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.

Would it get silly if there was an option to have a sideboard of like 1/10th the point value of the game?
This would mean you have two units, of the same cost(maximum 1/10th the point value of the game.)
after you see your opponents army list, but before either of you do any set up, you both get to chose which unit to use this game. This is done simultaneously without knowing what the other person picked. Then you start set up as normal. The chosen units are included in each army, while the unchosen unit is not included in the battle in any way.

So in a 1500 point game you could have a 150 point salvo side with a velocity tracker, and a hammerhead(not actually trying to balance the cost, just examples.) You see your opponent is running a AM heavy tank army, so you use the hammerhead. Then again, you might be facing necron flier spam and need the extra skyfire missiles.

I'm not a fan of this because it removes the (what little there are) strategic elements of list-building. I no longer have to think about my list when I know I can have whatever answer I need to use against my opponent.

In you own home brew games, I say why not? After all when going into a battle you will in a lot of cases know what you are getting into.

Why not 25% instead of 10%? Only problem with this, is you are carrying more minis than maybe you would normally carry but I thin this would be fun.

Thing is, I believe the lists will need to be made ahead of time, so you are not actually list tailoring to an exact army. (Unless that is what you guys choose to do.)

How many lists are you going to allow to have? Only one list? Two, maybe 3 side boards? Will they have to be actually all laid out if they are going to be used, so this way your opponent can see what you have?

With that being said though, I like when people make All Comer Lists like the game use to be made for. Sometimes I hate list tailoring, but then, other times, it would be nice to make a more well rounded army if both parties agree.

 curran12 wrote:
I'm not a fan of this because it removes the (what little there are) strategic elements of list-building. I no longer have to think about my list when I know I can have whatever answer I need to use against my opponent.

The idea wouldn't be to give enough points for all the answers... just enough to swap in or out a AA unit in a game depending on the number of fliers, or an extra squad of troops for objective grabbing. Your opponent does the same thing, so you have to be ready for his answers to your answers to his army. Enter mind games.

Davor wrote:
In you own home brew games, I say why not? After all when going into a battle you will in a lot of cases know what you are getting into.

Thats the idea. If scouting dosn't indicate any tanks, why are you sending in the fire dragons?

Why not 25% instead of 10%? Only problem with this, is you are carrying more minis than maybe you would normally carry but I thin this would be fun.

Would want to play test it. My suspicion is that 25% would be enough of your army that both sides end up as confused as before.

Thing is, I believe the lists will need to be made ahead of time, so you are not actually list tailoring to an exact army. (Unless that is what you guys choose to do.)

Thats the idea. You have one specialized unit you can swap out for another one... or just for more troops. You have to make a guess at what will only be relevant in a small number of match ups, or you would be better off just leaving the option alone.

How many lists are you going to allow to have? Only one list? Two, maybe 3 side boards? Will they have to be actually all laid out if they are going to be used, so this way your opponent can see what you have?

That starts getting complicated. My idea was 2 lists effectively. 1 list is with one squad taken, the other is with the other squad taken. Both players see the others list and know what is going on.

With that being said though, I like when people make All Comer Lists like the game use to be made for. Sometimes I hate list tailoring, but then, other times, it would be nice to make a more well rounded army if both parties agree.

See I like rounded armies... its just when you have to be ready for everything, you start just having to do spam of an OP unit.

Make sure you let us know how 10% works out. Tell us if you feel that is fine or maybe 15%, 20% or 25% works out better.

To make it more like GW, maybe roll off. On a 1,2,3 you can't have a side bird, 4,5,6 you get a side board. See GW random stuff. Kidding there though. I am starting to dislike all this randomness in the game now.

I'm not against the idea of being able to switch out a unit, but unfortunately I think it would just result in the same certain units being sideboarded. "Oh you brought 2 flyers, well I bring on my Stalker." or worse still "I see you haven't equipped your devastators with Flak missiles, well say hello to my Helldrake."

As you'll no doubt agree, a central issue in army building is: Do I a) make a balanced force that can contend with all comers, but not excel in any one area, or b) Specialise my force to have , strong defence, high mobility, air superiority, massed numbers, that will casue the army to excel in a given area, but be weaker agaisnt certain other amies.

I would say that if you were to implement a rule like that, I would apply a suitable penalty should a unit be substituted. Ideas that come to mind are delayed deployment of the replacement unit , random placement, inability to move or shoot on the 1st turn. Such a penalty would give a good incentive for players to continue to be wise when choosing their list.