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.

Manchu wrote:Not at all. The point is that they used to offer it; now they don't. Just like all the disappointed Squat fans out there, the IKRPG players were screwed over after dropping their cash. And if you think that a (rumored) non-d20 game will sub in for a d20-based game, I'd recommend you talk to some DMs trying to get their groups playing 4E. This kind of thing happens with every company. There's no use pretending that PP is exempt or that GW is the worst.

It's still available as PDFs and has updates in NQ. The Squat comparison is invalid, an Inquisition comparison is fairer.

Fearspect wrote:Miswrote that there, 80% as in 20% off (from the MSRP stated on the PP website).

Nearly any ebay webstore offers this sorts of rates.

I just want to make things clear though: I am just starting into Warmachines and just wanted to state what I found impressive. I will not stop playing WHFB or 40K; I just find this new system impressive and a breath of fresh air.

Fething hell man, you nearly gave me a heart attack with that though. I just spent $230 bucks to properly start my Cryx army at a sweet 30% discount (that's pretty much all of my spending money for the entire month!) and then I read '80% discount on Warmachine' and my eyes bulged. I swear there was a vein throbbing in my forehead. In fact, there's a picture to accurately describe my expression when I first read your post:














There is no rage like nerdrage.

George Spiggott wrote:It's still available as PDFs and has updates in NQ.

The fact that I have a load of 3.5 stuff on my shelf doesn't mean that system's alive or supported. Also, I thought we straightened this out about NQ already? And you can still play Squats--as long as you've already got the army and can find someone else willing to play 2nd ed. with you. Kind of like if you wanted to do IKRPG . . .

Ok, people bitching about dropping lines:

It's because they probably stopped making money with it.

Regardless of all your squabbles, they are all companies. No matter how good they want support their player base, they can't if they aren't making money.

This especialy aplies on pen and paper RPG's, once everyone has your book, your sales are gone. (unless you make a new book offcourse) But my guess is that IKRPG didn't sell that well.

GW has made crap desicions(sp?) I agree, and I myself so far prefer Warmachine/hordes when it comes to the game itself. But I'm not putting PP on a bloody pedestal. Who elevated these guys to divine status?


Oh, and who the hell came up with the "wh is more casual" argument? These games are as casual as you make them. I've never played a tourny in any wargame so that pretty much makes all my experience "casual".



4e DND sucks btw.

Soladrin wrote:

Oh, and who the hell came up with the "wh is more casual" argument? These games are as casual as you make them. I've never played a tourny in any wargame so that pretty much makes all my experience "casual".

If you look at the fundamental rules sets, Warhammer 40k has a multitude of 'gray areas'. These are areas where two mutually exclusive scenarios can both be supported by different interpretations of the rules. The Deffrolla debacle over the past 18 months is a great example. With these gray areas, players have to find a gentlemanly consensus because there is no definitive answer in the rulebook. This is a more 'casual' structure because game mechanics cannot be managed at the margin, or in online gamer parlance 'the bleeding edge'; the need to compromise dilutes the combination of rules and mechanics to less than their full potential.

WM/Hordes, by dint of being much, much more crystal clear eliminates rule ambiguities that might otherwise require compromise. This allows a very good player to fully exploit a powerful combination, and doing so is within the philosophy of the game set laid out on Page 5.

Back to the original question

If you are interested in warmachine, the best way is to find your local Press Ganger. Press Gangers are pretty much volunteers for PP who run unoffical events and demos in order to teach new people etc
They dont get paid for it, but they get special brownie points they can trade in for stuff if they are deemed worthy
Plus they are all pretty awesome guys. (i know three of them ) Hopefully you have a good one locally.

I don't know how you would find them, probably best to either ask on PP forums or all your local gaming groups. Or even LGS. Hell even try GW stores, i know some of the employees of our GW store even play warmachine.

Im not entirely sure if they have Mk2 quick start rules yet, but they should have leaflets telling you a basic outline of every rule so you know enough to play (they usually come in the battlebox's) Also like a little booklet with a brief description / pictures of models of each faction.
And you get to play a BATTLEBOX game! which are Intense, Seriously! a 4 vs 4 model game is pretty insane in warmachine.

If your still interested, do it again! and swap teams.

The best thing is if you want to start playing is get the battlebox its like £30? with discounts or so? and battlebox's are already heavily discounted because you're pretty much getting your 'Warcaster' for free.

Start with a friend and have lots of battlebox games, Warjacks are extremely flexible rules wise and have more then 1 type of attack. You can Throw units at each other, or headbutt them, or slam them around (Headbutting is funky)

So just try it out

And for argument sake, i know alot of people say Warmachine is Chess to GW as checkers.
But GW is the chess and Warmachine is Shogi.

They are both chess, but warmachine is more complex.

Sure, Warhammer is like Chess... But depending on your army of choice, one player might get no Queens, and the other might get 5 of them...

MasterDRD wrote:Fething hell man, you nearly gave me a heart attack with that though. I just spent $230 bucks to properly start my Cryx army at a sweet 30% discount

Where did you find 30%?

eBay Store seller, Macpac51. He claims to have the best discounts on the web and so far I haven't seen anyone with a better one.

Fearspect wrote:

MasterDRD wrote:Fething hell man, you nearly gave me a heart attack with that though. I just spent $230 bucks to properly start my Cryx army at a sweet 30% discount

Where did you find 30%?

Dungeontrader sells warmachine and hordes at 30% off all the time. I have made many orders with them and have always had good service and fast shipping.

Because it's fun!


... and I'm out.

sourclams wrote:

Soladrin wrote:

Oh, and who the hell came up with the "wh is more casual" argument? These games are as casual as you make them. I've never played a tourny in any wargame so that pretty much makes all my experience "casual".

If you look at the fundamental rules sets, Warhammer 40k has a multitude of 'gray areas'. These are areas where two mutually exclusive scenarios can both be supported by different interpretations of the rules. The Deffrolla debacle over the past 18 months is a great example. With these gray areas, players have to find a gentlemanly consensus because there is no definitive answer in the rulebook. This is a more 'casual' structure because game mechanics cannot be managed at the margin, or in online gamer parlance 'the bleeding edge'; the need to compromise dilutes the combination of rules and mechanics to less than their full potential.

WM/Hordes, by dint of being much, much more crystal clear eliminates rule ambiguities that might otherwise require compromise. This allows a very good player to fully exploit a powerful combination, and doing so is within the philosophy of the game set laid out on Page 5.

In my experience, the unclear ruling in Warhammer mostly just led to arguments that broke games and never ended that well. IMHO unclear rules are the bane of warhammer. I don't play a game so I can get a first degree in rule lawyering, I want to play a bloody game.

Soladrin wrote:

sourclams wrote:

Soladrin wrote:

Oh, and who the hell came up with the "wh is more casual" argument? These games are as casual as you make them. I've never played a tourny in any wargame so that pretty much makes all my experience "casual".

If you look at the fundamental rules sets, Warhammer 40k has a multitude of 'gray areas'. These are areas where two mutually exclusive scenarios can both be supported by different interpretations of the rules. The Deffrolla debacle over the past 18 months is a great example. With these gray areas, players have to find a gentlemanly consensus because there is no definitive answer in the rulebook. This is a more 'casual' structure because game mechanics cannot be managed at the margin, or in online gamer parlance 'the bleeding edge'; the need to compromise dilutes the combination of rules and mechanics to less than their full potential.

WM/Hordes, by dint of being much, much more crystal clear eliminates rule ambiguities that might otherwise require compromise. This allows a very good player to fully exploit a powerful combination, and doing so is within the philosophy of the game set laid out on Page 5.

In my experience, the unclear ruling in Warhammer mostly just led to arguments that broke games and never ended that well. IMHO unclear rules are the bane of warhammer. I don't play a game so I can get a first degree in rule lawyering, I want to play a bloody game.

QFmotherf***ingT. I can't honestly believe this has become a 'selling point' for Warhammer, or that people bring this up as some sort of plus. I've had some rules disputes in Warmachine, but they have always been clearly resolved within 5 minutes with no question towards the outcome. You can't imagine how refreshing it is to not have to argue some skewed interpretation of the rules because they're written poorly. For example, yesterday I finally encountered the infamous 'Doom of Malantai' dispute...

I find a ton of models/boxes for WM out there for 20, 30, 40 and even 50% off.

My lfgs offers a 20% discount on all pre-paid orders and they have a hard time keeping up with the current WM demand.

40k is a good game and good for casual play and semi-serious tournaments. It's got way to much division in it's ranks.

WM is a great game and good for any play, tournament or casual when compared to 40k. It's a smaller game but the division in it's ranks is very limited.

I'll keep my marines, but I will find most of my table top time committed to WM.

Manchu wrote:The fact that I have a load of 3.5 stuff on my shelf doesn't mean that system's alive or supported. Also, I thought we straightened this out about NQ already?

Yep, NQ publishes material for IKRPG, the line has not been dropped. The IKRPG 3.5 D&D rules material isn't being published. Changing editions isn't the same as dropping a line.

Manchu wrote:And you can still play Squats--as long as you've already got the army and can find someone else willing to play 2nd ed. with you. Kind of like if you wanted to do IKRPG . . .

Squat references still aren't relevant.

I think it comes down to affordability.

My retrubution army has 3 different 3-tier lists from different warcasters, and not much overlap of troops just the warjacks. total cost? less than $400 including all the tidbits of gaming stuff

I spent over 1k upgrading my orks when the new dex came out... its just way more expensive!

and if you are short on time, the model count is way lower enabling an all painted army much easier.

and the rules are really tight! and PP updated to mk2 after a lot of feedback, and they got the community involved to make sure the rules were streamlined and balanced

and their customer service rocks. I ordered a lot of stuff, was missing some pieces and they replaced all of them for free!

NaZ

George Spiggott wrote:

Manchu wrote:The fact that I have a load of 3.5 stuff on my shelf doesn't mean that system's alive or supported. Also, I thought we straightened this out about NQ already?

Yep, NQ publishes material for IKRPG, the line has not been dropped. The IKRPG 3.5 D&D rules material isn't being published. Changing editions isn't the same as dropping a line.

Manchu wrote:And you can still play Squats--as long as you've already got the army and can find someone else willing to play 2nd ed. with you. Kind of like if you wanted to do IKRPG . . .

Squat references still aren't relevant.

And, Privateer Press is currently working on a new IKRPG based on their own in-house rules system, and Matt Wilson has stated that it will it should be intuitive to people who play Warmachine/Hordes.

George Spiggott wrote:

Manchu wrote:The fact that I have a load of 3.5 stuff on my shelf doesn't mean that system's alive or supported. Also, I thought we straightened this out about NQ already?

Yep, NQ publishes material for IKRPG, the line has not been dropped. The IKRPG 3.5 D&D rules material isn't being published. Changing editions isn't the same as dropping a line.

Manchu wrote:And you can still play Squats--as long as you've already got the army and can find someone else willing to play 2nd ed. with you. Kind of like if you wanted to do IKRPG . . .

Squat references still aren't relevant.

Great arguments on both counts.

Manchu wrote:

George Spiggott wrote:

Manchu wrote:The fact that I have a load of 3.5 stuff on my shelf doesn't mean that system's alive or supported. Also, I thought we straightened this out about NQ already?

Yep, NQ publishes material for IKRPG, the line has not been dropped. The IKRPG 3.5 D&D rules material isn't being published. Changing editions isn't the same as dropping a line.

Manchu wrote:And you can still play Squats--as long as you've already got the army and can find someone else willing to play 2nd ed. with you. Kind of like if you wanted to do IKRPG . . .

Squat references still aren't relevant.

Great arguments on both counts.

There's one other major difference between IKRPG and Squats too. IKRPG has (so far) not been updated to a new edition, so anyone playing that game is playing the 'up-to-date', latest version. 40K, the game Squats were a part of, is now on 5th Edition, and even in terms of fluff they've ben completely obliterated. If it weren't for photos and long memories, nobody who plays 40k today would know they ever existed.

I would totally play in a Squats RPG.

"Oh no, that Tyranid ate Kenny! You bastards!"

My LGS has a bit of a motto when comparing 40k to Warmachine.

"Warmachine isn't a replacement for Warhammer, it's an alternative."

Which I can agree with. 40k is still my main game, but if someone wants to play Warmachine I'll gladly oblige them.

There's not a lot of 40k going on locally, but I wish those who still play it at the local shop would either play smaller games or play less of it. It's annoying to see a 4x8 table taken up by two 40k players who need a 4x6 when the same table could accommodate four people playing two games of a rules set that works on a 4x4 space.

So that's another "why" for Warmachine. A full sized game plays on a smaller table. Needs less space.

i played my first game of 40k this past weekend after about 6-8 months of playing warmachine/hordes heavily (3-5 games a week) and while i had some good points, i really forgot how limiting the ruleset is compared to WarmaHordes.

examples:

1. I had a Deff Dred engaged with some guardsmen. The Guardsmen had no chance of hurting the Dred, but i was stuck there killing 4-5 guardsmen a round and getting very little done. In Warmachine, that Dred would be a jack that could trample out of that combat, kill a bunch of models and be useful elsewhere, instead of being bogged down.

2. I waqs shooting a Chimera with Lootas. i had a good roll and blew one up with a salvo of shooting, but i could prolly have shot and damaged (or destroyed) more transports if i could split my fire up. Taking this into warmachine, i have a unit of 10 winter guard riflemen shooting down a Cryx arc node, after 6 of them shot i knock out its arc node, so i take the other four and shoot something else, since the cryx jack is more or less useless.

these are just 2 striking things that came up while i was playing. Just loking at my dred being bogged down by something that couldnt hurt it yet it couldnt leave really got to me, but it took the more intense PP ruleset to show me what i was missing.

studderingdave wrote:1. I had a Deff Dred engaged with some guardsmen...

40k would me so much cooler of Dreadnoughts could perform power attacks.

studderingdave wrote:2. I waqs shooting a Chimera with Lootas...

I really don't understand why split fire isn't part of 40k, Lascannons shooting at Grots is silly. Lasguns firing at Landraiders is even more silly. Flames of War offers a nice compromise system, I wish 40k was more like Flames of War more than I wish it was like Warmachine.

I actually had a half-assed attempt at converting 40k armies to the Warmachine system, at one point. I really ought to give that another go some time...

Shouldn't be that hard really.

Thing's that would work as caster/lock:

Librarian
Techpriest
Inquisitor
Psyker
Hive Tyrant and such
Farseer
Cron lord
etc.

Jacks would be harder though, Necron's are doable with light's being destroyers and such.

George Spiggott wrote:

studderingdave wrote:1. I had a Deff Dred engaged with some guardsmen...

40k would me so much cooler of Dreadnoughts could perform power attacks.

studderingdave wrote:2. I waqs shooting a Chimera with Lootas...

I really don't understand why split fire isn't part of 40k, Lascannons shooting at Grots is silly. Lasguns firing at Landraiders is even more silly. Flames of War offers a nice compromise system, I wish 40k was more like Flames of War more than I wish it was like Warmachine.

Actually, splitting fire was part of 40K, back in 2nd Edition. Also, back in 2nd, you had the ability to have special/heavy weapons fire independently from their unit. So, a unit of guardsman with a Lascannon could be firing at one unit, while the Lascannon fired on a tank or walker or something. Just add those rules along with cover actually meaning something onto the pile of reasons I play Warmachine now instead of 40K.

Soladrin wrote:Shouldn't be that hard really.

Thing's that would work as caster/lock:

Librarian
Techpriest
Inquisitor
Psyker
Hive Tyrant and such
Farseer
Cron lord
etc.

Jacks would be harder though, Necron's are doable with light's being destroyers and such.

Wraithlord
Warwalkers
Dreadnoughts
Killa Kanz

I SWEET heavy jack would be the soul grinder. Or an imperial warhound titan. I'm just sayin'

As people have said before WM/H is an alternative game system not a replacement. Comparing WM/H to 40k is somewhat of a misnomer, mostly due to scale. Were I play the average WM/H battle is 35 points and 40k it's 1500, at that level WM/H is much more of a skirmish game as compared to a 1500 point 40k battle. At that level 40k has the feel of a cohesive army much more than WM/H does. Hell at 35 ponts I could quite happily field around 10 models and have a competitve force, but as I said comparison between the two systems is somewhat redundant.

Realistically the main difference between the systems is that WM/H lends itself to competitive play as the system has been developed to be so from the outset. Additional factors such as painted minitures not being required for most tournaments support this. 40k can be used for competitve play and for the most part it works quite well, however due to the fact that the system was not intended for this purpose from the start means that 40k is understandably going to lag behind somewhat in that respect.

The other major difference is that of the differing task resolution systems that the games use. WM/H using a 2d6 base for any attack/damage roll means averages are going to be more pronounced on a bell curve than 40k that uses a 1d6 base system. However this does link in with my first point as due to the fact that WM/H is smaller scale it has the opportunity to use a more granular task resolution system. Using said system with 40k would be impractical due to the larger scale of the game.

Last but not least is the rules support. I've been quite surprised by the typos and rules ambiguities that have cropped up in 40k as of late. It's never been perfect but for the most part it's usually just been a case poor wording or possible misinterpretation that can be resolved quickly. But lately there have been some issues that have needed a complete errata or the lke to resolve.
That's not to say that WM/H hasn't had it's fair share of rules related snafus, however on the whole PP are quicker to respond to such errors but GW are certainly getting better at this.

Now that I've gotten off my why play WM/H? For all my talk about it being better at competitive play it comes down to the fact that you have magically powered robots and hulking beasts tearing into each other while horrendously powerful named movers and shakers of the world toss devastating eldritch powers about the battlefield with gay abandon.