Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Unfortunately one game a week is the best I can manage, and that's against a random opponent with a random army (if I get the game at all)

"Practice" and "training" are not things that can happen for me, so I tend not to worry about winning or losing. Its only getting crushed that I dislike (or crushing my opponent). The only reason This game got to me was that for once I was rolling the hottest I ever have and doing what I thought were sensible moves and it didn't make the blind bit of difference and there was nothing within the game I could have changed or done differently to improve the result. (with this particular opponent who is known for not making mistakes and being good)

 aprilmanha wrote:
Unfortunately one game a week is the best I can manage, and that's against a random opponent with a random army (if I get the game at all)

"Practice" and "training" are not things that can happen for me, so I tend not to worry about winning or losing. Its only getting crushed that I dislike (or crushing my opponent). The only reason This game got to me was that for once I was rolling the hottest I ever have and doing what I thought were sensible moves and it didn't make the blind bit of difference and there was nothing within the game I could have changed or done differently to improve the result. (with this particular opponent who is known for not making mistakes and being good)

So the opponent is really good and you dont hsve time to get good. Not the gsme's fault. Ask dudeman to tone it down or dont play him.

Ok I get the point... game is perfect, and I need to L2P

 aprilmanha wrote:
Ok I get the point... game is perfect, and I need to L2P

That's... Not what he said. Don't be snarky.

But yes, the game is very, very good. If you want to get better, you need to play more. That's not rocket surgery. Experience and knowledge is key. There is a huge 'burden of knowledge' requirement to be good at this game. Some people like it, some don't. Neither is wrong. But it's just the whole sun tzu thing - the key is to know what your stuff can do, and to also know what your opponents can do. The 'great' players do this, pub players like you or me are happy to roll dice.

Now your opponent seems good. And you don't have the time to play more than once a week (and I'm in the same boat). Neither is a criticism. Coupled with the fact that you don't know who or what you'll be facing each week. Considering this, you can either put that huge amount of work mentioned in my first paragraph to get good yourself. But that's probably impractical. Again, not a criticism. A lot of us don't have the time to devote to warmachine-fu and become grandmasters. Life, and all the stuff in it is probably more important. So then, if you can't devote your life to the game, and just want to throw down what you have and play an honest game or even a 'kick-about', is is possible you can talk to your opponents, maybe organise things in advance (do ye have a Facebook group or something, or can you text them ahead of time maybe) where you can say what it is you are looking for, and if folks are happy to oblige? Failing that, if they're jerks, don't play them.

Hope thst helps april.

Actually when I read WMHistorian's response i thought the same thing as Aprilmanha. If your interpretation is correct then he probably should have phrase his thoughts a little differently.

Otherwise I'm going with the interpretation of "If you can't invest the time to get better then don't bother to play."

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Actually when I read WMHistorian's response i thought the same thing as Aprilmanha. If your interpretation is correct then he probably should have phrase his thoughts a little differently.

Otherwise I'm going with the interpretation of "If you can't invest the time to get better then don't bother to play."

Well, that's one person's viewpoint. The strength of Warmachine and Hordes is that Ubber Competitive Types can play nothing but Steamroller, use clocks on the table, have all the FAQ's Errata, and Infernal Rulings memorized/on an App, or whatever. They bring calculators to the table to show the math that says they can indeed, walk in an arc around your model avoiding free strikes and still be able to engage whatever. They have memorized every card in the game. And they have a lot of custom little widgets, laser pointers, and perfectly balanced casino dice. This satisfies whatever drove them to be that way in the first place.

The game is also great for those that just want to throw some dice around and play with a beer (or whatever beverage) in one hand and a tape measure in the other. These are the people that are more interested in the social aspects of the game. Win or lose, this satisfies whatever emotional craving they had to play in the first place.

Two extremes of the player base in Warmachine and Hordes. When someone like the OP asks a question about "How do I get better?" or "getting my butt kicked, what am I doing wrong?"- then that person is going to get different answers depending on which camp the reply comes from. Looking back over this thread, you can see it perfectly. The replies have basically been "don't worry about it" all the ways to "L2P, Noob!".

It's up to the OP to read and interpret the answers to his/her question, and decide for him/herself what advice to follow. It would make me sad if the OP got turned off and quits the game simply because he/she was told "L2P, Noob!" There has been some excellent advice and thoughtful responses in this thread. Keep playing!

Im quite a casual player who likes to win (you're playing a game where someone wins and someone loses, I'd rather win than lose so should most people who play). But I believe that since I've started playing steamrollers the game has become so much better. It really helps against casters who are much better than headhunting than your caster is.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Actually when I read WMHistorian's response i thought the same thing as Aprilmanha. If your interpretation is correct then he probably should have phrase his thoughts a little differently.

Otherwise I'm going with the interpretation of "If you can't invest the time to get better then don't bother to play."

Your reading comprehension sucks. I said to find other opponents or ask the guy to tone it down. How you got "just quit" out of that is beyond me.

It's obvious that the OP also felt that that was what you meant. He was then told he was being snarky. I was simply saying that I could see his POV. If you have a problem with my and his interpretations of your writing then write more clearly.

MWHistorian, I know you love WMH but you are being a little to over defensive over this.

This thread is about a difficult matchup which I was not prepared for a killer combo move that took me from a near flawless victory to a total defeat in a single move that I could not have defended against once it was in motion.

I ask for advice, and many nice people came forward as said that its a bad matchup and nothing can be done, and that it happens. Not tactically helpful in the game, but good to hear and well appreciated, even if I am disappointed that such hard counters are as common in WMH as any other wargame.

Your response on the other hand as you mentioned, was to either not play with this opponent or ask them to go easy.
If I asked you to only take weak units and make bad choices for a game, would you want to play? If I asked you to not play me any more because I found you unfun to play with would not that sound even a little rude?

Either way, your reception came over as, and boils down to "game is perfect, and I need to L2P" because I don't know anyone who would go easy (or find such a game satisfying).

As for helpful advice, Am I right in thinking that a Jack needs a 3" runup for a Trample (like a charge move) or can it be done while in BTB? CAuse I'm thinking I might have gotten away with a Trample to knockdown the 2 Skinwolves who were on my caster as long as my jack didn't die to freestrikes.

 aprilmanha wrote:
even if I am disappointed that such hard counters are as common in WMH as any other wargame.

There are definitely a bunch of counters in this game, that's part of the design more or less, and the reason for playing with two lists (or more) in tournaments. Sadly this means that if you've thought up a cool list at home and bring it down to a pickup game at the club you run the risk of facing such a bad matchup. In my club we generally tend to either bring two lists to casual games just like we do to tournaments, or we choose a list after we know who we're playing against, so both can take something that can deal with the other guy's faction.

 aprilmanha wrote:
As for helpful advice, Am I right in thinking that a Jack needs a 3" runup for a Trample (like a charge move) or can it be done while in BTB? CAuse I'm thinking I might have gotten away with a Trample to knockdown the 2 Skinwolves who were on my caster as long as my jack didn't die to freestrikes.

No, unlike charges and slams there is no minimum distance needed for tramples. You can only trample over small bases however, so it would not have been an option to trample over the Skinwalkers. Also note that models that you trample over do not get to make free strikes against the trampling model.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
It's obvious that the OP also felt that that was what you meant. He was then told he was being snarky. I was simply saying that I could see his POV. If you have a problem with my and his interpretations of your writing then write more clearly.

With respect to her, op took 'ask him to tone it down or don't play him' and answered, misrepresenting this as 'game is perfect, l2p'. Whether thst was the intent or not, it's verging on being a dishonest charicature of a posters response, and there is a bit of a nasty tone in it(although to be fair, the Internet doesn't carry tone very well). In other words - that's not what he said. Hence snarky. Mwh's advice was good. Don't mistake sharp elbows for bad advice.

 MWHistorian wrote:

So the opponent is really good and you dont hsve time to get good. Not the gsme's fault. Ask dudeman to tone it down or dont play him.

 aprilmanha wrote:
Ok I get the point... game is perfect, and I need to L2P

 aprilmanha wrote:

Your response on the other hand as you mentioned, was to either not play with this opponent or ask them to go easy.

He's not wrong though. Sharp elbows aside, it is good, honest and practical advice. All it takes is a conversation. No hairs split. No egos hurt.

 aprilmanha wrote:

If I asked you to only take weak units and make bad choices for a game, would you want to play? If I asked you to not play me any more because I found you unfun to play with would not that sound even a little rude?

To be fair, if thst was me you were talking to and you explain you're new, don't play that much, don't know the game all that well. or are not that experienced at the game and you don't want to go up against a cutthroat list with the ruthlessometer turned up to 11, then, no I wouldn't be offended. I'd happily swap out some stuff- say, a caster and units I'd normally not use. I don't see it as 'bad' choices in the slightest. Opponents are opponents, everyone plays at a different level. and frankly, it's our duty to each other thst both try to have an enjoyable game. Frankly, it's nice to play different opponents with different attitudes and at different levels.

And it's not rude in the slightest to say 'no, I'd rather not play you'. If you said you'd rather not play me because of ideological differences or whatever, well, I'm hardly gonna go off and sulk or cry. I'm a big boy, and frankly we all have different 'wants' from our games. And for what it's worth, there's people I refuse to play against as well, and I make no bones about it. The consequence is that We just game in different circles. Doesn't mean you can't be mates outside, or whatever, you're just not compatible for playing games. Sounds like dealing with people in real life.

Honestly, I agree with Deadnight here. Asking someone to go easy on you doesn't mean asking them to make poor decisions on the table. It might mean asking them if they mind walking you through their decisions each turn, or to try out a caster they don't usually play (my Sorscha1 or Old Witch games, for instance, are a lot weaker than my Butcher2 and Sorscha2 play, although I'd hardly call myself competitive these days). They might even appreciate the opportunity to try out something weird that they don't want to pull out in a serious match yet.

IMO, when you meet someone like that I'd ask them what they think you could've done better. If they are experienced they could probably narrow it down to your warcaster placement, unit choice, etc.

There is nothing wrong with letting someone know you are still learning. A cool person will take that as a chance to try some new units or tactics that might balance things out a bit. When I play a new person I also let them take back minor things like activating order or something like that that isn't hard to change. I will also probably give them some tips on what to watch out for from my models/army.