40k List-Tech: Crons and Controversy?

The list-tech segment is a series of articles designed to focus on unique, competitive lists crafted by established players in the community in order to provide new and experienced players with tactics, tips, and tricks to use in the heat of battle.

“Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win”

― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Keep calm and make a list

Hello everyone and welcome to another List-Tech article! Today we have two LVO lists (I know it was a while ago) I promise you next article we will have some top lists from other tournaments. But for now, we have two really different style of Necron lists that both made the top 8 at the LVO. The first list ran by Jon Camacho not only is a unique list but also emphasizes the fact that you can bring a fun unique list to a large tournament and do really well! The other list is a more traditional Necron list ran by Alexander Fennel, an amazing player who has been around the hobby for a long time and is easily one of the classiest guys I met in Vegas. Both of these armies were beautiful (kudos to the pink flower crons!) and were a pleasure to watch in the LVO finals. Anyways on to the questions and the lists! Also if you made day 2 at Adepticon email me! I would love to hear about it!

The Questions

  1. Tell us a little bit about your army, why did you go with certain units? Why did you pick this army list in particular? Is there anything special about your army that you want to highlight?
  2. What expectations did you have for the meta? Were there any armies you were worried about? What match-ups did you feel most comfortable with?
  3. Hindsight is 20-20 and looking back on the LVO was there anything you would have changed about your list to better accommodate the meta you experienced?
  4. What are some tips or tricks you have for people who might want to start using your army?

pink monolith

Alexander Fennel’s Decurion Detachment

Reclamation Legion (Core)

Nemesor Zandrekh

10 Warriors

10 Warriors

5 Immortals

3 Tomb Blades: shieldvanes, nebuloscopes

Canoptek Harvest (Auxiliary)

5 Wraiths: 1 whip coil

3 Scarabs

1 Tomb Spider: Gloom Prism

Destroyer Cult (Auxiliary)

Destroyer Lord: Warscythe, Phase Shifter, Nightmare Shroud

4 Destroyers

4 Destroyers

4 Destroyers

Royal Court (Auxiliary)

Overlord: warscythe

Lord: Solar Staff

Orikan the Diviner

I’ve had my Necrons for a long time and wanted to see if I could make them work at the LVO. They’re very durable and the list I run has decent assault capability to go along with the shooting that the destroyers can kick out. The Solar Staff is the stand out item in the list – it does a great job protecting a unit against a first turn strike. Zandrekh is also a great character to take; his ability to change up warlord traits would give me a lot of options during the games.

I didn’t have many expectations of the meta going in. I guessed that with the funky ITC ruling void shields would be everywhere (and they were), Eldar would be common and they would all have a wraithknight (which seemed to be the case), and daemon armies would all be running a Daemon Knight, again because of the “generous” ITC rule that threw RAW out of the window and allowed them to count as a daemon of a particular god and also take legacies (this also seemed to be the case). I knew I would struggle against void shields because of the faq, but I figured I’d have a good shot against everything else as long as there was terrain to get some saves from.

In hindsight I might drop two of the destroyers to pick up a lord with the veil of darkness. The game I tied in round 5 and then lost to in the final 8 was because my wraiths got stuck in combat for too long. The veil would have been a great get out of jail card.

Necrons are an army that’s full of tricks. The best advice for someone who wanted to copy my list (though I’m not sure why!) would just be to practice so that you can take best advantage of all of them.

 necrons.01

Jon Camacho’s Wraithless Crons

Reclamation Legion (Core)

Nemesor Zandrekh

10 Warriors

10 Warriors

6 Immortals

4 Tomb Blades: shieldvanes, nebuloscopes

Judicator Battalion

Triarch Stalker – Heat Ray

Triarch Praetorians: 6 Rods of Covenant

Triarch Praetorians: 6 Voidblade + Particle Caster

Living Tomb

Obelisk

Monolith

8 Deathmarks

8 Deathmarks

1. Well I obviously went with a decurion as it makes the necrons tough. This is where I wanted to be different though, no canoptek harvest or destroyers. I was tired of seeing the same ol’ necron list with sometimes double canoptek or destroyer, it’s boring and makes for tournament to be viewed as “If you don’t bring this list you can’t win”. So I wanted to use the most hated necron unit to prove them wrong the monolith and obelisk. The secret to this army though is the deathmarks. With their pseudo intercepter and ability to wound anything on a 2+ for one turn really helped me deal with wraithknights, or counter some heavy alpha strike armies like drop pods.

2. I expected the meta to be exactly what it was, SPAM lol. A lot of the top lists now are just armies being made with tons of duplicate units. Sometimes it’s not the players fault as some of these formations make you spam like gladius strike force , but elder can just abuse it like playing 3 warp hunters and 6 sqds of bikes, but I went into it knowing this would happen at the top tables, that’s just the mentality some tournaments bring. I was more worried about super friends style list (bikes, Thunderwolves, whitescars, raven wing mix). As that scout move would take away a turn of board maneuvering for me. Kind of hard to set traps and jump around the board when they are in your face already. I wade through really comfortable with any match up really as my list was more about take all comers and thus gave me the same weaknesses that I’m not strong in anything other than maneuvering but I’m not weak either.

3. Well I would have never thought I would see a list with 9 squads of warp spiders, and would have planned for something like that. I didn’t know a list like this was possible with the new forge world book and was caught off guard at the finals. Alex was a good player but made a boring list in my opinion, he was a great guy but to me spamming a unit like that does not make you a good player, Of course if you could spam the best unit in the game 9 times who wouldn’t lol, and our game came down to who whoever had last turn would win the game. Those spiders have effectively 3 movement phases and he grabbed and contested 6 objectives the last turn of the game due to time running out on turn 5 he knew I would not be able to retaliate. My army couldn’t catch his and he couldn’t hurt mine so it came down to whoever had last turn and he was smart and made me go first in our game. Again though spamming does not make you a good player, outplaying your opponent does, no matter what units you take but again the tournament has this unfortunate perceived notion that you have to spam or you can’t win.

4. Play to lose, and what I mean by that is play against an army that when you see it you feel like “man I can’t beat that”. You learn more losing than you do winning. I love this army because 1 it’s has many different avenues of attack, and can keep a ton of units in reserve, deep strike almost everything, or deploy everything. Zhandrek helps me mitigate being tabled turn 1 and reserve manipulation later. 2 is that it is a deceptively mobile army, praetorians jump move , monolith and obelisk deep strike and move fast while teleporting other units, and deathmarks and deep strike during the opponents turn, shoot, and then move and assault during my turn. It’s my style list, tactics and adjustability over just spamming the same units over and over.

got a list
Did you just win an ITC event? Is your list dominating everyone it crosses? Did you just recently do well with a unique list at a large event? I want to hear about it! Just send it to
frontlinegamingpeteypab@gmail.com 
Please do not send your army list in a format such as Army Builder, send them in an easy to read, typed format. Thanks!

 

Tags:

About Petey Pab

Aspiring 40k analyst, tournament reporter and Ultramarines enthusiast, Petey Pab only seeks to gather more knowledge about the game of 40k and share it with as many people as he can in order to unite both hobbyists and gamers. We are, after all, two sides of the same coin.

35 Responses to “40k List-Tech: Crons and Controversy?”

  1. Orwell April 5, 2016 10:16 am #

    What “funky” void shield ruling is Alex referring to?

    • bogalubov April 5, 2016 10:35 am #

      That Gauss, haywire, ordnance, grav, tank hunter or any other rule that affects how vehicle armor penetration rolls are made do not affect void shields.

    • Gonka Koff April 5, 2016 2:11 pm #

      Maybe the ruling that only one model out of a unit needed a toe inside 12″ from the generator to protect the whole unit? It’s ok by RAW but… well… not really RAI I guess…

  2. Nathan Fluger April 5, 2016 2:31 pm #

    The not so subtle digs at players who spam are kinda sad. We get it dude, you believe in a higher moral authority to wargaming. Congrats.

    • Orwell April 5, 2016 3:24 pm #

      Know what u mean, a bit holier than thou

    • Marandamir April 5, 2016 3:34 pm #

      Instead of getting peeved at his digs, instead consider what he is saying. Spamming overpowered or unbalanced units simply gives an advantage in the list build process, it doesn’t make you a good player. Instead, of using spam as a crutch for weak game play, work on improving your game play. It may appear negative but it’s a valid point.

      • Hunchkrot April 5, 2016 3:51 pm #

        But why not both? It seems like it’s a little silly to expect someone to not bring the best list they can craft to a competitive event. Beyond that yeah you should be the best player you can, but the two are not mutually exclusive.

        • Nathan Fluger April 6, 2016 11:20 am #

          Exactly this.

        • tag8833 April 7, 2016 2:00 pm #

          There is a lot more to being the best player you can than winning games.

          Jon did more to demonstrate that he is a better player than the field by running a non-conventional and non-spammy army.

          Is Alex Harrison a better player than Jon? He might be, but the results of LVO don’t do anything to prove it. Jon played on Hard Mode. Alex played on Easy Mode. Alex came out on top.

          I’ll bet most people had a better time playing Jon. His list is interesting and diverse. I had the pleasure of playing against him at Texas Wargamescon. It is a game that stuck with me because of how unique his army was, and how well he played tactically.

          When I play an army like Alex’s. Those games aren’t as fun win or lose, because there is less diversity, less tactics, less interesting stuff going on.

          This is fundamentally a game, and just because we are playing in an age where army comp rewards a lack of creative thought, and spam is generally king, it doesn’t mean we can’t honor someone who did things the right way, and take from him an inspiration to be better players ourselves.

      • abusepuppy April 5, 2016 5:25 pm #

        Good players use the best tools available to them.

        Whining that other people are relying on “crutches” just shows that you aren’t willing to take advantage of all of the facets of the game to win. That’s especially hilarious in the context of an article quoting Sun Tzu, who advocated ding anything within your power to avoid a fair fight.

        • Jon Camacho April 5, 2016 9:12 pm #

          I totally agree with you, yea best tools are good but then what if you win with something that’s spammy, general consensus would be ” yea he won but only because he used this unit 8-9 times the same as everyone with that army, just his dice were hotter or he got first/last turn in that mirror match”. Win a tourney with 9 sass of warp spiders no one bats an eye, win with something different and glory to be had and tactics won the day. That’s what I wanted and almost had it. If you go to these events for fun that player usually doesn’t have a spam list. But if a player is generally trying to win the tourny, and not because they want prize support then why try to win with spamming if all you will get is ridiculed for it. That’s why I don’t play any list I make like that. I know for some people they want to win just to win and that’s good too, I can’t hate you for wanting to win just to win but id rather win and have people wonder how did that list work? What did the player to tactically? Not he win cause he had more dice to throw.

          Lol now let the hate replies flow!

          • Karaghul April 5, 2016 11:20 pm
            #

            First of all, congrats on the great result!

            Secondly, and not trying to “bring the hate”, but don’t you think it’s a bit ironic to judge list-building from an imaginary moral high-ground while jabbing/mildly ridiculing a fellow player’s (that you actually met and played against!)’s list and gaming choices?

            Because I would say the latter (ie. condescendingly jabbing at other players’s choices, that were within the allowed rule-frame) is more malicious, and/or toxic/noxious to the community than bringing list A, B, or W to an event.

            As oftentimes, just a matter of opinion though. My 2 cents. 🙂

          • abusepuppy April 5, 2016 11:29 pm
            #

            *shrug* If you do well with a list, more power to you. I’d love to see you write something more in-depth than the little mini-questionarre you did for the above article, because it doesn’t really touch on a lot of the important stuff about the army. If you really want to showcase your list and what you did with it, I would strongly encourage you to do a write-up and explain how you handled various potentially-problematic matchups (such as killing a Superfriends unit or a Wraithknight) and why you included the units that you did in it.

            List-building isn’t as simple as people generally think- just taking the maximum number of a “best” unit in a faction rarely results in a list that will actually win major tournaments. Even the supposedly-spammy armies (such as the nine-Spider list) have a lot more going on than most people assume at first glance; the Warp Spiders aren’t even half the points in the list.

            Knowing WHY an unconventional list wins is just as important as a conventional one does, because they’re both working off the same principals. It’s not about “winning for winning’s sake” it’s about having a strong understanding of the game and its mechanics so that you can play it well, just as with a sport. Both conventional and “rogue” lists have their advantages; it’s more a matter of deciding what sacrifices you want to make as part of a list.

          • Jon Camacho April 6, 2016 7:27 am
            #

            Karagul, yes ur right I was a bit malicious to the last opponent ( feel a little bad lol) but with the warp spiders it was the one that took time to actually figure out how to break list building by spamming, with the intent of spamming arguably one of the best units in the game. Just irked me and that game the most boring game lol, we both knew whoever went last would win. We even had to start our game over when we found out the judge gave us the wrong mission and told us to start over, alex asked me could we keep our pre game rolls and knowing that would cost me the game I agreed 🙁 cause it was fair.

            Puppy I also acknowledge that yea I’m being haughty and condescending but but no one has said I’m wrong, just that I shouldn’t be on a moral high ground about it. It’s more of putting it out there in this article, to try something other than net list/spamming AND what are you trying to achieve when you go to a tourny is what I wanted to express is what I do when I also make a list, because your right list building is super important and I would answer anything about my list in another article anytime.

          • Nathan Fluger April 6, 2016 11:26 am
            #

            To be fair, Jon, I generally build lists the way you do. I tend to eschew the “obvious” best units and go for a list that is more unique. However, that’s a personal preference and not something I hold over my opponents.

            When I was doing really well in tournaments in 5th edition with my big Ork force with units that most net-heads said were garbage (including AbusePuppy) I enjoyed being counter-meta against all the razorback spam.

            So, I get your perspective, but I never claimed that people using spam lists were somehow inferior or worthy of derision. That’s, I guess, as Karghul stated, a toxic kind of attitude. Not going to argue with results or motive, just…presentation, I guess?

        • abusepuppy April 6, 2016 11:54 am #

          >but but no one has said I’m wrong,

          Well okay, let me be the one to say it: you’re wrong. You’re a good player, obviously, but I straight-up disagree with you on this matter. Taking multiples of a unit is not less creative, less intellectual, less fun, or less skilled than taking a mix of different units.

          You think that seeing multiples of stuff is boring- that’s fair. That is your personal preference and you’re welcome to it. But your preference is not everyone’s preference, or even necessarily the majority’s- it’s perfectly legitimate for someone to find _your_ list uninteresting with the criticism “it’s just a grab-bag of random units.”

          It’s one thing to say “I enjoy playing this sort of list because that’s what makes the game interesting for me.” It’s another entirely to paint your position are morally or intellectually superior, which comes off as not just arrogant but also condescending- you’re essentially using your opponents’ “cheap” list as a scapegoat for your own losses at that point, which is pretty classless.

          • Arrias117 April 6, 2016 1:10 pm
            #

            “Taking multiples of a unit is not less creative, less intellectual, less fun, or less skilled than taking a mix of different units.”

            Less Creative:
            If we’re honest here, outside of cases where chicanery has to be pulled to spam in excess of the usual limitations (which I would admittedly and begrudgingly call creative), there is no way we can call identically spammed units creative. It is almost the exact antithesis of what one would call creativity. I don’t believe anyone would would refer to an artist that repetitiously produces identical pieces as creative.

            Less Intellectual:
            This comes across as a duplication of either the previous or a subsequent arguments. While the idea of a duplicated argument in a discussion on duplication makes me giggle, unless there is another meaning you are going for here I’ll handle this one in their respective segments.

            Less Skilled:
            This is the one debatable point. One could argue that through a limited selection of units, the knowledge required for how to use each unit in the army is equally diminished. With fewer “working parts” as it were, the army can technically be considered and easier list to play. However, there is an argument to be made that working with a more limited tool set can require more skill to ultimately achieve your goals. The problem with the second argument however is, if a single tool can quite effectively perform many functions, the can begin to crumble.

            Less Fun:
            I’m covering this supposition last, as this is the one I have the most issue with. A “spam list” is decidedly a less fun list to play against. Fun in a game ultimately comes from counter play. You make a move, I make a counter move. Otherwise, the result is a game that plays itself and all player agency is removed. If you remove all player agency, what you generate instead is frustration. Units in 40k are (supposedly) designed with strengths and weaknesses. The more spammed a units are in a list, the more important their weaknesses become to counter play. The opponent is eventually left in one of two scenarios. Either they have the counter in requisite strength, or they do not, resulting in the rock paper scissors style match ups we are quite aware of.

          • Jon Camacho April 6, 2016 1:29 pm
            #

            Lol almost the exact response I expected from abusepuppy but I can relate, but my opinion was asked and I put it out there knowing this would be the response from the community. Some agree, some disagree, some hate the way I said it lol, but I can respect the comments as not getting to heated this time around as I’ve seen discussions on here get crazy. But may I ask some questions.

            1. what list did you take to LVO? If not LVO last big tourny? What type?
            2. Why did you go? To have fun get solid rounds of games? To win? Big prize support?
            3.When you lost did you feel outplayed or out listed?

          • Petey Pab
            Pablo Martinez April 6, 2016 1:30 pm
            #

            “Of course if you could spam the best unit in the game 9 times who wouldn’t”

            Camacho fully understands that Alex Harrison is a good player using just the best tools he can to get the job done. Where does he take the moral high ground actually? He doesn’t, he just states his opinion and calls Harrison’s list boring (which I agree with) and says that spamming doesn’t make you a good player (which is very true). He even leads that entire controversial sentence with “Alex is a good player”. Puppy I know you have a different opinion, and that’s cool but Jon is just stating his opinion and isn’t trying to start an “anti-spam” revolution.

            I feel like the average tournament player sees unique lists as a competitive faux pas and must at least bring unit X or Y to compete, and Camacho’s list and viewpoint represent a refreshing change for players who take a more casual, or different approach to competitive list building.

            @Arrias117, thanks for saying everything else I wanted to say in a much more articulate mature way!

          • abusepuppy April 6, 2016 6:30 pm
            #

            >Less Creative

            How is taking different units more creative? In both cases, the player has simply made the decision to take a unit- no creativity is being exercised on their part at all. The supposedly-creative part of a “diverse” list is literally just taking items off a pre-conceived list, which is the antithesis of creativity.

            >One could argue that through a limited selection of units, the knowledge required for how to use each unit in the army is equally diminished. With fewer “working parts” as it were, the army can technically be considered and easier list to play.

            Both duplicative and unique lists face essentially the same sorts of of decisions during gameplay- ones of positioning and resource management. Although the _specific_ resources they have available may differ, in the more general sense they are actually quite similar- and, as you note, the _types_ of decisions that a duplicative list are actually more complex than that of a unique list.

            >Either they have the counter in requisite strength, or they do not,

            In what way is this applicable to duplicative lists and not unique ones? If a player doesn’t have a counter to Jon’s list, they will lose just the same as to Warp Spiders or anything else. You talk about “removing player agency” and whatnot, but don’t in any way connect that to how this supposedly occurs.

          • abusepuppy April 6, 2016 6:46 pm
            #

            >1. what list did you take to LVO? If not LVO last big tourny? What type?

            I took an Eldar/White Scars/Inquisition army. Coteaz and Land Speeder Storms were probably the most “unique” inclusions, otherwise it’s likely what you would expect from the factions included.

            >2. Why did you go? To have fun get solid rounds of games? To win? Big prize support?

            Well, here’s where I take issue- you’re portraying these things as not only mutually exclusive but actually opposed to each other. Sure, I was hoping to win the event- I wasn’t _expecting_ to, because there’s a lot of really good players there with excellent lists, but I felt like I at least had some chance. Obviously I wanted to play good games- who the hell WANTS to play bad games? One of the best things like tournaments such as LVO is getting to play people you’ve never played before. Prize support? LVO barely even _has_ any prize support- expecting to somehow recoup the money spent on airfare, hotels, food, etc, is borderline absurd.

            So you ask why I go and the answer is pretty simple- because I like playing competitive 40K. I presume the answer for you is the same, otherwise you would’ve stayed home and played with your friends and saved yourself half a thousand bucks or more.

            >3.When you lost did you feel outplayed or out listed?

            None of the games I played were against lists that were particularly unexpected- which I think is pretty common for anyone on the tournament circut. There’s only so many ways that you can combine the moving parts, when it comes down to it. That’s not to say that the players I played against weren’t good- one of my games I admit I won largely on luck, and I would argue that my loss was in large part the same, but luck doesn’t even really become an issue unless both players are good enough that they force it to come to that point.

            But to answer your question in a more direct fashion: at no point did I come against a matchup where I felt that I was unable to win from the start of the game due to my opponent’s list. I think if you encounter that sort of thing, it’s almost always your own fault- an experienced player should know the lists that exist and do their research and build an army that can handle them. It is entirely possible to make a TAC list even these days and that’s really the only sort of army I ever bring- I don’t like bringing deathstars and other lopsided lists, though I admit that is more a personal preference than anything.

    • Sex Panther April 5, 2016 7:07 pm #

      Maybe he is right tho. Just remember he made Top 8 at the biggest 40k event ever, and you didn’t.

      • abusepuppy April 5, 2016 11:29 pm #

        Almost-but-not-quite winning a tournament doesn’t give you moral authority to insult anyone you’ve ever disagreed with.

      • Nathan Fluger April 6, 2016 11:30 am #

        I have nothing but respect for anyone who places highly in big events. Which is a courtesy I wish he had shown to his opponent.

    • Petey Pab
      Pablo Martinez April 6, 2016 1:14 pm #

      I mean yeah there was salt in his words, and it certainly didn’t help that he lost to a spammy list in the finals however his sentiment is not his alone. There are many casual and semi-casual players out there that want to win a tournament in their own unique way (not only in 40k either). I put his list out there, and his viewpoint in part to also create dialogue about the subject. We want players to see that you can make the top 8 and have a chance at winning major events with whatever list you decide. If we look at a tournament community holistically you will see that everyone really wants the same thing (to get their money’s worth of fun), regardless of how they get there.

      I understand “fun” is subjective but in general I feel like everyone can have fun in their own away and not at the expense of others if we just all get along.

      Now having said all that I understand Camacho’s views are controversial and dividing however he still did show up for the event, played Harrison in a gentlemanly fashion, and from my understanding didn’t do anything to impede the fun of others. So, it’s ok for him to have the “anti-spam” mentality as long as it doesn’t come out in real life games.

      • Jon Camacho April 6, 2016 3:03 pm #

        Yea I should been clearer I had tons of fun with all my opponents, all played hard and played good, good times all around. And even though I did feel at times during my games slighted by a list I did play to an extent “gentalmenly” throughout the event lol. And arias177 and Pablo exactly what I wanted to say but you wrote it out waaayy better!! Thanks for the comments guys! Just the discussion and viewpoints I wanted to bring out.

  3. Nathen April 5, 2016 4:43 pm #

    Agreed, when most people go to a tournament it’s to either win or have a bunch of games for “organized” fun. Those who chose to try to win, why do they want to win? Big prize, notoriety, look at me I won type bragging? Make a spammy list and boom you win. But unless you really wanted that big prize you really don’t win anything else. Oh look you won by taking 9 sqds of warp spiders, if you wanted notoriety you won’t get it that way, you can’t say I was a good player cause you used the best units over and over. But make a list and use stuff you don’t normally use and then win and people will recognize you may play pretty good and have sound tactics. Now if all you want to do is win then go ahead and spam but all your really getting out of that is some prize support. Whatever you paid to go to that tourny and stay at hotels and food you probably could have just bought what you wanted to win. I would challenge anyone to win with a list that does not have more than 2 units duplicated.

    • abusepuppy April 5, 2016 11:32 pm #

      > Make a spammy list and boom you win.

      This isn’t even slightly true. Dozens, even HUNDREDS of people brought what you would call “spammy” lists and didn’t win the tournament, but it isn’t just because one person got luckier than all of them- if that were true, we wouldn’t continuously see the same players’ names at the top of many tournament rosters.

      >I would challenge anyone to win with a list that does not have more than 2 units duplicated.

      That’s just an arbitrary restriction; you could make the same challenge to play with one hand tied behind their back, or with a blindfold on, or while suffering from a concussion. Playing with a meaningless restriction doesn’t make you any better as a player, it just means you found a way to play around your handcap.

      • tag8833 April 7, 2016 2:17 pm #

        Out of curiosity abusedpuppy. If you were to play in a game between Jon’s list and Alex’s list, and you got to pick which one you used, which one would you pick, and why?

        Your argument is that because one or more spammy lists underperformed, player skill trumps list building, army comp, and rules completely. I think we both know that is bogus. If Jon and Alex switched list in that matchup how would you expect that game to go? If I took one of the other 9 warp spiders lists that didn’t make the finals, and I gave it to Jon, and you took one of the other eclectic Necron lists (if there were any) that didn’t make the finals, and gave it to Alex, how would that go?

        Are you really prepared to argue that Alex had as hard of a time accomplishing what he did as Jon did?

        • abusepuppy April 7, 2016 4:09 pm #

          >Your argument is that because one or more spammy lists underperformed, player skill trumps list building, army comp, and rules completely

          That isn’t my argument at all. Nathen claimed that bringing a spammy list was equivalent to being guaranteed a win, which isn’t true- player skill, list strength, the matchup, the mission, the dice, and many other factors all go into who wins a battle.

          But if I had to pick a list from between the two? Alex’s, easily. It’s much closer to something that I would design myself and I think it’s just a better list in general.

          >Are you really prepared to argue that Alex had as hard of a time accomplishing what he did as Jon did?

          Insomuch as they both were provided with the same tools, faced the same field, played the same missions, etc? Yeah, sure, I’ll argue that any day of the week.

          The limitations Jon put on himself are entirely his own creation. They have nothing to do with the rules of the game or of the tournament. And that’s fine- he can play the game however he wants to, because it’s his hobby as much as mine or anyone else’s. But I’m not going to respect him more because he’s placed artificial boundaries on himself and certainly not if he then takes those boundaries to be indicative of some sort of moral high ground in list-building. From a competitive perspective, artificially limiting oneself doesn’t prove that you’re “more skilled” than your opponents, it just shows that you aren’t willing or able to play the game to its full extent.

          Don’t get me wrong- I’m interested in his list and what he did with it, because he _did_ do pretty well. There’s lessons to be taken from that for sure. But I don’t think that moralizing about “spam” lists is one of them and I don’t really think he proved anything any more than the other seven players that made it to the final day.

  4. Requizen
    Requizen April 5, 2016 6:09 pm #

    What matchups did Jon Comacho run against? I would be interested in seeing how he approaches matchups with his funky list. I feel like a well played Wraithknight/Bike list would just beat it outright, but maybe he has a particular way of approaching it. I find that even with Deathmarks wounding on 2+, you can’t really kill the WK but perhaps ignoring it and tabling the rest of his army is the trick.

    Deathmarks and Praets are quite good. Decurion MSU is really underrated imo, you have a lot of extremely durable, mostly mobile units (Tomb Blades, Destroyers, Praets, Deathmarks, maybe Wraiths or Night Scythes).

    The issue is, there’s not a lot of support for these tools. Deep Striking everything? No scatter reduction available, and all the Deep Striking shooting really wants to be 12″ away. There’s no real way to deal with Invis or Deathstars other than just trying to ignore everything, which isn’t always an option.

    Adepticon was particularly brutal towards Necrons – we have trouble with 1 LoW, 2 is freaking impossible imo – and also normally dislike having to go CAD over Decurion, which the ACon missions almost straight up required.

    Obviously people are doing well with Necrons, but I’m still having some issues bringing them to high amounts of victories at competitions. Especially when our meta is lousy with WK/Bike/Spider Eldar and Stormsurge/RipWing Tau.

  5. Jon Camacho April 5, 2016 6:49 pm #

    I played against
    1. Eldar/corsair lots of hornets, wraithknight, Lynx (win)
    2. Gladius strike force with knight Acheron (loss)
    3. Tau optimized stealth cadre/ riptide wing lots of troop suites (win)
    4. Eldar 3 of those barrage D weapon wave serpents, knight, lots of bikes (win)
    5. 5 imperial Knights (win)
    6. Gladius strike force with space wolf ally (win)
    7. Finals. Eldar 9 units of warp spiders, scathatch knight, jetbikes (loss)

    Thanks for the comments!

    • Requizen
      Requizen April 5, 2016 7:20 pm #

      Do you have a writeup of any of those games anywhere? One of my main testing opponents plays Wraithknight + Lots of Bikes (and other various stuff) and I’d be interested in seeing your battle plan against them.

      Do you find the Obelisk to be a detriment or a boon most games? With the amount of D and Melta out there, it feels a bit hard to keep alive, and its damage output doesn’t quite match most other 300 point LoWs.

      Also, what did you do against 5 Knights? I just get tabled. Did you just DS around a lot and try to split their fire while hiding and playing mission?

  6. Jon Camacho April 5, 2016 8:48 pm #

    I don’t currently but send me a message on Facebook and we can list bash if you want for sure!
    Just search Jonathan Camacho, El Paso Texas, send me a PM

    • Alex r April 5, 2016 11:54 pm #

      Im not suprised your list lost to the strike force with knight. God impressed how he got all that in though

Leave a Reply