Reply To: The issue of the "elite" army (and finding opponents)….

[angelicdespot 4689xp 2]

I think elite units are simply more appealing to the ‘average’ player, even without any game or price considerations factored in.   Virtually every war / action film focusses on a small number of characters who are to some degree heroic.   And for obvious reasons.   It’s hard to identify with 200 characters, 140 of whom get killed during the movie.

Although as gamers we’re used to seeing asymetric battles (often balanced by points of scenario conditions), I’m sure most of us insinctively feel that the smaller army is the underdog.   And we like to see underdogs do well and appreciate the heroism of David vs. Golliath.

In other words, I think that people just find it easier to identify with – and therefore have an interest in playing – elite armies.   When you factor in cost, painting time, fame/infamy of elites, etc. it all adds up to bias in favour of elite armies.   (Also, and this is only a guess, it may be that in the world of tournament games elite armies are easier to practice with, transport and keep under control than horde armies are.   Fewer models = fewer distractions or things that can go wrong = more consistency = more victories?)

And then you have players like me who, over many years of trying to persuade friends and family members to play games with me and so having been used to letting my oponents play the elite armies that they’re interested in – I just love the hordes and the ‘baddies’.   You need them to have a story, and I’m more interested in being able to tell a story than I am in sticking to one faction if it means I don’t get a game in!