Darthweasel

one way to make it more fun and feed your hobby side is to do somethin akin to what I used to do with Raw Deal (ccg that died a horrible death). I created a "Supidity Fund". When I caught myself making a mistake I would throw a nickel in a bank. Bought a lot of decks of cards that way. You could do something similar, just alter scale to fit taste...in no time at all you will be paying for new models while laughing at your...underwhelming skill, lets say. Becomes a second game in and of itself

Looks like the book, for the way I like to play armies, has the same problem the last one did*; 1) they are minimum 25% slower than the next slowest army and in many cases 40% or, against cavalry, even more, meaning the opponent determines point of contact and who is involved in the festivities the slayers are worse than useless, they are free points for the opponent as anything slow enough to get caught by them can shoot them down before they get to it 2) 1 attack per model = fail unless you can choose the combats 3) Slayers, with their max 6" move when not charging, are going to get shot down or flat out avoided by anything they could threaten. Slow army, pedestrian number of close combat attacks, I will go flip through a book and hope it changes my mind, but the slayer thing alone is so disappointing I went from planning to pick up a book yesterday and play them next Saturday against one of my brother's Dark Elves to thinking the Dwarves are staying on the shelf unless/until another book is shelved. An army that maneuvers slowly, is too expensive per model to be able to take units large enough to control space, and cannot put out enough attacks in a short enough time to swing a combat just isn't all that exciting. I really hope people use the book better than i would and prove me wrong because it has been a long wait for this one. * All comments should be construed as including the idea "for my play style", other play styles will get varying mileage. I tend to like compact, maneuverable armies that can withstand and deal out a decent amount of punishment. I also play Orcs and Beastmen but have been trying to put together a High Elf list for about 6 months now and have yet to find one that fits my style. No need adding another one to the list at the exorbitant price the books are now...please, convince me I am wrong, I am trying to find a reason to buy the book and have not been able to talk myself into it yet.

it is mostly only a tournament thing...folks like my primary gaming group, we have never banned/altered/modified Fantasy special characters and never found them bent. Take with a grain of salt, though...playing around the garage table is not the same thing as a tournament game, which may be the difference. I would not play the Orcs without Gorbad...seriously, when I sit down to build a list, I put in Gorbad, then figure out what I want to do. Used to routinely use Wulfrik for the WoC and still include Galrauch 90% of the time...and run into the DE Crone, various Lizarman characters, Groesus for the Ogres, Khalida, etc every game. And every game is entertaining. Approach it with fresh eyes, don't put too much weight on either my opinions nor those of received Internet wisdom declaring them broken...figure out how YOU like the game and roll with that.

hey, that's not fair...neither of my brothers plays them :-) And I am closer to nobody than everybody...

For evil army with low model count and heavy magic use you have the very definition of the warriors of chaos...cannot speak to the fluff, never read it. If you go Chaos Warriors for core, sorcerers for hero level, chaos dragon ogres/knights for special and juggernauts for rare you will find points disappearing in a hurry. And easy upgrades to the things looking for to daemons, etc... I know they have not mentioned in the thread but they fulfill 2 of your 3 requirements.

I would posit there are different expectations in play, as well. Most people interested enough to go online to a forum have...lets say a deeper interest in the game. They know the percentage chance to make an 8" charge, have considered the cost/benefit of say...lascannon versus assault cannon... whereas GW deliberately makes the game for people who look and say "I have 20 tac marines, there are two troops choices...I have a land raider and dreadnought, okay, my list is done, lets play." When you try to make a game that is inherently, deliberately unequal into a "fair contest" there are going to be imbalances. Thing is, there are thousands of people playing at small game stores, or in their garages, or on the kitchen table, doubtless making numerous rules errors most games and not caring, having a good time and never realizing the reason their buddy has beaten them 276 consecutive times is because he has better troop options...but their voices are only heard in purchases, not forums. Note that I have no dog in the fight...balanced, imbalanced, doesn't matter to me, I enjoy the game...but I get both those who rail against the imbalances and those who don't notice them. Just trying to bring a neutral view to it