Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

On another forum I encountered a thread on dirty tricks. Courious to see what was contained therin I loked and was amazed to see the sheer number of cheating buggers that were posting within the thread and how blatent some of these people were. Some of the most outragous cheats suggested were:

knowing the measure of your finger tip to elbow
measuring angles and then using pythagorean thery to get the correct distance
over guessing cannons

Those were the ones off the top of my head.
Has anyone here ever encountered these types and how did you deal with them? Myself I had a coworker who used all of these and encouraged others to. Pissed me off but not much I could do so I discouraged it when I saw it from players and tried to avoid playing him when I could.

There are some things that you'll never be able to counter, like the tricks you've just mentioned. However, these in particular aren't necessarily game-breakers; at the end of third edition, I was so good at guessing ranges that I incurred redshirt ire at Games Day 2001 in Baltimore. I was helping my teammates guess mortar ranges, and when I told him to guess 23 and 3/4 inches, and that landed the shot right on the Sybarite's head, they were NOT happy. No tricks, just good estimation skills. You can't even really tell that from cheating, even though I wasn't.

Honestly, the only kind of cheating you can worry about, or need to worry about, are things like incorrect rules usage, fudging numbers, fudging die rolls, fudging movement or things of that nature. Anything you simply cannot catch, so you just can't worry about it.

efarrer wrote:knowing the measure of your finger tip to elbow
measuring angles and then using pythagorean thery to get the correct distance

Wait, so these guys literally lay their arm on the table, and measure at right angles the rise and run and then calculate the result. Those are both blatant pre-measuring. Of course, sometimes we mutually agree to allow pre-measuring, so in that situation it's okay.

over guessing cannons

I flat-out called my opponents cheaters to their faces when they deliberately over-guess cannons. They got the message, and don't do it any more.

Overguessing cannons is cheating? Can you explain this?

When people premeasure their elbow, tell them you have
something premeasured you'd like to throw down on the table.
You're just afraid it might tip over the table.

malfred wrote:Overguessing cannons is cheating? Can you explain this?

I'm thinking it's overguessing to hit a unit that is out of LOS behind the "target."

malfred wrote:
When people premeasure their elbow, tell them you have
something premeasured you'd like to throw down on the table.
You're just afraid it might tip over the table.

All my friends know that I'm under strict medical orders not to lift heavy objects, so this wouldn't work for me.

I've been told I put a mean look on when someone is trying to cheat me.

I guess the problem I have with people trying to cheat me is, they still don't win so what have they accomplished?

If you're gonna cheat, at least win. lol

I have seen guys who have a 'Nid- swarm army, and even when told NO template/Blast markers were in my army, they consistently measured 2" between EVERY fig every turn(with Tape Measure). This may be in the rules, but I seem to remember a guy by the name of Mackenro(Tennis Player-Maybe not spelled right) who used similar'head games' to distract his opponent.

Cheating....not really.

Make me want to take a Crowbar to his head.....definately.

We just have to be careful about whom we play, if we have a choice....

"measuring angles and then using pythagorean thery to get the correct distance "
Measuring angles is cheating, sure, but simply using the Pythagorean theorem is not. Sure you can't be very exact, but I use the theorem in my head sometimes to see if I have a chance. I really dont consider it cheating. It merely helps in guessing, and honestly doesnt come up as being applicable very often.

A few of my friends and I have been called cheaters behind our backs, usually after a rogue trader win. I believe the win isn't worth anything if you cheated to get it. I caught one player in our local store with loaded dice and called him out immediately in front of several other players. He didn't come back after that, and I don't blame him. Most people I've met who try to pul outrageous crap are usually by themselves and become scarce when the light is turned on them.

I use one cube of dice, all identical, and call out what I'm rolling for every time I roll. I count out the proper number of dice in front of my opponent, put them in a cup and roll them into a dice tray. If one rolls out on to the table or floor I call out whether I'll take the roll. If a dice is cocked (rare in the tray), I try and balance another dice on top and keep the roll if it stays. When I'm rolling many to hit or wound dice, I remove the misses and leave the successful rolls for my opponent to witness. I don't ever lean on the table or hold the tape over it until I've nominated a target or guessed range. I don't want anyone to have an excuse to claim shenanigans or call me a cheater.

Almost always when my opponent can see how I play, and that I am watching them closely, they don't try anything egregious. That's not to say I haven't ever been fooled, I'm not a paranoid by nature. But if you bring your A-game and have a good working knowledge of the rules most cheaters straighten up a little at least.

Most annoying cheating in my eyes is moving.
"I move it there... no there... (pushes figure a bit forward and backward)... no I think I move it there."
And you see the figure wandering and wandering and then think "I should have placed a mark on the starting point.". Winning inches in souch a way just makes me want to do things which I want not to mention but they always include physikal pain of my opponent.

Loaded dice? Really? lol that is hilarious.

Not sure about getting a tray and a shaker, although it's probably a good idea on those boards where the dice shoot everywhere or don't roll just slide.

Dice cups are good. I'll have to consider doing that. When all else fails you can
hide your leader inside it, cowering like the inferior commander he is...

LOL It is NOT a dice cup. Its a fortified command bunker...........

If some tournaments are to be believed, it's a drop pod...

It's not a dice cup, it is not a command bunker, it is not a drop pod...

it's an anti-greasy fingerd, cheetos eatin, fatty fat playing a fzorgle list shield.

Most annoying cheating in my eyes is moving.
"I move it there... no there... (pushes figure a bit forward and backward)... no I think I move it there."


I agree. Or the person who moves a tank, a couple of infantry units and a dread, then goes back to the tank and tells me he doesn't want it there after all. I tell that player too bad, as there is no way to tell for certain where the tank was originally. Or the guy who tries to target something completely out of the arc of one side of his tank, then asks if he can turn to optimize his shooting.

Ooops...sorry Symbio Joe, I need to learn how to quote.

Just try to make a working replica of a Bolter.
Take it to a "Cheaters" table.
Ask him/her if they think you can rapid-fire it at them, then Charge them?
You are wearing Termie Armour, so wait to hear their response before you blow them away with your witty diatribe.

I did say a WORKING replica......

You know... a sock full of 2nd Edition dreadnoughts would stop this problem real quick.

djones520 wrote:You know... a sock full of 2nd Edition dreadnoughts would stop this problem real quick.

As it happens, you can hold the old 2nd Ed Carnifex in such a way as to have the talons stick out between your fingers, with the main body held inside your hand. Makes an excellent set of brass knuckles. Even better if you happen to own one that's still made of lead.

BYE

I agree. Or the person who moves a tank, a couple of infantry units and a dread, then goes back to the tank and tells me he doesn't want it there after all. I tell that player too bad, as there is no way to tell for certain where the tank was originally.

Well thats against the rules anyway. you can move a model/unit around until you find the right spot you want it in within its legal movement range all you want, but once you have gone on to another model you cannot go back and move one you already moved as per the rules.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

djones520 wrote:You know... a sock full of 2nd Edition dreadnoughts would stop this problem real quick.

As it happens, you can hold the old 2nd Ed Carnifex in such a way as to have the talons stick out between your fingers, with the main body held inside your hand. Makes an excellent set of brass knuckles. Even better if you happen to own one that's still made of lead.

BYE

I've got two of the Screamer Killers... When I get back to the States, I think I'll bring them with me to some tournaments.

The Power Cosmic wrote:

malfred wrote:Overguessing cannons is cheating? Can you explain this?

I'm thinking it's overguessing to hit a unit that is out of LOS behind the "target."

Overguessing with a cannon isn't cheating, or even unsporting, per Gav and an article he wrote for WD.

Yeah I thought the main purpose of picking out a model for cannons is the direction, not the range. Over/underguesing, taking the bounce into account, was all good.

PenguinDude wrote:"measuring angles and then using pythagorean thery to get the correct distance "
Measuring angles is cheating, sure, but simply using the Pythagorean theorem is not. Sure you can't be very exact, but I use the theorem in my head sometimes to see if I have a chance. I really dont consider it cheating. It merely helps in guessing, and honestly doesnt come up as being applicable very often.

What was suggested was measuring A+B and then using math to get C (which was felt to be legal by the person because it didn't measure the path). I use the method you suggested all the time. I have no problem with that (and in fact control one variable by knowing exactly where I placed my artillery on the table). In that case it's fine, but as soon as you measure a single thing on the table it ceases to be fine.

mauleed wrote:

The Power Cosmic wrote:

malfred wrote:Overguessing cannons is cheating? Can you explain this?

I'm thinking it's overguessing to hit a unit that is out of LOS behind the "target."

Overguessing with a cannon isn't cheating, or even unsporting, per Gav and an article he wrote for WD.

I'd have sworn that there was an FAQ which forbade the practice of deliberatly choosing to overshoot into a target outside of LOS, and indeed as I read the second line of the section on cannons I see that the only valid targets are in LOS.

efarrer wrote:

mauleed wrote:

The Power Cosmic wrote:

malfred wrote:Overguessing cannons is cheating? Can you explain this?

I'm thinking it's overguessing to hit a unit that is out of LOS behind the "target."

Overguessing with a cannon isn't cheating, or even unsporting, per Gav and an article he wrote for WD.

I'd have sworn that there was an FAQ which forbade the practice of deliberatly choosing to overshoot into a target outside of LOS, and indeed as I read the second line of the section on cannons I see that the only valid targets are in LOS.

Ok the only thing I could find in the FAQ is the note reminding players not to take actions they know will fail, which is where the deliberate overguess falls in my eyes. Guess as close as you want to to the original target, hoping for carry through and I won't complain, but adding another 10 inches on to try and hit the model behind the unit. No.

Except I know overguessing won't fail. It'll work great!

Cheating is intentionally breaking a rule. I've never seen any rule you break when you overguess.

mauleed wrote:Except I know overguessing won't fail. It'll work great!

Cheating is intentionally breaking a rule. I've never seen any rule you break when you overguess.

Is this even an issue now. In V4 is there anything really "guess" at this point?