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.

Why does everyone say the DA are weak? They still have their 4-across-the-board statline and possibility for LR/termie spam. Is it just because the SW out spammed them? I am asking this out of curiosity because I have never once played against a DA list. Seems like regular mariners with just a few potential advantages and potential disadvantages. They still have bolter and power armor, and the same vehicles as anyone else in the SM world.

Guitardian wrote:Why does everyone say the DA are weak? They still have their 4-across-the-board statline and possibility for LR/termie spam. Is it just because the SW out spammed them? I am asking this out of curiosity because I have never once played against a DA list. Seems like regular mariners with just a few potential advantages and potential disadvantages. They still have bolter and power armor, and the same vehicles as anyone else in the SM world.

They're lacking a few vehicles found in the Vanilla codex, and they're lacking a few things (Mortis Dreadnought) that they should have, which I think is what spawns a lot of the DA whine, but the truth is they can be played brilliantly.

I personally think they're no less viable a codex than our good friends the Black Templars, who can also be a beast when played certain ways.

I'm sure I'm not alone when I say an entire army of Terminators scares the crap out of me.

I believe that Chaos Demons would be the hardest for beginners to play, just because you have to split your army into two different groups and pray that you get the right wave.

Orkz because of all the strange rules.

I voted for space marines. After reading all of the other posts on this poll I thought "maybe DE isn't such a beginner friendly army". Dark eldar was my second army and is currently my main. I love them to bits and when I first started them I had a solid grasp on the basic rules and a full sized army before they were taken off the shelves. However now that they are off the shelf I'd say that no one would even start them to begin with.

The reason I voted for space marines is the same reason as mentioned earlier on. They were too varied. I picked up the space wolf codex 8 years ago with much excitement, only to find out that I needed the main book too. Then there were alot of items and universal rules that referred to the main rulebook which my parents wouldn't buy me (sad face). I also didn't know how to glue on bolters and since I was young and a bit nervous at the local shop I never asked how to and so I struggled through every model.

Necrons was very easy to start instead. I was able to quickly grasp their rules and since they were so solid back then I actually won several games. I don't know if it would be the same if I had started them in 5th edition.

yakface wrote:
What is the worst Warhammer 40,000 army for a beginning player to start with, and why?

Cygnar

I went with Tau, my reason being that you just can't learn so much from playing them as your first army.

I guess any army that is too lop-sided into one aspect of the game, and weak in other aspects would be a bad choice. Tau won't teach you effective cc, DE won't teach you anything but. You wouldn't want a new player getting the impression that the game is ALL about cc (DE), or ALL about gunlines (Tau/Necrons), or ALL about transports (Eldar/DE), ALL about huge tanks and masses of heavy weapons (IG) ALL about massive power characters (SW) or all about hordes (Ork).

All of these armies have their strengths and are cool armies, but a beginner should get a little bit of everything, not an army that almost insists on a certain play style in order to be competetive.

Marines have a bit of everything. Anything less would skew the poor newbie's impression of what is most important in the game.

Or we could asume new players aren't complete idiots, and let them start with what they like.

HoverBoy wrote:Or we could asume new players aren't complete idiots, and let them start with what they like.

New players nowadays are 8 or 9.

I've seen newbies start with Tau, but never seen one win.
But I'd have to go with the flow, and say DE or Daemonhunters.

and they lose all the time, annoy all the vets who drew the lot to play against them... not necessarily because they are annoying or ask questions, but because it's like a wasted hour where you could have been playing a challenging game.
Safest army to go with is the most forgiving one, where you can make mistakes and still have your nice 3+ save, ridiculously tough land raiders, termies, etc. That can sometimes just shrug it off if you do a dumb move and get fire poured down on you. Worst army to go with is the one that absolutely needs a certain playstyle to pull off a win. Marines can just stomp around even if the player is dumb as a stump and still be a challenge to outwit or outmaneuver.

I voted no opinion why??...becasue having NO army was not an option..

Any army is better than none for a new player!... at least they get in on the fun!

In the hands of an experienced player DE is one of the most powerful armies in the game (with their current yet outdated codex). BUT in the hands of a new gamer the slightest misstake will cost you the game, and more often make you lose a very devastating defeat and not a close one...

witch hunters
namely because they cost a freakin fortune and are really annoying to paint.

I voted Tau. I think until you get a sense of tactics on the battlefield...its good to start with a more formidable, all around army. Eldar is another tough race to start with

Any inquisitorial force really, i've mastered the lists, but new players just don't know what to take and how to balance it

I voted Dark Eldar as the hardest, simply because it is easier to screw yourself over with a dumb move and harder to recover than most others. Tau are, in my opinion, the army with the cheapest, easiest tactics to pull off. Some flexibility is there, but who in their right mind who plays Tau does anything other than hug the board edge and blow away whatever comes into range? Space Marines are probably the best for survivability, Imperial Guard are....well, Imperial Guard, when you lose a squad, you've got 10 more where they came from, and Eldar may be specialized and all that, but if you've looked at their gear, stats and rules and stuff before playing, you can figure it out easy enough. Every other army has some things that it's designed to do and things it isn't built for, I just think the Dark Eldar are harder because of their "hit fast and make sure they can't hit back" style. And because they are squishy and few in number.

I think, it's Imperial Guard. It's easy to get cozy in the gunline, forgetting that some of the missions doesnt follow just standing on a corner blasting away your enemy, nor would your enemy just stand there on the opposite side of your gunline waiting to be blasted away.

I wonder if this poll has not been overtaken by events, as it had it's heyday before the last major released and has veered into Necro territory.

mindfield wrote:I think, it's Imperial Guard. It's easy to get cozy in the gunline, forgetting that some of the missions doesnt follow just standing on a corner blasting away your enemy, nor would your enemy just stand there on the opposite side of your gunline waiting to be blasted away.

Wait, people still play gunline guard?
I thought we all moved on to the mid-speed full mech

I chose DE because new players will not likely know to what extent that army is capable of. Its definately a great army. However a unexperienced DE player would likely get chewed on by a player of same skill level sitting across the table in power armor...

Witch Hunters - Hard Rules, Overpriced Models and a realy old codex mean that they are really hard to start with.

I restarted with Warhammer 40k last year and started daemons. It might just be me but i have had no luck with the army ive won 2 out of the 30 games ive played with it.

shadeyaces wrote:I restarted with Warhammer 40k last year and started daemons. It might just be me but i have had no luck with the army ive won 2 out of the 30 games ive played with it.

I think youre saying youre no longer new at the game. But I think Daemons can be one of the hardest army for a beginner to adapt. Only one daemon player in our local community here :( and he doesnt play often :(

Dark Eldar for sure. Even with the new codex (thank God, er, the Emprah), they're very unforgiving of tactical mistakes, very squishy. It takes a real master to use them effectively. But insanely deadly if used with skill.

Honestly, it was close between DE, Witch hunters, and my beloved Tau...I had to say DE because there's a certain thought process you need to play them and do decent

Eldar....too many special rules.

My top choices would be Tao and Witch Hunters.

Tao because their wargear is so incredibly complex and they are akwardly named too boot (and I guess they are hard to me being a vetran marine player because they are very very tactically different)

Witch Hunters due to the complexity of their special rules.

Does anyone notice a trend here? Both of these armies have some of the oldest codecies in print! Time for a revamp GW

It looks like DE is winning this poll but I don't know anything about them so I couldn't tell you if they are hard to play or not!

Orks are simple: CHARGE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!