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.

Future War Cultist wrote:I have to step in here and tell you that that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read with regards to 40k. Even more than wanting to eliminate Tau from the game.

It's only ridiculous because you're not understanding it.

The sense of what I am saying is:

"If I have to tailor my list to deal with yours (because your list can't be dealt with by a TAC list; because it's a niche list that requires specific hard counters to deal with it), then your list, not mine, needs to change."

Traditio wrote:

Tactical_Spam wrote:

That's humour right there. Change my list? Hahahahahahahahahaha... Oh wait, you were serious... Why should I be forced to change my triple Land Raider/Armoured Company List because you REFUSE to bring any anti-tank weapons?

I have anti-tank weapons galore. 8 missile launchers, 2 multimeltas, 1 plasma gun and 3 plasma cannons. Not to mention meltabombs, power fists, etc.

Expecting me to bring enough anti-tank weapons to deal with a list composed ENTIRELY of vehicles, many of them AV 14, is just unreasonable.

Which is why I run 3 Land Raiders backed up by a squadron of 3 Predators then 2 lone Vindicators. I don't expect you to be able to kill it. I expect it to steamroll over most things you put in its way.

Tactical_Spam wrote:Which is why I run 3 Land Raiders backed up by a squadron of 3 Predators then 2 lone Vindicators. I don't expect you to be able to kill it. I expect it to steamroll over most things you put in its way.

Precisely.

The reason why you run your list is to shut down my army, to kill my fun.

Instead of setting up an entertaning 3 hour spectacle, you're in it to provide a win for yourself, regardless of how utterly frustrating, dull and unpleasant it is for your opponent.

That's why I'd refuse to play you.

Or you could just ignore the Land Raiders like most people as they have very little offensive punch. The Predators are easily dealt with by Missile Spam or Lascannons and the Vindis die horribly to some Melta Guns. Seriously, its not that hard.

 Grimmor wrote:
Or you could just ignore the Land Raiders like most people as they have very little offensive punch. The Predators are easily dealt with by Missile Spam or Lascannons and the Vindis die horribly to some Melta Guns. Seriously, its not that hard.

Except, at that point, we're back to the hide and seek game.

I don't want to play the hide and seek game.

I don't want to play the sit on the objectives and do nothing for 5 turns game.

I want the battle of normandy in SPAAAAAACE.

I actually want to do stuff for 5 turns.

Traditio wrote:

Tactical_Spam wrote:Which is why I run 3 Land Raiders backed up by a squadron of 3 Predators then 2 lone Vindicators. I don't expect you to be able to kill it. I expect it to steamroll over most things you put in its way.

Precisely.

The reason why you run your list is to shut down my army

Its called "Tactics"

to kill my fun.

That is my sole purpose in life, to kill your fun. I will spend 3 hours of my precious life trying to spite you instead of doing something, I don't know, meaningful.

Instead of setting up an entertaning 3 hour spectacle

Oh, my Parking lot list is entertaining.

you're in it to provide a win for yourself

Why would I play a game with the intent to lose?

That's why I'd refuse to play you.

I doubt a game with your pandering about how OP my list is, despite the fact you refused to tailor your list in the slighest, would be worth playing.

You want to play "My Tactical Marines can kill everything" and not play the mission? Or do you just play Purge the Alien every game?

Like, not wanting to actually play the mission WHILE PLAYING AN MINI OBSEC-SPAM LIST blows my mind.

The enemy also wants to do stuff for 5 turns, like summon their extra daemons or use the awesome tanks. If you rock up and complain that they're cheesy TFGs for taking an AV14 tank or 2, or tanking 4+ vehicles of any description, or summoning 1 squad of Daemonettes then guess what, they can also find another person to play. And most people would actually play them because those are all reasonable things.

When you say "You want things to happen" what you really mean is "I want to be able to kill all your stuff".
At least, that's what it sounds like to me now.

Tactical_Spam wrote:Its called "Tactics"

You call it tactics. I call it shenanigans.

Either way, I wouldn't consider that game worth playing.

Oh, my Parking lot list is entertaining.

For whom? Certainly not for your opponent. You yourself have basically said that you run the list essentially to castrate your opponent.

Why would I play a game with the intent to lose?

Not setting out to win is not the same thing as setting out to lose. Build your list to create a spectacle; attempt to win after dice start rolling.

I doubt a game with your pandering about how OP my list is, despite the fact you refused to tailor your list in the slighest, would be worth playing.

You may want to look up what "pandering" means. Recommend "complain" instead.

At any rate, what you are basically saying is: "It's YOUR fault you didn't specifically tailor your list to deal mine."

Do you not see how ridiculous that is?

I have a better idea. Don't make a list that needs specific tailoring to deal with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
You want to play "My Tactical Marines can kill everything"

"Everything" is an ambiguous term:

If by "everything" you mean:

"It is not the case that there exists an x such that x is a model in my army and my opponent cannot kill x with an army composed primarily of tactical marines," then yes, that's what I mean.

If by "everything," you mean:

"For all cases x, if x is a model in my opponent's army, then my tactical marines will have killed it by the end of the game," then no, that's not what I mean.

The enemy also wants to do stuff for 5 turns, like summon their extra daemons or use the awesome tanks. If you rock up and complain that they're cheesy TFGs for taking an AV14 tank or 2, or tanking 4+ vehicles of any description, or summoning 1 squad of Daemonettes then guess what, they can also find another person to play. And most people would actually play them because those are all reasonable things.

Yes. I have no problem refusing to play someone who wants to do unfair, powergaming bull gak for 5 turns.

You want daemonettes? Then instead of running pink horrors of tzeentch, run daemonettes and pay their points cost.

You want a bloodthirster? Then run a bloodthirster and pay its points cost.

Traditio wrote:

I have a better idea. Don't make a list that needs specific tailoring to deal with.

Except it doesnt. All of my TAC lists could deal with this list, on top of this he has almost half of his points tied up in 3 vehicles that arent even that threatening. The Preds will fall to my usual Anti Tank and i usually fight 3 Vinis so 2 of them is SOP for me.

Grimmor wrote:Except it doesnt. All of my TAC lists could deal with this list, on top of this he has almost half of his points tied up in 3 vehicles that arent even that threatening. The Preds will fall to my usual Anti Tank and i usually fight 3 Vinis so 2 of them is SOP for me.

Aside from necrons, Tau and eldar, which lists do you have that can easily explode 3 landraiders?

Who cares about exploding them?

And are moving those goalposts heavy?

Traditio wrote:
You call it tactics. I call it shenanigans.

Am I going to have two quotes from you in a single night?

For whom? Certainly not for your opponent. You yourself have basically said that you run the list essentially to castrate your opponent.

It's only castrating if you brought a Bolter to a Lascannon fight.

Build your list to create a spectacle; attempt to win after dice start rolling.

This is how you lose.

You may want to look up what "pandering" means. Recommend "complain" instead.

No, that's exactly what I mean. I think you like facing OP lists so you can complain about it.

At any rate, what you are basically saying is: "It's YOUR fault you didn't specifically tailor your list to deal mine."

Or I'm saying "My Lord, please help Traditio write an actual army list."

I have a better idea. Don't make a list that needs specific tailoring to deal with.

I... Really? I mean really? You can't see it, can you? What is this, the revolutionary war? Am I supposed to stand in a line so you can mow me down as you please?

Traditio wrote:

Grimmor wrote:Except it doesnt. All of my TAC lists could deal with this list, on top of this he has almost half of his points tied up in 3 vehicles that arent even that threatening. The Preds will fall to my usual Anti Tank and i usually fight 3 Vinis so 2 of them is SOP for me.

Aside from necrons, Tau and eldar, which lists do you have that can easily explode 3 landraiders?

Orks with Kustom Mega Kannons (i bring lots)
Sister of Battle with 3 Excorsists
Ad Mech nuff said
Tzeentch Daemons, i magick it away.

Also, i just ignore them because they cant do jack to all my infantry and i play to the objectives because im playing Maelstrom.

Tactical_Spam wrote:This is how you lose.

If everyone had a similar attitude, it wouldn't be "how you lose." It would be how the game would be balanced and fair and fun for everybody. Except WAAC power gamers. And feth them. Their opinions don't count.

I... Really? I mean really? You can't see it, can you? What is this, the revolutionary war? Am I supposed to stand in a line so you can mow me down as you please?

Bring tons of scouts. Paint them red. Give them cool British hats. Ally in an HQ on a horse.

It'll be the coolest damn fight ever.

 curran12 wrote:
Who cares about exploding them?

And are moving those goalposts heavy?

He put them on wheels. Only way they can be relocated so quickly.

Traditio wrote:
If everyone had a similar attitude, it wouldn't be "how you lose." It would be how the game would be balanced and fair and fun for everybody. Except WAAC power gamers. And feth them. Their opinions don't count.

Even if you took whatever the Feth you felt like, certain armies would just be better than others. Eldar has almost no bad units and you can make a functional list out of virtually anything in the book, Necrons are much the same way, just less obnoxious about it.

Dark Eldar, Tyranids and CSM on the other hand have to be very careful about what they select because there is a bunch of trap units in their books.

 Blacksails wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
Who cares about exploding them?

And are moving those goalposts heavy?

He put them on wheels. Only way they can be relocated so quickly.

That or hes got Ogryn pushing them around.

 Grimmor wrote:


That or hes got Ogryn pushing them around.

Ogryn are too power gamey.

He obviously uses grots.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Grimmor wrote:


That or hes got Ogryn pushing them around.

Ogryn are too power gamey.

He obviously uses grots.

I doubt he would use Filthy Xenos, besides they are to busy "doing nothing" by sitting on that Objective and getting my Victory Points!

@Traditio:

Since apparently everybody should know the definition of Power Gaming, maybe you should enlighten me? I mean, I have a rough idea of what it could be....

And Traditio: If you honestly think that a Land Raider Spearhead and a Armour Task Force with 2x Lonely Vindicators in it is overpowered, clearly you know nothing about how little firepower Land Raiders actually have as well as how easy Vindicators are to kill.

Traditio wrote:
If everyone had a similar attitude, it wouldn't be "how you lose."

If everyone forgot they were playing a wargame and decided to play RPS?

Except WAAC power gamers. And feth them. Their opinions don't count.

Could say the same about people who can't play the game.

Bring Landraiders. Paint them with freehand. Give them cool dudes with swords yelling at their drivers to get them closer. Ally in an HQ on a Landraider.

It'll be the tankiest damn fight ever.

Fixed it.

I really do not understand why you feel you shouldn't have to change your list depending on what army your opponent is fielding. If I play against Tau I bring lots of AV and 4+ saves. If I play against marines I bring more fast attack and bodies. And if I play against something else I'll bring something else. I'm not going to bring units into a fight if I know they won't do anything worthwhile. This doesn't mean the game is unbalanced, it just means that specific army has an advantage in one way over that unit. That's how it should be. It adds variety to the game. If I could beat marines in the same way I could beat Tau then the game would get quickly boring- but the fact is I have to use different strategies, units, and tactics to pull off a win against those two armies.

And that's the rush you get from a successful strategic victory. You brought the right things and deployed them in the right way to rub your opponent's advantages. It's just tactics. In the twenty or so games I've played (I'm still pretty new) I have never once seen a grav weapon aimed at me because my opponents know grav isn't that great against orks. And I don't begrudge them for being list-tailors or anything, it's just knowing the do's don't's of facing one particular army. Hell, I don't even care if my opponent brings a riptide or a titan. It's a challenge. Sure, that titan blasted the hell out of my orks and that riptide was a damn bugger to catch, but I still caught and killed them because I focused them with the right unit. (The unit was Meganobz. In both cases. Meganobz solve everything. )

Traditio wrote:
Note that what I suggest in the OP requires ZERO house rules. It only requires that the players slightly adjust their attitudes.

I see. Zero house rules. So why is it that you just came up with a bunch of house rules in this thread? Or are you going to pretend that they aren't house rules because you called them "principles for list construction", even though you're treating them as rules by refusing to play against anyone who doesn't follow them?

No. I won't be inclusive of power gaming donkey caves. I won't be inclusive of people who refuse to fight fair and treat the game as the spectacle that it is. I won't be inclusive of rules lawyers who value winning over in-game immersion.

IOW:

"IF YOU HAVE FUN DOING THINGS I DON'T ENJOY YOU ARE A TFG AND I DON'T WANT YOU IN MY COMMUNITY".

Traditio wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
You want to play "My Tactical Marines can kill everything"

"Everything" is an ambiguous term:

If by "everything" you mean:

"It is not the case that there exists an x such that x is a model in my army and my opponent cannot kill x with an army composed primarily of tactical marines," then yes, that's what I mean.

If by "everything," you mean:

"For all cases x, if x is a model in my opponent's army, then my tactical marines will have killed it by the end of the game," then no, that's not what I mean.

The enemy also wants to do stuff for 5 turns, like summon their extra daemons or use the awesome tanks. If you rock up and complain that they're cheesy TFGs for taking an AV14 tank or 2, or tanking 4+ vehicles of any description, or summoning 1 squad of Daemonettes then guess what, they can also find another person to play. And most people would actually play them because those are all reasonable things.

Yes. I have no problem refusing to play someone who wants to do unfair, powergaming bull gak for 5 turns.

You want daemonettes? Then instead of running pink horrors of tzeentch, run daemonettes and pay their points cost.

You want a bloodthirster? Then run a bloodthirster and pay its points cost.

I don't run Pink Horrors or anything other than Slaanesh.

However according to you I'm a TFG power gamer because I have 2-3 of my 5-6 Psykers using Malefic, have 2 min Daemonette troop squads and spam Seeker Chariots and Seekers.
Summoning and more points spend on MCs, Cavalry, Vehicles and Super-Killy-and-Buffy Psychic HQs apparently makes me a bad person for running mono-slaanesh.

How is summoning a 10-strong squad of Daemonettes 1 every 3-5 turns per Summoning HQ (2-3) more power-gamey than the alternative I could be doing: Invis Spam. Those 2-3 Lvl 2 Psykers could instead be rolling on Telepathy like the rest of them. Then instead of Summoning and Psychic Skrieking you I'd have several Invis squads running at you.

Peregrine wrote:I see. Zero house rules. So why is it that you just came up with a bunch of house rules in this thread? Or are you going to pretend that they aren't house rules because you called them "principles for list construction", even though you're treating them as rules by refusing to play against anyone who doesn't follow them?

Do you really not see the difference between changing the rules for a model, on the one hand, and imposing restrictions on which models, powers,etc. you will and won't use?

IOW:

"IF YOU HAVE FUN DOING THINGS I DON'T ENJOY YOU ARE A TFG AND I DON'T WANT YOU IN MY COMMUNITY".

Yes. In other contexts, this is completely non-controversial.

If you have fun by wiping your cheeto covered fingers all over somebody else's furniture, then you are TFG and I don't want you in my home.

If you have fun by activating glitches in a video game and making it crash, then you are TFG and I won't want to play video games with you.

I could go on.

If your idea of fun in playing 40k comes primarily from winning, and not from the spectacle, then you may or may not be TFG, but I don't want to play the game with you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Matt.Kingsley wrote:I don't run Pink Horrors or anything other than Slaanesh.

However according to you I'm a TFG power gamer because I have 2-3 of my 5-6 Psykers using Malefic, have 2 min Daemonette troop squads and spam Seeker Chariots and Seekers.
Summoning and more points spend on MCs, Cavalry, Vehicles and Super-Killy-and-Buffy Psychic HQs apparently makes me a bad person for running mono-slaanesh.

How is summoning a 10-strong squad of Daemonettes 1 every 3-5 turns per Summoning HQ (2-3)

A 10 man squad of slaaneshi daemonettes costs 90 points. Explain to me why it's OK for you to play with 1850 + (90 multiplied by the number of units summoned) points whereas your pponent only is playing at 1850. You want slaaneshi daemonettes? Then pay their points costs and include them in your army list.

more power-gamey than the alternative I could be doing: Invis Spam.

Except, that's also power gamey and violate the basic principles of the OP.

Let me simplify the OP for you:

NO SHENANIGANS. NONE. NOT A SINGLE ONE.

Traditio wrote:

IOW:

"IF YOU HAVE FUN DOING THINGS I DON'T ENJOY YOU ARE A TFG AND I DON'T WANT YOU IN MY COMMUNITY".

Yes. In other contexts, this is completely non-controversial.

If you have fun by wiping your cheeto covered fingers all over somebody else's furniture, then you are TFG and I don't want you in my home.

If you have fun by activating glitches in a video game and making it crash, then you are TFG and I won't want to play video games with you.

I could go on.

If your idea of fun in playing 40k comes primarily from winning, and not from the spectacle, then you may or may not be TFG, but I don't want to play the game with you.

And playing to win immediately eliminates all possibility of a spectacle? I've seen games with OP lists provide a spectacle and seen "Stuff Happen". You can't seem to grasp the fact that the Spectacle of the game and Powerful Lists are not two mutually exclusive things.

Traditio wrote:Let me simplify the OP for you:

NO SHENANIGANS. NONE. NOT A SINGLE ONE.

And your definition of shenanigans seems to be ridiculous and highly subjective.

IllumiNini wrote:And playing to win immediately eliminates all possibility of a spectacle?

I didn't make this claim.

I've seen games with OP lists provide a spectacle and seen "Stuff Happen". You can't seem to grasp the fact that the Spectacle of the game and Powerful Lists are not two mutually exclusive things.

Stuff can happen when OP lists are played against each other. However, this is often contrary to the intention of the constructor of the list. As Tactical Spam himself said, his armored list was built to ensure that nothing actually happens...at least, for his opponent.

And your definition of shenanigans seems to be ridiculous and highly subjective.

Let your opinion be what it may, but note the following:

It would ensure that more people would consider their games fair, fun and action packed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IllumiNini wrote:And Traditio: If you honestly think that a Land Raider Spearhead and a Armour Task Force with 2x Lonely Vindicators in it is overpowered, clearly you know nothing about how little firepower Land Raiders actually have as well as how easy Vindicators are to kill.

It has nothing to do with overpowered or not overpowered. The intention of the list is to invalidate most of the opponent's army and play the hide and seek game.

That may not be OP.

But it's not entertaining. It's frustrating and chore-like.

Traditio wrote:

And your definition of shenanigans seems to be ridiculous and highly subjective.

Let your opinion be what it may, but note the following:

It would ensure that more people would consider their games fair, fun and action packed.

And how is this anything but highly subjective?

IllumiNini wrote:And how is this anything but highly subjective?

Because fun is had by doing stuff, and it is not the case that fun is had by not doing stuff.

This holds true universally.

Pretty simple, really.

And for anyone who may be reading this, I propose the question:

When is the last time that you played a space marine battle company and did NOT have fun?

Traditio wrote:
Do you really not see the difference between changing the rules for a model, on the one hand, and imposing restrictions on which models, powers,etc. you will and won't use?

No. "Riptides cost 100 points more" and "if you take a Riptide you must take 100 fewer points" are functionally identical rules. You might pretend that you aren't making model-specific house rules, but you are making a whole bunch of house rules about what is a legal list.

If you have fun by wiping your cheeto covered fingers all over somebody else's furniture, then you are TFG and I don't want you in my home.

Lol what? Are you honestly trying to argue that playing 40k competitively is equivalent to ruining someone else's furniture?

Traditio wrote:
A 10 man squad of slaaneshi daemonettes costs 90 points. Explain to me why it's OK for you to play with 1850 + (90 multiplied by the number of units summoned) points whereas your pponent only is playing at 1850. You want slaaneshi daemonettes? Then pay their points costs and include them in your army list.

Because summoning allows you to get units at a discount, but at the cost of reliability. If you pay full price and take them in your army list you get to do whatever you want with them. If you summon them you end up paying fewer points, but you don't get them immediately. You might fail the psychic test, your opponent might deny it, your psyker might get killed before you can summon them, etc. And I strongly suspect that demons have been balanced with the assumption that you will use at least some amount of summoning. For example, perhaps all demon psykers are "overcosted" by X% to account for getting Y points worth of extra models through summoning.

Now, summoning has been the core of some lists that aren't much fun to play against, but a blanket ban on summoning is massive overkill.

Peregrine wrote:No. "Riptides cost 100 points more" and "if you take a Riptide you must take 100 fewer points" are functionally identical rules. You might pretend that you aren't making model-specific house rules, but you are making a whole bunch of house rules about what is a legal list.

They're not the same thing.

Saying "Riptides cost 100 points more" presupposes a public agreement with respect to that rules change.

If we've made that rules agreement and you then fail to account for the points increase in your list, I can subsequently accuse you of cheating.

No such agreement is necessary in order to impose a personal 100 point handicap. You simply take 100 fewer points, whether or not you specifically call your opponent's attention to it.

It works out the same way, but the latter isn't really a rule change. The riptide's points cost remain formally the same. You just have less of other things.

Lol what? Are you honestly trying to argue that playing 40k competitively is equivalent to ruining someone else's furniture?

I'm just saying: we censor/exclude/penalize people all the time based on their having a different conception of having fun. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

Once when I played a cooperative video game with a friend of mine, my conception of fun was committing suicide by jumping into the lava over and over again.

My friend decided to play a different [one player] game after that. Do I fault him for it? No, not really.

Because summoning allows you to get units at a discount, but at the cost of reliability. If you pay full price and take them in your army list you get to do whatever you want with them. If you summon them you end up paying fewer points, but you don't get them immediately. You might fail the psychic test, your opponent might deny it, your psyker might get killed before you can summon them, etc

This isn't a good argument. "I may or may not get the extra points worth of models."

So what? You already have 1850 points of models. Why should you even have the possibility of getting extra?

And I strongly suspect that demons have been balanced with the assumption that you will use at least some amount of summoning. For example, perhaps all demon psykers are "overcosted" by X% to account for getting Y points worth of extra models through summoning.

This is pure speculation.

Also, let's test this. A bloodthirster of insensate rage costs 275 points without upgrades. Do you consider this overcosted?

Now, summoning has been the core of some lists that aren't much fun to play against, but a blanket ban on summoning is massive overkill.

It's at least apparently unfair. It's that simple.