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 wonder if there are factions that are underplayed and might be appreciated if someone brought them along to play against. I mean is "Too many space marines" or "To many imperials" a thing? Might there be an underplayed faction that few players think of building an army for?

I haven't seen Orks on a local table in a long time and it makes me sad. Same with GSC. Normally I'd say Tyranids as well, but I have a Tyranid army and enjoy playing it.

 Insectum7 wrote:
I haven't seen Orks on a local table in a long time and it makes me sad. Same with GSC. Normally I'd say Tyranids as well, but I have a Tyranid army and enjoy playing it.

I just got done binge reading Devastation of Baal, Desert Raiders and Warriors of Ultramar and after looking online I've been considering a Tyranid army myself. They look pretty affordable from a $$$ standpoint, except the big tyranids. Those can get be very pricey but run of the mill horde seems to be pretty affordable. Are GSC's and tyranids soupable like Imperial factions are? I think it would be pretty cool to have a mix of GSC armor with tyranids for the melee to avoid having to buy the big expensive tyranids.

Yeah GSC and Nids are soupable. There might be restrictions on it that I don't know about though, as I'm not an owner of the GSC. Ask around though!

Harlequins. I've got one player locally who plays them and since 8th came out I've managed to face them once. He's convinced himself that they are now not worth playing under 9th but that one came we played was good fun. Two different play styles and an army I never seen anyone else play.

Eh it varies by locality. Some groups have a diverse range including out of print armies; others have very singular focus on armies.

You also get cases like Sisters of Battle where many people wanted to play, but the line had very old models; was out of date and (as has happened) also skipped some editions in regard to codex support. All those things can result in an army getting less popular. Happened to Sisters of Battle, Dark Eldar, Necrons etc....

Then again an army gets a big release and BAM its popular (like necrons likely are right now).

In the end you do what you want for your army; doesn't really matter if everyone else plays it locally or if no one plays it; you've got to do what you want with your hobby .CAuse even if you just build and don't even apply paint, that's still a lot of hours you'll be spending building those models ;more if you paint and that's before you've hit the table.

 BlackLobster wrote:
Harlequins. I've got one player locally who plays them and since 8th came out I've managed to face them once. He's convinced himself that they are now not worth playing under 9th but that one came we played was good fun. Two different play styles and an army I never seen anyone else play.

Harlequins can be very strong but they have no margin for error at all. They're doing well on the tournament circuit.

Daemons are another one that you don't see often. I like them as a change of pace from Marines, Mono-Slannesh has some fun tricks.

 BlackLobster wrote:
Harlequins. I've got one player locally who plays them and since 8th came out I've managed to face them once. He's convinced himself that they are now not worth playing under 9th but that one came we played was good fun. Two different play styles and an army I never seen anyone else play.

Your friend must not be aware that Harlequins are top tier then.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 BlackLobster wrote:
Harlequins. I've got one player locally who plays them and since 8th came out I've managed to face them once. He's convinced himself that they are now not worth playing under 9th but that one came we played was good fun. Two different play styles and an army I never seen anyone else play.

Your friend must not be aware that Harlequins are top tier then.

it may be that the army as he wants to play it, isn't

you know how it is some people wanna play an army a specific way and if that's suboptimal it annoys them.

or just as likely he's heard all the "Marines super OP" comments online and has taken that to heart more then he should (if you listen to the internet it doesn't matter what you play, your army is trash tier.. unless it's top tier then you're an donkey-cave who shouldn't like said army and are clearly just playing it to be OP)

I would really like more eldar(all flavours) locally. basically the only pointy ears I play are an all jetbike/Walker Saim Hain army, which I do love playing with. Currently I play Deldar and am looking to expand into Harlies & Craftworlds at some point.

Orks are another faction I would like to play with. Back in RT/2nd my buddy had orks so my squad of Salamanders killed literally thousands over the course of 2yrs. but @ my flgs currently only 1 plays orks and they're just starting the army.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Yeah GSC and Nids are soupable. There might be restrictions on it that I don't know about though, as I'm not an owner of the GSC. Ask around though!

No restrictions for GSC + Tyranids. GSC + Astra Militarium has some restrictions but that is also a special case since ordinarily they wouldn't be eligible as allies due to no shared faction keywords.

I do concur with more GSC players being appreciated. As an example, my local shop has a surprisingly healthy mix of armies, but I am the only GSC player.

I would second Daemons...especially mono build instead of soup. Khorne or Slaanesh look great en masse, not a fan of the other two.

Khorne Daemons is probably the rarest army you'll see in the game (aside from FW-only stuff)...though to be blunt, there's a very good reason for that. They're both terrible and boring.

More generally, anything that isn't some variation of space marine (i.e. including CSM). Historically Eldar were another very common faction but 9th is rough enough on them that that no longer seems to be the case.

 Overread wrote:
Eh it varies by locality. Some groups have a diverse range including out of print armies; others have very singular focus on armies.

You also get cases like Sisters of Battle where many people wanted to play, but the line had very old models; was out of date and (as has happened) also skipped some editions in regard to codex support. All those things can result in an army getting less popular. Happened to Sisters of Battle, Dark Eldar, Necrons etc....

Then again an army gets a big release and BAM its popular (like necrons likely are right now).

In the end you do what you want for your army; doesn't really matter if everyone else plays it locally or if no one plays it; you've got to do what you want with your hobby .CAuse even if you just build and don't even apply paint, that's still a lot of hours you'll be spending building those models ;more if you paint and that's before you've hit the table.

Oh I know its my choice on everything and there are no limits. But why just build an army, when you can contribute to the larger community by intentionally seeking out armies that aren't what everyone else is doing? Sure I get it that some armies are just broken rules-wise and that is why players avoid them but at the same time there is something to be said about the guy who shows up and breaks out something fairly underplayed. It adds excitement for players who maybe bored playing against the usual factions and shakes things up a bit. Know what I'm saying? Playing an underserved faction can add some variety to another player's game and then everyone has a better time. Plus it could allow players to have a slight advantage if everyone is always used to playing say SM vs Orks and their armies are set up for that because that is what they always play and then suddenly you throw a wrench in their machine and force them to break out of their usual pattern to deal with a Tyranid horde.

Well to be fair I own almost all armies in the game atm, having been playing since 2nd ed.... the only ones I don't own are gsc/ad mech/custodes. And out of those 3 the only one I would not want to own is ad mech. So I will answer this question from a different pov.

The army i am having the most fun playing in 9th edition so far is Tyranids. I have about a 40% win rate with them so far, so its not an easy army to play with if your trying to win, but i am having a blast with my nids. Crazy monsters, swarms of baby bugs, and some very easy secondary options with units that used to just suck suddenly being very reliable and relevant... yeah i am loving my nids.

As others have said, it's more of a question of what is not getting played in your local meta really. Tyranids would be high in m book as not played in my area as most players when they see them here think "damn, nids.... ok.... well I have a fight on my hands but I can win this...."

I think that greatly depends on the both players. I don't really care what army my opponent plays nearly as much as how they play that army. If they are a pill or in some other way unpleasant to spend a few hours getting a game in it doesn't matter if they are the only player of that faction in a 300 mile radius. Conversely, I have no issue playing the same faction across multiple players if they are delight to hang out with.

In fact, I have done just that. Last year when I was pretty much only playing Kill Team, there were long stretches where all I played were Tyranid kill teams. Though none of them were the same hivefleet which does add move differentiation that a lot of people often give credit within a faction. It became an inside joke that to join the gaming group you had to have a Tyranid kill team. Heck, even when we expanded into playing some full 40k, strangely each of us had a different Chaos Space Marine army counting Death Guard and Thousand Sons as CSM. Again, everyone was fun to be around so it didn't really matter.

I always enjoy facing orks and also haven't seen much of them lately. Even when you lose against them, you usually get the satisfaction of creating a massive pile of dead greenskins.

Also bear in mind a sub faction might be an option from the armies you already see a ton of.

Harlequins, Custodes and Gen cult have always been extremely rare here. Daemons almost disappeared since 7th edition.

Orks and Tyranids are mostly played by longtime players, too expensive and time consuming (to paint) for new players and their style is a bit tricky for someone that used to play SM, necrons, AM, tau, AD mech, chaos or eldar. They're both not common here, despite being among the biggest and most important factions in the game.

Drukhari were also very uncommon here but they got a temporary revamp in 8th thanks to a solid codex. I also sold my army before 9th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Void__Dragon wrote:


Your friend must not be aware that Harlequins are top tier then.

Only in the hands of a longtime harlequin player and using a very optimized list. Typically an average SM army is much more rewarding, as it's super easy to play and even without the cheesiest combos it's usually quite effective. Tournament scene is only a tiny fraction of 40k and not always shows the state of 40k.

custodes unless you're willing to go forge world just feel incomplete right now, I'm hoping they get a "second wave" with 9th edition

Squats! (Hey, somebody had to say it.)

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Squats! (Hey, somebody had to say it.)

I mean if they managed to ressurect them in 9th edition it'd not suprise me.... mostly because the list of "cool ideas but GW would never do it..." keeps shrinking as GW does it

Weirdly enough, Imperial Guard for me. Used to have a player, but he favours Marines more now. Used to enjoy the classic match ups of hordes of Orks steam rolling across the table towards lines of terrified conscripts whilst thousands of Las bolts flashed through the air accompanied by the boom of battle cannons and the roar of heavy bolters.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Squats! (Hey, somebody had to say it.)

I mean if they managed to ressurect them in 9th edition it'd not suprise me.... mostly because the list of "cool ideas but GW would never do it..." keeps shrinking as GW does it

Shifting* not shrinking shifting.

Most Xenos armies I imagine, given how much of a minority they are overall versus the amount of Imperial (even excluding Marines) and Chaos players.

BrianDavion wrote:
custodes unless you're willing to go forge world just feel incomplete right now, I'm hoping they get a "second wave" with 9th edition

The sole game I played against Custodes (okay, it had the ol' loyal 32 but the rest was pure Custodes...) in 8th was one of the my favourite games I ever played. Those FW Termies hit like a fething truck, even vs. DG.

 Grimtuff wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
custodes unless you're willing to go forge world just feel incomplete right now, I'm hoping they get a "second wave" with 9th edition

The sole game I played against Custodes (okay, it had the ol' loyal 32 but the rest was pure Custodes...) in 8th was one of the my favourite games I ever played. Those FW Termies hit like a fething truck, even vs. DG.

I'm of the opinion that 9th edition makes custodes one of the most improved armies, the one thing that really held the army back in 8th was CPs. now that they can actually USE their CPs without taking the loyal 32 it'll be good times.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 BlackLobster wrote:
Harlequins. I've got one player locally who plays them and since 8th came out I've managed to face them once. He's convinced himself that they are now not worth playing under 9th but that one came we played was good fun. Two different play styles and an army I never seen anyone else play.

Your friend must not be aware that Harlequins are top tier then.

He's a very competitive player, plays attention to the tournament scene even though he doesn't play in it, keeps an eye on the rules and updates but just cannot see that they are worth fielding anymore. I think the last time we discussed it, he was complaining that they are too expensive points wise to field properly under 9th. I disagree and have seen some online battle reports where they have kicked bottom and won against a variety of opponents.

Hopefully, when we can meet up again, he'll be up for a game with them.

I haven't played against a Necron or Nid player in a LONG LONG time! I've had my fill of SM players though. I can't go to the store without encountering 4 different colors of Marine.

Likewise, I enjoy going out to events or to friendly games at the game store because you can physically see people get happy at the prospect of playing against Orkz as opposed to (Insert Marine Variant here).

 BlackLobster wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 BlackLobster wrote:
Harlequins. I've got one player locally who plays them and since 8th came out I've managed to face them once. He's convinced himself that they are now not worth playing under 9th but that one came we played was good fun. Two different play styles and an army I never seen anyone else play.

Your friend must not be aware that Harlequins are top tier then.

He's a very competitive player, plays attention to the tournament scene even though he doesn't play in it, keeps an eye on the rules and updates but just cannot see that they are worth fielding anymore. I think the last time we discussed it, he was complaining that they are too expensive points wise to field properly under 9th. I disagree and have seen some online battle reports where they have kicked bottom and won against a variety of opponents.

Hopefully, when we can meet up again, he'll be up for a game with them.

They have all the tools needed and then some as tournament results show.

Not easy army to play though. Not forgiving of mistakes.