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.

Skaorn wrote:

Ok, prove to me that your not the OP's friend, follower, or just the OP on a dummy account.

Prove to me you're not a robot sent from the future to destroy the 40k community!!!

My point was to point out the ridiculousness of your previous statements, which you failed to catch onto. You can't prove something in the negative. You're just making random accusations, and are you really aren't following the discussion here.

The OP very well could be full of crap (as i said in my post), but the fact that some people do fudge things or straight out cheat does remain a valid point of discussion. Nobody is forming a lynch mob - people here are discussing what should/could be done about cheaters. Mods removed the named person.

SirWeeble wrote:


You're just making random accusations, and are you really aren't following the discussion here.

I guess we'll just have to judge you two based on your reputations to determine which one of you is the liar.

 IronBrand wrote:

WH40k TOs (including GW) could learn a lot from the DCI. But history has shown that humanity usually doesn't learn from mistakes of the past

Yes, lying about public information in mtg is a failure to maintain the game state. But when your opponent is getting ready to declare attacks you don't need to remind them that one of your creatures has deathtouch or that one of you untapped lands is a maze of ith. If the cards aren't physically blocked by other cards then you're not failing to maintain the game state or hiding anything. In the theoretical case of a firewarrior behind a wall controlling an objective it's your opponent's responsibility to remember he's there. You don't have to acknowledge its existence unless your opponent asks. The same as how you don't have to remind your opponent that they have a unit in reserve still during their turn 3. Also if your opponent asks if their unit is in range to shoot one of your units you only have to say yes or no, not "yes but you'd need a 6 to hit and a 6 to wound, you should probably shoot this other unit instead". The important thing of course is the wording of any question your opponent asks. In a friendly game it's good sportsmanship to give them reminder about something here or there but in a tournament you have no obligation to help your opponent with their tactics.

40k is just the absolute worst game to try to make into a serious tournament game. Codexes with rules scattered throughout. No datacards or something similar. Player aversion to the point of silliness to any kinds of tokens or markers. It's like someone said "how can I make a game in the most tournament unfriendly way possible?". It's a recipe for easy cheating, lots of honest mistakes, and incredibly slow play, and it's nearly impossible for consistent TO policing. All that said, it is great beer and pretzels fun

SirWeeble wrote:

Skaorn wrote:

Ok, prove to me that your not the OP's friend, follower, or just the OP on a dummy account.

Prove to me you're not a robot sent from the future to destroy the 40k community!!!

My point was to point out the ridiculousness of your previous statements, which you failed to catch onto. You can't prove something in the negative. You're just making random accusations, and are you really aren't following the discussion here.

The OP very well could be full of crap (as i said in my post), but the fact that some people do fudge things or straight out cheat does remain a valid point of discussion. Nobody is forming a lynch mob - people here are discussing what should/could be done about cheaters. Mods removed the named person.

Actually I am a robot sent from the future to destroy the future of the 40K community. You apparently miss the ridiculousness of your own statements by challenging me to prove that I exist, to question my previous statement, yet you can't seem to spare the brain power to question the OP's statements. Also you can prove something in the negative, ask any mathematician, scientist, lawyer, etc.

So my original statement ask if there was evidence that the accused cheated, my fault for not stating unbiased evidence. My next question could have been worded better, but was asking if there was (unbiased) evidence that the accuser was making stuff up, per the accused. Now I did not claim "the OP is just making up nonsense" just pointing out that taking the OP's statements may not be honest and commenting on the crappy behavior I have gotten to witness first hand from the OP on this very thread, using the accused's real life information and calling him a cheater, rather than trying to work things out with the TO. This is the only thing I have actually accused the OP of and I fail to see how that is random or that others haven't been discussing this same exact thing on this thread. I think you seem to be mistaking "hey guys, it's possible the OP might be lying" for "the OP is a damn dirty liar", which are two rather different statements.

Now, maybe your statement that "but if we're assuming that the OP's information isn't an absolute lie, then yes, he did cheat" wasn't supposed to sound so black and white, but I think you might understand why I might not have perceived your statement as saying "the OP could very well be full of crap". You did follow that up with "he may not have purposely cheated" ( ). "Maybe he's just really bad, forgetful, or has problems seeing/reading. Even if that is true, he did cheat". Now I'm sure you'll state that the reason you gave for the accused to have made mistakes was to point out how ridiculous his rebuttals were, but that kind of indicates that you were taking the OP's claims at face value or that you have a very bizarre definition of cheating. I don't think I've ever met someone before who didn't think cheating didn't need knowledge of what they're doing and active intent to cheat. Every time I've cheated at something, I knew exactly what I was doing.

If you want to back the OP's actions against an alleged cheater then feel free to believe what you want to believe, just know you could be getting played. My problem with the OP are from the actions that the OP took on this thread not about whatever might have happened on the other side of the Atlantic for, apparently, both of us. This is separate from my problem with all the people who seem to take the OP's statement of what actually happened. If the TO investigates and finds the accused did cheats and bans him from future events, great! One problem solved as it should be. If the accused starts getting harassment from all over because the OP outed him, though, because nut jobs used that info to track the accused down, that's a problem; especially if the guy is innocent of the OP's claims. There is a reason why the mods at least removed the guy's name here, to at least protect the site from legal entanglements (though hopefully because they also view it as sketchy behavior too). In short I don't think that shouting someone's name out over the Internet as a cheater is an appropriate response to someone who does "fudge things or straight out cheats". Considering your previous stance on cheating though, I'm kind of curious how fudging something would be any different than cheating in your mind.

I just want to point out again that it's trivial to not be "cheated" the way the OP states. This whole witch hunt / brouhaha is an embarrassment.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
I just want to point out again that it's trivial to not be "cheated" the way the OP states. This whole witch hunt / brouhaha is an embarrassment.

You're right when you say it's embarrassing. However, everything else you said is incorrect. It doesn't matter how little or how much, how easy or how hard it was for the cheater to succeed. It's still cheating, and it's obvious from reading this that the cheater had a reputation before this came up.

Since we're posting our opinions: My opinion is that the fact that people are condoning cheating is disgusting. The fact that people are victim shaming is disgusting. Whether or not you believe the OP on if he was cheated against or not, the idea that several of you have both glorified the act of cheating, and blamed the victim for it is toxic for the community. I'm not talking about the people who disagree with the OP's response. I'm also not talking about the people who said that it never happened and left it at that. Reading these has lowered my opinion of several of you, and will effect my opinion of what you post in the future.

Thank god I don't know any of you in real life. After this thread, I'd never want to play you. It wouldn't be fun.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
I just want to point out again that it's trivial to not be "cheated" the way the OP states. This whole witch hunt / brouhaha is an embarrassment.

You're right when you say it's embarrassing. However, everything else you said is incorrect. It doesn't matter how little or how much, how easy or how hard it was for the cheater to succeed. It's still cheating, and it's obvious from reading this that the cheater had a reputation before this came up.

Since we're posting our opinions: My opinion is that the fact that people are condoning cheating is disgusting. The fact that people are victim shaming is disgusting. Whether or not you believe the OP on if he was cheated against or not, the idea that several of you have both glorified the act of cheating, and blamed the victim for it is toxic for the community. I'm not talking about the people who disagree with the OP's response. I'm also not talking about the people who said that it never happened and left it at that. Reading these has lowered my opinion of several of you, and will effect my opinion of what you post in the future.

Thank god I don't know any of you in real life. After this thread, I'd never want to play you. It wouldn't be fun.

If I stick my <APPENDAGE> into a hornets nest, is is blaming the victim when you tell me I am an idiot?

 BaconCatBug wrote:


Thank god I don't know any of you in real life. After this thread, I'd never want to play you. It wouldn't be fun.

If I stick my <APPENDAGE> into a hornets nest, is is blaming the victim when you tell me I am an idiot?

 Overread wrote:
That doesn't make any sense at all unless your attitude toward wargaming is to treat every single opponent as an outright cheater and expect every single action they take to be support with a full Harvord style reference if the specific rule and stat from all the rules materials.

Like I said earlier, Trust, but Verify. I admit, I am lucky enough to have 99% of the rules committed to memory, but even then I will always double check by either looking at my own codex or asking to see the opponents copy.

You only ever need to check once per game, if that. It doesn't "slow down" the game in the slightest.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Thank god I don't know any of you in real life. After this thread, I'd never want to play you. It wouldn't be fun.

Funny, I've never had problems with any person I have played with.

 BaconCatBug wrote:


Like I said earlier, Trust, but Verify. I admit, I am lucky enough to have 99% of the rules committed to memory, but even then I will always double check by either looking at my own codex or asking to see the opponents copy.

You only ever need to check once per game, if that. It doesn't "slow down" the game in the slightest.

It's a good way of handling things in general, but it's irrelevant to the topic at hand. It is not the players responsibility to mitigate the cheating attempts of their opponent. There shouldn't be any attempts in the first place.

The goal is not for an individual not to get cheated, but to foster a culture that condemns cheating and punishes it accordingly.

BertBert wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:


Like I said earlier, Trust, but Verify. I admit, I am lucky enough to have 99% of the rules committed to memory, but even then I will always double check by either looking at my own codex or asking to see the opponents copy.

You only ever need to check once per game, if that. It doesn't "slow down" the game in the slightest.

It's a good way of handling things in general, but it's irrelevant to the topic at hand. It is not the players responsibility to mitigate the cheating attempts of their opponent. There shouldn't be any attempts in the first place.

And there also shouldn't be any police because people shouldn't steal things. We live in an imperfect world. To be so naïve to think that people won't cheat is a problem on your end, not the cheaters.

This is why it is important to swot up on rules for all armies, not just your own.

BertBert wrote:
The goal is not for an individual not to get cheated, but to foster a culture that condemns cheating and punishes it accordingly.

It would be better to prevent cheating in the first place by taking the tiniest shred of personal responsibility and prevent yourself from being cheated.

There is a saying in my country: "A crow will not peck out another crow's eyes".

People take sides depending on who they identify with. The "witch hunters" identify with a person who gets cheated. The others... With the other guy.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

BertBert wrote:
The goal is not for an individual not to get cheated, but to foster a culture that condemns cheating and punishes it accordingly.

It would be better to prevent cheating in the first place by taking the tiniest shred of personal responsibility and prevent yourself from being cheated.

It's not my responsibility not to become a victim of a crime (in a larger sense - cheating is obviously not a crime) – the responsibility lies solely with the perpetrator. You are right in that there are ways of avoiding this, and I'd personally handle the situation very similar to what you describe, but when we are talking about a case like this after the fact, it's utter nonsense to blame the guy who got cheated for not being careful enough. There should be no cheating period. In reality, there will always be cheaters, so they need to be dealt with accordingly.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

BertBert wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:


Like I said earlier, Trust, but Verify. I admit, I am lucky enough to have 99% of the rules committed to memory, but even then I will always double check by either looking at my own codex or asking to see the opponents copy.

You only ever need to check once per game, if that. It doesn't "slow down" the game in the slightest.

It's a good way of handling things in general, but it's irrelevant to the topic at hand. It is not the players responsibility to mitigate the cheating attempts of their opponent. There shouldn't be any attempts in the first place.

And there also shouldn't be any police because people shouldn't steal things. We live in an imperfect world. To be so naïve to think that people won't cheat is a problem on your end, not the cheaters.

just because you lock your door at night doesn't mean the guy who robbed a buncha places shouldn't be dealt with harshly and condemned for his behavior

Based slavic saying are based [high five].

Same here. That is why it is important to act at the very second a cheater gets caught. Post everything you will get two stores or cities or countries of people siding with one dude over the other no matter what. Specially as they do not gain anything from their side being the wrong one.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
There is a saying in my country: "A crow will not peck out another crow's eyes".

People take sides depending on who they identify with. The "witch hunters" identify with a person who gets cheated. The others... With the other guy.

Heheheheeeee. I like this comment a lot.

 Overread wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:


Thank god I don't know any of you in real life. After this thread, I'd never want to play you. It wouldn't be fun.

If I stick my <APPENDAGE> into a hornets nest, is is blaming the victim when you tell me I am an idiot?

That doesn't make any sense at all unless your attitude toward wargaming is to treat every single opponent as an outright cheater and expect every single action they take to be support with a full Harvord style reference if the specific rule and stat from all the rules materials.

I mean sure that would work, but darn it if its not going to slow things down (unless your opponent happens to have indexed and sticky noted their entire rules setup).

In the end if your opponent asks you something and you check it one expects what you checked to be conveyed faithfully and accurately.



Also the hornets nest still doesn't make any sense; why are you abusing poor innocent friendly hornets? What have they ever done to you for you stick your appendage into their personal space!

tneva82 wrote:
Well. Seeing he's not looking to even finish any games(if you believe his 100% RAW) he doesn't mind that. After all he won't get any game finished anyway so wasting time double checking everything is OK before game locks up when RAW doesn't say either way.

And like I say every time people bring up this libellous nonsense, there are only two situations where the game "locks up" RaW, and it's simple enough to avoid them.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
I just want to point out again that it's trivial to not be "cheated" the way the OP states. This whole witch hunt / brouhaha is an embarrassment.

You're right when you say it's embarrassing. However, everything else you said is incorrect. It doesn't matter how little or how much, how easy or how hard it was for the cheater to succeed. It's still cheating, and it's obvious from reading this that the cheater had a reputation before this came up.

Since we're posting our opinions: My opinion is that the fact that people are condoning cheating is disgusting. The fact that people are victim shaming is disgusting. Whether or not you believe the OP on if he was cheated against or not, the idea that several of you have both glorified the act of cheating, and blamed the victim for it is toxic for the community. I'm not talking about the people who disagree with the OP's response. I'm also not talking about the people who said that it never happened and left it at that. Reading these has lowered my opinion of several of you, and will effect my opinion of what you post in the future.

Thank god I don't know any of you in real life. After this thread, I'd never want to play you. It wouldn't be fun.

If I stick my <APPENDAGE> into a hornets nest, is is blaming the victim when you tell me I am an idiot?

In your example, you're to blame. But then the hornets will make it well known that they don't want you to literally have sex with their house. A cheater meanwhile tries to hide it. Why don't you spend some time coming up with a more relevant reply before you post here again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaconCatBug wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Thank god I don't know any of you in real life. After this thread, I'd never want to play you. It wouldn't be fun.

Funny, I've never had problems with any person I have played with.

Your signature suggests otherwise.

edit: spelling

 Mmmpi wrote:

In your example, you're to blame. But then the hornets will make it well known that they don't want you to literally have sex with their house. A cheater meanwhile tries to hide it. Why don't you spend some time coming up with a more relevant reply before you post here again.

Oh Em Gee how dare you victum blaem!

 Mmmpi wrote:
Your signature suggests otherwise.

Feel free to find a single person who's played a game with me who had a bad time. I'm willing to even play a game with you via TTS if you wish.

For your example, I'm not blaming a victim, I'm blaming a perpetrator. One who got exactly what was advertised by said wasp's advertisements.

Still waiting for you to give a RELEVANT example.

As for playing you, I've already said that I refuse to, not that I know who you are to even try. (And I'm not asking either.) Or to check your references.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Well. Seeing he's not looking to even finish any games(if you believe his 100% RAW) he doesn't mind that. After all he won't get any game finished anyway so wasting time double checking everything is OK before game locks up when RAW doesn't say either way.

And like I say every time people bring up this libellous nonsense, there are only two situations where the game "locks up" RaW, and it's simple enough to avoid them.

“Libellous”...

I’m creased.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

In your example, you're to blame. But then the hornets will make it well known that they don't want you to literally have sex with their house. A cheater meanwhile tries to hide it. Why don't you spend some time coming up with a more relevant reply before you post here again.

Oh Em Gee how dare you victum blaem!

 Mmmpi wrote:
Your signature suggests otherwise.

Feel free to find a single person who's played a game with me who had a bad time. I'm willing to even play a game with you via TTS if you wish.

Would he have to double check your list for points, re measure each move, memorize all weapon profiles, track your CP expenditure, and ensure dice are not loaded to not be at fault if you decided to bend the rules a little?

Not saying that you or anyone here would, but its just an example of how easily a game can become a chore if you can't trust the other player to do anything... Sure it would be prudent to verify now and again, but you really shouldn't have to police up your opponent to that degree or be the one to blame should things go sideways.

 IronBrand wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
In MtG tournaments, lying about public information will get you game losses, match losses or even removed from the tournament (depending on how often you do it at what level of event). Things that anyone could see, like that hiding Tau warrior, number of wounds left on a model or the stats of a weapon.

MtG also punishes you for not telling your opponent when he is playing the rules wrong, especially if it's in your favor. You would have to tell your opponent if he is putting a -1 modifier on his shooting when he shouldn't. It's called failure to maintain the game state.

WH40k TOs (including GW) could learn a lot from the DCI. But history has shown that humanity usually doesn't learn from mistakes of the past

Yes, lying about public information in mtg is a failure to maintain the game state. But when your opponent is getting ready to declare attacks you don't need to remind them that one of your creatures has deathtouch or that one of you untapped lands is a maze of ith.

You must tell him that your creature has deathtouch once it deals damage though. If your opponent asks if there is any obvious way to prevent damage from his attacker you must not lie about your Maze of Ith. Depending on your REL you can tell your opponent that you are not obligated to tell him derived information, but you cannot lie to him.

According to the OP: "I asked him if I controlled an objective, he said yes." His opponent clearly lied to a question with an answer that was public knowledge and would be punished for such in MtG.

If the cards aren't physically blocked by other cards then you're not failing to maintain the game state or hiding anything. In the theoretical case of a firewarrior behind a wall controlling an objective it's your opponent's responsibility to remember he's there. You don't have to acknowledge its existence unless your opponent asks.The same as how you don't have to remind your opponent that they have a unit in reserve still during their turn 3. Also if your opponent asks if their unit is in range to shoot one of your units you only have to say yes or no, not "yes but you'd need a 6 to hit and a 6 to wound, you should probably shoot this other unit instead".

Sure, you don't have to tell him before he moves. You don't even need to tell him when he asks - multiple opponents I have played over the years answered similar question with "we'll see when it's time to count VP" or "we can check when you are done moving your models".
The only thing that you can't do is lie about it.

In more recent rules you are even required to tell your opponent about optional triggers that he has no reason to miss, like "you may gain 1 life" when there is no drawback to it.

The important thing of course is the wording of any question your opponent asks. In a friendly game it's good sportsmanship to give them reminder about something here or there but in a tournament you have no obligation to help your opponent with their tactics.

This is the core of it. Apparently he lied about it, and that is not OK, friendly game or not.

Any thought to prevent cheating aside, the game would be a chore. Based on his sig, he and I have a very different interpretation of quite a few rules. I'm sure at some point he'll say that I'm wrong about them, but that just makes our gaming incompatibility even more obvious.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
I just want to point out again that it's trivial to not be "cheated" the way the OP states. This whole witch hunt / brouhaha is an embarrassment.

You're right when you say it's embarrassing. However, everything else you said is incorrect. It doesn't matter how little or how much, how easy or how hard it was for the cheater to succeed. It's still cheating, and it's obvious from reading this that the cheater had a reputation before this came up.

Since we're posting our opinions: My opinion is that the fact that people are condoning cheating is disgusting. The fact that people are victim shaming is disgusting. Whether or not you believe the OP on if he was cheated against or not, the idea that several of you have both glorified the act of cheating, and blamed the victim for it is toxic for the community. I'm not talking about the people who disagree with the OP's response. I'm also not talking about the people who said that it never happened and left it at that. Reading these has lowered my opinion of several of you, and will effect my opinion of what you post in the future.

Thank god I don't know any of you in real life. After this thread, I'd never want to play you. It wouldn't be fun.

If I stick my <APPENDAGE> into a hornets nest, is is blaming the victim when you tell me I am an idiot?

No, as that is a false analogy...

There are strange hills to choose to die on, of which defending and condoning cheaters is one, but layering that with wasp’s nest/genital-based false equivalence fallacies is amazing. Watching this guy dig that hole deeper and deepe is just super entertaining.