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.

The last game I played, I got absolutely annihilated. I was playing Thousand Sons with a very light CD allied force, versus the new Ravenwing. But, I had a fun game and me and my opponent had a laugh and a fun game.

At my first game at my club, at 1K pts my pure Thousand Sons list met a Tau list with two Riptides, and I got absolutely destroyed, and I got fed false rules (my opponent claimed one of his relics meant he DtW on a 4+ regardless) so I was even worse off. The guy himself is a nice guy, and I like him outside of battles. but in battles he tends to be kinda WAAC.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that just because someone uses a strong list, doesn't necessarily make them 'that guy', and that people can also be different in and out of games.

I find that I become TFG when playing one. I am all for fun its why I started playing. If however you want to be a rule Nazi I will return in kind. And I have ragequit whilst playing before in a local tourney. Was playing a donkey cave of epic levels. The mod had to pretty much hold his hand as he cried fowl at any movements I made then argued about cover with both myself and the mod. I quit so he would not be able to place with a lack of points for the game. Then waited for the day to finish and had a beer and game at the mod's house with him and was told that, kid/man had been a pain for all other opponents and my buddy the rest of the day.

It's basically just bad conduct in the game. Bad conduct would be general cuntery on a social level and breaking the game on the level of the actual game.

 ThirstySpaceMan wrote:
I am all for fun its why I started playing. If however you want to be a rule Nazi I will return in kind. And I have ragequit whilst playing before in a local tourney.

Guy sounds horrible, but to be fair, its a tourney, and some people are going to take it seriously, being a rule nazi is fine in that setting. The game is made with particular rules, so they should be followed unless house ruled. Also note i'm not saying people should complain about 0.5" extra movement by mistake in a PUG but still, shouldn't label people those guys for just playing the game correctly.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Well:
-Whining about other players armies whilst bringing power play lists
-bending the rules to suit ones self
-using Eldar
-Breaking the rules, doubly so against beginners
-cheating in any way, including bringing more points than agreed
-Bringing a Primarch to a none 30K game
-Bringing a LoW to a sub 2K game (Guilty)
-Imperial Knights
-Purposely minmaxing your army solely to beat your opponents list. Doubly so if you are bringing Eldar, Tau, SM or Necrons against one of the weaker armies
-Bringning a 30K list to a 40K game
-Wrath of the Ancients lists
-Using bad language and/or being argumentative
-Bad hygiene
-Trying to impose restrictions on others (Had one opponent try to stop me from bringing tanks)
-Bringing any power unit or Primarch to a fun and fluffy game

The irony is very strong here.

cosmicsoybean wrote:Guy sounds horrible, but to be fair, its a tourney, and some people are going to take it seriously, being a rule nazi is fine in that setting.

No, it isn't. Being a rules nazi almost always makes you a donkey cave. Tournament or not.

The game is made with particular rules

Which are often unclear and should be followed and interpreted according to popular custom and common sense.

There are any number of circumstances in which you can nitpick over rules.

Chances are, the nit-picking rules nazi probably also loaded up his army with cheese and is, furthermore, trying to garner every possible in-game advantage he can independently of in game strategy.

Because he's probably TFG.

Don't be TFG. Don't be a rules nazi.

I have a rules nazi TFG associate. He can be winning by a landslide, and he will insist on an interpretation of the rules or on rules-nitpicking to further his advantage even more, in addition to the cheese that he brought to the table.

"You are about to get tabled, but just so you know, we are going by wounds, not model count. T4, not T3. Roll away!"



Actually, we can add that to the TFG check list:

Are you winning by a lot?

If you are winning by a lot, are you willing to concede an ambiguous rules interpretation to your opponent?

If you are winning by a lot and are unwilling to concede the interpretation, you are probably TFG.

Also note i'm not saying people should complain about 0.5" extra movement by mistake in a PUG but still, shouldn't label people those guys for just playing the game correctly.

Playing the game correctly =/= being a rules nazi.

I saw an adult playing Eldar absolutely crushing a kid who was playing CSM. Wraiths, bikes, etc vs what was clearly multiple starter sets added together. Clearly Eldar was crushing through the game, and the guy leaned down to the table while the kid was rolling dice and whispering "Miss. Miss. Miss".

I find that appaling to be honest. I mean what a fething gakker.

I mean even on the most basic level, that kid might well go away and never play the game again if those are the type of opponents he faces, which means, in the long run the whole hobby suffers, on every level (sales, community, making friends, organising events etc).

 master of ordinance wrote:
Well:
-Whining about other players armies whilst bringing power play lists
-bending the rules to suit ones self
-using Eldar
-Breaking the rules, doubly so against beginners
-cheating in any way, including bringing more points than agreed
-Bringing a Primarch to a none 30K game
-Bringing a LoW to a sub 2K game (Guilty)
-Imperial Knights
-Purposely minmaxing your army solely to beat your opponents list. Doubly so if you are bringing Eldar, Tau, SM or Necrons against one of the weaker armies
-Bringning a 30K list to a 40K game
-Wrath of the Ancients lists
-Using bad language and/or being argumentative
-Bad hygiene
-Trying to impose restrictions on others (Had one opponent try to stop me from bringing tanks)
-Bringing any power unit or Primarch to a fun and fluffy game

-Named chapter masters are all LoW around 250-300pts range.
-30k generally has a harder time against 40k (Unless you're CSM, Orks, Blood Angels, Dark Eldar and Guard)
-As someone who knows somebody who started Eldar in 5th (They liked the models) they can no longer get a game with anyone because he plays eldar. Sad really. Not their fault for crap rules.
-Knights, while cool and all, suffer from the CRIPPLING condition that is being a vehicle and then a walker on top, when a Stormsurge with 2 PILOTS is considered a GMC. Melta from Tau/SM/Guard/Eldar keep Knights tame.

Yep, I tried out my Knights in a tournament the other day, my opponents were Eldar with a Fire Dragon Formation, Necrons and a Krieg army.

The Fire Dragons obliterated the Knights, the Necrons got unlucky and didn't focus fire well, and the Krieg army I steam rolled.

I used to frown when I saw Knights, but they really aren't that bad. Three attacks isn't a huge amount, you only have a 1/6 chance of getting a good stomp and an equal chance of nothing.

Obviously don't ambush someone in a pickup game with Knights. Not really fun for anyone, in that case.

I've played against some donkey caves. Had a guy get the Night Fighting rule wrong, call a judge, when the judge told him he was wrong continued to complain, and eventually pulled his models on turn one, all over a single wound on a Venomthrope. Not even one that would ID him, either.

The cherry on top there was the judges decided to not award me a full win, and only gave me the tertiary point for line breaker. Despite me holding the relic, but at that point it was his word vs mine.

More recently, I played my aforementioned Knights vs the Necrons. Guy started complaining turn one, before anything happened. He got first turn, and moved his entire army full speed towards me.

Knights got a turn one charge. After cleaning up what I charged, he unloaded into me, but decided to not focus fire. He would've killed a Knight had he, but...

Anyways, the complaining continued for the entire game, including to anyone nearby. It was an awful, fun sucking experience, that was only made up for by the awesome dude I played afterwards.

I guess people find Centurions more fun to play against, as I've never gotten that from running them.

Anyways, went on a bit of a tangent - I always ask if someone wants to play a tournament list or a casual list, especially if they are new. I generally prefer to play games against harder lists, and with harder lists, but if someone is bringing their fresh from the box Dark Vengeance, bringing Grav Centurions isn't a sporting thing to do.

The biggest thing is being friendly - chat, cheer their successes, groan at either players dice failing them, remind people of things like Coteaz (I will warn people of my Coteaz if they are deep striking, and it's cost me more than a few free kills), let people shoot if they forget, etc. As mentioned before by other people, it's a game about man dollies, and 99% of the time, there isn't really anything on the line.

And, as a side note, if you do run Knights, or Centstars, or Seerstars, or some other hard list, you are not allowed to bitch at whatever your opponent brings or does. I play a Centstar, I don't get to bitch about your Wraith Knight, or his Supremacy Suit, or his Typhon. Maybe one of those WolfScarAngel stars, but that's about it.

.

Being a TFG is just being a jerk to others. I feel like it has nothing to do with how they play and more how they act.

 Jaxler wrote:
Being a TFG is just being a jerk to others. I feel like it has nothing to do with how they play and more how they act.

I agree with this in principle. In fact/in concreto, however, the two are often related.

The guy playing tau or Eldar, if he's a new player, is probably TFG.

I think the best way to sum it up is "That Guy" is someone who plays solely to win, without regards for enjoyment of his opponent or to the fluff of the game. So, for example, someone who min-maxes without regard for the "spirit of the game" or the background for their army, and does so *JUST* so they can trounce opponents and as a result feel superior.

However, it's highly subjective. For instance I'd consider someone playing a heavily min-maxed list (all plasma and bikes and the like) to be "That Guy" because they aren't playing in an "appropriate" manner. Someone else might think that if, hypothetically, I play a Decurion I'm "That Guy" even if it's built in a fluffy way and not min/maxing on Tomb Blades or Wraiths or whatnot.

It's 100% subjective, but ultimately it's somebody who doesn't care if they have an enjoyable game experience as long as they WIN; someone who only cares about their own fun, not their opponent's fun too.

 Ratius wrote:

I saw an adult playing Eldar absolutely crushing a kid who was playing CSM. Wraiths, bikes, etc vs what was clearly multiple starter sets added together. Clearly Eldar was crushing through the game, and the guy leaned down to the table while the kid was rolling dice and whispering "Miss. Miss. Miss".

I find that appaling to be honest. I mean what a fething gakker.

I mean even on the most basic level, that kid might well go away and never play the game again if those are the type of opponents he faces, which means, in the long run the whole hobby suffers, on every level (sales, community, making friends, organising events etc).

I spoke with the kid, told him not to be too bothered, as he was facing a really tough challenge (I wanted him to not feel overly upset to the best I could do as an outside person). I then asked what models he liked playing, and when he told me he really likes using cultists, I asked if he ran Typhus to make them zombies. He told me he didn't have a typhus model, but had a spare terminator. I offered to bring in a scythe and some nurgle bitz to convert him one, if he was interested. Hoping he sticks around.

Traditio wrote:
The guy playing tau or Eldar, if he's a new player, is probably TFG.

Or... maybe the new person chose Tau or Eldar because those are the models/fluff they liked the most? And whether or not they are TFG is a completely separate issue? No? Just me?

I think we should add "being immediately prejudiced against particular armies and those who choose to play them" to the list of TFG behaviours, personally.

Anfauglir wrote:Or... maybe the new person chose Tau or Eldar because those are the models/fluff they liked the most? And whether or not they are TFG is a completely separate issue? No? Just me?

Sure. That's why he's playing two wraithknights and a ton of scatter bikes.

That's the reason.

I think we should add "being immediately prejudiced against particular armies and those who choose to play them" to the list of TFG behaviours, personally.

If that prejudice is grounded in reality, it's not TFG behavior. It's just being realistic.

Note also my use of the word "probably."

Traditio wrote:
Sure. That's why he's playing two wraithknights and a ton of scatter bikes.

That's the reason.

First thing; that isn't what you said, though, is it? No. There's a world of difference between someone who is truly new to game and the hobby, and picks Tau or Eldar because they want to/like the look/sound of them... and someone who isn't so new to the game/hobby and picks specific builds/units within an army in order to min/max the mathhammer and eek out the highest levels of cheese currently available in the meta. A world of difference that is smashed asunder by your broad strokes of judgement. Second thing; if you really want to start getting pedantic about it, what you're describing is more the WAAC player behaviours, the army-jumpers who don't much care about the models/fluff and are just in it for the mathhammer. I'll clarify now that WAAC and TFG can and often are found within very similar/the same people. But it's not an absolute. Just like being a Tau or Eldar player isn't an absolute.

 Anfauglir wrote:

Traditio wrote:
Sure. That's why he's playing two wraithknights and a ton of scatter bikes.

That's the reason.

First thing; that isn't what you said, though, is it? No. There's a world of difference between someone who is truly new to game and the hobby, and picks Tau or Eldar because they want to/like the look/sound of them... and someone who isn't so new to the game/hobby and picks specific builds/units within an army in order to min/max the mathhammer and eek out the highest levels of cheese currently available in the meta. A world of difference that is smashed asunder by your broad strokes of judgement. Second thing; if you really want to start getting pedantic about it, what you're describing is more the WAAC player behaviours, the army-jumpers who don't much care about the models/fluff and are just in it for the mathhammer. I'll clarify now that WAAC and TFG can and often are found within very similar/the same people. But it's not an absolute. Just like being a Tau or Eldar player isn't an absolute.

I run a foot guardian heavy Eldar army, and pretty much have since I started Eldar.

Anfauglir wrote:First thing; that isn't what you said, though, is it? No. There's a world of difference between someone who is truly new to game and the hobby, and picks Tau or Eldar because they want to/like the look/sound of them... and someone who isn't so new to the game/hobby and picks specific builds/units within an army in order to min/max the mathhammer and eek out the highest levels of cheese currently available in the meta. A world of difference that is smashed asunder by your broad strokes of judgement. Second thing; if you really want to start getting pedantic about it, what you're describing is more the WAAC player behaviours, the army-jumpers who don't much care about the models/fluff and are just in it for the mathhammer. I'll clarify now that WAAC and TFG can and often are found within very similar/the same people. But it's not an absolute. Just like being a Tau or Eldar player isn't an absolute.

Anfauglir, I don't wish to disagree with anything that you've said.

I only wish to note that I used the word "probably." Given the fact that I used the word "probably," your arguments don't really refute anything that I've said.

Back to the OP:

How do you know if you're TFG? I just played against one:

TFG was playing Necrons. He was running 3 night scythes, 3 doomscythes, 4 squads of warriors, a bastion and immotek in an 1850 points list. He characterized his list as "somewhat cheesy" and asserted at the beginning of the game that I was going to "hate him" for how his army works.

On his turn, he fires his S10, AP 1 blast against a tac squad on a wall and hits 2 rhinos. He scores a penetrating hit and explodes result against one of the rhinos. I positioned the rhino to be 50% obscured (roughly) relative to his side of the field. I roll a 4 on a 4+ save. He first insists that I can't get cover because he was using a flying model, and then angrily and vehemently insists that I can only get 5+ cover.

I correctly respond that I had 50% obscurity relative to the firing model, and therefore have a 4+ save, express my unwillingness to debate the matter, and recommend that he move on to the next rhino.

Instead of being a good sport about the issue, he insists on arguing over his (presumably errant) understanding of the rules and...

I decided to say "Feth it. I'm not playing you. Have a nice day."

What's even more amazing about all of this is that, prior to me having any clue what he's playing, list-wise (I only asked him what army he was using in order to determine if I should bring a CAD, and how many free rhinos I should take...I didn't want to have an unfair advantage against anyone), after I set up the table and offer him his pick of sides (as per 4th edition etiquette), he insists that we deploy on long edges and play purge the alien.

Gee. I wonder why, right?

If you find yourself relating more to my opponent than to me, then you ARE TFG.

Edit: I just realized that the death beam is just a regular blast. TFG was using a large blast template, IIRC.

Traditio wrote:
Anfauglir, I don't wish to disagree with anything that you've said.

I only wish to note that I used the word "probably." Given the fact that I used the word "probably," your arguments don't really refute anything that I've said.

You're painting in very broad strokes, though. Like I said in my very first post in this topic; it's this kind of "criteria" that I take major exception to. Because, and it's quite simple, being TFG is about attitude above and beyond all else. That's it. Jumping on newbies to the hobby/game and judging them based purely on their army choice is damaging to the community, plain and simple. It brings us down to TFG's level. Just don't do it. Judge TFG because he's being TFG... NOT because they're playing what happens to currently be a strong army/list. Sometimes those things coincide. Sometimes they don't.

Anfauglir wrote:You're painting in very broad strokes, though.

Yes. That's what the word "probably" means. It means "more likely than not" or "more often than not."

Are you really going to disagree with me that new players who select Eldar more often than not, or more likely than not, are TFG?

If it's even a little bit more than 50% likely, it's "probably" true.

Traditio wrote:
Are you really going to disagree with me that new players who select Eldar more often than not, or more likely than not, are TFG?

Yes. Yes, I am. That's what taking major exception to something means. There are plenty of people who have either A) been playing the current "cheese/overpowered/whatever" armies since RT days and/or since joining the hobby, or B) are completely new to it and choose current "cheese/overpowered/whatever" armies for innocent reasons. Those people don't deserve to be judged or subjected to prejudice because of the TFG minority - yes, I'm stating that the number of decent hearted folks playing wargames with the right attitude outnumber TFG.

TFG is the guy who changes to Eldar because they are the new hotness because before he was playing whatever the hotness was before them. I know a TON of Eldar players who have been playing since last century. It's not their fault that Phil Kelly just can't contain himself.

Anfauglir wrote:Yes. Yes, I am. That's what taking major exception to something means. There are plenty of people who have either A) been playing the current "cheese/overpowered/whatever" armies since RT days and/or since joining the hobby, or B) are completely new to it and choose current "cheese/overpowered/whatever" armies for innocent reasons. Those people don't deserve to be judged or subjected to prejudice because of the TFG minority - yes, I'm stating that the number of decent hearted folks playing wargames with the right attitude outnumber TFG.

Ok. Well, let's just be clear on what you are saying. In order for you to disagree with my claim, you must claim, e.g.,:

"Of the newcomers to Warhammer 40k who select Eldar as their army, less than 50% of them are TFG."

Again:

"Of the newcomers to Warhammer 40k who select Tau as their army, less than 50% of them are TFG."

These propositions may or may not be true. But note that this is what you are committing yourself to claiming.

At the very least, I find them difficult to believe.

Would anyone else reading this like to chime in?

Of the tau and eldar players you know who have started their army NO EARLIER THAN 6TH EDITION, how many of them are TFG?

I know one eldar player offline. When it comes to 40k (or games in general), he has strong TFG/rules-lawyer tendencies.

Don't get me wrong. Generally OK guy that I consider a friend of mine.

I'd still lump him in the TFG category for 40k purposes, though.

By TFG, I mean "Brought 2 wraithknights to play against Orks and non-optimized space marines."

TFG is someone who doesn't understand the difference between min maxing, and optimization. You can take and play fluffy orks, yet optimize your list so that each unit does the most work it can do. The TFG will whine about a list where a unit does what it's suppose to and perpetually earns its points back. Don't be TFG.

Traditio wrote:

Anfauglir wrote:Yes. Yes, I am. That's what taking major exception to something means. There are plenty of people who have either A) been playing the current "cheese/overpowered/whatever" armies since RT days and/or since joining the hobby, or B) are completely new to it and choose current "cheese/overpowered/whatever" armies for innocent reasons. Those people don't deserve to be judged or subjected to prejudice because of the TFG minority - yes, I'm stating that the number of decent hearted folks playing wargames with the right attitude outnumber TFG.

Ok. Well, let's just be clear on what you are saying. In order for you to disagree with my claim, you must claim, e.g.,:

"Of the newcomers to Warhammer 40k who select Eldar as their army, less than 50% of them are TFG."

Again:

"Of the newcomers to Warhammer 40k who select Tau as their army, less than 50% of them are TFG."

These propositions may or may not be true. But note that this is what you are committing yourself to claiming.

At the very least, I find them difficult to believe.

Would anyone else reading this like to chime in?

Of the tau and eldar players you know who have started their army NO EARLIER THAN 6TH EDITION, how many of them are TFG?

I know one eldar player offline. When it comes to 40k (or games in general), he has strong TFG/rules-lawyer tendencies.

Don't get me wrong. Generally OK guy that I consider a friend of mine.

I'd still lump him in the TFG category for 40k purposes, though.

By TFG, I mean "Brought 2 wraithknights to play against Orks and non-optimized space marines."

"OMFG, LOOK AT THAT AWESOME ROBOT, IT LOOKS JUST LIKE THE ONE FROM ALDNOAH ZERO, I WANT TO PLAY IT SO BADLY,"
"Oh, cool, that's a Tau Battlesuit,"
"Tau? That sounds pretty cool, I think that I'll start playing as them, then."
"SCREW YOU, YOU LITTLE WAAC TFG, YOU SUCK!!!"

Lord_Inquisitor_Doge wrote:"OMFG, LOOK AT THAT AWESOME ROBOT, IT LOOKS JUST LIKE THE ONE FROM ALDNOAH ZERO, I WANT TO PLAY IT SO BADLY,"
"Oh, cool, that's a Tau Battlesuit,"
"Tau? That sounds pretty cool, I think that I'll start playing as them, then."
"SCREW YOU, YOU LITTLE WAAC TFG, YOU SUCK!!!"

I haven't claimed anything remotely like this.

Traditio wrote:

Lord_Inquisitor_Doge wrote:"OMFG, LOOK AT THAT AWESOME ROBOT, IT LOOKS JUST LIKE THE ONE FROM ALDNOAH ZERO, I WANT TO PLAY IT SO BADLY,"
"Oh, cool, that's a Tau Battlesuit,"
"Tau? That sounds pretty cool, I think that I'll start playing as them, then."
"SCREW YOU, YOU LITTLE WAAC TFG, YOU SUCK!!!"

I haven't claimed anything remotely like this.

You are saying that the primary reason that new players play Tau/Eldar is because they are TFG, despite the fact that they are new, and probably have very little idea as to how power levels work in 40k.

 Lord_Inquisitor_Doge wrote:

Traditio wrote:

Lord_Inquisitor_Doge wrote:"OMFG, LOOK AT THAT AWESOME ROBOT, IT LOOKS JUST LIKE THE ONE FROM ALDNOAH ZERO, I WANT TO PLAY IT SO BADLY,"
"Oh, cool, that's a Tau Battlesuit,"
"Tau? That sounds pretty cool, I think that I'll start playing as them, then."
"SCREW YOU, YOU LITTLE WAAC TFG, YOU SUCK!!!"

I haven't claimed anything remotely like this.

You are saying that the primary reason that new players play Tau/Eldar is because they are TFG, despite the fact that they are new, and probably have very little idea as to how power levels work in 40k.

He also doesn't take the fact that some build armies based on the liking of a model into account, but that's a story for another time

Lord_Inquisitor_Doge wrote:You are saying that the primary reason that new players play Tau/Eldar is because they are TFG, despite the fact that they are new, and probably have very little idea as to how power levels work in 40k.

I made the claim that this is probably true at least slightly more than half the time.

Furthermore, I dispute the last bit.

In point of fact, my associate was perfectly aware that Eldar were broken when he bought the 6th edition codex, IIRC, when he chose that particular army. That's why he bought bikes, wave serpents, wraithknights and wraithguard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
TFG is someone who doesn't understand the difference between min maxing, and optimization. You can take and play fluffy orks, yet optimize your list so that each unit does the most work it can do. The TFG will whine about a list where a unit does what it's suppose to and perpetually earns its points back. Don't be TFG.

2+ rerollable saves: not OK

Not upgrading tactical marine sergeants to veteran status: OK

If you can't tell the difference, you're probably TFG.