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.

so no dead fluffy things?
fluffy, 40k, dead, no? ok.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
It seemed like he had fun, But he knew he was gonna loose and conceded turn 3 so he can play more games. The guy knew I brought a Tourney list, but he stared and just wondered "What Am i going to do"
But I remember one person telling me "You cant hold back, it an an insult to them"

Play your best but that doesn't mean you have to bring your best list always. Honestly, a hardcore tournament list just isn't fun for a casual player with a casual list.

I usually have 2 lists (actually, I have a lot more than that) - a strong tournament list and a less-optimized, "casual list". However, even my casual lists are strong (just not as strong as my tournament lists). Bringing your "weaker" list doesn't mean you are giving your opponent any "freebies". It's not even an insult to them if you are still playing it to the best of your ability. At the same time, you will also challenge yourself.

BTW, I try to minimize the spam in my casual lists and try not to take more than 2 of the same type of units (unless they're standard troops). I also start using units that I don't normally get the chance to use in my more competitive lists. For example, my Fun-crons actually brings a monolith and some heavy destroyers and has no spam at all. It may seem weak, but I'm pretty good at it and have lost only once with it.

f2k wrote:

Each to his own, of course.

I learned nothing useful from that game of WarMachine. The combo that killed my 'caster came out of nowhere, with no warning and no way for me to know what was about to happen.

Indeed, I much prefer the teaching to be done through a continuous dialogue throughout the game. "If you move there you risk getting assaulted next turn", "remember to spread your Marines a bit more since I've got multiple ordinance weapons", "you might want to keep some guys back to counter my Terminators when they arrive from reserves - that Leman Russ looks mighty tempting", and so on...

But then again, I must admit that I might be biased as I generally dislike "hard playing" and "tournament gaming". I've met too many players who seemed to enjoy beating down newbs (and just about anyone else, for that matter), always bringing their hardest game and protesting loudly if their opponent don't do the same. Somewhere along the way, it seems to me, they have forgotten that the purpose of playing this game is for both players to have fun, winning is a secondary concern.

Yeah everyone has there own play style. While i enjoy winning. I much prefer to play a game where both the opponent and myself are trying our hardest to beat eachother. That being said, if i know the player doesn't know how to play the game i will help him and i use that opprotunity to try out new things (run different squads to see how they work). But throughout the game i do give them advice and let them know when they are making mistakes. But im not throwing the game to boost their confidence. It gives them a false sense of security which will get broken which will be worse than if i just beat them. At my FLGS we have this demon player that consistantly beats everyone, I enjoy playing him the most because it makes it challanging and when i do win it makes it that much better. I guess where im going with this is while you shouldn't "club the baby seal" they need to earn their win.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Because, It shows them you think so little of their ability, that you have to go easy on them. In sports if a new guy comes in, the other team doesnt let him score because he is new, they give him a hard lesson which is "Learn from you mistakes"

this analogy is pretty insulting to people who play sports.

 Allod wrote:
Firmly in the wrong camp. If he's still learning (as opposed to training), I always take more of a demo game approach, taking what I think might be an interesting opponent for his force (which usually won't even be complete at that point), even if it puts me at a huge disadvantage. That way, I actually have some fun, too, trying to overcome the odds. I find that much more rewarding than just "holding back" or curbstomping the newbie.

If he is the type who tells you "no, don't hold back, I want a real game, I'll learn quicker", I tend to ask whether he thinks that a Karate starter would also learn more if the black belt teacher just broke his arms in four seconds.

That being said, the guy in question had a full 1750 point army and already plays, so what exactly made this particular example a "baby seal" I don't know.

dont insult karate like that. sports and karate actually have depth and require talent and are a bit more complicated than "buy & spam new expensive thing"

kb305 wrote:

 Allod wrote:
If he is the type who tells you "no, don't hold back, I want a real game, I'll learn quicker", I tend to ask whether he thinks that a Karate starter would also learn more if the black belt teacher just broke his arms in four seconds.

dont insult karate like that. sports and karate actually have depth and require talent and are a bit more complicated than "buy & spam new expensive thing"

Erm... what?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Because, It shows them you think so little of their ability, that you have to go easy on them. In sports if a new guy comes in, the other team doesnt let him score because he is new, they give him a hard lesson which is "Learn from you mistakes"

Complete red herring. If someone turns up for training and is new to your team you don't just stick them out on the pitch and stomp all over them. You train with them, teach them, play friendly and training games where people don't play all out. You make it enjoyable first. That is with a single new person in team sports.

If you are a team playing against a much less experienced team, or in a non team sport against a much less experienced person, you don't go out and stomp them. You don't play all out for the win. That's called pot hunting and is frowned upon in most sports. In the FA cup you end up with top teams playing against non league teams. The top teams do not send the first squad of many reasons, one of which being that thrashing someone 25-0 is embarrassing for both sides.

f2k wrote:


What I learned from that game was that 1) WarMachine players use Page 5 as an excuse for WAAC gaming and 2) WarMachine is so insanely combo-driven as to resemble MtG - not particularly fun at all.

Now, is that all true? Probably not. I would certainly hope that there are friendly laid back WarMachine players out there. But I was so thoroughly put off by the "HA! Take that, NEWB!!!" attitude of my opponent that I'm not sure if I want to give it another shot.

Each to his own, of course.
.

That's quite Ironic really, as rule 5 of page 5 specifies that page 5 is never an excuse to play like that, or do that.

Page 5 is a mentality - bring your best, play your hardest, give it your all, don't whine or Moan, be a sportsman and a gentleman ( we're all here for the same reason), be magnanimous if you win, and come back stronger if you lose. And it's not an excuse to be 'that guy'.

It's ironic - what you see as an excuse for Waac gaming is actually the antithesis of what page 5 is all about. I'm a huge supporter of the real attitude of page 5 - frankly, in my mind, it's the best thing you can do for yourself. But I can fully appreciate that I'm coming fro a different point of view here. Also, if you don't mind, I hope it's ok to point out that the combo driven nature of warmachine might not be fun for you, but it's fun for lots of other folks. I'm pretty sure you didn't mean it in such a context, but that comment of yours Is coming across a bit on the judgemental side.

Lastly, for what it's worth, I think it's a shame that one experience with one player turned you off a whole community.

f2k wrote:

Each to his own, of course.

I learned nothing useful from that game of WarMachine. The combo that killed my 'caster came out of nowhere, with no warning and no way for me to know what was about to happen.
.

And that's happened to me more times than I can count. But I actually enjoy the 'how the hell did you just pull that off' moment. I'll follow it with a handshake, and 'good game'. Then I'll analyse the moves he pulled to get him to that place, and what I did that let him get away wi it, followed with 'what willI do next time'. I enjoy that mental process. There is always something new coming against you. You're always growing as a player. But as you say, each to their own. Neither approach is more righteous.

I think It's all down to how you appreciate the experience. Obviously, I'll appreciate it differently. But then again, I'm used to being punched in the head when I make a mistake in boxing.

f2k wrote:

Indeed, I much prefer the teaching to be done through a continuous dialogue throughout the game. "If you move there you risk getting assaulted next turn", "remember to spread your Marines a bit more since I've got multiple ordinance weapons", "you might want to keep some guys back to counter my Terminators when they arrive from reserves - that Leman Russ looks mighty tempting", and so on...

But then again, I must admit that I might be biased as I generally dislike "hard playing" and "tournament gaming". I've met too many players who seemed to enjoy beating down newbs (and just about anyone else, for that matter), always bringing their hardest game and protesting loudly if their opponent don't do the same. Somewhere along the way, it seems to me, they have forgotten that the purpose of playing this game is for both players to have fun, winning is a secondary concern.

Just playing devils advocate here, but why is it on the head of the hard players? Why is it their fault the other guy is not having fun? Surely it's equally plausible the other guy is equally guilty for not stepping up, as the hard players are for not stepping down? Secondly, fun is subjective. You can't simply define fun as being 'not bringing your hardest list'. Some people see hard lists as fun. ( too often, the answer isn't this side or that side is right, just okay with folks who want the same thing out of their fame. Communication is key )

It's funny as well, but I remember recently on another forums, there was a big complaint going by a poster against a bunch of Waac power gamers that had ruined his club. You know the type - according to him, they were dirty grubby power gamers only interested in winning, and they were ruining his club and seal clubbing him relentlessly. Well, one of those guys came on and defended himself, and presented a totally different story (and this was a very well respected poster on the boards to boot) and sausage they were doing the steamroller tournament games (warmachine) as most folks there simply wanted to up their game to the highest levels. The club was, by all accounts thriving, and numbers were increasing, if I remember right. And with his posts which were well written, respectful and well thought through, it really came across as sour grapes on the part of the op.

What am I trying to say here? Well, I suppose there is always the other side of the story. Two different people can see the same thing, and interpret it in utterly different ways. Take you f2k - you say you don't like hard gaming, prefer a more softly softly approach and dislike the more hardcore gamers. Well, fair play. No sir, I'm not going to discredit you or hold your preferences in contempt ( you're fully entitled to your pov) but bear in mind, someone else will see exactly the sane thing in a totally different manner. For example, I might see that softly softly approach as condescending (mate, please let me play my own game, make my own mistakes and learn from them) and might see those hard core gamers as fun guys having a laugh.

But then again, I like the 'it's on me' approach. It's funny too, I never really got that until I played warmachine. Never got the attitude of pushing myself, and having it being on my shoulders. Maybe it's to do with the fact that in the last few years, I've done a lot of running (love my 10ks, half marathons and even a 24hour endurance race!), gym work and a bit of boxing, and that attitude of pushing myself hard, as far as I can go is simply my default attitude now. It's not wrong either. No more than your seemingly 'more laid back' one us.

Regardless, cheers.

If clubbing baby seals is wrong, i don't want to be right...


... OH we're talking about wargaming! *ahem*


It's a fine line.

Most new players are very enthusiastic about any new game they pick up. They typically don't understand the in's and out's of the game just yet, they're in a sort of "honey moon period", rolling with their poorly optimized list.

The issue is if you curbstomp this person repeatedly in this early stage, he may begin to question if his time (and money) are not spent in doing something else. During the first few games with a brand new player, i probably won't go as full force as i normally would, or i take the time to break out the cool models i love that maybe aren't 100% optimized in particular combinations.

Essentially, yeah, i take it easy on new players and use the first handful of games to give pointers, show the ropes, etc.

After a handful of games, it's on bitch.



.. oh and completely goes with out saying if its a tourney, or some other event that money has been paid to play, or there's prizes - sorry, that's not the place for beginners. COmpetitions is where people bring their A-game, it's not a place to teach people the ropes. If a beginner goes to a hardcore tournament format, he should have every expectation to get farmed.

hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Extreaminatus wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I told that person severa times Im test out a tournament list, he knew what he was getting into

Then why make this thread? If he knew what he was getting into, why even bother asking us if "clubbing baby seals" is the right thing to do? From the sounds of the OP, it sounds like you may feel a little guilty about stomping someone who wasn't playing at your level and you knew it. Now, he may have thought he knew what he was getting into, but unless he's felt the power of a fully operational optimized Tau list, he really didn't.

hotsauceman1 wrote:Because, It shows them you think so little of their ability, that you have to go easy on them. In sports if a new guy comes in, the other team doesnt let him score because he is new, they give him a hard lesson which is "Learn from you mistakes"

Well, if he's going up against another team, he's clearly in a competitive arena, not a casual one. As for, "Learn from your mistakes," this is assuming he knew what mistakes he made other than, "Playing that WAAC dude with the Tau army."

When does wanting to win=waac? And he also learned it isnt best to shoot things you plan to charge and to move and not stay static.

Whoops, I too out a caveat saying you're not necessarily a WAAC dude during editing and forgot to put it back in, but if you went up against someone else who didn't joke and laugh with you during the game they're going to slap that label on you real quick. He could have learned movement and not shooting your assault target against an easier list, as well.

Ever since I saw the neckbeards at the tournament scene in my area (which I know is not the case everywhere else), I've approached this game from a casual angle, not a, "Bring the best of everything to crush your opponent." Yeah, you can make hard lists and tournament lists, but they should be played against the same, not against a casual player who's still getting the swing of his army.

A very good and well thought out reply, Deadnight. Kudos to you for that...


Yes, it is quite ironic. Unfortunately, most people only read as far as the "bring your best" part and never get further.

However, to be entirely honest, I must admit that I'm one of those guys as well. When I first saw that page I immediately thought "WAAC player paradise". You're right, of course, and a bit further thinking will make you see Page 5 for what it is. Well, it did for me, anyway.

But still, I would honestly have preferred if they had never put that in the book.


As for being turned off, let me say that, at that point in time, I was already highly allergic to "hardcore" players, so it didn't take much

I still remember the first tournament I took part in, years and years ago. In the very first game I ran into a Dwarf player with a 1000-odd point character stuck in a 1000-odd point regiment of ultra-hard dwarfs, and a single allied High Elf mage hiding in a forest. I wasn't exactly a great Fantasy player back then, but I knew enough to realize that I had a snowballs chance in hell of doing anything at all against that army. So I spend 6 turns desperately maneuvering to avoid getting caught, in the end loosing because one of my regiments ran out of space and got cut down.
Well, that kind of things happen so I dutifully shook hands with my opponent and then, overcome with curiosity, asked if he had enjoyed the game? "Enjoyed?", he asked, blinking slowly, "I won, that's the point, isn't it?".

The second tournament I went to, this time playing Blood Bowl, I first ran into a guy who tried his best to cheat at every opportunity. The second game was against a guy who, despite quickly gaining a comfortable lead against my depleted team, kept on fouling each turn, openly stating his goal to eliminate my team entirely from the tournament, partly for SPP, partly to to cut down on the competition as the tournament went on.

After that I decided that tournaments weren't for me.

You are, of course, right in that it's not fair to judge the entire community based on the actions of a few tournament players. But, you know... Once burned...


As you say, it's down to how we want to experience the game.Maybe I would enjoy tournaments more if I was a bit more hardcore in my play-style.

But to me, the game is really just an excuse to get together with my friends, drink some beer (well, soda, actually as we have a no-alcohol policy), and stuff my face with chips and McBurgers. What game we play and what outcome it has is entirely secondary to the simple goal of having fun.


Finally, as to putting it on the hard players...

Well...

It's the only place you can put it, really.

Problem is that you can't ask a newb about to play his first game to "bring his a-game". He's simply not able to do that. A veteran, on the other hand, most likely have a big collection and can fairly easily come up with a b-game list.


Now, of course a newb (or any player, for that matter) should not demand that his opponent changes his play-style. No-one should make demands of anyone - this is a social hobby and we should all be welcome.

However, if you're a veteran player and insist on being allowed to trash newbs, using your a-game tournament list. Well... You shouldn't be surprised then, if the newb feels unfairly treated and decides to quit. Not all will do that, of course, but some will. And that goes against my personal belief that we should all be welcome.

I'm reminded of a huge debate I got involved in on WarSeer some time ago. One member said (and I'm paraphrasing from memory here) that he had a right to always bring his a-game and that everyone else in the club did the same. Fine, I replied, but that would not be a club where I would want to play as that's not how I want to play the game and it's a shame the the club is so exclusive rather then inclusive.

After that, tempers flared a bit...


I'm glad that you specifically point out that you don't hold my preferences in contempt. However, threads as this one, and the one on WarSeer, sometimes does give me the feeling that some tournament players do truly look down upon anyone who doesn't bring their a-game and that anyone who, like me, bring a fluffy (what I like to call a f-game) list are insulting them by not offering them enough opposition.

Sadly, I have to admit that occasionally I'm just as bad (and if I have insulted anyone here I apologize), and just as intolerant as they are. I've been burned so many times now that perhaps I tend to be slightly judgmental myself. Thankfully, I have now found a club where people are generally as laid back as I am. Sure, some of them could easily table me if I started to smacktalk them, but in general they go easy on me and other newbs.

Each to his own - and I've now found a place where I can relax and feel at home when gaming.


But still, I would suggest that, for the veterans, it pays to go a bit easy on newbs, lest they scare them away for good as it nearly happened for me.


Anyway, I think I'm rambling a bit here. Sorry...

Tournament Players dont hold casual players in contempt in the slightest. That creates an "Use Vs Them" attitude that ruins the hobby.
No what people hate is getting pissed on for bringing those lists. No matter what those lists will show up in games and you should be prepaered for it. You cant live in fantasy land where Riptide/serpent spam does not exist. People find these power lists fun, just like you shouldnt piss on people bring casual lists you shouldnt piss on people bring power lists

And calling him a 'baby seal' is not holding him in contempt?

Riiiggghhhttt....,

The Auld Grump

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Tournament Players dont hold casual players in contempt in the slightest. That creates an "Use Vs Them" attitude that ruins the hobby.
No what people hate is getting pissed on for bringing those lists. No matter what those lists will show up in games and you should be prepaered for it. You cant live in fantasy land where Riptide/serpent spam does not exist. People find these power lists fun, just like you shouldnt piss on people bring casual lists you shouldnt piss on people bring power lists

So hang on you say there shouldn't be an "us V them" yet you say that people should be prepared for your list? How about you bring a list on the same level as mine? or is that "unacceptable"?

Adding onto to that you say we cant live in a fantasy world where riptide serpent spam does not exist, ok then but you also cant live in a fantasy land where there are casual players such as myself who just wants to play with units that we want to use, further more we all live in a "fantasy land" as 40k is a game of well... fantasy in space right?

Remember that competitive 40k is not the only way to play the game (I for example hate the competitive side of 40k as imo all it is, is I-have-rules-hammer), we all have our preferences in a game I like to see duels against warlords, Hellbrutes smashing things (then get blown up by a lascannon ) etc, etc, you might like the tactical insight of 40k, as said there is different styles for everyone.

No offence but your statement sounded to me contradictory.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Tournament Players dont hold casual players in contempt in the slightest. That creates an "Use Vs Them" attitude that ruins the hobby.
No what people hate is getting pissed on for bringing those lists. No matter what those lists will show up in games and you should be prepaered for it. You cant live in fantasy land where Riptide/serpent spam does not exist. People find these power lists fun, just like you shouldnt piss on people bring casual lists you shouldnt piss on people bring power lists

In an unbalanced mess of a game based around 'collecting, and painting models' there are going to be a lot of people who buy what is fun to paint, not what is statistically superior. You also have a game where those expensive models or the ability to have a large variety of models is very expensive and someone may not be able to prepare for 8 necron flyers or a crapton of riptides by buying, modeling and painting 90 lootas or even having to dump a neglected army and buy a whole new one.

It is perfectly reasonable for people to play 40k in an environment which the people don't prepare for tourney play and don't have to worry about getting their models smashed by a hammer because someone who has more money and a hard-on for winning feels like rolling in an 'teaching' them all how bad they are for not buying the FotM and spamming it.

I once went to a 'casual' gaming weekend event. Toned down my lists and took things I'd otherwise never do.

Wasn't a lot of fun, in fact, it was the worst, if not one of the worst gaming day experiences I've had. I faced Tervigon spam with mycetic spore'd Devourer Gaunts, Genestealers and a Swarmlord in one game and the final big game of 3000 points was against a guy who could have won a tournament with his Plague Marine, MC spam and FW flyer list. The only game where I had a hope in hell of winning was the first, which was pretty much the only fun game.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Tournament Players dont hold casual players in contempt in the slightest. That creates an "Use Vs Them" attitude that ruins the hobby.
No what people hate is getting pissed on for bringing those lists. No matter what those lists will show up in games and you should be prepaered for it. You cant live in fantasy land where Riptide/serpent spam does not exist. People find these power lists fun, just like you shouldnt piss on people bring casual lists you shouldnt piss on people bring power lists

You "don't hold casual players in contempt", but feel the urge to give him a lesson and prepare him because he "can't live in fantasy land".

Stop being TFG and get a life.

Contempt means I hate them, I do not hate them. What I do not like is being villianized for playing a list I like.

That is not what contempt generally means, and is quite obviously not what is being meant here.

Ok, So tell me what contempt mean because over here it typically means hate.
And maybe I hould give a bigger picture. This guy has played for a year or so, he knows the rules. He has played another local tournament player who comes by regularly and teaches use to play(He taught me list building and how to move). Maybe Baby seal isnt the best analogy. HE clearly knew his codex. I also helped him like "If your warp talons DS here I cannot shoot them next turn, move your land raider closer so your chosen can assualt" We both had fun. And he promised games to 2 other people so when I was up 7-4 he conceded so he could play. I was not a jerk, I helped him

con·tempt
/kənˈtem(p)t/
Noun
The feeling that a person or a thing is beneath consideration, worthless, or deserving scorn.
Disregard for something that should be taken into account.

Certainly things you hate you're more likely to find contemptible, but you don't need to hate something to hold it in contempt. Hate is used too easily by a lot of people.

Edit: you've gone from "he's new" and "he was distressed" to "he's played for over a year and had fun". Something is not adding up.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Contempt means I hate them, I do not hate them. What I do not like is being villianized for playing a list I like.

Look, you've got 6k posts. This is my fourth one. You're known here. There are witnesses.

Do you really want a french guy to teach you english ?

Of course you want. Stay still, baby seal !
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/educated?q=educated

That was a good joke.
And how does a Frenchmen play war games anyway? Do you just write "I surrender" on your list and give to your opponent or o you wait until models are deployed to do that?

And now the threads went off topic, I think...

When I got started off, my friends played me with very toned down lists and generally encouraged me to proxy so that I could understand the game better. There was some rough patches though because I started in late 5th with 4th ed Tau and while they liked to play high point values that meant I needed to spend lots of points on upgrades for the few things I actually did have to reach those levels. I lost games and realized I needed to play at lower point values so I wouldn't stretch myself thin. Then we started playing lots of team games so I could learn in game with my team mate(s). I stopped needing to bring Devilfish loaded with upgrades because I only needed to field half an army. It let me slowly build up to the level where I could stand on my own.

Also when someone says "Don't hold back" they should probably specify. If I was playing a new player who said that, I'd bring a somewhat normal list but I wouldn't play as aggressively. I would maybe try to cause enough damage to force moral checks but not try to eliminate entire units; He still learns about vulnerability while getting to use the units still. I wouldn't try to make the game a landslide, but I'd still try to win; He would learn little by little what he could have done to win the game. It makes it simple and still fun. What went right: I learned that the X guns are trash and Y cannons are pretty fun. What could I do better: I should have pushed forward the last round to contest objectives instead of playing defensively so long. Remember that a new player probably doesn't know his limits or the game well enough. So when they say "don't hold back" or "I only have about 1K, but I guess I could stretch up to 1.5K" then they probably don't have the experience to know what to expect. Maybe go over the lists before hand so you can point out an obvious problem that would make the game one sided, like bringing 3 heldrakes and him having no skyfire or units with better than a 3+.

I've had games where I've gotten absolutely slaughtered by a more experienced player and I learned nothing because too much went wrong for me to really pull any useful bits of knowledge from that.
Have you ever had one of those games? Where you end up only killing a hand full of your opponents models while 80% of your army has been removed? And then your opponent realizes he forgot to put a whole squad on the table and they've been in reserves. I've been on both sides of that. It's not fun and there is nothing to learn. What went right: Nothing. What could I do better: I don't even know. That's what you end up with.

 Litcheur wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Contempt means I hate them, I do not hate them. What I do not like is being villianized for playing a list I like.

Look, you've got 6k posts. This is my fourth one. You're known here. There are witnesses.

Do you really want a french guy to teach you english ?

Of course you want. Stay still, baby seal !
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/educated?q=educated

Four posts in and you're proving you're a condescending prick? Yep, good job

Welcome to the ignore list, by the way.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Remember that a new player probably doesn't know his limits or the game well enough. So when they say "don't hold back" or "I only have about 1K, but I guess I could stretch up to 1.5K" then they probably don't have the experience to know what to expect. Maybe go over the lists before hand so you can point out an obvious problem that would make the game one sided, like bringing 3 heldrakes and him having no skyfire or units with better than a 3+.

This! I used to say this as well when I started out with Dystopian Wars and Warmachine, as I wanted to learn it properly, which lead to well, me no longer playing both those games because while I was playing them, I wasn't really taught the ins and outs of the game, but I still got my ass handed to me hard under the pretense of "asking for it!" Though when I was taught a thing or two about how to get the most out of a unit, it was usually swiftly followed by my opponent gaining the upper hand and utterly destroying me due to his tips more or less helping himself in the end.

"If you move so and so you'll be able to fire the most guns on your cruiser," which I did, only he played Antarctica, so while he was helpfully telling me how to best place my ships, he could the very next turn use some absurdly powerful beam weapon that hit and sank several of my ships in one shot, without telling me about the abilities of his ships first hand. "Oh yeah, I have a particle cannon, all ships in a straight line are now automatically hit, no shield generator saves allowed, bye bye!"

Don't even get me started on Warmachine, the competitive level is so high here it's not exactly newbie friendly or even encouraging to try. Plus when you play faction starters and you as a Khador player play against the Cryx starter.. "I vomit on your 'Jacks, so their movement is now 2", I throw the bonejacks at them and tear your caster apart, wanna try it again?"

 liquidjoshi wrote:

 Litcheur wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Contempt means I hate them, I do not hate them. What I do not like is being villianized for playing a list I like.

Look, you've got 6k posts. This is my fourth one. You're known here. There are witnesses.

Do you really want a french guy to teach you english ?

Of course you want. Stay still, baby seal !
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/educated?q=educated

Four posts in and you're proving you're a condescending prick? Yep, good job

Welcome to the ignore list, by the way.

Wait, wut ?

He's a prick for being correct about the misuse of a word ... which the post he quotes directly illustrates it's misuse ?

In what universe does this make him a condescending prick?

Also, way to call out ignoring someone. Nothing says "nanny nanny boo boo, i called you a name and now i'm sticking my fingers in my ears so i can't hear your retort" quite like announcing to the forum at large that you're ignoring someone.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
When I got started off, my friends played me with very toned down lists and generally encouraged me to proxy so that I could understand the game better. There was some rough patches though because I started in late 5th with 4th ed Tau and while they liked to play high point values that meant I needed to spend lots of points on upgrades for the few things I actually did have to reach those levels. I lost games and realized I needed to play at lower point values so I wouldn't stretch myself thin. Then we started playing lots of team games so I could learn in game with my team mate(s). I stopped needing to bring Devilfish loaded with upgrades because I only needed to field half an army. It let me slowly build up to the level where I could stand on my own.

Also when someone says "Don't hold back" they should probably specify. If I was playing a new player who said that, I'd bring a somewhat normal list but I wouldn't play as aggressively. I would maybe try to cause enough damage to force moral checks but not try to eliminate entire units; He still learns about vulnerability while getting to use the units still. I wouldn't try to make the game a landslide, but I'd still try to win; He would learn little by little what he could have done to win the game. It makes it simple and still fun. What went right: I learned that the X guns are trash and Y cannons are pretty fun. What could I do better: I should have pushed forward the last round to contest objectives instead of playing defensively so long. Remember that a new player probably doesn't know his limits or the game well enough. So when they say "don't hold back" or "I only have about 1K, but I guess I could stretch up to 1.5K" then they probably don't have the experience to know what to expect. Maybe go over the lists before hand so you can point out an obvious problem that would make the game one sided, like bringing 3 heldrakes and him having no skyfire or units with better than a 3+.

I've had games where I've gotten absolutely slaughtered by a more experienced player and I learned nothing because too much went wrong for me to really pull any useful bits of knowledge from that.
Have you ever had one of those games? Where you end up only killing a hand full of your opponents models while 80% of your army has been removed? And then your opponent realizes he forgot to put a whole squad on the table and they've been in reserves. I've been on both sides of that. It's not fun and there is nothing to learn. What went right: Nothing. What could I do better: I don't even know. That's what you end up with.

Yes I have, I have been on both sides of that. The guy who did it to me a couple of times has shown me what I did wrong and so forth. And I do feel he learned something, like maybe when you have two inches for assault dont shoot or you will kill your sure chance of getting in combat

Right.

But only if you're playing this game:

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/15805/seals-of-satan