[Lopspoon]

After playing for a while, something I've started to wonder what a person's army says about them. Do you think that if someone plays Tau it might reflect on a general sense of hopefulness. I realize these might be cliche's but does anyone else find eldar players to be a bit more tactically minded than people with ork armies.

*Disclaimer, I'm not implying that orks or nids aren't tactical or any s*** like that, just asking what people think. :grin:

 

[Necrosis]

Some people play an army cause they think that army is cool, simply as that.

 

[Lord Reevan]

well I don't believe it's what they play but how they play it that really shows what a person is like. people who hold back a lot and play defensively are usually(in my group what I noticed anyway) that they're unsure of decisions and are better to follow others.
People who play very definite style armies, they know exactly they want to do with them, usually know what they want and make decisions easily.
Myself, I'm diagnosed with Rage issues and I play blood angels. Coincidence??

 

[Inquisitor Varrius]

On the whole, I think ork players seem to be more laid-back about how the game turns out. It might be my area, but they seem to be the guys who are friendlier towards rookies and play for the hell of it over winning.

 

[Kirby]

Note to self: next research grant run a correlational study on personality types and playstyles in gaming... love it =D.

I'd agree more with Lord Reevan, their style of play would likely be more indicative of their personality than their army especially considering so many people play different armies. This obviously would bring confounds into the study though as armies can play differently...would still be interesting to see.

 

[Lord Reevan]

well not so much how they're played as in BA mech or BA jumpy but how whatever is on the table is controlled. if you;re makign the enemy react to you by doing certain things, pushing against him takign the upper hand you'd seem to be more of an assertive person, while if you;re reacting to them, taking your moves slowly unsure as what to do it shows people to be less decisive and easily ruffled people. while if someone takes a long time with their moves but when he/she makes that move it is a very good move it is someone who plans and prepares for everything.

My opinion on how this could happen. I could be speaking complete bullshit for all I know

 

[Kirby]

haha. Psych 101 <3. It'd be a very difficult study to analyse but I'll see if I can ever do something about it . Again though, I play my armies differently depending on what's across the board. I'm a lot more aggressive w/my BA Blood Rodeo & Jumper armies compared to my Tyranid walkyshooty list (Gant screens ftw: I just had 111 gants in one game...), compared to my Mech marines who dominate midfield, etc., etc. Would still be interesting to find out...

 

[johnnymajic]

Certain armies do have certain play styles, so they both play a large part in the game.

You wont see a Tau player charging into assault (unless it's the last turn and necessary in order to contest an objective), and you won't see an army of orks sitting back and shooting

 

[Yodhan]

I would seriously hope that there isn't much correlation between my personality and the Dark Angels. I picked them because I like the color scheme. Now...how I play my Deathwing/Ravenwing army, using bikes to rush in and pop heavy armor, risking it all. Yeah, that's more like me. Hell, read my signature, and it pretty much describes me.

 

[Holmstrom]

It is something interesting to ponder about. Surely everyone chooses their main army because of how appealing it is, so trends should be there. I have to say, every enthusiastic Ork player I've ever met has been the same drunken loudmouth...but they're probably the funnest people to play against, IMO because they just feel like downing beers and having a good time.

 

[hijynx]

When I started playing Daemons, I felt like it was an extension of how I like to gamble a little too much.

 

[marcch]

A correlation between army type, tactics and personality is most likely there, at least initally when one first chooses to build and play an army. I would venture that with more seasoned players additional new army choices has more to do with trying out different style, tactics and modelling techniques (at least it is for me).

 

[Tzeen Qhayshek]

I just like to be the villains.

 

[Skartooth]

I have a quite defensive play style when it comes to 40k. This is the main reason I gave up on orks. In games I just couldn't commit to combats and losing so many men. They just weren't the army for me.

I think personalities and armies go hand in hand. For instance the friendly jokey guy down the club isn't going to play a hard as nails list he will probably play a nice soft hobby army. The aggresive guy isn't going to play eldar. Maybe I am wrong

Skar

 

[LukeValantine]

I know perfectly well why I played CSM when I first started. I mean its not like a grabbed the first army I thought looked cool, or that I liked their play style. No I picked them because from what I understood at the time they where in ideology like me. Driven frustrated, disillusioned, and looking for more...well of everything. I was always the kind of person that would laugh during a typhoon or a horrible lightning storm, or fight a losing battle bitterly even well beyond the point when I should have just stopped, not out of honor or fear mind you, but out of contempt that they where so much better then me, since they could beat me even though I gave it everything I had.

Mind you I'm a much more relaxed person now, but still I can't help but think something deep down inside of me identified with the fictional army of CSM. However I find VC are a better fit for me in fantasy.

 

[Kale Hellas]

i play defensive and then spring random stuff on them and charge right through the middle, i believe its a lot like me, protective until i know im safe then im fine.
on the other hand i play slaanesh marines and i don't think im an 8ft tall maniac who gets pleasure from pain.
so id say its probably play styles.

 

[Scathainn]

This may just be an American thing, but Ork players tend to be the friendliest.

Biggest assholes? Black Templars, interestingly enough.

 

[LukeValantine]

Vary interesting indeed... I'm looking at you Black Templar player (Points finger at screen idiotically).

 

[Styro-J]

I've been known to be manipulative to get my way. Its my hobby! Guess that fits Eldar, haha!

I actually chose this army because I have always favored the faster classes (swordmaster/assassin/rogue) of any game I play. More speed and precision but more fragility when actually hit has always been my method. Dark Eldar seem like they fit that bit much better (and they will be my second and only other army if and when the new codex comes out) but I liked the look and fluff of the Craftworld buggers better.

 

[goldleader23]

This may just be an American thing, but Ork players tend to be the friendliest.

Biggest assholes? Black Templars, interestingly enough.

You have no idea how right you are... Its the same way here. Orks are just super fun so the players are always loose about the game.
And the black templar player here is a super competitive asshole.