PDA

View Full Version : Lack of imagination



Gobbo Lord
28-06-2008, 15:33
Having replied to a few threads dealing with the same topic then seeing yet another one i thought id make a thread concerning my concerns.

Many threads are popping up along the lines of "I am starting Warhammer, which army should i choose?". Are people so devoid of imagination that they can not decide for themselves. Here are some quotes from said threads highlighting what i mean.


In 40K i play as the Necrons and i was wondering if you could depart some wisdom of which Fantasy army you recommend i start.


which army should i start and what should i buy for it ?

Surely the army you should pick should be based upon whichever army "calls to you" if you will. The one you most enjoy the background for, the model line, the thought of painting.

Many are also asking for the army that is "the most powerfull in combat" or "the most devastating with magic" yet previously in their post they admit to just starting fantasy and so can have no idea of how the game system itself works. So how do they know what they want from an army in terms of playstyle, unit selection etc. Even more worrying, the advice given is departed from helpfull souls willing to spill advice about the best army and best build and what unit x can and has done for them many times. They fail to mention their regular opponent is army z and that the tactic they are imparting is useless (or much less effective) against a different foe.

What im trying to say is that it seems people (most i notice moving over from 40k) are looking for certain builds of armies that can do certain things. "I want an army that can deal punishment and have strong artillery, what do you suggest?". What ever happened to getting an army you like that fires your imagination? "Wow stout warriors who remember wrongs done against them and stoically defend their crumbling empire" or "Wow, greenskinned hordes with wacky machines that have no concept of an empire and live for war"

Once you decide an army you should look through the book and buy a core unit or two. Then play them against people in your area. This is important. The armys you play and tactics your opponents use will shape and mould your own tactics and army build.

Am i ranting on or is this a change in how people look at the game. Rather than "I want to play as Vampire Counts because i think they are cool and i like where they fit in the fantasy world" is it now "I want to play an army that can deal in close combat and i dont care which one it is out of these three or four, which do you think is the best and what should i buy for them?"

Where is the army love people, and whats more wheres all the imagination gone.

MrBigMr
28-06-2008, 16:09
It's not always about what you want. When I was getting into WHFB I went through few armies (trying out other people's or proxying) before finding one for me. It's not like "Oh, I like vampires, I'll play VC", since they might end up playing way differently than what you'd imagine and it's not fun to play an army that you don't like.

And if you don't play your army right, longbeards will chew you up for it. It's better to ask up front, especially if you don't know much about the game. Just because you play 40K doesn't mean you know a thing about WHFB. Hell, the rules alone are double in volume.

TheLionReturns
28-06-2008, 16:35
I don't see too much of a problem in these posts. The way I generally read them are as "new to the game, give me advice on pros and cons of each army". It is sometimes good to get others opinions, you may discover characteristics of an army you hadn't realised. Its not like you ever make a decision on which army you select with no information. Almost everybody has at least seen the models and has a basic understanding of the army. I don't think seeking a little more info to base your decision on is necessarily bad.

One thing that does bother me is that certain armies are labelled as magic heavy, or shooting heavy etc. Sure you can make a fearsome gunline with dwarfs and a strong magic list with VC but these aren't the only ways to play. Some may argue they are the strongest way to play them, but other builds are possible and competitive. I think sometimes the internet establishes false norms (ie a certain build is how they play) for each army and new players get the impression that those are the only ways they can be played. The reality is that most armies can be shaped to your own preference to a reasonable extent. There may be universal characteristics but even with these great variety is possible.

theunwantedbeing
28-06-2008, 16:38
People do seem to be much too bothered about how powerful an army is, as opposed to how fun it is to use.

vinush
28-06-2008, 16:46
I always have, and will continue to do so, chosen my armies based on the look of the models.

Are they convertable? Do they inspire me? Do they look nice?

Then I will buy the army book first, and read it to decide if I want a theme to my army from the background in it.

I will then begin to buy my army, starting with a batallion if it is cost effective for me to do so or a core unit, then a character, a second core unit, and a second character/ special/ rare choice, etc.

I will build the army that way, and hopefully paint each purchase as I go (although this doesn't always work...)

\/ince

RavenBloodwind
28-06-2008, 16:50
Sending them to Spikedog's sticky thread on the topic at the top of this forum would work, one imagines.

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98740

The whole, power to cost to painting equation seems to be the more annoying issue. ("What army can I buy cheaply, will require no more than 5 minutes to paint and will win every game I play" mentality)

I, like other posters, often select an army based purely on the fluff or the look of the miniatures. I'd contemplated WE for a very long time but never bothered since they only had the get-you-by lists. The "new" plastics managed to pull me in with the gravitic force of a black hole.

logan054
28-06-2008, 17:29
Many threads are popping up along the lines of "I am starting Warhammer, which army should i choose?". Are people so devoid of imagination that they can not decide for themselves. Here are some quotes from said threads highlighting what i mean.

Honest answer, yes, sadly people no longer play warhammer as a hobby, its all about getting something over on the other guy, people want to save time with buying armies that dont fit into that very limited playing style which really should remain in 40k.


Surely the army you should pick should be based upon whichever army "calls to you" if you will. The one you most enjoy the background for, the model line, the thought of painting.

You know, thats funny, back when i started thats exactly the reason i started chaos, then again i was guy at the back of star wars cheering when Luke skywalker got his hand gut off ;)


Many are also asking for the army that is "the most powerfull in combat" or "the most devastating with magic" yet previously in their post they admit to just starting fantasy and so can have no idea of how the game system itself works. So how do they know what they want from an army in terms of playstyle, unit selection etc. Even more worrying, the advice given is departed from helpfull souls willing to spill advice about the best army and best build and what unit x can and has done for them many times. They fail to mention their regular opponent is army z and that the tactic they are imparting is useless (or much less effective) against a different foe.

I guess the part of the problem with warhammer now is that is has simplified so much that any idiot will get involved, you know i played a dwarf player once, complete gunline, his army moved a whole 3" in the entire game, funny thing is a few months later i see him whip a imperial guard tank company, go figure :rolleyes: I have actually seen a topic like this before arise here, also going on about advise given on the internet, the problem is for some reason people who post on here generally get brainwashed into playing warhammer in a certain way, it always starts just with one beard and his tank company, soon it spreads, arg.


What im trying to say is that it seems people (most i notice moving over from 40k) are looking for certain builds of armies that can do certain things. "I want an army that can deal punishment and have strong artillery, what do you suggest?". What ever happened to getting an army you like that fires your imagination? "Wow stout warriors who remember wrongs done against them and stoically defend their crumbling empire" or "Wow, greenskinned hordes with wacky machines that have no concept of an empire and live for war"

If you notice its because they just cant understand the whole movement system, i mean you have to admit it must seem rather strange to actually have to think about such things. To march or not to march? wait sorry, 40k dosnt have the problem, i think the biggest problem is deciding to rapid fire.


Once you decide an army you should look through the book and buy a core unit or two. Then play them against people in your area. This is important. The armys you play and tactics your opponents use will shape and mould your own tactics and army build.

Pfft, when i started undead many many moon ago (and then sold them) i started with a vampire lord :P then again it was the new vampire lord model from that silly undead campaign (he was pretty cool however!). No i get what your saying, sadly people just cant act that way, they want all their toys now! thats right! right now!

Am i ranting on or is this a change in how people look at the game. Rather than "I want to play as Vampire Counts because i think they are cool and i like where they fit in the fantasy world" is it now "I want to play an army that can deal in close combat and i dont care which one it is out of these three or four, which do you think is the best and what should i buy for them?"

Where is the army love people, and whats more wheres all the imagination gone.[/QUOTE]

MrBigMr
28-06-2008, 19:38
Why people prefer competitive above themed? Do you know how many times I have seen people being brought down for not taking no-brainer options, even on this very forum among other places? When you're a n00b who should learn to play the game, I can see why someone sets out to make a competitive army. You know how many times I have been told "if you take a DP over a KoS and shun all other gods in your pure Slaanesh daemon army, it's your own fault for losing"? Or when I thought about doing a cheap goblin army as a backup army, about 90% of people said "don't take goblins, they suck. Take boys, and night goblins and this and that, but never goblins."

So when this seems to be the mentality, can you really blame people for looking to do a competitive army over some fancy pants themed one? Sure, it's just someone oppinion, but no one likes to be put down in any form for doing something they like.


I can also understand someone to seek to make a competitive army, especially if they merely to seek to play the game and not to spend weeks on painting and converting stuff. Especially as a first army when you're not even sure you know if the hobby is going to stick with you.

And with GW's support on the Counts As and all that, what's to prevent someone from taking any army they want and themeing them what ever they want? I can take Warriors of Chaos, model them as Undead and call them what ever you want.

But then there's always the Counter-Strike generation WAAC players, which get as much compassion from me as any old fart longbeard that knows every dirty trick in the book.

Col. Tartleton
28-06-2008, 20:03
HEY just cause I used to play CS: Source sometimes, doesn't make me a WAAC Cheese maker! I PLAY GUARD!

Putting lead in noobs' domes has nothing to do with painting models.

And you guys seem irrationally against gun line Dwarves which is legitimate when your race is known for elite gunpowder weapons, heavy armor, and being slow and full of ire. They should be standing solidly in Napoleonic rows of thunderers spewing flame and smoke and putting holes in even the greatest knights of the realm.

That's dwarves, the ******** with all the guns in a world that uses swords who know that standing in good order and forcing the enemy to advance at them is the way to minimize casualties and maximize inflicted destruction.

logan054
28-06-2008, 21:00
HEY just cause I used to play CS: Source sometimes, doesn't make me a WAAC Cheese maker! I PLAY GUARD!

Putting lead in noobs' domes has nothing to do with painting models.

And you guys seem irrationally against gun line Dwarves which is legitimate when your race is known for elite gunpowder weapons, heavy armor, and being slow and full of ire. They should be standing solidly in Napoleonic rows of thunderers spewing flame and smoke and putting holes in even the greatest knights of the realm.

That's dwarves, the ******** with all the guns in a world that uses swords who know that standing in good order and forcing the enemy to advance at them is the way to minimize casualties and maximize inflicted destruction.

No i just hate gunlines in general, hate to say it but i have seen dwarf armies perform very well that are not just gunlines, did you mention you play guard :eek: :eek:

You talk about Napoleonic rows, am i play a historic wargame or a fanatsy one? You know its funny actually, i seem to remember that infact not all dwarf strong holds even used handguns, maybe its just the few that Thorek is visiting ;)

MrBigMr
28-06-2008, 21:30
HEY just cause I used to play CS: Source sometimes, doesn't make me a WAAC Cheese maker! I PLAY GUARD!
I mean the "lol pwned n00b" people. I've played my share of CS from v. 2.0 to 5.2. Lost interest after it became a sport instead of a hobby. But I remember once talking to a youngster who was convinced that playing Warhammer for other than to win is stupid and all those people are just kidding themselves. And to him everything in life is about winning.

When you have people like that, is it so hard to imagine some preferring to WAACgh!? But I do have to say I don't remember personally encountering many such people, though there are some.

And Guard was my first 40K army, just because they're the underdog.


When it comes to gunlines, I'm always reminded of the old motivational:
Gunlines.
Screw you, I'm winning this game.

But to tell the truth, I've been planning a shooty (Chaos) Dwarf army, mainly because my daemons don't have any shooty, so it's a little change to playing daemons.

Azmazi
28-06-2008, 21:53
Honestly, I always went for the army that "took me" so to speak. The first army I played was Guards, and it was a themed conscript army of converted Steel Legion into Russian looking guys. I also played them like a themed WW2 Russian Red Army. I only later picked up Dark Angels because I liked their lore of the whole (Shrouded in Secrecy and not really knowing if they were truly good or evil :D ).

When I went to Fantasy, I took to VC because I liked converting. I like the idea of making my ghouls out of pieces of Men at Arms and Zombies. I like the idea of my Skeletons being out of pieces of State troops and Tomb Kings with a few pieces of VC shields. I like the idea of my knights being converted Bret knights with red robes, and devilsh green eyes on the steeds. Its what made me love the army.

I also love the TK for their background, the whole idea of playing mummies and etc is kinda cool. So overall I picked my armies for theme and style. I just struck it lucky when I started playing VC as a hard hitting elite force and discovered they actually do it well (We talking 2 years ago btw).

Also you are right, a lot of the players coming over from 40k do tend to bring the WAAC style of gaming, and thats because of the mentality that 40k seems to have with the "We do it bigger, better, and more extreme!!!!!"

Gobbo Lord
28-06-2008, 22:05
You know how many times I have been told "if you take a DP over a KoS and shun all other gods in your pure Slaanesh daemon army, it's your own fault for losing"? Or when I thought about doing a cheap goblin army as a backup army, about 90% of people said "don't take goblins, they suck.

This is a problem indeed, it seems the tournament, WAAC attitude (or part of it) is seeping over into what should be friendly play. People might think i really like Orcs and Goblins but everyone says to them that they are rubbish they should get Warriors of Chaos in november because they will be better and easier to win with. People laugh at them saying why have you got two units of Saurus warriors when you should have Skink skirmishers. The answer should be, because I read the lizardmen book and liked the idea of the part of the Lizardmen army that hits hard after the skinks have harrassed the enemy, the part that protects the slann in their temples.


Its not like you ever make a decision on which army you select with no information. Almost everybody has at least seen the models and has a basic understanding of the army. I don't think seeking a little more info to base your decision on is necessarily bad.

True but i think the info sought is the wrong type. People seem to want to know how good Dwarfs are at killing people and what units people find to be the best. When i feel this is something a player should learn through experience.


new players get the impression that those are the only ways they can be played. The reality is that most armies can be shaped to your own preference to a reasonable extent. There may be universal characteristics but even with these great variety is possible.

This is again a problem, people might like the idea of Dwarfs (i know they are being exemplified a lot) but think if i buy dwarfs i must use a gunline. Rather than explore the possibilities and allowing natural army progression through experience.


And if you don't play your army right, longbeards will chew you up for it.

There is no right way to play an army, this is the misconception that i feel is leading to all these "new to fantasy" threads. If someone says you arnt playing that army right say well i built it using the army list so im sure its right , just not how you play.



infact not all dwarf strong holds even used handguns, maybe its just the few that Thorek is visiting

funny because its true....

Richter Kless
28-06-2008, 22:06
Also you are right, a lot of the players coming over from 40k do tend to bring the WAAC style of gaming, and thats because of the mentality that 40k seems to have with the "We do it bigger, better, and more extreme!!!!!"

And we´re back to the 40K bashing.
Taking into account that 40K is the game who has a whole book (with soon an expansion) devoted to fun play, I wouldn´t say 40K is all about winning, pwning and rock & roll.

And yes, a lot of people nowadays don´t seem to bother with thinking for themselves. They just go on the internet, ask what choices to make and get the answers on a silver plate.

Asking for some feedback on an armylist is fine, but requesting the internet to give you the most broken combination of units possible, is beyond lame.

MrBigMr
28-06-2008, 22:27
I have to agree with Richter. So far all this "that choice sucks" statements at me have come from WHFB side of my hobby. I think 40K is relaxed on the notion that it's easier, less rules (half in pages from WHFB). So there's less of a tactical thinking needed and as such you have more freedom to do your armies without condemning them to lose too often. With WHFB with all the nifty tactical applications, you can't just take what ever the hell you want. Khorne Warriors and Khorne Berserkers work quite differently. It's funny that you actually need a big brain to use Frenzied units.

TheLionReturns
29-06-2008, 00:59
True but i think the info sought is the wrong type. People seem to want to know how good Dwarfs are at killing people and what units people find to be the best. When i feel this is something a player should learn through experience.

I definitely take the point. I am fairly reluctant to criticise those who enjoy the competitive side of the hobby. We are all entitled to enjoy the hobby in our own way, with the proviso that we don't impact on other peoples enjoyment (ie WAACers shouldn't pick on NOOBs etc). If performance on the field of battle is important feel free to seek advice along those grounds.

What I really dislike is only using this shortcut approach though. As you have said you seem to learn a set style through it rather than mastering the range of possibilities with the army. In a way you are limited to learning the internet propogated norm and limiting yourself at that. I think getting advice is fine in picking up some basic info but it is better to experiment and try to master all aspects of your army yourself in addition to any advice. I guess it is up to those of us who answer such threads to suggest experimentation on top of any advice we give.




This is again a problem, people might like the idea of Dwarfs (i know they are being exemplified a lot) but think if i buy dwarfs i must use a gunline. Rather than explore the possibilities and allowing natural army progression through experience.


This association of dwarfs with a gunline bemuses me slightly. Of course they have strong shooting but if asked to name the dominant characteristics of dwarfs my instinctive repsonse would be slow and tough. Shooting is an option, slow and tough is not. It is a classic example of a tactic superceding the actual character of an army because it is powerful. I agree with the points you make but I also think that as well as a problem with the line of questioning the quality of advice given is questionable also.

Azmazi
29-06-2008, 01:20
And we´re back to the 40K bashing.
Taking into account that 40K is the game who has a whole book (with soon an expansion) devoted to fun play, I wouldn´t say 40K is all about winning, pwning and rock & roll.

And yes, a lot of people nowadays don´t seem to bother with thinking for themselves. They just go on the internet, ask what choices to make and get the answers on a silver plate.

Asking for some feedback on an armylist is fine, but requesting the internet to give you the most broken combination of units possible, is beyond lame.

Well if it is bashing...it was the truth. Being that I play both, I honestly see more "Cheddar" in 40k overall. Examples.
Min Maxing SM /w
Drop Pods or
Full Rhino army or
Insert insane amount of assault cannons + DS here
Jet Bike/Skimmer Eldar
Skimmer force Tau with battle suits
Chaos SM with 2 sorcs of slan with dual lash of submis

I can go on, but the reality was that the 40k books gave you "more" options to cheese it out. Due to this when the players merged over they didn't truly look into the aspect of it all and generally speaking they went looking for the higher tier armies. Now not all players are like this, however American aka USA players are. I cannot and will not say how Euro/Brit or other players are because generally speaking the UK players and some German players I have played were a lot more mellow and a lot better overall on the friendly side and tended to go with more all comer lists over the extreme push.

I think part of this also comes from the side that in the US there is the major push that if you aren't a winner you're nothing so to lose is the worst insult ever, so the WAAC is extreme.

OldMaster
29-06-2008, 07:09
It wasn't that I chose Chaos because of them being strong. It was more... a pleasant surprise ;)

Most people DO actually come with suggestions for their new armies for some reason. And mostly, yeah, because of them being really strong...

Condottiere
29-06-2008, 09:19
Does anyone get the feeling that armies are starting to resemble M:TG style tournament decks? But without the great illustrations.

logan054
29-06-2008, 11:17
And we´re back to the 40K bashing.
Taking into account that 40K is the game who has a whole book (with soon an expansion) devoted to fun play, I wouldn´t say 40K is all about winning, pwning and rock & roll.

Ohh please, i can say since 3rd ed came out i have maybe played 20 games of 40k (a few of those were 4th), back in 3rd the rhino rush was hardly about making a good game, it was purely about winning and it wasnt exactly a complex strategy. 40K lacks so many things that make for a good game, it really is just point and shoot.


And yes, a lot of people nowadays don´t seem to bother with thinking for themselves. They just go on the internet, ask what choices to make and get the answers on a silver plate.

Thats because people dont like to lose games, simple as, if they lose a game they come on the internet, make a post and see what people say they should do in order to get th winning streak up to near perfect.


Asking for some feedback on an armylist is fine, but requesting the internet to give you the most broken combination of units possible, is beyond lame.

The problem here really isnt with the poster, i think 9/10 times thats what someone is doing, or maybe asking for ways to tweak the army, i think every time i saw a Chaos list posted it was "take the warriors out, add knights". The original posters does this, beats his mate, he comes on line and then is told to take x unit out and add y, and the vicious circle continues. So i guess in way the problem is most people offering advice actually have a lack of imagination because they can only build one style of list.



I have to agree with Richter. So far all this "that choice sucks" statements at me have come from WHFB side of my hobby. I think 40K is relaxed on the notion that it's easier, less rules (half in pages from WHFB). So there's less of a tactical thinking needed and as such you have more freedom to do your armies without condemning them to lose too often.

I think after 3rd ed you would be generally more relaxed about the armies you play anyways :) well saying that i've seen a few DE players that was far less than relaxed about playing a IG tank company ;)


With WHFB with all the nifty tactical applications, you can't just take what ever the hell you want. Khorne Warriors and Khorne Berserkers work quite differently. It's funny that you actually need a big brain to use Frenzied units.

Ahh yes, Frenzied troops are just point and click units :rolleyes: of course, i guess you need a regular enstein to use tau army for example :eek:



Does anyone get the feeling that armies are starting to resemble M:TG style tournament decks? But without the great illustrations.

Yes i do, i just think GW refuse to admit the game is going that way, i think a topic started by Gav thorpe on another forum really shows how little they understand the mindset of player base.

Tarax
29-06-2008, 12:32
Apart from all the advise that's given, noone seems to look at older threads which deal with the same situation and give the same answers.

Every advise has been given plenty of times, but every time a 'new' player comes along, he is not bothered with reading old threads.

Also, the best way to see which army is best, is asking a friend/fellow gamer, learn the rules, know what you like (in playstyle and background) and by watching some games played by others.

MrBigMr
29-06-2008, 15:54
Ahh yes, Frenzied troops are just point and click units :rolleyes: of course, i guess you need a regular enstein to use tau army for example :eek:
I don't understand what you're getting at. I'm actually saying that Frenzied troops aren't just point and click. I've seen more than my share of Frenzied troops being bated to death and when you see a good Khrone player, he knows all the tricks to stop his troops from berserking over the enemy.

And with Tau lacking all serious CC abilities (even the Kroot are just a speed bumb), you need more than just "we stands here and shoots" to survive.


And Azmazi, I've seen some quite nasty WHFB combos in my time as well. Ethereal VC (won the last tournament with full on massacre), Knight Horde Chaos (came second), Gunlines (always fun), Skink hordes... Etc.

The cheese you mentioned in 40K, most is being dealt with all the while. SM will have Combat Squad rule, Drop Pods are more expensive, Rhino rushing ended a long time ago, rending is nerfed in 5th, I believe the latest Eldar codex was made with 5th in mind, since all that Falcon cheese will come down a bit in it, battlesuit/skimmer Tau is about as cheese as Leman Russ/infantry platoon Guard, but dual Lash DP is nasty, I'll give you that.

catbarf
29-06-2008, 17:20
Many are also asking for the army that is "the most powerfull in combat" or "the most devastating with magic" yet previously in their post they admit to just starting fantasy and so can have no idea of how the game system itself works. So how do they know what they want from an army in terms of playstyle, unit selection etc.

This is silly. Everyone has their preferences. I usually play horde armies in computer games, so when I started WHFB I wanted to go to the opposite extreme. I started Ogres without the slightest knowledge about them. The army appealed to me, as you say it should- but how was my choice different from going Tzeentch because of a love of magic, or Bretonnians because of a love of cavalry? Those seem to be the appeal of the army.

When someone comes on this website asking who has the best of a certain trait, they are trying to learn about the armies to find what appeals to them. Isn't it a little pretentious to call that a lack of imagination?

Vandur Last
29-06-2008, 17:31
I dont see the problem. Indeed i have made similar posts myself.
Consider this situation: I am returning to WHFB after a long time and would like something to contrast against my old Empire army. I want a army that is strong in melee, preferably one that is sturdy and has good heavy infantry. Is it wrong for me to come ask what armies currently meet these criteria?
Without either buying an army and/or playing it for a few weeks/months (depending on how often you get to play) i have no way of knowing that "army x" says in the fluff that they have good infantry but in game terms are horrible at it. Is it such a crime to ask your peers for thier input or must i go out and buy several armybooks and proxy some battles before i can get started collecting and painting my new army?

What about talking to other people in the GW store, is it OK to do that?


Anyway, asides from all that some people just enjoy talking/posting about warhammer... just for fun.

logan054
29-06-2008, 19:38
I don't understand what you're getting at. I'm actually saying that Frenzied troops aren't just point and click. I've seen more than my share of Frenzied troops being bated to death and when you see a good Khrone player, he knows all the tricks to stop his troops from berserking over the enemy.

Well didnt come across that way :P oh well


And with Tau lacking all serious CC abilities (even the Kroot are just a speed bumb), you need more than just "we stands here and shoots" to survive.

Move and shoot? seeing as they suck in H2H not alot else to do in the game really ;)

Gobbo Lord
29-06-2008, 20:01
I want a army that is strong in melee, preferably one that is sturdy and has good heavy infantry. Is it wrong for me to come ask what armies currently meet these criteria?

Not at all but you are missing out an integreal part of what these threads are asking. They do not just ask, which army is good at magic. They actually enquire about what units to use and how to build up their army, which units should they avoid etc,etc...


which army should i start and what should i buy for it ?

I posted this at the start of the thread and shall repost it to put across my point. Why is this person wanting to play Warhammer in the first place. It is not because he finds himself enthralled by the background and models because clearly he does not care which army he selects. He wants to win. He wants people to tell him the best army and the best things to buy for that army. Clearly he is lacking in imagination as it does not even occur to him to think about what he likes for himself


When someone comes on this website asking who has the best of a certain trait, they are trying to learn about the armies to find what appeals to them. Isn't it a little pretentious to call that a lack of imagination?

I dont think its pretentious to say people lack imagination when they are making statements such as this (previous quote). Its like they are a blank slate waiting to be filled by the first few posters who agree that in fact Deamons are the best army to play and he should buy Nurgle and Khorne because of these certain combinations of characters and units. If he wants to play Deamons he should work out combinations etc himself. Otherwise they go into battle with what they have been told is the best list with the best troops and the best combinations and they lose, they lose badly and they cant understand why. The reason for this is they havent learnt the army themselves they have not slowly built up an understanding of how the army works within the game, they have just brought what other people tell them without building up the experience themselves.

If they go into a shop they will see all of the armies and have a flick though the books, this should be enough to make your choice. The base character of each army is obvious and you do not need to ask. Dwarfs are obviously strong and steady, Vampires are obviously magic and horde etc, etc. Then you build it up yourself over the years, months, whatever and come to understand how the army works and what troops, strategies etc work for them.

MrBigMr
29-06-2008, 20:02
Well didnt come across that way :P oh well
"you actually need a big brain to use Frenzied units."
How in the hell do you spin that?

kettan
29-06-2008, 20:38
This thread brings back some old memories. When I had to choose my first army, I had just bought the box set and but all my Bretonnians and Lizardmen together. I was looking through the battle book for an army, that met my only criteria. I wanted to include a dragon. I was left with the choice beween HE, DE, WE, Undead and Chaos (little did i know, that all armies could include dragons back then). After lots of pondering i selected WE, mostly because of the models. Then came 6th edition of WH, no new WE in sight so i started Dwarfs, loved the new models and the fluff. This love lasted untill i saw HE. The Phoenix guard and Dragon Princes made it for me. My first love is still my biggest and I still use WE.
My HE army has a strong theme. One of my regular opponents is playing DE., so I made a Northern Warhost (this was before the new book). Lots of Shadow Warriors and White Lions, almost no cav.

Sorry for the long rant. My point is, imagineation is what makes the game fun for me. I dont think I would ever base what army I play on other peoples oppinion. For me the model selection and fluff, plays a major role and not the powerlevel of the army.

leadlair
29-06-2008, 21:17
This is a problem indeed, it seems the tournament, WAAC attitude (or part of it) is seeping over into what should be friendly play. People might think i really like Orcs and Goblins but everyone says to them that they are rubbish they should get Warriors of Chaos in november because they will be better and easier to win with. People laugh at them saying why have you got two units of Saurus warriors when you should have Skink skirmishers. The answer should be, because I read the lizardmen book and liked the idea of the part of the Lizardmen army that hits hard after the skinks have harrassed the enemy, the part that protects the slann in their temples.


Unfortunately you may want to find new people to play with if you are routinely getting laughed at for playing what you like.




True but i think the info sought is the wrong type. People seem to want to know how good Dwarfs are at killing people and what units people find to be the best. When i feel this is something a player should learn through experience.


I have been playing 40k and fantasy for a loooong time and frankly in some respects I think you are very wrong about learning what is good and what isn't through experience. You need to remember that buying the wrong unit for fantasy often means you just "wasted" 70-100 dollars and for some people that is really a lot of disposable income.

I see these people as having an idea what they want to be able to do and then seeking advice about what to buy in order to accomplish that. I don't really see any problem with that.



This is again a problem, people might like the idea of Dwarfs (i know they are being exemplified a lot) but think if i buy dwarfs i must use a gunline. Rather than explore the possibilities and allowing natural army progression through experience.


Again the high cost of miniatures doesn't always make the 'normal' army progression you are talking about something that someone wants to do. And why do that if you already know the feel you are looking for?




There is no right way to play an army, this is the misconception that i feel is leading to all these "new to fantasy" threads. If someone says you arnt playing that army right say well i built it using the army list so im sure its right , just not how you play.




funny because its true....

And you should also remember there isn't a wrong way to play either..... there is just the way you want to play. ;)

leadlair
29-06-2008, 21:29
Not at all but you are missing out an integreal part of what these threads are asking. They do not just ask, which army is good at magic. They actually enquire about what units to use and how to build up their army, which units should they avoid etc,etc...


And why shouldn't they? It seems to me that your argument doesn't have anything to do with imagination at all. Why wouldn't someone without much knowledge of the game want to seek advice?



I posted this at the start of the thread and shall repost it to put across my point. Why is this person wanting to play Warhammer in the first place. It is not because he finds himself enthralled by the background and models because clearly he does not care which army he selects. He wants to win. He wants people to tell him the best army and the best things to buy for that army. Clearly he is lacking in imagination as it does not even occur to him to think about what he likes for himself


See you are being fairly rude here. You have no idea what drives these individuals. And maybe there imagination tells them they want to really cast a lot of magic. It seems to me you are the one lacking an imagination by not understanding that there are different ways to "imagine" what you want to play. You can look at play style, you can look at cost, you can look at models, you can look at fluff and decide. No single way is more imaginative then any other.



I dont think its pretentious to say people lack imagination when they are making statements such as this (previous quote). Its like they are a blank slate waiting to be filled by the first few posters who agree that in fact Deamons are the best army to play and he should buy Nurgle and Khorne because of these certain combinations of characters and units. If he wants to play Deamons he should work out combinations etc himself. Otherwise they go into battle with what they have been told is the best list with the best troops and the best combinations and they lose, they lose badly and they cant understand why. The reason for this is they havent learnt the army themselves they have not slowly built up an understanding of how the army works within the game, they have just brought what other people tell them without building up the experience themselves.


Your argument is specious to say the least. If they win with it is immaterial when compared to wether or not they enjoyed the game. Would they have had a better chance of winning if they hadn't sought out the advice in the first place? The answer is probably no so what does it matter if they win or lose their first games? They are just getting experience either way which is what you seem to want in the first place. I always feel it is best not to tell someone else how to enjoy their hobby.......:rolleyes:



If they go into a shop they will see all of the armies and have a flick though the books, this should be enough to make your choice. The base character of each army is obvious and you do not need to ask. Dwarfs are obviously strong and steady, Vampires are obviously magic and horde etc, etc. Then you build it up yourself over the years, months, whatever and come to understand how the army works and what troops, strategies etc work for them.

No it shouldn't be enough...... it MIGHT be enough for you but don't try and force other people to conform to how you want to play the game by then telling them they lack imagination.

Lordsaradain
29-06-2008, 21:44
When I collect an army, it's the models mainly, and secondly fluff that appeals to me. I love the close combat aspect of warhammer so I cant imagine playing a shooty list (even though I have about 3k empire). Cavalry is another part that I love, I started collecting warhammer shortly after reading a triology on the crusades, and the firts thing I bought was the plastic empire knights. My all time favorite army is my chaos khorne, chosen upgrades for both knights and warriors and you hav esome pretty insane units. Back then, when I played that army, the term cheese had not been discovered by my gaming group so noone would be angry at anybody for making a good list, but rather praise them for it for being skilled at seeing what was most effective to field...

I've been "damaged" by my forum lurking though, so now I either play lists that are specifically NOT cheesy, or when I want to win, I go allout on the cheese. :P

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
29-06-2008, 22:09
I'm 40k player and i had recently some thoughts about play WFB as i had some spare money.

so ... i went to the hobby store in my area and watched 3 full games
Slaaneshi BoC vs Wood Elves 1500 0:20
Fun Eshin vs 1Stank Empire 1500 about massacre in favour of empire
Empire vs Wood Elves 1500 7:13 or 8:12 ... about that

and guess what ? i bought another 40k stuff

Azmazi
29-06-2008, 22:27
I don't understand what you're getting at. I'm actually saying that Frenzied troops aren't just point and click. I've seen more than my share of Frenzied troops being bated to death and when you see a good Khrone player, he knows all the tricks to stop his troops from berserking over the enemy.

And with Tau lacking all serious CC abilities (even the Kroot are just a speed bumb), you need more than just "we stands here and shoots" to survive.


And Azmazi, I've seen some quite nasty WHFB combos in my time as well. Ethereal VC (won the last tournament with full on massacre), Knight Horde Chaos (came second), Gunlines (always fun), Skink hordes... Etc.

The cheese you mentioned in 40K, most is being dealt with all the while. SM will have Combat Squad rule, Drop Pods are more expensive, Rhino rushing ended a long time ago, rending is nerfed in 5th, I believe the latest Eldar codex was made with 5th in mind, since all that Falcon cheese will come down a bit in it, battlesuit/skimmer Tau is about as cheese as Leman Russ/infantry platoon Guard, but dual Lash DP is nasty, I'll give you that.

True, 5th Edition is changing a lot of that, however you are right that WHFB does have some nasty combos, but the thing is they don't have as many as 40k does. As it stands you can do things less "tactically" in 40k as you don't have things like flanks/rears and the like (which is ironic being that flanking in modern warfare is still just as bad...)

I also think 5th edition might bring out a totally different set of cheese...that being the "tree formation" which is now being used by players. Aka laying down trees as they obscure troops meaning a 4+ cover save (yes its already being abused by those testing 5th in the 2 stores I play in). However no set of rules is perfect, and never will be.

In reality all of the issues tend to arise that players of their more favorite game set tend to see it as better than the other naturally. This is a given. Each one has its own different set of tactics and set of rules. Both have its different sets of cheddar. The main side I was getting at is that in my "area" the 40k players tend to be a lot more harsh on the cheese side as most of them are 8+ year players who do nothing more than push it to the extreme. Ironically most of our fantasy players are new. Having 20 fantasy players, over 8 of them are between 1 year to 2 months playing new. So they are being more friendly overall and enjoying the game. Hell I like the win, but some losses make you laugh. Thats the thing overall, I think the newer generations are losing the ideal of enjoying it relaxed instead of the usual cutthroat ill rape your mom and sister just to win attitudes (actually had a guy say that at the last Tournament too...what a nut case.)

logan054
29-06-2008, 22:27
"you actually need a big brain to use Frenzied units."
How in the hell do you spin that?

came across sarcastic actually, maybe its just me, perhaps its general consensus that frenzy is a easy game among many warhammer players, or terms such as "khorne players dont grow"

Gobbo Lord
30-06-2008, 00:07
don't try and force other people to conform to how you want to play the game by then telling them they lack imagination

I am not trying to come across as rude. And i certainly am not trying to force people to conform to a certain style of play. In the end i am voicing an opinion on the internet and seeing what people think.

I think the enjoyment of the game might be falsified for people playing with the armies and units suggested to them. Think of it like this (though im not forcing you to) a younger gamer who has not matured as a person asks for info on which army is good in combat, he gets told Dwarfs and Chaos Deamons and Orcs and Goblins by the people who reply. But he is also told to build a Nurgle plaugebearer unit with herald and regenerate and such and told exactly what powers to give his greater Deamon to make it the best thing in the game. He then goes and plays this army expecting to win with his super unit of awsome deamons he was told were the best. But he doesnt, this puts him off playing as he thinks his selection should be the hardest thing around and he must just be rubbish because "nothing can destroy a Great Unclean one with so and so and he will destroy anything that touches him" as this is what he was told by some people on a site such as this and clearly he is annoyed. He will not try again because he was so focussed on winning the game with the hardest things ever that it was a massive disappointment when he doesnt.

I go back to my original post, there is no way you can defend this post for its outright blandness. There was no clue as to what he wanted, no idea what sort of army he wanted to play or anything. Just "Im starting fantasy so...


which army should i start and what should i buy for it ?

The answer should be "you should start the army you think is good, these armies are good at combat, these at magic, these a little of everything etc, buy the army book and some core units get some games in and come back with more questions later"

Not "Get Deamons and have a unit of 25 plaugebearers with Herald with slime trail and regenerate thingy, a unit of 20 bloodletters, two units of 5 flesh hounds a bloodthirster with this armour that skill and this power etc etc, because this is awsome and means this and that etc etc."

But dont feel as if im going to start a crusade to make the world think and act like me, then id be destorying imagination myself, and i dont want to do that. I just feel the more detail you give people on exact builds of armies units to avoid, units to definently take etc, takes that little bit of discovery from the player.

leadlair
30-06-2008, 00:25
I think the enjoyment of the game might be falsified for people playing with the armies and units suggested to them. Think of it like this (though im not forcing you to) a younger gamer who has not matured as a person asks for info on which army is good in combat, he gets told Dwarfs and Chaos Deamons and Orcs and Goblins by the people who reply. But he is also told to build a Nurgle plaugebearer unit with herald and regenerate and such and told exactly what powers to give his greater Deamon to make it the best thing in the game. He then goes and plays this army expecting to win with his super unit of awsome deamons he was told were the best. But he doesnt, this puts him off playing as he thinks his selection should be the hardest thing around and he must just be rubbish because "nothing can destroy a Great Unclean one with so and so and he will destroy anything that touches him" as this is what he was told by some people on a site such as this and clearly he is annoyed. He will not try again because he was so focussed on winning the game with the hardest things ever that it was a massive disappointment when he doesnt.


Again I have to say..... so what? (Not trying to be too sarcastic :D) But follow my line of thought. Your right this could happen and it does.

But

What if that player never got any advice drops the $400 dollars he spent the last two years saving up on an army and then got his pants beaten every weekend for two months because no one ever told him that unit A really isn't very good. Sure they look cool but they stink. So said player gets discouraged and never plays again. Both scenarios (mine and yours) probably happen but I would think mine happens more often...... but who knows.

You can not be worse off for having gotten more input. And besides who says most of the people asking are kids?




I go back to my original post, there is no way you can defend this post for its outright blandness. There was no clue as to what he wanted, no idea what sort of army he wanted to play or anything. Just "Im starting fantasy so...


But you see that is where you go wrong. There is nothing to defend. Said individual just wants to start fantasy and kick some tail. Not my style and not someone I would particularly want to play but he can go and have fun at tournaments or whatever else he does.

And he didn't have any clue so he asked for peoples advice..... seems like a reasonable thing to do.




The answer should be "you should start the army you think is good, these armies are good at combat, these at magic, these a little of everything etc, buy the army book and some core units get some games in and come back with more questions later"


I think that while you are mostly right in the above statement that when you are about to drop $300 - $500 dollars on something there is nothing wrong with getting as much information as possible.




Not "Get Deamons and have a unit of 25 plaugebearers with Herald with slime trail and regenerate thingy, a unit of 20 bloodletters, two units of 5 flesh hounds a bloodthirster with this armour that skill and this power etc etc, because this is awsome and means this and that etc etc."


While this might be said it doesn't mean that is what the person actually goes out and does. They are just looking for input about what works well and trying to get some insight into their options.



I just feel the more detail you give people on exact builds of armies units to avoid, units to definently take etc, takes that little bit of discovery from the player.

This may or may not be depending on the person but it isn't the same as lacking imagination. What I am saying is that you need to understand there are different ways for people to enjoy the game and use their imagination in doing so.

Voodoo Boyz
30-06-2008, 01:15
I think the main thing to point out is that:

Models are expensive.

I had to live with the fact that I "picked an army that appealed to me" when I started wargaming; unfortunately I picked an army that had **** poor rules, where as other people happened to pick armies that had superior rules.

Let me tell you something, it sure does suck when the army/unit you like and spent a good amount of money on has **** poor rules.

So one thing I learned very quickly was to playtest the living hell out of just about anything. New armies I want to buy, new units or configurations I want to try. Just about everything. I'm pretty lucky that I have a gaming area in my home and other players who also have gaming spaces and none of us mind playing a lot of proxy games.

This lets us do in practice what people do online which is:

Find out what armies we like the rules for.
Find out which units work for us, and which don't.
Test conventional or "internet" wisdom on the table top against just about anything.

While you say that there is a lack of imagination the fact of the matter is that gaming is a significant draw to the hobby, and to many of us, the gaming aspect is the most important one. If the models are pretty and we like the fluff, that's all well and good, but if we loathe playing the army, then we're not going to be happy with it.

This extends past armies and down to units. You may like wood elves, see Eternal Guard, buy the very expensive models to make a regiment to give you static CR, and then find out that they suck.

I know that if I was starting Wood Elves I'd post and ask questions to find out stuff like that ahead of time, before spending the money and time to buy and paint a full unit.

It's not that people lack imagination. It's that people want to spend their time and money wisely and unfortunately GW has a problem where some armies have a lot of very poor and very expensive choices in their army books.

logan054
30-06-2008, 09:47
What if that player never got any advice drops the $400 dollars he spent the last two years saving up on an army and then got his pants beaten every weekend for two months because no one ever told him that unit A really isn't very good. Sure they look cool but they stink. So said player gets discouraged and never plays again. Both scenarios (mine and yours) probably happen but I would think mine happens more often...... but who knows.

Im gona jump in here :). so what if a player got beaten every weekend, you learn far more by losing than be told how to build army, hell i wonder how many of the older players (before the internet) actually won every single game? please, how can people actually improve with this important learning curve?


You can not be worse off for having gotten more input. And besides who says most of the people asking are kids?

Can you not? i can say i have been some pretty awful advice before now, if i was a noob i would have ended up spending far more money than i can afford to. I guess the problem is many people who post really have no idea of the value of money.


But you see that is where you go wrong. There is nothing to defend. Said individual just wants to start fantasy and kick some tail. Not my style and not someone I would particularly want to play but he can go and have fun at tournaments or whatever else he does.

You mean said people cant stand the thought they might loss a game and basically are unable to learn from the mistake they make, many and i thought England was a over protective society, seems the internet is just as bad. It really dosnt hurt to lose a game, its not like your going to forfeit a organ or anything


I think that while you are mostly right in the above statement that when you are about to drop $300 - $500 dollars on something there is nothing wrong with getting as much information as possible.

Tis true, still i do think the internet really is the blame for pushing the power level up, i mean if you didnt have so many people about telling you buy this unit and not this unit you wouldnt need to be so careful with you purchases in the first place :)



While this might be said it doesn't mean that is what the person actually goes out and does. They are just looking for input about what works well and trying to get some insight into their options.

Depends on how fresh that person is


This may or may not be depending on the person but it isn't the same as lacking imagination. What I am saying is that you need to understand there are different ways for people to enjoy the game and use their imagination in doing so.

ahh, your right, it isnt a lack of imagination to every single person who collects armies only to build armies in a set way and use set tactics rather than discussing alternate tactics for different units. No you right :rolleyes:

Shas'o Zor'bas
30-06-2008, 12:10
I don't see any problem with that. Even if you are searching for a powerfull army you won't choose one if you don't like it.

When I started 40k I was amazed by the Tau miniatures. Then I saw the Kroot (I didn't know that they where inside the Tau army) and I said that I would go with one of those. When I learnt that they were the same thing I was thrilled and went to buy my first fire warriors. Now I am not disappointed by my choice.

After 40k I wanted to start a fantasy army that would concentrate on CC and have magic just because Tau don't have those things and I wanted something different. So I posted a thread and decided to start BoC. You see that although WoC had what I wanted and were much better as many said, I didn't choose them because I just don't like them. I don't find a problem with that.

MrBigMr
30-06-2008, 13:42
Im gona jump in here :). so what if a player got beaten every weekend, you learn far more by losing than be told how to build army, hell i wonder how many of the older players (before the internet) actually won every single game? please, how can people actually improve with this important learning curve?
No amount of playing will make a bad army good. Sure, when rolling dice there's always a chance to win no matter how poor the odds, but no matter how much you get kicked around, you won't learn without guidance. They don't throw kids out into world saying "they'll pick it up along the way."

A good opponent gives you pointers. My unfortunate luck was to play plenty against a guy who never told you anything ("Should I do this?" "Do what ever you want.") and then proceeded to bash you to the ground, exploiting everything he could. He never told anything about how to avoid the mistakes one makes (such as how to use Frenzied units). I never learned a damn thing playing him. Apart from why people dislike him.

Besides, just because you like to take a DP with you daemons doesn't remove the fact that it's crap and people will tell you it's crap every single time you field it.

logan054
30-06-2008, 14:07
No amount of playing will make a bad army good. Sure, when rolling dice there's always a chance to win no matter how poor the odds, but no matter how much you get kicked around, you won't learn without guidance. They don't throw kids out into world saying "they'll pick it up along the way."

lol in a direct sense you are correct, i think your misunderstand perhaps, players themselves learn from loses, he will learn how not to use units and how to use units. What it will also teach you through trial and error what the unit combo/army lists best suit you. Im sorry but a player who is given advice isnt learning how to even create a army list, teaching someone parrot fashion in the long run. Perhaps this could explain why so many struggle when they change a army book because they actually lack the ability to make a army list.


A good opponent gives you pointers. My unfortunate luck was to play plenty against a guy who never told you anything ("Should I do this?" "Do what ever you want.") and then proceeded to bash you to the ground, exploiting everything he could. He never told anything about how to avoid the mistakes one makes (such as how to use Frenzied units). I never learned a damn thing playing him. Apart from why people dislike him.

Your correct, good opponents will give you tips, they will not usually however rebuild your armylist for you ;) On the other hand is it that guys fault you cant analyze a problem?


Besides, just because you like to take a DP with you daemons doesn't remove the fact that it's crap and people will tell you it's crap every single time you field it.

Its not crap, its just not a good option as another one, personally i have used a BT a few times with my daemons, its incredibly boring to use, so, by building a army in manor that is considered optimized i dont enjoy using my daemons. Funny thing is, it didnt take long for me to figure out a greater daemon was far better than a daemon prince, i think i took one look at them knew, i guess that advantage of learning to play game rather then just imitating how others play.

Braad
30-06-2008, 14:08
When I started, all I needed was a flip through the miniature pages on the GW website.
O&G all the way!!!
What units to choose? How about ALL of them!!!

It was so simple for me. And I'm still happy after 4 years.

But I do understand why people like to ask a bit about armies. I had mainly one opponent when I started, who played lizardmen, and for some reason O&G had real troubles with winning against those guys. I also looked for advise in the GW shops and on the internet, but most people couldn't give me anything. And it really is not funny that, after investing loads of money and time, all you can do is utterly being massacred every single time.
I think I won 2 games and did a draw on a third in 2,5 years playing (like once every 2 or 3 weeks). But I hang on, full of hope and it changed, partly because of the new O&G armybook. Now we both win and loose our fair share.

So I don't think its that weird that people like to know a bit more about an army before they start. With every game, the playing itself is most important, but if you never get anywhere other then utterly dying, then the fun also gets a lot less, so winning a bit is also important.

Another small example. I always like games like Doom and Duke Nukem (years ago, obviously), but I have a few friends who are so good that I ended up in a small heap of blood after about 5 seconds. Same thing. Its just no fun like that. That's why noobs should get advise. To keep the spirit alive.

mav1971
30-06-2008, 14:55
Years ago when I was starting to get into the hobby I looked at what was most interesting to me. At first I was going to do Skaven, then I realized how many figs I would have to paint. So I went with Chaos, because it would be quicker to paint a full army and I tend to lean more to the dark side.
Of course I went back to Skaven later and now have 5 or 6 different armies.

MrBigMr
30-06-2008, 15:32
Perhaps this could explain why so many struggle when they change a army book because they actually lack the ability to make a army list.
My main problems with changes in armybooks and codexes have been that all my imaginative and themed armies have been rendered obsolite. I love people for looking down on me for using a DP that in SoC was an ok choice, or refucing to take take other than Slaaneshi daemons and limiting my army that way. Or using Carapace on my IG, preferring Special Weapons Squad snipers instead of Ratlings, etc.

Imagination went the way of noisy longbeards and WAAC crowd that points and laughs at your army because you choose not to take no-brainer choices over the crap.


they will not usually however rebuild your armylist for you ;)
Then what you call a group of people that pick your list apart and pretty much rebuild it so that there's nothing left of the original one? Just the other day I started pondering about starting a Sister army and even made a small list of somewhat what I was going for. Not only were most of the options talked down, but they also posted lists that changed a lot of the force.

"Imagination" replaced by "fair" and "balanced."


On the other hand is it that guys fault you cant analyze a problem?
To analyze a problem, on would have to know plenty of the rules, which fairly few new players know. Not every person is book smart, able to put everything they read into effect. Some prefer to have a hands on approach to things. If I, having not even owned the rulebook as of yet and simply making an army from one of the armybooks without really knowing what I'm taking, get trashed and said "learn to play and well have fun", I have to say I'm left with a little "what the hell just happened" feeling.

I'm not expecting to win every time, all the time. Hell, I never play to win, but when your opponent just trashes you and picks on you for all the poor choices you have ever made, it's far from fun. Only way to have fun with him is to make a WAAC army and see who gets more massacres. With such people spread around, is it any wonder people look to make competitive lists? It takes but one ******* to ruin it for the rest of us.


Funny thing is, it didnt take long for me to figure out a greater daemon was far better than a daemon prince
One doesn't have to be Einstein to figure that one out. DP costs the same as in SoC, loses wings, Terror, marks are pretty much worthless on him and he gets less gifts. A fully kitted DP costs more than a stock GD and is nowhere near as good. Only things going for him are the fact that you can pick other lores and he's not a large target.

logan054
30-06-2008, 16:41
My main problems with changes in armybooks and codexes have been that all my imaginative and themed armies have been rendered obsolite. I love people for looking down on me for using a DP that in SoC was an ok choice, or refucing to take take other than Slaaneshi daemons and limiting my army that way. Or using Carapace on my IG, preferring Special Weapons Squad snipers instead of Ratlings, etc.

Sadly that is part of the hobby, things get changed, hell i didnt really like the fact i have 3 chaos armies rather than one army, hell i thought i had nice fluffy list. Like everyone else i had to learn to adapt, hell i posted the odd list on the internet as well, cant say i actually use the list advised but anyways.


Imagination went the way of noisy longbeards and WAAC crowd that points and laughs at your army because you choose not to take no-brainer choices over the crap.

Or you just ignore them ;) hell, do you really think at the end of the day anyone cares that much about your army, do you really care but bobby from half way across the world thinks, i mean how much bearing can it actually have on life?



Then what you call a group of people that pick your list apart and pretty much rebuild it so that there's nothing left of the original one? Just the other day I started pondering about starting a Sister army and even made a small list of somewhat what I was going for. Not only were most of the options talked down, but they also posted lists that changed a lot of the force.

"Imagination" replaced by "fair" and "balanced."

LOL, so people you actually play pick your list apart? my word, that pretty insulting actually. I get the impression you are talking about people on the internet, i wasnt ;) I can tell you for a start, very few people who even post in armylist forums really have a clue what fair and balanced is. Seriously, ayone who is telling you not to used infantry dosnt have a clue about the concept.



To analyze a problem, on would have to know plenty of the rules, which fairly few new players know. Not every person is book smart, able to put everything they read into effect. Some prefer to have a hands on approach to things. If I, having not even owned the rulebook as of yet and simply making an army from one of the armybooks without really knowing what I'm taking, get trashed and said "learn to play and well have fun", I have to say I'm left with a little "what the hell just happened" feeling.

Depends on the problem, for example, you dont need to know the rules that well to understand slapping a wizard out in open is a bad idea, at the end of the day how is someone else to know what rules you do and dont know? Should they be expected to tell you every rule in the book? hell i've been playing for many years and always forget things. Still i think the first thing you should buy is the rule book ;) helps alot!


I'm not expecting to win every time, all the time. Hell, I never play to win, but when your opponent just trashes you and picks on you for all the poor choices you have ever made, it's far from fun. Only way to have fun with him is to make a WAAC army and see who gets more massacres. With such people spread around, is it any wonder people look to make competitive lists? It takes but one ******* to ruin it for the rest of us.

To be honest, i dont play people like, they general **** me off and ruin the hobby, i have abit of advice, play someone else! I mean if you not that bothered about winning but rather enjoying a game then obviously playing someone like this just isnt for you. By the sounds of you know that you made poor choices in your list? question is do you understand why they are poor choices or again is this going to be parrot fasion.



One doesn't have to be Einstein to figure that one out. DP costs the same as in SoC, loses wings, Terror, marks are pretty much worthless on him and he gets less gifts. A fully kitted DP costs more than a stock GD and is nowhere near as good. Only things going for him are the fact that you can pick other lores and he's not a large target.

Yes that was actually the point i was making, its really the same with so many other things in warhammer, i mean if you can notice the differece between a DP and a BT sure you can notice the difference between say Marauders and chaos warriors? do you really need to have that explained.

Dont get this wrong, im not totally against advise, im more against the way it is done in so many cases, me telling someone what army to take dosnt help them in the long run, people generally learn through experience, good or bad.

Horus38
30-06-2008, 16:48
There's nothing wrong imparting some advice to new players. Most of them I imagine don't have any idea what is considered a "good/proper/balanced" starting army setup is. By telling them 2 core and a leader they now have a solid idea of what is a good initial step and wont fear some veteran laughing at them.

Players shouldn't have their hand held through the entire thing as that's half the fun of the games is making your army an individual experience. But telling them a few good initial steps is being a good fellow gamer and not getting put off by it.

MrBigMr
30-06-2008, 17:14
Or you just ignore them ;) hell, do you really think at the end of the day anyone cares that much about your army, do you really care but bobby from half way across the world thinks, i mean how much bearing can it actually have on life?
Well, I can tell you that for a person who doesn't care what people think, I care a little too much what people think. In the end, you can't make everyone happy. But I think it's just that such a hobby is a social engagement and being left out for being different isn't all that nurturing to a person's ego, especially a young person. The 30 odd longbeard that rolls his dice in between drinking and beating the missus might not care as much as the kid trying to make friends through a hobby he is interested in.


LOL, so people you actually play pick your list apart? my word, that pretty insulting actually. I get the impression you are talking about people on the internet, i wasnt ;)
There has been few cases of that happening in real life as well. I once though about doing a fun, cheap Goblin army from skull pass models (1000pts.). After presenting the idea, just in passing, one guy pretty much trashed Goblins and lied out an army I should make, containing mostly Orks with some Night Goblins on the side. "That's the way to do it."


Depends on the problem, for example, you dont need to know the rules that well to understand slapping a wizard out in open is a bad idea, at the end of the day how is someone else to know what rules you do and dont know? Should they be expected to tell you every rule in the book? hell i've been playing for many years and always forget things. Still i think the first thing you should buy is the rule book ;) helps alot!
Well, if I say "I haven't played at all and don't know anything", I think that's a hint that I haven't played much and that I don't know any of the rules. I'm talking about stuff like using Fast Cavalry, HW/Shield vs. Great Weapon in CC (which one to use on whith opponent), LOS, Frensied units, etc. Things that actually have to do with knowing the rules and work with them.

They're not really anything to do with pure strategic thinking. In real life you don't think "ok, we're 200 yards from the enemy, so their guns can't carry here, those dudes there can't see us because we're in their flank, etc." I did get enough points to qualify for even officer training in the army, but wasn't interested.

Kerill
30-06-2008, 17:36
People picking your list apart is generally not acceptable, giving suggestions I think is, but has to be carefully worded. People starting threads about what army to choose based on any criteria apart from I WANT TO WIN are fair enough. Not wanting an army that sucks beyond belief is understandable but then I don't think any armies are that bad.

People who ask for the cheapest army to play are not wrong for not choosing based solely on the fluff. Maybe they just want to play warhammer with their mates without having to re-mortgage the house.

People who choose something for the fluff, well its nice and easy.

A lot of people want an army that plays a certain way, again that's cool. Almost every army I play has lots of magic, because I love the magical aspect of warhammer and always will. I played a Khorne list and didn't find it that fun due to the lack of a phase. Returning to an earlier point, Khorne lists, although limited, aren't point and click since you need to screen and move VERY carefully (especially in the group I play since they read the frenzy rules slightly differently to my understanding).

I seldom see threads which are about wanting to learn warhammer quickly and get a feel for the game, but I'd be happy to advise them too on an army that includes almost every single possible rule and variant to learn the breadth of the game quickly.

logan054
30-06-2008, 18:07
Well, I can tell you that for a person who doesn't care what people think, I care a little too much what people think. In the end, you can't make everyone happy. But I think it's just that such a hobby is a social engagement and being left out for being different isn't all that nurturing to a person's ego, especially a young person. The 30 odd longbeard that rolls his dice in between drinking and beating the missus might not care as much as the kid trying to make friends through a hobby he is interested in.

Well thats a very nice thing to do in that kind of situation, sometimes however in that situation its better to tell the person the errors of their ways.


There has been few cases of that happening in real life as well. I once though about doing a fun, cheap Goblin army from skull pass models (1000pts.). After presenting the idea, just in passing, one guy pretty much trashed Goblins and lied out an army I should make, containing mostly Orks with some Night Goblins on the side. "That's the way to do it."

Damn man, all i can say is i was hoping that wasnt the case, that is pretty damn rude


Well, if I say "I haven't played at all and don't know anything", I think that's a hint that I haven't played much and that I don't know any of the rules. I'm talking about stuff like using Fast Cavalry, HW/Shield vs. Great Weapon in CC (which one to use on whith opponent), LOS, Frensied units, etc. Things that actually have to do with knowing the rules and work with them.

Thats a whole different kettle of fish to what my main issue with advice given on the internet, my main issue is with the spoon feed list, still i still think the first thing you should buy is the rule book. Personally i learned how to use all these types of things from watching other people play and experimenting.

MrBigMr
30-06-2008, 18:59
in that situation its better to tell the person the errors of their ways.
Not when the immediate response is for you to go and have sex with yourself.

Gobbo Lord
30-06-2008, 19:28
Personally i learned how to use all these types of things from watching other people play and experimenting.

And there it is.... the point of what ive been trying to say.

How did i learn how to use fast cavalry effectivly? I had my ass handed to me by an opponent using them (Marauder Horsemen). I learnt they could run up flanks and easily get to your warmachines if you ignored them. I learnt if they were march blocking you not to turn my unit towards them because next turn they move out of your line of sight again. I learnt that they were great for destroying rank bonuses. After the game i asked my opponent a few questions about how fast cavalry worked, having just experienced it first hand. What did i very soon do.... brought myself a box of wolf riders, made two units of 5 and off i went trying to use them as my opponent had, over time i learnt they need to be used slightly differently to the unit that had awed me so and so the way i use fast cavarly was formed and evolved the more games i had. After a while i had learnt from that crushing defeat how good one aspect of the game can be and how important they were to the army list.

That is how your army should evolve, through experience. If someone laughs at your goblin idea and says orcs are the way to go you should ignore them. He has come to that desision through his own experience and yours may differ. The problem is a lot of people dont ignore them. They ask more and more what should be in their army untill, truthfully, is it really their army or a strange mismash of things people have told him to include and avoid. Lacking the imagination, creation process of their OWN army and ideas.

Condottiere
30-06-2008, 20:21
Consider tabletop gaming as you would an apprenticeship. You have the "wiser" members of the community giving their opinions as to what works and how, possibly a mentor to give more detailed instructions and then you get some practical experience. You get feedback, and a chance to reflect. Rinse and repeat, several times. Once the process is completed, you have a fairly competent wargamer.

logan054
30-06-2008, 20:40
but it really isnt a apprenticeship, its a hobby, its more "wiser" members of the community deciding how warhammer should be player and getting all the younger players to conform to their vision of warhammer. I think the detail instructions part isnt that far from the truth actually ;)

Voodoo Boyz
30-06-2008, 21:35
but it really isnt a apprenticeship, its a hobby, its more "wiser" members of the community deciding how warhammer should be player and getting all the younger players to conform to their vision of warhammer. I think the detail instructions part isnt that far from the truth actually ;)

How are "longbeards" deciding on how Warhammer is being played?

People want to play non competitive games, then they're free to.

But when people ask "hey what's good in this army" and other people answer honestly, then it's more GW's fault for making things that are obviously better than others. If those people don't want to play with things that end up sucking in game, then why should you get mad? All the people giving the advice are doing is saving them time and money.

And I find nothing more sickening than seeing these "newbie" threads where they ask what is good in an army and people give misleading answers.

logan054
30-06-2008, 22:58
so, if every newbie comes on a forum, ask the same questions about what units to use and a "long beard" or "tournament player" tells each one to use pretty much telling them all dont use this, dont use that, only use these three units this isnt molding players to play in the same style? Its funny because i see less and balanced lists every times i go into my local GW.

The thing is people are not so free to play non competitive games, really by saving people money apparently infact the optimized build is just being pushed more under this guise.

As i said before their is a difference between offering a few pointers and totally redesigning a list, as the topic title suggests, lack of imagination, clearly if people can suggest using a small selection of units from a given army they clearly do lack the imagination to think out of the small box that is competitive play, warhammer, the way its meant to be played (apparently ;) )

MrBigMr
30-06-2008, 23:10
I think instead of people telling others what to use, they would tell how to use the units someone has though of using. No one likes to be told they're wrong, and you can't possible know why or how someone is planning to use such a unit. It's best to point how a unit fares and in what situations (like "Skeletons are best in this, where as Ghouls are better at that."), it'll either make the person asking aware of the units limitations, and either he/she will not use it or alter it to be better (like "Goblins need numbers behind them" rather than "Goblins are crap in the new book, use night goblins instead.").

Chain
30-06-2008, 23:50
Well I used to play Chaos and Lizardmen both armies have changed to much since i last played so i wanted to play something else:

Empire and Britonia is to normal for me(aka humans)
High Elves ain't to my preferences
Orcs & Goblins could be fun but nah
Skaven to much pest
Vampire Count pretty cool but I know to many already playing em
Tomb Kings, not bad but not my preferance either
Dwarfs Nice stuff but they're to slow
Wood Elves almost picked this army, but i know to many playing it so would not be as fun
In the end Dark Elves became my choice, seeing that they were to my liking and getting updated soon.

leadlair
01-07-2008, 04:35
And there it is.... the point of what ive been trying to say.

How did i learn how to use fast cavalry effectivly? I had my ass handed to me by an opponent using them (Marauder Horsemen).

And the newbie who just asked for advice on the internet will learn the same way.... we have all played warhammer and we all know there is a lot more to winning then just taking what someone else tells you.

Still has nothing to do with imagination wither........ ;)

leadlair
01-07-2008, 04:40
so, if every newbie comes on a forum, ask the same questions about what units to use and a "long beard" or "tournament player" tells each one to use pretty much telling them all dont use this, dont use that, only use these three units this isnt molding players to play in the same style? Its funny because i see less and balanced lists every times i go into my local GW.

The thing is people are not so free to play non competitive games, really by saving people money apparently infact the optimized build is just being pushed more under this guise.

As i said before their is a difference between offering a few pointers and totally redesigning a list, as the topic title suggests, lack of imagination, clearly if people can suggest using a small selection of units from a given army they clearly do lack the imagination to think out of the small box that is competitive play, warhammer, the way its meant to be played (apparently ;) )

The problem is you just make up a situation without knowing if that is what people really do.

Some kid comes on the internet and asks what should I put in my army and then gets all kinds of advice. You have no idea what advice he went with. So your argument is just made up and still has nothing to do with imagination. I mean do you really think it takes imagination to sit down and come up with an army list? Are you some kind of army list artist?????? :rolleyes:

I mean serioulsy you sit down think a little about what might work and then crunch some numbers. Not exactly very imaginative :)

Your also assuming there is only one way to make each army effective which is not true. So a new player still has to digest all the advice they get and then still learn how to play or if the even like playing what someone else told them to play.

DA_WAAGH
01-07-2008, 05:05
Well I posted a Thread of helping me find my army. I've played Warhammer and Warhammer 40k long time, and now starting to play Fantasy a lot more. I've played almost all the armies and wasted a whole LOT of MONEY! Even through I try I keep losing, and I try and Try. It's sad because I got ADD and OCD, so I at times get bored or lose interest in a army, and want to find the right one. With the past armies I played and got actual models were Elite armies, and I want to play a Horde army and get away from Elite armies. Even through I narrowed it down to a couple of armies, I like to have a second opinion, someone from the outside looking in, in a sort of way. Also I like doing a race no one does that much, to be different. Also fluff and style of play are the top. Even through some people think its stupid to ask for help, its a good thing to do and I don't think it should be down graded because people haven't found the right army that suits them and people who did down grade them at times and I think thats a bit mean. "Lack of imagination" I have so much imagination I could possibly make a story for each race in less then half a hour or LESS. Its trying to play it safe and wanting to save money.

Hope me saying this helps people out there with these Threads popping up.

logan054
01-07-2008, 06:07
The problem is you just make up a situation without knowing if that is what people really do.

Hardly, you can troll for many internet the this made up situation, but your right, i cant know for sure what people do, i can make a educated guess based on how people field armies in my local GW, funny how most of the same race are very similar.


Some kid comes on the internet and asks what should I put in my army and then gets all kinds of advice. You have no idea what advice he went with. So your argument is just made up and still has nothing to do with imagination. I mean do you really think it takes imagination to sit down and come up with an army list? Are you some kind of army list artist?????? :rolleyes:

Are you really the dense or are you just acting? seriously, lack of imagination is a expression as such, would lack of creative thinking fit better for you? No your right, my argument is just made up because it dosnt fit into your narrow little world.


I mean serioulsy you sit down think a little about what might work and then crunch some numbers. Not exactly very imaginative :)

Or, back in the real world, you crunch a few numbers, pick each, perhaps with a basic idea of what use it will have on the table, then possible tactics, what kind of support units it will, consider a general battle plan. Maybe some of do not require the help others do for list making ;) clearly you dont even understand the term.


Your also assuming there is only one way to make each army effective which is not true. So a new player still has to digest all the advice they get and then still learn how to play or if the even like playing what someone else told them to play.

Actually, im really not, thats not at all actually, i know for a fact you can make list affective in more than one way, i have said its the "wise ones" who assume lists can only be made effective with a small selection of units, i wouldnt be against this line of thinking if i agreed with it, who making up stuff now exactly?


Well I posted a Thread of helping me find my army. I've played Warhammer and Warhammer 40k long time, and now starting to play Fantasy a lot more. I've played almost all the armies and wasted a whole LOT of MONEY! Even through I try I keep losing, and I try and Try. It's sad because I got ADD and OCD, so I at times get bored or lose interest in a army, and want to find the right one. With the past armies I played and got actual models were Elite armies, and I want to play a Horde army and get away from Elite armies. Even through I narrowed it down to a couple of armies, I like to have a second opinion, someone from the outside looking in, in a sort of way. Also I like doing a race no one does that much, to be different. Also fluff and style of play are the top. Even through some people think its stupid to ask for help, its a good thing to do and I don't think it should be down graded because people haven't found the right army that suits them and people who did down grade them at times and I think thats a bit mean. "Lack of imagination" I have so much imagination I could possibly make a story for each race in less then half a hour or LESS. Its trying to play it safe and wanting to save money.

Hope me saying this helps people out there with these Threads popping up.

I think the problem here people take what such as myself have and twist it far to much, hes the bottom line. nothing wrong with some advice, its a different kettle of fish if you post and list and its totally redesigned to the point you maybe have only characters remaining.

Well you could write a story, good for you, that creative thinking dosnt seem to extend past fiction then, to use leadlair analogy or a artish, not artist can write stories and not or writers can paint a master piece, just some food for thought.

Condottiere
01-07-2008, 06:42
Let's replace the unfortunately (but what I considered witty) chosen term "wise ones" with elders. Winning a game depends a great deal more than having the "right" army list. You also have terrain, psychology, deployment and luck as factors.

DA_WAAGH
01-07-2008, 07:22
Also for winning the game dice rolling is the BIGGEST effect! you could play all cards right but if your dice are off you will lose.

Ward.
01-07-2008, 08:14
Gobbo Lord: I read the whole thread and I'm still not entirely sure what your objection is? Do you really dislike the idea of people being given useful advice?

The situation you described about people learning things for themselves often occurs in small gaming groups, where one person "discovers" an invincible tactic and goes on to dominate everyone else for 2-3 years.

Noobs being armed with power lists is also a balance factor, it allows beginner players to actually have a chance against the more experienced ones. Then when they get tired of the power list they can start trying out new things.

Chain
01-07-2008, 08:53
Waagh remember the most important thing is you play to have fun.
Sound to me like you should keep up with Goblins and there randomness and get enough of it then you might end in a 50/50 or so.

Perhaps try some other adversaries for the next few games, could be the others are just better tacticians then you atm?
Or get yourself some new dices if you think it might help.

many options and your the one that have to pick.

logan054
01-07-2008, 09:53
Let's replace the unfortunately (but what I considered witty) chosen term "wise ones" with elders. Winning a game depends a great deal more than having the "right" army list. You also have terrain, psychology, deployment and luck as factors.

Personally i would say winning a game warhammer consists of

1) knowing your own army
2) knowing your enemies army
3) deployment
4) moving you units into the right position at the right time
5) using your armies rules to the fullest
6) dice
7) terrain

The list isnt the biggest aspect of the game, its a important aspect of the game just as knowing the rules, still i dont see how picking a army for someone is actually helping them, part of learning the strengths and weakness of a army is really through trial and error, its natrual process for people to learn, hell i work and play school and i can tell you teaching children parrot fashion dosnt work. I can get a child to repeat after me 1-10 but when it comes to showing me the number they havent got a clue.

Advice is one thing, giving detail instruction on how armies should and shouldnt be played is something else, what it does is strip the hobby of the varity that many of us enjoy, i can personally say i get bored of playing Dwarf gunlines, sad thing is so many of them are with minor differences. Is this really the only way to play dwarfs?


Gobbo Lord: I read the whole thread and I'm still not entirely sure what your objection is? Do you really dislike the idea of people being given useful advice?

The situation you described about people learning things for themselves often occurs in small gaming groups, where one person "discovers" an invincible tactic and goes on to dominate everyone else for 2-3 years.

Noobs being armed with power lists is also a balance factor, it allows beginner players to actually have a chance against the more experienced ones. Then when they get tired of the power list they can start trying out new things.

How exactly is is a balancing factor? all it does is force the power level up and then the noobs continue to learn nothing, im sorry but i can see the point in even having a army book if every bit on advice online is just the same bit of garbage spurted out.

Problem is people cant think outside the box, and thats the lack of imagination this topic is talking about.

Gobbo Lord
01-07-2008, 10:53
Gobbo Lord: I read the whole thread and I'm still not entirely sure what your objection is? Do you really dislike the idea of people being given useful advice?

Someone wants to start a dwarf army. Before they even buy the book they come online and ask which units they should take, which they shouldnt and what tactics are the best. They go out and buy the units and models that they have been advised. Can they really call this their own army.

Similarly with Orcs and Goblins, someone posts up a list with a lot of goblins, not many orcs and magic heavy. They say, im starting fantasy and have the Greenskin book here is my army what do you think. They get it torn apart, everyone says its awfull, to take more orcs as they are better than goblins, that magic defense is the way to go with Greenskins, put Black orc fighter characters in the boyz units and to swap their stone thrower with two spear chukkas. His list is in tatters and he has been told that the above way is the only way to field orcs effectivly. Is that his own list? no, if he goes out and does as he is told for fear of "his list being rubbish in a game he doesnt fully understand yet, clearly he must play orcs this way if he wants to win", which from the responses (youll need orcs to win they are better) he feels must be the whole point of the game.

They use army lists that arnt their own creations, the lack of imagination means that they need others to point them in the right direction for their lists. I have no problem with a bit of advice (Orcs are a strong unit and Goblins are good as support units as orcs wont run away if the goblins do) But have a problem with (Goblins are rubbish take orcs instead if you want a competative army). The problem, and therefore lack of imagination comes in when people start new to fantasy threads wanting the latter example of advice. They want their army laid out for them. Where is the creative process?

And i agree with it pushing the power level up. If everyone is told to only take unit x and y with character z to be competative against that tournament player in your group. Rather than, dont play people you dont find playing against fun. Then the group in question becomes more and more saturated with competative tournament lists, the more players that take these options given when they ask "what should i put in my army" the more competative lists are in the group and the more people will have to ask about them.
Rather than it just being one or two people which everyone else doesnt play suddenly the whole group is playing that way. So when little jhonney goes for the first time he is destroyed, his army list laughed at and feels like he must be playing it wrong even though he loves his saurus warriors and cold ones. Where does little jhonney go to remedy this, onto the internet posting a thread along the lines of

"New to fantasy, what should i use in a Lizardmen army"

To which again he is told "Saurus suck, take skinks and a slann, its the best way to win with Lizardmen" Reaffirming to him that in fact winning is the entire point. So he throws imagination away and pretty much has his army list done for him.

silverstu
01-07-2008, 11:55
Well I think it is understandable for people wanting advice before starting an army to get an idea of how units might work, good starting choices etc. I think everyone agrees that this is fine- is the problem not the question being asked but the answers being given? Sometimes in an effort to be helpful posters state which units suck and what are the best configurations of which ever list - these being stated from the highly competitive view point. This may not be appropriate- the original poster may not be playing tournie/highly competitive level[at least not initially] and yet often this is the level advice is set at. Optimized choices which is a harsh viewpoint on an army and not the best one for someone starting out. What I'm saying is perhaps t is up to those giving advice to either qualify from what viewpoint that it is coming from or mediate so that it is relevant to someone just discovering an army. And yes part of discovering an army is getting beaten- I learned more about my armies by getting consistently thrashed than by any easy wins.

Ward.
01-07-2008, 14:14
Gobbo Lord: I think your reading into it to much, if they're that easilly influenced they're probably playing space marines anyway :p

Also imagination really is the wrong word here, while I can't think of a suitable replacement but I think if you find a better one a lot more people will see your point of view.

logan054
01-07-2008, 14:20
Well I think it is understandable for people wanting advice before starting an army to get an idea of how units might work, good starting choices etc. I think everyone agrees that this is fine- is the problem not the question being asked but the answers being given? Sometimes in an effort to be helpful posters state which units suck and what are the best configurations of which ever list - these being stated from the highly competitive view point. This may not be appropriate- the original poster may not be playing tournie/highly competitive level[at least not initially] and yet often this is the level advice is set at. Optimized choices which is a harsh viewpoint on an army and not the best one for someone starting out. What I'm saying is perhaps t is up to those giving advice to either qualify from what viewpoint that it is coming from or mediate so that it is relevant to someone just discovering an army. And yes part of discovering an army is getting beaten- I learned more about my armies by getting consistently thrashed than by any easy wins.

You know i think you hit the nail on the head, its just a shame some people cant see the wood for the trees ;)