Switch Theme:

"Make an army, not a list"  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
What do you think?
Agree!
Disagree!
I have no opinions on anything.

View results
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Sneaky Striking Scorpion




I saw someone say this on a thread the other day and I really liked it. It was something about a list with a bunch of Lashes and Plague Marines, basically something entirely not-fluff, and a total 'power build'.

Are most people only concerned with making an uber-list or do people actually include fluff into their play. All these lists spamming Special Characters (Vulcan, Eldrad) or mixed chaos cults sort of grinds my gears. It's not my right to tell people what they can and cannot play, but I don't have to play against someone if they're only in the game to with with their list that is clearly against background. In most my games we don't use Special Characters, and I am loathe to play a list with or against Special Characters for the ridiculousness that they bring to the table.

Does anyone else feel the same way, or am I totally alone on this? Are most people out to play the game for a winning list, or are they out to make a competitive list based on the material provided. Yriel would be fine in an Iyanden list, but why is he marching with random craftworld #72, and why is Eldrad with him for that matter. To me it makes little sense for Plague Marines to be lead by a pair of slannesh sorcerers. The same goes for SM SCs.

Should people respect the background of the race that they play instead of making only a powerbuild?

Please discuss and share your opinion, but I would like it to stay civil.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2009/05/25 02:48:25


 
   
Made in au
Killer Klaivex






Forever alone

I know where you're coming from. Most people who played with the old Chaos codex feel that way, I imagine. 40K has sadly started to favour power builds, mostly because the codex writers seem to have conflicting views. Fzorgle is a good example. It doesn't fit well with the rules, and wasn't designed with any foresight as to how abusive it is.

People are like dice, a certain Frenchman said that. You throw yourself in the direction of your own choosing. People are free because they can do that. Everyone's circumstances are different, but no matter how small the choice, at the very least, you can throw yourself. It's not chance or fate. It's the choice you made. 
   
Made in us
Doc Brown






I play with a lot of people who build 'lists' not armies. One friend plays chaos and sure enough has the dual lash + PM. So annoying.

A personal pet peeve of mine is how people play nids as well. I'll see six fex's set up, yeah that's alright. Then I'll see somewhere like 120 gaunts all ready. Cool. I'll see warriors and tyrants as well. Fantastic... Then he decides to deep strike in the Genestealers and I'm like "WHAT THE HELL!" Do you not know what a genestealer is? They come in BEFORE the assault and do the dirty, not AFTER. READ SOME FLUFF!

But yeah, it's annoying. I play Nids myself and use my stealers with scuttlers, but they move along cover. People call me an idiot but I like the idea of them all coming in and assaulting before anything else even gets to shoot. Meh, choices choices. My chaos list has no marks aside from Chaos Glory and only uses standard CSM, no cults. I play Word Bearers so this is fine. I once was asked why I don't use cult troops and make them different to represent people who worship a god more closely. I answer, "Because Word Bearers worship them equally and I prefer my fluffy list that CAN win over a non-fluffy list that WILL ALWAYS win." I get strange looks then and I tell them to ready an army... I usually win.

"From the fires of Betrayal unto the blood of revenge we bring the name of Lorgar, the Bearer of the Word, the favored Son of Chaos, all praise be given to him. From those that would not heed we offer praise to those who do, that they might turn their gaze our way and gift us with the Boon of Pain, to turn the Galaxy red with the blood, and feed the hunger of the Gods."

-Excerpt from the Three Hundred and Forty-First

Book of Epistles of Lorgar

Cheese Elemental wrote:That made me think... what's a good pick-up line in the Imperium?

"Hey baby, my plasma cannon's running hot and I need to purge you in the name of the Emperor tonight."
 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut






Springhurst, VIC, Australia

I whole heartly agree, this is how i "collect" armies, i just grab a dex and read the fluff and start writting my own and collect that way. The only problem is i like so much fluff across all races which is why i dont have a complete army lol

DC:90+S++G++MB+I+Pw40k98-ID++A++/hWD284R++T(T)DM+

Squigy's Gallery, come have a look
 
   
Made in us
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine






In regards to sc's, what if i were to use wazdakka in my all warbike army. Not nob biker but regular bikers

H.B.M.C. wrote:
"Balance, playtesting - a casual gamer craves not these things!" - Yoda, a casual gamer.
Three things matter in marksmanship -
location, location, location
MagickalMemories wrote:How about making another fist?
One can be, "Da Fist uv Mork" and the second can be, "Da Uvver Fist uv Mork."
Make a third, and it can be, "Da Uvver Uvver Fist uv Mork"
Eric
 
   
Made in gb
Horrific Hive Tyrant





London (work) / Pompey (live, from time to time)

Ill use a power build ish army at tourneys (maybe a small unit of nob bikers or massed lootas)
but usually i tend to take units i like the look of.
dont really care if a unit is amazing, if it looks like gak then i dont want it.

Suffused with the dying memories of Sanguinus, the warriors of the Death Company seek only one thing: death in battle fighting against the enemies of the Emperor.  
   
Made in gb
Hanging Out with Russ until Wolftime







Having 10 years of Loving Space Wolf Experiance, I have to say, "Make an Army, not a List" is one of the things that has kept me in the hobby. it is just so much more enjoyable.

The sad part here though, is that the Majority of players are like it, but the TFG's get a lot more spotlight and are a lot more Vocal

Got 40k Rules Question? Send an e-mail to Gwar! for your Confidential Rules Queries.
Please do not PM me unless really necessary. I much prefer e-mail.
Need it Answered RIGHT NOW!? Ring me on Skype: "gwar.the.trolle"
Looking to play some Vassal? Ring me for a game!
Download The Unofficial FAQs by Gwar! here! (Dark Eldar Draft FAQ v1.0 released 04/Nov/2010! Download it before the Pandas eat it all!)
 
   
Made in ca
Swift Swooping Hawk





Calgary, AB

@Youbedead:

I think that what he's talking about is wanting special characters to show up in themed armies, rather than power armies.

So taking advantage of Wazdakka's special rule (and his fluff) to make a warbike army would be totally okay. Especially if the rest of your choices were either fast (trukk mobs, koptas, etc.) or Mek-style (since it's only so far from tuning up your bikes to looting that nice red tank over there.)

The thing that the OP seems to be against are things like, to use the Chaos example, Kharn leading several squads of Noise Marines. Things that don't connect with the fluff at all, but are quite powerful in game, so are used.


As tot he rest of the issue, I'm kind of on the fence about it. I mean, the fluff is one of the main reasons I play. I love the richly created worlds. However, it's still a game, and at the core of all that story and excellent (usually) writing there's a set of rules for how to play a game. Which, while not exactly the be-all-end-all, are pretty damn important. I'm not going to get in a tiff about it, especially if it's fluff that seems to have vanished (I.E. Cult Animosity.) but it is certainly gratifying to see lists built to a common theme and idea, other than 'I wanna stomp my opponent'.

TL;DR version.
Fluff is good, but you have to let people who play for the game, play for the game. Doesn't mean 'playing to the fluff' is wrong,' but it's not the only way.

The Battle Report Master wrote:i had a freind come round a few weeks ago to have a 40k apocalpocalpse game i was guards men he was space maines.... my first turn was 4 bonbaonbardlements... jacobs turn to he didnt have one i phased out.
This space for rent, contact Gwar! for rights to this space.
Tantras wrote: Logically speaking, that makes perfect sense and I understand and agree entirely... but is it RAW?
 
   
Made in ca
God-like Imperator Titan Commander




Halifax

I'd be inclined to agree with players that it would be nice if the allowable army builds matched the backgrounds, but the problem is that the background really needs to be all things to all people. Personally I've given up on the 40k universe and prefer making up my own and reading similar work by other people to the official fluff, though the official fluff is good for flavour and a starting point or skeleton on which to hang something a little more solid and interesting.

But I also don't have a problem with people that want to design a list that they think is super-stompy because those lists are only super-stompy depending on the local meta-game, and then it's either Rock-Scissors-Paper or people move on to less obvious tactics. Mind you, the interesting thing that I'm finding these days is that the internet meta-game is catching up to what my Toronto gaming group figured out within weeks of 5th edition coming out.
   
Made in eg
[MOD]
Keeper of the Adeptus Arbites Flame






Cairo, Egypt

Pure BS.

First off armies ain't free. They cost money. They cost time. And plenty of both.

Second off, GW writes the rules and the background, their inability or unwillingness to have the two match up is the real problem.

Third, GW changes the fluff to sell more models. Now they're not as bad as say DC comics rewriting history every 3 weeks, but they'll change things from book to book, ignore ideas, raise new ones all to sell more models.

So telling other players to spend money and time to match an arbitrary set of rules the creators of the game didn't feel like including and which the creators will change on a whim is nothing but pure arrogance.

Anyone who REALLY cares about the fluff would only allow Marines (of any sort) to be used in 10% of the games and force players to spend 90% of the games with Orks, Nids and IG, the most numerous armies in the galaxy.

Any takers?

Now I do believe that players should stay away from cheesey lists. That's different.

Cheesey lists exploit the inherent imbalances to create an army that's not fun for either player to face in a game. But that's based on the principal that we should have fun, not someone's arbitrary understanding of GW's novels, comic books and so on.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/05/25 01:50:56


 
   
Made in gb
Hanging Out with Russ until Wolftime







You are in the wrong hobby then IMO. I don't play this game for the "game", I mostly play because I enjoy the Background. The Game is an Added Bonus

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/05/25 01:51:54


Got 40k Rules Question? Send an e-mail to Gwar! for your Confidential Rules Queries.
Please do not PM me unless really necessary. I much prefer e-mail.
Need it Answered RIGHT NOW!? Ring me on Skype: "gwar.the.trolle"
Looking to play some Vassal? Ring me for a game!
Download The Unofficial FAQs by Gwar! here! (Dark Eldar Draft FAQ v1.0 released 04/Nov/2010! Download it before the Pandas eat it all!)
 
   
Made in gb
Horrific Hive Tyrant





London (work) / Pompey (live, from time to time)

Gwar is pretty much the same as me, a casual gamer.
Mostly enjoy other aspects of it, for him its the fluff, for me its painting and converting

Suffused with the dying memories of Sanguinus, the warriors of the Death Company seek only one thing: death in battle fighting against the enemies of the Emperor.  
   
Made in gb
Hanging Out with Russ until Wolftime







JD21290 wrote:Gwar is pretty much the same as me, a casual gamer.
Mostly enjoy other aspects of it, for him its the fluff, for me its painting and converting
Don't get me wrong, I Like playing the game as well, and I like Playing in Competitive Environments as well. I just happen to prefer "fluffy" lists. I may not win against Broken Newer Lists (Space Wolves Vs Anything except Dark Eldar is pretty much Skewed towards them, especially since I play Full Drop Pod Wolves, using -gasp- Infantry rather than Land Raider Spam), but I still win sometimes, and I love it when some Smug Arse who has a Dual Lash List Suddenly has 2 Dreadnoughts Drop Podding right Next to their Two Lashers and unleashing hell

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2009/05/25 01:58:00


Got 40k Rules Question? Send an e-mail to Gwar! for your Confidential Rules Queries.
Please do not PM me unless really necessary. I much prefer e-mail.
Need it Answered RIGHT NOW!? Ring me on Skype: "gwar.the.trolle"
Looking to play some Vassal? Ring me for a game!
Download The Unofficial FAQs by Gwar! here! (Dark Eldar Draft FAQ v1.0 released 04/Nov/2010! Download it before the Pandas eat it all!)
 
   
Made in us
Stone Bonkers Fabricator General






A garden grove on Citadel Station

All of my lists have been "fluffy" lists. I play with a small group of friends, so I don't have to deal with people bringing tournament armies to friendly games. When I make an army I think fluff first, and then make a list based on that. I try to make my list effective, as long as it is still within my fluff.

ph34r's forgeworld Phobos blog
+From Iron Cometh Strength+ +From Strength Cometh Will+ +From Will Cometh Faith+ +From Faith Cometh Honor+ +From Honor Cometh Iron+
The Polito form is dead, insect. Are you afraid? What is it you fear? The end of your trivial existence?
When the history of my glory is written, your species shall only be a footnote to my magnificence.
 
   
Made in gb
Horrific Hive Tyrant





London (work) / Pompey (live, from time to time)

and I love it when some Smug Arse who has a Dual Lash List Suddenly has 2 Dreadnoughts Drop Podding right Next to their Two Lashers and unleashing hell



Im guessing thats the same look i see when i drop a pod with 9 death company and a chappy near anything

Even better when they realise that the unit only costs 175 points.
(50 for pod, 125 for chappy)

And what!? rending and feel no pain?


This is why i love blood angels, real combat monsters instead of those soft smurf boyz

Suffused with the dying memories of Sanguinus, the warriors of the Death Company seek only one thing: death in battle fighting against the enemies of the Emperor.  
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Madrak Ironhide







Sounds like you're valuing one style of play over another.

Perhaps making an army not a list will make more sense once GW makes an actual game...

DR:70+S+G-MB-I+Pwmhd05#+D++A+++/aWD100R++T(S)DM+++
Get your own Dakka Code!

"...he could never understand the sense of a contest in which the two adversaries agreed upon the rules." Gabriel Garcia Marquez, One Hundred Years of Solitude 
   
Made in se
Dakka Veteran





Plenty of room for both..

EDIT: To clarify, I mean that you should do what you want, depending on what you want to get out of the game. If you want to only play balls-to-the-walls competitive, you find a group of likeminded individuals, if you want to play fluffy games, again, you find people that feel the same way.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/05/25 02:22:00


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Baltimore, MD

First off, to the OP: I"m not a big fan of ring and run. It's pretty tacky to post a thread starter that is morally indignant and bombastic, including such even handed phrases as "Heinous crimes against the fluff" and then ask people to keep it civil. When read, your post seems to read: "I play the morally proper way, in which strict adherence to fluff (or at least those aspects that I favor) should govern list construction. Is that good or bad?"

Secondly, this was discussed in some detail in the thread on chaos players and the fluff. To sum up a few key points:

1) Special characters are archetypes of which the named persona is merely an exemplar. Every craftworld has a master psyker, every chapter has a master of weaponry, and every IG regiment has a top notch tactical genius that specializes in outflanking. Keep in mind that standard characters have far fewer options in the current books compared to 3rd edition.

2) Enforcing the old Chaos Animosity rules doesn't make as much sense as those elements are neither in the current Chaos Codex's background or in the rules. Previous books essentially had unlocking choices, and taking certain HQ's allowed certain troops. that's not the case anymore, and expecting Chaos to restrict itself to an unwritten rule is asinined, when no other codex faces that.

3) The fluff in 40k is very, very big. The Nidzilla lists that people decry, do you know where the first mentions of the possibility come from? Not Dakka, or Warseer, it was in White Dwarf. GW said that it was possible to build an all big bugs list out of the new Nid book, and mentioned that it represented a seige breaker or heavy combat unit. It was poo-poohed by competitive players until the Dakka Fex was figured out it became good. Now, despite it being pushed by GW itself as a fluffy list, it's a travesty. My point is that it's hard to call anything done well "impossible" under the fluff.

4) Context is important. If you're playing a campaign, I think it's fairer to expect more thematic lists than at an RTT. I've got no beef with somebody that says "I don't' want to play certain builds, because they're not fun," at casual play, but in a tournament, people bring the heat.

5) Much of the bellyaching by background favoring hobbyists is pretty clearly sour grapes. Now, nobody likes to lose games all the time, but there are some options other than running the same old list with the same tactics, then complaining that everybody else is playing cheese. You can ask people to bring softer lists or for a handicap (20% more points, say). You can create custom missions that fit your army. You can play more narrative driven games. The point is, there is no moral high ground because you're playing a gimpy list and expect everybody to respect it. If you want to play it, that's cool, but either man up and ask for an assist or take your beatings like a man.

6) The fundamental problem with the philosophy that armies should be built to the fluff is that it's totally subjective. Nobody has come close to articulating a proper standard for judging if an army is thematic enough, or fluffy enough, or overly power gamed. It is, more often than not, "that thing keeps beating me, I refuse to change how I play or learn how to beat it, and thus I shall call it improper."


My Painted Armies
: Co. B, 37th Praetorian IG: 11,000pts
Cygnar: 350pts
KOW Ogres: 4500 points
Loyalist Emperor's Children: 2500 points 
   
Made in gb
Tough Treekin






Birmingham - England

It depends, I have armies that I build purely for tournaments which are based on a list that gets tweaked.

I have other armies like my Guard and Marines that I have gone with a concept in both cases mechanized and picked units that fit in with that theme, everything in my marine army is either a tank, in a transport or got a jump pack. I use special characters in them however they are my own personal takes on the characters, I've built my own custom Shrike because I dont play Raven Guard I play Hawk Lords and Shrike + all the tanks fit in with the theme of being dropped off by Thunderhawk ( I see it as all of the tanks are dropped in by Thunderhawk Transporters and they then drive off towards their objective) and in my Guard army I use Marbo, mainly because its fun having Rambo in your army and i'm converting him to look like a black ops stealther (kind of Solid Snake crossed with a Cadian) to represent him so he fits in with my Cadian Mech army.

Once the theme is picked I will restrict myself to those kind of units etc however my casual armies tend to become collections, tournament armies tend to just be built to 1500pts and left at that.

When you give total control to a computer, it’s only a matter of time before it pulls a Skynet on you and you’re running for your life.

 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






Sheffield, UK

"If it's not ok it shouldn't be an option" - Pete Haines

Smart bloke was Pete Haines much more so than he's given crdit for.

Spain in Flames: Flames of War (Spanish Civil War 1936-39) Flames of War: Czechs and Slovaks (WWI & WWII) Sheffield & Rotherham Wargames Club

"I'm cancelling you, I'm cancelling you out of shame like my subscription to White Dwarf." - Mark Corrigan: Peep Show
 
   
Made in us
Sneaky Striking Scorpion




To Polonius: Unfortunately sarcasm doesn't translate well to text. Maybe I should have thrown a /S in there. I even said above that it is not my right to tell another player what they can and cannot do. All I said is if I don't like it, I can choose wether or not I will play with them. As for calling me morally indignant, thank you for keeping it civil.
   
Made in eg
[MOD]
Keeper of the Adeptus Arbites Flame






Cairo, Egypt

Gwar! wrote:You are in the wrong hobby then IMO. I don't play this game for the "game", I mostly play because I enjoy the Background. The Game is an Added Bonus


Then play Dark Heresy, or Inquisitor.

40k the table top game created to sell models reflects only a tiny part of the fluff and doesn't even do taht well.

 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Baltimore, MD

EasyE wrote:To Polonius: Unfortunately sarcasm doesn't translate well to text. Maybe I should have thrown a /S in there. I even said above that it is not my right to tell another player what they can and cannot do. All I said is if I don't like it, I can choose wether or not I will play with them. As for calling me morally indignant, thank you for keeping it civil.


Your welcome, unless you again forgot your little sarcasm thing. If you did, then you need to realize that you posted about how you were upset about the conduct of others, specifically in that people violate a taboo of the community. I'm sorry, I can't think of a more polite way to state what you were doing. You were, by defintion, indignant, about an issue that lay in the area of morals. Perhaps I could have said "fairly aggresively critical of people's behavior when it violates a traditional more" instead of morally indignant, but I appreciate brevity.

You clearly didn't read my post, because I was commenting that your original post wasn't a really fair question. It's called begging the quesiton: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beg_the_question, and in it, you essentially asserted as a premise the idea that building to fluff is good and power gaming is bad.

Oh, and by the way, I actually responded to the substance of your question as well. I'm guessing you're more interested in hearing commentary from those that agree with you, but on the off chance you were curious, I listed some points.

On a slightly different point, I think about theme a lot when I build my armies, but that's during the buying, modeling, painting part of it. When I create a list, I want to do well in the game I'm playing. If it's a fun game for teaching a noob, I take a very different list than if I'm going to a Hard Boys.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2009/05/25 03:15:41


My Painted Armies
: Co. B, 37th Praetorian IG: 11,000pts
Cygnar: 350pts
KOW Ogres: 4500 points
Loyalist Emperor's Children: 2500 points 
   
Made in ca
Huge Hierodule






Outflanking

To the OP
As much as I would enjoy participateing in your poll, I find that the only answer that would come near my oppinion is simply to insultingly phrased to merit clicking.

Q: What do you call a Dinosaur Handpuppet?

A: A Maniraptor 
   
Made in ca
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant




Ontario

I think lists should be tailored to the situation. If I am playing against one of the harder players in the area I will bring my harder list. When I go to the FLGS I generally bring an optimized army within restrictions. As in I don't intentionally go for the things that I am told are over the top. Like landraider spam or dread spam. I will however make an army with two landraiders and a bunch of rhinoed tac squads if I am going for an armoured assault theme. I might go for a bunch of dreads if I am going for an iron hands theme. (though I don't think they even use a large number of dreads but metal zombie somehow fits methinks)

I try to tailor my army to where and what I am playing.

As to fluff builds vs power builds, a great comparison would be Flames of War. Where nearly all armies must be made to a certain level of fluff because the rules demand it. You can't really create historically inaccurate armies as the army list has been created to a certain level of historical accuracy. There are certainly power builds within those lists, but it is far more acceptable to do so in a regular game of FoW than 40k.

DCDA:90-S++G+++MB++I+Pw40k98-D+++A+++/areWD007R++T(S)DM+ 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




I agree. My friend and I make armies based on what we think are cool units, and often pit our unwittingly 'crappy' armys' elements against each other. Personally I feel its more fun.

My friend uses swooping hawks in his eldar army, because he really likes the pieplate they drop. Sure mathammer wise its not all that effective but its sort of a 'trademark' of his. In his necron army he runs mostly Necron Warriors (this was back in 3rd/4th edition) and since both of us were essentially warhammer nubs- we didn't have any rule nazis or powergamers playing us to ruin our good time- we stumped each other with tactics some players would think were 'stupid' or 'waste of points'.

I guess now you wouldn't think that Warrior spam would be that hard to deal with, but it had a definite psychological effect on me, and it was ominous to see half the guys I knock down get back up again. Everything I shot was either too weak, or not enough good stuff.

I think it also goes to how armies can be fun to play when you don't yet know all the paper-scissors-rock metagame yet. Imagine a tournament where 10 players were given 10 never-before-seen armies/codecies, and have to put together an army having no idea how well it will work nor have any idea what they are up against. THOSE are the fun battles, in my opinion.
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

"Make an army, not a list" sounds very similar to the "Play the game, not the rules" phrase that the Amazing K gave us a few years ago. It's an equally as hollow statement made to allow others to stand on their Soap Boxes of Superior Morality +1 and look down upon those who enjoy playing competitively. It also implies that one cannot have a themed/fluffy army that is also a good list, and is one of the reasons why the casual-gamer mafia of Dakka must be stopped at all costs (especially those of them that instantly refer to any competative or tournament gamer as a WAAC player as a 'get out of making a valid argument free' card).

*ahem*

Of course, that's only when such a phrase is wielded as a weapon to bash a viewpoint over other people's heads - which I don't think the OP is doing - and as it happens I actually do agree with the sentiment. For quite a while now most of our group has been building armies, not lists. I want my "army" to do X, so I'll go and build the best "list" I can to fit that theme. So if a friend of mine wants to do a heavily bike-themed army, he'll go and make a bike-themed army. It will still be hard-as-nails and competative, but he won't start with the competative goal and end with the theme, it's the other way around.

For me I design a list around an idea that interests me. I might decide that one week I like Hellhounds, so I'm going to take three Hellhounds, and then I'll try and build a list that works around that. My current fixation is my Inquisitorial force, and the fact that I finally, after all these years, have the Valkyries to play them as AirCav. So, even though I know Inquisitorial Storm Troopers aren't very good, I'm going to do it anyway because my theme is that my Inquisi army has access to the best technology, so the Chimeras stay with my Cadians and the Valks go to my Stormies. And then the other units in the army will be geared around supporting this (doomed!) formation and hopefully giving it some ability to fight back once the Stormies have been slaughtered and the Valks shot down.

   
Made in au
Navigator





Karnaeya sees dual lash list.

"I know you, your from the internet."

I dont really have a problem playing any list. IF the guy has modelled it all out.

But wargamers myself included are a pretty whingey lot. So anything that isnt perfect IE everything will get complained about.

But the most obvious thing to me is people aren't expressing themsleves in real life. Cause if someone came to me with dual lash and I didn't wanna play them. Then I wouldnt .. it that simple. Tournements you can mark them down on sports. And you should of brought something hard yourself at a tournie.

She thirsts, We dance, They die, He laughs.  
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





Arlington, VA

There's a time and place for fluffy, casual armies and one for power lists and/or refined/tweaked list. If I'm just going to the FLGS to kill an afternoon, I'll put together a list that suits my fancy for the day, whether it be fast mech and bikes, slow and steady armor advance, or something wacky like SM Scout spam. However, if I'm going to step into a competitive arena, I'm sure as heck going to have my list as refined, tweaked, and optimized as much as possible. That doesn't mean I can't run a fairly themed army, but it does mean that my theme better be able to hold it's own against some tough competitors.

And special character spam seems to be the way things are headed in 5th. A lot of SCs just give way too much utility to be ignored completely (Vulkan). At least many of them tend to lead to fairly themed and/or fluffy lists (Khan on bike).

Check out my blog for bat reps and pics of my Ultramarine Honorguard (Counts as GK) Army!
Howlingmoon wrote:Good on you for finally realizing the scum that is tournament players, Warhammer would really be better off if those mongrels all left to play Warmachine with the rest of the anti-social miscreants.
combatmedic wrote:Im sure the only reason Japan lost WW2 was because the US failed disclose beforehand they had Tactical Nuke special rule.

 
   
Made in us
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine





So if you want to build an army, where do you start? I'm going to go out on alimb here and say the initial planning phase includes a list! All of my armies start with a core list, which is then expanded upon.

My Chaos army started as a standard dual lash list and has been steadily expanding since then. So sue me if I decided to play something competitive in order to keep up with the Nob Bikes and Crusher spam at my local store. My group has a tendency to play strong armies with tournaments in mind (our fun games are still often played with strong lists, but we have a blast playing and that is what is important) and that is that. We are by no means doing it wrong because we like to play with the strong armies that we are likely to see should we attend tournaments.

FWIW we are also willing and capable of building lists that many of you would consider to be more "fun" (I put it in quotes because to my group, fun is strong/competitive armies) and do so regularly when playing with people outside of our group in non-tournament environments.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: