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.

So a very quick question and feel free to offer as much detail as possible:

So I want to play either Cygnar or Retribution. Here are my pros and cons

Cygnar:
PRO - I feel has better models
CON - I have been told you need to use mercenaries to make up for their bad infantry

Retribution:
PRO - I have been told they are better range than Cygnar
PRO - I have heard they have decent to good infantry


So my real dilemma is I like the Cygnar models better, but it seems that Retribution is a better army, especially in the range game which is supposed to be the Cygnar specialty.

Any advice is useful, and I can give more details if wanted.

J0kerrMT wrote:
So a very quick question and feel free to offer as much detail as possible:
So I want to play either Cygnar or Retribution. Here are my pros and cons

Play either. Both are fine.

J0kerrMT wrote:

Cygnar:
PRO - I feel has better models
CON - I have been told you need to use mercenaries to make up for their bad infantry
Retribution:
PRO - I have been told they are better range than Cygnar
PRO - I have heard they have decent to good infantry
So my real dilemma is I like the Cygnar models better, but it seems that Retribution is a better army, especially in the range game which is supposed to be the Cygnar specialty.
Any advice is useful, and I can give more details if wanted.

Cygnar: whats wrong with Mercenaries? All they do is give you more choice. And its not like cygnaran infantry is bad. Gun mages are great. Stormnouns are fun. Sword knights can be deadly with the right support. And I’ve got a softspot for long gunners and trenchers.
Regarding the ranged game – both play a good ranged game. Cygnar might have been the original “ranged” faction when Warmachine hit, but all factions have grown and evolved. Don’t be so limited in your thinking. Just as other factions can do a ranged game, cygnar can now do a melee game. Regarding the guns, both have POW10s, Range 14s, solid jacks and Snipe spells across the board. I don’t think either is strictly better. Both are combined arms factions. Cygnar has better mercenaries, whereas retribution has harder hitting melee units.
I don’t know if Retribution is a better army. They’ve always had some hard issues, though their new caster Issyria and other releases seem to be bringing their game up to par. Cygnar is solid. Especially since the Stormwall hit. And while Ret have (arguably) better infantry, Cygnar gets more S-tier warcasters like Haley and Caine.
In terms of competitiveness and style, both can play an equal game. So it boils down to look/aesthetic/fluff preference. Go with that.

I agree with Deadknight.

Both factions can run a shooty game, though I think Cygnar can do it in more and more interesting ways (Gun Mages, Lightning, Long Gunners, Trenchers, Mercs).

I would be curious to hear exactly what you want / expect out of an army / faction before making a suggestion.

 Plarzoid wrote:
I agree with Deadknight.

Both factions can run a shooty game, though I think Cygnar can do it in more and more interesting ways (Gun Mages, Lightning, Long Gunners, Trenchers, Mercs).

I would be curious to hear exactly what you want / expect out of an army / faction before making a suggestion.

No problem...this is generally what I look for:

I like to play the mixed gamed...not an expert on anything, but can do everything. Not the the weakest, but not the strongest.

In other words...I like to have a range game...but I don't need to be the best at it.

I like good melee troops, but they don't have to be the strongest..just not fall to a strong wind.

Some armor is good, don't want the paper armor, but don't need everything to be tanks.

The one thing I can't tolerate is slow...the army has to have average to fast for speed.

I also don't like mixed forces...I like to just play a pure army with no attachments...weird right?


So if you have any suggestions for any army like this in warmachine or hordes let me know...i can also give more information if more specifics are needed.

What do you mean by a pure army with no attachments? As in, no mercenaries? Even in Retribution, they love their Ret-Mercs like Eiryss and Sylys. I guess you could consider them exceptions since they're both technically part of the Retribution organization, but differ in their fluff-rationale with the main army.

On that note, then you shouldn't have too much of a problem with Cygnar since most of the Highborn mercs are/were Cygnar citizens who had a difference of opinion with the kingdom.

 Kirbinator wrote:
What do you mean by a pure army with no attachments? As in, no mercenaries? Even in Retribution, they love their Ret-Mercs like Eiryss and Sylys. I guess you could consider them exceptions since they're both technically part of the Retribution organization, but differ in their fluff-rationale with the main army.

On that note, then you shouldn't have too much of a problem with Cygnar since most of the Highborn mercs are/were Cygnar citizens who had a difference of opinion with the kingdom.

When I say that, I want to use a army that doesn't use anything outside of its book.

So even if the model is a "mercenary" but is in the Cygnar book it would count as a Cygnar model.

Oh, so then you wouldn't be using Eiryss in a Retribution army either. That would be kind of saddening.

Also, there are multiple books and sources at this point. There's certainly the Forces of Warmachine: Cygnar/Retribution book, but other units are also in Wrath, Colossals, or No Quarters magazines. If you are limiting yourself only to models in the Forces of Warmachine book, you are leaving gaps in your army that the game developers specifically filled.

 Kirbinator wrote:
Oh, so then you wouldn't be using Eiryss in a Retribution army either. That would be kind of saddening.

Also, there are multiple books and sources at this point. There's certainly the Forces of Warmachine: Cygnar/Retribution book, but other units are also in Wrath, Colossals, or No Quarters magazines. If you are limiting yourself only to models in the Forces of Warmachine book, you are leaving gaps in your army that the game developers specifically filled.

I will reword what I said earlier: I want to use models that are only officialy part of their armies...so Khador would be all Khador, nothing else. Cygnar would be all Cygnar models..nothing else...No Mercenaries or minions.

J0kerrMT wrote:
No problem...this is generally what I look for:
I like to play the mixed gamed...not an expert on anything, but can do everything. Not the the weakest, but not the strongest.
In other words...I like to have a range game...but I don't need to be the best at it.
I like good melee troops, but they don't have to be the strongest..just not fall to a strong wind.
Some armor is good, don't want the paper armor, but don't need everything to be tanks.
The one thing I can't tolerate is slow...the army has to have average to fast for speed.
I also don't like mixed forces...I like to just play a pure army with no attachments...weird right?
So if you have any suggestions for any army like this in warmachine or hordes let me know...i can also give more information if more specifics are needed.

So… Essentially, the “balanced combined arms” approach. Yeah, that’s pretty much all of the factions then!

J0kerrMT wrote:
When I say that, I want to use a army that doesn't use anything outside of its book.
So even if the model is a "mercenary" but is in the Cygnar book it would count as a Cygnar model.

There is more than just the cygnar “book”. Sure, you’ve got the Forces of War: Cygnar book, but you also have Colossals and Wrath. The cygnar “book” is everything that works for Cygnar. Which includes plenty mercenary outfits. And if they’ll work for cygnar, then they’re a viable choice.

J0kerrMT wrote:

I will reword what I said earlier: I want to use models that are only officialy part of their armies...so Khador would be all Khador, nothing else. Cygnar would be all Cygnar models..nothing else...No Mercenaries or minions.

Mercenaries are already part of the armies of the Iron Kingdoms, and have served this role since well before even the thousand cities era.

It doesn’t matter if they do it for patriotism or profit, if they’re being paid by the crown, they’re part of the same Cygnaran army. Besides, it’s well noted in the fluff that use of mercenaries is simply what Cygnar does, so if anything, use of mercenaries is even more true to the spirit of Cygnar than an army of “cygnaran” units. But iIf it makes you feel better, paint them blue, and add Runewood to make them offially Cygnaran models instead of mercenary ones.

Deadnight wrote:

J0kerrMT wrote:
No problem...this is generally what I look for:
I like to play the mixed gamed...not an expert on anything, but can do everything. Not the the weakest, but not the strongest.
In other words...I like to have a range game...but I don't need to be the best at it.
I like good melee troops, but they don't have to be the strongest..just not fall to a strong wind.
Some armor is good, don't want the paper armor, but don't need everything to be tanks.
The one thing I can't tolerate is slow...the army has to have average to fast for speed.
I also don't like mixed forces...I like to just play a pure army with no attachments...weird right?
So if you have any suggestions for any army like this in warmachine or hordes let me know...i can also give more information if more specifics are needed.

So… Essentially, the “balanced combined arms” approach. Yeah, that’s pretty much all of the factions then!

J0kerrMT wrote:
When I say that, I want to use a army that doesn't use anything outside of its book.
So even if the model is a "mercenary" but is in the Cygnar book it would count as a Cygnar model.

There is more than just the cygnar “book”. Sure, you’ve got the Forces of War: Cygnar book, but you also have Colossals and Wrath. The cygnar “book” is everything that works for Cygnar. Which includes plenty mercenary outfits. And if they’ll work for cygnar, then they’re a viable choice.

J0kerrMT wrote:

I will reword what I said earlier: I want to use models that are only officialy part of their armies...so Khador would be all Khador, nothing else. Cygnar would be all Cygnar models..nothing else...No Mercenaries or minions.

Mercenaries are already part of the armies of the Iron Kingdoms, and have served this role since well before even the thousand cities era.

It doesn’t matter if they do it for patriotism or profit, if they’re being paid by the crown, they’re part of the same Cygnaran army. Besides, it’s well noted in the fluff that use of mercenaries is simply what Cygnar does, so if anything, use of mercenaries is even more true to the spirit of Cygnar than an army of “cygnaran” units. But iIf it makes you feel better, paint them blue, and add Runewood to make them offially Cygnaran models instead of mercenary ones.

No no...that is not what I am looking for. Thanks for the advice though.

Who would be considered the best balanced combined arms army with a slightly above to strong ranged force that can stand on its own without anything from mercenaries or minions?

It's no biggy, you can do alright without any mercenary models. You might have a couple of gaps that could be filled by those mercs, but it's not like Cygnar units and support solos are bad.

Back on topic of Cygnar vs. Retribution, my vote is Cygnar. They have more options due to being an older army and just personally I like their casters more. Both can do the combined arms approach just fine. The only army that doesn't really do combined arms is Cryx. Their best ranged unit is Nyss Hunters, a mercenary group, and none of their casters directly support ranged attacking very well.

 Kirbinator wrote:
It's no biggy, you can do alright without any mercenary models. You might have a couple of gaps that could be filled by those mercs, but it's not like Cygnar units and support solos are bad.

Back on topic of Cygnar vs. Retribution, my vote is Cygnar. They have more options due to being an older army and just personally I like their casters more. Both can do the combined arms approach just fine. The only army that doesn't really do combined arms is Cryx. Their best ranged unit is Nyss Hunters, a mercenary group, and none of their casters directly support ranged attacking very well.

Thank you!

 Kirbinator wrote:
Oh, so then you wouldn't be using Eiryss in a Retribution army either. That would be kind of saddening.

Also, there are multiple books and sources at this point. There's certainly the Forces of Warmachine: Cygnar/Retribution book, but other units are also in Wrath, Colossals, or No Quarters magazines. If you are limiting yourself only to models in the Forces of Warmachine book, you are leaving gaps in your army that the game developers specifically filled.

FYI both P and E Eiryss are in the Ret book.

Judging from your criteria I think Retribution edges out Cygnar just because they have a couple of units that are more robust. Neither faction has trouble shooting or running combined arms. Nor does either faction bring a lot of bulk. Cygnar runs jacks a little better and has stronger support casters while Retribution has slightly tougher infantry that perform with minimal support and casters that provide less support.

Do not neglect protectorate or Khador in your decision. They both have strong combined arms builds. I know they don't look like they have much ranged threat but winterguard and exemplars errant are both strong ranged units that get a ton of support. Reckonersbehemoth, and both factions' colossals are strong ranged jacks.

If you want a different feel and don't mind high evasion over high armor you could add Legion to the mix.

Is she? Huh, I was wholly unaware. That's awesome! I knew she had the special rule that she counted as a native Ret model when used with them, much like Sylys, but didn't know she was in the book. Sweet!

Here's the thing, until you've got a few games under your belt you won't really know what to pick and it'll be really hard for you to describe what you want - primarily because you're unfamiliar with the mechanics and how a certain playstyle interacts with the game.
You're initial choice is pretty much going to be an aesthetic choice with some armies ruled out from the roughest of gameplay descriptors.

You're already down to two armies that are both supremely combined arms, so it's going to be very hard to get advice on what army to pick between them. Naturally you'll get advice based on other people's own preference, but in the end you'll more or less going to have to take a chance and hope that the army you choose is going to be what you like.

What you can get advice on is specifics. Such as "Retribution can only take mercenary units that contain elves, but when they do those units count as Retribution models and not mercenaries" or "Cygnar can take most of the mercenary faction charters, but they can only count as in-faction models for purpose of spells if that unit has a certain solo attached to them".
Or, perhaps the most important one: Retribution is a new faction and considered to be a main faction, as such they do not have as many options as the other main factions but will gain above average number of new models with each new supplement (storyline advancement more or less).

If you choose Cygnar you'll also find it easier to get advice here since very few actually play Retribution, but most Warmachine veterans on these boards have at least 35pts worth of Cygnar lying around. (Actually, the Retribution advice I see on Dakka is mostly scraps of second-hand info)
On the plus side: you'll be a unique gem if you pick the elves!

I"m not so certain about the unique gem part. Those darned elves are all over my local stores.

If an army has access to Mercs you are doing yourself a great disservice gameplay-wise to not consider using at least a hand full. Some are worth their weight in gold. Reinholdt, Gorman, A&H are all examples of mercs that will make your army shine.

That said, I think Ret has very little access to mercs so if you are adamant about not including them they would probably be your best bet. All the other factions work a lot better if mercs are included as options when building your list.

And about shooting. An important thing worth noting is that shooting tends to be weaker than melee. It if very difficult to make a competitive gunline type list without including at least some infantry. So the best "shooting" army doesn't mean it is a good army. You really want the best combined arms army. Ret and Cygnar both fall into that easily, but even khador and Menoth can let loose plenty of havoc at range. Cryx is about the only warmachine faction that pretty much eschews shooting and even they are not devoid of good shooting.

J0kerrMT wrote:
So a very quick question and feel free to offer as much detail as possible:

So I want to play either Cygnar or Retribution. Here are my pros and cons

Cygnar:
PRO - I feel has better models
CON - I have been told you need to use mercenaries to make up for their bad infantry

Retribution:
PRO - I have been told they are better range than Cygnar
PRO - I have heard they have decent to good infantry

I think some heavy emphasis should be put on this. If you like the model, you'll enjoy assembling and painting them. If you don't like it, well, have fun making an army of stuff you don't like the look of or you feel another army would have been better looking.

Cygnar has a bunch of options, and is pretty solid. Go cygnar.

One last question...which army out of warmachine/hordes is most comparable to Space Marines?

Play style ( and if so which kind of marine army) or fluff?

Fluffwise, the closest you could possibly get would be various knightly orders. Particularly Menoth and the Knights Exemplar, but only so far as Space Marines are basically knights. Otherwise there is no similarity.

Playstyle, not at all really. Just about every faction has some sort of heavy infantry which means you can make list focusing on that.

J0kerrMT wrote:
One last question...which army out of warmachine/hordes is most comparable to Space Marines?

None. There are no bolters or power armor beyond warcaster armor.

 Surtur wrote:

J0kerrMT wrote:
One last question...which army out of warmachine/hordes is most comparable to Space Marines?

None. There are no bolters or power armor beyond warcaster armor.

To be fair, khadoran meno war wear steam powered suits. And go around wielding shock hammers, mortar-guns with chainsaw attachments or a halberd/shield combo. But yeah, they're the closest thing and they're well off from it.

And of course, there is the butcher. he's the size of one, and he'd make mincemeat out of a few marines with Lola, I figure!

I'm sorry joker, but I have to agree with the guys. The closest you'll get is a 'knight' theme for some units, whereas some marines also have a 'knight' theme. But in general,There are no 'space marines' in this game.

 motyak wrote:
Play style ( and if so which kind of marine army) or fluff?

Play-style: an elite force (small numbers), with good armor, accurate guns,

J0kerrMT wrote:


Play-style: an elite force (small numbers), with good armor, accurate guns,

'Good armour' is relative. Most infantry armour is arm11 to 16. Pow10s (ie shots from basic rifles) kill them on an average roll. And neither cygnar and ret get heavy infantry in the vein of menowar. And that's true across the board for all factions. That said, all factions have spells, feats and abilities to 'toughen up' their guys, whether it's via active arm boosts (defensive ward, arcane shield), passive boosts (defensive line etc) or through other methods.

'Small numbers' is relative in a skirmish game. A horde is thirty dudes. Most armies can go numbers light, or swarm.

'Accurate guns' is relative. Both cygnar and ret have caster feats and spells that boost accurate ranged attacks. Both have innately accurate troops on top of this. Heck, khador do as well, with kovnik joe and his winter guard buddies, and widowmakers are accurate as he'll as well.

You need to stop thinking in terms of 'this games version of something from 40k'. They're completely different games.

Thanks for the help...but I refuse to believe that a central theme is not avialable in all armies or this would be chess.

So, is their a group that in general is more elite than the others?With in general better armor, and better accuracy?

Out of all hordes and warmachine

All of them, they all have "spam" units that work by having bodies and they all have "elite" units that work by having great stats and special rules. For 'casters and 'locks every faction has super-solos that want the rest of the army to be self sufficient, 'beast or 'jack casters that do nothing for infantry, infantry casters who love having multiple units some of wich need support, and casters who will do a little of evreything.

The reason this isn't chess is that each army has slight differences and the same idea behind an army list runs slightly differently in different armies. Convergence and minions are the only 2 factions that aren't spoiled for choice at this point. Mercinaries have slightly less choice but that's because it can't all be run under one war caster.

 ChaoticMind wrote:
All of them, they all have "spam" units that work by having bodies and they all have "elite" units that work by having great stats and special rules. For 'casters and 'locks every faction has super-solos that want the rest of the army to be self sufficient, 'beast or 'jack casters that do nothing for infantry, infantry casters who love having multiple units some of wich need support, and casters who will do a little of evreything.

The reason this isn't chess is that each army has slight differences and the same idea behind an army list runs slightly differently in different armies. Convergence and minions are the only 2 factions that aren't spoiled for choice at this point. Mercinaries have slightly less choice but that's because it can't all be run under one war caster.

If each army has slight differences what are they? Can you give me the slight difference of each army then for warmachine and hordes?



From what I am reading, it sounds like either khador or menoth for an elite play style.

http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?120453-Newbie-needs-assistance-picking-and-sticking-to-a-Warmachine-Hordes-faction!

J0kerrMT wrote:Thanks for the help...but I refuse to believe that a central theme is not avialable in all armies or this would be chess.

So, is their a group that in general is more elite than the others?With in general better armor, and better accuracy?

Out of all hordes and warmachine

disbelieve it all you want bud, but that's how it works.

No faction is more "elite" than any of the others. All have "elite" units that you can focus on when making a list.

better armour? Allowing for spells and feats, that's all of them.

In terms of "armour", all factions have some ways of getting it. With some, they're built to be natively tough. look at khador - natively high arm infantry with Men o war, iron fangs, uhlans, assault kommandoes, and with the shield wall orders, they're quite tough. They dont reqlly have any ARM buffing spells though, but have other ways of hardening their infantry - typically defence bufs. Trolls get the tough special rule, as well as other support units such as the krielstone bearers which passively increase armour. Cygnar can spam arcane shield on theirs to make them very tough (+3ARM) as well as spells like deceleration (+2ARM against ranged attacks). Ret have quite a few casters with Inviolable resolve (fearless and +2ARM).Some of the knightly orders from cygnar get defensive line abilities which is a further +2ARM. So even if they're natively squishy, you can buff them to be very tough units.

Beynd that, you've got access to tough, multiwound infantry - all factions bar retribution (cygnar has mercenary options) which can add to the "better armour" feel of an army. whether its blighted ogryns, tharn, skinwalkers, troll champs, or gators on the hordes side, or bastions, men o war, ogryn assault corps, or blighted ogryn on the warmachine side.

Better accuracy? Most factions will have spells, feats or solos that will buff accuracy - i've given examples of this.

J0kerrMT wrote:

If each army has slight differences what are they? Can you give me the slight difference of each army then for warmachine and hordes?

From what I am reading, it sounds like either khador or menoth for an elite play style.

http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?120453-Newbie-needs-assistance-picking-and-sticking-to-a-Warmachine-Hordes-faction!

we've had this. Not being cheeky mate, but look at the stickies. they've got all the basics that layout the different factions. Differences are in the fluff, the models, and the playstyles and general themes. Though all factions might have the same broad set of tools (with regional variations) All factions ask different questions, and give slightly different answers when faced with issues.

What makes armies unique is the warcaster. khador and menoth have elite units, but the backbone of khador's army is its winter guard - conscript infantry that tend to roll along in large numbers. Khador has a vastly different roster of unit types from steam powered infantry, to stock heavy infantry with tower shields, conscripted mass infantry, guerrilla fighters, a sniper wing, guerrilla irregulars and storm troopers. Same withthe Menites. they have elite elements, but the temple flameguard, and zealots are hardly "elite warrior" material, though they are extremely effective and viable choices.