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.

 Dysartes wrote:

ccs, I wouldn't say he's crying about it - just annoyed that it was sprung on him as a gotcha. For example, would it have killed his opponent to say "I'm going to be using the Faith & Fury material for Alpha Legion - are you familiar with it?" before the game?

Pff. He's bitching about it on-line to any random person who reads his post. He's definitely crying about it.

Posting about it in one single thread where the topic came up is hardly that. Quit being judgmental.

a_typical_hero wrote:
Gotcha moments always felt cheap to me. Doesn't matter if it is me or my opponent having it. I don't see any benefit for the mutual enjoyment of the game if such things happen.

Same logic applies if someone forgot to advance with a unit and already cast a spell (and similar situations). Of course they can still advance. As long as I don't feel there is some kind of scheme behind it, why should I say no? In my last game three different Tyranid units charged my lone character model armed with a plasma pistol at the same time. He wanted to move his big Trygon(?) first instead of the Gaunts and I reminded him of the pistol being there, so he should charge with the disposable unit first in case I would hit. Losing the Trygon in that moment would have felt very bitter for him, I am sure.

This. Gotcha moments in a game where there is (almost) no hidden information have nothing to do with skill.

 Dysartes wrote:
For anyone who is treating this hobby as a hobby - not something they're 100% laser-focused on at all times, and not something that consumes all their free time like a second job - then it is reasonable not to be aware of new things.

Going to a tournament, especially one with prizes on the line? Sure, you should probably do some research into what's new (though tournaments often have the good sense to say that new material released X days before the event won't be used), but for an allegedly "friendly" game at the LGS? No, that's an unreasonable position to take.

Frankly, in this instance the_scotsman was facing an opponent who was at least partially TFG.

ccs, I wouldn't say he's crying about it - just annoyed that it was sprung on him as a gotcha. For example, would it have killed his opponent to say "I'm going to be using the Faith & Fury material for Alpha Legion - are you familiar with it?" before the game?

Is there a time frame wherein people should be expected to know these rules? Is it longer than one week, shorter, indefinite? Would this excuse extend to a recreational sports league where a rule change was made in the offseason and somebody comes to the game wearing illegal equipment or takes a penalty because of a change?

Also, tournaments postpone introducing major rules changes for army list/painting reasons not due to a gotcha moment where one player doesn't know a rule.

Scotsman could equally have asked his opponent if the new book had anything he should worry about in it or even asked if there was a rule that would change how he would want to deep strike before attempting to place a unit. The responsibility runs both ways but the expectation is that both players know the rules of the game they're playing.

 vict0988 wrote:
No excuse to not have done your hobby homework that is released what 12 times a year? What about actual homework? Who said one week? How about games on the day of release? How many games do you try to get in before the one week mark to gotcha as many people as possible before they've done their hobby homework?

I assume that if you have the time to game you have the time to invest in knowing the rules of the game. I play games that release impactful patches and new characters every few weeks, I'm expected to read and understand those patch notes before I play as otherwise, I'll drag my team down. This means at least having a baseline understanding of the rules the day the patch drops if not a few days before.

Also, it was scotsman who said it was about a week after release so I'm arguing based on that. The day of I and many other people at the shop would probably be talking about the new rule and how to try using it; this would make any complaints of not knowing the rule pretty invalid.

Dozens of individualized faction Stratagems with new ones being released for at least a couple of factions every few months is too much hobby homework when you add FAQ/Errata and new missions on top. That is too big a requirement to be a casual wargamer. I'd agree that GW is basically asking for piracy with what they're releasing in their books and how they're releasing them, reading a book aloud or showing it page-by-page is the same as sharing a pdf, what YouTubers are doing is as much piracy as what wahapedia is doing. I don't like to mention wahapedia too much, it's the only thing keeping things sane for me and I don't want GW to shut it down.

Look at the bi-weekly patch notes for a game like League of Legends, or the major patch notes for a game like Escape from Tarkov. These are as much or more work to read and understand as any GW update and you'll lose/have less fun for not having done your homework so why should it be different on the tabletop?

a_typical_hero wrote:
Gotcha moments always felt cheap to me. Doesn't matter if it is me or my opponent having it. I don't see any benefit for the mutual enjoyment of the game if such things happen.

Same logic applies if someone forgot to advance with a unit and already cast a spell (and similar situations). Of course they can still advance. As long as I don't feel there is some kind of scheme behind it, why should I say no? In my last game three different Tyranid units charged my lone character model armed with a plasma pistol at the same time. He wanted to move his big Trygon(?) first instead of the Gaunts and I reminded him of the pistol being there, so he should charge with the disposable unit first in case I would hit. Losing the Trygon in that moment would have felt very bitter for him, I am sure.

You should let your opponents make mistakes and eat the consequences. They won't learn or grow as a player if they always get a redo and might even have a seriously bad time against somebody who doesn't play that way if they get used to being handled with kid gloves.

 Jidmah wrote:
This. Gotcha moments in a game where there is (almost) no hidden information have nothing to do with skill.

So I guess a doctor who didn't read half of his textbooks is just as skilled as one who knows his inside and out then?

 Canadian 5th wrote:
So I guess a doctor who didn't read half of his textbooks

In this thread: People claiming that playing 40k is equivalent to studying to become a doctor.

This spectacle is amazing and saddening.

It depends on the situation, of course. A high stakes tournament game is different to a friendly pickup game. Ideally this should be something you discuss before a game, so you are on the same page. Better for both players if they expect the same things from a game.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
For anyone who is treating this hobby as a hobby - not something they're 100% laser-focused on at all times, and not something that consumes all their free time like a second job - then it is reasonable not to be aware of new things.

Going to a tournament, especially one with prizes on the line? Sure, you should probably do some research into what's new (though tournaments often have the good sense to say that new material released X days before the event won't be used), but for an allegedly "friendly" game at the LGS? No, that's an unreasonable position to take.

Frankly, in this instance the_scotsman was facing an opponent who was at least partially TFG.

ccs, I wouldn't say he's crying about it - just annoyed that it was sprung on him as a gotcha. For example, would it have killed his opponent to say "I'm going to be using the Faith & Fury material for Alpha Legion - are you familiar with it?" before the game?

Is there a time frame wherein people should be expected to know these rules? Is it longer than one week, shorter, indefinite? Would this excuse extend to a recreational sports league where a rule change was made in the offseason and somebody comes to the game wearing illegal equipment or takes a penalty because of a change?

In the Yugioh card-game there is a concept of a ruleshark, not someone that merely enforces the rules, but lets their opponent cheat long enough that the game state cannot be easily fixed and they get awarded a win when they could have stopped their opponent immediately upon seeing an illegal action happen and played the game out. If you are trying to gotcha your opponent with rules they don't know about in a casual game you're not following a high level of sportsmanship. I'd say this is indefinite, if you're playing casually you should never try to get an advantage from hiding knowledge your opponent could have had by doing better homework in terms of reading what's written by GW not studying tactics and combos. I've gotten gotcha'd by lots of people, I am pretty sure I've been hit by every one in the game at this point because I read new rules when I'm interested in the faction and what it can do, not as hobby homework. I don't ask people to tell me everything and I don't get mad when something new is revealed, it's just a minor negative experience, like the dice favouring one player too much over the other or any of the bazillion other small things that makes 40k less amazing.

 vict0988 wrote:
No excuse to not have done your hobby homework that is released what 12 times a year? What about actual homework? Who said one week? How about games on the day of release? How many games do you try to get in before the one week mark to gotcha as many people as possible before they've done their hobby homework?

I assume that if you have the time to game you have the time to invest in knowing the rules of the game. I play games that release impactful patches and new characters every few weeks, I'm expected to read and understand those patch notes before I play as otherwise, I'll drag my team down. This means at least having a baseline understanding of the rules the day the patch drops if not a few days before.

Dozens of individualized faction Stratagems with new ones being released for at least a couple of factions every few months is too much hobby homework when you add FAQ/Errata and new missions on top. That is too big a requirement to be a casual wargamer. I'd agree that GW is basically asking for piracy with what they're releasing in their books and how they're releasing them, reading a book aloud or showing it page-by-page is the same as sharing a pdf, what YouTubers are doing is as much piracy as what wahapedia is doing. I don't like to mention wahapedia too much, it's the only thing keeping things sane for me and I don't want GW to shut it down.

Look at the bi-weekly patch notes for a game like League of Legends, or the major patch notes for a game like Escape from Tarkov. These are as much or more work to read and understand as any GW update and you'll lose/have less fun for not having done your homework so why should it be different on the tabletop?

In casual play? I might check if my characters have been buffed in LOL, but sometimes I'll play a champion I haven't picked up in months or years, I won't know what that champion's last three updates did to them, I might not even check the optimal build-path for them and instead go with how I want to play that champion. Nobody would disagree if you specified competitive for both of these, if you're playing a champion you're bad at in ranked or if you show up to a tournament without any knowledge of your opponent's Stratagems you should expect to get crushed.

Also, it was scotsman who said it was about a week after release so I'm arguing based on that. The day of I and many other people at the shop would probably be talking about the new rule and how to try using it; this would make any complaints of not knowing the rule pretty invalid.

How can anyone get a gotcha in if everyone knows the rules? There clearly isn't a problem at your shop if everyone has agreed to chat before you play games and everyone knows every new Stratagem that has come out. What about if someone doesn't hang around the club and talk shop as much as the regulars? Do they deserve to get crushed for not being part of the in-group?

a_typical_hero wrote:
Gotcha moments always felt cheap to me. Doesn't matter if it is me or my opponent having it. I don't see any benefit for the mutual enjoyment of the game if such things happen.

Same logic applies if someone forgot to advance with a unit and already cast a spell (and similar situations). Of course they can still advance. As long as I don't feel there is some kind of scheme behind it, why should I say no? In my last game three different Tyranid units charged my lone character model armed with a plasma pistol at the same time. He wanted to move his big Trygon(?) first instead of the Gaunts and I reminded him of the pistol being there, so he should charge with the disposable unit first in case I would hit. Losing the Trygon in that moment would have felt very bitter for him, I am sure.

You should let your opponents make mistakes and eat the consequences. They won't learn or grow as a player if they always get a redo and might even have a seriously bad time against somebody who doesn't play that way if they get used to being handled with kid gloves.

That should be left up to the players at the table and in casual games it's generally way more fun to play casually. When I got into being strict with myself I had a good chunk of games that were way less fun because I forgot stuff and didn't let myself go back, then in some of those games I also didn't let my opponent go back and the games had a negative vibe. I think the key is agreeing with your opponent on what kind of vibe you want in your game, a competitive vibe can be super fun, especially if both players know what they're doing with their faction and against the faction they are playing against.

 Jidmah wrote:
This. Gotcha moments in a game where there is (almost) no hidden information have nothing to do with skill.

So I guess a doctor who didn't read half of his textbooks is just as skilled as one who knows his inside and out then?

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
This. Gotcha moments in a game where there is (almost) no hidden information have nothing to do with skill.

So I guess a doctor who didn't read half of his textbooks is just as skilled as one who knows his inside and out then?

You seem to be under the impression that reading textbooks is all there is to becoming a doctor.
And no, reading textbooks does not improve skill outside or RPGs.

 Jidmah wrote:
And no, reading textbooks does not improve skill outside or RPGs.

Well it could a person's your reading skill...

(-:

Nonsense, roleplaying is an innate skill, roll-playing is learned by reading. Very different skillsets. Though even roll-playing is helped more by knowing statistics than reading the rulebook thoroughly.

I was referring to RPGs where you would pick up a book and instantly gain +1 to whatever is on the cover.

 vict0988 wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:
Would you also ask for an undo if you made a move in chess, hand fully off the piece, and your opponent informed you that it would lead to mate in two via a pair of moves you'd never seen before?

If a new move or rule was added to chess then yeah. That's the problem with constantly adding new gotcha rules. GW should have kept it to Relics and WL traits and specialist detachments instead of just adding always available stratagems, if it's a relic/WL trait/specialist detachment your opponent has to announce it and you can ask what those do. Do you really want your opponent to have to read your supplement just before the game starts or would you rather warn them of incoming new rules? I guess you just want to crush your opponent for not doing their hobby homework, kind of lame.

I'd agree with you if it weren't for the fact that, the moment we get leaks or rules confirmation, some of us here get straight to work on what's broken, what's garbage, or what's gimmicky. In the current age of technology you should have a reasonable assumption of what an opponent's army can do. I won't let them take back mistakes and I certainly won't take back mine simply because that kind of coddling doesn't let you grow. We aren't five years old and trying to figure out the rules for a game.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

There's also no rule against you deliberately doing things to confuse your opponent with your models, like having a fully painted up catachan army but deploying them on the table as 3 different non-catachan regiments, or against deploying your leman russes behind a building and tilting their gun barrels up to draw LOS on your shooting phase and then pushing them back down after they shoot.

The LR thing sounds like a smart tactic and makes sense if you think of it as them using indirect fire.

pretty sure you're not allowed to change how your models are modeled mid-fight

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

There's also no rule against you deliberately doing things to confuse your opponent with your models, like having a fully painted up catachan army but deploying them on the table as 3 different non-catachan regiments, or against deploying your leman russes behind a building and tilting their gun barrels up to draw LOS on your shooting phase and then pushing them back down after they shoot.

The LR thing sounds like a smart tactic and makes sense if you think of it as them using indirect fire.

pretty sure you're not allowed to change how your models are modeled mid-fight

Nah, there's no rule against it.

Just like there's no rule like the one in chess he cited earlier stating when an action is "official" and cannot be taken back. Rules lawyers just gonna rules lawyer. I do find the breakdown of people who come down in favor and against hard rules lawyering and the people who do and do not actually go in person and play the game to be fairly predictable.

There is a precedent rule for drop pods, telling you to decide how the model is before the game and then keep them that way.

the_scotsman wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

There's also no rule against you deliberately doing things to confuse your opponent with your models, like having a fully painted up catachan army but deploying them on the table as 3 different non-catachan regiments, or against deploying your leman russes behind a building and tilting their gun barrels up to draw LOS on your shooting phase and then pushing them back down after they shoot.

The LR thing sounds like a smart tactic and makes sense if you think of it as them using indirect fire.

pretty sure you're not allowed to change how your models are modeled mid-fight

Nah, there's no rule against it.

Just like there's no rule like the one in chess he cited earlier stating when an action is "official" and cannot be taken back. Rules lawyers just gonna rules lawyer. I do find the breakdown of people who come down in favor and against hard rules lawyering and the people who do and do not actually go in person and play the game to be fairly predictable.

40k is a permissible ruleset, if the rules don't allow it, they disallow it. You can move your barrels and arms whenever you move your model, but no part of your model can move more than than allowed.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:
Would you also ask for an undo if you made a move in chess, hand fully off the piece, and your opponent informed you that it would lead to mate in two via a pair of moves you'd never seen before?

If a new move or rule was added to chess then yeah. That's the problem with constantly adding new gotcha rules. GW should have kept it to Relics and WL traits and specialist detachments instead of just adding always available stratagems, if it's a relic/WL trait/specialist detachment your opponent has to announce it and you can ask what those do. Do you really want your opponent to have to read your supplement just before the game starts or would you rather warn them of incoming new rules? I guess you just want to crush your opponent for not doing their hobby homework, kind of lame.

I'd agree with you if it weren't for the fact that, the moment we get leaks or rules confirmation, some of us here get straight to work on what's broken, what's garbage, or what's gimmicky. In the current age of technology you should have a reasonable assumption of what an opponent's army can do. I won't let them take back mistakes and I certainly won't take back mine simply because that kind of coddling doesn't let you grow. We aren't five years old and trying to figure out the rules for a game.

Who are "we" and "us"? Is that semi or fully competitive players with 1000+ posts on a 40k forum or is it John the 15-year old that started three weeks ago and is borrowing models so he can play or is it Ib who plays once a month but mainly paints and just wants to chill and have a game? Who wants to grow? Is that something you know from the kind of game you usually play or is it a good excuse for winning through a gotcha? The best option IMO is taking note of everything that might create a gotcha moment and let your opponent know before the game, in competitive games people are expected to know what to ask or to suffer the consequences. I got gotcha'd by Raven Guard and Ultramarines Stratagems they got because I was in a casual phase and not keeping up with the rules, I wasn't trying to grow, all the growth I got from those games could have been done before the game started by going over the 1-3 Stratagems that might create a gotcha. You're essentially just wasting my time if I'm trying to learn. If I'm trying to have fun you're certainly not helping me by winning with a move I didn't think possible and leaving me feeling cheated out of the chance I would have had if you had introduced your best new Stratagems. The Raven Guard game was within a week of release I believe, Ultramarines was way after. I just played an ITC game, where I play that to me signals people are playing rather competitively (although I try to kick things down a notch so people don't get mad when I roll hot), I brought my Stratagem cards and arrayed them from gotcha to trash so my opponent could look through at their leisure. In past games I have sometimes given my opponent time to read the most important ones and that is something I'll go back to for casual games. Don't mistake me for being holier than thou, I have played my fair share of games where I didn't, just a couple of games ago I basically cheated by explaining my relic wrong.

With regards to the "I didn't know this rule" thing:

When I new book comes out, I read up online to know what people are talking about it, and I ask my friends who buy it to take a look at it before we start our game.

It's not my responsibility to tell you what I'm going to do, that would be telling you my strategy. I can let you take a look at a new book I bought so you can read the rules for yourself, and if you ask me "hey, do you have a way to do X?" I can't like lie to you [the rules are open knowledge since you could buy that book yourself]. I expect my opponent to come into the game with a baseline level of being appraised of hobby developments, and I think it's entire fair to place the onus of doing so on them. We're not going to play the game of "can I take that back?" every time something happens that'd bad for you.

There are still people who don't understand tripointing is legal.

the_scotsman wrote:
Just like there's no rule like the one in chess he cited earlier stating when an action is "official" and cannot be taken back. Rules lawyers just gonna rules lawyer. I do find the breakdown of people who come down in favor and against hard rules lawyering and the people who do and do not actually go in person and play the game to be fairly predictable.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touch-move_rule

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_chess#Act_of_moving_the_pieces

You were saying...

 Canadian 5th wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Just like there's no rule like the one in chess he cited earlier stating when an action is "official" and cannot be taken back. Rules lawyers just gonna rules lawyer. I do find the breakdown of people who come down in favor and against hard rules lawyering and the people who do and do not actually go in person and play the game to be fairly predictable.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touch-move_rule

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_chess#Act_of_moving_the_pieces

You were saying...

I was saying maybe read? I know the rule exists in chess. it does not exist in Beerrhammer Pretzel-thousand Clownfiesta Edition, the game where 3 years later assault type weapons still don't fething work RAW. Attempting to rules-lawyer when someone has officially "made" a move and cannot take it back is pure idiocy because there is NO SUCH RULE in 40k. It's all up to that whole pesky "this game is also a social interaction between two human beings playing a game" thing. Sadly, there is no rule in the book for this that makes you Technically Correct, The Best Kind of Correct.

Is a move official when I take my hand off the models in the unit that's deep striking? is it official when I pick the unit up from the side of the board? Is it official when I say I'm going to deep strike that unit? The only rule on the books is "talk to your opponent and don't be a dick" so how can we know when you're allowed to scream "I'm using my super-special new rule from this book I just purchased!"?

it's a real travesty, and someone really ought to write GW to clear up this whole debacle. The game would be FAR better if we just knew when we could laugh in our opponent's face and scream no takesies-backsies.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Just like there's no rule like the one in chess he cited earlier stating when an action is "official" and cannot be taken back. Rules lawyers just gonna rules lawyer. I do find the breakdown of people who come down in favor and against hard rules lawyering and the people who do and do not actually go in person and play the game to be fairly predictable.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touch-move_rule

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_chess#Act_of_moving_the_pieces

You were saying...

I was saying maybe read? I know the rule exists in chess. it does not exist in Beerrhammer Pretzel-thousand Clownfiesta Edition, the game where 3 years later assault type weapons still don't fething work RAW. Attempting to rules-lawyer when someone has officially "made" a move and cannot take it back is pure idiocy because there is NO SUCH RULE in 40k. It's all up to that whole pesky "this game is also a social interaction between two human beings playing a game" thing. Sadly, there is no rule in the book for this that makes you Technically Correct, The Best Kind of Correct.

Is a move official when I take my hand off the models in the unit that's deep striking? is it official when I pick the unit up from the side of the board? Is it official when I say I'm going to deep strike that unit? The only rule on the books is "talk to your opponent and don't be a dick" so how can we know when you're allowed to scream "I'm using my super-special new rule from this book I just purchased!"?

it's a real travesty, and someone really ought to write GW to clear up this whole debacle. The game would be FAR better if we just knew when we could laugh in our opponent's face and scream no takesies-backsies.

Not my job to figure out my opponent's strategy for them.

If someone is trying to get into the game they're gonna see all the leaks for the books. There's no excuse for lack of information. You getting "gotcha'd" by Raven Guard and Ultramarines is all your own fault for being a poor player and not doing even a modicum of research, not the opponent's.

My view on it is thus:

If I'm playing competitively, or against a competitive player, it's on my opponent to know what I can do.

If I'm playing friendlies, or against a new player, then I'll let them know what sorts of things my army can do and let them take things back/do things they forgot about.

In both cases, it's to make the game better for both of us.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
I'd say a warning beforehand is in order but is just because of how I prefer 40k personally, not because they are necessarily OP. I like TAC vs TAC lists and any kind of skew list goes against that. But again that is just my personal preference, YMMV.

Lists that presents a monolithic defensive profile are not exclusive with lists that are take all comers.

A list that can take all comers can confront and defeat any presented list, and is therefore versatile in capability. It presents a diverse offensive profile, but this has limited to no bearing on the list's defensive profile.

Arguably, taking a skewed defensive profile list makes you a better take all comers list, since your diverse offensive profile ensures you can service any enemy threat that may be required and your monolithic defensive profile ensures that it is harder to service all of the threats that you present in exchange.

Interesting take, never thought it about that way. I'd still consider a list with (mostly) one defensive statline a bit of a skew list though.

 Castozor wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
I'd say a warning beforehand is in order but is just because of how I prefer 40k personally, not because they are necessarily OP. I like TAC vs TAC lists and any kind of skew list goes against that. But again that is just my personal preference, YMMV.

Lists that presents a monolithic defensive profile are not exclusive with lists that are take all comers.

A list that can take all comers can confront and defeat any presented list, and is therefore versatile in capability. It presents a diverse offensive profile, but this has limited to no bearing on the list's defensive profile.

Arguably, taking a skewed defensive profile list makes you a better take all comers list, since your diverse offensive profile ensures you can service any enemy threat that may be required and your monolithic defensive profile ensures that it is harder to service all of the threats that you present in exchange.

Interesting take, never thought it about that way. I'd still consider a list with (mostly) one defensive statline a bit of a skew list though.

A list with one defensive statline is the definition of a skew list.

I was saying that a "Take all Comers" list is a list that is designed to be able to adequately beat any list presented against it. It's the opposite of a tailored list, not a skew list. There's no reason a skew list isn't a take all comers list, and in fact it probably is.

With the breadth of content available, I think expecting the average non-competitive or new player to be familiar with everything is being more than a wee bit disingenuous. Many, if not most players have neither the resources to acquire nor the time to read every single rules source, nor spend many hours trawling internet forums and youtube videos to stay up to date on the constantly evolving meta. Few players are getting two dozen games in a year, even most "regulars" may only really get in one game a month, and expecting your average joe to memorize the meta and be familiar with every unit, ability, expansion, etc is staggeringly unrealistic.

That sort of expectation may have been more permissible back in say, 4E or 5E, where we might get 2 codex releases a year with no supplements and half the factions and armies we do now.

If you're talking a competitive game, then yes, people should know their stuff, but for new people or friendly games or pickups, I don't think it's reasonable to expect everyone to know or even have access to everything, even if there are unofficial ways to get the information (battlescribe, PDF's, youtube, etc).

 Vaktathi wrote:
With the breadth of content available, I think expecting the average non-competitive or new player to be familiar with everything is being more than a wee bit disingenuous. Many, if not most players have neither the resources to acquire nor the time to read every single rules source, nor spend many hours trawling internet forums and youtube videos to stay up to date on the constantly evolving meta. Few players are getting two dozen games in a year, even most "regulars" may only really get in one game a month, and expecting your average joe to memorize the meta and be familiar with every unit, ability, expansion, etc is staggeringly unrealistic.

That sort of expectation may have been more permissible back in say, 4E or 5E, where we might get 2 codex releases a year with no supplements and half the factions and armies we do now.

If you're talking a competitive game, then yes, people should know their stuff, but for new people or friendly games or pickups, I don't think it's reasonable to expect everyone to know or even have access to everything, even if there are unofficial ways to get the information (battlescribe, PDF's, youtube, etc).

Then they lose their games. If you play online video games for fun and don't stay up to date with the game and the meta you lose, why should 40k be different?

Especially when we pay for our updates compared to lots of other hobbies.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
With the breadth of content available, I think expecting the average non-competitive or new player to be familiar with everything is being more than a wee bit disingenuous. Many, if not most players have neither the resources to acquire nor the time to read every single rules source, nor spend many hours trawling internet forums and youtube videos to stay up to date on the constantly evolving meta. Few players are getting two dozen games in a year, even most "regulars" may only really get in one game a month, and expecting your average joe to memorize the meta and be familiar with every unit, ability, expansion, etc is staggeringly unrealistic.

That sort of expectation may have been more permissible back in say, 4E or 5E, where we might get 2 codex releases a year with no supplements and half the factions and armies we do now.

If you're talking a competitive game, then yes, people should know their stuff, but for new people or friendly games or pickups, I don't think it's reasonable to expect everyone to know or even have access to everything, even if there are unofficial ways to get the information (battlescribe, PDF's, youtube, etc).

Then they lose their games. If you play online video games for fun and don't stay up to date with the game and the meta you lose, why should 40k be different?

Competitive video games are equally or even more toxic than 40k, so that's not exactly the standard we should be using.

It all comes down to what you expect from this game. If both players agree that winning is what's fun, then gotcha plays are fine. If however, you're both interested in playing a good game, regardless of outcome; gotcha moments are cheap, nasty and a detriment to your entire community of players.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
With the breadth of content available, I think expecting the average non-competitive or new player to be familiar with everything is being more than a wee bit disingenuous. Many, if not most players have neither the resources to acquire nor the time to read every single rules source, nor spend many hours trawling internet forums and youtube videos to stay up to date on the constantly evolving meta. Few players are getting two dozen games in a year, even most "regulars" may only really get in one game a month, and expecting your average joe to memorize the meta and be familiar with every unit, ability, expansion, etc is staggeringly unrealistic.

That sort of expectation may have been more permissible back in say, 4E or 5E, where we might get 2 codex releases a year with no supplements and half the factions and armies we do now.

If you're talking a competitive game, then yes, people should know their stuff, but for new people or friendly games or pickups, I don't think it's reasonable to expect everyone to know or even have access to everything, even if there are unofficial ways to get the information (battlescribe, PDF's, youtube, etc).

Then they lose their games. If you play online video games for fun and don't stay up to date with the game and the meta you lose, why should 40k be different?

Completely wrong, in online video games you get matched against people of a similar skill level, whether your skill lies in game knowledge, tactical awareness or mechanics you'll go against people and with people that will result in a 40-60% win-rate. There is no such system in casual 40k, it's entirely possible to win 80% of your games over the course of an entire year assuming you play 4 games a month and then 12 games in the 1 week after your new Stratagems release. Play 14 games of League a month and 36 after a positive update to a champion and you'll just get matched against better players if you win too much. So what now, do we stop playing against players that are better than us? Didn't you want people to get better? Well, how about informing them of any gotcha abilities or Stratagems you have so you can play on a more or less even playing field and both have a chance to get better (and more importantly have fun, remember we're talking about casual)? Doing hobby homework is not a skill and it doesn't make you better at the game outside of how much better you'd be if your opponent bothered to tell you about their top 3 gotcha Stratagems/abilities.

League of Legends also publically posts their updates and makes videos about them, 40k content creators do go through all the new content but showing every single page or reading every pts cost is piracy, should piracy be required to play casually? Do you need to watch third party content or download programs to make League work? GW doesn't cover every change and doesn't always highlight the important ones in their articles, although reading the RG article would have saved me from my opponent falling back and shooting with 6 Devastator Centurions and essentially consolidating into them and taking 25 S5 attacks to drag out 2 measly CP. The introduction of an entirely new character or a total rework of an existing one is still something you can play out, you can see how much damage you take, play safe and hope you get carried even if they are very strong without your prior knowledge. There is no feeling out a Stratagem, once it's been used it has been used. If 40k had a best-of-3 format, then fine, keep Stratagems up your sleeve or use them game 1, your opponent knows about it from then on or you didn't use it game 1/2. Instead, you just get an unfair advantage in one game, shake hands, wash hands and go home.