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.

What I find very weird is that so many people think a stat or special rule isnt true(twin linked doomsday arks was brought up earlier) but then dont ask to see the codex.why?

Because if you do, your either losing game play time you paid for the table or if it is at a tournament you will be accused of trying to time the game.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
As for the other issue, no. If you END YOUR turn without anything then you lose. And I obviously did not.

Technically this is not correct. If you go first and had nothing on the table at the end of your 'player turn', you would not lose until the end of the 'game turn' which would be after your opponent had his 'player turn'. The only instance that I can think of where this would matter however is if a Necron player had a squad of Deathmarks in reserve and used the 'Ethereal Interception' special rule.

Or if you're playing a Horus Heresy Alpha Legion army (as they can potentially bring a unit in on your opponent's turn if the unit being brought in is the same type as the one your opponent successfully rolled reserves for, in which case it comes in instead of the opponent's unit).

Forgeworld...

When I see that, or the rules for the Hornet, or the previous cost on the Lynx, I can't help but say: those rules aren't polished just yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bookwrack wrote:
Fortunately, the worst story I have to tell is pretty mild - playing a game against a tau player, who had a hammerhead with no base, and all game long it hadn't been a problem, just having it cruising along at ground level.

Until the last turn, when I had... something somewhere vital, but it was out of sight behind a tall wall. He pulled out his tape measure and started picking up his dice and I asked what he was doing.

"Well, if it was on its base, it'd be high enough to see them, so I'm taking the shot."

I wasn't having any of that, and he got cranky that I wasn't willing to budge on his hammerhead suddenly getting to gain a couple inches of height.

You're supposed to count it at standard height, i.e. with a base. For all rules purposes. You're TFG.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:

NamelessBard wrote:

As for the infiltrate thing, you're just wrong. It's okay to not understand the rule. r.

And again... NON vehicles is SPECIFIC. Specific beats general.

So no. But you can certainly fel that way about it. It may turn into a roll off and if thats refused, then the shortest game of 40K ever. But you cant ignore the obvious black and white Restriction onthe ability. It mentions the Rule, then MODIFIES the rule. Very clearly.

You're wrong.
Three units get infiltrate.
Because of that, their DT receive infiltrate.
Proceed to infiltrate. Even separately if you wish.
Because that's how the rules work.
If you don't want to listen to people, go to YMDC.

SBG wrote:
This thread has become my TFG moment.

There aren't enough exalts in the world.

I think this game breeds TFGs.

 raiden wrote:
I think we have a TFG....

on another note on topic, watched a friend play someone I haven't met who says he hasn't played much (this was when malestorm was the newest of the new stuff, not long ago, but eh) and he only has a few models and so take it easy.

so the friend pulls out a bunch of orks and some other things, I didn't pay much attention, then the other guy brings our 2 knights and some other weird stuff.

he proceeded to lose as he couldn't keep up with the Malestorm points and wasn't able to table my friends orks, (4th ed. orks)

not much of a TFG, but I find it a bit odd to say you are new then pull out imperial knights... in a "friendly game". luckily thats about the worst I have seen.

Except IK are a legal army, so one can be new and be using IK as an army.

 Vermis wrote:
I think this game breeds TFGs.

Every game breeds TFGs. It's just how it is.

morgoth wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:
Fortunately, the worst story I have to tell is pretty mild - playing a game against a tau player, who had a hammerhead with no base, and all game long it hadn't been a problem, just having it cruising along at ground level.

Until the last turn, when I had... something somewhere vital, but it was out of sight behind a tall wall. He pulled out his tape measure and started picking up his dice and I asked what he was doing.

"Well, if it was on its base, it'd be high enough to see them, so I'm taking the shot."

I wasn't having any of that, and he got cranky that I wasn't willing to budge on his hammerhead suddenly getting to gain a couple inches of height.

You're supposed to count it at standard height, i.e. with a base. For all rules purposes. You're TFG.

Well I would hardly call him that. Altough what you said is correct, (at least in a way...) there is one question I must ask.
Bookwrack, in that game did you previously count yout los to the Hammerhead as if it didn't have a base?

I think that neither was TFG, it was just a misunderstanding. In situations like this, it is best to agree about using the vehicle before the game.
I personally play the models as they look. Going to the "if it was like this" is not the way to play in my opinion.

Well, he said all game long it'd 'been cruising along at ground level,' which indicates to me that they'd been treating it as being where it actually sat, and not where being based would've put it.

Right up until that last turn where being higher up suddenly became an advantage.

 soomemafia wrote:

morgoth wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:
Fortunately, the worst story I have to tell is pretty mild - playing a game against a tau player, who had a hammerhead with no base, and all game long it hadn't been a problem, just having it cruising along at ground level.

Until the last turn, when I had... something somewhere vital, but it was out of sight behind a tall wall. He pulled out his tape measure and started picking up his dice and I asked what he was doing.

"Well, if it was on its base, it'd be high enough to see them, so I'm taking the shot."

I wasn't having any of that, and he got cranky that I wasn't willing to budge on his hammerhead suddenly getting to gain a couple inches of height.

You're supposed to count it at standard height, i.e. with a base. For all rules purposes. You're TFG.

Well I would hardly call him that. Altough what you said is correct, (at least in a way...) there is one question I must ask.
Bookwrack, in that game did you previously count yout los to the Hammerhead as if it didn't have a base?

I think that neither was TFG, it was just a misunderstanding. In situations like this, it is best to agree about using the vehicle before the game.
I personally play the models as they look. Going to the "if it was like this" is not the way to play in my opinion.

It was a misunderstanding, until our dear forum poster here decided the other guy was a TFG and denied him the rules which were correct.
By doing that, he was TFG that day.
Models are played as they should be (GW model, standard pose, standard base) because that lets you ignore modelling for an advantage.
Plus, it's the rules, so refusing that to someone is over the top.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Portugal Jones wrote:
Well, he said all game long it'd 'been cruising along at ground level,' which indicates to me that they'd been treating it as being where it actually sat, and not where being based would've put it.

Right up until that last turn where being higher up suddenly became an advantage.

I think it indicates the Skimmer moved without base all that time.
If there was a discrepancy between the non-Tau shooting phase and the Tau shooting phase then yes of course that's not acceptable.

We'll have to wait for him to weigh-in, but you'd have to be pretty oblivious to say, 'my opponent was TFG when he was following the rules and I was the one changing things.' But then again, I have been reading Jancoran's posts in this thread... *rimshot*

Seriously though, "Until the last turn-" makes it sound like something suddenly changed in how the hammerhead was being treated.

I think with Bookwracks example, there was a simple misunderstanding between the two players - the opponent thought that they were using it as it should have been (on the base) while Bookwrack thought they were using it as it was on the day (no base) - the best thing for both of them would have been for them to agree whether it would be on a base or not throughout the game (aside the fact that it really should have had a base).

I for example, have a Zoanthrope that is yet to be pinned and as it is, can be out of LOS under a low wall, so while I wait for my materials, I simply hold the model in place with my fingers when my opponent or I are interacting with the model.

Shots fired from Portugal Jones!

sadly lately I've been thinking maybe I am that one fething guy as im really into heresy so have been using my death guard to play with my friends orks but its been embarrassing for him as the last two games we played I won 18 nill he killed one guy I almost wiped him out (left gaskull and his large unit of nobs alone) the next game we swapped deployment zones and tried again I won 13 nill no casualties and completely wiped him out he wasn't bitter about it and we both had fun customising the mission get your tech marine or mek in the bastion and the weapons work and falling asteroids and what not. its not like that I took an op list or cheated he was just a really bad player very bad tactics and only two units weren't baseline why? he had no anti tank I had two dreds and I was helping sort of in trying to guide him in tactics so why do I feel so bad?

morgoth wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:
Fortunately, the worst story I have to tell is pretty mild - playing a game against a tau player, who had a hammerhead with no base, and all game long it hadn't been a problem, just having it cruising along at ground level.

Until the last turn, when I had... something somewhere vital, but it was out of sight behind a tall wall. He pulled out his tape measure and started picking up his dice and I asked what he was doing.

"Well, if it was on its base, it'd be high enough to see them, so I'm taking the shot."

I wasn't having any of that, and he got cranky that I wasn't willing to budge on his hammerhead suddenly getting to gain a couple inches of height.

You're supposed to count it at standard height, i.e. with a base. For all rules purposes. You're TFG.

And what, praytell is "standard height"? As I can think of at least 4 different "standard" flying stem sizes produced by GW. Not to even mention brass rod.

Makumba wrote:
Because if you do, your either losing game play time you paid for the table or if it is at a tournament you will be accused of trying to time the game.

Paid...for the...? Holy crap dude your store is TFG! You're the guy with the store that doesn't allow anything not bought there weren't you?

the_scotsman wrote:

Makumba wrote:
Because if you do, your either losing game play time you paid for the table or if it is at a tournament you will be accused of trying to time the game.

Paid...for the...? Holy crap dude your store is TFG! You're the guy with the store that doesn't allow anything not bought there weren't you?

Charging for table use is something that has been mentioned by many, many, many people in the past. It's how some stores keep the lights on even if people aren't buying stuff.

Alright, this is a bit of an odd scenario to describe, but the local "TFG" isn't a "TFG" outside of the game. He's an extremely nice, social, agreeable person who goes out of his way to help other people in the club and elsewhere, but as soon as the game starts something switches inside his brain, it's an odd thing we've all noticed (unless it's a team game, because no one here takes those too seriously).

So, the game kind of follows this path:

- Decide points level and table, agree on armies
- He'll then build a list (almost everyone brings one ahead of time), he won't tailor it exactly, but he'll change a few units to match your army; if you've got a librarian, he'll bring a sorcerer to his Khorne list, if you don't have AA, he'll bring a pair of Blight Drones to his nurgle army, have a few tanks, he'll give more melta to his Crisis suits or EMP to Fire Warriors, etc
- Take out entire army model by model, arranging them in perfect formation prior to finalizing list
- Get third party to set up terrain (we always do that, avoid accusations of bias or manipulation, usually produces a more themed board, which is nice)
- Watch other player shift and move terrain to ensure as many ruins as possible are inside both table edges, and move LoS blocking terrain out of the midfield, or table entirely (note: all his armies are gunlines) End result is usually a line of ruins on either table edge, and low or scatter terrain only in the middle.
- Have brief arguement over whether or not to use Maelstrom or Eternal War missions; being a gunline player, he will never play Maelstrom
- Roll off for the 12 billion charts of randomness pre-game
- Watch player deploy a bunch of blast and long-range weapons on the absolute edge of the table, in ruins, ensuring they have line of sight and range on the entire board
- Deploy own army in 1/4 of the time
- Throughout game, player will keep cocked dice without checking if number favourable, re-rolling if unfavourable, always keen to pounce on other player for any potentially cocked dice which is favourable, claim LoS everywhere without checking, regardless of how carefully you have tried to hide even a single model from the wall of doom, and will get frustrated, unhappy and accusatory over any opponent unit performs better than he expected (I once got in gak for my Honour Guard with Relic blades killing a unit of Khorne Berserkers, "I really dislike units which have 2+ but look like normal space marines," my response, "Uh, I built them out of Grey Knights, converted them, gave them giant glowing swords in an effort to make it abundantly clear what they are," "I guess....") and will actively manipulate rules that he's been previously ruled against on, provided said person isn't in earshot, like claiming vehicles in squadrons can't be hurt in assault if there isn't an assaulting model in base contact with secondary vehicles, and will simply concede if the opponent does something he doesn't like, or in the very rare occassion where he perceives the opponent's list to be more powerful.

He also likes to call me a hypocrit when I call him out on his current favourite IG list not being as "nice" as he'd like to claim, as I run something similar over a year ago; a tank-heavy list. I used to run the Armoured Battlegroup from FW back when Russes couldn't score; I brought one of every Leman Russ in existance, gave the opponent fair warning, and gave them a few suggestions over how to counter it; it's not fun pounding an unprepared opponent into the dirt after all (and I usually lost anyways, not being able to seize any objectives, can only win by tabling). He runs Punisher Pask, a secondary commander Vanquisher, Demolisher squadron and standard battletank squadron with two vets in chimeras out of the regular codex, calls them a fluffy, nice list, and defends at as being a pretty tame list when fighting footslogging space marines because I, the person who only ever builds an army to a theme and can't roll above a 2 used a tank list back when it was, tactically speaking, terrible (and tended to run them straight into the enemy for gaks and giggles, I once had a pile three russes tall from trying to tank shock Obliterators to no avail)

And then give him an hour of vent his various frustrations over a game if it didn't follow his plan or he was challenged on something, and he's back to being just shy of a paragon of virtue. It's the damnedest thing.

On the skimmer and the flying base...

The way the post is written it sure sounds like it was treated one way by both players the whole game, then the other dude changes things at the end for his benefit.

To me if both players choose to ignore a rule all game, then one wants to use the rule at the end, he is wrong even if it is the rule. You can't pick and choose when to follow a rule. You either follow it or don't. Either one is fine as long as both players are doing it the same way.

Also, by not using the flying base, the other player is not fielding a properly modeled army. Why should he benefit from the rule while at the same time ignoring it? And if his failure to properly model has cost his opponent an opportunity to shoot, he should not then be able to shoot as if the model was properly modeled.

Grimtuff wrote:
And what, praytell is "standard height"? As I can think of at least 4 different "standard" flying stem sizes produced by GW. Not to even mention brass rod.

There are two stems that were provided for skimmers, both are valid and I think you're even allowed to change in game.

morgoth wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:
And what, praytell is "standard height"? As I can think of at least 4 different "standard" flying stem sizes produced by GW. Not to even mention brass rod.

There are two stems that were provided for skimmers, both are valid and I think you're even allowed to change in game.

I..Don't think anyone would allow that, ever, because that would open up some horrific model for abuse.

morgoth wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:
And what, praytell is "standard height"? As I can think of at least 4 different "standard" flying stem sizes produced by GW. Not to even mention brass rod.

There are two stems that were provided for skimmers, both are valid and I think you're even allowed to change in game.

While both are valid, there is nothing in the rules which would permit you to change the stem mid game.

*edit* Man, I'm not even touching those changing-stem shenanigans with a ten foot power lance.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
On the skimmer and the flying base...

The way the post is written it sure sounds like it was treated one way by both players the whole game, then the other dude changes things at the end for his benefit.

I forgot to mention that it was 5th edition, so True Line of Sight was in full effect as well. It wasn't an issue of communication - the whole game, shooting at (and as far as I could tell, being shot by) the hammerhead had followed TLOS for where it sat on the table. I want to say that on that same turn, it'd soaked a lascannon or multimelta shot with a cover save because I'd been worried about it doing exactly what he tried to do, but it was three or four years ago at this point. Which is why, 'well, if it was on a stand it could see them, so I'm taking the shot,' was such a *record scratch noise* 'Wait, what?' moment.

*edit 2* And why I feel it was worth including in a TFG thread was my opponent just picked up his dice to get on with the shooting - he didn't stop to ask if I'd consider letting him do it, or otherwise bring it to my attention. The only reason I jumped on it so quick, and hard, was because I'd been worried about that exact situation and had tried to position the unit to keep it from coming around. My first reaction was that I had made a mistake and missed a firing angle from his side of the table, but when I ducked down to check, I realized, nope, that groundbound hammerhead could not see my unit.

Yeah, I'm not playing the stem changing game, but it could have been added tactical depth. I would have loved it, it would have been so much fun.

Unfortunately, with the kind of reaction the community has to just about anything, it sounds like a very bad idea and a simple way to be accused of modelling for an advantage - something that only exists because of stupid TLOS.

Either way, Bookwrack, in most cases TLOS or not checking are exactly the same thing, just sometimes it's not the case.

The rules are that you count models in a standard pose with a standard base, no matter what you used as pose, alternative model or base.

That "groundbound" hammerhead should have been allowed to fire on your units, and unless you were denied shots at it because of its height (not thought so and did not ask), you had no right to deny that to your opponent.

But that's fine, everyone makes mistakes and will at times stand behind the wrong point, oftentimes because it makes total sense to them.

morgoth wrote:

That "groundbound" hammerhead should have been allowed to fire on your units, and unless you were denied shots at it because of its height (not thought so and did not ask), you had no right to deny that to your opponent.

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, is it?
*edit*
As well as not understanding what 'True Line of Sight' means, and a penchant for making up rules as they suit you. Ir would you like to try giving a page number for where in the 5th edition rulebook it says, 'models are treated as being somewhere else than they actually are?'

 Bookwrack wrote:
As well as not understanding what 'True Line of Sight' means, and a penchant for making up rules as they suit you. Ir would you like to try giving a page number for where in the 5th edition rulebook it says, 'models are treated as being somewhere else than they actually are?'

The BRB mentions the fact that miniatures should be used with the bases provided.
In order to prevent any "modelling for an advantage" discussion, it stands to reason that any advantage or disadvantage due to an unusual pose should be ignored when measuring range, TLOS an all that.

But hey, you can play it your way and have all the "modelling for an advantage" thing up in the air, your choice.

Morgoth, you're ignoring the fact that it was played the entire game from were it was, not were it should have been if it was on a base. The cheese wasn't that the other player wanted to pretend it was on it's base, but that he wanted to do so at the end of the game when it gave him an advantage.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Morgoth, you're ignoring the fact that it was played the entire game from were it was, not were it should have been if it was on a base. The cheese wasn't that the other player wanted to pretend it was on it's base, but that he wanted to do so at the end of the game when it gave him an advantage.

- Edited by insaniak. Please see Dakka's Rule #1 -

 Vigilant wrote:
Well... not at a Warhammer related event, but there was this Mini rc event I went to a while back. That one ing guy decides to look at my iwaver and xmods rc. He has the audacity to just come over and pop the chassis off pulling out the servos and ignoring me like nothing.

I nearly goomba stomped his face in. Some people just have no sense and grab anything without asking.

Dont touch something if it's not yours! Don't take apart something if it's not yours! Especially not 5 minutes before a race you arent even participating in! Don't be that mother ing guy!
...
...

I'm fine now. It's cool.

You can't call him TFG because he was like, eight years old, but..store apocalyspe game a few years ago, the manager was the games master for the game. He gave out party poppers to use as artillery barrages, with the idea that you fire them up at the ceiling and then whatever they land on gets hit by a basilisk shell or whatever. It was his way of eveing things out after one of the tables turned into a superheavy parking lot.

Anyway, some kid on the chaos side - I don't know why they let eight year olds join the game, but ugh, this was in the days of GW as Free Childcare - decided that the best use for this party popper was to absolutely make sure that my Valkyries couldn't deploy infantry onto one of the other objectives, and was about to fire it directly up at the bottom of the aircraft's wing.

From an inch away.

At a fully painted, slightly fragile model.

I consider myself quite restrained in that I merely guided his hand away and told him off... and then didn't have a screaming fit at his mother when she started lighting into me for daring to interfere with her darling baby boy.

The opponent was the one who suddenly tried to ignore TLOS based on where it "would have been" despite playing the game where it actually was. The opponent was also the one who wasn't using the flight stand. It's hardly the person who didn't let his opponent abuse the game system for an advantage who was being a dick.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Vigilant wrote:
Well... not at a Warhammer related event, but there was this Mini rc event I went to a while back. That one ing guy decides to look at my iwaver and xmods rc. He has the audacity to just come over and pop the chassis off pulling out the servos and ignoring me like nothing.

I nearly goomba stomped his face in. Some people just have no sense and grab anything without asking.

Dont touch something if it's not yours! Don't take apart something if it's not yours! Especially not 5 minutes before a race you arent even participating in! Don't be that mother ing guy!
...
...

I'm fine now. It's cool.

You can't call him TFG because he was like, eight years old, but..store apocalyspe game a few years ago, the manager was the games master for the game. He gave out party poppers to use as artillery barrages, with the idea that you fire them up at the ceiling and then whatever they land on gets hit by a basilisk shell or whatever. It was his way of eveing things out after one of the tables turned into a superheavy parking lot.

Anyway, some kid on the chaos side - I don't know why they let eight year olds join the game, but ugh, this was in the days of GW as Free Childcare - decided that the best use for this party popper was to absolutely make sure that my Valkyries couldn't deploy infantry onto one of the other objectives, and was about to fire it directly up at the bottom of the aircraft's wing.

From an inch away.

At a fully painted, slightly fragile model.

I consider myself quite restrained in that I merely guided his hand away and told him off... and then didn't have a screaming fit at his mother when she started lighting into me for daring to interfere with her darling baby boy.

Blame the parent, not the child. (Even if the child is a total dick)

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The opponent was the one who suddenly tried to ignore TLOS based on where it "would have been" despite playing the game where it actually was. The opponent was also the one who wasn't using the flight stand. It's hardly the person who didn't let his opponent abuse the game system for an advantage who was being a dick.

Hear hear.