Well at the store I played at we had a RTT that had maybe 1/3 some type of Chaos, 1/3 some type of Space Marine Chapter and the 1/3 were Aliens. What is the best army against Power armoured stuff. I'm starting a new army and just wanted something that didn't have power armour since it seems everybody plays that.

There's no single army that doesn't have to take special equipment for power armored units. If you like close combat, Harlequins might be the way to go. Most of their units you can equip with power weapons.

If you're willing to spend alot, the Imperial Guard has access to the leman russ and other death ordnance spitting tanks.

Most armies have a unit or two equipped to negate the armor advantage.
Dark eldar get the disintegrators, and incubi
Eldar get Banshees and star cannons (3 war walkers can pack 6 cannons)
Imperial guard get the leman Russ and basilisk
Marines get plasma cannons
Orks get Choppas (cheep and effective in large numbers.)
ect ect.
Just spend a little time at a GW looking threw the store copies of the codex's they have available and find out what army suites your play style.
-GM

Tyranids (warpblast ap3 blast)(Hive Tyrant HQ, & Zoanthropes 1-3 in a sqaud)
Eldar (starcannons assault 3 ap 2)(Platforms, Warwalkers, Wraithlords)
Imperial Gaurd (Battle cannons=ordance=dead SM, Earthshaker=Ordance =dead SM

I'm guilty of this too, so keep that in mind when you read what I'm about to write.

Power armor wearing armies are the most used armies in 40K. Power armor wearing armies are the most difficult armies to win with. People tend to use Space Marines and Chaos Marines primarily because they didn't realize that theyre the hardest to play, and also GW spends most of its advertising and fluff discussing loyal and traitor marines. Newbs generally start off playing the most hyped army, that being Space Marines, and more specifically the Ultramarines. Then they tend to get tired of them and either play something a little more interesting like Blood Angels or Space Wolves. After they get bored with that they move on to Chaos and wind up playing undivided for years. I did pretty much the same thing. When I first started playing, I called my unpainted models Black Templars (which back then were still vanilla) and then after I got bored with them (3 weeks) I started playing Blood Angels. I went undefeated with my Blood Angels and everyone gave me crap about playing an easy army, so I traded my huge BA army away for Eldar and I proceded to beat them even harder. They complained that the Eldar army was cheesy, and so I asked them what they thought was the hardest army to play was. They all responded Dark Eldar, so I bought a Dark Eldar army, and proceded to beat them harder than I was beating them ever before. Finally we realized that the Marines were actually a more difficult army to play than most of the alien armies. So now I'm playing a very difficult army, the Death Guard (which I'm sure that most of you will say is cheese also.... try playing them for a while). I got bored with the alien armies because they were actually easier and required less tactical forethought on my part to win with.

WH40K players generally fall into 3 categories. First the Newbs who are all playing either Space Marines or Chaos (or if theyre ultra newb theyre probably playing Ultramarines, especially now that the Battle for Macragge is coming out). Then there's the intermediate players who have gotten tired of their old horribly painted Space Marine army and have bought an alien army and are trying them out. Then there's the Veteran players who still keep their old alien army around for fun, but built up a new Space Marine or Chaos army to keep themselves challenged tactically and have usually organized their armies around the fluff. Obviously there are exceptions to this, but I'd say that this format describes approximately 60-70% of WH40K players out there.

It all just has to do with experience and how well you understand the machinations of the game.

In that whole long winded, off topic, "advice", you didn't give a single reason suporting why power armor is harder to use. I'm just making sure you know that.

My advice is to wait 'till the new nid dex comes out, then play them. They have sleak, cool modles. Not many people play them. They are tacticaly chalenging(sp), and will be newly revised.

Originally posted by TacticsGod@Oct 2 2004, 22:32
I'm guilty of this too, so keep that in mind when you read what I'm about to write.

Power armor wearing armies are the most used armies in 40K. Power armor wearing armies are the most difficult armies to win with. People tend to use Space Marines and Chaos Marines primarily because they didn't realize that theyre the hardest to play, and also GW spends most of its advertising and fluff discussing loyal and traitor marines. Newbs generally start off playing the most hyped army, that being Space Marines, and more specifically the Ultramarines. Then they tend to get tired of them and either play something a little more interesting like Blood Angels or Space Wolves. After they get bored with that they move on to Chaos and wind up playing undivided for years. I did pretty much the same thing. When I first started playing, I called my unpainted models Black Templars (which back then were still vanilla) and then after I got bored with them (3 weeks) I started playing Blood Angels. I went undefeated with my Blood Angels and everyone gave me crap about playing an easy army, so I traded my huge BA army away for Eldar and I proceded to beat them even harder. They complained that the Eldar army was cheesy, and so I asked them what they thought was the hardest army to play was. They all responded Dark Eldar, so I bought a Dark Eldar army, and proceded to beat them harder than I was beating them ever before. Finally we realized that the Marines were actually a more difficult army to play than most of the alien armies. So now I'm playing a very difficult army, the Death Guard (which I'm sure that most of you will say is cheese also.... try playing them for a while). I got bored with the alien armies because they were actually easier and required less tactical forethought on my part to win with.

WH40K players generally fall into 3 categories. First the Newbs who are all playing either Space Marines or Chaos (or if theyre ultra newb theyre probably playing Ultramarines, especially now that the Battle for Macragge is coming out). Then there's the intermediate players who have gotten tired of their old horribly painted Space Marine army and have bought an alien army and are trying them out. Then there's the Veteran players who still keep their old alien army around for fun, but built up a new Space Marine or Chaos army to keep themselves challenged tactically and have usually organized their armies around the fluff. Obviously there are exceptions to this, but I'd say that this format describes approximately 60-70% of WH40K players out there.

It all just has to do with experience and how well you understand the machinations of the game.
222677



wow, i dont think ive ever since this much BS in a single reply.

''Armies with power armor are the hardest to use'' = your so right, thats why DE is the most played race in warhammer, not the spacemarines/chaos SMs :rolleyes:

''there are 3 types of warhammer players out there'' = I beleive there are hundreds of different types of players out there, everyone has their own agendas and reasons for playing what they play, so thats BS. Ive never met two players that fall into the same category(unless it was 'newb, or *****' :lol: ) much less 1 out of every 3.

''I got bored with the alien armies because they were actually easier and required less tactical forethought on my part to win with.'' = keep shoveling it on here, and maybe just because YOU claim to have found the alien armies easier to play, doesnt neccesarily mean that anybody else feels the same way, in fact ive heard from about 95% of people that it acually is the opposite.

If your going to hijack the thread with an off-topic rant, atleast try not to alienate 50% of the members on the board. I know its pretty hard to think that maybe not EVERYBODY plays into the whole 'uber strong good guys of the galaxy' style, but there are some people on the board that like being 'the other guys', or the race that 70% of the other people at the club or tourney are playing.

Your arguement is wrong, dead wrong.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

back on topic, i would say that as a guidline, plasma weapons, and ord. weapons work the best against power armor armies. A lot of times your going to have to sacrifice pure firepower for less shots of something much stronger. good luck

Actually, I started with Orks and went Tau. Not everyone likes SMurfs. I find them obnoxious.

Actually, if you play them right Tau could be real good against Space Marines. If you can field 12 Crisis Suits with a fire lance config (plasma rifle/missile pod/multitracker) or maybe even a fusion blaster/plasma rifle config, you could do considerable damage. Deep Strike 'em, throw in some broadsides for anti-tank fire power. In a full force-organization chart, you could have 27 crisis-style suits on the field. A lot of points, but still. (9 broadsides, 9 crisis, 2 HQ crisis w/ bodyguard). If there were a fast-attack style of crisis suit, it'd be even better, but whatever. If you used switchable weapons with magnets or something that sort of army could kick some major buttocks. Hm.

Orks are good against marines, too, but it can be tough to get the necessary anti-tank firepower. Mind you, you could go for the clan that can get 3 looted tanks and match the marines tank-for-tank, but your firing is never going to be as good.

what TG described sounded just like me:

i started as blood angels, then switched to tyranids, then tau, and now im devoting myself to a massive NL force. Yes they are all very mobile forces that pack a punch when used correctly.

Oh, wow...
Disagreement and demands for proof are fine by me, but I'd appreciate a more civil response no matter how vehemently you disagree with my statements, especially from Four-Fingered-Fury. Obviously the ideas presented within my post, as with any post, are my OPINION and only my opinion, and as any opinion it obviusly will not please everybody. However, in on online forum such as this, since all anyone can do is post their opinion on any topc, opnions should be understood for what they are, but most importantly they should be respected. This is a community, and I can think that ideally we all hope that it will grow and continue to grow. But its important to remember that unless we treat each other with respect and kindness and welcome in new members (such as myself) that this community will die and we'll all have to find something else to do with our free time.

It is true that my post contained many generalizations and guesses, but I didn't feel like polling everyone who played warhammer on their gaming history. I'm pretty sure that nobody has done that yet and it sounds like a pretty gritty job, so until someone decides to put in the legwork, we can't prove or disprove any conjectures about the Warhammer gaming community. I just extrapolated what I see in my local gaming groups here in Washington state to the rest of the world. If this isn't what you see going on in your part of the world, then I stand corrected. It just must be a local phenomenon. And I have met many players that fall into the same categories, but I guess that just depends on how you categorize them. I tend to categorize things and make generalizations about populations because I'm a sociologist and that's what we do. Although it might not pan out in your personal experience, you could always be the exception.

However, when it pertains to the difficulty of playing with a power-armored army, my position is based on evidence. It is conventional wisdom that armies in power-armor are tactically forgiving and easy to play, and that armies like the Eldar are fragile and difficult. I had believed this too for quite some time. Does anybody remember the win/loss statistics that GW posted in White Dwarf and online about 2 years ago? They listed the win/loss rates for each type of 40K army against every other type of 40K army and then an overall win percentage. Their data had been compiled from 2 years of independent player submitted data, Grand Tournament results, and in house Games Workshop games. Their data gives Space Marines an overall win rate significantly lower than 50%, and on the opposite side of the spectrum are the Craftworld Eldar with a win rate significantly higher than 50%. Many people were surprised by this result, but I think it makes sense given the tactics that most players tend to use.
A Space Marine army, when designed and used to its maximum effect, is a terrible foe to face. However, most Marine players on both sides of the heresy simply have not learned many of the rather simple tricks that will allow them to take full advantage of their force. Most 40K players (including some GW writers) think of marines as a very forgiving force because of their high resiliance and their high skill in both shooting and close combat. While it is true that a space marine squad is a tough nut to crack, real tactical analysis on a particular army has to focus on the army as a whole. The most significant problem that marines face is their small army size. Initially, it looks as though marines are easily the equal of a force of a much larger size, but this doesn't take into consideration anything except for a straight combat. Most mission have some sort of objective that needs to be taken, such as a section of ground or an object, or something to destroy like an HQ unit. Very few missions call for just a straight out battle to the death, although those battles are certainly fun. In a battle to the death, points costs assure that both armies will be fairly well balanced. However, when there is an objective to achieve, the marine's small army size is a major detriment. They simply cannot handle any mistakes.
For example: in a Secure and Control mission, the objective is to take and hold D3+2 counters placed randomly on the table. You capture a counter if there is one of your units and no enemy units within 6" of it at the end of the game. Whoever has the most counters wins. Lets imagine that this is a battle between space marines and craftworld eldar, and there are 4 counters. The Space Marines have 4 squads of marines (which is sometimes more than I see fielded) which can capture ground. The Eldar, with much cheaper troops, is fielding lets say 7 units (which I have commonly seen many more toop units in Eldar armies). Now, forgiving the Space Marines the Eldar's speed, this battle is somewhat unbalanced anyway. The Space Marines have a choice; either send one unit to each of the counters, or to send more troops to a smaller number. The Eldar have a much easier choice sine they have both the ability to send units to all the counters, blocking the Space Marines from taking any, and still overwhelm the opposing forces at one or two counters. Given this scenario, I believe that I have demonstrated how Space Marines are not quite the forgiving force that most 40K players believe them to be, and this can explain their surprisingly low win rate. This problem repeats itself in every scenario to one degree or another, and even can be used against them in the more attrition oriented missions. The Space Marines simply cannot afford to make any deployment or movement errors and generally cannot afford to take many casualties.
Another probelm is one inherent with the army list. Space Marines do everything moderately well but excell at nothing. Every army except for space marines has sepcialist units that are fully capable of wiping the floor of even the hardest marine units at one thing or another. This means that with certain armies, such as the eldar, you can outlcass the marines in a shooting war until you get into close combat, where you can outclass them again. In fact, I believe that on the win ratio list that I mentioned before, the rankings match up with how easy it is for the army to specialize, with the most specialized armies at the top to the leas specialized at the bottom.

Anyway, I tried to demonstrate it to you... if you don't get it, then I hope that someone will ask for clarification on specific areas or provide evidence why they think that I am incorrect instead of essentially saying "Nu-uh, that's BS. Youre BS. This is BS." After all, that's the only way that we'll learn.

hey guys, its just a game.....

Originally posted by sdfmacross2@Sep 18 2004, 00:15
Well at the store I played at we had a RTT that had maybe 1/3 some type of Chaos, 1/3 some type of Space Marine Chapter and the 1/3 were Aliens. What is the best army against Power armoured stuff. I'm starting a new army and just wanted something that didn't have power armour since it seems everybody plays that.
214307


Eldar are one of the best armies against power armour i have Chaos Space Marines and one of my mates who uses Eldar whips me most of the time 1 con they are difficult to use. (Y)

*edit* decided it was better to PM him, then drag the thread off topic anymore.

Hmmm power armour hey? Well the best army (In my opinon that is) to use is Eldar with all their teched-up Ap 1 2 and 3 weapons.

Originally posted by Four-Fingered-Fury@Oct 6 2004, 17:30
*edit* decided it was better to PM him, then drag the thread off topic anymore.
224361


Aww I wanted to see some more responces to his great big essay...


What about World Eaters? You do not negate their saves, but with every model you reduce it to 4+ in combat for only a point extra, and with WE great combat ability the can ruin marines easily. Plus aspiring champions can be upgraded, give one rage of khorne, daemonic strength, mutation and a pair of lightning claws. Up to 8 attacks on charge, 3's to wound reroll, no saves allowed. :)

A daemon prince decked out with 8 attacks from berzerker glaive and a bunch of daemonic gifts should smash marines pretty easily too. Take a couple of defilers in this army to ignore their armour from long range, maybe a predator with lascannons to break vehicles and no problem.

Originally posted by strewart@Oct 6 2004, 04:56
Aww I wanted to see some more responces to his great big essay...



LOL, i didnt feel like getting bitched at for ''flaming'' by the mods.

ok, problems with the WE list... one, WE is stupid... they can lead you around the battlefield for days on end. and unless your opponant has a 3+ or better save, the axe is not going to do anything. how can a chainsaw that rips through power armour ohnestly not just make mince meat out of guardsman? 2. say you did it to 3 of your aspiring champions, thats 300 + points in 3 models. and with the deamon prince, you have those beautiful attacks, but you're going to get boned becuase your gigantic and deamon princes are scary so everyone shoots at them. i think the best army against power armour is anything but something in power armour. the hardest games ive played have been against guard, tyranid, and eldar (i play Chaos Undivided). guard is the most brutal army you can play against power armour because of one simple philosophy: if they make you roll dice, you will fail armour saves. and with the list im building (300 guardsman so far) at 12 inches your going to have 450 s3 shots coming at you! you will fail any save with that many shots. ANY save. if you had a 2+ save, then a 2+ ward save (bring fantasy to 40k) and another 2+ ward save. youd still die, due to the fact youd be making 200 saves. eldar are just queer, and tyranids are awsome. i say eldar suck because they are broken. there. i said it. yes, ive seen an eldar army take out twice its points without losing a single model. they have units that would be gay in fantasy. (fire warriors? come on!) i could rant and rave about how gay eldar are for days but thats not what this spread is about. (BTW: ive refused to play any eldar player. sorry guys, too gay)

in conclusion, guard, orks, tyranids and eldar are best against power armour. mainly because they are in the single digits for point costs. often under 6 points a model.