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 have an interest in playing either army, as they both seem lovingly melee-heavy and a case of "throw everything into melee range and watch stuff die" in tactic.

On one hand, I have awesome warriors of chaos, who as far a sI know are some of the toughest units in the game with great spells and great heroes, though they lack much ranged and the hellcannon is powerful but can just blow up (and take out your own guys!).
On the other, orcs and goblins. Lots of units. Lots of WAAAAAAAGH. Lots of choppy chop chopping.

Actually, it's a common misconception that Orcs and Goblins are a strong melee army. Whilst they do have plenty of combat units, some of which are indeed very good, their real strengths lie in shooting, of all places, as OnG best units are their cheap war machines. Don't be put off by this though. As I said, OnG do have some good combat units, and you can make a combat OnG army, it's just that it won't be the strongest build the army is capable of and, although it will serve just fine in friendly games, won't win you many tournaments. So while it is true that WoC are almost completely devoid of ranged units, OnG do have some strong ranged units to back up your army, even if you did go primarily combat-focused.

Warriors of Chaos are, on the other hand, a very strong melee army, and a very strong army overall. They're one of the best armies in the game, whilst OnG are pretty average. I'm not sure what your situation is, but if you're a beginner, I'd consider WoC over OnG since, being simpler and generally more powerful, they lend themselves better as a beginners army. They're forgiving, if you will. Warriors probably do have more units that are viable, and their characters are indeed fantastic, far better than OnG's.

I hope this helps, let me know if you have any more questions!

So whilst WoC is almost pure melee, O+G has a fair mix of both, even if it comes at not being SUPER amazing in melee? Sounds fair.

How about the magic side of things?

Well, Orcs and Goblins I think can only use their two exclusive Lores while Warrior Sorcerers get four from the BRB and three exclusives. I don't know exactly what the Waaagh! spells do though, but OnG are at a disadvantage simply by having less variety in that area.

Ranor wrote:So whilst WoC is almost pure melee, O+G has a fair mix of both, even if it comes at not being SUPER amazing in melee? Sounds fair.

How about the magic side of things?

Pretty much yeah. There are some very good OnG melee units, which will be able to deal with anything in combat, save for the "very good melee units" of other armies, such as WoC.

As for Magic, WoC probably do have the edge there too. WoC can take a bigger variety of lores, which, on the whole, are better. Their Wizards are also very good, since Daemon Princes are just brilliant and normal sorcerers can take armour. They also have a good array of Magic Items. OnG are more limited as they can only take two Lores, however, both Lores are pretty good with some stand-out spells and access to one stand-out Arcane Item that boosts the Ward Save of a Savage Orc unit. OnG also have the ability to spam low-level Wizards, and the ability to take an upgrade for the Arachnarok Spider that increases your Channeling ability. WoC certainly have the edge in magical variety, but actual magical power is a much closer-run thing. WoC perhaps do win out there as well though.

Well, next Saturday a swell guy at my local gaming club said he was more than happy to lend me an OnG army to see how it plays.

Having played a game with WoC already, we shall see what prevails; the chaos gods, or WAAAAAAAAAGH

ctually, it's a common misconception that Orcs and Goblins are a strong melee army.

This. Same goes for 40k Orks. Goddamnit GW Orks do not shoot they punch!

 Dakkamite wrote:

ctually, it's a common misconception that Orcs and Goblins are a strong melee army.

This. Same goes for 40k Orks. Goddamnit GW Orks do not shoot they punch!

True, though I think that's mainly a fault of 6th edition's ranged-favouring rules. With OnG, it's more of a problem with the book, and not that the melee is bad, but that the war machines are so good. Kind of like Lootas I guess though...

Look at Beastmen, we have a very solid combat army.

Grix wrote:
Look at Beastmen, we have a very solid combat army.

My only concern with Beastmen is their old army book, battalion (The models individually were cheaper to buy iirc >.&gt and (allegedly) outdated models. I don't wanna buy a load of 'em then suddenly have new stuff come out.

Really? I always thought squigs were pretty nice. Fanatics are also kind of annoying to face.

It's true though. Ork war machines are pretty ridiculous. I thought skaven were supposed to have some of the best war machines but apparently not. The bolt throwers are inaccurate but super cheap and doom divers are painful versus elite units and skirmishers. I honestly wish I had some more weapons teams or war machines as skaven. A little more punch would be more interesting than a horde and rare spam.

Warriors of chaos feel like one of the armies almost completely different from orcs though quite a few are. Warriors of chaos are elite. They're good in melee even when they aren't buffed through spells. Marks of chaos and similar just make them all the more powerful. They also have a daemon prince which can be made tougher or fly. The prince already has a 2+ armor save and like a 4-5+ ward or so. Shooting is pretty minimal all around for warriors of chaos with the hellcannon being the exception if it can even manage to hit. Anyway warriors of chaos are all around good in stats but they're really expensive. Don't be surprised to face 40 warriors, a daemon prince and not much else in 2.5k pts. Meanwhile the average skaven army has 250 models in the same points value.

A prince is listed as a CD unit though, not WoC, or can they be used in both? (And annoyingly it's one of the units only GW seems to stock :( )

Ranor wrote:
A prince is listed as a CD unit though, not WoC, or can they be used in both? (And annoyingly it's one of the units only GW seems to stock :( )

1. GW's site has the Daemon Prince under Lords and Heroes section of WoC.
2. It is indeed a Lord choice for WoC.
3. The kit is awesome.

Ranor wrote:

Grix wrote:
Look at Beastmen, we have a very solid combat army.

My only concern with Beastmen is their old army book, battalion (The models individually were cheaper to buy iirc >.&gt and (allegedly) outdated models. I don't wanna buy a load of 'em then suddenly have new stuff come out.

No, go check this thread over on warseer out. Has the cost savings for all the battalions.

http://goo.gl/SjiPGm