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.

Hey all!


I wanted to start a discussion about the lack of acceptance towards models and the competitive spirit in general. I remember the days where you could bring a hard list to not only pick up games at your flgs but also to the forums. People saw it as a challenge, and a lot of fun to play against and try to beat. It seems since sixth came out, people don't want to try and adapt anymore... They will simply call people WAAC or other nicknames to make them feel better about bringing a soft list. On the forums they chastise change. "Flyers are OP", "lords of war are cheese", those are some things you might see and hear. I'm glad gw made low legal. I get to bring my stompa and baneblade to regular games! I love the challenge and excitement of snap shooting at flyers and seeing that odd autocannon team strip off Hp and take down that night scythe! Do people really want lackluster battles with sub par units? That's like going to an action movie with no guns, or at best nerf guns.

Tldr, people should embrace change. After all it's closed mindedness that caused slavery, and many other crappy things like that. Embrace change people, add some excitement to your life. Stop complaining every time GW brings us something different and exciting.

Yes, I like lackluster games with sub-par units. Everything is cooler when nothing is powerful.

If it where my way (and lucky it isnt) everyone will play as a different guard army with all foot infantry and only the basic leman russ.

Sub-par and lackluster makes the best games. Chuck in some heinous big models and it gets dumbed down to who shoots better.

So, no offence. You are playing dumbed down 40k. Stop embracing stupidity and advance beyond basics. Stop spreading stupidity in wargaming and promote real tactics. Down with the arms race - its a drain on your wallet. Donate your arms race funds to curing cancer and do something decent.

TLDR - the way you play is boring and basic, you GW "sheeple." Also, the Expendables movie is why 40k is terrible the way you play it.

Dalymiddleboro wrote:After all it's closed mindedness that caused slavery, and many other crappy things like that.

Robert Downey Jr said something about "Never going full" something.

I can't remember specifically what he was talking about, but you definitely just did that.

This topic needs to be locked with a quickness.

I remember the days where you could bring a hard list to not only pick up games at your flgs but also to the forums.

These days never existed. They might exist in some metas, but not all. Sometimes, all the FLGS crowd wants to do is hang out, throw some dice, and shoot the breeze.

I get to bring my stompa and baneblade to regular games!

Your posting history suggests that you're a terrible person to play against, not for your lists but your attitude.

After all it's closed mindedness that caused slavery, and many other crappy things like that

Uh... no. Not... no.

The baneblade and stompa cost a total of 255 US dollars together.The only good answer to a LOW is another LOW. Since they're so expensive, it's hard for other players to field them. The game suddenly becomes closer to pay to win when you include LOW into the mix.

Also please don't try and use slavery to prove your point about a tabletop game. It's offensive.

Oh look, another DMB thread.

We know how this will end. Just move on and let the thread die people.

 Swastakowey wrote:
Yes, I like lackluster games with sub-par units. Everything is cooler when nothing is powerful.

If it where my way (and lucky it isnt) everyone will play as a different guard army with all foot infantry and only the basic leman russ.

Sub-par and lackluster makes the best games. Chuck in some heinous big models and it gets dumbed down to who shoots better.

So, no offence. You are playing dumbed down 40k. Stop embracing stupidity and advance beyond basics. Stop spreading stupidity in wargaming and promote real tactics. Down with the arms race - its a drain on your wallet. Donate your arms race funds to curing cancer and do something decent.

TLDR - the way you play is boring and basic, you GW "sheeple." Also, the Expendables movie is why 40k is terrible the way you play it.

That just sounds terrible. It's a challenge dealing with units that are durable and take chunks of models off the table, not to mention satisfying. It's not very satisfying killing a basic Russ. 40k was made to do crazy awesome things on the tabletop. Not punching a cat and running away. Stop having a boring life my man.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
The baneblade and stompa cost a total of 255 US dollars together.The only good answer to a LOW is another LOW. Since they're so expensive, it's hard for other players to field them. The game suddenly becomes closer to pay to win when you include LOW into the mix.

Also please don't try and use slavery to prove your point about a tabletop game. It's offensive.

I called slavery a terrible thing. How's that offensive? I was suggesting others be open minded and accepting.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
Yes, I like lackluster games with sub-par units. Everything is cooler when nothing is powerful.

If it where my way (and lucky it isnt) everyone will play as a different guard army with all foot infantry and only the basic leman russ.

Sub-par and lackluster makes the best games. Chuck in some heinous big models and it gets dumbed down to who shoots better.

So, no offence. You are playing dumbed down 40k. Stop embracing stupidity and advance beyond basics. Stop spreading stupidity in wargaming and promote real tactics. Down with the arms race - its a drain on your wallet. Donate your arms race funds to curing cancer and do something decent.

TLDR - the way you play is boring and basic, you GW "sheeple." Also, the Expendables movie is why 40k is terrible the way you play it.

That just sounds terrible. It's a challenge dealing with units that are durable and take chunks of models off the table, not to mention satisfying. It's not very satisfying killing a basic Russ. 40k was made to do crazy awesome things on the tabletop. Not punching a cat and running away. Stop having a boring life my man.

Your're right, maybe I should change the cereal I have been eating for the last 10 years. Maybe I need to kill my 2 year old cat and buy a new one. Maybe I should try some off milk for some excitement. Maybe I really do need change. What should I do?

 Swastakowey wrote:
Yes, I like lackluster games with sub-par units. Everything is cooler when nothing is powerful.

If it where my way (and lucky it isnt) everyone will play as a different guard army with all foot infantry and only the basic leman russ.

Sub-par and lackluster makes the best games. Chuck in some heinous big models and it gets dumbed down to who shoots better.

So, no offence. You are playing dumbed down 40k. Stop embracing stupidity and advance beyond basics. Stop spreading stupidity in wargaming and promote real tactics. Down with the arms race - its a drain on your wallet. Donate your arms race funds to curing cancer and do something decent.

TLDR - the way you play is boring and basic, you GW "sheeple." Also, the Expendables movie is why 40k is terrible the way you play it.

What? you dare to bring a OP LRBT? You WAAC powergamer! I would never play a game against you. Anything more powerful than conscripts is OP and should be banned from serious play as it makes the game unbalanced.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
Yes, I like lackluster games with sub-par units. Everything is cooler when nothing is powerful.

If it where my way (and lucky it isnt) everyone will play as a different guard army with all foot infantry and only the basic leman russ.

Sub-par and lackluster makes the best games. Chuck in some heinous big models and it gets dumbed down to who shoots better.

So, no offence. You are playing dumbed down 40k. Stop embracing stupidity and advance beyond basics. Stop spreading stupidity in wargaming and promote real tactics. Down with the arms race - its a drain on your wallet. Donate your arms race funds to curing cancer and do something decent.

TLDR - the way you play is boring and basic, you GW "sheeple." Also, the Expendables movie is why 40k is terrible the way you play it.

That just sounds terrible. It's a challenge dealing with units that are durable and take chunks of models off the table, not to mention satisfying. It's not very satisfying killing a basic Russ. 40k was made to do crazy awesome things on the tabletop. Not punching a cat and running away. Stop having a boring life my man.

Comming from someone whom has the poster history as you do, I dare say you need to thread carefull when making such claims. And no, no one I have meet in the decade or so I have been playing 40k has taken any enjoyment in such lists, Most people popular to your deranged views do not wish to come across as a less than pleasent fellow to be around And I fail to see what all this has to do with slavery and punching cats

Maybe he wants us to punch the cat TWICE then run away. Heresy for sure. Everyone knows you only punch the cat once!

Wonder how long this thread will last. Mods just closed down a thread giving all in it a get out of jail free card pass on their behavior. Looks like it might not be long before they do it to this one as well.

That being said, I dont mind playing against them. Many of them require specific tailoring to face but thats why I bring extra models with me whenI play inpublic and bring multiple army lists.

if someone doesnt want to play against them, they dont have to. Sorry, I'll pass on this game. They should be free to do that and not be called names or put down (just as they should not call names or put down the guy using them). If it is a tourney, find out what is allowed in it. If they are allowed in it and you dont want to face them, dont participate.

What about your opponent?
What about the social contract?
What if the person is new?
What if the person only gets to play once a month and doesn't like getting rapetrained off the board?
What if you just kept your super hard uber lists for the people that agree to play them?
What if you just use those same wicked evil lists for tournaments and tourney practice?
What if you just maybe acted like a god damn grown up and see its a game, not everyone has to enjoy a WAAC experience?
Why don't you instead find like minded people as yourself and just play them?
Why do WE have to adopt your style?

I know the answer to all the above questions. Its because your an a--hole.

Edit: Lots of anger on here, my comment wasn't needed. No need to crush people with your disagreement to something they suggested.

In my experience it has hardly changed when facing real people.
I think your main issue might be with fora and the internet in general.
Perhaps this image explains it the best: http://fcdn.mtbr.com/attachments/recycle-bin/635980d1314369883-inherent-problem-internet-anonymity-215499488_8pszr-l-2.jpg

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
Hey all!


I wanted to start a discussion about the lack of acceptance towards models and the competitive spirit in general. I remember the days where you could bring a hard list to not only pick up games at your flgs but also to the forums. People saw it as a challenge, and a lot of fun to play against and try to beat. It seems since sixth came out, people don't want to try and adapt anymore... They will simply call people WAAC or other nicknames to make them feel better about bringing a soft list. On the forums they chastise change. "Flyers are OP", "lords of war are cheese", those are some things you might see and hear. I'm glad gw made low legal. I get to bring my stompa and baneblade to regular games! I love the challenge and excitement of snap shooting at flyers and seeing that odd autocannon team strip off Hp and take down that night scythe! Do people really want lackluster battles with sub par units? That's like going to an action movie with no guns, or at best nerf guns.

Tldr, people should embrace change. After all it's closed mindedness that caused slavery, and many other crappy things like that. Embrace change people, add some excitement to your life. Stop complaining every time GW brings us something different and exciting.

I think the issue is that more and more, we're encountering issues where a general "take all comers" list is increasingly impossible, there are more and more things that require specialized hard counters to deal with, coupled with a large number of things that simply *never* see the field and a lot of things that *always* see the field, all wrapped up in an increasingly complex and disorganized array of army options lacking any coherent structure or direction.

Ultimately this means we're getting a lot of repeat army lists (and variations thereof) that often rely on building armies in ways never legal before, and that bear little-to-no resemblance to anything you'd actually see in the 40k universe and/or function entirely off of one gimmicky combo, and it is increasingly difficult to get pickup games on what people perceive to be a relatively even and common ground.

That is to say nothing of the repeated hyping and slobbering over such armies by places such as Bell of Lost Souls.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
Yes, I like lackluster games with sub-par units. Everything is cooler when nothing is powerful.

If it where my way (and lucky it isnt) everyone will play as a different guard army with all foot infantry and only the basic leman russ.

Sub-par and lackluster makes the best games. Chuck in some heinous big models and it gets dumbed down to who shoots better.

So, no offence. You are playing dumbed down 40k. Stop embracing stupidity and advance beyond basics. Stop spreading stupidity in wargaming and promote real tactics. Down with the arms race - its a drain on your wallet. Donate your arms race funds to curing cancer and do something decent.

TLDR - the way you play is boring and basic, you GW "sheeple." Also, the Expendables movie is why 40k is terrible the way you play it.

That just sounds terrible. It's a challenge dealing with units that are durable and take chunks of models off the table, not to mention satisfying. It's not very satisfying killing a basic Russ. 40k was made to do crazy awesome things on the tabletop. Not punching a cat and running away. Stop having a boring life my man.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
The baneblade and stompa cost a total of 255 US dollars together.The only good answer to a LOW is another LOW. Since they're so expensive, it's hard for other players to field them. The game suddenly becomes closer to pay to win when you include LOW into the mix.

Also please don't try and use slavery to prove your point about a tabletop game. It's offensive.

I called slavery a terrible thing. How's that offensive? I was suggesting others be open minded and accepting.

No, you're trying to equate the enslavement of an entire group of people and another few decades of oppression with criticisms about a tabletop game. Those are in no way comparable

OP similar post to your many historical ones.

Your post in a nutshell:
"I want pick-up game players to be forced to play the most powerful army I can think of and lose with no complaints if they brought the weaker list."

A simple suggestion to get what you want, tell your opponent:
"I want a no-holds-barred scrap in 40k with the most powerful list you can make, see you next week.".

I personally think the OP tries to find "victims" to challenge and is getting frustrated with them refusing.
Attempting to brow-beat with arguments: "but it is in the rules!", "it is a valid list!", "it is a challenge!" and the fallacy argument "embrace change!".

The only change really, is players of 40k are wise to GW rules not being balanced or fair and is subject to the flavor of the next publication and that this is not a truly competitive game, just a glorified version of rock-paper-scissors with list building.

If people have a different idea of how they play the game than you, it is their right to choose another player that matches their style.

So go find a player that plays like you and consider it a challenge! Happy Hunting!

If I don't like LOW...I want slavery. Okay.
Got it.

Maybe, just maybe, some people have played against LOW and didn't find it fun? Maybe that might be a thing. It's possible. If only there had recently been a thread about that very subject and people talked about their reasons for not liking it. (Hint: It wasn't about "cheese.")
Your lack of reading comprehension caused the Great Chicago Fire.

 MWHistorian wrote:
If I don't like LOW...I want slavery. Okay.
Got it.

Maybe, just maybe, some people have played against LOW and didn't find it fun? Maybe that might be a thing. It's possible. If only there had recently been a thread about that very subject and people talked about their reasons for not liking it. (Hint: It wasn't about "cheese.")
Your lack of reading comprehension caused the Great Chicago Fire.

Remember, rule number 1. . Also, this isn't a LoW thread. It's a thread about acceptance and LoW were used as an example. Please work on your reading comprehension before you take a jab at mine.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
If I don't like LOW...I want slavery. Okay.
Got it.

Maybe, just maybe, some people have played against LOW and didn't find it fun? Maybe that might be a thing. It's possible. If only there had recently been a thread about that very subject and people talked about their reasons for not liking it. (Hint: It wasn't about "cheese.")
Your lack of reading comprehension caused the Great Chicago Fire.

Remember, rule number 1. . Also, this isn't a LoW thread. It's a thread about acceptance and LoW were used as an example. Please work on your reading comprehension before you take a jab at mine.

You havent helped me with change yet...

I asked earlier and you have ignored me. How can you claim to be preaching acceptance when you ignore those in need of your guidance?

 Swastakowey wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
If I don't like LOW...I want slavery. Okay.
Got it.

Maybe, just maybe, some people have played against LOW and didn't find it fun? Maybe that might be a thing. It's possible. If only there had recently been a thread about that very subject and people talked about their reasons for not liking it. (Hint: It wasn't about "cheese.")
Your lack of reading comprehension caused the Great Chicago Fire.

Remember, rule number 1. . Also, this isn't a LoW thread. It's a thread about acceptance and LoW were used as an example. Please work on your reading comprehension before you take a jab at mine.

You havent helped me with change yet...

I asked earlier and you have ignored me. How can you claim to be preaching acceptance when you ignore those in need of your guidance?

I accept you good sir, but change must come from ones self!

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
If I don't like LOW...I want slavery. Okay.
Got it.

Maybe, just maybe, some people have played against LOW and didn't find it fun? Maybe that might be a thing. It's possible. If only there had recently been a thread about that very subject and people talked about their reasons for not liking it. (Hint: It wasn't about "cheese.")
Your lack of reading comprehension caused the Great Chicago Fire.

Remember, rule number 1. . Also, this isn't a LoW thread. It's a thread about acceptance and LoW were used as an example. Please work on your reading comprehension before you take a jab at mine.

You havent helped me with change yet...

I asked earlier and you have ignored me. How can you claim to be preaching acceptance when you ignore those in need of your guidance?

I accept you good sir, but change must come from ones self!

I need specifics mate. To get followers you need to put forth the effort!

What can I do to change?

 Swastakowey wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
If I don't like LOW...I want slavery. Okay.
Got it.

Maybe, just maybe, some people have played against LOW and didn't find it fun? Maybe that might be a thing. It's possible. If only there had recently been a thread about that very subject and people talked about their reasons for not liking it. (Hint: It wasn't about "cheese.")
Your lack of reading comprehension caused the Great Chicago Fire.

Remember, rule number 1. . Also, this isn't a LoW thread. It's a thread about acceptance and LoW were used as an example. Please work on your reading comprehension before you take a jab at mine.

You havent helped me with change yet...

I asked earlier and you have ignored me. How can you claim to be preaching acceptance when you ignore those in need of your guidance?

I accept you good sir, but change must come from ones self!

I need specifics mate. To get followers you need to put forth the effort!

What can I do to change?

Like myself many moons ago, you must wait or the right time to harness your inner change. When the time is right you'll know. ANd you will love life. I wish you luck and happiness!

There are too many personal attacks in this thread. Locking, and will add appropriate warnings to specific users later if needed...