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.

So is a player's attitude or his list more important in determining whether or not they are a power gamer. The reason I'm making this is because I run lists and have tactics that may be considered WAAC, but I'm not a powergamer (or at least I don't think I am...) and I like to help my opponents play better as well.

I have also seen a lot of people with mediocre lists that have that "Holier than the Emperor" attitude that just makes me want to call a WAAGGHHHHH!!!!

Be happy to hear your opinions on the matter.

It's the 'tude.

The list is a symptom, as many powergamers will be running cheeselists/spamlists/whatever to give themselves the edge, but they wouldn't be running them if they didn't have the 'must win' attitude

I'd rather face someone with an optimized list that they got from the net (said to be good) with a good attitude than an a-hole with any list

I agree with the attitude. Anybody can play with a strong list. I've known a few people that were about as far from powergaming as I knew that were able to put down very tough lists to beat, and the internet makes even the noob able to field the right tools for the job.

What seperates them from powergamers is their behavior in the game, and that's determined roughly 100% by their attitude and has nothing to do with the list. It's not just about winning either, because even non-power-gamers can still try their hardest to win a game of 40k.

The quickest way to figure out if you're playing a power gamer is to check up with yourself on how you feel while playing the game itself. Against good players who are also not powergamers, I feel challenged and get really into the game - I really want to try my best and win it. Against power gamers, I get sick of playing the game by turn 4 or 5. Like, a feeling of "it isn't worth it to win this game if it means I need to keep playing against this person".

I've had games that I've played against power gamers and won that I've felt worse about when it was done than against good, but non-power gamers that I've lost against.

Ailaros wrote:
The quickest way to figure out if you're playing a power gamer is to check up with yourself on how you feel while playing the game itself. Against good players who are also not powergamers, I feel challenged and get really into the game. Against power gamers, I get sick of playing the game by turn 4 or 5. Like, a feeling of "it isn't worth it to win this game if it means I need to keep playing against this person".

Turn 4 or 5? You sir have great patience... I usually smell one out by turn 2 and me and my friends just want to concede and lose rather than waste our time arguing over everything.

Its the attitude definetly, one guy at my local games workshop has henchman spam and he is willing to cheat over a rhino that has lost a stormbolter even when he has practically tabled his opponent already. He just isn't worth playing against.

The attitude, most likely, since i play a Tau army, i have to play the usual All-Crisis list, wich is obvs an Spamlist, with tons of XV-8 on the table, (all Elites choices, and HQ with bodyguards), but i have never been arguing over the rules since i actually trust my opponent and try to have as much fun as i can while not being too much frustrating if i play with my first Army List with 4 squads of FW... That was really frustating, being blow up by the wind and such... Well, the attitude.

The attitude. You can play a "competitive" list without being a tool about it, but if you're a tool then the list you play doesn't matter in the slightest.

The game is SUPPOSED to be fun. I don't really care if I win or lose, so long as I had fun - that, to me, is the goal.

The Attitude. Some people call be a-holes.

It's the person.

Its the attitude for sure. Some people are just poor sports. I recently had a game where one of my opponents started raging. He was throwing models around, being short with me, and arugmentative by the 4th turn. It made the game extremely un-fun. So much so that i wanted to pick up my models and leave. However, it sort of started making me mad and I decided the best way to deal with him was to continue grinding his army under my boot heel. Needless to say I will not be playing that person again.

I agree that it's definitely the attitude and the list is just a symptom.

However I don't think all power gamers are a-holes. It's really the WAAC attitude, and the inability to see the game as anything but a competition. Even if you're being polite, it's no fun in my opinion to play someone who can't indulge at least a little in the story behind a game (I'm talking outside tournament play, obviously).

Specifically, from my personal experience, I've set up big set-piece battles (sometimes elaborate involving multiple players over multiple inter-linked boards) or story-driven campaigns, and I have one friend who fairly reliably attempts to find loopholes in the rules to break my scenario. I know it's different strokes for different folks, and I'm no professional so the scenario rules are probably garbage to start. But in totally non-competitive friendly situations like that, indulging in the spirit of the game versus the rules as written and the need to win no matter what goes a long way to helping everyone around you have fun too.

I guess what I'm saying is, even a polite player can out themselves as a power gamer when they can't relax and just have fun instead of ruining someone else's day.

Waac isn't just a list it is also the needing 4's and purposefully scooping up some3's before the opponent notices

sam0 wrote:Waac isn't just a list it is also the needing 4's and purposefully scooping up some3's before the opponent notices

This is why i feel that it is better to roll your dice out in the open so your opponent can see them. I hate when players roll behind a piece of terrain and i can't see the dice.

sam0 wrote:Waac isn't just a list it is also the needing 4's and purposefully scooping up some3's before the opponent notices

See, that's cheating. There's nothing inherently wrong with a WAAC attitude, depending on the type of game.
Friendly game? Kind of a dick move, but nothing that bad.
Tournament? Expected.

WAAC: Win at any cost, which includes cheating your ass off and being a dick. Tanking the opponent's sportsmanship to give yourself a leg up, for example. Often will break the other guy's models when they lose, or ragequit on turn 3 when their favourite unit goes down, after screaming at the TO and the other player (in extreme cases..)

Competitive player: Not always the same as WAAC. Win if at all possible with your list, playing fairly and NOT being a dick. If the other guy beats you, take it like a man instead of ragequitting/tanking his scores. Shake the other guy's hand, and hope to do better against the next guy.

Sometimes the Competitive player starts assimilating some WAAC, and that's when things get blurry.

Ascalam wrote:WAAC: Win at any cost, which includes cheating your ass off and being a dick. Tanking the opponent's sportsmanship to give yourself a leg up, for example. Often will break the other guy's models when they lose, or ragequit on turn 3 when their favourite unit goes down, after screaming at the TO and the other player (in extreme cases..)
.

As a new mini wargaming player, I am shocked to hear that some people will break other peoples models just because they are losing. I mean we both pay a lot of money for our army's, put hours of time and effort to paint your units and just to have someone throw a tantrum and break your models is appalling. That's a sign of utter disrespect and a very mean thing to do. As you are taking about what has happened in Tournaments I can only assume the players are 18+ and they are acting like spoilt little children. Maybe the TO can have a naught corner for these people when they are acting up.

Having played many RTS/FPS online I have often gotten verbal abuse but that seem to be the norm on the internet atm. During ladder matches people call me WAAC, I play to win but that doesn't mean we can't have fun during the match. Sure I use the best stuff at the right time and will spam them if the situation calls for it , I feel its up to opponents to counter my tactics and units and fight tooth and nail for a win. Of course after game I first thank my opponent than discuss how they can play better tactics/units to get an advantage and use then to there full potential.

In 40k, as long has your not tailoring your list after seeing what your opponent has bought, I feel its your duty to try and win anyway possible . Its my job to counter than determination. As long as your aren't misleading your opponent about your units stats and capability on purpose, then I feel it should be battle of wits and dice.
Though I will say 40k is strange to me. Its is easy to forget rules and play rules and ability's wrong and worst of all, unless you have read your opponents codex thoroughly you don't know if they are telling you the real rules and stats or just making it up just to win.

If they are plain cheating my I would just end the game straight away. If you to stoop to cheating then I would won't give the respect of continuing the game.

I am.really into this. I would like to know what qualifies as "bad attitude" in your opinion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Never mind.

I think a fist fight will quickly ensue before any TO gets there if the guy started to smash my models. I'm pretty confident I'd win that fight and hell with winning the tourny at that point

Well seeing as the player makes the list, then it is ultimately down to the player.

Also, I completely agree with Ascalam. Not all power gamers are WAAC. In fact, I'd go so far to say that most of them aren't.

On the subject of WAAC tantrums:

I often have to play against, and a couple of times alongside, a horrendous WAAC player.

He will often cheat, brag and lie his way out of most situations that involve his chances of winning being damaged.

Being called a Crazy B*stard because I won't use Sammael how he does is not only rude, it insults me as a wargamer. If he thinks that just because he doesn't play like I do gives him a liabilty to swear and insult me, he is very wrong.

Also having him tell the Tyranid Player in a Kill Teams tournament to "Go for the Ravenwing, because then his Terminators have to scatter" was a dick move too. Great, so now you're trying to come out on top at the cost of teammates?

Being blamed for a loss at a Tournament because I took a weak Battleforce(We had to make an army out of a Battleforce/Battalion. No restrictions. I chose Ravenwing.) when most of the games we played were objective games and he made an army entirely out of DA Vets... That was annoying...

However, I have never had him break my models, but I fear that day is coming... I'm all too concerned for Fluffy the Cowboyfex...

rigeld2 wrote:

sam0 wrote:Waac isn't just a list it is also the needing 4's and purposefully scooping up some3's before the opponent notices

See, that's cheating. There's nothing inherently wrong with a WAAC attitude, depending on the type of game.
Friendly game? Kind of a dick move, but nothing that bad.
Tournament? Expected.

The definition of WAAC is "Win At Any Cost" or "Win At All Costs". That would include cheating, because who cares how you win so long as you win, right? So, yeah, there *is* something inherently wrong with the WAAC attitude. If this is the "expected behavior" at a tournament... why bother having TOs? If everyone is expected to cheat, then there's really no need to have any sort of referee or official, unless we're going to make this like a Blood Bowl game and give everyone the opportunity to bribe them before the match starts.

Heh... public service announcement poster: WAAC is Whack!

There's this one guy in particular that used to play in the FLGS i was nearest at the time (years back now, and a few moves away) that my 6 year old out-matures. (she plays too, and plays hardball )

I play to win with the list i bring to a game, and it'll be a decently strong list (not intentionally shooting myself in the foot, unless i happen to like the unit that does that (SAG's, Flash Gitz for example). I'm semi-competitive, because i don't really care that much if i lose, as long as i get to roll some dice.

A lot of the guys i play against at my current FLGS (awesome place btw! ) are competitive players (especially in the monthly tournament) but none of the local crowd (and very few of the visiting players) are WAAC's.

They play to win, bringing strong lists for tournaments (and less honed ones for casual games) and can take a beating like a man (or sometimes woman..we have a few female players ) without going into a frothing frenzy or tipping the table over.

I have played folk that tipped the whole table over when they lost, trashing hundreds of models and paintjobs, or grabbing the nearest model (or the one that killed their prized OMFG cheesball unit ) and pitching it at the wall.

I've lost 2 Hive Tyrants to that, over the years, as well as a BT Crusader, Ghazzy (he embedded IN the wall unharmed ... gotta love that 2++ ) and several other models.

Unfortunately / fortunately there always seemed to be a crowd that wouldn't let me vent my frustrations adequately at the time. Most of them i got replaced by the stores i was in, which was nice as they didn't have to do that, but that's beside the point.

I don't mind playing a competitive player, as long as i know it's going to be a hardball match. Some of my best games were in this category.

I refuse to play against a WAAC-hole outside of tournaments, and do my best to put up with the occasional one that pops up.

The difficult part is that a competitive, power gamer, and WAAC player has a different definition to every single person so it is kinda hard to clearly describe. What is a complete WAAC jerk to one person may just be a competitive guy to an other and a really cool guy to yet an other.

Now we all want to win, no matter how much you just want to play at least a small part wants to win and feel like you have some sort of chance of doing so. For my personal tastes (which are completely out there by most standards it seems), I have 4 categories of players.

"Fluff" players trend to stick with the fluff and make armies based on what units they like and not just copy and paste the majority of stuff. Not the most competitive in lists and play style but usually brings that different army or style. I kinda fit in here as I refuse to do the "normal internet list" with any army I play and usually have an unit that I must include and work around that.

"Competitive players" look at armies and build them effective on the game table first and foremost. Having fluff or favorite units in their army is most likely by luck or liking an unit for how effective they are game wise. The majority of players I find fall in here.

"Power Gamers" to me has a different definition than what most others think. To me a power gamer looks for things that he can "abuse" to make their army more effective but not going to cheat or make weird claims. These things can be very minor from abusing wound allocation, hiding until the last turn and jumping 24+" onto objectives, etc. To more major things like building your army around what can beat the local meta/person (aka list tailoring). I know what I just said will upset a lot here but that's just something I don't like seeing, weird I know but I don't hold anything really against them as I know that is what makes things so effective.

WAAC players are the ones that sneak in odd rule translations, cheats, and does things that make sure he has an edge outside of the rules. Playing extremely shady with slow playing, lightning quick dice rolls, no regard for your opponent, etc.

The major problem here is that it is extremely difficult to tell the difference between why people do some things. Did that player a WAAC player because he messed up a rule? Or was it a new player and forgot something? Or maybe the player is distracted by something else and didn't think of that at the time?

For example, a buddy of mine has been playing 40k for years but trends to only play for a month or so then stop playing for a month or two. So he isn't very good with the rules and can go a bit slow trying to remember how everything works. Other players I know think he is just playing slow and forgetting how to play to just be a jerk to others. Its a hard line to really tell the difference between such things.

I've seen a guy huck his own tank across a room in a tantrum but I've never heard of anyone mauling someone else's models, that would be crossing a line into like willful and malicious destruction of property which is a felony and the guy would at the very least be required to reimburse you and be permanently banned from the store/event.

If someone touches my models without permission their lucky to leave with their arm.

If it is a 5 year old just wanting a looksy, I deal with it. I get annoyed, especially with grubby, snotty fingered ones, and man handling but I can tough it out.

Some 12 year old picking it up without permission to look, but then apologising and asking permission is fine as long as their careful.

Snatching up my models? And no apology?Fething B*****ds! Especially if they are adults and should know better. If the w***er then insults the crappy paintjob of my first ever models, I ask him to put the mdel down and don't touch them again. If they persist I complain.

If a guy or girl breaks my model by accident, I let it go. Especially if they offer the repair or replace it. For example the 5 year old going " pah-choo" with the guns knocks a guy to the floor and an arm comes off.

If you were to cause.malicious harm to my things, you would.be.lucky to escape with your life. That isn't even a joke or hyperbole. RAW.

Well, I'm described as a power gamer, but I collect eldar, use path finders, wraithguard and warp spiders

But I admit I can have a 'holier than thou' attitude and I have what my friends describe as 'the righteous voice'. But that's when someone falls into my traps or I'm about to unleash a world of hurt, or making a comeback...

But I'm also pretty tactical, and win most of my games by out smarting my opponents, and that combined with 'the righteous voice' has earned me a reputation as a power gamer :/

Von Chogg

Players attitude, people who cheat/bend rules and argue everything for advantage can be called power gamers or WAAC.

I am going to start referring to WAAC as whine at all costs, which is the person who throws a fit about everything that has to do with gaming

Those.of you who.mention argueing= power gamer, a question. How far would you go with this? Would you call someone a PG fir argueing a.little rule like a cover save for majority squad?

What if the squad was the last 3 scouts camping on an objective taking a final shot with a battle cannon. Game changing, but a small tiny detail.

People who routinely argue rules, and are often proven wrong, I would put in this group. Rule disagreements are one thing, but when you get into an argument 5-6 times a game,and arguments generally boil down to 'its a grey area' or 'the rules arent specific enough' you are probably a power gamer.

I think too, it should be pointed out, theres absolutely nothing wrong with playing a balls to the wall playstyle, with a killer list, excellent rules knowledge, and a mindset to crush everyone you play against. So long, of course, you keep that playstyle to tournaments or pre arranged games where your opponents know whats coming. I think if your lgs is mostly kids and casuals/scrubs, and you play that way constantly, it is power gaming.

what about when someone takes a platoon command squad and vets as trrops and you argue that he cant do that.