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.

 jreilly89 wrote:
So after 7 pages, what it seems like is that if you ever want to make people on Dakka lose their gak, don't bring up TLoS, Blasts hitting different levels, any of the other ludicrous rules. No, bring up bringing 1503 points to a 1500 point game.

It's hardly exclusive to Dakka. The discussion would go fairly similarly in any large discussion group.

 Tamwulf wrote:
If you can go five points over, then you can go five points under just as well.

The limit is the limit.

Generally the times when I find my list a few points over and have trouble finding something to drop, it's because of my lack of Superiors with standard weaponry. Which means that yes, I'd love to swap out that Power Weapon for a Bolt Pistol (I go WYSIWYG and all my Superior models with power weapons also have boltguns for some messed-up reason), but I only have one Superior with a Bolt Pistol/Boltgun weapon combo, and she's always used with my Retributor squad since giving her a power weapon or plasma pistol is pointless.

Of course, then I figured I could just equip my Superiors with Stormbolters and use my Stormbolter-equipped Special Weapon models as Superiors, since a Stormbolter is always a terrible choice for the squad to take over a flamer, heavy flamer or meltagun, so there wouldn't ever be confusion over which stormbolter is the Superior (it's always the Superior). And that pretty much solved all of those problems. : D

Oh we ask eachother permission for inconsistencies in points before starting a game. And if someone is under by like 10 and they are alright with it usually we let them choose the mission type. Really most of the people playing here are newbies or are vets who are unfamiliar with the new rules. I played to early 4th edition and stopped till 7th when a friend offered to buy me the book. So basically we have to guess at some rules, especially things not used often like pile in rules and Psychic powers in vehicles. We look em up afterwards, but still xD


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Tamwulf wrote:
If you can go five points over, then you can go five points under just as well.

The limit is the limit.

Generally the times when I find my list a few points over and have trouble finding something to drop, it's because of my lack of Superiors with standard weaponry. Which means that yes, I'd love to swap out that Power Weapon for a Bolt Pistol (I go WYSIWYG and all my Superior models with power weapons also have boltguns for some messed-up reason), but I only have one Superior with a Bolt Pistol/Boltgun weapon combo, and she's always used with my Retributor squad since giving her a power weapon or plasma pistol is pointless.

Of course, then I figured I could just equip my Superiors with Stormbolters and use my Stormbolter-equipped Special Weapon models as Superiors, since a Stormbolter is always a terrible choice for the squad to take over a flamer, heavy flamer or meltagun, so there wouldn't ever be confusion over which stormbolter is the Superior (it's always the Superior). And that pretty much solved all of those problems. : D

Oh the pain of being a sisters player xD honestly I have giving up on my models being accurate besides special weapons, especially for my black Templar. The terminators replace their thunderhammers with grey knight termie power swords and the dumb storm shields with 3rd party kite shields. My tactical/initiate marines are all chainsword/pistol men, and all neophytes with shotguns and knifes. They aren't always that way in the list, and I make sure to inform my opponent what is what on the board, I just dislike using models that I find ugly looking. Like Grav cannons: they look so ugly

 Pouncey wrote:

autumnlotus wrote:
Well there is always the simple rule of asking your partner, and if no agreement can be made just roll off on it high or low. Usually it's not a satisfying answer, but it speeds a game along then it can be doublecheckes in a rulebook afterwards. Like an argument about whether or not a maulerfiend can climb levels in the game given that it's both a vehicle and a beast

I think this is the kind of thing that would require the opponent's permission, since the rules are very clear on what having a points limit means and points limits aren't at all unique to WH40k and are pretty much identically-defined across every game system that uses them.

I really hope that autumnlotus was talking about the maths problem. (because invoking TMIR on an utterly unambiguous rule just to get your way half of the time is extremely high on the douchebaggery index)

I was talking about rule disagreements and confusion in general. The extra points, while something that can be discussed before a game, is impossible to be confused by. 1500=/1502

autumnlotus wrote:
I was talking about rule disagreements and confusion in general. The extra points, while something that can be discussed before a game, is impossible to be confused by. 1500=/1502

Now we're actually playing a game of 1502pts. Mind if I go 5pts over?

Now we're actually playing a game of 1507pts. Mind if I go 5pts over?

Now we're actually playing a game of 1512pts. Mind if I go 5pts over?

Where does this end?

A limit is a limit for a reason.

The limit is whatever the game players put it down as. If its a planned game of 1500 then follow that rule unless it's agreed to be changed. But if its a random game with no planning then the points are not set in stone until lists are reviewed. Granted this is from a store group where a third party can pop over with a 100pt unit and screw with the game, so balance is not a issue unless it's an event or tournament.

So really: unless it is not fun, rules for a group are just guidelines. We follow the rules 99% of the time, but if we feel like doing something else we will. Especially for games like killteam or planetstrike: we alter rules as would be fun

 Grimtuff wrote:

autumnlotus wrote:
I was talking about rule disagreements and confusion in general. The extra points, while something that can be discussed before a game, is impossible to be confused by. 1500=/1502

Now we're actually playing a game of 1502pts. Mind if I go 5pts over?

Now we're actually playing a game of 1507pts. Mind if I go 5pts over?

Now we're actually playing a game of 1512pts. Mind if I go 5pts over?

Where does this end?

A limit is a limit for a reason.

Well, in that situation, both players would be okay with going over, since presumably after obtaining permission from their opponent to go 2 points over, they won't add a 5-point upgrade and ask again, so it'd be their opponent re-writing their list and finding something they like that's 5 points more than the new points limit, and then back and forth.

I imagine eventually someone would come up with a list that they're comfortable with that's within the points limit. Either that or they run out of time and both players go home without actually having played a game.

autumnlotus wrote:
But if its a random game with no planning then the points are not set in stone until lists are reviewed.

That's not true. The points are set when the two players agree to a points limit, before you build your lists.

3 or 4 if you're playing against friends, zero if in a tournament.

 Ghaz wrote:

autumnlotus wrote:
But if its a random game with no planning then the points are not set in stone until lists are reviewed.

That's not true. The points are set when the two players agree to a points limit, before you build your lists.

So the rules are more important then both players enjoyment and their option to work out a pt amount as they build their lists? This sounds less about rules, and more about you demanding that players play your way or not play at all

autumnlotus wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

autumnlotus wrote:
But if its a random game with no planning then the points are not set in stone until lists are reviewed.

That's not true. The points are set when the two players agree to a points limit, before you build your lists.

So the rules are more important then both players enjoyment and their option to work out a pt amount as they build their lists? This sounds less about rules, and more about you demanding that players play your way or not play at all

You mean use the rules presented in the rulebook?

For. feths. Sake.

autumnlotus wrote:
So the rules are more important then both players enjoyment and their option to work out a pt amount as they build their lists?

No, the rule protects both players' enjoyment of the game. By respecting the original point limit you don't put your opponent into an awkward position where they feel pressured to let you cheat a bit just to keep you from getting upset about it. Constantly re-negotiating the point limit as you're building your lists does nothing to improve the game for both players, it just allows one player to gain an advantage.

This sounds less about rules, and more about you demanding that players play your way or not play at all

Yeah, what horrible demands we make, expecting people to refrain from bending/breaking the rules in their favor...

I've established that the other players here don't mind it, so you aren't defending anyone but your own opinion. I get that the rules are there for a reason, and a standard game is still exactly the same point count for both sides or less if it cant be helped. What I'm saying is that there are a lot of ways to play, and calling them against player enjoyment is short sighted and rude. If it was you as one of the players here the rule would be followed no problem. What concerns me is if you would be one of the people that walk over to other tables and yelling at people for being "cheaters" for daring to not following the rules. Exception being to events and tournaments where the winner of that fight would impact other games.

autumnlotus wrote:
What concerns me is if you would be one of the people that walk over to other tables and yelling at people for being "cheaters" for daring to not following the rules.

I have no idea where you are getting this absurd idea from. I think the fact that you'd say something like this says way more about you than it does about me.

It comes from people repeatedly pointing out that the rules are the rules, follow them, when I have pointed out dozens of times people here are friendly enough to just allow one or two points extra to make it convenient for the other player. There is no hard pressure to allow it, and if I have a new person wanting to follow the rules exactly I'll do just that.

This concept of us vs them came from my comment of the group here pushing out bad apples, taken as us hating people who follow the rules, and has perpetuated into a strawman to attack as people ignore my comments. So yeah, I take these comments and picture angry individuals that will start screaming matches in games they aren't playing, because those are the two people we have ignored and had managers ban from a store. If that is incorrect then I apologize. If you don't want point deviance in your games that's fine, just don't tell others how they play is wrong seeing as how the point of the game is to have fun...which is what's happening here

autumnlotus wrote:
It comes from people repeatedly pointing out that the rules are the rules, follow them, when I have pointed out dozens of times people here are friendly enough to just allow one or two points extra to make it convenient for the other player. There is no hard pressure to allow it, and if I have a new person wanting to follow the rules exactly I'll do just that.

And where have we said at any point we'd butt in on someone else's game flailing our arms and shouting "UR PLAYING IT WRONG!"?

Go on, I'll wait.

 Grimtuff wrote:

autumnlotus wrote:
It comes from people repeatedly pointing out that the rules are the rules, follow them, when I have pointed out dozens of times people here are friendly enough to just allow one or two points extra to make it convenient for the other player. There is no hard pressure to allow it, and if I have a new person wanting to follow the rules exactly I'll do just that.

And where have we said at any point we'd butt in on someone else's game flailing our arms and shouting "UR PLAYING IT WRONG!"?

Go on, I'll wait.

The same place where I said I would pressure others to let me have extra points, apparently.

But seriously: everytime I mention people here don't mind it, someone chimes in and says we should follow the rules or are cheaters. Is that a productive way of looking at things? If its you playing its different which I have mentioned, so What are you arguing against? People not playing the way you want when you aren't involved?

 Tamwulf wrote:
If you can go five points over, then you can go five points under just as well.
The limit is the limit.

Yep, that right there.
Why people "lose their gak" is because you are taking liberties, making lite of it but if it means so little then use less points to the point limit!
<edit>Think of it as both an etiquette question and a rules question combined. Use more points = rude.

If my space marine needs a 3+ for a save and rolls a 2, that is close enough right?
If I shoot a lascannon at a Landraider and roll a 4, that is good enough correct?
Can that cop pull you over for driving 5 over the limit? Sure he can, but you would think he is a jerk.
Spending 2-3 points over on your army list is ok but 3 or more is getting to be a bit much?

We each have our opinion on what we think strikes the right balance that is why we have rules written down to avoid limit creep.

 Talizvar wrote:

 Tamwulf wrote:
If you can go five points over, then you can go five points under just as well.
The limit is the limit.

Yep, that right there.
Why people "lose their gak" is because you are taking liberties, making lite of it but if it means so little then use less points to the point limit!
<edit>Think of it as both an etiquette question and a rules question combined. Use more points = rude.

If my space marine needs a 3+ for a save and rolls a 2, that is close enough right?
If I shoot a lascannon at a Landraider and roll a 4, that is good enough correct?
Can that cop pull you over for driving 5 over the limit? Sure he can, but you would think he is a jerk.
Spending 2-3 points over on your army list is ok but 3 or more is getting to be a bit much?

We each have our opinion on what we think strikes the right balance that is why we have rules written down to avoid limit creep.

Actually, I don't drive, but both of my parents stay within the speed limit, treating it as the maximum it is. Much to the annoyance of the people behind them who want to go 60 in a residential area with frequent signs stating the speed limit of 40.

The issue here is people judging others based on what limit they consider adequate. Nobody should be involved in judgement calls for a game besides the ones playing. So yeah if someone told me they dislike lists that aren't exactly x limit, no higher no lower, then I would do my best to accommodate that default way of playing. No pressuring them to give me that extra point, no name calling, no anger. It's the same situation I have with rules in general. I have a right to refuse games if I find them not to my taste. It's what I do when I see baneblades in three digit pts lists, or what I do when a second wraithknight touches the field. Is it legal? Definitely. I just want to play it and that decision is supported by the rules. Same goes for my opponent if they don't like the look of my chaos knight or wants me to limit my summoning.

autumnlotus wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

autumnlotus wrote:
It comes from people repeatedly pointing out that the rules are the rules, follow them, when I have pointed out dozens of times people here are friendly enough to just allow one or two points extra to make it convenient for the other player. There is no hard pressure to allow it, and if I have a new person wanting to follow the rules exactly I'll do just that.

And where have we said at any point we'd butt in on someone else's game flailing our arms and shouting "UR PLAYING IT WRONG!"?

Go on, I'll wait.

The same place where I said I would pressure others to let me have extra points, apparently.

But seriously: everytime I mention people here don't mind it, someone chimes in and says we should follow the rules or are cheaters. Is that a productive way of looking at things? If its you playing its different which I have mentioned, so What are you arguing against? People not playing the way you want when you aren't involved?

A lot of people feel socially pressured to just say yes, because there's a perception that saying no to a few extra points makes them the bad guy in that situation.

As someone with social anxiety, I totally get not wanting to be put in a similar situation.

I get that, I have an aspect of that when it comes to strangers and a worry I'm being judged with everything I do. I am accommodating to those people though, to all new people who visit to see the scene here. Definitely not the spokeswoman, that would be the owner of the store, but I do help people get used to playing the game and try new things. First thing explained to them is the point system is there to have a sense of balance in the game, and should have their armies built in traditional sets of 1000, 1500, 2000, and 2500 and change them from there depending on what people feel like playing. At that point, with all the assistance I can give, someone still feels pressured by the dynamic here, then they should speak up to a friend or the manager to set up something more their style. It's how the first tournament here was started, and nobody shunned the idea.

It is awesome that some players are sensitive to things and want to get along.

The problem is that some like to push the limit and like taking "liberties"... makes them feel rough, tough and hard to diaper.

Been bullied in the past, learned how to get physical in a few different styles and developed a strong intolerance and confidence in dealing with bullies or rudeness.

It really is surprising how often people confuse "nice" = "weak"... very far from the truth.

Stick up for your wishes and what you feel is right.

Yeah, this extra points thing DOES open a can of worms, I always figured it was a no-brainer and then keep finding people trying to sneak in those extra points... I really would have liked to add extra armor to that Rhino of mine... no, you do not get more free-bie points, I had to make a difficult decision and you can too!

autumnlotus wrote:
I've established that the other players here don't mind it, so you aren't defending anyone but your own opinion.

And all you are doing is defending your own position, with the addition of trying to paint the players who want to abide by the rules as the 'bad guys' for not allowing your house rules. You are just as guilty as judging the player who wants to play by the rules as you claim we are for not allowing them to ignore the rules.

 Talizvar wrote:
It is awesome that some players are sensitive to things and want to get along.

The problem is that some like to push the limit and like taking "liberties"... makes them feel rough, tough and hard to diaper.

Been bullied in the past, learned how to get physical in a few different styles and developed a strong intolerance and confidence in dealing with bullies or rudeness.

It really is surprising how often people confuse "nice" = "weak"... very far from the truth.

Stick up for your wishes and what you feel is right.

Yeah, this extra points thing DOES open a can of worms, I always figured it was a no-brainer and then keep finding people trying to sneak in those extra points... I really would have liked to add extra armor to that Rhino of mine... no, you do not get more free-bie points, I had to make a difficult decision and you can too!

Nice.

As an aside, sometimes I find that Battlescribe is very, very wrong.

Like when it included the cost of the Boy in a Nob's points, but didn't include the Nob in the unit's size when determining how many heavy weapons were allowed. So in order to take 2 heavy weapons in a mob of Boyz with a Nob, you had to pay for 21 Boyz - if you only paid for 20, it would say that you hadn't taken enough Boyz to be allowed that second weapon.

I bring it up because sometimes I wonder if there are other errors in the Battlescribe data that I haven't noticed, but might get called on and accused of cheating if I posted a list here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghaz wrote:

autumnlotus wrote:
I've established that the other players here don't mind it, so you aren't defending anyone but your own opinion.

And all you are doing is defending your own position, with the addition of trying to paint the players who want to abide by the rules as the 'bad guys' for not allowing your house rules. You are just as guilty as judging the player who wants to play by the rules as you claim we are for not allowing them to ignore the rules.

Um, I'm the one who keeps bringing up the term "bad guy" and I only use it to refer to how people feel when they say no (after some other people already brought it up earlier in the thread). I didn't mean that they actually were bad people, just that they feel like the antagonists. Because how things actually are can be different from how people feel.

And their problem with those particular players, if I understood right, was that they would repeatedly walk up to games they weren't even participating in, and start lecturing the players about following point limits, when everyone who was actually playing that particular game had no problem with it. That's what got them booted out, not just wanting to follow the points limits. They've said multiple times that they don't push the extra few points on anyone who's not okay with it.

Their problem with this particular thread, is that every time they say that their local group generally doesn't have a problem with it, someone pipes up to tell them they're playing the game wrong, and calling them cheaters.

 Pouncey wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
So after 7 pages, what it seems like is that if you ever want to make people on Dakka lose their gak, don't bring up TLoS, Blasts hitting different levels, any of the other ludicrous rules. No, bring up bringing 1503 points to a 1500 point game.

Yup, it's weird that such a thing is so polarizing and sparks a huge argument/debate, but there's actually a math problem that, if posed to a forum, invariably causes intense flame wars for some bizarre reason. It's actually considered trolling just to post it, because of the intense rage it always, always causes from nearly everyone involved. Doesn't matter what forum it is, it always causes a flame war. It seems like such an innocuous thing, too, as it's just a bunch of numbers and math symbols.

Okay, now I have to ask - what's the math problem?

(If you don't want to post it, could you at least pm me it or send me a link?)

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293

Apparently Know Your Meme is aware of it.

Slightly off topic, but isn't that covered by bodmas (or pemdas if you're american)? http://www.purplemath.com/modules/orderops.htm I can fully appreciate it causing heated flame wars on the internet, but the rules for resolving it are pretty simple. Likewise, if you've agreed to a X points limit game, then going over it is breaking that agreement. Especially if you've had advanced notice to make up your list beforehand.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:

Do people still write in cursive these days?

Most people speak in cursive these days.

Yeah, that math problem is solvable. I don't know why anyone would think it isn't.

There are certainly math problems with more than one answer (certain formulas often give multiple answers, especially if they involve plotting certain graphs and finding certain features) but answers are attainable.

 vipoid wrote:

Colehkxix wrote:

I have my units configured how I want, and removing a melta bomb from one of them would be pretty sad. I have to remember which one didn't have the melta bomb.

Hmm, what was it I said yesterday? Oh yes:

 vipoid wrote:
The other aspect is that 99% of the time it's not a matter of 'can't' it's a matter of 'don't want to'. As in, the person has a lot of gear or other stuff that they could easily drop, but don't want to drop *any* of it.

And, they'd much rather just play with too many points than actually have to make a hard decision.

Grimtuff, can I borrow your 'I informed you thusly' meme?

What are you trying to prove with this?

The entire thread is about what people do or don't want to do. Not what they can or can't do.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

Colehkxix wrote:
A lot of opinions are going on the idea that everyone prepares their army in advance, rather than coming to the store and coming up with a list on the spot. Two players agree on a a point amount to create an army, and they both create their lists accordingly. However in come cases they may end up wanting something in their army that puts their points just above the limit.

Why wouldn't you have a selection of lists already prepared unless you're list tailoring against your opponent? I mean, if you've got 1500/1750/1850/2000 then you've covered all of the common game sizes.

Why waste time when you could be prepared?
"Do you want a game?"
"Sure, just give me 15 minutes to scrawl indecipherable hieroglyphics on a piece of scrap paper."

And, far too often, this is accompanied by "So what army are you playing? Can I see your list?" before they make theirs...

They want a game with more points than I am able to. I ask them for a lower points amount. They negotiate. "How many points can you do?" They say. "Maybe 1200?" I respond. From then on, we make our new revised lists as both players have not prepared such a list in advance. Having standard loadouts for my squads, I know that my Infantry Squads are 71 and so on. It doesn't take much time at all. Infact players with prepared lists seem to take longer setting up their armies than I do making a list out of nowhere and setting up mine.

 Ghaz wrote:

Colehkxix wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
The point is, its rude to ask your opponent if its okay to cheat. Would you be okay if your opponent asked if he could move all of his infantry squads 7 inches after he has already done so and expect you to only move yours 6 inches?

I.. it isn't rude to try and negotiate with another player and calling it 'cheating' is rather unreasonable.

The time to negotiate points values is past and it is rude to go back on your agreements. If I can't trust you to keep to your agreements in something as inconsequential as a game, how can I trust you to keep your agreements when it matters?

Uh... I'm not sure how to respond to this. It isn't rude? It's not that big of a deal? It's unreasonable to think that if someone wants to renegotiate a points amount with you, that they are untrustworthy?? (I am struggling to understand how you came to that conclusion.)

I think we'll just have to disagree on this one.

 jreilly89 wrote:
So after 7 pages, what it seems like is that if you ever want to make people on Dakka lose their gak, don't bring up TLoS, Blasts hitting different levels, any of the other ludicrous rules. No, bring up bringing 1503 points to a 1500 point game.

It's been surprising civil for a thread that ballooned into 8 pages in about a day, actually.