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.

 Orock wrote:
Crow splat I played in all of third and fourth. There is zero armies where you would have had to be that under. You MAY have had to drop a 25 point power fist or some such that you really wanted, but there was never a situation like your describing. I played hundreds of games I'm 3rd back in my college free time, and not on person ever had to go below 30, which was never game breaking. And this was a GW where you saw every army regularly, even sisters.

One should be wary of making definitive statements like never. But using your logic, it would be impossible to ever go over points because if you went over points and had to remove a 200 point unit then didn't NEED that unit because you could have chosen a cheaper unit or added a few guys to another squad.

Hell, we don't even NEED to play the game so let's just stop posting and shut this site down because we don't NEED it. We just want it.

The point is that it is possible to make a list where you can not remove anything without compromising the integrity of the list, where any change would result in some pretty significant changes in gameplay.

CrowSplat wrote:
The point is that it is possible to make a list where you can not remove anything without compromising the integrity of the list, where any change would result in some pretty significant changes in gameplay.

But, if that's the case, then you're trying to use a list that shouldn't be possible at the points you're playing.

 vipoid wrote:

CrowSplat wrote:
The point is that it is possible to make a list where you can not remove anything without compromising the integrity of the list, where any change would result in some pretty significant changes in gameplay.

But, if that's the case, then you're trying to use a list that shouldn't be possible at the points you're playing.

Shouldn't according to whom? There is no official printed rule that says in a 1500 point game you can use up to 1500 points and no more. So you cannot say according to GW. They have even put battle reports in white dwarf where one side or both have gone over by a few points.

So now we are talking about personal preference, which varies from person to person and goes back to my original post of "My house, my rules. Your house, your rules."

CrowSplat wrote:
Shouldn't according to whom?

Basic math.

CrowSplat wrote:
There is no official printed rule that says in a 1500 point game you can use up to 1500 points and no more.

Yes there is - that's literally the entire purpose of a point limit.

If you're using more than 1500pts, then you're not playing a 1500pt game.

In a competitive event, I will not only refuse to play the person, I will ask for their disqualification.

In a casual game, I so don't care. Just so long as I know how big a deficit I'm at, we can go up to a 3-2 points differential and I won't care.

CrowSplat wrote:

Shouldn't according to whom? There is no official printed rule that says in a 1500 point game you can use up to 1500 points and no more.

.

The Rulebook wrote:
Simply add up the points values of all the units in your army, and make sure that the total does not exceed the limit agreed upon for the game.

Acting as a limit is pretty much exactly what a limit is for...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CrowSplat wrote:

The point is that it is possible to make a list where you can not remove anything without compromising the integrity of the list, where any change would result in some pretty significant changes in gameplay.

Yes, that's true.

It's exactly the reason for the points limit.

 insaniak wrote:

CrowSplat wrote:

Shouldn't according to whom? There is no official printed rule that says in a 1500 point game you can use up to 1500 points and no more.

.

The Rulebook wrote:
Simply add up the points values of all the units in your army, and make sure that the total does not exceed the limit agreed upon for the game.

Acting as a limit is pretty much exactly what a limit is for...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CrowSplat wrote:

The point is that it is possible to make a list where you can not remove anything without compromising the integrity of the list, where any change would result in some pretty significant changes in gameplay.

Yes, that's true.

It's exactly the reason for the points limit.

Quotes rulebook without giving citation.... Color me unimpressed.

So you are honestly telling me that if Joe Newbro shoes up to wherever you game with a 1851 point list and asks to play a friendly game at 1850 you would refuse? That kind of behaviour would get you laughed out of where I play. And if you came back, you would get ignored. Actually, the store owner banned a guy from even entering the store for any reason because he was constantly complaining about things like this, or some guys marines were missing bolters on the model so they shouldn't be able to shoot, or a guy was using flamers as proxies for plasma and they should be used as flamers.

Go back and read all of my posts and take into consideration the context in which I am defending going slightly over points. Not once have I advocated it in a competitive environment, even though I have played in tournaments that have allowed it.

In a friendly game I can see a few points over not being an issue, in a tournament it should be zero points, as often times 1-5 points over doesn't actually mean 1-5 points extra, but rather more since you're utilizing points you'd otherwise be locked out of. As in if you're at 1845, and took a Fire Warrior you'd only be 4 points over at 1854, but you didn't gain just 4 points, you gained 9.

I usually make an effort to stay at or just under the points limit that's set in my games. I'm fine with it if someone is a few points over though, although if they're more than 5 points over I'm usually going to talk to them about it.

CrowSplat wrote:
So you are honestly telling me that if Joe Newbro shoes up to wherever you game with a 1851 point list and asks to play a friendly game at 1850 you would refuse?

Yes, I would refuse. Since my hypothetical opponent is willing to cheat to give themselves an advantage before the game even begins I can expect the game to have more incidents of cheating and/or attempting to bend the rules in their favor. Models moving just a little bit of extra distance to get into range, cover saves always being determined in their favor, etc. There's no reason for their list to be 1851 points besides a refusal to follow basic rules of the game.

or a guy was using flamers as proxies for plasma and they should be used as flamers.

You do realize that WYSIWYG is a thing, right? Honestly, if I played in that store I'd be glad to be done with them. If a store is kicking people out for trying to play by the rules of the game then it sounds like a pretty unpleasant place to play.

CrowSplat wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

CrowSplat wrote:

Shouldn't according to whom? There is no official printed rule that says in a 1500 point game you can use up to 1500 points and no more.

.

The Rulebook wrote:
Simply add up the points values of all the units in your army, and make sure that the total does not exceed the limit agreed upon for the game.

Acting as a limit is pretty much exactly what a limit is for...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CrowSplat wrote:

The point is that it is possible to make a list where you can not remove anything without compromising the integrity of the list, where any change would result in some pretty significant changes in gameplay.

Yes, that's true.

It's exactly the reason for the points limit.

Quotes rulebook without giving citation.... Color me unimpressed.

So you are honestly telling me that if Joe Newbro shoes up to wherever you game with a 1851 point list and asks to play a friendly game at 1850 you would refuse? That kind of behaviour would get you laughed out of where I play. And if you came back, you would get ignored. Actually, the store owner banned a guy from even entering the store for any reason because he was constantly complaining about things like this, or some guys marines were missing bolters on the model so they shouldn't be able to shoot, or a guy was using flamers as proxies for plasma and they should be used as flamers.

Go back and read all of my posts and take into consideration the context in which I am defending going slightly over points. Not once have I advocated it in a competitive environment, even though I have played in tournaments that have allowed it.

So where you play, its more important to take those few extra points than it is to honor your agreements. Gotcha. If Joe Newbro knows his list is 1,851 points, then why is he asking for a 1,850 points game if not to cause problems?

And as for your 'citation', page 116 under the heading 'Army Selection Methods':

To use points limits, you will need to reference each unit's points value, which you can find in its Army List Entry. Simply add up the points values of all the units in your army, and make sure that the total does not exceed the limit agreed upon for the game.

In a competitive environment I wouldn't allow it.

But in a friendly three points makes no difference to me, and forcing you to remove elements of your list for just 3 points is a bit tedious.

Yknow normally I can't see how people think dakkadakka is a negative place full of angry veterens. It confuses me how being accurate to deficancies in codex discussion makes you bitter, or hating a model for its lack of options despite its quality. But this thread right here makes me see at least part of that angry TFG side of the forum.

Will agree on pushing these sorts of people out of groups: encouraging WYSIWYG is fair, as is balanced point limits. But being a obnoxious person and demanding things of others to satisfy what you think is "right" in a non-tournament setting makes you a toxic component to the community. If someone is trying to jam in a couple points and lie about the point total fine, bring it up and have a discussion. Maybe buy a melta bomb, or ask your oponent to get rid of that flamer in his squad. But to just drop a game, and talk down to a player like some elitist individual is rude, period.

autumnlotus wrote:
Will agree on pushing these sorts of people out of groups: encouraging WYSIWYG is fair, as is balanced point limits. But being a obnoxious person and demanding things of others to satisfy what you think is "right" in a non-tournament setting makes you a toxic component to the community. If someone is trying to jam in a couple points and lie about the point total fine, bring it up and have a discussion. Maybe buy a melta bomb, or ask your oponent to get rid of that flamer in his squad. But to just drop a game, and talk down to a player like some elitist individual is rude, period.

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that asking a player to follow the rules of the game was considered offensive. Do you also consider it offensive to point out that your opponent just moved their models 7" instead of 6" to get into range? Would you still rant about people "demanding things of others" if they refused to grant the extra inch of movement?

I don't really care if people are like 3pts over or something, this typically doesn't bother me.

For organized events, one must stick to the limit, that's just something that must be accepted, cut whatever points you need to in order to get under that limit.

Aside from that however, I don't really care if someone is a small number of points over

Particularly in 7th, where the points are...increasingly meaningless and people are seemingly perfectly happy to play their 1850pt armies against 2500pt armies as long as GW apparently says those extra points don't count because formations have no explicit costs...

 Peregrine wrote:


I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that asking a player to follow the rules of the game was considered offensive. Do you also consider it offensive to point out that your opponent just moved their models 7" instead of 6" to get into range? Would you still rant about people "demanding things of others" if they refused to grant the extra inch of movement?

If someone pointed out a mistake? Of course not, I would thank them for correcting me. The same if someone counted my army up and said I was over by 10 points, I would apologize and take a model or item off the board. The context here is a firm and condescending attitude to those who think 1-4 points is somehow worth arguing over, and potentially dropping a game. That is the toxic attitude, that this rules lawyer-esque opinion that is more important then the game itself. I know that my group can talk to eachother kindly because we all know this is a game that is meant to be about fun and not strict rules. So if someone comes in that's new and demands this that and all of these exact rules be followed, being rude and talking down to others, yes we would ignore them until the corrected that behavior or left

autumnlotus wrote:
The context here is a firm and condescending attitude to those who think 1-4 points is somehow worth arguing over, and potentially dropping a game.

If it isn't worth arguing over then cut things out of your list until you are following the rules of the game. You can't have it both ways, if the points are no big deal then you shouldn't care if you don't get to have them.

That is the toxic attitude, that this rules lawyer-esque opinion that is more important then the game itself.

It isn't rules lawyering, the rules are perfectly clear. The fact that certain players want to give themselves an advantage by breaking the rules does not make their critics rules lawyers.

I know that my group can talk to eachother kindly because we all know this is a game that is meant to be about fun and not strict rules. So if someone comes in that's new and demands this that and all of these exact rules be followed, being rude and talking down to others, yes we would ignore them until the corrected that behavior or left

IOW, "let us cheat or you're not welcome here".

Or its simply people being laid back , and those that push harder and harder about exact points is being a "stop having fun and play my way" sort of person. It's a rule, I am not disputing that. Having exactly X point count is great to have, but to everyone around here its no a make it break situation. If you asked politely to change it I would do it, but if it requires me to go below I would ask if we could work out a way to be even even if it means playing 1495 or 1502 together. And if its a competitive event yes it should be assumed that exact value is important. But this attitude right here, in or out of the context of this discussion? Is not going to make anyone friends and should be smothered out of store or group

autumnlotus wrote:
Or its simply people being laid back

No it isn't. If you are genuinely laid back about it you would just play a 1497 point list in a 1500 point game if you can't add anything else without going over 1500. What you are actually doing is acting like you're entitled to those extra points and making a huge deal about any suggestion that you stop breaking the rules to give yourself an advantage.

I would ask if we could work out a way to be even even if it means playing 1495 or 1502 together.

IOW, "I would ask if we could work out a way where I get to keep my advantage and you get nothing". If I build a 1500 point list there probably isn't any simple change I can make to change it by +/- 5 points, at least without just throwing in a useless melta bomb. So why should I have to adjust my list to play at a non-standard point level just because you didn't do a good job of optimizing yours?

Because it's a game. If you need to obsess over the exact amount of points, it leads to conclusions on how you act while playing. I bet if you counted out an army that was 15 points under, you wouldn't be complaining. It's a desire to be Right, not a desire for perfect balance. Because if that was the case you wouldn't be playing 40k in general. If an army was made competitively I could understand wanting to avoid point scrounging, but most in the community are just random or fluffy games for fun. I'm not saying we should go full AoS (as that is the path of insanity), but given we play a game where I have to pay a points tax to play chaos while space marines get free vehicles, don't be surprised when this balance argument doesn't reach my ears

To complement what I wrote earlier: if it's so hard to avoid going over the points limit, surely that just means you have to get better at list crafting to points are used more optimally?

autumnlotus wrote:
Because it's a game. If you need to obsess over the exact amount of points, it leads to conclusions on how you act while playing.

Similarly, I could argue that stubbornly insisting on breaking the rules to grant yourself an advantage leads to conclusions on how you will act while playing.

I bet if you counted out an army that was 15 points under, you wouldn't be complaining.

You're right, I wouldn't, because that's a legal list. We both had 1500 points to spend, and we both made legal lists. The fact that you felt that your 1485 point list was better than an alternative 1500 point list you could have made instead is not my problem.

but most in the community are just random or fluffy games for fun.

If it's just a game for fun then why do you need to keep the extra points in your list? Surely if you're just playing for fluff and fun then it doesn't matter if you spend fewer points than your opponent, since winning doesn't really matter.

This is an assumption I never agreed to: I don't insist on keeping the points in for extra. The first time you ask me I'll do it, and try to be more exact if possible. But constantly asking "is that list following the rules?" At the start of every game will make me less interested in playing with you. Rules for rules sake is a very short sighted way of seeing things, and just because a list is legal does not mean it is fair. If I was 15 points less then the listed amount, and I ask you to lower your list, is that fair?

This conversation, at least in my part, is nothing about following the rules. It's about respect for your opponent before the exact rules. It's why someone that starts argueing about three or four rules a game is considered TFG. They aren't exploiting rules, they are just being inconsiderate and mean spirited

autumnlotus wrote:
But constantly asking "is that list following the rules?" At the start of every game will make me less interested in playing with you.

I see. So you're not interested in playing with people who actually verify your list and pay attention to what you're taking? I don't understand how you can even play the game like that. Every time I play a game I bring a written list with all of the point totals clearly marked (along with all unit upgrades, etc). Even a casual glance at my written list will tell you how many points I have spent.

Also, YOU have an obligation to announce the fact that your list is over the agreed-on point limit, even if I never ask. Failure to do so is blatant cheating.

If I was 15 points less then the listed amount, and I ask you to lower your list, is that fair?

No, because it's not my fault that you didn't spend your last 1500 points. We agreed on 1500 points, we both had the same resources available. You don't get to change the point level and force me to cut stuff just because you decided that your 1485 point list was stronger than an alternative 1500 point list.

It's why someone that starts argueing about three or four rules a game is considered TFG.

You have a very strange definition of TFG. If your opponent makes 3-4 rules mistakes a game then it is reasonable to argue about 3-4 rules a game. There is no obligation to let your opponent benefit from rule "mistakes" just because you've already reached your quota of rule arguments.

I think I see the problem here. Your local meta sounds like your local meta is very similar to a tournament with expectations to have everything to be in written form and every rule being done to the letter. In mine we don't review eachothers lists before a game, we simply play. If we are over points we tell the person, and they usually don't mind or politely ask to lower it or add something if it would require major tinkering to the list to fit better. It's not quite "beer & pretzels", but there is a level of trust even with pickup games unless that trust is broken that's fine, but there is a reason we avoid direct stubborn people about rules. It can easily reach levels where a player will talk down to their opponent, be condescending and brutish with expressing rules corrections, and generally being unpleasant to play with. That's not you, as far as I'm concerned, but this general demanding attitude for the rules to " just be so" makes a lot of people here feel unwelcome. So yes those sorts of people have been asked to leave, after multiple requests to be more respectful, and nobody is upset about them being gone. Usually they go to a store in the town neighboring ours with a more competitive scene, known for being full of WAAC players and money reward tournaments. More power to them, but that's not the default playstyle or attitude

autumnlotus wrote:
In mine we don't review eachothers lists before a game, we simply play.

Why would you ever want to do this? Even in the most casual of games I always show my list and ask my opponent to go through theirs. That way there's no ambiguity about what each model on the table represents, and no awkward moment late in the game where someone says "but I thought that was a flamer squad, not a melta squad!".

That's not you, as far as I'm concerned, but this general demanding attitude for the rules to " just be so" makes a lot of people here feel unwelcome.

If people feel unwelcome because they don't like being asked to follow the rules instead of breaking them to gain an advantage (AKA cheating) then I want them to feel unwelcome. I want that kind of person out of the community so that I don't have to constantly watch every move they make or worry that some poor newbie is going to be taken advantage of. What you're describing isn't casual "beer and pretzels" gaming, it's blatant cheating.

What in describing is a game that is most if the time equal, and sometimes off by a few points one way or another. There is nobody bringing an extra 50pts to a game, nor is anyone disguising units and lying about loadouts. Granted, sometimes lists end up surprising people. I have had one situation on fighting an all hellhound squadren with nothing but Cultists and sorcerers frantically summoning anti-armor. Was that a mistake on ignoring list reading at the start? Sure, it was a mistake and was a lil annoying, but it was still amusing. What we don't have is confusion on the board. We go through our lists on a general basis before a game, and into further detail if someone is confused. For newbies I will show them my list and explain how list building works there is very little cheating over here, and the few people who do are called out on it, so I would prefer you to keep your imflamitory phrases to yourself.

Except going over in points IS cheating because the BRB said so. He even quoted it.

If you agree to a points limit, it is where the limit is set. You know this ahead of time and should be able to build a list under it, I have done this before and have even play a tournament 200 points down when I forgot a unit.

If you are asking to go over, You have chosen to ask if you can cheat. Both players should know the points when building a list.
You can choose to put down what ever you want as a group, but turning up after the other player has put together there list. Pulled out models and got ready is showing disrespect, it's showing how little you care when you could have ask for more at first.
Unless they are a new player there is no excuse for this, if it's just a few points. Drop it.

There seems to be a certain amount of hypocrisy going on with several of the people advocating live and let live with extra points.

There's this constant argument that a few points don't matter and that you should be more laid back about that sort of thing. However, if those few points don't matter, then why don't you be the 'laid back' one and take them out of your list? According to you, they don't matter - hence you have no attachment to them or any need to keep them. So, why not do the polite thing and remove them? Then you can congratulate yourself for being laid back, and never have to trouble your opponent at all.