Starting WFB & asking for army selection advice: VC or LM?

[Kevin48220]

I've been into 40K for about a year, and I've got my 40K army about where I want it. That being more or less done, I decided that I want to have a second army project for next year. I'm getting pretty well into the whole WH thing, and I do enjoy modeling and painting. I looked at the other 40K armies and didn't see anything that jumped out immediately, so I thought: "Hmmm, let's look at the fantasy side of things..."

I'm now digesting my copy of the 8th edition rulebook and two army books--Lizardmen and Vampire Counts. I looked extensively at the models and read about the different armies online, and those are the two that: (1) looked like lots o' fun to paint; (2) looked to have a good variety of builds and models; and (3) had story & background that was really cool. On a gaming level, both armies looked to have a good mix of combat and magic, and the ability to run horde- and elite-based armies, and have some pretty badass characters.

So, it'll be one of those two, I expect, and I'm not planning to start getting any models until after I make my choice and get a good sense of what I want to build. I'm wondering if any VC & LM players out there have any opinions or info that might help someone decide between those two armies. For reference, I've been into 40K for about a year, and I play Codex Space Marines.

Any thoughts or opinions are appreciated!

[Mr Mystery]

I love Vampire Counts. Rock hard characters and being immune to psychology, coupled with ropey infantry give you are good mix of strengths and weaknesses.

Lizard men are a solid army too, but I've never managed to come up with a satisfying list for my own predilictions.

[Chronowraith]

Vampire Counts I like from a hobby perspective. You can do alot to individualize each zombie, ghoul, skeleton, etc and the characters themselves pretty much write themselves. I also love the aesthetic of the army. That being said, I hate playing as them or against them on the table top. Playing as them is a tedious task and playing against them is an outright pain in the rear.

Lizardmen I like quite a bit from a story and modelling/painting perspective. You have a much broader color palette to work with since, in the jungle, anything goes! List-wise they are a bit stale as they only have a few army builds that are viable (Temple Guard + Slann, skink skirmishers, large saurus blocks, and salamanders) while the rest of the units in the book are mediocre at best.

Lizards are probably more akin to Space Marines than Vampires, but really, go with whichever army you really want to play. Don't know? Ask friends to play a proxy game with you or visit a GW store and see if they have an army you can borrow to "test drive".

[Kevin48220]

Thanks for the comments, I appreciate them. I'm hoping to do some test driving before I settle on anything.

If I can ask, in what way do you find the VC tedious, Chronowraith? And how do you like the Tomb Kings, they being the other undead army?

[Chronowraith]

Every VC army I've played seems like every turn is the same as the last. The dice may come up differently but except for a couple units you usually know exactly what is going to happen with each unit in each phase. Magic is also pretty dull as you end up using your low level casters to raise dead models and your higher level ones to cast death magic or buff your existing units.

They are a pain to play against because I play another horde army, Skaven, and VC have all the same strengths (plus a few extra) and very few of the weaknesses (they do have other weaknesses though).

I love Tomb Kings. They are my secondary army after my Skaven but they can be incredibly difficult to play. They definitely need a balanced list as an all horde army doesn't have any hitting power and an all monster list doesn't have the staying power thanks to steadfast.

[Kevin48220]

Gotcha. That's a lot to think on, certainly. I'm probably only going to have time to build and field one Fantasy army, so I'm not so much looking for something that's guaranteed a win as something that's flavorful to build/play, and allows for a variety of builds.

[Chronowraith]

If you want multiple builds... I'd say you are more likely to enjoy Vampire Counts. Almost every unit in that book has a purpose and can find a place in a VC list.

Lizards are are really forced to take a Slann-Lord, Temple Guard, Saurus Blocks, and Salamanders (with some skink skirmishers for annoyance, redirecting, and roadblocks). Tomb Kings have more builds but everything has to be balanced perfectly or the army won't function.

[Kevin48220]

That's the impression I got from looking at the VC army book, that one could build a variety of different lists. It's admittedly a first impression, but I got the sense that one could go with a horde-based list, or focus on elites, or build various things in between. I also liked the fact that the force is composed of a variety of creature types (not just vampires), so lists could be potentially themed in different directions than "vampires show up in force".

[TheCastigator]

An interesting question, given how different the two lists are. Vampires have a TON of options given their rare and special choices being stacked. The other thing to note is that Lord and hero options are also offer a lot of variety and can dramatically change how a list is played. Vampires are a very horde(ish) list that is dependent on grinding out combats and playing a long game, they have units that help speed things along. I am a big fan of Black knights, Vargheists, and wolves to play a speed game. While there is some truth to the comment about knowing how they will play and resummoning, the army is not as dependent on it as you would believe. Vampires do require a bit more fineness, as you will bleed combat res all over the place, but are very strong.

Lizards are very good, being stronger, tougher and more elite. Stegadons are awesome (if overcosted), but you will be pigeonholed with only 2 core choices and only one really huge caster. That said a Slaan is the best caster in the game.

I always recommend going with the preferred aesthetic, as no one wants to paint models they don't like, but it sounds like in this case a look at the rules would help.

[Kevin48220]

Castigator, I appreciate your response. I don't necessarily mind being restricted in my core choices--I play Codex Marines in 40K, and there are only two Core/Troop choices in my codex there--as long as I've got a better range of options in other areas. Aesthetically, I'm pretty torn between the two. I have a long-standing affection for both dinosaurs and horror movies...so if there was an army of undead dinosaurs...hmmmm.

I've only been able to look through the army book for the Vampire Counts so far; but, I do plan to read the Lizardmen army book closely as well. I could certainly live with either aesthetic, but as you suggest, it's likely going to be the rules that make the final choice. I don't mean that in the sense of which army is more likely to win based on its particular scheme of rules; I mean it in the sense of "will I enjoy or get something out of modelling, painting, and playing every unit in this army?".

[Kevin48220]

Looking at things closely, I'm admittedly a bit distressed at the seeming lack of shooting attacks in the VC army. I'm admittedly a bit put off by that, as I hate to waste an entire phase of a turn in any game. So, VC are still in the running, certainly, but I'm looking at bit harder at Lizardmen now, as it looks like they have some shooting options.

I'm also opening up my focus somewhat, and looking at Dark Elves. In there, I'm seeing a good mix of flying units, monsters, shooting units, melee units, and characters & spellcasters. Their units don't look to be as solidly tough to kill as the LM units, but they more than make up for that in speed and flexibility, it seems.