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 after a few month hiatus from playing i packed up all my models, Loaded them into the car and went down to my local for a few games, All the tables were in play so i picked up the new Grey knight codex and had a flip through. Just to see how much my army has changed (which ill admit it's changed A lot) So i spoke to another GK player about the changes wondering what in and whats out now. I played a Crowe army. Mainly because I absolutely loved his fluff and his model. I didn't over do it on the transports (which i know is what a Crowe army was all about ) after a little banter I realized this guy was a after he laughed and told me my army was a waste now and would only work with unbound and even then it was a rubbish army. when i inquired about his he was all (as i know now ) generic waac net list. After another hour in my local I lost heart after seeing net lists every where. Not one person came into a GW store for fun.

Anyone else see this and how do you deal with it? it feels like all the people i've gamed with have been corrupted with these power lists. that i really have no interest in playing outside of competitive. yeah i can make an army of dreadknights interceptors and storm ravens but its not gonna be fun for anyone to play against and not fun for me to play. Same with my necrons. Yeah i can run a boring as net list and stomp everyone into the ground but honestly i dont wanna be that waac guy but i dont wanna play them either. I live in a pretty remote area and the lack of places to game is very slim GW only lol. so please any advice would be great

it is the opposite in my community. I have been absolutely kicking ass with an average list. The people in my community are just not competitive enough in 40k. They are in Fantasy, though, and there is a Fantasy campaign right now, so I might have to wait until that's done to have some tough players back to 40k.

1 Dreadknight and 1 Wave Serpent in 1000 points. If I were to be waac, I would grab 2 Dreadknights and Storm Raven. But seriously, I don't like armies that are cheesy as hell. Spamming any more than 1 OP unit like Flyrant, Riptide and Centurion in 1000 points is not fun to play with.

OP, this is basically what I've said about most GK players on multiple threads here, but I receive so much hate for it with people saying idiotic things like "what's a GK net list?" and "the DK is our only good unit" and crap like that.

Beware, you might get a flock of angry GKs invading your thread!

I've tried to encourage change but no one wants to, they're all set in their WAAC net list mindsets.

 XdeadpoolX wrote:
So after a few month hiatus from playing i packed up all my models, Loaded them into the car and went down to my local for a few games, All the tables were in play so i picked up the new Grey knight codex and had a flip through. Just to see how much my army has changed (which ill admit it's changed A lot) So i spoke to another GK player about the changes wondering what in and whats out now. I played a Crowe army. Mainly because I absolutely loved his fluff and his model. I didn't over do it on the transports (which i know is what a Crowe army was all about ) after a little banter I realized this guy was a after he laughed and told me my army was a waste now and would only work with unbound and even then it was a rubbish army. when i inquired about his he was all (as i know now ) generic waac net list. After another hour in my local I lost heart after seeing net lists every where. Not one person came into a GW store for fun.

Anyone else see this and how do you deal with it? it feels like all the people i've gamed with have been corrupted with these power lists. that i really have no interest in playing outside of competitive. yeah i can make an army of dreadknights interceptors and storm ravens but its not gonna be fun for anyone to play against and not fun for me to play. Same with my necrons. Yeah i can run a boring as net list and stomp everyone into the ground but honestly i dont wanna be that waac guy but i dont wanna play them either. I live in a pretty remote area and the lack of places to game is very slim GW only lol. so please any advice would be great

Really? i dont mean to be cheeky here deadpool, but thats coming across as a bit elitist, if you dont mind me saying. For what its worth, i couldnt be bothered with top level tourney play all the time either - sometimes its nice to take the foot off the accelerator.

But with regard to what you've said, What defines "fun"? Surely, if they're enjoying playing netlists, they're having "fun" too? ( Or is one kind of "fun" morally superior to another? is the other guy's "fun" wrong, just because its different to your "fun"? or mine?

What you're saying is getting perilously close to the "my kind of fun is right, everyone else doing it differently is doing it wrong, and mine should be the only kind that is supported" fallacy.

Moral of the story: Neither you, me, nor anyone else gets to grandstand, and define what "fun" is. None of us get to cast judgement. By all means, have preferences. And honestly, if theirs isn't the kind of 40k you want to be playing, you shouldn't play that style of game with them, and should seek like minded opponents. thats the key. But dont try and suggest they're doing is wrong because their style of gaming is different to yours. Regarding the specific situation about being in a remote area, the best options are still to find people who want to play a more laid back kind of a game. Failing that, communicate with those that do. Surely they're in the same boat as yourself with a small pool of opponents? getting one more active is good for everyone, even if it involves swapping things out in your lists a bit.

EDIT: and also, there is a different between WAAC and power builds. please don't confuse the two.

Toning it down a bit from the guy above - their kind of fun is different to your kind of fun, so you'll need to find some people that have the same idea of fun as you.

You mention that you're in a remote place, so I don't know how difficult it will be, but even 1-3 people with a similar mindset should be achievable? Search the internet for local gaming clubs and test the waters.

Deadnight wrote:

 XdeadpoolX wrote:
So after a few month hiatus from playing i packed up all my models, Loaded them into the car and went down to my local for a few games, All the tables were in play so i picked up the new Grey knight codex and had a flip through. Just to see how much my army has changed (which ill admit it's changed A lot) So i spoke to another GK player about the changes wondering what in and whats out now. I played a Crowe army. Mainly because I absolutely loved his fluff and his model. I didn't over do it on the transports (which i know is what a Crowe army was all about ) after a little banter I realized this guy was a after he laughed and told me my army was a waste now and would only work with unbound and even then it was a rubbish army. when i inquired about his he was all (as i know now ) generic waac net list. After another hour in my local I lost heart after seeing net lists every where. Not one person came into a GW store for fun.

Anyone else see this and how do you deal with it? it feels like all the people i've gamed with have been corrupted with these power lists. that i really have no interest in playing outside of competitive. yeah i can make an army of dreadknights interceptors and storm ravens but its not gonna be fun for anyone to play against and not fun for me to play. Same with my necrons. Yeah i can run a boring as net list and stomp everyone into the ground but honestly i dont wanna be that waac guy but i dont wanna play them either. I live in a pretty remote area and the lack of places to game is very slim GW only lol. so please any advice would be great

Really? i dont mean to be cheeky here deadpool, but thats coming across as a bit elitist, if you dont mind me saying. For what its worth, i couldnt be bothered with top level tourney play all the time either - sometimes its nice to take the foot off the accelerator.

But with regard to what you've said, What defines "fun"? Surely, if they're enjoying playing netlists, they're having "fun" too? ( Or is one kind of "fun" morally superior to another? is the other guy's "fun" wrong, just because its different to your "fun"? or mine?

What you're saying is getting perilously close to the "my kind of fun is right, everyone else doing it differently is doing it wrong, and mine should be the only kind that is supported" fallacy.

Moral of the story: Neither you, me, nor anyone else gets to grandstand, and define what "fun" is. You don't get to cast judgement. By all means, if theirs isn't the kind of 40k you want to be playing, you shouldn't play with them, and should seek like minded opponents. But dont try and suggest they're doing is wrong because their style of gaming is different to yours. Regarding the specific situation about being in a remote area, the best options are still to find people who want to play a more laid back kind of a game. Failing that, communicate with those that do. Surely they're in the same boat as yourself with a small pool of opponents? getting one more active is good for everyone, even if it involves swapping things out in your lists a bit.

EDIT: and also, there is a different between WAAC and power builds. please don't confuse the two.

I ummed and ahhhed on how to respond to this so i thought i would break it down to one thing. You say i come across elitist. Yet your whole response was smug and conceited and really didn't give any real advice or help on how to deal with this. You just came across as an arrogant internet troll. The only difference between WAAC and power build..... Is the player behind it


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quanar wrote:
Toning it down a bit from the guy above - their kind of fun is different to your kind of fun, so you'll need to find some people that have the same idea of fun as you.

You mention that you're in a remote place, so I don't know how difficult it will be, but even 1-3 people with a similar mindset should be achievable? Search the internet for local gaming clubs and test the waters.

Well there is one place to game and that's gw. Im new to the scene here but there isnt much outside of it


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SGTPozy wrote:
OP, this is basically what I've said about most GK players on multiple threads here, but I receive so much hate for it with people saying idiotic things like "what's a GK net list?" and "the DK is our only good unit" and crap like that.

Beware, you might get a flock of angry GKs invading your thread!

I've tried to encourage change but no one wants to, they're all set in their WAAC net list mindsets.

Sadly It isnt just gk players now..

One piece of advice...find people who look like they are playing campaign style games. Ususally, those kind of players are more interested in fluffy games than powerlists.

It may be worth it to go back, on a different day, and ask if you can watch some games. Maybe the store manager could help you find some people with similar interests, as well. Just don't slag anybody off, as the Brits say.

I'd tell you we could play a game, but I'm afraid the distance would be a bit much to overcome...good luck!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also. I frequently win with lists that would most likely popularly be considered mediocre or weak.

I'm not saying anything about your army, as I don't know much at all about GK, but I've found that alot of the hype over netlists and such is a bit exaggerated....I think the player has more to do with the outcome of games than the lists, barring blatant mismatches (which can indeed happen)

 XdeadpoolX wrote:
I ummed and ahhhed on how to respond to this so i thought i would break it down to one thing. You say i come across elitist. Yet your whole response was smug and conceited and really didn't give any real advice or help on how to deal with this. You just came across as an arrogant internet troll. The only difference between WAAC and power build..... Is the player behind it

First of all, I don't think he was being smug or conceited at all. In fact he included himself in that statement, he doesn't have the right to judge or grandstand, either. He's not looking down at you from some soapbox and implying he was morally superior to you based on his definition of "fun"...you, however, came awful close to doing that with the words you chose to describe this little "problem" you're having and he simply called you out on it. You're the one that looks conceited here.

Second, not sure how the hell you came to the conclusion that he was an "arrogant internet troll". Because he didn't like your attitude and rightly pointed out that your line of reasoning here isn't entirely sound? Mark me down as a troll then, too, because I personally didn't like your attitude either, and reading this flippant response to his post doesn't make me want to help you for fear of being treated the same.

Finally, he did give you advice, not just to reevaluate your position on what constitutes "playing for fun" as that could change from person to person (Maybe they do have fun playing net lists, ever think of that? Maybe they like playing in "tournament mode" all the time?), but to find like-minded players...which is probably the only "real" advice anyone can give you. Don't dismiss that advice or claim it isn't "real" advice because he didn't give you the validation you were looking for, and agree with you about how all the gamers in your area are WAAC douches that have been "corrupted" by net lists as if it were some disease, and tell you specifically how to change the mindset of your entire community so that they play the game in a fashion you find more to your liking. I hate to say it, but that's probably not going to happen, and if that's the only answer you're looking for then give up on the thread now.

You can try talking to people individually, ask them if they want to play a more "relaxed" game and tone down their lists, but if they're not into that then there's really nothing else you can do. You can't force them to play a different list (unless the one they're using simply isn't legal, and even then if they refuse to change it then you're kinda stuck but I probably wouldn't want to play them anyway, lol), especially if it involves having to buy expensive new models solely for the purpose of playing against you. If there's no one else to play with except this specific group then I guess you're out of luck.

 XdeadpoolX wrote:
The only difference between WAAC and power build..... Is the player behind it

This is the only thing we seem to agree on...except I'm not even sure if you believe it or not because you claimed you "didn't want to be that WAAC guy" as if simply playing a power list would make you WAAC. Player attitude, bending rules in your favor or outright cheating, fast-rolling and not letting you see dice results, those and more are the kinds of traits a WAAC gamer has. Do you do any of that when you play?

Speaking of this " guy" in your post, was he really trying to be an donkey-cave to you, or do you think maybe he was just a little bitter about the GK update and just told you the truth, that your Crowe list probably wouldn't work anymore with the new book because of the huge changes GK underwent and that your army would likely be unplayable without resorting to Unbound shenanigans?

Anyway, now that I think about it, if you really are as good as you say and can, in fact, "stomp everyone into the ground" with a "boring as net list" then maybe you should be the WAAC guy? I know it might not be very fun but that's the point, maybe if they get stomped enough they'll start to see that as well, and thus might be a little more interested in taking their foot off the gas a little bit. Again, though, some people like playing that way and might just rise to the challenge, turning their game up instead, so be prepared for that to backfire.

 XdeadpoolX wrote:

I ummed and ahhhed on how to respond to this so i thought i would break it down to one thing. You say i come across elitist. Yet your whole response was smug and conceited and really didn't give any real advice or help on how to deal with this. You just came across as an arrogant internet troll. The only difference between WAAC and power build..... Is the player behind it

with respect, dont mistake sharp elbows with being an "arrogant internet troll".

Being "smug", and "conceited" has nothing to do with it. I maintain what i said, and i include myself in what i was saying too; its an attitude we as gamers need to embrace with regard to our own subculture - everyone has a different idea on what "fun" gaming is. No one has a right to call out folks for playing a different type of game from themselves - they have every right to play their way, and enjoy it too. I play warmachine fairly competitively. i play flames of war casually. I dont see myself as "right" or "wrong" in either; i simply play the games i enjoy in a way that i enjoy them. I dont hold myself above anyone who does the former casually, and the latter competitively. each to their own, and if they enjoy it, fair deuce.

you tried to imply those guys in your area that were playing netlists were doing it wrong, that they were WAAC lists- (and seriously, WAAC is a despicable attitude, and is something entirely separate from competitive list building, which is just as valid a style of play as anything else. Dont mistake the two). I called you out on that. Specifically, that they should play for "fun", irregardless of whether they were having "fun", their way.

And for what its worth, i did give you advice. Practical, realistic advice. find like minded people who can play a type of game you enjoy playing. there might be some that just play at home. Not everyone necessarily plays at an FLGS. Or ask the guys in the shop if they're open to playing a different way. communication. If you live in a remote area, then other options are rather thin on the ground i'm afraid, and thats just the reality on the ground. I cant suggest "try another FLGS" if there isnt one; other advice either isnt relvant or practical .hence what i said; communication. the suggestion that they might be equally willing to change how they play in order to have a different opponent.

 XdeadpoolX wrote:

Deadnight wrote:

 XdeadpoolX wrote:
So after a few month hiatus from playing i packed up all my models, Loaded them into the car and went down to my local for a few games, All the tables were in play so i picked up the new Grey knight codex and had a flip through. Just to see how much my army has changed (which ill admit it's changed A lot) So i spoke to another GK player about the changes wondering what in and whats out now. I played a Crowe army. Mainly because I absolutely loved his fluff and his model. I didn't over do it on the transports (which i know is what a Crowe army was all about ) after a little banter I realized this guy was a after he laughed and told me my army was a waste now and would only work with unbound and even then it was a rubbish army. when i inquired about his he was all (as i know now ) generic waac net list. After another hour in my local I lost heart after seeing net lists every where. Not one person came into a GW store for fun.

Anyone else see this and how do you deal with it? it feels like all the people i've gamed with have been corrupted with these power lists. that i really have no interest in playing outside of competitive. yeah i can make an army of dreadknights interceptors and storm ravens but its not gonna be fun for anyone to play against and not fun for me to play. Same with my necrons. Yeah i can run a boring as net list and stomp everyone into the ground but honestly i dont wanna be that waac guy but i dont wanna play them either. I live in a pretty remote area and the lack of places to game is very slim GW only lol. so please any advice would be great

Really? i dont mean to be cheeky here deadpool, but thats coming across as a bit elitist, if you dont mind me saying. For what its worth, i couldnt be bothered with top level tourney play all the time either - sometimes its nice to take the foot off the accelerator.

But with regard to what you've said, What defines "fun"? Surely, if they're enjoying playing netlists, they're having "fun" too? ( Or is one kind of "fun" morally superior to another? is the other guy's "fun" wrong, just because its different to your "fun"? or mine?

What you're saying is getting perilously close to the "my kind of fun is right, everyone else doing it differently is doing it wrong, and mine should be the only kind that is supported" fallacy.

Moral of the story: Neither you, me, nor anyone else gets to grandstand, and define what "fun" is. You don't get to cast judgement. By all means, if theirs isn't the kind of 40k you want to be playing, you shouldn't play with them, and should seek like minded opponents. But dont try and suggest they're doing is wrong because their style of gaming is different to yours. Regarding the specific situation about being in a remote area, the best options are still to find people who want to play a more laid back kind of a game. Failing that, communicate with those that do. Surely they're in the same boat as yourself with a small pool of opponents? getting one more active is good for everyone, even if it involves swapping things out in your lists a bit.

EDIT: and also, there is a different between WAAC and power builds. please don't confuse the two.

I ummed and ahhhed on how to respond to this so i thought i would break it down to one thing. You say i come across elitist. Yet your whole response was smug and conceited and really didn't give any real advice or help on how to deal with this. You just came across as an arrogant internet troll. The only difference between WAAC and power build..... Is the player behind it

Deadnight's post will be exalted for truth, and XdeadpoolX's response hints (the kindest word I could use) that he doesn't like it when people disagree with him. Seeing as how people disagreeing with him is the underlying theme to his initial post, I doubt this thread will be enlightening anyone.

Having said all that, here's me beating my head against the wall: XdeadpoolX, if everyone at your store is playing competitive "netlists", as you say, why in the world do you think they wouldn't have fun playing against your GK version of competitive? They'd most likely welcome the challenge. It is an issue if you absolutely hate playing competitively, and if that's the case I do have a suggestion: Grow a scene that does appeal to you. Put up fliers where you encourage people to bring in more fluffy lists on a specific night of the week. Try out the Highlander format that people have been talking about on the net. Basically, see if anyone out there is interested in 40k-ing the way you'd like to without complaining to those who enjoy a different format.

Deadnight wrote:
And for what its worth, i did give you advice. Practical, realistic advice. find like minded people who can play a type of game you enjoy playing. there might be some that just play at home. Not everyone necessarily plays at an FLGS. Or ask the guys in the shop if they're open to playing a different way. communication. If you live in a remote area, then other options are rather thin on the ground i'm afraid, and thats just the reality on the ground. I cant suggest "try another FLGS" if there isnt one; other advice either isnt relvant or practical .hence what i said; communication. the suggestion that they might be equally willing to change how they play in order to have a different opponent.

This reminds me, sometimes stores will have a board in the back that people can use to put up contact info on to set up games or find RPG groups. Not sure if a GW store would or not since I imagine they don't actually want people in there playing games anymore and want you to buy your gak and get out like any other retail store, but that could be a way to find someone who plays more like you do but just doesn't play at the store.

Are net lists really net lists or a army that comprises of optimized units. Per your description maybe insert WAAC list for Net List? Any astute competitive player could study a Codex and come up with the completive units. I don't give a lot of credit to the "net list" tag. Heck, I see lots of lists going around the net I wouldn't play due to play style and synergy conflicts.

If your talking about being able to play players that buy models because they look cool. They are usually not the types that hang out at stores for pick up games.

Maybe a gaming club? I play a couple fluff players and I bring my fluffy lists and it always ends up being a ton of fun.

 XdeadpoolX wrote:
Not one person came into a GW store for fun.

I can beyond a shadow of a doubt tell you that this is 100% wrong.

Everyone who was playing there, regardless of list, was there to have fun. It may not be exactly how you perceive it to be, but different people enjoy different things in different ways.

That is where I think you're having issues with your entire post. Playing with the better units in a small codex does not automatically make it a net list, or make someone WAAC, or make them a douche. Being a dick is something someone can be regardless of their list.

If you don't like certain lists, fine. Feel free to not play them or against them. If you find most players enjoy more tuned lists, than your options are to talk with them about tuning them down, or tune yours up, or some combination thereof.

GK players are in a tough spot with such a hacked up codex. Your options are limited to begin with, and several immediately jump off the page as being no-brainer awesome and other being obvious dead weight. Such is life with GW.

Byte wrote:Are net lists really net lists or a army that comprises of optimized units. Per your description maybe insert WAAC list for Net List? Any astute competitive player could study a Codex and come up with the completive units. I don't give a lot of credit to the "net list" tag. Heck, I see lots of lists going around the net I wouldn't play due to play style and synergy conflicts.

Blacksails wrote:

 XdeadpoolX wrote:
Not one person came into a GW store for fun.

GK players are in a tough spot with such a hacked up codex. Your options are limited to begin with, and several immediately jump off the page as being no-brainer awesome and other being obvious dead weight. Such is life with GW.

Agree, kinda the point I was making as well. Yes, I quoted myself to reference this response to yours...

IMO, WAAC is a playing attitude, not a list. Literally, "Win at ALL costs". To included creative measuring, perfect warlord traits and psychic power "luck", rule bending, and masked/fast dice work. I don't mind playing against optimized/face eater lists, but really don't like playing a WAAC player.

The assertion that "Not one person came into a GW store for fun" doesn't make any sense, because what did the people come into the GW store for? Some of those people must have had fun, right? Keep in mind that every game has a winner and a loser, and I hope that people can have fun when they lose, too. If they can't, tabletop warfare is not for them, IMO.

Now, I do understand the essence of what the OP is saying. If you don't play by loading up with the "best units" of an army, your chances of winning are much slimmer; and, a lot of people enjoy a higher win ratio more than goofing off with armies that look cool or sound neat but work suboptimally.

This is a valid, and recurring complaint of 40k. If you're always playing with strangers who just want to win, 40k often restricts you to responding with a tailored list or an army's best units, in order to have a good win ratio.

If you don't like this, find a place to play where house rules prevent spammy lists, play with other players, or play another game.

Many players don't really LIKE the spammy lists, but they would prefer to play a spammy list and win, than play something else and lose. House rules with restrictions help. Otherwise, as someone else mentioned, campaign-style games help a lot, too. But, the very best thing you can do is find a regular group of people who like to play the same way as you.

Frankly, this is so in any game in which there are real people who play against each other; it's just more important in 40k, because the rules are flexible enough that cheesy armies are not explicitly forbidden.

It should also be noted that while some people may dislike armies they call 'spammy', other people thoroughly enjoy them and think they have redundancy and symmetry, not to mention being very fluffy in many cases.

Furthermore, a player can have a very strong list unintentionally; liking Wave Serpents or Riptides should not be punished by other players. Indeed, its a little ridiculous how some players call out other players for taking strong units or armies. Actually, its a lot ridiculous.

This is a problem with 40k. The balance issue creates a divide between players. Its gakky, but that's what happens when the game developers stop caring about the quality of the game and the sales people only care about the next report.

For the OP. They were there for fun. This is the problem I mentioned somewhere else. Some find the idea of playing games to curbstomp opponents and metagame and mathhammer and so forth till they get the absolute most powerful lists and then try to make those lists win games no matter what it takes fun.
These players usually end up chasing the guys like you who play for different reasons out of the hobby shops because they dont like to be talked down to or insulted and lets face it being curbstomped and having to double check math on lists, watch an opponant like a hawk on every single measurement and double check every dice roll and look up every rule in the turns to ensure your not being hosed on something is a pain in the neck.
As suggested earlier, find the campaign players and ask around. Youlll eventually be able to spot the players who enjoy playing the same kinda game you do. From personal experience, they usually are the ones who come in, look around and listen, then buy their stuff talk to the shop owner and a player or two and leae. When you find them there to play, it's usually when there isnt a big crowd.
Yes, this is not the case in EVERY shop and I'm sure, someone will come and say how THERI shop is not like that and so on and so forth, but I have played in and visited with shops across a large portion of the U.S. over the years and found this to be true in almost every one with only 2 exceptions and those 2 exceptions did not stay in business long before closing.
The usual note, these words are not meant to describe any particuler members here.

If you have a problem with more than a few people, then more than likely the common denominator is you. Based on your responses I'm going to go out on a limb and say that's probably true.

Here's a nice quote to explain the difference between WAAC and competitive for you.

 jy2 wrote:

Note to the OP. Win at all Costs, or WAAC, usually has a negative connotation. Just because someone runs a more competitive list than you are normally used to doesn't make that player a WAAC player. A WAAC player is also a player who wants to win so badly as to the exclusion of other people's enjoyment. It goes beyond just running a "netlist". Basically, a WAAC player is usually a poor sport, will argue rules in his favor, will semi-cheat to cheating outright, will argue if you do something that will hurt his chances to win, and will generally be rather unpleasant to play or even be around. It's really all about his attitude, not his list. There are plenty of competitive players who run tough lists, but are fair and pleasant people to play against. Ask yourself this, your GK opponent, is he a douche? Even though his list is tough to play against, did he do anything shady in the game or did he argue a lot? Was he pleasant to play against (not necessarily his army, but the person himself)? Then you will realize whether he really was a WAAC player or not. To me, it looks like your friend is just evolving as a player. It's very common. He plays. He wants to get better. Thus he starts running tougher lists. Soon enough, he will probably be going to tournaments. That's just the natural evolution of many players. You really can't expect him to stay a beers-&-pretzels type of player forever. Just as you prefer casual and friendly games using models that you enjoy, he seems to be evolving into the type of player that wants to be more competitive.

 Byte wrote:
Are net lists really net lists or a army that comprises of optimized units. Per your description maybe insert WAAC list for Net List? Any astute competitive player could study a Codex and come up with the completive units. I don't give a lot of credit to the "net list" tag. Heck, I see lots of lists going around the net I wouldn't play due to play style and synergy conflicts.

Technically wouldn't every list you see in the 40k Army Lists section of the forum be a "net list"?

 Blacksails wrote:
It should also be noted that while some people may dislike armies they call 'spammy', other people thoroughly enjoy them and think they have redundancy and symmetry, not to mention being very fluffy in many cases.

A "spam" list looks more like a real army to me than these incoherent mishmashes of random "fluffy" units that other people come up with. I would even go as far as saying that most spammy lists are more fluffy than the supposed "fluffy" lists are. And no, I'm not a fan of the "highlander" format, either.

With Tau for example I can think of a lot of "spammy" lists that are perfectly justifiable fluff-wise, there's a lot of different specialized cadres you could theme your army after. In the Damocles Warzone book there's basically a spammy formation for every unit you can think of; piranha spam, flyer spam, pathfinder + broadside spam, suit spam, hammerhead spam...there's even a drone formation FFS, you could take a big mess of drones and you can't really say jack about the legitimacy of it. Hilariously there's even a formation with a bunch of ethereals.

I will echo the sentiment that you should seek out other like minded individuals to forge various narratives with. Also, deriding strangers over cursory glances at their armies comes off about as awesome as lamenting an individual's "fancy book learnin", consulting the internet is what smart people generally do. Lamenting individuals for using good units just seems insane in any context friendly or competitive, as others have pointed out it's just as likely individuals purchased built and painted theirmodels because they really liked the aesthetic of the unit. Sadly happy accidents can also lead to spending countless hours painting units that just end up always being lackluster. People take pride in their little men, a lot of people seem to equate competition with a negative or pompous attitude and it's not really fair, I feel far more at ease playing an opponent who demonstrates a really good understanding of the rules because it's a good indicator that there will be few disputes and the game will go smoothly.

To put it very bluntly, everyone who plays a game wants to win. The difference between "competitive" and "fun"/"fluffy" players is that one changes their army to win and the other changes the mission.

It seems to be a sad story of people in your area. When I can get games with my local group (As we all have such sparatic schedules), our games are always fun and light hearted. No one brings WAAC lists. Ever. There's no reason for us to do so. We are all friends, we all frequent the same shop and all love the same game. We don't have to measure our 'manhood' by how strong of a list we can bring and being a total jerk to one another in the process. The game is just that. A game. Win or lose.

The closest thing to a WAAC player imo is someone who asks what I play and then deploys a multi cad sm army with IG ally , that has 3 wyverns and 6 whilrwinds in his list. Someone with a good list doesn't bother me or to be more precise didn't bother me, till 7th ed. Now with all the stupid random stuff and my army being bad for 7th, it is hard to enjoy the game. Oddly enough I never had this problem with other games, even when my list were far from perfect like my cygnar for example. I don't have a wall , I started with merc cygnar , but not with the good mercs. Still had and have a blast playing. And it can't be the players as I play against the same people.

I think you need to work out if you're a competitive player or not. Either option is fine; different people enjoy different things. I dislike the 'WAAC' term as it's often confused with poor attitude or poor sportsmanship.

I enjoy playing games at the competitive level (I used to play Magic: The Gathering at national level); I used to build highly competitive decks and enjoyed playing them against other players of a similar mindset. What I didn't enjoy was going to my FLGS and crushing players who were just 'kitchen table' players i.e. no competitive aspect, tried crazy combos out, beer n pretzels kind of gaming.

What confuses these players is the concept of 'fun'; one man's fun is another man's trip to the dentist... See, I happen to have fun playing semi-competitively. My housemate (regular opponent) and I are always talking about the strategies we've picked up from tournament reports and forums, looking at what the current level of filth for a particular army is, discussing tactics etc. While we both like winning, and we'll both play fairly good lists, we're not going to both run out and buy totally new armies just to beat the other for one afternoon. We have a middle ground, because that's the level we enjoy playing at.

In short, as many people have pointed out, talking to your opponent beforehand to get a feel for what sort of game you're both going to enjoy will go a long way. Of course, if someone insists on playing a tournament list against your non-tournament list, you can always a) politely decline or b) tough it out (and not play them again). Personally, I never enjoyed thrashing casual with my tournament decks - but at least the pain was generally only 15-20 minutes, not a couple of hours, and I'd always apologise wryly afterwards... then pull out my casual deck, or if they were interested in upping their game, give them some advice, talk about why I was using this card/ that strategy etc.

It seemed like the polite thing to do!

Personally, I never enjoyed thrashing casual with my tournament decks - but at least the pain was generally only 15-20 minutes, not a couple of hours, and I'd always apologise wryly afterwards... then pull out my casual deck, or if they were interested in upping their game, give them some advice, talk about why I was using this card/ that strategy etc.

And the casual deck doesnt cost +600$ .

 greyknight12 wrote:
To put it very bluntly, everyone who plays a game wants to win. The difference between "competitive" and "fun"/"fluffy" players is that one changes their army to win and the other changes the mission.

And this assumption is also equally as false as the idea that playing a competitive list automatically makes you a WaaC's baby seal killer...

I don't play purely to win, nor do I go into every game specifically 'wanting to win'. Having a good time & socialising is no.1 priority in my personal book. If I win, super! If I lose, meh, as it was entertaining, who gives a crap?! It's a game of freaking toy soldiers to be honest, and I don't tie my ego directly to my win/loss record. (and a good thing too, otherwise I'd be mistaken for a Maple Leafs fan since I'm always finding new & even more spectacular ways to blow insurmountable leads! )

For myself, I prefer to look at each individual game as a checklist:
1. Did lots of crap die?
The best games always involve massive body counts IMHO. Even when getting tabled, I can a have a blast as long as crap is dying left, right & center... The best game I played at Astro TO this past summer was a game where I had 1 model left by game's end. Even though the first couple turns involved me getting murdered by a pair of Thunderfire cannons, the next 4 turns saw both our armies just utterly mutilate the other with barely a dozen'ish models or so left by game's end! Sure I lost, but it was truly epic being apart of that level of destruction.
There is honestly nothing more dull in 40k than playing 5-6 turns of "keep-away-hammer" where the only actual 'kill' is the First Blood point... hell, even 17 innings of 0-0 baseball is more entertaining!

2. Did we actually play a game?
I'm personally very used to getting tabled as my dice rolls suck. If my opponent wins because they capitalised on my mistake(s), then well, hopefully I learn for next time! If the dice are kicking the crap out of me and my opponent can share in the laughs, at least I've provided some good entertainment!
Even if it's a one-sided wholesale slaughter, as long as there was a semblance of an actual 'game,' and not just a case of a tailored list dick stomping an opponent who had 0 hope of remotely affecting the outcome then why be upset about the outcome, good or bad?

3. Was my opponent a friendly chap?
Pretty simple really, as long as we can share a few laughs, enjoy the bad/insane dice moments and come to an amiable agreement on any in-game issues, then I'll happily play that person again. I might ask them if they'd mind maybe tuning down their list a little bit for next time, or else if they ask, of instead maybe playing about with some combos to tune mine up a bit. (as in sure, if you're up for it, I'll bring the re-rolled 2++, but don't say I didn't warn you things will get a little bit stupid! )
If on the other hand they're a condescending jerk trying to tell me how to mathhammer my army to perfection so they can "actually get a semblance of a challenge," or else are so serious that the game feels like a matter of life and death, etc... then screw 'em and don't play that person again.

You ever notice the cognitive dissonance pouring out of people who use the word waac as punctuation?

It's an attitude of players, not a list descriptor of army composition. It's telling that people complaining about the perceived power level of other player's lists, all the while insisting they themselves are totally laid back and just wanna have fun. I mean totally laid back fun loving people always seem to somehow also care about losing and have a super natural ability to infer a strangers disposition, behavior and world view from a cursory glance at the table they're on. "I don't really want to play against that army" is a very different statement than "that guy is obviously a waac tfg douche, I mean look, he has good units, did I mention how pleasant and fun loving I am?".


I'll just post Jy2's comment again, let is sink in

 Zande4 wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

Note to the OP. Win at all Costs, or WAAC, usually has a negative connotation. Just because someone runs a more competitive list than you are normally used to doesn't make that player a WAAC player. A WAAC player is also a player who wants to win so badly as to the exclusion of other people's enjoyment. It goes beyond just running a "netlist". Basically, a WAAC player is usually a poor sport, will argue rules in his favor, will semi-cheat to cheating outright, will argue if you do something that will hurt his chances to win, and will generally be rather unpleasant to play or even be around. It's really all about his attitude, not his list. There are plenty of competitive players who run tough lists, but are fair and pleasant people to play against. Ask yourself this, your GK opponent, is he a douche? Even though his list is tough to play against, did he do anything shady in the game or did he argue a lot? Was he pleasant to play against (not necessarily his army, but the person himself)? Then you will realize whether he really was a WAAC player or not. To me, it looks like your friend is just evolving as a player. It's very common. He plays. He wants to get better. Thus he starts running tougher lists. Soon enough, he will probably be going to tournaments. That's just the natural evolution of many players. You really can't expect him to stay a beers-&-pretzels type of player forever. Just as you prefer casual and friendly games using models that you enjoy, he seems to be evolving into the type of player that wants to be more competitive.

 Crablezworth wrote:
It's telling that people complaining about the perceived power level of other player's lists, all the while insisting they themselves are totally laid back and just wanna have fun. I mean totally laid back fun loving people always seem to somehow also care about losing and have a super natural ability to infer a strangers disposition, behavior and world view from a cursory glance at the table they're on. "I don't really want to play against that army" is a very different statement then "that guy is obviously a waac tfg douche, I mean look, he has good units, did I mention how pleasant and fun loving I am?".

I love this.

Well said.

XdeadpoolX:

Unfortunately, to have a "fair" pick-up game you typically have to play against very strong lists since the power level of the game is very high lately.
When you get to know some of your opponents you may be able to arrange a more "balanced" game, typically I would suggest creating a scenario.

I agree that those scoffing at your lists is irritating and they should give helpful suggestions with the reasoning behind it.
You would have a valid point on attitudes if these people are very happy with tabling their opponent: they are not looking for a challenge, just to win as you observed.

The type of player is not typically indicative of the army they play, I have a variety but Grey Knights are one of them (still have the metal models).

I still see people I would label "ambassadors" of the hobby and their enthusiasm really can make you appreciate why you play.
Stick with it a bit longer, find a little more relaxed people and have fun.

Good luck!

<edit> Added note, people still seem to not agree on what WAAC means so using that tends to get all kinds of exciting responses. I have found it is simply someone who is willing to completely ignore the rules to win if they think they can get away with it. This person is no longer playing a game, they are playing something else.

 Talizvar wrote:

You would have a valid point on attitudes if these people are very happy with tabling their opponent: they are not looking for a challenge, just to win as you observed.

How do you know that?

Social situations are highly complex. We don't know those players aren't there for a challenge. The store might prefer strong lists in general, and thus, to be challenged everyone else brings tough lists. Everyone playing this game has some desire to win. Don't make a villain out of those who try a little harder or care a little more about getting that win.

Point is, we know very little about the whole scenario, and the OP is being particularly judgemental of people that were just met and know very little about. Social interactions are highly complex. A line or two in a post describing the situation is hardly enough to draw any conclusions about the people the OP ran into.