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.

I have a question; Why do people tailor lists?

I for one am thoroughly against tailored lists, and disparage people at my store when I notice them doing it, especially the ones who I know can or would win anyway.
I do not mean to offend, but this probably will anyway; are you not good enough to win with a rounded list that you tailor yours for a specific opponent? If you want to practice for tournaments, you better have a rounded, balanced list anyway. If you are playing for fun, doesn't specifically making your army to destroy your opponent take some of the fun out of it?

I understand that sometimes it's a challenge, or for newer players learning the game, but for veterans, why?

This isn't exactly an army list, but I'm not exactly sure where else to put it.

TL;DR, why do you tailor army lists?
So... Discuss, I'm very interested (I mean that sincerely)

Well, do you mean making an army list and using that single 'tailored' list in a sort of all the time manner or do you mean "When I see he's got this, use List A and when I see she's using that use List B"?

I would assume it is because people do not like to lose and tailoring helps them with that.

It's also easier to solve a more limited problem like 'how do I kill/beat a 2 Land Raider list at 1250' than 'how do I handle all possible armour combinations at 1250'

This is partially in response to me browsing the forum and seeing almost half the threads being either 'what do i put in with X army to beat Y army' or 'list to beat X'

Also because of some of the guys at my store who have specific lists for specific people, tailored against the other's army, whether it be swapping out those assault marines for a dev squad because they know THIS guard player has more vehicles, or switching to mephiston because they know that THIS guy NEVER runs anti-psyker stuff in his GK's

Well, tailoring to a point isn't bad but if you're making anti-Bob and anti-Jeff lists that's a bit much. I can understand making a list that's good anti-armor or an infantry killer or anti-pysker but to spend the time finding out exactly what another player runs so that you can custom tailor a list for fighting his army and only his army then you've got a few issues.

IMHO, that's just OTT and you need help.

Well, you do kind of tailor lists all the time... Every game you play in a given arena teaches you something about your army; e.g. I'm weak against vehicles, or I get ruined by assault lists...

If you play repeatedly in the same arena, you customize your list for the situations you encounter most; and it's a natural development to get to know other player's styles and tactics, and make adjustments to compensate.

If you know your opponent usually fields multiple high armor vehicles, you're not going to have a lot of fun dropping in an army with no melta; and while it might be fun for him to steamroll your gunline, it certainly won't be a good battle.

Most of the players I know keep a 'sideboard' handy for casual battles... not so that they build out a list specifically against you, but in the mindset of a good general, to paraphrase Sean Connery, don't send your troops into a gunfight armed with knives.

For tournaments, yes, you should build the most versatile, well rounded list possible; but part of that is knowing the field, and preparing an army that can compete with the opposition you're most likely to meet.

I know I don't want to drag my tau into a fistfight with someone who always runs Shrike, without at least a couple of drone squads to screen my broadsides from early assaults. Because the truth is, If I'm not prepared for my opponent, there's really not much of a point of playing anyway.

Well tailoring lists is sometimes helpful practice but if its not for practice then its just stupid and totally lame and makes the game dumb.

I agree with you, Tailoring is annoying as its only a viable army for a couple games (against the same army/person). I play with a group of guys who don't tailor their lists against anyone in particular, because we rotate our games with each other (all of us play a different race). We have swarm armies, Orks / tyrannids. Ranged armies, Tau and Imp. Strong armies, gray knights, MEQ, sisters. Tactical nightmares (sometimes) dark eldar. Tailoring a list is good and fun, but we never use the same list twice, we're always tweaking to find a way to balance between everyone.

It helps to play a lot of different point games, that way no one can rely on using the same strategy, since armies have different strengths at different points.

Its really not so bad if both people know its coming, and are game vets. Stomping puppies is always bad.
For instance, if I go play a game on saturdays against the same opponents, I get pretty familiar with their lists. I know what they have model wise, and what they like to bring. I've got a lot of models, and am fortunate to be able to run pretty much what I'd like to. Taking advantage of someone who can't is wrong. If I tailor the list in store, looking at their models, and then pull out my stuff that beats those models, I'm a humongous asshat.

But if I'm playing a person in a similar situation, the picture changes a little bit. If I book a game against my friend's blood angels, a week from now, we both have a week to try and make the most brutal list possible. He knows I'm bringing Nids, I know hes bringing angels. We're both familiar with each others codices, and so I really don't see the harm in that. That actually brings out interesting thought exercises and hard choices. Is he bringing DOA or razorback list? Am I bringing horde nids or nidzilla? We usually still end up with fairly balanced lists, because we don't know.

Now, there is always the option of declining a friendly game. If you're running horde orks and see my list of 9 biovores, 3 harpies, and toxin sac genestealers, I'd stongly advise you to say "Oh hell no. Who else wants a game?" I'm going to be doing the same, because to do otherwise would be shooting fish in a barrel, and not really satisfying at all.

Tournaments are a different story, because you can't change your list. Just hope you brought a solution for everything.

I prefer playing in friendly games the same lists I would bring to a tournament. My meta has everything except tyranids in it, and a good ratio of them at that. So i end up playing fairly balanced lists all the time. I like practicing with these balanced lists because they make me better, and allow my opponent to play against what I believe to be a tournament ready list. Generally the people I play against in the friendly games do the same.

But that said, the other people at the store will have 6 or 7 lists the bring up with them for different armies. It particularly disgusts me when they pull them out against the one kid who plays tyranids and is all of 12 or 13. These are not people I play against...
Tailoring lists against someone who is prepared and doing the same, to a degree I'm cool with. When you are just taking advantage of your opponent sickens me.

My TAC lists are always tailored to kill Marines. With a little anti-horde support.

Why? In the local meta (and most, if I'm correct) power armor is as common as house flies.

If your army is set up to kill Landraiders, Predators, Rhinos. Dreadnoughts, Power Armor and Terminators, that takes care of 75% of what you see game to game.

Toss a few templates for anti-horde.. and bang-o. TAC. It's not "tailoring" to gear to play against marines IMO. It's making the list TAC. Noone is going to incorporate anti-Tau, anti-sisters or anti-Daemons into a TAC list. They just arent' common enough.

What I generally do is bring all my models to the store I'm playing at.

I also have several lists made up, stuff that is fun to play and usually themed. Drop pod list, horde list, nidzilla list, flyers list, etc.
I generally let my opponent choose which list he wants to play, and I generally accept, barring him choosing nidzilla vs JOTWW or some equally unfair to me lineup.

Since this is an army list thread, let me validate your parking, sir, with a list I'm currently fielding for 2500 games.

HQ
Winged Tyrant, HC/OA, LW/BS, TLDevourers, Leech/Para 295
Swarmlord 280

Elites
9 Ymgarls 207
9 Ymgarls 207

Troops
Tervigon TS/AG SL Outflanker 180
Tervigon TS/AG "Stay at home mom" 180
20 Devgants in a spore 240
15 Devgants "Mommas boys" 150
10 Genestealers Toxin Sacs 170
10 Genestealers Toxin Sacs 170

Heavy
Trygon Adrenals 210
Trygon Adrenals 210

If i win the roll to go first, everything starts on the board and runs across the board screaming boogety boogety.
If I lose, it all goes in a reserve and comes down on a 2+. I get everything I want in, and I deny them turn one AND turn two.

Swarmlord, stay at home tervy, and the non spore devgants stay on my objective.

I like the idea of having different lists that you let them choose from. I might just make mention of that to the guys i typically play with next time I go up.

I do that to some extent... If I am debating between to lists (typically a chaos list or a BA list, because i run both for my Night Lords) I'll let my opponent choose which codex, but that isn't really as much variety as you have there Doomthumbs, considering I play the two codices pretty similarly.

Not as much variety? You play two codices!
My math might be off, but isn't that close to twice the variety?

Lead by example with the list idea. Print them out, formatted all nice like, with a description of the abilities like you'd post here on Dakka. Maybe even put them in some binder sleeves so you look even more professional. Full permission to play it off like its your idea, even. If it looks cool enough, you'll inspire jealousy and imitation without even having to explain why its a good idea.

The interesting thing about tailoring lists is, if both players do it, the game just became more strategic, it becomes chess, instead of checkers, if you will. You consider the possible things in his army, and try to compensate for the aspect you think he'll field, only to be fooled as he changes it completely. While some people consider this unrealistic, consider it as two commanders anticipating what their enemy has, and is either right, or dead wrong and must adapt to the changed circumstances, or die. I personally have no problem with changing up my list every now and then, especially if I'm going to pay the money for the models.

If you don't change your list, even if you do well with it, you become weaker over time.
Because you become that guy that plays [List X]. So to beat you, [List Y].

Doomthumbs wrote:If you don't change your list, even if you do well with it, you become weaker over time.
Because you become that guy that plays [List X]. So to beat you, [List Y].

exactly. Innovation wins wars. Look at the French in WWII, they stick to the Maginot Line, which was superior in WWI....The second time around, the Germans just went around it or drove their tanks over it. =p

Everyone always rags on the French, but I really don't think thats fair?

Know what the last major conflict they won was?

It was in 1780.

Still need a hint?


They saved our asses in the American Revolution. Without the French, we wouldn't even be a country.

Screw freedom fries.

so.... they haven't won in.....how long?

Yep - GO FRENCH

Well if you don't change you or your enemey never change lists your games will be so boring and the only time it will change is by changing mission.

have you been loosing?

I personally do not believe in making an army that is built to defeat a single different army. That is a waste of money and effort. I also believe in making your opponent react to your army, not reacting to his. If your reacting to one foe, that list is in effect crippled against other lists.

I do use Marines as a benchmark though. You really have to assume anything that is good against marines will be good against 95% of your opponents. Str 3 Frags from a IG Grenade Launcher? Yeah, not gonna do jack and squat against T 4 guys. Same goes with armor saves and moral. I don't use sniper rifles because I don't think they are effective against marines, so really, they are effective against stuff I don't care about. Why I don't even really like flamers. I have shot a BA assault squad with 54 lasgun shots... I think I killed 1 or 2 marines after armor and FNP saves. Those same shots against a hoard of Orks might be more effective, but there are 3x more Orks than Marines, so it balances out.

Even though I have a friend that plays nothing but BA, it doesn't matter to be because of the benchmark I have chosen and the fact I strive to make well rounded armies. I don't worry about Land Raiders in particular, I worry about AV 14 and how to deal with it. I worry about how this squad will deal with a Dreadnaught in hand to hand. I worry about high toughness creatures like Wraithloards that don't have a AV score in combat. If I run Psykers I try to give myself some kind of rough plan on how to deal with Hoods. My first time playing against Demons with marines was a real trip and made me consider how I deal with a DSing heavy enemy.

Experiences tells you to come up with plans like that to help your army deal with it, but it also lets you know that you just accept some facts about your lists. Maybe I don't want this unit in CC, but if they do, I am writing them off as a loss. I am not going to waste points to make them better at something I know they will lose at. Sure, some day having that power fist on your devastator sarge may save the day, but till then that is 25pts I could be using elsewhere.

Doomthumbs wrote:Everyone always rags on the French, but I really don't think thats fair?

Know what the last major conflict they won was?

It was in 1780.

Still need a hint?


They saved our asses in the American Revolution. Without the French, we wouldn't even be a country.

Screw freedom fries.

I didn't mean to sleight the French, it was just the easiest example I could think of. Perhaps the Battle of 73 Easting would be appropriate? The Iraqis set up tanks in entrenched positions to minimize being a target, however the US computer guidance systems made that tactic obsolete and they proceeded to fight on a somewhat even paying field, despite the raging sandstorm that was going on.

I understand, and indeed apologize for what I'm reading today was fairly strong invective/ unnecessary spite.

I'm not even French, just savagely a fan of giving credit where it is due.

You didn't even sleight them! you merely faulted them for relying on the same tactics twice, which, unlike my poorly made comment, has a corollary to the current discussion.

Apologies again.

SoliderSnake wrote:The interesting thing about tailoring lists is, if both players do it, the game just became more strategic, it becomes chess, instead of checkers, if you will. You consider the possible things in his army, and try to compensate for the aspect you think he'll field, only to be fooled as he changes it completely. While some people consider this unrealistic, consider it as two commanders anticipating what their enemy has, and is either right, or dead wrong and must adapt to the changed circumstances, or die. I personally have no problem with changing up my list every now and then, especially if I'm going to pay the money for the models.

Agreed. A frequent opponent and I did this while exploring the latest release of the Codex:SM a couple years ago. He'd go big in drop pods, while next time I changed to more speed. Next match, he'd add long range; then I'd counter with more h2h marines. It was fun.

Currently, it's pretty much fixed lists due to playing a new army, DE. I can't really tailor my list as I only own models enough to put 1850 on the table. Same with him. And since many of us are league and the monthly RTT regulars, we've settled on TAC lists that rarely change.

Fluffwise, here's something to consider:

Sgt. Gristle: "Drop zone in T-minus 10 minutes!"

Private Meat: "Who're we killin' today, sarge?"

Sgt. G: "Greenskins have soiled our beloved Emporer's grain colony, Kellogg IV. No, damnit, put away those accursed, back-firing plasmaguns! It ain't traitor marines we're killin'! Orks, you mouth breathers! Green-skinned orks! Bust out every damn last flamer and can of napalm! Yes, ya idjit, pro-MEE -THEE UM! Secure for drop!"

I'm not advocating never changing your list, I was questioning the reasoning of having a different list for every single different comer.

And Doomthumbs, my chaos list and my BA lists are eerily similar. it's just a difference of whether two of the squads have jump packs (poor chaos, no raptor troops), and whether the devastators / Havocs are equipped with Missile Launchers or Meltaguns.
As opposed to nidzilla vs twenty thousand gants running across the field.

I guess where I'm at, having over twenty regulars makes it so you dont get really used to any single persons play-style enough (or play against that person enough) to make a single list for them so I never have an issue with someone countering my assault heavy armies. It's people making guardlists heavy on plasma for marines and heavy on flamers / templates for orks and so on and so forth that bother me.

People tailor lists because they want to win!
Now someone who tailors their list to say beat a specific player who is playing an all-comers list isn't playing very nicely. In that case the person tailoring their list is attempting to gain the biggest advantage possible against one player.
Someone else who tailors their list to battle the current meta is just trying to gain the biggest advantage possible against the majority of players.
The latter is perfectly acceptable in my book.

I used to go play at a FLGS that had a terrible tailoring lists guy, he would always wait until he had found out what everyone was running, and then scream "WAIT I NEED TO MAKE A LIST". Without fail, everygame, even after being mocked and confronted about it. I once watched him edit his list to be more effective against a brand new player with AoBR models.

It really turned off alot of new players because he is ALWAYS there, and most of the regulars stopped showing up because games would take forever to start, and slowly the stores gaming died, we moved on to a different place, and no one told him.

For as long as we take extra models to the club, incase we up the points value of our games, you are always gonna get a johnny saying:

"ooh orks, i'll swap my scouts and dreadnought for a thunderfire cannon and a dakka predator"

or changing the odd upgrade or weapon.

this is not the best but i think having multiple-lists is even worse, johnny may win a lot but wonders why he is only half-way up the tournament leaderboard.

P.S. my name is not Johnny

Yea i agree, why try and win with a tailored list when you wouldn't ever run that in a tournement... like >_> just run Take all comers lists to practice with

Unless its for a laugh yea.