|
|
Post by harryfang on Nov 9, 2012 22:10:06 GMT -5
any idea why 40k is generally more popular than fantasy?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Agrippa on Nov 9, 2012 22:40:13 GMT -5
Traditionally the tactics in 40k were less involved and easier to understand than the tactics involved in Fantasy. Or at least that was what it was like when I used to play and work for GW. 40K was basically a large scale skirmish game with near 360 degree vision and loose formations so units could spread out with freedom of movement. This appealed to kids quite easily. My manager used to tell me that 40k lures them in when they're young and Fantasy keeps them when they want a challenge. Fantasy used formations and movement restrictions for turning and every unit had different movement not just between races but even between units in the same army. Tactics were much more involved and quite tactical. Oh, and it's generally much more fun to shoot big flashy laser thingies over using a crossbow  |
|
|
|
Post by calitom on Nov 12, 2012 11:21:34 GMT -5
In fact now the opposite is true. 40k has the fluff that GW focuses more on (let's be honest, they aren't writing fantasy books by the dozen) so the world for 40k is a lot more involved and there's more to talk about other then how many attacks your unit of dark elf wyches has on the charge.
Also, 8th edition fantasy has really dumbed down the tactics involved in the game and have really made it more about how many dice you throw at something, be it a spell, a combat or even with shooting and saturation of firepower from war machines- in this sense it became more like 40k but they then introduced the randomness of terrain and charges to really muck things up more.
Now with 6th edition 40k they've gone the other way, while they introduced random terrain and charges (almost makes it seem like 8th edition fantasy was their testing grounds for such rules) they also injected a lot more tactics into the game itself, be it how you move- what order you charge in, etc. Deployment and even what order you shoot units in has become incredibly important due to cover being on a model basis not on the unit scale. Overwatch and focus fire have also changed the ways you go about things and are subtle rules that really make a difference.
So as far as gameplay goes, a lot of it is based on knowledge of the game system itself and taking advantage of the rules. Forcing your opponent to overwatch your gaunts so they don't get a chance to shoot your Trygon with all their meltaguns before combat is a perfect example of such rules and orders in 40k now.
Obviously I play 40k more now, but I have played both 8th edition fantasy and 6th edition 40k and personally enjoy 6th edition 40k a lot more.
|
|
|
|
Post by stonecutter on Nov 12, 2012 15:13:43 GMT -5
I would have to agree with all the points that Agrippa and Tom have raised. While I still remain committed to fantasy (too many fully painted armies to back out now), 8th edition did seem like a testing ground and it appears GW learned their lesson when introducing 6th ed 40K. That aside, if some of the more ridiculous spells are restricted, then fantasy definitely has a good scope for tactics since movement, charge order and sequencing of actions all have a major impact on how a battle is fought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Nov 12, 2012 15:51:14 GMT -5
I really enjoy the concept of warhammer fantasy... and for the longest time didn't play 40k at all... 8th ed really put me off of it unfortunately... which sucks because of all the settings, it's the one I most actually enjoy... and the armies are much more varied than 8 different brands of space marines...
however 6th edition 40k is probably the most fun I've had in wargaming in years... it's just a very solid and fun system... maybe that's because it's new, sure...
...but I remember having a conversation with Tommy, over and over again the first six months of 8th ed. fantasy's release... I kept saying "give it a chance... it's just new... I'm sure we'll like it just as much when we get used to it"...
weirdly enough, WHFB was the more tactical game at one point... it was seriously that 40k was to hook the young kids in and when they "grew up" they played Fantasy which was much more complicated, required more painting skills and more money to play (due to larger amounts of models you had to buy with much finer details than power armor)... but that's really changed... GW still makes fantastic kits... but the ones for 40k the last few years have just been incredible... full of intricate details and character... and the 40k ruleset has become much more tactical (rather than push metal boxes forward and shoot, shoot shoot) and 8th ed fantasy seemed to "dumb down" the tactical aspects to try and simplify movement etc. and combat and magic became throw alot of dice... push horde forwards.... roll six dice and IF dwellers... repeat til win...
I'm not about to give up on fantasy mind you...(too much time and money invested in it) but it's kind of been losing some of it's fun factor... and it's really difficult to recruit new players - "oh if you don't want to play skaven or high elves you have to drop about $600 to play... you okay with that? how about painting a hundred models? "
|
|
|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on Nov 12, 2012 17:45:48 GMT -5
As someone whose been playing 40k for 9 years, the points Shannon raised are exactly what keeps me from joining the fray. When I was making a choice last summer about whether to buy a 2nd 40k army, a WHFB army, or an alternative game, I picked 40k.
Why? Because the cost difference to buy into fantasy was ENORMOUS! I tallied up a 2000 point army in a couple different books and did a ton of research. The lowest $ I came up with was High Elves at around $400-450 (And I really wanted to play WoC or Lizzies). That's a ton of money to drop just to find out if you like the game
That's my 0.02 cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Nov 12, 2012 18:24:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by onlurker on Nov 24, 2012 11:40:11 GMT -5
While the world behind 40k has Necromunda, something about the nostalgia of Fantasy really gets to me. I like it; there's Heroquest I got to play when I was younger, and now I'm finding out more about games like Mordheim. I like the D & D 'feel' that kind of accompanies the battlefield w WHFB, and I think taking units that are a little fuller is appealing. Armed like people in the middle ages..
40k is cool & still appealing to me- and either game has as a hobby caveat- a couple of armies that are really good for conversions that can deepen the army's character. If I play 40k, it's Orks & for that reason. There's just so much you can do with them. I guess that's more a race & hobby preference thing, but that both 40k & FB have conversion potential armies is good.
yeah, while WHFB can be the more expensive of the two for big games, I think the creative potential of the game-system has been a treasure that remains untapped. Like Warhammer Fantasy Skirmish might be a great introduction to general principles while getting a person's foot in the door to the hobby, with painting, a few models & the rules in general. It'd be cheap to start & build (including a visit the Bit's section @ Nexus) and looks like a lot of fun. There's also the capacity for WHFB to be played on smaller points levels (for newcomers) even tho I've heard of some savvy'd players (on other forums) who happen to prefer it. It's slightly more ideal for newcomers, definitely if they're not there with their army yet.. and also drops lvl 4's. So good fun overall.
|
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Nov 27, 2012 7:19:09 GMT -5
I started both a 40k and fantasy army back in 2000 when I was in high school but no one around played fantasy so my skaven just sat there unused and unloved. 40k has taken some serious inroads to becoming more tactical while cleaning up rules to make it a much, much more playable game, who remembers Eldar Vortex weapons? Grenades? *shudder* I like 40k because of the backstory to the world. Since they came out with the Horus Heresy novels the options for really making an army drawn from history is easy to do and give (at least me) a sense of story to the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Nov 27, 2012 7:45:13 GMT -5
I've actually got an interest back in fantasy... after a bit of a "sigh" time lately... I'm even painting dwarfs again... hopefully some momentum can be gained again with the game and it move forward and grow again...
|
|
|
|
Post by thesanityassassin on Nov 27, 2012 11:03:01 GMT -5
Any reasoning behind the new interest in the game? I keep hearing rumours of new High Elves, and that keeps making me WANT to play again...and then I re-read my rulebook and just think "I really don't want to spend a bunch of money on this..."
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Nov 27, 2012 12:22:35 GMT -5
I think I just needed time to "get over it" to be honest... yeah sure I absolutely hated the magic system because of how brutal and one sided it could be... but then it just kind of got to where I only started hating a few spells / builds (ie: dwellers below - lore of life) and saw that the rest of the magic really wasn't that devastating... started to see a real effort in the army books since 8th came out at toning down the magic (compare ANY of the army book lores level six spells to dwellers and you'll see what I mean)... there's still some builds that I frankly wouldn't enjoy playing against (Teclis + lore of life comes to mind)... but no one really plays that anyways, so it's kind of a matter of theory only... there's a bunch of great guys who play fantasy that I genuinely have fun playing... I really love the setting and found it much more interesting (for me at least) than the 40k grimdark thing...I know this sounds like heresy... but I really couldn't give a crap about the horus heresy... spikey marines with daddy issues... ummm okay... I like that every army is unique and different (not a bunch of variations of space marines) and I like the look of fielding massively scaled fantasy armies (you NEED movement trays there's so many models... how awesome is that???) gradually I became more and more involved with 40k because I really like the game mechanics alot more... it seems more balanced (a few years ago people would have called me crazy for saying this!) and overall 6th is a pretty fantastic fun system... must be something in the 6's, because I found the WHFB six edition books pretty awesome too! So I play WHFB as more "beer & pretzels" playing... I want to have fun with it and make some cool themed armies that look cool on the tabletop... it's kind of like I remembered how fun the game was all over again... how much I liked the models... and how fun it is to treat every roll of 13 as a sign from the horned rat when I play my skaven (I need a thirteen to make that charge? well the horned rat says go for it... don't tell me I can't roll that on two dice... never tell me the odds!!!!) sorry, but I digress.... the fun of WHFB comes from the armies and the flavour and the uniqueness of it, and hanging out with some pretty fun people... I still gnash my teeth at the magic at times, along with the occasional WTF rule... but in general I've been having alot more fun since I "got over it" and just had fun with the game... |
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Nov 27, 2012 12:25:13 GMT -5
I really love the look of the new Skaven models, I think they'd be a ton of fun to convert and sculpt out to be really wicked looking, but That's a shart ton of models, sweet jeebus Skaven just drown the table in models.
To quote Assassin above, the amount of money required is the denying force on my end as I find the more limiting rules of fantasy a cool obstacle.
|
|
|
|
Post by fritzthedwarf on Nov 27, 2012 12:26:16 GMT -5
Same thing when I read the Dwarf army book. I like lots of things about the Dwarfs, liked some things about 8th and disliked others, but I really don't like the way GW fails to properly updated armies in between army books (Dwarfs are 2006 I believe - Wood Elves are shafted worse if I recall correctly). Having this problem with 40k is enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by onlurker on Nov 28, 2012 1:13:47 GMT -5
Yeah, it's hard to make all armies equal; I think a systematic approach would be good for them to utilize in progressing armies: i.e. they rotate races, set priorities and add new models based on a balanced system. I think something like that'd give people faith in committing much to an army. I think they do well, but it could probably be more balanced.
The FAQ is good stuff though, they take on a lot of 'little' issues with that, and it makes things even out a bit.
They really have a lot to cover with the FAQ/Errata's though, so it can be a lot for them to take in, while also thinking about progressing & moving forward.
They have a lot of work on their plate, and to move forward & improve at the same time takes > manpower, and still (more importantly) a unified, cohesive effort to keep things true to the game alive (and balanced). They really do have a big job cut out, but true say with updates. New Chaos bashy things vs. older Dwarfs book?
Then I wonder what I really know, other than that I'm a noob.
I think just the D&D/Braveheart/historic/Robin Hood/LOTR feel of fantasy can be massively attractive when you have blocks of armies at your control. That'd probably be (with all things considered; rules, prices, models, etc) the biggest factor when it comes to Fantasy.
|
|
