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.

Hey Guys,

I really don't want to troll the Tactics Forum.

I've got a few things I could write and kick off Necron discussions about. Tomorrow I'll take the highest voting option.

Thanks :-)

Sit down.

If you want to discuss Necron Tactics, write a Tactica. Don't just create stupid threads saying things are bad. Contribute to the forums and list alternatives.

I suppose I could write a Tactica. I really like the discussion these threads have sparked though. There's been valuable insights in each of the 3 threads so far.

I don't mind stopping though, consensus seams to be 50-50 so far.

I agree with squirrel. Though these types of threads have the ability to spur good conversation you're firing them off too quickly. Setting up a thread with a potental flamey title and watching people argue isn't adding anything to the discussion.

Why is there no "stop it with these threads, period" option? The titles of these threads border on baiting, the OPs don't demonstrate an in-depth enough understanding of the material to warrant a flame-attracting title, and the way this whole thing is being delivered (even this thread) seems either very egotistical or annoyingly tongue-in-cheek. Who actually writes a poll to determine whether he or she will keep spamming threads?

I would enjoy and maybe post in threads that:

- Didn't have an "X is terrible, Discuss!" subject line
- Had the OP start off with an analysis of the unit in question, rather than listing a few one-dimensional criticisms and sit back to let the flames begin
- Didn't pop up one after the other, it's just annoying

So, it looks like a slim majority want to see more writing, but with a large number of votes on "hold-off", I'll wait a few days then kick-off a post on Triarch Praetorians after the weekend.

I'm taking them in a tournament this weekend, so I'll have some more fresh perspective.

Jesus christ, it's not "stop posting" it's "stop posting THESE threads" you twit

Roboute wrote:Why is there no "stop it with these threads, period" option? The titles of these threads border on baiting, the OPs don't demonstrate an in-depth enough understanding of the material to warrant a flame-attracting title, and the way this whole thing is being delivered (even this thread) seems either very egotistical or annoyingly tongue-in-cheek. Who actually writes a poll to determine whether he or she will keep spamming threads?

I would enjoy and maybe post in threads that:

- Didn't have an "X is terrible, Discuss!" subject line
- Had the OP start off with an analysis of the unit in question, rather than listing a few one-dimensional criticisms and sit back to let the flames begin
- Didn't pop up one after the other, it's just annoying

I wrote this out in an more offensive tone. Decided I would quote Roboute instead. Your threads with their titles and opinions do nothing but people off so cut that out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

loreweaver wrote:So, it looks like a slim majority want to see more writing, but with a large number of votes on "hold-off", I'll wait a few days then kick-off a post on Triarch Praetorians after the weekend.

Don't. I didn't get a chance to vote in the poll. And it doesn't have a "piss off and stop posting threads" option

Jihallah wrote:Jesus christ, it's not "stop posting" it's "stop posting THESE threads" you twit

Roboute wrote:Why is there no "stop it with these threads, period" option? The titles of these threads border on baiting, the OPs don't demonstrate an in-depth enough understanding of the material to warrant a flame-attracting title, and the way this whole thing is being delivered (even this thread) seems either very egotistical or annoyingly tongue-in-cheek. Who actually writes a poll to determine whether he or she will keep spamming threads?

I would enjoy and maybe post in threads that:

- Didn't have an "X is terrible, Discuss!" subject line
- Had the OP start off with an analysis of the unit in question, rather than listing a few one-dimensional criticisms and sit back to let the flames begin
- Didn't pop up one after the other, it's just annoying

I wrote this out in an more offensive tone. Decided I would quote Roboute instead. Your threads with their titles and opinions do nothing but people off so cut that out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

loreweaver wrote:So, it looks like a slim majority want to see more writing, but with a large number of votes on "hold-off", I'll wait a few days then kick-off a post on Triarch Praetorians after the weekend.

Don't. I didn't get a chance to vote in the poll. And it doesn't have a "piss off and stop posting threads" option

Jihallah, master of the Orkmoticon.

DeadlySquirrel wrote:

Jihallah, master of the Orkmoticon.

LOL at the haters. Should've had more of your like minded friends vote. Out of 22 votes, a majority of people asked for more writing. Had I had two 'no' options, the no votes would've split between the two 'no' options.

I will respect those votes and hold off for a few days. After which I'll do one more thread, then write a tactica.

As for the poster that said I don't have the experience, I've been at this hobby for over 20 years, I know my way around 40k.

Most of these topics have been done here recently. Many of them aren't controversial. If you want to get a good thread going then perhaps bringing something new to the table would be good. As it stands, I think I've seen a thread on all of these....

loreweaver wrote:As for the poster that said I don't have the experience, I've been at this hobby for over 20 years, I know my way around 40k.

that's what a SM mate of mine says.

Before, during and after I whoop him on the table. Just because you've been doing it for X many years doesn't mean you haven't been doing it badly for X many years

Also I seem to be unable to find a post in this thread that says you don't have the experience. What I do see is-

Roboute wrote:The titles of these threads border on baiting, the OPs don't demonstrate an in-depth enough understanding of the material to warrant a flame-attracting title, and the way this whole thing is being delivered (even this thread) seems either very egotistical or annoyingly tongue-in-cheek. Who actually writes a poll to determine whether he or she will keep spamming threads?

loreweaver wrote:LOL at the haters. Should've had more of your like minded friends vote. Out of 22 votes, a majority of people asked for more writing. Had I had two 'no' options, the no votes would've split between the two 'no' options.

I will respect those votes and hold off for a few days. After which I'll do one more thread, then write a tactica.

And that stuff is comedy gold to me

You should:
1) Stop making threads that make an assertion with little/no evidence to support it,
and
2) Stop making threads with "discuss" in the title

If you really do have solid opinions and evidence to support your conclusions about the units contained in the Necron Codex, just make one well articulated post or article about your thoughts. We don't need this many threads from you about your black/white view of the units in the codex.

editzzzzz: I can has do grammers?

Jihallah wrote:

loreweaver wrote:As for the poster that said I don't have the experience, I've been at this hobby for over 20 years, I know my way around 40k.

that's what a SM mate of mine says.

Before, during and after I whoop him on the table. Just because you've been doing it for X many years doesn't mean you haven't been doing it badly for X many years

Also I seem to be unable to find a post in this thread that says you don't have the experience. What I do see is-

Roboute wrote:The titles of these threads border on baiting, the OPs don't demonstrate an in-depth enough understanding of the material to warrant a flame-attracting title, and the way this whole thing is being delivered (even this thread) seems either very egotistical or annoyingly tongue-in-cheek. Who actually writes a poll to determine whether he or she will keep spamming threads?

loreweaver wrote:LOL at the haters. Should've had more of your like minded friends vote. Out of 22 votes, a majority of people asked for more writing. Had I had two 'no' options, the no votes would've split between the two 'no' options.

I will respect those votes and hold off for a few days. After which I'll do one more thread, then write a tactica.

And that stuff is comedy gold to me

I'm glad you can find the humor in it. Personally, I try to imagine each person who posts like this as an thirteen-year-old boy with attention issues and a god complex, because finding out that someone has 20+ years in the hobby and still acts like aforementioned kid is just disappointing to me.

Roboute wrote:

Jihallah wrote:

loreweaver wrote:As for the poster that said I don't have the experience, I've been at this hobby for over 20 years, I know my way around 40k.

that's what a SM mate of mine says.

Before, during and after I whoop him on the table. Just because you've been doing it for X many years doesn't mean you haven't been doing it badly for X many years

Also I seem to be unable to find a post in this thread that says you don't have the experience. What I do see is-

Roboute wrote:The titles of these threads border on baiting, the OPs don't demonstrate an in-depth enough understanding of the material to warrant a flame-attracting title, and the way this whole thing is being delivered (even this thread) seems either very egotistical or annoyingly tongue-in-cheek. Who actually writes a poll to determine whether he or she will keep spamming threads?

loreweaver wrote:LOL at the haters. Should've had more of your like minded friends vote. Out of 22 votes, a majority of people asked for more writing. Had I had two 'no' options, the no votes would've split between the two 'no' options.

I will respect those votes and hold off for a few days. After which I'll do one more thread, then write a tactica.

And that stuff is comedy gold to me

I'm glad you can find the humor in it. Personally, I try to imagine each person who posts like this as an thirteen-year-old boy with attention issues and a god complex, because finding out that someone has 20+ years in the hobby and still acts like aforementioned kid is just disappointing to me.

Yes, because the interwebs are serious bidness! We must conduct ourselves in a professional manner here at all times! Games involving plastic toy soldiers and websites devoted to such games shall not be taken lightly!

<broadcast mode active: calm down, everyone, and put them back in your pants. Stay on topic and remain polite!>

Chill, dudes. Chill.

Also, it appears that the general public want you to stop posting these threads. Check your poll.

45% want no more (or no more yet), 55% want more but didn't agree on a topic. So I'm doing both, by waiting and next week I'll post a "Praetorians are Awesome" thread.

Feel free to take part, if you like. I think the overall quality of discussion has been good, and a slim majority of voters seem to agree with that sentiment.

Can I start a poll / petition to remove loreweavers thread creation from his account for 1 month?

It's a privileged not a right. Like I said in I believe your C'Tan thread, you're bordering on trolling and as said above by Roboute, every post/thread started is without sufficient topics/information other than a flametory 1-liner as a thread title hoping to spark a "heated debate" about your opinion.

Post a thread with a more open topic like "Ghost arks - tactics and discussion" and then elaborate your first post with actual points representing your thoughts, not just "I hate ghost arks! They are open topped! They support stupid warriors! Immortals are better!" It's basically like reading an essay written by a 8th grader with ADHD. Critique threads have a lot of potential and can spark a lot of intelligent conversation, and even sway peoples opinions (allowing they actually open their mind and accept criticisms / compliments to specific units), so just make sure they are intelligently constructed and I don't think people would have an issue.

loreweaver wrote:45% want no more (or no more yet), 55% want more but didn't agree on a topic. So I'm doing both, by waiting and next week I'll post a "Praetorians are Awesome" thread.

Feel free to take part, if you like. I think the overall quality of discussion has been good, and a slim majority of voters seem to agree with that sentiment.

Ah... Democracies and voting doesn't work like that.

One option has the VAST majority of votes and is way ahead of all other options.... Thus, that is the one which you must follow through on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cryage wrote:Can I start a poll / petition to remove loreweavers thread creation from his account for 1 month?

It's a privileged not a right. Like I said in I believe your C'Tan thread, you're bordering on trolling and as said above by Roboute, every post/thread started is without sufficient topics/information other than a flametory 1-liner as a thread title hoping to spark a "heated debate" about your opinion.

Post a thread with a more open topic like "Ghost arks - tactics and discussion" and then elaborate your first post with actual points representing your thoughts, not just "I hate ghost arks! They are open topped! They support stupid warriors! Immortals are better!" It's basically like reading an essay written by a 8th grader with ADHD. Critique threads have a lot of potential and can spark a lot of intelligent conversation, and even sway peoples opinions (allowing they actually open their mind and accept criticisms / compliments to specific units), so just make sure they are intelligently constructed and I don't think people would have an issue.

Also, this.

I'm honestly not sure what all the hate is about. I thought the discussions from his threads was pretty useful. Using a sensational headline is nothing new or worth getting in an uproar about. I would argue that bashing the bad units is probably not the most useful route though. I would much rather discuss the not-as-popular units such as Destroyer Lords.

<thread terminated; we aren't discussing the topic anymore, and are trending dangerously close to personal attacks>