Switch Theme:

Is there ever a true de facto best army?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
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 gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Castozor wrote:
I can see how some people think that providing "drafted" armies and having people play that is the best way to determine the truly best player but I don't think I agree.
List building is as much a part of the hobby and game as the assembling and playing part. For some, like me, list building is actually one of the most fun parts. Some would even argue building a proper list is basically half the game nowadays since it carries so much impact on the tabletop result. So cutting it out would just curb some of the best and brightest players from showing their true skill.


Sure list building is/can be part of the talent of playing the game but if logic can determine a superior list above all
Lists then the army that the list is derived from is the de facto best army. So my question is that really possible considering the many ways across many armies that list can’t be put together. There must be tens of thousands of possible lists.

So if the best list can be that easily determined that there is broad agreement that x army is the current best army wouldn’t all tournament players arrive with that list. If your true goal is to win and not just take part for fun.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




For yukishiro1 - yes, agreed. Quite a lot of the 40k channels have had the same thing over the last year. Its been interesting to see how some players have evolved... and some unfortunately haven't (which produces very predictable games).

mrFickle wrote:
Sure list building is/can be part of the talent of playing the game but if logic can determine a superior list above all
Lists then the army that the list is derived from is the de facto best army. So my question is that really possible considering the many ways across many armies that list can’t be put together. There must be tens of thousands of possible lists.

So if the best list can be that easily determined that there is broad agreement that x army is the current best army wouldn’t all tournament players arrive with that list. If your true goal is to win and not just take part for fun.


In theory you can breakdown 40k to geometry and statistics. You should therefore eventually be able to crunch the probable outcomes of all sequences of decisions and dice rolls.
But I think the amount of processing would be quite incredible as you have to run each variant to the end of turn 5 to get a statistical likelihood of that scenario playing out. So humans don't tend to work that way. They make leaps.

So I don't think anyone has set down a mathematical proof that IH was the best army circa January 2020. But you can watch a lot of tournament games and go, yeah, the stats seem really in this army's favour. Moreso than other lists. (Even if yes, I'm still going to suggest Cent spam was bad too.)
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

Listbuilding is not a skill in the era of the internet.

Orks 7000
Space Wolves 4000
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Blackie wrote:
Listbuilding is not a skill in the era of the internet.


What bout those making the lists
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

mrFickle wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
Listbuilding is not a skill in the era of the internet.


What bout those making the lists


The point is someone has an idea, posts it, gets tons of responses or watches some batreps/rewies and refines/optimizes his list without playing a single game. Most of the credit goes to the internet. Or someone wins a tournament and thousands copy paste that list getting good results with it. In practise everyone can play optimized lists as soon as they have the models, even if they are terrible in listbuilding: they just need a quick look over the internet. Someone could be very good in listbuilding and thinking about all the powerful combos without reading any review, indeed, but in the end someone else that just does a little copy-paste on competitive lists from other people can get the same results.

Other skills require playing the game instead and get a lot of experience.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/10 13:20:52


Orks 7000
Space Wolves 4000
 
   
Made in nl
Nurgle Predator Driver with an Infestation





That's not how everyone builds their lists though, and discussing your list online isn't fundamentally different from talking over army composition with your locals/friends. Now those piloting netlists, sure no skill there but a lot of the pro's build their own from what I've gathered and so do many other, more casual, players.
I will agree that with the points you mentioned list building might be the LEAST skilled of the skills in playing Warhammer but I disagree it takes no skill at all provided you do build your own.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Blackie wrote:
Listbuilding is not a skill in the era of the internet.


I think that's a little reductionist. Someone still has to come up with the original idea for a list. I think it's easier than ever to avoid list building and be successful but that doesn't mean there isn't a skill in doing it. Someone who is skilled at list building is more likely to be able to respond to changes in the meta, including the release of new books, more quickly than those who just wait to see what's good. In effect, they're the ones creating the meta.
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

It is reductionist of course. But even if someone really comes up with the original idea, his list will be probably shaped and refined by the respose he gets on the internet.

And nobody can't deny that the majority of players takes a look at discussions, reviews, articles or even the exact tournament winning lists in order to create their army.

So yeah, while it's true that someone may be better than others in listbuilding, playing with an optimized list is not a skill anymore. I mean someone may be really good at it, but someone else may be extremelly terrible in listbuilding and yet he may get the same results.

When I started playing during 3rd edition nobody had internet at home. The only source of ispiration for listbuilding was the random battle report on WD. In fact the lists I used to play with and against, even in tournaments, during 3rd were extremely different from the competitive 3rd edition lists I've found years later, by reading articles about the competitive meta of that edition.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/12 10:50:43


Orks 7000
Space Wolves 4000
 
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut





It is also true that there is the right list for the right player.
Playing someone else's list is tipically a bad idea. Netlisting too is tipically a bad idea, barring some heavy balance issues in that faction.

This isn't MTG where you can take a deck and immediately make it work.

A player's list is tipically born out of an initial idea, refined dozens of times game after game. But that list reflects how you are used to play with those models. Give 3 DA players a ravenwing bike squad, and they will use it in 3 completely different ways. There are a lot of considerations poured into a well tuned list, and those considerations are not on written on the army list.

The "netlisting" of 40K are more like common solutions. A player comes with an issue with a list he made, and he gets told to solve it like this or that. That part is largely standard by now. The "problem solving" approach to a list for a certain faction is quite predictable by now. The making of a list by scratches is still a very personal process.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/12 12:29:25


 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: