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.

 Wyldhunt wrote:

Thinking on it a bit more, I think a big part of it comes down to whether or not I can picture this army moving from one battlefield to the next. Like, if you have a bunch of vehicles, do you also have a way for your infantry to keep up with them, or is your army moving awkwardly slowly? In the avatar, night spinner, etc. example, it's tough for me to picture them marching in any kind of formation or moving around as a cohesive whole. Whereas throwing a few more wraith units into the mix not only helps reinforce the idea that this is a wraith army, but it also becomes easier to picture the main force walking steadily forward together. The faster elements could break off to do something else if needed or at least don't feel as bad about moving slowly because they're sticking near enough slow units for it to feel justified.

^I have a similar sentiment when I design my own armies. I like to envision how it moves in between battles and whether or not the mixture of units makes sense.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Wyldhunt wrote:

Thinking on it a bit more, I think a big part of it comes down to whether or not I can picture this army moving from one battlefield to the next. Like, if you have a bunch of vehicles, do you also have a way for your infantry to keep up with them, or is your army moving awkwardly slowly? In the avatar, night spinner, etc. example, it's tough for me to picture them marching in any kind of formation or moving around as a cohesive whole. Whereas throwing a few more wraith units into the mix not only helps reinforce the idea that this is a wraith army, but it also becomes easier to picture the main force walking steadily forward together. The faster elements could break off to do something else if needed or at least don't feel as bad about moving slowly because they're sticking near enough slow units for it to feel justified.

^I have a similar sentiment when I design my own armies. I like to envision how it moves in between battles and whether or not the mixture of units makes sense.

May have mentioned this before in a different thread, but our campaign maps facilitate both Kill Team and Crusade games using units from the same Order of Battle, and if you look at the background info for a Kill Team, a lot of times transports are the KT's Base of Operations. Kroot KT's I think have both a Great Knarloc Herd and a Devilfish Transport option; Drukhari have Skimmers, etc.

Which means someone at GW thinks like we do. You just need to play both games from the same roster to see it in action.

It's off topic, but gestalt profiles are cool. I mean, a lot of book keeping, but if you're an old-school pen and paper RPGer like this beardy guy, book keeping is part of the fun. The way a gestalt profile works is that any unit which can be used in both 40k and KT has a card for both Crusade and Spec ops, but only one XP track which can be increased by playing either game. Obviously, you only use the card for the game you're playing- Crusade advances don't affect Spec Ops games... But fluff wise, experience is experience, whether you get it in a skirmish or a battle.

If you do it, I recommend having a GM and picking advances (subject to GM approval of your RP justification for your choice). Really builds a sense of "my dudes" even in an edition with limited equipment options. In fact, it's literally the only reason why 10th's limited load out didn't autoforce a rage quit for me.

I don't see how in practics such a style works. Very few armies have more then one build, and even fewer have enough models to replace stuff and not play x3 or at least multiple x2 stuff. No army besides eldar can just replace 2-3 units in their list and run them as something comperably efficient.
For a lot of armies (GK, Custodes, WE) playing a highlander or non spam list just doesn't work. GW created both index and codex rules for those armies that force people in to runing multiple wardens, eightbound, terminators or NDKs.

Some detachment lose all sense existing, if spaming was to be removed. GW removed all bikes and biker characters, and left technicaly 3 and practicaly 1 mounted unit and it is a character. If it wasn't for SW who can take TWC characters and TWC, the stormlance would make no sense. The BT builds live on spaming tanks and transports etc Their other build was, and still kind of a is, based around spaming soon to be legened crusaders.

Ad mecha spams the living hell out of bird boys, and their skittari. Even with that in order to win they require a master class player to win with. Remove that and it would be a potentialy sub 30% win rate army.

And I really don't know how someone would play a proper chaos or regular knight lists without spaming. Especialy for chaos knights the rules revolved around having a horde of mini knights. The imperial knights try to enforce a more diverse list building, and as it is often the case diverse stuff does not work in practice. Especialy when stuff like bondsman abilities get nerfed and the huge knights can go through ruins.