[Steeldragon]

When you're building your armies, do you build an army around a theme, or do you build a theme around your army build out?

Just curious. I typically pick a theme and make an army to fit it, even if it's not always the best choice on the field.

 

[Shadowfane]

Generally themed, to the point where I couldn't really care less HOW it plays on the battlefield, as long as it looks good on there :grin:

 

[Steeldragon]

Generally themed, to the point where I couldn't really care less HOW it plays on the battlefield, as long as it looks good on there :grin:

Amen to that sentiment, I hate it when my armies look like crap.

 

[Pandawithissues...]

Generally themed, to the point where I couldn't really care less HOW it plays on the battlefield, as long as it looks good on there

Right there with you. If you have a better painted, themed army, you come away with the moral victory no matter the result. You can laugh in the face of people using an unpainted army, secure in the knowledge that you're awesome, and they suck.

 

[danjbrierton]

Right there with you. If you have a better painted, themed army, you come away with the moral victory no matter the result. You can laugh in the face of people using an unpainted army, secure in the knowledge that you're awesome, and they suck.

I'm going to disagree. I thoroughly enjoy winning, and despise losing. If my army sucks because of my unit choice, that's my fault and the list needs to be reworked. When I build armies I start with a central idea. The first question is do I want a shooty, balanced, or CC army. Then I say mass vehicles, or none at all? (inbetween is strategically handicapping) Next I say resillence, or mass, or mobility? That is the core of my army, I pick units to that theme, then I pick the rest of my units to compliment them. A story can be built around that.

For example, heres my current Iyanden / Exodite army:
Shooty - no vehicles - resilient
those attributes being wraithguard (squad o 10 with warlock), and pathfinders (18)
to compliment this list I need some anti horde, some mobility, some anti tank, and some close combat.
anti horde / mobility - 6 jetbikes, 2 shuri cannons
close combat / anti tank / mobility - 4 SS, exarch, Star Lance, withdraw
close combat - yriel
close combat / anti tank - wraithlord w/ BL / EML
general support - eldrad

totals 1750. Now I have my core force (wraith guard and path finders) being resilient. Keeping to this concept I want units that are also resilient, and shooty, and compliment the army (wraithlords, IC's, jetbikes are resilient [turbo boost] and decent at shooting). Now the theme, this is easy. Wraithguard? Iyanden. Pathfinders? I happen to have some exodite conversions from a previous project so i recycled them, raptor knights being shining spears, baron in exosuit being wraithlord, psychal being eldrad. The pathfinders act as a liason between yriel (leader of the iyanden) and the baron / psychal (leaders of the exodites). They got together, they said some mon'keigh are pushing too close, we need to form a kill team to show them this is our turf, and walla you have an iyanden exodite coalition strike force.

It's themed, it's maxed out (on resilience), it's fluffy, it's fun, it's unique.
~dan

 

[neilbatte]

i usually just buy a load of cheap models on ebay and build a large force out of it and adjust the army around whatever i end up with and while this may seem a strange way to do things with a bit of conversion work and a few normal purchases i always seem to end up with a solid force that wins more than it loses even against more expensive and elite purpose built armies and when i get bored with it and sell it on it always makes a profit for my next army

 

[Mad King George]

i used to buy a squad of evrything now after i started playing again ive realised that doesnt work

 

[Lord Sinkoran]

i go for themes but if the list looks shit i'm not going to use it

 

[Alexander_67]

I love the theming just as much as i love the making and painting so really its half and half. If i like an army but cant see any heart in it then theres no point. Every army should have character in my opinion. At least as much as they can get.

For instance my old Alpha legion army back when they were sneaky and such i took a few predators (because i'm a total tread head) and to fit them in my army I made camo nets for them. While the predators probably didnt belong in that type of army i changed them a bit to fit my theme.

 

[Hespithe]

I decide on a theme, and then make the army as competitive as I can while staying within the limits of that theme. Sometimes, the army can still be quite competitive, and then sometimes the army is more of a painting/modeling project than a playable army.

 

[kh4054ng3l]

Theme for me, your tactics can make up for some shortcomings in a list, or you can add/buy/convert more later to make up for the shortcomings or change the theme a small bit to make it "competitive". It should be more about having fun even when losing (although some who never lose call it a learning experience!)

 

[The Wraithlord]

I decide on a theme, and then make the army as competitive as I can while staying within the limits of that theme. Sometimes, the army can still be quite competitive, and then sometimes the army is more of a painting/modeling project than a playable army.

Same here. I find you enjoy an army more if it is based on a theme of some kind.

 

[Steel Rain]

Moral victories

 

[Culler]

I like to design armies that are fun to play, and that does usually center around some kind of theme. For orks, green-skinned biker gangs tickle me and are a lot of fun to play. They're highly mobile and decently hard-hitting. Then I throw in some lootas and a shokk attack gun because they too can be a lot of fun to use, even when they fail. Orks also get to roll a ton of dice which is always fun) Similarly I've gotten a kick out of a light armor themed SM force (6 dreads, 3 land speeders). Armies that stand and shoot generally aren't a lot of fun for me.

So basically I pick forces that I think would be fun to field.

 

[Djinn24]

I am the same way as hesp, I decide a theme and then work it into being competative. So I impose limitations on myself but still keep myself in contention to be able to win.

 

[Stormbolter88]

A lot of people, not just in 40K but in life, equate dignified losing with nobility and virtue. I think this is a remnant of Judeo-Christian thinking ... the whole martyrdom sacrifice thang.

 

[evantar]

I use to think of winning more than anything. Here lately, I think I'm going to start going for a theme with my army. I like the idea of having a basic theme my armies follow, although I still want it to be competitive. I don't do any tournies yet, but I guess you could say I wouldn't mind the bragging rights of winning games and a nicely setup list among all my friends. :grin:

 

[chrisman 007]

I decide on a theme. I makes it easier to build an army that it similar to the one in the codex.

 

[Mad King George]

think at what you will be killing mostly... as what you see at your local GWS battle field then use that as a template

 

[Dirge Eterna]

Ridiculously themed. I have names for every model in my SM army. I play for fun.

-Dirge