I've always wondered something...

[Uncle Nutsy]

This question has popped up in my mind off and on for all the time i've been participating in the internet side of the 40k universe.

Why is it that if an army list is posted, if it's not competitive or for a tournament, it's always glossed over, as if no one knows what to say about it? I've noticed it here, on warseer, 40konline, et al. It never sat right with me and frankly, it's discouraging to post any army list at all if it doesn't include, in the case of DE, 6x warrior/venom units, and in the case of tau, deathrains/fireknives/broadsides/piranhas.

I mean really.. is it really that one-dimensional? do people really just not know what to do when they see an unconventional list?

[Vangrail]

well sadly alot of people play meta, i mean thats fine but some people suck the fun out of the game. I enjoy when people build lists with some good units and units they think are cool. Personally I love the thunderfire cannon yes its fragile but it can do good and looks awesome. Also fits my sons of medusa theme.

[eldargal]

Personally I tend not to post on army lists at all because it tends to boil down to arguments over what is most powerful.

Maybe I'll make a nice, fluffy kabalite list with Court of the Archon and post it.

[AbusePuppy]

What, exactly, do you think should be said about such a list? Should other people intuit your fluff from the army list alone? Should people comment on how to make an obviously non-optimized list more optimal when that runs counter to the wishes of the list's creator?

In short, if you aren't looking for critique to make a list better- which is to say optimal, tournament-quality, or whatever other moniker you want to lay on that endpoint, what is the purpose of posting such a list other than to say "this is the list I use"? It's like telling people about what you had for breakfast- you can't expect any meaningful comment because there isn't really anything that can be said about it unless you can add something beyond the obvious.

[daboarder]

What, exactly, do you think should be said about such a list? Should other people intuit your fluff from the army list alone? Should people comment on how to make an obviously non-optimized list more optimal when that runs counter to the wishes of the list's creator?

In short, if you aren't looking for critique to make a list better- which is to say optimal, tournament-quality, or whatever other moniker you want to lay on that endpoint, what is the purpose of posting such a list other than to say "this is the list I use"? It's like telling people about what you had for breakfast- you can't expect any meaningful comment because there isn't really anything that can be said about it unless you can add something beyond the obvious.

tactics for using said list or streamlining it within the droad constraints established by the post in order to make it work as is without turning it cookie cutter would be good.

[Colonel Bindoff]

There's not always a lot that can be said about a fluffy list. I assume most fluffy players aren't too bothered about the win, and more about having fun. But as abuse puppy said, unless you say what you're after then people won have a lot to say.

Usually when I look at the lists forum people want help either to improve in general or because they want advice on beating something in particular. But it can be hard to offer advice on a fluff list. Case in point, a khorne list I'm painting up at the moment:

Termie lord, bloodfeeder
4 termie bodyguard, combi weapons, heavy flamer, chainfist
Land raider

8 tooled up khorne zerkers
Land raider

8 tooled up khorne zerkers
Land raider

Sometimes I run the zerkers with 3 bare bones squads and teleport the lord. It's 1500 points.

But what is anyone really going to say? Do I expect to win with the list? Not really. Is it fun when my raiders hit a battle line and storm into combat? Hell Yeah. Tactics are a moot point here (obviously more so than other examples I could have made) and if someone suggests obliterators in a list like this i'll probably die a little inside.

I also get the impression that not a lot of us fluff bunnies read the lists forum

[Wolfshade]

Unfortunately you end up people criticising lists just because they play something different. I remember I posted one list saying I was playing against nids and was given a completely re-written list full of meltas to take out tanks.

[Wildeybeast]

I see one or two comments saying that unless you are trying to optimize a list, there isn't much that can be said as 'non-tournie' lists are very personal. Whilst I think this is true to a certain extent, I don't entirely agree with it. Whilst a 'fun' list is very much a personal creation that you make for yourself and as such you really don't need anyone else's help with it, you can still get advice with fluff lists. I recall at least two posts on here in the last few months from people wanting to start RG armies, asking which units to take that stick to their fluff whilst still remaining competitive. With fluff/fun lists it's more about general advice rather than specific unit combos and I think it can be worthwhile asking for internet advice in this case, provding you make clear what it is you are looking for.

[Denzark]

Fluff is subjective - one's interpretation may not be someone elses.

So EG posts a DE list and says it is a fluffy Cabalite of the bleeding Butt Plug. My response is to some extent irrelevant.

Whereas a focussed competitive list is surely objective to a greater extent - some units have good synergy and effectiveness, and some never do.

So you can have a logic based debate on those lists, hence the greater discourse.

[Psychosplodge]

There's not always a lot that can be said about a fluffy list. I assume most fluffy players aren't too bothered about the win, and more about having fun. But as abuse puppy said, unless you say what you're after then people won have a lot to say.

Usually when I look at the lists forum people want help either to improve in general or because they want advice on beating something in particular. But it can be hard to offer advice on a fluff list. Case in point, a khorne list I'm painting up at the moment:

Termie lord, bloodfeeder
4 termie bodyguard, combi weapons, heavy flamer, chainfist
Land raider

8 tooled up khorne zerkers
Land raider

8 tooled up khorne zerkers
Land raider

Sometimes I run the zerkers with 3 bare bones squads and teleport the lord. It's 1500 points.

But what is anyone really going to say? Do I expect to win with the list? Not really. Is it fun when my raiders hit a battle line and storm into combat? Hell Yeah. Tactics are a moot point here (obviously more so than other examples I could have made) and if someone suggests obliterators in a list like this i'll probably die a little inside.

I also get the impression that not a lot of us fluff bunnies read the lists forum

I love that list!
So what if you don't win?

but on the other hand I can imagine your opponents face if you manage to carve through half an army of tau or guard...