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.

Hey everyone, totally new here and all.

Ive been collecting Chaos Space Marines for the last 6 months or so now and have a pretty good understanding of the rules.

However im having problems with 'bad gamers' for example gamers which will argue tooth and nail for little things such as can my Chaos Lord be hit when 90% of him is covered by his snipers and what not.

Does anyone have any tips for how to deal with this?

I would like to point out that im easy going with rules, it just pisses me off when people try to call for cover when they dont have it and call for clean shots when im hidden behind wall.

Some tips as best I can help with this:

1) First ensure you are determining being able to target vs. cover separately.
Remember that banners, horns and various spikes do not count as targetable or we would all have very compact models...
If ANY part of the main body or base of the model can be seen (yes, even through that 4mm hole in a ruin window) it is targetable.

2) If ANYTHING obscures the target model even slightly; it has cover. I have long given up arguing this, no percentage of model covered is given except for vehicles so anything at all provides cover..

3) For either 1 or 2 get a compact laser, it helps with some of the nastier arguments.

4) If you have to argue things this much, a discussion about area terrain, walls and shooting through squads needs to be discussed and agreed.

5) Failing all this: why do you play with these people?????

Welcome to dakka.

The best advice I can give here is to make sure before a game that both you and your opponent expect the same thing from it. A lot players enjoy the competitive nature of the game, and as such are very picky over rules just because when playing in tournaments and the like they need to make sure they are playing right, so naturally when practising from a tournament they need to simulate that kind of situation as closely as possible to make sure they're prepared. Some take this too far, like in the examples you listed, just pushing it too far to gain an advantage, but on the whole the vast majority of competitive gamers play fairly.

On the other hand, a lot of players (like me, and seemingly yourself) are far more concerned with playing a narrative/casual game, and often put the rules second to having 'cool stuff' happen in the game. This is where you're less likely to get 'rules lawyers' or WAAC players.

So it all comes down to making sure both players agree on what they're looking for. For example, if you're in the store/club and someone offers a game, ask what kind of game they want and tell them you're looking for a more casual game. They will either say that's fine and be playing with a similar mindset, or they'll just point out they're training for a tournament or testing a list and excuse themselves. This means that you'll get the kind of game you want, and your opponent gets the kind of game they want. Once you've been there a way, you'll get to know who plays how, and this won't be as much of an issue.

I'd also add that just because someone plays competitively, it doesn't mean they're going to argue endlessly over rules or cheat, only a tiny minority of players of any persuasion will turn to cheating to win. Most players, competitive or casual, are always looking for a fun and fair game.

Of course, if someone is genuinely cheating, then your best bet is just to call in the manager or another player if you get a rules dispute coming up. A third opinion will usually help settle this kind of thing and will also show up anyone who is actually cheating.

Hope that helps.

 Talizvar wrote:
2) If ANYTHING obscures the target model even slightly; it has cover. I have long given up arguing this, no percentage of model covered is given except for vehicles so anything at all provides cover..

I can understand why you're having trouble convincing people. BRB Page 18 - Determining Cover Saves I suggest having another read.

 Talizvar wrote:
Some tips as best I can help with this:

2) If ANYTHING obscures the target model even slightly; it has cover. I have long given up arguing this, no percentage of model covered is given except for vehicles so anything at all provides cover..

This seems like the most sensible solution for most things, its just as a power armor army the a 4+ cover save isnt too important for taking on bolter fire and what not.

I guess I could ask for in the most dire circumstances that we give a 2+ cover save for shots that are really silly (such as an out stretched arm from behind a metal wall)

Thanks for the replies

Also besides, the above good suggestions, do not forget one of the primary rules of WH40K. That is if you and you opponent can not agree on interpretation of the rules, roll a die to solve the dispute. Then get back onto finishing the game, its always better to solve rules disputes that way than continue to argue and hold up the game properly.

This way your opponent will always claim a +2cover , you will disagree and 50% of time he will have a +2cover save .
It's better to play the game by the rules , then inventing magical+4 covers , when basic covers for models in 6th ed is +5.

Makumba wrote:
This way your opponent will always claim a +2cover , you will disagree and 50% of time he will have a +2cover save .
It's better to play the game by the rules , then inventing magical+4 covers , when basic covers for models in 6th ed is +5.

I think you're misunderstanding/exaggerating. The roll-off rule applies when both sides have a grounding in rules, I can't imagine anyone taking it to the extreme you refer to. But yes, a 5+ is standard for obscured, ruins and barricades give a 4+.

Makumba wrote:
This way your opponent will always claim a +2cover , you will disagree and 50% of time he will have a +2cover save .
It's better to play the game by the rules , then inventing magical+4 covers , when basic covers for models in 6th ed is +5.

Yeah fair point. The issue that really comes up is if a modal can see another modal. If in doubt I always say no, however most will argue they can anyway.

A better way to play it: If in doubt, give your opponent the benefit.

That leads to far less rule issues and makes for more enjoyable games.

captsabre wrote: im having problems with 'bad gamers'

Then find better gamers.

There isn't anything you can do about people with bad attitudes. Just don't play 40k with them. Find different people. They're out there.

On the "find better gamers" point, when you do, be honest and sincere with them, let them know you are still learning and value their time in working with a newer player.

They will appreciate this, and be much nicer and casual with you, and even if decent people, help you quite a bit.

I can usually tell a person is a better player than I am fairly quickly, sometimes without even playing them. If they seem like decent people, I will just tell them "hey, you seem to be very good at this, I might not offer you a great challenge, but I would love to get a game in and get your insights at the end".

After a while, with a positive attitude...other gamers will seek you out for a game.

One of the most important things is to try and learn the rules as best as possible....and when something does not sound right, be polite and ask for a reference.

For example someone says something you did not know...or perhaps you think they might even be wrong.
Ask them "thats interesting, I did not know that - can you show me so I can read it later to understand it better".
If they were right, and you were wrong - then awesome, you learned something new and even better corrected something.
If they were wrong, you managed to affirm your position and educate them in very non confrontational way.

best of luck and have fun!

SYKOJAK wrote:
Also besides, the above good suggestions, do not forget one of the primary rules of WH40K. That is if you and you opponent can not agree on interpretation of the rules, roll a die to solve the dispute. Then get back onto finishing the game, its always better to solve rules disputes that way than continue to argue and hold up the game properly.

I have found too often that people who do not like a rule at the time prefer the roll-off for a 50% chance to get what they want.
We could at least try to make use of the rules as written where possible.
I have seen few instances where a roll-off is needed except the common forum clogging rules gaffs which I would be more than happy to roll-off rather than experience the full argument.

If you routinely have a problem with a specific player, stop playing him. Seriously. Life is too short to waste your time and his arguing over rules.

Not everyone plays the same way and gets the same enjoyment from the game. Try to find more laid back players like yourself.

Welcome to DakkaDakka and the hobby!

OP: I figured the real issue was being able to TARGET models, that is where I have seen the most interesting arguments.
A laser helps, people seem hesitant to argue against a LASER!
If I get into another discussion of models posed prone or creeping out of the "ground" of their base for advantage one more time...

 Talizvar wrote:
OP: I figured the real issue was being able to TARGET models, that is where I have seen the most interesting arguments.
A laser helps, people seem hesitant to argue against a LASER!
If I get into another discussion of models posed prone or creeping out of the "ground" of their base for advantage one more time...

Yeah looks like I should be getting a laser then! My take was more if in doubt say no to being able to target, for example you can't hit an outstretched arm from a mile away, but it looks like I'm wrong there. Oops.

However this has all cleared things up a lot!