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.

Since I've came back to Warhammer I've played a couple of games. Haven't attended any tournaments yet, will soon. But after having played a couple of those friendly games I've realised something.

My army is built around a huge alpha strike. On board I've usually got shooty Dreadnoughts and in reserves Lias Issodon with up to 3x10 Sternguards. Usually 10 are armed with SIB, 12 c-plasma and the rest with SB. The turn they arrive they deal huge amounts of damage, but never enough to completely cripple my enemy in one turn. Just a little more than people are used to loosing in a turn. And different people react differently. Actually so far no one has vocally called me or my army anything bad, but I could see in their eyes a slight surrender, anger or some other kind of a negative feeling. And that's where I start to "forget" some little rules that could help me. Not optimise my targets perfectly. "it would be fun if I charged you" instead of running away and shooting more etc. And since my army is a complete glass cannon, it's very easy for my opponent to recover.

I guess this doesn't really matter much, cause these are just friendly games. But I hope it won't translate into tournament games. Also so far out of 6 games I've played this edition, I've won only 1. And it could be because so far, every one of them was against a completely new army. I'm just interested in your opinion on this matter. Should I feel bad, should I not?

Treating your opponents the way you are, by intentionally throwing games, is insulting to them, and robs you of a properly played game. Don’t abandon your deserved victories because your opponent gets upset that you dared to defeat them. If your opponent gets pissed when he loses, that’s on him, not you.

 Verviedi wrote:
Treating your opponents the way you are, by intentionally throwing games, is insulting to them, and robs you of a properly played game. Don’t abandon your deserved victories because your opponent gets upset that you dared to defeat them. If your opponent gets pissed when he loses, that’s on him, not you.

I second this. You always learn more from losing than winning. By intentionally losing your not helping anyone, not even yourself, get better.

At this point in the meta alpha strike forces are a normal thing that you have to plan for. You can plan for it different ways, but in the end if you run the same force over and over and your opponents never adjust to deal with it then really it is what it is, but don't just throw a game because you feel sorry your army is doing better than theirs.

while verviedi is right, he is also selfish.

In friendly games (not tournament or hard boyz) you should do your best to have close running games.

If im doing a bit too well with the dice rolls i tend to start moving some models into less optimal positions, not casting with all my psychers, and going for risky gambles. This can actually make the game more fun in the end depending on how you go about it.

Charging your rippers off of an objective to hit a predator with 2 wounds left for example. I have nicknamed those rippers "Thread Rippers" ever since.

macexor wrote:
Since I've came back to Warhammer I've played a couple of games. Haven't attended any tournaments yet, will soon. But after having played a couple of those friendly games I've realised something.

My army is built around a huge alpha strike. On board I've usually got shooty Dreadnoughts and in reserves Lias Issodon with up to 3x10 Sternguards. Usually 10 are armed with SIB, 12 c-plasma and the rest with SB. The turn they arrive they deal huge amounts of damage, but never enough to completely cripple my enemy in one turn. Just a little more than people are used to loosing in a turn. And different people react differently. Actually so far no one has vocally called me or my army anything bad, but I could see in their eyes a slight surrender, anger or some other kind of a negative feeling. And that's where I start to "forget" some little rules that could help me. Not optimise my targets perfectly. "it would be fun if I charged you" instead of running away and shooting more etc. And since my army is a complete glass cannon, it's very easy for my opponent to recover.

I guess this doesn't really matter much, cause these are just friendly games. But I hope it won't translate into tournament games. Also so far out of 6 games I've played this edition, I've won only 1. And it could be because so far, every one of them was against a completely new army. I'm just interested in your opinion on this matter. Should I feel bad, should I not?

Really confused about your post, are saying you've let your opponent win there games? Because the last thing you say is that you lost the games because it was a new army.

If you're saying you've let your last 5 losses win, that's not really ideal as you're just hampering your own experience. Heavy deep strike armies are really easy to play around with experience, your opponents will never learn if you let them win.

I think the best thing would do is play your normal game, but if you feel your opponents keeps making mistake constructively let them know what they could do differently next game to do better.

Who are you playing?

Some players would feel robbed and insulted if you let them win or don't try your hardest. Hit them as hard as you can, every time, every way you can.

Others want to take their army, and compete on the field with the units they *want* to field. List building isn't part of their competition. You can 'let them win' by tailoring a weaker list, but again, letting them win on the table is mean.

Many players just want to have fun on the tabletop. Some because they like the fluff. Some like the spectacle. Some like the "beer & pretzels" (social hour). The "casuals". You can typically slough power in these games (forget to deploy a unit, stow something in a transport all game, do some random charge that's suboptimal), but don't make it painfully obvious.
But every player is different. Even within a meta. I play different opponents differently, because they're interested in different things.

You can check out the 'Sportsman' threads for more details about how to ensure the other guy has fun.

I would suggest varying your list a bit, to see more of the game. You'd better understand others and what options they have (and can go back to your original list after trying out a few other styles). But that's secondary.

Surely if you've played 6 and won only 1 with an apparently awesome army... perhaps something is indeed up.

If you said something like I've played 6 games, won 3 in the first turn or two and in the other 3 you only lost due to silly mistakes on your side, I'd probably say you need to think about your impulses to do those silly mistakes. But you're not saying that... perhaps your army is too unbalanced?

On the other hand you are allowed to have as much fun as you want, as long as it doesn't diminish your opponents fun (too much). So if you enjoy trying new things, and experimenting with tactics, then go ahead. It's exactly what friendly matches are for.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
while verviedi is right, he is also selfish.

In friendly games (not tournament or hard boyz) you should do your best to have close running games.

If im doing a bit too well with the dice rolls i tend to start moving some models into less optimal positions, not casting with all my psychers, and going for risky gambles. This can actually make the game more fun in the end depending on how you go about it.

Charging your rippers off of an objective to hit a predator with 2 wounds left for example. I have nicknamed those rippers "Thread Rippers" ever since.

That's not a game, that's the kind of thing you do with a small child who can't handle a real game. What's the point in even playing if you're going to deliberately "forget" to use your units or make obviously stupid decisions to throw the game? Just line up your models, admire how pretty they are, and declare the "game" a draw. That way you get the exact 50/50 result you want, without the pretense of playing a game to get there.

Not sure why the OP is generating such hostile responses.

Really though I'd suggest going all out and seeing the response from the players.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Eihnlazer wrote:
while verviedi is right, he is also selfish.

In friendly games (not tournament or hard boyz) you should do your best to have close running games.

If im doing a bit too well with the dice rolls i tend to start moving some models into less optimal positions, not casting with all my psychers, and going for risky gambles. This can actually make the game more fun in the end depending on how you go about it.

Charging your rippers off of an objective to hit a predator with 2 wounds left for example. I have nicknamed those rippers "Thread Rippers" ever since.

That's not a game, that's the kind of thing you do with a small child who can't handle a real game. What's the point in even playing if you're going to deliberately "forget" to use your units or make obviously stupid decisions to throw the game? Just line up your models, admire how pretty they are, and declare the "game" a draw. That way you get the exact 50/50 result you want, without the pretense of playing a game to get there.

It is a game. Mabey your forgetting games are supposed to be fun? Crushing your opponent completely isn't fun (at least it isn't if your not childish). Even more importantly, its a social game which is meant to be enjoyed by more than one person.

This tends to be one of those discussions that can get rather polarized replies and people can get all kinds of silly as they leap to the extreme ends of opinions very fast.

FIRST thing is that the answer to this varies a lot depending on the situation at hand. We don't know your social group nor the club and heck you might very well be playing against kids/young teenagers.



I would say that intentionally throwing matches isn't a good thing. It's ok to do it in a getting started match with a new player who will benefit from the thrill of winning to bolster their confidence; and because chances are being so new they won't see you doing it.

But I think that its unhealthy for the social group if you continually throw matches by intent; people will catch on and then they'll feel cheated. That they are only winning because the awesome player with the awesome list is intentionally letting them win.


Instead I think there's a few approaches to consider for casual games

1) Use a different list. Esp if you use the same list a lot (or very similar themes). You've proved your point the list works; now try something else. Not a "weaker" list just a "different" list with a different mechanic approach and focus. You're not toning it down just changing things up.

2) Encourage your opponent to use a different list. If they have access to other models but are always taking a list that is seriously badly matched against yours encourage them to use different units to counter your army list.

3) If its not so much lists consider if terrain is giving you an unfair advantage. Changing up the terrain setup might well adjust things

4) If your opponent is just not a as good a player consider helping to teach them advance their game. Show them how they can overcome your list. Heck one the best ways to do that is to let them use your army for a game or two. Show them how your army works, but also how you'd counter it with theirs.
Don't just play, teach - that is going to take more time than a normal match and you might not even finish before you have to pack up. But the idea is that you're investing your time in boosting the local skill level of your club.

Heck try to involve a few people so that its a group thing not just you and one other person (sometimes even if a player isn't great, they were good enough in their local meta so being singled out like that can be a knock on their confidence/image/whatever - which might mean they just see you as a know-it-all and react negatively to the offer)

 Peregrine wrote:

 Eihnlazer wrote:
while verviedi is right, he is also selfish.

In friendly games (not tournament or hard boyz) you should do your best to have close running games.

If im doing a bit too well with the dice rolls i tend to start moving some models into less optimal positions, not casting with all my psychers, and going for risky gambles. This can actually make the game more fun in the end depending on how you go about it.

Charging your rippers off of an objective to hit a predator with 2 wounds left for example. I have nicknamed those rippers "Thread Rippers" ever since.

That's not a game, that's the kind of thing you do with a small child who can't handle a real game.

Well to be fair, some tournament players ACT like small children who can't handle a real game. But that isn't the point

The point is that friendly games are SUPPOSED to be friendly. If you are playing a casual game and your army starts dramatic overpowering your opponent, NIETHER players is getting what they deserve: a nice friendly game.
Even if the losing player has all the maturity in the world, losing that badly just has no value. You're not having fun with your models and you're not learning from any mistakes.
Likewise, the winning player is not being challenged.

This is why I take the attitude of attempting to win by a slim margin. It challenges me tactically and sometimes I even get to try things I wouldn't have in the past, thus I grow as a player.
It also allows the opponent to actually play the game rather than be told to remove his models. This ensures I have repeat opponents and those opponents get better over time.
It is a very rewarding experience.

-

 Eihnlazer wrote:
It is a game. Mabey your forgetting games are supposed to be fun? Crushing your opponent completely isn't fun (at least it isn't if your not childish). Even more importantly, its a social game which is meant to be enjoyed by more than one person.

but never enough to completely cripple my enemy in one turn. Just a little more than people are used to loosing in a turn.

OP isn’t running a broken list, I may not be familiar with the overpowered SM units, but I can say that Issodon, some Sternguard, and shooty dreads are not going to be stomping the opponent’s list. Is it a strong alpha strike? Yes. Will it fold if the opponent is competent and shoots back instead of folding? Also yes. This isn’t the sort of ridiculous IG leafblower that cripples your opponent first turn, it’s a strong alpha strike that’s vulnerable to death as soon as the opponent gets a good turn, and can’t really work more than once.

OP is already making enough concessions, proven simply by his statement about list power level.

Just a further point - it takes longer, more work and is generally harder to train your local players up - ergo to improve them.

At least longer than it is to tone your lists down; let them win; make mistakes; take handicaps etc...


HOWEVER if you improve your local players skill then its FAR more rewarding for you and them in the long run. Because you'll have better opponents to play against; and they'll enjoy having a great level of skill in playing with you and others.


Handicaps and giving them a bonus is a stop-gap solution. It works for a little but doesn't really deal with the issue and most often either or both sides quickly get a bit jaded with the experience.

The more skilled player gets jaded that they can't play the army and way they want; the less skilled jaded in that every win feels like cheating and any loss is even more moral damaging (because now they lost even when you're giving them all the advantage)

Personally I find lists that kill 1/2 o 2/3 of my army before my first turn about as much fun to play againt as a turd in the punchbowl.

Even if I can then kill the offending units with what's left it leaves a bad taste in the mouth, especially If I spent hours coming up with the list, and never getting to use most of it. Being Leafblowered off the table without getting a turn is arguably worse, but not by much.

In a tournament setting I expect them, because the focus is on stomping your opponent with as few losses on your side as possible for maximum score, but in a friendly game I would consider it a dick move.

Each to your own though.

Haven't read all the responses yet, but some of you have misunderstood the topic slightly. As I said in the threads name, I do it unintentionally. Somewhat.

I want to win. Winning makes you feel good. It's not that I intentionally do something stupid that would say "hey, have this victory here". I dunno how to better explain this.

macexor wrote:
Haven't read all the responses yet, but some of you have misunderstood the topic slightly. As I said in the threads name, I do it unintentionally. Somewhat.

I want to win. Winning makes you feel good. It's not that I intentionally do something stupid that would say "hey, have this victory here". I dunno how to better explain this.

If you're forgetting things in the heat of the game - TAKE NOTES
A simple method would be a tick list with each unit you've got on the table and a set of columns for each turn. Tick off each time you play the unit; then you can easily check the list and see which units you've missed

 Galef wrote:
It is a very rewarding experience.

Then you and I must have a different concept of "rewarding". Calculating how many units you need to "forget" to shoot with to let your opponent pretend that they had a chance to win isn't rewarding, it's condescending and pointless. If the game isn't going to be fun without deliberately attempting to lose to make your opponent feel better just end the game. You don't need to keep playing once the game has been a complete farce and the only reason to finish is to say that you finished.

When I show up to the FLGS I bring three lists with me. Tourney, Competitive, Fun. I ask my opponent what level list he wants to play against. I then use that list and try my hardest with no remorse. Like everyone above said, no one learns anything if you don't try. I don't ever try to lose with my fun list. It's just not that strong a of a list and uses units I wouldn't normally play in a tourney letting my shelved models get some table time. If they win, cool. They feel good, we both learn things, and next time I play them I suggest the next list up.

I would never play again with someone who I found out was sandbagging me. It's incredibly disrespectful.

Discuss how your opponent could have come back from a poor situation, or change your list to something that might make for a more engaging game, but don't go making bad decisions on the tabletop for the sake of disrespecting both yourself and your opponent.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
while verviedi is right, he is also selfish.

In friendly games (not tournament or hard boyz) you should do your best to have close running games.

If im doing a bit too well with the dice rolls i tend to start moving some models into less optimal positions, not casting with all my psychers, and going for risky gambles. This can actually make the game more fun in the end depending on how you go about it.

Charging your rippers off of an objective to hit a predator with 2 wounds left for example. I have nicknamed those rippers "Thread Rippers" ever since.

It isn't my job to make sure the game is close. It's my opponents. Otherwise, how are they going to improve if I continuously play poorly?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Galef wrote:
It is a very rewarding experience.

Then you and I must have a different concept of "rewarding". Calculating how many units you need to "forget" to shoot with to let your opponent pretend that they had a chance to win isn't rewarding, it's condescending and pointless. If the game isn't going to be fun without deliberately attempting to lose to make your opponent feel better just end the game. You don't need to keep playing once the game has been a complete farce and the only reason to finish is to say that you finished.

Exactly. It's basically like playing SSB and deciding that, since your friend sucks, you're gonna curb-stomp them with ROB, but forget to use Lasers and Tops. It's basically saying "I'm better than you and I don't even have to use everything I got".

I don't understand this. When I play games with friends that have obviously less skill than me, or just aren't as familiar with the game as me, be it real life games, wargames, boardagames or videogames, I tend to play "easy" on them. Not that I make stupid things, but normally I don't take the same things I would take or use in a tournament or competitive game. Or if the game is cooperative, we would play in more easy difficulties, and I won't carry them for all the game, doing everything for them.

The conception that playing less than your best EVERY SINGLE TIME is disrespectfull to your opponent, even playing in a casual and friendly setting, is a very radical way to see... this game, and in general, life. Some times people don't want to "become better" at a game, they just want to have some fun. I don't understand whats the problem with that.

I might de-optimize the list a bit as they learn to deal with different aspects, but I wouldn't intentionally lose. My first year playing I lost almost every single game (played once every 2 to 3 weeks). Then I finally figured out how to play and came up usually winning. If they had gone easy on me, I never would've learned how to improve my game. I would have just been winning against them, which would reinforce the bad play that I had been doing, and get stomped later. Since I would've learned the bad habits, it would also be harder to break them.

Years ago, the local game-of-choice was D&D Miniatures. One of our players was nationally ranked, got invites to GenCon, didn't have to slog through the Swiss rounds for a spot. In the entire time I played against him, I won one game. He never threw a game, never gave me less than his best. While I knew I had a 50/50 chance of winning against other players, I preferred playing him because, no matter what, I was going to learn something and improve my play.

The closest I've had to unintentionally letting my opponent win was back in 7th edition.
Me with Necrons Vs Orks.

I used a C'tan power on his battlewagon (Got the Strength D shot) Penned, and immobilised it (with one Hp damage-I thought D weapons were supposed to be OP)

I then ignored it for the rest of the game (Because no gunz, and the unit in it got out)

Totally failing to realise it was sat on an objective because it was (mostly) obscured from view by a ruin.....
(I think it ended up a draw in the end)

I totally get this, and have done it myself a few times. If I've turned up to a friendly game and it looks like I'm going to curb stomp the opponent it leads to a much less interesting game. One thing I've occasionally done is to bring on my reserves piecemeal rather than swamping the enemy turn one and alpha-striking them off the board. I'm pretty sure no one's ever twigged that I've thrown in a few deliberate errors like this. When the opponent has caught up it can often lead to a really close game with lots of interesting tactical choices for both sides.

I don't really see it as any worse than intentionally bringing a friendly list. It means I can try out strong combos and units and still both players can have a fun, close game.

If your seriously telling me you would get offended by someone trying to get more out of the game and make it enjoyable to both parties then I think that's a personal issue.

Your free to concede as soon as you see its a lost cause, and I wont hold it againgst you, but if you want to continue to play I'm not going to intentionally go all out and table you without giving you a chance.


If you want to play EVERY game with a tournament mentality and try to make no mistakes then I will never hold it againgst you, but more often than not, players want to have a relaxed atmosphere when enjoying their hobby.

We tend to grab Pick-Up games at my FLGS, so I will usually plan my list out before, but I dont know who I might be playing. If I see my list is too strong against a newer player, I might ease off certain things like Psychic Powers, or take a few more Risk/Reward decisions. One thing I sometimes do is leave enemy Characters for last.

Now, Ive gotten licked plenty times myself, and I'm not asking for the same leniency. It is usually due to poor list writing on my part or my opponent, so the Losses can show you what you need and what you dont need. But a good game means a good player next time. I always try to have a Post-Game chat about what worked, what didn't work etc with my opponent.

I wouldn't play a casual game the same way I would play a tournament game in the first place, but I still wouldn't have fun throwing a match entirely, and I wouldn't consider it fun if my opponent was doing that either. If winning is no big deal and it's all about just playing the game... then just play the game. If you lose, you lose. Just means it's time for a rematch.

I like what deviantduck said. Talk about your lists BEFORE the game. If you see that your opponent has a poorly written list, let them know that they might have difficulty and for what reasons, and offer to alter your list to make it more even.