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.

Tons of us are having a blast with 40k, we do this thing where we talk to our opponents and figure out what kind of game we want to play instead of freaking the feth out about everything all the time and running in circles.

 Las wrote:
Tons of us are having a blast with 40k, we do this thing where we talk to our opponents and figure out what kind of game we want to play instead of freaking the feth out about everything all the time and running in circles.

But this is the point, if it was a balanced game, you'd be able to just bring an army and play, as opposed to having a discussion beforehand about 'oh what expansions are we using? Super heaves allowed? Are we playing competitive lists, or fluffy?' Etc.

 Las wrote:
Tons of us are having a blast with 40k, we do this thing where we talk to our opponents and figure out what kind of game we want to play instead of freaking the feth out about everything all the time and running in circles.

Tons of us are not having a blast with 40k. Because we're actually humans with different personalities who do not necessarily agree on what kind of game we want, rather than emotionless clones, interlinked via a hive mind.

 vipoid wrote:
rather than emotionless clones, interlinked via a hive mind.

Pfft, speak for yourself.

We, the Entity, are coming for you. And we are most displeased.

 Las wrote:
Tons of us are having a blast with 40k, we do this thing where we talk to our opponents and figure out what kind of game we want to play instead of freaking the feth out about everything all the time and running in circles.

Lol... There you go. Yeah, you can't treat 40k like starcraft.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Las wrote:
Tons of us are having a blast with 40k, we do this thing where we talk to our opponents and figure out what kind of game we want to play instead of freaking the feth out about everything all the time and running in circles.

But this is the point, if it was a balanced game, you'd be able to just bring an army and play, as opposed to having a discussion beforehand about 'oh what expansions are we using? Super heaves allowed? Are we playing competitive lists, or fluffy?' Etc.

Or maybe the nature of the game is to be a huge tool box of options for you to play with or without?

 vipoid wrote:

 Las wrote:
Tons of us are having a blast with 40k, we do this thing where we talk to our opponents and figure out what kind of game we want to play instead of freaking the feth out about everything all the time and running in circles.

Tons of us are not having a blast with 40k. Because we're actually humans with different personalities who do not necessarily agree on what kind of game we want, rather than emotionless clones, interlinked via a hive mind.

I don't even know how to respond to this. You do understand how talking and like, societies work right?

 Las wrote:
Or maybe the nature of the game is to be a huge tool box of options for you to play with or without?

IOW, garbage produced by incompetent morons who can't figure out how to scale the game properly.

What a refreshing view of things. I agree somewhat with the OP. Army selection does not have to be compeditive at all, but gameplay probably will be. Even compeditive players can hold back when making a steamroller list, and then have an honest challenge winning with a less then optimal list.
Often this makes for a fun game, instead of one that has an obvious outcome in turn 1. Everyone likes to win, but i personally prefer hard won victories.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Las wrote:
Or maybe the nature of the game is to be a huge tool box of options for you to play with or without?

IOW, garbage produced by incompetent morons who can't figure out how to scale the game properly.

Stop wasting your time and money on it then.

 vipoid wrote:

 Las wrote:
Tons of us are having a blast with 40k, we do this thing where we talk to our opponents and figure out what kind of game we want to play instead of freaking the feth out about everything all the time and running in circles.

Tons of us are not having a blast with 40k. Because we're actually humans with different personalities who do not necessarily agree on what kind of game we want, rather than emotionless clones, interlinked via a hive mind.

I'm not even a pro-GW guy, but you cannot literally say anything good about 40k on dakka-general without getting slammed hah. If you humans cannot at least agree on what kind of game you want, you can hardly blame the system (40k). My group does still love 40k, despite it's flaws, and we also love Infinity; in both cases actual human communication is required however.

 Las wrote:
Stop wasting your time and money on it then.

I did. I haven't bought a GW rulebook in a long time, and the only GW product I've bought outside of ebay in the past year or so is paint.

 Gunzhard wrote:
I'm not even a pro-GW guy

 Gunzhard wrote:
but you cannot literally say anything good about 40k on dakka-general without getting slammed hah.

Well, no, not when your only "contribution" is a self-congratulatory comment that does nothing but arrogantly deride anyone not enjoying the game from a position of smug self-superiority.

 Gunzhard wrote:
If you humans cannot at least agree on what kind of game you want, you can hardly blame the system (40k).

Why?

Why is it wrong for some to like Lords of War and some to dislike them? Or for some to like the idea of super-heavies and for others to dislike them?

Allowing all elements would be fine if the bloody game could actually balance them.

 vipoid wrote:

Why?

Why is it wrong for some to like Lords of War and some to dislike them? Or for some to like the idea of super-heavies and for others to dislike them?

Allowing all elements would be fine if the bloody game could actually balance them.

Who said there is anything wrong with that? ...I think the point was, take a minute to talk about it. So the likes can make nice with the dislikes.

 Gunzhard wrote:

I'm not even a pro-GW guy, but you cannot literally say anything good about 40k on dakka-general without getting slammed hah. If you humans cannot at least agree on what kind of game you want, you can hardly blame the system (40k). My group does still love 40k, despite it's flaws, and we also love Infinity; in both cases actual human communication are required however.

Welcome to the internet Remember though, that the average player is very proud and close-minded when discussing "game balance" and what to do with it, and considers the opponent his enemy. "cutting a deal" like agreeing on anything beforehand or even suggesting "holding back for a more narrative game" will seriously hurt his honor and make him feel like less of a man. Braying like a maniac at the community is much more effective, and leaves the player both blameless and powerless to influence the game in any way other then making are more merciless list then last time.

 vipoid wrote:

Why?

Why is it wrong for some to like Lords of War and some to dislike them? Or for some to like the idea of super-heavies and for others to dislike them?

Allowing all elements would be fine if the bloody game could actually balance them.

That's the whole point, Magellan. There's something for everyone in the game, so use your social skills and play with people who have a similar attitude to your own, it's pretty sick. If this is that much of a hurdle to you then there's always Catan.

 Las wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

Why?

Why is it wrong for some to like Lords of War and some to dislike them? Or for some to like the idea of super-heavies and for others to dislike them?

Allowing all elements would be fine if the bloody game could actually balance them.

That's the whole point, Magellan. There's something for everyone in the game, so use your social skills and play with people who have a similar attitude to your own, it's pretty sick. If this is that much of a hurdle to you then there's always Catan.

Which as he said would be fine if they were balanced. That's the point. The game balance is horrible. No ones saying the idea of Titans and superheavies and such is objectively bad, just that they aren't balanced.

 Gunzhard wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

I don't think we really need a semantics argument to know what 'depth' means.

Oh, but we do. Otherwise I can do this.

"Warmachine's fluff is depthier. FACT."

See, I don't need to defend that, or create an argument to back up my claim, I can just put FACT at the end of it, then dodge any questions about what I mean by depthier, thereby proving my point.

Sure when you half-quote to take things out of context... but I guess "nothing is ridiculous" right Blacksails? What do they call the Black Library equivalent for Warmarchine?

Skull Island X. FACT.

If that's how you feel then don't use them. Again use your bloody people skills. Or just don't play 40k if you straight up don't like it.

Is there any other thing in your life that you actively participate in screaming "I don't like this!" Instead of just stopping and moving on?

 Las wrote:
If that's how you feel then don't use them. Again use your bloody people skills. Or just don't play 40k if you straight up don't like it.

Is there any other thing in your life that you actively participate in screaming "I don't like this!" Instead of just stopping and moving on?

It's a forum. You discuss things. We're discussing 40k. Just because we disagree with you doesn't mean we can't talk about things.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Las wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

Why?

Why is it wrong for some to like Lords of War and some to dislike them? Or for some to like the idea of super-heavies and for others to dislike them?

Allowing all elements would be fine if the bloody game could actually balance them.

That's the whole point, Magellan. There's something for everyone in the game, so use your social skills and play with people who have a similar attitude to your own, it's pretty sick. If this is that much of a hurdle to you then there's always Catan.

Which as he said would be fine if they were balanced. That's the point. The game balance is horrible. No ones saying the idea of Titans and superheavies and such is objectively bad, just that they aren't balanced.

I wouldn't entirely disagree with you here. There are some units that just don't fit with the game balance, like the Revenant Titan for example. But I don't believe in throwing out the baby with the bathwater because it's really not all that bad, and those rare hypothetical matchups are not enough to make me give up on the system. In all cases communication makes an enormous difference in enjoyment level. I get sometimes you're stuck with limited opponents, which is not an issue for me, but really talking it out, with any game, does help make it more enjoyable.

 Las wrote:
Then don't use them.

Is there any other thing in your life that you actively participate in screaming "I don't like this!" Instead of just stopping and moving on?

First of all, "don't use them" is hardly as easy as you say. If you show up to 40k night at your local store and want to play a pickup game you don't get veto power over your opponent's list. If you have a long list of conditions that have to be satisfied before you're willing to play you will quickly get a reputation for being "that guy" and most people will decide that it's not worth the trouble of making a special list just to play against you. Have fun sitting in the corner awkwardly wishing you could have a game.

Second, what makes you think that "if you don't like it then move on" is a valid argument? If I quit 40k because of issue X it doesn't mean that X is no longer a problem, or that I can't criticize X.

Well to be honest for my DE one of my favorite units is mandrakes, ill put them in even if they do nothing haha

 Peregrine wrote:

 Las wrote:
Then don't use them.

Is there any other thing in your life that you actively participate in screaming "I don't like this!" Instead of just stopping and moving on?

First of all, "don't use them" is hardly as easy as you say. If you show up to 40k night at your local store and want to play a pickup game you don't get veto power over your opponent's list. If you have a long list of conditions that have to be satisfied before you're willing to play you will quickly get a reputation for being "that guy" and most people will decide that it's not worth the trouble of making a special list just to play against you. Have fun sitting in the corner awkwardly wishing you could have a game.

Second, what makes you think that "if you don't like it then move on" is a valid argument? If I quit 40k because of issue X it doesn't mean that X is no longer a problem, or that I can't criticize X.

I don't like playing with super heavies and I make that known to my opponents. Every once in a while i can compromise and play against one, again it's all discussion. I have never had the above situation happen. Being an adult is pretty easy.

 Las wrote:
If that's how you feel then don't use them. Again use your bloody people skills. Or just don't play 40k if you straight up don't like it.

Is there any other thing in your life that you actively participate in screaming "I don't like this!" Instead of just stopping and moving on?

Ah,the GW advocate's "Learn To Play."

"You must hate this or love it, you are not allowed to hold mixed feelings, have a desire for improvement while still playing or enjoy some aspects and not others."

Yet another lightweight argument without any merit.

 Gunzhard wrote:
I think the point was, take a minute to talk about it. So the likes can make nice with the dislikes.

I'm confused about how this will help.

Player A doesn't want to play against fliers.

Player B loves fliers and wants to use them.

What sort of agreement do you see them coming to, regarding fliers, which will satisfy both parties?

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Las wrote:
If that's how you feel then don't use them. Again use your bloody people skills. Or just don't play 40k if you straight up don't like it.

Is there any other thing in your life that you actively participate in screaming "I don't like this!" Instead of just stopping and moving on?

Ah,the GW advocate's "Learn To Play."

"You must hate this or love it, you are not allowed to hold mixed feelings, have a desire for improvement while still playing or enjoy some aspects and not others."

Yet another lightweight argument without any merit.

Pretty sure he never said anything about 'must love or hate'. And further I've never seen you say anything good about 40K, or for that matter, even let a positive comment regarding 40K go by unchecked.

You certainly are welcome to hate it though, or hold mix feelings, or desire improvement... but if you really do dislike the game, it would seem logical to just move on.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Las wrote:
If that's how you feel then don't use them. Again use your bloody people skills. Or just don't play 40k if you straight up don't like it.

Is there any other thing in your life that you actively participate in screaming "I don't like this!" Instead of just stopping and moving on?

Ah,the GW advocate's "Learn To Play."

"You must hate this or love it, you are not allowed to hold mixed feelings, have a desire for improvement while still playing or enjoy some aspects and not others."

Yet another lightweight argument without any merit.

Says the guy throwing up a straw man. I have mixed feelings about 40k too, I'm sure everyone on this forum has issues with GW and 40k. Get real.

 vipoid wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:
Who said there is anything wrong with that? ...I think the point was, take a minute to talk about it. So the likes can make nice with the dislikes.

I'm confused about how this will help.

Player A doesn't want to play against fliers.

Player B loves fliers and wants to use them.

What sort of agreement do you see them coming to, regarding fliers, which will satisfy both parties?

Well this is assuming only 2 players exist in your community? ...which I do realize is the case for some folks sadly. Why not play a game with and then another without? ...or agree not to use 3 helldrakes but instead just 1... I don't get the issue/problem(?).

What if you want to play Infinity and I don't? ...how can we satisfy both parties? This is less a game issue but more a people issue it seems to me.

 tarnish wrote:
What a refreshing view of things. I agree somewhat with the OP. Army selection does not have to be compeditive at all, but gameplay probably will be. Even compeditive players can hold back when making a steamroller list, and then have an honest challenge winning with a less then optimal list.
Often this makes for a fun game, instead of one that has an obvious outcome in turn 1. Everyone likes to win, but i personally prefer hard won victories.

In the same vein, the fluffy players should bring a better list so competitive gamers have more fun.

So, what conclusions can you draw from the fact that I'm still here?

That I, fundamentally, enjoy aspects of 40K while acknowledging it's problems and enjoying debating the whys and wherefores with people on the net perhaps?

What I struggle with is people who don't seem capable to have a reasonable discussion, and are so unquestioning in their devotion they seem to take anyone who makes any sort of critical noises as some personal affront.

Not you, Gunzhard, necessarily, but you have been playing that role quite admirably ITT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Las wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Las wrote:
If that's how you feel then don't use them. Again use your bloody people skills. Or just don't play 40k if you straight up don't like it.

Is there any other thing in your life that you actively participate in screaming "I don't like this!" Instead of just stopping and moving on?

Ah,the GW advocate's "Learn To Play."

"You must hate this or love it, you are not allowed to hold mixed feelings, have a desire for improvement while still playing or enjoy some aspects and not others."

Yet another lightweight argument without any merit.

Says the guy throwing up a straw man. I have mixed feelings about 40k too, I'm sure everyone on this forum has issues with GW and 40k. Get real.

No strawman, you literally said "if you don't like it, don't play it" which is the same thing we see time and again and falls so woefully short of acknowledging the nuances of the situation it's hilarious.