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.
I can't imagine playing someone who thinks that talking is a gamey bastards move.
Then maybe you should go back and read the posts where people explicitly suggested using a "conversation" as an opportunity to distract their opponent and gain a tiny advantage.
I suppose you could politely ask your opponent to keep schtum whilst you have your turn, and count yourself fortunate if they carry on with the game!
But if it's such a tiny advantage what does it matter anyway? It just seems like you'd look for any excuse to pack up and storm off if the game wasn't going your way, to be honest.
Seriously? He's never said talking during a game is bad. What he is against ( and I agree with) is making conversation/complementing their models at a calculated time to knock their balance off. You don't want to talk, you want them to mess up. It's very two faced, rude and pointless. But by all means, have a proper, real conversation as we play.
I don't get why people cannot grasp this difference.
I can't imagine playing someone who thinks that talking is a gamey bastards move.
Then maybe you should go back and read the posts where people explicitly suggested using a "conversation" as an opportunity to distract their opponent and gain a tiny advantage.
I suppose you could politely ask your opponent to keep schtum whilst you have your turn, and count yourself fortunate if they carry on with the game!
But if it's such a tiny advantage what does it matter anyway? It just seems like you'd look for any excuse to pack up and storm off if the game wasn't going your way, to be honest.
Seriously? He's never said talking during a game is bad. What he is against ( and I agree with) is making conversation/complementing their models at a calculated time to knock their balance off. You don't want to talk, you want them to mess up. It's very two faced, rude and pointless. But by all means, have a proper, real conversation as we play.
I don't get why people cannot grasp this difference.
I can't imagine playing someone who thinks that talking is a gamey bastards move.
Then maybe you should go back and read the posts where people explicitly suggested using a "conversation" as an opportunity to distract their opponent and gain a tiny advantage.
I suppose you could politely ask your opponent to keep schtum whilst you have your turn, and count yourself fortunate if they carry on with the game!
But if it's such a tiny advantage what does it matter anyway? It just seems like you'd look for any excuse to pack up and storm off if the game wasn't going your way, to be honest.
Seriously? He's never said talking during a game is bad. What he is against ( and I agree with) is making conversation/complementing their models at a calculated time to knock their balance off. You don't want to talk, you want them to mess up. It's very two faced, rude and pointless. But by all means, have a proper, real conversation as we play.
I don't get why people cannot grasp this difference.
How can you tell the difference though?
That was my thought as well. If the person is being obvious in their attempts to distract or disrupt you then they aren't doing a terribly good job at it
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/29 11:44:40
I only play with my friends so my rules reflect that:
1. Honesty is the best policy. Call your 6 cocked if it's cocked and don't argue about it. If you have to rely on your opponent forgetting reserve rolls or FNP to win, you don't deserve the win.
2. Agree before the game on which house rules to enforce and enforce them. This usually means no stealing initiative, no mulligans after the appropriate phase ends, etc.
3. Tone down the competitive side and focus on having an enjoyable game for both parties.
4. Cheese is allowed in minor amounts. Use your best builds but don't ruin the fun.
5. If you're not sure about a rule, look it up.
6. Dropped dice count if you make it clear that you want it to count before a result is clear (usually through body language, see rule 1). Dice off the table are to be verbally "called" in the same way.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/11/29 13:28:45
I can't imagine playing someone who thinks that talking is a gamey bastards move.
Then maybe you should go back and read the posts where people explicitly suggested using a "conversation" as an opportunity to distract their opponent and gain a tiny advantage.
I suppose you could politely ask your opponent to keep schtum whilst you have your turn, and count yourself fortunate if they carry on with the game!
But if it's such a tiny advantage what does it matter anyway? It just seems like you'd look for any excuse to pack up and storm off if the game wasn't going your way, to be honest.
Seriously? He's never said talking during a game is bad. What he is against ( and I agree with) is making conversation/complementing their models at a calculated time to knock their balance off. You don't want to talk, you want them to mess up. It's very two faced, rude and pointless. But by all means, have a proper, real conversation as we play.
I don't get why people cannot grasp this difference.
How can you tell the difference though?
That was my thought as well. If the person is being obvious in their attempts to distract or disrupt you then they aren't doing a terribly good job at it
No I don't mean in the game, you wouldn't be able to I guess. What I mean is all the people posting here saying that they only talk or complement models to get an advantage. That's just being a dick, that's what I have a problem with.
In the real world it definitely is more difficult to tell, yeah.
It's like cheating. People that cheat are just childish and immature, and obviously its not on, but you can't always tell if someone's cheating. But that doesn't make it okay.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/29 14:21:22
You can have a real conversation with someone and then when they lose they can accuse you of trying to distract them with it as an excuse.
Seriously, players should be able to talk and play at the same time without any ill effects.
I would say that if someone is purposely doing it to throw you off your game, they are being "dicks". However, they are being "dicks" that are (or should be) wasting their time.
I'm able to do both so feel free to try it on me. It being a "dick" move, you will only see me having a real conversation or making actual compliments without that in mind.
Either way, it should be a waste of time, so not really worth addressing beyond laughing at those who try it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/29 19:58:29
clively wrote: "EVIL INC" - hardly. More like "REASONABLE GOOD GUY INC". (side note: exalted)
Generally my local meta is 'don't be a dick to win'. But no one's going to stop you being a WAACTFG, it's generally pretty looked down upon and people probably will only play one game with you. That said, during a local campaign/mini-tournament type thing we had going on, everyone's respect for each other went out the window, and the last three way game between me and two other guys was a 3000 point game where I brought 4 heldrakes (back when they were stupidly OP;I allied BL with regular CSM), one guy brought 3 riptides, and the other guy brought something like 6 wave serpents or something.
My gaming rules (not 40K exclusive):
- Wheaton's Law above all else.
- I'm not the only person there to have fun.
- If it's not fun at the table, you need to step away from the table - if you stick around, it might get un-fun for others as well.
- Cheer the other guy; only chastise yourself (but sparingly - see previous rules).
I can't imagine playing someone who thinks that talking is a gamey bastards move.
Then maybe you should go back and read the posts where people explicitly suggested using a "conversation" as an opportunity to distract their opponent and gain a tiny advantage.
I suppose you could politely ask your opponent to keep schtum whilst you have your turn, and count yourself fortunate if they carry on with the game!
But if it's such a tiny advantage what does it matter anyway? It just seems like you'd look for any excuse to pack up and storm off if the game wasn't going your way, to be honest.
Seriously? He's never said talking during a game is bad. What he is against ( and I agree with) is making conversation/complementing their models at a calculated time to knock their balance off. You don't want to talk, you want them to mess up. It's very two faced, rude and pointless. But by all means, have a proper, real conversation as we play.
I don't get why people cannot grasp this difference.
How can you tell the difference though?
That was my thought as well. If the person is being obvious in their attempts to distract or disrupt you then they aren't doing a terribly good job at it
You can tell the difference by asking yourself why you are about to say "X." If the answer is in order to distract your opponent or hurt his chances of winning or something like this, then you know you're being a dick. If the answer is because you want to socialise with your opponent and have a pleasant conversation as you play, then by all means, go ahead.
When you play, ask yourself if anything you are doing that is not strictly part of the game is intended to hurt their chances, and if the answer is yes, then don't do it. This isn't hard to grasp. This includes taking your opponent to lunch beforehand and suggesting he order something that won't settle in his stomach so that he wants to finish early, or deliberately not using air conditioning, or pretty much anything you can think of. The bottom line is, don't be a dick.
Sure, it's hard to tell if your opponent is being a dick sometimes, or if he just has poor timing, but the onus is on the individual not to be a dick, and not to be able to spot dicks. Just don't be a dick. Number one rule. And don't touch other people's models without permission, and if given, touch them by the base.
calamarialldayerrday wrote: You can tell the difference by asking yourself why you are about to say "X." If the answer is in order to distract your opponent or hurt his chances of winning or something like this, then you know you're being a dick. If the answer is because you want to socialise with your opponent and have a pleasant conversation as you play, then by all means, go ahead.
Well of course you would know if you're trying to mess up your opponent, I was talking about whether your opponent would know
If your opponent can't tell the difference between you doing it to distract them or just having a polite conversation I don't see why it would even bear mentioning that it may or may not be a dick move.
It's not remotely like cheating, getting distracted because your opponent is talking to you is entirely your fault, it really doesn't matter whether or not they were doing it intentionally. If it was like billiards where there's an etiquette of not talking while your opponent takes a shot I might consider it a dick move... but wargaming is not even remotely like that. People talk during wargames, that's just the way it is, if my opponent wants to try and use that talking to distract me that's their prerogative... it's not going to work but they can try if they want... I'm not going to call them a dick for it (if I can even tell that's what they're trying to do).
If your opponent is being genuinely obnoxious then that's a different issue. Some people are just dicks, but I don't really see that as the same thing
I have only one rule but it is a rule I hold dearly.
When I play a game, I want all parties involved to have a good time. If my opponent tries to cheat, I will bot have a good time and I will quit. If my opponent is whiney for the Xth time because he failed 1 out of his 10 2+ saves, I will not enjoy myself and I will quit (and I can't imagine him having fun either).
At my local GW I know who I should avoid and who I can have very enjoyable games with. I know what I can pull with some people and what not to do. There's this guy who really enjoys every game to the last second and if he's down to his last squad of marines, he'll enjoy it if I send in a squad of 10 cultists instead of my Khorne lord with 7-13 Str6 AP2 I6 attacks.
I know most people would call this 'prolonging the game unnecesarily' but him and me both actually enjoy those last fights because even though he lost, insane gak tends to happen when you're throwing around dice. So why the feth would I not try to chop up bio-engineered super-humans with dudes in ragged cloth and steel pipes.
You don't have to be happy when you lose, just don't make winning the condition of your happiness.
- If its questionable whether there are 4 or 5 of my models under the template weapon, I always say 5.
- If my opponent thinks they have cover, I give them cover.
- Talk about and agree on terrain, cocked dice, and possible rules issues before the game starts.
- Be clear about what I'm doing at all times, to avoid disputes. I.e., if I'm preparing for a charge, measure the distance from my unit to the unit it will be charging before moving in the movement phase, and agree with the opponent before I move about how long the charge will be. Especially if it's a crucial charge, or if model placement will be tricky due to terrain etc.
- My opponent is not automatically a bad person if I lose the game.
- No whining.
"The Emporer is a rouge trader."
- Charlie Chaplain.
Respect your opponent.
Never quit if the dice are against you.
No super competitive spirit in casual games.
No Taudar. Just no.
Expect no less from my opponent.
If you can't believe in yourself, believe in me! Believe in the Dakka who believes in you!
Well, aside from the general ones expected when anyone plays (Cocked dice, be nice, don't touch unless told/asked to), I have a few that mark me as more than likely the most casual player you'll ever meet. Each line under the rules is a short demonstration of the rule in action.
1. Always attempt err on the side of badass.
- I never show up to a game without a leather jacket, t-shirt from a concert I've been to, or my hair done up like I'm part of Motley Crue. Bonus points for all three at once.
2. If in doubt about a tactical decision that may win you the game, ALWAYS refer to rule number one.
-Grav Chute Insertion is, therefore, always the most tactically sound decision. Especially in cities.
3. If an army list does not adhere to rule number one, it is not worth playing and should be scrapped.
-I once wrote an army list for an IG gunline. It was promptly replaced with an army of ballsy space paratroopers and screaming CC-based Guardsmen.
4. When deciding between giving a squad any weapon or a flamer, the latter choice best adheres to the First Rule. No exceptions.
-This is why my Veteran Sniper squads always had one Heavy Flamer in 5th edition. Yes, they DID used to be 20 point upgrades.
5. Majority rules.
-It just does.
6. I am not the majority. Therefore, if the opponent disagrees upon my view of something in relation to the First Rule, I am to make every attempt to do something else equally badass.
-Elysian Drop Troops; no army adheres to the First Rule more than they. Unfortunately, they are inherently beardy and I will have no beard on my neck if someone calls me on it.
7. In-game, no action is more in accordance with the First Rule than standing firm in the face of all oppression. I'll not walk away simply due to disappointment or irritation.
-Besides, go watch Paths of Glory and see what happens to Guardsmen who retreat, even if they had a good reason.
And finally, the only time I ever get competitive... Which usually is only in relation to TFG.
8. If I'm going to willingly let the opponent throw cheese at me, I'm going to smack him down (in-game) until he gives me some whine to go with it.
-Get it? Cuz cheese and wine? Yeah...
Praise be to the Omnissiah
IG/"Legion of the Damned" - 5000 points (Cripes, when did that happen?)
Vampire Counts: 1000 points? Maybe? Either way... Welcome to the Jungle
1) You and your opponent are both there to have fun. Don't bring an army that you know will out-class your opponent and make for an unfun game.
2) Agree before the game starts what all the Terrain is in terms of area terrain, and the cover save that it grants.
3) If your opponent makes a minor mistake (I forgot to roll to rally my troops, Oops we're in assault and I forgot to fire with this one unit, etc), let them correct it. They will extend the same courtesy to you.
4) In a rules conflict, defer to your opponent in the case of a judgement call. In the case of a rule conundrum, roll a D6 and get on with the game.
5) Do not get drunk and yell obscenities and act like a 12 year old when Eldrad fails a Leadership check in Turn 1, and runs off the board. You are a grown man in his 30's.
1. Main objective is to enjoy the game. In normal games if someone forgets to do something important, I allow it without problems. If there seems to be a dispute about something, just roll off and find the solution later if it can´t be found in a reasonable amount of time, and play it correctly the next time. Treat opponents with respect, and try to have a friendly, humorous and relaxed atmosphere. Varies when in tournaments.
2. No cheating - if one cheats he must be bad enough to need the extra "help" in order to perform
3. Rules played as RAW, even silly ones. It´s a game and it has rules, and that´s it. Comparing WH40K to "realism" I find a bit futile.
4. I try to maintain competitive level of play without resulting to outright broken combos - I find it fun winning while using a toned down, reasonably competitive TAC list. In tournaments this is different however.
5. I don´t tailor my army against certain armytypes or a player or his playstyle. I build my army with a mindset that I might face anything one can imagine.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/04 18:40:43
No superheavies and no fliers, no touching my opponent's dice or models, and don't whip it out at the table.
This isn't rocket science, people.
Emperor's Eagles (undergoing Chapter reorganization)
Caledonian 95th (undergoing regimental reorganization)
Thousands Sons (undergoing Warband re--- wait, are any of my 40K armies playable?)
are we still on the No fliers kick? I mean now every army can deal with them.
Every army can deal with them, but not every army can deal with them equally, and not every player owns a flier or a means to deal with them. Some people have limited budgets. It's the same with superheavies. Yeah, most armies have a way of countering a superheavy (IoM just uses another superheavy) but not everyone owns that counter (and if FW makes your hard counter, it gets very costly). Best way to deal with it? Don't bring it. Infantry, tanks, and bikes are the rock, paper, and scissors that this game was built on. I don't need dynamite or Spock fething it up. My opponent doesn't either.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/04 19:33:31
Emperor's Eagles (undergoing Chapter reorganization)
Caledonian 95th (undergoing regimental reorganization)
Thousands Sons (undergoing Warband re--- wait, are any of my 40K armies playable?)
I'm sorry what? That makes no sense. That is like saying I can't bring tanks because you can't deal with them. Every army has cheap access to anti air and anti super heavie
hotsauceman1 wrote: I'm sorry what? That makes no sense. That is like saying I can't bring tanks because you can't deal with them. Every army has cheap access to anti air and anti super heavie
Ok then, without mentioning fliers, name one cheap AA option in the DE codex.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
Twinlinked heat lances.
Ravages
Seriously hate against fliers & superheavies are just stupid. They are so easy to kill and fun to play, or you could ignore them and their limited move pattern
Seriously hate against fliers & superheavies are just stupid.
Only if you put your fingers in your ears and just make up stuff.
It's like me saying "Riptides are fine because lasguns can hurt them."
Of course, it would take 72 lasgun shots to inflict a single wound, but why let maths ruin our fun?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/04 20:00:04
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
vipoid wrote: Ok then, without mentioning fliers, name one cheap AA option in the DE codex.
Why put arbitrary restrictions on what AA you can take? This is like demanding that your army have lots of "anti-horde" units that all have STR 8 AP 2 or better, and ignoring all those lasguns/HBs/pulse rifles/etc.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
More like "REASONABLE GOOD GUY INC". (side note: exalted)
Dark Angels 4th Company (3,830pts) 950pts fully painted
'I'm like a man with a fork, in a world of soup.' 
If you can't believe in yourself, believe in me! Believe in the Dakka who believes in you! 
Praise be to the Omnissiah 
IG/"Legion of the Damned" - 5000 points (Cripes, when did that happen?)
Emperor's Eagles (undergoing Chapter reorganization)
Caledonian 95th (undergoing regimental reorganization)
5000pts 
6000pts 
