There is some good stuff here, but some very misinformed comments.
Building is a plus and a minus. With current costs, from a financial standpoint building does not make sense for your average person at this time Even for those who may get discounted pricing for various reasons, even pricing direct from the factory to their factory armorers, building a base rifle is still not a big savings over current pricing. Now if you want the satisfaction of doing it yourself despite costs, go for it. Do your research first. Yes this rifle is one of the easiest platforms to assemble, but those who say it is as simple as lego's are somewhat correct but generally misinformed.
Since the AR/M4 shares commonality of parts it simplifies the process. If you use quality parts with good build technique then most often then not, you are good to go. Lesser quality parts can be problematic which are often the result of a "tolerance stacking" issue. If you do have an issue, trouble shooting is more difficult for those who are new to the system. I might suggest m4carbine.net to do research if you build. Read, read and read more. Then if you have questions ask. The members over there are helpful to those who have already attempted to help themselves by doing their own reading and research. They are less forgiving to those who want everything spelled out in their own thread. Most answers can be found by searching. You can try ar15.com but too much BS there.
I personally build all of my own rifles because I do a lot of gun work professionally and I am heavily experienced on this particular platform. I get the right pricing, have all the tools and have been doing it for a long time. I pick and choose what parts I want from the start, so there is no need for a base rifle and then upgrading it. Quite frankly I build a better rifle than I can buy. However for most individuals a quality base rifle and upgrading is more often the way to go. Or the next step as mentioned is buying the complete upper and putting together the lower.
Torque values are important but not a huge issue for those who work around torquing things all the time. The barrel torque does matter for accuracy. Over tighten a barrel nut and accuracy can diminish and I am not talking about over torque as in beyond the 80ftlbs, I am talking about a torque spec that still falls within milspec values but can diminish barrel accuracy. There is a good range of torque value that we find is more conducive to accuracy. Over torque a muzzle device and you might again screw up accuracy by "trumpeting" your muzzle end. There are quite a few things that most experienced DIYers or even most factory trained armorers do not understand. Small things individually can be, well small, but stack them up together and they can be a big deal. Good or bad.
The .223 / 5.56 bullet efficacy quoted in this thread is not exactly correct or more so does not tell the entire story. The fragmentation topic discussed here and linked in this thread is in regards to statistics on FMJ rounds and at which velocity fragmentation occurs. These numbers vary greatly when it comes to soft point or various rounds that are built to induce expansion perhaps via hydraulics or impact deformation. We should understand that fragmentation and penetration are 2 very different topics. The #1 consideration on efficacy of a projectile is penetration first and foremost above any other considerations. If the round and the fragments do not have the ability to reach or pass through vital blood bearing vessels then it is nowhere near as effective. Fragmentation is only beneficial if penetration is correct. Of course if you can get both, better yet.
Think of it this way. If you get shot with a .308 in a soft blood bearing organ, not a CNS disruption and it goes through and through and the same with a .223/5.56 that goes through and through, the size of the hole difference is not so great. Anyone who want to start quoting permanent vs. non permanent wound cavity, hydrostatic, kinetic energy, save it. In other words, just because a .223/5.56 does not fragment but still penetrates correctly, that is what we want. Expansion and fragmentation is only a bonus which was a plus for that round, but not a necessity. We have been proving that well for the last decade plus.
Is it the best in long range engagements? Not by any stretch. Is it the best at short range? No, but it is a very good all around caliber out of a weapon platform that is reliable, shoots with ease and is accurate at long range. Anyone who questions effective range, I was shooting 18x30 steel at 920 yards pretty easy. What was the ballistic efficacy of the round at that distance? Not sure, but I can say 100% that I wouldn't want to get hit with it and that it would probably ruin your day, your week, the month, year or the rest of your life.