Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

What is the worst Warhammer 40,000 army for a beginning player to start with, and why?

Looks like dark eldar might just be the hardest for new players. But then again, you never know, I guess it depends on the person playing.

Witch Hunters or Dark Eldar. Witch Hunters because of obscene model pricing and complexity, Dark Eldar because it takes a while to get used to them.

Yup, I went with witch hunters too. Pricey, and their rules are very complex.

Demonhunters was the first thing to pop into my head when I read the question, but after taking a look at the choices I remembered Dark Eldar are an incredible finesse army. Sisters are a very close second though.

Daemon hunters were one of the first armies I had. Using inquisitorial henchmen, and allying with other imperial forces can be difficult for a new player. The rules are outdated as well so that can be confusing when your just learning the basic rules in the BGB.

I voted for DE because they require a good bit of skill to play well, and its quite easy to be wiped out completely with the DE. The units are abit more fragile than most other armies and unless handled carefully, with a specific plan in mind, the whole army can evaporate. Exactly the sort of army that a new player still learning the basic rules is going to have problems with.


Sliggoth

Eldar for sure.

Its one fo those armies that if you dont know how to use the rules in your favour you're going to get wrecked up every game.

DE. Seeing as they havn't had a new codex since... 3rd ED? Very fragile too, But daemon hunters and witch hunters are a close 2nd. Very high prices indeed...

Dark Eldar,as has been said, it is one of the least forgiving armies when dealing with "tactical errors" & requires a bit of skill to use effectively.

liquidjoshi wrote:DE. Seeing as they havn't had a new codex since... 3rd ED? Very fragile too, But daemon hunters and witch hunters are a close 2nd. Very high prices indeed...

Actually, 2nd ED, iirc

Gavo wrote:

liquidjoshi wrote:DE. Seeing as they havn't had a new codex since... 3rd ED? Very fragile too, But daemon hunters and witch hunters are a close 2nd. Very high prices indeed...

Actually, 2nd ED, iirc

Dark Eldar codex first appeared in 3rd ed.

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Codex:_Dark_Eldar_(3rd_Edition)

Daemons, they can go very well, or horribly wrong, also demoralizing if you start with them and get bad rolls causing you to loose the game.

Yeah, Dark Elfdar are 3rd ed, and very unforgiving, though the Daemonhunters and Witch Hunters are a close 2nd.

Who said Space Marines? They're arguably the best army for a beginner.

I agree with Dark Eldar; they are a very, very unforgiving army to play if you make a mistake. However, they can also be one of the strongest armies in the game (30-ish Dark Lances at 1500 ), so there you go.

I did not vote as I could argue for every army:

Metal armies: DH, WH, Chaos Daemons; too expensive and can put beginners off

Armies Needing Updates: DH, WH, Necrons, DE; Not worth starting at the minute

Armies that are unforgiving and therefore not fun: DE, DH; too hard too use and not fun if you muck up

Boring armies that everyone else has: All SM, Orks, Tyranids; could be different at certain stores but everyone has one of these armies (I have BA)

I think every army is both the worst and best for a beginner. It depends entirely on the individuals mindset and personal circumstances.

Xanthos wrote:Yup, I went with witch hunters too. Pricey, and their rules are very complex.

Ditto!

In the current mechanized metagame, DE are incredibly easy. Spam dark lances, pick targets and roll dice. Never seen a DE army in recent years that required a lot of strategy to use effectively. Long ago there were Wyches, Talos, even Warp Beasts. Now just Dark Lances.

Daemons seem much harder to beat. Even Fatecrusher can go horribly wrong with a few bad scatters, Fateweaver running away at the wrong time, etc. And the army suffers against mechanized lists.

DE might be unforgiving of the wrong decisions, but with Daemons sometimes there just IS no right decision, you just get hosed.

Demons belong in fantasy, or even better in an actual forces of chaos codex.

Spellbound wrote:In the current mechanized metagame, DE are incredibly easy. Spam dark lances, pick targets and roll dice. Never seen a DE army in recent years that required a lot of strategy to use effectively. Long ago there were Wyches, Talos, even Warp Beasts. Now just Dark Lances.

Daemons seem much harder to beat. Even Fatecrusher can go horribly wrong with a few bad scatters, Fateweaver running away at the wrong time, etc. And the army suffers against mechanized lists.

DE might be unforgiving of the wrong decisions, but with Daemons sometimes there just IS no right decision, you just get hosed.

Now thats not fair. I run Wyches with Blasters too, so I can assault the units inside the transports

I still think Dark Eldar are awesome, even if you don't win. The game's not solely about winning?

I don't have enough experience with DE to make an educated statement so I went with WH because of the faith rules, finess army, and the rules that don't matter anymore. DH would be close second to me due to the irrelevant daemon rules that still float in the codex.

Ravenous D wrote:Eldar for sure.

Its one fo those armies that if you dont know how to use the rules in your favour you're going to get wrecked up every game.

I have to disagree. I'm a (comparatively) new player, and I've never lost as the Eldar. I think they're a fine starting army, considering their obvious "this one kills this thing" style of using infantry. They're right there next to IG and Orks in terms of simplicity of use.

Why is everyone picking Dark Eldar? Have you actually played against them recently, or better yet, ever? My guess is no.
I say that Dark Eldar and Eldar are far from being the worst for starters. They have amazing fire and mobility, and with Dark Eldar, since nobody obviously plays against them very often, no one knows what unit does what or the typical strategies. And just because rules are old doesn't mean its a bad army for starters.

As was said before, just spam the Dark Lances and there you go. It's even perfect for killing Marines, which is worth it in itself since almost everyone plays them.

I pick Tau. Shoot, shoot again, and then you die in CC...

Dammit I thought it said best and went Necrons Doh!!

Id say what most others on here said and go w DE being worst due to the oldest codex (and no i havent played against them) and difficult to find models...

Locclo wrote:Who said Space Marines?

The people who misread the question.

I'm surprised nobody but ZacktheChaosChild have brought up Tau yet; they have hardly any tactical flexibility, not to mention it's very hard to even give your opponent a challenge unless you know exactly how to play Tau. Though I suppose the same could be said with DE.

Dark Eldar are not as fragile as everyone says. Their just easy to rip on for having the most outlandish play style.

I saw a new player come in with Dark Eldar and ripped up the field, was no joke guy tabled IG in his first game.

I think my second army ever will be them if anything.

I have no experience with Dark Eldar, Witch Hunters, or Demon Hunters. I do have a lot of playing experience with Tau and I can honestly say that I would never recommend them to a beginner. So much depend on your ability to keep the other guy off you and at the same time keep clear firing lanes. You also have to learn how to feed enemies roadblocks and use other units for blocking. And it's expensive too.

Dedrith wrote:
I'm surprised nobody but ZacktheChaosChild have brought up Tau yet; they have hardly any tactical flexibility, not to mention it's very hard to even give your opponent a challenge unless you know exactly how to play Tau. Though I suppose the same could be said with DE.

Hardly any tactical flexibility?
Maybe you don't really play Tau or havent met anyone who knows how to play Tau yet :-).
Or maybe you mean "hardly any tactical flexibility in the hands of a newbie/noob" ? That sounds more correct.