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 would like to say that I am really happy with all the responses that I have gotten on here. It really does make me feel better to know that not everyone in the gaming world is a douche lol.

Kingcracker is quite correct about the Grey Knights though. Just think about my original post. The rest of those armies only had 1 build that people spam at tournaments or even in normal games, the GK's have 3. That should tell people everything they need to know about them.

Has anyone tried a Sea of Green Ork list against the Grey Knights before? I would be interested to see what would happen in that game.

You missed tremmorcrons from the necron section


My BA are DOA, so more fluffy than heavy hitters.

My nids are more of an army which i built around units i like.

My DE only has 2 venoms, and no rav's. (wych cult)

And my daemons are classic fateweaver with added slaanesh daemons.
However, daemons struggle with anything but a cookie cutter list in tournaments, so dont expect too much change as fluffy daemon armies really dont do a great deal.




Edit: The sea of green is a nice idea unless they run purifiers.
In which case the sea hits an island.

You're forgetting the new wave of Nidzilla. Three tervigons, two Trygon Primes, a couple of units of required gaunts, Doom of Malantai and as many outflanking genestealers as you can afford. i've played against that same goddamned list fielded by four people at my FLGS, with Orks, Dark Eldar and Space Wolves, and the only time I didn't lose was when I scored a tie in the seventh turn of a capture and control mission because the last two members of a ten-strong meganobs unit that had Cybork bodies thanks to Mad Dok Grotsnik just made it to the other objective and passed their break test because two of them were killed. I look back on that game as the highlight of my 40K history now. If sixth edition doesn't fix a few things, I'm heading to merry old England with a baseball bat.

I will be the first to say that 6th had better be good and fix whats wrong with the game because if it doesn't then my models will be hitting Ebay and I will be taking my business to Privateer Press. Always did like the way those Menoth models looked anyway.

Crafter, i feel your pain.
While ive only gone against 1 swarm-bringer list, they seemed more content in sitting back and flooding me with termies.

I wouldnt have minded, but the main bulk of the army was:

Tervigon
Tervigon
30 termigants
30 termigants
30 termigants
tervigon
tervigon
tervigon

Now, while i dont mind the idea of if somethings worth doing, do it well, this takes the piss a bit.
More so that the game was triple objective.

Now, i dont mind a challenge, but what can i really do against that with daemons? XD
I simply started chewing through units, and end game he had all 3 objectives while i was pinned in a quarter of the board, with well over 100 termigants left alive.
That much spawning is worrying since i couldnt keep up with it.

Just find it funny he missed out on a trick.
Could have taken 3 units of 30 gargoyles to go with it lol.

Reivax26 wrote:I would like to say that I am really happy with all the responses that I have gotten on here. It really does make me feel better to know that not everyone in the gaming world is a douche lol.

Kingcracker is quite correct about the Grey Knights though. Just think about my original post. The rest of those armies only had 1 build that people spam at tournaments or even in normal games, the GK's have 3. That should tell people everything they need to know about them.

This isn't them being broken. All the newer books have multiple good builds; that's a sign of better design. It's the older books which have fewer viable builds.

Reivax26 wrote:Has anyone tried a Sea of Green Ork list against the Grey Knights before? I would be interested to see what would happen in that game.

I've known multiple people who've played that matchup. It can work quite well, though you really want shoota boys rather than sluggas. Purifiers ruin your day in HtH, so it's better to drown them in bullets, as against shooting they die just as fast as regular SM.

Reivax26 wrote:I will be the first to say that 6th had better be good and fix whats wrong with the game because if it doesn't then my models will be hitting Ebay and I will be taking my business to Privateer Press. Always did like the way those Menoth models looked anyway.

Your first post made a lot of assumptions about ow and why people play their lists. It makes the same Charlie Brown buzz as when someone says something along the lines of, "I love that you play DA instead of BA or GK because at least you play an army you like," both make basic assumptions about how and why a person plays. I've played Blood Angels for over a decade. I played a Rhino Rush army in the twilight of the 90's, a Jumper army in early 4ed, and a hybrid jump/scout/AV13 army in the PDF. Now I'm back to a Rhino Rush and have gone full circle. I made my list for the first tourney after the new BA book dropped and it has remained unchanged since; net list my eye. And yet it IS in fact a Razorspam/AV13 list because 5ed made the game about objectives and the best and most durable way for me to capture them is mounted RAS; if you don't like it boohoo. I do in fact still have what would now be a DoA army, my 6 chaplains, and Land Speeders. All sidelined until they work again:just like my Rhinos were.
For me 5t edition has been the worst edition so far; I don't like the way the game plays now and I feel the rules encourage WAAC net listing *shock* and that's what we get, but you know what? I still love 40k. No other games literature has convinced me that it is as interesting and engaging. Which means when the 6ed book drops I'll buy it, I'll read, I'll learn it, and I'll play it. But putting conditionality on "how good" it is and "it better fix" is childish. If you like the way Menoth look and you want to play Warmahordes, don't blame 6ed. Blame your disinterest in 40k or your interest in PP. They put out a great product. I played 40k briefly in 2ed, you want gakky rules 2ed had them in spades. GW puts out a markedly better product now than they ever have before. It's more expensive than it should be and its geared towards competition; if you can't accept that there's the door. I for one love that the internet has given us a resource and a community that shares things like netlists. I love that the internet gave me Brother Edwards BA to serve as a baseline for my own army, that the powerarmor only crowd at BnC will playtest your newest netlist on Vassal nearly any hour of the day. I love the discussion, critique, and ideas I get from Dakka. Those things come with netlists, Wardices, and other boohoo gak. Deal with it. If your answer to the tournament meta and a new ruleset is to pack up your ball and go home, then do so. Don't bitch about it first.

While I do not have a SW army, I have always wanted to make one that was max HQs, Lone Wolves, and Dreads.

I think it would be pretty cool.

My SW list runs two vindicators and not a single LF in sight. Only 1 - 2 HQs and even Bloodclaws depending on if I feel like leaving the terminators at home.

The primary issue is a list that does really well at a tourney gets copied, and that's ok.

The reason being anyone that makes a copy-cat list is only 80% as good as a player that makes their own lists and understands their codex.

It's just that more of the copy cat fools are around at these big gatherings, so the odds are in their favor to do well.

Units that work well are one thing, but the spam is just generic fools with no insight or tactical ability.

The only army in your list that I have, is chaos. I run chaos lords with demon weapons, no more than 6 obliterators, chaos dreads, normal CSM, raptors, that's pretty much it, and I do very well against the stuff you list.

I recently used a fabius bile list in a tourney, and it turns out even against 3 BA dreads with the keep killy claws, I did well.

Some players can't think for themselves, that's ok, I enjoy playing predictable players with very different than meta list and beating the stupid out of them.

The lack of originality in some builds is more of a reason for me to exploit other players lack of skill in building a list. I enjoy nothing more than going against IG leaf blower lists with my Orks. Nothing like Grazzy coming in with Snikrott from his table edge then blowing apart those artillery vehicles.

As far as IG goes, yes, to some degree all builds will be the same, differing only in infantry hordes or mech vet lists. Yes, as 2,500 points, I do run two melta vets and one plasma vet in chimeras. After that though, Yarrick, 5 ogryns in a chimera and 3 penal legion squads. Alot of Leman russ tanks.

I have posted threads before on my builds and all I usually recieved in response was "that wont work, you need this and this" or, "those units are horrible, this list will not win". Why, because it isnt the normal list. Still win, still lose, just like the standard best builds.

I would like to see a tournament where you have to build a legal army but some one else has to play it. Make the worst build you can, and see how they match up.

I like my guard mix list. It has regular infantry-blob, vets, LRBT, Hydras and Vendys. It does quite well.

Reivax26 wrote:This has been bothering me for some time now but I have let it build up until I just can't take it anymore. I want to see some originality in armies, especially those in tournaments.

Has anyone here had success with a Space Wolf army that doesn't use Long Fangs?
Has anyone had success with a Grey Knight army that isn't Draigowing/Purifiers/Henchman Spam?
Has anyone had success with a Blood Angel list that isn't doing Razorspam/AV13 Spam?
Has anyone had success with a Chaos Marine list that isn't running Dual Lash Princes/Plaguespam/Oblit Spam?
Has anyone had success with an Imperial Guard army that isn't a Leafblower?
Has anyone had success with a Dark Eldar army that isn't Venomspam?
Has anyone had success with a Necron army that isn't the Scarab Farm list?

I get so freakin tired of seeing the same old lists over and over and over. Can't anyone have an original thought in their heads anymore or has 40k turned into a game where it is required of you to look around the net to find the netlist for your particular army that is the best one for it supposedly.

Sorry but I am just in a really bad mood right now and someone on one of the other sites has filled my Rage meter to the top

my blood angel army is all DOA and my nilla marines all have bikes
my chaos marines dont run anything that doesn't have the mark of slaanesh,same goes for my daemons
my imperial guard are nothing but mass troop spam and 4 russ's
my deldar only have 2 venoms, 3 at the most
my eldar are 90% wraith
I play sisters of battle......this army couldnt get more unique if it tryed XD

I tend to win most games I play :3

although I have to agree with what AustonT said, you see these "net list" builds for a reason.....they consist of good units and people want to win games.

Mannahnin wrote:

Reivax26 wrote:I would like to say that I am really happy with all the responses that I have gotten on here. It really does make me feel better to know that not everyone in the gaming world is a douche lol.

Kingcracker is quite correct about the Grey Knights though. Just think about my original post. The rest of those armies only had 1 build that people spam at tournaments or even in normal games, the GK's have 3. That should tell people everything they need to know about them.

This isn't them being broken. All the newer books have multiple good builds; that's a sign of better design. It's the older books which have fewer viable builds.

Reivax26 wrote:Has anyone tried a Sea of Green Ork list against the Grey Knights before? I would be interested to see what would happen in that game.

I've known multiple people who've played that matchup. It can work quite well, though you really want shoota boys rather than sluggas. Purifiers ruin your day in HtH, so it's better to drown them in bullets, as against shooting they die just as fast as regular SM.

While I agree with Mannahnin on the build side of the argument, pretty much every codex has 2 or 3 really good builds that get spammed heavily. My argument about the GK is the fact that if you look at the tourny scene, ANY tourny scene, the GK just flood it, hands down. The reason? Mainly because they are OP and people like to WAAC, so bringing the GK is a better chance at that goal. And sure, the GK arnt AS bad as the Demons were for Fantasy, I mean they literally BROKE the damn game. But GK arnt that far behind in that regard. I mean you want to talk about balance, well explain to me how they are SO much better then a vanilla marine and at such a low cost, not to mention they get upgrades that are just incredibly WTF.



Again, no one will talk me out of my view on them, but every other army out there is pretty good in my book

AustonT: You are quite correct in that I have grown disheartened with 40k and I am not alone in that regard.

I really hope that 6th and the Chaos Codex actually make me want to play again. I have enjoyed this game for the last 12 years that I have played it but over the last few years there have been so many things that have irked me about the game that its taking the fun out of it.

I do agree that for the most part, the internet has helped the gaming community . It is good to bounce ideas around with people who play a similar army to yours, to learn from their mistakes so hopefully you won't make them too. The only downside to this is the people who simply get on sites to "Troll" around and put down everyone's list who uses a unit that is outside of what is percieved to be the best units in that dex.

A friend of mine recently started playing and after posting a list he was wanting to do on one of the other gaming sites he go so much negative feedback on the list that I had to talk him out of quiting the game before he had even really learned how to play.

I play vanilla marines and hybrid guard. My guard list has max 2 melta guns and 3 plasma guns. Marines, well it doesn't even matter what kind of list :p

I keep building my own lists every week. Moving and taking out what i feel useful and what i dont. I know alot of people dont use plasma, but i use it ALOT.
Right now im moving to mostly a list build around my armored mech or bikes.

I've done all of this but one, as it was just simply daft to not run a single squad of long fangs.

This is more whining about the meta and WAAC lists. Don't play at tournaments if you don't want to see this.

I know its not an efficient way of making an army, but I buy whats cool first... then make a list with what I got.

My own personal gripe, I hate special characters, I dont like playing with or against them. It just feels so... unoriginal. I enjoy the customization of the game!

Texanity wrote:I know its not an efficient way of making an army, but I buy whats cool first... then make a list with what I got.

My own personal gripe, I hate special characters, I dont like playing with or against them. It just feels so... unoriginal. I enjoy the customization of the game!

So playing only ultramarines instead of forces that feel like White Scars, Salamanders, Imperial Fists, Raven Guard, or a MoF list makes the game MORE original? I don't follow.

Lobukia wrote:

Texanity wrote:I know its not an efficient way of making an army, but I buy whats cool first... then make a list with what I got.

My own personal gripe, I hate special characters, I dont like playing with or against them. It just feels so... unoriginal. I enjoy the customization of the game!

So playing only ultramarines instead of forces that feel like White Scars, Salamanders, Imperial Fists, Raven Guard, or a MoF list makes the game MORE original? I don't follow.

Seeing as 4th edition you had traits rather than needed SC's, it's a valid complaint.

As a Necron player, I don't own a single scarab swarm. With a limited budget, I've ended up being more of a Wraith Wing type of player. Other viable lists (of varying degrees) I have seen or heard of (apart from Scarab Farm and Wraith Wing) include: Destroyer Wing (nerfed a bit but if synchronized with other units is just about as deadly as ever), Maximum Threat Overload, Tremor Spam, Barge Wing, Scythe Wing, Tesla Spam, SpeedCron (I've only seen one player use this build and it has been to great success. build includes: Overlord(s) on CCB, Triarch Praetorians w/ voidblades and particle casters or Lychguard in Nightscythes, Troops in Night Scythes, Tomb Blades, and Doom Scythes. Mech Armies beware!), Ark Wing, Ark of Destruction (another build I have only seen one player use. Includes: Overlord(s) in CCB, Warriors in Ghost Arks accompanied by Harbingers of Destruction, 2x Annihilation Barges accompanied by 1 Doomsday Ark), Overlord Court Overload, C'tan Hammer... and that's all I remember. Two of the builds from the Oldcrons have been fairly nerfed (though still playable): Silver Tide and Monolith Phalanx.

SC tend to be one trick ponies that its easy to find away around.

The purpose of the post was to see if anyone was having success with unorthodox lists compared to what the normal lists are for those armies that are seen in tournaments.

The one good thing about netlists though is that once you figure out their flaws they are usually not that hard to beat. Its those crazy lists that show up that throw everything into disarray. I love when that happens.

Buttons wrote:

Fafnir wrote:Blame the game, not the player, in this case.

40k is such a horribly balanced system, and poorly written at that. New codecies are written in ways to promote new units/models as being more powerful in order to push more model kits, rather than preserve any idea of a stable metagame. Because of this, 40k will always be a game that purposely centers itself around a select few 'net lists' above all else.

If you don't like that, I suggest you pick up a different game.

Or play non-competitive games with people that you can trust to not go too far out of their ways to win.

So, where is this imaginary line drawn then? At what point does competent tactics and strategy suddenly become "too far?" Furthermore, at what point does hamstringing your own play end up becoming patronizing to your opponent? It's an entirely arbitrary mindset, put in place to excuse poor design.

With such a mindset, you can call just about anyone or anything "metagaming" if you're not happy with it.

We shouldn't, under any circumstances, be excusing poor design, but rather, demand better rules for everyone, regardless of playstyle or habit.

Reivax26 wrote:I would like to say that I am really happy with all the responses that I have gotten on here. It really does make me feel better to know that not everyone in the gaming world is a douche lol.

Using good units =/= being a douche.

KingCracker wrote:My argument about the GK is the fact that if you look at the tourny scene, ANY tourny scene, the GK just flood it, hands down. The reason? Mainly because they are OP and people like to WAAC, so bringing the GK is a better chance at that goal. And sure, the GK arnt AS bad as the Demons were for Fantasy, I mean they literally BROKE the damn game. But GK arnt that far behind in that regard. I mean you want to talk about balance, well explain to me how they are SO much better then a vanilla marine and at such a low cost, not to mention they get upgrades that are just incredibly WTF.

Citation needed. There are plenty of people out there that play Grey Knights that have always wanted a Grey Knight army but didn't want to build an almost all-metal army. Now they have plastics and people flock to them. We really don't know why people play Grey Knights, so let's not claim that most people only play them because they're "OP".

Reivax26 wrote:
Kingcracker is quite correct about the Grey Knights though. Just think about my original post. The rest of those armies only had 1 build that people spam at tournaments or even in normal games, the GK's have 3. That should tell people everything they need to know about them.

Right... so one of the newer codices having more viable options makes it broken? Well, all my fellow GK players, it looks like we can't even field our army because someone might cry. Sorry, but AustonT pretty much hit the nail on the head: If you don't like it, either duck out or take it like a man. Not every GK player is a WAAC douchebag, which is contradictory to the attitude I seem to be detecting from this thread as of late - correct me if I'm wrong about this.

My Tyranid army uses Hormagaunts, a Flyrant, Warriors and Carnifexes. All no-no's, according to the internet. It also does not have any Tervigons, something that the internet says is required for Tyranids to not spontaneously combust on turn 1. Granted, I'll be getting a Tervigon soon, and a Tyrannofex (another no-no). I still win as well.

Don't listen to the internet and think it represents the greater playerbase. While a lot of people run net lists, a lot more don't, they just don't talk about it on the internet. Your local meta is different even to the local meta a few towns over due to different people playing there. The internet has a greater amount of people playing the tournament scene, which is again different to most local scenes, requiring very efficiently built lists. Which, given GW's tendency towards poorly internally balanced codices, means they all end up looking the same.

Most people think outside the box. Most people also don't post, or even read, internet message boards.

If it weren't for the under-priced missile launchers, there's absolutely nothing wrong with Long Fangs in a Space Wolf list, any more than Devastators in any other Space marine list.

Hell, using the Black Crusade codex rules in 3rd/4th edition meant that Long Fangs were the only HS choice I could even take for my Space Wolves 13th company !

Testify wrote:Net lists are only of use in tournaments. Any list can be countered if your opponent knows you're going to use it.

Right...

Because list tailoring is SO much better than net listing...