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 wanted to start this thread for two reasons.

1) Curiosity. I'll touch on this topic below.
2) Playstyle vs. Strategy. Is there a difference?

The first part - Curiosity.

There has to be different playstyles. Even if two people run the same list plays it differently. For example, I've played the same nids lists for close to a year off and on. I don't always play nids, but when I do it's the same list. (2 Flyrants, 2 Tervs, 2x10 Gants, Doom (spod), 2 Zoans (spod), and 3 Dakkafexes (spods)) It never changes and I always find it fun. It fits to playstyle (#topic)! I like getting in the enemy's face and I like playing aggressive. Extremely aggressive. The kind of aggression where it forces the enemy's on their heels. It forces them to make the correct calls on target priority. It forces them to make mistakes. I've found this strategy/tactic/playstyle to work best. When I play other armies, I use the same playstyle. And with similar results. It forces the opponent to react to me, rather than me reacting to them. My Black Templars lists runs 2 LRCs with 3 pods. My Tau runs 2 Riptides, infilitrating Kroots, Suit Squads, and allied Nob Biker Deathstar. I get to the opponent as fast as possible and look for weaknesses in their tactics.

I also want to mention that my brother (the same amount of experience on 6th edition) plays with a completely different playstyle. He plays (imo) extremely conservative. He goes for the guaranteed objectives, the safe strategy, the well-thought-out meticulous movements, and the for-sure win opportunities. On many occasions, he's played with my original Nids list (mentioned above) with his own strategy. I think it's crazy not using the list I made in full aggression, but I can't mock his playstyle because he wins with the list just the same. He also plays Daemons and Necrons with the same playstyle in mind. He knows what he must get done and he plays the objectives. He doesn't go to the enemy unless it's too his absolute benefit.

Alas, I was wondering what the fine members of Dakka had to say about playstyle. Do you consider it a strategy? Does playing aggressive or passive actually have any benefit or do you think it's the list that allows a player to win? Another thing to mention is if you go first or second (when you win the dice roll). I know this has a lot to do with the army lists, but on average, I usually always go first. I like the opportunity of taking the first shot. Sets the mood.


TL;DR -

What's your playstyle? How do you play 40k? Do you play reserved, do you play aggressive, do you play for aesthetics? Do tell. (Even you Ductvader!)

I love the fast, blow-things up style of play. I want to be all over the board causing destruction whenever possible. I wanted to have a huge melee focus with some artillery in the background.

With my orks, I can do that. I find that sometimes my strategy is not always well-thought out, and in many cases having a strong strategy comes from knowing your opponent. My orks went up against a new tau army on saturday and I'll be honest, I hadnt read the codex or anything. If I had known to target the markerlight drones first, could have made a big difference.

But yea there is truly a way to combine playstyle with strategy. But I enjoy my Deathskull orkz, the biker nobs, the looted wagons and the lootas. Thats the core of my army.

The odd units out in my army are the boyz, haha. Not being in a transport got them slaughtered on the first turn by the tau.

I like the disruptive, in the face style too. Conservative play isn't really for me so I'll create lists that are generally troop light (Crons) and focus on the "fun" stuff more.

Any list I build without deathmarks doesn't feel right

I typically play more gun line type armies now, being an IG player and my BA are relegated to shooting instead of CC. I am probably more of a cautious player, I look for the opponent to make a mistake and then try to exploit it. I love artillery lists, ignoring LOS and being able to negate cover is just awesoem.

I also like unconventional tactics that may pay out a turn or two later as other units play their part.

I used a BA list once with 2 drop pod DC squads of 9 with a chaplain in each, a LR with DC Tycho, Astorath with a ten man assault squad, a SR and 5 scouts. It was fun and unconventional. I used my DC (armed with bolters and one fist) to cordon off sections of the table and in effect make a funnel which my enemy poured his troops into, Tycho put his finger through the eye lenses of a 6 man Sternguard squad that tried to nuke my raider. Astorath and his ten assault marines jumped into 40 guardsman behind an aegis and slaughter ensued! All this being said, I knew I could field a list like this because the guy I was playing just doesn't understand tactics. He will go on the net copy a power list and then loose horribly and ask what he needs to change next time. He doesnt understand that he needs to know how to use a unit in order to win with it. Against a player with experience I would probably have had fun with that list, but I would expect to be taken apart.

I suppose if I had a Nids or Demon army I would play more aggressiy.

That example BA list by Lion seems pretty damn aggressive to me! Haha.

It's got that "Boom! Sup bro!" feel to it. In your face Turn1, deal with it. Then Turn2, yup, that's a LR full of death. My favorite.

I like mobile units as well, Icculus, but something about Turn1 pressure gives me chills

I play SM and like the mixed style:
(Drop in their face, bomb from a distance, apply pressure with an advancing and shooting line.)

long range shooting camped in the back:
Pick any Hvy with 36" or greater range. Tend to use Dakka Preds.

Disruption / dropping into the enemy:
A few drop pods, skimmers or termies in their face.
Some scouts moved forward with sniper rifles and missile launcher is fun.

Rolling up the front line:
Walking the SM troops forward unloading the whole way.
Some broken into combat squads if I need the missiles to do a bit more work. Getting Razorbacks with Las/Plas is helpful for an all-round weapon platform and for quick objective grabs.

As aggressive turn 1-2 as is possible. I believe in the 'Victory through annihilation' strategy. Typically this means Deep Striking, fast attack choices, and gunlines in the Holy Trinity of demolishing opposition. Go big or go home, history favors risk takers, all that jazz.

I like to react to my opponent.

I take a list with a bag of tricks and enjoy surprising my opponent with what I pull out. I play eldar and have two of everything in my collection. I like to bring a compltely different list to my gaming club each week and playing in a different manner.

When I play competitively, it's all about the objectives. Stealing them, contesting them, killing scoring units. I like using my mobility to steal the game from my opponent. I especially like the look of on opponents face when I win, despite having much less left on the table.

^ +1. Striking quickly and hard on your first turn is crucial. Drop Pods with Melta Sternguard come in to hit that Ionhead/Leman Russ/Vindicator, or instagib that squad of Broadsides. Space Marines are so tactically diverse that it allows a combination of this and maneuver warfare, scooting up behind the drop pod contents with Rhinos and Land Speeders. Whirlwinds and TFC's help too.

SM style lists, no matter the Codex, benefit from this diversity. Attempting to spam units in any loyalist PA codex (save, perhaps, GK, with the Crowe Purifier build) really tends to limit your options, IMHO.

I'm also a bit of a weirdo since I absolutely love Tactical Marines. I know that Grey Hunters/Grey Knights/insert MEQ troops are usually better, but they've just pulled through for me so many times.

I love being super aggressive, and thrive in the game's randomness. I deep strike a lot, and use a lot of special rules -- even if it's not uber-competitive.

If I really needed to define who I am as a player it would be as a pseudo 40k hipster (lol). I detest bringing a list that is passe, tried and true. I'd much rather take unconventional units and try to find a single use for them.

That doesn't mean I'm fielding all DC and guaranteeing a loss, but I'd rather try to be competitive outside of mass TH/SS termies or established meta.

It depends on what I'm playing. I'm more conservative with my Tau, going for easy objectives after 3-4 turns of weathering the storm.

Chaos I just go like waves crashing against rocks. Nab a couple objectives and throw everything else into CC or die trying.

Right now I'm running a cronair list with 7 flyers. I start with very little on the board and pray I make it into turn 2. I've only had one near death experience where a Tau player killed me down to a man in turn one.

Once we get to turn two it's fliers everywhere and cries of cheese. Not necessarily because of the fliers themselves but because of death rays they shoot, death & despair units that hop out and kill everything, and troops that drop out on turn 5 and hold objectives. I'm discovering there's an art to maximizing a flyer's time-on-board and keeping them relevant. Lots of little tricks that end up being one part strategy and one part tactics which is really what I love about the game.

For my daemons, it's hyper-fast alpha-strike style.

For my favourite playstyle overall? Herohammer, having tiny unit's that work as well as huge ones. I love feeling like the underdog and still pulling out a win.

A few people mentioned that Space Marines (and other MEQs) have a lot of variety and they try a combination of drop pods, disruption, and long-range fire power. Although, I agree it's nice to have a balance, I've found that utilizing multiple playstyles sometimes takes away from their impact.

For example, if you have a few pods, a few "trick" units (bikes or other disruption units), and an Aegis with some long-range fire power, I'd start to argue that those 200-500 points shooting from afar doesn't synergize with those trying to get into assaults/close range. You effectively split your own army up.

That's just what I notice when I try to include an Aegis in my BT army lists.

I like these posts though! Glad to see there are brothers that share the same taste for blood! haha.

I love Focus fire, or just tactically nuking a portion of the table.

Pie plates and bombs for me thanks.

I prefer to use the reversed flank style and destroy one half of the board. I might put something tasty on the weak flank to try and get my opponent to shift his power away from my stronger flank until it is too late.

I like to play a gunline army with a few units in reserve to deter my opponent from moving forward.

Works like a charm

I also like to play mech sometimes, as it reminds me of the time BA were still doing well at major tournaments.

Lucarikx

MAIM! KILL! BURN!

That about sums it up for me.

I play elder. Not sure if elder can actually play a hard aggressive army. Yeah T3. but they suit me perfectly. I start out with a collection of motley elves. Wait to see what my opponent fields. Pick what I want to tear apart what just needs some harassment. and then dart around the board. The look of consternation when Some one targets my Spiders then they run and jump a total of 6+3D6 inches is great. or when I rend threw a squad of terminations with Guardians.

I like reacting to what people bring and then hitting it hard. Every build has a weakness. Using the elder scalpel to carve the heart of a Marine is just fun for me

Saythings wrote:
A few people mentioned that Space Marines (and other MEQs) have a lot of variety and they try a combination of drop pods, disruption, and long-range fire power. Although, I agree it's nice to have a balance, I've found that utilizing multiple playstyles sometimes takes away from their impact.

For example, if you have a few pods, a few "trick" units (bikes or other disruption units), and an Aegis with some long-range fire power, I'd start to argue that those 200-500 points shooting from afar doesn't synergize with those trying to get into assaults/close range. You effectively split your own army up.

That's just what I notice when I try to include an Aegis in my BT army lists.

I like these posts though! Glad to see there are brothers that share the same taste for blood! haha.

In theory I agree, but some units really NEED to be shot, especially for meq lists. I don't think hybridized lists are as bad as lists with tons of reserves. I have beaten several people I should not have purely because they reserved units needlessly and thought they were being awesome.

I played the common "stay back and huddle on objectives until the game is over" for a few months of 6th, then I got extremely bored.
Now I play "place objectives as close to your enemy as possible and bring the fight to them."

I find it's either everything or nothing.

Reactionary force...which is something I learned to do much better in Warhammer after playing some Warmachine.

I often find it easier to play when I force my opponent into situations that are more harmful to their playstyle.

I play Deathguard. So I'm relatively conservative and try to kill from a safe-ish distance. But with my plague knives I'm also not afraid to charge and bring the fight to you. Basically my playstyle in every strategy game I have played.

I would also say that with my bugs, GKs, and Eldar...it's not a fear of taking losses that keeps me from going all out...its the steadily increasing amount of board control that I am trying to maintain.

Bugs and GKs take the center and branch out...the Eldar seem to have been surrounding the enemy thus far and make the center of the board a kill zone.

I still am a huge fan of Drop Pod Assaults (I usually put my objectives on his side of the field ). I know its dated and done... but its still my favorite. When running CSM, I want to assault as much as possible with Cultist blobs and Spawn/Juggerlords


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ductvader wrote:

Bugs and GKs take the center and branch out...the Eldar seem to have been surrounding the enemy thus far and make the center of the board a kill zone.

I too have noticed this... Tau and Eldar have made shooting the new black, just in different ways.

Right? Tau don't bother my bugs too much because they stay put...but Eldar can put out Tau-like shooting with mixed in AP1 and 2 while staying mobile.

...my adepticon team is half and half Tau Eldar next year.

Earlier in my 40k career i was pretty much "gung-ho" and went tyranids, now i kinda realized that 40k is nothing like Fantasy i switched over to Tau since they seemed to have a boarder variantcy with their crisis suits and that i like being a tech race that isnt based on magic like eldar or necrons.

Still play Warriors of Chaos in Fantasy, Tactical set-up is only the deployment and first turn, all after that is slaughter.

I like unconventional warfare.
Death Strikes? Three please.
Hell Hounds? Sure.
Plasma Sentinels? Looks awesome.

People get so caught up in "best", they often don't realize a lot of stuff is good enough.

-Matt

Dracoknight wrote:
i like being a tech race that isnt based on magic like eldar or necrons.

Woah woah...it's only magic to those that don't understand it. If I were to bring an ipod to the 1500's it would seem like magic too.

Magic exists in fantasy, not in 40k.

(^_^)

I'll keep it simple..

BATTLEWAGON OR GREENTIDE FER DA WIN!