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.

 Blacksails wrote:
Seriously, Maelstrom an excellent addition? Maybe in theory, but what was published is a joke. You randomly roll how many VPs you get. You want to talk important random rolls, that right there takes the cake.

The problem there again is what is written on the cards, which is balance, not the mechanic and that has always been an issue with 40k.

 Blacksails wrote:

Random charge distance everywhere always is actually important. Sure, given enough games and enough charges, it'll all average out, but when you need to make a safe 4" charge and roll snake eyes, you might have lost the game.

No it isnt, because in 5th most charges where into terrain, which made them random already. Then you dont make a 4" charge, you plan for a 2" charge or a 3", yes you might get snake eyes or you might miss all attacks, its a dice game, you are overstating its importance and you gamble your game on a successful 2d6 roll you are likelly to get screwed no matter what that roll is for.

 Blacksails wrote:

Warlord traits can make a difference. The difference between getting fear and granting move through cover is not to be overlooked.

That does not make a difference because this are conductive abilities, if your Warlord is S10 A15 AP2, Having fear or not is not relevant the character is a close combat monster and fear is only icing on the cake. On the other hand if your character is S3 A2 Ap- like a guardsman, then it having fear is also irrelevant because it sucks in close combat regardless of it. The problem with WLT is if your lord is S10 A15 AP2, and through traits it gains a gun that is 7 shots strength 5 ap2. Because that COMPLEMENTS the role he was built for. But that is not the case as far as i am aware of.

 Blacksails wrote:

Psychic powers being random is the same thing, only more important. Rolling the two best powers versus the two worst powers can have a big impact on the game. The random mechanic is a very poor and lazy substitute for actual balance.

No, that is the WRONG way of using psi powers like any one who has played fantasy can tell. Every one can shut 1 power a turn if you bring some decent defense. What you can not do is just everything down. The primaris powers you have access to are you actual psi power list, and you can pick them just as you did in 5th. You can also roll instead but you are less likely to get something important and more likely your opponent will focus on just shutting that one power down every turn.

 Blacksails wrote:

Vehicle damage was mitigated by HPs, but the chart still remains as a random mechanic that can instagib you. Same goes for reserves; still random, just mitigated some.

In 5th your vehicle blowing up, depended exclusively on the roll of a dice, your land rider could blow up from the first melta shot it got or take 9999999 shots all game long. That is MORE random. Now the vehicle is half as likely to blow up from a single shot than before (exept against dedicated tank busting weapons) and more likely to be worn out. That is less random not more. The fact that comparatively a rinho is less resilient now that before does not mean the system is more random.

xxvaderxx wrote:
The problem there again is what is written on the cards, which is balance, not the mechanic and that has always been an issue with 40k.

No, its both. The mechanic is poor and random. The concept behind assymetrical missions is a good one, but every aspect of its implementation was poorly done.

No it isnt, because in 5th most charges where into terrain, which made them random already. Then you dont make a 4" charge, you plan for a 2" charge or a 3", yes you might get snake eyes or you might miss all attacks, its a dice game, you are overstating its importance and you gamble your game on a successful 2d6 roll you are likelly to get screwed no matter what that roll is for.

Most of my charges weren't into terrain, so let's go ahead and say some charges were into terrain. Having a random dice roll not only slows the game down, but potentially punishes a player for rolling poorly on what would otherwise be a totally safe charge. The importance is as important it happens to be in the game being played. If the game comes down to a last turn charge onto an objective, I'd say its pretty important.

That does not make a difference because this are conductive abilities, if your Warlord is S10 A15 AP2, Having fear or not is not relevant the character is a close combat monster and fear is only icing on the cake. On the other hand if your character is S3 A2 Ap- like a guardsman, then it having fear is also irrelevant because it sucks in close combat regardless of it. The problem with WLT is if your lord is S10 A15 AP2, and through traits it gains a gun that is 7 shots strength 5 ap2. Because that COMPLEMENTS the role he was built for. But that is not the case as far as i am aware of.

But having a force multiplier trait is far more useful on my Guard commander then having something near useless in any situation. Same goes for my opponent. If I roll well and get a good trait for my army and terrain set up while my opponent rolls something awful like Fear, I'm already at the advantage because of a random dice roll. Its a lazy way to avoid having balanced options and giving choice to the player. Its straight up bad design any way you cut it.

No, that is the WRONG way of using psi powers like any one who has played fantasy can tell. Every one can shut 1 power a turn if you bring some decent defense. What you can not do is just everything down. The primaris powers you have access to are you actual psi power list, and you can pick them just as you did in 5th. You can also roll instead but you are less likely to get something important and more likely your opponent will focus on just shutting that one power down every turn.

So if I want a power that's not the primaris, I'm wrong? Point is, its a random mechanic that can reward or punish players when the better option is to balance the powers and let players pick which ones fit their force the best. Random for the sake of balance is awful.

In 5th your vehicle blowing up, depended exclusively on the roll of a dice, your land rider could blow up from the first melta shot it got or take 9999999 shots all game long. That is MORE random. Now the vehicle is half as likely to blow up from a single shot than before (exept against dedicated tank busting weapons) and more likely to be worn out. That is less random not more. The fact that comparatively a rinho is less resilient now that before does not mean the system is more random.

Sure, 5th ed's vehicles were more random. I already admitted that was mitigated. Its still a random mechanic that could use some reworking. Then again, the whole vehicle/MC thing leaves me scratching my head.

 zlayer77 wrote:
Our local gaming club is like a Mental DOJO, people scream, argue and are mean to one another.. That is just HOW WE ROLL... We love it.. we come back week after week for more.. Now we have had some 40k players come by over the years(who are the experince types) and they run for the Door quicker then the flash as soon as the CHaos breaks out.. The record is at 5m on a dude who more or less turned in the door and ran out after he saw what was going down and I explained "FEAR does not Exist in the DOJO" and "MERCY is for the WEAK" hahah, he had traveld 45m to get there and ran out in 5m "IT WAS FUN as hell", and we still have good laugh about it haha..

 zlayer77 wrote:
Many carebare 40k do not really care about winning or losing, they get the kicks from other things, like COOL LORE(because i will admit right here and now that I think 40k has the superior lore).

Out of all the ignorant things you said, this has to take the cake, and not only for you labeling 40k players as carebears. It seems for someone who supposedly started WM/H back in 2010 and who is, according to your own words someone who is competitive and likes competitive play, you seem completely oblivious to things regarding competitive WM/H. In here for example you say:

 zlayer77 wrote:
or I will get super frustrated having to face some broken stuff that I cant counter with my own skill..

Which implies you are not at all aware of the fact it´s an every day thing to be crushed in a WM/H tournament by just what the opponent brought, and not be able to counter it with skill, as many of the most competitive army builds are absolute rock-paper-scissors. No amount of skill will save certain builds from a Haley2 netdeck tournament list for example, and another matchup can´t even touch a High Reclaimer anti-dakka army. This leads me to believe you don´t have a lot of actual experience from a competitive WM/H enviroment aside from your local group. Personally I started 2007.

In competitive WM/H you will lose to just what the opponent brought to the table more than in Warhammer 40,000 in reality. Team tournaments counter this a bit, solo ones hardly.

PhantomViper wrote:

Backfire wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

People didn't quit because the rules became more or less tight or ambiguous than in previous editions, people quit because whatever tactical depth existed in the game was replaced with random everything and because whatever semblance of structure existed in 5th and previous editions were replaced with the abominations that are the formation/detachment/allies system and ultimately the inclusion of Apocalypse style units in "normal" 40k.

Ally system is as old as 40k, it was out of the game for what, 7 months at the tail end of 5th edition? It was not a 'new' addition.

Hmmm... What? I've played 40k from 3rd edition up to 6th and I honestly didn't see any ally tables in the rulebook before 6th edition

3rd edition had the original Grey Knights and Harlequins (required opponent to be playing chaos or have daemons (can't remember which, think it was just Chaos).

Legion of the Damned and Deathwatch were also added at one point, as well as a codex just to add assassins.

Then late 3rd added the Kroot Merc army, as well as Daemonhunters & Witchhunters (which both lasted into 5th when they were updated). All 3 of those armies had rules to get allied into other codices.

So while there wasn't a ally matrix in the rulebook, allies (and the predecessor of data sheets) certainly did exist.

The ally rules for all those armies were far more restrictive than what we have now, and generally far less abusable. They also did not wholesale allow any army to take any ally, and force multiplers were much less of a thing.

 RunicFIN wrote:

Which implies you are not at all aware of the fact it´s an every day thing to be crushed in a WM/H tournament by just what the opponent brought, and not be able to counter it with skill, as many of the most competitive army builds are absolute rock-paper-scissors. No amount of skill will save certain builds from a Haley2 netdeck tournament list for example, and another matchup can´t even touch a High Reclaimer anti-dakka army. This leads me to believe you don´t have a lot of actual experience from a competitive WM/H enviroment aside from your local group. Personally I started 2007.

In competitive WM/H you will lose to just what the opponent brought to the table more than in Warhammer 40,000 in reality. Team tournaments counter this a bit, solo ones hardly.

Yeah, no... You've probably never actually played a game of WMH in your life if we take into account the things that you say.

PhantomViper wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:

Which implies you are not at all aware of the fact it´s an every day thing to be crushed in a WM/H tournament by just what the opponent brought, and not be able to counter it with skill, as many of the most competitive army builds are absolute rock-paper-scissors. No amount of skill will save certain builds from a Haley2 netdeck tournament list for example, and another matchup can´t even touch a High Reclaimer anti-dakka army. This leads me to believe you don´t have a lot of actual experience from a competitive WM/H enviroment aside from your local group. Personally I started 2007.

In competitive WM/H you will lose to just what the opponent brought to the table more than in Warhammer 40,000 in reality. Team tournaments counter this a bit, solo ones hardly.

Yeah, no... You've probably never actually played a game of WMH in your life if we take into account the things that you say.

Granted I've only been playing for six months, but RunifFin's experiences do not mirror my own. There are bad match ups, but nothing to the auto win/lose in 40k.

nobody wrote:


3rd edition had the original Grey Knights and Harlequins (required opponent to be playing chaos or have daemons (can't remember which, think it was just Chaos).

Legion of the Damned and Deathwatch were also added at one point, as well as a codex just to add assassins.

Then late 3rd added the Kroot Merc army, as well as Daemonhunters & Witchhunters (which both lasted into 5th when they were updated). All 3 of those armies had rules to get allied into other codices.

So while there wasn't a ally matrix in the rulebook, allies (and the predecessor of data sheets) certainly did exist.

All of those were codex based and extremely restrictive in what types of units you got to use as allies. You can't really compare it with 6th and 7th editions allies matrix.

 MWHistorian wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:

Which implies you are not at all aware of the fact it´s an every day thing to be crushed in a WM/H tournament by just what the opponent brought, and not be able to counter it with skill, as many of the most competitive army builds are absolute rock-paper-scissors. No amount of skill will save certain builds from a Haley2 netdeck tournament list for example, and another matchup can´t even touch a High Reclaimer anti-dakka army. This leads me to believe you don´t have a lot of actual experience from a competitive WM/H enviroment aside from your local group. Personally I started 2007.

In competitive WM/H you will lose to just what the opponent brought to the table more than in Warhammer 40,000 in reality. Team tournaments counter this a bit, solo ones hardly.

Yeah, no... You've probably never actually played a game of WMH in your life if we take into account the things that you say.

Granted I've only been playing for six months, but RunifFin's experiences do not mirror my own. There are bad match ups, but nothing to the auto win/lose in 40k.

You stated you don´t play competitively, and that you are "not a tournament guy" - I was talking about competitive tournament level WM/H to a user that spoke about competitive play, so I don´t know what your purpose with this even is.

PhantomViper wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:

Which implies you are not at all aware of the fact it´s an every day thing to be crushed in a WM/H tournament by just what the opponent brought, and not be able to counter it with skill, as many of the most competitive army builds are absolute rock-paper-scissors. No amount of skill will save certain builds from a Haley2 netdeck tournament list for example, and another matchup can´t even touch a High Reclaimer anti-dakka army. This leads me to believe you don´t have a lot of actual experience from a competitive WM/H enviroment aside from your local group. Personally I started 2007.

In competitive WM/H you will lose to just what the opponent brought to the table more than in Warhammer 40,000 in reality. Team tournaments counter this a bit, solo ones hardly.

Yeah, no... You've probably never actually played a game of WMH in your life if we take into account the things that you say.

Are you a teenager? Why would anyone lie about playing a game? I´ve played since 2007 like I said, proof here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/420/608128.page

In any case you can from here on out be quiet about my lack of experience with WM/H, as I apparently out-experience you in said game.

 RunicFIN wrote:

The Division Of Joy wrote:
Our local gaming club is like a Mental DOJO, people scream, argue and are mean to one another.. That is just HOW WE ROLL... We love it.. we come back week after week for more.. Now we have had some 40k players come by over the years(who are the experince types) and they run for the Door quicker then the flash as soon as the CHaos breaks out.. The record is at 5m on a dude who more or less turned in the door and ran out after he saw what was going down and I explained "FEAR does not Exist in the DOJO" and "MERCY is for the WEAK" hahah, he had traveld 45m to get there and ran out in 5m "IT WAS FUN as hell", and we still have good laugh about it haha..

Well, Runic, we don't agree on some things, but here I can't agree harder.

Also, you got a good chuckle out of me with that.

Good lord Division, that sounds awful.

True enough. I avoid competitions like the plague.

Another lesson I learned from this thread: An immature person (or group of people) is immature to matter what game they play.

Being exclusionary for the sake of chest-beating and talking about how badass you are is a sad state to be in, no matter what the activity. Human beings should strive to be better than that.

 slowthar wrote:
Another lesson I learned from this thread: An immature person (or group of people) is immature to matter what game they play.

Being exclusionary for the sake of chest-beating and talking about how badass you are is a sad state to be in, no matter what the activity. Human beings should strive to be better than that.

A great group can make a bad game fun.
A bad group can make a great game unfun.

 Blacksails wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:

The Division Of Joy wrote:
Our local gaming club is like a Mental DOJO, people scream, argue and are mean to one another.. That is just HOW WE ROLL... We love it.. we come back week after week for more.. Now we have had some 40k players come by over the years(who are the experince types) and they run for the Door quicker then the flash as soon as the CHaos breaks out.. The record is at 5m on a dude who more or less turned in the door and ran out after he saw what was going down and I explained "FEAR does not Exist in the DOJO" and "MERCY is for the WEAK" hahah, he had traveld 45m to get there and ran out in 5m "IT WAS FUN as hell", and we still have good laugh about it haha..

Well, Runic, we don't agree on some things, but here I can't agree harder.

Also, you got a good chuckle out of me with that.

Good lord Division, that sounds awful.

Division didn't post that. The quote is messed up and it was posted by zlayer77.

He has to deal with an entirely different breed of TFG.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:

The Division Of Joy wrote:
Our local gaming club is like a Mental DOJO, people scream, argue and are mean to one another.. That is just HOW WE ROLL... We love it.. we come back week after week for more.. Now we have had some 40k players come by over the years(who are the experince types) and they run for the Door quicker then the flash as soon as the CHaos breaks out.. The record is at 5m on a dude who more or less turned in the door and ran out after he saw what was going down and I explained "FEAR does not Exist in the DOJO" and "MERCY is for the WEAK" hahah, he had traveld 45m to get there and ran out in 5m "IT WAS FUN as hell", and we still have good laugh about it haha..

Well, Runic, we don't agree on some things, but here I can't agree harder.

Also, you got a good chuckle out of me with that.

Good lord Division, that sounds awful.

Division didn't post that. The quote is messed up and it was posted by zlayer77.

He has to deal with an entirely different breed of TFG.

I actually thought "this seems more like zlayer77´s post, weird." Fixing my own atleast.

 Mr Morden wrote:

That's horrific?? Someone spent 45mins to come over to play some games and was driven away from the club in five mins - do you flag up the sort of environment you enjoy playing in on your club website - was the guy invited or just turned up...........

As some one who also does a bit of martial arts - "mercy is for the weak" is not something that's normally promoted in them to my knowledge? - at least not these days - it might have been in the days of Imperial Japan and that helped lead to the whole "inferior races" and atrocities?

Well, that was a random almost-Godwin.

Mymearan wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

xxvaderxx wrote:


Psi powers are not random, you are not supposed to plan getting the 6 on table X, you are supposed to plan ahead with the primaris if you are low lvl and you are likely to get what you need if you are lvl 4 and want to roll on the table.

I don't know how randomly rolling to see if you get one of the 6 powers is anything but random.

Because there is one you always know that you can get. The issue is if there is another one which is truly game-deciding, but the only one that strikes me as such is Invisibility and maybe Iron Arm.

What if you choose the primaris first, then roll on the same chart?

I was lucky. I didn't enjoy the WAAC attitude at my local club so I stopped going and have found a much more friendly place with a better group of lads and lasses.

The Division Of Joy wrote:
I was lucky. I didn't enjoy the WAAC attitude at my local club so I stopped going and have found a much more friendly place with a better group of lads and lasses.

Not to derail too much, but out of curiosity where do ya go now?

Titan, it's more of a relaxed place games wise.

Breng77 wrote:

Mymearan wrote:
The only truly game breaking random thing in 40k right now, imo, is the D-weapon table. All the other random stuff is fine to me, Invisibility aside. You don't have to play Maelstorm.

You mean other than the thunder blitz table, and the stomp damage table?

Oh and the warpstorm table, where you can potentially remove important pieces of your or your opponents army completely at random, same with the boon table in CSM nothing like killing a sargent and losing your warlord.....

But don't you remember what we had before the Warp Storm table? Entire army coming out of reserves at random, arriving at random places...
Warp Storm table is stupid, but it sure is improvement over how Daemons used to play before.

Backfire wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

Mymearan wrote:
The only truly game breaking random thing in 40k right now, imo, is the D-weapon table. All the other random stuff is fine to me, Invisibility aside. You don't have to play Maelstorm.

You mean other than the thunder blitz table, and the stomp damage table?

Oh and the warpstorm table, where you can potentially remove important pieces of your or your opponents army completely at random, same with the boon table in CSM nothing like killing a sargent and losing your warlord.....

But don't you remember what we had before the Warp Storm table? Entire army coming out of reserves at random, arriving at random places...
Warp Storm table is stupid, but it sure is improvement over how Daemons used to play before.

Which was no different from a drop pod SM army. It was not "all in reserve" (half your army came on in turn 1, just like DP SMs) and could be mitigated with Icons.

You're seriously suggesting that the replacement to random wargear for Daemons (to accompany all the other randomness of warlord traits etc.) is better than what came before?

I don't know what you mean! I always enjoy half of the tactical decisions in my daemon lists being settled on a dice roll!

I mean, who wouldn't want to be uncertain whether their 250 point GD was going to be their opponent's worst nightmare or soft as butter until minutes before the game?

Oh, and making your opponent wait while you make multiple rolls before getting going is just the bestest!

 Grimtuff wrote:

Backfire wrote:

But don't you remember what we had before the Warp Storm table? Entire army coming out of reserves at random, arriving at random places...
Warp Storm table is stupid, but it sure is improvement over how Daemons used to play before.

Which was no different from a drop pod SM army. It was not "all in reserve" (half your army came on in turn 1, just like DP SMs) and could be mitigated with Icons.

You're seriously suggesting that the replacement to random wargear for Daemons (to accompany all the other randomness of warlord traits etc.) is better than what came before?

Ummm...Drop pods are nearly immune to Mishap (which was also more dangerous in 5th), also with SM Drop Pod army, you are assured to get your 'preferred wave', whilst with Daemons you had to roll for it. Lets not even mention what Deep Strike-effecting abilities (like Warp Quake) did to Daemons...

I hated playing against old Chaos Daemons. You had just no control what was going to happen - either Daemon player rolled well & crushed you completely with his very effective units which teleported right next to you, or he rolled poorly and you had easy time shooting the dispersed Daemons like fish in a barrel (if you even had to shoot, sometimes half of the Daemons killed themselves upon arrival). It was mind-numbingly boring. I do hate Warp Storm table too because of all the annoying bookkeeping it produces, but at least Daemons now feel like an actual army where you have to deploy and maneuver etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 slowthar wrote:
Another lesson I learned from this thread: An immature person (or group of people) is immature to matter what game they play.

Being exclusionary for the sake of chest-beating and talking about how badass you are is a sad state to be in, no matter what the activity. Human beings should strive to be better than that.

Well actually I almost get where that guy is coming from. If one likes a competive, 'tough' environment where everything is fair game, who am I to say that is wrong way to enjoy the hobby? I say all wargaming is good wargaming. Now, obviously, it shouldn't happen at the expense of mocking and shutting out other gamers who are not into that style of environment.

I haven't played WM/H, but I was into MtG big time in the '90s, but I jumped out as I saw that the field was moving almost exclusively to tournament scene. Tournament players, decks and games just weren't fun, in my opinion. Sure enough, they featured great competition and good players, but it was all very mechanical, very 'dry' (and surprisingly enough, IMO many of the players weren't even that good: their understanding of the core dynamics of the game was weak and they mostly thought in the terms of getting killer cards and combos to their decks). Also, MtG design was increasingly moving towards combination mechanics, where you attempt to link several cards or effects for force multiplier-type effects to gain huge 'cliff edge' advantage. This is, by the way, also how FFG designs some of their games, and I think it's pretty weak way of game design. I know everyone does not agree and some people are really into that type of mechanics, but for me, ruletechnic gimmickry is no substitute for strategy or maneuvering. Best MtG games were such where both sides had huge arrays of creatures, defensive enchanchments, artifacts etc. and you tried to figure out the best way to employ your creatures' abilities, first strikes, banding, etc and whatever cards you had in hand to maximize your gains. Worst games were those where other player got his combo in play and you were locked down and all you could do was to hope to draw that Disenchant or Crumble which would allow you to knock off the keystone card which kept the combo together. Of course such combinatorics are possible in 40k too (especially true in 6th edition Ally system!) but it's not anywhere as common, at least not in casual environment.

I don't know how it is in WM/H, but one thing I like in 40k is that comeback victories are very possible. In hex wargames I've played, if you conceded early advantage, you were generally toast as the opponent would just keep pressing on and getting stronger. Same goes for MtG duels: sure sometimes you managed to crawl back, but most of the time not. It happened more often in multiplayer games where tempo was usually slower, but most players didn't care for them. In fact 40k sometimes feels even too lenient in this respect, in that it's sometimes unfair that the dominant player lost the victory because other guy rolled '6' for Run and then '2' for ending game on 5th turn...this was especially true in 5th edition BRB missions.

The Daemons warp storm table is probably one of the worst mechanics I've ever seen in a game.
Sure, on the whole it balances out eventually, but when 2 in 12 results can essentially result in an instant game loss for one person, it's horrendously broken. Most of the Daemon book it an example of lazy/poor game design, but that in particular takes the cake. Its more fit for Calvinball than 40k.

Its similar to the stomp/D-weapon tables. On a 1, absolutely nothing happens. On a 6, the target is just removed from the game period. The enormous variance in results and the game-winning effect of rolling that 6 just really shouldn't be allowed.

Welcome to GWs random tables of randomness for the sake of being random. If you don't like it, you aren't forging hard enough!

Backfire wrote:
I don't know how it is in WM/H, but one thing I like in 40k is that comeback victories are very possible. In hex wargames I've played, if you conceded early advantage, you were generally toast as the opponent would just keep pressing on and getting stronger. Same goes for MtG duels: sure sometimes you managed to crawl back, but most of the time not. It happened more often in multiplayer games where tempo was usually slower, but most players didn't care for them. In fact 40k sometimes feels even too lenient in this respect, in that it's sometimes unfair that the dominant player lost the victory because other guy rolled '6' for Run and then '2' for ending game on 5th turn...this was especially true in 5th edition BRB missions.

WMH generally has 2 victory conditions: scenario victory, or assassination.
A player can be 'losing' in terms of models on the field, but in the ones you have left are in the right positions on objectives then you can still win. Likewise, you may be down on models AND scenario, but with exactly the right activation order and little bit of luck you can grab an assassination win if your opponent isn't careful.

WMH is a bit different than 40k on scenario victories because it allows players to score throughout the game (in both your turn and your opponent's turn) and the game ends immediately once someone gets to the required number of scenario points; as opposed to 40k, where victory points are only scored at the bottom of turn 5 (or 6, or 7), and you must keep playing until the game times out.

New players (especially ones coming from 40k backgrounds) tend to underestimate the damage output that occurs in WMH or overestimate the durability, and hence fall victim to assassinations a lot. More experienced players tend to learn that your caster doesn't belong in the thick of things (unless he's Butcher) in the same way that the vast majority of 40k characters do, and assassinations tend to happen a lot more rarely.

Backfire wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

Mymearan wrote:
The only truly game breaking random thing in 40k right now, imo, is the D-weapon table. All the other random stuff is fine to me, Invisibility aside. You don't have to play Maelstorm.

You mean other than the thunder blitz table, and the stomp damage table?

Oh and the warpstorm table, where you can potentially remove important pieces of your or your opponents army completely at random, same with the boon table in CSM nothing like killing a sargent and losing your warlord.....

But don't you remember what we had before the Warp Storm table? Entire army coming out of reserves at random, arriving at random places...
Warp Storm table is stupid, but it sure is improvement over how Daemons used to play before.

No it is really not at all...old daemons were far less random. I rarely lost due to deep striking with daemons, I have own and lost via warp storm.

My daemon army was mainly foot troops (tzeentch, slaanesh, khorne) with a greater and some flamers. The dice roll for which element got deployed on the first turn was a very good indicator of whether i would win or lose the game. Not fun.

 RunicFIN wrote:

Are you a teenager? Why would anyone lie about playing a game? I´ve played since 2007 like I said, proof here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/420/608128.page

In any case you can from here on out be quiet about my lack of experience with WM/H, as I apparently out-experience you in said game.

Ahahahah! I've been playing WMH since 2003 and your trolling attempts are getting more desperate by the minute.

I also particularly like your posting history on the PP forums where you not only admit that you have no idea what the current state of the game actually is (something that is more than readily apparent to anyone that actually plays the game when they read your posts here), and where you also have this to say:

While WM/H are indeed some of the most balanced games there are,

So what is it? Is WMH one of the most balanced game that exists or is it so unbalanced that simple warcaster pairings can decide the game before it even starts?

Also, just because I'm hating my job at the moment, regarding your Haley2 comment:

 RunicFIN wrote:
No amount of skill will save certain builds from a Haley2 netdeck tournament list for example,

Lets take a look at some actual data, shall we?

http://www.discountgamesinc.com/tournaments/

Haley2 won 3 major tournaments this year (out of 33 reported tournaments, such a powerhouse!). And curiously enough, all of the Haley2 lists used to win those tournaments were different from each other... So where is this dominating "netdeck tournament list" that somehow doesn't win more than one tournament?

Also, two Cygnar players also won 2 tournaments in that list without even having Haley2 in their lineup. She is such a dominating caster that she doesn't even have to be in the list to make Cygnar win tournaments!

Lets look at some more numbers...

http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?212314-Crunching-some-WTC-results-numbers-and-I-had-a-question

During the WTC, out of 84 matches played involving Haley2, she achieved an astounding 51,2% win ratio. For such a powerhouse caster that manages to win games no matter the skill of the opposition, she sure does loose allot!