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.

Some of the rules in fantasy simply don't mesh with how I view the world.

Mainly, the idea that you can lose a combat if you don't take a wound. I'm ok with combat res. modifiers like ranks and all, but if you cannot hurt something, there should be no reason that it runs, period.

I just can't seem to get my head around that, and so I don't really enjoy it.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I stopped playing Fantasy because GW appears to have Squatted my Dogs of War.

When they resolve the DoW issue by giving me a new Army Book, I'll reconsider coming back in.

I love the irony in this statement.

You don't want the DE back but you want your Dogs of War back?

I've tried a few times to get into WHFB. The last time was quite recently - I picked up quite a few Empire sets, and worked out a decent list. But then I put it all away again and got back into my Marines and Orks. I have no problem with the WHFB fluff - after all, the WH40k fluff was derived from it originally, and WH40k is still essentially Orks in Space. I do have a preference for 'guns, tanks and explosions' (as another poster put it), and am far better at painting tanks than I am with horses, so I tend to prefer WH40k from a modelling point of view (although a well-painted WHFB army lined up on the table is an impressive sight). The battlefields also look better - WHFB battlefields tend to be rather empty, while a WH40k battlefield will have lots of scenery, and will be the better for it.

I think WHFB is probably a more tactically complex game, in that you need to position your units more carefully and make more detailed calculations of odds etc. It seems to be fairly unforgiving if you miscalculate a key charge. But I also find it a more limited game, in that there's a lack of manuever, and it seems less dynamic (I agree with the comments about the models also tending to be less dynamic looking, although the latest WHFB plastics are actually amongst GW's best).

My experience has also suggested that WHFB is more vulnerable to power gaming, in that certain lists (and character/magic item combinations) seem to have a significant advantage over others. This has been borne out by what I've seen at our local GW (where WHFB is by far the most popular game system). It's played on a very competitive level, and really only Vampire Counts, Lizard Men and Chaos seem to be viable. WH40k has it's issues, of course, but it seems to be less easily dominated by one or two lists, and even the so-called 'power builds' only seem to be dominant for a short period. It may simply be that WH40k is has a greater random factor (although I see someone has commented that WHFB is actually more random), but I think in general it's better balanced - although of course we're still in the early stages of codex revisions for the current version.

Thinking about it though, it probably does just boil down to 'guns, tanks and explosions' being what I want in a game. Especially guns, tanks and explosions made by Orks

Sidstyler wrote:Anyway, "put up or shut up" is one thing, I wish they'd stop with the bs myself,

but it does seem like you and others are actively campaigning against a release, hence the frustration

It's been at least 3 years of DE rumors that never produced anything, so, I refuse to give GW the benefit of the doubt on DE anymore. Every time someone says GW's doing something, it turns out to be false. Even Yak and Brimstone got suckered. People get wound up over the slightest thing, and nothing ever comes of it. So at this point, my patience is at an end. If there isn't an actual Codex, with honest-to-goodness minis to show, people should simply STFU until GW deigns to do more than just whisper nonsense.

I think you're confusing a high level of skepticism and disenchantment with something more insidious. If GW thinks DE are a good idea, and will sell, great! People with more patience and faith than I will be well-rewarded for their belief. Me, I think there are bigger, more interesting fish to fry like Chaos Guard and Ad Mech. But I wouldn't begrudge anybody anything if DE actually came out.

Of course, with a whole dollar on the line, I'd prefer that GW delay the release until after I collect from Yakface.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Vladsimpaler wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:I stopped playing Fantasy because GW appears to have Squatted my Dogs of War.

When they resolve the DoW issue by giving me a new Army Book, I'll reconsider coming back in.

I love the irony in this statement.

You don't want the DE back but you want your Dogs of War back?

As I replied to Sid, there's a big difference between the two armies. When you figure it out, you can decide wither you want to talk smack about someone who *actually* lost an army, versus a bunch of emo whiners who aren't satisfied that about the pace of updates to their 100% legal army.

The problem with Fantasy is the crappy new codexes beating up the crappy old codexes.

However, when every codex is eventually updated, I must say the game will only be more interesting (What with the awesome new style that codexes are being made in)

Redbeard wrote:Some of the rules in fantasy simply don't mesh with how I view the world.

Mainly, the idea that you can lose a combat if you don't take a wound. I'm ok with combat res. modifiers like ranks and all, but if you cannot hurt something, there should be no reason that it runs, period.

I just can't seem to get my head around that, and so I don't really enjoy it.

Oddly enough, your first point is why 40k irks me, but I won't get into that and derail the thread.....

Here's an explanation for your next point though: during the early years of the Iraqi Army/National Guard/etc. they tended to flee from combat at the drop of a hat. Totally unreliable. Now a unit in Fantasy that is outnumbered and flanked might similarly think "Well, they didn't manage to kill me yet, but clearly our situation is untenable! Flee!" and as soon as a few of them start doing that (your champ/standard/musician having a panic attack, represented by you rolling gak for your Ld roll), they all will.


A question for those that don't like Fantasy because of moving ranked up troops, rear ranks being near-useless, and similar issues:

Do you play any of the Total War series of computer games? To me, these games are basically a computerized version of Warhammer Ancients, which makes it similar to playing Fantasy, just without a magic phase or monsters (and if you are playing the LotR mod "Third Age: Total War" you come close to adding in both). I enjoy them immensely, and would kill for a WHFB mod to actually get finished and released (they tend to sputter out).

I don't have any real desire to learn a new system. I have enough 40K armies as it is, I don't need Warhammer ones.

Oh, and I started with 40K because I love tanks. Fantasy only has one tank, and it's a frilly iron on wheels, not a tank.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:As for which army, what appeals to you about each one listed. Only one I wouldnt reccomend right now would be Tomb Kings, on account they should be getting redone in the not too distant future (after Beasts of Chaos I hope!). They can still compete like, but I suspect the range will be getting an overhaul, and with any luck the models will get better and better. Roll on plastic Tomb Scorpions!

well, most of the armies i listed have a majority of nice models, tomb kings practically got me into WHFB but you probably right, i'm going to wait till somethings announced.

I don't like ranked combat; more specifically, I have a problem with ranked combat and painting. It just seems like you're just putting work into another rank bonus, and not a model of its own.

The lack of actual death seems a little silly too. Especially with the way the armies are often described in the fluff.

I said this in another thread

40k has GUN TANKS and SWORDS.. Thats why it wins.

Sidstyler wrote:And 40k hasn't, with all the land raider variants and dreadnoughts, the valkyrie release, the rumored trygon for Tyranids, etc.? 40k has big toys, too.

And the hydra is awesome, kiss my ass.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I stopped playing Fantasy because GW appears to have Squatted my Dogs of War.

When they resolve the DoW issue by giving me a new Army Book, I'll reconsider coming back in.

I'm tempted to post anti-DoW sentiment similar to the anti-DE crap that you yourself are so fond of, but I don't really care enough to. I'll give it a shot anyway.

Um...Dogs of War sucked. I'm glad they're gone, now we have more release slots for EMPIRE YEAH!

...it still doesn't fill the DE-shaped void in my soul.

I found the 5th ed. DoW book one of the most interesting armies books GW made... though it should have included rules/guidelines for creating your own Regiments of Renown.

If I'd come across this one for cheap, I'd buy it without thinking. Just for the awesome background material.

It's a shame GW "gave up" on this race, Regiments of Renown are one of the more interesting things of old-style GW, just check Stuff of Legends!
even Grom the Paunch, Goblin Warlord, used to be a RoR captain before they put him in a chariot and had him do a naval invasion of the High Elf kingdom.

Pretty much every reason I don't play Fantasy has already been stated already.

I've tried several times to start it up but every time I just get bored and switch back to pewpew lasers.

The main thing for me though I think is that I'm investing a lot of time and money for another rank bonus. Especially with armies like Skaven and VC.

Oh and I've seen the new Skaven book and I might be wrong but it's totally broken, who would've guessed?

I actually used to play fantasy but I haven't for many years. This is mostly because my gaming group here plays exclusively 40k but I prefer 40k for a number of reasons

1. Better models
2. Much, much better fluff. Just much more original (yes i know) and developed than the fantasy stuff. It really engages me and drags me in and the fantasy in space stuff is far more unique and cool than straight up fantasy to me.
3. I truly utterly suck at fantasy.

I'm a decent 40k player. I win more than I lose and whilst I harbor no illusions about sweeping 'ard boyz I win enough of the game to keep me interested.

I have never won in fantasy ever. I play dwarves so my games have largely consisted of

deploy
shoot
take leadership tests
fail leadership tests and run away

I have tried everything under the sun, more guns, less guns, different styles of deployment, iron breakers, stubborn banners, slayers on my flank with board edge on the other. Everything I can think of to ensure that the enemy is charging big tough ranked up units with a decent armour save and ld9 or 10 with re-rolls and stubborn HEAD ON and usually depleted by firepower beforehand.

Does it work. Nope, I have flubbed ld10 re-rollable checks consistently for years, causing my whole line to panic and crumble and lost every single game I have ever played.

When a game can be won or lost entirely on 1 or 2 dice rolls it annoys me.

so I stick to 40k.

Plus I hear that whilst Fantasy used to be pretty balanced the last 3 releases have broken the game. This makes me very sad as I started playing fantasy when 40k was in the midst of its rhino rush phase and despite my horrible luck I enjoyed the fact that most armies were fairly well balanced.

I know it's only a game, but I'd also like to see more real world type effects on the table. Impact hits from cavalry charges for example (after all this is what does the damage, not the bloke in the saddle) and as somebody else mention, archers should be be able to fire in ranks.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Fantasy only has one tank, and it's a frilly iron on wheels, not a tank.

^ This.

+1

It might just be a local phenomenon, but around here powergamers play Fantasy, fluff gamers play 40k.

I have no idea how to play. I'm building a WoC army, and totally want to do a Skaven one too.

Unfortunately no-one lives nearby to play with me, and I honestly think it looks damn difficult.

BTW, good to see you around the forum, Doc, I assume you've been busy earning money or something?

lord_blackfang wrote:It might just be a local phenomenon, but around here powergamers play Fantasy, fluff gamers play 40k.

But the 40K players think they are powergamers.

I will die (or worse play LotR *shudder*) before Fantasy.

I just don't like the entirely structured organisation of the Ranks and formations. There doesn't seem to be all that much room for fluidity. And honestly, some of the characters are quite simply horrifically overdone. (Archaon and other -negative armour save characters?)

Noble713 wrote:
Here's an explanation for your next point though: during the early years of the Iraqi Army/National Guard/etc. they tended to flee from combat at the drop of a hat. Totally unreliable. Now a unit in Fantasy that is outnumbered and flanked might similarly think "Well, they didn't manage to kill me yet, but clearly our situation is untenable! Flee!" and as soon as a few of them start doing that (your champ/standard/musician having a panic attack, represented by you rolling gak for your Ld roll), they all will.

Dude, it's a dragon not an Iraqi guardsmen. And he's not fighting the most technological army the world has ever seen, he's fighting a ranked-up group of night goblins - squirrels with sticks. Why is the dragon running from squirrels with sticks?

Emperors Faithful wrote:I will die (or worse play LotR *shudder*) before Fantasy.

I just don't like the entirely structured organisation of the Ranks and formations. There doesn't seem to be all that much room for fluidity. And honestly, some of the characters are quite simply horrifically overdone. (Archaon and other -negative armour save characters?)

Never mind that fighting in regiments makes no sense in a world where fireballs exist.

lol, yeah.

Well, I don't play Fantasy at the moment because of lack of time.
Better concentrate on one (or two) systems (40k, WM).

I find WHFB boring and a complete waste of my time. Add to this the likely hood of a game being 100% decided by deployment and you have a non-starter for me. I like the ability to maneuver, and being able to correct mistakes made before and during a game.

Quick, everyone gather together in a big group so the dragon can fly by and roast us!

Too much painting for a mediocre gaming experience for me. I don't fancy painting up a unit of (say) 30 models, only for 25 of them to have no significant impact on the game other than providing rank bonus and serving as wound markers.

Plus: no real vehicles.

And ranked up squares look stupid on the tabletop for many troop types. They're OK for Elves, Dwarves and some "organised" mannish troops. But big blocks of Chaos, or Orks or whatever just look stupid I think. I like my rules to promote a little more realistic look and feel.

And most units look stupidly small. The whole idea of a "regiment" of 20 models acting as some sort of coherent ranked body is just preposterous. I like my gaming experience a little more reflective of the way real military units behave.

And the whole "Warhammer World" consisting of a half dozen different races constantly at war, yet somehow the world survives and thrives, when in reality it would be a wrecked shell... like Europe after WWII buit this time without American economic help in reconstruction... again I just find it silly. I like my fantasy backgrounds a little more believable.

One thing I will say is that Fantasy armies all lined up and ready to go look more impressive than 40K ones, especially if they've got lots of infantry. That's just a subjective opinion obviously.

And I believe that is 1000 posts, lets see what's above Raging Rat Ogre...

EDIT - Monstrous Master Moulder?! Gah, I hate Clan Moulder! Not being one of these for what I guess will be another 1000 posts. I'm going back to Path of the Aspect Warrior.

EDIT 2 - Screaming Shining Spear? Hmm, not much better. What about Empire?

EDIT 3 - Knight of the Inner Circle. Ok that's relatively classy. I'll stick with that for the time being

It's another money sink that I can't support?

Osbad wrote:And most units look stupidly small. The whole idea of a "regiment" of 20 models acting as some sort of coherent ranked body is just preposterous. I like my gaming experience a little more reflective of the way real military units behave.

This too.


Another of the rules issues I have with Fantasy is how utterly shooting is nerfed. Consider that as early as 1350, missile fire was dominating battles like Crecy and Agincort, and that the Empire and Dwarves are a few hundred years more advanced than medieval Europe at that time. My experience in fantasy was that I'd get one shooting phase before the enemy cav could hit my lines. (Cause I never win the roll to go first). The idea that riflemen can kill maybe one knight before the knights get to them is stupid.

I understand, from a game designer's perspective, that they want it to be about the hand-to-hand engagements. But come on, a rifle line should be able to kill more than one knight (and, one from the front of the unit that's being fired at...) before the knights are on them.

To some extent, this issue exists in 40k too. (For that matter, why are people 40,000 years in the future waving axes around??), but at least it's explained with technology (guys with swords teleport in next to you, or get dropped off by their spaceship). There's no justifying how gimped basic ranged weapons are against cavalry in fantasy.

Well, Fantasy has always looked neat to me. The rules seem more complex than 40K and being a fantasy setting, it should be a different game. The comments I've read seem to support this.

There are two main reasons I don't play Fantasy. First, there doesn't seem to be a way in with a low model count. I already have an Ork army for 40K and doing a smallish force has a certain amount of appeal to me at present. I realize I can do Ogres for a small force, but this takes me into the second issue: the fact that there just isn't a full range of miniatures I really like the look of. There are definitely some nice pieces, but they seem to share an army with other minis I dislike. Unfortunately, the lion's share of the miniatures I dislike seem to be Core Units which you just can't do without.

I'll keep my eyes open, but it looks as though I'll be sticking to 40K for the time being.