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.

 Mannahnin wrote:
If you're playing with alternating terrain placement, this is part of the strategy of that system. You have two options.

A) Don't play alternating placement. Use the same terrain general terrain density, but have a neutral third party arrange the table.

B) If you're playing alternating placement, you need to accept that it is part of the game, and that players will place terrain for advantage, not for looks and having a cool battlefield. You then need to learn tactics for terrain placement.

Consider placing the gun further back, arranging the walls so that they stretch further in front of it, and block off the area immediately in front of the gun. The rules for the Aegis state that each wall segment just has to be in contact with one other wall segment. Place them in sections of two pieces, in a rough "V" shape- two pieces centered at the back, with the gun behind them. Two more pieces several inches in front of them, to the left. And two more mirroring them, to the right. Then more pieces in front of those. This way you create a big wide space in front of your gun where no other terrain can be placed, and give your gun better firing lanes.

Another tactic is when YOU have first placement (which is 50% of the time), to place something LOW, which doesn't block your gun's view, in that area in front of your Aegis. This keeps your opponent from putting a tall LOS-blocker there.

No, if you're playing alternating terrain placement with complete dingbats then it's part of the strategy of the system; play the game with decent people who would rather have a fun game than beat their opponent over the head with the rulebook, and you can happily choose option C: Ignore stupid(will the filter let me say "stupid", or will that offend its delicate sensibilities I wonder?) stuff like this and agree to place fortifications - which are bought as part of your army - after terrain is placed - you know, like everything else you buy as part of your army-.

I actually like the alternating terrain system a lot but I do think there are issues with the place forts, then place terrain sequence.

I'm rather surprised that GW didn't say 'set up the terrain (by narrative or alternating system), then if you have a fortification, remove the required number of terrain pieces (1 or 3) from the sector(s) as required in order to place it. So basically swap a bit of terrain out for your fort after terrain's been done.

Well maybe its the puny defense line which is the problem. Granted I believe you should place fortifications after terrain, but I'm not the rulebook writer. I know thw bastion w/ quad gun is only 25 pts more. You get to place the gun on the top of that thing. It could help for LOS.

My 2 cents

1) was what he did a dick move? Yes

2) Was what he did wrong? no

3) should you be mad at him for doing this? IMO no if you are playing a game that you have both agreed to use this rule then you cant really complain.

4) what can you do to counter it? if he places a huge building in front of you use it to your advantage. place a terrain piece in front of that one then move your troops into the building and use it for cover.

5)suggestion to make him not do it. Make it so to place terrain you need to flip a coin onto the table where ever it lands thats where you place terrain, or option 2, the opposing team gets to pick the order of terrain pieces. so if he has a huge building a small rubble pile and a bunker, you get to pick the order of placement. like he needs to place the rubble, then then bunker then the big ass building. then he gets to do the same for you. as the others said try making a V with your line.

 Jidmah wrote:
Everything in the rules is fair game. Calling a person TFG will not increase your player skill. Finding a way around it does.

Mhm yeah I'm sure you'd have this attitude if you faced down 2 Valkyries, 3 Vendettas, and a Thunderbolt. (The toughest list I've ever run.)

"Not cheesy at all, fair game"

Right?

Right?

Just because you can do something, doesn't make it right.

We scatter our terrain.

I find it funny that TheCaptain with the TFG avatar is being against this TFG behaviour...

... Not that I disagree with him...

 Blood and Slaughter wrote:
I actually like the alternating terrain system a lot but I do think there are issues with the place forts, then place terrain sequence.

I'm rather surprised that GW didn't say 'set up the terrain (by narrative or alternating system), then if you have a fortification, remove the required number of terrain pieces (1 or 3) from the sector(s) as required in order to place it. So basically swap a bit of terrain out for your fort after terrain's been done.

That's what I have suggested in the past and the tournament I am attending this weekend is doing this.

Baronyu wrote:
I find it funny that TheCaptain with the TFG avatar is being against this TFG behaviour...

... Not that I disagree with him...

Assuming someone is what they put up as their avatar is rather silly, don't you think?

I hardly think Canadian 5th is a WW2 tank. Or Ailaros is a Foleran guardsman with a laspistol.



Backspacehacker could be a Legion of the Damned marine though; I haven't decided yet.

That is false. I am actually a Wraithlord. My large hands make it very difficult to to type with.

I don't even have a face... Which makes facepalming quite a challenge.

I apologise for bringing the thread off rail...

The rules dont mandate that you deploy terrain like that.... you can always agree to play with a table thats already been setup.

Invisible Jesus wrote:
Wow. Are people always this unfriendly on dakka?

It's stupid, especially since you are arguing over a game that is no longer catering towards competitive gaming.

That's not gonna stop them from competing. You can try and argue that, and I agree with you wholeheartedly. But we are all humans. Will to dominate others etc etc. People will compete in anything.

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Everything in the rules is fair game. Calling a person TFG will not increase your player skill. Finding a way around it does.

Mhm yeah I'm sure you'd have this attitude if you faced down 2 Valkyries, 3 Vendettas, and a Thunderbolt. (The toughest list I've ever run.)

"Not cheesy at all, fair game"

Right?

Right?

Just because you can do something, doesn't make it right.

I'll take you with my 9 hydra's

(am taking the piss. Not requesting a "what would happen..." post )

 TheCaptain wrote:


Assuming someone is what they put up as their avatar is rather silly, don't you think?

I hardly think Canadian 5th is a WW2 tank. Or Ailaros is a Foleran guardsman with a laspistol.



Backspacehacker could be a Legion of the Damned marine though; I haven't decided yet.

I am the lizard

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Everything in the rules is fair game. Calling a person TFG will not increase your player skill. Finding a way around it does.

Mhm yeah I'm sure you'd have this attitude if you faced down 2 Valkyries, 3 Vendettas, and a Thunderbolt. (The toughest list I've ever run.)

"Not cheesy at all, fair game"

Right?

Right?

Just because you can do something, doesn't make it right.

Actually I would. I simply would have to find a way to counter that list. I doubt it to be unbeatable. If I take out those valkyries and the thunderbolt, the IG player has close to nothing to handle my horde. Seems like a way to win to me. Besides, if you bring a Thunderbolt, I can bring anything from IA, too, like those dirt-cheap flakka trukks in squadrons of 5. That, or I field the IA:8 ork leaf-blower and simply blast your army off the table before your planes arrive.

I'd rather think of a strategy and beat my opponent next time, than point fingers and run out of the store complaining about how much of a TFG my opponent was.

There is no unbeatable army in WH40k.

Crazy thought here - wouldn't playing against a WAAC guy - and figuring out how to beat him everytime - make you a better player by challenging yourself? I'd personally relish the opportunity to face someone who takes advantage of broad rules for their own benefit - tabletop games or otherwise.

 Jidmah wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Everything in the rules is fair game. Calling a person TFG will not increase your player skill. Finding a way around it does.

Mhm yeah I'm sure you'd have this attitude if you faced down 2 Valkyries, 3 Vendettas, and a Thunderbolt. (The toughest list I've ever run.)

"Not cheesy at all, fair game"

Right?

Right?

Just because you can do something, doesn't make it right.

Actually I would. I simply would have to find a way to counter that list. I doubt it to be unbeatable. If I take out those valkyries and the thunderbolt, the IG player has close to nothing to handle my horde. Seems like a way to win to me. Besides, if you bring a Thunderbolt, I can bring anything from IA, too, like those dirt-cheap flakka trukks in squadrons of 5. That, or I field the IA:8 ork leaf-blower and simply blast your army off the table before your planes arrive.

I'd rather think of a strategy and beat my opponent next time, than point fingers and run out of the store complaining about how much of a TFG my opponent was.

There is no unbeatable army in WH40k.

Tailoring lists is so not-bro.

1. you place defence line in your deployment zone
2. he places large LOS blocking scenery in your deployment zone
3. you place large LOS blocking scenery in your deployment zone
4. he places scenery elsewhere
5. you place even more scenery in your deployment zone!

Then take a shooty army, castle up and force him to come to you. If you deploy in the terrain then it won't affect your shooting at all! Not sure what you play, but 3 units of long fangs in cover, a couple of manticores etc would work just fine. Just keep some mobile troops handy for late objective claiming - no need to show their face until at least T3!

 TheCaptain wrote:
Tailoring lists is so not-bro.

Where did I mention tailoring in one word?

 Xenocidal Maniac wrote:
I agree with the above two posters. What your opponent is doing isn't sportsmanlike at all.

and unless you can somehow live out of being sponsored playing w40k , then it isnt a sport , so sportsmanship doesnt cover w40k games.

dont play armies that require use of foritification to counter flyers . I mean your opponent may as well be whining about not getting +4 cover in 6th ed . Rules are rules and placment of big terrain in front of AA guns is legal .

Makumba wrote:

 Xenocidal Maniac wrote:
I agree with the above two posters. What your opponent is doing isn't sportsmanlike at all.

and unless you can somehow live out of being sponsored playing w40k , then it isnt a sport , so sportsmanship doesnt cover w40k games.

It does if you want repeat games from people. Sportsmanship comes into play anytime two people are competing at anything. A person can be a poor sport at rock-paper-scissors.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:
Tailoring lists is so not-bro.

Where did I mention tailoring in one word?

The 5 flakk trukks. Assuming you don't run them now (which I'll safely assume)

 TheCaptain wrote:
Tailoring lists is so not-bro.

Why not list tailor if your opponent tends to bring a totally one sided spam list? If you have intel on what the enemy is going to deploy before hand, you take a list to counter it. It forces your opponents to buy models and build balanced lists that aren't weak to a rock-paper-scissors style counter army. Besides, I could see Orks taking flak truks anyway in the new meta.

This is the question that players at our local store are trying to answer.

On the one hand, rules are clear and they let a player counter a forification with for example some big hill terrain. It is another strategic aspect of the game - terrain and its placement. It is also a rule which makes fortifications less viable and we do not know if this is intended...maybe it is.

On the other hand, there is the time restriction on tournaments which makes terrain placement too time consuming to be played. It is also absolutely without any logic that fortifications can be placed on places where they are not usefull (directly in front of a hill for example). Comanders should not count with the possiblity that a ruin can miraculously appear right in front of their Aegis Line and ruin their day. That is just weird, even for warhammer 40k world .

For the sake of time, it is better to place the terrain before the fortification. But in that way they suddenly get better. There is also a problem that after fortification placement, the game table can have too much terrain pieces on. Anybody has a solution to this? I dont really know how to deal with this problem.

Terrain placement in 2nd was alternating. He drops a 3 story ruin in front of your game, you place some terrain that will help you or harm him. You castle yourself up if you are shooty or you can give yourself cover stepping stones to hop across the field with. Placing a 3 story building in front of your quad gun is no less douchy than showing up with a necron cheese list or a Gk triple psydread wih purifier spam. Yes it's not always fun to play these kinds of people however playing them and loosing will make you a better player. Those players rarely get better because they are using a cheap list or cheap tactics in their favor to gain advantage. You should feel sorry for them. Sometimes all people have going for them is a win in their game.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:
Tailoring lists is so not-bro.

Why not list tailor if your opponent tends to bring a totally one sided spam list? If you have intel on what the enemy is going to deploy before hand, you take a list to counter it. It forces your opponents to buy models and build balanced lists that aren't weak to a rock-paper-scissors style counter army. Besides, I could see Orks taking flak truks anyway in the new meta.

Tailoring is only okay if it's mutual. A one sided spam list is still TAC. (Or it can be, rather).

Flyers are very TAC, as has been demonstrated by the tournament scene. If you always field 5 flakk trukks, fine; but saying "Crap, that's a lot of flyers, let me get my flakk trukks" is one-sided tailoring, which is pretty dirty.

It does if you want repeat games from people. Sportsmanship comes into play anytime two people are competing at anything. A person can be a poor sport at rock-paper-scissors

probably a language barrier thing , but how does playing by the rules stop one from playing anyone ? The rules say it is ok ? is it legal to do ? then it is as sportsmanlike as it can be . Everything more is doing someone a favor or not playing an actual game .whats next taking back moves or maybe re-rolling under avarge rolls ?

Why not list tailor if your opponent tends to bring a totally one sided spam list? If you have intel on what the enemy is going to deploy before hand, you take a list to counter it. It forces your opponents to buy models and build balanced lists that aren't weak to a rock-paper-scissors style counter army

be my guest . you buy FW flakk guns [which in some place you wont be able to use] or 9 hydras which will only work in tailor games against normal IG or necron lists .Now your opponent with the flyers has a good list to play against everyone and you just spent 410$ on hydras you can only use in one match up . yeah tailoring of this kind is like so viable and such a wise thing to do .

Makumba wrote:
be my guest . you buy FW flakk guns [which in some place you wont be able to use] or 9 hydras which will only work in tailor games against normal IG or necron lists .Now your opponent with the flyers has a good list to play against everyone and you just spent 410$ on hydras you can only use in one match up . yeah tailoring of this kind is like so viable and such a wise thing to do .

If your opponents are taking FW models then tossing in a few flak trukks and a defense line makes good sense given the power of flyers.

I am the Walrus!

Can't you just bring 2 aegis lines, then put them about 2-3 feet apart so you can't get blocked by just one building and between the two of them you should have good coverage of the whole battlefield.

Then use the alternating terrain method and place a lake in front of one of your ADL's. Between that and terrain density limits it shouldn't be as big a hindrance to you.

If you're lucky the places you put your lines have a 1/3 chance of not being able to have any more terrain features placed in that zone as they count against terrain density.

If all else fails, borrow a 2 year old and sick him after his models Look Timmy, planes.

Why not list tailor if your opponent tends to bring a totally one sided spam list? If you have intel on what the enemy is going to deploy before hand, you take a list to counter it. It forces your opponents to buy models and build balanced lists that aren't weak to a rock-paper-scissors style counter army

be my guest . you buy FW flakk guns [which in some place you wont be able to use] or 9 hydras which will only work in tailor games against normal IG or necron lists .Now your opponent with the flyers has a good list to play against everyone and you just spent 410$ on hydras you can only use in one match up . yeah tailoring of this kind is like so viable and such a wise thing to do .

List tailoring is generally considered a Waac behavior. When getting the win supersedes having a good all around list; especially when the flyer player has a good, untailored, all around list, is not very fair. This is because it is up to the player to decide what lists are powerful enough to tailor against, by this logic. I could claim an Ork foot-horde is too overpowered and just swap out all my flyers and tanks for manticores and basilisks.

The moral gray area around list-tailoring is why it is unacceptable generally. I always offer my opponent to adjust his list when he finds out I am fielding flyers; but doing so without permission is a cheap, dirty win. Unless you let your opponent tailor back. Which further becomes a game of "who can tailor against a specific list" rather than "who is the best player with the best list"

40k is a game of rock paper scissors. Every unit counters things, and is countered by things. It is up to a good list writer to bring the right rocks, papers, and scissors to make his list work. If you know your opponent is bringing 90% rocks, how is it fair to swap out all your scissors for papers?

It resembles cheating


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Makumba wrote:
be my guest . you buy FW flakk guns [which in some place you wont be able to use] or 9 hydras which will only work in tailor games against normal IG or necron lists .Now your opponent with the flyers has a good list to play against everyone and you just spent 410$ on hydras you can only use in one match up . yeah tailoring of this kind is like so viable and such a wise thing to do .

If your opponents are taking FW models then tossing in a few flak trukks and a defense line makes good sense given the power of flyers.

Absolutely. Bringing flakk to fight flyers is a smart thing to do, but when you add flakk to a list that doesn't usually bring it so that you can better handle your opponent's flyers, then take it out next game when you're fighting a foot-list, that's tailoring. My example with the manticores vs. green tide shows why tailoring is unfair if it is one-sided and not agreed upon.

 TheCaptain wrote:

Why not list tailor if your opponent tends to bring a totally one sided spam list? If you have intel on what the enemy is going to deploy before hand, you take a list to counter it. It forces your opponents to buy models and build balanced lists that aren't weak to a rock-paper-scissors style counter army

be my guest . you buy FW flakk guns [which in some place you wont be able to use] or 9 hydras which will only work in tailor games against normal IG or necron lists .Now your opponent with the flyers has a good list to play against everyone and you just spent 410$ on hydras you can only use in one match up . yeah tailoring of this kind is like so viable and such a wise thing to do .

List tailoring is generally considered a Waac behavior.

It's really not though.

Seriously, everyone list tailors to some degree.

You adapt to your local meta. Adapting is a skill. It isn't cheating.

If I play regularly against someone, I will try different units to see how they work, especially if I lose frequently. Trying new units is half the fun (or possibly all the fun?). If you try new units you are by default list-tailoring.
If you play the same TAC list you are being dull, and you are not learning anything, you are not adapting. How can new players expect to improve if they don't do this? How can anyone expect to improve.

Sure, finding the best TAC list is what everyone should strive for, because you will not know your opponent if you play in tournaments and you will require your best TAC list. Plus finding that ultimate TAC is immensely satisfying and everyone should aspire towards this imo.

But in order to find that optimum list you have to - like it or not - list tailor to find out what unit can counter another unit. You cannot learn 40k without doing this. In this case it is totally innocent and actually quite essential for noobs.

However, there is a line to be drawn somewhere. If you are a veteran player who is list-tailoring just to win (and not to learn anything), that is poor form. The trouble is, how do you know if it's innocent (wanting to learn) or them being an a*shole?

Well, with friends and people at your FLGS it's pretty simple: You will be able to distinguish between people who are being WAAC/tailoring just to win and those who are doing it innocently, as most people will avoid playing the WAAC players and they will usually be TFG and will be just a horrible experience to play against or even talk to. The innocent ones will be the reverse, not argue over every rule and will generally be pleasant to talk to and hang out with.
The beauty of this is that you can always turn down a game against a WAAC player. And if you don't like WAAC in general, you shouldn't even be going near tournaments. So it shouldn't be a problem. If you think someone is being WAAC with list-tailoring, then walk away and don't play them. It's very straight forward. If you still play them despite this, it's your problem and you are being a total hypocrite. Likewise, if you are rejecting all forms of list-tailoring (even when it's innocent), you are also being a bit of a hypocrite, because everyone was new to 40k once and thus everyone list-tailors to some degree (as explained above).

But of course the point is you can always refuse to play.

I always felt "list tailoring" to akin to "screen looking" in 4 player split screen video games. I grew up with golden-eye and the likes. We would all play to have fun. But you could easily tell when someone was blatantly staring at your screen just so they could kill you. But in all honestly, everyone screen cheats. Just not to a huge extreme. As the above poster put it, its sort of part of the game.

There is an overboard to it though. If my friend has a full time job with plenty of disposable income and the new rage of fylers has come about, he will go buy as many as he pleases. As I do not have said amount of large income, I can not purchase those items.

In a friendly setting (we play eachother weekly) him bringing 6 flyers to the board when he knows that I have none and dont own anyhting that can handle that, would be very rude of him.

In a tournament setting where he has no idea what others will be bringing, that 6 flyer list would be perfectly acceptable.

That was a made up scenario just to show some things.

My friend and my situation is more or less we both have low incomes for the moment and deal with what models we have. I am Eldar and he is Vanilla SM. We play once a week. We both started playing with basically what we own. Over the course of a couple months we improve our lists by purchasing more models. Obviously, I purchase things tat will better help me deal with Marines. He purchases things that will better help him deal with eldar. We bring new units to the table and we learn.

This is list tailoring. We know we play each other and we know what each other brings to the table for the most part. Is this bad? No, of course not.

We I bring my ravager or razorwing, you bet your butt they will have disintegrator cannons on them. The same way you can put your pretty penny on him taking sternguard in a drop pod that uses cover ignoring rounds on my rangers (and everything else in my army that likes cover). Once again, is it list tailoring? Yes. But it is perfectly fine.