8th Ed. Which 40K army do you enjoy collecting and why?

@The Red Devil
Great one, can we get the 40K tag added to this subforum?


I am putting forth a lot of personal opinions. I'd be interested in yours even if they disagree with mine....unless you like Tau.



A while back, I went searching for a new group of players for a tabletop RPG (and I found one! But that's another story), but I found out something by accident.

My local area has an almost negligibly small Warhammer 8th/Age of Sigmar fanbase, but it has a surprisingly large 40K fanbase.

Right now me and @eron12 play about 6 games of WHF a year (if I'm lucky). It has been over 10 years since I played someone who was not Eron12. If I had a 40K army, I could play a lot more games with a much wider array of people.

But there is a problem. @Imrahil described a situation that applies to me very well.

Do I need MORE unfinished models? I have three armies, Lizardmen, Undead Hordes, and Empire.

If I could find my models a good home, maybe I should sell my Empire.

Lizardmen are my primary army, my fiction army, and my first love of miniatures.

I collect undead primarily for the modeling side of the hobby. I like to do conversions.

I took Empire because I have artillery envy, and I couldn't afford Chaos Dwarves at the time and an Empire starter box just happened to be on sale.

Let me cover my thoughts on hypothetical Warhammer 40K army thoughts.

These are the things I like (some of these are contradictory)

1-I like being unique. I don't want the army everyone has.
2-I find getting behind army fluff important.
3-I like varied play style options.
4-I can be weirdly picky about general aesthetics.
5-The easier it is to buy, assemble, and paint an army, the happier I am.
+1-I think I'd rather be in the Imperium of Man than outside it.

Every faction I've looked violates at least one of the 5 things. I am most likely to let #5 slide.



Absolutely Not!

Spoiler: The T'au

The T’au suck, this is objective fact. 100+ memes say so.

In all seriousness. I don't hate their fluff but I don't like it. I don't like their aesthetics. I don't like their one-dimensional play strategy. I think there would be an easy fix to both but GW won't do it.

I cannot find the original meme with Principle Skinner and Superintendant Chalmers, but the joke is that the T'au are made up of a great many races (including billions of humans)...the only faction in all of 40K to do so and we only ever see Tau and Kroots.

Spoiler: Adeptus Mechanicus

That said, I like the army fluff a lot.

Spoiler: Chaos Knights and Imperial Knights

I like the idea of playing a viable army with a very small number of units but I think their fluff is kind of stupid and the models look really stupid in my eyes.

Probably Not

Spoiler: Eldar/Dark Eldar

I like the macro fluff but I don't like the micro fluff. Meaning I think their overall backstory is really cool, but the stories of them after their cataclysm are lacking in creativity.

I think the Dark Eldar have cooler fluff but the Craftworld Eldar have better looking models.

I like the idea of playing psychic heavy army. I'm on the fence about fast and mobile glass cannons.

Spoiler: Tyranids

The models look pretty good, but their overall aesthetics is relatively close to Lizardmen and Undead.

Their fluff is a quite one-dimensional in my opinion.

The play style is varied, but it leans towards horde and that is a downside.

Spoiler: Gene Stealer Cults

They look kind of cool, but they seem to have a limited model line and limited play options.

If you could play a hybrid Gene Stealer Cult/Tyranid army they might be more tempting.

Maybe?

Spoiler: Space Marines

I would want a themed army around one of the major chapters or maybe the Crested Serpents (so I can get more mileage out of my tiny but hopefully growing collection of jungle terrain).

My favorite Space Marine factions happen to have relatively limited model lines. This means I would have to do my own conversions. I enjoy conversions but I am REEEEEAAAAAALLLY SLOOOOOWWW at them.

Ignoring the recent controversy with the Custodes. I like the idea of playing with a small model count army but I think they are kind of boring. And it bugs me that they are nigh invincible in their fluff but they don't live up to the hype on the table top.

My favorite loyalists are the White Scars and Salamanders. In fluff Salamanders are supposed to be the largest space marines but their model line doesn't seem to support this and it bugs me more than it should bug a reasonable person. I like the fluff and the like. The Ravenguard an honorable mention too.

The White Scars have any practically zero official model options.

On the Chaos side, I lean towards the 1000 Sons. It really bothers me that the Primarch of the 1000 sons has tusks for nipples. That seems weird and stupid and that alone knocks them down a notch.

I like the fluff and aesthetic of the Night Lords but I fear I'd get tired of it fairly quickly.

Spoiler: Space Orks

They have a varied play style and given that I play Lizardmen and Undead, it'd be fun to play a more chaotic and unpredictable army. And they have fun fluff and conversion ideas.

Playing Orks takes A LOT of models. That's a lot of time and painting that many largely monochromatic could be tedious.



I have a lot of cool ideas for Ork conversions but conversions take even longer when applied to a horde army.

Spoiler: Leagues of Voltan

I think the fluff is kind of cool and has potential, but GW might still drop the ball.

I kind of like the aesthetics but I'm on the fence.

It would certainly be a unique army given that it's so new. Also, I think I'd be able to get a viable army with a relatively small model count with these guys.

My personal front runners

They are all sort of horde armies.

Spoiler: Necrons

Of all the xenomorphs, they are my favorite faction.

I like their "get off my lawn you kids!" policy, and I like their epic backstory.

I like the general aesthetic but I think I would get tired of their monochromatic paint style but I think a multi colored Necron army would look a bit weird.

I'm on the fence whether I'd like their playstyle.

Spoiler: Imperial Guard

By far, my favorite 40K Fluff is centered on the Imperial Guard. Like many people, I like scrappy underdgos. I really like the idea of normal people standing their ground against insane space threats.

Fluffwise, they seem to play on the tabletop similar to how they play in the book.

The downside is that there is a lot of models to assemble, paint, and transport.

I like the idea of painting and modeling my force on a single planetary force, but unless I want to make a Cadian force, this would take a lot of work.

I especially like the idea of a Krieg, Catachan, or Planet Scalenex force, but any of those choices would be a lot of time and money.

It'd be even more work, but I think kitbashed heretic Imperial Guard armies look pretty bad ass.

Spoiler: Sisters of Battle

In my limited understanding of 40K armies. This would split the difference between the play style and general aesthetics of Necrons and Imperial Guard. Perhaps I am not correct.

I like the lore. They have a similar scrappy underdog motiff that the Imperial Guard has. They have better equipment and logistics but they still rely on their courage and faith over raw power.

I am making an educated guess I would like their quasi-horde, mobile, glass cannon-ish play style.

I think this would be relatively easy to personalize. I just use a different color scheme (if I can pick something). There are six major chapters and dozens if not hundreds of minor chapters.

If I don't pick the Order of the Martyred Lady (the ones with the platinum white hair), my sisters would probably look different from most.

I got to say, the Sisters of Battle's model sculpts do not match the Sisters of Battle art and the platinum white hair I think makes the mediocre facial sculpts look better.

Being the shallow male I am, I guess I'd rather have attractive nuns with guns than weird looking nuns with guns even if it serves no purpose.

Also, the cherub things that follow them around weird me out.

I really like stories (and animations) where different Imperial factions work together but I haven't found table top-legal ways to do this. I think it would be fun to play an army of Imperial Guard with a small number of Salamanders or Sisters of Battle backing them up since that what Salamanders and Sisters are often doing in the lore.

 

For all the difficulties with collecting them. I think my heart is with the Imperial Guard.

I'll wait till we see what happens with the current battle for 40K's soul. It will give me some time to get my house in order. I got to do some spring cleaning to organize my house and by extension, my hobby space.

Assuming I am convinced that Warhammer 40K is not a zombie franchise, I will assemble a modest unpainted Imperial Guard army that is tabletop ready.

I will work on beautiful personalized army, one model at a time.

If I opt not to start 40K, I can go back to working on my Lizardmen and Lustria-themed undead.

 

Anyway, I'd still be interested in hearing what 40K armies like and why, even if I disagree.

 

I think the new Necrons lore is pretty badass. The old lore was okay, but it actually meshes together fairly well in my opinion. The lore is a large part of the appeal for me. Going from slaves to the C'tan to rebel slaves from the C'tan.

I like the idea that they have weapons that can defeat gods but they are so used to fighting gods that they forgot how to fight normal people. I once heard it explained that that the Necrons are like if you armor that could survive a nuclear blast but be defeated by a monkey throwing a rock at you.

How does the Necron play style actually work on the tabletop? Do you just ram your regenerating minions at the enemy or is there some hidden depths?

Fluffwise, the core conflict of WH40K seems to be Chaos versus the Imperium, especially Chaos Marines versus Space Marines, but there is the fluff issue that the Chaos Marines have very limited options to recruit new members and the Space Marines have the Sisters of Battle, Inquisition, and Imperial Guard backing them up. Now the Chaos Marines are officially a scrappy underdog.

There is speculation that the Tyranids will become the new Big Bad and that Necrons might be the savior of the universe because Necrons have little to no biomass for Tyranids to steal and they can burn a Tyranid so thoroughly that the Tyranids cannot recycle it.

The biggest appeal to me is that the Tyranids have lots of color options. I would feel extra self-conscious playing with unpainted Tyranids than playing with unpainted anything else.

I'm curious if they have a different play style or do they fight like most of the other faction, just with a more monstrous look?

I bought the 10th edition rulebook (which is really small and convenient) and I bought the 9th edition rulebook (which was sitting in a clearance bin for 70% off, so why not?)

The new rulebook (which I bought a copy of, the only 40K thing I own). It doesn't have any rules for allied armies in it but a quick search online shows that you can mix armies:

These faction categories are:

• IMPERIUM- Possessed by Space Marines (including sub factions), Grey Knights, Astra Militarum, Inquisition, Adepta Sororitas, Adeptus Mechanicus, Adeptus Custodes, Sisters of Silence, and Imperial Knights.
  
• CHAOS- Possessed by Chaos Space Marines, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, World Eaters, Daemons, and Chaos Knights
  
• AELDARI- Possessed by Craftworlds, Drukhari, Harlequins, Ynnari, and Corsairs.
  
• TYRANIDS- Possessed by Tyranids, Genestealer Cults, and Astra Militarum if they take the Brood Brothers sub-faction (in which case they lose their IMPERIUM keyword).

Necrons, Ork, T’au and Votann can’t take any allies at all in matched play

Hypothetically, if I mixed Sisters of Battle and Imperial Guard, I could do it freely and mix and match units from both but I wouldn't be able to use the "Voice of Command" abilities of the Guard or the "Prayer" abilities of the Sisters.

I haven't looked at the rules for other factions but presumably Space Marines have something similar that would be given up if I mixed them in.

I am not sure anyone places mixed armies. I have not found any battle reports on for faction armies in 10th edition. That doesn't mean they don't exist, I only looked for 10 minutes, but the internet has hundreds of regular battle reports of different qualities.

I would consider Tyranids if I could mix Genestealers, Tyranids, and traitor Imperial Guard units in one grand army.

I already like the idea of Imperial Guard, Sisters, and Salamanders in a combined force.

Since the T'au supposedly accept anyone and everyone into their ranks, it would make since that T'au could incorporate all sorts of units into an allied force. That might be broken. Imagine mixing T'au with melee heavy units...that sounds like it brutally murder the meta.

Or maybe allied armies are unofficial.

But I guess I'd have to collect one army before I had a composite army.

 

Your theory is sound.

I have a counter theory for why Tyranids would bother fighting Necrons at all.

The Necrons themselves have little to no usable biomass but the planets they inhabit do have usable biomass. The Necrons don't particularly care about plants and animals, but it still is on their planet and thus belongs to them, so they aren't going to let outsiders steal it.

 

That was a nice sci-fi take on undead. There is nothing wrong with this lore, I just like the new lore better.

There is meme fodder on most of the factions. Arguably the factions without the memes are the ones you want to avoid because they don't have enough depth to make fun of them.

 

That's a scary thought that the Tyranids are holding back.

In any event, very few 40K factions "form an equilibrium with their environment", that sort of behavior isn't very grimdark.