Today I wanted to talk about my priorities while I am playing a game to achieve victory! I wanted to write about this because I feel like too often people wrack their brains with list changes when it is very possible that the problem isn’t the list but what you are trying to achieve with it. In these cases this is counterproductive because in the event of a complete list redesign all prior practice is nullified. Hopefully this helps people slow down, think about their moves in a different way and get more effective practice with a list before a complete redesign.
So here it is: Survival, Mission Objectives, Destruction. Article over……just kidding. That is my priority system when I am making a move at its basic core. There are many boring details, number crunching, flow charts (srsly warhams is serious bidness!), blah blah blah that I use in my head that can change these priorities in any given situation but when I am practicing for a non-specific format or just playing a book mission these are the priorities that I use with my play style and type of armies that I usually play. I can go into those situation changers in further details if requested but for now I’ll stick to my basics.
My first priority when playing is always first and foremost survival. Before I make a move I think if there is anything I can do to increase their chances of living or if their death will ensure the survival of a much more valuable unit to the current situation. This is an important distinction to make because units dying to ensure the survival (or maximum destruction of your opponent!!!) of the rest of an army is a well-established tactic. People will often bait you into first blood, getting a super easy kill point or just watching something shiny go kersplat!! Do not fall for these tricks by asking yourself what kind of trouble you are putting yourself in to do this. Perfect case and point is my Tyranids; I am always making free termagant units hoping people charge them so the swarmlord on the other side of the wall can feast, or make them move close enough to shoot so gargoyles can pounce. When you put destruction before survival in your priorities I lost a free termagant unit while you lost much more.
Second priority is Mission Objectives; take a minute to think to yourself; is making this move putting me closer to achieving the mission objective at the end of the game. This is especially tricky in kill point missions because people often confuse killing a unit, any unit, at any cost as a move closer to achieving your objective. This is not always the case if you are giving up several kill points to annihilate one for example. Or the case with objectives or the relic; hopping on that objective too early (or of course too late) may not be the best solution come turn 5 when you are in a good position to use that unit and still get back on that objective in the end.
You will notice a trend with these first two priorities in that they are long-term solutions while my third priority (destruction) is a short-term solution. What I mean by this is that the first two priorities help you through the whole game right to the end while the third only helps you in the here and now.
Third priority is destruction and at its core is a short-term solution. When playing you really only want to commit to this when you can change destruction from a short-term solution to a long-term solution. Ask yourself before you try to kill something; am I going to live if I do this? Is killing this unit helping me long-term win the game? Can I commit enough to ensure that beyond a shadow of a doubt (or dice!) that my target will either die or be crippled to the point that I have achieved my objective? Not doing enough damage to a unit, or in the case of melee armies doing too much damage can often be game breaking so get your priorities straight!
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment