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.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Why did this become such a huge thread? Holy cow.

Why can no one give the OP a clear and concise answer to his simple question. Is he breaking any rules of the game or being TFG by asking his opponent to not take a knight.

No...you are not. What you are doing is being a sissy pants but that is actually not uncommon among 40k players. I routinely beat peoples cheese with my own cheese. The game is cheese - you must find your own cheese and make them cry. Thats the game. I've tried to give suggestions about how to beat a knight with DE and IG.

Melta vets in space wolf drop pods.
Or venom with blaster true born.

He is not TFG and he is not being a sissy pants. To be calling anyone a sissy pants would be like saying "grow a pair". Do you play Warmahordes by any chance?

 Xenomancers wrote:
Why did this become such a huge thread? Holy cow.

Why can no one give the OP a clear and concise answer to his simple question. Is he breaking any rules of the game or being TFG by asking his opponent to not take a knight.

Generally questions have question marks at the end of them. If you'd actually read the thread you'd see plenty of people answering the op.

 insaniak wrote:
Or... whatever. Pick a reason. Did I miss the sign on sheet where we all need to provide you with a valid reason for wanting to play 40K before we're allowed to buy models?

Sigh. Why do you keep repeating this straw man? Saying "you should play a different game" does not mean that I've appointed myself ruler of 40k and you need to justify your decision to play to me.

Well, no... because he hasn't actually spoken to his opponent about it yet. Hence this thread.

I think we can safely conclude, based on the OP's opponent buying knights and making them a regular part of their army, that they like knights. We don't need a documented conversation to know this.

 Crablezworth wrote:
But that's a good thing right? The hobby will lose dead weight, I mean those people didn't want to get with times and comprise their entire army of 3 models as well, like me, and thus should leave the game... right?

Sigh. The 3x c'tan list is a tiny minority of the game, built entirely around a massive balance mistake. A list with 1-2 knights is just a typical 7th edition list, and any list that has no hope of competing with it is also going to struggle against a lot of other typical 7th edition lists. I'm pretty sure you can see the difference between the two.

and the answer we give them is put up or shut up essentially

Well yeah, because that's all there is to say in this situation. A list that can't handle 1-2 knights is the kind of "special snowflake" list that demands carefully crafted opposing lists designed around a non-standard selection of units that won't exploit any of the snowflake's fundamental weaknesses. To accommodate a list with no anti-tank units you have to have a long list of house rules: no knights, no LRBTs, no Hammerheads, no more than one Chimera, etc. And it isn't reasonable to expect people to bring special armies just to play against you. The only reasonable solution is for the OP to add more anti-tank to their list so that they have a chance of competing with "normal" lists, or to just accept that they aren't going to win very often.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
But that's a good thing right? The hobby will lose dead weight, I mean those people didn't want to get with times and comprise their entire army of 3 models as well, like me, and thus should leave the game... right?

Sigh. The 3x c'tan list is a tiny minority of the game

Evidence?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
A list with 1-2 knights is just a typical 7th edition list

Evidence?

 Peregrine wrote:
I'm pretty sure you can see the difference between the two.

I see no difference betwen the two as neither are typical 7th edition lists, whatever a typical 7th edition list is.

 Peregrine wrote:
it isn't reasonable to expect people to bring special armies just to play against you

Except when they're comprised of 3 star gods right?

 Peregrine wrote:
The only reasonable solution is for the OP to add more anti-tank to their list so that they have a chance of competing with "normal" lists, or to just accept that they aren't going to win very often.

That's not the only solution, you're simply just saying that. He could also try and find opponents who share the same ideals.

 Peregrine wrote:
Sigh. Why do you keep repeating this straw man? Saying "you should play a different game" does not mean that I've appointed myself ruler of 40k and you need to justify your decision to play to me.

Well then what does it mean?

Because if you're not trying to tell people that they should only be playing this game if they're playing it your way, you're doing a really average job of expressing yourself.

I think we can safely conclude, based on the OP's opponent buying knights and making them a regular part of their army, that they like knights. We don't need a documented conversation to know this.

So?

I like my Thunderwolves, and my Redeemer. I still have absolutely zero problem with an opponent asking me to not use them, which has happened on several occasions.

The issue wasn't whether or not the prospective opponent likes the models in question. It was whether or not they had an issue with not using them... something that hasn't been established yet, because the purpose of this thread was to determine whether asking that question in the first place would be out of line.


Somehow, we got from a really straightforward question that should have been easily answered with something along the lines of 'It's a game, you should feel free to play it however you want, provided your opponent agrees' to this mess where everyone is being told that they are unworthy to lay their eyes on 40K's hallowed rules if they aren't prepared to play the game the way certain people think it should be played.

Please, let it go.

It's become an argument about feelings instead of facts.

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
But that's a good thing right? The hobby will lose dead weight, I mean those people didn't want to get with times and comprise their entire army of 3 models as well, like me, and thus should leave the game... right?

Sigh. The 3x c'tan list is a tiny minority of the game

Evidence?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
A list with 1-2 knights is just a typical 7th edition list

Evidence?

And evidence that it is being used in every meta.

After all, if it is typical everyone should have faced one at some point.

 Peregrine wrote:
I'm pretty sure you can see the difference between the two.

I see no difference betwen the two as neither are typical 7th edition lists, whatever a typical 7th edition list is.

ITT: People with no concept of false equivalencies, and other people not wise enough to just stop replying to them.

The question has been answered. Why bother arguing with unreasonable people who don't understand that the purpose of a "game" is to have fun?

 Crablezworth wrote:
Evidence?

The fact that the c'tan is one of maybe 2-3 units at that level of power, out of the huge number of units in 40k.

Evidence?

The fact that you don't have to work very hard to put 6 HP worth of AV 13+ vehicles in your army. That's just "ok, I'll take a pair of Hammerheads for my heavy support" or "Pask is really cool!", not a deliberate attempt to bring the most overpowered army you can imagine. Even "casual" players who don't care at all about army optimization will frequently have that.

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I'm pretty sure you can see the difference between the two.

I see no difference betwen the two as neither are typical 7th edition lists, whatever a typical 7th edition list is.

You don't see the difference between playing Imperial Knights, in a regular 40K legal formation straight out of their codex, and playing multiple Trancendant C'tans, the nightmarishly powerful Lord Of War that people constantly scream is broken and only legal in Apocalypse/Escalation sized games ?

I'm sorry, but I don't believe you.

Peregrine, have you ever turned down a game?

 insaniak wrote:
Because if you're not trying to tell people that they should only be playing this game if they're playing it your way, you're doing a really average job of expressing yourself.

Go back and read what I actually said, not what people have decided to use as a straw man, and there's nothing unclear. What I said has nothing to do with how I want to play the game, it was a direct response to a statement that the OP had literally no units in their army capable of killing a knight (and therefore no units capable of killing a long list of non-LOW vehicles) and does not enjoy that situation. In that context "why are you playing 40k" isn't a demand for them to do what I want, it's simply recognition of the fact that they aren't having fun and their situation isn't likely to improve.

 adamsouza wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I'm pretty sure you can see the difference between the two.

I see no difference betwen the two as neither are typical 7th edition lists, whatever a typical 7th edition list is.

You don't see the difference between playing Imperial Knights, in a regular 40K legal formation straight out of their codex, and playing multiple Trancendant C'tans, the nightmarishly powerful Lord Of War that people constantly scream is broken and only legal in Apocalypse/Escalation sized games ?

I'm sorry, but I don't believe you.

Typical is subjective, you're saying knights in a list are typical, read common. And yet no one I play ever wants to field one. Tell you what, I'll t ake your word for it that where you play knights are common, why does that make them more valid if the only metric we're apparntly using for if we want to play an opponent is if their list is legal in 7th.

Here's the metric for if a list is legal in 7th. Does it comprise gw 40k models? It's legal.


You're the guys setting the bar that all that is required is that your army be legal for it to be universally accepted by prospective opponents. And yet a 3 c'tan unbound list is totally legal. Replace the op's opponent's two knights with two transcendent c'tans. Are we still going to call the op a whiner and insist he leave the hobby or maybe admit we all play a terrible terrible game.

 Crablezworth wrote:
Typical is subjective, you're saying knights in a list are typical, read common. And yet no one I play ever wants to field one.

Not just knights, knight-equivalent vehicles. For example, if you can kill a LRBT squadron you can probably kill a knight. So even if few people in an area use knights there are still probably lots of people bringing 6 HP worth of AV 13+ vehicles, and most people would find it at least a little bit odd if there weren't.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
Typical is subjective, you're saying knights in a list are typical, read common. And yet no one I play ever wants to field one.

Not just knights, knight-equivalent vehicles. For example, if you can kill a LRBT squadron you can probably kill a knight. So even if few people in an area use knights there are still probably lots of people bringing 6 HP worth of AV 13+ vehicles, and most people would find it at least a little bit odd if there weren't.

The op never argued for or demanded that no one use any vehicles. He like many others doesn't seem to have fun playing against super heavies in 1500pts. I'm under no illusions that there are some pretty terrible super heavies, it's the entire idea of them being used at 1500 that I myself can't wrap my head around.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Scoundrel13 wrote:
Is it wrong to ask him to leave them at home this time?

It's not wrong, but I fear your request may not be successful. Who knows, maybe they'll happily comply with your request. If they asked you to run a more competitive list next time, would that be something you're not comfortable doing or simply unable to do due to lack of models?

 Scoundrel13 wrote:


Am I being naive to not be building lists that can deal with Knights (I don't have the models without serious investment)?

Not naive, but sadly the game is very much pay to play. Peregrines not entirely wrong to think that you should make some effort to "keep up with the joneses". That may be as simple as a few more lascannons ore dark lances or as sad and cynical as gleefully joinging the race to the bottom and buying a knight or transcendent c'tan or revenant titan. The most cost effective solution is find opponents who share your fluffy ideals.

 Scoundrel13 wrote:
Should I simply try to enjoy playing a game where I have little to no chance of winning, no matter how tactically masterful I am? Otherwise I'm sitting at home with no war-gaming tomorrow.

If you know you're very likely to not enjoy the game, it may be worth passing on. Take the evening to scour the internets for new opponents.

 Peregrine wrote:
Then the OP is screwed anyway and shouldn't be playing 40k.

So if I don't want to play against Knights I either:
-Ask my opponent not to play them.
-Sell all my WH40k models and play a different game.

Guess which option I am going with..

 Crablezworth wrote:
The op never argued for or demanded that no one use any vehicles. He like many others doesn't seem to have fun playing against super heavies in 1500pts. I'm under no illusions that there are some pretty terrible super heavies, it's the entire idea of them being used at 1500 that I myself can't wrap my head around.

The OP said that they don't have anything that can kill a knight. That means they also don't have anything that can kill a LRBT squadron/Hammerhead/Predator/etc, and will have to remove those units from the game as well if they want any chance of winning.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kangodo wrote:
So if I don't want to play against Knights I either:
-Ask my opponent not to play them.
-Sell all my WH40k models and play a different game.

Guess which option I am going with..

Guess which option you're going with when your opponent says "nope, they're part of my army, maybe you should change your own army if you're worried about your chances of winning".

Kangodo wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Then the OP is screwed anyway and shouldn't be playing 40k.

So if I don't want to play against Knights I either:
-Ask my opponent not to play them.
-Sell all my WH40k models and play a different game.

Guess which option I am going with..

Or Option 3.

You resolve and talk to your opponent and say that you just want to have a fun game. Politely ask them. This is up to you.

Or Option 4

Don't play and just quit the game and find a new opponent if they refuse to do so.

Also Peregrine you are being extremely unhelpful and should cease insulting the OP and saying what he should and should not

 Peregrine wrote:
Guess which option you're going with when your opponent says "nope, they're part of my army, maybe you should change your own army if you're worried about your chances of winning".

The option I'm going with of just finding a different opponent?
Which would be quite easy to do since it is clear that the majority doesn't like Knights.
Perhaps I would play a single game to kick his ass and proof a point (that it is not about winning, but about fun).

 Xenomancers wrote:
Why did this become such a huge thread? Holy cow.

Why can no one give the OP a clear and concise answer to his simple question. Is he breaking any rules of the game or being TFG by asking his opponent to not take a knight.

No...you are not. What you are doing is being a sissy pants but that is actually not uncommon among 40k players. I routinely beat peoples cheese with my own cheese. The game is cheese - you must find your own cheese and make them cry. Thats the game. I've tried to give suggestions about how to beat a knight with DE and IG.

Melta vets in space wolf drop pods.
Or venom with blaster true born.

Yeah, to hell with hiom for not wanting to play a certain list. We should go lynch him for being such a sissy pants!!

/s

P.S. who even says sissy pants anymore???

It is not 'wrong' to ask your opponent not to bring a knight.

However, if you play this guy regularly, I would consider letting him take his knight once in a while if he asks for it.
I had to deal with lots of people who didn't want super-heavies in their games and since I have 4 of them, that made me sad because I had put a lot of work into painting them.

So hence came the solution, someone came to me and asked me to play a game in which I used one of my super-heavies. Reason: He had a tourney and super-heavy was allowed, but he had no experience handling them.
To make a long story short, my Lord of Skulls finally saw some table time, people saw the game and came to the conclusion that a lot of superheavies aren't that amazing rules-wise resulting in me being able to field a super-heavy once in a while on the condition that I let them know in advance that I will be bringing 'a superheavy'.

This thread really sums up 40k nowdays.

 Scoundrel13 wrote:
Hello Dakka.

40K moral dilemma for you here. For my gaming club tomorrow night, there's only one guy I can possibly play against. He uses two Knights at 1500pts with outflanking melta-wielding Sisters in Rhinos to support.

I use quite fluffy armies (either Guard or Dark Eldar), and neither has the raw firepower or combat ability to deal with Knights. Last time out, using my IG, I was stomped all over the board despite throwing everything at those damn Knights.

Is it wrong to ask him to leave them at home this time? Am I being naive to not be building lists that can deal with Knights (I don't have the models without serious investment)? Should I simply try to enjoy playing a game where I have little to no chance of winning, no matter how tactically masterful I am? Otherwise I'm sitting at home with no war-gaming tomorrow.

Have at it, internet.

Don't play him, your not willing to change your army why should he have to cater to you in that case? And by don't play him you decline to play against him not refuse to play against him. If hes curious as to why simply state your fluff army cant compete, that gives him the choice to alter his army instead of being forced to.

"Its physically impossible for my army to beat yours, and I can't spend cash for units that can. Gonna have to hold off this time buddy." And no hard feelings.

 60mm wrote:
This thread really sums up 40k nowdays.

A horribly divided community due largely to crappy rules? Pretty much

If you dont enjoy super heavies, fliers, and drastic imbalance, then maybe 40k isn't for you.

 MWHistorian wrote:
If you dont enjoy super heavies, fliers, and drastic imbalance, then maybe 40k isn't for you.

Or.. I could.. you know..
Find an opponent that also doesn't like them? Because that is quite easy to do, seeing as most people don't seem to enjoy them that much.

It's interesting how a small minority of players is trying to convince everyone to stop playing the game.
Quite funny to see.

Here's one suggestion for the OP. agree to play him with his normal army.
Turn 1, move 6 forward, run all your units forward.
turn 2. Repeat. Turn 3. Repeat. Repeat until your at his board edge, then do the same towards your board edge. Look him in the eye and ask if he's having fun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This of course, is if he says "no" or whines excessively about you asking politely for a no-knight opponent.

 Pyeatt wrote:
Here's one suggestion for the OP. agree to play him with his normal army.
Turn 1, move 6 forward, run all your units forward.
turn 2. Repeat. Turn 3. Repeat. Repeat until your at his board edge, then do the same towards your board edge. Look him in the eye and ask if he's having fun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This of course, is if he says "no" or whines excessively about you asking politely for a no-knight opponent.

Hahaha. Or, since you know he only has sisters and IK, pack the board full of flyers.

The problem with both is that the game is not fun. Why waste your time playing stuff that isn't fun... life is too short.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bishop F Gantry wrote:
Don't play him, your not willing to change your army why should he have to cater to you in that case? And by don't play him you decline to play against him not refuse to play against him. If hes curious as to why simply state your fluff army cant compete, that gives him the choice to alter his army instead of being forced to.

You're right of course. The practical reality, though, is that there are (only) 2 players. So, either they can figure it out and play an enjoyable game, not figure it out and force a game that's not fun, or play XB1 and call it a night.