PDA

View Full Version : Not sure about 8th edition...



reese3697
10-12-2010, 15:09
Hello all, I have been playing for many years and browse these forums often, though I rarely post.
So I played my first game of 8th ed earlier this week, and I'm not sure how much I like the new game. Now I am a pretty old gamer all things considered, I have been playing for 4 and 1/2 editions of the game (the 1/2 coming from "Ravening Hordes" between editions 5 and 6). So needless to say I have seen my fair share of changes to this great game. However some of the changes in 8th have left me scratching my head and seriously pondering whether or not to still play.

*as a disclaimer before I really start, I have not read the new rules cover to cover, but rather was shown new rules by another player while we played after skimming the new book for 15 mins*

For starters I must admit that I like the new army comp changes using percentages, its neat and I think will help balance out the game a bit. However, Lords still have NO PLACE in a game under 2000 points.

Magic has come a very long way, for the most part I cant complain because we arent playing cards anymore. Its also a little more balanced I suppose, though I dont really like the fact that if you roll double 6's it is also a miscast. Overall I dont think there was much wrong with the old system and feel they changed it just to change it.

WTF is with the new charging rules? The fact that my dwarfs can potentially charge 15 inches is RETARDED! The fact that my Bret knights can potentially charge only 10 inches is EVEN MORE RETARDED!

In combat, not to excited about the fact that charging doesnt mean you strike first anymore. Also I'm a little uneasy about the whole "fighting from rear ranks" deal my NG spears fighting in 3 ranks is a little ridiculous, and will be even more so in a larger game when I line them 10x4 to fight in 4 ranks as a "horde."

I havent experienced the rules for war machines yet, but what is this about no more guessing? You just measure and role randomization dice? One of my favorite pastimes was dropping a dwarf stone in the middle of a unit and smirking the whole time as the opponents jaw dropped! The most impressive part playing a good gun-line general was their ability to guess with war machines, why take that skill away? Now anyone can do it...

Im also uneasy about all the new little special rules that havent come up yet either, like "sniper" and the whole lot of crap in that section. If certain units or weapons can do something that fine, but it seems we will see them a lot more if they are being defined in the rules section.


Well I guess thats it from the old grumbler for now. I realize parts of this post are pretty arrogant, I fancy myself a pretty decent player (atleast in some older editions of the game). If you were paying attention, yes I mentioned 3 different armies I play, I left out 2 others. If I decide not to play anymore they will all be for sale.
I'm really liking the new models GW has been releasing the past few years, can you guys PLEASE explain some of this new stuff to me and hopefully save me from abandoning this game I love so much. I really dont get it, if it aint broke, then dont try and fix it!

scar face
10-12-2010, 15:13
I'm afraid to say it, but I agree with you on ALL of those points-

8th ed. appears to be the beginner's edition now, dropping charge tactics and the like in favour of an easier, beginner-satisfying system.

scar

Tzeentch Lover
10-12-2010, 15:22
dropping charge tactics and the like

Because infantry playing "chicken" 8 1/2 inches from each other and cavalry simply riding down any number of infantry w/o ASF was very "tactical.":shifty:

minionboy
10-12-2010, 15:37
Because infantry playing "chicken" 8 1/2 inches from each other and cavalry simply riding down any number of infantry w/o ASF was very "tactical.":shifty:

Agreed, I play Ogres and I always felt that staying 1" out of the enemies charge range always felt a bit cheesy. When charge is a set number like that, there is no risk involved, I happily sat 10.5" to 11" away (from elves for example) with my leadbelchers, got to shoot one turn and charge the next and there was nothing that could be done about it.

I always thought guessing was a bit lame really, after playing 4th through 7th edition, it wasn't even guessing anymore. I've sniped out countless lone characters with stone throwers because I was good at "guessing." It also levels the playing field for people with naturally bad depth perception, or poor visual estimation, contrary to popular belief, it's not a skill that all people are born with.

I like most of the changes in 8th edition, which is why I play it.

mrtn
10-12-2010, 15:41
In combat, not to excited about the fact that charging doesnt mean you strike first anymore. Also I'm a little uneasy about the whole "fighting from rear ranks" deal my NG spears fighting in 3 ranks is a little ridiculous, and will be even more so in a larger game when I line them 10x4 to fight in 4 ranks as a "horde."The new rules mean that Initiative isn't a useless stat anymore, a change that I welcome. And removing casualties from the back means that the old "tactic" of charge, remove the first rank, no attacks back, I win isn't possible any more, and good riddance.


I havent experienced the rules for war machines yet, but what is this about no more guessing? You just measure and role randomization dice? One of my favorite pastimes was dropping a dwarf stone in the middle of a unit and smirking the whole time as the opponents jaw dropped! The most impressive part playing a good gun-line general was their ability to guess with war machines, why take that skill away? Now anyone can do it...
Here's another change that's great. Being able to gauge distances doesn't make you a great general, it just makes you a great carpenter.

If I decide not to play anymore they will all be for sale.Keep them, you might like 9th or 10th edition.

For what it's worth I agree with Tzeentch Lover.

reese3697
10-12-2010, 15:44
Im not saying the old rules were perfect, just that the new ones seem a bit ridiculous! Dwarfs should NOT be able to charge 15 inches (potentially). I can see adding some randomness to charging, maybe d3 inches on top of old charge distance for example.

Emissary
10-12-2010, 15:47
I agree with the other replies here. I do think that 8th overall is a better edition. There are a few things I disagree with (a few spells are too powerful, powerscroll/teclis, terrain doesn't seem to do much) it has much less things that I disagree with then prior editions.

I also like that fights are now fights, rather then a few guys dying and the rest of the army breaking. I literally had fights between 2 25+ model regiments in 7th edition where 1 guy died from one side, nobody died from the other side and the side with 1 casualty broke and was run down. This can happen in 7th, but it happens a lot less of the time from what I can tell.

RanaldLoec
10-12-2010, 15:48
Ok I started playing at the very end of 3rd ed start of 4th ed.

I took a break at the end of 5th ed completely missed 6th in gaming and started again in 7th.

I've been playing 8th ed non stop since its release and I'm hooked I mean more than when I first started.

You have had one game play a few more against somebody who's done more than skimmed the rules. Then you might be a bit more open to the new game dynamics.

Yes its a big change and its all very random but I've grown to like that element of the game I've found charging and movement is still very important if not more so now than ever.

I know an average roll on 2d6 is 7 meaning most my units charge 11" this has to be factored into my movement phase. I want to get closer than 11" to make my charge my certain and at the same time trying to avoid my enemys units.

The increased charge ranges and less restrictive terrain makes this allot more challenging.

Like I said one game isn't really enough to get into 8th ed.

I remember my first beer, tasted bloody horrible didn't it. Over time I drank more and more beer and now well now I love the stuff just like 8th edition.

(im not alcoholic I just like beer).

Memnos
10-12-2010, 15:48
Im not saying the old rules were perfect, just that the new ones seem a bit ridiculous! Dwarfs should NOT be able to charge 15 inches (potentially). I can see adding some randomness to charging, maybe d3 inches on top of old charge distance for example.

Why not? There's no defined number for how far 'An inch' is, or how fast that is. Could be that the Dwarfs were on a slight, perfectly flat slope towards their enemy.

Could be that your Brettonian Knights charged only to find they've hit a groundhog colony and half their horses suffer broken legs.

Making random distances doesn't reduce tactics. It changes the tactics you have to use.

Emissary
10-12-2010, 15:49
Im not saying the old rules were perfect, just that the new ones seem a bit ridiculous! Dwarfs should NOT be able to charge 15 inches (potentially). I can see adding some randomness to charging, maybe d3 inches on top of old charge distance for example.

Why? It seems more tactical in having to manage the risk of that happening, then just trying to sit about 7" from them. The odds of it happening are rather slim, but it could happen. Maybe they're just really, really hopped up on beer.

Putty
10-12-2010, 15:53
8th edition to me is still leap and bounds better than 7th.

but a few things has spoiled it for me

1) power scroll
2) Skaven
3) some of the scenarios are horribly unbalanced.

my 4 favorite changes is combat being Initiative based, the big nerf to fear / terror, the remove from the back rule and the ability to measure anything, anytime.

i'm a-bit on the fence with the steadfast rule... primarily because it benefits Skaven too much.

Razaan
10-12-2010, 15:55
How are you getting a max 10 inch charge from your Brettonian Knights?

They have a mounted movement of 8, and don't worry about the 1 inch penalty for barding. Then, as cavalry, they roll 3D6 and subtract the lowest to determine charge range. That gives you 20 inches, with an average charge of 15-16 inches. Compared to the Dwarves' average charge of 10.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss all of the 8th edition rules so quickly and I certainly wouldn't be abandoning any armies right away. The ruleset is much better than you are giving it credit for and a lot of the changes make the game smoother, faster and not as overly complicated. It may be simpler to play than earlier editions, but it's not any less tactical by any stretch.

Learn the rules a bit more and play more than a couple games. 8th edition will grow on you.

Lord Inquisitor
10-12-2010, 15:55
I'm really liking the new models GW has been releasing the past few years, can you guys PLEASE explain some of this new stuff to me and hopefully save me from abandoning this game I love so much. I really dont get it, if it aint broke, then dont try and fix it!
Firstly, no matter what anyone says, if you want to like 8th but aren't sure you will... try it. Play a dozen games, and don't be put off by your first impressions. Nothing else is going to tell you if you like it and really, who cares what a bunch of geeks on the internet think? Try it and you may, I say. If you don't try, you'll never know. You already have the armies, what have you got to lose?

For me, there are many great things about 8th. There are some less great things and there are some downright annoying things. Overall, a marginal improvement, but I do feel there has been some tactical play loss in terms of unit manoeuvering but this has been mitigated by the fact that tactical matchups are based on unit fighting capabilities and not just who charged - so getting the right matchup is more important, which was something of a secondary consideration in many cases in 7th. I will say this: my initial impression from reading the book about what I won't like, actually turned out not to be such a big deal (magic uberspells, random charges, etc). However, I've been noticing certain more subtle defects later on that I didn't notice. So I won't say it's the best game ever and its very different from 7th ... but it's still enjoyable to be sure.


For starters I must admit that I like the new army comp changes using percentages, its neat and I think will help balance out the game a bit. However, Lords still have NO PLACE in a game under 2000 points.
Well, Lords like Empire generals are not so bad, and uberpowerful ones get really hard to fit in under 2000 points into the 25% restrictions. You can't get even a naked greater daemon with no upgrades at less than 1800 points.


Magic has come a very long way, for the most part I cant complain because we arent playing cards anymore. Its also a little more balanced I suppose, though I dont really like the fact that if you roll double 6's it is also a miscast. Overall I dont think there was much wrong with the old system and feel they changed it just to change it.
Were you playing the same 7th ed system? ;) There was much that was wonky with magic and 8th is a great improvement, mitigating the horrific power magic-heavy armies had in 7th. A bit too random for my liking but it isn't terrible. There are a few really wonky spells but overall it works well.


WTF is with the new charging rules? The fact that my dwarfs can potentially charge 15 inches is RETARDED! The fact that my Bret knights can potentially charge only 10 inches is EVEN MORE RETARDED!
You'll... get used to it. It makes the game more dynamic. Honestly, I could do with a bit less variability, but it isn't that bad. Play a dozen games, it'll feel like second nature. Yes, sometimes a snake eyes on a dead cert charge will ruin your day, but usually you can organise things that a failed charge isn't the end of the world. It would be insane under 7th ed rules, but 8th ed rules it is okay. The trick is to manoeuver into such a position that if you are making a risky charge declaration you are in a good position whether you pass or fail the charge. A failed charge doesn't pull you too far out of position so often it isn't that bad.


In combat, not to excited about the fact that charging doesnt mean you strike first anymore. Also I'm a little uneasy about the whole "fighting from rear ranks" deal my NG spears fighting in 3 ranks is a little ridiculous, and will be even more so in a larger game when I line them 10x4 to fight in 4 ranks as a "horde."
This is GREAT. Seriously. This was what 7th desperately needed to make core troops the focus again.


I havent experienced the rules for war machines yet, but what is this about no more guessing? You just measure and role randomization dice? One of my favorite pastimes was dropping a dwarf stone in the middle of a unit and smirking the whole time as the opponents jaw dropped! The most impressive part playing a good gun-line general was their ability to guess with war machines, why take that skill away? Now anyone can do it...
Yep. Well, was your sense of depth perception really such a big part of being a good general? It was skill, yes, but not really vital and you can concentrate on manoeuver (unfortunately there's less of that!). More to the point the loss of partials and lack of guessing has made war machines more powerful. But not overpowered, because you can hit them quicker with longer charges, it's just sad that conventional missile fire has fallen so much by the wayside.


Im also uneasy about all the new little special rules that havent come up yet either, like "sniper" and the whole lot of crap in that section. If certain units or weapons can do something that fine, but it seems we will see them a lot more if they are being defined in the rules section.
Personally, I think it is a very good thing if we see more universal special rules and less unique special rules. This is, from a game design perspective, a very good idea. Unfortunately, we're seeing more of both recently (especially with books like skaven).

The real flaws of 8th are to my mind none of these. The rules encourage deathstars, unfortunately, and reduced unit count is reduced tactical options. There is an increased role of randomness that I don't like (two or three turns where your opponent rolls 11s and 12s for winds of magic and you roll 2s and 3s can really bias a game) and the increased number of reforms a unit can make, while realistic, renders many tactics like baiting and redirecting often useless. Building rules are poorly tested and terrain in general is badly designed - far too random (I once had half my 3000 army in model count destroyed by terrain!) and while 7th's terrain rules were dreck as they were essentially impassable, 8th's rules don't slow you down at all! This has swung the pendulum back the other way and now terrain is inconsequential, unless of course it tries to kill you. It doesn't even block LOS and hit modifiers are meaningless because noone uses missile troops other than war machines.

So, basically, all of your complaints really just need a bit of adjustment and you will probably come around to them. 8th has some really great changes, foremost bringing the basic troopers into the fight in a big way, which is excellent, and the focus on unit-unit interactions is good. That said, 8th is not perfect and some of the changes went too far. There are still plenty of tactics in the game, some old and some new but it is important to remember that it is a new game and your old 7th ed army isn't going to do well anymore. You'll need to redesign the army from the ground up and gear it for the new edition.

kaulem
10-12-2010, 15:57
WTF is with the new charging rules? The fact that my dwarfs can potentially charge 15 inches is RETARDED! The fact that my Bret knights can potentially charge only 10 inches is EVEN MORE RETARDED!


People also have to stop looking at the extremes, these will almost never happen. The laws of probability on 2d6 means that 70%-80% of your rolls will be between 5 & 9 (i'm approximating, it's too early to do the math).

On 3D6 for cavalry (taking the highest 2D6) it's soo improbable to get less then 6 that it will almost never happen.

When it does, imagine that your regiment leader failed to call the charge at the appropriate time or that the unit got bogged down in muddy terrain or some such. (I've never seen a field as flat and perfect as a gaming table)

It takes some getting used to, and sure, when you do roll snake eyes on a charge it's very frustrating, but it does add a little uncertanty to the game which makes things a llitle bit more exciting.

Also, as noted elsewhere, guessing ranges becomes very easy if you play regularly, it shouldnt be regarded as a skill. (I could land a catapult dead on the enemy general at every turn back in 5th ed Undead)

Caitsidhe
10-12-2010, 15:58
There is nothing wrong with the new charge rules. A Dwarf unit has a reasonable chance of making a 10" Charge. Anything over 10" means they are more likely to fail. The multiple failed charge attempts just mean LOTS of stand and shoot retaliations. Your Dwarf player quickly realizes that long range charge attempts are a bad idea. It is just about learning to manage risk. Cavalry, even when they roll awful, are still solid chargers.

sigur
10-12-2010, 17:48
Being able to gauge distances doesn't make you a great general, it just makes you a great carpenter.

This actually made me laugh in front of my computer screen and that happens incredibly seldomly when I read forums. :yes:

Anyhoo, I second the plea for playing more games. I also tend to be critical of games just from reading the rules or playing one game or something but once one starts figuring out suff and it doesn't feel so alien any more, maybe you'll like it better. And if you still don't like it then, you can always play 7th edition again. :)

Lars Porsenna
10-12-2010, 18:14
Re: guessing distances. The problem with the old "guess" mechanic is one that those who play RPGs call "Player Knowledge vs Character Knowledge." In effect, someone that has superior knowledge of distances will be much, much more effective than perhaps the BS of the warmachine crew would warrant. Similarly, someone with a pathetic sense of distance will be far, far less effective than the BS of the warmachine crew would warrant. Changing the rules to the current form makes the BS of the crew more important, and your knowlege of how wide your thumb-forefinger spread irrelevant... :)

Damon.

WarmbloodedLizard
10-12-2010, 18:17
I agree that it would have been much better to correct the negative parts of 7th instead of designing a completely new but mediocre edition. I didn't find 7th edition perfect, but when I thought about what I would change to make the edition perfect, there were always just minor changes in my mind.
now, when I think about making changes for 8th there are always rather big changes needed.

8th is certainly a playable edition and it is still fun but it's not really an improvement over 7th. It's just different (and when the newness has worn off in 1-2 years, it will be a worse edition)

8th suffers a lot from the "good idea but horrible execution"-syndrome.

panic_puppet
10-12-2010, 18:39
I'd assume that the guess range is gone for in part one very good reason: the realms of battle game board. If you can see the joins, it makes it easy enough to know the rough distances involved, thus making it very easy to tell the right distances. There's little to no point in having the guess range if you can have 24" sections marked out for you.

Kal Taron
10-12-2010, 21:29
Re: guessing distances. The problem with the old "guess" mechanic is one that those who play RPGs call "Player Knowledge vs Character Knowledge." In effect, someone that has superior knowledge of distances will be much, much more effective than perhaps the BS of the warmachine crew would warrant. Similarly, someone with a pathetic sense of distance will be far, far less effective than the BS of the warmachine crew would warrant. Changing the rules to the current form makes the BS of the crew more important, and your knowlege of how wide your thumb-forefinger spread irrelevant... :)

Damon.

You might confuse Fantasy with 40K here. IIRC BS doesn't mean anything for "guess" weapons in Fantasy.

My opinion of 8th is many good ideas but with lacklustre execution and some changes are simply mind-boggingly bad/stupid. (TLoS and terrain spring to mind.)

Sygerrik
10-12-2010, 21:38
8th edition is an improvement over 7th in every possible way. I've been playing since mid-5th and I can honestly say I like 8th the best of all the editions. 7th was the worst in my mind; it was absolutely about gaming the rules (marchblocking, wiping out the front rank of enemies with deathstar units and then auto-breaking or almost-auto-breaking, lurking just out of charge range and playing chicken etc). The new edition is more tactical because you have to actually think more than one step ahead-- you can't just swing your hammer unit around the table and win.

My one complaint is the imbalance of rules regarding buildings combined with Fozzrik's Folding Fortress to ensure you always get one where you want it. But that item is often banned in local tournaments and in any case does cost 100 points.

8th edition kind of makes me embarrassed that we were all playing 7th for so long. It's like watching videos of your old school plays from the third grade.

ShivanAngel
10-12-2010, 21:44
Yeah 8th edition is better in so many ways than 7th, and more accurate.

Also guess weapons taking skill? I could drop a rock right on a characters head 99% of the time, there were ways to making guess ranges stupid easy. I never called it skill.

Ex. Make your movement trays exactly X inches and use them as pseudo markers.

All that guess ranging was, was a barrier to new players wanting to play with war machines.

Charge rules are great, again no more lolz im half an inch out of your charge range, get ready to eat it to the face.

Lord Inquisitor
10-12-2010, 21:44
You might confuse Fantasy with 40K here. IIRC BS doesn't mean anything for "guess" weapons in Fantasy.
Largely true, but rock lobbers and similar weapons can now fire indirectly, which does have a BS component.

zhu bajie
10-12-2010, 21:45
mechanics aside, I've no idea what the random charge distance is supposed to model. I mean in the real world, a unit of troops is going to march or charge a fairly standard distance. There's no reason on earth, unless the winds of Chaos effect how fast people run, that this should be a randomly generated result.

The Rogue Trader style Deathworld Terrain is 100% awesome.

ShivanAngel
10-12-2010, 21:48
There are numerous things on a battlefield that can effect how far you charge.

High charge distance
With a roar from the champion the troops are inspired and run headlong into the enemy.

The troops are extremely inspired and give it 110% for that certain charge.

Low charge distance.

The Cavalry is charging headlong into a unit, one of the horses steps into a low spot and falls, bringing down some of the unit with it. The have to stop for a second to regroup.

theorox
10-12-2010, 21:48
What's so bad about random charges? With premeasuring it is not only more fair, but necessary to make sure 8th doesn't turn into shufflehammer like 7th was.

Dwarfs can charge 15" now, yes. They can also charge 6". I don't mind. Now charging actually involves tactics, wich it really did not in 7th. Cavalry always got the charge, 90% of the time broke the unit it charged if it was remotely killy, and then won. Now you actually have to plan what to charge, how big of a chance you have to charge and what to do if you fail the charge.

7th was 99% predictable if you could eyeball distances. I'm not a carpenter and in Sweden we use Centimeters, so i would always be at a disadvantage to someone who knew it better.

And for those of you who are about to say "But there was no need to introduce premeasuring!!" i will say this: It was in 7th as well. When you moved your units in the movement phase with your BfSP "red spankwhip" you would know how far 18" was automatically. There was no guessing. Even if you tried not to notice how far the tapemeasure reached when you measured for movement, you did subconsciously put it into the back of your mind. Not to mention triangulation and knowing how long your forearm was when you were stretching to move a unit. Premeasuring is not something new to 8th, except now it's actually in the rules.

And really, it takes more than one game to really decide on how you like it. My feeling after the relatively few games i've played is that i really like 8th, but maybe i will get sick of it? Who knows? I don't expect to though.

Theo

Gotrek
10-12-2010, 21:53
dwards can actualy chrge as low as 5" if they roll snake eyes

theorox
10-12-2010, 21:58
dwards can actualy chrge as low as 5" if they roll snake eyes

I'm pretty sure they only flee and pursue -1? o.0

Theo

mrtn
10-12-2010, 22:00
I'm pretty sure they only flee and pursue -1? o.0

Theo

Their movement is 3. 3+1+1=5

theorox
10-12-2010, 22:02
Their movement is 3. 3+1+1=5

*Facepalm* :D My brain is a bit tired tonight...i even play Dwarfs for Grugni's sake!

Theo

Lars Porsenna
10-12-2010, 22:09
mechanics aside, I've no idea what the random charge distance is supposed to model. I mean in the real world, a unit of troops is going to march or charge a fairly standard distance. There's no reason on earth, unless the winds of Chaos effect how fast people run, that this should be a randomly generated result.


My assumption is so that occasionally you can pull off maneuvers, like the Greeks at Marathon that charged almost 1 mile at the Persians...


Largely true, but rock lobbers and similar weapons can now fire indirectly, which does have a BS component.

Correct. But nonetheless, even in situations where BS doesn't directly affect the shot, it can be viewed as a level of "competence" of the crew, whether the mechanics has an impact or not.

Damon.

ShivanAngel
10-12-2010, 22:15
The only thing I dont like about 8th is some of the rules for steadfast...

The idea behind it is great, but imo, its a little to good.

There needs to be an easier way to break steadfast then just "more ranks".

Cavalry hitting the flank or rear, Mass casualties (like 25% of the unit gets wiped out in combat) or something else would make it a lot more balanced...

zhu bajie
10-12-2010, 22:35
There are numerous things on a battlefield that can effect how far you charge.

High charge distance
With a roar from the champion the troops are inspired and run headlong into the enemy.

The troops are extremely inspired and give it 110% for that certain charge.



Introducing an arbitary random roll doesn't model this event when the effect of command on troops is already modelled by Ld.

Would be easy to make a rule extending charge range by a 2d6 Ld roll, say add 2 inches for each point under the units Ld. That would be more coherent with your example.




Low charge distance.

The Cavalry is charging headlong into a unit, one of the horses steps into a low spot and falls, bringing down some of the unit with it. The have to stop for a second to regroup.

If you've ever watched a horse race, horses which fall often damage themselves and have sprains or worse. Occasionally the horses have to be put down after a fall. IMHO The Dangerous Terrain rules model the 'horse falls' situation better.

bonertron
10-12-2010, 22:41
I totally agree with Reese, and I have played a LOT of 8th edition. I still play it, because Warhammer is just fun, but compared to 7th, 8th is a childs game. Anyone can pick up an army and win.

Random charges are ridiculous, my infantry can be 8" away, and still not get a charge off? "Lets get em guys! Oh wait, lets just wait til next turn" Im prety sure a General would be able to calculate how far his troops would be able to run.

Magic is silly now. People complained before, because magic was OP, but now a game can be won on turn 1. One big spell is a tide turner. An example being High Elves - Army marches forward. Caster 1 casts "Steed of Shadows" on Teclis, moving him beside the opponents front lines. Teclis casts uber mega death vortex spell (I cant remember the name) and wipes out opponents army. Game over, turn 1. Some would say "The odds are so low", but really, they arent. 2D6 Power dice, plus D3 from Teclis, plus D3 from The banner of Sorcery. Toss 5 dice on each spell, odds are they will go off (Teclis with IF!!). The crappy thing is that there are far too many of these game winning spells out there. There shouldnt be ONE thing that can turn the tide of a game.

People worry about a miscast... HA! The old miscast chart was WAY worse. Who cares if I potentially lose 10 guys on a double 1 roll on the chart, the enemy is going to get DESTROYED by my big spell. Most of the stuff on that chrat doesnt even matter, because the spell that goes off will basically win the game.

I could go on forever about the guess ranges mixed with no partials, the retarded deathstar units that allow ZERO victory, unless they are destroyed completely, the uselessness of any leadership tests (with the BSB allowing re-rolls), the stupid scenarios that come up during a game with the placement of models that can "lock" units, disallowing them to charge, wheel or do anything but sit. Even the new scenery rules, like REALLY?? Whats the point? - My horde unit of 50 guys takes D6 ST4 hits from the trees. OH NO!! Random power dice? Silly, Ive played tons of games where myself or my opponent will get a max of 5PD all game, wheres the fun in that? Especially when the other guy gets 10. The list goes on.... I find it really hard to believe that true strategy gamers can accept this???

There are a few cool points, dont get me wrong. The horde rule is cool, the composition rules are nice, archers can now rank up... there ARE some better things, but on a whole, this is a terrible edition, compared to 7th.

In my eyes, a strategy game should be about strategy, and not random rolls for everything... and by everything, I mean EVERYTHING...

I wish GW would have put a little more thought into this book, because for how excited I was for it to come out, it sure ended up as a disappointment on the whole.

I will continue to play though, because it still beats the heck out of Risk!

Caitsidhe
10-12-2010, 22:54
mechanics aside, I've no idea what the random charge distance is supposed to model. I mean in the real world, a unit of troops is going to march or charge a fairly standard distance. There's no reason on earth, unless the winds of Chaos effect how fast people run, that this should be a randomly generated result.

The Rogue Trader style Deathworld Terrain is 100% awesome.

Random charge distances reflect variations in the landscape, not the models themselves. For example, that open ground might be rocky under that tall grass, there could be ditches, there could be unexpected winds which one does. There is a big difference between a golf course and a wild field (not to mention charging through a forest). The dice represent variation in terrain without us having to do lots of math. In short, it isn't an exact science. The speed of the models never change and they ALWAYS get that, hence a dwarf is slower than a cavalry unit. The unknown variable so life lie within the 2D6. It is a good thing.

R Man
10-12-2010, 23:00
Random charges are ridiculous, my infantry can be 8" away, and still not get a charge off? "Lets get em guys! Oh wait, lets just wait til next turn" Im prety sure a General would be able to calculate how far his troops would be able to run.


Actually no. A general would, in fact, probably have no real idea where his troops are, or what their condition is, where the enemy are or the ground conditions are in front of his troops. Its not like he can ask the enemy to halt their activities while he checks. In some ways random charge distances represent this, that orders may come when they are most inappropriate due to misunderstandings, lack of info or even just sloppiness.


Magic is silly now. People complained before, because magic was OP, but now a game can be won on turn 1. One big spell is a tide turner. An example being High Elves - Army marches forward. Caster 1 casts "Steed of Shadows" on Teclis, moving him beside the opponents front lines. Teclis casts uber mega death vortex spell (I cant remember the name) and wipes out opponents army. Game over, turn 1. Some would say "The odds are so low", but really, they arent. 2D6 Power dice, plus D3 from Teclis, plus D3 from The banner of Sorcery. Toss 5 dice on each spell, odds are they will go off (Teclis with IF!!). The crappy thing is that there are far too many of these game winning spells out there. There shouldnt be ONE thing that can turn the tide of a game.

Wait? Do you mean the votex spell that has a 1/3 of a chance of doing jack if successfully cast? And your assuming your opponent has no dispel capabilities. Dispel the Steed and poof, opportunity gone. Which can be achieved by a relatively simple scroll. Are there any examples of this actually happening? Any battle reports, anecdotes or weird tales describing these events? Or is it more of an urban legend?

logan054
10-12-2010, 23:13
8th ed is fun but i think some of the changes went to far, for me I think a far better game would something that was half way between the two, I am not a massive fan of striking in Int, one of the things I hated when they released the new HE book was it didn't matter who charged, now its exactly the same for my WoC :(

I like the random powerdice but I really don't like the big sells, in most cases its roll 6 dice, get a double 6 and destroy a unit :wtf:

I like the idea of random charges however I think they have taken it far far, 2D6+M is just to far and I don't really like cavalry don't actually charge all that much further than infantry, if roll the same dice it's only a difference of 3" in most cases.

I do really like how many magic items are in the core book, it really filled some gaps in my WoC books but I don't like how some of the 7th ed stuff interacts with it (MoT easy access to 3+ wardsave).

Erratas and FAQ's are real issue this edition, certain items have just been ignored, while not game breaking they remove some of the fun from the game (Book of Hoeth springs to mind) while some silly things have been changed (Stank T10?? daemonic mounts changed so they don't get a LoS roll).

I am not 100% sure about the MR changes, I need to play more games with them, I wonder if they the old system would have been fine this edition or something like dispels on X dice roll would have been better.

bonertron
10-12-2010, 23:14
Well R Man, you ask and you shall receive.

Not really a battle report, but here is how I won my last tournament with my High Elves. I played against a VC army, and two Daemon armies, for the win.

This was my strategy, please forgive me for not remembering spell names, as Im at work and dont have a great memory.

Lvl 2 caster took the staff that allowed me to choose my spells, so I chose the shadow spell that lowers strength by D3.

Teclis took lore of life.

Magic phase, I would get my 2D6 dice, D3 from Teclis, and D3 from my banner of sorcery, as well as channeling with both mages. Usually I ended up with 10-12 dice per magic phase.

Lvl 2 would throw 5-6 dice on the modify strength spell, which was either equal to or more dispel dice than my opponent had. Then Teclis would irresistably cast Dwellers from Below, and wipe a good portion of the unit. Rinse and repeat.

Game over.

All 3 games I did this. My swordmasters didnt even need to see combat, and I think only did in one game, just to clean up a few stragglers.

I even sunk the Great Unclean One in this same manner.

Even with the vortex/steed combo, its the same thing. If I roll a 3/4 for my two power dice, you get a whopping 4 dice, and I will end up with 10-12 PD. If I toss 5 dice on steed, chances are you wont dispel it.

Amnar
10-12-2010, 23:23
I don't really play WFB anymore. In 7th I felt like I make decisions, in 8th I feel like I'm just along for the ride, rolling dice...

zhu bajie
10-12-2010, 23:25
Random charge distances reflect variations in the landscape, not the models themselves. For example, that open ground might be rocky under that tall grass, there could be ditches, there could be unexpected winds which one does. There is a big difference between a golf course and a wild field (not to mention charging through a forest). The dice represent variation in terrain without us having to do lots of math. In short, it isn't an exact science. The speed of the models never change and they ALWAYS get that, hence a dwarf is slower than a cavalry unit. The unknown variable so life lie within the 2D6. It is a good thing.

Unit A charges across a field, rolls a 2.
Unit B charges across exactly the same field and rolls a 12.

You're saying the field has changed from a briar-patch to golf-course. This is a very poor model for how moving across terrain actually works.


My assumption is so that occasionally you can pull off maneuvers, like the Greeks at Marathon that charged almost 1 mile at the Persians...

I can understand why some troops (especially barbarian types) might 'Hulk up' and do a power-surge - perhaps like a Frenzy or Waaagh! Or how a standard or musician might create that effect. But not every troop type.

castlesmadeofsand
11-12-2010, 00:20
like the Greeks at Marathon that charged almost 1 mile at the Persians...

Damon.

really? where's the actual proof of this. it would take at least 5/6 mins to charge that distance... the ememy would see it coming... (wait for it)... a mile off!! boom boom!! :D

Torpedo Vegas
11-12-2010, 00:30
I like how the guys at Giant Fanatic handled TLoS, their own system (Systemic Line of Sight) or SLoS, for those not in the know, it basically assigns a model a height based on what is its, i.e. Infantry get a height of 1, Large Targets 3, etc. I think if GW implemented a system along those lines it would be the best of both worlds, though given a choice, I actually prefer TLoS as apposed to the 7th ed rules.

Lars Porsenna
11-12-2010, 00:42
really? where's the actual proof of this. it would take at least 5/6 mins to charge that distance... the ememy would see it coming... (wait for it)... a mile off!! boom boom!! :D

Herodotus.

Damon.

Lord Inquisitor
11-12-2010, 00:44
I like how the guys at Giant Fanatic handled TLoS, their own system (Systemic Line of Sight) or SLoS, for those not in the know, it basically assigns a model a height based on what is its, i.e. Infantry get a height of 1, Large Targets 3, etc. I think if GW implemented a system along those lines it would be the best of both worlds, though given a choice, I actually prefer TLoS as apposed to the 7th ed rules.
We had something like that in 4th ed 40K, and it had the same problems as 7th ed Fantasy had. This was simple: noone ever seemed to play by the actual rules. Now a fully abstract system would be great but we've not tried that yet. TLOS has the advantage that people can generally agree on what the rules are!

R Man
11-12-2010, 00:50
Well R Man, you ask and you shall receive.

Hey! That's a completely different combo to the one you noted before.

The Spell you are thinking of is The Enfeebling Foe and I admit this is a very good combination. But I do wonder if this is because players are not used to that combination when you fought at the tournament. Like did anyone bring a dispel scroll? Or has anyone tried the Feedback Scroll? Such an item would seriously threaten Teclis and a Mage without a Ward save.

The Spell The Dweller is also short ranged, 24 inches (most likely) which would limit your targets. So do you deploy your mages close together to get them to combine better or something of the like?

And I don't know much about the composition of the other forces. But I'd like to note that they tend to be expensive for what you get. Would this combo have the same affect against the Empire (Arcane Seal, Rod of Power) or possibly orcs (Staff of Sneaky Stealing, not to mention cheap wizards and shamans to channel with) for example? Would it have the same effect on armies not only with cheaper troops, but also with lots of artillery to back them up?

I think there are some questions left unanswered. Are there any other examples from other people? When did the fights occur? What were your opponents actions? Do you have any battle reports on the site? After a new army book is released there are always cries of cheese and such simply because players are not used to the new game. Could this be a case of the same?

Amnar
11-12-2010, 03:02
I just want to point out that most people on here would also call military history one of their academic hobbies. Warhammer has never been, and never will be, close to realistic. I think that's a good thing by the way.

Caitsidhe
11-12-2010, 03:11
I just want to point out that most people on here would also call military history one of their academic hobbies. Warhammer has never been, and never will be, close to realistic. I think that's a good thing by the way.

This I agree with. However, the person I'm debating with has decided to attack 8th Edition on the basis of several things, the reality of a random factor being one of them. This took us into discussing real battle for reference. He said there are "LOTS" that support his supposition. It is only polite that he cite them for us.

Psygon
11-12-2010, 04:18
I had a lot longer post typed out, but it blew up, so here is the short version:

Have hope that future individual army books will fix some of the problems, as the current armybooks were not made for 8th (Hell, some weren't made for 7th), and the Errata/Amendments that were released did nothing other than the minimum that needed to be done in order to patch a few holes and make the transition possible (read: not seemless).

So, faith in Jeremy Vetock and the March release of Orcs and Goblins!

Caitsidhe
11-12-2010, 04:25
I don't want anyone to get the idea that I am 100% in love with 8th Edition. I'm not. I think rough terrain should have continued to half movement, for example. I think the game lost some options with that change. I despise true line of sight. I think there are a LOT of things which need price adjustments or changes to make them viable in the new rules. Overall, however, I do think the game improved.

unheilig
11-12-2010, 04:43
i really think the radical changes to 8th warranted a "ravening hordes" style re-do of the armies.

i really think 8th may have to stay on the shelf.

Torpedo Vegas
11-12-2010, 05:24
I try to stay pragmatic. I find its better to adjust to the new rules than to go online and bitch about how the game got ruined. Charges are random now? Deal with it. Magic is central to the game? Deal with it. Throwing a fit and crying "But my tactics don't work anymore, so that means all tactics are gone!" Seems like a cop out to me. The closest thing I can compare this to is when 4E DnD came out. I didn't care for it at all, but neither did I try and convince everyone that the game sucked. Of course, this is solely my oppinion, and if anyone presents a convincing rebuttal I'll gladly eat my ass.

UberBeast
11-12-2010, 05:28
I try to stay pragmatic. I find its better to adjust to the new rules than to go online and bitch about how the game got ruined. Charges are random now? Deal with it. Magic is central to the game? Deal with it. Throwing a fit and crying "But my tactics don't work anymore, so that means all tactics are gone!" Seems like a cop out to me. The closest thing I can compare this to is when 4E DnD came out. I didn't care for it at all, but neither did I try and convince everyone that the game sucked. Of course, this is solely my oppinion, and if anyone presents a convincing rebuttal I'll gladly eat my ass.

What is pragmatic about giving advice to someone who you know isn't going to listen to you?:p

Torpedo Vegas
11-12-2010, 05:58
What is pragmatic about giving advice to someone who you know isn't going to listen to you?:p
If I came off as sounding like I was offering advice, let me make it clear, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, I was just stating my opinion.

Voss
11-12-2010, 06:44
mechanics aside, I've no idea what the random charge distance is supposed to model. I mean in the real world, a unit of troops is going to march or charge a fairly standard distance. There's no reason on earth, unless the winds of Chaos effect how fast people run, that this should be a randomly generated result.

Actually, there are a lot of reasons for this, the biggest of which fall under the category of 'we use a flat gaming table because it saves us massive headaches', but its a complete abstraction. Real terrain isn't rarely like that, even when it appears so.

For example, many observers described the terrain for Pickett's charge at Gettysburg as 'perfectly flat', at least until you get to the ridge line, and it looks it, from a distance. If you walk it, however, you find its anything but. There are lots of dips and swells and small hills that aren't apparent to the naked eye, and essentially made a complete hash out of the Confederate charge on the third day of the battle.

Add in problems of giving and receiving orders that any pre-modern military has to deal with (and I'm not going to get into), plus motivation, training, condition, fatigue, morale and a hundred other factors and it doesn't seem like an unreasonable and unrealistic thing.

Caitsidhe
11-12-2010, 14:07
Actually, there are a lot of reasons for this, the biggest of which fall under the category of 'we use a flat gaming table because it saves us massive headaches', but its a complete abstraction. Real terrain isn't rarely like that, even when it appears so.

For example, many observers described the terrain for Pickett's charge at Gettysburg as 'perfectly flat', at least until you get to the ridge line, and it looks it, from a distance. If you walk it, however, you find its anything but. There are lots of dips and swells and small hills that aren't apparent to the naked eye, and essentially made a complete hash out of the Confederate charge on the third day of the battle.

Add in problems of giving and receiving orders that any pre-modern military has to deal with (and I'm not going to get into), plus motivation, training, condition, fatigue, morale and a hundred other factors and it doesn't seem like an unreasonable and unrealistic thing.


EXACTLY. Well said.

UberBeast
11-12-2010, 15:04
Actually, there are a lot of reasons for this, the biggest of which fall under the category of 'we use a flat gaming table because it saves us massive headaches', but its a complete abstraction. Real terrain isn't rarely like that, even when it appears so.

For example, many observers described the terrain for Pickett's charge at Gettysburg as 'perfectly flat', at least until you get to the ridge line, and it looks it, from a distance. If you walk it, however, you find its anything but. There are lots of dips and swells and small hills that aren't apparent to the naked eye, and essentially made a complete hash out of the Confederate charge on the third day of the battle.

Add in problems of giving and receiving orders that any pre-modern military has to deal with (and I'm not going to get into), plus motivation, training, condition, fatigue, morale and a hundred other factors and it doesn't seem like an unreasonable and unrealistic thing.

While you are correct on the realistic point of view, this truthful assessment of certain battlefield conditions runs into a little trouble with the new random movement charge.

I simply find it strange that a unit can move freely and at a measured pace turn after turn in the movement phase, through terrain that is already indicated on the table. They can even march freely up to an inch away from their opponents, but as soon as a charge is declared they fall into some sort of random time-warp where nobody knows how far they will move.

It just doesn't have any continuity, and it seems like a clunky rule designed out of a desire to change a mechanic that already worked well and was a great deal more realistic (if flawed).

Surely there could have been a better way to make the charge phase more interesting, such as adding in some of the factors you mention like command or motivation?

SlayerMonka
11-12-2010, 16:20
Hey all,

I thought I would add my 2 pence worth to the melting pot.

When I was hearing the rumours of 8ed, I was dishearted with what I was hearing. Saying this I duely paid for the big red rule book. iOncw I recieved a copy of it. Sat and read the thing cover to cover twice. having the read the rules, I was ready for a game of 8ed.


A lot has changed, tactics as a direct result tactic have changed. I enjoy and like the new random charge ranges. Well think about it, a unit of skaven slaves trying to charge a large monster (ie hydra), are they really like to go hurling off like a firework factory on fire, or more smolder like damp sock. On the other hand a unit of chaos knights, are going to happy charge a block of night gobbos spearmen. Though I few make might have seen the devasting effect of the drug crazed fantatic, and slow the charge down slightly.

Quickly while on the topic of movement, marching in my mind is very different of charging. With charging you are preparing, psyching your self up for the on coming combat. Where with marching to you are jogging toward a point or objetive you need to claim.

I admit the TLoS rules are a little strange in fantasty, where as they work well in 40K.

Everyone complaints about the most of the 6th spell of all the lores, being broken and in foul move winning the game. Saying that I have using dwelllers below a few times, and found its a bit blur, pish, same with the purple sun of death as well. Not the great. I have more use from the hexes and bluff in the lore of heaven and shadows. (I play WoC and dwarfs)

Terrian;

I am like the new terrian rules. Still trying to get my head round all the rules of them. I like the fact that wood are not just a quick sand trap for anything that doesnt shrimish. I like the fact in a fantasty world you have fantastical terrian.

I would admit there are a few things that need correcting. Though on the whole the game has taken step in the right direction. Admitly fantasty maybe not be for everyone. I have no interested in Flames of War which a fair few of my gaming circle is getting into.

Though remember the effect of rose tinted glasses. Everything seems better from the past. Ie the cartoons we grew up watching. Now tracking some down on youtube just make to want to cry. Destorying that childhood remember.

Me and a friend decide to break out and dust off the old rules and codexes for 2ed 40K. I was field a guard army, my mate had nids. After the first round of combat with stealers involved which took about 40 minutes to work out. we decide to call it there. Oh the problems with 30 odd stealer hits 50 odd guard.

Dont get me wrong, we have played 2ed a couple of other times. Though just with much smaller points. and have enjoyed it. Though the experince need make me be very thankful for the newer, slimmer and quicker to play rules.

theorox
11-12-2010, 16:35
Well R Man, you ask and you shall receive.

Not really a battle report, but here is how I won my last tournament with my High Elves. I played against a VC army, and two Daemon armies, for the win.

This was my strategy, please forgive me for not remembering spell names, as Im at work and dont have a great memory.

Lvl 2 caster took the staff that allowed me to choose my spells, so I chose the shadow spell that lowers strength by D3.

Teclis took lore of life.

Magic phase, I would get my 2D6 dice, D3 from Teclis, and D3 from my banner of sorcery, as well as channeling with both mages. Usually I ended up with 10-12 dice per magic phase.

Lvl 2 would throw 5-6 dice on the modify strength spell, which was either equal to or more dispel dice than my opponent had. Then Teclis would irresistably cast Dwellers from Below, and wipe a good portion of the unit. Rinse and repeat.

Game over.

All 3 games I did this. My swordmasters didnt even need to see combat, and I think only did in one game, just to clean up a few stragglers.

I even sunk the Great Unclean One in this same manner.

Even with the vortex/steed combo, its the same thing. If I roll a 3/4 for my two power dice, you get a whopping 4 dice, and I will end up with 10-12 PD. If I toss 5 dice on steed, chances are you wont dispel it.

See, that's not the fault of the game itself, but of you playing in a competative tournie with an overpowered special character and using a combo that, while undeniably effective, was dull and boring to both you and your opponent.

;)

Theo

bonertron
11-12-2010, 17:02
Theo, my point is just that stuff like that shouldnt be able to happen. It makes me wonder how they even play tested this book. I generally don't play cheeseball lists like that, but I came up with that idea and had no idea how effective it would be. Heck, lizards can easily pull off some pretty crazy stuff too, so can dark elves... Basically any army that can use the lores out of the book can do some variation of a really terrible spell combo, all the lores have them.

Here is another example of something not thought out by GW:
2 units of 10 skirmishing skinks
Slaan on a stegadon
1 unit of 110 skinks with 10 kroxigors in the 2nd rank

The skirmishing skinks line up in front of the deathstar, making shooting at the deathstar at a -2, and the slann in the back, also at a -2, but has some stupid banner that gives another -1. So essentially, you get zero victory until that whole unit is dead, and you cannot kill a kroxigor until all of the skinks are dead, because you pull casualties off the back now, never exposing the Krox. Did GW never encounter this during their "extensive" play testing? I mean, this unit would easily be wiped by one of the games overpowered spells (initiative test!!!!), but for someone playing dwarves (which I was), this is impossible. On a side note, I'm not sure how shooting through a FOREST grants soft cover, but having a skink in front of a stegadon will grant hard cover. Well thought out GW!

Also, there could be some stupid spelling mistakes in this, and for that I apologize, I'm on my iPhone and it's autocorrect is FAIL.

Torpedo Vegas
11-12-2010, 17:18
snip
I don't think pointing out the potential for abuse in 8th ed as a valid crititism, as 7th ed had just as much potential for down right stupid lists. Now, does 8th ed favor certain builds? **** yeah, and there is where we find some balance problems, but I think that could be fixed if we got some new army books.

Lars Porsenna
11-12-2010, 17:25
I think that "deathstar" of 110 Skinks and 10 Krox would be vulnerable to stone throwers firing indirectly, or indeed any template weapons...

Damon.

yabbadabba
11-12-2010, 17:32
Here is another example of something not thought out by GW:
2 units of 10 skirmishing skinks
Slaan on a stegadon
1 unit of 110 skinks with 10 kroxigors in the 2nd rank
The skirmishing skinks line up in front of the deathstar, making shooting at the deathstar at a -2, and the slann in the back, also at a -2, but has some stupid banner that gives another -1. So essentially, you get zero victory until that whole unit is dead, and you cannot kill a kroxigor until all of the skinks are dead, because you pull casualties off the back now, never exposing the Krox. Did GW never encounter this during their "extensive" play testing? I mean, this unit would easily be wiped by one of the games overpowered spells (initiative test!!!!), but for someone playing dwarves (which I was), this is impossible. On a side note, I'm not sure how shooting through a FOREST grants soft cover, but having a skink in front of a stegadon will grant hard cover. Well thought out GW! Its not impossible for Dwarves. For a start any war machines and infantry on hills would spend all day happily banging away at that unit. It won't be long before those 110 Skinks aren't too good looking. The two units of skirmishing skinks are unimportant and Dwarf Infantry units will quite happily go toe to toe with that skink unit, allowing some dwarf characters to run around and finsh off whatever the canons had left of the Slann on a Stegadon. Add in some terrain advantages and all of a sudden its not such a great army after all. A one trick pony that would scare someone with a one trick pony army. Edit: A Flame Canon would have some use!

As for my Empire - mortars would have a field day.

Problem with such armies is that they tend to fall down hard in unfavourable circumstances and don't have enough flexibility to cope.

@Lars Porsenna - big up Herodotus.

re: Scenery. The fantastical terrain is an option, not compulsory. However some of the changes do fit in with GW's design philosophy of fast fun and furious as well as their move towards an exclusive 11-18 year old market.

bonertron
11-12-2010, 17:37
I'm just worried that when we get some new army books (at this rate there should be about 4 of them before 9th edition), that they are going to be just as ridiculous. I can picture it now, my Vampire Counts will have a 24 cast spell that will kill your unit outright, and turn them into my zombie slaves! If they didn't make something like that, they would be horribly underpowered as compared to anyone who has access to all of the spells in the rule book.

I played hundreds of games in 7th with my vast variety of armies and against an even more vast variety of opponents. I've never seen so many "I win button" armies, as I have in 8th. Mostly due to magic. You can't dispel scroll an IF, and on 6 dice, you have a 25% chance of rolling double 6s, and potentially winning the game.

People used to complain about Daemon magic phases, how they could have 2000 point lists with 24 power dice, and spells coming at you from everywhere. Now its 6 power dice and one spell that will do WAY more damage.

The biggest disappointment for me is that the magic phase was my faaaavorite phase. I bought armies specifically for the magic. Now it's just too overboard, and magic has just got boring. It relies on your 2d6 roll. I can have an army with 4 casters in it, but if I roll a 3 on 2 dice, my opponent with one lvl 2 caster will out magic me in his phase with a better PD roll. I guess I just preferred the dozen little spells going off, as compared to the one big one that wins the game.

I can't understand how people complained about magic in 7th and are not in 8th??

Torpedo Vegas
11-12-2010, 17:41
I can't understand how people complained about magic in 7th and are not in 8th??
We got used to it. You build your army to have good counter-magic potential, and if your entire list falls apart because one unit gets nuked then it obviously wasn't a well balanced list.

Feefait
11-12-2010, 17:52
The fact that you can call yourself an 'older gamer' and still have the lack of maturity to use the word retarded - and still expect to be taken seriously is the funniest thing about this post. Go play 7th with yourself then.

yabbadabba
11-12-2010, 17:53
I ma sorry mate but these comments are not rational
I'm just worried that when we get some new army books (at this rate there should be about 4 of them before 9th edition), that they are going to be just as ridiculous. I can picture it now, my Vampire Counts will have a 24 cast spell that will kill your unit outright, and turn them into my zombie slaves! If they didn't make something like that, they would be horribly underpowered as compared to anyone who has access to all of the spells in the rule book. Based on what? You have no evidence to support this. If this had come after the first army book and there was an enormous, cheap "I WIN" button in the middle of it then yes, I would agree with you. But at the moment this is an irrational and unproven fear.


I played hundreds of games in 7th with my vast variety of armies and against an even more vast variety of opponents. I've never seen so many "I win button" armies, as I have in 8th. Mostly due to magic. You can't dispel scroll an IF, and on 6 dice, you have a 25% chance of rolling double 6s, and potentially winning the game. You have never been able to stop IF unless with some unique special character magic items, so no change there. More importantly now there is a potential downside to IF. Your argument is based on something that is unlikely to happen statistically (and btw is a great argument against death stars - one uber spell and good night army). There are currently far less "I win" buttons in 8th than 7th - for example almost all infantry in 7th was for SCR as striking back in combat was never going to happen - but we will have to wait for the first army book to truly see what is going on.


People used to complain about Daemon magic phases, how they could have 2000 point lists with 24 power dice, and spells coming at you from everywhere. Now its 6 power dice and one spell that will do WAY more damage............
...The biggest disappointment for me is that the magic phase was my faaaavorite phase. I bought armies specifically for the magic. Now it's just too overboard, and magic has just got boring. It relies on your 2d6 roll. I can have an army with 4 casters in it, but if I roll a 3 on 2 dice, my opponent with one lvl 2 caster will out magic me in his phase with a better PD roll. I guess I just preferred the dozen little spells going off, as compared to the one big one that wins the game. Again, the big one doesn't always win the game. IR can cause more harm to you than your opponent. You also have to roll for the spell to begin with!


I can't understand how people complained about magic in 7th and are not in 8th?? They have complained about both. There are plenty of threads on here about it. They were complaining about magic when we had cards, they were complaining about magic when you could design your own magic items with greater death runes....

I appreciate you have concerns. Having played hundreds of games across 7 editions of this game I have found that you cannot get the full picture of how the game will work out until 2 years and a handful of army books in.

Torpedo Vegas
11-12-2010, 18:05
The fact that you can call yourself an 'older gamer' and still have the lack of maturity to use the word retarded - and still expect to be taken seriously is the funniest thing about this post. Go play 7th with yourself then.
Age and maturity are not dependent on each other.

zhu bajie
11-12-2010, 20:12
I enjoy and like the new random charge ranges. Well think about it, a unit of skaven slaves trying to charge a large monster (ie hydra), are they really like to go hurling off like a firework factory on fire, or more smolder like damp sock. On the other hand a unit of chaos knights, are going to happy charge a block of night gobbos spearmen. Though I few make might have seen the devasting effect of the drug crazed fantatic, and slow the charge down slightly.


Both example of where the psychology rules are already in place and would be better employed than random charge distances. Slaves would suffer from fear from large monsters, and knights have already the advantage of being mounted.

Nobody is saying Warhammer has to be realistic, it just has to coherently model what it is trying to simulate in order for it to be a good game. Random charging distances is simply a bad model, a bad game design decision. Every reason I've seen given for random charge distances already has a game mechanic in place to cover those occurrences. I can only imagine the design team thought 'hey, we need more dice rolls, where can we add them?'

The simple answer is to stop treating the rulebook like a law-book and accept that new rules are options. Sure for a tourney at your local GW you'll have to stick to the holy scripture, but otherwise just say to your opponents "random charging is silly, all units charge at 2xM, no pre-measuring". Job done, game fixed, play on!

Darkangeldentist
11-12-2010, 22:00
So far I've only a couple of minor bugbears about 8th, power dice generation being too random (I think 3 D6 pick the two highest would have been much better) and the rules for buildings. The encouragement towards deathstar forces is also a bit annoying.

I do like the random charge distances and really find it a bit frustrating to hear so many people complain about it so much. More than anything it's made charging a lot more interesting and finally slower armies aren't left knowing they have to take enemy charges all the time. Whilst the shuffleling that occurred between units/armies with the same movement rates was frustrating it was nothing compared to the futility of trying to maneuvre against an enemy that was faster than you. The bait and flee tactics of fast cavalry were diabolical with some armies and just plain unfair in some cases.

R Man
11-12-2010, 22:33
Problem with such armies is that they tend to fall down hard in unfavourable circumstances and don't have enough flexibility to cope.

I would also like to point out that armies who's power comes from smaller shooty units (like Empire) are much harder to stop and uber spells are limited in power against such targets. For example, the Teclis combo will cost about 700 points. That's pretty expensive combo (you can buy a lot of crossbowmen with that!) and since Teclis must come at least within 24 to cast the spell, he will get blasted. So what if he fries a unit of Skaven? To make the combo pay, he needs to do it 3 times, without being annihilated by ratlings, Jezzils and Warp Lightning Cannons first.

A similar case for Empire. Teclis has a big round target on his head that will be aimed at by every mortar in the Empire army. We can say the same thing about Orcs. Shooting sucks really, but they can get a lot of war machines for a low price. Notice two things about the armies fought in the example: Daemons and Undead, no shooting. And their troops are expensive so it's hard for them to take losses. Since we know nothing of what comprised their lists, it is hard to make any actual judgments.

So I would say that as soon as people become aware of what can happen, they will develop ways to stop it. I think that we might still be trying to figure out what is happening in 8th edition, so people are taking things to their obvious conclusion (deathstars), not noticing magic combo's (because spells were either cast and they killed or they weren't and didn't) and forgetting things (stop attacks don't affect cavalry right?).

Lord Inquisitor
11-12-2010, 23:24
Well R Man, you ask and you shall receive.

Not really a battle report, but here is how I won my last tournament with my High Elves. I played against a VC army, and two Daemon armies, for the win.

This was my strategy, please forgive me for not remembering spell names, as Im at work and dont have a great memory.

Lvl 2 caster took the staff that allowed me to choose my spells, so I chose the shadow spell that lowers strength by D3.

Teclis took lore of life.

Magic phase, I would get my 2D6 dice, D3 from Teclis, and D3 from my banner of sorcery, as well as channeling with both mages. Usually I ended up with 10-12 dice per magic phase.

Lvl 2 would throw 5-6 dice on the modify strength spell, which was either equal to or more dispel dice than my opponent had. Then Teclis would irresistably cast Dwellers from Below, and wipe a good portion of the unit. Rinse and repeat.

Game over.

All 3 games I did this. My swordmasters didnt even need to see combat, and I think only did in one game, just to clean up a few stragglers.

I even sunk the Great Unclean One in this same manner.

Even with the vortex/steed combo, its the same thing. If I roll a 3/4 for my two power dice, you get a whopping 4 dice, and I will end up with 10-12 PD. If I toss 5 dice on steed, chances are you wont dispel it.

The question here is this:

Are the 8th ed mechanics unbalanced or is it (a) Teclis, (b) banner of sorcery, (c) Loremaster, all of which were designed for the previous version of Warhammer? If you took away these items and teclis, would Helf magic be overpowered and abusable?

I'm not of the opinion that the sun shine's from 8th ed's posterior, there are many things that annoy me. That said, I think there were some terrific changes and removing the total power dice available for wizards from the number of wizards was an excellent decision and works so much better than I would have ever have expected although I feel it is a little overly random for my liking. If you play with armies that don't have (a) Loremaster, (b) power scroll, (c) cupped hands, (d) access to additional power dice, the system works rather well. There are a few wacky spells (we all know Purple Sun was not the best spell they've ever thought of), but generally it works pretty well. The problems start with particular items and abilities from 7th ed books that were designed for the old magic system and cause issues for the new. Abilities that add power/dispel dice (e.g. priest spam), excessive dispel runes (dwarfs), guaranteed irrisistibles (teclis, powerscroll*), miscast avoidance (cupped hands) all screw up the system because the system is different to how it was when it was created. (* The exception being powerscroll, that's just a really badly thought out item!) This doesn't mean the system is bad because items designed for the old system work too well. It's a shame these characters and items weren't errata'd (given the extensive errata we saw including things like the rather unnecessary change to Steam Tanks)

Now, in the coming months we'll see the first 8th ed army books and we'll see how things look then. Not that I'm really expecting supreme balance I've no doubt that we'll see a bunch of items that are overpowered and that don't have the excuse of saying "ah, well, these were designed for the previous edition" (like the powerscroll) ... but let's give them the benefit of the doubt.

The bearded one
12-12-2010, 03:29
Just for the record to all the "dwarfs charging 15" ? Wtf that's ridiculous" -sayers everywhere: In gameterms the difference in movement between dwarfs and men, goblins, saurus etc. is only 1 inch, and come on, even zombies shuffle 4" :p

Do you look up like 'huh, that's weird' when any of those charge 16"? No. But dwarfs 15"? Stupid. Well fluffwise the dwarfs are well equipped to make a lengthy charge without faltering. Stamina far exceeding that of other races, discipline, motivation, leadership, coördinated. I dunno about you but dwarfs making a charge slightly less then humans and such can isn't really that weird.

Remember the 1/2" standoffs of 7th edition ( If you do not, your memory must be clouded by the excessive use of cavalry, dragonlords and monsters to even remember any infantry in there )? To be honest that's a lot sillier. Apparently troops, even motivated, wellrested athletic elites cannot bring themselves to charging 1/2" further.

Some of the 8th edition changes might've been a bit over the top, but I think that without the megaspells the 8th edition magic system would have been more applauded and if some small adjustments and restrictions were made a bit halfway between 7th and 8th edition it could have been the best of all.

For example lvl1 wizards using dice 6, just implement a maximum, although one a bit more relaxed than 7th. Level +2 dice max. So a lvl4 can use 6 dice like he can now, but lvl 1's only 3 etc.
Let steadfast be cancelled when a unit is disrupted from a flank/rear charge etc. Make the random charge 2xM + D6 etc. Such 'midway tweaks' to changes that are regarded as over the top ( although I like almost all the changes ).

For those people suggesting that forests should half movement again? I'm glad they got rid of it. If there was a forest noone in his right mind would send anything into it that is not skirmish. You will be stuck there half the game, and you will be hit by forests effects while in there. Imagine being in a venomthicket for 3 turns. 3 dangerous terrain tests for each model in the unit. That's statistically 50% dead when you're out. In 7th a forest was basically an impassible barrier of concrete and barbed wire

One of the things I like most about 8ths impact is that it made infantry usefull again after several editions going from herohammer to cavalry/monsterhammer, finally we have meatshieldhammer

Lord Inquisitor
12-12-2010, 05:50
For those people suggesting that forests should half movement again? I'm glad they got rid of it. If there was a forest noone in his right mind would send anything into it that is not skirmish. You will be stuck there half the game, and you will be hit by forests effects while in there. Imagine being in a venomthicket for 3 turns. 3 dangerous terrain tests for each model in the unit. That's statistically 50% dead when you're out. In 7th a forest was basically an impassible barrier of concrete and barbed wire


I like most of your suggested changes, however on terrain we differ in opinion. I agree that 7th's terrain rules were awful but at least they encouraged tactical play. I just mosey right through terrain these days and the only disincentive is that occasionally it will kill my troops and run off giggling.

There is a middle ground between "either impassable to most troops or open to skirmishers" and "yay open terrain to all units". Something simple like "no marching through terrain" would do nicely. Indeed rivers have this rule and I find that rivers are a really interesting feature to have on the table for this reason.

Toshiro
12-12-2010, 08:34
I love 8th edition even though I think there are some balance issues.

I really can't figure out why some people hate random charges though. Things finally happen! in 7th it could go 3-4 turns without a single battle because everyone just hung back ½ inch outside of charge reach. Now we finally see some combat, and combat that lasts more then one turn and have more then 1 casualty. :D

oldschoolmonk
12-12-2010, 08:48
I think the new rules of 8E have a lot of potential to make the game funner for both parties. The only real complaint I would have is the watchtower scenario can be abused by some units too hard to kick out (although this hasn't been an issue yet). We've had a load of balanced, bloody, give and take, fun games with 8E. I don't think we would have had the same if we were still playing 7E with our current army balance: Dark Elves, Bretonnians, Lizards, and Chaos.

Guessing ranges shouldn't be the determining factor for a battle won or lost. The decisions of where firepower is allocated or where troops are sent should be the deciding factor. Magic will wreck you if you fail to kill wizards and don't have any scrolls to protect from those big spells, but maybe less so in a tournament where everyone packs a power scroll (still, many of our armies are resistant to the big 3 spells). The new game has much more potential to be a fun and enjoyable experience (I'm not wiping out armies without taking any losses with my DE for example).

Daniel36
12-12-2010, 09:03
However, Lords still have NO PLACE in a game under 2000 points.


Sorry if this has been pointed out already, but it is my understanding that all the Army Book restrictions still apply, regardless of the new percentage system. So you can't even get a Lord under 2000 points.

Do correct me if I am wrong.

I agree somewhat with you on the charge, but it makes the game a lot more tense. I really like the new edition and think it's miles better than 7th, but it's all down to a volatile mix of personal taste and player demographic, I guess.

theorox
12-12-2010, 09:39
I have to say, i really like random charges! I don't see a problem at all. They work.

Yesterday my brother's Ironbreakers charged my boarboy Big'Uns, wrecking my whole battleplan with a 13" roll. (Well, a large part of it.) Still, it was cool. They annihilated me in 2 rounds of combat. That doesn't matter. They had a sporting chance of charging, my brother took it and it payed off. This is so much tactical than 7th, where if i knew that the distance from my wrist to my elbow was 8-10"i could just imagine laying my arm on the table. Was that only me? ;) He would never have charged then.

Theo

theorox
12-12-2010, 09:41
Sorry if this has been pointed out already, but it is my understanding that all the Army Book restrictions still apply, regardless of the new percentage system. So you can't even get a Lord under 2000 points.

Do correct me if I am wrong.

I agree somewhat with you on the charge, but it makes the game a lot more tense. I really like the new edition and think it's miles better than 7th, but it's all down to a volatile mix of personal taste and player demographic, I guess.

You are wrong. The Errata (Amandaments) tells us to ignore the armylist selection page(s) in the Armybooks and only use the pages in the Warhammer Rulebook. :)

Theo

KalEf
12-12-2010, 09:45
I totally agree with Reese, and I have played a LOT of 8th edition. I still play it, because Warhammer is just fun, but compared to 7th, 8th is a childs game. Anyone can pick up an army and win.

Random charges are ridiculous, my infantry can be 8" away, and still not get a charge off? "Lets get em guys! Oh wait, lets just wait til next turn" Im prety sure a General would be able to calculate how far his troops would be able to run.

Magic is silly now. People complained before, because magic was OP, but now a game can be won on turn 1. One big spell is a tide turner. An example being High Elves - Army marches forward. Caster 1 casts "Steed of Shadows" on Teclis, moving him beside the opponents front lines. Teclis casts uber mega death vortex spell (I cant remember the name) and wipes out opponents army. Game over, turn 1. Some would say "The odds are so low", but really, they arent. 2D6 Power dice, plus D3 from Teclis, plus D3 from The banner of Sorcery. Toss 5 dice on each spell, odds are they will go off (Teclis with IF!!). The crappy thing is that there are far too many of these game winning spells out there. There shouldnt be ONE thing that can turn the tide of a game.

People worry about a miscast... HA! The old miscast chart was WAY worse. Who cares if I potentially lose 10 guys on a double 1 roll on the chart, the enemy is going to get DESTROYED by my big spell. Most of the stuff on that chrat doesnt even matter, because the spell that goes off will basically win the game.

I could go on forever about the guess ranges mixed with no partials, the retarded deathstar units that allow ZERO victory, unless they are destroyed completely, the uselessness of any leadership tests (with the BSB allowing re-rolls), the stupid scenarios that come up during a game with the placement of models that can "lock" units, disallowing them to charge, wheel or do anything but sit. Even the new scenery rules, like REALLY?? Whats the point? - My horde unit of 50 guys takes D6 ST4 hits from the trees. OH NO!! Random power dice? Silly, Ive played tons of games where myself or my opponent will get a max of 5PD all game, wheres the fun in that? Especially when the other guy gets 10. The list goes on.... I find it really hard to believe that true strategy gamers can accept this???

There are a few cool points, dont get me wrong. The horde rule is cool, the composition rules are nice, archers can now rank up... there ARE some better things, but on a whole, this is a terrible edition, compared to 7th.

In my eyes, a strategy game should be about strategy, and not random rolls for everything... and by everything, I mean EVERYTHING...

I wish GW would have put a little more thought into this book, because for how excited I was for it to come out, it sure ended up as a disappointment on the whole.

I will continue to play though, because it still beats the heck out of Risk!

I (and my gaming group) agree with pretty much all of this. 7th seemed to have more "in game" opportunities to change the combat effectiveness of your (and your enemy's)troops, and harsher consequences for faulty maneuvers. But in fairness, 8th has a great "lets have a good time" flavor to it. There may have been an almost chess level of jockeying around for the charge in 7th, and it did slow things down (even if i liked it). Also, where as 8th definitely made some stuff super broken... it also made all the CRAP way better!

@the beard, That's the kind of thing people who are lamenting over 7, were looking for.



Unit A charges across a field, rolls a 2.
Unit B charges across exactly the same field and rolls a 12.

You're saying the field has changed from a briar-patch to golf-course. This is a very poor model for how moving across terrain actually works.
I can understand why some troops (especially barbarian types) might 'Hulk up' and do a power-surge - perhaps like a Frenzy or Waaagh! Or how a standard or musician might create that effect. But not every troop type.

I'm with you. but If GW made a new rule saying "models with movement values over 5 count as flying on the charge" and gave no explanation, you could expect these responses to your complaint.
A: that is ridiculous. I wonder how playtesting showed that to be necessary?
B: they should fire someone at GW! that is not realistic :wtf:
C: Oh didn't you know? in the warhammer world, the winds of chaos blow fast moving creatures upwards.
D: 11bc in Egypt there was a small "uprising". In this uprising, there was a sand storm and some of the the horse riders were thrown onto the enemy... so this is pretty accurate in real life.
E: well I guess these guys fly now :eyebrows:

So weather its magical bogs opening up and closing all the time, or a veteran general has no Idea how fast people can run, or some obscure thing in history, or that lots of times people can run way faster than the elves and horses in the warhammer world... justifications are made up, and minds are closed off. BTW, if I liked it, I would say it was a fun/fair game dynamic and it still factored movement in. and that's whats important to me.

The bearded one
12-12-2010, 14:19
@ KalEf: I wouldn't say it is or isn't realistic, but that it's unbalanced :)
With this system both sides have a pretty even chance for charging. 7th edition did heavily favour anything with high movement since charge = win. If you have khorne/slaanesh daemons, skaven or elves of any kind, then you could charge a substantial distance further than all the M4 and M3 sloggers. This advantage wasn't included in pointcosts as far as I see, except with cavalry.


I like most of your suggested changes, however on terrain we differ in opinion. I agree that 7th's terrain rules were awful but at least they encouraged tactical play. I just mosey right through terrain these days and the only disincentive is that occasionally it will kill my troops and run off giggling.

There is a middle ground between "either impassable to most troops or open to skirmishers" and "yay open terrain to all units". Something simple like "no marching through terrain" would do nicely. Indeed rivers have this rule and I find that rivers are a really interesting feature to have on the table for this reason.

Mmm.. I guess some small movement penalty could be in order, although rivers usually are a lot thinner than forests, giving you the chance to be through it in a turn, whereas most forests can take 2 to 3 turns.

How about taking a little thing from 40K? In a forest you cannot march, but you can move M + D3 ( D6 would've been too much ). You're not as drastically slowed down as not being able to march, but still slower than if you could.

logan054
12-12-2010, 14:39
The idea of random movement is good, it removes maths hammer from the game, problem I find is that its just to random, I had a idea about what would have been better, something like

3: Infantry: M+ D3+2 (Dwarfs with +1)
Cav: M+ (2D6 choosing the highest) + 4

I actually think it could be a cool idea if warseer did like a warhammer 8.5

reese3697
12-12-2010, 23:02
So firstly, I never imagined this would spur such a reaction. I also didnt think people would take such offense to my gripes either.
Thank you all for your input (whether constructive or not), I have done my best to read every post up until now. Some of the debates have gotten pretty heated which I find crazy, but stuff happens I guess. The different viewpoints on most of these issues has gotten me to thinking and accept the changes for what they are even if I dont like them. As someone said, "just wait for 9th ed," but I will still play.
People obviously feel very strongly about most of this stuff, no matter what side they fall.

But still, thank you all for your input.

the_slosh
12-12-2010, 23:04
I remember my first beer, tasted bloody horrible didn't it. Over time I drank more and more beer and now well now I love the stuff just like 8th edition.

(im not alcoholic I just like beer).

Well that's a nice sig right there! :angel:

MasterSparks
12-12-2010, 23:15
So firstly, I never imagined this would spur such a reaction. I also didnt think people would take such offense to my gripes either.
Thank you all for your input (whether constructive or not), I have done my best to read every post up until now. Some of the debates have gotten pretty heated which I find crazy, but stuff happens I guess. The different viewpoints on most of these issues has gotten me to thinking and accept the changes for what they are even if I dont like them. As someone said, "just wait for 9th ed," but I will still play.
People obviously feel very strongly about most of this stuff, no matter what side they fall.

But still, thank you all for your input.

Just remember that there are alternatives to Warhammer out there for you to dabble in if you'll simply make yourself open and keep an eye out for them. Quality time is too scarce to spend on playing something that grieves you, just for the sake of playing it. :)

Odin
12-12-2010, 23:51
I'm afraid to say it, but I agree with you on ALL of those points-

8th ed. appears to be the beginner's edition now, dropping charge tactics and the like in favour of an easier, beginner-satisfying system.

scar

Well, it's satisfying this 20-year veteran as well. The best 3 games of Warhammer I've ever had have all been under 8th edition.



For starters I must admit that I like the new army comp changes using percentages, its neat and I think will help balance out the game a bit. However, Lords still have NO PLACE in a game under 2000 points.


Except en Empire General, Goblin Warboss, Skaven Warlord...

Biff Gunhed
13-12-2010, 00:19
If you don't like playing 8th Edition, stop complaining and keep playing 7th. What's the big problem?

Also, I don't understand how a game that allows inexperienced people to win is a bad thing.

Tzeentch Lover
13-12-2010, 02:08
If you don't like playing 8th Edition, stop complaining and keep playing 7th. What's the big problem?

I imagine most people can't just walk into their normal gaming place and expect someone to want to play a previous edition.

Biff Gunhed
13-12-2010, 02:23
Well if the friends one plays with prefer playing 8th Edition it can't be all bad.

MasterSparks
13-12-2010, 06:57
Well if the friends one plays with prefer playing 8th Edition it can't be all bad.

Sure it can - if I hate it to the point where I really don't want to play it while all of my friends love it to the point where they really don't want to play any more of 7th edition, I should and still will label it as something negative instead of rejoicing because my friends like it.

Imagine feeling this much left behind after a change of dynamics that you had high hopes for before and during the release. It's hard stuff, man, but we'll all endure. :cool:

pkain762
13-12-2010, 07:37
this is a mewt point, nobody likes everything about each edition... i find it pointless to argue... you either like it, love, hate it, or you eh... about it....

To each his own, i love this edition, the new rules speed up the game... i don't have to sit there for a half hour while a person thinks "is that 10 inches or is it 10 and a half inches?"

The game is quicker, things die, and i like the new rules.... 8th has my approval

kain

urien
13-12-2010, 08:07
Are the 8th ed mechanics unbalanced or is it (a) Teclis, (b) banner of sorcery, (c) Loremaster, all of which were designed for the previous version of Warhammer? If you took away these items and teclis, would Helf magic be overpowered and abusable?

we could said it the other way around -

are 7th ed mechanics crappy as all 8th ed fans say or is it (a) demons and vamps ab's, (b) skaven abominations, (c) ab power creep? all of which were ott
and destroyed balance? if you took those out would 7th be sound and good ed?


Well, it's satisfying this 20-year veteran as well. The best 3 games of Warhammer I've ever had have all been under 8th edition.

and for me it's not satisfying, the best 3 games of Warhammer ive ever had have all been under 6th edition. the worst under 7th and 8th sounds like a childs play comparing to those two earlier. playing WHFB since 1993.

yabbadabba
13-12-2010, 08:19
I imagine most people can't just walk into their normal gaming place and expect someone to want to play a previous edition. As this is the way most new wargames get into clubs and gaming groups, why not try it? You might be surprised.


and for me it's not satisfying, the best 3 games of Warhammer ive ever had have all been under 6th edition. the worst under 7th and 8th sounds like a childs play comparing to those two earlier. playing WHFB since 1993. So have you played 8th then?

theorox
13-12-2010, 08:49
I like the basic mechanics of 8th better than 7th too. It wasn't all armybooks.

Theo

Lord Solar Plexus
13-12-2010, 09:34
Anyone can pick up an army and win.


Hah! Not me.

Although that had nothing to do with the respective edition.

urien
13-12-2010, 12:10
So have you played 8th then?

yeah i tried it and i dislike it,

i try things before making up my mind about them, just so not to sound like im farting arguments out of my ass,

so youre saying youre doing otherwise?

The bearded one
13-12-2010, 12:36
Just for clarity, how many games did you try? 5? 10? 20?

8th might not be as tactical as you cannot control nor predict most things anymore but I find it to be a helluvalot of fun. I am not a tournament guy. Currently I only go to 1 tournament a year ( not that we have that many in the Netherlands anyway, but a decent number ), which is the frenzy, a doubles tournament. And I only go there because it's fun to 'go out' a day with some buddies from the local GW and play some games as teams against new people outside the normal circle.

It's a game isn't it? I find 8th far more fun as it is a bit more random, wacky and unpredictable, and now stuff will die in combat instead of in overrun moves.

A few tweaks could've made this edition so much better. If only GW took a month or two more to playtest such things and do some meaningfull errata's. It's all 7th edition books for a different edition so I am curious to find out how the new books will work with it and it might clear up a lot of the mess. Usually a lot of trouble is caused not by the edition but by the books and items from the previous editions. Though without the megaspells most of the problerms of overpowered magic could have been avoided. Actually if I could change 1 thing about the 3 big spells it'd be changing either pit or purple sun into a toughness test so you would have a mega str, initiative and toughness test. Sounds fair doesn't it? Then low initiative armies aren't penalized as much anymore.

I guess I find myself in a serene paradise of 'how it should be' in my local gaming circle. Armies include 4 lizardmen ( lol, yeah, me included ), dwarfs ( me ), chaos warriors ( 1 has an army done, 2 not yet ), ogres, empire and dark elves. We do have one building up a khorne daemon army which will be crazy tough. Anyway.. I have on average been playing 2 games of 2500 pts each week since the start of 8th. I have only been hit by a purple sun 3 times in total and 2 pits of shades. And never the ******** of "turn 1 - wizard flies to the flank - wizard IF's purple sun - entire army dies". We usually don't use that stuff because we're playing for fun. Well.. okay, there is 1 lizardmenplayer who has repeatedly tried to purple sun me and others but fate is cruel so he usually doesn't IF it and it is dispelled, or it misfires an awkward amount of times and eats the slann :)

In short I like this random nature. But most of all I like that infantry is actually involved in the game. While I doubt many of us really noticed it while playing 7th edition it is becoming increasingly clear to us now when we look back on 7th that there didn't tend to be any real lasting fights. Just charging, killing the front row and overrunning. Killing people in close combat is so much better then just overrunning them.

yabbadabba
13-12-2010, 13:23
so youre saying youre doing otherwise? I am not a shiny toy syndrome guy, and I am not a tournament chap. So I tend to play whatever I feel like. I might get about 1/2 4th Ed games a year, still play 2nd Ed 40K occasionally etc. Thats just 40K and WFB. Generally we will play the current version, but we also talk about what sort of game we want to play and then decide what ruleset to use. As its for fun we see no need to do anything other than what we want.

sssk
13-12-2010, 13:42
I won't lie, I've only read the original post and the most recent post from the original poster, because I'm in somewhat of a rush.

However, i think my response would be "don't knock it 'til you've tried it....and got used to it a bit".

Initially it does seem very simple with a lot of technical aspects removed (guess ranges, getting charges correct etc), and I thought much the same as you after my first game or two. After 10 games though, everything makes a bit more sense, and after 20, it really is a very good rules set (in my opinion). I think it has become more of a game for the gamblers amongst us (or the brave). This is particularly the case when there is an enemy just over your average charge range, and you hear that voice in your head saying "do you feel lucky...punk?". But overall it's a good solid rule set (again, in my opinion) and it really helps to balance a lot of the problems which we saw before. Now any army really does have a chance against any other army (provided you know what you're doing with your army of choice).

Anyway, I hope that helps. The moral is, play some more games and then see if your perspective changes.

MalusCalibur
13-12-2010, 13:44
The new rules mean that Initiative isn't a useless stat anymore, a change that I welcome.

I'm loathe to get involved in this pointless debate again, but I very much felt the need to correct this fallacy.

Initiative is just as situational and overall useless as it ever was, because although it now directly affects striking order, striking order rarely matters due to the way casualties are now removed. Nothing at all has changed.

As for the OP's concerns, it really is up to you what edition you play. Personally, I would recommend sticking to 7th edition, with its sensible and coherent core rules, and if the balance problems in the army books are a problem, work with your gaming group/friends to rebalance them yourselves. You can't rely on GW to ever balance anything, after all.

Feefait
13-12-2010, 15:55
I like it when people say because the same tactics they've used for however many years no longer work that there are no longer tactics at all. It seems much more productive to come to grips with needing new tactics. In my opinion that's what i love most about 8th. It's a different game and I have to learn to play it as such - it's refreshing to not be able to just trot out my skaven checkerboard formation and wait for the enemy to try and charge me and then get countered everywhere or blasted apart.

The bearded one
13-12-2010, 16:09
I'm loathe to get involved in this pointless debate again, but I very much felt the need to correct this fallacy.

Initiative is just as situational and overall useless as it ever was, because although it now directly affects striking order, striking order rarely matters due to the way casualties are now removed. Nothing at all has changed.

I'd like to counter this somewhat. It's not wrong or anything, it's true. A while back I talked to an experienced tournamentplayer who just came back from england and used flails on his marauders instead of great weapons because he did not want to waste their high initiative.. on a block of 50 marauders. Some obligatory eyebrowraising was in order as he would need to lose 20 guys to lose any attacks back if the marauders used great weapons.

Initiative is not important when large blocks are involved with 3 or 4 ranks when not in horde formation, or 4 or 5 ranks when in horde formation. Striking order will usually not affect the number of attacks coming back at you.

However in the case of smaller units it will, or if your own unit is so hitty that it could reduce the attacks back on even a big ranked unit. Units of 1 or 2ranks of monstrous infantry/cavalry/beasts, heroes, units that are whittled down, monsters ( you might be able to down them before they strike or in the case of the hydra reduce its template strenght ) and above all cavalry. Against these initiative is of importance.

But in 7th initiative was of very little importance ( combats hardly ever lasted beyond the turn you charged ) so it is a wacky complaint to say "initiative is not important in 8th". It wasn't important in 7th either. Although I disagree. While it is not a gamechanging stat it can regularly play a part.

O,, and don't get me started on the importance of initiative for our dear friends purple sun and pit of shades. ;)

logan054
13-12-2010, 16:12
Initiative is not important when large blocks are involved with 3 or 4 ranks when not in horde formation, or 4 or 5 ranks when in horde formation. Striking order will usually not affect the number of attacks coming back at you.

However in the case of smaller units it will, or if your own unit is so hitty that it could reduce the attacks back on even a big ranked unit. Units of 1 or 2ranks of monstrous infantry/cavalry/beasts, heroes, units that are whittled down, monsters ( you might be able to down them before they strike or in the case of the hydra reduce its template strenght ) and above all cavalry. Against these initiative is of importance.

Couldn't agree more with this actually, so, so true, this is why I use great weapons on my Chaos warriors, they are tough enough to take the attacks and can rarely kill enough to stop full attacks back at them.

Lord Inquisitor
13-12-2010, 17:41
I'd like to counter this somewhat. It's not wrong or anything, it's true. A while back I talked to an experienced tournamentplayer who just came back from england and used flails on his marauders instead of great weapons because he did not want to waste their high initiative.. on a block of 50 marauders. Some obligatory eyebrowraising was in order as he would need to lose 20 guys to lose any attacks back if the marauders used great weapons.

Thing is, it can and does matter sometimes, even for big units. If you get hit by an Abomination for example, those marauders with flails might kill it before it does horrific damage to it. Let's say you get attacked by 10 khorne warriors with great weapons. With flails (assuming 30 attacks) you kill 8, only 6 attacks back and 4 kills, easily breaking the remaining warriors. With great weapons you also kill 8 but you take 30 attacks back, killing 17. The difference is in winning or losing! With great weapons you lose combat and steadfast or not run the risk of fleeing and being cut down by 2 chaos warriors!

Initiative is only meaningless when both sides have enough troops to absorb casualties.

N810
13-12-2010, 17:57
Initive is Meaningles....
(when you don't play Lizardmen)
striking at the speed of Zombies... :p

MalusCalibur
13-12-2010, 19:03
Initiative is not important when large blocks are involved with 3 or 4 ranks when not in horde formation, or 4 or 5 ranks when in horde formation. Striking order will usually not affect the number of attacks coming back at you.

My point exactly. Given that the majority of units that are worth using in 8th are big infantry blocks of 3-4 ranks, this is the example that will come up most, and so Initiative remains very situational (i.e. where there are units small enough to be directly affected, Attacks wise, by casualties). I'd be willing to say that those situations will come up as often as prolonged combats did in 7th, meaning Initiative is about the same level of useful as it was then.

UberBeast
13-12-2010, 19:15
I'm surprised I don't hear anything about characters. Initiative is a fairly big for characters, both against other characters and when rank and file are trying to direct their attacks against them. For instance, trying to kill the black orc warboss before it gets a chance to decimate you.

yabbadabba
13-12-2010, 19:25
My point exactly. Given that the majority of units that are worth using in 8th are big infantry blocks of 3-4 ranks, this is the example that will come up most, and so Initiative remains very situational (i.e. where there are units small enough to be directly affected, Attacks wise, by casualties). I'd be willing to say that those situations will come up as often as prolonged combats did in 7th, meaning Initiative is about the same level of useful as it was then.Initiative becomes important for small units attacking Flank/Rear and Front (as well as characters Uberbeast).

The bearded one
13-12-2010, 19:39
Thing is, it can and does matter sometimes, even for big units. If you get hit by an Abomination for example, those marauders with flails might kill it before it does horrific damage to it. Let's say you get attacked by 10 khorne warriors with great weapons. With flails (assuming 30 attacks) you kill 8, only 6 attacks back and 4 kills, easily breaking the remaining warriors. With great weapons you also kill 8 but you take 30 attacks back, killing 17. The difference is in winning or losing! With great weapons you lose combat and steadfast or not run the risk of fleeing and being cut down by 2 chaos warriors!

Initiative is only meaningless when both sides have enough troops to absorb casualties.

Indeed that is true. This goes to show some thought has to go into weaponchoices with regards to the initiative.

Although consider this scenario once again. A HPA will have 4 marauders in basecontact, which means the HPA will be hit by 12 models. 13 attacks with champion. The odds of killing a model with 6 wounds, T5 and regeneration are very slim and it is stubborn on ld 8. If the marauders used flails they would strike first, but if they don't manage to get 6 wounds through the regeneration they will have to try and kill it with str3 the following rounds and that's an incredibly hard task.

If the entire horde could strike that HPA then the odds are good. With 12-13 attacks? Nope. And while you may strike last with great weapons at least you strike at str5 each round.

Same scenario against a hydra, except higher weapon skill, handlers and a breath weapon.

Besides they're only marauders. 5 pts a model, they are some of the best value for points in the game. I don't mind losing a couple more for str5 every round as they are dirt cheap.



Because 8th edition has more prolonged combats, whittled down units are seen quite often. At least in my gaming group anyway. My last game started with 30 templeguard and ended with 4. A game a few weeks before that started with 23 hammerers and ended with 5.

Lord Inquisitor
13-12-2010, 19:44
My point exactly. Given that the majority of units that are worth using in 8th are big infantry blocks of 3-4 ranks, this is the example that will come up most, and so Initiative remains very situational (i.e. where there are units small enough to be directly affected, Attacks wise, by casualties). I'd be willing to say that those situations will come up as often as prolonged combats did in 7th, meaning Initiative is about the same level of useful as it was then.

Try playing with Ogres. Striking in initiative is a huge change for them.

It's situational but every army has units that really care about initiative. Even an army like skaven that you'd think wouldn't care have HPAs, gutter runners, plague censer bearers and soforth.

yabbadabba
13-12-2010, 19:56
This is part of what I love about Empire in the new rules- you make your opponent think hard about unit choices. Too big, and mortars and wizards will have a field day; too small and a horde unit/Knight unit will eat it. Of course then your opponent has to try and guess what selection of units you are going to take :evilgrin:

stashman
13-12-2010, 22:26
8th is so good and so easy to play.

Haven't have so fun in any version, playing since 6th.

UberBeast
14-12-2010, 01:06
8th is so good and so easy to play.

Haven't have so fun in any version, playing since 6th.

Which is funny because the rules in 6th were almost exactly the same as in 7th.

The bearded one
14-12-2010, 02:16
Which is funny because the rules in 6th were almost exactly the same as in 7th.

I believe he means he started in 6th, not that he found 6th one of the most fun editions :)

UberBeast
14-12-2010, 04:59
I believe he means he started in 6th, not that he found 6th one of the most fun editions :)

Yes, I see how it could be read that way. :o

Wakerofgods
14-12-2010, 09:23
From a gameplay point of view everything (except the magic lores) is far, far better IMO.

Far better.

If the random charges is too much for you from a realism point of view, that sucks mate :(. It is very important and works extremely well to kill lame game-destroying 'tactics' that were the core of 7th edition. If you loved these tactics, then yes (IMO) the game you loved is dead. Or at least, the specific 'tactics'. I was quite a fan of those tactics at the time but now don't miss them at all and absolutely love this new game!

Except the magic. I hate that so much at the moment.

The bearded one
14-12-2010, 12:30
Except the magic. I hate that so much at the moment.

Funny enough while browsing through the lizardmen slann entry I found that their discipline of the ancients called 'becalming cogitation' is an incredible defence against all the 6 dice bombing hoping for IF ( Unless it's teclis or the book of hoeth )

They choose a wizard within 24" at the start of the turn and every powerdice of that wizard that rolls a 6 is discarded. No IF for you! If they try a big spell they might not even make the casting value.

logan054
14-12-2010, 12:49
Let's say you get attacked by 10 khorne warriors with great weapons. With flails (assuming 30 attacks) you kill 8, only 6 attacks back and 4 kills, easily breaking the remaining warriors. With great weapons you also kill 8 but you take 30 attacks back, killing 17. The difference is in winning or losing! With great weapons you lose combat and steadfast or not run the risk of fleeing and being cut down by 2 chaos warriors!

Initiative is only meaningless when both sides have enough troops to absorb casualties.

I totally agree with you, its very situational, I think it all comes down if you can break you opponent on the charge then flails are better than great weapons, if you can't because of steadfast/high leadership, BSB then next round you are going to come very unstuck.


I'm surprised I don't hear anything about characters. Initiative is a fairly big for characters, both against other characters and when rank and file are trying to direct their attacks against them. For instance, trying to kill the black orc warboss before it gets a chance to decimate you.

I think it really depends, if they are in a challenge then its a massive thing, if they are not and the enemy still has a front rank or two then sadly they are going to get die a horrible death (this again is something my warriors with GW and MoK and very good at, 6-8 WS5 S6 attacks usually does the job :D)

UberBeast
14-12-2010, 16:05
I think it really depends, if they are in a challenge then its a massive thing, if they are not and the enemy still has a front rank or two then sadly they are going to get die a horrible death (this again is something my warriors with GW and MoK and very good at, 6-8 WS5 S6 attacks usually does the job :D)

Even outside of a challenge, if your characters or higher initiative troops are in btb with your opponent's character they can chop him down before he has a chance to influence the battle. This is very nice against BSBs.

logan054
14-12-2010, 16:18
Even outside of a challenge, if your characters or higher initiative troops are in btb with your opponent's character they can chop him down before he has a chance to influence the battle. This is very nice against BSBs.

You don't give you BSB's protection? the flip of this is that those attacks are not aimed at the unit and are aimed at a character, this is going to mean less combat res, if I have aimed 2 khorne warriors at you BSB the max I can score is +2 rather than +6/8. With this way he has influenced the fight, rather than losing by 6 you may only lose by 2. If your leadership 8 testing at 6 is usually better than testing at 4, most heroes only have 3 attacks so I guess it all depends if you think he will have that much of a effect on fight, it wouldnt be the first time I have had some amazing rolls against a character then fluffed my attacks against the unit.

The bearded one
14-12-2010, 16:45
You don't give you BSB's protection? the flip of this is that those attacks are not aimed at the unit and are aimed at a character, this is going to mean less combat res, if I have aimed 2 khorne warriors at you BSB the max I can score is +2 rather than +6/8. With this way he has influenced the fight, rather than losing by 6 you may only lose by 2. If your leadership 8 testing at 6 is usually better than testing at 4, most heroes only have 3 attacks so I guess it all depends if you think he will have that much of a effect on fight, it wouldnt be the first time I have had some amazing rolls against a character then fluffed my attacks against the unit.

Don't forget the point that the BSB grants to combat res that is lost, and the rerolling of ld tests within 12". The other 8 chaos warriors should be doing enough killing to win by a large margin anyway.

Kal Taron
14-12-2010, 16:48
You don't give you BSB's protection? the flip of this is that those attacks are not aimed at the unit and are aimed at a character, this is going to mean less combat res, if I have aimed 2 khorne warriors at you BSB the max I can score is +2 rather than +6/8. With this way he has influenced the fight, rather than losing by 6 you may only lose by 2. If your leadership 8 testing at 6 is usually better than testing at 4, most heroes only have 3 attacks so I guess it all depends if you think he will have that much of a effect on fight, it wouldnt be the first time I have had some amazing rolls against a character then fluffed my attacks against the unit.

You say it like everyone can get the kind of protection WoC can. Some armies have no reasonable way to give their BSB enough protection.

logan054
14-12-2010, 17:07
You say it like everyone can get the kind of protection WoC can. Some armies have no reasonable way to give their BSB enough protection.

You mean a 1+ save on foot or a 4+ wardsave, funny i thought I saw both of those in the common magic items, you have the various helms that will bump a save as well, items like dawnstone to make those saves rerollable, plenty of options, I guess it really depends on the army we are talking about.


Don't forget the point that the BSB grants to combat res that is lost, and the rerolling of ld tests within 12". The other 8 chaos warriors should be doing enough killing to win by a large margin anyway.

Yes I know, as for the other 8 chaos warriors that really depends on what they are armed with and what mark they have, if they are Tzeentch with HW+SH then it might not be enough to actually win combat, really depends on the size of the unit and what it is up against, while I agree that 12" reroll for all leadership tests is great I have to say I don't really use it all that much, again this depends on the army in question more than anything.

UberBeast
14-12-2010, 17:08
You don't give you BSB's protection? the flip of this is that those attacks are not aimed at the unit and are aimed at a character, this is going to mean less combat res, if I have aimed 2 khorne warriors at you BSB the max I can score is +2 rather than +6/8. With this way he has influenced the fight, rather than losing by 6 you may only lose by 2. If your leadership 8 testing at 6 is usually better than testing at 4, most heroes only have 3 attacks so I guess it all depends if you think he will have that much of a effect on fight, it wouldnt be the first time I have had some amazing rolls against a character then fluffed my attacks against the unit.

Thanks to stubborn and the huge amount of attacks both sides toss these days, combat res isn't nearly as important as killing an enemy BSB.


You mean a 1+ save on foot or a 4+ wardsave, funny i thought I saw both of those in the common magic items, you have the various helms that will bump a save as well, items like dawnstone to make those saves rerollable, plenty of options, I guess it really depends on the army we are talking about.

Characters can easily deal with most "well-protected" BSBs.

logan054
14-12-2010, 17:16
Thanks to stubborn and the huge amount of attacks both sides toss these days, combat res isn't nearly as important as killing an enemy BSB.

I don't know I find combat res is very handy against units, the again I tend to use reasonable sized units of multiple attack high strength models who's aim is to usually kill enough models so I have equal or less ranks than myself, If you have just killed 15 of you guys (this isn't hard if you unit pumps out 25-30 attacks) chances are you don't have more ranks anymore so I guess your not stubborn and I guess your needing double ones, that reroll really isn't going to help you alot.

If I had targetted you BSB with 3 guys I may not have killed enough guys to reduce you ranks so you would stubborn anyways, all comes down to what army you use.


Characters can easily deal with most "well-protected" BSBs.

I guess it depends on the BSB, as he should be no weaker than a normal hero if he is equipped in that way, I am pretty sure my WoC BSB would deal with most enemy lords in combat or at the very leaset hold him up and prevent him from getting and combat res which again turns the combat in my favor, this can be important if your talking about frenzied units, don't want to lose all those attacks.

UberBeast
14-12-2010, 17:48
My argument was that initiative is more important in 8th edition than in 7th despite step-up. I cited characters as one important factor in my argument, and it's simply true that step-up doesn't completely prevent characters from making the most of a high initiative.

Is there anything here you disagree with or are we just arguing semantics?

logan054
14-12-2010, 18:00
According to yourself combat res isn't as important as it was in 8th with that in mind how can a few extra kills from a character be important? again it really depends on the situation. In prolonged combats I was was far more important than in 8th because if you died you couldn't strike back, as long as you have the models in 8th you will always be getting to strike back. So unlike in 7th if a character killed the 2/3 guys in b2b he was fine, this isn't the case.