Sequel Thread. What army would you NEVER play?

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.

**shortymcnostrill**

For me it's space marines (any flavor). The knights/humans+1 in space archetype just doesn't do it for me. I could have been tempted by the 2nd ed incarnation though.

**Hecaton**

Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Hecaton wrote:
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Okay, I have a bunch of things to say about this:

1: Are we seeing the same models for old and new? This isn't the FW keeper of secrets with six exposed nipples we're talking about. The old repentia were pretty hideous models, but weren't naked or not-kid-friendly or anything [or at least, no less kid friendly than the new ones. They've traded sacks over their heads in exchange for spiked collars and more dangly chains, and also some like grafts on their skin]. I would say my disappointment with the repentia was that they kept the weird leather & chains bondage cult aesthetic the old models had instead of going for something like "clad in parchment" like the art often shows. They still look like a goofy BDSM cult, but like, they always looked like that which was the general criticism of their old models, so, uh... not sure what's up with the kid friendlyness.

They covered up their bodies more with athletic gear, for some reason. It doesn't seem very 40k to me, and is strange juxtaposed with the piercings and so on. Like "Oh these are murderous fascists who kill people who look different but wouldn't want to accidentally catch a sideboob!"

Uh... I'm sorry, I'm not seeing this anti-fanservice PG-rating conspiracy you're talking about. I have both new and old ones, and they look pretty aesthetically consistent [though the old models are ugly and kind of distored and unnatural looking as hell, but that's just the hallmark of like 25 year old sculpts].

Like,
A: I'm not convinced that their top-thing being strapless was critical to the model's aesthetic or conveying the lore of being disgraced members of the order who wear no armor and trust in faith to protect them. Like, the new models are really faithful to the old designs for the Repentia in a bad way. They still look like a BDSM fetish cult instead of what they're supposed to be because I don't know, naughty nuns are hot for leather, chains, and piercings?
B: Neither the old nor new aesthetic looks at all like the art and general thematic description where they wore a tabard made of scripture.

Like, I understand "I don't like them, they're weird looking," or "I don't like them, they don't match the old lore." I don't understand "I don't like them because they're less hot than the old models" because they're not any less weirdly fanservice-y, unless you're into face-sacks, in which case, well, that's very specific and I don't think having bags on their heads made them unsuitable for children before.

There are lots of reasons to dislike the army, some of them valid and some that I won't touch with a 11ft pole. But this one confuses me like hell.

Hecaton wrote:
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
As a side note, I don't get this whole thing with "40k isn't/shouldn't be kid friendly". This might be my American sensibilities speaking [wherein violence is acceptable for children of all ages but even thinking about the idea of sex is instantly like no-show for anyone under 21] or maybe just a really warped vision of what's acceptable for kids, but like with the exception of the FW keeper of secrets and that one dark eldar model, it's mostly just fantasy/cartoon violence that's almost certainly less realistic than what they're seeing in their video games [also, like it's miniatures. The least kid friendly thing about them is the glue and fine motor skills involved with assembly].

I'm American as well, and I've been playing GW games since I was about eight. My parents didn't really understand how fethed up the setting was, though. But the "not kid friendly" comes in more in terms of actually having the genocidal fascists of the Imperium be, well, genocidal fascists, instead of whitewashing and sanitizing them so that a wine mom will buy them for her kid.

Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
2: Also, like, what's this about the moral angels and how do the pentient engines and repentia have anything to do with that? They're definitely not showing the organization that is the sororitas to be a particularly nice organization, and there are and always have been male and female pilot options for the things.

Overall, the new changes make the organization seem "nicer."

I'm not sure how. Like, none of the lore has been changed, they've even added in the Anchorite and Mortifier [which are recaptured defectors from the order and repentia who rout in battle, respectively], and the models themselves have more torturey medieval stuff on it. Like, seriously, I'm not even sure if we're looking at the same models, the new pilots are screaming and contorted with all kinds of hoses and face masks and syringes and even an iron maiden on one of them.
That said, I'm kind of sad they dropped the religious punishment overtones that was the previous pilot being in a tunic in a crucifix pose with no real other ancillary torture-stuff for just going ham on the "medieval torturer's dungeon" aesthetic with like that mask with the hoses into his eyes, the coffin with the syringes, or the stocks that one guy has.

It's not about how "hot" they are; it's more about how they look in athletic gear. If the same amount of skin was covered up but it was parchment stapled to their skin I'd be down. But they should look wretched and psycho, and running around nearly-naked is a good way to signify that.

**Tokhuah**

I would never play any form of Imperium scum. I might consider it though if they created a Frixum Pisces Chapter. It would require kit bashing some unique heads however...

**Inquisitor Lord Katherine**

Hecaton wrote:

It's not about how "hot" they are; it's more about how they look in athletic gear. If the same amount of skin was covered up but it was parchment stapled to their skin I'd be down. But they should look wretched and psycho, and running around nearly-naked is a good way to signify that.

I agree with that sentiment, because that's how they're drawn in the art. Clad in a tabard made of scripture, because they're proclaiming that their faith will protect them, which is the point. I don't think they should be naked, that's just fanservice and serves no purpose for the unit. Arcoflagellants are wretched and psycho and pumped up with drugs and their hands replaced with weapons and all that, Sisters Repentia are Sisters who have somehow failed the order and have been placed in a suicide unit to redeem themselves. There's definitely no lore reason for them to be tits out or even in their whole spikes-and-chains BDSM get up, besides some like truly unnecessary and evocative idea of exactly what kind of naughty the naughty nuns are.

That said, even if I don't think the BDSM cult look is the way they should have redone them, I cannot deny that the old models also had the same BDSM fetish cult aesthetic going, and the new models are really true to form with the old models, just much better looking, so like, I can get some disappointment that the models weren't changed aesthetically, but they're definitely not more kid/moral guardian friendly, I think, given that the alternative of having like robes of scripture as often illustrated is pretty much less fanservice unless you have a very specific thing.

**Karol**

I know they were a thing in Spain from history, and that they were a thing in eastern europe too, although no longer practiced, but having processions of hooded half naked men and women whipped or performing scarification isn't just a BDSM thing.

And petitioners to lifting an official curse from a priest or a bishop often had to come to the bishop palace with a text of the excomunication nailed to the skin on their fore head, and wearing no cloths other then a sack.

**Inquisitor Lord Katherine**

Karol wrote:
I know they were a thing in Spain from history, and that they were a thing in eastern europe too, although no longer practiced, but having processions of hooded half naked men and women whipped or performing scarification isn't just a BDSM thing.

And petitioners to lifting an official curse from a priest or a bishop often had to come to the bishop palace with a text of the excomunication nailed to the skin on their fore head, and wearing no cloths other then a sack.

Yeah, but like, I'm 99% certain those medieval flagellants were not dressed like the repentia.

Most art depicts them with like the cone-hats and relatively formless smock-tunic-thing; which is pretty different from tight bodysuits with short-shorts [or a strapless leather top with a high-slit skirt thing/front/back tabard for the old models].

**Karol**

they had hood and loin cloths at least if we were to trust paintings from the XVIIth century. And they were a thing, at least here, till the partition of the country. Then Prussians and Russians forbade most religious expression, not being catholics and all, and the austro hungarians played the catholics vs ortodox vs greek catholics.

Historicaly even some polish kings were flaglants. All 3 of the Wasas were, and when their joined the processions they wore hoods and a loin cloth. Certain closed female convenants practicied whipings and processions till the outbreak of WWII.
And in case of those we have still people alive that saw it as kids and pictures. Wasn't very popular back then, as the socialists in the goverment really didn't like the church between WWI and WWII.

And for easters we still have crucifictions with real people in rural areas, and then flagglants, although only males are part of the procession. Only difference is that today that they don't wear masks at all.

**vipoid**

Irbis wrote:

And in case of those we have still people alive that saw it as kids and pictures. Wasn't very popular back then, as the socialists in the goverment really didn't like the church between WWI and WWII.

What socialist government? You mean fascist, authoritarian right wing regime that in fact jailed socialists for the 'crime' of opposing them and was so militarist/antisemitic that allied powers during WW2 did everything to remove its members from any possible political and military post, an intervention unique in both WW1 and WW2?

Wait, are you seriously arguing that the National Socialists weren't socialists?

**r_squared**

Yeah, don't start all that bollocks again.

The only army I wouldn't play I genuinely gave a go and bought some box sets for. However, I just couldn't get into painting them at all and sold them to a mate at a discount.
Sadly, it was Tau.

Im actually on board with the fluff, it's just the aesthetic and game style of the army. Just cannot be bothered with that. If they had some mechanism for bringing in alien auxiliaries, exotic and interesting ones, then maybe.

**Castozor**

Interestingly enough one army I said I´d never play due to aesthetics and lore (Death Guard) I ended up playing because eventually I did like some of their lore and value game play over aesthetics. So while I wont say never, armies I'm very unlikely to ever play are Primaris because they are a blatant cash grab drowning out proper releases, Eldar of any kind because I dislike elves and their attitudes, DE doubly so because DE/Slaanesh attitudes are just not for me.
Knights/Custodes/LoW models in general, because they do not belong in 2k point games for me. Other than that most armies are fine to me although really the main thing keeping me from just having 10+ armies is obviously money and time for painting/building.

**vipoid**

Castozor wrote:
Interestingly enough one army I said I´d never play due to aesthetics and lore (Death Guard) I ended up playing because eventually I did like some of their lore and value game play over aesthetics.

Out of interest, did you modify the DG aesthetics at all for your own army, or do you just use them as-is?

**TinyLegions**

BrianDavion wrote:
TinyLegions wrote:

2: Anything Chaos: I really have a pet peeve about the gods of Chaos interjecting themselves into the games plane of existence yet other gods are not able to.

except the other gods DO interject themselves into things, the emperor clearly does (he even arguably has his own deamons in the form of living saints like Celestine and the Legion of the damned) and it's basicly eistablished fact that Gork and Mork are indeed working through Ghaz

Not nearly to the extent that Chaos gods do and that is my point. You are comparing a few token personalities and a very rare unit with whole armies of Daemons, in addition to CSM which are basically space marines with adjustments. This is not including Dark Eldar which are basically in league with Slanneash IIRC. I have not rolled dice on felt in a while so I may be out of the loop as far as power ranking goes, but that is whole armies who are directly affected by their gods vs a few personalities that are affected by theirs. I don't see that as a balance in favor of the deities in opposition to chaos.

You can say the same thing with Eldar as well, you have the Avatars, which are basically the equivalent to Daemon Princes, but it is just them against the above. Its the same problem WFB had, you have a few token personalities against the whole horde of chaos.(which "everyone" used to complain how overpowering they were due to these damn marks)

**Overread**

Dark Eldar are by no means in alliance with Slaanesh - in fact if you suggested it they'd probably gut you for the insult. They are just as fearful and maddened by their desire to avoid She Who Thirsts as the Craftworlders. However the Dark Eldar take a different pathway toward trying to ensure that their souls don't get stolen by Slaanesh.

**harlokin**

TinyLegions wrote:
[ This is not including Dark Eldar which are basically in league with Slanneash IIRC.

As Overread pointed out, this is completely and utterly false.

**Super Ready**

Whether they like to pretend otherwise, or not... they're certainly doing his bidding and giving him strength.

**harlokin**

Super Ready wrote:
Whether they like to pretend otherwise, or not... they're certainly doing his bidding and giving him strength.

No more so than anyone else. Do Space Marines give succor to Khorne through their actions? Quite possiby, but it is not their intent, pretend otherwise or not.

**Super Ready**

Actually I'd say yes, more so. One because Eldar emotion is that much more powerful for feeding Chaos, we know this from how Craftworld Eldar behave with the path, and it's fair to say that Drukhari are not showing the same kind of restraint...!
Secondly, I've gotten the impression over time that because they're literally using such acts to stave off death, they have to go over-the-top out of necessity.

Your point's valid, though, the gods do very well feed off other races as well, however unwittingly - it's just that Drukhari actions are going to be particularly tasty for Slaanesh even when you take that into account.

**harlokin**

Yup I agree. I suppose their eschewing of their psychic nature is an attempt to reduce their impact.

**Bobthehero**

Orks, there's nothing about them that interest me, they're by far my least favorite faction.

Anything melee heavy. I like my guns.

**Voss**

Careful. You might set off the argument about whether orks are a 'melee faction' or a 'dakka faction.'

**Super Ready**

Well that's just silly. Clearly the only point of even having dakka, is so that you can krump something you can't get to yet...!

**dream archipelago**

Anything non-Chaos really, the way it should be.

**MinscS2**

Without a doubt: Tau.

- Don't like the models - at all.

- Don't really like their lore.

- Don't like their playstyle. I prefer killing stuff in the close combat phase over the shooting phase, or potentially doing a bit of both. The notion of an army without any form of dedicated close combat units just makes me retch.

**Jidmah**

Voss wrote:
Careful. You might set off the argument about whether orks are a 'melee faction' or a 'dakka faction.'

You summoned me? *points to signature*

**Archebius**

I don't know if there are any armies I would NEVER play. I think it's cool that GW supports as many different factions as they do (for varying values of "support"), and I really enjoy modeling and collecting.

That being said, Death Guard and most Chaos units don't really appeal to me. I enjoy some of the out-there Slaanesh designs, I don't mind the ripped-from-a-metal-album-cover infantry, and the Heldrake is SWEET, but a lot of their other special units and characters feel overdone.

Also, Custodes.

**ChargerIIC**

Second least likely is Death Guard. I hate the whole zombie escteshtic and its really hard to find new directions to take thier paint schemes when you need so much flesh. That and their lore started out good and just fell over and died halfway through the Horus heresy and never recovered even in 40k.

The only thing that would be worse would be Dark Eldar. I will burn every model I own, set fire to my hands, and use the flaming stumps to demolish the GW corporate offices before I ever assemble another freaking DE model.

**Nurglitch**

I'd never play Primaris Space Marines or Knights of any flavour. Primaris are a very 'on rails' army, and Knights are boring.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:
Careful. You might set off the argument about whether orks are a 'melee faction' or a 'dakka faction.'

The real question you need to ask is whether Orks are a morker faction, or a gorker faction.

**bsharitt**

Probably would never do Eldar of any flavor.

I could probably never do a full Khorne army. Occasional Khorne stuff in a mixed Chaos army, but just Khorne is too much for. After so much blood and skulls, after a while it starts to feel a bit corny(no pun intended... well not much at least).

**slade the sniper**

I hate Eldar....but now have a full army of the stupid space elves.
Dark Eldar also were a no go...until I got a bunch of them.
I hated Orks until the Mrs. bought a bunch of them.

I guess I wouldn't ever buy and build basic Tyranids. I do have some, but made them all as Xenomorphs.

A full Chaos army is probably something I wouldn't do either, but I am interested in doing something with the Alpha Legion.

I would have liked to do an old Necrons army, but the new fluff kinda makes me not want to.

-STS

**BrookM**

Did some cleaning, warnings have been issued and I have removed the off-topic bs and quotes referring to said off-topic bs. I would kindly ask one and all to keep politics and religion out of your discussion and to stay on topic.

Thank you.