It would be nice to know HOW MANY Ironblasterchariots [what are those things called?] are an even match to ten steam tanks. And why would mechanized warhammer be any less fun than a naval battle game of ironclads or a micro-armor game with wee little tanks?
It is actually fairly easy to play a fun mostly balanced game. It is near impossible to play a competitive balanced game. example 1, I'm only here for fun and to talk with my friends, I bring 500 wounds of fun models and play with maybe 200. Doesn't really matter who wins because that is not the point and cannot really be determined well. example 2, I want to have fun playing warhammer but really want to win against another good player. I somehow bring all 7,000+ wounds worth of models. I only choose the best among every army and table my opponent, sadly all his skills just can't beat my deeper pockets. Or I could simply choose less models or not the best and have another fun game where winning doesn't matter.
I'm intrigued about this as well. I really hope they do a great job, and keep the 8th edition tournament scene going strong. While I don't play in tournaments myself, I think a healthy tournament scene will keep 8th
I can't speak for everyone, but I *think* most people can to some degree agree with the following: I don't necessarily play to win, but play to have fun as in not getting rofl-stomped. The issue with saying "x amount of wounds" is that herpa derp saurus (and likely others) are still just one wound and thus are objectively much much more powerful than many other 1 wound infantry models. Imagine 8th edition fully kitted chaos warriors costing the same as saurus warriors, but with the stats as writte in the books. You can still play 2500pts, but that doesn't change the facts that the warrior unit will tear our's to pieces. Personally I'm not a fan of saying "please be fair" and I know that people don't have the same perspective about what is overpowered and what is reasonable as me. You'd have to be ultra casual to not give a single fvck at all. Now I'm just speaking from my own perspective so maybe the way I see things are compeltely different to normal people, but from my point of view example 1 can very very easily turn out bad. With that said I play to also win or at least have a fair shot of winning. If I get completley tabled it wasn't a fun game for me and it certainly won't be any more fun because of some neckbeard trying to dance with me. **EDIT** just to clarify: No I don't trust other people's judgement
Ehh it doesn't really work that way, though... Saurus beat Goblins to a pulp for the most part, yeah. But Quarrelers look at Saurus and go, "HAH!" But then that Quarreler sees a Shade behind him and is all "O_O" but then that Shade sees a Temple Guard and goes "FFFFUU--" but then that Temple Guard, out of the corner of its beady little eye, spies a Black Guard and runs for the hills. And don't even get me started on how multi-wound models, command, command abilities, support options, chaff, etc. play into all of this! But even on the bottom of that totem poll, Goblins can excel in certain areas where Saurus lag. So on and so forth. Just like before: lots of different roles. I guess what I'm getting at is... "Rock, Paper, Stonehorn" is still alive and well. Wounds are a decent general idea for balance, but you still need to consider what your opponent is putting down and how you'll counter that. It doesn't stop with wounds -- there are still roles, arguably more roles than there were before. Some one-wound infantry are better than others at specific things, yeah... but then chances are, the 'other' can be fielded in such a way (probably through a battalion) that makes it worthwhile. Like Saurus, for example. Alternatively, if you don't like the thought of putting down models until you both agree, "Ehh yeah that's enough," then enforcing a wound cap per unit and a wound cap per army works out pretty well if you're playing against someone decent. Agreeing on a number of battalions or warscrolls or heroes or whatever is good too, if that's your cake.
Brettonian Pegasi standing in for the RAF then? Ripperdactyls for Bf-109s and Terradons with rocks for Heinkel 111s?
I think you're on to something Pendrake. Maybe a new fantasy version of "Wings Of War" where the planes are replaced with flying mounts from multiple factions?
I have been corresponding with a Tournament Organizer asking that very question. As best I can tell, jury is still out... I'll post more once I learn more. @Lord Grok Of Xillaqua : Well Wings of Warhammer seems like the obvious title. It could be organized using the keywords. We would fit in with the Forces of Order for example.
they said that the first alfa version will go up beggining of august... I think that edging out some overly nasty spells and units, and buffing the under dogs will give new and permanent life to 8th edition..
I heard a rumour that they were working on warhammer 8.5 edition. How much merit that rumour has is still up in the air, but the fact that others are hearing rumblings as well is a good sign. @serbianwolf August!... that would be great. Gives Warhammer a greater chance of holding on to its players.