Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Oct 31, 2017 6:03:33 GMT
Imagine you'd been playing Snakes and Ladders for many years and enjoying it, even though you saw the problems with randomness and lack of player agency. In fact you only played with a plethora of house rules to make the game more interesting. And then, one day someone tells you about chess. Hard to go back to Snakes and Ladders after that. That's how I felt starting Warmachine after years of playing GW games. And it's not the convert's zeal here (I guess). I have several WH and WH40K armies in my basement, thousands of hours put into converting and painting, packed and waiting for better times. I keep checking if new editions or fan projects will allow me to bring them to battle once more. I'd LOVE if this happened! But GW rules just don't cut it nowadays. Too random, too imbalanced, with player as a mostly passive observer of events shaped with dice and power disproportions between factions. As for Warhammer, it's important to note that the game doesn't exist any more in the original shape. The closest you'll get is the 9th Age, a fan project which continues WH as we used to know it and is better rules-wise and balance-wise in most aspects (an easy feat to accomplish when it's GW "roll dice and see what happens. Or just buy this new, expensive model" rules that you compare to)but depending on your location it may be thriving (ETC had numbers similar to WM&H WTC) or non-existant (local communities based on shops which do not support the game) If you are interested in WH40K as well, I started a thread with the beginning of the new edition, wondering what the appeal of such a game is for a WM&H player. You can find the discussion here: lormahordes.freeforums.net/thread/1727/new-40k?page=1&scrollTo=32910
|
|
Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Oct 31, 2017 6:37:13 GMT
Why would you dooo dis. Why! I'm going to be watching this thread very closely. Anyway, my best explanation for 40k is the game I play when I'm tired of dealing with the average warmachine player. You should get what I mean. Huh. I started warmachine so I'd have a game to play when I was tired of dealing with the average warhammer player.
|
|
|
Post by killroundears on Oct 31, 2017 7:21:07 GMT
Either is going to depend massively on your local meta.
If you get the average warmachine netlister who only plays their factions top tier stuff, in the best themes possible, and very often just rips lists from the latest tournament results you will have a very bad time if you are just trying to play casually. When people tell you they have a "high new player attrition rate" this isn't very surprising. For all of warmachines vaunted depth it has a terrible new player experience and that's why 40k is eternally more popular
but 8th ed 40k can easily have That Guy players too in a local meta.
As for which game he will enjoy more, that's something to be found out by playing demo games tbh. 40k 8th ed has made great strides to improve the game so its not like "if you like good rules its only warmachine"
Judge based on the quality of the local players, and the enjoyment from demo games. Asking on a warmachine forum will probably result in a horde of "warmachine" and asking on a 40k forum results in a horde of "40k" answers.
For me personally the better one is warmachine
(i'm assuming this is 40k vs Warmachine, the other two warhammers are different experiences from 40k)
|
|
|
Post by sstrider on Oct 31, 2017 10:30:01 GMT
I play both so here are some bullet points of how I would explain to someone undecided between them:
Warhammer: -Fantastic and huuuge model range -Unique, huge and highly detailed fluff with still a lot of flexibility to make your dream army -High customizability for your army, lots of conversions and unique stuff on the table, great if you are creative guy. I have a guy in our meta who converted Khador juggernauts into Kastelan robots and they look fantastic -More casual, not a bad thing if you want fluffy/narrative battles and have a relaxed good time -Less balanced though, also some people consider that the streamlining of the new edition made it bland -Army building sometime decides the game -Biggest player base out there, so you probably have way more oponents, that said expect lots of space marines -If you like fluff you shouldn't disregard how prolific Black Library is, it's a way of keeping interest in the game when you don't have time to play. -Expensive entry price to have a starting army. -The prices varies a lot depending on the army you like
Warmachine: -Much more balanced and fantastic ruleset, easy to learn but hard to master -Much more competitive, which can be a plus or not, THAT guys can turn off new players -Cheaper entry level, however as expensive to get a tournament ready army. -Bad price/quality ratio on minis, older ones have dubious quality and others are overly expensive. Tbh to me in the long term is a much more expensive game than Warhammer, IF Uhlans price is highway robbery to me. -Imo the game itself is more fun than warhammer, I have way more fun playing warmachine matches -The fluff is great but way harder to get acess too (lack of a good wiki for example) -Better faction balance in the playerbase, the vast majority of 40k players seem to play Space Marines, which gets tiring -CHECK YOUR META BEFORE INVESTING, there is a smaller playerbase for this game, no use investing if there are few matches. My meta is nearly dead and have troubles finding matches while warhammer always has people
(Trying to be as neutral as possible in here, specially since neither is my fav mini wargame, Infinity is)
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Oct 31, 2017 11:17:41 GMT
Warmachine is generally perceived to have a much tighter rule-set and much better game balance, and is geared towards competitive play.
Warmachine also has a very steep and very brutal learning curve (more like a sheer cliff) you will utterly smashed for a good while, but if you persevere winning feels great.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Oct 31, 2017 11:51:46 GMT
Why would you dooo dis. Why! I'm going to be watching this thread very closely. Anyway, my best explanation for 40k is the game I play when I'm tired of dealing with the average warmachine player. You should get what I mean. Huh. I started warmachine so I'd have a game to play when I was tired of dealing with the average warhammer player. I am sure it depends on the meta, but I have similar experience. Our WM&H community is extremely friendly. I think the reason is it is so small and the game so niche. Discouraging new players would be shooting ourselves in the foot. Our veterans often guide newbies even during local tournament or league games in a similar way they do in intro games. Losing an irrelevant game in a local tournie (that they know they would win if they wanted anyway) is an insignificant price to pay for attracting and retaining fresh blood. And those new players who had an amazing time at their first few events and feel encouraged can become a real challenge in the future. WHarhammer tournaments on the other hand ... oO Also, even though the OP was asking about Warhammer many people talk about WH40K. I'd say that, even though Warhammer shared many faults with WH40K -imbalance, randomness, low player agency- it was still much more tactical, especially in certain periods in its history. 6th editition for example favoured manoeuver a lot and I remember it fondly for being able to beat even an OP unit with an average one and mostly regardless of the dice rolls if I managed to maneuver well and set up proper traps. I think the 9th Age can be closer to this feeling than the game's last official, 8th edition. WH40K never really approached that, it was mostly throwing dice at each other across the table, and I've known the game since its 3rd edition.
|
|
gorsk
BattleBox Champ
Posts: 52
|
Post by gorsk on Oct 31, 2017 14:51:42 GMT
A lot of the perspective are from tournament players. But to take a little different approach, here goes.
Warhammer seems to attract more casual players. Also, the community seems to attract more hobby modelers. You get a sense of pride for assembling some of the kits because they take a bit more effort to assemble. Just go to a convention and look at some of the display boards. But, this also translates to having some pressure to oplay painted.
One other note, you need a 6 foot by 4 foot surface, while wmh only needs 4 by 4.So wmh can fit in an apartment more easily.
Warmachine & Hordes (go trolls!) has more focus on the game mechanics and thus focuses on game execution. This attracts more competitive players. Going to a convention here, you will see precision measuring sticks and many more unpainted models. The death clock can add to the stress levels of beginners.
So my advice is to talk to your friend about his & his son’s goals and pesonalities. Then pick the games that fit their interests.
|
|
|
Post by AdeptusB on Oct 31, 2017 15:38:04 GMT
I think WH/40K is a bit cheaper per model, but a 'standard' game (i.e. the most common build totals) requires far more models than WMH. In WMH you will rarely have more than one or two units in your army, while in WH/40K you will rarely have less than three.
|
|
|
Post by sludgeogre on Oct 31, 2017 15:42:26 GMT
Why would you dooo dis. Why! I'm going to be watching this thread very closely. Anyway, my best explanation for 40k is the game I play when I'm tired of dealing with the average warmachine player. You should get what I mean. Huh. I started warmachine so I'd have a game to play when I was tired of dealing with the average warhammer player. Had to comment on this. I wanted to start wargaming for many years, especially when I played Magic in college, but ended up quitting magic because of the expense and the awful, terrible people, then didn't get into wargaming because of the expense and the smell of the people playing WH40K. No disrespect or anything, I'm just saying, objectively, they needed to shower. Fast forward a decade and I'm now a chemical engineer with a relatively high paying job in a relatively small town, so I have hobby money finally. I see Penny Arcade playing Warmachine on their Twitch channel and all of the sudden that spark to start wargaming is lit in me again. I decide to buy some models and dip my toes in the waters. TL;DR, here's the point: I was immediately hooked into the community because it is filled with intelligent, thoughtful, and non-basement-troll people. All of the games I have had over the past 4 months (2-5 games per week) have been fantastic. Meanwhile, the 40K community (again, not trying to be a dick, it's just an observation) smells like vinegar and dirty feet and they constantly bicker with one another and say the weirdest stuff. I would not be able to play a game in that community. I'm glad those guys have a way to express themselves, but I'm just not into it at all. They do voices and accents and narrations and the whole thing and man I can't take it. I find it fascinating that these three games have such different kinds of nerds that get attracted to them. Magic is at least 50% dickhead, demeaning, I'm-smarter-than-you-now-let-me-show-you kinds of nerds. Warhammer is 80% awkward, obsessed with fantasy, talented with hobby stuff, this is my whole life kind of nerds. Warmachine is probably 20% both of those groups, and 80% gainfully employed nerds that like to drink and destress by pondering model rules and interactions while they play a game that is similar to chess, but has far more varied outcomes, and you get to pick the pieces. There's also the hobby side that about half of people don't even partake in, and the other half really enjoy and are very good at. I hope I didn't offend anyone, but this has just sort of been my journey and why I've landed here and why I really enjoy it.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Oct 31, 2017 15:42:45 GMT
All are wargames and feel very different from eachother. Why that is might be glaringly obvious to some but it took me a while to figure out, and it starts with my misgivings about the use of scenery in warmachine (or lack thereof) in comparison to warhammer. Not only does it make your table look awesome, it greatly impacts the movementgame (of warhammer, which Iv been playing for almost 20 years) and I couldn't understand why warmachine uses so little of it. As I got more acquinted with the game, I noticed that it didn't need it to make the movement game interesting, not to the same extend warhammer needs it. Especially in fantasy having bottlenecks where you can choose position or force your opponent to break the battleline means everything because the footprint of everything in your army is so much bigger than in warmachine that it really takes away options in way that hardly exists in warmachine. Playing warhammer in an empty table on the other hand is a hollow ordeal (save for charge reactions which an excellent mechanic to deepen the movementgame). Warmachine is very different in that regard, because of the smaller foorprint of all your "units" movement in this game is interesting in the sense that chess is interesting. At first all I saw was a bunch of models walking up to eachother, rolling dice, but given all the different interactions it's not that simple. Like in chess you have to ne super deliberate with where everything stands ones the gap is closed, and that's not normally the case in warhammer where you problems lie in closing the gap in the first place.
To me this is the biggest difference between the two systems and besides local playerbase and others practical considerations, that is what you should look into, which game appeals to you the most in that regard. Warhammer isn't as rich in rulesinteraction as warmachine, but making a mistake in the movementphase is gonna cost you hard. We have had lots of debate after games about the mistakes we each made. Warhammer doesn't need much houseruling to make for a well balanced game if that is a concern for you and some restraint while listbuilding solves a lot of the balance issues. The same is true in warmachine where an unfavourable matchup can destroy your chances far more swiftly than warhammer ever did. That's why in tournaments you bring 2 or 3 lists.
|
|
|
Post by HubertJFarnsworth on Oct 31, 2017 15:43:42 GMT
While I agree that a very vocal part of the community is very focused on tournaments, that really should only matter to your friend if they're, well, planning to engage with the community.
If all they want is a game to play together than it doesn't really matter what the community thinks, they should pick the game that interests them the most. Personally I find Warmachine more fun because of the number of interesting interactions available; where 40k to my experience is largely about pushing a block of guys into position and then rolling fistfuls of dice at each other, I enjoy that each turn of Warmachine is like a little puzzle of trying to find the right pieces to move where to achieve my goals. If that's the sort of thing they find interesting then I suspect they would enjoy Warmachine more, if not then they may enjoy the grandeur of scores of men, women, and aliens fighting towering mechs and monsters even if the results come down to different sized fistfulls of dice.
If they do want to spend time at a game store with a community than they should definitely find out what nights are set aside for each game and try to get there and meet people. Try to talk to people about the games, see what they talk about, and try to get demos from players or the store itself. If it seems like the community lines up with what they want then pick that game; if both of them line up pick the game that they like the models for the most.
I think the two most important things to look for in a hobby are: Models/Fluff/Rules that grab you, excite you, and keep you interested depending on your preference for such things, and people you enjoy engaging in the hobby with. I think this is the best way to make sure the hobby stays interesting and fun for years to come.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Oct 31, 2017 15:53:23 GMT
I think the two most important things to look for in a hobby are: Models/Fluff/Rules that grab you, excite you, and keep you interested depending on your preference for such things, and people you enjoy engaging in the hobby with. I think it is the one , most important thing. When my students ask me about which system is the best, I answer "the one where you can find enough opponents to play with". The game can have the best rules, extraordinary models and incredible enjoyment factor, but it is totally irrelevant if there's nobody to play it with.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Oct 31, 2017 15:58:59 GMT
sludgeogreNot offended at all but having been part of all three gaming communities which, where I'm from, intermingle quite a bit, I just wanna say that as gross generalisations come yours is really dumb. They are different games that incite different discussions and different degrees of dickish behavior which, trust me, you will find anywhere a bunch of nerds conglomerate. Same goes for the smelly shirts.
|
|
|
Post by pardusprime on Oct 31, 2017 16:07:46 GMT
I started with Warmachine because my local homies were absolutely agog over how cool it was. It took me a while to pick up the rules and to parse the whining from the legitimate complaints, but I really like it now that I've played games and understand what's going on.
I've been learning Warhammer now that all the WM/H players have jumped ship for Guildball, and I absolutely horrified in most cases. The rules alone are enough to turn my hair white. Hearing the local advocate talk about how great 8th edition is what I imagine it's like talking to someone with Stockholm Syndrome. The game absolutely reeks of thirty years of catering to basement trolls over the health of the business. That being said, it is a perfectly serviceable game, if a little glurgy and obviously designed towards 'whoever has the biggest wallet wins.'
Whatever complaints I have about WM/H pretty much evaporate after marinating in Games Workshop's special sauce. I strongly and strenuously emphasize Warmachine/Hordes if it's even the least bit close.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Oct 31, 2017 16:15:29 GMT
sludgeogre Not offended at all but having been part of all three gaming communities which, where I'm from, intermingle quite a bit, I just wanna say that as gross generalisations come yours is really dumb. They are different games that incite different discussions and different degrees of dickish behavior which, trust me, you will find anywhere a bunch of nerds conglomerate. Same goes for the smelly shirts. Sludgeogre describes his own experience with his local groups - hard to argue with this unless you're also from his area.
|
|