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.

Does anyone else find themselves making list choices based on how quick and easy a unit is to use?

I like to keep games moving quickly and neatly, not getting bogged down with lots of dice rolls and complicated things. This was probably one of the reasons I hated 5th wound allocation, so complicated sometimes. I sometimes find myself making list choices based more on how much I will like using the unit, rather than just its raw effectiveness. I'll cite a few recent examples:

1 - My leman russ hull guns. I decided to go with the flamer and no sponsons. I do think this is the strongest setup for them, but my main consideration was not having to roll 3 bolter dice a turn for no real reason. Now it is just "pie plate and move on".

2 - Thinking about my vulture guns. The choices seemed to be MRPs or punishers. Again, I thought that scattering 4 blasts would be far more annoying than just rolling 20 dice.

3 - My sudden dislike for manticores. The multiple barrage rules seem overly complicated to me, I just lost interest.

Does anyone else have similar thoughts when picking units? I think if something was 10% more effective but 100% more annoying to use, I would go for the less tedious unit most times.

I do the exact same thing a lot of the time too.

For me the problem is remembering to use their fiddly bits in a timely manner: Buying one-use-only wargear or stuff that is only situationally useful (and therefore rarely comes up) is more or less a point-tax with me in that i often forget to ever use the item or power.

So what i tend towards are units with a specific and straightforward roll (assault, shooting, etc) that they can do repeatedly and away from units with a lot of situationally useful options that i'd need to keep track of.

I like to take units with less "ease of use" to tournaments. It runs down the clock, and I often find my games ending abruptly at turn 4, taking my opponent both off-guard and unprepared.

Not really a game-changer, but it can make things interesting.

I do this some times. Generally stick with units I know I can trust to do the job, without any gimmicks, or 'sometime' aspects. The Eldar in general lean this way which is great.

I tend to avoid the units in armies that are very difficult to use or tend not to get a decent return on their points; like the wraithguard or shining spears.

I don't think I've ever done things quite the way that you have, but I have felt a little bit of a tug along these lines recently.

I have 4 really nice dice that I use for my low-volume rolling, but the rest of my dice are 20 kopchows that I keep in a cigarillo tin. I bring conscripts in groups of 20. To shoot them, I pick up all the dice, shake them in the tin, shout "conscripts!", and count the hits. Then I just pick up all the dice and do it again. No thinking required. Likewise, the punisher has 20 shots. It's terribly convenient.

Meanwhile, with my PISs, they tend to take casualties and stick on the board (rather than refreshing to full strength like conscripts), and they have a sergeant and a heavy weapon and a special weapon, so I always need to count how many lasguns I need to shoot.