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.

Polonius wrote:Discussions on the price difference is a little tricky, given the sheer smaller scale of warmachine. Sure, you can build one decent 1500 40k army for $200, I think the PP fans would point out that nearly any tournament force can be built for ~$250.

I think that 40k hits diminishing returns later in the spending curve, however. I've spent thousands of dollars on 40k, and I still feel like I'm expanding my options and having fun when I buy a new army (I'm building eldar, and It's a ton of fun).

Yup. Minimum tournament-sized spend is comparable. And it is definitely true that you can spend a lot more on 40k than other armies. A lot of this is due to the genius of the 40k FOC. For example, a SM army wants 3 Land Raiders, 3 Predators, 3 Vindicators, 3 Whirlwinds, and 3 full Devastator squads to max out the Heavy support options. That's a lot of spend.

WM doesn't work that way, because a lot of their stuff is unique. And having lots of Jacks is unplayable due to the limited amount of action points that are generated.

Eldar, in particular, is an army that you can spend a awful lot on. With so many distinct units, even trying to have one of each type adds up quickly. If you want to double down, it's even more spendy.

For 5th Edition, I'd like to see a push to get back to 1500 points precisely because it opens the board up for more movement and reduces players ability to concentrate capabilities, forcing more thought on list design.

So GW ability to make you spend more money is an asset to the players?

BTW 500 to 750 points is the standard for WM.

syr8766 wrote:1. Killer combos: The way turn/unit activation works and the emphasis on harmony between units, caster, solos and warjacks/beasts gives it a (perceived) CCG feel: "I put 3 focus on this warjack. Unit X creates cover, Unit Y shoots up target, Solo 1 Charges from the left, knocking target over. Move caster up, cast spell. Warjack with 3 focus walks up and finishes target off."
2. Special rules: everything has a special rule, and the trick is to use the special rules in the right order, on the right opponent (as opposed to no one has special rules, and you're just trying to shoot/bludgeon the enemy, which is more typical of most tabletop miniatures games).
3. Synchronization/harmony (see above): building an army has the feel of building the 'right' deck.

See, this doesn't really seem like valid reasons for decrying WM as a CCG-style game. Maybe in the hardcore tourney scene you're totally focused on metagame <shudders>, but I don't believe most people play like that. Besides, even if these are the reasons for calling WM a CCG, it's not bad. You've got to have a much more concrete plan going into WM than 40k. If you don't know how your units interact and can affect a certain situation, you're going to get you butt handed to you every time. It's called tactics (or maybe strategy, can't remember), and WM has it in spades over 40k.

To me there's really no comparison between playing WM vs. 40k. WM is much more engaging and interesting. You've got to figure out what you want to accomplish each turn, what order to use your units in to accomplish your goal, and tip the odds in your favor with the 2d6 system. If you miss one thing or roll a snake eyes, it can royally screw up your plans. But while there is usually less redundancy in WM armies, most of the time you're never out of the fight completely. You just have to think about it, something you rarely have to do in 40k.

I guess if you just want to push some plastic around and roll buckets of dice, then by all means, 40k is for you.

Buckets of Dice!

It's always fun.

The Power Cosmic wrote:

I guess if you just want to push some plastic around and roll buckets of dice, then by all means, 40k is for you.

Don't forget making little 'pew pew' sounds when you shoot.

JohnHwangDD wrote:As I demonstrated earlier, you can construct a legal (and fairly decent) 1500-pt SM force from 3 Battalion Boxes - or a little over $200 USD if bought from the Warstore. If you're playing standard 1000 pts of WM/H on budget, you'll probably spend the same $200 USD for your stuff, but just have a lot fewer models.

Battleforces are the best way to build up a solid army in 40k, no doubt about that. Spaze Marienz HURR aside, I'm not sure what kind of decent army you can make out of 60 Space Marines (15 tac/battleforce, 5 command/battleforce) and 3 Razorbacks (and or rhinos) though... A more solid example might be Necrons (1 Lord + 2 battleforces + Necron Phalanx Apoc Box = 1 world of hurt on a budget)

I think the discussion is getting off track though. WM players seem to be drawn to the game for rules and tactical reasons. 40k players drawn to the modelling, army and fluff aspects of their hobby. There are no wrong answers.

I was a big WM fan before Prime came out through Escalation. I thought it was a lot of fun.

Then everyone realized you were better off using hordes of infantry.

It's not a bad game for very small skirmishes. Hell, the HeroClix mechanics lend well to that type of game. It's when you're fielding 60+ models, which I easily did with Cryx and Menoth, that the game broke down to a ton of rolling. The mechanics don't work for how the game is played these days, especially at 750, and take forever and a day to just roll dice.

Also, PP used to have pretty good quality control. Nowadays they're letting those ridiculously 2 dimensional Pirates be sold and tons of other really crappy figures.

I'm also not a huge fan because to play the game I need to have intimate detail about my opponent's army so I know exactly what combos he can do and how. The game requires the level of twinking that only hardened D&D powergamers can bring. I'd rather play and learn from my tactical mistakes instead of getting my ass kicked by some twink with an unpainted army because I didn't know every detail of how his army worked.

It's laughable that people talk about 40k being won or lost in the army building, it's not, but are willing to forgive the silly combo nature of WM's one turn caster kills.

WM is also just as expensive as 40k. Competitive Menoth or Cryx armies can cost quite a bit and if you're playing at 750 points, the level most people I know played at before I quit, then the price really is on par with 40k. Short of taking 3+ heavy warjacks, which sucks, the game is going to cost as much as 40k.

I don't want to argue about balance, even though some things in WM are really too good, but there are a lot of mechanics that are simply Not Fun To Play Against (TM).

Sorscha, regardless of balance, sucks to play against. It's not fun to have your entire army static for a whole turn. Kreoss isn't much better. Goodluck fighting Bane Knights. Hell, I ran Zealots and a Monolith Bearer and I know that couldn't have been much fun to play against as those freaks would crash into an army with hellish fire bombs of unstoppable 84 points kickassery.

Sure, 40k has some annoying things. Falcons and Harlies are annoying and Nidzilla is stupid but the game is much more mission based and you can more easily get around those things.

For now, PP isn't getting my money and I sold almost all of my armies. Hopefully they'll clean the game up once WM2 comes out and they'll make 'jacks good again and make it so models like those Kommandos won't ever see the light of day. If that happens I might play again.

Until then, I'll be happy playing 40k and historicals.

I like 40k, both for the fluff and the system.

I consider the fluff to be self-explanatory, looking at PP's offering vs. GW's enormous stable of rulebooks, novels, codexes, RPG etc. and its no context.

In terms of game play 40k has rules and each unit has exceptions. In WM/Hordes each model is entirely unique, creating a far more difficult to balance game,, and while I think they've been better than GW at it I don't think they've been better enough to overcome their systemic disadvantage.

Maybe if I really dove into WM/H I could get a handle on every unit/model and figure out the combinations, but as a superficial player I can't quite grok it.

CaseyVa wrote:
I'm also not a huge fan because to play the game I need to have intimate detail about my opponent's army so I know exactly what combos he can do and how. The game requires the level of twinking that only hardened D&D powergamers can bring. I'd rather play and learn from my tactical mistakes instead of getting my ass kicked by some twink with an unpainted army because I didn't know every detail of how his army worked.

I don't have every army memorized and I get by pretty well. But that has more to do with every WM army having a chance to win, which is not something 40k can boast.

Its a good thing no one who plays 40k plays with unpainted models or twinks their lists.

It's laughable that people talk about 40k being won or lost in the army building, it's not, but are willing to forgive the silly combo nature of WM's one turn caster kills.

I have been playing WM since it came out and I have never seen a one turn caster kill. I have read several posts from people on here complain about it, but no one ever bothers to explain how this happens. Seriously I want to know.

keezus wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:As I demonstrated earlier, you can construct a legal (and fairly decent) 1500-pt SM force from 3 Battalion Boxes - or a little over $200 USD if bought from the Warstore. If you're playing standard 1000 pts of WM/H on budget, you'll probably spend the same $200 USD for your stuff, but just have a lot fewer models.

Battleforces are the best way to build up a solid army in 40k, no doubt about that. Spaze Marienz HURR aside, I'm not sure what kind of decent army you can make out of 60 Space Marines (15 tac/battleforce, 5 command/battleforce) and 3 Razorbacks (and or rhinos) though...

You forgot that you get 5 scout/battleforce and 5 assault/battleforce, so there are a bunch more warm bodies in the force.

3 boxes gives:
45 tacticals
3 rhinos
15 scouts
15 assault

That's not terrible at all. Decent mobility and very solid numbers.

All you would need after this is a Devastator Box for the extra Heavy weapons to share around.

Crimson Devil wrote:I have been playing WM since it came out and I have never seen a one turn caster kill. I have read several posts from people on here complain about it, but no one ever bothers to explain how this happens. Seriously I want to know.

I've done this in a game. 350 pts and both sides moved to the center. My opponent's Feat kind of fizzled and whiffed. On my turn, I was able to really leverage Dennie's Feat with 2 Slayers loaded with Focus... squish! pulp!

If you were playing on a 4' board (assuming a 10" deployment zone) that means he advanced his warcaster 19"+ in his first turn (without running). That's one hell of a moron/rubber ruler you were playing.

I'm missing something right?

Indeed, namely that "one-turn kill" is not synonymous with "first turn kill".

JohnHwangDD wrote:Indeed, namely that "one-turn kill" is not synonymous with "first turn kill".

Silly me, I was a sleep at the wheel. I was thinking FIRST turn caster kill when I wrote that.

ONE turn caster kills happen all the time.

That's what I understood you to have written too, 'one turn' caster kills are indeed ten a penny. I've had a couple of turn one victories in 40k, I've never seen one in Warmachine.

Deadshane1 wrote:Its a simple question, why do you prefer one over the other?

Truthfully, I like them both.

40 k because you never get over your first crush, and for Warmachine- a game with five models can be as fun as a game with 100.

I used to be a hard core Warhammer 40k GW fanboy. I used to think everything they put out was gold and I was to ignorant to see that this was so far from the truth. I refused to even try other games because, like other GW players, I had hundreds (for some people its thousands) of dollars wrapped up in the game. Ever since I gave Warmachine a chance I never looked back and GW can stick it where the sun dont shine for all I care and here are the reasons why:

"Hell is repitition"

The one thing that got me was how GW refuses to properly update thier armies lists whenever they release a new codex. Whenever a new army codex comes out it makes the other ones obsolete. After all, why give a totally updated FAQ when they could sell it too you years later in a nice lamenated book. Now people will say "Dark Eldar is not obsolete, they win tournaments". Well if you have to build your army one exact way in order to play it then that army is obsolete. In this way players are either chasing or hoping for the new a codex that will give them an edge. This marketing scheme is great for GW because it brings in the suckers, however, it also places the suckers in thier basement. Painting models and broke in the GW rat race, rather than playing some games and hanging out with these awesome creatures called females and all the places they inhabit.

GW Rules are Flimsy and They Don't See an Issue with It.

All I have to say is this. if some generals were playing chess and one of them did an illegal move and he suggested it could be legal by rolling a die then chess wouldnt exist and there would be one more dead general in our history. There is no such thing as read as written or interpretated in the Privateer Press line. Yes, its that solid.

Model Quality

The models are gorgeous and easier to but together than the GW's metal and plastic line. Hardly any flash, makes my hobby easier and gives me the opportunity to have a life, rather than assembling models.

Story

Warmachine's story is just as rich as Warhamnmer 40k's except the Warmachine story is more mature. When I first played Warhammer 40k I loved the way its backstory imitated late Imperial Rome during the rise of Christianity. It has all the literary symbols representing the Fall and Depravity of Man but when you boil it down to its nuts and bolts W40K is all about good guys verses bad guys. Because, even if the Imperium of Mankind is the bloodiest regime in humanities history its better then the alternatives of spritual damnation through Chaos or physical annihilation by alien incursion.

Much like our own world, Warmachine is complicated. Though Cygnar and Khador have border disputes over land claims, niether is set to annhilate or deprave the other. Only Cygnar's border claims based upon the Orgoth occupation and Khadors based on ethnic identity exist as legitimate reasons for war, but there are no heroes here. This a more mature and politically engaged storyline. Even Menoth represents the modern day struggle we see between Isreal and Palastine. Cygnar claims that the Protectorate is not legally a seperate nation and Menoth believes in its own nationhood. Yes there are "evil" armies out there in the realms of Immoren but even with those forces not everything is as black and white as it seems.

Community

I don't want to speak ill but as someone who took college credit classes in high school, played wrestling and football, was in the honor society in college, working on my masters, and living in a border city, I have enjoyed the company of many different communities in my life so far and the GW group is not one of them. Every time I play someone at W40k I always get the feeling that the opponent across from me is trying to make me do penance because he sees me as the person who stole his lunch money years ago. The players are rude, misogynistic, and kinda of creepy. Me, my friends, and our gf's and wives went to see the 40k club we heard was in town and it was really embarrassing to be associated with those people in even a marginal way. The GW community is not helpful to new players, they treat women players like they can't comprehend rules sets, and they are almost xenophobic of other gamers. I have meet people who play historical miniatures, naval battles, and Battletech and I always love to sit and talk with them about our games and how they played out. With GW players they give you the "o'really" eyebrow and wander off.

40k is Mysogynistic

I play female soldiers in my armies all the time with Khador. I have Sorscha as my leader, gender mixed units, and female manhunters. Now, I read the Cyphus Cain novels and I know there are women in the military of the distant future, so how come if I want to play females (unless they fit the stereotypical elves, i mean eldar) in my army they have to be the all inclusive Sister's of Battle. Who is GW trying to market to by representing thier model line in this fashion? I guess GW wants to keep the hobby an all boys club.

This is the Game that will Never End

When you read the 40k rulebook it appears simple enough and then you get into codices. Every codex has it own special rules, overruling unique rules, and some rules that dont even exist except you wouldn't know that until you check out the online FAQ and even then its not definitive, there only strong suggestions. Then you think the rules are simple to play and then you have have some guy right his rules on a sheet of paper rather than using ArmyBuilder (which should be produced by GW for free since we put alot of money into the hobby), so you find out in mid game that your opponent cant do basic math (not all nerds are smart, that's a stereotype) and he's over, so you have him build a new list and he has 4 carnifexes on the table but he doesnt have enough points to have 4 carnifexes and your opponent doesnt know this cause he either didn't read or ignored certain conditions in his rulebook so you ask him to remake the list again. Welcome to your life, its a one hour game made five.

See how this can get complicating.

With Warmachine you only need your core rulebook, every exceptional rule is on the cards you play and they say what they mean and mean what they say. No guessing games. The armies have points on them so you just add up the points (which is something we have been doing since third grade)and your ready to game. It takes about one minute to see if your list is legal and if you want to build lists at home Tabletop Commander is FREE and allows you to build awesome army lists before you buy.

Nice Necromancy!!!

Previous post was 15 months ago.

I've played Warmachine since Prime, and play 40K. There argument that Warmachine is a more balanced game was true until Superiority, after that balance was lost. When you can lose without ever moving a model because of how you initially setup, the game isn't balanced. I witnessed at GenCon 2008 the 56 second game where EVlad feated Widowmakers killed the opposing player before he even got a turn. I would not want to be the player who traveled hundreds of miles, to be eliminated before even moving one piece in his force.

Please check the date before you post,the last post was in 2008!

Double post.

There are a number of reasons why Warmachine has the edge as a game. Especially, the fact that individual warjacks can use focus and movement choices that have a much larger range of effects.

Warmachine also has an advantage in that you build an army with your own tactics in mind and you have the means to deal with just about anything the other guy fields, so you always have your chances.

With 40 K there are certain armies that will absolutely destroy set kinds of opponents every time.

Certain builds have the number of other builds, and the game isn;t competitive, as other guys mentioned at the level of army bulder.

A "Balanced" space marine list for example can usually be taken to pieces by orc horde as there is no way the marines can CC them all, or shoot em all before being overrun.

This is a huge problem when you are commiting large amounts of money to one idea and run into another idea which crushes yours every time.

Despite that I voted for 40K.

The Warmachine models suck, and the army lists are too small, the fluff is total nonsense and truly uninteresting. Most of the warcasters are unappealing. Most of the models are on par with the 40K dark eldar.

40K is great if you have the money to make variable lists and the kind of club where the other players have plenty of money, good model selections and skill at the game.

When you get up two competitive armies with plenty of terrain, 40k becomes a much better experience.

The fluff as folk keep saying is really solid, and best of all, you get to name and invent your own themes and commanders.

Warmachine needs to get into plastics and a much bigger range of factions, models and player creativity to do it for me....

OTG

@OTG: WRT plastics and more factions, PP is expanding things, as they must, simply to keep pace with GW and customer expectations. PP just added Elves, and we should expect to see Dwarves next year or the year after.

Of course, they're also "dumbing down" from RT/2E type detailed stuff into 40k3 streamlining, so I'm very interested to see how the fans will react. When GW did it, the torches and pitchforks came out, so we'll see if PP fares any better.

Lol this post is old as hell. Ive played both games and IMO I would rather slam my weeny in a sliding glass door than play WH/H ever agian. The 40k armies are cooler and if I wanted to play with cards i would go play yugioh with all the other 2 year olds that cry like bitches when they lose.

Threadromancy!