I'm curious to see how strict people are on enforcing points limits in non-tournament games (obviously in official tournaments things are different). I have a poll if you want, or you can explain your answer.
I personally belong to the "1-10 points over is fine if your list ended up that way" school. When I make a list I throw everything I could possibly want in there, then trim down until I get to the points limit. But there's times when I end up with 1505 points for a 1500 pt list or something like that, and have no obvious way to kill that last 5 points without completely reorganizing.
Whenever I have played, we have always agreed that it must be a certain points value, and not anything over that, even if it means you have some spare points at the end.
It has never seemed that hard to do, and so we haven't seen a reason to change it.
dementedwombat wrote: But there's times when I end up with 1505 points for a 1500 pt list or something like that, and have no obvious way to kill that last 5 points without completely reorganizing.
Which is the whole point of having limits. 1 to 5 points could have a huge impact.
Depends on what the points are spent on. If it's a point or 2 over, I won't complain because chances are it's not gonna be possible to end up exact. If it's 5 points over I'm usually fine with it, but again if it's 5 points on a possibly game changing weapon I may have concerns. I know that's why points are there, but some people take this stuff like the bible XD
If your models are 100% WYSIWYG (right down to melta bombs, etc) then I'll be fairly generous on points limit. It can be a real bitch to sort out the last 10-15 points.
If you're not WYSIWYG then points or under, no exceptions - if you're a few points over then drop a melta bomb, downgrade a weapon or something.
Im fine with 1-10 points over under the assumtion there isn't a easy way to cut it.
Never happened to myself to as i can easily cut down on a gaunt or gargoyle.
I'm generally pretty flexible w/ in a few pts on lists. I really only play against the same core group of people & we have a pretty laid back outlook on our games. 5 pts is fine, but anything over that I'm gonna expect you to get rid of something - like has been said, 10 pts is enough for a game changing meltagun in a seemingly inoccuous tactical squad. Luckily the people I play against are all of this same general mentality, so it has never been an issue for us.
1-10 points as long as there is no wargear costing exactly that 1-10 points.
Also, I'm not forcing people to cut points if that means one of their four identical units doesn't have some piece of not-game-changing equipment, like a boss pole, heavy bolter, flakk armor or plasma pistol. It's going to get mixed up during the game anyways, and it's extra strain on me to keep track of who doesn't have assault grenades.
Vryce wrote: I'm generally pretty flexible w/ in a few pts on lists. I really only play against the same core group of people & we have a pretty laid back outlook on our games. 5 pts is fine, but anything over that I'm gonna expect you to get rid of something - like has been said, 10 pts is enough for a game changing meltagun in a seemingly inoccuous tactical squad. Luckily the people I play against are all of this same general mentality, so it has never been an issue for us.
~Vryce
10 points is enough for 2 meltaguns in Tactical Squads. ^^
You may be up to zero points over. If you feel that being 1-10 points over is no big deal because that extra equipment probably won't change the game then why are you so reluctant to remove it from your list and play 1-10 points under the limit?
I an RAW because I think it is also RAI. If we set it at 1500 that does not mean 1502. You have choices so for example... lose the extra marine or downgrade your plasma rifle to a flamer. It is not hard to make a points limit.
That depends on why they are over it and what the available 'fix' is.
I'm not going to make him lose his only Power Fist in a tactical squad because he is 1-5 points over the list.
Nor am I denying him a LC on his Razorback.
But if he can easily drop 1 Ork Boy or a melta-bomb, than I do mind.
In the local meta here it seems to be understood that point limits are hard and fast. No one breaks them, so I don't either and now that's how I play. It's not that they are hard asses they just all play that way and so no one goes against the grain, you'd almost be like an outsider.
Kangodo wrote: I'm not going to make him lose his only Power Fist in a tactical squad because he is 1-5 points over the list.
Nor am I denying him a LC on his Razorback.
Why not? Why should someone get to go over the point limit to have a power fist instead of a power axe for their AP 2, or a LC Razorback instead of a HB Razorback? We're not even talking about having to drop an entire unit and be 100 points under the limit, just having to settle for less than the best upgrades.
The main thing I can think of to apply to this are the uneven SMHQ storm bolters. If I were to, say, take one on a captain and a librarian, that would usually put me 1 pt over the limit, as it doesn't fit in nicely with the multiples of 5 points costs with the rest of the army. In my mind, they ought to be a decimal value to fit in better. points, and as I only play my friend, he doesn't mind this 1 point over the limit. I will strictly adhere to a points limit in any other scenario, though.
*Edit - Not sure if I can post points costs here, so edited them out.
BladeSwinga wrote: The main thing I can think of to apply to this are the uneven SMHQ storm bolters. If I were to, say, take one on a captain and a librarian, that would usually put me 1 pt over the limit, as it doesn't fit in nicely with the multiples of 5 points costs with the rest of the army.
Then drop a plasma gun to a melta gun, or only take one storm bolter. The problem isn't the storm bolters, it's that you feel that you're entitled to never play under the point limit or have to make sacrifices to fit all the upgrades you want.
In my mind, they ought to be a decimal value to fit in better.
This would be neater, but how would it help? If they went up to 5 points each to make it an even number you'd be even more points over the limit and still have to cut something to make up for it.
If the game is 2500+ points then 1-10 isn't going to make a massive difference to the whole game, but if its 1000 point game, then it's strict to the limit or a couple under if needs be
Beard wrote: If the game is 2500+ points then 1-10 isn't going to make a massive difference to the whole game
Exactly. 1-10 points won't make a massive difference, so playing 1-10 points under the limit to avoid going over should not be a problem and you should never ask to go over the limit.
Your initial question specifies non-tournament games, so I say 1-2%. In actuality, I'd let my opponent go higher than that if they really wanted. (I don't mind playing at a handicap. I have been known to eliminate 1-200 points out of my own lists in order to get better at using limited resources.)
Tournament games are, obviously, a complete 180. A single point over is a single point too many! (I would even lobby for a disqualification at that point.)
Kangodo wrote: That depends on why they are over it and what the available 'fix' is.
I'm not going to make him lose his only Power Fist in a tactical squad because he is 1-5 points over the list.
Nor am I denying him a LC on his Razorback.
The whole *ahem* point of the limit is that it forces a limit on just how much stuff can be crammed into your army. If he really wants that LC on his razorback, then he needs to make slack elsewhere.
For my money, a limit is a limit. In friendly games, that doesn't automatically mean that I won't play you, though... just that I expect you to point it out before we start playing, so I can alter my list to match the new limit if I can be bothered to do so.
Peregrine wrote: You may be up to zero points over. If you feel that being 1-10 points over is no big deal because that extra equipment probably won't change the game then why are you so reluctant to remove it from your list and play 1-10 points under the limit?
Your talking gear... it could be the diffence of being able to fit in a game changing unit.. to often this conversation restricts itself to gear. It could be whole squad of something.
Beard wrote: If the game is 2500+ points then 1-10 isn't going to make a massive difference to the whole game
Exactly. 1-10 points won't make a massive difference, so playing 1-10 points under the limit to avoid going over should not be a problem and you should never ask to go over the limit.
This. Coming in under points is just as little a deal as coming in over points and is also within the rules, so there's no reason not to do so.
Peregrine wrote: You may be up to zero points over. If you feel that being 1-10 points over is no big deal because that extra equipment probably won't change the game then why are you so reluctant to remove it from your list and play 1-10 points under the limit?
Your talking gear... it could be the diffence of being able to fit in a game changing unit.. to often this conversation restricts itself to gear. It could be whole squad of something.
Well, yes, but if say, as DE, I'm trying to fit in a 9th reaver with blaster to my list, and that put me 4pts over, I could take out a venom blade on, may be, my arena champ or something to put my list back under the limit.
Usually 1-10 points is ok but it really depends. If he's playing Tyranids and can easily kick 1 gaunt out of his list, I'll force him to do so. But if he's 1-5 points over and really the lowest number of points he can drop is way bigger than the points he's over the limit, I let him go.
The limit's there for a reason, if you're going over, you're doing something wrong.
The only time I'll consider it is if I'm playing a buddy and I know that the only WYSIWYG models he has will take him over.
Also, the poll is rather biased. It makes out that by following the rules that two people have agreed on, I'm some how unreasonable. If you want to fit that last plasma gun in, well then we'll just have to play 1750.
I apologize for making a biased poll. I had no intention of doing that when I originally made the responses. All I had in my head while writing them was "strict to exact value", "strict to some single digit number of points", "strict to a couple percent", "generic 'other please explain' answer".
I guess there's a reason I never was good at data collection
The whole *ahem* point of the limit is that it forces a limit on just how much stuff can be crammed into your army. If he really wants that LC on his razorback, then he needs to make slack elsewhere.
But I don't do that.
Peregrine wrote: Why not? Why should someone get to go over the point limit to have a power fist instead of a power axe for their AP 2, or a LC Razorback instead of a HB Razorback? We're not even talking about having to drop an entire unit and be 100 points under the limit, just having to settle for less than the best upgrades.
I'll allow a zero point breach of the maximum allowed.
5 points is the difference between a Mortar and an Autocannon. It makes a hell of a lot of difference to the Rhino heading towards you.
3 points allows for a Singing Spear upgrade. Make a lot of difference to the Land Raider nearby. Plus I get to hear about how his Warlock killed my Land Raider forever.
1 point is a Searchlight. The Searchlight that just lit up my Stormraven, allowing the rest of his army to shoot at it.
Saying; "It's just 1 point. It doesn't make a lot of difference" is a huge fallacy. That 1 point might also be part of a larger chunk of points that makes it possible to field that extra Hive Guard, Terminator, Meltagun or whatever.
Saying; "Just add a Melta Bomb to one of our Sergeants and we are even" is a fallacy. Said squad might not have been taken to move aggresively forwards....making the upgrade utterly pointless. Hell, it might even induce me to stray from the basic tenents of my battleplan, which I had in mind when I made the armylist. Maybe I even considered giving him a Melta Bomb but discarded the idea because it was a useless waste of points.....and now I add it again to compensate for your unwillingness to follow the rules?
If 5 points is no big deal, then remove them. They are "no big deal", remember?
Thank you for putting me in a situation where I, by saying "no", is denying you your "right to have fun". I am not really given a choice. You broke the rules/agreement and suddenly I'M the TFG?!?
We have to set the limit somewhere....and that might as well be at the limit agreed upon beforehand.
When my friend was running the old Tau I allowed him one or two points, because I knew he had to deal with those 3 pt upgrades and what not, and I always hated doing that so I didn't mind. And it was just at home and not serious. But my brother who had newer army books with neater upgrades (and myself for that matter) had to stick to exact limits. Now the new Tau are out, he will too.
As strict as the other guy. With one condition ~ if I see Helldrakes, Manticores, or other such BS in your list, feth you your not going a single point over the limit.
motyak wrote: When my friend was running the old Tau I allowed him one or two points, because I knew he had to deal with those 3 pt upgrades and what not, and I always hated doing that so I didn't mind. And it was just at home and not serious. But my brother who had newer army books with neater upgrades (and myself for that matter) had to stick to exact limits. Now the new Tau are out, he will too.
That is actually something I noticed in the new codex is that point totals are much rounder. I might not have to deal with those problems anymore.
To be completely honest I go in into pretty much every game I play expecting I'll be wiped off the board by turn 3 by a combination of horrible rolls and lack of familiarity with the opponent's army. I'm really not that good at this game and don't take it all that seriously.
I don't mind the army being a few points over, but there are limits.
Playing 1000 points of Empire against another 1000 points of Empire, only to find that he had an extra 250 points in the form of his steam tank... yeah... that's a bit much.
How is this a question? A points limit is a points limit. Make your list fit. That's the game. Unless rolling a "5" can count as a "6", its really close after all.
It I'm playing someone outside of a casual format or for the first time, etc., I try to stay very strict point wise. Once I build a rapport, etc., or am playing with friends, the points values become less strict.
This isn't including scenarios or games we play where we deliberately skew points
Not a point over. What gets me is when there's no basing, the army is half proxies, unpainted, and/or broken... and you don't even have to ask because you know that they are 20+ points over. And they are, and of course think that it's 'no big deal'.
If I make the list with the other person along waiting to start the game and I end up being 1-3 points over the limit with my wysiwyg list I ask the opponent kindly if he insists on me changing the list to fit while he waits probably one or two minutes longer or if he is ok to start the game with this list. So it's a matter of time mostly, if I'm at home writing a list for the next game at weekend I have all the time I need to swap the numbers around to get right under the limit.
If I am asked if my opponent can get some additional points I have some terms the list has to fulfill: - no more than 5 points over the limit - cheapest upgrade used should be more than twice the points you are over the limit - no cheaper upgrades available than your cheapest upgrade This may be sound a bit confusing but the streamlined version of this is 'If you're at 1496 points out of 1500 you can have those Meltabombs.' but if you can cut upgrades to get straight to the limit I insist on it.
Why not? Why should someone get to go over the point limit to have a power fist instead of a power axe for their AP 2, or a LC Razorback instead of a HB Razorback?
Because those are the models he has. People have limited collections, and they won't have a model for every option in the codex.
If I have to choose between the opponent going five points over or playing with non-WYSIWYG army, I'll give him those five points any day.
As a casual gamer at heart, and having spent a lot of time with the RPG games, I take a very relaxed approach to the points limit. As long as you cannot easily rectify the problem, then it's fine. If you can drop an upgrade somewhere, then you should probably do that (fluffy/modelling exceptions allowed), but otherwise, no problemo.
As an addendum, I ensure my army lists are firmly within any points limit, as on the rare occasion I have a throw down game, I'm aware others are less lenient than I.
Meh...asking for an X point allowance is the same as asking for an X inch allowance.
"Do you mind if I'm a point over?" is like asking, "Do you mind if I'm an inch too far, when I make this assault move / shot / etc.?"
If my opponent feels comfortable asking for an extra point, he should feel comfortable granting me an extra inch. I won't ask for it, and he shouldn't either.
Scott-S6 wrote: If your models are 100% WYSIWYG (right down to melta bombs, etc) then I'll be fairly generous on points limit. It can be a real bitch to sort out the last 10-15 points.
If you're not WYSIWYG then points or under, no exceptions - if you're a few points over then drop a melta bomb, downgrade a weapon or something.
Personally, my lists are always points or under.
WYSIWYG is too costly to do with some armies. I don't see how WYSIWYG should be the factor in playing a friendly game where point can be slightly over.
I'll allow a zero point breach of the maximum allowed.
5 points is the difference between a Mortar and an Autocannon. It makes a hell of a lot of difference to the Rhino heading towards you.
3 points allows for a Singing Spear upgrade. Make a lot of difference to the Land Raider nearby. Plus I get to hear about how his Warlock killed my Land Raider forever.
1 point is a Searchlight. The Searchlight that just lit up my Stormraven, allowing the rest of his army to shoot at it.
Saying; "It's just 1 point. It doesn't make a lot of difference" is a huge fallacy. That 1 point might also be part of a larger chunk of points that makes it possible to field that extra Hive Guard, Terminator, Meltagun or whatever.
Saying; "Just add a Melta Bomb to one of our Sergeants and we are even" is a fallacy. Said squad might not have been taken to move aggresively forwards....making the upgrade utterly pointless. Hell, it might even induce me to stray from the basic tenents of my battleplan, which I had in mind when I made the armylist. Maybe I even considered giving him a Melta Bomb but discarded the idea because it was a useless waste of points.....and now I add it again to compensate for your unwillingness to follow the rules?
If 5 points is no big deal, then remove them. They are "no big deal", remember?
Thank you for putting me in a situation where I, by saying "no", is denying you your "right to have fun". I am not really given a choice. You broke the rules/agreement and suddenly I'M the TFG?!?
We have to set the limit somewhere....and that might as well be at the limit agreed upon beforehand.
The points limit is the points limit. You and your opponent can agree to a different points limit up to the start of the game (and sometimes after the start of the game) but you can not be even one point over the agreed points limit.
Byte wrote: Your talking gear... it could be the diffence of being able to fit in a game changing unit.. to often this conversation restricts itself to gear. It could be whole squad of something.
Then play without an entire squad. You don't get to break the rules just because it would be harder to win if you don't.
Crimson wrote: If I have to choose between the opponent going five points over or playing with non-WYSIWYG army, I'll give him those five points any day.
Or here's an option: if you want to play 100% WYSIWYG (as if that is a realistic expectation) and you don't have a HB Razorback model (or some other upgrade to cut to make room for the LC Razorback), drop the Razorback entirely.
CadianXV wrote: As a casual gamer at heart, and having spent a lot of time with the RPG games, I take a very relaxed approach to the points limit. As long as you cannot easily rectify the problem, then it's fine. If you can drop an upgrade somewhere, then you should probably do that (fluffy/modelling exceptions allowed), but otherwise, no problemo.
But every single over-the-limit problem is easy to fix: remove something from your army. I can't think of a single army that would ever have absolutely zero upgrades purchased (including extra models for a squad) and therefore be completely unable to remove something to fit within the limit. Every single army can fix the problem within a few seconds. So when someone says "I can't remove anything" what they really mean is "I don't want to remove anything".
Billagio wrote: In my friendly games being 1-10 over is fine, the other person just adds a few points in of their own to even it up
Though I agree that a points limit is a points limit, I can see this as a resonable compromise.
It's not reasonable at all because one player is getting much more out of it. For example, you go over the point limit to bring a melta gun instead of a flamer, but I can't make a similar upgrade because I've already taken all of my melta gun upgrades I had available. So I get to throw on some random 5-point upgrade that will probably not contribute anything, while you get something you actually wanted.
Also, there is no need to compromise, just like we don't compromise between my opinion that my lasguns should be STR 10 AP 1 and your opinion that they should be STR 3 AP -, with a "compromise" of STR 6 AP 4.
I don't want someone being over the limit at all. I would never go over a point limit. I still answered "other" , because it is not like I am going to total up someone's list before I play them. I just expect them to be a fair player and not go over the limit, but unless they told me I would never know. If they did tell me I would look to see if I could add some piece of war gear or small upgrade to get to whatever they have. If I could not do so I MIT ask them to drop something.
CadianXV wrote: As a casual gamer at heart, and having spent a lot of time with the RPG games, I take a very relaxed approach to the points limit. As long as you cannot easily rectify the problem, then it's fine. If you can drop an upgrade somewhere, then you should probably do that (fluffy/modelling exceptions allowed), but otherwise, no problemo.
As an addendum, I ensure my army lists are firmly within any points limit, as on the rare occasion I have a throw down game, I'm aware others are less lenient than I.
Strange, I got similar gaming background, but wold never permit such thing.
I am in the boat of RAW and RAI. They wouldn't be there otherwise. Downgrade some gear or drop a troop. I have my made list to the points limit so why can't you?
No points over, period.
I do not know how many times I had to agonize over those last 5 points of who gets what.
This is why some items are cheap that have some impact.
I have never played a list 1 point over.
I get a little grumpy when people try to justify why their list is over.
How about you finish a little under just for giggles?
Talizvar wrote: No points over, period.
I do not know how many times I had to agonize over those last 5 points of who gets what.
This is why some items are cheap that have some impact.
I have never played a list 1 point over.
I get a little grumpy when people try to justify why their list is over.
How about you finish a little under just for giggles?
Ditto! Just last night in fact I was making a 1000pt list that came out to 1003. Making the list took me about 10 minutes. I spent probably another hour removing things, swapping things, adding things in, just to fit within 1000 and still be pleased with what I'd picked. In the end it came out to 997 and I was happy.
In fact, with my Marine armies I am often 10-12 points under and I'm fine with that, I've played them for so long there's no point me adding some random crappy wargear I won't use (or will forget about) and I can't fit another body within the limit, so it stays short on points.
When two people agree upon a points limit, both should have enough respect to make their list equal to or less than the agreed upon limit.
1 point over is breaking the agreement, and disrespecting your opponent.
If you are over, it should be no big deal to drop something to make your list come in at or under the agreed upon points limit, and this should be done well before you are about to deploy.
I make lists that come to the points limit without going over. Then I tweak them and re-make them to shuffle things around without going over the limit that we have agreed upon.
If I am expected to make a list at or below the limit we have agreed upon, then I ask my opponent to adhere to the agreement as well. It is just common courtesy to do so.
Insaniak has hit it on the head as well.
insaniak wrote: The whole *ahem* point of the limit is that it forces a limit on just how much stuff can be crammed into your army. If he really wants that LC on his razorback, then he needs to make slack elsewhere.
Billagio wrote: In my friendly games being 1-10 over is fine, the other person just adds a few points in of their own to even it up
Though I agree that a points limit is a points limit, I can see this as a resonable compromise.
It's not reasonable at all because one player is getting much more out of it. For example, you go over the point limit to bring a melta gun instead of a flamer, but I can't make a similar upgrade because I've already taken all of my melta gun upgrades I had available. So I get to throw on some random 5-point upgrade that will probably not contribute anything, while you get something you actually wanted.
Also, there is no need to compromise, just like we don't compromise between my opinion that my lasguns should be STR 10 AP 1 and your opinion that they should be STR 3 AP -, with a "compromise" of STR 6 AP 4.
Which is why you are free to say "No" if someone asks to go a bit over. If you cant make a similar points upgrade that you feel will really benefit you, you are in the right to say "No". And this is strictly talking about my group of close friends here....
Funny how people say a few points over is no big deal. If it's really no big deal then why the difficulty staying under the limit?
If a player can't even follow the very first rule of our game, the size of the battle, how can I possibly not expect that he will be just as cavalier with all of the other rules?
When I play with my friends, we don't quibble about 10 points or so, but we also don't make lists that are consistently exactly 10 points over, either. I think the amount of flex on this is pretty proportionate to if you are, or are playing, TFG.
Ultimately we'd rather be playing then pointing so if someone is 4 or 5 points over I can always add something fast to balance it, or more honestly, shrug and say "ok, let's play". And, with my friends, generally speaking we're either over or under by about 4 or so points.
If I cared at all about winning I might feel differently.
I'd never, ever bring a list that was over if I were playing a stranger, but I also don't play strangers anyway.
It's "point limit", not "point suggestion". A 1k game means </=1,000 points, not 1000+"extra so I can have more gear/troops lolz". I assume all my opponents are sufficiently versed in basic addition, crazy right?>
Yeah.. I trimmed a DL down yesterday as I was going to be a few points over a 750 point game.
I considered being 5 points over so I could fit in MSS in such a small game would be a bit of a spanker move.
I personally don't mind if people are 1-5 points over, however I also think its fairly easy to be under the points value. It just means you need to drop something, which really should not be a problem.
Ouze wrote: When I play with my friends, we don't quibble about 10 points or so, but we also don't make lists that are consistently exactly 10 points over, either. I think the amount of flex on this is pretty proportionate to if you are, or are playing, TFG.
Ultimately we'd rather be playing then pointing so if someone is 4 or 5 points over I can always add something fast to balance it, or more honestly, shrug and say "ok, let's play". And, with my friends, generally speaking we're either over or under by about 4 or so points.
If I cared at all about winning I might feel differently.
I'd never, ever bring a list that was over if I were playing a stranger, but I also don't play strangers anyway.
Exactly. I feel the same way about it. I mainly play only with friends, so its usually not a big deal, but I can see how playing with strangers or at a tourney it would be unacceptable to be over.
I generally don't have an issue going over, and am usually within 10 points or less under, or exact.
The people I play with are all really mellow. A few times I have been over, it's been by less than ten points, due to units rather than wargear. I disclose the additional points, and why. No one has cared. For the record, those extra points did nothing to save me a savage beating.
My second game, I had a really bizarre point total. 673 or something. I was at an awkward stage in my acquisition, and it was a pick up game. My opponent/teacher was very gracious, and just made a similar list to be a good match, with little regard to points. In that instance, I would rather be flexible and encourage new blood. I was very grateful for this player, and his willingness to accept my weird list.
If the list I really want to run is significantly over the agreed upon limit, I suggest we bump the limit up, or have a second list to go with. In those instances it's usually a new unit I want to try, or combo of units. I've heard others accept a breach of the limit equal to the point cost of a base infantry unit. I personally think that's excessive. I have had a single GH make a difference, though not game changing. 15+ points is pretty hefty.
I think the big thing is at least at this point for me, I've planned my purchases around a particular list, or variations of a particular list. I decide what point limit I want to get to with my next couple purchases, then find units and loadouts that fit.
As I acquire more points, and really get to experiment with lists, I'm sure there will be harder decisions to make, but that's part of the fun I think.
Ultimately, I think it's situational. A new player, with a small force that would be severely weakened by cutting or lowering a unit, like me in my 2nd game, no big deal. Take all you can, and I'll make a list to fit. Playing with a buddy who wants to try out their new shiny, make it fit as best you can within reason. I'll adjust my list accordingly. While I think the limit should be met, or less, but I'm not going to stress over 5 points, regardless of where they came from. I also think it's more important to have equivalent point values on both sides. If we initially planned on 1500 but end up playing 1625, so what? As long as we're even. Staying at or under has never been an issue for either side in the games I've played.
Like my meta, I'm pretty relaxed. First rule is to have fun. I've never had that rule broken, regardless of point values.
If the other guy wants to be strict then I''ll be strict, if he wants lax and informal then it's lax and informal for me. I'm not particularly choosy and I prefer the game be fun for all parties involved.
I'm extremely lenient in apocalypse though, as it's pretty much a "bring your whole collection" party game. The game is going to take forever anyway and the points values are so large that quibbling over a point or two is meaningless.
I chose 1 to 10 points over, because I like the suggestion the rulebook gives on page 108 choosing your army section, under size of game. (it states that most players would be happy to let the opponent get a few points over the agreed total) But even if it wasnt written in the rulebook, or in the countless of battle reports in white dwarf, I would still be happy to give my opponents a few points. As long as they arent taking needlesly advantage of it. And as most other have said, I dont think it should be allowed in tournaments. ( as people would then just make 1510 points armies instead of 1500 as an example)
My friends and I always have a 5 point slack rule. Not that we actually make lists to take advantag of it, just that if someone ends up 1-5 points over, we ignore it. Any higher, and you're entering 'entire model' territory and they just drop a model.
Personally, I've started to take a more conservative approach where if I can't hit the point limit exactly, I'll go under, even if it means dropping a model to be under. I certainly don't quibble if a friend is still over the point limit, since I'd rather just get on with playing than watching him sit there for 30 minutes making a new list.
Griddlelol wrote:Also, the poll is rather biased. It makes out that by following the rules that two people have agreed on, I'm some how unreasonable.
Yeah, I find this curious as well.
I take a very hard line on points (we have a points system for a reason), but I wouldn't necessarily refuse to play someone because of it. Heck, I've played games with points handicaps on purpose on more than one occasion. As such, the poll isn't sufficiently nuanced.
But if I have to choose only one option, it's got to be the top one. Points limits are limits just as much as the limit of only moving 6" (Not six and a little bit more), or the limit of melta being half the range of the weapon, or the limit of only getting to do stuff on your turn or take units from your codex (or limited allies). The game is defined by its rules, not the rules subject to what one person decides on at any given time.
1
a : something that bounds, restrains, or confines
b : the utmost extent
5
: a prescribed maximum or minimum amount, quantity, or number: as a : the maximum quantity of game or fish that may be taken legally in a specified period
b : a maximum established for a gambling bet, raise, or payoff
6
a : a number whose numerical difference from a mathematical function is arbitrarily small for all values of the independent variables that are sufficiently close to but not equal to given prescribed numbers or that are sufficiently large positively or negatively
b : a number that for an infinite sequence of numbers is such that ultimately each of the remaining terms of the sequence differs from this number by less than any given positive amount
7
: something that is exasperating or intolerable — lim·it·less adjective
— lim·it·less·ly adverb
— lim·it·less·ness noun
See limit defined for English-language learners »
See limit defined for kids »
Examples of LIMIT
He has reached the limit of his endurance.
In training, she pushed her body to its physical limits.
He tries to be creative within the limits of conventional journalism.
There are limits to what I can put up with from him!
Origin of LIMIT
Middle English, from Anglo-French limite, from Latin limit-, limes boundary
First Known Use: 14th century
Related to LIMIT
Synonyms
bound, boundary, cap, ceiling, confines, end, extent, limitation, line, termination
Related Words
extremity, cigarette end, terminus; border, brim, edge, margin, rim, verge; outside; bar, barrier, fence, hedge, restraint, stop, wall
more
Now I am a tolerant person and so I forgive people for their lack of understanding this concept which is fairly advanced and taught to me thoroughly by my bank when I was young. I personally have a nearly 30 pt deficit in my 1500 pts Deathwing list (1470 pts). I marked 0 pts over but I have and will play up to 1.5x over my own points but I will get progressively less "friendly" in my play style and list selection as you get more "liberal" with your points usage.
-Loki- wrote: I certainly don't quibble if a friend is still over the point limit, since I'd rather just get on with playing than watching him sit there for 30 minutes making a new list.
How are people taking 30 minutes to make a new list? Drop a model or an upgrade and start the game.
Kangodo wrote: You don't get fined for slightly driving above the speed LIMIT, so that argument is nonsense.
Depends on where you are, and if it's quota day for the police. Driving even 1 mph over the speed limit is still speeding, and you can still get a ticket for it.
And my opponents can expect me not to make a drama if they go slightly over this limit.
Those opponents have unreasonable expectations, just like it would be unreasonable for me to expect you to not make any drama because I roll just a few extra dice for my shooting.
Put whatever models you have on the table and write some nonsense about how this month's new release killed everything, then take some pictures of dice sitting on the table and pretend they were an actual game.
Fixed that for you.
And if you're serious, I'd love to play there and just bring a bigger army than everyone else and automatically win.
Peregrine wrote: Depends on where you are, and if it's quota day for the police. Driving even 1 mph over the speed limit is still speeding, and you can still get a ticket for it.
And in what unreasonable country would that be?
Those opponents have unreasonable expectations, just like it would be unreasonable for me to expect you to not make any drama because I roll just a few extra dice for my shooting.
It's just unreasonable to you. More than half the people disagree with you on this.
The poll clearly shows that many people find that expectation quite reasonable.
Apples and oranges..
You cannot compare those two things.
Kangodo wrote: And in what unreasonable country would that be?
Anywhere someone feels like pulling you over for going 1 mph over the speed limit. If the cop is having a bad day and feels like giving out some speeding tickets you're going to be paying a fine.
It's just unreasonable to you. More than half the people disagree with you on this.
The poll clearly shows that many people find that expectation quite reasonable.
That's not what the poll asks. There's a huge difference between being willing to let your opponent go over the point limit and feeling entitled to go over the point limit without your opponent complaining.
Put whatever models you have on the table and write some nonsense about how this month's new release killed everything, then take some pictures of dice sitting on the table and pretend they were an actual game.
Fixed that for you.
And if you're serious, I'd love to play there and just bring a bigger army than everyone else and automatically win.
Impossible if I bring the newer army My narrative will pwn your narrative .... hard.
I play friendly games so as long as its no more than 1-10 points over its all good. And by that I mean unless there is a single unit/wargear item that can be cut to bring it under. If its only 6 points over because you brought a meltagun, then take out that gun. But if it would require a total rethink of your list then im happy to just ignore it.
I always aim to either be bang on or under with my lists.
-Loki- wrote: I certainly don't quibble if a friend is still over the point limit, since I'd rather just get on with playing than watching him sit there for 30 minutes making a new list.
How are people taking 30 minutes to make a new list? Drop a model or an upgrade and start the game.
We've tried that. The person decided, since he couldn't take the list he wanted, it was back to the drawing board. So now we just have a little leeway.
I'm not saying it's for everyone, just that it works for our group. If I ever played anyone from outside my group, I'd make sure I was under or on the limit.
When i write a list, i generally start off with a rough idea of what i want to take. and usually this first draft ends up being 20-50% over the agreed points limit. I then tweak my army until it is at or below the agreed upon points limit while being as close to my rough idea as i can make it. I have been over a few times over 20 years, but that was purely down to typos where i forgot to count something.
A points limit is just that, a limit. sometimes it can be annoying to tweak your list until it is almost perfect only to discover you missed by 2 points, but that is still 2 points over what you agreed to play.
Campaign and narrative games can be different, since i play a lot of narrative games where we don't bother to have points limits, or anything like that at all, but for a PUG or in a tournament, then the limit is cast in stone
I don't really care about points values - write the scenario, tell the opponent the ideas behind it and let them take what they feel is appropriate for the game.
Considering how everyone moans about the points costs being wrong and needing changing, going on about being under or over seems like a waste of time anyhow.
I dunno man. Can appreciate where your coming from there, but the points *generally* are a good way of making equal armies, and the more equal the armies, the better the game IMO. Without using points at all, one guy might inadvertently bring twice as much stuff as the other and stomp him without any effort.
I like how the rhetoric around the hard limit camp is increasingly stronger as this thread goes on.
We've moved from various well reasoned arguments why they should be solid to claiming people who don't abide by them are stupid, dictionary definitions, and aspersions on the math and cognitive abilities of those over.
Go to the next step in the ITG playbook - "Once, someone brought me a list that was 1502 points. I cut off his hands, because that's how I roll, and everyone in the store cheered me on."
Listen, guys, play how you like. Don't be so defensive about it.
Ouze wrote: I like how the rhetoric around the hard limit camp is increasingly stronger as this thread goes on.
We've moved from various well reasoned arguments why they should be solid to claiming people who don't abide by them are stupid, dictionary definitions, and aspersions on the math and cognitive abilities of those over.
Go to the next step in the ITG playbook - "Once, someone brought me a list that was 1502 points. I cut off his hands, because that's how I roll, and everyone in the store cheered me on."
Listen, guys, play how you like. Don't be so defensive about it.
Ouze wrote: I like how the rhetoric around the hard limit camp is increasingly stronger as this thread goes on.
We've moved from various well reasoned arguments why they should be solid to claiming people who don't abide by them are stupid, dictionary definitions, and aspersions on the math and cognitive abilities of those over.
Go to the next step in the ITG playbook - "Once, someone brought me a list that was 1502 points. I cut off his hands, because that's how I roll, and everyone in the store cheered me on."
Listen, guys, play how you like. Don't be so defensive about it.
Fo realz. Seriously.
It is very simple. You contact the nearest commissar and they "educate" the individual with a bullet to the head.
I only posted the definition because people kept going on that a limit means it should be near to it. If you play over the points you are not within the limit. That is fact and you need to recognize that you have broken a rule just as if I had moved 6.5" instead of 6". We can agree to forgive about the breaking of a rule but if you feel entitled to this breaking of rules it is an indicator of your thought processes and character (if you take that as an insult then that is you own mindset there is not actually an insult there).
Now going over 1-10 points and going over ~100 points is a totally different thing but without a clearly define line where is that limit? As IG I can get a lot out of 5 pts (extra flamer or flamer=>melta) so should a SM player be allowed to go 20 pts over so they can get a plasma cannon? You can easily come under points and you may have to be under points by a significant margin to do so. What gives you the right (entitles you) that you should instead be given extra points so you do not have to sacrifice? What led the person to believe that they are entitled to break the limit? If you can answer those questions well enough so I can understand the mindset behind it after having read the definition of a limit (as many of the answers in this thread directly contradicted the definition) then I will reconsider my position and try a list 1 point over (GASP).
I can definitely see how some might feel it is only fair to stay under the points limit, I mean, when I build my DE lists, let's say I want to squeeze in another reavers squad, but after putting together the rest of the list, I realised I was some points over, so I take that reavers squad out, and shuffle points around until I'm under the limit. What I'm saying is that it's not so simple as "drop a melta bomb" "take an unit out" "drop 1 model", etc, people who build their lists to fit under the limit have made their own sacrifice elsewhere. It's kinda disrespectful to the guy who took out what he wanted to field just so he's under limit, then you turn around and say "I don't want to sacrifice anything in my list, it's only a few over, no biggies, right? High fives?".
Though, personally, friendly games, I'd allow a few points over, my goal in friendly games isn't victory(only) but also just having fun with friends. Games with strangers, stick under the point limit unless agreed to go certain points over.
Ok, Lets say my Tau list is 1502.
Well y'know what is 2 points? Neuroweb jammer, something that makes my entire unit gain "Gets Hot" potentially game breaking.
A limit if for a reason, If you cant do a pre-agreed upon number, then go up, i will too, but do not try to make this one side
Honestly I don't see what the big deal is if I let someone go a little over the limit. I try to not do it, fairly easy to knock off a gaunt somewhere, but I honestly don't care if that Stormraven has ceramite plating or not.
Byte wrote: Your talking gear... it could be the diffence of being able to fit in a game changing unit.. to often this conversation restricts itself to gear. It could be whole squad of something.
Then play without an entire squad. You don't get to break the rules just because it would be harder to win if you don't.
Presumptuous much? I don't remember asking a question or implying I break rules. Take a second and stop looking down your nose and read my post. You are saying to me the point I was making. Some players expect to run an entire extra unit that ends up only being 5 points over. Over the limit by 5 or whatever points is over the limit period. Be it extra points from a squad with no wargear or a single melta bomb.
Byte wrote: Your talking gear... it could be the diffence of being able to fit in a game changing unit.. to often this conversation restricts itself to gear. It could be whole squad of something.
Then play without an entire squad. You don't get to break the rules just because it would be harder to win if you don't.
Presumptuous much? I don't remember asking a question or implying I break rules. Take a second and stop looking down your nose and read my post. You are saying to me the point I was making. Some players expect to run an entire extra unit that ends up only being 5 points over. Over the limit by 5 or whatever points is over the limit period. Be it extra points from a squad with no wargear or a single melta bomb.
It's harder to pick fights and split hairs if you're not looking down you're nose though.
I think this all belongs in another thread...
"My opponent's list is 5 points over. 40k first world problems."
Peregrine wrote: Depends on where you are, and if it's quota day for the police. Driving even 1 mph over the speed limit is still speeding, and you can still get a ticket for it.
And in what unreasonable country would that be?
Fixed speed cameras in Oz have a 2km/hr tolerance, which is only a little over a mile/hr.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kain wrote: Honestly I don't see what the big deal is if I let someone go a little over the limit. I try to not do it, fairly easy to knock off a gaunt somewhere, but I honestly don't care if that Stormraven has ceramite plating or not.
If you let someone go over the limit, that's not a big deal at all. The point people are making is simply that players shouldn't expect to be able to go over.
Byte wrote: Your talking gear... it could be the diffence of being able to fit in a game changing unit.. to often this conversation restricts itself to gear. It could be whole squad of something.
Then play without an entire squad. You don't get to break the rules just because it would be harder to win if you don't.
Presumptuous much? I don't remember asking a question or implying I break rules. Take a second and stop looking down your nose and read my post. You are saying to me the point I was making. Some players expect to run an entire extra unit that ends up only being 5 points over. Over the limit by 5 or whatever points is over the limit period. Be it extra points from a squad with no wargear or a single melta bomb.
It's harder to pick fights and split hairs if you're not looking down you're nose though.
I think this all belongs in another thread...
"My opponent's list is 5 points over. 40k first world problems."
Hmmm... so pointing out that someone is talking down somehow makes me smug?
Part of the skill of this Game is how you put together an army list.
You have to use the Points you have efficiently with the army you have. that's part of the game.
Well... if I would have known what a s***-storm this would have turned into I don't think I ever would have started the topic (although I must say watching it is rather amusing).
In the context I asked this question (which is probably not how many people play) I never know how many points we're playing to or what role I'll need to fill until I'm at the place we'll be playing. I've played 2000 points vs 2 1000 pt armies, I've filled in 500 pts for someone else who could only field 1000, I've played 4 way free for alls at 1000 pts a side (That's really fun, since we house rule you can shoot into close combats if they don't involve your units)...
I usually just see a guy who isn't playing, ask "how many players, how many points per army?" Then make my list. After I spend some time making it I'll pitch something like "hey, you said 1500, but my list is 1503. You want me to re-organize it or is that ok?" I don't walk into a game expecting my list will be ok, I ask whether he wants to wait longer while I mess with optimizing my list more vs just slapping down my first draft and rolling with it.
Kangodo wrote: I'm not going to make him lose his only Power Fist in a tactical squad because he is 1-5 points over the list.
Nor am I denying him a LC on his Razorback.
Why not? Why should someone get to go over the point limit to have a power fist instead of a power axe for their AP 2, or a LC Razorback instead of a HB Razorback? We're not even talking about having to drop an entire unit and be 100 points under the limit, just having to settle for less than the best upgrades.
just throwing this out there but if he is OK with the other person being a few points over then what is why someone should be able to be over the points limit, it is only OK to be over the points limit by any amount if both players agree that is it fine, otherwise the other person should drop something. If both players agree then anything is allowed (as long as it is not a tournament) in my books.
Byte wrote: Your talking gear... it could be the diffence of being able to fit in a game changing unit.. to often this conversation restricts itself to gear. It could be whole squad of something.
Then play without an entire squad. You don't get to break the rules just because it would be harder to win if you don't.
Presumptuous much? I don't remember asking a question or implying I break rules. Take a second and stop looking down your nose and read my post. You are saying to me the point I was making. Some players expect to run an entire extra unit that ends up only being 5 points over. Over the limit by 5 or whatever points is over the limit period. Be it extra points from a squad with no wargear or a single melta bomb.
It's harder to pick fights and split hairs if you're not looking down you're nose though.
I think this all belongs in another thread...
"My opponent's list is 5 points over. 40k first world problems."
Hmmm... so pointing out that someone is talking down somehow makes me smug?
Honestly I think getting the points right is part of the skill so no dice on my part.
Getting to the 1500 point or other and sticking to it, having to cut and having to make changes and possibly totally readjust your strategy, fething hell people take that away you are taking away a sliver of the skill and nature of it to me.
dementedwombat wrote:Well... if I would have known what a s***-storm this would have turned into I don't think I ever would have started the topic (although I must say watching it is rather amusing).
In the context I asked this question (which is probably not how many people play) I never know how many points we're playing to or what role I'll need to fill until I'm at the place we'll be playing. I've played 2000 points vs 2 1000 pt armies, I've filled in 500 pts for someone else who could only field 1000, I've played 4 way free for alls at 1000 pts a side (That's really fun, since we house rule you can shoot into close combats if they don't involve your units)...
I usually just see a guy who isn't playing, ask "how many players, how many points per army?" Then make my list. After I spend some time making it I'll pitch something like "hey, you said 1500, but my list is 1503. You want me to re-organize it or is that ok?" I don't walk into a game expecting my list will be ok, I ask whether he wants to wait longer while I mess with optimizing my list more vs just slapping down my first draft and rolling with it.
Kangodo wrote: I'm not going to make him lose his only Power Fist in a tactical squad because he is 1-5 points over the list.
Nor am I denying him a LC on his Razorback.
Why not? Why should someone get to go over the point limit to have a power fist instead of a power axe for their AP 2, or a LC Razorback instead of a HB Razorback? We're not even talking about having to drop an entire unit and be 100 points under the limit, just having to settle for less than the best upgrades.
just throwing this out there but if he is OK with the other person being a few points over then what is why someone should be able to be over the points limit, it is only OK to be over the points limit by any amount if both players agree that is it fine, otherwise the other person should drop something. If both players agree then anything is allowed (as long as it is not a tournament) in my books.
Byte wrote: Your talking gear... it could be the diffence of being able to fit in a game changing unit.. to often this conversation restricts itself to gear. It could be whole squad of something.
Then play without an entire squad. You don't get to break the rules just because it would be harder to win if you don't.
Presumptuous much? I don't remember asking a question or implying I break rules. Take a second and stop looking down your nose and read my post. You are saying to me the point I was making. Some players expect to run an entire extra unit that ends up only being 5 points over. Over the limit by 5 or whatever points is over the limit period. Be it extra points from a squad with no wargear or a single melta bomb.
It's harder to pick fights and split hairs if you're not looking down you're nose though.
I think this all belongs in another thread...
"My opponent's list is 5 points over. 40k first world problems."
Hmmm... so pointing out that someone is talking down somehow makes me smug?
Nope, I was agreeing with you.
I think there is a significant miss-communication then as firstly if the opponent and you agree on a 1500. point game that is different than agreeing to a 1500+/-10 game. With a group of friends you can have an implicit understanding and there will be no need for the commissariat to get involved.
With a random group of internet people or PUG there is no such implicit understanding and you should state that it is a 1500+/-10 game. Most people as seen in this thread have the implicit understanding that there is a 1500. pts limit and will follow that what the poll shows is many of them are then lenient on others.
It is actually kind of ridiculous to show up with a list over points according to the poll as 40% of the people polled will not play you with said list.
If you are making the list right then and there you will probably have much better luck but OP that might require a new poll with different wording. You might in fact want to try what I do which is have bracketed lists and a folder. I will bring a 2 lists (competitive and easy modes) at 500, 750, 1000, 1200, 1500, 1850, and 2000 pts with me in a folder under my codex in my carrying case. If a new player wants to play 641 I will use the 500 pts easy mode list and play at a 141 handicap. I am not out to kill new players anyways and the handicap usually helps them absorb oops moments better.
Also I do find it funny that most comments about being looked down upon have an implicit element of martyrdom to them. This element usually implies the one who feels they are being looked down on in fact feels they are in the right and superior to their opposition.
Having said that sorry if I poured gasoline on the fire before but I couldn't help messing with all the people who kept going limit /= limit, if you bothered to read the definitions I highlighted you would see it was a pun (your breaking the limit has pushed me to the limit of my sufferance).
I think it's worth pointing out that most of the time I get the question, "Hey can I be X points over?", it's from someone who, upon agreeing to play a game, asks me what army I play then runs off to tailor a list.
Is it that hard to come up with a 500 pt, 1000 pt, 1500 pt, etc. list before heading to your friendly local?
My newest line is unfortunately, "I made my list at home, before I knew what army I'd be running against. I'd appreciate it if you built a list with the same considerations". Unless both players are running tailored lists, I'd say it's pretty bad form to tailor a list at your FLGS. It pretty much makes you TFG, and sadly it's a trend that I'm seeing more and more lately. Time to start a thread...
Playing at the shop or FLGS, I'm fairly strict. You have a cap, you know it in advance, and it's not that hard. Maybe I'm sitting at 1490 because I couldn't fit something in with that 10 points. If my opponent then has 1510, well I could have easily done something with 20 points, but now it's a back and forth tweeking the lists.
If an opponent looked over my list, and I had failed my maths and turned out I was at 1501, I would feel it completely in their rights to ask me to adjust something to bring it to 1500 or less. I expect the same from people I play with.
HOWEVER, playing at home with my brother or one of my buddies, we do everything a bit more lax. We do have a house rule of up to 1%, but you have to explain why you had to go over. The explanation doesn't have to be super air tight, but it can't be because you wanted to run 1515 because you could. Even still we tend to have more 1485 lists than 1515.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: I think it's worth pointing out that most of the time I get the question, "Hey can I be X points over?", it's from someone who, upon agreeing to play a game, asks me what army I play then runs off to tailor a list.
If you're playing against a bro at home or a mate in the garage, play 1523 on 1498 and enjoy.
However when someone goes to a club or FLGS and then puts the pressure on the guys following list creation norms to allow him have an unfair advantage, I draw the line. I'm against anything that creates a negative culture of making rule abiding players feel like they will be cast in a negative light if they don't allow a lazy player to get something beyond what he should have brought to the game.
Not a point over, even if it's just against friends.
It's a limit for a reason like so many have already said, and if I go over the limit, it's off to the drawing board again until I find an army I'm happy with that's under or exactly the limit. And let me tell ya, there's a lot of times I go 1-2 points over the point limit with my necrons. Bloody 13 points warriors, such a weird number.
I like to allow my opponent margin for error, but unless I JUST wrote the list and the opponent is in a hurry to start, I always err on the side of exactly or a few points under (sometimes my army list is 1985 or 1990 for SM, for example).
Griddlelol wrote:Also, the poll is rather biased. It makes out that by following the rules that two people have agreed on, I'm some how unreasonable.
Yeah, I find this curious as well.
I take a very hard line on points (we have a points system for a reason), but I wouldn't necessarily refuse to play someone because of it. Heck, I've played games with points handicaps on purpose on more than one occasion. As such, the poll isn't sufficiently nuanced.
But if I have to choose only one option, it's got to be the top one. Points limits are limits just as much as the limit of only moving 6" (Not six and a little bit more), or the limit of melta being half the range of the weapon, or the limit of only getting to do stuff on your turn or take units from your codex (or limited allies). The game is defined by its rules, not the rules subject to what one person decides on at any given time.
YEah,... and really, if you think about it, those games where you are at a bit of a points deficit compared to you opponent are probably games that you learned the most from, b/c they were more of a challenge. I mean, in a real battle, there is nothing that says that both sides of the conflict will be even... sometimes, you have to face an overpowering force, but when you do and triumph, it makes the victory all the more sweet
hotsauceman1 wrote: Ok, Lets say my Tau list is 1502.
Well y'know what is 2 points? Neuroweb jammer, something that makes my entire unit gain "Gets Hot" potentially game breaking.
A limit if for a reason, If you cant do a pre-agreed upon number, then go up, i will too, but do not try to make this one side
Perhaps. But would you say that every possible Warhammer 40K army list from all available Codex books is perfectly balanced at 1500 exact?
It seems to me that the "power-level" of different armies (and different lists within an army) swings some 10% to 15% each way from the nominal point-value anyhow.
Ouze wrote: I like how the rhetoric around the hard limit camp is increasingly stronger as this thread goes on.
We've moved from various well reasoned arguments why they should be solid to claiming people who don't abide by them are stupid, dictionary definitions, and aspersions on the math and cognitive abilities of those over.
Isn't that an almost natural progression of any discussion when one side presents well reasoned arguments, per your own admission, and the other side keeps insisting that "it isn't a big deal"?
Griddlelol wrote:Also, the poll is rather biased. It makes out that by following the rules that two people have agreed on, I'm some how unreasonable.
Yeah, I find this curious as well.
I take a very hard line on points (we have a points system for a reason), but I wouldn't necessarily refuse to play someone because of it. Heck, I've played games with points handicaps on purpose on more than one occasion. As such, the poll isn't sufficiently nuanced.
But if I have to choose only one option, it's got to be the top one. Points limits are limits just as much as the limit of only moving 6" (Not six and a little bit more), or the limit of melta being half the range of the weapon, or the limit of only getting to do stuff on your turn or take units from your codex (or limited allies). The game is defined by its rules, not the rules subject to what one person decides on at any given time.
YEah,... and really, if you think about it, those games where you are at a bit of a points deficit compared to you opponent are probably games that you learned the most from, b/c they were more of a challenge. I mean, in a real battle, there is nothing that says that both sides of the conflict will be even... sometimes, you have to face an overpowering force, but when you do and triumph, it makes the victory all the more sweet
So from this thread I have gotten that I am apparently the devil incarnate for not really bugging opponents whose lists are slightly over the limit to play exactly or under the points limit. Huh...
I am fairly simple on how I handle that issue. Everyone around here plays exact or under. On the one time a guy came up to me and explained that his list was slightly over, I inquired how much. I looked over his list and asked him, very carefully, "Is there absolutely nothing you can do to make it exact or under, easily?" He said no, and I said fine. I then pulled out 1 extra 'nid and matched his list on price, exactly. I told him that these lists would be balanced, and he agreed.
The thing I ALWAYS do with a codex, is what i call the 5-0 method. Whenever I run through a codex, I never go for the "full package". I build each unit to an acceptable point, and make sure that each one ends in point price of either a 5 or 0. That way, no matter what happens, I can quickly configure a list that will always end up being exact.
1. Did you agree with a 1999 point game or a 2000 point game? 2. Do you not want to play against double FOC? Make that point clear. 3. Do you not want to play against more than 4 hell drakes? Make that point clear.
You can play what if games all day, or just tell the other person what kind of game you are interested in playing. No sense in losing sleep over it.
kronk wrote: If you want to play the victim, sure. You can absolutely take it that way.
Or, being a reasonable and rational person, you can accept that what you and your group enjoy is not necessarily what other groups enjoy.
And that's 100% ok.
Happy gaming.
Some of the opinions here seem to disapprove of people like me who don't care about our opponent's going over (heck I can't be assed to call someone out on cheating more often than not) for encouraging bad play.
It's mostly because after carefully packing and carrying around hundreds of nids, orks, chaos, and valhallans, shuffling through a binder to get a list, carefully unpacking all the models, and of course making a multihour drive across hellish traffic I really just want to play, I lack the energy to quibble over minor cheating. Especially not when I'm going to have to deploy model spam armies and spread them out to coherence for big games. After what seems like an eternity of setting up and laser pointing to ensure straightness at that point my brain really doesn't want to go through an argument.
I'm okay with going a little bit over, but conditionally.
For one, if it's a friendly game and you threw a list together in the last ten minutes, then I don't care if you're a couple points over. So long as it's a friendly game, go ahead, have fun with your 2003 point list.
That said, if it's a more official setting and you've had time to build your list, then you should have had time to figure out how to build a list at or under the points limit. If you've had a week to put together a list, then you've had a week to tinker with the units and hit that limit dead-on. I can sympathize if you play a codex with genuinely weird point values (Eldar, Tau, possibly Necrons) but still, you've had the time, drop a piece of wargear or a model from a squad.
Oh, and zero sympathy if you play Marines of any flavor. Seriously, almost every point value ends in a 5 or 0.
Selym wrote: I go by the guidelines of 5% either way, and trying to chop off upgrades until you're at the points limit if possible.
5%? For 1500, that's 75 points, for some army, you can buy an extra cake with that, and probably some posh tea to go with that! That's quite a very generous margin to give.
Not saying you're wrong or anything, just surprised!
I personally dont mind one single point over, as a WOC player in fantasy my units mostly get odds here and there and cause me to have weird costs.
And my Eldar allies cost 161 aswell...However, prefer to stick within the limits myself, my Tau list is at 1k exactly despite something that is "less than optimal" but it filled out the points, and my WoC list is at 1996 out of 2000, because screw odds.
Selym wrote: I go by the guidelines of 5% either way, and trying to chop off upgrades until you're at the points limit if possible.
5%? For 1500, that's 75 points, for some army, you can buy an extra cake with that, and probably some posh tea to go with that! That's quite a very generous margin to give.
Not saying you're wrong or anything, just surprised!
Right? Thanks for the extra unit of 19 gretchin and a runtherd.
Makumba wrote: But what if you play 1999 and he goes 1 point over and brings a double FoC list with 4-5 helldrakes ?
At that point he isn't doing it accidentally, he is doing it with full intent to piss you off. If he goes over the point limit like that, on purpose, just so he can take 4-5 helldrakes (which, I don't think I would play regardless. I don't see that as a fun game for my foot guard...) then you need to have a small chat with this man about sportsmanship...
Kain wrote: Some of the opinions here seem to disapprove of people like me who don't care about our opponent's going over (heck I can't be assed to call someone out on cheating more often than not) for encouraging bad play.
Disapproving of opponents going over is not the same as disapproving of people who don't care if their opponents go over.
You're reading something into the thread that just isn't there. It's entirely up to you what you choose to allow or not allow from your opponent.
I think saying 1-10 won't give you good info, I think a poll going 1-3, 4-~7, 8-15. I'm ok with MAYBE 2 points over, but mostly am pretty strict with the points limit. It's a limit, not a round number.
4 points is about my limit, I personally play same points or under, but if my opponent is like 4 points over im okay with that, 5 points over and you can probably drop a melta bomb, combi weapon, or something.
conker249 wrote: 4 points is about my limit, I personally play same points or under, but if my opponent is like 4 points over im okay with that, 5 points over and you can probably drop a melta bomb, combi weapon, or something.
Why can't you drop that melta bomb or combi weapon at 4 points over?
Kain wrote: It's mostly because after carefully packing and carrying around hundreds of nids, orks, chaos, and valhallans, shuffling through a binder to get a list, carefully unpacking all the models, and of course making a multihour drive across hellish traffic I really just want to play, I lack the energy to quibble over minor cheating. Especially not when I'm going to have to deploy model spam armies and spread them out to coherence for big games. After what seems like an eternity of setting up and laser pointing to ensure straightness at that point my brain really doesn't want to go through an argument.
This.
As for going over purposely and then doubling FOC - at this point I'll probably ask to switch my warboss for Mekboss Buzzgob. RAW he comes riding a Stompa, and is a legal HQ for regular 40k Ork armies. Stompa > Helldrakes.
Selym wrote: I go by the guidelines of 5% either way, and trying to chop off upgrades until you're at the points limit if possible.
5%? For 1500, that's 75 points, for some army, you can buy an extra cake with that, and probably some posh tea to go with that! That's quite a very generous margin to give.
Not saying you're wrong or anything, just surprised!
Right? Thanks for the extra unit of 19 gretchin and a runtherd.
Note the "chop off upgrades until you're at the points cost" part.
I'm fine with 5 pts either way (some codex's are frustrating with odd point items that make it difficult to get to a round number. Obviously I let my opponent know in advance (or the other way round)
It's not about being all evil and Rarrrrrr so angry, when I say I don't like it when someone is a point over. It's just, there is always a way to get yourself at or under the points limit, and going over it, just isn't playing fair. -just- taking one more meltabomb, weapon, man, whatever, might be the thing that scores you the game. It's unlikely, but it's better to just avoid it altogether.
As long as the army looks reasonable for the amount of points we agreed upon for the game..I truly can care less at any overage, but I play with friends and fellow military vets, so we don't sweat the small stuff, just play and have fun.
conker249 wrote: 4 points is about my limit, I personally play same points or under, but if my opponent is like 4 points over im okay with that, 5 points over and you can probably drop a melta bomb, combi weapon, or something.
Why can't you drop that melta bomb or combi weapon at 4 points over?
im not a stickler for points, most if not all my games are friendly based, so ill ask if they can, and if they dont they dont, ill still drink a beer with them afterwards.
I'm fine with someone being one point over in casual games.
But, I do my best to be at 1500pts exact, or even under, and I expect my opponents to do the same. I'm currently running a list that's 1495pts, because I don't have any Melta Bombs laying around to throw on one of my sergeants, nor do I have anything else i could buy that would keep me on the points limit.
It's generally good sportsmanship to be on or under the points limit.
As for WYSIWYG, I'm pretty lax about it, mostly because my vindicators do not have Stormbolters modeled on, as I built them during 3rd/4th Edition, before they came with them baseline. (also, I can't tell most Xenos weapons apart at a glance, for the most part. Well, lances are obvious, but other than that, beats the hell out of me.)
Selym wrote: I go by the guidelines of 5% either way, and trying to chop off upgrades until you're at the points limit if possible.
5%? For 1500, that's 75 points, for some army, you can buy an extra cake with that, and probably some posh tea to go with that! That's quite a very generous margin to give.
Not saying you're wrong or anything, just surprised!
Right? Thanks for the extra unit of 19 gretchin and a runtherd.
Note the "chop off upgrades until you're at the points cost" part.
It includes chopping off whatever you can.
Oh! Now that's just no fun! I'll still take a venom though, tyvm.
If you have no issue playing with someone who is a little over, that's fine. What isn't fine is making your list, discovering that it is one point over, and saying "eh, whatever, it's one point, no one will care." At that point, you are basically forcing any polite player to let you play with extra points or unfairly make them look like a hardass when they aren't. You build your list below the points limit. If it comes out over, you adjust. It doesn't matter how much you are over, you just don't go over. If the other guy goes over, and you really don't care., it's none of my business and you can do what you want. But it is wrong to build a list in advance, find it is a couple points over, and brin it in anyway, expecting your opponent to be ok with it and essentially pressuring them into letting you do that or look like TFG.
loota boy wrote: If you have no issue playing with someone who is a little over, that's fine. What isn't fine is making your list, discovering that it is one point over, and saying "eh, whatever, it's one point, no one will care." At that point, you are basically forcing any polite player to let you play with extra points or unfairly make them look like a hardass when they aren't. You build your list below the points limit. If it comes out over, you adjust. It doesn't matter how much you are over, you just don't go over. If the other guy goes over, and you really don't care., it's none of my business and you can do what you want. But it is wrong to build a list in advance, find it is a couple points over, and brin it in anyway, expecting your opponent to be ok with it and essentially pressuring them into letting you do that or look like TFG.
+1, this! It drives me nuts when gamers force other gamers into awkward social situation out of laziness/selfishness. We, as a group, already have enough of that in RL. Lets end nerd on nerd crimes and play by the rules.
We, as a group, already have enough of that in RL. Lets end nerd on nerd crimes and play by the rules.
We, as a group, already have enough bean counters and nit-pickers to deal with in RL. Lets end nerd on nerd crimes and stop letting quarrels over a few points or rules get into the way of having some tabletop fun.
Personally, for me, if there is a way for the person to drop it down to the right level (ie drop a weapon/model/option) then I would prefer that happen, simply for the sake of a fair game (or have the other add something)
Again, if you don't care about a few points, and your friends don't care, fine. That's how you play, I couldn't care less. But you should NEVER bring a list that is slightly over to a pick up game or to a game where you don't know the person well enough to know he doesn't care, and even then only if it was accidental and can't be easily fixed.
To build my lists I go backwards then most others, from what I've seen any way. I start with a general idea that will fill half to three quarters of the list and include my mandatory HQ and Troops, then take the remainder of points to buy support for the core force or reinforce the cores individual teams with more boots on the ground. It has the nice advantage of having a bunch of 'seed' lists that can be flushed out to try new strategies while keeping to something familiar. From what I've been able to tell others generate a big list then trim down. Doesn't seem wise to me to start with a complete and cut but rather to know you have the pieces you wanted and a few shinys to go with 'em. So rarely do I have trouble with points. I like the idea of playing scenarios with uneven lists but everything else about the game designed to balance it out as a tactical/strategic faux simulator, though I've never done one. I don't do tournaments so no problems there. The games not balanced enough and probably couldn't be either for me to spend money for one.
loota boy wrote: Again, if you don't care about a few points, and your friends don't care, fine. That's how you play, I couldn't care less. But you should NEVER bring a list that is slightly over to a pick up game or to a game where you don't know the person well enough to know he doesn't care, and even then only if it was accidental and can't be easily fixed.
Yeah, that's pretty much how I feel.
Tabletop gaming is different from video gaming in that the rules governing a tabletop game's behaviour are controlled entirely by the human minds involved. If all parties involved agree on something, that's the way it is. Of course, not everyone agrees with each other, which is why random games with strangers should be expected to follow the standard rules as closely as possible. The standard rules are official, which makes nearly everyone agree that they are the default. Deviating from the default is fine so long as everyone involved agrees. But not everyone agrees.
