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.

I guess this is where I get to sit back, relax, and enjoy not having that Space Marine Paint Scheme Recognition Privilege.

Ain't noooooooobody but nooooooobody gonna demand my codex and to see if my Rusted Claw genestealer Cultists are correctly displaying the official canon vomit-inducing star wars rebel pilot jumpsuits, because outside space marines, chaos marines, orks, guard regiments with different models, and maybe eldar I would challenge anyone but the beardiest fluff-monkeys to actually know and memorize any faction's "official" color schemes.

Quick, without googling it, how do you tell the difference between a Pauper Princes and a Bladed Cog GSC neophyte?

How about Coven of Twelve/The Dark Creed haemonculus coven?

Nephrekh, Novokh and Nihilakh dynasty necrons, no this is not a trick question those are actually different things!

Now ask yourself, if you don't know what any of these fething things are, how could you possibly be confused by them, and if it wouldn't confuse you if I showed up to the game and had my models painted as Forgeworld Lucius but I was actually using the rules for Metalica then why is it fair to hold space marine players to a different standard?

the_scotsman wrote:
I guess this is where I get to sit back, relax, and enjoy not having that Space Marine Paint Scheme Recognition Privilege.

Ain't noooooooobody but nooooooobody gonna demand my codex and to see if my Rusted Claw genestealer Cultists are correctly displaying the official canon vomit-inducing star wars rebel pilot jumpsuits, because outside space marines, chaos marines, orks, guard regiments with different models, and maybe eldar I would challenge anyone but the beardiest fluff-monkeys to actually know and memorize any faction's "official" color schemes.

Quick, without googling it, how do you tell the difference between a Pauper Princes and a Bladed Cog GSC neophyte?

How about Coven of Twelve/The Dark Creed haemonculus coven?

Nephrekh, Novokh and Nihilakh dynasty necrons, no this is not a trick question those are actually different things!

Now ask yourself, if you don't know what any of these fething things are, how could you possibly be confused by them, and if it wouldn't confuse you if I showed up to the game and had my models painted as Forgeworld Lucius but I was actually using the rules for Metalica then why is it fair to hold space marine players to a different standard?

This could be a good argument that there is way to much Special Snowflake rules in the game, Rather than more standard battle tactics or army construction incentives. Or that the Game is way to bloated Rules wise if there is so much for the Oponant to remember based on what color lore you choose D:

Apple fox wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I guess this is where I get to sit back, relax, and enjoy not having that Space Marine Paint Scheme Recognition Privilege.

Ain't noooooooobody but nooooooobody gonna demand my codex and to see if my Rusted Claw genestealer Cultists are correctly displaying the official canon vomit-inducing star wars rebel pilot jumpsuits, because outside space marines, chaos marines, orks, guard regiments with different models, and maybe eldar I would challenge anyone but the beardiest fluff-monkeys to actually know and memorize any faction's "official" color schemes.

Quick, without googling it, how do you tell the difference between a Pauper Princes and a Bladed Cog GSC neophyte?

How about Coven of Twelve/The Dark Creed haemonculus coven?

Nephrekh, Novokh and Nihilakh dynasty necrons, no this is not a trick question those are actually different things!

Now ask yourself, if you don't know what any of these fething things are, how could you possibly be confused by them, and if it wouldn't confuse you if I showed up to the game and had my models painted as Forgeworld Lucius but I was actually using the rules for Metalica then why is it fair to hold space marine players to a different standard?

This could be a good argument that there is way to much Special Snowflake rules in the game, Rather than more standard battle tactics or army construction incentives. Or that the Game is way to bloated Rules wise if there is so much for the Oponant to remember based on what color lore you choose D:

Tbat's kind of the point though. You don't need to remember the colours, your opponent will tell you there rules.

the_scotsman wrote:
I guess this is where I get to sit back, relax, and enjoy not having that Space Marine Paint Scheme Recognition Privilege.

Ain't noooooooobody but nooooooobody gonna demand my codex and to see if my Rusted Claw genestealer Cultists are correctly displaying the official canon vomit-inducing star wars rebel pilot jumpsuits, because outside space marines, chaos marines, orks, guard regiments with different models, and maybe eldar I would challenge anyone but the beardiest fluff-monkeys to actually know and memorize any faction's "official" color schemes.

Quick, without googling it, how do you tell the difference between a Pauper Princes and a Bladed Cog GSC neophyte?

How about Coven of Twelve/The Dark Creed haemonculus coven?

Nephrekh, Novokh and Nihilakh dynasty necrons, no this is not a trick question those are actually different things!

Now ask yourself, if you don't know what any of these fething things are, how could you possibly be confused by them, and if it wouldn't confuse you if I showed up to the game and had my models painted as Forgeworld Lucius but I was actually using the rules for Metalica then why is it fair to hold space marine players to a different standard?

Exactly. The inverse is also true. Just because I happen to know the colour scheme for Hive Fleet Kraken, should I then be holding all Tyranid players to that Hive Fleet if they happen to have painted their models in Kraken colours? Is that reasonable, considering 90% of players likely don't know what those colours should be? I might even have accidentally painted my Kabal or Coven units in the colours of a different Kabal/Coven, for all I know. That's an army I play, and I still couldn't tell you what all the sub-faction colours are. I'm still waiting for an explanation as to why saying "these models that are painted as Ultramarines are using Raven Guard rules" is so confusing we need to disallow it. But only for Space Marines apparently.

Drager wrote:

Apple fox wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I guess this is where I get to sit back, relax, and enjoy not having that Space Marine Paint Scheme Recognition Privilege.

Ain't noooooooobody but nooooooobody gonna demand my codex and to see if my Rusted Claw genestealer Cultists are correctly displaying the official canon vomit-inducing star wars rebel pilot jumpsuits, because outside space marines, chaos marines, orks, guard regiments with different models, and maybe eldar I would challenge anyone but the beardiest fluff-monkeys to actually know and memorize any faction's "official" color schemes.

Quick, without googling it, how do you tell the difference between a Pauper Princes and a Bladed Cog GSC neophyte?

How about Coven of Twelve/The Dark Creed haemonculus coven?

Nephrekh, Novokh and Nihilakh dynasty necrons, no this is not a trick question those are actually different things!

Now ask yourself, if you don't know what any of these fething things are, how could you possibly be confused by them, and if it wouldn't confuse you if I showed up to the game and had my models painted as Forgeworld Lucius but I was actually using the rules for Metalica then why is it fair to hold space marine players to a different standard?

This could be a good argument that there is way to much Special Snowflake rules in the game, Rather than more standard battle tactics or army construction incentives. Or that the Game is way to bloated Rules wise if there is so much for the Oponant to remember based on what color lore you choose D:

Tbat's kind of the point though. You don't need to remember the colours, your opponent will tell you there rules.

well yes, they can. But it may still mean there is too many. Considering the scale of the game. Or even just poor design causes more issues than there would be. I have never even seen this sort of argument come up before outside of 40k
as pointed out, the difernt dyanasty are efectvly worthless, and could be summed up as something like battle tactics that players swap around and explore with.

Slipspace wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I guess this is where I get to sit back, relax, and enjoy not having that Space Marine Paint Scheme Recognition Privilege.

Ain't noooooooobody but nooooooobody gonna demand my codex and to see if my Rusted Claw genestealer Cultists are correctly displaying the official canon vomit-inducing star wars rebel pilot jumpsuits, because outside space marines, chaos marines, orks, guard regiments with different models, and maybe eldar I would challenge anyone but the beardiest fluff-monkeys to actually know and memorize any faction's "official" color schemes.

Quick, without googling it, how do you tell the difference between a Pauper Princes and a Bladed Cog GSC neophyte?

How about Coven of Twelve/The Dark Creed haemonculus coven?

Nephrekh, Novokh and Nihilakh dynasty necrons, no this is not a trick question those are actually different things!

Now ask yourself, if you don't know what any of these fething things are, how could you possibly be confused by them, and if it wouldn't confuse you if I showed up to the game and had my models painted as Forgeworld Lucius but I was actually using the rules for Metalica then why is it fair to hold space marine players to a different standard?

Exactly. The inverse is also true. Just because I happen to know the colour scheme for Hive Fleet Kraken, should I then be holding all Tyranid players to that Hive Fleet if they happen to have painted their models in Kraken colours? Is that reasonable, considering 90% of players likely don't know what those colours should be? I might even have accidentally painted my Kabal or Coven units in the colours of a different Kabal/Coven, for all I know. That's an army I play, and I still couldn't tell you what all the sub-faction colours are. I'm still waiting for an explanation as to why saying "these models that are painted as Ultramarines are using Raven Guard rules" is so confusing we need to disallow it. But only for Space Marines apparently.

Yup, I'm in that boat - sub-factions didn't really exist for the genestealer cult until the codex came out, and as it turned out because I didn't paint my cultists in neon fething green or orange, and instead in a scheme that's relatively close to Cult of the Four-Armed Emperor, i'm required to always run them as that instead of the cult I want?

That's wack. And then there's my ork army - my favorite unit in the army is Flash Gitz, I own 15 of them plus Badrukk, all painted up in my red+yellow flames color scheme. Now, Freebootas are their own subfaction and flash gitz MUST be freebootas.

So I can either force my opponent to differentiate between which identically painted orks are Freebootas and which are (the correct paint scheme) Evil Sunz, or I can run them all as freebootas, which is less competitive but I like it more because I don't like having two different tactics on the field.

So guess what I'm gonna do? I'm gonna run them as freakin' freebootas. And CAAC internet finger-waggers can't do anything to stop me!

Which is good, too, because I feel like the sight of my Harlequin army where each model is painted completely different colors might cause them to have an aneurysm and die from all the horrible confusion it causes when I choose what masque tactics I want to use.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


Throughout the game, you'll have to remember that the entire army is actually Chaos Space Marine Renegades, and that particular squads are actually Berzerkers, Noise Marines, Plague Marines or Marked. But the opponent claims that the army is WYSIWYG, and gave you a copy of their list, so they say you should accept it.

This part is a total deal-breaker for me. That is a proxy army. No way I would accept that and if my opponent tried to push it I would call a judge. If the judge started waffling about "we agreed it in an email" I would demand my money back for the tickets being sold under false pretence.

Now if every marine squad is a CSM squad with the weapons exactly as shown then I would give it a try - after all tactical marines proxied for CSM is not a big stretch and at no point am I likely to mis-remember which unit type is which and get sucker-punched.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Would you be OK if your Tournament opponent showed up with a 100% perfect Codex Ultramarines army, but played it as Chaos Space Marine Renegades?

Assume:
* $1,000 cash prize
* Tournament Rules require fully WYSIWYG armies, no exceptions
* ALL weapons are "correct"
* ALL models have "correct" Ultramarines Chapter, 5th Company, Squad and soldier insignia
* army composition matches a Codex demi-Company supported by Veterans from 1st Company and auxiliaries
* the Marneus Calgar Special Character model is the Chaos Lord
* Codex: Chaos Space Marines >>> Codex: Ultramarines
* background story is that the Ultramarines 5th Company *just* turned to Chaos, so they haven't had time to repaint their stuff

Throughout the game, you'll have to remember that the entire army is actually Chaos Space Marine Renegades, and that particular squads are actually Berzerkers, Noise Marines, Plague Marines or Marked. But the opponent claims that the army is WYSIWYG, and gave you a copy of their list, so they say you should accept it.

Obviously, the player is playing as Chaos Marines because the army is "better", but would you be cool with that?

If you were the Tournament Organizer, would you allow it?

First of all, there's a lot of worthless information in this post. Why do I give a gak what company they are? The feth does it matter if it's a khador dummi-company or w/e?

The part I care about is: Is it WYSIWYG? If the noise marines have sonic blasters and the bezerkers have chain axes, then we're fine.

Now if he had different chaos marks with no visual differentiation, that would be an issue. Also if he had different legion abilities with no visual way to tell what's what, that would be an issue too.

ERJAK wrote:
If the noise marines have sonic blasters and the bezerkers have chain axes, then we're fine.

If you read more of the thread than the OP, by "correct" weapons, he means they don't have the correct weapons - Noise Marines don't have Sonic Blasters or anything that looks like them.

 ArbitorIan wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:

Wildkarrde wrote:
So what if i get my Salamanders, put a green sticker over the chapter badge so you cant see it anymore on all my models. I then say they are a successor chapter of the Ultramarines called the green spots. How does that work. At what point does it become a custom chapter? Is the just the chapter badge that defines them?

I think for some people it does. Reading through some of the posts here, it would seem some people here take iconography to be very important, to the extent that for them, the wrong chapter badge is not WYSIWIG. I'm not sure I've seen anyone suggest that an Ultramarine army can't be green though. Is anyone here actually suggesting that?

Nope, nobody is suggesting an UM army with the UM trait can't be a green chapter

What we're suggesting is that running an obviously Salamanders army with the UM trait would be confusing.

Why? What's a Salamanders army? Aren't those the little lizard lookin things that can regrow their tails?

I'm guessing from the context that those are some sort of special snowflake space marine army. Okay...sooo...what does their chapter tactic do? Because I(and MOST other people) have no idea. Which is why 99% of everyone just asks you what your chapter tactics do. Marine players think that just because there are a lot of you that everyone has an encyclopedic knowledge of your codex.

Without looking it up, what color scheme is the Ardent Rose Order of the Sisters of Battle? Is that even an actual Order?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
If the noise marines have sonic blasters and the bezerkers have chain axes, then we're fine.

If you read more of the thread than the OP, by "correct" weapons, he means they don't have the correct weapons - Noise Marines don't have Sonic Blasters or anything that looks like them.

Then the thread was written poorly, because it says CORRECT WEAPONS right there at the top.

Noise marines use sonic blasters. If you equip a marine squad with melta guns and CALL them sonic blasters, that's NOT the correct weapon and NOT WYSIWYG and the discussion is over right there. I'm not gonna let a guard player use basilisks as wyverns either.

For the sake of continuing the discussion beyond 'it's not WYSIWYG, duh' I fixed the OPs flawed premise to something that might actually be worth discussing. That way he and by extension you don't waste everyones time with silly nonsense. Which is what almost everyone has been doing for several pages BTW.

ERJAK wrote:

 ArbitorIan wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:

Wildkarrde wrote:
So what if i get my Salamanders, put a green sticker over the chapter badge so you cant see it anymore on all my models. I then say they are a successor chapter of the Ultramarines called the green spots. How does that work. At what point does it become a custom chapter? Is the just the chapter badge that defines them?

I think for some people it does. Reading through some of the posts here, it would seem some people here take iconography to be very important, to the extent that for them, the wrong chapter badge is not WYSIWIG. I'm not sure I've seen anyone suggest that an Ultramarine army can't be green though. Is anyone here actually suggesting that?

Nope, nobody is suggesting an UM army with the UM trait can't be a green chapter

What we're suggesting is that running an obviously Salamanders army with the UM trait would be confusing.

Why? What's a Salamanders army? Aren't those the little lizard lookin things that can regrow their tails?

I'm guessing from the context that those are some sort of special snowflake space marine army. Okay...sooo...what does their chapter tactic do? Because I(and MOST other people) have no idea. Which is why 99% of everyone just asks you what your chapter tactics do. Marine players think that just because there are a lot of you that everyone has an encyclopedic knowledge of your codex.

Which is sad, because they have probably the most interesting trait (inb4 - by "interesting" I mean "most potential to change things" not "powerful"). One reroll per squad, once per turn. Which means if you run "fluffy" Tac squads, you have a reroll for that single Heavy or Special you're trying to leverage. Which would mean they can perform without camping inside the HQs bubble - allowing for a more distributed/interesting battle plan. Unfortunately, you never see them, because deathstar-bubbles are simply better.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
If the noise marines have sonic blasters and the bezerkers have chain axes, then we're fine.

If you read more of the thread than the OP, by "correct" weapons, he means they don't have the correct weapons - Noise Marines don't have Sonic Blasters or anything that looks like them.

Then the thread was written poorly, because it says CORRECT WEAPONS right there at the top.

Noise marines use sonic blasters. If you equip a marine squad with melta guns and CALL them sonic blasters, that's NOT the correct weapon and NOT WYSIWYG and the discussion is over right there. I'm not gonna let a guard player use basilisks as wyverns either.

For the sake of continuing the discussion beyond 'it's not WYSIWYG, duh' I fixed the OPs flawed premise to something that might actually be worth discussing. That way he and by extension you don't waste everyones time with silly nonsense.

\
That's what half this thread has been; the bait & switch between the OP's first post, and the clarifications of what the OP meant

 ArbitorIan wrote:

Drager wrote:
Not necessarily, I don't know you or your character beyond the above post, but the behaviour you describe above - enforcing paint = rules and trying to create an environment were switching Chapter for better rules is discouraged - is how the most TFG guys I've met behave.

It smacks of telling people they are having fun wrong and it's frankly very rude. It's totally within your rights to refuse a game for any reason, but giving people the side eye, impugning their character (implying they will cheat as you do above) and creating an environment that's hostile to them is the epitome of TFG.

I might have misunderstood your post, but that's how it came across to me.

I think you might have an extremely different idea of the definition of TFG to most people.

Either that or you’re deliberately trying to muddy the waters by ‘redefining’ it from bad/cheating/rules-lawyering player to some sort of too-casual person.

But yeah, definitely not the definition of TFG most people would use.

But you yourself have claimed that the rules don't matter, so by your own logic his definition of TFG is perfectly valid and by rejecting it, YOU are in the wrong.

One man's TFG is another man's saint.

I think most people generally agree on who's TFG and who's not, but there's bound to be variance.

 ArbitorIan wrote:
- If they look like Salamanders, play them as Salamanders. If they look like green not-Salamanders, play them as whatever your want.
- If they look like Blood Angels, play them as Blood Angels. If they look like orangey-red not-Blood Angels, play them as whatever you want.

Exactly!

Bharring wrote:
One man's TFG is another man's saint.

I think most people generally agree on who's TFG and who's not, but there's bound to be variance.

More like "every man's TFG is one guy's saint".

I've yet to meet a TFG that doesn't have justification for how they act in their own head, and doesn't feel that their reputation isn't unfairly placed upon them. As I've been involved in the leadership of a large gaming club for several years, I've had to have "the talk" with a lot of people garnering TFG reputations, let them know that people are consistently having negative experiences playing with them, and ask them to change their behavior or leave the group. The most common categories I find are:

"My faction/model collection is Underpowered, I am just giving them the things they should have, it's not my fault GW is incompetent/hates my faction/people play powergame armies" (most common response from people who repeatedly get complained about for cheating)

"I just play by the rules as they are written, if you can show me in the rules where what I'm doing is wrong I will change what I'm doing." (most common response from people with...very interesting interpretations of what rules "definitely" mean, who are extremely blatant about following the rules exactly to what they see as "the letter of the law" and do things like egregious modeling for advantage, list-building loopholes, weird intentionally confusing proxies etc.)

The reason these discussions come up and get so heated on the internet is that both parties have an extremely common TFG-type they're tilting against. Type 1 TFG who can't handle losing so he "misremembers' the stats and abilities of his models, "accidentally" shows up to the table with extra points, and ignores most of the rules of the game in favor of trying to get the high of a win is the kind of TFG I imagine the "Rules As Written" crowd on the forum are tilting against. Type 2 TFG who combs through the rulebook looking for anything he can arguably exploit like telescoping antennas on his tanks to draw line of sight, models blatantly proxied as other models like unpainted Space Marines as Genestealer Cultists that are more competitive to intentionally confuse and gain advantage in game, and claiming he can draw line of sight through a mirror is the kind of person OP is imagining and tilting against.

I think these are two different concepts:

1. The "Everyone's a hero in their own story" discussion - even most TFGs think they're the "good guy".

2. Variations in what's acceptable/reasonable between people. I was surprised to see some people suggest list-tailoring for tactical advantage was part of the game in another thread - that seems like a big not-OK to me, but apparently not to everyone. On the other hand, you have people who think it's cheating to not have written your list in stone before you even show up, long before you know who you're facing/what board/what narrative you're playing.

I also agree on the "two different TFG" types you're laying out. BCB for example (I hope @BCB agrees with this, not picking on him) would probably love to play a mirror of himself - and there are other people suitable technical. Other people would hate to play someone as technical as BCB (note: "technical" and "rules-lawyery" are synonyms, after all).

More people would hate the "misremembering" player, but there have been a couple posters here, from time to time, who have defended that "playstyle", so even that is not TFG to everybody (which is hard for me to accept, but clearly true).

Playing by the rules cannot, by definition, be TFG behaviour.

Think about it, if it was, then asking your opponent to roll to hit for his shooting is TFG behaviour.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Playing by the rules cannot, by definition, be TFG behaviour.

Not heard of the ol' lawful evil? You can play exactly by the letter of the rules (which even I suspect you do not do) and be an utter bellend about it.

The advent of lack of WYSIWYG in 8th is one of these things. "bUT iT's NoT iN tHe RuLeS!"

Evil isn't the only form of Lawful.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Playing by the rules cannot, by definition, be TFG behaviour.

Think about it, if it was, then asking your opponent to roll to hit for his shooting is TFG behaviour.

Um, no. "playing by the rules" is a defense of particular types of TFG behavior and absolutely 100% falls under the heading.

You always do this, posit some bizarre reductio ad absurdum argument whereby ANYTHING you can argue as "Rules As Written" is perfectly admissable because "that's the game you're playing" while simultaneously curating a little list in your signatures of rules interactions that make enormous swathes of the game completely impossible to play.

I have no doubt at all that you sincerely believe that the game is in fact impossible to play, and that everyone who does believe they are playing the game is in fact playing an elaborate construct of "house rules". And, by your own reductio ad absurdem arguments, you'd be right.

But then you also have to accept that following the rules as written, requiring your opponent to have 93 (or whatever you're up to) printed documents to play the game, disallowing your opponent from ever using an assault weapon after advancing because they're not allowed to be selected to shoot, setting up mirrors around the board to allow your models to always draw line of sight to every other model on the board, standing your tanks up on end to draw line of sight and then putting them back down on the board to get out of LOS....literally makes what everyone but you calls "playing the game" impossible.

There is no definition of "TFG behavior" that does not include "Making the game impossible to play".

Add in to that the fact that despite your attitude of "everything I say is the word of god and once I've said it there is no dispute on the matter" there actually IS plenty of argument to be had regarding the rules.

As far as I can tell, you're using the following line in the rules as the basis of your argument in this thread:

"The rules and characteristics of all models, and some terrain features, are presented on datasheets, which you will need in order to use the models in battle."

To you, this appears to be a sentence that indicates beyond any shadow of the doubt that each possible model produced by Games Workshop must have one single possible datasheet corresponding to its playable rules. Someone else might not see that rule as providing any rules content whatsoever beyond "you must assign datasheets to your models" and make the argument that any model can correspond to any datasheet you like. Both of those can encompass TFG behavior. You could take your interpretation and refuse to play with somebody's minorly converted model because it is not the exact model that must correspond to that datasheet. You can take his interpretation and model a baneblade with a 3-foot tall extendable antenna that allows it to draw line of sight to everything on the board (I use that example because I've seen that).

But if someone with that attitude played someone else with that attitude, would they be TFG? Or would it be two players mutually enjoying a technical game?

Bharring wrote:
But if someone with that attitude played someone else with that attitude, would they be TFG? Or would it be two players mutually enjoying a technical game?

You'd need two players with identical opinions on what the various vague rules mean, and then it'd be pretty much impossible to play the game because the game just isn't designed in a perfectly technical way. You'd get bogged down trying to figure out how much you're legally allowed/required to "stoop down" to draw line of sight, whether you can "stoop down" if you're already seated in a chair, what angle is required to make with your back in order to be "stooping" and then they'd have to wait a few months for a FAQ answer to that question in order to finish the first shooting phase.

the_scotsman wrote:
But then you also have to accept that following the rules as written, requiring your opponent to have 93 (or whatever you're up to) printed documents to play the game, disallowing your opponent from ever using an assault weapon after advancing because they're not allowed to be selected to shoot, setting up mirrors around the board to allow your models to always draw line of sight to every other model on the board, standing your tanks up on end to draw line of sight and then putting them back down on the board to get out of LOS....literally makes what everyone but you calls "playing the game" impossible.

You complain about stawmen and then build up two yourself. How to draw LOS is defined clearly in the rules and via FAQ, and you can't move your tanks after you shoot (unless you charge in the Charge Phase), so while you can stand your tanks up on their ends, you'll end up being a beacon for return fire unless you charge.

But yes, I don't allow my opponent to use assault weapons after advancing because the rules don't allow you to do so.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
But then you also have to accept that following the rules as written, requiring your opponent to have 93 (or whatever you're up to) printed documents to play the game, disallowing your opponent from ever using an assault weapon after advancing because they're not allowed to be selected to shoot, setting up mirrors around the board to allow your models to always draw line of sight to every other model on the board, standing your tanks up on end to draw line of sight and then putting them back down on the board to get out of LOS....literally makes what everyone but you calls "playing the game" impossible.

You complain about stawmen and then build up two yourself. How to draw LOS is defined clearly in the rules and via FAQ, and you can't move your tanks after you shoot (unless you charge in the Charge Phase), so while you can stand your tanks up on their ends, you'll end up being a beacon for return fire unless you charge.

The fact that you accept the fact that you can stand a tank up on end to draw line of sight and don't allow your opponent to fire assault weapons after advancing but also do not recognize that that would very clearly be viewed as TFG behavior I think says more than I could ever really reply with, so I'm just going to leave it there.

the_scotsman wrote:
The fact that you accept the fact that you can stand a tank up on end to draw line of sight but also do not recognize that that would very clearly be viewed as TFG behavior I think says more than I could ever really reply with, so I'm just going to leave it there.

So, again, by your logic asking your opponent to only have 1 shot with their meltagun instead of 200 is also TFG behaviour. I don't view following the rules as TFG behaviour in any circumstances because following the rules is the entire point of having a rules system.

Here is a challenge for you, let's have a game on TTS but I get to follow your own logic and get to ignore any rules I find inconvenient. My 200" range LOS ignoring Railguns that are heavy 200 will have lots of fun!

No; by his logic, asking your opponent to have 0 shots with their melta gun instead of 1 after advancing is a problem, as RAI is clear to him and his opponent.

Alternatively, by your logic, asking to get 1 shot instead of 0 with the same advancing meltagun is a problem, as RAW is clear to you and your opponent.

Outside clearly and cleannly defined systems, it's quite possible - and with enough chaos, probable - that there would be 2 or more entirely valid but mutually exclusive understandings.

Bharring wrote:
No; by his logic, asking your opponent to have 0 shots with their melta gun instead of 1 after advancing is a problem, as RAI is clear to him and his opponent.

Alternatively, by your logic, asking to get 1 shot instead of 0 with the same advancing meltagun is a problem, as RAW is clear to you and your opponent.

Um, there's a two and zero before that last zero...

So that's not what he's saying at all.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
The fact that you accept the fact that you can stand a tank up on end to draw line of sight but also do not recognize that that would very clearly be viewed as TFG behavior I think says more than I could ever really reply with, so I'm just going to leave it there.

So, again, by your logic asking your opponent to only have 1 shot with their meltagun instead of 200 is also TFG behaviour. I don't view following the rules as TFG behaviour in any circumstances because following the rules is the entire point of having a rules system.

Here is a challenge for you, let's have a game on TTS but I get to follow your own logic and get to ignore any rules I find inconvenient. My 200" range LOS ignoring Railguns that are heavy 200 will have lots of fun!

Here is a challenge for you: Travel, in person, to any Games Workshop store with a large group of people playing. Play against an actual human opponent, stand up your tank on end to draw line of sight, and refuse to allow your opponent to fire an Assault weapon after advancing.

Call the owner of the store over and explain that what you've done is allowed in the rules, and your opponent is cheating, and demand that they be kicked out of the store.

the_scotsman wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
The fact that you accept the fact that you can stand a tank up on end to draw line of sight but also do not recognize that that would very clearly be viewed as TFG behavior I think says more than I could ever really reply with, so I'm just going to leave it there.

So, again, by your logic asking your opponent to only have 1 shot with their meltagun instead of 200 is also TFG behaviour. I don't view following the rules as TFG behaviour in any circumstances because following the rules is the entire point of having a rules system.

Here is a challenge for you, let's have a game on TTS but I get to follow your own logic and get to ignore any rules I find inconvenient. My 200" range LOS ignoring Railguns that are heavy 200 will have lots of fun!

Here is a challenge for you: Travel, in person, to any Games Workshop store with a large group of people playing. Play against an actual human opponent, stand up your tank on end to draw line of sight, and refuse to allow your opponent to fire an Assault weapon after advancing.

Call the owner of the store over and explain that what you've done is allowed in the rules, and your opponent is cheating, and demand that they be kicked out of the store.

House Rules are House Rules. And I would never call someone a cheater unless they are intentionally ignoring the rules for an unfair advantage. Someone not realising you can't shoot after advancing because of GW's crappy rules isn't a cheater. Likewise, I would never play in a club or store that had such extreme House Rules as to ignore clear RaW.

Also TIL that people on the other end of a Tabletop Simulator game are actually goats and/or robots. Robot-goats. Rowboat. Alpharius confirmed for Goat Robot.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
The fact that you accept the fact that you can stand a tank up on end to draw line of sight but also do not recognize that that would very clearly be viewed as TFG behavior I think says more than I could ever really reply with, so I'm just going to leave it there.

So, again, by your logic asking your opponent to only have 1 shot with their meltagun instead of 200 is also TFG behaviour. I don't view following the rules as TFG behaviour in any circumstances because following the rules is the entire point of having a rules system.

Here is a challenge for you, let's have a game on TTS but I get to follow your own logic and get to ignore any rules I find inconvenient. My 200" range LOS ignoring Railguns that are heavy 200 will have lots of fun!

Here is a challenge for you: Travel, in person, to any Games Workshop store with a large group of people playing. Play against an actual human opponent, stand up your tank on end to draw line of sight, and refuse to allow your opponent to fire an Assault weapon after advancing.

Call the owner of the store over and explain that what you've done is allowed in the rules, and your opponent is cheating, and demand that they be kicked out of the store.

House Rules are House Rules.

IOW "I've already been banned from my local GW for being a knob so cannot do this as everyone in the local area won't play me".

Have you even played a game IRL?