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.

Taffy17 wrote:
Went down to GW last night for a quick game. Got paired up against a guy who i knew was notorious for being "that guy".

short of constantly just refusing to play him is there anything i can do without stooping to his level?

If not should the game be changed to prevent this type of behaviour?

That sucks.

And no, there isn't anything you can do, so you should simply refuse to play him. Period.

The only change to the game should be packing up your minis when things get stupid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:
"I've seen him run apocalypse formations at 1500pts against beginners."

Nope nope nope nope nope.

Depends on the formation. If it's one of the buy the regular models and pay extra +XX points for a couple special rules, it might not even be close to "broken".

Suppose there was a CSM formation that required 6 units of Possessed, but counted them as Troops. Would that be unfair against noobs? Probably not.

 Desubot wrote:
The intention (point) of unbound is to be able to play with your "collection" without that pesky Force org. This is paraphrasing the WD article when it was first introduced.

You are free to say it allows for "some" people to "abuse" it but the game is already abusable without unbound.

ergo the person who has the bigger collection will abuse it more . In smaller games he doesn't have to pay the HQ or troop tax, or what ever happens to be not optimal, but an army has to take or can't take, because of FoC.

It maybe, and I say maybe because people with better armies would just get an even better edge over those with weaker ones, works in places where everyone owns multiple armies of above normal size.

It was obvious from the post that the points limit was 500 points. And equally obvious that this person went over that limit - which means he broke the rules. Breaking the rules is cheating.

The rules say "usualy", if the rules said Both players will use the same points limited then it would be cheating. In fact thanks to how awesome clear english is you don't know if the you in the "entirely up to you" is ment for you the player or you the two players. Add the usually and it is more or less free game to do what ever you want. Of course your opponent can say he won't play you, but he can't say your cheating, if your playing it by the rules.

The games had literally nothing to do with Unbound. It was not the source of the problem.

Let me check. Apo formations in non apo games. That is unbound. Unbound riptide lists. That is unbound. Sternguard and knights, seems unbound too. But maybe it is just FW.

Bro that isnt even unbound they would of both been playing apocalypses so there wouldn't even be regular scoring.

You have no permission to use apoc formation outside of apoc.

You can do whatever you want in the ed of 40k because ever thing is legal.

zilka86 wrote:
Point of unbound is to brake the game. Gw did so people can be tfg and waac players and ther list is leagal my last game i used 5wk and 8ws no troops that's it gw wants to promote power gaming so all play along with there new ideas

GW don't write rules for WAAC players. Unbound was intended to encourage people to buy a wider range of models instead of just the one army. The fact that it allows abusive lists is just a side-effect, and not one that GW considers to be important since they don't consider playing to win an appropriate way to play the game.

zilka86 wrote:
You can do whatever you want in the ed of 40k because ever thing is legal.

The hell?
Can I roll a die and say on a 2+ I win?
If the rules do not support this, not everything is legal.

Also, you know you can say no to games you don't want to play, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

zilka86 wrote:
Point of unbound is to brake the game. Gw did so people can be tfg and waac players and ther list is leagal my last game i used 5wk and 8ws no troops that's it gw wants to promote power gaming so all play along with there new ideas

GW don't write rules for WAAC players. Unbound was intended to encourage people to buy a wider range of models instead of just the one army. The fact that it allows abusive lists is just a side-effect, and not one that GW considers to be important since they don't consider playing to win an appropriate way to play the game.

I love how GW hates competitive play. Would be funny if the executive board had a internal 40k tournament to get the chairman position...

The first ever unbound tournament, with no netlists.

zilka86 wrote:
How can i be wrong

That's the spirit!

Don't ask questions you don't want to know the answer to.

 insaniak wrote:

zilka86 wrote:
Point of unbound is to brake the game. Gw did so people can be tfg and waac players and ther list is leagal my last game i used 5wk and 8ws no troops that's it gw wants to promote power gaming so all play along with there new ideas

GW don't write rules for WAAC players. Unbound was intended to encourage people to buy a wider range of models instead of just the one army. The fact that it allows abusive lists is just a side-effect, and not one that GW considers to be important since they don't consider playing to win an appropriate way to play the game.

Which begs the question of why the game has rules for determining who wins.

Well because clearly the game needs a winner. You're just not supposed to be trying to win. It should be a pleasant surprise when it happens.

My people on this thread have suggested not playing That Guy when he comes to the table. Play him.

As frustrating as it can be, you learn a lot when you play That Guy. Take the time to go through a game, soak up the bad rules interpretations, the cheating, and the win at all cost attitude and use it to your advantage next time.

There was a time when people would have called me That Guy, or at least a WAAC player. I was good at it with my 5th edition CSMs. Things settled down once 6th edition came out, but I really loved messing with people's understanding of an otherwise tedious set of rules.

I would spam Khorne Berzerkers all over the table and wipe out 3 units a turn while my twin warptime DPs would smash whatever armor my opponent brought. If it was a low point game, I would still bring them all as part of an illegal list. If someone challenged me on it, I would use the "The Blood God Demands' USR that I completely made up and would sometimes pretend to read from the CSM Codex. I had a store manager convinced it was a real rule to the point where he could cite the specific wording to other players. There were a small group of CSM players who would use it all the time without getting challenged. People at my FLGS would argue about the specific wording even though it was never written.

I started playing a list that consisted of a Chaos Lord, 2 min sized CSM squads, and 33 spawn. The list dominated, there were games where I did not lose a single model. This happened precisely because everyone always moves their models towards the middle of the board, and no one really knew what kiting was or how forced movement gave them an advantage. But that kind of cheese was thick and smelly, partly because people thought spawn sucked. They sucked individually but were awesome en masse especially against 5th edition tactics.

On the being a jerk front, I would force people to look stuff up throughout a game to challenge me. Do that enough times and someone is going to give up and start rolling off for whether or not the rules actually work the way you say. Start with a series of trivial claims that can be easily disproven then make more audacious claims that only benefit you when it comes time to roll for them - you have a 50% chance of getting an unfair advantage with no downside. Once, I convinced a guy his IG did not get a shooting phase because of some special rule that comes along with Doombolt, we rolled for it and I had no shooting against me for like 3 turns. Once, I convinced a guy that he could not shoot winged DPs because there were no rules for attacking flying walkers (even though the DP was an MC, not a walker). I forced him to look up the rules in the BRB, which did not exist, and my DP suddenly became invulnerable to shooting attacks. Once, I convinced someone that the AP3 warpflame attacks from my possessed also took away fleet from his models for the turn after the attack (which was straight up invention - possessed did not have a shooting attack, I only had regular CSMs in my list, and there was no special rule that took away fleet in all of 40k.) Turned his squishy Eldar into sandwich spread.

While none of this was good, it was entertaining. Other players knew what I was up to and we would spend time figuring out what the actual rules were after a game. There were people who wanted to play me just to see if they could keep the rules straight. There were other people who felt violated and would make accusations, but I never really felt like I was being a jerk because I would always cop to whatever it was I was doing and did not mind if someone walked away. A couple times, grown men cried, which was sad. I would buy them a soda, tell them it's just a game and do what I could to make them feel better.

But I never really looked at it as the worst thing in the world. Either we had a fun, unique game or someone learned a lot about the rules. That Guys are not all bad.

Errrr it's only a game of toy soldiers, you know.

 techsoldaten wrote:
My people on this thread have suggested not playing That Guy when he comes to the table. Play him.

As frustrating as it can be, you learn a lot when you play That Guy. Take the time to go through a game, soak up the bad rules interpretations, the cheating, and the win at all cost attitude and use it to your advantage next time.

There was a time when people would have called me That Guy, or at least a WAAC player. I was good at it with my 5th edition CSMs. Things settled down once 6th edition came out, but I really loved messing with people's understanding of an otherwise tedious set of rules.

I would spam Khorne Berzerkers all over the table and wipe out 3 units a turn while my twin warptime DPs would smash whatever armor my opponent brought. If it was a low point game, I would still bring them all as part of an illegal list. If someone challenged me on it, I would use the "The Blood God Demands' USR that I completely made up and would sometimes pretend to read from the CSM Codex. I had a store manager convinced it was a real rule to the point where he could cite the specific wording to other players. There were a small group of CSM players who would use it all the time without getting challenged. People at my FLGS would argue about the specific wording even though it was never written.

I started playing a list that consisted of a Chaos Lord, 2 min sized CSM squads, and 33 spawn. The list dominated, there were games where I did not lose a single model. This happened precisely because everyone always moves their models towards the middle of the board, and no one really knew what kiting was or how forced movement gave them an advantage. But that kind of cheese was thick and smelly, partly because people thought spawn sucked. They sucked individually but were awesome en masse especially against 5th edition tactics.

On the being a jerk front, I would force people to look stuff up throughout a game to challenge me. Do that enough times and someone is going to give up and start rolling off for whether or not the rules actually work the way you say. Start with a series of trivial claims that can be easily disproven then make more audacious claims that only benefit you when it comes time to roll for them - you have a 50% chance of getting an unfair advantage with no downside. Once, I convinced a guy his IG did not get a shooting phase because of some special rule that comes along with Doombolt, we rolled for it and I had no shooting against me for like 3 turns. Once, I convinced a guy that he could not shoot winged DPs because there were no rules for attacking flying walkers (even though the DP was an MC, not a walker). I forced him to look up the rules in the BRB, which did not exist, and my DP suddenly became invulnerable to shooting attacks. Once, I convinced someone that the AP3 warpflame attacks from my possessed also took away fleet from his models for the turn after the attack (which was straight up invention - possessed did not have a shooting attack, I only had regular CSMs in my list, and there was no special rule that took away fleet in all of 40k.) Turned his squishy Eldar into sandwich spread.

While none of this was good, it was entertaining. Other players knew what I was up to and we would spend time figuring out what the actual rules were after a game. There were people who wanted to play me just to see if they could keep the rules straight. There were other people who felt violated and would make accusations, but I never really felt like I was being a jerk because I would always cop to whatever it was I was doing and did not mind if someone walked away. A couple times, grown men cried, which was sad. I would buy them a soda, tell them it's just a game and do what I could to make them feel better.

But I never really looked at it as the worst thing in the world. Either we had a fun, unique game or someone learned a lot about the rules. That Guys are not all bad.

Not sure why you are even playing, if that is your style.. That's like going into the LGS thinking "how big a jerk can I be today".. Using the "it was a unique game" excuse, is only to make it sound better in your own head

It sounds like the only person having fun in those games was you.
Nothing to be proud of there, you acted like a bell end and got away with it because those around you were too trusting to call you out.
You didn't do any one any favours, and reading that, it appears that you believe you were bringing something to the game to enhance it.
I agreed with you at the start, you should play people like that, as I am a firm believer that you should challenge yourself to improve. But "that guy" will never improve as an actual general, and will only ever be successful at a low level, they would not get away with that sort of behaviour in more serious competition. There is no real victory in cheating, or "interpreting" the rules to your advantage as you will rely on that to win.

daemons bane wrote:

Not sure why you are even playing, if that is your style.. That's like going into the LGS thinking "how big a jerk can I be today".. Using the "it was a unique game" excuse, is only to make it sound better in your own head

Nah. The measure of a jerk is whether or not that person has friends afterwards. It was just fun to mess around with people who took the game too seriously, I am not someone with a real addiction to winning.

I doubt anyone was ever hurt by anything I ever did on a tabletop, but I can say for sure people at my FLGS know the rules better as a result.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 r_squared wrote:
It sounds like the only person having fun in those games was you.
Nothing to be proud of there, you acted like a bell end and got away with it because those around you were too trusting to call you out.
You didn't do any one any favours, and reading that, it appears that you believe you were bringing something to the game to enhance it.
I agreed with you at the start, you should play people like that, as I am a firm believer that you should challenge yourself to improve. But "that guy" will never improve as an actual general, and will only ever be successful at a low level, they would not get away with that sort of behaviour in more serious competition. There is no real victory in cheating, or "interpreting" the rules to your advantage as you will rely on that to win.

Trust is a strong word and should not be used as a substitute for understanding the rules / applying some common sense. And it's not safe to assume I acted that way in a vacuum, other people bring their own creative interpretations of the rules too.

My post was really to point out the fact you can learn something from That Guy, and it was a response to all the people saying don't play him. I am saying have fun with it, it's a game between two people.

With regards to competition, I have never seen the point of a tournament and don't understand those who do.

Sounds like they just know the ones you made up.

What a terrible way to teach people the game.

@techsoldaten:

Killing and eating people made a lot of sense to Jeffrey Dahmer, and he could probably spin quite a delightful yarn about how he prepared his favorite dish, but it doesn't mean you want to invite him to the dinner party.

Kudos to you for bragging about crapping all over social contracts and wasting people's time. You must have a black belt in Forum-fu.

 techsoldaten wrote:
My people on this thread have suggested not playing That Guy when he comes to the table. Play him.

As frustrating as it can be, you learn a lot when you play That Guy. Take the time to go through a game, soak up the bad rules interpretations, the cheating, and the win at all cost attitude and use it to your advantage next time.

There was a time when people would have called me That Guy, or at least a WAAC player. I was good at it with my 5th edition CSMs. Things settled down once 6th edition came out, but I really loved messing with people's understanding of an otherwise tedious set of rules.

I would spam Khorne Berzerkers all over the table and wipe out 3 units a turn while my twin warptime DPs would smash whatever armor my opponent brought. If it was a low point game, I would still bring them all as part of an illegal list. If someone challenged me on it, I would use the "The Blood God Demands' USR that I completely made up and would sometimes pretend to read from the CSM Codex. I had a store manager convinced it was a real rule to the point where he could cite the specific wording to other players. There were a small group of CSM players who would use it all the time without getting challenged. People at my FLGS would argue about the specific wording even though it was never written.

I started playing a list that consisted of a Chaos Lord, 2 min sized CSM squads, and 33 spawn. The list dominated, there were games where I did not lose a single model. This happened precisely because everyone always moves their models towards the middle of the board, and no one really knew what kiting was or how forced movement gave them an advantage. But that kind of cheese was thick and smelly, partly because people thought spawn sucked. They sucked individually but were awesome en masse especially against 5th edition tactics.

On the being a jerk front, I would force people to look stuff up throughout a game to challenge me. Do that enough times and someone is going to give up and start rolling off for whether or not the rules actually work the way you say. Start with a series of trivial claims that can be easily disproven then make more audacious claims that only benefit you when it comes time to roll for them - you have a 50% chance of getting an unfair advantage with no downside. Once, I convinced a guy his IG did not get a shooting phase because of some special rule that comes along with Doombolt, we rolled for it and I had no shooting against me for like 3 turns. Once, I convinced a guy that he could not shoot winged DPs because there were no rules for attacking flying walkers (even though the DP was an MC, not a walker). I forced him to look up the rules in the BRB, which did not exist, and my DP suddenly became invulnerable to shooting attacks. Once, I convinced someone that the AP3 warpflame attacks from my possessed also took away fleet from his models for the turn after the attack (which was straight up invention - possessed did not have a shooting attack, I only had regular CSMs in my list, and there was no special rule that took away fleet in all of 40k.) Turned his squishy Eldar into sandwich spread.

While none of this was good, it was entertaining. Other players knew what I was up to and we would spend time figuring out what the actual rules were after a game. There were people who wanted to play me just to see if they could keep the rules straight. There were other people who felt violated and would make accusations, but I never really felt like I was being a jerk because I would always cop to whatever it was I was doing and did not mind if someone walked away. A couple times, grown men cried, which was sad. I would buy them a soda, tell them it's just a game and do what I could to make them feel better.

But I never really looked at it as the worst thing in the world. Either we had a fun, unique game or someone learned a lot about the rules. That Guys are not all bad.

This is actually pretty funny, if maniacal. Although I think it points to exactly how bloated the rules are that people would take things like that at face value, since finding the exact thing you were speaking of could be akin to looking up pathology for an exotic disease.

Not that I really agree with it, but in the context of reading this story on a forum, I'm not feeling the need to get riled up.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
Sounds like they just know the ones you made up.

What a terrible way to teach people the game.

That's what I got out of that terrifying peak into a WAAC gamers psyche... *shudder* .

 techsoldaten wrote:
My people on this thread have suggested not playing That Guy when he comes to the table. Play him.

As frustrating as it can be, you learn a lot when you play That Guy. Take the time to go through a game, soak up the bad rules interpretations, the cheating, and the win at all cost attitude and use it to your advantage next time.

There was a time when people would have called me That Guy, or at least a WAAC player. I was good at it with my 5th edition CSMs. Things settled down once 6th edition came out, but I really loved messing with people's understanding of an otherwise tedious set of rules.

I would spam Khorne Berzerkers all over the table and wipe out 3 units a turn while my twin warptime DPs would smash whatever armor my opponent brought. If it was a low point game, I would still bring them all as part of an illegal list. If someone challenged me on it, I would use the "The Blood God Demands' USR that I completely made up and would sometimes pretend to read from the CSM Codex. I had a store manager convinced it was a real rule to the point where he could cite the specific wording to other players. There were a small group of CSM players who would use it all the time without getting challenged. People at my FLGS would argue about the specific wording even though it was never written.

I started playing a list that consisted of a Chaos Lord, 2 min sized CSM squads, and 33 spawn. The list dominated, there were games where I did not lose a single model. This happened precisely because everyone always moves their models towards the middle of the board, and no one really knew what kiting was or how forced movement gave them an advantage. But that kind of cheese was thick and smelly, partly because people thought spawn sucked. They sucked individually but were awesome en masse especially against 5th edition tactics.

On the being a jerk front, I would force people to look stuff up throughout a game to challenge me. Do that enough times and someone is going to give up and start rolling off for whether or not the rules actually work the way you say. Start with a series of trivial claims that can be easily disproven then make more audacious claims that only benefit you when it comes time to roll for them - you have a 50% chance of getting an unfair advantage with no downside. Once, I convinced a guy his IG did not get a shooting phase because of some special rule that comes along with Doombolt, we rolled for it and I had no shooting against me for like 3 turns. Once, I convinced a guy that he could not shoot winged DPs because there were no rules for attacking flying walkers (even though the DP was an MC, not a walker). I forced him to look up the rules in the BRB, which did not exist, and my DP suddenly became invulnerable to shooting attacks. Once, I convinced someone that the AP3 warpflame attacks from my possessed also took away fleet from his models for the turn after the attack (which was straight up invention - possessed did not have a shooting attack, I only had regular CSMs in my list, and there was no special rule that took away fleet in all of 40k.) Turned his squishy Eldar into sandwich spread.

While none of this was good, it was entertaining. Other players knew what I was up to and we would spend time figuring out what the actual rules were after a game. There were people who wanted to play me just to see if they could keep the rules straight. There were other people who felt violated and would make accusations, but I never really felt like I was being a jerk because I would always cop to whatever it was I was doing and did not mind if someone walked away. A couple times, grown men cried, which was sad. I would buy them a soda, tell them it's just a game and do what I could to make them feel better.

But I never really looked at it as the worst thing in the world. Either we had a fun, unique game or someone learned a lot about the rules. That Guys are not all bad.

I imagine you also like to play paintball against 10 year olds.

If there's no house rule that bans unbound, then he's perfectly within his right to field most of the stuff. What gets me is that he knows he's cheating and dismisses everyone who informs him about this as pushy. Also, you're not allowed to bring apocalypse formations in normal. I know he will defend this on the basis of him trying to have fun, but he is someone that has so little of a life, that he gets his satisfaction from fielding ridiculously OP lists against new players.

Basically, he's clearly a dick. Try finding out who else is sick of him and agree to boycott playing him.

natpri771 wrote:
If there's no house rule that bans unbound, then he's perfectly within his right to field most of the stuff. What gets me is that he knows he's cheating and dismisses everyone who informs him about this as pushy. Also, you're not allowed to bring apocalypse formations in normal. I know he will defend this on the basis of him trying to have fun, but he is someone that has so little of a life, that he gets his satisfaction from fielding ridiculously OP lists against new players.

Basically, he's clearly a dick. Try finding out who else is sick of him and agree to boycott playing him.

I bet he likes trolling people on Counter Strike or League of Legends because "the lulz".

 jreilly89 wrote:

I imagine you also like to play paintball against 10 year olds.

Uh, no.

Over the last 7 years, I have mentored at least 100 people in how to play the game, organized the community at my FLGS to the point where there's about 250 active players, and generally tried to have a positive impact on the people around me. I regularly loan models to people who need them for games, have conducted modelling and painting workshops and even lent people money to get ideas to the kickstarter phase.

These are all pretty positive contributions, I would think. If anyone wants to call what I did cheating and accuse me of scumbaggery, go ahead.

But first, consider the idea that you probably cheat too. Either deliberately or passively through a lack of knowledge about the rules, I don't know many people who have not creatively interpreted something, moved a model a little more than 6 inches when it matters, rerolled something they claimed was 'cocked,' organized their assaults to that they can conveniently forget an important leadership check, forgotten that a squad was all firing something with Gets Hot, etc.

It's not like I don't notice when these 'honest' people are doing this crap and pretending like they have short memories or never read that rule. If ragequitting a table is the right and proper response to someone not being squeaky clean is the only solution, like this thread suggests, that suggests to me you guys don't have the right and proper perspective on the game yourselves.

I met a guy in a gaming store in Ohio who insisted that his Scarabs firing the ADL Quad Gun would hit with Entropic Strike. This was after playing one of the most rules lawyersy games I've ever played in my life. Needless to say we haven't played again.

Met another guy who "forgot" his codex conveniently, and all of his Annihilation Barges were equipped with TWO twin-linked tesla cannons. After the game a casual observer informed me that he was playing that all wrong. Strange how both these guys were Necron players...

You aren't under any obligation to game with idiots. Don't game with him...it's really that simple.

zilka86 wrote:
Point of unbound is to brake the game. Gw did so people can be tfg and waac players and ther list is leagal my last game i used 5wk and 8ws no troops that's it gw wants to promote power gaming so all play along with there new ideas

First of all, doesn't this forum have a rule about spelling and grammar? I have yet to read a single post by this guy that's actually coherent. Second, you cheated. Unbound means you can ignore FOC, it doesn't mean you can take a wave serpent with no troops in it. 2 weeks ago in another thread you were complaining that you couldn't afford to spam the new power units and keep up with all the TFG players. In that time you've apparently managed to purchase, build and game with 5 WK and 8 serpents (an illegal list of about $1000 in models). Either you're lying to make a point or somehow put that list together recently. I have a hard time believing someone who isn't even capable of writing a coherent short sentence drops $1k/month on 40k.

Basically, it boils down to two things:

Play him and rules lawyer him, when you do, since you know he'll cheat.

Don't play him.


We've had one version of TFG, at least when it comes to the whole cheating aspect. When the entire community started checking him on everything he was cheating on his army, he quit coming around. Also, since it is a GW store, you can't be using anything other than current rulesets, codices, and anything on the table has to be a GW product or so much % of GW product (like model conversions..other than say, tape measures and dice...they're not quite that picky.)

It may be a lot hard to rules lawyer your TFG to get him to change, since he seems to run multiple codices however. It may not be worth your time and effort.

You may be better off just not playing him, if you're going to be spending all your time fighting over the books.

 techsoldaten wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

I imagine you also like to play paintball against 10 year olds.

Uh, no.

Over the last 7 years, I have mentored at least 100 people in how to play the game, organized the community at my FLGS to the point where there's about 250 active players, and generally tried to have a positive impact on the people around me. I regularly loan models to people who need them for games, have conducted modelling and painting workshops and even lent people money to get ideas to the kickstarter phase.

These are all pretty positive contributions, I would think. If anyone wants to call what I did cheating and accuse me of scumbaggery, go ahead.

But first, consider the idea that you probably cheat too. Either deliberately or passively through a lack of knowledge about the rules, I don't know many people who have not creatively interpreted something, moved a model a little more than 6 inches when it matters, rerolled something they claimed was 'cocked,' organized their assaults to that they can conveniently forget an important leadership check, forgotten that a squad was all firing something with Gets Hot, etc.

It's not like I don't notice when these 'honest' people are doing this crap and pretending like they have short memories or never read that rule. If ragequitting a table is the right and proper response to someone not being squeaky clean is the only solution, like this thread suggests, that suggests to me you guys don't have the right and proper perspective on the game yourselves.

There's also a limit. I am in general a pretty straight guy when it comes to rules. Sure, I may forget something by accident, but I have never intentionally scammed my opponent and for you to suggest otherwise is insulting. I've definitely misinterpreted/misplayed rules when I was knew, hell, sometimes I still do unknowingly until I'm corrected and play the "correct" way. If I do something out of turn or by mistake and it's recent, I absolutely go back and fix it, or I make a note to not do that again.

What you're suggesting is outright anarchy and scummyness. I don't care if you built 5 LGS and donated thousands of dollars to players to support their armies, you play like a cheat and I shall call you as such. You make up rules only to gak on others, you pull the wool over other peoples eyes, and intentionally ruin the spirit of the game.

So forgive me for accidentally missing rules, but stow your holier than thou attitude. You're nothing more than a 4th grader who picks on 2nd grader.

 jreilly89 wrote:

There's also a limit. I am in general a pretty straight guy when it comes to rules.

You protest a lot for someone who has done nothing wrong and not been accused of anything. Your accusations are insulting.

 jreilly89 wrote:

Sure, I may forget something by accident, but I have never intentionally scammed my opponent and for you to suggest otherwise is insulting.

No, I just think 40k has a big, complex ruleset and everyone breaks the rules at some level. You choosing to taking that fact personally is silly.

 jreilly89 wrote:

I've definitely misinterpreted/misplayed rules when I was knew, hell, sometimes I still do unknowingly until I'm corrected and play the "correct" way. If I do something out of turn or by mistake and it's recent, I absolutely go back and fix it, or I make a note to not do that again.

I really doubt that, based on years of observation against thousands of players. You are really doing a lot to make yourself sound like a saint, and I wonder why you are working so hard at it.

 jreilly89 wrote:

What you're suggesting is outright anarchy and scummyness. I don't care if you built 5 LGS and donated thousands of dollars to players to support their armies, you play like a cheat and I shall call you as such. You make up rules only to gak on others, you pull the wool over other peoples eyes, and intentionally ruin the spirit of the game.

I said you can call me whatever you want, I am pretty secure and can deal with your antics.

But I asked that you be honest about how you play the game. The way you describe your actions is a little too close to the ideal for me to believe you. Maybe if you could get some other players to vouch for the fact you are such an honest, puritan player, that would lend some credibility to your claims.

But you are putting a lot of effort into making me out to be a bad guy, and I really don't think there's any clear black and white when you are talking about complying with the rules of 40k. Regardless of someone's actions.

 jreilly89 wrote:

So forgive me for accidentally missing rules, but stow your holier than thou attitude. You're nothing more than a 4th grader who picks on 2nd grader.

Ah. That's the second time you accused me of beating up on people smaller than me.

Sorry you were bullied as a child and for the emotional scars it left. But I am not your enemy.

Hey everyone, please remember Rule Number One here is Be Polite. It is getting a bit too tense ITT. Thanks.

Edited by Manchu. Please seem my comment above.