Winning with fluff

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.

**kirsanth**

Is you army built to win games?

**Ixias**

Not sure if I understand the question...do you mean how rigidly one follows the fluff of army vs army? In any case, I play to win but not to the extent that I will bend rules. Me and my pals are a little competitive, but the ultimate goal is for everyone to have fun, no hard feelings if I lose (or anyone else for that matter).

**Ledabot**

Me and my mates are competive too. We just tend to edit the size of the table ect for our abvantage

**Asherian Command**

I play for fun. Not to win.

**Mahtamori**

How's this: I play for the competition. If I am crushing my opponent, I tend to help them out with little things like "don't forget control points, I can't win if you kill my troop choices" and I may even go so far as to loosen the rules if it means it'll make the game more fun.

I don't play to lose, though, if my opponent wants to beat me I'll give them a run for their money. This is also why I find it hard to play experimental units (aka just about everything in the Eldar Fast Attack). As far as that goes, I suppose I stick to the fluff. Eldar war to win, but they usually have an uphill battle.

**Xca|iber**

I play to win, and even if it looks like I'm losing, my crazed space Templars will fight to the death, since that is what their fluff dictates.

Of course, that doesn't mean I'm not frustrated by losing to bad dice/extremely unlucky rolling, etc.

**juraigamer**

You missed the option were you build an army based on the units you wanted to use regardless of their effectiveness.

That said I play to play, winning happens, losing happens. So long as it's a reasonably balanced game, I don't really care unless the game is severely one sided.

**TheRedArmy**

I play to win because I am competitive, and I dislike losing. I would not say I play to WAAC, though I easily get frustrated if I think I'm losing due to a bad army list (i.e. I can take a loss because rolls were against me, but I hate a loss because I made a bad list).

However, I have an urge to be playing some "fun" battles lately (i.e. taking a list of a number of unique, awesome characters against a small army), and I am looking forward to that.

**Nungunz**

I play to have a challenge. I like winning, of course, but if I don't like curb-stomping an opponent who has a poor list or is a poor general.

I want a good, hard-fought, competitive game. I well-played defeat is infinitely better than an easy victory.

**MekanobSamael**

I design my armies with the intention of winning. That said, if my group agrees to play a particular kind of game, I will certainly tailor my army to that game. I tend to play reasonably fluffy armies--I don't find that it conflicts with my attempts to win games.

**Shake Zoola**

I dont really care if I win or lose...its all in how the game is played!

If I lost due to an experimental unit imploding or bad rolls or even being out manuvered thats fine with me!

As long as both me and my opponent had fun and respect each other then it was a good game! The dice always even out in the end and you tend to learn more from a defeat than a victory!

**gannam**

I build tournament armies to win, and then I design fluff to support that army.

You can totally do that, and its ok.

Example. You have a space wolf army that is totally gun line, razorback spam.

Well, thats not very fluffy at all, but hell, even space wolves have to have a support attachment. There is a company in the book that is primarily long fangs and long range stuff. (don't remember the name).

Just paint your dudes to reflect that.

**liam0404**

I play to win, but as I mentioned in the Horus Heresy Allegiances thread elsewhere on the boards, if i'm fighting against CSM, I try that "little" bit harder to win!

Traitors!!!

**Daemon-Archon Ren**

Other: It depends on what army I play.

Space wolves: Play to win (bc lbhe, anyone playing wolves/blood these days is doing the same)

Dark eldar: Play for fun mainly, but still make some 'cheezy' out-of-fluff choices.

CSML Pure Fluff Thousand Sons (so I don't have to worry about winning too much these days)

**TRISKELION7**

My fluff helps me too win as I'm thousand sons and I often play marines. Only terminators and vehicles can withstand my troops, and then there's my support units!

**SoloFalcon1138**

huh?

**osumicrobio**

Gotta play to win with my group, there are 4 of us that have been friends since before high school, and with that type of group you have to make sure you earn the right to make fun of the other guys :-P

We are all tournament players so we all take every sort of list our minds can think of, so we know our armies inside out and aren't just taking the "List of the Week" to the competitive scene.

**Daemon-Archon Ren**

TRISKELION7 wrote:My fluff helps me too win as I'm thousand sons and I often play marines. Only terminators and vehicles can withstand my troops, and then there's my support units!

This worked for me for a day or two, then everyone picked up a GEQ Army/Marine players quit... Not to mention FnPain-in-the-ass Blood angels...

**Sanctjud**

Yes.
Everything else is a lie.

**y0disisray**

Sorry im a power gamer here. I always train/play to win because eventualy I wanna start playing at Gamesday/Adepticons.

**Daemon-Archon Ren**

y0disisray wrote:Sorry im a power gamer here. I always train/play to win because eventualy I wanna start playing at Gamesday/Adepticons.

"Year Started Wargaming: 1996"

you'd think with 15 years of experience, you'd be ready by now

**Ledabot**

I play for fun. Its more fun winning. thats why i let others win, because im such a funny guy

**BloodThirSTAR**

This should be in the 40k discussion forum.

**kirsanth**

BloodThirSTAR wrote:This should be in the 40k discussion forum.

There is a button for that if you think so, no need to raise your post count in that regard.

I play to win, it irritates me when opponents don't. Or worse, complain that someone else is.

I read a lot from people suggesting that there is a better way to play, but it seems that few other options are chosen.

/shrug

**Absolutionis**

Originally, when I played my Tyranids, I wasn't very good. I oftentimes lost. Now I realize this was because I used to send things one-at-a-time into the fray.

Then, I decided that winning wasn't everything and simply started charging everything forward like in the fluff.

Ironically, that worked. I realized that the best way to keep my larger monsters safe is not to keep them back, but to charge them ALL forward. Be aggressive.

The fluff talks about target saturation. In an effort to keep with the fluff for fun, I started winning games.

**Happygrunt**

I play to play, and work my wins and loses into the fluff.

**oni**

I would like to think that my army is built to win games. Doesn't mean that it does.

**Cryonicleech**

I build my lists with a fluffy theme in mind. Doesn't mean they have to suck.

I have a great Ghrond themed Dark Elf army that I'd like to think could give some people a run for their money (excluding gunlines *shudder*)

**Mike Noble**

I play to win and have fun at the same time. As hard as it is for some people to believe, this is completely possible.

**Mr Mystery**

I design my army to look cool, then work on the tactics to bring me the wins.