PDA

View Full Version : The straight up review on current Armies



Warp Zero
19-12-2006, 09:47
Hello, I've only been playing 40k for quite a while now. I've recently purchased the latest edition of Warhammer Fantasy. I did this because, I've always wondered if it would be a fun thing to branch out into. Bought the book, I've taken one pass at reading the rules. So far, I think I'd like to give it a try.

Here's the thing. Long ago, I asked those of you here on the fantasy forums what you thought of each army. But that was a while ago. Now, we have new Orcs, new Empire, and a new edition of the game.

I don't know what Fantasy is like, but with 40k ...it seemed that some armies (mostly those that had their Codex done recently) seemed better balanced over others that were too difficult or still needed updating.

Basically, which armies in Fantasy are fun to use while at the same time reliably balanced without having to resort to "cheese". If you could please, give me a brief run down on each army. Pros, Cons, etc. That would be fantastic.

Right now, all I have to go on are looks. Just on "looks" I like Vampire Counts, Dark Eldar, Orcs, and Brettonians.

THanks for any help you can provide.:D

DeathlessDraich
19-12-2006, 10:41
Of the recent releases, I can't think of any Dwarves and O&G armies that are objectionable. However O&G could be strengthened slightly.
Wood Elves are proven to be too strong in some ways and the new Empire certainly looks like a definite improvement.

Baindread
19-12-2006, 10:44
I'll take this alphabetically:

Beasts Of Chaos: They got their own book but this one and Hordes Of Chaos is really one big book where you can pick out anything you want from either one. This gives Chaos the biggest versatility in the game, which makes them one of the strongest given that they have a unit for every occasion, so to speak. They generally tend to do well in tournaments and are generally viewed as one of the strongest books in the game.

Bretonnia: Lots of cavalry. Basic strategies. Easy to use. Easy to win. Enough said.

Dark Elves: The second or third weakest book as of now. Only HE and OK are weaker and HE only because Dark Elves got a small rules update a year back. Lots of movement but they lack heavy hitters and are very, very frail for their points cost.

Dwarfs: Got an update at the beginning of this year. Nothing too revolutionary but it brought them on par with many of the other books. Still pretty static though.

Empire: Getting an update soon, hard to say how that will pan out.

High Elves: The second weakest army in the game. They will get an update soon though, which hopefully will make them competitive.

Hordes Of Chaos: Read Beasts Of Chaos.

Lizardmen: A balanced army. A lack of units and items leading to limited variation when playing them. Does well in tournies and make use of multiple strategies.

Ogre Kingdoms: The weakest book in the game. The ogres are do-or-die in close combat, most often dieing. Cavalry are their bane and are also limited by few unit choices.

O&G: Recently got an update which worked wonders. The army is now ORCS&GOBLINS instead of "LOTS OF GOBLINS". Better balanced versus the other books as well with lots of interesting item combinations and strategies.

Skaven: Like before. Strong shooting and magic. Somewhat diminished in power due others being able to single out the Ratling guns but still pretty strong list.

Tomb Kings: Fairly balanced. They are static and like a weaker brother of the Vampire Counts.

Vampire Counts: Still strong and among the best books. The age of the models though are really starting to shine through.

Wood Elves: After their new book, the WE are among the best armies in the game. Good shooting, excellent close combat, lots of good skirmishers and monsters.

Dspankdo
19-12-2006, 11:43
As has been said, Brettonia are a very strong army and easy to use, for someone just getting into fantasy they would probably be the best choice, just going off how simple they are to use. There are also very few armies that will excell against them, it's pretty much just the dwarf and empire gunlines and skaven SAD(Skyre army of doom/death).

Mephistofeles
19-12-2006, 12:01
If you want just a really basic rundown of what units the different armies are good with, I'll try:

Beasts of Chaos/Hordes of Chaos: Good knights, hard elite infantry. Can have really good magic, and many strong monsters.

Brettonia: Awesome cavalry.

Dark Elves: Access to a lot of monsters, and really good infantry and cavalry. Everything is extremely expensive points wise though, and they have nothing really cheap and disposable.

Dwarfs: Good Infantry, no cavalry. Nice warmachines and shooters.

Empire: Good overall. Good cavalry, infantry, shooters and war machines, but not specialised in either.

High Elves: Good magic and cavalry.

Lizardmen: Good magic and infantry.

Ogre Kingdoms: Really scary close combat units, and some good shooters. Often find themselves severely outnumbered though.

Orcs and Goblins: Orcs are strong in CC, Goblins damn sneaky with different tricks. Can have good magic. Usually a horde army.

Skaven: Can have insane magic. A true Horde army. Can have lots of scary shooting.

Tomb Kings: Not so strong on the magic department. Some good monsters, and acceptable shooting.

Vampire Counts. Good Magic, good characters. A horde army.

Wood Elves: Good CC and good shooting.

- Human
19-12-2006, 15:34
@ Dspankdo:

Just because he's starting Fantasy doesn't mean he should start with the easiest army. It doesn't take long to get used to the other armies, which may be more rewarding to play.

szlachcic
19-12-2006, 16:01
@ Dspankdo:

Just because he's starting Fantasy doesn't mean he should start with the easiest army. It doesn't take long to get used to the other armies, which may be more rewarding to play.

Exactly, I tried using a Bretonnian army once (bought the army box and everything when they came out in 6th) and found them to be one of the most boring armies to play with. Then again, I was used to my Dark Elves and the whole charge into anything you see with a bunch of knights tactic was no fun. Then again, the Brets do have some interesting options if you go the themed route since they do have some lovely models.

If I was to give some advice I would just say decide by looking at the models/artwork for all of the armies and pick the one that strikes you the most. I did this for both 40k and Fantasy. When I was starting 40k I had no idea how to play and what was good, but the Eldar appealed to me the most. This was right before 3rd edition so when I saw the Dark Eldar I was set since I tend to prefer evil armies. This carried over into fantasy when I started and I chose the Dark Elves. Good luck with picking your army.

Selsaral
19-12-2006, 17:00
I only know a few armies, but I know them fairly well so I will just comment on those:

Chaos: IMHO, beasts eclipse mortals. They are faster, more manueverable, cheaper, and have tons of nasty options and special rules. They have great miniatures too. They can also call upon the bruteforce of mortals when required. They are extremely capable of winning against any army, and are great fun to play. Reasonably susceptible to accusations of cheese (which I don't really care about).

High elves: They are just about to be refreshed, but they don't need a whole lot. I practically broke down into tears the first time I faced Vaul's Unmaking and the Ring of Corin. Their magic items are really spectacular, and the army can field good shooters, fighters, and casters. Not too many cries of cheese as far as I can tell.

Skaven: Another devastating army but one with a large list of unusual advantages and disadvantages. They had several features nerfed in 7th ed (ratling guns and swarms among others) but still appear plenty strong. They are frustrating to face because even if you win melee battles, you are still losing strategically (because the skaven have a million more melee units where that came from, and they will happily get you overrunning away from the battle). In fact, you can win several huge melee battles every single turn and still easily lose battles against them. So bruteforce melee ability doesn't necessarily lead to victory. Watch out for devastating shooting and spells as you overrun through their units. Extremely susceptible to cries of cheese. Personally, I greatly enjoy the challenge of overcoming such an unusual army, but not everyone sees it that way.

Lizardmen: Diverse and strong. Expect to see outrageous numbers of salamanders and be prepared to cry everytime they fire at you. These guys can handle any opponent. Only salamanders and skink armies generate cheese whining really.

Wood elves: Recently refreshed and gives insight into the direction of the new armies. Overall strong but it's easy to lose with them, you really need to make correct decisions with them. Their shooting is actually fairly weak as far as I can tell, depending on your terrain (a field with lots of forests and no hills will present almost no LOS for glade guard, and scouts are too expensive to be fielded in great enough numbers). With hills their shooting can be great however, so be prepared for many long terrain-generation discussions with your opponents. But they have great melee troops and appear to enjoy a balance of shooting, magic, and fighting in each battle. Really fantastic miniatures IMHO. Not too many cheese complaints as far as I can tell, just a general grudging respect for their formidable abilities.

javaguru
19-12-2006, 17:50
Hello, I've only been playing 40k for quite a while now. I've recently purchased the latest edition of Warhammer Fantasy. I did this because, I've always wondered if it would be a fun thing to branch out into. Bought the book, I've taken one pass at reading the rules. So far, I think I'd like to give it a try.

Here's the thing. Long ago, I asked those of you here on the fantasy forums what you thought of each army. But that was a while ago. Now, we have new Orcs, new Empire, and a new edition of the game.

I don't know what Fantasy is like, but with 40k ...it seemed that some armies (mostly those that had their Codex done recently) seemed better balanced over others that were too difficult or still needed updating.

Basically, which armies in Fantasy are fun to use while at the same time reliably balanced without having to resort to "cheese". If you could please, give me a brief run down on each army. Pros, Cons, etc. That would be fantastic.

Right now, all I have to go on are looks. Just on "looks" I like Vampire Counts, Dark Eldar, Orcs, and Brettonians.

THanks for any help you can provide.:D

I've been playing undead since 5th and even with an older army book they are still very solid. IMO, the army you should choose is the one taht inspires you to play and paint. I played a daemon force under HoC rules and enjoyed it. Army lists change but your love of the background will keep you playing them. I have collected countless models and can field well over 2k points with most of the WH armies but I generally play 2-3 of those 90% of the time.

Warp Zero
19-12-2006, 21:30
A big thanks to everyone who has replied so far. Your responses were great. Just the kind of info I was looking for! :D

I know that one should just pick what inspires him, but I don't want to fall into the trap I fell into with 40k. That being: picking an army (the Eldar) that didn't get a new Codex for a very long time. Which would be fine if the list was decently balanced while I was waiting....but I don't want to pick the red-headed stepchild again. If you know what I mean. I applaud GW for a fantastic relaunch of the new Codex...but if I can avoid choosing yet another army that would take me on the same path I took with Eldar....I would choose not to do it again.

Yeah, I really like the look of the Bretonnians. But I also like the look of Vampire Counts too. For whatever reason, my mind likes the image of ghosts floating around the field mixed in with rank and file skeletons. Painting wise, I would love to go to town on all the color schemes and heraldy of the Brets. I think the Dark Elves looks really slick, but it sounds too close to what I went through with my 40k Eldar.

Hmm....too bad about what I'm hearing with Ogre Kingdoms. My friend is picking them up for his Fantasy choice. Will he have a rough time ahead of him? Please tell me that there is a way to do well with them?

Anyways: for now I think Vampire Counts is in the lead followed by maybe Orcs&Goblins and Bretonnians. Although I don't like hearing that even though they look cool....they're pretty one dimensional and boring to play after a while.

Avian
19-12-2006, 22:19
Hmm....too bad about what I'm hearing with Ogre Kingdoms. My friend is picking them up for his Fantasy choice. Will he have a rough time ahead of him? Please tell me that there is a way to do well with them?
Ogres are not weak by any means. Having played them in heaps of games over the last year and a half I have lost with them exactly three times in straight up battles (as well as two times using those silly Lustria rules that benefited everyone except me).

However, they are not exactly easy to use against a competent opponent. Knights and war machines in particular can be quite difficult to handle.

My Ogre Kingdoms Tactics page (http://folk.ntnu.no/tarjeia/avian/tactics/ogre_index.php)

Murderous Monkey
19-12-2006, 23:45
Anyways: for now I think Vampire Counts is in the lead followed by maybe Orcs&Goblins and Bretonnians. Although I don't like hearing that even though they look cool....they're pretty one dimensional and boring to play after a while.

Although it is true that Bretonnians tend to have a fairly... focused list there are more options if you look for them. Brets have very cheap infantry, so you could field a peasant horde if you wanted - backed up by a Knight with the Virtue of Empathy to give you a fighting character with them. They have fast cavalry, flying cavalry and a tasty catapult. They also have stubborn Grail Pilgrims in infantry stakes. There is enough to use there if you want something a bit different, its just that the list is clearly designed to be cavalry heavy and that's effective enough that it's easy to go no further. I've not played Brets at greater than a 1000 points, but they do clearly have some options that aren't constantly used.

If you really love them you can find a way to make them your own. They might not have any elite infantry and have four choices of heavy cavalry instead, but I'm sure you can get quite a bit of variety if you're not determined to maximise efficiency. And if you are determined to do that then you'll have a single list for every army anyway, so that doesn't prove much either. (i.e. every army has a theoretical 'most effiecient build' so you'd end up with a single list with minimal tweaking whichever army you played)

On the other hand Vampire Counts are also super cool. Why not go Blood Dragon and combine the two in a frenzy of 'counts as' - recently zombified men-at-arms as your skeleton infantry, knights as Black Knights and damsels for your corrupt necromancers? There's lots of potential if you want it.

Oh, and for what it's worth none of the armies in Warhammer (in my opinion) have as many balance problems as the Eldar did. Certainly in standard friendly games you won't have to ignore half your list to have a chance of winning, some things may be more efficient but almost everything has a use in the right circumstances.

Hope you find something you like.

DarkTerror
20-12-2006, 07:34
Very good points made so far. I agree with nearly all of them.

However, I must add a couple of *'s onto the end of a couple of the reviews.

Lizardmen and Ogre Kingdoms are frowned upon by some (Ogre Kingdoms mostly). Lizardmen by some saying they fit in slightly less with a more traditional fantasy environment. Ogre Kingdoms because some think they were a poorly conceived idea.

These views should also be factored in IF you care what your friends / gaming group thinks about your army. For some, discussing your army is half the fun of the game, and they want only armies their friends want to discuss as well.

Just being honest, I haven't seen too much said about Lizardmen other than an occasional comment. However, I have witnessed Ogre Kingdoms outright boo'ed on many occasions.

Again, just *'s on the end of the reviews.

Venkh
20-12-2006, 10:42
High elves suffer very much from the "half my army list is useless" syndrome (very similar to 3rd ed Eldar).

The Elite infantry in the list is pretty pathetic for its points cost.

However, like the Eldar the useful end of the list can be very handy indeed the list having:

Excellent, cheap magic items
A devastating magic phase
Cheap core heavy cavalry
Eagles!

The debate between the relative strengths of the HE and post revision DE lists is a close call. I would say that DE are definately weaker in an "all comers" tourney environment but the army list is more balanced overall.

When playing each other i would say that Stoic (immunity to panic) is far more useful than hatred(which has some easily exploited drawbacks)

In any case i would steer clear of high or dark elves for the time being. The High Elves are about to get a new book and the Dark Elves are somewhat difficult and expensive (£$) to field.

Finnigan2004
20-12-2006, 13:48
Hey warpzero-- one other thing that might or might not factor in to your decision is that depending on how fast you want your army on the table to be fully painted, vampire counts might offer a lot quicker time frame. If you love to paint and are faster than me though, this might not be a huge deal to you. Love the avatar though-- KHAN!

Warp Zero
20-12-2006, 20:11
Hey warpzero-- one other thing that might or might not factor in to your decision is that depending on how fast you want your army on the table to be fully painted, vampire counts might offer a lot quicker time frame. If you love to paint and are faster than me though, this might not be a huge deal to you. Love the avatar though-- KHAN!

Heh heh thanks. I saw this still pic somewhere and how to use it as my Avatar. :D A timeless and awesome moment in cinematic history. As far as painting goes, I try to paint slow enough to be satisfied with my own paint job, yet fast enough so I don't have to wait a year before playing. I'm not sure what is the lowest point bracket Fantasy can be played at and be fun. Like, in 40k ... we can do 500 point games and its a decent hour or so of playing. Although it obviously shines at 1500 to 2000. I'm glancing at the rulebook and Fantasy looks like it needs at least about 1000 before its fun. Not sure though.

Venkh, thanks for that run down on High and Dark Elves. That's the kinda thing I wanna avoid. But if High Elves have an awesome relaunch when its their turn for a new Army Book, then I'll try 'em then perhaps. I'd go Wood Elves, but another friend in my club is trying them out. Same goes with Chaos. Another friend has called dibs on them. Basically, so far ....people have chosen Wood Elves, Ogre Kingdoms, and Chaos. I can basically pick anything but those. Not that its a hard and fast rule to "not pick" something already chosen within our club, but its one I kinda use when we first get into something. I only do repeats with my 2nd army. Plus there are so many fun choices, its easy to steer clear of repeats within a club.

Dark Terror, I don't worry about any perceptions others may have. I rarely run into anyone that rolls their eyes or otherwise sneers at an army choice. Plus, most of my gaming is done within our circle of friends so....we don't do judge each other in that manner. We're not gonna be negative if someone does Iron Warriors for instance....or like you said, Ogre Kingdoms or anything else that is fashionable to sneer at.

Murderous Monkey, your comments on Bretonnians has started me thinking. Yeah....if there are ways of playing them differently without "gimping" myself ... yeah...maybe they may start rising up the candidate list of armies to pick. Thankyou for your added notes.

Okay, so now I think my candidates for my first fantasy army are (in order of most likely to get bought):

1. Vampire Counts ( I like the look well enough, and I like the concept. I'm a big fan of ghosts, vampires, and wraiths. Also I hear they're not gimpy rules wise....so that's a bonus!)

2. Orcs & Goblins (there are some new models that look great ...making them attractive at the moment for me. Plus an army with big green brutes is always good looking on the table eh?)

3. Bretonnians (almost sure to keep me from getting bored with painting them. So much heraldry and such. Plus the classic look of mounted knights never goes out of style. Just worried if I'll good bored with "playing" them is all. I'll have to ponder this one a bit longer)

Baindread
20-12-2006, 20:38
Ogres are not weak by any means. Having played them in heaps of games over the last year and a half I have lost with them exactly three times in straight up battles (as well as two times using those silly Lustria rules that benefited everyone except me).

However, they are not exactly easy to use against a competent opponent. Knights and war machines in particular can be quite difficult to handle.

My Ogre Kingdoms Tactics page (http://folk.ntnu.no/tarjeia/avian/tactics/ogre_index.php)

Aren't that just a testament to your skill rather than the powerlevel of ogres?:angel:

Einholt
20-12-2006, 23:17
Hmmm lol, this might seem like an awkward suggestion money wise but I think it would be good for ya in the long run, you can pick up the current brettonia battalion before they repackage it and a couple of blisters to get on ur way with playing and as you said they have alot of options on the painting. I dont think you would get bored of playing brettonia but you might get bored of simply increasing the army you have without major tweaks. That being said the bret battalion would get u in the game gives you a small force you can learn to play with and enjoy. This is all leading to me suggesting that vampires would probably be your best long term and build up army but to avoid buying the outdated models so close to the new release, Id go brettonia and test em out since the box set is pretty great and can be played without an upgrade, if you fall in love wit em you can expand on bretts, but Im sure the new vampire line will draw you to them. The great thing in the end is you will have variety and experienced two armies. I mean its a bit more money but if you buy current vampire stuff and all the new things come out that u buy its not unconcivable the current models would become obselete. Just my 2 cents =).

Move Fast Hit Low
21-12-2006, 00:19
Like finnigan said, of your top three armies that you have chosen as your favorites, one of them is a horde army (O&G) and the other can be made into a horde army quite easily (VC). While with bretonnians you will have a significant smaller body count making it faster and easier to send your men into battle. But if your one of those people who like to paint tons and tons of models or have the money to buy tons and tons of models than go with O&G or VC. Oh by the way if your one of those people with the money, then i hate you :D

Warp Zero
21-12-2006, 09:35
Heh heh heh. I'm not rich, I just skim money from other aspects of my life. My crappy wardrobe and lack of decent funiture probably is a good clue as to where my money spending priorities are. :D

Anyways....hmm....hold off on VCs till they come out? Interesting...does anyone know when they'll be getting new stuff? If its like next year sometime...then yeah that makes sense. But if its like 2008 and beyond....I don't know....I guess.

Plus, I hate to commit to waiting for the revamp, then when it actually comes....they don't change that many models and I'm like, "D'oh! I could've been painting skellies this whole time if I knew they weren't gonna change 'em anyways!"

Y'know how long I held off of buying Wraithguard thinking "surely that'll be one of the things to get redone...I mean c'mon, its a 2nd edition model still....." But obviously they didn't redo it. I could've bought them and been playing with them earlier. *shrug*

But yeah, if they're gonna do VC soon...yah, I may just fill the time doing a small starter army with something else instead. I check out the rumor section, the info seems conflicting. Some say High Elves are next...some say Vampire Counts.....

Avian
21-12-2006, 13:36
Aren't that just a testament to your skill rather than the powerlevel of ogres?:angel:
Perhaps, but it just emphasises my opinion that the skill of the player i more imporant than the quality of the army. A good player with a less effective army list will generally wipe the floor with a less good player with a better army list. Though of course some lists are significantly less reliant on skill to use than others.

Warp Zero
23-12-2006, 10:22
And that's the kind of stuff I'm concerned about. At least when I come to rules. If two equal skill level players have equal chance to win regardless of what army they play. Then the armies are balanced.

Anyways. If know one minds...I'd like to hear more about how Orcs & Goblins play. True, I'm leaning toward Vampire Counts, but if they're being redone in 2007, maybe I'll do O&G till then?

Heretic Burner
23-12-2006, 21:44
No if two equally skilled players play different armies it is very unlikely they will have a 50:50 win ratio. Particularly if its something like Brettonnia vs Orcs & Goblins.

Vampire Counts and O&G are about as different as they come in the game. While VC have units that are completely reliable in the face of any type of psychology and even breaking from combats, O&G have by far the most random units in the game. By far the biggest factor in any O&G game is animosity, a rule that makes your units do something you'd probably not want them to do ~1/3 of the time - every turn. This is major and takes a lot of getting used to. So if you are of a tactical bent, O&G is probably not for you.

Another big difference is the magic phase. Most VC armies are heavily involved in the magic phase, raising skeletons, blasting their enemies, moving their troops faster, etc. The new O&G book pretty much made the army the second worst at magic in the game (after dwarves, of course). It's pretty unplayable except against the most casual of environments. If you like magic O&G might not be for you.

What O&G do well is offence on the cheap. While they'll be chopped to pieces against truly powerful units like Khorne knights, they can throw a relatively cheap unit of orcs into combat and expect a decent impact against say elves or humans. You can't go too far wrong with getting the boyz fighting though this is easier said than done.

Honestly you just have to ask yourself what kind of player you are. Sure many believe your opinion on the models themselves are most important but I simply believe you need the right fitting army for you. If winning games is important to you go with Skaven, Brets, or Wood Elves for example. If you enjoy rolling dice go with a Dwarf or Empire gunline. Some people like having a different game everytime where a Skaven or O&G might be lead to more unexpected events than say a Bret army. Some people like being the underdog so maybe Ogre Kingdoms, Dark Elves, or O&G are your pick it will be much harder winning with those armies. You get the idea.

I don't know about holding off until they bring out new models is the way to go though. There are decent models in every army produced by GW (though its borderline debatable for Dark Eldar). New isn't always better either, some of the older models are far superior to the replacements brought out.

lorelorn
23-12-2006, 23:22
Anyways. If know one minds...I'd like to hear more about how Orcs & Goblins play. True, I'm leaning toward Vampire Counts, but if they're being redone in 2007, maybe I'll do O&G till then?

Bear in mind the Vampires will be out in the second half of 2007, so you are looking at a 6-9 month army with the Orcs & Goblins.

If that's ok with you, the easiest way to get started is with two copies of Battle for Skull Pass and Skarsnik for your general. You can then add some fanatcis to give the goblin units some bite, and add some orc units to make the army 'orc & goblin' rather than 'goblin'.

Really the best first step is to buy the army book, have a good read, and figure out the kind of army you would like to play. There are plenty of options, though it is infantry power that is emphasised in the current book.

With the Vampire Counts the plastics are certain to be redone, the metals less so.

Inkosi
24-12-2006, 04:51
And that's the kind of stuff I'm concerned about. At least when I come to rules. If two equal skill level players have equal chance to win regardless of what army they play. Then the armies are balanced.



When has life become fair?? If everything is absolutely balanced in this world, in the most perfect scenario, everyone would be best buddies and Bush would be inviting Kim Jung ll over to his range for christmas party.

Unfortunately, the world as we know it is a place of irregularities and unfairness. Expecting the armies to be balanced is almost equivalent to expecting that every guy in the world to be equally handsome ("think millions of brad pitts").

Its hard to define the skill of a player when wins can be decided by so many factors. If skilful player loses because of a weaker army or bad luck, due credit would still be given and i dont think any player should be judged by wins for his skill.

GW's tinkering would most likely than not be unable to balance up the armies, but i dont see we would be seeing any major changes to the current state of armies.

Warp Zero
24-12-2006, 06:46
When has life become fair?? If everything is absolutely balanced in this world, in the most perfect scenario, everyone would be best buddies and Bush would be inviting Kim Jung ll over to his range for christmas party.

Unfortunately, the world as we know it is a place of irregularities and unfairness. Expecting the armies to be balanced is almost equivalent to expecting that every guy in the world to be equally handsome ("think millions of brad pitts").


I agree with you Inkosi...well, about what you said in regards to "life". But I get plenty of unfairness in real life as it is. Game rules are things we can control. Dice we can't ...player we can't...I understand that. But the rules we can control. We can make them fair. It is of my opinion that game rules can be balanced. I play games to "escape" reality and all its unfairness. :)

Its true, table top games with variable rules per faction makes the goal of balancing armies very had. Chess is balanced...that's true...but each player is playing the same army. Football is balanced, each side is subjected to the same rules...its not like if you played Los Angeles, they start with extra yards, but Dallas get 2 extra Linemen....no, both are subject to same rules. Its just up to the players.

But, all I'm saying is...I would (ideally) want an army that isn't gimped "rules"-wise. Because nothing takes the fun out of a game when you're getting pounding by another guy who isn't even trying. I don't mind losing, I just want to have a good fight before I lose is all. I don't like getting massacred.

Heretic Burner: thanks for the run down on O&G. I too am a bit squeemish when hearing about animosity. But if those behaviors swing to the positive outcome as much as they swing to the negative....then maybe its not so bad.

Man, lots to think of. On top of that...the new Empire models look great. Don't know how they play though.

Psychodelica
24-12-2006, 12:57
Hm, you can always do as I did and chose an army becuase you like the fluff about it. I started out with Wood Elves, a bad decision since I really suck at tactics.

The wood elves are a quite diverse army, with many different units and a sensible but ranged selection of special rules. It has excellent shooting and movement, but since two of the most common close combat units are skirmishers without command, you have to think twice and maybe thrice before venturing into close combat. The flee easily when used against units with full command and ranks.

I might be biased, but I think that, with the new range, it is by far the most good looking of the armies :D

Disposable Hero
24-12-2006, 14:31
I played Skaven, Vampire Counts and Mortal Chaos.
Loved them all, every army is so full of character.

My latest army are Wood Elves and they are real fun. Great army book, great models and it plays great.
Much more moving smartly instead of swarming or rushing..

Have fun!

Inkosi
24-12-2006, 15:37
I agree with you Inkosi...well, about what you said in regards to "life". But I get plenty of unfairness in real life as it is. Game rules are things we can control. Dice we can't ...player we can't...I understand that. But the rules we can control. We can make them fair. It is of my opinion that game rules can be balanced. I play games to "escape" reality and all its unfairness. :)


I wasnt thinking properly in the early morning so ya you got the points on gaming spot on.

Some solutions i always have in mind.

Give your army a f... background (takes some time to not use the F word). Power gaming armies tend to go to the extreme and do not fit into the background at all. Armies with a background tend to be more balanced.

Sportsmanship. Or rather playing with people with the same mentality. If you just like me want to enjoy gaming, our gaming group should not have people gear towards power gaming. Solves all problems with unbalanced lists.

And of course, house rules. If a particular rule is so overpowering or doesnt make sense, change it. It just need 2 sensible players with the right attitude to enjoy a game.

Much easier than changing the rules and stats every few years right??

cheers

Heretic Burner
24-12-2006, 17:04
It is true. It really doesn't matter too much what army you choose if you are fortunate enough to find the right opponents. While playing a weaker army against, say, a Skaven ultra shooty army just isn't fun, playing that weaker army against a Skaven player that doesn't mind throwing some rarely used units into his army for a more balanced game is golden.

I am with Warp Zero. GW can certainly do a (much) better job of balancing their armies even with the multitude of units differing between them (a good example is Starcraft, a game where players almost universally agree is extremely well balanced despite "armies" that play drastically more different than you'd find between different Warhammer armies). Still, as players you do have the power to balance, house rule, and play with uneven point value armies on your own. I tend to find GW stores dominated by powergamers but outside of these stores you may just be able to play a more casual game even against those same powergamers. Just be advised tournaments aren't, of course, going to allow this so if you are looking ahead into going that route you will be advised to consider how much a winning army is worth to you.

Proxy. Proxy. Proxy. Have a few mock games to find a army you are satisfied with. A few games like these can save a small fortune later.

Warp Zero
25-12-2006, 01:08
I wasnt thinking properly in the early morning so ya you got the points on gaming spot on.

Well, I have to apologize a bit and say that ... what you and Heretic Burner said is pretty spot on too. Yes the game may have imbalances.....obviously not something we can control. But, a game is always fun when you play with friends. So what does it matter?

Here's a couple of things that makes my situation a bit weird.

1.) I'm kind of Jekyl & Hyde with my gaming. Most times is all about getting together with friends and rolling dice. Who cares who wins or loses. Other times, I let certain events that happen on the table get to me. Then I start to curse the rules and I mumble about how imbalance things are.

Take for example: every time I play my Eldar against Tau. Piles and piles of Eldar bodies and heaps of broken Skimmers result in our battles. Going against Tau is frustrating: My unit shoots at yours, oh...and the same unit shoots at a different one of yours because I have Target Lock....trying to stay clear of my firepower by hiding behind terrain? No prob...here are some Seeker Missiles...what? Everything in your army is frail but you make it for it with a super tough Wraithlord? Whatever, railgun, railgun, railgun, railgun....oh and they're all twin linked....oh...and here are some more seeker missiles too....oh, you're smart...you keep your skimmers moving so that I can never get more than a glance on them...no matter, I always roll a 5 and 6 on the glance chart anyways...its just a good as getting a Penetrating Hit.......Oh, my Broadsides aren't dead....you have to kill all six gun drones before you can actually touch the wounds on my Broadsides....until then....railgun, railgun, railgun.....too bad your Dark Reapers don't have gun drones....or else they'd get in more turns of firing before they ran away after one of them just died huh?

FRUSTRATING!

Then I try to calm down. I remind myself that yah....Tau are mean. But I was mean too. I'm sure he's equally frustrated when 9 Striking Scorpions with Exarch mowed through 4 Crisis Suits and a Shas'O. I gotta remind myself that its for fun...

So a part of me says, "Pick the army that you think has the coolest models and coolest fluff". But the Mr. Hyde in me says, "Yeah whatever, pick something that is strong so you don't get creamed so much."

2.> My gaming group is kinda odd. True we're all friends and we play with a great deal of fair sportsmanship. There's always a relaxed atmosphere around the table. Yet, my group also finds fun in noodling with their list....making it leaner...meaner....in essence...powergaming. Probably the nicest group of powergamers you'd meet. Usually, here on the boards, when we say "powergamer", we think of a grimfaced guy who will argue over milimeters, wording in a book, etc, etc...

But my friends don't argue about stuff like that. They're nice guys. But they do powergame a bit. We never sat down and said to each other.."uh, Bob shouldn't take that list...its unfair." Its like we're too nice to tell another guy that he shouldn't play the way he wants to play. Odd huh? Everyone power games...but everyone is too nice to say anything about it. Its a bit weird.



Some solutions i always have in mind.

Give your army a f... background (takes some time to not use the F word). Power gaming armies tend to go to the extreme and do not fit into the background at all. Armies with a background tend to be more balanced.

I see what you mean. While the powergamer in me likes to make efficient lists, there is the "nerd fluff" guy in me that still likes to reign in back to the reality of the setting too.


Sportsmanship. Or rather playing with people with the same mentality. If you just like me want to enjoy gaming, our gaming group should not have people gear towards power gaming. Solves all problems with unbalanced lists.

And of course, house rules. If a particular rule is so overpowering or doesnt make sense, change it. It just need 2 sensible players with the right attitude to enjoy a game.

Much easier than changing the rules and stats every few years right??

cheers


It is true. It really doesn't matter too much what army you choose if you are fortunate enough to find the right opponents. While playing a weaker army against, say, a Skaven ultra shooty army just isn't fun, playing that weaker army against a Skaven player that doesn't mind throwing some rarely used units into his army for a more balanced game is golden.

Again, as stated above ... we don't usually edit each other. Its almost easier to just say, "alright...use Rules As Written". Nothing past that. If we don't, there's usually one guy who starts getting crazy with his house rules. Then we can't keep saying "no" to him while we're saying "yes" the ones I come up with. Just doesn't seem fair.

But I like what you're saying about just being into the proper spirit of the game. Thanks for giving me a reality check.

With that said, I may lean toward Orcs&Goblins now. Random...fun....they may just be what the doctor ordered. But hmmm....new Empire looks cool too...damn these games....too many choices.... :D