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.

Hi, I was wondering if any veteran players of WFB could share with me their opinions of WFB 6th edition, and how it measures up to AoS. I have this game set from long ago with extra empire and Ork models, but haven't even assembled one model. I thought about finally giving it a go, as I have a friend who will play, but to be honest all the rules governing movement, facing, and combat has kind of leaving me feeling that I am going to spend a lot of time referencing the rulebook while playing. It seems AoS might be quicker, and considering their bases, don't line up in rank and file like in the old days.

I imagine 6th has to be pretty good, since there was a skirmish rule set released, as well as the famous Mordhiem game, during this run, so it seems like it had a lot going for itself. But WFB has always seemed a little overwhelming to learn.

I am not worried about trying to find players to play with, I have a friend already. But it just seems like a lot of work to get started out of the gate if AoS is better. I guess I could just buy that to fill my sudden fantasy fix.

Thanks!

I'm an advocate for AoS but what about having a game of each and decide for yourself? =]

I would recommend avoiding AoS like the plague. It is only an illusion of easier and cheaper. while 6th edition does have fiddly bits, it is worth the effort. once you get the hang of it you will find it has alot more to offer. AoS is in my opinion the worst mini game to be produced in the last decade. I have played over 100 games of it and found it to be just unsatisfying, shallow, and not much fun at all, a bigger pain in the ------ than its worth. I will also say the 2 games are nothing alike one another in how they actually play out. but warhammer 6th ed is also a dead game. no support, likely few to no players. realistically, would go find a better company all around to try their games instead.

6th was my favourite edition back in that day, but I wouldn't go back to it now. I like the streamlined rules in AoS and not dealing with facing and all that jazz. Always loved Warhammer, but I don't think I can go back to square bases now, looks clunky and old fashioned.

I suppose I could consider myself a veteran gamer - having played every edition of WFB since the 2nd edition box set.

Personally, I started to lose interest around 7th edition. 8th became over large and clunky. All the 'End Times' (apocalypse) style gaming finished my interest in it.

For me, 6th edition was the version I had most fun with and played the most. I still collect the GW fantasy figures, but these days I use them for playing KoW (2nd edition). The game is less clunky, simpler, more tactical and I enjoy playing games of it far more than I had any edition of WFB in its history.
After a game of KoW, I feel I've played a game of WFB without all the rules checking and still have enough time for another game of it.

IMO, KoW2 > WFB6 > AoS.

But, AoS rules are free so you can test them out.
KoW v2 rules are free so you can test them out.
If you already have WFB 6th, then you have enough to play all of them and make an informed decision.

Pretty much any other version of WFB is better than AoS. AoS is more of a suggestion about what to do with some minis than it is a game. The lack of structure would make any prolonged group of players struggle for how to make it work.

I'm not sure what people are actually switching to right now. A lot of the big tournaments kept 8th edition with modifications like those used in the ETC. I highly doubt any serious WFB players (and most of them are serious) will switch over to AoS for more than a fun alternative game night.

KoW has a solid rules set and if you're looking for a streamlined game using ranked units, it's excellent. It's not my cup of tea because I'm looking for something a little deeper and more complex, but if you're not looking for something complex, it's excellent.

Wolf Lair is hosting a rules set called 9th Age which seems like it's what 9th edition "should've been". Not sure who's playing it or how it plays.

My personal favorite is 8th edition as it really only needs to tone down the spells to be perfectly playable and decently balanced.

I've played Warhammer Fantasy Battle (and many other miniature systems) since the WHFB hardback book in the 80's.

I prefer Age of Sigmar.

I really like the system and all of the support for the system.

It is a new system, so my opinion may change in a year or two.

6th from what I remember was one of the more enjoyable editions to me with excellent army books but it had balance issues with the core rules. Kinda the opposite of 8th with emphasis on uber skirmishers and infantry relegated to support. Infantry blocks were ranks of 4 wide and suffered pretty much everything. I have always felt 7th was better.

9th age I just read through and it looks great. The main downside to me is they didn't address skirmishers/fast cav enough IMO. It looks to be where 8th left off only possibly better. Idk I haven't played since 8th crushed our community so take that fwiw.

I had some of my best fantasy gaming in 6th-7th. 6th has some issues as pointed out with skirmishers and so on, but it's a fun tactical ruleset.

For me, my enjoyment of a minis game is much more dependent on faction rules than core game rules. A good core game can't hold my interest if the rules for my faction are bad or boring, while poor core rules can be forgiven if the mechanics for the units I use are interesting and engaging.

As such, 6th edition did not do much for me. The core rules were great, possibly the best warhammer fantasy has ever had, but I found the ravening hordes rules to be rather anemic, and even once the army books started coming out, I found them to be for the most part rather boring and proscriptive (though not nearly as bad as the 7th ed vamp counts in that regard). I missed the over-the-top pomp of the 4th and 5th edition armies (though imo the 5th edition stuff was declining towards the end).

By comparison, I really can't argue that AoS is, at heart, anything other than a terrible game. But even so, I love the rules for my army. Most everything has interesting special rules evocative of their fluff.

I can appreciate a good game like 6th intellectually, but I can't engage with it on a visceral, emotional level that would give me the motivation needed to paint up a whole army and bring it to the table on a regular basis.

I've played WHFB since 5th and for me AoS was the breath of fresh air this game needed.

However YMMV so it's best to try out a couple of battles in each before you commit. AoS can be played with square bases so don't worry about the modelling.

If you just want to start playing with minimal learning time then AoS is without a doubt better.

The new prices are kind of insane.

AoS and WHFB are such different games that it's really hard to say. I prefer any edition of WHFB over AoS, and any edition from 4th through to 7th more than 8th.

These days unless you have a really strong local community in either AoS or WHFB I'd recommend not starting either. GW just culled Tomb Kings, who knows what's next? Because of that I wouldn't recommend and army unless it's one that has been recently updated (Sigmarines, Lizardmen, Khorne, Fyreslayers), otherwise you don't know if it will still exist in a few months.

AoS IMO is a terrible game, WHFB is decent but as an OOP game it can be hard to start a community so unless you have an established community I wouldn't bother. There's other games out there that you can play. Unless you really love the WHFB models then just play a couple of games of each and decide which you prefer, and remember you can use the models to play KoW as well if you want to give that a try.

The hardcore fantasy group in central Wisconsin started to dwindle around 6th edition. By 8th edition, the group was small. End times breathed some new life into fantasy, but by the end it was pretty much dead. Our FLGS' stock of fantasy sat dormant for the past few years.

AOS came around and I'd say about half of the fantasy players picked it up. The other half was either po'd at GW for killing fantasy, po'd at gw for balance issues in fantasy, or sold their collections anyway.

The AOS scene was a breath of fresh air that rejuvenated the fantasy scene (at our flgs and at local player's homes). I'd say AOS hits the table more than 40k around here now, and it even sucked some 40k players in with the free rules, low model count if you want, etc (esp with the increase in formation hammer, increased costs, more units needed, etc). It has become the casual game of choice (though I still like 40k, wwx, x-wing, etc)

Our store's fantasy stock sells fast now, and you have to pre-order stuff or be in store when stock comes in or you may have to wait until the next week's stock arrives.

6th was designed by Tuomas Pirinnen who knew what he was doing.

They improved in 7th and 8th, but also fethed it up. However it was mostly the codex imbalance that did it.

I prefer AoS by a long shot. That being said 6th sure was fun. Though to be honest, cavalry ruled that game. Not to mention that there was a lot of jockeying for a charge. Some games I played there was only one or two rounds of combat proceeded by four to five turns of maneuvering.

I'd also encourage you to give KoW a shot. I actually play both games and think they compliment each other quite well.