PDA

View Full Version : Do you think tailoring an army list is a good/bad idea?



Daemon king Mad Dog
10-09-2006, 13:39
I do not think that if you change your army list because of two things:

1. What your playing

and/or

2. What you think yoru opponent is going to use.

is the makings of a bad player, but while changing yoru army list because:

1. You take something out because it doesn't do very well and add soemthing else that you think will do well (in general, not just against one opponent).

and/or

2. Because you work out soemthing that does the same job for less points.

and/or

3. Becasue you work out soemthing that does the job better but for the same amount of points.

Is good, because i see this as having your army able to make it a fun game, some units doing extremly well, while tohers are a bit in over their heads.

Could you when you post say what you put on the poll and what army you collect.

Daemon king Mad Dog
10-09-2006, 13:46
If i understand you correctly.

premise one. Yes and no.
Its generally bad for to talior armies just to kick the crap out of your opponet. BUt at the same time it can lead to very challenging games if you both agree to it. Normally though its better to just bring a generalized "take all comers army"

Premise two. meh
Thats just the natural evolution of armies. People (most of the time newer players) will buy a ton of stuff anf have no idea whats going on besides its cool. Eventually you find something that works good, and over the time playing the army evolve new tactics that you like and will get units that support those tactics the best. i mean if you like a static battle line, a squad of bikes you once bought dont really go to well with it ususally


I play Eldar, of all flavors

dont really see a poll though

Sorry.



You tell me.

You are the general of an Imperial army. You have been sent into a warzone where the enemy are orks.

Do you:

A: bring lascannons because you know they are an excellent anti-ork weapon
B: bring plasma guns because you like your own troops crispy fried
C: bring melta guns because your intelligence tells you orks ride land raiders like bikes
D: Bring Heavy bolters and missile launchers because you would be an IDIOT TO DO OTHERWISE? :p

All jokes aside, you should probably build a 'tournament list', so you can take all comers, to be fair.

Realistically, you'd equip yourself with the best weapons for taking down your enemy.

Of course, you wouldn't attack an equal number of them either, you'd ambush them and shoot their feet off.

Hellebore

These are the ones from the other threads, if any mdos reads this please pleas please delete them and don't tell me off because it won't let me go back on the same thing to correct the poll.

t-tauri
10-09-2006, 13:49
Spell check, preview post before you submit and delete your other threads. ;)

UnRiggable
10-09-2006, 15:18
I think it's wrong to change your army list, because then that takes the awesomeness away from it. A great army list is one that can take down all opponents.

Helicon_One
10-09-2006, 15:24
Its fine as long as both players know the score in advance. If I show up with a prewritten list of 1000pts of Orks at the gaming club and say "right, who fancies a game then?", its pretty poor form for my opponent to scurry away into the corner and swap all the lascannons and meltaguns for heavy bolters and flamers. If I'd arranged the game with them in advance and both players have the same chance to optimise, then all is good.

Tim

Hellebore
10-09-2006, 15:50
Its fine as long as both players know the score in advance. If I show up with a prewritten list of 1000pts of Orks at the gaming club and say "right, who fancies a game then?", its pretty poor form for my opponent to scurry away into the corner and swap all the lascannons and meltaguns for heavy bolters and flamers. If I'd arranged the game with them in advance and both players have the same chance to optimise, then all is good.

Tim

This I agree with.

All's fair..... so long as ALL'S fair.

hellebore

mooserehab86
10-09-2006, 16:00
I voted for 4 5 & 6. It is completely reasonable to change your list if you find a way to make it better, if you just want to make it more characterful, as well as many other reasons. How can you develop a list that can "take on all comers" without having many experimental games to determine what works well and what doesn't? The only list-changing I don't like is when someone does it right before a game, knowing what opponent they are going to face and tailoring the army to fight that opponent specifically. Winning shouldn't be so important that you need to customize your list to fit every opponent individually.

Shibboleth
10-09-2006, 16:04
I say all of the above.
That's part of the fun I think. Pulling out the new secret weapon you've been working on. :D
Of course your opponent is free to do the same thing too, but I do agree that this should be within the context of Helicon_One's suggestion.

I think WD encourages it also. They even recently showed how to pin your Eldar Weapons Platform to make all the weapon options available (which is actually detrimental to GW sales!)

bob syko
10-09-2006, 16:38
I don't change my lists just to win, I buy loads of stuff then just put it all in there, if I have too much stuff to fit in I melt it down into chains and pretend to be Mr T.

Or if you prefer the truth I just shimy the army round every now and then.

DeathMasterSnikch
10-09-2006, 16:41
Hmm, no option for

'I change my army because I do, no thought behind it other than 'Ooo I havn't used this in a while'

primarch16
10-09-2006, 16:41
I change my list so I can exerience new units and tactics to gain the full potential of my army and to make each game different.

Simsandwich
10-09-2006, 16:42
I shimmy it about, sometimes going... "I think I will have 40 Kommandos today" or " Feral Orks?", just so it doesn't get tedious.

Bloody Gauntlet
10-09-2006, 17:14
Hmm, no option for

'I change my army because I do, no thought behind it other than 'Ooo I havn't used this in a while'

Exactly. That's the main reason, really.

abomination
10-09-2006, 17:18
As long as both sides have the same opportunity to tailor their force then it's no real issue. (I prefer all-comer lists, myself.)

marv335
10-09-2006, 17:21
i have nearly 6000pts of stuff.
i change stuff now and again just because i have so much of it.
using the same list all the time would be boring.
if you just use the same thing all the time you might as well be using necrons.

Yarick Zan
10-09-2006, 17:27
i cange my list for a few simple reasons

1. the unit in question doesnt do so hot for me or i dont like the way it plays
2. make a slight variation for my army so its more fluffy and it feels right
3. i play with power gamers so i have to have some kind of edge. infact power gamers to the max.

Maxis Lithium
10-09-2006, 17:32
My list is contantly changing. I enjoy experimenting with tactics and units. If smething dosen't go well, I remeber it for next time. I think about how I used the unit, and what I can do with it to make it better.

I don't believe in "the perfect list" or stratagy. there is no ONE way to build an army. The core of my army usually stays the same (I.E. My guard will ALWAYS have a platoon of infantry. My Speed Freek Orks will LAWAYS have trukk Boys, Etc...) but elietes, HQ and many other things are always changing for me.

And no, I never tailor my list to my opponent. that's just not cricket.

Captain Brown
10-09-2006, 17:40
Edited the title so it made something remotely resembling what you asked. Please check your text before you start threads and do not start four threads all on the same topic in the same forum within a half hour of each other.

Captain Brown
WarSeer Inquisition

Horus38
10-09-2006, 18:15
Anyone who doesn't change their list in general is missing out on the fun of creating new army setups.

As far as your opponent, I usually slightly tailor depending on what army I'm facing in order to give him a good look. Completly hosing an army with a specific list doesn't make for a fun game.

Xander-K
10-09-2006, 18:20
It seems some of you guys are confused about the thread title, heheh this is about TAILORING lists not CHANGING, tailoring IMO is very bad sportsmanship knowing what you are facing and bringing ideal weapons/units for the task makes the game a whole lot more boring.

Having lists with strengths AND weakness' agains't said foe actually brings a challenge into the game.

lord_blackfang
10-09-2006, 18:23
Tweaking the list to improve overall performance, or for variety, is good. Tailoring it to the scenario or enemy (unless both agreed to it) is both stupid and unsportsmanlike (stupid because you'll never learn any tactics if you always have the perfect tool for the job.)

Personally, if I change my list I do it before I know who/what I'll be facing next.

(Evil)Ash
10-09-2006, 18:29
we never fight with a pre-existing list, but always make a new one every game. what's also interresting is to choose your scenario before your army lists, that way you no units go to waste and some units you hardly ever use might become interresting.

greetz,:evilgrin:

AtlantianWarrior
10-09-2006, 19:02
I like to make a list when I know the mission. As for tailoring my list the only time I do is when I am fighting Chaos.

robertsjf
10-09-2006, 21:00
I can also see tailoring a list to a mission, but I like keeping the same lis because ultimately not every commander has the opportunity to optimize his forces. Sometimes he has to make do. And if the Administratum gave you nothing but lascannons and meltaguns and then sent you to fight orks, tough.
That being said, as long as both opponents have the ability to tweak their lists prior to the game it's fair.

Gaebriel
10-09-2006, 21:48
I don't have an army list - as in one army list.

I have a few thousand points lying around and choose what suits me, what I have a theme for, or what I think is effective considering the particular opponent/opponent's army/scenario.

I don't play tournements, I play in a well defined meta-environment, and my lists are never cheesy.

So yes, I tailor, chose option 1&2 - while options 4&5&6&9 are not touching me, because every one of my list is built from scratch anyway...

insectum7
10-09-2006, 21:56
I voted no changing, but that's not really the whole story. I will run a couple experiments before fixing on a list, so I'll try some different combinations of units for a few battles and then commit. Right now I am in the experimental phase again, but that's after playing an unchanging Space Marine list for a year and a half or so. I think that having a diverse, balanced, multi-role list that gets a good ratio of wins after so long is really the pinnacle of 40K. But in all honesty, I'm kinda a snob.

I really, strongly, try to discourage players from changing their lists every battle, because the experience of using combinations of units for multiple games grants a better unterstanding of the posible strategies involved.

purplehoob
11-09-2006, 13:15
I voted no to changing your list, however it should read no to tailoring your list.

Many a time I have been asked, so what have you got in your army, only to have them scuttle away to the farest reaches of the shop to concoct a killer army list specifacally made to kill Genestealers/ Guard / tanks.

I do switch things about in my lists, I too have many points, however I never switch just before a game. I pick a list that night and stick to it, if you check out your opponents army list then make an army to beat it in my books this is an unfair advantage.

I now say when people ask, I have stuff with me, just put up a army of the same points cost, I will match it. I don't ask what race you are playing until we have started, so why should you?

marv335
11-09-2006, 13:50
i have folder.
in this folder i have many lists at different points values.
most ofthe lists are themed i.e. scouting force, seige force, assault force, 1st company, tournament, infantry, etc
befire the game i select a list depending on whim.

Deadite
11-09-2006, 14:46
Its fine as long as both players know the score in advance. If I show up with a prewritten list of 1000pts of Orks at the gaming club and say "right, who fancies a game then?", its pretty poor form for my opponent to scurry away into the corner and swap all the lascannons and meltaguns for heavy bolters and flamers. If I'd arranged the game with them in advance and both players have the same chance to optimise, then all is good.

Tim

I voted "no" simply because the poll was confusing and didn't have an option for a statement as Helicon_One posts.

"No changing" should be seen as "no tailoring without prior consent", and the poll didn't present that option very well.

Everyone changes their armies up, it's a natural part of the hobby, for various reasons (many listed in the poll). However, tailoring without prior arrangements is very unsportsmanlike and a true testament to your lack of gaming prowess.

Steel_Legion
11-09-2006, 18:22
i think tailoring to an extend is good, for example bringing 3 russ's versus a marine army is just cruel, or nothing but plasma against deathwing, but then a little of that kind of behavour can make a game more balanced, otherwise you will just bounce of etc etc and at least if you slightly tailor its a challange for both armys

Kegluneq
11-09-2006, 18:56
I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with tailoring an army to an opponent's so long as it's done within reason - i.e., each side takes a good range of units rather than just spamming the opponent's weakness. When we play, for instance, we use lists drawn up on the foreknowledge of what army our opponent will be fielding, but don't take their actual army roster into account. This at least gives you the motive and opportunity to continually field different armies, rather than corner yourself into only playing one list.

This can of course backfire when your opponent doesn't stick entirely to the spirit of things, and fields an all infantry Marine army when you play with Shadowsun for the first time...

Fluffwise, there's nothing wrong with tailoring your armylist to fight a particular enemy; there are very few situations in which one army can wipe out the other reliably regardless of units used, and if two armies are going to meet it's more relaistic if they've come realistically prepared. If anything, fielding an unconventional list can then make it more challenging if done well.

Chaos Lord Primus
11-09-2006, 19:51
I do 4+5+6, but my local gaming is a special situation: we have a Tau Player, a Marine player, a Nids Player, a CSM player (me), and a Grey Knights player (also me). With an Eldar player on the way once the new Codex arrives.

Because we face so many different styles, to optimize to face list weakens you on the others. Yes, my Grey Knights could load up on incinerators and toast (pun intended) the Nid player unequivocally, but would be blown to pieces by the Tau. At the same time, I could kit out assault oriented GK squads and annihilate the Tau but be torn to shreds by the Nid player's Genestealers.

So, I don't do 1 or 2, but only because it's actually worse in the long run (we all maintain more or less the same list structure from game to game, so changing it once means changing it for all, and having different options on hand is expensive for us newbies).

Chem-Dog
11-09-2006, 20:25
I think tailoring Army lists is fine, I play IG so a large core of my army points are always going to be spent on obligatory troops choices (especially if I am playing with my Steel Legion) in the shape of infantry platoons SO I have a solid core of 500-700 points of troops that don't change the rest of my army will be composed of pretty much what I fancy.

I play mainly against a couple of friends we all know what models we each have so trying to mix it up is part of the fun, will I go Sentinel Heavy or take lots of Tanks? Recently I've been test driving units for my Savlar Army, I've tried rough riders (who have horrendously bad luck) and will be trying Ogryns soon.

Daemon king Mad Dog
11-09-2006, 21:18
I think it's wrong to change your army list, because then that takes the awesomeness away from it. A great army list is one that can take down all opponents.

Ah, but how do you get that great army list? By changing it to incorporate things doing rubbish.




I do switch things about in my lists, I too have many points, however I never switch just before a game. I pick a list that night and stick to it, if you check out your opponents army list then make an army to beat it in my books this is an unfair advantage.

I now say when people ask, I have stuff with me, just put up a army of the same points cost, I will match it. I don't ask what race you are playing until we have started, so why should you?

The first thing, i do that, and the second thing, my opponents also seem to KNOW what i'm feilding. i never do (although i do surprise them occasionaly by repainting my entire army in a night, their expecting to face khorne, so i have a really shooty space marine army, muwa ha ha ha!). ask, and i always write lsitas, not the night before, but probably the week before, gives me a lot of time to tweak it by re-thinking, never due to what i'm facing.

I also feel that commanders do not have all the choice in the world. I always have a themed army, it's just like, i would really like to use mad dog as a blood thirster, but that doesn't fit, as mad dog = mad dog every day. I never change his equipment apart from after a rescue mission, or something where you ahve to take an objective, we normaly decide what the objective is.

I have made a campaign, where you are not allowed to change your army list and you must write one! I am frequently annoyed by one of my friends, who makes an army list up on the spot, after he has seen my army in action or something else. He doesn't even write it down! so i can't even tell whether he's cheating!

sorry about the double post, i'm reading through the thing backwards, and so i'm positing as i go.


p.s. i put in no changing your army list is bad as a joke, and it's winning! :O

Daemon king Mad Dog
11-09-2006, 21:40
I say all of the above.
That's part of the fun I think. Pulling out the new secret weapon you've been working on. :D


Pulling otu a new secret weapon, thats fine, i do that all the time, but my new secret weapon is normaly just something i HAVE been working on for ages, and just because it IS deadly, but not just against this army, or just agaisnt that army.

And this thread is about tailoring your lists in other words changing it to make it better or improve it.

And as for all the other threads, I didn't ahve any choice, it says that one of the poll questions is too long, and so i have to make a new thread as it won't let me change the poll :( i dunno if it's normal or just a slight bug or what.

Tensor
11-09-2006, 22:09
I'd never tailor my list to play against opponents - I would certainly change my list if I didnt like how it worked out.

UnRiggable
11-09-2006, 22:24
I think it's alot more satisfying and a lot more fair. There may be tactics on the battlefield but some of it is also preperation. That's why people take heavy bolters and the like because they are versatile. It's also why people are skeptical when it comes to flamers and other specific weapons (I am the only tau player who uses them, it's kind of dumb). Of course, you can do what you want, but I find it a lot more fun the find an almost-perfect solution than to bunch up on lascannons and autocannons if I know I'm playing a mechanised forced while switching styles between battles. I just find it more fun to say "Check out my bulletproof list" Rather then say "If I'm playing crons (which I do alot) I'll be taking nine B-sides, but otherwise it's all Hammerheads and Sniper Teams."

Of course you can do what you want, I hope GT's are a solid list rather than a switchable one.

Poisonpen
11-09-2006, 22:38
Hmm, I do not tailor my list. I will alter my list should a particular aspect be less than effective (leadbelchers anyone?) after enough games, but there is a distinction to be made bewteen the two.

Is this the same as Tailoring? Not in my eyes, as it is still an all-comers list. I will not drop something should I fight a certain army -nor will I add a specific unit just to kill something I know my opponent will take. The only time I alter my list is when, as stated above, a unit or model is performing poorly or I want to experiment. Neither of which is guaranteed to improve my performance. The way I usually operate is by using one of a few standby lists I have made that I have seen as particularly fun and still efficient. I may drop or add to this list but again, since I have no idea what my opponent will take it is not tailoring, it is just experimenting. This keeps some spice in the game without anyone getting the intended/underhanded shaft.

There are some times in which I inform my opponent before a game of what I am taking should it be vital to the game. While not 40k per se, I always tell my opponent if I am not taking a Wizard in Fantasy (this is for low point games where not everyone auto-picks a wizard) as dispel scrolls are fairly common, I'd hate for 25 points of 500 to be useless to a player, especially in a friendly game.

Essentially, my view on this is there is no harm to experimenting and altering a list after a game, but to do so right before to enhance performance is a bit underhanded in my book. My group usually doesn't have this problem though as we all just bring a random list for a random army and it usually balances out.

This is just an opinion, so it may not be applicable to every situation.

AtlantianWarrior
11-09-2006, 23:07
Kegluneq
I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with tailoring an army to an opponent's so long as it's done within reason - i.e., each side takes a good range of units rather than just spamming the opponent's weakness. When we play, for instance, we use lists drawn up on the foreknowledge of what army our opponent will be fielding, but don't take their actual army roster into account. This at least gives you the motive and opportunity to continually field different armies, rather than corner yourself into only playing one list.

I am with you on this. I play Daemonhunters. So yeah if I know I will be playing chaos I will take wargear and abilities to fight chaos. If I am not fighting chaos I make an all comers list. If what I do is tailoring oh well. I believe you can make a list to fight another army as long as do not know what units are in the others list. Knowing who you will be playing is good enough.

skuller
12-09-2006, 03:29
and you miss the option : " i dont change my army since I dont have any other models"
but I'll vote 2 I change my Grimgore Ard boyz army for a savage orc army since my regular oponnet plays undead

BrainFireBob
12-09-2006, 07:42
I'm constantly trying various things out for fun. I run the army I want to run in games, and occasionally to playtest with an eye toward future ideas.

So yeah, 4, 5, and 6.

Tailoring to beat an opponent? Bad. Tailoring to beat an irritating twerp that pretends humanity in the guise of manhood-derivation-from-beating-twelve-year-olds-mercilessly-and-cheating? Good.

Brother Muninn
12-09-2006, 08:35
On a whole, my list is pretty balanced, but if I'm going one on one with a buddy we declare our armies and prepare accordingly. Otherwise we'd be ill equipped to face one another. I didn't convert my dreadnought to be able to switch arms for nothing you know.

bratbag
12-09-2006, 09:00
Tailoring your list- Big no no. If you start to go down this path you might as well not play, as you win/loose the game the night before when your making your list.

Changing your list over time-Definate yes. For both fluff and personal taste reasons your army will change over time as you become more familiar with it.Thats just part of the hobby.

Daemon king Mad Dog
12-09-2006, 19:46
yay! now all i need to do is to convince my mate who does this.

It is very annoying as i don't, and he works out his army list after i ahve placed all ym models on the board in preperation for deployment.

BrainFireBob
12-09-2006, 19:58
yay! now all i need to do is to convince my mate who does this.

It is very annoying as i don't, and he works out his army list after i ahve placed all ym models on the board in preperation for deployment.

That's just flat out abusive, and more, incredibly rude to keep you waiting when you're ready for a game.

Zzarchov
12-09-2006, 20:08
Im a big fan of having a list made up before you know who you are going to play. It makes for a more enjoyable game.

Deadite
12-09-2006, 20:22
yay! now all i need to do is to convince my mate who does this.

It is very annoying as i don't, and he works out his army list after i ahve placed all ym models on the board in preperation for deployment.


Soo.... don't place your models on the board before deployment....
Simple as that.
If he's waiting for you to do so, just put out one unit until he puts out one unit... similar to deployment.
Bring all of your models to the game so he has no idea what you could be fielding in the points allowed. And just pull the army out unit by unit until you both have your army lists accounted for.

Daemon king Mad Dog
12-09-2006, 21:08
Good idea. Also, i'm going to warhammer club tomorrow, and i know that my opponent is feilding an army, purely to take out imperial guard.

Little does he know that I will be feilding, sneaky sneaky space marines with a missile launcher! (it's combat patrol)

And he has some brand new fully tooled up (sorta) storm troopers for his grey knights :D

I think this is the best way to deal with it, as in the close confines of the warhammer club (1 1/2 hours) there is absolutly no time for army list chaging. Oh and he doesn't know he's playing me yet.

Daemon king Mad Dog
12-09-2006, 21:10
Im a big fan of having a list made up before you know who you are going to play. It makes for a more enjoyable game.


so am i :)

sorry for the double post :(

Kahadras
12-09-2006, 22:13
I'm not really in favour of tailored lists. At the end of the day I see the best players as being the ones who can take on anybody with his untailored balanced list and win.

Tailoring is OK in certain circumstances i.e both players have agreed on it and both have a good range of models to draw from. In those situations I would say that it was fine.

Kahadras

The Song of Spears
12-09-2006, 22:23
I change my army at random mostly to try new units, and new configurations and such.

But with all the bitching about cheese lists and the like, it might actually be best to tailor each others list to the army you will be facing that battle, as it could possibly mean that the chances of an even match would increase due to both armies bringing the best match for the other to the table.

Just because someone brought a list that even with a genius playing may fail simply due to it not being able to cope with the opponents chosen list. Thatís not much of a satisfying victory knowing an ape could have used your list and crushed the opponent that game.

Getifa Ubazza
12-09-2006, 22:31
If something isnt pulling its weight then i will change it, but i dont change my list for my opponent as i prefer to think that what ive got is what ive got and its up to me as the player to make an army that can do well dispite not being built to face a particular opponent.

I play Tyranids

Daemon king Mad Dog
13-09-2006, 19:00
Yeah, i think also that the skill of warahmmer tactics, begins with deployment, not making your army list. Making your army list is not a particular skill, but it is still a small amount of tactics, but it's just knowing (for some poeple) whats good agaisnt what and whats good.

cailus
14-09-2006, 00:34
I don't tailor because part of me is a realism freak. In the real world militaries often deploy with inadequate equipment. There are several reasons why this may happen:

1. lack of funding
2. delays in system procurement
3. initial system specification was incorrect
4. the evolution of new tactics or the deployment of a new system by the enemy that makes your system obsolete.
5. System is being used in an manner that it was not designed for due to lack of appropriate systems.

Warlord Kyle
14-09-2006, 03:17
The idea is that u are a army, you can't just make a tank out of thin air to replace something else. Also if one player may remake their army for each battle the other player should be able to but may not have the models or the reasources to get them.:eyebrows:

UnRiggable
14-09-2006, 03:30
I don't tailor because part of me is a realism freak. In the real world militaries often deploy with inadequate equipment. There are several reasons why this may happen:

1. lack of funding
2. delays in system procurement
3. initial system specification was incorrect
4. the evolution of new tactics or the deployment of a new system by the enemy that makes your system obsolete.
5. System is being used in an manner that it was not designed for due to lack of appropriate systems.

Yes but that includes the fact that they set out knowing who they are fighting (sometimes exactly how many units of X also). But I still think you shouldnt tailor your AL

Sarge
14-09-2006, 03:34
I personally voted for all of the above, and collect Tau (though I used to collect IG).

The truth is, like any real battle field commander, you're going to arm your troops appropiate for the threat at hand, with what you got. You wouldn't let your infantry take on a tank with a SAW, if you had a LAW anti-tank rocket laucher, would you? So why should you be forced to keep a heavy bolter when you're going up against an armored company? I don't think you should.

Now, if you find some "all takers" army list, good for you, but I know from experience, how much it sucks to have alot of anti-infantry weapons, and see your enemy roll up with alot of tanks. So I support minor revisions, like swapping a lascannon for a heavy bolter, or visa versa. However I'm not a big fan of replacing full units, and will only personally do so with the agreement of my opponent.

So you could say I'm for "all's fair in war, as long as you use what you have at hand".

scramasax
14-09-2006, 03:58
Warhammer is a strategy game. I consider part of the strategy to try to guess what the other guy will use for that game. It is part of a being a good general to try to read the psychology of the other general and what he will do with the unit he has.

If we don't change our list then I found the game to be more repetitive.

BrainFireBob
14-09-2006, 06:33
Warhammer is a strategy game. I consider part of the strategy to try to guess what the other guy will use for that game. It is part of a being a good general to try to read the psychology of the other general and what he will do with the unit he has.

If we don't change our list then I found the game to be more repetitive.

This only works a) If you have a set group, and b) if you have enough time and money to flex up their list.

Dawn of the Dogs
14-09-2006, 06:36
i think changing an army list is good, solely because using the same list over and over again gets boring.

Lancaster
14-09-2006, 06:49
Personally, I only think that an army list should be changed based on point size or simply that something isn't pulling it's weight.

I hate it when people engineer an army specifically to defeat your strategy, like tons of Ordanince/blast weapons versus Orks, or Many Deepstriking Assault Terminators Versus Tau. Basically it says "I can pick models that are specifically targetted to YOUR army, and have a completely unrounded force, but that doesn't matter because I'm only going to play you and you can never win!"

Sir_Turalyon
14-09-2006, 08:06
Yes, because wargaming is for fun and playing with the same list all the time is boring.

stjohn70
14-09-2006, 14:39
Totally agree with Xander-K. Ok to change list. NOT ok to tailor.

synapse
14-09-2006, 15:16
I voted 1&2, though only if you have the models to represent it. Would you guys want to penalise someone (like myself) who has spent the money to buy 8 of each heavy weapon for his devastators to have a good choice deending on who he is facing? If someone spent the time and money to buy all those units and options for his army, he should use them. just becasue someone he is facing only has an exact 1500 point army and no choice should not mean someone he plays aginast should be restricted. There are varyous levels to the hobby and many players enjoy tactical flexibility - with all the choices in the army books its hard not to want something of everything to choose from and then use it aginst something its good against! whats the point buying it otherwise?
Than again i can see many tournament style players hating this sort of gaming. Fair enough. To each their own

having said that i think such decisions whould only be based on the army list and not the specific army you are placing (as in - you know you are playing mariens so take these]/i] weapons, rather than im playing that specific marines army so ill take [i]those weapons - i dont agree with that. though when playing familiar opponents its hard to avoid.

I wholeheartedly agree wit hchanging your list depending on the army you are playing against. And if anyones wondering all my armys are fluff based and i am primarily a modeller/painter

Daemon king Mad Dog
14-09-2006, 17:36
2? who would do 2? and admit it!
2 is.. is... the wrongest thing! Because thats just like:

OOOOOH.. look, you have a nasty daemon prince, better make something to counter that... (scribble scribble scribble write write write) oh thats a possessed squad? (scribble scribble scribble write write write) etc.