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 ?

Warmachine with out a doubt

Warmahordes is cheaper by virtue of having to buy less models.

BFG

Probably Warmahordes to start, but it really isn't that big a difference in the long run. Yeah, you need less stuff for WM/H, but everything is individually more expensive, and it seems to be a lot harder to stick to one list, you'll find yourself grabbing new casters and jacks and units as you think of cool new ways to use them with your other stuff.

There's also a hidden cost: Other people to play against. Sure, you could discover what you consider the best wargaming system in the world, but if there's no one to play against, what value do you get out of the system?

I love how Warmahordes plays, but at my FLGS there's practically no players.

Its cheaper so long as you stick with one list at 35 points. As soon as you up yourself to 50 points it could get more expensive and if you want to play multiple list tournies then its just as expensive as 40k. In short its only cheap if you don't dedicate yourself to the game. Both games are expensive.

Red Comet wrote:Its cheaper so long as you stick with one list at 35 points. As soon as you up yourself to 50 points it could get more expensive and if you want to play multiple list tournies then its just as expensive as 40k. In short its only cheap if you don't dedicate yourself to the game. Both games are expensive.

It's true, once I am done finishing 2 50 pts list I realize I could have probably build an elite 2k 40k army.

Warmachine seems to be a bit more expensive on a model by model basis, but you need fewer to play.

Brother SRM wrote:Warmachine seems to be a bit more expensive on a model by model basis, but you need fewer to play.

True that, 10 Bane Thralls cost 80 bucks, but you wont need more than 2 sets of those (plus UA).

Average cost per army? WH40K > WM/H

Average cost per model? WH40K < WM/H

Comparing the point levels of WH40k at 2000 and 1850 to WM/H of 50, 35. Which is where I feel both games come into their own with respect to balance such as it is.

Warmachine is "cheaper" because you don't have to buy as many models, but a "full" warmachine army is still very costly.


If you want an army on a budget, with 40k you get more models for your money. You don't have to start the hobby with a 2000 point army.

As others have noted, the costs, if not the exact same, are pretty close.

In other words, the difference is negligible in comparison to the games' background, aesthetic and local gaming presence. Make your choice based on those things.

If you want significantly cheaper tabletop gaming, look to the variety of skirmish games available.