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.

Not a single point over, for reasons eloquently stated by others.

0 points over is acceptable.

When two people agree upon a points limit, both should have enough respect to make their list equal to or less than the agreed upon limit.

1 point over is breaking the agreement, and disrespecting your opponent.

If you are over, it should be no big deal to drop something to make your list come in at or under the agreed upon points limit, and this should be done well before you are about to deploy.

I make lists that come to the points limit without going over. Then I tweak them and re-make them to shuffle things around without going over the limit that we have agreed upon.

If I am expected to make a list at or below the limit we have agreed upon, then I ask my opponent to adhere to the agreement as well. It is just common courtesy to do so.

Insaniak has hit it on the head as well.

 insaniak wrote:
The whole *ahem* point of the limit is that it forces a limit on just how much stuff can be crammed into your army. If he really wants that LC on his razorback, then he needs to make slack elsewhere.

 DeffDred wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
In my friendly games being 1-10 over is fine, the other person just adds a few points in of their own to even it up

Though I agree that a points limit is a points limit, I can see this as a resonable compromise.

It's not reasonable at all because one player is getting much more out of it. For example, you go over the point limit to bring a melta gun instead of a flamer, but I can't make a similar upgrade because I've already taken all of my melta gun upgrades I had available. So I get to throw on some random 5-point upgrade that will probably not contribute anything, while you get something you actually wanted.

Also, there is no need to compromise, just like we don't compromise between my opinion that my lasguns should be STR 10 AP 1 and your opinion that they should be STR 3 AP -, with a "compromise" of STR 6 AP 4.

Funny how people say a few points over is no big deal. If it's really no big deal then why the difficulty staying under the limit?

If a player can't even follow the very first rule of our game, the size of the battle, how can I possibly not expect that he will be just as cavalier with all of the other rules?

When I play with my friends, we don't quibble about 10 points or so, but we also don't make lists that are consistently exactly 10 points over, either. I think the amount of flex on this is pretty proportionate to if you are, or are playing, TFG.

Ultimately we'd rather be playing then pointing so if someone is 4 or 5 points over I can always add something fast to balance it, or more honestly, shrug and say "ok, let's play". And, with my friends, generally speaking we're either over or under by about 4 or so points.

If I cared at all about winning I might feel differently.

I'd never, ever bring a list that was over if I were playing a stranger, but I also don't play strangers anyway.

It's "point limit", not "point suggestion". A 1k game means </=1,000 points, not 1000+"extra so I can have more gear/troops lolz". I assume all my opponents are sufficiently versed in basic addition, crazy right?>

Yeah.. I trimmed a DL down yesterday as I was going to be a few points over a 750 point game.

I considered being 5 points over so I could fit in MSS in such a small game would be a bit of a spanker move.

I personally don't mind if people are 1-5 points over, however I also think its fairly easy to be under the points value. It just means you need to drop something, which really should not be a problem.

 Ouze wrote:
When I play with my friends, we don't quibble about 10 points or so, but we also don't make lists that are consistently exactly 10 points over, either. I think the amount of flex on this is pretty proportionate to if you are, or are playing, TFG.

Ultimately we'd rather be playing then pointing so if someone is 4 or 5 points over I can always add something fast to balance it, or more honestly, shrug and say "ok, let's play". And, with my friends, generally speaking we're either over or under by about 4 or so points.

If I cared at all about winning I might feel differently.

I'd never, ever bring a list that was over if I were playing a stranger, but I also don't play strangers anyway.

Exactly. I feel the same way about it. I mainly play only with friends, so its usually not a big deal, but I can see how playing with strangers or at a tourney it would be unacceptable to be over.

I generally don't have an issue going over, and am usually within 10 points or less under, or exact.

The people I play with are all really mellow. A few times I have been over, it's been by less than ten points, due to units rather than wargear. I disclose the additional points, and why. No one has cared. For the record, those extra points did nothing to save me a savage beating.

My second game, I had a really bizarre point total. 673 or something. I was at an awkward stage in my acquisition, and it was a pick up game. My opponent/teacher was very gracious, and just made a similar list to be a good match, with little regard to points. In that instance, I would rather be flexible and encourage new blood. I was very grateful for this player, and his willingness to accept my weird list.

If the list I really want to run is significantly over the agreed upon limit, I suggest we bump the limit up, or have a second list to go with. In those instances it's usually a new unit I want to try, or combo of units. I've heard others accept a breach of the limit equal to the point cost of a base infantry unit. I personally think that's excessive. I have had a single GH make a difference, though not game changing. 15+ points is pretty hefty.

I think the big thing is at least at this point for me, I've planned my purchases around a particular list, or variations of a particular list. I decide what point limit I want to get to with my next couple purchases, then find units and loadouts that fit.

As I acquire more points, and really get to experiment with lists, I'm sure there will be harder decisions to make, but that's part of the fun I think.

Ultimately, I think it's situational. A new player, with a small force that would be severely weakened by cutting or lowering a unit, like me in my 2nd game, no big deal. Take all you can, and I'll make a list to fit. Playing with a buddy who wants to try out their new shiny, make it fit as best you can within reason. I'll adjust my list accordingly. While I think the limit should be met, or less, but I'm not going to stress over 5 points, regardless of where they came from. I also think it's more important to have equivalent point values on both sides. If we initially planned on 1500 but end up playing 1625, so what? As long as we're even. Staying at or under has never been an issue for either side in the games I've played.

Like my meta, I'm pretty relaxed. First rule is to have fun. I've never had that rule broken, regardless of point values.

If the other guy wants to be strict then I''ll be strict, if he wants lax and informal then it's lax and informal for me. I'm not particularly choosy and I prefer the game be fun for all parties involved.

I'm extremely lenient in apocalypse though, as it's pretty much a "bring your whole collection" party game. The game is going to take forever anyway and the points values are so large that quibbling over a point or two is meaningless.

I chose 1 to 10 points over, because I like the suggestion the rulebook gives on page 108 choosing your army section, under size of game. (it states that most players would be happy to let the opponent get a few points over the agreed total) But even if it wasnt written in the rulebook, or in the countless of battle reports in white dwarf, I would still be happy to give my opponents a few points. As long as they arent taking needlesly advantage of it. And as most other have said, I dont think it should be allowed in tournaments. ( as people would then just make 1510 points armies instead of 1500 as an example)

My friends and I always have a 5 point slack rule. Not that we actually make lists to take advantag of it, just that if someone ends up 1-5 points over, we ignore it. Any higher, and you're entering 'entire model' territory and they just drop a model.

Personally, I've started to take a more conservative approach where if I can't hit the point limit exactly, I'll go under, even if it means dropping a model to be under. I certainly don't quibble if a friend is still over the point limit, since I'd rather just get on with playing than watching him sit there for 30 minutes making a new list.

Griddlelol wrote:Also, the poll is rather biased. It makes out that by following the rules that two people have agreed on, I'm some how unreasonable.

Yeah, I find this curious as well.

I take a very hard line on points (we have a points system for a reason), but I wouldn't necessarily refuse to play someone because of it. Heck, I've played games with points handicaps on purpose on more than one occasion. As such, the poll isn't sufficiently nuanced.

But if I have to choose only one option, it's got to be the top one. Points limits are limits just as much as the limit of only moving 6" (Not six and a little bit more), or the limit of melta being half the range of the weapon, or the limit of only getting to do stuff on your turn or take units from your codex (or limited allies). The game is defined by its rules, not the rules subject to what one person decides on at any given time.

Point limits are point limits you are under or you don't understand the word limit;

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/limit


Now I am a tolerant person and so I forgive people for their lack of understanding this concept which is fairly advanced and taught to me thoroughly by my bank when I was young. I personally have a nearly 30 pt deficit in my 1500 pts Deathwing list (1470 pts). I marked 0 pts over but I have and will play up to 1.5x over my own points but I will get progressively less "friendly" in my play style and list selection as you get more "liberal" with your points usage.

 -Loki- wrote:
I certainly don't quibble if a friend is still over the point limit, since I'd rather just get on with playing than watching him sit there for 30 minutes making a new list.

How are people taking 30 minutes to make a new list? Drop a model or an upgrade and start the game.

 ansacs wrote:
Point limits are point limits you are under or you don't understand the word limit;
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/limit

Can we stop with the "limit = limit"?
You don't get fined for slightly driving above the speed LIMIT, so that argument is nonsense.

I expect my opponents to not go over the point limit.
And my opponents can expect me not to make a drama if they go slightly over this limit.

And as long as their list isn't 101% cheese, I won't cry over a couple of points.

Kangodo wrote:
You don't get fined for slightly driving above the speed LIMIT, so that argument is nonsense.

Depends on where you are, and if it's quota day for the police. Driving even 1 mph over the speed limit is still speeding, and you can still get a ticket for it.

And my opponents can expect me not to make a drama if they go slightly over this limit.

Those opponents have unreasonable expectations, just like it would be unreasonable for me to expect you to not make any drama because I roll just a few extra dice for my shooting.

I do it like they do it in the White Dwarf.

Put whatever models you have on the table and start rolling those dice!

Easy.

 Zweischneid wrote:
I do it like they do it in the White Dwarf.

Put whatever models you have on the table and write some nonsense about how this month's new release killed everything, then take some pictures of dice sitting on the table and pretend they were an actual game.

Fixed that for you.

And if you're serious, I'd love to play there and just bring a bigger army than everyone else and automatically win.

 Peregrine wrote:
Depends on where you are, and if it's quota day for the police. Driving even 1 mph over the speed limit is still speeding, and you can still get a ticket for it.

And in what unreasonable country would that be?

Those opponents have unreasonable expectations, just like it would be unreasonable for me to expect you to not make any drama because I roll just a few extra dice for my shooting.

It's just unreasonable to you. More than half the people disagree with you on this.
The poll clearly shows that many people find that expectation quite reasonable.

Apples and oranges..
You cannot compare those two things.

Kangodo wrote:
And in what unreasonable country would that be?

Anywhere someone feels like pulling you over for going 1 mph over the speed limit. If the cop is having a bad day and feels like giving out some speeding tickets you're going to be paying a fine.

It's just unreasonable to you. More than half the people disagree with you on this.
The poll clearly shows that many people find that expectation quite reasonable.

That's not what the poll asks. There's a huge difference between being willing to let your opponent go over the point limit and feeling entitled to go over the point limit without your opponent complaining.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
I do it like they do it in the White Dwarf.

Put whatever models you have on the table and write some nonsense about how this month's new release killed everything, then take some pictures of dice sitting on the table and pretend they were an actual game.

Fixed that for you.

And if you're serious, I'd love to play there and just bring a bigger army than everyone else and automatically win.

Impossible if I bring the newer army My narrative will pwn your narrative .... hard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kangodo wrote:

And in what unreasonable country would that be?

Switzerland. It happened to me (albeit from an automated radar and not a traffic-cop).

Swiss people are ... precise.

I play friendly games so as long as its no more than 1-10 points over its all good. And by that I mean unless there is a single unit/wargear item that can be cut to bring it under. If its only 6 points over because you brought a meltagun, then take out that gun. But if it would require a total rethink of your list then im happy to just ignore it.

I always aim to either be bang on or under with my lists.

 Peregrine wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
I certainly don't quibble if a friend is still over the point limit, since I'd rather just get on with playing than watching him sit there for 30 minutes making a new list.

How are people taking 30 minutes to make a new list? Drop a model or an upgrade and start the game.

We've tried that. The person decided, since he couldn't take the list he wanted, it was back to the drawing board. So now we just have a little leeway.

I'm not saying it's for everyone, just that it works for our group. If I ever played anyone from outside my group, I'd make sure I was under or on the limit.

When i write a list, i generally start off with a rough idea of what i want to take. and usually this first draft ends up being 20-50% over the agreed points limit. I then tweak my army until it is at or below the agreed upon points limit while being as close to my rough idea as i can make it. I have been over a few times over 20 years, but that was purely down to typos where i forgot to count something.

A points limit is just that, a limit. sometimes it can be annoying to tweak your list until it is almost perfect only to discover you missed by 2 points, but that is still 2 points over what you agreed to play.

Campaign and narrative games can be different, since i play a lot of narrative games where we don't bother to have points limits, or anything like that at all, but for a PUG or in a tournament, then the limit is cast in stone

I don't really care about points values - write the scenario, tell the opponent the ideas behind it and let them take what they feel is appropriate for the game.

Considering how everyone moans about the points costs being wrong and needing changing, going on about being under or over seems like a waste of time anyhow.

I dunno man. Can appreciate where your coming from there, but the points *generally* are a good way of making equal armies, and the more equal the armies, the better the game IMO. Without using points at all, one guy might inadvertently bring twice as much stuff as the other and stomp him without any effort.

I like how the rhetoric around the hard limit camp is increasingly stronger as this thread goes on.

We've moved from various well reasoned arguments why they should be solid to claiming people who don't abide by them are stupid, dictionary definitions, and aspersions on the math and cognitive abilities of those over.

Go to the next step in the ITG playbook - "Once, someone brought me a list that was 1502 points. I cut off his hands, because that's how I roll, and everyone in the store cheered me on."

Listen, guys, play how you like. Don't be so defensive about it.

 Ouze wrote:
I like how the rhetoric around the hard limit camp is increasingly stronger as this thread goes on.

We've moved from various well reasoned arguments why they should be solid to claiming people who don't abide by them are stupid, dictionary definitions, and aspersions on the math and cognitive abilities of those over.

Go to the next step in the ITG playbook - "Once, someone brought me a list that was 1502 points. I cut off his hands, because that's how I roll, and everyone in the store cheered me on."

Listen, guys, play how you like. Don't be so defensive about it.

Fo realz. Seriously.

 Ouze wrote:

Listen, guys, play how you like. Don't be so defensive about it.

Unless you like playing with armies that are 2 points over the limit!