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.
heartserenade wrote: Wait, WoW and Mt:G are shallow games? Man, you must really know how to make friends on the internet.
That or he has absolutely no idea about what he is talking about... Which considering that he seems to think that moving large blocks of infantry straight forward, rolling buckets of dice for no apparent effect and getting the right spell off to win the game is somehow complex or tactical might give some credit to that latter notion.
Isn't accessibility and ease of use the whole point of GUI based operating systems? Wow. That must mean 'muricans can't use servers and stuff, because they're headless. How does google even manage?
I'm guessing you've never used a mac before? OS X is as deep as Windows and Linux are. In fact , my home network is a mix of all three of those os's, and every machine can pretty much do what the others can. Just in different ways.
Edited for spelling.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/08 19:36:24
The game is great, it is better balanced and tactically deeper than 40k but it'll cost you twice as much to get into and take you twice as long to put all those mooks together and paint them.
This was pretty much what I deduced after reading about the game. When researching which fantasy mass-battle to try and get the club to buy, I was actually pretty impressed with what folks were saying about the current edition.
However, one look at what it was going to take to buy-in and we decided to go with Kings of War instead. It's a much faster playing game with much more flexible army lists. Even a member who has most of a WHFB dark elf army really enjoys KoW. Note that KoW probably uses a similar number of figures, but with no reason to restrict ourselves to a specific miniature company we've been able to build armies for a fraction of the cost. Also, the fact that the rulebook is cheaper than a GW army book and has 8 army lists in it, and is also available for free really helps convince folks to buy in.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/08 20:20:01
But I feel that I must point out that most folks can use non-GW figures for WHFB just as easily as for KoW.
As long as what you see on the table is what they are supposed to be (orcs with two weapons are orcs with two weapons) then I don't think that most folks will care that they aren't GW orcs. (And, honestly, if somebody wants to make a fuss that my lightly armored halberdiers aren't GW lightly armored halberdiers then the odds are excellent that he is not worth playing to begin with.)
Perry Miniatures, as mentioned so many times, makes some very nice plastics that can be used equally well for Empire in WHFB and Kingdoms of Men in KoW.
The key is don't buy GW miniatures - right there you begin saving money, and will likely be able to field a full WHFB army for around the same cost as a full WH40K army that uses GW miniatures.
The price on the army books for the current edition of WHFB... what are they? CRAZY?!!!
The Auld Grump
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
heartserenade wrote: Wait, WoW and Mt:G are shallow games? Man, you must really know how to make friends on the internet.
That or he has absolutely no idea about what he is talking about... Which considering that he seems to think that moving large blocks of infantry straight forward, rolling buckets of dice for no apparent effect and getting the right spell off to win the game is somehow complex or tactical might give some credit to that latter notion.
While those are, indeed, valid yet simple tactics for some armies, other armies really need a more subtle and nuanced approach. Running a big block of elves or dwarves straight up the center without support is just begging to get smashed. Six-dicing uber spells can work, but when that also costs you your 3-400 point general in the subsequent miscast you really haven't gained anything.
A properly run elven MSU army can embarrass a Deathstar Army by keeping the deathstar out of combat the whole game. And THAT, my friend, takes SERIOUS tactics.
heartserenade wrote: Wait, WoW and Mt:G are shallow games? Man, you must really know how to make friends on the internet.
That or he has absolutely no idea about what he is talking about... Which considering that he seems to think that moving large blocks of infantry straight forward, rolling buckets of dice for no apparent effect and getting the right spell off to win the game is somehow complex or tactical might give some credit to that latter notion.
While those are, indeed, valid yet simple tactics for some armies, other armies really need a more subtle and nuanced approach. Running a big block of elves or dwarves straight up the center without support is just begging to get smashed. Six-dicing uber spells can work, but when that also costs you your 3-400 point general in the subsequent miscast you really haven't gained anything.
A properly run elven MSU army can embarrass a Deathstar Army by keeping the deathstar out of combat the whole game. And THAT, my friend, takes SERIOUS tactics.
No thats is Strategy (the planned action before the fight starts). No, it not really hard to move MSU around the borad vs. Deathstars as there is usually not much to get in the way.
Peter: As we all know, Christmas is that mystical time of year when the ghost of Jesus rises from the grave to feast on the flesh of the living! So we all sing Christmas Carols to lull him back to sleep.
Bob: Outrageous, How dare he say such blasphemy. I've got to do something.
Man #1: Bob, there's nothing you can do.
Bob: Well, I guess I'll just have to develop a sense of humor.
TheAuldGrump wrote: But I feel that I must point out that most folks can use non-GW figures for WHFB just as easily as for KoW..
...The key is don't buy GW miniatures - right there you begin saving money, and will likely be able to field a full WHFB army for around the same cost as a full WH40K army that uses GW miniatures.
The price on the army books for the current edition of WHFB... what are they? CRAZY?!!!
You can of course use non-GW figs with Warhammer, but as your last line notes, you've still got to buy a rulebook ($75)and an army book ($50). That's $125 before you buy a single miniature! KoW rules are free or a $35 buck rulebook that includes army lists. You can have around Half (or more) of a KoW army (from mantic or somewhere else) and the rules for just the price of the two required Warhammer rulebooks.
Of course I didn't even have to make that obvious choice, because I knew that a $125 buy-in just for rulebooks would be a complete non-starter for my club.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/01/08 23:26:42
TheAuldGrump wrote: But I feel that I must point out that most folks can use non-GW figures for WHFB just as easily as for KoW..
...The key is don't buy GW miniatures - right there you begin saving money, and will likely be able to field a full WHFB army for around the same cost as a full WH40K army that uses GW miniatures.
The price on the army books for the current edition of WHFB... what are they? CRAZY?!!!
You can of course use non-GW figs with Warhammer, but as your last line notes, you've still got to buy a rulebook ($75)and an army book ($50). That's $125 before you buy a single miniature! KoW rules are free or a $35 buck rulebook that includes army lists. You can have around Half (or more) of a KoW army (from mantic or somewhere else) and the rules for just the price of the two required Warhammer rulebooks.
Of course I didn't even have to make that obvious choice, because I knew that a $125 buy-in just for rulebooks would be a complete non-starter for my club.
But, in my opinion, the KoW rules are terrible and far too simplistic. I'd rather pay that money for the WHFB rules.
If you prefer KoW, then free rules are great. But if you don't, then free rules aren't any condolence. That's like telling a vegetarian they're giving away free chicken nuggets at the local McDonalds.
You can of course use non-GW figs with Warhammer, but as your last line notes, you've still got to buy a rulebook ($75)and an army book ($50). That's $125 before you buy a single miniature! KoW rules are free or a $35 buck rulebook that includes army lists. You can have around Half (or more) of a KoW army (from mantic or somewhere else) and the rules for just the price of the two required Warhammer rulebooks.
Of course I didn't even have to make that obvious choice, because I knew that a $125 buy-in just for rulebooks would be a complete non-starter for my club.
But, in my opinion, the KoW rules are terrible and far too simplistic. I'd rather pay that money for the WHFB rules.
If you prefer KoW, then free rules are great. But if you don't, then free rules aren't any condolence. That's like telling a vegetarian they're giving away free chicken nuggets at the local McDonalds.
That's true of course. In General myself and the club prefer streamlined rulsets to more crunchy games, but that's a taste thing.
Not sure I agree with the McDonalds analogy, -we find KoW to be plenty tasty and satisfying- but you're right, if you like WHFB, and/or the built-in comminity of gamers (a very nice feature to be sure) you're stuck paying WHFB prices for rules. Perhaps WHFB is like White Castle. Sure you're paying more per-oz-of-meat than other fast food joints, but if you want a slider we're the only game in town.
Of course there are other rulesets Like Armies of Arcana that offer a fantasy mass battle game with more crunch than KoW, but you aren't getting the built-in GW community of gamers.
I find the KoW rules to be more concise, better written, and more tightly edited. Rather than having five abilities that are almost identical, with a pile of conflicting rules, KoW has one ability that has no exceptions.
So a single list of the special abilities can be shared between armies.
To continue the analogy - if KoW is is MacDonald's, then WHFB is Burger King buried beneath a load of garbage.
The WHFB rules are not better, but they do have a lot more customization to 'have it your way.' Then they are just buried under a bigger pile of yuck and arguments.
WHFB will have a bunch of templates for warmachines and spell effects - KoW will have a statblock that says Zap! 3, Breath Attack 6, Blast 6, or the like. Zap!, Breath Attack, or Blast handle all the area of effect attacks.
The net result is the same - how much damage is done to the target unit, but the amount of time spent getting those results is a lot shorter in KoW.
The templates are not needed, so why have them?
There is no chart needed to see if you hit or miss, nor is there a chart to see if you wound - both are in the stat blocks for the units.
The charts are not needed, so why have them?
The rules and qualities in KoW do not have exceptions - so there is no need to 'roll a d6' to determine whether the irresistible force or the immoveable wins - since there is no irresistible force or immovable object.
The unit qualities do not need to be spread across a dozen books, so why have those dozen books?
KoW is much better playtested than WHFB - balance is a lot tighter. Mantic does not add in new qualities at the last minute because marketing wants to plug a new model. (Anyone else remember Dark Angels in 3e WH40K - with a landspeeder special character that sucked at both close combat and as a vehicle? Or the Ravenwing command squad that broke the rules as written and needed to have errata before they could even be used? I played Dark Angels - a decade later and it still annoys me.)
Neither KoW nor WHB is White Castle... maybe Malifaux qualifies? Not as common, better material, but smaller portions.
Warmahordes is definitely Wendy's.....
Given a choice between KoW and the latest version of WHFB I will take KoW every time.
You are still allowed to prefer WHFB, but the rules for KoW are not 'terrible', they are just much shorter, more concise, and more clearly written.
But allow less customization.
The Auld Grump
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/09 08:57:54
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
TheAuldGrump wrote: I find the KoW rules to be more concise, better written, and more tightly edited. Rather than having five abilities that are almost identical, with a pile of conflicting rules, KoW has one ability that has no exceptions.
So a single list of the special abilities can be shared between armies.
Spoiler:
To continue the analogy - if KoW is is MacDonald's, then WHFB is Burger King buried beneath a load of garbage.
The WHFB rules are not better, but they do have a lot more customization to 'have it your way.' Then they are just buried under a bigger pile of yuck and arguments.
WHFB will have a bunch of templates for warmachines and spell effects - KoW will have a statblock that says Zap! 3, Breath Attack 6, Blast 6, or the like. Zap!, Breath Attack, or Blast handle all the area of effect attacks.
The net result is the same - how much damage is done to the target unit, but the amount of time spent getting those results is a lot shorter in KoW.
The templates are not needed, so why have them?
There is no chart needed to see if you hit or miss, nor is there a chart to see if you wound - both are in the stat blocks for the units.
The charts are not needed, so why have them?
The rules and qualities in KoW do not have exceptions - so there is no need to 'roll a d6' to determine whether the irresistible force or the immoveable wins - since there is no irresistible force or immovable object.
The unit qualities do not need to be spread across a dozen books, so why have those dozen books?
KoW is much better playtested than WHFB - balance is a lot tighter. Mantic does not add in new qualities at the last minute because marketing wants to plug a new model. (Anyone else remember Dark Angels in 3e WH40K - with a landspeeder special character that sucked at both close combat and as a vehicle? Or the Ravenwing command squad that broke the rules as written and needed to have errata before they could even be used? I played Dark Angels - a decade later and it still annoys me.)
Neither KoW nor WHB is White Castle... maybe Malifaux qualifies? Not as common, better material, but smaller portions.
Warmahordes is definitely Wendy's.....
Given a choice between KoW and the latest version of WHFB I will take KoW every time.
You are still allowed to prefer WHFB, but the rules for KoW are not 'terrible', they are just much shorter, more concise, and more clearly written.
But allow less customization.
The Auld Grump
I agree with all that. I think the last line is one thing that many folks will cause many folks to gravitate toward WHFB however. GW games are almost like CCG's in that they reward you for pouring over your army list for hours tweaking various upgrades, comparing notes with folks on the internet, finding the perfect combination of elements that will magnifiy the abilities of your units, etc, etc. This is a rewarding experience for some as it allows you to essentially be "playing" the game long before you unpack your miniatures. Yet there is a dark side in that it does sometimes result in battles where the outcome is almost certain the moment the miniatures hit the table.
KoW has some customization, and despite what some say, it is possible to min-max your way to some rather uber-ish armies. However, with far fewer options and having no separate "magic" phase (it's rolled into combat), it doesn't offer nearly the same "deckbuilding" experience or opportunities for "stacking" of abilities. So, while there's less pre-game involvement, there's also less chance that you'll set your minis down and know what the out come of the battle will be. Put another way, victory is going to be determined much more by maneuvering and tactical choices than by what combination of upgrades and magic you have chosen.
TheAuldGrump wrote: I find the KoW rules to be more concise, better written, and more tightly edited. Rather than having five abilities that are almost identical, with a pile of conflicting rules, KoW has one ability that has no exceptions.
So a single list of the special abilities can be shared between armies.
Spoiler:
To continue the analogy - if KoW is is MacDonald's, then WHFB is Burger King buried beneath a load of garbage.
The WHFB rules are not better, but they do have a lot more customization to 'have it your way.' Then they are just buried under a bigger pile of yuck and arguments.
WHFB will have a bunch of templates for warmachines and spell effects - KoW will have a statblock that says Zap! 3, Breath Attack 6, Blast 6, or the like. Zap!, Breath Attack, or Blast handle all the area of effect attacks.
The net result is the same - how much damage is done to the target unit, but the amount of time spent getting those results is a lot shorter in KoW.
The templates are not needed, so why have them?
There is no chart needed to see if you hit or miss, nor is there a chart to see if you wound - both are in the stat blocks for the units.
The charts are not needed, so why have them?
The rules and qualities in KoW do not have exceptions - so there is no need to 'roll a d6' to determine whether the irresistible force or the immoveable wins - since there is no irresistible force or immovable object.
The unit qualities do not need to be spread across a dozen books, so why have those dozen books?
KoW is much better playtested than WHFB - balance is a lot tighter. Mantic does not add in new qualities at the last minute because marketing wants to plug a new model. (Anyone else remember Dark Angels in 3e WH40K - with a landspeeder special character that sucked at both close combat and as a vehicle? Or the Ravenwing command squad that broke the rules as written and needed to have errata before they could even be used? I played Dark Angels - a decade later and it still annoys me.)
Neither KoW nor WHB is White Castle... maybe Malifaux qualifies? Not as common, better material, but smaller portions.
Warmahordes is definitely Wendy's.....
Given a choice between KoW and the latest version of WHFB I will take KoW every time.
You are still allowed to prefer WHFB, but the rules for KoW are not 'terrible', they are just much shorter, more concise, and more clearly written.
But allow less customization.
The Auld Grump
I agree with all that. I think the last line is one thing that many folks will cause many folks to gravitate toward WHFB however. GW games are almost like CCG's in that they reward you for pouring over your army list for hours tweaking various upgrades, comparing notes with folks on the internet, finding the perfect combination of elements that will magnifiy the abilities of your units, etc, etc. This is a rewarding experience for some as it allows you to essentially be "playing" the game long before you unpack your miniatures. Yet there is a dark side in that it does sometimes result in battles where the outcome is almost certain the moment the miniatures hit the table.
KoW has some customization, and despite what some say, it is possible to min-max your way to some rather uber-ish armies. However, with far fewer options and having no separate "magic" phase (it's rolled into combat), it doesn't offer nearly the same "deckbuilding" experience or opportunities for "stacking" of abilities. So, while there's less pre-game involvement, there's also less chance that you'll set your minis down and know what the out come of the battle will be. Put another way, victory is going to be determined much more by maneuvering and tactical choices than by what combination of upgrades and magic you have chosen.
I can agree with that.
One thing that I feel like mentioning though is that I liked Mordheim more than either WHFB or KoW - and for reasons that go against why I prefer KoW over WHFB.... Warbands become less balanced over the course of the campaign.
Balance in Mordheim is iffy, but I really, really enjoyed the team management aspect of the game - so I ended up liking the game more - and it is all about customizing your warband.
There were some early WHFB scenarios that had some of that same team management quality - McDeath as an example.
At some point I want to see what I can do for a series of linked KoW scenarios.
The Auld Grump
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
Just started playing KoWwith Perry Models to reenact historical battles (yes, someone maderules to make KoW historical and it's fantastic). I'm liking it so far, but I do find it lacking on the customization part. One thing about us in general is we like to dissect little aspects of everything, from stat points, skills and equipment of your MMORPG character, to the sideboard and mainboard choices of your CCG card deck, and from the wargear and army composition of your wargaming army. It's just a small turn off, though. I guess a lifetime of making micro-decisions about everything conditions you to think like that.
@heartserenade.
SOME player like spending hours and hours working out list /deck/force optimization.
And are happier spending time on the on the 'pre-game pre-amble'. Than actually playing the game.
(Because ALL ideas are brilliant strategies until you get to put them into practice.. )
And many feel this way if their game of choice has comparatively less in the way of in game choices.
However, there are plenty , (of mainly older,) players who enjoy actually playing the game, rather than the pre -able building up to the game its self.
(Mainly because their game of choice offers far more in game choices.)
So some people like playing KoW.(With a small amount of time list building)
Others like list building (and purchasing new stuff )for WHFB.(With a small amount of time playing the game.)
Lanrak wrote: Others like list building (and purchasing new stuff )for WHFB.(With a small amount of time playing the game.)
I spend almost no time buying and very little time list-building. I play a fair amount of WHFB though.
Buying is when I start. List-building is when I learn. Playing is when I want.
editing to add: I see very few playing games on DakkaDakka, but I do see a lot of list building here, as well as discussion of purchasing. Maybe that is confusing.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/01/10 17:28:44
"It is not the bullet with your name on it that should worry you, it's the one labeled "To whom it may concern. . ."
Lanrak wrote: @heartserenade.
SOME player like spending hours and hours working out list /deck/force optimization.
And are happier spending time on the on the 'pre-game pre-amble'. Than actually playing the game.
(Because ALL ideas are brilliant strategies until you get to put them into practice.. )
And many feel this way if their game of choice has comparatively less in the way of in game choices.
However, there are plenty , (of mainly older,) players who enjoy actually playing the game, rather than the pre -able building up to the game its self.
(Mainly because their game of choice offers far more in game choices.)
So some people like playing KoW.(With a small amount of time list building)
Others like list building (and purchasing new stuff )for WHFB.(With a small amount of time playing the game.)
Different strokes for different folks.
I get you. What I'm trying to say is that I hope KoW has best of both worlds. Infinity sort of has this (you have lots of troops with lots of loadouts to choose from, and everything is viable so it creates more options) while still being able to be very tactically deep on the table itself. But it is a sci-fi skirmish game so it scratches a very different itch.
heartserenade wrote: Just started playing KoWwith Perry Models to reenact historical battles (yes, someone maderules to make KoW historical and it's fantastic). I'm liking it so far, but I do find it lacking on the customization part. One thing about us in general is we like to dissect little aspects of everything, from stat points, skills and equipment of your MMORPG character, to the sideboard and mainboard choices of your CCG card deck, and from the wargear and army composition of your wargaming army. It's just a small turn off, though. I guess a lifetime of making micro-decisions about everything conditions you to think like that.
While this can be very satisfying, it often leads to a game being much harder to balance (as I'm sure you are aware). It's sort of the same with units/characters that have high levels of synergy or other unusual play styles. I think Malifaux has some incredibly fun mechanics with many of its units, but the game has a history of balance issues with some of its more eccentric units. There's also the issue of ending up with a unit that is either useless or unbeatable, depending on the battlefield situation. I know this isn't exactly relevant to what you were saying, but it kind of ties in with the concept of having lots of options for customization from a balancing perspective. I'm not saying its impossible to have a really well balanced game with customizable units, but it makes it harder. I think KoW might be able to afford a bit more options for adding customizable flavor to units without ruining the balance too much.
It definitely is connected: more options means it's harder to balance since adding just one additional option would need playtesting, what more if you have 5 more and god knows what kind of unholy combo you can pull with it.
@heartserenade.
SOME player like spending hours and hours working out list /deck/force optimization.
And are happier spending time on the on the 'pre-game pre-amble'. Than actually playing the game.
(Because ALL ideas are brilliant strategies until you get to put them into practice.. )
And many feel this way if their game of choice has comparatively less in the way of in game choices.
However, there are plenty , (of mainly older,) players who enjoy actually playing the game, rather than the pre -able building up to the game its self.
(Mainly because their game of choice offers far more in game choices.)
So some people like playing KoW.(With a small amount of time list building)
Others like list building (and purchasing new stuff )for WHFB.(With a small amount of time playing the game.)
Different strokes for different folks.
Very much agreed. While I definitely fall on the simpler, faster, cheaper side of things with my preference for KOW, I clearly see where some folks are going to prefer the more detailed play and prep of WHFB. Also, one can't forget that while WHFB often lags behind 40k in popularity, there is still a very large built-in playerbase. Something that KoW Doesn't have. The much higher price of WHFB does include FLGS ubiquity, a valuable thing, especially for those who may not have a gaming group of their own.
heartserenade wrote:It definitely is connected: more options means it's harder to balance since adding just one additional option would need playtesting, what more if you have 5 more and god knows what kind of unholy combo you can pull with it.
I agree also. The less options a game gives the players the easier it is for the game designers to retain some sense of game balance. I find KOW units to be flavorful enough, but, clearly KoW doesn't give the same sort of differentiation that you will get in WHFB. There are some KOW statlines that are quite similar. The payoff is a more balanced and fast playing game. I completely understand that some folks would prefer to sacrifice a bit of balance for the detail and differentiation that you get in a WHFB army.
One final point:
Neither game lets you entirely off the hook in terms of prep time, because both games function best with ALOT of miniatures on the table so you're going to be spending an enormous amout of pre-game time painting blocks of troops.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/01/10 20:43:57
@heartserenade.
SOME player like spending hours and hours working out list /deck/force optimization.
And are happier spending time on the on the 'pre-game pre-amble'. Than actually playing the game.
(Because ALL ideas are brilliant strategies until you get to put them into practice.. )
And many feel this way if their game of choice has comparatively less in the way of in game choices.
However, there are plenty , (of mainly older,) players who enjoy actually playing the game, rather than the pre -able building up to the game its self.
(Mainly because their game of choice offers far more in game choices.)
So some people like playing KoW.(With a small amount of time list building)
Others like list building (and purchasing new stuff )for WHFB.(With a small amount of time playing the game.)
Different strokes for different folks.
Very much agreed. While I definitely fall on the simpler, faster, cheaper side of things with my preference for KOW, I clearly see where some folks are going to prefer the more detailed play and prep of WHFB. Also, one can't forget that while WHFB often lags behind 40k in popularity, there is still a very large built-in playerbase. Something that KoW Doesn't have. The much higher price of WHFB does include FLGS ubiquity, a valuable thing, especially for those who may not have a gaming group of their own.
heartserenade wrote:It definitely is connected: more options means it's harder to balance since adding just one additional option would need playtesting, what more if you have 5 more and god knows what kind of unholy combo you can pull with it.
I agree also. The less options a game gives the players the easier it is for the game designers to retain some sense of game balance. I find KOW units to be flavorful enough, but, clearly KoW doesn't give the same sort of differentiation that you will get in WHFB. There are some KOW statlines that are quite similar. The payoff is a more balanced and fast playing game. I completely understand that some folks would prefer to sacrifice a bit of balance for the detail and differentiation that you get in a WHFB army.
One final point:
Neither game lets you entirely off the hook in terms of prep time, because both games function best with ALOT of miniatures on the table so you're going to be spending an enormous amount of pre-game time painting blocks of troops.
Though Mantic has plugged the 'colored primer, block colors, dip, and base' method for getting models on the table fast. (I used it when I did a commission for 300 zombies - not as detailed - but I got them all done within a two week window.)
And, in return, The Army Painter uses Mantic miniatures as the demonstration models. (And Warlord, and Perry, and... huh... no GW.... )
The Auld Grump
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
)