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 think I did a thread about this a couple a months ago, but I've already chosen an army that I can play as my main (empire) as they can pretty do anything they want ^^

We don't play tournaments so I don't know how that affects my choice... I've always loved the idea of daemons, and magic superiority? But I don't know if daemons have that capability. Which army has the best chance to dominate in the magic phase?? And to be honest I don't think daemons have great balance :/ I'd like to think I couple pick whatever I like out the book and make it work.

Another army I like are dwarves. I love the resolute idea of them, and I'm obsessed with hammerers, iron drakes and iron breakers! I know they don't have a magic phase but can I make the most of them as an army?

Thank you

 Andy140491 wrote:
I'd like to think I couple pick whatever I like out the book and make it work.

Go find another game then. Warhammer doesn't do internal balance. Dark Elves might be your best bet, cause then you are comparing so-so units to awesome units, instead of terrible units to awesome units.

Also, given we may be rolling up on a new edition of warhammer, I'd advise not purchasing anything until we get some more concrete information on what 9th ed looks like.

I'd say that lizardmen has good internal balance. Everything is fairly average with nothing really standing out miles ahead of the rest.
Ogres also have decent internal balance. Only a few of the units are sub par, and you can play effectively with several builds.

Daemons internal balance is terrible, and are average at best in the magic phase.

Dwarfs don't just lack a magic phase, they also lack a meaningful movement phase. The army is far to static for me; YMMV.

Dark Elves and High Elves are probably at the top in terms of internal balance. There's a couple builds of theirs that tend to dominate, but they can accomplish plenty of other builds that are solidly competitive as well and neither has too many stinker choices.

I really dislike dwarfs. Yeah the *idea* of them is cool, but M3 and no magic makes them really one-dimensional to play.

I find that ogres and elves have really decent internal balance. Both armies have a few units to avoid but other than that; you can go many ways with them.

To me, dwarfs lack any fun. Point here shoot, point here shoot, hold your ground and maul them to death on 4+/6++ basic infantry.

 Pelas Mir'san wrote:
I find that ogres and elves have really decent internal balance. Both armies have a few units to avoid but other than that; you can go many ways with them.

To me, dwarfs lack any fun. Point here shoot, point here shoot, hold your ground and maul them to death on 4+/6++ basic infantry.

Ogres? Really? You could cut all but like 3 pages out of that book and nobody would even notice. Every Ogres list is almost exactly the same. The only question is "mournfang or maneaters, ironblasters or stonehorn"

Personally I like the Ironguts. There is also sabrecats and leadbelchers, even regular ogres...gnoblars. I do not play competative warhammer. I just play to have a good time. You may face different ultra competative people, but I do not. Tell me that dark elves lists are different. Most run the same thing over and over and over again.

Warlock spam, bolt throwers, and witch elves.

How about wood elves? beastmen? bretonnians?

 Pelas Mir'san wrote:
Tell me that dark elves lists are different. Most run the same thing over and over and over again.

Warlock spam, bolt throwers, and witch elves.

How about wood elves? beastmen? bretonnians?

Or 80 executioners!
...
and 10 warlocks

As mentioned already, Daemons are the outright [b]worst[/I] book when looking at its internal balances. Stuff tends to either be stupidly good, or laughably awful, with perhaps the lone 'bright spot' of a decently costed unit being the Burny Chariots... (then you go compare Beasts of Nurgle to everything else and wonder what kind of drugs the author was smoking! )

As for their magic, Tzeentch is easily the worst of the bunch, (hilariously!), Nurgle gets a pair of solid lores, and Slaanesh can break the game and pull off 1st turn victories thanks to Caco Choir being so obnoxiously powerful.



Alongside the likes of Lizzies, Ogres & High/Dark Elves though, I'd also give a shout out to Vampire Counts. Lots of fun & interesting lists to be played around with there, and they're also a magical powerhouse to boot.
The only really obnoxious stuff is maxing out on Terrorghiest/Banshee Screams, and/or spamming Hexwraiths.

To be honest I was dead set against any elves of any kind. With my taste diverting away from 'elves' because they're flimsy. With. Dark elves being a slight exception... my only problem is that last time I played dark elves it was when I borrowed a friends army, when I was trying to decide which one I liked the best. I played a small game against my really competitive friend who fielded wood elves and the only model he lost was an archer due to his own miscast turn one. He shot me off the board. Felt like playing his tau in ye olde times. But as far as looks are concerned they do it for me too!

Playing elves has a rather steep learning curve. Even Dark Elves, with their combat prowess, are far from a 'point and click' army.

Once you learn the tricks, though, they are a very dangerous and competitive army.

Wood Elves are a pretty harsh matchup for Dark Elves, though. It wasn't good even when the Woodies had their old book. With their new book they're brutal. They're one of the few armies that can beat gunline dwarves or empire at their own game.

So if I was to play Dark elves id have a pretty hard time against woodies? I mean I'm not collecting my second army to be super competitive, but I don't wanna get thrashed because he spams wild riders and archers.

I know this may sound silly, but what makes Dark elves stand out from other armies? Is there anything they have that other armies don't??

 Andy140491 wrote:

I know this may sound silly, but what makes Dark elves stand out from other armies? Is there anything they have that other armies don't??

Armywide ASF, mundane kit 1+ armor save mounted chars (2+ infantry), murderous prowess (reroll 1's to wound in CC), all horses are fast-cav, warlocks are fastcav poison wardsave mage rare choices. And witches with a cauldron can be pretty nasty. RAW cauldron grants shooting, magic and CC rerolls to wound.

But again there's a new edition on the horizon, so I wouldn't go crazy optimizing things for the current ruleset.

kooshlord wrote:

 Andy140491 wrote:

I know this may sound silly, but what makes Dark elves stand out from other armies? Is there anything they have that other armies don't??

Armywide ASF, mundane kit 1+ armor save mounted chars (2+ infantry), murderous prowess (reroll 1's to wound in CC), all horses are fast-cav, warlocks are fastcav poison wardsave mage rare choices. And witches with a cauldron can be pretty nasty. RAW cauldron grants shooting, magic and CC rerolls to wound.

But again there's a new edition on the horizon, so I wouldn't go crazy optimizing things for the current ruleset.

Matt Ward Nerf!

To be honest I'm going for the models with the way they look. And I love the dark elves. Either that or warriors. And I just think dark elves are a little more diverse.

I just like armies that stand out.. and I've always considered all elves way too similar :/

 Andy140491 wrote:
To be honest I'm going for the models with the way they look. And I love the dark elves. Either that or warriors. And I just think dark elves are a little more diverse.

I just like armies that stand out.. and I've always considered all elves way too similar :/

Well buddy have I got news for you! Currently you can take all 3 elves in one list & rumour has it that is how it will saty. Expect elves to become more generic as high, dark & wood get blended. Likely this will see their kits combined / samefied.

Then again these are just rumours, I'm not saying believe them I'm advising caution. Remember it is better to expect nothing & receive something, than expect everything & receive nothing.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath wrote:

 Pelas Mir'san wrote:
I find that ogres and elves have really decent internal balance. Both armies have a few units to avoid but other than that; you can go many ways with them.

To me, dwarfs lack any fun. Point here shoot, point here shoot, hold your ground and maul them to death on 4+/6++ basic infantry.

Ogres? Really? You could cut all but like 3 pages out of that book and nobody would even notice. Every Ogres list is almost exactly the same. The only question is "mournfang or maneaters, ironblasters or stonehorn"

I'd be interested to know what army you played as the same could be said of all the books out at the moment

 Shas'O Dorian wrote:

 Andy140491 wrote:
To be honest I'm going for the models with the way they look. And I love the dark elves. Either that or warriors. And I just think dark elves are a little more diverse.

I just like armies that stand out.. and I've always considered all elves way too similar :/

Well buddy have I got news for you! Currently you can take all 3 elves in one list & rumour has it that is how it will saty. Expect elves to become more generic as high, dark & wood get blended. Likely this will see their kits combined / samefied.

Then again these are just rumours, I'm not saying believe them I'm advising caution. Remember it is better to expect nothing & receive something, than expect everything & receive nothing.

The same could very likely be true for WoC and Daemons as well...

So if Warriors appeal a bit more than Elves in general, then you might consider an unholy alliance of mortals + daemons.
Daemons on the whole benefit a tone just from gaining access to WoC Core units, as Daemonic Core outside of Regen'ing Plaguebearers or MSU'ed Horrors/Daemonettes are just plain awful...
As well as sturdier characters, since right now, outside of Greaters and the Nurgle Herald, the majority of DoC characters are both bland, and super easy to kill due our complete inability to gain even mediocre protection.

Plus, there's nothing that really matches the look of a unified mono-God army of the combined books!