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.

It sounds like you actually gave him alot of tips how to win but he wouldnt listen, and he lost. I don't see the problem with that.

It would be a problem if he was new and you didnt give him any advice, but that's not the case. That's what happened to me when i started 10 years ago... first game with new tyranid army (completely non optimized obviously) and that black templar guy just roflstomped me and another dude after seeing i was losing pretty hard gave me at least some advice... "That powerfist will now melt your Tyrant, but you cant attack him back because he's just a champion". Let's just say i never played in GW again for a couple of years.

But it sounds like you did your best to help him. I think for learning, even smaller battles (maybe 500- 750P) with only a couple of units are better for him. There you can prepare and maybe use a very "fluffy" (as in underpowered) unit combination against him.

I am impressed with how much people care about a "proper" introduction to the game.
It is bordering on appearing rather selfless on the part of the OP.
I would not agonize too much though, young guys eventually are gonna do what they are gonna do no matter what you have to say.

At some point though, playing your "A" game may need to happen as another type of introduction to how 40k can be.
It would at least open the discussion of how each of you "like" to play.

I have had a bit too much time in my life catering to others that reminding people that you too have wishes and wants is not a wrong thing to do.

Personally I crush noobs until they learn, makes them better players and they adapt quicker then someone being babied for months on end.

But that's me, I actively challenge the guys that don't get games in because they win. You learn better through adversity then through stagnation. Adapt and overcome.

 Ravenous D wrote:
Personally I crush noobs until they learn, makes them better players and they adapt quicker then someone being babied for months on end.

But that's me, I actively challenge the guys that don't get games in because they win. You learn better through adversity then through stagnation. Adapt and overcome.

The fact that you "crush noobs until they learn" makes me hesitant to trust you.

think more important is explaining why something worked or failed, how to counter a problem for example. after game, in, or such as appropriate depending.

not just beating them or wining but instead of just well you lost that unit, why you lost that unit, and suggest a better tactic, why that unit did great, or such if its right depending on person etc.

and everyone learns differently, be prepared to adapt

but defenitely maybe consider using tac marines or less optimized units,, not helpless but not brutal power units.

 Ravenous D wrote:
Personally I crush noobs until they learn, makes them better players and they adapt quicker then someone being babied for months on end.

Haha.
That is like "breaking their necks just a little so they learn".
Just as likely to create a rage-quit and they take their toys and go home and you have one less player to play.
Your method of learning will happen if the person is committed to playing the game but a "newbie" has no such commitment yet.
"Babied for months" is a bit of an assumption, more like playing one type of game and then being introduced a more tournament style: the gloves are off.

But that's me, I actively challenge the guys that don't get games in because they win. You learn better through adversity then through stagnation. Adapt and overcome.

Rough circles you play in if people do not get to play if they win.
Most of us here do not mind losing and having another go as long as the winner does not act like a jerk.
Sharpening your army list and having a plan is usually the response to a challenge if you have a competitive bone in your body.

So yeah, challenge is good, but baby steps dude, think about the children!

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:
Personally I crush noobs until they learn, makes them better players and they adapt quicker then someone being babied for months on end.

But that's me, I actively challenge the guys that don't get games in because they win. You learn better through adversity then through stagnation. Adapt and overcome.

The fact that you "crush noobs until they learn" makes me hesitant to trust you.

Bear in mind I give them the pre warning and give them the speed that they want to play at, I have a for fun army, a friendly all comers, a tournament all comers, and a soulless tournament crusher. And I ask what they are running and try to set them up vs a better match if there is anyone.

My fun list is a 1500pt all walking wraithguard army, eats tanks and MCs, buts its slow as hell and doesn't have the unit numbers to deal with lots of targets, its more pretty then anything. Kid asked me for a game and I asked what sort of heavy weapons he has, and he only had a hand full of things that could deal with wraithguard so I refused the game but put him against something else that he had more fun playing against and was more active, he still got crushed, but he was still able to roll dice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talizvar wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:
Personally I crush noobs until they learn, makes them better players and they adapt quicker then someone being babied for months on end.

Haha.
That is like "breaking their necks just a little so they learn".
Just as likely to create a rage-quit and they take their toys and go home and you have one less player to play.
Your method of learning will happen if the person is committed to playing the game but a "newbie" has no such commitment yet.
"Babied for months" is a bit of an assumption, more like playing one type of game and then being introduced a more tournament style: the gloves are off.

But that's me, I actively challenge the guys that don't get games in because they win. You learn better through adversity then through stagnation. Adapt and overcome.

Rough circles you play in if people do not get to play if they win.
Most of us here do not mind losing and having another go as long as the winner does not act like a jerk.
Sharpening your army list and having a plan is usually the response to a challenge if you have a competitive bone in your body.

So yeah, challenge is good, but baby steps dude, think about the children!

I guess what I mean is don't go easy on anyone. I give kids the choice of level of difficulty but I wont go easy on them, if they ask questions I'll help them out, and I'll explain rules as we go. Really just meet them half way and have fun doing it, that way they don't get that weird stigma about competitive players.

 Ravenous D wrote:
I guess what I mean is don't go easy on anyone.

So what is the level of play then?

I give kids the choice of level of difficulty but I wont go easy on them,

Is not setting your "difficulty level" a form of "going easy"?

if they ask questions I'll help them out, and I'll explain rules as we go.

Good practice, makes for fun play and they learn.

Really just meet them half way and have fun doing it, that way they don't get that weird stigma about competitive players.

Oh, I can 100% want to win, but my requirement is a HARD game and we both need to have fun.

Was really good at a first person shooter a long time ago, agreed with friends to only play with pistol (seemed comical to me).
We all had fun, it also got me REALLY good playing to a handicap (I got even better!!!).
So I do appreciate the viewpoint of taking a thumping can give motivation to improve, most want it on their terms though.

Competitive for me is "challenge" even if you set your army list a hundred points short or something and do not point it out (lets not get into the 5 extra points discussion...).
I never "let" people win but HATE tabling on either side.