And the worm turns ...

[bebe]

I was having a conversation at the LGS last night with another veteran player. He was frustrated at the bandwagon jumpers that gravitate to each new codex. I pointed out that I was now playing GK, Necrons and Nids. But I did not jump any bandwagon.

Unlike some of the other veterans, I kept my old armies going back well over a decade. I already had an inquisition army that I was using. I also played deamonhunters until they sucked so bad I couldn't use them any more, lol.

And one of my first armies were necrons so I had plenty of models to incorporate into a new list - I'm actually playing foot crons with a monolith and a few new toys to beef up a list that suddenly plays well.

When Nid codex came out I had tyrants, gaunts, fexes, stealers. So beefing up my list was not too painful. Now they are drooping out of contention a bit but 6ed may very well change all that. Hordes and DSing units might be the new taste de jour.

So just meandering a bit here, sorry. Just thought I would warn all those prematurely giving up on a particular army. The worm does turn.

[killercroc]

I don't play Bandwagon armies either. I do not play IG, DE, GK, SW, or BA. I do however have a small Necron force since they are the army that got me into Warhammer, so why not play them? Heck, due to all the Necron players we are having a tournie with them.

[N.I.B.]

I'm a one army guy. In WFB it's Vampire Counts, in 40K it's Tyranids. I don't spread my love and dillute it, I focus on one at a time. Kind of like a marriage.

[vecuu]

I started playing Nids right before 3rd edition came out, and, as such, I have several old 2nd edition models. Stopped playing for a long time, and got back into it in 5th ed, and it felt only natural to get back into Nids.

I know there is typically a general consensus about how strong a codex is, but, like all games that rely on planning and strategy, strength can only take you so far. For example, in Magic the Gathering, you can have all the Rares in the world, but if your deck doesn't have the same synergy as my deck loaded with Commons and Uncommons, I'm bound to win, since I took the time to discover which strategy fits with my play-style.

I have some interests in a couple other codecies in 40k (Grey Knights for a Coteaz army interest me the most), but until I'm satisfied with the current condition of my Nids and find myself with around $300 in spare cash at one time, I doubt I'll ever start another army. It simply takes too long to build and paint all the bugs I want, and I will not start another army until this one is fully painted at the very least.

[Hatchy]

I started the army just when 5th edition was coming out. The army I chose - and have stuck by since - is Tyranids. This was a choice purely for the look of the models, I loved them !

Mentioning about band wagon armies, do Angry Marines count? I'm thinking of starting up an Angry Marines army in the future as a side force to my Nids.

[Hunger]

How exactly do you define 'bandwagon jumpers' Bebe?

I've liked Necrons since they were first released, and have thought about making some purchases on a few occasions, but haven't ever felt inspired by their one and only codex. If I was going to start a Necron army it would make sense to do so now, given their excellent new codex. Would that make me a bandwagon jumper?

Does the power level of the Necron codex determine whether new army starters are bandwagon jumpers? Would they be labelled as such if the Necron codex was not as powerful, because then it would be more likely that they are starting the army for the reasons you approve of and not because they want a powerful army?

[Col]

I started in 5th Edition, and got Tau and Tyranids.

....Don't think there's anything more to say than that I can't wait for 6th ed.

[zephoid]

I have been the opposite of the bandwagon jumpers. I started just before 5th tyranids and i started out with a genestealer list. 5th came around and i kept my list, only picking up trygons and making a tyranid prime. When i finally got bored of running the same list over and over in tournies i picked up eldar. I currently have over 10k eldar including a custom built titan along with my 12k of nids. I was thinking about necrons, but they just seem such a one dimensional army that predictable. I prefer eldar and dark eldar where you can take just about anything and do well (excluding guardians defenders and the whole FA slot bar spiders).

[liam117]

My first army was 'nids just because they look awesome, but then I started to really like the whole 'super human' part of being a space marine, but then I wanted more so i repainted them to dark angels so i could have terminators as troops.
so far i haven't and wouldn't join the bandwagon!

[bebe]

]

How exactly do you define 'bandwagon jumpers' Bebe?[/quote]

That is the point of the thread. How would you define it? I'm surprised how few players have multiple armies. I guess I've been playing too long.

[WestRider]

I've actually twice picked up Armies at times when it could have been considered bandwagon-jumping (2nd Ed Chaos and 4th Ed Nids), but have never actually been justifiably accused of it.

Probably because I only won like 8 out of my first 70 or so 2nd Ed Games and my 4th Ed Nids were about as far from 'Zilla as it's possible to get.

The one time I caught flack about Bandwagon-Jumping, it was with my Guard, which I started in 3rd Ed, shortly after their Codex release plugged most of the loopholes in their "Black Codex" list. So I'd had the Army for something like 8 years and was running a mostly Infantry force when I was accused of jumping on the Leafblower bandwagon

If I ever do start another 40K Army (the 5 I've got right now are already more than I can really keep up with), it'll probably be Space Wolves, and may well occasion more complaints, but my reasoning for that is mostly just "Dude! Vikings! IN SPACE!"

[The New AIDS]

I was starting Nids after having completed my Eldar (for now), but when the DE came out they were so gorgeous I knew I had to play them. I despised their old aesthetic, but with the new one, I had to start them. I'm a sucker for space elves of any kind, which is what they are now.

[carnogaunt]

When I started 40k, my first army was Tau. However, since there wasn't anyone else starting out with me, I also collected an army for other people to use, so I've always been juggling multiple armies.

That other army was a Space Marine army, chosen because I had heard that they were easy for beginners to pick up (again, there wasn't anyone who would put in the commitment to really learn to play). I chose the Black Templar color scheme because it was featured in the 3rd Ed rulebook and looked easy to paint (this was before I had any concern about things like highlighting; black is perhaps the hardest color to highlight). At the time, I didn't have any knowledge about the Black Templar army list in Codex: Armageddon, and by the time I found out, I didn't care to make changes, so I just collected them as regular Space Marines until they got a standalone codex in 4th. I don't think that makes me a bandwagon jumper.

The only other army that I started right after a new codex was Eldar, and that was entirely due to the updated Aspect Warrior models. By the way, they're still not finished and I haven't quite played a real game with them.

All of my armies: Black Templars, Chaos Space Marines, Eldar, Imperial Guard, Tau, Tyranids. Pretty much everything is still optimized for 4th Ed...

[romorini]

From what I've been able to glean from the internet vs. my own experiences, there's a subset of fans that jump on practically every army. Warhammer is their 'one big thing' and they need to dabble a bit in everything to keep it fresh for themselves. New Codices, new models, new armies, and alternate builds each provide their own expressive outlet.

For example: The friend that introduced all of us to the hobby (my wallet curses his name weekly) has been playing for more than a decade, and lost a substantial number of models in a house fire. I think he had four 40K armies, and 3 fantasy. Judging by his current collection, he seeks out different tactical experiences (Tau, Dark Eldar, Salamanders), he was downright giddy when he was able to bust out his rickety old 3rd ed raiders and hideous pewter wytches with the current rules.

Now, this is not how anyone else in my gaming group operates. Everyone has at most two armies, and the pairings are interesting. Necrons & Sisters, Orks & IG, Orks, and Eldar & Nids (me). No real pattern, just different playstyles, background, and aesthetics.

Those who hop from army to army for solely a competitive advantage probably don't mind the expense. Heck, if they can paint well enough, they may well break even on the army transfer when they sell the old and buy up the new. There's also, no doubt, the satisfaction of successfully implementing a new paint scheme to consider.

[Psychichobo]

The annoying thing is when you have a bandwagoner in your group - nine times out of ten they go for what the rumours speculate will be the most powerful setup too. Being a bandwagoner goes hand in hand with desire to win at all costs at times.

That's what I see as a bandwagoner - someone who grabs the newest army in the hope it'll be really powerful and will make it easier to win. I've never minded anyone liking the new models and buying the army as a result, but it's depressing when you hear about LGS's where 9 of 11 players went for the BA dex when it came out...