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 in the title.

EDIT: My apologies for not clarifying. Taking into account the lore and the gameplay of each, which seems to be better. Is the abysmal rules of 40k sufficient to outweigh any fluff advantage that it might have (or vice versa), or are the rules behind 40k awesome enough to outweigh any fluff failures it has (or vice versa, etc. etc.

I am considering starting to play Warmachine, but can't really afford to do both, hence the poll. This is also why I haven't added a neutral response, because it would be giving me essentially useless information. If you don't have an opinion, then please don't vote, so that you don't get forced into making a choice.

Third Option: I Like Both Equally.
Fourth Option: I Hate Both Equally.
Fifth Option: I Play Something Else

The answer is not binary.

The Auld Grump

Of the two choices, I prefer 40k/WFB.

Both pale in comparison to the mighty Blood Bowl.

Define 'better'?

Rules quality?

Balance?

Company support?

Fluff?

Model quality?

Player base?

'Better' is just a loaded term that's gonna get this whole thing bogged down.

Personal preference for me is warmachine, but gw do make some interesting noises from time to time, battle at calth is great.

I can't get into the background of Warmachine, so 40k/AoS for me.

You'll find more opponents for Warhammer, currently, and the fluff is far larger. I also think the models are usually nicer.

Warmachine has better/tighter rule sets, and PP encourages sales through FLGSs.

Both games are fun. Honestly, it comes down to this: do you care about having a larger opponent base with more fluff, or a more competitive game? Decide from there for your answer.

PP has way better rules then anything GW has ever written

PP has Pressgangers that will teach you how to play the games and run tournaments

PP and GW are both expensive, 40k is the most expensive because the amount of money you have to spend on books just to play a game $140+. AoS and WMH have free rules

If PP finds a problem with their game they fix it, you might be waiting years for GW to fix problems if they ever fix them

Have a rules question? post on PP website forum and get an official answer, GW if your lucky might answer your question on their new FB page

PP works hard to balance their game, GW doesn't care about balance

This question is sort of liking asking whether people prefer Ham Sandwiches or Fruit Salad...

There is no direct comparison possible between the games, because they're two completely different types of games.

For me, the 40K and old WHFB fluff are more engaging (although I suspect that's largely just a familiatity thing), while the rules for Warmahordes are certainly better written... But as to which game is actually better, that would depend on what I was wanting to play. If I want to play a skirmish game, then Warmahordes would be better. If I want to play something larger, then 40K or WHFB would be the way to go.

At least if those specific games are the only options.

Weird comparison. It's like asking people if they like playing with a Tiffany Vase or YuGiOh cards.

---

If you like models and lore, go with 40k.

If you like models, go with AoS.

If you like rules, go with Warmahordes.

If you like both rules and models, there are plenty of alternatives out there.

 Absolutionis wrote:
Weird comparison. It's like asking people if they like playing with a Tiffany Vase or YuGiOh cards.

---

If you like models and lore, go with 40k.

If you like models, go with AoS.

If you like rules, go with Warmahordes.

If you like both rules and models, there are plenty of alternatives out there.

What games would you recommend for both rules and models?

 Gorthor21 wrote:

What games would you recommend for both rules and models?

I'd go with: whichever ones have rules you enjoy and models you like...


That's sort of like asking who played the best Batman... Everyone's going to give you a different answer.

For me 40k has better models and that's about it. The basic game engine is inferior, the balance is inferior, the flow of play is inferior, the writing & editing is inferior it's just a worse game at every level. Sure the scale is different but if I wanted to play a large scale game I'd wanna play a good large scale game. The earlier fruit salad & ham sandwiches analogy is fair but WarmaHordes is a pretty good ham sandwhich and the 40k fruit salad has a least a couple mushy grapes and moldy slices of honeydew in it.

Also count me in that odd camp (at least odd for around here), that much prefers the Warmahordes (Iron Kingdoms) fluff to the 40k fluff. In the game products at least the 40k stuff is very much about this angry big guy was is so much angrier and killier and yellier than these other guys and look at these crazy body counts we sure can talk about. The scale of the whole thing forces such a wide view and painting in such broad strokes none of it comes off in a way I can be invested. This extends even to the RPG products and the like, simply because the setting is so huge to even try and model it at all demands the loss any fine detail.

Maybe the 40k novels and stuff are different but as far as the settings as presented in game materials go (Wargames + RPGs) I find the Iron Kingdoms to be a much more interesting, clearly defined and comprehensible setting.


Which isn't to say WarmaHordes is perfect it has tons of flaws. I just find it way better than 40k on every level.

GW puts out really nice plastics, from a technical standpoint though.

To further muddle the waters, I vote X-Wing.

 Gorthor21 wrote:

 Absolutionis wrote:
Weird comparison. It's like asking people if they like playing with a Tiffany Vase or YuGiOh cards.

---

If you like models and lore, go with 40k.

If you like models, go with AoS.

If you like rules, go with Warmahordes.

If you like both rules and models, there are plenty of alternatives out there.

What games would you recommend for both rules and models?

Infinity


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Chongara wrote:
Also count me in that odd camp (at least odd for around here), that much prefers the Warmahordes (Iron Kingdoms) fluff to the 40k fluff.

I'll second that actually. The Warmachine RPG stuff is amazing, and while 40k had pretty good fluff once, along with amazing books and great RPG stuff (through FFG), their current stuff is....

Well we got Murderfang with his Murderlust killing people with his murderclaws on the planet Omicide, and BL seem to have forgotten to release any real books recently with the stupid amount of audiobooks, short e-stories and limited edition hardback novellas. I am not even sure what's going on with the licensed RPG line, but I get the impression FFG are too busy swimming in money from X wing to keep working on them.

PP on the other hand recently put out the Unleashed RPG which was so overflowing with stuff they had to cut it short at like 600 pages and pull an entire faction out of it, giving them their own book which came out shortly after. They've only just started putting out real novels from their publisher, but Into The Storm was very good imo and I can't wait for the second one. Not to mention the latest actually books for Warmachine and Hordes where a significant step up in quality of fluff over what was already a lovingly crafted setting that just had a habit of filling page space with pointless fighting.