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.

I have noticed a very interesting trend in army list construction that is in my opinion becoming more and more alarming. Anybody want to take a guess, go ahead I'll wait...



Spam Spam Spam

I'm not sure why everybody feels the need to copy and paste units in their army lists. In fact if you look at the army lists on this site how many don't copy a unit exactly? not many i'd bet

think about it yourselves when's the last time you played a game against someone who didn't have cloned valkryie squads, or grey hunter squads or units in rhino's copied, or 2 exact units of blood crushers, or how many eldar lists have you seen where they have multiple war walker squads all kitted out the same, or even avenger units in wave serpents with the same load out., or how many marine armies run 2 dreadnaughts in the exact same way. I mean the list goes on and on. Or on the same note when's the last time your army didn't do that?

Now there's nothing wrong with doing this. it is all perfectly legal and such. but ask yourself one very important question

Is it fun?

do you like seeing units in someones army copied, like they fought against the dreaded xerox legion?

Personally i find it rather boring. there are tons of units in a codex and I don't mean any offense to anybody who does it, but I think it's a lack of tactical thought and flexibility. All those units in the books all do different things, usually fun and interesting things. I do understand the people who bring 8 units of beserkers all 8 man strong, theme and fluff selections are not what I'm getting at here but armies that people try to do well with at tournaments.

But why is everybody picking 2 units that are very obvious in how they work and copying them? Do they not want to exercise any thought in their games or do they want to just play a super simple game. Especially with the way new codex's are designed, there are so many ways you can go with some of the books and I just don't see people using it.

This is a serious question I don't mean to offend I'm just trying to understand why people are doing this. as the trend seems to be increasing more and more.

I mean after all all those units that people say suck, do have uses in them. Those units that people don't expect can do filthy things to people.

Think, and I mean really think about diversity in your armies, it gives you tactical flexiblity to deal with a wide range of missions and objectives, and also a wide range of armies and people with different schools of thought on the game. After all dust off those "terrible units" you know the ones I mean. the ones that people on the internet say are terrible.

Units like daemonettes, possessed, chaos dreadnaughts, vanguard, master of the forge, scorpions with biting blades, flash gitz, rough riders, guardsmen actually on foot, kroot, vespid, or even the daemonhunter list (on its own) or even failing that how about a marine squad with a different special weapon, I mean do they really all have to be identical?

This is my challenge to you try out some armies, not just a game or two, I mean really try out some new builds without copying a single unit. you'll be surprised how awesome that new thing you're trying out can really be. After all variety is the spice of life.

in all truth units work best in matched pairs.

if i have one IDdreadnought it can hurt things bad, but might die quickly.

2 ICdreadnoughts can hurt even more things and have 3 times the survivability.


Redundancy is a very sound tactic that ensures that your plans don't go out the window when that one unit dies, and it reduces the number of people who rely on that 1 uber unit to win the game for them and whine when it dies.

in smaller games it is more likely that every unit will be unique, but in larger conflicts(both real and imaginary) redundance ensures tactical flexability.

besides having every unit unique(from a equipment standpoint) can be confusing and there are some combinations of wargear that are very effective combos and having multiples allows awsomness to be enlarged.

Spam lists come from players who like to min/max/optimize. That being said, I find min/maxing a little boring. Another plague marine lash spam chaos list *yawn*.

I personally like to run a chaos dreadnaught in my list for kicks every now and again. I mean I took all that time to assemble and paint it and I feel bad when I don't get a chance to use it. Sure it's a hindrance but is also fun, I just wish it got its attack profile doubled when rolling a blood frenzy (which happened in the last 2 previous Chaos books).

What will make this post a bit weird is that my army also has 10 lesser daemons (represented by Daemonettes). Maybe you should stop reading my mind Tortuga932...

I agree...to a certain extent.

Yes, lists like:

Blood Angels

Troops

Assault Squad x10, Fist, x2 Meltas

Assault Squad x10, Fist, x2 Meltas

Assault Squad x10, Fist, x2 Meltas

Assault Squad x10, Fist, x2 Meltas


That is boring to me (and at the same time, weak in my opinion).

However, I take two such squads, and the reason I do so is so my opponent cant just wipe out that one squad and eliminate all melta threat on the table. I also take two combi preds, because if you are actually lucky enough to take one down, guess what? Theres another one right there next to it, still firing away.

Spamming the "best" squads doesnt mean it's optimal. At the same time, having each unit be completely different doesnt necessarily mean it's optimal either.

Ever taken a real, close look at the speed freaks army in the Ork Codex?

Just puttin' it out there...

MekanobSamael wrote:Ever taken a real, close look at the speed freaks army in the Ork Codex?

Just puttin' it out there...

QFT

Clone squads is what you would use for specalizing in a particular part, like heavy weapons themed army or a fast attack type army, or shooty army,etc. Some people would preffer to have their units focus on that part.

Well, to accomplish anything, you need three things that can do it. The first will be destroyed before it gets to try, the second will make the attempt and fail, and finally the third will get the job done (if you're lucky ).

The thing about "spam" or "redundancy" is, is that it's really good. Unless your unit is very resilient, making only 1 of it basically gives your opponent an option. Does he want to eliminate all of your X, or your Y? He will do whatever suits him best at the time.

If you don't have redundant units, it doesn't mean that your list won't work, just that in many situations your opponent will be able to eliminate units at will.

Spamming is effective, but what the OP is getting at is that it kills the spark of creativity. @ OP: you're definitely on to something. I'm an Ork player and rcently I got hld of a few boxes of Lootas and Burnas. Now, Lootas are a VERY effective unit, and Loota spam is simply awesome, but, I thought, why not rather challenge yourself a bit? So I made them all Burnas, and they're staying that way. Now my army isn't just some generic Ork list, but one that plays in an uncommon way.
In a nutshell, if you can feel like you've expressed something about yourself in your army, then you just enjoy the game a lot more...

Orky-Kowboy wrote:Spamming is effective, but what the OP is getting at is that it kills the spark of creativity. @ OP: you're definitely on to something. I'm an Ork player and rcently I got hld of a few boxes of Lootas and Burnas. Now, Lootas are a VERY effective unit, and Loota spam is simply awesome, but, I thought, why not rather challenge yourself a bit? So I made them all Burnas, and they're staying that way. Now my army isn't just some generic Ork list, but one that plays in an uncommon way.
In a nutshell, if you can feel like you've expressed something about yourself in your army, then you just enjoy the game a lot more...

QFT

Sometimes it can be hard to find the right balance between being creative and competitive.

Orky-Kowboy wrote:So I made them all Burnas, and they're staying that way. Now my army isn't just some generic Ork list, but one that plays in an uncommon way.

Anyone who claims that burna boys aren't 6 flavors of epic has never packed them onto a battlewagon with a deffrolla and run them headlong into a cluster of space marines... it's kinda funny to watch them go nuts over the fact that you've just scored 64 s4 ap5 hits after tankshocking with a deffrolla, or that you've just assaulted their termies with a crapton of PWs

Orky-Kowboy wrote:Spamming is effective, but what the OP is getting at is that it kills the spark of creativity. @ OP: you're definitely on to something. I'm an Ork player and rcently I got hld of a few boxes of Lootas and Burnas. Now, Lootas are a VERY effective unit, and Loota spam is simply awesome, but, I thought, why not rather challenge yourself a bit? So I made them all Burnas, and they're staying that way. Now my army isn't just some generic Ork list, but one that plays in an uncommon way.
In a nutshell, if you can feel like you've expressed something about yourself in your army, then you just enjoy the game a lot more...

But your army also violates the proposal of the original post. The effectiveness of the unit in question doesn't factor in in the slightest, he is just objecting to every unit being equipped and set-up the same. So all Burnaz is just as bad as all Lootas.

My Eldar have started as an army of one unit of everything mixed and matched to the tasks that are required. The problem is that it isn't always effective. No matter how much I'd like to split up into one squad of everything I simply can't be as effective as I'd like to be.

If there was better game balance in the rules, this would be true. However, there isn't.

To give an example, Eldar heavy support choices: dark reapers, support weapons and falcons are considered clearly inferior by most savvy players. This leaves fire prisms and war walkers. Fire prisms have a special rule that makes fielding 2-3 far better than fielding 1. So you'll see duplication there. With war walkers, you'd have to be an idiot not to see that bright lances and starcannons are well overpriced. So, scatter lasers/EMLs, and less commonly shuriken cannons, will be seen.

Fact is, some units are less effective in every codex. So when people need to find 2000 points of models, they may take one choice several times over - its competitors are noticeably worse.

I agree, lists are much more fun when players simply pick their units out of a hat. I've often enjoyed games against players who have put no discernible thought into their lists and instead picked it like they're ordering Chinese.

It often depends on the individuals playing the game, what their outlook and approach to the game is. Me and my regular opponents have enjoyed playing 'spam' like lists, we enjoy playing wonky lists, we just enjoyed playing the game.

If a unit entry was fluffy, and had 'okay' rules I would probably pick it...if i felt like it...sometimes.

I don't think killing the creative spark comes into it, I haven't created anything, except making my army background up, painted my minis and made up a list.

I switch up my lists fairly often. I built all these vehicles and painted so many minis, Im going to use all of them dammit! I built a boom gun wagon because it was fun and looks cool, so naturally I use it from time to time. I like playing for the fun of the game, the only time I bring out the kill all lists, is when its some type of campaign and I want to win.
Otherwise I play the less attractive units, just because its something different, sometimes they perform so well you want to use them forever, and then they hoe you big time the next game. Its fun to play that way.

I agree with you, seeing LR spam lists against my Orks gets old REALLY fcking fast. Yes Orks suck at taking out LRs, I get it. How about we play something different for a change eh?

I agree with the OP,spam lists are boring even if effective.I prefer playing with units that i like for the fluff/overall coolness.Also,how fun is painting and assembling the same units all the time?

WizardOfGrotz wrote:I agree with the OP,spam lists are boring even if effective.I prefer playing with units that i like for the fluff/overall coolness.Also,how fun is painting and assembling the same units all the time?

Ork player here, I can tell ya, over 100 ork boyz, SUCKS

Redundancy is bad eh?

I'll tell you one thing; during my time as an army officer, I made sure that combined arms operations never had more than one identical unit. I'd grab a single infantry platoon from someone's company, a single tank from my own platoon, one driver from the motorpool to truck around some of the infantry (the others would walk of course), one mortar team, a single medic, and a single artillery spotter.

That was my ideal mix for combat; insurgents NEVER see it coming, and its nice and fluffy. Oh wait....

Where I think people fall into the trap is that they assume that redundancy means taking the same thing over and over.

For me, redundancy means having multiple units that can achieve the same thing.

It is possible, but often difficult, to create good lists with minimal spam and multiple redundancy - you just need to be creative about how you do it.

chimera has hit it right on the head,redundancy in a list doesn't mean you should clone a unit multiple times to do a job. thats why cloning units is boring you don't need to spam assault 2x melta 3 times to kill a tank, you just use different units to achieve the same goal, so instead of that how about assault 2x melta, lascannon predator, and dreadnaught. not only can all 3 units kill tanks just as effectively as the 3 assault squads but they can all also perform different roles in the game. and you have different tools to do different things in addition to killing your opponents tank,

I actually don't think spamming the same unit to get a job done is useful. assuming your opponent will kill it so you need two of something to me reeks of a lack of tactical thought. thats why i'm trying to figure out why everybody does it. because you can run into the wrong matchups and not have good answers to what your opponent has

I agree with the OP it is very easy to get into a rut of picking things that work and neglecting things that maybe are not deemed as effective.
As a result of this I am going to play a couple of units I don't ususally use in my mini 1000 pts game tonight: Space Marine bikes (not attack bikes) a Land speeder with AC + HB and a Chaplain with a 10 man assault squad

Distinguish between spam and redundancy. Spam is redundancy without flexibility, merely having multiples of the same configuration of the same unit. Redundancy with flexibility can consist of taking different units, but so long as it consists of taking units that can perform each other's roles without neglecting a role or set of roles will not be so vulnerable to the "rock-scissors-paper" situation that happens with spam.

Tortuga932 wrote:chimera has hit it right on the head,redundancy in a list doesn't mean you should clone a unit multiple times to do a job. thats why cloning units is boring you don't need to spam assault 2x melta 3 times to kill a tank, you just use different units to achieve the same goal, so instead of that how about assault 2x melta, lascannon predator, and dreadnaught. not only can all 3 units kill tanks just as effectively as the 3 assault squads but they can all also perform different roles in the game. and you have different tools to do different things in addition to killing your opponents tank,

Except you're then splitting it into things that can be killed with anti-heavy infantry and anti-tank that will, ultimately, create a major issue, given the fact that they can now thin your anti-armor capabilities without having to waste as much fire, since you're dealing with 2 armored units, and an assault. The other issue becomes the fact that 2 of those units can't hold objectives.

Tortuga932 wrote:chimera has hit it right on the head,redundancy in a list doesn't mean you should clone a unit multiple times to do a job. thats why cloning units is boring you don't need to spam assault 2x melta 3 times to kill a tank, you just use different units to achieve the same goal, so instead of that how about assault 2x melta, lascannon predator, and dreadnaught. not only can all 3 units kill tanks just as effectively as the 3 assault squads but they can all also perform different roles in the game. and you have different tools to do different things in addition to killing your opponents tank,

I actually don't think spamming the same unit to get a job done is useful. assuming your opponent will kill it so you need two of something to me reeks of a lack of tactical thought. thats why i'm trying to figure out why everybody does it. because you can run into the wrong matchups and not have good answers to what your opponent has

What world do you live in where triple-las Predators are as effective at tank hunting (particularly against AV14) as a melta?

Corrode wrote:

Tortuga932 wrote:chimera has hit it right on the head,redundancy in a list doesn't mean you should clone a unit multiple times to do a job. thats why cloning units is boring you don't need to spam assault 2x melta 3 times to kill a tank, you just use different units to achieve the same goal, so instead of that how about assault 2x melta, lascannon predator, and dreadnaught. not only can all 3 units kill tanks just as effectively as the 3 assault squads but they can all also perform different roles in the game. and you have different tools to do different things in addition to killing your opponents tank,

I actually don't think spamming the same unit to get a job done is useful. assuming your opponent will kill it so you need two of something to me reeks of a lack of tactical thought. thats why i'm trying to figure out why everybody does it. because you can run into the wrong matchups and not have good answers to what your opponent has

What world do you live in where triple-las Predators are as effective at tank hunting (particularly against AV14) as a melta?

Probably the real one a melta you have to get in range, then survive, then hit then penetrate. Three triple Las preds not moving give you a hell of a better chance of hitting and penetrating. Besides there is more to life than AV14

Multiples work better because their effectiveness is squared.

A pair of Meltas or flamers are better than one melta and one flamer because it's 4 times better at its job as opposed to the 'flexible' but lower effective flexible build.

Hence, if we take it to 'spammed' units (even crappy ones) their effectiveness are squared.
Having 4 like Assault squads means they are 16 times better.

I don't know if anyone here knows of my 'Crap Legion', but I did just that, take all the crap choices in the CSM dex and make an army and win with it...and win it did, with no doubling or stuff like that, so it's possible, but less effective.

_____________________________-

People use more than one Possessed, Vanguard, MoTF, scorpions, Flashgitz, roughriders, vespid....scratch that people use them at all?

-Daemonettes: they need numbers and are troops, so you can't really get away from 2 such squads if they are going fluffy.
-Possessed: you don't need more than one because they are painfully expensive, I support their usage but not to the point where they take away from the list noticably. I guess taking more allows you more rolls on the daemonkin to get what you want, but it's a poor reason.
-Dreads: need to have similar 'safe' builds to mitigate their crazies.
-Vanguard, horrible for points, the reason to double up could possibly to plan for losing one in the heroic intervention, but again, too many points for that issue.
-Doubling MoTF, wtf?
-Scorpions: wtf?
-Flashgitz: do they score/are they deathstar-able...I don't think anyone doubles them.
-Roughriders: minimalist is the way to go, anything else is a waste...and they are great at counter-charging...so yes, identical just because they are usually taken naked.
-Guardsmen on foot: again the square effectiveness.
-Kroot: utility and squared effectiveness (esp. in the utility roles).
-Vesp-whut?
-Daemonhunters really don't have great options....PAGK don't have options, StormTroopers (if taken in an impure list) really need to take the meltas for AT work, and again the squared rule for meltas.

Things are doubled (at the least) in anticipation of one of them failing. The opponent has to work 4 times as hard to remove that threat as opposed to just dealing with one unit and moving on to something else with no pressure.

You don't have to spam/double up, but it's undeniable that they work very well when done in at least a sprinkle, it introduces reliablilty to the list. I guess the only army that can get away with it is a Vulkan list...but funny enough it just gets more crazy when things are doubled up/spammed.

Night Lords wrote:I agree...to a certain extent.

Yes, lists like:

Blood Angels

Troops

Assault Squad x10, Fist, x2 Meltas

Assault Squad x10, Fist, x2 Meltas

Assault Squad x10, Fist, x2 Meltas

Assault Squad x10, Fist, x2 Meltas


That is boring to me (and at the same time, weak in my opinion).

I agree the above is weak, but i also have a very hard time calling it "spam" , its a Troops option for the blood angel, there are only so many things you can do with them, Also if you want to be somewhat realistic, every squad in going to be identically equipped . standard issue and all.

I mean would it make it look better if 2 of the units gave up jump pack for drop pods?, They are doing the same thing. ( though now you have to buy a pod for another unit to fly empty ) . I mean would you call it spamming if it was a bunch of 10 man tac with flamers and rockets in rhino's? Most people would call that the better part of a company.

I mean the reason you see Assault Squad x10, Fist, x2 Meltas is because it does 2 roles well. I mean would you consider the following spam?

3x Assault Squad x10, Fist, x2 Meltas
3x scouts x 6 rocket launcher sniper rifles

I don't think its reasonable to expect or want people to bring stuff that dosen't work, I mean there is no reason to take Tac squads with the BA .

Some units just are not worth taking , are you really going to take stormtroopers in an IG army, are you really going to take wraith guard in an eldar list, alot of the time units people don't take are over pointed, to narrowly focused, just poorly though out , or just outright don't work.

Most armies are going to focus in on either shooting or assaulting, If i am makeing a shooty eldar list troop wise im taking rangers , dire avengers, maybe guardians. if im making assault eldar, im going to use bikes for objective grabbing. it makes no sense at all to take one of each option. The reason you take 2 or 4 of the same squad is consistency , 2 units of assault marines with meltas will kill tanks one will get picked apart before it makes it, 4 units will kill the tanks and then assault. Sure I could use 2 assault squads and 2 dev squads, and get similar results but, once the tanks are dead the dev squads sitting back drinking beer, wile the assault squads are fighting. if i do it with 4 assault squads i get more fight out of the units.

There's another problem with making your units different - it encourages focus fire on whichever is most useful in that situation.

For example, if I have a 3xMeltagun vet squad and a 3xFlamer vet squad then a mech player will kill the melta squad whilst ignoring the flamer squad. A horde player will kill the flamer squad.

If all vet squads have flamer and melta then none present themselves as high priority targets.

Target priority is one of the most important skills for a 40K player - it doesn't pay to make it easier for your opponent.