PDA

View Full Version : are IG a better training army?



carldooley
25-05-2011, 01:11
The owner of my local FLGS has asked me to teach kids how to play various games (but I'm asking about 40k) and I was wondering if IG might be a better starting army than SM. I have plenty of SM, but my thinking was that if you start off on the 'weaklings' of the universe, you will have a better appreciation for the improved characteristics that you will be paying for later on when you start the 'tougher' races. Putting an Infantry squad against a lone biker to sort of hammer the point home, for an example.

noobzor
25-05-2011, 01:19
Guard probably costs significantly more money to make a viable force with, which may be an important factor to consider.

carldooley
25-05-2011, 01:24
Guard probably costs significantly more money to make a viable force with, which may be an important factor to consider.

I'd be using my own models to teach the game. I have SM, GK, IG, some Nids, and some CSM from when I engaged in 'flavor of the month' SM.

The Marshel
25-05-2011, 01:31
it'd be an interesting way to be introduced into 40k. do you have access to orks? small scale ork/guard battles would be a very nice way to get into 40k i reckon

agurus1
25-05-2011, 03:26
I started with SM (Blood Angels to be more specific) and I found that a much more forgiving platform to learn the game on. Also you are able to discover the weaknesses of other races and therefore plan for when you move on to another.

When I finally moved on to Guard, I appreciated all of their abilities so much more because of my time with the Space Marines.

totgeboren
25-05-2011, 06:50
To be honest, I think SM are a better starting point. Often when I play my Traitor Guards, I get frustrated with their inability to make proper assaults, like when you really need to shift something from an objective and things like that.

SM (or in my case CSM) allow me as a player to make full use of all three phases of a turn, whilst with my IG I focus heavily on the shooting, often hoping my guys get killed in the assault (so I can shoot), and for the movement to matter much, I really need Chimeras, since IG in the open are so incredibly easy to kill.

SM give a better over all tool for showing of all the parts of the game in a more even handed way.

Scythe
25-05-2011, 07:15
Guard will probably give a new player a quite different introduction game. It will highlight game mechanics like cover saves and morale a lot more. Marines, being more forgiving and better in combat, shift that focus more to direct movement and close combat. You can say something for both sides I guess. I would leave the more tricky elements of the guard (orders system) out though. Ork Boyz (shootas) might also not be bad for an introduction game.

Castigator
25-05-2011, 07:17
I do not think Guard make a good start:

- too many minis (point for point). Start with less.
- not Sci-fi/40K enough. Rambo showcases the universe badly.
- not diverse enough in playstyle (SM make better use of all phases, less pigeon-holed to specific strategies).
- too many dice, not enough movement. IG can be rather static. The fun (for most) in 40K is pushing minis around, not rolling dice.

Axeman1n
25-05-2011, 08:08
I started with tanks, with a few IG to round it out. I found the stand and shoot elements to be a lot easier to learn than the subtle movement strategies needed to play other armies. The only thing is SM give you a lot of fudge factor. You can make a lot of mistakes and still win with them. I've found you get a lot more players comeing back when then win.

orkmiester
25-05-2011, 09:33
@Axeman1n


The only thing is SM give you a lot of fudge factor. You can make a lot of mistakes and still win with them. I've found you get a lot more players comeing back when then win.


quite true... BUT when they get out into the 'real' wargaming world they may find themselves being battered by 'weakling' humans who have access to plenty of weapons that make marines squeal. So start them off with BOTH then you can (as the points rise) point out the differences between the two and possibly show them that marines are not the 'best boys':p.

of course 'ahem' that wouldn't stop a newbie being disheartened when his prize marines get blasted to pieces by guard:shifty:

orks are a good one as well- just try to avoid nobz bikers please:D we don't want marines getting splatted again now do we?

just start them off with a variety- folks will soon find what they like...

carldooley
25-05-2011, 09:37
then perhaps 2 introduction armies, one SM and one IG? and allow choice?

Castigator
25-05-2011, 09:42
then perhaps 2 introduction armies, one SM and one IG? and allow choice?

A choice of two is always great. But I wouldn't use 2 Imperial. Why not Space Marines and Orks? Has the advantage of being able to refer to AoBR right away too!

Shamana
25-05-2011, 11:18
Space marines and orks sound better imo. Orks have a lot of models (quite entertaining, too, which may appeal to kids), have particularities with movement, shooting and melee, and are fairly accessible due to the AoBR. That way you can help kids learn about universal rules such as Furious charge, the intricacies of closed- and open-topped vehicles, jetbikes, and even quantity vs quality of attacks - I was quite surprised how effective BS 2 shooting could be, I can tell you that :) . Plus, you can teach kids how to go "WAAAAAAAGH!" and not get shouted at... too much :D.

Okuto
25-05-2011, 14:13
marines and nids or marines vs orkz tend to be better off.

I run intro games with the above....last time I tried a IG vs chaos which turned out ok but the fact that you need so many models to start IG destroyed all the zeal

GrogDaTyrant
25-05-2011, 14:36
Some time ago during late 3rd edition, the LGS I used to work at changed up it's intro-table to Eldar vs IG. The result was actually quite interesting. The entirety of the rule set could be taught to players regardless of which side they picked. No one was Fearless, or had 'super-fearless', and the point cost of each unit allowed for a wider range of unit types to be introduced to the new players. It worked amazingly well.

Probably the biggest surprise to us, was the sharp increase in sales for those 2 specific armies. Much of the newcomers were no longer starting off on Space Marines, but were opting for either IG or Eldar as their first army (with neither being 'more popular').

We varied it up a few times, trying such combinations as Orks vs Nids, or even Eldar vs Dark Eldar. Each time the results were pretty much the same. The store ended up with a pretty diverse mix of players. Eventually a higher up from HQ came through on a regional visit and dictated that the intro table must match the starter-set exactly. And that ended our little experiment.

Lionsbane
25-05-2011, 15:18
The owner of my local FLGS has asked me to teach kids how to play various games (but I'm asking about 40k) and I was wondering if IG might be a better starting army than SM. I have plenty of SM, but my thinking was that if you start off on the 'weaklings' of the universe, you will have a better appreciation for the improved characteristics that you will be paying for later on when you start the 'tougher' races. Putting an Infantry squad against a lone biker to sort of hammer the point home, for an example.

They will not have any appreciation for improved characteristics if they never return. I see your point, however teaching a new game is as much about getting them to enjoy the game as it is learning the rules. Hammering any point home is not exactly the attitude you should be going for. You are pushing an agenda here that has nothing to do with getting new people into the hobby.



Some time ago during late 3rd edition, the LGS I used to work at changed up it's intro-table to Eldar vs IG. The result was actually quite interesting. The entirety of the rule set could be taught to players regardless of which side they picked. No one was Fearless, or had 'super-fearless', and the point cost of each unit allowed for a wider range of unit types to be introduced to the new players. It worked amazingly well.

This is a ton better. Both sides get to murder each other pretty well. No points to be hammered home. I'm not saying coddle new people. I am however saying first and foremost make it something they will enjoy doing.
Space Marines are used quite often because even when they lose they kill more of the enemy. That and they are the Iconic part of 40k that sets it apart from the 400 other sci fi games.

Remember any time you introduce someone to any new game the most important part is to get them to enjoy the game itself so they will want to play again.

Scythe
26-05-2011, 05:30
Some time ago during late 3rd edition, the LGS I used to work at changed up it's intro-table to Eldar vs IG. The result was actually quite interesting. The entirety of the rule set could be taught to players regardless of which side they picked. No one was Fearless, or had 'super-fearless', and the point cost of each unit allowed for a wider range of unit types to be introduced to the new players. It worked amazingly well.

Probably the biggest surprise to us, was the sharp increase in sales for those 2 specific armies. Much of the newcomers were no longer starting off on Space Marines, but were opting for either IG or Eldar as their first army (with neither being 'more popular').

We varied it up a few times, trying such combinations as Orks vs Nids, or even Eldar vs Dark Eldar. Each time the results were pretty much the same. The store ended up with a pretty diverse mix of players. Eventually a higher up from HQ came through on a regional visit and dictated that the intro table must match the starter-set exactly. And that ended our little experiment.

Sounds like a very good setup. Shame GW ended such an initiative to get a more even spread of armies on the table. I think the 40k setting has a lot more to offer than just space marines, and they should take such opportunities to highlight this.

But then, it is hard to break the marine circle I guess.

Charistoph
26-05-2011, 06:21
Why not have a choice of options for the newbies, and then pick an appropriate opposite. As you play, point out the advantages.

Aside from the point discrepancy and the mucked up FOC, Black Reach is a good starting point, and it shouldn't be too hard to set up an equivalent setup of your other armies for a quick intro match or two.

If the kids use SM (most will), then use IG or 'Nids for the first round. Second round, have them play against Chaos. Then a third round against Grey Knights.

If the kids use 'Nids first, then use your IG against them, then upgrade to SM, then GK. Let them feel the increase of difficulty in defeating the tougher, but numerically smaller, enemy.