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.

I'm just getting into 40k in my area and most players don't seem very competitive. Furthermore, there's already a reputation for Ad-Mech players as there's a that guy who has a hyper competitive list. I don't want to be that guy, but I'm also a naturally very competitive player. I'm a numbers guy and I make Mathhammer spreadsheets for fun. Bringing bad lists seems like an obvious option, but that takes a lot of the fun out of it for me.

What do you do when it's clear you're bringing a gun to a friendly knife fight?

I tend to bring out the models with dust on them and try them out. The problem is that a savvy player can still beat someone less competitive with sub-optimal models.

Many tell me that they prefer to just throw the game in this circumstance, but I disagree.

I've played WMH since nearly day 1 and went on a deployment for 7 months. When I returned, the group I had known was scattered and a new crew with little experience was playing. I'd play coy with them but didn't really enjoy the game. During a tournament, I played a good list to the peak of my skill and ran the table against all opponents; still didn't enjoy my games.

I realized that your goal is to provide a challenging game without utterly wrecking their love of the game. Try to illustrate why certain actions were a bad choice, explain strategy tips they can use in the future. The post-game is just as important for newer players as the game itself.

I also use these matches as a time to test out some list-building theory I've been thinking of or to try out a fun army.

steerpike92 wrote:
Bringing bad lists seems like an obvious option, but that takes a lot of the fun out of it for me.

The way I see it, this doesn't have to take the fun out. Once you decide you're going to use some sub optimal units, or build your list around sub optimal units, it becomes a challenge on how to use those units most effectively. Synergy and combinations can still be found. The options and choices can be mathhammered out to find the best way of using those units even if they themselves are not the best.

Share your knowledge. Inform your opponents WHY you built the list the way you did, HOW you use it, and then teach/show them how they can do the same for their list, whilst still meeting any fluff, thematic, or "I just think that model/unit is cool" comments.

Also, give them tips/pointers on how to BEAT your list, effective counters you see in their list for yours, and make sure they don't make any "dumb" mistakes.

Afterall, you don't see NFL teams playing against HS teams now do you? If your list is "overwhelming" then you are not being competitive at all now are you...

I would play thematically.

I can't change list, as I pretty much just carry a single list around at any one time. It is pretty hard to carry a sideboard if you play Guard. However, I will play more like a crazy Guard general, ordering the men over the top and getting the tanks to try and crush the enemy. A full out crazy Guard linebreak. It is quite fun and usually ends up being amusing for both sides no matter who wins. Shouting at the Guardsmen as your Commissar shoots them is kinda satisfying.

It probably sounds crazier than I actually do it, I'm not "in character" or anything. Just the occasional bit of roleplay and a strategy that doesn't care for the lives of my men. I guess you have to treat the game as more of a shared narrative experience, like dnd, than a competitive game. Just try to make it fun for your opponent really.

Just don't be a Richard.... it's not that hard to just have fun and play the game. Losing is sometimes good.

That's an perfect opportunity to test bad models and units! As also giving tips to the other player against you during the match and helping him remember stuff about his own army (if you know it, of course!).

Also, there's no pressure to win - just a laidback game

Just gimp your list somehow. Really it's the easiest way. If the other player didn't bring a hard list and doesn't play it that way, it's not going to be fun for either of you.

If I realize I brought a list that way, I just remove a unit or two without saying anything during deployment. My go to was either my vindicator or my bike squad when playing SM. Just... don't put it down.

The thing here is that you will actually have a more enjoyable game at that point while still trying to win during the game, and your opponent will too.

Alternatively, as a casual player it's a great idea to bring a harder list if you're going to be playing pick up games. Really it's more about going into each game on the same page with the same expectations rather than what is a right way to play.

Competitive players/lists playing competitive players/lists have a lot of fun doing so, and casual players have a lot of fun playing casual players.

It's the reason why I love the occasional tournament: while I'm usually fairly casual, I have a blast just taking a hard as nails list and trying to "WAAC" all day. The fact that I often lose doesn't make it any less enjoyable for me, because everyone there is on the same page regarding what type of games we are playing and having fun.

You can still optimize the crap out of a bad list, just start with a flawed premise. For instance, a Dark Eldar might say 'I'm going to build the best list I can without spamming darklight weapons' and building around that restriction would involve figuring out which of the other anti-vehicle options you usually gloss over is the most point-efficient and how to work around whatever it is that makes it worse than darklight usually.

I don't know enough about AdMech to suggest an appropriate restriction, but maybe something like trying to make the focus of your army be CC would work. By making it about changing your overall goal rather than about not picking the optimal units in your usual 'army template', you should hopefully keep the fun optimization part of list-building while reducing your overall strength.

Have fun not playing an optimized list. I love my IG rough riders, but now way in hell would I bring them to a competitive game in 7th. Same with assault marines in my SM army. Especially with the former, most people had never seen them on the table, and seeing new units on the table was fun, even if they were pretty bad.

I tend to give my opponent tactical options, when I notice them making bad moves..

I just keep trying out new lists with different units i like, all of which i think are competitive, and be as nice as possible as i win games.

Well for the past year I've been playing Word Bearers with a core of Possessed. So I've been using a generally considered overcosted unit, and also learning how,to squeeze every drop out of it. Though I must confess, the new rules have bumped my planned World Eaters auxiliaries up the paint queue, and hereafter my answer to this question would be 'don't take a bunch of Dreadclaws containing Berzerkers and a Sorcerer'

I spent a few years working GW retail, I always enjoyed introducing people to the hobby and helping them move from learning rules to learning strategy, and it's never a chore to take off my general's hat and not use an opponent's collection as a punching bag. A few years ago I stopped seeing my army as an extension of myself and more a part of a spectacle that I helped direct, if you're not playing for stakes then learning to find slapstick humour in a charge roll coming up snake eyes makes this leisure activity more pleasant

steerpike92 wrote:
I'm just getting into 40k in my area and most players don't seem very competitive. Furthermore, there's already a reputation for Ad-Mech players as there's a that guy who has a hyper competitive list. I don't want to be that guy, but I'm also a naturally very competitive player. I'm a numbers guy and I make Mathhammer spreadsheets for fun. Bringing bad lists seems like an obvious option, but that takes a lot of the fun out of it for me.

What do you do when it's clear you're bringing a gun to a friendly knife fight?

Take a deliberately non competitive list. Treat it as a challenge. It's the only way you're going to enjoy it. Everything else involves you holding yourself back or sounding like a condescending jerk.

No one is going to blame you for giving it your all if you're taking a deliberately dumb list, at least, not most.

Your other option would be to deliberately give your opponent's a handicap by way of narritive missions. Say for example giving your opponent 100 power points to your 50, and theming it around an ambush or something. Narrative play often involves deliberately mismatched forces working to accomplish different goals. These would allow you to go "all out" while still making it a relatively fair fight as long as you design the missions appropriately.

That said, there are some out there, and I say this as a fairly casual player myself, who will demonize anyone who is playing this game with even the slightest intention of winning. There is no pleasing them, so don't get too worried about it. Some people just assume you're a tryhard if you're doing such evil things as

1. Playing the mission
2. Not taking deliberately dumb loadouts
3. Not charging your Tau/Guard into his Khorne beserkers and dying to a man in close combat/not letting your khorn beserkers get in a shoot out with his IG/Tau and just dying in the open
4. Using vehicles
5. Using monsters
6. Using infantry
7. Not using any of the above
8. playing IG
9. Playing filthy knife ea- I mean eldar
10. playing chaos
11. Playing any faction aside from your opponent's chosen faction
12. Actually knowing what models in your codex do off the top of your head
13. Asking to see the opponent's codex in order to familiarize yourself with their rules

Etc. etc. etc.

At a certain point just remember that you picked this game up to have fun. Sometimes there's just no pleasing people and you just need to find others with similar interests.

Usually I bag non-optimal units or pick out a mission that cripples my army and occassionally forget special rules for a match against a newbie.

If somebody wants to play a casual game to do something different I'll build a list of sub-par units but I will still be trying to win.

A Casual At All Costs player can kiss my ass. If you aren't going to try I'm going to crunch you once and never accept a second match against you.
I know two Casual At All Costs players and they're no more fun to play against than the WAAC tossers, at least if the WAAC tosser is a rules lawyer he or she is a useful practice partner.

I personally build gimmick armies; ones that focus around a particular theme over tactical effectiveness. Like my Bile's Mutant Army (filled with cultists, Spawns and one squad of max-size CSM as Bile's modified mutants) or my Retro Armies (adhering to only wargear and organization that were available at the time).

Of course this does sometimes run into situations where my army becomes hilariously OP because my opponent just so happen to be weak to the gimmick I brought.

I run the same list no matter what. It helps that I generally go for more "battleforce" type armies rather than skew; I believe some armies can build redundancy into their lists without strictly going for spam, and an army that takes "a few items of everything" in doubles teaches me and my opponent in turn.

If my opponent is less skilled, I'll be more friendly/laid-back. I'll forgive rules mistakes ("hey, weren't you going to move that squad?"), I won't be particular about taking full advantage of certain special rules, I may play faster rather than being meticulous about positioning, etc. If my opponent asks, I'll give pointers on how to have a better shot, etc.

I sometimes don't use everything I bring on the battlefield

Especially easy to do so if you bring Deep Strikers.

take a Narraitive list. I'm not saying play power levesle tc but rather "I'm taking 3 squads of tac marines, 1 of assault 1 of devestators and a rpedator, this is the gladius strikeforce under the p[ersonal command of my custom chapters greatest captain, captain bob!"

The only way I can think of is to bring a sub-optimal list, with units that are fluffy and fun to play with and against, rather than just the most competitive stuff. Like, in 7th edition, I might run a Tau list with a whole bunch of Fire Warriors rather than battlesuits.

Drink three beers before the game.

 MacPhail wrote:
Drink three beers before the game.

3 seems a tad low...

Maybe use a highlander style list and have to fill each alot and not have more of one non troop or transport.

Force you to use a few more varied options but keep you thinking etc working out best to use various options in lists you rarely use say like a on foot assault squads or such.

GodDamUser wrote:

 MacPhail wrote:
Drink three beers before the game.

3 seems a tad low...

Lightweight.
Or they never had the skills to wash away in the first place...lightweight seems nicer.

Your listed options aren't fun, therefore - Other:

You play... in character... and I don't mean just screaming WAAAAGH or FOR THE EMPEROR.

I mean, play as if this is an actual battle and you're the commander --- Maelstrom objectives are actual orders received via vox and those men under your command are real; they feel feel pain, have dreams, loved ones and hope to survive the war and receive a pension one day (lol). Hell, you may even know some of them (I name all my models after people I know, acquaintances for troops and the like and friends for special weapons/commanders/ sergeants etc.).

This creates an interesting dynamic where, for example, you need to seize an objective this turn to win the field but know it's a suicide mission for the squad that can make it (the enemy will clear it next turn).... but your best friend leads that squad. Suddenly it's personally not worth losing those men to take that point.

You're more likely to lose games because you're no longer a ruthless chess player but a considerate commander who starts making decisions based on preserving men rather than simply throwing them at objectives or to get linebreaker etc. I find it extremely fun and it works for me.

 lindsay40k wrote:
A few years ago I stopped seeing my army as an extension of myself and more a part of a spectacle that I helped direct, if you're not playing for stakes then learning to find slapstick humour in a charge roll coming up snake eyes makes this leisure activity more pleasant

I'm a filthy casual when it comes to miniature games, but this is the approach I take when I play games with my kids. When I play something like Arcadia Quest with my daughters, I find that I'm not trying to win the game but instead to direct the experience so that they find it just the right amount of challenging and fun. The game is more fun when everybody is still in the game and actively invested in playing. After an early setback, you can lose a player's attention and they start playing on their iPhones. I've seen it happen in one sided miniature games too.

The poll suggests that this is patronizing, but I don't think it is unless you are purposely misleading your opponent into thinking they are better at the game than they are. If you provide just the right amount of challenge, they are invested and having fun. They only care that you are going easy on them if they think they are playing at a higher level than they are - the patronizing comes from giving into that false pride rather than providing a fair experience (for their current level, at least).

(My wife once asked me if I went easy when I played games with her too. I, of course, said no. I may have been patronizing on this one occasion).

I voted Other- I change nothing!

I only won one game in 7th Ed out of about 8, so I'm obviously pre-gimped

Hopefully, I'll do better in 8th Ed... lol

Personally, I'd lean towards changing my lists a bit.

I'd probably describe my usual lists as semi-optimised, in that I mainly favour good units with solid loadouts (no surplus gear), but will also 'waste' points on less competitive (but fluffy) gear for my HQ(s), as well as often including one or two less good units that I happen to like. In essence, I understand what makes a good list but choose not to go all the way.

Anyway, if I thought my lists were still too good then I'd probably just go a bit further with my fluffy stuff. e.g.:
- I might use more characters than are strictly necessary.
- I might be more generous with gear for my characters and sergeants (e.g. I might give my IG sergeants and Commissars power weapons instead of just chainswords).
- I might try out one or more Special Characters that are fun but uncompetitive (e.g. Trazyn for Necrons).
- I might include more units that are less competitive but fluffy (or have models I like).
- I might try out other weapon options (e.g. plasma is probably best for guardsmen, but I love flamer models so I'd probably include more of those instead).
- With the new faction system, I might try mixing in units from other armies even though they don't synergise as well with what I;m using.
That sort of thing.

I might also try something suggested above and go for fun/fluff over tactics (e.g. playing very gung-ho guardsmen who relentlessly charge towards the enemy).

It is simple. To play with casual players and have fun you need to play like a casual player.
Use miniatures which look cool or that you like a lot, even if they aren't good ruleswise.
Build a list based on your favourite pieces of background. Now you can finally make that one fluffy list you have always wanted but never could because it wouldnt stand up to competitive lists.
There is lots of ways you can make fun army lists without them being optimised.

 MacPhail wrote:
Drink three beers before the game.

If the gap between the two players is so much that a quick talk about how to slightly tone down one list and tone up the other won't cut it, then yeah, I'd probably opt for a beerhammer game and let the alcohol do the tactics.