alittle disappointed.

lease bear with me as I rant a little.

So, I went to my FLGS to do a meet and greet, and get a feel for the people playing there, spectate a few games, and watch 8th edition in action; Reading only gets you so far after all. And I have to admit, I'm a little irritated with GW.

Watching the games it's seems like things have gotten a little, too, balanced. Almost as if the rules are being tailored for tourney play and forgetting about being a fun friendly game where armies stand apart, play differently, and each brings its own experience to the table. I saw armies that should be completely different, and fielded as polar opposites look strangely similar on the table.

For instance. I used to play bretonnians and loved fielding massive amounts of knights to take advantage of their devastating charges. But after watching them play and speaking with the player, cavalry has become, well, severely lack luster. Now I realise this might not be a great example of my frustration as their book is quite old, but I think it gets my point across. It's like there is no real reason to set up a brilliant table anymore. Line up two armies and go. That's about the feel I get with this rule set.

On another note, there was an old red shirt I used to play with before the GW store in my area shut down and it was quite nice to see a familiar face. Also the group there was simply an amazing bunch and I can tell it's going to be fun to game with them as they don't seem to be all to concerned with tourney style play. I also found out that the ol red shirt and his buddies still play with 6th edition and old books on occasion and I was invited to bring along my brets for a game or two.

So tell me. Do you agree the game and some of the armies have lost some of their excitement in exchange for more balanced tournament play? Or am I just being over the top?

The game of WHFB is pretty far from balanced if you ask me!! Can you be more specific about how it is more balanced?

Cavalry is still good just need to be used differently due to things like Steadfast and ranks of attacks. Monstrous Cavalry is incredibly strong in the game at the moment.

Sure, the game has changed quite drastically from the 6th edition. Some say it's a good thing, while others dream of finding a time machine to go back to those days. Don't take this the wrong way, both paths have their merits

I too am a bit disappointed with how cavalry handles, despite not using Brets as a main army. Only have a couple of units to the army I've got Empire, with lots of Knights. I've got Dark Elves, with lots of Cold One Knights. I've got High Elves, with lots of Dragon Princes and Silver Helms. I've got Vampire Counts, with lots of Black Knights and Blood Knights. The list goes on and on... The large unit sizes, especially with infantry blocks, have dented the power of cavalry by quite a margin. Back in the day, a tooled up unit could over-run a block of infantry relatively easily, but nowadays the cavalry unit is lucky to survive to the next round, due to rank attacks and Steadfast. The role of cavalry has changed, as has the way you need to use them

Overall, I'd say the game has evolved to a better version. Sure, there's some things that I don't like, for example the mass damage spells that once cast have a good change of ruining the game for your opponent. But still, I play for the fun of it with a group of good friends, and we can ignore the occasional rule that makes the game not as fun

The playstyles need to evolve with the game, yes, but I do feel that that is the way with all things in the world

- Loran

Balance is not that amazing but it is certainly better than 7th. And a game can never be too balanced. You mean something else I feel!

I think there's still as much character to the game as in 6th. Cavalry has taken a hit but monstrous cavalry is king. That said you can make anything work. Cavalry sometimes need a bit of effort to make work but some armies can really make effective cavalry armies.

Empire can run all-knight armies and can be very effective. Brettonians are not the strongest but you can make then work. Dark elves have a fast cav deathstar or all-cav army that is one of the best builds in the game. High elves can run all cav as well and do it well. Black knights are the basis for the most cheesy vampire count build.

If you go to a tournament rather than a game store where people are running very optimised lists then many armies heavily utilise cavalry especially as the backbone for a deathstar.

yeah i've ponder over my original complaints and feel alot of it is just from a nice smack to face having been gone for 7th and likely a big chunk of 8th. i still feel as though some of the armies have lost their individualism, but i will note the fact that in someways the rules seems to play just a tad smoother.

and i think balanced might be the wrong way to put it. more like. army composition has become surprisingly generic compared to lists i remember seeing during 6th. and poor, poor, bretonnians. my past labor of love. cannons, lots of infantry, a few casters, sprinkle in monsters to taste, bake, and viola.

i remember all the games where my vast hordes of knights, one unit of 20 men-at-arms, and a trebuchet could never lose. it was a time in the past i fear. but memories of such glorious battles will live on in our hearts, nay, in our very SOULS..... ok im done. 

but seriously it is quite sad to see such a beautifully unique army not able to take full advantage of the knights.