Switch Theme:

Would taking a Shadowsword into a 1000 point game make me "That Guy?"  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Posts with Authority





I'll even be super clear. It's not a 'yes or no' question when you really put thought to it. There's a lot of things to consider.

If this is your friend you're playing, and you're like one of my buddies- the joke between us is to surprise one another and deliberately put down something absurd. It's a bit of a friendly arms race between us. That's the point, it's all part of the gag with us.

If this is someone you that is competitive- then feel free to use the maximum most effective stuff you have. That's what you want to do with competitive players, because it's a challenge for them and that's what they really need.

Is it some dude that just started playing a month ago and is still using a 'Start Collecting' set or something? Don't be a jerk, give him something he can work with and learn from.

Is it someone you don't know? I'd be on the safe side and let them know, or ask them what they're in the mood for.

There are three very valid arguments:

1- You should be able to play with your toys, and no one should be able to dictate what toys you can and can't play with. If they don't like it, they can play with someone else. I've seen my fair share of people that try and tell you that they'd rather you not use X, Y, and Z and try to limit your options down to his own advantage and 'tailor your list' to his army.

2- You don't want to get a reputation as a jerk that does something like this for a 'friendly casual game'. As I said, that'll stick to you and I see more than one person that's earned this reputation... and they got to use their badass list and cool toy a few times, but not so much now that no one wants to play with them.

3- At the end of the day, what is important is that both you and your opponent have a good game. That means you BOTH need to have fun. Unless this is some kind of tournament, fun for both of you is the priority. Because if you're really only concerned about how much YOU enjoy something- there's an activity for that and you don't need to do that at the FLGS unless you want to get thrown out and arrested.

Mob Rule is not a rule. 
   
Made in ca
Sagitarius with a Big F'in Gun





I brought a knight to a local 'friendly' 1000pt tournament where people had mostly casual lists. I had just finished painting it, so wanted to use it. Some people got a bit snarky about it. I ended up 2nd to last place. 1 superheavy is not difficult to counter. They can be bogged down, distracted, or you can run circles around them and take objectives. I personally prefer casual games, but do not care at all what people bring. The game is basically complex rock-paper-scissors and there's no point to being butt-hurt over losing a casual game.

IMO casual games are for taking your time, being social, maybe trying experimental or fluffy lists, and not being an over-serious jerk about the game. If people want to test out their tournament list, I'd still play it, as long as they don't pull some macho "I PLAY TO WIN." attitude, or say their too busy focusing on their strategy to talk.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/09 17:06:41


 
   
Made in us
Clousseau





East Bay, Ca, US

SirWeeble wrote:
I brought a knight to a local 'friendly' 1000pt tournament where people had mostly casual lists. I had just finished painting it, so wanted to use it. Some people got a bit snarky about it. I ended up 2nd to last place. 1 superheavy is not difficult to counter. They can be bogged down, distracted, or you can run circles around them and take objectives. I personally prefer casual games, but do not care at all what people bring. The game is basically complex rock-paper-scissors and there's no point to being butt-hurt over losing a casual game.

IMO casual games are for taking your time, being social, maybe trying experimental or fluffy lists, and not being an over-serious jerk about the game. If people want to test out their tournament list, I'd still play it, as long as they don't pull some macho "I PLAY TO WIN." attitude, or say their too busy focusing on their strategy to talk.


What knight did you bring? What was your list like? Were you allowed multiple detachments? An Imperial Knight+ Guard would do well at 1000 points.

 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

Bharring wrote:
He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
 
   
Made in ca
Sagitarius with a Big F'in Gun





 Marmatag wrote:

What knight did you bring? What was your list like? Were you allowed multiple detachments? An Imperial Knight+ Guard would do well at 1000 points.


I brought an knight errant. I know, not the best knight, but i like it. The rest of my list was admech. I brought a few skitarii and ironstriders and minimum HQs. The game allowed a max of one super heavy aux detachment. Max 2 detachments total.

I think I had 3 games in the tourney. One was an Craftworld Eldar mostly-tank list(4 tanks). He basically just camped his tanks on objectives, killed my infantry and iron striders at range and I had my knight lumbering around trying to break through their -1 to all damage perk. Bad rolls + -1 to hit + him keeping away from CC had the game end with me only killing 1 tank and he wiped most of my force. My 2nd game was Vs necrons. He tied my knight up with a bunch of wraiths who slowly ground it down in CC, killed the rest of my force, and got objectives with scarabs. #3 was vs a Primaris anti-infantry focused army that didn't have much that could hurt the knight and I won. I basically just rampaged the knight through his one tank and then the marines.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/09 18:05:20


 
   
Made in us
Clousseau





East Bay, Ca, US

Yeah, a Knight Errant was probably not the right choice, but good for you for bringing something cool. A dominus would probably have rampaged through everyone, especially a valiant.

It looks like the Necrons player planned to face some armor. Eldar, you do have a trait that ignores minus to hit, but if you didn't build your knight with that, it makes life tough.

 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

Bharring wrote:
He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
 
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 Marmatag wrote:
Playing a Guard list in a casual setting, where you're concerned about balance and your opponent having a fun time, is already a mistake. Either they can cut through your chaff and kill your tanks or they can't. The game is already over in the list building phase.


Oh yes, this is definitely a reasonable point of view. IG players should sell their armies and buy space marines, and certainly shouldn't expect to be permitted in casual settings.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Personally, I kind of thrive on opponents doing stuff like this. Not in the sense that I'm super successful and win a lot when it happens, but seeing how well I do against overwhelming odds gives me a better idea of how strong I really am then any time I win. It might just be a childhood wasted on NES-Hard games, but nothing compels me to play more quite like getting the boss to half health so I can start thinking of ways to get it down to a third.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





SirWeeble wrote:
The game is basically complex rock-paper-scissors and there's no point to being butt-hurt over losing a casual game.


Quoted for truth. 40k has never been balanced well enough to take seriously as a competitive game, if you're not using it as an excuse to hang out and laugh at how ridiculous the whole thing is you're doing it wrong.

   
Made in us
Keeper of the Flame





Monticello, IN

Pro tip: if an action in list building causes you to instinctively pause and ask yourself if it makes you "That guy", the answer is automatically "yes".

www.classichammer.com

For 4-6th WFB, 2-5th 40k, and similar timeframe gaming

Looking for dice from the new AOS boxed set and Dark Imperium on the cheap. Let me know if you can help.
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Its AoS, it doesn't have to make sense.
 
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






The Newman wrote:
Quoted for truth. 40k has never been balanced well enough to take seriously as a competitive game, if you're not using it as an excuse to hang out and laugh at how ridiculous the whole thing is you're doing it wrong.


Uh, no. If I'm going to do something where the goal is to laugh at how ridiculous the thing is it isn't going to be a hobby where I have to spend thousands of dollars and countless hours of painting time before I can even start. I have no idea why people have this kind of attitude towards something that requires such an immense investment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Just Tony wrote:
Pro tip: if an action in list building causes you to instinctively pause and ask yourself if it makes you "That guy", the answer is automatically "yes".


Alternatively, too many people live in fear of being labeled TFG for taking the "wrong" list and should get over that fear. Playing with good units doesn't make you TFG. If you instinctively pause and think you might be TFG the first thing you should do is look at the toxic mess of a community you're in and ask yourself why you play with people who act like that.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/10 08:15:29


There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in ca
Posts with Authority




I'm from the future. The future of space

We just have a standard practice where if you take something T7 or higher or 7 wounds or higher you give the opponent a heads up in games 50PL/1000 points or less. They can then either throw in something comparable or add some anti-tank.

Balance in pick up games? Two people, each with their own goals for the game, design half a board game on their own without knowing the layout of the board and hope it all works out. Good luck with that. The faster you can find like minded individuals who want the same things from the game as you, the better. 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Or any other kind of skew list, really.

From experience, no one is happy to face 150 boyz at 1000 either.

7 Ork facts people always get wrong:
Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other.
A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot.
Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests.
Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books.
Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor.
Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers.
Orks do not have the power of believe. 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






SirWeeble wrote:
Funny how TFG has changed from meaning someone who cheats, is a general ass, doesn't know the rules, and makes crap up, and generally makes the game un-fun to someone who brings a shadow-sword.

Bringing an all tank list is ok though? 28 T8 wounds = TFG. 72 T8 wounds (6 russ tanks) = OK. Or is that a TFG thing too? If so, how about a write up of what is an 'allowed' list.


A person can definitely follow all the rules of the game to the letter and be TFG. The only thing that makes you "that fething guy" is if everyone in your particular group sees you as such and avoids you. It can be applied fairly or unfairly, depending on the group.

That said, I'd much, MUCH, MUCH rather face a single baneblade at 1k than a single knight. The new warlord traits/relics they slapped on to knights massively increased the power level of a single one making it an absolutely absurd prospect to bring down even at 1k with its easy access to 3++, super-shooty gatling guns, plenty of rerolls to hit/resurrect stratagems...

A shadowsword just blows away one vehicle per turn and fires like 30 BS4+ heavy bolter shots. Considering a loaded up one is basically 100% of your tank support for the game, I'm not all that spooked by it at 1k. But you can most certainly expect some more casual groups to ostracise you if you regularly bring it.

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





It ultimately just comes down to intent and perceived intent. If you're asking the question in the first place it's likely not your intent to be TFG. So then it comes down to what your opponent perceives as your intent. The best advice I can give is to chat with your opponent a bit before the game. When you're talking to decide points, armies, etc. bring up that you want to try it out for whatever reason. The worst they can do is say no and as long as everything is handled calmly no one reasonable is going to accuse you of being TFG. Hell you might even find someone else who wants to bring their own LoW in that scale game. Last weekend I had an opponent want to play his stormsurge which I was completely fine with but I didn't have enough points of models on me for the size of game he wanted.
   
Made in ca
Ancient Venerable Black Templar Dreadnought





Canada

I am pretty tired of the "TFG" label based on army selection allowed by the rules of the game.

There is NO RULE that says you cannot take a LoW in a <1000 pt game or ask for opponent permission or even give "fair" warning.
I feel that being judgemental with someone playing within the rules of the game is not fair and is poor sportsmanship.

Next you people will say you regularly go 1-3 points over the agreed pts value on a list because it is more important to cheat than lose that one piece of inconsequential wargear.

I indulge in the occasional "Scrub" behavior and give my opponent a heads-up on some army selections because I want a tough game not "bring a knife to a gun fight" outcome.
Sometimes I feel we need to adhere to the letter of the law in rules to highlight how some game rule systems utterly break without the fan-base house-ruling the heck out of them.
GW seems more receptive than they were in the past.

I think I still see red to the worlds "forge the narrative" or more "forge new rules since we did not test ours enough".

Heck, I get moaning and groaning from some of the FLGS hobby group that I am "no fun" to play because I have too many armies... so they can not list tailor against it since they do not know what army I will bring.
It all boils down to how badly the person wants to win and if it looks like they can't win, "dude, I just wanted a "casual" game" is their rally cry.

I love playing my friends more-so.
We play our best, heck, dip into evil as far as we can and laugh when a hideous list is dropped on yourself and you try to pull a pariah victory out of it.
We still sometimes play not 100% optimal lists because we still get hung up with our "Boys before toys" phrase but that is a carry-over from historical gaming.

A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
Napoleon Bonaparte 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Talizvar wrote:
I am pretty tired of the "TFG" label based on army selection allowed by the rules of the game.

There is NO RULE that says you cannot take a LoW in a <1000 pt game or ask for opponent permission or even give "fair" warning.
I feel that being judgemental with someone playing within the rules of the game is not fair and is poor sportsmanship.


Its about whether you care if the other player has fun or not. If they don't mind its not a problem. But they might. Which is why giving a heads up is reasonable. I'd agree that it would equally apply for a boyz skew or whatever.

If they then turn around and go "aha, he's taking a Shadowsword so I'll spam all the lascannons, victory will be mine!" that's TFG behaviour on their part.

Speaking as someone who spent a long time as TFG "I have to show I am the greatest general whatever the consequences", I can say that travelling a considerable distance to see someone you don't play very often only to go "oh, we are a turn in and its clear one of us has won at the list building stage" isn't very fun.
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Talizvar wrote:
I am pretty tired of the "TFG" label based on army selection allowed by the rules of the game.

There is NO RULE that says you cannot take a LoW in a <1000 pt game or ask for opponent permission or even give "fair" warning.
I feel that being judgemental with someone playing within the rules of the game is not fair and is poor sportsmanship.

Next you people will say you regularly go 1-3 points over the agreed pts value on a list because it is more important to cheat than lose that one piece of inconsequential wargear.

I indulge in the occasional "Scrub" behavior and give my opponent a heads-up on some army selections because I want a tough game not "bring a knife to a gun fight" outcome.
Sometimes I feel we need to adhere to the letter of the law in rules to highlight how some game rule systems utterly break without the fan-base house-ruling the heck out of them.
GW seems more receptive than they were in the past.

I think I still see red to the worlds "forge the narrative" or more "forge new rules since we did not test ours enough".

Heck, I get moaning and groaning from some of the FLGS hobby group that I am "no fun" to play because I have too many armies... so they can not list tailor against it since they do not know what army I will bring.
It all boils down to how badly the person wants to win and if it looks like they can't win, "dude, I just wanted a "casual" game" is their rally cry.

I love playing my friends more-so.
We play our best, heck, dip into evil as far as we can and laugh when a hideous list is dropped on yourself and you try to pull a pariah victory out of it.
We still sometimes play not 100% optimal lists because we still get hung up with our "Boys before toys" phrase but that is a carry-over from historical gaming.


"TFG" has nothing to do with objective behaviors, like any stereotype there is variation and there are many individuals who are unfairly saddled with the reputation. All it is is the tendency within a group to have one guy everyone or most people avoid playing with who ends up sitting in the corner not playing anyone.

For any reason.

And much like talking yourself out of a speeding ticket, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that NOBODY has ever talked themselves out of a TFG reputation by claiming "but I'm just playing by the rules!"

"TFG" is an enduring stereotype because in almost any game group there ends up being one (or a couple) of individuals who play a different style of game than the rest of the group and earn themselves a soft-rejection by enough people refusing to play them.

This can be because of rule bending.

This can be because of a gakky attitude/poor social skills.

This can be because of playing more competitively than the rest of the group and earning a reputation as being a "power gamer".

None of these have to be fair assessments, the only thing that matters is that the general opinion of the individual within the group drops to the point where he can't get a game and he still hangs around, becoming instantly recognizable as the one everyone views as "that F-ing guy".

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in us
Clousseau





East Bay, Ca, US

 Peregrine wrote:
 Marmatag wrote:
Playing a Guard list in a casual setting, where you're concerned about balance and your opponent having a fun time, is already a mistake. Either they can cut through your chaff and kill your tanks or they can't. The game is already over in the list building phase.


Oh yes, this is definitely a reasonable point of view. IG players should sell their armies and buy space marines, and certainly shouldn't expect to be permitted in casual settings.


If your argument against super heavies is wound volume, toughness, and save, guard have that in leman russ tanks already. if your meta can't deal with a super heavy they can't deal with guard. it's not a stretch.

 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

Bharring wrote:
He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

 Marmatag wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
 Marmatag wrote:
Playing a Guard list in a casual setting, where you're concerned about balance and your opponent having a fun time, is already a mistake. Either they can cut through your chaff and kill your tanks or they can't. The game is already over in the list building phase.


Oh yes, this is definitely a reasonable point of view. IG players should sell their armies and buy space marines, and certainly shouldn't expect to be permitted in casual settings.


If your argument against super heavies is wound volume, toughness, and save, guard have that in leman russ tanks already. if your meta can't deal with a super heavy they can't deal with guard. it's not a stretch.


And if your meta can't deal with a superheavy, they are probably playing the wrong game. There is an army in this game that is literally Superheavies: The Army (imperial knights).
   
Made in us
Clousseau





East Bay, Ca, US

Or you're playing marines or a casual fluffy list. Not everyone plays for the same goals, and you see more of that at 1000. "I put my landraider here because that's where the road is," for example.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/10 16:05:50


 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

Bharring wrote:
He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





My argument against superheavies is "It's no fun". Once in a while, it's fun to see. But it feels like a different game to me.

I used to play WMH. One of the reasons I lost interest in it was superheavies. I won far more games against them than I lost - they weren't scary or hard. But so much of the parts of the game I enjoyed were just invalidated by them.

Superheavies in 40k are similar. I get that they are part of the game. I get that they aren't OP. I get that you want to field them. I'll play against them. But I'll tend towards playing against other players.

Now, in a tourny, that's a whole other story.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

 Marmatag wrote:
Or you're playing marines or a casual fluffy list. Not everyone plays for the same goals, and you see more of that at 1000. "I put my landraider here because that's where the road is," for example.


Well, yes, it's true, but "my meta" is not the same as "the player I'm playing at the moment." My meta can handle superheavies, but not every player I play against can. So I warn them it's coming, or change my list if they want me to. But that requires more pregame conversation than most people are fine with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote:
My argument against superheavies is "It's no fun". Once in a while, it's fun to see. But it feels like a different game to me.

I used to play WMH. One of the reasons I lost interest in it was superheavies. I won far more games against them than I lost - they weren't scary or hard. But so much of the parts of the game I enjoyed were just invalidated by them.

Superheavies in 40k are similar. I get that they are part of the game. I get that they aren't OP. I get that you want to field them. I'll play against them. But I'll tend towards playing against other players.

Now, in a tourny, that's a whole other story.


Can you articulate what superheavies change about the game that lesser vehicles (e.g. Armigers, Leman Russes, Land Raiders, Hammerheads, etc) don't change?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/10 16:12:14


 
   
Made in us
Clousseau





East Bay, Ca, US

In a tournament it's a 2000 point game, and you should be ready.

In a casual 1000 point game? Who honestly knows. It's clear this game is costed based on 2k points. And, not everyone has efficient access to anti-tank at 1k.

Bringing super heavy at 1000 without considering your opponent seems tone-deaf to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Marmatag wrote:
Or you're playing marines or a casual fluffy list. Not everyone plays for the same goals, and you see more of that at 1000. "I put my landraider here because that's where the road is," for example.


Well, yes, it's true, but "my meta" is not the same as "the player I'm playing at the moment." My meta can handle superheavies, but not every player I play against can. So I warn them it's coming, or change my list if they want me to. But that requires more pregame conversation than most people are fine with.


This thread isn't about you and your meta, it's in response to the original poster. We all know you're in camp superheavy ride or die.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/10 16:16:36


 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

Bharring wrote:
He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

 Marmatag wrote:
In a tournament it's a 2000 point game, and you should be ready.

In a casual 1000 point game? Who honestly knows. It's clear this game is costed based on 2k points. And, not everyone has efficient access to anti-tank at 1k.

Bringing super heavy at 1000 without considering your opponent seems tone-deaf to me.


Agreed. As you can see by the first post in this thread.


 Marmatag wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Marmatag wrote:
Or you're playing marines or a casual fluffy list. Not everyone plays for the same goals, and you see more of that at 1000. "I put my landraider here because that's where the road is," for example.


Well, yes, it's true, but "my meta" is not the same as "the player I'm playing at the moment." My meta can handle superheavies, but not every player I play against can. So I warn them it's coming, or change my list if they want me to. But that requires more pregame conversation than most people are fine with.


This thread isn't about you and your meta, it's in response to the original poster. We all know you're in camp superheavy ride or die.

I was specifically addressing this post of yours:
 Marmatag wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
 Marmatag wrote:
Playing a Guard list in a casual setting, where you're concerned about balance and your opponent having a fun time, is already a mistake. Either they can cut through your chaff and kill your tanks or they can't. The game is already over in the list building phase.


Oh yes, this is definitely a reasonable point of view. IG players should sell their armies and buy space marines, and certainly shouldn't expect to be permitted in casual settings.


If your argument against super heavies is wound volume, toughness, and save, guard have that in leman russ tanks already. if your meta can't deal with a super heavy they can't deal with guard. it's not a stretch.

The relevant bit is bolded and turned red for your convenience. I am making the claim that an entire meta that can't handle superheavies is a meta that needs to change, because otherwise it's going to dwindle away and be left behind by the world. Then, by extension, most metas can handle superheavies, and therefore can handle guard.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/08/10 16:20:35


 
   
Made in us
Clousseau





East Bay, Ca, US

What a meta should be able to handle is largely irrelevant. Unless you plan to jump through the internet and give him and his play group an education.

 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

Bharring wrote:
He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
 
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






 ServiceGames wrote:
Is a Shadowsword in a 1000 point game (though legal) frowned upon since it's so powerful in 8th? Would I be considered "That Guy" if I did bring a Shadowsord to a 1000 point game?

Thanks

SG


1,500 no, 1000 yeah it kinda does make you that guy.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

 Marmatag wrote:
What a meta should be able to handle is largely irrelevant. Unless you plan to jump through the internet and give him and his play group an education.


Depending on where his playgroup is, I'd be happy to.
   
Made in us
Clousseau





East Bay, Ca, US

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Marmatag wrote:
What a meta should be able to handle is largely irrelevant. Unless you plan to jump through the internet and give him and his play group an education.


Depending on where his playgroup is, I'd be happy to.


You have a very interesting opinion of yourself.

 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

Bharring wrote:
He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

 Marmatag wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Marmatag wrote:
What a meta should be able to handle is largely irrelevant. Unless you plan to jump through the internet and give him and his play group an education.


Depending on where his playgroup is, I'd be happy to.


You have a very interesting opinion of yourself.


Thanks! I try to have interesting opinions about everything.
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






Well realistically at that point level you don't want a shadow sword. You'd do a lot better with a baneblade or a hell hammer.

Hellhammer is actually the best all around baneblade IMO. It's main gun goes to str 10 which allows it to wound on 2's vs t5 - it's also got better AP and ignore cover. The range is not an issue at all at 36". Shadow sword is just overkill at 1000 points. A main gun with more shots is more important.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: