PDA

View Full Version : Will all armies be the same in 10 years time?



SteelTitan
15-02-2011, 10:19
A thought occured to me long ago, when Lizardmen got Saurus Cavalry.

This idea was again brought to mind when new army releases were combined with big plastic monster-sets that are all (1) a mount for a magic user and (2) a warmachine of some sort (screaming bell / stegadon / big spider).

Now, with the O&G release I see skirmishing scouting goblins.


Back in the day, certain unit types seemed to be more restricted to certain armies and now with army books being crammed with new units, all armies seem to be getting all types of units.

Will, as time goes by, armies lose their unique play style because they will all have fast cavalry, regular cavalry, skirmishers, scouting skirmishers, big monster mounts + warmachines, etc etc?



On the other hand, Lizardmen also lost their fast cavalry, Vampire Counts lost their fast cav dire wolves, etc.

Gav2k
15-02-2011, 10:45
While i think its a possibility, sure, i dont think its particularly likely. Even if it does happen, all armies differing special rules and statlines still provide their flavour and playstyle.

Id actually quite like it actually. The more differing units an army has within its book, the greater the choice.

theorox
15-02-2011, 10:54
I'd hate it and don't expect it to happen. The game is becoming a bit more streamlined possibly, but hardly. :)

Theo

sssk
15-02-2011, 11:00
Now, with the O&G release I see skirmishing scouting goblins.

Did I miss something? Squig hoppers skirmish, and have all the way through 7th edition, what else skirmishes?

Just to raise an interesting point, while it is a very different game, necromunda essentially uses the same stats for almost everyone, with slight differences in skills and weapons available, yet it is (or was) extremely well balanced, and one of the most fun games I've played in my wargames career. Now I'm not saying that warhammer should become like that, with everyone having the same stats and different abilities (it fundamentally wouldn't work). I'm simply saying that there is a certain balance which comes from everyone having access to similar units etc, so maybe it would be a good thing...in a way.

Oh dear, having written that, I've just thought, this post is going to get ripped to tiny pieces by the masses. Ah well, not to worry, I'm just promoting discussion

Ultimate Life Form
15-02-2011, 11:45
Vampire Counts lost their fast cav dire wolves

...and skirmishing Ghouls and so on. So the focus shifts from time to time, but I doubt we'll eventually have one single army that is played with different models - it wasn't that way in the past 25 years and it won't be that way. Though this new 'every army gets at least 1+ BIG new Monster' shtick is unwarranted and annoying to say the least.

Gav2k
15-02-2011, 11:58
Though this new 'every army gets at least 1+ BIG new Monster' shtick is unwarranted and annoying to say the least.

We dont know that every army will get one of these new huge monsters though. Sure, we know OnG get one, but TK are only rumoured to get one, and after that we dont know anything. The huge-monster trend might turn out to be a horrible idea and GW could pull it right away, leaving only OnG and possibly TK the only armies reminiscent of their attempt.

However, even if all armies DO get a big gribbly, who's to say theyll play the same role? Example, WoC Warriors and WE Glade Guard are both Core Infantry on foot, but both have vastly differing skills and roles.

Now i know thats like comparing chalk and cheese, but its the principle - just because all armies would have the same unit-types wont mean that all armies play the same.

Ultimate Life Form
15-02-2011, 12:05
We dont know that every army will get one of these new huge monsters though.

:wtf:

High Elves have dozens of Dragons flying about all of a sudden.

Vampire Counts got a Varghulf.

Lizardmen gave in to Stegadonism.

Skaven got 2 (if you count the Doomwheel), but at least one really mean critter.

Beastmen got 3!!!!!! Just like that!

And Goblins suddenly pull Kumonga out of their little green heads. Where did that come from?!?

All of the recent releases entailed gigantic new monsters of sorts. If we can say that there's one trend these days, it's going BIG!

Lord of Divine Slaughter
15-02-2011, 12:15
GW makes minis for you to paint.

To give you a chance to show of your creations, they created a game, so you had something to do with your minis - other than putting them in a glass cabinet.

With a finite amount of minis available, any collector would at some point end up with a full collection, so GW needs to churn out new minis instead of just rehashing old ones.

New minis need new rules not to end up in the glass cabinet.

Its quite simple :)

Gav2k
15-02-2011, 12:17
Fair point actually. Still, as long as there's options, you dont HAVE to take them. Although i admit, in some cases you cant help yourself. And whats wrong with having a few biggies on the table anyway?

If theyre impressive models, then ill be happy to face off against them, and ill feel even better about being able to take down a behemoth with some wee wood elves!

Sticking to the topic though, do you really think it will ruin the game if everybody gets at least one big monster? Especially if, as you said, most armies seem to have one already.

theorox
15-02-2011, 13:45
Every Warhammer army includes a monster anyway, that's how it should be. This isn't historical warfare.

Theo

Korraz
15-02-2011, 13:58
:wtf:

High Elves have dozens of Dragons flying about all of a sudden.

Vampire Counts got a Varghulf.

Lizardmen gave in to Stegadonism.

Skaven got 2 (if you count the Doomwheel), but at least one really mean critter.

Beastmen got 3!!!!!! Just like that!

And Goblins suddenly pull Kumonga out of their little green heads. Where did that come from?!?

All of the recent releases entailed gigantic new monsters of sorts. If we can say that there's one trend these days, it's going BIG!

High Elves are God Damn Elves, of course they get batches of flying newts.
Doomwheel was old, HPA in some ways already there with the old WD Hellpit Variant list (Rat Chimera, Blind Burrower, Rat Hydra, Warpstone Sniffer...)
Kumonga comes from 1996.
The Varghulf isn't even a monster. The VC thing would be the Corspe Cart.
And it's not like Beastmen and Lizards always were the guys with the big ones. Beasts actually swapped Greater Demon, Demon Prince and Shaggoth for more beast-like monsters.

astornfleshlay
15-02-2011, 14:35
High Elves are God Damn Elves, of course they get batches of flying newts.
Doomwheel was old, HPA in some ways already there with the old WD Hellpit Variant list (Rat Chimera, Blind Burrower, Rat Hydra, Warpstone Sniffer...)
Kumonga comes from 1996.
The Varghulf isn't even a monster. The VC thing would be the Corspe Cart.
And it's not like Beastmen and Lizards always were the guys with the big ones. Beasts actually swapped Greater Demon, Demon Prince and Shaggoth for more beast-like monsters.

Isn't the Varghulf classified as a monster, as per the BRB?
It's definitely not big and bad-ass (as in the "size" of the model) like the new Spider.....but just saying

Urgat
15-02-2011, 15:06
Did I miss something? Squig hoppers skirmish, and have all the way through 7th edition, what else skirmishes?

Snotlings. But yeah, I got no idea where he got his idea. Kindda doesn't give credibility to the whole topic.

scarletsquig
15-02-2011, 15:56
I quite like how each army is getting a cool new centrepiece model unique to their army, or the revival of an old one.

The hellpit and arachnarok are quite creative and interesting new additions.

As far as adding monsters to armies that shouldn't have them... well, throughout 6th and 7th edition, all armies could field a giant legally so swapping out the giant option for something more unique to the army doesn't really make a massive amount of different gameplay-wise.

Malorian
15-02-2011, 15:58
As far as adding monsters to armies that shouldn't have them... well, throughout 6th and 7th edition, all armies could field a giant legally so swapping out the giant option for something more unique to the army doesn't really make a massive amount of different gameplay-wise.

Good point.

I also hear that back in the day all armies had access to dragons and other monsters.

TonyFlow
15-02-2011, 16:14
Yeah, you could spend 25% of the points on "Monsters". Each armybook had a list of monsters to choose from. They could also be used as mount for your characters.

Most notably there was the emperor dragon. Nasty stats (all 8s and 9s) and str5 breath weapon if I recall correctly.

wizbix
15-02-2011, 16:18
O'n'G's will still be green in ten years time - fact.

Lukasz_VT
15-02-2011, 16:33
Yeah, you could spend 25% of the points on "Monsters". Each armybook had a list of monsters to choose from. They could also be used as mount for your characters.

Most notably there was the emperor dragon. Nasty stats (all 8s and 9s) and str5 breath weapon if I recall correctly.

I used to love reading the table of monsters in the bestiary back in the mid 90s. I like the move to give armies more big beasties, it's just a shame my ogres only get a bitch-giant.

kaffis
15-02-2011, 17:13
Also, the mere notion that every army book gets a big model for a wizard to ride on (as put forward in the OP) doesn't really imply that armies are getting the same.

Unless you're honestly arguing that a Screaming Bell is just like an Archmage on a Dragon is just like a Shaman on a Spider.

After all, they all are big models that count as mounts for level 4 wizards, right? So the screaming bell gets thunderstomp attacks and flies just like the High Elves' Drag-OH WAIT. It's completely different, and fits the character of the Skaven army. Imagine that.

Torpedo Vegas
15-02-2011, 17:16
I used to love reading the table of monsters in the bestiary back in the mid 90s. I like the move to give armies more big beasties, it's just a shame my ogres only get a bitch-giant.

The slave giant is a knife, not a hammer, he is for killing characters, not wiping out units. And besides, we got Greasus Goldtooth, so fat he counts as a monster.

Sygerrik
15-02-2011, 17:38
Large monsters are colorful, act as centerpieces to armies, often have crazy fun rules, and are amazingly detailed gorgeous models. We need more, not less. Many armies throughout history, from Hannibal and his elephants to modern infantry with armor support, have used a combined-arms approach. Infantry can't handle everything, large support units can't handle everything, but between the two of them they are a force to be reckoned with.

It makes perfect sense for every army to have access to something big, whether it's the technological wizardry of the Steam Tank, the brute force of a Ghorgon, or the HPA which is pretty much half-and-half.

decker_cky
15-02-2011, 17:49
Orcs and goblins had skirmishing savage orcs back in the day too. I think the 6th edition orc book is the only one that didn't have skirmishers for them.

SteelTitan
15-02-2011, 17:53
Snotlings. But yeah, I got no idea where he got his idea. Kindda doesn't give credibility to the whole topic.

I was talking about the NEW release; the "ninja-goblins". I don't know the actual unit name but apparently they are scouting skirmishers.


Just to make clear; it's not like I was complaining or anything so lets try to keep this topic free of negativity. It was just a thought I threw out there because it keeps coming back to me as GW continues to release new armies.


Anyway, on with the discussion;
I'm not saying that all big plastic kits are the same but somehow I don't relish the idea that there is a possibility that in 5 years time every army has a big plastic monster with a mage on it. Why? Because it diminishes the uniqueness of the whole concept. When the stegadon came out, I was like WOW, how cool! Then the Skaven got a big plastic kit, also with an option as a mage-mount...now O&G. It just make the whole possibility of having a cool mage-mount model kinda mehhh. I'm not against big plastic kits in general; the HPA is a big plastic kit and it's awesome...hell, all the big plastic kits are awesome but the whole "mage+big monster" just bugs me somehow and I don't hope that this possibility becomes available to every army.

AND it's not JUST about monsters; i never said i was against monsters :P

MAIN POINT But this was just one example of this thought i have; that I actually liked that not all "unit types" (skirmishers, scouts, light cavalry, heavy cavalry, chariots, monsters, flyers, fast cavalry, etc.) were available to every army (when I started warhammer more than 10 years ago).

AND they are still NOT available to every army, that is not what I am saying; but I'm just commenting on a trend, sharing my thoughts.


I also full-heartedly agree with Lord of Divine Slaughter; GW makes their money by selling miniatures and new unit miniatures probably sell better than only renewing old ones. New ones require new rules and that means introducing unit types that other armies also have.

I also fully realise that the more units, the more variety = better games so in the long run it's all good.



EDIT: Ow another example that comes to mind is Skaven and not having flyers. I like the fact that they DONT have flyers. Offering them flyers in the next armybook increases variety but i wouldnt be a fan regardless.

Temozarela
15-02-2011, 18:16
The trend of having a something "large" (whether it be a dragon or an oversized bell) has always been in place. Perhaps you're not so angry about the trend of giving mages large mounts, but rather GWs tactic of releasing them as a plastic kit with each army's release. From a sales point it is a big shiny new thing that will attract new players, modellers and painters, while a wider selection of options (mount, warmachine, monster) means it gives players more reason to pick one up, or three. Sure, I don't like the manipulation of the masses, producing something that maximises profits over belonging in an army, but GW have done well to make each kit relatively unique to each army. As mentioned before, you can't compare a dragon to a bell, and if you then complain about mages getting mounts, again, it's been like that for ages. I want a screaming bell because it's cool and is a nice centrepiece, I don't want any of my skaven to ride a giant spider or a dragon however.

What would be bad is if GW started to contradict an armies style through new units, like a powerful ranged unit for VC or dangerous and reliable Skaven unit. Armies can have variety, Skaven could get cavarly and flyers, but they'd need to be unmistakably Skaven. It's when the need to make profit overcomes the fundamental differences and play styles, that attracts players to each army, we should be worried.

Captainbastard
15-02-2011, 18:18
The so called ninja miniatures are not even skirmishers, they are an add on to normal goblin units.

Some armies will never change that much. For instance, skaven will never have knights or very strong elite troops. Brettonians will never have cannons.

The changes which were made in 6th and 7th edition mostly had an explanation. For instance, heavy cavalry was very potent (had been since bretonians and woc in 5ht edition). So therefore they had to make sure most armies had some half decent cavalry, including lizardmen.

As for bringing out lots of big monster, they always wanted to have huge monsters. In 4th edition they had tons of rules for huge monsters like Emperor dragons. They just could not make minis big enough to really represent really huge monsters. But of course players and games designers will want big monsters and it would be unfair to leave some armies without them when other armies do have them, so I think most armies will have them eventually.

Ultimate Life Form
16-02-2011, 11:43
and it would be unfair to leave some armies without them when other armies do have them

...in the same way as some armies have to do without Warmachines, or Magic, or Shooting, or a complete model range, or... :rolleyes:

Shimmergloom
16-02-2011, 17:13
I used to love reading the table of monsters in the bestiary back in the mid 90s. I like the move to give armies more big beasties, it's just a shame my ogres only get a bitch-giant.

At least he doesn't run when gnoblars get killed.

Little Joe
16-02-2011, 17:36
No, lot's of diversity left through stats if need be.

I wouldn't mind some mechanical help for dwarfs (thunderbarge), there is only so many things you can do with a basic dwarf before you run out of options. And every new army book gets new options, like it or not. Money needs to be made.

But I do not want cavalry, skirmishers or a big organic monster.

Besides, if something does't evolve (creative or otherwise) it is dead. Would you play the same game with the same rules and models for ever?

Leth Shyish'phak
16-02-2011, 17:52
...in the same way as some armies have to do without Warmachines, or Magic, or Shooting, or a complete model range, or... :rolleyes:

Indeed, it is very unfair that my Chaos Warriors cannot have cannon and mortar support. :mad:

SilentCivilian
16-02-2011, 20:13
Brettonians will never have cannons.
...again

Sorry could not resist. :D