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.

1-5. with some odd point upgrades, I have little issue with going over the point limits in my opponents lists, however, if you KNOW you could get 'legal' by dropping one melta bomb, just drop the melta bomb. IF you have to rework a good portion of your list becuase the 5 man squad came out to 536 points instead of 531, then whatever.

 Skalathrax8 wrote:
Incase you havent seen my previous posts...i did 100000% ask!!!! If i needed one more melta bomb, i would have totally asked: hey guys can i go 3 points over? If they said no, then never mind! As i have said repeatedly i should have messaged them before and said: can we make the limit 2005k please?

The big long post was not aimed at you so no worries.
Asking is the important part so no harm, no foul.
I guy I used to play with would go INSANE if someone went over the limit and he found out later.

It is a courtesy to be polite and follow the rules, anything else is a "presumption" and can be shunned as bad as eating with your mouth open at the table...

jreilly89 wrote:

"If you go 1 point over, you are to be tried and executed for unsportsmanlike conduct"-Davor

Twiqbal wrote:Ton of TFGs in this thread.

So that makes me TFG? How come it doesn't make you TFG for getting more points in and cheating? Isn't that the definition of TFG who cheats and tries to take as much or stretch as much as he/she can? What makes you so special that you are not TFG unless you are talking about yourself as TFG then for being a person who has to go over the point limit.

Really hope none of you have ever gone 5 mph over the speed limit.

Ok two totally different things, one we are playing a game, the second we are talking about peoples lives and people who actually died because of speeding. But lets go by your analogy. Most people go over 20Km/H. That is acceptable but still breaking the law. So since a lot of people go over 20Km/H now we have a few people who do 30Km/H or even more than that as "normal" speed. When do we put a stop to it. Now let's bring it back to 40K. So what is wrong with 3 points over. How about 5? Maybe 10? How about 100? When do you put a stop to it? Once you put a stop to it you have just become TFG by your definition. Hell some people will say going over 100 points is not a big deal. So if it's not a big deal to them, I guess it shouldn't be a big deal to you now.

At the end of the day, 3 points over doesn't hurt. If your friend asks if you mind, you're well within your rights to say no, but no reason to get righteous about it.

At the end of the day going over 1000 points is not a big deal either. Then again are you getting righteous right now because of 3 points?

Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

 Twiqbal wrote:
Ton of TFGs in this thread. Really hope none of you have ever gone 5 mph over the speed limit.

At the end of the day, 3 points over doesn't hurt. If your friend asks if you mind, you're well within your rights to say no, but no reason to get righteous about it.

If it doesn't hurt me for you being 3 points over, then it won't hurt you to drop whatever is making you 3 points over and then be under the points?

Or you can hang around while I make a new list at the new 1503 point limit.

Exactly. if 3 points over is not a big deal then playing at 1500 points is not a big deal. Hell since 3 points is not a big deal now how about you play at 1497 points while someone plays at 1500. I am sure if the game was set for 1497 points, I will bet you anything that person will be able to make an army at 1500 now. Still be going over 3 points but at 1500 now.

By the way, if you were ever going to play me, in most cases I wouldn't make an issue out of it. I just play to have fun. Never won a game yet in 40K. So it's not an issue for me, but this being the internet and seeing how people love making excuses I like being the devils advocate and choosing to say why it's not ok.

Davor wrote:

Twiqbal wrote:Ton of TFGs in this thread.

So that makes me TFG? How come it doesn't make you TFG for getting more points in and cheating? Isn't that the definition of TFG who cheats and tries to take as much or stretch as much as he/she can? What makes you so special that you are not TFG unless you are talking about yourself as TFG then for being a person who has to go over the point limit.

TFG can be as much about attitude as it can be about cheating. Calling people cheaters for asking to change the points limit of the game slightly is kinda an overreaction, and a lot of the people arguing against it seem very angry about a points difference that is 1/300th of the total points limit, particularly considering how ridiculously unbalanced a game Warhammer 40k is even with perfectly equal points values. There's also nothing that makes the game more balanced at round points limits.

Really hope none of you have ever gone 5 mph over the speed limit.

Ok two totally different things, one we are playing a game, the second we are talking about peoples lives and people who actually died because of speeding. But lets go by your analogy. Most people go over 20Km/H. That is acceptable but still breaking the law. So since a lot of people go over 20Km/H now we have a few people who do 30Km/H or even more than that as "normal" speed. When do we put a stop to it. Now let's bring it back to 40K. So what is wrong with 3 points over. How about 5? Maybe 10? How about 100? When do you put a stop to it? Once you put a stop to it you have just become TFG by your definition. Hell some people will say going over 100 points is not a big deal. So if it's not a big deal to them, I guess it shouldn't be a big deal to you now.

People going 20 km/h over the speed limit really shouldn't be the norm.

Also, anyone who goes over the points limit and doesn't let you also go over the new points limit by the same amount is just wrong.

Also also, in Apocalypse, a points difference of 100 points wouldn't even be enough to grant an extra strategic asset.

At the end of the day, 3 points over doesn't hurt. If your friend asks if you mind, you're well within your rights to say no, but no reason to get righteous about it.

At the end of the day going over 1000 points is not a big deal either. Then again are you getting righteous right now because of 3 points?

They're getting upset about it because numerous people are calling anyone who asks for a slightly higher points limit a cheater, a TFG, the worst kind of scum in gaming and the like. It's hard not to take offense when you say, "Is it okay if we play a 2005 points game instead of a 2000 points game? I couldn't make my list fit quite exactly." and dozens of people shout "CHEATER!" "SCUM!" "TFG!"

Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

 Twiqbal wrote:
Ton of TFGs in this thread. Really hope none of you have ever gone 5 mph over the speed limit.

At the end of the day, 3 points over doesn't hurt. If your friend asks if you mind, you're well within your rights to say no, but no reason to get righteous about it.

If it doesn't hurt me for you being 3 points over, then it won't hurt you to drop whatever is making you 3 points over and then be under the points?

Some people's collections are more of a collection of squads rather than a collection of individual models to be organized into squads when writing the list. Dropping to the next-cheapest squad they don't already have in their list may put them much, much below the points value, with no way to make up the difference. A 30 points difference is way more than a 3 points difference, and if the complaint is about the extra power that 3 points affords them, then the 30 point deficit is going to skew the battle 30 points in the other direction. If it's about a slavish adherence to the exact rules with fairness not being a part of it, then frankly they should hate Sisters of Battle players for cheating in every game they use an Exorcist in in 6th and 7th edition, due to the exact, proper rules not allowing that tank to shoot at anything that's not directly overhead. There's no ambiguity about it, you don't have to interpret the rules in a special or skewed way to see it that way. If you're gonna argue that that's just an absurd situation and RAW shouldn't be followed because it makes no sense, then clearly you care more about fairness than RAW and should care more about the imbalance that would come from an opponent having to be 30 points under than 3 points over.

Or you can hang around while I make a new list at the new 1503 point limit.

Anyone who wants to be over the points limit and doesn't want to let you adjust your list to suit the new points limit is a jerk.

I feel like some of you may be overreacting to various perception of overreactions.

No one cares about people that actual ask to increase points value.
especially in a pick up game.
its a social interaction between two people that should agree first in the first place.

sure its a bit meh when one person works really hard to tune a list to exactly what was agreed with and another person comes in with a list he just absolutely cannot alter.

it absolutely matters when they dont bother saying anything.
it shows a level of lazyness as others have pointed out.

its also messed to do so in a Tourny setting. but that should be obvious and caught by TO anyway

 Pouncey wrote:
There's also nothing that makes the game more balanced at round points limits.

No, but most people tend to build lists for round point limits. If I have a 1500 point list then bumping the point limit up to 1505 usually means that you get the extra 5 points that are very important to you, while I get some random upgrade I probably won't get much out of (otherwise I would have included it already). When you ask for that non-standard point limit what you're saying is "I gain an advantage at this weird point level, let's use it". It's not cheating, but it's kind of dishonest and rules lawyery.

They're getting upset about it because numerous people are calling anyone who asks for a slightly higher points limit a cheater, a TFG, the worst kind of scum in gaming and the like.

Nobody is calling them "the worst kind of scum in gaming". Please don't make straw man arguments.

It's hard not to take offense when you say, "Is it okay if we play a 2005 points game instead of a 2000 points game? I couldn't make my list fit quite exactly." and dozens of people shout "CHEATER!" "SCUM!" "TFG!"

Except you CAN make your list fit without any problems at all. You don't WANT to make your list fit, because it would mean having a less powerful list. That is not the same thing at all.

Some people's collections are more of a collection of squads rather than a collection of individual models to be organized into squads when writing the list.

So? Why is it so important that your models be organized into the correct squads and never mixed? Just swap some models like everyone else. Or at least, if it's so important to keep everything together, make some standard 1000/1500/1750/etc lists where all the squads are perfectly organized and make sure that they're legal when you choose how to build/paint your collection.

If it's about a slavish adherence to the exact rules with fairness not being a part of it, then frankly they should hate Sisters of Battle players for cheating in every game they use an Exorcist in in 6th and 7th edition, due to the exact, proper rules not allowing that tank to shoot at anything that's not directly overhead. There's no ambiguity about it, you don't have to interpret the rules in a special or skewed way to see it that way. If you're gonna argue that that's just an absurd situation and RAW shouldn't be followed because it makes no sense, then clearly you care more about fairness than RAW and should care more about the imbalance that would come from an opponent having to be 30 points under than 3 points over.

I've already explained why this analogy is a terrible one. The Exorcist example was a clear case of RAW being broken and not matching RAI. Obviously the Exorcist is supposed to be able to shoot at stuff, and it is just missing a "hull-mounted" description on its missile launcher. The point limit is a case where RAW and RAI line up just fine and there is no reason to suspect that the rules aren't working as intended. The rules make perfect sense, they just don't allow you to gain an advantage that you want.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
There's also nothing that makes the game more balanced at round points limits.

No, but most people tend to build lists for round point limits. If I have a 1500 point list then bumping the point limit up to 1505 usually means that you get the extra 5 points that are very important to you, while I get some random upgrade I probably won't get much out of (otherwise I would have included it already). When you ask for that non-standard point limit what you're saying is "I gain an advantage at this weird point level, let's use it". It's not cheating, but it's kind of dishonest and rules lawyery.

I can't speak for other people, but when I end up with a list that's around 5 points over it usually means that I wrote a list full of models I like with squads that are nearly identical, and if I absolutely had to sacrifice something I'd swap a Battle Sisters Squad's melta to a flamer or drop their flamer entirely. Which is the same difference to my army's overall effectiveness as my Space Marine opponent upgrading a Tactical Squad's flamer to a meltagun, or meltagun to a plasma gun. The 5 points are only important to my sense of symmetry in having all my Battle Sisters Squads equipped the same, and frankly my lists aren't powerful enough to not get tabled by footslogging Orks.

They're getting upset about it because numerous people are calling anyone who asks for a slightly higher points limit a cheater, a TFG, the worst kind of scum in gaming and the like.

Nobody is calling them "the worst kind of scum in gaming". Please don't make straw man arguments.

TFG is code for that.

It's hard not to take offense when you say, "Is it okay if we play a 2005 points game instead of a 2000 points game? I couldn't make my list fit quite exactly." and dozens of people shout "CHEATER!" "SCUM!" "TFG!"

Except you CAN make your list fit without any problems at all. You don't WANT to make your list fit, because it would mean having a less powerful list. That is not the same thing at all.

Again, I don't design my lists for maximum power.

Some people's collections are more of a collection of squads rather than a collection of individual models to be organized into squads when writing the list.

So? Why is it so important that your models be organized into the correct squads and never mixed? Just swap some models like everyone else. Or at least, if it's so important to keep everything together, make some standard 1000/1500/1750/etc lists where all the squads are perfectly organized and make sure that they're legal when you choose how to build/paint your collection.

To be clear, I'm not one of those players. Those players tend to be the ones who have a name and at least a paragraph of backstory for every model in their army.

If it's about a slavish adherence to the exact rules with fairness not being a part of it, then frankly they should hate Sisters of Battle players for cheating in every game they use an Exorcist in in 6th and 7th edition, due to the exact, proper rules not allowing that tank to shoot at anything that's not directly overhead. There's no ambiguity about it, you don't have to interpret the rules in a special or skewed way to see it that way. If you're gonna argue that that's just an absurd situation and RAW shouldn't be followed because it makes no sense, then clearly you care more about fairness than RAW and should care more about the imbalance that would come from an opponent having to be 30 points under than 3 points over.

I've already explained why this analogy is a terrible one. The Exorcist example was a clear case of RAW being broken and not matching RAI. Obviously the Exorcist is supposed to be able to shoot at stuff, and it is just missing a "hull-mounted" description on its missile launcher. The point limit is a case where RAW and RAI line up just fine and there is no reason to suspect that the rules aren't working as intended. The rules make perfect sense, they just don't allow you to gain an advantage that you want.

It's still ignoring the rules. It's just that everyone agrees it's the right way to play that unit.

Also, how would it being a hull-mounted weapon let it shoot properly?

 Pouncey wrote:
Which is the same difference to my army's overall effectiveness as my Space Marine opponent upgrading a Tactical Squad's flamer to a meltagun, or meltagun to a plasma gun.

Except, as I said earlier, this is not true. Upgrading a melta gun to a plasma gun might actually be downgrading the weapon if I want to use that tactical squad as an anti-tank unit. If that's the case then I'm not going to take the "upgrade", even if spending the extra 5 points would put me at the same 1503 as your list. You can't just assume that adding a random 5-10 points to a list is going to be a meaningful upgrade.

Again, I don't design my lists for maximum power.

Then it shouldn't be a problem to drop units/upgrades until you have a legal list. If the power level of your list isn't relevant then playing even 50 points below the point limit shouldn't be a problem for you.

It's still ignoring the rules. It's just that everyone agrees it's the right way to play that unit.

It's only "ignoring" the rules in the sense that it's ignoring an obvious mistake. There is no legitimate argument that the Exorcist is intended to function by RAW. But no such issue exists with point limits. This is not a situation where your list is 1503 points in a 1500 point game because there's an obvious typo in your codex where an upgrade is 3 points more than it is supposed to be. You simply want to take more stuff than the rules allow you to take.

Also, how would it being a hull-mounted weapon let it shoot properly?

Because then it would clarify that it can shoot in a 45* arc directly ahead of the tank.

Davor wrote:
Exactly. if 3 points over is not a big deal then playing at 1500 points is not a big deal. Hell since 3 points is not a big deal now how about you play at 1497 points while someone plays at 1500. I am sure if the game was set for 1497 points, I will bet you anything that person will be able to make an army at 1500 now. Still be going over 3 points but at 1500 now.

By the way, if you were ever going to play me, in most cases I wouldn't make an issue out of it. I just play to have fun. Never won a game yet in 40K. So it's not an issue for me, but this being the internet and seeing how people love making excuses I like being the devils advocate and choosing to say why it's not ok.

This is all I'm getting at. You shouldn't go over, but if you do, let your opponent know. It's not a big deal.

 Twiqbal wrote:

Davor wrote:
Exactly. if 3 points over is not a big deal then playing at 1500 points is not a big deal. Hell since 3 points is not a big deal now how about you play at 1497 points while someone plays at 1500. I am sure if the game was set for 1497 points, I will bet you anything that person will be able to make an army at 1500 now. Still be going over 3 points but at 1500 now.

By the way, if you were ever going to play me, in most cases I wouldn't make an issue out of it. I just play to have fun. Never won a game yet in 40K. So it's not an issue for me, but this being the internet and seeing how people love making excuses I like being the devils advocate and choosing to say why it's not ok.

This is all I'm getting at. You shouldn't go over, but if you do, let your opponent know. It's not a big deal.

It's not a big deal either way. The thing I am seeing is some Pro Camp are saying "its not a big deal to go over" and the Against Camp says "it's not a big deal to be at max" and the Against Camp agree with the Pro Camp it's not a big deal BUT the Pro Camp are saying the Against Camp are wrong. That is where most of the Against Camp I believe are having issues with. How come it's ok to be over but not ok not to go over max? To me that is TFG. Saying "no problem being over 3 points, but it's an absolute problem playing at max."

 Peregrine wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
Which is the same difference to my army's overall effectiveness as my Space Marine opponent upgrading a Tactical Squad's flamer to a meltagun, or meltagun to a plasma gun.

Except, as I said earlier, this is not true. Upgrading a melta gun to a plasma gun might actually be downgrading the weapon if I want to use that tactical squad as an anti-tank unit. If that's the case then I'm not going to take the "upgrade", even if spending the extra 5 points would put me at the same 1503 as your list. You can't just assume that adding a random 5-10 points to a list is going to be a meaningful upgrade.

So, spending more points doesn't automatically make a unit more powerful or useful?

Again, I don't design my lists for maximum power.

Then it shouldn't be a problem to drop units/upgrades until you have a legal list. If the power level of your list isn't relevant then playing even 50 points below the point limit shouldn't be a problem for you.

You're right, it shouldn't be a problem for me. I could always drop a flamer for a bolter and it'd have minimal effect on how powerful my army is. It might even make it a bit more killy due to how rarely I get to use flamers versus how often I get to use bolters. My only opponent and I both view small points differences as insignificant though, so we give each other permission to be a few points over. If I end up with a list that's a few points over, my mom usually adds an Ammo Runt to her Big Mek with Shokk Attack Gun.

It's still ignoring the rules. It's just that everyone agrees it's the right way to play that unit.

It's only "ignoring" the rules in the sense that it's ignoring an obvious mistake. There is no legitimate argument that the Exorcist is intended to function by RAW. But no such issue exists with point limits. This is not a situation where your list is 1503 points in a 1500 point game because there's an obvious typo in your codex where an upgrade is 3 points more than it is supposed to be. You simply want to take more stuff than the rules allow you to take.

Erm, the rules let players set their own points limits for games. If two people decide they want to play a 1005pt game, that's completely within the rules. There's no actual rule that dictates that all points values for games must be a multiple of 50, and there's also a part of the 7th edition rulebook that says that two players can set uneven points limits if they choose to (i.e. one army being allowed to have a higher or lower point limit than the other)

Also, how would it being a hull-mounted weapon let it shoot properly?

Because then it would clarify that it can shoot in a 45* arc directly ahead of the tank.

No one's ever mentioned this before in discussions about the Exorcist. Yes, that'd be a simple fix.

 Pouncey wrote:
So, spending more points doesn't automatically make a unit more powerful or useful?

No, of course not. I already addressed this earlier.

Erm, the rules let players set their own points limits for games. If two people decide they want to play a 1005pt game, that's completely within the rules. There's no actual rule that dictates that all points values for games must be a multiple of 50, and there's also a part of the 7th edition rulebook that says that two players can set uneven points limits if they choose to (i.e. one army being allowed to have a higher or lower point limit than the other)

No, of course you can play a 1005 point game, but that's not the same as agreeing to a 1000 point game and then saying "but can I cheat and bring an extra 5 points".

Though, as I already pointed out, there are conventions about playing games with even point increments. And it's rather poor behavior to try to set the point limit for the game at some weird non-standard amount that just conveniently happens to favor your exact list. A 1005 point game isn't something people normally build lists for, it's just a 1000 point game with an extra 5 points added that only one player is likely to benefit from. And if you're requesting a 1005 point game it's pretty clear that what you really want is a 1000 point game where you get an extra 5 points, but with my agreement instead of just breaking the 1000 point limit.

 Peregrine wrote:
No, of course you can play a 1005 point game, but that's not the same as agreeing to a 1000 point game and then saying "but can I cheat and bring an extra 5 points".

Though, as I already pointed out, there are conventions about playing games with even point increments. And it's rather poor behavior to try to set the point limit for the game at some weird non-standard amount that just conveniently happens to favor your exact list. A 1005 point game isn't something people normally build lists for, it's just a 1000 point game with an extra 5 points added that only one player is likely to benefit from. And if you're requesting a 1005 point game it's pretty clear that what you really want is a 1000 point game where you get an extra 5 points, but with my agreement instead of just breaking the 1000 point limit.

To me, asking if it's okay if I'm a few points over the limit is effectively the same thing as asking if my opponent wants to modify the points limit slightly. I have no objection if my opponent wants to modify their list to match. I also bring it up with my opponent before I even print up my roster, which is usually well in advance of the game, so they have ample time to add or change things to fit. They've always been okay with it.

I dunno. Back when I played at a club, I always made sure my armies were at or under the points limit. If I were ever to go back to doing that, I'd always make sure my lists were within the points limit. And as a result of seeing how many people are against it in any way, shape or form, I've been tending more and more to keep myself at or under the points limit, even in games that are just against my mom.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
No, of course you can play a 1005 point game, but that's not the same as agreeing to a 1000 point game and then saying "but can I cheat and bring an extra 5 points".

Though, as I already pointed out, there are conventions about playing games with even point increments. And it's rather poor behavior to try to set the point limit for the game at some weird non-standard amount that just conveniently happens to favor your exact list. A 1005 point game isn't something people normally build lists for, it's just a 1000 point game with an extra 5 points added that only one player is likely to benefit from. And if you're requesting a 1005 point game it's pretty clear that what you really want is a 1000 point game where you get an extra 5 points, but with my agreement instead of just breaking the 1000 point limit.

To me, asking if it's okay if I'm a few points over the limit is effectively the same thing as asking if my opponent wants to modify the points limit slightly. I have no objection if my opponent wants to modify their list to match. I also bring it up with my opponent before I even print up my roster, which is usually well in advance of the game, so they have ample time to add or change things to fit. They've always been okay with it.

I dunno. Back when I played at a club, I always made sure my armies were at or under the points limit. If I were ever to go back to doing that, I'd always make sure my lists were within the points limit. And as a result of seeing how many people are against it in any way, shape or form, I've been tending more and more to keep myself at or under the points limit, even in games that are just against my mom.

The difference is, for you, you see the extra 5 points right before the game and decide it's okay and throw a power weapon on a sergeant or something. They might have engineered their army to drop a few upgrades here and there that wouldn't have done anything to squeeze an extra squad in which just happened to bring them 5pts over.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
No, of course you can play a 1005 point game, but that's not the same as agreeing to a 1000 point game and then saying "but can I cheat and bring an extra 5 points".

Though, as I already pointed out, there are conventions about playing games with even point increments. And it's rather poor behavior to try to set the point limit for the game at some weird non-standard amount that just conveniently happens to favor your exact list. A 1005 point game isn't something people normally build lists for, it's just a 1000 point game with an extra 5 points added that only one player is likely to benefit from. And if you're requesting a 1005 point game it's pretty clear that what you really want is a 1000 point game where you get an extra 5 points, but with my agreement instead of just breaking the 1000 point limit.

To me, asking if it's okay if I'm a few points over the limit is effectively the same thing as asking if my opponent wants to modify the points limit slightly. I have no objection if my opponent wants to modify their list to match. I also bring it up with my opponent before I even print up my roster, which is usually well in advance of the game, so they have ample time to add or change things to fit. They've always been okay with it.

I dunno. Back when I played at a club, I always made sure my armies were at or under the points limit. If I were ever to go back to doing that, I'd always make sure my lists were within the points limit. And as a result of seeing how many people are against it in any way, shape or form, I've been tending more and more to keep myself at or under the points limit, even in games that are just against my mom.

The difference is, for you, you see the extra 5 points right before the game and decide it's okay and throw a power weapon on a sergeant or something. They might have engineered their army to drop a few upgrades here and there that wouldn't have done anything to squeeze an extra squad in which just happened to bring them 5pts over.

I don't really view that as a problem, to be honest.

To me, the entire points system is a way of balancing armies by assigning a points value to the effectiveness of a particular unit or upgrade. A properly built 1,000 points army should have a fair chance against any other properly built 1,000 points army. A 5-point difference to the total power level of the army is a difference of only half a percent, which is not particularly huge.

While yes, they would be able to fit in an extra unit that costs a couple hundred points, all but five of those points are power that their army would've had anyway had they redesigned it to be exactly at the points limit. It's not like they're filling out their points limit and then getting an entire extra unit on top of that. They're only getting an extra 5 points of effectiveness out of their overall army by including it.

Yeah I think people might be annoyed, I play very casual and let some rules slip here and there in the name of narrative / gameplay. but a point limit is a point limit, its part of the challenge to come up with a list that is that number or below.

I'm fairly stubborn when it comes to points values. Under, never over although I am flexible and as an adult am able to negotiate things.

Really though I just ask to increase my l own limit accordingly. funnily enough most times I have said this my opponent has made a quick revision to their list. It generally catches out the opportunist when they try and explain that its then not fair for me to be over the limit.

 Pouncey wrote:

Some people's collections are more of a collection of squads rather than a collection of individual models to be organized into squads when writing the list. Dropping to the next-cheapest squad they don't already have in their list may put them much, much below the points value, with no way to make up the difference. A 30 points difference is way more than a 3 points difference, and if the complaint is about the extra power that 3 points affords them, then the 30 point deficit is going to skew the battle 30 points in the other direction.

All of my models are WYSIWYG and organized into squads. I also like squads to be 5 or 10 models, I dislike odd squad sizes. Sometimes I can't squeeze every point out of a list but I am always under points.

A points limit is still a limit and an agreement to show up to a game with a list that is at or under X points is still that.

I don't expect any accommodation for my self-imposed limitations.

As a rule, I suggest you give yourself 10% wiggle room. Meaning if you want to build a 500 point list, reserve 50 points for upgrades you may need, or to throw in a few extra models as a unit or make them join an already existing unit.

It helps keep your army legal points-wise.

Hmm... Just to throw a little more fuel onto the flames:

So some people are happy going 5 points over and asking just before the game if that's ok. Would those same people be happy if the opponent says "Fine, I presume you don't mind me upgrading this power weapon on my tank-hunting unit to a powerfist? It will take me 5 points over your list, of course"

That would add a meaningful upgrade to the list and would just swing the points advantage the other way.

I am fine with my opponents being a few points over. About 10 at the most.

Lionheart713 wrote:
As a rule, I suggest you give yourself 10% wiggle room. Meaning if you want to build a 500 point list, reserve 50 points for upgrades you may need, or to throw in a few extra models as a unit or make them join an already existing unit.

It helps keep your army legal points-wise.

10% is a huge amount of points! 50pts in a 500pts game is almost enough for another chimera, enough for a rhino and a power weapon, enough for multiple extra models in a unit.

10% is 150 points, that's another squad of Grey Hunters I just added to my 1500 point list, since now we're playing 1650pts.

I can understand the arguments for ignoring 1-10pts (despite disagreeing with them), but 10% is just ridiculous.

 Griddlelol wrote:

Lionheart713 wrote:
As a rule, I suggest you give yourself 10% wiggle room. Meaning if you want to build a 500 point list, reserve 50 points for upgrades you may need, or to throw in a few extra models as a unit or make them join an already existing unit.

It helps keep your army legal points-wise.

10% is a huge amount of points! 50pts in a 500pts game is almost enough for another chimera, enough for a rhino and a power weapon, enough for multiple extra models in a unit.

10% is 150 points, that's another squad of Grey Hunters I just added to my 1500 point list, since now we're playing 1650pts.

I can understand the arguments for ignoring 1-10pts (despite disagreeing with them), but 10% is just ridiculous.

Look at it this way: You bring in your core units and formations in the 1500 point game, keeping them 10% below the point limit. You're standing at 1350 points now, and have 150 points to add your Grey Hunters squad along with a few cheap upgrades. All set.

I think the final 10% allows you to get a little creative.

I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you meant you allow people to go 10% over the agreed limit. Ignore my previous post.

master of ordinance wrote:I am fine with my opponents being a few points over. About 10 at the most.

Well that is nice of you for doing that but once someone goes 11 points over and you refuse, you have just become TFG now. After all it's only going 1 point over the limit.

See what I mean for the pro camp. Hasn't been addressed. When does it stop when you allow someone to go over the point limit. As soon as you say No you become TFG going by your standards. So when is enough is enough? Just like the quote above he is only going over 1 point over the limit. After all the Pro Camp is basically saying a 1500 point game is 1505 points. So going 1508 points or even in the quote above 1515 points over is perfectly fine because it's on 3-10 points over your set limit. Since the set limit is 1503 points someone bringing in 1506 points is perfectly fine going by your logic.

Mostly when I hear the 3 point over the limit request it's a piece of war gear that they're trying out and have just strapped on to an existing list.
Why couldn't something else be dropped, it'll have to be dropped in any kind of official setting...dunno, sometimes it's just easier to judge which one gets dropped when they're all at work together and one just doesn't seem to pull its weight or the other two have great synergy and the remaining one just doesn't work quite so well.
40k isn't a short game unless it's a real mis-match so most people don't really get to or want to try things again and again and again to figure out what works, they use the quicker option of strap it on and try it out. Usually when I'm hunting for a game on the day I find the people who have multiple armies to be the most willing to have another game and they always seem to want to swap armies regardless of how their first one performed in the match they were just playing. They don't want to do multiple tests, they just want to have some fun and try to out some new stuff. Not everyone is a list builder same as not everyone is a painter or a kit-basher.
If it helps them decide what stays and what goes I'm still fine with having to deal with the extra points against me.

Davor wrote:

master of ordinance wrote:I am fine with my opponents being a few points over. About 10 at the most.

Well that is nice of you for doing that but once someone goes 11 points over and you refuse, you have just become TFG now. After all it's only going 1 point over the limit.

See what I mean for the pro camp. Hasn't been addressed. When does it stop when you allow someone to go over the point limit. As soon as you say No you become TFG going by your standards. So when is enough is enough? Just like the quote above he is only going over 1 point over the limit. After all the Pro Camp is basically saying a 1500 point game is 1505 points. So going 1508 points or even in the quote above 1515 points over is perfectly fine because it's on 3-10 points over your set limit. Since the set limit is 1503 points someone bringing in 1506 points is perfectly fine going by your logic.

10 points is a cheap weapon upgrade or something similar. Once it starts getting over that though it does start taking the micky.

WobblyGoblin wrote:
Hmm... Just to throw a little more fuel onto the flames:

So some people are happy going 5 points over and asking just before the game if that's ok. Would those same people be happy if the opponent says "Fine, I presume you don't mind me upgrading this power weapon on my tank-hunting unit to a powerfist? It will take me 5 points over your list, of course"

That would add a meaningful upgrade to the list and would just swing the points advantage the other way.

That'd be fine with me, personally. Though I might ask if I can put melta bombs on someone to make it even, or take a flamer in a squad that previously couldn't afford a flamer.

Also I might wonder silently why you put a standard power weapon on a dedicated tankhunting unit to begin with, but then I'd just figure you wanted to have some defence in case they end up in melee against infantry.

Well that is nice of you for doing that but once someone goes 11 points over and you refuse, you have just become TFG now. After all it's only going 1 point over the limit.

See what I mean for the pro camp. Hasn't been addressed. When does it stop when you allow someone to go over the point limit. As soon as you say No you become TFG going by your standards. So when is enough is enough? Just like the quote above he is only going over 1 point over the limit. After all the Pro Camp is basically saying a 1500 point game is 1505 points. So going 1508 points or even in the quote above 1515 points over is perfectly fine because it's on 3-10 points over your set limit. Since the set limit is 1503 points someone bringing in 1506 points is perfectly fine going by your logic.

To be clear, I don't think anyone's a TFG for saying no when asked to change the points limit slightly. If you did say no, I wouldn't argue or try to persuade you or guilt you, I'd just say okie dokie, take out a flamer or downgrade a meltagun to a flamer, and just ignore the part of my brain that likes having my similar squads be symmetrically equipped. I also used to design Dungeon floor layouts in D&D symmetrically, much to some people's annoyance.

I think you become a jerk on this topic when you accuse people who even ask if it's okay to up the points limit a bit of being cheaters, and assume they violate the rules in every way they think they can get away with.

 Pouncey wrote:

WobblyGoblin wrote:
Hmm... Just to throw a little more fuel onto the flames:


I think you become a jerk on this topic when you accuse people who even ask if it's okay to up the points limit a bit of being cheaters, and assume they violate the rules in every way they think they can get away with.

^^^^^^^ Agreed ^^^^^^^

I honestly feel like if I showed up to a pick up game and my opponent was like "Oh hey I'm 5 points over is that okay?" my first question would be "You want to just add 50 points to the limit?" Because then we could both add potentially meaningful upgrades/changes to our lists in a short amount of time. I feel like this is a solid compromise, because then I'm not forced to take some small upgrade that I don't care about just so my opponent can feel better about going over our agreed-upon limit. I would prefer not to get into a habit of allowing the points limit to be fluid, but I could see myself allowing my friends to do so once in a while. At the same time, I don't foresee them even thinking about asking to do so.

If my opponent says no to increasing the limit, then the originally agreed-upon limit is the limit. If they say "I don't have extra models" or "Everything is fully upgraded already and I don't have extra models" then the originally agreed-upon limit is the limit. Time to drop a small upgrade. I feel like it's a respect problem if my opponent were to push the issue and would probably just call the game and do something else. So good on y'all for asking and accepting your opponent's decision.