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.

The actual rules portion of the warmachine books is about the same size as the rules portion of the RRT IMO. They are pretty close. When I say concise I mean they take the time to describe their concepts in more detail, things are far tighter in the wording and in the description of how things work.

The majority of warmachine rulebooks are either expansions or descriptions of additional units, they don't really alter the base rules at all.

The rules section of RRT is 22 pages long. The rules section of WM Prime Mk II (excluding the pages covering scenarios) is 60 pages long. My impression is that WM/H is a game of exceptions to the rules, so it is probably misleading not to count the army books. This is true to a far more limited degree with RRT and all the special rules are included in those 22 pages, in about 6 pages.

But I think you are right about WM/H having tighter wording.

 Manchu wrote:
As for my own personal anecdote, I have owned WM/H rulebooks for years now and still don't understand how to play the game. I understood RRT after skimming the photos taken at GenCon. I have never played and have no interest in playing WM/H. I have played and enjoyed RRT several times.

Don't feel bad - a lot of people claim to have been playing 40k for decades, and don't really know how to play, either.

I'm sure if you were to go back to the early WM starters and QuickStart rules, with someone who knew their way around the game, it wouldn't be too bad. But if you're not interested, why would you own the rulebooks? In my case, I own original Cryx and Khador starters, along with the original Prime rulebook so I can play a WM skirmish at any time. Sure, it's a bit limited, but it's not hard to start -- assuming you want to play.

In your case, if you've played and enjoyed RRT, that's a great endorsement. Who knows, maybe I'll consider playing a game or two at some point?

I really like the WM/H setting and until recently always aspired to get into the game. I have realized lately, however, that my taste runs contrary to the rules-heavy, tournament-focused design of games like WM/H. Don't get me wrong, I think RRT is mostly fine for tournament play -- certainly nothing like MtG intensity, however. But it is also simple and approachable enough to pick up pretty much at the drop of a hat for a bit of pew pew fun. It is probably more enjoyable for those who like the show.

Ahh... That makes total sense. Yeah, I want something light and easy now, but the big games (40k & WM/H) are going ever deeper into heavy complexity.

My current game of choice is Bolt Action. It is also fairly simple (again compared to something like WM/H) but I think the rules are clear and comprehensive. The heart of the game is drawing dice (each die represents any given unit in your army and your opponent's army) to determine activation. I find that I am decreasingly interested in army-wide activation, even when a game has turn-interruption mechanics. RRT uses unit-level alternating activation, which holds my interest better than UGO-IGO design (bad label but you know what I mean), especially thanks to the command point economy. There is a good amount of tactical choice in RRT's command point mechanics.

I'm not really sure what you find so confusing about WMH. At it's base, it's move figures, roll 2d6 and add it to your attack value (melee or def) to see if you equal the targets defense value + any buffs the target may have. It's that easy to grasp.

A deeper understanding of each unit/model however...Then yeah because each warcaster/warlock makes things interact in very funny ways at times

Seems like you understand perfectly well what is complex about WM/H.

The fact that different units interact with each other in different ways? Isn't that better for the long term growth of a game? It'd be pretty bland if units were just units and didn't have any sort of way of interacting with the abilities of others

To me, WM 1E was always like playing a combo deck in Magic, trying to set the board for just the right time to pop the Feat... Whoever sets up and goes off first usually wins, and then, primarily by Caster Kill.

I found WM 1E is less of a tactical game than a really ornate duel.

Maybe WM 2E changes that, I don't know.

Depends on the feat though. Some feats are just kind of bland and not game-winners or changers. Also, it depends if you're playing scenario, which you really should because winning by caster kill can be very one-sided. 2E is pretty different from 1E from what I've heard from 1E players. I only started in 2E so I can't say.

Robotech RPG tactics has almost the same amount of base rules. They are just not as described in as much detail and lack examples in many instances. Special rules and characters in RRT modify how things interact in almost the same way they do in warmachine, only the information is in the book like 40k instead of the card.

Honestly I think warmachine may actually be more simple in some ways. There are not nearly as many damage avoidance mechanics in warmachine as there are in RRT.

Manchu I think you might just understand RRT better but really at their roots they are not very different.

Sining wrote:
The fact that different units interact with each other in different ways? Isn't that better for the long term growth of a game? It'd be pretty bland if units were just units and didn't have any sort of way of interacting with the abilities of others

I don't think WM/H is a bad game or whatever just because it isn't for me. Nor do I think RRT is bland game because it doesn't work like WM/H. I think the relative simplicity of RRT is one of its strengths -- which is how this originally came up. I don't see many people having a hard time learning or being taught RRT because it is a pretty efficient rule set.

Robotech is finally shipping to Australia - with a February 8th departure, 4 weeks at sea, 1-2 weeks in customs and a conservative 1 week of local shipping, I should have Wave 1 in hand roughly in the final week of March, 2015

Deadzone wave 3 arrived 2 weeks ago.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
OTOH, I'm pretty sure a big portion of the 40k Hobby consists of simply "Buy Product."

Gah! Stop channeling Kirby from GW!
At least GW is "Forge the Narrative" while Kevin is "Make it up as you go", wait a minute...

I play (and enjoy) Warmachine, but it is an infinitely more complex game than RRT. Warmachine is very much a tournament ruleset with synergistic combinations in your army lists that can take hours to think of and give you a headache, but when you pull them off and murder a Carnivean in one charge, you get a little rush of accomplishment.

Warmachine has also had over a decade of development, and has been developed specifically as a tournament ruleset with no wiggle room for rules misinterpretation.

RRT is a much simpler ruleset - making it prone to rules lawyer asshat arguments (like the battlepod behind a lamp post). But it is very much a simpler game than WMH.

Actually, having not played it in months and months now, I'd kinda like to bust it out again, but that would make me a fanatic for playing the game, right?

BTW, I emailed frpgames and asked how their top seller list is formed. I'd be willing to bet money it's just an algorithm pulled from their quantity sold for the month. It's full of other games that are huge on BGG.

(I also agree with whoever was talking about Magic being sold in multiple skus - as my brother is a games store manager, and I've learned a huge amount about MTG recently. They sell the booster boxes in quantity, and have very little demand for booster packs)

Someone also asked about why a foam bag would hit the best sellers for a day or two - well, the answer is obvious to me. I personally have several items on my wish list at frpgames so when they come back in stock, I get an email. I would bet that an Army Transport case of some variety arrived at frpgames, x number of people had it on their wish list, get emailed, and then bought it. This has happened to me with their Litko bases, where I get an email of stock, and it actually goes out of stock before I am able to complete the purchase. (I often wonder if frpgames' inventory is the realtime inventory of Warpath due to the rapidity of stock level changes)

 Swabby wrote:
I disagree, my wife plays WH/H and 40k. She picked up the RRT book and gave me a solid wtf look.

???
Scary stuff when I see that look my other half, it tends to equal "Don't make me come over there to kill you... it is almost worth the bother." I have an exciting household.
I would say the command points, stealing initiative and the levels of hit, dodge, roll with impact as well as "where be the unit points costs???, oh yeah, those wee cards lying about" give those moments.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

Sining wrote:
The fact that different units interact with each other in different ways? Isn't that better for the long term growth of a game? It'd be pretty bland if units were just units and didn't have any sort of way of interacting with the abilities of others

I don't think WM/H is a bad game or whatever just because it isn't for me. Nor do I think RRT is bland game because it doesn't work like WM/H. I think the relative simplicity of RRT is one of its strengths -- which is how this originally came up. I don't see many people having a hard time learning or being taught RRT because it is a pretty efficient rule set.

Bolt-Action was mentioned and that is a good example of nicely laid-down rules that have a hidden complexity to it.
RRT is simple enough to figure out and play is not bad, I enjoy the more activation type turns than the "You-go, I-go" for the first player - first turn advantage can be too much.
I think it is the contrast of fairly accessible rules with the models being a bit finicky that made it a bit of a letdown, at least PB is looking at making better assembly instructions (the sprue map may be more helpful for matching parts) so they seem to realize this gap.
Gah! I think I have agreed with Manchu... I was not even drinking...

 judgedoug wrote:
having not played it in months and months now, I'd kinda like to bust it out again

LOL same here. It always happens when I return to posting ITT. I think it forces me to remember how intuitive and fun the mechanics actually are, which certainly came as a surprise to me given, to be frank, PB's RPGs.

 Talizvar wrote:
I think I have agreed with Manchu...

There there, it gets easier over time.

FAQ's are up on Palladium's forums..

 Talizvar wrote:
Bolt-Action was mentioned and that is a good example of nicely laid-down rules that have a hidden complexity to it.

This is why I'm a Warlord Games sarge and do demos for Bolt Action. Conversely I would never be a Palladium Megawhatever Ambassadorman.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
UGH

13. Do all Mecha under the template of a blast weapon get attacked, even though they could be at different elevations, sometimes extreme, due to terrain? If so, what are the upper and lower limits of the blast?
Yes, all Mecha covered under the template get an attack on them without regard to the height.

...and this is why Starship Trooper's SIZE trait was the best innovation in miniatures wargaming, to be ignored by every other ruleset after that.

WilhelmRochRedDuke wrote:
FAQ's are up on Palladium's forums..

http://www.palladium-megaverse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=97&t=147215

Is that the FAQ that Rick claimed we'd never see?
LOL

 n815e wrote:
Is that the FAQ that Rick claimed we'd never see?
LOL

Yes, already making a list of additional questions on the FB page.

 Talizvar wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
OTOH, I'm pretty sure a big portion of the 40k Hobby consists of simply "Buy Product."

Gah! Stop channeling Kirby from GW!
At least GW is "Forge the Narrative" while Kevin is "Make it up as you go", wait a minute...

That's not Kirby, that's an acknowledgement of the overflowing Closets of Shame at Dakka!

I like how the FAQ ignores like all the rules questions thar are still unanswered on their forums.

Have they mentioned any progress on the con exclusive/LE miniatures yet?

 Manchu wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
I think I have agreed with Manchu...

There there, it gets easier over time.

I think I just had a panic attack...

Anyway: a FAQ!!! presented in a Forum... how quaint!
At least we got some answers to burning questions... wait a minute, not so burning??
Okay, they addressed something and rewarding good behavior is the right thing to do:

Keep em coming PB (You need to crank out a few more...)

At least Forar can no longer have his squad of ricks.

 Swabby wrote:
At least Forar can no longer have his squad of ricks.

He still he would just have to make some custom characters with the same stats and different names if his group allowed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Swabby wrote:
I like how the FAQ ignores like all the rules questions thar are still unanswered on their forums.

I'm kinda pissed that they only took into account some of the questions we came up with here. I'm going to be calling them.

 Mike1975 wrote:

 Swabby wrote:
At least Forar can no longer have his squad of ricks.

He still he would just have to make some custom characters with the same stats and different names if his group allowed.

Can't be done.

You can't make "not-Rick" for 5 points.

Also custom characters take up the Special slot in a squadron, if I'm not mistaken, so you could have Rick and an RPG character, but can't fly a squadron full of RPG characters in an RRT game.

 Swabby wrote:
I like how the FAQ ignores like all the rules questions thar are still unanswered on their forums.

I'm kinda pissed that they only took into account some of the questions we came up with here. I'm going to be calling them.

Gents, I've been haranguing them for like half a year for not starting to address some of these, and they finally did. The post even admits that it'll be a living document and will be updated in time.

13 answers is a start, and presumably more will be forthcoming.

Hopefully it doesn't take another half a year to get 13 more, but as a vocal critic, even I think it's a reasonable start.