|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|01-02-14 11:40 PM|
Originally Posted by Words_of_Truth View Post
|01-02-14 05:44 PM|
Originally Posted by emporershand89 View Post
|01-02-14 05:26 PM|
It is funny how all of you are simply ripping on one another instead of presenting generalizations about tactics used between Brits and Americans; or Shmuck vs shmuck for that matter. Stay on Topic
On the topic of Tactics changing Internationally I can admit I have noticed several differences. In particular dealing with U.K players I notice that the more Elite the unit the better. American players, both in Warhammer 40k and any video game competition, prefer to have cheaper firepower, "en mass." This means they would rather stack up several squads of Heavy Weapons Teams for Imperial Guard instead of 1 Baneblade, they prefer Death Companies to Elite characters, and prefer to shoot you than CQB you. For the U.K part they will invest points in the more Elite unit because they tend to play much more conservatively, and will only commit their units when they see a advantage. U.K will favor Monoliths over Heavy Necron Warriors, Land Raiders over Cyclone teams, and SwarmLords over a horde of Warriors.
Another distinct difference, IMHO, is U.K players like to trudge it out, whereas Americans prefer to rush in. Many players in the U.S love Valkyries, JetFighters, and other Air units used to bring swift mobility to troop movements and deadly mobile firepower platforms to key positions. Many U.K players (especially at Pax East) have shown me they will stick it out with massive Artillery bombardments, Hordes of Elite Orks, or crush everything under the Nid Warriors claws. Slow and Steady vs Swift and Deadly.
As for other countries they have their own perks, particularly 3 Swedish players I had the privilige of facing at Pax East demonstrated how they love to use Elite special characters over basic Troops. I'm not even sure if it was legal for a 2,000pt battle with all the Space Marine character he had (High Marhsal, Castellan, Emporers Champion, Reclusiarch, and a Sword Brethern CS?? I was like WTF man???!!!). Funny thing was they both laughed at and abhorded me when I told them to use massive maounts of basic heavies for Imperial Guard. I still beat 2 of the 3. Anyway different places, different approaches to the same problem. Dog eat Dog world babe!!!
|01-01-14 10:36 PM|
|tuebor||It's all about local meta, there's no national character to it, outside of smaller nations of course. I've played in France, Germany, Canada and several US states and I've found no greater variation between countries than what you find between clubs in the same town.|
|12-17-13 07:21 AM|
|Archon Dan||As stated earlier, I think it really boils down to local meta. I have no tournament plans but I think my LGS has prepared me well should I take the plunge. From what I've read about other LGSs, mine is really diverse. I've read how "Eldar is big here" or "nobody plays Orks." At my store almost everyone has more than one army and nearly all the armies are represented. If I want to learn to fight Tau, I know who to ask. The same is true for Eldar, Orks or IG. And when it comes to Marines, each player uses different Chapter Tactics. So, while some players "cut their teeth" against very specific local metas, I would say facing more diverse opponents lets you learn the strengths and weaknesses of an army build faster.|
|12-04-13 04:52 PM|
Originally Posted by Bearer.of.the.Word View Post
I really have no idea. UK players seem to stick together shitty units to form shitty armies and then bitch if you even suggest it's bad, but that's the same everywhere I think.
|12-04-13 07:21 AM|
UK players tend to prefer "Rock" lists like Nob Bikers (when that was a thing) over the MSU style, even when MSU was the most powerful archetype in late 5th.
Of course that's a generalization, but from what I've read about American tournaments and what I've seen in person in British tournaments, it seems to be the case. I don't know if you can get any more specific than that.
|12-03-13 11:40 PM|
Originally Posted by MidnightSun View Post
That being said the majority of games I play end on turn 12 when one of us is tabled, and only after a blood thirsty close combat grinding match.
Screw victory points, the gods appreciate the strong not the guy who's really good at baby sitting stuff.
|10-10-13 11:51 PM|
|emporershand89||I did notice this at Pax East, held in my hometown this past year. 2 U.K and 1 French player I battled used very reserved tactics. They prefered less units with more kick than more units with mob tactics. Alot of my fellow U.S players were complete horde/mob tactics (Guard, Necrons, Nids). It was interesting to see, especially the one 2v2 Apocalypse game that spanned 4 tables.|
|10-10-13 05:07 PM|
I know, I was joking
I think it's only natural that trends will adapt and evolve to meet the local Meta.
It goes beyond nationally to locally. If your area has a load of Ork/nid players then you will see a lot of flamers in tactical squads, guard squads and so on but if there are loads of mec players or marines
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|