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 honestly don't see the problem with people wanting to play spamhammer. I am in agreement with Ailaros. If that is the way they want to play then by all means they have that right. Personally, I think it adds a lot more of a challenge to take people on who take their tourney lists against my un-optomized play-test/for-fun list. I'm not sure whether you think it is boring because you are getting defeated all the time, or because you are constantly crushing them because you know how they are going to play their army since you've seen in so much lately. I think with every meta list out there they will tend to die out or fade away (perhaps not completely, but enough that you'll see different builds) as other people start to tailor their lists to beat them or use their units wisely and in doing so gain victory.
I think a lot of the fun in playing the game is not what your opponent is playing, but what you bring to the table yourself and how you use it. What's that? You brought your 3x longfang squads? Well let me just deepstrike my "un-competitive" stormtroopers with plasmaguns right next to you and give you something to think about.
Basically my personal belief is "To each their own". Among friends, I may jokingly give them crap for bringing cheesy units, but even if I lose it is like a victory. Why? Because I have seen how he plays his list and since he had such a victory will likely play it again the same way. For them: if something works well why change it? With that kind of tactical advantage I'll have a better chance of beating him by expecting how he is going to deploy, play, etc. It goes back and forth like that. Lists get changed because of this, play-style changes, and that is what makes the game fun I would think.
It makes wonderful fluff-sense, because logistics are much less difficult when only a single type of fuel and ammunition is required by the army in question.
Now the competitive scene is a bit different, for example spammy Space Wolves is much less fluffy than spammy Ultramarines.
Which just tells me that the Codex should reflect the Fluff, not the Player.
Yeah but boring why? For you? Why should it be boring for you if you are playing the army and list you want? Also for tournament lists I can understand why players would want to take the best unit out of their codex and copy/paste because it is the best. Every codex has that golden unit. Why punish someone for wanting to take advantage of it? I say just play your list and have fun with it. If you are going up against some power-gamer accept the fact and just do as much with your army as you can. If you lose you lose no big deal, if you win, well heck you just beat a tourney list with your fluffy themed list.
I remember coming into my FLGS to play a random pick up game. Played against some guy who ran an apparently pretty powerful dark eldar list. When the other guys in the store heard who I was playing they rolled their eyes and made remarks like, "have fun with that" or "oh you'll see". Anyway, long story short, I played him with a test list I had made that utilized 2 devil dogs. I had no idea he was playing D. Eldar and had my list made up before hand since I wanted to try it for fun and see what devil dogs could do. In the end I literally crushed his list into the dirt. I almost felt bad. Funny thing too, the guy had recently won a tournament or something. At the end of the day he had like 3-5 KPS and I had somewhere around 13. It was ridiculous.
I'm with Ailaros 100%. It takes two to tango. My first impression when I hear people complain about spam is always that they want their opponent to play the way they think the game should be played, which is just unfair. It's my army, so I get to decide what's in it.
As for the claim that competitve people tend to have huge collections, not in my case. My list is designed for one purpose: to break my opponent's face. It also happens to be 95% of what I currently own. I literally cannot make more than a few changes without proxying.
Finally, if you think that spamish lists aren't fluffy and therefore are a pox on the hobby, I have one main objection. It isn't my fault that GW writes fluff that flies in the face of what is actually good on the tabletop. If I tried to make my army fully fit the fluff in the Blood Angels codex, my list would be laughably bad. In particular, I'd have to do fun things like take a Whirlwind and give my Devastators Land Raiders as dedicated transports. I refuse to be browbeaten into buying models to make a horrible army because GW can't be bothered to make what works in their fiction line up with what's actually good on the tabletop.
At times I even wonder if anyone at GW has any idea what a good army is, but I guess bad sample armies sell more models.
Current Record: 5 Wins, 6 Draws, 3 Losses 2000 points
The main reason I hate spam lists is because without fail, it always seems I end up facing people who have the same, exact, NETLIST.
There's only so many times I can face a specific space wolves list and not get so bored! I once played five people who had the exact same list in a ROW!
Imperial guard comes second, with four!
What's worse is that they all, without fail, played the exact same as each other. I felt like I was facing a computer instead of people.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/04/28 15:50:26
Nalathani wrote:Fix the codexes, and you fix the spam.
I disagree. There will always be either:
1) Something that is better than something else at what you want it to do.
2) Something that appeals to you more.
I can't speak to your #2, because variety appeals to me more. #1 - I think that's pretty much just another side of the problem.
Meaning, if all your opponents are spamming mech lists, then you need to pack as much anti-mech as possible, therefore, you take what is best at that. The way to play against the problem is to become part of the problem, unfortunately.
But, if many different archtypes were possible, you'd need to have tools to deal with them all. So while unit A might be better against light mech, unit B might be better against heavy mech, and because heavy mech is viable, you trade off one of unit A to get one of unit B. And you trade off another unit A to get a unit C, which has a better game against light infantry.
Once upon a time there were great sprawling threads about whether Striking Scorpions or Howling Banshees were better. Now, if you play eldar at all, you just have to spam fire dragons.
Yeh I personally dislike the whole spam thing... I recently started collecting a Grey Knight army (pause for the boos and hisses) as I came back from a long 40k absence and saw their new models on the GW website. Dreadknights? Yes please! A unit choice called Paladins? Nice! (I always had a paladin character in my online rpgs... though I was disappointed that they have paladins WITHOUT SHIELDS?!? wtf..)
Of course after I'd read through the codex and bought my first couple models, I was in a local store talking to the guy behind the counter when some random guy started slating me for "collecting the flavour of the month" and only playing the overpowered cheesy army, and that all I have to do to win is to Paladin/Draigo spam etc etc
Of course this annoyed me muchly, mostly because I had assumed that the Grey Knights were just as balanced as any other SM chapter, but also because that guy just assumed that I would be spamming purifiers/paladins in all my lists.
In reality I always try to get as much variety into any of my lists as I can. Fielding 5 squads of the same unit and nothing else would bore me to tears, both to paint as well as to play. But to suddenly find myself having to defend my choice of army, just because there are people out there who will exploit rules and spam units just to get a win at all costs...
Lets just say I'll be glad when 6th edition comes out. I for one am hoping the leaked "patch up" rules are for real, as it will mean everyone will have to play paladins the way I play them by default! (eg. none of that weird wound-allocation shenanigans that I find... well, against the spirit of the game)
In fact most of the spamming that goes on I find either boring, or against the spirit of the game. Variety is the spice of life people! Make your armies interesting! Seriously, you'll have more fun in the end lol
(The opinions written above are mine, and by no means should be used against me in a court of law, as I'm probably wrong on many levels. Also, I've noticed that this borders on a rant, but hey if you cant rant on the internets where can you!)
Experiment 626 wrote:I think what the OP is getting at is just how depressing and insanely boring non-tournament game nights are getting in many areas, where you only ever see the top rated netlists ad nausium every freaking time you go to play for fun... (I can atest to that since that's what the bulk of my local meta is like - WAAC's 24/7, and it's a crying shame people have become this petty and focused on purely winning over having fun & your games telling a good story. )
Naturally in most tournaments you should go into the event expecting the filthiest of the filthy-cheese lists to show up because the bulk of the player community is there to win games. So, if you go into a tourny with a non-optimised list, then suck it up, take your lumps and enjoy your last few games vs the other like-minded attendees.
Just know that you're throwing awards like 'Best General' and 'Best Overall' out the window, but you can always focus on prizes like 'Best Sport' or 'Best Painted'.
However, I think alot of competitive players need to take a break and put more effort into ensuring that weekly open gaming nights are fun for both players and not just another curbstomping marathon! Most players aren't looking for all out balls-to-the-wall 'uber competitive play on pick-up nights. So really, the onus is more on the competitive player's shoulders to perhaps tone down their lists just a little bit because their opponents either aren't into that kind of play, aren't 'great' players and/or just like to play the units they like as well even if they're totally trash!!!
By the same token, the non-competitive player needs to be upfront themselves and let their opponent know, for example, "This is my super-fluffy-themed list, so please can you take some pity on me and not pull out your 'uber list?!" (showing your opponent the list can also help too as that way a competitive player can also potentially remove the more rediculous hard-counters to keep the game entertaining)
So really, outside of tourny prep games or tourny play, is it really *that* hard for competitive players every now and then to;
- Use only 3 Purifyer squads instead of 6 and perhaps try out a different unit like a Purgation squad or Dreadknight? (and leave the 'ing herp-derp grenades at home!!!)
- Swap out 2 of your 6 venoms for say a beast pack or raider?
- Leave Fateweaver at home for a night?
- Don't use wound-allocation BS?
- Try out some Penal Legion squad/s instead of 3-5x meltavets in bawkes?
etc...
Seriously, trying out some different unit combos every now and then not only helps further your own game play and perhaps gives you some new ideas, but it can also really help out less competitive players as they're not forced into a corner they're utterly unprepared for! (seriously, how nessessary is it to pull 6 razorbacks + 3 baal's on a poor sod who's only playing in his 5th game?! )
As an afterthought, the less competitive player/s can also perhaps ask their more competitive opponent/s to help them with their tactics and how to perhaps improve their list within their comfort zone. (ie: "well, 5x missile launchers is a better way to run your long fangs because of reasons 'X/Y/Z'") Eventually, the less competitive player/s will slowly and eventually improve to the point that everyone can (hopefully) play the list/s they like and still be decently competitive & the community itself will be faced with less of a divide between, "you're just a jerky spamy power-gaming TFG!" and "you're just a fluffer-nutter who thinks I should play only crap units to fit your theme!"
This... this is my over all point in a nut shell. By all means keep competitive lists competitive... keep friendly list friendly
Squidmanlolz wrote:A lot of spam lists can be backed up with fluff.
Colonel Greiss of the Catachan 2nd Chimera spammed, he used all of his Chimeras as mobile fire points (like many guard players do). The Chimeras gave the Catachan 2nd more flexibility than could have normally be expected of them.
I don't really like players who spam consistently (I occasionally spam, and don't mind players who do it once in a while) I disagree with the statement that spam lists aren't fluffy enough, most are plenty fluffy.
Ok but this is spamming because it makes sense and matches its armies fluff... not because they player heard it would win them games.
Ailaros wrote:
Experiment 626 wrote:So really, the onus is more on the competitive player's shoulders to perhaps tone down their lists just a little bit because their opponents either aren't into that kind of play
Why? Why shouldn't the other person change? Why do either need to change?
Joey wrote:Because it took me months to learn the ins and outs of every unit in my codex.
They found someone on the internet to tell them
So? People found a more efficient way to field reasonably competitive lists. They did it in a different way?
Plus, there's something I think people are missing here. There are TWO players here, and you're one of them. Your opponent is bringing a netlist to be competitive? Bring a list tailored to rip netlists to shreds. It's not that difficult. Your opponent is just sitting there doing nothing but rolling dice without moving anything? Bring a list where you do movement. If a game is boring, it can only be because you are also participating in the boringness.
Blaming your loathing of your opponents list on your opponent is missing at least half the point. The real question is why are you loathing the list, not why is your opponent bringing it.
See you are the people I will just not play and generally ignore in pick up friendly games and enjoy utterly stomping in tournament because you are spamming some unit or army you heard is winning. Guess what I also heard that people think that unit is good, experience and tactics beat out"spam flavor of the edition/codex" any day.
WhiteWolf01 wrote:I honestly don't see the problem with people wanting to play spamhammer. I am in agreement with Ailaros. If that is the way they want to play then by all means they have that right. Personally, I think it adds a lot more of a challenge to take people on who take their tourney lists against my un-optomized play-test/for-fun list. I'm not sure whether you think it is boring because you are getting defeated all the time, or because you are constantly crushing them because you know how they are going to play their army since you've seen in so much lately. I think with every meta list out there they will tend to die out or fade away (perhaps not completely, but enough that you'll see different builds) as other people start to tailor their lists to beat them or use their units wisely and in doing so gain victory.
I think a lot of the fun in playing the game is not what your opponent is playing, but what you bring to the table yourself and how you use it. What's that? You brought your 3x longfang squads? Well let me just deepstrike my "un-competitive" stormtroopers with plasmaguns right next to you and give you something to think about.
Basically my personal belief is "To each their own". Among friends, I may jokingly give them crap for bringing cheesy units, but even if I lose it is like a victory. Why? Because I have seen how he plays his list and since he had such a victory will likely play it again the same way. For them: if something works well why change it? With that kind of tactical advantage I'll have a better chance of beating him by expecting how he is going to deploy, play, etc. It goes back and forth like that. Lists get changed because of this, play-style changes, and that is what makes the game fun I would think.
Like i said earlier I think its a matter of keeping friedly fluffy games fun and competative tournament games WAAC. I just find that every time I face a DE/GK/SW/ect, ect, I see the same units spammed and run every time. Sometimes I crush them sometimes I lose. Mostly its just a monotany thing that I never saw in the other editions.
ZebioLizard2 wrote:The main reason I hate spam lists is because without fail, it always seems I end up facing people who have the same, exact, NETLIST.
There's only so many times I can face a specific space wolves list and not get so bored! I once played five people who had the exact same list in a ROW!
Imperial guard comes second, with four!
What's worse is that they all, without fail, played the exact same as each other. I felt like I was facing a computer instead of people.
Agreed
Maitereya wrote:Why do chess players spam pawns?
This game is a far far comparison from chess. In chess you have to take 8 pawns without choice, in warhammer you can take whatever you want.
Redbeard wrote:
pretre wrote:
Nalathani wrote:Fix the codexes, and you fix the spam.
I disagree. There will always be either:
1) Something that is better than something else at what you want it to do.
2) Something that appeals to you more.
I can't speak to your #2, because variety appeals to me more. #1 - I think that's pretty much just another side of the problem.
Meaning, if all your opponents are spamming mech lists, then you need to pack as much anti-mech as possible, therefore, you take what is best at that. The way to play against the problem is to become part of the problem, unfortunately.
But, if many different archtypes were possible, you'd need to have tools to deal with them all. So while unit A might be better against light mech, unit B might be better against heavy mech, and because heavy mech is viable, you trade off one of unit A to get one of unit B. And you trade off another unit A to get a unit C, which has a better game against light infantry.
Once upon a time there were great sprawling threads about whether Striking Scorpions or Howling Banshees were better. Now, if you play eldar at all, you just have to spam fire dragons.
Your sentence about the eldar units is perfect. Back in a different age it was about preference/effectiveness... now its just take as many units that you know are statistically awesome as you can.
Niiru wrote:Yeh I personally dislike the whole spam thing... I recently started collecting a Grey Knight army (pause for the boos and hisses) as I came back from a long 40k absence and saw their new models on the GW website. Dreadknights? Yes please! A unit choice called Paladins? Nice! (I always had a paladin character in my online rpgs... though I was disappointed that they have paladins WITHOUT SHIELDS?!? wtf..)
Of course after I'd read through the codex and bought my first couple models, I was in a local store talking to the guy behind the counter when some random guy started slating me for "collecting the flavour of the month" and only playing the overpowered cheesy army, and that all I have to do to win is to Paladin/Draigo spam etc etc
Of course this annoyed me muchly, mostly because I had assumed that the Grey Knights were just as balanced as any other SM chapter, but also because that guy just assumed that I would be spamming purifiers/paladins in all my lists.
In reality I always try to get as much variety into any of my lists as I can. Fielding 5 squads of the same unit and nothing else would bore me to tears, both to paint as well as to play. But to suddenly find myself having to defend my choice of army, just because there are people out there who will exploit rules and spam units just to get a win at all costs...
Lets just say I'll be glad when 6th edition comes out. I for one am hoping the leaked "patch up" rules are for real, as it will mean everyone will have to play paladins the way I play them by default! (eg. none of that weird wound-allocation shenanigans that I find... well, against the spirit of the game)
In fact most of the spamming that goes on I find either boring, or against the spirit of the game. Variety is the spice of life people! Make your armies interesting! Seriously, you'll have more fun in the end lol
(The opinions written above are mine, and by no means should be used against me in a court of law, as I'm probably wrong on many levels. Also, I've noticed that this borders on a rant, but hey if you cant rant on the internets where can you!)
Great example of my current mindset.
Really, overall, yes this is just an old bitter gamers complaint about the current meta that will likely change in a couple years. I just can help but get bored with todays gamers desire to spam units not because they like that units look or fluff but because it will win them games. At the end of the day in regular pick up games I will just choose not to play spamfest/cookie cutter armies while winning games against long fang spam and purifier lists in tournament with my crusty old Slannesh themed CSM.
Children of Excess 2500pts
Hive Fleet Chimera 3000pts
Laughing God wrote:
Great example of my current mindset.
Yay! Validation for my crazy mental processes!
But seriously, the crazy wound allocation stuff on paladins really depressed me when I found out about it. It was a couple weeks after I'd already commited to collecting Grey Knights, and I was looking forward to fielding a beefy little paladin squad in my inquisitorial force, but I couldnt understand why people were suggesting all sorts of wierd wargear combinations that I should be using...
Of course when realisation dawned, it turned me away from wanting paladins anywhere near my army. They have become dirty, soiled, disgraced by the WAAC people.
Well, for a couple of days anyway. Then I got over it and decided that I would still field them, I would just make sure I used them properly.
Laughing God wrote:
Great example of my current mindset.
Yay! Validation for my crazy mental processes!
But seriously, the crazy wound allocation stuff on paladins really depressed me when I found out about it. It was a couple weeks after I'd already commited to collecting Grey Knights, and I was looking forward to fielding a beefy little paladin squad in my inquisitorial force, but I couldnt understand why people were suggesting all sorts of wierd wargear combinations that I should be using...
Of course when realisation dawned, it turned me away from wanting paladins anywhere near my army. They have become dirty, soiled, disgraced by the WAAC people.
Well, for a couple of days anyway. Then I got over it and decided that I would still field them, I would just make sure I used them properly.
Moral high ground for the win!
I used to love the GK codex from the last edition. I always painted this picture in my head of one GK termie facing off against this massive GD ready to throw down. The army always appealed to me. I was going to make a list of GK termies/paladins simply for that fluff ideal and I LOVE the models. The currect tournament scene and everyone telling me to give each unit a different weapon when in fluff a standard squad mostly had glavies turned me off to the idea. Like if I ran anything but a mixed weapons unit I was an idiot . Still might build a small armie though for my own tastes but your story was still a great example. Keep 40k fluffy and fun my friend
Children of Excess 2500pts
Hive Fleet Chimera 3000pts
Laughing God wrote:The currect tournament scene and everyone telling me to give each unit a different weapon when in fluff a standard squad mostly had glavies turned me off to the idea.
Actually, each Grey Knight fights with his preferred weapon, so a mix would be just as fluffy as everyone having halberds.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
My current Grey Knights lists generally have at least one Dreadknight (usually 2, but its points-dependant), and a couple of inquisitorial HQs with henchmen, with terminators ready to teleport down to support... its just seems to use most of the "fun" parts of the army to me! (Though I have been looking into the assassins and whole "Astral Aim" possibilities recently too..)
This is usually immediately responded to with "Take out that, you can get another Psyrifleman for that, you can fit 6 psydreads in your army if you take out some of those, and why arent you using Draigo you need Draigo and then you can...." etc.
Why would I want to win using a spammed out method of play that, while it might make victory more likely, is just following everyone elses method?
Come up with something fun and interesting, granted it may blow up in your face, but the worst that will happen is you'll *gasp* lose.
Course if its the final round of a tournament, and you have bet your first born child on the outcome, then maybe trying out the conversion beamer in a purgation squad should be left for another time lol. Unfortunate side effect of the more competitive scene i guess.
Redbeard wrote:But, if many different archtypes were possible, you'd need to have tools to deal with them all. So while unit A might be better against light mech, unit B might be better against heavy mech, and because heavy mech is viable, you trade off one of unit A to get one of unit B. And you trade off another unit A to get a unit C, which has a better game against light infantry.
This would be true if the mech archetype was the ONLY competitive one, which it isn't. At worst, you could accuse 40k of being a rock-paper-scissors game, but it's not a rock-paper-nuclear weapon one.
Plus, I'd be careful not to make the mistake that the major tournament ring is exactly synonymous with competitive 40k play, and that everything else is non-competitive by comparison. Tournaments are a competitive scene that has certain rules, and other things like local leagues, are also competitive, but have a different set. Just because something is good at a tournament doesn't necessarily mean it's good outside of a tournament environment, and vice versa for non-tournament play.
Laughing God wrote:See you are the people I will just not play and generally ignore in pick up friendly games and enjoy utterly stomping in tournament because you are spamming some unit or army you heard is winning. Guess what I also heard that people think that unit is good, experience and tactics beat out"spam flavor of the edition/codex" any day.
Once again, I take offense. I have never played at Adepticon (or like), nor do I think you could utterly stomp me, nor have I EVER played a flavor of the month army, much less a flavor of the month list.
You seem to be making your point by no means other than throwing mud on people you disagree with and then decrying them for being dirty. I don't know what's worse, the straw man or the ad hominem. In any case, if you want to have a reasonable conversation, then be reasonable. Otherwise you're just being an irrational little whiner who just wants his way.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/04/28 21:51:46
So why can't a competitive/spammy list be fun? Or why can't a fluffy friendly list be competitive? It seems like you are making out this gap exists between these two types of lists which isn't necessary true.. Granted after giving it some thought, i guess I can understand where you are coming from when you are tired of spammy lists. After playing them 10 times in a row I can see where your bordom stems. I think it is easier among friends to make that step where you all start to decide to make different lists around different units. It is something you would feel more comfortable bringing up by saying, "why don't you try something different? We get it X spam list is good, but have you thought about some other list you wouldn't mind trying?" I don't think you should expect that same kind of understanding going into a pick up game. Some people play their tourny list year round because they want to get good with it before the actual tourny. I don't see the problem with that. But on the other hand why would it be so awful to try and make a fluffy and or fun list that is actually competitive ad can take on all comers? I think the entire idea of what a "fun" list is, is completey subjective. Some people equate fun with WAAC and their ideal list is to pick units that are cost effective and able to handle all possiblities the enemy might throw at them. To them thy want the most for their points and that is what they enjoy. Someone else might enjoy their entirly fluffy list built around unit X. That said, what about lists that spam units that aren't considered competitive? What if someone constantly played you with their 3 units of 3 sentinels list? Would you get bored playing that? I don't feel this thread is a thread about spam lists so much as a thread about why we don't like unit X from random codex Y.
That said I think among friends it is alright to make that suggestion or request, but to expect some random gamer without knowing them or what they consider fun to change their list seems unfair to their desires.
I actually prefer running against "competitive" netlists with my slightly more unorthodox lists; it's hard to do, but when you beat a hard-list with a fluffy one, I find, it's a much more fulfilling win.
Also, I play to win. Therefore, I'm going to use every mechanic I can to achieve this; multi-assaults, wound-allocation, Seer Council; you name it. The way I see it, why should I be forced to curb my own abilities if my opponent decides that I'm a "WAAC" gamer for trying to win? That is the aim of the game: to win. Not to have fun.
Anouther one of these "Holier than Thau" threads... Oh, those filthy competetive players.. how common and foul they are! How dare they ruin my favorite game by playing lists that i find boring.
grendel083 wrote:"Dis is Oddboy to BigBird, come in over."
"BigBird 'ere, go ahead, over."
"WAAAAAAAAAGGGHHHH!!!! over"
"Copy 'dat, WAAAAAAAGGGHHH!!! DAKKADAKKA!!... over"
I think a big factor in people spamming lists isnt soo much for the "must win" attitude.
Its more to do with the price of of making a fluffy list.
For example, i wanted to do a cult of flesh army, but, price really is a killer compared to a normal list.
3 units of 10 wracks - £123
2 units of 5 grotesques - £125
So, theres £250 for the core of the army, and only about half or so of what you will actually need.
Throw in transports for them, 3 talos kits and then characters and its bordering £500.
However, you can run the basic venom cookie cutter list for around half this price.
loota boy wrote:Anouther one of these "Holier than Thau" threads... Oh, those filthy competetive players.. how common and foul they are! How dare they ruin my favorite game by playing lists that i find boring.
Just to say, I would never stop someone playing a boring/spammy list. If its my opponent and he's decided to do that then fine. It means he will have a good chance of winning a friendly game, and I hope it brings him joy! However I'd be fielding a list I enjoy, win or lose, and the few victories I get will be all the sweeter
Jackal wrote:I think a big factor in people spamming lists isnt soo much for the "must win" attitude.
Its more to do with the price of of making a fluffy list.
For example, i wanted to do a cult of flesh army, but, price really is a killer compared to a normal list.
3 units of 10 wracks - £123
2 units of 5 grotesques - £125
So, theres £250 for the core of the army, and only about half or so of what you will actually need.
Throw in transports for them, 3 talos kits and then characters and its bordering £500.
However, you can run the basic venom cookie cutter list for around half this price.
Yeh, this. This is a pain. I wont be running a talos in my DE list anytime soon, not until Ive tested out a proxy a few times to see how it runs. Theres no room in my budget to be buying models I "like the look of", if they arent going to end up ever being used in a list... which is unfortunate, cos theres a lot of nice models out there!
My last impulse buy was... a dreadknight I think, which is going to be the main part of my GK list... and even that was partly funded by trading-in some very old models I never used in my original Tyranid force.
Although on the flipside, Im surprised by how many people run razor/rhino spam, when those things are expensive! In fact... arent they almost worth the same in Pounds as they do in Points? Clever GWlol
edit: Removed about 5 "lols" because I re-read my post and realised I had lol-spammed. lol.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/04/28 23:21:40
I do not agree with the OP. From the sounds of things, the OP just needs other people to play kit bash units and lose quickly. I mean terms like "I enjoy stomping" sounds like it's comming from a competitive player. Friendly games where you don't care if you win or lose too much do not include such sentiments.
If you are a competitive gamer, then you will play to the strengths of your army and expect others to do the same. Unfortunately that netlists work doesn't mean they are bad or boring. We've had some long discussions on this already. To be competitive means that you will need to have several things due to the nature of combat and attrition. For list building you need reduency which = spam apparently. You need lists that focus well at doing one thing or another. We've bashed plenty of units cause of ineffective unit composition like why do you need that one truck of flash gits? Get more lootas!
The nature of competitve gaming brings out these lists. Change up the game objectives/missions/rules and you'll see some change but then again, people will adapt and I bet the OP will just be as frustrated after things settle down into the new 6th edition "spam."
For truely fun times however where everything and anything goes, I highly recommend that the OP take a short break and try some Apoc games. I've been having nothing but fun in those. Heck, the sheer amount of crazy I've seen has helped me enjoy this hobby more than toruneys. Planet strike, cityfight, battle missions are all very fun done once in a while. Sure it may take more effort to find a game and teach someone new rules but nothing comes without effort.
Longfang missle spam for example has failed pretty hard in the last city fight game I had. Couldn't draw LOS to more than 12' in front of them due to all the buildings we had. Might as well have taken some dreads due to all the CC going on.
+ Thought of the day + Not even in death does duty end.
Laughing God wrote:See you are the people I will just not play and generally ignore in pick up friendly games and enjoy utterly stomping in tournament because you are spamming some unit or army you heard is winning. Guess what I also heard that people think that unit is good, experience and tactics beat out"spam flavor of the edition/codex" any day.
I find your knee-jerk labeling offensive. I play Guard because I like the army. Spamming infantry is practically built into the fluff and lists of every Guard army ever made. I never grab a flavor of the meta army, and I vehemently hate anything Space Marine.
Ailaros wrote:You seem to be making your point by no means other than throwing mud on people you disagree with and then decrying them for being dirty. I don't know what's worse, the straw man or the ad hominem. In any case, if you want to have a reasonable conversation, then be reasonable. Otherwise you're just being an irrational little whiner who just wants his way.
QFT.
182nd Ebon Hawks - 2000 Points
"We descend upon them like lightning from a cloudless sky."
Va'Krata Sept - 2500 Points
"The barbarian Gue'la deserve nothing but a swift death in a shallow grave."
I don't know how some of you people play, but I could care less what kind of list my opponent brings.
In fact, you should probably be more concerned with being a fun, good opponent who helps foster a positive gaming environment with a sense of camaraderie and competitiveness.
You can play to win and have fun at the same time. You can also be a great opponent with the hardest list possible and both sides having fun. You can also bring the softest, fluffiest, most non-spam list ever and still be a giant asshat.
Stop worrying about what your opponent wants to play and focus on being a fun player no matter the list.
Its that simple. By you not playing games against people because you think their list is too spammy and non-fluffy (which I find very laughable), you are effectively becoming TFG. Good gaming groups and stores are built by good people, not by the lists those people bring.
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress
+Spaceship Gaming Enthusiast+
Live near Halifax, NS? Ask me about our group, the Ordo Haligonias!
I prefer to build lists that at the very least have some repetition in unit choices. It helps build a cohesive army plan with a few possible side choices added into a main force.
sudojoe wrote: For list building you need reduency which = spam apparently.
I'd say there was a difference between redundancy and spam... though I agree its a pretty narrow line, especially in certain armies (IG especially). I think it tends to become more obvious in 2000+ points games, especially if you have all 6 troops choices being full squads of identical units. But again, for some armies this is a valid choice.
One big grey area, hence I only try and make sure *my* list is interesting to me. My opponent can do what he likes! I would get bored painting 100 identical troopers however lol
I think some people are misunderstanding me here on exactly what I'm complaining about. I don’t have a problem with people brining multiples of the same unit to a game. The point has been made already several times that in some lists it just makes sense (IG lots of artillery or infantry, Deathwing lots of Termies, ect, ect,). If the fluff and the idea of the armie makes sense to have those units then so be it.
The overall point I’m trying to make is that I’m bored and tired of seeing a lot of the same lists that utilize full FOC of just one unit. There is a huge difference between spamming units that fit your army and you like and spamming units that win games. I personally find it monotonous, and uncreative. I assumed they played these lists because winning is fun for them and they want to win every game they play, that makes sense. Maybe that’s not the case… maybe they just really really like that unit, but when I see maxed TWC squads and 3 units of LF I doubt it.
But really at the end of the day it’s to each their own. Several of you have made the great point that there are just different kinds of players with different kind of preferences. I come from a very laid back gaming group where people take the units they like the fluff and look of before they take a unit they know will smash face. This is how I want to play my friendly pickup games. If someone likes to be more competitive and spam units that win games then I will avoid playing that person until tournament time comes around. Does that make me a bad person because I don’t get enjoyment out of playing against the same units, over and over again? No just everyone has a different ideal of what makes the game fun and I will stick to mine.
Comes down to there being two different types of play it seems: 1.competitive love to win 2. Laid back just play the units you brought, over some nice conversation. Of course there is grey area in between. I like taking my more casual lists against a tournament list every once and a while. What I dont like is when I see everyone in the shop basically running the same lists and units. Maybe some of you havent experienced this lately or it doesnt bother you because you get to test your armies (which like I said I enjoy from time to time) or maybe you are one of the ones who playes like this and you just enjoy running that cookie cutter list.
So it seems everyone’s idea of fun is different. Some people find it fun to play a lot of the same units; others to play a variety of units most never try. If having a negative opinion on playing spam lists over and over again in both friendly and competitive games makes me a “whiner” then fine… I’m a whiner. As always play for fun, whatever your definition of fun might be.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2012/04/29 08:05:18
Children of Excess 2500pts
Hive Fleet Chimera 3000pts
I agree with Laughing God on this one, I am also part of a laid back gaming group who for the most part play with fun fluffy armies rather than WAAC armies(besides that one guy with draigo wing). And I'm glade that I'm part of the group, because I do find that my FLGS is where the competitive players congregate and you begin to see the same old drab competitive lists that the majority of competitive players take in an attempt to optimise their lists(or atleast thats been my experience of FLGS when I've gone).
I went to one of the big Tournaments in New zealand for the first time this year called battle cry, with a mate of myn to just check things out. We new quite alot of the people there who were playing moderns and Fantasy, and quickly picked up on an undercurrent of feelings between the non 40K players and 40K players. We went over to look at the 40K armies, and there were a few lovingly painted/modeled armies with display boards etc particularly 2 very cool Eldar armies one of which was based on a Harlequin scheme, and 2 cool spacewolf armies. But the vast majority of the rest (about 3/4 of the people there) had armies that looked either bashed and battered or looked like they had just been spray painted so that they could enter the tournament. And for the most part the people their didn't seem the most friendly or social, the atmosphere on that side of the room was just cold in general. Were as every other game that was being played there were being played with awesomely painted models, by people who were friendly, and in the case of FOW people were actually helping each other with tactics. It confirmed the worst fears I had for the 40k player base, atleast when it comes to tournaments.
There were a few very nice people playing 40k who seemed to be veterans, and I know it could've been a one off, but It seemed more of a confirmation of what I see on alot of other internet forums for wargames out there. Which is why I like Dakka because there seems to be a good mixed playerbase on this forum.
Please realise that I'm not trying to offend anyone, and I know not all competitive players or groups are like this, but I think everyone knows that there are players and groups out there that are like this. Everyone is allowed to play how they want to and with who they want to, everyone has fun in different ways. However I none the less prefer fun unique armies to competitive lists.
3000+
2000+
1500+ 
5 Wins, 6 Draws, 3 Losses 2000 points
500 points
bored! I once played five people who had the exact same list in a ROW!
)
Hive Fleet Chimera 3000pts
. Still might build a small armie though for my own tastes but your story was still a great example. Keep 
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress 
182nd Ebon Hawks - 2000 Points
