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.

 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?

Because it's not an online video game? I have no idea why you keep comparing the two.

What this discussion highlights is one of the major failings of GW's current design ethos. I can't think of any other tabletop wargame that has the sheer number of rules that 40k does, spread around so many different sources. Yes, it's technically all open information but it's often partially hidden behind a "paywall" in the sense you need to buy the book or a ridiculous amount of time investment to keep up with everything that's going on. Compare that to a game like Warmachine or X-Wing where I can walk up to a game against an opponent and army list I've never faced before and, within minutes, be completely informed about the capabilities of my opponent's force. I may miss certain subtleties in some interactions but in general they're all openly available and easily accessible. That means the game comes down to who plays best with the tools they have and decisions made with full information available to both players on everyone's capabilities, rather than who knows more about the various tricks they can pull off on unsuspecting players. To me, that's what wargames should be about rather than gotcha moments.

 vict0988 wrote:
Completely wrong, in online video games you get matched against people of a similar skill level,

Not in World of Tanks, Escape from Tarkov, Warthunder, Fallout 76... I could go on.

There is no such system in casual 40k,

Then work with your shop and/or playgroup to make one.

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.

Why is the burden on the skilled player to explain things that the casual player should know about? Why can't the skilled player simply answer questions as they arise and otherwise play as if their opponent knows the rules of the game?

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?

Points costs aren't a gotcha and between Goonhammer, Dakka, and YouTube you'll hear about the good 'gotchas' if you do any looking at all.

Do you need to watch third party content or download programs to make League work?

If you want to learn the meta it's recommended to use third party sites for builds and matchup tips for League.

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.

Unfair advantage? Knowing the rules is unfair now... No, it's on every player to know the rules of the game before they put models to table. If they don't, too bad for them, they should engage with the hobby more than just showing up and putting models down.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slipspace wrote:
What this discussion highlights is one of the major failings of GW's current design ethos. I can't think of any other tabletop wargame that has the sheer number of rules that 40k does, spread around so many different sources. Yes, it's technically all open information but it's often partially hidden behind a "paywall" in the sense you need to buy the book or a ridiculous amount of time investment to keep up with everything that's going on. Compare that to a game like Warmachine or X-Wing where I can walk up to a game against an opponent and army list I've never faced before and, within minutes, be completely informed about the capabilities of my opponent's force. I may miss certain subtleties in some interactions but in general they're all openly available and easily accessible. That means the game comes down to who plays best with the tools they have and decisions made with full information available to both players on everyone's capabilities, rather than who knows more about the various tricks they can pull off on unsuspecting players. To me, that's what wargames should be about rather than gotcha moments.

I've just come back to the hobby after a long break and I can find all the rules I'd need to play any army for free without downloading any scanned GW material. It's not unreasonable to expect that anybody with an internet connection and 5 minutes could do the same.

Games are both about knowing the rules and actually playing them. You seem to only place value on the gameplay when both should be equally important.

I think that there is a fundemental difference in the approach to the game by several people here. In itself, that is not a bad thing. There are different styles of play and different things that players want out of the game. However, the problem lies when people think that their game format is superior to others. There is no fundemental way to play 40k. Competitive formats are not superior to narrative ones, or vice versa. Things would be much easier if we accept what others want to get out of the game.

The style I believe that Canadian 5th prefers is a perfectly valid way to play. However, if playing against a "more casual" player, both will find the experience lacking in some regard. It is up to both player to recognise this and take adequate steps to accomodate the other, or at least agree that they want different things and to find other opponents. I have seen what happens in a club when there is a competitive/casual split, and it isn't good for anyone if people let it fester into animosity.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

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.

Why is the burden on the skilled player to explain things that the casual player should know about? Why can't the skilled player simply answer questions as they arise and otherwise play as if their opponent knows the rules of the game?

The skilled player? Who said you're skilled because you've done your hobby homework? I don't think having done hobby homework shows skill and I think I have made that very clear. No, it puts the onus on the player with the gotcha rules to explain those because if they don't then it might make the game unfair and unfun towards the person who has committed the grand crime of not keeping up with their hobby homework. I actually do my hobby homework most of the time, but I don't paint my minis, what would you rather have a player with a painted army where you have to explain your gotcha rules or a player that has a half-painted collection but knows your rules better than you do?

Do you need to watch third party content or download programs to make League work?

If you want to learn the meta it's recommended to use third party sites for builds and matchup tips for League.

If you only use meta picks and meta items you're not playing casually are you? You're purely speaking to a competitive game between competitive people, I don't think you understand the meaning of casual and I've already agreed with you given that you're only talking about competitive games. This idea of every game is a competition fits with you not believing LoW can ever be not cool to bring, just admit you're a competitive player that always plays competitively. Other types of games than competitive games exist, I can pick up a League of Legends champion that I tried once or twice a few years ago with a set of runes I think seem mostly reasonable, pick out the recommended items I think sound good or even build something wholly unique that I think might be fun and I rarely get punished for it. There is too much to know in 40k to expect newer and casual players to understand everything before the game, all it takes is another two minutes of pre-game talk or even just sending a pre-prepared word document to your opponent before the game depending on your gaming situation.

Unfair advantage? Knowing the rules is unfair now... No, it's on every player to know the rules of the game before they put models to table. If they don't, too bad for them, they should engage with the hobby more than just showing up and putting models down.

How broad should this knowledge be? Should you have memorized your codex before you do your first game, or at least by the second game? How about memorizing every ability and Stratagem in the game, is that on the first, second or third game? Many of the people I have played with have never faced Necrons before, they'll be asking me what the AP is of my Immortal guns on the third battle round, it's still zero, they have to look up their S, AP, number of shots, even what weapons their models are equipped with in the case of the SM Executioner.

I've just come back to the hobby after a long break and I can find all the rules I'd need to play any army for free without downloading any scanned GW material. It's not unreasonable to expect that anybody with an internet connection and 5 minutes could do the same.

Games are both about knowing the rules and actually playing them. You seem to only place value on the gameplay when both should be equally important.

If you type in the code for a game from scratch and perfectly recreate it and then sell that game it's still theft of intellectual property. That you think it should be expected of everyone to commit theft of intellectual property to play the game just because you do it and you think it's okay is truly outrageous (even though I happen to agree). You haven't done 5 minutes of research if you know every ability and Stratagem, that's like 10 hours of study, that's without knowing profiles.

You act like it's hard to memorize that stuff. You only need to know the important Strats. I mean, if you think you need to memorize Raven Guard rerolling all hits on Word Bearers and that somehow interfered with the fact they can fall back and shoot...that's being a REALLY bad player LOL

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You act like it's hard to memorize that stuff. You only need to know the important Strats. I mean, if you think you need to memorize Raven Guard rerolling all hits on Word Bearers and that somehow interfered with the fact they can fall back and shoot...that's being a REALLY bad player LOL

The problem is you need a baseline amount of knowledge before you can then start figuring out which strats you can ignore completely. Some are obviously pretty bad even at first glance, but where's the cut-off? I think the people in this thread that are arguing against these sort of gotcha moments are trying to say that skill should be more important than knowledge in a wargame. Memorising all the abilities and options for different enemies isn't really a skill, it's just more of a memorisation procedure. The real skill should be what you do with the information on the board tiself but 40k is terrible for that because it's so difficult to have all the info to hand, so the game becomes a memory test rather than one of skill.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You act like it's hard to memorize that stuff. You only need to know the important Strats. I mean, if you think you need to memorize Raven Guard rerolling all hits on Word Bearers and that somehow interfered with the fact they can fall back and shoot...that's being a REALLY bad player LOL

Nah you need to memorize all the abilities as well, if you think I'm going to tell you that you're -3 to hit my Alaitoc flyer before you shoot you're dead wrong buddy, gotta learn the hard way. How many guns were you putting into my flyer again? Ah yes, let me lather myself in peanut oil as I watch you walk into my gotcha, -1 to hit? Ha! You can't even hit me and I'm all lubed up by this point and I'm starting to shower in pecan nuts and it is fething amazing my dude. I'll force you to roll all your weapons hitting on 7+ as well (demz the rules) and I'll walk straight to hell to toast me and my pecan nuts in my peanut oil because I'm a gotcha devil.

 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?

Because as I noted above, people get in very few games a year, and thats a good way to keep them from getting in more and to shrink a player base.

It's one thing to get curbstomped in an anonymous 20 minute match from the comfort of your bedroom in a game you spent $50 on and may get hundreds of games in, and where the game may have sophisticsted match making systems, and in most cases has substantially fewer mechanisms, factions, units, and stats to memorize than 40k.

It's quite another when that happens after setting aside half the day to play a game face to face at the FLGS across town, that you manage to get in once a month, and spent several hundred dollars to buy into.

These are radically different experiences with substantially different outcomes for communities for "gotcha" moments.

By way of contrast, the Warmachine community has a strong aversion to gotcha plays within the context of a much higher skill floor/ceiling rule set...

 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).

That's why I'm willing to let them read my book. Obviously, if they don't play Guard, Tau, or GSC, I don't expect them to buy The Greater Good. That said, I'm going to be using stratagems and rules from it, and I'm happy to let them look over the new rules I have at my disposal before the game starts.

I'm not under an obligation to tell them how I'm going to play the game. And the whole thing with permitting extensive take backsies whenever I do something that takes advantage of a mistake you made is just opening up a can of worms that will slow the game down and make it generally unpleasant. My take on this: once you roll the dice, you've committed to that action and it can't be taken back. With movement, when you start moving another unit, that move is committed and shouldn't be changed. I'll usually let someone go back if they forgot their psychic phase and have only shot 1 unit or maybe 2, but if you're all the way at your assault phase then you probably should have remembered first. I'm more open to it in doubles games, because the number of times the something comes up like "I wanted to put my seekers there, could you have moved your dreadknight a little to the left?" or "Wait don't shoot that! I was going to charge that with my lychguard!" is very high and I'd rather the game keep moving than stop every phase to have a team discussion.


As far as Lords of War go, I will tell you I have a Shadowsword in my list when we reveal our lists. If someone is my personal friend, I afford them the right to ask me to/not to include my Shadowsword, to/not to include my vendetta, to/not to include my Land Raider Terminus, etc.

 vict0988 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You act like it's hard to memorize that stuff. You only need to know the important Strats. I mean, if you think you need to memorize Raven Guard rerolling all hits on Word Bearers and that somehow interfered with the fact they can fall back and shoot...that's being a REALLY bad player LOL

Nah you need to memorize all the abilities as well, if you think I'm going to tell you that you're -3 to hit my Alaitoc flyer before you shoot you're dead wrong buddy, gotta learn the hard way. How many guns were you putting into my flyer again? Ah yes, let me lather myself in peanut oil as I watch you walk into my gotcha, -1 to hit? Ha! You can't even hit me and I'm all lubed up by this point and I'm starting to shower in pecan nuts and it is fething amazing my dude. I'll force you to roll all your weapons hitting on 7+ as well (demz the rules) and I'll walk straight to hell to toast me and my pecan nuts in my peanut oil because I'm a gotcha devil.

Um okay that's fine, guess I won't shoot the flyer with something else.

Look how easy that was.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 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?

Because as I noted above, people get in very few games a year, and thats a good way to keep them from getting in more and to shrink a player base.

It's one thing to get curbstomped in an anonymous 20 minute match from the comfort of your bedroom in a game you spent $50 on and may get hundreds of games in, and where the game may have sophisticsted match making systems, and in most cases has substantially fewer mechanisms, factions, units, and stats to memorize than 40k.

It's quite another when that happens after setting aside half the day to play a game face to face at the FLGS across town, that you manage to get in once a month, and spent several hundred dollars to buy into.

These are radically different experiences with substantially different outcomes for communities for "gotcha" moments.

Blame GW bloat then for that problem.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 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?

Because as I noted above, people get in very few games a year, and thats a good way to keep them from getting in more and to shrink a player base.

It's one thing to get curbstomped in an anonymous 20 minute match from the comfort of your bedroom in a game you spent $50 on and may get hundreds of games in, and where the game may have sophisticsted match making systems, and in most cases has substantially fewer mechanisms, factions, units, and stats to memorize than 40k.

It's quite another when that happens after setting aside half the day to play a game face to face at the FLGS across town, that you manage to get in once a month, and spent several hundred dollars to buy into.

These are radically different experiences with substantially different outcomes for communities for "gotcha" moments.

Blame GW bloat then for that problem.

No, in this context I will blame those relying on the gotcha plays, as they're obviously bad at being a wargamer.

After all, if they were good they wouldn't need a crutch of hidden knowledge, would they?

I always read my opponent's book if I'm unfamiliar. I never take their word on how their strats work, either. That being said, I never use gotcha stuff. I always tell people about the most obnoxious BA strats as well as tripointing.

 Dysartes wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 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?

Because as I noted above, people get in very few games a year, and thats a good way to keep them from getting in more and to shrink a player base.

It's one thing to get curbstomped in an anonymous 20 minute match from the comfort of your bedroom in a game you spent $50 on and may get hundreds of games in, and where the game may have sophisticsted match making systems, and in most cases has substantially fewer mechanisms, factions, units, and stats to memorize than 40k.

It's quite another when that happens after setting aside half the day to play a game face to face at the FLGS across town, that you manage to get in once a month, and spent several hundred dollars to buy into.

These are radically different experiences with substantially different outcomes for communities for "gotcha" moments.

Blame GW bloat then for that problem.

No, in this context I will blame those relying on the gotcha plays, as they're obviously bad at being a wargamer.

After all, if they were good they wouldn't need a crutch of hidden knowledge, would they?

Hear hear! That's an exalt!

 vict0988 wrote:
The skilled player? Who said you're skilled because you've done your hobby homework? I don't think having done hobby homework shows skill and I think I have made that very clear. No, it puts the onus on the player with the gotcha rules to explain those because if they don't then it might make the game unfair and unfun towards the person who has committed the grand crime of not keeping up with their hobby homework. I actually do my hobby homework most of the time, but I don't paint my minis, what would you rather have a player with a painted army where you have to explain your gotcha rules or a player that has a half-painted collection but knows your rules better than you do?

Research is a skill as is memorization and retention of information. If it wasn't there would be a degree for librarians or archivists.

I could care less if your army is just legs on bases, with the weapon that model is using stuck on the base. I care far more about the rules and gameplay side than the hobby/modelling/crafting side of this game.

If you only use meta picks and meta items you're not playing casually are you?

If you have any intention of climbing you should use these tools. Also, do you know how awful it is to lose a game of League, even a normal game, because one of your teammates is 'just playing again after 6 months' or types 'lul, wut patch?' into team chat? You should put in a minimum of effort to not be a boat anchor to your team.

You're purely speaking to a competitive game between competitive people, I don't think you understand the meaning of casual and I've already agreed with you given that you're only talking about competitive games. This idea of every game is a competition fits with you not believing LoW can ever be not cool to bring, just admit you're a competitive player that always plays competitively. Other types of games than competitive games exist, I can pick up a League of Legends champion that I tried once or twice a few years ago with a set of runes I think seem mostly reasonable, pick out the recommended items I think sound good or even build something wholly unique that I think might be fun and I rarely get punished for it. There is too much to know in 40k to expect newer and casual players to understand everything before the game, all it takes is another two minutes of pre-game talk or even just sending a pre-prepared word document to your opponent before the game depending on your gaming situation.

So would you also expect an enemy Riven to tell you that their champion can animation cancel and weave auto attacks? How about a Lee Sin telling you about what an InSec is? Or telling you that there's a glitch at the moment where your ultimate can push people through a specific wall to safety when they should hit and get stunned? At which point is the burden of knowledge on the casual player?

How broad should this knowledge be? Should you have memorized your codex before you do your first game, or at least by the second game? How about memorizing every ability and Stratagem in the game, is that on the first, second or third game? Many of the people I have played with have never faced Necrons before, they'll be asking me what the AP is of my Immortal guns on the third battle round, it's still zero, they have to look up their S, AP, number of shots, even what weapons their models are equipped with in the case of the SM Executioner.

Memorize as much or as little as you wish just don't whine when you feel you were punished for not knowing something you should have.

If you type in the code for a game from scratch and perfectly recreate it and then sell that game it's still theft of intellectual property. That you think it should be expected of everyone to commit theft of intellectual property to play the game just because you do it and you think it's okay is truly outrageous (even though I happen to agree). You haven't done 5 minutes of research if you know every ability and Stratagem, that's like 10 hours of study, that's without knowing profiles.

I haven't stolen anything from GW and, honestly, the reviews and articles on places like Goonhammer are 100% fair use and will get you up to speed with the gotcha moments of the game. Beyond that, it gets a little more grey but accessing a site hosting pirated material isn't a crime so I'll keep using my sources for the time being.

Lastly, you don't need to 100% memorize everything, you just need enough knowledge to ask appropriate questions of your opponent and play out your turn properly. Even if the example that kicked off this tangent it could have been avoided by dropping a cheap unit first and that is 100% something that you should do when playing C:SM.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Because as I noted above, people get in very few games a year,

Sucks to be them.

and thats a good way to keep them from getting in more and to shrink a player base.

I don't cry over salty casuals rage-quitting a game that, your words not mine, they already barely play.

It's one thing to get curbstomped in an anonymous 20 minute match from the comfort of your bedroom in a game you spent $50 on and may get hundreds of games in, and where the game may have sophisticsted match making systems, and in most cases has substantially fewer mechanisms, factions, units, and stats to memorize than 40k.

You can play on Vassal for free and get more games in that way.

It's quite another when that happens after setting aside half the day to play a game face to face at the FLGS across town, that you manage to get in once a month, and spent several hundred dollars to buy into.

Then invest a little more into the game when you're away from the tabletop so you don't waste your investment. Or preschedule your games with other scrubs and casuals. If you're always getting matched with people who play opposite to your own style that's on you.

 Dysartes wrote:
No, in this context I will blame those relying on the gotcha plays, as they're obviously bad at being a wargamer.

After all, if they were good they wouldn't need a crutch of hidden knowledge, would they?

Those professional MtG, Poker, Hearthstone, etc. players must all be terrible for relying on hidden knowledge to win at their game of choice. IRL generals are such fething cheaters for encrypting and classifying important information and not freely giving it to their opponent.

Come prepared to play and stop crying.

Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:]
That's why I'm willing to let them read my book. Obviously, if they don't play Guard, Tau, or GSC, I don't expect them to buy The Greater Good. That said, I'm going to be using stratagems and rules from it, and I'm happy to let them look over the new rules I have at my disposal before the game starts.

I'm not under an obligation to tell them how I'm going to play the game. And the whole thing with permitting extensive take backsies whenever I do something that takes advantage of a mistake you made is just opening up a can of worms that will slow the game down and make it generally unpleasant. My take on this: once you roll the dice, you've committed to that action and it can't be taken back. With movement, when you start moving another unit, that move is committed and shouldn't be changed. I'll usually let someone go back if they forgot their psychic phase and have only shot 1 unit or maybe 2, but if you're all the way at your assault phase then you probably should have remembered first. I'm more open to it in doubles games, because the number of times the something comes up like "I wanted to put my seekers there, could you have moved your dreadknight a little to the left?" or "Wait don't shoot that! I was going to charge that with my lychguard!" is very high and I'd rather the game keep moving than stop every phase to have a team discussion.


As far as Lords of War go, I will tell you I have a Shadowsword in my list when we reveal our lists. If someone is my personal friend, I afford them the right to ask me to/not to include my Shadowsword, to/not to include my vendetta, to/not to include my Land Raider Terminus, etc.

Aye, that's really all that's necessary. One doesn't need to tell their opponent how they're going to play the army, but just make sure everyone knows what's *possible* beforehand, and if there's something that a typical TAC list might not be able to deal with, mention it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Blame GW bloat then for that problem.

It is a problem I blame GW for, 100% absolutely. However, you can't pretend like it's not an issue. There's lots of stuff out there that isn't my fault, but that I have to accept and work around anyway, and that would go really poorly for me if I pretended it wasn't my problem and just said "well blame X for making me do it!".

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Sucks to be them.

Sucks to run out of people to play with and to see player groups collapse too, or to gain a reputation as a TFG.

I don't cry over salty casuals rage-quitting a game that, your words not mine, they already barely play.

Protip, we're not talking about professional sports or top end E-sports, we're talking about a *hobby* that is presented by the company that makes all this stuff very explicitly as a "beer and pretzels" experience, GW and 40k are *peak* casual. If you're at the point where you're whining about "casuals" with respect to 40k, I would suggest that you've missed something

More to the point, I'm not even talking about "casual" players, I'm talking about *regular* players. Even among the competitive crowd that try to play every week, most are hard pressed to get 50 games in an entire year, and even the most hardcore will probably have trouble getting a hundred games in a year (as opposed to tens of thousands for many E-Sports games), while most regular players won't get a hundred games in over the course of an entire edition. I think at my peak, when I was attending at least one local event a month and a couple larger events a year in multiple cities and at least three different states, I think the most games I ever got in one year was about 80. Most regular players only really average one or two games every month or two.

You can play on Vassal for free and get more games in that way.

You can, but that's largely irrelevant, it doesn't play exactly like tabletop 40k, isn't what most people are in this hobby for, and isn't something 99.9% of the playerbase engages in. Without the physical experience of moving minatures, getting to play with ones toys, having a 3D battlespace, etc, 40k offers very little as a game in and of itself. 40k really is, and always has been, a pretty bad *game*, not something people generally want to play (by the tabletop rules) simply for the game itself. If they're going to play something on the computer, they'll generally play something that is actually designed to be played on such a platform and have way more fun doing it, and there's a reason that 40k video games use almost no tabletop mechanics/stats/rules.

Then invest a little more into the game when you're away from the tabletop so you don't waste your investment. Or preschedule your games with other scrubs and casuals. If you're always getting matched with people who play opposite to your own style that's on you.

As I noted above, methinks you're missing a whole lot of the point of the hobby, and are expecting a lot more of people than the producers of the game expect from them. People are into 40k for lots of reasons, quality rules and intense competition typically are not among them however. Yeah it helps to prearrange games against opponents that have similar mindsets, but that's not always possible, and winning games by "gotchas" doesn't do much for anyone.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Sucks to run out of people to play with and to see player groups collapse too, or to gain a reputation as a TFG.

If people are going to call you TFG for playing by the rules I'd rather not play them anyway.

Protip, we're not talking about professional sports or top end E-sports, we're talking about a *hobby* that is presented by the company that makes all this stuff very explicitly as a "beer and pretzels" experience, GW and 40k are *peak* casual. If you're at the point where you're whining about "casuals" with respect to 40k, I would suggest that you've missed something

More to the point, I'm not even talking about "casual" players, I'm talking about *regular* players. Even among the competitive crowd that try to play every week, most are hard pressed to get 50 games in an entire year, and even the most hardcore will probably have trouble getting a hundred games in a year (as opposed to tens of thousands for many E-Sports games), while most regular players won't get a hundred games in over the course of an entire edition. I think at my peak, when I was attending at least one local event a month and a couple larger events a year in multiple cities and at least three different states, I think the most games I ever got in one year was about 80. Most regular players only really average one or two games every month or two.

How is any of that preventing you from reading about rules before you bring your models out to the table? Also, it's not that hard to fit a 6x4 table into most homes from there invite people over and play whenever. You can even proxy armies neither of you owns, or set up custom scenarios to practice things like going second against that one list that always beats you.

If you want to get in games you will.

You can, but that's largely irrelevant, it doesn't play exactly like tabletop 40k, isn't what most people are in this hobby for, and isn't something 99.9% of the playerbase engages in. Without the physical experience of moving minatures, getting to play with ones toys, having a 3D battlespace, etc, 40k offers very little as a game in and of itself. 40k really is, and always has been, a pretty bad *game*, not something people generally want to play (by the tabletop rules). If they're going to play something on the computer, they'll generally play something that is actually designed to be played on such a platform and have way more fun doing it.

I'm merely saying that even a scrub can get in a quick game easily as you brought up the issue of time and cost as barriers to getting games in.

As I noted above, methinks you're missing a whole lot of the point of the hobby, and are expecting a lot more of people than the producers of the game expect from them. Winning games by "gotchas" doesn't do much for anyone.

You're winning the game because your opponent fethed up, you didn't do anything and if they couldn't be assed to ask you're not hiding anything either. It's not on me to read minds and know what somebody does or doesn't know.

 Dysartes wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 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?

Because as I noted above, people get in very few games a year, and thats a good way to keep them from getting in more and to shrink a player base.

It's one thing to get curbstomped in an anonymous 20 minute match from the comfort of your bedroom in a game you spent $50 on and may get hundreds of games in, and where the game may have sophisticsted match making systems, and in most cases has substantially fewer mechanisms, factions, units, and stats to memorize than 40k.

It's quite another when that happens after setting aside half the day to play a game face to face at the FLGS across town, that you manage to get in once a month, and spent several hundred dollars to buy into.

These are radically different experiences with substantially different outcomes for communities for "gotcha" moments.

Blame GW bloat then for that problem.

No, in this context I will blame those relying on the gotcha plays, as they're obviously bad at being a wargamer.

After all, if they were good they wouldn't need a crutch of hidden knowledge, would they?

You'd have a point if it actually WERE hidden knowledge.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:]
That's why I'm willing to let them read my book. Obviously, if they don't play Guard, Tau, or GSC, I don't expect them to buy The Greater Good. That said, I'm going to be using stratagems and rules from it, and I'm happy to let them look over the new rules I have at my disposal before the game starts.

I'm not under an obligation to tell them how I'm going to play the game. And the whole thing with permitting extensive take backsies whenever I do something that takes advantage of a mistake you made is just opening up a can of worms that will slow the game down and make it generally unpleasant. My take on this: once you roll the dice, you've committed to that action and it can't be taken back. With movement, when you start moving another unit, that move is committed and shouldn't be changed. I'll usually let someone go back if they forgot their psychic phase and have only shot 1 unit or maybe 2, but if you're all the way at your assault phase then you probably should have remembered first. I'm more open to it in doubles games, because the number of times the something comes up like "I wanted to put my seekers there, could you have moved your dreadknight a little to the left?" or "Wait don't shoot that! I was going to charge that with my lychguard!" is very high and I'd rather the game keep moving than stop every phase to have a team discussion.


As far as Lords of War go, I will tell you I have a Shadowsword in my list when we reveal our lists. If someone is my personal friend, I afford them the right to ask me to/not to include my Shadowsword, to/not to include my vendetta, to/not to include my Land Raider Terminus, etc.

Aye, that's really all that's necessary. One doesn't need to tell their opponent how they're going to play the army, but just make sure everyone knows what's *possible* beforehand, and if there's something that a typical TAC list might not be able to deal with, mention it.

I think you're going further than I consider neccessary.

I will let them read my book and answer questions if they ask, but if they don't ask I'm going to assume they already know. I will also definitely not tell strangers in a pick up game what's in my list before their list is finalized, there's no reason I should tell them to be ready to counter something that I'm bringing if they're not giving me the equal option to learn about one of their list aspects and allow me to counter it. Also, if they're about to make a strategic mistake, I won't tell them until well, after I've take advantage of it. That's a them problem if they're making strategic mistakes, I've made available all the material they need to know so it's not something they couldn't have known.

I've also often made list choices with the express purpose of making my take all comers list able to well, Take all Comers. I've no reason to explain those measures so they can make a tailored list to oppose my TAC list.


I will help them out if they're trying to execute on something but aren't pulling it off, and I can clearly see the intent, such as three pointing or arranging consolidates to tag more units. If they're trying to do something, and don't succeed because they weren't careful enough, they'll feel frustrated because they thought they had me 3-pointed when they didn't, and the thought and intent was there, so I might as well help them do the thing they want to do.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Sucks to run out of people to play with and to see player groups collapse too, or to gain a reputation as a TFG.

If people are going to call you TFG for playing by the rules I'd rather not play them anyway.

There's lot of ways to play by the rules. Lots of TFG's play entirely within the rules. It's about trying to maintain a pleasant experience for both players. These aren't mutually exclusive.

How is any of that preventing you from reading about rules before you bring your models out to the table?

Because if people aren't getting huge numbers of games in then, they probably aren't investing a couple thousand dollars in rules sources or spending many hours independently researching the rules and meta to know everything the game might throw at them. They'll absolutely have responsibility to know their own stuff, and the *basics* of most common opponents, but beyond that, at least in my own experience playing this game for many years and editions, most people tend to get substantially fuzzier beyond that, particularly the last couple editions as the content level has exploded.

Also, it's not that hard to fit a 6x4 table into most homes from there invite people over and play whenever. You can even proxy armies neither of you owns, or set up custom scenarios to practice things like going second against that one list that always beats you.

Yeah most people can get (or reuse) a table. Buying and storing a good amount of terrain, and having a home situation that's conducive to having people over to play regularly, is a different matter, and if they can only make it down to the game store once a month, they probably don't have time for a bunch of scrim games either.

If you want to get in games you will.

People have jobs, kids, other interests and responsibilites, etc that means they get an afternoon a month to devote to playing 40k and a couple hours every other week to work on building and painting something. 40k shouldn't have to be treated as a 2nd job for the average player. People like us that are posting on forums like this, that get in fair numbers of games and are plugged into the web communities and stay abreast of the meta are a tiny fraction of the playerbase, and a big part of why GW has always felt it can get away with rules treated mostly as afterthoughts.

You're winning the game because your opponent fethed up, you didn't do anything and if they couldn't be assed to ask you're not hiding anything either. It's not on me to read minds and know what somebody does or doesn't know.

How hard is it to say "hey, I'm playing X army, using stuff from sources Y and Z, and units A/B/C look similar but do different things, are you familiar with all these and do you need to read over any of those before we start?" If they say they don't need to, then you've done your part, if they aren't familiar with the stuff, let 'em read over the rules before starting. That's basically how I start every game, and is really all I'm advocating.

However, if they don't know, and you're just expecting everyone to know everything without asking, that's going to result in poor play experiences and is not just the fault of the other player, the game simply is not in a state where the expectation that everyone knows everything is reasonable.

I imagine having a friendly/casual game with Canadian to be an unpleasant affair...

 Canadian 5th wrote:

If people are going to call you TFG for playing by the rules I'd rather not play them anyway..

You do realise that what you're essentially saying here is 'I would rather the hobby didn't exist than make the experience a pleasant one for my opponent'...?


Gaming is a social experience. There's a place for a competitive attitude, and for playing things tight to your chest - and that's when your opponent is ok with that style of play. For most 40K players, though, the game is much less serious business than that, and treating it as if people deserve to be curbstomped if they don't put in as much study time as you personally feel is warranted is not going to end well.

Canadian 5th wrote:I could care less if your army is just legs on bases, with the weapon that model is using stuck on the base. I care far more about the rules and gameplay side than the hobby/modelling/crafting side of this game.

Canadian 5th wrote:I haven't stolen anything from GW and, honestly, the reviews and articles on places like Goonhammer are 100% fair use and will get you up to speed with the gotcha moments of the game. Beyond that, it gets a little more grey but accessing a site hosting pirated material isn't a crime so I'll keep using my sources for the time being.

Canadian 5th wrote:Then invest a little more into the game when you're away from the tabletop so you don't waste your investment. Or preschedule your games with other scrubs and casuals. If you're always getting matched with people who play opposite to your own style that's on you.

Uh huh

*roll to disbelieve*

 Vaktathi wrote:
There's lot of ways to play by the rules. Lots of TFG's play entirely within the rules. It's about trying to maintain a pleasant experience for both players. These aren't mutually exclusive.

I'll be pleasant, make small talk, joke about dice luck, etc. but I'll also enforce the rules and tell people that they should have asked before making a move if they were worried about something unexpected happening. I'm not going to yell at anybody for being a noob in person just as I'm not typing in all caps here.

Because if people aren't getting huge numbers of games in then, they probably aren't investing a couple thousand dollars in rules sources or spending many hours independently researching the rules and meta to know everything the game might throw at them. They'll absolutely have responsibility to know their own stuff, and the *basics* of most common opponents, but beyond that, at least in my own experience playing this game for many years and editions, most people tend to get substantially fuzzier beyond that, particularly the last couple editions as the content level has exploded.

I would consider strategems, army wide special rules, and the like basic knowledge in 8th edition.

Yeah most people can get (or reuse) a table. Buying and storing a good amount of terrain, and having a home situation that's conducive to having people over to play regularly, is a different matter, and if they can only make it down to the game store once a month, they probably don't have time for a bunch of scrim games either.

Then they should put in the effort to set up a casual narrative game that they'll enjoy before going to the shop to ensure that their only game that month will be enjoyable.

People have jobs, kids, other interests and responsibilites, etc that means they get an afternoon a month to devote to playing 40k and a couple hours every other week to work on building and painting something. 40k shouldn't have to be treated as a 2nd job for the average player. People like us that are posting on forums like this, that get in fair numbers of games and are plugged into the web communities and stay abreast of the meta are a tiny fraction of the playerbase, and a big part of why GW has always felt it can get away with rules treated mostly as afterthoughts.

I still don't think it's unreasonable to either expect a casual player to set up a game on social media beforehand or do some research if they just want to come in for a PUG.

How hard is it to say "hey, I'm playing X army, using stuff from sources Y and Z, and units A/B/C look similar but do different things, are you familiar with all these and do you need to read over any of those before we start?" If they say they don't need to, then you've done your part, if they aren't familiar with the stuff, let 'em read over the rules before starting. That's basically how I start every game, and is really all I'm advocating.

I'll go over my list, any relics that I'm buying, and explain any pregame CP I'm spending. I don't think it's needed or expected that I also start covering rules which might not even come into play before we even deploy our models.

However, if they don't know, and you're just expecting everyone to know everything without asking, that's going to result in poor play experiences and is not just the fault of the other player, the game simply is not in a state where the expectation that everyone knows everything is reasonable.

We disagree on this point.

 insaniak wrote:
You do realise that what you're essentially saying here is 'I would rather the hobby didn't exist than make the experience a pleasant one for my opponent'...?

I'll be playing with either my weekend MtG/D&D/Boardgame group and ignoring the rest of the 40k world or playing the more competitive crowd at the LGS. If it gets down the list to playing a PUG I'm going to play the way I normally do and given that I expect this to be a rarity I won't much care if the once every 2 months, doesn't really know the game casual thinks I'm TFG for not allowing a do-over for a publicly available rule.

Catulle wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:I could care less if your army is just legs on bases, with the weapon that model is using stuck on the base. I care far more about the rules and gameplay side than the hobby/modelling/crafting side of this game.

Canadian 5th wrote:I haven't stolen anything from GW and, honestly, the reviews and articles on places like Goonhammer are 100% fair use and will get you up to speed with the gotcha moments of the game. Beyond that, it gets a little more grey but accessing a site hosting pirated material isn't a crime so I'll keep using my sources for the time being.

Canadian 5th wrote:Then invest a little more into the game when you're away from the tabletop so you don't waste your investment. Or preschedule your games with other scrubs and casuals. If you're always getting matched with people who play opposite to your own style that's on you.

Uh huh

*roll to disbelieve*

Dude, I got my start with 40k back in 3e playing floor wars on a roughly 6x4 rug and when we wanted to play with models or factions we didn't own we proxied using what we had or resorted to cardboard-hammer. I don't have access to that playgroup these days as we've all moved to new cities and drifted apart but given my start, you can play your plastic grey army against mine anytime. If it's just legs on bases we'll swap in the closest model in terms of size for LoS, measure, and move on.

As far as piracy, I don't consider a tool like army builder or a site like wahapedia to be such and between those two sources you can build any list you like. Do you consider printed on paper proxies of MtG cards played at a kitchen table to be theft? I ask because in the case of MtG if you have the right group you can literally play any deck you like for the cost of ink, a few sheets of paper, some sleeves, and a few hundred bulk lands likely had for under $25. Every card and its rules are also 100% free online on WotC's own website, perhaps GW should consider going that route with their rules as well.

 flandarz wrote:
I imagine having a friendly/casual game with Canadian to be an unpleasant affair...

The vast majority people playing hard-asses on online forums tend to be pretty tame people in real live.

 Jidmah wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
I imagine having a friendly/casual game with Canadian to be an unpleasant affair...

The vast majority people playing hard-asses on online forums tend to be pretty tame people in real live.

I think people would be more open to Canadian and Slayer if they could modify the tone of their posts. Katherine is saying something similar and comes across as perfectly reasonable.

Dai wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
I imagine having a friendly/casual game with Canadian to be an unpleasant affair...

The vast majority people playing hard-asses on online forums tend to be pretty tame people in real live.

I think people would be more open to Canadian and Slayer if they could modify the tone of their posts. Katherine is saying something similar and comes across as perfectly reasonable.

Everything I said WAS reasonable. We live in the age of technology where information is stupid easy to come across. Not knowing what a new release is bringing is purely the fault of the ignorant at this point.

Dai wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
I imagine having a friendly/casual game with Canadian to be an unpleasant affair...

The vast majority people playing hard-asses on online forums tend to be pretty tame people in real live.

I think people would be more open to Canadian and Slayer if they could modify the tone of their posts. Katherine is saying something similar and comes across as perfectly reasonable.

It's not tone, they're saying different things and play the game differently to each other.

 Canadian 5th wrote:
As far as piracy, I don't consider a tool like army builder or a site like wahapedia to be such and between those two sources you can build any list you like. Do you consider printed on paper proxies of MtG cards played at a kitchen table to be theft? I ask because in the case of MtG if you have the right group you can literally play any deck you like for the cost of ink, a few sheets of paper, some sleeves, and a few hundred bulk lands likely had for under $25. Every card and its rules are also 100% free online on WotC's own website, perhaps GW should consider going that route with their rules as well.

Accessing content that should be purchased, via a route that means you are not paying the content producer? You may not like to think of it as piracy, but it is.

In the case of the MtG example, as you've noted WotC do give you access to images of all the cards in the game - as well as errata'd card text, last I checked Gatherer - so that information and material has been made publicly available by the content owner. You still wouldn't be allowed to use such proxies in whatever-they're-calling-their-official-events-this-year (seriously, the tour names have changed far too many times over the last few years, for no discernible reason).

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dai wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
I imagine having a friendly/casual game with Canadian to be an unpleasant affair...

The vast majority people playing hard-asses on online forums tend to be pretty tame people in real live.

I think people would be more open to Canadian and Slayer if they could modify the tone of their posts. Katherine is saying something similar and comes across as perfectly reasonable.

Everything I said WAS reasonable. We live in the age of technology where information is stupid easy to come across. Not knowing what a new release is bringing is purely the fault of the ignorant at this point.

The problem is there is way to much information, this is just one game in a wider hobby. And most people will have a few other things they like to do. And interests within the hobby as well. The burden is quite high if players are not willing to at least to go though some rules quick.

I play warmachine and magic, and we go though rules and such quickly. At least so players have an idea.
And it’s not uncommon in magic tournaments to hand your opponent a full deck list. With some even requiring you to have enough copy’s.

Why I think GW needs to get on top of these issues, it really sucks if players are making it worse.