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.

The Thunder Child wrote:Its not behavior, i'm not being a jerk about it, for players who like a little more tactical and realistic play its pretty fun not knowing whats in the transports. Its not cheating, its bringing a sliver of realism into the game.

It is not realistic, 40k is an abstraction, it is only fun due to the massive unfair advantage you are getting, the game is not designed around secrecy and is not balanced for it. If your opponent takes bad notes or you are unclear he can and should re-ask as many times as he needs and you have to tell him what he wants to know. You don't have a choice.

It is cheating and your sliver of realism has no place in tourneys at all and minimal place in friendly games.

The Thunder Child wrote:In tourny play, I bring 1list for the Mod, 1 List for me and 1 List for my Enemy. On the list of mine and the Mods i annotate which squads are in which transports, and only the basic list to my enemy. That way the mod can be there to keep honesty (not that he needs to but for the sake of the other player.) In friendly games though, openness is the best policy.

Name the tourny or BS.

[

No, seeing as you can't prove a negative you'd actually have to prove that I did cheat. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. If you think otherwise then prove that there isn't an invisible floating being floating behind my left ear that nobody but can see or interact with.

this leads me to believe that you DO cheat if your arguement is prove that im cheating. or you remove the opportunity to be called a cheater and give me the info i want to know.

Great, I'll show you my paper with squad names written in four languages and let you sort it all out. All the info would be there you just wouldn't be ale to read it and that's frankly your issue and not mine.

Alright ill find someone to translate your list and waste an hour or you could get it over with and just tell me so i don't have to be a douche and waste time to figure out your douche move.

Using other languages that exist and are spoken is hardly a code only I know.

this would be considered code to those who can't understand it. i write notes to people in german during class because my teachers can't read it. thus german would be code for them to have to translate into common, known-to-them terms. not a perfect analogy but it proves a point.

I like to take a bunch of identical units so that which unit is in which transport never matters. =D

Dashofpepper wrote:I like to take a bunch of identical units so that which unit is in which transport never matters. =D

Ha! Agree with Dash here. I'm gittin too old to remember where the tournament is half the time...

solkan wrote:The first of the previous discussions on this topic:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/304351.page

Summary version: If you and your opponent cannot agree on how to handle unit secrecy, you are directed to page two to settle the disgreement. If you can't settle the disagreement, shake hands and agree that you should not play the game after all.

100% correct.

By RAW, the game starts with both lists and transport occupants in secrecy, and it takes both players to agree to show lists and occupants of transports. And even then, after you agree, by the letter of the rule, lists are only shown AFTER the game anyway.

BUT... Just go with what Solkan says, and both players just agree on whatever it is you guys want.

So, what does exchanging lists have to do with whats inside your transports? You still have to tell me that.

The. default is full disclosure.

This means you either:

a) take the quickest route, which saves time and means you get to play a proper game, and answer the question fully. 'This squad has 2 meltas and a fist'
b) have a printed list and clear markings, that matches wargear which is what identifies the squad

Swapping lists after only allows you to confirm the veracity of a), as well as points totals. Anything less IS cheating.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The. default is full disclosure.

This means you either:

a) take the quickest route, which saves time and means you get to play a proper game, and answer the question fully. 'This squad has 2 meltas and a fist'
b) have a printed list and clear markings, that matches wargear which is what identifies the squad

Swapping lists after only allows you to confirm the veracity of a), as well as points totals. Anything less IS cheating.

Great Scott86 man, read the fricking rule!

The default is exchanging your list after the game and making clear which unit is embarked in which transport. That is it!

Now note, before deploying players can agree whether or not to share army list before and/or during the game. Which is an option, NOT default.

Some players prefer full disclosure, which again is just an option.

But really what does it matter? Your creative reading of the rules creates a requirement to disclose equipment at request when it does not exist.

Share army list after game = pretty clear there.
Make clear which squad is embarked in which transport = can be done without disclosing equipment
Full disclosure = Sharing of army lists before and/or during the game if both players agree before deploying.

Not a single requirement to tell your opponent what embarked units are equipped with. Total player created fallacy and when insisted upon, cheating as it is not required by the rules.

Done with this one since you will just keep creating a rule that does not exist as your counter.

Dashofpepper wrote:I like to take a bunch of identical units so that which unit is in which transport never matters. =D

Especially when those identical units arrive in identical CRASSUS ARMORED ASSUALT TRANSPORTs.

Brother Ramses wrote:

The default is exchanging your list after the game and making clear which unit is embarked in which transport. That is it!

Now note, before deploying players can agree whether or not to share army list before and/or during the game. Which is an option, NOT default.

Some players prefer full disclosure, which again is just an option.

But really what does it matter? Your creative reading of the rules creates a requirement to disclose equipment at request when it does not exist.

Share army list after game = pretty clear there.
Make clear which squad is embarked in which transport = can be done without disclosing equipment
Full disclosure = Sharing of army lists before and/or during the game if both players agree before deploying.

Not a single requirement to tell your opponent what embarked units are equipped with. Total player created fallacy and when insisted upon, cheating as it is not required by the rules.

Done with this one since you will just keep creating a rule that does not exist as your counter.

But if either player says that they want to exchange lists before the game, then that becomes the default, since BOTH have to agree to the secret lists. And I'll never agree.

As for the unit in the transport, if it's not identical to every other unit of the same type, yes, you should ID the equipment. Only reason not to is if you're trying to pull a shell game. And if you're not doing that, then why do you care?

BR - and how do you identify, UNIQUELY, the unit inside the transport?

By the equipment they are carrying

NOTHING ELSE IDs the unit inside.

You keep ignoring that one, vital piece of the rule that you like to pretend doesnt exist. Oddly enough, nooone else does.

Brother Ramses wrote:Not a single requirement to tell your opponent what embarked units are equipped with. Total player created fallacy and when insisted upon, cheating as it is not required by the rules.

If you don't tell me what's the unit is equipped with, you didn't make clear what unit is inside the transport, in which case you would be breaking the rules and cheating.

In my group of friends we dont announce what is in what but we always keep a list to hand to avoid shennanigans and if you ask, the opponent will tell you.

Simples. Might to work as well among strnagers though.

Praxiss wrote:In my group of friends we dont announce what is in what but we always keep a list to hand to avoid shennanigans and if you ask, the opponent will tell you.

Simples. Might to work as well among strnagers though.

Do you also rebalance the codexes point values for the drastic unpaid advantage pillbox marines would have and the disadvantage footslogger units would have?

Even if you don't shellgame, the simple act of having such an overwhelming and unfair advantage not justified by the rules makes the game unplayable at that point.

Brother Ramses wrote:
Great Scott86 man, read the fricking rule!

The default is exchanging your list after the game and making clear which unit is embarked in which transport. That is it!

Now note, before deploying players can agree whether or not to share army list before and/or during the game. Which is an option, NOT default.

Some players prefer full disclosure, which again is just an option.

But really what does it matter? Your creative reading of the rules creates a requirement to disclose equipment at request when it does not exist.

Share army list after game = pretty clear there.
Make clear which squad is embarked in which transport = can be done without disclosing equipment
Full disclosure = Sharing of army lists before and/or during the game if both players agree before deploying.

Not a single requirement to tell your opponent what embarked units are equipped with. Total player created fallacy and when insisted upon, cheating as it is not required by the rules.

Done with this one since you will just keep creating a rule that does not exist as your counter.

You keep hiding behind this, but that doesn't change the fact that you can't answer the question.

BROTHER RAMSES, WHICH OF YOUR UNITS DID YOU INSERT INTO MAGGIE THE RHINO? DON'T MAKE ME DO THIS THE HARD WAY AND PENETRATE HER MYSELF JUST SO THAT I CAN FIND OUT.

Yup. Felt as good to say as I thought it would.

Just to be clear to people: there is a bit of a difference in casual friendly play and tournement/ league play in 40k, and this is one area in particular where the rules tend to be more strict.

In casual play you can do whatever you want, thats the nature of 40k. If your group of friends likes to increase the uncertainty of the game it can do that.

Do not expect that any TO will be even slightly amused by anything other than a clear and easy to understand method showing what unit is inside each and every transport. One of the quickest ways to get on the bad side of a TO is to do something that could appear to be an attempt to cheat. You may have an arcane process that can be decoded to determine which unit is inside each vehicle. If however your method has a loophole that could allow cheating, expect to get penalized.



Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:Just. One of the quickest ways to get on the bad side of a TO is to do something that could appear to be an attempt to cheat.

Sliggoth

Amen brother. Guess I've spent too much time on the judging side (altho I do have over 20 GW GTs under my belt as a player as well) and those arcane methods really irk me. Just tell them, for Pete's sake.

daedalus wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:
Great Scott86 man, read the fricking rule!

The default is exchanging your list after the game and making clear which unit is embarked in which transport. That is it!

Now note, before deploying players can agree whether or not to share army list before and/or during the game. Which is an option, NOT default.

Some players prefer full disclosure, which again is just an option.

But really what does it matter? Your creative reading of the rules creates a requirement to disclose equipment at request when it does not exist.

Share army list after game = pretty clear there.
Make clear which squad is embarked in which transport = can be done without disclosing equipment
Full disclosure = Sharing of army lists before and/or during the game if both players agree before deploying.

Not a single requirement to tell your opponent what embarked units are equipped with. Total player created fallacy and when insisted upon, cheating as it is not required by the rules.

Done with this one since you will just keep creating a rule that does not exist as your counter.

You keep hiding behind this, but that doesn't change the fact that you can't answer the question.

BROTHER RAMSES, WHICH OF YOUR UNITS DID YOU INSERT INTO MAGGIE THE RHINO? DON'T MAKE ME DO THIS THE HARD WAY AND PENETRATE HER MYSELF JUST SO THAT I CAN FIND OUT.

Yup. Felt as good to say as I thought it would.

This one was too funny not to reply,

"The Grey Hunter pack with, "Maggie" painted on the edge of their bases."

Oh look, clearly identified which squad is embarked in which transport without ever revealing what the squad is equipped with exactly as the rules tell me to do.

And, of course, you armylist has a Grey Hunter pack marked "Maggie", right?

Now we just need to determine if we share armylists before, during or after the game......and we all know what the de facto norm (regardless of what the rules actually say) is, don't we?

Different groups do it different ways.

It doesn't really matter what the rulebook says, if your local group does it differently, it is done differently and that's the way people play.

BR - now show me those exact models.

Oh look, I now know the equipment they have.


Your attempt at a shell game is noted.

I have not had a game, either among friends or at a games night where people have demanded to know what my rhios are carrying.

If they asked i would of course tell them.

Admittedly i have never been to a tourney so i am sure they are much more strict there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nkelsch wrote:

Praxiss wrote:In my group of friends we dont announce what is in what but we always keep a list to hand to avoid shennanigans and if you ask, the opponent will tell you.

Simples. Might to work as well among strnagers though.

Do you also rebalance the codexes point values for the drastic unpaid advantage pillbox marines would have and the disadvantage footslogger units would have?

Even if you don't shellgame, the simple act of having such an overwhelming and unfair advantage not justified by the rules makes the game unplayable at that point.

How do you mean "rebalance"? You mean give the other person a points advantage if they don't have transports?

Also, what does "Shellgame" mean?

The shell game is a common street con in which three shells or cups are laid on a table.

The hustler puts a ball under one of them and rapidly switches the shells around to confuse the onlooker.

Finally the onlooker bets that he knows which shell contains the ball.

The real con is that the hustler palms the ball at the beginning so it isn't under any of the shells.

Oh, so by "Shellgame" you mean swapping what units are in what Rhino without the the other guy realising.

Gotcha.

Well, yes, that would blatently be cheating. Like i said, in a friendly game, among friends, we dont normally tell each other what out transports are carrying unless asked.my lists are here to be looked at if you want though.

A few really nasty variants on the shell game are possible, and its why tourneys in particular tend to stomp on anyone doing anything that even begins to look shady.


More than one person I have seen keep their squads in their cases until they pop them out of the transport...and since some people use variants on their squads they may well have more than 10 models all painted up for a 10 man squad. For those times that the squad has a melta or is only 10 regular troops. And then oh so accidently deploys the melta guy from squad maggie instead of deploying the melta guy with squad nannie as shown on his army sheet.

Had one guy who had each of his transports with doors that would open, inside he had markings that distinguished which squads vehicle it was. For "realism" purposes...and he had some people go along with it. Those same vehicles also had a second set of markings on the bottom that distinguished which squad was inside. For two of the vehicles it just so happened that the inside and the bottom markings werent the same... So depending on where he needed the melta, he had the melta squad.

Things like this are why a TO will tend to look at anything even possibly shady as a major offense, and act accordingly.



Sliggoth

Brother Ramses wrote:This one was too funny not to reply,

"The Grey Hunter pack with, "Maggie" painted on the edge of their bases."

Oh look, clearly identified which squad is embarked in which transport without ever revealing what the squad is equipped with exactly as the rules tell me to do.

Unless you show them to me, that's not clear. It would be really easy to have one of each special weapon for each of your rhinos "Maggie", "Lisa" and "Marge" hiding in your suitcase. If you don't show the models or tell me what they are equipped with, thats not clear, and you are cheating.

Let's assume 12 trukkboyz are roughly about the same impact as 20 footsloggers.

I deploy my 3 trukks, and one unit has a PK. You deploy your 3 Footslogger units and one Nob has a PK.

I don't tell you anything but 'there are trukkboyz in these units, I am not cheating.' But on the flip side, I can *SEE* due to WYSIWYG where your PK nob is and what unit he is in along with any and all gear and attached ICs. On the other hand, you cannot see that on my end.

The disadvantage of models on foot have gone WAAAAAAAAAAAY up while transports have increased in effect with no change in points. It is a change that is game-breaking in my opinion as it impacts so much of the game and drastically changes the meta balance.

So if hiding what is in transports is 'legal' then why can't I make footsloggers with no descript gear or markings either? Why can't I have a whole ork army on foot wearing ninja capes that hid their weapons from view? And you have no idea what each unit has packing until I choose to disclose it. Did you pump your fire into my burna boyz or some sluggas? Are there tankbustaz with tankhammers next to your land raider or are they shoota boyz? Spin the wheel and win a prize!

It is not more realistic, it is not more 'fun' except for the person 'wininz gamez' by basically being a cheater and decieving his fellow gamer. Even if he is not shellgaming, he is tilting the table of fairness in his favour.

Brother Ramses wrote:
"The Grey Hunter pack with, "Maggie" painted on the edge of their bases."

Oh look, clearly identified which squad is embarked in which transport without ever revealing what the squad is equipped with exactly as the rules tell me to do.

Nope, you still haven't, cause how do I know that you only have one squad with 'maggie' painted on it? When someone is that desparate to hide what's in their vehicles, it always makes me wonder why....................

Edit: As an example. I paint the shoulderpads on my IG, each squad a distinct color or combination of colors. So I have vet squads painted up with three plasmas and three meltas and a lascannon and a demo charge, as well as a sgt and a bunch of regular guys. That way, when I want to change lists around, I just swap certain models in the squad. So, I can tell you that it's the squad with the gold and red shouderpads. And that squad can be any one of the various veteran squads in my list just by swapping models (which ALL have the same identifying marks). but if i say it's the meltavet squad with the demolitions doctrine, you look at my list and know exactly which squad it is.

As above.

BR is attempting to circumvent the utterly clear directive to IDENTIFY the unique, and trying to play a shell game.

That is exactly the sort of behavior that would make me *very* suspicious of my opponent.