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'm not asking about a model here or there, but an entire army using proxy models. Allow me to clarify before you select your answer:


First, assume that the proxies are all models from the same army - using Tau in place of IG or Orks in place of marines - essentially using one army's codex rules with another army's models. Also, all models are either current or OOP but official GW models, not from other companies or miscellaneous bits of rubbish like the infamous soda bottle carnifex or beer can dreadnought.

Second, assume that the proxies are appropriately "armed" using like weapons and that the alternates are easily identified. In other words, that group of mega-armored nobs with powerklaws and shootas count as a Terminator squad armed with PF/SB.

Finally, no mid-game switching. You are provided with an army list indicating what models count as what units and your opponent is helpful and transparent in regards to this information.




I'd like to know whether or not you would consider playing against this kind of "replacement army" in a casual, friendly game as well as a tournament setting as well as why.

Causal and if you where trying out a new list, I would not have a problem. I would like to see the list in ork models down the road however. For a tourney, I would say no. When cash prizes are at stake at least give the same effort as the guys who are showing up with the correct or count as models. I really do not care if they are painted however.

If you are just proxying to test an army in a casual game sure let me know what they all are and we are good.

it really depends. if you want to give guardsman pulse rifles and count them as fire warriors, thats cool... they are both similar units to begin with in purpose.

calling a nob a terminator, however... I wouldn't be as cool with that. It makes no sense to have a bs4 ork nob, with 1 wound. The models rules are too dissimilar. Keep it to things that make sense. kroot for orks would be an example of an OK one...

I'd like to vote "get it off the table," but I am guilty of having already played the worst proxy armies.

One in particular that stands out. It was a tau army that consisted of

Crisis commander (Terminator)
Bodyguard suits (terminators)
shield drones (chaos marines)
3 squads fire warriors (dark eldar and chaos marines)
2 broadside teams with drones (terminators and marines)
3 sniper teams (marines for spotters and chaos marines for the drones)

meh, who cares as long as it's a) friendly and b) you tell your opponent that they all have. I would not have any problem facing someone in a friendly that uses pipe cleaners glued to pennies (true story, my bro-in-law uses this for his bloodbowl team). If you don't have the cash to throw down on a game you might play one or two times, who cares?

in a friendly game, yes, i can live with it.
tournament, no thanks.

Arschbombe wrote:I'd like to vote "get it off the table," but I am guilty of having already played the worst proxy armies.

One in particular that stands out. It was a tau army that consisted of

Crisis commander (Terminator)
Bodyguard suits (terminators)
shield drones (chaos marines)
3 squads fire warriors (dark eldar and chaos marines)
2 broadside teams with drones (terminators and marines)
3 sniper teams (marines for spotters and chaos marines for the drones)

HERETIC! How did your opponent know what was what lol.
If someone was playtesting an army, or wondering what new models to add, or had the model but had not assembled it yet (though, if i've just seen you sitting around of something for days and days, ignore this),I'd be kewl about it. But seriously if you just can't be bothered to spend the time to make your models, then why bother spending time to play the game? It's this which makes me so attached to my models-the time and effort i've spent into them. Actually buying and sticking with an army is what makes you committed to it imo. I kept with my chaos marines for 4 years before I started another army, and I only ever proxied once-and I was proxying black Legionnaires as Iron Warriors. The only difference was the point job and their weapon options. I then proceeded to buy the models I needed. For those people who didn't want to spend that money on a new army, then I would find that unacceptable (with the exception being very similar models-ie- soul grinders as defilers, A dark eldar champion as an archaon etc etc). For those who can't spend the money on a new army, then I would make an exception. I wouldn't down right refuse a game with someone who has a proxy army-they might just wanna try it out. But consistent proxying would irritate me.

I would play against it if you built the army for the purpose of "counting-as" the other army.
I would play a couple test games but not more if the army was just proxied to try out another list.

karimabuseer wrote:HERETIC! How did your opponent know what was what lol.

LOL. I'm sorry. I was playing against that army. I'm the wysiwyg nazi in my group. The others tease me about it. Like in my last game with the group I was fielding my nids and only had 1 zoanthrope in 1250 points. My opponent, with his two land raiders, kharn, terminator lord and berzerkers, was telling me I should have taken another zoan. I said I could only field one because I only had one, and he laughed at my naivete.

Arschbombe wrote:

karimabuseer wrote:HERETIC! How did your opponent know what was what lol.

LOL. I'm sorry. I was playing against that army. I'm the wysiwyg nazi in my group. The others tease me about it. Like in my last game with the group I was fielding my nids and only had 1 zoanthrope in 1250 points. My opponent, with his two land raiders, kharn, terminator lord and berzerkers, was telling me I should have taken another zoan. I said I could only field one because I only had one, and he laughed at my naivete.

Oops, sowwie :S...Tell them that kharn has pretty hair. Because it's true . Anywayz lol, same as in my group (unless my m8 starts to lose-they then try and pick out any inconsistencies in my army ).
Just wondering, has anyone experienced trouble with drop pods being proxied? There's this thing going around that you can proxy drop pods. It's been going on for a year or so now (ever since new sm codex came out). Everyone just proxied loads and loads of drop pods, and accompanied them with terminators and dreads in drop pods. It's ridiculous-especially since no one lets me proxy a dreadclaw in apocalypse matches, because "they're better".

I am the only one in my group who owns any drop pod models. The others use CDs to represent the foot print of the pods. I'm ok with it because the plastic pods are fiddly and not well-suited for playing on the table top with their doors down.

Arschbombe wrote:I am the only one in my group who owns any drop pod models. The others use CDs to represent the foot print of the pods. I'm ok with it because the plastic pods are fiddly and not well-suited for playing on the table top with their doors down.

I agree with the fiddly bit, but still...proxying like, 5 drop pods for over a year
And are you a blood ravens player-if so, do you know about their ts connections? (Sorry about swaying from the op's topic, but look at this http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Blood_Ravens#Possible_Connection_to_the_Thousand_Sons_Legion. Also, in the omnibus, Ahriman said that he personally knew the Blood Ravens cm).

No Blood Ravens for me. Irrationally I cling to the idea that a SM chapter invented for a tabletop game and evolved over 20 years of game development is naturally and inherently superior to one developed for a mere video game.

Back on the drop pod theme. There's no way I could pressure my pals into buying actual drop pods. They've seen mine on the table and prefer the ease of use of the CDs.

guardpiper wrote:For a tourney, I would say no. When cash prizes are at stake at least give the same effort as the guys who are showing up with the correct or count as models. I really do not care if they are painted however.

I don't follow your reasoning here. If someone has an army of ork models that are fully assembled, painted, and based but wants to use the Tau rules (and has bought the codex) how is that giving less effort than someone putting together a gray army of marines who uses codex SM?

Horst wrote:it really depends. if you want to give guardsman pulse rifles and count them as fire warriors, thats cool... they are both similar units to begin with in purpose.

calling a nob a terminator, however... I wouldn't be as cool with that. It makes no sense to have a bs4 ork nob, with 1 wound. The models rules are too dissimilar. Keep it to things that make sense. kroot for orks would be an example of an OK one...

So similar models with similar rules for things to make sense. If the player's fluff supports any minor changes to a unit's stats or rules, would you be more willing to allow them?

Arschbombe wrote:I'd like to vote "get it off the table," but I am guilty of having already played the worst proxy armies.

One in particular that stands out. It was a tau army that consisted of

Crisis commander (Terminator)
Bodyguard suits (terminators)
shield drones (chaos marines)
3 squads fire warriors (dark eldar and chaos marines)
2 broadside teams with drones (terminators and marines)
3 sniper teams (marines for spotters and chaos marines for the drones)

That's pretty much what I'm talking about in terms of a proxy army, completely substituting one army's models for another's. I can see the translations, but chaos marines as drones and fire warriors would give me pause - one or the other please!

usernamesareannoying wrote:in a friendly game, yes, i can live with it.
tournament, no thanks.

Why no for the tournament?

ph34r wrote:I would play against it if you built the army for the purpose of "counting-as" the other army.
I would play a couple test games but not more if the army was just proxied to try out another list.

What if the intent was to play the army using the alternate codex exclusively?

karimabuseer wrote:
If someone was playtesting an army, or wondering what new models to add, or had the model but had not assembled it yet (though, if i've just seen you sitting around of something for days and days, ignore this),I'd be kewl about it. But seriously if you just can't be bothered to spend the time to make your models, then why bother spending time to play the game? It's this which makes me so attached to my models-the time and effort i've spent into them. Actually buying and sticking with an army is what makes you committed to it imo. I kept with my chaos marines for 4 years before I started another army, and I only ever proxied once-and I was proxying black Legionnaires as Iron Warriors. The only difference was the point job and their weapon options. I then proceeded to buy the models I needed. For those people who didn't want to spend that money on a new army, then I would find that unacceptable (with the exception being very similar models-ie- soul grinders as defilers, A dark eldar champion as an archaon etc etc). For those who can't spend the money on a new army, then I would make an exception. I wouldn't down right refuse a game with someone who has a proxy army-they might just wanna try it out. But consistent proxying would irritate me.

Just wondering, has anyone experienced trouble with drop pods being proxied? There's this thing going around that you can proxy drop pods. It's been going on for a year or so now (ever since new sm codex came out). Everyone just proxied loads and loads of drop pods, and accompanied them with terminators and dreads in drop pods. It's ridiculous-especially since no one lets me proxy a dreadclaw in apocalypse matches, because "they're better".

Like I mentioned above, the proxy army would be one that the player had invested both time and $$ in... From your point of view this player would be sodedicated to his army that he didn't want to swap out the models - just the ruleset. As far as investing in a new army, what if the player found the models of the codex he'd like to use left much to be desired in their aesthetic? For instance, an IG player that found the painting and converting of orks too "messy" but liked the concepts behind their style of play and wanted to use them for his army. Would it bother you if this player used the ork codex exclusively to run his IG?

I've not heard anything concerning drop pods specifically being proxied, but there are simple and affordable scratchbuilds that have circulated for a long time - at least since Forgeworld came out with theirs.


I'd like to run my Aspect-heavy and Exodite eldar as Space Wolves. My army's fluff is that aspect warriors work in mixed squads to complement each other's talents when directed under a Phoenix Lord to do so - in this case to protect a maiden world inhabited by exodites, teaching them the warrior path and providing them with Craftworld equipment when needed. I'd use Phoenix Lords as SW characters or Wolf Lords, Exarchs as Wolf Guard, Aspect Warriors in mixed groups as Grey Hunters (Avengers for bolter marines, Banshees for PW, Scorpions as MotW, Dragons as melta marines), Dark Reapers as Long Fangs with ML's, Harlies as Wolf Scouts, and Wraithlords as Dreadnoughts/Venerable Dreads. My Exodite Dragon Knights would be Thunderwolf Cavalry. Any comments on using a list like this?

On a second note, I'd run it as a drop pod list but since eldar don't have pods, I've had to scratch-build them. I used the DOW Aspect Temple building as inspiration and personally have to say they look a sight better than slapping a CD on the table...

Gavin Thorne wrote:

ph34r wrote:I would play against it if you built the army for the purpose of "counting-as" the other army.
I would play a couple test games but not more if the army was just proxied to try out another list.

What if the intent was to play the army using the alternate codex exclusively?

Then that would fall under my first option and I would be fine with it.

Get it off the table.

I don't mind a few models here or there, but a whole friggin army??? No way.

How are you going to remember what is what? No thanks.

Doombot001 wrote:Get it off the table.

I don't mind a few models here or there, but a whole friggin army??? No way.

How are you going to remember what is what? No thanks.

Have you read the thread?
He would be specifically making a counts-as army to use the rules of a different codex.

Now go back and read that thread.

Honestly, as long as the proxies are on the right sized base and are similarly sized I would not care.

I have proxied plenty of units and on occassion whole armies before deciding to buy them. I had cut leman russ shaped foam blocks at one point.

I would not like to see tourneys allowing this but in a casual game I say bring it on!

I say Get it off the Table!

I wouldn't absolutely refuse to play someone with a prozied army, but it doesn't make any sense and I would not be keen to play them all the time.

If you like the orks, use the ork rules. If you use the entire army with codex: Space marine rules, it's confusing for your opponent because of the visual disconnect. Also, you may feel your codex doesn't represent your army fully in the rules, but do you really think another army's rules will do a better job?

I can't escape the sense that a lot of people who do this are trying to have their cake and eat it too. They say that the marine rules 'represent their orks' abilities' but what they really mean is "I like the tactical benefits of using these rules".

Friendly games, as long as I can tell what is what easily at a glance ("The fire warriors are guardsmen, the suits are sentinels, The stealthsuit is an officer"), i'm all good.

For more serious play, i'd want to see similar models counting as similar models, or at least, a good justification of the proxy ("My Tau are really really angry, and have awesome armour, but their pulse rifles are heavily modified, so i'm using marine rules. also, my suits are now naff, but really freaking awesome in CC")

"These guardsmen are Orks, and These marines are nobs" would work acceptably, too, or something similar.



EDIT: As long as its really obvious what represents what. "These marines are stealers, these marines over here which look identical are actually gaunts, and these ones over here with no paint on are warriors" is a get it off the table moment.

Gavin Thorne wrote:I'd like to know whether or not you would consider playing against this kind of "replacement army" in a casual, friendly game as well as a tournament setting as well as why.

Regardless of setting (casual / tournament) and actual models (OOP /current) being armed appropriately and no switching are the bare minimum, along with using GW models.

If OOP models (e.g. Squats, IG Jetbikes, Zoats, Fimir), or an OOP list (e.g. WFB DoW, WFB CD) I have no problem with any of this.

In a casual / friendly game, I'd be OK with it, but I will chide you if you start telling me that your weedy, wimpy Tau are actually big, burly Orks.

In a tournament game, if they're current models and not *massively* converted, and converted well, NO. This includes playing Dark Angels as Ultramarines.

IMO if you want to play an army with Tau models or Ork models, just play a Tau or Ork army.

It's kind of pointless to play a completely different army's codex, even as counts as.

As far as friendly games go, if you want to substitute non-GW models, that's fine with me, I do it myself.

Things need to look kind of like what they are supposed to be. For example, the Leman Russ is a bigger vehicle than a Chimera, so your 'counts as' Leman Russ should be a larger model.

Tournaments will set their own rules. Official tournaments will only allow GW models.

The game is costly enough without having to go out and buy everything you want to play with, so long as its Reasonalblly close, and Clearly stated, id have no trouble playing against PhysReps, tournament or no.

I could care less if I liked it, having fun weights more to me.

Depends what it is.

For instance, I've always wanted to do a Tyranid army using Guard models - so Hormagaunts would be Guardsmen with twin blades, all running forward and screaming, Hive Tyrants and Carnifexes would all be converted Sentinels and whatnot.

That I would be ok with.

But if you're just plunking down Guardsmen with Lasguns and saying "These are Hormagaunts" then no, I wouldn't be ok with it.

I played against Gavin's Exodites last night.

He completely wiped the floor with my CSM, and I had no issues which keeping track of which of his heavily converted Exodite Eldar models were what part of the C:SW army.



Every year at the GTs and what not we see amazingly converted armies like Exodites, Squats, & Slann and every year there are posts on Dakka, Seer, BoLS, or /tg/ of ZOMG that looks awesome.

I say get it off the table, but with one caveat. I would only consider it for to help another player decide whether or not they want to switch armies entirely. For example, if I had a friend who was a long-time Tau player who wasn't having any luck and is considering playing Orks because he believe it would more suit his playing style, I would play a game or two with them so they could get the feel. These games would be played in an experimental fashion and would not be competitive.

Other than that, get it off the table. I don't care how much effort was put into the army being used as proxies. The reason we use models rather than round pieces of construction paper because the game is better when you can see a good resemblance of what is going on. Playing the game with painted models on modeled terrain makes the game MUCH more enjoyable. When I was young and broke I bought a Space Marine army for myself but one friend of mine built an Eldar army entirely out of proxies. Lego winnebagos representing grav-tanks, troll dolls representing Wraithlords, green army men representing Guardians. We played at his place on the floor on a brown rug over terrain made of stuffed animals, candy bars and soda cans. Every game I felt like my marines were invading Candy Land. I put up with it then because I love the game and it was my only option, but there is no way that I would try to put someone through that. Once I finally played against a fully modeled army on modeled terrain, there was no turning back.

One thing that I've learned over the years is that the condition of your opponent's army is directly related to the quality of the game they will give you. People who put in the effort have taken time to think about the rules and strategy and make for better opponents. On the rare occasions I have played against proxy armies in the past, they have invariably been easy opponents and have almost always tried to cheat their way into victory by changing wargear (since it's not represented) and sometimes whole units! Proxy players haven't made the effort. They seem to want an easy victory and when they don't get it they ruin the game. A bad time is had by all. I'd rather not play than have a bad time.

I'm not a harsh man, but this is one of my great pet-peeves.

I dedicate a considerable amount of my time and resources to ensure that everything I field is WYSIWYG, and modeled with a fair amount of detail, so the thought of playing a proxy army just makes me squirm a little.

I am a big advocate for the visual quality of a game. I can't stand to see unpainted models on the table, much less models that are proxies for something else.

In a friendly game, this is totally fine. It's fine because we're all there to have fun. If I forget that your Pheonix Lords are going to be coming at me with all the rage and durability of the Sons of Russ, then you'll remind me before I do something really stupid.

At a tournament, I don't want to have to mention all the little secrets that are to be found in my codex until I spring them. Using a 'counts as' army, especially something drastically different like Ork/Tau or Eldar/Space Wolf, forces an opponent not only to contend with all the rules inherent in the 'counts as' list; but to try and react as though they weren't the army modeled.

There is also the matter of picking the flavor of the month codex as your 'counts as' choice. To paraphrase the Bounty Hunter, it seems like you're trying to capitalize on a newer codex which integrates better with the current rules.

In the tourney, get it off the table, or run it WYSIWYG.