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 left 40k 3 years ago and a ton of people at the club wants to run a campaign. Ive always loved the models of 40k more tha FB/AoS so this has definitely gotten me back in. I don't have any experience in this small scale + build your exp/armory kind of game.

1. Have read some forces are strong up front or strong late campaign type of description. What makes a faction strong early on but not late? What makes something strong late but not early on?

2. Spending Prometheum. When the goal of the game is to bank this stuff, is it even a decision to spend them on upgrades or specialists? Early on before the power spikes have hit for certain forces, I can understand other factions wanting to tech up on upgrades sooner to hit their power spikes so adding a special weapon can really swing a game. After the initial tech is it even worth it?

3. Specialist inbalance. I don't know if this is a big issue since I have such little experience in the game, but some specials are disgustingly strong while others seem very underwhelming. The counter argument lots have said is "well option x gives the opponent caches" but this isnt always true. Compare a specialist pick like a DE Succubus vs GSC acolyte. Neither give a PC when taken out while one is literally a HQ 1 man multiwound monster while the other can barely take on an unarmed marine.

Worse yet, compare a Purestrain Genestealer vs the Succubus. Purestrain forfeits a PC while Succubus doesnt, and the Succubus brings more of everything to the table
It's like they just took some random infantry models from 40k with total disregard to statline and gave them all an equal cost. Why wouldn't a succubus be toned down? Why wouldn't a Genestealer be ramped up?

4. Faction picks. I have a GSC ready, but also considering DE or Eldar for their models.
-Concerns for GSC is the super weak specialist picks (if I'll even use them) which leaves not much variety in the force with guardsman stats and small basic weapons. Not sure if a bunch of light arms plus mediocre melee can stand up to the more elite factions.
-Love Eldar and the variety of models they can bring, but pretty expensive $$ wise to get guardians, autarch, dire avengers and a wraithguard box just for this campaign
-DE seem it could get one dimensional, get in close to pistol & melee with basically the same unit type (wyches) with minor statline changes from each different entry
Anyone have experience w these, and thoughts?

you'd be better off asking this in the specialty games area, this is for regular 40k.

The advantage of GSC is their numbers, and starting hiding (so cant be sniped first turn)

Also they can have 3 heavies in their squad (Grenade Launchers FTW)

While the DE have nicer wargear they are no where near as cheap

I haven't bothered using a specialist yet.. but then again I haven't been kneecapped as a squad yet to justify burning a cache for the extra hitting power

Can't speak on GSC specifically, but spending Prometheum on upgrades has its' place for low model armies like Grey Knights. By spending a cache on points you can have enough to pick up a Special Weapon or a better CC Weapon. Some armies are cheap enough to just build naturally, while for others those cache upgrades almost seem mandatory.

The expensive choices generally start off weaker as you can't afford as many well equipped models, bringing up issues when you are facing twice as many enemies depending on the mission. This starts to go away as long as your units stay alive from game to game. They get stronger through useful upgrades while other armies spend their points on less impactful things because they began the campaign at a stronger point.

The elite CC armies work well with GW's new terrain if it is available, but are fairly weak if the board is set up like a typical game with sparse terrain.

I don't think the Specialists are balanced across the board, and some armies only have one somewhat viable choice if that. Many come off as more of a fluffy pick, which works well of there is an ongoing narrative. I suppose they could be used in must win situations, but the random nature of bottle tests does make it even more of a gamble (even if that Specialist is alive). Especially for the horde based armies with weaker models. The only other reason I can see would be if you lost a key model and need a quick boost to strenghten your squad for a match. Either way it is nice to have variety given most armies are made up of a single troop choice.

Archonite wrote:

1. Have read some forces are strong up front or strong late campaign type of description. What makes a faction strong early on but not late? What makes something strong late but not early on?

IG vets are strong at the start cause they have relatively cheap bs4 guyz and 3 specialists with access to plazma and heavy flamers. They can get 2 kitted up fighters every next game. However, they're limited to 10 models. so the further the game proceeds the weaker they get cause they're still t3 ld7 guyz with 4+ armor at best. So, i'd say that ig is quite strong at the start, ok in the mid and weaker by the end - your aim is to rush to victory asap.

Whereas armies like csm are likely to start with 4-5 marines and will have to spend more resources to get new fighters in, however those fighters are way stronger on 1-on-1 basis than ig vets. So, you start with a relatively low model count with mediocre damage output but you get a marine dude every other game and eventually you'll end up as a 10-strong team of power-armored fighters with great stats. I'd say that CSM are weaker at start, ok mid game but pretty good at the end.

And there are harlequins and grey knights that are the strongest mid game cause they have really expensive fighters and limited model count. They're ok at start and weaker later on when other teams get maxed out. It especially shows when you have 6 harlies vs 20 orks. Yep, you get hit on 6-s with ranged attacks but when every of those 20 orks carries a shoota, they're bound to get a couple wounds in. And than they can rush in cc vs what remains of the space clowns. Yep, 1 on 1 an ork is not likely to survive vs a harlequin or a tyranid warrior. But when there are 3-4 boyz all rushing in same mellee combat it's a whole different story.

Archonite wrote:

2. Spending Prometheum. When the goal of the game is to bank this stuff, is it even a decision to spend them on upgrades or specialists? Early on before the power spikes have hit for certain forces, I can understand other factions wanting to tech up on upgrades sooner to hit their power spikes so adding a special weapon can really swing a game. After the initial tech is it even worth it?

Don't forget that some killteams can't even get new fighters in without spending promethium. Also, it's not a bad idea to properly team up and equip your dudes early on so that you can get more wins and more promethium as a result.

Archonite wrote:

3. Specialist inbalance. I don't know if this is a big issue since I have such little experience in the game, but some specials are disgustingly strong while others seem very underwhelming. The counter argument lots have said is "well option x gives the opponent caches" but this isnt always true. Compare a specialist pick like a DE Succubus vs GSC acolyte. Neither give a PC when taken out while one is literally a HQ 1 man multiwound monster while the other can barely take on an unarmed marine.

Worse yet, compare a Purestrain Genestealer vs the Succubus. Purestrain forfeits a PC while Succubus doesnt, and the Succubus brings more of everything to the table
It's like they just took some random infantry models from 40k with total disregard to statline and gave them all an equal cost. Why wouldn't a succubus be toned down? Why wouldn't a Genestealer be ramped up?

Yeah, some of those specialists do seem way weaker than the others.

Archonite wrote:
4. Faction picks.

Up to you. GSC is fine cause you can get 15 and they have neat special rules. And witches are indeed a bit one-dimensional. And they're definitely tougher to play with than, say, tyranids or harlequins. Simply cause witches are less durable and less choppy. They depend on terrain even more.