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.

All star gaming contest? So what are the requirements to enter? Just a big ego or some proof of a phenomnal (sp?) gaming record (e.g., GT and RTT best overalls)? I will probably sit this one out.

Actually, as you stated earlier, it's a unit you don't mind being measured publicly.

So you're right, you better sit this one out.

Ah so the taunting. Pretty good for a laff out loud. Good luck with yer awesome record in the future. A lot of peopls are gunning for ya.

Its only a game played with toy soldiers. Anybody would think there manhood was in question.

Anybody would think there manhood was in question.

Don't take it away from Mauleed, 40k seems to be the only way to prove himself.

I for one can't take online win ratios seriously- the internet is anonymous, we can all bullsh*t on here- the more insecure, the steamier the bullsh*t.

Though the level of ass-kissery displayed around Mauleed leads me to believe there is some truth to his claims.

Anyway, I second a post way back in this topic- it appears everyone wins a lot more than they lose- so where are all these losers? (Awaits obvious pun aimed at me).

And it's not the size, it's how you use it...and whether it is fixed to your groin or head!

Shadow: Actually, that's why tournament results are probably one of the more reliable
ways to track wins/losses. There's a written record...SOMEWHERE. Some leagues also
have tournament trackers amongst several stores, such as Russ's Dakka software so
that there's a way to verify wins/lossess.

Gone are the days of BYOR.

True. I'm too lazy to do background research on Mauleed's gaming history- I'll just take the words of his sycophants (I'm not refering to you, don't worry) that he has a good win ratio.

It brings up my favourite paraphase: "You may win more games then me, but your still an a*$%&*)"

It also highlights a glaring flaw in Competitive 40k, the army list is 60% at least of the reason someone wins or loses. It's not like Football, or Chess where only the player's game knowledge and skill/talent affect the outcome.

Actually in chess with all other factors being equal, white will win. They get the first turn.

Except talent/skill normally isn't equal- and that will ultimately decide who wins the chess game- though I conceed the White side may have an advantage, so bad example.

But in 40k the army list plays a humongous part in the probability of someone winning. I hear these outrageous win ratios all the time, and assuming (though unlikely) that they are true, I have no doubt that they are won with uber, min-maxed power armies.

This doesn't prove your the better player, only the 'better' army list writer.

One idea our gaming group was considering for a tournament was for the organiser to design a moderate/mediocre SM army list- and everyone would use that list. Then only how they use the army would decide the winner.

Of course this would be boring to play several games against the same army with the same army- and would require everyone to buy/ acquire that army...

I agree that it's at least 60% list in 40k.

Which of course begs the question of why people who are always whining about it being 60% lists can't manage to figure out how to make one that wins, or simply copy one that already does, but instead blame their own losses on the other guy's list, instead of the other 40% factor: their play.

Here's the thing if it's 60% the list then how much of it is luck? This is a dice game, chess isn't. The dice can completely screw you over so long as you mess up/roll big on some crucial rolls.

For fun example I had I had a 3k point 2 on 2 battle this weekend that seemed to defy all sorts of statistics throughout the game. Sisters + Marines vs. Nids + DE Web Way Wych Cult

First round of shooting the nearly all Genestealer Nids faced off against 68 BS4 Bolter Shots and 2 Missile Launcher templates. Out of all his 4+ saves, 2 failed.

Of course it went the other way and we ended up winning the game because it was Escallation and when it came time for the Dark Eldar to come on, none of the Wytches made it in on Turn 2, leaving 2 Ravegers and an HQ to face off the bulk of 3k points of Marines + Sisters. They lost the game on the dice rolls for reserves on Turn 2 because we got most of our stuff and they didn't.

To top it off at the end of the game I had his Head Wytch HQ with combat drug/shadow field locked in assault with an Assault Chaplain, 10 Assault Marines, and 5 Tacticals, with 2 PF Sarges. He made every single 2+ save and died in the second round of combat to rolling 3 6's for his combat drugs.

While I completely agree that having the right army list is most of the game a LOT of this comes down to luck. If you can't roll that crucial 5 or 6 at the right time or you get a bunch of 1's at the wrong moment, the game can end right there.

Hey, I was voodoo boy's gaming partner against our 2 friends in that 3k 2vs2 battle. They had some very bad dice rolls especially with the reserves. Anything involving dice, takes luck into consideration(IMHO).  One important roll could win or lose a battle. Tactics are important but someimes I think that bad dice rolls could make you lose. I'm sure people have gotten bad rolls at crucial times which caused them to lose the game. When Voodoo Boy and I play every week, he has gotten bad rolls at crucial times such as having terrible luck with rending with the assault cannon(I think he has only managed to do it 2 or 3 times so far) To me both players could have great tactics and play very well but it's that one crucial roll or series of rolls which decides if you will be the winner or loser. I've had my tactics blow up in my face because I got some bad rolls.

Hey now, rolling bad dice is a skill, I tell you. A skill!

Yes, luck plays a part, but theoretically both sides have an equal chance of bad luck/good luck. So it could theoretically be removed from the equation.

In practice, it comes down to the army list again. A power gamer list tries to minimise the reliance on luck by:

1) Having multiple redundancies- counting on your Predator to blow up that enemy tank requires luck, having 3 Predators waiting to do so is far more reliable.

2) Reducing the interference of the dice- hoping your opponent fails his Armour Saves depends on luck, not giving your opponent an Armour Save due to low AP doesn't.

3) Choosing armies and units that don't have a huge dependence on luck.

So even with luck- the army list plays a huge part. Which IMO is dissappointing- any monkey can copy and paste a netlist. And many times a game has already been won or lost before the players show up.

If the list is so important and so easily copiable, and luck can be discounted, why is it that we find people with high win-loss records?

I absolutely agree that luck can be mitigated somewhat by tthe army list, by taking lots of redundant, efficient units you can mitigate luck somewhat to get the desired result.

But that just doesn't change the game. I've lost or have seen games lost over a single dice roll. The example above was perfect, when the DE player in our game didn't get any Wytches on Turn 2, and our side got Speeders, Dreads, and Exorcists - the opposing players were screwed.

Skill comes into play even with the most tooled up "I hate Statistics) lists, which is why you have a few players who know the game well enough to have excellent gaming records. But even they aren't without getting screwed by luck - all it takes is one bad roll at the wrong moment and your game can be over.

If the list is so important and so easily copiable, and luck can be discounted, why is it that we find people with high win-loss records?

Because some people have more powerful lists than others- gee, that was tricky.
I didn't say that army lists are 100% what wins games, I'm saying that the army list accounts for most of the game- a fact that I don't like, but it doesn't stop it being true.

A counter question: If army lists don't have much affect on a game, why are there numerous copy and paste army lists, and a limited number of 'beardy' tournament winner armies (e.g. IW's)?

Of course, I think we've all ignored the possibility that these people are the master of the tactic of getting their opponents so blind stinkin' drunk that running their own units off the table seems a great option.
Twenty star cannons? My command squad'll stand out in the open, naked to counter 'em...hic!

>>Because some people have more powerful lists than others- gee, that was tricky.

If lists are so easily copiable, why doesn't everyone play with a powerful list and win?
Your theory is that it's easy to win with a good list, and it's simple to copy a list. Why doesn't everyone have a good list then?
Why aren't results trending to 50/50?

>>If army lists don't have much affect on a game, why are there numerous copy and paste army lists, and a limited number of 'beardy' tournament winner armies (e.g. IW's)?

Of course lists have an effect. Everyone knows the game is unbalanced.

Some players use good lists and win more games. Does that mean they have no skill? You have to explain why the same players consistently place high in tournaments. Is it just their list, not them? Why doesn't everyone use the same list to win?

My worst 40K experience was in a two on two with some friends of mine. Nids and Iron Warriors vs. Imperial Guard and Vanilla Marines. I was playing Marines at the time.

I Deepstruck a 5-man squad of Termies, right on target. I had waited until the horde of tyranids had reached the edge of rapid-fire range in the trench where most of my squads were. I rapid fired in the range of about 60 bolter/bolt pistol shots, a half-dozen ML/Plas/Lascannon shots, and 10 shots from a Destructor (2 Autocannon, 6 HB, 2 SB). Its been awhile since it happened, but I believe I ended up hitting with about 10 shots, and killed 3 or 4 guants. I shot with my Termie squad at the same group of nids (8 Assault Cannon, 6 SB), and hit with 1 AC and 1 SB. Again, I killed nothing.

The next turn, his gaunts kill ~18 Marines and about the same number of IG in close combat, but not before the Iron Warriors player deepstrikes his own Termie squad right next to mine, killing 2 with combi-bolters. In adding insult to injury, the remaining 3 Loyalist Termies I had ended up getting rended by a half-dozen genestealers.

I still marvel at how we managed to pull a Draw out of that one.

CK

the reason not everybody copies the same winning list is due to the fact they look crap on the board, i would rather win/lose with a list that i like the look of. i can make cheasey list just like most people but they just look to boring. winning is not my main priority, having fun is. People need to get some help with there issues about there gaming records. its like little kids comparing the size of there pencils. Grow up. Have fun, Seek theraphy

As others have said:

1) Not everyone must WAAC. They may choose armies for style, looks, theme, models, etc.

2) Not everyone is a 'Vet'- noob's won't automatically know to go on the net and copy a list, they will quickly learn to after being stomped a few times.




Please read my responses.



Before jumping to conclusions. You need to provide better counter-arguments, these just aren't cutting it.

i don't really keep track.
in my last tournament i was 1-1-1, but then i don't attend many of them.
my best tourney score was 2-1-0 (playing an IG player, he was so slow we never finished so it was a draw)
in pickup games, i can't remember the last time i lost. i've had a couple of draws but no losses.
unless you count fantasy. i couldn't win at fantasy if i held a gun to my opponents head.

it's not something i like to brag about though, sooner or later the dice suck and there's nothing you can do.

wait, just remembered, i got hosed by a mech tau army a few months back.
couldn't make a save, couldn't make any night vision tests to see any of the sniper teams/stealth suits.
some days the dice suck.

can't think of any others though. it's not something i consider important. i'd rather have a close fought battle i lost than win by a huge amount. it's more satisfying.

As to perfect records, my Father use to say to me:

"Son, don't worry about not being perfect, there was a perfect guy once... Know what happened to him?"

I said "What Dad?"

he said, "He got crucified."

Of the two, Victory and Loss, the latter is the better teacher.

> Posted By nyarlathotep667 on 08/25/2006 4:17 PM
Hippies can bathe too!

Liar!!!

my record is more average, when i remeber the victory conditions i tend to win most of the times. my losses (most of them anyway) are down to not paying attention to the mission objectives and just trying to kill everything.

I play good opponents, bad opponents, average opponents, have experience good luck, bad luck, and average luck, and I think I've played enough games to know how good I am, I win about 7 out of 10 games I play.

My batrep in the batrep section is a game of pretty average luck where I won. Recently I've had absolutely shocking luck in 2 battles in a row, nothing went right, but in both I managed to pull out a draw.

My w/l/d record would be a bit higher for sure if I used more powerful lists, but it would be lower for sure if I only played powerful lists.

Check out this guys profile i would love to play him he sounds awsome!!!!

http://www.40konline.com/mos/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=833&action=profile;u=20067

"Check out this guys profile i would love to play him he sounds awsome!!!!

http://www.40konline.com/mos/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=833&action=profile;u=20067"

He's the man, all right. Been playing since he was 10 years old and only ever lost 6 games!

yea`h an those 6 games he lost were to me. lol