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.

Hmmmmm 3 people voted for the first option I would like to hear from them...

I already told you Cain, I will hijack [the army] with X-treeeeem prejudice any player not playing up to my standards. And my standards is high, to the Emprah.

I really hate it when people help either side with tactic, rules corrections are fine. But, pointing out my strategy when I'm already 2 Kps down with the game finishing at 3-7 (I had 3) seriously annoys you. The next time they showed up I mentioned it a few times, they still did it a few times. Next time I'll tell them to go find a game if they really want to play so bad >_>

What I hate more is when they seemingly hate the race your playing so they intentionally point out any traps and basically help the other side wipe you out by turn three.

Sounds like you need some Commissar intervention, it's too bad you live so far away.

In a nutshell, I think that under no circumstances should you say anything remotely connected to the game at all unless you are one of the two players involved. You should keep your yap shut.

The number of times I've had to spend an extra ten minutes debating someone who isn't even playing in my game because they were "certain" a rule was being played wrong when, in fact, they had no idea what they were talking about...

If we want you to "weigh in," we'll ask you. Otherwise, assume we don't want to know your opinion. At all. Ever.

It saves the uncomfortable moment of me having to turn to you and say, "Thanks for your input, but I'm really not interested in your opinion. Could you please stay out of our game?" Because that always ends in hurt feelings.

I've had guys make comments about us playing the rules wrong, but they always did it in a very polite way, asking first if they could pipe in, that sort of thing. I think the presentation of it makes a big difference in how it's viewed.

Deadshane1 wrote:Bystanders need to STFU on rules AND tactics unless asked. Period.

Nothing more irritating than a bystander taking one side, arguing, then being proven wrong after 5 wasted minutes of arguing.

Shut up....and watch THEIR game, not YOURS.

So if player A is blatantly cheating and player B doesn't know, no one should let Player B in on it?

Its cool for them to weigh in on rules, but never on tactics.

don_mondo wrote: So if player A is blatantly cheating and player B doesn't know, no one should let Player B in on it?

I think the situation depends on how well you know the people that are playing the game. I have been a part of games where people play one off games that have "house" rules to see how things could be different if the rules were different. So if you just walked up to a game and didn't know this before hand you may think these people were outright cheats. However if you know the people playing, and are on friendly terms with them or at least of the guy who is getting cheated. (I mean we all know those guys that every one knows are cheats but somehow manage to not get kicked out of LGS) In the 2nd situation I think it would be your obligation to say...Whooaaa whooaaa hold on a minute something isn't right about that.

But I think the situation of cheaters should be a rare event and that said cheaters are usually rooted out, and either change their ways, or are sent packing before too long.

To go from kibutzing a game like what I believe deadshane and most of us are refering to, to "Helping a player that is being "blatantly" cheated" is quite a big difference.


GG

Weighing in on rules is fine IMO, but there should never be suggestions on tactics.

"Dude I'm playing one opponent not two or three." If there is an observation on tactics just let 'em know after the battle.

I see no reason to not coach a new player at tournaments. Coach not tell how to play. In fact I have been to tournaments where a younger player had his father and his father helped him with rules and explaining how things worked.

No one there had a problem with it at all.

No help of any kind during a tournament. You have judges or organizers to ask rules questions of and nobody should be giving a player advice during said tournament. Friendly game, sure.

ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS ON RULES
but after you have found the page so you can shove it in thier face
nothing is better than calling the cheaters out

those that want dont want your opinion are outright cheating someone who doesnt know the rules
in most cases its army specific and hell i dont know what every unit in each army can do and i think most are the same
for example -i havent read the tau codex because i dont play tau
why should a bystander assume that the Ork player knows all the tau rules is ludicris

everyone against rules clairifaction is a cheater

i disagree if the bystander has no evidence, but if they do interject and are proven wrong, then you have helpped them become better gamers
well done

After reading through I have the image of two groups of gamers trying to play one game. Where all the decisions are debated and each group comes to a consensus before taking action. Might make an interesting game if there were time limits.

Generally I abide by option 3 and 2 to varying degrees of intrusion depending on the situation. I've been backseat tacticianed before in a tournament and I'll never do it to someone else.

The only sort of tactics advice that I consider it permissible to give during a game is list type advice. Like asking a player "Why did you take all of those super expensive vanguard vets? You might try taking _____ instead."

As long as your advice only pertains to future games and you aren't trying to run their army during the current one, that's fine with me. You should let them make mistakes, but you should be able to say "Next time, try using unit X in such and such a way instead of blah blah"

Something I came across the last couple of weeks has involved a TFG and a friend. The TFG thinks he knows everything (shocking to find out he doesn't). If they ask I've been giving input, but if the TFG is acting like a donkey cave then I just look up the rule and text it the next day to my buddy who has been playing him. The next time an argument comes up my friend has the page reference handy for him to share with TFG.

Non-confrontational way of answering a question.

WAAAGH! wrote:
everyone against rules clairifaction is a cheater

And anyone who interrupts strangers having fun is a rude spanker...see opinions vary, some of us consider politeness more important then a glorified board game

Luckily now that I'm older most youngsters aren't willing to come up to me uninvited to offer their opinions like they all felt compelled to when I was a teenager playing games in public.

Jack

WAAAGH! wrote:those that want dont want your opinion are outright cheating someone who doesnt know the rules

Jack beat me to it. That's the most asinine statement I've heard all day (and I went to work today, so that's saying A LOT).

Maybe they're not cheating. Maybe they just don't want you in their game. They don't know you. Your opinion is meaningless to them. If it was that important to them, maybe they'd look the rule up themselves.

Or, and I know I may be in the small minority here, but maybe they think hashing out the rules is actually a fun part of the game and makes both players better at it and learn the rules better when they have to look stuff up for themselves.

Just like school.

Teacher: "Johnny, come up to the board and solve this problem."
Jackass Kid Sitting Next to Johnny: "Psst. Johnny. The answer is 352."
Johnny: "How did you get that answer?"
Jackass Kid Sitting Next to Johnny: "Who cares? Just go write it up on the board. The answers are on page 362."

What has Johnny learned? Not a damned thing, thanks to you.

Mind your own business. Keep your mouth shut if you're not directly involved in the game and haven't been asked for your opinion.

#3.

STFU unless directly addressed.

I'm the 'veteran' player at my club and am frequently asked rules questions by the noobs. Usually it's because they've confused a 5th ed rule with the 4th ed one.

I only give the rules advice (and I'll quote it from an open rulebook), not the battle tactics advice.

At a tourney, the only other person I want speaking to me (apart from my opponent) during a game is a ref if we called one over.

If the person is new and it is a friendly game then tactical advice is okay. In fact, even you the opponent should be helping them get the hang of the strategy.
NOT IN A TOURNEY THOUGH!

In any case if someone is not using the rules correctly or is being tfg with the rules then it should be pointed out regardless.

Asking a bystander for tactical advice is permissive, bystanders poking their noses in unasked, is not permissive, even if it is to make a rules correction. If it isn't critical, it's not a big deal. If it is about something that is controversial (Master of Ordinance and mortars), then if a bystander speaks up, they should be beaten.

In leagues, asking for tactical advice would be permissive, rules corrections allowable if confusion is present, sure. In tournaments, only rules corrections should be allowed, no asking for tactical assistance.

like i said if you think your playing right
the bystander notices you are break a crucial rule(not an unimportant one)
or are obviously duping a inexperienced gamer
then your opponent should be informed POLITELY that he is being taken advantage on so that it does not happen any futher
AND RULEBOOK IN HAND OPENED TO CORRECT PAGE
so there will be no arguement
(i do know some rules are hazy and bystanders can let the gamers argue those themselves)

but on a cut and dry rule ALWAYS


as your opponent deserves to play a fair and enjoyable game as much as you do

if you are against this then you are quite obviously cheating and dont want to be called out on it

Grignard wrote: Have you ever played a game where a small cluster of people gather around the game, and a couple of those people either give tactical advice or proffer rules corrections? Do you think this is appropriate or intrusive?

Yes, I have. As it is with many things on dakka, this is wildly situationaly dependant. In general, I think that people should remain silent about both. I think the question on tactics is pretty obvious, but as far as the rules corrections I chose my sources a bit. I dont accept interpretations or rules quotes from everyone. Who says they are right as well? Of course, sometimes they certainly will be, and sometimes they won't. I think people should hold their tongues unless requested, whehter thier ruling would help me or not. After all, it's not a game of "help griz out" or "assist griz's opponent", is it?

As long as it doesnt affect the game in progress, anything non-insulting goes.

"why on earth did you do THAT" will ALWAYS get me coming back with "you'll see" even if I just muffed it.
Otherwise, carry on. Gentle mocking when I get owned is fine too.

Also, if you give tactics advice to my opponent, I wont dreadsock you, due to not owning one. I'll settle for a case to your face. Dont do it. (barring if you asked me first, and they're a newbie. If so, i'll probably be doing it too).

At tourneys, however, STFU, unless you're discussing something thats done and dusted. Dont jump in with rules unless you're a judge.

I'd say always on rules and never on tactics.

The rules are a shared, consensual reality that every player has to have access to (and everyone needs to be held to). Tactics are a personal thing that needs to be learned. The time for a tactics lesson is after a battle, if you're asked.

This only applies for friendly games, obviously.

I honestly am having trouble understanding this, so maybe some can explain it to me in a way that doesn't sound like crazy talk.

Why do you feel you have the right to interject yourself into someone else's game (whether on rules or on tactics) without being asked?

I could make it a more elaborate question than that, but I think that will suffice for now.

xtapl wrote:I honestly am having trouble understanding this, so maybe some can explain it to me in a way that doesn't sound like crazy talk.

Why do you feel you have the right to interject yourself into someone else's game (whether on rules or on tactics) without being asked?

I could make it a more elaborate question than that, but I think that will suffice for now.

Because bad habits are hard to break, and next game I might be against him.

If you don't want to play with other people involved, don't leave your basement. Make your own board; don't come to my FLGS.

This game has some great potential to be a great social activity. when spectators offer advice or tactics, they are interacting with your game and you because they are interested. Put your small mind away and talk to some strangers, strike up a conversation about a shared interest and make a new friend, hell, make a new enemy and whup him good next time when he brings his smack-talkin' ork army down.

Think about the world outside of the game you're playing, after all, that's probably why you came down to the store in the first place.

You can be social without being intrusive. Those things are not exclusively interconnected.

It is perfectly possible to sit, watch a game, interact, have fun, and keep your rules opinions to yourself.

Yeah. Only rules, and only if someone is cheating. It's INCREDIBLY annoying t have someone 'weigh in' on your game - it's a battle of wits between two players, and this includes remembering the rules.

However, If one player is stating that 'you should do it this way' when they are blatantly wrong, I'd consider that highly suspicious of cheating...

Not to mention the old 'you can't look at MY codex' thing....