Warmachine

[Hiro Protagonest]

So, I'm interested in learning about Warmachine, since I've been interested in WH40k but looking into it has made me less likely to buy it.

So what's it like? Books and miniatures prices (also where to buy them, aside from the starter sets on the official site)? Community? Any ways to play online?

[Scowling Dragon]

I used to play it and own about a thousand+ points (Sorry bucks) worth of stuff. Im waiting for the rules to get better.

And....The fluff is cool but the rules of the game? Not so much. The unit design feels very much "Well this feels like it should have this" rather than through diligence and through thought out balancing. Newer (better designed) releases contrasted to older ones shows this to be true in my mind. There is a reason there are never articles about what went into the design of the units.

The company also tends to "Balance" newer older releases by releasing new stuff you have to buy to make the older stuff stronger rather than by errata.

Community is honestly some of the worst I have ever seen (At least on the PP forum). If you like thinking critically and expect thought and rationale then expect to be let down.

Its cheap on small scale but costs about the same as any other game on the large scale.

I would not recomend until the rules get updated. Also the Warjacks are rather meh and take more of a sidenote expect with a few factions/ Warcasters.

Edit: But what do I know? Im a grouch so my opinions don't count.

[Lost Demiurge]

Ah, Warmachine... I have such mixed feelings about it.

On the one hand, the local community is mostly pretty decent, and the minis are awesome. The warjacks are nicely big and clunky, the troops have good detail, and the warcasters are full of personality. The various sides have a lot of fun lore, and are pretty well delineated without being overly restrictive. (Though that's mainly due to over a decade of the game being around and growing.)

On the other hand, it's a really unforgiving game. You have to guard your team's leader at all times, and compared to some of the nasty combos/units out there, they're pretty fragile. Lose the warcaster, lose the game, regardless of any other scenario rules. Also, it's really, really hard to come back if you take significant losses early on, I've found. As stated earlier, balance is rather hit or miss, and you WILL go up against units that make you choke on the unfairness of it all.

Compared to other games, it's a halfway point between skirmish games and army games. Kinda falls between Malifaux and Warhammer, I've found. If you don't play with troops it's a skirmish game. If you play with troops, it's like a really big skirmish game. You can go up to army scale if you really want, but those are like four+ hour games. Most low-to-mid point games resolve in about 1-2 hours or so.

Also, if you play Warmachine, it pays to know how its sister game "Hordes" plays. It's the same rules with different quirks, and you'll probably end up in jack-on-beast fights here and there, particularly if you do local tournaments and events. You don't need to play both, but you do need to know the basics for both.

The good part of Warmachine is that $150 or so will get you a starter set, a unit of troops, and maybe an extra warjack or a couple of solos, enough to play a 15-25 point game. It's pretty inexpensive compared to Warhammer, if you don't go deep. You can pick up a used rulebook for about half cost on ebay, but if your local scene's any good they'll be happy to teach you what you need to know. And if they're not any good, well, why get into it in the first place? Oh, also, the used minis market for Warmachine is typically pretty volatile. Checking the used bins at FLGS and the occasional online bargain has got me most of my armies. You have to be a bit patient, and some models never get traded in, but it's a good way to stock up on common stuff.

So is it for you? Dunno. It's a mature game with an established playerbase and over a decade of growth. Got its ups and downs, but you're the one who has to decide in the end.

Oh! As to playing online, yeah, there's an app that allows that. In that case, all you need are the books, and maybe the cards, which are pretty cheap. The app's Pretty good, too, by all accounts. I forget the name...

[Scowling Dragon]

I agree with all of the above. Local community can be pretty good. I didn't comment on minis cause thats personal taste.

I suggest waiting for the video game to come out and trying it out as it has similar rules to the tabletop game.

[Hiro Protagonest]

The trailer for it does look kinda like Bloodbowl, which is a direct port of the board game, so it could be the same thing.

So as usual for competitive tabletop games, only worth it if you have a good local community.

[Scowling Dragon]

And money to burn.

Why is it with "competitive" board games one of the most expensive hobbies for the smallest to show for it (I could have purchased a amazing computer for the cost of my figs) have crap rules? They should be down to the T for the money spent.

[SaruSama]

I'm going to present a different opinion here, I really like the game. Its got an amazing rule set and really fun factions. I have rarely had a game where i haven't learned something from it and i've been playing since 2011. That said i will give my usual warning to anyone looking into it. You will get your teeth kicked in your first games. Expect to loose your first 10 games at least. The learning curve is definitely steep. Also as with any other wargame make sure you have a good local community. See if you can get them to play some other game you both know and see if these are the type of people you'd like to hang out with alot. If you don't like the people you're playing against you won't enjoy the game regardless of the rules. If you have any other questions about it from someone who really likes the game feel free to ask me although I'll probably be slow to respond since I don't check the forums too often.

[SaruSama]

One thing I will agree with Dragon here is that the pp forums are pretty dang aweful, I would mostly avoid them. Also if you've got some time to burn, Chain-attack, a podcast that talks about warmachine/hordes did a 4 part series for new players. Heres the link if you want to check it out. http://www.chain-attack.com/category/newplayerseries/

[Mx.Silver]

Eh, I've circled around the edges of Warmachine before but I've never been able to get into it. A lot of that is aesthetic reasons* (I do not care for the overall visual design in the slightest, even before you get into how fiddly some of the assembly can be), and I'm not hugely fond of the fluff - it's always just looked rather flat. The core rules themselves are reasonably functional, but they're not terribly special and balance is, as has been pointed out, not great. List building is a very big factor in determining who wins, which can be an issue if your local environment is quite competitive.
Community isn't great, and I can't help feel there are some things in the rules and overal design philosophy that don't help with this. Page 5 has historically been a bit of an issue, to the point where the second edition of the rules had to introduce a clause specifically telling players not to use page 5 as an excuse to be an arse to people.
It's cheaper than most Games Workshop products (although very little isn't) but it's not on the cheapest end of the spectrum either. Particularly since, as with Warhammer and 40k, it has that individual army books practice going on.
Of course, it is probably the most popular miniatures game of that scale outside of Games Workshop (although games like Malifaux and Infinity do seem to be getting a bit more well-known as time passes). As such, you can probably find other players without having to teach them the game yourself.


*although I would note that aesthetics should be a very important factor in deciding about this hobby. A lot of your time, and probably money, will be spent on assembly and painting.

[Cheesegear]

So what's it like?

Depends on your community. As others have said, a lot of the online community is pretty terrible, this may be due to the 40K players with the terrible attitudes quitting 40K and gravitating towards War Machine. But don't quote me on that. Probably the most depressing thing about War Machine (and 40K), but especially true for War Machine, is that just because you like something, whether it be due to the model, it's fluff, or maybe you only bought something 'cause it was the only thing you could afford. But, at the end of the day, just because you want something to be good, it doesn't follow that it is good.

I like War Machine, simply because it has good mechanics, however, I will not play War Machine competitively because of how toxic - and broken - the meta is.


Books and miniatures prices (also where to buy them, aside from the starter sets on the official site)?

'Cheaper than 40K.' But so is a lot of things.


Community?

The most toxic community I've ever seen, and I was even around when Games Workshop had a forum on their website. War Machine can literally be won in the first turn. Because of this fact, if your army isn't the very best, like no one ever was, then you're bad, and you should feel bad, and you should quit playing BECAUSE PAGE 5 THAT'S WHY! Again, depends on your community. You shouldn't base your conclusions on the internet. Go to wherever they're playing War Machine near you, find out how many people play regularly, what do they play, and generally introduce yourself and ask their opinion on the game - not us, the internet. Because our view of game is based on the same thing, our own personal games and metas.

[SaruSama]

Hey cheese i dont think youve played since mark 2 came about, because thats exactly what it was created to fix. Its literally imposible to win turn one now short of you literally runing your caster in front of your army at full speed at the enemy.

[Scowling Dragon]

No it still is. Just those are more very rare tricks pulled off by a very few casters.

Still looking at the older rules the "Fixes" MKII provided (I started off with MKII) are more like patchwork crutches then addressing the core issues. Guess thats why the issues are still there.

[Ishikar]

I have a large Khador force but I actually dislike playing the game because of how the rules can work and a good portion of the local meta having been incredibly abusive to newer players. Case in point my first two 15 point "battlebox" mangled metal/tooth and claw style games were against the malak karn bullet and goreshade with his free 7 point unit feat and you can't use your warcaster spell.

Yeah, not to mention the introductory/slow growth league was won by the people who were running it.

Admittedly that's a local issue but a lot of the game is just WAY too rock paper scissors and the casters I kind of like (Vlad1, Karchev, Strakov) aren't top tier so they're basically considered crap. In Malifaux I can play strats/schemes and avoid my opponent and in 40k units are typically diverse enough so that losing one unit won't completely hamstring you.

Also I'm disappointed in the fact that my heavy armor foot infantry (Iron Fang Pikemen in this case) are less survivable than others and how abysmal shield wall is against certain other effects and abilities that are out there. Basically if I'm running Khador infantry and I hit a Stormwall, Menoth fire list, or (shudders) pretty much anything Cryx then it seems like I'm just putting my models out, moving them forward and then putting them away and congratulating my opponent on a win.

Add in the inherent imbalance between fury/focus. Fury is better because you can fully utilize your beasts in an alpha strike and it feeds your warlock rather than having to gauge if you want your warcaster or warjacks to be effective this turn (Helljack again is Cryx laughing at this, as they do everything else).

Also the Turn 1 win isn't as rare as you'd imagine and the warcaster dies=game over makes certain jacks and combos a choice between clustering around your caster and losing scenario or moving out for scenario and losing by assassination.

[Lost Demiurge]

If the people who are running a league are allowed to win it, then you've got a corrupted community.

Part of running a league should be disqualification to any sort of victory. Can't have the people running it being capable of placing in it, that's just common sense.

[Cheesegear]

Also the Turn 1 win isn't as rare as you'd imagine and the warcaster dies=game over makes certain jacks and combos a choice between clustering around your caster and losing scenario or moving out for scenario and losing by assassination.

I play/ed Cygnar, and was basically told - IRL, to my face - to sell my army because nothing Cygnar can do is competitive. So I went to the internet, and told one of the two or three tricks that Cygnar does have, is running Caine2 straight at the enemy Warcaster, it doesn't matter how you fill the rest of your points, because the only piece on your side of the board that matters is Caine... Lame. That said, if it doesn't work for whatever reason (the dice hate you), then you lose, because Caine is now standing by himself in the middle of the enemy army, and now they kill my Warcaster. GG.

[Scowling Dragon]

But its OK. Because they overcompensated now by making a bunch of very expensive stuff fantastic for Cygnar. Like the Storm Strider or the Colossal.

[SaruSama]

A lot of the complaints on here sound like they boil down to your meta was awful. Which sucks but again if the people you play are awful the game isnt going to be fun. I can promise there are great metas out there where we have alot of fun with the game. I've been lucky enough to find 3 of them. As to the balance issues I really think this mostly goes back to the learning curve being incredibly steep. The fury versus focus thing is a lot of newer players notice and focus on, and its true to a point. There are other issues such as slightly generally better stats/feats/spells available to warcasters (obviously this is generality) that help to balance it, however. To highlight this just look at recent big tournament wins it runs the gambit through both hordes and warmachine factions something that wouldn't be true if one side was simply better. Also yeah sometimes the model/s you want to love and like just isn't that good but are the rest of you honestly saying there are other tabletop games where thats not true? Also as to the loosing your caster loosing you the game thing I don't understand why this garners so much hate, its basically like if your queen is also your king in chess and chess does not get that much hate.
(As a side note on the first turn winning thing I honestly can't think of anyone capable of doing that can you give me an example?)

[Cheesegear]

A lot of the complaints on here sound like they boil down to your meta was awful. Which sucks but again if the people you play are awful the game isnt going to be fun. I can promise there are great metas out there where we have alot of fun with the game.

I play in an area where tournaments are quite regular, in doing so, even the 'casual' games are considered practice games for tournaments, and generally people want to try something they think is competitive vs. something else. Because they're playing a hard list, you have to play a hard list.


To highlight this just look at recent big tournament wins it runs the gambit through both hordes and warmachine factions something that wouldn't be true if one side was simply better.

But, it's the same War Machine faction - generally Cryx - that consistently competes against Hordes. If you look at big tournament wins, and see the same army over and over and over again, then that army is broken. Thanks to recent developments in the 40K community, the 40K community can objectively track which army books are 'breaking the game' and take steps to counteract this. "If you want to go to a tournament, you will face Imperial Guard. Build your army accordingly."


Also yeah sometimes the model/s you want to love and like just isn't that good but are the rest of you honestly saying there are other tabletop games where thats not true?

No, we're not saying that. We're saying it's more true in War Machine because there's so much stuff. 40K has it's armies broken down into sections, and makes the player make zero-sum choices; If you take one unit, you can't take another unit in the same slot. When you look at binary choices objectively, it's really easy to build decent - if not actually good - army in 40K, even for new players.

War Machine asks you to pick a War Caster. Except there are like eight of them for every race.
After that? Do what you want. With so many choices, you are bound to make more mistakes. Especially if you're new and don't understand how your chosen War Caster actually works.

[Leon]

Ive been playing Since it first began and its a great game.

Tho these days i have found that the push is for bigger and bigger games that i don't feel suit the system all that well, the best point range i find is the 15-35 range with a 15pt Highlander being my Fav.

Ive known people who quit after Mark Two came out and it stopped them from being able to exploit some mechanics to win easy (which is laughable really) but most people i know who played MK1 still play 2 and a whole lot more have join since 2 came out and enjoy it.

Cost to get in is much better than GW. The Minimum you need is a Battle Box to start playing. from ther eits really your choice in how much you ramp it up. Even better is the 2 Player Battle Starter set that gives you 2+ extra Battle boxes and a nice compact rule book and some other useful items.

They are faction limited so its maybe not a great thing if your wanting to do a Cygnar/Cryx or Ret Force but its a good place to start if you know nothing else about the factions and want to get some forces rolling.



War Machine asks you to pick a War Caster. Except there are like eight of them for every race.
After that? Do what you want. With so many choices, you are bound to make more mistakes. Especially if you're new and don't understand how your chosen War Caster actually works.

Which is a good thing, making mistakes helps you learn what is a good thing to do and a bad thing.
Friend of mine who plays Ret has hit his stride on what works after a number of defeats using the wrong casters with the wrong army elements (Best was Garryth and a jack Heavy list. First time i have seen a machine wraith actually do something useful) and now has a rather nasty lil list with Vyros

[Mx.Silver]

Cost to get in is much better than GW.
To be fair, I can't think of a still in print miniatures game where this is not true. I would also note that Warmachine/Hordes is the also one of the very few non-gw games that follows the GW model of each army requiring its own individual book of rules.



Which is a good thing, making mistakes helps you learn what is a good thing to do and a bad thing.

I would say it's generally less good when those mistakes are about which models you spend real money on.

[SaruSama]

Are you seriously saying that there arent bad models/units in warhamer? Models that youd spend real money on then not get to use in a competitive meta because they dont work? It sounds like you play in a real competitve meta and want to play more casually. There are plenty of groups that play casually basically exclusively. It soubds like you just ended up in one that doesn't suit you very well, which sucks sorry.

[SaruSama]

Also the latest big tourney wins are not all cryx. Its a wide range of things from mercs to cygnar to circle, retribution, menoth, and legion. I actually can't think of one recently where cryx won. (Big tourney here refering to big conventions like adepticon or the wtc)

[Cheesegear]

Are you seriously saying that there arent bad models/units in warhamer?

For the third time, no. I am saying that the ratio of good units to bad is far more skewed to the bad side in War Machine than 40K.

[SaruSama]

O im sorry cheese, i didnt realize you were making a ratio claim. (Its early over here /embarassed). I guess i just disagree with you on that claim. Basically i think your putting a litttle too much emphasis on list building/models perceived power. Even if youre in a bad matchup 9 times out of 10 you can play your way out of it. Im not saying its easy just that its possible. Than if you keep this mindset and look at your losses there is almost always something you could have done to play better and win. Essentially the game is by no means won or lost on list selection.

[Leon]

To be fair, I can't think of a still in print miniatures game where this is not true. I would also note that Warmachine/Hordes is the also one of the very few non-gw games that follows the GW model of each army requiring its own individual book of rules.


I would say it's generally less good when those mistakes are about which models you spend real money on.

$50 gets you a Solid Core of a Force to play with with Quick Start Rules from the Website, $50 from GW will get you a Unit if your lucky

Your not required at all to have the Faction books. All you need is the Unit Card that you get with the Mini, anything else is a added bonus.
Unless its a very new unit buy a Faction Deck and you have all the card (inc multiples there of somethings) and then you play some games with it in proxy. Or you know buy the stuff you like the look of and meta be dammed make them work for you.

[ExtravagantEvil]

I'm going to agree with SaruSama, and say that Warmachine is a great game, and one that you should check out.
On the important front of price tags. You can buy minis through Discount Games Inc. for about 1/3 of the Core cost, so it actually is a lot cheaper than 40k is without having to resort to eBay.

On the side of the competitiveness. Yeah, it's competitve a lot of time. A lot of the higher echelon players that host podcasts and blogs actually give a lot of comparisons to chess moves when discussing the game. It is a game that is incredibly, incredibly deep. The tactical possibilities and synergies are immense, which means there's always a way to tickle your brain. In contrast also to most of the thread, I find that the rules are really stream lined and simple. At least more so than 40k. The turns don't take as long, all the rules are spelled out on cards so all you need to remember is a couple of rules on some Wrestling Moves, and order of activation tricks.

I played 40k when I was younger and tried to play as much as I could, though my timing was terrible in entering the hobby and the instant I got into it my time vanished into the inky void. But every game I did play felt like it was more determined by the dice than by my own tactics and actions.

Warmachine comes with the exact opposite dice philosophy. Restricting to 2d6 forces things to a predictable Bell Curve, and all the mechanics hinge on manipulating a basic probability curve. Dice happen sometimes though all the same. I've lost games just because I got snake eyes on a damage roll, leaving a wall of 5 heavy armored paladins for me to deal with when I thought they'd all be dead, costing me the game.

Now, like all games there's a dependence on community. Some communities just aren't good for new players. Warmachine in most metas is competitive. People in the low to mid-tier of play experience can be incredibly competitive. I for one, support this. It's training. It's incredibly, incredibly cerebral. However, some places just have terrible metas with people who recite internet decklists as litanies rather than guides, and do believe in "playing it wrong". That is just as much in 40k as it is in Warmachine/Hordes though and depends on the local scene.
Really though, a good meta is one that treats a new player like one of the pros in terms of respect and play difficulty, while pointing out what they did wrong. It should be a long series of losses that teach rather than losses that just grind at a player.

However, this does not mean you can start a more casual meta by inviting people to play casually and just treat it as a more streamlined, less time consuming wargame.

Warma-Hordes though embraces a mentality that says that everything that happens in this game is on you. Everything is your fault, your glory, and luck can only take you so far. It forces you to not justify bad play by saying it was a bad dice roll or 5. It's a mentality that gets players to learn the game, and feel a wonderful challenge as a result.

On the models end: they aren't as easy to assemble as 40k models, and I admit that wholly. They are not as smooth as 40k's resin, nor as forgiving to put together. That is the only real part that I regret about PP's decisions.
Seriously, the models are not as easy to glue as 40k.

[Scowling Dragon]

On the side of the competitiveness. Yeah, it's competitve a lot of time. A lot of the higher echelon players that host podcasts and blogs actually give a lot of comparisons to chess moves when discussing the game. It is a game that is incredibly, incredibly deep. The tactical possibilities and synergies are immense, which means there's always a way to tickle your brain. In contrast also to most of the thread, I find that the rules are really stream lined and simple. At least more so than 40k. The turns don't take as long, all the rules are spelled out on cards so all you need to remember is a couple of rules on some Wrestling Moves, and order of activation tricks.

I disagree, Having played more games I find that Hordes ISN'T that deep. Strategically, debatable, but very blunt Tactically.

The game plays very aggressive to a fault because of its worst mechanic: Charge Dice. Which essentially makes the game all about getting that primary charge off. Or even if it isn't a charge its still all about aggression.

I find it just NOT very deep.