Sorry, didn't mean to come off so hostile. I feel like the logical conclusion of asking people for the 'best' army is the mathematically optimized unit choices and the list that wins the most games. These are the only purely quantitative measures we have. Searching out what's the most effective combination of battle suit weapons is inherently a power gaming question! (Mind you I don't use that term as a perjorative. I sometimes play a min/maxed army list myself. I just don't like it when people are steered in that direction as the only way to play.)
To me the textbook is the tacticas and accumulated wisdom provided by more experienced members. You can read those, get the Codex, come up with some lists based on what you've learned, and post them for C&C and discussion. My fear is that posting just stickied lists is like looking at the answers without solving the problems. And having a 'recommended' list may discourage new players from posting as much and stifle discussion.
It just sounds to me like what would really fill the role you're talking about is more/better tacticas for players new to an army. A collaborative tactica can also preserve some of the discussion between experienced players regarding, for example, the merits of banshees vs scorpions. Whereas a list would only reflect who came out on top at the end of that discussion. |