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.

Orkeosaurus wrote:

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:I let my opponent know what book I'm playing, that's about it. Honestly, the whole point of military intelligence is to bring what you need though. If I'm fighting Orks, why would I need any Icons of Slaanesh? I say let each side know what book you're playing and let them swap a few points. It's not only more realistic but makes the games more fun.

Uh... what?

Chaos marines would stop worshipping Slaanesh because they're fighting orks?

I don't think the fluff rationale really works that well, outside of an ongoing campaign or something. For one thing, it's illogical to assume that you would always have that level of intel on what you're going up against, especially against some enemies (Dark Eldar? Alpha Legion?), or the capability of switching out equipment (or entire squads) right before a battle. For another there's already a huge amount artificial leveling already going on, with point limits, force organization charts, table edges, etc.

No, but the commander isn't going to blindly dispatch a bunch of specialist groups where they're not needed unless he's that cocky. In the super-techno age I think they'd have a fair amount of intel. You can use fluff to justify any argument and it's kinda pointless IMO. Ultimately whether I spend 20 points on a stat boost that won't matter and could spend 10 less and get an ability that does matter is something important.

I think the larger issue at hand is super specialized lists that aren't "take all comers" that you have to tailor to even stand a chance at having a fun game against. When my opponent uses a Jetbike Seer Council and three tanks with a couple of piddly troops inside to park on objectives, I have to use a very specific list to beat that or I'm screwed. Same with Necron Max-Destroyer lists or Chaos Lash/Oblit spam.

Gwar I agree with you, But look at these quotes!

Liquidwulfe wrote:My thought process is this: Once you climb into that dropship and hit dirtside, what you brought is what you got.

Deathklaat wrote:i make take all comers lists, i do not tailer and i look down upon it. If you have to tailor your list to win a game then you might want to find another hobby.

fullheadofhair wrote:

Swordguy wrote:

*I had that happen my last game - I expected to play an Ork player, and when he didn't show, my IG faced a 100% mechanized Steel Legion list. I had three (3) Lascannons in total, and everything else was flamers and heavy bolters. What's the point in playing that game if you can't swap out wargear?

Aren't you doing what everyone dislikes? You tailored your list to take down an Ork player instead of an all comers list. Suck it up coz your gamble didn't pay off. No, you don't get to change weapons and the point of playing is to suck it up because you decided against using a balanced all commers list and you attempt to gain an unsportsman like advantage failed. I personally refuse to allow people to change their list once they know what I have - I take all comers lists that have barely changed in 2 to 3 years (or when there is a new codex).

Tailoring lists unless agreed in advance by both parties is definitely a TFG trait.

I guess were all just supposed to make armies and put them in large black boxes, that way no one will know what you brought....and you can't cheat by bringing a few more laz cannons when facing the guy with 100 tanks. Works fine if no one in your group likes any of the A++ lists.

Vladigar wrote:

tastytaste wrote:I always bring an all comers list. Lately though I notice people at my local store making lists after me. Happening because I been playing LR heavy lists of late. All of sudden everyone is bring Lascannons.

I almost thinking about calling some people out on it.

Honestly, that's not your opponents' fault. What do you expect them to do? Purposefully hamstring themselves just because you don't diversify your lists often enough? If you mowed me down with Land Raiders the last 3 games and I have a reasonable expectation that you're going to use a similar list, you're darn right I'm going to be loading up on lascannons. Tailoring a list on the spot after seeing an opponent's list is cheesy. Tailoring a list based on past experience with an opponent is sound tactical judgement.

QFT!

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

No, but the commander isn't going to blindly dispatch a bunch of specialist groups where they're not needed unless he's that cocky. In the super-techno age I think they'd have a fair amount of intel. You can use fluff to justify any argument and it's kinda pointless IMO. Ultimately whether I spend 20 points on a stat boost that won't matter and could spend 10 less and get an ability that does matter is something important.

I think the larger issue at hand is super specialized lists that aren't "take all comers" that you have to tailor to even stand a chance at having a fun game against. When my opponent uses a Jetbike Seer Council and three tanks with a couple of piddly troops inside to park on objectives, I have to use a very specific list to beat that or I'm screwed. Same with Necron Max-Destroyer lists or Chaos Lash/Oblit spam.

Don't you know! Your just supposed to "suck it up" and lose. No peaking - you have to guess what your going to be facing. Because we all know that everyone brings "take all comers"
lists.

No, I just usually know that my opponent is just going to deepstrike termies into me and that I am going to lose. All of that will change in 9 days...

Inqusitor + 2 Mystics + Plasmacannons up the wazzo I'm Guessing? No need to wait, surely there are some Swedish Pir- err I mean people who will gladly aid you?

I generally play pre-printed army lists, as it saves time.

Tailoring takes a lot of the strategy and tactics out, IMO.

Gwar! wrote:No one is saying you cannot know what army your opponent is playing, in fact it's actually the first part of organising a game (BRB Page 86, Agree Points limit and choose forces) so it's actually required to tell your opponent what Army you are using before the game (not what's IN the army of course)

That doesn't answer his point, though:

I don't need to see your list, but if your playing an all tank division. It's kinda ridiculous to expect the person your playing to just suck it up.
My problem with the no peeking - you can't change any part of your list or your a jerk mentality.
Is that if that's how your going to play, I guess we should all just bring the ork biker list/nidzilla/tank company. Because most of the time (80%) you have no chance in beating (or even giving them a run for their money) these armies unless you can tool up at least some of your force.

Sure, the exact percentage is pulled out of the ass (as are 69.4% of all statistics), but the point is valid. In pick-up play, where the objective is for both players to enjoy themselves, nothing is gained if one army list (not player, mind you) is so completely outclassed as to make playing the game an exercise in futility.

Tourney play is different, of course - nobody is arguing that. We're talking casual play here.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:No, but the commander isn't going to blindly dispatch a bunch of specialist groups where they're not needed unless he's that cocky. In the super-techno age I think they'd have a fair amount of intel.

You aren't famaliar with the Grim Darkness of the No One Knows What's Going On are you?

Seriously though, you don't always have a choice as to what specialists you send into a warzone, and that goes triple against enemies that can be completely undetectable until their attack starts: necrons, eldar, dark eldar, daemons, marines, inquisition, etc. It's nice to think of every battle as being "the chapter master commits X resources worth of guys to fight a bunch of orks", but in reality there would be a lot more at play, especially since 40k is at a relatively small scale for most armies. (Maybe an anti-tank platoon never made it to the enemy's battlewagon brigade and is mired up against infantry? Maybe the flamer squads were picked off by flashgits on the way to meet up with the rest of the contingent?)

You can use fluff to justify any argument and it's kinda pointless IMO. Ultimately whether I spend 20 points on a stat boost that won't matter and could spend 10 less and get an ability that does matter is something important.

Is that not what I said?

It is important, and it's important that one player does not gain an advantage that the other player cannot match.

I think the larger issue at hand is super specialized lists that aren't "take all comers" that you have to tailor to even stand a chance at having a fun game against. When my opponent uses a Jetbike Seer Council and three tanks with a couple of piddly troops inside to park on objectives, I have to use a very specific list to beat that or I'm screwed. Same with Necron Max-Destroyer lists or Chaos Lash/Oblit spam.

If they don't mind you making a list that has a chance against their army, then that's great. It really makes things a lot more sensible. There's not much of a point in trying to play a game if you're outclassed beyond a realistic point of winning.

That doesn't mean you should try and sneak up on someone's list and alter yours right before challenging them, of course. Just talk to your opponent beforehand and it'll either work out or you'll have avoided a game you probably wouldn't have wanted to play anyway.

I only do it when the game's preset. I'll usually hint to my opponent to do the same. "Hey I'm playing T-Sons next week, bring rail guns." or something. In games where I don't know which army I'll be facing I make whatever list I feel like despite how well it may or may not do against a given army.

I never tailor my lists, and always bring a take-all-comers army.

I like the take-all-comers armies because it makes you do more with less, and it makes you hard. If you tailor your lists, it makes you soft.

Blackmoor wrote:I like the take-all-comers armies because it makes you do more with less, and it makes you hard. If you tailor your lists, it makes you soft.

Very good point, but not everyone is as skilled as Blackmoor.


GG

I make a list full of stuff I want to play with so I can learn what works and what doesn't to keep it different. I don't tweak my list unless I'm spanked a couple of times, then I throw something different in.
You don't want to be complacent and use the same list over and over again. I played against a guy who figured I would be tank heavy because I had been playing some of the Razorbacks and Predators and stuff I just got done with. I showed up with a lot of heavy troops and spanked him.

The way I think about this is that in any given War a general has little or no control over what forces he has under his command. That’s decided by other political and economic factors outside of his control. He gets what he gets and has to adapt accordingly.

As a result I prefer a take all comers style list. Tailoring is a form of Meta gaming that I really dislike. Basing a list based upon what army your opponent is taking is something I would not outright object to but certainly frown upon. Tailoring after seeing your opponents army list? Well that’s practically cheating and I would have a severe issue with anyone who tried that with me. Not only that but is basically gives the richer hobbyist the advantage as he has the greater pool of toys to swap out.

However I do like that 3 list Idea TR suggested earlier. That’s something I wouldn’t mind trying in the future.

I dont tailor my army against anything.

Nor do i care what the game mission is ><

I just kill as much as i can , and if that happens to win the mission , woot. If i lose, oh well!

LunaHound wrote:I dont tailor my army against anything.

Nor do i care what the game mission is ><

I just kill as much as i can , and if that happens to win the mission , woot. If i lose, oh well!

But what happens if you are playing Eldar, surely you must not take the Vindicare!

You mean Vindicare + Farseer Taldeer?

there is no female farseer models so thats not a problem!

That or the Vindicare would love to kill Idranel, she is jealouse of their love!

*Mind Bullets !!



That or Macha would be shot.

I'll tailor magic items in WHFB, but otherwise I bring all comers.

Unless I'm teaching someone how to play, in which I'll take some fluffy (read: crap) units to generally throw the game.

[

Kreenshaw wrote:

I guess were all just supposed to make armies and put them in large black boxes, that way no one will know what you brought....and you can't cheat by bringing a few more laz cannons when facing the guy with 100 tanks. Works fine if no one in your group likes any of the A++ lists.

i use the GW hard cases for all my armies so i do indeed put them in large black boxes and no one knows what i'm bringing until i open them!

i usually bring 2 lists, one for MEQs and another for a horde army. that pretty much covers most of the bases (nidzilla covered with anti-MEQs high strength/low ap weapons, etc). if someone brings an all out av14 vehicle force or a large nob biker army to a friendly neighborhood game, i'll just concede the game and move on to the next opponent.

Ya see, I feel that is a bad idea. The way I have taught many kids (aged anywhere from 9 to 15) is to beat them utterly into the ground, and give them a goal, to humiliate me by beating me. And to my great pleasure, they all took it positively, and are now excellent strategists and players. One of them has even been able to beat me

The reason I take quite a well rounded army is that I don't like to make a list on-the-fly. I don't just walk into the FLGS and ask people for a game; it's all pre-arranged, and in tournaments (except the state championships), you get told what your matchups are. It's easy to figure out anyway.

You must be lucky, Gwar!

If I beat someone in their first game, they get highly discouraged (don't look at me, I did nothing) and they lose interest fast

Heh, tailoring lists to beat a specific list is a lame trick imo. Your army list is a toolbox, you want lots of tools to beat lots of opponents in it. If your list doesn't have the tools to face off against a certain opponent then hard lines, build a better list. When you tailor it's allmost like playing rock, paper, scissors but your seeing what the other guy picked before you decide. With all comers you get more of a tactical battle as you both try to co-ordinate the different elements of your force to maximum effect.

I mean it is a case of shades of grey rather than black and white a lot of the time. Obviously my all comers lists have counters to popular lists in them HOWEVER I'm not setting up to kill land raiders for one match then switching out to fight horde orcs the next. My one list has tools to fight both and the skill is being able to beat both with that one list.

If I get thrashed by an army my list had no counter to then I will look at rejigging it to include an element that can deal with that situation without overly weakening me against other situations I have to face. I certainly wouldn't just write a list to beat it and only use that list vs that guy.

Nope, don't tailor. In fact, I usually build my list before I know who I'm playing or what army they're bringing. It's one of those tourney player things, don't ya know..............................
One of the advantages of a large group is that I can just show up on gaming night and easily get in a couple games against random opponents.

Since I'm lucky enough to have 3 armies, I make 3 all-comers lists for each army. Then before the game (assuming I actually decided to bring all 3 with me, or maybe just 2 of them) I roll off for which army I'll be using. I never know what army i'm playing ahead so I don't tailor my lists, and choosing a random army before the game prevent my opponent from tailoring their's.