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.

If you're looking for players who will enjoy the challenge, you need to ask around and find those players, simple as that.

Regardless of all the flame going around in this thread from multiple people, that's what it comes down to. Have a fun, maybe super fluffy army, and have a competitive army. If you can only make one due to money, build the competitive and add on to do a fluffy one from there.

In short, this thread is a ridiculously long way and process to get to: talk to the opponent to see what the enjoy and don't enjoy.

Just to clarify: From what the OP said, the OP is not a WAAC player.

He's a hyper-competitive player. And that's not neccessarily a bad thing so long as the OPs opponents understand that he is looking to play against other power lists and plan accordingly.

To the OP: Just tell your opponent what type of game your looking for in advance. If the guy in the local game store is looking for a friendly non-competitive pick-up-game, the simplel solution is to say "thanks for the offer of the game, but we'd better not." Because neither of you will enjoy the game very much.

For the benefit of the OP: A WAAC player is a cheater. He's the type of guy that brings 2200pts to a 2000pt game, argues rolls, moves his guys seven inches rather than six by measuring from the from the front base to the rear of the base, picks up dice and declares he's got a six before you have a chance to glance at them etc. He's the guy that only ever gets to play in tournaments because no one local is interested in playing him more than once before everyone in the local area has heard that he is a cheating git.

There's a very significant difference, between a WAAC player and how the OP describes himself. The OP has made the mistake that many relative newcomers new to the hobby do: he used some confusing jargon incorrectly.

Basically, he was trying to say one thing and didn't realise he was actually saying something else entirely. So please go easy on the guy.

 LeadLegion wrote:
Just to clarify: From what the OP said, the OP is not a WAAC player.

He's a hyper-competitive player. And that's not neccessarily a bad thing so long as the OPs opponents understand that he is looking to play against other power lists and plan accordingly.

To the OP: Just tell your opponent what type of game your looking for in advance. If the guy in the local game store is looking for a friendly non-competitive pick-up-game, the simplel solution is to say "thanks for the offer of the game, but we'd better not." Because neither of you will enjoy the game very much.

For the benefit of the OP: A WAAC player is a cheater. He's the type of guy that brings 2200pts to a 2000pt game, argues rolls, moves his guys seven inches rather than six by measuring from the from the front base to the rear of the base, picks up dice and declares he's got a six before you have a chance to glance at them etc. He's the guy that only ever gets to play in tournaments because no one local is interested in playing him more than once before everyone in the local area has heard that he is a cheating git.

There's a very significant difference, between a WAAC player and how the OP describes himself. The OP has made the mistake that many relative newcomers new to the hobby do: he used some confusing jargon incorrectly.

Basically, he was trying to say one thing and didn't realise he was trying to say something else entirely. So please go easy on the guy.

Yeh, I think you've hit it on the nose. A better title to this post would've likely been "I think I want to play with what many describe as WAAC lists." I definitely have no interest in cheating or bending the rules of the game. I do not, however, think I should be punished for playing up to the very edges of those confines.

Have you seen 30 Jump Pack Death Company with double hammers charging down the field before?

they can't enen catch many races transports and don't score and as everything in power armor get hurt by helldrakes , so no I never saw 30 DC runing around.

Nor do I. Unfortunately, the internet is full of people who jump to conclusions or who are too quick to label other people as trolls or WAAC players. Dakka is no exception, although it tends to be better than most 40K forums in this regard.

By the way, you might not know this but if you go back and edit your first post on this thread, you might still be able to change the title you gave this thread.

I gotta go with troa and leadlegion. You aren't WAAC, but are hyper-competitive (which isn't necessarily a bad thing). OP, you just have to talk w/ prospective opponents about the type of game they want to play (and you too).

Halfpast_Yellow wrote:

 redthirst wrote:

I'm like you: I'm very competitive and I want to play with and against the most competitive lists, so I know what a hassle it can be to find that in 40k (honestly, no other game I've ever played has such a wide-spread anti-competitive mindset... like, no one talks about TFG at a Magic or Warmachine tournament, but I have heard players accused of bringing "cheesy" lists to a 40k tournament like it was a bad thing).

This should really be an epiphany of sorts. Magic and Warmachine are designed from the ground up for competitive tournament play. 40k isn't a competitive game. It's like saying "I want to be competitive at yahtzee", or beach cricket, or role-playing, etc etc. Most people who have indulged in one or more of those sorts of past times would look at someone saying that and their internal monologues would be telling them that that person "just doesn't quite get it". That's the WAAC or hyper competitive 40k player.

When did the trend of WAAC players start getting upset about being called WAAC players and insist on being called 'hyper-competitive' or whatever on Dakka start anyway? Something I've noticed since coming back for the new Eldar. WAAC does not mean 'cheater' or bad sportsman, cheater and bad sportsman mean those things. Win-at-all-costs armies have always been a thing, it's what gets put on the table by players who don't consider the enjoyment of their non-WAAC opponents in a hobby that's designed more about 'forging the narrative' than who won the game at the end of it.

I'm a competitive person. I love studying metas, I love working on strategies within game systems, like the OP. My advice to a kindred spirit would be to embrace a system that rewards that, and where everyone is swimming in the same direction. Chess, Poker, Warmachine, League of Legends, Magic the Gathering. I like 40k for building, painting, and pushing around the pretty models making stories in the dystopian sci fi universe, I like Chess and Warmachine for the actual brain workout. It's still fun discussing what-ifs on the dakka 40k forums, but it's such a snooze=fest actually trying to play it out on the table.

Exactly. 40k and WFB are fantastic vehicles for story telling but if you're getting stuck into them in a competitive way but aren't interested in anything else then there are plenty of other game systems that deliver far better rulesets and balanced factions.

 Grey Templar wrote:
WAAC is an attitude, not a playstyle.

you can be hyper competitive and not be a WAAC player.

As long as you are a cordial opponent it doesn't matter what horrible things you do to your opponent's unoptimized army list. Only a sore loser would harp on you bringing your A game. I would personally find it slightly offensive if my opponent didn't bring his A game. It says the game really isn't worth their time and effort to try and win.


Now if someone is a newer player, you can restrain yourself. But be careful not to do it too much. If there isn't a challenge there isn't an incentive for the other player to improve. its why when I play new players I still ensure I have a list that will beat them, but one that will teach them through the loss how to become better and not just give them the illusion of victory. And then every now and then you can pull off the gloves and do what could truly be called seal clubbing.

In turn, when I play someone of better caliber than myself I never ask for punches to be pulled. Defeat teaches more than victory, and I want to learn.


If someone calls you a WAAC player and you truly haven't been a jerk, that person is probably just a sore loser who doesn't want to change their style so they can beat you. And frankly someone like that isn't worth your time to play against.

Losing a closely fought battle is almost as fun as winning it.

Post of the year.

Exactly. 40k and WFB are fantastic vehicles for story telling but if you're getting stuck into them in a competitive way but aren't interested in anything else then there are plenty of other game systems that deliver fat better rulesets and balanced factions.

That is only partly true . Very offten people have two options either play a GW table top game or not play a table top game at all .

Fair enough. I was just going from what read, I am glad to be wrong. I see where you are coming from now.

All you can do is then just ask around before starting a game. Do you have a group you play with? Maybe set something up before hand where you can stratagize (sp?) where half the fun is sometimes.

 Janthkin wrote:
Everyone needs to take a step back from the keyboard, and enhance their calm.

Further rudeness will have unpleasant effects on your continued ability to post.

these "competitive" threads always see the same people commenting, continuing their arguments between themselves across multiple threads. Hopefully this one will avoid the inevitable locking.

I think the OP's problem stems from the fact that he plays magic the gathering. Givin the fact that their are some huge tournements for mtg with a lot of prizes I mean i've been to some were the prize pool was over $3k, this leads to some major list optimizations for decks. And when some cards are worth more thatn $100 apiece most people don't bother building so called casual decks. So when a magic player gets into a new game like 40k they tend to want to run min/max lists because thats what good magic players do with their decks. Unfortunitly this kinda attitude kinda rubs alot of 40k players the wrong way. I honestly dont see why though. You probaly got into 40k for the same reason that i did because its a cool stratagy game an an altenative to playing magic all the time. People don't have to play 40k for the fluff they can play for the statagey aspect of the game to. And to limit yourself with something subpar because people say it takes no skill to win with a good army list is frankly idiotic. Alot of the good army lists are good only if you play them right meaning they have a high learning curve and so a newbie couldnt just pick them up and expect to win against an expierinced player that may be only decent at the game.

themadlbb wrote:
Back in the day I always played tournament magic. I picked it up around the same time I started 40k. Anyway my favorite part of the game was trying to find the most advanced strategies to compete at the highest levels with my opponents. I tend to feel the same way about 40k. Now I am nowhere near naive enough to believe that there is such a thing as an unbeatable list and dont want there to be.

However I do wish that I could play and tune those hyper competitive lists on the net. Farsight bombs, wraithwing, you name it I wanna play it if I think I can beat the snot out of my opponent.

My problem is a. I don't want to get people pissed at me when I bring my power list out, and b. I dislike the fact that when someone else inevitably brings a power list I feel like ive gimped myself because I'm worried about what others think of my list.

Does anyone feel like they can reconcile these issues or am I doomed to simply hold back when really I just want to unleash?

Honestly dude don't worry about it.

Ive been making the net lists since 2001 and more often then not they are either one trick ponies or gimmicky as hell and fail against any general with a brain in his head. 90% of people that play it have a good time, the other 10% will bash it (loudly...) without even trying to fight it. The only one that was practically an auto win was Nidzilla, and we wont see its like for a long time.

You can be a WAAC player and not be an donkey-cave that just copies net lists.

I think coming from MtG your going to find that 40k games are a bit different.

In 40k, the biggest factor in winning games is the general, not the list. I'm not saying the list doesn't factor in, because it does. However the player is going to have a far larger impact.

If you want to pursue tweaking 'net lists or power lists or whatever you want to call them: go for it. Just understand that the winability of the list is going to depend on your local meta, your tactical skills and your opponents skills.

I'm not putting MtG down ( a couple of my kids play it ), but its a very different situation when any given hand is based on a random drawing of cards. Sure, 40k has its own random elements - some pretty radical depending on the army you play, but its not at the same level and most are controllable to some degree based on your plan of action.

As others have said: if you want to truly build and prove your skills then do so with a bottom tier army. I play DE, which is by no means considered a power army. However I've won my last 10 games straight against opponents with lists varying from space wolves, CSM, DA, daemons, nids and even tau. A few of those lists were tailored to beat me.

Why have I been winning? Simple, I spent 50+ games getting my butt handed to me and I watched and learned. I understand my army and most of the others. I own several different armies, but DE is my primary one simply because its the hardest to play well.

Winning in 40k isn't just pick a few units and drop them on a table, then tweak wargear as necessary. Rather its having a plan that coordinates your units into a cohesive force. More than that: it's having multiple plans based on the various missions and types of foes you will face.

Exalted post!

For a very good reason. The main take-home point for the OP though is this:

*With lot's of practice, you can do well with any army. It takes a good, experienced player to pick up a net-list and do well with it but it takes an very excellent player to take a "low-tier or under-powered" codex and do well with it. That's your standard of excellence right there.