Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,602 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
how popular is fantasy compared to say 40k in your area. seems that 40k is more popular, yet fantasy is the better game ;) [imo].

why do you think this is the case?

i think its too do with ease of painting and start up costs.

a real fantasy army costs more than 40k because you need more models. fantasy models i think take more time to make them look good [not in all cases]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,277 Posts
40k by a long shot in my area. Reasons are simple. 1) Ridiculously slow build up before you have a proper size army (30 models compared to 80-120). 2) Noticeably higher average starting cost for a 2000 pt army. 3) Larger and more punishing learning curve. 3) The problems of storage and transport of 100+ models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,172 Posts
i think when GW first started Fantasy was thier flag ship line, but with the erruption of 40K, more diverse models and more reasonable costs, it took over. I started Warhammer in 1987/88 and got into the 40K side about 7 years later. I had a vast fantasy army but found 40K more affordable
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,122 Posts
Because fantasy players are abandoning fantasy due to random movement rules and completely barmy magic?

Transporting and set up is a lot longer with fantasy which can be annoying if you only have a short amount of time
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,694 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
821 Posts
>> In my gaming group, its about 50/50. The younger players started wi 40k, due to cost, but the old men of the group prefer fantasy. I am a 40k player 1st, but I got introduced to fantasy, and have to say I enjoy it. The good thing for me is that the only fantasy army that really grabbed my attention was Warriors of Chaos, so model count isnae as high as most other armies. Due to rediciolous pricing by GW, im not surprised 40K is more popular, cos wi most fantasy armies,and the way shit is packed now, £40 for 20 minis is a jip.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
533 Posts
I like the fluff potential of 40k. Practically anything could happen in the 40k universe- your army could rule or slaughter billions of people without it impacting on the existing fluff, while that doesn't seem possible for fantasy. That means you have more freedom to create whatever you like with your faction while staying within the bounds of fluff

Also guys wearing fully enclosed suits of armour and carrying automatic weapons are cool. Carrying missile launchers and flamethrowers is cool. Having those guys in a tank is cool.

I was into those Fighting Fantasy books as a kid before I discovered Games Workshop, and much preferred the fantasy settings to the sci-fi ones, but for a tabletop game with miniatures I instantly gravitated to 40k. I think 40k stuff just seemed far more bad ass
 

·
DA GOLDEN WAAAGH
Joined
·
1,285 Posts
Personally in my experiences the cost is an extreme compaired to the standard 40k list, only horde armys come anywhere near to the same ammount of models. But also for me a lack of fantasy players anywhere nearby were also a factor, with few 40k and one or two fantasy players that i could easily find.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,375 Posts
40k is for boys.
Fantasy is for men.

There are more boys than men in the scene :p
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,993 Posts
For my original gaming group 40k won out due to two major factors:

1. The much steeper learning curve, because while some 40k armies can be severely hamstrung with poor deployment, from what I recall it can all but guarantee a loss in fantasy.

2. The cost of a good sized fantasy army is much higher than that of a good sized 40k army, and thats something harder to deal with when you aren't making all to much while going to school.


Also, starting fantasy smack dab in the middle of hero-hammer was not the best in my opinion.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,830 Posts
Because Fantasy's shit. As a long time Fantasy player, I've come to the realisation after they churned out Warriors of Chaos, Daemons of Chaos and High Elves in a short space of time that really didn't know what the fuck they're doing.

It was balanced, and Vampires was the best book that GW have ever produced, IMHO, including 40K, but not FW or WHForge. Then they came out with retarded stuff. Utterly.

Fantasy has become a toy range; in a way, 40K is as well, but the difference is, they're mostly useable. Look at Fantasy's biggest releases, and they're simply turning into modelling projects. They're now too big, too daft, and have utterly retarded rules that 6th edition managed to perfect away from 5th edition stupidity.

The game is now so random that the actual units you use do not matter. While I realise it is a fun game, and meant to be so, it can be broken easier by some armies ability to remove the randomness and force dice rolls, while others cannot have that same effectiveness, and just crumble when their one shtick fails.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
My LGS is almost 100% 40k in the store (although the manager says there is a healthy fantasy community that plays at people's homes).

As for my personal reason for prefering 40k over fantasy. I like the heroic style sci-fi setting of 40k with guns, vehicles, etc. There are other similar games and in general I prefer them.

Why I avoid fantasy has to do with my original miniature playing was Ral-Partha and other historical miniature games. If I want to move large blocks of models, I fall back on Historicals...I would rather run large blocks of French heavy knights or Hoplite infantry than Grail Knights or Skaven.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,137 Posts
Higher model count and player base are both factors. Probably the largest factors other than GW's balls-out focus on Space Marines.

There is another, though.

People always say that Fantasy is the more tactical game. The more cranial, and challenging game.

When I was first expanding into Fantasy I thought that was plain elitism and swore I'd never say it.

It's actually true though. Of the two, Fantasy is far more the thinkin' man's game.

Not everyone wants their leisure time to involve more thinking than necessary. When I played 40k I often found that whole turns had elapsed without my being able to remember them. I'd been playing (and winning) on auto-pilot.

One simply cannot do that in Fantasy, to play successfully, even to lose well, one needs to keep one's brain engaged with the game. Some people like that, others prefer a game that lets the brain idle for a few hours.

It's like asking why the telly is more popular than reading.

I's still peg GW's marketing policy as the number one reason, though.

It's impossible to overstate the degree to which GW pushes 40k and Marines in particular.

If Little Timmy (and/or his mum) walks into a Games Workshop without knowing anything about the games they sell, well, 90% of the time he'll walk out with a box of smurfs in his hot little hand. The one and only time I've been in a GW shop the assistant spoke to me for almost a minute about my Sisters of Battle before trying to flog me a Stormraven. I bet if I'd been a Fantasy man back then, he'd still have tried.

Actually - it'll be even worse than that now... Little Timmy, knowing nothing about the hobby will be offered an intro game, of 40k - using the Dark Vengeance models. Marines Vs Marines.

"See, Timmy, these guys are super cool Space Marines with motorbikes with guns on them! And these guys are super cool Space Marines with spikes and battle axes! Which do you want to collect?"

If he's lucky, he'll see some red boxes on a shelf somewhere, and might even hear that LotR exists, in some nebulous fashion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
As seems to be the case with many of you, in my area Fantasy tends to attract older, veteran gamers; It seems to require more strategy than 40k. The fact that the kits are more expensive and you need more models for an army are definite barriers, which is why I've never been able to bring myself to start a Fantasy army.

That aside, I think the Fantasy background tends to appeal more to older gamers while the 40k fluff is more accessible for everyone. I enjoy the 40k background on a much deeper level than I did when I first started playing, but it still remains the reason I get into my chosen armies. The 40k armies can seem less archetypical than the Fantasy ones (even though they've got plenty of expies, i.e. "Elves in Space:, "Tomb Kings in Space.")
 

·
Rattlehead
Joined
·
6,741 Posts
See, I disagree with the sentiment that it's more tactical. Fantasy, in the few games I've played but the many I've seen, boils down to bring a big fuckoff block of infantry and as many Level 4 Wizards as you can, then follow a set of fairly inflexible tactics (seriously, I've never seen High Elves do anything except sit on Throne of Vines and buff the shit out of either Swordmasters or Phoenix Guard. Never. I got bored playing Ogres because it's a. cast buffs, b. charge. That's the whole game plan). 40k has it's own imbalances (shooting > combat, for example), but unlike Fantasy you can build an army with minimal shooting, or minimal combat, or whatever. In Fantasy, you take a magic-heavy army, because it's the only competitive option.

Midnight
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
40k is more popular around where I live most of the reasons stated. I personally haven't gotten a fantasy army because building a skaven army is expensive >.>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
I think it's something else. My area like most is 40K, but there's a strong fantasy contingent. That being said, I used to think along the lines of 40K is more for kids/young adults, and fantasy is for adults. I'm an example - started out with Fantasy, liked the look of 40K, switched to 40k, before stopping the hobby (moving to uni, money reasons etc).

Now nearly 6/7 years later I'm 23 and loving fantasy again and find the tactical approach, the vastly different armies and army rosters of each race far more interesting and diverse. Say what you want about the games, but 40K certainly has the certain-lists-smash-tournament kind of armies - remember the space marine drop pods lists?! - but fantasy has a much, much larger amount of competitive lists. Yes, you need mages to be competitive, but that's like saying you need troops to be competitive. Of course you do, it's a given. But it's not the be-all-end-all. If you spend all your points on mages, they're going to die. Badly. They need support troops. Fantasy is the game of a perfect army roster balance. Core, heavy hitters, troublemakers, mages, artillery, monsters, monster hunters, the list goes on.

So why is 40K more popular? I think the two reasons stated are pretty accurate; easier learning curve, less models per army equals less cost. But for me, the main overall reason is what I'd call the 'instant action'. Things die in 40K, and they die quickly.

Think about it - Fantasy is the game of tactics. Movement, the right charge, flanking, breaking, running down. It comes down to a very big game of rock paper scissors. Everything in the game has a counter, a weakness, and the meat of it is to exploit your opponents weaknesses without allowing your own to be hit. Your army is made up of rock-paper-scissors units, and its about matching them with the right targets, and throw in some luck.

40K on the other hand, whilst I'm not for a second disputing the tactics and some variance in lists, I'm a fan of both games after all, is more forgiving. You learn quicker, because there's less to use, and certain weapons can kill most things. You can make bad decisions and lose but make similar bad decisions in fantasy and more often than not you'll be massacred.

And as I said, things die much quicker. On turn one in 40K, you're not so concerned with moving your troops the perfect charge distances, you're not so bothered with allowing your flanks exposed, you're not trying to move a battle line. Your guys go forward, or they hold steady for the most part. But they shoot, they shoot a lot, and something often dies. It's quicker action, less foreplay. Guys run forward with guns and tanks and blow stuff up. Therefore it appeals the action gamer, and the kids who want to see something happen straight away.

But for those who like the foreplay of fantasy the real (and for me larger) reward is watching your epic plan of battle go perfect. And it's damn hilarious when it doesn't and your mage blows up, your hellcannon eats its crew and your chaos warriors flee from skaven. That's the luck of the game, you try to minimise the luck, but it's what makes it unpredictable and fun. It's about risk versus reward and tactics versus luck. For me, it's a fine and dandy balance. It's a poor metaphor, but if Fantasy is Chess, then 40K is closer to checkers.

Though I've noticed far more kids (by kids I mean below the age of say, 21) playing Fantasy at my local GW and clubs. It's a cool sight. I think most fantasy players fall into two categories: you have the guys who like the tactical aspects and greater depth of play, and you have the guys who like the fantasy setting over the sci-fi.

(Though I'm going to be awkward and say I think the 40K universe is far more badass. I love the fluff more, but fantasy has its own and great stories.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
As a younger gamer (15), in a younger gamer dominated area, 40k wins due to all the aforementioned reasons. By far the largest factor is start up costs and the time constraints of setting up.
I love the strategy and coordination Fantasy brings, but it cannot really beat the action, ease and all round experience 40k brings. The greater fluff freedom, customisation and army themes really appeals to most
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top