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 actually regularly test lists against myself on Vassal. Even before I moved it was a good way to run a test with new ideas. A lot of them are one offs due to my crazy army ADD but some I like.

For the ones I like generally my "opposition" is my Space Wolves (since it's my most proven army in R/L) and I try to play 2-3 games (though most end early) w/differing deployments, objectives, and replaying with the same set-up sometimes as if my opponent had seized. I'll also do with this mech guard and the the test bed DE army that Dash's list grew out of.

I don't know if it would help other people or not but I do the above (the multiple games) when I find a list I think has a lot of potential.

I say go for it

I liked svendrex's suggestion a lot. I'd certainly be interested in reading one of these and seeing your turn by turn thought process for DE.

XV25 wrote:I liked svendrex's suggestion a lot. I'd certainly be interested in reading one of these and seeing your turn by turn thought process for DE.

Actually, you don't need a batrep to see my turn by turn thought process with DE. I put it out in GREAT detail. There's a link in my signature - how to win with DE.

Dashofpepper wrote:

XV25 wrote:I liked svendrex's suggestion a lot. I'd certainly be interested in reading one of these and seeing your turn by turn thought process for DE.

Actually, you don't need a batrep to see my turn by turn thought process with DE. I put it out in GREAT detail. There's a link in my signature - how to win with DE.

What would be more interesting is the thought exercises that could evolve from you constructing viable, tournament ready lists, and then giving them to your friends to play with, guiding them in how they should play that army. Then when they feel confident in their skills, play against you and then make a battle report about the results.

Remember, you build the list; they supply the models.

I always play-test a new army/deck/whatever against my hardest to see if it can work out, even with the odds tilted against it by playing as though the tried-and-true army is all-knowing and the other isn't. I vote helpful, fwiw.

It's a valid idea to play games against oneself for testing and practice.

I don't think a batrep on a solo game has much interest. It doesn't display competing tactical thinking.

I think a batrep would be less informative than say something along the lines of "This is a classic pincer attack using X units" and showing what logicaly happens.

Lots of people post that X unit is awesome because of Y stats, but we don't often get to see "Use X unit in the following manner to Support Z unit, which should try to be on the far side of the board, to do B"

Iron dog had some great ideas of tactics on his website. Using something like that would prove to be far more helpful.

Also, how to react to basic tactics. If I see my opponent doing a refused flank, how would I react to do? What should I do? Set up a refused flank with your DE and then show us how you would react to it with your Orks and vice versa. I'd take all the classic military tactics and work through them, then add your own that you might think of.

I wouldn't be entertained by a self v. Self Batrep, and that's what I read them for: entertainment.

Find someone decent in your area, play them, and Batrep that with lots of tactically insightful commentary.

My two cents.

Hulksmash wrote:I actually regularly test lists against myself on Vassal. Even before I moved it was a good way to run a test with new ideas. A lot of them are one offs due to my crazy army ADD but some I like.

For the ones I like generally my "opposition" is my Space Wolves (since it's my most proven army in R/L) and I try to play 2-3 games (though most end early) w/differing deployments, objectives, and replaying with the same set-up sometimes as if my opponent had seized. I'll also do with this mech guard and the the test bed DE army that Dash's list grew out of.

I don't know if it would help other people or not but I do the above (the multiple games) when I find a list I think has a lot of potential.

I say go for it

+1

I know when I got back into 40k after not playing since the begining of 4th edition, I spent a lot of time running scenarios against myself to get familiar with new rule changes and to reaquaint myself with the armies. This was before I got my buddies into or back into the game. I'll still run mini games against myself just to try something out. For full scale testing, I have a buddy that I play with that helps me.

@ DoP: Like you said, you have a very comprehensive guide on playing DE, so the only reason I could think of to do this for you (since you are doing this for other's benefit) would be just a one-off game that you could take pictures of, demonstrate how the concepts of the article are applied, and add it the article. If you do a similar article for Orks or Necrons, do the same thing. You could also do what Sev proposed and make it a REALLY long but comprehensive article.

I guess my point is, running the batreps and just posting them in this particular forum doesn't accomplish much, but running them with a particular purpose to each and tying them into an article of tactics would be very useful for players imo.

Dashofpepper wrote:Is there tactical value for other people in laying out how I go about it? I'm pretty sure that my DE would beat my Orks. My Orks would beat my necrons. My Necrons would beat my DE. That isn't to say that all DE beat all Orks, etc - just that I'm pretty sure how my particular games would end up because I know how to play both sides well.

Having read your DE tactics thread and numerous Ork tactics and battle reps - I still think there would be some benefit and it wouldn't be quite as cut and dried as you make it above. It's not a case of not knowing the plan from the start - but more how the plan changes as the battle unfolds. Even playing yourself, luck (not to mention terrain layout...) is going to potentially put a spanner in the works. If it doesn't, well, then I guess it's not worth while...

How your DE deals with a lacklustre start against your Orks could be interesting if it changes your tactics and/or priorities - but only if it makes a game of it - probably not so much if it just ends up with your Orks doing what they do best... but even then the decisions could be interesting...

It might be that you need to play several games in order to find one with a combination worth batrepping (a bit like how GW play several games but only one makes White Dwarf) Then again - you may need to play several games just to determine the answer to your initial question - did anything happen that was worth batrepping?

I find great value in games against myself, so I'd imagine it would be the same reading about someone else's.

I'm not interested in battle reports or games where someone screws up and makes a bad play. I'm interested in cases where both opponents make no mistakes about what either side is up to. That's a better simulator of top flight competition.

I wouldn't really pay much interest to it to be totally honest. I believe the only real things that can be learnt is from the games with their surprising moments and both players trying something new to improvise during the game.

Although if you ever do post another battle report I would be there within seconds Who am I to shun the knowledge of the (in)famous DoP himself?

I think not, as part of the fun of bat reps is opponents making surprise moves / mistakes. It will be rather hard to surprise yourself .

It's not at the level of playing Battleship against yourself... but close

Kilkrazy wrote:It's a valid idea to play games against oneself for testing and practice.

I don't think a batrep on a solo game has much interest. It doesn't display competing tactical thinking.

agreed. taking pictures of you playing with yourself and then telling us the details sounds strangely inappropriate but i can't put my finger on exactly why.... i'd recommend trouncing the locals and recording it for posterity instead like the old days.

+1 for you to make bat reps, also excellent points svendrex

something my buddy does is at the beginning of a fight when he practices against himself, he literally writes out multiple things he could do, perhaps there's more than one viable tactic to tackle and army, then he rolls on which way to act, this forces you to prepare for multiple scenarios are you yourself are unsure of what you'll roll.

While for you there's probably only one "viable" tactic for any given situation because you seem to have the game down to a science, it might help the new players etc. if you then went on to explain why tactic x is the dumbest choice they've ever made in their life.