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 are in a casual game with someone you knowingly is way below you in experience and skill, then what is the point of going through the exercise of crushing them underfoot except to feed your own ego on the tears of others?

Can even a professional have fun shooting hoops with some friends who are not very good? Sure. Do you say "1on1" an crush them utterly and beat them 21-0 and then say 'Good game scrub!'?

I have better things to do with my time.

If the person is a novice and is learning the game, then I enjoy helping someone learn the game, and that may mean playing a game where you explain rules and tactics for both sides of the table so they can learn what they SHOULD do and what to expect someone to do to them.

If the person knows the game, but simply doesn't have an optimized list so it would just be a gross mismatch where the game is won/lost before a dice is rolled, I would consider changing my list to gain experience with some lesser-used units.

If this is considered a 'training match' where both people are going to play hard, then so be it. I will sometimes decline a game saying 'Hey I am practicing with a tourney list, so I am looking for someone who is looking for a no-holds barred match.' and people either can accept a potential clubbing (or give me one back)

Crushing people learns them nothing if they lack fundamental understanding of the game and their armies. A defeat can help improve an experienced person who has the experience to understand *WHY* they lost. Novice people not experienced with the rules who are defeated due to 'not knowing' something or not understanding something haven't learned anything from being beaten by a Yu-Gi-oh trap card. If your goal is to educate, then educate. Teach them how and why you do what you do and what actions they should do so they can see the game under full transparency.

Yes, But what if they know the rules, know turn order and how everything goes down? What then?
Also, Why should you tone it down? It is an insult to the other player if you do not do your best

oh don't kill a seal,

Cause you need a meal, NO!

Do it cause you wanna hear the little sucker squeal!

Look em in the face, and do it just for kicks,

And poke out thier eyes with yer eye pokin sticks!

-----

That is a reference, btw. I have an internet cookie to the first who gets it.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Yes, But what if they know the rules, know turn order and how everything goes down? What then?
Also, Why should you tone it down? It is an insult to the other player if you do not do your best

If they lack the experience to play the game and the game is decided before the game begins, what is the point in crushing them? Usually they lose because they barley know their own codex and the core rules let alone 20 other codexes. If they have never played against Orks, they may know how the game works but will probably spend most of the game falling into pits because he lacks experience of how my units work and his army interacts with mine.

So I can either throw my codex and list at him with the minimum list and say 'figure it out while I crush you.' or I can play the game with pure transparency so he can gain understanding and experience from the game. Is it possible I may still crush him? possibly, but at least he will know why it is happening by explicitly being transparent. I am capable of playing a game in such an impartial way where the game can continue as normal but help remove mistakes due to ignorance of rules or mechanics from the mix. It helps people learn.

It is not an insult to help someone who is inexperienced learn to play or not taking advantage of ignorance in a casual game where there is a massive inequity in skill and experience. Sometimes a demo game or playtest can be enjoyed by both and is more productive than 'clubbing seals'

I really don't see the point in playing an optimized tournament-style list against a new player, or even an experienced player who is not also playing a tournament list. I wouldn't unpack my models for a game like that. I would use that game to try out new things in my codex that I wouldn't normally use, which is usually more fun than a netlist game anyway.

In a competitive environment though, no holds barred. Even then I wouldn't be inclined to "rub it in" as long as he took the loss with dignity.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Yes, But what if they know the rules, know turn order and how everything goes down? What then?

Knowing all the rules doesn't mean much by itself. You still have to learn how to apply the knowledge. A soldier may know all about combat after he completes basic training, but it doesn't mean he'll immediately be a Rambo on the battlefield.

Also, Why should you tone it down? It is an insult to the other player if you do not do your best

Your "best"...what? Your best listbuilding? Your best gameplaying? Your best sportsmanship? I find this NSFW quote to be very appropriate. Your best does not matter. What matters is how you define winning. Discouraging a new player to the point where they no longer enjoy playing the game is akin to winning the battle but losing the war. We all lose when players leave the hobby.

I still remember one of my first games of WarMachine.

We'd barely started when my opponent goes something like this: "I'll move this guy here and cast a spell on that guy. He can than more there and buff this guy. He then moves here, attacks your 'caster, annnnnnndddddd... BOOM! You're dead! Wanna try again?"

No, I don't really want to try again. In fact, it put me off for quite a while.

Yes, I knew the rules (sort off, anyway) and knew the general strengths and weaknesses of both armies. But I didn't know about the obscene combos you could make, had no real feeling for the threat-range of my opponents army, didn't know what to look out for...

And so, several years later, the whole "Page 5" mentality - Play Like You Got A Pair - still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Why is it an insult to not play your best? Why not go easy on a newb? I'm genuinely curious.

Because, It shows them you think so little of their ability, that you have to go easy on them. In sports if a new guy comes in, the other team doesnt let him score because he is new, they give him a hard lesson which is "Learn from you mistakes"

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Because, It shows them you think so little of their ability, that you have to go easy on them. In sports if a new guy comes in, the other team doesnt let him score because he is new, they give him a hard lesson which is "Learn from you mistakes"

Point taken.

However, in my mind there is a big difference. This is not a sport, it's a game - a social hobby, if you will. In sports, you will generally train with your own team for quite a while before getting to play against a real opponent. When playing 40K, on the other hand, the only real training you can get is against an opponent - no chance to train with your own team first as there isn't one.

Also, do keep in mind that a veteran has every right to think little of a newbs ability. After all, he's a newb for a reason, right? Certainly, when I begin playing a new game, I enter my first game with the definite expectation that my opponent is much better than me and could easily table me within a few turns. And I would be very surprised indeed if my opponent didn't expect the same. And that, exactly, is why I would expect him to go easy on me. Yes, he could table me easily, but then again... That's a bit of an easy victory... Nothing worth bragging about, right? So what's the point? You won, sure. But what about your opponent? At best, he walked away, having learned very little - if anything at all. At worst, he walked away, never to return.

Who is to say that they didnt learn anyything? When I played my Warmachine game They didnt get me any quarter(You could say they gave me "No quarter") They stomped me. Im not put off the game, I just need to learn more about it and how things interact.
And who is to say walkling away crushed doesnt teach you anything? It taught me plenty, like how i should position my models so they are not crushed, how not to deploy And most importantly, learn from what my opponent did.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Who is to say that they didnt learn anyything? When I played my Warmachine game They didnt get me any quarter(You could say they gave me "No quarter") They stomped me. Im not put off the game, I just need to learn more about it and how things interact.
And who is to say walkling away crushed doesnt teach you anything? It taught me plenty, like how i should position my models so they are not crushed, how not to deploy And most importantly, learn from what my opponent did.

Who are you to decide how people best understand or learn the game? Your style of 'educating' people by beating them to a pulp is not 'one size fit all'. While being beaten to a pulp may be how you learn best and does not put you off the game doesn't mean it will be the same for all people.

You also have the issue of how human nature reacts to fundamentally unfair situations... and in a game with deeeeeeeeeep imbalance like 40k, the game doesn't become a contest of skill and games can be won or lost before a dice is even rolled. When people identify something as unfair, they have different reactions. Some instantly exploit the 'unfairness' for personal advantage, Some attempt to rewrite the system to balance the system to be fair for all, and some simply retreat from or divest themselves from the unfair system. This has even been proven in primates where two monkeys are asked to do the same task for different rewards. When they observe the unfairness for the same supposed action, they shut down. This is also one of the major differences between the genders and how they game. Women are known to be much more attracted to 'cooperative gameplay' and are more adverse to 'unfairness' in games.

So because you enjoy educating people via savage beatings, learn best via savage beatings and naturally exploit or take advantage of a fundamentally unfair system doesn't make it right, or appealing or fun for everyone else. The best you can do is find 'like-minded people' which are usually found at organized events where everyone is also 'exploiting the unbalanced system for personal advantage' and 'playing to win'.

Empty pointless victories are empty pointless victories, and I can't take pleasure in them. If you feel using a statistically superior list in an unbalanced system against someone without the money to buy the newest powerhouse list or lacking the experience to know the rules to the level you do constitutes a 'earned' victory and had fun 'educating' them, then enjoy yourself. You might lack opponents pretty quickly if you don't find like-minded people.


Boils down to: If you can identify them as a 'baby seal' then you admit that they had no hope of winning and the game is unfair. If you try to redefine baby seals or move goalposts to include people who are not baby seals, then try to defend beating people in fair games, then don't call them baby seals.

The only reason to knowingly crush someone who is a baby seal without changing a thing is if you get your rocks off to it or you want to knowingly harm others in a social setting. Games should be consensual, and both players should communicate pre-game and try to do something both people will enjoy. If that means playing a baby seal and you are incapable of holding back or changing your playstyle to a more friendly or 'educational' way, then decline the game and find someone of similar skill or wants a similar level of intensity to their games.

nkelsch wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Who is to say that they didnt learn anyything? When I played my Warmachine game They didnt get me any quarter(You could say they gave me "No quarter") They stomped me. Im not put off the game, I just need to learn more about it and how things interact.
And who is to say walkling away crushed doesnt teach you anything? It taught me plenty, like how i should position my models so they are not crushed, how not to deploy And most importantly, learn from what my opponent did.

Who are you to decide how people best understand or learn the game? Your style of 'educating' people by beating them to a pulp is not 'one size fit all'. While being beaten to a pulp may be how you learn best and does not put you off the game doesn't mean it will be the same for all people.

You also have the issue of how human nature reacts to fundamentally unfair situations... and in a game with deeeeeeeeeep imbalance like 40k, the game doesn't become a contest of skill and games can be won or lost before a dice is even rolled. When people identify something as unfair, they have different reactions. Some instantly exploit the 'unfairness' for personal advantage, Some attempt to rewrite the system to balance the system to be fair for all, and some simply retreat from or divest themselves from the unfair system. This has even been proven in primates where two monkeys are asked to do the same task for different rewards. When they observe the unfairness for the same supposed action, they shut down. This is also one of the major differences between the genders and how they game. Women are known to be much more attracted to 'cooperative gameplay' and are more adverse to 'unfairness' in games.

So because you enjoy educating people via savage beatings, learn best via savage beatings and naturally exploit or take advantage of a fundamentally unfair system doesn't make it right, or appealing or fun for everyone else. The best you can do is find 'like-minded people' which are usually found at organized events where everyone is also 'exploiting the unbalanced system for personal advantage' and 'playing to win'.

Empty pointless victories are empty pointless victories, and I can't take pleasure in them. If you feel using a statistically superior list in an unbalanced system against someone without the money to buy the newest powerhouse list or lacking the experience to know the rules to the level you do constitutes a 'earned' victory and had fun 'educating' them, then enjoy yourself. You might lack opponents pretty quickly if you don't find like-minded people.

I agree with Nkelsch, One shoe does not fit all sizes, for example I have been playing 40k for 5+ years and I don't remember or know all the rules, sometimes I miss rules out or miss triggers because I forget they were even there. Just saying "they will learn next time as I crush them" is pointless, no internet cookie for you, why? because at the end of the day the game is a game your not competing for a job or anything that would change your life, your there to relax and play a game and that is the same for your opponent. It is frequently said by GW and in the rulebook that this is a game where both people make agreements to make a fun enjoyable game (although half of it is too cover poor rules writing but I digress) for both people, if you feel like someone wasn't enjoying the game then sorry, but you played 40k wrong. What I would do is as said many a time on this thread is to make handicap's for yourself, instead of using all those riptides for example replace them with Kroot? use models that you like instead of what synergises well, trust me you will find the game against this opponent more enjoyable as you will be using new things, experience new situations and all in all have a good refresh on you tactical mind and maybe learn a new tactic that could work well against other opponents that you never thought of before all while helping out with the experience of the new player.

Also apologies if my reply sounded a bit angry, this was not the intention.

I'm in the uncomfortable position of finding myself agreeing with nkelsch on something.

Outside of a tournament or tournament prep game - and certainly against people who are lesrning the game and/or the basic tactics of their army - there is no honour in going full-on, WAAC, intent on grinding your opponent into the ground.

If nothing else, ensure expectations are set before the game, and be prepared to dial things back if asked.

I told that person severa times Im test out a tournament list, he knew what he was getting into

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I told that person severa times Im test out a tournament list, he knew what he was getting into

No he didn't, because he's new to the game, he knowes its going to be a hard game but, my bet is (since I was like this when I started) he doesn't understand the imbalancing of 40k and therefore would have known that he would have called it by turn 3, and by what you said in the OP then I maybe right.

Always save your tourney lists for the vets who have the experience of dealing with hardcore lists, as new players don't know what they are getting into when facing a hardcore list, they need to learn gradually the difference between the competitive side and the casual side to 40k atm new players will not know the difference meaning that they think its all the same, when they really are not

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I told that person severa times Im test out a tournament list, he knew what he was getting into

Then why make this thread? If he knew what he was getting into, why even bother asking us if "clubbing baby seals" is the right thing to do? From the sounds of the OP, it sounds like you may feel a little guilty about stomping someone who wasn't playing at your level and you knew it. Now, he may have thought he knew what he was getting into, but unless he's felt the power of a fully operational optimized Tau list, he really didn't.

hotsauceman1 wrote:Because, It shows them you think so little of their ability, that you have to go easy on them. In sports if a new guy comes in, the other team doesnt let him score because he is new, they give him a hard lesson which is "Learn from you mistakes"

Well, if he's going up against another team, he's clearly in a competitive arena, not a casual one. As for, "Learn from your mistakes," this is assuming he knew what mistakes he made other than, "Playing that WAAC dude with the Tau army."

 Extreaminatus wrote:
Then why make this thread?

Probably just to get people to agree with him that the point of view put forward is the correct one to assuage some traces of guilt.

The "If I don't bring my best I'm insulting them" thing is always bizarre to me. How are you insulting them? And even more important/relevant, how do you know their preferences so damn well that you can decide for them what is insulting? No, it's not even that, it's a nonsense excuse to crush a newbie.

 happygolucky wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I told that person severa times Im test out a tournament list, he knew what he was getting into

No he didn't, because he's new to the game, he knowes its going to be a hard game but, my bet is (since I was like this when I started) he doesn't understand the imbalancing of 40k and therefore would have known that he would have called it by turn 3, and by what you said in the OP then I maybe right.

Yes he did, He played another tourney vet who goes there aswell and uses his list against them.
And I do not feel guilty unless the person did not have fun, on the outside this person looked. like he enjoyed it, but was a little distrssed playing tau(HE said he played them before and they are not fun)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Extreaminatus wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I told that person severa times Im test out a tournament list, he knew what he was getting into

Then why make this thread? If he knew what he was getting into, why even bother asking us if "clubbing baby seals" is the right thing to do? From the sounds of the OP, it sounds like you may feel a little guilty about stomping someone who wasn't playing at your level and you knew it. Now, he may have thought he knew what he was getting into, but unless he's felt the power of a fully operational optimized Tau list, he really didn't.

hotsauceman1 wrote:Because, It shows them you think so little of their ability, that you have to go easy on them. In sports if a new guy comes in, the other team doesnt let him score because he is new, they give him a hard lesson which is "Learn from you mistakes"

Well, if he's going up against another team, he's clearly in a competitive arena, not a casual one. As for, "Learn from your mistakes," this is assuming he knew what mistakes he made other than, "Playing that WAAC dude with the Tau army."

When does wanting to win=waac? And he also learned it isnt best to shoot things you plan to charge and to move and not stay static.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So, Is it wrong to club a baby seal?

When I play chess against a beginner, I don't replace my bishops by two queens just to "teach him/her".
When I play rugby against a beginner, I don't use all my strength to to shove his/her face into the ground.

But maybe I'm doing it wrong.

I don't think it's okay to beat the crap out of a casual gamer with a list you built in order to win your next toy-soldiers-championship.

I do not really think that clubbing baby seals is the best analogy to suit this predicament now that you have explained further. Baby seals do not know what they are getting themselves into !

If I'm playing beginners I actually often have more fun, as it lets me bring all the odd units you'd not normally touch with a ten foot barge pole to the table. Mix in a couple of decent units and have fun.

Unless they are a gifted player right off the bat, a typically beginner is going to struggle against a vet just because of the mindset isn't there yet, target priority etc.

I've run three clubs in the past as well, brought dozens of gamers into the hobby in years gone by. Sadly been a while since I had the time to set one up. I do miss it, and the fun of introducing folks to the game.

I have been the clubbed baby seal. Not THIS one, but I have been that guy. Recently. Like the last 8 months or so really. On that note.

I was playing my first game against Eldar. This was weeks before the new Marine Codex was released. Intellectually I knew I was in for a uphill fight. 3 Wave serpents, a Fire Prism pretty much a 2k net list of ouch. He went first. By the bottom of turn 2 I was pretty much tabled. Yeah I had some units left, but nothing that could help. I was crushed, both in the game and mentally. So I decided I was going to change my "mission". I decided that in order for me to win, I had to wipe one unit off the board. Yeah he would win the game, but I would win a moral victory. I was rather disappointed with my game. I would not however, let my opponent see that. He took the time to play the game through until it was painfully obvious that I couldnt win. To honor his time commitment, I tried to make light of my loss and to at least outwardly look like I was having fun. I got home and burned the list I was using because it was obviously flawed. I grumped around the house. I put my 40k stuff away and instead of painting with my wife, I dug out a book and read. The point is; Yes, he may have "known" what the list was. Yes he may have "looked" like he was having fun. Bieng the clubbed seal to a optimised list is a rather pointless way to spend a few hours.

Did that loss make me a better player? Well, I have learned to space my units out better. I use more cover then before. Oh and I have yet to play another Eldar army LOL. I understand someone has to be the test subject for your tourney list. The only way to figure out which units work for YOUR play style is to play. Just try and bear in mind, the novices arent enjoying themselves as much as you when you beat them 26-0.

I'm gonna mix it up and agree with the OP *ducks under barrage of flaming soap boxes*

Now then, IMO, there's a difference between "clubbing the baby seal" - i.e, bringing a netlist against the guy in the store who walking in five minutes ago saying "Should I start with Dark Vengeance or the Space Marine battleforce?" - without a word, and saying "I'm bringing a tournament list to this one, are you sure you want to go ahead with it?" to a guy you've played before with weaker lists. And my reason for saying this is that it (usually) keeps people in check. It should only really be done when they're pretty confident with the rules and their army's abilities, and serves to show them what they can expect from high level play. To a degree. It's good for one time where you can say "This is the best you'll possibly face right now, lets see how you do."

I do NOT condone this against guys that have a total play time of five seconds, and you should always give prior warning before bringing it, making it clear how powerful it is.

If the guy knew this and still said yes, then you don't have anything to wrroy about, especially if both players had fun.

Alexi wrote:


Did that loss make me a better player? Well, I have learned to space my units out better. I use more cover then before. Oh and I have yet to play another Eldar army LOL. I understand someone has to be the test subject for your tourney list. The only way to figure out which units work for YOUR play style is to play. Just try and bear in mind, the novices arent enjoying themselves as much as you when you beat them 26-0.

To be fair those kind of things should be pointed out to a beginner anyways, heck in some cases it has felt like I was playing myself, I stress felt, but it helps folks understand how to play the game, and helps them get their heads round some of the trickier concepts right out the gate.

Also to be honest using a tourney list to splat a list which has zero chance to cause you even a twitched eyebrow is in no way a good way to test a list. Thats not at you by the way, just a general observation.

No offense taken. I dont do so well with tourney lists. I do more of a combined arms list...a TAC sort of list

I made a thread about this a few weeks ago.
People seemed to think that I should magically be able to give my opponent an even match no matter what I knew about their skill or what list I was taking.

I played a new-ish CSM player a few days ago. Even going easy on him, with some units literally doing nothing all game, I tabled him turn 3. Sometimes you can't give someone a chance, even when you go so easy on them its obvious that you're holding back. I don't play a particularly competitive list - just he took a really terrible one.


My advice:
1) If you know you're playing against a more casual opponent, take a more casual list or warn them you're playing a tourney list.

2) If you're still tabling people, try to give as many hints as possible about target priority and movement.

3) If you still beat them up - seek better opponents if you can, swap armies, or purposefully take underpointed lists so that your opponent had a better chance without it being too obvious that you're helping out.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Trondheim wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So tonight I played a 1750 game with my Tau V. CSM. This guy is new and mostly plays with his friends. Well things to say is that sometimes he looked like he was not having fun.
Now when I started my buttocks was handed to me several times with no mercy before I won. I Bring this philosophy to other games, IF they loose they will learn.
Now.......When I played him, He looked distressed trying to figure it out, he said he wasnt but I could see. I baught An optimized tau/sm list with some major power units.
So, Is it wrong to club a baby seal?

Congratulations you just made me realize even more why I seldom find it rewarind to play with WAAC players whom takes joy in stomping new players. If your goal is to make people want to not play the game then I sallute you!

Wow, I never said I enjoyed it. I enjoyed the game because the guy and me where laughing that whole. And for those, He isnt a brand new but he is still learning, He knows the rule and been playing for a few months.
And I did give him advice and where to put his Warp talons, his Landraider so Kharn can get into combat fast. He didnt whine he just quit so he could get more games in that night.

Play as you would play normally. Whats the differnce? That someone's feelings might get hurt? The best way to learn how to play is to get your ass handed to you. Now with that your right.... give him advice. Help him improve his list and his game play style. During the game ask him why he is making that move and politely suggest alternatives that would be better for him. But DON'T ever down play YOUR game. At the end of the game give him a few suggestions and tell him you would like to play him again sometime. Don't end the game with a "haha just stomped your ass" end it with a "hey you played pretty good... But" and then follow that up with "i would like to play you again now that you know how this, this and this part of my list works".


I don't know about other people and will not try to put words into their mouth. But after the initial learning phase where i learn the basics, i want them to play me as hard as they can. Its like when i fight people (for sport, with rules and stuff) i don't want them to take it easy on me and i will not take it easy on them. Now that being said after i choke them out i give them advice and show them how to counter moves but im not going to just let them slip it.

hotsauceman1, the fact he conceded, regardless of supposed reasoning, indicates he did not enjoy the game at all. Or did he surrender more games at turn 3 that night regardless of how he was doing?

Secondly...Why even make this thread if you're just backtracking and all sorts of defensive?

Lastly, you don't take optimized lists in this case, you take fun or random lists.

so you showed him what a crap broken unbalanced game it is.. i guess he would find out sooner or later

hotsauceman1 wrote:Who is to say that they didnt learn anyything? When I played my Warmachine game They didnt get me any quarter(You could say they gave me "No quarter") They stomped me. Im not put off the game, I just need to learn more about it and how things interact.
And who is to say walkling away crushed doesnt teach you anything? It taught me plenty, like how i should position my models so they are not crushed, how not to deploy And most importantly, learn from what my opponent did.

I think Nkelsch did a good reply to this.

What I learned from that game was that 1) WarMachine players use Page 5 as an excuse for WAAC gaming and 2) WarMachine is so insanely combo-driven as to resemble MtG - not particularly fun at all.

Now, is that all true? Probably not. I would certainly hope that there are friendly laid back WarMachine players out there. But I was so thoroughly put off by the "HA! Take that, NEWB!!!" attitude of my opponent that I'm not sure if I want to give it another shot.

Lemartes12 wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Trondheim wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So tonight I played a 1750 game with my Tau V. CSM. This guy is new and mostly plays with his friends. Well things to say is that sometimes he looked like he was not having fun.
Now when I started my buttocks was handed to me several times with no mercy before I won. I Bring this philosophy to other games, IF they loose they will learn.
Now.......When I played him, He looked distressed trying to figure it out, he said he wasnt but I could see. I baught An optimized tau/sm list with some major power units.
So, Is it wrong to club a baby seal?

Congratulations you just made me realize even more why I seldom find it rewarind to play with WAAC players whom takes joy in stomping new players. If your goal is to make people want to not play the game then I sallute you!

Wow, I never said I enjoyed it. I enjoyed the game because the guy and me where laughing that whole. And for those, He isnt a brand new but he is still learning, He knows the rule and been playing for a few months.
And I did give him advice and where to put his Warp talons, his Landraider so Kharn can get into combat fast. He didnt whine he just quit so he could get more games in that night.

Play as you would play normally. Whats the differnce? That someone's feelings might get hurt? The best way to learn how to play is to get your ass handed to you. Now with that your right.... give him advice. Help him improve his list and his game play style. During the game ask him why he is making that move and politely suggest alternatives that would be better for him. But DON'T ever down play YOUR game. At the end of the game give him a few suggestions and tell him you would like to play him again sometime. Don't end the game with a "haha just stomped your ass" end it with a "hey you played pretty good... But" and then follow that up with "i would like to play you again now that you know how this, this and this part of my list works".


I don't know about other people and will not try to put words into their mouth. But after the initial learning phase where i learn the basics, i want them to play me as hard as they can. Its like when i fight people (for sport, with rules and stuff) i don't want them to take it easy on me and i will not take it easy on them. Now that being said after i choke them out i give them advice and show them how to counter moves but im not going to just let them slip it.

Each to his own, of course.

I learned nothing useful from that game of WarMachine. The combo that killed my 'caster came out of nowhere, with no warning and no way for me to know what was about to happen.

Indeed, I much prefer the teaching to be done through a continuous dialogue throughout the game. "If you move there you risk getting assaulted next turn", "remember to spread your Marines a bit more since I've got multiple ordinance weapons", "you might want to keep some guys back to counter my Terminators when they arrive from reserves - that Leman Russ looks mighty tempting", and so on...

But then again, I must admit that I might be biased as I generally dislike "hard playing" and "tournament gaming". I've met too many players who seemed to enjoy beating down newbs (and just about anyone else, for that matter), always bringing their hardest game and protesting loudly if their opponent don't do the same. Somewhere along the way, it seems to me, they have forgotten that the purpose of playing this game is for both players to have fun, winning is a secondary concern.