Everyone knows 40k peaked with 3rd edition, but what was the best version of Warhammer fantasy?
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Everyone knows 40k peaked with 3rd edition, but what was the best version of Warhammer fantasy?
The one I played as a kid.
Not the one this guy played as a kid.
Objectively correct, so 6th in my book, but nostalgia is a hell of a drug
pic related
I too choose this guy's unusually fat momma
Why is that dwarf cosplaying an elf?
I think we can all agree it was 6th edition.
The one where we got the vampire Pirates.
So 6th.
?si=gifpWcl-VYgKvV8Q
>1st - 3rd edition: Oldhammer charm, a diamond in the rough.
>4th-5th edition: Herohammer, colorful aesthetics but exploitable rules
>6th edition: Literal perfection, peak WHFB
>7th-8th edition: Hordehammer, decline into tourneygay nonsense absurdly huge armies that would eventually lead to the death of the game
6th definitely had the best starter set.
It's a close call between 5th and 6th for me.
Not really. I got this one as a kid and as a stand-alone game this set sucked. Same with the 40k 3rd edition starter set which I got around the same time.
Later edition starter boxes had much more playable forces.
6th is the best but they botched a few army books. It's not perfect if you played HE as an example. They were assraped by Thornton.
t. Chaos player whose best friend had HEs.
7th is not hoard. But it could be considered a tourney/comp version of 6th.
6th edition.
4th and 5th look cool, but if you've actually played them you know that literally 50% of your points are spent on heroes.
>literally 50% of your points are spent on heroes
That made them playable for poorgays like me and my friends though.
Did 40k peak with 3rd? I've never played any edition other than 3rd edition, but I could clearly tell that they massively cut down the content of the game from 2e. Way less armies, way fewer options, etc.
Guy might be one of those weirdo competitive only gays whom only plays to win and can't stand an amusing story, and let's face it, 2nd ed lends itself a bit better to narrative style then competitive.
It never ceases to amaze me that gw banged on about "forging the narrative" in their rulebooks for so many editions, while each edition stripped out more and more of the stuff that actually allowed you to forge a narrative until by 8th it was the most soulless a game has been for a long time
3rd is still a bit too new a ruleset to really be peak, since it's a near-complete rewrite of 2nd. 4th and 5th each fix and break different things about 3rd ed, but overall I'd probably prefer to play one of those than 3rd (codex/army depending).
2e was a semi RPG. For that scale I preferred Warzone 1e, it allowed similar or even better scenarios (say Doomtroopers only vs Legion, basically a Doom wargame) with less clutter.
Either 3rd or 6th. Depending if you like Oldhammer or Modernised GW.
3rd edition because it has unit creation baked in.
>40k peaked with 4th edition
Fixed
>Warhammer fantasy
6th edition
Word
4th was almost perfect but ruined by the skimmer rules. You must be Eldar or Tau gays.
An hybrid would be the best but IN CASE I still prefer 3ed.
Both very compatible and both 1000 times better than anything that followed tho.
Absolue truth, proclaim it from the mountains.
Preach brother, preach. Truer words have never been spoken.
I agree. When was Eye of Terror? Was that 4th?
EoT was 3ed. The best edition.
4th edition (core+space marines+tyranids) is extremely good and if that standard continued for the rest of the edition it would have been the best the game had seen. However you can tell that the rest of the books were made by the C and D teams because most of the veteran writing staff retired or left the company after making the core rules and two starter codexes. 4th is also where they started trying to accelerate the release schedule, giving it much less time to breathe (4 years, compared to 3rd edition's 6 years)
3rd edition had a rough start but also the longest amount of time to fix itself with the only decently implemented community feedback/errata/expansions. The last couple years of it were pure quality.
100%
People cannot handle the truth. WHFB peaked at 7th editon.
The best 40k edition is 10th. Closely followed by 8th then 3rd.
When faced with the truth, the no-games moron will just cover his ears and scream.
People fap over 6th because of nostalgia but they also forget the bad parts.
>Infantry were same-y sword and board anvil blocks.
>Elites sucked - why pay double points for "elite" infantry with 1+ WS and a weird weapon like halberd?
>Only two good magic lores(hint, take Heavens if your army has access to it).
>5 man lancer units either rode over whole units or were destroyed by Heavens magic.
>Gunlines everywhere.
>Monstrous infantry were pointless. Ogres were introduced as a scary new army but became a laughingstock.
>Dark Elves got an army book update in White Dwarf and still had to run a gunline or MSU to win.
>Chaos were presented as this terrifying threat but got wrecked in the Storm of Chaos campaign.
7th was great. It made units like Dark Elf black guard and Chaos Warriors forces to be reckoned with. It had great sculpts. The only bad thing about it was the Daemons army.
>Chaos were presented as this terrifying threat but got wrecked in the Storm of Chaos campaign.
This was one of the best moments of 6th edition, though? GW's pushed Gary Stu got put down shamefully.
I have always hated Chaos wankery. Why invest in the world if its doomed anyways? It also doesn't make sense.
>Sparsely populated frozen wasteland full of monsters supports massive hordes of marauders somehow
>If you survive being a marauder for 200 years you get promoted to chaos warrior
>There is constant infighting among the chaos forces, the leaders start killing each other and splitting off as soon as the campaign hits one setback
>Meanwhile your enemies are renaissance/early-modern guys with cities who can build cannons and handguns and train people to use them in a couple months
>Your allies are brown forest-orcs without any of the sense of fun or wacky units orcs have. And daemons who are super unpredictable.
Ugh, now I'm worked up. Part of me wishes TW Warhammer and The Old World never happened so I could have just buried WHFB and moved on.
the coolest lore was about venturing into the chaos wastes.
gw has perfected purple prose with chaos. what hp and house on borderland started.
chaos is the big threat.
7th had the Shadestar so is automatically the best edition.
>Dark Elves got an army book update in White Dwarf and still had to run a gunline or MSU to win.
6th era DE was the Monster Mash and Cold Ones Forever
you probably played in a shitty and boring meta going by the rest of your greentext
This better be bait
It was 4th 40K you inbred
I liked the Winds of Magic supplement.
I don’t know that, because I never played 3rd edition. And unlike you I don’t just accept other peoples opinions on art to be fact so I feel like I have taste.
Loser
Probably 6th because after that we had certain armies never getting updates again.
But I think that also might of be the unyielding reign of skirmishers and peasant bowmen
Age of Sigmar
Well, obviously it's not 8th. But 8th did have a lot of good ideas, but as usual with GW, some piss poor execution.
>Unified Magic Item lists so every army book isn't two out of four pages of the exact same magic items everybody else has but with a different name.
>Remove models from the back in combat so the guys who aren't attacking first can actually do something.
>Charges no longer have ASF so when combined with the above the Initiative stat actually matters for the first time in god knows how long?
>Steadfast making it so if you outnumber a unit, losing a combat to them is taken on your base Ld. Should that have actually been calculated via Rank bonus instead and thus making flank attacks way more viable? Yes. But again: GW.
>Each unit type get's a gimmick! (Mixed bag here and the Infantry gimmick shouldn't have been literally a neon sign saying: GIVE US YOUR PAYCHECK, and also Cav should have got some bonuses too.)
>Sword and Board giving 6++ to the front, thus giving it bonus alongside all the other options.
Of course there were some absolutely boneheaded rules as well. Only an Elf player would be so shameless as to insert that stupid ASF caveat of giving you rerolls on everything if you had ASF & the highest Initiative. No one with an ounce of shame would have dared.
Also, anyone who thinks 8th wasn't being set up to fail needs to be reminded that they had Matt Ward write the basic Magic Lores.
>Only an Elf player would be so shameless as to insert that stupid ASF caveat of giving you rerolls on everything if you had ASF & the highest Initiative. No one with an ounce of shame would have dared.
That's good game design because it gives ASF value even with high I.
It's bad game design because rerolls on attacks is supposed to be a Dark Elf thing, ASF is the High Elf thing, and they shouldnt get both. Conversely you could make the argument that HE no longer needed ASF in 8th because their Initiative was now all they need, whereas prior they needed ASF to counter being charged, as that used to give Always Strikes First when successful, but in 8th edition that was replaced with a flat +1 to combat resolution.
I would also make the argument that ASF isn't a High Elf thing, or an Elf thing, but a generic special rule
Matt Ward's problem was always fluff, not crunch
7th edition Daemons was one of the most broken fricking lists in warhammer history.
Both games were never good at any point.
6th is definitely where it peaked but I wouldn't play it now, it's kind of a clunky mess that's really showing its age and a lot of problems. Tons of freedom and works best with a GM and campaign play to curb all the bullshit but it needs a lot of work put into it to get a good game out of it as there's just a lot of bad mixed with the good.
WHFB's combat engine as well is as a design just stuck with tons of problems that make it slow, awkward and clunky compared to other rank and file games due to its long, long legacy without huge overhaul, and just the increasing piling on of extra shit that happened in its last editions didn't help at all.
6th edition had the vampire counts book which immediately makes it the worse edition because it was more broken than daemon 7th and all the elfwank combined.
Is this from a low ld army?
NTA but the problem with vampires wasn't really fear, as much as their magic.
Summoning a brand new unit anywhere that can block or redirect charges is easily the most potent effect you can get out of a spell, and it was their first so there was no risk of missing it.
Then you get and out-of-sequence move/charge spell, which might well be the second most potent effect in the game. And then you get buffs and pretty good damage spells. And your combat lords are all casters.
Second to that, the actual undeath rules make zombies and skeletons incredibly efficient tarpits. Can't panic them, can't break them, and the only way to get rid of them in a turn is to beat them in combat by a ludicrous amount to crumble the whole unit, which you can't really accomplish even with elite units in 6th.
Fear was just the cherry on top of all that.
4th edition soley because of the undead army book before they fricked it over splitting into VC and TK.
Also the battle report from WD176 where a chaos army with a chaos lord riding a chaos dragon and 300 points of magic items annihilates a dwarf army all by himself.
5e was a bit more subdued albeit still herohammer.
6th edition up to 7th edition with 6th armybooks
which roughly matches the 3rd-4th ed of 40k in terms of years
it was simply a more relaxed time, with great in-house artists and with a relatively better balanced approach to the hobby, game and marketing
early 7th
AoS 2ed
Alright, better question: choose your favourite edition, and then list what changes would you make to it.
My ideal mix would be:
>6th
>slight tweaks to armour saves (something along the lines of: plate armour doesn't stack with shield or steed save, but stacks with barding, so max save is 4+ for infantry and 3+ for cavalry, but Strength penalties start from S5 instead of S4 - so low saves remain useful more consistently, but also saves can't get too high)
>nerf cannons (either introduce a d3'' deviation of the initial impact point, or make non-Rare cannons do d3 wounds instead of d6, or ideally both)
>hybridize 6th, 7th and 8th edition magic: keep the 6th edition spell lists and general rules; you roll for winds of magic like in 8th instead of having starting 2PD/2DD, but you roll 2d3 instead of 2d6; mages do generate PP and PD like in 6th/7th, but half as many (so if you have a total of 8 levels of mages across the board, you get 4PP and 2 PD)
> WFB 8E
Cannons use BS to determine the initial impact.
Steadfast is against the units base Ld, not the Generals. Steadfast is removable by being disrupted.
Chariot and Monster mounts use combined profiles.
The ignore-armour bit of Killing Blow works against every target.
Horde rule is deleted. When you charge, the charging unit can reform to maximise frontage as part of their move.
Spell effects that RfP instead cause unsaveable wounds and are allocated like shooting.
>It was never called warhammer
I never played it. What was it like?
Good things and bad.
Beta Hail Caesar. Play that instead.
40K peaked with Rogue Trader, unironically. 2e is also better than 3e. Third is the best edition of WFB.
do they still write up white dwarf battle reports as prose stories or nah? I always liked that.
Probably 6th edition, with the army lists only coming from the compilation singular book. Sure, things get stale, but why TF do you care when you're playing a game from 20 years ago?