How important is variety (of armies) in a community?

[wayniac]

This is a bit of an odd question, but one that constantly lurks in the back of my mind.  Like the title suggests how important (if at all) do you feel a variety of factions are to building and maintaining a healty AOS community?  What I mean is, here is an actual example:  I am trying to rebuild AOS in my area after it kinda fizzled and then 8th edition 40k finished it off; there are a few people who play it, but nobody is organized and I am trying to fix that.  I have been following the previews of the new Maggotkin of Nurgle, and thought about doing an army.  However, there are a few Nurgle players already (it's fairly popular), at least one new player who is starting Skaven Pestilens, so this is what got me thinking:  If you show up for a game day, and half or more of the people are playing the same faction or a variation of the same faction, that's pretty boring to see.  If I were a new player, it'd likely make me not really interested in the game.  I firmly believe that variety is crucial to a game taking off and establishing a community; you want people to see different factions playing, IMHO as much a widespread variety as possible, so they can experience the full "pleasure" of the game visually, and this is lost if too many people are playing similar things.

This got me thinking of doing a different army instead.  Now, note that I like many things about AOS; it's not a case of me trying to force myself to pick a different faction when I really wanted Maggotkin, it's more "I like X, Y and Z and there's already several people playing X so maybe I'll take another look at Y and Z instead".  People tell me I'm being silly and bring up the whole "play what you want" but as I point out, I want many things, but I'm more than willing to pick my second or third choice if it means a more varied playing field.

What do you think?  Does this make sense in a community?  I know that I would rather see people playing different factions than half the people playing a single alliance or, worse, a single faction within that alliance.

[mumperpa]

I don't see it being a problem so long as they run different armies. Maggotkin has demons and mortals, which can both be very different to play against. Pestilens even has a different battletome. While having lots of variety is important, having to play an army you're not interested seems like a bigger turn off. Honestly, your group would have lots of narrative potential. You could run some great team games and campaigns with massive amounts of nurgle vs. everybody else.  Plus,  so long as people paint with creativity it can add variety. I think an organized group with fun battles should be enticing enough. If you're looking to make a competitive group, it might be a different story.

[Sheriff]

I agree, I imagine it would suck. Since started playing I've fought a different faction pretty much every game and its been great. 

Mirror matches or the same thing all the time would be super boring; did anyone see the warhammer tv cup recently? It was like 4 tzeentch versus some other stuff. Snorefest (and I love warhammer tv - first time I've though nah no thanks). Also there was some sort of masters tournament elsewhere recently where it was basically only stormcast and tzeentch - no thanks. 

[wayniac]

10 minutes ago, mumperpa said:

having to play an army you're not interested seems like a bigger turn off.

Well remember, it's more I'm interested in 3-4 different armies, so if I had to pick Option #2 or Option #3 instead of Option #1 it's not that big a deal to me

Just now, Sheriff said:

I agree, I imagine it would suck. Since started playing I've fought a different faction pretty much every game and its been great. 

Miror matches or the same thing all the time would be super boring; did anyone see the warhammer tv cup recently? It was like 4 tzeentch versus some other stuff. Snorefest (and I love warhammer tv - first time I've though nah no thanks). Also there was some sort of masters tournement elsewhere recently where it was basically only stormcast and tzeentch - - no thanks. 

This is exactly what I'm concerned about.  I get in a tournament or whatnot, but when trying to build a community?  Seems like this would be a major deterrent to people who are on the fence or interested in learning AOS.

[Faedryd]

I totally understand you. When I got into AoS in mid/late November and did my research (which armies do I like in appearance? What is their playstyle? etc.), one of my favorites where the Disciples of Tzeentch. But my cousin plays Tzeentch and even though we don't meet that often, I picked another army I liked, cause I thought it would be kind of boring otherwise. Since there were more factions I liked this was no big deal to me. So I don't think your thoughts are silly and as long as you don't force yourself to play something you don't want to everything should be fine and IMO more fun, since there will more variety in your community, if you choose something else.

[Sheriff]

2 minutes ago, wayniac said:

Well remember, it's more I'm interested in 3-4 different armies, so if I had to pick Option #2 or Option #3 instead of Option #1 it's not that big a deal to me

This is exactly what I'm concerned about.  I get in a tournament or whatnot, but when trying to build a community?  Seems like this would be a major deterrent to people who are on the fence or interested in learning AOS.

I'm in the same boat (kind of) locally, and variety is vital. I'm new to the game and trying to avoid 'serious' players like the plague, as they play the same 3 armies because they are hot right now for stomping at tournaments. Some are great guys though and are happy to help new players. 

Variety of armies and a fun attitude are the key ingredients, and you need quite a few players nearby from which to find thoose ingredients. The exception would be if there are a few fun nice guys with a selection of armies to pick from, but I reckon that must be super rare. 

In my short experience of playing the game, trying to find variety, the key thing is much like finding a good job - you gotta be willing to travel for it rather than expecting it to appear locally. The internet is a wonderful thing for facilitating this though. 

[mumperpa]

1 minute ago, wayniac said:

Well remember, it's more I'm interested in 3-4 different armies, so if I had to pick Option #2 or Option #3 instead of Option #1 it's not that big a deal to me

Makes sense.  Do some conversions and a cool paint job and you could still get away with it. Granted, a lot of nurgle abilities don't effect nurgle units, or help them friendly or not, so playing another nurgle player could be tough. So long as you don't mind picking another army, it would probably be the safest choice. Just make sure you still get an army you'll enjoy. 

[MacDuff]

Part of building a community is to get everybody excited about the richness of the game and fantasy surrounding it. To me it's ideal if you can expose players to a wide variety of rules, and from them very different tactical approaches. Having several newbies all playing with a similar army/type of game approach will get stale and predictable, regardless of cosmetic tweaks. I applaud your maturity in caring about the 'greater good' by going to Plan B. I'm something of a collecting freak, so I have Stormcast, Seraphon, Sylvaneth, Free People, and Tzeentch armies, with Nurgle almost done (once the new stuff comes out), Khrone being slowly painted (3 starter sets might have been a tad too much), and Undead slowly assembling. The neat thing is that every one plays differently and I can decide which one to bring & play based on the armies of others who are coming. A Firestorm campaign really helps in defining participant armies beforehand.

[firebat]

I don't think it is. I mean it doesn't put people off 40k and that's all bloody Space Marines  

[Arkanaut Admiral]

This makes perfect sense.  You should try to field as many different armies as possible.   After all, variety is the spice of life.   I remember years ago in my school warhammer club everyone either played dwarfs or lizardmen, and it got stale pretty quickly.  These days in my group we've got stormcast, bloodbound, overlords and nurglely slaves to darkness.  We don't get a lot of games due to work etc. so it's avoided becoming stale so far but I definitely think we need more diversity.

[wayniac]

Yes that is basically my thought. A potential new player may get turned off from the game if there are a lot of people playing the same faction or army. The community should have a variety of armies so somebody interested does not get bored

[Galas]

Thats why I only play factions with enough variety.  In AoS, I only play Greenskins with a little of mixed Destruction (Giants and Ogres) and Khorne Chaos+Slaves to Darkness. 

But I can asure you that I can make 5-6 totally different lists/armies with my collections that play completelly different. I have no problem having mirror matches with my factions. I can have a mixed Destruction army, or a full Ogre one, or a full grenskin one. Or a full Grot army (Mixing moonclan and spider riders, araknoks, etc...). I can make even things like a full boar rider army, full Ironjawz/Blackorks or Bonnesplitterz, etc... (I suppose this is a little unfair because Greenskins where my army back in Fantasy so I allready had enough models to make armies for a ton of now factions in AoS)

 

I agree. Faction variety  is important for a community. I'll factor it in process to chose a faction, but probably not very high. When I choose a faction my ranking of reasons is:
1º)Do it has enough unit variety? (Thats why I never do 100% new armies with just 3-5 units)
2º)Do I Love the aesthetic of the basic troop models?
3º)Do I love the general aesthetic of the faction?
4º)Do I like how they play?
5º) Hows the relation price-points? (Greenskins have sucked out my Horde-Mojo)
6º) How many people is playing that same faction I like with lists I like in my community?

 

 

[chord]

I think this why the grand alliances were a great Idea, provides a lot of variety.

I would say people should play what they like but maybe encourage less matched play with allegiance and go grand alliance

[13on2D6]

I agree @wayniac that you are doing the right thing by trying to diversify the armies in your local scene.

I am lucky that my local scene has a load of different armies- Stormcast, txeentch, Nurgle, Khorne, Dispossesed, Fyreslsayers,KO,  Slvaneth, Dark aelves, Slaneesh, Beastclaw, Slaves to darkness, Ironjaws, Seraphon and a few others!

I have tried to do some different armies and have had this last year a Skaven army (ran variations of Skyre and verminus and combined) a Khorne army and a mixed Chaos army which had a bit of everything!

My new project which will be ready for Jan 20th and fully painted (Why have I left it so late!)  for our club tournament is a pure Spiderfang list

I personally like to have something different but know its also good for the community!

Next on the list is Seraphon- there is only 1 player locally at the moment too plus I love the models!

 

[Kugane]

As long there isn't a sense of balance in the game, the variety of armies is going to be little. The thing I noticed when the new General's Handbook came along was that instead of adding more balance to the game, instead it stripped lots of armies from their ability to play competitively. Armies that were already struggling are now even worse, etc.

I personally would prefer if GW released battletomes instead of new General Handbooks to fix issues with armies. Because right now I kind of feel that with most warhammer games, it keeps being 1 step forward 3 steps back if they keep making old stuff outdated so quickly. I have the feeling they push rules to sell armies, not push rules to fix the game state.

I hope this changes

[Karchev23]

Variety is the spice of life for wargaming IMO. That is all

[Ollie Grimwood]

As mentioned above it hasn’t affected the much more successful 40K which is mostly Space Marines. 

There is a reason for this though Space Marines have much more variety in terms of available units and asthetic, it’s very easy to make very different Space Marines armies. 

This is a deiberate design feature and one they have replicated for AoS with the Stromcast in terms of the available selection of troops.  For the asthetic feature this as been replicated (or attempted with varying degrees of success) with Stormcast, Ironjawz, Overlords, Seraphon and in a lesser way with  Bloodbound, Fyreslayers and Sylvaneth .   It’s also part of the reason there’s more Space Marine/Stormcast releases than other for their respective systems. 

That said visiting tournament and Narrative events since the GHB 2016 dropped I’ve not found the variation of factions represented to be wanting with lots getting use.  Locally people may not but that’s surly down to the preferences in a small sample group. 

Not too sure new poeple will notice too much, returning players might and I don’t think people crossing over from 40K would probably think it’s no worse than what they’ve been used to.

If club/group veterans have multiple armies they should definately mix things up. I would absolutely not try to divert new folks away from what has them excited, that’ll kill things faster than anything else. 

[Ulf]

I think it depends on whether the new players you're hoping to bring in are completely brand-new to wargaming, or just new to AOS.

If they're completely brand new to miniatures games, then yeah, seeing a variety of different model aesthetics & themes is probably going to appeal to them. But if they've played other games, know 40K, etc etc.... they already know that any system has variety like that, and they'll look into the different options on their own.

[wayniac]

Thanks for the replies, all.  It would be a mix, as right now the community here is very nonexistent (a few people here and there who play among themselves, organize their games in secret, etc.) and some are just unwilling to go to the store I want to have be the host, and last time we tried to do things at the store it... well things happened (Not 100% sure what) and interest never really kicked off.  I did a demo AOS game with a new player who had the Skaven Pestilens Start Collecting set; he was telling me how his friend has the Khorne Bloodbound starter, his roomate has a Sylvaneth starter and a co-worker bought the Seraphon starter but just to paint (so I told him, well offer to show them the rules.  Worse comes to worst, they dislike the game and paint the box anyways.  Best case scenario, they get hooked!).  So I think I might stick with my "Plan A" and do Maggotkin, as while there's another nurgle player or two I don't think they come to the store I'm looking at, and a friend of mine who also has Nurgle has decided to do a cavalry and monster based Slaves to Darkness army instead of sticking with Maggotkin.  Of course I am notorious for "deciding" on an army and then some new release makes me reconsider 

It's a little hard to organize as this area has very little people who coordinate (even into 40k), it's mainly just disparate groups that seemingly don't want to be organized at all into a real community.

[TheNotebookGM]

I would say variety is important enough to waver on an army if you have a strong second choice but it sounds like you'll be able to squeeze some variety out anyhow so follow your bliss. 

[AGPO]

Variety of definitely the spice of the hobby, but it doesn't have to be found in different factions. I play a bloodbound army filled with hordes of bloodletters and reavers, but another guy I know plays a very elite army based around skull reapers and crushers. They're two very different challenges for an opponent, but it also makes playing large multi player games that bit cooler because our forces work together thematically, adding some cool narrative elements.

 

[Dave Fraser]

It's important to remember the most sensible solution. 

 

Own them all!!!

[RuneBrush]

I think it's one of those things that different people will look for different things.

A brand new player who doesn't know much about AoS simply would want to see people rolling dice and having a really good time.  The armies being fielded largely are the icing on the cake, though a few centrepiece models will also help to entice them.  For a player who knows a bit about AoS or Warhammer they're likely going to want to see different armies on each side, both from an aesthetic and tactical aspect.  A player who already plays will be looking for a wider range of armies, likely built with a similar mindset to themselves.

I class myself as a "veteran" - not from a skill point of view but from the length of time I've been in the hobby.  When I look at a group of AoS players, I look for people who have themeatic armies and a fairly wide range of builds across multiple grand alliances.  In my own local group, we've got two Nurgle, two Bloodbound, one Stormcast, one Freeguild and one mixed Death (I'm talking 2k armies rather than Skirmish).  My own next army will be Ironjawz, though I've also Deathrattle lurking, my choice has been influenced by my group, we regularly natter about what we're doing next and we're all keen to see other alliances represented.  It's also worth noting that we're not a heavily competitive bunch, though we can all field a beardy list we make it pretty obvious how tough a list we're bringing to a game.

To try and entice people to play with your own group the key items I'd say are:

• make sure that everybody is visibly enjoying themselves - two, sullen miserable players will put anybody off regardless of the army
• have a good understanding of the rules, print things out on crib sheets and avoid book flipping it makes the game run much more smoothly
• as little grey plastic as possible, one or two new additions are fine but whole armies of grey just look bad
• aesthetically different armies - a dozen Stormcast armies in different chamber colours looks much more impressive than three Stormcast in gold