# The Fantasy Space Marines?



## angels of fire (Dec 4, 2007)

Which Fantasy army do you think gets the most attention like the Space marines in 40k, I've looked around and it kinda seems that fantasy are quite fair in the updates. This might be because I haven't been into to fantasy all that long but what are your thoughts? THanks in advance, Angels of fire.


----------



## torealis (Dec 27, 2006)

There isn't one. Fantasy has a more mature audience in general, and taste therefore varies more than 'BIG DUDES IN ARMOUR!!!'

Empire and O+G might tend to get more attention than most, most plastic kits etc. But you generally find that updates to books and models are comprehensive across the board.

Certainly while working at GW i never discerned any one army being massively more popular than others.


----------



## neilbatte (Jan 2, 2008)

Its quite refreshing that all the armies with only a few exeptions ( chaos dwarves and ogres) get fairly similar coverage and the only real time an army gets extra attention is when it gets updated which is understandable it probably helps that there are few armies that don't have a stable fan base and none of the armies are exceptionaly ugly like dark eldar in 40k plus with most armies having a good range of plastics unlike the inquisitor armies their are none that are ridicoulously expensive when compared to the others so most of the armies are similar in cost and have a battleforce to start with.


----------



## Lord Sinkoran (Dec 23, 2006)

I'm gunna agree with torealis here there isn't really a army that gets most attention like the SM do.


----------



## dirty-dog- (May 14, 2008)

i tend to agree, i havent seen any one most picked army.

i play lizardmen, just cause i like to paint and play them, but every army has its particular playing style, and it tends to be that fantasy is more strategicly based wheras 40k is kind of a mess, it doesn't matter what you do with your army, as long as you charge foward or sit and shoot, your alright.

with fantasy you have accualy got to think taticly and use terrain to your advantage.


----------



## Drachaos (Apr 10, 2008)

dirty-dog- said:


> with fantasy you have accualy got to think taticly and use terrain to your advantage.


Same as with 40k now, terrain means a whole lot more due to true LoS.

BUT i'm in agreeance there is no favourite. I would say tho, bring back Chaos Dwarves. Those guys are sick and twisted!

All i know at present is i'm happy with my Wood Elves


----------



## dirty-dog- (May 14, 2008)

ah, a wood elves player........

but anyway, the way that my group played, we generally used true los anyway, so to us its not much of a change. the only real change is the run and vehicle damage tables. and cover saves improved.

but owell, i like fantasy more. it seems more life like.

soz about being off topic.


----------



## Blackhiker (Dec 28, 2007)

I have never seen favoritism in the fantasy world, but I have seen some armies get slightly neglected compared to others. Like vampire counts until their new codex had almost nothing in the way of boxed sets, but most of the armies are fairly evenly recognized


----------



## DarknessDawns (Oct 21, 2007)

the trends only follow releases, but i find the no armies dominate as such.


----------



## angels of fire (Dec 4, 2007)

It seems then that fantasy is doing better than 40k in the balanced updates and such. But 40k still wins on sales.


----------



## Liamo (Jul 16, 2008)

I've never seen anyone under the age of 16 playing fantasy, but I think that's mainly because "guns are COOL!!!".

Anyway, I've never seen any army used more then any other really when I've been wandering around my local GW. But I've never actually played a game with my Vampire Counts yet (or any game fullstop really, which I'm going to put right eventually), so I can't really comment. But people I've seen playing have never used the same armies.


----------



## bobss (May 18, 2008)

> "guns are COOL!!!".


or ' my little brain cant cope with all these rules ' . sorry that reminded me of something _sick_ my friends said a while ago.

errm, i see alot of dwarf and o & g players, maybe thats down to BFSP and how orcs have bucket fulls of plastics.


----------



## CyDoN (Dec 21, 2007)

I think it might be brettonia the knights look alike with their stats they are teh uber ones 

well that might just be me


----------



## luthorharkon (Nov 2, 2007)

I've got to say it's mighty even but has anyone noticed that fantasy is actually inside the 40k universe?


----------



## jman (Feb 20, 2008)

40k seem a little bit like just kill a take objectives

while fanasty is all about screening you power units to reduce damage to those 12 pts/ model chaos warriors


----------



## Zorenthewise (Aug 7, 2008)

luthorharkon said:


> I've got to say it's mighty even but has anyone noticed that fantasy is actually inside the 40k universe?


I have never seen any fluff to support this, and GW has never said that. This is an internet rumor at best. And believe me, I was disappointed when I found that out!


----------



## jakkie (Dec 21, 2007)

there is no army that definatly has more players then others, but the top 3 have to be O&G, Empire and, i think, Dwaves, probably in that order, too.


----------



## itsonlyme (Aug 22, 2008)

Zorenthewise said:


> I have never seen any fluff to support this, and GW has never said that. This is an internet rumor at best. And believe me, I was disappointed when I found that out!


Its not actually a rumour, its the older fluff, i think they did away with it in 3rd ed 40k, back in the day i believe (3rd ed fanatsy) chaos could have plasma pistols and such as chaos rewards. 2nd ed 40k even had rules for crossbows and the like (actually improved the armour save or power armour two a 2+, was funny against termines, 2+ on 2D6!, 1+ on 2D6 for Khorne termies!)


----------

