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.

Show Outline for Episode 6

Intro and Cast

Tim Gunther from the Drop Podcast and The Forge Podcast

Jeff Carroll from the other side of the world and Podhamer the Warhammer Fantasy Podcast

Andrew Sutton aka Stelek from DakkaDakka

Troy McCauley from The Samurai Gunslinger Blog.

Feedback

News Items

Monsterpocalypse RuleBook Released in pdf


BattleLore and Memoir 44 Expansions announced


Armorcast releasing extensive line of muzzle flash extensions during Gen Con


Operation Frostbite Released to the Public

Battlefield Evolution: Pacific War now available for pre order


DISCUSSION TOPIC: 1 Fluffy Bunnies Vs WAAC’s

DISCUSSION TOPIC: 2 Warhammer Army Book Dark Elves

To listen or download go to This Week in Wargaming

Well, where to start?

I am certain Dakka mods will view this podcast to be a provocative one, thats certain.

First, what is said is meant with the intention of constructive criticism.

Lets start with the airing of grievances.

Stelek states that he is not willing to change. Or rather he cant be bullied to change. His opening statement is one of stubborn nonacceptance of the fact that he comes of as a gakker in how he communicates and is unwilling to change how he is perceived.

Not only that, but Stelek digresses from the issue at hand and that is his negativity. He fails to address it in a straightforward manner by attempting to explain it through rationale that the game forces him to be that way. When he steps into a thread and dismissively berates an persons model with such harsh criticism, nothing constructive can be gleaned from it, it is quite apparent that the Stelek goes out of his way to be negative most especially when unsolicited.

Let me qualify the above by saying that as a poster of Dakka for many years, I have seen a lot of grumpy people come and go here. Myself included many times in fact. Good conversation grows from places where opinions collide. Thats how progress is made.

That said, Stelek says has not learned the subtle and necessary art of tact. I believe he does know this art, but willfully ignores it. He is too intelligent to not know that he comes off as a crass and belligerent person who mocks everything that he disagrees with. In short, his style of communicating comes across as what Goethe once described as a Philistine character "The Philistine not only ignores all conditions of life which are not his own but also demands that the rest of mankind should fashion its mode of existence after his own."

He has some really innovative and valid points on many occasions. I have to admit that I have learned a lot from his posts.... if and when I can be bothered to decipher meaning through the fog of over-the-top pessimism.

[edit] As an after thought, I would prefer if you would not use this feedback in your podcast.
Especially after hearing the insulting accents spoken in part for the speakers. Thanks.[/edit]

Note to you, Stelek:
Normally this wouldn't be said in a public fora, but since this issue is raised and addressed by you in such a public fashion, I feel that it is fair to respond in kind. I am sure you can be a nice guy in person, but your persona communicating on the internet is so greatly lacking, that is is hard to see any credibility in nearly anything you post. This is meant to be constructive, and I can see why it would be hard to take constructively. But I feel I cannot pull any punches with you, as you do not do so in kind.

Now, as for the rest of the podcast:

Tsk Tsk. Starshiptroopers 3 eh? Well, we all make mistakes.

Also, I agree with your stance on the sharing of information on the internet, but... the whole reason Joss Whedon made those episodes available when he did was so people wouldn't do that. Granted with the episodes up for such a limited amount of time, it is hard to catch, but he did make it free to the public before he makes it into DVD. I have to give Mr. Whedon credit for that and I wont be going through alternate sources to get this until the DVD is released. Which normally is against my character.

After that, I think I have been negative enough for one post, so I wont comment further on the rest of the podcast.

Well, I spent alot of time thinking about whether replying to this would be conducive to rational discussion or not.

I finally decided after a few days, deleting my replies every day, to give it a shot.

Hellfury wrote:Stelek states that he is not willing to change. Or rather he cant be bullied to change. His opening statement is one of stubborn nonacceptance of the fact that he comes off as a gakker in how he communicates and is unwilling to change how he is perceived.

Correct. I am how I am. You'll note I didn't report you for calling me a gakker, because sometimes I am--I didn't report it because I respect what you have to say. And despite everything you said, I don't think it was meant to be disrespectful the way alot of posts are when directed at me.

Anyway, I've changed alot in my life. Some things, just won't ever change.

Hellfury wrote:Not only that, but Stelek digresses from the issue at hand and that is his negativity. He fails to address it in a straightforward manner by attempting to explain it through rationale that the game forces him to be that way. When he steps into a thread and dismissively berates an persons model with such harsh criticism, nothing constructive can be gleaned from it, it is quite apparent that the Stelek goes out of his way to be negative most especially when unsolicited.

I don't ever go out of my way to be negative. My criticism IS harsh. I'm not anybody's mother. Not going to coddle anybody.

Hellfury wrote:Let me qualify the above by saying that as a poster of Dakka for many years, I have seen a lot of grumpy people come and go here. Myself included many times in fact. Good conversation grows from places where opinions collide. Thats how progress is made.

So we're making progress.

Hellfury wrote:That said, Stelek says has not learned the subtle and necessary art of tact. I believe he does know this art, but willfully ignores it. He is too intelligent to not know that he comes off as a crass and belligerent person who mocks everything that he disagrees with. In short, his style of communicating comes across as what Goethe once described as a Philistine character "The Philistine not only ignores all conditions of life which are not his own but also demands that the rest of mankind should fashion its mode of existence after his own."

You forget that I am a well-educated man, and that Goethe's writings are best known for their dialectical bend.

Often I attempt to use this method to resolve a discussion rationally, to get to the truth--that's key to my philosophy.

Whatever the truth might be, let it be known..."live thoughtfully, and by that token fully, in the world of common experience".

Nothing is easy, especially not the truth.

It's only when I have to rely on science that I rely less on dialectical discussions and more on well, science itself.

The Double Slit Experiment is a great example. You can know something, yet never be able to witness it and thus be unable to prove it.

It's a paradox. Much of what I have to say, I know. I can also never prove it.

So if I learn the subtle art of tact (well, I do know it) but choose not to apply it, is there a reason I do not?

Simply put, it dilutes my message. I don't want anyone to have to guess what I am saying.

I want the truth out there, even if only I can see it and it can never be proven--I don't want anyone quibbling over a word I said.

Hellfury wrote:He has some really innovative and valid points on many occasions. I have to admit that I have learned a lot from his posts.... if and when I can be bothered to decipher meaning through the fog of over-the-top pessimism.

It's part of who I am. Some call it being a realist. I don't know about being real or not, but I do have an unflagging desire to see the truth through to the end.

I call it being empowered with an overwhelming common sense.

If it even hints of mediocrity, I have to call it such.

Hellfury wrote:Note to you, Stelek:
Normally this wouldn't be said in a public fora, but since this issue is raised and addressed by you in such a public fashion, I feel that it is fair to respond in kind. I am sure you can be a nice guy in person, but your persona communicating on the internet is so greatly lacking, that is is hard to see any credibility in nearly anything you post. This is meant to be constructive, and I can see why it would be hard to take constructively. But I feel I cannot pull any punches with you, as you do not do so in kind.

That is your loss. If you cannot sort through the negative feedback, how do you know you aren't missing a vital truth?

If I take the time (and I do, alot of it) to give people a dose of reality in their lists and tactics, but my delivery offends, they can simply choose to ignore me and enjoy their violet view of the universe.

"You know in war you don't have to be nice, you only have to be right."

Remember my mission? I aim to change the world, even if it's only a very small insignificant part of it.

[edit] As an after thought, I would prefer if you would not use this feedback in your podcast.
Especially after hearing the insulting accents spoken in part for the speakers. Thanks.[/edit]

Well I certainly did not mean for them to be insulting, and this is the first comment I have seen that did not take them with the light humorous tone they were intended with, including one of the quoted parties who got quite a kick out of it. In any case I will certainly heed to your request and not include the post as feedback.

I was also curious as you hinted you had more negative feedback on the rest of the show. That piques my curiosity as there did not seem to be much beyond Stelek's retort that was particularly controversial.

Still, as allways, thank you very much for taking the time to provide some feedback.

As for Stelek, well he is pretty good at defending himself

Pretty disappointing, Dakka has an ignore feature but no such option for TWIW. At least let us know when he will be a guest so we can avoid dling that episode ...

I have to agree with Hellfury on several points. I have been one to jump on your back more than a few times Stelek, and I have often made an A hole of myself in the process. So let me apologize for some of the harsher things I have said as they ulitmately are not contructive, only mean.

You do know your 40K very well, I think some of your tactica articles are great and some fo the lists you post are inovative and very effective, and I enjoy reading them.

But, you do not HAVE to be so abbrasive about things. You rip people left and right then when anyone says anything negative to you, you run to Yakface and report them for being mean to you, when you do the same to everyone else.

My suggestion is to try and be nice in your critiques, or at least less arrogant. And if you are going to dish the insults out, be prepared to take them in return. If, as you state, you are just being yourself, then dont cry about it when someone gives you a dose of your own medicine as they are just doing what comes naturally to them as well.

You are not master yoda and this is not real war, its a game with toy soldiers that we all enjoy playing and bsing about and one in which we can all learn form each other by posting here. No one of us is the master of all things 40K, we are all prepetual students of this game and that is why it is so enjoyable to post here as, in my opinion, the best minds in 40K congregate at Dakkadakka. No ones opinions or ideas are bullet proof or total garbage.

I think if you at least attempt to be more civil, people will be more apt to listen and that you will enjoy your time here and not have to go on a rant trying to defend your behaivor. There are no fundamental truths that state that the only effective lesson is a harsh one.

As far as Goethe is is concerned (and i am sure no one cares about or is immpressed by our knowledge of German literature, but oh well, the topic has been raised), in his most famous work, Faust, shows that the things that are least important in life: banality, malicousness and triviality, are impodied in Mpehistopheles or, the Devil. Faust recognizes that anyone absorbed in thses things is missing out on the greater human experience and is in fact, the antithesis to what Faust becomes when he gains redemtion. Being mean, spiteful and uncaring of other peoples feelings is what Goethe shows us is the lowest of human characteristics. And, like Faust, anyone is capable of changing at any point. Sayin gthat you ar unable to change is bulloney, it means you are unwilling to change which untimately, is your loss as it will drive people away form you.

You bring a lot to the table, you are intelligent and have a good mind for 40K, it would only be a good thing for you, or anyone for that matter, to be more positive.

At any rate, i will get off of my sopabox, lord knows i am not perfect.

I thought the podcast was good on the whole and gained some useful info so thanks for that and please keep them coming.

Stelek wrote:
You forget that I am a well-educated man, and that Goethe's writings are best known for their dialectical bend.

Often I attempt to use this method to resolve a discussion rationally, to get to the truth--that's key to my philosophy.

Whatever the truth might be, let it be known..."live thoughtfully, and by that token fully, in the world of common experience".

Nothing is easy, especially not the truth.

It's only when I have to rely on science that I rely less on dialectical discussions and more on well, science itself.

The Double Slit Experiment is a great example. You can know something, yet never be able to witness it and thus be unable to prove it.

It's a paradox. Much of what I have to say, I know. I can also never prove it.

So if I learn the subtle art of tact (well, I do know it) but choose not to apply it, is there a reason I do not?

Simply put, it dilutes my message. I don't want anyone to have to guess what I am saying.

I want the truth out there, even if only I can see it and it can never be proven--I don't want anyone quibbling over a word I said.

The dialectic implies a process of give and take such that one might productively search for truth. It makes no claim that one might ever actually find such a truth. Indeed, Goethe (in the Platonic tradition) was well known for his treatment of the forms (of which truth is a manifestation) as something which would be forever beyond the grasp of any given individual. In the Socratic mode: "The only thing I know is that I know nothing."

In any case, tact isn't a matter of diluting your message. Clarity and subtlety are not opposing forces. Indeed, the rejection of social convention often will cause people to misconstrue your message as discordant ranting, unworthy of due consideration. You mention the double-slit experiment as a means of describing your predicament, but I think you misinterpret its meaning. Positing truth as a self-evident conclusion, given a relevant set of data, should not all people be able to arrive at that conclusion, given access to the pertinent information? If that is not the case, if the data which underpins a given 'truth' does not necessarily lead to that 'truth', should the nature of 'truth' itself be re-examined? Should it not be clear that the truth is in fact an artifact of context and nuance that is somehow above simple factual synthesis?

Stelek wrote:
That is your loss. If you cannot sort through the negative feedback, how do you know you aren't missing a vital truth?

The same question could be posed to you. If you refuse to entertain the observations of other how can you be certain that you are not missing an important element of the truth?

Stelek wrote:

Hellfury wrote: In short, his style of communicating comes across as what Goethe once described as a Philistine character "The Philistine not only ignores all conditions of life which are not his own but also demands that the rest of mankind should fashion its mode of existence after his own."

You forget that I am a well-educated man, and that Goethe's writings are best known for their dialectical bend.

I made a vow not to comment further on this thread since I have said what has needed to be said, but since Stelek has requested rebuttal to his post, I can only offer this:

There is another poster on another board who commented to me saying "Hellfury, After seeing his rambling response I think you should not have used the Goethe unless you were hoping he would follow Werther's example.".

While I don't think it is quite fair that you should commit suicide like Werther does, Werther is relevant to this discussion, as does Reecius post regarding Goethe.

Werther was another person whom Goethe wrote about concerning Philistinism in "The Sorrows of young Werther".
Werther relates to you because like Werther you are an egomaniac. An egomaniac with a point, but an egomaniac none the less.
As I described earlier about Goethe's definition of Philistine, Everything in Werther's world exists only exists in relation to its effects on him. This is a direct reflection on many ways I seeing you posting.

Nobody has a problem with you, personally (even though it does get quite personal), its how you portray yourself. And thats where it becomes a damned shame. Its tantamount to wasted potential.

No, you shouldn't change yourself and bend to the whims of others, I agree. But thats not the same thing as being conscious of how others view you, and communicating with them in a respectful accord.

I simply cannot stress that enough.


[edit to fix some truly horrendous spelling. I need to type slower and proof read my crap.]

@ dogma: I acknowledged the truth of what was said about me. What more can I do? Change to suit the masses clamoring for my head? You can have my head first.

@ Reecius: I don't tell people to feth off, to feth themselves, that they are fething donkey-caves, etc etc etc.

In short, while I might use a shotgun to spread the love I don't single people out with stuff that is strictly against the rules.

Since I get singled out for doing stuff that ISN'T strictly against the rules (or for which there is a rule and I didn't break it but I had 5 people report me) then I'm damn sure going to report people for actually breaking the rules.

I like a good argument as much as the next guy. If I don't tell you to f-ck off, you should not tell me to. You don't "know" what I'm thinking, so assuming by some kind of negativity that I'm screaming "f-ck off" at my computer is a serious fallacy. No one has ever gotten me angry on Dakka. Annoyed at times, but that's about it.

I guess you could say, I have a thick skin but a low tolerance for intolerance and secret/double standards.

Nobody has a problem with you, personally (even though it does get quite personal), its how you portray yourself. And thats where it becomes a damned shame. Its tantamount to wasted potential.

No, you shouldn't change yourself and bend to the whims of others, I agree. But thats not the same thing as being conscious of how others view you, and communicating with them in a respectful accord.

I simply cannot stress that enough.

See, that's something I can work with. And that is something I am working on.

I'm still working out ten years of GW rage. Takes a while to burn off that much steam, ya know. You just happen to be in the same vicinity as me while I'm doing it.

I'm trying to focus my vitriol into my blog instead of dakka. That way dakka can be a happier place, and everyone wins.

You know, it's pretty funny how times change. I seem to recall in the old days it was Mauleed who was full of piss and vinegar and vitriol. And since I came back to Dakka this winter, Mauleed's all mellow now and has passed the torch to Stelek. (In truth, when I first came back and read Stelek's posts and didn't see Mauleed around for a while, I thought Mauleed had changed his name to Stelek.)

Do I think that the vitriol is good for Dakka? Maybe not too much of it, but I think that it's the frank talk from experienced vets that makes Dakka the "Straight Talk Express" of the 40k Forum World. There's a lot to learn from the clash of ideas. Maybe I've just gotten jaded by being on Dakka for too long, but I don't come here expecting everyone to be all nice and happy with each other. I mean, I always love to see players on Dakka being supportive of one another, but Dakka is as much the internet as anywhere else and consequently, that means flames, attacks, and other ugliness. That said, I think the Mods here do a great job of knowing just when to step in - they keep a good balance of the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Stelek wrote:@ dogma: I acknowledged the truth of what was said about me. What more can I do? Change to suit the masses clamoring for my head? You can have my head first.

I don't want your head. Indeed, the only people that would are those who open themselves to the same criticisms that are frequently leveled at you. I want you to see that engaging with the world is not some black and white proposition that requires either single minded egotism or meek acquiescence.

As has been said, you have a great deal to offer the community, and none of us is above the occasional rant. I (and others) are merely suggesting that your self-proclaimed mission would be better served if you were to treat alternative opinions with the kind of respect you demand of your own.

Death By Monkeys wrote:I think that it's the frank talk from experienced vets that makes Dakka the "Straight Talk Express" of the 40k Forum World.

The reason I am here and nowhere else. For the longest time, I was just on the army builder forum arguing semantics with Ghaz but unable to really participate in online forums because I felt doing so would compromise my position as a neutral observer of the game system and possibly lead to tainted army lists.

dogma wrote:I don't want your head. Indeed, the only people that would are those who open themselves to the same criticisms that are frequently leveled at you. I want you to see that engaging with the world is not some black and white proposition that requires either single minded egotism or meek acquiescence.

As has been said, you have a great deal to offer the community, and none of us is above the occasional rant. I (and others) are merely suggesting that your self-proclaimed mission would be better served if you were to treat alternative opinions with the kind of respect you demand of your own.

Ah I am very black and white on alot of things. Some I have compromise on, but the list is indeed short. Call it a failing of my humanity.

I do try to treat alternative opinions with respect. Few people share my insights, thus the mission--and the clash. Alot of players believe running the internets favorite baby or their local store heroes latest fun build out of a battleforce boxed set makes for good games of 40k. I don't think it does. I think you can make for good tactics in 40k (although "real" tactics like movement, shrouding, smoke, concealment, ambush, suppressing fire, etc all don't really exist in 40k) but you need to know them before you can build an army.

Most players find the models they like, make an army out of them, and get crushed. Then they sell their army, and try again. Or worse, quit entirely and call 40k crap.

I want to reverse that trend. I want to grow the hobby. I want more people knowing how the intricacies of 40k list building, 40k tactics, and the bell curve all interact with each other equally.

That way, they can STILL build a list based off the models they like--they just have to know how to USE it properly. I want to help people be able to do that. Every unit has a place. I can find it if no one else can. If you can find them...the A-team. lolz

Anyway the reason I am so hard on people is there is no 'fair' in wargaming. If it's there, it's fair. It beats your army in 2 turns? Don't bring armies that are so weak!

I'm taking one of the weakest, fluffiest, crap armies to Vegas just to see how well I can do. Not because I don't know how to build a powerful army. Because I do. But because I know I can beat most players out there, even with this craptastic army, unless they bring a well-honed army they have alot of experience with. I asked to run a lower points army but I got told not to, so I have to run a crap fluff army instead of a hard core list minus 500 points. lol Well so be it.

Sorry, I'll stop now. Not sure where is leading.

Egomania, maybe.

After listenning to Ep6 I relistened to Ep5 and I agree Stelek was incredibly negative.

Its not cynical when you are only paying attention to the negaives (case in point the FAQs; when reviewing the FAQs stelek just brought up the mistakes/abusive loopholes - at no time did he on his own bring up a good decision of the FAQs and instead had to be prompted to say *one* good thing.)

Stelek; have you tried to actually say one or two good things before starting on the negatives?

Yes I can see in some cases that you have to be blunt; but in most cases there is always something good to be said.

If GW can actually re-release FAQ's say every 3 months, AND re-release FAQ's that make a Codex playable instead of making people wait 2 years for a new one...that's positive.

So far, I haven't seen this. And sadly I haven't had the time to follow through as I'd like to.

See; now your learning

Aeon wrote:After listenning to Ep6 I relistened to Ep5 and I agree Stelek was incredibly negative.

Its not cynical when you are only paying attention to the negaives (case in point the FAQs; when reviewing the FAQs stelek just brought up the mistakes/abusive loopholes - at no time did he on his own bring up a good decision of the FAQs and instead had to be prompted to say *one* good thing.)

Stelek; have you tried to actually say one or two good things before starting on the negatives?

Yes I can see in some cases that you have to be blunt; but in most cases there is always something good to be said.

You noticed that too? All of his comments are what he did not like about it, and everything that he said was negative.

Here are his comments from Mr. Brightside from the TWIW 5th podcast: (I had to listen to that ear-raping again)

On 5th Edition:
He complained about his friends who use torrent of fire armies, and how they are unkillable (IG and Tyranids with deathspitters). How no Imperial armies survived 5th edition. Orks did not survive 5th edition. Eldar are an uber army that can’t be stopped (especially his jetbike army). Clear battlefields with no cover saves and how a lot of models slow down the game.

On Tournaments:
How all of his opponents are jerks and that they all demand a 5+ cover save. After the first game of all tournaments you and your opponent are jerks.

On FAQs:
How Skyleap is broken. How firing vibro cannons into combat is stupid. How drop pods can contest objectives. You need to pass a LD check for SW to use counter attack. How SW are no longer have the immunity to out-numbering. You can’t stop Ork vehicles from moving forward. How broken-good Deff Rollas are. How worthless Wytch Weapons are. The new FNP and how overpowered Grotesques with WWP are. How Tau vehicles are death in KP missions. How bad Holocaust is now. SoBs are the only good units in a witch hunter’s army. His comments on tyrannids are that he did not have anything to complain about.

In fact, the host had to prompt him to say something that was positive and he said that he liked the new PotMS rules for the Grey Knights. Otherwise he never said anything else positive.

Compare this to John (Brimstone from Warseer) was for the most part positive with his comments. What I do not like is how that represents Dakka to the public. Here is Stelek from Dakka, he is negative and hates everything about the hobby you enjoy. Here is John from Warseer who is positive and likes what he sees about the game. What website would you go to?



In his review of the Dark Elf army book (from the 6th podcast) his review of the units were either things were broken good, or crap. He says he looks at a lot of things as black and white which makes for a horrible reviewer because if he can’t see more then one way to play, or more than one way to use a unit.

To give an example of this, in his chaos tactica he states under Chaos units that aren't very good:

Chaos Sorcerer. Dies to power fists or regular marines beating on him--T4 with 3+ save impresses nobody, mister! Demon Prince isn't BS3 anymore, so hiding and casting psychic powers is all he does. Is as useless in CC as a standard SM character.

When in fact Chaos Sorcerers are one of the best units in the Chaos Codex.


But those are his opinions, and he is entitled to them. What I did not like was how he spoke as if he was knowledgeable of the US tournament scene. He has no idea about it what so ever. Not only that, but no one can speak with any reasonable degree of knowledge about it because it changes so much from store to store, and region to region. I have played in a lot of tournaments this past year in over 7 states, and I can speak only in generalizations in a few select areas, but to have him speak like he knows all about tournaments in the US and how US gamers are was pure malarkey. What is funny is that the US was portrayed as ultra competitive, and the UK are guys looking to just have a good time, when in the US GTs have more emphasis on soft scores, and comp, where in the UK there is no comp, and you take the cheesiest, most abusive army you can make.

When I was listening to their topic of tournaments and they talked about comp and sportsmanship and Stelek did not say a word. I was waiting for him to leap in and talk about how he scored (by far) the lowest sportsmanship score in the LVGT last year.

Gee, can't imagine what your deal is. Oh right, we both know.

Blackmoor wrote:
On 5th Edition:
He complained about his friends who use torrent of fire armies, and how they are unkillable (IG and Tyranids with deathspitters). How no Imperial armies survived 5th edition. Orks did not survive 5th edition. Eldar are an uber army that can’t be stopped (especially his jetbike army). Clear battlefields with no cover saves and how a lot of models slow down the game.

Yes, you go ahead and try to kill IG with unmodified LD9 running around. Didn't kill the gun? You accomplished nothing.

Fired a lascannon at a Nid Warrior, got past the 4+ save? Good for you, caused a wound. Since they can back up and fire, good luck getting anything but a land raider force there.

What imperial army survived unscathed into 5th edition? So far, it seems like only Black Templar can put out a competitive build.

Horde Orks is what everyone believes is best in their fluff, not a damn shooting army. Horde Orks are crap!

Eldar are able to do everything. With every list. Not uber? Then why are you playing them? Why is everyone playing them? Because Marines are just too good and they'd feel embarressed if they ran the all-powerful Ultramarines? Come on.

Clear battlefields and alot of different models getting slammed by torrent of fire DOES slow the game down. Somehow we (the players) can't figure out ing VP's, but then GW asks the same players to do simple math and divide 13 by 3? Yeah, that doesn't slow the game down at ALL.

Blackmoor wrote:
On Tournaments:
How all of his opponents are jerks and that they all demand a 5+ cover save. After the first game of all tournaments you and your opponent are jerks.

Yeah, I've played in alot of different tourneys in different states. Anytime there is a hint of doubt, they want a cover save. If you make sure and they don't get one, they chipmunk your soft score.

If you are there to compete at a major tournament, and you are not a hobbyist, yep you are going to be a jerk in games 2 through X.

You are. I am. We all are. Everyone there to compete is going to make you play by the rules (which alot of people believe makes you a poor sport--"not going to make me do that, are you?" can't believe how many times I've heard that at RTT's, GT's, and Indy GT's...yes it's a COMPETITION you MUST play by the rules). They are going to make you not cheat with your measurement, dice, etc.

Blackmoor wrote:
On FAQs:
How Skyleap is broken. How firing vibro cannons into combat is stupid. How drop pods can contest objectives. You need to pass a LD check for SW to use counter attack. How SW are no longer have the immunity to out-numbering. You can’t stop Ork vehicles from moving forward. How broken-good Deff Rollas are. How worthless Wytch Weapons are. The new FNP and how overpowered Grotesques with WWP are. How Tau vehicles are death in KP missions. How bad Holocaust is now. SoBs are the only good units in a witch hunter’s army. His comments on tyrannids are that he did not have anything to complain about.

Yeah, so none of those is wrong, so what's your point?

Oh and I meant Holocaust is bad on SQUADS. It's pure gold on individual psykers. Pretty sure I said that, but whatever.

Why would Tyranids complain? They are still solid, and they got their CC builds back.

Blackmoor wrote:
In fact, the host had to prompt him to say something that was positive and he said that he liked the new PotMS rules for the Grey Knights. Otherwise he never said anything else positive.

Actually I just do what he asked, which was give the negative. That was the role I was asked to fill. So I did it.

I had a few positive things to say, but that was BRIMSTONES job. To say nice lovey things and make you feel better.

Blackmoor wrote:
Compare this to John (Brimstone from Warseer) was for the most part positive with his comments. What I do not like is how that represents Dakka to the public. Here is Stelek from Dakka, he is negative and hates everything about the hobby you enjoy. Here is John from Warseer who is positive and likes what he sees about the game. What website would you go to?

I certainly don't hate everything. John presents the rose-colored glasses view of the 40K world.

I don't. Why should I? We are in a world of PC people who just love to tell you how great things are, and don't mind that burning sensation there is no fire.

Give me a break. I'm the anti-PC guy. I will tell you how it is.

Like I'm doing now. Oh, and you are quite negative in this post--you think you represent Dakka well? I was embarressed to see your article on your LVGT army got the feature on the articles wiki on dakka. There are lots of articles by other people in there that merit a place, not your ego trip. Want to run an ego trip? GET A BLOG!

Blackmoor wrote:
In his review of the Dark Elf army book (from the 6th podcast) his review of the units were either things were broken good, or crap. He says he looks at a lot of things as black and white which makes for a horrible reviewer because if he can’t see more then one way to play, or more than one way to use a unit.

Actually that isn't anything like the review. Please don't lie about what I did or did not say.

I liked the book. I was positive about it.

I can set aside my black/white view long enough to give an impartial review, which I did.

Blackmoor wrote:
To give an example of this, in his chaos tactica he states under Chaos units that aren't very good:

Chaos Sorcerer. Dies to power fists or regular marines beating on him--T4 with 3+ save impresses nobody, mister! Demon Prince isn't BS3 anymore, so hiding and casting psychic powers is all he does. Is as useless in CC as a standard SM character.

When in fact Chaos Sorcerers are one of the best units in the Chaos Codex.

Just because you say 'in fact' does not make it true.

They are good support elements, but they are horrible in CC and they are horrible in shooting.

You can try and convince everyone that a chaplain with re-rolls to wound is great for 150 points, but I don't think anyone who knows the game will buy it.

They don't help Chaos until Chaos is running over 2000 points. A point I've made several times on the army list forums.

Blackmoor wrote:
But those are his opinions, and he is entitled to them. What I did not like was how he spoke as if he was knowledgeable of the US tournament scene. He has no idea about it what so ever. Not only that, but no one can speak with any reasonable degree of knowledge about it because it changes so much from store to store, and region to region. I have played in a lot of tournaments this past year in over 7 states, and I can speak only in generalizations in a few select areas, but to have him speak like he knows all about tournaments in the US and how US gamers are was pure malarkey. What is funny is that the US was portrayed as ultra competitive, and the UK are guys looking to just have a good time, when in the US GTs have more emphasis on soft scores, and comp, where in the UK there is no comp, and you take the cheesiest, most abusive army you can make.

Gee another 'I know as fact' statement.

You can't say on one hand that GW GT's are not competitive, but Adepticon is...and then say the UK GT's are the cheese.

I've been to 2 UK GT's and qualified to later heats. I don't know what 'comp' you are referring to in either place, in the US there is no comp (the system was discontinued years ago).

Maybe you should actually go to one and see just how many abusive, cheesey armies there are. I took a marine army both times (smallest army I could fit) and it was very weak compared to the US power lists I usually face at the "soft" GW GT's here, and I advanced to heat three both times. Gee, they sure are competitive...I borrowed a battleforce ultrasmurf army from a friend at the studio and won my games.

Yeah, maybe you shouldn't talk if you don't have first hand experience.

Psst, in the UK last year...best General and best overall in heat 1 went to: SPACE MARINES.

Please note this is the piece of absolute crap that won the UK 40K GT last year:

http://uk.games-workshop.com/tournaments/40k-2005-06/assets/duncan-brown-armylist.pdf

Yeah, that's a serious contender. Get wiped by scrubs and pushed to the back tables right quick in the US.

Let's all laugh at the power gaming the UK tournament scene has. And at Blackmoor, for not knowing thing one about worldwide GT's.

If you are referring to 'soft scores' such as sportsmanship and painting, many players confuse 'sportsmanship' with 'cheesemo lists'.

I freely admit I get low scores. People don't like spending more time setting up than playing.

What can I say? I'm going to take a soft list this year and see what happens.

Blackmoor wrote:
When I was listening to their topic of tournaments and they talked about comp and sportsmanship and Stelek did not say a word. I was waiting for him to leap in and talk about how he scored (by far) the lowest sportsmanship score in the LVGT last year.

Why? Everyone knows this. You keep bringing it up, like it's a moment of shame for me.

It's a point of laughter really. I've always gotten low sportsmanship scores.

People don't like playing 2 turn games at GT's.

To which I say, tough. Don't suck.

Kind of like this entire post of yours. Tough, and stop sucking.

You know Stelek, you really need a lesson in reading comprehension. Go back and re-read Blackmoor's post, think, then type.

I love that earlier you mentioned how you report the posts that are rude to you, yet in the post above you say:

" Kind of like this entire post of yours. Tough, and stop sucking."

It's awfully hypocritical to report posts that are rude to you when you have no ability to not be rude in any of your posts.

You are like the schoolyard bully that runs to your mommy every time a kid hits you back. Only, in this case, your mommy are the Dakka mods who probably could care less that someone was being mean to poor little Stelek. Geez, grow up and get over yourself.

Troy: I will add to the growing crowd that says I will no longer be listening to a TWIW that has Stelek on as a guest. I'm voting with my feet as it were and it's too bad cause I like your podcast.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Hmmm, so little to actually reply to, guess I'll have to try really hard to find something...

I report posts that tell me to f-ck off, f-ck you, you know...things that aren't socially acceptable things to say without risking a punch in the face? It's one thing to be rude (your post was rude) and quite another to tell someone to f-ck off.

The fact that you don't seem to grasp the reality of this speaks volumes.

Please, don't make cute stories about schoolyard bullies, mommies, meanings, and growing up. It works well on other sites, but not Dakka. We're all adults here. Act like it.

Love your sig, btw. It's very mature.

You think we don't all get the meaning?

Let me complete it for you, just so everyone who isn't aware of what you really think of others actually knows.

"If anyone would know how great I am and where I lie, let him surpass one of my works."

By the way, the correct Shelley quote is 'Look on my works...'

Reading comprehension fail? Why yes, you do.

I'm sorry you'll be skipping TWIW. Not what I want since I DO want to improve everyone, not just the people who ask for my help but the people (such as yourself) that spit in my face when I offer it.

Good luck to you, Ozy, in all your works.

Epic!

Stelek wrote:
It's a point of laughter really. I've always gotten low sportsmanship scores.

People don't like playing 2 turn games at GT's.

To which I say, tough. Don't suck.

Kind of like this entire post of yours. Tough, and stop sucking.

4-11 It has little to do with that and more to do with the fact they do not like playing with a self absorbed gakker. You can try to make up all sorts of tough guy responses for your social retardation that is composed of social misfits. We all know it is everyone else's fault you act like a eight year old, we make the mistake that you will act your age instead of plopping down these incoherent rants. You do remind me of this:

Neuer was he saiciate of herying his own prayse

Stelek wrote:

The fact that you don't seem to grasp the reality of this speaks volumes.

If the irony were any more perfect i would weep.

Stelek wrote:
Please, don't make cute stories about schoolyard bullies, mommies, meanings, and growing up. It works well on other sites, but not Dakka. We're all adults here. Act like it.

Love your sig, btw. It's very mature.

Once again you have no idea what you write or the context it puts you in.

Stelek wrote:Let me complete it for you, just so everyone who isn't aware of what you really think of others actually knows.

"If anyone would know how great I am and where I lie, let him surpass one of my works."

By the way, the correct Shelley quote is 'Look on my works...'

ZOMFGBBQ YOU CAN USE GOOGLE AND WIKIPEDIA! You should get a medal for being able to type in his quote and read it in the first entry, click the link, and pass it off like you somehow knew that.

Stelek wrote:If you are there to compete at a major tournament, and you are not a hobbyist, yep you are going to be a jerk in games 2 through X.

That might explain your sportsmanship scores. You get what you give. I have had very few problems at any of my tournaments. I have also made it all the way up to table #2 in both the LVGT and the Baltimore GT and I had a lot of fun in my games all the way. Heck my 2 favorite games last year I was on Table #1 at Gamesday LA’s RTT.

Stelek wrote:Yeah, so none of those is wrong, so what's your point?

Ok, let’s take Skyleap. Your major argument was that they can land on turn #5 and can contest any objective. What you fail to point out is that in random game length that 66% of the time they will be standing there, and get shredded. That does not sound like a winning tactic, and I do not see everyone running out to buy Swooping Hawks because of how good they are. I hope all of my opponents bring them.

Stelek wrote: Actually I just do what he asked, which was give the negative. That was the role I was asked to fill. So I did it.

Yeah sure good cop-bad cop, Then why did he ask if you have anything positive to say?

Stelek wrote: I was embarrassed to see your article on your LVGT army got the feature on the articles wiki on dakka

This is the first I have heard about it, so much for an ego trip.

And this is a bad thing because everything has been insane at work with Indian Independence day, our system crashing for 3 days, and Tropical Storm Faye shutting down our Jacksonville center for 3 days, I was going to blow off the army and play my Eldar and play a little WAR beta. Now I have to finish it and see if I can paint a GT army in a week and a half.

Stelek wrote: Just because you say 'in fact' does not make it true.

You can get 6 attacks with re-rolls to hit and to wound with a force weapon. That is a very good assault unit, and I have had Chaplains tear through my army before.

Stelek wrote: You can't say on one hand that GW GT's are not competitive, but Adepticon is...and then say the UK GT's are the cheese.

Sure I can say that...I just did. And I never said anything about being competitive. You equate comp friendly with whether or not you are competitive, and I certainly do not. As far as the US GTs go, last year was the first year without comp, but they have a legacy of good comp that still carries on (not for you obviously). I did not mention Adepticon , but I am glad that you brought it up. In Chicago/Midwest they stress less comp than a lot of other areas, and mostly play with the hardest list you can make, and throw in all the forgeworld you want as well. This is what I was referring to by regional differences. In the Midwest comp is not much of a factor, and they welcome Forgeworld.

Stelek wrote: Psst, in the UK last year...best General and best overall in heat 1 went to: SPACE MARINES.

Um, they went to Tau. I am sure you are going to say how much Tau suck, but play Scott Simpson a game and then see if you think that.

Stelek wrote: Please note this is the piece of absolute crap that won the UK 40K GT last year:

http://uk.games-workshop.com/tournaments/40k-2005-06/assets/duncan-brown-armylist.pdf

Yeah, that's a serious contender. Get wiped by scrubs and pushed to the back tables right quick in the US.

Let's all laugh at the power gaming the UK tournament scene has. And at Blackmoor, for not knowing thing one about worldwide GT's.

Yeah, let’s laugh at me.

OMG, that is funny. That was from 2005 with the finals played in 2006!!!

http://uk.games-workshop.com/tournaments/40k-2005-06/4/

That list was for the 3rd edition Eldar codex at the height of uber Ulthwe seer councils and 3 shot BS4 Starcannons which were the cheesiest armies you can make back then . Thank you, that list proves my point that the UK GT is a cheesefest!!! That year those lists littered the top spots at the GT. Man, I can’t get over how funny that was!

Stelek wrote: Everyone knows this. You keep bringing it up, like it's a moment of shame for me.

They don’t know it, and it should be a moment of shame. It would be for me.

I would go on, but I am home from work and have a ton of painting to do.

Ain't my fault if GW's site is broken. The info I posted was correct as of today. Go look for yourself.

Ulthwe was never at the height of anything, it had one super unit and the rest of the army you took apart. I'm sure you disagree, but then...you like Eldatadar so who cares?

I agree, I get as good as I give. I obviously deserve a low sportsmanship score for tabling my opponents in two turns. I salute you and your silly ideas.

I feel bad for your personal situation.

I think the rest of your post is worthless muck. On to something maybe constructive.

Dice Monkey wrote:It has little to do with that and more to do with the fact they do not like playing with a self absorbed gakker. You can try to make up all sorts of tough guy responses for your social retardation that is composed of social misfits. We all know it is everyone else's fault you act like a eight year old, we make the mistake that you will act your age instead of plopping down these incoherent rants.

Rest of what you said is pretty much a incoherent rant, so I've deleted it. Sorry.

I have a social retardation? Or is that a group? I think I understand the RAI, but your RAW sucks.

How's that?

I wonder how I'm a self-absorbed fether and you can discern that over the internet?

Or even in 30 minutes of play at a GT?

Sorry, I'm not quite that shallow.

Speaking of shallow, I'm quite well-educated. I'm sorry I've read what is to my younger sisters generation many lost (and to them, useless) authors of bygone eras.

FWIW, I usually read a book a day. Those I enjoy I try to stretch out.

I'm almost 35. Been reading a long time. Thankfully, I also suffer from reading comprehension and an excellent recall, so I don't read books twice unless I'm searching through some historical documentation.

You should go to the national archive or the library of congress sometime. Just take a book at random, read it in an hour, and go to another section at random and do it again.

It's quite interesting what you learn.

I had to stop doing that at my local library, I've read all the books.

There, how is your self-absorbed fether detector doing now?

I have come to the defense of Stelek on more than one occasion. He seems to only ever be the only one on his side simply because he has a reputation for being an ass and word seems to spread fast that no one likes him so you shouldn't either.

You all need to stop being so thin skinned and petty. Even if Stelek, on occasion, has been the same. He is knowledgeable. I'm more than happy to have him berate me over something rather than tell me in a nice gentle manner.

Which would I remember more? "That list is a little weak..." or "This is pure crap, head to anywhere with this and expect a lot of losing". If you are the kind of person who does not enjoy hearing the harsh truth, there is an ignore function and there is room enough on it for Stelek if you so see it fit to disregard his advice.

Everyone has to understand that Stelek will never coddle your gentle ego. If something a person you will never meet, let alone see, is destroying your fragile psyche with typed words you need more help than Stelek does.

[walks in, realizes not wearing waders, and/or BS repellent, walks on]

Advocating the ignore function is crap. I've ignored Stelek and it just means I don't have any idea what everyone is angry about now 75% of the time.

I'm with Blackmoor that having the voice of this one guy, who is only net-famous for how much he is disliked, be put forward as the voice of Dakka and the voice of US gamers is a very poor choice. It's fine if Stelek is in there as a 'lets see what the arrogant power-gamer who hates everything and that everyone hates has to say about this?'. Preferably with the minutes that he is allocated clearly labeled on the podcast so those of us who really just find it obnoxious can skip it.

He could have a catchy jingle for his section:
"I'm the best, you're so dumb, I hate this game, and you hate me - it's Steleeek!" <Guitar riffs>

Moz wrote:Advocating the ignore function is crap. I've ignored Stelek and it just means I don't have any idea what everyone is angry about now 75% of the time.

I agree with this sentiment. If you ignore Stelek you probably aren't going to know what's going on sometimes, same as if you ignore anyone else who is very active here on Dakka. Maybe everyone needs to take what Stelek says in stride and not be getting so uppity about it.

Uhhhhh......

What's everybody arguing about? Stelek's a troller...and that is news how?

Stelek comes off as a jerk. We all know that. I am just wondering what he adds to anything other than derision? I don't pay any attention to the fantasy forums but I have never noticed Stelek offering anything the remotest bit innovative. I tend to ignore his posts because.... nothing to be learned from them at all. It's all just self aggrandizement. I really don't think we need to drag Goethe into this. It's really far too high brow.

ender502