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.
Did anyone see the article on BoLS about cheating at tournies? One of the points was about Castellan cheating in regards to House rules, and their detachments. Basically this seems to have resulted from a top 8 finalist having a bit of a tizzy when he got called out on it. But I can't find the specifics?
Did anyone watch the feed and see what they were referencing? I need to review to see if it was a honest mistake or if it was infact cheating. To be honest, shouldn't this sort of thing be handled clearly in the army list reviews? If you walk up to a game, with x unit, and don't know the rules, isn't that on the player?
I don't want to name the player, for interest of shaming. But I think you can likely find it off a search of the googles or at least reviewing the article on BoLS.
I can tell you unequivocally that not all instances are deliberate. I will share with you my LVO story.
It was my first 40K tournament (at least since I played earlier in life around 3rd edition), and my first ITC games. I usually play casual with friends and so hadn't built a "competitive" list before. Knowing knights are an issue, I took 6 harlequin Skyweaver jetbikes in an auxiliary detachment for my Craftworlders. No problem I thought, I'll eat the CP as I felt the tradeoff was worth it. So I played my first 3 games day one vs 3 very cool guys, in one game I put the bikes into the webway, in the others I'd spent a CP to put prismatic blur on them. No problems, right? Game 4 I play a guy who seemed very experienced tourny wise (think he knew my list better than I did, lol) and he calmly pointed out that I couldn't use strategems on my harlequins as it is an auxiliary detachment (I was contemplating putting them in webway). Wait, what? He said to look in my codex at strategems page and sure enough, there it was written at top of page. I've been playing 8th since it's inception and have never noticed this. Sure I knew I'm losing CPs by taking this unit, but I was never aware of any other drawbacks since I'd only played casual games before and never taken an auxiliary detachment. None of my local guys were aware and mentioned it when reviewing my list, we just didn't know.
Of course, now I feel like crap for my first 3 opponents. Would it have changed the final outcome of the games? Very possibly, maybe not. Either way, it's still a mistake on my behalf, not my opponents for not knowing this. I went 0-3 in my second day so I'd like to say that was karma, but even if I went 3-0 the second day I would have absolutely pulled out of any playoff game if I was fortunate to have got that far as it would have been disingenuous to believe I had reached that far "cleanly'. All I can do at this point is apologize to my first 3 opponents and hope I see them next year to buy them an enormous beer.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Did anyone see the article on BoLS about cheating at tournies? One of the points was about Castellan cheating in regards to House rules, and their detachments. Basically this seems to have resulted from a top 8 finalist having a bit of a tizzy when he got called out on it. But I can't find the specifics?
Did anyone watch the feed and see what they were referencing? I need to review to see if it was a honest mistake or if it was infact cheating. To be honest, shouldn't this sort of thing be handled clearly in the army list reviews? If you walk up to a game, with x unit, and don't know the rules, isn't that on the player?
I don't want to name the player, for interest of shaming. But I think you can likely find it off a search of the googles or at least reviewing the article on BoLS.
If I remember correctly it was in the Tau vs imperium soup game. I don't remember exactly what happened (i also don't play imperial knights so don't know all their rules super well). But essentially the IK player attempted to use a strategem that wasn't technically available to him because of his house. What that arguing was about was if he should get refunded on the command points used or not. I guess the question now is if he had used that combo of a strategem in other games. Either way i dont really classify this as falt out cheating this is more of a yellow card vs a red card
I didn't see it, but it was mentioned in another thread:
Spoiler:
Zande4 wrote: Someone can probably sum it up better than me for the ones more familiar with House Raven rules but i'll try to get the jist of it.
Ad Mech player got a lucky seize and was stomping the Tau player. Tau player made a mis-move earlier in the game and the Ad Mech wouldn't let him do a re-do.
Later in the game, the Ad Mech player spent 3 command points to make his Castellan's weapons count as assault so he could advance and still shoot. He advanced 1'' to try and get LoS on the Broadsides.
Tau player pointed out he couldn't use that power or something because it was the wrong house. I'm unsure on this part because I don't know their rules well. He was correct so the ad-mech player asked for a re-do, so he could both undo the advance and get his command points back.
Tau player said no, which is fair because he did the same earlier.
Admech player started getting really angry, red faced etc. Judge was called over and said the Castellan advanced so it can't shoot and no re-do but he does get the command points back.
Personally I don't think he should have got the command points back because he had already declared he was using them.
Game was pretty tense for the next 2 turns or so.
There seems to be some confusion over what a single Knight in a Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment is entitled to (in terms of Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
Personally, I'd like to see Tos make participants use units that are clearly marked differently than other units of the same type. I see more of the 2nd and 3rd things mentioned and a lot of the time it is an honest mistake. But there have been times when I've played (not just 40K) that somehow that unit on the right became what I was sure had special rules that only applied to the unit on the left. The other problem comes from when those 2 units intermix. Somehow, somebody ends up closer/farther from where the unit was supposed to be all to the controlling players favor.
I'm not saying use different paint jobs but maybe different colors on the base or maybe even different scenic stuff on the bases (one has red bushes the other blue).
beast_gts wrote: I didn't see it, but it was mentioned in another thread:
There seems to be some confusion over what a single Knight in a Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment is entitled to (in terms of Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
Doesn't sound like "confusion", it sounds like he just didn't know his rules...which I'd argue is worse than cheating.
beast_gts wrote: I didn't see it, but it was mentioned in another thread:
There seems to be some confusion over what a single Knight in a Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment is entitled to (in terms of Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
Doesn't sound like "confusion", it sounds like he just didn't know his rules...which I'd argue is worse than cheating.
Not knowing your rules is bad, but cheating is worse. I'd rather someone be ignorant than malevolent.
beast_gts wrote: I didn't see it, but it was mentioned in another thread:
There seems to be some confusion over what a single Knight in a Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment is entitled to (in terms of Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
Doesn't sound like "confusion", it sounds like he just didn't know his rules...which I'd argue is worse than cheating.
Not knowing your rules is bad, but cheating is worse. I'd rather someone be ignorant than malevolent.
Exactly. At least with ignorance you can rectify for the future.
Cheating is part of a core personality and attitude. Granted I'll admit as a kid I wasn't the most honest when it came to board games, but I'm definitely ashamed of that. To this day, I would even consider conceding a game if I misinterpreted in my favor and it led to me winning.
beast_gts wrote: I didn't see it, but it was mentioned in another thread:
There seems to be some confusion over what a single Knight in a Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment is entitled to (in terms of Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
Doesn't sound like "confusion", it sounds like he just didn't know his rules...which I'd argue is worse than cheating.
The IK Codex says "ABILITIES - IMPERIAL KNIGHTS Detachments (excluding Super-heavy Auxiliary Detachments) gain the following abilities: [KNIGHT LANCES/HOUSEHOLD TRADITIONS]" so it can't be run as House Raven (and I can't see that it's been FAQ'd) - but if that's the case how did he get to game 4(?) before someone called him on it - did none of his other opponents or the judges notice?
I found a reddit thread the pretty clearly laid out the events, and the people involved.
Player in question Had a Castellan, which I think we can all agree was the "central unit" of his whole game plan. No one brings a Titanic unit and uses it as chaff. He needs to know the rules of his core strategy mechanic.
That being the case, he began the game and denied his opponent a "rewind" on a rules error, when his opponent asked for one. Then, when his error came into play, he asked for a rewind after his opponent called him on it. He was denied a rewind, in turn. His opponent actually stated that the player in question had made this "mistake" in all his previous games, and had received warnings previously that day regarding this. Then the player in question begins shouting and throwing a temper tantrum, that not only makes it onto the game microphone, but also on one of the neighboring game's recordings as well. After shouting at the TO for about 5 minutes, he is allowed to keep his mistake, AND given back his CP that he spent on the "mistake".
To me this is pretty damning. Having one mistake, fine. accept it, learn from it, move on. Do not make a scene, throw a temper tantrum, and act like a jackbass all after receiving multiple warnings for the exact thing you are trying to do again.
Other people who have played this player state he is a jerk and a clock bully, who has used this "mistake" in tournament settings before.
Just my opinion, but this wasn't a mistake. This was one player trying and succeeding to get away with rules bloat, and having a hissy fit when called on it. Case and point - reports are TO's removed the videos of his game, and started banning people on the chat mentioning the event, or the player's name.
beast_gts wrote: I didn't see it, but it was mentioned in another thread:
There seems to be some confusion over what a single Knight in a Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment is entitled to (in terms of Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
Doesn't sound like "confusion", it sounds like he just didn't know his rules...which I'd argue is worse than cheating.
The IK Codex says "ABILITIES - IMPERIAL KNIGHTS Detachments (excluding Super-heavy Auxiliary Detachments) gain the following abilities: [KNIGHT LANCES/HOUSEHOLD TRADITIONS]" so it can't be run as House Raven (and I can't see that it's been FAQ'd) - but if that's the case how did he get to game 4(?) before someone called him on it - did none of his other opponents or the judges notice?
You can run a knight as House Raven in an aux detachment, you just don't get the "chapter tactics" of advancing and shooting (pg 90 vs pg 106). It'll still qualify for the relic and strats (since it has the right key words), so the incident must have centered around him trying to use the advance+shoot household tradition when he couldn't.
This allegedly happened at major tournaments, with players reportedly being called on it and claiming they misread the rule. I’ve seen it happen enough to doubt that all instances of it happening are innocent.
This goes a bit over my understanding of english, so can someone help me. How can something happened allegedly aka we don't know if it happened, to in the next sentance go to I have seen it happen, and not just one time, but often enough to be able to discern this being done as part of cheating and being done by someone with not full grasp of rules?
Plus if this is about LVO why didn't he just use named and say X cheated, and not play around with words. Because either there is a problem or there is no problem.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Zande4 wrote: Someone can probably sum it up better than me for the ones more familiar with House Raven rules but i'll try to get the jist of it.
Ad Mech player got a lucky seize and was stomping the Tau player. Tau player made a mis-move earlier in the game and the Ad Mech wouldn't let him do a re-do.
Later in the game, the Ad Mech player spent 3 command points to make his Castellan's weapons count as assault so he could advance and still shoot. He advanced 1'' to try and get LoS on the Broadsides.
Tau player pointed out he couldn't use that power or something because it was the wrong house. I'm unsure on this part because I don't know their rules well. He was correct so the ad-mech player asked for a re-do, so he could both undo the advance and get his command points back.
Tau player said no, which is fair because he did the same earlier.
Admech player started getting really angry, red faced etc. Judge was called over and said the Castellan advanced so it can't shoot and no re-do but he does get the command points back.
Personally I don't think he should have got the command points back because he had already declared he was using them.
Game was pretty tense for the next 2 turns or so.
There seems to be some confusion over what a single Knight in a Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment is entitled to (in terms of Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
Out of curiosity what strategem he was trying to use? Imperial knights don't have such strategem(1CP one gives the HEAVY STUBBERS for all knights such ability at -2 to hit but I doubt that was issue and 3CP...). Googling up don't see admech strategems having one either.
Would be thinking he was trying to use raven house trait with lone knight(illegal) but that doesn't cost 3CP.
This allegedly happened at major tournaments, with players reportedly being called on it and claiming they misread the rule. I’ve seen it happen enough to doubt that all instances of it happening are innocent.
This goes a bit over my understanding of english, so can someone help me. How can something happened allegedly aka we don't know if it happened, to in the next sentance go to I have seen it happen, and not just one time, but often enough to be able to discern this being done as part of cheating and being done by someone with not full grasp of rules?
Plus if this is about LVO why didn't he just use named and say X cheated, and not play around with words. Because either there is a problem or there is no problem.
Well if he doesn't have solid proof accusing them publicly could technically even be cause for legal trouble wouldn't it? Especially in America. There's court charges for weirder things in there.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/14 19:25:49
I found a reddit thread the pretty clearly laid out the events, and the people involved.
Player in question Had a Castellan, which I think we can all agree was the "central unit" of his whole game plan. No one brings a Titanic unit and uses it as chaff. He needs to know the rules of his core strategy mechanic.
That being the case, he began the game and denied his opponent a "rewind" on a rules error, when his opponent asked for one. Then, when his error came into play, he asked for a rewind after his opponent called him on it. He was denied a rewind, in turn. His opponent actually stated that the player in question had made this "mistake" in all his previous games, and had received warnings previously that day regarding this. Then the player in question begins shouting and throwing a temper tantrum, that not only makes it onto the game microphone, but also on one of the neighboring game's recordings as well. After shouting at the TO for about 5 minutes, he is allowed to keep his mistake, AND given back his CP that he spent on the "mistake".
To me this is pretty damning. Having one mistake, fine. accept it, learn from it, move on. Do not make a scene, throw a temper tantrum, and act like a jackbass all after receiving multiple warnings for the exact thing you are trying to do again.
Other people who have played this player state he is a jerk and a clock bully, who has used this "mistake" in tournament settings before.
Just my opinion, but this wasn't a mistake. This was one player trying and succeeding to get away with rules bloat, and having a hissy fit when called on it. Case and point - reports are TO's removed the videos of his game, and started banning people on the chat mentioning the event, or the player's name.
I can tell you specifically that it was not intentional, and he had gotten confused over a FAQ and recieved conflicting information on how that was supposed to work. Where he screwed up was not going to the judges earlier to get a definitive ruling and also losing his cool over it.
I have played the guy more than any of these people and he has always tried to be open and honest. The fact is people make mistakes in games over rules. There are better ways to handle it than he did, but you show me anyone that hasn't gotten twisted up on a rule in the game and i'll show you someone lieing through their teeth.
11,100 pts, 7,000 pts
++ Heed my words for I am the Herald and we are the footsteps of doom. Interlopers, do we name you. Defilers of our
sacred earth. We have awoken to your primative species and will not tolerate your presence. Ours is the way of logic,
of cold hard reason: your irrationality, your human disease has no place in the necrontyr. Flesh is weak.
Surrender to the machine incarnate. Surrender and die. ++
Tuagh wrote: If you won't use a wrench, it isn't the bolt's fault that your hammer is useless.
If he was mistaken, fine. What about the previous warnings and "mistakes"? Also, losing your cool about it, while denying your opponent a redo, while demanding one, and then screaming so loud it's picked up on another game's mics, isn't symbolic of a "good player". It's symbolic of a whiney entitled brat who got called on his cheap moves and couldn't handle being told he's wrong.
Like others have said, it is impossible to prove intent.
But the facts surrounding the matter speak volumes. Multiple SPECIFIC warnings about this. Refusal to submit when told he was wrong by the judge. Hysterics.
And finally I have withheld the name of the people involved out of respect to those involved. It's up to that person to clear their name, not mine to destroy it. When outright cheating happened last year, the player involved came out with a one page article explaining his actions and apologizing. BTW, that same player was also top 20(?) at this event.
Well if he doesn't have solid proof accusing them publicly could technically even be cause for legal trouble wouldn't it? Especially in America. There's court charges for weirder things in there.
A kind of a sad, that you can't say what you think. Thank you for explaining this to me.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
This allegedly happened at major tournaments, with players reportedly being called on it and claiming they misread the rule. I’ve seen it happen enough to doubt that all instances of it happening are innocent.
This goes a bit over my understanding of english, so can someone help me. How can something happened allegedly aka we don't know if it happened, to in the next sentance go to I have seen it happen, and not just one time, but often enough to be able to discern this being done as part of cheating and being done by someone with not full grasp of rules?
Plus if this is about LVO why didn't he just use named and say X cheated, and not play around with words. Because either there is a problem or there is no problem.
You can't say it did happen, since you don't know for sure -- so you say "alleged" as in, someone is alleging that this event happened this way.
Zande4 wrote: Someone can probably sum it up better than me for the ones more familiar with House Raven rules but i'll try to get the jist of it.
Ad Mech player got a lucky seize and was stomping the Tau player. Tau player made a mis-move earlier in the game and the Ad Mech wouldn't let him do a re-do.
Later in the game, the Ad Mech player spent 3 command points to make his Castellan's weapons count as assault so he could advance and still shoot. He advanced 1'' to try and get LoS on the Broadsides.
Tau player pointed out he couldn't use that power or something because it was the wrong house. I'm unsure on this part because I don't know their rules well. He was correct so the ad-mech player asked for a re-do, so he could both undo the advance and get his command points back.
Tau player said no, which is fair because he did the same earlier.
Admech player started getting really angry, red faced etc. Judge was called over and said the Castellan advanced so it can't shoot and no re-do but he does get the command points back.
Personally I don't think he should have got the command points back because he had already declared he was using them.
Game was pretty tense for the next 2 turns or so.
There seems to be some confusion over what a single Knight in a Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment is entitled to (in terms of Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
Out of curiosity what strategem he was trying to use? Imperial knights don't have such strategem(1CP one gives the HEAVY STUBBERS for all knights such ability at -2 to hit but I doubt that was issue and 3CP...). Googling up don't see admech strategems having one either.
Would be thinking he was trying to use raven house trait with lone knight(illegal) but that doesn't cost 3CP.
No idea - I can't think what stratagem it would be either. It's just adding to the confusion.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maelstrom808 wrote: I can tell you specifically that it was not intentional, and he had gotten confused over a FAQ and recieved conflicting information on how that was supposed to work. Where he screwed up was not going to the judges earlier to get a definitive ruling and also losing his cool over it.
I have played the guy more than any of these people and he has always tried to be open and honest. The fact is people make mistakes in games over rules. There are better ways to handle it than he did, but you show me anyone that hasn't gotten twisted up on a rule in the game and i'll show you someone lieing through their teeth.
What was his intention - what was he trying to do?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/14 20:37:32
From the article, its the Strat that lets you move, advance, and shoot? He was trying to do that. He was allowed to keep the advance, and his CP was returned. If you are in the finals, you shouldn't be given any second chances.
So I wasn’t there and I heard about this 3rd or 4th hand…
But supposedly 2 guys there were playing on the clock, and as you know when you get both players below 10 minutes neither player can start another turn. Supposedly Necron player took an exceptionally long turn, gutted his opponents army, and ended with 8 or so minutes on his clock, when his opponent with just a few models left had 40+. The guy with 40+ sat there for 30 minutes till his clock was under 10, and then passed the turn, and as he had a few more CP, wins, as Necron player who has a massive advantage didn’t get another turn to finish up.
I really doubt this happened, as it would be against the code of conduct, and only an idiot necron player would sit there for 30 minutes, but it was something people seems to be talking about.
Zande4 wrote: Someone can probably sum it up better than me for the ones more familiar with House Raven rules but i'll try to get the jist of it.
Ad Mech player got a lucky seize and was stomping the Tau player. Tau player made a mis-move earlier in the game and the Ad Mech wouldn't let him do a re-do.
Later in the game, the Ad Mech player spent 3 command points to make his Castellan's weapons count as assault so he could advance and still shoot. He advanced 1'' to try and get LoS on the Broadsides.
Tau player pointed out he couldn't use that power or something because it was the wrong house. I'm unsure on this part because I don't know their rules well. He was correct so the ad-mech player asked for a re-do, so he could both undo the advance and get his command points back.
Tau player said no, which is fair because he did the same earlier.
Admech player started getting really angry, red faced etc. Judge was called over and said the Castellan advanced so it can't shoot and no re-do but he does get the command points back.
Personally I don't think he should have got the command points back because he had already declared he was using them.
Game was pretty tense for the next 2 turns or so.
There seems to be some confusion over what a single Knight in a Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment is entitled to (in terms of Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
Out of curiosity what strategem he was trying to use? Imperial knights don't have such strategem(1CP one gives the HEAVY STUBBERS for all knights such ability at -2 to hit but I doubt that was issue and 3CP...). Googling up don't see admech strategems having one either.
Would be thinking he was trying to use raven house trait with lone knight(illegal) but that doesn't cost 3CP.
No idea - I can't think what stratagem it would be either. It's just adding to the confusion.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maelstrom808 wrote: I can tell you specifically that it was not intentional, and he had gotten confused over a FAQ and recieved conflicting information on how that was supposed to work. Where he screwed up was not going to the judges earlier to get a definitive ruling and also losing his cool over it.
I have played the guy more than any of these people and he has always tried to be open and honest. The fact is people make mistakes in games over rules. There are better ways to handle it than he did, but you show me anyone that hasn't gotten twisted up on a rule in the game and i'll show you someone lieing through their teeth.
What was his intention - what was he trying to do?
The strategum was order of companions which is the reroll all 1's in the shooting phase. He tried to shoot after advancing as the raven house trait allows, but he didn't have said trait.
The argument started I believe over the 3CP for the strategum as technically the strategum doesn't require the model to be able to shoot to have the strategum played on it, it would be pointless but he played the strategum and then tried to shoot with a model that couldn't be chosen to shoot.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: From the article, its the Strat that lets you move, advance, and shoot? He was trying to do that. He was allowed to keep the advance, and his CP was returned. If you are in the finals, you shouldn't be given any second chances.
That's the House Raven Tradition (Chapter Tactic) - Heavy weapons are treated as Assault weapons, and there's no penalty for advancing & shooting Assault weapons.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: From the article, its the Strat that lets you move, advance, and shoot? He was trying to do that. He was allowed to keep the advance, and his CP was returned. If you are in the finals, you shouldn't be given any second chances.
That's the House Raven Tradition (Chapter Tactic) - Heavy weapons are treated as Assault weapons, and there's no penalty for advancing & shooting Assault weapons.
You are not allowed house strats in the detachment he was using.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: From the article, its the Strat that lets you move, advance, and shoot? He was trying to do that. He was allowed to keep the advance, and his CP was returned. If you are in the finals, you shouldn't be given any second chances.
But thing is what strategem let's you do that? Only one that I know from knight codex(which I just double checked) that deals with advance+shoot is 1CP one pregame that gives your HEAVY STUBBERS ability to do that(at -2 to hit). Doesn't sound right. I googled up adeptus mechanicum ones and drew blank there. Other strategem that deals with advance+X is 2CP one that allows you to CHARGE but thing is that's 100% legal strategem to use regardless of your house or are you super heavy or super heavy auxiliary detachment.
Apart from heavy stubber one above only one that allows advance+shooting is Raven TRAIT and yes that is illegal if knight is solo knight in super heavy auxiliary but that doesn't cost CP.
Now guess one possibility is it's something from Vigilus book which I don't know fully. In which case would be nice to know. I don't recall any strategem that fits description so if there IS one I would like to know name and what publication it is.
edit: Aah above explanation cleared. Strategem was legal, trait no. Good to know I hadn't missed any strategem!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/02/14 20:56:22
Reemule wrote: So I wasn’t there and I heard about this 3rd or 4th hand…
But supposedly 2 guys there were playing on the clock, and as you know when you get both players below 10 minutes neither player can start another turn. Supposedly Necron player took an exceptionally long turn, gutted his opponents army, and ended with 8 or so minutes on his clock, when his opponent with just a few models left had 40+. The guy with 40+ sat there for 30 minutes till his clock was under 10, and then passed the turn, and as he had a few more CP, wins, as Necron player who has a massive advantage didn’t get another turn to finish up.
I really doubt this happened, as it would be against the code of conduct, and only an idiot necron player would sit there for 30 minutes, but it was something people seems to be talking about.
Oh it's happened at times, with players running out the clock. Best one I heard was in WMH, where a player saw they were playing what would be an unbeatable Trollkin list for them (and if they did engage, a miserable, drawn out game) so- what they did when their turn (and clock) started was walk off and go buy an ice cream then proceeded to eat it in front of their opponent as slowly as possible.
No idea if the guy got a judge over, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did (even though the player was breaking no rules).
Games Workshop Delenda Est.
Users on ignore- 53.
If you break apart my or anyone else's posts line by line I will not read them.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: From the article, its the Strat that lets you move, advance, and shoot? He was trying to do that. He was allowed to keep the advance, and his CP was returned. If you are in the finals, you shouldn't be given any second chances.
That's the House Raven Tradition (Chapter Tactic) - Heavy weapons are treated as Assault weapons, and there's no penalty for advancing & shooting Assault weapons.
You are not allowed house strats in the detachment he was using.
Incorrect. Detachments don't limit strategems. If your strategem is imperial knight detachment he gets strategems. Whether it's super heavy or super heavy auxiliary is irrelevant(note this is different from regular auxiliary). And house strategems have no separate restriction either and even in super heavy auxiliary detachment you have house despite no trait.
It's the trait that is not allowed. So the strategem here was 100% legal usage. Just pointless as he couldn't shoot after advance due to not having the TRAIT(which requires non-superheavy auxiliary detachment).
Reemule wrote: So I wasn’t there and I heard about this 3rd or 4th hand…
But supposedly 2 guys there were playing on the clock, and as you know when you get both players below 10 minutes neither player can start another turn. Supposedly Necron player took an exceptionally long turn, gutted his opponents army, and ended with 8 or so minutes on his clock, when his opponent with just a few models left had 40+. The guy with 40+ sat there for 30 minutes till his clock was under 10, and then passed the turn, and as he had a few more CP, wins, as Necron player who has a massive advantage didn’t get another turn to finish up.
I really doubt this happened, as it would be against the code of conduct, and only an idiot necron player would sit there for 30 minutes, but it was something people seems to be talking about.
Oh it's happened at times, with players running out the clock. Best one I heard was in WMH, where a player saw they were playing what would be an unbeatable Trollkin list for them (and if they did engage, a miserable, drawn out game) so- what they did when their turn (and clock) started was walk off and go buy an ice cream then proceeded to eat it in front of their opponent as slowly as possible.
No idea if the guy got a judge over, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did (even though the player was breaking no rules).
It wouldn't work in Warmahordes. The clock is sudden death. He can sit their and buy ice cream and eat it, and the other guy can watch movies on his phone. The first guy to run out of time loses at that moment. The Troll player wouldn't have cared.
While I immediately doubt the insistence that he "just got it wrong", I think the main thing here is simple: act like a child, get treated like a child - yes, even if you're right. TO's, and judges need to start curb-stomping this kind of behavior. This race-to-the-bottom-customer-is-always-right nonsense is a garbage way to approach a community of players/consumers.
I'm not surprised to hear that someone in a gaming tournament cheated, etc. I am surprised to see anyone allow an adult to throw a temper tantrum in a public space without being kicked out. Stop allowing children to partake in your events, it lowers the atmosphere and respectability of your event by miles.
11,100 pts, 
7,000 pts
