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.

As I was walking to class this morning, I got to thinking about how making a list for a tournament would be different than for just casual play.

So I'll put this question forward, do you design your list with different variables in mind for tournaments than you do casual? And I'm not talking from just making a competitive list, I also mean to think about tournament elements.

For examples, the first large scale tournament I went to (Da Grand Waaagh!) showed I really needed to think about my list more. Some of the observations I made were:

Round length, with a grand total of 2 hours and 15 minutes to see who you were playing, read the scenario, deploy armies, play the game (with obvious rules questions popping up as people play armies they've never played before etc...) there's hardly enough time to finish 3 rounds. This proved to be a big deal, as if anyone looks at my battle reports on here, my armies are usually build for the long haul, and I don't start "winning" games until the later turns (5-6). So I would have to approach this from a whole new angle.

"Competitive" lists vs "cheese" lists:

When I designed my list, I was trying to stay with a relatively decent comp list. Only power part of it was dual hydra, the rest was pretty semi-fluffy. When I got to the tournament, however, I noticed there was a LOT of power builds around. Dual steam tank/arch lecter, 9 warmachin empire, 11 warmachine + banner OnG, chariot spam beastmen, etc...

So do you consider tournaments to have a different level of "cheese" than in casual play?

Rules Judges:

Even in 8th there's still some rules that are borderline on understanding, do you try to assume worst case scenario with them, just in case the rules judges are on the opposite side of you so you're not surprised? Like at the tournament, they ruled fleeing units give victory points, even though BRB only mentions fled off the table.

Anyway, simple question: Do you take other tournament variables into effect when making your lists?

Ultimately I think it depends alot on your local area.

For instance at my FLGS I bring several lists depending on who I play (its very competitive, 2 Stanks, skaven w/bell, furnace, doomweels, and lots of MoT WoC). I have my tournament list, a modified version of the same list to try out new/different units, and a fun list (dragon lord, CoK, blackguard).

In most cases I'll be playing one of the first two lists, if i'm playing against somebody who is just learning, or is not playing a tournament list (I usually ask), I make adjustments.

As far as tournaments go.

The only major change I ever make is my choice to rely on fundamentals and try not to tailor my army towards specific opponents.

More importantly, I try to design an army that is compeititve in every phase. If it's not an army that is competitive in one phase or another, I try to balance the phases it *is* competitive in (one may argue that Chaos isn't competitive in the shooting phase... so you try to spread your balance of force to be competitive in movement, magic, and combat)

The truly balanced army is sort of like a super balanced football team that doesn't have any superstars, and yet manages to win consistently anyway. There may be a few more challenges with the army because you have to work in combination to deal with the surprises your opponent throws your way.... BUT, a well balanced army can handle all comers.

Ragnar4 wrote:As far as tournaments go.

The only major change I ever make is my choice to rely on fundamentals and try not to tailor my army towards specific opponents.

More importantly, I try to design an army that is compeititve in every phase. If it's not an army that is competitive in one phase or another, I try to balance the phases it *is* competitive in (one may argue that Chaos isn't competitive in the shooting phase... so you try to spread your balance of force to be competitive in movement, magic, and combat)

The truly balanced army is sort of like a super balanced football team that doesn't have any superstars, and yet manages to win consistently anyway. There may be a few more challenges with the army because you have to work in combination to deal with the surprises your opponent throws your way.... BUT, a well balanced army can handle all comers.

Ditto on this...and I like variety in my army so I'm not the spamming type (at the most 2 of something but not triplicate of exactly the same choice, efficiency be damned)...

I consider the scenarios if I know what is going to be played. For example in a watchtower scenario I want a unit of 20 core with command that can go into the building if I have it at the start and a unit that will be able to rip my opponent out if I dont.

No watchtower scenario then I can build bigger units.

I tend to find a nibble of cheese to play on. I have built a Kairos all Tzeentch Daemon army and won a tournament with it (7th edition).

I have designed armies and found them in the hands of my opponents (the same power design in principal if not the same model count).

It depends on what you want to get out of the tirnament. Win Prizes go for the cheese. Have fun less cheese please.

I played in ArdBoyz recently and my opponent was using Orcs and Goblins.

He cast Waagh! with a Iresistable Force. OK so far. Now he rolls a 12 on the OnG Miscast Chart. And the Spell goes off again. In a friendly game we would reroll this. In ardboyz he is taking the wording as it states and the spell goes of (it has gone off and now we are resolving the miscast) again with iresistable force.

If it had not been an ArdBoyz Tournament I dont think he would have tried to see the rule that way. But because of the tournament style he used the rules to his advantage (we argued and rolled off in his favour).

So playing with a loophole in the rules is another methodology that you can use and exploit. Jsut bring your proof for when the rules judge comes over.

My opponent is a friend and I would expect nothing less from him in this kind of tournament.

My local area is pretty competitive. Friendly guys for the most part, but nobody really brings an intentionally fluffy list. I think the closest we get to that is the Skaven guy who purposefully doesn't want to bring two of anything just so he can fit as many Skaven goodies into one 2500 list as possible. That being said, it's still a properly made list that can participate in nearly every phase of the game every turn.

I tend to shoot for getting the most out of my points. I don't add unnecessary upgrades like command or seldom-used magic items, and I want each of my units to actively contribute to something that the others can't. If I bring duplicates, it's because there isn't another unit in the army that does the same thing, or doesn't do it nearly as well, and I need to fill in a hole. I guess that's why my Skaven buddy can get away with bringing one of everything, each of those things fills in a hole and there are overlapping roles units throughout that army book. Honestly I'm kind of jealous, that Skaven book is pretty darn well written for 8th and lends itself to variety very well once you move out of copy/pasting hordes of clanrats and slaves.

Unfortunately, I'm such a slow painter that most of my army selection is based on what I've painted up. The tournament list I developed in 7th was something I thought would be decent against all-comers, had a way to deal with the inevitable hydras and hell-pits, and hopefully did so in a way that wasn't a cookie-cutter to everyone else.

Avoiding a cookie cutter build does two things for me: The first is that it fulfills contrarian impulses. If I win, I don't want to do it the same way as everyone else.

The second is that it can give a slight edge- in 7th most opponents knew what they would try to do against an anvil gunline, but I found that all but the best players would be taken a little aback by a strollaz combat army. Of course, plenty recovered just fine and pasted me anyway, but it was something to throw people a little off balance...

I take the strongest list that I can play well, provides me with the best match ups against the metapower builds in the area, and is not built on a one trick pony as great players can easily pick it apart.

I don't worry about how the comp/cheese is perceived as even if I think it is comp/fluffy, there will be an opponent who will appraise it in his/her subjective view. I'd rather play a list that I know well, gives me a good matchup with other strong players and just go to play hard.

Depends on the tourney. one FLGS in my area has a tourney every 2 months. I try to bring something kind of fluffy to that.

Then there's a duluth tournament with no comp system and a whole bunch of jerks who frequent the duluth FLGS... double stank, anvil gunline, double pit all showed up last time. To that, I'm bringing a whole cheese wagon. Edit: to be clear this was at 2000 points under the 7th ed slot system.

When putting together a tournament list or any list in general I focus on fulfilling a few key points. These things need to be in the list for it to be good and some can double up in multiple categories.

2500
LVL 4 sorc.
Sadly this guy just seems necessary. A lvl2 with a scroll just doesn't cut it for defense. Its lvl 4 or nothing, and nothing can be kind of punishing at times. Without him you need units that can take hits from magic. Large amounts of units with smaller numbers generally foots this bill, and works well with the dragon mounted lord that usually takes the place of a lvl4.

BSB
This guys is almost mandatory in 8th as the bonuses he gives are huge. Give him some good defensive gear or be prepared to have him hide well.

War machine hunters
At least 3 units need to be quick enough to deal with warmachines and in general should be fairly disposable. Three because the enemy will be able to deal with one, one will fail, and you need one to succeed. If you make them tougher then two can suffice but they will start to get expensive. These units can double as re-directors, flankers if there are no warmachines on the opposing line.

Bait
in 7th I always included a few units of cannon fodder to take charges/redirect the enemy. In 8th they aren't quite as good but can still find a place when called on. A couple of these units usually help greatly if only as speed bumps.

Line troops/Hammer troops
A balance between these types of units is necessary. In general I find that 3 good combat units are necessary in a list. Without them the enemy will get to you and roll over you in a few turns. No amount of magic and shooting will save you if you have nothing that can fight. Good combat units are defined as being as good as 18 warriors of chaos with halberds. Spear men with a combat char can count as such a unit if the spear men are tough or the char is flighty. A dragon or hellpit abomination can also count as one of your one. They generally clock in at 300+ points.

Once you have three such units You can either fill out with one or two more such units or fill in with weaker units such as clan rats or marauders. How many of these units you take depends on what points you have leftover. Generally I find it really hard to have 5 good combat units in any army. The points just wont do it without really sacrificing in other areas. I guess this means the points across the board are fairly balanced, go GW.

Shooting.
Up to this point army selection is generally done based on some game plan. Take two units of knights and your going to have a faster hard hitting army. Lots of weak units and your going to have a flexible but weak hoard army.

I generally chose shooting units to cover the weaknesses of the rest of the army. Either I need shooting to thin down units, weak units or tough units, so they don't have ranks when they get to me or I need shooting to deal with large flying monsters. With Dwarfs it is usually the first but with elves it is usually the second. I try to limit the points I invest in shooting as it is far less reliable than combat in warhammer and as I said will not finish off much by itself, combat units are needed.

Example list w/ High elves at 2500 pts made when i started playing 8th.

LvL 4 archmage
Lvl 2 mage
BSB (in phenix guard)
25 seaguard
25 seaguard
14 swordmasters
25 phenix guard
6 dragon princes
2x bolt throwers
2x eagles

I took this list to a few games and got trashed. Even with the two mages (and the banner of sorc) I just couldnt do enough damage in the magic phase. The enemy's combat units could make it to my line and I didnt have enough units to deal with them. One of my two combat units was easy to shoot out and lacked staying power (a factor of only costing 200 pts). The other was then left with no support. The seaguard were wasted points as I generally had no problem cutting through weak troops.
A better list that complied with the tenants above turned out to be

Lvl 4 archmage
BSB
25 spearmen
25 spearmen
25 spearmen
21 swordmasters
25 phenix guard
15 white lions
2x bolt throwers
3x eagles

I don't remember quite how much the new one costs (missing a unit or two) but it is much better. I have another combat unit and another support unit giving me a wide battle line that can flank units coming in. I still have the two bolt throwers to convince large flyers to not play to many games as magic rarely stops such units and the two eagles are good war machine hunters and/or blockers.