Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Redundancy is not a catholic term for a lapsed nun now in the process of a sex change in order to fuel her candacy for mayor of Eureka , California ; Spam is not a canned meat product

Spam in the form of you take a lot of one particularly good thing as to overwhelm your opponent and nullify his ability to eliminate this threat from your army.

Redundancy is another one. You take multiples of things that accomplish the same goal so that if one is lost the others take its place in its role or multiply its role in the force organization by accomplishing the same thing.


It's why lists are successful. It's a common military tactic; its been used in warfare for the last oh I dont know since our ancestors decided to start throwing rocks at the other monkeys to knock them out of their trees and take their bananas / rocksex their womenz.


It's why list work; its why you should use it.


1 Landraider = easy kill
2 Landraider = easy kill
3 Landraider = not so easy
4 landraider = difficult
5 Landraider = What the hell I'm going to spit in your drink when you are not looking

3 Obliterators = Annoying
6 Obliterators = Very Annoying
9 Obliterators = I am going to poison your dog.


Comedic Analogies aside ; these are important to know not so much the killing your dog part but the realization that Spam and Redundancy are what win Games.

Once you realize this ; that almost all winning Tournament armies are redundant and spam , you will be a better player.


Here are some check lists to creating a list :

1. Does my army have something that can accomplish the same goal as this unit YES/ NO
If no; add it. If Yes , add one more if possible to insure maximum frustration in your opponent.

2. Is this unit a lynchpin of my army and will its destruction cause the collapse of my army quicker than the crotch of my trousers at an 80 year strip contest YES/ NO
If no continue ; If yes, re-examine your list and possibly restructure so that your army does not rely on that specific unit or take a duplicate of that unit if possible. 2 is better than 1 except with Venereal Diseases.

3. What is the focus of my army and what will it do best; there is a reason the military doesn't train soldiers to fulfill all roles but instead trains specialist roles.



All of this leads to the building of a list that is focused ; redundant; and has spam.

I agree that spam is annoying and shows people are more interested in winning than having an interesting army or a fun game. I play warhammer games because they have incredible stories behind each army, to show off my modelling chops and to compare my work to what other people are doing, and to have some good clean competition. Spamming units tarnishes those things somewhat. I don't think people that spam should be shot behind a woodshed or anything and they are well within the rules to pick any army choices they like, but you would never find me running an army with 5 land raiders. It wouldn't be fun for me and it isn't fun for my opponent.

Personally, I think land raider spam is a lot harder to deal with, and a lot smarter for the player choosing it, compared to oblit spam. Oblits are 75pts each and 9 of them is a huge chunk of an army to waste on something that gets 9 total shots. With that many points I could take 3 full squads of havocs(4ac+4bolter) with ACs and still have points left over for rhinos, more havocs, or to spend elsewhere in my army. 2x12 ac's = 24 str7 ap4 r48" instead of 9 lascannon/plasma cannon/etc shots. I prefer 2 squads of havocs with 1 squad of oblits so I can have mass of shots and also the versatility of oblits to fill in with whatever weapon I need. Could also take 2ac+2ml for versatility as well. If you choose dakka preds instead you get 4x the amount of shots instead of 2x , at the cost of range and strength(but when you're firing 4 more shots and able to move 12" does it really matter?). Who cares if you have a TL flamer when a dakka pred is firing 8 shots instead of 1 with equal to or better than strength for roughly the same points.

the point of obliterators is being able to fight any kind of fight you want. yes, a dakka pred can dish out a lot more shots, but if your playing a space marine army those shots are "eh" at best. but an obliterator has a weapon for any situation. also, there's a pretty good chance of that predator to be blown up with one good shot. having two wounds, a +2 armor save, and an invulnerable save make them just as survivable if not more survivable than a predator. not saying an obliterator cannot be blown up in the same fashion, but there are more things protecting it than a predator.

i re-read your post and notice you also mentioned havocs, they are a pretty stationary unit. at least obliterators have slow and purposeful and have the ability to deep strike. your going to be spending a lot of time re-positioning them if you dont do it right. (lololololololol just don't even argue this point, i didn't realize we were having the same argument on another post,)

obviously no one is going to be taking 9 obliterators squads of 3 are overkill. squads of two are preferred. i think 4 is acceptable for 1500 points. considering your other options are almost all ordnance weapons. i like knowing my shots have a decent chance of hitting. i ;d rather see my shots straight up miss than scatter and give my hopes up of landing maybe on something.

For those who think that variety is the spice of life, and spam is the king of meats, I would like to present the alterantive army builder!

hollismason is dead right with what he says and would endorse everything with one slight coda.

'Two things that do the same job do the same job.'

Everyone who writes spam armies forgets this, so let me illustrate.

LRVanquisher puts out AP2 hurt from the comfort of a MBT.
LRDemolisher puts out AP2 hurt from the comfort of a MBT.

Putting one of each does not instantly dilute your army and make it less viable than 2x LRVan or 2x LRDem.

Now, before anyone starts on about relative strengths and ranges of these two, I mention it because most IG armies take these tanks for anti-TEQ duty. The important bit is the AP2 and the rest is a bonus. Clever writing of your lists can give you the best of both worlds, with more flexibilty than pure spam.




However delicious that is.

Two small seer councils with two farseers or One council & one Avatar. Job done. Same thinking applied?

If your intention is two tough CC units that provide support for your line, then yes.

You have to place it in context with the rest of the army, of course.

I'm not saying spam is bad, just that, in the immortal words of Obi-wan Kenobi, '...you can't win, but there are alternatives to spamming...'

I agree that the spam approach is quite successful in 40k.
However, spam sometimes prevents you from adding some flexibility into the army.
E.g., instead of another Tactical, an outflanking Scout squad is sometimes very useful.

You all just said what took me until 'Ard boyz to figure out(course i have only been playing since last year). Before then i wasn't exactly sure why everybody used spam lists i knew they won with them but just thought they had been playing for a while and knew how to play. Everybody at 'Ard boyz had a spam or really nice mech list then it dawned on me ooo these lists work really well. I just like some variety in my lists usually thats my only problem with spam lists.

some lists tho work almost only with "spam". I see you dark eldar. Raiders... raiders and more raiders. It feels like spam... but its just a mechanized list, and they are all paper thin.

Many units in the DE codex are outshined by basic others, wyches, warriors, and ravagers. Pretty simple, and cheap, able to take many.

It's just basic common sense sure you can make a army that has 1 of everything. 1 tactical ; 1 biker squad ; 1 scout squad ; 1 terminator squad.

It just won't be as effective agaisnt an army that has clear focus and multiple redundancies.

It has no redundancy.


Spam or redundancy though to not miss the point is not making an unbalanced list. If I have a 10 man biker squad as my "tank" hunter unit and nothing else the list is not "Balanced" you need in addition to any order to create a viable list.

This is what is redundancy ; spam is where I take multiples so lets say I have a 10 man biker squad for tank hunting and 2 landspeeders. That's better.

Now what is the next stem well 2 6 man squads and 2 landspeeders are going to be even more effective.


It just increases the effectiveness of the army.

I disagree with this sentiment.

Its not about spamming units that do one thing. Its about units that can do everything.

Lets look at some of the units in the top tier armies.

dakka pred
HF/MM landspeeder
Vendetta
Seer council
Fire prism
oblits
Tau hammerhead
ect

Notice how every one of these units can shift and perform most rolls on the battlefield?

The reason these are spammed is not to add redundancy but because usually there is one 'Best' unit in each of the force organization chart options for this.

This way your opponent really can't decide on priority targets because no matter what he kills, the entire rest of your army can still step in and fill the role.

I played against a dude in a FLGS tourney and he ran 4 dreads a LR and a tac against my Necrons and a wiped the floor with him because of it. In the end of the day if your spam unit costs more than the amount of points they will kill i say break it up a bit and leave 'em at home

Just because you spam or have redundancies in your list do not automatically make your list win.

It takes some skill at knowing what units to spam and what parts of your army to be redundant.

Points based system + unbalanced list options = multiples of best options

I generally concur with Hollis. Repeating unit selections is usually a sign of a good list.

I agree with this. The main thing I don't agree with that 1 or even 2 LR's are still VERY hard to kill lol!

I'd say

1 Landraider = Hope you brought some meltaguns
2 Landraiders = Hope you brought a LOT of meltaguns
3 Landraiders = This is not going to be fun.
4 Landraiders = %*$& you.
5 Landraiders = I'm going to slit your tires.

One thing I'd actually like to add to this though in a serious note.

Another aspect of redundancy in Warhammer is also Duality. Duality = The ability for a unit to have multiple purposes, and for it to be able to do those purposes WELL. For example, you used the Landraider and Obliterators as a redundant unit. Both have one major distinction in common. They both have "duality". Obliterators can pop a tank (meltaguns and Lascannons!) while also taking care of infantry (flamers etc.) and heavy infantry (plasma cannon). They can do multiple jobs with efficiency.

The same goes for a landraider. While it's staple of AV14 is probably the reason why it's so godly, it's ability to function as multiple things is its key to being good and being worthwhile to spam. The standard vanilla raider can be a scoring unit (stick troops inside), tank killer, assault carrier, and can even take care of heavy infantry like Terminators and Obliterators and hurt Independent characters and Monstrous creatures well! It functions well in multiple manners.

When we look at something without duality (lets say A heavy weapons squad with heavy bolters or a Landspeeder with a Heavy Bolter and Assault Cannon) they function in basically one single way. The heavy bolters won't really do well against most tanks, they have a shot at killing an x-port on some LUCKY dice, but they really can only function in one manner, killing troops. They can't kill tanks efficiently. The landspeeder is the same thing, barring rending from the assault cannon, it functions to take out light infantry to maybe some 3+ meqs. But when it comes across something like a Predator or Vindicator or other tank, it really can't reliably handle it well. Unlike it's cousin the MM/HF landspeeder who can take out tanks VERY well while still being able to fry infantry, it can do both things efficiently.

If the game were perfectly balanced, then it would be a real decision between redundancy and flexibility. No one unit _should_ be able to just do everything and players would be forced to pick units based on relative strength/resilience to a task.

However, the game, like the world, is not perfect, and thus we have:

[quoted from jmurph]
Points based system + unbalanced list options = multiples of best options


When there is a clear "best in slot" choice in an army list, as so many of these Tactica threads seem to be trying to find, the "winning" strategy is to take as many as possible. Does this make you a better player? No. Taking a sub-optimal list and using it well makes you a better player. Spamming a list is a statement that you understand the game isn't balanced, and you're going to exploit it as hard as you possibly can. This isn't necessarily wrong; in competitive environments, it's necessary. But, don't confuse rules exploitation with actual generalship. You are manipulating the imperfections of the system, not utilizing a flexible and realistic force. Real militaries use diversified troops and armor for good reason, but then again, they don't look at battles as lasting 6 turns and being based on Kill Points.

Spam lists have many advantages for folks who aren't interested in a rounded force;

Easy to learn - you've got one thing you do, and the resilience to do it pretty much no matter what.

Easy to collect and paint - It's all the same, no need to worry about cohesion or anything.

Highly forgiving - So you're not a pro at eyeballing distances and you miss your charge distance half the time. Who cares? When 2 miss, the other three will make enough of a mess to make it not matter.

And the downsides?

Boring - For your opponent, and you eventually. How pretty is that spam list sitting on the shelf? Frustrating to your opponents if they have to put up with it frequently.

No flexibility - When you're a hammer, every problem looks like a nail right? Right?

Tailored solutions - Here's the big one. Once your trick is old hat, everyone will know how to beat it to pulp. Good as some of the spam lists out are (Vulkan, Lash/Plague, Raider, even Chimera spam) , once the tools are developed to beat it, that tool works against your ENTIRE army. No bait and switch for you, it's just uphill charges now.

All in all, I think you can see I'm on the versitility and diversity side of things, but I do recognize that for a competitive list to take to one tournament and blow it away, powerful spam lists are the way to go. Just remember, I hope, that your friends would like to see some variance just because, well, it's a game.

It's the basic principle that more is better. What you take more of is what is important.

Some lists are powerful and naturally "better".

Let's look at the winning lists that win tournaments; if you will notice they all have the commonality of " multiples" and redundancy.


You can take 60 Scout Marines with Close Combat weapons ; thats spam it serves a specific purpose.

It's not going to do a hell of a lot of good against someone who say has 3 tacticals in 3 rhinos.

Now let's look at the above.

60 scouts is not ultimately going to win a game , however having multiples of a unit does serve the function of redundancy.


So while 60 scouts on their own may not; 60 scouts /w 6 dreadnoughts or 30 terminators will for instance.


Why?

Because its redundant and killing 1 10 man squad of terminators does not defeat the army.

When you look at your army you really need to ask these questions?


1. What is this units purpose? CC ; Antitank : Antihorde? DO I have something in my army that can adequately replace this unit if it is destroyed?

This is why multiples of one type are good.


2. Does this meet the focus of purpose or goal my army is trying to meet?


Tactical Flexibility is not lost with lists that spam correctly.

Halsfield wrote:. I don't think people that spam should be shot behind a woodshed or anything...

i do

GeneralRetreat wrote:When there is a clear "best in slot" choice in an army list, as so many of these Tactica threads seem to be trying to find, the "winning" strategy is to take as many as possible. Does this make you a better player? No. Taking a sub-optimal list and using it well makes you a better player. Spamming a list is a statement that you understand the game isn't balanced, and you're going to exploit it as hard as you possibly can. This isn't necessarily wrong; in competitive environments, it's necessary. But, don't confuse rules exploitation with actual generalship. You are manipulating the imperfections of the system, not utilizing a flexible and realistic force.

QFT

Spamming units is useful but unimaginative tactic. It doesn't make you a great general. What makes you a great general is playing with a non-competitive army and STILL winning.

I think people confuse certain aspects of redundancy and spam.

This is redundant
Librarian
Librarian

5 man Terminator w/ redeemer
5 man Terminator w/ Redeemer

Tactical
Tactical
Scout
Scout

;
Lash Prince
Lash Prince

Termicide
Termicide
Troop Troop Troop
Obliterator
Obliterator
Obliterator

Those are redundant list that use list spam.

This is Spam

MoF

Dread w/ melta
Dread w/ melta
dread w/ melta
Dread w/ Melta
dread w/ melta
Dread w/ melta

Scout
scout
scout
scout
scout

It spams the crap out of 2 specific units in the premise that it will face a list that although able to overcome that individually when in large numbers it will not be able to.


It's not a "easy win" all armies take some modicum of skill.

Yeah, I think jmurph has the best concise analysis of how it works.

Every time a new codex comes out, the players comb through it for the best "value" units--that is, those that have the biggest imbalance between high capability and low cost. Some units emerge as imbalance stars (TH/SS termies, hydras, valks, shoota boyz, speeders), and others go on the "currently nerfed" shelf (falcons, devastators, deff koptas).

Then players look for imbalanced combos and force multipliers (i.e. Vulkan) and the spam ensues.

There's actually a theory in statistics/math about how the longer a system of rules is in place, the more refined the winning strategies become--and therefore the more limited the number of viable strategies becomes, because anybody who varies from the top strategies becomes less competitive.

Personally I do find it fun to go up against an opponent's best possible list, whether I'm playing a spam list or not. But it's an acquired taste--I used to whine about cheese too when I first started losing to powergamer lists.

[edit]
But I also agree that it gets kind of depressing when a new Eldar player posts a mech Eldar list on the army list forum and all us Dakka vets come around and say, "You really should have a farseer and an autarch, and then 2 or 3 DAs in serpents, and 2 FDs in serpents and then 3 fire prisms." As if there's only one viable list for Eldar. We could save a lot of time by just sending every newbie on the army list forum around to Steleks blog.

Overspecialize, and you breed in weakness. It's slow death.
- Major Motoko Kusanagi Ghost in the Shell

Spam lists are great, until people start bringing the counters to them.
A SM biker army full of meltas will destroy LR spam. That same list will suck against a 150 model ork army.

ArbitorIan wrote:

GeneralRetreat wrote:When there is a clear "best in slot" choice in an army list, as so many of these Tactica threads seem to be trying to find, the "winning" strategy is to take as many as possible. Does this make you a better player? No. Taking a sub-optimal list and using it well makes you a better player. Spamming a list is a statement that you understand the game isn't balanced, and you're going to exploit it as hard as you possibly can. This isn't necessarily wrong; in competitive environments, it's necessary. But, don't confuse rules exploitation with actual generalship. You are manipulating the imperfections of the system, not utilizing a flexible and realistic force.

QFT

Spamming units is useful but unimaginative tactic. It doesn't make you a great general. What makes you a great general is playing with a non-competitive army and STILL winning.

And then you meet the player who is an equal general to you but didn't bring a gakky list and you never beat him.

Fun, casual games, bring whatever you want. Tournaments, bring what it takes to win.

Flavius Infernus wrote:
But I also agree that it gets kind of depressing when a new Eldar player posts a mech Eldar list on the army list forum and all us Dakka vets come around and say, "You really should have a farseer and an autarch, and then 2 or 3 DAs in serpents, and 2 FDs in serpents and then 3 fire prisms." As if there's only one viable list for Eldar. We could save a lot of time by just sending every newbie on the army list forum around to Steleks blog.

The thing with this is, its just going to take any new player a couple months to realized what the most viable eldar army is. Then he is going to spend a whole ton more monies in order to fix his current army to make it competitive.

This way, at least he only has to drop $500+ once instead of twice.


I know cause I have done it.
And dropping 500 on an army and then finding out it can't compete with top tier sucks.

Chimera_Calvin wrote:For those who think that variety is the spice of life, and spam is the king of meats, I would like to present the alterantive army builder!

hollismason is dead right with what he says and would endorse everything with one slight coda.

'Two things that do the same job do the same job.'

Everyone who writes spam armies forgets this, so let me illustrate.

LRVanquisher puts out AP2 hurt from the comfort of a MBT.
LRDemolisher puts out AP2 hurt from the comfort of a MBT.

Putting one of each does not instantly dilute your army and make it less viable than 2x LRVan or 2x LRDem.

Now, before anyone starts on about relative strengths and ranges of these two, I mention it because most IG armies take these tanks for anti-TEQ duty. The important bit is the AP2 and the rest is a bonus. Clever writing of your lists can give you the best of both worlds, with more flexibilty than pure spam.

No, terrible example, because one is a single-shot weapon designed for shooting enemy tanks badly, the other is for clearing hordes of armoured foes.

Generally speaking, HollisMason is right, and anyone who disagrees, is wrong. You may consider it boring not playing a Battleforce piece of trash list, I consider it boring to lose all the time against better lists, even when I'm a better player, because I'm not better enough/get the wrong mission/can't be bothered using terrible units for the sake of it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, there ARE only 2 ways to play Eldar.

There's another way to put this 'redundancy' idea.

METAL BOXES!

So is this Redundancy or SPAM?

Belail
Interrogator Chaplin [Teminator Armor/Combi-Plasma]

Elite
Deathwing Command upgrade [Assault Cannon] x1
Deathwing [Assault Cannon] x2

Troops
Deathwing [Thunder Hammer/Cyclone] x1
Deathwing [LC/Cyclone] x2
Deathwing [Heavy Flamer] x3

I like to bring a strong list with some "not the standard internet build" stuff in it. If I beat the standard internet power builds, I derive additional satisfaction from the win. More fun, and without the whining.

Taking a crippled army list to make an example isn't as funny as you think.