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.

What I like in Warmachine/Horde is the way rules were written; it's very rigorous and can be a bit "boring" to read, but they are clear and use a lot of universal keywords. Even the "special rules" usually follow the same pattern, so the whole thing can be played smoothly.

To me, the most grievous flaw of this game are its unique characters. You are forced to play with them since you can't create "your own warcaster/warlock" to lead your small force - that and the fact they usually are more powerful/interesting than their generic counterpart when they exist. Thus, all of your games look a bit silly when the Butcher 3 kills for the seventh time Haley 1.

Sure, you can say "it was not the real Haley/Butcher". Even so, it's so repetitive than after a while, you stop trying to justify it.

That's the price of competition, I guess. Still, I believe it's a bit sad you are totally unable to have a "generic unnamed warlock/warcaster" so that you can tell your own story. It doesnt have to be more powerful, just to have the possibility to play with anything other than a special character.

That looks to be more a problem with your meta than the game. If you only bring the same caster every time then it's your own fault that there is no variety in your games. There are over 100 casters in the game and the smallest faction still has 5 choices. Live a little and try someone new. You may lose with the new caster but see if you don't have some fun again.

 Bullockist wrote:
The warjacks in WM look different. Khador-cygnar-cryx- ret, they are poles apart.

Imo, Cryx, Retribution, and Convergence have jacks that really look different from other faction's jack. But Khador, Cygnar, Retribution, and to a lesser degree mercs seems to all have quite similar jacks.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Bullockist wrote:
The warjacks in WM look different. Khador-cygnar-cryx- ret, they are poles apart.

Imo, Cryx, Retribution, and Convergence have jacks that really look different from other faction's jack. But Khador, Cygnar, Retribution, and to a lesser degree mercs seems to all have quite similar jacks.

They really REALLY don't.

The only factions which have even remotely similar jacks are Mercs and Cygnar(because most merc jacks are retired Cygnar designs).

 Sarouan wrote:
What I like in Warmachine/Horde is the way rules were written; it's very rigorous and can be a bit "boring" to read, but they are clear and use a lot of universal keywords. Even the "special rules" usually follow the same pattern, so the whole thing can be played smoothly.

To me, the most grievous flaw of this game are its unique characters. You are forced to play with them since you can't create "your own warcaster/warlock" to lead your small force - that and the fact they usually are more powerful/interesting than their generic counterpart when they exist. Thus, all of your games look a bit silly when the Butcher 3 kills for the seventh time Haley 1.

Sure, you can say "it was not the real Haley/Butcher". Even so, it's so repetitive than after a while, you stop trying to justify it.

That's the price of competition, I guess. Still, I believe it's a bit sad you are totally unable to have a "generic unnamed warlock/warcaster" so that you can tell your own story. It doesnt have to be more powerful, just to have the possibility to play with anything other than a special character.

Sounds like you should go back to 'forging a narrative'

Seriously, unique casters keep the game in some sense of balance. Or each 'build your own' would be boiled down to the most efficient sections by the internet.

And if you've lost seven times in the same match up, step up your game.

Looking through the line, I don't see much difference besides Elf-Jacks and Spooky-Jacks. I'm sure people who play and care about the fluff can tell, but from an outsiders perspective, they're pretty samey.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
Looking through the line, I don't see much difference besides Elf-Jacks and Spooky-Jacks. I'm sure people who play and care about the fluff can tell, but from an outsiders perspective, they're pretty samey.

Well, they really really don't look anything like each other and I don't understand how anyone could possibly think that.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
Looking through the line, I don't see much difference besides Elf-Jacks and Spooky-Jacks. I'm sure people who play and care about the fluff can tell, but from an outsiders perspective, they're pretty samey.

You're joking, right? They look nothing alike.
You're seriously telling me that you don't see a difference between this:


And this?


You're either blind or live under a bridge.

Actually he's saying just the opposite. He can tell that those look different from all the others. He is saying that he can't see the difference between Khador's Beast 09 and Cygnar's Thunderhead.

That's easy, Beast is painted Red and Thunderhead is painted Blue.

Yeah they look a lot alike

i think Helen Keller could tell the difference between the different jacks.

You guys really should have learned not to feed the trolls by now...

Anyone that plays 40k and claims that he can't tell the difference between the faction warjacks in WM is clearly trolling.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Actually he's saying just the opposite. He can tell that those look different from all the others. Hesaying that he can't see the difference between Khador's Beast 09 and Cygnar's Thunderhead.

He said "Elf jacks" and "Spooky jacks"

 MWHistorian wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
Looking through the line, I don't see much difference besides Elf-Jacks and Spooky-Jacks. I'm sure people who play and care about the fluff can tell, but from an outsiders perspective, they're pretty samey.

You're joking, right? They look nothing alike.
You're seriously telling me that you don't see a difference between this:

Spoiler:

And this?

Congratulations, you posted the exact two factions that I mentioned Looked Different!

You're either blind or live under a bridge.

aaaaand reported.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PhantomViper wrote:
You guys really should have learned not to feed the trolls by now...

Also, reported.

Anyone that plays 40k and claims that he can't tell the difference between the faction warjacks in WM is clearly trolling.

Must not be me then. I don't play 40K.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:


aaaaand reported.

Also, reported.

Entire posts devoted to saying "reported"
which means the Mods just have to waste a minute clicking the "ignore" button on the report

Not wasting mod time by clicking "report"

Not sure what site you're looking at, but you may want to read my post again.

or

Entire post dedicated to being wrong about another entire post, ironically wasting more time than post it's complaining about.

You pick.

PP consistently applies detailed design vocabularies to each faction. It may not be apparent to someone totally new to WMH but then again the factions are also conveniently color-coded, I guess for the sake of marketing to newbs.

As I said, different factions are just differently painted giant machines.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
As I said, different factions are just differently painted giant machines.

From the POV of someone who knows very little about WMH, I'm sure it seems that way.

But all the same, it is incorrect. Different factions not only paint their machines different colors but have quite different designs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosopagnosia

 judgedoug wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosopagnosia

I think it's more a matter of lacking interest.

To my wife, for example, most cars with broadly similar body types look the same. To me, they look completely different. The fact that they are indeed very different does not make her anymore interested in cars, however.

To the OP. Do you play in an ultra competitive environment?

People choose there army to win. And defence doesn't win the game.which is even more a factor in ultra competive rings. Forcing the game to be more defensive does nothing to change the player base.

Personally I love pulling out my 3 dedvastators and associated goodies that let them slam for free. This while fun to watch my oppentents frustration is not a gurenteed way to win.

Simplely put people who want to win will choose the most attack-y kill other stuff and not choose defensive stuff.

The exction to this is when the game alows you to hurt people whne you succed in being defensive. Examples being blue/black mill deccks in magic. Lizardman Reversals in the UFC card game as well as reversals in fighting games period. However these are rare in molst games or just plain hard to do.

Only flaw I see is 1q WM factions to 6 Hordes counting merc/minions...give me more warbeasts :-D

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
As I said, different factions are just differently painted giant machines.

Your ignorance of Warmachine continues to astound me.
Most armies are infantry with a handful of jacks at most. There's also cavalry, solos and battle engines to throw in.
Let's look at a typical army. I'm going to assume that you're ignorant of the game and not trolling....because it sure seems the later.
Here's an army that will look similar to my merc army when it's finished.

I see a bunch of individual characters, some long gunners, zombies controlled by a necromancer, some big tough guys and...oh, wait, one jack that looks nothing like any other faction's jack.
This is typical.
Or just continue throwing out inaccurate statements with no basis in fact.

Okay, I did misread your post, but your post is still as incorrect as ever.
Example. Does this...


look like this?

FWIW, he didn't claim that his statement was based on any facts or knoweldge -- it's just his perception. It's also fairly OT so let's move on.

 Manchu wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
As I said, different factions are just differently painted giant machines.

From the POV of someone who knows very little about WMH, I'm sure it seems that way.

.

Definitely. My point was its flaw, mainly why I've never gotten interested.

Ok, I'm done here, unless of course more people want to accuse me of trolling or being blind/brain damaged. Sorry to interrupt your discussion.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
mainly why I've never gotten interested

I have the opposite issue; after a few years, I really fell for the visual style and the fluff. But what the OP describes is what spoils WMH for me.

I'm going to go with Manchu in this discussion. Slave has said he doesn't have much interest in WM. So he isn't really going to pay attention to the differences in the various Jacks.

To me one flower pretty much looks like another (with some color and minor shape variences). I'm sure that a gardener would not think highly of my opinion but that's the way I see it.

As a game, I actually think the materials the models are made out of are the greatest flaw. I had a huge, fully painted troll army, and a smallish legion army. I have minion army baggies waiting to be built for three years now.

When I moved from the UK to Germany, I packed my dudes into a KR Multicase as carefully as a could, and packed that into a padded box. Same with all my warhammer stuff.

None of my warbeasts survived the journey. All of my Warhammer models, all of my infantry and so on, they all made it with maybe an arm off here or there, but my heavy warbeasts were all in pieces. Chipped pieces. They had been pinned and glued and varnished, and now they were just so much chipped crap.

I was so disheartened I closed the case and have never assembled, painted or played with another warmachine model ever since, even though I know they have branched out into awful mould line covered Restic and apparently hard plastic these days.

I can understand Slaves point of view actually. Just briefly looking at the lines, I initially thought the jacks were goofy looking proportion wise.

It was actually the infantry models that got me into the game, and later on I appreciated the differences in jack models. I do think beasts are pretty varied and cool looking though.

There are some great minis out there too. I personally love the Devils Shadow Mutineers, and most models have great details if you take the time to highlight them.

PhantomViper wrote:
You guys really should have learned not to feed the trolls by now...

Anyone that plays 40k and claims that he can't tell the difference between the faction warjacks in WM is clearly trolling.

Do not get me wrong, I really do like the game. I have a 50 point army lead by Captain Gunnbjorn, where I converted most models to give them military cap like Gunnbjorn, cigars, and for a bunch of models including all my battlegroup, they are showing their middle finger to the enemy. I am not saying the miniatures are bad. I am saying Cygnar, Khador and Protectorate jacks looks very similar to me, and that is part of why I went for Horde instead.