New 40K race to be announced at Chicago Games Day?

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.

**Noisy_Marine**

I play Chaos like crazy and even I think the xenos races need more love. Make plastic eldar aspect warriors for pete's sake!

**person person**

I know, xenos need some cool stuff.

**Kungfuhustler**

Why did it have to be a squarebase army? Why? And why did it have to be a re-issue of Chaos Dorfs? WOE IS ME.
(seriously, another fantasy army? What are they thinking?)

**greenskin lynn**

Kungfuhustler wrote:Why did it have to be a squarebase army? Why? And why did it have to be a re-issue of Chaos Dorfs? WOE IS ME.
(seriously, another fantasy army? What are they thinking?)

they're thinking fantasy is the old folks game, and they have more money to dump into a new army then some kid buying space marines with cash made mowing lawns.......or this army is secretly a plot to strike down the demon codex dominance, somehow, in a weird way.

**Oshova**

Yeah Fantasy is much more for the 'classic' gamers, kids are more drawn into 40K for blowing stuff up and driving tanks around. Whereas fantasy has more tactics, and more thought involved.

Personally I'm looking forward to see what direction GW takes with the Chaos Dwarfs, the original way, or the hellcannon way . . . could be interesting.

**fire4effekt**

Oshova wrote:Yeah Fantasy is much more for the 'classic' gamers, kids are more drawn into 40K for blowing stuff up and driving tanks around. Whereas fantasy has more tactics, and more thought involved.

Personally I'm looking forward to see what direction GW takes with the Chaos Dwarfs, the original way, or the hellcannon way . . . could be interesting.

Play me and say i don't have tactics, or any thought involved

I will wear your head as a hat and drive through 3 states blowing things up with my no tactic/thought tank!

**Bikeninja**

Wow, this thread will now turn into the "which is better 40k or Fantasy thread". I hope that the comment about thought and tactics only being used in fantasy was just poor wording. If not then let the games begin. I may now have to pay attention to this thread now that fightin words have been thrown out. WEEEE!

**H.B.M.C.**

Bikeninja wrote:Wow, this thread will now turn into the "which is better 40k or Fantasy thread".

BattleTech!

**Tk421**

fire4effekt wrote:
Play me and say i don't have tactics, or any thought involved I will wear your head as a hat and drive through 3 states blowing things up with my no tactic/thought tank!

I don't think he was meaning to be insulting. I think he was just referencing that there are two different styles of gaming, both with different tactics. WHFB is more akin to the original minis-games of Napoleonic battles, while 40k is a matter of special abilities, cover-fire, artillery support and such. Both have developed tactics, just different kinds.

Just chill out or we'll have another pointless argument about which is "better". I think we all want to avoid that.

**Elessar**

Oshova wrote:Yeah Fantasy is much more for the 'classic' gamers, kids are more drawn into 40K for blowing stuff up and driving tanks around. Whereas fantasy has more tactics, and more thought involved.

And that ladies and gents, is how you spot a born Ork player...

**Oldgrue**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
BattleTech!

QFT!

**with an iron fist**

Oldgrue wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
BattleTech!

QFT!

Pre 3050 or post 3050?

**BrookM**

with an iron fist wrote:
Oldgrue wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
BattleTech!

QFT!

Pre 3050 or post 3050?

I prefer breast.

**hammerofulric**

Bikeninja wrote:Wow, this thread will now turn into the "which is better 40k or Fantasy thread". I hope that the comment about thought and tactics only being used in fantasy was just poor wording. If not then let the games begin. I may now have to pay attention to this thread now that fightin words have been thrown out. WEEEE!

The line I used at a GW recruitment event when asked whether 40k was a boy's game or a man's game:

Lord of the Rings - girl's game
40k - boy's game
WFB - MAN'S GAME!

And then they hired me.

**Miguelsan**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Bikeninja wrote:Wow, this thread will now turn into the "which is better 40k or Fantasy thread".

BattleTech!

+1 to that.

**Oshova**

Yeah sadly bad wording on my part =[
What I meant was that Fantasy just includes MORE . . .

**JohnHwangDD**

hammerofulric wrote:The line I used at a GW recruitment event when asked whether 40k was a boy's game or a man's game:

Lord of the Rings - girl's game
40k - boy's game
WFB - MAN'S GAME!

And then they hired me.

War of the Rings - boys's game
40k - man's game
WFB - geezer's GAME!

**Voronesh**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
hammerofulric wrote:The line I used at a GW recruitment event when asked whether 40k was a boy's game or a man's game:

Lord of the Rings - girl's game
40k - boy's game
WFB - MAN'S GAME!

And then they hired me.

War of the Rings - boys's game
40k - man's game
WFB - geezer's GAME!

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!

**orkman**

hammerofulric wrote:
Bikeninja wrote:Wow, this thread will now turn into the "which is better 40k or Fantasy thread". I hope that the comment about thought and tactics only being used in fantasy was just poor wording. If not then let the games begin. I may now have to pay attention to this thread now that fightin words have been thrown out. WEEEE!

The line I used at a GW recruitment event when asked whether 40k was a boy's game or a man's game:

Lord of the Rings - girl's game
40k - boy's game
WFB - MAN'S GAME!

And then they hired me.

Yeeeppp... pretty much 100% true.

**Archonate**

Oh it is not. WHFB is the biggest collection of ripped off cliches that GW has ever had the audacity to claim as their IP. Of everything they do, 40k has the most novelty and originality. It's no wonder that it's more popular. Everything about it is more appealing right down to a more in-your-face, gritty application of modern war strategy.
The Sci-fi genre has always had more flexibility and potential than the fantasy genre, which is inevitably a static clone of everything else fantasy.
40k also requires a greater capacity for tactical savvy and improvisation. (Unless you play SMs, which equate with playing WHFB as far as the amount of out-thinking involved.)
This is all "in my opinion" of course... (An opinion forged from nearly 17 or so years of exposure to both games...)

**Railguns**

Not to cast aspersions on you... but that just seems completely wrong. Of the 2, 40k is more or less a "point and kill" game with few tactical choices beyond leveraging probability in your favor. If the sci-fi genre is more "flexible", than 40k is hardly an exemplar of that. The game is essentially a transplanted version of Warhammer fantasy, with some of the races replaced with less silly future counterparts (like Tyranids in place of Skaven). "Fantasy" may just be more stagnant as a genre because there aren't any real attempts to push what occurs in fantasy. Since Tolkein the standards of the genre have been fairly "set". In that regard, I'd actually say that Warhammer Fantasy is more creative and interesting than the vast majority of the genre it claims to be part of.

**Khornholio**

Wow! What a thread. Good thing they didn't announce a new LOTR race.

**Railguns**

I would get a good chuckle out of that.

**Archonate**

Railguns wrote:Not to cast aspersions on you... but that just seems completely wrong. Of the 2, 40k is more or less a "point and kill" game with few tactical choices beyond leveraging probability in your favor. If the sci-fi genre is more "flexible", than 40k is hardly an exemplar of that. The game is essentially a transplanted version of Warhammer fantasy, with some of the races replaced with less silly future counterparts (like Tyranids in place of Skaven). "Fantasy" may just be more stagnant as a genre because there aren't any real attempts to push what occurs in fantasy. Since Tolkein the standards of the genre have been fairly "set". In that regard, I'd actually say that Warhammer Fantasy is more creative and interesting than the vast majority of the genre it claims to be part of.

I guess it usually just comes down to what an individual finds more interesting. To me personally the fantasy genre, as you said, seems very stagnant. I've tried to figure out what could be so interesting about it and I just don't see anything. But I'm sure there are plenty who feel that way about 40k. From watching and playing both games a lot, I personally see much deeper tactical dynamics in 40k. Quite probably my bias contributes to that perception. But that's no less probable for those who favor the WHFB.

**Sidstyler**

Oddly enough I find LotR more interesting than GW's own fantasy line. There are some good models though, and I want a Dark Elf army of my own eventually, but the background just didn't appeal to me because I've seen it all before.