40K or WHFB?

#1gunslingercidPosted 8/24/2012 8:27:04 PM
If you could afford to invest in only one of the two systems which would you choose? Warhammer or Warhammer 40,000? and why?

And when I say 'invest' I'm talking about both the 'play' and 'hobby' aspect of it?
---
Momento Mori
#2Duke AriochPosted 8/25/2012 7:58:29 AM
My decision was for 40k. One was that my father and his friends played it, but the most appealing difference to me was the formation setup. In FB you need to keep most units base to base in a square or rectangle formation which is a hassle unless you buy movement trays (an added expense). I also found the rules for FB to be more complex than 40k, but then again 40k has its share of confusing rules.

In 40k you only need to keep members of a squad within 2" of another member.

As a side not, if you decide to play chaos daemons, then you can play both. It is the only army that has the same units for both games (soul grinder being the one exception that i know of). They look awesome imo, but are difficult to play compared to something like space marines.
---
"Blood and souls for my Lord Arioch!" - Elric of Melnibone
#3BadProfessionalPosted 8/25/2012 8:22:10 AM
Duke Arioch posted...
It is the only army that has the same units for both games (soul grinder being the one exception that i know of).


Soul Grinders are in WHFB as a Rare option for Daemons of Chaos (crafted by Dwarves that have turned to Chaos).

Otherwise, I would agree with 40K over WHFB, though my reasoning is based on the setting more than the rules.
---
Sarcasm passes for serious here.
Serious passes for sarcasm here.
#4Duke AriochPosted 8/26/2012 11:03:49 AM
BadProfessional posted...
Duke Arioch posted...
It is the only army that has the same units for both games (soul grinder being the one exception that i know of).


Soul Grinders are in WHFB as a Rare option for Daemons of Chaos (crafted by Dwarves that have turned to Chaos).

Otherwise, I would agree with 40K over WHFB, though my reasoning is based on the setting more than the rules.


The more you know, I figured because of the gun he would be 40k only....though I suppose they do have cannons and such in FB...
---
"Blood and souls for my Lord Arioch!" - Elric of Melnibone
#5TannhauserPosted 8/26/2012 12:34:42 PM
I haven't played WFB since one or two editions ago, so my opinions may not be up to date. My biggest problems with WFB is that the game is often won or lost before the first turn starts, based on the army lists and deployment. Most of the time, when Unit A is directly across the board from Unit B, Units A and B will be fighting each other, so if one can't beat the other due to static combat resolution bonuses, attached characters, etc., there's not much you can do about it once the first turn starts. A lot of this is due to the way movement works in WFB, with everything in blocked formations. Again, some of this could have changed in the newest edition. But, generally speaking, a mistake in the deployment and movement of your troops in WFB is harshly punished.

I prefer W40K for the freedom you have while playing. Units can, for the most part, move where they like, without having to worry about being blocked by your own units. A mistake in the deployment and movement of your troops in W40K can be punishing, but is often salvageable due to the freedom of movement. I also like the setting for W40K, as well as many of the models.

Of course, I do feel Game Workshop is a horribly mismanaged company that is headed by corporate suits that don't have two brain cells to rub together across the entire board, but that's another topic.
---
"Through the darkness of future past the magician longs to see. One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." -Twin Peaks
#6SolasunPosted 8/27/2012 10:05:09 AM
Soul Grinder was on the plastic models release - 40k only. It appears Daemons of Chaos recently got rules for it too.
---
"They're trees. Upside down. On floating islands.
The awesomeness is overwhelming." ~ crusader4him
#7zhukov1943Posted 8/29/2012 5:12:47 PM
WHFB has definitely languished since the last rules set...rumor has it that it's being prepped for new rules because it's flopping so bad and players are fleeing for 40K or other systems in droves. Might wanna wait six months to see what happens.
---
'Reality,' sa molesworth 2, 'is so unspeakably sordid it make me shudder.'
#8Duke AriochPosted 8/30/2012 2:54:12 PM
I find most of my problem is with the magic rules. For some reason it seems 100 times more complex than the psychic rules for 40k. Of course that and the formations. I would argue from a Sun Tzu standpoint that most battles in 40k are also won on deployment...or even army selection. For example, when facing daemons I know they have an invulnerable save.....why bother with fire dragons for extra points when dire avengers yield better results.? Much of 40k comes down to mathhammer and opportunity as opposed to bells and whistles that FB comes down to.
---
"Blood and souls for my Lord Arioch!" - Elric of Melnibone
#9SolasunPosted 9/1/2012 7:33:14 AM
The one thing that killed Warhammer for me was True Line of Sight. They then compounded this by adding it to Fantasy.

I should say my issue with TLOS is such that - I'm a modeller primarily so I tend to use scenic bases etc; now with TLoS if my unit has a model on a raised base with it's head sticking over the top of cover - that unit gets shot. Pretty pointless for as I put alot of my leaders on hills etc.
---
"They're trees. Upside down. On floating islands.
The awesomeness is overwhelming." ~ crusader4him
#10mrtzeentchPosted 9/1/2012 3:46:42 PM
I lost interest in WHFB when 6th Edition came out. Yes, 5th had major balance isssues but they gimped way too much in 6th. Plus they took out my Kislev, damnit.

So I'll go with 40K
---
why they dont teach cops to be better shooters so they can shoot the knive from his hand - MCCHOKE4PREZ