Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I tend to throw stuff, yell, make threats and berate the other players parents. Good times!

BeefCakeSoup wrote:

TermiesInARaider wrote:

BeefCakeSoup wrote:I really don't complain about fakesauce armies. Dark Eldar are pretty stellar and pants most anything you want to bring to a scrap. About the only thing I can't stand to fight is that guy who had the money and time to build a massive 25 tank mechwall of IG at 2500 points. Other than that turd I pretty much enjoy all games, especially against really bad GK players when I have broken sauce night shields!

So I'm guessing you're one of those 'embrace the cheese', types? I'm cool with that, so long as you're polite.

What I don't get is why you're ragging on the guy with the 25 tankwall IG list? If he put in the time, money, and effort to assemble and paint those tanks, why should he be condemned for using them, when you so proudly laud your brokensauce night shields? Sounds a little hypocritical, to me...

Well mostly because my night shields are a strategy, more importantly, they are a strategy that can be circumvented. You can't really stop a well built Mech IG wall, it pretty much just grapes you regardless of your army. Imotehk CAN be sweet against it, but for the rest of us, a real IG mech wall is still about as graped as it gets.

As you say, you'd know far more about Dark Eldar or IG than I would.

Kal-El wrote:Why does the OP list the SW long fangs as cheese? I use them and most of the time they suck 3/5 hits is the norm with 2/3 wounds/pen/glance if that for a 5 man squad of mine. They seem on par with the other heavies imo.

I found it hilarious when, after hearing how much people complained about Devastators being underpowered for their huge pointcost, they went on complaining about how overpowered Long Fangs were for their tiny poincost.

TermiesInARaider wrote:

BeefCakeSoup wrote:

TermiesInARaider wrote:

BeefCakeSoup wrote:I really don't complain about fakesauce armies. Dark Eldar are pretty stellar and pants most anything you want to bring to a scrap. About the only thing I can't stand to fight is that guy who had the money and time to build a massive 25 tank mechwall of IG at 2500 points. Other than that turd I pretty much enjoy all games, especially against really bad GK players when I have broken sauce night shields!

So I'm guessing you're one of those 'embrace the cheese', types? I'm cool with that, so long as you're polite.

What I don't get is why you're ragging on the guy with the 25 tankwall IG list? If he put in the time, money, and effort to assemble and paint those tanks, why should he be condemned for using them, when you so proudly laud your brokensauce night shields? Sounds a little hypocritical, to me...

Well mostly because my night shields are a strategy, more importantly, they are a strategy that can be circumvented. You can't really stop a well built Mech IG wall, it pretty much just grapes you regardless of your army. Imotehk CAN be sweet against it, but for the rest of us, a real IG mech wall is still about as graped as it gets.

As you say, you'd know far more about Dark Eldar or IG than I would.

All I know about IG is that they put tanks in tanks and call it troops.

As for DE, I'm okay with them, but mostly because they are insanely easy to play with their new dex.

I think I didn't squarely explain what this thread is about. It's not for ragging on this build/that build. It's for how you react, what you do, when you see something that doesn't seem fair, or balanced, or too competitive, or whatever it may be.

Personally, I'm not at the level, skill-wise, where it's going to matter what my opponent is playing. I'm most likely going to lose anyways. So for me, it's a non-issue. But some people get very, very annoyed when they see all Purifires and Psyfleman Dreads sitting across the table from them. So call this tapping public opinion.

I have no problems with any cheesy list, what i have a problem with is constantly playing the same list with a different face,

Kal-El wrote:
Ah ok, its a point cost thing then. Thank you.

I know the deal with the Long Fangs is more than just their point cost, but I was trying to make a parallel between those two cases and the point cost was the main common factor. Also, you seem to have messed up the quote tags.

Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:I'll continue to play against it just like any other reasonable person. Though, I have at times talked to them after the game about how cheesy I felt the list was. I won't accuse them of doing anything wrong, typically it will be more along the lines of "man, I wish my Codex could possibly do anything close to such a nice cookie cutter power list". Anyone smart would get the point, than it just (typically) turns into talks about how awesome said Codex is, while being a dual conversation about how Cheesy it can be. LOL

This is typically what I do. I've been lucky enough though to play with only 4-5 players who are all respectful. But also really good and talented. So even though I'm like 2/12 it's still cool. Just this last game I played a long fang drop pod Logan grimnar cheese list to a draw till turn 6. This is a guy who placed top 30 at adepticon and plays tournaments regularly who was impressed at how I played being so new. It was fun despite losing on turn 6. Afterwards we talked about how crazy the space wolves Wolves codex is.

I found it hilarious when, after hearing how much people complained about Devastators being underpowered for their huge pointcost, they went on complaining about how overpowered Long Fangs were for their tiny poincost.

Vanilla Devastators? Overcosted

BA devastators, much better, about right

SW Devastators, cheaper, with a cheaper sarge, and a far better ability? undercosted.

They gained both a cheaper cost than BA and Vanilla with a better combat ability (both BP and CCW), along with the ability to split fire in a single group.

Right? Or why should I blame the other guy for my inability to see the way to counter his army?

Tell that to a daemons player who just fought a list with two to three interceptors and about three strike squads.

cheese goes best with toast, or noodles.

personally i like a nice grated parmesian. it makes wonderful DE vehicles.

I don't mind the cheese, if it's legal, LET'S PLAY! I will usually be polite and chat it up with my opponent to see what kind of player and person he is. Asking friendly questions like "How long have you been playing?" "What Armies do you have?" so on. This helps me on a couple levels. First, these are great opening conversational pieces. Secondly, it gives me insight on my opponents knowledge base.

I try not to look at just my opponents List and judge him as a Douche/cheesy player before I get to know or understand him. He might be a new player that just asked his friends advice on which army is a strong Army to get. He could be tired of getting his butt kicked with his first Army choice that didn't really fit his playing style so he is trying something new after some research on what seems to work for other people. He could just be a total Power List band-wagoner that has more money then Tactical skills. Lastly, he could be a really good player that knows how to build and play strong lists. With any of these guys, I will play the game with rule number one in mind, HAVE FUN. If my opponent isn't that fun of a person to play I will most likely never seek him out for another game but on the other hand if I keep an open mind and have a fun game, I might have just found a new gaming friend that I will try to play again.

It's not like any army in 40k is unbeatable, no matter what they play. Thus crying "cheese" is equivalent to admitting once own incompetence in list building and generalship.

I respond to someone who fields the best of his army with respect, as he has clearly understood what his codex is about. Or he copied a list he doesn't understand and will suffer a crushing defeat. Either way, no reason to insult that person by comparing him to diary products.

The Cheese might come from the Codex.

But the rotten stinky cheese smell always comes from the way the players act.

Friendly players playing net-lists don't bother me. I hate playing rude bastards.

I think "cheese all depends on your point of view. Some people find a GK paladin squad casting powers all over the place, smashing through an army cheesy, while those same players may accuse an Eldar player with runes of warding and 3 squads of fire dragons a cheese player. To me "cheese" seems to be the thing in your opponent's codex that you have a hard time countering.

As to my reaction? I deal with it. Every codex has some cheese, whether it be crazy psychic powers, vehicle spam, or just plain old brute force units, and it's your responsibility as a player to counter it as best you can. The only time I have a problem with "cheese" is when the opponent playing the list decides that anything that can beat his WAAC list must be using a total cheese army themselves, rather than learning from their mistakes and re-evaluating their play style. Even then, it has less to do with the list itself, and more to do with the player behind it.

GimbleMuggernaught wrote:I think "cheese all depends on your point of view. Some people find a GK paladin squad casting powers all over the place, smashing through an army cheesy, while those same players may accuse an Eldar player with runes of warding and 3 squads of fire dragons a cheese player. To me "cheese" seems to be the thing in your opponent's codex that you have a hard time countering.

As to my reaction? I deal with it. Every codex has some cheese, whether it be crazy psychic powers, vehicle spam, or just plain old brute force units, and it's your responsibility as a player to counter it as best you can. The only time I have a problem with "cheese" is when the opponent playing the list decides that anything that can beat his WAAC list must be using a total cheese army themselves, rather than learning from their mistakes and re-evaluating their play style. Even then, it has less to do with the list itself, and more to do with the player behind it.

This. People just don't like changing things up. :/

I respond with 15 Fearless Terminators with TH/SS and some kitted out Ravenwing in 1000pt games.

Kal-El wrote:Why does the OP list the SW long fangs as cheese? I use them and most of the time they suck 3/5 hits is the norm with 2/3 wounds/pen/glance if that for a 5 man squad of mine. They seem on par with the other heavies imo.

There are a few things wrapped up in the long fangs issue. Firstly is their special rule about being so experienced they can split fire. OK fine, but firstly ALL space marines who don't die in battle are extremely long lived and should be able to do the same thing and secondly, IMNSHO, EVERY UNIT should be able to split fire however it wants, especially when they have combined arms and are threatened by infantry and heavier threats. Why would a trooper with a melta waste the shot on an IG trooper if there is a tank sitting next to the IG squad that is just as dangerous.

Despite having that additional special ability that other space marine devastators don't have they are actually CHEAPER pointswise than other devastators.

Combined those things add to many people's cheesy list. I don't consider them cheesy so much as a perfect example of stupid unit special rules that should apply to all and completely inconsistent vision in writing new codecies or even seeming to have the slightest awareness of the points in other Space Marine books. Why exactly do similar units in all of the different Space Marine books have completely different points costs? It is just sloppy and lazy...

Skriker

sfshilo wrote:I eat and kill it....

In that order?

I do not understand this concept of which you speak.

Please, define....very clearly....what "cheese" is.
Please, do not use examples, "I know it when I see it" or emotions as primary factors in said definition.

Steelmage99 wrote:I do not understand this concept of which you speak.

Please, define....very clearly....what "cheese" is.
Please, do not use examples, "I know it when I see it" or emotions as primary factors in said definition.

Cheese covers multiple angles at once and can be used to describe:

1) Units that are felt to be under priced for the abilities and when compared to similar units in other forces.
2) Units that break the "spirit" of the game and allow people to play truly annoying forces that make some battles with them close to pointless with certain armies.
3) Units that combine these factors.
4) Something people exclaim when once again they lose a game and can't acknowledge or accept that they may just be a bad player, but instead insist the enemy list is full of.

Clearer?
Skriker

TermiesInARaider wrote:So you sit down, excited to play your new Blob-guard, or Nidzilla, or whatever list you may have just created, and boom, you see it. GK Purifiers. Psyfleman Dreads. Droppod BA. Longfang spam. Whatever it is, your opponent's army REEKS of hot, steaming, Limburger cheese. How do you respond?

I, personally, will keep going without a second thought, so long as the guy is polite and friendly. For me, games are about the people you're playing with, not what you're playing and who wins, so if I put out my fluffy-cloud Crimson Fists, and I get hit with six Psyfleman Dreads, and get totally steamrolled, it's no skin off my back. That said, I cannot, and will not, tolerate anyone who can't be polite, no matter what kind of list they're playing.

What about you?

The way I look at it, if the rules allow it, it isn't "cheesy", "beardy" or any other-y. I try to play as best I can. But I direct my full scorn at the writers who produced the codices and rules that allow such lists, along with the faceless GW suits who approved, or worse, ordered such products.

I agree with your take on politeness.

Cheese is the term players use for units or mechanics that they consider overpowered.

I'm probably a small minority here when I say that I think it's Perfectly okay to get pissed off when someone pulls out some BS list because they DO exist, however it would still be rude to make a scene. It's better to play the game and if you play that person again, simply ask them to use a different list if you're not looking for a competitive game.

Unless the guy is a complete jerk, then all bets are off.

There is no such thing as a cheesy or unbeatable list.

If there is a list I have extreme difficulties with, that is because of my tactical short comings. I then try and figure out how to defeat it with my options avaliable.


To do anything less is to admit defeat. Blame it on the other player all you want, but thats not where the problem is.

Grey Templar wrote:There is no such thing as a cheesy or unbeatable list.

If there is a list I have extreme difficulties with, that is because of my tactical short comings. I then try and figure out how to defeat it with my options avaliable.


To do anything less is to admit defeat. Blame it on the other player all you want, but thats not where the problem is.

This if I get stomp by something, it's becouse I don't no the rules well or how good they are at "such and such". It dosen't happen twice.

I don't mind cheese lists too much, I'm there to play a game.

What matters to me is the general. If the person is acting like a douche I won't have as good a time but oh well.

Zathras wrote:Slice it thin, put it on bread with dry salame and a nice spicy mustard and have lunch.

Me to except I use normal mustard.

I find "cheese" is pretty common and I just play against it. if it is the easiest and best list to use, that's why my opponent is using it. If I get worked up over it the game turns into a fight for survival and that defeats the main reason I play.

I play against it, as I would against any other type of lists. It all boils down to the player really

Grey Templar wrote:There is no such thing as a cheesy or unbeatable list.

If there is a list I have extreme difficulties with, that is because of my tactical short comings. I then try and figure out how to defeat it with my options avaliable.


To do anything less is to admit defeat. Blame it on the other player all you want, but thats not where the problem is.

Yes, of corse! How woefully inept of me to roll a 1 and not get the first turn, not to mention how utterly incompetent of me it was to play a codex with no psychic defense of any kind and let my opponent warp quake the entire table, thus preventing me from even putting one ing model on the table!!!
Oh yes, I played so poorly, my opponent was a genius to spot a broken as gak power and spam it against my poor Daemons... Guess I should just learn to play better right?!!


Get off your high horse, there most certainly ARE those very few lists that are outright broken and unfair that no amount of skill or preperation can overcome - you're simply 100% screwed from the word go. (like how about Tyranids vs 2-3 vendettas + chimerawall IG, or Daemons vs quake-shunting GK's?!)

You can't avoid these games in a tournament, and it sure as hell is a huge slap in the face when some douche pulls such a list out to use against you in what's supposed to be a 'friendly' game.
So yes, when the other guy is being a complete tool and simply trying to be as big an as possible, I'll happily pick up my models and leave him to stroke his oversized ego since he's obviously making up for some more obvious shortcomings...