PDA

View Full Version : Different list building methods.



djinn8
06-04-2010, 07:38
A friend and I were discussing the difference methods we have when constructing our army lists and I would like to discuss it with the fourm.

When I write up my army I aim to create an all-comers list with a certain playstyle and character that I will enjoy. This list then become the template for all future list made with this army, swapping out units with similer roles for a bit of variety and making perminant changes to the list to accomodate weakness. While my lists aren't optimised, they are refined and familier.

My friend takes a more random approach to list development. He writes a fresh list before each game, trying out new units and tactics with mixed results. This means that sometimes he will run very unbalanced lists or one-trick armies, but in general the armies preform quite poorly because he doesn't have experience running them.

I'm posting this because our different approaches to list building are interfering with our games since I have an almost 100% win rate and he is pretty demoralised. When he approached me yesterday I was accused of putting to much effort into my lists because they have good synergy and that all the bases are covered. He then suggested that I perscribe to his method of list building. His argument being "Its just for fun so make a list, slap it down of the table and see what happens". My argument would be "Just because a game is for fun doesn't mean you have to play it poorly".

What are your opinions?

Hunger
06-04-2010, 10:05
Maybe you should design your next list not as an all-comers army but to represant a particular kind of force.

For example, if you are a Guard player, rather than going with the general assumption that your force has access to an umlimited amount of chimeras, russes and battle-hardened veterans, you could go with the thematic assumption that your enemy is attacking one of your artillery emplacements.

Pick stuff that you would expect to find in such a force - a garrison of basic infantry, not much need for lots of transport, so just one or two chimeras, the actual artillery pieces instead of linebreaker tanks, perhaps some ogryns to lug heavy equipment when they are not fighting.

Get the picture?

SandQueen
06-04-2010, 10:13
I always start with my HQ. To me the HQ should reflect what you want the army to do. For example:

+ If I want to get into the thick of things, go in screaming and go out swinging I'll take an Autarch. I'll equip them to fit in with one of my other units (usually Striking Scorpions or Shining Spears). Or I might even take a phoenix lord if I really feel up to it (had some success with Karandas especially).

+ If I want to play it safe and make my enemy come to me, sticking to defense and superior fire power I'll take a Farseer. Between Doom, Guide, and Fortune I can lay the hurt where I want.

And these two choices ten filter down into Army composition. A Combat commander like an Autarch goes with a smattering of Aspect Warriors. Usually the core of my army will be three to four Dire Avenger squads in wave serpeants with Bladestorm among other upgrades. They fly in, slaughter a unit, and then leave. Simply, bloody, and fast. But overall my numbers wont be as good.

With the defense commander I usually take more guardians and back them up with Wraithguard and lords. Hard units that can weather horrific amounts of fire and come out on top and at the same time dont require me to stick them in cover or keep them hidden to stay alive. With the guardians I give them snazzy weapon platforms and sometimes even support weapons (Vibrocannons like a BOSS).

TheDarkSaint
06-04-2010, 10:20
Instead of list altering, try mission altering. Go grab some of the missions from the new mission book or think of a new mission that gives you a serious handicap. Then have your buddy play you.

Aegius
06-04-2010, 11:55
I don't agree with your friend. not at all. OK, so your 100% win record may be ruining his fun, but as long as you are not cheesing your lists, then the blame for his record isn't yours. I take a lot of time writing my lists too, and I'm happy to play all comers with them. I may change a unit from time to time, but generally the army is more or less the same. This actually gives your friend a little bit of an advantage, he knows what you'll be fielding, but at the same time, because he hasn't got the hang of using certain units, he won't be able to optimise the speciality awsomeness of the units he has taken to specifically vaporise certain elements of your list.

I personally used to use the 'optimised list' aproach, along with my opponents, but I found that the game would just turn into a game of paper, rock, scissors. Along with this, I was spending far too much money on my toy soldiers and not getting enough painting done.

Olith
06-04-2010, 12:12
You could try writing a list for each other using your own methods and see where that takes you.

djinn8
06-04-2010, 13:15
Maybe you should design your next list not as an all-comers army but to represant a particular kind of force.

Well I already have a themed army - IG Infantry (not a tank in sight). Besides, coming up with different themes each game will hurt my wallet. I can't afford to go out and buy every option in the codex so that I can play what I like on a whim. Getting the army I have at the moment cost enough as it is.


Instead of list altering, try mission altering. Go grab some of the missions from the new mission book or think of a new mission that gives you a serious handicap. Then have your buddy play you.

The problem with playing at a handycap is that if I was to win it would just make the situation worse, and if he was to win it wouldn't really change anything since the game was engineereed that way from the start. I do agree that missions should be the variable though, not the list.


I don't agree with your friend. not at all. OK, so your 100% win record may be ruining his fun, but as long as you are not cheesing your lists, then the blame for his record isn't yours. I take a lot of time writing my lists too, and I'm happy to play all comers with them. I may change a unit from time to time, but generally the army is more or less the same. This actually gives your friend a little bit of an advantage, he knows what you'll be fielding, but at the same time, because he hasn't got the hang of using certain units, he won't be able to optimise the speciality awsomeness of the units he has taken to specifically vaporise certain elements of your list.

Glad someone agrees with my way of thinking. I see an army a bit like a football team - You don't go replace all the players each game and your stratergy always stays roughly the same. The problem with the supposed advantage my friend has (knowing the enemy before hand) is that I have two armies and am currently building a third, so it forces him to build an army that is also an all-comers list. Problem is, he usually writes his list just before we are about to play, which is why he keeps lossing. Not enough thought going into the list - by which I mean there is a lack overall strategy and a lack of exp in how to best bring that strategy to fruition.


You could try writing a list for each other using your own methods and see where that takes you.

I've no problem with that. As I said above, I have two armies and have offered to let him pick one to play with. He doesn't seem to want to play them though. I can understand wanting to win with your own army though. We have at times played a game and then swapped around and played the each others, but because so much of 40K is in the list building stage and not what happens on the table, a losing army will lose regardless of who's playing (well most of the time anyway).

Ravenous
06-04-2010, 13:33
I generally centralize my armies around an idea and then make that idea work against all comers. For example my Eldar army I wanted to get as many flamers/destructors in there and combined with doom. Turns out my army is weak against Mech if its spread out, so I added fire dragons and a few EMLs on the waveserpents.

Project2501
06-04-2010, 18:39
I don't agree with your friend. not at all. OK, so your 100% win record may be ruining his fun, but as long as you are not cheesing your lists, then the blame for his record isn't yours. I take a lot of time writing my lists too, and I'm happy to play all comers with them. I may change a unit from time to time, but generally the army is more or less the same. This actually gives your friend a little bit of an advantage, he knows what you'll be fielding, but at the same time, because he hasn't got the hang of using certain units, he won't be able to optimise the speciality awsomeness of the units he has taken to specifically vaporise certain elements of your list.

I personally used to use the 'optimised list' aproach, along with my opponents, but I found that the game would just turn into a game of paper, rock, scissors. Along with this, I was spending far too much money on my toy soldiers and not getting enough painting done.


I couldn't have said it better myself.

I get a codex, draft up some all comers lists, rework into one all comers list, and that's pretty much that with some unit changes from time to time.

Your friend needs to stick with a list for more than one game before he can possibly know exatcly how to use it in any given situation. He's jus shooting himself on the foot at the rate he's going.

3 0f 6
06-04-2010, 19:02
I picked a random-ish nid list once, against an army I have fought on many occasions. I basicly used what I had assembled, rather than proxying the hell out of my opponent (we do this a lot and I felt like a change). I got a minor win using a non all comers list, with not a lot a thought put into it TBH, I had sooo much fun with the army, even though I had next to nothing left at the end, he did not either and I won by a small margin.

We did this again at a later date and IIRC my opponent grabbed a minor win.

Both fun games, though I have to say games where you just get the hell smacked out of you and nothing hits when you shoot or assualt, and you fail ALL your saves are less fun.

I must add that complaining about the way my opponents write their lists is not going to help me win a game, in that situation I would look at what I use against what they use, I do not mean list tailoring just a bit more common sense, like not using the worst units en masse etc.

Years back, me and a mate had constant SW vs DA (Deathwing in fact) battles. They varied in size (1500 to 3000). We both had victories and losses without any list tailoring (though I might add the SW scouts were a tad hax when I first used them).

fun, fun, fun, fun, fun.

I like the idea of writing each others lists, assuming there are some sensible rules in place to do it.

Spartacus
06-04-2010, 19:29
I'll usually just start with a few units and / or character builds that I really like, and then try and find synergy out from there. I'll spend a while looking at a list and wonder how it would work, and if everything can work together.

As long as it plays and feels fluid. As long as it's got a purpose.

You should put SOME thought into what you're throwing down on the table. Throwing together cool stuff, or just using "what you've got on you", is awesome. Just ... don't get mad if you lose, no?

And tailoring a list is perfectly OK as long as all parties involved are doing it. It becomes stupid when you're working with an imbalanced system and one army or list always comes out on top. Not the players' fault there though, IMO.

Either way, yeah, have fun with it. I can't have fun with a game if my opponent isn't having fun with it. Call me soft. :P

GrogDaTyrant
06-04-2010, 20:12
I snag a theme, and run with it. I then work with keeping the list to that theme, while trying to ensure that it can still handle a variety of situations. Thematic lists IMHO are far more entertaining to play with, even if you end up with a bike army and run into problems against MCs.

Znail
06-04-2010, 20:55
A friend and I were discussing the difference methods we have when constructing our army lists and I would like to discuss it with the fourm.

When I write up my army I aim to create an all-comers list with a certain playstyle and character that I will enjoy. This list then become the template for all future list made with this army, swapping out units with similer roles for a bit of variety and making perminant changes to the list to accomodate weakness. While my lists aren't optimised, they are refined and familier.

My friend takes a more random approach to list development. He writes a fresh list before each game, trying out new units and tactics with mixed results. This means that sometimes he will run very unbalanced lists or one-trick armies, but in general the armies preform quite poorly because he doesn't have experience running them.

I'm posting this because our different approaches to list building are interfering with our games since I have an almost 100% win rate and he is pretty demoralised. When he approached me yesterday I was accused of putting to much effort into my lists because they have good synergy and that all the bases are covered. He then suggested that I perscribe to his method of list building. His argument being "Its just for fun so make a list, slap it down of the table and see what happens". My argument would be "Just because a game is for fun doesn't mean you have to play it poorly".

What are your opinions?

The problem here lies with your friend. He has to make up his mind. Either its just for fun and then it doesnt matter that he always lose. Or else so does he consider winning important and then he needs to put some effort into that. Expecting you to roll over so that he can get his important wins is a rather backwards way of thinking.

Ravenous
06-04-2010, 21:11
Yeah by the sounds of that its almost FAAC vs WAAC. I build my lists the same as the OP, and I get the same guff from the FAACers around here.

Tell him to adopt the method of enjoying getting his ass kicked or start playing like he has a pair, or tell him to take up knitting with the other grannies.

Hunger
06-04-2010, 23:24
Tell him to adopt the method of enjoying getting his ass kicked or start playing like he has a pair, or tell him to take up knitting with the other grannies.

Wow, what a macho approach to playing the game! I'm really impressed by your no bullsht attitude to defeating your opponents! You've literally shaken my worldview!

There I was assuming I the OP's opponent's way of enjoying the game was by trying out new things and experimenting with different lists, when all along he was playing the game WRONG, and clearly needs to man-up to your butch level of gameplay. He's clearly a 40K sissy, what with his sub-optimal unit choices and apparent inexperience.

OP, on the strength of Ravenous's sagely advice, I'm afraid that unless your opponent either writes or downloads a no-holds-barred WAAC list, tailors it to specifically defeat your army and sticks with it through thick and thin whether he likes it or not, you're just going to have to tell him that he is obviously not cut out to play such a ruthless, cut-throat game like 40k.

[/scoff]

MasterDecoy
06-04-2010, 23:28
I start with army theme (even if that theme is centered around 1 unit)
move on to army core (2 troops and HQ)
once thats out of the way its on to plugging holes (anti tank/anti infantry)
after I have tha ability to deal with the 2 major's (Infantry and tanks) I start to innclude fun stuff.

What I end up with generally is a solid list that is fun to play and conforms to a theme, they generally at very least give people a serious run for their money.

Tourniquet
06-04-2010, 23:59
I decide how Competitive i want it to be first.

From there i start with troops. 2 Under 1k, 3over 1.5k

After i have my troops i pick my AV.

So now i have
2-3 Scoring Units
1-2AV Units
and 2-3 Anti-Horde Units (Since my troops are Dire Avengers)
Then i get a H.Q.

Then with the spare points i either add upgrades, or other units to fill a role i am short on/need/think would be fun

Dezert
07-04-2010, 01:15
I have found it is not the list in general. Some players hit a peak and never really learn anymore or simply lack some knowledge on tactics to make unusual lists to work. List building is a skill but playing the list correctly is another. I do agree with you on playing lists for some time for familiarization and that is what makes it harder for you to be beat you have seen more situations with your list to find a solution. Sit down with your friend and help him come up with a list to familiarize himself. Once he gets the logistics of the list then he'll be more competitive with you.

Ravenous
07-04-2010, 02:53
Wow, what a macho approach to playing the game! I'm really impressed by your no bullsht attitude to defeating your opponents! You've literally shaken my worldview!

There I was assuming I the OP's opponent's way of enjoying the game was by trying out new things and experimenting with different lists, when all along he was playing the game WRONG, and clearly needs to man-up to your butch level of gameplay. He's clearly a 40K sissy, what with his sub-optimal unit choices and apparent inexperience.

OP, on the strength of Ravenous's sagely advice, I'm afraid that unless your opponent either writes or downloads a no-holds-barred WAAC list, tailors it to specifically defeat your army and sticks with it through thick and thin whether he likes it or not, you're just going to have to tell him that he is obviously not cut out to play such a ruthless, cut-throat game like 40k.

[/scoff]

Said the pot to the kettle.

1) I was joking 2)His opponent is the one giving him a hard time about sticking with an all comers list instead of writing a list on the spot with whatever he has on him and then playing. My comment is to ruffle his opponents feathers a bit since its obvious its he who is trying to force his game unto others *cough* like typical FAACers *cough*

If his opponent feels like being a punching bag thats fine, maybe he should play other gamers with the same ideals as him rather then tell the OP he has to change his playing style in order for him to have fun.

Skyros
07-04-2010, 02:56
I too try to design all comers lists. However, if my opponent was repeatedly running wacky oddball lists I would either try to help them develop all comers lists, or try some wacky oddball lists myself.

As you say, such a divergent view of what list building is about won't lead to very fun games for either player.

Ravenous
07-04-2010, 03:16
It really comes down to the fun factor, people have fun in different ways. Some people just like rolling dice and screwing around, others like their games to have a bit more of a purpose.

Its when the two clash you have a problem.

Thud
07-04-2010, 03:39
I find a theme that I really like, and then build the most competitive army I can within that theme.

IMO, if I'm just taking random units and rolling dice for the sake of rolling dice, I might as well just watch someone else play.

Gearhead
07-04-2010, 03:53
It depends. I'm the guy who teaches the newbies, so if I'm doing that, I go with what looks cool or is themed. All Mechanized, all static, mostly terminators, whatever can suck them into a story. At the same time, I build the list not to be a pushover.

For Tourneys, I picks things I a) Know how to use (a unit can be powerful, but worthless if used wrong) and b) mesh with what the general plan is. Typically, there is no plan. I have no idea who's bringing what to a tourney, so the "plan" is "small firebase with mechanized offence/counter". I tend to bring a lot of troops (four at 1250 for my Tau), just to make sure I don't get shafted in 2/3 of games. There's a lot in Tau because, well, It's Tau; I get to bleed killpoints anyway when my vehicles blow up and dornes pop out.

I start with troops, then a basic HQ, and build out the theme from there. If I have some extra points, they tend to go to the HQ. Power Weapon becomes Relic Blade, Bolt Pistol Becomes Storm Shield, Captain becomes Pedro, etc.

DEADMARSH
07-04-2010, 05:08
A friend and I were discussing the difference methods we have when constructing our army lists and I would like to discuss it with the fourm.

When I write up my army I aim to create an all-comers list with a certain playstyle and character that I will enjoy. This list then become the template for all future list made with this army, swapping out units with similer roles for a bit of variety and making perminant changes to the list to accomodate weakness. While my lists aren't optimised, they are refined and familier.

My friend takes a more random approach to list development. He writes a fresh list before each game, trying out new units and tactics with mixed results. This means that sometimes he will run very unbalanced lists or one-trick armies, but in general the armies preform quite poorly because he doesn't have experience running them.

I'm posting this because our different approaches to list building are interfering with our games since I have an almost 100% win rate and he is pretty demoralised. When he approached me yesterday I was accused of putting to much effort into my lists because they have good synergy and that all the bases are covered. He then suggested that I perscribe to his method of list building. His argument being "Its just for fun so make a list, slap it down of the table and see what happens". My argument would be "Just because a game is for fun doesn't mean you have to play it poorly".

What are your opinions?

My opinion is your friend is probably not good at playing the game- anyone who can't make a decent list (and I don't mean fully optimized WAAC because I'm pretty sure that's what you mean too) has no grasp on the way a unit will behave on the tabletop.

If he's taking terrible, one-trick-pony type lists, you guys are probably playing at a fairly high point total. Make that stop. 2,000 point games are a bad idea for this cat- it gives him more than enough rope to hang himself with.

Instead, try talking him into playing a series of escalation games with you. If one (or both of you) have unfinished models, here's the perfect excuse for why you want to play such small point games and work your way up. Start at 500 points. Put restrictions on FOC choices or vehicles or HQs or whatever if you have to, but do whatever it takes to make him field a non-stupid list that actually has a chance against you. If he wins, congratulations- next week we play 750 (keeping the original 500 points intact, of course). If he loses, you stay at 500.

What's the worst that can happen? He says, "No."? He quits playing? If he's as demoralized and whatnot as you say, it's a matter of time anyway.

djinn8
07-04-2010, 07:42
My opinion is your friend is probably not good at playing the game- anyone who can't make a decent list (and I don't mean fully optimized WAAC because I'm pretty sure that's what you mean too) has no grasp on the way a unit will behave on the tabletop.

No I don't mean WAAC, I themed with a plan. I'll post my list at the end of this post and you can decide for your self if it's designed to win or just have fun.


If he's taking terrible, one-trick-pony type lists, you guys are probably playing at a fairly high point total. Make that stop. 2,000 point games are a bad idea for this cat- it gives him more than enough rope to hang himself with.

Normally we play at 1500 and it's this point level where we have the problems. Playing lower point game (combat patrol to 1000 points, we have a pretty even win lose ratio. I guess that is because when I sit down to write a list at this level it is usually of the top of my head and rushed. I believe that 40K has an optimum points level to play at and going above or below this grants certain armies a bonus or detriment. As a Guard player 1500 seems the magic number: lower and there aren't enough bodies on the field to support one another, higher and the power level multiplies with the number of men that can be fielded.

Here's the list I run anyway. As I said in an earlier post units can be switched out to preform similer roles (Rough Riders instead of Special Weapon Squads/ Conscripts instead of Penal Legion/ Creed insted of Straken, etc...) but in general the list stays the same.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Company Command (Straken, Grenade, Standard, Vox, Astropath) - 200

Storm Trooper Squad (2x Melta) - 105
Storm Trooper Squad (2x Melta) - 105
Guardsman Marbo - 65

1st Platoon Command Squad (2x Grenade, Vox) - 45
30x Infantry Squad (Commissar, Melta, 2x Flamers, 4x P-Swords, Vox) - 250
10x Infantry Squad (Grenade, Autocannon, Vox) - 70
10x Infantry Squad (Grenade, Autocannon, Vox) - 70
Special Weapon Squad (Plasma, Melta, Demo) - 80
Special Weapon Squad (Plasma, Melta, Demo) - 80
Heavy Weapon Squad (3x Lascannnons) - 105
Heavy Weapon Squad (3x Lascannnons) - 105
Heavy Weapon Squad (3x Mortars) - 60

Penal Legion Squad - 80
Penal Legion Squad - 80
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

DEADMARSH
07-04-2010, 14:38
No I don't mean WAAC, I themed with a plan. I'll post my list at the end of this post and you can decide for your self if it's designed to win or just have fun.



Normally we play at 1500 and it's this point level where we have the problems. Playing lower point game (combat patrol to 1000 points, we have a pretty even win lose ratio. I guess that is because when I sit down to write a list at this level it is usually of the top of my head and rushed. I believe that 40K has an optimum points level to play at and going above or below this grants certain armies a bonus or detriment. As a Guard player 1500 seems the magic number: lower and there aren't enough bodies on the field to support one another, higher and the power level multiplies with the number of men that can be fielded.

I agree with you that 40k works better at different point levels, but again, the point is your buddy can't make competitive lists at 1,500. You hadn't mentioned you guys were more closely matched at lower point levels, but that fact kind of fits the assumption I've been working under here.

I wouldn't say your list is optimized to the max, but you are fielding 2 special characters in your list, so while it's a friendly, you're still throwing out hard challenges to people when they come in the box, so to speak. :) What we'd be better off focusing on is your buddy's list though. He's the ones with the list issues, not you. Your list is fine.

If I had to guess, your buddy goes for the big, shiny, expensive units when he ought to be picking up bog standard bodies to give him more of a battlefield presence. Am I right?

djinn8
07-04-2010, 15:45
If I had to guess, your buddy goes for the big, shiny, expensive units when he ought to be picking up bog standard bodies to give him more of a battlefield presence. Am I right?

Spot on.

Generally he used Plague Marines, Thousand Sons, Possessed with Marks, Marines With Marks, bloated Deamon Princes and a special characters or two. Part of the problem is that he doesn't have that big of a collection. His inital purchase was around 3000 point of stuff if you include all the special characters, but being untested, the whole has no real synergy to it and he has refused to buy anything new for his army. I'm not sure why that is? He has the money as he buy codexes when they are released. Even if he only bought a unit at the same rate as new codexes he would have a good three or four new units by now which would go a long way to bridging the gaps in his collection. That said we alow each other to proxy what we want (hell, I ran an Green Tide list a few weeks back using my IG models) so its not that big an issue.

The biggest problem is his refusal to adapt his tactics, create a list with any stratergy, and stop focusing on how he's going to lose every game. I swear hearing him endlessly go on about how the dice favour me more than him is driving me crazy. I mean it got to the stage the other day where he was writing down ever dice rolled so he could prove it ...gah[/rant]

Ahum... What I mean is he should tighten his game, not convince me to lower mine.

ED: also I think that it would be a good idea for him to read the tacticas on here to get some ideas. But since the other day he was making some pretty personal remarks about me and my access to such things it might not happen. Might just be sour grapes though. It a shame the site doesn't have a Chaos Tactica PDF I could print off for him.

Don't suppose anyone knows of something like it?

DEADMARSH
07-04-2010, 23:20
Spot on.

Generally he used Plague Marines, Thousand Sons, Possessed with Marks, Marines With Marks, bloated Deamon Princes and a special characters or two. Part of the problem is that he doesn't have that big of a collection. His inital purchase was around 3000 point of stuff if you include all the special characters, but being untested, the whole has no real synergy to it and he has refused to buy anything new for his army. I'm not sure why that is? He has the money as he buy codexes when they are released. Even if he only bought a unit at the same rate as new codexes he would have a good three or four new units by now which would go a long way to bridging the gaps in his collection. That said we alow each other to proxy what we want (hell, I ran an Green Tide list a few weeks back using my IG models) so its not that big an issue.

The biggest problem is his refusal to adapt his tactics, create a list with any stratergy, and stop focusing on how he's going to lose every game. I swear hearing him endlessly go on about how the dice favour me more than him is driving me crazy. I mean it got to the stage the other day where he was writing down ever dice rolled so he could prove it ...gah[/rant]

Ahum... What I mean is he should tighten his game, not convince me to lower mine.

ED: also I think that it would be a good idea for him to read the tacticas on here to get some ideas. But since the other day he was making some pretty personal remarks about me and my access to such things it might not happen. Might just be sour grapes though. It a shame the site doesn't have a Chaos Tactica PDF I could print off for him.

Don't suppose anyone knows of something like it?

Lol, I know what you mean, man- I'm soooo much more lucky with my dice rolls when I'm playing somebody with a list I know inside and out. It's all just perception, of course, and it's rarely objective. :)

I swear man, reading your posts, it's like we're playing the same guy. I had a very similar experience a couple of summers ago with a guy who played at my store. Don't want to bore you with all the gory details, but suffice it to say, he sounds very much like your friend (and is the big reason I keep guessing right when it comes to your buddy).

The tactica Chaos idea is a good one if you can find one somewhere (or just modify a Marine tactica- the armies are pretty similar after all), but I'd really try and steer him towards the escalation idea I mentioned a few posts back. If he learns how to use his units in low point games, it'll stick with him in higher point games. He has to figure out, just like the guy at my store did, that even if you have some monster 200 point character on the field, it isn't an auto-win. The escalation deal seems a good idea especially because he doesn't have a lot of models either.

Good luck, man. I'm not too proud to admit I gave up on the guy at my old store. It seemed as though everytime I felt like I'd made some headway and he'd finally come up with a semi-competitve list that I wouldn't just absolutely blow to hell by the end of turn 2, sure enough, he'd show up with the most poorly composed one-trick-pony wannabe Nid 'Zilla list you've ever laid eyes on and a gigantic grin on his face, like, "I got you this time!" I'd sigh, and it'd just be wash, rinse, repeat.

Hope it works out better for you than it did for me!

Znail
08-04-2010, 00:45
Wow, what a macho approach to playing the game! I'm really impressed by your no bullsht attitude to defeating your opponents! You've literally shaken my worldview!

There I was assuming I the OP's opponent's way of enjoying the game was by trying out new things and experimenting with different lists, when all along he was playing the game WRONG, and clearly needs to man-up to your butch level of gameplay. He's clearly a 40K sissy, what with his sub-optimal unit choices and apparent inexperience.

OP, on the strength of Ravenous's sagely advice, I'm afraid that unless your opponent either writes or downloads a no-holds-barred WAAC list, tailors it to specifically defeat your army and sticks with it through thick and thin whether he likes it or not, you're just going to have to tell him that he is obviously not cut out to play such a ruthless, cut-throat game like 40k.

[/scoff]

So do you also get angry with your opponent when you try out new lists and you dont win? Do you feel entitled to your fair share of winning no matter what you do? Will you refuse to play anyone who wins too many games? Claiming to play only for fun and complaining about not winning is an obvious contradiction. If you are realy only playing for the fun of it then losing shouldnt be a problem! And if losing is a problem, then you need to improve yourself, not whine.

Its a serious suggestion. Either learn to accept loss or improve yourself. Note that there are two options there and the first one is as also a serious option. Asking others to play poorly isnt a good option.

adreal
08-04-2010, 07:11
He has chaos? Hmmm

You're infantry guard, so if he hits your lines he shouldn't have too much of a problem, it's just getting there I guess.

Without knowing exactly what your friend own's it's hard to suggest things for his list.

HQ
He should go for a lord (hide in rhino), maybe a tzeentch sorc (warptime and wind), a tzeentch prince might seem better, but I bet dollars to dohnuts you can blast it out of the sky really quickly.

ELITES
Termies with combi flamers, keep them small and icon free, that way he could drop them down with some oblit's (more on them later) and put pressure on your rear lines

TROOPS
Plague marine's in rhino's, give them melta, flamer, powerfist

Basic marines, IoCG, twin special weapons (flamer, unless you guys play other players who have tanks) champ with power weapon, rhinos, they shouldsee him through

Other cults, Zerkers in rhino's are never a bad thing, 1K son's are a waste unless their is MeQ, Dakka noise marines in cover are golden (heavy 3 bolters)

FAST ATTACK
If he takes spawn, hit him
Raptors are okay, but don't really cut the mustard against anything other then guard in close combat, but the IoN on them could work
Bikers with IoN will annoy you, give them flamers and a power weapon

HEAVY SUPPORT
Oblits are his friend, twin linked flamers, meltas and plasma with lascannons, multi meltas and plasma cannons as well.....oh and 3 powerfist attacks each on the charge

Havocs, are okay, multi missile blasts could be fun for him

Vindi, a great little vechile, with dameonic possession

Preds are okay, but over costed

Raiders.....well with zerkers (and maybe abbadon) they are nuts, but are pretty expensive

defilers, can be alright

Okay, I know what I put up here is sorta meta gaming against you, but do you guys play anyone else, how does he go against others?

He really should sit down and nut out alist he is happy with, or atleast a core (3 plague marine squads in rhino's could be that core) and then work around that.


As to how I make lists, usually I think of a cool idea that fits withwhat I own (and that is alot) I nut out a list and ask advice on how to make it better without sacrificing my idea.