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.

Right. Yet again you're implying the casual player has all those things, or knows anti-tank is required. Fluffbunnies are a thing, are they in the wrong?

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Right. Yet again you're implying the casual player has all those things, or knows anti-tank is required. Fluffbunnies are a thing, are they in the wrong?

Yes, because even a fluff bunny can look at their own codex and see units that they can't easily kill with purer greentide. Or is this hypothetical fluff bunny supposed to have stopped reading before they saw the Stompa?

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Right. Yet again you're implying the casual player has all those things, or knows anti-tank is required. Fluffbunnies are a thing, are they in the wrong?

Did you miss where I said...

 JNAProductions wrote:
If a player REPEATEDLY brings Knights when you lack the tools to counter them (say, you're new to the hobby and don't have a good collection yet) then yeah, they're a jerk and a dingus. But if you just say "Hey, want to play a 2k game?" and they say yes, you should generally be bringing a TAC list that can handle most things.

Because it sure seems like you did.

In addition to that, fluffy=/=bad. A perfectly fluffy Space Marine Battle Company, while not tournament level or super cutthroat, is a powerful list still.

As for knowing anti-tank is required, well, I would expect anyone with moderate experience (say, a dozen games or more) to know that, yeah, you need something to handle big, tough models. They're not uncommon.

I won't say there's NO responsibility on the end of the winner, but it'd be foolish to say there's no responsibility on the loser either. The winner should, ideally, tone down their list if they face the same person in the future, as well as offering advice on how the loser can better their list. But if the loser of the match just says something like "Well, I'm not changing what I do, YOU CHANGE to make a better game for me!" they can feth off.

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Right. Yet again you're implying the casual player has all those things, or knows anti-tank is required. Fluffbunnies are a thing, are they in the wrong?

I've run fluffy Night Lords since fething 3rd edition, and I fething know how to beat a fething knight list. Just because someone cares about the fluff doesn't mean they don't have a clue about how the game works.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Right. Yet again you're implying the casual player has all those things, or knows anti-tank is required. Fluffbunnies are a thing, are they in the wrong?

I've run fluffy Night Lords since fething 3rd edition, and I fething know how to beat a fething knight list. Just because someone cares about the fluff doesn't mean they don't have a clue about how the game works.

Congrats on playing the game for 20+ years!
What about Timmy who's just finished reading the novels and is building a luna wolves list full of tactical marines.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Right. Yet again you're implying the casual player has all those things, or knows anti-tank is required. Fluffbunnies are a thing, are they in the wrong?

Did you miss where I said...

Nah, I saw it. It's the "Repeatedly" part where you're wrong. Knights in casual games are bad (I'm talking about pick up and play, no discusison beforehand).
If there is discussion beforehand it's totally fine as long as both people agree.

And it isn't really "just some" anti tank, if you are going up against a knight list and have "some" anti-tank it wont really cut it, thus the degeneracy.

So do you only consider a tabling a victory? Because again-you should be winning on objectives VERY HARD with an Ork Horde against a Knight list.

 JNAProductions wrote:
So do you only consider a tabling a victory? Because again-you should be winning on objectives VERY HARD with an Ork Horde against a Knight list.

Casual, pick up and play isn't always objectives. Hell, a lot of timmy's-first-game I've seen is just a shooting gallery.

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Casual, pick up and play isn't always objectives. Hell, a lot of timmy's-first-game I've seen is just a shooting gallery.

That Knights player could equally be upset about the all boyz list if their first game was objectives based, so...

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So do you only consider a tabling a victory? Because again-you should be winning on objectives VERY HARD with an Ork Horde against a Knight list.

Casual, pick up and play isn't always objectives. Hell, a lot of timmy's-first-game I've seen is just a shooting gallery.

Okay, so clearly, we shouldn't include any models that someone might not like in their first game. No Leman Russes (they shoot 40 shots! and are T8!), no Knights (they have an invuln AND are T8!), no Custodes (T5 and 2+/4++ on a troop!), no Plaguebearers (they come 30 strong, are -1 to-hit, AND have layered saves!), no Harlequins (they can move so fast, shoot, charge, fall back, shoot, charge, it's crazy!), no Space Marines at all (they get extra AP on their weapons just for being there!), so on and so forth.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So do you only consider a tabling a victory? Because again-you should be winning on objectives VERY HARD with an Ork Horde against a Knight list.

Casual, pick up and play isn't always objectives. Hell, a lot of timmy's-first-game I've seen is just a shooting gallery.

Okay, so clearly, we shouldn't include any models that someone might not like in their first game. No Leman Russes (they shoot 40 shots! and are T8!), no Knights (they have an invuln AND are T8!), no Custodes (T5 and 2+/4++ on a troop!), no Plaguebearers (they come 30 strong, are -1 to-hit, AND have layered saves!), no Harlequins (they can move so fast, shoot, charge, fall back, shoot, charge, it's crazy!), no Space Marines at all (they get extra AP on their weapons just for being there!), so on and so forth.

No. Any Skew lists that require specific things to counter them is bad.
An all flier list, all leman russ etc etc.

Yet again, if you want to run a gamer list just talk to the person before hand.

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So do you only consider a tabling a victory? Because again-you should be winning on objectives VERY HARD with an Ork Horde against a Knight list.

Casual, pick up and play isn't always objectives. Hell, a lot of timmy's-first-game I've seen is just a shooting gallery.

Okay, so clearly, we shouldn't include any models that someone might not like in their first game. No Leman Russes (they shoot 40 shots! and are T8!), no Knights (they have an invuln AND are T8!), no Custodes (T5 and 2+/4++ on a troop!), no Plaguebearers (they come 30 strong, are -1 to-hit, AND have layered saves!), no Harlequins (they can move so fast, shoot, charge, fall back, shoot, charge, it's crazy!), no Space Marines at all (they get extra AP on their weapons just for being there!), so on and so forth.

No. Any Skew lists that require specific things to counter them is bad.
An all flier list, all leman russ etc etc.

Yet again, if you want to run a gamer list just talk to the person before hand.

If you want to run a poorly-optimized "fluffy" list, just talk to the person beforehand.

It cuts both ways.

 JNAProductions wrote:
If you want to run a poorly-optimized "fluffy" list, just talk to the person beforehand.

It cuts both ways.

Take it from a poster who can be stubborn, as you yourself have seen, Eonfuzz is trolling us right now and he'll keep moving the goalposts until you give up. There's a reason he's started ignoring all my replies.

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So do you only consider a tabling a victory? Because again-you should be winning on objectives VERY HARD with an Ork Horde against a Knight list.

Casual, pick up and play isn't always objectives. Hell, a lot of timmy's-first-game I've seen is just a shooting gallery.

Okay, so clearly, we shouldn't include any models that someone might not like in their first game. No Leman Russes (they shoot 40 shots! and are T8!), no Knights (they have an invuln AND are T8!), no Custodes (T5 and 2+/4++ on a troop!), no Plaguebearers (they come 30 strong, are -1 to-hit, AND have layered saves!), no Harlequins (they can move so fast, shoot, charge, fall back, shoot, charge, it's crazy!), no Space Marines at all (they get extra AP on their weapons just for being there!), so on and so forth.

No. Any Skew lists that require specific things to counter them is bad.
An all flier list, all leman russ etc etc.

Yet again, if you want to run a gamer list just talk to the person before hand.

A horde list is a skew list.

And how did we go from "fluff bunnies" to "Little Timmy "?

Please excuse me, I have a search party to get together, got to find those goal posts.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So do you only consider a tabling a victory? Because again-you should be winning on objectives VERY HARD with an Ork Horde against a Knight list.

Casual, pick up and play isn't always objectives. Hell, a lot of timmy's-first-game I've seen is just a shooting gallery.

Okay, so clearly, we shouldn't include any models that someone might not like in their first game. No Leman Russes (they shoot 40 shots! and are T8!), no Knights (they have an invuln AND are T8!), no Custodes (T5 and 2+/4++ on a troop!), no Plaguebearers (they come 30 strong, are -1 to-hit, AND have layered saves!), no Harlequins (they can move so fast, shoot, charge, fall back, shoot, charge, it's crazy!), no Space Marines at all (they get extra AP on their weapons just for being there!), so on and so forth.

No. Any Skew lists that require specific things to counter them is bad.
An all flier list, all leman russ etc etc.

Yet again, if you want to run a gamer list just talk to the person before hand.

A horde list is a skew list.

And how did we go from "fluff bunnies" to "Little Timmy "?

Please excuse me, I have a search party to get together, got to find those goal posts.

Hate to say it, but little timmy is GW's target market.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
If you want to run a poorly-optimized "fluffy" list, just talk to the person beforehand.

It cuts both ways.

Take it from a poster who can be stubborn, as you yourself have seen, Eonfuzz is trolling us right now and he'll keep moving the goalposts until you give up. There's a reason he's started ignoring all my replies.

Skipping 1 post does not mean "ignoring all of your replies" lmao.
Look, the onus is on the person who knows more about the game to warn the other player.

Generally, fluff bunnies play the game not for its mechanics, generally little timmy doesn't know he must have an adequate amount of anti tank. Generally, the gamer who plays knights knows more about the rules.

If the person who knows their list is unfun, or requires specific things to have an even playing field doesn't talk about it that's some degenerate play.

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Hate to say it, but little timmy is GW's target market.

Why did you ignore the comment about a horde list being a skew list?

Look, the onus is on the person who knows more about the game to warn the other player.

This isn't what you were arguing before. Your specific complaint was an all boyz army versus a knight, so why are we now talking about new players?

Generally, fluff bunnies play the game not for its mechanics, generally little timmy doesn't know he must have an adequate amount of anti tank. Generally, the gamer who plays knights knows more about the rules.

Why can't Timmy play Imperial Knights? Or Leman Russ spam? Or Fliers?

If the person who knows their list is unfun, or requires specific things to have an even playing field doesn't talk about it that's some degenerate play.

You mean like if a person brings a horde list against Imperial Knights and wins on objectives?

 DarkHound wrote:
What's the consensus on the inclusion of superheavies? Both in general and in pick-up games at an LGS. At what point levels is it more acceptable to field one (or more)? Are there any that are particularly unfair? I'm especially interested in Knight Titans.

Well, in the circles I play in, the attitude has always been "Bring it on."
The only limitations have been 1) must fit within the pts (we don't allow lists to exceed the stated amount, not even by a pt), 2) your list must be legal.

As for unfair? Whatever I lose to of course.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Using knights outside of tournaments is pretty degenerate, but that's more of a balancing issue than a pick up and play contract.

Well since I & those I play with don't do tourneys.... Fortunately we don't share your PoV on this subject.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Right. Yet again you're implying the casual player has all those things, or knows anti-tank is required. Fluffbunnies are a thing, are they in the wrong?

If they don't realize they need AT they will if they come play with me & mine (regardless of knights being fielded).
Or they'll have to figure out some other way of dealing with armor.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Right. Yet again you're implying the casual player has all those things, or knows anti-tank is required. Fluffbunnies are a thing, are they in the wrong?

I've run fluffy Night Lords since fething 3rd edition, and I fething know how to beat a fething knight list. Just because someone cares about the fluff doesn't mean they don't have a clue about how the game works.

Congrats on playing the game for 20+ years!
What about Timmy who's just finished reading the novels and is building a luna wolves list full of tactical marines.

Timmy will soon be filing an order for some AT units.

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Using knights outside of tournaments is pretty degenerate, but that's more of a balancing issue than a pick up and play contract.

.

Lol. Why? You don't know how to deal with them? Plenty of ways.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:
220 points for 4 damage bois yeee haw goteeeem

If you only run boyz you're not going to have much anti-tank. More at 11.

Hold up, aren't we talking about pick up and play games? Are you saying that Ork players can't run Orks?
I was using it as an example of why Knights are degenerate in casual games lmao.

So you bring 2000 pts of only orks so like...285 orks?

You realize right other armies would find THAT boring to face and not have enough shots to deal with either...You spam one dimensional list, there's always going to be hard counters.

Not to mention only noobs play kill point only so you can still be easily favourite.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

But with casual play you can't make any assumptions about lists. The example I was making above is the ideal "Ork Horde" of a massive green tide. Versus that one guy that brings in knights.
We, on the forums for the game, know that just green tide is bad against mechanized lists, but that casual ork player versus the knight gamer doesn't know that.

So you think casual game means one dimensional boring ork boy only spam list that hard counters other armies even better than your army gets countered by knights...

Lol. Guess your meta is full of armies only boy spam hard counters and you enjoy roflstomping them. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCC!!!!

Sure, good for you that you play with regulars and you already know what to expect. Weird flex, but okay.

I'm talking about casual games here, not "I know these people".

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Why did you ignore the comment about a horde list being a skew list?

Because a fluffy greenie ork tide isn't a flavour of the month WAAC build.

This isn't what you were arguing before. Your specific complaint was an all boyz army versus a knight, so why are we now talking about new players?

My specific point was playing a Knights list in a casual match is degenerate.
Not sure why you feel like me bringing up Ork Boyz being bad against Super Heavies eclipses every other discussion that's taken place here.

Why can't Timmy play Imperial Knights? Or Leman Russ spam? Or Fliers?

Sure, but if you had taken half a moment to read my posts (Which you were complaining I didn't fyi) You'd see that I'm arguing about the burden of knowledge.
A dude picking FOTM lists would generally have a better idea of the game than a casual guy, thus it's on them to talk about it.

You mean like if a person brings a horde list against Imperial Knights and wins on objectives?

Yet again you bring up me talking about Orks being weak. Are you by any chance upset about that? Chill lmao



Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

- snip -
So you think casual game means one dimensional boring ork boy only spam list that hard counters other armies even better than your army gets countered by knights...

Lol. Guess your meta is full of armies only boy spam hard counters and you enjoy roflstomping them. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCC!!!!

No, it was a single example of fluffbunny just like I used the tactical marine list earlier.
How hard is to accept that you talk about stuff before hand if you're bringing gamer stuff.

Not hard.

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Because a fluffy greenie ork tide isn't a flavour of the month WAAC build.

Nor are Imperial Knights or Leman Russ heavy lists so...

My specific point was playing a Knights list in a casual match is degenerate.
Not sure why you feel like me bringing up Ork Boyz being bad against Super Heavies eclipses every other discussion that's taken place here.

Which is why you only brought up a unit of boyz... I guess you may have also mentioned Space Marines but that build wouldn't have issues with Knights so....

Sure, but if you had taken half a moment to read my posts (Which you were complaining I didn't fyi) You'd see that I'm arguing about the burden of knowledge.
A dude picking FOTM lists would generally have a better idea of the game than a casual guy, thus it's on them to talk about it.

None of those lists are tournament quality...

it's a question about having the tools to atleast be able to deal with each others army.

F.e. i also would never subject a knight pure player to my 200 man renegade guard build for the simple fact that it is more or less a forgone conclusion due to objectives.

Basically to get an interesting list i'd avoid skew lists of anykind and superheavies are skew par excellence.

 DarkHound wrote:
What's the consensus on the inclusion of superheavies? Both in general and in pick-up games at an LGS. At what point levels is it more acceptable to field one (or more)? Are there any that are particularly unfair? I'm especially interested in Knight Titans.

When I'm playing Guard, I bring my Shadowsword starting at around 1500 points, if I can expect it to survive and perform well in the matchup [IE, if I know there will be tanks for it to shoot and it won't just die. Even at 2000 points losing 500 points in a pass a heavy blow]. Fewer points and it's too much of my army in one asset, which is crippling to me when I lose it. Even at 1500 I feel it's questionable. The Shadowsword is a good counter to other super heavies, so I also bring it if my enemy has fancy toys they like, since it's excellent for sniping their fancy shinies and making them sad.

A cheaper superheavy would definitely be an asset at lower point levels. Bring one only when you have more assets to compensate for it's loss so it's less integral and less crippling if/when it is destroyed, and you can protect it better since you have assets to suppress their equipment that's trying to destroy it. At really low points, it's too easily countered to actually win the game even if they don't destroy it, and while it seems that it would face fewer counters, most super heavies are far more destructive than they are resilient so they can destroy it more easily than they can other assets at it's cost point, especially as you get bigger, and they pay heavily for that firepower, so the more of your army is super-heavy the more fragile it is in the end and the more power you'll lose when it goes down.

 Eonfuzz wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

- snip -
So you think casual game means one dimensional boring ork boy only spam list that hard counters other armies even better than your army gets countered by knights...

Lol. Guess your meta is full of armies only boy spam hard counters and you enjoy roflstomping them. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCC!!!!

No, it was a single example of fluffbunny just like I used the tactical marine list earlier.
How hard is to accept that you talk about stuff before hand if you're bringing gamer stuff.

Not hard.

An army made up of only Tactical Marines isn't a fluffy list though, just a terrible one. A fluffy SM list would be the very definition of combined arms with a variety of Tactical, Assault and Devastator units backed up with some Primaris and a vehicle or two. Similarly your "fluffy" green tide isn't so much a fluffy list as just a bad one, and if it's nothing but Boyz it's just as much a skew list as the Knight list is. If an army can't deal with a single Knight, either by killing it or ignoring it and playing objectives, it's not the Knight player's fault.

I'll agree that all-Knight lists are not a great experience in casual play, but the same goes for any skew list IMO. The reason Knights tend to get singled out is because pure Knights have no option but to be a skew list whereas other armies always have an option to bring non-skew forces. The big problem with your attitude here is you seem to insist that only one of the skew lists needs to change because of some internal definition of fluffy or casual that may not apply to everyone else. Why is it up to the Knight player to change his list and not the Ork player who may well have an equally skewed list?

They aren't fun to play against when nothing you have can put a dent in them and they delete 1-2 units a turn.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
They aren't fun to play against when nothing you have can put a dent in them and they delete 1-2 units a turn.

Well you could say that about loads of things, it's not like lords of war are that different. Like anything, there are reasonable amounts and there are OP amounts/combos. A Baneblade isn't really any worse than equal points of Russes.

I would say that a single LoW is something people should be prepared to play against, so doesn't really need any special consideration. If I want to bring a Knight or Shadowsword to a 1.5k+ game I think that is reasonable. Of course, there are limits to what is "reasonable". I think that having a baneblade at 500 is a bit odd, so you should expect some people not to be too eager.

They represent a scale that I do not enjoy or want to play at, it’s why I did not play apoc in the first place.

Pushing them into 40k sucked and I think has pushed a lot of the model line out of the game thematically and with the way rules are designed now.

Like with most things, being mindful of others is key and hopefully compromise can be found.
People can play in more than group as well
Asking what kinda of game people are interested in is good, working out what needs to be discussed is the hard part.

Apple fox wrote:
Like with most things, being mindful of others is key and hopefully compromise can be found.
People can play in more than group as well
Asking what kinda of game people are interested in is good, working out what needs to be discussed is the hard part.

Exactly. Sure, if you want to play blind pickup games you have to expect to see things you don't like so much. However, a bit of a pre-game discussion can improve things vastly for both players. There can be people who take advantage of this, of course. Someone who when you say "are you ok with a baneblade?" says sure, then just so happens to pull out their lascannon list.

It's all about respect and good sportsmanship really.

 Trickstick wrote:
Well you could say that about loads of things, it's not like lords of war are that different. Like anything, there are reasonable amounts and there are OP amounts/combos. A Baneblade isn't really any worse than equal points of Russes.

I had a Castellan remove a third of my army before I even got a second turn. And it killed the allied Stormsurge to boot.

As I said. It was't a fun game.

I do own a Knight since they were originally released and only ever used it in two games where a friend of mine used his as well.

I would never use it without telling my opponent and in a random game I ask about any Knight like models in advance.

My personal line of "it is alright bringing it without asking before" is somewhere around the 200pts mark for non vehicle models.

The etiquette is to put it in your army list and then put it on the table using the options you paid for. Job done.

maybe let your opponent know what you are playing, what 'strategy' you are going to bring to the table. For instance, I have 2 Stormsurges, 2 Tigersharks, lots of infantry, a lot of drones, and a slew of other options, each of which can allow me to skew my lists in several directions. When my opponent finds out I play Tau, the only thing that (she\he\they) can assume is that I am not bringing psykers.
The rest of you?
Remember, Strategy then Tactics.
Strategy: what you bring to the field.
Tactics: what you do on the field.
Personally, I don't like when an ork player brings psykers. Why? Ballistic Skill. Smite, which isn't a shooting attack allows my opponent to bypass their frankly abysmal ballistic skill, and reliably put wounds on models that I thought were safely bubble wrapped.