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.

When discussing the new army am building with my brother, he always goes for the "s" word when I show him my list.
He generally plays Marines and Eldar, who have fairly survivable units, while I go for horde armies like Orks, Dark Eldar, soon, Guard.
Because the units that I use are not very survivable, I think that I must use multiple units with the same purpose, just to remain competitive.

Dakkaites, how far is too far, before redundancy becomes spam?

Orks - never.
DE - never.
IG - Don't you dare take two of the same things~!

If your playing regular games then yes it becomes annoying facing 36 DL or 5 KFF/BW every game. But mixing up points and scenariors should prevent this - hell even terrain can prevent this.

But if he's (your older brother ) and complaining about your lists then maybe he isn't taking a T1 build all the time, packing some warp-bests might be fun... but if his list is geard properly then their just going to be shot to piesces turn one/two and never assault... if he wants to play a one sided game.....

Tell him to wipe away his tears, people whining about spam need to get a life...

I'm sorry i like to make army lists that can take losses of units without folding like a wet paper towel ... It's called good list making.

Dear god he's annoyed at Spam?

Oh wait he plays SM. To them having 3 troops borders on Spam.

Look with Horde armies the point is that you're spamming units/models. Its like a man armed with revolver accusing someone with a M240 of cheating because he passed on the six-shooter for more bullet spraying. Not everyone who plays 40k has to be an elitist prick... some people just want see the sea turn red, the sky burn and land... GREEEEEEEEEEN!!!

Your brother is an idiot if he thinks IG/Orks spamming is a bad thing. I'll complain about spamming in MEQ armies but not in IG/DE/Ork/Tyranids, because not every faction can be cheezed up the wazoo with elite soldiers, in fact its better that they aren't, as it is I play too many self-opinionated powered armoured pricks so remind him that in the metagame owning SM makes a you cheap pawn to be spammed as part of a greater tide of MEQ arseholes in the 40k community....

Personally I believe there's a difference between redundancy and spam. A simply way of putting is that spam is simply copying/pasting the same build/army throughout due to a lack of imagination, whereas redundancy is taking multiples of one unit/tank for tactical sakes. For example:

Spam=
- 10x Assault Marine - 2x Melta, Powerfist - 235pts
- 10x Assault Marine - 2x Melta, Powerfist - 235pts
- 10x Assault Marine - 2x Melta, Powerfist - 235pts
- 10x Assault Marine - 2x Melta, Powerfist - 235pts
(I've seen this or similar in many BA lists, they may 'mix it up' a bit and even swap out one squad for flamers!!)

Redundancy=
- 3x MM/HF Land Speeder
(which I use), having light armour etc. Redundancy is vital.


Personally, I think all armies can avoid spam through a bit of imagination and variation.
A green tide army can have (masses of) shootas/sluggas with varying heavy/special weapons. Taking a lot of boyz is inevitable, how you equip and use them is different.

I disagree with Spam myself, I think it simply lacks imagination in a game of 1" high plastic men. However, redundancy is a tactical use that doesn't go overboard.

Orks SHOULD be spamming, that's how their army works. Guard SHOULD be spamming, that's how THEIR army works. Tyranids SHOULD be spamming, same as the last two. Space Marines SHOULD have every tactical squad be tactically adaptable and able to handle whatever comes their way (that's their entire purpose), and if this means three, four, or more tactical squads each with power weapon, meltagun, and missile launcher, so be it. Lots of Battle Sisters is really the most fluffy way to build a Sisters of Battle list, and standardization fits that army as well. Tau and Necrons don't hav that much of a choice to begin with. And so on and so forth. "Spam" fits the fluff.

People that whine about "spam" every goddamned chance they can are just that-- whiners. Ignore them and play the list you want to play. What they have to say shouldn't and doesn't matter, as they openly defy both the fluff AND tactical sense.

People often say I go to far when I field 5-6 squads of veterans with triple melta in Chimeras ( Mech to counter a place with all mech armies).
I always tell them "At least you you don't have to face 2 to 4 full platoons worth of troops, every squad having las cannons, the command squads having las cannons and 5 heavy weapon squads a platoon with las cannons." Because that would scare off any one who doesn't pack anti horde and only anti tanks.

Even though my Ork army is only 1100 points, I still get complaints that I spam too many Boyz.

Yes, that's how Orks work.

Well done figuring that out.

Then I proceed to stomp them into the ground with a tidal wave of Boyz.

They usually shut up after that.

According to my scientific researches in my subterranean secret laboratory somewhere in South America, I've reached to the conclussion that for most whinners the terminology changes based on this variants:

- It's on my list: spam
- It's on his list: redundancy

Study provided by T.K.Gue, branch of the Darkian Empire

Fine line. People have different views dependant on how they play the game.

Easy to cross that fine line, though if they just want to try redundancy... (six minimum grey hunter squads in razorbacks later...)

I personally spam the hell out of certain units if they're effective enough, on the other hand I also take duplicates of certain units, while not wanting to spam them.

Dark wrote:subterranean secret laboratory somewhere in South America

It's in Argentina, everyone!

Whoops, was I not supposed to tell?

Dark wrote:According to my scientific researches in my subterranean secret laboratory somewhere in South America, I've reached to the conclussion that for most whinners the terminology changes based on this variants:

- It's on my list: spam
- It's on his list: redundancy

Study provided by T.K.Gue, branch of the Darkian Empire

This is what I came here to say. I am glad someone else finds this to be true as well.

Wait wait wait, so this army wouldn't be classed as spam, merely redundancy? (for example):

- Farseer - Fortune, Runes
- Farseer - Fortune, Runes

- 6x Fire Dragon - Waveserpent w/ TL Shuriken Cannon and Shuriken Cannon
- 6x Fire Dragon - Waveserpent w/ TL Shuriken Cannon and Shuriken Cannon
- 6x Fire Dragon - Waveserpent w/ TL Shuriken Cannon and Shuriken Cannon

- 10x Dire Avenger - Exarch w/ Bladestorm and 2xAvenger Catapults - Waveserpent w/ TL Shuriken Cannon and Shuriken Cannon
- 10x Dire Avenger - Exarch w/ Bladestorm and 2xAvenger Catapults - Waveserpent w/ TL Shuriken Cannon and Shuriken Cannon
- 10x Dire Avenger - Exarch w/ Bladestorm and 2xAvenger Catapults - Waveserpent w/ TL Shuriken Cannon and Shuriken Cannon
- 10x Dire Avenger - Exarch w/ Bladestorm and 2xAvenger Catapults - Waveserpent w/ TL Shuriken Cannon and Shuriken Cannon
- 10x Dire Avenger - Exarch w/ Bladestorm and 2xAvenger Catapults - Waveserpent w/ TL Shuriken Cannon and Shuriken Cannon
- 10x Dire Avenger - Exarch w/ Bladestorm and 2xAvenger Catapults - Waveserpent w/ TL Shuriken Cannon and Shuriken Cannon

- Fire Prism
- Fire Prism
- Fire Prism

I don't see a problem with that list at all.

Just Dave wrote:Wait wait wait, so this army wouldn't be classed as spam, merely redundancy?

Dark wrote:- It's on my list: spam
- It's on his list: redundancy

If you have enough units left to do the job they were supposed to after you take casualties, that is redundancy.

If you have too many models for them to do the job that they were supposed to, and they must now do other jobs, then you have spam.

For example- If you bring 5 battlewagons, and are left with one after crushing 3 of your opponent's landraiders- you have redundancy. If you bring 9, and are left with 4 after crushing your opponent's 3 landraiders- you have spammed.

Neither of those is spam.

SaintHazard wrote:

Dark wrote:subterranean secret laboratory somewhere in South America

It's in Argentina, everyone!

Whoops, was I not supposed to tell?

Oi! Guys, we've been discovered, pack all and go, destroy what's not salvageable!

D:

Excessive redundancy is nothing more than a failsafe. You bring nine battlewagons because what if you have four after crushing three LRs but then three more get blown up by Land Speeders?

Therefore, excessive redundancy isn't excessive - it's playing it safe.

Are multiple redundant failsafe mechanisms on a submarine's ballast tanks spam?

Ask a few drowning sailors what they think.

Despite that fact that it showed no tactical acumen, only the the ability to copy and paste?

To me, running 2 vindicators alongside a LRC is redundancy as any of them reaching the line would cause serious pain and therefore casualties can be afforded.

However, to me, simply copying the same unit - by the letter - is 'spam' and unimaginative. Eldar shouldn't even rely on redundancy or spam according to the fluff, they should specialise. Whilst - according to you - ' "Spam" fits the fluff.'

SaintHazard wrote:

Are multiple redundant failsafe mechanisms on a submarine's ballast tanks spam?

Ask a few drowning sailors what they think.

True, but it doesn't give the ocean a very sporting chance. I suppose my point was that the difference between spam and redundancy is situational and almost impossible to achieve in a general list because you must be prepared to defeat the enemy's redundancy.

The difference between spam and redundancy is whether or not one player whines about it.

Nothing more than that.

I have always used the rule of two, unless it is some sort of theme list (or there just plain is not an option for something else). Hence my Guard army has no more than two of the same unit in it. My Eldar Jetbike Army has six identical Jetbike troop choices, but thats themed and no one is going to complain about that.

Sometimes, however, a book or its slot options suck so massively that a little spamming is the order of the day. I think Nids and Kan Wall Orks have a free pass at spamming, as do Necrons or Inquisition lists (no real choice). I don't think Guard has any excuse to spam because they have so much variety of competitive units in their list, even in the Troops section, but thats just me.

Spam- 9 obliterators
Redundancy- Double lightning claws on 10 terminators

Obliterators are great, which is why people spam them, but 9 is too many. It's basically just annoying at that point. Well, actually....It's only 675 points, but still...That's your entire HS choice right there...

Double lightning claws can serve a unique position in your army, and in this case, more is better. Not to mention that I'd rather get no shots at all than a couple, so having a complete unit is the way to go

Just Dave wrote:Despite that fact that it showed no tactical acumen, only the the ability to copy and paste?

To me, running 2 vindicators alongside a LRC is redundancy as any of them reaching the line would cause serious pain and therefore casualties can be afforded.

However, to me, simply copying the same unit - by the letter - is 'spam' and unimaginative. Eldar shouldn't even rely on redundancy or spam according to the fluff, they should specialise. Whilst - according to you - ' "Spam" fits the fluff.'

Well, in some situations (not all, but some) spam does fit the fluff. We hear plenty of stories of a few Marines getting overrun by an ocean of Gaunts. We hear about Tau fending off wave after wave of Orks. What's to say the "non-horde" type armies can't get in on the action? Waves of Dire Avengers. Waves of Tactical Marines. Waves of Necron Warriors. My point is, it's not necessarily a bad thing, and the distinction you're making is very subjective.

You argue that taking six of the same unit doesn't show tactical acumen. I argue that if that list is successful on the battlefield, how can it not be a tactically sound list? To you, tactical acumen seems to be ability to contextually specialize. To me, it's the ability to win a battle. I guess both definitions have merit, and either can be argued as right or wrong, but I don't see that anyone should be - to use a bit of a strong word here - condemned for employing tactics that you would define as the result of a "lack of creativity."

Gitzbitah wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:

Are multiple redundant failsafe mechanisms on a submarine's ballast tanks spam?

Ask a few drowning sailors what they think.

True, but it doesn't give the ocean a very sporting chance. I suppose my point was that the difference between spam and redundancy is situational and almost impossible to achieve in a general list because you must be prepared to defeat the enemy's redundancy.

This is true, and in a friendly match I would say the ocean should have a sporting chance of drowning those sailors. But I don't think we're arguing sportsmanship here. We're arguing tactical effectiveness. That's a very different thing.

Melissia wrote:The difference between spam and redundancy is whether or not one player whines about it.

Nothing more than that.

In my opinion, the difference between redundancy and spam is tactical acumen and intentions.

I'd say spamming is a hard one to call. Redundancy is completely logical, but since more than one unit can fulfil a role in thelist, taking multiple of the same thing pushes it towards spam in my opinion.

For example Devastators and Land Speeders can both be used as anti-tank, but Devastators are also good against MC's, and Speeders with an additional flamer are good against entrenched units. To me that's redundancy, whereas taking 3 Devastator squads is more like spam.

That said, spam isn't always bad, frankly I'd expect to see some degree of Termagant/Hormagaunt spam in a Tyranid swarm since, well, that's how they work!

SaintHazard wrote:

Just Dave wrote:Despite that fact that it showed no tactical acumen, only the the ability to copy and paste?

To me, running 2 vindicators alongside a LRC is redundancy as any of them reaching the line would cause serious pain and therefore casualties can be afforded.

However, to me, simply copying the same unit - by the letter - is 'spam' and unimaginative. Eldar shouldn't even rely on redundancy or spam according to the fluff, they should specialise. Whilst - according to you - ' "Spam" fits the fluff.'

Well, in some situations (not all, but some) spam does fit the fluff. We hear plenty of stories of a few Marines getting overrun by an ocean of Gaunts. We hear about Tau fending off wave after wave of Orks. What's to say the "non-horde" type armies can't get in on the action? Waves of Dire Avengers. Waves of Tactical Marines. Waves of Necron Warriors. My point is, it's not necessarily a bad thing, and the distinction you're making is very subjective.

You argue that taking six of the same unit doesn't show tactical acumen. I argue that if that list is successful on the battlefield, how can it not be a tactically sound list? To you, tactical acumen seems to be ability to contextually specialize. To me, it's the ability to win a battle. I guess both definitions have merit, and either can be argued as right or wrong, but I don't see that anyone should be - to use a bit of a strong word here - condemned for employing tactics that you would define as the result of a "lack of creativity."

Well thank you for pointing out that it's our/your opinion rather than fact. And yes, I do believe it to be subjective and I agree that certain armies can 'spam', as in the examples you have mentioned. I also agree, that someone shouldn't be 'condemned for it', I wouldn't approve of 'spamming' such as that which I described, but I wouldn't particularly criticise or even condemn them, simply not approve. IMHO.

My argument is that unnecessarily taking 6 of the same unit, without the thought that 'I may lose one, may want back up' but instead thinking along the lines of 'that unit's good, where's the copy/paste option' is 'spam'. I understand Ork hordes, the intention is to take waves and waves of the buggers (although you could mix them up a bit for variety sakes, eg. Shoota instead of Rockets), but in my Eldar, for example, I believe that if there in no tactical or almost imaginative intention then yes, I think I would class it as spamming.

Are 4 dreadnoughts spam?
I hope not...

Just Dave wrote:In my opinion, the difference between redundancy and spam is tactical acumen and intentions.

And would you try and claim a person with high "tactical acumen" cannot see the use of a list with six identical troops choices?

The concept of "spam" is an illusion created by crappy players. People whine that a Space Marine list with three tactical squads is "spam". People whine that an Ork list with more than three mobs of boyz is "spam". People whine that a Sisters list with more than two squads of Battle Sisters is "spam". People whine that ALL Necron lists are "spam". People whine that using more than one fragon squad is "spam". People whine that having an infantry platoon with more than three squads is "spam". People whine that having more than one Imperial Guard Veteran Squad is "spam". People whine that filling up an artillery battery is "spam".

The common thread in all of this is that people whine.