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.

Makumba wrote:

Chancetragedy wrote:
Just gonna say I'm done arguing with brick walls. And I'm glad you guys don't play where I do. Because I'd be fairly ticked if my only game of the week walked off after turn 1. It's fairly unbelievable to me that anyone would do this. But to each his own.

picking up dead models when you cant do a thing when your opponent is killing you for 2 turns can hardly be called a game . Its like you end up clinched up in hth in WFB and you know neither of you can/will break , but you will win through attrition in 4 turns. technicly you could roll it , but some dont bother . they would rather start a game against someone else.

gk wanted to call the game here... i asked to continue, and we did, so big credit there. but its definitily not fun "playing out" a battle that really... you cant win. ive had games of fantasy that way... all my warmachines self destruct, my wizards miscast and kill themselves or loose magic levels, then next turn i fail any and all panic checks, get charged and yea.. at that point its game over. ive conceded those a few times - but i always offer an immediate rematch with maybe a diffierent scenario. that way i can redeploy, change dice and maybe have a better game. - and the other guy dosent feel like he gets no game

I had one like this week . I was playing a nercon scyth wing .second turn I blowed up all transports the orc player had and made his lootas run 12"[2 turns to get back in to range of shoting my dudes if I didnt move] . I didnt want to get 3 turns of rolling shoting and him doing nothing , so we stoped and played some warmachine .

Maybe he just got into the hobby or competition isn't his thing so he doesn't meta game like that.

there is a name for people who arent in to competition in life. they are called losers. He shouldnt have build an army based on looks/conversions/"cool" , if he wants to have an army and not a collection of models.

Your first two points were excellent.

Your third point makes you look stupid. I have an army based on looks/conversions/"cool".

I can get a game in whenever I want. Mainly because my "cool" "looks"ing "conversion" army makes for great day of gaming win or lose.

If at any point you are unhappy with the game and feel like continuing it will be a chore, it's time to quit. If that's turn 1, turn 5, or turn 3,685. Doesn't matter. If both people aren't having fun, it's no longer a game. Respect those who leave turn 1. If they aren't having fun, they are not obligated to play. Anyone who considers it an obligation really needs to rethink their life.

OTOH, often playing through what looks like a losing situation will allow you to actually salvage a hard-fought win or draw, and/or will teach you more about how to beat the army you're facing in future games. In my experience, coming back from an early beating can be extremely satisfying. I had a tournament game last month where I lost my Farseer, 7/9 Harlequins, 6/8 assault marines and their Rhino, and 5/10 assault marines before I even got to move, and still came back to win the primary objective of the mission.

I've come back from seemingly-crippled position on turn one and won or drawn a bunch of times, and had it done to me.

Sometimes people should be encouraged to keep their chin up and not quit too easily. Losing and feeling like you're having a bad game can become a self-fulfilling prophecy easily if you have a negative attitude.

I think my record is managing to draw a game with exactly one model left alive on the final turn, in close combat, contesting an objective.

I can get a game in whenever I want. Mainly because my "cool" "looks"ing "conversion" army makes for great day of gaming win or lose.

I have seen people start the game in groups of 4-5 and it was always the dude that picked the wood elfs/tyranids/etc that quit first .I have never seen people quit or be desatisfied with the game while playing IG/SW/Necron type of armies . Never seen one . Picking up army based on how good an army is or how good GW makes it in general , gives a bigger chance for one to have more fun . what ever the fun is B&P or serious .
I mean would you recommend nids to anyone new , when the desing team gives hints like "we have problems with balancing tyranids" [aka "we have no idea how to make them work without breaking the game one way or another"]?

In my experience, coming back from an early beating can be extremely satisfying. I had a tournament game last month where I lost my Farseer, 7/9 Harlequins, 6/8 assault marines and their Rhino, and 5/10 assault marines before I even got to move, and still came back to win the primary objective of the mission

In 2500 this means your probably still have half of your army . the orc player had nothing to dent an untouched army of GKs , he couldnt score , he had line breaker and first blood against him , if he tried to play aggresive it would be slay the warlord too . Yeah he should like totaly go for the 2 more turns of removing his own models from the table . People are forgetting that nids or DE or orcs are not marines . Marines can sometimes lose half an army in a single turn . Happens . But if an orc player loses half his army in a single turn , then there is no place for a come back , because if someone blew up half an orc army in a single turn , then with only half or less orc army returning fire the next turn will see the orcs dieing again .

I was playing 2k, so I lost about 25% of the army before I moved.

The Ork was playing just over 2k, and suffered what, 10%, 15% casualties?

 Mannahnin wrote:
I was playing 2k, so I lost about 25% of the army before I moved.

The Ork was playing just over 2k, and suffered what, 10%, 15% casualties?

he lost a lot more . without the tar piting of paladins , before his second turn he would have lost both his boy units , the storm boyz the wagon and would have a lone warboss unit facing the whole untouched GK army . he lost almost the whole whole army on his 1st turn .

No he didn't. The Paladins can only hit two units per turn. In the first turn they didn't wipe out either of the units they crippled. They killed "all but 9" of one unit (so 21 models, and now the guys who fled can rally on a 9, probably with a re-roll), and 13 of another (leaving probably 17). That's still two viable scoring units, which can still hold or contest objectives. So on turn 1 the Paladins failed to kill even one unit. The Storm Boys not making the charge is arguably better for the Ork player, as that forces the Paladins to shoot/charge the storm boys now, instead of hitting a scoring unit, such as finishing off one of the units they damaged on turn 1.

I'm not going to argue whether it was reasonable for him to bail any more. I've made my point about that.
I strongly agree with Mannahnin, however. On turn one, the Ork player had two units damaged. On turn two, he is set to lose his stormboyz (not guaranteed. They could hold his palis for a turn potentially) and have one boys unit finished off. Assuming his Stormboyz die immediately, on turn 3 he loses his second damaged boys squad and let's say his battle wagon. That comes to about 700ish points half way through the game. You say he lost most of his army on turn one, but assuming that he manages to wipe a squad with each of his Pali units every turn ( however that's rather optimistic for the GK player) he has lost a third of his army half way through the game.

As a Tau player. In one of my first games against IG, I lost the innitiative and proceeded to lose a 170pt hammerhead and all battlesuits bar my single wound left commander (300pts worth) as well as had a few infantry units take casualties. That was 1500pts and I lost in one turn what the Ork player would have lost in a bad case in two turns. Not only that, but most of my strong killing power had been wiped. From there, I quickly changed tactics and turned defensive whilst hugging cover and playing guerilla style.
I won that game. There were three objectives, and I had an outflanking Kroot squad grab one in a forest on turn 4 and holding strong against all enemy attacks. A FW team in a DF held another as it came in from reserves On turn 4 ( game ended turn 5). Although I lost just about everything else over the course of the game ( I finished with my two units on objective, though the devilish cacked it leaving my FWs to tough it out, and my crisis commander, the tough little cookie!), I stuck through, changed tactics when faced for the first time with a reasonably strong IG list (and I wasn't even playing cookie cutter Tau. I had 4 battlesuits, a single broadside and a hammerhead for my competitive part - near all of which died before letting out a shot). So, no. I don't think that the Ork players plight was hopeless.

I know I said I was done arguing this, but I had just remembered that inspirational tale, and who could resist telling that! In any case, despite that little anecdote, you're overstating drastically how much he lost, and even if he did lose what you said, if you think there was no way to win that - then you need to learn to play more flexibly.

P.S. @DAaddict, all fair points, but I'll maintain my opinion and leave you to yours. None thing though; he hadn't lost his stormboyz on turn one, so those calculations are probably more apt to he end of turn two.

In sixth edition, models die faster, but the process of removing them from the table is slower and somewhat convoluted. If the process of a game is going to be nothing more than watching one side remove models, it's not going to be much fun for anyone.

People are forgetting that nids or DE or orcs are not marines .

Sorry, but as someone who rather loves DE I must point out that DE and plenty of other non-MEQ armies can take a beating in the opening turn of the game and still consistently recover. It just requires a different response. In the case of DE you lash out like a cornered animal. I believe I have a brief account of a battle where I got hammered first turn by some Forgeworld awfulness and proceeded to tear apart the hardy force vastly outnumbering me floating around page 4 or so. If anything about the first turn usually wins the game it's movement, I would say. Drawbacks happen, but usually things are salvageable.

Now that I am not sleep-deprived and thinking a touch better I would like for there to be a more comprehensive list of the Ork units and their casualties incurred on the first turn. Originally I was under the impression that they had lost well over half, maybe three quarters, of their army. As I keep reading it seems like less of a blow was dealt.

As for the sporadic bursts of bashing Draigowing as cheesy...I think that perhaps it's just that many other armies are old and in need of an update or that certain more-recent ones (*cough*'nids*cough*) were written...badly. Mabye I've just been lucky, but I've never had a problem chewing up Draigowing with Deathwing (as expected, we're still the masters of 'wing armies ) or DE.

I still stand by conceding opponents in general ought to not have anything held against them, save for in tournaments, perhaps. The lose of the chance for a great comeback scene to occur is more than enough punishment for surrender.

< Taken by the void dragon. >

People are saying when you know you have no chance of winning you might as well quit; I've got two important questions.

- Where do you get this gift of prescience that let's you predict the outcome of a dice game?

- More importantly, where do you get off saying you will know the outcome on turn 1?

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

Where do you get this gift of prescience that let's you predict the outcome of a dice game?

More importantly, where do you get off saying you will know the outcome on turn 1?

Prescience? If, just by doing the averages you know how many models are likely to die next enemy turn? And you know that what's left won't manage enough of a dent in the enemy to have a chance? Sometimes it really is clear.

A bad first turn is a pretty good sign things are going to hell. Sometimes the guy that goes first pounds the other so hard that he can't recover, sometimes he has so bad luck with rolls that what looked like a losing setup becomes unstoppable. Like our summer tournament where the IG put 12 S6 shots and a S8 large blast against one of my Rhinos and didn't manage to do more than a hull point damage to it. His game was lost right there, even if we played it out anyway. The rest was just my troops getting up in his face and killing hapless guardsmen by the bucketload until they ran out.

This is why random charge is an unnecessary penalty. The cost of failing a charge roll is far greater than the reward or making a slightly longer charge.

And the new charging through difficult terrain just rubs salt into the gaping wound.

Before, you had a roughly 1 in 6 chance of charging 5" or more, up to 12". Now, you have a roughly 1 in 6 chance of charging 5" or more, up to 6".

Because I guess the game designers still thought that assault was too easy to get into...

I don't play in tournaments or at the game store against strangers.

I only play against my friends. Quitting on turn 1 would be rude as we plan to play at least a week in advance, travel to each others houses, and nearly 100% of the time are playing a campaign game.

If I was playing a new person in a game store and I was losing, I'd still play it out, and expect the other guy to do the same.

HOWEVER, if the guy I was playing was a complete ass/dick/jackass, I'd have no problem stopping the game at any time, turn 1, turn 4, during set-up, whatever. I'm not going to waste my time playing a jerk.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:


A bad first turn is a pretty good sign things are going to hell. Sometimes the guy that goes first pounds the other so hard that he can't recover, sometimes he has so bad luck with rolls that what looked like a losing setup becomes unstoppable. Like our summer tournament where the IG put 12 S6 shots and a S8 large blast against one of my Rhinos and didn't manage to do more than a hull point damage to it. His game was lost right there, even if we played it out anyway. The rest was just my troops getting up in his face and killing hapless guardsmen by the bucketload until they ran out.

Might I ask, what mathematical principle are you using to determine shoddy rolls on turn one are going to mean the game is over. All I can see in your post is superstition. Though it would be annoying, I have at least some empathy for someone who forfeits due to crippling losses. If someone ditched a game with me turn one because he 'didn't feel like he would win', I can honestly say that they are not who I want to be playing against.
Could you please give me a logical reason that a bad first turn means you CANNOT win? Honestly, if you think the simple fact of dice averages suggesting a loss are reason enough to quit, then you're in the wrong hobby. By that logic, all you have to do is look at your opponents list and leave, because 40K in general is not balanced. Some armies do better than others, but this is a DICE game. Poor odds mean next to nothing. If you're happy to never play anyone with a stronger list, then be my guest, but you won't get very far in he hobby.

Aun Tier wrote:Could you please give me a logical reason that a bad first turn means you CANNOT win?

It's about opportunity cost. If you show up at a 1500 point game, and your opponent blows away 500 points at the top of turn 1, then, really, you've brought a 1,000 point list to a 1500 point game. Those things that happen early on in a game snowball down through the rest of the game as the impact of slain units is felt turn after turn. As shooting tends to happen early in the game (and 6th ed is certainly skewed towards shooting), this makes this snowballing effect more pronounced.

Anyways, the more disproportionate your casualties, the luckier you need to be in order to turn things around. Yes, it's possible that that ork player could have turned around at the top of turn 2 and rolled practically nothing but 6's, but by that point, that's the kind of luck that the ork player would NEED in order to be able to turn the game around. As this isn't terribly likely, you can see why it wouldn't be worth the effort to spend the time playing just fishing for miraculous die rolling (which would have to get more miraculous every turn due to the mechanic in the above paragraph).

Why I personally would have stuck around until turn 2 is over, but by that point, just to see if there was a miracle in store, but after that, the odds are going to be so very finite, that they're not really worth playing anymore.

Chancetragedy wrote:
How to deploy your melta guns safely. How to bait the land raiders into doing what you want them to do through maneuvering. How to be a decent non TFG sport and realize its a game and you made a mistake. How to play the mission when you don't have a clear advantage? Seriously, how rediculous is your argument? There are ALWAYS lots of things you can learn from games played winning or losing. How big of a poor sport do you have to be to pull a turn 1 baby quit? To me it's simple. You entered into a verbal contract to play a game against someone who is taking time out of whatever they could be Doing. Only to quit 10 minutes in because your mad you lost some troops. Why even agree to play?

Uh, personal attacks really work well in an argument about people being TFG. You forcing a player who has absolutely no fun playing the game to stay and slaughter every last of his models while calling him names is being TFG. Plus, you know, you could just get someone else to play after those ten minutes. There is usually at least one person hanging around every store who is waiting for an opponent.

There are games you learn absolutely nothing from. But since you obviously did read and/or understand my examples, there really isn't much point to it. Have fun clubbing baby seals

 Aun Tier wrote:
I'm hearing people comparing this to people losing all anti-tank on tun one against 3LRs, but this guy only lost reportedly 300ish points out of 2000, and lost a charge. There is nothing comparable in these examples.

I made that completely fictional example up for Cancetragedy, as he clearly couldn't grasp that a game could turn completely unfun and not worth playing on turn one. From experience I know that players who never played orks tend to have problem grasping the ork units, so I used marines for the example.
Of course, the example is much worse than the actual situation (because the salamanders player didn't do anything wrong), but neither game is really worth playing more than the other. The ork play realized during turn one that his list blows and that he has no way of handling paladins. Turns 2-7 wouldn't have held any new things to learn. The point really is, no matter whether you have 20 or 20.000 points left on the table, if you can't affect the game anymore, the game is not worth playing.

 Mannahnin wrote:

I disagree entirely. 6th has actually mitigated this matchup issue. In 5th 1/3 of the games were Kill Points, which was a very difficult scenario in which to beat Draigowing. And a single unit of Scoring Paladins could hold multiple objectives at one time. Now Kill Points are only 1/6 of missions, and a given unit of Paladins can only hold one objective. You can still win or draw with only a few models left on the board in 6th, and in fact it's easier than it used to be against lists like Draigowing with a few, very tough units.

Is this your first edition change?

Heavy guns never tire is quite easy to win for draigowing as well, but otherwise I agree with you. Paladins are quite easy to get off objectives with tank shocks, and the relic is pretty much an auto-loss for them if you have any troops faster than footsloggers. Even then, Draigowing can't afford to run, as they lose precious shooting that way.

Spetulhu wrote:
Then he'd have nothing capable of dealing with terminators except the Warboss w. Nobz and possibly the other Warboss if he wasn't running away at the time.

Both nobz and warboss simply fold to paladins due to NFW, backed by a lot of attacks and WS5. Sad truth is, a warboss is better off shooting than charging a unit with NFW.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
People are saying when you know you have no chance of winning you might as well quit; I've got two important questions.

- Where do you get this gift of prescience that let's you predict the outcome of a dice game?

- More importantly, where do you get off saying you will know the outcome on turn 1?

The same place I learned that I'm never going to win the lottery.

@spetulhu

Having looked over my post, I think that I may have been a bit hostile towards you. For that, I apologise.

@Ailaros
It's funny that you should make that specific example. If you would have a look at one of my earlier posts, I actually detailed a game where that exact scenario occurred to me, and I won. So, whilst its certainly a tough spot to be in, I definitely wouldn't call it unwinnable. As for the rest of your post, you made some good points, and I respect that much.

 Aun Tier wrote:

Could you please give me a logical reason that a bad first turn means you CANNOT win?

Well, because you aksed...

Have you ever been the poor b d with their shiny new Daemon army who ends up on the other side of the table from some donkeycave playing with 30+ models capable of using Warp Quake... And they go first because you failed to sieze the initiative?!

Sure, it's a 'perfect storm' example, but that's happen to me more times than I care to count.
Being forced to deploy half your army into a tiny little 10"x12" area is never going to happen. Losing perhaps 25%-30% of your initial wave of units to forced auto-mishaps means you've just auto-lost on your first turn. (remember, as a Daemon player, I have no way of stopping Warp Quake and no way to alter/buff my reserve rolls!)

Now what typically happens against the 'average' GK army is there's a full Strike or Interceptor squad present. If the GK player wants to be a dick, they can simply castle up their deployment, throw the Strikes/'Ceptors out in front of their army, spread out the full 2" coherency and then blast off a quake bubble that will force me to drop an average of 24" away from them to ensure I don't auto-mishap!
Considering Daemons outside of Tzeentch builds have the least amount of shooting in the game, the "game" at that point will just involve my units trying to hop from cover to cover while getting blasted off the table by the GK army.

Hence why as a Daemon player, I won't play against GK's. It's not fun in the least, and typically, it's very easy for the GK player to force a Turn 1 or 2 loss.

Experiment 626 wrote:

 Aun Tier wrote:

Could you please give me a logical reason that a bad first turn means you CANNOT win?

Well, because you aksed...

Have you ever been the poor b d with their shiny new Daemon army who ends up on the other side of the table from some donkeycave playing with 30+ models capable of using Warp Quake... And they go first because you failed to sieze the initiative?!

Sure, it's a 'perfect storm' example, but that's happen to me more times than I care to count.
Being forced to deploy half your army into a tiny little 10"x12" area is never going to happen. Losing perhaps 25%-30% of your initial wave of units to forced auto-mishaps means you've just auto-lost on your first turn. (remember, as a Daemon player, I have no way of stopping Warp Quake and no way to alter/buff my reserve rolls!)

Now what typically happens against the 'average' GK army is there's a full Strike or Interceptor squad present. If the GK player wants to be a dick, they can simply castle up their deployment, throw the Strikes/'Ceptors out in front of their army, spread out the full 2" coherency and then blast off a quake bubble that will force me to drop an average of 24" away from them to ensure I don't auto-mishap!
Considering Daemons outside of Tzeentch builds have the least amount of shooting in the game, the "game" at that point will just involve my units trying to hop from cover to cover while getting blasted off the table by the GK army.

Hence why as a Daemon player, I won't play against GK's. It's not fun in the least, and typically, it's very easy for the GK player to force a Turn 1 or 2 loss.

So niave.

Thats a tailored army, not a competitive one. It will never show up unless the GK player knows he is going to fight a daemon player.

Against any other matchup, that GK army will do pretty bad.

In fact, the truely competitive Gk armies often have no warp quake at all, or only enough to keep the daemons out of the GK deployment zone. henchmen spam, Draigowing, and Purifier spam all lack Warp quake.

Hmm. I think that I made that question more general than I intended.
I was specifically curious in this case why an IG player failing to kill a Rhino was game over. Was there more to this than I was seeing? Because from what I read, that was the only poor thing to happen in the IG turn. I don't see at all how that failure is anymore than an inconvenience.

 Ailaros wrote:

Aun Tier wrote:Could you please give me a logical reason that a bad first turn means you CANNOT win?

It's about opportunity cost. If you show up at a 1500 point game, and your opponent blows away 500 points at the top of turn 1, then, really, you've brought a 1,000 point list to a 1500 point game.

Completely ridiculous. If you brought a 1000pt army to that game, you'd be left with 500pts to retaliate. You absorbed a lot of firepower and lost 500pts, that doesn't mean to effectvely brought 1000pts. You still took that punishing turn of firepower. Your argument would make sense if you took a 1000pt army and your opponent didn't get a turn, but that doesn't happen.

[

 Ailaros wrote:


Completely ridiculous. If you brought a 1000pt army to that game, you'd be left with 500pts to retaliate. You absorbed a lot of firepower and lost 500pts, that doesn't mean to effectvely brought 1000pts. You still took that punishing turn of firepower. Your argument would make sense if you took a 1000pt army and your opponent didn't get a turn, but that doesn't happen.

500pts vs 1500pts , what kind of a shoty army are we talking about here . must be meq too , if we are talking about absorbtion , because nids/IG/tau in general just die . In the 20 paladins vs orcs example there was so many orcs dead , only because the paladins cant kill more then 2 units/models of orcs per turn . So if the opposing army kills 2/3 or half of your army then the first thing it is going to kill , is the stuff that can return fire or assault back . If I go first and my valks and chimeras get blown up by necron scyths coming in second , then I may technicly have 50 dudes on the ground and some Lemmans , but if this is turn 2 , then the chance of them surviving is rather small .

So niave.

Thats a tailored army, not a competitive one. It will never show up unless the GK player knows he is going to fight a daemon player.

its not tailored it is something GK squad get as basic power . It would be like calling an normal marine army tailored against orcs/nids , because it took the free flamer for its tacs.

In fact, the truely competitive Gk armies often have no warp quake at all, or only enough to keep the daemons out of the GK deployment zone.

and in a tournament he wouldnt probably be playing demons .

s a Tau player. In one of my first games against IG, I lost the innitiative and proceeded to lose a 170pt hammerhead and all battlesuits bar my single wound left commander (300pts worth) as well as had a few infantry units take casualties. That was 1500pts and I lost in one turn what the Ork player would have lost in a bad case in two turns. Not only that, but most of my strong killing power had been wiped. From there, I quickly changed tactics and turned defensive whilst hugging cover and playing guerilla style.

bad example . first of all tau are shoting and you had scoring units left alive . the orc had 7-12 man orc mobs alive [cant shot , cant charge , no longer fearless ] . you had mobility in the form of outflanking units and skimer transports and you were playing against a static army . the orc could play guerilla style with what the 5 choppers or maybe pot shoting with the nob shootas ?

(not guaranteed. They could hold his palis for a turn potentially)

in the open so no cover . 4x4 psycannon shots and 5x2 str5[counting there is a banner in the pally unit] followed up by 10 paladins hiting in hth . overwatch is in , but so is the old pre FAQ wound LoS! wound allocation . there is a green stain left of the stormboyz after 1 turn.

There are many sides to this common question, then of course there is the specific instance you mention.

The crux of the matter is that *most* of the times players who think it is over in turn one are not making wise choices.

I have played many games where it looked very bleak early in the game, and have managed to pull out a good game. I am sure many others have had similar results.

In fact, often, I point out that you don't have to beat your opponents army, you just have to defeat the other player.

Also, all the comments about "learning more" etc. Are all valid.

However, having said all that...some games are just bad match ups, period - either by bad luck or bad planning or just mission + terrain + list combo; what ever. It happens.

While I have seen VERY few games actually decided early (as opposed to players thinking they are) I can admit...there are the rare cases where things may be indeed a lost cause with little recourse.

So, was it good sportsmanship? I don't know - thats highly subjective. I can say from your description it did not seem like bad sportsmanship...but again, that's subjective.

 Ailaros wrote:
And the new charging through difficult terrain just rubs salt into the gaping wound.

Before, you had a roughly 1 in 6 chance of charging 5" or more, up to 12". Now, you have a roughly 1 in 6 chance of charging 5" or more, up to 6".

Because I guess the game designers still thought that assault was too easy to get into...

Edit: I see what you're saying.

Fortunately that's just a badly worded update. All it says is to insert the bit about "by the shortest path" into that sentence. It doesn't overrule anything about the following sentences which state that you make it on 3D6 drop highest, it just makes it clear that you can't take a longer path to go around the terrain and use your standard assault distance.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Sometimes people should be encouraged to keep their chin up and not quit too easily. Losing and feeling like you're having a bad game can become a self-fulfilling prophecy easily if you have a negative attitude.

This. Obviously sometimes the game will legitimately be decided early, but I've seen way too many games where one player just gave up after taking losses that were far from crippling. And I know I've been on the losing end of that opening turn, felt like the game was hopeless and I might as well just kill what I can, and then come back to win a solid victory. Sure, the dice can always continue to hate you, but far more often it's just a psychological question of whether you can suffer losses and keep playing, or just give it all up as hopeless the moment you're at a disadvantage.

In short: don't be that guy who loses a unit on turn 1 and ragequits because he's expecting to win the game with no losses.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
I would never again play anyone who quit on Turn 1.

At that point, you've probably invested an hour into getting the little men out, making a battlefield for them, and pushing them around some. Quitting on turn 1 means that person is ok with murdering an hour of my life away.

It depends on what you did. In this case, his enemy clearly decided to be an arsehole and pull a Draigowing off. In friendlies, people should refrain from playing cheesy WAAC lists and play normal, balanced lists unless everyone agrees on fielding whatever he feels like. Goddamn, just communicate before the game. Say what you want, what you don't want, your expectations of game, etc.

Keep in mind that the 'donkey-cave' as you put him is probably about to read your post. There's no need for insults like that. On top of that, he has already stated that he clearly asked the Ork player if he wanted to play a 2055pt game against his Draigowing army. The Ork player accepted without complaint, and so you cant say that he sprung this list on him. It's simply not what happened.