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.

I'd also like to stop seeing the argument that a PL list with full wargear is leaps and bounds more Points than a PL list without.
Because the opposite is also true. A Points list with minimum upgrades to squeezed in more models has a way higher PL than a Points list that takes some upgrades.

-

Reemule wrote:
A big part of the problem is casual players using Match Points.

They would have a happier game if they stuck with PL.

But by using points they fool themselves into thinking they can and should have an opinion in balance and competitive play and they get angry when they don't comprehend they are using something not intended for them in the wrong way.

I'm a casual player. Tried PL. Didn't like it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dandelion wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

Perhaps I didn't convey the idea clearly. No two groups of gamers will play the same version of 40K. Between differing metas, interpretations of rules, house rules (even official ones like ITC), terrain usage, armies in use etc... and that's before considering personal playstyles. The only person that I know of actually playing 40k by the rules is BaconCatBug. Even GW isn't playing the 40k they wrote. A such, it is pretty arrogant to presume to know how and why people play the game.

Huh. I played 40K in Western MA in multiple stores, even dipping down into Northern Connecticut. I've played in California. Now I'm playing in Japan. I'm literally playing the same game in all three areas. So, yeah. Don't give me that dung.

OK, do you play any of the narrative games like Cities of Death or Planetstrike? If not the you are playing a significantly different game than those that do. My point about my games being different had a bit of hyperbole to try and drive the point but instead you've gotten hung up on that rather than the main point: which is that you don't know how people are playing the game so why do you get to decide what's fun for them or not?

[

Turn that question around. Why do you decided what is fun over me? Why do you get to decide what is 'casual'?

My umbrage wasn't at the fact that you play differently. It was at the idea that you think I can't understand your house rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galef wrote:

Aelyn wrote:
Points are a budget that allow you to squeeze out every bit of value. Power levels are a way of approximating balance to ensure it's not a total curbstomp without having to worry too hard about optimization.

That's probably the best description of either that I have seen, honestly. At least of the intent of either. Have an exalt!

-

I have yet to see a PL game that didn't result in a curb stomping, even between extremely casual players. Anecdotal I know, but it's what I have to work with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson Devil wrote:




Oh for feths sake! What is broken in your brain that says everytime someone does something you don't like, it means they think they are superior to you?

Posts like this one.

So is your intention to remove the context of my reply to Peregrine and imply it was a smear directed at you?

Nope. But while you said it in reply to Peregrine, it was common to several comments you've made towards others in this thread, myself included.

It was never directed at you, so you can't have it.

 Mmmpi wrote:

Turn that question around. Why do you decided what is fun over me? Why do you get to decide what is 'casual'?

I didn't?

My umbrage wasn't at the fact that you play differently. It was at the idea that you think I can't understand your house rules.

Clearly we aren't on the same page here because I don't know how you came to that conclusion. That comment wasn't even directed at you. It has nothing to do with my personal house rules and everything to do with how Peregrine thinks he knows how I play, or rather how I should play. Point being that he can't possibly know since he's never seen me play.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
It was never directed at you, so you can't have it.

This doesn't make any sense. Please reword.

Mmmpi wrote:Nope. But while you said it in reply to Peregrine, it was common to several comments you've made towards others in this thread, myself included.

do you mind dropping the pseudo-outrage at the fact that some people prefer to play casually, as though it's personally aimed at attacking your character for preferring competitive? I play literally nothing but competitive, my signature on the forum is aimed at deflecting the stupid insults that some rabid casual players love to send at us, and as I said early I actually agree with the criticism of PL as a system, and I had an extended argument with Sgt Smudge the page before. Yet nowhere that I've seen yet in this thread is there any justification for behaving like this. At no point did anyone say you don't get to decide what you're allowed to consider fun or have fun doing. Coming in here shouting down measured conversation with accusations of virtue signalling and superiority complex's for just wanting to play a game, and then act outraged when people disagree is just incredibly toxic behavior. And consider that this is someone who agrees with the criticism of PL and is actually on your side of this debate, should be a wake up call mate.

 SHUPPET wrote:

Mmmpi wrote:Nope. But while you said it in reply to Peregrine, it was common to several comments you've made towards others in this thread, myself included.

do you mind dropping the pseudo-outrage at the fact that some people prefer to play casually, as though it's personally aimed at attacking your character for preferring competitive? I play literally nothing but competitive, my signature on the forum is aimed at deflecting the stupid insults that some rabid casual players love to send at us, and as I said early I actually agree with the criticism of PL as a system, and I had an extended argument with Sgt Smudge the page before. Yet nowhere that I've seen yet in this thread is there any justification for behaving like this. At no point did anyone say you don't get to decide what you're allowed to consider fun or have fun doing. Coming in here shouting down measured conversation with accusations of virtue signalling and superiority complex's for just wanting to play a game, and then act outraged when people disagree is just incredibly toxic behavior. And consider that this is someone who agrees with the criticism of PL and is actually on your side of this debate, should be a wake up call mate.

I play casually. I'm frustrated that I'm told I'm not a casual player because I use points and try to make decent lists. So, yeah. Keep calling it pseudo-outrage. Really productive.

Yet nowhere that I've seen yet in this thread is there any justification for behaving like this.

Then you might want to re-read this thread because it's full of it.

At no point did anyone say you don't get to decide what you're allowed to consider fun or have fun doing.

It's been flying back and forth in both directions for what? 8 pages now?

Coming in here shouting down measured conversation with accusations of virtue signalling and superiority complex's for just wanting to play a game, and then act outraged when people disagree is just incredibly toxic behavior.

If what I said doesn't apply to you, then it doesn't apply to you. There are people doing exactly what I have said they're doing. Calling people on toxic behavior isn't toxic in it's own right.

And consider that this is someone who agrees with the criticism of PL and is actually on your side of this debate, should be a wake up call mate.

When my points stop being valid, I'll stop.

 Mmmpi wrote:

I play casually. I'm frustrated that I'm told I'm not a casual player because I use points and try to make decent lists.

I've yet to see someone make that accusation.

Yeah, did we miss a page or something?

The moment I saw this thread I knew Peregrine was going to jump in here and start swinging. Which is what he does. He is not reasonable or rationale, he is just a bully. This situation has been going on for several threads and I don't see it stopping anytime soon.

I'm a causally competitive player. I use both systems to make armies and I play in tournaments on occasion. I make the army I want to put on the table and then play it as hard as I can. And I do this for me. Not for some publicly recognized virtue or pat on the back. I'm doing it for me, because it is the way I have fun. So, You have fun doing your thing and leave us alone so we can too.

Peregrine isn't a bully. He just doesn't take any gak, which is exactly what the concept of power levels is. The mental gymnastics to defend it are insane.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
Yeah, did we miss a page or something?

The moment I saw this thread I knew Peregrine was going to jump in here and start swinging. Which is what he does. He is not reasonable or rationale, he is just a bully. This situation has been going on for several threads and I don't see it stopping anytime soon.

I'm a causally competitive player. I use both systems to make armies and I play in tournaments on occasion. I make the army I want to put on the table and then play it as hard as I can. And I do this for me. Not for some publicly recognized virtue or pat on the back. I'm doing it for me, because it is the way I have fun. So, You have fun doing your thing and leave us alone so we can too.

At this point he and a couple of other are clearly violating the first rule of this forum. I suppose if one can express the nastiness semi articulately it's all good?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Peregrine isn't a bully. He just doesn't take any gak, which is exactly what the concept of power levels is. The mental gymnastics to defend it are insane.

Ah yes "I know how game should be played so if you dare to play in way that doesn't fit my view of game is played you are wrong".

Mental hoops some people have to take to attack how other people want to play is insane. Especially when they then try to use word "balance" and "point levels" together when points aren't even meant to provide balanced game is just lol laughable. People are soooooooo misusing points if they are using those to provide "balance". Right tool for the right job and point cost is not right tool for balanced game.,

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Peregrine isn't a bully. He just doesn't take any gak, which is exactly what the concept of power levels is. The mental gymnastics to defend it are insane.

"Not taking any gak" can be done without verbally clobbering other people by assuming you are somehow in the absolute right a priori, mostly because you just chose so, even in the face of contradictory evidence. Peregrine does that, berates others and otherwise behaves in an abrasive manner that isn't so much an attempt at a discussion as it is a declaration of "my opinion is a fact of nature and everything else is duuuuumb." Combine this with the previous statements that basically reduce to "can't handle my FACTS, huh? Get out." and it's very much getting in the bullying territory, where shouting and opinion pushing dominate over opinion presentation and constructive discourse. It just hides under sometimes acute observations and buzzwords.

And no, even if you claim "the concept of power levels being gak", that does not make it a fact. There are people who use them and like them, which alone means they are a net positive for some. It is frankly amazing, in the field of mental gymnastics, how hard can it be for some to realize that it's entirely okay that others do as they like and no, they are not better off with using a system that has more fiddly bits than they need. Like Crimson (I think) said earlier, if one is fine with the tradeoff of doing the counting faster and looser, it's just another way of doing it.

I'm fully willing to admit that I may have missed some posts or their implication, so can someone please source where all these intellectually superior posts degrading us competitive players for not being as virtuous as they? Because if not, I'm going to go ahead and say that it isn't "not taking gak" at all, rather, it's you guys just needlessly giving it.

Reemule wrote:
A big part of the problem is casual players using Match Points.

They would have a happier game if they stuck with PL.

But by using points they fool themselves into thinking they can and should have an opinion in balance and competitive play and they get angry when they don't comprehend they are using something not intended for them in the wrong way.

Going to sound like a snarky response, but the bigger part of the problem is IMO hyper-competitive players using points.

As they by definition aren't aiming to create balanced games but seek to find the most recent loop-hole / most undercosted combination, using PL for things like LVO, etc.. would make mathhammering more difficult and create greater diversity of lists as players find less-often seen combinations or combos using "free" gear, which just never appears with point values in a hyper competitive setting.

Not to mention that free lascannons and plasmacannons, assaultcannons, stormshields, etc.. would go some way to counter the systemic flaw of 40K towards the extremes of hordes or unkillable stuff (deathstars, knights, etc..).

Again, if players aren't trying to get on an even keel with their opponent but are actively trying to gain an edge, using points becomes a moot point and counter-productive to the aim of the entire points system.

Mmmpi wrote:I'm a casual player. Tried PL. Didn't like it.

That's cool. Each to their own. It doesn't mean that other casual players don't like it too.

I have yet to see a PL game that didn't result in a curb stomping, even between extremely casual players. Anecdotal I know, but it's what I have to work with.

It's good that you recognise it's anecdotal. Plenty of people in this thread would try and pass that on as a fact that all PL games end in curb stompings.

For what it's worth, I've only had three curbstompings since using PL, two which I handed out, and the worse one which I was dealt.
Funnily enough, all of them would have been curb stompings even if we'd been using points too.
First one was taking a Knight to a 50 PL AM vs Necrons game (which I'd cleared with my opponent beforehand - we both enjoyed the game though)
Second was AM vs Necrons, but this time, I took fewer units, didn't upgrade what units I had beyond basic weapons, but castled up. Won the game all the same, despite the Necrons probably having more points.
Third was Scions+Imperial Soup (doubles list) vs Eldar, which the Eldar smashed. Still a fun game, but even with the Eldar using baseline units, they still pulled out the win (so, they were probably underpointed too)

Every other PL game has been quite even.

 Crimson Devil wrote:




Oh for feths sake! What is broken in your brain that says everytime someone does something you don't like, it means they think they are superior to you?

Posts like this one.

I genuinely have no idea how this justifies Peregrine's speech.

Mmmpi wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
It was never directed at you, so you can't have it.

This doesn't make any sense. Please reword.

I believe it's saying "I'm not directing this at you, I'm not calling you out, so don't take it as a comment about yourself. If you want to call me out as being inflammatory to you, please use a quote where I directed it at you."

Mmmpi wrote:I play casually. I'm frustrated that I'm told I'm not a casual player because I use points and try to make decent lists. So, yeah. Keep calling it pseudo-outrage. Really productive.

I don't believe I've ever called you that. All I've asked for is people not to insult me or say my idea of fun is wrong, because I choose to use PL.
As a matter of interest, can you find a quote where someone has said that to you in this thread? I don't believe I've seen it.

If you're casual and prefer points, more power to you.

Yet nowhere that I've seen yet in this thread is there any justification for behaving like this.

Then you might want to re-read this thread because it's full of it.

I'm not seeing any of it. I'm seeing people attacking PL players because they aren't having fun in the right way, and that their personal preference is "objectively worse", but I've seen no justification for it.

At no point did anyone say you don't get to decide what you're allowed to consider fun or have fun doing.

It's been flying back and forth in both directions for what? 8 pages now?

No, the only people who've said that have been people like Peregrine. The people supporting PL, from what I've seen, have been saying "I find this fun, but you don't have to. Just don't attack me for it".

Wanting to have your own beliefs is not imposing it on other people. Belittling others for their beliefs is imposing it.

Coming in here shouting down measured conversation with accusations of virtue signalling and superiority complex's for just wanting to play a game, and then act outraged when people disagree is just incredibly toxic behavior.

If what I said doesn't apply to you, then it doesn't apply to you. There are people doing exactly what I have said they're doing. Calling people on toxic behavior isn't toxic in it's own right.

Can you quote those examples please?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Peregrine isn't a bully. He just doesn't take any gak, which is exactly what the concept of power levels is. The mental gymnastics to defend it are insane.

So, you're implying that the preference of liking PL is gak?

That's EXACTLY what I mean about Peregrine (and others) pretending like their personal opinions are factual! We shouldn't have to defend our opinions when we're not forcing them on other people! We're simply saying to the OP "This is what I like about this". That shouldn't have to be defending by people who pretend like their opinions are some kind of immutable fact!

If you like PL is gak, that's good for you. I'm not going to try and convince you that it's perfect for you and that you should change what you do to play it. I understand that you don't like it. At the same time, why should I not expect you to respect my opinions that it's fine for me? Why should I have to lower my expectations of a respectful discussion because people can't accept that opinions aren't facts?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

SHUPPET wrote:I'm fully willing to admit that I may have missed some posts or their implication, so can someone please source where all these intellectually superior posts degrading us competitive players for not being as virtuous as they? Because if not, I'm going to go ahead and say that it isn't "not taking gak" at all, rather, it's you guys just needlessly giving it.

While we did argue about PL/points earlier in this thread, I enjoyed that discussion, because at least you didn't try and personally attack me, or attempt to belittle me for liking PL. Thank you for that.

I guess I must have expected too much of other people to be like you.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Again, if players aren't trying to get on an even keel with their opponent but are actively trying to gain an edge, using points becomes a moot point and counter-productive to the aim of the entire points system.

Not sure how far I agree with this whole statement, but I've quoted the last bit because I do agree with that.

The point of competitive play is to maximise your effective power relative to your points. Points are supposed to be balanced, in that theoretically 2000 points of anything should be able to, with maybe some slight margins of error, have a 50/50 win/loss rate against another 2000 points. However, that's not true, especially not in competitive 40k.

auticus said something along the lines of "competitive players try and make your 2000 points like act like a 3000 points". At the same time, Peregrine calls PL bad because it allows for someone to make a 100 PL list (roughly 2000 points) act like a 3000 point list. If you can't see, viewers at home, they have the exact same kind of outcome, getting more bang for their buck - in the hands of a competitive player.

Maybe it speaks more about the competitive mindset* that competitive players would try and maximise their lists in both PL and in points, and less about those systems themselves.


*Note that I'm only taking what Peregrine and auticus have said about competitive players, and using that as my basis for this argument. I'm not suggesting myself that competitive players minmax, but only reappropriating what has been said. I am also not implying that to be a competitive player, or even to minmax, is inherently bad, and if that's what you enjoy, more power to you.

I'd also like to point out that peregrine has confirmed that he is not playing 8th at all, so he isn't really qualified to pass judgement on anything related to that edition.

He is also one of three people on my ignore list right now. Literally nothing he writes is worth reading.

 Jidmah wrote:
I'd also like to point out that peregrine has confirmed that he is not playing 8th at all, so he isn't really qualified to pass judgement on anything related to that edition.

That's like saying that because I'm not a doctor I can't comment on the merits of using trepanning to cure toothache.

Or I'm not a rocket scientist so I'm not qualified to state that the Challenger launch wasn't an unqualified success.

Or I've never played Big Rigs Over The Road Racing so I can't say that it's a terrible game.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Reemule wrote:
A big part of the problem is casual players using Match Points.

They would have a happier game if they stuck with PL.

But by using points they fool themselves into thinking they can and should have an opinion in balance and competitive play and they get angry when they don't comprehend they are using something not intended for them in the wrong way.

Going to sound like a snarky response, but the bigger part of the problem is IMO hyper-competitive players using points.

As they by definition aren't aiming to create balanced games but seek to find the most recent loop-hole / most undercosted combination, using PL for things like LVO, etc.. would make mathhammering more difficult and create greater diversity of lists as players find less-often seen combinations or combos using "free" gear, which just never appears with point values in a hyper competitive setting.

Not to mention that free lascannons and plasmacannons, assaultcannons, stormshields, etc.. would go some way to counter the systemic flaw of 40K towards the extremes of hordes or unkillable stuff (deathstars, knights, etc..).

Again, if players aren't trying to get on an even keel with their opponent but are actively trying to gain an edge, using points becomes a moot point and counter-productive to the aim of the entire points system.

If they don't use points what should the use?

So, I owe several people an apology. I went back through the thread to find what had gotten me to respond they way I did.

Crimson Devil: If you guys can stop being condescending, you'll get a conversation. But since Peregrine & Slayer-fan continue to act like we're a bunch of moronic donkey-caves, then no you won't.

This is an example of one of the posts I misread. Got the tone completely wrong, both for him and a couple other people, and dove right in.

Sorry for my share of the trouble. (Would have done this sooner, but I didn't have time to go back through the thread until now.)

 Mmmpi wrote:
So, I owe several people an apology. I went back through the thread to find what had gotten me to respond they way I did.

Crimson Devil: If you guys can stop being condescending, you'll get a conversation. But since Peregrine & Slayer-fan continue to act like we're a bunch of moronic donkey-caves, then no you won't.

This is an example of one of the posts I misread. Got the tone completely wrong, both for him and a couple other people, and dove right in.

Sorry for my share of the trouble. (Would have done this sooner, but I didn't have time to go back through the thread until now.)

It did look strange it seemed almost entirely unprovoked, I figured something must have gotten confused because I genuinely couldn't see the posts that had anyone feeling targeted. I myself can't stand when casuals throw darts at anyone who enjoys playing the game different to them, so I'd be the first to support you if I had seen it too. I have respect for you being my willing to admit a mistake, many people just charged forward anyway out of pride. Looks like this was simply another thread trashed by Peregrine's needless hostility and toxic attitude

For all you guys complaining about Peregrine, use the ignore feature. If nobody ever replies because everyone is fed up by the toxicity from this account, it’ll go away. I have Peregrine on ignore, and my Dakka experience is way better for it. Peregrine’s opinion gets forced and treated like fact against all of us. Use ignore, and have a better day. I did! :Thumbsup:

 Mmmpi wrote:
So, I owe several people an apology. I went back through the thread to find what had gotten me to respond they way I did.

Crimson Devil: If you guys can stop being condescending, you'll get a conversation. But since Peregrine & Slayer-fan continue to act like we're a bunch of moronic donkey-caves, then no you won't.

This is an example of one of the posts I misread. Got the tone completely wrong, both for him and a couple other people, and dove right in.

Sorry for my share of the trouble. (Would have done this sooner, but I didn't have time to go back through the thread until now.)

Don't worry about it. Mistakes happen whether you use points or power level.

I am casual (semi comp at moments) and I love points. I like building lists. For me, and I am only speaking for me, power levels take a lot of the fun out of the game. I am sure I am not alone, but it is not the only way to play. And I probably could be asked to play with power levels as long as the next game is points. On a rules level, and perhaps I am ignorant here, but it seems that weapon and unit upgrades are not taken in to account. I do not think this is a good way to go about things. I could be very very wrong. But seeing as I have never even seen people use power levels (my area) my knowledge is cursory at best and probably wrong at worst.

I think people swing hard on power levels is because they do not want them to take hold as a "legit" thing. Like it or not, overall ideas are used for pug games. List points may change from shop to garage but on average you can expect PuG's at 1850-2000. It is nice to have a overall standard. Maybe ill give PL's a try at my next games if I can find like minded people.

Also I find I agree with Pere more often than not. And I am very sure I am not a "WAAC" power gamer. Hell, I even hate to use soup unless its very very fluffy (which it always almost is not.....marines do not fight like IG nor would they be deployed as such). I don't see why he should be blocked by anyone. But to each his own.

People are mad that he's telling them the PL system is bad. Because it IS bad. Granularity creates more balance than relying on players to make balance. The latter can still be done with points anyway.

Plus it isn't hard to make a list for a pickup game on the fly.

It's not the message, it the delivery.

Mmmpi wrote:So, I owe several people an apology. I went back through the thread to find what had gotten me to respond they way I did.

Crimson Devil: If you guys can stop being condescending, you'll get a conversation. But since Peregrine & Slayer-fan continue to act like we're a bunch of moronic donkey-caves, then no you won't.

This is an example of one of the posts I misread. Got the tone completely wrong, both for him and a couple other people, and dove right in.

Sorry for my share of the trouble. (Would have done this sooner, but I didn't have time to go back through the thread until now.)

We all make mistakes, thank you for coming back and admitting that. It is much appreciated and respected.

timetowaste85 wrote:For all you guys complaining about Peregrine, use the ignore feature. If nobody ever replies because everyone is fed up by the toxicity from this account, it’ll go away. I have Peregrine on ignore, and my Dakka experience is way better for it. Peregrine’s opinion gets forced and treated like fact against all of us. Use ignore, and have a better day. I did! :Thumbsup:

Whilst ignoring is an option, that's essentially letting Peregrine get away with bullying people into silence.

Toxicity shouldn't be essentially excused and allowed because "if you don't like it, don't try and show that toxicity isn't okay".
I appreciate the feature of the ignore button, but that doesn't change the toxicity in this thread.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:People are mad that he's telling them the PL system is bad. Because it IS bad. Granularity creates more balance than relying on players to make balance. The latter can still be done with points anyway.

No, bad is subjective, unless you're calling it objectively bad at something empirical. "PL is bad (subjective) because it has less granularity (objective) than points" is the fixed version of what you're saying. That would be fine to say. The problem is, you treat the subjective as an objective instead.
Alternatively, you could say "PL has the potential to be less balanced, and is bad at balance" would be objective.

Saying "PL is bad" is your opinion. In my opinion, it is good. Is that just as truthful as yours? Technically yes, because neither are truthful at all. They're opinions, and subjective.

I'm also less mad about the fact he's calling PL bad like it's a fact, and not an opinion, and more about the fact that he, and yourself, are calling the people who use it bad. You're not attacking the PL system. You're insulting the people who use it.

Plus it isn't hard to make a list for a pickup game on the fly.

It might not be hard, but it's even easier with Power Level. It might not be by a considerable amount, but you can't deny that calculating 1+1 is easier than 1+1+1+1+1+1+1

I'm not insulting the people using it. I'm insulting the people defending it as a legit system to create armies with.