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.

 EVIL INC wrote:

Side A.- It is ok to cheat and you are ruining my fun and disrespecting me if you dont let me.
Side B- The rules are there for a reason. To insist upon cheating ruins the game and disrespects me.
Side A.- It is ok to cheat and you are ruining my fun and disrespecting me if you dont let me.
Side B- The rules are there for a reason. To insist upon cheating ruins the game and disrespects me.
Side A.- It is ok to cheat and you are ruining my fun and disrespecting me if you dont let me.
Side B- The rules are there for a reason. To insist upon cheating ruins the game and disrespects me.
and so on and so forth, each time using different words but saying the same thing..

Nobody is saying that cheating s okay. We're saying that accidentally going over by 1 or so points is not necessarily cheating.
And pointing out that being 1 point over the opposing army means about as much as the last ant I stepped on.

The real issue appears to be the but hurt shown by the opponent in the OPs original post.

The rules don't legislate for a players frame of mind - points limits or not.

OP - Play how you would like to play. If you cannot find n amicable middle ground then it maybe time to find another opponent or learn to set stricter guidelines before hand.

Harsh but fair applies.

 EVIL INC wrote:
The question is not "is most players ok withit" (obviously most players are NOT ok with cheating if the replies here are anything to go by. The question is "what is the rule?" that is fairly straightfoward and simple.

It was asked why so many people think it would be OK to go ever few points. It is because GW told them that it would be. Whether or not you agree with it, that sentence is there and certainly communicates how GW expects the game to be played, and it is no wonder if some people believe them. There is absolutely no similar verbiage in any other rule ("Yes, this is the rule, but it is no big deal to break it a bit.")

So if both players have agreed on a 1500 pts game, and one of them asks the other one, 15 min before gamestart: hey, Cornelius. can we agree on a 1501 pts game instead? as thats what my list is now, I´ll let you have a bite of my snickers then.

If Cornelius agrees, they are both going 100% RAW and noone is cheating or deserving of a beating out back. right?
If no, is a player always a cheater if he kindly requests another point limit for the upcoming game? what if he said: Dude, I like totally forgot my tanks at home, can we make it a 1000 pts game instead of 1500?
Or: Yeah I know we agreed on 1500 on the phone, but I just got this sweet deal on 3 fully painted Mega-dreads, would you mind we upped the game to 2K?

How long time in advance is a player allowed to kindly request a different point level than the original agreed upon, without being branded cheater and TFG? 3 days? 15min? after the other guy has deployed ½ his army?

@EVIL INC If you think Ive broken some forum rules, I would kindly request you to tell me how and why, and of course report me to Mods. (As Im not part of side B in your example)

Britneyfan12 wrote:
So if both players have agreed on a 1500 pts game, and one of them asks the other one, 15 min before gamestart: hey, Cornelius. can we agree on a 1501 pts game instead? as thats what my list is now, I´ll let you have a bite of my snickers then.

If Cornelius agrees, they are both going 100% RAW and noone is cheating or deserving of a beating out back. right?
If no, is a player always a cheater if he kindly requests another point limit for the upcoming game? what if he said: Dude, I like totally forgot my tanks at home, can we make it a 1000 pts game instead of 1500?
Or: Yeah I know we agreed on 1500 on the phone, but I just got this sweet deal on 3 fully painted Mega-dreads, would you mind we upped the game to 2K?

How long time in advance is a player allowed to kindly request a different point level than the original agreed upon, without being branded cheater and TFG? 3 days? 15min? after the other guy has deployed ½ his army?

The request to change point levels isn't cheating, its going over the agreed point level without compensating your opponent is cheating

Also expecting your opponent to happily agree to changing the points value at any time is pretty inconsiderate. You may not realize this but some people don't carry their entire army with them so will only bring what models they need. This is why its rude to just change the points limit on a whim. If you increase the point limit they may not have brought enough models to play that size game, if you reduce the point limit then you forced you opponent to carry a bunch of cases and models for no reason.

Its just a courtesy to let your opponent know in advance what the point size is before they commit to anything.

Well as being over by 1 whole point is sacrilegious, because it makes the game unfair, then you shouldn't mind cutting your points to match my 992. I mean, seriously, you want a perfectly matched game. The difference in ability is far greater being 8 under than 1 over.

As an aside, My 1000 point Tau list has 5X6 man Fire Warrior Squads, a naked Hammerhead with railgun as that is how it was modeled long before I learned how to magnetize stuff, 6 Pathfinders naked, 2 total Broadsides, two 3 man team of stealth suits, and my commander and bodygaurds. The commander and bodyguards actually have upgrades because well you know they have no weapons if you don't give them an upgrade, and you waste points on them if you don't take 2 weapons since they are priced as if they are firing 2 weapons a turn. But of course I am being unfair when I end up 1 whole point over. Sure I can lose a whole squad of fire warriors to upgrade the bejeezus out of something, but that isn't what I was aiming for. I prefer to use boots on the ground over over priced upgrades of dubious tactical value. Also removing a pathinder just makes the point discrepancy worse.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Well as being over by 1 whole point is sacrilegious, because it makes the game unfair, then you shouldn't mind cutting your points to match my 992. I mean, seriously, you want a perfectly matched game. The difference in ability is far greater being 8 under than 1 over.

As an aside, My 1000 point Tau list has 5X6 man Fire Warrior Squads, a naked Hammerhead with railgun as that is how it was modeled long before I learned how to magnetize stuff, 6 Pathfinders naked, 2 total Broadsides, two 3 man team of stealth suits, and my commander and bodygaurds. The commander and bodyguards actually have upgrades because well you know they have no weapons if you don't give them an upgrade, and you waste points on them if you don't take 2 weapons since they are priced as if they are firing 2 weapons a turn. But of course I am being unfair when I end up 1 whole point over. Sure I can lose a whole squad of fire warriors to upgrade the bejeezus out of something, but that isn't what I was aiming for. I prefer to use boots on the ground over over priced upgrades of dubious tactical value. Also removing a pathinder just makes the point discrepancy worse.

I second that.

That is part of the philosophy of my group.
We set a limit, and we have to get as close to that limit as possible (If you're 4 points under, but could be 1 point over, be 1 point over).

 Selym wrote:
We're saying that accidentally going over by 1 or so points is not necessarily cheating.

No, that's not at all what we're talking about here. The issue isn't playing a game with what you thought was a legal list and realizing later that you made a math mistake and you were actually a point or two over, which would be an accident and not cheating. We're talking about deliberately making a choice to play a list that you know is over the point limit, which is cheating.

And pointing out that being 1 point over the opposing army means about as much as the last ant I stepped on.

Actually it says a lot about your attitude about the game and your need to win at all costs. If you insist that you're entitled to break the point limit so you can have a better chance of winning then I can expect a game full of other WAAC behavior: rules lawyering, moving your models a little extra distance, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Well as being over by 1 whole point is sacrilegious, because it makes the game unfair, then you shouldn't mind cutting your points to match my 992. I mean, seriously, you want a perfectly matched game. The difference in ability is far greater being 8 under than 1 over.

So what if it's a bigger difference? We have the same point value to work with, and that's what fairness is. If you don't reach the point limit then you are free to add things to your list until you do (without going over).

The commander and bodyguards actually have upgrades because well you know they have no weapons if you don't give them an upgrade, and you waste points on them if you don't take 2 weapons since they are priced as if they are firing 2 weapons a turn.

Why does this mean you're entitled to cheat? Take cheaper weapons, take a twin-linked weapon instead of two weapons, or even take just a single weapon. Or downgrade the bodyguards to cheaper standard elite crisis suits. The only "problem" here is that making these changes would hurt your chances of winning.

But of course I am being unfair when I end up 1 whole point over.

Exactly. You had 1000 points to work with, and you don't get to demand extra points just because it would give you a better chance of winning.

Sure I can lose a whole squad of fire warriors to upgrade the bejeezus out of something, but that isn't what I was aiming for.

Yes, and you failed in your aim and did not make a legal list. Now you have to revise your list and make a legal one.

I prefer to use boots on the ground over over priced upgrades of dubious tactical value.

Again, why does this mean you're entitled to cheat? If you want more boots on the ground then change your list to add more of them without going over the limit. For example, you could trade your Hammerhead for more troops.

Also removing a pathinder just makes the point discrepancy worse.

So what? It would be a legal list, which is the only difference that matters.

 Peregrine wrote:

And pointing out that being 1 point over the opposing army means about as much as the last ant I stepped on.

Actually it says a lot about your attitude about the game and your need to win at all costs. If you insist that you're entitled to break the point limit so you can have a better chance of winning then I can expect a game full of other WAAC behavior: rules lawyering, moving your models a little extra distance, etc.

Actually, that works both ways. I don't give a damn if my opponent is a few points over me.

Heck, I could give an Ork player a 100 point advantage against my CSM, and it would still be an easier game than one where I face Tau.

And that is what I mean.

I'm not suggesting that I'm entitled to break rules, I'm saying that you're supposed to be having fun, rather than wasting hours arguing about every tiny little miniscule aspect of the game in the name of "fairness". And facing an army that is a couple of points over in no way means that the player is going to do: "WAAC behavior: rules lawyering, moving your models a little extra distance".

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Well as being over by 1 whole point is sacrilegious, because it makes the game unfair, then you shouldn't mind cutting your points to match my 992. I mean, seriously, you want a perfectly matched game. The difference in ability is far greater being 8 under than 1 over.

As an aside, My 1000 point Tau list has 5X6 man Fire Warrior Squads, a naked Hammerhead with railgun as that is how it was modeled long before I learned how to magnetize stuff, 6 Pathfinders naked, 2 total Broadsides, two 3 man team of stealth suits, and my commander and bodygaurds. The commander and bodyguards actually have upgrades because well you know they have no weapons if you don't give them an upgrade, and you waste points on them if you don't take 2 weapons since they are priced as if they are firing 2 weapons a turn. But of course I am being unfair when I end up 1 whole point over. Sure I can lose a whole squad of fire warriors to upgrade the bejeezus out of something, but that isn't what I was aiming for. I prefer to use boots on the ground over over priced upgrades of dubious tactical value. Also removing a pathinder just makes the point discrepancy worse.

Yes you are being unfair. All you have to do is drop 1 fire warrior. then you put the other 5 amongst the rest of your squads and spend the remain 11 points on an upgrade which can easily be 10 points. Now you're 1 point under and have a legal list.

Honestly the only reason i think people have such a big issue with this is because they are really bad a writing lists. its really easy to stay only 1 or 2 points under a limit if you aren't stupid about it.

Aah but megatrons2nd isnt being 1 point over at all. He is merely kindly requesting the point limit to be 1001 instead of 1000. Thereby upholding the RAW regarding both players have to agree on a set limit (BRB 108).
Megatrons2nd would of course allow you to also play 1001 points. Courtesy or not, if both players can agree on a point level, then it is RAW. It doesnt matter when you agree on that point level, it could easily be 5mins before gamestart (sure the opponent isnt forced to accept, but if he does, its completely RAW and HIWPI)

 Selym wrote:
I'm not suggesting that I'm entitled to break rules, I'm saying that you're supposed to be having fun, rather than wasting hours arguing about every tiny little miniscule aspect of the game in the name of "fairness".

But there's nothing to argue about. Bring a legal list within the point limit and don't spend time arguing about how you really need to have those extra points.

And facing an army that is a couple of points over in no way means that the player is going to do: "WAAC behavior: rules lawyering, moving your models a little extra distance".

Of course it does. If you know that the point limit is 1000 points and you deliberately make a choice to bring 1001 points and exploit your opponent's reluctance to be the bad guy and refuse to allow it then that is not a good start to the game. If you're going to take a little extra in one area then why should I believe that you aren't going to take a little extra somewhere else?

Britneyfan12 wrote:
Aah but megatrons2nd isnt being 1 point over at all. He is merely kindly requesting the point limit to be 1001 instead of 1000. Thereby upholding the RAW regarding both players have to agree on a set limit (BRB 108).
Megatrons2nd would of course allow you to also play 1001 points. Courtesy or not, if both players can agree on a point level, then it is RAW. It doesnt matter when you agree on that point level, it could easily be 5mins before gamestart (sure the opponent isnt forced to accept, but if he does, its completely RAW and HIWPI)

No duh, that's why that's not what this thread is arguing about. We are debating whether its alright to have 1001 points when the limit is 1000.

Also he isn't asking for the limit to be 1001. He says that the list for 1000 is 1 point over should be legal because he can't be bothered to write a list that is within the given point limit.

It is so mind boggling amazing to me to see people advocating that it should be acceptable for a offender to victimize another for standing up for their themselves. Specifically a cheater bullying his opponent into accrpting an illegal list by making their honest opponent ashamed of even questioning the illegality.

As to "most people", GW does not speak for me: I am not okay with overages, its against the social agreement for a mutually fun game. If its "fun" for you to not follow the agree upon limits, what makes you think its "fun" for me to let you brow beat me into accepting your braking of our mutual agreement? If you can't keep your work on building a list, what else won't you be keeping your word on? Dice rolls? Measurements? Line of Sight? Basic math?

SJ

"Because people who are quibbling about 1 point have obviously gone over their army and the rules with a fine tooth comb, looking for every single advantage they can get, and those are the same types of people that don't have the time of day for a beginner ( that doesn't understand the all rules for every single army ) and will go out of their way to make use of every single mistake that the beginner makes, without teaching him/her - sure they will TELL the beginner he did this wrong and that wrong, but it's not teaching. "

I find that very insulting. i have taught the game to many players over the years and teaching that following the rules is nopt a bad thing. it instills a sense of personal honor in them. I also find it very insulting to be accused of being TFG and going over the list with a fine tooth comb mathmatically searching for every advantage (Obviously as we have seen in another thread this is not true). Even in tournaments I take what i THINk might or might not work and what i think is cool or whatever unt I just finished painting and want to show off. that assumption of my motives for following the rules is a personal insult and attack.
Expecting my opponent to follow the rules and nopt cheat in a game is not at all using them as a weapon against them. Rules are rules regardless of if you are in the game or on a forum or living in society (laws), you follow them.

Instead of going 1 point over, I am just going to arbitrarily reduce the point value of weapon options and models so my list is legal. I mean really? Who cares if my Cybork Upgrade is 9 points instead of 10 or my Red Paint job is a point cheaper?

I mean 'My Fun' is the most important thing and winning is how I have fun which is why I won't play with a list UNDER the limit when I can bully an advantage by downplaying how points impact games.

You going to go over? I will lower the point costs on my units... And maybe next my models will move half an inch farther than normal too?

I have removed a bunch of off-topic chatter from the thread. Please stick to the topic. It is not up to posters to take others to task for perceived rules infringements If you see a post that you think is inappropriate, just report it and leave the moderating to the moderators.

nkelsch wrote:
Instead of going 1 point over, I am just going to arbitrarily reduce the point value of weapon options and models so my list is legal. I mean really? Who cares if my Cybork Upgrade is 9 points instead of 10 or my Red Paint job is a point cheaper?

I mean 'My Fun' is the most important thing and winning is how I have fun which is why I won't play with a list UNDER the limit when I can bully an advantage by downplaying how points impact games.

You going to go over? I will lower the point costs on my units... And maybe next my models will move half an inch farther than normal too?

And overreactions like these are why I don't talk to strangers anymore.

Let's get a few examples going on here, so that we can clarify a few opinions.

Example 1:


Example 2:


Example 3:



IMO, the first 2 are acceptable, while the third is a blatant point grab.

I am of the opinion that being slightly over the limit is acceptable if you're not just grabbing at the chance to get more stuff (i.e intentionally being uncompetitive, or you were caught in an unexpected pick up game).

 megatrons2nd wrote:
After reading this thread, I am glad I don't play against most of you. 1-2 points over is not going to do much. There are many armies that I have built, for fun, that do this and don't use much in the way of upgrades, but I would have to play 8 points under and with an illegal squad as it is now under minimum size due to this "no overage ever" mentality. Are you so hard up for a win that you have to be 8 points more than your opponent? .

That last question will continue to garner the same response, no matter how many times it is asked - Are you so hard up for a win that you can't drop that point that would make your list legal?

Why is it only the player insisting on adhering to the points limit who isassumed to be the one with the WAAC mentality? If that point is so trivial, why can't you just drop it before you even show up for the game, rather than making a potential issue of it?


Here's the thing: Points costs actually do two things. The most obvious is that they tell you what a given option is worth. But the other thing that they do as a result of that is restrict how much stuff you can fit into an army list at a given points limit. If including that last lascannon takes you over the limit, and you really want that lascannon, well then you need to make the tactical choice to remove something else to keep the list legal. Building an effective list within the limit is a part of the strategy of the game, just like choosing how to deploy, or where to move your units.,

Insisting on you adhering to that isn't your opponent being unreasonable. It's the entire (ahem) point of the limit.

 insaniak wrote:
The most obvious is that they tell you what a given option is worth.

You'd think so, but then we have:

-Riptides
-Baledrakes
-Vendetta Gunships.

It's hardly an accurate measurement.

And yo have to bear in mind, in a MEQ army, 1 point is roughly 1/13th of a model. Not even worth a bolter round.

By 'worth' I simply meant 'what it costs to take it'. Whether or not those costs are accurately balanced is a separate can of worms entirely.

 insaniak wrote:
By 'worth' I simply meant 'what it costs to take it'. Whether or not those costs are accurately balanced is a separate can of worms entirely.

Than why bother with points at all? The points are obviously wrong. So why are people so adamant about being 1 point over being so evil? Obviously, a point has a margin of error in it.

It is no more unfair for me to ask for 1 point than it is for you to ask me to play at -8 points.

It appears that many people on here have quite a bit of free time to go over a list. I don't, and all my lists are made on the fly so to speak, as I never know when I will get a game in.

Luckily every person I've asked has allowed a couple points.

Example 1:

Spoiler:

500 pts game.

One guy plays an ABG, takes a CCT with a couple of upgrades (200 pts), and 2 LRBT's (150 each) totalling a clean 500 pts.
The other guy plays CSM and brings:

Abaddon (265 pts)
Chaos Cultists (50 pts)
Chaos Cultists (50 pts)
Predator Annihilator (140 pts)

Which is 505 pts.

Both players have only just met in a GW store, and the CSM player only has these models on him, and has all the wargear glued on and in WYSIWYG condition.

Is the CSM player being a WAAC cheat, or is the +5 pts acceptable?

extremefreak-regarding example 1, what if those were the only models he has and the the store has a strict WYSIWYG guideline?

Should he be forced to only play 375 point games?

Breaking the rules is breaking the rules. GW produced a rulebook for a reason. To toss it out the window because you dont want to follow the rules that are in it and still apply those rules to your opponent is not acceptable to me.
To pick and choose what rules you want to apply to which player based on what you think is more likely to get you a win is also not acceptable.
The rules are there for a reason, to be followed.This particuler rule is one of the ones that is plain and simple without the need for a FAQ at all.

The game is designed to be fun for BOTH players. making a list that is legal is easier now than it has ever been before in terms of not going over the points limit. To purposely go over the limit is a breach of not only the rules as written in the rulebook, but also the most important rule as you are purposely disrespecting, insulting and trying to ruin the fun of your opponent by cheating to gain an unfair advantage.

The rules are the rules. Either you follow them or you are cheating. In a case like this, there is not grey area, it is a black and white issue. To propose that it is "ok" to break the rules is proposing that it is "ok" to cheat.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Than why bother with points at all?

Because, imperfect as they are, they are the guide that we have. Without them, we would just be throwing whatever models we have on the table and hoping for the best.

It is no more unfair for me to ask for 1 point than it is for you to ask me to play at -8 points.

Infantry models in 40K can move up to 6". Is it as fair for me to move my guys 7" on my turn as for you to choose to only move 3" on yours?

It appears that many people on here have quite a bit of free time to go over a list. I don't, and all my lists are made on the fly so to speak, as I never know when I will get a game in.

It doesn't take that long to write up a list... and if you do it in an army builder program or excel, it's even quicker to take an existing list and tweak it. When I'm going somewhere for a pick up game, it's then just a matter of printing off a couple of different lists at the most commonly played points limits.

It's people showing up for a pick-up game without a pre-made list that puzzle me. That's valuable gaming time we're wasting while I stand around waiting for you to throw a list together... and that list is more likely to contain errors due to being done in a rush


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Happyjew wrote:
extremefreak-regarding example 1, what if those were the only models he has and the the store has a strict WYSIWYG guideline?

Should he be forced to only play 375 point games?

It's down to how he approaches it. Showing up and saying: 'These are the only models I have, they come to 505 points. How about a game?' would be perfectly fine. Just showing up to a pre-arranged 500 point game and expecting to use that list? Not so much.

 Happyjew wrote:
extremefreak-regarding example 1, what if those were the only models he has and the the store has a strict WYSIWYG guideline?

Should he be forced to only play 375 point games?

Not at all. He can play 505 point games.

I am not trying to be TFG here, but if he needs play at 505 points, why would you you agree to a 500 point limit? I would let him play his 505, up the game to a 505 limit, and just add a 5 point upgrade to my own list. As long as it is agreed upon, the point limit can be any value.

It only becomes a problem when the person who is over the limit causes a fus about not being able to field their illegal list at that point level.

 insaniak wrote:

It appears that many people on here have quite a bit of free time to go over a list. I don't, and all my lists are made on the fly so to speak, as I never know when I will get a game in.

It doesn't take that long to write up a list... and if you do it in an army builder program or excel, it's even quicker to take an existing list and tweak it. When I'm going somewhere for a pick up game, it's then just a matter of printing off a couple of different lists at the most commonly played points limits.

I try to keep a notebook with pre-made lists in them at different points levels myself. this way, I can just go to the section with the correct number and pull out a random one or a thmed one that I wanna play just for giggles.
I think that a lot of the ones who "make them up on the fly do so in order to tailor. of course, that is only an observation I have made fter invariably seeing them just happen to have the counter for everything in thier opponent's army when they are done so treat that as only an observation from what I have seen over the years.
Chances are,if someone only ons 505 points of models, they are most likely a rookie and in need of "training games. As i said earlier, these sorts of games, i make the exception for and do my best to coach the rookie on nuances, tactics, tips and explain WHY i am doing what i am or WHY i would do something they did differently as well as answer questions about 'what to get next" with the caviot that they shouldnt take what i suggest to heart on my word alone and suggest ways to convert models to make different units chaper in terms of $. the things any good gamer would be happy to do in that situation.

 Selym wrote:
Is the CSM player being a WAAC cheat, or is the +5 pts acceptable?

Cheating. Drop Abaddon to a generic HQ with the same equipment to keep it WYSIWYG.

Is the CSM player being WAAC cheat, or is the +5 pts acceptable?

Cheating. The CSM player had plenty of time to make a legal 500 point list, and there's no point in trying out something that isn't legal.

Is the CSM player being WAAC cheat, or is the +5 pts acceptable?

Cheating. The CSM player can easily bring a legal list and has deliberately chosen to go over the limit.

I am of the opinion that being slightly over the limit is acceptable if you're not just grabbing at the chance to get more stuff

Except that's what all cases of going over the limit are. You have a limited number of points to spend, if you try to spend more then you're just grabbing at the chance to get more stuff. I mean, what else do you call it when you take a legal list and insist on breaking the rules to add something to it?

 EVIL INC wrote:
Breaking the rules is breaking the rules. GW produced a rulebook for a reason.

Yes, they probably also put those sentences that inform you about the spirit of a game there for a reason.

To toss it out the window because you dont want to follow the rules that are in it and still apply those rules to your opponent is not acceptable to me.

Absolutely no one is doing that. Obviously anyone who thinks that it is OK to go few points over extend that same courtesy to their opponent as well.

To pick and choose what rules you want to apply to which player based on what you think is more likely to get you a win is also not acceptable.

Luckily no one is doing that.

The rules are there for a reason, to be followed.This particuler rule is one of the ones that is plain and simple without the need for a FAQ at all.

The rule is clear. So is the spirit of the game. Why you care about one but not about the other?