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.

bigtmac68 wrote:Well yeah, of course you are taking the most effective choice for the points cost. Why would you not do that and Why is that bad?

I will never understand how NOT doing something illogical(delberatly taking a less than optimal choice) makes you a bad gamer.

i think you have to look at the flip side of this debate as well. Some people play the game to bring the setting alive, tell a story and create what they see as a fluffy army in the context of he setting and game background. The so-called "crap" units exist in the setting and thus to a person like this can be fluffy additions to a force. Sometimes I'll play a certain unit because it fits the scenario, army fluff, campaign narrative or just because I want to put something kooky on the board.

If you wanna play a min/maxed ultra competitive list, sure go ahead. that's your right.

But jut like you are complaining that people telling you it is bad is annoying/illogical I'll point out that just as many people on your side of the debate bring their annoying tendency to dismiss any type of wargaming that isn't focused on being ultra-competitive. If I had a dollar for every time some wargaming Sun Tzu Jr. told me to drop some "crap" unit and replace it with "moar better stuff" i'd be a millionaire.

List posted: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/246318.page

I feel somewhat bad since I did take 3 Tac Squads in Rhino's, though only 2 have Meltas and the same kit out.

CT GAMER wrote:

bigtmac68 wrote:Well yeah, of course you are taking the most effective choice for the points cost. Why would you not do that and Why is that bad?

I will never understand how NOT doing something illogical(delberatly taking a less than optimal choice) makes you a bad gamer.

i think you have to look at the flip side of this debate as well. Some people play the game to bring the setting alive, tell a story and create what they see as a fluffy army in the context of he setting and game background. The so-called "crap" units exist in the setting and thus to a person like this can be fluffy additions to a force. Sometimes I'll play a certain unit because it fits the scenario, army fluff, campaign narrative or just because I want to put something kooky on the board.

If you wanna play a min/maxed ultra competitive list, sure go ahead. that's your right.

But jut like you are complaining that people telling you it is bad is annoying/illogical I'll point out that just as many people on your side of the debate bring their annoying tendency to dismiss any type of wargaming that isn't focused on being ultra-competitive. If I had a dollar for every time some wargaming Sun Tzu Jr. told me to drop some "crap" unit and replace it with "moar better stuff" i'd be a millionaire.

Oh I agree, I think being judgemental on either end of the scale is bad. IF you want to play a fluffy list wonderful, if your into campaign play or leagues or special scenarios like planetstrike and the like, awesome. Just dont slam me for "spamming" when I am always very upfront that I play tournaments, and the only games im interested really in playing are tournament style. Thats just what I find enjoyable and it does not make me some kind of WAAC DonkeyCave.

I do have to point out though, that I think the honey moon is over with PP, or at leas here. I cant tell you how much complaining I have heard over Mark II. I used to own an FLGS and I can tell you, complaining about X Y or Z was the number one passtime and not just in mini gaming. Card Gamers, Comic Readers, hell even my coffee shop customers were always complaining about something ;-)

God bless all of you who still do the FLGS thing, you are better men than I!!!

If mass mechanized spam gets on your nerves I recommend looking at house rules / scenarios that help encourage diversity. Also, smaller point totals can help limit to troops choices - which are arguably meant to be spammed, considering you get 6 troops choices on a FOC as opposed to 2 or 3 of anything else.

What about a tournament where you gain bonus points for each FOC category where you have a surviving unit? Perhaps a bonus for your opponent having no surviving units in a category as well? At lower points totals the carrot + stick approach could shake things up.

- Marty Lund

Or play a special campain inside a building/facitlity/starship where large vehicles won't fit inside.

I'll have the spam, spam, spam, spam, with bacon and spam!

I'm astonished it took until page 2 for someone to talk about the delicious pig-based meat product...


But to answer the question 'is 40k still all about spam?', it depends on if you mean 'is 40k still about spam if I want to win a lot?'.

In competitions, yes. There will always be spam, because people go to tournaments to win, so they'll find a unit/build that works and then take it again (and again...) so if the first one dies you can still follow your game plan through.

In scenarios, it depends. If the scenario/fluff calls for spam, then spam there will be. If not, meh.

In friendly play, your call. Spam if you want, or not if you don't. If its just for a laugh and a few beers who cares?

Voodoo Boyz wrote:As far as being "bad", well if it makes the game stale because you KNOW what you're going to face against the majority of the time, it gets annoying and stale, ie. less fun.

This is the reason I quit 40K. I am still having a hard time being convinced to return to it.