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.

Which do you consider should be the hobby of someone low on cash ?

Um, it'll be cheaper to start playing full games of WM, but if you
get into it you'll end up spending as much as 40k, if not more.

WM/Hoards only costs you 50 bucks to get a playable army with the rules. I don't even know what a legal army in 40k would cost any more.

The average WM/Hoards 35 point army will run you about 200-250, depending on how many variation (min/max units as well) that you want. Where as a decent 40k army will probably run you 350+ (buying vehicles etc).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But as Malfred said, when you expand from that 1 list you'll probably end up playing about the same (but have more legitimate options and playstyles).

Cheaper to start playing and a 35pt army is much cheaper compared to its equivalent 1500pt 40k army. What others have said about expanding being the same price in the end isn't as clear as it sounds.

If you expanded in the same manner with 40k it would cost more, (IG armies being more then Space Marines etc). The one area where Warmachine/Hordes has far exceeded the cost of 40k is in the following:

I have purchased more factions and quicker then I did in 40k because simply, I could afford it. In the end though I started buying more and more for each faction...I had opened the proverbial "Can of Worms".

So in conclusion - 4ok = more expensive per faction to start playing up to 35pts

Well right now the army I'm getting is costing about 248 dollars without shipping or tax, which is a 35pt list but if you plan on playing in a steamroller tournament or one that requires you to have multiple lists you need to spend about another 100 dollars depending how interchangeble the lists you are taking. Running infantry lists are insanely expensive, as they cost more than jack/beasts and some of the warcasters/warlocks are expensive as hell. Some things are cheaper and you can add that you don't have to take vehicles which pretty much double the cost of a unit. It's easier to get in to warmahordes but some of the other stuff has me considering going online to buy to get a discount which I don't like to do.

Some things are a bit crazy in their prices like the Harbinger for proctectorate 40 bucks for a character model I get its a sorta big model but come on. Then the retribution of scryah cavalry, 100 dollars for a box of 5?

However, there is also the bit to consider that in 40k if you buy an army you have the same army and your playstyle will vary very little. Most game you will make very similar sequences of plays and changing how your army works requires a substantial investment. Once you have a nice set of core units for WM, if you get bored with the way you have been playing you can easily buy a new Warcaster for $10-$15 and suddenly those core units you have are going to play entirely differently.

Overall I would say that WM is much cheaper, I still find myself spending quite a bit on WM, but when I look at how much More I was spending on 40k I feel a bit better.

Warmachine / Hordes by a good margin. The raw number of models you need is much less, and you'll generally be running $200 to $300 ahead when you get to the 50 point level by going with Privateer Press from scratch as opposed to the 2000 - 2500 point level in Warhammer / 40k.

Remember, GW requires a $100 startup investment before you even buy any models (rulebook + codex). For $50 you can play basic games, and getting the full expanded rules will cost you another $30 on top of that for a full rulebook... if you don't take the free field test PFD that Privateer published that is still floating around out there. Generally you'll add 8-10 points for another jack at $35 each, and $50 for a full troop unit in a similar point range. Some things vary up and down - character jacks cost $50, small character units can add a good value to your army and run only $25.

For instance, take the Cygnar battle box ($50) for 11 points. Add a Squire and Journeyman Warcaster as essential support solos (16 points and $68.98). The jump to 25 is a little intimidating for adding troops because you're new, so we add a Defender and pawn the Charger off to Jr. to run (25 points and $103.97). Unfortunately our jack heavy group gets swarmed by a bunch of troops in one game, and we decide that we want to add some troops that can cut through infantry - even though they're a bit pricey, we spring for a full unit of Stormguard, and recruit the intrepid adventurer Reinholt to help Stryker out as a good luck charm (35 points and $180.93).

So we're still shy of $200 for a 35 point force, although tax may well get us up there. Stormguard are not exactly a 'cheap' option - we could go with another unit (Trencher Commandos, etc) that are only $50 for 10 that will also push us up to 35 points and will put us around $160 for the lot from owning nothing to having a 35 point Warmachine force.

Consider that for Space Marines at this price level, you'd not even have a batallion box for $180 - you could probably get 2 $35 options after rulebook and codex, but those are unlikely to even crack 750 points, and in some cases not even 500. Having more options in Warmachine will cost you more, but if you drop $400 on either system, you'll have a good variety of options with PP (starter box with 2 or 3 additional jacks + character jack, and then $200 for units and solos, probably adding 3 full units and 3 or 4 solos on average) while with GW you'll probably just be completing your 2000 point core force at the $400 level, depending on what you're going for.

Malifaux is cheaper than both. In fact, you could get two starter boxes for the same cost as a starter for either of these.

Well if he had asked which was the cheapest game, I'd have
said DnD with cardboard chits, especially if you steal the chits;
however, he was asking about two specific games in comparison.

I still think I spend more on warmachine, but that's because
I clearly have a problem.

If you want a more detailed comparison then somebody has done that here.

For some reason, whenever I spend money on Privateer Press products I don't feel so bad afterwards. There's none of the shame, and feeling like I've been bent over a table and forced to watch as my wallet was violated. Even if I spend equivalent amounts.

Thx for your answers

RuneGrey wrote:

For instance, take the Cygnar battle box ($50) for 11 points. Add a Squire and Journeyman Warcaster as essential support solos (16 points and $68.98). The jump to 25 is a little intimidating for adding troops because you're new, so we add a Defender and pawn the Charger off to Jr. to run (25 points and $103.97). Unfortunately our jack heavy group gets swarmed by a bunch of troops in one game, and we decide that we want to add some troops that can cut through infantry - even though they're a bit pricey, we spring for a full unit of Stormguard, and recruit the intrepid adventurer Reinholt to help Stryker out as a good luck charm (35 points and $180.93).

That's really cool - you basically described my exact way to breakt into Warmachine :-). In order of purchase:

Cygnar Battlebox

Jr. + Squire

Stormguard

Defender / Triumph (Magnetized)

Reinhold

solitaire... or catching butterflies... or watching clouds roll by...

I don't think the link offered was a great comparison--as he did not include transports for the 40k armies (Although even without, WM still came in cheaper!). Anyways, something I posted awhile ago;

I did this comparison before;

Cygnar Battleforce 40 bucks
Long Gunner box 40 bucks
Stormblade box 40 bucks
Gun Mage box 27 bucks
Journeyman 7 bucks


150 bucks gives you a pretty good 35 point force (which 'feels' like a sub 1850 game of 40k to me). Upgrade to 50 for another 50 bucks with Strangewayes, Stormclad and UA (Which 'feels' like a 1850ish+ game to me). So 200 bucks gives you a pretty good 50 point force (Which seems to be the Steamroller format---35 or 50).

Let's make a competitive 1850 Vulkan list!

(all prices at 20% off)
Vulkan 16 bucks
Dread 35 bucks
Dread 35 bucks
TH/SS Terms 40 bucks
---LRC 45 bucks
Tac Squad 30 bucks
----Rhino 26 bucks
Tac Squad 30 bucks
----Rhino 26 bucks
Scout Squad 20 bucks
----Telion 12 bucks
LS w/ HF/MM 24 bucks
LS w/ HF/MM 25 bucks
Pred 40 bucks
Pred 40 bucks
Pred 40 bucks

485 dollars

That's actually 1800---so you have some room for upgrades (Where I don't know, PF on Tac squads is pretty pointless). But 50 is there if you want it.

Can we at least all agree that it's silly to compare the two games? One is a small scale skirmish game, one is a larger scale tactical combat game with mulitple units.

On a per-model basis, they're about the same. Warmahordes costs less because it requires less models to play. Which is, again, why games like Malifaux or MERCS are even less expensive; they require even fewer models.

Not really. Regardless of how many miniatures you place on the tabletop--the question being posed is; "For equal entertainment value, which game is cheaper?". In theory, I could play 40k at 400-500ish points (even less possibly)--but for all intents and purposes, count on 1500-1850 point games. Taking Warmahordes for example, I could in theory--play 15 point games only--but for all intents and purposes (Tournaments, pick up games, etc), count on 35 or 50.

And when you play both, you quickly get a feel that 35 points in Warmahordes equates into relatively the same length/gaming exposure as a 1500 pt 40k game--and 50 equates into relatively the same length/gaming exposure as an 1850-2kish 40k game.

i dont even want to list what my Imperial guard amy would have cost... or the fact that 40k armies get outdated if you want to be competetive..

Then when you do get a new book (4-5 years later).. you have to rebuy the army it seems..

With warmachine, i have a large Menoth force, and im getting a Circle army.

Then if i ever decide to do a tourney im gppd to go, then for fun, i want something different, i can make a 35pt list of another faction for around $150 -$200 and be set, you dont always need multi casters for every army if you have a main army to play for those instances.

Well I have been looking at ebay lately and seeing a lot of warmachine armies put up for sale, usually around $200 on average. And I had to chuckle a little when I read the list of units and saw them talking about 2-3 of every faction jack and 1 of every faction unit, bar stuff like kossite woodsmen, and at the end they say retail value is $653 or around that. Then I think how that would buy about 1500 points of competitive 40k army...So 1 list.

One of the things I enjoy about Warmachine is that I can pick up a 10 to 15 dollar model that can drastically alter the way my army plays. Switching Warcasters without having to switch any other model in the army is a fun way to try something new. I can't really do that in 40k.

Will you be spending money on WM/H? Yes. Sometimes it'll feel like you're spending a lot, but I've noticed that there doesn't tend to be many stinker units/models in the game. I can't think of anything that could be labeled the WM/H equivalent of Stingwings for instance.

I have a feeling that if you wait a few weeks, and those 2 Player sets start showing up on eBay, that you'll be able to jump in with a fairly good sized starting force for under $100.00 (even after adding a couple of pieces to the faction you choose from it).

I think there is a hidden cost to Warmachine in game fatigue.

You really can't play WM/H as anything less than competitively due to the caster kill win mechanic. Yes, two people who regularly play each other can house rule the caster kill no longer constituting a win, but even then the absence of the caster/lock is going to be a huge loss of power in battlegroup management and unit support.

I think this results in a game that the less competitively inclined get tired of more quickly. It's not as much 'fun' to put all your models on the table, make one mistake, and be packing up again on turn 2, 15 minutes later. By contrast even people who are getting horribly stomped on in 40k get the dubious pleasure of pushing models around and rolling dice.

But in a purely financial sense, WM/H is going to outstrip 40k on dollars spent versus playability achieved, simply because model counts are lower. You can easily end up spending as much/more on WM/H than 40k, but at that point you have the equivalent of 40k Apocalypse-sized collections.

I can't remember, cause all we play is caster-kill, but does WM/H have objective based missions? I know, for instance, objective based missions are a huge part of Malifaux, and do play a role in 40k. I also know that some of the league events have featured heavily in objective based playstyle, but I'm struggling to remember if there are objective scenarios in the rulebook for WM/H?

We play by this;

http://privateerpress.com/files/Official%20Steamroller%202011%20Rules.pdf

Consistent rules--the minute someone says "Steamroller Tournament"---you know what it means.

Is it just me, or are used warmachine models consistently more expensive than GW equivilents? Meaning, used models hold a higher percentage of their value on ebay?

Or is it just a reflection that there is less used stuff in circulation, and what is is almost always metal and rarely converted?

sourclams wrote:I think there is a hidden cost to Warmachine in game fatigue.

You really can't play WM/H as anything less than competitively due to the caster kill win mechanic. Yes, two people who regularly play each other can house rule the caster kill no longer constituting a win, but even then the absence of the caster/lock is going to be a huge loss of power in battlegroup management and unit support.

I think this results in a game that the less competitively inclined get tired of more quickly. It's not as much 'fun' to put all your models on the table, make one mistake, and be packing up again on turn 2, 15 minutes later. By contrast even people who are getting horribly stomped on in 40k get the dubious pleasure of pushing models around and rolling dice.

But in a purely financial sense, WM/H is going to outstrip 40k on dollars spent versus playability achieved, simply because model counts are lower. You can easily end up spending as much/more on WM/H than 40k, but at that point you have the equivalent of 40k Apocalypse-sized collections.

I find this amusing, as you can play WM/H as casual..

Im not sure about you, but i dont find it fun being resticted to 1/2 to 1/4 of the units in a book because the rest are terrible. Ive shot players off the table in 1 turn with IG, the next 4-5 turns were... boring. Play a deepstrike army and 1 bad role and you lose 200+ points,

Caster kill is still better then oh.. the game ended because the random turn dice said so.. who happens to have killed more of the opponets cheap killpoint units rather then things that matter.

----

Scenarios in WM/H make it alot better, you can still win by caster kill, but you dont have to.

I see more scenario wins then i do caster kills as we learn the game how to use the caster.. without getting them smacked down.

Spyder68 wrote:

sourclams wrote:I think there is a hidden cost to Warmachine in game fatigue.

You really can't play WM/H as anything less than competitively due to the caster kill win mechanic. Yes, two people who regularly play each other can house rule the caster kill no longer constituting a win, but even then the absence of the caster/lock is going to be a huge loss of power in battlegroup management and unit support.

I think this results in a game that the less competitively inclined get tired of more quickly. It's not as much 'fun' to put all your models on the table, make one mistake, and be packing up again on turn 2, 15 minutes later. By contrast even people who are getting horribly stomped on in 40k get the dubious pleasure of pushing models around and rolling dice.

But in a purely financial sense, WM/H is going to outstrip 40k on dollars spent versus playability achieved, simply because model counts are lower. You can easily end up spending as much/more on WM/H than 40k, but at that point you have the equivalent of 40k Apocalypse-sized collections.

I find this amusing, as you can play WM/H as casual..

Im not sure about you, but i dont find it fun being resticted to 1/2 to 1/4 of the units in a book because the rest are terrible. Ive shot players off the table in 1 turn with IG, the next 4-5 turns were... boring. Play a deepstrike army and 1 bad role and you lose 200+ points,

Caster kill is still better then oh.. the game ended because the random turn dice said so.. who happens to have killed more of the opponets cheap killpoint units rather then things that matter.

----

Scenarios in WM/H make it alot better, you can still win by caster kill, but you dont have to.

I see more scenario wins then i do caster kills as we learn the game how to use the caster.. without getting them smacked down.

The thing is, caster kill happens a lot less once you learn the game and have seen a few of the tricks people will use to get at your caster early on. Once you actually earn how to project their force on the table without them being in a vulnerable position, things change very quickly and the tactical level of the game goes up a lot. When you tend to see a LOT of caster kills are new players vs. modestly more experienced players - the ones who've learned the lessons about assassination runs vs. the ones who've not seen such things before. I was showing a friend the ropes with his Khador army and the situation there was pretty much: 'Wow, I did not realize Vlad was actually in your threat range there - you teleported that Warpwolf 8" and then walked em 3 more so he could hammer on my caster by using Kromac's Warpath.' I'd even pointed out to him that if he moved his caster there he was in danger - he thought it would be cool, so I just shrugged and showed him why it wasn't the next turn.

The complexity of Warmachine games goes up as people's skill level does, which is one of the major selling points for it over 40k right now. Fantasy I will argue is closer to WM/H in terms of more balanced rules, but doesn't quite make it there - it still suffers from GW's typical sloppy writing and 'just fudge it' rules methodology at times. But PP has shown that when you have a solid set of rules meant for tourney play, it reflects down through the entire gaming community - there is always another level of detail and tactics that you can delve into as your playing skill improves, while I feel 40k generally boils down to 'did you build a good list, from the right codex, which allows you to throw enough dice to win'.

I would not say that the caster kill is a bad thing, as long as you understand that your caster is sort of a liability and that you need to protect them then you should be in good shape. For example when I went to my first WM tournament I had a 3-1 Win loss ratio with basically a khador battle box and some doom reavers. (1 jack I think and a solo or two) Before that tournament I had played maybe 3 games, however I paid careful attention to protecting my caster and found that enemy casters don't like to be introduced to the sharp edge of a fell blade when they are frozen.

Yes the caster kill makes a game go much more quickly, but that just means you can play a full tournament in 1 afternoon because the game ends when you general dies. In 40k you usually know who is going to win after the first or maybe the second round of shooting, however after that you will still be beat a dead game for another 2-3 hours or so. I like the caster kill, and the only way someone is going to convince me to play a game of 40k with them is if they say that killing the enemy HQ = victory.

Khornate25 wrote:Which do you consider should be the hobby of someone low on cash ?

-Malifaux
-Infinity
-Sharp Practice (Or Terrible Sharp Sword)

It's definitely cheaper to start warmachine, but as other have said, it gets much more expensive once you get in, especially if you decide to do more then one faction.

Valeofthegate wrote:It's definitely cheaper to start warmachine, but as other have said, it gets much more expensive once you get in, especially if you decide to do more then one faction.

But isn't the same thing true for all wargames? Take 40k for example. The cost for one army is much higher that Warmachine, but there are also a lot of people who have more than one army. Maybe the codex is out of date, or there is a new flavor of the month army-wise. So in the end, WarmaHordes is still much cheaper army for army than say WHFB or 40k