Hey folks! You can find my battle reports for the other games in the GT here: Game One Game Two Game Three Game Four Game Five: You're reading it!
This weekend I made the eight hour drive to San Antonio, TX for the Alamo GT. I had originally planned on taking my Necron Wraith Wing, but my wife does the painting around here, and she was under the weather for the last two weeks and didn't get a lot of painting done, so we didn't get the Monoliths done. I don't mind going to RTTs or FLGS tournaments with unpainted models, but not traveling long distances for a Grand Tournament. Worse...I sent in the wrong Dark Eldar list! I wych cult and my kabal are both labeled "2,000 DE.xls" in different places on my desktop, and I didn't realize until I printed out my lists Friday when I was leaving work that I had sent in my Kabal "Darklight Storm." And what I had sent was a modified version of my usual Darklight Storm that I had never actually used before; I made it to playtest a slight tweak in wargear for units.
Darklight Storm HQ: Baron Sathonyx HQ: Haemonculi with Shattershard, Crucible of Malediction, and Animus Vitae
Troop1: 5x Warriors with 1x Blaster // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons Troop2: 5x Warriors with 1x Blaster // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons Troop3: 5x Warriors with 1x Blaster // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons Troop4: 5x Warriors with 1x Blaster // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons Troop5: 5x Warriors with 1x Blaster // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons Troop6: 9x Wyches with Haywire Grenades // Raider with Flickerfield and Torment Grenade Launcher
Elite1: 4x Trueborn with 4x Blasters // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons Elite2: 4x Trueborn with 4x Blasters // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons Elite3: 3x Trueborn with 3x Blasters // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons
Fast Attack1: 3x Beastmasters, 4x Razorwing Flocks, 5x Khymerae
Heavy Support1: Ravager with 3x Dark Lances and Flickerfield Heavy Support2: Ravager with 3x Dark Lances and Flickerfield Heavy Support3: Ravager with 3x Dark Lances and Flickerfield
1,996 points List Analysis -Baron Sathonyx is actually the core of this army for his +1 to go first ability. Dark Eldar are most potent during an alpha-strike, and anything they can do to help get that alpha-strike is worth doing. -The beast unit itself is a decent unit, but primarily exists to give the Baron a unit to hang with. The Baron is jump infantry, so can't embark on a raider or venom, and I don't want him floating around by himself getting sniped down. It works out rather well since beasts don't have grenades and couldn't use their nifty I6 and I5 if they had to assault through cover. The only decent saves in the unit are the 4++ on the Khymerae, but those are important to save for close combat power weapons. That makes the Baron's +1 cover save a perfect match for beasts! The only downside to the unit combination is their mismatched movement and assault speeds. The Baron can move 12" and assault 6", and the beasts can move 6" and assault 12". They're both fleet, but together they can only move 6" and assault 6". I've found after practice and testing that I can pretty accurately judge when to leave the Baron attached, and when to separate him so that I can get a 12" charge on the beasts. -Each warrior venom has dual purposes. The venoms are potent anti-infantry, while the unit inside can add its own potent anti-infantry with 8 poison shots rapid-firing at 12" with a STR8 AP2 shot getting a terminator killer shot in there, or serving as a potential anti-tank addition. -Flickerfields on Everything! Nightshields are pretty useless against almost everything that shoots at tanks, but a 5+ invulnerable save works in both close combat and ranged combat; and theoretically giving me 1/3 more vehicles! Every melta against a ravager that pings off my flickerfield is a little personal victory. -The wyches in this army primarily exist to make this a TAC army. Lances don't work against Monoliths or Blessed Hull, so haywire grenades fill the gap against things which I don't have the ability to kill. They're a decent assault unit, but have no Agonizer. My opponents keep being surprised at that fact - but at the end of the day, I don't have 25 points to spare for it. -The Haemonculi is there to pass a pain token on to the wyches unless the wyches get a for their drug and start with one - in which case he couldn't pass the pain token over, so he instead starts with a Trueborn unit. Don't ask about the Animus Vitae; it doesn't do anything to help him, and is only there because this wasn't a tested variant of my Darklight Storm. Game Five Opponent: David Light's Blood Angels HQ: Librarian with Unleash Rage and Sanguine Sword
Troop1: 10x Death Company, 2x Power Weapons, 1x Power Fist, Chaplain Lemartes Troop2: Death Company Dreadnought with Blood Talons and a Melta Gun Troop3: Death Company Dreadnought with Blood Talons and a Melta Gun Troop4: 10x Assault Marines with 2x Melta Guns, Power Fist and Jump Packs with a Razorback + Twin-Linked Assault Cannon Troop5: 10x Assault Marines with 2x Melta Guns, Power Weapon, no Jump Packs with a Razorback + Twin-Linked Assault Cannon Troop6: 5x Assault marines with a Powerfist, no Jump Packs
Elite1: 2x Sanguinary Priests with 2x Power Weapons
Heavy Support1: Storm Raven with Twin-Linked Multi-Melta, Twin-Linked Lascannon, Extra Armour Heavy Support2: Storm Raven with Twin-Linked Multi-Melta, Twin-Linked Lascannon, Extra Armour
Remember the Alamo!!: This is it, this is the endgame in the Battle for Alamo Prime. The enemy has been forced back into a final desperate stand. Strike now and finish them! Alamo Prime is nearly ours! Objective: Seize Ground (3 Objectives) Deployment: Dawn of War Special Rules: Rulebook Default Duration: Random Game Length Secondary Objective: Those in particular must die! For this objective you must choose four enemy units from among the following force selection categories: Elite, Fast Attack, Heavy Support. You must select at least one unit from each category, unless your opponent has no units in that category. For each of such units that you utterly destroy by any means, you receive a single objective point. This is the only scenario in which both players may earn secondary objective points.
"You will remembe this battle! Each minute! Each second! Until the day that you die! But that is for tomorrow, gentlemen. For today, Remember The Alamo!" -Sam Houston -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Battle Report Note: Once upon a time, I played an MMO called Eve Online where I was a famous carebear, most noted for writing/singing/performing parodies. I did a couple for 40k, but they never found an audience (Dice Dice Baby, Vanilla Ice Style), and I just ran across a link for one that I thought I would put up for you to get into the mood for my last battle report.
I actually wanted to make a parody FOR my battle report, or as a supplemental as the same song but with appropriate lyrics, but it would take me probably all of tonight to write it, I have a tournament tomorrow for my Necrons to beat face in, so wouldn't get anything done tomorrow, and would have to try recording it on Sunday - all of which would hinder a battle report being written for my fifth game...by which point I'd probably be getting flamed hardcore for not having written it. So...have a beer. Listen to a funny song for which you probably won't get the jokes (unless you've ever played Eve Online) and picture a 40k Variant to the tune of "And if I get banned from Dakka, I know why...."
Pre-Game Tactical Assessment: So...table #1 for game 5. Back from lunch, and pairings go up. I'm on top of the heap. In fact, I have such a commanding lead on battlepoints, that if I tie this game, and anyone else gets a full 20 points, I'll still end up with more Battle Points than anyone else. I never play for the tie, I go for the throat - but its comforting to know that I have a safety net. I went to dinner last night with my opponent's first round matchup, and he seeks me out to let me know that David is playing Blood Angels. We wander around the tables looking for his army so that I can see what's in it, but its nowhere to be found. He rummages out David's army list and passes it to me. Hrm...no Mephiston, no ridiculous las/plas razorback spam with 3-6 predators backing it up. Two Stormravens, two razorbacks. o.O Four vehicles!?! Four vehicles don't scare me. The two dreadnoughts kick it up to six, but he only has four vehicles with long ranged firepower...I'm starting to feel confident.
Here's a shot of the table. We roll off for objective placement and I win, getting to place two to his one. Those are my two in the center foreground and his in the rear left. We talk about terrain and come up with the following: The long junkpile on the right is 4+ area terrain for infantry, BLOS where applicable. The circular thing in the middle left is area terrain 4+ with the tower being impassable. The radio tower thingy to the right is area terrain 4+, BLOS where applicable. The hill to the rear right is TLOS. So is the hill to the rear left, and the trenches over on the left are 4+ cover for infantry inside. The Star Wars shield generator thingy in the middle - he wants area terrain 4+ for infantry, with the disks impassable, which I accept.
SLAAAAAVES!
And his objective token.
We roll for deployment option and I win - I choose the side I'm on (and taking pictures from). I choose to go in full DoW reserves. David starts deploying units, and puts a razorback in the middle of the board, and another to my right behind the junk pile. I note that its Dawn of War, and that he only gets two troop units and an HQ option for deployment, and he takes them back off.
Dashofpepper comments: Now that I think about it in context, I wonder if he did that on purpose to see if I would think he'd put units over there. When they announced the start, David still wasn't at our table. He said later (on Dakka) that they had an early start, and that he didn't miss the official game start time. When he did arrive at the table, he made a big deal about being drunk, having to pee repeatedly, being loud and boisterous. I took it at face value at the time. In the Alamo GT thread in tournament discussion he wrote:
Foreigner wrote:I was not remotely as intoxicated as you or anyone else may have thought. I tend to play up perceived weaknesses on purpose both to disarm the opponent and because its somewhat entertaining. I also enjoying playing the idiot. I think I pull it off fairly well
Given that I like to drink while playing sometimes and I'm still dangerous, I didn't remotely consider the possibility that him drinking would give me an advantage. Anyway, it's a tangential note; I just wonder if he intentionally illegally deployed with the intent of trying to make me think he was broadcasting his future intentions.
I don't remember if he tried to seize or not; if he attempted, he didn't get it.
For the secondary targets, he nominates my beast unit, the smaller trueborn unit, and two of my three ravagers. I nominate both of his storm ravens and both of his sanguinary priests.
Dashofpepper Turn One: My army moves flat-out onto an empty table. Between nightfight and 4+ cover saves I should escape relatively unscathed. *SHOULD* being the key word. My beast unit....I don't actually know what to do with it, so I move it on by the central objective. From a tactical perspective, a lot of thought actually goes into what goes where on the table. Two ravagers on the left flank with the ability to move 12" left or right to get shots anywhere on the table...the third ravager center right with the ability to cover the middle of the table and the right flank in case he *does* bring units in behind that pile of junk. Two trueborn in the middle because there are two objectives in the middle, with the third on the right to offset the anti-tank power on my left flank, with venoms equally spread amongst all of it. Strong killzones to the front, with the ability to bring 2/3 of my firepower to bear left or right.
My beasts run 3", and I pass the turn over to David.
Enemy Turn One: David moves on the board. Both death company dreadnoughts are in the stormravens. Death Company is in one stormraven, with a 10 man tactical squad (no jump packs) and a sanguinary priest in the other storm raven. The 5 man squad is in a razorback with a sanguinary priest. The other tactical squad with jump packs combat squads and jumps on 12". I didn't take a picture of his movement, so I'll describe it the best I can. You'll see it in an upcoming picture anyway. Both storm ravens move onto the board flat out - the one with death company rolling 24" up the board just on the other side of the tower by my leftmost Ravager. Both razorbacks come on the field 12" in the center, behind the Star Wars shield thingy. The one on my far right has the 5 man tactical squad in it. His combat squadded unit jumps five guys onto his objective, and the other five trail behind his other storm raven.
On to shooting!
The razorback that is empty shoots first; he goes for my venom that has the small trueborn unit in it since its a bonus objective point for him. Nightfight gives him 30" of range. He's well within 24" range. Four shots, twin-linked. He gets four hits. 4+ to glance, 5+ to penetrate. 4 Penetrates. I fail four cover saves. He explodes my venom. Three trueborn inside getting wounded on a 4+. He causes 3 wounds. I fail three armour saves. Boom. First salvo of the game and I've lost two units. What's worse...this will go on to characterize almost the entire game. My last game was pretty ridiculous for dice rolling; this game is straight up off the chain. While I was out to lunch, my dice got stoned and David's ODed on speed. I kid you not.
The stormraven closest to my left ravager uses PotMS to shoot at my ravager with his twin-linked lascannon. He gets the shot, I fail my cover save, and...he explodes my ravager. The furthest Storm Raven doesn't have LOS to anything that Nightfight could help him with, and the other razorback fails nightfight. The ravager with the green die on it is the one that isn't a target for his secondary objective points.
Dashofpepper Turn Two: I prep my alpha-strike. I've lost a trueborn unit and a ravager, but I've got two ravagers left, a raider lance, 8 more blasters between my trueborn, and 5 blasters spread out amongst my warrior units. That's 20 shots, 3+ to hit, and either 3+ to glance (razorbacks), or 4+ to glance (Storm Ravens)
I move into position for shooting - my beasts are still confused about where to go. They can't hurt the storm raven because of the AV12 in the rear.
Post movement as I'm getting ready to shoot: There's a ravager out of sight to the left that's going to shoot at one of the two storm ravens depending on what happens elsewhere. All the venoms on the left move 6" so that I don't have to disembark to shoot - but they'll all be within 18" of that closest storm raven. Both ravagers are lined up to have shots at either storm raven depending on what my close range anti-tank does. My trueborn on the far right move up 6" to line up blasters against the closest razorback. Two of my warrior venoms move up and disembark warriors. I know he has assault marines in the right razorback, so I disembark one warrior unit as a screening unit, with the second unit behind with the blaster in the lead having a clear shot between two warriors in the other squad to shoot at his razorback.
Four games down, and I haven't gotten to use my haywire grenades yet. 6+ to hit, but damn it, I need to put them to work.
I open fire! Miserably. My four trueborn on the far right shoot at the razorback with the assault marines in it and get four misses. My two disembarked warrior squads shoot at the same razorback. One misses. The second one hits, glances, and stuns it.
Onto midfield! My other unit of four trueborn shoot at his central stormraven. I get 3 of 4 hits, one penetrate and one glance. He saves them both. Three warrior blasters from three separate venoms shoot at it - one gets a penetrate and he saves. One misses. One gets a glance and he saves. On to my ravagers. The furthest one shoots at his furthest storm raven; Two penetrates and a glance! He saves both penetrates, and the glance gets through....shaken. The other ravager shoots at the central ravager. One glance and one penetrate - he saves both.
Alright...I've still got splinter cannons. Five venoms have LOS and range to his combat squadded assault marines. The furthest one shoots at his nearest assault marines - I roll about average and get 4 wounds out of 12 shots, and he fails one save - but is within 6" of his storm raven with the priest in it. Or at least...the head of the nearest model is within 6" of the tail of the storm raven. I'm not sure if it is supposed to be measured from the base or not...but I don't bring it up; he's got another 5 guys from the other half of the combat squad in range too, so my other four venoms unload on them. 48 shots. Somewhere between 10-15 wounds. Not a single failed 3+ armour save.
Well. That was ineffective. My wyches are in a bad situation, but they get a 3" run roll and start to split around the base of the storm raven next to them. They assault in on 2D6 and get 5" - not quite enough to get all the way around.
Terrible...terrible shooting phase.
On to assault!
Haywire grenades get thrown...I get 3-4 hits! They all glance, but one of them gets a six to immobilize it - and since it went flat out, its wrecked. This spawned a 40 minute rules discussion, which I'll cover at the end of the battle report. Lemartes and 3 Death company get out on one side - the dreadnought gets out on the other side.
We had a 30-40 minute pause in our game here because of a rules dispute. Wyches have mostly surrounded and assaulted a storm raven and wrecked it. They didn't get a run far enough to COMPLETELY surround it, and left a 3" or so gap on one side of the base. Thus begins the rule dispute on disembarking. It went like this:
David: Alright, I'm going to get out 6 guys, and the other 4 and the dreadnought are destroyed. Dash: I'm pretty sure that if the entire unit can't get out, then the unit is destroyed? David and Dash consult rulebook. David: No, it specifically says models that can't get out are destroyed. Justin: But on the column next to it, it talks about the unit disembarkation. David: But the model rule is more specific. Justin: Hrm...alright. But you should still be able to emergency disembark, yeah? All 10 guys get out without 2" of the hull? David: No, because that would put me within 1" of you. Justin: <I'm actually arguing for his benefit here, I know> My models are 1", your models are 1", which means that 2" out from the hull puts you precisely 1" away from me. David: No, I'd still be within 1". Justin: Dude, its just addition. Its a mathematical certainty that you can get out. David: Then my dreadnought can get out over here! <Puts dread on the other side of wyches> Justin: Uh...no, you can't move through my models to disembark your own. David: Yes I can, it says ANYWHERE within 2" of the hull, it doesn't say I can't move through you. Justin: So they magically teleport to the other side? You can't get there without going through me and moving within 1" of my models. David: It doesn't say that I can't.
Meanwhile, the judges are looking at the rulebook...and we're 40 minutes into repeating the same things over and over...and they haven't ruled one way or the other. Finally, I'm freaking out even more about the time and our game not finishing and say, "Alright...look - lets just do it your way so we can get on with the game." Judges say, "So you're good here?" I say, "Yeah, we're fine."
This is the ONE tournament that I didn't bring the GWFAQ with me. And in big bold text in the main rulebook FAQ, it says that disembarking models must follow the rules for normal model movement, and can't move through enemy models to disembark.
The end result was him getting a dreadnought out that he shouldn't have been able to, and 30-40 minutes of our game wasted. Yes...it was partly my fault. I was incorrect about the unit being destroyed part, and arguing for an incorrect ruling. It happens. The judges weighed in on that and got it settled right after they got involved.
It was also partly his fault. He should have KNOWN that you can't move through enemy units. My bad for not having the FAQ with me, but all it did was clarify the obvious so that people couldn't try doing it. I wanted to clear the air and have a good rest of the game, so I apologized for being a douche and nitpicking about the rules.
The reason that this conversation took 40 minutes....well, I attributed it to him being drunk, but he's later said that he was faking the drunkenness. >< Basically, I don't shout over people. I would start to explain my position, and he would interrupt me with his. I'd hear him out and try to rebuttal...and he's talk over me again. When the judges got involved, he talked over them too - like talking loudly enough and saying it over enough would convince them and us. I couldn't get in a word edgewise, the judges couldn't get in a word edgewise...we just sat there listening to him. I literally spent half an hour thinking he would let me explain my position, or trying to explain it to the judges and getting interrupted. I finally gave up because I figured he was too drunk to realize he was being obnoxious. >< On a positive note, the John is planning on implementing a rule in all following Alamo GTs because of this incident where one player speaks their piece, and the other player is not allowed to speak. Then the other player speaks their piece and the first player is not allowed to speak. Then the judges decide.
Moving on...
Enemy Turn Two:
The tactical squad + sanguinary priest from the stunned razorback disembarks and moves forward 6" into assault range of my leading warrior unit.
The assault marines that were hanging behind the now wrecked storm raven jump up 12" while the dreadnought pivots towards my haemonculi raider. His death company repositions itself a bit for a charge into the wyches - I'm not sure if he's planning on throwing his dreadnought at my wyches or the death company or both.
Here's his death company movement.
The other storm raven moves 12" over towards my beasts and drops his assault marines in front of them.
The dreadnought from that storm raven disembarked before it moved out - the dreadnought then moves 6" up to my ravager.
Onto shooting!
The dreadnought by my ravager shoots at my ravager and misses. *phew* The 5 man assault squad that jumped up near my wych raider shoot at it and miss. The dreadnought shoots at the wych raider with his melta and penetrates...and rolls a 1. Open-topped and AP1; I lose the dark lance. The stunned razorback pops smoke (during movement). The unstunned razorback explodes another troop venom on my right flank...causes 5 wounds to the warriors inside...who predictably fail 5 armour saves and are wiped.
His remaining storm raven shoots at the second ravager on his bonus objective list and explodes it after my flicker fields continue to...flicker...fail...
Onto assaults!
The death company assault into my wyches. I manage to not get any wounds past his armour saves (and Feel No Pain) and then fail all my invulnerable saves, lose initiative, and get wiped out.
His five man assault marine squad with the sanguinary priest in tow prove to be tougher than my five warriors in close combat, and I die without inflicting any wounds. I took this shot during my turn - the other squad is alive, they just hopped back into their transport.
His dreadnought assaults my ravager - needing 6+ to hit and getting one. I fail my flickerfield save and he penetrates to weapon destroy my front lance.
His other dreadnought and assault marines pile into my wych ravager and kill it; the haemonculi gets out and passes his leadership test.
His 10 man assault squad assaults into the Baron and beast unit - I get in a couple wounds with rending razorwings - enough to count towards my ability to pass leadership after he gets done with me. The Baron takes one wound....makes one Shadowfield save...and fails it. However, he's attached to the Beasts, so he can't hit and run out of combat.
Dashofpepper Turn Three: Alright, lets see. I'm down a trueborn squad and their venom. Another troop squad and a venom. Two ravager. My wyches and their raider. A good chunk of my beasts and my Baron's shadowfield. And thus far...I've shaken a stormraven that got to PotMS fire anyway, and stunned an assault cannon razorback for a turn, and wrecked a stormraven that cost him half of his death company. Not a very good alpha-strike.
Same picture, different discussion points. One of my venoms from behind the shield generator jumps up on top and passes a dangerous terrain test. The base represents where the model is; it was kind of wobbly up there. The warriors that the now dead warriors were screening jump back into their venom.
My ravager on the left jumps 12" over the dreadnought that just assaulted it so that it can shoot at its rear armour. On the right, I circle up to pour death and dismay into his tactical marines and his razorbacks.
With the assault marines on the right having a priest, splinter cannons would be wasted, so I target the assault marines camping on his objective in the backfield. It takes EVERY splinter cannon in my army to kill those 5 marines.
My four trueborn in the venom to the right shoot at the unsmoked razorback...and miss four more times. 0/8 shots hitting on a 3+. You guys are awesome. The four trueborn in the middle shoot at his stormraven. 0/4 hits. Seriously? My warriors on the right (and one venom who I figured was out of range of the assault marines on the far right) rapid fire into the 5 marines and priest. 16 rapid fire splinter rifles, two blasters, and 12 shots from a splinter cannon later, I've caused no wounds. Since my wych squad is dead, my haemonculi figures that the shattershard is his best bet to take down Lemartes and Death company. I lay down the template, smack them all, and...they all pass toughness tests. My remaining ravager pumps two shots into the rear of his dreadnought at point blank range and misses with both.
What...the farting feth. Seriously. David's dice REFUSE to let him down, and mine aren't even to the hung-over stage of their lethargy.
We move on to assaults - which is the beasts and his assault marines. I smack a couple more down with rending (I've been trying to protect my razorwings) in exchange for losing all my beastmasters and khymerae...can't make an invul save (or a flickerfail save to save (haha!) my life. My beasts stick around.
Enemy Turn Three: On the right flank, he decided to try ramming his razorback down the throat of my trueborn venom...and immobilizes himself on the wreckage of the dead venom.
The dreadnought in midfield brings its bulk to bear on my itsy bitsy haemonculi, while his assault squad jumps forward to get into my midfield and towards my rear objective. There's only four of them. I didn't even kill the other one, he failed a dangerous terrain test in...the first turn I think.
On the far left, his other dreadnought shuffles around to face my last ravager again.
Death company moves up to support his tactical marines against my beasts, and on the right, his death company walk forward to the nearest venom (from the now dead warrior squad) and shoot it out of the sky.
Shooting!
On the left his dreadnought fires his melta at my ravager. And misses again. In midfield his tactical marines fire bolt pistols at my venom but fail to glance. Death company is readying a charge so doesn't shoot, and the dreadnought is about to assault my haemonculi and doesn't shoot. On the right his immobilized razorback moved too far to shoot, and the other razorback shoots at my trueborn venom, scores a glance and a pen..and HOLY SMOKES! My first flickerfield save of the game. I make them both!
His storm raven explodes another troop venom, but this time he doesn't do any wounds to the squad inside. They pass their pinning check.
Onto assaults.
Alright guys. Your help REALLY wasn't needed here. But his death company joins the assault on my beasts and finishes wiping them.
His tactical squad in midfield assaults the venom they were eyeballing with krak grenades and miraculously whiff.
The assault marines on the right can't charge because they shot too well.
The dreadnought on the far left assaults my ravager, but gets no 6s this time.
The dreadnought in midfield assaults into my haemonculi, who pwns the dreadnought with his STR10 C'Tan Doomsword. But the sword slipped at the last minute and cut off his hand and he wasn't quick enough to dodge the blood talons. Or at least that's the story that he's telling his friends over some Soul Nectar at the Coven Bar right now to explain how he got shipped back in pieces.
Dashofpepper Turn Four: Taking a beating here. Nuff said.
My ravager on the far left plays hopscotch again and jumps over the dreadnought to take a couple more shots at his rear armour.
I've given up shooting at his damned Storm Raven with blasters - I need to take down troop choices at this point to stand any chance of pulling out victory. In midfield, two of my warrior units move 12" over towards his corner objective and disgorge troops to rapid fire into the assault squad that tore up my beasts. Its kind of suicidal, but I've put them on opposite ends of their venoms so that the death company can't multi-charge and hit them both. That sanguinary priest is in 6" of his other assault squad too, so there's no point shooting at them until I can take down that squad with the priest in it.
On the right side, my trueborn venom retreats 6" to line up splinter cannons with the midfield assault marines and the assault marines on the right.
I have one venom flat out 24" to get within 3" of his backfield objective.
On to shooting!
So...order of fire plays a big part in what I shoot and when. He has 4 tactical marines and a priest - the priest is also covering down FnP on another unit. I have three warrior squads with splinter rifles and a blaster each, three venoms with dual splinter cannons each, and one trueborn unit of 4 blasters. I'm hoping that my shooting goes well with the splinter weaponry so that I can save blasters for the storm raven with my trueborn - if I were to pop those first, they'd obviously kill everything BUT the priest. I rapid fire both squads into him, then two venoms...and kill two marines. With my two blaster shots. >< He's left with the priest is left with one tactical marine. I've got a squad in midfield aimed at his other unit, the trueborn venom and the trueborn. The way he's been rolling saves....I don't feel like I have much of a choice, so I drop four trueborn blaster shots into his assault marine and priest to kill them both.
The priest dying deprives the other assault squad of Feel No Pain, so I drop the trueborn venom and the other warrior squad into them, killing three out of four. On the right, my trueborn drop four blasters into the other assault squad with the priest...and he makes four cover saves.
My ravager on the far left drops two more dark lances into the back of his dreadnought and...misses twice more. $%@!@
We're drawing quite a crowd at this point - most of the games are over. I start going through my verbal monologue (out loud) of what's fired where to make sure I've done everything; sweeping left to right. I note that his lone remaining assault marine in midfield will need leadership, and he rolls it and fails - falling back 3D6.
I continue sweeping to the right and get to my trueborn venom on the right...which hasn't fired yet.
We pause to discuss. My choice of target for the venom would be his lone assault marine (who happens to be toting a melta-gun) that's already fallen back. He fell back out of LOS of my venom. David says that I can't shoot at it because he already fell back. I tell him that we should have done leadership at the end of the shooting phase. He tells me that I was ok with him taking leadership. I tell him yes, but it was still out of order - this is the point where my fourth round opponent yells "STOP $$#@ CHEATING!" and I say, "NO SPECTATOR COMMENTS!"
The point of taking leadership at the end of the shooting phase is to prevent the attacking player from gaining an advantage. If you do enough casualties to a unit to make them have to check leadership, you could have them take leadership immeidately and see if they fall back or not - a tactical advantage to the rest of your firepower. David insists that I can't shoot at him since he's already fallen back....we're running out of time, and definitely do *NOT* have time for another lengthy rules dispute, so I move on; I shoot at the only other viable target, the assault marines with the priest next to me, who predictably take no wounds. This one *did* peeve me a bit. Doing something out of order should NEVER gain an advantage. I don't mind people running during the move phase to save time as long as it doesn't give an unfair advantage (like making extra room for the unit behind to move into the gap, or on from reserves or something). I didn't expect his marine to fail leadership; marines never do, so I didn't mind him taking it at the time so that I wouldn't forget about it later.
At this point, we're ticking down to the last few minutes of time. We tell the TO that we need more time; we're on Table #1, we had a late start, a 40 minute mid-game interruption for a rules dispute, and we're still on turn four. He tells us that we can have 20 more minutes.
Enemy Turn Four: The lone tactical marine auto-regroups, consolidates 3" to my left, then jumps 12" towards the venom that went flat out.
His dreadnought moves up 6" towards my trueborn venom.
His storm raven moves flat out onto the midfield objective to contest it - my warriors are sitting in their wreckage on it.
On the right side, his assault marines 2D6 forwards and open up on my trueborn venom with a melta and bolt pistols, getting a shaken and weapon destroyed result.
On the left flank, he pops a melta at my warrior venom, which fails its flickerfield save and wrecks it. My warriors get out and pass pinning. To pre-empt more discussion from the same 50 people about venoms that have been voicing their disapproval in all the other threads - The venoms were approved by the TO. Deal with it. If I *had* the actual venom - which still isn't released - while it is shorter than a 3rd edition raider, the wings on it create a wider profile. Instead of getting out in a straight line, I would have just gotten out clumped 2" on the outside of the left wing. Still out of assault range.
His dreadnought moves up to my warriors and assaults them. Nom nom nom nom. They disappear in a red mist of blood talons.
On the far left flank, his dreadnought was getting dizzy turning around and turning around. He got a hit this time, and the melta penetrated through my flickerfield to explode my last ravager.
On the far right, his assault marines don't attempt to assault my trueborn venom - he's probably hoping to get up to the midfield objective and take it.
In midfield, Death company jumps one of my disembarked warrior squads and kills it.
Dashofpepper Turn Five:
They gave us 20 minutes in the last turn - we're the only game still going on, and I'm not sure how much time we have left - I didn't try taking any pictures because those take time. In fact, my games would all go faster if I didn't take pictures, but then there would be no battle reports.
On the far left, my warriors move around the wrecked venom to deliver a blaster to the face of the assault marine, killing him and retaking the objective.
In midfield, my last two venoms over on that side move 12" up between the dreadnought and my warriors on his backfield objective so that he can't physically get there with his dreadnought.
My last troop venom in midfield behind the storm raven moves over onto the objective while the trueborn venom moves up a few inches so that it can shoot into the back of the dreadnought that killed my other warriors. My blasters finally do something and I explode it.
On the right, my trueborn venom is shaken and weapon destroyed - I move closer to the storm raven, disembark and whiff again.
All venoms that can fire into Lemartes and the deathcompany. Lemartes takes a wound and one death company goes down.
I'm expecting this to be the last turn; we've got...minutes left out of our extra time. My turn ends with me holding two objectives for the moment.
Enemy Turn Five: His midfield razorback that isn't immobilized passes a dangerous terrain check and moves 18" flat out to get within 3" of the backfield objective that my warriors are on.
His sanguinary priest and last assault unit get a 4" move towards my objective in midfield - putting him about 5-6" away from it. He jumps his stormraven off the objective I'm holding and goes to land on the other one to be able to contest it. Lemartes and the death company move towards his backfield objective to help deal with the two venoms I'm trying to block his access with.
On to shooting. His dreadnought meltas a venom and I make a flickerfield save. His assault marines on the right need to roll a 2+ to get within range of my last objective to contest it too and...he rolls a 1. Suddenly he can't contest the objective.
On the far left, his dreadnought and lemartes + death company remnants assault into their respective venoms; the dreadnought wrecks his; the other is unscathed.
Time gets called.
The back left objective is contested, the middle left objective is contested, and I own the center rear objective and win 1-0.
Post Game Tactical Assessment: David literally handed me the game at the end. His death company could have contested the the objective that his storm raven jumped onto, and he could have left his storm raven where it was risk free of the results of his assault marine rolls. That would have ended in a tie - the advantage still would have swung to me given my huge lead on battle points for the tournament results. I was shocked when he moved his storm raven off. After the game, he said that he thought they were giving us time for a sixth turn, which is why he moved the Stormraven off the objective - our 20 minute extension came in the middle of turn four, so I wasn't sure about that.
David said that he was sure he could get a draw at worst, or a win if we went to six turns. I had two trueborn units left....if I could take down his unit of three assault marines and a priest (now in the open) with a trueborn unit...possibly finally kill the storm raven...I'm not so sure that he could have gotten it. I offered to continue to six turns anyway for peace of mind (it wouldn't count for the tournament since we already turned in our scorecards) but he declined. I would have liked to have seen what happened.
Aside from that....everything that could go wrong did go wrong. Even stuff that shouldn't have happened ruleswise went wrong. I pretty much failed with my shooting 90% of the game, most of which was when it counted - when I had units alive to shoot. The dreadnought that should have died in the stormraven wreck went on to kill a raider, haemonculi, and a warrior squad, and absorb fire that I could have been directing at...probably a storm raven. Not being able to shoot at a falling back tactical marine with a melta-gun cost me another venom and the ability to physically block the objective over there from his razorback moving flat out onto it.
My beasts rolled badly, the baron whiffed everything and failed his first shadowfield save, my wyches did nothing in close combat....my ravagers all died without killing anything, my trueborn were too drunk to hit anything....I took massive casualties across the board the entire game.
To be honest, winning in the face of that adversity was a glorious moment. We didn't get a sixth turn to see where it could have gone, although I offered - this game makes me think of the threads on Dakka about luck vs. skill. The dice were against me, and his were with him.
We talked after the game - he wasn't hostile, for which I was grateful, but he told me that he considered it a bad game and gave me a bad game vote for not getting through six turns.
Sportsmanship at the Alamo works as a multiplier; the third bad game vote cost me -16 points. 16 points the value for winning a game.
The tournament ended with me winning Best Overall. In longstanding tradition, I inquired of the TO who came in dead last and gave them my loot, minus the plaque - which would have been tacky. I've collected a lot of loot over the last two years since I've started 40k, and don't care about prize support anymore - I play for the challenge.
And boy, was this a challenging game.
Monday morning following the GT, the TO sent out an e-mail noting that he tabulated scores incorrectly - and that I shouldn't have won Best Overall. Eh. *shrugs* I was the only player to go 5-0. No hurt feelings on my end. I *did* do some serious soul-searching on the way back from the Alamo. Three bad game votes are nothing to toss aside. I called Hulksmash, called Mike Brandt...called some other 40k friends from around the country to talk to them about it.
Ultimately, I've never had sportsmanship issues at an event before. Were these justified? Eh...I don't think so. I've told the story, been honest about it, you the reader will be the judge of it as you always are. Some of you will think that my opponents were being petty. Some of you will think that its no ones' business but those who gave them. Some of you will think (and avidly post) about what a rotten bastard you think I am. I probably can probably even scribble down 90% of your names before you even show up in this thread.
Outliers happen. If I start developing a trend of bad sportsmanship, I'll have to think about it - but folks who meet me generally like me, and I get along with folks just fine during almost every game. I'll admit that I've never had such a hostile interaction with anyone like I did with Chris before; he and Kingsley were glaring daggers at me when I left and whispering to their friends; it was a bit uncomfortable.
I've got nothing against David though. He gave me a bad game vote. I might not agree, but he wasn't a douche about it, and I respect his ability on the table, and his attitude. And as I said earlier, I don't hold grudges.
Anyway, that's a wrap! Dark Eldar prevail 5-0.
Plenty of GK players there, but none did well enough to have to get beaten down by me. Several Mech IG players there as well, but again - none did well enough to face me. I did see several Space Wolf armies; one was completely drop-pod oriented, another was standard longfang/razorspam - I was *really* hoping to draw them in a match; I have a personal grudge against all space wolf players.
And at the end of it all, I had fun. I got to meet some cool new folks, I made some friends, I got to put some faces to some internet names; I even met two internet celebrities (Goatboy and Darkwynn). The Alamo was a cool event, John was a great dude to meet - while terrain was a bit...less...than I might have hoped for, I heard something about someone's vehicle with a truck full of terrain breaking down being the reason for that, but that there was supposed to be more terrain. I think he said that there would be a lot more next year too.
I had intended on bringing my Necrons, but they didn't get finished in time; next year I'll have to bring my NEW Necrons, which will undoubtedly be such overpowered Matt Ward cheese that they make Blood Angel players feel like Suit-less Tau armies.
I feel your pain about getting undeserved bad sports scores. At the recent astro in winnipeg, one opponent gave me 0/5 for army sportsmanship. Sure, I tabled him in about 3 turns, but I don't think it was a fair assessment.
Another player gave me a 1 in player sportsmanship because I called him on a couple BS moves, such as stealing my dice (...) and knocking models over, then replacing them in a tactically advantageous position.
Sometimes you have a bad game and there is nothing you can do. Others don't like getting beat down and give you a bad sports score as a result. I've definitely noticed a trend: the better I do in Battle points the worse I do in sportsmanship. The worse I do in battlepoints the better I do in sportsmanship. I'm really beginning to see why so many people don't like sports scoring.
In all honesty dude, I have no problem with who you are and enjoy the way you play.
Here is the thing, if I go to watch the Dukes of Hazzard, I am going to expect car chases, bad acting, hot chicks, and general jackassness. Now if I am going to a tournament and draw you in the tournament, am I going to expect an easy, lets hug and make cupcakes type of game? Hell no!
Nice to see you writing up the battle reports. Can't wait to see the next tournament.
I would have been cross if I thought I'd have time for another turn that never came, as well, even if I had misheard about it. Although I would have tried to give the judges a bad game mark instead. As it stand, it seemed like bad judging. That "amendment" to their judging should have been how they played it to begin with. But I'm a stern judge.
Dash wrote:
We pause to discuss. My choice of target for the venom would be his lone assault marine (who happens to be toting a melta-gun) that's already fallen back. He fell back out of LOS of my venom. David says that I can't shoot at it because he already fell back. I tell him that we should have done leadership at the end of the shooting phase. He tells me that I was ok with him taking leadership. I tell him yes
Incidentally, he jedi mind tricked you fair and square here. You told him it was ok that he took his leadership then. He should have made you stop shooting after that too since it meant your shooting phase was over. You yourself recommend these kind of tactics in your DE strategy guide.
@ Dash
The truth is always grey from the eyes of spectators and side seat drivers. You went, had fun, and conquered, so don't sweat it. If you feel any conviction, then continue to meditate, if nothing is found, then move on until something like this possibly happens again. Some did not like the outcome, but they will get over it. You are always welcomed back to Texas to compete.
If there is any lesson to be learned, it is that you could possibly smile the whole time like a politician as you table victims. LOL.
Dash, I'd just like to say that half the reason I registered was to be able to say that your battle reports have been very influential on my learning of the game. Your explanations of the reasonings behind your actions as you describe them is very enlightening, as well as your analysis of opponent actions and intent. I enjoyed reading your reasoning throughout this entire set of reports, thanks for putting so much work into these.
the only thing that i am wondering about was how Rage on all of his Death Company stuff was played.
There was some discussion on Dakka Dakka about Dread rage, and (some people think) that dreads only have a 45 degree arc for LOS, not 360" like infantry do.
If that was the case, then the dread would not be able to turn around and face your ravager those two times, but would have instead moved forward if it could see another unit.
How did rage factor into the movement of the Death Company? Did you ever consider leading them away from the battle with a single venom? That is a tactic that you always hear in tactics threads, but I have never seen in used in a battle report.
Unless I've missed a rule, the big Stormraven headache could have easily been resolved.
You stated you got a wrecked result (with some help from him going Flat Out) on the Stromraven. The picture shows the model was removed and just the base remained. Why was the model not placed where it had been wrecked, like any other vehicle? If that had been done, it would have take small amount of time to line up where your wyches would have been, but due to the size of the Stormraven, he would have easily been able to place the models down as per the rules.
Sarigar wrote:Unless I've missed a rule, the big Stormraven headache could have easily been resolved.
You stated you got a wrecked result (with some help from him going Flat Out) on the Stromraven. The picture shows the model was removed and just the base remained. Why was the model not placed where it had been wrecked, like any other vehicle? If that had been done, it would have take small amount of time to line up where your wyches would have been, but due to the size of the Stormraven, he would have easily been able to place the models down as per the rules.
I would agree, don't know why he kept the base and not the model, no offence but it's not like the paint might scratch because even if it does it's no real let down.
How do you feel now about that beast unit in the list? They seemed pretty lost in this game, and in the other battle reports I had noted that you were on the lookout for enemy units that weren't in transports just so your splinter weapons had something to shoot at. Well, isn't your beast unit allowing the same thing for your opponent? I'm guessing that if you could put the Baron in a venom then you wouldn't need the beast unit at all.
The unique nature of splinter weaponry means that two mechanized Dark Eldar lists have absolutely no targets at the start with all those 12-shot venoms, whereas other armies are quite happy to shoot at venoms and raiders with their small arms fire.
Sarigar wrote:Unless I've missed a rule, the big Stormraven headache could have easily been resolved.
You stated you got a wrecked result (with some help from him going Flat Out) on the Stromraven. The picture shows the model was removed and just the base remained. Why was the model not placed where it had been wrecked, like any other vehicle? If that had been done, it would have take small amount of time to line up where your wyches would have been, but due to the size of the Stormraven, he would have easily been able to place the models down as per the rules.
The storm raven entry explicitly requires the owning player to disembark using the base of the model, not the Hull. The Valkyrie / Vendetta requires the same now per the FAQ I think.
Dash, you deserve serious praise for winning that game. Your dice were utterly horrendous, to the point of statistical anomaly. I don't think I have ever heard of anyone rolling so badly.
I hate to imagine how well you would do if you rolled average, let alone were a little lucky.
But seriously, thanks for an excellent read. Your dice have my sympathy.
Oaka wrote:How do you feel now about that beast unit in the list? They seemed pretty lost in this game, and in the other battle reports I had noted that you were on the lookout for enemy units that weren't in transports just so your splinter weapons had something to shoot at. Well, isn't your beast unit allowing the same thing for your opponent? I'm guessing that if you could put the Baron in a venom then you wouldn't need the beast unit at all.
The unique nature of splinter weaponry means that two mechanized Dark Eldar lists have absolutely no targets at the start with all those 12-shot venoms, whereas other armies are quite happy to shoot at venoms and raiders with their small arms fire.
The Baron is jump infantry, so he can't embark in a vehicle. He needs an escort unit on foot, and he pairs well with the beasts in terms of force multiplication. The beasts are anti-assault units, with the occasional midfield mayhem unit - by the time they cross the field, my lances and blasters should have units on the ground. They can also discourage people from trying to assault my disembarked trueborn, or a counter-assault unit.
People generally never shoot at them because they have 3+ cover - and shooting at the beasts with anything with long enough range to hurt them is also a weapon that could be used to explode a venom, raider, or possibly a ravager. They mostly go unmolested outside of assault.
Dashofpepper wrote:The tactical squad + sanguinary priest from the stunned razorback disembarks and moves forward 6" into assault range of my leading warrior unit.
His five man assault marine squad with the sanguinary priest in tow prove to be tougher than my five warriors in close combat, and I die without inflicting any wounds. I took this shot during my turn - the other squad is alive, they just hopped back into their transport.
I'm kind of new to the rules, but I thought razorbacks weren't assault vehicles. Or is that just for moving the vehicle and then jumping out and assaulting?
Dashofpepper wrote:
Pre-Game Tactical Assessment: So...table #1 for game 5. Back from lunch, and pairings go up. I'm on top of the heap. In fact, I have such a commanding lead on battlepoints, that if I tie this game, and anyone else gets a full 20 points, I'll still end up with more Battle Points than anyone else. I never play for the tie, I go for the throat - but its comforting to know that I have a safety net. I went to dinner last night with my opponent's first round matchup, and he seeks me out to let me know that David is playing Blood Angels. We wander around the tables looking for his army so that I can see what's in it, but its nowhere to be found. He rummages out David's army list and passes it to me. Hrm...no Mephiston, no ridiculous las/plas razorback spam with 3-6 predators backing it up. Two Stormravens, two razorbacks. o.O Four vehicles!?! Four vehicles don't scare me. The two dreadnoughts kick it up to six, but he only has four vehicles with long ranged firepower...I'm starting to feel confident.
We roll for deployment option and I win - I choose the side I'm on (and taking pictures from). I choose to go in full DoW reserves. David starts deploying units, and puts a razorback in the middle of the board, and another to my right behind the junk pile. I note that its Dawn of War, and that he only gets two troop units and an HQ option for deployment, and he takes them back off.
[u]Dashofpepper comments: Now that I think about it in context, I wonder if he did that on purpose to see if I would think he'd put units over there. When they announced the start, David still wasn't at our table. He said later (on Dakka) that they had an early start, and that he didn't miss the official game start time. When he did arrive at the table, he made a big deal about being drunk, having to pee repeatedly, being loud and boisterous. I took it at face value at the time. In the Alamo GT thread in tournament discussion he wrote:
Foreigner wrote:I was not remotely as intoxicated as you or anyone else may have thought. I tend to play up perceived weaknesses on purpose both to disarm the opponent and because its somewhat entertaining. I also enjoying playing the idiot. I think I pull it off fairly well
Given that I like to drink while playing sometimes and I'm still dangerous, I didn't remotely consider the possibility that him drinking would give me an advantage. Anyway, it's a tangential note; I just wonder if he intentionally illegally deployed with the intent of trying to make me think he was broadcasting his future intentions.
I don't remember if he tried to seize or not; if he attempted, he didn't get it.
For the secondary targets, he nominates my beast unit, the smaller trueborn unit, and two of my three ravagers. I nominate both of his storm ravens and both of his sanguinary priests.
Haywire grenades get thrown...I get 3-4 hits! They all glance, but one of them gets a six to immobilize it - and since it went flat out, its wrecked. This spawned a 40 minute rules discussion, which I'll cover at the end of the battle report. Lemartes and 3 Death company get out on one side - the dreadnought gets out on the other side.
We had a 30-40 minute pause in our game here because of a rules dispute. Wyches have mostly surrounded and assaulted a storm raven and wrecked it. They didn't get a run far enough to COMPLETELY surround it, and left a 3" or so gap on one side of the base. Thus begins the rule dispute on disembarking. It went like this:
David: Alright, I'm going to get out 6 guys, and the other 4 and the dreadnought are destroyed.
Dash: I'm pretty sure that if the entire unit can't get out, then the unit is destroyed?
David and Dash consult rulebook.
David: No, it specifically says models that can't get out are destroyed.
Justin: But on the column next to it, it talks about the unit disembarkation.
David: But the model rule is more specific.
Justin: Hrm...alright. But you should still be able to emergency disembark, yeah? All 10 guys get out without 2" of the hull?
David: No, because that would put me within 1" of you.
Justin: <I'm actually arguing for his benefit here, I know> My models are 1", your models are 1", which means that 2" out from the hull puts you precisely 1" away from me.
David: No, I'd still be within 1".
Justin: Dude, its just addition. Its a mathematical certainty that you can get out.
David: Then my dreadnought can get out over here! <Puts dread on the other side of wyches>
Justin: Uh...no, you can't move through my models to disembark your own.
David: Yes I can, it says ANYWHERE within 2" of the hull, it doesn't say I can't move through you.
Justin: So they magically teleport to the other side? You can't get there without going through me and moving within 1" of my models.
David: It doesn't say that I can't.
Meanwhile, the judges are looking at the rulebook...and we're 40 minutes into repeating the same things over and over...and they haven't ruled one way or the other. Finally, I'm freaking out even more about the time and our game not finishing and say, "Alright...look - lets just do it your way so we can get on with the game." Judges say, "So you're good here?" I say, "Yeah, we're fine."
This is the ONE tournament that I didn't bring the GWFAQ with me. And in big bold text in the main rulebook FAQ, it says that disembarking models must follow the rules for normal model movement, and can't move through enemy models to disembark.
The end result was him getting a dreadnought out that he shouldn't have been able to, and 30-40 minutes of our game wasted. Yes...it was partly my fault. I was incorrect about the unit being destroyed part, and arguing for an incorrect ruling. It happens. The judges weighed in on that and got it settled right after they got involved.
It was also partly his fault. He should have KNOWN that you can't move through enemy units. My bad for not having the FAQ with me, but all it did was clarify the obvious so that people couldn't try doing it. I wanted to clear the air and have a good rest of the game, so I apologized for being a douche and nitpicking about the rules.
The reason that this conversation took 40 minutes....well, I attributed it to him being drunk, but he's later said that he was faking the drunkenness. >< Basically, I don't shout over people. I would start to explain my position, and he would interrupt me with his. I'd hear him out and try to rebuttal...and he's talk over me again. When the judges got involved, he talked over them too - like talking loudly enough and saying it over enough would convince them and us. I couldn't get in a word edgewise, the judges couldn't get in a word edgewise...we just sat there listening to him. I literally spent half an hour thinking he would let me explain my position, or trying to explain it to the judges and getting interrupted. I finally gave up because I figured he was too drunk to realize he was being obnoxious. >< On a positive note, the John is planning on implementing a rule in all following Alamo GTs because of this incident where one player speaks their piece, and the other player is not allowed to speak. Then the other player speaks their piece and the first player is not allowed to speak. Then the judges decide.
At this point, we're ticking down to the last few minutes of time. We tell the TO that we need more time; we're on Table #1, we had a late start, a 40 minute mid-game interruption for a rules dispute, and we're still on turn four. He tells us that we can have 20 more minutes.
They gave us 20 minutes in the last turn - we're the only game still going on, and I'm not sure how much time we have left - I didn't try taking any pictures because those take time. In fact, my games would all go faster if I didn't take pictures, but then there would be no battle reports.
I've got nothing against David though. He gave me a bad game vote. I might not agree, but he wasn't a douche about it, and I respect his ability on the table, and his attitude. And as I said earlier, I don't hold grudges.
In response to a few things (not negatively but clarifications from my side)
1) I was not trying to deploy 3 (4) units for dawn of war. My second razorback has a priest in it (AND REQUIRES SAID PRIEST TO WORK). I wanted to deploy 2 empty razorbacks and walk the assault squad with priest on to my objective as the game progressed. Your getting on me about deploying wrong pushed me mentally off the fence as to whether I should deploy at all, so I chose not to place the razorbacks.
2) I was at the hall at 12:04 for a 12:30 game (cause I had to wait for noon to buy a drink from the vendor). We started by 12:30. I was quite well on time.
3) When disembarking the storm raven, you kept trying to convince both me and the judge that my entire unit was destroyed because a part of it was incapable of getting out of the wreck. Which is incorrect. We both know the 40k rules judges there were both not overly well versed in the 40k rules, and prone to having tables "dice off" for any rule they didn't know. The "whole unit destroyed" in this case was incorrect. After I thought I conclusively proved that I was able to get out part of the unit, and the rest would die, you continued to insist the entire unit was dead. Since this was wrong and taking time, I started cutting you off when you said it. I couldn't have the judge (who didn't know the rule) deciding to kill the whole unit incorrectly.
3b) After failing to convince anyone that every model is dead because some of them die, you switched to trying to force the unit to emergency disembark. Your argument for this was their ability to get out anywhere within 2 " of the base, thus allowing them to slip out through your models and take up positions anywhere around the base. Firstly, they were already capable of disembarking anywhere withing 2" of the base, Secondly, you were the first to propose to idea of disembarking right past your models. You even spent 5 minutes trying to explain the math to me where the 1" base your models were on allowed a 1" gap beyond your models in which to disembark and still be within 2" of the vehicle. I didn't really understand your argument here, because you had gone from "some models can't disembark and therefore everyone dies" to "everyone has to get out and is completely ok, see, 1" + 1" = 2". This even led the judge to rule, and then force me, to disembark the dreadnaught.
4) When we asked the TO for more time, my understanding of it was that we would have time to play to completion, not a slight bump in time. The tourney schedule had our game ending at 3:00, and with the 20 minutes you say we were given, we were still stopped around 3:10. So, 1 part my bad on assuming we'd get to play 5+ turns (6 to 7 in our case) as opposed to merely 1 more turn. But I won't take much blame for the game not ending. As I've said earlier, I was on time, my bathroom breaks (2) were neither excessive or long (in 1 case coming during your turn 1 move, returning to you still moving).
5) As to the promised explanation for the bad game vote (I didn't want to get off topic in other threads, but some other people did it anyway). I bad game voted you for a combination of things, but the primary was pace of play. I feel I correctly played the storm raven wreck immediately upon it occurring. The significant delay to the game stemmed from your attempt to kill an entire unit who was not by the rules dead. This eventually changed into a second attempt to withhold a unit that posed a threat to your army. By trying the emergency disembark argument, you wanted to get them stuck in for an extra round so they both couldn't hurt you, but also serve as a shield to a counter assault by other units into your witches.
5b) The other time issue I had was your shooting phases. Not the length of them (as I can't complain that your army had alot of shooting) but rather the way in which you played them. You had a tendency to hop around the board shooting units in a seemingly random order (and not just trying to get tanks open to then shoot guys) but rather in such a way that it led to multiple attempts to shoot twice with a unit in the same phase.
5c) I also think that you and I just happen to have a personality clash. You rubbed me the wrong way several times throughout the game. I don't know if it was intentional, but the way you come across with some of your comments and how you go about the game seems to really get to people.
In an unrelated response to another poster about the death company: In most turns Dash would have had to completely abandon huge sections of the board that were of importance to try and leash my death company. I was able to get them out of their vehicles in the middle of a ton of targets, there in giving myself a few rage outs. While I have to move towards the nearest enemy unit, I can assault anyone. Especially if I shoot that unit first (forcing me to assault only them).
This in fact was why the death company did not contest the central objective in turn 5. The closest enemy unit was in the opposite direction. They did however kill 2 warrior squads and 2 venoms over turn 4-5. And were in position to get into contest or destroy range of my back objective.
Also, the assault squad in central position to either contest the middle objective, or take it (troop choice, gonna win an assault against 5 warriors) was still fully intact with all 5 squad members and the priest.
In response to the leadership / fallback / jump pack marine. While you were talking your way through your shooting phase, and trying to determine whether you had fired everything, you got through your list of units, and finished your sentence with "And this unit takes a leadership test".
This came across as the end of a paragraph of verbalization, and came across as a command to take the test, you were done shooting. So I took the test, and fell back. In a previous game of yours, an opponent did a similar thing, and you did not allow them to back track to redo or undo something that had already happened. If it is of any importance, I let you backtrack and shoot a venom, but not at this unit. And when you did fire the venom, you missed or failed to wound with several shots, and I made the 2 armor saves you caused. So even if you had shot the jump pack guy, nothing would have changed.
Dash - do you still feel strongly that your notoriously bad dice rolling can be attributed to the chessex dice? Now that you have some experience with the Koplow dice, do you feel that your rolls have changed at all? My impression from reading your reports is that the Koplow dice can still fail just as misserably as the chessex dice. I'm just not sure if it's a matter of bad timing or frequency.
Dashofpepper wrote:
Ultimately, I've never had sportsmanship issues at an event before. Were these justified? Eh...I don't think so. I've told the story, been honest about it, you the reader will be the judge of it as you always are. Some of you will think that my opponents were being petty. Some of you will think that its no ones' business but those who gave them. Some of you will think (and avidly post) about what a rotten bastard you think I am. I probably can probably even scribble down 90% of your names before you even show up in this thread.
Outliers happen. If I start developing a trend of bad sportsmanship, I'll have to think about it - but folks who meet me generally like me, and I get along with folks just fine during almost every game. I'll admit that I've never had such a hostile interaction with anyone like I did with Chris before; he and Kingsley were glaring daggers at me when I left and whispering to their friends; it was a bit uncomfortable.
Happens. Years back I got the second highest sports score at one tournment, then basemnet at the next. Same army, same play style, same personality. It just happens.
You had me worried there, Dash. Good to see you pull out the win. From what i've read in these battle reports, not only were you a good sport in terms of trying to be amicable to your opponents but you were also fairly permissive with discrepancies in the rules. I can say, I have only read one battle report in which you have lost, and that was due to your permitting an opponent to go back a phase. I personally think it would be an honor to play you, that I would get my keister whooped, and we could go for a beer afterwards. Sounds like a good day to me, keep doing what you're doing, my friend.
Sarigar wrote:Unless I've missed a rule, the big Stormraven headache could have easily been resolved.
You stated you got a wrecked result (with some help from him going Flat Out) on the Stromraven. The picture shows the model was removed and just the base remained. Why was the model not placed where it had been wrecked, like any other vehicle? If that had been done, it would have take small amount of time to line up where your wyches would have been, but due to the size of the Stormraven, he would have easily been able to place the models down as per the rules.
The storm raven entry explicitly requires the owning player to disembark using the base of the model, not the Hull. The Valkyrie / Vendetta requires the same now per the FAQ I think.
Interesting. Skimmers are removed from their bases if possible (assuming they are not glued to the stand) and placed on the table when wrecked or immobilized per the basic rule book. From your interpretation (and possibly your opponents as well), the vehicle is wrecked, he has to measure from the base to see if he can get out. Then, once you decide which models can disembark do so and are placed. Then, you have to pretty much move every model around the base and place the Stormraven on the table. And under Emergency Disembarkation, it states the player can try to place the models anywhere within 2" of the hull of the vehicle. It can be argued that 'Emergency Disembarkation' is not the same thing as 'Disembarking' which is what is covered in the Blood Angels codex, thus the opponent would be allowed to place the Stormraven on the table, then perform an 'Emergency Disembarkation' as per page 67 of the main rulebook.
He could have easily set the model on the table and models would have been reconfigured slightly to conform its larger size and it would have been pretty easy to put the models on the table and continue gaming. He could have easily claimed that 'Disembarking' and 'Emergency Disembarkation' are two separate rules. There have been challenges with the Valkerie/Stormraven flight stands and just having a small amount of flexilibility in gray areas of the rules would go a long way.
After viewing your reports in full, there appears to be a lot of gray areas of the rules that you seemed insistent going your way and having little to no flexibility. From what I can pull from your reporting on this tourney:
-Garnering the approval of proxied vehicles, however, I completely conceed that the TOs made the absolute wrong call in this case. But, you gamed the game, so to speak.
-Taking advantage in game of said modelling for advantage which could have had a huge impact on 1st turn shooting in Night Fight where every inch can matter. With the tables as such, size for gaining cover appeared to not be an issue at all. When your guns are 36" range, getting extra inches can become critical.
-Using blocking maneuvers to where parts of your vehicle is sticking off the table to try and ensure models can't get past (the weapons sticking from the prow appear to be off the table) . It's pretty clear these days any part of models can't hang off of the table
-Putting part of a base of a model that falls underneath a vehicle, then claiming your oppoent's base can't share space with your own vehicle, yet, your model did.
-Debating disembarking and emergency disembarkation as one in the same to your benefit
-Having an illegal army list apparently (man, folks ripped into the 16 y.o. for being 3 points over, but your illegal list gets glossed over; you write these massive tacticas yet bring an illegal list stating is was a simple error; c'mon man!)
-Being called out for using equipment/models that were not on your list
-Rolling dice issues (that was called out on another thread, not your battle reports specifically, but I've experienced it first hand from you and this would not surprise me)
-Possibly firing units more than once. An easy fix is to simply place a marker next to units that have fired, especially MSU armies at this kind of points value. (again, this was not you reporting, but your opponent doing so within your battle report)
This has been quite a list of things that really pile up in one tournament. While going through the reports, there was nothing really new tactically offered; it really was a demonstration on how a min/max list can fare against non min/max lists. It's mainly an attitude that you will push and push to get your way on any ruling possible and pull as much shenanigans as possible unless caught. That is simply not fun to play against; and I had hoped you would have mellowed out since the time we played a couple of years back. The reason you didn't get low Sportsmanship scores was b/c it was Ard Boys and there is nothing to score. You having 'sportsmanship' issues is absolutely nothing new and claiming this event was a fluke is very, very misleading.
You will definitely get at least one win at the NOVA. After playing against you as well as seeing all this kind of stuff in you own reporting, I'll absolutely conceed the game if I get paired up against you. It's just not worth my time or effort to try and dodge this many landmines in a game.
Sarigar, I will let someone else respond specifically to your points but just about every one has no merit w.r.t. the rules overall. For example, he only needs to be 1/2 " from the board edge to block him which is obviously allowed. His opponent simply did not understand the rules if he really thought he could assault.
If you do not know the rules, then do not go to a GT. People need to spend more time in YMDC just reading.
calypso2ts wrote:Sarigar, I will let someone else respond specifically to your points but just about every one has no merit w.r.t. the rules overall. For example, he only needs to be 1/2 " from the board edge to block him which is obviously allowed. His opponent simply did not understand the rules if he really thought he could assault.
If you do not know the rules, then do not go to a GT. People need to spend more time in YMDC just reading.
Not everyone goes to a GT to be a throat slitting power gamer with a tricked out MSU army. Some people go just to play some games and meet people. Local differences in play style and rule interpretations combined with personal experiences in gaming lead to people having different views of the game and rules. A lot of players don't have experience against every army so cannot be expected to know all their rules, let alone some random FaQ ruling.
Example. 2 of Dash's games in this very tourny, in 1 game (against DE I think) he used the venom's hull to stop an enemy assaulting one of his units, and in the next game they use the Storm Raven's base for determining assault ranges and disembarking. By the rules, sure, but you don't see how that could be confusing to someone? It's not exactly spelled out that skimmers = use vehicle hull, and "flyers" = use flying base.
Now hold up a second. Weren't there extra Objective points given to those who managed to kill specific enemy units? And Didn't your opponent manage to kill, what, 2 or three of those? Wouldn't that have given him 2 or 3 extra objectives at the end of the game?
Carnage43 wrote:
Not everyone goes to a GT to be a throat slitting power gamer with a tricked out MSU army. Some people go just to play some games and meet people. Local differences in play style and rule interpretations combined with personal experiences in gaming lead to people having different views of the game and rules. A lot of players don't have experience against every army so cannot be expected to know all their rules, let alone some random FaQ ruling.
Yeah but it was still a GT. That's like saying not everyone competes in sports to be the best some just want to hang out and drink Gatorade.
Carnage43 wrote:
Not everyone goes to a GT to be a throat slitting power gamer with a tricked out MSU army. Some people go just to play some games and meet people. Local differences in play style and rule interpretations combined with personal experiences in gaming lead to people having different views of the game and rules. A lot of players don't have experience against every army so cannot be expected to know all their rules, let alone some random FaQ ruling.
Yeah but it was still a GT. That's like saying not everyone competes in sports to be the best some just want to hang out and drink Gatorade.
I could argue about "beer league" baseball and hockey, but I don't wanna get into an argument in relation to metaphors.
GT participation isn't regulated, so "soft" armies and rules disputes will happen and you just need to deal with these players as they come. Even Dash is wrong occasionally (As you will see him mention in the odd battle report) and there's few people with more and more varied tournament experience then him. Calypso2ts' insisting that you shouldn't show up to a GT "If you do not know the rules" is unrealistic, as there's so many random loopholes and so much 'stupid' in the rules that it's virtually impossible to know the proper resolution to every possible rules dispute. Even if you do know everything, well, you still have to convince your opponent you are right. As you often see in Dash's reports it's often better to just play it wrong to avoid a dispute and move the game to resolution. Otherwise arguing every single rule every time gets you situations like this game, a 40 minute waste of time. If that happens often, you will never finish a game and never place well in a tournament.
My point is, you have to know the rules of course, but can't expect that everyone knows everything. It's a fact of tournament life.
Monster Rain: Drama involving me is pretty much always tied to the internet. People that are not willing to be douchebags in person to me will gladly do so online. NC and FL drama long ago - completely online.
No matter what, it will happen.
@Foreigner: The judge didn't rule that you could have your dreadnought; he was ok with you getting out your 4 guys. After the tournament, John said that he NEVER would have allowed you to place your dreadnought, he thought all parties had agreed that it was destroyed. I was ok with you getting your full unit out instead of just four via emergency disembark. You never got to hear my side - because you never let me say the whole thing, which was that the gap between my wyches should allow you to move models out between them, to the other side of my wyches - getting the whole thing out technically within 2" of the hull, but not straight out. I don't know if its legal or not, but I thought it would be nicer than just four guys. However, your dreadnought could DEFINITELY not fit out. You were right about the partial unit being able to disembark - once we went through the rulebook and looked at (with the judge there too - we got that out) - the whole unit vs. partial unit getting out is where communication broke down. When I finally threw my hands up in the air because you were shouting down any attempt to get in a word edgewise and said "Alright, lets do it your way" it was to you getting out your unit - NOT your dreadnought. John didn't know you were keeping your dreadnought out; he wouldn't have allowed it - and said so afterwards. *shrug* It is what it is. You got it out, it pwned my face.
Every time I think I know the rules pretty dang well, I find something else I didn't know. I learned at least two things at the Alamo GT that I didn't know before:
1. Skimmers and jump infantry don't have to take multiple dangerous terrain tests when they enter and leave multiple terrain features. I've always done this, and thought you were required to. Since I play a skimmer heavy army, this will be HIGHLY advantageous to me in the future.
2. Partial units can disembark from transports that are wrecked. Again; I've always killed my entire unit. The only time I've run into this before with an opponent was with my orks - when I am surrounding the ENTIRE transport, usually 2-3 ranks deep, so the entire embarked unit is destroyed without question. This was actually my first time running into this situation in a game.
I *haven't* been playing this game for years and years; I didn't start until after fifth edition; I'm much better equipped with rules knowledge now than I was a year ago; and a year ago was much better than I was a year before that when I got my first models. Heh. It wasn't too long ago that I discovered the brilliance of using cookie trays / moving trays to move models between tables. The Alamo GT was the first one where I came equipped with wreck markers for other peoples' vehicles. The idea of using markers to show what has fired where is also smart; I'm going to poach it. I *do* have a system for firing; I outlined it in my OP I believe. I *do* wish we had gotten to six turns. Taking pictures eats into game time. Not writing battle reports is a lot easier than writing them. I write them as a community service - for the same reason that I take the time to write extensive tactical articles, and strategy guides, and critique army lists, and meticulously respond to the barrage of PMs that I'm always getting asking for advice, army critiques, opinions, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sarigar - your post is hostile. It also extrapolates far more than it has a right to. Some of what you wrote is an actual lie. I had hoped you were a long-dead ghost, but since you've chosen to poke your face into this thread and puke a smelly mess, you deserve serious consideration and response in your attempt to sully my name.
I'm not going to go through your list of issues point by point - in pretty much every case, it was addressed and answered very well in the battle report or thread where it was addressed. Clever of you to list what you did how you did. Instead, I have this to say:
I have virtually infinite patience, and an EXTREMELY high tolerance for bulldookie. These battle reports and others that I have written show that in ample quantity. I'm not sure what it takes to get me to dock someone in sportsmanship - someone screaming that I'm cheating despite a judge ruling against them on the very issue they're fussing about...then heckling me during another round and booing me later - that's not enough to push my buttons enough to merit a bad game vote. I fight my way through far more internet drama that I deserve; because I'm stubborn, and optimistically believe that people are mistaken or misinformed instead of petty and malicious. I *should* just ignore it. I *SHOULD* avoid trying to help people. I *DEFINITELY SHOULD* go quietly about my business. I've always been optimistic about my ability to influence the world in little ways - doing something to make the world a better place to live in (which explains my military service), or raising the collective ability of 40k gamers (thus all the tactical guides and battle reports).
I can put up with a lot. I don't think anyone would say anything differently. In the entire history of my 40k career (as short as it has been), there has only been one game - EVER - in which I picked up my models and refused to play my opponent because they were simply intolerable. That opponent...was you. As new as I was to 40k, before I even KNEW what a GT was, or that there was organized 40k outside of FLGS tournaments or 'Ard Boyz...I had the misfortune of being paired up against you in the first round of 'Ard Boyz semi-finals.
You just wrote that you've experienced dice-rolling issues against me first-hand. That's a flat lie. I conceded my game to you on turn two. Before firing a shot. Before making an assault. There was nothing that you could have done to win that game - if I had stuck through your ridiculous shenanigans - you taking an extra movement phase during MY assault phase, I still would have won. I packed up my models because the insult of having to deal with you was more than even my immense tolerance for the ridiculous could bear. Need a refresher? I was playing Orks. You were playing Eldrad's Seer Council. Eldrad and your Seer Council boost behind the battlewagon that Ghazghkull and his nobs are in. You fail your roll for fortune. You fail your reroll. Ghazghkull disembarks with a hungry look on his face.
The straw that broke the camel's back was the burna wagon in midfield. My burnas all disembark. I declare a Waaaugh! (Still no dice to roll). My burnas disembark 2" and get an auto-six to run. I move them. You pitch a fit because you think I've moved too far - your wave serpents and disembarkations were attempted to cleverly block me from getting to assault all those tasty fire dragons. I would have made it anyway. You went berzerk. I picked up my burna models, put them off to the side of the table, and asked YOU to disembark them for me, then run them 6" in the direction I wanted to go. I asked you to do this because I KNEW that you would arrive at the same place I did. And that the burnas were going to pick up a massive multi-assault and between them and Ghazghkull literally end the game on turn two.
Instead...you picked up your models and started moving them around on the board. And you said, "No - fine, you can move them there. And so I'm going to move *these* guys over *here.* And *these guys are moving here. Now go ahead."
Dude, we weren't even playing 40k anymore, we were so far off into Sarigar fantasy land that a return to the game wasn't even plausible. You were right - I wasn't crystal clear on the rules at the time. I didn't know that passengers couldn't fire out of an open-topped fast transport that moved 12". I knew that everything for them got bumped up one iteration. Believe it or not, that's a pretty common noobie mistake. I run into pretty often against newer players. I don't pitch a fit and accuse them of cheating, I get out my rulebook and show them the entry for it. I appreciate when people teach me the rules - games where I learn something new - especially at this point in my career where I know enough to think I know it all, and occasionally am surprised by a rule (like I pointed out above about dangerous terrain tests and disembarkation from wrecked vehicles) are especially valuable to me.
For the ridiculous amount of cheating that you were engaged in couple with your hostile attitude - it was simply the worst 40k engagement I had ever been involved in. Like I said; I would have won anyway. I was hoping that you getting a full point massacre from me would speed you on your way to at least win the tournament, but your other opponents apparently had more stomach for you than I could muster.
Think on that. For all the drama I deal with on the internet, I don't have an ignore list. For all the crap I occasionally run into at tournaments, I let it ride. I give the opponent the benefit of the doubt, I let things slide, I let opponents go back to previous turns to do stuff they forgot, pick up assaults that they forgot to do, make illegal assaults....I let a *LOT* go. And only once...once EVER...have I run into such bad sportsmanship and such horrendous cheating that I decided I would rather pack up my models and drive two hours home from a regional tournament than have to put up with any more shenanigans. And that was you.
Sarigar wrote:You will definitely get at least one win at the NOVA. After playing against you as well as seeing all this kind of stuff in you own reporting, I'll absolutely conceed the game if I get paired up against you. It's just not worth my time or effort to try and dodge this many landmines in a game.
In short: Don't worry about it. I'll get more than one win at the NOVA. Hopefully I'll get all wins. You and I won't play against each other, because I'll be at the top tables, and despite the shenanigans that you're willing to engage in to try winning a game, you're still not good enough to win. Unless you've drastically changed...and your post here is indicative that you have not...you won't get bracketed against me.
'Ard Boyz doesn't have sportsmanship, but most events that I attend do. And I have *NEVER* had a sportsmanship issue at a single one of them. I wish you luck with your gaming; I'm glad that we roll in different circles. I had to face a lot of prejudice in the Southeast when I moved, and I have you to thank for that with your unwelcome introductions to the folks living where I had just moved to on their forums and yahoo groups that a cheater named Dashofpepper had just moved to the area. I had the misfortune of moving to an area where many of the players knew and liked you, and you poisoned the waters for me when I moved there. Strangely, since moving to a place where no one has ever heard of you, I've had no issues. In the GTs I've been to, I've had no issues. Outside of your personal influence, the Alamo is the first time I've had sportsmanship issues.
And given the circumstances behind it, I'm not worried about a greater significance.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Anvildude wrote:Now hold up a second. Weren't there extra Objective points given to those who managed to kill specific enemy units? And Didn't your opponent manage to kill, what, 2 or three of those? Wouldn't that have given him 2 or 3 extra objectives at the end of the game?
Nay.
The killing specific enemy units was related to gaining the bonus objective - which was for points. Getting a win is worth 16 points, accomplishing the bonus objective is worth four more additional points for a possible of 20 points in a game. THe "objective" isn't the kind of objective on the table-top, in which you have to claim an objective to win - just an objective "marker" for additional points.
So the bonus objective for this mission was to kill the targeted enemy units. He killed...all four of mine? So got the four bonus points associated with doing so - one point per. I killed two of his, and got the two points associated with doing so.
All in all, people, it's a game. We need to learn to live and let live. This is also a game that has a bunch of areas in which the rules are unclear (Go look at the many thread in You make da call if you need proof).
Dash played an excellent game, in all of the games presented, coming back even with horrible dice rolls. That should be applauded, not booed.
As for the cheating on both parts... Who cares? It's over, what happened happened, leave it at that. Those who really did cheat, know who they are. Those who didn't know they didn't.
For those who did, take what you learned. Figure out tactics, and move on. If you have to cheat at a game to win, it's not the game for you in the first place.
Those that didn't, stop feeding the trolls. It's not worth it.
In regards for past grudges, you should really just avoid each others threads. It's not worth anyone's time to deal with the crap being flung around by people with grudges. Live by the old saying "If you don't have anything nice to say, then don't say anything at all"
Again, great come back Dash, I look forward to seeing more bat raps (especially in regards to your crons) soon.
Krisken wrote:Oooohh, now we're heating up! I knew I wouldn't be disappointed!
Nah - not heating up. That was a pretty dispassionate reply that I made. The facts are what they are; "It is what it is" is the applicable phrase. Getting angry at someone for having it in for you doesn't help anything; although I'm not infallible. Stack enough of it on top of itself and I'll make an angry post here and there.
Again, great come back Dash, I look forward to seeing more bat raps (especially in regards to your crons) soon.
My Wraith Wing went undefeated again today at a tournament! I took pictures and plan to write battle reports....soon. I wrote a battle report every day Monday-Friday to cover the Alamo GT, and need a break. I didn't win best overall - I didn't get max points during one of my games (against a pretty standard Razor/longfang spam SW army), and ended up in second. We only got through four turns, and I couldn't kill the last two grey hunters on an objective - the only objective that counted in the game - to win the game. Arg.
I faced an Ork Kan-Wall, Razorfang SW, and Eldrad Mechdar.
My statement was probably too harsh with respect to the rules. I did a lot of research before my first GT. When you move outside a comfortable group where everyone agreed on an interpretation it can be different.
Maybe a better statement is at a GT one should be aware of these differences and willing to lay out to judges a rule in less than 30 seconds (this game isnt THAT complex) and then move on accepting their decision.
Krisken wrote:Oooohh, now we're heating up! I knew I wouldn't be disappointed!
Nah - not heating up. That was a pretty dispassionate reply that I made. The facts are what they are; "It is what it is" is the applicable phrase. Getting angry at someone for having it in for you doesn't help anything; although I'm not infallible. Stack enough of it on top of itself and I'll make an angry post here and there.
You spend a lot more time on dispassionate posts than I do! That's all drama under the bridge, I suppose. Either way, quite amusing.
I've been enjoying this battle report and the counter viewpoint of your opponent from the game. It might be a nice feature to include opposing viewpoints from these games whenever possible, even when they disagree with your own analysis of what happened, for your readers. As i have stated previously, I often find the truth is somewhere in the middle.
Good luck at your next tourney and I look forward to seeing how you do with Necrons.
Dashofpepper wrote:I didn't know that passengers couldn't fire out of an open-topped fast transport that moved 12". I knew that everything for them got bumped up one iteration. Believe it or not, that's a pretty common noobie mistake. I run into pretty often against newer players. I don't pitch a fit and accuse them of cheating, I get out my rulebook and show them the entry for it. I appreciate when people teach me the rules - games where I learn something new - especially at this point in my career where I know enough to think I know it all, and occasionally am surprised by a rule (like I pointed out above about dangerous terrain tests and disembarkation from wrecked vehicles) are especially valuable to me.
Could you point out that page to me, I believe my friend and I are making said noobie mistake (pretty possible, since hes only recently gotten into an army with open topped transports).
I'll cover that one. From pg 70 of the BRB for open topped transports it says
Open-topped vehicles do not have specific fire points. Instead, all passengers in an open-topped vehicle may fire, measuring range and line of sight from the hull of the vehicle.
So it's treated like fire points, without limit to how many can fire, which takes us to pg 66 under "fire points" which says at the bottom of the section
Models firing from a vehicle count as moving if the vehicle moves, and may not fire at all if the vehicle moved at Cruising speed that turn.
Great come back Dash, real shame about the 'drama' that happened, congrats on winning. And well done with the Wraith Wing! I eagerly await further Bat Reps (but totally understand you needing a break)
I skipped to the end to comment so I don't know if this has been covered, but you don't have to be able to disembark the whole unit when the vehicle is wrecked and partially surrounded. Just that the models that can't disembark are destroyed.
The internet didn't freak out over Tony having 3 extra points in his army list for the Nova Open. A certain internet douche did, and a few folks jumped on it. But by and large, no one cared.
My list wasn't over in points - it was under. And the illegality was adding a useless piece of wargear (one too many) onto a character that pretty much can't use it. I added it trying to get my army UP to the point requirement. There's nothing to freak out about. Take it out of my army and I've got 1,991 points, and nothing changes. If my haemonculi had one too many pieces of wargear and it was USED in a game...that would be different.
If someone dedicates 5-10 points to buying a searchlight for a tactical marine squad that can't use it - its illegal. Also never used and a worthless expenditure of points.
No one is freaking out about it for the same reasons that *most* people don't freak out. Its irrelevant. I put myself at a disdvantage, got no benefit from it, and didn't have a full 2,000 point army - and some of that not full 2,000 points was useless. Yeah! Lets make some internet dramas!
The skimmer's model doesn't get removed, and the base left, but the other way 'round. The StormRaven itself needs to get set down, and the based pulled off the table. Is there something, someplace about StormRavens that by-passes the usual practice of placing the wrecked skimmer model on the table?
The internet didn't freak out over Tony having 3 extra points in his army list for the Nova Open. A certain internet douche did, and a few folks jumped on it. But by and large, no one cared.
Yeah, they kinda did. Spend some time listening to the podcasts from around that time and you'll get a pretty good idea on how bad people ripped on him for it.
----------------------------------------------
Oh, sorry, Dash. Thanks for the Batreps. They're gonna help my DE games improve. Have been helping. I did rather well my last two games. I'm back up to a DE 50/50% Win/Loss ratio!
Do the Batrep pix really slow down the games? And how're you keeping track of what happened? Do ya have a good memory or are you taking notes? I'd love to be able to do this and some decent players at the FLGS do a few, but found the games really stretch out in length. Any tips?
Brothererekose wrote:
----------------------------------------------
Oh, sorry, Dash. Thanks for the Batreps. They're gonna help my DE games improve. Have been helping. I did rather well my last two games. I'm back up to a DE 50/50% Win/Loss ratio!
Do the Batrep pix really slow down the games? And how're you keeping track of what happened? Do ya have a good memory or are you taking notes? I'd love to be able to do this and some decent players at the FLGS do a few, but found the games really stretch out in length. Any tips?
No, its all from memory with pictures to help - no time to take notes, so I do my best recalling what shot where, what happened...its not 100% accurate, but close.
Darklight Storm
HQ: Baron Sathonyx
HQ: Haemonculi with Shattershard, Crucible of Malediction, and Animus Vitae
Troop1: 5x Warriors with 1x Blaster // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons
Troop2: 5x Warriors with 1x Blaster // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons
Troop3: 5x Warriors with 1x Blaster // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons
Troop4: 5x Warriors with 1x Blaster // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons
Troop5: 5x Warriors with 1x Blaster // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons
Troop6: 9x Wyches with Haywire Grenades // Raider with Flickerfield and Torment Grenade Launcher
Elite1: 4x Trueborn with 4x Blasters // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons
Elite2: 4x Trueborn with 4x Blasters // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons
Elite3: 3x Trueborn with 3x Blasters // Venom with Dual Splinter Cannons
Fast Attack1: 3x Beastmasters, 4x Razorwing Flocks, 5x Khymerae
Heavy Support1: Ravager with 3x Dark Lances and Flickerfield
Heavy Support2: Ravager with 3x Dark Lances and Flickerfield
Heavy Support3: Ravager with 3x Dark Lances and Flickerfield
Your list is illegal!!!
HQ: Haemonculi with Shattershard, Crucible of Malediction, and Animus Vitae
A haemonculi can only have two of the above wargear, not three!
I bet that if I took an SM librarian HQ with 3 powers people would declare my list null and void so what gives?
Seriously, have you even read any of this thread up until now?
Pyriel, congratulations on getting through a fifth of the OP. I'd encourage you to read more and post less.
No need to be hostile, it makes you sound like I actually hit a nerve there lol.
Simply started to read something I thought to be a good batrep and stopped when I saw the list being illegal. Even skimmed the first page to see if an explanation was offered but didnt find any or missed it (ergo skimmed).
My thoughts exactly but tourney judges make the calls.
I also didnt know until I googled (now) and found this article that tourneys were that innacurate where people that go over the point limits with their lists are allowed to win etc.
My question is thus, can you, as a frequent tourney visitor shed some light on this phenomena, how often do these slipups happen and what is the general level of acceptance to these things by the judges?
I got a list slightly wrong pointwise once on a tourney an got a very bad reception over this but was allowed to continue if I altered the list right away.
Pyriel, thanks for rephrasing your inquiry in a more polite way. I've deleted the off-topic and rude back and forth. If folks can keep the discussion polite, we won't have to delete any more posts or give any suspensions out. That's a warning. Keep it friendly, folks.
For what it's worth Dash your record speaks for itself, you do make some deviously cheesy moves, like spinning a venom or raider for the extra movement, but at tourny's anybody who shows better be prepared for every cheesey legal trick there is, no on forks out X amount of money not to try and win the damned thing. You are quite knowledgeable, in fact at my FLGS some younger kids wanted to start DE armies and I printed out your guide and took it in for them. Gongrads on the tourny placement.
The internet didn't freak out over Tony having 3 extra points in his army list for the Nova Open. A certain internet douche did, and a few folks jumped on it. But by and large, no one cared.
My list wasn't over in points - it was under. And the illegality was adding a useless piece of wargear (one too many) onto a character that pretty much can't use it. I added it trying to get my army UP to the point requirement. There's nothing to freak out about. Take it out of my army and I've got 1,991 points, and nothing changes. If my haemonculi had one too many pieces of wargear and it was USED in a game...that would be different.
If someone dedicates 5-10 points to buying a searchlight for a tactical marine squad that can't use it - its illegal. Also never used and a worthless expenditure of points.
No one is freaking out about it for the same reasons that *most* people don't freak out. Its irrelevant. I put myself at a disdvantage, got no benefit from it, and didn't have a full 2,000 point army - and some of that not full 2,000 points was useless. Yeah! Lets make some internet dramas!
In fairness, a fair number of folks did freak out about Tony's list being over. In many other top competive events, like the UKGT or Adepticon, I don't believe he would have been able to win with an illegal list. Generally there is a substantial penalty even if the error is minor.
Part of this is just to set a clear standard for everyone else that people are expected to be careful and conscientious making their lists, and not put all the onus on the judges.
This is why Tony doing so well (especially winning) at Adepticon was so important and meaningful. It definitely legitimized him more in the eyes of many players from around the world who are accustomed to very strict enforcement of list legality.
Mannahnin wrote:
This is why Tony doing so well (especially winning) at Adepticon was so important and meaningful. It definitely legitimized him more in the eyes of many players from around the world who are accustomed to very strict enforcement of list legality.
Then its probably a good thing that the Alamo wasn't my first run around the block.
That must have been a tough tourney to walk into the second day, given the atmosphere for you the first day, and especially knowing you would not even have the reward of beautiful tables to play on...
Way to hang in there and keep it real. I like how you gave the loot away at the end - contrary to what someone else posted, i think that's a classy play. Shows you care about the game, as a game.
It would only have been a problem if Dash had used that third item, and as he has mentioned more times than I can count in the five battle reports, that third item was the animus vitae and it was useless and he had no plans of ever using it (and what a surprise he never used it). Most of Dash's reports don't devolve into this kind of stuff so like I said before, I hope you have a little more game time and less arguing in the next tournament Dash.
Ummm, wow. Great version of the events between us: great wordsmithing. I'll leave it at that.
Take it however you want. It's not hostile, but compiling the information from your own reporting and some knowledge from actually having to game with you.
The bottom line is the culmination of all the gray areas and others (based on the other players responses) creates a very unfun enviornment when playing against you. To best sum it up; if they give you an inch, you take a mile.
I didn't attend the NOVA, but I read/heard about the 3 points over and it simply did cause a lot of drama. Personally, I don't think it made a big deal just as I don't think you also having an illegal list made a big deal in the overall effects of each game. However, the rules are in place for a reason which is to ensure everyone is on the same level playing field. Sometimes this works, sometimes not. But, when it is a clear violation of the rules, then it should be enforced. You had an illegal list. Tony had an illegal list and Mike Brandt enforced the rules to the best of his ability as it was discovered after the fact.
If you've upset gamers in NC, FL, GA (another drama filled battlereport you posted) and now TX (drama filled battlereport) and still making the claim that it is everyone else's fault and you accept absolutely zero responsibility is hard to even comprehend. Wait, I forgot UT as Stelek even posted it was not an enjoyable experience to game with you.
You can tell me to reflect or that I lie. I'm ok with all this. After 20+ years playing this game, I've only had one really bad experience and that was with you. And like you, I've also played in multiple states. Unlike you, I don't have issues with folks (aside from you) regarding how I play a game of toy soldiers.
I have watched stelek play and Stelek is the one that I would never want to game against. That being said, you have to take everything stelek says with a grain of salt, a big one.
Automatically Appended Next Post: the moral of this story is you should all switch to playing warmachine/hordes
Again, you hit upon areas well outside of my 'sphere of influence'.
I read your reports and commented on gray ares of the rules as well as other posters comments regarding your playstyle. As many others have; not in some malicious tone in which your last post was.
I am free to post in regards to the battlereports, which I have done.
This is all very interesting Dash. It seems like at the Alamo you took advantage of the fact that the TO's would settle rulles arguments by a dice off. I will need to add this to my repertoire.
Also, its really a shame all these gamers dislike you and try to run you down. Keep your head up and shake it off.
Dash- I see you taking a lot of heat, but after reading the reports, and the responses from your opponents in your threads, you must have the patience of Jobe.
Anglacon wrote:Dash- I see you taking a lot of heat, but after reading the reports, and the responses from your opponents in your threads, you must have the patience of Jobe.
Yes to suffer the slings and arrows of posters criticizing shoddy conversions and illegal lists...he's a real martyr!
Nice report. Again could do without the drama and tone in the OP, but it is clear that Dash is ignoring me at this point, so my pleas for civility and no drama will fall on deaf ears. :(
I have lurked dakka for years and these batreps have encouraged me to pick up the hobby once again since i sold my stuff in 2001, thanks Dash and don't let the haters bring you down!
After reading all 5 battle reports and all the drama associated with it...I can't believe how seriously people take this game. It's really ridiculous...LOL. I'm glad my hardcore-competitive tournament-play days are over. The TMZing of this game across the internet is truly ruining the enjoyment of the "game" now. I often wonder if the only prize given was just a t-shirt...how many people would still be playing in these tournaments?
@Dash: Sorry to hear you had some troubles at the GT. My advice is to not take it so seriously. It will burn you out eventually. Take it from someone who's been there. Lastly, you will always be welcome in Orlando.
Krisken wrote:I'm confused. Doesn't the ignore function work? Couldn't y'all just ignore the people who post things you don't like?
It seems a lot of the drama could be avoided with a simple click of a button.
Well done Krisken, you have got the right idea and only been a couple of weeks on the forum.
Just to remind everyone, the public forums are not the place to pursue feuds.
Don't do it by PM too much, either, as it could be considered harrassment.
Moderators do not have access to private messaging. Investigations have to be done by an administrator. They prefer not to have to do it unless necessary.
bagtagger wrote:
the moral of this story is you should all switch to playing warmachine/hordes
You know? Ultimately, this is my takeaway from this thread.
At a regional GT, which should be a very competitive event, what do we see?
TOs weak on the rules--rules clarity has always been an issue in GW games, "dicing off" or allowing 40 minute rules dispute interruptions should never be acceptable at a 'high level of competitive play'.
Incomplete/unfinished games--completely understandable R1-4 in the 'scrub rankings', but for the final game of the final day to determine the overall winner and the game ends prematurely? With only a bare handful of models left? Give them a further extension.
Honestly, what brought about this game resolution? Slow play resulting from rules confusion resulting in a premature game end with both player admitting to a decidedly different conclusion if the game had gone on to subsequent turns.
How is this representative of a competitive event? Or a competitive system structure in general? "Competitive" 40k has, and continues to, strike me as an argument over being the tallest midget in the world.
The Drama created by all of this is really just disheartening.
Most of use where not there, you know who should care about illegal lists and possibly advantageous/disadvantageous conversions? The judges. Should the judges have acted in these areas? Yes, but they are human. Stop complaining about the size of his Venoms when he got prior permission to use them, stop complaining about the legality of his list, because ultimately, if the judges of the event want to disqualify him on that point, it is their call to make, not ours.
I have played Dash a few times, one of those times personally, early this year he attended the same local tournaments I did, and though a few of us gave him a challenge, he won every tournament here. Did any of us in this area have hard feelings or anything? Maybe a few, but nothing compared to the sour grapes of these past threads.
Here is what I saw in these battle reports, comparing Dash's explanation to his opponent's explanation. His third round opponent took an unoptimized list, and got angry when he met an army with a hard counter/ "Your lists isn't fun to play against, so I am giving you a bad sportsmanship score" just proves everything that is wrong about sportsmanship scoring and doesn't put that player in a good light. His fourth round opponent made a mistake with a rules interpretation, and his target priority, and then got mad at Dash for it. The judges ruled, it didn't go in his favor. We have all had games like that, but with fleet and the positioning of his models, he could have still easily moved around it and made it a non-issue, making the perceived advantage of longer raiders a moot point. He made the mistake, not dash, he should only blame himself for the outcome. His last round opponent, again, superior rules knowledge applied to one of the downsides to a storm raven (disembarking from a base) created sour grapes. Dash was again right, but his opponent got mad, and again, created a hostile atmosphere.
All of this, unfortunately, in all honesty, doesn't make his opponents look too good. It seemed like they and Dash both walked in with different philosophy towards the game, and they where upset because Dash's outlook on the game equaled him winning. It makes them out to be sore losers, and that is a damn shame.
Internet Drama and being upset about toy soldiers does nothing positive towards the hobby. Nothing.
You lost, you know what, I faced Dash across the table from me, and I lost. It was still a good game, that I enjoyed.
To be fair though, Dash, you are not innocent in all of this either. You have professed to being a good 40k player, you profess, that you have an incredibly high win record. Though most places you go are filled with stories that games against you are unenjoyable. Granted, I chalked a large portion of that to local opinions and attitudes towards the game that makes playing a competitive outsider fall immediately into drama and sour grapes and honestly, that is a very bad aspect of the larger 40k community. However, I think a portion of this also, is your insistence and reliance on rules interpretations that favor you, which in all honesty are fairly contentious. When you where playing in our area, you where certain that beasts benefited from pain tokens. You have an article where a key tactic to an army is the fairly contentious vehicle rotation.
My challenge to you, is if you are this great player, if you are this person who is always looking for a competitive challenge, can you enter these tournaments without those rules interpretations? Can you enter a tournament with a list that isn't 9 Venoms? Can you?
To me, that would be the impressive feat, that would cement, in my eyes and others, your true player skill. That you took a legal list, didn't use poorly worded rules for an advantage, and took a list that was a little more diverse but still highly competitive, and won a major tournament with it. You do that, and then you earned top player points. That is, if you really want to address the issues people seem to be having with you.
Sarigar wrote:Unless I've missed a rule, the big Stormraven headache could have easily been resolved.
You stated you got a wrecked result (with some help from him going Flat Out) on the Stromraven. The picture shows the model was removed and just the base remained. Why was the model not placed where it had been wrecked, like any other vehicle? If that had been done, it would have take small amount of time to line up where your wyches would have been, but due to the size of the Stormraven, he would have easily been able to place the models down as per the rules.
The storm raven entry explicitly requires the owning player to disembark using the base of the model, not the Hull. The Valkyrie / Vendetta requires the same now per the FAQ I think.
Unless its an explodes result and then its the footprint of the vehicle.
The storm raven entry explicitly requires the owning player to disembark using the base of the model, not the Hull. The Valkyrie / Vendetta requires the same now per the FAQ I think.
I would argue that neither entry applies to "emergency disembarkation". Only standard embarking/disembarking is changed from the BRB in those entrys. So I would use the normal rules for emergency disembarking. I don't own any storm ravens or valkayries, this is just also the easiest way to avoid arguments like what happened. I like when raw also follows the KISS principle...
The storm raven entry explicitly requires the owning player to disembark using the base of the model, not the Hull. The Valkyrie / Vendetta requires the same now per the FAQ I think.
I would argue that neither entry applies to "emergency disembarkation". Only standard embarking/disembarking is changed from the BRB in those entrys. So I would use the normal rules for emergency disembarking. I don't own any storm ravens or valkayries, this is just also the easiest way to avoid arguments like what happened. I like when raw also follows the KISS principle...
Ok, stormraven is 5" in the air, good luck deploying 2" from the hull. And yes, it would still be in the air -- it doesn't become a wreck until after disembarks (emergency or otherwise).
There's nothing 'KISS' about these flyer models, imo.
Well, I've never met Dash. So, I don't know what it's like to play against him. But I can say, I love reading these battle reports. Dash's analysis of the game as it's happening and the explanation of moves/attacks is fantastic, and has really made me take a closer look at my own tactics. Great series of battle reports Dash. Keep 'em coming!!!
Don't sweat it Dash. I've been to plenty of big events and seen plenty of people whine and cry when they got beat. Most those guys are white knuckle "gotta win" types. No one around here has any problem with how you play. Matter of fact we reather enjoy having an internet celebrity in our midsts.
no ridiculous las/plas razorback spam with 3-6 predators backing it up
Im sorry, no offense, but a player who is running 8 venoms, a raider, and 3 ravagers who complains about razorspam is being hypocritical. You may want to stop calling the kettle black.
Great report Dash, i look forward to reading about your crons! on a seprate note, just a question (not attacking), would you consider playing a few games without the pivot move? (even if it is legal). You are a more than capable general, and if you win a game or two without it, it should shut some people up. Just a thought..
Just to the rule question about the base and wrecking the model - I will point out that, per the rules, you disembark and *then* wreck/explode the model. So, for purposes of disembarking the Storm Raven player correctly used his base as he should. Whether or not he should have dropped down the model is, ruleswise, a bit of a gaff - but I often prefer not to drop my models on rough based tables either just to avoid chipping and the like, so I can't really fault him for that.
@Dash - very much appreciate your batreps. It was nice to see how you utilized the Baron in them, I've been working with him and the beasts but appreciated getting to see them used in a more shooting oriented list which is more up my alley.
As a question, your dice woes aside, why did you opt for a shooty Kabal as opposed to your Wych cult, and how would you compare their effectiveness?
Finally, I'm amused to see the new Raider as the Raider and the old ones as Venoms. I've been having to do some pretty interesting 'counts as' for my Venoms as well, and am very much looking forward to the new models so I can spare myself "okay, all the Raiders with tail fins are Raiders, all the Raiders without tail fins are Venoms, got it?"
Sarigar wrote:Ummm, wow. Great version of the events between us: great wordsmithing. I'll leave it at that.
Take it however you want. It's not hostile, but compiling the information from your own reporting and some knowledge from actually having to game with you.
The bottom line is the culmination of all the gray areas and others (based on the other players responses) creates a very unfun enviornment when playing against you. To best sum it up; if they give you an inch, you take a mile.
I didn't attend the NOVA, but I read/heard about the 3 points over and it simply did cause a lot of drama. Personally, I don't think it made a big deal just as I don't think you also having an illegal list made a big deal in the overall effects of each game. However, the rules are in place for a reason which is to ensure everyone is on the same level playing field. Sometimes this works, sometimes not. But, when it is a clear violation of the rules, then it should be enforced. You had an illegal list. Tony had an illegal list and Mike Brandt enforced the rules to the best of his ability as it was discovered after the fact.
If you've upset gamers in NC, FL, GA (another drama filled battlereport you posted) and now TX (drama filled battlereport) and still making the claim that it is everyone else's fault and you accept absolutely zero responsibility is hard to even comprehend. Wait, I forgot UT as Stelek even posted it was not an enjoyable experience to game with you.
You can tell me to reflect or that I lie. I'm ok with all this. After 20+ years playing this game, I've only had one really bad experience and that was with you. And like you, I've also played in multiple states. Unlike you, I don't have issues with folks (aside from you) regarding how I play a game of toy soldiers.
How about sticking to the ACTUAL BATREP AND TOURNAMENT AND NOT REHASHING YOUR PERSONAL BULL ? It makes you sound petty, and I'm sure you're not petty and thats just the post talking.
That was a response to DoP. I think someone wishing me to die would garner me the opportunity to a response (his post apparently got deleted so you may not have seen that).
My other posts have also been multiple replies to the actual battlereports. A lot of the issues in the games appeared to revolve around gray areas of the rules. This is by far not a perfect game system and requires a bit of cooperation among two players. Insisting on one version as the only version of a gray area of the rules has only led to ill feelings and, ultimately, DoP being unable to win despite going 5-0. 3 of his opponents did not have fun games against him and my contention is if one doesn't doggedly insist on certain interpretations of gray area rules, this may not have occurred.
That has been the crux of my comments. A little give and take goes a long way, especially in an enviornment where all parties involved knew ahead of time that Sportsmanship scoring was present. Does some of things that torqued folks off really decide who wins or loses a game (movement/vehicle proxies/illegal list/40 minute rule debate, etc...)? Most likely not, but it absolutley did affect multiple players enjoyment of an event that they put time/money/effort into.
If you have a problem with my posts, you can pm me as your own posts about me can be considered just as petty.
Mahu wrote:
My challenge to you, is if you are this great player, if you are this person who is always looking for a competitive challenge, can you enter these tournaments without those rules interpretations? Can you enter a tournament with a list that isn't 9 Venoms? Can you?
I'm in the middle of writing some batreps for my Assault Necrons. Which....are undefeated on the tournament scene. That's about the biggest competitive challenge I can come up with.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Sarigar, I didn't say I wish you would die.
I said that you you make the world a little worse of a place to live in.
Like I said - I have an extremely high tolerance for shenanigans; you're the only player who has ever cheated so badly and been such a bad sportsman that I refused to game against you. You did an excellent job in poisoning your backyard when I moved there so that I'd have a hostile crowd of people I'd never met; I don't live there anymore, and strangely enough - I get along with all my local gamers. Some of them have even posted in this thread!
Dashofpepper wrote:I'm in the middle of writing some batreps for my Assault Necrons. Which....are undefeated on the tournament scene. That's about the biggest competitive challenge I can come up with.
Try it without three monoliths.
Seriously, the internet nonsense machine creates such hysterical self-fulfilling prophecies. The internet decides that Necrons are horrible, despite having the single toughest vehicle in the game(Monolith), beastly CC units (C'Tan) and wargear that really can upset people when used correctly (Veil of Darkness.) When a competent player (yes Dash, I'm saying you're a competent player take it as a compliment) manages to buck a convention that is mainly based on theoryhammer it is then cited as proof that the player doing it is somehow a tactical gen-CRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED!
There are plenty of people out there doing just fine with Necrons. I'll leave it at that.
bagtagger wrote:It would only have been a problem if Dash had used that third item, and as he has mentioned more times than I can count in the five battle reports, that third item was the animus vitae and it was useless and he had no plans of ever using it (and what a surprise he never used it).
I strongly disagree. Illegal list are illegals lists- one too many wargear pieces, 3 points over, one too many psyhic powers, etc....the fact that it was useless and he had no plans for it are just excusing it.
Part of tournment play is.....list building. Basic elements that one should be able to do. Dash is a great player but should know better. Its not his first rodeo.
Or Dash put it:
"Then its probably a good thing that the Alamo wasn't my first run around the block."
I've always been in favor of DQing any illegal lists.
Like I said before - blame it all on Hulksmash. I was on the go without a codex at hand, and he told me to add it in to fill me out to close to 2,000 points.
And actually, the typical course of action is to remove the illegal unit/object/etc from the list. Since it was never used, or even remembered to have been there, the result was the same.
Here's a good analogy: Someone brings a straw spit shooter to a rifle range that only allows rifles, and leaves leaves the spit-shooter in their bag. They take pictures and post them on their blog. You see that they brought a device to shot spitwads along with them, and raise a ruckus that they shouldn't be allowed back to the range since it wasn't a rifle.
They say, "Uh...it's a straw that shoots spitwads. I didn't know I couldn't have it, and it would be useless on the rifle range anyway. What's the biggie?
It was my bad. I was walking to my car and didn't even come close to remembering that restriction. Dash should have double checked (or used Army Builder ) but I did tell him to add it since it seemed like a mildly useful item
It's certainly not your fault Hulk. Saying that is absurd. It was ultimately Dash's decision to put it in his list. It was ultimately Dash's fault for not checking (or remembering) the legality of it.
Accepting responcibility for it is like accepting responcibility for telling someone to run a red light. It's illegal, they should know its illegal, they should be the one in charge if they're drining the car (or bringing the list) and they get the ticket.
Not that I think DQ'ing Dash is the right choice of action, but blaming it on others, and failing to accept responcibility for one's actions is childlike behavior.
yermom wrote:It's certainly not your fault Hulk. Saying that is absurd. It was ultimately Dash's decision to put it in his list. It was ultimately Dash's fault for not checking (or remembering) the legality of it.
Accepting responcibility for it is like accepting responcibility for telling someone to run a red light. It's illegal, they should know its illegal, they should be the one in charge if they're drining the car (or bringing the list) and they get the ticket.
Not that I think DQ'ing Dash is the right choice of action, but blaming it on others, and failing to accept responcibility for one's actions is childlike behavior.
Dashofpepper wrote:Like I said before - blame it all on Hulksmash. I was on the go without a codex at hand, and he told me to add it in to fill me out to close to 2,000 points.
And actually, the typical course of action is to remove the illegal unit/object/etc from the list. Since it was never used, or even remembered to have been there, the result was the same.
Here's a good analogy: Someone brings a straw spit shooter to a rifle range that only allows rifles, and leaves leaves the spit-shooter in their bag. They take pictures and post them on their blog. You see that they brought a device to shot spitwads along with them, and raise a ruckus that they shouldn't be allowed back to the range since it wasn't a rifle.
They say, "Uh...it's a straw that shoots spitwads. I didn't know I couldn't have it, and it would be useless on the rifle range anyway. What's the biggie?
BUT THE RULES SAY ONLY RIFLES ARE ALLOWED!!!!
Mountains out of molehills for real.
Not really that last part. Legal is legal, Illegal is not. I've come up to judges in campaigns or tournments when I've made math errors and told them to DQ me whne I screw up on occassion- the last one being a couple years a couple games into a campaign I noticed my math error, pointed it out and had them award wins to prior wins in games I already played, then made the corrections and moved on.
While not a monumental issue, its not one I'd blow off either. Usually its been removal if caught before hand. Aterwards its different. For myself, I'm being consistant. I doubt you did it on purpose nor for advantage, but illegal is illegal.
Monster Rain wrote:Dash, can you honestly say that you wouldn't care if one of your opponents had an illegal list?
That depends. If it is over in points....that's one thing. If they spend 10 points to buy flickerfields for a Venom...which already has flickerfields...their list is illegal. It also puts them at a 10 point handicap. I wouldn't care in the slightest. If someone buys Extra Armour for a tactical marine sergeant...also illegal! Go for it. =D
I bought a close combat piece of wargear for a character that stays out of close combat on pain of certain death. Yes, it was illegal. No animals were hurt in the making of the film.
Dashofpepper wrote:Like I said before - blame it all on Hulksmash. I was on the go without a codex at hand, and he told me to add it in to fill me out to close to 2,000 points.
And actually, the typical course of action is to remove the illegal unit/object/etc from the list. Since it was never used, or even remembered to have been there, the result was the same.
Here's a good analogy: Someone brings a straw spit shooter to a rifle range that only allows rifles, and leaves leaves the spit-shooter in their bag. They take pictures and post them on their blog. You see that they brought a device to shot spitwads along with them, and raise a ruckus that they shouldn't be allowed back to the range since it wasn't a rifle.
They say, "Uh...it's a straw that shoots spitwads. I didn't know I couldn't have it, and it would be useless on the rifle range anyway. What's the biggie?
BUT THE RULES SAY ONLY RIFLES ARE ALLOWED!!!!
Mountains out of molehills for real.
Not really that last part. Legal is legal, Illegal is not. I've come up to judges in campaigns or tournments when I've made math errors and told them to DQ me whne I screw up on occassion- the last one being a couple years a couple games into a campaign I noticed my math error, pointed it out and had them award wins to prior wins in games I already played, then made the corrections and moved on.
While not a monumental issue, its not one I'd blow off either. Usually its been removal if caught before hand. Aterwards its different. For myself, I'm being consistant. I doubt you did it on purpose nor for advantage, but illegal is illegal.
Your example is a red herring.
I would say it is more like entering a sharpshooter competition where the rules are: you can use a rifle that cost up to X$, and you are not allowed to use scopes with zooming capabilities.
If your rifle costs <= X$, but it comes with a scope with zooming capabilities (that is detachable), and you leave the scope in the case for the competition because you forgot to remove it from the carrying case before leaving home, you would have done about the same as dash.
It gives you the possibility to cheat, but you haven't cheated unless you use the illegal equipment. Making sure the illegal equipment isn't used is more than enough, disqualifying someone for it would be way over the top.
Accersitus wrote:I would say it is more like entering a sharpshooter competition where the rules are: you can use a rifle that cost up to X$, and you are not allowed to use scopes with zooming capabilities.
If your rifle costs <= X$, but it comes with a scope with zooming capabilities (that is detachable), and you leave the scope in the case for the competition because you forgot to remove it from the carrying case before leaving home, you would have done about the same as dash.
I would say it's more like entering a competition where you can use 2x scopes, but not any scopes that are more powerful, bring a scope with variable zoom function, forget the variable zoom exists, and leave it set to 2x zoom the whole time.
Accersitus wrote:I would say it is more like entering a sharpshooter competition where the rules are: you can use a rifle that cost up to X$, and you are not allowed to use scopes with zooming capabilities.
If your rifle costs <= X$, but it comes with a scope with zooming capabilities (that is detachable), and you leave the scope in the case for the competition because you forgot to remove it from the carrying case before leaving home, you would have done about the same as dash.
I would say it's more like entering a competition where you can use 2x scopes, but not any scopes that are more powerful, bring a scope with variable zoom function, forget the variable zoom exists, and leave it set to 2x zoom the whole time.
I agree, fits better. Point is the same though, it gives you the possibility to cheat, you haven't cheated.
I would say it is more like entering a sharpshooter competition where the rules are: you can use a rifle that cost up to X$, and you are not allowed to use scopes with zooming capabilities.
If your rifle costs <= X$, but it comes with a scope with zooming capabilities (that is detachable), and you leave the scope in the case for the competition because you forgot to remove it from the carrying case before leaving home, you would have done about the same as dash.
It gives you the possibility to cheat, but you haven't cheated unless you use the illegal equipment. Making sure the illegal equipment isn't used is more than enough, disqualifying someone for it would be way over the top.
Bad example. In this case the scope wasnt in the case, but actually on the rifle itself(because the model wasnt left in the case, it was actually on the table being used). Sure it didnt get used(wargear wasnt used), but you still brought and equipted something that was against the rules.
Dash is a great player, and I doubt he was trying to cheat nor find a way for an advantage that was against the rules. However, its not his first tournment either, so he does know whats suppose to be or not be.
Wasn't the young guy who just won one of the golf opens DQ'd for having one too many golf clubs in his bag even though he didnt use it (he honestly thought he took it out but was DQ'd anyways).
Sarigar wrote:Unless I've missed a rule, the big Stormraven headache could have easily been resolved.
You stated you got a wrecked result (with some help from him going Flat Out) on the Stromraven. The picture shows the model was removed and just the base remained. Why was the model not placed where it had been wrecked, like any other vehicle? If that had been done, it would have take small amount of time to line up where your wyches would have been, but due to the size of the Stormraven, he would have easily been able to place the models down as per the rules.
The storm raven entry explicitly requires the owning player to disembark using the base of the model, not the Hull. The Valkyrie / Vendetta requires the same now per the FAQ I think.
Interesting. Skimmers are removed from their bases if possible (assuming they are not glued to the stand) and placed on the table when wrecked or immobilized per the basic rule book. From your interpretation (and possibly your opponents as well), the vehicle is wrecked, he has to measure from the base to see if he can get out. Then, once you decide which models can disembark do so and are placed. Then, you have to pretty much move every model around the base and place the Stormraven on the table. And under Emergency Disembarkation, it states the player can try to place the models anywhere within 2" of the hull of the vehicle. It can be argued that 'Emergency Disembarkation' is not the same thing as 'Disembarking' which is what is covered in the Blood Angels codex, thus the opponent would be allowed to place the Stormraven on the table, then perform an 'Emergency Disembarkation' as per page 67 of the main rulebook.
He could have easily set the model on the table and models would have been reconfigured slightly to conform its larger size and it would have been pretty easy to put the models on the table and continue gaming. He could have easily claimed that 'Disembarking' and 'Emergency Disembarkation' are two separate rules. There have been challenges with the Valkerie/Stormraven flight stands and just having a small amount of flexilibility in gray areas of the rules would go a long way.
As other people have stated that's not how you do it. If you are going to call someone out it would help if you know how to play the game.
After viewing your reports in full, there appears to be a lot of gray areas that you seemed insistent going your way and having little to no flexibility. From what I can pull from your reporting on this tourney:
That is completely your opinion, not fact.
-Garnering the approval of proxied vehicles, however, I completely conceed that the TOs made the absolute wrong call in this case. But, you gamed the game, so to speak.
Again your opinion, and you're not the TO your opinion dosen't matter.
-Taking advantage in game of said modelling for advantage which could have had a huge impact on 1st turn shooting in Night Fight where every inch can matter. With the tables as such, size for gaining cover appeared to not be an issue at all. When your guns are 36" range, getting extra inches can become critical.
Did they even play night fight? I'll have to go back and check. In any case big woop, using approved models and legal movement.
-Using blocking maneuvers to where parts of your vehicle is sticking off the table to try and ensure models can't get past (the weapons sticking from the prow appear to be off the table) . It's pretty clear these days any part of models can't hang off of the table
Page 56, measure to or from the hull (ignore gun barrels, dozer blades, antennas, banners, and other decorative elements). If the hulls on the table i'm good. Again if you are going to call someone out learn how to play the game.
-Putting part of a base of a model that falls underneath a vehicle, then claiming your oppoent's base can't share space with your own vehicle, yet, your model did.
I don't speak this kind of english.
-Debating disembarking and emergency disembarkation as one in the same to your benefit
This did not end up to his benefit. And both players were confused on what to do.
-Having an illegal army list apparently (man, folks ripped into the 16 y.o. for being 3 points over, but your illegal list gets glossed over; you write these massive tacticas yet bring an illegal list stating is was a simple error; c'mon man!)
I agree. Dash this is not acceptable. I don't care if you like Army Builder or not, get it. This can not happen.
-Being called out for using equipment/models that were not on your list
Were did you see this? Now I think you are making things up.
-Rolling dice issues (that was called out on another thread, not your battle reports specifically, but I've experienced it first hand from you and this would not surprise me)
Again, now you are just making things up.
-Possibly firing units more than once. An easy fix is to simply place a marker next to units that have fired, especially MSU armies at this kind of points value. (again, this was not you reporting, but your opponent doing so within your battle report)
Now you are lying.
This has been quite a list of things that really pile up in one tournament. While going through the reports, there was nothing really new tactically offered; it really was a demonstration on how a min/max list can fare against non min/max lists. It's mainly an attitude that you will push and push to get your way on any ruling possible and pull as much shenanigans as possible unless caught. That is simply not fun to play against; and I had hoped you would have mellowed out since the time we played a couple of years back. The reason you didn't get low Sportsmanship scores was b/c it was Ard Boys and there is nothing to score. You having 'sportsmanship' issues is absolutely nothing new and claiming this event was a fluke is very, very misleading.
This is quite a list of things you made up. If you do not want to play in a competitive environment don't. It's that simple. You want to call out Dash for the way he plays, dude who made you the God of how to play 40K? He posts rules questions all the time, and does what the community says is O.K. If you play him use the same rules interpretations and get over it.
You will definitely get at least one win at the NOVA. After playing against you as well as seeing all this kind of stuff in you own reporting, I'll absolutely conceed the game if I get paired up against you. It's just not worth my time or effort to try and dodge this many landmines in a game.
Dash never met you, and have to say you rub me the wrong way. I think you come off extremely arrogant, but I also don't think it is your job to make me enjoy games. And I agree with you that losing is the best way to learn how to play this game. You do write some good reports, if you want to keep doing it people will enjoy them and let the haters hate.
I'm fairly certain they mentioned they played each other once before in one of these threads (though with all the drama it's hard to keep track of who has first hand knowledge of anyone anymore).
bagtagger wrote:
the moral of this story is you should all switch to playing warmachine/hordes
You know? Ultimately, this is my takeaway from this thread.
At a regional GT, which should be a very competitive event, what do we see?
TOs weak on the rules--rules clarity has always been an issue in GW games, "dicing off" or allowing 40 minute rules dispute interruptions should never be acceptable at a 'high level of competitive play'.
Incomplete/unfinished games--completely understandable R1-4 in the 'scrub rankings', but for the final game of the final day to determine the overall winner and the game ends prematurely? With only a bare handful of models left? Give them a further extension.
Honestly, what brought about this game resolution? Slow play resulting from rules confusion resulting in a premature game end with both player admitting to a decidedly different conclusion if the game had gone on to subsequent turns.
How is this representative of a competitive event? Or a competitive system structure in general? "Competitive" 40k has, and continues to, strike me as an argument over being the tallest midget in the world.
Kurb wrote:
Don't bring "these people" into PP games
To ensure that we don't derail the thread into GW vs PP 'that old thread again', what I find specifically striking is that the true contention in the thread is all surrounding rules issues and judging; illegal list, lengthy game interruptions/slow play, proxies, passive/weak judges in meaningful YMDC situations. Very little about the game play or the dice 'luck factor'.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grimgob wrote:Wasn't the young guy who just won one of the golf opens DQ'd for having one too many golf clubs in his bag even though he didnt use it (he honestly thought he took it out but was DQ'd anyways).
In professional competitions, breaking the rule is all the justification needed for a penalty to be called. It rarely matters what 'impact' it has on the game, that the rules were broken is justification in and of itself.
That said, there tend to be strict and documented guidelines about what constitutes a rule violation and a specific penalty associated with specific rules violations. 40k has none of these things, or rather 40k leaves everything up to TO discretion; if the TO/judge is more passive then regulation is almost certainly going to be more laissez-faire.
Mahu wrote:
My challenge to you, is if you are this great player, if you are this person who is always looking for a competitive challenge, can you enter these tournaments without those rules interpretations? Can you enter a tournament with a list that isn't 9 Venoms? Can you?
I'm in the middle of writing some batreps for my Assault Necrons. Which....are undefeated on the tournament scene. That's about the biggest competitive challenge I can come up with.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Sarigar, I didn't say I wish you would die.
I said that you you make the world a little worse of a place to live in.
Like I said - I have an extremely high tolerance for shenanigans; you're the only player who has ever cheated so badly and been such a bad sportsman that I refused to game against you. You did an excellent job in poisoning your backyard when I moved there so that I'd have a hostile crowd of people I'd never met; I don't live there anymore, and strangely enough - I get along with all my local gamers. Some of them have even posted in this thread!
Dashofpepper wrote:Can you post in my battle report thread on Dakka that if anyone has any tactical or game related queries, that they can find me on Skype under the user name "Dashofpepper" please? Tell them that I'm usually on after 1730 CST.
Arguing about the fact that his list was "illegal" is ridiculous. If you never once used the item in question then technically you are playing with a handicap, as you spent points you never could use. I could give my Archon a flickerfield upgrade, but due to the fact that i can't use a vehicle upgrade on an infantry unit, those 10 points are effectively wasted.
It shouldn't if happened, obviously, but the realist in me cannot accept a handicap as reason for expulsion.
\
He's using the 'it was a silly upgrade anyway' defense that Dash posted on the previous page.
That's actually not the argument i used at all. If the item in question was never used, it can effectively be ignored. If he had tried to use it in combat i would agree that it was a form of cheating, but the fact remains it wasn't.
\
He's using the 'it was a silly upgrade anyway' defense that Dash posted on the previous page.
That's actually not the argument i used at all. If the item in question was never used, it can effectively be ignored. If he had tried to use it in combat i would agree that it was a form of cheating, but the fact remains it wasn't.
It's irrelevant.
So if I had an extra landraider full of TH/SS terminators that I just added to my list, that's cool as long as I don't move, shoot or assault with them? The items in question were never used, so they can be effectively ignored.
\
He's using the 'it was a silly upgrade anyway' defense that Dash posted on the previous page.
That's actually not the argument i used at all. If the item in question was never used, it can effectively be ignored. If he had tried to use it in combat i would agree that it was a form of cheating, but the fact remains it wasn't.
It's irrelevant.
So if I had an extra landraider full of TH/SS terminators that I just added to my list, that's cool as long as I don't move, shoot or assault with them? The items in question were never used, so they can be effectively ignored.
No because they would represent a force organization chart slot, used to block los, killpoints etc..
It ideally shouldn't have happened, Dash explained from the beginning that he had no intention of using this list anyway, but objectively it had no barring on any of his games.
Night's Blood wrote:No because they would represent a force organization chart slot, used to block los, killpoints etc..
Fair enough. Let's go with something a bit closer.
C:WH list and I take a psychic hood for my Canoness but end up playing against bike orks, IG with no PBS and DE. List is still illegal. I had the potential to use it in a game, but just because I never played a psychic army I get away with it?
It ideally shouldn't have happened, Dash explained from the beginning that he had no intention of using this list anyway, but objectively it had no barring on any of his games.
No one is saying that it had any effect on his games or it is why he won. People are saying that your list is supposed to be legal at a tournament and if it isn't there should be repercussions.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Heck, what about if he was playing SW and had two lords, one with
WC/SS, Rune Armor, TWC WC/SS, Rune Armor, TWC, MB
right before the tournament, he is 5 points short and just adds MB to the first lord. He never ends up using the MB for either lord in the tournament.
Night's Blood wrote:No because they would represent a force organization chart slot, used to block los, killpoints etc..
Fair enough. Let's go with something a bit closer.
C:WH list and I take a psychic hood for my Canoness but end up playing against bike orks, IG with no PBS and DE. List is still illegal. I had the potential to use it in a game, but just because I never played a psychic army I get away with it?
It ideally shouldn't have happened, Dash explained from the beginning that he had no intention of using this list anyway, but objectively it had no barring on any of his games.
No one is saying that it had any effect on his games or it is why he won. People are saying that your list is supposed to be legal at a tournament and if it isn't there should be repercussions.
The faults in your argument are all the more obvious as you continuously have to use examples to prove yourself.
Objectively, in this specific case, it was irrelevant. The Animus Vitae gives you an extra pain token when a kill is inflicted in close combat. The haemonculus was never in close combat.
If Dash DID use it, i would be on your side of this issue, but he didn't, he probably even forgot he even had it equipped, as this isn't even the list he intended to use.
Again, it's irrelevant.
Night's Blood wrote:The faults in your argument are all the more obvious as you continuously have to use examples to prove yourself.
Really? What is the fault in "You took an illegal element in your list. Even though you didn't use it, having an illegal element makes your list illegal."
If Dash DID use it, i would be on your side of this issue, but he didn't, he probably even forgot he even had it equipped, as this isn't even the list he intended to use.
Again, it's irrelevant.
If you keep saying it over and over again, it doesn't make it any more a fact. In your opinion, it is irrelevant. In point of fact, it is relevant because people are interested in talking about it.
thehod wrote:So based on your experiences with BA, do you feel that Splinter cannon shooting is any effective vs FNP marines and how annoying are Stormravens?
You may have missed this on the last page:
I'm Dashofpepper's wife.
He asked me to say this:
Dashofpepper wrote:Can you post in my battle report thread on Dakka that if anyone has any tactical or game related queries, that they can find me on Skype under the user name "Dashofpepper" please? Tell them that I'm usually on after 1730 CST.
Night's Blood wrote:The faults in your argument are all the more obvious as you continuously have to use examples to prove yourself.
Really? What is the fault in "You took an illegal element in your list. Even though you didn't use it, having an illegal element makes your list illegal."
If Dash DID use it, i would be on your side of this issue, but he didn't, he probably even forgot he even had it equipped, as this isn't even the list he intended to use.
Again, it's irrelevant.
If you keep saying it over and over again, it doesn't make it any more a fact. In your opinion, it is irrelevant. In point of fact, it is relevant because people are interested in talking about it.
Because i don't agree that it was an illegal list if he never used the item in question. You're idealistically claiming that because he paid points for something he never used, and that is technically illegal, that it has bearing on his placement.
Like i said in my first post, and like dash has said before, the appropriate response in this case is to remove the item in question, but because it was never used in any of his five games, it is indeed irrelevant.
Simply bringing up examples because your argument is inherently weak does not provide credence to the matter at hand.
pretre wrote:So if I had an extra landraider full of TH/SS terminators that I just added to my list, that's cool as long as I don't move, shoot or assault with them? The items in question were never used, so they can be effectively ignored.
If you somehow, ACCIDENTALLY, had a LR+TH/SS terminators written on your list, and SOMEHOW nobody caught it, and you never even got the models out of your case in any game, nor mentioned them, then yes. That's totally cool.
But really, good attempt at a horrible analogy. I bet you thought you were being really smart
Night's Blood wrote:Because i don't agree that it was an illegal list if he never used the item in question. You're idealistically claiming that because he paid points for something he never used, and that is technically illegal, that it has bearing on his placement.
I don't think it has any bearing on his placement, but it certainly is relevant.
Like i said in my first post, and like dash has said before, the appropriate response in this case is to remove the item in question,
I completely agree. If I was the TO, I would have had him remove the item in question and just be under points.
but because it was never used in any of his five games, it is indeed irrelevant.
Just because it wasn't caught and didn't affect his games does not make it irrelevant. List-making is a very important part of 40k and you are responsible for bringing a legal list to a tournament.
Simply bringing up examples because your argument is inherently weak does not provide credence to the matter at hand.
You're hung up on the examples. I didn't even use any when I replied to you. Seriously, unstick yourself.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ph34r wrote:But really, good attempt at a horrible analogy. I bet you thought you were being really smart
Yeah, I admitted as such if you read a little further. What's with the hate, geeze?
Night's Blood wrote:Because i don't agree that it was an illegal list if he never used the item in question. You're idealistically claiming that because he paid points for something he never used, and that is technically illegal, that it has bearing on his placement.
I don't think it has any bearing on his placement, but it certainly is relevant.
Like i said in my first post, and like dash has said before, the appropriate response in this case is to remove the item in question,
I completely agree. If I was the TO, I would have had him remove the item in question and just be under points.
but because it was never used in any of his five games, it is indeed irrelevant.
Just because it wasn't caught and didn't affect his games does not make it irrelevant. List-making is a very important part of 40k and you are responsible for bringing a legal list to a tournament.
Simply bringing up examples because your argument is inherently weak does not provide credence to the matter at hand.
You're hung up on the examples. I didn't even use any when I replied to you. Seriously, unstick yourself.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ph34r wrote:But really, good attempt at a horrible analogy. I bet you thought you were being really smart
Yeah, I admitted as such if you read a little further. What's with the hate, geeze?
You just proved my arguement right with your own words. Because, effectively, "remove the item in question and just be under points," was exactly what Dash did by removing it himself, or, never using it.
Night's Blood wrote:You just proved my arguement right with your own words. Because, effectively, "remove the item in question and just be under points," was exactly what Dash did by removing it himself, or, never using it.
Umm no. He did not remove the item in question. He didn't bring it up. He didn't even realize it. He just didn't use the item because he forgot it. That doesn't make it any more legal. If the TO had been on the ball, they would have noticed it and asked him to remove the item, but they werent. Just because your infraction wasn't noticed, doesn't mean it isn't an infraction.
Also, way to quote my whole post just to ignore it.
pretre wrote:
Night's Blood wrote:Because i don't agree that it was an illegal list if he never used the item in question. You're idealistically claiming that because he paid points for something he never used, and that is technically illegal, that it has bearing on his placement.
I don't think it has any bearing on his placement, but it certainly is relevant.
Like i said in my first post, and like dash has said before, the appropriate response in this case is to remove the item in question,
I completely agree. If I was the TO, I would have had him remove the item in question and just be under points.
but because it was never used in any of his five games, it is indeed irrelevant.
Just because it wasn't caught and didn't affect his games does not make it irrelevant. List-making is a very important part of 40k and you are responsible for bringing a legal list to a tournament.
Night's Blood wrote:You just proved my arguement right with your own words. Because, effectively, "remove the item in question and just be under points," was exactly what Dash did by removing it himself, or, never using it.
Umm no. He did not remove the item in question. He didn't bring it up. He didn't even realize it. He just didn't use the item because he forgot it. That doesn't make it any more legal. If the TO had been on the ball, they would have noticed it and asked him to remove the item, but they werent. Just because your infraction wasn't noticed, doesn't mean it isn't an infraction.
Also, way to quote my whole post just to ignore it.
pretre wrote:
Night's Blood wrote:Because i don't agree that it was an illegal list if he never used the item in question. You're idealistically claiming that because he paid points for something he never used, and that is technically illegal, that it has bearing on his placement.
I don't think it has any bearing on his placement, but it certainly is relevant.
Like i said in my first post, and like dash has said before, the appropriate response in this case is to remove the item in question,
I completely agree. If I was the TO, I would have had him remove the item in question and just be under points.
but because it was never used in any of his five games, it is indeed irrelevant.
Just because it wasn't caught and didn't affect his games does not make it irrelevant. List-making is a very important part of 40k and you are responsible for bringing a legal list to a tournament.
What other way can you remove an item from your list besides not using it?
I'm not addressing the other parts because im getting to the crux of the issue at hand, not going off topic.
Which is a perfectly reasonable answer. Except now you have to understand the actual environment of a tourney. Dash already explained that he was under time constraint. Also, we are now getting into a idealistic debate. From the realist perspective, as i've said before... "Like i said in my first post, and like dash has said before, the appropriate response in this case is to remove the item in question, but because it was never used in any of his five games, it is indeed irrelevant."
Nobody is trying to say that what he did was "right", although that stinks of subjectivity, we're saying that on the grand scheme of things it really, really, was irrelevant.
What does one do if they get to a tourney and relize you have one too many Heavy choices (not realistic I hope but follow me here for example) You decide that the answer is to remove a Pred, therfore do not deploy the unit, acting like it was never in the list, and playing with a point handcap. This is essentially what dash did, he removed the problem entity, but it is wargear and can not be not deployed. Would it have made you feel better if he had ripped a piece off of his hamonculous?
More than that, this is a futile argument as the tourny is done and over with.
Dashofpepper wrote:
....and meticulously respond to the barrage of PMs that I'm always getting asking for advice, army critiques, opinions, etc.
Very true. You've responded to a lot of my PMs even though I ask about armies you don't play. I really appreciate a player of your level taking the time to respond to players who don't even attend tournaments regularly and are just seeking advice. Keep up the awesome batreps and great job at the GT.
I was out of town that day otherwise I would have probably gone and had a chance to meet you! :O Hopefully the docking for sportsmanship and some of the less than friendly players didn't put you off from coming back down to tournaments here in SA.
Isn't the more significant point that the TO contacted him after the event and told him he'd miscalculated Dash's battle points, which meant he hadn't won after all?
Dash already had given away the prize support so the 2nd place player lost out both on that and possibly the Winner's plaque.
Isn't the real issue: Why is an official regional Grand Tournament run in such a slipshod manner from an organizational and regulatory/judges standpoint?
So I preface this by saying I have not yet read the battle report (that will happen after I post this) nor have I ever played EVE--however I am familiar with the game and your battle reports (I lurk frequently).
This is solely in response to your parody song. I have no idea it it sets the tone for your BR but it is ****ing hiliarious--it had me rolling the entire time and definitely brightened my day.
That said, I hope to see you on the other side of the table one day, as I expect we could have a lot of fun (definitely so if we have a bottle of Captain to share) and, I especially, could learn quite a bit. More to come after I finish reading BR #5.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I haven't read through all of the comments yet, so someone else may have already offered this piece of advice, if so, I apologize for being redundant.
Something you may want to consider in the future, Dash: while you are curb-stomping your opponent, don't try to cheer them up. While I am no where near as experienced a player as yourself, for a while that was my tactic as well. If my opponent was not enjoying what was happening with their little men, I tried to make the game pleasurable for them anyway by joking and laughing--even playing into their delusions of "I would have had you if my dice didn't suck". But what I have found through observation and comments from friends that my opponents are actually offended. Though such high-spirits have the best intention, the recipient (the oft oded nerd-rager--and I mean this as a joke, so don't flame me) tends to take it as patronizing and belittling due to their low morale. In the past I have gone to extremes to try and cheer up my opponent (at a GT a few months back I talked my opponents out of rage-quitting twice despite being on the last table during round 5, him complaining about how I roll my dice, and being so sick I had no voice round 4--only to have him rage-quit a third time and tell me he hoped he never played me again) but I think a new strategy is needed.
In the future, in that kind of situation, I plan to be congenial and pleasant, but not overly friendly or try to cheer them up. I will treat them with respect and keep a dialog going, but I won't let them get away with blatant rules violations just because they are unhappy. And if my opponent appears sullen, I will take a break to use the bathroom or something--and if they are still sullen I will just play quick to end their misery as fast as possible.
So that's my plan, maybe it will help you, Dash, (and others)....lemme know what you think.
teh_jake wrote:
So that's my plan, maybe it will help you, Dash, (and others)....lemme know what you think.
-jake
edit: Typo.
Sounds good lol. Better than what I do. I just stay quite and have this look on my face like. o_o *gak im owning them so badly...i better not say anything*
Grimgob wrote:Wasn't the young guy who just won one of the golf opens DQ'd for having one too many golf clubs in his bag even though he didnt use it (he honestly thought he took it out but was DQ'd anyways).
Night's Blood wrote:Arguing about the fact that his list was "illegal" is ridiculous. If you never once used the item in question then technically you are playing with a handicap, as you spent points you never could use. I could give my Archon a flickerfield upgrade, but due to the fact that i can't use a vehicle upgrade on an infantry unit, those 10 points are effectively wasted.
It shouldn't if happened, obviously, but the realist in me cannot accept a handicap as reason for expulsion.
Please tell me, is there a seperate catagory for lists that is not legal or illegal? A "its illegal but i didnt use it anyway" catagory?
As far as the list error, Mistakes are made. An advantage of list submission ahead of time is that the lists can be checked for errors.
The Alamo had advance list submissions. The judges didn't catch his error either.
They gave him the OK on the list, it didn't put him over points, it didnt give him any advantage, physical or psycological (whos afraid of a vitae on a heamy?) So i really don't see a problem with it.
sourclams wrote:Isn't the more significant point that the TO contacted him after the event and told him he'd miscalculated Dash's battle points, which meant he hadn't won after all?
Dash already had given away the prize support so the 2nd place player lost out both on that and possibly the Winner's plaque.
Isn't the real issue: Why is an official regional Grand Tournament run in such a slipshod manner from an organizational and regulatory/judges standpoint?
Wait what? Where's this at? IF thats true, the 2nd place player deserves to get the same prize support, the organizers have an obligation to foot the bill since they gave away his prize to the wrong person. Mind you, thats only if this is true.
And an illegal list is an illegal list. No exceptions. Just because he didn't use the item or "who would be afraid of that!" is irrelevant. If I had an extra meltagun and never fired it, my opponent still judged that units in game "value" based on the list I handed him. Once you play at the "top level" in events, you're held to a higher standard. It sucks, but them's the breaks. You check your list 10 times, and you take your lumps like a gentlemen (like that golfer) when you make an error.
Thats my take anyway, for what it's worth.
And to Dash:
My Dad and I, when I was younger, had a long conversation about relationships. I was upset, they'd all get to a point, and crash and burn. What the hell was wrong with the opposite sex I asked? Was I just unlucky? And his advice, whether I wanted to hear it or not, was that at some point, you've got to step back, and take a look at the big picture, and identify what the common factor is in all of the failed relationships: me (or you in this case). You may want to consider taking a step back to evaluate how you approach social situations and other people in games. I'm fully aware this probably falls on deaf ears, but if it were me and drama followed me at most events I was at, most threads I was in, etc., I'd probably take a harder look at how I'm acting, than at how the other people in the situations are. After all, we have zero control over how anyone, other than ourselves, acts.
None of that is intended offensively, just my opinion and friendly advice for what it's worth. Feel free to ignore it if you don't agree. I've never had much of an interaction with Dash at events, and we haven't been paired up yet. Maybe at the invitational/NOVA main this year we'll get to duke it out.
I'd like to know the details of the ban. If it's temporary... I guess that's okay but I don't think deserved.
If it's permanent, well that's some bs.
Dash has contributed more to this site than most anyone, and I and all of my friends have learned 100x more than him than from anyone else as well. A true competitive player that makes great lists, responds to PM's, and writes the best battle reports and most detailed guides all for the sake of the reader.
Skelly wrote:I'd like to know the details of the ban. If it's temporary... I guess that's okay but I don't think deserved.
If it's permanent, well that's some bs.
Dash has contributed more to this site than most anyone, and I and all of my friends have learned 100x more than him than from anyone else as well. A true competitive player that makes great lists, responds to PM's, and writes the best battle reports and most detailed guides all for the sake of the reader.
Skelly wrote:I'd like to know the details of the ban. If it's temporary... I guess that's okay but I don't think deserved.
If it's permanent, well that's some bs.
Dash has contributed more to this site than most anyone, and I and all of my friends have learned 100x more than him than from anyone else as well. A true competitive player that makes great lists, responds to PM's, and writes the best battle reports and most detailed guides all for the sake of the reader.
Agreed. He probably doesn't have any more interest in coming back but he's helped so much here. Helped me personally improve my game bunches. He's even taken the time to help me with armies he doesn't play. Sad day..
For those of you wishing to chat with Dashofpepper, he's joined Hulksmash's blog - his future batreps and tactical articles will be going up there. You can check out his introductory article here:
We have a policy of not divulging the details of any user's moderation in consideration of the user. The speculation in this case is pretty well pointless as you all know of a venue whereby you may currently contact DashofPepper.
Grimgob wrote:Wasn't the young guy who just won one of the golf opens DQ'd for having one too many golf clubs in his bag even though he didnt use it (he honestly thought he took it out but was DQ'd anyways).
Night's Blood wrote:Arguing about the fact that his list was "illegal" is ridiculous. If you never once used the item in question then technically you are playing with a handicap, as you spent points you never could use. I could give my Archon a flickerfield upgrade, but due to the fact that i can't use a vehicle upgrade on an infantry unit, those 10 points are effectively wasted.
It shouldn't if happened, obviously, but the realist in me cannot accept a handicap as reason for expulsion.
Please tell me, is there a seperate catagory for lists that is not legal or illegal? A "its illegal but i didnt use it anyway" catagory?
No, but the appropriate reaction was to remove the item from the list. This, as you know, was done.
At this point, this discussion seems moot; for one, Dash is not present on these forums, and is unable to participate in this discussion.
On top of that, the event is done and over with. Nobody, neither Dash, his opponents (one of which played DE himself), or the tournament officials caught the mistake. Talking about it now will not influence anything and serves only to smear his reputation and, in my honest opinion, just proves his point about how ridiculous and vicious the drama on these forums are.
Thirdly, Dash admitted the mistake, and explained that it had no bearing on any of his games. I believe it was an honest mistake; believe it or not, people are not perfect, and sometimes they miss things. That goes for the TO who approved the list as well. Seeing as it had no effect on his games, and at harshest, probably would have simply been removed anyway had anyone noticed, making a huge stink about it after it's far too late to do anything about it but learn from it is pointless. Even if they could retroactively DQ him, it's not like he has the prize support he won.
This is a case of people taking their warhammers too srsly. Really. Warhammer 40k tournaments are not the same as golf tournaments. This kind of internet drama just reflects badly on the community, and crops up way too frequently, I think. We really should just try to enjoy this stupid hobby and get along.
Thanks for all the pics. I have wanted to do the same, but it just never works out for me (I get lost in the match and forget). Are there any tips you have for being disciplined about this?
Finally, Holy Crap Batman - those are the emptiest tables I have every seen at a big tourney!
EDIT: I just saw that Dash has been banned - I'll have to go find his blog then concerning my questions.
dayve110 wrote:As far as the list error, Mistakes are made. An advantage of list submission ahead of time is that the lists can be checked for errors.
The Alamo had advance list submissions. The judges didn't catch his error either.
Seems that everyone is ignoring this so I figure I would quote and repost.
As posted by the article, above, the golf officals didnt catch the extra club either. Doesnt make it right however.
Which is the specific action taken by the golf officials.
Now how does how they responded to the extra club anyway related to how the Alamo GT officials have responded? I have seen posts from them, but nothing on this issue. The tourney results have not been changed to reflect a ruling by them.
Maybe, just maybe, in their opinion they see that this matter does not warrant anything at all because it was moot.
No, but the appropriate reaction was to remove the item from the list. This, as you know, was done.
I ask you, what would you have done?
That is mostly incorrect. Thats is one of a variety of things they could do.
That was NOT done, as a matter of fact. Judges missed it. He missed it. Item wasnt USED, it wasnt removed until after he got home. Approriate would be any of the following:
1) removed item, let him keep playing
2) removed item, docked him points, let him keep playing
3) removed item, let him play, DQ'd him from actually winning any prizes.
4)DQ'd him immediately, removed him from play.
5) Do nothing.
ALL of them would be approriate responses by Tournment organizers. Any of them would
No, but the appropriate reaction was to remove the item from the list. This, as you know, was done.
I ask you, what would you have done?
That is mostly incorrect. Thats is one of a variety of things they could do.
That was NOT done, as a matter of fact. Judges missed it. He missed it. Item wasnt USED, it wasnt removed until after he got home. Approriate would be any of the following:
1) removed item, let him keep playing
2) removed item, docked him points, let him keep playing
3) removed item, let him play, DQ'd him from actually winning any prizes.
4)DQ'd him immediately, removed him from play.
5) Do nothing.
ALL of them would be approriate responses by Tournment organizers. Any of them would
Or like what they have appeared to do now which is see that it affected nothing, no need to adjust the tournament results, and let it just die off as it is a moot point.
Or like what they have appeared to do now which is see that it affected nothing, no need to adjust the tournament results, and let it just die off as it is a moot point.
If thats what the TO's wish to do, thats fine. Its YOU and Dash and others who are rationalizing that "its no big deal" thats the issue. You cant just blow it off as "I didnt use it."
Or like what they have appeared to do now which is see that it affected nothing, no need to adjust the tournament results, and let it just die off as it is a moot point.
If thats what the TO's wish to do, thats fine. Its YOU and Dash and others who are rationalizing that "its no big deal" thats the issue. You cant just blow it off as "I didnt use it."
Yea well, they can actually. Just as you can go on about that being a big deal, they can go on with their lives not caring the slightest.
I'd proffer in no other sport would this reach the level of anything. At worst there would have been some minor penalty if used.
Frazzled wrote:I'd proffer in no other sport would this reach the level of anything. At worst there would have been some minor penalty if used.
What's your basis for this comment? "Most other sports" have very strict regulations with paid officials enforcing them. If the 13th football player's toe is over the sideline, then not only will the officials call a do-over, they'll apply a penalty against the offending team.
I'd proffer in no other sport would this reach the level of anything. At worst there would have been some minor penalty if used.
Then frankly your a fool. There are plenty of examples of DQ and other fines and such for folks cheating. NE coach got caught video taping otehr teams practices (article 9 of the NFL rules), Belicheck fined, team fined, loss of a first round draft pick. Golfer unintentionally brings ,an extra club, DQ'd, when he voluntarily admits it.
there are a host of ways folks get punished from a slap on the wrist to forfeiting all around various sports. Only folks like yourself try and poo poo it away. Its not like its a N00B mistake.
I'd proffer in no other sport would this reach the level of anything. At worst there would have been some minor penalty if used.
Then frankly your a fool. There are plenty of examples of DQ and other fines and such for folks cheating. NE coach got caught video taping otehr teams practices (article 9 of the NFL rules), Belicheck fined, team fined, loss of a first round draft pick. Golfer unintentionally brings ,an extra club, DQ'd, when he voluntarily admits it.
This is the problem with these discussions. Something is amiss and people starting screaming "cheater."
You're equating major strategy examples with chickenshit. The comparison makes baby Jebus sad.
there are a host of ways folks get punished from a slap on the wrist to forfeiting all around various sports. Only folks like yourself try and poo poo it away. Its not like its a N00B mistake.
Thats my point. This is a slap on the wrist. No ever forfeits a game or a win on minor trivialities. Your're going from Zero to OMGCHEATERSMOTEHIM in 3.4 seconds. About a 9 on the tension scale.
I would like to point out that while going over points may not affect the game much, some times it does by quite a bit. You all say that that piece of wargear makes up the extra points, but how do you know. Mabye that extra point cost I interpret as an extra blaster he should not have bought. You cant claim that because one piece isnt used it was the irrelivant piece. Say I went over to buy my space marine captain an andamantite cloak or whatever so he wouldnt insta die. Say he never got attacked through the whole tourney, does it still not matter.
Heres another thing where it may have changed the game. Say I was 10 points over on my tau to buy a flachette discharger on my hammerhead. Now an ork boyz unit in one game specifically dident charge my hammerhead because he feared losing 10-15 guys on the charge, and that cost him big in the match. Sure it was never there, but the psychological impact of it being there changed the game.
If you have extra points you should have to play under points, even if it drops you 20 or 30 just to be able to make the cut. There shouldnt be any excuse to be over points.
He wasn't over points though. He was actually still under. The problem was having 3 arcane wargear items with a limit of 2. And according to the batreps it never got used. It's a little different than going over in points. Just clarifying. Wouldn't bother me if I'd played him, but also wouldnt' bother me if he got DQ'd after the fact.
But Dash wasnt over points. He just accidentely added a piece of wargear (that the judges didnt notice) that was illegal and never used. EDIT: lol ninja'd by Hulksmash
carmachu wrote:
there are a host of ways folks get punished from a slap on the wrist to forfeiting all around various sports. Only folks like yourself try and poo poo it away. Its not like its a N00B mistake.
Thats my point. This is a slap on the wrist. No ever forfeits a game or a win on minor trivialities. Your're going from Zero to OMGCHEATERSMOTEHIM in 3.4 seconds. About a 9 on the tension scale.
Not sure where you're going here frazzled. There was no slap on the wrist, there was nothing. And as he was saying, there are a whole spectrum of examples, FROM a slap on the wrist, to forfeiting entirely, in sports. It's generally forfeiting/dq'ing entirely, and not slaps on the wrist, as per the golfer example. He made a minor error, admitted it, and got dq'd. The rules are the rules, an illegal list is an illegal list. Once this was noticed, if you followed the majority of examples in sports, you'd have DQ'd dash and stripped his title.
I'm not saying thats the right response, but I think characterizing it as "OMGCRAZY" and a "9 on the tension scale" is far fetched. It's more the norm then anything.
carmachu wrote:
there are a host of ways folks get punished from a slap on the wrist to forfeiting all around various sports. Only folks like yourself try and poo poo it away. Its not like its a N00B mistake.
Thats my point. This is a slap on the wrist. No ever forfeits a game or a win on minor trivialities. Your're going from Zero to OMGCHEATERSMOTEHIM in 3.4 seconds. About a 9 on the tension scale.
Not sure where you're going here frazzled. There was no slap on the wrist, there was nothing. And as he was saying, there are a whole spectrum of examples, FROM a slap on the wrist, to forfeiting entirely, in sports. It's generally forfeiting/dq'ing entirely, and not slaps on the wrist, as per the golfer example. He made a minor error, admitted it, and got dq'd. The rules are the rules, an illegal list is an illegal list. Once this was noticed, if you followed the majority of examples in sports, you'd have DQ'd dash and stripped his title.
I'm not saying thats the right response, but I think characterizing it as "OMGCRAZY" and a "9 on the tension scale" is far fetched. It's more the norm then anything.
If I obliterate your quarterback illegally at most I get a 15 yard penalty. The team doesn't get disqualified. You're talking about disqualifying the team because they brought unapproved gym socks and left them on the sideline. Nonsense.
Please show me the majority of sports that support this. I'd proffer you're absolutely full of histrionic bs at this point.
I really think people are getting overly worked up about the extra Animus Vitae. It's an item that only benefits a unit in close combat that was in an army with no units that want to be in close combat. The item itself actually does nothing to increase the combat effectiveness of the model carrying it. All it does is allow the model carrying it to generate more pain tokens as it kills models in close combat. Once again, it's on a model that is configured to not be in close combat in an army that strives to avoid close combat.
Yes, I understand that illegal builds need to be examined. However, I do not believe that an illegal build should automatically be some sort of disqualification. The sanction should be in direct proportion to the effect the illegal build has on the game.
In this case, I believe that people running the tournament made the right decision. The illegal wargear item had zero effect on any of the games, thus resulting in zero sanction.
It's a hard line to draw either way. While you can say "The item wasn't used throughout the tournament"-----you end up with two issues;
1. You have no idea if opponents change in game decisions according to your illegal wargear
2. You have to draw a line at what point the illegal gear matters in terms of DQ---which is practically impossible to do
Pragmatically speaking, if I were to run tournaments----my policy would be black/white. If your list is illegal in anyway, I'm sorry you must be disqualified. It's open, honest, up front and objective.
AgeOfEgos wrote:It's a hard line to draw either way. While you can say "The item wasn't used throughout the tournament"-----you end up with two issues;
1. You have no idea if opponents change in game decisions according to your illegal wargear
2. You have to draw a line at what point the illegal gear matters in terms of DQ---which is practically impossible to do
Pragmatically speaking, if I were to run tournaments----my policy would be black/white. If your list is illegal in anyway, I'm sorry you must be disqualified. It's open, honest, up front and objective.
Its also stupid, asinine, bureacratic, and nonsensically reaks of government employees. Such an attitude would be an excellent way to insure tournament participation would fall dramatically.
Before going nuclear how about using, you know, common sense and just say "dude your list is illegal change it." Seriously.
If discovered afterwards: 1) Did it impact the games? 2) if so by how much; 3) was this list reviewed prior to the game? (if it was indeed reviewed then there's no fault to the player, but the TO).
I understand what you're saying Frazz and agree that it some cases, it may not affect the game to a dramatic degree (or anymore than dice may for example).
However, due to the subjective nature of the 'sometimes' and 'how much' (What if the opposing player stated it affected his decision making?)----the pragmatic, objective and fair method would be zero tolerance (in my opinion). I do not consider it a burden for players to ensure they have legal lists.
AgeOfEgos wrote:I understand what you're saying Frazz and agree that it some cases, it may not affect the game to a dramatic degree (or anymore than dice may for example).
However, due to the subjective nature of the 'sometimes' and 'how much' (What if the opposing player stated it affected his decision making?)----the pragmatic, objective and fair method would be zero tolerance (in my opinion). I do not consider it a burden for players to ensure they have legal lists.
I do if you are going to disqualify them for a simple error, especially if you looked at the list and ok it previously.
AgeOfEgos wrote:I understand what you're saying Frazz and agree that it some cases, it may not affect the game to a dramatic degree (or anymore than dice may for example).
However, due to the subjective nature of the 'sometimes' and 'how much' (What if the opposing player stated it affected his decision making?)----the pragmatic, objective and fair method would be zero tolerance (in my opinion). I do not consider it a burden for players to ensure they have legal lists.
I do if you are going to disqualify them for a simple error, especially if you looked at the list and ok it previously.
I won't address the checking it before hand---as I think that's setting the tournament up for failure. For example, if a list checker misses a mistake----then the burden and responsibility is now shared by the tournament organizers. Personally, I have no issue with attending tournaments that state if your list is found to be illegal in any way---you may continue your games---but will be disqualified from winning prizes.
The simplicity of the error is subjective---which is the issue. While one player may consider an extra ML a non-issue due to him wiping out the Fang group turn 1----another player from a previous round may take exception as a remaining Fang ML blew up his Wave Serpent at a crucial point in the game.
In addition, perception may prove an issue. Even if the organizer were to speak to each of a person's opponents post-tournament to determine the impact of an illegal list---the rest of the tournament participants will not have that perspective. They will have no idea on the impact of an illegal list and will likely have a distaste for organizers arbitrarily determining what is a significant error.
Transparency, objective up front requirements----with the burden of responsibility on the player base seems the way to go (in my opinion). I might feel differently if we were asking them to construct a statistical probability table----but constructing an army list and double checking its legality is a relatively simple task that each participant should be in habit of. Accountability for their mistake in not double checking their list via a DQ from winning a place/prize hardly seems a harsh method to ensure fairness throughout a tournament. They still got to play their games, roll some dice and push some pewter---they'll just miss out on some plastic wrap.
AgeOfEgos wrote:It's a hard line to draw either way. While you can say "The item wasn't used throughout the tournament"-----you end up with two issues;
1. You have no idea if opponents change in game decisions according to your illegal wargear
2. You have to draw a line at what point the illegal gear matters in terms of DQ---which is practically impossible to do
Pragmatically speaking, if I were to run tournaments----my policy would be black/white. If your list is illegal in anyway, I'm sorry you must be disqualified. It's open, honest, up front and objective.
Its also stupid, asinine, bureacratic, and nonsensically reaks of government employees. Such an attitude would be an excellent way to insure tournament participation would fall dramatically.
Before going nuclear how about using, you know, common sense and just say "dude your list is illegal change it." Seriously.
If discovered afterwards: 1) Did it impact the games? 2) if so by how much; 3) was this list reviewed prior to the game? (if it was indeed reviewed then there's no fault to the player, but the TO).
Or you could take 5 minutes to proof read your list, I know its a difficult concept for some to grasp.
This was a very interesting battle report and I thoroughly enjoyed it.
However, I do not believe the old raider to be anything like the venom in size or shape and your opponents conversions are very close in scale to the new model. While there was no current model at the time I think that the two different kinds of venom within the one match do cause confusion and bad feeling. This is not a personal attack on either of you, just an observation.
Frazzled wrote:This is the problem with these discussions. Something is amiss and people starting screaming "cheater."
You're equating major strategy examples with chickenshit. The comparison makes baby Jebus sad.
I'm pointing out that YOU are flat out wrong in your statement that no one would get penalized in all of sports. I can list example after example in all sports of ALL varieties of folks breaking rules intentionally or unintentionally and getting penalized. Folks have gotten slaps on the wrist to DQ'd and everything in between.
Your equating that there is a seperate catagory between illegal or legal. There isnt. Inappropriate personal comment redacted by Mannahnin.
Is he a cheater? No. Did he have an illegal list? Absolutely. Doesnt change anything.
Thats my point. This is a slap on the wrist. No ever forfeits a game or a win on minor trivialities. Your're going from Zero to OMGCHEATERSMOTEHIM in 3.4 seconds. About a 9 on the tension scale.
Folks can and HAVE forfeited games over minor items. Your whitewashing facts left and right. From sports to this. Its pitiful. That isnt your point. Your point has been 'its no big deal'. Well yeah, illegal lists are. Intentional? No. Is he a cheater? No. Did he break the rules? Absolutely. Whatever the TO decides from that point on would be fine- from a slap on the list to getting thrown out.
Or like what they have appeared to do now which is see that it affected nothing, no need to adjust the tournament results, and let it just die off as it is a moot point.
If thats what the TO's wish to do, thats fine. Its YOU and Dash and others who are rationalizing that "its no big deal" thats the issue. You cant just blow it off as "I didnt use it."
My stance on this issue is it is a moot point because the judges HAVE NOT done anything. I am saying it isn't a big deal based on the inaction of the judges. By nonaction the TO's have settled the manner pretty clearly.
This really seems to be more of an issue of you just having a problem with Dash in general and probably wanting him strung up by his nuts with modeling wire for this offense, despite the apparent, "don't give a crap" attitude of the actual TO's. Seriously give this one a rest. Maybe next tourney they will flog him.
Keep it polite, folks. No need to make it personal.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote:
AgeOfEgos wrote:Pragmatically speaking, if I were to run tournaments----my policy would be black/white. If your list is illegal in anyway, I'm sorry you must be disqualified. It's open, honest, up front and objective.
Its also stupid, asinine, bureacratic, and nonsensically reaks of government employees. Such an attitude would be an excellent way to insure tournament participation would fall dramatically.
Before going nuclear how about using, you know, common sense and just say "dude your list is illegal change it." Seriously.
If discovered afterwards: 1) Did it impact the games? 2) if so by how much; 3) was this list reviewed prior to the game? (if it was indeed reviewed then there's no fault to the player, but the TO).
As has been noted beforehand, many tournaments (and amateur or professional sporting events) take a hard line, in part because it keeps things simple and avoids an appearance of favoritism. As mentioned before, the standard policy for the UKGT, for some years, has been to give the player a 0 for every round in which they used an illegal list so far. They check lists during the weekend. A friend of mine was in contention to place high, then the judges found an error three or four games in and gave him that many zeroes in place of his previous wins. Was he bummed out? Sure. Did he understand the reasoning behind the policy? Certainly.
Some TOs do use your suggested subjective test (like the guys at The Alamo did, and like Mike Brandt did at the NOVA last year), and asking the opponents. The remaining issue there, of course, is that even if the player's five opponent's don't object, is that really fair to everyone else at the event? Tony K had to accept a degree of discredit and complaint and teasing (being nicknamed "3PO", etc.) until he cleaned the slate by also winning at Adepticon, and doing so with a legal list.
I agree with AoE that it's a bit stickier if the judges have checked the list and they missed it too. Certainly in that situation they bear a share of responsibility for the issue. But it is an issue.
Thanks Dakka, another good player and poster driven away by a bunch of idiots who couldn't keep their mouth shut and a bunch of mods and admins that only selectively defend people. This site becomes worse each time we lose posters like Gwar! and Dash.
Norade, summarizing the various folks who disagreed with or criticized Dash as "a bunch of idiots who couldn't keep their mouth shut" hardly seems an accurate or nuanced representation of Dash's multiple years of oft-contentious discussion on this site.
As you have no access to the user case files for Dash or his various detractors, nor to their edited or deleted posts, you literally cannot know how consistent or selective the moderation has been.
While we do not discuss individual disciplinary action with other users, a person is only ever suspended for what they choose to post. If someone is rude to you, it is always better to take the high road and not reciprocate. Not merely to avoid negative consequences from the moderators, but because it demonstrates that you are above petty insults and that your arguments and positions aren't so weak as to require flaming or personal attacks to shore them up.
AgeOfEgos wrote:It's a hard line to draw either way. While you can say "The item wasn't used throughout the tournament"-----you end up with two issues;
1. You have no idea if opponents change in game decisions according to your illegal wargear
2. You have to draw a line at what point the illegal gear matters in terms of DQ---which is practically impossible to do
Pragmatically speaking, if I were to run tournaments----my policy would be black/white. If your list is illegal in anyway, I'm sorry you must be disqualified. It's open, honest, up front and objective.
Its also stupid, asinine, bureacratic, and nonsensically reaks of government employees. Such an attitude would be an excellent way to insure tournament participation would fall dramatically.
Before going nuclear how about using, you know, common sense and just say "dude your list is illegal change it." Seriously.
If discovered afterwards: 1) Did it impact the games? 2) if so by how much; 3) was this list reviewed prior to the game? (if it was indeed reviewed then there's no fault to the player, but the TO).
Or you could take 5 minutes to proof read your list, I know its a difficult concept for some to grasp.
True Dat, but having played with the awesomesauce of Chaos Dex 3.5, that was easier said than done.
However, I've not been to a tourney where they didn't have lists to the TO prior to gaming. The tourneys I have run we always went through the list first. That seems like a given.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
carmachu wrote:
Frazzled wrote:This is the problem with these discussions. Something is amiss and people starting screaming "cheater."
You're equating major strategy examples with chickenshit. The comparison makes baby Jebus sad.
I'm pointing out that YOU are flat out wrong in your statement that no one would get penalized in all of sports. I can list example after example in all sports of ALL varieties of folks breaking rules intentionally or unintentionally and getting penalized. Folks have gotten slaps on the wrist to DQ'd and everything in between.
Your equating that there is a seperate catagory between illegal or legal. There isnt. Inappropriate personal comment redacted by Mannahnin.
Is he a cheater? No. Did he have an illegal list? Absolutely. Doesnt change anything.
Thats my point. This is a slap on the wrist. No ever forfeits a game or a win on minor trivialities. Your're going from Zero to OMGCHEATERSMOTEHIM in 3.4 seconds. About a 9 on the tension scale.
Folks can and HAVE forfeited games over minor items. Your whitewashing facts left and right. From sports to this. Its pitiful. That isnt your point. Your point has been 'its no big deal'. Well yeah, illegal lists are. Intentional? No. Is he a cheater? No. Did he break the rules? Absolutely. Whatever the TO decides from that point on would be fine- from a slap on the list to getting thrown out.
Your personal freakout is an excellent oexample of this. I didn't say people didn't get penalized. But for reals, you've never seen a football, basketball, or soccer game (I'm assuming by your comments you definitely didn't play any). Penalties and punsishments are given out all the time. They don't freaking kill the other team for it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Brother Ramses wrote:
carmachu wrote:
Brother Ramses wrote:
Or like what they have appeared to do now which is see that it affected nothing, no need to adjust the tournament results, and let it just die off as it is a moot point.
If thats what the TO's wish to do, thats fine. Its YOU and Dash and others who are rationalizing that "its no big deal" thats the issue. You cant just blow it off as "I didnt use it."
My stance on this issue is it is a moot point because the judges HAVE NOT done anything. I am saying it isn't a big deal based on the inaction of the judges. By nonaction the TO's have settled the manner pretty clearly.
This really seems to be more of an issue of you just having a problem with Dash in general and probably wanting him strung up by his nuts with modeling wire for this offense, despite the apparent, "don't give a crap" attitude of the actual TO's. Seriously give this one a rest. Maybe next tourney they will flog him.
Having an illegal list (no matter to what degree) is no one's fault but your own. You can't blame anyone but yourself for being 1 point over. You should step up and be ready to responsibility for your actions and fully accept whatever punishment is handed out. Sure, it sucks to get DQ'd for 1 point over or a piece of wargear that didn't really matter, but you have to draw the line somewhere. If you have a gray area, where does it end? If you can get away with 1 point, why not 2? why not 3? why not 30, 300 or 3,000? You need to understand that the drawing a line, preserves the integrity of the event as a whole and that integrity is more important than your individual happiness (when you're in the wrong to boot!).
However, with that being said, I think it is in the best interests of a TO to check lists before a tournament to catch mistakes so they don't have to DQ people. It's in the financial interest of the TO to make sure you have a good time, so you'll want to come back and bring your friends. There is a careful balance that needs to be maintained between finding an amicable solution and upholding the integrity of the event. Nevertheless, at the end of the day any list making mistake is YOUR OWN FAULT and you should be ready to take the full repercussions.
Leenus wrote:Having an illegal list (no matter to what degree) is no one's fault but your own. You can't blame anyone but yourself for being 1 point over. You should step up and be ready to responsibility for your actions and fully accept whatever punishment is handed out. Sure, it sucks to get DQ'd for 1 point over or a piece of wargear that didn't really matter, but you have to draw the line somewhere. If you have a gray area, where does it end? If you can get away with 1 point, why not 2? why not 3? why not 30, 300 or 3,000? You need to understand that the drawing a line, preserves the integrity of the event as a whole and that integrity is more important than your individual happiness (when you're in the wrong to boot!).
Good thing that Dash wasn't over the points limit then...
Leenus wrote:Having an illegal list (no matter to what degree) is no one's fault but your own. You can't blame anyone but yourself for being 1 point over. You should step up and be ready to responsibility for your actions and fully accept whatever punishment is handed out. Sure, it sucks to get DQ'd for 1 point over or a piece of wargear that didn't really matter, but you have to draw the line somewhere. If you have a gray area, where does it end? If you can get away with 1 point, why not 2? why not 3? why not 30, 300 or 3,000? You need to understand that the drawing a line, preserves the integrity of the event as a whole and that integrity is more important than your individual happiness (when you're in the wrong to boot!).
Good thing that Dash wasn't over the points limit then...
Yes, his list was illegal. He had an illegal piece of useless wargear on someone who couldn't take it. He was already under points, and spent some of the points that he did have on more useless stuff. Bravo for him still winning despite both the accidental and the intentional handicaps stacking. I'm sure he's learned his lesson, and will take out the illegal wargear and fill in the rest of his missing points with more stuff to increase his edge.
dayve110 wrote:Yes, his list was illegal. He had an illegal piece of useless wargear on someone who couldn't take it. He was already under points, and spent some of the points that he did have on more useless stuff. Bravo for him still winning despite both the accidental and the intentional handicaps stacking. I'm sure he's learned his lesson, and will take out the illegal wargear and fill in the rest of his missing points with more stuff to increase his edge.
The point is, the rules are there for a reason. If you're going to DQ someone for being 1 point over, also (typically) an honest mistake, how is this other form of illegal any different? Illegal is illegal. If the opportunity would have arose, Dash would have used that item, since he didn't know it was illegal until after. If he would have used the item, we would be singing a COMPLETELY different story. Why didn't he use it? Because he didnt need to/the opportunity never came up.
I guarantee you Tony's list last year had at least a couple items that were never used in any game, so no harm no foul right? He was over points (illegal list) but didnt use the items the points were there for.
Also, he had 3 items, not 2. Why is the animus vitae the one we call into question? I know it's what he said he added, etc etc, but technically, since we can't assess intent and have nothing but his word, couldn't you assume the third "illegal" item was one of the models others, which he may have used?
Look, I'm not saying we should crucify dash, or make a giant deal out of this. But I take exception with the people who just brush it off as "meh, totally doesn't matter". Dash consistently is a top finisher, he isn't a new player. An illegal list is an illegal list. Rulings need to be consistent. If we DQ one guy for an illegal list, we should dq the other, it's only fair. I realize the Tony K and the Dash event were at totally different venues, but the community response is a bit absurd and arbitrary. Events would benefit from a clear set of rules and expectations followed by a clear set of punishments/penalties.
carmachu wrote:
I'm pointing out that YOU are flat out wrong in your statement that no one would get penalized in all of sports. I can list example after example in all sports of ALL varieties of folks breaking rules intentionally or unintentionally and getting penalized. Folks have gotten slaps on the wrist to DQ'd and everything in between.
True, but real sports have high stakes. In some sports, prize money or prestige is enormous; in others people's health or lives might be at risk due to rules breaches (I'm a referee myself in such a sport, and have DQ'd people over seemingly trivial issues).
But this is a game of toy soldiers. A 40kGT isn't US Open. If I started enforcing rules and lists in similar fashion than I enforce rules in the sport I'm reffing, nobody would ever play with me.
AgeOfEgos wrote:I won't address the checking it before hand---as I think that's setting the tournament up for failure. For example, if a list checker misses a mistake----then the burden and responsibility is now shared by the tournament organizers.
Since the tournament organisers are the guys responsible for ensuring that everyone is playing according to the rules of the tournament, that's exactly as it should be.
carmachu wrote: I'm pointing out that YOU are flat out wrong in your statement that no one would get penalized in all of sports. I can list example after example in all sports of ALL varieties of folks breaking rules intentionally or unintentionally and getting penalized. Folks have gotten slaps on the wrist to DQ'd and everything in between.
True, but real sports have high stakes. In some sports, prize money or prestige is enormous; in others people's health or lives might be at risk due to rules breaches (I'm a referee myself in such a sport, and have DQ'd people over seemingly trivial issues).
But this is a game of toy soldiers. A 40kGT isn't US Open. If I started enforcing rules and lists in similar fashion than I enforce rules in the sport I'm reffing, nobody would ever play with me.
But then again the rules are very important to Dash as seen in his 45 min. discussion to smooth out a rules differance and what about how Dash makes it so serious "traveling around the Country winning tournaments" as he says. So even to Dash little rules descrepences (as Moster Rain pointed out eairlier by asking him if he would care if it were the other shoe persay) matter. So rules shouldent be so subjective. P.S. Im not calling for blood but its a valid community point as seen in threads such as "is it ok for your opponant to be 1 point over". In general the concencus was never.
If I were running a tourney, and it came to light that one player's list was illegal, I would have no choice but to disqualify. In the instance of the Alamo, this didn't come out until well after the fact, the winner had already given his prize away, and the TO's were so inept that they had already screwed up the scoring and declared the wrong winner by leaving out part of the scoring. I don't think that there is anything that the Alamo can do to make things right. The whole tournament wasn't very well set up, as evidenced by the poor TOs/judging and horrible lack of terrain.
AgeOfEgos wrote:I won't address the checking it before hand---as I think that's setting the tournament up for failure. For example, if a list checker misses a mistake----then the burden and responsibility is now shared by the tournament organizers.
Since the tournament organisers are the guys responsible for ensuring that everyone is playing according to the rules of the tournament, that's exactly as it should be.
*Shrug*, I can see that argument----provided they put forth a caveat stating regardless if they pre-approve your list-----if at anytime your list is found illegal you will be DQ.
Carmachu wrote:Folks can and HAVE forfeited games over minor items. Your whitewashing facts left and right. From sports to this. Its pitiful. That isnt your point. Your point has been 'its no big deal'. Well yeah, illegal lists are. Intentional? No. Is he a cheater? No. Did he break the rules? Absolutely. Whatever the TO decides from that point on would be fine- from a slap on the list to getting thrown out.
Your personal freakout is an excellent oexample of this. I didn't say people didn't get penalized. But for reals, you've never seen a football, basketball, or soccer game (I'm assuming by your comments you definitely didn't play any). Penalties and punsishments are given out all the time. They don't freaking kill the other team for it.
Please cool down the rhetoric. When you're using hyperbole like "stupid, asinine, bureacratic, and nonsensically reaks of government employees", you have little room in which to point fingers or accuse others of freaking out. Coming from you I should probably suspend you for that "government employees" barb; that's probably the lowest blow you can think of.
As cited earlier in the thread, there is a (fairly recent?) example of a player at a major golfing event being DQd because he realized he had an extra club in his bag. This is a pretty parallel situation. Did Dash's list error or that extra club make any difference in the event? No, probably not. But if you're trying to maximize consistency and fairness to other players, a DQ or other harsh penalty, even for a seemingly-minor infraction, is not "stupid" or "asinine". It's fairly common and the reasoning behind it understandable. Now, as I said before I'm not saying that how The Alamo or the NOVA handled it (which were both more in line with your suggested approach) is bad either. I think both approaches have their benefits and drawbacks. There's no call to beangry or nasty to each other over whether you prefer one way or Carmachu prefers the other. They're both workable approaches.
Hulksmash wrote:He wasn't over points though. He was actually still under. The problem was having 3 arcane wargear items with a limit of 2. And according to the batreps it never got used. It's a little different than going over in points. Just clarifying. Wouldn't bother me if I'd played him, but also wouldnt' bother me if he got DQ'd after the fact.
As a player, this is pretty much exactly my attitude.
As a TO, things are a little more complex. Dash and I have already exchanged a few emails (at his initiation) regarding thoughts on his DE and his Raiders, so that he is clear where the judges' stand on his models and other ideas before he even gets to Wargamescon - this is a sign of a thoughtful player, and I'll note that the most consistent thing I have found about players who ask questions like this is that they tend to be veteran and skilled players. In regards to an illegal list, there are two categories. First, players who submit and have their lists approved ahead of time. If their list is somehow incorrect (which is as close to impossible as I can make it), then the error is corrected and we move on with play, and I give their opponents fabulous cash and prizes in compensation. If they did not submit their list ahead of time and an error is found, they cannot win anything at the tournament and the list is corrected as soon as the error is found. We offer the list review (and printing copies of your list) to insulate players from making mistakes that cost them, but we allow players to drop that ball and potentially deal with the consequences.
I truly don't understand where all this contention is coming from. The list was illegal. Simple as.
It does amuse me that Dash of all people fell foul of this. If I remember correctly, he was one of the most outspoken voices wanting to turn 40k from a 'past-time' into a 'sport' with high-stakes money on the line etc. etc. Imagine the reaction if this kind of discrepancy had crept up in one of his show matches or 'Win a Battleforce' games...I dread to think...
Lycaeus Wrex wrote:I truly don't understand where all this contention is coming from. The list was illegal. Simple as.
It does amuse me that Dash of all people fell foul of this. If I remember correctly, he was one of the most outspoken voices wanting to turn 40k from a 'past-time' into a 'sport' with high-stakes money on the line etc. etc. Imagine the reaction if this kind of discrepancy had crept up in one of his show matches or 'Win a Battleforce' games...I dread to think...
L. Wrex
I think this battle report quite clearly illustrates why 40k can't possibly go 'sport', high stakes or no. Not because of the list, which is a problem in its own right, but because of how the 'championship game' actually went.
How would the Superbowl go, as an event, if the team down by 3 in the 3rd quarter was on the 1st yard line with 3 downs to go, the opposing judge calls for a line measurement, the clock is left running, and time runs out without the O ever touching the ball again?
AgeOfEgos wrote:I understand what you're saying Frazz and agree that it some cases, it may not affect the game to a dramatic degree (or anymore than dice may for example).
However, due to the subjective nature of the 'sometimes' and 'how much' (What if the opposing player stated it affected his decision making?)----the pragmatic, objective and fair method would be zero tolerance (in my opinion). I do not consider it a burden for players to ensure they have legal lists.
I do if you are going to disqualify them for a simple error, especially if you looked at the list and ok it previously.
I wouldn't call someone placing a hive tyrant inside a mycetic spore a simple error...
After reading this through I cannot believe the fuss that people are making about your army and play Dash. It's a competative tournament for feth sake! I think the problem is that because it is classed loosely as a 'hobby', people think it has to be brought to the table in a non competative (which they seem to equate with fun) way. Rubbish. If you have played in loads of tournies, you don't spend hours painting your army, deciding on composition and making the effort to show up to willingly lose to your opponent. You fight like a mad dog thats just been shot in the nut sack. If you don't like that competative element, don't play in tournaments!
fluffywyvern wrote:After reading this through I cannot believe the fuss that people are making about your army and play Dash. It's a competative tournament for feth sake! I think the problem is that because it is classed loosely as a 'hobby', people think it has to be brought to the table in a non competative (which they seem to equate with fun) way. Rubbish. If you have played in loads of tournies, you don't spend hours painting your army, deciding on composition and making the effort to show up to willingly lose to your opponent. You fight like a mad dog thats just been shot in the nut sack. If you don't like that competative element, don't play in tournaments!
Read the entire thread carefully. People have issues with (summarized what I believe are the core points of this thread below) the fact that Dash attended a competitive event and:
1) Had an illegal list
2) Arguably had illegal and/or models that were done for advantage
You can attend a tournament and play "like a mad dog thats just been shot in the nut sack" (ever the poet?) and also adhere to the rules. The fact that some people (Dash included in my opinion) have such a laissez faire attitude towards this as if "eh, who cares, whats the big deal?" is the issue. When you espouse the rules at every turn and will argue for hours on the internet and 40 minutes in person over rules, they obviously are important to you. But when you break one and give it the 'ole "eh, whats the big deal guys?" is where I (and I think others) have an issue. I attend GT's and place in the top spots as well. If I was in Dash's shoes, I can honestly say I would have DQ'd myself. I would have been heartbroken doing it and a bit sick to my stomach, but thats life sometimes.
As a third point, you realize Dash has apparently been banned from Dakka, and if you'd like to find him, you'll need to take a jaunt on over to Hulksmash's Homeplace (where he is now an author alongside his buddy).
fluffywyvern wrote:After reading this through I cannot believe the fuss that people are making about your army and play Dash. It's a competative tournament for feth sake! I think the problem is that because it is classed loosely as a 'hobby', people think it has to be brought to the table in a non competative (which they seem to equate with fun) way. Rubbish. If you have played in loads of tournies, you don't spend hours painting your army, deciding on composition and making the effort to show up to willingly lose to your opponent. You fight like a mad dog thats just been shot in the nut sack. If you don't like that competative element, don't play in tournaments!
Read the entire thread carefully. People have issues with (summarized what I believe are the core points of this thread below) the fact that Dash attended a competitive event and:
1) Had an illegal list
2) Arguably had illegal and/or models that were done for advantage
You can attend a tournament and play "like a mad dog thats just been shot in the nut sack" (ever the poet?) and also adhere to the rules. The fact that some people (Dash included in my opinion) have such a laissez faire attitude towards this as if "eh, who cares, whats the big deal?" is the issue. When you espouse the rules at every turn and will argue for hours on the internet and 40 minutes in person over rules, they obviously are important to you. But when you break one and give it the 'ole "eh, whats the big deal guys?" is where I (and I think others) have an issue. I attend GT's and place in the top spots as well. If I was in Dash's shoes, I can honestly say I would have DQ'd myself. I would have been heartbroken doing it and a bit sick to my stomach, but thats life sometimes.
As a third point, you realize Dash has apparently been banned from Dakka, and if you'd like to find him, you'll need to take a jaunt on over to Hulksmash's Homeplace (where he is now an author alongside his buddy).
You are absolutely right, as much as I at times get tempted to claim that I have wargear that I didnt take, because my dice actually HATE me, I don't, and I play "like a mad dog that's just been shot in the nut sack. I don't give in to the temptation of cheating because I know it is not a just victory. Rules are placed there for a reason, and if you choose to say to the rule "What's the big deal", then you aren't playing the game right.
Seems like I've read some BATREPs from Dash in the past that discusses his opponents having illegal units and wargear. If I remember right, he still tabled them(as he often does) so it wasn't a big deal to him(didn't pursue DQ). I'm not justifying, just saying.
I'm sure it won't happen again on his lists. You guys have never made a mistake on one of your lists? Ever? I know I have. Its the TO's call(IRT the models as well). I've had to come clean before during a tourney. The TO had his opinion and asked my opponent's and generally got a consensus from the tourney group. I wasn't DQ'd, I was willing to pull out but I was asked to stay. I felt like a slug, but i made an honest mistake. Albeit I wasn't in contention for a win either.
Games that are meant to be played competitively have infractions defined and penalties for those infractions defined ahead of time.
For example, Magic: the Gathering -- not an athletic sport, but played very competitively by thousands -- has a penalty guide that lays out exactly what the penalty should be for each infraction.
Magic has a penalty for almost exactly this infraction. Before games start, you must fill out a sheet that contains the contents of your deck. Judges randomly check these lists against the actual contents of players' decks - this is called a deck check. Usually the penalty is a single game loss, and you have to fix your list (this varies based on what is wrong).
Disqualifications are generally reserved for actual cheating, which usually involves the judge having to determine intent to cheat. Cheating and making an honest but unfortunate mistake are two different things.
It's too bad that there is no tournament penalty guide for 40k. Another thing Magic gets right is having a ridiculously comprehensive rules guide and almost instant FAQs upon release of a set, but I digress.
CoreFault wrote:Games that are meant to be played competitively have infractions defined and penalties for those infractions defined ahead of time.
For example, Magic: the Gathering -- not an athletic sport, but played very competitively by thousands -- has a penalty guide that lays out exactly what the penalty should be for each infraction.
Magic has a penalty for almost exactly this infraction. Before games start, you must fill out a sheet that contains the contents of your deck. Judges randomly check these lists against the actual contents of players' decks - this is called a deck check. Usually the penalty is a single game loss, and you have to fix your list (this varies based on what is wrong).
Disqualifications are generally reserved for actual cheating, which usually involves the judge having to determine intent to cheat. Cheating and making an honest but unfortunate mistake are two different things.
It's too bad that there is no tournament penalty guide for 40k. Another thing Magic gets right is having a ridiculously comprehensive rules guide and almost instant FAQs upon release of a set, but I digress.
I too semi-wish we had something more formal as MTG does, and although DQ's are reserved (typically) for actual cheating, if you say, forget to put an exiled card back into your deck for the second game of your 3 game match (an honest accident), and get deck checked, you take a game loss.
Forgot to take out your sideboard when starting your next match? (cards in a seperate pile that you can swap in after match 1 to help the matchup)
Game loss here too.
Show up with an illegal 60 card deck? DQ or game/match loss, I can't remember exactly...
And I can say that no, I have never, not once, made an error on one of my lists for a GT. I can't remember all the countless shop tournies I've been in, but as far as I can remember, I've never goofed on one of those either.
Look, GT's are these big events. You prepare for months, you spend 100's of hours painting, testing, list building. By the time the tournament rolls around that you've spent time and money (I try to keep my spending to ~500USD for the event, by driving to it, and splitting hotel rooms, Dash routinely states that he comes in more at the 2k-3k range for an event), I've checked my list. I've checked my list 10 times the night before, looking up rules for each unit. Because I'll not have a stupid error sully an entire event of good gaming (or become zee netrage), or whats more, sully the last several months of work.
Dash isn't a bad guy, I just wish he'd handle some of these a situations a bit better, both before and after.
Monster Rain wrote:Not like they need more work, but the INAT people are respectable enough to come up with something like what Corefault is describing.
It would at least be a start.
This would be a welcome addition. I may not like what INAT comes out with all the time, but it would be nice to have a set of established rules/consequences that are semi-consistent between events. It would also help to legitimize the tournament scene (a bit).
I'm sure plenty of folks wouldn't like it, but it would head off some of the headaches for players/event organizers, as they could stand behind policy (not a beloved practice albeit). Everyone would know walking in exactly what would happen, and then when it did, they'd have no one to blame but themselves. If the penalties weren't followed, mud wouldn't get slung at the player, but at the judge that failed to enforce it.
I can tell you that the INAT guys are not really interested in standardizing tournaments. Although I do like the idea of a defined set of penalties for an event, which other events could borrow if they liked. There will never be standardization like there is when Magic's official sanctioning process, but given how INAT has become fairly popular, an INAT-style set of rules for adjudicating certain problems and rules violations at tournaments might get a fair number of events on board.
Mannahnin wrote:I can tell you that the INAT guys are not really interested in standardizing tournaments. Although I do like the idea of a defined set of penalties for an event, which other events could borrow if they liked. There will never be standardization like there is when Magic's official sanctioning process, but given how INAT has become fairly popular, an INAT-style set of rules for adjudicating certain problems and rules violations at tournaments might get a fair number of events on board.
Yea, I've got no wish to standardize tourneys either, but I think a standard set of rules/penalties would be useful, while not forcing any event to change its core structure/how it wants to run things as far as gaming is concerned
for their drug and start with one - in which case he couldn't pass the pain token over, so he instead starts with a Trueborn unit. Don't ask about the Animus Vitae; it doesn't do anything to help him, and is only there because this wasn't a tested variant of my Darklight Storm.
My beast unit....I don't actually know what to do with it, so I move it on by the central objective. From a tactical perspective, a lot of thought actually goes into what goes where on the table. Two ravagers on the left flank with the ability to move 12" left or right to get shots anywhere on the table...the third ravager center right with the ability to cover the middle of the table and the right flank in case he *does* bring units in behind that pile of junk. Two trueborn in the middle because there are two objectives in the middle, with the third on the right to offset the anti-tank power on my left flank, with venoms equally spread amongst all of it. Strong killzones to the front, with the ability to bring 2/3 of my firepower to bear left or right.
Suddenly he can't contest the objective. 
ACTUAL BATREP AND TOURNAMENT AND NOT REHASHING YOUR PERSONAL BULL 
