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.

JOHIRA wrote:

imweasel wrote:It makes zero sense.

Does it?

I think making a fuss over the difference between officially calling for a 501 point list, and allowing someone to play a 501 point list despite agreeing to a 500 point game makes zero sense.

Oh really?

Well why not allow 502, 1003, 1504 and 2005 then?

I am still amazed that people who attempt to renig on their previous agreement still want to treat this as an issue of honesty.

Renig is not an act of honesty, from anything I have read.

kirsanth wrote:I am still amazed that people who attempt to renig on their previous agreement still want to treat this as an issue of honesty.

Renig is not an act of honesty, from anything I have read.

No offense, but I find it odd you've edited this post 3 times, and haven't realised that it's spelt 'renege'.

Haven't followed this immensely long argument - when I play I come in at or under the points level, if someone is 1 point over, they'd better take out a 5 pt upgrade or something, just like I would.

You know what else is funny?

I have looked it up each time as it looked off. There is apparently some reason to print it as I have, even if it is not always right.

I have, really.

I knew it looked wrong each time I typed it.

Thanks!

(Also! -- no offense taken. I very much appreciate corrections!)

No more than 5 points.

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:

kirsanth wrote:I am still amazed that people who attempt to renig on their previous agreement still want to treat this as an issue of honesty.

Renig is not an act of honesty, from anything I have read.

No offense, but I find it odd you've edited this post 3 times, and haven't realised that it's spelt 'renege'.

Haven't followed this immensely long argument - when I play I come in at or under the points level, if someone is 1 point over, they'd better take out a 5 pt upgrade or something, just like I would.

agreed.

If against my brother 300. If against my friends, none because I hate vox-casters!!!

If someone asks you if it's okay to go over the points limit, then just ask them if
it's okay if you go over their points limit.

It'll be awesome.

imweasel wrote:

JOHIRA wrote:

imweasel wrote:It makes zero sense.

Does it?

I think making a fuss over the difference between officially calling for a 501 point list, and allowing someone to play a 501 point list despite agreeing to a 500 point game makes zero sense.

Oh really?

Well why not allow 502, 1003, 1504 and 2005 then?

Indeed. Why not?

malfred wrote:If someone asks you if it's okay to go over the points limit, then just ask them if
it's okay if you go over their points limit.

It'll be awesome.

Haha, this is true! If I've brought 1998 points and he's bought 2002, why can't I slap on another 5 pt upgrade!?

To clarify, I'm not someone who is going to be a hardass to some new player who's 1 point over, or anything. Just the idea I was brought into the hobby with (and I think it exists for sound reasons) is that when building your list you build to less than or equal to the points limit. When I write a list, I often reach the last unit or so and realise I'll go over the limit. I simply go back, shuffle things around, and come in under the limit before I write the points total at the bottom of the list and set off. That's not a hard thing to do, and it helps if everyone in a group adheres to that.

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:

malfred wrote:If someone asks you if it's okay to go over the points limit, then just ask them if
it's okay if you go over their points limit.

It'll be awesome.

Haha, this is true! If I've brought 1998 points and he's bought 2002, why can't I slap on another 5 pt upgrade!?

To clarify, I'm not someone who is going to be a hardass to some new player who's 1 point over, or anything. Just the idea I was brought into the hobby with (and I think it exists for sound reasons) is that when building your list you build to less than or equal to the points limit. When I write a list, I often reach the last unit or so and realise I'll go over the limit. I simply go back, shuffle things around, and come in under the limit before I write the points total at the bottom of the list and set off. That's not a hard thing to do, and it helps if everyone in a group adheres to that.

I'm not suggesting that ypou go to 2002. I'm suggesting that you go to 2007.

then he'll want to go to 2012.

then you can up the ante to 2017.

Casual game, 4pts above maximum in 40k, 0 above in Fantasy (there's enough 1-5pt stuff in fantasy you can drop, as opposed to 40k where the cheapest things are usually 5pts or more).

Competative? 0. Tournaments should have ways of filtering out these lists, but if it's a non-regulated tournament or just a small thing, then often they can slip through. You had 1 month to prepare, not 1 minute.

Assuming that a point actually means something in terms of game balance (which is highly debatable) a 15 or 20 point difference in a 1500 pt game is less error than is introduced by using chessex dice instead of a casino dice, or a red measuring stick instead of a set of calipers. Why is it on this particular issue people are so concerned with precision? Especially since the very measurement unit people are so worried about precision on is arbitrary to begin with, it makes no rational sense.

Because points are one of the few factors that you can control whether you're a beginner or a veteran. A beginner won't go out of his way to buy a bucket-load of expensive casino dice, but he can sure as hell look at his codex/army book and re-work a few things.

But why should he have to as it makes no difference to the game outcome if he does or he doesn't?

5pts over buys him a meltabomb he uses to blow up my land raider in combat on the final turn of the game and he wins by 1 killpoint.

Without the meltabomb, my land raider survives and the game is a fair draw.

And 99 other times he doesn't get to use the meltabomb and his points are wasted. your example doesn't show anything one way or another.

asmith wrote:But why should he have to as it makes no difference to the game outcome if he does or he doesn't?

If it does not matter, do not bring it.

asmith wrote:And 99 other times he doesn't get to use the meltabomb and his points are wasted. your example doesn't show anything one way or another.

No, it does show something, but you are too stubborn to acknowledge it.

@ kirsanth: Why worry about it at all? you guys are obsessing over trivialities with regard to points that you do not obsess over in regards to anything else involved in the game.

@ avatar 720: No it doesn't show anything at all, and I'm not being stubborn, I'm being rational. Your example is not.

asmith wrote:Why worry about it at all? you guys are obsessing over trivialities with regard to points that you do not obsess over in regards to anything else involved in the game.

Because points are one of the few factors that you can control whether you're a beginner or a veteran etc. etc. ad nauseum.

@ avatar 720: No it doesn't show anything at all, and I'm not being stubborn, I'm being rational. Your example is not.

It is perfectly rational, meltabombs are taken all the time to counter dreadnoughts etc. and these kills, as shown, can tip a game.

Anyone can control measurement and dice randomization just as tightly as you guys want to control points allocation. The lengths you have to go through to do so make no sense for so little effect. The same is true of points allocation, it's just that for some reason most people don't acknowledge it. I guess your point is that it's just psychological?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
cherrypicking an anecdote is not a rational arguement

I don't think it matters whether 5 points has an effect on a particular game, it's the principle. You agreed to play a points limit, it takes SO LITTLE effort to come in under that. As said, if it's a trivial difference, the man who's over the limit should man up and be 4 points under!

JOHIRA wrote:Indeed. Why not?

If you bring 2k I should be able to bring 2100.

After all, why not?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

asmith wrote:Anyone can control measurement and dice randomization just as tightly as you guys want to control points allocation. The lengths you have to go through to do so make no sense for so little effect. The same is true of points allocation, it's just that for some reason most people don't acknowledge it. I guess your point is that it's just psychological?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
cherrypicking an anecdote is not a rational arguement

No more than you cherry picking whatever you decide is worth cherry picking.

I mean, after all, if I am throwing 35d6, wouldn't it be ok to throw the whole brick of 36? That's 'so little effect' as to hardly bother worth talking about, right?

@ imweasel: No probably it would not have that much effect (about 3%). Even so that is about a 600% greater effect on the outcome than if we were talking about 8 points over in a 1500 pt game. If you wanted to make a fair comparison it would be if you needed to roll 199d6, but rolled 200d6 instead. In fact while counting this many dice you probably would expect about that much error.

asmith wrote:@ kirsanth: Why worry about it at all? you guys are obsessing over trivialities with regard to points that you do not obsess over in regards to anything else involved in the game.

You do not visit ymdc much, do you? All kinds of trivia is used to 'obsess over'.
As I have said, I do not worry. I know the folks I play with are honest and can count.

When the folks I play agree to any rule, they will abide by it.
Point limit is the first rule you agree on when starting a game, by the rules. Check page 86.

Like I said earlier dice and measuring equipment have greater errors than the kinds of points differences that are being talked about here, and no one calls people who use these things dishonest cheaters. It just seems strange to me there is such a disconnect between the two.

The difference between 0 and 1 is pretty much infinite.

Cheating is generally acknowledged to require intent.

It seems strange to me to associate a mistake or random chance with deliberately breaking an agreement.

Gonna try to sum up the two arguments here:

Side A: 5 points over isn't a big deal so why make a fuss over it.
Side B: You knew the rules, follow them like I do.

I will pose a question to side A:
Side A: If you claim that 5 points is no big deal, can't you simply go without it and come in at or under the points limit

I myself am firmly planted in side B, mainly because I play by the rules and I feel they are there for a reason.
If playing a lower skilled / newer play I will handicap myself by intentionally playing low but he must still abide by the points limit, it will teach him how to build a proper list as well as the cost effectiveness of various items. I.E. does that sarge really need melta bombs? I mean how often is a dev sarge assaulting a vehicle? ect

cost effectiveness? Wait are you knowingly picking things that cost points less than they should compared to their in game effectiveness? I think this is an intent to cheat there pal.

edit: guess I need to put a in there



Automatically Appended Next Post:
@kirsanth: yes it is not that he was aiming for a 2000 pt list and it happened to come out to 2008, it is that he had a 2000 pt list then maliciously added 8 more critical points that are probably going to swing the game in his favor at a crucial moment, and now he is trying to use social engineering to break down your defenses and allow him to carry out his dastardly plan. the cheating bastard!