PDA

View Full Version : 40k convert seeking general information



redbaron998
13-02-2007, 11:06
Hey, I have been drawn recently from my dark future of only war to a dark past of only war...oh well i guess im the only one who thought that was funny



Ok a few questions.

1. I have heard recently about fantasy really picking up in the 40k forums with thier new edition. What kinda success are we looking at here because our fantasy players at my Hobby Town have all seemed to vanish

2. Is GW any better to the gamer community with fantasy than 40k? As in communication and responding to the publics overal opinions?

3. Are there any armies that are just plain not worth it? I know in like 40k Orcs for example are so outdated there isnt even a point in playing them untill they get updated in anouth year+.

4. What is the most common army? Is the market saturated with one like in 40k about 50% of players play SM.

Any help is appreciated thanks

lilljonas
13-02-2007, 12:14
3) Not entire armies, more like different army builds lose or power between editions, but I can't think of an army that is "unplayable". Most people seems to agree that a fantasy game is less decided during army list construction than 40K.

4) Nothing is close to SM in fantasy. Sure, there's a lot of Empire, O&G and Chaos players, but it's still pretty even among the armies that have army books.

Grymlok
13-02-2007, 12:41
1. where I game the slight majority are into fantasy. there are a few people who play both systems, including myself, although I firmly believe that fantasy is the superior system.

40k does seem to attract more secondary school aged gamers than it did before, which may be down to some of the rediculous stuff they write as background material in codexs and the like (you know the "primarch fought the bad guy for 10 days without stopping". They should tone down some of the background stories.

for example there used to be a special character in the
space wolves codex who had a higher strength than Leman Russ acording to his description. I'm sure his strength was only 7. He had a story about his last act of holding back 100 orks to allow the rest to escape (I may well have that wrong as I have long since lost the codex). that same character
now would have a story of how he held of 10,000 orks with his bare hands

2. pass

3. if I was loaded I'd buy one of every fantasy army, I can't say I'd do the same in 40K.

4. ask two different GW staff and they'll give you two different responses. probably varies across the country. you could check tournament results in the forums to get an idea though.

TheWarSmith
13-02-2007, 12:57
1. This REALLY depends on your community. I've seen areas with heavy 40k concentrations and no fantasy, but then it turns as players get bored, and switches back and forth. Just do a bit of investigation on your community to see if fantasy could make a swing. Often small groups form larger when people hear that fantasy may be making a revival in a now fantasyless zone.

2. It's really about the same. Many fantasy players will complain, but we get closealmost, if not equal attention that 40k does

3. Some are rediculously outdated and don't have current books(chaos dwarves and DoW). But really there's no army that's OMG AWFUL!!


4. No, there's no Space Marine or Tau that EVERYBODY and their grandma plays. Partly because unlike 40k, there aren't 50 types of 1 army. You will see a lot of O&G and dwarves right now since they came in the 7th edition starter box so a lot are using them as cheap ways to play.

Any help is appreciated thanks[/QUOTE]

gORCUS
13-02-2007, 16:32
1) Where I play, fantasy is the game of choice, in fact last weekend was the first time I've ever seen 40 ga... I mean 40 K, played at our store.

2) Can't say, as I don't know how the 40K crowd is treated by GW.

3) There are armies you probably want to hold off on as they will be redone within a year or two, but none are really unplayable. Just check the rumors to see what's in the works for fantasy.

4) There is no one dominating army. I've seen a lot of dwarves and and wood elves lately, but thats probably just because they are "winning" armies. I haven't seen that many ogre kingdoms(my army), tomb kings or chaos dwarves( which I know aren't current, but neither are DoW, and I know two local gamers playing them).

I heartily recommend fantasy, I haven't played 40K, but from what I've heard there is a lot more strategy in fantasy. The main drawback is the size of the commonly played 2000 point army, generally a lot bigger than any 40K army I've ever seen. It costs in both time and money.

Hope that helps!

BodhiTree
13-02-2007, 16:46
I've stepped over into the realm of Fantasy myself, and there is one major difference that I can see. 40k has a lot of background you can read about, but the fact that it's so humanity-centric kind of hobbles it. This being said, there are so many factions that seem to have big secrets and such. In Fantasy, I've been overwhelmed by the amount of background there is to read. I can barely digest it all. In 40k there are a handful of extreme power-players that are working to save or screw over the galaxy, but in Fantasy there are so many ridiculously awesome characters that have their own agendas, and more often than not work to screw over people in their own 'race'. For this reason alone, Fantasy already has more depth than 40k.

Paulus
13-02-2007, 17:38
Think everyone who's responded has pretty much covered things but I'll give it a bash anyway!


1. I have heard recently about fantasy really picking up in the 40k forums with thier new edition. What kinda success are we looking at here because our fantasy players at my Hobby Town have all seemed to vanish

Only you could answer this I'm afraid, every area/gaming club's different.

I should imagine you could find a few players in your area though.


2. Is GW any better to the gamer community with fantasy than 40k? As in communication and responding to the publics overal opinions?

Not really, as Warsmith say's we get almost as much attention as 40K, just doesn't seem like it because of the never ending stream of Space Marines.


3. Are there any armies that are just plain not worth it? I know in like 40k Orcs for example are so outdated there isnt even a point in playing them untill they get updated in anouth year+.

Only armies without many/any of the shelf mini's are Chaos Dwarf's & Dog's of War - These are still very playable but offer much more of a challenge to collect. They WILL cost you more & alot more modelling may be involved, this may be what you want though.

High Elves & Vampire Count's are next to be updated (this will take you into '08, beyond that is guess work, even if an educated guess) but these 2 armies are still collectable/playable.


4. What is the most common army? Is the market saturated with one like in 40k about 50% of players play SM.

There isn't one really!

My advice to you would be go to GW's site, read some background on each & look at the models, see which suit you best & go from there.

ENJOY!

Heretic Burner
13-02-2007, 23:32
1. As in any big release you might get a temporary bump but nothing long lasting. What numbers of fantasy players you've seen before, you'll likely see about the same in a month or two. If they've already vanished, well you are probably out of luck.

2. Better to the gaming community? Of course not. Space Marines are GW's baby. Fantasy is generally an afterthought. Since GW very rarely communicate or respond to the public opinions in 40K you certainly aren't going to see any difference for fantasy. If anything their response is at an all time low, they've even taken away the forums on the website.

3. Yes! Many armies. Fantasy Orcs have been released with a ghastly army book (codex equivalent). And while you might have to wait a year+ for a new Ork codex, you're looking at a good 6 or so for the Orc and Goblin disaster to be fixed. Other extremely poorly thought out armies include Ogre Kingdoms (very long wait for another army book) and Dark Elves (shorter wait but still significant).

4. Fortunately no. But expect to see a lot of similar dwarf and O&G armies (due to the Battle for Skull Pass release). Chaos is always very popular as well as is Empire.

dominic_carrillo
13-02-2007, 23:41
in our group, 40K players are usually 12 year old kids who just want to play tau against marines or marines agaisnt marines, or spacewolves versus dark angels versus tau versus chaos marines versus marines versus eldar versus marines.

needless to say we avoid those young fools at every cost.
fantasy is a better game, its like checkers and chess compared to 40K.

the coolest thing about WFB is that the equivalent of space marines could be beaten by the equivalent of imperial gaurd. whereas in 40K, space marines can kill everything and anything with both arms tied behind their backs.

Paulus
13-02-2007, 23:59
1. As in any big release you might get a temporary bump but nothing long lasting. What numbers of fantasy players you've seen before, you'll likely see about the same in a month or two. If they've already vanished, well you are probably out of luck.

2. Better to the gaming community? Of course not. Space Marines are GW's baby. Fantasy is generally an afterthought. Since GW very rarely communicate or respond to the public opinions in 40K you certainly aren't going to see any difference for fantasy. If anything their response is at an all time low, they've even taken away the forums on the website.

3. Yes! Many armies. Fantasy Orcs have been released with a ghastly army book (codex equivalent). And while you might have to wait a year+ for a new Ork codex, you're looking at a good 6 or so for the Orc and Goblin disaster to be fixed. Other extremely poorly thought out armies include Ogre Kingdoms (very long wait for another army book) and Dark Elves (shorter wait but still significant).

4. Fortunately no. But expect to see a lot of similar dwarf and O&G armies (due to the Battle for Skull Pass release). Chaos is always very popular as well as is Empire.

Someone clearly prefers 40K ;)

boardbox
14-02-2007, 00:42
1) Area and group. Within my group fantasy is more popular and in my area 40k seems to be the game of choice.

2) Meh. Most of the whining I hear on either side pertains to a particular type of player. Try asking an HE powergamer about archers sometime.

3) No army is really underpowered. Different units and builds lose or gain power as the game evolves. You wouldn't have a lot of fun with a HE archer army but take a balanced or cav list and there's nothing wrong with the army. Or taking small orc armies is kinda silly.

4) I think the most common army in fantasy is the one that's just released (not empire, just in general). So if you want something that doesn't seem common just go back a few releases. There is nothing that even remotely compares to SM's in 40k

Just an afterthought, comparing the two games I think fantasy is the better game. I like the fluff more. It tends to be more reasonable then some of the stuff outta 40k. Also, armies I feel are a little easier to break in 40k and I don't think it's as tactical as fantasy once you hit the battlefield. Since the game favors shooting and there are few penalties when shooting, it isn't hard to determine how an army will fare on the basis of raw firepower while in fantasy a lot of the game happens in the movement phase and it is deadly for a flank to collapse. Just an inch off in your movement phase in fantasy can spell doom but in 40k you can just all ahead full into good firing positions.