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.

It's unavoidable that these two would be compared. They're the two biggest wargames out there, and there is some bit of rivalry going on between them.

I've been sneaking around the forums abit, because honestly, while I do prefer 40K, I would tottally go with Warmahordes if not for a few select things which will likely be remedied in the future. Though, I did think it would be interesting to get a list of pros and cons of the two when compared to each other. I'll start off with what I believe are a few.

Market Saturation
Simply put, WH40K is still the dominant by a good amount. This has many perks, the biggest being it'll be easier to find a game, and if you move, you'll likely have an easier time finding new people to play with whereas in Warmahordes you may not find anyone at all if you had to move! Honestly, this is the biggest reason why I don't go with Warmahordes. I'm moving in about a year, and I have no idea if I'll find a gaming group for Warmahordes where I'm moving, but know I will for 40k.

Price
No question, it's cheaper to get into Warmahordes. You need less units, and it only becomes more costly if you want them all, this gap of prices just gets bigger each year as GW keeps raising prices, and I find it's the biggest reason people go Warmahordes.

Books
The way PP does their books is just better. You buy the two player box and you'll have a set of rules that'll be all you need, you only need to buy one book to play your army, and only need the army specific book if you really want it. Not only that, the book quality is just better for Warmahordes, with a section on the hobby itself rather than just the game.

Hobby: GW minis offer much more customization options (plastic and wargear). PP has a(n expensive) bits ordering service. Both have specialist collectors' items (Forgeworld and Extreme, respectively), though Forgeworld is much more extensive.

Your argument about books is the wrong approach: both games have starter sets, rulebooks (including mini and large), and army books, and both have hobby sections.* In fact, in the long run, GW will cost less, unless you plan on collecting a lot of armies. Quality is subjective.

The difference is that PP has a rolling release schedule for all armies, while GW has the (IMHO worse) "army a month" release schedule, which means big gaps between releases.

*Also, GW produces various hobby books which range from beginner to advanced, while PP has released one beginning level DVD (not making a judgment claim here, PP is smaller and younger, but both produce explicitly hobby-related material).

GW is a miniatures company that makes a game. They typically have beautiful multi-part plastics and shoddy rules mechanics that change dramatically with editions and codices and reward 'spam'. Specific models/units tend to have distinct hot/cold editions where what was good in previous editions is no longer good now, resulting in alot of army/model recycling. Ambiguities in their rules-writing and lack of R&D support results in models/abilities that can play dramatically differently based on interpretation. GW is also often criticized for monolithic release schedules and favoring 'Marine' armies. Factions can go years at a time with no updates, and release tranches dump a lot of merch on the market in a short period versus a more moderated release schedule. GW gameplay is typically linear (everything moves, everything shoots, everything fights).

PP is a gaming company that makes minis. Their game was basically built ground-up from the rules, resulting in a tight, near-technical terminology and continuity. This results in little to no ambiguity. PP tends to update armies/factions more equitably with everything getting something in 3-6 month tranches. Other than a Mk. II re-release, there's really no editions or continuity issues with PP product, and inter and intrafaction balance is generally very good, aside from a 'stinker' model/unit or two. PP gameplay is typically dynamic, dependent on resource allocation, usage of 1/game abilities, and building powerful combos. PP models tend to be metal and mono-pose, and there are definite quality differences between newer and older sculpts.

spiralingcadaver wrote:Hobby: GW minis offer much more customization options (plastic and wargear). PP has a(n expensive) bits ordering service. Both have specialist collectors' items (Forgeworld and Extreme, respectively), though Forgeworld is much more extensive.

Your argument about books is the wrong approach: both games have starter sets, rulebooks (including mini and large), and army books, and both have hobby sections.* In fact, in the long run, GW will cost less, unless you plan on collecting a lot of armies. Quality is subjective.

The difference is that PP has a rolling release schedule for all armies, while GW has the (IMHO worse) "army a month" release schedule, which means big gaps between releases.

*Also, GW produces various hobby books which range from beginner to advanced, while PP has released one beginning level DVD (not making a judgment claim here, PP is smaller and younger, but both produce explicitly hobby-related material).

Well I meant, for example, the 2p box for Warmahordes has a rule book, that it's all you'll need. Don't need to go out and buy a $50 book like in WH40K when you buy their bigass 2p box.

That, and there is no hobby section in WH40K codexes, but they do have those in Warmahorde "codexes". I don't exactly count the "model showcase" of 40k codexes as a hobby section (hell, it's more a BUY FW STUFF! showcase in the grey knights codex), it's just showing lots of images. PP gives freakin' building tips.

Pros:
- Generally well balanced
- Fast and tactical gameplay
- Tactical ability is more important than list building
- regular Army wide releases
- Easier but more flexible core gameplay
- relatively cheap to start with

Cons:
- Units often got only 3 sculpts in a 10 man unit
- in the long run as expensive as 40k
- lower player saturation
- very steep learning curve
- lots and lots of information to remember to become " good"

Generally i think Warmahordes is the superior game, the only cons i see are more " hobby" and less " gaming" related

spiralingcadaver wrote:In fact, in the long run, GW will cost less, unless you plan on collecting a lot of armies.

I don't understand how you arrive at this conclusion. GW's system requires more models to play, rewards taking multiples of effective unit types, and the ruleset requires significant reinvestiture if you change your army archetype (within the same codex) - e.g. Kult of Speed vs. Kan Wall vs. Green Tide.

keezus wrote:

spiralingcadaver wrote:In fact, in the long run, GW will cost less, unless you plan on collecting a lot of armies.

I don't understand how you arrive at this conclusion. GW's system requires more models to play, rewards taking multiples of effective unit types, and the ruleset requires significant reinvestiture if you change your army archetype (within the same codex) - e.g. Kult of Speed vs. Kan Wall vs. Green Tide.

I don't get it either, but it always comes up.

I bought some of the starter boxes for warmachine when it first came out. I put them on the shelf since my group got heavy into 40k. I have been looking at Warmahordes a lot lately just for a change of pace and I was wondering if my beginner box jacks from the original release are still viable in todays game.

The boxes, all boxes, are all valid.

Well I guess my real question is does PP do a good job of not making the newer jacks so over the top that the older ones have no use anymore.

quite the opposite actually. PP has been scaling back their new releases, the older stuff is still usually the best stuff. bane thralls and doom reavers have been around for a long time and are still seen. i run juggernauts a ton when i play khador, menoth loves their choirs and vanquishers, and cygnar staples like jr and the defender have been here for a long time.

some of the newer stuff is really good, but it doesnt outshine older stuff.

OT:

this may sound weird, but i really value a game that lets me engage enemy models without having to charge them. also i really like the option to leave a combat, even at the risk of being destroyed. in this 40k makes little sense to me, when would a GK terminator care about being engaged with a grot?

warmachine is a lot more skirmish oriented. the ranges are shorter, topping off at the lower 20 inch range. troops have a chance to hurt heavy targets in both melee (CMA) and ranged (CRA). troops can interact with other troops and as a result warmachine has more inborn synergy than 40k.

40k is great for converting. i also really like the fluff, but the game leaves much to be desired. like i said above, elements like leaving combat are important for me, because its relaistic. GW also has a horrible release schedule, killed their bitz catalog and shunned the specialist games community. GW is surely still top dawg, but the gap between them and other companies is shrinking.

You will be happy to hear, that Codex creep is a GW thing. There are very few cases were something makes something older obsolete. In fact a lot of the most powerful units in the game are from prime/ primal ( Gun Mages, Banes....)
The same goes for the jacks. All Battleboxes contain a " basic" heavy jack that is still used quite often, mostly for its cheapness ( Slayer, Ironclad, Juggernaut...) and some light jacks that bring utility.
While some of them are not the most competitve choices ( Destroyer, Defiler....) they are all useful

Namica wrote:

keezus wrote:

spiralingcadaver wrote:In fact, in the long run, GW will cost less, unless you plan on collecting a lot of armies.

I don't understand how you arrive at this conclusion. GW's system requires more models to play, rewards taking multiples of effective unit types, and the ruleset requires significant reinvestiture if you change your army archetype (within the same codex) - e.g. Kult of Speed vs. Kan Wall vs. Green Tide.

I don't get it either, but it always comes up.

Cadaver's close: Warmachine/Hordes definitely have a lesser buy in cost - a game at 15 points is just as tactical and involved as one at 35 or 50 points - but if you want to collect an entire faction, then Warmachine/Hordes will be more costly. Which is kind of a silly argument, when you think about it. One of Warmachine's greatest strengths is the fact that a single change in an army list - 1 solo, unit, warjack/beast - can noticeably change how an list plays on the table. And changing a Warcaster is even bigger.

Namica wrote:

keezus wrote:

spiralingcadaver wrote:In fact, in the long run, GW will cost less, unless you plan on collecting a lot of armies.

I don't understand how you arrive at this conclusion. GW's system requires more models to play, rewards taking multiples of effective unit types, and the ruleset requires significant reinvestiture if you change your army archetype (within the same codex) - e.g. Kult of Speed vs. Kan Wall vs. Green Tide.

I don't get it either, but it always comes up.

Oh, my bad, I should have specified, I just meant in terms of books.

Hückleberry wrote:Well I guess my real question is does PP do a good job of not making the newer jacks so over the top that the older ones have no use anymore.

The consensus is that new releases do not make old releases useless.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/394724.page

infinite_array wrote:Cadaver's close: Warmachine/Hordes definitely have a lesser buy in cost - a game at 15 points is just as tactical and involved as one at 35 or 50 points - but if you want to collect an entire faction, then Warmachine/Hordes will be more costly.

Frankly I continue to find this statement fallacious and flat out wrong (not calling you out, I think you roughly agree, just using the quote) even though I see it expressed often.

If you buy an entire faction, then you have an incredible number of potential lists at your disposal. The playability of a warmachine/hordes faction represents something like 50 separate 2,000 point 40k lists.

I think I priced the entire Trollbloods faction (one of the most expensive on a per model basis) out at around $1,000. The entire faction. Aside from a few specific tier lists, you can run whatever you want...almost a dozen warlocks, three or four distinct lists per warlock, easy.

What would $1,000 get you in Imperial Guard armies? One coherent 2.5k list? Maybe two distinctly different 2k lists if you went somewhat transport-light?

Frankly, I don't understand how 'buying an entire faction costs more'. If you're buying the entire faction, you have 1 of each model/unit. If you're buying an entire 40k codex, you have 3 or more of every model/unit. WM is cheaper on a list-by-list basis and on a faction-by-faction basis, and a LOT cheaper on an 'all possible combinations' basis.

infinite_array wrote:Cadaver's close: Warmachine/Hordes definitely have a lesser buy in cost - a game at 15 points is just as tactical and involved as one at 35 or 50 points - but if you want to collect an entire faction, then Warmachine/Hordes will be more costly. Which is kind of a silly argument, when you think about it. One of Warmachine's greatest strengths is the fact that a single change in an army list - 1 solo, unit, warjack/beast - can noticeably change how an list plays on the table. And changing a Warcaster is even bigger.

This is sort of the case. For instance, two infantry casters could run the same infantry list two different ways viably (hypothetically, faster vs. harder to kill). However, swapping in a jack caster could potentially require you to swap out 90% of your army to run it well. If you're willing to play with a limited set/style, then that statement is mostly true, but if you're playing 2 different styles, that's just as radically different as the Kult of Speed vs. Kan Wall.

Mercs and Minions also often have little overlap. For instance, the following casters are often run in theme lists:
-Shae (+ talion)
-pMagnus
-eMagnus
-Ashlynn

From that list, there is a partial overlap on jacks taken, and only one non-jack in common in those lists.

Add to that Searforge & the rhulic themes for one more solo overlap but no jack overlap with the above.

Mercs is literally four different 'armies': Dwarves, Pirates, Steelheads, and any mishmash of those plus various Khadoran and Cygnar units to create highborn or four star syndicate charters.

Even ignoring that this is the least favorable comparison basis for a dollar:%collectibility argument, I would gamble that a dollar spent on Mercs will still get you more playability in normal gaming formats than a dollar spent on 40k models.

Exactly! That's what I didn't get. Getting a list for Warmahordes is a few hundred less than a comparable 40K, and you can change that list for cheaper than 40K.

So you can buy an entire faction in 40K for cheaper, you'll have alot less options than buying the whole army in Warmahordes. You have a Space Marine shooty list. Almost horde like. How much would it cost to make that into more of an assault list? Buy lots of pistol + chainsword bits, a whole new HQ, maybe a whole different sort of termie. It'll likely cost over 100. Changing a tac in Warmahordes can be as easy as changing one warlock, or a warlock and a unit.

@spiralingcadaver:

Did you just really use the fact that 4 Mini-factions dont have a lot of overlap, if you use highly constricted lists, to say that warmachine is not cheaper than 40k? Seriously?

In terms of pros/cons (to get things a little back to topic)

Models:
GW is hands down better. I have yet to hear of anyone that thought PP's models were better. Detail, conversion possibilities, look/material.

price per model:
GW is generally better but price per army PP is generally better. This is just because PP uses smaller armies.
My 1850 GW army runs at around $350 and my 35 pt PP army runs at $230
Just the way it is mostly because my GW army has more than 2x the models in it (that makes a difference). Arguing about the versatility of armies, changing them, etc wont change that.

Book wise and rule wise (by rules here i mean the presentation of rules):
I like GWs method. Yes the army every 3 months means most armies are stagnate for a long time but this also means everything you need for one army is in one location. I find having to look through multiple books to find the rules for a single army in PP's method to be very annoying.
Yes i know you can just get the cards but that means I have to go buy all the models before seeing the actual stats, equally annoying.

In terms of actual rules:
Warmachine is actually closer to warhammer fantasy 6th edition. The vehicles in 40k have always been an issue for balance. In 3rd they were speed machines delivering troops, in 4th they were death traps, in 5th they are tough as nails. Take them out and many issues go away. Warmachine has nothing that far removed from the rest of the units rules wise (jacks and warbeasts are closer to monstrous creatures than vehicles rules wise, slightly tougher, lots more wounds).

In fantasy and in warmachine the factions are actually very similar with a few differences between them. Generally they had the same rules just in different combination and one stat or another was higher than the other factions. Wrmachine is the same. Throw in charge = win along with combat is far more likely to kill something that shooting and walla, direct comparison.

I'm gonna guess that codex creep, or some flavor of it will work its way into warmachine but because of the method of updates it wont be as bad as it is with games workshop's release design.
Give it another 4 years and mark 3 will come out.

Vombaticus wrote:@spiralingcadaver:

Did you just really use the fact that 4 Mini-factions dont have a lot of overlap, if you use highly constricted lists, to say that warmachine is not cheaper than 40k? Seriously?

No, I used it to say that it isn't always as cheap as swapping out a $10 model to play a different army, as an extension of the comment about different caster styles often dictating army type.

cypher wrote:In terms of pros/cons (to get things a little back to topic)

Models:
GW is hands down better. I have yet to hear of anyone that thought PP's models were better. Detail, conversion possibilities, look/material.

Honestly, aside from the Dark Eldar, I like the PP models better.

The vehicles of 40k are lazy and uninspired, mostly just cliche tanks and METAL BOXES with little variations to themes. There is far to much uniformity, and even with the uniform look it's just so lazy looking with few exceptions. PP just has variety all over the place, and few models I feel look derpy, while I can take handfuls of units in WH40K and say they look derpy.

cypher wrote:In terms of pros/cons (to get things a little back to topic)price per model:
GW is generally better but price per army PP is generally better. This is just because PP uses smaller armies.
My 1850 GW army runs at around $350 and my 35 pt PP army runs at $230
Just the way it is mostly because my GW army has more than 2x the models in it (that makes a difference). Arguing about the versatility of armies, changing them, etc wont change that.

Book wise and rule wise (by rules here i mean the presentation of rules):
Yes i know you can just get the cards but that means I have to go buy all the models before seeing the actual stats, equally annoying.

In terms of actual rules:
Warmachine is actually closer to warhammer fantasy 6th edition. The vehicles in 40k have always been an issue for balance. In 3rd they were speed machines delivering troops, in 4th they were death traps, in 5th they are tough as nails. Take them out and many issues go away. Warmachine has nothing that far removed from the rest of the units rules wise (jacks and warbeasts are closer to monstrous creatures than vehicles rules wise, slightly tougher, lots more wounds).

In fantasy and in warmachine the factions are actually very similar with a few differences between them. Generally they had the same rules just in different combination and one stat or another was higher than the other factions. Wrmachine is the same. Throw in charge = win along with combat is far more likely to kill something that shooting and walla, direct comparison.

I'm gonna guess that codex creep, or some flavor of it will work its way into warmachine but because of the method of updates it wont be as bad as it is with games workshop's release design.
Give it another 4 years and mark 3 will come out.

I would love to see your army lists. Even with your numbers you're still showing a savings of 33% by playing PP over GW. How about telling us how much you spent for a second usuable list for 40K vs how much you had to pay to make your second PP army?

As far as finding all of the stats for the various units you can buy a deck of cards for whichever faction you're interested in for between 11-15 dollars. These decks have most of the cards of the faction for a small fraction of the cost of one GW codex and you don't even need the Forces of book from PP to play your faction. That's hardly the case for GW.

As for the rules themselves you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who's played each system claim that 40K has a better rule system than PP especially in terms of clarity of how to play.

What army is it, at that? Most armies will cost 300-400 (with some being much more) to get to 1k points, unless GK, which are BY FAR the cheapest army.

These decks have most of the cards of the faction for a small fraction of the cost

As i said. I enjoy the GW's policy of having ALL rules in one place. Finding most but not all gets annoying.

Clarity of rules, yea GW has missed that one. Will see if 6th fixes that but I'm not holding my breath.

One for PP, one for GW.

Not seeing your point on how much a second usable list would be. I can either replace some or all of the list ranging from some extra money to another $300.

cypher wrote:

These decks have most of the cards of the faction for a small fraction of the cost

As i said. I enjoy the GW's policy of having ALL rules in one place. Finding most but not all gets annoying.

Clarity of rules, yea GW has missed that one. Will see if 6th fixes that but I'm not holding my breath.

One for PP, one for GW.

Not seeing your point on how much a second usable list would be. I can either replace some or all of the list ranging from some extra money to another $300.

How are GW's rules and PP's rules not in the exact same place?

You want rules for 40k, you buy the BRB. You want the rules for Warmachine/Hordes, you buy Prime or Primal mk2.
I have a warmachine and a hordes army, but I only own the hordes rulebook, because with the exception of a few rules, they're exactly the same. I don't own the big rules for 40k, just the small book

You want information on your army's rules? You buy the codex, you want information on your army's stats? you pull out the card. The difference is that I don't have to flip through a book to find the right unit/model. I look down and see a pretty picture.

I'm thinking its more of a GW: 1, PP:2...

And as for the model issue, I love the look of the PP models more so than GW's models. I mean sure I can pose and convert easily with GW, but I suck at that anyways, so I try to just get a cohesive looking army on the table

cypher wrote:

These decks have most of the cards of the faction for a small fraction of the cost

As i said. I enjoy the GW's policy of having ALL rules in one place. Finding most but not all gets annoying.

Clarity of rules, yea GW has missed that one. Will see if 6th fixes that but I'm not holding my breath.

One for PP, one for GW.

Not seeing your point on how much a second usable list would be. I can either replace some or all of the list ranging from some extra money to another $300.

It shows that PP allows people to spend less money for a better variety of armies. In most cases if you just pull out 1 unit from a 40K army you're not changing the basic army tactic/feel that much. In PP changing 1 unit can make quite a difference in how the army plays/feels.
It also shows the flexibility of the systems in terms of choices for players. GW not so flexible without spending some significant amount of dollars (in most cases). PP changing one caster can cost as little as 12.00 and with that you've changed your army significantly.

Well, I buy both companies' models to collect and paint.

I only play with one company's models.

Rulewise, PP wins hands down IMO.

The rules are cleaner, better written and have less “zaniness” than what I encountered with GW. Rule issues are tackled fairly frequently by PP through online errata (note errata not just rules FAQs). The formatting of the books is better as well with the story and rules for a single character or unit in the one place (no flipping back and forth). The inclusion of rules on the character cards is a bonus IMO as it allows players to use a model without having to buy the army book (although I prefer to use the army book over the cards).

When an update occurs (like a new edition or expansion pack) all factions get updated therefore not leaving any ruleset outdated (making all factions viable for play). So far, all of the new additions in mk2 have not created any power creep (with core models technically being stronger than the Wrath additions).