Least newb-friendly army?

[twistinthunder]

hey guys,

i was wondering, with tyranids coming soon I might start a new army. whilst trying to decide which army i was wondering, what do you guys think is the least newb-friendly army?

Personally I'm not sure, i want to say daemons but the deep-strike rule isn't very complex.

[Miggidy Mack]

Daemonhunters. It's all meta plus the rules and FAQ make for confusing game play. Combine those two problems with a codex with only 13 options not including those from other codex's and you have yourself an army that any new player will grow to hate. Oh, and if you want to use certain units you have to take unlocking secondary units OR not take others at all.

It's just a mess.

[Melissia]

Daemonhunters. They take a lot of finesse to win, and you really have to learn that rather than come to the game with it.

[Lerra]

Tau. One of the more complicated armies with many unit choices (and lots of way to build a terrible list), and also a very tactically challenging army.

Daemons is one of the best armies for a new player, imo (my first 15 games were with a friend's daemon army). While it plays differently from the other armies, you can operate pretty effectively without knowing a thing about your opponent's army. All of your saves are invuln, so AP doesn't matter. All of your models are immune to instant death, so strength doesn't really matter. You aren't going to make common newbie mistakes like marching the space marines into the AP3 weaponry, or letting your HQ be instant-killed by a power fist. The whole army is fearless. There is only one piece of armor in the codex. You don't have to worry at all about deployment. I would definitely recommend Daemons to a new player.

[imperialsavant]

:)
Yeah, I'll go along with DaemonHunters but Witchhunters also can be a bit daunting if you dont get your head around the Acts of Faith for the Sisters. Used to be soooo simple, pass a Leadership test.
Now its Errr! was that over or under the number in that squad. lol ;)

[Craftworlds_Voice]

Ones with confusing rules - so probably Daemonhunters and Witchhunters first of all..
Then Tau and Eldar, they are both quite fragile and have weaker stats-units

[Melissia]

Sisters of Battle are actually fairly simple to play, it's learning how to play them WELL that matters.

Quite simply, you get in their face and set them on fire. You then proceed to shoot them with as many bolters as you can bear.

And then you melta their tanks just for ****s and giggles.

[N0rdicNinja]

I would agree that dedicated Daemon/Witch Hunter forces are pretty un-nooby-friendly, but a very close competitor in my mind is the Dark Eldar, while they're definitely still a competitive force, they're not a very friendly army at all unless you have the right tactical mindset. A new player isn't going to know how to adequately take advantage of their maneuverability, and since EVERYTHING in the army (including vehicles) dies quicker than a Uwe Boll movie... it ends up a tale of frustration for the player less they prove to be a quick learner.

[DarkLink]

Sisters of Battle are actually fairly simple to play, it's learning how to play them WELL that matters.

Quite simply, you get in their face and set them on fire. You then proceed to shoot them with as many bolters as you can bear.

And then you melta their tanks just for ****s and giggles.

Yeah, first dozen or so games I played with allied sisters, I managed to get them uselessly killed. How simple is charging forward and killing something with fire? When you do get them right, though, they tend to cause all sorts of chaos and easily make their points back.



Daemonhunters are the toughest to start out with. I've played Tau, too, and while Tau have a learning curve, it isn't half as steep as the Daemonhunter's. I got lucky in that I started with a CC army, Khorne Berzerkers, then played a shooty army, Tau, then started Grey Knights, which is somewhere in between. I've stuck with them because they can move, shoot and assault well, though they aren't the best at any one area.

[Old_Paladin]

I know it's an old and unpopular army; but no one has said Dark Eldar yet?
Talk about hard to learn; a single mistake (in either list building or playing) with that glass hammer and it's all over.

[Lord Azaghul]

We tried teaching a couple of guys to play a while back. We built 1000pts list for several armies

One choose guard, the other necrons. Guard won the roll to go fire.

Necron player did not have fun, losing about half his army to the 2 heavy choices the guard had.

[N0rdicNinja]

I know it's an old and unpopular army; but no one has said Dark Eldar yet?
Talk about hard to learn; a single mistake (in either list building or playing) with that glass hammer and it's all over.

Check two posts above yours

[Old_Paladin]

Check two posts above yours

Yup, totally missed that. Probably because it was stuck between Daemonhunters and Uwe Boll (and that's just not a good place to be! [for many reasons]).

[eagleboy7259]

Dark Angels and Blood Angels... only specialized builds offer really competitive gaming

[trjames]

Yup, totally missed that. Probably because it was stuck between Daemonhunters and Uwe Boll (and that's just not a good place to be! [for many reasons]).

Uwe Boll is definitely possessed by a ruinous power, and thus a natural target for the Daemonhunters.

[N0rdicNinja]

Uwe Boll is definitely possessed by a ruinous power, and thus a natural target for the Daemonhunters.

Which is exactly why being between them is a bad place to be ;)

[DarkLink]

I know it's an old and unpopular army; but no one has said Dark Eldar yet?
Talk about hard to learn; a single mistake (in either list building or playing) with that glass hammer and it's all over.

I'd put Dark Eldar right above Daemonhunters, because while both have a very steep learning curve, once you get the hang of Dark Eldar then you can dominate, as they are still capable of being very competitive. With Daemonhunters, though, all but the weakest of opponents will always be an uphill battle, even after you've learned how to play the army.

[RocketRollRebel]

Dark Eldar, anything Inquisition, Tau and Eldar (respectively). When I talk to someone who is just starting out tho I do discourage the question of "which army wins the most". Yeah of course you want to win games but you can do that with any army with the right build and the right tactics. Yes some armies do have a very sharp learning curve but if you are new then go with the army that just jumps out at you and appeals to you the most because with GW games you are making a hefty investment of time and money into a hobby so go with one you are going to like for a while! Everyone gets beat down a lot at first even if they are running a power army but as time goes on you gradually get the hang of the game and your army and you will start wining games.

[arkfatalis]

What about Necrons? They don't give you much bang for your buck and can easily be beaten by being overwhelmed, not a great army seeming that horde guard is now much more of an option and horde tyranids are coming out soon.:(

[MunDMC]

Eldar from an army list building perspective. New players frequently get a case of "i want one of everything". Combine this mentality with specialized units that must be wielded with precision and you get a tabled new guy quite easily.

My first army was eldar. My second was Daemonhunters. Am i a massochist? Do i need therapy? The challenge with DH is not so much list building but solid tactics, and the ability to fight the urge to use PAGK as assault specialists.

[Subject Keyword]

I think Necrons make a wonderful starting army. They were my first. They allow a new player to get caught up in sticky situations without losing entire units, and their wargear is simple a hell. Just remember to tell those noobs to put a Res Orb in every unit.

[eagleboy7259]

I think Necrons make a wonderful starting army. They were my first. They allow a new player to get caught up in sticky situations without losing entire units, and their wargear is simple a hell. Just remember to tell those noobs to put a Res Orb in every unit.

And then a tank rolls up and 40 robots sprout an oil leak...

[RocketRollRebel]

I think Necrons make a wonderful starting army. They were my first. They allow a new player to get caught up in sticky situations without losing entire units, and their wargear is simple a hell. Just remember to tell those noobs to put a Res Orb in every unit.

I agree that they are a nice simple army to figure out and put together and paint. In 4th you had a chance to win as a new player but now the learning curve on Necrons has gotten quite steep. Down side is that I could imagine them getting boring to collect due to the lack of variety in units and models. The first game of 40k I played was with a friends Necrons vs his Orks that he wanted to try out (good ole combat patrol got a win to! haha) Not the best army but not a terrible army for a starter either. New players will learn the dirty tricks of their army soon enough with experience.

[DarkLink]

Eldar from an army list building perspective. New players frequently get a case of "i want one of everything". Combine this mentality with specialized units that must be wielded with precision and you get a tabled new guy quite easily.

My first army was eldar. My second was Daemonhunters. Am i a massochist? Do i need therapy? The challenge with DH is not so much list building but solid tactics, and the ability to fight the urge to use PAGK as assault specialists.

Actually, you're probably right, Eldar are up there, with the other armies mentioned, simply because of the difficulty of finding good synergy within the list. You need experience for that, though once you get it Eldar are quite good.

[Lerra]

I agree that Necrons are a very simple army to learn. They are MEQ with fewer units, fewer upgrades, and models that are quick and easy to build. I saw a friend paint 2000 points of Necrons in 3 weeks as his first army. While it's not that easy to win with Necrons, it's one of the few armies where you can go to your first tournament (and not make a fool of yourself) within 3 weeks of picking up the rulebook for the first time.

[Duke]

Actually, you're probably right, Eldar are up there, with the other armies mentioned, simply because of the difficulty of finding good synergy within the list. You need experience for that, though once you get it Eldar are quite good.

its funny casue its true. I dont know how many times a Newb has seen me play with my Eldar and watched my nicely painted army sweep the enemy. Usually they get all excited about space Elves and start collecting it only to realise that they are difficult to play with and interesting to paint. I have added to my Eldar collection a few times by buying their old models once they switch to a more friendly 'starter army.'

Duke

[BuFFo]

hey guys,

i was wondering, with tyranids coming soon I might start a new army. whilst trying to decide which army i was wondering, what do you guys think is the least newb-friendly army?

Personally I'm not sure, i want to say daemons but the deep-strike rule isn't very complex.

Necrons.

I have personally seem TWO new players get into necrons earlier in the year, only to drop out of the game due to how easy it was for them to phase out by the end of turn 2 and mainly by the end of turn 3.

Other armies may be 'harder' to use, but I never seen an army actually drive players out of the hobby due to extreme frustration.

[archimbald]

chaos spacies are pretty easy to use tho also.I started out with eldar but had to change cos shop stopped stocking them,, changed to csm when new codex came out. simple to learn and use. as for inquisition... faith points are a joke. nice idea, but a joke