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'm looking to start WHFB with my brother, coming from four years of 40k. He's chosen to do Beastmen despite their reputation because he likes the models. After browsing the GW website for countless hours, I've decided I like the Wood Elf models, I love the way the army handles in the army book and the Wood Elf vs Beastmen fluff aspect. Then I come to read about how Wood Elves are horribly overcosted and generally considered among the weakest Army Books.

Obviously, this is in particular comparison to Beastmen, but I am hoping to become comfortable enough with them to take them to some other games at my FLGS. So, ignoring the possibility of a new army book in the next couple of years, my question is: Can a complete newbie to WHFB pick up Wood Elves and ever hope to succeed? Will it make me a better player in the end by having to learn the hard way, or am I just going to get frustrated by them and end up starting a new army?

I don't mind the idea of having a weaker army that wins on tactics... but at some point, you have to get some help from your book, right? Should I even consider Wood Elves or just go pick up a couple Island of Blood boxes and start High Elves instead?

Thanks!

Wood Elves have two major drawbacks for a newbie, stiff learning curve and their best unit is worth its weight in gold. Though beastmen also have a fairly big learning curve so maybe you can learn together!

As a Beastmen player myself, Wood Elves are pretty annoying for me. I don't like shooting in general, but Wood Elves can move away from my advance and still fire without penalty. Both armies are tricky to play right, but if you're mainly playing each other then that won't hinder either of you too much, since you'll both have a learning curve to deal with.

I know the games I play against Wood Elves are always lots of fun, and usually pretty close too.

Wood Elves are a better army than the internet would have you believe. They can be a frustrating army to play at times. And it can be a difficult learning curve.

However it is always nice to have an army that is written off, since it doesn't matter when you lose and it really winds people up when you beat them.

Wood Elves in my local tourny scene place atleast 5th consistently so they are really not under-powered if you play them right!

Wow, thanks for the tips. I'll be sure to give them a good look over in that case!

marielle wrote:Wood Elves are a better army than the internet would have you believe.

Johnny-Crass wrote:Wood Elves in my local tourny scene place atleast 5th consistently so they are really not under-powered if you play them right!

qft. Plus they were in the final six in this year's Ard Boyz Finals for the West region. So they can definitely perform.

However, i'm pretty sure the only competitive list is stacking as many tree units as possible. WE were my first choice when I migrated from 40k to WHFB earlier this year. I ended up not picking them due to some formula I forced myself to follow to make decision-making easier (I wanted to limit myself to 2 armies out of the dozen, or so, I was interested in), it had nothing to do w/ how uncompetitive they're perceived to be. Kinda wish I had stuck w/ them... Oh well

Dr. Cheesesteak wrote:

marielle wrote:Wood Elves are a better army than the internet would have you believe.

Johnny-Crass wrote:Wood Elves in my local tourny scene place atleast 5th consistently so they are really not under-powered if you play them right!

qft. Plus they were in the final six in this year's Ard Boyz Finals for the West region. So they can definitely perform.

However, i'm pretty sure the only competitive list is stacking as many tree units as possible. WE were my first choice when I migrated from 40k to WHFB earlier this year. I ended up not picking them due to some formula I forced myself to follow to make decision-making easier (I wanted to limit myself to 2 armies out of the dozen, or so, I was interested in), it had nothing to do w/ how uncompetitive they're perceived to be. Kinda wish I had stuck w/ them... Oh well

I'd go for a mixed force of trees and elves.

I have had some very fun and hard fought battles with some WE vets.

They are by no means weak if you know how to use them this is not easy for a new player but you will learn.

Seems extremely fluffy I like the sounds of why you chose them.

I also like the mix of elves and trees.

Quick tips always cast throne of vines with your lvl 4 caster the spell is amazing.

The players I know really do enjoy the army and with a bit of luck here and there you are not too badly off.

The current accepted "best build" for Wood Elves is what has been affectionately termed "The Fighting Forest". Treemen, treekin, dryads, with a few small glade guard units for shooting. They're ALRIGHT but not brilliant.

WE can be a very potent army if played correctly, but yes the curve you need to climb can be a bit harsh at times. But then again the same goes for beastmen really, since both armies are somewaht hanging behind the rest of the armies atm if you look at it from a purly army book wie