Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,602 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've seen discussions before about the type of lists people take to the gt finals vs there heats lists.

Some say they take a more competative list to the heats, and then something to have fun with at the finals. Others, like myseld do the opposite, as in take a more fun army to the heats[although I still try to make a well balanced playable list that wont get shown up], and then if you qualify take a more competative list. Obviously there are also those who will take there best lists to both or a fun list to both.

So which are you and why. I find it odd to not try to make a list that gives you a good chance vs anything you might face to the finals. Why bother qualifying if your not going to play your best to win, even if you don't think it likely that you will. Is it so when you dont win you have the fall back off, well i never really tried i used "insert name here" instead of a competative list.
 

·
Slave to Heresy!
Joined
·
8,803 Posts
I take the best list possible to the Heats and try to improve it for the finals.

I'm aiming for a top 50 finish but in fairness I'll be happy with a few DC rolls and a top 100.
It is fair to say i'll be more relaxed without the pressure of not qualifying on the final day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
999 Posts
Ummmm...lat I checked you had to use teh same list through an entire GT. I have been to two GT's and there were never any options for alternate lists.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
630 Posts
Ummmm...lat I checked you had to use teh same list through an entire GT. I have been to two GT's and there were never any options for alternate lists.
Nope, one list for the heats (6 x games) and then the same or any other list for the final (6 x games) no mixing between games obviously.
I attended my fist GT last year with Cadian7th army and ended up falling short of qualification by 4pts Just so happens that I didn't bring any fluff (6pts), don't think the FLAME ON! guys will ever let us forget that one! :oops:
This year I ended up taking what I considered to be a fairly balanced list despite It being a BA list and qualified In 3rd. I'll probably try and up the anti again though as those top table can get mighty tough and with the added IW's from the heats the beardier the BA's the better! :twisted:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Never been to a GT when there where heats and you couldn't take a different army to the final (maybe its different over your side of the pond but i didn't think they did heats) - and i have been to all of them bar 1. They treat the final as a totaly seperate tourney so everything is set back to zero and you can do what you want.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
I take a more competitive list to the Heat's because I am aiming to qualify for the Final, as well as have 6 fun games against people and armies I've never met before.

At the Final, I plan to take a 'less' competitive army...i.e. the one army with no qualifiers- Witchhunters.
To me, if I've qualified for the Final then I've 'earned' the money back of the Ticket. I have nothing I need to prove- I can go to the Final for 6 more fun games against people and armies I've never met before.

Is it so when you dont win you have the fall back off, well i never really tried i used "insert name here" instead of a competative list.
That's pretty weak if you ask me, so should we all play Iron Warriors? How fun would that be?

best lists to both or a fun list
I am aiming for the apparently mythical army that is both effective and fun to play with and against.

I find it odd to not try to make a list that gives you a good chance vs anything you might face to the finals. Why bother qualifying if your not going to play your best to win, even if you don't think it likely that you will.
Taking a non-'netlist cut and paste' army doesn't mean you don't prepare to face anything, and doesn't mean you don't play your best to win.
I'd like tournaments to test peoples skill at playing the game, rather than how many minutes they spent searching the internet for a pre-set army list. Writing army lists is a skill (one that is becoming redundant with netlists) but it is not the be-all and end-all of 40k- otherwise why bother showing up.

This year I ended up taking what I considered to be a fairly balanced list despite It being a BA list
:lol: - biting lip...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,602 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
i agree you dont need a netlist to do remain competative, i fact i cant think of anything more boring to do, i'd find the GT very boring if i took one. But when i make an army i balance what i think is fun to use, and what will give me a good chance against any opponent i may face. I try to take into account what i'm likely to face, and what will help me deal with that. Personally i would care if i lost all 6 games, as long as in each game i can give a good game of it. I'd hate to have a game and face an opponent and know i dont have a chance against there army because ive gone with something sub par.
Just because you use a competative list, i dont think that means you need to have a characterless copy paste list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
i agree you dont need a netlist to do remain competative, i fact i cant think of anything more boring to do, i'd find the GT very boring if i took one. But when i make an army i balance what i think is fun to use, and what will give me a good chance against any opponent i may face. I try to take into account what i'm likely to face, and what will help me deal with that.
Agreed, though in practice- for the most common armies (SM's, IW's, Tau, Eldar) this essentially means it does boil down to 1-2 common builds for each. And these can be found quite easily on the net- so the skill of army list writing is redundant.

Just because you use a competative list, i dont think that means you need to have a characterless copy paste list.
Just, the impression I got from your initial post was- anyone who doesn't take a WAAC'er netlist is not doing what they should at the Final- their just giving themselves a justification for losing. Everyone should bring the most competitive lists possible....which to me means netlists and most often IW netlists.


What I'm trying to get at is that in theory we should all strive to build the most effective, efficient army lists to give and get a tough game.

In practice however, 40k is not balanced. There are certains units, and indeed certain armies that are simply easier to win with than others- so to take the theoretical to it's conclusion if we're all going for the most powerful- we will all end up using the same army list.

It's sometimes more fun to choose an army and units that are rare, if less powerful, you may not win as much but you'll have fun and bring something new doing it.

And frankly I have nothing to lose at the Final (i.g. no qualification to aim for), and am far from likely to win or even reach the top ten since I don't have IW's, Skimmer Eldar, Mech Tau, etc. (and of course, I'm not the best at 40k- I can accept there are better players, I know a fair few of them).

So I can bring an army that's different, rare and hopefully get some fun games out of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
137 Posts
LongBeard said:
This year I ended up taking what I considered to be a fairly balanced list despite It being a BA list and qualified In 3rd. I'll probably try and up the anti again though as those top table can get mighty tough and with the added IW's from the heats the beardier the BA's the better! :twisted:
lmao, you have to be kidding me Matt. Seriously, the only thing that was slightly balanced in your list was the assault marines!! At least you've settled on my old list as the new cheese :wink:

Well i took mech eldar spam to the heats and am taking farsight spam to the finals....personally i think they're both the same level of competitiveness. I kind of wanted to have a rarer list at the finals, though i know Torgoch is taking a similar list (and took it to the heats) so its scuppered there. Just have to see which one of us get farsight killed the most :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
630 Posts
lmao, you have to be kidding me Matt. Seriously, the only thing that was slightly balanced in your list was the assault marines!! At least you've settled on my old list as the new cheese
Hey! I could quote from a fair few forums on how 'balanced' my list was and how suprised that It did well, but being BA's and all I won't deny the truth :wink:
As for my 'new' list I'm going to drop the extra speeder baggage and play about with a squad of scouts as I know you love them oh so dearly Chris! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
This is only my second GT season, but in all tournaments I've ever entered I've taken some Tau list variant, purely to see how i can get it to perform. For the GT I've always taken as strong a Tau list as i can with the aim of seeing how high i can go with it, in other tournaments i take something a little less dangerous. Unfortunately I don't play 40k nearly enough to get them to perform as well as they should.

Possibly next year I might try and tear myself away from Tau (likely!) but i'm determined to take my nids or impossibly evil dark eldar to a campaign weekend or something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
I think that at the heats you have the majority of people aiming to at least qualify as the free final ticket is a great insentive to want to do well.

However at the final I belive that it becomes less clear cut. You will have some people who believe that by qualifying they have 'earned' the money back of the ticket, so they may decide to go to the final with the sole aim of having 6 great games.

secondly I think you will have some people who while may not be going to win, would like to test themselves against some great gamers who go to the final. these people may decide to tweak the list they took to the heat and see if they can improve on the standing they achieved at the heat.

Finaly I think you get some people who are aiming for a top position, to achieve this sort of position they will have to take a competitive army to even stand a chance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
Hey! I could quote from a fair few forums on how 'balanced' my list was and how suprised that It did well
I could quote from a fair few IW's forum members that IW's have been nerfed because the Oblit should be T 5. And that 4 Heavy Support isn't that bad...

You beardy badger, :wink:

Finaly I think you get some people who are aiming for a top position, to achieve this sort of position they will have to take a competitive army to even stand a chance.
I think you'll have to go a step 'higher' than competitive. You could have the most competitive Guard, or Ork army but are still likely to fail.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Jeridian said:
I think you'll have to go a step 'higher' than competitive. You could have the most competitive Guard, or Ork army but are still likely to fail.
Possibly a stronger word than competitive is needed to describe the lists that are likely to appear at the very top. However I did not want to imply that only certain armies could achieve a top 3 position. At heat 3 orks came 2nd when every other ork player failed to qualify, so while the design of your list is important, your skill as a gamer is as important if not more.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,602 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
i think there is also at least an element of luck of the draw as well. If you take a certainlist and never face your "anti" then you could in theory win the whole thing, whilst someone else misses out where they face difficult opps every time. Whilst a good player with an all comers list will have to play well in every game
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,717 Posts
Exodite said:
Jeridian said:
I think you'll have to go a step 'higher' than competitive. You could have the most competitive Guard, or Ork army but are still likely to fail.
Possibly a stronger word than competitive is needed to describe the lists that are likely to appear at the very top. However I did not want to imply that only certain armies could achieve a top 3 position. At heat 3 orks came 2nd when every other ork player failed to qualify, so while the design of your list is important, your skill as a gamer is as important if not more.
Do you have any idea of the list for that ork army, just interested.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Its spikydavids army, so if your from the oxford club you probably know him.

There's a list the batte reports section on dakka and in the tournament section in warseer. waagh fotheringham-willoughby
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,602 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Warboss, Big Shoota, Choppa
Big Mek, Slugga, Kustom Force Field
4 Kommandoz w/rokkit, Nob w/Tankbusta bomz, rokkitz, 2 ammo runtz
4 Kommandoz w/rokkit, Nob w/Tankbusta bomz, rokkitz, 2 ammo runtz
16 Flash Gitz w/More Dakka, 4 Big Shootaz, Nob w/power klaw, more dakka, shootier
18 Slugga Boyz w/3 rokkitz, Nob w/power klaw, rokkit, 2 ammo runtz
12 Slugga Boyz w/3 rokkitz, Nob w/rokkit, 2 ammo runtz
16 Slugga Boyz w/3 Big Shootaz, Nob w/Big Shoota, Power Klaw
4 Tankbustaz w/3 rokkitz, Nob w/rokkit, 2 attack squigz
4 Tankbustaz w/3 rokkitz, Nob w/rokkit, 2 attack squigz
19 Grotz, Slaver w/squighound, big shoota
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
I've played it 3 times now, 1-1-1. Its a formidable list in the right hands, and i think he has a very good chance of top 3ing in the final with it. not sure it can gain enough of a VP margin to win tho.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top