kill me I'm Invincible!!!" and "I called Invincibility first".

As far as WM/Hordes goes I'd agree that the game needs to be at or above 500pts to ensure a good fight. At least that has been my experience. It's pretty hard for Hordes if they don't have enough room in the list to include a "fury battery" unit. At 350 they would have to give up a good chunk of fire power to do so and another chunk to protect it. Also Warlocks 1v1 against Warcasters seem to be at somewhat of a disadvantage. Just imagine Butcher or Sorchia bumping into Lilith alone in some dark alley... Hordes Warlocks are mostly buff and seem pretty weak on their own.

just my 2 cents...

The transfer mechanic goes a long way towards keeping them alive, but if you're going to be transfering a lot you're going to either have to have the forethought to leave more than one free fury on your beast, hence not using it to it's full effectiveness, or transfer to multiple beasts.
Some, like Kromac for example, are the equal and more of any Warcaster in melee. Animus are also another hidden strength.

Kromac seems really good as a beat-stick. On paper. But I don't see him as the
equal of a warcaster. His real strength is casting an animus many times or many
different ones. His melee special abilities are of the situational variety that
require too many variables to rely on.

malfred wrote:Kromac seems really good as a beat-stick. On paper. But I don't see him as the
equal of a warcaster. His real strength is casting an animus many times or many
different ones. His melee special abilities are of the situational variety that
require too many variables to rely on.

I think that was my point... Hordes, imho, seems to favor the "thinking game" as opposed the "raw power play". Hordes armies just don't have the comfort of singularly powerful units but rely more on the controller’s careful commitment of force and synergy. The only real parallel in WM would be Talion Charter where the buff is the only hope of victory. Khador is pretty easy to play, Menoth a bit harder, Pirates even more and Trolls... That's when you are a master...

When I look at GW, whatever they make a new model for, they create a killer set of rules to sell said unit. I don't mind that too much, what I do mind is when they say "opps, we made X unit a bit too good, well with the next rule set, we'll nerf it back down to nothing." I have seen that time and time again with GW.

I agree. Nice analysis and so far thier has not IMO been an unbreakable concept or unit in WM. Just when you think you have the perfect combo that can't be toped someone just picks it apart. Thier really are no ubber units in the game. Even the Tharn wolfrider/Kromac combo is easy to stop once you have faced it once. In my area it seems that the WM/Hordes players also come with a certain maturity that is lacking in other games but that may just be meta thing.

Hello,
My turn for my two cents:

I played 40k since 2ed, well I did stop during 3rd ed, due to studies, drinking and girls but went back at the middle of the 4th. I played a little bit the 5th and then I discovered Warmachine.
Let say that I was playing 40k because I love the setting more than the rules, at the end of my 40k period, games were fairly predictable, you know what your opponent has, you know what he will probably try to do and it felt a bit static. I move I shoot, you remove losses, I charge if I can and then you do the same.
I blame GW for that, they tried to hard to make it mainstream that they ripped the soul out of it (especially since the last chaos codex which remove most of the customisation of the lords).
So to summarize to me 40k was about tuning your list and then see if it worked, the way you played (as long as you don't do completely dumb things) will not have a huge impact.
One then a guy at the local GW told me about warmachine, "yeah I heard about it and would mind trying but I don't know where". Well he knew and I started a Khador army almost the next day. Man how fun is this game, I had the feeling someone brought the ridiculously overpowered character from 40k 2nd ed back to life. And I love all the possibility that can develop during a game, it is much more complex in term of playing than 40k, the synergies between unit are more difficult to work out for beginner.
So there it is, warmachine has fairly simple list building, usually you are not going to work on it as much as you do in 40k, but when you play it is much more complex, there is more decision involved which make it a lot more fun to play. I still love 40k for the setting but I love warmachine for its system.

Money wise I think warmachine will be more expansive than 40k if you really in to it. If you want to add variation you need to buy units whereas in 40k you can introduce variations a bit more cheaply, removing some marines to take a champion, taking a special weapon. There is a lot of things you can change without spending to much. In warmachine this isn't true. The other thing I really like is their book format, you get a book every 2 years or so if I am correct but it contains stuff for every factions. For players that are really into it it is a great source of information about what your opponent can field. You don't need to buy every codexes and I think it also allows PP to keep things fairly balanced between faction. On the GW side it fells that every codex is more powerful than the last one. To me WM/Hordes is much more balanced than 40k...