50197
Post by: Siphen
I feel like there's already been a discussion on this topic, so I apologize if this is a repost. I'd just like to know what people think about list tailoring.
What exactly defines list tailoring? How much is appropriate (or acceptable)?
I'm of the opinion that minor list tailoring is fine, but it's difficult to draw the line. If you know you're playing against Eldrad, is it ok to leave out a psyker that would normally be included? If you know you're playing against Tyranid swarms, is it ok to pack a few extra flamers into the army? If you know you're up against an army with little to no shooting, is it ok to drop the disruption pods or KFF (normally auto-includes in their respective armies)?
The list of questions could go on, but you get the idea. Thoughts?
2304
Post by: Steelmage99
I am thoroughly against list-tailoring of any kind.
51467
Post by: broodstar
There I a guy in my game shop that I accused of list tailoring when I first started playing. He plays Orks and I play Tyranids. His guy piled 13 Burna Boyz into a Battlewagen, I asked around my the shop and everyone responded, "No, that's Ralston, he does that to everyone."
I've been accused of tailoring because I wait until we decide on point levels but when people look at my list it's the same formula every time (unless I am in a evolution stage in between formulas).
I'd say ask around if you think you have been tailored.
To me tailoring is just cheating.
47395
Post by: UMGuy
For me, I do make adjustments to my list every time I play, but I do not know who I am playing.
If you bring certain things in your army for a particular opponent or army that is tailoring. And it is pretty obvious when done. I am also against it. Anyone with $ or all models can easily plan to outdo just about any list. It takes someone with some tactical abilities to make due with what they bring.
46864
Post by: Deadshot
If it is an organised hame, and you both know what each side is using, armywise, then list tailoring is fine. It is even hard to avoid in this situation.
13022
Post by: Locclo
I think it's kinda dependent on how much advance notice you have, and what you know your opponent is playing. I mean, the general practice of my FLGS and gaming group is to write a list without knowing who you'll face. You can kinda build lists against the most common players (for example, most of the players at my FLGS run marines, so it's generally a safe bet to write a list to beat marines) but it's impossible to know who you're going against until you're there.
I mean, I'll say this, it's really cheesy to look at your opponent's list and then write a list to counter theirs. But if you're just building against a theme that's a common opponent, I'm fine with it. Force your opponents to change their lists up from time to time. 
28484
Post by: y0disisray
broodstar wrote:There I a guy in my game shop that I accused of list tailoring when I first started playing. He plays Orks and I play Tyranids. His guy piled 13 Burna Boyz into a Battlewagen, I asked around my the shop and everyone responded, "No, that's Ralston, he does that to everyone."
I've been accused of tailoring because I wait until we decide on point levels but when people look at my list it's the same formula every time (unless I am in a evolution stage in between formulas).
I'd say ask around if you think you have been tailored.
To me tailoring is just cheating.
Honestly I wouldnt consider burna boyz as list tailoring against Nids just because burna boyz are good in an all comers list. Its really hard to pin point a person and say he list tailors unless he takes a bunch of random wargear/psychic powers/units that aren't normally taken but have a strong effect against your army.
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
y0disisray wrote:broodstar wrote:There I a guy in my game shop that I accused of list tailoring when I first started playing. He plays Orks and I play Tyranids. His guy piled 13 Burna Boyz into a Battlewagen, I asked around my the shop and everyone responded, "No, that's Ralston, he does that to everyone."
I've been accused of tailoring because I wait until we decide on point levels but when people look at my list it's the same formula every time (unless I am in a evolution stage in between formulas).
I'd say ask around if you think you have been tailored.
To me tailoring is just cheating.
Honestly I wouldnt consider burna boyz as list tailoring against Nids just because burna boyz are good in an all comers list. Its really hard to pin point a person and say he list tailors unless he takes a bunch of random wargear/psychic powers/units that aren't normally taken but have a strong effect against your army.
What would you think for a Inquisitor/ SoB list that tailors against psykers?
28405
Post by: dnanoodle
I don't consider writing lists to match your group tailoring. There is so much stuff in 40k. If you have a group varied enough to represent it all, you're very lucky. That's an interesting gaming group. Most of us don't. I'm not taking stuff I know I dont need. But I do often take things that are nasty against lists I know I might face just in case. My Libby has Dark Excommunication for that reason. If my friend ever dares challenge my GKs with Daemons again, there it is. And I'll show him how I've wasted 5 points every game for a year just to screw with him one time lol.
On the other hand, this is the guy who played a 3k game against me (Eldar) and our friend (more Eldar) using his Space Wolves. He took one look at our armies laid out--at my JetCouncil and my partner's 2 Farseers--and said, "I think I need 3 Rune Priests!" THAT is tailoring. And cheese. Don't sweat making a TAC list that only includes stuff to be used against your group though. I think that's reasonable.
5301
Post by: Milisim
I have army lists for 1k, 1500, 1850 and 2k...
That is for both my DE and Tau. I dont care who is playing what the lists never change.... All my lists are TAC.
I dont even Venom pam with my DE... I think I use 6 at 2k. The rest are raiders...
51821
Post by: Boggy79
I rarely use the same list twice as I like to tinker and see how I do with strange and wonderful units sometimes.
Having said that I rarely know which army I'm facing. All my main opponents have a nice mix of shooty and CC armies so I can't tailor a list.
One guy used to bring close to 4000 points to each game and write his list when he saw who he was facing. He didn't last long in our group.
48860
Post by: Joey
What's wrong with tailoring? If you know who you're fighting, it's the only rational thing to do.
30356
Post by: Jaon
I come to a game always expecting to fight MEQ, and have written my list accordinly.
Is that tailoring? Well no...my list is an all comers list. Nearly all comers are MEQ. I can just as easily fight a tyranid horde, and I havent loaded all up on plasma or anything. Its more mindset than units (its very hard to accuse a GK player of tailoring anyway..).
If you've allowed your opponent to tailor a list off yours, its your own god damn fault. Keep your list a secret or, if its a full disclosure agreement, see that they write theirs first. I dont even see it as cheating. If people play to win, thats alright, they have every right to write their list the way they want it.
I am of course against someone going "I see you play GK and have a lot of transports, let me just change my list to add in some hydras" but if they are expecting to fight you, I'm all for them writing up a hardass list to fight me. Dont expect people to hinder themselves.
And in the end, you may end up accusing someone of tailoring when they actually just run that list all the time, the example in the OP being a good example.
18698
Post by: kronk
Joey wrote:What's wrong with tailoring? If you know who you're fighting, it's the only rational thing to do.
Exactly.
Our group plays a narative campaign. We know who we're fighting at least a week before the game and make our lists for that game accordingly. You bring one list, planned out before the game, and slap it on the table.
Both sides do it. Fair game. 
I would be pissed off if I showed up to a game store for a pick up game and an opponent wanted to see what I was bringing before he made his list. THAT is a dick move. 
48228
Post by: lazarian
Joey wrote:What's wrong with tailoring? If you know who you're fighting, it's the only rational thing to do.
Because its cheating? If you know what your fighting and make an army to tailor it, you gain an incredible advantage, your opponent should get a fair bit of points to compensate.
Maybe if you and your opponent are ok with it before had, possibly. However some armies have too many specialist tools (like eldar) and its not right they get to 'guess' properly. You should have to take an all comers list. At the very least draw up your list before you come on down to the FLGS. Anything else is shady IMO. Automatically Appended Next Post: kronk wrote:Joey wrote:What's wrong with tailoring? If you know who you're fighting, it's the only rational thing to do.
Exactly.
Our group plays a narative campaign. We know who we're fighting at least a week before the game and make our lists for that game accordingly. You bring one list, planned out before the game, and slap it on the table.
Both sides do it. Fair game.
I would be pissed off if I showed up to a game store for a pick up game and an opponent wanted to see what I was bringing before he made his list. THAT is a dick move.
What your stating isnt list tailoring though, the second item you mention is what people assume when you state list tailoring.
18698
Post by: kronk
I think we may be talking about 2 different things here.
1. If you're playing a campaign and you know who you will be playing on a given week, I'm OK with both sides making a list for the army they will be fighting. However, the list must be made before the event with no changing.
Is this OK or not OK with people?
2. If you're playing a pick up game, and see that your opponent is playing horde orks, then change out a few of your models/units immediately before the game.
Is this OK or not OK with people?
For me:
1. OK.
2. Not OK.
48860
Post by: Joey
lazarian wrote:Joey wrote:What's wrong with tailoring? If you know who you're fighting, it's the only rational thing to do.
Because its cheating? If you know what your fighting and make an army to tailor it, you gain an incredible advantage, your opponent should get a fair bit of points to compensate.
Maybe if you and your opponent are ok with it before had, possibly. However some armies have too many specialist tools (like eldar) and its not right they get to 'guess' properly. You should have to take an all comers list. At the very least draw up your list before you come on down to the FLGS. Anything else is shady IMO.
What? I know I'm playing Space Marines, my opponant knows he's going to be playing IG...so he should get more points?
Or just anyone playing against me in general should get more points?
Or are you saying that people who cheat...are cheating?
48228
Post by: lazarian
Joey wrote:lazarian wrote:Joey wrote:What's wrong with tailoring? If you know who you're fighting, it's the only rational thing to do.
Because its cheating? If you know what your fighting and make an army to tailor it, you gain an incredible advantage, your opponent should get a fair bit of points to compensate.
Maybe if you and your opponent are ok with it before had, possibly. However some armies have too many specialist tools (like eldar) and its not right they get to 'guess' properly. You should have to take an all comers list. At the very least draw up your list before you come on down to the FLGS. Anything else is shady IMO.
What? I know I'm playing Space Marines, my opponant knows he's going to be playing IG...so he should get more points?
Or just anyone playing against me in general should get more points?
Or are you saying that people who cheat...are cheating?
You shouldnt be at that step, you should already have an allcomers list before you guys go over what armies your using. This point cant be stressed enough, there are armies that absolutely gain in power by knowing their opponent over other armies. That is what is called an unfair advantage, thus cheating.
If it is the situation where on is just playing a friend and you are both comfortable and aware of each others armies and tendencies then certainly do whatever you two are going to do. Anything past that you need to have your list beforehand.
edit-grammar
47462
Post by: rigeld2
Milisim wrote:I have army lists for 1k, 1500, 1850 and 2k...
This, except add in 1750 and 2500. When I go for a pickup game, I bring those lists and the models for all of them. (it helps that the 2500 includes everything the 2k list has, etc.)
I don't see a reason to take the time to make a list on the spot - rushed means you'll make mistakes with calculations (without AB/whatever).
Plus, you get down to rolling dice faster.
46864
Post by: Deadshot
It is stupid not to tailor to a specific army codex if you know you are fighting it. Specific units, no. Specific army styles. Maybe.
Examples.
My opponent runs Orks so I'll take Captain Tycho (PE: Ork)
This is codex tailoring. Fine.
My opponent runs hordes. I'll take flamers over Meltaguns. Fine. Style tailor.
My opponent runs Daemons. I'll take Banishers, Dark Excommunication Libbies and Dreadknights( who have Dark Ex.) against a Daemon Army, when nothing else is antidaemon bar a NFW Inquisitors, is not right.
Taking loads of Flamers againt a Ripper Themed Army (Parasite, Rippers, Skyslashers only) is not right.
TakingNithing but Plasmaspam against Deathwing, Draigowing, Terminator Loganwing or Deffwing, is wrong. Though some may argue that against Draigowing its ok.
15115
Post by: Brother SRM
I'm in the midst of a 40k league and we know our opponents before the games coming up. A little bit of tailoring is to be expected - if I'm playing against Dark Eldar iI'll probably take a rifleman dreadnought (I didn't last night, but I should've!) or a devastator squad to counter a list that will likely have a lot of light armor. This is okay, and fairly general. Lists tend to be all-comers lists with a unit or two that will prove to be extra useful against that week's opponent.
I used to game at Pandemonium and one opponent asked what army I was running and asked to see my list. He looked it over and wrote an army list specifically tailored to counter every unit in the army. That was pretty representative of that player base.
18698
Post by: kronk
Brother SRM wrote:I used to game at Pandemonium and one opponent asked what army I was running and asked to see my list. He looked it over and wrote an army list specifically tailored to counter every unit in the army. That was pretty representative of that player base.
It's easy for me to say this sitting hundreds of miles a way with the anonymity of the internet, but I would have told him what he could suck.
15115
Post by: Brother SRM
I honestly have no idea why I didn't react to it at all. I wouldn't need to get all faux-macho tough guy about it, but I should have called him on being a jerkass.
7637
Post by: Sasori
I don't ever tailor. Even If I know what opponent I'm playing.
If they tailor to me, then it will be all the more satisfying when I beat them.
39550
Post by: Psienesis
When it comes to Eldar who have Farseers who are, you know, prophets, I don't see a problem with list-tailoring on their part. After all, that's pretty much fluff-appropriate for an Eldar army. They can see the future, they can foretell what they'll be facing, and deploy the appropriate troops to counter it. This is the Eldar way.
(Note that I have not played an Eldar army in close to 20 years, and even then they were not my best army).
For units without such abilities, eh, then it gets a bit more tricky. If you're building an army to specifically counter every unit the other guy is putting on the table... that's a Real Dick Move.
If you're just building an effective list that does well against the other's list, but is otherwise TAC, then you're probably OK.
42856
Post by: Tye_Informer
kronk wrote:I think we may be talking about 2 different things here.
1. If you're playing a campaign and you know who you will be playing on a given week, I'm OK with both sides making a list for the army they will be fighting. However, the list must be made before the event with no changing.
Is this OK or not OK with people?
I'm okay with this. In fact, I think this makes it more fun, since you don't really know what they are bringing and they could surprise you. A non-horde type Tyranid list for example.
kronk wrote:
2. If you're playing a pick up game, and see that your opponent is playing horde orks, then change out a few of your models/units immediately before the game.
Is this OK or not OK with people?
I'd be okay with this as well, provided I get to make a few changes too. For example, I'm hanging out at the FLGS, looking for a battle with my models on the table. Another guy shows up and sees the models I have and wants a game. We agree on a points limit, he makes his army list, I make mine. I would ask what faction he was playing, but probably wouldn't ask what models he had. I'd just make a list that I thought would be good against his and would be fun to play. Then we'd bring our lists to the table and introduce our army, roll to setup, etc.
The only situation I would have a problem with is if he was actively making swaps as I was introducing my army. He sees I'm playing Necrons and writes up a fast assault list, then starts swapping out his assault guys when he sees Lynchguard with Mindshackle scarabs Lords in it.
52795
Post by: kshaw2000
someone trys to make me tailor my list after the games is starting.
my trygon prime comes up against some kind of GK OP thing and someone says *cough*make that a mawloc*cough*
18698
Post by: kronk
kshaw2000 wrote:someone trys to make me tailor my list after the games is starting.
my trygon prime comes up against some kind of GK OP thing and someone says *cough*make that a mawloc*cough*
That's rather rude and underhanded.
25703
Post by: juraigamer
If everyone had pre-made lists then you couldn't tailor, you simply choose a list before you know who you are playing and with a matching point value.
List tailoring is such changing your list to be more effective against the enemy. Taking flamers against hordes is one thing. Example: Guard player says lets play a 750 point game, I borrow friends dark eldar and make a list, the guard player (whom I've played dozens of games with) busts out a veteran squad with 4-5 flamers in a Valkyrie. He's never run it before, he doesn't even have the models for it, it's just so he could have a better chance to beat me. (for reference, I stomped him into the ground)
Any advantage gained by a change made after knowing what you are playing against is tailoring. It could be small like switching a unit out for another one, or changing a psychic power, or it could be BIG like bringing completely anti-demon tooled grey knights to fight a demon player.
20086
Post by: Andilus Greatsword
Joey wrote:What's wrong with tailoring? If you know who you're fighting, it's the only rational thing to do.
Pretty much. I'll usually write up a couple lists beforehand and might change things up if I know who I'm playing - however, if/when I do so, then I am sure to let them know what army I'm playing and give them ample opportunity to tailor against me as well. I don't tailor to specific units in their list, because neither of us reveals out lists until we're about to start. Also, I try to gauge whether someone's running a "fun" or "competitive" list, just so I don't get steamrolled unfairly (and because I hate to steamroll someone else outside of a competitive environment). I think this is more than reasonable.
48139
Post by: BarBoBot
IMHO it takes more talent to win with an all comers list. If you have to tailor your list to beat mine, your basically telling me you dont think you can win fairly.
I played with a guy who tailored his space wolves. If I said I was playing necrons or if another guy was playing orks, his list will have several jotww among other things.
When I bust out my chaos list with 2 demon princes, a couple dreds and lots of plague marines in rhinos where jaws isn't as effective, all of a sudden he isn't using jotww
Same when he played against DE..... High initiative and lots of transports, and all of a sudden no more jaws.
I debated making a list for every army I own and telling him I will roll to see which army I use just before the game...
55042
Post by: Oppressor
I only make and use take all comers lists and I only play space marines.
Since almost every list made is already inherently geared to be able to take out space marines, I don't really think anyone would bother specifically tailoring their list against me either.
46926
Post by: Kaldor
lazarian wrote:Joey wrote:What's wrong with tailoring? If you know who you're fighting, it's the only rational thing to do.
Because its cheating?
Oh please. Hyperbole much?
lazarian wrote:However some armies have too many specialist tools (like eldar) and its not right they get to 'guess' properly.
On the flipside, if all lists must be TAC lists, than only a tiny handful of weapons, units and wargear are actually useful. Why sideline huge portions of each codex?
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
I would say that there is two levels to tailoring.
-Tailoring against your group? That's ok. Why worry about how to maximize against Tyranids if there's no one that plays them at the club.
-Tailoring against an opponent after you now what they're fielding? Sure, if he can then tailor a new force against your tailor versus his original force...........in other words, no. It's bad form. Adapt on the run.
46926
Post by: Kaldor
AegisGrimm wrote:-Tailoring against an opponent after you now what they're fielding? Sure, if he can then tailor a new force against your tailor versus his original force...........in other words, no. It's bad form. Adapt on the run.
Do you mean race, or specific list? I have no problem with saying to a buddy "Hey, next week my marines versus your guard?" and then we both have a chance to tailor our lists.
But looking over an opponents list and then tailoring your list specifically is bad form.
18690
Post by: Jimsolo
I'm opposed to tailoring a list to face your opponent's specific list. I'm all in favor of it when it comes to tailoring for a specific army or player, on the other hand, so long as they had the same chance to do so to you.
16175
Post by: Stormfather
Kaldor wrote: I have no problem with saying to a buddy "Hey, next week my marines versus your guard?" and then we both have a chance to tailor our lists. But looking over an opponents list and then tailoring your list specifically is bad form.
Jimsolo wrote:I'm opposed to tailoring a list to face your opponent's specific list. I'm all in favor of it when it comes to tailoring for a specific army or player, on the other hand, so long as they had the same chance to do so to you.
This is pretty much how my local gaming group plays it, too. We know who has which army, we all have a general idea about each other's preferences, but our lists are generally made double-blind and before the battle, so you never know exactly what you're going to be facing until after you've committed to your list. You need to keep a take-all-comers core to your army to deal with any surprises, but can customize specific loadouts to what you anticipate your opponent will field.
36866
Post by: Big Mek Dattrukk
My FLGS league games are set up to prevent tailoring. each player must have paid their dues and submitted their final list for the month before they are allowed to see what others have submitted. also, the first game each month is entirely random. about the only tailoring that can be done is for the objectives, which are posted a week in advance.
46926
Post by: Kaldor
Stormfather wrote:This is pretty much how my local gaming group plays it, too. We know who has which army, we all have a general idea about each other's preferences, but our lists are generally made double-blind and before the battle, so you never know exactly what you're going to be facing until after you've committed to your list. You need to keep a take-all-comers core to your army to deal with any surprises, but can customize specific loadouts to what you anticipate your opponent will field.
This is so much more an interesting way to play things than simply having a single TAC list. All of a sudden, certain options in the codex become more attractive, and you can buy and use those interesting units that the internet tells us are less than optimal. It really throws a whole other spin on things.
Further, it's exactly how they do things in White Dwarf battle reports, choosing units and wargear based on the opposition army.
18499
Post by: Henners91
I think it's perfectly acceptable to list tailor, so long as it's within good humour.
I mean - I am sure that if you arrange a game for next week or whatever, and it's against marines, you're going to take plasma/power weapons... would you do so against Guard? I doubt it...
But it can cross a line I guess...
49995
Post by: -666-
I don't see how it can be fair if someone asks to see your list first then creates theirs specifically to play against yours. They get a possibly huge advantage. That's not fun or fair for the person on the receiving end in my opinion.
I used to play this one fella who'd always ask me what army I was going to bring - found out he'd ask other people for as many details as possible in regards to what units and options I'd have. Invariably when I showed up he would have an army specifically tailored to beat mine. Eventually I then would say Im bringing army X but show up with army Y. That made him finally stop tailoring his lists.
18499
Post by: Henners91
If we're talking about actually reading a list and altering yours down to minute details to take it out - yeah, that's pretty dickish.
I think tailoring a list, aware of what models your opponent probably has and of his army choice - that's okay and quite normal.
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
Do you mean race, or specific list? I have no problem with saying to a buddy "Hey, next week my marines versus your guard?" and then we both have a chance to tailor our lists.
But looking over an opponents list and then tailoring your list specifically is bad form.
Sorry, that's what I meant, but didn't write it right. List, not race.
50243
Post by: Castiel
I think that there is a level to which it is acceptable, but it can be taken too far. For example an Eldar player swapping out a unit of Banshees for Striking Scorpions because they are facing Orks instead of marines, or swapping meltaguns for flamers aganst Nids is only sensible. However, looking at your opponents specific list and writing a list specifically designed to counter it is bad form.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
It really annoys me that, except for tournaments, I rarely see meltas in the other army anymore - they're always swapped out for flamers when my opponent learns I'm playing nids. That's why I prefer pre-written lists.
50243
Post by: Castiel
rigeld2 wrote:It really annoys me that, except for tournaments, I rarely see meltas in the other army anymore - they're always swapped out for flamers when my opponent learns I'm playing nids. That's why I prefer pre-written lists.
Why shouldn't they be swapped out though? Against 'nids meltas are nowhere near as useful as flamers are.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
Castiel wrote:rigeld2 wrote:It really annoys me that, except for tournaments, I rarely see meltas in the other army anymore - they're always swapped out for flamers when my opponent learns I'm playing nids. That's why I prefer pre-written lists.
Why shouldn't they be swapped out though? Against 'nids meltas are nowhere near as useful as flamers are.
... Exactly my point. Me swapping out the Rupture Cannons my Tyrannofexes have for, say, a Fleshborer Hive, when fighting foot IG, would be a dick move. So would dropping Hive Guard and picking up Pyrovores.
Pre-written lists prevent those shenanigans.
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
It's more fun to have a list that can do pretty well against everyone in your local group, with just a little tweaking if you then know the general race you are going up against in the upcoming game.
Further tailoring than that is really like putting a game on "easy" just before you fight a boss.
10193
Post by: Crazy_Carnifex
Kaldor wrote: I have no problem with saying to a buddy "Hey, next week my marines versus your guard?" and then we both have a chance to tailor our lists.
But looking over an opponents list and then tailoring your list specifically is bad form.
This is exactly what I think. It opens up all sorts of different options in a codex. For example, when fighting other 'Nids, or someone I know doesn't spam transports, it's a shame to waste two elite slots on hive guard.
I think there are two different things at play here. "List Tailoring", where you build a list to counter your opponents list, and "Meta-Gamin", where you change your list depending on who you are expecting to faces, but still turn up with a prefab list.
48139
Post by: BarBoBot
Henners91 wrote:I think it's perfectly acceptable to list tailor, so long as it's within good humour.
I mean - I am sure that if you arrange a game for next week or whatever, and it's against marines, you're going to take plasma/power weapons... would you do so against Guard? I doubt it...
But it can cross a line I guess...
The whole point of an all-comers list is to make a list that can do well no matter what army you are facing...I would not take out my plasma/ PW if I were facing guard, and I would not auto include flamers against nids....
I make a list at a certain point cost that I think can do well against different army types, and I play that list no matter which army im playing.
Sure lists change when your trying new stuff out or whatever, but its a d-bag move to tailor your list against your opponents specific army unless it was already agreed upon. Thats my 2 cents.
35947
Post by: Lolcanoe
Is it bad when you have to pull out one army, and then have to pull out another one just before the game, because you know your opponent has tailored his list?
46926
Post by: Kaldor
rigeld2 wrote: Me swapping out the Rupture Cannons my Tyrannofexes have for, say, a Fleshborer Hive, when fighting foot IG, would be a dick move.
No, it's sensible and legitimate.
54011
Post by: fluffstalker
If you knew you were fighting the IG say, a day or two beforehand, and didn't have his list, only knew based on hearsay or word of mouth what his army was. That would be a "soft tailor" which is also known as metagaming. Which is fine. It's stupid to gimp your list by trying to be "all-comers" when "all-comers" in your local club means smurfs, wolf smurfs, red smurfs, grey smurfs and maybe green smurfs. Obviously in this case, you wouldn't start chucking in random flamers into your list just to "round it out".
What would be a douche move would be stealing a look at the exact list beforehand and carefully analyzing and countering everything on it half an hour before the game. Like, walking into the store and looking at his list and pulling out a notepad and changing your list. Because if you're allowed to do that, what's stopping him from doing it to your hastily drawn-up list immediately after? Then you do it and then he does it and then you do it and thenandthenandthenhamburgerswithracoonmeatandthenweneedtogodeeper.
56091
Post by: Chesh
I don't see anything wrong with swapping out wargear (within reason) before a game, but switching up entire UNITS? That's not cool.
Wargear swapping is just smart play. Things like switching out a meltagun marine for a flamer marine when you find out you're up against a horde army is fine, but something like switching a predator for a vindicator in the same situation is over the line.
50243
Post by: Castiel
rigeld2 wrote:Castiel wrote:rigeld2 wrote:It really annoys me that, except for tournaments, I rarely see meltas in the other army anymore - they're always swapped out for flamers when my opponent learns I'm playing nids. That's why I prefer pre-written lists.
Why shouldn't they be swapped out though? Against 'nids meltas are nowhere near as useful as flamers are.
... Exactly my point. Me swapping out the Rupture Cannons my Tyrannofexes have for, say, a Fleshborer Hive, when fighting foot IG, would be a dick move. So would dropping Hive Guard and picking up Pyrovores.
I don't know what those weapons and units do, so I can't comment on that example. But against a Tyranid army a flamer is far more useful and 5 points cheaper than a melta. Why should I spend more points and put myself at a tactical disadvantage against you just because you don't like it. You play a horde army with no transports, why the hell would I take meltas against that when they are fairly redundant against 'Nids?
There is a difference between swapping a couple of weapons in units to make them more useful in the battle to come and writing a list with the specific intention of countering another persons list. One is common sense, the other is a dick move.
46864
Post by: Deadshot
For the reason that you are gaining spare points. If you have 30 Meltaguns at 5pts each, and swap them for flamers, you gain 60pts. That affords a whole new Predator, Techmarine or Land Speeder.
And the same for others. If I swap a 10 man Terminator Squad with all Chainfists, and 2 CML for 10 Sternguard in a Pod, because you play Gunlines, then that also frees up points for another hundred or so points for a Libby with Force Dome.
If it is a pickup and play game, then write a list serperately from your opponent and use it. Its even better against someone you don't know. Don't klet them know what army you play if you don't know theirs.
If it is an arranged ame, pregame tailoring to your opponent's style, Ie, Hordes, Gunline, Nidzilla, MEQ, etc, Is perfectly legitimate and hard to avoid at all.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
Castiel wrote:There is a difference between swapping a couple of weapons in units to make them more useful in the battle to come and writing a list with the specific intention of countering another persons list. One is common sense, the other is a dick move.
There really isn't a difference.
Yes, you have non-optimal weapons in your army. I don't see the downside to that, as *everyone* will. It's not like the Meltaguns are completely useless - they'll still cause wounds. They just aren't as LOL as flamers.
Why do you feel the need to swap out wargear?
As far as the Rupture cannon/Fleshborer thing - the former is a STR10 2 shot weapon. The latter is a STR4? ( iirc) 20 shot weapon. One is fairly useless against footguard. The other would be much better, and cheaper.
I just don't understand the problem with making a TAC list and sticking with it. Unless by swapping the Meltas out you just don't spend the extra points - I'd be okay with that.
18653
Post by: brainscan
tbh i dont disclose what army im fielding in advance ever to my opponent. If at the club or in the store i ask to see the list at the same time as my opponent gets to see my list, that way no tailoring occurs. If you are stupid enough to declare what faction youre fielding in advance you should take the hit of letting your opponent tailor their list.
Fortunately im able to keep people guessing as i can potentially field a choice from multiple factions. That way no one really knows what im going to be playing. If i play a random game in the store i dont even open my case until the lists are on the table that way im not declaring my faction...
50243
Post by: Castiel
rigeld2 wrote:Unless by swapping the Meltas out you just don't spend the extra points - I'd be okay with that.
That was what I meant. There is no point taking the melta when the flamer will do a better job in the situation. Why would a Space Marine take a meltagun against Tyranids when he knows that the flamer is more effective?
56091
Post by: Chesh
rigeld2 wrote: Unless by swapping the Meltas out you just don't spend the extra points - I'd be okay with that.
To me, at least, a 5 point flamer vs a horde list is worth exactly the same as a 10 point melta vs a mechanized list.
If you're going to swap out weapons, fine - like I said, that's smart play. But if you use the points from taking cheaper wargear to pick up another unit, that falls under "switching out units entirely" and is over the line.
The way I figure it is this - every army has an armory where they store their wargear. Since there's no fog of war in 40k, we know pretty much exactly what we're going to be facing. We have time to stop at the armory and trade our meltas for flamers, but we don't have time to wait for another unit to show up before we have to get deployed in position for the battle.
Edit: I R Kan Grammer Gud. Herp Derp.
28172
Post by: loner
Upon seeing all of this, I thought I just add mine:
I play footguard in my stores and most people know not to expect many (if any) tanks at all. Quite often I make jokes about how they should expect a hundred screaming little guys running around a field.
If my opponent takes the time and such to ask other players which armies I play and what they look like, I don't care much about it. He can go ahead if he wishes, hell I'll even email him my list upon request.
If he deems it necessary to tailor his list to counter mine, he can go ahead. I play 40k because I want to play a game. If I happen to go up against a powergamer, then I know who not to play to in the future.
50243
Post by: Castiel
loner wrote:Upon seeing all of this, I thought I just add mine:
I play footguard in my stores and most people know not to expect many (if any) tanks at all. Quite often I make jokes about how they should expect a hundred screaming little guys running around a field.
If my opponent takes the time and such to ask other players which armies I play and what they look like, I don't care much about it. He can go ahead if he wishes, hell I'll even email him my list upon request.
If he deems it necessary to tailor his list to counter mine, he can go ahead. I play 40k because I want to play a game. If I happen to go up against a powergamer, then I know who not to play to in the future.
This is a great point, and well made. Well said loner!
39296
Post by: gpfunk
If 2 competitive players choose to play against one another, then list tailoring is bound to happen. I am of the opinion that if both players know each other's general armies, then not list tailoring is basically like a battle commander choosing not to review intel before a fight. Its just dumb.
If it is a friendly game, you shouldn't list tailor, as you shouldn't be taking very competitive army lists.
If you are going to a tournament, list tailoring is idiotic, as you must plan to go against multiple types of armies.
This is my opinion. I don't list tailor in friendly games, but if I know I am going into a competitive match with a competitive player, we generally agree before hand on the issue.
42011
Post by: thakabalpuphorsefishguy
If this isnt indicative of my gaming ethic, I dont know another way to convey it. I play against tau regularly with my CW Eldar. I still take runes of warding simply because a good farseer would ALWAYS be prepared to face a psychic threat.
So in other words.... i NEVER tailor. I will try to build a list that can handle any codex, and any build, and plan strategy and tactics I can employ to counter what I may face on the table top
50336
Post by: azazel the cat
Kaldor wrote:This is so much more an interesting way to play things than simply having a single TAC list. All of a sudden, certain options in the codex become more attractive, and you can buy and use those interesting units that the internet tells us are less than optimal. It really throws a whole other spin on things.
Further, it's exactly how they do things in White Dwarf battle reports, choosing units and wargear based on the opposition army.
I agree with you for the most part.
I'm all for tailoring an army list in order to fight a certain race. I think that's perfectly fine. (if I'm fighting Tyranids, you'd better believe that my Necrons are rolling out the Monoliths.)
However, I am absolutely against tailoring an army list against a specific list. For example, if I create a list not to generally kill Grey Knights, but specifically to kill YOUR Draigowing list, then that is poor form. It generally just reduces the game to being rock-paper-scissors and choosing your tool after your opponent.
52878
Post by: jgehunter
thakabalpuphorsefishguy wrote:If this isnt indicative of my gaming ethic, I dont know another way to convey it. I play against tau regularly with my CW Eldar. I still take runes of warding simply because a good farseer would ALWAYS be prepared to face a psychic threat.
So in other words.... i NEVER tailor. I will try to build a list that can handle any codex, and any build, and plan strategy and tactics I can employ to counter what I may face on the table top
If we go by fluff a "good" farseer would be the biggest list tailor in the entire world.
IMHO if both player know who they will be facing and it's a pre arranged game there is no reason why you wouldn't "soft tailor", I mean if you are building your list for a match against tyranids you are not just going to say " yeah I'll fit a couple melts here just for the sake of it."
41664
Post by: ShatteredBlade
It depends really, such as if it in a tournament or a friendly game. For a tournament list tailoring makes sense as you put money on the line or are going for prizes.But if you ask for a friendly game, then ask what army I play so you can tailor your list to mine? That spins me into a level of pissed off I rarely enter. And yes, I've had people do that to me.
29529
Post by: scotta29
I had a similar situation when a gamer who always asks who he's playing what army they have
he asked me i told him nids he gloated saying he can field 3 thunderfire cannons and 20 or so flamers and squash me flat
i proceeded to squash him with 6 carnifexes a trygon and a hive tyrant from my pre-written list
im just trying to make a point that tailing to a race doesn't always go to plan because not every one plays stereotypical lists
5301
Post by: Milisim
At the end of the day though the only information that my opponent will be getting from me prior to a game is the points value.
If its an 1850 Tournament I will be at 1850. Thats all the info Im giving out..... Thats all the Tournament requires of me is to match the value of points as best as I can...
I could show up with a DP Blood Angels army, A mechanized Tau army or a Zippy MSU DE lovefest..... To me that is how 40k is supposed to be played...........
You decide on the points and play the game.............
46926
Post by: Kaldor
loner wrote:Upon seeing all of this, I thought I just add mine:
I play footguard in my stores and most people know not to expect many (if any) tanks at all. Quite often I make jokes about how they should expect a hundred screaming little guys running around a field.
If my opponent takes the time and such to ask other players which armies I play and what they look like, I don't care much about it. He can go ahead if he wishes, hell I'll even email him my list upon request.
If he deems it necessary to tailor his list to counter mine, he can go ahead. I play 40k because I want to play a game. If I happen to go up against a powergamer, then I know who not to play to in the future.
Tailoring your list to a specific race is NOT powergaming.
thakabalpuphorsefishguy wrote: i NEVER tailor. I will try to build a list that can handle any codex, and any build, and plan strategy and tactics I can employ to counter what I may face on the table top
Fair enough, but wouldn't you like to see other Eldar units get a chance to play on the field? Swooping Hawks, for example? Wraithguard? Theres nothing wrong with choosing units that willbe more effective against your foe. Otherwise some units will simply never get used.
51383
Post by: Experiment 626
Our GW store used to have a 'Staff Challenge Board' where you could write down a staff member's name and thus challenge them to a game of 40k when they had the time. You'd write down your name & army, and because pretty much everyone knew the staffer's armies, there was a good deal of list tailoring going on.
For the most part if was all in good fun and no one took it too seriously, unless you came up against some god awful filth like Eldrad in a 1000pts game.
The only time I did tailor my list during this time was when I was challenged by a Tyranid player who spent the next 2 weeks relentlessly cat-calling and telling me how much I was going to cry at the humiliating defeat I was about to take.
Note: I am bloody infamous in my area as the world's worst dice roller. I almost never win, typically because my to-hit, to-wound & saving throw rolls tend to be,   
The name calling was getting so ruthless that my manager would tell this moron to stop because it was getting demeaning and outright vicious in nature.
I just told this guy, you should never poke a sleeping dragon in the eye. When it wakes up, it gets royally peeved!!!
So my list I took against him looked like;
Captain w/relic blade + storm shield.
=I= Lord w/scourging + power armour. 1x heavy bolter servitor, 1x mystic, 1x acolyte w/storm bolter.
Culexus Assassin
5x hammer/shield termies
Dread w/asscan + missile launcher
2x 10 man tac squads w/flamer + heavy bolter
10 devies w/4x lascannons
6 devies w/3x missile launchers
Not outright tailored, but definately built with 'nids in mind. Suffice it to say, I actually rolled well that game as karma came back to bite this guy firmly in the arse. He got fustrated to no end by how my termies would not drop, spent the entire game chasing my culexus around with a carnifex, ran his forces headlong across open ground right into the teath of my guns and generall became quite sour about the whole thing.
In the end, I tabled him while losing only 3 marines!
Against people acting like total d-bags, talking crap and trying to humilate you in front of your customers, I think a big 'ol serivng of humble pie is well deserved, even if it involved a bit of tailoring to do it.
42011
Post by: thakabalpuphorsefishguy
jgehunter wrote:thakabalpuphorsefishguy wrote:If this isnt indicative of my gaming ethic, I dont know another way to convey it. I play against tau regularly with my CW Eldar. I still take runes of warding simply because a good farseer would ALWAYS be prepared to face a psychic threat.
So in other words.... i NEVER tailor. I will try to build a list that can handle any codex, and any build, and plan strategy and tactics I can employ to counter what I may face on the table top
If we go by fluff a "good" farseer would be the biggest list tailor in the entire world.
IMHO if both player know who they will be facing and it's a pre arranged game there is no reason why you wouldn't "soft tailor", I mean if you are building your list for a match against tyranids you are not just going to say " yeah I'll fit a couple melts here just for the sake of it."
HEY! HEY!! Get out of here with your logic and facts   And There is a difference between making a cold weather jacket, and making a north face sub zero weather parka. Just because I understand that my local meta is HIGHLY MEQinized (get it? ) and build my lists accordingly, doesnt mean I am preparing my list to counter my best friends Khorn Berserker foot list with over 75 power armoured nasties with toys at 2000 points. I take lists that are as equally equipped to take on tyranid stealer spam, as it is to take on gk or ba razor spam or ork green tide etc..
So no, I dont tailor. (And I dont consider there to be such a thing as "soft tailoring," you are either building a TAC, or you are tailoring your list to smash one players one army)
30256
Post by: Brotherjulian
I tailor every list unless I'm in a tournament, because I don't have a set army. I have zounds and zounds of points to play with and every list is usually a bit different. But playing against my brother's Chaos - you betcha I'll have AP3 weapons and CC units. Against my buddy's Nids - templates and sniper rifles for everyone! it just makes sense and they all do the same thing.
My brother hates being forced to make an "all comers" list when we play tourneys, as he feels it tailoring the army list to be 50% of the strategy
20079
Post by: Gorechild
I'm really against list tailoring, if your opponent slips in one or two hard counters into their list it completely throws what could have been a balanced fun game. It used to be a regular occurence at my gaming group for somebody to say "are you playing Eldar or Chaos this week?" whilst writing their lists, however I answered would completely alter what I'd fight. After getting my balanced lists screwed over for months I've come up with a way to nip it in the butt. I'm lucky enough to have several, very different armies. I've written out a 1500 point list for every one of my armies all of which are prepeared to take all comers, they're set in stone and never change (with the exception of Nid's as they're a WIP at the moment). Now, when I'm asked who I'll be using I say that I dont know yet. Once their list is all written up I roll a dice. If I get a 1 the CSM case comes out, 2 is Daemons, 3 is Eldar, 4 is Dark Eldar, 5 is Nids and 6 is a re-roll. Obviously this is only made possible by the fact that we always game at my house
40113
Post by: do you hear the voices to
My favorite style of play is narrative campaigns, and if something makes sense in the narrative I generally agree with it on the table top. If a space marine strike force is trying to remove a tyranid swarm from a planet, they'd be stupid not to bring flamers.
If chaos marines pick up a space marine battle cruiser on their relays, and begin preparing to be boarded why wouldn't they grab their plasma weaponry to burn through the invaders power armor?
When we just do pick up games the lists are universally designed(I don't say TAC because none of us are really good at list building haha). We just play for fun anyway, none of us are really that competitive, so it's generally not a problem.
46926
Post by: Kaldor
Gorechild wrote:I'm really against list tailoring, if your opponent slips in one or two hard counters into their list it completely throws what could have been a balanced fun game...
I'm lucky enough to have several, very different armies... they're set in stone and never change
Honestly, the problem here is you, not them. If you change up your list occaisionally not only will you find new aspects of each of your armies to enjoy, but you've restored the balance and fun into your games.
9230
Post by: Trasvi
I always show up to every game with the same lists. I need to carry my models around, and I don't have room to carry all sorts of extra models I might not use. Not to say I never change my list, but I'll keep it the same for a few weeks at a time. My list is designed to fight MEQ, because, thats what you fight 90% of the time.
However, I have a very orky themed carry case =D If people are writing up a list on the day, I don't pull my models out of the case until they hand the list over  .
5531
Post by: Leigen_Zero
kronk wrote:
I would be pissed off if I showed up to a game store for a pick up game and an opponent wanted to see what I was bringing before he made his list. THAT is a dick move.
This defines list tailoring rather well I think.
Tailoring a list to be good against orks/nids/ GKs etc is not list tailoring (it's not a good idea, but it's not tailoring).
Actually saying in the shop 'ahah! you take diversified nobz, so I'm gonna take long fangs, in trukks so I'm gonna take landspeeders' (or something like that, I'm not an expert on SW vs Ork tactics) after seeing your opponents list is tailoring, and is generally frowned upon.
IMHO, list tailoring is the wargaming equivalent of
'I brought my attack dog, with built-in force field!'
'Well I brought my dinosaur! who eats force-field dogs!'
20079
Post by: Gorechild
Kaldor wrote:Gorechild wrote:I'm really against list tailoring, if your opponent slips in one or two hard counters into their list it completely throws what could have been a balanced fun game...
I'm lucky enough to have several, very different armies... they're set in stone and never change
Honestly, the problem here is you, not them. If you change up your list occaisionally not only will you find new aspects of each of your armies to enjoy, but you've restored the balance and fun into your games.
It's my fault that I only ever used to face tac squads carrying plasma guns/cannons every time my chaos saw the board? That all other psykers disappeared the second there is the smallest chance that runes of warding might be in my list or that most melta's suddenly dissapear from lists when I used Wave Serpents?
If people didn't purpously tailor their lists to put me at a disadvantage then there wouldn't be a problem. When one of my armies is re-released or new models are brought out I do try mixing things up, but it's not like Eldar, CSM, Daemons or DE have changed much in the last year. Neither have Nid's, but seeing as I'm new to them I'm changing them around atm anyway untill im happy with something.
46926
Post by: Kaldor
Gorechild wrote:It's my fault that I only ever used to face tac squads carrying plasma guns/cannons every time my chaos saw the board? That all other psykers disappeared the second there is the smallest chance that runes of warding might be in my list or that most melta's suddenly dissapear from lists when I used Wave Serpents?
Firstly, I'd like to say I'm not trying to have a go at you.
Secondly, if your lists never change, then it kinda IS your fault that you keep hitting those same anti-you builds. Now, I'm assuming that your opponents do NOT check your list over and then specifically build a list to counter it. I Also assume that since your lists never change, they don't need to actually check your list over. They already know whats in it.
It's your fault you see those same builds all the time, because your list never changes. Your opponents have worked out the best way to counter those lists, and why shouldn't they do it? If you introduced an amount of uncertainty (maybe leave the Wave Serpents at home, just as an example) they could only build lists with a small amount of tailoring.
I believe the problem you percieve is that you are recieving an unfair penalty for NOT tailoring your list, and I believe you are creating the problem by refusing to take advantage of the ability to tailor your own list. The problem is, in fact, artificial.
When one of my armies is re-released or new models are brought out I do try mixing things up, but it's not like Eldar, CSM, Daemons or DE have changed much in the last year. Neither have Nid's, but seeing as I'm new to them I'm changing them around atm anyway untill im happy with something.
But why only try new things when an army is re-released? Many units or upgrades in many armies are only really useful against specific types of enemies. So if you know you're likely to face those enemies, why not include some of those units? Building and tweaking a new army before each match is a lot of fun.
7936
Post by: SDFarsight
Kaldor wrote:AegisGrimm wrote:-Tailoring against an opponent after you now what they're fielding? Sure, if he can then tailor a new force against your tailor versus his original force...........in other words, no. It's bad form. Adapt on the run.
Do you mean race, or specific list? I have no problem with saying to a buddy "Hey, next week my marines versus your guard?" and then we both have a chance to tailor our lists.
But looking over an opponents list and then tailoring your list specifically is bad form.
Stormfather wrote: We know who has which army, we all have a general idea about each other's preferences, but our lists are generally made double-blind and before the battle, so you never know exactly what you're going to be facing until after you've committed to your list. You need to keep a take-all-comers core to your army to deal with any surprises, but can customize specific loadouts to what you anticipate your opponent will field.
This^. Creating lists against a certain codex and player is one of my favourite things in 40K, though I'd draw the line at knowing their exact list unless the player in question is so limited or devoted to a single list that anything other than tailoring is charity to them.
52720
Post by: Hyd
Andilus Greatsword wrote:I'll usually write up a couple lists beforehand and might change things up if I know who I'm playing - however, if/when I do so, then I am sure to let them know what army I'm playing and give them ample opportunity to tailor against me as well. I don't tailor to specific units in their list, because neither of us reveals out lists until we're about to start. Also, I try to gauge whether someone's running a "fun" or "competitive" list, just so I don't get steamrolled unfairly (and because I hate to steamroll someone else outside of a competitive environment). I think this is more than reasonable.
This.
As long as everyone is on the same page, tailoring or not is no big deal. There is no imbalance if both sides have access to the same advantage.
I'm also with Kaldor on that one : it can allow for variations from the oh so classic TAC approach, and as they say variety is the spice of life !
Note that it makes complete sense fluff-wise as well. If a detachment is cut off from the bulk of the army and its supply lines, it makes sense to always play the exact same list to represent this situation ; otherwise, a commander knowing what he's going up against will pick the most suited tools for the battle. TAC lists are a gaming convention.
The problem is when one person has access to the other's list and adapts to gain a unilateral advantage. And this can't be compensated by then allowing the other to tailor as well ; the imbalance is just swapped. Now if someone wants to play with a handicap then why not.
51344
Post by: BlapBlapBlap
scotta29 wrote:I had a similar situation when a gamer who always asks who he's playing what army they have
he asked me i told him nids he gloated saying he can field 3 thunderfire cannons and 20 or so flamers and squash me flat
i proceeded to squash him with 6 carnifexes a trygon and a hive tyrant from my pre-written list
im just trying to make a point that tailing to a race doesn't always go to plan because not every one plays stereotypical lists
That gives me a fuzzy feeling inside. A thousand internet Kudos to you!
Anyway, back on topic, I honestly hate list tailoring. Thank goodness my local games club freezes lists during campaigns.
52812
Post by: Tiger9gamer
Quick question for a noobie: is it considered tailoring to, say, run sternguard with either combi-meltas for tank heavy armies and change it so I can use plasma against marines in a different match? same thing with librarian powers.
56091
Post by: Chesh
That's what we're kind of debating in this thread. Obvious tailoring, e.g. taking hard counters for specific units in an opponent's list, seems to be unanimously frowned upon.
However, "soft" tailoring is a more gray area. Taking the right load-out for different situations is just being an intelligent commander. After all, if you had access to an armory that was stuffed full with both flamers and meltaguns, why would you take meltaguns against green tide orks instead of flamers?
Long story short, seems like we're all pretty split on the issue. Some people here abhor ALL forms of tailoring, including the soft tailoring (Oh hey, I'm playing orks/marines. Better take flamers/meltas!), while others (including myself) see the soft tailor as just simply good gameplay.
33160
Post by: Iur_tae_mont
Gorechild wrote: Now, when I'm asked who I'll be using I say that I dont know yet. Once their list is all written up I roll a dice. If I get a 1 the CSM case comes out, 2 is Daemons, 3 is Eldar, 4 is Dark Eldar, 5 is Nids and 6 is a re-roll.
Obviously this is only made possible by the fact that we always game at my house
I do a Similar thing with my armies, but because d6s determine almost everything I do when it comes to my fun time, not because of List tailoring.
51375
Post by: Inquisitor Ehrenstein
I feel that people are ridiculous, and I almost want to say that they just want to enforce their ability to win.
I think people should be able to use different lists against different generic codex armies, before learning what is in the specific list.
However, people don't go for that. You'll get whined at and no one will play with you if you use a completely realistic and logical tactic.
What I will say is complete nonsense is when people tailor their list to fight a specific list; that is really ridiculous and OP in 40k.
56091
Post by: Chesh
Maybe the OP should edit this to add a poll? Something along the lines of:
A) NO! You print your list and run with it. Period. No changes ever, under any circumstances.
B) "Soft" tailoring is alright, but going unit for unit switching in hard counters is going too far.
C) I want to know everything in your list so I can modify mine just before the game starts!
52795
Post by: kshaw2000
kronk wrote:kshaw2000 wrote:someone trys to make me tailor my list after the games is starting.
my trygon prime comes up against some kind of GK OP thing and someone says *cough*make that a mawloc*cough*
That's rather rude and underhanded.
I didn't do it. They were actually working at the store. They also "accidently" got £21 worth of gaunts stuck in the back of the store cubboard.tsk. luckily the person was just working there when the main person was on holiday, and they were happy to return my gaunts after they had returned from it!
5580
Post by: Eidolon
I tend to run the exact same list for months straight, and then ill make minor adjustments and run that list against anyone and everyone.
I am definitely an all comers player, and feel that tailoring is cheating when only 1 player does it, and it wasnt agreed on. When either both players agree to tailor, or when one player encourages another to tailor for whatever reason, than its alright. Other than that, if someone just tailors every game, its basically cheating.
53546
Post by: Nakor The BlueRider
First, what is considered list tailoring?
If I knew my friend was playing IG and he knew I was playing Necrons, would it considered list Tailoring for me to bring Scarabs? He might run a foot guard list or mech heavy list, I wouldn't know that fact in advance I would only know the only the points limit and the Army he was fielding. Of course he could bring Hellhounds and other flamer/blast templates if he though I was going to bring scarabs.
To me, that isn't list Tailoring, its just bring a units you feel will be most effective against certain army's.
What I considered List Tailoring to be, is knowing what units your opponent has bought then making a list based on that knowledge. Like if you opponent had is army out, waiting for a game and you just made list solely based on countering his units.
55250
Post by: Actinium
list tailoring gets in these weird counter tactic cycles of like
'Oh guard guy is taking all infantry blobs with lascannon teams? Next I'll load out on heavy bolters and foot.
Oh space marine guy loaded out on heavy bolters and foot? Next I'll load out on ordnance and plasma.
Oh guard guy loaded out on ordnance and plasma? Next I'll field heavy tanks and scouts.
Oh space marine guy loaded out on heavy tanks and scouts? Next I'll field heavy flamers and meltas.' and so on.
Just take a tac list all the time and not have to buy 5 variant lists worth of models and magnetize every pair of arms to keep up with the joneses.
56905
Post by: Farseer Mael Dannan
I guess it really depends IMHO. In my gaming group we are all just friends from the same work office, we have:
Tau
Orks
Eldar
IG
Nids
Space Marines
Chaos
So it's a pretty diverse group. However, the way we do it is you know the teams the week before (we play on Sundays 3v3) and that gives you a full week to prepare a team strategy. We play a 3v3, and almost everyone has a multitude of lists from swarm to mech. Yes, we cater a bit since we do know who the enemy races we are playing against...hell that is a bit of the point. However, everyone has the ability to field a list that we have never seen before, or field 1 of 3 lists that could break our tailoring. Additionally, "in the moment" tailoring is entirely forbidden. If your team sees that you switched up all your upgrades after watching the enemy deploy, they will usually (and have) called people out before. Than again though, it helps when all of you are friends first, and Warhammer buddies second.
18479
Post by: s00nertp
Steelmage99 wrote:I am thoroughly against list-tailoring of any kind.
Agreed. It is completely unacceptable to list tailor if someone tells you their list, tells you their army, etc. You should ALWAYS use all-comers lists.
Can you tailor for an opponent in a tournament? No. So what makes it ok for a casual game?
For me there is only 1 exception: You and your partner discuss and agree to this specifically beforehand.
There is a reason to share armies beforehand: some armies have natural "less-fun" match-ups (ex: Tyranid vs Dark Eldar... Tyranid is at a strong disadvantage no matter the list). The person sharing a list is being respectful, and shares in the spirit of encouraging balance. One should not disrespect that generosity with an insult such as tailoring.
Saying you are trying to be "efficient" or "logical" is just an excuse to avoid blame for doing something disrespectful. Akin to a bum begging for money, a donor putting $10 in the cup, and the bum then blaming the donor for getting them drunk.
List tailoring without prior discussion has no excuse.
I personally have no room for those kind of players in our gaming group. It is my observation the best games are close ones, hard fought wins. Tailoring encourages lopsided wins. How fun is that for either side?
Be honest with yourself.
46926
Post by: Kaldor
s00nertp wrote: You should ALWAYS use all-comers lists.
How atrociously dull.
s00nertp wrote:Saying you are trying to be "efficient" or "logical" is just an excuse to avoid blame for doing something disrespectful...
Be honest with yourself.
lol, nope. Turning up to a blind match and then tailoring your list against your opponent while they are stuck with their own list is a bit crap. You're getting an advantage they can't have.
But any game agreed upon the week before should utilise list tailoring. It should be the norm, it IS how battle reports in WD are written, and even some tournaments are starting to come on board with it by allowing side-board lists.
It should never be considered disrespectful.
44276
Post by: Lobokai
We have 1 nid, 3 ork, 3 sm, 1 sw, 1 BA, 1 Eldar, 1 csm, 1 GK, 2 Tau, and 2 IG players in our club. Everyone makes a list and shows up ready to play. Then roll dice to see who plays who and then we roll the mission and off we go. Anyone tailoring a list is gonna need a crystal ball.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I highly recommend this format. Entering our second year and everyone seems to enjoy it.
58175
Post by: MarkCron
Having just come in, I reckon there is a consensus here. Generally, everyone agrees that looking at someone else's list THEN creating your own list, is tailoring (cheating - where that is defined as getting an unfair advantage).
There is a difference of opinion on whether tailoring vs generic armies or your local meta is ok, but generally the comments against seem to be focussed more on the principle of a TAC list. This seems to be a discussion about everyone should run TAC, vs everyone can tailor against their meta.
I reckon that the key thing is whether both players have the same opportunity. If I know the other player is playing <insert army>, then it is fair for them to know I'm playing <insert army>.
If I have their complete list, they can have my list. We can both tailor to our hearts content, but can't change once we show up to play.
As for TAC - if you have to play with the list you show up with, you have a TAC list. It just may not work .
As has been mentioned several times, part of the attraction and interest in 40k is to get units that may not make it onto the table, on the table. For me, that means having the opportunity to change the list I play - not unfairly though.
Then the strategy and mind games really begin - "I know their list, they know mine, so I think they'll change x, I'll change y and throw in Z) and suddenly you have a new strategy for existing units, or a couple of units you haven't used before (if you have the models!!)
If it takes equal opportunity list tailoring to get that - I'm all for it.
5301
Post by: Milisim
The best way to run a game is to ONLY agree to the points cost.
It shouldn't matter the army just the points.
I would go as far as to say for optimum fairness to roll for mission and what not and then produce a list to your opponent.
18479
Post by: s00nertp
Kaldor wrote:s00nertp wrote: You should ALWAYS use all-comers lists.
How atrociously dull.
My lists are always changing depending on my mood, cool new purchases that I just painted up, etc. My personal preference is to keep 4 or 5 general all-comer lists per army. All of them balanced. I show up blind & know I'll get a great game in with anyone.
My only point is I make the list beforehand and will not modify it when someone tells me their army, what they are bringing, etc. It stays the same.
None of the 25+ tournaments and in my area allow tailoring lists during the tournament.
In the spirit of "the love of the game", I appreciate you sharing your view.
24153
Post by: tetrisphreak
I'll chime in here as well - List Tailoring to me is a person who looks at your army set up on it's tray, or while you're unpacking, then writes up a quick 'counter' list for everything he sees. "Ooh, a land raider, i better put a 4x melta honor guard squad in here...hrm, he's also got terminators. I normally run missiles on my devastators but today they'll be PLASMA cannons...yeah.." etc, etc. An obvious change from a usual list to specifically counter specific models they see you're going to field.
As an interesting side note, I have a regular opponent who just hates to lose. He cringes at the thought, and is notorious for the above practices. Many times he's the only person around for a game so i've had to adapt to his crappy behavior - I put models out on my tray that aren't even in my list to throw him off, then before the game starts i pull the 'extras' away and all the stuff he took to kill it is now much less useful.
As far as knowing what codex your opponent is using and building a list to generally do well vs that army, that's OK....under the stipulation that both players have the time to do so. If one guy shows up with a deathwing army and says "who wants a game?" it's bad form to build an anti-deathwing list, because he brought his list unprepared for any specific opponent.
If more people played this hobby like a game instead of a sport you'd see many fewer topics of this nature floating around. Sadly, the needs to WIN and roflstomp are strong for many wargamers.
35930
Post by: Daedricbob
I usualy have a list tailored against mechspam and a list tailored more against infantry, and intend to use one or the other depending on who I'm facing.
I then invariably throw them both out of the window and use my fluffy list that is great fun to play but always gets me killed. :-)
46926
Post by: Kaldor
Daedricbob wrote:I usualy have a list tailored against mechspam and a list tailored more against infantry, and intend to use one or the other depending on who I'm facing.
I then invariably throw them both out of the window and use my fluffy list that is great fun to play but always gets me killed. :-)
Dude... that avatar...
58175
Post by: MarkCron
Daedricbob wrote:I usualy have a list tailored against mechspam and a list tailored more against infantry, and intend to use one or the other depending on who I'm facing.
I then invariably throw them both out of the window and use my fluffy list that is great fun to play but always gets me killed. :-)
This!
58450
Post by: Phragonist
If you change up your list every time you play, no one can tailor against you. (based on pre-existing knowledge)
Let's say you play against a guy called Brad every week.
Every week Brad brings the same army.
If he beats you, you put different units in your army to counter how he just beat you.
This is list tailoring, but it is fair.
The next time you play Brad, you may win because of how you tailored your army against his, and that he didnt change his list.
However, if Brad changes his list every week, it is impossible to tailor against him. Brad should bring a list one week. Then forsee what units you will take to counter that army, and take the counters to THOSE units in his army.
Moral of the story is, dont bring the same army every week.
If I KNOW I'm going to be playing a bunch of terminators, of COURSe I'm going to bring as much plasma as I can. The counter to this is to not bring terminators every week.
7936
Post by: SDFarsight
Phragonist wrote:If you change up your list every time you play, no one can tailor against you. (based on pre-existing knowledge)
Let's say you play against a guy called Brad every week.
Every week Brad brings the same army.
If he beats you, you put different units in your army to counter how he just beat you.
This is list tailoring, but it is fair.
The next time you play Brad, you may win because of how you tailored your army against his, and that he didnt change his list.
However, if Brad changes his list every week, it is impossible to tailor against him. Brad should bring a list one week. Then forsee what units you will take to counter that army, and take the counters to THOSE units in his army.
Moral of the story is, dont bring the same army every week.
If I KNOW I'm going to be playing a bunch of terminators, of COURSe I'm going to bring as much plasma as I can. The counter to this is to not bring terminators every week.
Indeed. Going for TAC list each time is taking a great part out of the hobby- designing lists. You don't have to create an entirely new and original list each and every game, but going to the other extreme by taking the same list to the same club over and over again is only inviting lists to be tailored against yours- anything else would be an act of charity.
2066
Post by: Dark Scipio
Joey wrote:What's wrong with tailoring? If you know who you're fighting, it's the only rational thing to do.
That.
23257
Post by: Praxiss
Hmmm.
seeing your opponents list before hand and making a list specifically to counter his?
-Wrong
Knowing your opponent is bringing IG (but not what hsi list is) and modifyign your list appropriately?
-Fair enoguh i woudl say.
Chances are if you know what they are bringing, they know what you are bringing.
If you knew you were playing against 'Nids tomorrow, would you bring an anti-armour list? No. You might swap out some melta for flamers, soem armour for a CC option.
How boring would it be if you and your friends fielded the same TAC list every game?
28172
Post by: loner
Praxiss wrote:
How boring would it be if you and your friends fielded the same TAC list every game?
How's it boring if someone keeps fielding the same list?
I mean, sure it's fun to try out some new units every once in a while, but if you and your opponent both field the same TAC list, then the game is about who has the best tactics or strategy and not about: "Yeah... I usually field all mechanized, but today I thought, why not take all infantry? You've got nothing that can beat me so I immediately win."
Also, ff you modify your list to counter his and he brings something unexpected, then what?
Either way, I've said it before but I care little about list tailoring people.
I play 40k because it's a game, not because I have to win. If you really need to adept your list to play against a specific army, just because you want to win, then you're taking it a bit too serious in my eyes.
34439
Post by: Formosa
perfect eample of this on vassal
I was asked if i want to play a game, "sure why not" i says,
He speaketh "what army doth you play, what!"
"hmm i consider, if i answer i know he will tailor, however i will inform him of his failure, before the game begins"
"Nids" I say
"ok lets play" says he
We doth both reveal lists
"you playing space marines!?" he exclaims
"Yes, changed my mind" i retort
"but i taliored to tyranids?" he states
"Really??" i say
"yes"
"your actually admitting it???"
"yes"
"wow....im gone....peace out" I say and leave
46926
Post by: Kaldor
loner wrote:Praxiss wrote:
How boring would it be if you and your friends fielded the same TAC list every game?
How's it boring if someone keeps fielding the same list?
Because you quickly work out what are the useful TAC units, and what are not. No one takes vanguard, no one takes devastators, no one takes thunderfire cannons, etc. If you just pick one list and run it forever, you miss out on opportunities to try all those other units in an environment where they won't actually suck.
Formosa wrote:"you playing space marines!?" he exclaims
"Yes, changed my mind" i retort
"but i taliored to tyranids?" he states
"Really??" i say
"yes"
"your actually admitting it???"
"yes"
"wow....im gone....peace out" I say and leave
You acted like a douche in this scenario. You agreed to play a game with knowledge of your opponents force, then lied about it. If you didn't want to play a tailored game you should have just said so.
7936
Post by: SDFarsight
loner wrote:Praxiss wrote:
How boring would it be if you and your friends fielded the same TAC list every game?
How's it boring if someone keeps fielding the same list?
I mean, sure it's fun to try out some new units every once in a while, but if you and your opponent both field the same TAC list, then the game is about who has the best tactics or strategy and not about: "Yeah... I usually field all mechanized, but today I thought, why not take all infantry? You've got nothing that can beat me so I immediately win."
Also, ff you modify your list to counter his and he brings something unexpected, then what?
Either way, I've said it before but I care little about list tailoring people.
I play 40k because it's a game, not because I have to win. If you really need to adept your list to play against a specific army, just because you want to win, then you're taking it a bit too serious in my eyes.
I see list tailoring as a fun part of the game rather than somekind of desperate beardy act of 'win by any means'. It is the planning, the Green Room before the match itself. Like a football manager taking a good look at his players and not always going for the standard 4-4-2 formation ( TAC).
29294
Post by: wererat
My least favorite thing is when my nid friend and I plan for a big 5000pt game a week in advance. I know I'm fighting nids and it so hard to purchase tank hunters and take other anti tank weapons that I know will be friggen useless. It feels like a waste of points :/ I also know he likes taking zoanthropes and I have to remind myself to not take blessed hull on my land raider crusaders because I normally wouldn't.
23257
Post by: Praxiss
A certain degree of list tailoring makes sense! Obviously not ina tournet settign where you woudl need to take a TAc list.
But playing a single game? If your opponent says "i will be bringing IG" then chances are you will be facing tanks, so you bring melta/warscythes etc etc.
You dont make a list to specifically beat him into the ground, you take units that should be effective against what you believe you will be facing.
As i said earlier, if you knew EXACTLY what an opponent was taking and made a list designer to counter that exact list, then that woudl be dodgy...
Example - i am in a tourney with 3 friedns next week (just a friednly 4 player tourney). i thoguh i was facing BA, IF and Red Scorpions (he likes Dreads especially). So i took a fair bit of anti-tank. yesterday the red Scorpion player announces he has [pulled a 'ned army out of nowhere. in response i have taken out a little anti-tank and put in somethign better suited to killign monstrous creatures.
I am guessing he will have some. i am not tailoring to hsi specific list, just to what i think he MIGHT field in a 'nid army. It probably still wont work. he knows i am takign 'Crons so i'm guessing will eb bringign some CC stuff to take advantage of my main weakness.
31121
Post by: amanita
The way we usually run a game is we decide what armies are involved, decide the point totals and then create a scenario on a random battle generator. Some re-rolls are allowed per each side, and a few scenarios are very situational with an obvious defender and attacker (hence the addition of barricades, wire, etc. and the possibility of the defender having fewer points). Players have a few days to come up with their lists, and the game commences on the weekend.
Now you know who you are fighting and probably most of the situation. Sometimes we'll roll for weather or night fighting before the game starts. We usually have a main objective and side objectives as possible tie-breakers. When possible, we email our lists to a third party the night before a game to verify the legality of the lists.
In other words, we ALWAYS "list tailor" for a situation. Both sides do this due to the military intelligence on hand. It's what any commander would do.
I'd never advocate knowing more about the enemy's list than they know about yours, but bringing a knife to a gunfight is just stupid. If all you play are random pick-up games, then yes you'll have to use a TAC list. But that's out of necessity, not desirability in my mind. When you make blanket statements that all list tailoring is evil then you need to pull your head out of the sand.
34439
Post by: Formosa
Kaldor wrote:loner wrote:Praxiss wrote:
How boring would it be if you and your friends fielded the same TAC list every game?
How's it boring if someone keeps fielding the same list?
Because you quickly work out what are the useful TAC units, and what are not. No one takes vanguard, no one takes devastators, no one takes thunderfire cannons, etc. If you just pick one list and run it forever, you miss out on opportunities to try all those other units in an environment where they won't actually suck.
Formosa wrote:"you playing space marines!?" he exclaims
"Yes, changed my mind" i retort
"but i taliored to tyranids?" he states
"Really??" i say
"yes"
"your actually admitting it???"
"yes"
"wow....im gone....peace out" I say and leave
You acted like a douche in this scenario. You agreed to play a game with knowledge of your opponents force, then lied about it. If you didn't want to play a tailored game you should have just said so.
Tsk tsk tsk, dont throw names around young man, tis rude, especially when you have no idea what you are talking about
I had no idea what he was playing, i didnt ask, he asked me, i was waiting to see if he would tailor if i did tell him, he did, he failed the test, i dont play with people who do this.
Also Basimpo will tell you all of this guy, he is known for tailoring and cheating in general
47462
Post by: rigeld2
He wasnt right, but you were also wrong in how you handled it.
No reason to lie to him - just say "let's trade lists".
You definitely don't have the high ground in this situation.
And if he's such a cheater, why accept his offerto play in the first place?
46926
Post by: Kaldor
Formosa wrote: Tsk tsk tsk, dont throw names around young man, tis rude, especially when you have no idea what you are talking about
I had no idea what he was playing, i didnt ask, he asked me, i was waiting to see if he would tailor if i did tell him, he did, he failed the test, i dont play with people who do this.
Also Basimpo will tell you all of this guy, he is known for tailoring and cheating in general
And I've had a go at Basimpo as well, for doing the same thing.
If you didn't want him to tailor you should have just said "Hey man, I prefer to play blind lists, so I'm not going to tell you what army I'll be playing" and if he bailed out then fine.
Agreeing to tell him your army, then lying about it is a douchey thing to do.
56638
Post by: victor.IG
If me and my opponent meet and say we want to play 1500 points he knows im playing IG i know hes playing orks I will build my list out of what i have to give me the tools to have the best chance of winning agaisnt what ever orky stuff he fields as he should be bringing his best tools to defeat what i am fielding.
theres no way to "tailor" your list to beat someone thats just ridiculous, you bring your units that will be the most helpful as should your opponent. that being said if you play 1 list every time and its always the same list and you play the same opponent every time and he plays the same list and you win 80% of the time and he decides you know what im going to bring more flammers to help fend off his horde and you start whinning because he "tailored" his list to better his chance of victory ? you look like a tool for expecting someone to not better their chances and bring a more equal force and having a chance to win. also you again should be doing the same.
bottom line is you should not expect people to play at a handicap for you so you can continue winning because you think if they bring more suited tools to have a more fair chance on the field that they are TFG and "cheaters"
this argument never makes any sense i cant imagine expecting my opponent to bring a buncha useless crap every day and not bring stuff that would hinder my ability to win just makes no sense
53760
Post by: FifteenHours
Kaldor wrote:loner wrote:Praxiss wrote:
How boring would it be if you and your friends fielded the same TAC list every game?
How's it boring if someone keeps fielding the same list?
Because you quickly work out what are the useful TAC units, and what are not. No one takes vanguard, no one takes devastators, no one takes thunderfire cannons, etc. If you just pick one list and run it forever, you miss out on opportunities to try all those other units in an environment where they won't actually suck.
Formosa wrote:"you playing space marines!?" he exclaims
"Yes, changed my mind" i retort
"but i taliored to tyranids?" he states
"Really??" i say
"yes"
"your actually admitting it???"
"yes"
"wow....im gone....peace out" I say and leave
You acted like a douche in this scenario. You agreed to play a game with knowledge of your opponents force, then lied about it. If you didn't want to play a tailored game you should have just said so.
hahahahha. BUSTED!!!
The guy he was playing was actually me! I remember this unfortunate incident.
Glad to see that it isn't just me who thought he was a douche for doing this.
What he didn't mention in this post was that I asked what army he was playing because I wanted to try playing new units against an army I had never played before on that day.
What he also didn't mention was that he still played me. He never said "peace out" and he didn't leave.
Instead, he went off on an incredibly obnoxious and patronising rant about how "I have taught you a lesson now about tailoring your list" after I gave up on turn 2 because I had tailored my list to tyranids since I had never played them before and - surprise surprise - was getting creamed.
Yet he seemed to think it was an amazing victory, but I pointed out to him he had only won through pure deceit and it was pretty much akin to outright cheating. Nevertheless he kept taunting me and claiming he had "taught me a lesson." Then it got kind of nasty with him swearing and insulting my family etc so I just laughed and left. Far better things to do.
Kind of glad he has been exposed though.
Formosa, you seriously need to get a life and realise when you are wrong. Also, lying on a message board to try and make yourself look cool is really quite pathetic.
34439
Post by: Formosa
FifteenHours wrote:Kaldor wrote:loner wrote:Praxiss wrote:
How boring would it be if you and your friends fielded the same TAC list every game?
How's it boring if someone keeps fielding the same list?
Because you quickly work out what are the useful TAC units, and what are not. No one takes vanguard, no one takes devastators, no one takes thunderfire cannons, etc. If you just pick one list and run it forever, you miss out on opportunities to try all those other units in an environment where they won't actually suck.
Formosa wrote:"you playing space marines!?" he exclaims
"Yes, changed my mind" i retort
"but i taliored to tyranids?" he states
"Really??" i say
"yes"
"your actually admitting it???"
"yes"
"wow....im gone....peace out" I say and leave
You acted like a douche in this scenario. You agreed to play a game with knowledge of your opponents force, then lied about it. If you didn't want to play a tailored game you should have just said so.
hahahahha. BUSTED!!!
The guy he was playing was actually me! I remember this unfortunate incident.
Glad to see that it isn't just me who thought he was a douche for doing this.
What he didn't mention in this post was that I asked what army he was playing because I wanted to try playing new units against an army I had never played before on that day.
What he also didn't mention was that he still played me. He never said "peace out" and he didn't leave.
Instead, he went off on an incredibly obnoxious and patronising rant about how "I have taught you a lesson now about tailoring your list" after I gave up on turn 2 because I had tailored my list to tyranids since I had never played them before and - surprise surprise - was getting creamed.
Yet he seemed to think it was an amazing victory, but I pointed out to him he had only won through pure deceit and it was pretty much akin to outright cheating. Nevertheless he kept taunting me and claiming he had "taught me a lesson." Then it got kind of nasty with him swearing and insulting my family etc so I just laughed and left. Far better things to do.
Kind of glad he has been exposed though.
Formosa, you seriously need to get a life and realise when you are wrong. Also, lying on a message board to try and make yourself look cool is really quite pathetic.
Nice try old bean, you were the rude one, you never asked me to test anything, you simply asked me to play a game and what army i was playing, i never asked you because i had played you before under a diferent name and you tailored vs me that time too, i wanted to see if you would pull the same BS and you did, if the only way you can win is to dupe new players and cheat them... well
I was also refering to another game in my other post, but thank you for reminding me of this
46926
Post by: Kaldor
Formosa wrote: Nice try old bean, you were the rude one, you never asked me to test anything, you simply asked me to play a game and what army i was playing, i never asked you because i had played you before under a diferent name and you tailored vs me that time too, i wanted to see if you would pull the same BS and you did, if the only way you can win is to dupe new players and cheat them... well
I was also refering to another game in my other post, but thank you for reminding me of this
You're still not getting it.
You agreed to play a certain type of game, even though you didn't want to. You also lied to your opponent about the type of game you were about to play.
You then claimed the moral high ground for lying to your opponent and tricking him into playing a different type of game.
You are quite clearly and unequivocally in the wrong here.
56040
Post by: Basimpo
Kaldor wrote:Formosa wrote: Nice try old bean, you were the rude one, you never asked me to test anything, you simply asked me to play a game and what army i was playing, i never asked you because i had played you before under a diferent name and you tailored vs me that time too, i wanted to see if you would pull the same BS and you did, if the only way you can win is to dupe new players and cheat them... well
I was also refering to another game in my other post, but thank you for reminding me of this
You're still not getting it.
You agreed to play a certain type of game, even though you didn't want to. You also lied to your opponent about the type of game you were about to play.
You then claimed the moral high ground for lying to your opponent and tricking him into playing a different type of game.
You are quite clearly and unequivocally in the wrong here.
lol Kaldor. You seem to think cheating is a noble and honorable way to approach a game with a stranger.
Personally, when it comes to it on Vassal, if someone even tells me their army before i even get around to making a list i simply drop the game and let them know that its not the right thing to do, on vassal.
Furthermore, in the instance i told you about, i was basically bullied into "telling" what i was bring or threatened with a No Game. Oh noes.
I still wont play that guy, and i know several other people who have had "game" experiences with him and wont play him either.
I know firsthand of one of the instances Formosa is talking about. Some gent asked him his army, and said "Oh i wont list tailor, but itll just make the game better"
Enter Nids vs tailored list.
End result? Formosa wiped the floor with him.
What you are saying, Kaldor, is its OK and FINE that one player CHEATS as long as both players "agree"
Furthermore, if that dude had never played tyranids before, how would he know what to tailor for?
If it was a case of "hey man, im new to 40k/vassal/my army do you mind telling me what youre bringing?" Thats ones thing. Its another thing for this:
"You BETTER tell me or ELSE i wont EVER play you EVER and ill say MEAN dreadful things about you FOREVER"
Remember, its mostly vassal we are talking about and the "real world" rules dont necessarily apply here as they do...in the real world.
42292
Post by: terranarc
Anytime a game gets digitalized, it becomes WAAC. It lacks that human interaction real TT games have which unfortunately also includes courtesy and maturity.
In my local group, we tailor for fun. Some guy's like, oh deathwing? I'll give all my genestealers toxin sacs then and I'll be like fine donkey-cave, I'll take 3 land raiders and still have fun.
What gets on my nerve is when someone clearly is clearly trying to have fun by winning instead of winning by having fun. It's like he sees your deathwing and suddenly spends the next 5 minutes building a triple vindicator list and follows up by being obnoxious about the rules the entire game.
I've only met 2 people like that and honestly, no one likes them anyway so hes "that guy" you MIGHT consider playing if everyone else had a game goin or you're just to courteous to say no.
Also, honestly, vassal has some of the worst, most kiddish players I've ever seen. Yes, there are genuinely good players both skill and manners that are great fun to play against but eh, it only takes one rotten slice of bread to make the entire plastic wrapped and sealed loaf inedible when you have a delicious sandwich right next to it, fresh and perfectly sanitary with the occasional fly you can just shoo away.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
Basimpo wrote:Kaldor wrote:Formosa wrote: Nice try old bean, you were the rude one, you never asked me to test anything, you simply asked me to play a game and what army i was playing, i never asked you because i had played you before under a diferent name and you tailored vs me that time too, i wanted to see if you would pull the same BS and you did, if the only way you can win is to dupe new players and cheat them... well
I was also refering to another game in my other post, but thank you for reminding me of this
You're still not getting it.
You agreed to play a certain type of game, even though you didn't want to. You also lied to your opponent about the type of game you were about to play.
You then claimed the moral high ground for lying to your opponent and tricking him into playing a different type of game.
You are quite clearly and unequivocally in the wrong here.
lol Kaldor. You seem to think cheating is a noble and honorable way to approach a game with a stranger.
A) tailoring isn't cheating. It's bad form, but not against the rules.
B) kaldor never condoned the tailoring
Seriously, one person being a jerk does not make it okay to be a jerk back. I don't care about the circumstances - the old adage about two wrongs not making a right is true.
Furthermore, in the instance i told you about, i was basically bullied into "telling" what i was bring or threatened with a No Game. Oh noes.
I still wont play that guy, and i know several other people who have had "game" experiences with him and wont play him either.
I'm not familiar with Vassal - is there a downside to No Game other than waiting longer for a game?
If not ... Who cares? If you think he wants to tailor, no one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to accept every game offered. You chose to be put in the situation.
What you are saying, Kaldor, is its OK and FINE that one player CHEATS as long as both players "agree"
Again, tailoring isn't cheating - but actually, as long as both players agree breaking rules is fine.
"I know it's the shooting phase, but I forgot to roll for reserves. Do you mind?"
See? Broken rule, but if the other guy doesn't mind it's okay.
If it was a case of "hey man, im new to 40k/vassal/my army do you mind telling me what youre bringing?" Thats ones thing. Its another thing for this:
"You BETTER tell me or ELSE i wont EVER play you EVER and ill say MEAN dreadful things about you FOREVER"
Remember, its mostly vassal we are talking about and the "real world" rules dont necessarily apply here as they do...in the real world.
Yeah, online anonymity means you don't have to act like a normal human being. Thanks. I forgot that rule in the Internet Bible.
56040
Post by: Basimpo
Hm, i actually believe around the 90-100 page of the brb it suggests that you dont reveal your list until after the match is over.
Also, about the internet bible thing, i cant tell if you are being sarcastic/serious or not....if you truly dont believe that people "change" when they get on the internet...then im happy that you are still an untouched virgin in a sea of internet "thugs"
Real life, real tabletop list tailoring is waaaay different than vassal tailoring. In vassal, if you say that you are going to play daemons, dont be surprised when your meq opponent puts 8 land raiders on the table.
As dude said, when the face to face is gone, its alllll about WAAC. Lets take another example. I started a 2v2, 2 necrons against 2 orks. For fun, as suggested by my opponent, i took orikan and a WW ctan, after he suggested it as being awesome against orks. I told him before the game what i was doing. We started the game, he went first and immobolised every single one of his ork vehicles. 4 rolls, 4 vehicles down. What should have happened (if it wernt for his fool of a friend) is we laughed it off, and started a new game, minus the WW and Orikan as simple as that.
On vassal, the people who /want/ to know what army you are bringing are the I WANT TO CRUSH YOUR FACE AND BRAG ABOUT HOW AWESOME AMAZING GENERAL I AM type people. They arnt friendly gamers. As its said, there is an unusually high number of TFGs on board vassal, and i theorize they (the TFGs) come from low FLGS areas whose FLGS has booted them...but thats just my theory
Hey, i may be in the wrong. But then so were the other 5 or 6 people who played the same guy, and all separately came to the same conclusion. Hm, odd how about 5-7 people came to the same conclusion, independently of one another about the same thing....
Also, just to further clarify, i play formosa in vassal. I know that he likes to bring tyranids. I like to bring necrons. If im trying a particularly spammy av13 list i will tell him Hey bring as much av13 penning stuff that you can, or ill say something like hey, mind if i bring a lot of so and so?
Youre right, there was NO gun held to my head. But it was either play a game, or none at all that day (It was, afterall, 2-3am my time)
47462
Post by: rigeld2
Basimpo wrote:Hm, i actually believe around the 90-100 page of the brb it suggests that you dont reveal your list until after the match is over.
You should re-read A Note on Secrecy, page 92. Also note that it's not a rule.
Also, about the internet bible thing, i cant tell if you are being sarcastic/serious or not....if you truly dont believe that people "change" when they get on the internet...then im happy that you are still an untouched virgin in a sea of internet "thugs"
No, I'm aware that some people choose to become jerks on the Internet.
I'm also aware that those people are jerks. There's no requirement to do that. It being Vassal isn't an excuse to be a jerk.
Real life, real tabletop list tailoring is waaaay different than vassal tailoring. In vassal, if you say that you are going to play daemons, dont be surprised when your meq opponent puts 8 land raiders on the table.
I'm not sure how that's different, but okay.
Youre right, there was NO gun held to my head. But it was either play a game, or none at all that day (It was, afterall, 2-3am my time)
Oh, that's cool then. It's perfectly fine to play a game you know you won't enjoy so you can complain about it later instead of about a million other things at 2am.
Whatever let's you sleep at night. Just don't go around pretending that you were 100% right.
49909
Post by: Luide
Basimpo wrote:Hm, i actually believe around the 90-100 page of the brb it suggests that you dont reveal your list until after the match is over.
It kinda suggests completely opposite. It even goes to say that full disclosure is the norm in tournaments.
Anyway, every group I've ever played with has always played full disclosure.
In my current group before start of the game we put all the units on table, go through all units and take time to explain/remind what special rules and equipment each unit has to opponent, so that there are no hidden surprises.
I would be willing to do secret lists with people I play with regularly. But obviously this would be something we'd agreed on beforehand and we'd have to come discuss how to handle transports, how to handle wargear that doesn't have canonical wysiwyg representation (teleport homers, different types of grenades, list is very long).
2304
Post by: Steelmage99
Luide wrote:Basimpo wrote:Hm, i actually believe around the 90-100 page of the brb it suggests that you dont reveal your list until after the match is over.
It kinda suggests completely opposite. It even goes to say that full disclosure is the norm in tournaments.
Anyway, every group I've ever played with has always played full disclosure.
In my current group before start of the game we put all the units on table, go through all units and take time to explain/remind what special rules and equipment each unit has to opponent, so that there are no hidden surprises.
I would be willing to do secret lists with people I play with regularly. But obviously this would be something we'd agreed on beforehand and we'd have to come discuss how to handle transports, how to handle wargear that doesn't have canonical wysiwyg representation (teleport homers, different types of grenades, list is very long).
I think you missed what this thread is about.
31121
Post by: amanita
Uhhh....how exactly did Luide miss what this thread is about?
52214
Post by: felixander
Basically it depends on who you're talking to. If you list tailor constantly you won't learn how to get out of bad situations in a tournament as easily. I have All Comers Lists for 500, 750, 1000, 1500, 1750, and 2250 points. I only make changes BEFORE I know who I'm playing against. So my Imperial Guard army I take Melta vets. Oh I'm playing against Green Tide and those Meltas are not going to be anywhere nearly as good as flamers? I'm not a WAAC player so no I won't change my weapons. I understand that you get bored playing the same army over and over, so I do switch it up, but not after I know who I'm playing against. On the other end everyone I play against List Tailors. I play Mech and am not interested in playing foot guard, so that means that everytime I play against someone they go "OH WAIT" And after 15 minutes they suddenly have all meltas, meltabombs, and lascannons. I think that is silly and cheap (And I still end up winning most games, unless I play the Space Wolves who suddenly run 3 Long Fang Squads, even in 1000 point games  ).
4820
Post by: Ailaros
I wish I had gotten in on this earlier and saved myself the bother of reading so many posts...
The first thing that everybody is missing here is a definition for the term "list tailoring", so allow me to provide one.
You are making your list tailored whenever you give ANY thought WHATSOEVER to what the list is going to actually be played against. If you are going to a tournament and you know that there will be a lot of MSU spam and you do ANYTHING with that piece of information (like, say, throw in some missile launchers or autocannons), You are list tailoring. If you know that there are a bunch of marines at your local store, and you use this information to have ANY impact on your list, you are list tailoring. If you know that you're going to play a game against a foot ork commander next game and that information has ANY impact on your list, you are list tailoring.
Any list that isn't made inside of a pure hypothetical world, but rather uses any amount of information about real players and real armies you're actually likely to face off against is at least a partially tailored list.
If, then, basically all lists are tailored lists, then it's really a matter of HOW tailored do you make your list. It's just negotiating the proverbial price now. Let me be the first to say that if your stance is that some list tailoring is okay, and some list tailoring isn't, you're either being arbitrary, or being a huge hypocrite.
The other thing that I think people are missing here is that list tailoring is a form of player skill - one of the few places that player skill matters in a game of 40k. Knowing exactly what your opponent is going to bring and making the exact best list against your opponent in your codex requires a huge amount of skill. Certainly as much as any other aspect of the game.
The real question here, then, is should there be an artificial restriction to player skill? If you see 40k as a competitive exercise, your answer to this question must be no. Otherwise you're a huge hypocrite.
If you believe that there should be limits to 40k as a competitive exercise, because 40k is other things in addition, then it's a matter of making player skill suppression fall in line with HOW competitive you think 40k SHOULD be. Now you're being arbitrary. Why should SOME forms of player skill be used in SOME situations while OTHER player skill shouldn't?
As for me, myself, I fall in the latter camp. When people reach the upper echelon of player skill in 40k (which I happen to believe is actually rather easy), the only way that you can continue to ratchet up the difficulty level is by taking on handicaps. Handicapping one's self, of course, is the opposite of being competitive. While it takes a lot of skill to exactly tailor a list against an opponent, it takes MORE skill to win with a crappy list, and it takes way, way more skill even than that to play with a non-optimized list against a list which has been tailored against you.
Honestly, I feel much better about myself for having won this game (me with a non-optimized-against- WH, take-all-comers list against a list that was clearly tailored to beat mine) than if I had won that game with a perfectly crafted list to destroy my opponent. In this case, I feel better because I won on a higher challenge level, not because I was as competitive as I could have been. For me, placing winning with more difficulty over winning at all is something I arbitrarily have decided on.
Of course, I can in no way look down on people who list tailor without switching from me being arbitrary to me being a hypocrite. If I have chosen a certain set of morals, I can't be judgmental when other people choose a different set. I may think my way of playing 40k is better than the purely competitive way of playing it, but if my opponent is playing to the maximum possible congruency with the way he thinks 40k should be played, I'd be a jackass to criticize him. Or a giant hypocrite. Take your pick.
31885
Post by: chrisrawr
woops wrong thread
46926
Post by: Kaldor
Basimpo wrote:What you are saying, Kaldor, is its OK and FINE that one player CHEATS as long as both players "agree"
No, I'm saying it's not cheating at all, and if you've agreed to it you shouldn't be surprised when it happens!
45782
Post by: Blood and Slaughter
I think people sometimes get a bit hung up about having pure all-comers lists in games.
Certainly running a set list against anything that's thrown at it is an excellent and common way to play and you only come unstuck with that approach when someone tailors against you because they've seen your list before and 'tweak' there's.
But what I find equally good, though seldom played, is codex-tailoring, which has been alluded to before. So you know that your opponent will be bringing (say) Black Templars, he knows you will bring Dark Eldar. And so you both tailor your armies against the known opponent. the hard of reading may care to note that this is not the same as knowing your opponent's precise list. This has the added advantage of being more 'realistic' (because in most wars you do tend to know who you're going to be fighting, thoygh not the precise composition of the opposing force), though please note that I've put inverted commas around 'realism' as I do understand 40K isn't based on realism. The disadvantage of this approach is that the player with either the greatest variety of models for his codex, and possibly the player with the most flexible codex, will sometimes have an advantage. Playing someone I know well and like, I find this easily the most enjoyable approach as there is a stromng element of second-guessing in the list-drawing stage.
Minor list tailoring, where I show you my list and then you tweak yours but i don't get to change at all, is quite common, I find. usually where the tweaking player feels at a disadvantage skill-wise or codex-wise. I don't mind this too much, though I'd not do it myself, so long as there's not massive altering going on. Someone saying 'oh, you have foot orks, and swapping all his plasma and most of his melta for flamers' would receive the quizzical stare that is my equivalent of punching him through a window.
The pure list tailoring, where someone knows you'll be bringing an all-comers list and what that list usually comprises, is really the last resort of the desperate. Actually I think this can be okay if there's a huge disparity in skill between the players, but it's otherwise a pretty cheap trick really.
7936
Post by: SDFarsight
Kaldor wrote:Basimpo wrote:What you are saying, Kaldor, is its OK and FINE that one player CHEATS as long as both players "agree"
No, I'm saying it's not cheating at all, and if you've agreed to it you shouldn't be surprised when it happens!
Exactly. FifteenHours merely asked which army he'd play against with no knowlege of the actual list, just as I and many other people would do at my FLGS and now that's studdenly "CHEATING" as if he hacked into Formosa's computer to take an advantaged peek at his list.
FifteenHours made it quite clear what the game was going to be. If Formosa didn't want that game then he could have just asked for the game to have different parameters (no army information), rather than lying and then hypocritically pretending that he turned the tables on somekind of secret con.
58702
Post by: Paitryn
Ok so what im gathering in this thread is that some people are disclosing their lists before their opponent has even made theirs. therfore their opponent is tailor making a list to counter yours.
sorry, but thats kinda your own fault. present your list before the game starts.
Now if you say "Im playing Blood Angels" and a player makes a list to counter that, well I would encourage and HOPE my opponent does so, because it makes the game much more interesting and puts a true test to my skills.
seeing as how there is more than one way to go with almost every army out there, Someone isn't capable of making a list tailored perfectly against yours unless your
A: using too many stereotypical units for that army.
B. Handing him your army before he even considers building his.
If your issue is A.: Stop using everyone elses stuff. Yeah BurnaWagons rock, but they dont always warrant being used. Razorback spam will die to high STR dakka. TLDR: build better lists. or at least change it up.
Issue B: just quit doing it. Tell someone what army your bringing but dont hand them your list. if they ask, "I'll hand it to you before the game starts" and that should be sufficient. if they refuse they aren't worth playing to begin with. you wont learn anything from them.
56040
Post by: Basimpo
rigeld2 wrote:Basimpo wrote:Hm, i actually believe around the 90-100 page of the brb it suggests that you dont reveal your list until after the match is over.
You should re-read A Note on Secrecy, page 92. Also note that it's not a rule.
Also, about the internet bible thing, i cant tell if you are being sarcastic/serious or not....if you truly dont believe that people "change" when they get on the internet...then im happy that you are still an untouched virgin in a sea of internet "thugs"
No, I'm aware that some people choose to become jerks on the Internet.
I'm also aware that those people are jerks. There's no requirement to do that. It being Vassal isn't an excuse to be a jerk.
Real life, real tabletop list tailoring is waaaay different than vassal tailoring. In vassal, if you say that you are going to play daemons, dont be surprised when your meq opponent puts 8 land raiders on the table.
I'm not sure how that's different, but okay.
Youre right, there was NO gun held to my head. But it was either play a game, or none at all that day (It was, afterall, 2-3am my time)
Oh, that's cool then. It's perfectly fine to play a game you know you won't enjoy so you can complain about it later instead of about a million other things at 2am.
Whatever let's you sleep at night. Just don't go around pretending that you were 100% right.
If you noticed, i used the word suggest. Not, rules. Furthermore, i could care less about tournaments. That wasnt the topic of what I was saying.
If you are unfamiliar with vassal youll find its the norm that people choose to be jerks...
And as i prefaced my sentence with Hey, i may be in the wrong but...
2304
Post by: Steelmage99
Luide wrote:
It kinda suggests completely opposite. It even goes to say that full disclosure is the norm in tournaments.
Anyway, every group I've ever played with has always played full disclosure.
In my current group before start of the game we put all the units on table, go through all units and take time to explain/remind what special rules and equipment each unit has to opponent, so that there are no hidden surprises.
I would be willing to do secret lists with people I play with regularly. But obviously this would be something we'd agreed on beforehand and we'd have to come discuss how to handle transports, how to handle wargear that doesn't have canonical wysiwyg representation (teleport homers, different types of grenades, list is very long).
amanita wrote:Uhhh....how exactly did Luide miss what this thread is about?
This thread is clearly about the act of letting prior knowledge about the composition of the enemy army influence the composition of your own.
It also is about the order of operations, ie. one army-list being made before the other.
Luide talks about "Full Disclosure".
This is a separate issue unrelated to the above. Full disclosure concerns whether or not one should reveal his army-list to his opponent during the game. This is often done to prevent Deep Strike and Reserve surprises, and the playing of "shell games" with transports.
When Luide mentions such things as "full disclosure", "going through units", "explain rules", "no hidden surprises", "secret lists" and " WYSIWYG" it is quite clear what he is talking about....and that isn't List Tailoring.
51756
Post by: Nalathani
I agree with Paitryn. If you show your opponent your list before the game starts and both lists are made, its your fault.
At our flgs, we find an opponent, agree on a point value, and then make our lists.
If I know i'm going up against space wolves, for example, I'll often take Ymgarl genestealers to kill his Longfangs. Occasionally, he doesn't take any longfangs at all! He'll drop pod everything but some thunderwolf cavalry.
We "tailor" our lists to break up the monotony of the armies. They never know if I'm swarming genestealers and hormagaunts, or if I'm bulking up on T6. I never know if I'm going up against 2 landraiders and 3 dreads, or devastator missle spam with laserbacks.
Each of us tailors against the codex we know we're up against, but since we have no idea what their list will be, it just keeps things interesting. You have to be able to handle anything anyway since they could do whatever they want that particular game.
7936
Post by: SDFarsight
Basimpo wrote:rigeld2 wrote:Basimpo wrote:Hm, i actually believe around the 90-100 page of the brb it suggests that you dont reveal your list until after the match is over.
You should re-read A Note on Secrecy, page 92. Also note that it's not a rule.
Also, about the internet bible thing, i cant tell if you are being sarcastic/serious or not....if you truly dont believe that people "change" when they get on the internet...then im happy that you are still an untouched virgin in a sea of internet "thugs"
No, I'm aware that some people choose to become jerks on the Internet.
I'm also aware that those people are jerks. There's no requirement to do that. It being Vassal isn't an excuse to be a jerk.
Real life, real tabletop list tailoring is waaaay different than vassal tailoring. In vassal, if you say that you are going to play daemons, dont be surprised when your meq opponent puts 8 land raiders on the table.
I'm not sure how that's different, but okay.
Youre right, there was NO gun held to my head. But it was either play a game, or none at all that day (It was, afterall, 2-3am my time)
Oh, that's cool then. It's perfectly fine to play a game you know you won't enjoy so you can complain about it later instead of about a million other things at 2am.
Whatever let's you sleep at night. Just don't go around pretending that you were 100% right.
If you noticed, i used the word suggest. Not, rules. Furthermore, i could care less about tournaments. That wasnt the topic of what I was saying.
so.... you do care about tournaments...
53760
Post by: FifteenHours
Formosa wrote:FifteenHours wrote:Kaldor wrote:loner wrote:Praxiss wrote:
How boring would it be if you and your friends fielded the same TAC list every game?
How's it boring if someone keeps fielding the same list?
Because you quickly work out what are the useful TAC units, and what are not. No one takes vanguard, no one takes devastators, no one takes thunderfire cannons, etc. If you just pick one list and run it forever, you miss out on opportunities to try all those other units in an environment where they won't actually suck.
Formosa wrote:"you playing space marines!?" he exclaims
"Yes, changed my mind" i retort
"but i taliored to tyranids?" he states
"Really??" i say
"yes"
"your actually admitting it???"
"yes"
"wow....im gone....peace out" I say and leave
You acted like a douche in this scenario. You agreed to play a game with knowledge of your opponents force, then lied about it. If you didn't want to play a tailored game you should have just said so.
hahahahha. BUSTED!!!
The guy he was playing was actually me! I remember this unfortunate incident.
Glad to see that it isn't just me who thought he was a douche for doing this.
What he didn't mention in this post was that I asked what army he was playing because I wanted to try playing new units against an army I had never played before on that day.
What he also didn't mention was that he still played me. He never said "peace out" and he didn't leave.
Instead, he went off on an incredibly obnoxious and patronising rant about how "I have taught you a lesson now about tailoring your list" after I gave up on turn 2 because I had tailored my list to tyranids since I had never played them before and - surprise surprise - was getting creamed.
Yet he seemed to think it was an amazing victory, but I pointed out to him he had only won through pure deceit and it was pretty much akin to outright cheating. Nevertheless he kept taunting me and claiming he had "taught me a lesson." Then it got kind of nasty with him swearing and insulting my family etc so I just laughed and left. Far better things to do.
Kind of glad he has been exposed though.
Formosa, you seriously need to get a life and realise when you are wrong. Also, lying on a message board to try and make yourself look cool is really quite pathetic.
Nice try old bean, you were the rude one, you never asked me to test anything, you simply asked me to play a game and what army i was playing, i never asked you because i had played you before under a diferent name and you tailored vs me that time too, i wanted to see if you would pull the same BS and you did, if the only way you can win is to dupe new players and cheat them... well
I was also refering to another game in my other post, but thank you for reminding me of this
How exactly was I rude? You spent 10 minutes basically lecturing me on how you supposedly "Taught you a lesson about list tailoring" and became bizarrely aggressive when I politely pointed out that you had taught me nothing.
I am not sure if you are purposely lying or you have convenient forgotten what was said that day as it seems you do this quite often to people, which probably explains your regular name changes to be honest. Either way I have no idea why you would try and tarnish my name on an internet message board just because I tailored my list and openly admitted it before hand. You could've just walked away at that point if you didn't like it, but the fact is you chose not too.
To clear this up, here is how the conversation went:
"What army are you playing?"
"Tyranids."
"Cool, I HAVE NEVER PLAYED THEM so let's play. I am just looking for a fun game."
Now, this should be pretty damn obviously I am quite a new player having never played them. So why did you expect I would put myself at a handicap and run my all-comers tournament list?
Secondly, I admitted to tailoring my list a little (I wanted to try things like Hydras and Griffons against a horde army) after you revealed your list before turn 1, and yet you still chose to play me and I chose to still play you (though I probably shouldn't have been so polite). Why did you do this if you thought it was such a terrible crime? If you had an issue with it you could've just walked away.
Regardless of any of this, your taunting and torrent of abuse later on was completely unacceptable. Seriously, if this were IRL, you wouldn't have gotten away with this and if you do this in stores or gaming centres then one day you'll probably do it to the wrong person and get a punch in the face. Bear that in mind for your own sake please.
As for me doing it before...Really? Interesting. Maybe you are only saying that because you are the one getting a bad reputation on vassal now to the point you have to change your name on a regular basis.
Honestly, I consider Vassal a place to playtest lists and do it in a laid back community. It isn't anything else. WAAC? Not for me thanks.
FH
56040
Post by: Basimpo
SDFarsight wrote:Basimpo wrote:rigeld2 wrote:Basimpo wrote:Hm, i actually believe around the 90-100 page of the brb it suggests that you dont reveal your list until after the match is over.
You should re-read A Note on Secrecy, page 92. Also note that it's not a rule.
Also, about the internet bible thing, i cant tell if you are being sarcastic/serious or not....if you truly dont believe that people "change" when they get on the internet...then im happy that you are still an untouched virgin in a sea of internet "thugs"
No, I'm aware that some people choose to become jerks on the Internet.
I'm also aware that those people are jerks. There's no requirement to do that. It being Vassal isn't an excuse to be a jerk.
Real life, real tabletop list tailoring is waaaay different than vassal tailoring. In vassal, if you say that you are going to play daemons, dont be surprised when your meq opponent puts 8 land raiders on the table.
I'm not sure how that's different, but okay.
Youre right, there was NO gun held to my head. But it was either play a game, or none at all that day (It was, afterall, 2-3am my time)
Oh, that's cool then. It's perfectly fine to play a game you know you won't enjoy so you can complain about it later instead of about a million other things at 2am.
Whatever let's you sleep at night. Just don't go around pretending that you were 100% right.
If you noticed, i used the word suggest. Not, rules. Furthermore, i could care less about tournaments. That wasnt the topic of what I was saying.
so.... you do care about tournaments...
What?
56040
Post by: Basimpo
FifteenHours wrote:Formosa wrote:FifteenHours wrote:Kaldor wrote:loner wrote:Praxiss wrote:
How boring would it be if you and your friends fielded the same TAC list every game?
How's it boring if someone keeps fielding the same list?
Because you quickly work out what are the useful TAC units, and what are not. No one takes vanguard, no one takes devastators, no one takes thunderfire cannons, etc. If you just pick one list and run it forever, you miss out on opportunities to try all those other units in an environment where they won't actually suck.
Formosa wrote:"you playing space marines!?" he exclaims
"Yes, changed my mind" i retort
"but i taliored to tyranids?" he states
"Really??" i say
"yes"
"your actually admitting it???"
"yes"
"wow....im gone....peace out" I say and leave
You acted like a douche in this scenario. You agreed to play a game with knowledge of your opponents force, then lied about it. If you didn't want to play a tailored game you should have just said so.
hahahahha. BUSTED!!!
The guy he was playing was actually me! I remember this unfortunate incident.
Glad to see that it isn't just me who thought he was a douche for doing this.
What he didn't mention in this post was that I asked what army he was playing because I wanted to try playing new units against an army I had never played before on that day.
What he also didn't mention was that he still played me. He never said "peace out" and he didn't leave.
Instead, he went off on an incredibly obnoxious and patronising rant about how "I have taught you a lesson now about tailoring your list" after I gave up on turn 2 because I had tailored my list to tyranids since I had never played them before and - surprise surprise - was getting creamed.
Yet he seemed to think it was an amazing victory, but I pointed out to him he had only won through pure deceit and it was pretty much akin to outright cheating. Nevertheless he kept taunting me and claiming he had "taught me a lesson." Then it got kind of nasty with him swearing and insulting my family etc so I just laughed and left. Far better things to do.
Kind of glad he has been exposed though.
Formosa, you seriously need to get a life and realise when you are wrong. Also, lying on a message board to try and make yourself look cool is really quite pathetic.
Nice try old bean, you were the rude one, you never asked me to test anything, you simply asked me to play a game and what army i was playing, i never asked you because i had played you before under a diferent name and you tailored vs me that time too, i wanted to see if you would pull the same BS and you did, if the only way you can win is to dupe new players and cheat them... well
I was also refering to another game in my other post, but thank you for reminding me of this
How exactly was I rude? You spent 10 minutes basically lecturing me on how you supposedly "Taught you a lesson about list tailoring" and became bizarrely aggressive when I politely pointed out that you had taught me nothing.
I am not sure if you are purposely lying or you have convenient forgotten what was said that day as it seems you do this quite often to people, which probably explains your regular name changes to be honest. Either way I have no idea why you would try and tarnish my name on an internet message board just because I tailored my list and openly admitted it before hand. You could've just walked away at that point if you didn't like it, but the fact is you chose not too.
To clear this up, here is how the conversation went:
"What army are you playing?"
"Tyranids."
"Cool, I HAVE NEVER PLAYED THEM so let's play. I am just looking for a fun game."
Now, this should be pretty damn obviously I am quite a new player having never played them. So why did you expect I would put myself at a handicap and run my all-comers tournament list?
Secondly, I admitted to tailoring my list a little (I wanted to try things like Hydras and Griffons against a horde army) after you revealed your list before turn 1, and yet you still chose to play me and I chose to still play you (though I probably shouldn't have been so polite). Why did you do this if you thought it was such a terrible crime? If you had an issue with it you could've just walked away.
Regardless of any of this, your taunting and torrent of abuse later on was completely unacceptable. Seriously, if this were IRL, you wouldn't have gotten away with this and if you do this in stores or gaming centres then one day you'll probably do it to the wrong person and get a punch in the face. Bear that in mind for your own sake please.
As for me doing it before...Really? Interesting. Maybe you are only saying that because you are the one getting a bad reputation on vassal now to the point you have to change your name on a regular basis.
Honestly, I consider Vassal a place to playtest lists and do it in a laid back community. It isn't anything else. WAAC? Not for me thanks.
FH
Least you found a place for people to back you up and call you right...But heck ,even child murderers get support from strangers.
2304
Post by: Steelmage99
Basimpo wrote:
If you noticed, i used the word suggest. Not, rules. Furthermore, i could care less about tournaments. That wasnt the topic of what I was saying.
so....you do care about tournaments...
What?
You said; "I could care less about tournaments."
In order for you to care less, you have to care, at least a bit, beforehand. Otherwise how could you start caring to a lesser degree.
The sentence you should have used was; "I couldn't care less for tournaments", as in you are already at the lowest degree of "care" and thus cannot go lower. Automatically Appended Next Post: Basimpo wrote:
Least you found a place for people to back you up and call you right...But heck ,even child murderers get support from strangers.
Was that really necessary? Really?
47462
Post by: rigeld2
Basimpo wrote:Least you found a place for people to back you up and call you right...But heck ,even child murderers get support from strangers.
No one said he was right, in fact I've said the opposite.
I also said you were not right either.
And seriously, that comparison is extremely stupid.
48746
Post by: Billagio
In my group of friends, we know who we are playing before the game, so we can tailor for that army, but we still dont know what KIND of list they are bringing or anything, since it would be very hard to account for it all. IMO, in friendly games you can tailor to the ARMY, but not the list specifically since you shouldnt know before you made your list as well
56040
Post by: Basimpo
Steelmage99 am i in the wrong thread? Is this YMDC? Correcting people over the internet is surprise surprise another "douche" internet "thug" thing to do.
Are you an english teacher? If so, what makes you think you can go out like an errant knight and slay bad grammar?
If you are not an english teacher of some sort, what makes you think you are qualified to correct people? The intent of the words i said was there 100% irregardless of how i said them.
Please dont try to side track people with inane, unasked for, and unqualified corrections that serve no purpose to further the discussion.
7936
Post by: SDFarsight
Basimpo wrote:Steelmage99 am i in the wrong thread? Is this YMDC? Correcting people over the internet is surprise surprise another "douche" internet "thug" thing to do.
Are you an english teacher? If so, what makes you think you can go out like an errant knight and slay bad grammar?
If you are not an english teacher of some sort, what makes you think you are qualified to correct people? The intent of the words i said was there 100% irregardless of how i said them.
Please dont try to side track people with inane, unasked for, and unqualified corrections that serve no purpose to further the discussion.
You asked, so he gave an answer. You could say thanks for the tip. I mean, it's not like I or Steelmage made somekind of ad hominem attack.
But as you said, we're getting side-tracked on grammar.
Billagio wrote:In my group of friends, we know who we are playing before the game, so we can tailor for that army, but we still dont know what KIND of list they are bringing or anything, since it would be very hard to account for it all. IMO, in friendly games you can tailor to the ARMY, but not the list specifically since you shouldnt know before you made your list as well
Indeed, list-tailoring is wrong, but there's nouthing wrong with army-tailoring.
2304
Post by: Steelmage99
Basimpo wrote:Steelmage99 am i in the wrong thread? Is this YMDC? Correcting people over the internet is surprise surprise another "douche" internet "thug" thing to do.
Are you an english teacher? If so, what makes you think you can go out like an errant knight and slay bad grammar?
If you are not an english teacher of some sort, what makes you think you are qualified to correct people? The intent of the words i said was there 100% irregardless of how i said them.
Please dont try to side track people with inane, unasked for, and unqualified corrections that serve no purpose to further the discussion.
I am not the one that corrected you. The poster that said; "So you do care about tournaments?" was the one.
I am simply the guy that explained the post you didn't seem to understand.
And you did indeed ask for that explanation. You wrote; "What?"....remember?
My explanation was carefully worded, polite and without personal attacks.
A personal attack would have been me saying;
"Your disregard for the rules of the English language is simply atrocious, and is a sure sign of a lesser mind.
Your lack of punctuation is a personal affront to all intelligent individuals, a group of people to which you clearly don't belong.
Your inability to properly format at text, so it is even remotely readable, is a testament to the failings of whatever institute of learning you, however briefly, have frequented".
....But I didn't say something like that.
I simply said;
You said; "I could care less about tournaments."
In order for you to care less, you have to care, at least a bit, beforehand. Otherwise how could you start caring to a lesser degree.
The sentence you should have used was; "I couldn't care less for tournaments", as in you are already at the lowest degree of "care" and thus cannot go lower.
52872
Post by: captain collius
I generally don't list or army tailor i have two types of lists my competivie TAC list (Terminators predators speeders) and my stupid fully DS list (5 squads of terminators 2 dreads in pods and 2 hqs).
Generally i feel not tailoring leads to more fun.
List tailoring in and of it self is just boring.
46926
Post by: Kaldor
Basimpo wrote:Steelmage99 am i in the wrong thread? Is this YMDC? Correcting people over the internet is surprise surprise another "douche" internet "thug" thing to do.
Are you an english teacher? If so, what makes you think you can go out like an errant knight and slay bad grammar?
If you are not an english teacher of some sort, what makes you think you are qualified to correct people? The intent of the words i said was there 100% irregardless of how i said them.
Please dont try to side track people with inane, unasked for, and unqualified corrections that serve no purpose to further the discussion.
You seem like you'd be a really fun guy to play against.
53760
Post by: FifteenHours
Steelmage99 wrote:Basimpo wrote:
If you noticed, i used the word suggest. Not, rules. Furthermore, i could care less about tournaments. That wasnt the topic of what I was saying.
so....you do care about tournaments...
What?
You said; "I could care less about tournaments."
In order for you to care less, you have to care, at least a bit, beforehand. Otherwise how could you start caring to a lesser degree.
The sentence you should have used was; "I couldn't care less for tournaments", as in you are already at the lowest degree of "care" and thus cannot go lower.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Basimpo wrote:
Least you found a place for people to back you up and call you right...But heck ,even child murderers get support from strangers.
Was that really necessary? Really?
Wow...Just wow.
I think some people here need to take a giant step back and remind themselves that THIS IS JUST A GAME. I mean, especially on Vassal...
Seriously, you are now comparing me to a child murderer?...That is quite hilarious.
The funny thing is I am generally against list-tailoring, so I am actually in agreement with Formosa and his friend Basimpo.
90% of the time I play an all-comers list. The other 10% I am experimenting with new units, being a relative new-comer to the game, and I will tailor (depending on your definition) and will be honest about it, as I have said from the start. But IRL I will almost always take an all-comers list since I may one day find myself entering a tournament and so it's just good practice for that. That's my personal feelings on the topic. I honestly have ABSOLUTELY NO ISSUE if someone wants to tailor against me; If they ask what army I am playing it's obvious they are going to tailor to some degree - so if I don't like this I can always politely decline a game with them.
Because you see, it's A CHOICE. I do not understand why you do not understand this simple concept. You could decline to play, but instead you chose to subject me and other players to a highly condescending torrent of abuse. You could've walked away, but you didn't. Why? I honestly have no idea. Latent psychological problems? Boredom? Frustration with your life? I have no idea and don't care to be honest. But believe me you now have an appalling reputation on Vassal. Unfortunately though, due to name changing, other players will be subjected to your BS and new players will be put off what is otherwise a great piece of software that helps people learn and playtest the 40k system.
Anyway, I honestly cannot be bothered to waste anymore time on this as I have far better things to do than deal with a couple of whiny kids on a message board. If you don't like list-tailoring and can't treat people with respect (rather than compare them to child murderers lol!), just walk away or find another hobby.
FH
45380
Post by: Celticwelsh
I've never used the same army twice. I'm fine with tailoring. I know my friend loves playing Dark Angels with lots of bikes so I build against it. At the same time, he knows I'm a mobile Guard player so he builds against it. But we are not allowed to see each others army list until we are both done and at that point there is no changing lists.
13518
Post by: Scott-S6
SDFarsight wrote:Indeed, list-tailoring is wrong, but there's nouthing wrong with army-tailoring.
The problem with army tailoring is that it leads to lots of assumptions. How do you tailor against a C: SM army? You might be facing lots of: T4Sv4+ T4Sv3+ T4Sv2+ AV11 tanks AV13 tanks AV14 tanks AV10 skimmers AV13 skimmers that are immune to melta walkers So you need to be able to deal with a bunch of infantry, some guys with 2+ saves, light, medium and heavy armour as well as walkers. That's an all-comers list. Even less flexible codexes like Orks - do you gear up for Kan wall horde orks or for battlewagon rush orks or for MANZ spam? Or a little of all of them - that's an all-comers list again. There really isn't a lot you can do with only knowledge of the codex you'll be playing. Generally, that knowledge is coloured by knowledge of what models that player has or what's common for that codex. Most of my mid-game table-wipes have been against people who thought that they could army-tailor, unfortunately for them they found themselves up against a list very different to their assumptions and it's usually at that point that they start to get irate.
7936
Post by: SDFarsight
Scott-S6 wrote:SDFarsight wrote:Indeed, list-tailoring is wrong, but there's nouthing wrong with army-tailoring.
The problem with army tailoring is that it leads to lots of assumptions.
How do you tailor against a C: SM army? You might be facing lots of:
T4Sv4+
T4Sv3+
T4Sv2+
AV11 tanks
AV13 tanks
AV14 tanks
AV10 skimmers
AV13 skimmers that are immune to melta
walkers
So you need to be able to deal with a bunch of infantry, some guys with 2+ saves, light, medium and heavy armour as well as walkers. That's an all-comers list.
Even less flexible codexes like Orks - do you gear up for Kan wall horde orks or for battlewagon rush orks or for MANZ spam? Or a little of all of them - that's an all-comers list again.
There really isn't a lot you can do with only knowledge of the codex you'll be playing. Generally, that knowledge is coloured by knowledge of what models that player has or what's common for that codex.
Most of my mid-game table-wipes have been against people who thought that they could army-tailor, unfortunately for them they found themselves up against a list very different to their assumptions and it's usually at that point that they start to get irate.
Indeed, it gives you some information (the army's archetype) but not enough to say 'I know that they're going for footslogger spam, so I'll take X unit/weapons to counter it.'
When it comes to specific players, the main aspect is their predictability- even if they have alot of units in their collection you could know that they're a sucker for a certain style of play. Or as Stormfather said:
Stormfather wrote:
This is pretty much how my local gaming group plays it, too. We know who has which army, we all have a general idea about each other's preferences, but our lists are generally made double-blind and before the battle, so you never know exactly what you're going to be facing until after you've committed to your list. You need to keep a take-all-comers core to your army to deal with any surprises, but can customize specific loadouts to what you anticipate your opponent will field.
51966
Post by: RAVEN 97
List tailoring is wrong and cheaty but changing phycic powers is worse if you play nids and they suddenly change machine curse for vortex of doom you loose an advantage
46926
Post by: Kaldor
RAVEN 97 wrote:List tailoring is wrong and cheaty but changing phycic powers is worse if you play nids and they suddenly change machine curse for vortex of doom you loose an advantage
What advantage? How is it wrong or cheaty? I mean, I assume they aren't tailoring to beat your specific list so whats the problem?
|
|
