I jumped on with Dark Eldar only because I wanted to do them when I started 40K again a few years ago but the models were atrocious. I always liked the idea of a Wych Cult and angry women =).
I wasn't so much interested in the Darklight spam list as I was the CC capability of the Wych.
I am generally an aggressive gamer on the table and push the limits of a list to outperform my expectations.
Grey Knights are great but Ordo Malleus is not where my passion lies.
I already have a beautiful Sisters army so no jumping there...Ordo Hereticus is what I love!
As a long time table-top gamer, my belief has always been that it is better to know your enemy by playing with them than by playing against them.
Do you plan on jumping in with the upcoming armies?
Do you think your local FLGS will be flooded with the new and shiny?
"As a long time table-top gamer, my belief has always been that it is better to know your enemy by playing with them than by playing against them."
ReplyDeleteA sentiment I share, hence the number of armies I have.
Additionally, I have found the universe of 40k so diverse that it is rare I cannot find something within a race/army that appeals. Tau being a notable exception (particularly since DE finally fixed my model-rage over them).
With MTG, I built decks of all sorts (even playing them in tourney regardless of dislike for type) so that I would have a greater understanding of what made them tick...and thus had a better chance of understanding what to stop/ignore/mitigate.
Finally, as a hobbyist/tourney player/TO, I find I WANT to bandwagon...it keeps me in tune with all of the nuances of the game/metagame/player-base.
I don't even like to think of it as 'bandwagon' jumping...just a natural progression of my love for the source material/game.
Like MTG, the 'new' thing is (with the newer marketing/design philosophies) is vibrant and environment-altering. It's refreshing and vibrant.
We are on the same page here.
ReplyDeleteI play what I like, I play what I have to so I understand and I play what I need to so I survive.
Sometimes a diverse background or versatility in your game leads some to believe you are 'trendy' or not loyal...WTF?
Unfortunately, we are still dealing with 'fatbeards' in our community.
ReplyDeleteThey've always been there, and frankly have their place.
No one I know can dig into the depths of fluff and pull out the esoteric like the same people that gripe about how much better this edition, or that codex, or that style of play was...or knows the history (and changes therein) of their favorite army, than the die-hard fluff-bunnies. Ultimately, they are the ones who really 'grow' our hobby, infecting their optimism and love of the universe into the next generation.
Hyper-competitive players have a tendency to shout down the 'damage' they do with too much 'netlisting' and 'WAAC' mentality/building.
The middle, as in most things, is the best road...but hard. Hard in an environment with a changing tournament scene and passions for all aspects of the hobby so strongly felt for.
WTF is a correct response, but also for those that believe a 'win' is the only important factor.
Those of us that love the models, and the universe, but like to play in tourney/with the hard lists get lumped into the WAAC crowd with little regard for reality (when we win) or dumped into the 'wannabes' when fortune does not go our way when we lose.
We play what we like, WHY we like, and as with any tribal group (which is what any social gathering devolves to in the long run) we get labeled.