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.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
So far, no talk about the game even slightly pulling back from combo-mania, which is disappointing. My number one reason for disliking the game really did stem from how specific lists had to be to be "decent". Player needed to begin their turn, activate several specific units, in a specific order, to carry out essentially the one function a different unit would then fulfill. At that point you had either answered your opponents list/unit or you didn't.

I always feel like Warmahordes is a game with too few correct answers, and essentially is unplayable if you try to just take "ok" answers.

While I don't disagree that more 'correct' options are always good, the combo nature of Warmahordes is precisely what I like about it over other games, as it makes casualties really matter. You're potentially not just losing a specific model, but losing the synergies that go along with that model, so the wrong unit being stomped on can affect your entire battle plan.


Not excited about having to go out and buy more new cards, though, I have to say. Glad I had only got around to updating my Cryx so far. At least now I know to wait before chasing down the others.

As someone who owns large(ish) armies for every faction in Warmahordes, I'm not excited about buying replacement cards for everything.

As it's just me and the wife who play though, we'll probably stick with MK2. Not like I'll be buying anything new from them after their online pricing hissyfit anyway.

Well colour me excited. I'm liking the sound of everything but pre-measuring, but hey, I'm not a rules developer so what do I know. I just hope they tackled the CRA tax and make Trenchers more fieldable.

I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere, but does anyone know if the new Pime.al will include the additional rules from expansions like Collosals? And if the new faction books will include all the new troops and beasts and such in the MKii expac books?

Faction books should include all existing units, and I expect the new core will have rules for all unit types currently in existence, just like when MkII dropped.

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
Is there going to be terrain for the game? The "two trees and a hill" setup was extremely off putting for a game. I want spectacle but it seems like terrain was frowned on and dispensed with.

Any word on this?

I do hope more terrain shows up on WM tables now!

I'm still annoyed by the recent pricing issues, but the little that we have been told about MK3 sounds very promising. I really hope that warjack-heavy becomes as viable as warbeast-heavy.

 Laughing Man wrote:
Faction books should include all existing units, and I expect the new core will have rules for all unit types currently in existence, just like when MkII dropped.

Cool, cheers mate. Here's hoping.

I do love Warmachine for the technical exercise it is, after my first game 8-odd years ago when an opponent charged up a Centurion some 18 inches and blasted me. Great wake-up to go 'Oh sweet, it's the sort of game where you can really *do* things!'.

That said, I haven't played for over 3 years due to some degree of stagnation. Some of my old stuff is still super top notch, while others will never see the light of day (poor Trenchers). The arrival of so many HUGE models was a big turn-off, as they didn't fit the scale and problem-solving nature of the game, in addition to the realistic logistical transport problem.

Hopefully Mk3 will really resolve much of those issues. That said, I've been more interested after hearing this (more point granularity! Battlegroup focus! 2-3 free Jacks!) than at any point in the last 3 years of largely random unusable (or too usable) Solos and giant models.

I'm really looking forward to this. Mk2 has been getting more and more of a mess with every release so a rebalancing is good. I'm hoping they do it right and less used units start to see the table again.

More 'Jacks is always a good thing.

 .Mikes. wrote:
Well colour me excited. I'm liking the sound of everything but pre-measuring, but hey, I'm not a rules developer so what do I know.

In my group, since you could just measure your warcaster's control area whenever, they used that as a way to pre-measure attacks. "Oh, just checking my control range... doo dee doo... I'm declaring an attack against this guy who is totally in range, or so I assume". I don't care because I like pre-measuring and any win that was gained from a mismeasure didn't feel much like a victory anyway.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alpharius wrote:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
Is there going to be terrain for the game? The "two trees and a hill" setup was extremely off putting for a game. I want spectacle but it seems like terrain was frowned on and dispensed with.

Any word on this?

I do hope more terrain shows up on WM tables now!

I'd like to know too, but I honestly think that Warmachine players don't WANT terrain, and the inclusion of it may be offputting to the current playerbase. Actually, I think most of my complaints/wishes for the new edition are things that the current playerbase would hate, so I'm less enthusiastic about any of them happening.

 Alpharius wrote:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
Is there going to be terrain for the game? The "two trees and a hill" setup was extremely off putting for a game. I want spectacle but it seems like terrain was frowned on and dispensed with.

Any word on this?

I do hope more terrain shows up on WM tables now!

No word that I've seen, but I agree with the sentiment.
People that do pick up games with me always frown when I have at least three forests on a table, a good few walls, and a building or two to break up any open ground. Sometimes I'll throw a hill in the middle flanked by forests.
3D terrain I might add, not the 2d stuff everyone seems to like.

-Edit- I play Cryx btw, so the forests aren't because of "LoleyelesssightLegion"

overtyrant wrote:
Love the game but I've always hated the caster kill = auto win aspect of the game.

"I kind of like Chess but that whole checkmate thing puts me off" (just joking )

I do wonder because every game I like ends up adding pre-measuring.

Mildly excited wasn't a fan of MK2 so wondering what they will change, and those starter boxes are a good way to get the new rules.

Pre-measurement is a sign of the times: Your ability to eyeball 11.5 inches isn't a meaningful distinction of skill as compared to your ability to think through how you're doing a task or going about accomplishing a goal.

Likewise, Caster Kill has a very important gameplay mechanism: It allows players on the back foot to have a chance at winning by taking advantage of an opening. It increases the skill ceiling by allowing one to swap to a 'Plan B' if your army got off on the wrong foot and took a bad initial punch, but the enemy overextended doing so.

Generally, all of the 'I got pasted turn 1/2!' arguments come from inexperience.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
I do wonder because every game I like ends up adding pre-measuring.

Probably because it used to seem relevant, but it never really was the same arena/skill set as everything else to be able to guess distances compared to smart tactics/list building/playing the odds. I used to be really good at it, but still think it's kind of mechanically useless.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Killionaire wrote:
Caster Kill has a very important gameplay mechanism: It allows players on the back foot to have a chance at winning by taking advantage of an opening

I'd say that almost every game I've played of WM ended in a caster kill. If that weren't the case, then I might agree that it's a nice backup, but usually it's how the game ends, regardless of whether it's an early snipe, a lucky hail mary, or the final blow in a well-executed maneuver.

Personally, I found it extremely boring and was a major contributor to why I stopped playing. I've played similar commander-focused games where they define the list and are the lynchpin if not the strongest, and can both be near-impossible to remove or the game's still winnable without them, and I prefer that style since it makes a more interesting dynamic.

Wasn't "more jacks/beasts" one of the goals of Mk2?

As long as jack's run on a limited resource the game is going to trend towards powerful, efficient, infantry; for any caster that isn't all about jacks.

 insaniak wrote:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
So far, no talk about the game even slightly pulling back from combo-mania, which is disappointing. My number one reason for disliking the game really did stem from how specific lists had to be to be "decent". Player needed to begin their turn, activate several specific units, in a specific order, to carry out essentially the one function a different unit would then fulfill. At that point you had either answered your opponents list/unit or you didn't.

I always feel like Warmahordes is a game with too few correct answers, and essentially is unplayable if you try to just take "ok" answers.

While I don't disagree that more 'correct' options are always good, the combo nature of Warmahordes is precisely what I like about it over other games, as it makes casualties really matter. You're potentially not just losing a specific model, but losing the synergies that go along with that model, so the wrong unit being stomped on can affect your entire battle plan.


Not excited about having to go out and buy more new cards, though, I have to say. Glad I had only got around to updating my Cryx so far. At least now I know to wait before chasing down the others.

Warmachine has always been M:TG in miniatures form. Why change it now?

Games do go to control points in a timed environment. Or rather,
a player with a control point advantage forces their opponent
to try for some shady hail mary shenanigans that may or may
not work. I still see that as the game being more than about
the assassination.

Anyone have any info on the new battlebox casters?

Caster kill annoyed me, especially when you fail an assasination with your own caster. which is fine......except sorscha failed all her attacks on the feat turn and left the guy alive......seriosuly annoying.

Removing Caster Kill fundamentally changes the game. Same with Caster-centric focus of construction. It's also why 2-caster games are generally a clusterfeck: It messes too much with the core DNA.

Anyway, without Caster-Kill and thus, with a less mechanically precise game, these days I'd prefer to play Dark Age anyway. It's like a more deadly, mutually-destructive Warmachine without any focus on any individual models and instead on a spread of objectives and units with multiple actions per turn.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Caster kill annoyed me, especially when you fail an assasination with your own caster. which is fine......except sorscha failed all her attacks on the feat turn and left the guy alive......seriosuly annoying.

You're playing a game with dice. You can work the odds in your favor for only so long...

Sometimes the sure thing isn't sorscha. Sometimes you freeze them and let your Warjack take over. The higher p+s can be a surer thing if your opponent is stacking the arm.

 Killionaire wrote:
Removing Caster Kill fundamentally changes the game. Same with Caster-centric focus of construction. It's also why 2-caster games are generally a clusterfeck: It messes too much with the core DNA.

Well, that is right now ofcourse. MK3 can for sure changes things up a bit.

 .Mikes. wrote:
Anyone have any info on the new battlebox casters?

As far as what we heard back in one of the more recent Primecasts, we just know that all of the casters in the BB will be new.

...and they look fantastic. An opinion.

Definitely picking up the Cryx and Circle one.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

I do wonder because every game I like ends up adding pre-measuring.

Probably because sooner or later the people writing the rules realise how pointless it is to not allow it, as people just find ways around it.

Doubly so in Warmachine where you could essentially pre-measure by checking your control radius anyway.

 Killionaire wrote:
Removing Caster Kill fundamentally changes the game. Same with Caster-centric focus of construction. It's also why 2-caster games are generally a clusterfeck: It messes too much with the core DNA.

Maybe, maybe not. Losing a caster would still be a big deal, but not ending the game when it happened would be a huge improvement, in my opinion. Considering that even the most melee powered caster still crumbles in a single turn when an entire army focuses a full turn on him, the casters are far too squishy to do anything with. Plus, forcing players to live with the consequences of their hail mary plays could be cool. Yeah, you put everything into that turn and killed their caster, but now your own caster is buried deep in enemy territory with no focus and no exit plan.

I'm super intrigued. I've been listening to a ton of WM/H podcasts lately, and thinking of bulking out my Skorne. This actually makes me want to paint up some "for fun" models. Hopefully the game-wide rebalance is effective and some things I like the aesthetics of (Bloodrunners, Rhinodon) aren't such a corner case/suboptimal pick anymore.

I like the idea of "goosing" the hobby aspect too. My last foray into WM/H kind of broke my heart with how much plastic (or only partially assembled!) miniatures were on the table. Made me realize just how much I valued the hobby aspect.

 Carnikang wrote:

 .Mikes. wrote:
Anyone have any info on the new battlebox casters?

As far as what we heard back in one of the more recent Primecasts, we just know that all of the casters in the BB will be new.

Ah righty, thanks. Well,m soemthing else new to look forward learning about.

Everything I've heard sounds really good. I really wish they hadn't made that stupid retailer decision, because I haven't been this excited about WM/H in years.

So I'm personally excited, and I like the spoiled changes so far.

On the premeasuring note, I can premeasure in guild ball and I find it makes for a tighter and friendlier game. For example, I know my charge plus melee range, so I can measure it before anything is moved, which takes away the error induced by moving a model, then checking distance, even if it is small.

About terrain: I think that most of the community plays with less terrain then is recommended, especially in steamroller. You need a compelling reason to pick first or pick side, and consider what is near any objectives or zones. Plus it really needs to be asymmetrical, which people don't often do.

As for 2D over 3D terrain pieces, I actually like 2D, since again, it makes for a tighter game. If we're being really honest, good 3D terrain can enhance a game, but if I actually put time into painting an army I like having the visual focus be on my models.