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.

 BayneMor wrote:

 tvih wrote:

PredaKhaine wrote:
Smoking is an addiction - self inflicted, but still an addiction.
Letting someone who smokes go for one mid game isn't any different to them going for a toilet break. They both can take 10 minutes and they both could come back smelling. Both can lead to a much happier opponant.
A game where everyone is happy is the best game.

It's different. One is a choice, one technically isn't (especially if you're like me and have... health issues related to that, though luckily to date that's never been an issue for any 40k games I've played). You could just take a dump on the gaming room floor for example, but I think everyone can agree that that's not exactly a good idea

Also despite the "tone" in my previous post I'm not saying I would refuse to play against smokers or anything. Just don't expect me to be happy about it if you're hopping out for a cig all the time, and/or smell like it. The smell/smoke of cigarettes gives me a killer headache very, very fast, aside from just simply being a bad smell in its own right.

This ^^

I grew up with both of my parents being smokers (one smoked cigarettes the other cigars) and developed an allergy to the smoke from specific cigars and cigarettes that just give me a killer migraine in seconds flat. It's for this particular reason that I don't particularly enjoy spending time with smokers while they are smoking or just after they had finished smoking. Normally it isn't a problem during a game if my opponent goes out for a smoke break (Heck it gives me more time to study the table and further develop my strategy). If for some reason I do get any side effects from the smoking I'll politely let my opponent know what's going on and apologize if my attitude changes during the game.

I smoke, but will almost never go for one during a game. Only time I will is if my opponent is a smoker, and goes out, then I might as well go with him. When I'm around non smokers though, I do my best not to share my habit. I usually go as far as to have an extra sweater in my bag to change into after having a smoke so I don't smell as strongly. I have a body spray that is hypoallergenic, because my non smoking wife is allergic to many colognes, and it's not an over bearing smell. I guess I get a little self conscious of the smell. I always chew gum after, actually I just chew a lot of gum, helps with cravings. During a game I don't usually get cravings as my attention is held by the game. I also usually only have 4-6 smokes a day.

All that being said, even as a smoker, I sometimes get annoyed with other smokers who smell strongly and get in your face, or need 3 smokes an hour.

Worst kind of player is the one with no sense of humor about the game. I tend to enjoy the roleplaying aspect of 40K (i.e. kind of pretending to actually BE the General while I'm playing). I've played D&D since 1984, so this comes natural to me.

But some players are snarky and nasty towards me because they dont really realize that I'm not JUST playing Chess with them. I'm sort of enjoying the idea of sneaking up behind, or imagining the horror on their mens faces as I shock them with the unexpected tank shock or the balls-out Deep Strike. I even punctuate things with sound effects.

I think a person without a sense of humor doesn't really appreciate the KIND of fun I'm trying to have with the game.

Powergamers! I know there is nothing wrong with playing competitively, but flyers in anything under a 1500pt list ESPECIALLY with an army with ZERO anti-air capability (eldar, tau etc) is just wrong. Anything where the opposing list is just spam of the army's most powerful unit is a facepalm for me.

I have no problems with fluff gamers though, as long as they aren't s about it.

The worst types are the mega-powergamers. Not just types who play competitively, but the types that insist that everyone else should play competitively, and that people who just play for fun are not true wargamers.

For example, I have a fondness for Tyranid Warriors, Carnifexes and Lictors. I wouldn't use them in a tournament, but in a fluffy/friendly game I will. I don't want some person immediately pointing at my lovingly made army and saying "Your army sucks, if you do this equation you can see that you should throw it in the trashcan and take this army composition instead! The META GAME SAYS SO! YOU AREN'T PLAYING COMPETITIVELY SO YOU SUCK!".

Likewise I hate people who turn up at a friendly game, or play against a first-time player, with a list that could win a tournament. There's nothing more off-putting for new players than some cheeseball rolling out a Necron Croissant of Death list against their first-ever list of some Space Marines, a Captain, some Scouts, Assault Marines, a Dreadnought and a Predator.

Pretty sure this falls into the "Other" category, but players that don't take my advice. There is a Tyranid player in my group who 3 times in a row has charged his Swarmlord straight towards my gunline and been cut down by Lacannon/Multimelta shots, and each time I tell him that it was a bad strategic move. I personally would rather known that he has improved and for me to loose than for me to know that I've wasted my breath yet again.

I put power-gamer.

Simply because I recently played a Necron player a few times in a short space and despite having three different narrative based missions and two differing setups for 1500 points games, he still used loads of flyers and really sucked the life out of the game. I honestly couldn't see how it was fun for him, it was just winning or looking frustrated when losing.

The worst part was me challenging his HQ with mine, in the centre of the field of battle, amongst the fallen from either side, and he refuses, hides behind a few wraiths and then slowly kills Mine. It was kind of a sign of how the whole battle went. He'd pretty much won that game as it happened, I just did it to add abit of character to the (already pretty boring) game.

Some of the best battles I've had I haven't always won so I'm not sore, just annoyed when winning becomes everything.

 Garviel wrote:
I put power-gamer.

Simply because I recently played a Necron player a few times in a short space and despite having three different narrative based missions and two differing setups for 1500 points games, he still used loads of flyers and really sucked the life out of the game. I honestly couldn't see how it was fun for him, it was just winning or looking frustrated when losing.

The worst part was me challenging his HQ with mine, in the centre of the field of battle, amongst the fallen from either side, and he refuses, hides behind a few wraiths and then slowly kills Mine. It was kind of a sign of how the whole battle went. He'd pretty much won that game as it happened, I just did it to add abit of character to the (already pretty boring) game.

Some of the best battles I've had I haven't always won so I'm not sore, just annoyed when winning becomes everything.

I played one last week, best game I've played in a long while and it was a draw! Space Marines vs Dark Angels, 400 points so both armies virtually identical, (5 man sniper team, camo cloaks + 10 man tactical with missile launcher and flamer and a captain), I had an 8 man sniper team, librarian, tactical squad with plasma gun/cannon and it was fun! We're both relatively new players, mistakes were clearly made but it was a laugh and that's what counts

I do play one guy who has to win at all costs, he rage quits when he loses, I remember seeing him play Dark Angels vs Grey Knights and he unexpectedly lost one of his units after turn 2 after a bad dice roll and quit the game. It was embarrassing coz the dude's in his 40s

 Garviel wrote:


Simply because I recently played a Necron player a few times in a short space and despite having three different narrative based missions and two differing setups for 1500 points games,

Miscommunication killed that, not the player. He wanted competitive, you wanted narrative. The two are mutually exclusive, in my experience at least. Next time you play, you should really state your reasons for playing and let your opponent decline or accept depending on what they want from the game.

 Griddlelol wrote:

 Garviel wrote:


Simply because I recently played a Necron player a few times in a short space and despite having three different narrative based missions and two differing setups for 1500 points games,

Miscommunication killed that, not the player. He wanted competitive, you wanted narrative. The two are mutually exclusive, in my experience at least. Next time you play, you should really state your reasons for playing and let your opponent decline or accept depending on what they want from the game.

I see where you're coming from. The point was we Always play normal competitive games in our little group of gamers and the one time we all specifically tried to play a narrative, not just me but the other gamers aswell, he still turned out the same list.

One battle ended in a draw as none of the narrative objectives were achieved because he left them alone and just attacked me, like in the battles we normally have. It was kind of naff after two turns realising your the only one trying to play the mission.

So he knew he was changing to narrative and decided to bring power anyway? Again, I wouldn't say that's an issue with power-gamers, that's an issue with that particular player.
I play competitively all the time, but if I'm playing against someone who specifically wants a narrative game (or a new opponent) I'll play by their rules, rather than by mine. However at a tournament, if someone brings a narrative list (which isn't unheard of) I have no qualms about tabling them on turn 2.

Really it's not the type, it's the person. If the person's a douche, he/she/it will always be a douche no matter what they like about 40k.

Yes I see your point.

I played the gauntlet a few years back and it's reminiscent of the lists I came up against then. That's why I would call him a power gamer as it just reminds me of the way tournament players would play. Which is fine, I play that way myself week in week out, but these few games were narrative driven and whereas I tailored my army towards capturing objectives, he didn't. His army was tailored just to kill and make no play for objectives.

People who try to act like they don't need the rulebook to play but don't even know their own army.

The certain type of power gamer, or as i call them the win at all costs gamer,

They bend the rules when they need to win,
they play the worst lists on the planet,
they can actually suck the fun out of competetive play,
they love playing newer gamers in competetive play because its and easy win, that means they get higher VPs

Generally these people are the ones that give other competetive gamers a bad name

I honestly hate the WAAC gamers, they're just so incredibly annoying about rules, but bend it for themselves. But, I have had a time when they were incredibly stupid/derpy.


A few weeks ago (Yes, a few weeks ago. I inherited 1500 points of my guard from an amazing older cousin.) I played my first three games ever at a tournament, the second two guys I faced were positively amazing, and pretty much taught me how to play.

The first one however, was probably the biggest I've ever met. He constantly berated me about how slowed I was for running Tau, that I was going to get destroyed because I wasn't running flyers (ADL evidently "doesn't count") and saying how I'd just made the worst move possible. Whenever I'd kill one of his guys though, he'd complain of cheese. What was this guy running? Cron Air w/ IG allies for the three vendettas. He was running the cheesiest list I've ever seen, and was a general neckbeardy jack . He actually lost, thank god for so much TL railgun goodness and lucky die rolls.

He then followed me around the tourney, cussing me out and flipping me off whenever I told him to shut up. About halfway during my second round, he pulled a tableflip on his opponent and left... leaving his minis on the ground. Guess who ended up with them?

 Trondheim wrote:
Neck beards and unwashed players, oh and anyone who plays Tau

I have a beard.......if you dont mind my asking whats a beard gotta do with being a "bad" player?

i would have to say the worst type of player would be an "elitist" who thinks he has every rule for every codex memorized, as well as someone who is proven wrong and whines about it until they get their way.

 Slipknotsomeone wrote:

 Trondheim wrote:
Neck beards and unwashed players, oh and anyone who plays Tau

I have a beard.......if you dont mind my asking whats a beard gotta do with being a "bad" player?

By "neckbeard" he means closet people/basement dwellers that don't have proper hygiene and are pretty annoying. He's not saying that people with beards are bad.

I love power gamers for the challenge they give me (unless its 3 heldrakes, then i desire to smash them in the face) and I respect fluff players for making super unique armies. I HATE the silent not talking types, if they are just really shy I understand but it just makes games so awkward when there is absolute silence as he moves his models.

 Deunstephe wrote:

By "neckbeard" he means closet people/basement dwellers that don't have proper hygiene and are pretty annoying. He's not saying that people with beards are bad.

Yeah, "neckbeard" is pretty common Internet slang for the most awful and stereotypical nerds. They don't exist in real life as often as people say they do, but they're out there. To be fair, nobody should have a neckbeard anyway.

 Gyrtop wrote:
I honestly hate the WAAC gamers, they're just so incredibly annoying about rules, but bend it for themselves

I had that yesterday! Usually the games I play against him are always fun, he's been wargaming for like 10 years, I've had about 10 games so rules wise I'm trying to remember the BRB, my codex, individual unit powers etc etc and I didn't roll for psychic powers at the start of my movement phase, so did it at the start of my shooting instead, usually I apologise and say I've forgotten but he gave me some uber speech about the importance of timing and when to roll it, yet just a turn earlier he remembered that I didn't roll for morale check (but made me do it) and then on my turn I move my Black Knights behind cover and then he was like "I hope you don't mind me rolling for assault, I forgot" despite literally 10 minutes earlier 'The Speech'

That pissed me off massively

You shouldn't judge him for not letting you go back. Yeah most people would, but its not a given. There is no rule saying you have let him go back, so if it would of let you wreak his army with a good assalt, why would he let you?


Also forgetting to do a moral check can be malicious, and can change the out come of the game. I'd say thats one of the only things that you should go back and do unless its been a turn or so.

So yeah, its not ''Oh your a power-gamer because you wont let me assalt'' but to him it sounds like ''Im insulting you because you arn't letting me make up rules that could potensially give me an advantage''. Just think about it from his view.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
You shouldn't judge him for not letting you go back. Yeah most people would, but its not a given. There is no rule saying you have let him go back, so if it would of let you wreak his army with a good assalt, why would he let you?


Also forgetting to do a moral check can be malicious, and can change the out come of the game. I'd say thats one of the only things that you should go back and do unless its been a turn or so.

So yeah, its not ''Oh your a power-gamer because you wont let me assalt'' but to him it sounds like ''Im insulting you because you arn't letting me make up rules that could potensially give me an advantage''. Just think about it from his view.

It was weird because we both agreed it'd be a practice game to see how our lists would fare, so it was all for fun, yet it was the most serious game he played. Sixth turn I moved my bikes, they moved flat out so couldn't fire/assault AND were behind cover so had no line of sight anyway, this is when he said "I hope you don't mind me rolling for assault, I forgot (from the 5th turn)" and moved his Eldar Jetbikes into my deployment zone to get a linebreaker point. This is why I was annoyed because I use prescience, which affects the shooting/assault phase anyway, and the first turn I completely forgot to roll for it until I was part way through shooting, so I didn't roll for it at all, and then the second turn remembered right before my shooting phase (since I wasn't moving the librarian/tactical squad in the first place)

It annoyed me because he's usually helpful, knows the rules inside out, but yesterday he was stupidly picky "isn't that an illegal list? Why does that unit get 4 attack each? Why are you doing that?" but he knew what he was bringing down, I made no secret of it and it he knew about it coz of Facebook chat etc

It was just really bizarre.

I can totally understand playing against someone like me would be immensely frustrating, I'm a new player but mistakes are made in every game I've seen down there, we have a mix of abilities from Tournament players to complete and utter n00bs like me. Usually every game I've seen is really friendly, with the crafty veterans helping out the newer players, it's always full of banter but this was different

When i vote Powergamer, i specifically mean the ones who not only play to win, but to ensure that the game is not fun for their opponent.

if the game is over before turn 3, i feel bad no matter which side of the game I'm on.

 Brother SRM wrote:

 Deunstephe wrote:

By "neckbeard" he means closet people/basement dwellers that don't have proper hygiene and are pretty annoying. He's not saying that people with beards are bad.

Yeah, "neckbeard" is pretty common Internet slang for the most awful and stereotypical nerds. They don't exist in real life as often as people say they do, but they're out there. To be fair, nobody should have a neckbeard anyway.

Too true, but then there are some people who want to grow a beard but it just stops at their chin. Those poor, beardless people.

As a beginner I've only had one game at a GW store against a GW staff member, using an army I had never heard of and trying to use a codex I was unfamiliar with. This didn't stop some bloke who I'd seen in there the previous week pointing out everything I did wrong tactically, making comments about how long it took me to find out stats on weapon and troops and being cross that I didn't roll on the warp mishap table when I managed to deep strike to within 3/4" of an enemy unit (I was originally looking at playing Tau because I had an old codex of theirs and a crisis suit I'd bought years ago and forgotten about not to mention the fact that they do look pretty cool so did know the deep striking rules and had discussed them with the GW staffer before we started to clarify some points). He didn't share these peeves with me mind you he just kept muttering to his mate and the GW guy very quietly about it all, which irritated me a bit. Not a great introduction to 40k. I don't know what type of gamer I'll end up being (hopefully a patient one, without BO who knows the rules and doesn't use them to cheat and is gracious in defeat and victory) and I don't know what kind of gamer he is but I'd settle for not being that kind of bloke.

Spetulhu wrote:
Bad sportsmanship is on the top of my list. Things like only reminding you of rules when it benefits him, for example.

This is true.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Big Mek Dattrukk wrote:
When i vote Powergamer, i specifically mean the ones who not only play to win, but to ensure that the game is not fun for their opponent.

if the game is over before turn 3, i feel bad no matter which side of the game I'm on.

This too.

I'd have to say a case of bad sportsmanship is usually what annoys me the most. Sure, it's a game and every game like it has to have a winner and a loser, but being a feth about it isn't on. At the end of the day, you play the damn thing because it's fun, and if the other player feels crushed by the game (either because of swift defeat or because of their opponent playing for keeps, so to speak), then it wasn't a good game.

 Bungle wrote:
As a beginner I've only had one game at a GW store against a GW staff member, using an army I had never heard of and trying to use a codex I was unfamiliar with. This didn't stop some bloke who I'd seen in there the previous week pointing out everything I did wrong tactically, making comments about how long it took me to find out stats on weapon and troops and being cross that I didn't roll on the warp mishap table when I managed to deep strike to within 3/4" of an enemy unit (I was originally looking at playing Tau because I had an old codex of theirs and a crisis suit I'd bought years ago and forgotten about not to mention the fact that they do look pretty cool so did know the deep striking rules and had discussed them with the GW staffer before we started to clarify some points). He didn't share these peeves with me mind you he just kept muttering to his mate and the GW guy very quietly about it all, which irritated me a bit. Not a great introduction to 40k. I don't know what type of gamer I'll end up being (hopefully a patient one, without BO who knows the rules and doesn't use them to cheat and is gracious in defeat and victory) and I don't know what kind of gamer he is but I'd settle for not being that kind of bloke.

welcome to dakka

A few pages back someone mentioned taking smoke breaks during a game.

That doesnt bother me. I went to my local shop last year and the guy was smoking a cigar inside the place. I thought that was really rude. There were 20 people there and this guy is right in the middle smoking.

By all means Im up for having a cigar and some drinks but there is a time and place. Have to say ''other''.

My vote is for other. I just can't stand, even in tournaments, where people you play can't let things slide. 40k has a ton of rules and let's face it, no one remembers all of them all the time. So when a disagreement pops up I can't stand when players go full on berserker mode about how they are right and just ruin any fun in the game. Or even worse, when I've let things slide for them and the opponent gets all pissy when I make a mistake or simply disagree with their interpretation.

If you can't roll of a disagreement on a 4+ you need to not be playing a game with plastic toys.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
Fluff players by far. I play a pick up game with one of my good lists, i want a good game vs a good player. As soon as the words ''My army is only for fun, dont expect me to win'' makes me want to pack up there and then. I dont play to auto win, i dont want to slaughter you because your army sucks. If you want to play fluff, play with someone who plays fluff, dont call me cheesey when my archon gets to Str10 because you feed him sanguary priests and punches in a landraider ''because that would never happen''.

I play to win, but the word play is just as important as the word win.

I've been playing 40k in one form or another for a very long time. These days my armies are ALWAYS theme based. I don't build lists just using the "perfect and most cost effective for the power" units in my codex because it is boring using the same units every game. I have thousands of points for each of my armies specifically to be able to switch out my armies regularly and rarely play the same force two weeks in a row. I AM a good player and I WILL give you a good game as soon as you get off your high horse and acting like I am ruining your day by playing the army I WANT to play from my side of the table. The table top experience is a shared experience. We are not there just to fulfill YOUR needs for the game.

If you have specific needs for the game then you walk in the door like a man and loudly state that you have your "good list", which I expect means tournement crushing list, and would like to play some games against similar lists, people will either seek you out or not bother. If you are just there to play pick up games as part of the group and bring a tournement list, then you are bit of a douche for being annoyed when the person across from you ISN'T playing such a list and an even bigger douche for getting pissy when someone calls you on playing a tournement list. After all the person you are facing could have just as much of a tournement level list as you, but it doesn't in any way guarantee a good game or that they are even a good player. I find a higher incidence of poor players playing net lists than good players, because they think the list will win the game for them despite their complete lack of tactical acumen or skill at the game.

Skriker