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.

Not sure if someone has brought this up or not but I see a significant difference in the community of players between 40k and WMH.

PP community seems a lot warmer and tends to be a little more mature overall. Of course you go onto Focus and Fury boards and this claim falters hehe, but in general I've found it very inviting and everyone is so eager to get new players involved. People geek out a lot about different combos etc. and I'd have to say that Sportsmanship seems to skyrocket for PP.

Its just my opinion, and of course this is all dependant on where you live/game/etc.

cincydooley wrote:Don't get me wrong; I don't mind the competition. However, based on my experiences (and bear in mind I play in the Adepticon Team Tourney every year), I find that Warmahordes tournaments are far more aggressivly competitive to play in, to the point the fun goes away. I like being able to drink during the Adepticon TT and relatively competitive. I don't have to study anyone else's army to do so. I simply don't have the time to know every combo possibility for every Warmahordes army I could face. As such, I'm at a significant disadvantage just walking into the game. For me, I prefer more casual competition, and for me, I've found that more often playing 40k. I typically play Warmahordes with 2 or 3 friends that have similar time constraints to me, and in that setting the game is really enjoyable for me.

My god. You went to a national level tournament and it was highly competitive? Say it ain't so!

hivemind66 wrote:PP community seems a lot warmer and tends to be a little more mature overall.

on a literal note, from my experience there is a lot less "grabby 11 year old" syndrome in Warmahordes. 40k caters to a younger audience, while Warmahordes seems to have a slightly higher barrier of entry. this suits me well, considering Warmahordes carries more synergy and rules, needs its players to have a higher grasp on interactions.

40k is practically made for twelve year old children. People rat on about GWs popularity slipping, PP is going to take the spotlight, they're just nerd ragers. People will always like 40k, it has some of the best background and most user friendly miniatures of all the miniature wargaming industry. Anyway even if this nonsense comes true, GW probably makes three quarters of there money out of pre pubescents anyway.

I like PP, but they have quite a way to go. I hope they end out having a more beautiful albeit metal range than GW, a bit like Malifaux. My main decrepancy with Warmahordes is that it is hard to personalise and 'count as' your units, every caster has a set background. 40k has sort of bread and butter tofu HQs that you can print your own background into. I mean 40k has many restrictions that I don't like too, though. I love the style of list building with Warmahordes, the fact it is so easy to make themed fluffy lists. Although that is following quite closely to the background of the Iron Kingdoms.

Although I have to say price wise 40k and PP seem about the same. Although that could be because I'm a brit and also my local miniature bargain bucket stocks 40k cheaper than Warmahordes. I mean £25 for a 10 piece unit of mcdonalds thralls to the £13 of a box of ork boys.

zilegil wrote:40k is practically made for twelve year old children. People rat on about GWs popularity slipping, PP is going to take the spotlight, they're just nerd ragers. People will always like 40k, it has some of the best background and most user friendly miniatures of all the miniature wargaming industry. Anyway even if this nonsense comes true, GW probably makes three quarters of there money out of pre pubescents anyway.

I like PP, but they have quite a way to go. I hope they end out having a more beautiful albeit metal range than GW, a bit like Malifaux. My main decrepancy with Warmahordes is that it is hard to personalise and 'count as' your units, every caster has a set background. 40k has sort of bread and butter tofu HQs that you can print your own background into. I mean 40k has many restrictions that I don't like too, though. I love the style of list building with Warmahordes, the fact it is so easy to make themed fluffy lists. Although that is following quite closely to the background of the Iron Kingdoms.

Although I have to say price wise 40k and PP seem about the same. Although that could be because I'm a brit and also my local miniature bargain bucket stocks 40k cheaper than Warmahordes. I mean £25 for a 10 piece unit of mcdonalds thralls to the £13 of a box of ork boys.

Mini to mini GW is no doubt cheaper.

It's that you need far fewer minis, and the "heavies" cost more in 40k than Warmahordes where the price difference pops up. I can have 35 points of a warmahordes army for the same price as a 1000pt WH40K army (and even then, I have to pinch pennies)

Laughing Man wrote:

cincydooley wrote:Don't get me wrong; I don't mind the competition. However, based on my experiences (and bear in mind I play in the Adepticon Team Tourney every year), I find that Warmahordes tournaments are far more aggressivly competitive to play in, to the point the fun goes away. I like being able to drink during the Adepticon TT and relatively competitive. I don't have to study anyone else's army to do so. I simply don't have the time to know every combo possibility for every Warmahordes army I could face. As such, I'm at a significant disadvantage just walking into the game. For me, I prefer more casual competition, and for me, I've found that more often playing 40k. I typically play Warmahordes with 2 or 3 friends that have similar time constraints to me, and in that setting the game is really enjoyable for me.

My god. You went to a national level tournament and it was highly competitive? Say it ain't so!

I like drinking while I play in the adepticon 40k TT... Wouldn't fathom playing in an adepticon warmahordes tourney. Congrats on your failed sarcasm.

cincydooley wrote:

I like drinking while I play in the adepticon 40k TT... Wouldn't fathom playing in an adepticon warmahordes tourney. Congrats on your failed sarcasm.

I hear the allnighter tourney is a blast.

Also, it's not like every 40K tourney is like the TT. I tend to find more rules lawyers, TFGs, and other unsavory characters in 40K Tourneys than I do in WM/H tourneys. It's why the Adepticon 40K TT is the only 40K tourney I do anymore. Hell, it's looking to be the only 40K I do anymore, period.

cincydooley wrote:

Laughing Man wrote:

cincydooley wrote:Don't get me wrong; I don't mind the competition. However, based on my experiences (and bear in mind I play in the Adepticon Team Tourney every year), I find that Warmahordes tournaments are far more aggressivly competitive to play in, to the point the fun goes away. I like being able to drink during the Adepticon TT and relatively competitive. I don't have to study anyone else's army to do so. I simply don't have the time to know every combo possibility for every Warmahordes army I could face. As such, I'm at a significant disadvantage just walking into the game. For me, I prefer more casual competition, and for me, I've found that more often playing 40k. I typically play Warmahordes with 2 or 3 friends that have similar time constraints to me, and in that setting the game is really enjoyable for me.

My god. You went to a national level tournament and it was highly competitive? Say it ain't so!

I like drinking while I play in the adepticon 40k TT... Wouldn't fathom playing in an adepticon warmahordes tourney. Congrats on your failed sarcasm.

Sarcasm? Never. Just observing how unfair it is that being drunk hurts your chances of winning a game. Clearly, Privateer needs to cater more to the alcoholic portion of its fanbase.

There's an obvious difference on the PP forums themselves between the "casual" players and "competitive" players as well.


It's worth noting however, that in basically every notable instance the winners of major events are nice guys who don't rage over every detail or suggest only "competitive builds". More or less the main suggestion is to get a deep understanding of the varied units in the game and their interactions with each other.

There's always going to be poor players, no matter what game you play. That doesn't necessarily mean those players will lose - they can win every game and still be poor players.


In my personal experience the PP scene was more adoptive of me starting out than the 40k scene. I had the main PP guy around here literally walk me through the game and foster me through the process where the 40k players observed my entry into the hobby with casual disinterest. This is probably due to PP having a smaller player base, but, that served me well as a newbie.



tl;dr

all games have jerks in them - don't pay them too much mind

Go read a dozen or so high level 40k tourney reports, then read a dozen or so from WM/H, and take note on how many times a judge had to be called to resolve something.

My money's on WM/H having far fewer.

correlation2 wrote:It's worth noting however, that in basically every notable instance the winners of major events are nice guys who don't rage over every detail or suggest only "competitive builds". More or less the main suggestion is to get a deep understanding of the varied units in the game and their interactions with each other.

Part of the reason is because "competitive builds" are much more varied and dependent upon player ability in WM/H.

Right.

It's also worth mentioning that WM/H lends itself to less rules arguments due to having a superior rule base. Once you understand the fundamentals of the game most everything sinks into place. For specific issues the Rules section of the Privateer Press forums has ( usually ) fast answers to even the most bizarre situation.

Also worth noting that many key rules decisions are made there by Infernals, whose rulings are considered immediately... the rules.


As for lists, yeah, when you vary your list you aren't as easily accounted for. Virtually every competitive player accounts for Iron Flesh'd Kayazy/WGIDS, for example, Cryx tricks.

Not to mention if you bring a fully decked out Idrian list or something you might just have fun with it. No real need to sacrifice fun for the sake of competitiveness just because other people are. Could be worth it just to see how far you can get in a WM tourney with your favorite thematic force. ( not to be confused with the actual theme forces, although some of those (( eButcher Reaver spam )) are fun too ).

George Spiggott wrote:
2. In the UK PP has a subsidiary manufacturer for producing metals. They don't seem to have the same backlog. Back when the plastics came out they were a royal pain to source in the UK.

Tell that to my Rangers and mercs that I have ordered 4 months ago from Maelstrom and are still showing as "Out of stock at the supplier"!

Talk to anyone and they will tell you that I'm a PP fanboy, but the stock issues that PP has have really started to get on my nerves.

Negator80 wrote:Go read a dozen or so high level 40k tourney reports, then read a dozen or so from WM/H, and take note on how many times a judge had to be called to resolve something.

My money's on WM/H having far fewer.

I'd agree. And this is because of the rules, not the players.

Honestly, trying to compare a game based off its players is pointless.

Each game has players that are jerks, rules lawyers, unwashed, or just really angry that you dare face them.

I've seen a Hordes player taunting his losing opponent, only to fly into a rage when his opponent managed to kill one of his warbeasts... the only thing to die in that army during the game.

On the flip of the coin, I saw just the other night a Necron player with his shiny new codex pack up his army after the IG player he was across from manged to kill his C'tan Shard first turn. He said there was no point in continuing as "he took out my combo piece. I can't run the army without it." He then refused to play anyone else and pouted for the next 3 hours until he finally left.

Both men, each in their late 30's, are poor representatives of their gamer groups. Making sweeping generalizations based on personal observation of local groups does not serve anything.

However... WM/H leaves far, far less grey area for a rules lawyer to flourish, like mold in a damp crack.

I have never, ever had 'rules lawyer' issues in WM/H like I have had with 40k.

To quote Sourclam's Profile:

"I play Warmahordes. It's simply a better game. "

Both games are fun. Play what you like. Neither one is really "cheaper" than the other. As far as costs go, if you want to be competitive you will be spending roughly the same amount on each game. A heavy warbeast/jack is about 10 points and costs about $30-45. A unit costs about $50 with a unit attachment $20. Throw in a Light warbeast/jack and its another $20-30. Then you'll need a warcaster which is another $15-20 depending on the caster. If you go heavy infantry you're looking at $40-80 for a full unit. Add a Solo or two and its another $10-20. Its all a matter of perspective. The number of points and the faction will depend on the cost. In the Orlando area, most of the games played are 50 points.

boyd wrote:Both games are fun. Play what you like. Neither one is really "cheaper" than the other. As far as costs go, if you want to be competitive you will be spending roughly the same amount on each game. A heavy warbeast/jack is about 10 points and costs about $30-45. A unit costs about $50 with a unit attachment $20. Throw in a Light warbeast/jack and its another $20-30. Then you'll need a warcaster which is another $15-20 depending on the caster. If you go heavy infantry you're looking at $40-80 for a full unit. Add a Solo or two and its another $10-20. Its all a matter of perspective. The number of points and the faction will depend on the cost. In the Orlando area, most of the games played are 50 points.

Look at what you wrote. You've basically boiled down a heavy warjack, full unit with UA, light warnoun, and warcaster/warlock for less than $150. That's probably in the ballpark of a 20 point list. To expand that to a 35 point list, using your own numbers, you probably need to spend another $100. Using your own numbers, I've built a competitive tourney-level list for $250 ballpark. (And I do think your numbers are representative. I built my buddy a 35 pt Menoth list for $250 ballpark, and can do the same with most factions. Some factions are even cheaper, like Legion. The only one that is really more expensive is Trollbloods).

I would really like to see you build a variety of 1500 point 40k lists for under $250 MSRP when a single rhino is $33. Heck, let's try to do it:

SW Battle Force
2 max GH squads
min Scouts
Drop Pod
500 pts, $100

Long Fang squad
Dev box
2 extra missile launchers from bits site
115 pts, $46

Rhino

35 pts, $33

Logan Grimnar (just to fill points)
275 pts, $22.75

So far I'm at 925 points and $200 spent, and my army is pretty crappy on top of it because I've dumped Logan into a list where he doesn't really fit at all, but he gives a good $:army points pad.

Model:Model, WM/H and 40k have similar costs, if not WM/H being more expensive.

List:List, WM/H is a lot cheaper because there are fewer models on the table.

Faction:Faction, WM/H is far, far cheaper and gives you vastly more return on your gaming dollar due to only ever needing to buy 1-2 of any single model/unit.

Additionally, the Battleboxes provide a fairly decent base to start any faction army at the cost of like, 50$. Generally speaking you get around 10+ pts of models. The battleforces for 40k seem to comprise much less. ( in terms of lists )

Like if I buy a 130$ Tau battleforce I get something like 500 pts worth of models, barring weird amounts of upgrades and stuff. If I quadruple that to play a 2000 pt game that's like 520$.

If I bought 4 battleboxes it would cost me 200$ and I'd have like, 50+ pts.



Those would be some pretty gimped lists all around of course, but that's how it goes.

( the new holiday bundles might alleviate this to some degree, they range in the 150-300$ range but include battleboxes and then a few additional jacks or units themed to each specific faction. )

sourclams wrote:

boyd wrote:Both games are fun. Play what you like. Neither one is really "cheaper" than the other. As far as costs go, if you want to be competitive you will be spending roughly the same amount on each game. A heavy warbeast/jack is about 10 points and costs about $30-45. A unit costs about $50 with a unit attachment $20. Throw in a Light warbeast/jack and its another $20-30. Then you'll need a warcaster which is another $15-20 depending on the caster. If you go heavy infantry you're looking at $40-80 for a full unit. Add a Solo or two and its another $10-20. Its all a matter of perspective. The number of points and the faction will depend on the cost. In the Orlando area, most of the games played are 50 points.

Look at what you wrote. You've basically boiled down a heavy warjack, full unit with UA, light warnoun, and warcaster/warlock for less than $150. That's probably in the ballpark of a 20 point list. To expand that to a 35 point list, using your own numbers, you probably need to spend another $100. Using your own numbers, I've built a competitive tourney-level list for $250 ballpark. (And I do think your numbers are representative. I built my buddy a 35 pt Menoth list for $250 ballpark, and can do the same with most factions. Some factions are even cheaper, like Legion. The only one that is really more expensive is Trollbloods).

I would really like to see you build a variety of 1500 point 40k lists for under $250 MSRP when a single rhino is $33. Heck, let's try to do it:

SW Battle Force
2 max GH squads
min Scouts
Drop Pod
500 pts, $100

Long Fang squad
Dev box
2 extra missile launchers from bits site
115 pts, $46

Rhino

35 pts, $33

Logan Grimnar (just to fill points)
275 pts, $22.75

So far I'm at 925 points and $200 spent, and my army is pretty crappy on top of it because I've dumped Logan into a list where he doesn't really fit at all, but he gives a good $:army points pad.

Model:Model, WM/H and 40k have similar costs, if not WM/H being more expensive.

List:List, WM/H is a lot cheaper because there are fewer models on the table.

Faction:Faction, WM/H is far, far cheaper and gives you vastly more return on your gaming dollar due to only ever needing to buy 1-2 of any single model/unit.

My point is still neither game is that much "cheaper" than the other. My 2,000 point space wolf list cost me ~$350 (Logan + Retine+LRC = ~800 points). With the exception of a horde army you're in the $300-$350 ball park. If you want to be hated by your opponent you could field a Draigo list and for ~ $175 you can have a 2,000 point army that is pretty competitive as well. From the tone of the original author it sounds like he's more familiar with 40K. I've heard people in person and read threads on this forum over the years that make it sound like for $100 you're able to play at a competitive level. Truth is, you're not. In order to really play at a very competitive level you're going to need a lot as these steam rollers allow you to take two (or three lists and you can't play the same one twice). Its all a matter of perspective. Warmahordes allows you to start playing faster than 40K which is pretty true (the battle box offers a nice starter where the WH40K starters are decent starters. The only issue I have with Privateer Press is that its still hard to get their minis. I waited about 4 months before they filled my order for a unit of Beast Handlers for my skorne. I still enjoy the game and their product line is starting to fill back up but its still not great.

I've got a skorne army - its just now reaching the point where I can probably go to an event and play a somewhat competitive game. I am working on a Rasheth and Makeda lists. Rasheth and Nihilators are very mean. Makeda , Molik Karn and Nihilators are just as mean I'm trying to build a Zaal list but I'm having trouble finding the infantry as I want Karax rather than Swordsmen. I enjoy both games as each offers something different.

I'm torn as I like the rules PP has put out but I am in love with GW's models. I think its just the fact that I can customize my GW models more that makes me like their models. I was drawn into Warmahordes strictly because I liked the Skorne models. Its not that I don't like PP models, its just that I can't customize them as much as I can with 40K/WHFB models. Both put out a good product.

boyd wrote: I've heard people in person and read threads on this forum over the years that make it sound like for $100 you're able to play at a competitive level. Truth is, you're not. In order to really play at a very competitive level you're going to need a lot as these steam rollers allow you to take two (or three lists and you can't play the same one twice). Its all a matter of perspective.

Fortunately, what you said is definitely not true. First: the basic SR format and the one that is being played mostly allows two lists but the second is fully optional. Most of the players take the second list only as a "backup" just in case of a bad matchup or really specific scenario. It is not unusual for many players to play and win tournaments using only one list during entire event. So in fact you can play at a "very competitive level" with a single list only. That is because effective playing WM depends much more on the player's skill than the list used (not that the list itself is unimportant).
Second: the case of three or more lists required that you mentioned is the "Divide and Conquer" variant of SR format and a variant only. And even then it is not that hard to build several different lists with different abilities/playing styles that will share 80%-90% of the same models. Sometimes it is enough to change a single model (caster/warlock) to get a list that plays totally different.

mazgier wrote:

boyd wrote: I've heard people in person and read threads on this forum over the years that make it sound like for $100 you're able to play at a competitive level. Truth is, you're not. In order to really play at a very competitive level you're going to need a lot as these steam rollers allow you to take two (or three lists and you can't play the same one twice). Its all a matter of perspective.

Fortunately, what you said is definitely not true. First: the basic SR format and the one that is being played mostly allows two lists but the second is fully optional. Most of the players take the second list only as a "backup" just in case of a bad matchup or really specific scenario. It is not unusual for many players to play and win tournaments using only one list during entire event. So in fact you can play at a "very competitive level" with a single list only. That is because effective playing WM depends much more on the player's skill than the list used (not that the list itself is unimportant).
Second: the case of three or more lists required that you mentioned is the "Divide and Conquer" variant of SR format and a variant only. And even then it is not that hard to build several different lists with different abilities/playing styles that will share 80%-90% of the same models. Sometimes it is enough to change a single model (caster/warlock) to get a list that plays totally different.

To build off of this argument, I run mainly two troll lists that work well for my local area. I'm not a great player by any standard, but I manage to pull out wins based mostly on sheer luck, and amazing tough rolls. My last two tournament lists were as follows:
pMadrak
Dire Troll Mauler
Impaler
Axer
Champions w/Skaldi
Krielstone Bearers w/ Stone Scribe Elder
Fell Caller Hero

eDoomshaper
Mulg
Dire Troll Mauler
Champions w/Skaldi
Krielstone Bearers w/ Stone Scribe Elder
Runebearer

Both lists use roughly the same models, and it costs like 200 bucks with some change...

Turn this around, and go to my IG army (which I bought second hand), I spent 425 dollars on over 3k points worth of models, but if I had bought my 1750 list retail, I would have spent almost 550 dollars on just chimeras, Russes, Basilisks and a single Valk...

And I really only have 2 lists if you consider the fact that I can scale up to 2000 points just by adding in some extra upgrades and another troop unit, which would have me spend another 35 bucks on a chimera...


Consider the fact that I've only been playing for a year, and I find Warmachine a better buy because I'm not spending 600 bucks on support units/transports, but I'm able to spend 200 on an army, and have the freedom to change the list up with an additional twenty dollars. Sure it means I don't go to the movies, but thats why I have dvds...

I gotta say, one of the things I love about PP games is the ability to be sitting in my local game store running my Rogue Trader game, and decide I want to drop a tenner or so on a warbeast/warcaster/solo. If I do that, suddenly I have a new dimension to my lists, or an entirely new list, if it's a warcaster or warlock. With 40K, that is simply not common at all. I'd have to buy several boxes of infantry most of the time, or a few transports, or whatever.

Honestly...both irk me in some form or fashion, yet getting the chance to game, model, model-and-game, does mean that it's the hobby itself rather than a particular brand that interests me. I won't speak of balance, for both games are ones where the balance is internally rather loopy, and the differences are fairly marginal externally barring a few "losers." (Meaning...nobody wins in balance...)

GW's insistence that they're a "Minature company" first and foremost is troublesome. Granted, tabletop combat gaming is a fairly diverse hobby and people play it for a wide variety of reasons, yet asking for polished, unambiguous rulesets that don't result in humorous YMDC-threadfights should not be the perogative of tournament gamers. Having open-correspondence with fans of the game (much less an actual forum) likewise. It's nice to see they actually write FAQs/Erratas with unambiguous answers (as well as proper changelogs), for it took them long enough.

On the other hand, the general rules for Warmachine Customization and Conversion bother me. Given that there are *less* models in a Warmachine army rather than in a 40k army by default, and they generally have more options overall, it's especially irksome to know that you can't customize your units or jacks. While a *lot* of the "upgrade" options in 40k are pointsink items ("Buy Extra Armor, a Hunter-Killer Missile, and a Storm Bolter and you've doubled the cost of your Rhino!"), and others weaker than others ("Melta precedes Plasma if you're not Relentless"), the options exist. You could alter the loadout of your Razorback, army-dependent. A Dreadnought isn't "Mortis Dread. Melta Dread. Missiledread..." A Dreadnought is a Dreadnought, with loadout options available. Given the option to say "This is a Charger Chassis. It *must* equip its hardpoints with the following options," it would open up more conversion/modeling opportunities and (if properly balanced) army options.

An interesting point, although at the same time you can easily look at the different jacks as various customization options. The classic Ironclad chassis has 2 hardpoints, and you can equip it with a Quake Hammer and Open Fist, Heavy Barrel and Shock Hammer, or Metal Storms mounted on open fists.

While the potential to have more customized loadouts might seem appealing, it also exists at odds with the goal they have of making sure that you can identify a jack and its abilities at a glance without having to worry about sneaky customization. It also gives an advantage to warmachine, as a lot of warbeasts don't have hard points that can be used like warjacks, and are effectively purpose 'grown' for the job. You might say that some could swap roles (IE, various titans using weapons meant for other titans) but others don't have the option - a Rhinodon isn't anything other than a Rhinodon, a Gharlhorn can't become a Shadowhorn, and a Wrassler doesn't develop tentacle lust for schoolgirls like a Swamp Horror.

Rules are not in the same place in PP.

Core rules? Rulebook.

Building a list? Assume I don't own the models yet (I don't.)

Well, I'm looking through my Menoth book. Whoops, also need my Wrath book. You know what, better grab my Merc and Minion book too. Can Saxon Orrick join Menoth...?

So no, building an army is not fun when I have to flip through 2-4 books to make lists.

hivemind66 wrote:Not sure if someone has brought this up or not but I see a significant difference in the community of players between 40k and WMH.

PP community seems a lot warmer and tends to be a little more mature overall. Of course you go onto Focus and Fury boards and this claim falters hehe, but in general I've found it very inviting and everyone is so eager to get new players involved. People geek out a lot about different combos etc. and I'd have to say that Sportsmanship seems to skyrocket for PP.

Its just my opinion, and of course this is all dependant on where you live/game/etc.

I loved PP's rules system and models, but got burnt out on the general focus on powergaming/min-maxing/net-listing/etc.

Warmahordes is M:TG in miniatures form. Nothing wrong with that per se, but I prefer story based/scenario/campaign style gaming, and that is hard to find with Warmahordes.

GW games can have that focus as well in the tourney scene, but you can usually find people willing to play scenario/campaign games as well far more readily...

Cost of warmachine: 35 point armies with rule book and accessories $187-220 so about $400 for a 50 point army.

Cost of 40k: Complicated, will attempt to calculate my IG
2 CCS + 1 PCS=$75
HWS=$39
2 infantry squads and 5 vets=$203 or 250 if you want Karshin's for the models, but am going to call it $203
Demo SWS + spare demo charge=$28
2 squads of 6 psykers=$60
5 Chimera=$175
Manticore=$50
2 hydra flak tanks=$133 from forge world, or $110 if you kit bash them from an aegis and chimera. Call this one $133 because kit bashed from an aegis looks like crap if you don't buy some kind of turret.
3 Vendettas=$198 for the Valkyrie kit+70 for the conversion kit=$268
Melta guns bits from gw websight=$25, will cost a lot more if you want plastic melta guns

Grand total=$1,056 for 2,000 points.

Most marine armies will rung about $600 for 2,000 points, and non MEQ armies tend to cost even more.

In order for a 50 point warmahordes to cost $1,000 the average point to $ ratio needs to be $20 per point. The most expensive units I could possibly find still tend to go for less than $10/point which makes it difficult to break $350 for 35 points or $500 for 50 points.

40k costs a lot more than warmahordes.

That being said warmahordes has a higher quality player base because it has a smaller player base. Douchebag WAAC players burn bridges with other players. There are plenty of bridges to burn in the 40k community, and less bridges to burn in the warmahordes community. If a douchebag/WAAC player does get into warmahordes he will start to burn bridges, have a hard time finding games within a smaller community, get bored, and move back to 40k.

Clarence wrote:Building a list? Assume I don't own the models yet (I don't.)

Well, I'm looking through my Menoth book. Whoops, also need my Wrath book. You know what, better grab my Merc and Minion book too. Can Saxon Orrick join Menoth...?

So no, building an army is not fun when I have to flip through 2-4 books to make lists.

Forward Commander or iBodger if you use a smartphone - no more than a minute to build and validate a list. Oh, and they're free...