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.

Well it seems like this thread proves the point.

If you don't like apples, try oranges. Don't whine about apples.

Howard A Treesong wrote:I don't understand the Magic hate. How can people seriously say "Magic players are X" or that they "All do Y"? Try looking at the mixed bag of people who play Warhammer before tarring everyone of a different system with the same brush.

I play, and have played, a number of games so don't really care who does what in a shop. The "my gang vs their gang" attitude is rather childish and stupid. It's no better than people who squabble over whether Nintendo or Sega are best, or who makes the best trainers.

I play Magic. I've met a few douchbags but most are at least friendly and pleasant and some are very nice people. Oddly enough, that's what I've seen of Warhammer too. And model making in general actually. I see a fair bit of Magic-hate though, there are quite a few threads on Dakka complaining that Magic players share some unpleasant characteristics and dare to do things like take up too many tables on games night and the like. Well first come first serve.

Actually I find that when playing Magic, there are more adults about so that makes me more comfortable than most Warhammer playing venues. Also with things like D&D there are a better mix of people of all ages. There are several girls at one of my local places doing Magic nights now, and I've met quite a few girls doing D&D in general, this is good because my wife seems happier when she isn't the only girl in the room.

I've seen more Power Gamers at my FLGS which play Magic than at my FLGS, GW and any Good Game Store Combined. I only play against Adults at my stores. The real problem with Magic Gamers is that they give you lists to "Help" you improve but you have to spend $200+ to make a good deck out of it. A lot of the guys are nice but the douches from magic are big douches compared to the Warhammer version which are small ones.

Why thank you mwnciboo, I do try ! Geez, it's not everyday I go on the web.

Pacific wrote:I really can't understand the whole 'either/or' mentality towards gaming systems. It almost reminds me in a way of the old 16-bit wars, with people either choosing a SNES or Megadrive, and then being massively disparaging about anything on the other system (even though they secretly wanted to have a go!)

Another good remark, which still holds nowadays (Sony VS Nintendo VS Microsoft).
I recall reading something about that as well, a tendency we have to pick one side and to be adamantly and rather irrationally partisan about the matter. Applies to about anything from "real-life" considerations to toy soldiers games, as demonstrated by the OP !

Now you know, and knowing...

rockerbikie wrote:
I've seen more Power Gamers at my FLGS which play Magic than at my FLGS, GW and any Good Game Store Combined. I only play against Adults at my stores. The real problem with Magic Gamers is that they give you lists to "Help" you improve but you have to spend $200+ to make a good deck out of it. A lot of the guys are nice but the douches from magic are big douches compared to the Warhammer version which are small ones.

Just to chime in - the same exact thing can happen in wargames.

'Here, let me see your list. Oh, no wonder why you keep losing. You don't have enough tanks/'jacks/infantry/transports/whatever. If you want to win, go out and buy this list of models. Sure, it'll cost you $200+, but at least you'll be a winner!'

And I'm sure there are plenty of stores where the douchbaggery of wargamers far outweighs that of the CCG crowd. Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal.

No matter what I (and themselves) call the game, I still don't hate WM/H.

Hate the playa, not the game and all that.

I hate the current version and incarnation of 40k, but I just don't play it as a direct result.

Hi all.
There has always been a wide variety of games to suit the wide variety of gamers out there.
All the styles scales periods of history and fictional settings , cater to a wide variety of games.
GW plc used to support a much wider stable of games before they settled on Tolkens fantasy,GWs fantasy, and GW fantasy in space as the only games they wanted to focus on.

Most mature gamers seem to be happy to live and let live, and undestand the difference and variety of games and gamers in the world today.

I can only assume those with a 'strong negative emotional resonce to 40k/WHFB' have had a MASSIVE negative experiance with those games...

Perhaps they wanderd into a shop, where there were display stands full of exellently painted minatuers, and they were shown how to play a game and they WON thier first game.And only being 11-15 felt great and exited about the cool sounding stuff the nice man sold them.....
Years later having realised they had been misled , and recived comparitivley apauling value for money.('Kin GW ripped me off I tell you!)
They may have an understandable , if antisocial , atitude towards 40k /WHFB.

IF GW plc were still a games company, rather than focusing on selling toy soldiers to children.Perhaps the negativity towards GW plc might not be as bad?

If the OP had already explaind how expencive 40k is , and how poorly the armies are supported(excluding SM.), and the poor definition and over complication in the rule set.And the guy STILL was interested then fair enough.

Different strokes for different folks.

All I say is you can use the cool 40k minatures with other rule sets if you want to give them a try...
If they are happy with the current 40k rules fair enough.

I only object to GW plc pretending there is ONLY the GW hobby (tm).

Lanrak wrote:If the OP had already explaind how expencive 40k is , and how poorly the armies are supported(excluding SM.), and the poor definition and over complication in the rule set.And the guy STILL was interested then fair enough

What a total load of biased bullsquirt.

chromedog wrote:
Hate the playa, not the game and all that..

Or reworded, don't hate the game if the playah is an asshat! Good to see we are on the same team after all, one tends to be in the final equation

Knights-Abhorrent wrote:

beigeknight wrote:The names were a mix of Romeo and Juliet, Gladiator, and 300. That would make a sweet movie....

Juliet: Romeo, Romeo. Where art thou Romeo?

Leonidas: *Kicks Juliet off balocny* THIS IS SPARTAAAAA!

Maximus: ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?!

I hope you don't mind if this gets sigged? I nearly spat tea all over my keyboard in work... That would have been difficult to explain away

Also infinite_array - I'm definitely going to use the Hetzers gonna Hetz picture in future


As to the actual topic; I'm one of the people that would dabble with any game system that interested me, even though 40K is my "standard" as the one I will always come back to. I find it quite strange that people stick so rigidly to one system, fair enough if you don't enjoy any of the others, but no reason to hate on it...

But then, Hetzers gonna Hetz

Kaldor wrote:

Lanrak wrote:If the OP had already explaind how expencive 40k is , and how poorly the armies are supported(excluding SM.), and the poor definition and over complication in the rule set.And the guy STILL was interested then fair enough

What a total load of biased bullsquirt.

Really? I don't know of many people with the Australian flag showing by their posts who haven't complained about the prices down under, which establishes Lanrak's first point.

The support for certain ranges (and entire games) is patchy. As Brettonia or Wood Elf players in WHFB, for example, or SoB or Eldar players in 40k - let alone those of us whole like Blood Bowl or Epic. If you're army/game isn't getting new releases, then there are problems. I would say there are some flagship armies (SMs, Empire, O&G) that receive solid and consistent support when new editions roll around, but there is certainly nowhere near balanced support between factions.

Having not played 5th Ed 40k or 8th Ed WHFB, and only flicked through army books/codexes, I'm not really in a position to comment on his final point. However, as everyone knows, two out of three ain't bad...

There will be asshats in any game. Saying that game X is full of Dbags is just ignorant IMHO

Sometimes the conflict comes from some folks inability to adapt or accept an aspect of a game that the players treat as the norm.

Magic full of Dbags? or maybe you just dislike the ultra-competitive mindset. (I know I did, and i really didnt like the "hunt" aspect or cost )

Arrogant Fighting Game enthusiasts? or maybe you just hate getting cherry-tapped by that korean kid.

Im not saying an aspect of a game should be an excuse for any asshattery though. God knows how I hate hearing stories of PP players taking page 5 in the wrong direction(our small community thankfully doesnt have that...yet)

but sometimes its easy blaming "them" than our inabilty to deal with the game

I'd have to say that your position is unfortunate, OP, but agree that you should speak to the store owner. If he is going to the trouble of letting you try to increase 40k sales, he should be also helping to restrain idiocy that would drive away customers. I honestly hate gaming stores sometimes, just for the mouth-breathers that you get in them, not to mention staff more interested in talking to their friends than helping customers.

I can also agree with the number of GW-haters that you meet, and how useless their diatribes are. It is like people eager to talk about religion - they are dying to tell you what they think, but don't want to hear what you think.

mattyrm wrote:

Knights-Abhorrent wrote:MOD Y U NO EDIT OTHER "NONE-WARGAME IMAGES" ?!

Dammit, Haters ARE gunna hate... ¬¬

You cant attach them mate.. just link them by right clicking on the pic, copying the URL and then putting it inside the brackets like this...

[ i m g ] http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/11/29/article-1231775-076515D5000005DC-149_468x353.jpg [ / i m g]

Minus the spaces, gives you this...

That picture was from the Gay Love Parade 1986......men in uniform, I think.......just off lens was a Policeman, a Lollipop "man", and a cowboy is crotchless leathers.....ahh, those were the days

So when did this change from haterz gunna hate to sailors on parade?

notprop wrote:So when did this change from haterz gunna hate to sailors on parade?

When it was posted on Dakka, where no one is actually allowed to like any of the games the site is about.

And for those saying M:tG is an expensive hobby... I Top 8ed three tournaments with decks that cost less that $22*. I don't know if it's still possible to make a budget deck that is competitive now, but one thing that M:tG does quite well is reward diligent players who seeks combinations that work. So the trash card of today can be the sought-out card tomorrow.

I also don't get the Magic hate. As I have said earlier, there are douchebags in every group. When I was still in competitive M:tG some of my playtest buddies loathe 40k players for the same reasons. So really, hating a group because they're different is racism in a different form. Yes, racism. You're judging and hating people based on something trivial (skin, nationality, religion,sexual orientation, political leanings, and on this case, hobby preferences). Sure it's not fullblown as some but the source is the same--hatred towards something not you.

It's like the gamer form of bigotry. Really.






*since I've been harping in the Your Paint Might Be Alive thread that claims need proof, here are mine (I'm Rayson Lozada):
http://www.neutralgrounds.net/index.php/post/index/64
http://www.neutralgrounds.net/index.php/post/index/124
http://www.neutralgrounds.net/index.php/post/index/61

DarknessEternal wrote:Well it seems like this thread proves the point.

If you don't like apples, try oranges. Don't whine about apples.

Indeed.

Go check out the glue thread, its fething gripping stuff.

mattyrm wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:Well it seems like this thread proves the point.

If you don't like apples, try oranges. Don't whine about apples.

Indeed.

Go check out the glue thread, its fething gripping stuff.

But don't get stuck there

Shadelkan wrote:

The worst came at the end. Mercutio and I had had a great game, which ended in a draw and some awesome moments with a Carnifex and his ASoB Termies. Mercutio had some questions about my idea of building a community; he wanted to help, because he wanted sizeable community to play with. Then, out of the blue, Leonidas flat out interrupts us. He tells Mercutio "hey, if you want a good community, forget about 40k and join Malifaux." Mercutio and I paused, stared at him... and ignored him. I could tell he wasn't happy, and it was obvious neither was I.

Sounds like a pretty agressive d-bag. There's always one hanging around, not getting dates, or jobs.

Delephont wrote:

That picture was from the Gay Love Parade 1986......men in uniform, I think.......just off lens was a Policeman, a Lollipop "man", and a cowboy is crotchless leathers.....ahh, those were the days

I was thinking that too, looks rather homoerotic, "look at my big gun"

Rayvon wrote:

Delephont wrote:

That picture was from the Gay Love Parade 1986......men in uniform, I think.......just off lens was a Policeman, a Lollipop "man", and a cowboy is crotchless leathers.....ahh, those were the days

I was thinking that too, looks rather homoerotic, "look at my big gun"

I see a young man serving his country. This thread appears to be aptly named.

notprop wrote:So when did this change from haterz gunna hate to sailors on parade?

Be better if we could swerve back to that topic. Thanks.

All military Pics are bit homo-erotic. It's boys with toys.

The above is a good example of banter that doesn't descend to hating. I am willing to put forward that if you hosted that pic or something similar on Youtube you would end up with 40 or 50 comments below and some would be "UK f.a.g/gay marines, US Marines FTW" etc etc or some kind of Political thing, or some idiot "Patriot" hijacking it and using it to bash some other religion or political group.

Haters love hating, but as I've said it reduces their life span.

kronk wrote:

Rayvon wrote:

Delephont wrote:

That picture was from the Gay Love Parade 1986......men in uniform, I think.......just off lens was a Policeman, a Lollipop "man", and a cowboy is crotchless leathers.....ahh, those were the days

I was thinking that too, looks rather homoerotic, "look at my big gun"

I see a young man serving his country. This thread appears to be aptly named.

Oh come on, I was joking....who knew?

We have this (main topic) every so often, people wondering about why others don't like what they like....I say just ignore them. Sure it's great when you can surround yourself with supportive, friendly people, but life throws you a curve ball.....as long as the people arn't getting physical about it, tell em to "be on your way!" and be done with it.

Delephont wrote:
We have this (main topic) every so often, people wondering about why others don't like what they like....

We have few of those threads. We have many threads of people complaining that others don't hate what they hate.

notprop wrote:So when did this change from haterz gunna hate to sailors on parade?

He's no Sailor, he's a Marine. Although he is employed by the Navy, say's so on his ID card. If you ask a Marine what they want on their ID Card they will probably say "HOOFIN".

Sailors are a strange breed, I know I was one.

HI folks.
My comments about 40k/WHFB earlier , may have been seen as biased.(I belive them to be an objective assesment .)
I personaly think the background and minatures for 40k and WHFB, are very inspiring.And I can totaly understand gamers/collectors being hooked purely by these asthetics.

However, these elements are totaly subjective , as ALL asthetics are.(One mans perfection in form is another mans hideous abomination.)

So I stuck to the elements of 40k/WHFB that CAN be compared objectivley.(Actual comparison of physicaly measurable elements.)And in my 27 years experiance of gaming I can compare rule sets quite objectivley...

1) The comparative cost of playing a 'full game' of 40k/WHFB , to playing a 'full game' of other minature games .40k and WHFB are generaly more expencive.(By a fairly large margin in some cases.)
The 40k is relativley expencive compared to other games systems , is defencable/provable.

2) When a company leave game play issues unadressed, to the point gamers start wearing 'GW dont give a FAQs' tee shirts.And then GW plc simply copy the FAQs from a great gamers forum (Shhh you know who. ) ......And when some armies have to wait years' a DECADE! in some cases for a rules up date.
The 40k has poor game support compared to other game sytems , is defencable/provable.

3) The poor definition in the 40k/WHFB rules, is simply down to ambiguity caused by NOT using constant phrasiology.And writing rules in exclusivley , rather than inclusivley way to highten the strategic focus that supports sales.The amount of players asking for clarification of what rules actualy mean sort of back this up.(RAW vs RAI)
Compared to other rule sets available , 40k and WHFB are poorly defined.

Over complication, When a game uses less suitable game mechanics resolution methods, it often needs far more additional rules and resolution methods than necisary.
EG many games use ONE resolution method to resolve ALL damage interaction.
40k uses armour saving throws, invunerable saving throws, STR vs AR , Feel No Pain,Eternal Warrior, Instant death , etc .

Most games the core rules cover 80 to 90 % of all game play.And special rules are used sparingly to achive faction/racial differences.And highlight units /models that are unique on the battle field.
40ks core rules ONLY cover standard infantry.That 1 out of the 14 unit types found in the game of 40k.
40k is the most over complicated counter intuitive rule set I am aware of.Compared to the 30 odd other games I have played over the last 27 years.
The statement the 40k ruleset is poorly derfined , counter intuitive and over complicated is defecible and provable by direct comparison to other rule systems.(Even the game developers say the 40k rules are not that important... )
But this is not the place for this lengthy process.

Many people find the asthetic of 40k/WHFB make up for the shortfall in other areas,and enjoy playing the games .
This is perfectly fine.
I have played games with exellent rules and poorly sculped minatures.
This is perfectly fine .

We have pointed out the dodgy asthetics ,shakey background,dodgy rules writing , poor wording in many games systems to many gamers at our local club.We just want gamers to be well informed so they can pick the games they will enjoy.

All game systems have good points and bad points .It is important to make gamers aware of what they are.
This is what I was trying to convey.

The over the top negative responce the OP experinced was not warrented , or justifiable.

Lanrak wrote:
40ks core rules ONLY cover standard infantry.That 1 out of the 14 unit types found in the game of 40k.

You should perhaps read the rest of the book then.

Lanrak wrote:HI folks.
My comments about 40k/WHFB earlier , may have been seen as biased.(I belive them to be an objective assesment .)
I personaly think the background and minatures for 40k and WHFB, are very inspiring.And I can totaly understand gamers/collectors being hooked purely by these asthetics.

However, these elements are totaly subjective , as ALL asthetics are.(One mans perfection in form is another mans hideous abomination.)

So I stuck to the elements of 40k/WHFB that CAN be compared objectivley.(Actual comparison of physicaly measurable elements.)And in my 27 years experiance of gaming I can compare rule sets quite objectivley...

1) The comparative cost of playing a 'full game' of 40k/WHFB , to playing a 'full game' of other minature games .40k and WHFB are generaly more expencive.(By a fairly large margin in some cases.)
The 40k is relativley expencive compared to other games systems , is defencable/provable.

2) When a company leave game play issues unadressed, to the point gamers start wearing 'GW dont give a FAQs' tee shirts.And then GW plc simply copy the FAQs from a great gamers forum (Shhh you know who. ) ......And when some armies have to wait years' a DECADE! in some cases for a rules up date.
The 40k has poor game support compared to other game sytems , is defencable/provable.

3) The poor definition in the 40k/WHFB rules, is simply down to ambiguity caused by NOT using constant phrasiology.And writing rules in exclusivley , rather than inclusivley way to highten the strategic focus that supports sales.The amount of players asking for clarification of what rules actualy mean sort of back this up.(RAW vs RAI)
Compared to other rule sets available , 40k and WHFB are poorly defined.

Over complication, When a game uses less suitable game mechanics resolution methods, it often needs far more additional rules and resolution methods than necisary.
EG many games use ONE resolution method to resolve ALL damage interaction.
40k uses armour saving throws, invunerable saving throws, STR vs AR , Feel No Pain,Eternal Warrior, Instant death , etc .

Most games the core rules cover 80 to 90 % of all game play.And special rules are used sparingly to achive faction/racial differences.And highlight units /models that are unique on the battle field.
40ks core rules ONLY cover standard infantry.That 1 out of the 14 unit types found in the game of 40k.
40k is the most over complicated counter intuitive rule set I am aware of.Compared to the 30 odd other games I have played over the last 27 years.
The statement the 40k ruleset is poorly derfined , counter intuitive and over complicated is defecible and provable by direct comparison to other rule systems.(Even the game developers say the 40k rules are not that important... )
But this is not the place for this lengthy process.

Many people find the asthetic of 40k/WHFB make up for the shortfall in other areas,and enjoy playing the games .
This is perfectly fine.
I have played games with exellent rules and poorly sculped minatures.
This is perfectly fine .

We have pointed out the dodgy asthetics ,shakey background,dodgy rules writing , poor wording in many games systems to many gamers at our local club.We just want gamers to be well informed so they can pick the games they will enjoy.

All game systems have good points and bad points .It is important to make gamers aware of what they are.
This is what I was trying to convey.

The over the top negative responce the OP experinced was not warrented , or justifiable.

I agree with a few points but 2, and 3, are not so easily defined.
There are rulesets out there that are far more ambiguous than 40k and there are also games with far worse support. GW are not the best of games on these points you mention, but they are far from the worst.

HI.
@ Darkness Eternal.
My point was the core rules should cover the majority of the units and gameplay , with special rules used SPARINGLY to show unique traits and abilities.
This is why 40k is over complicated, the core rules cover so little, the game relies on so many extra seperate rules it becomes bloated.

40k has 100s of pages of rules to cover its straight forward game play.(40k inspiring asthetic and straight forward game play are its stong points IMO.)
The same level of game play could be achived with less than 40 pages of rules.(If we used more apropriate game mechanics and resolution methods.)

Therfore 40k rules are unecissarily over complicated.(2 to 4 times more pages of rules than actualy necissary.)

Rayon,
I know of some absolute stinkers too!
And some games dont get alot of development support because .
a) They dont need it, the gamers are happy with what they have.
b) The game is OOP and gamers just adapt wht they have to what they want.
Both of these conditions mainly occur with games written for mature/experianced gamers .(I would argue GW prime demoghraphic for 40k excludes these 2 options.)

Out of the popular games companies that sell TTMG , GW plc concern for actual game play issues is very low in comparison.(The dev team would do a lot more if left to thier own devises, as they used to do.)

However , comparing rule sets that are sold for money, and have similar levels of complexity in game play, or similar levels of complication in the rules.
40k especialy, is comparitivley over complicated counter intuitive and poorly defined .

Perfection doesnt exist.You just pick the game that right for you.
And those that put asthetic content and straight forward gameplay, over well defined tacticaly richer rule sets , are going to pick different games.

There is no right or wrong just what is right for you!
And gamers only find the right game if they are made aware of all the options availble ,and the strenght AND weaknesses of each game system.

I was posting to try to point out ,I hoped the OP DID objectivly critique 40k to the potential new player.In which case the 'asshats' actions were even more out of place.

I dont wish to derail this thread any more, by lenghty discussions of comparitive game development and support.

I belive the highly negative responce 40k often gets, is more due Kirby's atitude towards GW customers than the actual game of 40k/WHFB.