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:

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.

If I'm silver while try-harding and playing 3 games a week then when I play around and play 1 game a week League will put me with bronze players. I don't play games that put me consistently against better players, sounds like a great way to get people to purchase microtransactions though.

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?

I'd expect my opponent to weave auto-attacks a hundred times in skirmishes and fights and expect Lee Sin to insec 2-4 times, I might get surpised and even die one time from not being familiar with my opponent's kit, but unless you've played a matchup five times since anything changed in the game then you won't know exactly how a fight is going to pan out. You can't know what exactly the maximum damage output at a given level a champion has, if a player exceeds that you'll know, at worst it's a 5 minute wait and a 50 minute game, I could be travelling for an hour on bus and wait for half an hour, spend 4 hours on a game and be sour about how I spent a CP and all the shooting my Leman Russ Demolisher into a flyer only to find out it cannot do anything because it's -3 to hit because even if I knew about the gotcha Stratagem of -1 to hit, I might not have asked what Alaitoc does or know that all aircraft are -1 to hit. Alternatively, I might know those two things and not know about the Stratagem. I also see a lot of people mention take-backs, that's not what I'm asking for, ideally you mention the first time your opponent shoots at something with a gotcha Stratagem that it has the option of using that and verify how much firepower they want to put in or you mention it when presenting your list and you say this is -1 to hit in the Shooting phase, -2 if it's >12" away and I can use a Stratagem on any of my x, y or z units that makes them -1 to hit for the rest of the phase after you've decided what weapons to shoot at it with. Perfect world: GW changes these Stratagems to be something you use at the start of the phase.

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.


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.

So everything by your first game gotcha, instead of referring to the rules primer to newer players I will instead refer them to a PDF with everything in it and tell them to come back when they've memorized it, that's another ten hours of Total War for me. Oh but they don't need to if they just accept you're going to own their ass because they haven't done their homework, I get it you really just want easy games, very fun for newer players. I used a gotcha yesterday against a player who was on his third game, he loved it, he asked if I played any other armies that could punish him for not doing more homework.

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.

Legality depends on where you live, users of popcorntime (free pirate streaming service) in Denmark have been fined I have been told. The morality is far outside of etiquette, but I think it's poor etiquette to expect people to do something illegal, you might want to do cocaine but don't bully the people that don't want to join.

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

Sucks to be them.

No, it just sucks to play against you and me because we're gotcha devils.

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.

Who mentioned a rage-quit? They love it don't they? They aren't there to have casual fun, they're there to get better at the game, except not really, they're really there to be loser fodder for gotcha devils.

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.

Is that an admittance of playing competitive games against competitive people? Get the hell out of here, you're a regular competitive player not a true gotcha devil like me. Bwah.

"Etiquette for using Lords of War" that's what this thread is supposed to be about right? Just checking as it got de-railed about 5 pages ago by someone arguing about not knowing extra rules hidden in new books the instant they come out.

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.

Yeah, honestly I don't normally care if someone else decides to be a hard-ass on a rule during a game. It just changes the tone of the game we're playing, and you'd better bet the next time you slip up I'm not letting you take it back.

The entire purpose of my first point was just to say that gaining an advantage because of something my opponent doesn't know generally feels sleazy TO ME. So I tend not to do it. For example, when I play my Harlequins, I generally want to put my Solitaire up front so he can threaten things early, and since he's a tiny single model the easiest way to do that usually is to tuck him somewhere out of LOS. Even the corner of a building with windows is generally more than enough space to hide a Solitaire where he's functionally invulnerable. But that means inevitably my opponents tend to lose track of him because out of LOS in 40k means literally out of sight, usually of my opponent who's across the table from me.

The number of times I've had to point out to an opponent moving a unit forward or deep striking a unit - hey, you know the Solitaire is right here behind this thing - is basically almost equal to the number of games I've played with Harlequins. I also make sure to announce when and where I'm deploying him, point him out specifically to my opponent. Especially back in 7th when he was freely targetable, I hid him behind a wall pretty much 100% of the time, it's just what you did with him to keep him alive.

Nobody has to do that. Just like nobody has to tell you about their brand new super-special rule. I don't even know if there's a rule specifically requiring you to tell your opponents what psychic powers you choose or anything, all these things are just done for the sake of common courtesy, because unlike a game like Infinity there isn't a system for "open and closed" information baked in.

It feels lame to me, so I don't do it, and if my opponent does it, it tends to change the tone of the game.

Damn, maybe having a country name on this forum in your username gives you some kind of brainworms. I wonder how long I've got until I too succumb to the madness.

Apple fox wrote:

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.

There's only so much you NEED to memorize though. The last thing I should have memorized when facing Genestealer Cults is the silly strat that lets Autoguns be Assault 2 for example. The only reason I do remember it is someone probably thought that was a good idea and would help Neophytes LOL

 Dysartes wrote:
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.

I also wouldn't care if it was. I was also supportive of the old online bits sellers and of Chinese recasts of GW models before my hiatus from the hobby.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vict0988 wrote:
If I'm silver while try-harding and playing 3 games a week then when I play around and play 1 game a week League will put me with bronze players. I don't play games that put me consistently against better players, sounds like a great way to get people to purchase microtransactions though.

3 games per week... try-harding...

I'd expect my opponent to weave auto-attacks a hundred times in skirmishes and fights and expect Lee Sin to insec 2-4 times, I might get surpised and even die one time from not being familiar with my opponent's kit, but unless you've played a matchup five times since anything changed in the game then you won't know exactly how a fight is going to pan out.

That's the same in 40k as well, only there are major balance patches every 2 weeks.

I could be travelling for an hour on bus and wait for half an hour, spend 4 hours on a game

In this case, do the job that League's client does for you and matchmake yourself a fething game. The only one to blame for you showing up and having a bad time if you don't matchmake is yourself.

So everything by your first game gotcha, instead of referring to the rules primer to newer players I will instead refer them to a PDF with everything in it and tell them to come back when they've memorized it, that's another ten hours of Total War for me. Oh but they don't need to if they just accept you're going to own their ass because they haven't done their homework, I get it you really just want easy games, very fun for newer players. I used a gotcha yesterday against a player who was on his third game, he loved it, he asked if I played any other armies that could punish him for not doing more homework.

You should probably put in at least 30-40 hours before you actually invest $1000+and dozens of hours gluing and painting into your little plastic soldiers. Otherwise, you may find that you don't like your army, your local scene, the game's balance, etc. and have wasted your money on things you'll never use.

Legality depends on where you live, users of popcorntime (free pirate streaming service) in Denmark have been fined I have been told.

Evidence? Also, lol get a VPN.

Who mentioned a rage-quit? They love it don't they? They aren't there to have casual fun, they're there to get better at the game, except not really, they're really there to be loser fodder for gotcha devils.

If they ask before making a move and communicate as the game progresses there won't be a gotcha. If they clam up and just make moves based on how they think the game works without knowing the rules they deserve what they get.

Is that an admittance of playing competitive games against competitive people? Get the hell out of here, you're a regular competitive player not a true gotcha devil like me. Bwah.

I'm not sure what your point is but keep whatever you're smoking far away from me.

 Rolsheen wrote:
"Etiquette for using Lords of War" that's what this thread is supposed to be about right? Just checking as it got de-railed about 5 pages ago by someone arguing about not knowing extra rules hidden in new books the instant they come out.

The matter is actually tangentially related, since the heart of the question is "am I obligated to let my opponent change their list and actions after revealing elements of my own that might disrupt their strategy or they might not have planned for?"

I believe the answer in both cases is decisively "no." The onus is on them to consider what I could field, do, or use and consider how it would affect their strategy and how they'll mitigate it's contribution to mine.

It is also the responsibility of the individual to keep themselves appraised of the rules at any given time, and to be aware of when one is not and seek to remedy that situation pre-emptively. Is is not my responsibility to teach you to play 40k or to hold your hand as you pilot your list. I assume my opponents arrive to the game at least fundamentally invested enough in winning the game to make an effort at strategy and be sufficient cognizant of any deficiencies in their knowledge of the rules to seek to remedy them as relevant before the game begins. If you know that you don't know what stratagems are an option for CSM in Faith and Fury, you should ask your opponent before the game to look at their book. If you know that the Imperial Guard has access to super heavy tanks, but don't know how bad one of them in your opponent's list will be for your army, you should ask your opponent before the game to look at their book. I think it's unfair to ask every player to buy every book, so I consider it adequate courtesy as a person being asked to hand over the book so they can look at it. On the other hand, I also consider it unfair to me to tell them that I am/am not fielding a Shadowsword just so that they can prepare a counter, or that they shouldn't drop there because I'll use my interceptor stratagem on them just so that they can not do something that will have a negative outcome for them.

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

Use your own judgement. Superheavies, and Lords of War in general, are nowhere near as daunting to face as they once were with everything being able to wound everything. For my part, I don't particularly mind facing them if i'm playing a pick up game, but I play far more casually than i once did and i would prefer not to face them. I also generally don't field any of my own.

40k is a weird game that, in my experience tends to split the community into at least 2 parts (casual/competitive) due to its game balance issues, and putting a casual list up against a competitive list, or a casual player up against a competitive one can lead to one or both of you not having a good time. so talk to your prospective opponent, discuss what kind of game you both expect, and go from there.

Killing an IK is basically like killing two Russ tanks. I don't see the issue.

Martel732 wrote:
Killing an IK is basically like killing two Russ tanks. I don't see the issue.

And yet leviathans terrify you. The mind boggles.

Leviathans have a damage reduction strat and 2+ and a 4++ base. And they are cheaper than IKs. And they do more damage than IKs. They are better in every way except wound count and close combat. Oh, and better BS. How could I forget that cheese.

Martel732 wrote:
Leviathans have a damage reduction strat and 2+ and a 4++ base. And they are cheaper than IKs. And they do more damage than IKs. They are better in every way except wound count and close combat. Oh, and better BS. How could I forget that cheese.

Hellforged leviathans lack the strategem and only have a 5++ against shooting. And if you can't kill one in a turn or tar pit it with chaff you aren't working hard enough.

Havent seen one of those in a while to be honest. Only imperial.

Martel732 wrote:
Havent seen one of those in a while to be honest. Only imperial.

And yet you constantly call for the banning or nerfing of both. And those imperial ones are just as easy to tar pit.

I kind of agree with Martel though - the UM player in our group has a pair of grav bombard Leviathans he keeps save with Tigurius and repairs with tech marines. Despite them not having the "fun-gun" load-out, I'd rather play against a full knight army than against those.
Their durability combined with their damage output is just insane.

 Jidmah wrote:
I kind of agree with Martel though - the UM player in our group has a pair of grav bombard Leviathans he keeps save with Tigurius and repairs with tech marines. Despite them not having the "fun-gun" load-out, I'd rather play against a full knight army than against those.
Their durability combined with their damage output is just insane.

Once again, the problem isn't the leviathan, it's loyalist marines. The hellforged leviathan can only be repaired by it killing things in cc. And we know how hard it is to get something to work in cc. This is one of the things that sucks about playing csm, when we do get something nice, the fething loyalists get a better version, and everyone then wants to nerf or ban both versions.

And of course both versions are the same. Fething. Price.

Sure, but I doubt that me fielding a DG leviathan with miasma protection would be vastly more fun to play against.

The issue isn't really the powerlevel - as you can imagine an UM with Tigurius and two Grav Leviathans isn't exactly competitive.

It's more of the frustration of not being able to do anything about those two dreads, while they just walk about and pick two unit to delete per turn.

 Jidmah wrote:
Sure, but I doubt that me fielding a DG leviathan with miasma protection would be vastly more fun to play against.

The issue isn't really the powerlevel - as you can imagine an UM with Tigurius and two Grav Leviathans isn't exactly competitive.

It's more of the frustration of not being able to do anything about those two dreads, while they just walk about and pick two unit to delete per turn.

You can tar pit them. And if things that are hard to kill bother you then what about Custodes? An army of units that all have at least 3 wounds and a 2+ backed up by at least a 5++ can be pretty frustrating, but you don't call for the army to be eliminated, you just change your strategy when facing them. I personally find games against them interesting, as it forces me to adapt.

 Jidmah wrote:
Sure, but I doubt that me fielding a DG leviathan with miasma protection would be vastly more fun to play against.

The issue isn't really the powerlevel - as you can imagine an UM with Tigurius and two Grav Leviathans isn't exactly competitive.

It's more of the frustration of not being able to do anything about those two dreads, while they just walk about and pick two unit to delete per turn.

And that can't be said about all of the following: TFC; obliterators, artillery regardless, riptides, commanders, possessed bomb, heck even intercessors to some degree because 30" baseline gun.
That is a non argument imo.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
I kind of agree with Martel though - the UM player in our group has a pair of grav bombard Leviathans he keeps save with Tigurius and repairs with tech marines. Despite them not having the "fun-gun" load-out, I'd rather play against a full knight army than against those.
Their durability combined with their damage output is just insane.

Once again, the problem isn't the leviathan, it's loyalist marines. The hellforged leviathan can only be repaired by it killing things in cc. And we know how hard it is to get something to work in cc. This is one of the things that sucks about playing csm, when we do get something nice, the fething loyalists get a better version, and everyone then wants to nerf or ban both versions.

And of course both versions are the same. Fething. Price.

Couldn't agree more.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Sure, but I doubt that me fielding a DG leviathan with miasma protection would be vastly more fun to play against.

The issue isn't really the powerlevel - as you can imagine an UM with Tigurius and two Grav Leviathans isn't exactly competitive.

It's more of the frustration of not being able to do anything about those two dreads, while they just walk about and pick two unit to delete per turn.

You can tar pit them. And if things that are hard to kill bother you then what about Custodes? An army of units that all have at least 3 wounds and a 2+ backed up by at least a 5++ can be pretty frustrating, but you don't call for the army to be eliminated, you just change your strategy when facing them. I personally find games against them interesting, as it forces me to adapt.

You can't tarpit them any better or worse than any other unit. Which means, if you opponent screens them properly, you can't. There is also the issue of two flamers and buff characters doing heroic interventions. And since they are UM, they can just walk it off.

As for custodes? They don't actually compare at all. They kill much less for the points you spent, are slower, aren't T8, every three wounds you do reduces their damage and there is no doctrine and chapter tactics on top of what they have.

The thing with the leviathan is that it combines a ridiculous defensive profile (T8/W14/2+/4++) with a just ridiculous offensive profile (grav bombards/butcher cannons(storm cannons). Sure, it pays its price for that, but that doesn't make it more fun to face than a knight, baneblade, daemon primarch, lord of skulls or other things get that have people get their knickers up in a bunch just because they have the LoW battle role.

Oh, and before the usual "LeViaThanS ArE fINe!!!!111" crowd jumps me, I don't care. The Leviathans are not winning my UM buddy lots of games, so I highly doubt they are OP. It just sucks to play against them.

Again, alot of other Units Fall into the Same vein.

Not Online!!! wrote:
And that can't be said about all of the following: TFC; obliterators, artillery regardless, riptides, commanders, possessed bomb, heck even intercessors to some degree because 30" baseline gun.
That is a non argument imo.

Drone-swamped tau might compare (I have no experience with that), everything else on that list has obvious downsides that can be used to outplay or destroy them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Again, alot of other Units Fall into the Same vein.

For clarification, I was specifically referring to this statement of him:

Martel732 wrote:
Leviathans have a damage reduction strat and 2+ and a 4++ base. And they are cheaper than IKs. And they do more damage than IKs. They are better in every way except wound count and close combat. Oh, and better BS. How could I forget that cheese.

 Jidmah wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Sure, but I doubt that me fielding a DG leviathan with miasma protection would be vastly more fun to play against.

The issue isn't really the powerlevel - as you can imagine an UM with Tigurius and two Grav Leviathans isn't exactly competitive.

It's more of the frustration of not being able to do anything about those two dreads, while they just walk about and pick two unit to delete per turn.

You can tar pit them. And if things that are hard to kill bother you then what about Custodes? An army of units that all have at least 3 wounds and a 2+ backed up by at least a 5++ can be pretty frustrating, but you don't call for the army to be eliminated, you just change your strategy when facing them. I personally find games against them interesting, as it forces me to adapt.

You can't tarpit them any better or worse than any other unit. Which means, if you opponent screens them properly, you can't. There is also the issue of two flamers and buff characters doing heroic interventions. And since they are UM, they can just walk it off.

As for custodes? They don't actually compare at all. They kill much less for the points you spent, are slower, aren't T8, every three wounds you do reduces their damage and there is no doctrine and chapter tactics on top of what they have.

The thing with the leviathan is that it combines a ridiculous defensive profile (T8/W14/2+/4++) with a just ridiculous offensive profile (grav bombards/butcher cannons(storm cannons). Sure, it pays its price for that, but that doesn't make it more fun to face than a knight, baneblade, daemon primarch, lord of skulls or other things get that have people get their knickers up in a bunch just because they have the LoW battle role.

Oh, and before the usual "LeViaThanS ArE fINe!!!!111" crowd jumps me, I don't care. The Leviathans are not winning my UM buddy lots of games, so I highly doubt they are OP. It just sucks to play against them.

Again, you're talking about the loyalist version. And people like Martel who constantly gripe about leviathans (and everything else, in his case) also want to nerf or ban the chaos version. If the loyalist leviathan had a 5++ like the hellforged it wouldn't be so damned annoying.

And who has trouble killing LOW?

Please refer to the last line of the post you quoted.

A model can be utterly unfun to play against despite not doing great in tournaments.
And yes I believe that it applies to both variants equally, because both have the same underlying problem, which is in no way related to their point costs.

 Jidmah wrote:
Please refer to the last line of the post you quoted.

A model can be utterly unfun to play against despite not doing great in tournaments.
And yes I believe that it applies to both variants equally, because both have the same underlying problem, which is in no way related to their point costs.

What underlying problem is that? The last time I played against a leviathan in a chaos list it had like...16 souped-up autocannon shots or something. Nothing that seemed particularly bonkers for a 250-ish point model. And lascannons were perfectly efficient against it because it had 2+5++, it just got blown up turn 2 or so.

Ah, I completely forgot that the chaos variant just has 5++ vs shooting.

I retract my statement above and agree. A leviathan that can actually be hurt by anti-tank weapons is much less of an issue than the loyalist variant.

 Jidmah wrote:
Ah, I completely forgot that the chaos variant just has 5++ vs shooting.

I retract my statement above and agree. A leviathan that can actually be hurt by anti-tank weapons is much less of an issue than the loyalist variant.

Which means you didn't read my post.

And then told me to reread yours.

Yes, yes, you were right, I was not. Friends?

 Jidmah wrote:
Yes, yes, you were right, I was not. Friends?

The Chaos leve has 4++ if in melee though
Also are DG even allowed to take one?

For FW models, <Legion> can be DG or TS.