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.

So after a few games at my FLGS, talking with some friends we realized that our FLGS at this point has basically no local meta.

What I mean by this is:

1) Our community is blessed by an incredibly diverse selection of armies. Nearly every army is represented. We even have a good sisters player. Over just my last 11 games I've played: Tyranids, Eldar, Eldar/Tau, BA, IG, Necrons, Orks, GK, Tau, DE, Chaos. We only have one C:SM player in the area total and no more than 2 GK players. Xenos is strongly represented. Its an awesome community and its a lot of fun.

2) The lists you might find are equally diverse. Net lists, fluffy lists, Elite lists, hordes, balanced all comers lists, etc.. This lists are just as unpredictable as well. I've seen Wraithguard deathstars, IG leafblowers, Super Elite Paladin. etc..

I run IG as my main and been dabbling in chaos allies atm. I like to bring a balanced all comers list to the store each week. It becoming difficult to try and account for every thing I might see on the tabletop when I build my lists.

What is everyone's advice concerning listbuilding and how do you all approach your respective communities meta? Do you run counter meta, balanced lists, extreme lists, fluffy, fun etc.. ? How you approach list building w/o much of a current meta?

Where do you live? It sounds glorious and I will be moving there directly!

I would say that a TAC list in good in this case. In situations like this I always try to think of list building in really broad strokes. For example, don't think "How will I deal with the speed of DE transports", but rather "How can I combat an opponent who is faster than me". Typically that allows you to build something that will help against the fast units of ANY army and not just the one specific unit. Take that approach to as many aspects as you can think of and try to build your list that way (heavy support/cc/etc.). IMO that approach will allow you to build lists that are fun to play while not being OP and will still give you a fighting chance in most games.

Another approach would be to ask you what your strengths are, build your army to really hype those strengths and try to make everyone else adjust to you (in a tactical sense, not in a TFG sense lol). My two cents!

I think the best approach is to just build a tac list. Your lucky to live in a community with a diverse meta. I live in a game community heavily skewed toward MEQ, I try and write TAC lists but I have to fight the urge to design to kill MEQ.

Glocknall wrote:
What is everyone's advice concerning listbuilding and how do you all approach your respective communities meta? Do you run counter meta, balanced lists, extreme lists, fluffy, fun etc.. ? How you approach list building w/o much of a current meta?

Arrange a game. Agree with your opponent which codex you'll both be using, then you both go and tailor a list to fight the appropriate codex. This is by far the preferred method of list building, and really breathes new life into the game. Suddenly every game is different, with a different list. And suddenly every unit in the codex has a viable use, as opposed to the small selection of units generallyb considered to be 'good'.

Give it a go!

 Kaldor wrote:

Arrange a game. Agree with your opponent which codex you'll both be using, then you both go and tailor a list to fight the appropriate codex.

+1 to this. Although I recommend taking a TAC list with you too in case you get to play a PUG game once you're done.

 Kaldor wrote:

Arrange a game. Agree with your opponent which codex you'll both be using, then you both go and tailor a list to fight the appropriate codex. This is by far the preferred method of list building, and really breathes new life into the game. Suddenly every game is different, with a different list. And suddenly every unit in the codex has a viable use, as opposed to the small selection of units generallyb considered to be 'good'.

Give it a go!

I have to say i totally agree. I have several TAC lists i use for pickup games, but when i've organised a match versus someone, building a list to fight a particular army can be a lot of fun and you will use units you don't normally think as viable.
You should bear in mind though, that its quite easy to fall into the trap of building your list to beat your opponents collection, rather than his army, and that can mke it a very lopsided game, and not much fun for your opponent.

madtankbloke wrote:

 Kaldor wrote:

Arrange a game. Agree with your opponent which codex you'll both be using, then you both go and tailor a list to fight the appropriate codex. This is by far the preferred method of list building, and really breathes new life into the game. Suddenly every game is different, with a different list. And suddenly every unit in the codex has a viable use, as opposed to the small selection of units generallyb considered to be 'good'.

Give it a go!

I have to say i totally agree. I have several TAC lists i use for pickup games, but when i've organised a match versus someone, building a list to fight a particular army can be a lot of fun and you will use units you don't normally think as viable.
You should bear in mind though, that its quite easy to fall into the trap of building your list to beat your opponents collection, rather than his army, and that can mke it a very lopsided game, and not much fun for your opponent.

^This, though with a piece of added advice: Try strange and new scenarios that reward different play choices, it will add an additional dimension beyond building different lists to face different foes.

madtankbloke wrote:
You should bear in mind though, that its quite easy to fall into the trap of building your list to beat your opponents collection, rather than his army, and that can mke it a very lopsided game, and not much fun for your opponent.

Yeah, it can be hard to know where to draw the line, especially if you're playing someone who's collection you know quite well. Do you deliberately build a weaker list, or deliberately take units you know will stomp his, and where along the continuum do you draw the line? I've always said it's important for players to consider the enjoyment of their opponent when building a list, and this is a really good example of why!

There is local meta, then there is edition meta.

Making sure you army can do the following is key to victory:

Take objectives
Kill infantry
Kill elites, such as terminators
Kill heavy tanks
Kill or ignore fliers
Keep from getting in or winning melee

Just basic standards of list buildings.