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.

I generally build my forces to fight everyone, not a specific opponent, or faction.

But a store I was visiting and scoping out the scene had guys specifically saying things like, "Sorry, only brought my ant-Nid army today," and "If you give me 20 minutes I can redo my list to fight your Custodes."

Is this normal?

No, its not particularly normal.

I build TAC lists.

That said, take all comers is meta dependent and has changed over the years. With things like knights and other superheavies, we need more AV then we used to.

But I generally pack one list to bring to the store, and put it down regardless of what’s on the other side of the table.

I've always aimed for TAC lists. That results in the most consistently interesting type of problem solving, imo.

It depends entirely.


Having generic lists that you can take to the club to just play anyone is very normal if you're playing pick-up games at the club or at least if you're not pre-arranging.

However if you pre-arrange with someone the week or days before or such then tailoring will most often happen unless you specify something with your opponent or you specifically don't want to tailor yourself.



If you know you're going up against X type of army then taking options during army construction that favour fighting against X type of army is 100% solid normal gameplay and part of the flow of the game.



If someone at your club AWLAYS takes a swarming army of Tyranids with LOADS of gaunts you know that taking an army build around anti-tank with low attacks high damage units is probably going to do poorly against that army and that maybe swap some out for some more "machine gun" style units or area effect artillery and so forth.

Generally I brought TAC lists, but for a lot of the time what I brought was "what I have painted" really, it wasn't exactly a tuned list.

But sometimes I was in a series of games with one opponent over a few weeks and we'd both tailor to some extent, but we were limited always by model choice and so on, and both knew the other was doing that and were okay with it.

These days, I do TAC lists but I provide the lists for both factions based on the models I own, because I'm generally playing with friends who are not wargamers rather than "the wargaming community".

Not regularly, no. I feel it’s quite unpsorting to do so, and having been on the receiving end of it more than a few times, can leave your opponent wonder what the point is.

I didn't find it necessary since 8th edition.
Before that though, if you wanted to have any chance/fun with CSM you better had a good talk with your opponent before AND play maelstrom of war.

List tailoring for a specific opponent without prior discussion is unsportsmanlike.

Many of my games are now pre-arranged on a local discussion board. It is customary with us to discuss the type of game we are seeking. If I am preparing for a tourney I might declare my army. My opponent might then say “ Are you looking for any specific matchups?” I might then say “I am worried about facing Knights with this list.” And my opponent might then say “Cool - I will bring a Knight list!” So he might tailor to beat my list but I have asked him to do so.

What would be uncool is a pickup game at the FLGS where I bring several lists and choose mine once I see what my opponent has without discussion.

Having a sense of your local meta and bringing a list to an event tailored for your understanding of the meta (but without knowing the lists)? Totally normal and often totally ineffective. Most events will have a list submission date with lists revealed on the same day to prevent tailoring.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
List tailoring for a specific opponent without prior discussion is unsportsmanlike.

Believe it or not, not all list tailoring is done for advantage.
Because as much as my friend Dave likes to play?He's not very good + has a finite collection. (I could list every model he owns)

If I DON'T tailor my lists down to match his, Dave will never win, never have a hope of winning, & neither of us will have any fun.
I also don't need to discuss this with him. Just quietly bring the non-optimized, C or D teams.

Only if I know they’re bringing a skew list.

ccs wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
List tailoring for a specific opponent without prior discussion is unsportsmanlike.

Believe it or not, not all list tailoring is done for advantage.
Because as much as my friend Dave likes to play?He's not very good + has a finite collection. (I could list every model he owns)

If I DON'T tailor my lists down to match his, Dave will never win, never have a hope of winning, & neither of us will have any fun.
I also don't need to discuss this with him. Just quietly bring the non-optimized, C or D teams.

Without consent is the better way to phrase it.

If you're playing with a stranger, the only way to get consent to tailor is to ask them.
If you're playing with a friend you know well, then it can be unspoken.

That being said, would Dave be mad if you told him you were tailoring down?

ccs wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
List tailoring for a specific opponent without prior discussion is unsportsmanlike.

Believe it or not, not all list tailoring is done for advantage.
Because as much as my friend Dave likes to play?He's not very good + has a finite collection. (I could list every model he owns)

If I DON'T tailor my lists down to match his, Dave will never win, never have a hope of winning, & neither of us will have any fun.
I also don't need to discuss this with him. Just quietly bring the non-optimized, C or D teams.

This is more or less what I do. If I know what my opponent is bringing, I try to tailor my list with the goal of having a close matchup. So if I know my opponent doesn't have much in the way of anti-tank, I'll try not to include too many vehicles. If I know my opponent is excited to try out a unit that I know I could wipe out in a single round of my normal shooting units, I'll consider bringing different shooting units with less range or other reasons to not insta-wipe the unit my opponent is excited about. If I know my opponent wants to field an all-vehicles skew list, I'll avoid taking too many units that will spend the game fishing for 6s because that's not much fun on my end.

I've been trying to get in the habit of asking people whether I should bring a more casual or cutthroat list. If they answer in a straightforward fashion, I'll try to bring a TAC that meets their preferences. Often times they'll answer by sending me a rough draft of their list, and I'll try to build a list that will be a good matchup for them. ("good" = enjoyable for both of us.)

But a guy at the store building specifically anti-faction lists is definitely not typical and is possibly unsporting if people didn't sign up for that experience to begin with.

 JNAProductions wrote:

ccs wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
List tailoring for a specific opponent without prior discussion is unsportsmanlike.

Believe it or not, not all list tailoring is done for advantage.
Because as much as my friend Dave likes to play?He's not very good + has a finite collection. (I could list every model he owns)

If I DON'T tailor my lists down to match his, Dave will never win, never have a hope of winning, & neither of us will have any fun.
I also don't need to discuss this with him. Just quietly bring the non-optimized, C or D teams.

Without consent is the better way to phrase it.

If you're playing with a stranger, the only way to get consent to tailor is to ask them.
If you're playing with a friend you know well, then it can be unspoken.

That being said, would Dave be mad if you told him you were tailoring down?

Not at all. He already knows I'm doing that. And he appreciates that I'm one of the people who will dial a list down.
And make no mistake, just because I'm playing C & D list units doesn't mean I'm playing down skill-wise

As for playing strangers? Or people who're simply shop acquaintances? I don't feel the need to ask their consent either. I'll start by bringing something I consider a solid mid-tier force.
Once we've played a game or two? Or I've observed them playing others? I'll have a good read on where they are skill & model wise. After that, if I know they are my opponent, I'll bring something within their range.
Unless we meet in an Escalation League or a Crusade. Then they'll just have to deal with whatever I've selected....

Only so far as "I know I'm playing my friends SMs, I'll choose more special weapons in my squads that can deal with MEQ" in general terms.

 RustyNumber wrote:
Only so far as "I know I'm playing my friends SMs, I'll choose more special weapons in my squads that can deal with MEQ" in general terms.

That is pretty much list-tailoring. You are using foreknowledge of your opponent’s list to advantageously inform your list building choices. It’s a mild form since you are only making a few weapon adjustments, but it is tailoring. It’s also a friend, and likely he doesn’t care! With two friends, tailoring can be part of the fun if you both know what is going on.

It if it was a stranger in a pickup game and you quietly swapped out weapons in your list when you saw that he was playing Space Marines then that would be unsportsmanlike barring a prior good-faith discussion.

Now, some leagues/events have “side-boards” that allow adjustments upon seeing your opponent. Some armies even have faction rules that allow the choice of enhancements after list-building.

Yeah, I literally only play with one friend and very occasionally my son. We know what we each have and have good-naturedly developed our armies to attempt to counter eachother. I think it's fine if you all know you're doing it and are happy with it. I probably wouldn't do it if I was playing a random person.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

 RustyNumber wrote:
Only so far as "I know I'm playing my friends SMs, I'll choose more special weapons in my squads that can deal with MEQ" in general terms.

That is pretty much list-tailoring. You are using foreknowledge of your opponent’s list to advantageously inform your list building choices. It’s a mild form since you are only making a few weapon adjustments, but it is tailoring. It’s also a friend, and likely he doesn’t care! With two friends, tailoring can be part of the fun if you both know what is going on.

It if it was a stranger in a pickup game and you quietly swapped out weapons in your list when you saw that he was playing Space Marines then that would be unsportsmanlike barring a prior good-faith discussion.

Now, some leagues/events have “side-boards” that allow adjustments upon seeing your opponent. Some armies even have faction rules that allow the choice of enhancements after list-building.

I would disagree.
It’s making an educated guess, but if the marine player takes 2 raiders, 2 redemptors, 2 gladiators/predators, then your anti-MEQ weapons are likely not going to be particularly effective.

I almost exclusively use TAC lists.

I think the only recent time I even came close to "tailoring" was when I swapped out 2 Heavy Bolter Long Fangs for Lascannons when facing a Chaos Knight list; didn't change the infantry-heavy list otherwise though.

My favorites are a fairly typical/bland Necron Canoptek Court list (~40% win rate) and the Grotmas Custodes Detachment (80% win rate).

The dreadnought-heavy Grotmas Custodes Detachment served me well. I used the same exact list 5 times; winning against Orks, pre-codex Eldar, Ultramarines & a 3 super-heavy Guard list, while only losing to a Ravenguard list.

Additionally, even before the Vertus weapons got buffed, I had full on mentally switched to the Hurricane Bolters over missiles. I swapped them out while making the list the day before I played my Ork buddy; he still claims list tailoring to this day for changing those 4 weapons (3 Vertus + Vertus Cpt). =)

Yes, but based on narrative factors rather than point-based, efficiency based, etc.

An example would be whether or not I include Agents, and if I do, which agents to include. Narrative grudges that develop between units over a campaign would be another.

Named characters only appear for pivotal battles, and I try to restrict their use to theatres of war in which they are known to operate during the time period in which the battle is set.

I generally make what others would call TAC lists. I don't make them to vs. anything specific. They usually have a theme of some kind. The current idea I'm kicking around is making a list with The Lion using the Vanguard Spearhead detachment as inspired by his time hunting an escaped prisoner on the decks of his ship - but the theme is more important than "Take All Comers". I just like to layer in primary, secondary, tertiary in the build so they naturally become TAC.

Breton wrote:
I generally make what others would call TAC lists. I don't make them to vs. anything specific. They usually have a theme of some kind. The current idea I'm kicking around is making a list with The Lion using the Vanguard Spearhead detachment as inspired by his time hunting an escaped prisoner on the decks of his ship - but the theme is more important than "Take All Comers". I just like to layer in primary, secondary, tertiary in the build so they naturally become TAC.

Theme and TAC are not connected. They are the narrative and mechanic aspects of the list. While all my lists are take all comers, only most of them have narrative themes. Mechanized spearheads, recon and reinforcements, demi-cos. But they all have a decent mix of AV, horde clearing, maneuver, screening, etc.

But sometimes the theme is non narrative. Like cram as much fresh paint into the points and not have it be dysfunctional

Usually no.

I think if one or the other player is running a very hard skew, then its not unreasonable to flag this up and maybe adjust accordingly.

I mean its not unreasonable for competitive players to say if a list can't handle "X" then it deserves to run into "X" and lose. But... its not exactly fun. There's only so many games of "I can't scratch them but maybe I can win on objectives" you can handle before it gets dull.

With that said I'm not really convinced ye olde "weapon-swap list tailoring" matters that much today. "I'd have been running flamers, but now I'm running plasma guns". Really? I doubt it somehow. I mean maybe flamers would be better against some all-in Cultist/Gaunt build but its a bit of a reach.

I think, if you’re bringing skew, it’s polite to tell your opponent and offer them a chance to tailor their list.

Helps ensure a fun game.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I think, if you’re bringing skew, it’s polite to tell your opponent and offer them a chance to tailor their list.

Helps ensure a fun game.

EDIT: I can see doing this, as most (all) of my lists (Knights and Custodes) can be considered "skew" lists.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I think, if you’re bringing skew, it’s polite to tell your opponent and offer them a chance to tailor their list.

Helps ensure a fun game.

Roster-based campaigning is great for this.

Your roster is all the forces you can select from when you build an army. In a multi-planet campaign, you might have a split roster- 1500 on one planet and 1k on the other. If you're fighting on planet A against a 1k army, you pick the most appropriate 1k from the 1500 points available. Better yet, you could both agree to 750 to give the 1k player some sideboard capacity.

List-tailoring is built into the process of assembling an army from a roster, rather than arriving with a fixed army.

Wrong thread, methinks.

For a store game, TAC list and keep it.

If there's a severe imbalance (say, termagaunts against knights?) AGREE changes to lists, or play it anyway for the silliness.

With friends, we know each others' models, so we both tailor by agreement up to and including "Can you bring your model x; I want to see if my model ys can cope with it?"

 JNAProductions wrote:
Wrong thread, methinks.

Yeah, kinda merged two threads in my head. Fixed it.

No, mostly because GW designed my army to have very little units in general, even fewer actual used load outs/taken units. For other armies I don't think it makes for fun games. Being told that your opponent plays infantry and then turning up with a list bristling with multi shot str 5-6 weapons, does not make for a fun game. May as well roll the dice at home.