|
Post by Anaris on Apr 20, 2017 1:04:43 GMT
Thought this the best place to put this since its not supporting 8th edition per say, it's just a question though.
Why do some people who don't play fantasy or sigmar at all anymore hate 8th edition and either say they loved 7th or even most common 6th?
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Apr 20, 2017 1:31:54 GMT
Fixed charge ranges is a huge one!
Also the ability to do enough damage on the charge to ensure no striking back.
No premeasuring.
The above are all things i love about 8th but some don't like them.
In 6th or 7th a unit of 5 chaos knights could quite happily charge a unit of 50 goblins and expect no attacks back and to basically auto-break them. Some love this style of play. I must prefer the strategic, mass battle feel of 8th edition but it's ultimately all subjective.
|
|
|
Post by Bureaucrat of Chaos on Apr 20, 2017 8:27:43 GMT
I have played 6th/7th only once or twice, but it seems pretty nice.
I think the rules encourage smaller units than 8th, like 20-25 basic core troops are often optimal? This impacts somewhat on the gameplay as well, and the painting and collecting aspect of the hobby, the look etc. Randomised Warhammer craziness was toned down a bit as well. They went for a darker, some say more "realistic" feel in aesthetics and presentation. This was also appealing to many. Mordheim was released around the same time as 6th (1999-2000). It was very much a study in the "grimdark" aspects of the Warhammer world and was probably the perfect gateway game.
I was out of the hobby those years, but can totally get that it was something of a golden age which is fondly remembered.
Many Warhammerists are basically nostalgics, and the edition they played in their formative years will always be special to them. Which is one of the reasons why I think that Grandmaster Wang is right in saying that it's all ultimately subjective.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2017 15:36:48 GMT
I think some of it has to do with unit sizes. 8th increased the size of the armies and required more models to play and that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. Some have (poorly I feel) argued that this similar issue is what ended up killing fantasy. Also what others have said. Personally I HATED the MSU cavalry army auto-break the opponent edition of the game (I played 2 games then sat that entire edition out. It was.not.fun. for me) grandmasterwang hits the nail on the head with it being subjective. Personally I found an AMAZING group during 8th edition when I was at school and even with an engineering course load was still managing to play 1-2 games on Saturdays with my buddies. We even got 3 people to start the game (2 of them are still playing) just by watching us play with our painted armies. So for me 8th edition is the one that I remember with most fondness and so it will always be the "best" edition for me. But I can understand if others had this same or similar experiences with older editions in a similar group.
|
|
|
Post by Anaris on Apr 20, 2017 16:25:08 GMT
Yeah, I hear different things about 6th and 7th edition fantasy. I only started playing 1 year after 8th was released. I came from 6th edition 40k.
|
|
|
Post by KevinC on Apr 20, 2017 18:22:16 GMT
Regarding balance in 8th edition, it is much more difficult than other editions to abuse the rules. Here are some examples:
- In previous editions, a good player could completely abuse the power of skirmishers and fast cav. If fact you could make an all fast cav or skirmisher army, dash around your enemies to avoid all combat, and defeat your opponent soundly. Meanwhile the game was no fun at all.
- Fear in editions other than 8th was totally crazy, if you lost combat to a fear causer, and you were outnumbered, you broke auto! In fact, psychology in general was too much. Low leadership stuff was extremely fragile - and you could not reroll with the BSB.
- 6/7th edition the player could build their lists to determine how many magic dice they could get each phase. 8th might have some big spells, but the Winds of Magic are random, and armies are suppose to be larger. If you want to dominate your enemies with magic, play 6th and 7th edition, you can have your mighty magic phase every turn and crush your opponent without getting into combat!
- Speaking of magic, if you played Vampire Counts and also had half a brain, you might lose to bad luck about once everyone ten games. With the power of magic, fear, and raise the dead, Undead armies were all but unbeatable.
- More on magic, actually with being able to stack your power dice, the big spells in 6th were devastating. I remember Orcs & Goblins players never took a proper Warboss to lead their armies because the Shaman Lord was insane! The Foot of Gork with the double dohus or the reroll staff made Orcs pretty gross. You could destroy entire armies with that combo. You can even go back to at least one 6th edition battle report in WD where this happens. On the tournament scene is was a regular sight.
- 6th edition saw the rise of the Tzeentch flying circus, perhaps the greatest force to blast your enemies away and avoid combat. Sound like fun ?
- The Skink skirmish army, run circles around your enemy shooting them with poison missiles while your Slann blast them with magic. Avoid combat and win!
- The Dark Elf Dark Rider army (see tactics for Tzeentch flying circus and Skink skirmish armies above - key tactic: don't engage in combat, no matter how much your opponent complains).
- Skaven were also totally insane in 6th edition, heavy shooting army backed by huge units of cheap infantry. Warp-lightening, magic, and remember the Rattling Guns when they hit auto? Skaven were probably the hardest army in 6th, along with Vampires.
- Storm of Chaos, while a totally awesome supplement and campaign, the armies were super hard in there. The Daemon Legions list was gross.
- March blocking, which made a lot of the above armies successful, was nothing but an extremely frustrating part of the game that players used to make magic/shooty armies work really well. Back then if an enemy model was with 8", you were march blocked automatically and could not march. Obviously used to slow down armies while they were blasted by magic and missiles.
- People constantly complained that High Elves and Dark Elves were weak and 'sucked' and so you never saw them.
- Tournaments were made of: Skaven, Vampires, Lizards, Daemon Legions.
- 6th edition army books had hardly no fluff, and dropped a lot of classic units: Steams Tanks, War Wagons, Forest Goblins, Spider-Riders, all the classic special characters, etc.
That's all that comes to mind at the moment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2017 19:07:28 GMT
Kevin you have a better memory than I do but now that I've seen it I remember it all.
Tzeentch warriors of chaos could have over 20 power dice in the magic phase; back then the mark on a unit gave you one power die in the magic phase.
I do miss being able to turn a chaos lord into a lvl4 sorcerer, but thems the pits.
|
|
|
Post by mahbruck on Apr 21, 2017 16:34:27 GMT
The 6th edition always holds the most special place in my heart as this happened during the hallowed time when I could play almost twice per week, attend a tournament twice per month (yep, I was once that hardcore 😉). Also, the hobby spirit during that time was at the peak, sure there were some louder and louder grumbling (especially at the cheesefest at GW Nottingham Grand tournaments), but the future of Warhammer Fantasy was especially rosy with the ETC being born at the end of 2007 while new tourneys cropped up everywhere everytime. The 6th were well designed to play within 1000-2000 pts whereas the 8th's armies are recommended from 2500 pts upwards. Obviously, the 8th became more complex, more random and more cash required. Also GW have put no effort to stop the rampant negativity that grew stronger and stronger for a decade till the end, they 'had to' bomb the 8th and the whole Warhammer world. Systemwise, both the 6th and the 8th ed appeal equally to me, but just like i said, the 6th benefited from an unrivaled, buoyant atmosphere of its time whereas the 8th was just surrounded by sheer negativity from the beginning to the end. That is probably the impression of most people have about the last edition unfortunately. - People constantly complained that High Elves and Dark Elves were weak and 'sucked' and so you never saw them. Should have seen me bringing my Dogs and High Elves to Nottingham GT against all double Stanks, Thorek and SADs of the world over. Intrigue at Court FTW!
|
|
|
Post by gjnoronh on Apr 21, 2017 17:21:35 GMT
It's a mixed bag. There is an edition for all of us that I think is nearest and dearest to their hearts. 8th was very different from the 3rd edition I started playing with. The places to abuse power shifted in 8th from previous editions. The first time I ran into mindrazored elf elite infantry in a tournament sticks in my mind as an 8th moment that didn't feel at the time particularly balanced.
When 8th launched about 1/4 of all GW players left the game. A lot stuck with it because it was the name of the game but missed earlier editions. Premeasuring was a particular complaint (particularly in regards to artillery) that people felt dumbed down the game.
Honestly having been through almost all the edition changes for WFB (1st and 2nd weren't really full gaming systems) I still fundamentally think the differences in edition aren't that important. Hanging out with friends drinking a beer is what's most important. It's admittedly why I am more open then most EEFL folks to AoS and 9th. 8th looked very little like the warhammer I started with and really it didn't matter I had fun with my toy soldiers. I can takes those minis and do it with other systems as well.
|
|
|
Post by avatarofbugman on Apr 21, 2017 20:09:56 GMT
It's admittedly why I am more open then most EEFL folks to AoS and 9th. 8th looked very little like the warhammer I started with and really it didn't matter I had fun with my toy soldiers. I can takes those minis and do it with other systems as well. Gary, To be fair, AoS is not a rank and for game, which is what EEFL people love, and 9th age is already starting to fray and doesn't have the fluff and allure that Warhammer did. As to 1/4 of players leaving at the introduction of 8th, many cane back, and there was a similar swoon with each new edition. How else do you explain all the Oldhammers? Also, I very the fall off after AoS much larger than 1 in 4. That said, I am open to AoS as a game system, is just not Warhammer in scope out scale.
|
|
|
Post by gjnoronh on Apr 21, 2017 20:33:07 GMT
Agree with most of your points. However having been through essentially all of WFB's edition changes the 8th ed change was by far the largest drop off of all of them. Some came back but a lot didn't. 7th was an evolution of 6th, 5th a bit of evolution of 4th. 3rd to 4th and 5th to 6th were big changes but I didn't see the rage quits of 8th ed.
AoS is indeed a bigger change by far then 7th to 8th and really in all fairness it (somewhat like 9th is becoming or Kings of War) are different games then the WFB lineage. It's not the successor to 8th it's a new game system in entirety. But my point is what I like is the toys work for all of them. Someone says play Warmachine or whatever and I think sheesh I have shelves of great toys if I switch to X I'm starting over.
My other point is also to a lesser extent 8th isn't really that much like 3rd WFB. Yes the minis are largely ranked up but most of the mechanics have undergone a lot of evolution in those decades. It's not the warhammer I started with or even the editions I loved and played the most. It's a darn good rules set but I don't personally romanticize it's successes. When 8th launched I lost a good chunk of tournament buddies who had been there for a decade or so of 6th-7th. Rage quit happens - the survivors tend to love what they've got. AoS for all of it's problems and failures has brought a lot of new gamers into the system in my area. That's more then we had for 8th for quite some time locally.
|
|
|
Post by avatarofbugman on Apr 21, 2017 20:42:03 GMT
Gary, I am not arguing that people didn't quit after 8th was released, I was staying that the reason most people here are EEFL people is because AoS doesn't even resemble the old Warhammer. I've played 3rd edition, my friend had it, and agree that 8th isn't the same, but it had the same scope and feel that you can't get from a skirmish game.
I also feel that you unfairly portray the EEFL community saying that they won't try other things. I've played and liked both KoW and AoS, although I feel like they are rules better fit for tournament play in a lot of ways. I think the fact that many tournament people left when 8th was released is due to the fact that it was not really well designed for tournament play.
Many of us play many games, and EEFL stand for the idea that Eighth Edition Fantasy is the last of the Warhammer line in our eyes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2017 20:43:45 GMT
The only thing stopping me from playing AoS is LoS. I HATE 360° LoS as I enjoy flanking and movement shenanigans, and 40k and AoS take this away.
If I wanted to play a fantasy skirmish game (I like them, and do play them) then I would play Warmachine or Hordes.
|
|
|
Post by Anaris on Apr 22, 2017 3:43:01 GMT
The only thing stopping me from playing AoS is LoS. I HATE 360° LoS as I enjoy flanking and movement shenanigans, and 40k and AoS take this away. If I wanted to play a fantasy skirmish game (I like them, and do play them) then I would play Warmachine or Hordes. It's also stupid you can shoot your range weapons while in close combat and then still attack in close combat. Effectively making any shooting the best. Yeah high elf shadow warriors and sisters of avelorn for the win!
|
|
|
Post by wilsonthenarc on Apr 22, 2017 13:18:22 GMT
Honestly having been through almost all the edition changes for WFB (1st and 2nd weren't really full gaming systems) I still fundamentally think the differences in edition aren't that important. Hanging out with friends drinking a beer is what's most important. First off, +7,000,004 points to Gary for the sentiment quoted above. Also, KevinC is the man. All of you, listen to this guy. He knows a thing or two about a few things. So... I played 4th / 5th / 6th regularly. I bet I played 500+ games combined over those three editions. I took much of 7th off, maybe played 10 games all told. Certainly wasn't plugged into the "Know Crowd" and certainly wasn't gaming competitively. I actually missed 80% of the tenure of 8th and only got really back into it circa 2013/14. History Lesson by Wilson:I found that the "Flying High" rule and a mounted Lord on a large Monster dictated much of 4th/5th as far UNFAIR stuff went. Any mid level or better dude on a mid level monster was a threat. Give him the Hydra Blade, give him the Black Amulet. Hey Presto, Bob's yer Uncle. The chumps you charged can't swing back at all. Feels like "Easy Mode". Feels like a Game Genie. But after 6 times, it wasn't fun so we stopped doing it. In my mind - I clearly remember the change from 5th to 6th being a real and serious effort towards fairness. I think that was the advent of CORE troops. That actually helped make the game feel like massed battles again. To a certain degree, over all the editions, an Empire Halberdier is always and always should be the proverbial dragon fodder. I just love the game for the sake of the game. I really do feel like 8th edition strikes the best balance between massed troops and monsters. Neither is completely overpowered against the other. Like any good game, there is some rock//paper//scissor efforts. If anything, big blocks of semi-elite infantry rule the day. That feels very good and quite right to me, IMHO. 8th has really good (Pretty Good?) balance in Magic. Not perfect. I don't love taking numerous Level 1's with the intent to spam 6-dice spells. But that's just me. I actually think that plan is in character for Orcs & Goblins, and Skaven too. They don't mind if their wizards blow up. Anyway.... my rambling thoughts.
|
|