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.

metallifan wrote:Worst one? My buddy trying to argue he could use a second-edition codex in a game using the 5th-Ed ruleset. In the end, I let him use it and just settled for steamrolling him, up until he was sure he couldn't win and came up with an excuse to go home.

If he paid the 2E points costs, he probably faced off against twice as much stuff on your side of the board.

If I can find the exact rule in the rulebook quickly (I usually can), I'll show my opponent, and move on. If I cannot, then I'll simply let it go, it's not worth arguing rules instead of playing a game. Rules debates are best left for when you're bored at work.

I have made it a personal goal of mine (one that I have succeeded IMHO) to master the "soft correction". A "soft correction" is correcting someones rules mistake in a manner that does not upset/annoy/demeen them. I always have a BRB on hand and am VERY quick to use it, as I really don't expect complete strangers to take me at my word (plus it really helps on those rare occasions that I'm wrong.) I'm a big proponent of "Live by the Rules, Die by the Rules", I don't know how many times I have had to remind people that their defiler's cannon gets to roll two dice and take the highest or to add 1 to the damage roll on my DE raiders..... sometimes it hurts helping people blow your stuff up. Since doing this I have really only had 1 issue over a multitude of tournaments and always had a very high sports score (when applicable).

That being said if someone pushes my a-hole button I have no problem rules-lawyering some d-bag into the ground.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

metallifan wrote:Worst one? My buddy trying to argue he could use a second-edition codex in a game using the 5th-Ed ruleset. In the end, I let him use it and just settled for steamrolling him, up until he was sure he couldn't win and came up with an excuse to go home.

If he paid the 2E points costs, he probably faced off against twice as much stuff on your side of the board.

He plays a Stealer' army and an SM one. Always insists on using the Nid 2E rules (which I suppose would actually be 3E). Once in a while I give him a good beating, but most of the time I'm so tired of him whining over every single rule or roll that doesn't go his way, that I just shrug it off and stop caring. Sadly, I can literally count the number of 40K players in this city on 2 hands. And one hand are the normal people I play with. The other hand are the ones at the FLGS downtown that don't realize that we have running water and showers at this day in age. Plus, one of them is a yell-talker and just generally really annoying.

gardeth wrote:I have made it a personal goal of mine (one that I have succeeded IMHO) to master the "soft correction". A "soft correction" is correcting someones rules mistake in a manner that does not upset/annoy/demeen them. I always have a BRB on hand and am VERY quick to use it, as I really don't expect complete strangers to take me at my word (plus it really helps on those rare occasions that I'm wrong.) I'm a big proponent of "Live by the Rules, Die by the Rules", I don't know how many times I have had to remind people that their defiler's cannon gets to roll two dice and take the highest or to add 1 to the damage roll on my DE raiders..... sometimes it hurts helping people blow your stuff up.

What Gardeth said. I'm want to play by the rules whether it's in my favor or the opponents. and IMHO this is one of the hallmarks of real sportsmanship (along with civility and respect). In other words it's not just knowing and correcting the rules when it's to your advantage, but whether it's to your disadvantage too.

You shouldn't let rules mistakes by your opponent slide when it's to your benefit, but all of a sudden get very precise when it will affect you badly.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote: he ended up only giving me 7 out of 10 on sportmanship, when both of my other opponent's gave me full.

In my mind, a 7/10 is still a good sportsman and should be indicative of an average to good game. It could be that the TO actually scored you correctly and your other opponents didn't.

I view sports scores as a reflection of "How willing am I to play this person again (aside from winning or losing). I would say that out of 10 points for sportsmanship, you would start off at 5-6/10 points for an opponent who doesn't really do anything but play the game and shake hands afterwards. If they are pointing out rule corrections that harm themselves, or making the game more enjoyable, they get points added. If they are being a , have not learned the basic BRB and thier own army rules, or are trying to weasel rules advantages when there are none to be weaseled, then they are getting docked points.

Even in this discussion, we can see how subjective these soft scores are. For example, I find sportsmanship to be a fairly binary operation, you are either a good sportsman or a bad sportsman, and I do not feel I should be judging your personality. I know some people, including myself, that are sometimes awkward in public, have social issues, etc, but if the game is fun, flows, and my opponent wins, loses, or draws with a good nature, then that is a good sportsman.. bang 10, since I couldn't ask for anything more regarding their sportsmanship. Sure I could want more conversation and idle banter, but that should not be a requirements for good sportsmanship. I sometimes find that some opponents will try to be "friendly" even though they are slow playing, don't know the rules, and are excessively confrontational, and are probably good people, but not good sportsmen.

I think the events that use the sportsman checklists understand the subjective nature of this score and by using a checklist it TRIES to make it less subjective. So if an event does use sportsmanship, I would encourage the use of such.