Friday, October 12, 2012

Why I Don't Play Warmachine

Over at Dakka Dakka they are having their monthly thread on who is better Privateer Press or games Workshop. This month’s particular twist is entry cost and between Warmahordes and 40k. It’s out to 11 pages and 300 posts…..and has started to turn into the usual pissing contest.

Now there is nothing particularly new in the arguments – and it could just as easily be rules quality/Warmahordes vs. Fantasy/production quality etc. However it got me thinking about the topic.

I have never played either Warmachine or Hordes and to be brutally honest I can’t see that I ever will. People have offered me the chance to try it and I read threads on it but I have a mental block. I was trying to determine why that was and it dawned on me.

I just don’t like the aesthetics of the game. The models don’t appeal to me in the slightest. It not that they are different from GW – I like Malifaux and have heaps of historicals – I just don’t see them as great or unique models. IMO the design shares a lot in common with Confrontation models from Rackham and I really didn’t like them either. And I guess that’s what makes us human – we have different likes and dislikes.

Given that I don’t like the models, I would never invest the time into building and painting them. That remains an insurmountable hurdle to entry to the game for me. Normally you will see one race/species you like in a game and that draws you in. But the Warmahordes game lacks that entry door in my eyes.

Different folks, different strokes.


  1. I've posted about this before. For me, the models are not that interesting but the bigger thing seems to be that I'm not interested in skirmish-level games. Ultimately Warmachine and Warhammer are different games - how people think they can be compared at all is a bit beyond me.

  2. I think warmachine has a lot more in common with 2nd edition 40k. The rules are a lot more detailed and character models are really powerful.

    The interesting mechanism is that you automatically lose if your general dies.

    How would it change 40K or fantasy if you lost if your general is killed?

  3. See, I really like the models, and the rules of the game are pretty good too. What bothers me is the impact of the disaffected. Don't tell me to play your game because my game is shit, and for kids, and overpriced, and blah blah blah. Get me to play your game by saying why you like your game. There's no need for a comparison, there's no need to approach it in that manner.

    It's a real shame too, because it's certainly not all of the community, there are some really positive guys who are doing great stuff with it - but unfortunately for me all the good they do is overwhelmed by the negativity of others.

    1. I agree with Charlie. The negativity put me off the game for so long.
      And erks me everytime that there is constant negativity towards the GW products (doesn't matter what they do). But yeah i think the vocal disaffected are actually doing more harm then good

      Also i don't like games without pre measure anymore (even though they have a really bastardised version of it) ... annoys me

      The models I think some are really good . But mostly i'm indifferent about them. Also i don't like the fact that you have to use PP models(esp the ones you don't like).

    2. Hey PAW. You only have to use PP models at a PP sanctioned event where you are using their prizes etc, like at a GW GT. If you wished to run a casual one you could with no dramas of course. You are all allowed to do conversions as long as 50% of the model is the original model. In a couple of tournaments that I have run, I have let it slide for one or two models in a tournament, I love converting myself.

      I think the main reason (aside from profits :P) is that because WM/H runs timed turns, or Deathclock (chessclock style) events, every second counts. It makes it really hard when you are under pressure to remember what model 'counts-as' what model in your oppositions list. I know that not being able to look at a model and know what it represents drives me crazy.

      On the flip side, I do miss building a character from the ground up.

  4. The main reason I can't ever see myself getting into Warmachine is that it's a skirmish game. It might take me 3 years to paint an army for Warhammer, but at least it looks like an army.

    The other reason is the miniatures. I don't really like the heroic scale in Warhammer as it is, but I can put up with it. Warmachine seems to take that a step further with weapons and armour that is beyond the ludicrous you often find in Warhammer. That obviously isn't a problem for a lot of people, and good on them; it's not for me to tell my fellow geeks how to spend their time and money. But like Pete, the models don't do it for me.

    Still, more power to those who like it; I hope they enjoy it as much as I enjoy Fantasy Battle.

  5. I looked at one of the starter boxes and it was something like 80-90 dollars for three models, that's when I stopped getting interested.

    Another I don't like is that I'm not able to customize the units or heroes with weapons/armour and what not, where as in Fantasy I get some degree of that.

    1. Were these prices from the past Wargames Supply business? If so, those prices seem horrendous. WM/H is definitely not more expensive than 40k/Fantasy. Is sounds like you saw a really bad deal.

  6. I am the same. I Don't like the models. They are more expensive than GW and the majority of the sculpts are terrible IMO
    The rules are just hero hammer. We all know how well that worked out.
    The community appears to be full of people who insist that their world view on wargaming is the correct one. And I can't stand how PP fans go on about how PP cares about them etc. Reality check. They are there to take your money. Come back to us when PP is bigger.
    I'm looking to get into Flames of War as an alternative system. Something about tanks =)

    1. I've done the same, FoW is a great game, I've done Canadian Tanks.

  7. Well I bought the rules sold the rules for WM so no loss. I'm sure WM is a fine game for those interested, it all comes down to your point of view in the end.
    Like Simon Switer I'm playing FoW Canadians. Why well because my mates play it, relativly cheap, simple yet tactical, & well written. Oh and the games are fun to play. :). Pretty much what we all want in a minature war game IMO.

  8. As Charlie has pointed out Warmachine does seem to attract the "disaffected". some of these people seem to display a zealotry whereby they need to denigrate games they've played previously but have left behind.

    However they seem to forget not everyone wants to be "saved" and not everyone necessarily has the same problems they had.

    The good thing is they've found a game they like. The bad is that sometimes the display all the guile and sensitivity of a Greenpeace doorstepper.

    As I said in the main post, unless there is a major change in the model aesthetics then I'm a lost cause. But don't worry, I'm still happy.

    1. First up, just so I'm not trying to hide where I sit, I am one of the two primary organisers for WM/H in Wellington. It is disappointing to me that WM players are being branded with the 'disaffected/zealot' brush. I know some of the guys are enthusiastic, and passionate and want to share their good experiences with others, but you get those in every game.

      Even though I am an advocate for the PP games, I still read this blog and many others, and follow news and stuff on BOLS etc because although I dont play 40k any more, I'm still interesting in what is going on out there. I still collect the black library books and enjoy the amazing 'history' and world that GW has built. I would say that most WM/H players in my experience feel the same way.

      I just hope that people don't equate the morons you read on the forums with the real life players. Both games are very different and offer a different play experience. I certainly don't lump all GW players in the same bucket because of what I've read, or a couple experiences that I've had - I used to be one.

      For those who want to give it a go, I hope that would-be players realise that we have an open and friendly playing environment here in Wellington. That many of our players play multiple games (Including 40k/F) and are certainly not harassed because they do. The wargaming community is small enough as it is without further segregation.

    2. I'm sure Charlie's (and my subsequent) comments re disaffected weren't aimed at you, Sean(?).

      The work you do with the Wellington WM/H community is fantastic e.g. CTA. You always get dicks in every community - and moreso online where people can be internet warriors.

      As stated, my hurdle is the models themselves. Now that's not PP's problem, it's my issue. I'm sure there are people with the same view of GW models - and I can give you a few there too that don't do it for me e.g. The Held Rake

    3. Hey Pete, it is indeed I (Sean). I wasn't disagreeing with your points on aesthetics, that is a completely individual choice and totally understandable.
      I just hope that the wider gaming community, particularly in Wgtn do not tar all Warmachine players with the same 'disaffected/win-at-all-costs/Warmachine-is-better-than-GW-games' brush. The same players who play WM now, undoubtedly played GW before. We are all the same player base which fluidly transitions from one game to another from time to time. As you quite rightly said, there are dicks in every community. Its up to the rest of the more rational-minded community to try and minimise their negative impact.

      Warmachine is a great game if you want to come and learn it. It is different to GW, so (like many of our players) its perfectly ok to play both. Aesthetics & Rules aside.