Warhammer Fantasy too fantastical?

[The bearded one]

I have 3 armies without cavalry.

[vcassano]

I have two armies that revolve around cavalry... doesn't really mean anything. Some cavalry units are over-priced due to the last edition of rules favouring them. This should be ironed out.

[Durloth]

In my opinion, in the current trend there are more lights than shadows. I have started playing with the 4th ed and the fluff has been evolving dramatically since then.
I agree with Bubble Ghost that the current edition, in terms of fluff is a step backwards in relation to the 6th and 7th. And this is a pity, somehow, because books have really become beautiful to read or just to look at, but in all of them, after reading the background I was left with a feeling of having something less than the previous edition army book was. I also consider those years as the gold era of the warhammer background evolution and feel that the current one has lost a bit of depth and well placed historical references.
However, from all other perspectives, the game is simply stunning and all related sectors have expanded so much (minis, scenery, conversions possibilities, reference material at disposal, accessories)! I was one of those whining a lot for the passage from metal to plastics, but now, even if I am still not entirely convinced, when I look at my table and all scenery elements and miniatures deployed, what an eyecatcher that scene is!
Rulewise, and this is merely a personal opinion, I prefer 8ed to all others, because it allows big monsters and devices and powerful characters (which are just spectacular on the battlefield) without unbalancing the game like it used to happen in 4th ed (and a bit less in 5th).
Finally, from a "technical" point of view, the level of detail and the esthetic of the new miniatures (with some exceptions, IMHO, like the empire griffon) are most of the times fantastic and this is what keeps me buying GW miniatures even if I have two cupboards full of painted miniatures and other two filled with unopened boxes...

This is exactly the text I was going to write. Thanks for saving me the trouble Roi

[Urgat]

I have 3 armies without cavalry.

Considering two of the three armies don't even have a cavalry choice, and the third one's only cavalry unit is known for being too expensive (and, more importantly in my case, having ugly models), this is highly indicative on 8th ed meta.

edit: besides... "cough cough", from only a couple weeks ago

[Mr Ogre]

On the subject of flanking and steadfast, I'm of the opinion that if a unit is attaced on two or more fronts, then it loses steadfast. Nothing ruins discipline like the threat of being surrounded.

Also means it takes that little bit more skill than just an isolated flank charge to crumble the enemy line.