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.

Evey time im make my way to the FLGS I have noticed that everyone's lists are just competitive now, even for friendly games.
I only like playing agenst competitive lists to find a way to beat them, but I think playing agenst s "Fluff" list is a lot more fun then the competitive lists out there.
I guess I need to find a new group or convince them to atlest carry a "Fun list". so what do you think Dakka? Do you play with "Fluff" lists/fun lists?
I would like to know

The issue is many hobbyist, old and new, are finding it increasingly difficult to purchase large armies for Warhammer and 40k.

As such, many people turn to the "best" list as an indicator as to what to buy.

It takes a long time hobby player or someone with disposable income in order to field list with fun aspects.

It depends on who you play against and local area.

Humorous anecdote - My friend got back into 40k along with me about a year and a half ago, and we recently started playing at my FLGS. He runs Dark Eldar, but not mech, only his Wyches are in Raiders. After he pulled a minor win against my Nids in a really close, enjoyable game, he played a local who ran mech-Emperors Children against him.

Defiler, Vindicator, Daemon Prince with Lash, twp Rhino mounted CSM squads. It was about 1000 points. His Dark Eldar only managed to kill the Daemon Prince. His entire army was obliterated by a slowly moving parking lot.

When we left, he turned to me and said 'that was the most unfun game of 40k I've ever played. I don't mind losing, but put some fething infantry on the table'. We came from 3rd/4th edition, where vehicles were only sprinkled through armies. I guess we'll continue making those kinds of armies and playing in our own group with my other friends and brother who also just got back into the game.

Also there has been a bit of a shift from 'having fun' to 'curbstomping everyone is the only way to have fun'

Some of my best gaming memories are games I was getting beaten in, but there is a large and growing section of the community that will discard 90% of the codex units as 'trash' and spam the rest over mathhammer.

If that gives them pleasure, then so be it, but it doesn't really make for the fun, laid back games i thrive on, where you and your opponent are both having a laugh, chatting and joking as you play.

I can play hard-ball tournament playstyle, but i prefer to do so only at tournaments. Most new players seem to show up with the FOTM marines (often proxied), and someone else's netlist looking for pickup games, lately, and ragequitting if they aren't winning by round 3. YMMV, but that's been my experience.

I run them pretty often. I also lose pretty often

It just depends on your environment. I have a very casual gaming group and there's rarely cut throat tournament lists getting used.

Bongfu wrote:The issue is many hobbyist, old and new, are finding it increasingly difficult to purchase large armies for Warhammer and 40k.

As such, many people turn to the "best" list as an indicator as to what to buy.

It takes a long time hobby player or someone with disposable income in order to field list with fun aspects.

I think your second point is valid, the other two aren't. This has always been an expensive hobby, and sometimes large armies are more competitive so that's that. Also, it takes disposable income to play this game at all, and you can be a new player and still run a list with fun aspects. Hell, most armies aren't 100% cutthroat netlists. I run lots of fun lists, and ran them when I was still new to any given army.

Well, it's a competitive game wherein there is a winner and a loser.

If losing doesn't detract from your fun, then there's no reason to be competitive. If you'd rather win than lose, then it's going to be more fun if you're competitive, because you're more likely to win.

Not all people understand why winning is desirable. If you're one of them, then you'll just have to intellectually understand that this is true of other people.

You can also be competitive and win and not have fun, but that's not the point of this thread.

Oh, and it is both possible to be competitive and run at least somewhat fluffy lists. People that think that any army has only a the one good list and the rest are crap are narrow minded.

Bongfu wrote:The issue is many hobbyist, old and new, are finding it increasingly difficult to purchase large armies for Warhammer and 40k.

I agree with this statement 100%. I play Chaos Marines and just to add a PARTIAL squad of Plague Marines or 10 Thousand Sons to my army is 50$ and up which is insane.

It is a competitive game, true enough

Comptitive- i like to win. I can handle losing, but winning is always good.

Game- If both people involved aren't having fun, it's not a game . I'd rather be boardwiped by someone who understands this, and who i can enjoy playing against (who just happens to be lucky, better at tactics than me or have an army i can't handle well with my list) than fight a game and win against someone who never laughs, stares at the dice incessantly, calls for rulings or makes RAW arguments at the drop of the hat and spams all the cheesy crap he can, bending interpretation of the rules to breaking point in doing so.

I will gladly play a competitive player, who offers me a decent challenge, as long as he's a fun guy to play against. Most of the tournament players locally are in this bracket. They want to win, and will play their best to do so, but they are great guys to play too, and will happily chew over the match after and shake your hand at the end


Then there's the rules lawyer TFG's with all the personality of a Chess-o-matic machine..

I don't know if I would say my lists are ever made with the intention of being competitive. I just see a unit, decide that I like said unit, get them and play with them. It was only by luck a year ago that I liked Necron Destroyers which allowed me to field a destroyer wing army which just happened to be a bit competitive. However I also liked pariahs so then again my elite selection in my army was also non competitive.

Brother SRM wrote:I run them pretty often. I also lose pretty often

It just depends on your environment. I have a very casual gaming group and there's rarely cut throat tournament lists getting used.

Bongfu wrote:The issue is many hobbyist, old and new, are finding it increasingly difficult to purchase large armies for Warhammer and 40k.

As such, many people turn to the "best" list as an indicator as to what to buy.

It takes a long time hobby player or someone with disposable income in order to field list with fun aspects.

I think your second point is valid, the other two aren't. This has always been an expensive hobby, and sometimes large armies are more competitive so that's that. Also, it takes disposable income to play this game at all, and you can be a new player and still run a list with fun aspects. Hell, most armies aren't 100% cutthroat netlists. I run lots of fun lists, and ran them when I was still new to any given army.

While I see your point, what I meant was that back in third edition (when I started playing) you could buy a decent sized army for around $250-$300. Now with all the price increases, only the elite armies are available for that cost, and that's building to a set list. If you look at armies like Orks or IG, just basic troops cost you an arm and a leg to build. A Guardsmen platoon cost you cost you $25 for a CCS, and at least two $29 boxes of Guardsmen, when I remember you could buy a box of 20 guardsmen for $23.

I concur that price may be part of it. Folks specifically buying and building to a tournament list.

That being said, I think most folks do wind up collecting some extra stuff. I think one pretty simple way to make a somewhat "fluffy" list is just to make a gentleman's agreement to compose lists with no repeated units. Though some codices have an easier time with this than others. This gives you greater variety on the table, but you can still play to win.

My main Chaos lists nowadays are fluffy - well, fluffy for my custom warband. No Slaaneshi or Nurgle models or marks, just Khorne/Tzeentch; there aren't any Obliterators either.

I win a few, but lose the vast majority because I don't play Dual Lash with Plague Marine and Obliterator spam, and because a few of my units have 'fluffy' gear, which pushes their cost up.

My Tau aren't fluffy per se, but there isn't a lot of Tau fluff to go on, and I greatly dislike Ethereals, Kroot, and Vespid.

My Eldar are competatively built now, but when I get more cash I might buy some fluffy units using custom Craftworld fluff; Rangers and Pathfinders with Scorpions, Warp Spiders, and Dark Reapers; completely ineffective but based on my fluff of striking from the shadows, killing silently, swiftly, and without being seen; only vehicular support would be dedicated Scorpion Serpents, maybe a unit of outflanking War Walkers, and perhaps some Vypers.

It'll be costly, very costly since the vast majority of it isn't currently competative and thus, I don't have it, but would be fun to play.

Like others have already said, the models are way too expensive to build non competitive lists unless the player has been around for quite a while. However, eBay is your friend, stop paying for MSRP when the Internet exists.

I want to get the most bang for the buck and so therefore I'm looking to maximize the effectiveness of my troops (my grey hunters are fully kitted out).

As a new player I am spamming some(okay alot) however I am doing an off the wall fairly fluffy list, since in real life there is quite a bit of repetition in an army, vendettas for anti armor, and ACs with vets for antiinfantry

For me it just depends on what is going on at the time. If I want to start preparing for a tournament then ill bring a tournament competitive list but I would let my opponent know before hand so they can bring their tournament list. If there's a break inbetween tournaments then I have no problem bringing a fun list just to spice things up. Currently im working on an ork warbiker army just for fun despite having a solid battlewagon list. I am also starting an Emperor's Children with a bunch of Noise Marines/Dual Lash DPs/Obliterators etc...which I dont think is all that competitive imho. Dont let mech spam get you down because by the looks of things it might be worth waiting for 6th edition as it seems that things are going to be going back to a bunch of non-mechanized army lists.

This is a general problem in almost all collectable competitive games I have seen. Someone figures out the "best" fit or options and then everyone else jumps on it because it wins.

Personally I hate that, I would rather take even an uncompetitive army to a tournament and loose then play an army that I feel does not reflect my playing style and personality. This is probably not such an Issue in tabletop gaming but I saw it a lot in collectable card games. People all choose cookie cutter builds to win, no one plays with a style of their own. Part of playing with a style of your own is that it makes the game fun, its you being represented in your cards and your units and models, not some mathhammered spreadsheet without any soul.

I think sometimes places that hold friendly games should make a losers league. Where you play with the build that is almost made to loose, no competitive options allowed, only the silly fun stuff that everyone else thinks is crap.

I just enjoy putting down my storm raven no matter the points cost game. Doesn't matter the opponent or my list comp, it'll always have a storm raven in it. And maybe autocannon dreads.

So far I enjoy what I got, and at the end of the day I win/loose about the same cept against necrons which seem to always edge me out. Game is still fun for me but because I play what I enjoy. Not as big a difference what the other guy uses. Of course I don't intend to ever win a tournament but damn it I'll enjoy the hot dogs at one!

I tend to take models that look awesome to me *Glares at the Daemonette on the desk*

I personally enjoy playing fluffy lists. However, I almost always get my butt kicked. I love the little moments like when Straken's CCS assaulted a drop pod and blew that up then did a suicide assault into a large SM unit. The look on my friend's face when Straken housed his Librarian was priceless. Of course my CCS was annihilated the next turn, but the game was pretty much over at that point anyway.