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.
All I know is that every time I even consider playing 40k again, something turns me off from the idea and I decide that WMH is overall better and more worth my money. Usually it's the crazy cost to even start a basic 1,000 point army for 40k, sometimes it's the fact that the idea/concept I have doesn't work well within the rules due to no balance or care, but it's always something that in the end makes me say "Feth that!" and decide not to give GW a cent.
Would I prefer to play 40k? It's very likely, and i know it's popular at a store nearby so I'd have a lot of games. But I can't in good conscience do it without feeling dirty. I'm not a huge fan of Warmachine (and with a tournament coming up it will be the real test for if I enjoy it) but it feels a lot better than playing 40k right now.
I wish I could live in a world where I didn't mind collecting GW miniatures, using GW paints and brushes and playing on GWRoB tables. And, if the price of all those was about 50-60% less than it is currently, that might have been a reality.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/11/29 14:27:18
RunicFIN wrote: The most active bits of users on this forum are anti-GW or somewhere inbetween, I´d wager if all users voted WM/H would be left with 30% of the votes.
I like both games for different reasons, so I didn´t vote. The only thing I don´t like are the whiny GW Doom Clones.
This polls shows nicely however the fact that what is written on these forums in general is a tiny fraction of all wargamers opinions and should be perceived as such. Next to that it should be noted that haters always make more noise than people that are satisfied, the subject can be pretty much anything.
What´s that, 160 people soon? My very, very small country ( with a tiny population of ~ 5451270 ) has atleast 3100 confirmed wargamers, the real total being probably twice or thrice the amount.
Perhaps "Whiny Doom Clones" isn't a good way to carry on a conversation. When yous simultaneously dismiss and insult people you don't agree with, there's not going to be any understanding from either party.
And I reported you.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
RunicFIN wrote: The most active bits of users on this forum are anti-GW or somewhere inbetween, I´d wager if all users voted WM/H would be left with 30% of the votes.
I like both games for different reasons, so I didn´t vote. The only thing I don´t like are the whiny GW Doom Clones.
This polls shows nicely however the fact that what is written on these forums in general is a tiny fraction of all wargamers opinions and should be perceived as such. Next to that it should be noted that haters always make more noise than people that are satisfied, the subject can be pretty much anything.
What´s that, 160 people soon? My very, very small country ( with a tiny population of ~ 5451270 ) has atleast 3100 confirmed wargamers, the real total being probably twice or thrice the amount.
Perhaps "Whiny Doom Clones" isn't a good way to carry on a conversation. When yous simultaneously dismiss and insult people you don't agree with, there's not going to be any understanding from either party.
What are you executing, if not tactics? Your argument seems completely void of a complete process.
Strategy is list building, tactics, and their execution, is what wargames are all about. Warmahordes is a warGame. Bolt action is still more a warGame. Many more historical leaning titles are WARgames. Or whatever this metaphor is supposed to be. Warhammer 40k, in either instance, is bad. It's tone of "force the narrative" with an ever changing, never advancing narrative makes it suggest it's a sandbox. However, playing it as a sand box requires either the same motivations of players to be identical and/or a large amount of house rules.
Warhammer 40k is a substandard product with a very high cost. Warmachine is a solid to excellent product with a very high cost. That's about the difference; the quality. Ones a good game with descent fluff, the other is a poor game and fluff that's been drug through the mud or retconned to add "the model of the week".
No buddy pianists are people whose sole focus is execution, generals are people whose sole focus is tactics. Tactics is the plan, execution is following the plan with precision. Warmahordes is mtg with minis because it follows the same steps, you set up your plan-combos at deck building and you proceed with the execution adjusted by the game events.
What are you executing, if not tactics? Your argument seems completely void of a complete process.
Strategy is list building, tactics, and their execution, is what wargames are all about. Warmahordes is a warGame. Bolt action is still more a warGame. Many more historical leaning titles are WARgames. Or whatever this metaphor is supposed to be. Warhammer 40k, in either instance, is bad. It's tone of "force the narrative" with an ever changing, never advancing narrative makes it suggest it's a sandbox. However, playing it as a sand box requires either the same motivations of players to be identical and/or a large amount of house rules.
Warhammer 40k is a substandard product with a very high cost. Warmachine is a solid to excellent product with a very high cost. That's about the difference; the quality. Ones a good game with descent fluff, the other is a poor game and fluff that's been drug through the mud or retconned to add "the model of the week".
No buddy pianists are people whose sole focus is execution, generals are people whose sole focus is tactics. Tactics is the plan, execution is following the plan with precision. Warmahordes is mtg with minis because it follows the same steps, you set up your plan-combos at deck building and you proceed with the execution adjusted by the game events.
So, being able to make a plan before battle is a bad thing? If you're trying to say that the game is mapped out before you begin, I have to beg to differ. None of my plans ever survive past contact with the enemy.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
Also the synergy betwen miniatures is the core of Warmahordes.. And the game is decided on the table and not in the list building, any list can beat any other list.. It is more about your personal skill as a player..
This really is just nonsense. Warmachine tournaments have you bring multiple lists and/or sidebars because matchups can absolutely determine victory at any level of play. List building is absolutely a huge part of Warmachine, and part of the fun.
How you can say that "synergy between miniatures is the core of Warmahordes" and then say that list building isn't key is mind boggling.
Let's see how that all trencher Darius list does.
What are you executing, if not tactics? Your argument seems completely void of a complete process.
Strategy is list building, tactics, and their execution, is what wargames are all about. Warmahordes is a warGame. Bolt action is still more a warGame. Many more historical leaning titles are WARgames. Or whatever this metaphor is supposed to be. Warhammer 40k, in either instance, is bad. It's tone of "force the narrative" with an ever changing, never advancing narrative makes it suggest it's a sandbox. However, playing it as a sand box requires either the same motivations of players to be identical and/or a large amount of house rules.
Warhammer 40k is a substandard product with a very high cost. Warmachine is a solid to excellent product with a very high cost. That's about the difference; the quality. Ones a good game with descent fluff, the other is a poor game and fluff that's been drug through the mud or retconned to add "the model of the week".
No buddy pianists are people whose sole focus is execution, generals are people whose sole focus is tactics. Tactics is the plan, execution is following the plan with precision. Warmahordes is mtg with minis because it follows the same steps, you set up your plan-combos at deck building and you proceed with the execution adjusted by the game events.
So, being able to make a plan before battle is a bad thing? If you're trying to say that the game is mapped out before you begin, I have to beg to differ. None of my plans ever survive past contact with the enemy.
Make better ones?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/11/29 14:46:25
MWHistorian wrote: If you're trying to say that the game is mapped out before you begin.
I guess you don´t play WM/H on a competitive level too much. See posts above regarding tournament matchups for truth.
Certainly tactics change during the match. But most matches are clear before they even begin, further enforcing the fact in WM/H list building plays just as big as a part as in WH40K. Often you can also easily see what will happen during a competitive WM/H match if both players know what they´re doing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/29 14:48:50
MWHistorian wrote: If you're trying to say that the game is mapped out before you begin.
I guess you don´t play WM/H on a competitive level too much. See posts above regarding tournament matchups for truth.
Certainly tactics change during the match. But most matches are clear before they even begin, further enforcing the fact in WM/H list building plays just as big as a part as in WH40K. Often you can also easily see what will happen during a competitive WM/H match if both players know what they´re doing.
Wait...since when do you play Warmachine?
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
I've played both. They both have ups and downs. Anyone who claims otherwise is biased one way or the other.
It's about priorities. Some people don't like the aesthetics of WMH and just can't play a game they don't like the look of. Understandable and legitimate. Some people like a game with rules that make sense and don't promote OP spam lists like 40k. That's legitimate as well.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
MWHistorian wrote: If you're trying to say that the game is mapped out before you begin.
I guess you don´t play WM/H on a competitive level too much. See posts above regarding tournament matchups for truth.
Certainly tactics change during the match. But most matches are clear before they even begin, further enforcing the fact in WM/H list building plays just as big as a part as in WH40K. Often you can also easily see what will happen during a competitive WM/H match if both players know what they´re doing.
As a multiple times nationally placing former-hardcore player, no.
Just no. Warmachine and Hordes require a ridiculous level of mental acuity and skill to play to a high competitive level ; list construction alone does not determine the outcome of a game. A well constructed list absolutely helps, but the player behind the models has an order of magnitude larger effect on the game.
Evidence of this is shown every time you see a garbage player using a net-list, and getting his ass handed to him.
When I won my four hardcore awards, it was with a very unconventional list for hardcore ; a 41 model count e-caine assassin list. Went counter to everything people thought about hardcore, most people looked at it and i got either a funny smirk (thinking they'd whoop me), or a silent look of . o O (WTF?).
Friends on the national tourney scene were able to look at it, go "Ooooohhh, that's what you're doing, clever, i'll have to watch out for that!" and replicate it, but if you didn't have that level of skill at the game, and took that list to hardcore, you'd get your ass handed to you if you didn't know how to play it.
Full disclosure: i no longer play PP games, I'm a GW gamer mostly now. But to suggest that WM/H isn't a hugely tactical game where player skill doesn't come into effect is just patently wrong. It's a very tactical and intricate game where a mistake of misjudging an 8th of an inch can mean the difference between the game continuing another turn, and extending your hand to your opponent and, but for bad dice luck, saying "good game".
-- Haight
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/11/29 15:02:53
MWHistorian wrote: If you're trying to say that the game is mapped out before you begin.
I guess you don´t play WM/H on a competitive level too much. See posts above regarding tournament matchups for truth.
Certainly tactics change during the match. But most matches are clear before they even begin, further enforcing the fact in WM/H list building plays just as big as a part as in WH40K. Often you can also easily see what will happen during a competitive WM/H match if both players know what they´re doing.
I often use the MTG to explain it because it is really well known, likely the best game ever invented and works like a mathematical function(no surprise since it was created by a mathematician).
you tactis-decs are like a function you execute every turn, which has an entry parameter (the state of the board) and an exit parameter (what you are supposed to do to follow up on your plan and win). Deck building-list building is akin to defining that function, one of its main components being your chosen victory condition. This is true for both WM and MTG.
Programaticaly it would look like this
function "your deck-list" (board state)
step1 evaluate board state vs your chosen victory condition
step2 return your turns actions
end function
Step1 is where player skill comes in because there is no computer to do it for your, but you are still slave to that function and the person that can most accurately apply it will win. The thing most people that play wm and have little or no real competitive experience with mtg dont realize is that step 1 is slave to list building that came before it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/29 15:10:09
Haight wrote: Full disclosure: i no longer play PP games, I'm a GW gamer mostly now. But to suggest that WM/H isn't a hugely tactical game where player skill doesn't come into effect is just patently wrong. It's a very tactical and intricate game where a mistake of misjudging an 8th of an inch can mean the difference between the game continuing another turn, and extending your hand to your opponent and, but for bad dice luck, saying "good game".
You've piqued my curiosity, what actually drew you back to GW games? My own experience as well as that which I see from everyone else in my local area is that once someone leaves GW games for something else they begin to find the idea of going back absurd. A lot of that may come from the speed at which prices have been rising on top of Australia's already ridiculous pricing but it's still not something I've actually encountered before.
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
I've played both. They both have ups and downs. Anyone who claims otherwise is biased one way or the other.
It's about priorities. Some people don't like the aesthetics of WMH and just can't play a game they don't like the look of. Understandable and legitimate. Some people like a game with rules that make sense and don't promote OP spam lists like 40k. That's legitimate as well.
Fair being fair, i haven't played Warmahordes in nearly 4 years, so my knowledge on current spam lists is probably dated.
However in the year immediately after Mk2's release, spam lists were alive and well. There has been and always probably will be an idea in WM/H of top tier stuff, and if a little of something is good, then more if it is usually better.
This is nothing new to any gaming system, in all fairness. Scale also plays a part in spamming. It's harder to spam in a skirmish game than it is with a small or large army format game most of the time.
I've played both. They both have ups and downs. Anyone who claims otherwise is biased one way or the other.
It's about priorities. Some people don't like the aesthetics of WMH and just can't play a game they don't like the look of. Understandable and legitimate. Some people like a game with rules that make sense and don't promote OP spam lists like 40k. That's legitimate as well.
Fair being fair, i haven't played Warmahordes in nearly 4 years, so my knowledge on current spam lists is probably dated.
However in the year immediately after Mk2's release, spam lists were alive and well. There has been and always probably will be an idea in WM/H of top tier stuff, and if a little of something is good, then more if it is usually better.
This is nothing new to any gaming system, in all fairness. Scale also plays a part in spamming. It's harder to spam in a skirmish game than it is with a small or large army format game most of the time.
I haven't seen a spam list outside theoretical 'for fun' mental exorcises. Spam lists generally get you clobbered.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
I've played both. They both have ups and downs. Anyone who claims otherwise is biased one way or the other.
It's about priorities. Some people don't like the aesthetics of WMH and just can't play a game they don't like the look of. Understandable and legitimate. Some people like a game with rules that make sense and don't promote OP spam lists like 40k. That's legitimate as well.
Fair being fair, i haven't played Warmahordes in nearly 4 years, so my knowledge on current spam lists is probably dated.
However in the year immediately after Mk2's release, spam lists were alive and well. There has been and always probably will be an idea in WM/H of top tier stuff, and if a little of something is good, then more if it is usually better.
This is nothing new to any gaming system, in all fairness. Scale also plays a part in spamming. It's harder to spam in a skirmish game than it is with a small or large army format game most of the time.
I haven't seen a spam list outside theoretical 'for fun' mental exorcises. Spam lists generally get you clobbered.
It's very rare, and that's one of the things i like about Warmachine. The difference between "good" and "bad" is usually not much, it's more a case of another thing being better for the points rather than Unit X being "bad", while in 40k it's generally that Unit X is outright terrible and can't even perform it's intended role, not just that Unit Y can do the role a little better.
Haight wrote: Full disclosure: i no longer play PP games, I'm a GW gamer mostly now. But to suggest that WM/H isn't a hugely tactical game where player skill doesn't come into effect is just patently wrong. It's a very tactical and intricate game where a mistake of misjudging an 8th of an inch can mean the difference between the game continuing another turn, and extending your hand to your opponent and, but for bad dice luck, saying "good game".
You've piqued my curiosity, what actually drew you back to GW games? My own experience as well as that which I see from everyone else in my local area is that once someone leaves GW games for something else they begin to find the idea of going back absurd. A lot of that may come from the speed at which prices have been rising on top of Australia's already ridiculous pricing but it's still not something I've actually encountered before.
Very complicated answer. TL;DR - lots of reasons. For the full spiel, see below.
Spoiler:
I worked for Privateer in a semi- professional capacity as an infernal for several years. My name is published in the very late MK1 and early Mk2 books (i say this not to brag, but as a point of pride - i worked VERY hard to leave lasting marks on models that i'm very proud of, for every faction. Due to Non-Disclosure reasons, i can't say exactly what, but it was a lot of fun and a lot of hardwork.... its incredibly satisfying to get someone to see your point of view, and both of you suggest a compromise that Jason Soles and Kevin Clark and later David Carl would take in part or in whole. Good guys all of them, passionate about what they do).
Some of it was professional burnout ; my hobby had become a job, and I was not enjoying it anymore.
Some of it was competitive burnout ; my friends and I that played were in full on practice compeititive mode every time we played. It sounds stupid even to write this, but one of the groups i was playing with just got so intense it stopped being fun. The other one was starting to go that direction, and it was like i couldn't get away from the uber uber competitive all the time.
There were also people that knew I was an Infernal (which due to the rules things INfernals due was public knowledge, though my R&D aspects were not even if my involvement in them was) so even in those rare moments i could just enjoy the game at face value, i had someone always asking me what happens in Mk1 when a shadowshifting bane knight has berzerk and kills a model with a triggering on destruction ability.... (which if you follow rules in WM/H, was an order of operations issue that was never solved in Mk1... there is no answer for what happens, it was eventually ruled "This, b/c we say so".) or some other complex thing.
My specialty as an infernal was balance - not arcane complex timing mechanics issues (though i did have a knack for spotting them, if not assisting in their resolution as much as others), which is why i was brought on by PPS_Kevin originally, so that got wearing after a while.
Finally.... due to all the hardcore, i began to hate painting just for the completion part of the event ; i'm a painting perfectionist, and i paint very slowly. Around about the 5th time i was still up at 2 am the night before an event putting finishing touches on a unit or jack was when i'd had enough of that too. I love to paint, i just like to paint at my pace. As my lists were getting refined usually up to a day or so before the event (.... do i take 6 trenchers, or 7 ? Do i take the ATGM solo, or not this time ? - that sort of thing)... it often meant a lot of last minute paint scrambling and never being happy with the end result.
Finally i love conversions, and PP at the time (no idea if that has changed) while not being anti-conversion by any means, had the party line of "check with the tourney organizer". Being the practical person i am, i said "better safe than sorry", and did not do converting. Another, albeit self imposed, sacrifice of the hobby to the game, so to speak. Again, my fault, not pointing fingers at them. It was my choice.
So long story short, professional burnout, game burnout, hobby burnout, painting burnout, competitive burnout.... i was ready for something more light-hearted.
Friends of mine had played WHFB a looooong time, and were starting up a mordheim campaign. We played like 2 games of mordheim, and just at that point Island of Blood was announced. I loved the Griffon model and wanted to paint it. My best friend used to play skaven and still had a bunch of stuff. We played a game, and loved it. Dipped bakc into 40k, as i played that eons ago.
I will say i'm a semi-casual player now. I'm a lot older for one thing, so having fun with my friends is a lot more important to me than airtight rules.... i'm perfectly okay with a d6 roll off to resolve something, in fact i'll usually give it to my buddy in his favor, and we'll look it up after. I don't look down at people that want airtight rules, not at all, hell that used to be part of my job with PP.... but it just isn't a requirement anymore - fun is.
I've actually thought about teaching my now seven year old son WM/H, as they are great games.
I've played both. They both have ups and downs. Anyone who claims otherwise is biased one way or the other.
It's about priorities. Some people don't like the aesthetics of WMH and just can't play a game they don't like the look of. Understandable and legitimate. Some people like a game with rules that make sense and don't promote OP spam lists like 40k. That's legitimate as well.
Fair being fair, i haven't played Warmahordes in nearly 4 years, so my knowledge on current spam lists is probably dated.
However in the year immediately after Mk2's release, spam lists were alive and well. There has been and always probably will be an idea in WM/H of top tier stuff, and if a little of something is good, then more if it is usually better.
This is nothing new to any gaming system, in all fairness. Scale also plays a part in spamming. It's harder to spam in a skirmish game than it is with a small or large army format game most of the time.
I haven't seen a spam list outside theoretical 'for fun' mental exorcises. Spam lists generally get you clobbered.
It's very rare, and that's one of the things i like about Warmachine. The difference between "good" and "bad" is usually not much, it's more a case of another thing being better for the points rather than Unit X being "bad", while in 40k it's generally that Unit X is outright terrible and can't even perform it's intended role, not just that Unit Y can do the role a little better.
A really well reasoned post, and one i agree with .
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/29 15:26:34
Haight wrote: Some of it was competitive burnout ; my friends and I that played were in full on practice compeititive mode every time we played. It sounds stupid even to write this, but one of the groups i was playing with just got so intense it stopped being fun. The other one was starting to go that direction, and it was like i couldn't get away from the uber uber competitive all the time.
This is what I am afraid of, myself. I mean, I like to win but I'm afraid that the game will become always playing in a tournament environment even if there's no tournament, while I never ever felt that in 40k and I would take strides to avoid it whenever possible.
Haight wrote: Some of it was competitive burnout ; my friends and I that played were in full on practice compeititive mode every time we played. It sounds stupid even to write this, but one of the groups i was playing with just got so intense it stopped being fun. The other one was starting to go that direction, and it was like i couldn't get away from the uber uber competitive all the time.
This is what I am afraid of, myself. I mean, I like to win but I'm afraid that the game will become always playing in a tournament environment even if there's no tournament, while I never ever felt that in 40k and I would take strides to avoid it whenever possible.
I dont think that is a problem, same as the random objective mechanic is not a problem on 40k, the problem is what is written on the actual cards. in wm the problem are the scenarios themselves not that there is a set standard for them.
Haight wrote: A really well reasoned post, and one i agree with .
Something I always think of in regards to this point is the MoW Shocktroopers (as I play Khador) for WMH and Warp Talons for 40k. Shocktroopers aren't that great (although some things help them out) but they aren't a bad choice; Iron Fang Pikemen are better for the points but I frequently on the forums see ways to make the Shocktroopers work better, and they're still a viable choice in a game. Compare that to Warp Talons which are overcosted and can barely (if even) do what they are intended to do; they are a waste of points in every sense because they aren't good at all. Taking Warp Talons instead of something else is actively hurting your game, while if I really like Shocktroopers and want to field a unit I might not be quite as effective as if I had taken a unit of IFP, but I'm not going to have a huge disadvantage for picking the wrong unit.
Haight wrote: Some of it was competitive burnout ; my friends and I that played were in full on practice compeititive mode every time we played. It sounds stupid even to write this, but one of the groups i was playing with just got so intense it stopped being fun. The other one was starting to go that direction, and it was like i couldn't get away from the uber uber competitive all the time.
This is what I am afraid of, myself. I mean, I like to win but I'm afraid that the game will become always playing in a tournament environment even if there's no tournament, while I never ever felt that in 40k and I would take strides to avoid it whenever possible.
I never play tournaments. I don't play to practice for tournaments. I play WMH because it allows me to make fluffy armies for fun and still win games, something 40k is supposed to do but doesn't. Also, the official PP published stuff has tons of resources for running narrative games and campaigns. It's all there. Some people just need to utilize it more.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/29 15:33:08
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
I've played both. They both have ups and downs. Anyone who claims otherwise is biased one way or the other.
It's about priorities. Some people don't like the aesthetics of WMH and just can't play a game they don't like the look of. Understandable and legitimate. Some people like a game with rules that make sense and don't promote OP spam lists like 40k. That's legitimate as well.
Fair being fair, i haven't played Warmahordes in nearly 4 years, so my knowledge on current spam lists is probably dated.
However in the year immediately after Mk2's release, spam lists were alive and well. There has been and always probably will be an idea in WM/H of top tier stuff, and if a little of something is good, then more if it is usually better.
This is nothing new to any gaming system, in all fairness. Scale also plays a part in spamming. It's harder to spam in a skirmish game than it is with a small or large army format game most of the time.
I haven't seen a spam list outside theoretical 'for fun' mental exorcises. Spam lists generally get you clobbered.
Fair in the current meta.
If you were playing in Mk 1, i direct you to seraph spam, which was ridiculously good during that era. There were others, that's just the first one that jumps to mind. If they've managed to limit or eliminate spam lists, that means internal balance is doing a good job... i guess by proxy that means i did a good job, as that was my schtick as an infernal, and the nice thing about WM/H is that the models continue to persist forerver, nothing gets squatted.
So if that is the case, even 4 years after my departure from the Infernals, that makes me happy to hear. Diversity in list making due to balance was my top priority, i wanted to make spamming not only impractical, but also potentially detrimental, as spamming is usually a sign that something is potentially not balanced as opposed to other like choices available. Not always (cryx arcnodes, for instance), but oftentimes.
Haight wrote: Some of it was competitive burnout ; my friends and I that played were in full on practice compeititive mode every time we played. It sounds stupid even to write this, but one of the groups i was playing with just got so intense it stopped being fun. The other one was starting to go that direction, and it was like i couldn't get away from the uber uber competitive all the time.
This is what I am afraid of, myself. I mean, I like to win but I'm afraid that the game will become always playing in a tournament environment even if there's no tournament, while I never ever felt that in 40k and I would take strides to avoid it whenever possible.
My advice ? If you think you're getting burnt out, you are. And you're further along than you think.
I would play some other games for a shortwhile ; this does two things, it makes you remember why you love the game you're on hiatus from, and it also gets you playing something fun you really don't give two gaks about.
I found my best innovations in competitive gaming lists for WM/H usually game immediately or nearly immediately after a short break of a month or so.
Don't get to the point where picking up a 30mm round base makes you want to wince.
Haight wrote: Some of it was competitive burnout ; my friends and I that played were in full on practice compeititive mode every time we played. It sounds stupid even to write this, but one of the groups i was playing with just got so intense it stopped being fun. The other one was starting to go that direction, and it was like i couldn't get away from the uber uber competitive all the time.
This is what I am afraid of, myself. I mean, I like to win but I'm afraid that the game will become always playing in a tournament environment even if there's no tournament, while I never ever felt that in 40k and I would take strides to avoid it whenever possible.
I dont think that is a problem, same as the random objective mechanic is not a problem on 40k, the problem is what is written on the actual cards. in wm the problem are the scenarios themselves not that there is a set standard for them.
A good point ; one thing i detested about competitive warmachine was how steamroller objectives usually boiled down to "capture the geometry" in one way or another. Either staying in or out of geometric patterns, keeping your opponennt in or out of geometric shapes on the table. Again, haven't played it in 4 years, but i always hated that.
THat's why i gravitated to hardcore ; four goals. Win as much as possible. Kill as much as possible. Paint as awesome as possible. Kill as quickly as possible. 4 goals, any number of ways to get to those goals.
40k's new objective system would be ingenious if it had one thing ; a competitively weighted average system that translated a varied objective structure in weighted event points. My local shop does this, and its worked beautifully. You see the standings where everyone is taking their FotM army, and they are at the top and bottom, with a previously though non-competitive army brought by a guy who excels in palying to objectives at the top (Dark Angel, which shocked me, and i love DA aesthetically).
Edit: Criminally atrocious spelling.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/11/29 15:44:24
MWHistorian wrote: If you're trying to say that the game is mapped out before you begin.
I guess you don´t play WM/H on a competitive level too much. See posts above regarding tournament matchups for truth.
Certainly tactics change during the match. But most matches are clear before they even begin, further enforcing the fact in WM/H list building plays just as big as a part as in WH40K. Often you can also easily see what will happen during a competitive WM/H match if both players know what they´re doing.
Wait...since when do you play Warmachine?
I´ve stated it atleast twice on threads inwhich you were present ( basically whatever thread I post in anyway, seems I got a fan ) around 1,5 - 2 months ago. I own a Khador army, I´ve previously owned 2 Cryx Armies, Retribution, Trollbloods, Mercenaries and Everblight. I started WM back in MK1, I think 2005-2006. Pics of minis:
Ya know, I really think my bitterness about WMH comes from the two years I was the #1 advocate for it in my area and I just couldn't get people to give it a shot. A few of the local players have painted battleboxes for people or even bought some stuff, but you'll never ever see it played in my town...
I still voted for it on the poll, only because my experience with 40k was much less than favorable.
ALSO! I wish they were a little more lenient on conversions, but that's really just tournaments anyway.
You just need to be smart about it.
For example:
LINKS LINKS LINKS LINKS LINKS LINKS LINKS LINKS LINKS
Please note: far the last link, they're All 100% legal conversions, as per steamroller rules........ Afaik, none have been refused entry into tournaments.
Point stands: you'll only get out what you're willing to put in.
I think I should have said "non PP model pieces" instead of "conversions". I really wanted to blend various model companies together to make my force, but ummm... can't. Again! That's only for tournaments, so my whole rant is irrelevant (though I doubt anyone is going to protest my Tharn ladies mixed in with my Witch Elf horde for WHFB).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/30 00:37:58
I was looking through the No Quarter magazine from PP. It had three articles on conversions, one on making scenery and one on story based scenarios for Cygnar.
I remember when White Dwarf used to be like that.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
MWHistorian wrote: I was looking through the No Quarter magazine from PP. It had three articles on conversions, one on making scenery and one on story based scenarios for Cygnar.
I remember when White Dwarf used to be like that.
Very true, but unless things have changed drastically, the official stance on any conversion if it's allowed or not rests with the TO.
That's how it was when i was playing seriously competitively (and by "seriously" i mean traveling more than just regionally for events), which was enough to make me and many others shy away from converting our tourney models in case we ran afoul of a douschebag TO.
MWHistorian wrote: I was looking through the No Quarter magazine from PP. It had three articles on conversions, one on making scenery and one on story based scenarios for Cygnar.
I remember when White Dwarf used to be like that.
I don't play (although I am thoroughly enjoying Tactics at the moment and have some models around) but I still pick up No Quarter whenever I can. I think the thing that sold me on it was the first painting tutorial there for a Skorne Siege Animantarax. They painted it green as if it had malachite armour. I was very in depth, explaining a relatively complex technique and not in the 'cannon' colour scheme. It just jumped out at me as something you'd never see in a White Dwarf these days and likely wont see again.
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
Realising you're part of A hobby and not THE hobby FTW!
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
The best game will always be whatever everyone else plays... unless you want to do the hard work to change up a scene.
I'm quite enjoying W/H and Malifaux that I play. Infinity is in flux with 3E, so I don't see that picking up until after the first of the year.
Warmahordes is way harder to master than 40k. While I was beat upon by good opponents when I started 40k, having 15 missile launchers + 30 Grey Hunters put me on a track to success. I can't just buy to win (not even MOAR BANEZ) with my Warmachine.
I think I should have said "non PP model pieces" instead of "conversions". I really wanted to blend various model companies together to make my force, but ummm... can't. Again! That's only for tournaments, so my whole rant is irrelevant (though I doubt anyone is going to protest my Tharn ladies mixed in with my Witch Elf horde for WHFB).
The legion of mechablight I linked earlier has a lot of non pp pieces.
To be fair, most companies are iffy about mixing in other companies stuff. Even gw have, in the past, had 'gw model and gw bits only' stipulations.
The (un)official line from most tourney organisers is 'so long as your opponent knows what it is, go for it'.
I've got a lot of gw bits mixed into my pp armies. My wardog is non-pp. tiny wee bulldog thing I bought at a trade fair. About 6mm tall. my 'pin-up sorscha' is converted from a Corvus belli Caledonian (yes, that model. With the knickers. It's epic) Bestigor axes for my doom reaver fellblades and great bears axes, sisters repentia for female doom reavers. I'd seriously consider some gw cavalry models, wood elves for Nyss hunters and I've seen dark elves used for hex hunters. Guess what? I've never had any issues with it from any opponent. All I've ever gotten is compliments.
Remember, the official line is often for tedious legal reasons and to cover pp's back from litigious companies that are over zealous in defending their ip.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/11/30 13:55:32
Diversity in list making due to balance was my top priority, i wanted to make spamming not only impractical, but also potentially detrimental, as spamming is usually a sign that something is potentially not balanced as opposed to other like choices available. Not always (cryx arcnodes, for instance), but oftentimes.
