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.

Platuan4th wrote:Not true. 3rd had a rule stating that you didn't have to show your opponent your list and in fact could outright refuse if asked.

Got a page reference? I had actually remembered 3rd as being the opposite (and specifically asking for lists to be shared) but couldn't find any rule one way or the other.

If no one else does I'll post it in a few hours when I get home. I still have the 3rd BRB. I think Platuan is a bit off on 'flat out refusal.' One thing that is certain is that they have changed the rules for 'secrecy' every edition.

Insaniak had the right of it with saying that it was wildly unpopular.

Out of historical interest, I tried looking for the appropriate secrecy rules in the 3rd and 4th edition rulebooks.

I couldn't find any mention about list exchange in the 3rd edition book, although I did find some fairly strict text about WYSIWYG. There might have been FAQ statements, but I don't want to go fishing for archaic FAQ's.

On the other hand, page 81 of the 4th edition rulebook has the statement, "You opponent cannot normally inspect your army roster, including asking you what is in each transport vehicle. Players are, however, free to share this information if they so wish." As Insaniak pointed out, one may notice the fairly radical difference between those two statements and the 5th edition text.

Akaiyou wrote:
Anyway like Insaniak mentioned, the rule is clear as day. You are only required to show your list AFTER the game.

No, the rule is clear as day that we should discuss it beforehand.
"However, before starting to deploy their armies, it is a good idea for players to agree whether or not they can read the opponent’s force roster before and during the game."
And in that discussion I will say that I want to see your list. Now what?

As already mentioned, there are no 'good' reasons to play the secrecy game, but many 'bad' ones, all involving cheating. If I don't know you and play against you regularly (and even for some that I do), you'll show me your list prior to the game or there will not be a game. It's that simple.

I'm not going to say that a person wanting to withhold their list is for cheating. But I would say that that person is a little to intent on winning at toy soldiers. Basically it's just a game and definitely in non tournament/friendly pick up game play why not share your list? If winning is that important to someone I may just not play them because I'll assume they are either sore losers or bad winners neither I like.

don_mondo wrote:As already mentioned, there are no 'good' reasons to play the secrecy game, but many 'bad' ones, all involving cheating.

Sorry, but this is hyperbole at best.

Yes, there are bad reasons for wanting to withhold your list. But how about simply wanting to deploy without knowing what your opponent has, to keep a bit more of the element of surprise?

Half the time in pick-up games, I don't even ask what army my opponent is fielding, let alone what's in their list.

Insaniak, you don't have to look at my list if you don't want to. I frequently don't bother either, and I generally bring pre-built lists to open gaming, not knowing who or what my opponent will be. But that's neither here nor there.

What's being discussed is whether or not you have to show me your list if I want to see it before game begins (or as written on page 92, before deployment). So, tell me one 'good' reason for my opponent to INSIST on not allowing me to see his list before deployment..............

Akaiyou wrote:Nosferatu are you actually reading the rulebook? I pointed out the page number and everything so that people would take a look prior to posting. Not to sound rude but on warseer many people also seemed to not bother reaing the rulebook first.

But yes do take another look and read carefully and then answer my questions again.

Not to sound rude, but did YOU actually read the page and rule that you're quoting? the questions you're asking makeme think you obviously havent ... as they say quite clearly you agree between yourself and opponent whether to show lists before a game except in tourney play. There no concrete answer you can get to try to give you an advantage by point ot a raw forum and saying, see they said i didnt have to tell you!!

If your army is not 100% WYSIWYG stock citadel models, then you are breaking the rules and need to disclose to me your units type and configuration in order to comply with WYSIWYG rules and for me to accept your non-standard models.

This becomes full disclosure, and it then becomes 'easier' to just swap lists. If you want to verbally explain it, then go for it... But if your models are not WYSIWYG, then you don't have the right not to tell me what they are supposed to be.

WYSIWYG = Full disclosure (except for maybe psychic powers, but by that time you have probably broken rule #1 so the game won't happen anyways)

I think the answer to the OP question is: Yes, by RAW you can flat out refuse to show your list until after the game, BUT that does make you TFG, people will think you are a cheater or a WAAC moron and nobody will play you - so don't do it

If you really just want to have an element of surprise during deployment, discuss it with a friend and ask them nicely if they want a game like that. Don' try to force it on random opponents in "friendly" matches

When I play I always tell my opponents if anything is counts as etc and what unit is in what tank. Secretacy is then down to a minimum, but somethings like wargear isn't mentioned - it's obivously that's a daemon prince with wings but not known if got a mark of what psychic powers.

Generally I do that and never had a problem and my opponents do it vice-versa.

As for a phyiscal list I've only seen one from all my opponents ever. This doesn't bother me and I trust there army is 2,000 points.

Zain60 wrote:I don't want to deploy while reading a list, if that's what you're asking. I think chronology is definitely important. You are trying to validate your counter-proposal of showing a list later on. In answer to that, it's just as valid as what Dash asked before the game. Both are different than 'after the game' and both are 'opponents discussing it before the game'

However, the reason why you countered is suspect. At the point I'm deploying I either want to know what's in my opponent's list or not so I can focus on deploying strategically.

Dude why are we still talking about Dash?? I don't understand why are people hell bent on bringing up the personal matter which I tried to avoid. It has already been proven by RAW that i am correct that list are not REQUIRED to be shown prior to the game and best course of action is to be discussed with the opponent, we are passed that point now. My current question is very general lets keep it that way please.

And i'm not trying to validate or make a counter proposal or whatever it is you want to assume that i'm doing. I'm simply asking a question, would YOU feel like it is a bad thing to have lists revealed after rolling off for 1st? Stop trying to read between the lines please.

I personally do NOT think it's a horrible idea I play like that all the time and I infact find it more fun when im not setting up terrain or placing objectives based on a roster. Because yes i have played games in all scenarios with lists revealed, before, during, after. I may not play in tournaments but i do play very often. However if my favorite play method is infact taking out the fun from the game i'd like to know thus why i ask my simple question.

Dashofpepper wrote:

Zain60 wrote:I don't want to deploy while reading a list, if that's what you're asking. I think chronology is definitely important. You are trying to validate your counter-proposal of showing a list later on. In answer to that, it's just as valid as what Dash asked before the game. Both are different than 'after the game' and both are 'opponents discussing it before the game'

However, the reason why you countered is suspect. At the point I'm deploying I either want to know what's in my opponent's list or not so I can focus on deploying strategically.

And for some players, like Tyranids and Eldar...going first or second is a choice they make based on their opponent's list and their own list.

Honestly, you're not losing anything by switching lists before the game. Its polite, its sportsmanlike, its required in all tournament venues....and most friendly games are tweaking a list, or learning the game, or getting ready for a tournament....which still follows the same game etiquette. When someone is unwilling to show me their list, I can honestly draw no conclusion except that its illegal, or they're going to try cheating. I can't speak for other people here.

You make 2 points here "except that it's illegal, or they're going to try cheating"

And I simply do not see how waiting until we roll off for first does not address these concerns if I already have my list on hand or in vassal's case loaded. It's not like I can go and edit it. And i'm also not denying you the right to go over the list, IMO the most important part of the game is how you deploy, and I always make my list available before deployment at the earliest. What harm is done? At that point all you've done is set down objectives, picked mission/deployment.

I feel that I give people the chance to check if my list is illegal or if there is anything at all wrong with my list in due time. Plus i've never EVER had a problem with someone finding something wrong with my list. On the contrary I end up correcting more lists than i'd like. Or find people that write down "Chaos Rhino - 50 pts' and don't list what upgrades exactly are on it which I personally feel is cheezy. I use army builder for my list making while not 100% perfect, it is quite accurate so luckily till this date i've never had an issue when it comes to the list part.

As you mentioned the only loss is someone who'd want to go 2nd or 1st based off someone's list which I also find cheap. I guess i'm one of the few that falls into that last sentence of pg 92 scenario, that prefers to have a game where not everything is decided by the roster. Call it a closer WAR simulation game if you will, objectives wouldn't be placed conveniently for you in real life and the time of attack wouldn't so perfectly match the intel that you have on your enemy. That's how i look at it i guess.

kartofelkopf wrote:Meh. If there's a reason to want to keep your list secret, I'd love to hear it.

The only ones I can think of involve wanting to spring an "AHA! Gotcha!" combination/surprise on the opponent... If you feel strongly enough about needing this secrecy to not play a game over it, I think you've probably got other gaming issues, too (sportsmanship, generalship, etc...).

There's a whole slew of bad reasons to want secrecy (in the sense that everything should be wysiwyg)- "miscalculated" points, illegal units, "surprise" combinations/transport deployments, etc... and very few good reasons to want secrecy.

Now, if you're doing a special scenario with hidden or "fog of war" deployment, then, obviously, that changes things. But, for standard games... share your list.

Read my 2 answers above for my reasons.

And while there may be a whole lot of bad reasons to want secrecy there are also some good ones which the rulebook itself lists. Furthermore would you REALLY have that big of a problem with waiting until the deployment phase to reveal your list? Every concern you mentioned miscalculated points and all that can be addressed within the first 5 minutes of starting the game. Is it such a long wait?

Akaiyou wrote:
It has already been proven by RAW that i am correct that list are not REQUIRED to be shown prior to the game and best course of action is to be discussed with the opponent, we are passed that point now. My current question is very general lets keep it that way please.

You have not proven that.

The rulebook tells you three things:

1. It is a good idea to show your opponent your list after the game.
2. You and your opponent need to agree on whether lists will be shown before the game.
3. The norm is for list exchange.

In our aborted game, the game broke down on step 2. After providing you with my list, you refused to do the same. You are not required to show your list before the game starts. You are required to come to an agreement with your opponent about showing lists, and it goes on to tell you that the norm is to do so.

If you want to play completely by RAW...to the letter...and ignore its suggestions and otherwise, remember that as a Tyranid player, you can only play models on their supplied bases, meaning that models unreleased that you made and converted are illegal. Its a whole package approach.

Akaiyou wrote:I don't understand why are people hell bent on bringing up the personal matter which I tried to avoid. It has already been proven by RAW that i am correct that list are not REQUIRED to be shown prior to the game and best course of action is to be discussed with the opponent, we are passed that point now.

Wrong, we have proven that you have to agree one way or the other before deployment.
"However, before starting to deploy their armies, it is a good idea for players to agree whether or not they can read the opponent’s force roster before and during the game."

So what are you going to say to me when I say I want to see your list before deployment pursuant to the quoted text? Obviously, if you say no we have not agreed and the game now becomes a non-game. I'm not sure what you're objecting to any more since your text below (bolded) seems to say that you agree to sharing lists before deployment. To answer that, no, no problem. I'll roll off for mission, deployment zones, who goes first all without seeing your list. But before deployment, I'm going to 'agree' that we can view each other's lists before and during the game. And exchange lists at that point.

Akaiyou wrote:And while there may be a whole lot of bad reasons to want secrecy there are also some good ones which the rulebook itself lists. Furthermore would you REALLY have that big of a problem with waiting until the deployment phase to reveal your list? Every concern you mentioned miscalculated points and all that can be addressed within the first 5 minutes of starting the game. Is it such a long wait?

Only one I see them mention is that some players "prefer to leave a feel of secrecy around their lists, as bluffing can make a game really entertaining". I don't really see that as much of a reason personally. What other 'good' reasons do they mention?

Dashofpepper wrote:

Akaiyou wrote:
It has already been proven by RAW that i am correct that list are not REQUIRED to be shown prior to the game and best course of action is to be discussed with the opponent, we are passed that point now. My current question is very general lets keep it that way please.

You have not proven that.

The rulebook tells you three things:

1. It is a good idea to show your opponent your list after the game.
2. You and your opponent need to agree on whether lists will be shown before the game.
3. The norm is for list exchange.

In our aborted game, the game broke down on step 2. After providing you with my list, you refused to do the same. You are not required to show your list before the game starts. You are required to come to an agreement with your opponent about showing lists, and it goes on to tell you that the norm is to do so.

If you want to play completely by RAW...to the letter...and ignore its suggestions and otherwise, remember that as a Tyranid player, you can only play models on their supplied bases, meaning that models unreleased that you made and converted are illegal. Its a whole package approach.

Well well you just cannot go beyond the personal matter can you? Ok i'll step down to your level and i'll address it with the CORRECT information. Not the BS you trying to force feed here after the fact.

1. The minute I got on skype, and had picked out a list to play you with I said CLEARLY "Reveal lists after deciding 1st turn" I've done this with every single person without exception that i've played against on vassal at the very beginning.

2. You laughed at me, mocked me saying I don't read 40k rules well and proceeded to LOAD your list as you said and reveal it. Completely IGNORING what I had said.

3. You were telling me that i was REQUIRED to show my list BEFORE the game. And this is the part where i 'refused to do the same' that you mentioned. I swear I wish I could go back in time to record the conversation so anyone can see this is the TRUTH of things. I refused because #2 was a great sign of disrespect period.

4. I looked up "Note on Secrecy" for you and said "Pg 92, read that. I'm not REQUIRED to show you my list as you claim" and I want to point out to Don_Mondo as well who seems to avidly support you while missing my point entirely. I am NOT debating that it should be discussed between you and the opponent. Did i not make mention of this myself? I said I was proven correct because there is NO FRIGGIN REQUIREMENT to show your list until after the game.

As far as REQUIREMENTS go, it is only after the game. However you and the opponent may agree otherwise. What part of that is wrong? Dash was NOT at all following this he INSISTED that it was REQUIRED, hell even right now he still insists that there is NO CHOICE. Which brings me to point #5

5. After I show him the stupid page he reads it and clings to the following "It is in the norm in tournaments to have full disclosure prior to the game". Mind you this is a game in vassal NOT a tournament game. And i keep pointing that out to him until I finally get sick and i say 'you know what? im not dealing with this" when he realizes im going to click on him he tries to cut me off with "listen if you do not want to reveal your list we can choose not to play" something along those lines and i clicked on him mid sentence. Done with.


Point being is that if he had an issue during our game with my suggestion which came first than anything else after loading the terrain. He could've been a gentleman about it and we wouldve rolled off and no issue whatsoever.

But come on, who the hell is going to allow someone to tell them they don't know how to read and mock them right b4 a game starts and then be all happy wappy about it?

So once more Don_Mondo do YOU personally feel that it would make the game that much less enjoyable to reveal the lists after deciding first turn?

It's a very simple question, lets stop talking about everything else and just focus on that, he'll im inclined to edit my first post just to get more answers to that particular quesiton and see what the sentiments are.

Here's a list of other places i posted the same question and from the people that actually did bother to answer it, it seems not many if any would have a real issue with revealing after deciding first with some actually preferring it that way

http://www.warpshadow.com/forum/posting.php?mode=reply&f=22&t=14260

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/288105.page#1470047

http://thetyranidhive.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=26041

http://forums.tauonline.org/index.php/topic,94965.0/topicseen.html

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=253083

http://www.librarium-online.com/forums/40k-rules-help/192571-note-secrecy-pg92-quesiton-those-good-rules.html

Akaiyou wrote:
As far as REQUIREMENTS go, it is only after the game. However you and the opponent may agree otherwise. What part of that is wrong?

I could care less about whatever personal arguement you and Dash are having, that's between the two of you and is best discussed privately. I'm not supporting anyone on anything. I'm just pointing out the fallacies in your argument because, well, simply put, you're wrong.

Page 92 text again, since you keep ignoring it.
"However, before starting to deploy their armies, it is a good idea for players to agree whether or not they can read the opponent’s force roster before and during the game."

So, your statement above is still incorrect. No, it's not a "requirement" only after the game. All that is required is for me (before deployment) to say I want to see your list before the game (which is the phrasing page 92 uses, I even bolded it for you above). At that point, you either agree or disagree. You can cling to the other line if you want:
"To keep things fair, you should always allow your opponent to read your force roster after a game."
but once I suggest full disclosure, we have to come to an agreement one way or the other, which means there is no "requirement" one way or the other.

sigh you don't get it you are hell bent on your own point i'm done debating this with you.

I tried to be more specific about what exactly i mean and it doesnt seem to get across to you.

No, it doesnt get across because you are simply wrong on this.

If I state full list disclosure before the game, then that is my part of the bargain - if you dont agree, then there is no game.

I'm sorry you havent gotten the answer you wanted, but that really isnt our fault...

Exactly as Nos said. The BRB leaves some flexibility on disclosure of lists before or after the game but more importantly it says 'agree with your opponent.' If you cannot agree on it, then do not play.

How terrible of a game would it have been anyway starting out on that note?

Akaiyou wrote:sigh you don't get it you are hell bent on your own point i'm done debating this with you.

I tried to be more specific about what exactly i mean and it doesnt seem to get across to you.

Yep, only problem is that you were specifically wrong............... And it's not "my point", it's the rulebook's point.

If you say so, like i said im done with that discussion with you my friend. No sense in continuing it

This has only been an issue once, for me.

I'd gotten a pickup game against a random guy at the flgs. He was playing chaos marines, and had several squads in transports.

As he was deploying a pink & black rhino, I said, "noise marines, yes?" He hesitated for a moment, and then said, "I don't actually have to tell you."

The game went downhill from there.

In this instance, I couldn't give a gak what the RAW is--it's really a question of common courtesy. A refusal to make full disclosure may or may not be legal by the rules, but it absolutely paints you as a douchebag.

Fortunately, I only really play strangers in tournaments (where exchanging lists is one of the first steps), so like I said, it's only come up once.

I can tell you one thing, though, I have zero interest in rolling dice with that guy ever again.

CatPeeler wrote:
As he was deploying a pink & black rhino, I said, "noise marines, yes?" He hesitated for a moment, and then said, "I don't actually have to tell you."

The game went downhill from there.

He does have to tell you. Sounds like a bad experience and a terrible person to play against.

nkelsch wrote:He does have to tell you. Sounds like a bad experience and a terrible person to play against.

Whether he had to or not is beside the point.

If I ask anyone a pointed question (on ANY subject), and they refuse to answer, my interest in their company rapidly wanes.

Agreed with catpeeler, RAW just doesn't matter with stuff like this - it is TFG behaviour, and hopefully, nobody want to be a TFG

don_mondo wrote:

Akaiyou wrote:
As far as REQUIREMENTS go, it is only after the game. However you and the opponent may agree otherwise. What part of that is wrong?

I could care less about whatever personal arguement you and Dash are having, that's between the two of you and is best discussed privately. I'm not supporting anyone on anything. I'm just pointing out the fallacies in your argument because, well, simply put, you're wrong.

Page 92 text again, since you keep ignoring it.
"However, before starting to deploy their armies, it is a good idea for players to agree whether or not they can read the opponent’s force roster before and during the game."

So, your statement above is still incorrect. No, it's not a "requirement" only after the game. All that is required is for me (before deployment) to say I want to see your list before the game (which is the phrasing page 92 uses, I even bolded it for you above). At that point, you either agree or disagree. You can cling to the other line if you want:
"To keep things fair, you should always allow your opponent to read your force roster after a game."
but once I suggest full disclosure, we have to come to an agreement one way or the other, which means there is no "requirement" one way or the other.

Reading through this I cant help but notice that there's a slew of personal issues happening.

That said, it's time to toss my two bits in here.

"It is a good idea.".. to blah blah rosters.

Nowhere in those five words is there anything even close to sounding like a definitive rule. It is objective at best and seems to be aimed at making sure everyone gets along.

On the other hand..

"It is not required"... blah blah blah...

Is very black and white. It says, with no wiggle room, that if you dont want to reveal your roster until after the game, screw it, you dont have to.

So even if it's a good idea to talk about sharing rosters and lists and making a secret handshake and agreeing to buy each other capcakes afterwards, it's not required. The witholding player can just flat refuse to show until after the game, or in this case case, perhaps bargain to show after deployment, and he is within his rulebook rights to do so.

At this point, you, the "I am entitled to you list as you are to mine before we start because I need to be assured you are not cheating" player, can always just say "Well, I'm not comfortable with that. Sorry."

To the OP, I would gladly play a game with forces revealed after roll off for 1st turn. As an eldar player, it's pretty interesting to see how different the hordes of space marine players adjust their stuff once the figure out I'm an army of cover-saving distance keeping space elfs.. and how many objectives are decidely placed out in the open away from any and all cover and how much terrain is either removed from the field or shifted around so they have free shots at my overpriced units without 3+ armor saves. (scorpions and firedragons excluded.)

So much focus on how if a player doesnt want to give his whole list away then he must be cheating.. Has it occured to anyone to ask themselves whether or not they want someones complete list so they can tweak wargear, modify their original positioning plan, or adjust their cover? I get a lot of..

"Oh. Your playing Eldar. One sec. Lemme think about this a moment."

If I'm playing my footslogging list, its amazing how much terrain vanishes.

If I'm playing mechanized, there's not two inches of free space on objectives for my Eldar Standard End-O-Game-Tank Schock to go off without "fail this roll and your tank 'splodes' rolls."

All I'm saying (And I think the OP is saying ) is that a player is completely justified and within the rules to withhold his list till after the game. If you discover he is cheating, then spread the word in your LGS and people will just not play him. Shady stuff happens whether you reveal your list or not.

We play it as... setup terrain, roll for mission and deployment. Each side deploys forces. After forces are deployed, tell about anything youre proxying and disclose your reserves / contents of your transports.

But this was all decided by the group.

I agree with Thunderfrog.

When a line of text says that "it is a good idea" that makes just that a good idea but not mandatory.

Thunderfrog wrote:

Is very black and white. It says, with no wiggle room, that if you dont want to reveal your roster until after the game, screw it, you dont have to.

So this line doesn't exist?
Page 92 text yet again:
"However, before starting to deploy their armies, it is a good idea for players to agree whether or not they can read the opponent’s force roster before and during the game."

Once I say I want to see your list, we have to come to an agreement one way or the other. And I'm only going to agree that we share lists. See my point. I don't see any wiggle room here either.
And note that it says before deployment, not after as you are suggesting. But to address your other concers (as I already covered once previously), after deployment. That means AFTER determining scenario/deployment, AFTER setting up terrain, AFTER rolling to see who goes first, AFTER setting out objective markers. In other words, I can't diddle the terrain on you because you're playing mech or footsloggers, I can't adjust my list (tweak wargear) based on your list. So wow, look at that, by following what the rules actually say, we've eliminated most of your concerns regarding showing lists. Imagine that..................

Thunderfrog wrote:

don_mondo wrote:

Akaiyou wrote:
As far as REQUIREMENTS go, it is only after the game. However you and the opponent may agree otherwise. What part of that is wrong?

I could care less about whatever personal arguement you and Dash are having, that's between the two of you and is best discussed privately. I'm not supporting anyone on anything. I'm just pointing out the fallacies in your argument because, well, simply put, you're wrong.

Page 92 text again, since you keep ignoring it.
"However, before starting to deploy their armies, it is a good idea for players to agree whether or not they can read the opponent’s force roster before and during the game."

So, your statement above is still incorrect. No, it's not a "requirement" only after the game. All that is required is for me (before deployment) to say I want to see your list before the game (which is the phrasing page 92 uses, I even bolded it for you above). At that point, you either agree or disagree. You can cling to the other line if you want:
"To keep things fair, you should always allow your opponent to read your force roster after a game."
but once I suggest full disclosure, we have to come to an agreement one way or the other, which means there is no "requirement" one way or the other.

Reading through this I cant help but notice that there's a slew of personal issues happening.

That said, it's time to toss my two bits in here.

"It is a good idea.".. to blah blah rosters.

Nowhere in those five words is there anything even close to sounding like a definitive rule. It is objective at best and seems to be aimed at making sure everyone gets along.

On the other hand..

"It is not required"... blah blah blah...

Is very black and white. It says, with no wiggle room, that if you dont want to reveal your roster until after the game, screw it, you dont have to.

So even if it's a good idea to talk about sharing rosters and lists and making a secret handshake and agreeing to buy each other capcakes afterwards, it's not required. The witholding player can just flat refuse to show until after the game, or in this case case, perhaps bargain to show after deployment, and he is within his rulebook rights to do so.

At this point, you, the "I am entitled to you list as you are to mine before we start because I need to be assured you are not cheating" player, can always just say "Well, I'm not comfortable with that. Sorry."

To the OP, I would gladly play a game with forces revealed after roll off for 1st turn. As an eldar player, it's pretty interesting to see how different the hordes of space marine players adjust their stuff once the figure out I'm an army of cover-saving distance keeping space elfs.. and how many objectives are decidely placed out in the open away from any and all cover and how much terrain is either removed from the field or shifted around so they have free shots at my overpriced units without 3+ armor saves. (scorpions and firedragons excluded.)

So much focus on how if a player doesnt want to give his whole list away then he must be cheating.. Has it occured to anyone to ask themselves whether or not they want someones complete list so they can tweak wargear, modify their original positioning plan, or adjust their cover? I get a lot of..

"Oh. Your playing Eldar. One sec. Lemme think about this a moment."

If I'm playing my footslogging list, its amazing how much terrain vanishes.

If I'm playing mechanized, there's not two inches of free space on objectives for my Eldar Standard End-O-Game-Tank Schock to go off without "fail this roll and your tank 'splodes' rolls."

All I'm saying (And I think the OP is saying ) is that a player is completely justified and within the rules to withhold his list till after the game. If you discover he is cheating, then spread the word in your LGS and people will just not play him. Shady stuff happens whether you reveal your list or not.

THANK YOU. Finally someone understands my point.

Glad to see, im not just typing up gibberish that is beyond understandable here.