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.

I'm really starting to get peeved every time someone points out that, in contrast to Warmachine being designed for competitive play, 40K is more for casual play, and yet they neglect to point out that a large part of this is that 40k's rules were written by drunken monkeys in a gak-flinging contest, and that the armies are all imbalanced as hell. Yes, Warmachine is designed to be competitive. So not being designed for tournament play is a valid excuse for poor rules writing/game balance which cause many arguments and rules disputes to pop up? I swear I've never, ever played a game of 40k above 1k points where there wasn't at least 1 rules dispute.

MasterDRD

that point really resonates with me. I've played orks since codex: armageddon and took the time/energy/money to update my orks when the new dex came out

what did I get for switching from trukks to battlewagons? 2 years of continous arguements about their function only to have it finally faq'd by GW, in such a way that there were MORE arguements about its use

Its just not fun to sit there and argue rules before, during, and after EVERY single game of 40k I play.

At least in warmachine the rules are clear and concise, even when you have to find aspects and put them together from different parts of the book you still get a clear answer. I have not found a single ambigous ruling in the games I've played that would result in a "dice off" or other disagreement resolution method.

so I'd rather play warmachine now

NaZ

I've played Orks since the BBB days of Third Edition, and one thing that really stands out to me is that Warmahordes have almost always got simultaneous releases. This means my army will always get something new, there's always a new project, there's always an adjustment to balance. It's brilliant. Compare that to a decade of stagnation with a threadbare codex and an incomplete model line for my orks, and there's no contest in my mind as to which company provides a better customer service. That's why I have no worries about starting a new Warmahordes army, compared to 40K and Fantasy, which I am consolidating and selling off, with no serious plans for any new projects.

Lokdown wrote:on the whole PP are quicker to respond to such errors but GW are certainly getting better at this.

I completely disagree with the gw part.

6 months to release the tyranid faq? Flip flopping on rules? Misleading a fan based faq? And that's better? Please.

GW has been terrible at rules, faq's and errata for years. It's inexcusable. I don't think the INAT helps this issue at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MasterDRD wrote:I'm really starting to get peeved every time someone points out that, in contrast to Warmachine being designed for competitive play, 40K is more for casual play, and yet they neglect to point out that a large part of this is that 40k's rules were written by drunken monkeys in a gak-flinging contest, and that the armies are all imbalanced as hell. Yes, Warmachine is designed to be competitive. So not being designed for tournament play is a valid excuse for poor rules writing/game balance which cause many arguments and rules disputes to pop up? I swear I've never, ever played a game of 40k above 1k points where there wasn't at least 1 rules dispute.

I'm not going to disagree with you.

However, I would like to point out that with the current monkey's flinging the current monkey poo, all you have left is an expensive, time consuming hobby in 40k.

If it looks, feels, smells and tastes like poo, it's probably 40k and it's a good thing we didn't step in it.

imweasel wrote:

Lokdown wrote:on the whole PP are quicker to respond to such errors but GW are certainly getting better at this.

I completely disagree with the gw part.

6 months to release the tyranid faq? Flip flopping on rules? Misleading a fan based faq? And that's better? Please.

GW has been terrible at rules, faq's and errata for years. It's inexcusable. I don't think the INAT helps this issue at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MasterDRD wrote:I'm really starting to get peeved every time someone points out that, in contrast to Warmachine being designed for competitive play, 40K is more for casual play, and yet they neglect to point out that a large part of this is that 40k's rules were written by drunken monkeys in a gak-flinging contest, and that the armies are all imbalanced as hell. Yes, Warmachine is designed to be competitive. So not being designed for tournament play is a valid excuse for poor rules writing/game balance which cause many arguments and rules disputes to pop up? I swear I've never, ever played a game of 40k above 1k points where there wasn't at least 1 rules dispute.

I'm not going to disagree with you.

However, I would like to point out that with the current monkey's flinging the current monkey poo, all you have left is an expensive, time consuming hobby in 40k.

If it looks, feels, smells and tastes like poo, it's probably 40k and it's a good thing we didn't step in it.

I'm not entirely sure I understand what you just said...? So... yeah.

Anyway as to why you should play Warmachine, if you happen to go to my particular game store there's one more compelling reason to start... If you don't I will hunt you down and kill you.

As a 40k player, one thing that drew me to warmachine was the fact that nearly every roll is 2d6, and the total of both dice.

This means that you don't need to throw piles of dice, this means that attack and damage are closer to average without needing to throw more attacks/wounds, this means that warmachine's "boosting" is very effective while being fairly simple, this means that only one player at a time is throwing dice.

I also happen to like steampunk.

The only problem for me is finding players, there are only 3 warmachine players (that I have seen) in my area, and they don't go to my main store, so I am trying to test this game out on as many people as possible, to make sure its fun, but also to ask them if they think its fun, and if they think its fun, maybe I can drag them into the game with me.

To elaborate on the dice thing, in Warhammer of both flavors you end up tossing buckets and buckets of dice each turn, but in Warmachine the most dice you'll ever really need are 4 at a time. (maybe 5 with some funky combo, but I haven't seen it yet...)

5 dice needed regularly.

2+ additional die for Waepon master, +boost for charge, +1 different die for damage column on warjack.

I think we can make the generalization 'Warmachine - fewer than 10, Warhammer/40k - between 20 and 90'.

Highest I've ever pulled off is 6, with Xerxis' feat on a charging Molik Karn. I could probably do better (Butcher + Irusk comes to mind), but it requires at least 100 points, and is thus extremely rare.

Highest I've ever pulled off in 40k is 116 at one time, which is 29 Ork Boyz charging into the assault.

And since that only requires 300 points, it's not rare at all. Fewer dice but more normalized distribution is another reason I like WM more than 40k.

Why play Warmachine?...because you play with a pair...and...and...Page 5.

Warmachine is fast-paced and is built for competitive play. It's fun, and it's got some nice models.

And seriously, what's with the hate-on for 40k? There are tons and tons of rules disputes, broken armies, etc. but is it really that much of an issue? Sure, playing Necrons against the new BA is just dumb, things like Librarians in Termie-Armor making sweeping advances, and MEQ's running around getting the newest toys, but at the end of the day, yes, GW's game is made to be a hobby. Is that so bad?

For the rules thing, yes.

Sanctjud wrote:Why play Warmachine?...because you play with a pair...and...and...Page 5.

The MK1 Page 5 was way more brutal than the MK2 Page 5... Why oh why did they tone it down and give it an 'afterschool special' vibe to it? Save that for page 6 or whatever. I demand an errata that fixes Page 5! (a reprint would be nice too)

Cryonicleech wrote:

And seriously, what's with the hate-on for 40k? There are tons and tons of rules disputes, broken armies, etc. but is it really that much of an issue? Sure, playing Necrons against the new BA is just dumb, things like Librarians in Termie-Armor making sweeping advances, and MEQ's running around getting the newest toys, but at the end of the day, yes, GW's game is made to be a hobby. Is that so bad?

I haven't played 40k for a while, but the way you describe it (Broken armies, tons of rules disputes), those do sound like a big deal...

I introduced a friend who plays 40k to Warmachine yesterday, and he loved it. He said it was a great change of pace from 40k. Is he going to quit 40k? Of course not.

It comes down to: Do you like the models? Do you like the game? Do you like smaller battles? If so, then you'll probably like warmachine.

And one more thing, people keep saying that it's just as expensive as 40k. Yes, model for model it is, but you don't have to spend that much. My friends and I shopped around, built 35 point armies for about a hundred bucks, and have a blast.

Here's one more reason to love WarmaHordes. PP is less tight assed with the IP allowing projects like Vassal to exist and army builders that don't suck.

For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about Vassal is an online game engine that allows you to play WarmaHordes online. The latest updates included all of the models that had been released to date. I see this as being very awesome on a couple of fronts.

1.) I can play WarmaHordes against my friends who are not geographically located close enough to play frequently.
2.) I can play test different lists to test out whether or not combos are effective before I pony up the cash to pay for models. Sure you may have to buy a Forces of Warmachine/Hordes book or deck of Faction cards, but that's still cheaper than buying a whole army only to discover that it doesn't fit your play style very well.

There used to be a 40K module for Vassal, but it had to be pulled from the site as a result of a cease and desist notice from GW. GW is so tight with their IP it's not even funny. I had considered making an army builder like application for iPhone, only to be shot down by GW's legal department.

http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?24209-Vassal-WARMACHINE-4.0-Released

Speaking of iPhone army builders, iBodger is made of win and own. Even lists and displays your tier bonuses, along with how to get 'em.

Laughing Man wrote:Speaking of iPhone army builders, iBodger is made of win and own. Even lists and displays your tier bonuses, along with how to get 'em.

Too bad there isn't a version for the Blackberry...

Well, if you used a proper MP3 player you wouldn't have this problem, would you?

Cryonicleech wrote:Warmachine is fast-paced and is built for competitive play. It's fun, and it's got some nice models.

And seriously, what's with the hate-on for 40k? There are tons and tons of rules disputes, broken armies, etc. but is it really that much of an issue? Sure, playing Necrons against the new BA is just dumb, things like Librarians in Termie-Armor making sweeping advances, and MEQ's running around getting the newest toys, but at the end of the day, yes, GW's game is made to be a hobby. Is that so bad?

I don't know.

Why not ask the necron player while he is playing the BA player?

The need to ask that question should answer your own.

imweasel wrote:

Cryonicleech wrote:Warmachine is fast-paced and is built for competitive play. It's fun, and it's got some nice models.

And seriously, what's with the hate-on for 40k? There are tons and tons of rules disputes, broken armies, etc. but is it really that much of an issue? Sure, playing Necrons against the new BA is just dumb, things like Librarians in Termie-Armor making sweeping advances, and MEQ's running around getting the newest toys, but at the end of the day, yes, GW's game is made to be a hobby. Is that so bad?

I don't know.

Why not ask the necron player while he is playing the BA player?

The need to ask that question should answer your own.

I agree wholeheartedly with the above. I started up a Necron army, the faction that got me into 40k, cooked up an interesting paint scheme for them, worked on a few models, but my motivation to continue working on them waned pretty fast, because when I played 40k I quickly ended up playing Chaos instead. Playing Necrons stopped being fun because frankly, they suck now. Why would I continue working on an army I can't have fun with? Maybe my interest will be rekindled when they get their new codex... if GW ever actually makes it.

That was just an example, really, none of my friends play Necrons or BA.

Necrons (and pretty much any old dex excluding DE) have it pretty rough right now, and while GW is certainly going to take their time writing the Necron (or hell, any Xeno) codices, what I'm saying is that 40k is unbalanced, so the knowledge of this should dictate that perhaps it's not the best game to play if you want to win with certain factions. Warmachine has that balance, and while it's certainly much better to play Mercs in WM than say, Daemonhunters in 40k, GW's mini line isn't bad, and while Warmachine is the more balanced game, I believe that 40k supports the hobbiyst more.

Cryonicleech wrote:and while Warmachine is the more balanced game, I believe that 40k supports the hobbiyst more.

That makes no sense whatsoever, especially considering the fact that if you wan't to learn how to paint your GW army you have to buy a (very) expensive magazine, or a (very) expensive alternative book, whille PP has pretty detailed painting guides on the "army" book itself...

ever flipped through a codex?? it has the same kind of paintingguides... (at least I think they are more or less of the same level)

Thing is, for the best painting advice you go to the interwebs. Don't want to search the web, grabb a dwarf. they always have some paintingadvice.(not always the best advice mind you..)

And how many Warmachine conversions have you seen?

Very few, due to the restrictions placed on recognizability of the models.

Those you do see are added details, no counts as, no swapping the base model for what you like the look of better.

Not a good or a bad thing, but it indicates the focus of the game over the hobby.

LordRavurion wrote:ever flipped through a codex?? it has the same kind of paintingguides... (at least I think they are more or less of the same level)

I don't have my codexes here with me, but I don't remember seeing any type of painting guide on either my Warhammer Darke Elves Army Book, or my Codex: Imperial guard... I might be getting forgetfull with my old age, so pardon me if I'm wrong.

LordRavurion wrote:
Don't want to search the web, grabb a dwarf. they always have some paintingadvice.(not always the best advice mind you..)

Exactly, if you wan't any type of decent advice you have to buy White Dwarf, wich isn't exactly cheap OR good value for money these days.

Also, if you aren't refering to painting guides, then what do you mean when you say that "40k supports the hobbiyst more"?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

skrulnik wrote:And how many Warmachine conversions have you seen?

Very few, due to the restrictions placed on recognizability of the models.

Those you do see are added details, no counts as, no swapping the base model for what you like the look of better.

Not a good or a bad thing, but it indicates the focus of the game over the hobby.

It doesn't indicate anything but the fact that for WH you have all the models that there are rules for, in 40k / WH you NEED to convert some stuff heavilly (or even scratch build them yourself), if you wan't to use some of the options available to you in the codex / army book.

Since when did you NEED to buy White Dwarf for painting guides? Make an account on GW's webbysite and voila presto, painting guides. What you're saying doesn't make any sense, since you never NEEDED to buy those expensive magazines or alternative books.

I've seen tons and tons of converted 40k armies, some of them even completely scratch-built/converted. The only Warmachine conversions I have so far are 2 converted Nightwretches and a converted Nightmare from the Battlegroup Slayer. It's not a negative, but it shows that at least in the player's mindset the game is predominant over the hobby aspect, IMHO.

So it's the choice between beautiful models with craptastic rules or not-so-bad models with great ruleset...

mazgier wrote:So it's the choice between beautiful models with craptastic rules or not-so-bad models with great ruleset...

Yep. Your version of the hobby is what drives you to one or the other.

Personally I play both.

Warmachine is taxing. A game is never a light exercise. I am thinking on my turn. And on my opponents.
Thinking about his abilities, mine, past experience, what I just read off of his cards, etc.

40k is simple in that respect. When my turn starts, I am in, and have lots to consider. But most is dictated by my list and setup.
The interactions are not as complex, so I do not need to work as hard to get the most out of my units.

My analogy would be this when comparing only the game. Not the hobbby/prep aspect or background.

40k is like fast food. It gets the job done, and its pretty tasty. But there is little effort involved to it.

Warmachine/Hordes is a meal you have cooked for yourself. Its good, but you had to put in a lot of work to get the end result. This relies as much on your skill as the raw ingredients.