*th edition opinions.

Ok guys Ive seen dozens of you scanning the book. Tell us what you think. The pro's and con's. Im about to lay out $74 bucks for this fucker and I dont get to play often.

It's a big change, thats for sure.

Calvary, Chariots, Monsters, all of them took a big hit, mainly due to the steadfast rule AND not striking first on the charge.

Ogres, Minators, Kroxigors, & Trolls got a boost cause of their second rank rules and stomp.

Skirmishers are pretty badly nerfed. Flying creatures also got a bit of tone-town.

Magic is completely different, but much deadlier (for both sides).

Army composition completely changes the game-play. I think we'll see a bit more Hero-Hammer running around (similar to WoTR).


All in all, I'm not 100% sure if I like the new edition or not. I've written up a few lists and I'm going to try it out. If too much of the tactics are gone then I'm done. If not, I'll keep playing.

It's mostly the same game -

Infantry blocks got the BIG boost, but many would argue that was needed because they were getting phased out of use.

Elite unit armies all got toned down. Your going to need some blocks of your own to win now. Chariots, Cav, Monsters, and such are now mostly support units.

For your O&G - probably a boost since you can field such big units for low points. You also get many cheap heors and more bolt throwers in a game. O&G also avoid the new super dealy miscast table.

Most non-man-sized elements in the game have rules to support them being very destructive (e.g. a unit of minotaurs will have 5 attacks a model: frenzy, base attacks, auto-hit stomp... 4 attacks for a second rank, at that.). While that won't mean they will -break- a unit, they will most certainly win combats very frequently unless overwhelmed with combat resolution. Most monster sized models now have D6 (so average 3-4) auto-hitting attacks extra, on top of their profiles (Bloodthirsters have an extra D6 auto-hitting attacks, Hydras have an extra D6 auto-hitting attacks). Players could senselessly throw them into combat and come out a winner.

They can still win the combats they want, but the laws of averages will swing in the favor of the infantry unit getting wailed on and they'll steadfastly tire the rival monsters/ogres out until a bad round of combat comes in and they'll beat them. It's no longer a game of super-units in the realm of rank and file men marching on foot to watch their dragon-mounted/mobile church-mounted Priests/Lords do all the work for them.

Hammers are no longer indestructible, anvils are no longer laughable (at least, you would hope if they were to try and smooth this stuff over at a first glance).

On a lighter note:
____________________________________________________
1 Mounted Orc Great Shaman with magical accoutrement
1 Night Goblin Great Shaman with magical accoutrement

1 Night Goblin Shaman with magical accoutrement
1 Mounted Black Orc Big Boss with BSB + Spirit Totem

One Mob of 46 Orcs, full command + shields

2 Mobs of 49 Night Goblins with full command, nets and 2 fanatics each

1 Mob of Squig Herders, 30 squids and 20 handlers

2 stone throwers

2 doom divers
____________________________________________________

2 lords, 2 heroes, 3 big core blocks, 1 special block, 4 warmachines, 2250 in 8th ed, I would likely retool the magical items they give my army when the FAQ leaps out... also: I'm sure I'm short 40+ points here, I removed orcs to leave the mob in a 10x5 formation.

EDIT: -1 power die for the rival army, +4 for mine with Staff of Sneaky Stealin' + Spirit Totem.

The best unit in my collection certainly appears to be my 40 Saurus Warriors.

Of course they used to be 2 units, but together and outfit with Spears I'm bringing a base 50 S4 attacks to the table. That's pretty nice!

What I don't understand is the Horde rule, you have to be 10 wide but you still have to engage base to base to get the attack, so if you only attack a mob with a 5 wide block, aren't you nerfing a lot of its bonuses?

Also, can someone explain to me the role of cavalry now? I mean, don't you have to be 2 ranks to deny a rank? Plus with initiative strikes, it seems like rank denial just got very expensive for them...and march blocking is kind of obsolete...not sure how to properly construct cavalry in this edition.

Cavalry seem to be more of a high hitting flank type of deal. Lot of Cavalry can be pretty tough so it's not like they are completely useless going head to head.

Less amounts of cavalry units in favor of larger single formations will probably be seen now, which in a way makes a bit more sense than previously 5 dudes on horses would tear up massive blocks of infantry like nothing.

Horde 10 wide vs. 5 man front
(assuming 1 attack per model and no special weapons)
5x2 rows = 10 attacks for the 5x4 unit
7x3 rows = 21 attacks for the 30 man horde

Extra rank, extra wide = extra good

I agree with Kyle - it's big Cav units now. 10 wide to hit the horde or 5x2 to hit the flank. 5 man units would be harraser type or war machine hunters. Light Cav get the Vanguard rule which lets you move 12", so that can help get you up the board and in the backyard on turn 1.

I'm having a hard time getting excited for the new WFB. It feels like GW mashed rules from different systems added paprica for taste and viola': 8th edition. My spirits are a bit dampend with GW right now. Am I the only one with these thoughts? Have any of the players that have tried the new system felt like this, or am I off baisis?

What did you expect them to do, rip the rules in half and just do a complete new system?

War of the Ring was obviously a test product, WOTC did same thing with D&D 4th edition by testing many of it's rule changes in the Star Wars Saga edition beforehand. Taking elements from other game systems by the same company is nothing new.

The new edition is getting most of our regular group growing interest back into trying WFB now, we haven't played in ages and this is by far one of the biggest rule revisions they have done to the game compared to the lame updates they have done in the past.

I personally never was heavy into WFB as I disliked many aspects of the rules, some of which are being changed with this edition of the game, so I'm giving it a new shot to see if it sticks. For people who loved the old edition I could see obvious hostility to change, its pretty natural.

My issue comes from a lack of rules for the armies. Sure GW will have an FAQ for all the armies when the book is released, but how about that being in the main rulebook? Maybe then it would be worth the 75 bucks GW is asking. Maybe not. It's great they totally re-worked the rules, but it would have been nice to include something along the lines of what they did in 3rd edition 40K. Included all the armies in the main rule book. It worked then, It could work now. If that was done, I don't think you'd have anyone pissed about a shitty 75 dollar price tag.

Note: Correction on my part. They should have included the OLDER useless armies... you know the ones that have a bitch of a time winning against the newer army books.....

To the extent in size of amiers now, it wouldn't work like 3rd edition 40k. The amount of amiers and size of specific armies just has gotten too big. The sheer scale of testing to revamp all the armies would make it impossible. 40k armies at the time back then also were for the most part smaller in scale till they got their own codex that greatly expanded each range.

Look at Warmachine and Hordes, it's been several years project for a similar revamp to all rules and armies in one go, and that is with a small amount of armies in comparison to the amount of armies in warhammer fantasy. 5 armies per game about. WFB has 15 armies right now with extensive army lists for each.

The game is just too big for that to be feasible, they would have to cut out tons of material from all armies to put it in the same book with individual army rules which would just piss off ton of people as it did when GW jumped from 2nd to 3rd edition 40k. Peole were royally pissed when they transitioned from 2nd to 3rd, lot of folks weren't around or don't remember this it seems.

I don't think I'll really play this edition. I'm not going to go out of my way for it- that's for sure.

Maybe when I come down every once and a while I grab a game with a couple of you guys but I'm not going to start up here.

Why not ? you now have almost guaranteed ASF elves with Hatred !
I hate initiative order attacks....., why charge ?

What's the point in having high initiative if the enemy can still strike back with full attacks?

Also, its not that DE wont' be decent... its more that I'd have to buy 100+ warriors, some other stuff, and drop things that are no longer viable.

Fair enough, but how about an eratta (like the one coming out) to go with the rulebook. It would have been much better than the garbage fluff that fills it now. My point is GW isn't even trying to please the fan base. It seems like they are just trying to keep us content enough to keep buying their product. I hate to say it, but I'm starting to sound like Jerry lol. I'll still play because I have armies, but it's not as great an experience as it COULD be.

"I'll still play because I have armies, but it's not as great an experience as it COULD be."

??? Can you explain? I thought the bulk of your complaints were with the pricing and emphasis on fluff in the new rulebook, how does that affect the "experience" when you haven't even played it yet?

I agree with some of your complaints, but it's a little early to go all doom & gloom on the system without actually, you know, playing it.

Maybe I have an easier time with change since I didn't spend as much time mastering 7th, but I for one welcome the change to shake things up and change some of the problems in that edition.

The "experience" as a whole that I'm talking about is with GW. It's been an ok ride with them, but it could have been better. It feels like I'm getting nickle and dimed at every turn. Actually playing is only part of the experience. Getting priced gouged to get to play.... is a different part of the experience. As it is, my ....relationship (?).... with GW is on a delicate balance.

It does suck that EVERY player is suppost to up $75 for the new rules.

I'm going to try and play it - but I'm not going to dump a bunch of money in and revamp my armies. I'll work with what I have.

I got to agree with that. Also at what point do you decide that you do not like the new rules and sell the armys. If you wait to long after release you will not get top money for it.

That point is when you lose the fun of the game, lose the fluff totally, don't want to try something new, when you go home home pissed and feel you've wasted your time, and when your goal is WAAC'd..

Very good point it really is not the game you are playing with but the people you are playing it with. Some time I forget that point. Thank you

KingdomCome wrote:Fair enough, but how about an eratta (like the one coming out) to go with the rulebook. It would have been much better than the garbage fluff that fills it now. My point is GW isn't even trying to please the fan base. It seems like they are just trying to keep us content enough to keep buying their product. I hate to say it, but I'm starting to sound like Jerry lol. I'll still play because I have armies, but it's not as great an experience as it COULD be.

Yet without all that "garbage fluff", why would you play Warhammer over another game? Despite what you may like, some people really do enjoy and want the fluff material. During the old 3rd and early 4th dex era people often complained about lack of fluff, now you get the opposite with the new army books/codex being packed with fluff. Just goes to show that no one will ever be satisfied, make someone happy, another is disappointed. Why put the errata in the book when it's eventually going to be obsolete, and when most players only want their armies specific errata which is going to be a tiny download handhout that will be remembered right off the bat? It might be nice but it's a minor inconvenience and not really different from any other companies handling of their new editions

Garry wrote:I got to agree with that. Also at what point do you decide that you do not like the new rules and sell the armys. If you wait to long after release you will not get top money for it.

When you stop enjoying it? Don't see what is so hard for some people, they act like this is all done at gunpoint when they have full choice. It's as I've said before, never understood people who will play for years and invest tons of money into a game yet all they do is bitch about it. If it's bothering you so much, just move onto something else that you will enjoy, there is tons of options out there. And what of people who enjoy the new rules? Lot of games get better with new editions. Some don't that is true to a personal preference of course, and then some games just change so much that a person loses interest. I used to love Confrontation for example in 3rd edition, but when they went with the games "4th ed", I said fuck that game, it no longer was what I loved, I wasn't going to stick around and play it. I would imagine those playing WFB who end up hating 8th ed will simply walk away, yet past experience has shown me that some people just can't....

The new rulebook might appeal to some who like shiny things. Personally, I'd wait for the boxed set which should have a mini rulebook in it. Bill from Pembroke bought the 7e hardback rulebook and I only saw him bring it to a few games - it's just too big and unwieldy. He's stated plenty of times on these boards its too big to use in a game.

If you need the rules badly, read the book at Joel's and or wait for someone to scan it and post it online.

Matt is correct - I hate my full size rule book. Too big, too heavy.

I told Joel I'll buy the starter set with mini book in Auguest when it comes out.