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.

Which armies fit their fluff well and which do not fit it at all?

I think that IG fit their fluff well (due to lots of cheap units) and SM fit theirs the worst (however that's probably due to how OTT their fluff is).

CSM are pretty poor:

There are no Legions ingame, in the fluff Legions are a significant threat to the Imperium.
The only legion that has been represented so far (Black Legion) is described as a mix of veterans and recent renegades, the same publication states veterans must be purchased as an upgrade on every model possible.
Their seers cannot divine, whereas in the fluff their seers are excellent diviners.
Chaos Lords are weaker than common chapter masters, whereas in the fluff they are death incarnate.
CSM are 90% followers of Nurgle, whereas in the fluff the Death Guard were far from the largest traitor legion.
1A is apparently 'Bezerk'

SGTPozy wrote:
Which armies fit their fluff well and which do not fit it at all?

I think that IG fit their fluff well (due to lots of cheap units) and SM fit theirs the worst (however that's probably due to how OTT their fluff is).

I agree with both of those. DE fit as well from what I know of them.
I disagree with some of the chaos, I think Nurgle fits the bill pretty well, as does Khorne.

Necrons are balls 'ard to remove and will just get back up.

Now some people will disagree because RP rolls are now taken immediately but I think that's ok and I imagine a succesful RP is like being repaired on the run while a failed RP roll doesn't mean it can't reanimate but just means it'll take a good amount of time before it's back up.

Entire battles wouldn't last more than 15-30 minutes in real-time, so if a necron is 'removed as a casualty' he's actually performing more difficult repairs and he'll join his metal brethren again when the fight is over.

DaPino wrote:
Necrons are balls 'ard to remove and will just get back up.

Now some people will disagree because RP rolls are now taken immediately but I think that's ok and I imagine a succesful RP is like being repaired on the run while a failed RP roll doesn't mean it can't reanimate but just means it'll take a good amount of time before it's back up.

Entire battles wouldn't last more than 15-30 minutes in real-time, so if a necron is 'removed as a casualty' he's actually performing more difficult repairs and he'll join his metal brethren again when the fight is over.

You know it's funny, from a fluff perspective Necron armies are really rather unfair.

If a guard army loses, millions of people die. Heck, even if they win, thousands will still have been expended as necessary losses.

If a Necron army loses, they teleport back to their repair bays. Even if you obliterate the Tomb Complex, odds are a decent fraction will have used their fancy tech to evacuate. Really hard to just make them stay down.

DaPino wrote:
Necrons are balls 'ard to remove and will just get back up.

Now some people will disagree because RP rolls are now taken immediately but I think that's ok and I imagine a succesful RP is like being repaired on the run while a failed RP roll doesn't mean it can't reanimate but just means it'll take a good amount of time before it's back up.

Entire battles wouldn't last more than 15-30 minutes in real-time, so if a necron is 'removed as a casualty' he's actually performing more difficult repairs and he'll join his metal brethren again when the fight is over.

I have to agree that with the Newcrons, their codex is probably the fluffiest way to run an army yet, because their detachment is literally how Necrons operate in fluff. And as far as RP goes, I've read stories of Overlords getting shot at without dying, and what little damage was done, is repaired immediately. The new RP better resembles that because you can take it against every wound, as opposed to just when you die. Plus Phylacteries now do what they're supposed to, which is fix the bearer.

In short, the Necron dex fits their fluff very well.

Tau. Guns all over the place, using tech to get the upper hand, but pretty hopeless in a hand to hand fight.

Dark eldar fit there fluff fast hard leathal but if you get the drop on them they fold like wet tissues.
necrons fit a tide of relentless killing machines that are really hard to stop.
deamons like wise fit they cooperate together for the most part on real space incursions but will occasionaly stab each other in the back (warpstorm) hardly any ranged weapons and like to do the dirty up close.
nids can be like there fluff with hoards of critters and a few bigger ones but on the table not so much as spamming mc's is the most reliable and theve got a lot of diffrent one.

Skullhammer wrote:
Dark eldar fit there fluff fast hard leathal but if you get the drop on them they fold like wet tissues.

Sad thing is, I have to disagree. Dark Eldar are no faster than Eldar, and aren't as tough. And there's a lot of little things in their codex that just doesn't seem to do what it should do by fluff standards.

You can do a pretty convincing Tyranid invasion force now thanks to a couple of formations, Tyrannocytes and Sporocysts. Endless Swarm with 90 Termagants and 90 Hormagaunts that re-enter play on a 4+ is the starting point of course.

DE depends. Kabal and Coven units fit their fluff very well, but Wych Cult units do not. Their fluff has them as exotic unstoppable killing machines, but on the table they keel over in a stiff breeze.

Sisters are pretty good, barring the lack of Frateris Militia.

They don't have a lot of options, but all of the options they do have will tear your face off. 'cept Celestians, obviously, since they're still kind of iffy on where they stand fluff wise anyway.

Daemons fit pretty well. Crazy shenanigans every turn

I don't think Tau are played properly as per their fluff. Tau are a mechanized army that retreats instead of holding positions favoring a counter attack later on. Only defending when they absolutely have too. Then most Tau lists are static gun lines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And how come my Succubus can't take a bike or sky board and my Archon can't have wings?!

NauticalKendall wrote:

And how come my Succubus can't take a bike or sky board and my Archon can't have wings?!

Because GW hates Dark Eldar. >.>

The problem with Tyranid fluff represented on the table is Shadow in the Warp. It doesn't do ANYTHING like it should. I understand why in the balance of the game SITW needs to be limited to synapse range, but in fluff it effects the planet for weeks before the hive ships arrive. By the time a nid army is on the field the planet would be drowned in it.

Additionally it needs to do more things. Maybe negate/ignore non tyranid know no fear/fearless since sitw is getting under their skin and in their heads.psykers dice rolls suffer a -1.

It's incredibly underpowered at the moment.

Lance845 wrote:
The problem with Tyranid fluff represented on the table is Shadow in the Warp. It doesn't do ANYTHING like it should. I understand why in the balance of the game SITW needs to be limited to synapse range, but in fluff it effects the planet for weeks before the hive ships arrive. By the time a nid army is on the field the planet would be drowned in it.

Additionally it needs to do more things. Maybe negate/ignore non tyranid know no fear/fearless since sitw is getting under their skin and in their heads.psykers dice rolls suffer a -1.

It's incredibly underpowered at the moment.

hmm house rule idea..
Any creature with SITW grants you an extra dice to deny the witch with.

BrianDavion wrote:

Lance845 wrote:
The problem with Tyranid fluff represented on the table is Shadow in the Warp. It doesn't do ANYTHING like it should. I understand why in the balance of the game SITW needs to be limited to synapse range, but in fluff it effects the planet for weeks before the hive ships arrive. By the time a nid army is on the field the planet would be drowned in it.

Additionally it needs to do more things. Maybe negate/ignore non tyranid know no fear/fearless since sitw is getting under their skin and in their heads.psykers dice rolls suffer a -1.

It's incredibly underpowered at the moment.

hmm house rule idea..
Any creature with SITW grants you an extra dice to deny the witch with.

That would be cool if deny the witch wasn't already a useless roll that was so poorly thought out and may as well not exist.

IG don't really fit their fluff especially well either, nowhere near as badly as SM and CSM who are the worst offenders, but they're there.

The IG is supposed to be mind-bogglingly diverse with enormous variation in regimental doctrine, organization and aesthetic. While there's enough model ranges, GW and otherwise to have some decent diversity in the look of the Imperial Guard, actual variation in army is impossible to reflect in the game aside from the Forgeworld regiments. Honestly, how many guard armies these days aren't, in effect, the Cadian 8th with Pask or Creed. Considering how the rules actively punish anything that isn't mechvets with tanks, even without the old regiment builder rules, the codex offers few viable options.

NauticalKendall wrote:
I don't think Tau are played properly as per their fluff. Tau are a mechanized army that retreats instead of holding positions favoring a counter attack later on. Only defending when they absolutely have too. Then most Tau lists are static gun lines.

That's a fault more with how GW has designed the book though, not how people are choosing to play them specifically. There is literally no incentive whatsoever to play Tau as anything other than a boring static gunline, you're basically gimping yourself if you even try, and I would argue that's not a reasonable thing to expect anyone to do in any game. If anything mechanized armies got worse in the new book, and running mech Tau in the old book was already not the most "optimal" way of playing them in the first place.

I would love to play Tau the way they're "meant to be played" as per the fluff, but it's all on GW at this point.

Eldar.

Those arrogant asshats piss everyone off.

Bharring wrote:
Eldar.

Those arrogant asshats piss everyone off.

 Sidstyler wrote:

NauticalKendall wrote:
I don't think Tau are played properly as per their fluff. Tau are a mechanized army that retreats instead of holding positions favoring a counter attack later on. Only defending when they absolutely have too. Then most Tau lists are static gun lines.

That's a fault more with how GW has designed the book though, not how people are choosing to play them specifically. There is literally no incentive whatsoever to play Tau as anything other than a boring static gunline, you're basically gimping yourself if you even try, and I would argue that's not a reasonable thing to expect anyone to do in any game. If anything mechanized armies got worse in the new book, and running mech Tau in the old book was already not the most "optimal" way of playing them in the first place.

I would love to play Tau the way they're "meant to be played" as per the fluff, but it's all on GW at this point.

Tau are a "mobile force" in a campaign sense. Forming a static firing formation to take down known enemy targets doesn't contradict that. They wouldn't suit Battle Focus.