Post by Joelercoaster on Aug 29, 2015 7:39:13 GMT -6
H'okay, so...
Something I've been meaning to check up on, and just recently did via the cheat sheet, is the order of "choose mission" vs "choose army". Point being, according to "The Rules", you are meant to determine the mission *before* you write up your army list (assuming that determining the army/points values entails a list).
It's very Warmahordes, in that way, where tournament-wise you bring, I think three? army lists, and choose which to use during each round (knowing the army your opponent will represent, but not their list).
The biggest allegory I can draw to 40k is with my Nids. Can't speak for the other buggly players, but I have noticed a trend where "standard" (read; fairly to-the-fluff, mix of swarm/mid/MC) are actually pretty solid at board control for objectives, but lackluster at killpoint games.
Long story short - does anyone think that bringing 2-3 army lists, and choosing based on mission, would be more appropriate to 7th ed? Obviously for anyone doing tournament training it's a bit moot, but also most tournaments have modified objectives that you know before hand anyway... but for general pick-up games? I wonder if it would actually help draw out a few lesser used units. Tervigons are amazing for securing objectives (and more and more as they spawn), but terrible for KP games... but I would happily swap them out for Venomthropes (which I rarely take) in a KP game for the added durability. Or maybe I just need to kitbash a Malanthrope and have a functional elite unit? Ba-haaaaaah! Srsly though.
Anyway, just a thought.
Something I've been meaning to check up on, and just recently did via the cheat sheet, is the order of "choose mission" vs "choose army". Point being, according to "The Rules", you are meant to determine the mission *before* you write up your army list (assuming that determining the army/points values entails a list).
It's very Warmahordes, in that way, where tournament-wise you bring, I think three? army lists, and choose which to use during each round (knowing the army your opponent will represent, but not their list).
The biggest allegory I can draw to 40k is with my Nids. Can't speak for the other buggly players, but I have noticed a trend where "standard" (read; fairly to-the-fluff, mix of swarm/mid/MC) are actually pretty solid at board control for objectives, but lackluster at killpoint games.
Long story short - does anyone think that bringing 2-3 army lists, and choosing based on mission, would be more appropriate to 7th ed? Obviously for anyone doing tournament training it's a bit moot, but also most tournaments have modified objectives that you know before hand anyway... but for general pick-up games? I wonder if it would actually help draw out a few lesser used units. Tervigons are amazing for securing objectives (and more and more as they spawn), but terrible for KP games... but I would happily swap them out for Venomthropes (which I rarely take) in a KP game for the added durability. Or maybe I just need to kitbash a Malanthrope and have a functional elite unit? Ba-haaaaaah! Srsly though.
Anyway, just a thought.
