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 eyeballing the new starter box, but have no idea what to do.
Can I please have some advice, maybe a link or three?
I read the sticky, but I think I may be too noob'ed to take most of that advice.
Thanks all!

Generally I would suggest to stick to the army that has the aesthetic that pleases you.

Warmachine and Hordes can change army tactics usually by the changing your warcaster or warlock.

The links and stiickys here are amazing, but I can see how such a huge infodump could leave your head spinning. The first steps I suggest taking are:
A) Look over the quickstart rules for both games and demoing or proxying a game or two. You can do fine with just a pair of terminators, a dreadnaught, and a librarian standing in when you are just testing te waters, base sizes won't be exact but it hardly matters when your learning. The QS rules can be found here http://privateerpress.com/warmachine/the-game or here http://privateerpress.com/hordes/the-game.
B) Check out the PP gallery pages and possibly some models painted by gamers here on Dakka or other sites and decide what armies appeal to you. The factions are all balanced very well in both games so you won't need to worry about codex creep or whatnot. There may be some talk of faction bias on forums, but compared to what you may be used to in 40k, you'll need a microscope to see it. You'll get way farther picking up models you love and you can be passionate about to build around than you will netlisting, so pick what looks cool.

Most important thing I've learned? When people talk about a model not being the best choice for a list it means something TOTALLY different from what a 40k player might mean. It does not mean "so broken why even put it on the table" (ie my vespids, skyray, kabalite warriors, BT bikers etc) it means 'there are other things in the faction most people have an easier time using".
Seriously, there are very few bad models, so as long you get some amount of synergy and properly balance out your anti-infantry/anti-armor you can pretty much play what ever the heck looks cool to you and you'll be ok, even in alot of competitive play. The balance brings you a whole new world of choice, that I'm really enjoying (especially since I'm the type that hates to field the same thing as some one else in the game store lol).

Edit-There are exceptions I'll grant you- Drudges for example, are just horrible mess with abilities that don't even synergize with themselves on the battle field- but by and large I think what I said holds true for the system.

Remember to look at hordes, mercs and minions! It's not just warmachine's 5 main factions.

btemple0 wrote:Generally I would suggest to stick to the army that has the aesthetic that pleases you.

Warmachine and Hordes can change army tactics usually by the changing your warcaster or warlock.

I'll disagree with this. While their are a variety of approaches in each faction, they are fairly confined in their overall capabilities. A player who likes tons of Infantry is going to like Khador a lot more than say, Legion. Similarly someone who wants to run 'Jack heavy is going to have more options playing Protectorate.

My suggestion would be find some folks to test out with. Either borrow their models for a couple games with them or get some bases and proxy some things in with paper standees. (If nobody you know will tolerate either of these... find a better play group. If that isn't an option try just looking at some of the models and see what kind of play style sounds good to you.).

It really sucks being with an army you don't really enjoy playing with. Kinda happened with my friend. He liked the look and fluff of legion, but the overall fragility of the faction just doesn't work on the table for him.


EDIT: To that end, what sort of play styles do you enjoy?

-Do you like to take risks or prefer to play it safe?
-If you play RPGs or MMOs what sort of classes do you tend to go for?
-What did you like about your 40k army?
-What did you dislike about your 40k army?

I wish I started with Hordes...but glad I have ret as well.

Thanks all for the great replies.

Chongara, I'll answer your questions and add a few more tidbits. I appreciate the candor and effort.

I'm about 60% Modeler 40% player, which means that the aesthetic of a model range is slightly more important to me than it's prowess on the field.

I am a risk taker and like to play it big. I take risks in the name of good fun and for epic cinematic moments, even if the move might lose me the game if I fail.

When I play RPGs and MMOs I like warriors, clerics, and shaman types.

I play Orks in 40k, and I love that they cater to my aggressive, over the top style, and that they look outstanding when modeled and painted correctly.

I dislike how many models I need to field to have a chance at winning, and wish I could field small elite versions of the same army and have a chance.

Right now, I think I may be interested in a Jack heavy army because I'm assuming its a low model count, heavy hitting, melee army.

I also like to model and paint for effect, concentrating on battle damage, grease, chipping, and aging effects.

matphat wrote:Thanks all for the great replies.

Chongara, I'll answer your questions and add a few more tidbits. I appreciate the candor and effort.

I'm about 60% Modeler 40% player, which means that the aesthetic of a model range is slightly more important to me than it's prowess on the field.

I am a risk taker and like to play it big. I take risks in the name of good fun and for epic cinematic moments, even if the move might lose me the game if I fail.

When I play RPGs and MMOs I like warriors, clerics, and shaman types.

I play Orks in 40k, and I love that they cater to my aggressive, over the top style, and that they look outstanding when modeled and painted correctly.

I dislike how many models I need to field to have a chance at winning, and wish I could field small elite versions of the same army and have a chance.

Right now, I think I may be interested in a Jack heavy army because I'm assuming its a low model count, heavy hitting, melee army.

I also like to model and paint for effect, concentrating on battle damage, grease, chipping, and aging effects.

Based on your statements on playstyle choices, Legion of Everblight is the first faction that jumps out at me. They do well running beast heavy, even (generally speaking) compared to the other hordes factions. Many of their best beast choices are also fairly high points wise. This means there are a lot of different lists you can run that will have fewer models compared to other factions. Other factions can run low model counts too, but it's really a matter of how many of those combinations work well.

They also fit in with you liking "High Risk" they hit hard, but aren't particularly resilient. They've got heavies that run as low as 16 ARM. They lack the level of shenanigans that say, circle can pull to keep themselves safe. The net result is a bad move, botched attack or unlucky dice can leave you in a particularly precarious position. This is true of anyone of course but Legion is overall particularly thin on recovery or back up options.

That said they do have some issues. Shaman and Cleric types indicates you have a love of tricks, support abilities or generally getting more than what's initially on paper. Again any faction can do this to some extent, but it's more the forte of say Trollbloods or Protectorate.

In terms of your [i]modeling choices, Legion sounds like a poor fit. They're a very organic faction, with few of their models being particularly armored (nothing to weather, chip or grease). They do well with a fair amount of blood spatters or gore, in fact the official paint guide suggests this. So if that works for you they might fit.

Any of the Warmachine factions would allow you to do that sort of weathering, as warjacks have lots of metal to chip away at. Khador or Mercs are probably the most fitting as Khador uses rugged built to last equipment that looks particularly beat up in the art. While Mercs mostly use old, decommissioned 'Jacks that may have seen better days. However Khador sounds like the furthest from your playstyle. As they have more options for low-risk higher model armies, than low count high risk armies. If you want to blitz in "Waaagh" style you'll have few options.


This link may be worth it for you: http://battlecollege.wikispaces.com/

It'll have pictures of all the models for each faction as well as tactical tidbits. You shouldn't take it as gospel, but for a beginner it'll give you the gist of it. Again if you can get a few test matches in either with loaners or proxies that'd probably serve you best.

It sounds to me like legion, circle, or protectorate suit you the best.
Legion tends to go beast heavy and some of them have a tundra warrior/shaman vibe.
Circle runs enough beasts to feel elite and has literal druids, shamans, and savage warriors.
Protectorate run jack heavy easily and have lots of knights and priests.

Surtur wrote:Remember to look at hordes, mercs and minions! It's not just warmachine's 5 main factions.

6