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 just played a frustrating game of 40k, if you can even call it a game. I was running my Dark Angels, my opponent was running his Thousand Sons, and we were playing the second Fate of Konor campaign mission with 2000 point lists. We ended up only playing one turn before my opponent more or less ragequit because he felt like my list was cheesy and that has me worried that I was being TFG for bringing the list that I did to a friendly game.
Here's the list I used:

This is what my opponent was running:

We deployed as per the mission rules and he successfully siezed on me. I had placed my Razorback and Dreads inside Azrael's bubble, with my Intercessors wrapped around them to prevent charging. My Scouts and Assassin were in a nearby ruin, and my flyer was hiding in the corner. On his turn he moved all the Rhinos full of Rubrics up, as well as the Vindicator and the Disc Sorcerer. He dropped the Scarab Termies and the Termie Sorcerer close to my blob, near Ezekiel. He tried to cast some powers, but Ezekiel's deny dice were hot and he denied a couple of them. He did get Prescience off though, but he got perils despite his command reroll and the Termie Sorcerer took a couple of wounds. In the shooting phase, he killed all but 2 of the Intercessors thanks to some unlucky dice on his part. His Vindicator tried to kill the Razorback but again luck was against him and he passed the invul saves thanks to Azrael. He did manage to charge the Scarab Termies into that flank, charging into Ezekiel and the surviving Intercessors and piling into the Razorback to keep it from firing next turn. He wiped the Intercessors but managed only 1 wound against Ezekiel. However, he had now left his Termie Sorcerer (the Warlord of his army) out in the open due to flubbing his charge. I was quick to capitalize on this, flying my Nephy along the board edge nearby and dropping my Termies in such a way as they threatened his entire army potentially. I tried to cast Smite but he denied it, but I did get Aversion off to negate his Prescience on the Scarabs. In my shooting phase, my Nephilim did exactly one wound to his warlord, but one of my Deathwing squads finished him off. My Dreads blew the Vindicator away, and the second Termie squad ganked the Disc Sorcerer since he was the next closest enemy after the fallen Vindicator. It was at this point that my opponent called it. I definitely had the upper hand, although he was most likely going to kill Ezekiel in the next round of combat and still had all his Rubrics. I think we might have still had a decent game going, but my opponent didn't like how I was using all the special characters (the constant rerolls to hit really pissed him off). To be fair, this was only his second 8th edition game and his first with his Thousand Sons. I didn't think my list was that strong, although in hindsight it kind of was. Do you on Dakka think I was being a WAAC cheesemonger for using the list I did? I didn't know what his list was going to be; in fact I was expecting him to bring his Genestealer Cult army, so I didn't tailor against Thousand Sons at all. Should I have used other units instead of the named characters with their powerful aura abilities? My opponent felt that it gave me an unfair advantage since Thousand Sons don't have those powerful auras. One thing I will mention is that my opponent is a nice guy but has a reputation for getting salty when he loses at 40k; the guy at my FLGS today was telling me about how he always gets upset when people use stronger stuff against him.

TL;DR: Am I TFG for bringing a list with Azrael and other special characters to a friendly game against a fluffy list?

To me it sound more like you actually knew what you were doing and he heard about Rubrics not sucking on the internet and decided to spam them.

Not to mention I think he walked into a "I use Scissors, you use Rock" type of scenario. You have quite a number of things that would render his armor moot (and thus he probably was relying on his invul saves a lot of the time) while he seemed to have grossy overestimated the Infernobolts in his bolters. he isn't packing much in terms of anti-armor (1 Term with a Combi Melta, two hellfyre racks and a Vindicator is kinda tiny), so really anything other than naked stormtroopers would have done a number on him.

Guy just doesn't know yet how to play. He's just starting up 8th, which is very different, and his list really isn't that strong overall, though that shouldn't affect the enjoyment of this game. I think they just had a combination of bad tactics and bad luck and a (mostly) not great list. Your list is stronger (though not overly strong), you have more experience, and you were able to just cream his clock on a few rolls.

What's usually more important in these situations is how people acted, and not their lists. As they're very new, were you letting them take things back that were obvious "they're used to a different system" mistakes? Did you help point out some of the changes to the game? Did you make an effort to make the game enjoyable for them?

If you did, well, then that person needs to grow up a bit and not rage-quit their first couple of games when they have no idea yet how things work.

I am biased, but I think it is hard to run Dark Angels without some of the characters. Buffs are big in this edition, so he should get used to it and soldier on through the game.

Unless he asked you specifically "Can you take an easy list?" I think you did fine. You didn't bring anything overly cheesy, though your list was good.

Assuming you were a polite and sportsmanlike opponent... I see no issues with your behavior.

That you are questioning how you're perceived is already a great sign of how self-aware you are - which already leans you deeply away from TFG category.

Frankly your opponent sounds more like he is and will be one. To raegquit in the first turn regardless is generally horrible sportsmanship - particularly when he still had a pretty large chunk of his army intact. Looking beyond whether his list or tactics were sound he played a high-risk, high-reward opening with the deep strike charge then seemed upset that it didn't win him the game right there.

And I guess Magnus isn't a thing for TSuns. Definitely not you in this case OP.

God I hate it when people quit games early.

feth this guy. Never play his whiney ass again.

It sounds like it was a combination of a bad matchup for him (poor unit choices maybe too) and from the sound of it he had some poor dice rolls.

It's not good to ragequit, but OTOH if you're not enjoying a game why bother.

Seems like his list was poorly thrown together and it sounds like he had some pretty bad luck on the dice.

Calling your auras "unfair" is a tad ridiculous though, guy just seems like a very sore loser.

I dont think you brought a waac list, definitely a strong list but not waac, I would be pissed if i was you haha.

I don't think you're a WAAC or TFG for the list you're using

but the list you'r using is VASTLY more powerful than the list he was using

Like INSANELY more powerful

Like, If you gave him an additional 1000 points to play, if he kept using the same list style. He would probably still lose.

How could you go wrong by building a good list and playing it effectively?
Assuming you acted with sportsmanship and well manners, it sounds as your opponent is a poor player lacking all of the above.

Unless otherwise decided upon, how can he fault you for your list or how you play it? Its perfectly fine to setup and feel that for whatever reason you are behind (list compositions, deployment zones, scenario etc) but this is all part of the game...Part of ANY game.

You are absolutely not TFG. You brought a competitive list and he brought a weak list. The outcome was inevitable.

As other have said, assuming you were polite, he was probably more mad at himself, but lack the emotional intelligence (what we used to call maturity) to see the fault was within his own list/tactics and not you.

Often others project their anger outward and find some perceived problem with you to focus that frustration on. I used to see it all the time in online games as well--people want the game to be what they want it to be, and do not play it as it is. These same people deride others for abandoning their playstyle for the new meta (in online games this is called "flavor of the month," here often referred to as "netlists") and get made because they can't or won't adapt.

Based on his rep, it seems like this is the case.

Had he not thrown a temper tantrum, you could have discussed ways he could improve his army. I often find friendly discussions with players who just tabled me to be the best chance to improve.

Sounds more like your opponent was a dick. I don't understand rage quitting. Sometimes "your guys" lose, what fun would it be to always win?

When I am for sure losing I set mini goals like seeing if Calgar can stomp Dante and Asteroth together (he can), or how many LC Termies can my two remaining Assault Scouts take out (zero, wounded one).

You can still have little victories without winning the game.

So many named characters?
Why?
I wouldn't have quit unless there is something else wrong.
But I would have teased you for leaning on cheese.
Good naturedly of course...
IMO named characters should be used only with explicit consent of the opponent.
And frankly I would much rather game against and with your opponent's army than your ' list'.
I can understand both sides however.
But yours was not a friendly game list really.
Not in my mind anyways...

 jeff white wrote:
So many named characters?
Why?
I wouldn't have quit unless there is something else wrong.
But I would have teased you for leaning on cheese.
Good naturedly of course...
IMO named characters should be used only with explicit consent of the opponent.
And frankly I would much rather game against and with your opponent's army than your ' list'.
I can understand both sides however.
But yours was not a friendly game list really.
Not in my mind anyways...

Jeff, my spirit agrees with you, but this is 100% the opposite in the game for years and years now. I have been at this since 1994, and I agree it's a better game without primarchs trudging around in minor skirmishes, but that is simply not the case anymore.

On the note of friendly vs competitive, this is such an abstract concept that it barely is worth discussing. It's a pretty standard DA list. Should he just bring tacticals in rhinos and some bikes?

Where is the line?

 jeff white wrote:
So many _______________?
Why?
I wouldn't have quit unless there is something else wrong.
But I would have teased you for leaning on cheese.
Good naturedly of course...
IMO ______________ should be used only with explicit consent of the opponent.
And frankly I would much rather game against and with your opponent's army than your ' list'.
I can understand both sides however.
But yours was not a friendly game list really.
Not in my mind anyways...

The above argument has been used on every unit from the mighty Baneblade to Magnus to the lowly Scion and even Conscripts now.

Everyone has their own opinion of "cheese."

The way the rules are now I'll fight any army at least once. If they want to bring a Warhound to fight my Scout Battalion that's fine, I'll give it my best.

You do not have a WAAC list.

Azrael IS strong - to be sure - he is the strongest HQ - in my opinion - in the entire space marine universe. Stronger than Draigo, Dante, Calgar, you name it. That 4++ bubble is ridiculous, coupled with reroll hits.

Looking at your opponent's list, though, he is in an entirely different ballpark. But that's not really your fault unless you knew his list before the game and then brought Azrael.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say he probably is new to 8th edition. His list and tactics are simply not compatible with what the game is at this point. I would have crushed this guy completely, too.

I would not call you TFG for this. TFG is not something you can be in a single game.

But I can understand why your enemy is salty. I'm not sure about Dark Angels, but I guess what you brought is among the strongest you can field with pure DA.
That is not a bad thing, what I think is bad about your list:
I don't think there is a way to have fun when playing against that list. Either you shoot down the enemy list without a chance for him to do enough damage to your excessively buffed gunline or you the game ends after 2 turns when your opponent plays a list that is able to drown your gunline in cheap melee bodies like orks or gaunt-heavy nids.

I wouldn't be too discouraged, your list isn't all that bad.

The game wasn't even over and despite obviously having a bit of an uphill battle to fight he still had options. I think this mentally separates the good generals from the great, I mean where would the world be if the Allies had given up in North Africa after they had been almost completely crushed by Rommel in the War, you fight to the end because you never know what can happen.

It's unfortunate you will always get sore losers and sore winners in all competitive activities in life (no matter how casual a game is it is still a game of winners and losers).

If this was bad I'd love to see him at my club. Where I play my lists are considered fluffy and even I had a Chaos player complaining about Guilliman being OP when he was accompanied exclusively by tactical squads and a couple Dreadnoughts when on the same day we had other tables with Guilliman and Assault Cannon Razorback spam, Guilliman and Hellblaster with Ancient spam and Wraith spam(all the more amusing by the fact that he had multiple M/L Havock units with aegis defence line cover and spammed bezerkers). He ended up kicking and throwing stuff when Guilliman won combat against a unit of bezerkers, despite taking wounds.

Playing marines without named characters is sometimes handicapping yourself so don't worry about it too much. The fact that you're thinking about whether you had resorted an OP list and if you need to tone it down is the best sign. I'll tell you now the answer there is no.

Keep on doing what you're doing, you're obviously just more efficient at list building and utilising that list than your opponent.

You can take Azreal and have a good chance to win - or you can not take him and have a good chance to lose.

nothing is stopping this guy from including magnus in his list.

 Marmatag wrote:
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say he probably is new to 8th edition. His list and tactics are simply not compatible with what the game is at this point. I would have crushed this guy completely, too.

He is new to 8th. This was only his 2nd game in the new edition. His first was also against me, but he was using a somewhat better Genestealer Cult list and my list was not as strong (no Azrael, for example). That game he was much less salty, but the salt was there, again mainly due to my characters. Maybe what I need to do is if we play again (and I probably will because I'm a softie) actually help him out more with learning good basic strategies for 8th. He didn't protect his characters enough, and I made him pay for it when what I should have done was explain how that's a bad idea in this edition. He wants to get Magnus for his Thousand Sons but says he doesn't have the money right now. I won't go into it out of respect for his privacy, but he's probably right about that. He's just very picky about how he wants the game to be, to the point of wanting to run his own tournaments with special characters and certain other "problem" things banned.

In future, I did tell him that we could discuss lists before playing next time so I don't just wipe him out. Since he is newer to 8th than I am maybe I should go easy on him until he finds his feet, then I can haul out the tougher stuff. He does need to adjust his attitude, though, as quitting after just one turn is lame. I don't do this even if it is painfully obvious that I'm going to lose the game.

Sounds a bit patronising.

Perhaps challenge him to a game where neither of you use any special characters.

He took none in a Thousand Sons list (Magnus and Ahriman are pretty good too) and unless I'm mistaken Genestealer Cults don't have any special characters either.

Meanwhile you took three special characters. Good ones.

Just play him without any special characters and see how it goes. You might lose who cares, you've already humiliated this guy twice.

Well its nice that you all are rallying to OP but to me the whole story looks like that one guy new to edition brought very basic list against kind of far more refined list and then refined list guy proceeded to stomp the simple list. And apparently stomping happened in very unapologetic manner.
Also taking out those dreadnoughts with his list with vindicator dead is kind of uphill battle. Especially if they have ++ aura too. But hey, apparently last edition people were also supposed to smile and enjoy when Tau shoots them off the table in 2-3 turns without ragequitting, so Tau player doesnt feel bad about himself.

This game (Warhammer 40k, not the match) is inherently unbalanced. Accept it, or quit Warhammer 40k. Period.

Your opponents list looks more fluffy than filled with the best index selections - a thematic list, but a basic one. He doesn't have many options for dealing with multiple kinds of threats; armor, hordes, flyers - this is a listbuilding problem.

Your army is fine. Never let anyone tell you what you can and can't play - if it's casual play, its your opponents choice if they'd like to play your armor - it's on them.If it's a tournament, feth their opinion; tournaments are where you get no room to complain. Bring your best (attitude and/or army), or go home.

Well its nice that you all are rallying to OP but to me the whole story looks like that one guy new to edition brought very basic list against kind of far more refined list and then refined list guy proceeded to stomp the simple list. And apparently stomping happened in very unapologetic manner.
Also taking out those dreadnoughts with his list with vindicator dead is kind of uphill battle. Especially if they have ++ aura too. But hey, apparently last edition people were also supposed to smile and enjoy when Tau shoots them off the table in 2-3 turns without ragequitting, so Tau player doesnt feel bad about himself.

It was a listbuilding problem, plain and simple. His opponents options were "learn from this game" or "complain". He chose the latter - I understand that some people don't have a lot of different models, and the editions always change up what's best; that's just Warhammer 40k.

Pony up cash or sell your army - and if you play for fun or theme, you have to understand you're handicapping yourself, and can't complain.

No one likes the way GW balances, or the speed at which they do it - but, we all have to deal with it. Quit the game, or quit complaining. Or, get a job at GW, work your way up the corporate ladder, and rebalance the game yourself.

 3orangewhips wrote:


Jeff, my spirit agrees with you, but this is 100% the opposite in the game for years and years now. I have been at this since 1994, and I agree it's a better game without primarchs trudging around in minor skirmishes, but that is simply not the case anymore.

On the note of friendly vs competitive, this is such an abstract concept that it barely is worth discussing. It's a pretty standard DA list. Should he just bring tacticals in rhinos and some bikes?

Where is the line?

Yeah, there is no "line" - it remains a matter for discourse.
This sort of meta-level conversation, about what is fair and balanced,
between people who are at the same time invested in the outcome of their discussion,
is what I always thought to be the virtue of wargames in general and 40k in particular,
in part because of the level of investment, both monetary and in terms of time/energy.

This discourse is practice for instances when such skills at arbitration are seriously important,
such as in civil discourse over the fairness and efficacy of laws and regulations in civil society.
Frankly, 40k is valuable to me from a social virtue standpoint, simply for this reason -
there are very few opportunities for young people to develop these skills.
40k affords that opportunity, along with the opportunity for the development of other skills and talents.

So, about the "line", well, personally I try to encourage individual input and development.
I would rather hang out with people who might, for example, use a named character statline to represent their personally created, and lovingly painted and converted character model than some chap with off the shelf named dudes based green, washed and with boltgun metal slathered over the steely parts.
And I would enjoy time spent with others who will challenge themselves to make it without recourse to named characters from the standard corporate pulp at all. The universe is simply too big for the same half-dozen of the usual suspects to show up at every engagement. And, practically, I myself would tire from a life exploiting tricks and loopholes, and I tire quickly of others who choose to live that way, as well.
This is just my bent.
Sure, I would entertain a tosser with the latest netlist hotness.
But, as indicated above, he/she may not enjoy the ribbing for lacking the virtues that I find redeeming.
This is of course the right of each individual, to aspire to those virtues that he/she finds most integral to the life worth living.
By the way, I am a philosophy professor (retired) in real life - can you tell?





Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ghorgul wrote:
Well its nice that you all are rallying to OP but to me the whole story looks like that one guy new to edition brought very basic list against kind of far more refined list and then refined list guy proceeded to stomp the simple list. And apparently stomping happened in very unapologetic manner.
Also taking out those dreadnoughts with his list with vindicator dead is kind of uphill battle. Especially if they have ++ aura too. But hey, apparently last edition people were also supposed to smile and enjoy when Tau shoots them off the table in 2-3 turns without ragequitting, so Tau player doesnt feel bad about himself.

Yeah, this is basically my understanding of the situation.
If the losing opponent had somewhere else to be, and maybe a girl/boy friend waiting for him/her,
then I can easily understand why that person felt like they had wasted their time and were ready to cut their losses short.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 XT-1984 wrote:

Perhaps challenge him to a game where neither of you use any special characters.
...
Just play him without any special characters and see how it goes. You might lose who cares, you've already humiliated this guy twice.

This seems most reasonable to me, if the OP is interested in smoothing things over.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZergSmasher wrote:
He wants to get Magnus for his Thousand Sons but says he doesn't have the money right now. I won't go into it out of respect for his privacy, but he's probably right about that. He's just very picky about how he wants the game to be, to the point of wanting to run his own tournaments with special characters and certain other "problem" things banned.

In future, I did tell him that we could discuss lists before playing next time so I don't just wipe him out. Since he is newer to 8th than I am maybe I should go easy on him until he finds his feet, then I can haul out the tougher stuff. He does need to adjust his attitude, though, as quitting after just one turn is lame. I don't do this even if it is painfully obvious that I'm going to lose the game.

Money is the cause of a great deal of stress, for everyone in every situation within the current economy.
I read a long time ago that 86% of marital conflicts originate due to money problems, i.e. the lack thereof.

That said, I find it most unappealing that you would judge him to need to adjust his attitude.
Frankly, if this was your tact, with me, I would have likely not played that second game.
And rather advised that it is yours in need of adjustment.

Considering the OP seems to be willing to do anything to get a decent game in, while the other guy came up with a sub-par list, looked like he was gonna lose, then ragequit, I do have to agree that the OP's opponent needs an attitude adjustment. The game is for the enjoyment of both parties, and the OP seems to be willing to bend over backwards to accommodate his opponent, while it doesn't seem like the same is happening in reverse.

On a tangent though, to the OP, I also dislike special characters, but not because they're powerful. I just find it incredibly weird that the leader of the opposing army is waltzing into some random skirmish. Like Calgar and Guilliman probably should be coordinating a system-wide crusade, not putting down some random eldar shenanigans on some backwater planet. I am probably gonna get bludgeoned for saying this, but I think special characters should be restricted to Narrative games and not have points for matched play for that reason, since they're suppose to be narrative. Plus, it gives a chance for people to make unique characters for their own armies from the generic characters. I have seen a dozen or so Guillimans, Calgars and Catos, but nary a single nameless Ultramarines Captain in a long time (amusingly though I see a bunch of unnamed Techmarines, but that's only because the Master of the Forge and the Master of the Apothecarion are the only Ultramarines to not have models). So this may be his dislike for characters. I could be completely wrong and he's just a scrub for disliking the unique ability of characters, which, to be fair, can be unbalanced at times simply because you can't replicate it otherwise.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Considering the OP seems to be willing to do anything to get a decent game in, while the other guy came up with a sub-par list, looked like he was gonna lose, then ragequit, I do have to agree that the OP's opponent needs an attitude adjustment. The game is for the enjoyment of both parties, and the OP seems to be willing to bend over backwards to accommodate his opponent, while it doesn't seem like the same is happening in reverse.

On a tangent though, to the OP, I also dislike special characters, but not because they're powerful. I just find it incredibly weird that the leader of the opposing army is waltzing into some random skirmish. Like Calgar and Guilliman probably should be coordinating a system-wide crusade, not putting down some random eldar shenanigans on some backwater planet. I am probably gonna get bludgeoned for saying this, but I think special characters should be restricted to Narrative games and not have points for matched play for that reason, since they're suppose to be narrative. Plus, it gives a chance for people to make unique characters for their own armies from the generic characters. I have seen a dozen or so Guillimans, Calgars and Catos, but nary a single nameless Ultramarines Captain in a long time (amusingly though I see a bunch of unnamed Techmarines, but that's only because the Master of the Forge and the Master of the Apothecarion are the only Ultramarines to not have models). So this may be his dislike for characters. I could be completely wrong and he's just a scrub for disliking the unique ability of characters, which, to be fair, can be unbalanced at times simply because you can't replicate it otherwise.

I can understand your reasoning for objecting to special characters for sure, although I don't entirely agree with it, but that's a discussion for another time. My opponent's attitude comes from the fact that I'm getting to reroll so many misses. He was just disgusted by how good my aura abilities were (and let's face it, Azrael gets perhaps the best aura abilities other than Roboute Guilliman himself), and unhappy that Thousand Sons don't really have anything like that. I'm not even sure that's true. I recommended maybe using Daemon Princes for their reroll abilities, but I'm not sure he even heard me. I'd offer to work with him specifically on how to make a better list, but I'm not sure he'd even be willing to hear me out. I'm at least going to try though, and if it still doesn't work out I'll just have to stop playing him.

You brought Azrael, that's enough to roll over any list that isn't built seriously.

Next time play a smaller game since hes new. The more points the easier it is to be unbalanced imho. Or try switching armies and see how that goes, maybe he will stomp you and the true disparity of the lists will be displayed.
Last edition my second game ever of 40k i had my list all out, was a tau list, like 3 crisis, 2 ghostkeels, 2 broadsides and rest fire warriors and drones. Guy purposely made a termie heavy list in a land raider, since i told him my loadout and i literally had nothing in my list that could touch his landraider. Bright a librarian also, his excuse was he hated tau, but he just wanted to be a dick.
That was a waac guy, he knew it was my second game and still did it. Your list is strong but you dont seem to be tfg.