"History is written by the victors!"
So to explore this in greater detail I want to ask you:
"what the community consensus was? Do you guys tend to go more towards tailoring to a particular opponent? Or do you come up with a more well rounded list and then change it when you think it needs changing or after its proven that it's weaknesses need to be changed."
A common misconception is that list tailoring is about gaining some unfair advantage. It is not. It is a poker game where you and your opponent are evolving and trying out different strategies. I would be pretty bored facing opponents who fielded that same list against me time after time, the occasional minor variant. I want to have to adapt to surprises and try new things.
And when people have to field all-comers lists, variety goes down the toilet.
But in the general case, it has always been part if the game to me. I am an old first edition player now returned and it was a great surprise to me to find some people now regard this as tantamount to cheating. Might as well play chess and always use the same dozen opening moves. There is no difference to me. Choosing a good army and second-guessing your opponent is a part of the game and lots of fun.