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.

As above. What do you use in your army to deal with the current meta in a tournament?

wow... broad question...

I guess I try to win?

My own (hopefully) competitive list?

My DW army has faired very well against Cron Air and Drake Spam. Not from having anti flyer tech, but from being Terminators. I spam anything with a 2+ save and add CML on anything that can take it.

Don't play them, I why would I want to play a WAAC player?

Never encountered a super competitive army.

Probably get stomped, especially if the player is competent as well. I don't play enough with my army to be that good

I'd most likely employ the tactic of getting tabled whilst attempting to maintain good humour. Then I'd go home and cry about it. Either that or furiously tinker with my list until I'm better prepared for the next engagement... Perhaps both.

I will hide all my units behind LOS and not engage and drag on the game to turn 7

I tend to read about them on forums and wonder how many friends they have lost over the years.

I lose?

 kinratha wrote:
Don't play them, I why would I want to play a WAAC player?

That term doesn't mean what you think it means. Assuming that everyone who takes a competitive list will try to win "at all costs" (i.e., including cheating) is equivalent to assuming that everyone who takes a non-competitive list is a drooling idiot.

I agree. If I refused to play people that wanted to win, I wouldn't have anyone to play against.

Saythings wrote:
I tend to read about them on forums and wonder how many friends they have lost over the years.

So You lose friends because You play competitively on competitive environment? What.

I give them a good game and try to exploit their weaknesses to win. And saying Competitive = WAAC is hopelessly generalizing. Thats like saying fluffy players are trying to lose! The overwhelming majority of people who bring competitive lists will play by the rules and not try to cheat you, but somehow trying to win is now a bad thing...

I still expect my friends to get revenge for 3rd edition BA. But I don't have to like it.

I forgot how hard it is to detect sarcasm on the interwebz. T.T

I have competitive lists and fun lists. I play them accordingly. Some players that always run competitive lists get boring to play!

Who doesn't want to play BTs though?! Oh that's right, everyone that enjoys the competitive scene.

I just looked it up. I have a losing record vs BT with BA. Maybe that makes me a bad player. By some miracle, I have a winning record vs CSM, however.

Lemme know what list they were running, or better yet, the list you were running ^.^

Use a balanced list?

Most competitive lists can win or lose the rock/paper/scissors game of other competitive lists.

Many deathstar based lists fall apart to balance.

I'd disagree with the above comment. I'd posit that deathstars are popular because of how difficult they are for TAC lists to deal with.

 kinratha wrote:
Don't play them, I why would I want to play a WAAC player?

So everyone that plays a competitive list is a WAAC player now are they?

Meh, let them come. My competitive list is also pretty optimised.

 LValx wrote:
I'd disagree with the above comment. I'd posit that deathstars are popular because of how difficult they are for TAC lists to deal with.

Tyranids, Tau, and Eldar most definitely disagree. Many reactionary IG lists would also agree.

My bugs in particular, love a deathstar...nothing says tasty like 20 Paladins to 100+ termagants.

 ductvader wrote:

 LValx wrote:
I'd disagree with the above comment. I'd posit that deathstars are popular because of how difficult they are for TAC lists to deal with.

Tyranids, Tau, and Eldar most definitely disagree. Many reactionary IG lists would also agree.

My bugs in particular, love a deathstar...nothing says tasty like 20 Paladins to 100+ termagants.

Well, Paladins aren't the only deathstar in the game!. I play Nids and i've had difficulty with Seer Councils (though I haven't played the current iteration). My Tau have also had some problems with some of the more ridiculous deathstars (Screamers with 2++, Hounds with 2++, Tzeentch FMCS with 2++).

And for the most part I would consider IG and Tau to extreme in their own right (Almost fully focused on shooting with a complete lack of assault and most likely a lack of true mobility).

For me a true TAC list would be a list that features a bit of everything, mobility, shooting and combat. I think these sorts of armies tend to do poorly vs. Deathstars.

How do I deal with competitive lists?

(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻

Or curl up into a ball and cry...

 Alfndrate wrote:
How do I deal with competitive lists?

(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻

I love you.

 kinratha wrote:
Don't play them, I why would I want to play a WAAC player?

This entire thread is awesome, lol. Nearly every person in my meta is a WAAC player. Many of them will not play a game until they have meticulously constructed an optimal list to beat the other (then they will invite them to play a game, without warning). I started a TAC tourney, but people lost interest. (and just to be clear, some guys are great to play games with, they're not all WAAC)

How do I deal with this? Well, since I have nobody else to play, I just lose. I lose game after game, because I refuse to bring broken or overpowered lists that are optimized against a single opponent (also, I played blob guard for way too long after 6th dropped, my bad). Warhammer 40k is not balanced by nature, it breaks in an instant if you look at certain combos. Breaking the game is a fast way to take all the fun out of it. So you always win? ... cool, you must get all the pussy.

I'm not saying don't try to win. That would be stupid, you want to play to win. But if winning is the only thing you think is fun, and you don't have fun unless you slant everything in your favor, well, then maybe you should get a life.

So what's the solution? You could demand that all your friends adhere to a strict set of rules (which is an awful idea), and channel your inner Communist.

However, the best solution would be to create a different kind of contest. Try to beat as many opponents with the same list, for instance. Then you're not tailoring to 1 opponent, and the difference is made on the table, rather than on paper. Isn't this game supposed to be about tactics? I would think that anyone with any desire to ACTUALLY compete wouldn't go for the uber tactic, but get down to a level that made sense in the context of the game. 40k is not balanced, it's inherently unfair, that's the game, so what are you really doing by creating such an extreme tilt? I don't see the point in finding the easy button, if you're favored so dramatically ... why play?

Players must be willing to be gentlemen. If you're seeking out the combo that denies your opponent their best ability, and puts out enough firepower to table them on turn 2, you're really just trying win "automatically" rather than fighting it out.

Well, if your opponents enjoy playing against the most optimized lists, then it is gentlemanly. It's pretty simple. You play what is appropriate to the group of people you play with.

 LValx wrote:
Well, if your opponents enjoy playing against the most optimized lists, then it is gentlemanly. It's pretty simple. You play what is appropriate to the group of people you play with.

True.

Then what do you change to avoid a rock-paper-scissors scenario? In extreme list building, you win by list, not by tactic.

If everyone agrees that it's a contest of list building, that's fine. You should try MTG, it's fun.