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.

Do you look at play-style?

Coolness of model?

Right now I am torn between Imp Guard, Space Wolves, or Grey Knights

Imp Guard - My playstyle, but they look sorta...eh.

Space Wolves - Awesome models...marines on wolves But I don't like close combat

Grey Knights - Better looking than Imp guard, and play style is better than wolves...but not as cool as wolves

Comments? Help?

Coolness.

out of the time spent with my army 90% of it is either modeling, painting, or just looking at them. 10% is actually playing the game.

actually i would lump in some time thinking about lists and the army background into that 90. For me, its all about enjoyment of the hobby. the game itself is a rather small portion, although I love playing, i love the way my army looks even more.

Thats what keeps me wanting to field them. they look awesome and if they die in battle, they looked badass while doing so.

Playstyle all the way. The models are largely irrelevant for most armies since there are multiple interchangeable lines. Some of which look fantastic, some of which don't.

Also by the way, SW aren't a CC army.

This again? Well I suppose I will humor you then sir. For its a mixture between a army that contains what I find pleasing to the eye and fluff that makes me interested in the first place.

Depends on what you care about the most in YOUR hobby!

If you care about playing the game, then definitely play style should be your top concern.

If you enjoy the modelling/painting side more, then coolness of models should be a top priority.

If you do both, which is what most people do, then go by your gut. You are going to be spending a lot of time with the army, so if you don't like the way they look, you won't be happy. At the same time, if you have a preferred play style, then you end up playing whatever army you pick in that way.

You can always change your models to your own idea of uniqueness, but each army will always be best at a certain style or styles.

If you like the play style of guard, but the models are meh, play guard and make the models something you like! There are plenty of 3rd party bits you can add, especially to guard, to make them more your style.

That's all I got, hope it helps!

Models.

Will they be fun to paint? Are they dynamic or all mono-pose?

I spend 100x more time painting and modeling than I do playing, so it needs to interest me.

It's hard to explain for me. Usually it's something that strikes my fancy and usually marine stuff. Like I love the Horus heresy stuff so most of my marines are painted in pre heresy schemes like death guard, Luna wolves, salamanders, and 1k sons. But I also really like robots so why not get necrons haha. So I guess it's usually coolness and trying to make armies modeled after things about 40k that I really like. But there's also play style that comes into play. I really like aggressive mid range armies so I play vulkan marines, GK(1k sons), and necrons who all are aggressive and stay in that 24" range.

I look at the models: Will I enjoy painting them? Do I see the color scheme in my head?

Playstyle: Does it fit my playstyle?

Diversity: Is it mono-build army or are there several valid or fun builds to make? I need diversity to maintain interest.

Looks first. Then I see if I like the way they function. If yes, I choose them, if not, I look for other armies I like the look of. There are so many, that it wasn't long before I found the one I liked.

Also, I also like looking for armies that are underplayed, as I quite like being the only person who plays my army in my area (Chaos daemons)

I am primarily a painter and a player, so that is what I look at when choosing an army- For example, when I got tired of playing Tyranids I decided that I wanted to get a fairly opposite playstyle, so wanted a fast, surgical army with strong shooting support. Dark Eldar Fit the bill exactly, and also have the best models out there.

I enjoy both look and fluff. I try to play fluffy lists as well.

1) Price tag
2) model
3) crunch
4) fluff

In that order.

1) cool models
2) fluff
3) play style

pretty much in that order. that's what drew me to C:SM and CSM. it's also what's drawing me to DE, but the fact that so many of their models are finecast has kept me from getting into them. one can only hope that changes some day...

How fun they're going to be. How fun they will be to play with, to win with, to lose with, to paint, to model, the whole shebang. I also like variety. My first army was Salamanders, and after I played that for a while, I wanted an army that would be simpler to paint, faster to play, and gave me a chance to be on the other side of the 'you don't get a save' whooping stick, so I went with Tau.

Personally, I would identify what you are looking for in a new army, what you enjoy about the game, and what you dislike about it, and make your decision based on that.

As a Guard player with a slew of vehicles and a horde of infantiers, my primary concern after the usual ones (aesthetics, fluff, for me) is now army size. I desperately want a small army of a few elite models for ease of transportation and set up.

Currently looking at an Ork biker mob, comprised of mostly nob bikers, some regular warbikers, and a few dakkajets. Maybe 25 models total.

Chose Sisters because of their cool fluff and nice models. Also liked the sound of the playstyle of some of their units.

Fluff and models together. They both need to catch my attention.

Model range.

I like to paint my stuff. If I do not like the model range, then I do not pick the army. I can make an underpowred army work for me well enough, but I can't make myself enjoy painting to gaming with models I don't like.

Fluff is secondary to model range. If I like the models, but don't like the fluff, it's not too big a loss. But this so far hasn't happened. I love the Tyranid fluff, and Tyranids are GW's best 40k model range. Even the best alien model range on the market. I like the fluff for Vampire Counts - they're what they should be. Schemeing, conniving bastards who see the living as cattle and just want to further their own ends, and are absolutely soulessly bloodthirsty. None of this glittering in the sun gak. And they command shambling hordes of the dead.

Vampire Counts are an oddity in that, while I like the model range, it didn't 'grab' me as much as I'd hoped. But none of the other Fantasy armies grabbed me at all. It wasn't until they got their new stuff for 8th edition that the range as a whole popped, and I'm glad I had the bulk of an army by then to build on.

Fluff. Cool models, then everything else.

1 - Model aesthetics
2 - Playstyle (including versatility of playstyles)
3 - Fluff
4 - Price

In that order. I picked Tyranids because the first 3 outweighed the price.

I picked Tau because it was Robotechish. I really didn't give a poop about Warhammer til I got my hands on a Crisis suit and a Fire Warrior. and the rest as they say is history. I love playing with them while I hear the theme music in my head.

I chose my Tyranids out of their looks and the fact they were different from all the space meh-reens, but my mistake before getting into them was that of not investigating what kind of units i needed to do decently, so its pretty patchwork.

So later i gave them up as my playstyle changed, and now i went for Tau wich was basically the opposite as Tyranids and had a LOT of customization and fun things to play around with. ( Tyranids have basically no upgrades to speak of )

The most important things for me are fluff and the look of the models. I would like to win the occasional game, but tactics are not that important to me. I need to get into the army and develop my own background. It's what drew me to Farsight Tau in the first place.

When I picked IG, it was because I didn't see anyone playing them, they had way more to pick from back then as far as minis/uniforms (bring back all the older minis.) And I played a lot of 2vs2, so I made my army to fill in what his was missing.
When BFG came out, it was always Imp vs Imp, so I started a Chaos fleet, just to have a "bad guy' and I had the Chaos Codex for Cypher, so people bought me Abbadon, and I started down the Chaos road.
The handful of box sets I bought that always have Marines got me a Marine Army.
I like playing SoB most, because of the fluff.
But that is why I picked my armies.

Well, coolness of models is one point. Another is paintability.
Synergy is the biggest issue. You need to fight the enemy at all threat ranges.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Synergy is the biggest issue. You need to fight the enemy at all threat ranges.

Not true at all, you just need to be able to mitigate any issues of lacking certain ranges.

Tyranids almost exclusvely fight at close range and assault, yet have ways to mitigate this issue (drop pods to get close, psychic powers to get tough enough to actually get foot sloggers close). Tau exclusively fight at range, but have ways of mitigating their lack of assault prowess (ability to negate cover to maximise casualties, supporting overwatch fire and a few tricks to avoid receiving a charge).

What do I look for?....
Can I convert it? can it be a ork army...
da waargh wing (Ravenwing with ork bikes) , da def wing Termi with Meganobs, Green days AKA grey knights (under construction)
or my Nerco-nids

Me look da orks... me love to convert

1) Models.
2) Flexibility (can I have different lists, use different playstyles).

I was torn between GK and SW too, Dreadknights vs Thunderwolves but Dreadknights won! I think it was the sword that was taller than most models that did it!