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.

 Hedgehog wrote:
So what I'd like to ask is which units have you decided NOT to take, even though they would be effective on a battlefield - and why?

For my Wazdakka biker army I refuse to take Lootas, instead opting for Deffkoptas for my ranged anti-vehicle as they just suit the theme I was going for.

mynamelegend wrote:
I absolutely agree.

Then don't do it?

Cyaneye wrote:
There are some units that fluff wise, I would love to field, but due to my playstyle, I would merely hiss and turn away from it.

For example, it isn't quite a tyranid army without Hive Tyrants and Carnifexes, but their steep cost for a single model is difficult to justify. (280 for a dakka flyrant? That's a pretty big target on its back) Rippers look fun to use, but what's the point of a troop that can't score? Shame, they'd go nicely with my malanthrope.


Stone crusher I could justify, though

... so basically you can't justify any monstrous creatures, since they all have extremely steep costs in the currect codex?

You sir are not playing Tyranids!

 Melissia wrote:

mynamelegend wrote:
I absolutely agree.

Then don't do it?

OUCH BURN!

But seriously i don't take a lot of things. lootas, meganobs, wraith units, fire prisms( i may start), warwalkers etc. on the ork front it's the difficulty and cost of getting good sized units of them. On the eldar side it's mainly a fluff thing i have taken an aspect heavy path of command.

I don't ever plan on using Plaguebearers in my CD army. I've never been a huge Nurgle fan to begin with, and I prefer my daemons armies aggressive and fast. Not that I don't see their worth, I just want no part of it

Hive Guard. It isn't a matter of "fluff" or "principles" or anything, its just that in games sub 2000 points they don't fit in with my tactics. For the points, they're good. Like, really good. But, my army needs every elite slot dedicated to units that can APPEAR IN THE MIDDLE OF YOUR ARMY AND KILL A SQUAD. Erm, right... but I like Ymgarls better, in every way, than Hive Guard. Which sucks, cause I bought and painted 6 of them.

This is the scale of my most hated units that I don't run. 1 being the highest, and you get the picture. Prepare for mass ...

1. Flying Hive Tyrant
2. Tervigons
3. Old One Eye
4. Trygon
5. Mawloc

I won't use my stormraven even though I own one

I also own a warhound that I don't use because it wouldn't be fair against my friends who don't have anything to stop it

Anything in the Fast Attack section of the Tau codex that does not have a markerlight on it.

I hate the fact that our fast attack section is stacked so heavily (counting forgeworld here) that I'll never get to run XV9 suits. Even throwing in a single barracuda because I love the model is probably not going to happen.

Also more than one riptide. No particular reason, I think that I'd just feel dirty if I ran 3 riptides as my elite slots.

I refuse to 'spam' units that are considered extremely good.
No Wraith-spam, no AB-spam, no flyer-spam for my Crons.

I refuse to take units that may be fluffy but are not the most effective choice

I use the most efficient means available to reach victory

and crying "WAAC powergamer!"

Uhm..
Isn't using the most efficient means available to reach victory the definition of WAAC?

your fluff should not be used as an excuse to take suboptimal choices

Why not? The fluff is nothing but the story that surrounds your army.
And if I want to play melee-Crons without Wraiths and make a story around it than I can do that.

when asked why he refused to send out his own tankhunter predators, he responds with "Well, they're so boring and boxy, you know?"

No, he will simply respond: "Our army doesn't have predators anymore, they got destroyed in the last skirmish."

Kangodo wrote:
Isn't using the most efficient means available to reach victory the definition of WAAC?

No. WAAC means "win at ALL costs", which includes cheating, rules lawyering, etc. Playing an optimized list with good tactics is just being good at the game.

Meh, I still think that there is a line between WAAC and a cheater.


Anyway, OT...I refuse to take wraiths despite how much I love the little buggers. I already take plenty of scythes, ABs, D&D squads, and MSS overlords so i think I can cut my opponent a break somewhere

 Peregrine wrote:

Kangodo wrote:
Isn't using the most efficient means available to reach victory the definition of WAAC?

Playing an optimized list with good tactics is just being good at the game.

Which carries about as much gamer cred as being good at snakes n ladders.

Warbuggies.

Ive wanted to, theyre not the same as Looted Wagons when it comes to kitbashing but its basically expected to be since they fit the mentality of a speed-freak ork perfectly.

But they just....suck...lol... anything and everything pops them and koptas can do the job faster thanks to scout and has a chance to avoid the damage it takes.

 Peregrine wrote:
No. WAAC means "win at ALL costs", which includes cheating, rules lawyering, etc. Playing an optimized list with good tactics is just being good at the game.

Never heard the definition that included cheating.
Rules lawyering, however socially %^*& it might be, is still legal within a game.

If you cheat, you lose.
If you lose, you aren't winning.
So I really do not see that as 'winning' at all costs.

Its only cheating if you get caught. Thats what most people live by.

Been hearing people taking 2+ armor saves on their broadside drones, which is not a thing anymore. To any non-tau, they wouldnt know any better and allow it.

I don't take the Soul Grinder for my daemons because:
* it's plastic
* huge
* doesn't fit my idea of daemons
* I think the model looks silly

mynamelegend wrote:
I absolutely agree.

I suppose I should have kept my point more simple - "You do what you want, on the single condition that you don't look down upon me and label me 'WAAC powergamer' if I don't play in the same way you do".

Truly and honestly, people who choose to roleplay in a different manner have my thumbs-up. As long as they don't start looking down upon me because I roleplay in a different way.

Sadly, way too many people who do the - completely and entirely fine - choice of limiting their choices based on fluff or model preferences, suddenly start complaining when others don't follow suit. It's a bit of a problem on this forum, and it never ceases to annoy me.
If I come across as a jerk when stating it, then my communications skills clearly need improvement.

Uhm, your OP specifically mentioned people who role play without WAAC lists as psychotic

Leman Russ, but that is because Earthshaker Carriages are so darn cheap

I also don't take repentia. Dunno, the models put me off. My sisters are professional (if fanatically devoted) soldiers, not screaming half-naked nutjobs...

It used to be flamers for me, for the chaos daemons when they were overpowered.

Now they are average, I use 3 full squads. I always loved them, but I diddn't want to play point and click mode with my army when they were OP

 -Loki- wrote:

Cyaneye wrote:
There are some units that fluff wise, I would love to field, but due to my playstyle, I would merely hiss and turn away from it.

For example, it isn't quite a tyranid army without Hive Tyrants and Carnifexes, but their steep cost for a single model is difficult to justify. (280 for a dakka flyrant? That's a pretty big target on its back) Rippers look fun to use, but what's the point of a troop that can't score? Shame, they'd go nicely with my malanthrope.


Stone crusher I could justify, though

... so basically you can't justify any monstrous creatures, since they all have extremely steep costs in the currect codex?

You sir are not playing Tyranids!

I do run MC's, but they're the ones that can be run cheaply with minimal upgrades. My list currently runs a Harpy, Mawloc, and Malanthrope, altogether running less than 450 points for those 3 Granted, they aren't the biggest or baddest, but they let me sink more points into more bodies.

Hive Tyrant and Carnifex both start at 160, but don't do very well naked, and by the time I spend upgrades to make them decent, they already cost close to a land raider for a single model.

Tervigon is next, but only one.

I won't take any unit that has the letter E in its name. No Vendettas, no Leman Russ, no Chimera, no Veteran squad. In fact the entire fast attack and heavy support sections are closed off - even the Hydra flak tank unit has the word 'battery' in it. Just a Company Command Squad and/or Lord Commissar and Infantry Platoons filled out with Infantry squads and the mandatory Platoon Command Squad. I could use Ogryn squads, Ratling squads, and Guardsman Marbo under this restriction but I don't feel like it.

Ok, not really. I only really seriously don't feel like using IG flyers. There are other units in the codex that don't fit in with what I'm doing but I'm not exactly intentionally refusing to use them. Incidentally, if anyone wanted to play with the above restriction the easiest army to do it with is Orks. Codex Space Marines can only do it if you use a special character HQ and a number of armies can't do it at all.

I don't think that I'd take Penitent Engines. At least not for matches that were at all serious. Just can't justify taking them over an Exorcist or Rets.

I remember somebody saying that they're good for hordes, though. So maybe my tune'll change if my local meta is full of Ork and IG players.

 Melissia wrote:
I also don't take repentia. Dunno, the models put me off. My sisters are professional (if fanatically devoted) soldiers, not screaming half-naked nutjobs...

I quite like the repentia's fluff. "Fanatical zealots trying to atone for their percieved sins" fits the Sisterhood's identity as devoted religious warriors. But yeah, I'm with you on the look of the models. Not really a fan of them. I'll probably greenstuff them some robes or something when I eventually get some.

 Raxmei wrote:
I won't take any unit that has the letter E in its name. No Vendettas, no Leman Russ, no Chimera, no Veteran squad. In fact the entire fast attack and heavy support sections are closed off - even the Hydra flak tank unit has the word 'battery' in it. Just a Company Command Squad and/or Lord Commissar and Infantry Platoons filled out with Infantry squads and the mandatory Platoon Command Squad. I could use Ogryn squads, Ratling squads, and Guardsman Marbo under this restriction but I don't feel like it.

Ok, not really. I only really seriously don't feel like using IG flyers. There are other units in the codex that don't fit in with what I'm doing but I'm not exactly intentionally refusing to use them. Incidentally, if anyone wanted to play with the above restriction the easiest army to do it with is Orks. Codex Space Marines can only do it if you use a special character HQ and a number of armies can't do it at all.

I'm taking this as a challenge now... does this include wargear or just the unit name?

 Troike wrote:
I quite like the repentia's fluff. "Fanatical zealots trying to atone for their percieved sins" fits the Sisterhood's identity as devoted religious warriors. But yeah, I'm with you on the look of the models. Not really a fan of them. I'll probably greenstuff them some robes or something when I eventually get some.

I prefer to have my Sisters be "Elite Soldiers of God", as it were, instead of "angry mob of surprisingly well equipped fanatics".

Interesting question. I suppose the one that stands out, at least in 5E was that I never used Crisis suits.

In 6E I do.

In 6E, I dont use Hammerhead Gunships.or WraithKnights, even though both can be effective.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Leman Russ, but that is because Earthshaker Carriages are so woefully undercosted

fix'ed =P

Nay nay

Its also because I am playing a Siege Regiment army, things that can fire further than 24'' and can move are heresy.

mynamelegend wrote:
I refuse to take units that may be fluffy but are not the most effective choice to field when compared with other options (comparison to be taken in full, point costs and FOC and all that).
My Death Korps will not field rough riders until they become the most efficient unit to field as compared to other options available to me. This means it is exceedingly unlikely that I will field rough riders in the foreseeable future.

I am a hardcore roleplayer. And my general on the tabletop uses the most efficient means available to achieve victory. That means I use the most efficient means available to reach victory as well.
Unless you are an ork, or possibly playing one of the more delusional Necron lords, your fluff should not be used as an excuse to take suboptimal choices - because your warlord, your avatar on the field of battle, would surely choose the path that is perceived by you to be the most likely to victory?

Having some sort of twisted "pride" in avoiding conventionally powerful units is foolish at best and psychotic at worst. But if you insist that your warlord is too poor at his own job to understand the most efficient options, then that's naturally your choice.

This argument is inherently flawed for certain organisations, such as the Imperial Guard.

A Guard colonel, the highest battlefield rank outside special characters, has no say in what units are under his or her command.

Heck, a Warmaster or Lord General has no real say over what units are under his or her command.

What happens is, the commander overseeing the theatre says to the Munitorium, "I need three more regiments of drop troops."

The Munitorium passes the note around internally until it finds a unit kind of like drop troopers that it can get to the CiC in a reasonable amount of time, and goes to the Navy to say "Please get these guys and take them to that theatre."

Ten months later, and the CiC gets his requested reinforcements, only they're not Drop Troops, they're Light Infantry, because really what's the difference? They get their aircraft from the navy anyway. Only to the Warmaster, it's an important difference because the Light Infantry will have field guns that can't be loaded onto a Valkyrie, such as autocannons.

Edit: Oh, and as to the original point of the thread, I don't take Psykers in my Guard, or any ground vehicles heavier than a Tauros, because I play an Elysian mono-regiment army.