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.

Close talkers.

You know the people that have to get right into your face and breath their dorito laced coffee breath at you when they speak, while simultaneuosly showering you with spittle, as they rave about this or that.


GG

edit..I also forgot to mention that these same people seem to have an innate radar lock, whereby they are able maintain this closeness even as you politely try to back away out of the breath/spray zone.

generalgrog wrote:Close talkers.

You know the people that have to get right into your face and breath their dorito laced coffee breath at you when the speak, while simultaneuosly showering you with spittle as they rave about this or that.


GG

I tend to shove these people back out of my personal space, so I can't say I feel your pain on that one

My is seeing some with a different army every time a new Codex comes out... They buy the models and make the army, but never paint them...( i call them flavor of the month people)...

Added to the list: People who make single posts about regional issues in threads that have been derailed.

When me (a tau player) is going against another player who is not playing eldar, and some kid comes along and starts talking about how great his eldar army is and how it could totally beat both of our armies and that wairthlords are totally awesome.
Also when I am playing a game and kid tries to tell me and my opponent about his new gaming system that he made using green army men and how it is so much better than 40k and we need to play it and pay him money for it. While we are playing.
Now I have worked as a camp counselor before and know in general most kids mean well, but I really wanted to say go away, I am playing a game and I do not care about how great your eldar army is and I do not want to play your new game. Fortunately the lack of response made the kids realize we did not care and left us be.

When you start a "Why do you like X over Y" Thread and someone comes in telling you that Y is better.

Go start a thread about why Y is better, don't threadcrap this one!

Vulcan wrote:When you start a "Why do you like X over Y" Thread and someone comes in telling you that Y is better.

Go start a thread about why Y is better, don't threadcrap this one!

You mean how your "Why do you like WHFB over 40K" Thread has a few posters that say "40K is more balanced, and thus fun, although I would enjoy fantasy more if it were stable" instead of just saying "Fantasy rules, woo"?

Here you go:




EDIT: Piper, I bet his "Great new game system" was just 40K rules with army men instead of minis

people who quote large amounts to text to say Qft or yes

metallifan wrote:

Vulcan wrote:When you start a "Why do you like X over Y" Thread and someone comes in telling you that Y is better.

Go start a thread about why Y is better, don't threadcrap this one!

You mean how your "Why do you like WHFB over 40K" Thread has a few posters that say "40K is more balanced, and thus fun, although I would enjoy fantasy more if it were stable" instead of just saying "Fantasy rules, woo"?

Here you go:




EDIT: Piper, I bet his "Great new game system" was just 40K rules with army men instead of minis

Thats not quite what hes trying to say. The example you gave is someones opinion.. exactly like the OP asks... he is however refering to when you ask somes opinion then instead of giving their opinion they flat out say that 40k or Fantasy is better and will argue as to why instead of giving their own opinion. Different people will like different game systems and thats just natural behavior. But trying to say that one is flat out better than the other... well that wasnt the question... if the thread was "Is 40k or WHFB better?" than that would be an ok answer... but not in an opinionated thread...

Or coarse I might be way off but I believe this is what hes trying to say.

Buttlerthepug wrote:

metallifan wrote:

Vulcan wrote:When you start a "Why do you like X over Y" Thread and someone comes in telling you that Y is better.

Go start a thread about why Y is better, don't threadcrap this one!

You mean how your "Why do you like WHFB over 40K" Thread has a few posters that say "40K is more balanced, and thus fun, although I would enjoy fantasy more if it were stable" instead of just saying "Fantasy rules, woo"?

Here you go:




EDIT: Piper, I bet his "Great new game system" was just 40K rules with army men instead of minis

Thats not quite what hes trying to say. The example you gave is someones opinion.. exactly like the OP asks... he is however refering to when you ask somes opinion then instead of giving their opinion they flat out say that 40k or Fantasy is better and will argue as to why instead of giving their own opinion. Different people will like different game systems and thats just natural behavior. But trying to say that one is flat out better than the other... well that wasnt the question... if the thread was "Is 40k or WHFB better?" than that would be an ok answer... but not in an opinionated thread...

Or coarse I might be way off but I believe this is what hes trying to say.

QTF


(Sorry. Couldn't help myself )

Pretty much my point. If you want to talk about how 40K is better than fantasy, there is a separate thread for that. After all, I didn't go pointing out the shortcomings I find in 40K in the 'Why do you like 40K better than WFB' thread, so why do you feel it necessary to do it when the question is reversed?

I'm pretty evenly split between "pro-painters" and thread necromancers.

Players who don't know their own codex (or do, but prefer to make up their own rules)

And when questioned refuse to show you the codex to confirm the rule. I had a friend I refuse to play now because of that. When I first started to play and he lied about how FNP really worked and said it was a special rule in his codex rather than the rulebook

HellsGuardian316 wrote:Players who don't know their own codex (or do, but prefer to make up their own rules)

And when questioned refuse to show you the codex to confirm the rule. I had a friend I refuse to play now because of that. When I first started to play and he lied about how FNP really worked and said it was a special rule in his codex rather than the rulebook

That's like my buddy trying to say his Nids can Fleet, Run, then Assault all in the same turn. I don't let him use his Nids in large battles anymore. Easier to deter him from cheating when it's small-scale. Now he plays Marines, which is good because he has to ask me for clarification on a lot of their stuff, so he -can't- cheat with them.

I had forgot to mention this before, but this is definitely something that bothers me even though it isnt a big deal...

When people who are refering to fantasy orCs write OrKs... I know its not a big deal but its not that hard to change the K to a C and be right in proppa... especially since theres been a few occasions where Ive seen people do it and then in another thread they get down on people for bad grammer/spellings...

Again I know its not major but every time I see it, I kringe and want to punch the person in the suck hole (Does that mean I need anger managment?).

I hate TFG (who always seems to play Eldar) always bragging about how his Banshees will "totally kill all ur boys in close combat."

also, people who like Kathy Griffin, and after that people who like Sarah Silverman.

My pet peeve is self apologizing gamers who feel a need to justify their socially inept choices. Like the guy who wants to do a topless Dark Eldar/Elf army or model breasts onto his Space Marines...and then has to clarify that he's not weird or strange and just thinks it would be funny or fluffy or a modeling challenge or whatever. I can't imagine they're fooling anyone but themselves.

When people ask me why my female Dark Eldar Wyches look better painted then my male ones (to whom I generally add pants - the ladies stay in the thongs) I reply that I have a lot more fun painting the female ones and I want them to look hot.

Nobody judges me any better or worse for saying that then how they've already judged me for playing a game with lots of little army men.

My pet peeves are the assumptions that being a regular tournament attender makes you an ass, and that tournaments are beacons for douchebags.

My biggest peeve has to be people who blather on about "proper painting technique", which when asked for clarification, basically is described verbatim from any of the GW painting guides/articles.

Sorry, but I do not buy into it. I fail to see how painting 5-6 layers of red over black is any more "proper" than painting 1 transitional colour onto black (such as tan), then a layer of red perhaps followed by a wash or highlight.

As far as I am concerned, any technique which gets painted armies onto the tabletop is a valid one. I have seen too many people walk away from armies half done because they were told the GW way to paint was the only proper method. I am not trying to invalidate their way, but being told my way is improper, I wasn't aware there was a rulebook for painting.

Then again, maybe I am just a cranky !

Man, I second almost everything here so far, but will add three more. 1.People who fully read rulebooks and codices in LGS, 2. People who have claim to know everything about an army they know nothing about, and tell people who couldn't care less about said army, 3. People who jump to the conclusion that you jumped to a conclusion and therefore say you are wrong. And yes, I am perhaps the most easily angered person you will meet.

Thank you metallifan, I needed a dose of sad violin today.

I don't get pissed of or angered very easily, so the following are more of pet annoyances.

On forums:
-Elite Speech. It doesn't take that much effort to type properly.
-Folks who quote massive ammounts of text. There's a reason that newspapers use "..." often when quoting.
-Large amounts of empty space in posts in an attempt to make some kind of point. Lots of folks do it, but it's still annoying.

When Gaming:
-Bad hygine
-Rudeness
-Armies that are more than half unpainted.
-People who keep talking about something that you don't care about and won't take the hint to stop. When I say "I'm not really interested that ______." I mean it!

My only gaming pet peeve is the guy who for reasons I have yet to understand rolls batches of dice one or two at a time.

There's of course nothing wrong about doing it as long as the proper amount of dice are rolled, it just grinds my gears.

You know what really grinds my gears ...

Kymera wrote:My only gaming pet peeve is the guy who for reasons I have yet to understand rolls batches of dice one or two at a time.

There's of course nothing wrong about doing it as long as the proper amount of dice are rolled, it just grinds my gears.

It's called "Slow-rolling" and it's just -barely- above cheating. Basically it's used by the guys that're too scared of being caught with rigged dice. People do it because they're more likely to get good rolls when they roll dice 1 or 2 at a time. Next time he does it, call him out on it and tell him that if he won't start rolling fair, then he can find someone else to play dirty with.

Buttlerthepug wrote:I had forgot to mention this before, but this is definitely something that bothers me even though it isnt a big deal...

When people who are refering to fantasy orCs write OrKs... I know its not a big deal but its not that hard to change the K to a C and be right in proppa... especially since theres been a few occasions where Ive seen people do it and then in another thread they get down on people for bad grammer/spellings...

Again I know its not major but every time I see it, I kringe and want to punch the person in the suck hole (Does that mean I need anger managment?).

I completely agree with you. I also am peeved by people who write "cringe" with a "k" instead of a "c." What the hell is up with that? That's almost as bad as writing "orcks"! Completely annoying!

...Buttlerthepug, you do know I'm just playing with you

George Spiggott wrote:People who ask what's in your list, then write theirs.

This doesn't annoy me too much myself - I know I'm a better player than most random teens in the local GW, and I've got no issue with them getting a small advantage. Besides, it's not like it's unrealistic for an army to know what foe they're fighting...

However, what does annoy me is... well, my opponent in this conversation recently. We'd just agreed to a pick-up 1000 point game of 40K:

Me: "Okay, my list is already written, so let me know when you're ready."
Opp: "Sure, I just need to write my list. What army do you play?"
Me: "In 40K? Dark Angels, Imperial Guard, Daemons and Space Wolves."
Opp: "No, I mean what army are you going to use?"
Me: "The Wolves."
Opp: "All right, I'll be a minute..."

*scribbles list*

Opp: "Do you have any tanks in your list?"
Me: "... Why don't you wait and see?"
Opp: (under breath) "That's not fair..."

For the record, his army had Ghazgkull Thraka in it. I killed him with Jaws of the World Wolf before he'd managed to do anything in combat ^_^

metallifan wrote:
It's called "Slow-rolling" and it's just -barely- above cheating. Basically it's used by the guys that're too scared of being caught with rigged dice. People do it because they're more likely to get good rolls when they roll dice 1 or 2 at a time.

They may think this. But statistically speaking, it makes no difference.

Unless I misunderstood you to mean that rolling less dice repeatedly = higher probability of good rolls. Which, if that is what you meant, is wrong.


GG

generalgrog wrote:

metallifan wrote:
It's called "Slow-rolling" and it's just -barely- above cheating. Basically it's used by the guys that're too scared of being caught with rigged dice. People do it because they're more likely to get good rolls when they roll dice 1 or 2 at a time.

They may think this. But statistically speaking, it makes no difference.

Unless I misunderstood you to mean that rolling less dice repeatedly = higher probability of good rolls. Which, if that is what you meant, is wrong.


GG

Yeah... there isn't anything too terribly wrong with that as long as they're fast about it. When rolling saves for differently equipped models, I always roll them one batch at a time to keep from getting confused as to whether the green dice is for a flamer guy or the Captain. However, it does burn my grits when people don't do wound allocation correctly or nominate each model taking a save as they roll rather than nominating them all in the beginning and then rolling.

Maxstreel wrote:

Buttlerthepug wrote:I had forgot to mention this before, but this is definitely something that bothers me even though it isnt a big deal...

When people who are refering to fantasy orCs write OrKs... I know its not a big deal but its not that hard to change the K to a C and be right in proppa... especially since theres been a few occasions where Ive seen people do it and then in another thread they get down on people for bad grammer/spellings...

Again I know its not major but every time I see it, I kringe and want to punch the person in the suck hole (Does that mean I need anger managment?).

I completely agree with you. I also am peeved by people who write "cringe" with a "k" instead of a "c." What the hell is up with that? That's almost as bad as writing "orcks"! Completely annoying!

...Buttlerthepug, you do know I'm just playing with you

Lol my apologies >.< I didnt know the right spelling so I took a guess... 50/50 chance eh?

Biggest Pet Peeve:

Anyone who cannot concede they were beaten without a lame and possibly insane excuse... I've had everything from "The sun was in my eyes and I wasn't paying enough attention to the game", "those kids at that table four tables away are too noisey" etc. right through to "My Girlfriend dumped me"

I'm not insensitive and if your GF dumped you thats fine as an excuse for not really focusing on the game BUT... "You only won because..." excuses drive me nuts... I'm not a strong player, couple this with a complete disregard to whether I win or lose and appalling bad luck sometimes (One gaming group had a rule where I was not allowed to touch anyones dice lest I cursed them and I've held several records for improbable numbers of ones both in a row and all at once... I mean seriousely, it should not be possible to roll 30 to hits needing a 5 or a 6 and not making one...) so being beaten by me is a very rare event... being told that it only happened because you ate something that gave you gas... Not fair...

Thor665 wrote:My pet peeve is self apologizing gamers who feel a need to justify their socially inept choices. Like the guy who wants to do a topless Dark Eldar/Elf army or model breasts onto his Space Marines...and then has to clarify that he's not weird or strange and just thinks it would be funny or fluffy or a modeling challenge or whatever. I can't imagine they're fooling anyone but themselves.

I actually really enjoy people like this... I'll not go into details as I'm sure there are all sorts of impressionable young minds on here but suffice to say I'm extremely weird and strange and make no excuses for it... I've always been open about things and encourage everyone else to be too... Theres something fantastic about the double take some very "normal" people do in public when they recognise me and realise why...

I once sat down at Burger King, dressed fairly low key (I dont make excuses but I dont try 'n agrivate people either) recognised someone in the line and said Hi... His GF/Wife (Who knows?) looked across at me and hissed "How do you know.... That?!?"

If I was a nastier person I'd have told her