Bartertown.com

Okay, I used to have some of the figures, but never played the game. With the way that Privateer Press handled their letter from Lonewolf Labs (Army Builder guys), I figure I might get into either Warmachine or Hordes. With that being said, I'm not such a fan of their forum layout, so I'm tossing it out here.

Who here plays either Warmachine or Hordes? What can you tell me about the game? What is the typical point cost of the battle, and how does that translate into figures? Aside from machines versus beasts, what differences are there between Warmachine and Hordes? I think I remember that you were supposed to be able to play them interchangeably, but I might be mistaken there. How differently do the games play? What is a good approach for a new player to start? I know Warmachine just released MK2, and I think Hordes is getting a revamp. So is it better to wait on Hordes until the revamp?

Any players in the middle Tennessee region?

For a discussion regarding the Lonewolf / PP thing above, check out this link. http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=497369.

I own a small, 1st edition Cryx force. WM/H is a good diversion from 40k. You can play starter boxes, or go roughly double that for a larger game. WM/H is much more of a skirmish game, with much smaller model counts - think 2nd Ed 40k. WM &H are compatible though the controlling of Jack robots and beasts is different.

If you're jumping in, then just buy the WM stater box of whatever you like the look of, and play against the downloadable Mk.2 rules. Later, after Hordes is straightend out, buy the Hordes starter that looks good, and you'll be all set for playing.

I myself own effectivly the entire cygnar and troll factions and at one time had all of each of khador, menoth, pirates, cryx, and circle (now all gone by trading here!).

I'd say that the main difference is the fury vrs focus aspect. Besides this there really isn't a huge difference. For jacks they tend to have more armor, hit points and slightly better statline over a beast but a beast can use more "fury" to make more attacks or boost more often. A army will normally have 2jacks and a caster with 6focus which he can allocate up to 3on each Jack and can leave any on himself while a warlock will run a heavy and 2lights on average with a heavy that has 4or 5possible furry uses and a light which has 2or3 furry so a total of 8-11 possible extra dice, attacks or whatever. However in hordes if u can't calm down the beasts then they go nuts and u can't use them AND they attack the closest model in LOS. Look on the site for the free rules for more info.

Warmachine has the mkii book out and the cards so Id go with them to start with as u have the final ruleset instead of the beta ruleset that is out right now for hordes.

And yes they are interchangeable as long as your following the army quidelines.

oh and the biggest game I've played was about 6k on both sides, the rules can support the higher point levels but it does take a long time.

The best point level is 25-35 those points work very well, but start with box vrs box to start off with.

I started to play in the last few months. Three of my friends play Warmachine (Cryx, Menoth, Khador) and I play Hordes (Skorne). Warmachine is about allocating focus well, and Hordes about generating and managing fury, the basic game is the same for both. I would look at the latest PDF rules on the PP site if you are interested in Hordes, but ultimately would wait for the finished rules. We started with the box sets and are building towards 25 point games. http://battlecollege.wikispaces.com/ has some good tips on units, and how to use them, but their hordes MKII isn't upated yet.

Creeper wrote:With the way that Privateer Press handled their letter from Lonewolf Labs (Army Builder guys), I figure I might get into either Warmachine or Hordes. With that being said, I'm not such a fan of their forum layout, so I'm tossing it out here.

Yeah, pretty awesome, eh? I got a good chuckle. I was amused with a Lone Wolf guy showed up on the PP website to argue his side and got banned for promoting non-PP products

Creeper wrote:Who here plays either Warmachine or Hordes? What can you tell me about the game? What is the typical point cost of the battle, and how does that translate into figures? Aside from machines versus beasts, what differences are there between Warmachine and Hordes? I think I remember that you were supposed to be able to play them interchangeably, but I might be mistaken there. How differently do the games play? What is a good approach for a new player to start? I know Warmachine just released MK2, and I think Hordes is getting a revamp. So is it better to wait on Hordes until the revamp?

I play both Warmachine and Hordes. Our typical games at the local store at 35 pts for each side. Usually that means I have a caster, 1 heavy jack, 2 light jacks, 2 units, and 1-2 solos.

The difference between the games is that Warmachine is Asset management, whereas Hordes is Risk management. Warmachine is a set number of focus for each side, whereas Hordes makes their own fury, and you have to balance what you need, by what you can generate.

The best place for a new player to start is buy looking over the factions, and picking what you think is visibly appealing. Once you find what you like, buy a battlebox for that. Play 5-6 games, if you like it, buy a unit and a solo, play 5-6 more games. Buy another Caster, play 5-6 games. And expand that way.

Hordes is indeed is in flux with their beta test of mark 2. I caution people at the local store about this, but give them basic overviews of what the armies are like. They arent going to change the themes of each army, just how the rules interact.[/quote]

I think everyone is covering the bases well. I owned every faction, minimum of 500pts, and I have recently narrowed that down to MERCS (Searforge/Dwarves) and Trolls. I have a few pieces left if you're interested in them. I am not that familiar w/MKII ruleset for WM, and I have not field tested the Hordes MKII ruleset, so take what I'm about say w/a healthy dose of table salt.

In its bare-bone essence, here's how to sum it up pretty quick...
*EDIT* whoops... i repeated what Alienated_One said here Oh well... it's worth repeating!
Warmachine = Resource Management (allocation of focus)
Hordes = Risk Management (Risk your beast going apes**t if you put fury on them)

For me, I liked Hordes because I could boost to-hit/dmg on the fly. Hordes is nice because if someone whacks the crap out of your warlock, you can transfer ALL of the damage to a beast at the cost of 1 fury; however, if you maxed out your beast on fury (such as 4/4, 2/2, 3 out of 3, etc.) then you can't.

Warmachine is nice because when you get to know your army really well, you can plan ahead and know exactly where your focus is going to go and how to use it.

In either case, knowing your models will push you to victory even when odds are stacked against you. I can't tell you how many battles I've watched where the guy was just flat out freakin screwed (either by their own error or bad luck w/the dice) but because they knew the rules well, and knew EXACTLY what their models could do, what order to activate, and how to work them together in tandem... they came back and put the smack down on the dude that was just whippin their arse a couple turns ago.

Also, PP has a lot of neat "scenario" games like No Mans Land, etc. So it's not always just "my army can beat up your army" or "assassination" which is: kill the enemy caster/warlock = game over.

No matter what you decide (and I encourage you to play both WM & Hordes), take a close look at all the casters/warlocks available to you. There are times when certain leaders will work in certain scenarios better.

And, finally, on the note of knowing your army and taking a close look at models... don't get caught up in 'fads' which is real easy to do on the PP forums. Everyone has an opinion and you'll flat out have people tell you you're stupid because you built your army this way or that - not true. Certainly there are strategies and tactics to employ, but seize the liberty to experiment, have your arse handed to you (many, many times), and do things against the norm. You may be surprised with what you come up with, and it is absolutely AWESOME when you slap the crap out of your opponent w/something they didn't expect b/c they spend too much time readin the forums!

Sorry for the novel - turned out to be a lot more than I thought I would say

Cheers,
Rik

Do the PP rules lead to as much arguing as GW rules do?

Creeper wrote:Do the PP rules lead to as much arguing as GW rules do?

No



The old rules (mki) had some weird issues with rules having different meaning but the same name. Like incomporial which on some models said u could NOT charge while other incomporial rules said u could.

But this has been changed sence mkii and all like rules are now grouped together as more general rules which all have the same wording (they cut and pasted most of them to make it easier)

pluss you can go onto the pp forums and ask the game designers/ rules gurus in the rules section and get your question answered.

Creeper wrote:Do the PP rules lead to as much arguing as GW rules do?

If there was as large of a player base gaming for monetary prizes, I suspect it'd be pretty close.

Fundamentally, the GW (40k) ruleset is quite good, especially with the newer Codices. Maybe 1 questionable rule pops up per Codex. So in ordinary, non-tournament play, no problems.

But put enough people all chasing the same $xx value prize, and things can get a bit ugly. Sad, really. But that's human nature.

EZ mac wrote:

Creeper wrote:Do the PP rules lead to as much arguing as GW rules do?

No



The old rules (mki) had some weird issues with rules having different meaning but the same name. Like incomporial which on some models said u could NOT charge while other incomporial rules said u could.

But this has been changed sence mkii and all like rules are now grouped together as more general rules which all have the same wording (they cut and pasted most of them to make it easier)

pluss you can go onto the pp forums and ask the game designers/ rules gurus in the rules section and get your question answered.

And ones an Infernal (rules guy) answers a question, its the rule. There isnt multiple people saying this, then the next guy saying 'oh this', etc. They stand behind the people.

I agree. At my LGS on our "WM/H night" there are WHFB & 40K players, we PP players are the minority, and I hear all kinds of "battles" about rules. I never played 40K (and don't care to), and I played WHFB in like 1998, so I really can't comment on the comparison. During rules MKI if we had any disagreements, we'd either look it up on the laptop (via PP forums) and/or someone had a printed copy of the erata - and if that didn't work, we'd "roll" for it.

There were plenty of opportunities to "break" the game in the MKI rules (I don't know MKII well enough to comment), but that is all about perspective. For example, the Khador Drakun is a dude on a horse (he can dismount also) and he CANNOT be knocked down. Of course, being mounted his threat range via "charge" is a pretty good distance, so what people would do is allocate a focus to their jack (to hit) and then for activation sequence would activate the jack, charge their own Drakhun in the back, pick him up and throw him d6" - then they would activate the Drakun and charge. So, effectively, you've "sneakily" added some threat range to that beat stick on a horse.

So... some people say that is breaking the game. The counter argument would be "well the rules don't say I can't!" Then the counter-counter argument would be "Well the rules also don't say I can't hit you in the face w/a toaster either!" Moral of the story - you'll always have something so it really just comes down to the type of folks you play with and their knowledge of the game.

I never had a problem w/someone being "creative" w/the rules because A) - I like to see the creativity/interpretation, and B) - they get to pull that trick on me once. Next time - I'll bait them to do it again and then hand their arse to them!

connivingsumo wrote:There were plenty of opportunities to "break" the game in the MKI rules (I don't know MKII well enough to comment), but that is all about perspective. For example, the Khador Drakun is a dude on a horse (he can dismount also) and he CANNOT be knocked down. Of course, being mounted his threat range via "charge" is a pretty good distance, so what people would do is allocate a focus to their jack (to hit) and then for activation sequence would activate the jack, charge their own Drakhun in the back, pick him up and throw him d6" - then they would activate the Drakun and charge. So, effectively, you've "sneakily" added some threat range to that beat stick on a horse.

they changed the 'Khador pegasus' in the new edition of the rules. If you are knocked down or expereince an effect that would knock you down, you cannot move on your turn anymore. So no throwing the Horses, no throwing Borka, no throwing the dwarf.

Its a rules update that I actually like.

connivingsumo wrote:The counter argument would be "well the rules don't say I can't!" Then the counter-counter argument would be "Well the rules also don't say I can't hit you in the face w/a toaster either!"

So you carry a toaster around when you game? Wierd.

For me, the counter is "the rules don't say I can't put my boot up your ass -- how do you want to proceed?"

JohnHwangBT wrote:

connivingsumo wrote:The counter argument would be "well the rules don't say I can't!" Then the counter-counter argument would be "Well the rules also don't say I can't hit you in the face w/a toaster either!"

So you carry a toaster around when you game? Wierd.

For me, the counter is "the rules don't say I can't put my boot up your ass -- how do you want to proceed?"

I always like the threat of putting several of my heavy warjacks in a sock, and hitting them repeatedly in the head with it. Sockjacking for the win!