PDA

View Full Version : Armies you like, but wont collect do to something stupid with them



~PrometheuS~
01-05-2010, 03:01
Armies you like, but dont collect due to a stupid rule? or other reason

For me its WoC, love the idea of having a full mounted army, like the minis, but, cant bring myself to collecting them due to that rule where you have to challenge..... i know i could go wizards, but, i much prefer combat lords..... they are alot more fun :)

If they didnt have that rule, i would have a full mounted WoC in no time

Any others?

Col. Dash
01-05-2010, 03:06
Failing to see how thats a stupid rule. Its actually a very fluffy rule to counteract how powerful the lords are.

ftayl5
01-05-2010, 03:26
yeah, theres nothing wrong with that rule, with a statline like a choas lord's (+ magic items) you'd be challenging almost anything anyway.... you shouldnt let that keep you from an all cav WoC army, they're cool

~PrometheuS~
01-05-2010, 03:28
yeah, theres nothing wrong with that rule, with a statline like a choas lord's (+ magic items) you'd be challenging almost anything anyway.... you shouldnt let that keep you from an all cav WoC army, they're cool

I would much prefer to address the units enemy charaters are with, then the charaters themselves, challenging an unkillable dreadlord in black gaurd, or, a crypt ghast (every turn) is not something i want my lord to be doing....

vorthain
01-05-2010, 04:02
Beastmen. Ambush seems too random. Also, are we counting 'lacks armor saves' as a rule?

LaughinGremlin
01-05-2010, 05:18
Dogs of War must have a shabby, flabby paymaster...

Dantès
01-05-2010, 05:45
O&G, and animosity. I really, really want to start an all-cav O&G force with some of the new River Trolls and a Wyvern Lord but...animosity just kills it. I've seen it wreck too many games; from stopping you the turn you needed that crucial game-changing charge, to stopping all of your movement because of a badly placed unit that squabbles, and even units spending more than half the game squabbling. They really could have implemented this rule much better (it does give flavor to the army, but really, it could have been done much better.)

Maybe if they made it so that when a unit squabbled, the champ would smack a few of his boyz over the head to get them back in line. Remove d3 from the unit, and continue as normal.

Necromancy Black
01-05-2010, 06:52
Gotta agree with the above. I like Orcs, by animosity is a ridiculous rule. It needs some sort of change!

At the very least, make it so only units that don't declare a charge have to take animosity. That's perfectly fluffy and would go a long way for a bit of balance.

Dis_Pater
01-05-2010, 07:15
For me its Tomb Kings. I love the idea of lots of chariots and the Egyptian theme of the army but cant do skelies!

edit: oops, just re read the op and realized you wanted a rules reason.

~PrometheuS~
01-05-2010, 08:40
For me its Tomb Kings. I love the idea of lots of chariots and the Egyptian theme of the army but cant do skelies!

edit: oops, just re read the op and realized you wanted a rules reason.

Doesnt really have to be rules, just a reasoning to why you would collect army, but cant do it because.....

ftayl5
01-05-2010, 08:45
I would much prefer to address the units enemy charaters are with, then the charaters themselves, challenging an unkillable dreadlord in black gaurd, or, a crypt ghast (every turn) is not something i want my lord to be doing....

Oh yeah, i didn't think about that, wow that rule sucks!!

My main hated rule is animosity
But my MAIN most hated rule is the 'not official and hasn't been updated in years' rule that DoW have :(

Odin
01-05-2010, 08:50
I would much prefer to address the units enemy charaters are with, then the charaters themselves, challenging an unkillable dreadlord in black gaurd, or, a crypt ghast (every turn) is not something i want my lord to be doing....

So challenge with your unit champion.

Hjiryon
01-05-2010, 08:55
Daemons of Chaos.
I actually like some of the models a lot (Might've to shop for some stuff online to get older figs, but not a big deal).
I just don't like playing an army that says "you suck at this game and hence picked the army that can't lose"... That's not written into their rules per se, but it's pretty close.

High Elves.
I play high elves as my primary force in the other wargames I've picked up that has them (Warmachine, Confrontation)... But ASF takes so much strategy out of WHFB, I can't be bothered.
So for now, I'm hugging trees instead.

~PrometheuS~
01-05-2010, 08:57
So challenge with your unit champion.

Obvious option and then your back in same boat once unit champion is dead

Also by what i gather, your champ can issue the challenge, but if they enemy issue one, your charater has to accept, meaning your lord...

Might need to read my rule book about that though... lol

Griefbringer
01-05-2010, 09:11
But my MAIN most hated rule is the 'not official and hasn't been updated in years' rule that DoW have :(

Strangely enough, my DoW list (from Chronicles 2004) has a very prominent "Official Rules" stamp on the first page.

Sand
01-05-2010, 09:45
The challenge rule is fine, honestly. I can see how it might be a bit silly that sorcerers have to challenge, but I think the idea of a Chaos Champion/Lord going "nah, I don't dare fight you man to man" is pretty stupid, honestly. And fluffwise, that is what not accepting a challenge is. It's impact is relatively small anyway, as even if you didn't issue the challenge, your opponent would. In which case your alternative to racking up overkill would be to stand and whimper at the back of the unit.


Obvious option and then your back in same boat once unit champion is dead

Also by what i gather, your champ can issue the challenge, but if they enemy issue one, your charater has to accept, meaning your lord...

Might need to read my rule book about that though... lolA Chaos Champion can fight any undead unit champion for a looong time before he breaks a sweat (Blood Knights being a possible exception), so I don't see how that's a problem.
As for an unkillable Dreadlord, that's really an outlier and more of a problem with a specific army build, rather than a problem with a good and fluffy rule in the Chaos army.
And of course, if you charge, you get to issue the challenge.

Darkspear
01-05-2010, 09:50
back to the main topic. There are certain armies that have specific minis that I like but the rest of the range puts me away. Some examples of the minis i like are

WOC - warriors
Lizardmen - saurus
Wood Elves - glade guard and glade riders, eternal guard. The forest spirits puts me off.

vega528
01-05-2010, 10:14
Lizardmen for me. I love the models, the lore, and the way the army functions, but I could just never figure out how to paint the saurus warriors. I even bought, built, and painted the entire battalion box and krog-Gar. I repainted the saurus like 20 times before finally giving up and just giving the whole box away. Eventually I will probably retry now that I'm a better painter, but it will be a few years from now because of other armies I have to paint.

Chaosminon
01-05-2010, 10:17
For me, its skaven, i like the idea of a rat army, but i dont like how random their guns and stuff are

Grimstonefire
01-05-2010, 10:20
Much like Darkspear, there are things about many armies that put me off from a models point of view.

Chaos Warriors are rubbish imo, they shouldn't have the cloaks and have more warped armour.

VC/TK. I couldn't stand painting an army of bone. Sure VC have other builds, but still. Lizardmen look too similar as well imo.

Mostly what's putting me off collecting another army is not the rules or the models, it's the fact that I'm mainly a collector and I have enough unpainted models to keep me busy for years.

mrtn
01-05-2010, 10:35
Beastmen. Ambush seems too random. Also, are we counting 'lacks armor saves' as a rule?

Ambush is optional, just go without if you don't like it. :)

To me the army I'd like to start is a skeleton army without vampires. I'd like a wight or necromancer general, not a sissy with pointy teeth.
Still, I might end up starting one with the new TK book, if that's possible and easy enough to do without the egyptian theme.

Lijacote
01-05-2010, 10:48
I'd have collected high elves, if their miniatures weren't so clunky. Swordmasters would be nice to have, but no, they are ham-fisted trolls, same for some other minis. Dark elves I would absolutely adore to collect, but witch elves are so unattractive. If there were to be new plastics, I'd collect a million point army in a heartbeat. Khaine!

Urgat
01-05-2010, 11:02
Dwarves, I love them, but not how their army plays.

FORtheGREATERgood
01-05-2010, 12:56
I would have to say beastmen. Ambush is only nice if they come in close to an enemy or objective and as previously mentioned they don't have much of a save to speak of. Many of the new models (I'm looking at you minotaurs) are cool in the book but the model looks ridiculous. The legs are so muscular and mutated it just looks like slabs of fat or something.

Also, this isn't a rules one, but for some reason I could never bring myself to collect bretonnia. I don't know if it's the fluff and the look or what, but it is the one army I've never been interested in collecting.

Arkfatalis
01-05-2010, 13:18
I would have to go with the Empire. The heroes and lords are just terrible compared to other armies. Sure I can have more but I'd rather have a powerful one rather then aload of weak ones. How many times has the world been saved because of a hero of the Empire? In lore terms they seem to be the greatest heroes ever but in rule terms they suck!

Witchblade
01-05-2010, 14:13
HE because of ASF.

Jind_Singh
01-05-2010, 14:49
For me I'd have to say Skaven - I love their fluff, rules are fine, and the idea of the verminous horde sends shivers down my side.

However, their models kill it for me - While I've bought a box of each of the new kits, it's the old stuff which I despise! Weapons teams are outdated! Rat Ogres look like Poo Ogres, the Clan Eshin stuff is OLD, even the Plague Monks look dated compared to the new clan rats, and plague monks, you get on the furnace kit.

So Skaven it is for me!

Sifal
01-05-2010, 16:06
Cetain elements of the empire army like bloody steam powered horses and pigeon bombs are too far-fetched even for the warhammer world.

I can't collect warriors of chaos but they all look the same. in fluff terms each warrior is supposed to be unique, bestowed with different gifts, armour etc. in model terms they are all identical, taking the same forward step, leaning at the same angle etc. The only way i could WoC would be maurauders with the characters being the only 'warriors of chaos' with chaos armour etc becasue they are supposed to be rare.

snowywlf
01-05-2010, 16:14
For me it is High Elves. I like how they play and their versatility. But I really cant stand their models. Those ridiculous faces and oven-mitt hands? Ug. I considered making an army called Faceless, and greenstuffing their helms to cover their faces. Still stuck with the gianormous hands though.




Lizardmen for me. I love the models, the lore, and the way the army functions, but I could just never figure out how to paint the saurus warriors. I even bought, built, and painted the entire battalion box and krog-Gar. I repainted the saurus like 20 times before finally giving up and just giving the whole box away. Eventually I will probably retry now that I'm a better painter, but it will be a few years from now because of other armies I have to paint.

I know *exactly* what you mean. Since I started playing Lizardmen, it has taken me 9 months to even paint the first figure to satisfaction. I've tried out maybe a dozen test Saurus with various colors and not been happy with one. However, I finally found a combo that I like. It's a red very similar to :mad:, and then I mix white for highlights and black for the darker areas (like the scales, they end up more blood-red). Ivory bone spikes and teeth, and then the jewelry is all metallic black. Very striking combo and I'm finally ready to paint my army. The lizardman models are really fantastic (especially temple guard, wow) so keep trying!

Vulcan7200
01-05-2010, 16:44
For me, it's Dwarves. I love their Lore. I love how they play. I really want to play them. But Hammerers and Ironbreakers being made out of metal completely turned me off of them. Models that you generally need to field in larger units, should not be $25 for just 5 models.

it's coming this way!
01-05-2010, 16:57
I'd start an oldschool Tzeentch Daemon army this second if I didn't feel like I'd get jeered off every table for my army choice. I mean, I don't like playing daemons either, it's just a shame they're so overpowered. I think I just have a fear of playing a really competitive army.

I really like the idea of Warriors of Chaos, but I feel like the list makes them sort of boring... which is totally illogical. I guess I just feel like they're missing something? (SoC Flayerkin or something)

dragonlancr
01-05-2010, 18:01
Skaven. Awesome models, awesome fluff, awesome playstyle.

But...

Where the hell would I store all 380 minis? It would take me an hour to set them all up before a game. Not to mention how long it would take to put them away. Not for me.

I would collect Skaven if it didn't require so many models.

TheDarkDuke
01-05-2010, 18:03
Armies you like, but dont collect due to a stupid rule? or other reason

For me its WoC, love the idea of having a full mounted army, like the minis, but, cant bring myself to collecting them due to that rule where you have to challenge..... i know i could go wizards, but, i much prefer combat lords..... they are alot more fun :)

If they didnt have that rule, i would have a full mounted WoC in no time

Any others?



Well im with you on this , although im more of regular warriors over mounted. that and i want my old semi crappy super expensive tzeentch warrior mages back.

Raulengrin
01-05-2010, 18:12
Dragonlancr and Jind_Singh summer it up pretty well for me: Skaven because the old models are, in my opinion, hideous. And the fact that I have enough trouble transporting my Dark Elf army with half as many models (if not less) than a Skaven army would have...

But the new models are almost cool enough for me to just say screw it and buy an entire army. The Doomwheel just makes me drool every time I see it, and let's not get started with the screaming bell...

LeSquide
01-05-2010, 18:13
I really like the Warriors of Chaos minis; I know that the basic warrior choices are pretty poor due to being footsloggers when there are cheap cav available as core choices, but I'd play them anyway...

If it wasn't for the fact that they're all posed the same. They're plastic models, darn it! Why can't they be as potentially varied as Free Company, or at least Empire State troops?

Zinch
01-05-2010, 18:15
For me, it's Dwarves. I love their Lore. I love how they play. I really want to play them. But Hammerers and Ironbreakers being made out of metal completely turned me off of them. Models that you generally need to field in larger units, should not be $25 for just 5 models.

Don't complain, I've been collecting Dwarf since 5th edition, when didn't exist miniatures for quarrelers and thunderers in GW... I have 20 hammerers, 20 slayers, 20 rangers of bugman and 15 miners in metal... I just LOVE dwarfs ;)

For me is Daemons. Like my nickname shows, I like a lot the fluff of Tzeentch and the miniatures of its daemons, but I can't collect an army to feel like I'm cheating when playing. Also, there's enough metal in my armies for now...;)

ClockworkCorsair
01-05-2010, 18:24
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Ogres yet. I love the models and the theme and the potential for converting is almost limitless but the rules kill it for me. If I'm going t invest I want an army that I can work with (normally going for the underdogs I'm determined not to any more)

Rogue
01-05-2010, 18:31
Well I would say that the the only army that I do tend to like but I am having trouble justifying playing it is VC. Mainly because they nerfed Necromancers in this edition and centered it around Vampires that can now take a hodge podge of abilities that only was allowed if you had the bloodline. In addition to that, I think that the Characters look like crap now compared to when VC had the bloodlines. The rest of the new models are definately very cool looking. I was going to field this army before this happened, now it is at the end of the list for me to collect. I may get to it, but I dont see myself fielding them until 9th edition perhaps given my other projects that I want to do ahead of them. I would rather do a few WAB armies before I start up on these guys.

Carraway Effect
01-05-2010, 19:53
It would take me an hour to set them all up before a game. Not to mention how long it would take to put them away. Not for me.

I would collect Skaven if it didn't require so many models.

Well, if set-up time is the big issue, you could always try magnetized movement trays. You can either make your own out of Rare Earth magnets and thin metal sheets, or purchase premade ones from GF9.

Alternately, a Dark Elf player at my local based his infantry blocks on cavalry bases, so he can take them away two at a time (plus a few standard-size bases to "make change"). That might help a little, at least.

Plus, if you run an army heavy on Bells/Furnaces/Doomwheels/Hellpits, you can get down to a more reasonable model count.

Lordsaradain
01-05-2010, 20:36
I think dwarves are pretty cool from a fluff perspective, but I dont like how the army is played. For me M3 is unacceptable, as I love getting the charge myself.

blackcherry
01-05-2010, 20:43
For me its Tomb Kings. I love the idea of lots of chariots and the Egyptian theme of the army but cant do skelies!

edit: oops, just re read the op and realized you wanted a rules reason.

Just an idea, but why not use a counts as army composed of desert raiders or the like? Or have Egyptian models (using another ranges minatures of course). They don't rely on magic as much as VC, so just think about the rules in a different light.

They are a highly disciplined force but with very poor morale (explains the crumbling). The raising can literally be imagined as the will of the leaders of the army (so liche priests/tomb kings) forcing them to hold their ground and return to formation.

Perhaps its a bit of a leap , but if I don't like a certain part of the force but love most of it, using count as armies have always helped. Its worked for me in the past.

_Ashdil_
01-05-2010, 20:52
Bretts, not for the rules or how the models look. But for how long it would take to paint 2k+ points. I tried with the battalion once. But the KotR took ages, still they looked wonderful. So sold it all.

ftayl5
02-05-2010, 04:58
Strangely enough, my DoW list (from Chronicles 2004) has a very prominent "Official Rules" stamp on the first page.

So does mine, but I still cant use it in tourneys and it still isn't very competetive, and the only core infantry is pikemen which are great, but I want an offensive DoW army!


For me its Tomb Kings. I love the idea of lots of chariots and the Egyptian theme of the army but cant do skelies!

In 2000pts (or more(if you take a king)) an all chariot army is legal and possible, quite effective too, one of the more popular Tomb Kings army builds. At <2000pts, chariots are special choices, so it doesnt work :(