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.

You guys have probably never seen these before (heavy sarcasm intended) but I've been pulled into 40K by a friend of mine and want to get an army. My buddy was telling me I should get Chaos Marines, saying how awesome it would be to have monstrous creatures mixed in with the Space Marine's heavy armor. On my personal side of things I played Orks a lot when Dawn of War II came out and grew to love their bizarre style and stupid British accents. Either way I don't have much to go on and want to ask the wisdom of the internet (a term I'm sure is an oxy moron most of the time). Thanks for any input.

WAAAAAAAGH DA ORKS






(does that help?)

Orks. The codex has a lot more flavor and fun stuff in it than the chaos one. You should play what you like, not what your buddy likes. You already said you like the orky style so it's a no-brainer. If your buddy like chaos marines so much, let him play them.

Jeriko wrote:You guys have probably never seen these before (heavy sarcasm intended) but I've been pulled into 40K by a friend of mine and want to get an army. My buddy was telling me I should get Chaos Marines, saying how awesome it would be to have monstrous creatures mixed in with the Space Marine's heavy armor. On my personal side of things I played Orks a lot when Dawn of War II came out and grew to love their bizarre style and stupid British accents. Either way I don't have much to go on and want to ask the wisdom of the internet (a term I'm sure is an oxy moron most of the time). Thanks for any input.

As a fellow new player, I was really excited about the idea of playing Orks because I liked their fluff and style. However, one of the first things I learned was that Orks are the poster child for "horde armies", meaning lots of models to move around the board and a metric crap-ton of dice to throw and determine results from...which when you are new, can be daunting and slow down a game considerably while you try to process everything. I decided to go with CSM hoping I could weather a few "noob" mistakes with tougher (albeit fewer) models, and was considerably more interested in the idea of a traitor chapter than I was running a loyalist SM force. That said, you could probably get the same forgiveness from mistakes with a loyalist SM army and have a lot more bells and whistles. More than a few posts here on Dakka advocate running CSM as 'counts as' a SM codex, as well.

Anyway, those might not be concerns you're specifically worried about, but I figured I would throw them out there.

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH! DA ORKS! DA ORKS! With orks you can get the stompa!

CSM. More...Normal. Tbh, probably less boring than orks, despite being incredibly boring themselves.

Oh yeah I should explain. A buddy of mine already plays SM. Actually in the circle of friends who play most are taken, and while no one really cares if there is a double of theirs, I have that stubborn streak of wanting to be different. That's why I didn't jump on Orks, is because someone has them. I was also looking at the Tau, but not as heavily. I'll throw them into the conversation to see what you guys say.

The most important thing by far in your first army is that it captures your imagination. Read through the background section of the rulebook and go with the one that interests you the most.

Well how do they play? What are the key units? Basic strategies (I'll learn the complex stuff later)? That's also what I care about.

Okay, so presumably you don't really want to be Orks, because (although fun and different) you don't want to be a copy. Good.

CSM aren't weak, let me start with that. They can win, but their strongest tactics are what most people would call... flavorless. If you're not really into the CSM backstory, it's probably not an issue, but if you actually like Chaos Marines and the Traitor Legions, it will start to bug you.

Also, they have a lot of trash in their codex. There's a lot of units only worth taking in extremely specific builds, many of which are fading in popularity as more and more counters appear in newer codices. Also, in my experience, many of the things CSM can do, other codices can do better. They are terrible with the "codex creep" factor.

One thing I enjoy about them though is that they play very differently from my Black Templars. Basically, I enjoy shooting sometimes - so I run CSM when I feel like having some firefights. They're very good at making versatile lists (like normal marines), but they struggle imho against some unit types, because CSM lists often rely on High S, Low AP weapons to tip the scales, rather than weight of fire (see: Plasma Plague Marines). This doesn't work against everyone.

Tau I'm less familiar with. I've fought them a couple times, but it was so long ago, and both of us sucked pretty terribly, so my experience was probably not typical. Short story is that they're really shooty. ...That's pretty much as far as my knowledge goes.

Anyway, think about what you like, how you like to play, and what suits your painting desires, and pick your army based off those qualities you like.

I've got no experience actually playing Tau, but I'll admit I started a Tau army before deciding to re-think my approach. The main reason for that was I found Tau models very easy to acquire, whether it was via EBay, Bartertown or the Swap Shop here. Compared to Eldar (another of my initial startup candidates) or Orks, whose mech components were harder to come by or not on the receiving end of deep discounts, Tau were both readily available and seemingly cheap. This was around a year or so ago, so I'm not sure if that's the case...but if it's a factor for you, it might be something to consider.

As far as playstyle, I'm definitely no expert...but the reason I decided against Tau was because I had read that it was an army with a particularly steep learning curve. I'm not sure if the general meta for the faction has improved to where a new player has more options that perhaps it did a year ago, but at the time it was generally considered a one trick pony (ranged attacks) and if that trick went south on you, it was going to be a quick and brutal buttkicking. I know I've read blogs and heard podcasts that discuss some alternative tactics such as Piranha screens and different battlesuit tactics that are popular and effective, and I was always a big big fan of the battlesuits themselves...so perhaps it's something you might consider, so long as you know going in that it might be less forgiving than an "jack of all trades" force like C/SM.

I dont have a ton of experience with local meta, since my actual play has been limited to a handful of demo-style games in between moving across the country. What I have noticed, however, is there is a lot of codex creep / flavor of the month in the competitive community, primarily as seen online. The CSM codex, like the Eldar and maybe even the Tau, is one that is just old enough that it is apparently starting to show it's age compared to the newer, shinier releases like IG and Space Wolves. You might see members of your playing group who gravitated away from a previous army to Blood Angels or Space Wolves recently, or perhaps someone is already moving towards Dark Eldar in preparation for their upcoming re-release. I guess what that might mean to you is, if someone in your play group HASNT gravitated to an army like Dark Eldar, Grey Knights or even Necrons, you might consider those as an option to get into the game, learn the basics, and about the time the new codexes/models hit the market, you will really be hitting your stride and the inherent codex creep will at least temporarily make you the kid with the newest and shiniest toys. I dont know if that sort of idea appeals to you...but it's something maybe worth considering.

I thought IG was the poster child for horde armies?

They outnumber both Orks and Nids.

Somehow.

Actually I really do like the Necrons, I've heard them described as zombie robots, but I've also heard that they are underpowered right now, and the newest expansions for them are rumored, so maybe as an expansion. As far as the other SMs are concerned, like the Space Wolves and Demonhunters, although I think they are very cool, I know nothing about them. Mostly because my friend knows nothing about them, because they are hard to find locally.

If nobody in your local meta plays Space Wolves right now, it definitely might be something for you to consider. New codex and some newish models would probably place you ahead of the power curve...plus the SM "durability" might ease your learning curve.

Wolves are a good choice, though understand that you might receive a bit of flak for using them, as they are considered one of the "easier" armies to win with, alongside Guard and Blood Angels.

Also, some die-hard fans lament the move away from Space Vikings towards Space Werewolves. Again, if fluff is not a driving factor for you, then it's no big deal.

'Crons require a lot of patience. Many of their rules are confusing, and its really easy to both "cheat" and "get cheated," even unknowingly, due to the way certain rules function. Also, new codex relatively soon (supposedly).

Daemonhunters rumoured to be next in line for updates. I probably wouldn't start there, unless you really into the army (as a faction).

First of all the Wolves seem more Viking to me then the SMs. SMs have always seemed somewhat Roman or Greek to me, or at least a hybrid of Greek and Viking.

But what makes Demonhunters difficult to play as? I don't have much bias yet as far as factions are concerned. I only know about the ones in Dawn of War II. I will learn what ever I chooses back story, seeing as I'm a lore nerd and love back story.

On a side note you guys are a very friendly community. I'm also a paintballer and that community is far more rude. Well at least until I found the right website, but that's beside the point.

Jeriko wrote:First of all the Wolves seem more Viking to me then the SMs. SMs have always seemed somewhat Roman or Greek to me, or at least a hybrid of Greek and Viking.

But what makes Demonhunters difficult to play as? I don't have much bias yet as far as factions are concerned. I only know about the ones in Dawn of War II. I will learn what ever I chooses back story, seeing as I'm a lore nerd and love back story.

On a side note you guys are a very friendly community. I'm also a paintballer and that community is far more rude. Well at least until I found the right website, but that's beside the point.

I'd keep your defenses up if I were you. This community can get real ugly... in that, "Draw, varmint!" kind of wild west way.

The only issue I hear with DH is that they don't have very many options as far as competitive lists go (in a similar manner to CSM, only more pronounced). Another issue I've seen leveled against them is that their primary competitive strategy, which involves 3 GK Land Raiders with GKs, is terribly balanced - it's too difficult for a friendly list to beat, but too easy for a WAAC list to decimate. I can't really say one way or another though; I don't play them.

It sounds to me like the decision was already made: Chaos, due to already having an Ork player. But the nice thing about both Chaos and Orks is that they are as happy to fight themselves as anyone else...

Man, it's the worst when you pick an army based on what friends have. Don't worry about doubling up on armies. it's going to happen. You're going to face someone running what you run.

Pick an army to want. It's your hobby as well now, not just theirs.

Go with what you think has the coolest models/fluff/paint schemes.

Also do not discount the power of personalization, it is not hard to have a unique looking army (time consuming but not hard)

Chaos codex suffered from GWs "Simpler is better" phase & kinda lacks, well, everything. I'd go orks.

On a side not check my profile pic

As primarily an Ork player I'd say "Go Green!", just because there's already an Ork player doesn't make you one of the crowd. For one thing you could be an epically successful ork player. Its pretty much a better idea to build an army based on what you like about them, rather then because of ticking the multi-cultural box for your group.

If you really feel like being the thumb amongst the fingers, Dark Eldar are getting an update for the first time in over a decade, at present they're quite hard to learn with, but I think the new codex will make things a little easier.

I know chaos sounds like alot of fun but their current codex really sucks the life out of them. If you like the models and don't mind waiting a few years for a new codex (seriously, this codex makes me gag some times) then go right ahead and get your self some SPOIKEH MUHREENS.

As for Orks, they are an incredibly fun army that can fit many different rolls, they have some of the most elaborate spells and machinery and who doesn't like a 6 point model that has 4 str 4 ws4 attacks on a charge. Yeah boyz die easy BUT THERES ALOT OF EM!

Also nothing is more amusing then rolling a double 6 or double 5 on your SAG

both armies are fun. One is more up to date and hilarious. The other has powerful (cool looking too) units but their codex is a huge set-back on their playability.

Ma55ter_fett wrote:Go with what you think has the coolest models/fluff/paint schemes.

Also do not discount the power of personalization, it is not hard to have a unique looking army (time consuming but not hard)

In addition to the personalization of the army he could run a completely different list from the other ork player. If the other guy runs battlewagon, he could run Kan wall or green tide.

Arschbombe wrote:

Ma55ter_fett wrote:Go with what you think has the coolest models/fluff/paint schemes.

Also do not discount the power of personalization, it is not hard to have a unique looking army (time consuming but not hard)

In addition to the personalization of the army he could run a completely different list from the other ork player. If the other guy runs battlewagon, he could run Kan wall or green tide.

This is the truth. I'm one of two Ork players at my FLGS. I run a Wagon-heavy crumpy list, backed up by Lootaz. He runs a Green Tide with a little of everything useful in the codex. Our playing styles are quite different.

Orks are not Orks are not Orks.

On a side note, where else other than Orks can you find strategies that revolve around hitting other peoples' tanks with your tanks?!

Orks are a pile of awesome. Chaos Space Marines are, at the end of the day, just nastybad spiky Space Marines.

Go Orks.

Chaos Marine book is pretty bad..
What about Chaos Orks? Just normal Orks but Chaos themed because Orks can do anything

Yeah after much soul searching I realized that I have to go Orks. I will get into the personalization because that's what I do, I do 3D modeling and a lot of that is painting details onto models. Granted digital assist makes that easier.
Now I just need to scrape together some cash.