PDA

View Full Version : Is warhammer actually fun.



skullkandy
25-02-2010, 19:44
I have played GW epic for a very long time, and have played about 4 games of 40k, but I've never played any warhammer fantasy. I bought some beastmen a while back when it was the box with the mix of ungors and gors just because I wanted to paint those cool minis. Now I'm considering actually playing and the question I have is Warhammer actually fun.

I read one article somewhere saying how warhammer was more strategic and thoughtful than 40k which is what drew me towards it. I hated how in 40k should be renamed Transporthammer. Every game was won before it already started by picking one of 3 army lists. Then the game itself was completely pointless except the last turn in which everyone just raced their transports to the objectives or table quarters and the winner was whoever had some rule trick to get their transport there faster. It was complety and utterly not about combat, leadership, tactics or anything other than some silly rule combination allowing your transports to get somewhere before the other guy.

I really wanted a thinking mans game where you're trying to out think your opponent and there are lots of factors playing in so that everyone doesn't already know the outcome of the match on turn 1.

So I started reading warhammer fantasy forum posts. Now I know forums are almost always negative and everyone thinks their army is absolutely worthless and can not ever win under any circumstances due to rules. But the impression I got is that warhammer is very similar to 40k where nothing you do matters, there is no chance and combat doesn't matter in the least.

The vision the forums give me of warhammer is that the game consists of cool units chasing weak guys they will never catch and weak guys running around distracting cool troops. The game comes down to each player just moving around trying not to be the one who guesses distance incorrectly and takes a charge. there isn't any fighting until the last turn when everyone finally engages in battle and whichever one guessed distance wrong recieves the charge and loses. I also get the impression that psychology doesn't matter anymore because almost every race has a way to be immune and the ones that don't can't ever win a single game.

Yet again this sounds just like 40k where the winner of the game is the guy who picks the book that was written OP (dual lash in 40k/vampire counts in fantasy) at which point the outcome is 90% decided. The rest of the game is just waiting for the last turn and hoping youre the guy closest to the objective/charge range when it happens. It sounds very much like no one ever enjoys it except the tourny players who take the same cheesy broken impossible to beat army list every time.

someone please tell me this is not the case and a battle can swing back and forth with tactics playing a major role instead of only whoever can visually guess inches the best.

Malorian
25-02-2010, 19:51
Tactics mean more than the list in fantasy.

The main part though is who you play with. If you play with people who don't look at wargaming the same way you do then you won't have as much fun as if you did find people who have the same mind set.


Just watch threads like this as fantasy vs 40k can get very heated very fast...

Don Zeko
25-02-2010, 19:53
In a word, no. Warhammer certainly has its issues, but the picture you're painting here has little relationship to the reality of most games.

Tenken
25-02-2010, 19:54
Warhammer is... sort of fun. It's extremely frustrating, they should really rename is "Psychologyhammer" as that makes the biggest impact on the game (except to vampires and daemons, the two strongest armies.... hmmm). It sucks when you lose a combat because you were outnumbered and the enemy had ranks but you killed more, then you autobreak cuz they cause fear and you get run down. It's really not fun at all.

The movement rules are clunky and arcane, as are LOS. Something can move 1" to your side and you can't do **** about it cuz you can't see it to charge (apparently no one in the warhammer universe knows how to turn their head). And with how wheeling works don't expect your infantry block to do much but move foreward. It's commonly said fantasy has more strategy involved, but that strategy is all in the deployment phase, once that's done everyone just marches forward and whoever had the better match up in deployment zones wins. At least that's true for infantry blocks, fast cav, flyers, and monsters all ignore that generalization.

Fantasy is also balanced to ****. You have noticeable tiers of armies with vampires and daemons sitting comfortably at the top and dark elves nipping at their hells. Meanwhile armies like ogres and orcs and goblins can barely even manage to beat each other at the bottom of the pool.

Ultimate Life Form
25-02-2010, 19:55
Hm...

Most of the points you adressed are at least partially true, but I think that's quite an exaggeration. Most armies fulfill one or more of the criteria you criticize, but never all. Every army has some sort of weakness, even Daemons (their horribly expensive troops), and you need top learn how to exploit those. Yes, if you face Wood Elves, prepare yourself for a game of hide and seek, and yes, Undead are Immune to Psychology but they have other weaknesses.

The main tacticalness of Warhammer comes from you having to place your troops in a favorable position, protecting your flanks while trying to crack the enemy's defense. Also you need to learn your way around efficient use of Magic and Shooting and which enemy unit you can safely engage and which to avoid. Once you get those down, the game is fun (at least to me).

Razakel
25-02-2010, 19:58
Fantasy can often involve a lot of Shooting (Empire, Dwarves, some Orcs & Goblins army), a lot of Magic (High Elves, Dark Elves, Lizardmen). But in almost all situations the army must be equipped for combat, the different Move values in Fantasy mean that it isn't always about guessing distances correctly as you stated.

In fact some armies specialise in getting the charge off (Ogre Kingdoms & Bretonnia come to mind).

Me for example, a large portion 30-40% of my army is composed of Shooting, but I take Lords & Heroes equipped for heavy duty combat, and regularly take at least 3 combat units, that's where my games are decided.

I personally have a lot of fun playing Fantasy, your mileage may vary, I play an army I love with people I like so every game for me is a good laugh. We only rarely use power-house lists because they're boring, but it is certainly possible the players you play with will feel differently.

Nunnja
25-02-2010, 19:59
I played both, and like them both for different reasons, but I have to say I prefer Warhammer to 40K.

I paint more than I play now, but I always remember Warhammer battles as being real thinking exercises where a decent strategy and commitment to said strategy were vital to getting the most from the game.

And as Malorian said, who you play with really makes the difference - a cretinous or pedantic opponent can really suck the fun out of it!

Good luck with making a decision :)

Malorian
25-02-2010, 19:59
"Tacticalness"

My favorite word of the week. Thanks ULF ;)

skullkandy
25-02-2010, 19:59
Thanks for the response. I hope it doesn't turn into flame because I honestly want to hear gamers say that complainging aside it is fun to play and out-thinking your opponent is more important than buying the right army book.

In my opinion there are two types of gamers. The ones who enjoy gaming for it's own sake and find fun in matching wits in a fair fight. Then there are the gamers who are too psychologically fragile to handle the thought of possibly losing at a game and only find fun in the game if the deck is stacked completely in their favor before the game even starts.

I really don't care what the second group thinks because I won't game with people like that anyway. So I'd like to hear from the first group if the impressions given in forums are gross exagerations as I hope they are. To me the way everyone talks about it makes it sound like no one likes playing and everything sucks.

Ultimate Life Form
25-02-2010, 20:01
"Tacticalness"

My favorite word of the week. Thanks ULF ;)

Well, as a non-native speaker, you have to make words up every now and then... :shifty:

(But it's also one of my hobbies in my own language, so don't worry.)

skullkandy
25-02-2010, 20:06
Well, as a non-native speaker, you have to make words up every now and then... :shifty:

(But it's also one of my hobbies in my own language, so don't worry.)

words are just arrangment of sounds as a conduit to convey an abstract thought from one mind to another. So if you make a sound or write a series of symbols and the other minds hearing or viewing it recieve the intended concept then the purpose of the word has been achieved. Therefore if you say it and everyone knows what it means it's a word. Hence why spelling is pointless. Either that or this is my way overthought excuse for being horrid at spelling.

Condottiere
25-02-2010, 20:10
It does depend on the circle that you run with; if everyone is more or less on the same wavelength, you all get the battles that you want to play.

Because Warhammer is "historical", with blocks of troops being common, there is a slightly more strategic aspect to the game. The armies involved are by no means balanced, so how you deal with that invariably has an effect on your enjoyment.

There are lots of facets to this hobby, whether gaming, painting, strategizing, etcetera, all you need to do is figure what parts you happen to like and concentrate on those.

GrogsnotPowwabomba
25-02-2010, 20:10
If you want a truly good, tactical game that doesn't rely on special rules and army lists to win, play Warmaster, Epic 40K, or Flames of War.

Fantasy and 40K are rubbish anymore with all the crazy characters, uber units, item combos, etc. As has been stated before, the LOS and movement rules for Fantasy are clunky, although I applaud the effort and understand what they were aiming for. Also, alot of your success comes down to deployment as has been stated. Another HUGE problem with Fantasy is the lack of missions. In 40K, the various mission types add variety and (in theory) force people to make more balanced armies. In Fantasy, your only option is a pitched battle, which plays out the same way 90% of the time.

I used to love Fantasy, but in the past year or two after being exposed to Flames of War and having gotten back into Warmaster, I just don't find the game enjoyable anymore. It feels more like a chore to play than anything...

Gaargod
25-02-2010, 20:11
Pah! I still disagree that psychology is the weakness of fantasy, or magic, or anything else in the core rules. The weakness is in not playtesting the damm army books, so you end up with stupid rules and ridiculous armies, both good and bad.

But yeah. Its definitely fun. And very different to what you have outlined, actually. You can force people to charge via clever positioning/shooting/whatever - there is very rarely a case of 'sit back and not charge'.
I've only ever had one game of that, with a silly orcs list vs ogres, where my orcs were designed to take advantage of WAAAAGH and could charge, and break, the big ogre units. That was... some time ago. It was also a deliberately mad list on both parts - by taking more shooting/distraction units/cavalry i could have easily broken the 2 turn stalemate. Normally it wouldn't have worked like that at all, but for the last 2 matches with similar lists i'd pulled that trick off, so my opponent was naturally nervous.

Although charging does mean a lot, there are definitely ways to force an opponent's hand (unless he can figure a way to get out of it). Doing something unexpected is also effective (charging a hero alone out of his unit when the unit as a whole couldn't make it for example, to catch/tie up a weak unit).

Remember, warseer is nicknamed whineseer for a reason. Yes, fantasy has its balance issues, probably more so than 40k (dual lash really isn't THAT terrible, nor are nob bikerz), but i defy anyone to say a book is unbeatable. I've played horrific lists before, and crushed them, regularly. I'd like to say i'm fairly good at warhammer, but really its not that difficult. Understand a little bit of probability (i.e. work out the rough average result of a combat, to help you get the gist), research a little bit on effective lists (read a few tacticas here for example - for me its got to the stage where i can criticise lists' of most races, even if i don't play them), play some games and you should be able to win at most levels.


Note: that's for COMPETITIVE games. In a friendly match, you don't need to do any of the above. Hell, in a 'soft' area, you don't need it. Even just watching games can be extremely enjoyable, never mind playing it.

Fantasy is my favourite of the 3 systems - 40k just seems a little light on tactics some times, whereas WotR needs a little polish (although personally, i feel if it had the right 'push', such as more minis, more time in the spotlight, a decent FAQ, it could be the best of them).


EDIT: Ninja'd. 9 times! Christ you people type fast...

Gork or Possibly Mork
25-02-2010, 20:12
The only advice I can give to you is find some WHFB friends who care more about fun than building powerful list.

Yes sometimes list won't do well against others but most of the time even the underdog has a fighting chance.

WHFB does have some balance issues ( what complex game doesn't ) but it's full of tactics and alot of fun if you can find like minded people who don't care much about winning/losing and just wanna have a good time.

Tbh the first few times I played WHFB I didn't like it. Mostly because I didn't know the rules or tactics involved and I never won a game. Later as I learned how to play and got some wins under my belt I learned it doesn't matter as long as you have fun. If you can find friends that feel the same you can't go wrong.

Tarliyn
25-02-2010, 20:14
I find warhammer extremely fun! It is my favorite of the half dozen or so rule sets I have tried (Fantasy, 40k, Warmachine/Hordes, some histroricals).

Has far as tatics go these are things that I have boiled each of the big three fantasy/scifi games out there down to:

40k: Target Priority. 40k is all about knowing which things you have to destroy so you can capture the kill points/objectives.
Warmahine/Hordes: This has either risk management or resource management based off of wither you play hordes or warmachine. This also has Target Priority as you have to figure out what to kill in order to get to their caster (which is how you end the game).
Fantasy: Movement and psychology. The game can be lost in the movement phase. While things like target priority are important to, it is a little less so since rather than trying to focus fire something down you are engaged in battle at multiple points all of which can decide a battle. Psychology is also very important but not in a bad way. What do you need to do to cause a panic check? How can I keep my general/bsb close so my units can pass that fear/break test more reliably? I find there are more things to consider when playing fantasy. There even is some light resource management in fantasy during the magic phase. That being said fantasy as its flaws as well, the plethora of big monsters that are retarded powerful is a plague that haunts this edition, and last edition it was either cav or shooting armies, next edition who knows what it will be. The only thing I am certain of is there will be something that overshadows everything, that is the nature of these kinda games though.

In short, I think fantasy gives you way more things to consider while playing and I enjoy it immensely.

Edit: Also as been said above, while playing some uber competive games can be fun from time to time; the most fun you will have with any miniature game is to make sure you and your play group are focused on having fun and not winning. Sounds obvious but many miss the point entirely.

Edit2: Also in regards to people playing to win. I have a little story that helps explain those people. I had a friend in college who wanted to join our magic play group. Now this friend was normally pretty laid back but when he played magic it was cutthroat. Why was this you ask? Well he had never played magic before joining our group, so he felt like he had something to prove. He didn't have to prove anything to us but more to himself. After he got some wins under his belt though he settled down and began to see how the rest of the group played and soon settled in. So if you get a new player give them a chance to get over their insecurities about winning and soon they will settle down. Obviously it doesn't work that way for everyone but I think it is more universal than people think. I myself was even the same way when I started playing fantasy, but now that I have some wins under my belt it isn't such a big deal if I loose. In fact I got swept the other day in a 1500 point game. He destroyed my entire army and I only got like 400 points of his, but it didn't matter. The game was fun despite all that.

badgeraddict
25-02-2010, 20:15
Is Warhammer actually fun?

What a daft question! I've not so much fun as playing a game of warhammer with friends. Some of the best jokes come out of the woodwork when playing.

The game itself is pretty solid as others have already said.

N810
25-02-2010, 20:20
An good way to get a feel for how the game real plays is to go read some battle
reports, even if you don't understand all the terminology, it will help you get
a feel for how a game is played, and how each army works. ;)

sssk
25-02-2010, 20:31
I think Malorian had it right in his first post. Who you play with is a massive decider in how fun it is.

Personally I like playing for fun games and having a good old chuckle. Winning isn't terribly important, as long as the game was fun (though a win every now and then is nice). Running on this theme, I tend to find that tactics are big part of it, because none of my gaming group brings horribly unbalanced armies to the table. This means that rather than person x winning because they have unit Y which can/will/does destroy everything, it's all down to planning moves well in advance, making sure combats are in your favour etc, as no single unit is particularly likely to steamroll anything.

Also to refer to your point, it's definitely not a case of all the units standing off until the last turn where someone declares charges and either wins or loses depending on if they've guessed their charge range correctly or not. combats occur regularly from at least turn 3 onwards (the first 2 turns are often spent manouvering your troops for cunning charges, or just getting into charge range). Obviously some players use "shooty" army lists (though no army is inherently and necessarily "shooty"), but for the most part shooting is just to help your troops get to combat (by killing units which would otherwise harass them) or to dispose of (or at least weaken) units which are going to be too hard for your troops to beat in combat. Therefore most army lists cannot afford to stand back and not engage. Arguably some extremely magic/shooting heavy lists can, but then this goes back to choosing who you play against (none of my group would crack out one of those legendary 20 billion power dice armies which are sometimes seen on the battlefield).

Anyway, I've started waffling. Suffice to say it's a great game with many a tactical choice to make. If you don't believe me, build those beastmen up to 500pts and have a few small battles (with casual players). Indeed it's arguably even more tactical at small points levels, because every unit is important, even a small unit of goblins can't be thrown away needlessly.

The only way to find out if it's for you is to play and see (see if you can borrow an army if you don't want to buy models till you're sure).

stiltjet
25-02-2010, 20:41
It is a great game! Good fun!

Check out Once Bittens youtube battle reports to get a feel for the game and the tactical decisions involved..

Agoz
25-02-2010, 20:47
I love the game, its my favorite, it has a few problems, but I always come back for more, week after week.

Midloo
25-02-2010, 20:48
I really wanted a thinking mans game where you're trying to out think your opponent and there are lots of factors playing in so that everyone doesn't already know the outcome of the match on turn 1.


Then you should check out Warmaster as most of the thought goes into the tactical considerations that happen during the game instead of the list-building beforehand :)

I've plays tons of WHF and it can be a very fun game, but like any other, it has it's flaws. Those have been weighing on me lately and I've been trying some other systems like WotR and Warmaster. Fantasy can be great fun, but I've been having more consistently fun games with Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game and War of the Ring, as well as Warmaster and WM/Hordes.

Regardless, WHF has tons of lore and is a big, often fun world to explore. If you have the beasts and you have some drive, give it a spin!

Edit
25-02-2010, 21:02
Fantasy is still fun, though I find it not as tactical as it once was, a bit more about beating faces in now. Still you have to beat in the right faces and get into position to do so, so still alot of tactics to it.

However if you are looking for more tactical games, alot of skirmishing games are more so. Ones where you alternate models/units or have resources like action points. I play a little of everything, but the more tactical games are usually smaller where each model matters (if you want to stay in the GW lines, try mordhiem or necromunda) Privateer Press (warmachine/hordes) etc seem more deep on some aspects, but of course lack the "army" feel of fantasy. It basically depends on what local people play, as any wargame, you need people to make it happen.

R Man
25-02-2010, 21:18
Remember, everything presented on Warseer is always portrayed as worse than it really is. Bad things in Warhammer often come from a handful of sources:
Spam, Overdone Magic, Special Characters and Magic item combos. Rarely are units themselves problematic.

For example, even Black Guard are only broken because of the ASF banner. Remove that and the problem goes with it. The Vampire Counts are actually quite reasonable, as it is Invocation Spam that truly breaks them.

And the best idea it not to play with Jerks.

yabbadabba
25-02-2010, 21:20
Is WFB fun? Yes but not as fun as your opponent.

skullkandy
25-02-2010, 21:30
If you want a truly good, tactical game that doesn't rely on special rules and army lists to win, play Warmaster, Epic 40K, or Flames of War.

Fantasy and 40K are rubbish anymore with all the crazy characters, uber units, item combos, etc. As has been stated before, the LOS and movement rules for Fantasy are clunky, although I applaud the effort and understand what they were aiming for. Also, alot of your success comes down to deployment as has been stated. Another HUGE problem with Fantasy is the lack of missions. In 40K, the various mission types add variety and (in theory) force people to make more balanced armies. In Fantasy, your only option is a pitched battle, which plays out the same way 90% of the time.

I used to love Fantasy, but in the past year or two after being exposed to Flames of War and having gotten back into Warmaster, I just don't find the game enjoyable anymore. It feels more like a chore to play than anything...

I come from Epic, that's the GW game that i've played for years and why I disliked 40k so much. Epic was intense and very thoughtful. It depended more on how good you were at thinking one step ahead or really playing against your opponent instead of against his list.

I've heard warmaster is very similar not only in scale but the way it plays out, the only thing I don't like is finding an epic player is rare, finding more than one is unheard of so I imagine warmaster is the same. Also no gaming store carries the minies or has terrain for those games due to so few players.

I may have to google flames of war.

GrogsnotPowwabomba
25-02-2010, 21:45
I come from Epic, that's the GW game that i've played for years and why I disliked 40k so much. Epic was intense and very thoughtful. It depended more on how good you were at thinking one step ahead or really playing against your opponent instead of against his list.

I've heard warmaster is very similar not only in scale but the way it plays out, the only thing I don't like is finding an epic player is rare, finding more than one is unheard of so I imagine warmaster is the same. Also no gaming store carries the minies or has terrain for those games due to so few players.

I may have to google flames of war.

I hear you man...I would have completely quit WFB years before I did if Warmaster players were more common. Flames of War, though, is a very popular game and you should find a good number of players in any metropolitan area.

skullkandy
25-02-2010, 21:52
I think Malorian had it right in his first post. Who you play with is a massive decider in how fun it is.

Personally I like playing for fun games and having a good old chuckle. Winning isn't terribly important, as long as the game was fun (though a win every now and then is nice). Running on this theme, I tend to find that tactics are big part of it, because none of my gaming group brings horribly unbalanced armies to the table. This means that rather than person x winning because they have unit Y which can/will/does destroy everything, it's all down to planning moves well in advance, making sure combats are in your favour etc, as no single unit is particularly likely to steamroll anything.

Also to refer to your point, it's definitely not a case of all the units standing off until the last turn where someone declares charges and either wins or loses depending on if they've guessed their charge range correctly or not. combats occur regularly from at least turn 3 onwards (the first 2 turns are often spent manouvering your troops for cunning charges, or just getting into charge range). Obviously some players use "shooty" army lists (though no army is inherently and necessarily "shooty"), but for the most part shooting is just to help your troops get to combat (by killing units which would otherwise harass them) or to dispose of (or at least weaken) units which are going to be too hard for your troops to beat in combat. Therefore most army lists cannot afford to stand back and not engage. Arguably some extremely magic/shooting heavy lists can, but then this goes back to choosing who you play against (none of my group would crack out one of those legendary 20 billion power dice armies which are sometimes seen on the battlefield).

Anyway, I've started waffling. Suffice to say it's a great game with many a tactical choice to make. If you don't believe me, build those beastmen up to 500pts and have a few small battles (with casual players). Indeed it's arguably even more tactical at small points levels, because every unit is important, even a small unit of goblins can't be thrown away needlessly.

The only way to find out if it's for you is to play and see (see if you can borrow an army if you don't want to buy models till you're sure).

Cool, that's pretty much what I was hoping to hear. The way the forums read everyone makes comments about "it only has 6 move so it's attacks are pointless cause it will never ever get to attack." and "if it's not on a horse it's only purpose is to take a charge and flee." or "no one will ever attack your elite troops so don't waste points on extras."

It made it sound like no one ever actually fought, just danced around each other trying not to be the one who had to use those little painted swords.

I'm definitely going to keep working on my beastmen, but I think i'm also going to see if there are more than 2 people in all of america that play warmaster to get into some of that as well.

Thommy H
25-02-2010, 21:53
Wait...why would anyone play it if it wasn't fun? Some of the replies in this thread makes no sense. How can you not enjoy your own hobby? Don't like it, stop playing: no one's making you.

On topic: yeah, it's fun. That's why I do it. I'd have to be psychotic otherwise.

skullkandy
25-02-2010, 21:55
Fantasy is still fun, though I find it not as tactical as it once was, a bit more about beating faces in now. Still you have to beat in the right faces and get into position to do so, so still alot of tactics to it.

However if you are looking for more tactical games, alot of skirmishing games are more so. Ones where you alternate models/units or have resources like action points. I play a little of everything, but the more tactical games are usually smaller where each model matters (if you want to stay in the GW lines, try mordhiem or necromunda) Privateer Press (warmachine/hordes) etc seem more deep on some aspects, but of course lack the "army" feel of fantasy. It basically depends on what local people play, as any wargame, you need people to make it happen.

I'm going to make a forum no no here and post right after my own post because I somehow didn't notice this above.

Skirmish games are my preferred game type and I love the hell out of some necromunda. god i miss gorka morka.

Corrode
25-02-2010, 22:15
I come from Epic, that's the GW game that i've played for years and why I disliked 40k so much. Epic was intense and very thoughtful. It depended more on how good you were at thinking one step ahead or really playing against your opponent instead of against his list.

I've heard warmaster is very similar not only in scale but the way it plays out, the only thing I don't like is finding an epic player is rare, finding more than one is unheard of so I imagine warmaster is the same. Also no gaming store carries the minies or has terrain for those games due to so few players.

I may have to google flames of war.

I think you have an extremely flawed and one-sided view of both 40k and Fantasy. Neither game is as tactically complex as Epic, but they certainly aren't as awful as you are portraying them to be in this thread, apparently from much hearsay and little experience. I suggest doing less reading of over the top forum posts crying about how X army is broken or Y game involves 'no skill' (usually wargamer-speak for 'I'm not good enough to beat it') and more playing of the games. If you still dislike them, that's fine, what you enjoy is what you enjoy, but giving them a fair go seems an infinitely better plan than just regurgitating Whineseer memes.

skullkandy
25-02-2010, 22:34
I think you have an extremely flawed and one-sided view of both 40k and Fantasy. Neither game is as tactically complex as Epic, but they certainly aren't as awful as you are portraying them to be in this thread, apparently from much hearsay and little experience. I suggest doing less reading of over the top forum posts crying about how X army is broken or Y game involves 'no skill' (usually wargamer-speak for 'I'm not good enough to beat it') and more playing of the games. If you still dislike them, that's fine, what you enjoy is what you enjoy, but giving them a fair go seems an infinitely better plan than just regurgitating Whineseer memes.

You didn't have to be so acusitive there chap. I was neither "regurgitating" nor posing a one sided view of my own.

I was saying that this is what these forums make warhammer sound like and ASKING if this was a true portrayal or just over exaggerated forum talk because I was hoping it was the second.

Corrode
25-02-2010, 22:45
You didn't have to be so acusitive there chap. I was neither "regurgitating" nor posing a one sided view of my own.

I was saying that this is what these forums make warhammer sound like and ASKING if this was a true portrayal or just over exaggerated forum talk because I was hoping it was the second.

I'm not being accusative, but the OP very much sounded like 'this game sucks because this is what the forums say', and basically contained every ill-informed meme about 40k I've seen on the boards. I'm glad to see (on a second read through I have to admit, I'm not at my best) that you've decided to dismiss most of it for the rubbish it is. No offence intended.

N810
25-02-2010, 22:52
Pretty much most things on the internet forums are exaggerations.
In reality the difference between a top teer cheese army and some hopeless bottom teer list
is like a W/L ratio... of like 60/40.

any game can be fun with decent fun players,
also any game can be miserable with terrible obnoxious ones.

skullkandy
25-02-2010, 22:55
I'm not being accusative, but the OP very much sounded like 'this game sucks because this is what the forums say', and basically contained every ill-informed meme about 40k I've seen on the boards. I'm glad to see (on a second read through I have to admit, I'm not at my best) that you've decided to dismiss most of it for the rubbish it is. No offence intended.

It's ok. I did assume it was all forum rubbish. I just needed some of you who have played to reassure me of that assumption before I slap some bills down for more man-toys(as my gf calls them.)

Forums internet wide are renowned for being negative and exagerating the worst in everything. But the overwhelming amount of negativity I read around here about warhammer was starting to give me second thoughts about starting it up.
I had tried to get into 40k when all my great epic friends moved away but every game I watch or played was people just sitting around in transports waiting until the end of the game to rush in at the last second and grab objectives. I think part of that was that I come from a very laid back epic gaming group who played for fun, then i went to my local shop and tried playing 40k you either brought a power list that won tournies and took everything insanely serious or you got laughed out of the store.

I just needed you veteran players to say "dude, it's the internet, people are always calling anything that isn't completely overpowered "worthless" it's no different here." lol

Commissar Vaughn
26-02-2010, 00:41
I think warhammer and 40k can be fun but I don't think I enjoy them as much as I used to: nowadays I mostly play flames of war and black powder which are both awesome. Warhammer and 40k feel clunky and slow by comparison since I started playing them. Still it can't be denied it looks cool and the background is brilliant and that is enough to keep my dogs of war and guardsmen fighting.

StarFyreXXX
26-02-2010, 03:44
Some rules are very frustrating and make the game less fun IMHO (the line of sight is the big one; yes, I can't turn my head to see what's beside me, and other stuff like a slann on a floating platform that he can raise up and down at will, isn't counted as flying in terms of spells that affect the ground).

dumb stuff like that takes away from the game IMHO, but overall, if you remember it's all make believe anyways and don't take the game personally, it's fun to push models around a table :)

Sanjay

txamil
26-02-2010, 05:34
You're looking for a game called Warmachine.

yabbadabba
26-02-2010, 08:24
You're looking for a game called Warmachine. No you are definitely not :D

Seriously try both - they are completely different games and do different things for the gamer.

Crovax20
26-02-2010, 08:44
Playing against WAAC's when you yourself are playing a fun list, that is not min maxed.... sucks. Playing against other fun lists is amazing, with combats being interesting and the game being tense overall.

We got two vampire count players at m LGS, one of them is a WAAC, the other brings a reasonable list. I have had a very tense game against the fun list, which resulted in a minor victory for me because my last turn mortar shot was dead on and mauled his bat unit. Else he would have had a draw because my mortar was about to be charged by it.

The WAAC player, I just couldn't do anything. 3 vampires and a black coach in a 1250 point game... blegh. Resulted in a massacre for him against my Orcs & Goblins. Although the WAAC player redeems himself by running interesting fantasy campaigns (in which he only plays the game master basically)

ferda
26-02-2010, 08:52
wow the first is such a bullshi*. man i cant belive that u actually r playing WH, with this terrible dumb attitude.

The Red Scourge
26-02-2010, 09:01
Is warhammer fun?

Yes, definitely :)

Is warhammer a good game with solid rules, perfect balance and great minis?

Nope, but one out of three ain't that bad, and rules and balance is something you can remedy with a good group of likeminded gamers - make the game your own :)

Grey Mage
26-02-2010, 09:47
Skullkandy- your doing it wrong when it comes to 40k, its only stupid and blunt if you let it be, theres plenty of ways to out think and out maneuver enemies.

That being said, WFB is an absolute blast if you have a friendly play group. Less good for random pick-up games I find though, as differences in playstyles mean alot more.

Gromdal
26-02-2010, 10:02
Warhammer has awesome fluff and background. A slow moving game system with great problems and unbalance and a to small gaming crowd.

So yes it is fun in a way, but often a terrible hobby and has made me leave for very long periods.

stiltjet
26-02-2010, 13:10
WHFB can be great fun if you play with the right people.

It is a great game. One of the best out there.

skullkandy
26-02-2010, 15:25
wow the first is such a bullshi*. man i cant belive that u actually r playing WH, with this terrible dumb attitude.

u r 2 stp n fu L2 wrt.

anyway.....back to intelligable discourse.

So the overall opinion I'm getting is that warhammer fantasy is closer to the chess match style thinking game like I'm looking for. But this is dependant on finding a good group who plays for both the loser and winner to have fun instead of a group who is only in it to find the quickest route to abuse rules.

sounds like I need to find myself a laid back gaming group and finish painting my beastmen.

Malorian
26-02-2010, 15:30
sounds like I need to find myself a laid back gaming group and finish painting my beastmen.

Exactly :) (As long as they aren't too laid back for you.)


Not sure where you are from but check at the local GW and they should be able to give you the names of some clubs. Plus if you are from a big enough city then the club might have it's own website and you can just google it.

sssk
26-02-2010, 15:35
"sounds like I need to find myself a laid back gaming group and finish painting my beastmen" (sorry, haven't quite got the hang of this "quote" thing).

That sounds like an excellent plan. For one thing, the game seems about 100000000% better when there're two well painted (or even not that well, but still painted) armies facing off against each other. I find it a lot less enjoyable (aesthetically) when you're facing the amorphous grey blob that is "an unpainted army".

If you have a GW nearby, pop in with a few hundred points and ask the staff to show you the ropes, I'm sure they'd be all too happy, and they definitely aren't going to come out guns blazing with a massive wedge of cheddar. Then you can have the rules explained quickly and easily, and so games against other people will be more fun and less searching through the rule book every 2 minutes to see what unitX can or cannot do.

Good luck

Gah, severly ninja'd by Malorian

Putty
26-02-2010, 15:36
Warhammer Fantasy is only fun it you are a good sport despite losing your first 100 games.

Of course, that losing streak can be rectified by playing net-lists of tier 1 and 2 armies.

Malorian
26-02-2010, 15:39
Warhammer Fantasy is only fun it you are a good sport despite losing your first 100 games.

Of course, that losing streak can be rectified by playing net-lists of tier 1 and 2 armies.

I only had a hard time my first 3-5 games and then was quickly up to speed.

Then again I started with Brets which at the time were called cheese so there still might be some truth to what you say.

Putty
26-02-2010, 15:42
I only had a hard time my first 3-5 games and then was quickly up to speed.

Then again I started with Brets which at the time were called cheese so there still might be some truth to what you say.

Take my word for it.

I play Empire and I do not run double Stanks or a Waltar.

A combined arms balanced Empire army (or any tier 3 - 4 army) is near unplayable in a competitive environment (which i am at)

Malorian
26-02-2010, 15:44
A combined arms balanced Empire army (or any tier 3 - 4 army) is near unplayable in a competitive environment (which i am at)

Me thinks you need a new group just like the OP.

yabbadabba
26-02-2010, 15:47
That sounds like an excellent plan. For one thing, the game seems about 100000000% better when there're two well painted (or even not that well, but still painted) armies facing off against each other. I find it a lot less enjoyable (aesthetically) when you're facing the amorphous grey blob that is "an unpainted army". Not quite true. Your opponent is far more important than whether your army is painted or not. Find someone good to play with. The rest can come later.

Putty
26-02-2010, 15:52
Me thinks you need a new group just like the OP.

I have another group... but they is slow going.

I reckon we might be able to get a game in by 4th quarter. :p

(they just started getting their stuff...)

Alltaken
26-02-2010, 17:53
I believe it's tremendously fun, I do have a nice gaming group and we play hard armies sometimes, not real cheese but they might include a one trick pony as in your sleeve unit.

My approach is that it's all based on how much versatility you can add to the game. We have found it in this ways: normally we play different armies every week, play different point levels. We are only 3 players in the end, so we had to buy more than 1 army each unless we expected to get bored till death of the game.
I regularly play againts Vamps and Ogres, I play lizzies and I do fear more Ogres than vamps, go figure!

The game revolts around effective combat movement, army compisition and resolution. Which for me is tons of fun!

Building different armies which are suited for different purposes brings a lot of depth and experience to the game.
We use old random scenario generator with dice and quarters, that does make deployment a huge strategic asset, and the randomness has proven that movement do plays a huge factor. Even infantry has turned up doing the unsuspected.

As long as you can try new things or twixes and turns and have different battle every now and then or different adversaries (armies not generals) I guess you can a lot of fun

enyoss
26-02-2010, 18:48
The vision the forums give me of warhammer is that the game consists of cool units chasing weak guys they will never catch and weak guys running around distracting cool troops. The game comes down to each player just moving around trying not to be the one who guesses distance incorrectly and takes a charge. there isn't any fighting until the last turn when everyone finally engages in battle and whichever one guessed distance wrong recieves the charge and loses. I also get the impression that psychology doesn't matter anymore because almost every race has a way to be immune and the ones that don't can't ever win a single game.


Reading the forum posts, you might well come to these conclusions.

However, I think that is most likely because those who gripe about the system shout louder, and post more, than those who don't. I've been playing Warhammer since 1994, and still find it hugely enjoyable as a past-time. For the record though:

o - I've played in a few different gaming clubs and find that the first combat hardly ever occurs later than turn 3 (most often, engagement happens on turn 2 on the flanks). Serious tournament players might like spending all day dancing units around a board avoiding combat to win, but every casual player I have met likes to get stuck in.

o - Psychology is important and can have a big effect, and yeah, some armies don't suffer from it. The game is far richer for its inclusion though in my opinion. If the fear mechanic was so crushingly responsible for determining the outcome of games Ogres wouldn't be bottom of the pile, and Empire wouldn't be in the middle. It can be improved in places for sure, but it's not going to keep you up at night as it is.

o - Playing with like minded people is key! Just because you like using hard lists doesn't make you a bad person, just find people who enjoy playing against those lists.

Overall, I'd say give it a try and make up your own mind. Many people will no doubt think I'm just ignorant of the flaws which ruin the game. Still, as a player who likes to win but who also likes friendly chit-chat with his opponent and to see a balanced army on the table, WHFB is the best, and I'll be enjoying it until they prise those dice from my cold, dead, hands.

EDIT: Thank god my n00b attempts at trolling did not go unnoticed :D. Thanks Grey Mage! ;)

Grey Mage
26-02-2010, 22:23
Overall, I'd say give it a try and make up your own mind. Many posters will find my views offensively ignorant to the flaws they think ruin the game, and will disagree vehemently. Still, as a player who likes to win but who also likes friendly chit-chat with his opponent and to see a balanced army on the table, WHFB is the best, and I'll be enjoying it until they prise those dice from my cold, dead, hands.

Let me get it out of the way for you:

"WTF?!?!?!!!one1!!! FUN? INT3lleg3nce? Coming to ur con-clusions?? Who the heck do you think you are??!?!!! HERESY! Play the REAL Game ok nowz?! Good, thx-bye."

;) just so we can carry on.

Peregijn
27-02-2010, 12:08
words are just arrangment of sounds as a conduit to convey an abstract thought from one mind to another. So if you make a sound or write a series of symbols and the other minds hearing or viewing it recieve the intended concept then the purpose of the word has been achieved. Therefore if you say it and everyone knows what it means it's a word. Hence why spelling is pointless. Either that or this is my way overthought excuse for being horrid at spelling.

i am coppieng this in my sig. love it :)

enygma7
27-02-2010, 20:23
Some systems are more robust and balanced than others, but to put it simply any game is what you and your opponent make it.

I don't even recognise your description of 40k and consider it entirely inaccurate, but I will say that if this is your experience then you will find warhammer worse as it is both less balanced between army books and more vulnerable to power builds than 40k in my experience.

kungpung
27-02-2010, 22:32
Warhammer and 40k has really lost its golden days scince the exploration of FoW. FoW is the system 40k should have been, focusing on the troops, their position and manuvering. Instead warhammer (and 40k) is all about the big nasty characters employed at the right time in the right combat. Yes, in sort that is tactic but not in a deep perspective. Characters should only be a morale boost and tactical supervisor.

In WH Somehow the newest codex (or armybook) always has a new set of special rules making the core-rules obsolete and pushing the newest army into lead position. If played without regulations on a competitive level the armylists and the play style will be utterly boring...

kormas
28-02-2010, 01:16
tbh the newest book shavnt been that bad, sure Skaven have the HpA (wtf where they thinking) and the doomwheel can be nasty if paired up. but overall it is pretty balanced, tehy went through a faze where they seriously over powered Doc, DE and VC, but appart from these books it is pretty well balanced.

i have been playing for a while now and i find that i can no longer play 40K, caus i just get bored as i move my troops around the board and shoot the nastiest thing in sight....gets repeditive.

while in warhammer i have a great time playing at my local gaming group, and at cancon (tourni i attend), although as far as i can tell, Oz tournies are fairly harshly comped so there arnt to many power lists there (ogers won Cancon) .

i say that fantasy is a great game that can be extreamly fun and rewarding :D

puppetmaster24
28-02-2010, 01:24
well i have lots of fun when i play.

skullkandy
01-03-2010, 16:01
Exactly :) (As long as they aren't too laid back for you.)


Not sure where you are from but check at the local GW and they should be able to give you the names of some clubs. Plus if you are from a big enough city then the club might have it's own website and you can just google it.
I wish there was a GW shop in my town. The odd thing is I live in Kansas City which is pretty much the largest town for a long distance in all directions. It shocks me that GW hasn't set up a store here. Yeah it's farm land all around, but kansas city also includes overland park and shawnee kansas which are two of the richest cities in the US full of spoiled rich kids spending daddy's money left and right.



i am coppieng this in my sig. love it :)
hahah, thanks Peregijn, I really am horrible at spelling despite being an otherwise half way intelligent person. So I had to come up with some excuse for spelling like a second grader.

Ixquic
01-03-2010, 16:30
Warhammer and 40k has really lost its golden days scince the exploration of FoW. FoW is the system 40k should have been, focusing on the troops, their position and manuvering. Instead warhammer (and 40k) is all about the big nasty characters employed at the right time in the right combat. Yes, in sort that is tactic but not in a deep perspective. Characters should only be a morale boost and tactical supervisor.

In WH Somehow the newest codex (or armybook) always has a new set of special rules making the core-rules obsolete and pushing the newest army into lead position. If played without regulations on a competitive level the armylists and the play style will be utterly boring...

This is 100% the case. Half of the competitive lists are literally a few models and just throwing dice (either war shrines, burning alignments or handfuls of power dice) which can't be stopped.

At least in my area there are two type of Fantasy that are played. One is little kids that just throw together what looks cool and have no idea. The other is people writing lists that literally play themselves and have as few models as possible in order to do extreme points denial. Neither of those types of games are fun in the least. Played a 2000 game recently where I my opponent had less than 10 models left on the board, none of which were monsters and I only ended up with 500 VP. Everything was consolidated into two units, one of which had a 3+ ward save, stubborn, rerollable break tests, and T5. Another one I had my entire army (Vampire Counts) insta-killed by one spell that makes you pickup an entire unit (of course it's targeting my general) that the other player kept casting on 5 dice, doesn't require line of sight and is a 24" range. The only thing I can do to stop it is to get in combat with the aforementioned unit of doom although I didn't have the time to get across the field to do it.

Right now Fantasy is totally broken. I'm holding out for 8th since the game isn't enjoyable to play right now and who knows what they are doing with the new system.

samiens
01-03-2010, 16:38
OP- Honestly, its about your attitude- the 40k you describe has no relation to the actual game, nor does the Warhammer- you can get so much more out of both games

Grimm Toof
01-03-2010, 19:34
Well I stopped playing both really, mostly because I disfavor GW's ubergrand market scheme of shutting down LGS's, making you play in their store their way, which is constantly updated with new rulebooks ($20) and the entire deletion of charachters and units which cost you oodles of money and hours of time painting. Rulebooks shouldn't be revised every 3 years, and if they are, it should be free. GW gets by from pushing bland models off to people who dont have anywhere else to game and face a choice of buying said misshapen and undetailed models or quitting wargaming altogether.

Forgive my rant, I do like the game in itself, I just don't like GW's business model customer scheme, and I believe their practices are threatening wargaming as a hobby, not just for the person who enjoys games aside from the GW one size fits all technique, but to GW fans themselves.

That said, I like some models, the new skaven special charachters are cool, but the fact that those minotaurs got past the pre production stage is laughable, i mean come on, they dont even have fur!

Mending my rant to answer OP: Warhammer is extremely fun if you have a chum to play with, warhammer is chum if you play against an extremist.

Wintersdark
02-03-2010, 00:49
Just like 40k, how fun it is depends entirely on you and who you play with. If you all play on the same "wavelength" so to speak, it's enormously fun. But, like 40k, if your playstyles are too different it can become frustrating.

The real downside to fantasy in a random-opponent system is there is a lot more time-investment to a game. You spend a lot more time setting up your army, and games typically take longer, so if you're playing in a LGS or a tourny or what have you, and you face someone really unpleasant to play with, it tends to be more frustrating than a poor 40k game which is over very quickly.

But, the potential problems are the same - 40k, fantasy, other systems entirely; pedantic, obnoxious people who are bent on "beating you at the rules, not at the game" can wreck games in any system.

To be honest - and I realize this is highly subjective - to be the actual game mechanics have very, very little to do with how much fun I'll have playing. It's all about the people I play with, the setting of the game, etc.

ChaosVC
02-03-2010, 01:54
Depends on the people you are playing with. I believe this have been repeated by many people already.

N810
02-03-2010, 04:31
I submit this survey on the average ages of WHFB players.
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=247542
Something to take into consideration. ;)

KalEf
02-03-2010, 06:59
Honestly I expected a bunch one word NO posts.

I tend to have between 3 and 7 people to play a giant group game at my house once a week. It is a great time! There is enough stuff going on on each side no one needs to take it too seriously, and we can all have a good time!... big table though... and my wife gets a little crabby when were not done at 3 pm. :(

I play both games though I do prefer fantasy. units all varying in speed and maneuverability so much. Heck just having models facing a direction adds a huge dynamic to the game.

We have house rules for the 6th edition armies, and we also don't use special characters. Some of them are dumb and nigh unkillable :skull:

So........... Yes

Bingo the Fun Monkey
02-03-2010, 07:57
Partaking in the generation of Fog of War with your opponent before and after battle makes any game fun (even Dragondice) and takes away the competitive edge. Of course you can only do that in a safe environment.

Kukkelukke
02-03-2010, 09:50
Just avoid the cheese and the game is great :D

minionboy
02-03-2010, 10:29
I find warhammer to be a ton of fun, but that is because I quit gaming with a super competitive group and started a much more casual, beer-drinking, type coterie.

yabbadabba
02-03-2010, 11:11
It is a beer and pretzels game minionboy :)

Vermin-thing
02-03-2010, 11:54
Well first off I would like to thank GW for the wonderful job their doing on the rules. :rolleyes:

Wile not perfect at any rate I consider WHFB to be the funnest part of my week by far. (except trolling 4chan from time to time) :p I wonder why I still play the game because there are so many glaringly obvious holes in the game. LOS, fear, psychology in general, ASF, IoN, wheeling and march blocking to mention a few. I pay it because it's fun, and a very good opportunity to play with some good friends. Nothing can ruin it though like someone standing over your shoulder trying to play the game for you, which is my personal pet-peeve. Wile I really enjoy it, it is still a vast amount of work to play, and can some times bring on the stress.

All I can do is look forward to the future and 8th, not to mention paint some amazing models.

GrogsnotPowwabomba
02-03-2010, 19:34
Warhammer and 40k has really lost its golden days scince the exploration of FoW. FoW is the system 40k should have been, focusing on the troops, their position and manuvering. Instead warhammer (and 40k) is all about the big nasty characters employed at the right time in the right combat.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Flames of War blows the GW flagship games out of the water.

GrogsnotPowwabomba
02-03-2010, 19:36
Right now Fantasy is totally broken. I'm holding out for 8th since the game isn't enjoyable to play right now and who knows what they are doing with the new system.

Exactly...and this point denial nonsense you described is the reason I've been pushing for Fantasy to have scenarios like 40K since 6th Edition. Does anyone remember that WD article with the WHFB scenarios? It was a great foundation and I was shocked that it didnt' make it to the 7th edition core rules.

Fantasy is a joke atm...and its sad because it was so close to greatness. If 8th edition doesn't get better I'm selling my models.

GrogsnotPowwabomba
02-03-2010, 19:39
But, the potential problems are the same - 40k, fantasy, other systems entirely; pedantic, obnoxious people who are bent on "beating you at the rules, not at the game" can wreck games in any system.

Funny how this doesn't happen in Flames of War. I think its partly because the community is more mature, but also because *gasp* they have a clean ruleset that isn't easily abused like 40K and WHFB.

N810
02-03-2010, 19:43
Actual ages of WHFB players ;)
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=247542

fluffstalker
02-03-2010, 21:37
Fun yes. I find all the GW games fun. But when I want a really competitive game I go for FoW or Warmachine/Hordes.

Wintersdark
03-03-2010, 04:52
Funny how this doesn't happen in Flames of War. I think its partly because the community is more mature, but also because *gasp* they have a clean ruleset that isn't easily abused like 40K and WHFB.

It has nothing to do with maturity. GW's rules are extremely (needlessly? That's another discussion) complex, are written by people who do not think in terms of exploitation and are thus ridden with unintended loopholes, and then with each new army book are broken and errata'd. FoW has a much simpler (but not less strategically stimulating) ruleset where it's much easier for all the players to really understand the rules.

I've read through them, though I've never played. I'd like to, though.

But no... It has nothing to do with maturity. I'm repeating this because statements like that tend to take discussions in bad, nonproductive directions. Which is a 'kiddy game' and whatnot just starts useless flamewars.

ChaosVC
03-03-2010, 05:46
I am sure flames of war is a decent game, but I really cannot find it anymore tactically more stimulating then 40k haven't played and watch a few demo games. The rules are bascially more simpler compare to GW games and less complex, you simply do not required to memorise a whole lot of special rules for every different model and army in the game.

Most historical games have simpler rules because you really can't make new things up out of the blue and everything has to be relatively reaslistic to what was there during those periods. Never the less, historical games are very fun in a tactical sense and much more challenging to play but generally lacks the varity of play styles that fantasy and science fiction games has offer, it will eventually gets very dry.

Lord Solar Plexus
03-03-2010, 05:51
I don't remember a single rules debate or questionable phrasing when we played Babylon 5...

ChaosVC
03-03-2010, 05:52
Same goes with poker :D

archie-d
03-03-2010, 08:51
im gonna parrot the folks who said who youre playing with matters, and if you can find like minded people fantasy can be what youre looking for

but i think that also applies to 40k to be honest, it can indeed be as you described it but if your gaming group all agree thats a terrible way to play, it isnt going to be like that.

O&G'sRule
03-03-2010, 14:19
The game is as fun as you want it to be. If you want to play cynical tactics no you won't enjoy it, if you just trust your army, tactics and the dice gods then don't need to be so defensive. My opinion is everyone should play orcs and goblins once, if you try to be too clever you can guarantee they will mess it up, sitting back measuring distances will only end in catastrophe. You have enough units to be careless with a few at least so just play and enjoy, if you win ....great if not ....you'll get im next time. No one likes to play people that have to win

Grand Warlord
04-03-2010, 13:49
As mentioned before, for me it all comes down to the attitude of my opponent. I play for fun, not for wins. So if I come up against a WAAC kind of player I probably wouldn't enjoy it. It would be so bad in a tournament setting, where the goal is to win (I still shoot for sportsmanship though). In a friendly or a 1 off game, it sucks.