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.

Whenever I see an armybuilder printout list at a tourny, I cringe. They're soo difficult to read and understand. I don't want to have to sift through every superfluous rule a unit has, just to find out what upgrades they have. IG is the worst. Neither does anyone need statlines, especially ones that are occasionally wrong. This is why I don't use armybuilder. I want my opponents to actually know whats in my army.

This is the format I use for my lists and I hope we can improve upon it:

For ICs/Independent Vehicles:
Archon: 132
-agoniser, shadow field, combat drugs, plasma grenades

Ravager: 135
-2 disintegrators, night shield

For Units + Transports:
Raider Squad: 121
1 Sybarite with agoniser
1 Warrior with blaster
1 Warrior with splinter cannon
7 Warriors
(indent)-Raider: 60
(indent)-hororfex


All units are in foc order. Nothing that comes with the unit is listed, only upgrades. For example, with Ork Boyz, boyz with sluggas and choppas, would just be listed as boyz. Similarly, I would never list Striking Scorpions as having plasma grenades because they didn't need to buy them. I'm unsure if I like how I list the number of models in the squad. While it is definitive, it's difficult to tell at a glance how many warriors are in the above squad.

What are your thoughts?

-Leo037

Use a spreadsheet program. Label everything, regular wargear and upgrades, and in full - no acronyms, abbreviations, or whatnot. Include the page numbers in your Codex where the rules for each piece of equipment may be found.

Your list is great for you, but I have absolutely no idea what any of those things do (yes, there is a certain amount of responsibility on me to know what a Ravager is, but still). I would prefer a list of the statline for each unit type, and page references for the wargear, just so I can look it up if needed.

Viperion

What does comprehensive mean to you? AB prints the most comprehensive army list I've seen including some of the "superfluous" rules you dislike. AB can be tailored to print various information related to a unit. But remember, just because you think a particular format makes sense doesn't mean it makes sense to another. Listing an army in FOC orger might make sense but so does listing the army in order of normal deployment.

I like to see all that comes with a unit so there is no confusion. You're comment about plasma grenades assumes I know that Eldar Scorpions automaticly carry such. Such minute detail can easily be forgotten if not written down.

Comprehensiveness is just being complete and listing everything. Comprehensible, on the other hand, means making things clear with proper sign-posting, layout, spelling, grammar, etc.

I dunno. Standard equipment should be listed as well, I
think, you just have to find a way to clarify what is standard
and what are upgrades.

I use the Wolflair Army builder program. All options are available to be printed below each unit. It is a bit out of date though...........

As others have said, it doesn't sound like you want to make the most comprehensive lists. I think if your prerogative is to ensure that your opponent knows what's in your army, stat lines and "superfluous rules" are actually quite important. On the other hand, if you're looking for a format to compose your tournament lists and assume everyone you'll play against knows what all the units and upgrades are/do, the format you posted is pretty solid. I can't imagine much improvement for that purpose, except maybe listing the FOC category explicitly.

But remember, just because you think a particular format makes sense doesn't mean it makes sense to another. Listing an army in FOC orger might make sense but so does listing the army in order of normal deployment.

Well thats the point of the thread.

Yeah, sorry I didn't clarify, this is meant for a tournament setting.

-Leo037

In the past I have always made and brought 2 lists to the tournaments I would go to. The first would be a fancy nicely formated list that looks like something the General of an Army would use to inventory his army. The second is the Army Builder list so all the details and stat lines will be listed there. I have found this makes most people happy though it is a lot of extra work and I did not actually do that in the past tournament season though I might do it this year.

If I was playing in an environment where you share lists, I would consider having wargear written on a list to be an extension of WYSIWYG.

Tacobake, are you saying that if its on your list it does not need to be on the model? If that is the case I would strongly disagree and require it to be on the models as well as on the list.

Negativemoney wrote:Tacobake, are you saying that if its on your list it does not need to be on the model? If that is the case I would strongly disagree and require it to be on the models as well as on the list.

no, that's not what I was trying to say.

I think what I was trying to say is that if you're playing in an environment where you share lists then I would expect that _all_ wargear is listed, including grenades and bolt pistols and whatever else. Meaning I would take it just as seriously as I would take WYSIWYG.

I mean, if you're sharing lists you're sharing lists for a reason.

I discovered the roster sheets on GW and been taking advantage of them although they might not be formal enough for tournaments.

http://us.games-workshop.com/games/40k/gaming/gaming.htm

Good thread.

It's something that a lot of folks overlook. Army Builder gives you all the stats, though in summarized and (albeit infrequently) erroneous form. But it's often a pain to read, particularly for IG lists.

One thing folks should remember is that AB can also do summary sheets, which boil a list down to one page without as much detail, and are much easier to review quickly.

My traditional format is a one page Word or Works document. I break down each unit with its number of models, name and upgrades. For a tournament list I'll usually break out the cost of the upgrades as well. I leave statlines and deafault (unchangeable) equipment off, but always bring my codex and offer to answer any questions my opponent has at any point.

I'll post a link to an examplea bit later.