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.

Hello everyone!

I always wondered...what is a cheesy army?We all hear it all the time, but I just dont know what kind of lists can be classified as cheesy.
Any examples?

And because I am playing eldar right now, what elements can I put into my eldar to make it cheesy?

Don't worry, you can't. Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Imperial Guard are the "cheesy" armies now. See thunder wolves, long fangs, sanguine priests and the pure firepower that is the IG tank. Eldar are a little on the weak side right now, and even running a seer council and fireprisms won't make you cheesy.

If it's legal I don't think it's fair to call it "cheesy". But there is always going to be "that fething guy" who plays "that fething power build". It's typically the "all-ahead-idiot-full" style armies that require no tactical finesse, and it's always the best codex at the time.

In short, it takes a very good player to win with a suboptimized army. It takes very little skill to spray somebody off the table with the latest greatest Mech IG list.

Two executioners with plasma canon sponsons in a 750 point skirmish against my foot slogging sisters...that's cheesy

=I= White-Wolf wrote:Two executioners with plasma canon sponsons in a 750 point skirmish against my foot slogging sisters...that's cheesy

Would you say it is Pepperjack, or Cheddar?

I mean like...tournament winning lists...what is it like?

Slarg232 wrote:

=I= White-Wolf wrote:Two executioners with plasma canon sponsons in a 750 point skirmish against my foot slogging sisters...that's cheesy

Would you say it is Pepperjack, or Cheddar?

I think plasma would lean towards the pepperjack category. It can be good, but the next day...

Edit:

Here's some cheese.

After the new Space Wolves codex came out this guy ran 4 Rune Priests with JotWW.

Blood Angels can get pretty cheesy.

I don't really think it is possible to have a cheese army in a tourney without breaking some rules. If it is allowed by the rules then its not cheese.

Doesn't stop people from crying about it though. They make a kit for that though:

http://www.ccgarmory.com/gfwhandchtop.html

Now if you are playing casual, its both players responsibility to communicate what kind of game they would like (level of competitiveness). Cries of cheese is when players didn't communicate well.

The most common cry of cheese is spam lists, where they pick the most efficient and effective units, and bring as many as they can of them. Examples are SM razorspam, ork kan walls and BW spam, ect.

The second most common is the death star, where people build a huge points sink that is nearly impossible to bring down and has large offensive potential. Notable examples are diverse nobs, jetbike councils, and SM command squads.

The last kind of cheese is where their is questionable rulings on how a unit works, but somebody built a list on it. Like the DE duke lists that people thought could assault from deep strike. This one is the hardest, since GW is hardly consistent with their FAQs, and its often hard which side to come down on for whether it works. Considering how many good armies and builds you can play, it can be awfully shady to do this, unless you are stuck with one of the old books with bad writing, no FAQs, and not much in the way of viable builds (some of the tricks necrons can pull are fun, but hardly game breaking).

I call it cheese when people bring a tournament list to friendly game when there is no agreement that we are practising for tournament. Now take the same list to a tournament setting and it wouldnt be cheese in my eyes. There is times to play the game for fun and then there is times to play to win... learn the difference.

For the kind of people that throw accusations of Cheese! around, a cheesy army is generally any one that's harder than theirs.

All Sanguinery Guard Blood Angels armies........ It was meant to be a friggin friendly game (though just about every army that that guy plays with is on a similar level of cheesiness). ¬¬

Personally, you can't have a cheesy codex.
Only cheesy builds.
Some codeci have a larger number of possible cheesy builds.

Purplefoood hits it on the nose here.

Sang guard armies built properly are cheesy.

IG mech can be cheesy.

Missile spam SQ can be cheesy.

Wings of Light wrote:I mean like...tournament winning lists...what is it like?

That really reminds me of the end of this skit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zP0sqRMzkwo&feature=autoplay&list=PLE4AD35CE4D390677&index=19&playnext=2

"Cheese" is totally subjective and to personal taste. Many folks don't believe in it at all. Usually it's just a way of denigrating an army list or codex a given player doesn't like or which beat his army. It's particularly sad when it's not even the army, but that the person was just outplayed and is blaming the army.

Mannahnin wrote:"Cheese" is totally subjective and to personal taste. Many folks don't believe in it at all. Usually it's just a way of denigrating an army list or codex a given player doesn't like or which beat his army. It's particularly sad when it's not even the army, but that the person was just outplayed and is blaming the army.

I have to disagree with you here.

In my above post, i've beated the builds I listed on multiple occasions - but they are extremely challenging to play against, and thats not what youre always looking for - especially at PUGs or your FLGS. To beat lists like these, you have to have a formulated plan from the word go, and oftern failure to adhere to it will lead to a swift defeat.

An army can be strong without deminding such a hgh level of play to defeat, and thats the sort of game thats more fun to play. After a game against Mech IG, my brain often feels ready to dissolve into a pile of goo!

That's purely subjective, though. Other folks prefer that experience from their regular games, and are disappointed when they face a "soft" army.

It's better to describe armies as either "casual/fluffy" or "competitive/optimized" or similar words which convey the idea you're talking about without implying that one is superior to the other. Both are fun, as long as the players are on the same page and come to the table with compatible expectations.

timetowaste85 wrote:Don't worry, you can't. Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Imperial Guard are the "cheesy" armies now. See thunder wolves, long fangs, sanguine priests and the pure firepower that is the IG tank. Eldar are a little on the weak side right now, and even running a seer council and fireprisms won't make you cheesy.

Logan Grimnar + Njal Storm caller + a ton of wolf guard, plus a few wolf guard split into your units for better leadership, a few 5 man squads with razor backs and a long fang squad.

I just got back into 5th edition coming from 2nd and man, Space Wolves got it made now. Back when I was playing second edition nothing could kill assassins and Marneus Calgar.