I'll never forget his articles in WD for 6th ed Empire and Vampire Counts, he had such a love for thematic rules. 6th ed Empire was my absolute favourite, a stalwart and courageous army of mankind.
Thank you for setting up and recording this interview! As well as thank you to Alessio for your career in games design both in and outside of GW, and great vision for WHFB/MESBG and all of the army supplements you took part in! We share a mind on many things regarding Tabletop Wargames. For the few negative views in the comments down below...they all seem to stem from the same issues. Mostly grievances with board decisions, and many...many opponents who refuse to look at the games of ANY edition of WHFB in any other way than trying to build obnoxious army lists. There is no single edition of WHFB that you can't be a dingus if you didn't want to be. If you believe there to be one, well you most likely had opponents with the same ideals as you yourself. "I wish I could write half as well as Rick (Priestly)". A very humble statement though I understand where it comes from. I would say you have contributed wonders to the games you've designed. I myself consider him the Father/Grandfather of past AND modern wargaming. He won't stop either, the dude just keeps designing and writing up killer rulesets.
My fave GW guy. I still remember him fondly because he would try to make cool fluffy lists with a their own little story for battle reports while his opponents just took whatever was strong/new. Surprised to hear he was a serious tournament guy at one point.
Huge fan of this guy's work on 6th edition. Really inspired game developer that was at the right place in the right time. Brings a smile to my face seeing how passionate he still is.
I agree with Alessio's view on adjusting the game type and/or style to best align with the group's sense of fun. I still opt for 6th edition over any other edition, with 3rd being a close second for when I want more RP. I was shocked to learn that he was not a mini painter! Thanks for the interview!
Thanks for these interviews. Now, after so long, hearing about the thoughts that the designers have put into it is really great. I have a special question for Alessio: in White Dwarf there was an article about the new edition of the army book Vampire that came out in April 2001. There Alessio says that the studio has considered which vampire archetypes could be further developed. The strigoi have been added to the army book of the 6th edition. At the same time, Alessio says that they were able to agree on another vampire archetype. However, since the Vampire Army book of the 7th edition abolished the archetypes in a certain way, this vampire archetype that was announced for the future never came out. Now, after almost 25 years, I'm still excited to hear what the archetype was supposed to be! Secret knowledge from the past. Best regards
All the people complaining about how Alessio ruined this or made this great have no idea. Direction came down from on high. Always did and does, no single person gets to own the games direction. In 8th we were briefed to push large armies and infantry hard. I worked on White Dwarf but got pulled into the book production to fix the photos to show large armies. That book almost didn’t make it out due to the pressure this created.
I've got a lot of the books you showed, 6-8 were definitely the editions that stuck in my head as "classic" Warhammer. Looking up his resume he's honestly been a designer on most of my favorite mini games from the past decade. Great interview!
If Alessio did (or was heavily involved with) the background of the 6th and the 7th core rulebook, he did a good job at it. Especially with the background with his "The Empire" army book, the background in there was brilliant. (Admittedly I have either never read the earlier Empire army book or read the earlier Empire army book a LLOONNGG time ago, most like the latter. But I have read the 5th edition core rulebook and 5th edition core background book.) The idea (not necessarily his and perhaps earlier than 6th excluding special rules) to introduce/allow the units of "Knights of The White Wolf" with their unique weapons/rules while the book/omnibus of "Knights of the White Wolf" was popular was quite clever. Also if Alessio did (or was heavily involved with) the background of Mordheim then he especially deserves praise, it was brilliant. I might also compliment other books that he has been involved with but they are not in arm's reach. I also find it amusing that the "Dogs of War" army book about (mostly) mercenaries from Tilea (the Warhammer Fantasy version of Italy) was written by an Italian or perhaps a former Italian. (Also the special rules for infantry in his "The Empire" army book was quite noteworthy. Also removing halflings from the The Empire army was probably for the best.) Audience, if the people mostly involved/responsible for the Warhammer Fantasy background or 40K background have been talked to on this channel, could you give me their names? (And please don't say J.R Tolkien or Peter Jackson). I don't think that Matt Ward will ever be on this channel, he was quite unpopular back when he was "in control." This dislike was warranted however he was quite good when he was working as a sidekick to the previous people in control.
On the subject of pre-measuring; I'm personally of the view that in games in which range-finders, advanced-targetting systems, etc. exist, pre-measuring is "fluffy" (a nebulous term) and makes sense. Within games/settings in which such a thing doesn't exist, I think you can introduce guessing and keep it sensible.
I think what Alessio means by fluffy, is that it's not a game mechanic geared towards competitive play/a competitive player would prefer. As someone who was active in tournaments during 6th and 7th ed, I don't necessarily agree though. To me, premeasuring seems more fluffy, because it's easier. It's an interesting viewpoint though. Alessio was a much more prolific player than I was, and I can understand also that he thinks "guessing" is fluffy, since it makes decision making a bit murkier.
Talking about how 8th "fixed" the issue of useless infantry. It was Alessio's 7th ed that made infantry blocks bad. In 6th they were the staple of the game, then 7th allowed you to overrun and fight multiple combats a turn so msu cavarly spam became the norm, 8th edition then did a massive overcorrect and made standard cavalry useless and massive blocks of infantry the norm. 6th ed was the peak
I forever remember the White Dwarf staff calling him out for putting together a Steam Tank wrong by saying that the culprit of this mistake will remain “namelessio”.
I liked the closing thought about how different things impact our perception of an edition. I really loved the cartoony little illustrations in whfb 5th ed (I bet the veterans hated them!) and they really shaped my perception of that edition being fun and whimsical. I’m not sure who did them but I’d love to see that person in front of your camera!
Grande Alessio: ..."and who I'm playing with because if I'm playing with John Stallard, the Perry twins etc". Essentially if you are playing with Legends doesn't matter if you win or not, it's all about FUN.
I always enjoy hearing from Alessio, and regard him as a hobby hero. 6th edition fantasy lured me away from 40k with the focus on infantry and combined arms compare to prior editions which were hero focused. I found the 7th core rules the peak of the game however some of the later army books seemed to sadly be on a different playing field. I completely bounced off 8th due to the large unit sizes as I didn’t like the concept of big blocks compared to manoeuvring more smaller units and didn’t enjoy armies aesthetics however still continue collecting and gaming in 6th & 7th edition to this day!
I’ve had the good fortune of speaking with Alessio Cavatore a few times back in the day. He’s always been an extremely friendly person and very passionate about the game. His approach has always been trying to make things flavorful AND balanced (he wrote Skaven, Empire and Vampire Counts in 6th IIRC), generally speaking his army books were usually those that left their players happier when they were released. The best example of his design philosophy is LotR, which is the game he was in charge for the longest time (IIRC). That said, at the start of this interview he’s actually misremembering. He moved to Nottingham during 5th edition, not 4th and 6th was the edition he really became part of the design team. By 7th he was put in charge of projects (like 7th itself) but was then moved around quite a bit. As he correctly mentioned, 7th was actually just 6th with a few balance changes, mainly to magic (as magic in 6th was way more abuse prone than in 7th… people pooled magic dice and then went in for big spells, like comet of Cassandora, so you needed a lot of magic protection, which came in the form of scroll caddies). The issue with 7th was not the core rules but the powercreep that followed. Cavatore had moved on at that point though, and GW promoted people whose design philosophy was something like “if it looks cool, let’s do it”… which quickly broke the edition beyond any hope of salvaging it. There is a reason many people still play core 7th with 6th edition army books.
I still have my copy of 8th edition, a beautiful book with a lovely red book mark string. Was about to build a Dark Elf army and then they nerfed Warhammer. Have never liked AoS. Too much like an attempt to merge World of Warcraft with 40k. Way too high fantasy for my tastes.
Yeah, the man who first-handedly participated in the end of the WFB by making it painfully boring to paint and collect... Big thanks for the interview. IMHO, if game designers had painted a couple of hordes of 40+ identical miniatures, they would understand why the hobby declined. Instead of the joy of collecting, we got deathstars.
Tre edizioni, (4 con TOW) ed ancora non siamo riusciti ad ottenere delle regole realistiche per armi come le lance da fanteria, che dovrebbero essere ottime contro la cavalleria, ed invece fanno schifo.
His comments on the no step up bullshit is so true. Why bother painting miniatures for TOW, that will always be so bad that had you not had a core tax they would be utterly disqualified from play? In fact, why release a game that makes the majority of infantry units completely garbage? Man I hate TOW back in the day of like 5th ed 40k and onwards I remember they used Psychic tests on 2d6, and I always thought that it was so lacklustre compared to WHFBs magic phase...well bingo bango dogshit and here is TOW with f*cking psychic tests and no magic phase...f*****ck I hate that game so much.
I started playing WHFB in 97 or 98 late 5th and the mostly 6th, yet I have played the most since 2019 using 8th ed rules. I always thought that 8th ed was best but that 6th had more finesse or something like that, but man after both watching a plethora of batreps and trying to play TOW and realising what a dumpster fire of a game TOW is, I got to say that I really love 8th. Still don't like nuke spells and those harsh miscasts, but I think I prefer watching paint dry over playing TOW. 8th edition is really good game imo. 8th edition > TOW It is also funny to watch the cringe levels of people talking about lore and glow ups for everything and then all you see is list maxing and general power gaming everywhere. Because TOW is about loving the lore and the setting, thats why everyone and their mother runs a lord on a dragon or a minotaur deathstar for core.
It sounds like you need better opponents! Each edition of our beloved WHFB is written with extreme levels of passion. Kudos to all of the designers and their visions. Unfortunately every edition of the game also had room for players to make it an unenjoyable experience if they wanted to.
@@lukapavicevic335 It is not a question of who I play against. TOW is just so much worse than 8th ed IMO. Another thing which really bugs me is something I've noticed in the batreps on YT, because of the terrible rules for combat result: fall back in good order instead of breaking like in 8th, combined with the fact that rank and flank is by its own nature rather clunky with the movement of units, nothing tactically changes on the battlefield. In 8th edition units could punch through the enemy line and start to roll it up, or engage war machines in the back field. But in TOW units start and end the game in the same spot in the line, because the combats drag on forever since units rarely breaks. It is utterly boring. 8th edition was much better in this regard, and made for much more interesting and tactical game. Also an army like the empire now only plays like a gunline, since their troops are utter garbage. In 8th edition you could make a viable gun line, a viable infantry army, or a viable cavalry force, or a viable army with all elements. But in TOW you now only get to play one strategy: deploy far back and try to win the game with shooting. I honestly think that TOW is just riding on a wave of novelty being fueled by influencers on YT and the fact that GW supports the game currently. Nothing with TOW is better than 8th. I've watched a bunch of your batreps on MWG and MM and I've yet only seen one that I genuinely liked, the final one in your fantasy campaign. This is not a criticism of your content, but just a way to highlight how the enjoyment of warhammer fantasy for me is completely gone. The original Old World Wars, I think I've watched all the remaining episodes on YT at least twice or thrice.... Because TOW has sucked away many 8th ed players and batrep content, It has left me in a kind of weird and bad place. I just now started with 40k 7th edition again, in the middle of painting an empire army. I can't explain other than that TOW just poisoned the well for me, or tarnished warhammer fantasy.
Thanks for making the game objectively worse and being a poor steward of the superior work that was handed to you. You set the stage for the current shitshow.
No, 7th Ed came about in 2006. 6th Ed - the absolute BEST Ed had the longest run.. 7th Ed had some good things but overall, 6th Ed is just superior, more balanced. What really destroys 7th Ed are the horrible power creep and over the top nonsense in the army books. Fat Ward seems responsible for alot of that utter garbage. 6th Ed will always be considered the most balanced and what Warhammer should be about. Troops, Core, rank and file. Not some scared little minimum "tax" and where the support is doing the main job with nonsense Herohammer characters. Failure.. Tuomas Did the fantastic 6th Ed and 7th Ed started the downfall and 8th Ed - and TOW too, just is.. Absolute garbage. Monsters and Herohammer characters, actual rank and file, that should be the bread and butter is not useful.. Guess what? if you are clever you make them good as they can be numerous and be sold en masse. But GW and the dumb developers go for shiny nonsense for immature kids with zero tactical ability instead, dumbing down the game.. Alessio is part of this problem and did NOT carry the game over in the right direction. I would not be proud of that if I was him. Actually ask him some critical things. There are alot of BS from GW.. And him.
to be fair the bean counters were directing the show by the time 7th and 8th came in. 7th coincides with 40ks 5th edition where GW abandoned all balance in favor of purposely creeping codexes to get tournament players to buy a new army every quarter. Other videos show that many of the creative heads that were the heart and soul of GW within its golden era were not permitted to experiment or take the game in new directions because the bean counters were afraid to change the formula.
The only factual thing you‘ve said in your long rant is that 7th came out in 2006. Everything else is subjective. Let me guess, you are in your 30s and 6th is the first (or main) edition of WFB you played. You hate everything that came after it and are more or less oblivious to everything that came before. Don‘t get me wrong, I like 6th, but I started with 3rd, back before GW went public and greed and corporate policy ruined the game… or maybe I‘m just biased? ;)
@@pforson So what if it is subjective? No, I am older, I am over 40. I have seen alot of this and I have seen the nonsense. that you are incapable to see it just means you are one of those unable to think critically and see the cynism GW evovled and how the game declined to cater for dumb people that wants shiny things with no skill, no strategy, no tactics. You are one of them. the usual stuff, too dumb to realize you are not clever.
@@jsalbano Exactly. And Cavator is well into this. He could have fought against it but he did not, he took alot of bad decisions just for pure greed but made the game worse.
@@ja37d-34 I don't even play WFB anymore, I've moved on to other non-GW games. My point is that there is no "best" edition, as you so proclaim - they all have pros and cons. 6th is not a particularly tactical game requiring skill and strategy, no edition of WFB is - as Allesio said, it is a large RPG game. Oh, and as an aside, I have a phd in computer science, so I would at least consider myself moderately clever.
I'll never forget his articles in WD for 6th ed Empire and Vampire Counts, he had such a love for thematic rules. 6th ed Empire was my absolute favourite, a stalwart and courageous army of mankind.
Thank you for setting up and recording this interview! As well as thank you to Alessio for your career in games design both in and outside of GW, and great vision for WHFB/MESBG and all of the army supplements you took part in! We share a mind on many things regarding Tabletop Wargames. For the few negative views in the comments down below...they all seem to stem from the same issues. Mostly grievances with board decisions, and many...many opponents who refuse to look at the games of ANY edition of WHFB in any other way than trying to build obnoxious army lists. There is no single edition of WHFB that you can't be a dingus if you didn't want to be. If you believe there to be one, well you most likely had opponents with the same ideals as you yourself.
"I wish I could write half as well as Rick (Priestly)". A very humble statement though I understand where it comes from. I would say you have contributed wonders to the games you've designed.
I myself consider him the Father/Grandfather of past AND modern wargaming. He won't stop either, the dude just keeps designing and writing up killer rulesets.
My fave GW guy. I still remember him fondly because he would try to make cool fluffy lists with a their own little story for battle reports while his opponents just took whatever was strong/new.
Surprised to hear he was a serious tournament guy at one point.
Man, I love this guy. Our group ha gone straight back in to 6th and 7th edition over the last year after not vibing so much with TOW. Alessio rules.
Huge fan of this guy's work on 6th edition. Really inspired game developer that was at the right place in the right time. Brings a smile to my face seeing how passionate he still is.
I agree with Alessio's view on adjusting the game type and/or style to best align with the group's sense of fun. I still opt for 6th edition over any other edition, with 3rd being a close second for when I want more RP. I was shocked to learn that he was not a mini painter! Thanks for the interview!
Thank you for this very sophist interview
Thanks for these interviews. Now, after so long, hearing about the thoughts that the designers have put into it is really great. I have a special question for Alessio: in White Dwarf there was an article about the new edition of the army book Vampire that came out in April 2001. There Alessio says that the studio has considered which vampire archetypes could be further developed. The strigoi have been added to the army book of the 6th edition. At the same time, Alessio says that they were able to agree on another vampire archetype. However, since the Vampire Army book of the 7th edition abolished the archetypes in a certain way, this vampire archetype that was announced for the future never came out. Now, after almost 25 years, I'm still excited to hear what the archetype was supposed to be!
Secret knowledge from the past.
Best regards
All the people complaining about how Alessio ruined this or made this great have no idea.
Direction came down from on high. Always did and does, no single person gets to own the games direction.
In 8th we were briefed to push large armies and infantry hard. I worked on White Dwarf but got pulled into the book production to fix the photos to show large armies. That book almost didn’t make it out due to the pressure this created.
I've got a lot of the books you showed, 6-8 were definitely the editions that stuck in my head as "classic" Warhammer. Looking up his resume he's honestly been a designer on most of my favorite mini games from the past decade. Great interview!
If Alessio did (or was heavily involved with) the background of the 6th and the 7th core rulebook, he did a good job at it. Especially with the background with his "The Empire" army book, the background in there was brilliant. (Admittedly I have either never read the earlier Empire army book or read the earlier Empire army book a LLOONNGG time ago, most like the latter. But I have read the 5th edition core rulebook and 5th edition core background book.) The idea (not necessarily his and perhaps earlier than 6th excluding special rules) to introduce/allow the units of "Knights of The White Wolf" with their unique weapons/rules while the book/omnibus of "Knights of the White Wolf" was popular was quite clever.
Also if Alessio did (or was heavily involved with) the background of Mordheim then he especially deserves praise, it was brilliant.
I might also compliment other books that he has been involved with but they are not in arm's reach.
I also find it amusing that the "Dogs of War" army book about (mostly) mercenaries from Tilea (the Warhammer Fantasy version of Italy) was written by an Italian or perhaps a former Italian.
(Also the special rules for infantry in his "The Empire" army book was quite noteworthy. Also removing halflings from the The Empire army was probably for the best.)
Audience, if the people mostly involved/responsible for the Warhammer Fantasy background or 40K background have been talked to on this channel, could you give me their names? (And please don't say J.R Tolkien or Peter Jackson).
I don't think that Matt Ward will ever be on this channel, he was quite unpopular back when he was "in control." This dislike was warranted however he was quite good when he was working as a sidekick to the previous people in control.
TLDR
14:00 TIL Savoie (my home region) was in Warhammer 😂 great interview as always!
On the subject of pre-measuring; I'm personally of the view that in games in which range-finders, advanced-targetting systems, etc. exist, pre-measuring is "fluffy" (a nebulous term) and makes sense. Within games/settings in which such a thing doesn't exist, I think you can introduce guessing and keep it sensible.
I think what Alessio means by fluffy, is that it's not a game mechanic geared towards competitive play/a competitive player would prefer. As someone who was active in tournaments during 6th and 7th ed, I don't necessarily agree though. To me, premeasuring seems more fluffy, because it's easier. It's an interesting viewpoint though. Alessio was a much more prolific player than I was, and I can understand also that he thinks "guessing" is fluffy, since it makes decision making a bit murkier.
Talking about how 8th "fixed" the issue of useless infantry. It was Alessio's 7th ed that made infantry blocks bad. In 6th they were the staple of the game, then 7th allowed you to overrun and fight multiple combats a turn so msu cavarly spam became the norm, 8th edition then did a massive overcorrect and made standard cavalry useless and massive blocks of infantry the norm. 6th ed was the peak
Unless you were playing dwarves or vampire counts, your post makes no sense.
2006 was 7th edition. 6th ed had 6 glorious years!
Yeah, best ed. Could not even get that 6 years long run right. Says it all.
I forever remember the White Dwarf staff calling him out for putting together a Steam Tank wrong by saying that the culprit of this mistake will remain “namelessio”.
So many of the issues with ToW come down to the Infantry rules
I liked the closing thought about how different things impact our perception of an edition.
I really loved the cartoony little illustrations in whfb 5th ed (I bet the veterans hated them!) and they really shaped my perception of that edition being fun and whimsical.
I’m not sure who did them but I’d love to see that person in front of your camera!
It was Dave Gallagher who drew all those little cartoons - very talented chap.
Grande Alessio: ..."and who I'm playing with because if I'm playing with John Stallard, the Perry twins etc". Essentially if you are playing with Legends doesn't matter if you win or not, it's all about FUN.
Dude I i love your videos but can you please make the audio louder? Listening without headphones sucks and then the ads blast my ears off
Great interview, but too short!!!
Pre mesure was the best change ever! Lo g live Warhammer!!!!
BEST EDITIONS EVER!!!GOLDEN ERA!!!
Hey man, 8 absolutely love your content, but as a not looking listener, you could improve your own audio or overdub your questions?
Allessio is such a dude. I loved working with him
What did he do that was good again?
he assisted with mesbg
I hate paiting. I love competitive playing! Long live Warhammer!!!
I always enjoy hearing from Alessio, and regard him as a hobby hero. 6th edition fantasy lured me away from 40k with the focus on infantry and combined arms compare to prior editions which were hero focused. I found the 7th core rules the peak of the game however some of the later army books seemed to sadly be on a different playing field. I completely bounced off 8th due to the large unit sizes as I didn’t like the concept of big blocks compared to manoeuvring more smaller units and didn’t enjoy armies aesthetics however still continue collecting and gaming in 6th & 7th edition to this day!
oh, looks like christmas came early this year
Djd he really call 6th and 7th herohammer? Wow.
5th 👀
Not that they are hero hammer, but units were often the delivery method for heros. In 5th they didn't need that delivery method.....
Here we have the one who destroys the hobby that I liked so much.
He woke up one day and said; I'm going to make all GW games the same. Brilliant.
I’ve had the good fortune of speaking with Alessio Cavatore a few times back in the day. He’s always been an extremely friendly person and very passionate about the game. His approach has always been trying to make things flavorful AND balanced (he wrote Skaven, Empire and Vampire Counts in 6th IIRC), generally speaking his army books were usually those that left their players happier when they were released. The best example of his design philosophy is LotR, which is the game he was in charge for the longest time (IIRC).
That said, at the start of this interview he’s actually misremembering. He moved to Nottingham during 5th edition, not 4th and 6th was the edition he really became part of the design team. By 7th he was put in charge of projects (like 7th itself) but was then moved around quite a bit. As he correctly mentioned, 7th was actually just 6th with a few balance changes, mainly to magic (as magic in 6th was way more abuse prone than in 7th… people pooled magic dice and then went in for big spells, like comet of Cassandora, so you needed a lot of magic protection, which came in the form of scroll caddies).
The issue with 7th was not the core rules but the powercreep that followed. Cavatore had moved on at that point though, and GW promoted people whose design philosophy was something like “if it looks cool, let’s do it”… which quickly broke the edition beyond any hope of salvaging it.
There is a reason many people still play core 7th with 6th edition army books.
6th edition Vampire Counts is what got me playing the game. I guess I've got him to thank for everything!
My man Tulkash out here with the DEEP lore!!
I still have my copy of 8th edition, a beautiful book with a lovely red book mark string. Was about to build a Dark Elf army and then they nerfed Warhammer. Have never liked AoS. Too much like an attempt to merge World of Warcraft with 40k. Way too high fantasy for my tastes.
"The Old World" is a great recent ruleset if you've still got the itch.
@@trollslayer8828 no, it really isn't 8th > TOW
@SinglemSolis ok, well...maybe @lordofthesith would like to try it.
This is legend
Yeah, the man who first-handedly participated in the end of the WFB by making it painfully boring to paint and collect... Big thanks for the interview. IMHO, if game designers had painted a couple of hordes of 40+ identical miniatures, they would understand why the hobby declined. Instead of the joy of collecting, we got deathstars.
He made a the spicey-a warhammer 👌
Tre edizioni, (4 con TOW) ed ancora non siamo riusciti ad ottenere delle regole realistiche per armi come le lance da fanteria, che dovrebbero essere ottime contro la cavalleria, ed invece fanno schifo.
His comments on the no step up bullshit is so true.
Why bother painting miniatures for TOW, that will always be so bad that had you not had a core tax they would be utterly disqualified from play?
In fact, why release a game that makes the majority of infantry units completely garbage? Man I hate TOW
back in the day of like 5th ed 40k and onwards I remember they used Psychic tests on 2d6, and I always thought that it was so lacklustre compared to WHFBs magic phase...well bingo bango dogshit and here is TOW with f*cking psychic tests and no magic phase...f*****ck I hate that game so much.
With no step up, it makes initiative and speed relevant again.
I started playing WHFB in 97 or 98 late 5th and the mostly 6th, yet I have played the most since 2019 using 8th ed rules. I always thought that 8th ed was best but that 6th had more finesse or something like that, but man after both watching a plethora of batreps and trying to play TOW and realising what a dumpster fire of a game TOW is, I got to say that I really love 8th.
Still don't like nuke spells and those harsh miscasts, but I think I prefer watching paint dry over playing TOW.
8th edition is really good game imo.
8th edition > TOW
It is also funny to watch the cringe levels of people talking about lore and glow ups for everything and then all you see is list maxing and general power gaming everywhere. Because TOW is about loving the lore and the setting, thats why everyone and their mother runs a lord on a dragon or a minotaur deathstar for core.
It sounds like you need better opponents! Each edition of our beloved WHFB is written with extreme levels of passion. Kudos to all of the designers and their visions. Unfortunately every edition of the game also had room for players to make it an unenjoyable experience if they wanted to.
@@lukapavicevic335 It is not a question of who I play against. TOW is just so much worse than 8th ed IMO.
Another thing which really bugs me is something I've noticed in the batreps on YT, because of the terrible rules for combat result: fall back in good order instead of breaking like in 8th, combined with the fact that rank and flank is by its own nature rather clunky with the movement of units, nothing tactically changes on the battlefield. In 8th edition units could punch through the enemy line and start to roll it up, or engage war machines in the back field. But in TOW units start and end the game in the same spot in the line, because the combats drag on forever since units rarely breaks. It is utterly boring. 8th edition was much better in this regard, and made for much more interesting and tactical game.
Also an army like the empire now only plays like a gunline, since their troops are utter garbage.
In 8th edition you could make a viable gun line, a viable infantry army, or a viable cavalry force, or a viable army with all elements. But in TOW you now only get to play one strategy: deploy far back and try to win the game with shooting. I honestly think that TOW is just riding on a wave of novelty being fueled by influencers on YT and the fact that GW supports the game currently.
Nothing with TOW is better than 8th.
I've watched a bunch of your batreps on MWG and MM and I've yet only seen one that I genuinely liked, the final one in your fantasy campaign. This is not a criticism of your content, but just a way to highlight how the enjoyment of warhammer fantasy for me is completely gone.
The original Old World Wars, I think I've watched all the remaining episodes on YT at least twice or thrice....
Because TOW has sucked away many 8th ed players and batrep content, It has left me in a kind of weird and bad place. I just now started with 40k 7th edition again, in the middle of painting an empire army. I can't explain other than that TOW just poisoned the well for me, or tarnished warhammer fantasy.
Thanks for making the game objectively worse and being a poor steward of the superior work that was handed to you. You set the stage for the current shitshow.
No, 7th Ed came about in 2006. 6th Ed - the absolute BEST Ed had the longest run.. 7th Ed had some good things but overall, 6th Ed is just superior, more balanced. What really destroys 7th Ed are the horrible power creep and over the top nonsense in the army books. Fat Ward seems responsible for alot of that utter garbage.
6th Ed will always be considered the most balanced and what Warhammer should be about. Troops, Core, rank and file. Not some scared little minimum "tax" and where the support is doing the main job with nonsense Herohammer characters. Failure..
Tuomas Did the fantastic 6th Ed and 7th Ed started the downfall and 8th Ed - and TOW too, just is.. Absolute garbage. Monsters and Herohammer characters, actual rank and file, that should be the bread and butter is not useful.. Guess what? if you are clever you make them good as they can be numerous and be sold en masse. But GW and the dumb developers go for shiny nonsense for immature kids with zero tactical ability instead, dumbing down the game..
Alessio is part of this problem and did NOT carry the game over in the right direction. I would not be proud of that if I was him.
Actually ask him some critical things. There are alot of BS from GW.. And him.
to be fair the bean counters were directing the show by the time 7th and 8th came in. 7th coincides with 40ks 5th edition where GW abandoned all balance in favor of purposely creeping codexes to get tournament players to buy a new army every quarter. Other videos show that many of the creative heads that were the heart and soul of GW within its golden era were not permitted to experiment or take the game in new directions because the bean counters were afraid to change the formula.
The only factual thing you‘ve said in your long rant is that 7th came out in 2006. Everything else is subjective.
Let me guess, you are in your 30s and 6th is the first (or main) edition of WFB you played. You hate everything that came after it and are more or less oblivious to everything that came before.
Don‘t get me wrong, I like 6th, but I started with 3rd, back before GW went public and greed and corporate policy ruined the game… or maybe I‘m just biased? ;)
@@pforson So what if it is subjective?
No, I am older, I am over 40. I have seen alot of this and I have seen the nonsense. that you are incapable to see it just means you are one of those unable to think critically and see the cynism GW evovled and how the game declined to cater for dumb people that wants shiny things with no skill, no strategy, no tactics. You are one of them. the usual stuff, too dumb to realize you are not clever.
@@jsalbano Exactly. And Cavator is well into this. He could have fought against it but he did not, he took alot of bad decisions just for pure greed but made the game worse.
@@ja37d-34 I don't even play WFB anymore, I've moved on to other non-GW games. My point is that there is no "best" edition, as you so proclaim - they all have pros and cons. 6th is not a particularly tactical game requiring skill and strategy, no edition of WFB is - as Allesio said, it is a large RPG game.
Oh, and as an aside, I have a phd in computer science, so I would at least consider myself moderately clever.