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.

I started with Tau, and although I have no intention of abandoning the little blue guys, I find myself extremely excited about my new Blood Angels. In conversations at my FLGS, I've discovered that this progression isn not at all uncommon. Apparently, a lot of people go from Tau to Blood Angels (or, in one case, Orks).

I have two questions for our discussion:

First of all, does this seem to be true in your experience?

Secondly, why do you think this is?

And third, have you noticed any other recurring themes in the gradual progression from one army to the next?

I have Tau and many times i have considered Orks. I think it's probably because as Tau players we run for the hills and shoot over our shoulders hoping that the enemies die. If anything make sit into close combat we fold like a house of cards. So i think its perfectly understandable that a Tau player would want an in-your-face army that dominates the close combat phase. I think that players like to play armies that are very different form the ones they already own. So if you own a shooty army you don't (generally) get another highly shooty army.

Interestingly enough my friend who mainly used to play tau switched to orks (and then DE when they came out) two very good assaulting armies. Myself, I was a Tyranid player exclusively for about 2 years, and I've recently come across a Tau army i got in a good trade. So for me it was the other way around (plus i needed a change from tyranids badly).

I find when you play an army that is strong in the shooting phase or assault phase, when you start another you tend to pick the opposite.

I went from Black Templar to Venom Dark Eldar

I also started with Tau and then picked up Blood Angels as my 2nd army. I enjoy switching between them and find the variety challenging. Tau will still be my first and favorite army though.

Haha, funny you should mention that...Tau is my main army, and I'm trying to decide between Orks and Eldar as my second army

I went from Tau to UltraSmurfs....funny how I landed on a gunline smurf army that shoots better than my Tau army... *sigh*

I know a guy who went from Blood Angels to Tau, but that was back in 4th around when the Tau Empires codex came out.

While I can't comment on Tau to Blood Angels specifically, going from shooty to choppy is pretty common. I went from Dark Angels to Space Wolves. Then I went from Space Wolves to Codex Marines with lots of shooting. I went from there to Orks, then to Imperial Guard. If I were to start another army I don't know what I'd go to, but I'm favoring another shooty army.

I don't play Tau but I started Orks after amassing a Guard army and it was certainly interesting to be playing a vehicle-heavy, shooty army that's weak in CC and start an army that's strong in CC and largely goes about on foot.