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.

With my ork army (pretty much) finished, I looked at my 'to do' list.

and I saw CSM, Necrons and BT were in line (and skaven, but I gotta wait for the starters set first). But I'm not entirely sure on what to pick first. I have to 2 weeks to make up my mind, since i'm currently in vietnam (being in the nighttrain/plane makes you think) and in the last week of my vacation I will go to bangkok (thailand) were the stuff is much cheaper.

'But why are you making a thread telling us you're gonna do this stuff? ;o' Well, because I need you dakkanites to help me out. But enough with the storytelling, let's get on to why I like these army's.

Chaos Space Marines:
Csm, yeah, they're pretty much awesome. Have the same stats as sm, but if you play these no one will ever complain about being an sm fanboy. Besides the awesome stats, they have pretty nice HQ choices. And ofcourse they can summon deamons! If I will do this army, I was thinking 'bout doing an army based around Ahriman, simply because his fluff is awesome. Or ofcourse an slaanesh army, 'cus he's 'tha sex gawd'. The downside is however, I don't like all those spikey thingys on them 3;

Necrons:
Robots. They can't die. And there robots. 'nuff said (:
I always liked the necrons, since I started playing 40K. Actually, they are the reason I started looking at 40K, just because I saw an battle report with necrons in the White Dwarf. They are easy to paint, and easy to play with (at least, that's what people told me). What I don't like about them, is they have no personalty. Which means no super uber epic hero. Which means no super uber epic fluff about the leader of that army.

Black Templars:
Hurrrrrrrr, we will defeat you with the might of tha emperah! I like the Templars, with their robes of death they look pretty awesome to me. They can field landraiders, are cc orientated (spelling?), and just look like they will completely pwn your ass off. The downside is however, they have an outdated codex. And they pretty much got no tactics, except for running towards the enemy. Hurrrr


So, that's basically it. I'm terribly sorry for all the bad spelling, since i'm doing this all from my ipod (And that's didication ) And ofcourse, english isn't my first language. I do hope you guys can help me out a little bit, and give me some advice.


thanks in advance (:

I'd have to pt forward the Ahriman CSM, for all the reasons you listed, and boo the others, also for all the reasons you listed.

I'd considered getting CSM before, which is a big thing for me considering my lifelong abject abhorrence of the demonic and the like.
Why?? Because Ahriman and his boys are examples of what happens when people play with things they shouldn't. And their models are cool, not too spiky, like Egyptian SM's.

Necrons are godawful in every way, especially if you're taking any sort of Marines army already. Thousand Sons aren't great, but you could make a really cool Tzeentch-flavored Chaos Marines army.

Do BTs or Necs, as everyone and their mother has CSMs.

You can flavour 'Crons, althought admittedly not as much as would be nice. Which is a shame, and a fault with the old Codex's. Most of the flavour comes from how you model and paint them. Well, you can do Close Combat 'Crons (lots of Wraiths, Flayed ones and Pariahs) but it's not a solid list.

Personally, I like 'Crons. You can make them look nice with a very simple paint scheme. Or do something more advanced, such as rusting and half collapsed ones, or ceramic style ones.

Chaos can be fun as well, especially a Tzeentch army. They are a lot more common than either Templar or 'Crons though. Your certainly don't have to stick spikes all over them. It's Chaos, after all. You can do whatever you want with them. Smooth and creepily organic works just as well as angry and spiky. See a lot of Death Guard vehicles.

Templar are fun too. They're still, in the end, Marines though and as mentioned have not real tactic beyond run and kill. But they are a nicely different flavour of Marine and they aren't going to get you evil glances like Blood Angels or Space Wolves will.

Personally,I'd go Necrons. Right now, they're not so good. They take a lot of skill to beat even a moderately skilled player of one of the nastier, more modern forces. You're gonna loose, a lot. But once the new Codex comes out, you'll have three advantages. You'll have most of the army ready, bar whatever the new power units are they'll no doubt produce. You'll be known for playing them beforehand and your local gamers will know you're not jumping on the bandwagon. And finally, you'll have had the practice while the army sucked. Once it gets stronger and nastier? Oh yeah.

Thanks jon (:

anymore feedback?

Necrons are pretty dull and a tad underpowered ATM. But the models paint up easilly enough.

Chaos is also kind of limited in its effective field options, but worlds better than Necrons. With the various legions, you can mix in some variety in your paint, which is a good thing. No need to go super spikey- its a matter of taste. Be warned, though, that Tzeentch and Slaanesh are probably the least effective cult choices, though they look great.

BTs are a straightforward scheme on a SM army. There codex is a bit dated and inflexible, but still quite effective. They have a very medieval them going which can be fun to convert and plenty of plastic. I wouldn't worry about other players whining about BAs or SWs, though, if you want to play them. Such players just need to grow up and stop crying about toy soldiers.

I would recommend focusing on the playstyle you like and going from there, otherwise you are likely to be disappointed.

I'd say slaanesh, because... summoned daemonettes. they look fun to paint

But seriously, the CSM Sprue comes with TONS of options (I think you get like 8 heads for the troops that don't come with spikes or horns... But if you intend to make a CSM force lacking spikes and horns... why not just get vanilla marines and use extra bronze?)

Play Ahriman CSM's. Be the most feared sorceror in the galaxy who cannot get into a library guarded by clowns.

Question.

Do you want to choose the army that will hold its own on the tabletop best?

Or the army that'd be most fun to paint?

Or the army that'd be easiest to paint?

Or the army that's most fun to play?

Melissia wrote:Do BTs or Necs, as everyone and their mother has CSMs.

I don't play CSM, just IG, but my dad on the other hand.... Both Eldar and CSM, and he is thinking of Orks.... the heretic!!

Black templars.

The models are to die for, and as long as you can paint robes decently enough, they will not let you down.

They're awesome as far as rules go, nothing on the top, so I wouldn't expect to win against competition geared lists unless you want to play one of a few builds.

They're awfully pretty though, and fun since the rules make you have to commit.

Hurr, definitely hurr.

Alternatively, if you go Chaos, you always have the option of using the Space Wolves or Blood Angels codex to represent your force. For example, the Grey Hunters are the most elite marine troops around (excepting maybe Plague Marines), so they represent 10,000-yo warriors very well. Blood Claws can represent drug-crazed new additions to the forces (I've seen great conversions using the torsos from fantasy marauders, and the legs and shoulder pads from CSM).

With Blood Angels, it'd be even easier since you have multiple HQs that could easily stand in for Daemon Princes, Red Thirst/Black Rage can represent various stages of being fethed up, and Priests can be the designated drug dispensers.

SaintHazard wrote:Question.

Do you want to choose the army that will hold its own on the tabletop best?

Or the army that'd be most fun to paint?

Or the army that'd be easiest to paint?

Or the army that's most fun to play?

Hmmm. Ofcourse I actually want to win some battles, but I don't want an all overpowerd army. I'm also looking for an army which is actually a challenge to paint but which should look good with my lack at painting skills.

And the army must be fun to play with ofcourse, but I guess by winning games you increase the fun.

Chaos and run them with a loyalist codex. Terminus' post has all the information.

Happygrunt wrote:Chaos and run them with a loyalist codex. Terminus' post has all the information.

But I don't really like the SW and BA codex (for as far as i've seen 'em)

vleermie wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:Question.

Do you want to choose the army that will hold its own on the tabletop best?

Or the army that'd be most fun to paint?

Or the army that'd be easiest to paint?

Or the army that's most fun to play?

Hmmm. Ofcourse I actually want to win some battles, but I don't want an all overpowerd army. I'm also looking for an army which is actually a challenge to paint but which should look good with my lack at painting skills.

And the army must be fun to play with ofcourse, but I guess by winning games you increase the fun.

Then I recommend Ahriman CSM. Fun as hell to paint (I did some Thousand Sons and an Ahriman model for a buddy of mine) and even with my meager painting skills they looked cool as hell on the tabletop. Besides that, Thousand Sons aren't terribly overpowered - in fact, they're considered by some to be the worst of the cult marines - but they're still very playable, or you can just use regular CSM and paint them in Thousand Sons colors.

And CSM are always fun to play, IMO.