Why so few Beastmen armies? - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Son of LO Polaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,653
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    720 (x8)

    Why so few Beastmen armies?

    I've gotten the impression that Beastmen isn't really a popular army... most possibly even one of the least played ones. I wonder why is that? Reading 5th edition rules we don't seem half bad. We get cheapy hordes with spears that can go positively postal in melee on a good primal fury roll. We get cheap bowmen that not only provide lots of shots but are also skirmishers and can ambush for extra mobility. We get cheap but effective heroes... We can get VERY powerfull magics. Our army even has a catapult-equivalent that can move easily from place to place if need be and has a huge (24") aura of magic-no-no...

    Revenant Moon Necrons: (W/L/D) 0/1/0 (6th edition: 13/2/2)(5th edition: 14/6/4)(3rd edition Codex: 16/4/7)
    XIX Legion: (W/L/D) 0/0/0 (5th edition: 14/12/2)(5th edition Codex: 4/3/0)
    Black Legion: (W/L/D) 1/0/0 (6th edition: 2/3/0)
    Something Wicked... Reikwald Beastmen: (W/L/D) 10/4/1

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    i am da Wahhchief Digger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    utrecht, Holland
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,419
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    320 (x8)

    It also has a bad reputation when it comes to scoring wins. Not decisive, ofcourse, just look at extremely popular greenskins in 7th, but it adds up.


    I dont play beasts, had a few regiments a long time ago and traded them for 40k tanks.

    One factor would be its limited theme. Outsiders hear names like Gor, Ungor, Bestigor and think, "so umm its goats and cows with weird names?"
    Basing an entire army on 2 initial ideas (the minotaur and the Beastman) just doesnt seem inspiring enough for newcomers.
    I also think beasts need a bit more imagination than say, knights, Daemons or greenskins. The whole theme is just harder to jump into
    The tactics are quite unique, with very obvious weaknesses (weak against anything ranged) That scares off new people aswell.

    and then theres the most important factor: Advertising!
    GW became the biggest of miniatures in the 90ies because it had/has an extreme machine of marketing. It made them stand out above its competitors. Some companies had better looking models at the time, some had a better game system, but they just didnt organise Games Days, open up stores and hand out magazines with colourfull pictures like the White Dwarf and Journals.
    The beastmen dont get enough attention so no real fanbase grows on the beasts.

    1. bad win rep
    2. cows with clubs
    3. no love from GW

    1 and 2 and 3 together is no Beasty Boys in my region (except for 1, but compared to the 4 chas dwarf players, thats not impressive)).


    My respect to beastmen players that stick to them !
    Eternal Newbie

    Warchief Diggah o da Bloodmoon Squiggahs

  4. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Age
    28
    Posts
    581
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    141 (x3)

    I started beastmen, because they where part of chaos (hord of chaos & beast of chaos). Now that they are sperated there is a reason less to buy beastmen models

  5. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Age
    30
    Posts
    256
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    20 (x1)

    It's not an instant win button I guess. I went BM cause I didn't want another 'elite' army (play CSM in 40K). Haven't won any games yet (of 3), but slowly starting to see that your strategy has to be different from the mainstream guys out there - it's an army which makes you work for your victories. (I'm a fantasy noob anyway). But the upside so far is the cheap T4 guys you get on the board who easily become T5 S4. Down side is that shooting really messes you up.

    My flatmate got High elves, not looking forward to playing him (always strike first, tonnes of bolt throwers, everyone has nuts armour, high LD so cygor is virtually no counter to magic etc) - for him the decision was more along the lines of "with which army do I have the highest chances of winning?" Beastmen was probably right at the bottom of his buy list.

    Though I'm kinda happy, I hope beastmen are seen as easy kills, that I remain the only person at my store who plays them, and that people can cry at by how much they underestimated the army by once I work out how to wield them.. It is a strategy game after all right?
    Be nice to your enemies, it will make them madder!

  6. #5
    Member super sorcerer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Age
    29
    Posts
    194
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    8 (x1)

    b"h
    I don't have beastmen, but I play a lot against them, becouse I have a friend that play beastmen.
    Although I usualy win, I don't think it is a bad army. Especialy in 8th edition. In 7th edition I always manipilated his ghorgons to run after fast cavalry, and we didn't play much 8th edition yet. Although this army don't have too much armour, you still have core fliers and core chariots to hunt warmachines and shooting units. Ambush, Jabberslythe and razorgors are more usefull tools against heavy shooting armies (in addition to harpies and chariots).

    My flatmate got High elves, not looking forward to playing him (always strike first, tonnes of bolt throwers, everyone has nuts armour, high LD so cygor is virtually no counter to magic etc)
    Against high elves I would take a heavy magic list with shard of herdstone, hagtrifetish and some magic defence. It depend on how many points you play, but some units of gors in ambush are a good tool to attack you opponent's important units from the rear/flank. Don't forget at least 2 harpies units to counter his war machunes. Since your opponent will strike first anyway you mught find that bestigors will be usefull, they will wound on 2+ and -3 penalty to armour save. All elves are toughness 3, so they are vulnerable to shooting, so you could try some units of ungor skirmishers. If you want some more advice against elves you are welcome to open a thread about it, and I could post some lists.

    Anyway, beastmen is not a bad army, and it have enough fliers and fast units to counter shooting. Though it still got a weakness against skink skirmishers in a lake (one of my favorite lizardmen tactics).

  7. #6
    Member Mr.Blonde's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    220
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    35 (x1)

    In my local hobby community, I'm known as "The Beastman guy". This isn't because I have the biggest collection of Beasts there, or even because I'm the best Beastmen player there, it's because I'm the only Beastman player there. In fact, I'm one of only three Beastman players in the state, and as for the other two guys, Beastmen was neither their first, or their last WFB army.

    I believe the reasons for this are manifold, but it mostly boils down to 2. Lack of mass appeal, and they're just not that good. In the asthetics dept. the Beasts do alright, but it's their overall 'feel' that just doesn't jive with people. I mean, for real, we're used to the concept of Orcs, goblins, elves, and dwarves from every fantasy author, from Tolkein on forward. But Goatmen? you'll have to go a little further back for that dude, like greek mythology back. People just don't tend to identify with them.

    And reason two is that they really just aren't that competitive(correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the Beastmen have taken 1st place at a major tournament ever).Most other people I know who play Beastmen, do so only 'cause they're stragglers from their 'Hordes of Chaos' days. However, none of that matters. We Beastman players are an elite corps. Much like the anarchist armies we push around on the table tops, we don't care about conforming with the masses, and thats what makes it all so cool.

    Polaria, kudos on the great topic mate.
    " Are you gonna bark all day little doggy,
    or are you gonna bite? "

  8. #7
    Son of LO Polaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,653
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    720 (x8)

    Beastmen are my first WHFB army and when I was planning on getting a WHFB army I had finally narrowed it down to Empire, High Elves and Beastmen. When I heard new IoB and whole October would be HE galore I decided I wouldn't take the army everyone else was taking... Looking back I realized that Beastmen had the newest codex and very recently remade, very nice looking models. Besides, when looking at those Tolkienistic goody-elves and comic-sidekick orcs&goblins the satyrs and minotaurs suddenly had loads of appeal.

    So bring it on all you elves, Cloven Ones are not picky. They will gladly drink blue blood as well as red one
    Revenant Moon Necrons: (W/L/D) 0/1/0 (6th edition: 13/2/2)(5th edition: 14/6/4)(3rd edition Codex: 16/4/7)
    XIX Legion: (W/L/D) 0/0/0 (5th edition: 14/12/2)(5th edition Codex: 4/3/0)
    Black Legion: (W/L/D) 1/0/0 (6th edition: 2/3/0)
    Something Wicked... Reikwald Beastmen: (W/L/D) 10/4/1

  9. #8
    Senior Member SheBeast76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    PA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    747
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    34 (x2)

    1. Their fluff - A bunch of twisted human-like creatures who burn down towns and villages in protest to civilized races. Before battle, they gather at a herdstone. Each tribe leader, scratching their name on the stone and peeing on it. If they are not off to war, tribes challenge each other by throwing dung and insults. When its over, the winning tribe uses the defeated as a "toilet" before moving on ... Its just not the backstory to recruit the masses.

    2. Warhammer history - The beastmen are merely a footnote. Always part of a grander choas invasion or some cranky upstarts before the Empire sniffs them out and rebuilds their towns. They had their great "heroes", but they are either dead or hiding in a cave licking their wounds. Again, GW isn't doing much to gain the interest of the masses.

    3. Books - For most of their existance, the beastmen were an ally or could take allies. Most players used beastmen allies as a "shield" for their greater deamons or large warrior units.

    4. Models - They were metal for the longest time, even when the other races were made completely over in plastic. If I remeber correctly, beastmen would have been the last army redone in plastic.

    They don't have much to offer in the way of varity. Besides the three standard types, the minotaurs, their chariots, and drunken idiots, they did get some new "faces". However, these massive creatures of destruction have no current models. This leaves the player in need to convert models , and damn is that giant model expensive!

    5. A stample - The beastmen race is not a stample of fantasy, let alone loved by written history. Most can recall the satyr, pan, and the centaur. The minotaur in its maze created by the greeks. These are not widely used images, even by the fantasy writers of today.


    I personallty play them.

    My nickname being "ox" or "she-ox" being such a large woman with the ability to lift quite heavy loads. I real boon for working in retail/stockroom ... also good in bar fights too ;D

    My favorite fantasy creature is the minotaur, followed by the dragon. I spent hours drawing humans with beast-like heads, which lead to my love of fantasy art.

    Yeah, I love the wicked furballs, and they will probably be my warhammer force until GW decides not to produce the line anymore. My male opponents think its funny I play them, and often kid about it, but are left stunned and weeping when I kick their ass!

    >

    Onward! My fatal fluffies!
    Last edited by SheBeast76; September 16th, 2010 at 18:34.

  10. #9
    Member Clockwork-Titan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    42
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    7 (x1)

    Personally I feel the reason they don't get picked up is because of the fact that, no, they have never one a grand tournament due to the massive glaring weaknesses and the overall style of WHFB. The beastmen come off in the fluff as being the hordes, the angry dissident masses. FB's fluff wants people to favor the glorious shining champions, whether they be good, evil, or simply misunderstood. Knights in shining armor and uniformed footmen marching in defense of their cause or to destroy the enemy.

    Personally I picked the Beasties up after my Ogre kingdom's army for simialar reasons. I'm in love with the idea of loose bands of murderous brutes roaming the countryside destroying stuff. And even more so I love the idea of dragging the shining paragons of good and evil from their barded horses and stomping their teeth in before roaming off to ravage their crops and eat their women.

  11. #10
    Senior Member SheBeast76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    PA
    Age
    40
    Posts
    747
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    34 (x2)

    Quote Originally Posted by Clockwork-Titan View Post
    Personally I feel the reason they don't get picked up is because of the fact that, no, they have never one a grand tournament due to the massive glaring weaknesses and the overall style of WHFB. The beastmen come off in the fluff as being the hordes, the angry dissident masses. FB's fluff wants people to favor the glorious shining champions, whether they be good, evil, or simply misunderstood. Knights in shining armor and uniformed footmen marching in defense of their cause or to destroy the enemy.

    Personally I picked the Beasties up after my Ogre kingdom's army for simialar reasons. I'm in love with the idea of loose bands of murderous brutes roaming the countryside destroying stuff. And even more so I love the idea of dragging the shining paragons of good and evil from their barded horses and stomping their teeth in before roaming off to ravage their crops and eat their women.

    LOVE IT! XD

    ...just don't eat me...

    :}

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts