home

Author Topic: humans of the old world?  (Read 9153 times)

Offline Baron Martens

  • Posts: 185
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #25 on: February 12, 2011, 11:21:47 PM »
Well obviously they're always going to want to expand the size of the game to push more models, but they can only take that so far.  Unlike 40k, reinforcements don't work so well in fantasy, and there's only so many units you can fit on the board, especially when they also increased the amount of terrain in 8th significantly.

There are plenty of straight up historical wargames out there if you just want human infantry vs. human infantry.  That's kinda the point of warhammer, is that there's monsters and magic and weird inhuman races and stuff.  If you don't like that, why are you playing?

Offline S.O.F

  • Posts: 2921
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #26 on: February 13, 2011, 01:14:36 AM »
Well obviously they're always going to want to expand the size of the game to push more models, but they can only take that so far.  Unlike 40k, reinforcements don't work so well in fantasy, and there's only so many units you can fit on the board, especially when they also increased the amount of terrain in 8th significantly.

There are plenty of straight up historical wargames out there if you just want human infantry vs. human infantry.  That's kinda the point of warhammer, is that there's monsters and magic and weird inhuman races and stuff.  If you don't like that, why are you playing?

It's not that I dislike fantasy elements, magic, non-humans, and monsters, its that I like them done with some subtlety. Historicals are fine and that is where I began wargaming as a kid, but I find them very limiting. You can fight some battle between one historical force and another but it doesn't change anything, it gaming in a closed narrative, WHFB is not. In addition while you can play all sorts of historical armies they often don't stack up against each other. WHFB at least in theory steals historical tropes and evens them out with 'fantasy elements' which I think makes a game between Tomb Kings and Bretonnians far more engaging than new Kingdom Egyptians vs HYW French. Warhammer fantasy background has always been the kind of background I could understand, you take history and fantasy and bash it together aiming to create a setting roughly more believable than most fantasy worlds out there. Where I dislike GWs direction of late is rather than flesh out the lists with interesting still fantastic type things we get giant beasties. Most likely when a new Empire book rolls around rather than making Warriors of Ulric and Ulric Priest, GW will throw in idiotic clockwork angels, and while some may find this cool I can similarly say that there are other rule sets about steam punk nonsense out there why can't people go play them instead. And yes terrain has increased in this edition but to a ridiculously fantastic way. I didn't realize that regular forests were just too boring for folks and we need the majority of them to be some insano-terrain. Fantasy for a reason I like, fantasy there for the sake of it being there is just not my interest.

Oh and the note on 8th edition game size, this week I was looking at my old copy of the General's Compendium and also the Warband rules and was quite saddened that with the 8th changes such small scale games are rather incompatible.  But that is a topic for a different time.....
Soldier of Fortune
Crazy DOW player
Rabid Mets Fan

Offline Baron Martens

  • Posts: 185
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #27 on: February 13, 2011, 01:58:04 AM »

Where I dislike GWs direction of late is rather than flesh out the lists with interesting still fantastic type things we get giant beasties. Most likely when a new Empire book rolls around rather than making Warriors of Ulric and Ulric Priest, GW will throw in idiotic clockwork angels, and while some may find this cool I can similarly say that there are other rule sets about steam punk nonsense out there why can't people go play them instead. And yes terrain has increased in this edition but to a ridiculously fantastic way. I didn't realize that regular forests were just too boring for folks and we need the majority of them to be some insano-terrain. Fantasy for a reason I like, fantasy there for the sake of it being there is just not my interest.


Boy, people are still really hung up about that robo-horse aren't they.  Seriously, apart from that, where is all this steampunk everyone is so worried about?  The term clockwork angel gets thrown around all the time, did I miss some major announcement from GW? 

I get that you have an ideal warhammer fantasy, and that it's different than the direction GW's been going of late; that's true for most people to some degree or another.  Personally, I find alot of these new monsters quite interesting; I guess you could say the Hell-Pit Abomination is a little steampunk, but honestly it is quite distinctly skaven/warhammer-y. 

GW hasn't even put out models for all those giant monsters in the beastman book.  It's true their releases of late have focused on adding bigger models, but tone down the hyperbole please.

I'm just getting a little sick of all the old farts complaining about how "back when I started we had ulrik units, and even though they were metal and uni-pose and all looked the same and had the same function as Greatswords in game, I'll swear that they were the best thing ever until GW brings them back.  And even though the newer units are well sculpted and plastic, the general kit has a little clockwork angel decoration and that pisses me off because the empire I knew and loved didn't...blah blah blah."

Things change, and that's uncomfortable (even if its just a toy soldier game).  But really, there is only so much variety you can put into each unit type, and infantry is maxing out right now.  Monsters are a comparably easy way to introduce interesting new models and gameplay, so that's the way GW is going.  You can like it or not, and that's your prerogative.  But just because it's different than things were doesn't mean the game is getting ruined.

Offline S.O.F

  • Posts: 2921
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #28 on: February 13, 2011, 04:15:22 AM »
Boy, people are still really hung up about that robo-horse aren't they.  Seriously, apart from that, where is all this steampunk everyone is so worried about?  The term clockwork angel gets thrown around all the time, did I miss some major announcement from GW? 
 

Well it not just the robo-horse its the fluff from the 8th edition rule book. There it has talk about Clockwork Angels fighting with Zeppelins and those 'demigryph' knights. Since the giant spider was previewed in the fluff for Orcs and Goblins it doesn't seem unreasonable some component of this will find its way into the Empire list as well. something I'm not keen on myself.

Quote
I'm just getting a little sick of all the old farts complaining about how "back when I started we had ulrik units, and even though they were metal and uni-pose and all looked the same and had the same function as Greatswords in game, I'll swear that they were the best thing ever until GW brings them back.  And even though the newer units are well sculpted and plastic, the general kit has a little clockwork angel decoration and that pisses me off because the empire I knew and loved didn't...blah blah blah."

Well I have to say I kind of enjoy being deemed an 'old fart' already at 26, perhaps someday when GW takes away Arch-Lectors on War Altars you too may pine for a simpler time. Ulric stuff gets mentioned so much because it had more soul to it, where things they do add, like pigeon bombs and helstrom rockets, don't. Gimmicks and Gadgets seem a very high priority these days.  When new release time rolls around its not as if GW addresses problems with making the lists more viable across the board, they fix some yes but for every fix manage they to damage something else. Instead more time is spent showcasing what new and often unheard of before component is added to the army. Really there should be no reason for GW to constantly go back and forth whether or not all Chaos armies can be fielded together or not but is done merely so that for the change they can come up with a bunch of new stuff that we really didn't need. My opposition to new monsters is not so much that they 'ruin' the game for me but they are exceedingly lazy max profit min effort projects on the part of GW. I would be extremely happy if GW came out with an Araby army with sweet War Elephants, Kislevites with their bear mounts, or Chaos Dwarfs with their daemonic engines of doom but instead we get Arachnorok Spiders and Abombs. These may be cool but why have a proper plastic set of Skaven Slaves not been produced first (slaves are supposed to be way scrawnier not just the slightly less clothed clanrat poses) or some equally cool Big Un regiment options.


Quote
Things change, and that's uncomfortable (even if its just a toy soldier game)...... But just because it's different than things were doesn't mean the game is getting ruined.

Of course because 'ruined' is indeed hyperbole but, one really can't argue that Warhammer is perpetually in its most enjoyable form.
Soldier of Fortune
Crazy DOW player
Rabid Mets Fan

Offline Baron Martens

  • Posts: 185
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #29 on: February 13, 2011, 05:40:29 AM »
Old Fart is a relative term  :biggriin: More in terms of how long you've been playing than actual age.

The Empire has moved away from old frosty wolf mans followers, and on to a more Da Vinci-esque feel; however I don't think its fair to say one of those has more character than another.  That's pretty much a matter of personal taste.  I also think its unfair to generalize the game moving in a steampunk direction, when its only really the Empire that has any indication of doing so, and even that is still debatable for now.

I agree its a little lazy, but GW does love its money.  Skaven slaves don't need their own kit, it really doesn't benefit them to put out a separate set when the clanrat one works well enough; I mean by that thinking each state troop type should have a separate kit.  I'm sure swordsmen should look distinct from halberdiers and dirty levy spearmen, but it isn't practical.  GW will never be able to make their fluff match their models completely, it would be bad business.

And new armies are even riskier; chaos dwarves and araby would be cool releases, but in a down economy it's a big investment on their part; a new army isn't going to attract much in the way of new customer base, leaving everyone that already has armies they're happy with.  It makes more sense to add a couple of new kits for people to pick up for their existing armies.

I'm not saying I prefer all this out of GW, but I do understand why they do what they do.  I'd rather enjoy a sweet gigantic spider they do release than complain about what they won't put out, or how they haven't kept up with such and such.

Offline Johann Q Peasant

  • Posts: 354
  • Cheese Burgher
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #30 on: February 16, 2011, 05:45:23 AM »
Baron Martens,

I can see why you are wondering as to why this "steampunk" is thrown around so much.  You have a point, the only miniatures you see are a clockwork angel and a robo-horse.

    But the thing is, alot of guys (such as myself) chose this empire because of its Renaissance / Landsknechts theme to it.  The fluff (8th ed Rulebook and even some of the Black Library novels) are changing it, adding things that are very advanced, and to me, do not mesh at all with the "Empire" theme. If the Empire is riding around in Steam Driven towers that can hold an entire regiment (brb introduction, next to the pic of Empre fighting Dark elves) and the Gold order is flying around in "sky galleons" (brb, pg. 268) and the School of engineering is producing clockwork angels and pigeons, along with ever more destructive machines, its harder to understand why anyone would line up with spears and have at it in the Empire; yea, you'll say "the expense, tradition" but the whole thing is the Empire uses its brains to win, and its technology, and if they have TOWERS that can patrol entire borders and carry large amounts of troops, why bother to get out? just run over the enemy army. Why fight the chaos hordes hand to hand? They have the technology (you cant say its the expense, because the Empire is "the Wealthiest and most powerful" Realm in the old world, whats stopping from having regiments of repeating-handgunners? Are we just retarded? 

Is it dumb? yea, but I got alot invested in the army, and I'd rather not see them change from what got me into them in the firstplace. Hell, even the Mordheim models dont look as dreary as the new state troopers, and they came from an even worse time, and in one of the worst places in Warhammer lore.

I hope it makes sense; The Da-vinci esque feel is cool, but if it keeps going past that...
Putting the "Off" in Off-topic.

Offline Baron Martens

  • Posts: 185
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #31 on: February 16, 2011, 07:41:08 AM »
I can understand and respect that, even though its a little tougher for me to get worked up about it since I probably like the Da Vinci-esque stuff about as much as the Landsnecht parts.  Basically the point I'm trying to make is that it seems people are grumbling alot over changes that are unlikely.  You mentioned several good examples of worrying pieces of fluff from the BRB, but how likely do you think a model and rules for a sky galleon or steam tower is?  Especially as anything more than a silly centerpiece model that's only legal in high point level games?

Forgive me if I'm wrong, because I'm probably still newer to the hobby than alot of guys around here, but I've never seen or heard of GW totally reinventing the way an army is composed or its playstyle; I think your standard Empire state grunts and milita are safe.  To me, all these pieces of fluff seem like the same semi-legendary stuff that GW always has floating around in the background to make things more exciting, without ever interfering with the game itself.

Now if its the fluff itself you don't want to see changed at all, well then yeah I can see a legitimate complaint there.  But it is fluff, and as such is probably pretty easy to ignore the parts you don't like. 

And of course if I'm proven totally wrong by the 8th ed. Empire book, and GW totally screws the army up, I'll be sure to apologize profusely and accept all the 'I told you so' and 'stupid young whippersnapper doesn't know his place' you all can dish out  :biggriin:

Offline Von Kurst

  • Posts: 1417
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #32 on: February 16, 2011, 02:50:30 PM »
Forgive me if I'm wrong, because I'm probably still newer to the hobby than alot of guys around here, but I've never seen or heard of GW totally reinventing the way an army is composed or its playstyle...

I forgive you, but they do that kind of thing ALL the time.  Bretonnians from 3rd to 5th, Beastmen from 5th to 6th, Wood Elves from 7th to 8th, Skaven, 5th edition Empire to 6th edition, Chaos (nearly every the time, it is chaos after all).
“Why is the rum always gone?” -Captain Jack Sparrow
"It is, it is a glorious thing To be a Pirate King."
 -Gilbert, Sir W(illiam) S(chwenck)

Offline Baron Martens

  • Posts: 185
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #33 on: February 16, 2011, 05:11:25 PM »
Forgive me if I'm wrong, because I'm probably still newer to the hobby than alot of guys around here, but I've never seen or heard of GW totally reinventing the way an army is composed or its playstyle...

I forgive you, but they do that kind of thing ALL the time.  Bretonnians from 3rd to 5th, Beastmen from 5th to 6th, Wood Elves from 7th to 8th, Skaven, 5th edition Empire to 6th edition, Chaos (nearly every the time, it is chaos after all).

Well I don't know about much before 6th, so ok.  But, Wood Elves haven't gotten an update for 8th yet; the rules nerfed them yes, but their play-style hasn't changed.  What I mean is that I have never heard of, say, the Wood Elves being a ranked up close combat army, and changing to a shooty skirmish army.  Or the Empire ever having been anything but ranked infantry with artillery support.  And sure they re-arrange the organization for the chaos armies all the time, but the basic units and how they work aren't shifting all that much.  Even if details and organization change, the character of each army is pretty static.

Offline S.O.F

  • Posts: 2921
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #34 on: February 17, 2011, 05:14:22 AM »
Well I don't know about much before 6th, so ok.  But, Wood Elves haven't gotten an update for 8th yet; the rules nerfed them yes, but their play-style hasn't changed.  What I mean is that I have never heard of, say, the Wood Elves being a ranked up close combat army, and changing to a shooty skirmish army.  Or the Empire ever having been anything but ranked infantry with artillery support.  And sure they re-arrange the organization for the chaos armies all the time, but the basic units and how they work aren't shifting all that much.  Even if details and organization change, the character of each army is pretty static.

Well to some extent but I think you see far more continuity than I. Wood Elves have always been good archers and such but fast/skirmishy armies were a symptom of the late 6th edition and 7th edition rules. In previous game environments they were not the element of the army that 'characterized' it. I think the referenced Beastmen is perhaps the best example of perpetual shifting 'character/playstyle/makeup'. In the 5th edition they were essentially brown Orcs and Goblins (infighting, Orc stat Gors abet with 2 wounds, and Goblin stat Ungor). Generally didn't have all that much flavor. The 6th edition fleshed out the Beastmen nicely made them into the ambushing mixed loose order types along with some interesting beastie choices. Sadly the new Beastmen have reverted back to more of the Brown Orcs and Goblins but now with monsters and the ambush elements carried over. To me, that is a constant character shift, yeah they are still called beastmen but none of these armies on the table are the same.

Now looking at the Empire, today its all about artillery and Arch-Lectors which is far from it origins. The Empire was always a combined arms force, artillery softened, infantry held, and cavalry routed. Now it seems artillery and engineers are the focal point of the force (something that used to be the domain of Dwarfs). Looking at the old late 3rd Edition list it amuses me to think how folks would get by these days if they were forced to have two regiments of infantry for every piece of artillery as they used to.

This extends to all levels of the game really. To me, it seems GW think Warhammer, in its older versions, was boring and won't sell as well unless the 'electrify' all parts of it. When the 8th edition came out, someone over at TWF called it 'Warhammer by Micheal Bay' and pretty much that seems true. Sure infantry blocks are big but mainly because they are the only thing for the point you can afford to have die in droves. Fluff has likewise gotten 'amped up'. When reading the Beastmen book the other day I was struck by the changes they felt they needed to make from what was essentially a copy and paste job from the Liber Chaotica about Gorthor:

Example Paragraph
LC Version: Hochland recovered slowly, though some areas around the Middle Mountains were never reclaimed. They remain the domain of the beastmen to this day, and men will not go near them; fearing the memory of those evil times.

Beastmen Book Version: Hochland and Ostland were ultimately to recover, but only slowly, and vast areas around the Middle Mountains were never reclaimed. They remain the domains of the Beastmen, leagues of forest dotted with the ruins of villages and towns shattered and demolished by the Cloven Ones, overgrown and hidden by the trees. Men will not go near these lost settlements, fearing the memory of evil times.

Why the change? The first not suitably grim enough it had to be taken to ridiculous levels? With the amount of stuff GW writes having been 'devastated' I'm suprised there is a Warhammer World at all.

Now I have long understood that new human armies are unlikely because they are a large initial expense (by GW standards) for uncertain return. What annoys me is that what we get instead is an increasingly cartoony farce of giant monsters/explosions/shiny objects and constant fiddling with bits that should be left alone.
Soldier of Fortune
Crazy DOW player
Rabid Mets Fan

Offline UndeadEmpire

  • Posts: 206
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #35 on: February 17, 2011, 07:08:07 AM »
Off topic: Nippon is the Japanese word for Japan.

Offline Von Kurst

  • Posts: 1417
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #36 on: February 17, 2011, 07:12:54 PM »
Off topic: Nippon is the Japanese word for Japan.

I thought that was ON topic...
“Why is the rum always gone?” -Captain Jack Sparrow
"It is, it is a glorious thing To be a Pirate King."
 -Gilbert, Sir W(illiam) S(chwenck)

Offline Uryens de Crux

  • Posts: 3754
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #37 on: February 17, 2011, 07:32:03 PM »
Good post SOF.

But then fluff is what we make it isn't it.
We go to gain a little patch of ground that hath in it no profit but the name.
The Free Company of Solland

The Barony of Wusterburg

Offline Johedl

  • Posts: 278
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #38 on: February 20, 2011, 10:48:44 PM »
With China and India on the rise economically, you think they might come out with a Cathy or Ind Army. However, I think a Cathy Army would be very similar to Empire, with just a few more dragons . . . probably some bad-ass monks . .

I have allways thought of Cathy as more elven than empire. Repeating Crossbows, Cathayan Swordsmasters, some form of wardancer like troop. Dragonriders, and of course a few dragon shaped cannons. Perhaps when 9:th edition comes around Cathy and Hobgoblins will be in the box.

Offline patsy02

  • Posts: 5704
  • Moderator in charge of Gender Equality (Honorary)
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #39 on: February 21, 2011, 01:20:52 AM »
Well I don't know about much before 6th, so ok.  But, Wood Elves haven't gotten an update for 8th yet; the rules nerfed them yes, but their play-style hasn't changed.  What I mean is that I have never heard of, say, the Wood Elves being a ranked up close combat army, and changing to a shooty skirmish army.  Or the Empire ever having been anything but ranked infantry with artillery support.  And sure they re-arrange the organization for the chaos armies all the time, but the basic units and how they work aren't shifting all that much.  Even if details and organization change, the character of each army is pretty static.

Well to some extent but I think you see far more continuity than I....
[snip]
... What annoys me is that what we get instead is an increasingly cartoony farce of giant monsters/explosions/shiny objects and constant fiddling with bits that should be left alone.
Agreed. On everything you said.
I agree with the inhumane treatment of animals.

Offline Burgermeiser

  • Posts: 294
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #40 on: February 22, 2011, 12:13:05 AM »
there are several and they have been left deliberately vague for possible future development (Unlikely to happen) and for freedom in book and story authors (More likely). The three biggest ones I'm aware of is Cathay, which is analogous to China, Nippon, an analogy to Japan, and Ind, an analogy to India. There are several converted armies from many people based on these places, but there is little officially printed about them, I do know that there is a Skaven colony around Cathay somewhere, but I don't know much more than that. :mellow:

The first edition of Warhammer had rulesets for Nippon and Cathay, but the later editions continually focussed on the main human factions of the West, resulting in the current groups we have now. I'm just glad the Empire's too big a staple for that to happen to them.
"To reign in Averland, you must be as mad as an Elector. Which, fortunately, I am!"-Marius Leitdorf (Viscilitudes of Count Averland, Chapter VII, Paragraph XIV)

Offline Finlay

  • Posts: 18635
  • C'mon Son
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #41 on: February 22, 2011, 02:11:44 AM »
I think its funny that they always go on about catastrophic chaos invasions, needing help from everyone, the world being doomed etc... Can't they send a few envoys along the silk road?
I don't care about the rules.

Pass the machete.

Offline Erkenbrand

  • Posts: 140
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #42 on: February 22, 2011, 01:21:12 PM »
There is a Cathayan ambassador in Altdorf

Offline Finlay

  • Posts: 18635
  • C'mon Son
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #43 on: February 22, 2011, 01:36:22 PM »
Who doesn't care if chaos open a warp gate on the old world, or something?
I don't care about the rules.

Pass the machete.

Offline MrDWhitey

  • Posts: 7348
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #44 on: February 22, 2011, 01:39:51 PM »
Maybe Cathay has a vastly different view of the daemons than the Empire does, and thinks of the Empire as weak/scaremongering when it comes to Chaos incursions.

As I recall, Daemons are hunted in the east to bleed their blood out to sell as trinkets (ogre butchers apply it as warpaint onto Tyrants), which could indicate they're not exactly feared.
I thought he should act responsibly and just kill himself.

Offline Uryens de Crux

  • Posts: 3754
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #45 on: February 22, 2011, 01:45:35 PM »
Cathay probably doesnt fear demons so much because they are so mired in beaurocracy they are using an older version of the rules. Demons probably still have to make instability checks each round or something.
We go to gain a little patch of ground that hath in it no profit but the name.
The Free Company of Solland

The Barony of Wusterburg

Offline wissenlander

  • Pure of Heart
  • Posts: 7470
  • The original Graf of Brennenburg
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #46 on: February 22, 2011, 08:28:09 PM »
There's also a cult devoted to Tzeentch in Cathay, quite openly as well. 
Me and Wissenlander had babies!

not together.

finding photographic evidense that Wiss smiles is going to be hard...

Offline Alleton

  • Posts: 1344
  • I'm not unit champion, shoot someone else!
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #47 on: February 23, 2011, 01:11:00 PM »
They probably hunt Daemons for dinner too. Talk about no respect!

What's for dinner? Flesh hound surprise and creamed Khorne.
Demonslayer
 "hey, let's use one of those seals that keep ultimate darkness contained and use it to fry goblins, also have it be operated by the college janitor".

Warhammer Plog:
http://warhammer-empire.com/theforum/index.php?topic=42622.msg751211#msg751211

Offline Baron Martens

  • Posts: 185
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #48 on: February 23, 2011, 06:06:39 PM »
Mmmm, tasty mutant surprise.

Then again, they did build a giant wall to keep the chaos tribes out; I seem to recall they have a problem with the Hung.  They probably have to deal with chaos as well, its just the dark gods seem to have a hard on for conquering the Empire.


Offline Gneisenau

  • Posts: 6730
  • Alleged Ungulate
Re: humans of the old world?
« Reply #49 on: February 23, 2011, 06:16:28 PM »
That's because they are, well, Hung.


Ahem. Could also be because the WHFB storytelling is focusing on the Empire. Either Cathay has the same problem, or they are much much better at handling it. Perhaps things are easier when you have an actual dragon as emperor.

Given current economical developments, it's just a matter of time until GW realises the possibilities of a Cathayan army.


Edit: One question - in the original version of the BRB, what is the adjective for the Wu tribe? "Feared"?
« Last Edit: February 23, 2011, 06:33:56 PM by Gneisenau »