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.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Big P wrote:So the new edition means buying lots more models for my existing armies?

Oh now thats surprising...

Yes and no. The rules now enable larger units, giving them distinct benefits (more attackers, or stubborn) and this is certainly encouraged, but still far from compulsory.

I do believe you're being optimistic there. The metagame will almost certainly favor players who will buy more in order to get those benefits, so if you want to be competitive, you'll need them.

And those that already own the big units. How many people that play orcs buy up the old starter sets, or skull pass, build big units of 20-25 models, and then get their butts kicked. Or dwarves with big units of elite infantry, only to find out you couldn't maneuver enough to bring someone to combat? Small, hardhitting units nailed the front rank of those big blocks of infantry, giving no attacks back, and breaking them on the charge. And they all went back on the shelf.

I've got dwarf and orc units getting played for the first time in 20 year!

ShivanAngel wrote:

skrulnik wrote:

I would be willing to spend $20 on the little book. But expecting a $90 purchase to NOT have a 526pg monster book is dumb.

They will be all over Ebay for 10 dollars after a month....

BS. $10 starting with $6-10 shipping, maybe. They don't stay that low if you follow the auctions til the end.

I was trying to grab a 40k book for a friend. gave up after a week because the total price kept creeping into the mid $20s.

Look don't like it don't buy it ... I hate to break it to you, you're play a game where 16 little plastic dwalf cost £18 ... that over £1 per model.

You also have to factor in how much do you really spend on warhammer.

I bought my skaven army about 2 months ago, spent around 350 dollars on it. Havent spent any money on them since. So the number of hours of enjoyment relative to cost ratio is getting better.

In a month i have to spend 80 bucks on a rulebook. I honestly dont have a problem with that. Lots of people say GW gouges and charges to much etc. However you have to look at the big picture. Once a lot of people get their armies built they stop buying models. At least i do.. So once that 400-500 dollars is spent for your army they dont really make any more money off you.

Big P wrote:Well us in the historical world are well used to variable charges... Lost of rules have them.

Makes it alot more fun.

Actually, along with the "you can measure anything you wan't now", what it makes is remove the last bit of skill that was required to play the game and replace it with yet another layer of luck.

The dumbing down of Fantasy in the last 2 editions is notorious, looks like my DE (wich I've played faithfully from 4th edition until 7th), will spend the next 5 years gathering dust...

Er, Shivan, GW does cost too much. When I started, I could get a good 2.25K army for cheaper than a new console (of course, barring the new Nintendo stuff).

Now, I did the math: Same army, same models, none of it changed, could buy something a 360 Elite with 2-3 games for the same price. Again, no model change. This is also excluding the lack of a rulebook & army book, which is now +$104 USD for a grand total of three to six games.

To be fair, it was overpriced when I started on a lot of things (See: Much more metal boxes). However, there's a difference between being able to buy an army for the cost of a vanilla console and being able to buy several months / years' worth of entertainment (depending on the games bought: You can easily get several weeks / months out of some games without wearing out their "short term" welcome, let alone their long-term welcome).

Sorry for the derail, but:
1) We're already derailed.
2) I just dislike seeing people claim it's a reasonably priced hobby.

BTW, the Rulebooks really are getting out of hand: Army and Rulebook together. Say you want two GW WHFB armies, as well as the rulebook. Let's say that no new Army Book comes out until the next edition, and the next edition's book costs the same as this one's. $75 + $75 for those, now another $58 for both the army books. $208 USD for no models. Just the books so you can play the next four-to-six years. Let alone if you have to shell out another $58 for the new army books, for a grand total of $266.

While the Rulebooks may be full of content, they really need to see a price decrease soon. At $266 before models for four-to-six years, I could buy enough paperback books to sustain me for at least half that time.

PhantomViper wrote:

Big P wrote:Well us in the historical world are well used to variable charges... Lost of rules have them.

Makes it alot more fun.

Actually, along with the "you can measure anything you wan't now", what it makes is remove the last bit of skill that was required to play the game and replace it with yet another layer of luck.

The dumbing down of Fantasy in the last 2 editions is notorious, looks like my DE (wich I've played faithfully from 4th edition until 7th), will spend the next 5 years gathering dust...

Being able to judge a distance is hardly skill imo.

You could teach a monkey to do that. Proper deployment, flank protection, moving units correctly. Thats skill.

I think the variable charges adds more skill to the game. Forcing your opponent to either attempt to charge and fail, or risk being charged. Theres a lot more variables to determine the pros and cons of a situation.

I can live with the random charges. Once you get close it's a non-factor. What bugs me is terrain nit slowing down a unit. What possible justification could they have for flying in the face of logic, precedence and real-world experience. How many times have YOU waded across a swimming pool with five of your friends AT NORMAL WALKING SPEED only to have one of them drown on the way? And yet GW is claiming this happens all the time!?
I can see open order troops (the new "skirmishers") moving thru woods at no speed reduction, but a block of rank and file infantry? Trying to maintain formation? Yeah, right.
And please don't tell me "it's FANTASY, dude". Fantasy, yes. Ludicrous, no.

Open order skirmishers might even struggle in woods. There is such a thing as undergrowth to contend with.

Does it not negate one of the advantages of WE's?

Ease of play. As is right now, Fantasy boards are extremely light on terrain, and in my experience, rather than something to plow through it's merely something to avoid going through. Now, the current situation clearly benefits certain armies, which is why the mind numbing boredom of a Gunline is so popular. You're opponent dare not use cover in his approach, as it slows him down immeasurably, and you just concentrate your firepower on the more mobile units.

Now, make Terrain something usable by all armies, albeit at a risk, and you benefit all armies equally.

But gunlines are much, much better now with actual line of sight (-1 to hit is better than not being able to target at all), firing in two ranks without needing a hill, no guess ranges, no partials on templates and less restrictions on cheap special and rare slot warmachines.

I feel bad for the guy that excitedly gets his old infantry army that was shelved in 7th edition together to play 8th and then doesn't make it halfway across the board.

PhantomViper wrote:

Big P wrote:Well us in the historical world are well used to variable charges... Lost of rules have them.
Makes it alot more fun.

Actually, along with the "you can measure anything you wan't now", what it makes is remove the last bit of skill that was required to play the game and replace it with yet another layer of luck.
The dumbing down of Fantasy in the last 2 editions is notorious, looks like my DE (wich I've played faithfully from 4th edition until 7th), will spend the next 5 years gathering dust...

ah yes, the idea that if you don't like a rule, it's somehow "dumbing down" the game.

Where to place your units now has an element of risk to it. You don't know if the other player can get a charge off or not. You and he both have to plan for it to go both ways. It actually takes a lot more skill to play the game. How much skill is there in putting cavalry 7" to 12" away from a unit of dwarfs? You absolutely know you can charge, and that he can't.

Adapting to changing situations in a game is also skill, as in adapting to a new ruleset.

Sadly not. With generally extended charge reaches, and overall more cover on the board, they days of Gunline Boredom dominating are gone. Are they pointless now? Nope, of course not, but instead of seeing your opponent run pell mell across open terrain, hoping to have enough troops to smash your head in, they will now be pouring through all kind of terrain, and without decent fighting blocks of your own, too many eggs are in that one basket to rely upon it like you used to.

skrulnik wrote:I would hope that GW would release the mini book as a stand alone.
...
I would be willing to spend $20 on the little book. But expecting a $90 purchase to NOT have a 526pg monster book is dumb.

I agree. I'd buy the little book for $20 as an impulse the next time I was in a shop.

I would hope that GW would release the mini book as a stand alone.

That would be nice, but to date they have never done that. The closest thing to that was when they included it in the "Gamer's Edition" on the WFB 7th Edition release, but it was still part of a bundle of products that cost $75 at the time.

Durzod wrote:I can live with the random charges. Once you get close it's a non-factor. What bugs me is terrain nit slowing down a unit. What possible justification could they have for flying in the face of logic, precedence and real-world experience. How many times have YOU waded across a swimming pool with five of your friends AT NORMAL WALKING SPEED only to have one of them drown on the way? And yet GW is claiming this happens all the time!?
I can see open order troops (the new "skirmishers") moving thru woods at no speed reduction, but a block of rank and file infantry? Trying to maintain formation? Yeah, right.
And please don't tell me "it's FANTASY, dude". Fantasy, yes. Ludicrous, no.

And you'll be happy to know that most scenery in 8th edition does not slow down movement

They affect units in other ways. A ranked unit has trouble forming up in woods, and can't get steadfast, whereas skirmishers are stubborn in woods. Woods and Obstacles are dangerous for cavalry to charge through. etc.

Game moves quite fast, even with added scenery bits.

Allowing everyone to run through cover no penalty IMO is dumbing down the game. At the very least it could be something like "The Turn / Player Turn that you exit the terrain from, your unit still lacks ranks as it attempts get get itself back into proper marching order." In the very least prevent me from taking my Black Orcs separated from your troops by 18" of field including 10" of woods, and charging with absolutely no penalty unless it's a Mysterious Wood.

It does less to encourage tactical thinking (Baiting units into woods / using Skirmishers / Cavalry to quickly move around the woods is much less impressive now), and it's not like it's making you more durable (If anyone in 40K could move through woods without penalty, you think people would suddenly start using them more whilst they can still get 4+ saves from their squads?).

Just... I don't like how you're only at a penalty as RnF if you're parking in the woods at the very moment. Don't let me march through, charges starting or ending in woods are only D6, if you pass 25% or more of your unit through a wood on any given player turn (50% if you're under Horde Formation) you cannot gain a Rank Bonus that player turn / game turn, something.

Impulse spending is not a sustainable business model.

One book, £45, lasts you several years. Value = Good, surely? If GW were this bigg bad money grabbing machine some imagine, surely double the thickness = double the price, and not just a bit more? Rememer folks, there is my hobby, there is your hobby, and then there is THE hobby. The rulebook has the task of satisfying all that, hence all the extra stuff in it. Great for me, I love reading background and coming up with my own stuff. Great for a newcomer as it sets the scene. You however, might prefer JUST the rules, and no bumph. Valid opinion, but sadly one at the more extreme ends of the opinion scale, and thus one not really appeased by the new book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Minsc, I seriously suggest reading through the whole book before writing it off as dumbed down. I can and will continue to bait you into woods with Skirmishers, just in a different way. Why? ALL Skirmishers are Steadfast in woods, meaning with the right number in there, I can potentially tie up your massive unit for a couple of turns. All it takes is for just one Skirmisher to be in the woods when combat begins.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just thinking about it a little further, woods etc are DEADLY to big ranked units. All the time you are in there, you lose Steadfast for having more Ranks, meaning combat comes to down to whomever gets the most kills. A well positioned Skirmish or Cavalry unit can literally run roughshod over the unit, inflict heavy casualties, and quite possibly wipe you out. So although the old tactical decision is gone, it's replaced with an entirely new one. I think my Hydras will be lurking in woods from now on...Chariots too!

N.B. Not trying to belittle your opinion, just trying to engage in a little conversation and constructive criticism!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:One book, £45, lasts you several years. Value = Good, surely? If GW were this bigg bad money grabbing machine some imagine, surely double the thickness = double the price, and not just a bit more? Rememer folks, there is my hobby, there is your hobby, and then there is THE hobby. The rulebook has the task of satisfying all that, hence all the extra stuff in it. Great for me, I love reading background and coming up with my own stuff. Great for a newcomer as it sets the scene. You however, might prefer JUST the rules, and no bumph. Valid opinion, but sadly one at the more extreme ends of the opinion scale, and thus one not really appeased by the new book.

I love the background too, and would buy the big book if I could. Depending on how the Island of Blood set is priced, I may buy it anyways due to cost saving and - possibly - it being more accurate (again: It looks like the Big Book clarifies things much more readily than the little one, the Irresistible Force / Miscast being the most obvious example). I just don't like the prospect of slapping down some $180 USD in the next four-to-six years for three books (8th Ed, O&G 8th Ed, 9th Ed). I'm not a gamer, but considering my limited schedule of going to a GW / working on my stuff I can make more use of that $180 elsewhere for leisure.

Key word on the end there being leisure: Like you said, it's a hobby. While $600-$700 being shelled out over five years for the stuff and an army is a lot (Again, 360 Elite w/ five to ten games, Wii w/ potentially fifteen-ish), in the long term it's not going to drive you broke unless you're on a very low income: $600 in five years is $120 a year, $10 USD a month. Almost everyone can afford to save up at least $10 USD a month for leisure, just changing your groceries to store brand or using some coupons can get you that if really pinched for money.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Minsc, I seriously suggest reading through the whole book before writing it off as dumbed down. I can and will continue to bait you into woods with Skirmishers, just in a different way. Why? ALL Skirmishers are Steadfast in woods, meaning with the right number in there, I can potentially tie up your massive unit for a couple of turns. All it takes is for just one Skirmisher to be in the woods when combat begins.

The Skirmishers better be Dryads or a unit of 20-some Huntsmen, as they're not going to last more than two player turns otherwise (simply by being horrendously chewed out by enemy infantry). And a big difference here is that the reward is much smaller for the same effort: Last edition, you bait some Chaos Knights into charging into the woods they're stuck there for the next two to four turns unless you present them a charge. This edition, they're stuck there for however long you keep throwing units into them to tie them up: Otherwise, they're out their very next turn.

I did look at the book BTW, I was at the GW for some nine hours this Saturday and even errata'd a thread I made on 8th Edition from some errors I drew before looking at it. I'm of the opinion now that I can and probably will play 8th, but I'm also still of the opinion that things are simplified.

EDIT:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Just thinking about it a little further, woods etc are DEADLY to big ranked units. All the time you are in there, you lose Steadfast for having more Ranks, meaning combat comes to down to whomever gets the most kills. A well positioned Skirmish or Cavalry unit can literally run roughshod over the unit, inflict heavy casualties, and quite possibly wipe you out. So although the old tactical decision is gone, it's replaced with an entirely new one. I think my Hydras will be lurking in woods from now on...Chariots too!

N.B. Not trying to belittle your opinion, just trying to engage in a little conversation and constructive criticism!

The problem is that it's going to be very hard to catch a unit in the woods: If you don't start the turn inside the wood, but parked right outside, most of the infantry unit (if M4, if M5 or M6 practically all of it) can clear the wood in a single bound. If they start the turn only partially in the wood, it's very likely they can clear it in one round.

I know that "most" is not "all" and thus keeps the lack of ranks, but GW seemed to have forgotten that practically every army has at least one mean to clear the wood in an assault without a single model touching. While I realize they shouldn't have to adjust for everything, it again doesn't seem right watching some thirty Blood Letters bum-rush a unit 16" away through a set of woods and suffer absolutely no penalty. Well, for them it does, but for Orcs / Skaven / Lizardmen?

mikhaila wrote:
ah yes, the idea that if you don't like a rule, it's somehow "dumbing down" the game.

Where to place your units now has an element of risk to it. You don't know if the other player can get a charge off or not. You and he both have to plan for it to go both ways. It actually takes a lot more skill to play the game.

And that added "risk" is nothing but a gamble on the roll of the dice.

A poor player can now get out of a bad positioning by just rolling high enough for a charge... how is that NOT dumbing down the game?

mikhaila wrote:
How much skill is there in putting cavalry 7" to 12" away from a unit of dwarfs? You absolutely know you can charge, and that he can't.

You are using an extreme to try and justify your position. There is skill in puting your unit outside other units charge range so that you can bait your opponent into a failed charge, just because you mention one of the easier and more extreme cases doesn't make less true in other situations.

mikhaila wrote:
Adapting to changing situations in a game is also skill, as in adapting to a new ruleset.

Too bad that new ruleset has very little resembling the old one, its not a case of adapting to a new ruleset, its a case of the game turning into something that I don't wan't to play anymore. I would go as far as to compare it to the change from 4th to 5th edition! And just like that change got me to pick up the game again, so will this one cause me to drop it again. (and by this one I'm refering to the amalgamated mess of IMO bad rules that GW is calling 8th edition, not just the movement rules in particular)

Thing is, the terrain rules have changed how you approach it, when you combine it with the less predictable charge range. This is my thinking (feel free to disagree. We are only dealing in opinion after all!)....

So, currently, I tend to avoid woods etc because I am slowed to a literal crawl, as not only am I prevented from Marching, but my movement is then halved, so the majority of units will shuffle 2" through it a turn.

But, in 8th Edition, I can march straight through it, risking the legs of 1 in 6 of my troops (or more if I'm Cavalry!). However, what if I cannot emerge from the other side of the woods fully, and my opponent has units nearby? The exact type of unit isn't terribly critical here, I hasten to point out. Now, if they are a good charge distance away (say, 12" or more for Infantry) I might just push through, knowing that the odds of the charge failing are in my favour, meaning I can be out and free next turn, possibly turning to face my would be aggressor. But that's still a massive risk. Even if his unit is 16" away, the charge can still connect, and them I am thoroughly bollocksed, especially if he has the good sense to jump me in the flank, where I cannot parry, nor bring additional attacks to bare. So considering this, it's very much a case of thinking just because I can, doesn't mean I should. I can make things a bit more solid in my favour by having a unit tailing my own, in a position to counterattack my opponents units, ideally should they fail their charge. This is a pretty significant tactical undertaking, as even a small unit of light troops can do horrendous damage in a flank charge these days, as not only do I get more attacks, but my opponent is extremely unlikely to be steadfast, unless Stubborn regardless.

Let me just say thank god forests are no longer the tar pits of death they used to be anymore. If you ever went into a wood in 7th, chances were you were never getting out. Good riddance!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:But, in 8th Edition, I can march straight through it, risking the legs of 1 in 6 of my troops (or more if I'm Cavalry!).

Actually, to my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) you're only at risk for the cavalry anyways, at only 1-in-6 for them. Standard infantry just loses ranks, Cavalry and the like are now Dangerous Terrain (albeit woods being more nasty to Heavy than Light cavalry now as it's no-save for Dangerous).

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Now, if they are a good charge distance away (say, 12" or more for Infantry) I might just push through, knowing that the odds of the charge failing are in my favour, meaning I can be out and free next turn, possibly turning to face my would be aggressor.

Personally, I wouldn't declare the charge. You're much more likely to get your March Distance on your own than with the single, lowest D6. Actually, to my understanding Dwarves are the only ones who can even match that.

Everyone takes Dangerous Terrain when *marching* through area terrain. Cavalry get it worse when going through woods.

As for baiting Frenzied stuff into woods, I'd say it's now more tactical, as they can take a Ld to restrain, or have to charge the closest. When someone has paid for Frenzied Knights O'Doom, to simple bog them down in a wood for most of the game wasn't especially tactical. But remember, still dealing purely in opinion. Apologies if I come across as lecturing.

Sidstyler wrote:

Tri wrote:Hard back = More expensive then paperback ... also its only 256 pages So really what the hell is your point? A smaller paperback is cheaper then a larger hardback?

No gak, really? Hardback is more expensive? I had no idea!

I know that, clearly you missed the point. PP gives you OPTIONS, less expensive options. GW charges you a crap-ton and tells you to feth off, you either take what they give you or leave it. And the PP hardback option is still much cheaper than what GW offers, and even at only 256 pages it still gives you more than what any GW rulebook does.

And I'm really getting sick of people bringing up page count, as if that really mattered. Apparently it doesn't even matter what's on the damn pages, only that they have the page count. If they were all blank would it still be worth $75? Apparently because it'd still be a hug brick of a book and weighing a ton = worth a lot.

As for this, this is my last post about it. I said what I think and that's that, lol. If I get the book at all I will, in fact, hit eBay. That's a big if, though.

Then leave, nobody really cares if you buy it or not. At all.

Wait for the starter set, you can buy that for basically the same price as the book and get a bunch of miniatures along with your rulebook as well.

Skipped 3 pages of QQ.

The small rulebook will be good. Probably, I'll find a HE player and trade Skavens for High Elfs.

ShivenAngel- the magic cards are just the lores of magic from the main rule book. Each army will get a limited edition card set released when they get a new army book.

Mick

Sorry, I still find the new "run thru me at no penalty" terrain rules an idiotic departure from physics and reality. Will it stop me from playing? No. But it won't stop me from praying that GW sees the light in 9th ed., assuming I'm still around then. Gettin' old, y'know.

Durzod wrote:Sorry, I still find the new "run thru me at no penalty" terrain rules an idiotic departure from physics and reality. Will it stop me from playing? No. But it won't stop me from praying that GW sees the light in 9th ed., assuming I'm still around then. Gettin' old, y'know.

Trust me, there's penalties.)

Watching a chaos knight roll a 1 and die as leap across a defended barricade to charge my gobbbos is quite hillarious. You know how hard it is for for a gobbo to kill a chaos knight. They got one from the wall, and one in the ensueing combat because 10 of them got to attack. My opponent later stared at the board fo 5 minutes, wondering if he should take a shortcut through the woods with a block of chaos warriors, and risk a charge from a unit of orcs that would about 11 inches away.

If you make terrain to restrictive on movement, the game bogs down, units don't move, and we get to play a skirmish and monster game. If you want both terrain AND blocks of troops, you have to have some way for troops to move and engage. I was horrified when we set up the first game, and used the random terrain generator to fill the board up. Figured it would just suck. And then had a hell of a game.

Im glad terrain wont completely bog down some armies now.

Played a game a week or so ago where i got the side with 2 big forests just outside my deployment zone. It took 3 turns just to get half my army through the damn woods.