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.

Danny Internets wrote:Well he apparently is a "good friend" of someone whom he plays frequently enough to come here and complain about his pattern of behavior. And they apparently have mutual friends who play 40k and sit around talking about it. And the OP says he's "cramping up the LGS" with respect to the way he plays the game, which probably means people are playing him...or do you think he's playing against himself?

I think you're making a lot of assumptions.

If the group IS indeed a group of 'good friends', and if they are all continuing to play with him as frequently as you imply, perhaps they continue to play with him due to that friendship? Or perhaps when those other players are present, this troublesome individual is the only available opponent? The reasons could be endless. We don't know all the details, obviously.

The point is - this person is causing problems with the people he plays with. The OP was looking for advice on how to handle it. Your response "Maybe it's YOU with the problem" is irrelevant and does nothing to help the situation, especially since the OP DID suggest that the rest of the group were taking issue with the player's gaming mindset.

Danny Internets wrote:
And if you read carefully you'll see that I never said the OP was a masochist, for the reason you describe.

I can read just fine, thanks. You made the statement that anyone playing the guy must be a masochist if the guy was that bad to play against. I think you are just being very narrowminded when it comes to the situation. I've had some friends in the past who were terrible to play with, but I did so anyway, because they were good friends. There's a difference between such a player, and a random Joe I meet at the Bunker. I am more inclined to endure bad sportsmanship from a good buddy, than I am from a total stranger.

Danny Internets wrote:
If other people aren't enjoying the game then why are they playing him? You seem to be dodging this question.

Hardly. I already addressed it, if you would care to read a little more closely. There's no clear indication from the OP that people are still lining up to play the guy. That's merely a situation you've fabricated based on the OP's post. Without knowing more details, it's hard to say whether the OP is the only guy who's currently not or considering not playing the guy anymore. It's clear, though, that the rest of their group have confronted him to some degree about the situation. That to me says a lot.

I get the impression, Danny, that you are a similar player to the one Ark is having a problem with, based on your responses, which is why you're being so defensive about the discussion. I don't think anyone is saying the guy is as bad as you are accusing others of making him out to be. I can't speak for others, but my summary response has been - no matter how 'bad' the guy is, if he's a 'good friend', it would be worth Ark's time to talk it out with him. That's all.

Agh, been a while since I saw this thread.

My thanks to all the responses, the comical and the mature.

Mort has really hit the nail on the head with a power-hammer. The thing is the guy is a good friend and my "group" are all good friends who have had a lot of years under their belt of knowing each other. There is also a similar group at our LGS, their a few years older and we give each other hell for the age difference (in good fun of course). We all have thick skins.

That being said, none of the other group really plays the guy. We "tolerate" him on the table, because he is a good friend. He's a lot of fun when being out late. It's just no one has the patience to deal with him, especially since half the time he doesn't even know his own rules. So I've gone through some pains to try and read his codex, of course he gets "offended" by it, but it can be tiresome to have to pick up his codex and show him that maybe that gun doesn't have AP3. Or some such non-sense.

There has been a lot of down time from play as of late, mainly because I recently sold off my small force of Blood Angels (for a very cheap price) to a friend who has a hard time budgetting money for 40K. As of right now I am army-less. I hate it! I've not had time to crunch a list for my new army (going to be going Chaos Daemons, I really want a Nurgle/Tzeentch army.. But, IIRC they used to be unable to ally. I know thats irrelevant now, but I like fluffish lists. So maybe Khorne/Tzeentch.) so I'll prolly just pick up some pick horrors and flamers. They seem like they'd be a lot of fun painting.

Er, sorry for getting off track. The point I was trying to make is, he hasn't played in a long time. The last time he wanted to play he was turned down. So, we'll see I guess. Thanks for all the replies, again.

I get the impression, Danny, that you are a similar player to the one Ark is having a problem with, based on your responses, which is why you're being so defensive about the discussion. I don't think anyone is saying the guy is as bad as you are accusing others of making him out to be. I can't speak for others, but my summary response has been - no matter how 'bad' the guy is, if he's a 'good friend', it would be worth Ark's time to talk it out with him. That's all.

Your desperate reach for a personal slight indicates you haven't been following anything I've been saying, which is sad given the number of responses you've provided. Every response I've made has been with regards to the attitude, held by people like the OP and yourself, that makes you want to push your ideologies on others. It's both obnoxious and ego-centric. His reasons for playing as just as valid as yours and the OP's.

I have no problem with powergamers in any way, shape, or form. In fact, I don't have problems with any particular group of 40k gamers. Perhaps others might mark me as a powergamer or some variation on that, though I'd be surprised given the fact that I've won the Best Sportsman and/or Favorite Opponent awards at three of the last six tournaments I've participated in. I simply subscribe to the philosophy of letting others do as they please as long as they don't infringe on others. Playing a game like 40k competitively, even overly competitively, does not infringe on others who voluntarily choose to subject themselves to that.

Playing a game like 40k competitively, even overly competitively, does not infringe on others who voluntarily choose to subject themselves to that.

Well that seems to be the problem, if he insists on playing like a douchebag then he won't have anyone to play with anymore since no one wants to subject themselves to that.

If he wants to play competitively then he needs to find likeminded people to do so with, or play in tournaments. No one's way of playing 40k is inherently "wrong" like you said, but simply put this guy is in the minority. If he wants to continue playing with the OP's group then he can either change his attitude and try to be a fun opponent or just find another group. I'll agree that it's wrong to try and "force" the guy to change, though, so my advice to the OP is to just let him be and stop gaming with him, friend or not.

Ark: You obviously play with the same group on a regular basis. Why not write a narrative campaign with a number of set-piece, but one sided games. Perhaps one senario sees a detachment of defenders (three or four troops choices) defending a location against a full on attack (all of their opponents army less the Hvy Support). Obviously the points totals will be totally inequitous, but the idea is that the defender sees how many turns he can keep the attacker out of his deployment zone. This could, in the campaign, represent a screening action, with the defender protecting either a staged retreat or mustering attack. A lot of the campaign could be written like this, based on 'real' battles, not *balanced* wargaming principals. These games are fun, but possibly hell on a table top for a WAAC player.




ps

Some like 40k because it, to some degree, involves matching wits and intelligence against opponents.
Some like 40k because it's a great beer & pretzels game.
Some like 40k because the models are cool.
Some like 40k because the background is interesting.
Some like 40k because it's an excuse for adults to go "pew pew pew" every time their army men get to fire lasers at each other.

LOL. All of the above !

Danny Internets wrote:Your desperate reach for a personal slight indicates you haven't been following anything I've been saying, which is sad given the number of responses you've provided. Every response I've made has been with regards to the attitude, held by people like the OP and yourself, that makes you want to push your ideologies on others. It's both obnoxious and ego-centric. His reasons for playing as just as valid as yours and the OP's.

If you say so.

However, you were making assumptions about the player that were, for all intents and purposes, sheer fantasy. Simply look at Ark's last response - my comments and those of others similar to mine, were far closer to reality than yours were.

The only thing ego-centric in this thread were the assumptions you were making - out of thin air. There's no 'reaching for a personal slight' in that, as your posts are here for all to see. If you feel 'slighted', then like I suggested, perhaps this issue hits a bit close to home for you.

Danny Internets wrote:
I have no problem with powergamers in any way, shape, or form. In fact, I don't have problems with any particular group of 40k gamers. Perhaps others might mark me as a powergamer or some variation on that, though I'd be surprised given the fact that I've won the Best Sportsman and/or Favorite Opponent awards at three of the last six tournaments I've participated in. I simply subscribe to the philosophy of letting others do as they please as long as they don't infringe on others. Playing a game like 40k competitively, even overly competitively, does not infringe on others who voluntarily choose to subject themselves to that.

Sorry, I just don't agree with that mindset. Both players are in the game to have fun. If one of them isn't having fun because of the other's attitude - your suggestion is to 'live and let live', and for the person not having fun to just suck it up and take it?

Real life just doesn't work that way, especially when referring to a 'hobby' that we voluntarily play for fun and entertainment. Encouraging someone who isn't having fun to just 'accept' the intollerable condition that removes such fun, is ludicrous. Such a mindset falls perfectly in mind with the power-gamer "all for me" mentality, which is immature and unnecessary.

In this situation, as has been further detailed for you now, the 'other person' happens to be a good friend. In such a case, it's sensible to try to work it out with the person, to give them a chance to adjust their attitude and once again meet-up with friends on the table, instead of just blowing the person off. One person is ruining the fun for the group. Yet, your suggestion is to simply let him play how he wants, and 'so what' if every other member of the group doesn't have fun playing the guy?

There's a difference between giving the guy a chance to change his attitude on his own - and trying to 'force' it on him. If I were in Ark's shoes and the guy refused to change his ways, I'd still be his friend - I just wouldn't play games with him any longer. But I sure wouldn't try to 'force' it on him by threatening the friendship or anything silly like that.

Ark wrote:Er, sorry for getting off track. The point I was trying to make is, he hasn't played in a long time. The last time he wanted to play he was turned down. So, we'll see I guess. Thanks for all the replies, again.

Good luck, Ark. As I described - I've been in the situation you describe - on both sides - at one time or another. It's not easy, especially when dealing with someone you consider a friend.


@Zzzzzz,

A Narrative campaign is a fantastic idea for the reasons you describe. It's also fun in general, as well! Great suggestion.

okay this may sound weird but it worked with one of my friends. study his game play and army and when you know enuff about it DESTROY his army time and time again and say hahahaha i win you lose hahaha do this a few times and then have a chat with him and say how did it make you feel when i rubbed it in your face with my win?

I have to say it... What a total hypocrite.

G

Danny Internets wrote:

I get the impression, Danny, that you are a similar player to the one Ark is having a problem with, based on your responses, which is why you're being so defensive about the discussion. I don't think anyone is saying the guy is as bad as you are accusing others of making him out to be. I can't speak for others, but my summary response has been - no matter how 'bad' the guy is, if he's a 'good friend', it would be worth Ark's time to talk it out with him. That's all.

Your desperate reach for a personal slight indicates you haven't been following anything I've been saying, which is sad given the number of responses you've provided. Every response I've made has been with regards to the attitude, held by people like the OP and yourself, that makes you want to push your ideologies on others. It's both obnoxious and ego-centric. His reasons for playing as just as valid as yours and the OP's.

I have no problem with powergamers in any way, shape, or form. In fact, I don't have problems with any particular group of 40k gamers. Perhaps others might mark me as a powergamer or some variation on that, though I'd be surprised given the fact that I've won the Best Sportsman and/or Favorite Opponent awards at three of the last six tournaments I've participated in. I simply subscribe to the philosophy of letting others do as they please as long as they don't infringe on others. Playing a game like 40k competitively, even overly competitively, does not infringe on others who voluntarily choose to subject themselves to that.

Wow, unprovoked personal attack AND solid support. Green Blow Fly hits one out of the park!

(Troll elsewhere.)

Modquisition on:

Gentlemen, as a reminder, please do not include personal attacks.

Modquisition off.

If my commenting that you sounded 'defensive' is construed by you and the mod as a personal attack - then I offer my apologies.

However, I don't see where I 'personally attacked' you in any other form or fashion.

Good luck in your future games, and happy holidays.

Mort wrote:If my commenting that you sounded 'defensive' is construed by you and the mod as a personal attack - then I offer my apologies.

You take a guy whom you refer to as being immature and whom others have called stupid, a tool, obnoxious, annoying, loser, deserving of physical violence, etc, and then say "oh, hey, you sound just like him!" That's not supposed to be insulting? lol.

However, you were making assumptions about the player that were, for all intents and purposes, sheer fantasy. Simply look at Ark's last response - my comments and those of others similar to mine, were far closer to reality than yours were.

He says the guy's playing style is negatively impacting the local game store then says no one is actually playing him. Sounds like he's exaggerating one side or the other (the player's effect on the group or his group's response), seeing as they are mutually exclusive.

Sorry, I just don't agree with that mindset. Both players are in the game to have fun. If one of them isn't having fun because of the other's attitude - your suggestion is to 'live and let live', and for the person not having fun to just suck it up and take it?

His local gaming group does not consist of 2 players. Furthermore, life is full of choices. I don't have any sympathy for people who know they won't enjoy playing with the guy and then go ahead and do so anyway. No one has to suck anything up if they don't put themselves in the situation to begin with. Play someone else. Bam, problem solved.

Furthermore, I never said a conversation with the player is out of the question. In fact, I've said several times that there's nothing wrong with that. However, as made clear by the OP and by yourself, the intent of the conversation is not really to have a genuine discussion, but rather to explicitly make the player conform to the standards of the OP without regard or respect to his own (i.e., pushing ideologies on someone else).

Danny Internets wrote:

Mort wrote:If my commenting that you sounded 'defensive' is construed by you and the mod as a personal attack - then I offer my apologies.

You take a guy whom you refer to as being immature and whom others have called stupid, a tool, obnoxious, annoying, loser, deserving of physical violence, etc, and then say "oh, hey, you sound just like him!" That's not supposed to be insulting? lol.

I suppose it would be insulting if the shoe fit.. otherwise, I'd say someone was just taking it too personally and needing a tissue.

two_heads_talking wrote:I suppose it would be insulting if the shoe fit.. otherwise, I'd say someone was just taking it too personally and needing a tissue.

I'll keep that in mind in case I ever feel the need to call someone a moron. Remember, they're not allowed to get insulted...unless the shoe fits.

* Looks out to left field *