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.

Laughing God wrote:

theamericanos wrote:dont listen to these people. Get a dark eldar army. They are unbeatable if used correctly. It can take a while but once you master it they become an army that really pisses off people because their big tuff orks and marines are getting shredded and demoralized by evislender space elves. I f you want to know more about them pm me.

Telling people to start the game with the most brittle unforgiving army in the game is ill advised... just saying.

Unless of course thats the army that best suits you. Go for it, just expect alot of pain before you get a handle on DE.

I started playing 40k two and a half months ago? Guess what my first army is? :p

It's a steep curve, because you don't get forgiven for mistakes like Marine armies, but it isn't any less enjoyable, especially when you play a game with good strategy and tact and the army rewards you with a good whupping of your opponent.







My advice, go with what you like the most fluff-wise, as said above. When I was picking up the game, I saw the DE codex and models and instantly knew they were perfect for me. I have yet to regret picking them. Yes, a bunch of people play SWs. Yes, they are kinda cheesy. But if you like em the best, GO FOR IT! I can't stress enough how much of an impact loving your army has on your experience.

Guard are a pretty solid army and good for starters.

Orks they can be tough to play but are loads of fun.

Chaos....well they can win if you play again someone that messes up alot. They are my first army and my favorite but they kinda blow in non friendly games.

Tyranids are not to bad but are a fairly slow army now. If you are a cunning person they will work for you.

Eldar well a few people I know play as them and they can kick alot of butt. Wrath walls and jetbike armies Str 6 spam all hurt.

Dark Eldar well they are the new book and have alot of pain in the book but are a very hard army to be good with.

Space Marines are balanced and can be a very good army if used correctly.

Necrons....they are a joke against other armies sorry but its true.

Tau have alot of firepower but not enough to stop most armies.

BLack templars good if you wanna spam tank hunter termies.

Dark Angels meh not that great either.

Space wolves well they are a tough cookie to crack. My only problem is their drop pods cant hold 12. All around a good book with lots of hard hitting things.

Blood angels are good fast army and can spam armor 13.

Brother Heinrich wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:

Brother Heinrich wrote:I won't tell you what to to buy, but I will tell you this, space wolves, just another face on the bandwagon, dark eldar, steep and unfriendly learning curve that will have you hating this hobby out of the gate. but as aforementioned, look into the backgrounds, model range, and feel of each race, and let that be your deciding factor, that way when you win it feels that much more like your personal accomplishment, and not, "hey look what the rules did for me on autopilot!"

There is no such thing as "autopilot". I really wish people would stop spewing out that bs.

Yeah, I realize that the older codices have a really hard time competing with the newer ones, because they were written for an older edition under a completely different mindset and only have one, maybe two army builds that are any good and everything that differs is almost guaranteed to lose. But GW only works so fast, so it's something you either have to accept and just play with them regardless, knowing it'll be an uphill battle and you'll have to be on top of your game to do well, or switch to a newer, more competently-written codex in the meantime, until your older army gets updated. It sucks, but that's the nature of the beast and what GW's chosen business model has resulted in.

all of 40k is turning into auto-pilot, sorry that's just the way the game is going, I've spent the past month tabling/getting tabled every day I go to my FLGS, you know what that tells me? this game has gone out of orbit like a rogue planetary body, there is no balance there is either my codex crushes you or your codex crushes me, I've beat veteran players of 12+ years and had my ass handed to me by the kid who picked up the hobby and a box of space wolves three weeks ago. Sorry brother but 40k is rapidly turning into rock 'em sock 'em robots. And now with 6th on the horizon I fear this hobby is rapidly pushing out the old crowd and herding in the new, so like a good old wolf, I'll step out before it turns into magic the gathering where what your army looks like or the background behind it are irrelevant and its only about what the pieces do and how hard you can win.

You need to find better people to play with. There's a reason people like Hulk and I and others love this game and see it as still competitive (despite its many failings / not necessarily being designed that way) --> we play exclusively with people who are running potent lists at a potent level of play, but with affability to the fore. Tabling or getting tabled at the FLGS? You're hurting your own game, and your perception of the hobby in the process.

Yeah, I've found the game to be anything but rock/paper/scissor in the current edition as long as your bringing a balanced force. Now if you are running one dimensional armies or relying on "tricks" then yeah, it's going to feel that way when you run into someone who is counter to your dimension or trick.

But in reality I have about a 85% win record with multiple codexes. Daemons, Tyrannids, SW's, BA's, and Orks. 3/5 of those are suppose to be non-competitive according to the internet. And I do well with them across the country and have fun. Note I stand by this primarily applying to 5th edition/late 4th edition codexes. As these have the ability to have multiple viable builds as opposed to earllier codexes of which everything except Necrons in my opinion can compete.

Brother Heinrich wrote:Yeah, I realize that the older codices have a really hard time competing with the newer ones, because they were written for an older edition under a completely different mindset and only have one, maybe two army builds that are any good and everything that differs is almost guaranteed to lose. But GW only works so fast, so it's something you either have to accept and just play with them regardless, knowing it'll be an uphill battle and you'll have to be on top of your game to do well, or switch to a newer, more competently-written codex in the meantime, until your older army gets updated. It sucks, but that's the nature of the beast and what GW's chosen business model has resulted in.
all of 40k is turning into auto-pilot, sorry that's just the way the game is going, I've spent the past month tabling/getting tabled every day I go to my FLGS, you know what that tells me? this game has gone out of orbit like a rogue planetary body, there is no balance there is either my codex crushes you or your codex crushes me, I've beat veteran players of 12+ years and had my ass handed to me by the kid who picked up the hobby and a box of space wolves three weeks ago. Sorry brother but 40k is rapidly turning into rock 'em sock 'em robots. And now with 6th on the horizon I fear this hobby is rapidly pushing out the old crowd and herding in the new, so like a good old wolf, I'll step out before it turns into magic the gathering where what your army looks like or the background behind it are irrelevant and its only about what the pieces do and how hard you can win.

You must see that using your own limited experience as a broad generalization for the state of the game as a whole is not going to hold any water, right? You represent a tiny fraction of the gaming populace as a whole. Perhaps due to inequities in skill, armies, local meta, or whatever, you have a situation locally that causes big wins and losses.

I play a lot in a lot of different areas against a wide array of players and without a doubt, two players with roughly equal skill and armies results incredibly close, tense games. Most of my games are either me crushing them because they lack skill or a good list, or a very closely fought game that comes down to a single roll of the die or one mistake made by myself or my opponent. I have won GTs and RTTs with a variety of armies against a variety of opponents. I don't say that to pay myself on the back as I am sure no one cares that much, but simply to show that a good player consistently wins regardless of codex When pitted against another good player, baring list missmatches or bad luck, the two will have a very closely fought game.

Of course, you are entitled to your opinion, but I strongly disagree. 40K is not a perfect system and can't be due to the number of variables involved and the way the game is updated, but it is great for competitive play as evidenced by the large and ever growing number of tournaments.

I went from a completely new player to a tournament player in around 6 months. Took me the full year to actually become a "good" tournament player IMO. My problem was I started with Tau at the start of 5th edition, not the best army for a new player. With Tau you really need to be good at judging distances (JSJ) and target priority.

Eldar are a hard army to play when learning the game. They also tend to be a little behind the times in terms of point costs for most units.

Space Wolves on the other hand are a newer codex with the ability to make some very power characters with 4 HQ slots, have some troops with the ability to hold objectives thanks to Counter attack, and spam heavy weapons in the heavy support slots thanks to longfangs.

While you generally won't see a huge difference with most space wolf lists (usually logan-wing, razorback spam, or thunderwolves supported by 3 squads of long fangs plus grey hunters to score objectives), you will see them on the top tables in most tournaments.

If you are looking to become a tournament player Space Wolves are a solid army list.

Keep in mind though that the missile launcher seems to be "the new black" in 2010, so my guess is that Thunderwolfs or logan-wing might be a more competitive list than razorback spam in 2011 (besides Blood Angels can do Razorback spam better anyways).

punkow wrote:ooooh guys!!!! come on!!! I'm just trying to reduce the SW spam out there...

We know, we're just saying you're selfish for attempting to do so. Don't tell people to pick armies they don't like just because you want to play something different.

What happens if that person went with Necrons, not because he really liked them but simply because everyone at the store wanted him to be "different", and convinced him it'd be alright because they can still win games and they'll be easy to paint. Then he loses every single game despite being told they were still "competitive", gets frustrated because the same people who told him he could win are trouncing him every single time, and quits 40k altogether because they feel like they were lied to, realized that their $600 army is worthless, and will be for at least another 3+ years? Does that sound like a good thing for the hobby as a whole?

punkow wrote:it's not funny to see every tournament final SW vs SW, just becaude SW are half of the armies present in the tournament, and I think that a new player should know this...

I feel he should know this, too, so that if he wants to play a good army he'll know which one to get, instead of listening to people like you who are trying to lie and manipulate and get him to play sub-par armies for your own benefit.

If you guys want to play "different" armies so badly why not buy one for him? Let him collect an army worth collecting, and if you feel like curbstomping Necrons or something then you can provide him with that army yourself. That way everyone's happy. Sound good?

punkow wrote:anyway a new player will be beaten for the first games by experiened players even if they use 'crons. I also think that Eldars, at low points like 750 or 1000 are not so unforgiving ... The Avatar and the Seer Council are very strong hqs, very sturdy and the same can be said about wraithlords that are much more forgiving of vehicles of other armies with similar role (AKA dreddies)... Dire avengers surely aren't the best troop choice in the game but they can be used effectively without too much tricks... add the most resilient dedicated transport of the game (wave serpent) and you have a solid core for a bigger army that do not need a tremendously clever use to be effective and fun....

I don't think you know as much about Eldar tactics as you think. Wraithlords are better than dreadnoughts, huh?

punkow wrote:I know that this isn't what the OP asked but I think that his perpective was wrong and would like to tell him... Btw he can choose whatever he wants...

Except Space Wolves, we have enough of them already. Right?

Black Bear wrote:well imperial guard are brilliant for new players because you can field massive numbers for relatively little points and don't necessarily need any tactics to win with them

You sound like you've never played with or against Imperial Guard.

MVBrandt wrote:I suppose if your experience is seeing bad players against good guard players

This is where most generalizations come from, people watching good players play bad. That's why there's a stigma against "net lists" and competitive play in general, people don't get it.

Brother Heinrich wrote:all of 40k is turning into auto-pilot, sorry that's just the way the game is going

Sorry, you're wrong. Why not try actually playing with one of those supposedly unbeatable SW lists that "play themselves" and say that again?

It doesn't matter how good your list is, if you don't understand what makes it good, you won't find success with it. You might get lucky and win a game here or there if you go up against an inferior list (because good list beats bad list, assuming generalship is about the same), but you won't be winning tournaments one-handed and blindfolded like a lot of scrubs seem to think.

Brother Heinrich wrote:I've spent the past month tabling/getting tabled every day I go to my FLGS, you know what that tells me?

That you're not as good at 40k as you think you are? That your list probably has some fat that needs to be trimmed? That you need new tactics? That you've been playing with the same exact list for 5 years and everyone at the store has had plenty of time to learn how to beat you? That you're playing with an old, gimped codex? That your dice are just really, really bad?

Brother Heinrich wrote:this game has gone out of orbit like a rogue planetary body, there is no balance there is either my codex crushes you or your codex crushes me

5th edition is probably the most well-balanced the game has been in a LONG time, probably more than it's ever been. You're honestly telling me that you can take any of the 5th edition codices and "crush" another one without even trying? If so you're either a liar or you've never played with a 5th edition army.

The only reason the game looks like it's "out of orbit" is if you're stuck playing with an old codex, in which case yeah, you have to work extra hard to pull off wins because your codex was poorly designed. I've admitted as much about a thousand times now, old codices are crap compared to the new ones. And that's what gets me about this whole thing, people are crying and whining about 5th edition being "unbalanced", but they don't realize the reason why there's such a huge imbalance, is the design philosophy from 4th edition that they love so much that's still screwing them over. I'm assuming you're a CSM player, judging purely on your rank thing under your name since I have nothing else, but that's the perfect example of how 4th edition worked: gakky codex comes out, it has exactly one good build that appears to be overpowered so everyone flocks to that army (double Lash with oblits), then when everyone realizes that build isn't unbeatable ("omg how does I beat Lash? o right take vehicles, lolz") and the rest of the codex is a bland, unfluffy, unflavored piece of crap, they wait for the Next Big Thing to come out, and the cycle repeats again. Same with Orks (nob bikers, only did well for a while because people found a way to "exploit" wound allocation to make them annoying), same with Dark Angels (Deathwing, everything else you're better off with Codex Space Marines), etc. That's how "balanced" your game was, everything was crap except for that one good list, the only way you could get any semblance of balance was if everyone played with gakky armies and just mutually agreed not to use their army's "powerbuild".

5th edition is much better in comparison. Not perfect, no, but there hasn't been a 5th edition codex yet that was truly "bad". Tyranids are probably the weakest of the new 5th edition codices, and even that is more or less minor nitpicking for me, the army isn't "bad" by any means, I just don't get why they did some of the things they did. There's been a lot more variety in 5th edition so far...there's a lot less of this "no-brainer" crap that plagued older books for instance (which most people complained about), now you have codices like Dark Eldar where the majority of the book is worth taking in the right situation (the only unit I haven't really seen people put in lists are grotesques), and not only that but almost every unit can be tooled to do whatever you need it to, you can have anti-infantry or anti-tank in every slot. You can build foot armies, mech armies, or hybrid armies, and they're not only viable competitive builds, but they stay true to fluff, too.

The main problem with the game right now is that there are too many armies being left behind, and GW is only updating about two a year, one of which has to be a Marine army for obvious reasons. The difference between 4th and 5th edition books is too great, and they're working too slow. I think a lot of people will find that once everyone is up to date, though, the game won't look as unbalanced as it does now, when you have stragglers from fething 3rd edition begging for some kind of attention. Once we get the god-damned Marines out of the way then the rest of us can start having fun, too (I play Tau so I know what it's like to be stuck with a crappy, mono-build codex).

Brother Heinrich wrote:I've beat veteran players of 12+ years and had my ass handed to me by the kid who picked up the hobby and a box of space wolves three weeks ago.

So many things wrong with this sentence, I don't even know where to start.

First of all, that'll happen with any luck-based game. Doesn't matter how old you are or how long you've been playing, if you roll poorly enough experience doesn't matter. I'd think this is something we all would have come to accept by this point, but I guess not.

Second, what does his age have to do with anything? So he's a kid, does that mean he's not allowed to beat someone twice his age? You think 12+ year veterans are "too good" to lose to someone who hasn't even played for a full year yet? Man up.

Third, "a box" of Space Wolves? So, what, you're judging the power level of a codex based on a game that was literally one squad vs. another? Because that's literally what you said. Even if you're talking about a battleforce that doesn't exactly make you look good, since IIRC the battleforce doesn't have any of the units in it that make Space Wolves so good...no long fangs, no razorbacks, no thunderwolves, no wolf guard, etc. You can't use this piss-ant game against a newbie as undeniable proof that SW are bs.

Brother Heinrich wrote:Sorry brother but 40k is rapidly turning into rock 'em sock 'em robots.

I'm not your fething brother. And you don't know what you're talking about. You're a little fish in a little pond and you think you have the right to judge 40k as a whole based on your experiences playing 500 point games against people who just started.

I get my ass kicked all the damn time, too. I could just as easily say "Oh 5th edition is bs GW is RUINING THE HOBBY!"...until people realize that the only person I regularly get games with is my brother, who has a Blood Angel army, with my outdated Tau. And then you find out that my main enemy is myself, because I deploy like a moron and unknowingly block my own lines of fire on turn one, or leave myself open to deep strikers, and that I don't screen units properly or have good target priority, etc. Then it becomes more apparent that the problem is me and not the "omg so broken" Blood Angel army I'm playing against.

Brother Heinrich wrote:
And now with 6th on the horizon I fear this hobby is rapidly pushing out the old crowd and herding in the new, so like a good old wolf, I'll step out before it turns into magic the gathering where what your army looks like or the background behind it are irrelevant and its only about what the pieces do and how hard you can win.

That's kinda funny, because if true balance is what you wanted then you'd want the game to turn into MTG. 40k is a joke in comparison, especially our tournament scene.

Also, what your army looks like or the background behind it are as relevant as you want them to be. Even Magic can be played with "themed" decks, the trick is finding like-minded people to play with. You can't go to a Pro Tour qualifier with your gakky green deck that you built for fun with random cards you liked the look of and expect to dominate everyone there, for example (like my first embarrassing experience at a Magic tournament...I wasn't expecting to do well but every match-up I had was over in five minutes, literally).


Sorry if this is too long.

If anyone was still interested in reading this than whew have i taken on a task! i've just purchased the following units

SW: Battleforce
Eldar: Battleforce
Dark Eldar: Wytches, Kabalite warrior, Harlequin Troop

And their corresponding dexes I got a HUGE DEAL on all of this stuff (Just under $300!!!) and whew! man do i have some modeling ahead of me but, these three armies really got my attention (plus daemons but ill hold off for now) and, ill get the chance to play around, see what works for me. granted i know i wont have a huge force of any one army but, when I do find what clicks I'll be able to trade a bit and, narrow things down!

Thanks again everyone for your input i cant wait to get a bulk of these guys done to show off on here!

lol. "I couldn't pick one, so I bought them all!"

Whatever works.

to CaptMateyo, glad you finally decided on an army(s), to everyone else, I will continue to be a grouchy thorn on the subject of space wolves and 40k in the current edition so feth off.

You can be as grouchy as you want - I don't think it irritated people, so much as we were trying to help you understand the game as it actually is. If you wish to remain unaware, and think of 40k as a descending bad game fallen from glory days and destined to be bad ... well, that sucks for you, not for us.

We know, we're just saying you're selfish for attempting to do so. Don't tell people to pick armies they don't like just because you want to play something different.

instead of listening to people like you who are trying to lie and manipulate and get him to play sub-par armies for your own benefit.

Selfish?? My Own benefit??? Calm down dude! Who are you to say such things in this arrogant fashion? Is it false that SW are over-represented? What should I do? not telling such thing to a new player? Do you like to play against your own army? If yes nobody says you shouldn't, but I find that fighting against my same army is not so much fun, and if you play SW it's a serious risk... ....

First thing: I live in a different country... I doubt I will never play with the OP, second: You have no right to judge others in such a way...

I don't think you know as much about Eldar tactics as you think. Wraithlords are better than dreadnoughts, huh?

Who said WL aree better the dreddies? I'm not talking about what's best... I'm saying that, as MCs Wraithlords are more reliable for new players since you can better predict the amount of fire they will be able to withstand... My point was to show that at LOW POINT cost plays, even eldars have a solid core of units and so they can be funny even for new players.

That you're not as good at 40k as you think you are? That your list probably has some fat that needs to be trimmed? That you need new tactics? That you've been playing with the same exact list for 5 years and everyone at the store has had plenty of time to learn how to beat you? That you're playing with an old, gimped codex?

Whoooo!!!! Calm down again!!!

Btw the OP made the big move and bought 3 different armies... I'm absolutely happy to welcome him to the hobby and I absolutely do not blame him for choosing SW... My point was totally different.... who is willing to understnd will understand...

I woulda borrowed and proxied a friend's armies using those 3 he's interested in prior to dumping money into two armies he'll not end up using, but that sure is a way to get your feet wet.

Welcome

CaptMateyo wrote:If anyone was still interested in reading this than whew have i taken on a task! i've just purchased the following units

SW: Battleforce
Eldar: Battleforce
Dark Eldar: Wytches, Kabalite warrior, Harlequin Troop

And their corresponding dexes I got a HUGE DEAL on all of this stuff (Just under $300!!!) and whew! man do i have some modeling ahead of me but, these three armies really got my attention (plus daemons but ill hold off for now) and, ill get the chance to play around, see what works for me. granted i know i wont have a huge force of any one army but, when I do find what clicks I'll be able to trade a bit and, narrow things down!

Thanks again everyone for your input i cant wait to get a bulk of these guys done to show off on here!

I look forward to the pics and battle reports if you so decide to do them!

Just google "Leafblower IG list" and go with an Imperial Guard army.

You will read dozens of articles about people either complaining that it is too good/praising it for being so good.

Welcome to the hobby, dude! It will most likely provide you with years of good fun, new friends and less money!

Money is overrated anyway

My Sisters of Battle still hold out fairly well, but you can really only use 1 list with them (with minor variations), and pretty much HAVE to take 3 exorcists or you'll get smashed into the ground.

OH! And the first time you use your faith points to make your Seraphims' armor save be invul +3... expect your opponent to cry and whine and moan and call over a tournament judge, despite showing your opponent your codex.

*sigh* just don't go sisters... they're fun, but they're a hassle at tournaments.

It would be easier to list the armies that aren't tournament capable than the ones that are-- for reference, the incapable armies are Dæmonhunters and Necrons. Everything else is valid, and even the "incapable" armies can occasionally pull out a surprise win. Necrons in particular have a few tricks that many people aren't ready for, and their Monoliths literally cannot be killed by many armies.

Reecius wrote:Welcome to the hobby, dude! It will most likely provide you with years of good fun, new friends and less money!

HAHA hell yea bro still trying to explain to the misses why i spent $300 on "action figures" just wait till she sees they arent even painted or put together haha I cant wait

Haha, yes sir! That conversation will be ongoing for a loooong time! If it comes to a crisis, just point at her shoes and you should be solid!

Lucky timing, CaptMateyo.

See this thread:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/335819.page

Brother Heinrich wrote:to everyone else, I will continue to be a grouchy thorn on the subject of space wolves and 40k in the current edition so feth off.

You too, "brother".

Can't believe I went through all the trouble of typing that gak out, and what did I get in response? "Don't care, feth off." I bet you were star of the debate team in high school, weren't you?

I would say you'll be missed, but honestly I'll be having too much fun with my powerful and fluffy codices to really notice you're gone.

punkow wrote:Selfish?? My Own benefit??? Calm down dude! Who are you to say such things in this arrogant fashion?

I think it's been made well aware by now that I'm from the internet, I can pretty much say and do whatever the hell I want.

punkow wrote:Is it false that SW are over-represented?

Maybe they are, though how you'd be sure that's a fact I have no idea. The best you could do is start a poll on a forum and ask people to post what armies they play with, but that won't tell you what everyone uses.

punkow wrote:Do you like to play against your own army? If yes nobody says you shouldn't, but I find that fighting against my same army is not so much fun, and if you play SW it's a serious risk... ....

Now you're implying that if he buys the army he wants he'll never get to play with anyone but himself, you're telling me that isn't manipulative in any way? That you're saying this crap purely for his own good?

If that's actually true and no one will play with a new player because he picked an army they personally think is "overrepresented", that's pretty fething sad, and says a lot about the kind of people that like this particular hobby, doesn't it? I hate Marines with a passion, and I think Marine armies in general are overrepresented, but if I was looking for a game and all I had to play were Marines I wouldn't turn a guy down for it. I might be a little disappointed if I never got to play against anything else, but once again, that would be me being selfish, expecting other people to play armies they might not necessarily like just for the sake of variety, just so I can feel happy playing against something different. It's also a little insensitive when you consider that not everyone can really afford one army, let alone two or more...

So no, you shouldn't lie and say Space Wolves aren't popular, go ahead and tell him. What I object to is telling him in a way that suggests he should pick a different army, regardless of whether or not he wants to play a different army, "Or else..." It comes off as being a little threatening, the "casual" crowd once again turning ugly and trying to force everyone to play their way.

punkow wrote:First thing: I live in a different country... I doubt I will never play with the OP

Well then I'm sorry, English probably isn't your first language, and I'm probably misinterpreting what you've said.

punkow wrote:second: You have no right to judge others in such a way...

You're absolutely right.

And while we're on that topic, neither does anyone else. So think about that next time one of you guys accuses a budding SW player of not caring about the background or look of their army and just wanting to play on "easy mode"...

punkow wrote:Whoooo!!!! Calm down again!!!

Now what the hell was wrong with anything I said there? The guy asked a question, and was implying that there was no way on Earth he could have lost a game for any other reason than Space Wolves being "too powerful", so I offered some answers, all of which were reasonable and made sense. All of which could be proven, too, at least more easily than "Space Wolves are BROKE!"

You wanna call me out for judging you too harshly, fine, I'll agree with you and offer my apology. But I refuse to accept that I was being more rude than Heinrich here.

yeah, it's not like Space Wolves aren't an inherently popular army, you know. They're marines, which are cool, but have fun and drink beer, which is also cool, and they have wolf pelts and tatoos, which is even cooler, and they have amazing models....

I think you get the point. Yeah, if the OP builds a missle spam list he pulled off the net, than you can say he's a filthy powergamer, and go back to your CGM meeting. But you can build a really fun, balanced army out of that codex, that's not the same.

Sidstyler wrote:

punkow wrote:Do you like to play against your own army? If yes nobody says you shouldn't, but I find that fighting against my same army is not so much fun, and if you play SW it's a serious risk... ....

Now you're implying that if he buys the army he wants he'll never get to play with anyone but himself, you're telling me that isn't manipulative in any way? That you're saying this crap purely for his own good?

That's not what he said. He said that he finds "fighting against my same army is not so much fun"; ie: both you and your opponent using the same army. When you pick a more popular codex, there is an increased risk of this. How many SM vs. SM games do you see at the store/tournaments? A lot. One advantage of picking a less-common army is that you experience fewer mirror matches; and saying it's more fun to have fewer mirror matches is not exactly a crazy or selfish statement.

Overall I think you both have valid points. Sid, I think you misunderstood a few of Punkow's comments and took most of them in the worst possible light.

To the OP: If Space Wolves and Eldar are the forces that appeal to you, play those. I like the Norse theme of the SW, and as a Space Marine variant, they are rather more forgiving of beginning players than Eldar or Dark Eldar tend to be.

It also depends on what armies your regular opponents are playing. What do you anticipate facing a lot? Eldar may be limited to a couple of builds and have a steep learning curve but they are monstrously effective against Power Armoured infantry, such as MEQs

CaptMateyo wrote:If anyone was still interested in reading this than whew have i taken on a task! i've just purchased the following units

SW: Battleforce
Eldar: Battleforce
Dark Eldar: Wytches, Kabalite warrior, Harlequin Troop

And their corresponding dexes I got a HUGE DEAL on all of this stuff (Just under $300!!!) and whew! man do i have some modeling ahead of me but, these three armies really got my attention (plus daemons but ill hold off for now) and, ill get the chance to play around, see what works for me. granted i know i wont have a huge force of any one army but, when I do find what clicks I'll be able to trade a bit and, narrow things down!

Thanks again everyone for your input i cant wait to get a bulk of these guys done to show off on here!

First off welcome to the hobby. I did much the same thing (multiple armies when I got back into playing) and if I can offer some advice, stick to playing one until you get them "down" rather than bouncing between armies while learning the game. It makes it a lot easier only having to remember one set of list rules at a time (either that or my pea brain can't hold that much at once). When bouncing I would often be heard to say "@#$^, I forgot to .........".
Anyway, good luck and have fun with YOUR armies.

Maybe I overeacted but I simply wanted to give my opinion and I I don't like to be judged, especially on the internet but I'm sure nobody wanted to offend OK?...

And if my english isn't perfect I'm sorry but It has been a while since I wrote something complex.

Btw I welcome Mateyo to the hobby and I think he will have a lot of fun with these armies! SW Eldars and DE have very different units and styles of play. Maybe you should find some games with low points (750?) to see which army appeal you most. Remember that in this moment vehicles are almost mandatory for the armies you have so your next purchase should be rhinos or Wave serpents or raiders... But for now you can proxy this stuff with something (toys... pieces of paper...)
Good gaming!!

Mannahnin wrote:That's not what he said. He said that he finds "fighting against my same army is not so much fun"; ie: both you and your opponent using the same army.

...oh. OH.

Well like I said, there's a chance I might have misunderstood him, yeah.

i started with ULTRAmarines.

they were not inherently competitive.

now i play with tau.

they are not inherently competitive.

I still have fun.