PDA

View Full Version : So just how good is WFB?



Far Seer
25-10-2011, 09:31
I have been a long player of 40K and occasionally got interested in starting WFB. I know it's older than 40K, but just how fun is it in 8th edition? Are a lot of WFB games available to you at you LGS?

xxRavenxx
25-10-2011, 09:33
In terms of availability, it will vary from store to store, so only someone in sydney can answer that.

In terms of fun. Yes. Its very fun.

My suggestion is to grab a small army, (or borrow someones) and give it a go, then work up to a full army. Buyers remorse is a bitch...

TheCaptain
25-10-2011, 09:37
Its an amazing game, and quite balanced compared to 40K. You can take units you want to without having to worry about it being a waste of points... as for games, if not enough people play, convert them.... and get what you think is pretty

Far Seer
25-10-2011, 09:48
Most of the games played at my LGS are 40K. But one of the staff did introduce me to a demo game using the contents of IOB, and it was quite fun.

Oogie boogie boss
25-10-2011, 09:55
I think it's much more balanced that 40k. Don't get me wrong, i do like 40k, but a lot of the time victory comes down to firepower (in my experience) and how tooled up your HQ characters are. WFB is much more about units, movement and deployment. I like to compare it to chess, where 40k is more like chequers. WFB is much more strategic, and i believe require much more thought about how you use your troops as an army.
That's just me though.
You can also get more wackiness in fantasy, and it feels more lighthearted.

Far Seer
25-10-2011, 10:27
Apparently magic ruins the game or something...?

Baggers
25-10-2011, 10:34
It depends. Magic can be very powerful and with the right combinations and some good dice rolling, nigh on unstoppable. However, a few bad dice rolls and his power is no longer as good as it was.

It all depends on what you and your oppenant bring to the table. I personally think the magic is not that over balanced. If you play it right.

Oogie boogie boss
25-10-2011, 10:36
Not at all. True, magic has gotten more powerful, but it's also a lot more unpredictable. Some of the spells are now potential game winners, but you won't cast them much. Basically, it's now generally bigger but much fewer when it comes to spells. And as the unit sizes are generally bigger now then they used to be, this stops most spells from being absolutely devastating.

zoggin-eck
25-10-2011, 10:39
Try the game a few more times, either with the starter set at the store, see if you can borrow a different store army or even if some kind fellow can bring two armies to play some day.

Decide for yourself, rather than rely on others. The "magic ruins it" or "my army is useless" apects the most obvious.

The nice thing is you're starting fresh, so the whole "8th edition" tag means nothing, it may as well be the first edition to you if you've had no experience with earlier versions :) Enjoy the game for what it is.

warplock
25-10-2011, 10:43
I personally think magic is a bit wrong, it seems to be all or nothing. The spells are far too powerful but also miscasts are far too common and can potentially strip the mage of all their power and destroy any unit he's in. All because you rolled two sixes. It's the most frustrating thing in the world - seeing all your best-laid plans go completely to waste because of a miscast. I think the spells should be greatly toned down - minor buffs and hexes here and there instead of 'the entire unit now has S8 / two thirds of the enemy unit (or even army in some extreme cases) is now dead with no saves, of any kind, allowed', with miscasts having a similarly lesser effect.

trotsky
25-10-2011, 16:04
I like it for the lack of spacemarines. This may sound like a silly point but (depending on your group) there is no army vastly more popular than others.

Lord Solar Plexus
25-10-2011, 16:21
I used to play nothing but 40k, then converted completely to Fantasy, barring the odd small pick-up game. I personally think Fantasy is much, much better. Magic is a priori no more cruel than moving, shooting or close combat.

Confessor_Atol
25-10-2011, 16:21
As a long-time fantasy player, I'm loving 8th ed. I'd agree with everyone else here and say start small (500 pts.), and avoid armies that are going to be released soon (VC, empire, dwarves).

Magic can be powerful and risky, so I'd limit it to 1 level 2 mage until you're above 1500 pts.

Ozorik
25-10-2011, 16:25
As a long time fantasy player 8th is a terrible ruleset and killed off any desire to continue playing a game that I first started in the late 80's. If you like static gameplay and rolling lots of dice you may well like it though.

AngelofSorrow
25-10-2011, 16:28
I too am a long time fantasy player. 13 yrs and counting.
It's an amazing game and 8th is by far the best rule set for the game their has ever been. There is nothing static about it and there is a whole lot more to it than just mass dice rolling don't let people on here fool you.

My advice play it a couple more times. Read the background and really inspect the models those 3 things should suck you right in.


Ready for eternal war!

Urgat
25-10-2011, 16:29
Apparently magic ruins the game or something...?

It is, if you play the deathstar way (the "all the eggs in the same basket" way"). In short, it's powerful if you build your army in a way that makes it efficient.

Ozorik
25-10-2011, 16:37
It's an amazing game and 8th is by far the best rule set for the game their has ever been. There is nothing static about it and there is a whole lot more to it than just mass dice rolling don't let people on here fool you.

I strongly disagree.

Have a test game (or 3) if you can and make up your own mind. Make them as varied as possible though so that you know exactly what you are getting into; its no good spending hundreds of currency units on a army that you will only use a handful of times.

Confessor_Atol
25-10-2011, 16:45
Troll much?

Ozorik
25-10-2011, 16:46
Perhaps you would like to explain exactly how expressing dislike for something is trolling?

chamelion 6
25-10-2011, 16:47
I can only say I've yet to play a game that was either static or just rolling dice... I think it comes down to the mindset of the players themselves.

Nothing in the mechanics of the game forces you into a static strategy or forces you to rely on dice to win your games..........

Confessor_Atol
25-10-2011, 16:49
Perhaps you would like to explain exactly how expressing dislike for something is trolling?

You expressed you dislike, and that's great.

Then someone else expresses their enjoyment.

Then you post again just to say you disagree..... that's when you lost me.

Ozorik
25-10-2011, 16:50
No miniatures game can be completely static nor involve just dice rolling but there is a point when both of these factors become too pronounced.

Do we really need to have this discussion again?

As to my 'trolling' my post contained a great deal more than my reiteration of my dislike. Perhaps you would like to label AngelofSorrow a troll for saying that my opinion should be ignored?

Confessor_Atol
25-10-2011, 16:54
I disagree

chamelion 6
25-10-2011, 17:04
No miniatures game can be completely static nor involve just dice rolling but there is a point when both of these factors become too pronounced.

Do we really need to have this discussion again?

I won't argue that, but exactly what is "too pronounced?"

Where I disagree with you is that in the previous edition the game mechanics were so rigid that, for me, the game was very static. The out comes of most combats were predictable before the units engaged and most of the game was spent shuffeling units an eighth inch this way or that until somebody blinked. Whoever charged first won, so it was an endless game of positioning.

The new mechanics introduced some randomness to the game so that you can't always predict the outcome of something before it happens and the randomness of the charge ended the static shuffle dance and brought some much needed dynamics back to the game. Yes, people trying to bring the last edition's mindset into this one tend to become rather "static" and become frustrated that they can't excersize the same kind of control they used to have and become obsessed with die rolling instead of learning to plan for contingencies.

At least this has been my experience. It's not the game that's static, it's the player's approach that becomes static.

russellmoo
25-10-2011, 17:05
8th ed has really divided the old warhammer fantasy community- there are older players who love it, there are older players who hate it-

I think it comes down to a conscious decision by GW to cede skirmish style play to Privateer Press, thus rather than competing directly with PP, GW has instead gone the other route and filled a niche-

What this really means is that if you were a big fan of small units backed by super elite characters you have abandoned WFB 8th edition, and are probably playing Hordemachine (where the skirmish style, and armies built around a single character appeal to you).

However, if you have love for the common soldier, and never cared much for special characters, or not having your general's death decide the game, and have a desire to flood the table with models 8th edition is your favorite-

All of the love or hate for 8th really come down to this: Do you like smaller scale skirmish type battles where every model is unique and special- or do you like fielding massive hordes of troops, and like lots of death and destruction.

Personally, warma-hordes is fun to play, but boring to watch- which is why some areas use a stop watch, or turn time limit to speed up gameplay- WFB I've found is not just fun to play but can actually be enjoyable to watch- especially on a well done table, with well painted miniatures-

DaemonReign
25-10-2011, 17:08
I am always sadened by opinions that Ozorik are airing.

Personally I've been playing Warhammer off and on for over 15 years and I have never liked a rule-set more than 8th.

I'm not sure what "static" gameplay even means to be honest. Surely dice-rolls are important but they're really not that much more important compared to how the game has always been.

What I like most about 8th Ed is that finally we have set of rules that promotes ever bigger games. Playing at 2k is fun, playing at 4k is great, playing those 10k games is just a fantastic event of epicness.

chamelion 6
25-10-2011, 17:12
8th ed has really divided the old warhammer fantasy community- there are older players who love it, there are older players who hate it-

I think it comes down to a conscious decision by GW to cede skirmish style play to Privateer Press, thus rather than competing directly with PP, GW has instead gone the other route and filled a niche-

What this really means is that if you were a big fan of small units backed by super elite characters you have abandoned WFB 8th edition, and are probably playing Hordemachine (where the skirmish style, and armies built around a single character appeal to you).

However, if you have love for the common soldier, and never cared much for special characters, or not having your general's death decide the game, and have a desire to flood the table with models 8th edition is your favorite-

All of the love or hate for 8th really come down to this: Do you like smaller scale skirmish type battles where every model is unique and special- or do you like fielding massive hordes of troops, and like lots of death and destruction.

Personally, warma-hordes is fun to play, but boring to watch- which is why some areas use a stop watch, or turn time limit to speed up gameplay- WFB I've found is not just fun to play but can actually be enjoyable to watch- especially on a well done table, with well painted miniatures-

I'd say this is a pretty fair summary. ;)

I do like massive armies and lots of death and destruction... I like the feel of two units clashing, which the last edition lacked as most units just ran away after being out manuevered.

Oogie boogie boss
25-10-2011, 17:16
Agreed. 8th ed. makes for much more impressive games, and the effect of the dice hasn't increased. If anything, i'd say the increased randomness has if anything increased the need for considered, flexible generalship, as not everything acts to a set pace or design, so you have to have contingency plans for when things go awry.
I think it's great.

Lordy
25-10-2011, 17:22
Apparently magic ruins the game or something...?

only 3 or 4 spells really ruin the game.

3 or 4 magic items also do the same.

But i'd take Fantasy over 40k every day of the week if you're more of a tactical gamer.

40k is fun but it seems to be the weaker players who will never be any good at fantasy that play it round my area because it's easier to play.

TheOneHawk
25-10-2011, 17:24
I've only played 8th and 7th, and while 8th has some things I really quite dislike, overall it's a much better, more balanced, rule set.

Things I dislike are how strong some spells are, how insignificant the miscast table usually is, and needing 10 models to disrupt (Just a personal gripe, since I play Chaos and having 10 models fast enough to flank effectively isn't cost effective, especially since it doesn't remove steadfast)

Dominatrix
25-10-2011, 17:25
I have been playing WFB since 6th edition. A lot of things have changed in 8th some for the better, some for the worst. When I think about a typical warhammer game however the last word that comes to my mind is static. Seriously Ozorik do you even know the meaning of the word? If the randomness of dice rolls is what annoys you (to an extent I can relate to that), then you have a problem with warhammer being too "random" not "static".

To get back to the OP's question it is a superb game system and personally I prefer it to 40K after having played both extensively. A thing to remember is that anything taken to an extreme ruins the game. Including but not limited to magic. On the contrary I feel the current level of magic is a suitable counter to the system encouraging you to take hordes (units with a lot of models), which would otherwise run rampant.

Anyway as previous posters say, try it out yourself and see how it fits.

AngelofSorrow
25-10-2011, 17:31
I am always sadened by opinions that Ozorik are airing.

Personally I've been playing Warhammer off and on for over 15 years and I have never liked a rule-set more than 8th.

I'm not sure what "static" gameplay even means to be honest. Surely dice-rolls are important but they're really not that much more important compared to how the game has always been.

What I like most about 8th Ed is that finally we have set of rules that promotes ever bigger games. Playing at 2k is fun, playing at 4k is great, playing those 10k games is just a fantastic event of epicness.

Yes. I 100% agree. Big games are great.

The people I encounter that don't enjoy 8th Ed are the ones who refuse to change ( @ Ozorik this is not always the case and not leveled at you) and adapt to a new edition. Especially one that brings about alot of changes.

Also look at the minis. Gaming is only 1 aspect here of weather you will enjoy it or not.



Ready for eternal war!

Jind_Singh
25-10-2011, 18:11
Bickering posts aside - we all know there are only 2 types of Warhammer people right now:

1) The ones who HATE 8th ed and what it represents for them in the game
2) The ones who LOVE 8th ed and see it was one of the best things out there

I was number one thought process but after getting past my initial 8th Ed hangover I am FIRMLY a number two man now - 8th ed is brilliant!


But opinions are just that - opinions! Here is some meaningful content that might help you make your mind up about trying out fantasy.

1) It is slightly more expensive to collect a Warhammer army over 40k - it does vary with armies as some armies (Ogres) can be collected on a shoe string budget! 2 Battalion boxes and you're done! Add one or two cool units to make the army look/play better and you're well done!

2) When you collect and field an army it feels VERY much like an army! The joy of seeing our miniatures ranked up in file and rank is a great feeling! Deployment tends to see our armies deployed in the same zone - were as in 40k the spaced nature of the units, deployment (Dawn of War for e.g) makes 40k feel like an engagement building up to a war, but in Warhammer even with just 2000 points you know you have an actual army to command. So very strong visual appeal.

3) Game play- 8th is a very smooth flowing game, like 40k, and you'll find the turns just race by. There is also a lot of back and forth ebb of game flow - just like 40k - and a lot of the times it's hard to know who has won until the person has won! This is a HUGE improvement on the old ed were you would know at a certain point there was NOTHING you could do to avoid the defeat - it was about causing as much hurt as possible before you went down. Now there is no way of knowing if you're going to make it - lots of highs/lows then role reversals as you're low and the other side is high! While it is true there are more random elements that were introduced into Warhammer 8th, they also serve to add the greatest joys of the game - it's much more seat of your pants excitement than the old static 7th ed was, and the game has come a long way!

4) Collecting: With so many books just recently redone (Orcs & Goblins, Tomb Kings, Ogres, Storm of Magic), with a host of new models, we're in one of the most exciting times right now with Warhammer - it's like something new pops up every other month! Splash releases also came back with a really good vampire counts release - so we're feeling a lot of Warhammer love and support! The armies themselves are gorgeous to collect - 40k has an extremely strong model line up - some of the best by GW - but Warhammer also has it's own feel/look which is a joy to collect.

5) Popularity - hit and miss - in our area we're fine - lot's of players (We just sold out a 26 person Warhammer event in like 3 weeks!) but some areas I heard it nose dived. It's going to be something only you can find out in your own local area.

6) Were to start: My advice for newbies is thus:

- Walk into the gaming store
- Look at the various battalions and grab the ones that look interesting - put them on a tab
- Once you have done that sort the boxes out into like and REALLY LIKE - dispose of the likes!
- Now you should be left with 2-3 armies to chose from. Grab their corresponding army books and flick through them - which are the top 2 that excite you? Go for the look of the models, read some of the back ground stories - does anything set fire to your imagination?
- Whoever gets the most mental votes...WINS!

Buy a battalion, a character, and an army book - assemble said models as you read and re-read the book. Try out some games to get a feel for it and then expand to 1000 points.

Armies are best when collected in blocks of 500 points.

Eventually aim to have a 2,500 point army so you can play any kind of game - and if you really get the Warhammer bug don't stop! My Orcs & Goblins have hit over 13,500 points and are still going strong!

Most importantly...


WELCOME TO WARHAMMER!!!

Ozorik
25-10-2011, 18:19
I am always saddened by opinions that Ozorik are airing.


Heh. I find it saddening how I have absolutely no desire to play fantasy again.


I won't argue that, but exactly what is "too pronounced?"
What ever you think it is.

My favourite Warhammer edition is Warhammer Ancient Battles 2.0, basically 6th ed but with some very worthy extras.

TheOneHawk
25-10-2011, 18:29
Out of curiousity, Ozorik, how many games of 8th did you play before writing it off. I hated it at first too. I thought it was dumbed down and random. Then I played for a while and fell in love with it.

Karak Norn Clansman
25-10-2011, 18:38
To me, Warhammer 8th edition is a lot funnier than 6th, which was balanced but quite tawdry, or 7th, which was a magic item character fest along with very hard-hitting special units (the "deathstars"). The emphasis on ranked infantry is welcomed, and we can finally see huge units on the battlefield as a common occurence. The downside is that skirmishers and cavalry have become quite rare. The introduction of more monsters and warmachines is fine and balanced as far as I've found out, but magic can be a bugger.

One need some strong spells to counter the infantry hordes, and level 4 wizards are entering almost every army in 8th edition. To me, this isn't much of a problem. Warhamer is supposed to have its heavy dose of magic, and since no rules set survives the players, it is hard to tailor a perfect set of rules. 8th is the best edition so far in my experience, and plays reasonably fast (especially if you magnetize every unit).

Moreover I agree with Jind_Singh.

Malorian
25-10-2011, 18:39
So just how good is WFB?

Chuck Norris hung up his nunchucks to play 8th ed.

popisdead
25-10-2011, 19:55
In terms of fun. Yes. Its very fun.

With good friendly opponents it is very very fun!

Rogue
25-10-2011, 21:25
I have been a long player of 40K and occasionally got interested in starting WFB. I know it's older than 40K, but just how fun is it in 8th edition? Are a lot of WFB games available to you at you LGS?

As some of the more sagely advice has already been posted, you really do need to play a few games and see if you like the game. Given your background, I would imagine that you would like WFB in the 8th edition given that it is 40K only in fantasy for a lot of rules. Personally, I am doing the opposite of what you are doing, in that I am starting 40K. The only difference is that you may still play 40K, but I am not playing WFB anymore. If you or anyone else wants to know why, please feel free to read my blog in my signature.

Rogue
25-10-2011, 21:30
To me, Warhammer 8th edition is a lot funnier than 6th, which was balanced but quite tawdry

You are more than welcome to PM me with a reply, but what exactly do you mean by "tawdry" concerning the 6th edition.

Jind_Singh
25-10-2011, 21:51
Out of interest Far Seer any armies in particular you kinda like the look of?

And also - what about Warhammer would interest you most? You already play 40k so there must be certain criteria you're looking to evaluate prior to making a decision -post them up so we can see!!!

Far Seer
26-10-2011, 05:31
Wow, I didn't expect so many replies! The thing that attracts me most to WFB is the complete change in background from the grimdark of 40K, as well as the different rules. Out of the armies GW has made, I like High Elves and Lizardmen the most, simply because I like the models. I just really hope I don't get hooked on to WFB like I did with 40K, and start 3 armies in 3 years!

Lord Solar Plexus
26-10-2011, 05:56
Then you better don't start in the first place, Far Seer.



What ever you think it is.


Then why do you keep trying to talk everyone else into your opinion? By now we've all got the gist of it I gather.

jtrowell
26-10-2011, 08:08
One thing I would advise you would be to see if you're interested by one of the few armies that got a new book for 8th edition:
- Orcs & Goblins
- Tomb Kings
- Ogres Kingdoms

All those armies have fairly good internal and external balance, with almost no choice that is eitheir too powerful or too weak, and even the few ones at both extremes (snortlings, tomb king casket of souls, ...) can be taken or ignored without leaving your army non competitive or overpowered.

Older armies still have book from older editions where some choices are unuseable, overpowered, or too cheap, limiting the choices if you want a fun game.

Some armies have only a few choice left that are viable or strongs:

- Vampire counts with their goul spam, as their other core units are overcosted in the new ruleset, like the Tomb kings were before their new book, but they are supposed to be the next book early 2012 if the rumours are true)

- Wood elves where the only true competitive choices are Glade Guard and forest spirits, the rest being overcosted and/or almost useless in the new system (a true skirmishing army is no longer trully workable)

Other are good for most of their army but suffer of a few overpowered or unfun choices.

Liber
26-10-2011, 09:22
Warhammer Fantasy is *********** awesome.


I started out with 40k with my high school friends...then one of those friends decided to try out Vampire Counts, so i said i would buy a few dwarfs just for the heck of it...and i was hooked.

Haven't played or cared about 40k (which i used to love) for almost 6 years now.

So be warned Far Seer! You just might like it too much :)

Urgat
26-10-2011, 09:34
Wow, I didn't expect so many replies! The thing that attracts me most to WFB is the complete change in background from the grimdark of 40K, as well as the different rules. Out of the armies GW has made, I like High Elves and Lizardmen the most, simply because I like the models. I just really hope I don't get hooked on to WFB like I did with 40K, and start 3 armies in 3 years!

Well, you got one of two points down:
1) what army you prefer, mini/fluff wise
2) what kind of gameplay attracts you most. Do you prefer big hordes of weak troops that swamp everything, few elites that smash through things, whitering down with ranged fire then finish off in melee, or no ranged fire at all? Do you see yourself going big on magic, or merely restraining yourself to the needed minimum (killy wizard of killing or some dispell ability)? DO you like your troops to be running around, or are you more of the innamovible kind?
subsidiary 3) do you like big monsters or not?

High Elves and Lizardmen can do a bit of all that to an extent, for instance.

Btw, my opinion is that WFB has never been so good as it is now. I don't care of all the other considerations but one: fun? And yeah: it's flipping plastic fun.

On army "viability": it boils down to your playing group. Any book and any build will work fine if you don't play people who's only goal is to create THE list designed to ground you as bad as possible.

Jack of Blades
26-10-2011, 09:42
The thing that attracts me most to WFB is the complete change in background from the grimdark of 40K

You're saying Fantasy is a change from grimdark?

You and the fluff could need an urgent meeting it seems :p but yeah to an extent that's true.

Ozorik
26-10-2011, 11:38
Then why do you keep trying to talk everyone else into your opinion? By now we've all got the gist of it I gather.

Isn't that essentially the point of a forum (and arguably what you are doing yourself)? Besides surely the OP would prefer to have something more balanced than simply saying that 8th is great.

lbecks
26-10-2011, 12:11
At the very least it's Warhammer: Fantasy Battles and not Warhammer: Space Marines. Gosh I hope that contingents rumor is true.

Daniel36
26-10-2011, 12:27
8th ed has really divided the old warhammer fantasy community- there are older players who love it, there are older players who hate it-

I think it comes down to a conscious decision by GW to cede skirmish style play to Privateer Press, thus rather than competing directly with PP, GW has instead gone the other route and filled a niche-

What this really means is that if you were a big fan of small units backed by super elite characters you have abandoned WFB 8th edition, and are probably playing Hordemachine (where the skirmish style, and armies built around a single character appeal to you).

However, if you have love for the common soldier, and never cared much for special characters, or not having your general's death decide the game, and have a desire to flood the table with models 8th edition is your favorite-

All of the love or hate for 8th really come down to this: Do you like smaller scale skirmish type battles where every model is unique and special- or do you like fielding massive hordes of troops, and like lots of death and destruction.

Personally, warma-hordes is fun to play, but boring to watch- which is why some areas use a stop watch, or turn time limit to speed up gameplay- WFB I've found is not just fun to play but can actually be enjoyable to watch- especially on a well done table, with well painted miniatures-

Russelmoo is hereby the hero of this thread.

He has summed it up better than I can.

I hated 7th ed. I painted a couple of miniatures for two armies during that period, and played about 2 loose battles and I think one local tournament. The tournament I suppose was fun, but only because I annihilated a High Elf death star unit with a stand and shoot reaction of 5 Glade Guards.

8th ed. has so far netted me more losses than wins, but that is because my army (Wood Elves) is still tailored to the 7th ed. style of play, and they have been gutted rules wise. However, as I am of the camp that LOVES mass warfare and the common soldier, I am currently hard at work on painting up an Empire force (can't get more common than that... well... unless you choose Brettonia) that is going to feature more horde formations than anything else.

I am super excited to start using that army, even if it will still take me a while, because, honestly, 8th ed. IS going to cost you more money... for the hordes...

Sh4d0w
26-10-2011, 12:31
Can i just say to Farseer that it is very important you pick an army that you like the look of..........BUT try not to pick wood elves i know im going to get some hate here but they really are for more advanced players who want a challenge.

Just a note of 8th edition from me, when me and my mate heard on these forums about 8th we weren't so keen. After the release and seeing all the rules we were even less keen. After playing 10 or so games with our 3k armies, me (dark elves) and him (lizardmen) we absolutely despised it. It seemed totally random, we both hated the magic and what it could do. So we both sold our armies and stopped playing for a while. Then we got bored and decided to both try 8th with new armies.

Needless to say it worked a treat. I opted for my first love (dwarfs) which i chose because i hated magic and i knew that they could effectively remove it from the game, my mate opted for chaos, his original favorite army. He also loved the change. I think the main difference from 7th and 8th edition is that every army is playable and you can win with. Against some armies in 7th winning was virtually impossible if your opponent was experienced.

I think that Ozorik needs to try a different army because it means you can start fresh with your lists and ideas for your new army whereas the problem me and my mate had was we had perfected our armies to 7th edition and 8th edition changes made us felt like we'd taken 3 huge steps backwards that we couldn't recover from.

Daniel36
26-10-2011, 12:39
Sh4d0w came up with an interesting point that I would like to elaborate on.

Right now, not every army works that great in 8th, because their army book has either a 7th ed. mindset, or worse, a 6th ed. one, but when you look at the 3 army books released so far, to me it feels GW finally decided to abandon the "power creep" deal that many armies in previous editions suffered from (or benefited, depending on your point of view), and try to go for balance, with a few things to make the army stand out from others.

I could be wrong, and these are only the first three books, and others may disagree on my point of view with equally valid reasoning, but I do believe that with the new books they are really trying to balance things out and return to what makes this game fun.