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.

Hulksmash wrote:-Magic is far to effective.

-Not enough dice rolled. Ergo luck plays a dispirportionate (sp?) role.

Personally I hope it's as large of a change as the change between 4th and 5th edition 40k.

I would expect nothing less than a 40k5-scale revamp going to WFB8. However, it's interesting that a lot of what you're complaining about appears to have been fundamentally addressed by War of the Ring.

That said, I think the dumb luck factor is probably going to stay. A lot of WFB players like the fact that it's easy (and common) for the tide of battle to swing back and forth, and the way that happens is by minimizing dice rolls so that extreme results occur more often. Following this path of game design, one could reasonably expect more "Thorpian" effects on 1s and 6s where there currently aren't any to accelerate the game. For example, right now, to-hit in HtH is either 3s, 4s or 5s, so add some Thorpian effects to give big results on the outliers that cut dice: 1 to-hit does a free hit back, 6 to-hit auto-wounds, 6 to-wound negates saves.

@Minsc

So what your saying is that you don't win much with your Orcs so the game is ok? Saying that fantasy is 70 percent pre-game just means your not going to win probably even 40% of your games against a Daemon list and more than likely a lot more losses. That's a balanced game system for you?

To be honest a change to the way the game functions will see a lot more people come back. I know a lot of people that have stopped playing fantasy currently and look to the new rules to revive it for them. Much like many people stopped playing 40k in the year leading up to 5th. Mostly because 4th edition was 75% list building.

@John

Actually War of the Ring is a much better game overall than the current Fantasy game. And I can see them integrating a lot of the rules into Fantasy to make the game involve more playing in general.

A friend of mine said that the war of the ring was an experiment for the new edition of FB (apparently the ex-local store manager was told that as part of the info about the War of the ring)

Hulksmash wrote:@Minsc

So what your saying is that you don't win much with your Orcs so the game is ok?

What I'm saying is if the game was so heavily based on army / list as well as luck, how come I can force a draw / minor victory dash defeat most of the time via tactics when seemingly that makes up only 30% of the game? Supposedly if 40K that would make total sense, but in Fantasy that has gotta be some sort of anomaly or outlier to the standard order of things.

Hulksmash wrote:Saying that fantasy is 70 percent pre-game just means your not going to win probably even 40% of your games against a Daemon list and more than likely a lot more losses. That's a balanced game system for you?

If the majority of my games are ending in draws and minor victories / defeats? Yes. That's what balance is. It's not a balanced system overall, but fixing the problem by making most of the armies that already suck suck more until the player shells out another $150 to make all their units have an additional +6 Combat Res from ranks doesn't sound balanced to me. Maybe in rules / theory, but once you apply money to the equation that all goes down the john.

The biggest problem with Fantasy is the Army books, not the core rules.

Having to go 10 wide would kill my desire to play the game. If my armies are nerfed into oblivion, I don't have the resources to buy a whole bunch of things to make them playable again.

However, maybe the rank bonus is based on the unit being square...For instance, a 5x5 unit is a +5 Rank bonus, a 6x6 is a +6?


I will say that player skill plays a lot more of a factor in Fantasy than it is in 40k. At least in Fantasy, it isn't possible to build an army that cannot win a battle regardless of luck, etc like it is in 40k.

I have also heard that LotR plays much easier and based on fantasy concepts.

I also enjoyed playing Warmaster because of the relative ease of play.

Agreed - Psych is a farce, and Magic is too influential.

And OT:

I thought this was a much better pic



Although - Is it really off topic if she's in chainmail and we're talking about WHFB???

Not at all! Totally on topic and bring more of it, I say!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Minsc
You are the exception to the rule. Look at tournament results and you see them absolutely dominated by the big three. Orks and Gobbos are not even close to holding their own.

@Skyth
Can you clarify your statement? IN 40K it is possible to make a list that will win regardless of luck? What army is that?

Saying Fantasy requires more skill than 40K is a fallacy. They are apples and oranges.

Both games require a huge amount of skill to win with, but my stance is that right now, Fantasy is just flat out not as much fun to play, at least for me, due to balance issues.

An ignoramus with a good Daemon list that just moves straight forward and casts spells will win the majority of his games.

The game needs some balancing. I for one don;t even like playing it that much right now unless it is a friendly game. 40K is just infinitely more engaging and fun for me at the moment.

What if it was when units contact eachother they move to ten wide not the unit has to be ten wide

Reecius wrote:@Skyth
Can you clarify your statement? IN 40K it is possible to make a list that will win regardless of luck? What army is that?

Actually, the opposite...An army that cannot win unless they are playing someone that let's themselves be tabled...There are a couple armies that can make an army with no scoring units. (Orks and Nids)

Being able to build a bad army list isn't any different from deliberately playing badly.

If you're playing badly, you can still win

I got hit with the Nerf Bat . . .

Can I have my picture back please

Minimum of 10 a rank to get bonuses? Looks like the boyz are going to be living in my Warhammer Quest dungeons for a while.

I'm not sure that 10 ranks bonus would even work at all.

Why would anyone want to rank models 10 wide?

Sure you would be pretty much guaranteed to get all the unit in combat, but even if they are going to fight in 2 ranks you'd be relying a lot more on CR than on rank bonuses..

Hmm... maybe I answered my own question there? They are trying to seriously nerf the whole concept of the rank bonus to just an added bonus?

skyth wrote:If you're playing badly, you can still win

Not if you're trying to lose.

And BTW, those 40k armies with NO Scoring Units? Easily able to win by tabling the opponent...

I really hope that WotR isn't a test run for Fantasy 8th unless they acknowledge the severe flaws that game has. Most people only play it with friends since it isn't very popular so they don't notice the huge problems but once you bring in any elements of power gaming into it, everything totally breaks down. "Player restraint" has always been GW's plan for ultimate game balance which is a horrible idea in general but WotR is practically designed around it.

Personally I don't think there's really anything you can fix with a new ruleset that will hurt the current power armies at all at least in relation to the other lower tier books. Really there needs to be a total reset to see any real change but apparently they aren't doing that. There have been some store run campaigns with weird scenarios with kill points and claiming terrain but with quarters deployments lately which has been theorized as a get used to the new ideas you'll be playing in four months deal. If that's the best they can do to try and reel in demons (in won't since tabling your opponent will always be a win) I'm just going to concentrate on 40k and Warmachine for actual fun and just buy a demon army to bring to tournies every few months.

If they buff infantry units and force more contact I'll probably like the new edition. With Dwarves it's like pulling teeth playing a tournament game right now. With Ogres it's just funny since the largest basic creature army in Fantasy has the biggest issues with leadership

I think a big problem with Ogres that there is no way to fix is that 90% of the army is expensive multi-wound models. Fighting Skaven is incredibly unfun since they have so much stuff that has a D6 or D3 wound multiplier on everything it hits (auto hitting Doomwheel lightning, Warp lighting Cannons with no partial templates, Hellpit Abominations) so you are basically picking up tons of 35+ point models every turn. Even the dreaded 13th spell is ridiculous. I played a guy that just threw 5 dice at it every turn since if it went off I was removing 4D6 ogres which is impossible to survive from no matter how low he rolled.

Basically Ogres will always be a low tier army no matter what they do for it with the new book, especially with the current 7th edition books which will be valid for the next four years.

Well that just makes it worse. To be honest I've started to avoid fantasy about 6 months back due to the unfun nature of the game. I'm just praying that 8th gets me back. I only have 3-4 3k armies for it and I don't want to have to go thru the effort of selling them all

April 17th we'll get some info. There should be some sort of information about 8th edition going up on the website.

Sweet, that's pretty soon.

Also, can we drop the 40k chit chat from this thread, I'm sure it could be a great conversation in the 40k General Discussions forum but it doesn't belong here.

Can anyone who's played a good bit of WotR describe how gameplay there works and how it could be integrated into WHFb?

The turns are played by alternating player phases. So one guy moves his stuff, the other guy moves his stuff, then the next guy shoots and then the other shoots.

There's no rolls to hit. Depending on what type of unit you are (monster, cavalry, infantry) and what your fight statistic is versus the unit you are in combat with and if you charged you get more dice to throw. Toughness and armor are basically jammed into one stat.

Units are in formations. So you have trays with eight slots that hold models which are then made into infantry formations then 2 slot trays for cavalry formations. Movement is pretty lax, it's not nearly as restrictive as fantasy with 25% turns, reforms and such.

Stuff has special abilities that generally use might to use. Some of these are pretty ridiculous. Spells mostly just go off but can be stopped with opposing wizards and stuff and get harder to cast the more you use.

There's variable charge distance. You roll a dice and add that to your movement. If you can't reach your target (a 1 on that roll always fails) then you stall and typically get counter charged. This brings the "super randomness of small amounts of dice rolled" really big into focus if you like or hate that.

Generally the system isn't bad and has some interesting ideas. The problem was that there was absolutely no playtesting whatsoever since there are obviously broken stuff once you start comboing things which generally have almost no restrictions. Dol Amroth knights have a +1 to wound because of their lance. They also have a hero that gives them +1 to wound. There is also no 1s always fail rule so if you are up against something that you would normally wound on 3+, you don't need to roll, just take off as many guys as I'm picking up dice. Certain models generate might. You can stack multiples of these to get basically infinite might so there is no limit to your army's special abilities. Radagast has an ability where no one can charge his formation; there's no roll or test it just works. With tons of extra might I think you can see where that combo goes. There's tons of stuff like that which is a power gamer's dream but it really is just a mess of things that sounded cool on paper and went straight into the book without thinking them through. It's a Matt Ward book so his massive incompetance seeps through pretty strongly.

Variable charge distance really doesn't belong in Fantasy.

The plastic trolls and boarboyz hit May 22nd.

£27 for the former, £15 for the latter.

Kudos to Mr. Hastings on Warseer for the info.

reds8n wrote:The plastic trolls and boarboyz hit May 22nd.

£27 for the former, £15 for the latter.

Kudos to Mr. Hastings on Warseer for the info.

So ~$35-40USD for the trolls and $25 for the Boarboyz? Not bad. The Boarboyz prices will be in line with the DE Cold One Knights then.

Looking forward to some multipart Troll goodness, and high time the old thalidomide ravaged Boars were updated.

On the subject of the 10 wide discussion I dont see it happening, we are led to believe that the new Skaven and Beasts books are made for 8th ed. Things as ever have stayed pretty much the same just with a few tweeks changes and the odd new thing. 10 wide to get rank would need a big decrease in the cost of core troops otherwise rank bonuses would be out of reach of a lot of army's unless you were playing 3000+ point games. Though it wouldn't affect my Night Gobbos they are 10 wide as standard

There's quite a lot of wider than 5 units in the books aren't there though ?

Well they always like to show big flashy units in the books.

Personally I would love it to go 10 wide it would suit my style of play, which is using massed core units and few characters and other fancy stuff. But 10 seams a bit of big jump and would hurt armys that have better than average but expensive infantry like Dwarfs. Though if the two ranks attacking rumor is also true then I can see that balancing thing out, which makes my argument pointless

reds8n wrote: There's quite a lot of wider than 5 units in the books aren't there though ?

Spill it Red!