Poll |
 |
|
 |
Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 19:48:28
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Waaagh! Warbiker
|
So, I do a fair bit of digging when it comes to lists because I am the type of player that doesn't play often, mostly because I have a family, and as a result suck at the game.
A tailored list, I find, generally helps the situation. Although, I don't play WAAC lists simply because there aren't exactly many in Ultramarines Doctrine style play.
I do know there are players who say, will bring 3 Helldrakes and Ally some other MC Flyer or something, not sure the list but well...
We all know the kind and it seems there's a STIGMA directly related to WAAC idealism on these forums.
Now I have played MTG for a LONG time and in TOURNAMENT play WAAC decks are not only welcome, but the standard of play.
Is this rude to some of you ? Or do you see it how I see it ?
I ENJOY competitive play, at its utmost.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 20:01:14
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets
|
None of these options fit my answer...
When I go to a tournament, I am there a little less for fun and a lot more to try to win. That's the difference between friendly play and a competition. I enjoy winning some store credit and a couple hours of playing games for.a chance to do so means I'm gonna work harder than if it's Wednesday evening and we're just playing for fun.
Some lists, especially Tau and Necrons, are rather monotonous to play against, especially when it's a power list, but that's part of the challenge of the game. And sometimes, not having the prime power list can be effective. Changing things up can make opponents rethink their strategies, too.
When I am at a tournament, I'm there to win. I probably won't, but I am trying as hard as I can. I don't want an opponent to waste my time and I don't want to waste his.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 20:05:52
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
No such thing as a WAAC list. there are strong lists that WAAC players play.
WAAC are the type of people that will straight up cheat and bend the rules to win ala win at ALL costs.
|
Unit1126PLL wrote: Scott-S6 wrote:And yet another thread is hijacked for Unit to ask for the same advice, receive the same answers and make the same excuses.
Oh my god I'm becoming martel.
Send help!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 20:13:24
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Waaagh! Warbiker
|
Desubot wrote:No such thing as a WAAC list. there are strong lists that WAAC players play.
WAAC are the type of people that will straight up cheat and bend the rules to win ala win at ALL costs.
I had some dill weed try to have me reroll my saving throws (after I made them all at once) that i needed 3+ on on my legion of the damned yesterday because he felt I was obligated to roll them according to ap1 ap2 ap-.
This same dill weed plays a garbage 40 Bike 2 Land Speeder 2 Flyer List as White Scars, he PURPOSELY parks a bike in terrain every time so if you charge, which I did, he gets into the rules about how if you even TOUCH terrain via charge you need to roll another die and take the lowest.
This wouldn't be as possible as another bike list, as they wouldnt get skilled rider and +1 jink innately as White Scars do. I consider a list that bullshits it's way to victory a WAAC list. Though, some of said lists are just competitive.
I don't mind the WAAC list method, ie Flyer spam and taking advantage of the rules. I do however mind players that do small gak like that to abuse the small gak like the fact that I have to "not avoid terrain" as per the BRB.
Some people are against spamming in lists to win even, which is what I am asking in this poll.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 20:19:20
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
But that's an example of him bearding the rules not a list (well i see it as just a bike list honestly nothing WAAC about it) Ether way though. I also have no problems with spamming. I mean 4 cryptic commands don't make you no WAAC just a guy with a lot of money and a bunch of good cards. (What im trying to say is a competitive mind set is NOT a WAAC mindset is all. And unless a list is blatantly incorrect like points or extra models, it can never be a WAAC list as its all following the rules)
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/09/26 20:26:05
Unit1126PLL wrote: Scott-S6 wrote:And yet another thread is hijacked for Unit to ask for the same advice, receive the same answers and make the same excuses.
Oh my god I'm becoming martel.
Send help!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 20:28:21
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Hierarch
|
WAAC isn't manipulating the game to take advantage of jank rules, WAAC is misinterpreting those rules blatantly.
WAAC isn't taking the most broken netlist on the planet and playing to it's strengths, WAAC is taking said lists and misrepresenting what things do.
WAAC isn't about exploiting wonky rules interactions not yet addressed by the FAQ or errata, WAAC is arguing a TO or judge's interpretation until you're blue in the face until the call is made in your favor.
WAAC isn't about taking a little bit of extra time here and there to consider your moves, WAAC is about intentionally playing the clock down to deny your opponent their last turn.
WAAC is about extremes taken in pursuit of winning a trivial game with no regard for your opponent or sportsmanship. Hard play is a positive thing, dickish play is not.
|
Things I've gotten other players to admit...
Foldalot: Pariahs can sometimes be useful |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 20:30:42
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Yeah, WAAC requires gamesmanship or flat out cheating (all costs) so I won't do either of those.
I will play hard within the realm of being a good sport. Outplaying someone is fine, exploiting a rule or cheating is not.
|
My Models: Ork Army: Waaagh 'Az-ard - Chibi Dungeon RPG Models! - My Workblog!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE TEST: rigeld2: "Easy test - are you willing to play the model as a stock one? No? MFA." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 20:47:32
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Waaagh! Warbiker
|
Dronze wrote:WAAC isn't manipulating the game to take advantage of jank rules, WAAC is misinterpreting those rules blatantly.
WAAC isn't taking the most broken netlist on the planet and playing to it's strengths, WAAC is taking said lists and misrepresenting what things do.
WAAC isn't about exploiting wonky rules interactions not yet addressed by the FAQ or errata, WAAC is arguing a TO or judge's interpretation until you're blue in the face until the call is made in your favor.
I dont get how EXPLOITING rules isnt waac. Things not being FAQd and directly arguing the WORDING of something is exactly why you can not draw Line of Sight to a Bikers BIKE. Is that not WAAC thinking? Because thats RAW.
Dronze wrote:
WAAC isn't about taking a little bit of extra time here and there to consider your moves, WAAC is about intentionally playing the clock down to deny your opponent their last turn.
WAAC is about extremes taken in pursuit of winning a trivial game with no regard for your opponent or sportsmanship. Hard play is a positive thing, dickish play is not.
Exploitation of rules as well as using undercosted overpowered models on purpose when you don't even play that army outside of tournament play can be skewed as unsportsmanlike itself. Being that some people don't have the money to afford some of the WAAC lists directly, and also a list to play for fun.
The above is the EXACT stigma that I mean is related to WAAC. I think of there as being levels of WAAC. Here are two examples.
The guy who BENDS the rules and does gak by the book SO HARD that it causes your opponent greif and causes them to play worse or give up subconciously.
The guy who BREAKS the rules and bullshits his way to a win via hitting models and terrain and the table to fudge die rolls etc.
The stigma to WAAC is that a WAAC player will CHEAT as severly as possible, when in some cases it might just mean a Rule-Bible Thumper with deep pockets.
Super Side Note : Why isn't there a place to easily find the lists of recent GTs and placements ?
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/09/26 20:50:50
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 21:07:16
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
There's no such thing as a WAAC list in a tournament. You may think so, but that's opinion.
Lists are either legal or illegal. There's nothing about a 5 riptide or 4 heldrake list that is illegal, unless a tournament has instituted some sort of comp.
You may not like that some people spam powerful units, but there's nothing in the rules that forbids it. We all start out with a blank sheet of paper and a couple hundred dollars to spend on models, don't hate on people just because they bought different models than you. They may not have many friends because of their competitive lists, but that's on them.
As other have stated, "WAAC" is a mentality of a player, not an aspect of their list.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 21:09:23
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
What is the point of winning a game which you have broken wide open by 'exploiting' the rules?
And most tourneys have FAQs which deal with almost all the real issues... The issue is when someone knows the BIKE LOS issue was FAQed by the event but then tries in his individual games to argue it because it is not in the GW FAQ.
And then a Judge comes over and says 'no... Play RAI as RAW breaks the game.'
And then game two, the player returns to his RAW interpretation, conveniently forgetting a judge already shut him down simply because the new player doesn't know it yet.
A good sport would take a questionable rule he wishes to 'exploit' and ask the TO for a ruling before he shows up. A bad sport shows up knowing the rule is broken, and builds an army around a sketchy interpretation knowing full well there is a common RAI which is against him and multiple valid positions and then attempts to break every game until forcibly overruled by judges.
If I checked with a TO and he said 'nope, Bikes don't count for LOS which makes the rider close to unshootable!' then I would be fine showing up with it. You know that would never happen.
|
My Models: Ork Army: Waaagh 'Az-ard - Chibi Dungeon RPG Models! - My Workblog!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE TEST: rigeld2: "Easy test - are you willing to play the model as a stock one? No? MFA." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 21:23:48
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Morphing Obliterator
|
nkelsch wrote:What is the point of winning a game which you have broken wide open by 'exploiting' the rules?
And most tourneys have FAQs which deal with almost all the real issues... The issue is when someone knows the BIKE LOS issue was FAQed by the event but then tries in his individual games to argue it because it is not in the GW FAQ.
And then a Judge comes over and says 'no... Play RAI as RAW breaks the game.'
And then game two, the player returns to his RAW interpretation, conveniently forgetting a judge already shut him down simply because the new player doesn't know it yet.
A good sport would take a questionable rule he wishes to 'exploit' and ask the TO for a ruling before he shows up. A bad sport shows up knowing the rule is broken, and builds an army around a sketchy interpretation knowing full well there is a common RAI which is against him and multiple valid positions and then attempts to break every game until forcibly overruled by judges.
If I checked with a TO and he said 'nope, Bikes don't count for LOS which makes the rider close to unshootable!' then I would be fine showing up with it. You know that would never happen.
Well said. This just about sums it up, IMHO. A competitive player will take many powerful units, a WAAC player finds as many questionable interpretations as they can, and builds an army around them. I call them Avoid At All Costs players.
|
See, you're trying to use people logic. DM uses Mandelogic, which we've established has 2+2=quack. - Aerethan
Putin.....would make a Vulcan Intelligence officer cry. - Jihadin
AFAIK, there is only one world, and it is the real world. - Iron_Captain
DakkaRank Comment: I sound like a Power Ranger.
TFOL and proud. Also a Forge World Fan.
I should really paint some of my models instead of browsing forums. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 21:26:40
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
nkelsch wrote:What is the point of winning a game which you have broken wide open by 'exploiting' the rules?
And most tourneys have FAQs which deal with almost all the real issues... The issue is when someone knows the BIKE LOS issue was FAQed by the event but then tries in his individual games to argue it because it is not in the GW FAQ.
And then a Judge comes over and says 'no... Play RAI as RAW breaks the game.'
And then game two, the player returns to his RAW interpretation, conveniently forgetting a judge already shut him down simply because the new player doesn't know it yet.
A good sport would take a questionable rule he wishes to 'exploit' and ask the TO for a ruling before he shows up. A bad sport shows up knowing the rule is broken, and builds an army around a sketchy interpretation knowing full well there is a common RAI which is against him and multiple valid positions and then attempts to break every game until forcibly overruled by judges.
If I checked with a TO and he said 'nope, Bikes don't count for LOS which makes the rider close to unshootable!' then I would be fine showing up with it. You know that would never happen.
All of these things are aspects of a player, not a list. The OP was asking about lists.
We all have horror stories about people with less honest morals and intentions, but please don't associate these things with an army list that has no morals, feelings, or desire to cheat.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 22:31:02
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
hyv3mynd wrote:nkelsch wrote:What is the point of winning a game which you have broken wide open by 'exploiting' the rules?
And most tourneys have FAQs which deal with almost all the real issues... The issue is when someone knows the BIKE LOS issue was FAQed by the event but then tries in his individual games to argue it because it is not in the GW FAQ.
And then a Judge comes over and says 'no... Play RAI as RAW breaks the game.'
And then game two, the player returns to his RAW interpretation, conveniently forgetting a judge already shut him down simply because the new player doesn't know it yet.
A good sport would take a questionable rule he wishes to 'exploit' and ask the TO for a ruling before he shows up. A bad sport shows up knowing the rule is broken, and builds an army around a sketchy interpretation knowing full well there is a common RAI which is against him and multiple valid positions and then attempts to break every game until forcibly overruled by judges.
If I checked with a TO and he said 'nope, Bikes don't count for LOS which makes the rider close to unshootable!' then I would be fine showing up with it. You know that would never happen.
All of these things are aspects of a player, not a list. The OP was asking about lists.
We all have horror stories about people with less honest morals and intentions, but please don't associate these things with an army list that has no morals, feelings, or desire to cheat.
Not true... rule interpretations do have to do with lists...
Go back in time to the era when Deffrollas may or may not have worked on vehicles because "special kind of tank shock" was unclear. What is the point in showing up with 8 deffrollas for anti tank only to find out your whole army cannot deffroll on a ram? Often the list is built around a gadget or easteregging of a rule and the list becomes bad without that combo.
Imagine taking a Kanwall army expecting you can Cybork Body the Kanz? Imagine taking all flyers expecting to have a liberal vertical LOS arc opposed to the narrow 22 degrees down. What about Grabber klaws auto destroying flyers? A huge number of intentional rule misinterpretations or RAWBREAKING which haven't been faqed makes for poor lists that only work if the gimmick works.
So 'gamesmanship' is very much influenced in list building. Many Tourneys have top-sitting armies whose combo is invalidated weeks later by GW FAQs because of questionable applications of rules.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/09/26 22:33:10
My Models: Ork Army: Waaagh 'Az-ard - Chibi Dungeon RPG Models! - My Workblog!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE TEST: rigeld2: "Easy test - are you willing to play the model as a stock one? No? MFA." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 22:32:48
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Hierarch
|
nkelsch wrote:What is the point of winning a game which you have broken wide open by exploiting the rules?
Let me present to you a very real scenario from back in 5th ed: a tau player in a tournament game wins the roll to deploy first. He sets up his models, save a couple of large squads of kroot, which are declared to be infiltrating. His opponent, opting to hold in full reserve, declares he will not be deploying any models. The tau player then proceeds to line his opponent's table edge with kroot models, in coherency, in a single file line, preventing any models from coming in off the table edge, due to the so-called 'angry inch', and rendering his opponents models destroyed in the process. Would you consider this practice, entirely and unquestionably legal at the time, to be a WAAC move?
It is clearly exploitation of both RAW and RAI, and breaks neither the letter nor the spirit of the rules.
This may seem like a remote example, but it is entirely the point you're asking me to answer for here. 40k is a very complex game, to the point of being too much so, and suffers from such rules interactions that make such things possible as a result. If this clear and blatant exploitation is WAAC, then it begs the question of where the gradient becomes acceptable within the possibility of legal game states. If it is not, you then have to answer for where the rules exploits become unacceptable and legitimately outside of the intended legal game state, which carries a much more subtle shift into that grey area.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/09/26 22:35:03
Things I've gotten other players to admit...
Foldalot: Pariahs can sometimes be useful |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 22:34:21
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
nkelsch wrote: hyv3mynd wrote:nkelsch wrote:What is the point of winning a game which you have broken wide open by 'exploiting' the rules?
And most tourneys have FAQs which deal with almost all the real issues... The issue is when someone knows the BIKE LOS issue was FAQed by the event but then tries in his individual games to argue it because it is not in the GW FAQ.
And then a Judge comes over and says 'no... Play RAI as RAW breaks the game.'
And then game two, the player returns to his RAW interpretation, conveniently forgetting a judge already shut him down simply because the new player doesn't know it yet.
A good sport would take a questionable rule he wishes to 'exploit' and ask the TO for a ruling before he shows up. A bad sport shows up knowing the rule is broken, and builds an army around a sketchy interpretation knowing full well there is a common RAI which is against him and multiple valid positions and then attempts to break every game until forcibly overruled by judges.
If I checked with a TO and he said 'nope, Bikes don't count for LOS which makes the rider close to unshootable!' then I would be fine showing up with it. You know that would never happen.
All of these things are aspects of a player, not a list. The OP was asking about lists.
We all have horror stories about people with less honest morals and intentions, but please don't associate these things with an army list that has no morals, feelings, or desire to cheat.
Not true... rule interpretations do have to do with lists...
Go back in time to the era when Deffrollas may or may not have worked on vehicles because "special kind of tank shock" was unclear. What is the point in showing up with 8 deffrollas for anti tank only to find out your whole army cannot deffroll on a ram? Often the list is built around a gadget or easteregging of a rule and the list becomes bad without that combo.
Imagine taking a Kanwall army expecting you can Cybork Body the Kanz? Imagine taking all flyers expecting to have a liberal vertical LOS arc opposed to the narrow 22 degrees down. A hunge number of intentional rule misinterpretations or RAWBREAKING which haven't been faqed makes for poor lists that only work if the gimmick works.
So 'gamesmanship' is very much influenced in list building. Many Tourneys have top-sitting armies whose combo is invalidated weeks later by GW FAQs because of questionable applications of rules.
Can you cite an example of "many tournies have top sitting armies who's combo has been invalidated by a FAQ"?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 22:37:28
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Dronze wrote:nkelsch wrote:What is the point of winning a game which you have broken wide open by exploiting the rules?
Let me present to you a very real scenario from back in 5th ed: a tau player in a tournament game wins the roll to deploy first. He sets up his models, save a couple of large squads of kroot, which are declared to be infiltrating. His opponent, opting to hold in full reserve, declares he will not be deploying any models. The tau player then proceeds to line his opponent's table edge with kroot models, in coherency, in a single file line, preventing any models from coming in off the table edge, due to the so-called 'angry inch', and rendering them destroyed in the process. Would you consider this practice, entirely and unquestionably legal at the time, to be a WAAC move?
It is clearly exploitation of both RAW and RAI, and breaks neither the letter nor the spirit of the rules.
This may seem like a remote example, but it is entirely the point you're asking me to answer for here. 40k is a very complex game, to the point of being too much so, and suffers from such rules interactions that make such things possible as a result. If this clear and blatant exploitation is WAAC, then it begs the question of where the gradient becomes acceptable within the possibility of legal game states. If it is not, you then have to answer for where the rules exploits become unacceptable and legitimately outside of the intended legal game state, which carries a much more subtle shift into that grey area.
Yeah, do you take pride in bringing an extreme list and winning the game without playing? Good for you. I don't.
In that particular game, the white scar player had the ability to deploy units on the table and didn't need to keep everything in reserve. So if he would have deployed some models, the issue wouldn't have come up.
It was the equivalent of being Yu-Gi-oh and saying oh? all in reserve? ok? *giggle* ok? my turn? you done? *gigglesnort* YOU ACTIVATED MY TRAP CARD! Infiltrate, BAM!@ I WIN! *touchdowndance*
That is true skill.
And the realistic thing was they replayed, and everyone from that point forward was 'aware' he was planning to do that so they deployed some units.
|
My Models: Ork Army: Waaagh 'Az-ard - Chibi Dungeon RPG Models! - My Workblog!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE TEST: rigeld2: "Easy test - are you willing to play the model as a stock one? No? MFA." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 22:37:50
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
Dronze wrote:nkelsch wrote:What is the point of winning a game which you have broken wide open by exploiting the rules? Let me present to you a very real scenario from back in 5th ed: a tau player in a tournament game wins the roll to deploy first. He sets up his models, save a couple of large squads of kroot, which are declared to be infiltrating. His opponent, opting to hold in full reserve, declares he will not be deploying any models. The tau player then proceeds to line his opponent's table edge with kroot models, in coherency, in a single file line, preventing any models from coming in off the table edge, due to the so-called 'angry inch', and rendering them destroyed in the process. Would you consider this practice, entirely and unquestionably legal at the time, to be a WAAC move? It is clearly exploitation of both RAW and RAI, and breaks neither the letter nor the spirit of the rules. This may seem like a remote example, but it is entirely the point you're asking me to answer for here. 40k is a very complex game, to the point of being too much so, and suffers from such rules interactions that make such things possible as a result. If this clear and blatant exploitation is WAAC, then it begs the question of where the gradient becomes acceptable within the possibility of legal game states. If it is not, you then have to answer for where the rules exploits become unacceptable and legitimately outside of the intended legal game state, which carries a much more subtle shift into that grey area. I would answer no it is not a WAAC move considering it wasn't even an exploit. the white scars player made an incredible mistake not deploying his models (done so to prevent first turn shooting which was part of 5th rules) after seeing his mass amount of kroot. So whats more beardy: exploiting a rule that preventing an enemy who goes first an entire round of shooting or a exploiting a players full mistake for exploiting a rule. Edit: Damn you sneaky ninjas!
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/09/26 22:38:23
Unit1126PLL wrote: Scott-S6 wrote:And yet another thread is hijacked for Unit to ask for the same advice, receive the same answers and make the same excuses.
Oh my god I'm becoming martel.
Send help!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 22:39:55
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
hyv3mynd wrote:
Can you cite an example of "many tournies have top sitting armies who's combo has been invalidated by a FAQ"?
I know 2 years ago when 6th just came out a lot of the 'allies' wargear interaction and psychic powers which were running rampant became invalidated by GW FAQs about a month later. Also a lot of the ambiguous power weapon combos which people used to great effect got locked down. Edition changes do a lot of that. It was very much an issue when 6th hit.
I also can tell you for a while in 5th, the Deffrolla battlewagon bash was either really strong or really weak depending on an event's particular FAQing of deffrollas working on tanks. And we had 2 years of ambiguous inconsistent rulings on that issue.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/09/26 22:43:02
My Models: Ork Army: Waaagh 'Az-ard - Chibi Dungeon RPG Models! - My Workblog!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE TEST: rigeld2: "Easy test - are you willing to play the model as a stock one? No? MFA." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 22:43:43
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
nkelsch wrote: hyv3mynd wrote:
Can you cite an example of "many tournies have top sitting armies who's combo has been invalidated by a FAQ"?
I know 2 years ago when 6th just came out a lot of the 'allies' wargear interaction and psychic powers which were running rampant became invalidated by GW FAQs about a month later. Also a lot of the ambiguous power weapon combos which people used to great effect got locked down. Edition changes do a lot of that. It was very much an issue when 6th hit.
6th has been out 14 months. Hardly 2 years. I believe NOVA was the first big event to run the new rules and I can't think of a single list from the top bracket that exploited rules that were later FAQd.
My point remains. WAAC is a player trait, not that of a list. If you design a legal list and follow current rules, FaQs etc, nothing about the actual list can be WAAC. Only the player running it.
You cannot assign devious intent to an inanimate object. Players are the ones who purposefully misinterpret the rules.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/09/26 22:48:29
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 22:48:35
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
hyv3mynd wrote:nkelsch wrote: hyv3mynd wrote:
Can you cite an example of "many tournies have top sitting armies who's combo has been invalidated by a FAQ"?
I know 2 years ago when 6th just came out a lot of the 'allies' wargear interaction and psychic powers which were running rampant became invalidated by GW FAQs about a month later. Also a lot of the ambiguous power weapon combos which people used to great effect got locked down. Edition changes do a lot of that. It was very much an issue when 6th hit.
6th has been out 14 months. Hardly 2 years. I believe NOVA was the first big event to run the new rules and I can't think of a single list from the top bracket that exploited rules that were later FAQd.
Considering we have had 2 novas since 6th edition, I am saying 2 years ago. And I was there, a large number of armies had lists which were explicitly exploiting the psychic power issues between allies, especially eldar. Eldrad was in a crapton of armies.
People built explicit lists to use rules which were 'unsolved' by FAQs and gaps in the rules. Even though the event had their own list for 'power weapons' many of the event power weapons were overturned by FAQs.
So you are saying no one anywhere has ever built a list based upon a rule issue which has not been FAQed?
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/09/26 22:50:28
My Models: Ork Army: Waaagh 'Az-ard - Chibi Dungeon RPG Models! - My Workblog!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE TEST: rigeld2: "Easy test - are you willing to play the model as a stock one? No? MFA." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 22:59:25
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
nkelsch wrote: hyv3mynd wrote:nkelsch wrote: hyv3mynd wrote:
Can you cite an example of "many tournies have top sitting armies who's combo has been invalidated by a FAQ"?
I know 2 years ago when 6th just came out a lot of the 'allies' wargear interaction and psychic powers which were running rampant became invalidated by GW FAQs about a month later. Also a lot of the ambiguous power weapon combos which people used to great effect got locked down. Edition changes do a lot of that. It was very much an issue when 6th hit.
6th has been out 14 months. Hardly 2 years. I believe NOVA was the first big event to run the new rules and I can't think of a single list from the top bracket that exploited rules that were later FAQd.
Considering we have had 2 novas since 6th edition, I am saying 2 years ago. And I was there, a large number of armies had lists which were explicitly exploiting the psychic power issues between allies, especially eldar. Eldrad was in a crapton of armies.
People built explicit lists to use rules which were 'unsolved' by FAQs and gaps in the rules. Even though the event had their own list for 'power weapons' many of the event power weapons were overturned by FAQs.
So you are saying no one anywhere has ever built a list based upon a rule issue which has not been FAQed?
You're still missing the point. I'm saying there's no such thing as a WAAC list, unless the list itself is illegal.
"So you are saying no one anywhere has ever built a list based upon a rule issue which has not been FAQed?"
This statement still depends on human intent. The intent to build a list that exploits an ambiguous rule. Without the " WAAC player" the list itself is not " WAAC". You need a human being intent on exploiting a rules loophole for his own personal gain to make this scenario work. The list itself can never be WAAC unless its illegal. The most commonly accepted approach to ambiguous rules is to take the least beneficial approach. Someone who takes an ambiguous rule and plays it to the maximum personal gain can indeed be WAAC.
Remove the human aspect and the list is not WAAC. Hence why I claim the OP's premise is flawed, there are no " WAAC lists", only strong versus soft, competitive versus fluffy.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 23:16:47
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Tunneling Trygon
|
I'll pretend the OP says "Super-cheesy-hardcore-sealclubber list" instead of "WAAC list", because of the argument above over the meaning of "WAAC".
A lot of people online like to complain about hardcore lists, but when you go to a tournament, very few people will complain. Usually, I'll set up, my opponent will look at my list and we'll play a game, and sometimes my opponent will say "Wow that was nasty". But, he was playing Serpent Spam, or Triptide, or Corndog rush, maybe a Vulkan Pod list or an IG gunline. It happens, everyone has a decent list at a tournament. That's why they're tournaments. You play to win.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 23:19:07
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
Im fine with calling it a sealclubber list.
|
Unit1126PLL wrote: Scott-S6 wrote:And yet another thread is hijacked for Unit to ask for the same advice, receive the same answers and make the same excuses.
Oh my god I'm becoming martel.
Send help!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/26 23:47:55
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Member of the Ethereal Council
|
When you go to tourneys, if you are a duecy WAAC players you will not be tolerated. On guy told me about tourneys "Yeah, Im here to win, We all are and we will try our best. But we all lay this game to enjoy ourselves. We want to have fun so we will make it fun"
WAAC players tend to not leave clubs
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/27 17:23:49
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
I am against comp but then again there is something negative to be said about an army no one enjoys playing against.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/27 18:24:56
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Dozer Blades wrote:I am against comp but then again there is something negative to be said about an army no one enjoys playing against.
Can't have your cake and eat it too.
As long as GW says triplicates are legal, and there's no comp involved, a portion of tournament players will always max out strong units. "Enjoyment" is subjective as well. Some competitive players "enjoy" facing the hardest lists possible whereas a portion of the middle/bottom of the pack players will not.
The players who don't "enjoy" facing triptides or triple drakes are almost always the ones without spam themselves, even if the format is open. It's a very rare thing indeed to find a player toting five FMC's complaining about facing triptides.
If people really want to not face "unfun" or " WAAC" lists, they need to start supporting comp again. Crossing your fingers and hoping another player in a competitive tournament cares about how much fun you'll have facing their list is a fool's wish.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/27 18:59:23
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Pragmatic Primus Commanding Cult Forces
|
hyv3mynd wrote:If people really want to not face "unfun" or "WAAC" lists, they need to start supporting comp again. Crossing your fingers and hoping another player in a competitive tournament cares about how much fun you'll have facing their list is a fool's wish.
Although I think comp obviously runs counter to a lot of undercurrents in the hobby right now, I have a gut feeling that it may regain popularity at some point down the road. Just look where 40K is headed...new, more complicated codicies for everyone and multiple supplements per codex in an edition built more around "forging the narrative" than balanced tournament play. There will likely be plenty of opportunities for very powerful but "unfun" builds.
The rapid release schedule is keeping players off-balance to some degree right now. But after the major codicies are done and the metagame gets a chance to settle more, we'll have a better chance to see what 6th edition hath wrought for competitive play. Some players might be fine with it, but others might not like what they see.
Although, much as only Nixon could go to China, I think one of the really big events would have to adopt comp before it'd really catch on. Given an environment in which some players complain about even having a painting requirement, most small and medium-sized events would probably lose more attendance than they gain by adding another 'soft score' or army limitation.
I did see Da Boyz is bringing comp back, and I give them a lot of credit for returning to their roots on that.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/09/27 19:52:25
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/27 20:09:23
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife
|
I selected that it should be allowed, but frowned on. Technically many of these WAAC strategies are legal since gaps can be found in the rules and FAQs are too infrequency to fix every issue in time.
You go to a tournament to win, but you shouldn't achieve this by wasting 10 minutes arguing over 1/100th of an inch out of range or making your opponent miserable.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/27 20:45:30
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Ancient Venerable Black Templar Dreadnought
|
A tournament is to give it your best in all things: no holding back but you must remain within the rules.
A WAAC player will not let little things like rules get in the way of a win however. Lie, cheat and headgames are the norm.
Give me a competitive player any day.
40k has very "open" rules that have a great deal of latitude of interpretation so any "competitive" play can get mired down with rules interpretations, reviews of FAQ's and the painful "roll off" if no-one can agree.
A tournament is a game where the primary goal is to win within the rules set down for the tournament.
Further loose rules such as "sportsmanship" then forces the difficult decision of meeting some fluff/OP balancing acts.
"Tabling" your opponent tends to net you a low sportsmanship score so you now have to figure out a way to present your army as "fluffy" or "not rude" while still maintaining the OP you want.
I would suggest painting the whole thing to look so awesome that the evil list is ignored till it is too late.
The hobby, relaxing... the dreaded... beer and pretzel games you have with your friends.
Tournaments you know your rules cold, min-max all you can and have a plan on how to deal with all those net lists. Do not hold back. Show no mercy. Stay in the rules. Leave no excuse for your win or loss.
If you have any doubts on how to act, watch a few seasons of "Survivor". All the evil behavior all boils down to everyone knows it is ALL a game.
|
A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
Napoleon Bonaparte |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/09/27 21:34:08
Subject: WAAC Stigma
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
hyv3mynd wrote: Dozer Blades wrote:I am against comp but then again there is something negative to be said about an army no one enjoys playing against.
Can't have your cake and eat it too.
As long as GW says triplicates are legal, and there's no comp involved, a portion of tournament players will always max out strong units. "Enjoyment" is subjective as well. Some competitive players "enjoy" facing the hardest lists possible whereas a portion of the middle/bottom of the pack players will not.
The players who don't "enjoy" facing triptides or triple drakes are almost always the ones without spam themselves, even if the format is open. It's a very rare thing indeed to find a player toting five FMC's complaining about facing triptides.
If people really want to not face "unfun" or " WAAC" lists, they need to start supporting comp again. Crossing your fingers and hoping another player in a competitive tournament cares about how much fun you'll have facing their list is a fool's wish.
You are not making any friends and I have seen it come back to bite people in the ass. It is what it is like it or not.
|
|
|
 |
 |
|