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 every second thread in the WHFB section being the same question over and over again, would it be possible to make a sticky with a brief rundown of how each army plays so folk can be directed there instead of having 50% of the boards content filled up with the same question? Its starting to gak me to tears.

Try this.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/401246.page

Squash wrote:Try this.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/401246.page

This is good. But like Jubear said, we should get this stickied!

Happy to add more about Dark and Elves in said thread as well

Squash wrote:Try this.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/401246.page

Could a mod sticky this?

Check the thread date, it's very old, in fact the Empire and Vampire Counts descriptions are now out of date. Back in the time of this thread I contacted a mod about having this stickied, but was told stickying for this would force the mods to sticky too many other things and thus clutter the board, he was probably right.

Squash wrote:Check the thread date, it's very old, in fact the Empire and Vampire Counts descriptions are now out of date. Back in the time of this thread I contacted a mod about having this stickied, but was told stickying for this would force the mods to sticky too many other things and thus clutter the board, he was probably right.

Well, there should be an updated one that is stickied! B/c I do agree, these threads are getting quite redundant to the point of pointlessness.

Here is a fact.

People that makes the "help me pick army threads" wont bother to read the stickies if there was one.

More importantly, why are they so bad?

Sometimes it's nice to hear from the community what they think, rather than some arbitrary sticky that might not really help.

Well, at least we could tell them to "go read the sticke" instead of doing the rundown every time.
Anyway, perhaps we should do a new thread and include a good description of every army and have it sticked, or perhaps do an article of each army, update when necessary, and post the newbies in the right direction.

Peoples' opinions change on armies as time goes on. A 6 month old post is 6 months out-of-date.

A sticky is for commenting on one topic. Each individual posting in the same sticky isn't really asking the same question, they are asking what army should "I" choose, not the OP. And everyone who posts has different likes/dislikes/requirements. So the sticky would be a convoluted mess of people responding to old questions and different criteria. You would have to quote everyone to even know what's going on and read past all the posts that don't apply (because they are answering someone else).

Yeah, it's an awful lot of the same question. But they generally don't get a lot of responses and fall off. Besides, without them, this subforum wouldn't have anything except the occassional argument about whether 40K players stink more than WHFB players.

Threads like this which have no relation to Warhammer Fantasy at all need to stop.

While I agree that it can be pretty annoying, I don't see the harm... and occasionally does offer the occasional laugh.

LunaHound wrote:Here is a fact.

People that makes the "help me pick army threads" wont bother to read the stickies if there was one.

This.

Also it really wouldn't bother me at all if people did more than just say "I am starting this army, tell me what I need". Adding in "I want magic heavy and I like the look of X unit" would be enough, just something that doesn't leave the first three replies as "We need to know what do you want to do with this army before we can help".

I vote we all reply with "models of some description" so that they have to research their armies.

thedarkavenger wrote:I vote we all reply with "models of some description" so that they have to research their armies.

Oh I am totally down with this. Oh will happily write a full list for someone and get into depth about how and why it works, once that is they actaully know what they want to play.

But people want other peoples opinions rather than going to lexicum or GW sites, thats why they made a thread.

The issue really is this: The Title of this Section is "WHFB General Discussion and Background" and while "Help me choose an army" does fit in this section what I reckon most people who frequent here want to see in terms of threads is things like: "Should WHFB get more of GW's attention over 40k?" or "Is Sigmar really a God?" or "Will the High Elves make a comeback or will their population eventually dwindle until they are extinct?". Such threads actually promote discussion and are generally far more enjoyable for people to read and join in with than "Help me choose an army".

Another thing is something that Jervis Johnson, in all his infinite wisdom, summed up very nicely in a recent Standard Bearer when he discussed this same issue. That thing is: "I cannot choose your army for you." At the end of the day, it is YOUR army, and YOU are the one that is going to be buying the models, assembling them, painting them and playing games with them. Not me. Not Jubear. Not Squash. Not anyone else on these forums. YOU. So, we could say that one army suits your needs when really, you don't enjoy collecting that army. I can't think of a good example in the Fantasy Universe, so I'll use a 40k one: A typical 40k army that I'll enjoy playing (and will do well with) is an army that can chuck some powerful assault units into the enemy lines, or stick some firepower in range quickly, backed up by powerful psychic support. If I said this in a "Help me choose an army thread" a perfectly reasonable answer would be "You should get a Space Wolves army made up of Grey Hunters and Rune Priests in Rhinos and Assaulty Wolf Guard in Land Raiders". Thing is, I borrowed my Uncle's SWs a few months back to try out such an army. I did not like it one bit.

However, what we CAN do is tell you the advantages and disadvantages of each army. We can tell you that High Elves are a cheap army to collect moneywise because you get a load in the IoB box and, thanks to their elite-ist nature, they can scale points values quickly. We can tell you that Wood Elves are a low tier army and therefore not recommended for a beginner, since you'll need a lot of skill to win. Etc, etc, etc. Now, doing this would not be so bad, if we didn't have to do it all the time. Even if we can comment on these threads saying "Please read this [insert thread link]. It's a thread designed to give you help in choosing an army, read through it, see if it makes up your mind (and if it doesn't, I'll be happy to answer any more questions you have)." - The bracketed part depending if you feel charitable - This is a lot better than having to write out the merits of certain, or every, army.

So, if we can get this thread stickied, it would help. Yes, it will not make up everyone's mind. Yes, there will be some people who will miss it or not bother reading it. However, it will benefit some people and we can save ourselves some time and point the one's who've missed the thread to it. It'd be better for us and, frankly, better for those who need help choosing an army.

I remember the push for an army info sticky- but the mods have already said its not going to happen.

This is a hobby site. The help choose threads are often the very first exposure people have to the new hobby.

How about helping the hobby grow and being supportive of new members across the globe? If you don't like the threads, don't read them.

While that link is good, I gotta argue with the tiers, Beastmen are in no way low tier, keep thinking it though.

There are six "decide an army" threads on the first page right now.

A new one pops up at least every week.

The answers are ALWAYS the same:

which army do you think looks cool?
which army appeals to you from what you know?
what style of play would you prefer?

Perhaps it's just me, but when I intend to buy something, I research it, not just ask the salesman what I should buy.

Looking up army reviews is quite different than asking people for an army suggestion.

Now, as for the problem with threads of this topic:

What we need is an up to date synopsis of each army in a single thread. From there, we can simply link the thread every time someone asks which army to play. It doesn't need to be an in depth review of every unit in an army, just a summary of the flavor and play style of it.

Hargus56 wrote:While that link is good, I gotta argue with the tiers, Beastmen are in no way low tier, keep thinking it though.

that link is a year old, fyi. ...as has already been established in this thread, if you read it.

As for the topic at hand, maybe the sticky should be more like a "resource to all WHFB armies" thing instead of a description/suggestion thread that is fluid due to updates? All 15 armies have at least 1 fan site dedicated to that army. Granted, that could take traffic away from DakkaDakka, but it could also help answer some questions for new players before they post. Also, a brief fluff summary could be included as well, since that (usually) doesn't change as frequently as game rules/mechanics.

I'd gladly start a thread that is more info/resource-oriented instead of suggestion-oriented if it were to be stickied. Not sure how to get one stickied though...

Dr. Cheesesteak wrote:

Hargus56 wrote:While that link is good, I gotta argue with the tiers, Beastmen are in no way low tier, keep thinking it though.

that link is a year old, fyi. ...as has already been established in this thread, if you read it.

As for the topic at hand, maybe the sticky should be more like a "resource to all WHFB armies" thing instead of a description/suggestion thread that is fluid due to updates? All 15 armies have at least 1 fan site dedicated to that army. Granted, that could take traffic away from DakkaDakka, but it could also help answer some questions for new players before they post. Also, a brief fluff summary could be included as well, since that (usually) doesn't change as frequently as game rules/mechanics.

I'd gladly start a thread that is more info/resource-oriented instead of suggestion-oriented if it were to be stickied. Not sure how to get one stickied though...

Indeed, each army does have a site. Sadly some of the more popular armies have terrible sites with low traffic(druchii.net), some of which are extremely slow.

http://www.ulthuan.net/home.html (High Elves)
http://warhammer-empire.com/ (Empire)
http://s4.zetaboards.com/cotec/index/ (Warriors of Chaos)
http://www.thedaemoniclegion.com/ (Daemons of Chaos)
http://www.freewebs.com/herdstone/ (beastmen)
http://www.da-warpath.com/ (Orcs & Goblins)
http://www.druchii.net/index.php (Dark Elves)
http://www.vampirecounts.net/
http://www.chaos-dwarfs.com/
http://www.lustria-online.com/ (Lizardmen)
http://www.ogrestronghold.com/forum/index.php
http://www.khemri.co.nr/ (tomb kings)
http://www.roundtable-bretonnia.org/
http://www.bugmansbrewery.com/ (dwarves)
http://s6.zetaboards.com/The_UnderEmpire/index/ (skaven)
http://www.asrai.org/ (wood elves)

That right there is 16 sites dedicated to the 16 current armies in Warhammer Fantasy. Now go do your own homework on which one you like.

DukeRustfield wrote:This is a hobby site. The help choose threads are often the very first exposure people have to the new hobby.

How about helping the hobby grow and being supportive of new members across the globe? If you don't like the threads, don't read them.

In fact, I usually post in these threads, when I can genuinely help. But why should we do the same for thread after thread when it's easier to make a sticky with compiled info?

Dr. Cheesesteak wrote:

I'd gladly start a thread that is more info/resource-oriented instead of suggestion-oriented if it were to be stickied. Not sure how to get one stickied though...

Same here. It doesn't have to be stickied really, all it needs to be is existent. We can still link to it then. I guess a collaborated effort is the way forward, some people are going to be a lot more knowledgable about some armies than others.

Aerethan wrote:

Indeed, each army does have a site. Sadly some of the more popular armies have terrible sites with low traffic(druchii.net), some of which are extremely slow.

http://www.ulthuan.net/home.html (High Elves)
http://warhammer-empire.com/ (Empire)
http://s4.zetaboards.com/cotec/index/ (Warriors of Chaos)
http://www.thedaemoniclegion.com/ (Daemons of Chaos)
http://www.freewebs.com/herdstone/ (beastmen)
http://www.da-warpath.com/ (Orcs & Goblins)
http://www.druchii.net/index.php (Dark Elves)
http://www.vampirecounts.net/
http://www.chaos-dwarfs.com/
http://www.lustria-online.com/ (Lizardmen)
http://www.ogrestronghold.com/forum/index.php
http://www.khemri.co.nr/ (tomb kings)
http://www.roundtable-bretonnia.org/
http://www.bugmansbrewery.com/ (dwarves)
http://s6.zetaboards.com/The_UnderEmpire/index/ (skaven)
http://www.asrai.org/ (wood elves)

That right there is 16 sites dedicated to the 16 current armies in Warhammer Fantasy. Now go do your own homework on which one you like.

These are good, but the problem with them is that each I imagine is promoting their corresponding army. Certainly the people on the links are likely to be slightly biased. Someone posted before about why can't you link to the GW pages on them. It's the same concept - GW are trying to sell you the army, so will usually only list the positives.

So we need a cynical thread about every army to balance things out? DIBS!!!!

One thing that most of these sites have(or should have) is a tactics section that outlines how the army and units play, which is important information. They also have better representations of models than what GW supplies since GW photoshops every pic they make.

A lot of information on that Beastmen link is no longer viable one look at the army list section will tell you, here is a link direct to the forum: http://z8.invisionfree.com/herdstone/index.php?

Aerethan wrote:So we need a cynical thread about every army to balance things out? DIBS!!!!

One thing that most of these sites have(or should have) is a tactics section that outlines how the army and units play, which is important information. They also have better representations of models than what GW supplies since GW photoshops every pic they make.

yeah. I think that's what should be the typical route - that new players check out these sites maybe to get a general feel for that army. Then come to DakkaDakka to ask for an impartial (hopefully) perspective.

Like Brets and Ogres? Check out those sites. Got a better understanding of how they play? Then come here and ask how Brets and Ogres perform vs specific armies (like your local meta) from those players' perspectives. Or how Brets cavalry compares to other cavalry. Which of the 2 is cheaper depending on how many pts I want? etc etc. That's how it'd be ideally, I suppose.

I really don't mind the one's where it's just "New to Fantasy. I like WoC, Lizardmen, WE, and Ogres but I don't know anything about them. Can you guys help me?" It's just those ones seem to be running rampant the past few months. Granted, the posters have every right to post those threads. It's just kind of wearisome to give a summary of multiple armies multiple times a week. A sticky would be much better.

I was giving examples, not remarking on their validity. For some armies there are more than a single site or forum.

And I agree that helping someone decide between armies 1, 2, or 3 is fine, but just asking blank questions about picking one of 16 different armies is just stupid.

And honestly, if someone wants a "learner" army, just tell them Empire. They are simple, straightforward, and generic. They compete in all aspects of the game without being overpowered at any of them. Empire might not be your favorite, but they are the one army that has everything in moderation.

I don't believe sending people to other websites as a matter of procedure is how you run a discussion forum. In fact, it's rather nonsensical.

>This is a discussion forum.
>I would like to discuss.
>Cool. Leave.

DukeRustfield wrote:I don't believe sending people to other websites as a matter of procedure is how you run a discussion forum. In fact, it's rather nonsensical.

>This is a discussion forum.
>I would like to discuss.
>Cool. Leave.

You're missing the point. It isn't that we dislike the "Need help picking an army" threads or don't want to discuss those subjects. Heck, I love helping people pick an army and going over armies' traits, styles, etc. It's just how redundant and wearisome they are. I can only give so many half paragraph summaries of WoC and Lizardmen before i just want to say "try checking one of the exact same threads." OP in this thread, and others including myself, are simply asking for a Stickied thread that would make things better/easier for the regular suggesters and the new "need help picking an army" posters.