Are army books getting weaker?

[yabbadabba]

Count me in amongst the concerned old geezers who liked things more in the good old days

lol good old days .... there was just as much abuse and redundancy as now.

[Ultimate Life Form]

I expect them to go up in points as many infantry have. It is really a bit silly for them to be cheaper than goblins and at the same time being so much better. However there's a great lot of spells that's tailored exactly against that type of unit, and they die in droves to pretty much anything. War Machines will completely obliterate them. I like how the Skaven hate went straight from the strongest unit to the weakest unit. They can be nasty - but honestly if you don't know how to kill them you're doing something wrong.

[happy_doctor]

lol good old days .... there was just as much abuse and redundancy as now.

True, rose tinted glasses and all that... However (and I'm talking 6th and early 7th here) there was a time when the quality of the unit itself was less important than the place it occupied in the battlefield; with proper maneuvering you could make anything from Forsaken to Rat Swarms work. If you asked me some years back what a unit's most important characteristic was, I'd reply "movement" without a second thought.

But I'm probably steering off topic here...

[Urgat]

lol good old days .... there was just as much abuse and redundancy as now.

It was worse actually. You got the megalord of ultimate magic combo rofl-stomp the opposing lord, or lose.

[hashrat]

It was worse actually. You got the megalord of ultimate magic combo rofl-stomp the opposing lord, or lose.

That is just how you played the game, that has nothing to do with the rules, just the games doing their utmost to bend them to gain advantage.

[Urgat]

That is just how you played the game, that has nothing to do with the rules, just the games doing their utmost to bend them to gain advantage.

I didn't play like that, everybody did. That's what happens if you allow people to put 50% of their points in their characters: they make one character with 50% of the army, and it can kill anything easily.

[Dnd_dad]

With casting pool completely changed I'd say that the game is more balanced. I don't miss games where my opposition is sporting 20+ casting pool.

[yabbadabba]

I didn't play like that, everybody did. That's what happens if you allow people to put 50% of their points in their characters: they make one character with 50% of the army, and it can kill anything easily.

Add into that a magic tiem allowance of 3 per character, with the top points cost of a magic item being around 150pts, Khorne Lords were something nobody wanted to face without some serious support.

[Duke Danse Macabre]

Perhaps 9th edition will bring back the good old days.
I'm already sick of people trying to sell us monsters which any stead fast infantry unit can beat and then being charged extra for that monster having fear and terror which lost its edge after 7th edition.

Maybe we will get lucky and they will start bringing in unit size caps across the board, may not be a bad thing if done well.

[yabbadabba]

Perhaps 9th edition will bring back the good old days.

Which good old days? For me, 8th almost does it.

I'm already sick of people trying to sell us monsters which any stead fast infantry unit can beat and then being charged extra for that monster having fear and terror which lost its edge after 7th edition.

Then ignore them.

Maybe we will get lucky and they will start bringing in unit size caps across the board, may not be a bad thing if done well.

Why would you want unit caps? A few units could with them (Skaven slaves, I am looking at you!) but its not needed for the vays majority of units.

[Urgat]

Perhaps 9th edition will bring back the good old days.
I'm already sick of people trying to sell us monsters which any stead fast infantry unit can beat and then being charged extra for that monster having fear and terror which lost its edge after 7th edition.

Maybe we will get lucky and they will start bringing in unit size caps across the board, may not be a bad thing if done well.

Which good old days? For me, 8th almost does it.
Then ignore them.
Why would you want unit caps? A few units could with them (Skaven slaves, I am looking at you!) but its not needed for the vays majority of units.

Well clearly, his good old days were when monsters could trash infantry no matter the size of the unit (better monsters, unit caps...). I like it better now, monsters still do their job just fine if they don't try to chew bigger than what they can handle. I agree terror and so on are much less important, but I was kinda fed up of the terror bomb runs, good riddance.

[vinny t]

Let's go through the new army books and see the changes.

Orcs and Goblins - The new army book is greatly improved compared to the old one. There is much more variety and overall a much more balanced book. The broken animosity rules were improved and overall the new book is much stronger.
Consensus: Better

Ogres - This one isn't even a contest. The new book is vastly superior compared to the old one for many many reasons I'm sure everyone's aware of.
Consensus: Much Better

Vampire Counts - Now this one is a little harder to judge. The old book had a few outdated rules that were easy to exploit which resulted in many similar broken lists. The new book adds a little more variety but overall probably decreases the power level a tad.
Consensus: Weaker, but more balanced

Empire - Got rid of a few broken things, and nerfed a few other ones. Didn't really improve much but balanced the book a little.
Consensus: Weaker

Tomb Kings - Went from a crappy book to a slightly better but still crappy book. Sphinxes and Necro Knights are the best options but are still a little underwhelming.
Consensus: Better, but still bad

So it looks like overall, 8th edition books have increased slightly in power level and have gotten a whole lot more balanced.

[Nymie_the_Pooh]

At this point with the releases for the army books things seem to be less about making armies stronger with each new book and more about trying to balance them all against each other. There are some older army books that fall behind, and some that have options that imbalance the game in their favour quite a bit due to edition changes. The new books have been pretty good about taking out those high end options while boosting the less competitive options. Things aren't perfect, but the books printed so far in this edition are better balanced against each other than I can remember army books being in the last two editions.

[oldWitheredCorpse]

Tomb Kings - Went from a crappy book to a slightly better but still crappy book. Sphinxes and Necro Knights are the best options but are still a little underwhelming.
Consensus: Better, but still bad

The old book was perfect for 6th edition, if a bit boring when it came to the number of viable builds. It struggled to keep up with 7th edition power armies, though. The new book is radically different (the new magic phase is hard to adapt to), but might just turn out fine if power creep doesn't strike back too soon.

[Urgat]

Well, powercreep had already started during 7th ed, iirc, the 4th armybook released was Vampire Counts (which was nasty before we switched to 8th), and next was demons. Fourth is VC again (much milder now) and next Empire. For now we're quite safe, no? In hindsight, there wasn't much of a powercreep during 7th ed, it was like a powerspike, it went from OnG, Empire right to HE, VC, demons. Two completely different power levels in two, three releases (HE was in between imho). After that it was pretty random, but it never really dropped down or increased that much. Too bad for OnG, Empire, and those 6th ed books that weren't replaced.

[Ultimate Life Form]

Orcs and Goblins - The new army book is greatly improved compared to the old one. There is much more variety and overall a much more balanced book. The broken animosity rules were improved and overall the new book is much stronger.
Consensus: Better

Dunno, I know someone who regularly attends to tournaments and was a passionate O&G player (even through 7th, though preferably not at tournaments). However now he stated that since the update he just has no idea how to make them work anymore. He attributes this mostly to the loss of his favorite, the Waaagh spell. Then again maybe he's not as good as he likes to think.

[Rosstifer]

Dunno, I know someone who regularly attends to tournaments and was a passionate O&G player (even through 7th, though preferably not at tournaments). However now he stated that since the update he just has no idea how to make them work anymore. He attributes this mostly to the loss of his favorite, the Waaagh spell. Then again maybe he's not as good as he likes to think.

They have certainly done better percentage wise at Tournaments with the new book, they aren't really winning or placing often though. The very nature of the army makes it hard to do so, in a 6 game tournament you'll have at least one game where it all goes a bit wrong.

[Urgat]

Dunno, I know someone who regularly attends to tournaments and was a passionate O&G player (even through 7th, though preferably not at tournaments). However now he stated that since the update he just has no idea how to make them work anymore. He attributes this mostly to the loss of his favorite, the Waaagh spell. Then again maybe he's not as good as he likes to think.

He loses one spell and he doesn't know how to make them work anymore? Don't really have anything to comment on that, in fact.

[IcedCrow]

The good old days. Lulz.

5th edition - you can keep that edition. I hated it. That was the era of super heroes. Troops were table-dressing.

6th edition - when it came out was my favorite. It neutered the hero hammer. A lot of our guys rage quit because they couldn't one shot kill your army with their tooled out lord anymore. I'd have to say 6th edition was my "golden age" of warhammer fantasy. Especially in the beginning before the optimization MSU crap started becoming dominant with the steady increase in reliance on internet and internet lists.

7th edition - you can keep that edition. Chess builds, net lists, the 1/8" dance of doom, the very broken later builds of the demons, dark elves, and VC, MSU spam making armies look like checkerboards as opposed to armies. I rank 7th edition as a half step better than 5th edition in my own personal litany of "i can't stand this". I quit fantasy for 3 years waiting for 7th edition to go away.

8th edition - A potential new golden era for me. Army books that are more or less balanced. Other than some magic that I think needs toning down (the army killer spells like 13th spell, purple sun, etc) and the way that min/maxers switched from MSU to super blobs, with the right gaming group this is by far the best for me.

The new 40k edition is also the best for me IMO. I hope they can rip out the broken codexes over there (grey knights, space wolves, etc) and I have a very happy next four or five years of gaming.

[happy_doctor]

However (and I'm talking 6th and early 7th here) there was a time when the quality of the unit itself was less important than the place it occupied in the battlefield; with proper maneuvering you could make anything from Forsaken to Rat Swarms work. If you asked me some years back what a unit's most important characteristic was, I'd reply "movement" without a second thought.

Just a clarification, read the bold part: I agree that 5th edition was herohammer for most (not my gaming group, but we were the exception). I am talking about 6th edition mainly, plus the 7th edition before the power creep began. So no, gentlemen, I do not mean the days when heroes could singlehandedly turn the battle, nor the monstermash that was late 7th. I mean the days when the game was played more on the field and less on the list building table. Like Iced Crow, I think 6th was the peak of the game, it had some minor issues when it came to movement/charges/redirection as well as a killer magic phase that were both addressed in 7th edition core rules. What the army books of 7th did to the game is a totally different matter, though..