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.

xruslanx wrote:
Turn it on its head, would you kick someone out of a tournament who miss-calculated the point value of their army by 3 points?

This has happened from time to time in my area, as I said before the person is told to remedy the situation before the tournament, most of the time its a piece of wargear that is removed or a model in a unit.



I think more offten than not most people have the 4/6 point problem rather than a 9/1 point problem. In every codex I own there are 5 point items that can be added to close the gap and not go over. Some people argue they are useless, however I'd say most are very situational.

Sometimes I'll look at a list that someone proposed with an over the limit points and I'll notice every sargent has a power weapon and/or a plasma pistol (or equilivant in case of non Space Marines). Do you really need those on every sargent or every upgrade in a unit?

Steelmage99 wrote:

etc

But for example, in a casual game of let's say 1500 points, a Necron player wants to include another Immortal but only has 16 points left, and taking the model will make him at 1501 points - surely that's not game breaking?

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

etc

But for example, in a casual game of let's say 1500 points, a Necron player wants to include another Immortal but only has 16 points left, and taking the model will make him at 1501 points - surely that's not game breaking?

Sure it is. Because it is the 90 point Annihilation Barge that is actually forcing that 17 point Immortal over the top. If said Annihilation Barge wasn't in the list the Immortal wouldn't cause the point-limit to be exceeded.
One cannot cherry-pick which model is the one forcing the cheating.

Also the subject of what is game breaking or not is one if interpretation. If the two sides cannot come to an agreement of whether said cheating is OK, then surely we defer to what was agreed upon.

Two players made an agreement about the point-limit of the game. One of them did not honor said agreement. That is really the long and short of it.

Which of the two do you think is the one that should adjust his army-list?

 megatrons2nd wrote:
So...The rulebook lied.

Pg 108 Size of the game section.

Second Paragraph.

3rd Sentence.

"Indeed, to get around this, most players are happy to let their opponent go a few points over the agreed total-after all, a few points here or there are unlikely to upset the battle's course."

It does state previous to this that most armies tend to be a shade smaller than the agreed limit, because it is impossible to actually spend all the points.

I have had several armies go the way of the Dodo, because what I wanted in it put me 1 whole point over, and removing something would make me 9 points under. I would give a couple points of leeway over. But going over by the cost of a whole model is not acceptable, to me.

The rule book states it all. If you are NOT one of the players who are happy to let the list go over a few points then DONT PLAY! Clearly the spirit of the game is to just play and be happy and honestly if you are so upset by a few points going over you are kinda wound up to tight to have a fun game anyways.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So RAW its ok to go over a few points. RAI for TO will probably not allow any over points.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
But for example, in a casual game of let's say 1500 points, a Necron player wants to include another Immortal but only has 16 points left, and taking the model will make him at 1501 points - surely that's not game breaking?

Is there nothing in the Necron codex that is worth less than 17 points that could be dropped from the list to make that extra Immortal fit?


Once again, the whole point of having a limit is that it restricts what you can fit into your army. Once you start saying 'well, this doesn't fit, so I will just stretch the limit to make it go in' you might as well just throw the whole concept of a points limit out the window and just play Apocalypse style, putting everything you feel like playing with on the table.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vector Strike wrote:
In my area, for friendly games we let up to 1% over the limit, rounding down (i.e. 500p game, max 505. 750p, max 757). ...

If this is a set, agreed extension, then you're not playing 500 point games.. you're playing 505 point games.

If you're going to allow it as a matter of course, why would a player not simply design his list to use those extra 5 points?

 insaniak wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:
In my area, for friendly games we let up to 1% over the limit, rounding down (i.e. 500p game, max 505. 750p, max 757). ...

If this is a set, agreed extension, then you're not playing 500 point games.. you're playing 505 point games.

If you're going to allow it as a matter of course, why would a player not simply design his list to use those extra 5 points?

I like what Insaniak said here.
I would also note that, in a 2000pt game, a 1% error margin would allow me to fit Psybolts onto a squad, or almost take another PML on my DP...either of which can be game-changing. 1% doesn't sound like much, until you realise you've got 20 extra points to play with! And if you're playing at 2020 and your opponent is only at 1997...? Someone clearly has the upper hand.
And then I'd show you Insaniak's post.

Funny thing. I tend to not use a lot of upgrades. Meaning, for me, I lose a model anytime I go over, or lose one of the few upgrades I do take, which then puts me back in the same boat of being 1 point over or 8 points under, instead of the 1 point over 9 under from the previous model.

I thought searchlights were free? What upgrades cost 1 point? I don't have any......Oh grenades.....except that it is per model for a squad, so not a 1 point upgrade.

Lern2Upgrade then? Instead of taking that extra model, try those upgrades you don't use then?

I can say 'I don't use upgrades, so I need to take a whole nother dethkopta so it is 5 points over or 30 points under!'

If you can't figure out how to build a list which maximizes the points you have and still be effective, then you have issues. Don't put those issues on your opponent's shoulders by being entitled to break the rules.

In most games the limit is the upper limit..every once in a while We do Random FOC Games ..then its hazy ..and we all allow a bit of leeway for those ..Because you dont know what units your taking till the game starts...and only a handfull of us have enough models in a single Army that we can Pull the units out of the hat easy..Making them fit inside a rigid points structure less so ..(ie theres locally about a dozen of us that have been collecting in excess of 20 years) ..So Large Games and Random FOC Skirmishes are more common ..few of us have the desire to goto large tourneys anymore

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Funny thing. I tend to not use a lot of upgrades. Meaning, for me, I lose a model anytime I go over, or lose one of the few upgrades I do take, which then puts me back in the same boat of being 1 point over or 8 points under, instead of the 1 point over 9 under from the previous model.

I thought searchlights were free? What upgrades cost 1 point? I don't have any......Oh grenades.....except that it is per model for a squad, so not a 1 point upgrade.

You don't get special considerations just because your own self-imposed restrictions are causing you difficulties.

In a 1750 point list I recently built I only had 12 points left, so instead of giving a Tervigon a third psychic power I gave it Adrenal Glands, I didn't add the third power because I didn't think it would be fair to go over the agreed upon limit.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Funny thing. I tend to not use a lot of upgrades. Meaning, for me, I lose a model anytime I go over, or lose one of the few upgrades I do take, which then puts me back in the same boat of being 1 point over or 8 points under, instead of the 1 point over 9 under from the previous model.

Too bad. The limit is a limit, you don't get a special exception just because you would be playing a better army if you broke that limit.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Funny thing. I tend to not use a lot of upgrades. Meaning, for me, I lose a model anytime I go over, or lose one of the few upgrades I do take, which then puts me back in the same boat of being 1 point over or 8 points under, instead of the 1 point over 9 under from the previous model.

I thought searchlights were free? What upgrades cost 1 point? I don't have any......Oh grenades.....except that it is per model for a squad, so not a 1 point upgrade.

Some armies have to pay for searchlights. I'm also a firm believer is "Boys before Toys" where you are better serves with more boots on the ground then a few tricked out characters, or having all the whistles and bells on your vehicles. Each upgrade I take is specific for a job and grudgingly payed for.

But when I'm almost finished with a list, sometimes a melta bomb gets handed out, and I'm still 2-3 points under the limit. I just run with that.

 BarBoBot wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
I can't think of any tournament that wouldn't disqualify someone for being 3 points over.

Funny thing about that... There was a major tourney that was won by a well known player whose list ended up being 3 points over not that long ago.... The nickname 3PO (3 points over ) still gets mentioned now and again. They didnt DQ him. Tony kopach is the player I believe.

That is strange. Was the list not checked before the tournament?
Perhaps he wasn't disqualified because the TO's were also partially to blame for not spotting it beforehand?

 grendel083 wrote:

 BarBoBot wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
I can't think of any tournament that wouldn't disqualify someone for being 3 points over.

Funny thing about that... There was a major tourney that was won by a well known player whose list ended up being 3 points over not that long ago.... The nickname 3PO (3 points over ) still gets mentioned now and again. They didnt DQ him. Tony kopach is the player I believe.

That is strange. Was the list not checked before the tournament?
Perhaps he wasn't disqualified because the TO's were also partially to blame for not spotting it beforehand?

Nope, if you read the transcript the TO allowed it because its in the rules to allow. *shrug*