Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.18922887 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Hello /tg/,

recently I've decided to get into Warhammer 40K and would like to ask two questions. Mostly revolving around the armies I'm interested in.
I'm interested in the Orks, CSM and IG and would like to know which army is better for a new comer to tabletop gaming?
I also heard that GW is releasing new codices and I would like to know if it makes sense to create a army before the new releases or whether I should wait?

>> No.18922904

Chaos is definitely getting a new codex this year. Orks might be too. Guard have had one fairly recently.

>> No.18922976

Guard have the best codex of the 3 at the moment. With guard and orks you are probably going to need a large number of models and/or lots of tanks. I don't play any of the 3 so I can't really give you any tactics pointers.

>> No.18923654

Do new codices change the gameplay of armies very radicaly or can you usually play with the army you had earlier without having to add tons of new units?

>> No.18923704

>>18923654
Depends. The Grey Knight's Codex only required a bit of modification from the old setups(assuming you played Knights, not henchmen or a force heavy in IG) while adding a fair amount of new stuff.

The Necron codex did similar, but it did eliminate the pariahs.

Mostly though they just modify points a bit, add something here or there, and call it a day.

>> No.18923725

>>18923654

Depends on the army really, when the new imperial guard codex came out most army lists were still playable and still competive while the new tyranid and necron codex completly revamped their play style.

>> No.18923755

As if ya even have to ask, ya humie git

>> No.18923767

>>18923725
>>18923704
>>18922976
>>18922904
>>18923755


Thank you very much for answering the questions.

>> No.18923790

>>18923704
You must be playing a different game that has GK than I am.

The new codex changed the BASE weapon of the Gk from the Force Halberds (Which I think is obviously ridiculously iconic to the GK) to a damn sword. Of course the Gk models were metal, and the halberd now costs points, so good luck changing that easily.

Claiming that the Gk didn't radically change the play style is among the stupidest things I've ever heard

>> No.18923828

>>18923790

You didn't specify how that changed their playstyle. They lost a S6 close combat weapon and gained a S4 force weapon, yeah. Oh, they look different now too.

But how does that change their playstyle? They still are like more expensive Space Marines with better CC weapons and storm bolters, but no meltaguns or plasmaguns.

>> No.18923845

Don't give your money to those fucking jews and their overpriced shit

>> No.18923853

>>18923790
My list setup was almost identical between the two(all the metal ones had halberds anyway).

The style did change in that it went from a defensive method to a more aggressive one(shorter range on heavy weapons for example), but the poster asked it you could play with the old army, which you can, and with GK's you could do in a viable manner.

>> No.18924002

>>18923828
Wait a minute, having access to the cheapest and most mobile and cost effective special weapons in the ENTIRE game isn't a massive shift in playstyle? Having access to one of the most cost effective units ever in the game (psyflemen) isn't a massive shift in performance?

You have never EVER played a GK list in your entire life.

Previous GK list was a "specialist" list. It required you to make precise movement to maximize your storm bolter awesomeness. Not many armies in the game can reliably put out 20 bolter shots at 18-24 a turn. It was extremely fine tuned and required extreme skill in managing the 20-30 marines on the field.

>>18923853
The sheer amount of ridiculously cost effective units in the new codex means that your new list either sucks, or your old list really REALLY sucked

>> No.18924091

>>18924002
Old list was 4 squads of knights with 4 psycannons(only weapons worth taking then), Grandmaster with IotJ and a retinue, plus a pair of lasdreads and a LR.

New list shifted gears and ended up as either 4 squads of purifiers or just go with PAGK, loose 2 psycannons, and add in some of the new terminators.

Old list did decently, new list did better once I went from turtling to being able to go on the offensive.

>> No.18924106

>>18924002
>having access to the cheapest and most mobile and cost effective special weapons in the ENTIRE game isn't a massive shift in playstyle? Having access to one of the most cost effective units ever in the game (psyflemen) isn't a massive shift in performance?

Those are both performance shifts (for the better), not playstyle shifts.

>It required you to make precise movement to maximize your storm bolter awesomeness.

Since when was S4 shooting awesome?

>Not many armies in the game can reliably put out 20 bolter shots at 18-24 a turn. It was extremely fine tuned and required extreme skill in managing the 20-30 marines on the field.

Most armies including 3e ones could put out far better shooting at that distance or from further away. That kind of playstyle would just mean getting tabled by starcannons from beyond your range in 3e tournaments.

>> No.18924169

>>18924106
That's a dumb argument. Performance and playstyle go hand in hand. Do you play in a way that doesn't take advantage of your unique performance advantages, or just play in a retarded way that doesn't use your strengths? When an army gets among the cheapest and fastest short range anti tank and the best medium range anti transport weaponry in the game, that is playstyle uprooting.

The fact that you don't know the strength of s4 shooting tells me you don't play much. Reliable S4 shooting is an amazing asset when you can leverage that at a nice 18" and use it effectively.

Finally, stop being dumb, the reason that medium long range GK worked so well was because it took FULL ADVANTAGE of shrouding rules. Because of them, target priority was extremely critical because being dumb and shooting at a squad you didn't need to could be a complete waste. leverage your armor for force your opponent to waste entire shooting turns was an entire strategic playstyle behind the GK. That is now gone.

>> No.18926175

OP, I have no advice to offer.
Only variations on your picture.

>> No.18926200

>>18924169

>The fact that you don't know the strength of s4 shooting tells me you don't play much. Reliable S4 shooting is an amazing asset when you can leverage that at a nice 18"

>> No.18926219

>>18926175
And some DKoK

>> No.18927062

Guard are great. You can do a lot of cool things with them and still have a reasonable chance of victory.

Yeah, you could go with the boring netlists, or you could do something silly like Ogryns in Chimeras and a cc-kitted Command Squad.

You could build a fluffy army and grind them under the treads and boots of the infinite ranks, or you could make an elite commando squad arriving by gunship insertion to surgically strike your foe.

In case you couldn't tell, I'm an airdrop guard player myself.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action