PDA

View Full Version : Toppan's Which Army? Thread, Fantasy Style!



Toppan
13-08-2006, 21:54
So, ive been playing 40k for a couple years now, and im mostly finished with my feral orks. Ive decided to start fantasy because
1. i <3 fantasy novels...movies...games...etc...all of it!
2. i dont feel like starting another 40k army...sci fi and guns are really not "my thing" so to speak
3. the release of 7th addition will spurt a wave of players, so i can participate in any new events!

now, ive done this a billion times, the whole, which army? thing. im not tired of it because it helps.

the problem is, ive never played fantasy per se, ive experimented, and ive never read the rules...so i guess you could say im a purebred newbie. which is good.

so lets get down to the nitty gritty already.

which army?

first post, ill tell you what ive played before and what im looking for in an army tactically wise. then ill cross reference what you say with my own opinions model wise and fluff wise and see if i can make a decision.

i played feral orks in 40k, basically a swarm of models adept at shooting and close combat with absolutely no defense whatsoever. i had a chunky (pointwise) unit of boars that i had for my HQ. they were either something that died really fast and easy or something that won the game for me.

basically, expendable but effective troops as a distraction for the upcoming sledgehammer.

now, in fantasy i dont want something that is close enough to this to where i can figure out what im doing straight off. i want something completely different from this style of fodder+uber unit, maybe a sort of balance.

also, ive always been more of a combat person more than a ranged one...not sure why, must be the ork in me, but i can tell you i really like the misfire stuff and scatter rolls. templates=yay

so, this is where you come in warseer, tell me what you think and ill get back to you with what i think. i know i should look into models aesthetic values first and go from there, but im deviating from that, and looking at the tactics first. i guess i could lay out what armies i am absolutely not playing right here as well.

NOT hordes of chaos, NOT bretonnians, NOT skaven, NOT dwarves, NOT any type of elf.

there you go, now...help me out please :)

cliffs
1. starting fantasy because of 7th and i like it
2. want a different style army than my feral orks in 40k
3. dont want useless meatshield units while i have one uber one
4. tactics first
5. no hordes of chaos, no bretonnians, no skaven, no dwarves, no elves

Mephistofeles
13-08-2006, 22:39
Well, it's a bit hard if you don't want any meatshields, since there are a lot of armies which are about that. Well, maybe:

Lizardmen: You can play 'em almost completely Close Combat, or if you want to play it more fantasy style, you can do it Close Combat/Magic, which would work nice.

Ogre Kingdoms: Big creatures who smash stuff. If you don't want to, don't bring the meatshields to battle. It might work, but maybe a bit boring in the long run.

Highborn
13-08-2006, 23:34
TK might be interesting, with the screaming skull catapults so you can play with your artillery. Every army can go the meatshield/uber-killy-unit-of-death approach, it's just a matter of whether you do or not.

Toppan
13-08-2006, 23:42
oh..well in that case i suppose i dont want an uber useless unit that just uses up points. maybe a meatshield unit with a little oomph or ranged attack

like i said, i dont really know much about them, but i dont want to play a copy of my orks over again...

ok well...i do like it when my hero/HQ rushes up there and i see fear clearly in my opponent's face, so strong hero/lord would be a definite plus for me. i do like magic per se...but im still oblivious about it.

oh, and one of my best friends plays lizards...so ill add them to the list above.

that leaves:
beastmen
tomb kings
vampire counts
empire
orcs/gobbos
ogres


BUT, i want to have all the armies open to me before i start canceling them out. its unfair to myself if im oblivious to what im picking out in the first place

SO, go ahead and just tell me what armies are good at what...maybe i can decide from there

EDIT

i just finished reading a bit and well...hmmm

what ive decided, is that i dont know enough about the game to entirely say whether i like magic, combat or ranged the most, but i know i like combat a lot. i also have another piece of criteria. i want to be able to convert the models. that means i want plastic models mostly.

painting wise, i dont care really. painting isnt my forte, but i can make it work
fluffwise, i dont especially like the "evil" races, like dark elves and vampires, but the neutrally evil ones like ogres and tomb kings i can respect. i dont like the pure good guys at all, ie...bretonnians..., too much hate for the 40k imperium getting to me i suppose.

EDIT AGAIN

i noticed i dont really like horses. cavalry bases bug me a bit...theyre ponderous and hard to move around, but then again, ive never used the little movement tray dealies. im more of a footslogger man i suppose.

Mephistofeles
13-08-2006, 23:57
Empire is cool if you play it in your own way. You can have magic, artillery, a whole wunch of large regiments or a small bunch of knights if you want to.

Orcs and Gobbos are prone to going meatshieldish, but you can always not do that.

Toppan
14-08-2006, 00:15
that really isnt helping too much...i know what models they can use...and its obvious orcs will go meatshieldy...

what i really want to know right now is the general overview of which army is good at what. like...empire is good at artillery apparently, and i like that, so thats a + for them

and orcs are meatshieldy, so thats a -...but you said you can always not do that...and now im confused

EDIT

also, i dont want an easy army. if an army is easy, i wont do well with it. my feral orks are severely underpowered, but when i play and win with them, it makes it a ton better. therefore, i want an army that is either hard to master or loses in a fun way

DeathMasterSnikch
14-08-2006, 00:42
Orcs - can do anything :p
Empire - are boring.
Lizardmen - have very few weaknesses and excel in CC
Vampire counts - (surprise surprise) use psychology to win and (surprise again) arn't known for their ranged powah!
Tomb Kings - I have no experience with them at all.

StormCrow
14-08-2006, 00:57
TK's bring in some interesting tactics in that there are quite a few variables on the list that keep it interesting. Oddly enough, the way you described your orks is also how the TK's play in some respects....they have meatshields, reliable shooting (5+ to hit on ANYTHING), and sledgehammer units (chariots, ushabti, scorpions, giants). Their fluff doesnt describe them as evil per se, but a bit old fashioned in the way they do things....all they want is their empire back, is that too much to ask?

You said you didnt want an easy army, and TK's are by no means easy. Getting spells off at the right time and not being overzealous are key to strategy i've found, as TK's require a fair amount of good timing to make sure they break the enemy quickly so they can move on. Unfortunately unlike their vampire cousins, they cant rely on raising fresh units, what you get at the start is all you have. However the TK's have a myriad of special rules and magic items that make them unpredictable to the enemy, and with all the psych tests they can force, it can be entertaining to say the least...just ask the dwarf player whos 500 warrior unit ran in the first turn.

Another prerequisite of the TK's is that you take care of your characters....a lot of your army's effectiveness relies on them. Basically if you lose the heirophant, you lose your core choices. You lose kings and princes, you lose a fair portion of your sledgehammer force. You lose your mages, you lose your tactical advantages in magic shooting, charging etc.

And until you get into special and rare choices, the painting can be a bit boring. But on the plus side the TK cavalry sucks so you won't have to worry about those annoying cavalry bases! We use chariots instead, bigger bases, and a lot more pain for enemies.

Toppan
14-08-2006, 01:38
wow...5+ is good in fantasy? my orks hit on 4+...huh...

well i might as well put up what army's models i like the most just to get some reactions. then ill put up what i like about the other armies or something of that sort

ogres: hard hitters, big and strong, love most of the models, mindset fits mine very well...big brutish but cunning in their own way. plus, im about to buy some gnoblars as gretchin for my orks and i already have the army book for some reason

empire: experimented with them a bit, looked through their models and i dont really like the tons of core/troop choices, other than that, im fine with them. humans struggling to survive works for me.

vampire counts: hmmm, the vampire thing is a bit cliche, but i like most of the models. i also like how they can raise dead, which is pretty cool. and i could name the skellies and convert them pretty well with a lot of bits.

tomb kings: love the models, love the blue and gold (my favorite 2 colors), unsure on the egyptian theme, and unsure on the special/rare choices altogether, but the ushabti is pretty cool.

beastmen: the models are very familiar to me, and i think i could convert them a bit. i dont like the whole "chaos" thing, but if i had to mark them, id do tzeentch, just because. i like all their choices of units, all of them.

bretonnians: hate the whole mightier then thou attitude, not one for the fluff...hate cavalry bases...dont like having such great armor on every unit...theyd be like playing the space marines of 40k all over again.

chaos: not going to play them because my friend is going to, they dont appeal to me too much, and well...meh

lizardmen: one of my old friends play them, so im hesitant on to play them or not. they seem to have a lot of small models, but if i can get over the fact theyre practically using sharp bits of wood as swords, just painted nicely, i suppose i could like the models. otherwise...meh again

skaven: one of my opponents at the store, a regular, plays skaven, dont know why that bothers me. anyway, i like about half of the models, but the fact theyre swarmy like my orks is a downside. if i were to play them however, i wouldnt regret it in the long run because i love rodents :)

dwarves: i like the tiny stunties, but far too many people play them and i hear theyre plain cheesy. besides that, i dont like how theyre overly bearded and small. i do like their fluff though, and they just got an update didnt they?

high elves and wood elves: hate em, dang pansies

orcs: im familiar with the orcs and actually own some of the models. im trying to lean away from another orc army, but then again i could play them if i want. but like i said, ive played 40k orks, and this is pretty much the same thing.

dark elves: i dont know, theyre still elves, but i love the models. spiky bits on everyone! plus their armor and weapons look awesome...tons of them have cloaks which are awesome...and well...i dont exactly like the whole torture and kill fluff style.

Twisted Ferret
14-08-2006, 02:43
Well, let's look at your list:

beastmen
tomb kings
vampire counts
empire
orcs/gobbos
ogres

No evil, no good:

tomb kings
orcs/gobbos
ogres

Not too similiar to your 40K army:

tomb kings
ogres

Of the two, I'd probably pick Tomb Kings as they've got a lot of CC units, neat artillery, and are tactically very different from every other army out there. One of my favorite armies, actually; unique, and can be really effective. Challenging but rewarding.


Edit: Just looked at your post right above mine. It sounds like you're leaning toward these two armies more than any others anyway. In fact, from your brief paragraphs, it looks like your favorite might be Ogres - you just don't know it yet! :p No negatives listed for them, whereas every other army has at least two... and they're the first in the list. Unconscious preference?! Well, either way, I don't really know much about them... so I can't really compare and contrast them with TK.

Toppan
14-08-2006, 03:02
ha...well its just i dont really know otherwise whats wrong with them. here you go

ogres: if i dont get the charge, im screwed and if i dont have enough ogres, im screwed. so apparently theyll be expensive modelwise (and pointwise)

if i was to make a list like yours, itd be like this

choices:
ogres
dark elves
TK
empire
vampire counts
orcs/gobbos
beastmen

i dont care about the evil/good thing, as i can always say my army is different :P

ones with more negatives than positives
orcs
empire
vampire counts

that leaves
TK
ogres
dark elves
beastmen

BUT, i do like vampire counts a bit fluff and model wise, and i dislike elves immensely fluffwise, so maybe they should be up there?

so how about we go from there?

gorenut
14-08-2006, 06:14
The problem with Vampire Counts.. for the most part, they win exactly how you said you don't want to play. They have all these meatshield type units that wrack up on outnumbering and combat resolution, then you have your "uber" unit or unit being the cargo delivery for your vampire to break the enemy. For the most part, Vampire infantry are useless at actually killing things. They hold the enemies up, outnumber, and then your hammer breaks them and make them lose and run due to your units causing fear. They are also argueably one of the easier armies to play because everything is so reliable, you don't have to worry about psychology (which is a HUGE advantage), and your characters are extremely strong.

From the get-go, it sounds like Ogres might fit your bill. You don't want too many meatshields and you can run Ogres without em. As tough as they are, they are actually a challenging army to play. You will feel each casualty. Their characters are also up there as something most generals will definiitely fear. If you like combat, they are one of the armies that actually win by killing more than racking up on combat resolution (can't get more combat oriented than that). You said you already like the models, so I say go for it. They are definitely a unique army.

Barring that, you might also consider Dogs of War if you aren't big on tournament play and actually have good gamers around. They are a great list, but I'm just warning you ahead of time because they aren't a totally official army list with a book. If you like conversions, you can basically have anything in that army. They have slowly become my primary army and I have lots of fun with them. I have dwarfs, Ogres, "civilized" soldiers, feral norsemen.. it's a site to behold. However, their characters are kinda lacking, so that might detour you.

Highborn
14-08-2006, 07:21
Ogres should actually be reasonably cheap modelwise, because they're so expensive pointwise. Definitely better than the likes of skaven, where a regiment box could get you as low as 40 points worth of troops.

If you don't like the fluff, don't play them.

If you love the fluff, then definitely consider it. Ultimately though, you want a mixture of fluff and play style.

Toppan
14-08-2006, 08:06
well, thanks for the help and everything. i cant see myself playing a semi swarmy army like TK, with all those skeleton warriors...and beastmen are the same thing, but i still like them a lot...DoW maybe hehe

also, i was looking at the ogres and...theyre all plastic mostly...which is TOTALLY FREAKING AWESOME

i hate metal models really, and will maybe just buy a bull sprue and convert a model for my bruiser :)

thanks for all the help, it really does seem like this was a useless thread, and i always do this...maybe they should take away my which army thread posting permission haha...

Tyrant name...clan name...paint scheme...theme...so much to do!

thanks everyone!