Dont get me wrong, I love my Praetorians and their allies. My WW1 French Guard army will be nearing completion soon and im still planning on building the last 3 Assassins! But making and creating models is where the fun ends for 40k and even Fantasy. Which is a pity as the beauty of the genres is that there are no limits to what you can and cannot do. But when it comes down to the game itself, I noticed many games can be one sided and many units prove to be dead weight in an army.
Take my Lizadrmen army for example. I have a big block of Saurus who on paper look really good! I mean aside from their initiative, they actually have hardy stats. But in practice, they are usually bested by many foes, proving useful only when an expensive lord is with them. Most people on the internet suggest I scrap them and take Skink Skirmishers instead. But I do not want to take skink skirmishers as not only are they a pain to paint, there are also potentially hundreds of models that will be needed for this! People at the club say the game is balanced and I just need to find the combinations of units that work and so on. But this advice annoys me as I shouldn't have to buy more units or change my intended plan just to have a viable army (within reason of course).
With 40k, the problem is similar, but far worse. The Eldar players at the club, have powerful armies. One enjoys his army being powerful (as a result you wont often see his army on my blog...) and the other has a force he made well before learning the rules (my usual Eldar opponent). His army is potentially very scary and although it thankfully lacks things like jetbikes, its still a hard fight for an army like mine. In-fact, its a wonder I have done as well as I have against him. Against the Grey Knights, something as free as demons made the last game I had very one sided and ultimately kinda killed the game for me. My opponent saw it as something he needs to improve on and work out a new list, but when somebody has a TAC army at 1000 points, I cant help but think this is an issue.
After playing Flames of War my eyes where opened to how wargames could be played without this imbalance I had grown up playing. When a game is objective focused and uses missions to balance out the possible bad match ups (and there are some) it feels like tactics take a front seat while simply killing and having better stuff takes a back set. Then after looking deeper into Bolt Action where things seem vastly superior to the way GW does its games has made me decide to seriously push and collect new game systems and limit my 40k and stop my Fantasy expanding.
|A cool Flames of War Diorama|
My friends have heard me talk about focusing on historic games and so on for a while. Well now im finally doing it! After Bolt action has been started and my 2 starter armies are done (and maybe one more army...) I want to work on another game and go from there.
|Dystopian Fleet (I love the Aircraft Carriers)|
|Fire Storm Armada Ships.|
- Finish current 40k Projects.
- Start and Finish the Bolt Action Stuff thats on its way.
- Finish starting Fire Storm Armada
- Start Dystopian Legions
- Begin a Black Powder Force
- Dropzone Commander
All this will take time but unless GW changes how it does its games I think its time well worth spending. Of course im sure 40k will be frequently played given the current state of the club. But the only thing that will change that is actually trying new games and demoing them with the other members.
I think I have a good mix of Historic and Sci Fi games there. Lets hope all goes to plan!
Anybody else planning to try a new game anytime soon?