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.

When picking forces what do you agree on before you start adding up points?

Is it just the points cost? So you agree 2K points but have absolutely no idea what the other guy is bringing at all?

Do you agree on broad factions? IG, CSM, etc but nothing more?

Do you get specific like Thousand sons vs spacewolves?

One general guideline we have is that if one guy only has one fully army, maybe he can't afford more, especially now, and the other guy has more than one, he should out of fair play tell the one army guy what he's bringing to give him a chance to sort of tailor his army, since the guy with multiple armies knows what he's facing in general.

 Matt Swain wrote:
When picking forces what do you agree on before you start adding up points?

Is it just the points cost? So you agree 2K points but have absolutely no idea what the other guy is bringing at all?

Do you agree on broad factions? IG, CSM, etc but nothing more?

Do you get specific like Thousand sons vs spacewolves?

One general guideline we have is that if one guy only has one fully army, maybe he can't afford more, especially now, and the other guy has more than one, he should out of fair play tell the one army guy what he's bringing to give him a chance to sort of tailor his army, since the guy with multiple armies knows what he's facing in general.

My friend won't start making an army until I tell him which of my 5 factions I'm playing.

In general, it's probably fair to let people know what your faction is going to be, particularly in a tight playgroup.

In general pick up games I've always agreed:

1) The points value of the game

2) What edition/version of the game we are using. Good to confirm around new edition changes, but also when there are expansion rule sets out there.

3) What objectives/style of game its going to be. Ergo capture objectives; straight annihilation etc...

4) What army we are each bringing.



I'd consider the above the base information most would agree on before a game. Accepting that with people you play a lot you might not need to confirm every one of those as you might play regularly enough that you both already know what you're expected. For totally new people you'd confirm it all so that you're both on the same page when you bring your armies.

If you are feeling generous/want a challenge/want to be fair to your opponent you might say that you're taking a specific type of army - eg you might say Tyranids Swarm" etc... as a general idea what nature of force, but its optional.



Beyond that going into more detail of what you're bringing is more about creating more challenge for yourself; or perhaps helping someone to learn and letting them think about what best to bring to tackle your kind of army etc..
Plus if you play somone regularly they will use what they know of your collection. IF they know you only ever take a swarm Tyranid army then if you say Tyranid you can expect them to use what they've learned in the past in building their army.

 Matt Swain wrote:
When picking forces what do you agree on before you start adding up points?

Is it just the points cost? So you agree 2K points but have absolutely no idea what the other guy is bringing at all?

Do you agree on broad factions? IG, CSM, etc but nothing more?

Do you get specific like Thousand sons vs spacewolves?

One general guideline we have is that if one guy only has one fully army, maybe he can't afford more, especially now, and the other guy has more than one, he should out of fair play tell the one army guy what he's bringing to give him a chance to sort of tailor his army, since the guy with multiple armies knows what he's facing in general.

I assume we are talking about pre-arranged games through a social media platform and not pickup games at the FLGS. I will ask them what kind of game they are looking for. I know most of the players locally who go to the FLGS, so we're pretty up front with each other. If they are looking to test a tourney list I will give them some options from my available armies:

"Have you played against Astra Militarum yet? - No - Ok - I will bring AM then." If we aren't looking for something specific we will usually tell each other what we are bringing, but perhaps not the full list. Sometimes we'll tell each other "Surprise me."

If I am looking for a specific type of game I will say so. "Hey player that I know, I am looking to test my Deathwing Army ahead of our tourney in three weeks. I am bringing Azrael, an Apothecary and lots of Terminators with Eradicators in support. Come at me!"

If my opponent is a stranger/new player, though, I will not bring my tourney-test list and instead bring a more middle of road option.

At my LGS/club all the games are organized and booked through Facebook, there's no rolling up and playing whoever happens to be hanging around.

Usually it's just deciding a points level, saying what factions we're playing, what mission pack we agree to use (usually the GT one because it saves having to lug around the giant core rulebook) and then usually a confirmation of what sort of experience we want out of the game; casual or more competitive.

Depends, really.

Sometimes my opponent has multiple armies, and we’ll just agree 2k or what have you. This works best when both parties have multiple options.

But I’ll also invite specific match ups, either for variety or targeted practice.

One great way to balance or handicap a game with a new recruit (or rekroot? ) is for the vet to tell the noob just exactly what he's bringing so the noob has an advantage, plus it helps him learn how to pick a good army for the job.

I generally prefer blind army selection at pre-specified points, since it incentivizes bringing take-all-comers lists.

For instance, I play Nids and Grey Knights.
If I tell you I'm playing Nids, how many flamers and blast weapons will you want to bring?
If I tell you I'm playilng GK, how many Plasma/Grav weapons will you pack?

A friend of mine plays infantry heavy Raven Guard and Imperial Knights. Enough said.

I play pretty casually, but I've done tournaments in 5th and 6th. The idea that your army has to be able to hold up in three back, to back, to back games against different factions has value outside of just being a competitive environment.

I've been thinking about a system between my friends and I where we start using PL to build a list. Then, when we play against each other we share lists (so at this point just factions, and units, effectively) and can then tailor our unit loadouts but not actually change the units.

The idea stems from the fact that 40k in 9th edition is essentially a series of skew lists, with some factions being skew by design (Knights and Harlequins, mostly). That, coupled with the fact that we generally player lower point games (1500 and below) means that we can get in seriously unfun situations.

Oops, brought my TAC list vs an Imperial Knights force? Aw well, guess I'll be hoping a few heavy bolters can ping a wound or two off after my multi-melta unit explodes turn 1.

Basically the idea is that we have to bring a TAC infrastructure but can tailor as needed. There's also the faintest air of mystery in that you don't 100% know what weapons/special wargear is going to be taken by your opponent (assuming they bring lists with units that can have varied loadouts, of course)

Points. Factions. Possibly mission. Special rules e.g. no superheavies, no named characters, who brings the drinks.

I don't like to know enemy forces, i bring a TAC list, with the only variations being different point sizes.

When it comes to army selection, I'm a disciple of Nigel Stillman

There are 2 ways to go about it.

1) You know the faction they are playing, which may or may not help the both of you as there are many factions that can take many different types of lists. Only a few can not. This is seen as not as fair by some and seen as more fair by others.
1a) Why is or isn't it fair? Knowing the faction means you can tailor your lists a bit more, if you know you are fighting Knights for example then you know to bring a lot of anti-tank, if you know you are fighting Marines then you can bring high AP and 2-3 damage weapons.
1b) Why do people think it is or is not fair? Well b.c list tailoring while it can equal the game out many armies can handle certain archetypes better than others so it can skew the game.

2) Ask for games and a power level with no idea of each other factions. This is by many the most popular way to play, agree on a friendly/causal or comp game and then just pick up and go with lists mostly already ready (you'll bring a Friendly and a Comp list with you and maybe a few extra units to adjust for points differences). This favors the TAC lists aka "Take all commoners" style lists that are consider the most balanced lists b.c they are meant to fight any faction and list with no Tailoring.

It really comes down to the type of person and their opinions on what is fair. Always ask your opponents how they like it.

Back in the 3rd edition days, you (optionally) used your faction's strategy rating to see who then determined the scenario, attacker/defender, and then make up your army. In such a case, the factions were picked beforehand, and then the army lists were made.

Personally, while I know it's not practical with 9th editions loosy-goosy definition of what a "faction" is, I like to see games as "I am playing Orks. Ok, I am playing SPESS MAHRINES. Time to make the army lists."

It lets you counterpick but also not let you counterpick, because theoretically ok your opponent is playing orks, but what KIND of orks is he playing? In practice, of course, each faction is pretty much pigeonholed into a single build. The ork player isn't going to be bringing MANZ and Deff Dreads, after all. And heavy bolters and even normal primaris bolt weaponry can shred both orks and their transports alike, so it's not actually detrimental to bring massed heavy bolters.

Certainly in my last gaming club we would have a discussion about what we would bring to the extent that we would exchange lists before we turned up and then test and adjust to make sure it wasn't a lopsided mess.

I think it's probably a good idea to have a chat about this before hand. I play a number of factions and some, like Orks, can have several playstyles. In normal times I don't have the luxury of several games a week so they should be as fun and as close a game as is reasonable to expect.

I don’t get to play much these days thanks to Boris but when I did and do, we agree a points limit and that’s pretty much it. I usually tell my opponent what army I’ll be bringing and don’t really care much for what they are bringing. It just gives me a challenge.

There are those who power play, want my list in advance, don’t send me theirs etc - I either give the list and don’t care, or send a fake list and turn up with a different one completely to annoy them - but only if they’re a dick.

vecuu wrote:
I generally prefer blind army selection at pre-specified points, since it incentivizes bringing take-all-comers lists.

For instance, I play Nids and Grey Knights.
If I tell you I'm playing Nids, how many flamers and blast weapons will you want to bring?
If I tell you I'm playilng GK, how many Plasma/Grav weapons will you pack?

A friend of mine plays infantry heavy Raven Guard and Imperial Knights. Enough said.

I play pretty casually, but I've done tournaments in 5th and 6th. The idea that your army has to be able to hold up in three back, to back, to back games against different factions has value outside of just being a competitive environment.

Here's the thing. For example, I have at my disposal Guard, Sisters, Marines, Grey Knights, and Custodes. Most of my personal friends have one factions, maybe two.

If we play blind, I will always know what faction they're going to play, but they have to pick from one of mine. So it's only fair for me to tell them what faction I'm going to play is.

In general it's just;
Game of ___? Y/N
Location.
Time.
Pts limit.
Any special details that really need to be known up front (ex: No unique characters this time)

We never really discuss what forces we're bringing.

Doing explicitly pickup games, I will have lists ready for 1000, 1500, and 2000. Originally 1850 was in there but that kinda stopped with 8th.

Rihgu wrote:
I've been thinking about a system between my friends and I where we start using PL to build a list. Then, when we play against each other we share lists (so at this point just factions, and units, effectively) and can then tailor our unit loadouts but not actually change the units.

The idea stems from the fact that 40k in 9th edition is essentially a series of skew lists, with some factions being skew by design (Knights and Harlequins, mostly). That, coupled with the fact that we generally player lower point games (1500 and below) means that we can get in seriously unfun situations.

Oops, brought my TAC list vs an Imperial Knights force? Aw well, guess I'll be hoping a few heavy bolters can ping a wound or two off after my multi-melta unit explodes turn 1.

Basically the idea is that we have to bring a TAC infrastructure but can tailor as needed. There's also the faintest air of mystery in that you don't 100% know what weapons/special wargear is going to be taken by your opponent (assuming they bring lists with units that can have varied loadouts, of course)

I like the concept of this, but feel that it would favor some armies more than others. For example, a quick trip to the armory and most marine units can swap rolls with minimal fuss. But a Fire Dragon is not going to be cashing out hordes any time soon. (OK, the exarch can take a flamer, but that’s not the point) Not that an Eldar army would be completely hosed, you can still swap out scatter lasers for brightlances on a number of units in a mech build. Marines are crazy flexible in this regard. Which is kinda their point in the fluff.

We did at the start and in 7th Edition because the balance was that bad back then. Now everyone in my group has 3 factions + and balance is overall pretty good, so the only thing I'm careful with is vehicles when fighting against that one guy whose Necrons lost all of their anti-tank moving to 8th Edition

It very much depends. If we are doing a tournament style game, all I would expect to agree would be the points limit and maybe which FAQ or edition is in play. I think this makes the puzzle of army building more interesting and forces you to try and plan for all comers, which generally results in more satisfying games in that environment. And if you come up against a surprising list that is skewed in some way, it is an interesting puzzle to try to solve. So I really like that.

But other times you want to do a narrative game or a series of narrative games, and then you probably discuss which faction, what is going to be in the list, any special rules, and generally try to create a fun narrative experience rather than "list tailoring" in any real way. I've done both types of games a lot, and I think nowadays I am a bit more inclined toward the latter, if only because I am playing with new players and I think it is more interesting for them if there is a narrative, and they are using my minis anyway so list building is sort of irrelevant.

Being mainly an 6th and 7th player, agreeing on a matchup for the sake of balance was critical to have a fun battle. This doesn't mean tailoring a list to beat the opponent but it gave me an understanding of how hard/soft my list needs to be so everyone can have a fun time playing the game. Blind matchups can be fun but they could also result in skewed matchups with either a low tier codex fighting a top tier one (which usually turn into a stomp) or a mismatch in player mindsets so a fluffy list goes up against a smelliest of cheese tournament list even if the codexes are roughly in the same ballpark.

Lists still need to be fairly TAC as you don't know so much about what they are fielding but allows you to avoid annoying situations like only having a moderate amount of AT vs an all Imperial Knight list (you can win against it but it's stupid having all your anti infantry stuff doing nothing except camping objectives or throwing themselves into the meat grinder to clog it up). It was also helpful when playing against newer/less skilled players as it means you can bring a weaker list and play hard instead of being something competent and having to deliberately pull punches during the battle to give the opponent a sporting chance.

 Nevelon wrote:

I like the concept of this, but feel that it would favor some armies more than others. For example, a quick trip to the armory and most marine units can swap rolls with minimal fuss. But a Fire Dragon is not going to be cashing out hordes any time soon. (OK, the exarch can take a flamer, but that’s not the point) Not that an Eldar army would be completely hosed, you can still swap out scatter lasers for brightlances on a number of units in a mech build. Marines are crazy flexible in this regard. Which is kinda their point in the fluff.

Yea, units with fixed loadouts like Aspect Warriors and Aspekt Boyz (tankbustas, burnas, etc) would be at an inherent disadvantage in the "metagame" around this style of playing. Luuuuckily, none of my friends are Craftworlds players (although this doesn't encourage it at all). And yes, it does improve marines even more...
Still going to try toying with it and see how bad it makes things. Might make a thread on it if it goes surprisingly well or drastically horrible

I usually tell my opponent what I'm bringing. Especially if they aren't particularly good or new. I want everyone to have an enjoyable experience.

I did play frequently against a cheesy donkey-cave (who some of you might know because he's won a few grand tournaments) who switched out his army right before the game to have a better chance of winning. I told him I brought DE and he said he had Iron Warriors back in 6th ed. So I went to grab lunch before the game and when I came back he switched his army to an all Tank Company Guard army so that my poisoned weapons were useless. The game went about as well as you think it did. I hated playing this guy back then, and I refuse to do so now. Definitely the definition of a WAAC player.

I only so tournaments and prep thereof so it's just whatever is in the rules packet published beforehand.

Pick the points, not the armies usually for pickup. Usually we just let each other know what arny, not agree on.