"Anybody still playing WAB 1?" Topic

1. No, switched to WAB 2, I like bugs
2. No, switched to Clash of Empires, I like shiny new books
3. No, switched to Hail Caesar, I like shiny new books and I have grown up since Warhammer days.
4. No, switched to DBx/ Impetus/ Armati, I realized I prefered to put my miniatures on shiny group stands and I didn't like so much to remove casualties
5. Yes. Why shouldn't I? Still popular around here, smooth, a lot of supplements, no flaws.

6. Never played it.

Me neither, Connard Sage, but just bought them on a bargain, and I would like to be informed about their popularity.

3 and 5 for me. I'll still use WAB for some periods but will probably use Hail, Caesar for others. I have only played a couple of Hail, Caesar games but have enjoyed them. I just can't see the rules working that well for some of the ancients periods I game.

#2 at this point of time.
Played WAB 1.5 for several years. When WAB 2.0 came out group checked out the rules. Seemed ok….but.
Recently, the gaming group has played COE for several classical armies 5,000 pt/side match ups.

M
Posted two recent Clash of Empires AAR on blog.
wargamerabbit.wordpress.com

I have still to decide between 5 or 2.

- I was looking forward to WAB2 but decided not to buy it because of the arrogance of the errata renumbering all the old supplements rather than correcting stupid mistakes in the WAB2 book.

- I also decided not to Hail Caesar, but only because it appears to be intended for big games.

- I bought Clash of Empires instead. So far I have not played it but the book looks good.

Mick

Yes

4+5

3 & 5 for me.

I'm still happy with WAB2 but have played quite a bit of Hail Caesar since it came out.

I have all the WAB books, though I hardly play the game. Will not buy WAB 2 b/c they abandoned the local retailers. Also own Hail Caesar, which I rather like, but still not my favourite ancients game.

6 for me.
I cannot disagree with Connard Sage all the time :-)

Old WAB works fine enough for me.

I still prefer WAB1, but play WAB2 under protest.

Pat

I am still playing WAB2 for Dark Age armies.

Happy with it and see no reason to change to anything else

Mike

I did but it was very silly..

5, soon 3

Like WAB (I actually have old and new) but am going to try out Hail Caesar

That being said, I quite like WAB – and the other guys know the rules

No, #4 then #3. Still use my element basing. Have rebased the WAB armies to element bases.

Actually started at 4. Rebased a few armies,for 1 but changed them back.
I left my Anglo-Danish based for Wab1.

#3, but if/when i do play WAB, it would be ist edition. I may still use Wab rules for Sieges, as Hail Caesar does not really cover them.

WAB One and Two.

#4 Impetus all the way, I would try HC(#3) at some point but I am happy with Impetus right now and have no reason to switch.

7) just bought version 1 (not 1.5), but still building armies before I can try it.

I played WAB v1.0 and quite liked it. I still have all the books/supplements, etc. However, I've gone to Impetus and will likely be playing that for most of my gaming.

There are still a number of minis of mine based for WAB, on sabots for Impetus, but they will be slowly rebased permanently.

I really like WAB, but I like Impetus more. The real plus for me is all the information in the various supplements.

I probably still do – that is I have 2.0, but have only played using 2.0 a couple of times; so, likely remember 1.5 (or 1.0) stuff instinctively, more or less, when playing with what should be 2.0 rules. I'm confused…

P.S. I've yet to play HC, but will try out Black Powder in a week – so we'll see if I like that set, as it is similar in mechanics to HC.

I have both WAB 2.0 and CoE. The problem I have is no gamers that are really local. Had a nibble from one guy, and asked if he was still interested, and never got a reply. Getting increasingly difficult locally digging up historical gamers that don't play FoW…

Damon.

(D) Plan to play v1 at some point.

"I still prefer WAB1, but play WAB2 under protest."

-----> Like :)

WAB2 has been as effective as Advanced Squad leader at killing off a good game. WAB1 only needed a few rules fixed to make it fine competitive game and a decent system for Classical Warfare. All the rest could have been "Optional Rules"-- even the changing of the combat chart. CoE doesn't grab me because like Advanced Squad leader-- the game is not enhanced by crafting and inserting tons of extra rules that only 'seem' to make it more realistic… but in effect reduce the game's ambiance. In short WAB is a 2D6 system that allows for some luck and some skill, and rewards players with pluck-- within those bounds and 2D6 rolls is where the "skill is", and where the "simulation" is… because a bad roll can be as disasterous as crossing that river and getting all wet, or the fog that suddenly made the bow strings go slack-- in short the intangibles that make the tension high and friction seem like a balanced game. Adding multiple modifiers to morale, fractional counter charge moves, tracking losses, and many of the other so-called simulative enhancements are just uneeded IMO. Now if they were added as optional rules for those who wish to ladle in such detail- that would be great-- but the producers all said if it is optional then players will never use it.. I disagreed.

What I do agree with is the simple measure to restrict skirmishers, and the attempt to address the imbalance that happens in multiple unit combats-- which to me was always the worst problems in WAB1 or 1.5. WAB 1.5 should have been WAB2, Pyrrhus should not have invaded Sicily.. hindsight.

Switched to Hail Caesar. Warhammer rules give me a headache these days, they feel like unpaid work. The core rules of Warhammer (Fantasy, 40K, WAB) haven't significantly evolved since the eighties. Plus casualty removal is a pain.

I like Mighty Armies and MA:Ancients for small, quick battles, so the big battles of Hail Caesar don't bug me.

I just ordered WAB 2.0 with the sale.

I'm with JJ, way too many special rules in CoE for my taste and WAB1.5 was just right for most things. But I ordered WAB2.0 bugs and all cuz I couldn't resist having a look for myself.

I'm sad that I was involved in WAB2 at all… I had altruistic/self serving reasons :)
I reckon that is why I don't have much of an opinion and certainly have no idea why anybody would listen to it anyway
I applaud Scott for buying it on sale though.. it is probably worth that price.

#4

Tried both WAB1 & WAB2 (and lots of Warhammer). Too slow too fiddly.

Element basing workds great and keeps game moving (besides looking much more like a medeival battle).

DBA for historicials and Hordes of the Things for fantasy.

TomT

What's WAB 1.5? I have the original book; was there errata issued that turned it into 1.5 or was there another printing that incorporated changes?

Cheers,
Aaron

Aaron,

1.5 is the second printing which incorporated all of the accepted errata into the book. More clarifications as well. Finally, there was the rules for battles with fewer figures and smaller units. Border Wars or something I think it was called.

John

Why not WAB 1.5? I can understand the reluctance to stretch to WAB2 but 1 had glitches….

The best thing there tho' was the fact that English Longbowman fire twice. That made more sense than guys in chariots firing twice.

still using WAB one, sometimes two

WAB2 – dislike element based games along with games without casualty removal and also games where rolling a single dice can decide a combat – as Rick P pointed out in this months WI, using multiple dice tends to even out probability. and I'm never going to rebase all my figures.

Yes – a bit.

not going to buy the same rules twice if the originals haven't fallen apart yet.

Which they haven't.

STILL playing it?

I haven't even gotten to play it ONCE, yet!