The Spirit of 40K

[Mal]

I am neither a fluff **** or a WAAC player... I like friendly matches where you can just kick back, relax and play the game... but during competative matches I will not, under any circumstances, hold back.

With this in mind I have had people throw 'the spirit of 40k' in my face lately as a reason to not play competatively... and to be perfectly honest, I just don't get it. The spirit of 40K is something that is defined by the game itself... and the game is targeted to 14yr old boys who may aswell be diagnosed with ADHD.

I cannot see how that means I shouldn't play competatively.

To give an example, BuFFo informed me of a movement technique that allows transports to get a little closer to enemy lines on turn 1... I have scoured the rule book and the tactic is perfectly legal. It may not be very nice, but lets face it, in competative play, there is very little that can be considered a 'nice tactic'.
So having put this tactic to one of my gaming groups I had a member come out and call me an outright cheater because im not following the spirit of 40K by doing this.

What a load of twaddle.

As far as im concerned, if people do not want to use tactics like these to help them gain an advantage in competative games, then more fool them, I however refuse to handicap myself just because my opponent doesn't like my tactics.

So what are your views on the matter? Do you think competative matches are any place for 'friendly play'? What do you view the 'spirit of 40K' as?

[eldargal]

40k is designed as a fun, friendly game, it is not designed with tournament play in mind as GW often point out. This isn't to say tournaments do not have a place, but if you take an over-competitive approach to regular games amonst friends/club members (I'm not saying you do, just making the point) then that is against the spirit of the game.

[Mal]

Yes but I don't so that... as stated in the first paragraph of my post.

What im talking about is people saying you should play competatively in competative games because its not in the 'spirit of 40K' which is nothing but an excuse for loosing in my opinion.

The tactic in question allows me to make a 1st turn charge... but only a few inches over the enemies deployment zone... so if they start a few inches further back, or put their highly durable/killer combat units at the front, its countered. I really don't see how this kind of tactic can be considered cheating or even unfair... its just a basic deployment tactic.

Every arguemnt i've had against it has either been completly unfounded (I got called a cheater and assuced of bending the rules, yet this tactic does neither), or like you stated eldargal, it shouldn't be used in friendly games...

Don't take this the wrong way but the counter argument of not using those tactics in friendly games when its already stated they are only for competative games is a bit redundant and not much of a counter argument at all. We've got to keep this in perspective.

[scadugenga]

If you're trying to play tourney-style competitive against someone who's just looking for a fun game, then yes, you are violating the "Spririt of 40k."

But lets make it a bit more broad--you're violating the "spirit of good gamesmanship."

The spirit of 40k, or any game, is that both (or all) players are intended to enjoy the game, win or lose. If you're scouring the rules to give you just that little bit extra edge, then you should save that for tourney play.

Otherwise, you fully deserve being called a WAAC player if you're bringing your "tourney" game to a "friendly" game environment.

Talk to your opponent first--see what his expectations are. If he or she doesn't want the uber-I'm-in-training-for-'ardboyz" kind of game, then maybe you shouldn't play that person, and find someone who'll give you the kind of game you want.

Frankly, you seem to only think there's one way to play the game--and you're wrong. If you truly believe that competitive play is the only way to play, then you are really just out there looking to curbstomp people and are a WAAC player.

[Night System]

well from my experience, games can be broadly fitted into 2 catagories.

*friendly*
here is your pick up games, your catch up, your organized burger and a beer with your friends, campaign games, etc.

*competitive*
Tournaments, and practicing for tournaments.

in the first instance, pull a tactic like that and you can be officially branded as a Arsehole =]

but if playing in a tournament, or practicing for one, then your opponent should shut up moaning and get on with it, playing in tournaments is entirely optional, if you dont like the taste dont try and eat the biscuit, it is as simple as that.

A place for everything and everything in its place...

[Mal]

If you're trying to play tourney-style competitive against someone who's just looking for a fun game, then yes, you are violating the "Spririt of 40k."

But lets make it a bit more broad--you're violating the "spirit of good gamesmanship."

The spirit of 40k, or any game, is that both (or all) players are intended to enjoy the game, win or lose. If you're scouring the rules to give you just that little bit extra edge, then you should save that for tourney play.

Otherwise, you fully deserve being called a WAAC player if you're bringing your "tourney" game to a "friendly" game environment.

Talk to your opponent first--see what his expectations are. If he or she doesn't want the uber-I'm-in-training-for-'ardboyz" kind of game, then maybe you shouldn't play that person, and find someone who'll give you the kind of game you want.

Frankly, you seem to only think there's one way to play the game--and you're wrong. If you truly believe that competitive play is the only way to play, then you are really just out there looking to curbstomp people and are a WAAC player.


Now you've had your little flame fun, go back and read my post... the first paragraph in particular...

Feel like a fool yet?

I am talking about competative tactics in competative games, nothing else, so please stop with the pointless bashing of using them in friendly games when I have repeatedly said that I don't.

I enjoy friendly games, and when im offered a game at the clubs I play at, its friendly games, unless its a league event or im asked for a competative game. I do not play WAAC unless im in a competative match.

[Grimnar42]

Without knowing the tactic and thus not being able to give an opinion basically is it a loophole tactic or something that can be legitimately and validly used.

Also just because the rules say you cant do something does not validate its use. Ultimately its up to you if you think its ok play people who also think its ok. Its all about fun and different people have different ideas of fun.

[Mal]

I understand that grimnar, and the tactic doesn't require and ambigious rules interpretations, it just uses the vehicle turning rules to the letter, but combined with transport and fleet unit to allow for first turn board dominance... just a basic deployment tactic.

Af for friendly games, yes there is plenty of reason not to use these tactics, but in competative games, I see no reason to not use them. But thats the difference between competative games and friendly games.

[eldargal]

I know, I said I wasn't accusing you in my post, I was just stating exactly what I think would be against the spirit of the game.:)
Competitive play is what competitive games are for, so long as you are a good sport about it (no gloating/whinging) anything goes in terms of tactics and lists.


Yes but I don't so that... as stated in the first paragraph of my post.

What im talking about is people saying you should play competatively in competative games because its not in the 'spirit of 40K' which is nothing but an excuse for loosing in my opinion.

The tactic in question allows me to make a 1st turn charge... but only a few inches over the enemies deployment zone... so if they start a few inches further back, or put their highly durable/killer combat units at the front, its countered. I really don't see how this kind of tactic can be considered cheating or even unfair... its just a basic deployment tactic.

Every arguemnt i've had against it has either been completly unfounded (I got called a cheater and assuced of bending the rules, yet this tactic does neither), or like you stated eldargal, it shouldn't be used in friendly games...

Don't take this the wrong way but the counter argument of not using those tactics in friendly games when its already stated they are only for competative games is a bit redundant and not much of a counter argument at all. We've got to keep this in perspective.

[Mal]

Thank you.

[Rapture]

I am not sure I would refer to taking advantage of poorly constructed vehicle pivoting rules as a tactic. It is understandable why people would be upset by your (lets be honest) WAAC movement phase. I would be embarrassed to be caught doing something like that, whether the environment was competitive or not.

However, you are entitled to play however you like. Why not just encourage you opponent to pull off the same move to keep the playing field even? Or just both agree not to do it, once again balancing things. Unless you prefer to play games when the odds are tipped in your favor due to the fact that you know someone who likes to read the rule book specifically looking for obscure advantages.

[Old_Paladin]

Rapture, you did read that he has said it was Buffo's tactic, right?


And it perfectly shows both sides of the debate.
Sometimes people are just going to have to act like adults and realize that just because they don't know every nuance of the game doesn't mean the other player is a WAAC'er.
And sometimes players need to realize that just because they are smarter, not everyone is out to better their gameplay.

It also shows that no matter what there will always, always, be a group of people that complain about things; it's human nature. Some people want to play their hardest, some people find joy in mediocrity. Both are right and wrong at the same time. The game is not perfected for competitive tournies, but it's still more then solid enough to hold up to extreme challenges the majority of the time.

[BuFFo]

Mal, maybe now you understand why to many people, I am the one who always seems like a bad guy on these forums. I mean, look at your responses! People either cannot read around here, or they just want to 'attempt' to sound smart, but fail on every level.

This is the simple truth, right here...

Warhammer 40,000 is a game like any other. It is a game like Chess, Black Jack, Basketball, Hockey, Monopoly, etc... What do all games have in common? Rules.

When you play a game, you play by it's rules. In life, many aspects of humanity have "Gray Areas", but games are not one of these things. You can only ever do one of two things; Play by the rules, or not.

For some reason, people in 40K seem to have this self entitlement of telling other people HOW to play the game. For example;

I move my squad 6". I am playing by the rules. No one complains.

I move my Raider 12", then Pivot. I am playing by the rules. There is ZERO ambiguity here. People cry foul and become insulting.

I did not CHEAT. I am playing by the rules as printed in a rule book. Yes, in 40K there are rules that are not written well, and can be debated, but this is NOT one of those situations.

Who are you to judge me? Who are you to tell me I can move my models 6" by the rules, but I must limit myself when moving my vehicle?

The answer is painfully simple. Those kind of people who tell you that you cannot do something are either ignorant or blantantly stupid. They either honestly think you are breaking the rules, or know you aren't, but don't want you to take a certain action in game because it will give you an advantage they were not aware of.

As for 'Friendly' and 'Competitive'. This is a game with a winner and a loser. I don't care what anyone's excuse is for playing 40K because the one constant is that every game, by the definition OF a game, is Competitive. You are playing to win, regardless of any other factors.

You may be playing to teach someone, but this is the exception. You aren't playing the game, you are teaching a new player the rules. You may be playing just to have fun, but the game still requires a winner. It doesn't matter. The game, as the rules state, require a winner, a loser, or a draw.

Personally, I prefer the terms 'Tournament' and 'Friendly/Pick up games" to distinguish the two mental modes of playing this game.

Of course I am pretty sure people are going to multi quote me and pick me apart. Such is the internet. The fact remains regardless. You are either playing by the rule, or you are breaking them. Just because someone insults you by calling you a power gamer, a WAAC player, a rules lawyer, it doesn't matter. There is no Gray Area here.

Just ike if someone takes a Nob Biker Squad, or 9 Vendettas, or Mephiston. The rules allow it. No one is being 'cheesy'. No one is 'cheating'. They are playing by the same rules you are. Every time I see someone call an army list cheesy, of unfluffy, a part of me dies inside.

And for anyone claiming to know the 'Spirit of the Game', they are full of sh!t. There really is no eloquent way to put it. That is just an excuse people say to tack on an insult and/or attempt to tell you how to play the game THEIR way.

[Mal]

Thank you very much for your words BuFFo, I feel much vindicated now.

Basically I will play the way I choose to play... and im never short of people wanting to play me... in an average session I will receive at least half a dozen game challenges (even though I only have time for 2, sometimes 3 games per session).

It just rubs me the wrong way when people try to pull this... it is essentially bullying, you either do what they want (and which point you may aswell take a hammer to your minis), or you get branded the bad guy... This is the one aspect of the game I really loathe.

Can't people just leave me alone and let me play? Is it really too much to ask for?

P.s. BuFFo check your PM's i've sent you something you may find interesting.

[BuFFo]

Thank you very much for your words BuFFo, I feel much vindicated now.

Welcome to a very exclusive club in 40k. You have a brain.


It just rubs me the wrong way when people try to pull this... it is essentially bullying, you either do what they want (and which point you may aswell take a hammer to your minis), or you get branded the bad guy... This is the one aspect of the game I really loathe.

This hobby is full of bullies.


Can't people just leave me alone and let me play? Is it really too much to ask for?

They are jealous that you thought of something first they didn't.

Like with this whole Pain Token stuff going on in the BoLs blog. I wish I thought of that. Well, I don't have a codex, so I can't read it as much as the guys who basically live in a hobby store!

[scadugenga]

I've read your opening paragraph. And you know what? This is what is paraphrases as: "I don't want to sound like an *******, but I'm going to be one anyway."

Your entire post, when you're not lamenting people not wanting to play competitively with you, is bashing 40k. Evidence as below:




With this in mind I have had people throw 'the spirit of 40k' in my face lately as a reason to not play competatively...


The spirit of 40K is something that is defined by the game itself... and the game is targeted to 14yr old boys who may aswell be diagnosed with ADHD.

There was another one (I think in a different thread) where you said 40k is for powergaming 14 year olds as well.

So, what it appears like to me is either

1) You're upset that your friends won't play the game the way you want to and are seeking indepent 3rd party vindication of your viewpoint,

2) You thought that there wasn't enough flaming going on in the forums and wanted to rectify that, or

3) You are sincerely interested in the question.

If #3 applies, then your execution is hideous. Your question gets lost in the rest of your post about lack of competitive play for you, and your obsession with 14 year olds and 40k orientation.



Feel like a fool yet?


Not really. Feel like a tool yet?

[Mal]

scad... whats the target audience for 40K?

[scadugenga]

Mal: Target audience for 40k? Gamers. I think age is (mostly) irrelavent. Though I admit that the game has definitely dumbed down--oops, I mean "streamlined" since 2nd ed.

That being said--no one (and most assuredly not me) is saying you can't play competitvely (or to use Buffo's better analogy tournament style). My only intention is to point out that if you don't agree on the style of play for the game, and one party is different in intention from the other--then you will not have a good game. Communication--key.

@Buffo I don't think anyone's calling you a cheater--I'm certainly not. And kudos--I think your "tournament / friendly play" distinction is *much* better than competetive/friendly styles. Removes confusion.

[BuFFo]

@Buffo I don't think anyone's calling you a cheater...

Hey, for a dollars you can call me anything you want... For 10 dollars I can BE anything you want!


And kudos--I think your "tournament / friendly play" distinction is *much* better than competetive/friendly styles. Removes confusion.

I am fully cognizant of what a 'power gamer' is and what a 'casual' gamer' is, but I prefer to lump everyone into either Tournament Minded or Friendly Minded.

[Mal]

Mal: Target audience for 40k? Gamers. I think age is (mostly) irrelavent. Though I admit that the game has definitely dumbed down--oops, I mean "streamlined" since 2nd ed.

That being said--no one (and most assuredly not me) is saying you can't play competitvely (or to use Buffo's better analogy tournament style). My only intention is to point out that if you don't agree on the style of play for the game, and one party is different in intention from the other--then you will not have a good game. Communication--key.

@Buffo I don't think anyone's calling you a cheater--I'm certainly not. And kudos--I think your "tournament / friendly play" distinction is *much* better than competetive/friendly styles. Removes confusion.

For the record the target audience for 40K is young boys around 14 years of age...
Having once run a youth activity group for boys aged 12-16 my correlation to this age group being able to be diagnosed as having ADHD is right on the money.

Your last post was sensible and polite... your previous posts were nothing but flaming me, and more to the point, flaming me for doing something I already told you I don't do...

Can you see where I may take exception to that?

[DarkLink]

Screw the "spirit of 40k". I'm gonna play the game how I want to, in order to have as much fun as possible. I don't care if some whiner gets up on a pedastle and starts acting all high and mighty towards me.

Any game is a competition to see who wins. You play by the rules, and are under no obligation to hinder yourself because of some arbitrary decision someone else made about what is fair and what isn't.



Now, it's worth noting that the game is usually more fun if both people have fun. Generally that means that a game with two completitive players against each other, or two casual players against each other, will be more fun than a mix of the two.

If someone makes a list just to mess around, it'll probably be more fun to do the same, rather than ruthlessly curb-stomping them into the ground. Unless they're into that sort of thing:rolleyes:.

[DadExtraordinaire]

For the record the target audience for 40K is young boys around 14 years of age...
Having once run a youth activity group for boys aged 12-16 my correlation to this age group being able to be diagnosed as having ADHD is right on the money.

Your last post was sensible and polite... your previous posts were nothing but flaming me, and more to the point, flaming me for doing something I already told you I don't do...

Can you see where I may take exception to that?

Hi Mal, et al.

Interesting discussion you have here, however I have to correct some of the points banded around based upon experience and first hand knowledge:

1.A part of the GW Business model is aimed at the around the young teenage group.
2. The other is aimed at hobbyists who like to game, collect and immerse themselves if they so choose in the fluff (a word I use but I really dislike immensely).
3. GW was conceived right from the start as a business not a hobby (I was born in Cheshire and (knew of) as did Ian Livingstone (who still drops in the School to give talks about his life and business acumen) and Steve Jackson attended Altrincham Grammar Boys school).
4. They joined up later with Bryan Ansell and formed Citadel Miniatures.

(You can go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Games_Workshop and read up on (what sparse information) of the history of GW

5. The "fans" (include in here some rather key people: Rick Priestley, Bryan Ansell, Richard Halliwell, John Blanche, The Perry Twins, and lately during the past couple of decades!!!- Tom Kirby) and the paying fan, turned the business into what it is today with the odd MB and Board room reshuffle(s).
6. The core rules were never designed for competitions - having said that for "fans" who have made this possible is absolutely amazing and a lot of considerable effort input by the fans has paid off.
7. Alan Merrett is considered the "god father" of the history as we know it today (ok fluff grrr).
8. Jervis Johnson is considered the "god father" of the designs of the key games as we know them today.
9. Jes Goodwin is considered the "god father" of the overall "feel" of the figures for W40K and other designers support him of course (albeit each of the designers are gods in their own right anyhow, to me it seems slightly mute point as, the design team has to be one of the most successful group of talented people to produce day in / out 1st class quality designs).
10. Today’s look and feel of GW is in my opinion the best - in the early days it felt a little disjointed, strategies were not clearly defined, yet it was all rather exciting as there was nothing like it really anywhere in the world - a unique shop that catered for miniature gamers - wow :o

History lesson over for today.....now...where was I...oh yes, I say Mal each to their own.

If people want to play by WAACaday (sorry can't help myself it reminds of Timmy Mallet:p) then great for them. Do I play to win, yes, but I also play to have fun and enjoy the setting and environment, so if I do not win no big deal, I just make sure I learn from the experience. Personally I am in the same league as Jervis Johnson& co and EldarGal - I love the narrative, the cinematic game events.

My friends and I always try and play games around a story and usually campaigned base (however we did play a stack of games to thoroughly understand 4th and then switch to 5th edition) - we've played WW2 Coral Sea in 1/6000th scale, WW2 20mm, 1/300th, loads of Ancients 28mm, ECW 15mm, Napoleonic (a 3 vs. 2 punch up with one of the allies joining mid through the game all because he did not want to be told how to take a village in front of their position that I was holding, as quite rightly it turns out, he would lose all is men, so he joined the "good French side in this case" of French vs. Austrian, Prussian and Russian. - Great fun and we were only 14/15 at the (loooonnggg) time (ago).....

When I game I tend to fight interesting scenarios like take and hold a bridge until relieved....or fight with 500 points less than my opponent with the objective to delay them and inflict as much damage as possible but still extract my army away from the enemy........things like that it helps you understand the limits of your force better than any comp. game, I can tell you...

Have you guessed yet what else I play?

I play "Historical" games as well ;) To the detriment or should I say horror of my bank manager, I have more lead than any EU food mountain you care to mention (75% of my Ancient armies all 28mm some several thousand painted to competition quality) rest bare, bare I tell you bare....and they all have my name on it....to paint them...back to the paint desk...

Like I said interesting debate......:cool:

[DadExtraordinaire]

[QUOTE=Mal;101906]Having once run a youth activity group for boys aged 12-16 my correlation to this age group being able to be diagnosed as having ADHD is right on the money.QUOTE]

Sorry Mal, but maybe I am a touch sensitive at the moment having a son who has just recently been diagnosed with suspected Autism or ADHD (the assessment is still ongoing) but I am rather perturbed by your jibe at children who suffer from this often misunderstood condition.

I think I understand where you are coming from when having to handle a group of 12 - 16 young youths, but please in future consider your comments before typing and displaying on a public forum?

Many thanks.

[Mal]

Having once run a youth activity group for boys aged 12-16 my correlation to this age group being able to be diagnosed as having ADHD is right on the money.

Sorry Mal, but maybe I am a touch sensitive at the moment having a son who has just recently been diagnosed with suspected Autism or ADHD (the assessment is still ongoing) but I am rather perturbed by your jibe at children who suffer from this often misunderstood condition.

I think I understand where you are coming from when having to handle a group of 12 - 16 young youths, but please in future consider your comments before typing and displaying on a public forum?

Many thanks.

Accepted, I apologise for any discomfort caused by my statements.

As to historical, I play warhammer historical 28mm, I have 2k points of vikings and I had 1800 of normans (until I sold them, 1 darkage army is enough)... i've looked at a roman period army... but I just can't face painting that many guys in skirts :p.

Story based games are great, espically if your doing it over more then 1 game, the problem comes up when most of my games are pick up games rather than planned events, so I don't get to do this very often.

[DadExtraordinaire]

Accepted, I apologise for any discomfort caused by my statements.

As to historical, I play warhammer historical 28mm, I have 2k points of vikings and I had 1800 of normans (until I sold them, 1 darkage army is enough)... i've looked at a roman period army... but I just can't face painting that many guys in skirts :p.

Story based games are great, espically if your doing it over more then 1 game, the problem comes up when most of my games are pick up games rather than planned events, so I don't get to do this very often.

Thank you. I accept the gracious apology. I really like the Dark Ages - I'm slowly building up a Saxon (from early to late period by using certain packs for each period from Old Glory so for early I will have the front rank with smaller shields and for later move by rear rankers with larger round shields and semi-kite shields to the front, I guess its 3 armies in 1 on the cheap ;) My friend has a Norse Irish, and another friend has a Viking - they use to gang up on me and join forces but we either draw or like the last battle I eek out a narrow win (I did have my flanks secure so they broke on my solid Saxon shieldwall:rolleyes: )

Romans - Where do you want to start? Do you play WAB? Imperial Romans (histroically as well) are probably the best in the game - I have two of them one by Irregular Miniatures and one by Gripping Beast. I also have joint favourite with my Imperials that is the Late Roman Army - very colourful, has a mix of cavalry from Heavily armoured through to light horse archers, solid core of spear and archer foot and some very useful auxilia. I will have to see if I can get some photos of them and stick them on here some how :confused: my friend who has the Norse Irish army, has an opposing force for my Late Romans - The Sassanids quite a good force.

My other Ancient armies are are typically made up of many different figure manufacturers, IIHRC: Hoplite Greek, Seleucid, Ptolemaic, Carthaginian (another favourite), Republican Roman, Caesarian Roman, Early Roman (pre-republic), Early Italian States, Tang Chinese, Abbasid (another favourite post islamic conquest -colourful, regular troops foot and cavalry, and very hard hitting with support from Naffatun throwers (flame missles), Norman, Early Byzantine, Maurikian Byzantine (another favorite similar remarks to the Abbasids minus the Naffatun throwers), Quadi and Marcomanni Germanic Tribes, Dacian Tribe, Gallic.....besides some Feudal Scots and English for good measure.

I have now got heavily back into 40K have all races at 3500+ except for the Eldar - slowly building and the Necrons (I just can't get my head round these as I believe there is only one true Devourer in the Universe...however, my friend who has Sassnid and Norse Irish ancient armies is building up a fairly sizeable Necron army).

[Porty1119]

In 40k, there are two general types of people, with a few variations on the basics: people who play to win for various reasons (tactics, challenges, or personal insecurities), and people who play beer and pretzels for various reasons (narrative game, socialize, or just the beer)

[Mal]

Yeah I play WAB (although I don't play 2.0, don't know why but I just can't get in sync with it).

I spent months building my my vikings, trying to find relatively accurate minis from a multitude of different manufacturers to reduce the repeatsa in my army (I actually have about 50% of my army with different casts!).
My konniger is a beast, I have the big fella from wargames foundry, the one with 2 wolfskins over his shoulders and a big axe...

Last campaign I played it I ended up standing off in a challenge between my konniger and the normans army general... even though the norman was mounted the minis still stand eye to eye! Hes the only larger scale mini in my army, and while its not entirely a historically accurate mini, it just looks soo cool that I had to add it in.

I was considering imperial roman if for no other reason than they cover a multitude of time periods.

[Mal]

In 40k, there are two general types of people, with a few variations on the basics: people who play to win for various reasons (tactics, challenges, or personal insecurities), and people who play beer and pretzels for various reasons (narrative game, socialize, or just the beer)

There is a 3rd group too... there are those of us who can play both (although not at the same time as that would just be confuzzling :p )

[scadugenga]

For the record the target audience for 40K is young boys around 14 years of age...
Having once run a youth activity group for boys aged 12-16 my correlation to this age group being able to be diagnosed as having ADHD is right on the money.

Your last post was sensible and polite... your previous posts were nothing but flaming me, and more to the point, flaming me for doing something I already told you I don't do...

Can you see where I may take exception to that?

1) Please post the link to the GW Press Release that specifically states that 40k is for adolescent boys.

2) Lumping an entire age bracket with ADHD is not only bad form, but in poor taste as well.

3) My first post was nothing more than an If/Then. After you called me a fool, well, quid pro quo, neh? And if you think that was flaming, you either have a very loose definition of flaming, or are very thin skinned.

4)If you want more serious discussion on a topic, then you need to be less emotionally charged/biased in your request. Your initial post was full of piss & vinegar about people not wanting to play you in a competitive (ie tournament) fashion.

5) Politeness begets same.

Cheers,

S

[DadExtraordinaire]

Yeah I play WAB (although I don't play 2.0, don't know why but I just can't get in sync with it).

I spent months building my my vikings, trying to find relatively accurate minis from a multitude of different manufacturers to reduce the repeatsa in my army (I actually have about 50% of my army with different casts!).
My konniger is a beast, I have the big fella from wargames foundry, the one with 2 wolfskins over his shoulders and a big axe...

Last campaign I played it I ended up standing off in a challenge between my konniger and the normans army general... even though the norman was mounted the minis still stand eye to eye! Hes the only larger scale mini in my army, and while its not entirely a historically accurate mini, it just looks soo cool that I had to add it in.

I was considering imperial roman if for no other reason than they cover a multitude of time periods.

I like a man with commitment, 50% is no small feat. I agree with you on the Konniger. I got head of shortly but have a think about the Imperial Romans. They are drilled and therefore they tend to be quite flexible in movement and from a painting perspective if you get hold of a dip like Army Painter medium shade dip you could easily knock out a 2000 point army of Imperial in next to no time. ;)

[scadugenga]

@DadExtraordinaire--best of luck to you and your family with your son. That sounds like an ongoing nightmare scenario to have to go through.

[Mal]

I'll have a look into the army painter dips... im passingly familiar with them as I have a mate who uses them for some of his historical armies, I suppose dipping would save me a lot of time...

Either way it'll have to wait until after i've finished the dark eldar forces im working on, unfortunately my wallet can't quite keep up with my plastic crack habit.

[MarneusCalgar]

Sorry everyone, but what is the meaning of WAAC??

In Spain we also have players that play every 40K game as if it is the last round of a tournament... Remeasuring the distances after you´ve done, looking inch after inch to see if he can take any advantage...

Well, if I´m playing pro, or in a tournament, it also bothers me... One thing is to win or playing smart to deserve winning and other thing is play whining for every movement or play that happens in the game...

[Mal]

WAAC = Win At All Costs

Generally speaking most WAAC gamers will do anything they need to to score a voctory... enjoyment is secondary to comming first.

[david5th]

I never thought i would use religion in a discussion but -

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." ( i know it is not worded like that in the bible.)

If someone uses a tactic that the opponent complains about but is legal, that's really their problem.
However i dont think its right when the same person gets out-thought and then complains - Hypocrite.

I have seen this in tournaments and this is one of the few things that annoy me.

I have do problem with WAAC / Power / cheese players. I find my laid back attitude frustrates them and casues them to make mistakes.:)


This is a game with a winner and a loser.

It has 2 winners, the winner of the game and Games Workshop every time we buy anything. ( I know many people use independant outlets but i am making a general statement.)

I will just raise my void shields and ensure my heatsinks work for the inevitable flaming.
( Make sure that i am well done and core all the way through please.:))

[DarkLink]

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." ( i know it is not worded like that in the bible.

Precise wording isn't too important, because it's all translated from one of several ancient languages anyways. You can't retain the exact wording, because languages don't have a direct, word-for-word correlation. Five different people can translate the same thing five different ways, and they can all be correct.



If someone uses a tactic that the opponent complains about but is legal, that's really their problem.
However i dont think its right when the same person gets out-thought and then complains - Hypocrite.


This is as important as the person using the tactic on their opponent being polite is (I don't care if that sentence doesn't make much sense).

Yes, the person using the tactic should be polite to your opponent. But outsmarting your opponent in a competition is not rude.

Getting mad at your opponent for doing something perfectly within the rules, however, is rude. The problem here isn't the person using the tactic, it's the attitude of the "victim".

Generally speaking, of course. Specific situations can change all this. Remember, all generalizations are false:D.

[N0rdicNinja]

Example of something I consider against the spirit of the game:

My Dreadnought moonwalks up to your Land Raider and pulverizes it with its butt grind attack so that your heavy weapons team standing opposite of the Land Raider has to shoot the Dread's front armour.

Perfectly legal move, but entirely illogical. Imagine the battle is a movie, anything that would be "against the spirit of the game" would generally be the same kinds of things that would make you go "WTF!?" if you saw it happen on screen.

This is all irrelevant when two competitive players go head to head, but a lot of people love to let the game play out dramatically in their head. It really does add to the fun for a lot of people, and I'm one of those people. Hence why I never have and I never will play in a tournie and I generally tend to play in basements with friends over going to my FLGS (although I will if no one else is available).

[DadExtraordinaire]

@DadExtraordinaire--best of luck to you and your family with your son. That sounds like an ongoing nightmare scenario to have to go through.

Many thanks for the thoughts and sentiments :o ....it will be a long road, but my son is into the 40K Space Marines (he likes the tanks and figures so currently he is playing with my painted Space Crusade figures and two unpainted Rhinos and Preds :D ) as well as the lego Star Wars and the Transformers film (great action with some dry SOH film, IMHO).

[DarkLink]

but entirely illogical.

Not really. The Dread just smashes the land raider, then pivots at the waist to take the incoming fire. The Dread's not going to be like "hey, I just smashed this land raider, but there's a dev. squad behind me. Meh, they'll probably miss anyways."

[Kahoolin]

To me, if you haven't broken the rules or wildly violated the fluff then you don't have a problem with the spirit of the game.

Rules is obvious. Breaking the rules is breaking the spirit of the game. The reason I say violating fluff is breaking the spirit of the game is because the game designers (whatever their faults may be ;)) design the game to cinematically simulate the background.

As far as "holding back" to make the game fun, I agree with BuFFo. No-one should demand that you play to lose so they can have fun. That's ridiculous.

So a Dark Eldar first turn charge: Legal? Yes. Fluffy? Hell yes. Therefore, you're golden in my opinion.

[Mal]

To me, if you haven't broken the rules or wildly violated the fluff then you don't have a problem with the spirit of the game.

Rules is obvious. Breaking the rules is breaking the spirit of the game. The reason I say violating fluff is breaking the spirit of the game is because the game designers (whatever their faults may be ;)) design the game to cinematically simulate the background.

As far as "holding back" to make the game fun, I agree with BuFFo. No-one should demand that you play to lose so they can have fun. That's ridiculous.

So a Dark Eldar first turn charge: Legal? Yes. Fluffy? Hell yes. Therefore, you're golden in my opinion.

I like this guy...

[Rapture]

Example of something I consider against the spirit of the game:

My Dreadnought moonwalks up to your Land Raider and pulverizes it with its butt grind attack so that your heavy weapons team standing opposite of the Land Raider has to shoot the Dread's front armour.

Perfectly legal move, but entirely illogical. Imagine the battle is a movie, anything that would be "against the spirit of the game" would generally be the same kinds of things that would make you go "WTF!?" if you saw it happen on screen.

This is all irrelevant when two competitive players go head to head, but a lot of people love to let the game play out dramatically in their head. It really does add to the fun for a lot of people, and I'm one of those people. Hence why I never have and I never will play in a tournie and I generally tend to play in basements with friends over going to my FLGS (although I will if no one else is available).

That is a perfect example for the way I feel. The reason that I play a game with models as opposed to Parcheesi pieces is because there is a lot more to 40k than just the interaction of the rules. Vehicles spinning to move faster, models altered to lower their height, and other "clever" tricks can detract from the game as a whole.

[david5th]

[QUOTE=DarkLink;102143
This is as important as the person using the tactic on their opponent being polite is (I don't care if that sentence doesn't make much sense).

Yes, the person using the tactic should be polite to your opponent. But outsmarting your opponent in a competition is not rude.

Getting mad at your opponent for doing something perfectly within the rules, however, is rude. The problem here isn't the person using the tactic, it's the attitude of the "victim".

Generally speaking, of course. Specific situations can change all this. Remember, all generalizations are false:D.[/QUOTE]

That was what i was trying to say but far less eloquently than you.:)

[DadExtraordinaire]

To me, if you haven't broken the rules or wildly violated the fluff then you don't have a problem with the spirit of the game.

Rules is obvious. Breaking the rules is breaking the spirit of the game. The reason I say violating fluff is breaking the spirit of the game is because the game designers (whatever their faults may be ;)) design the game to cinematically simulate the background.

As far as "holding back" to make the game fun, I agree with BuFFo. No-one should demand that you play to lose so they can have fun. That's ridiculous.

So a Dark Eldar first turn charge: Legal? Yes. Fluffy? Hell yes. Therefore, you're golden in my opinion.

I agree with you, Kahoolin. In terms of breaking the rules we could also say "...as well as moving the odd 1/4 of an inch etc".

Without some kind of background the game would be like any other. For historical wargaming you have history which I find is great for learning how good you are as a general when trying to recreate an historical battle and do better than the side you are playing, historically.

That is why I find the IA books from 1 to 7 brilliant pieces of W40K fluff that allows you to recreate those situations depicted.

As for themed or WAAC you can be guided somewhat from the background fluff for the force as to what sort of list and play the army would be suitable for IMHO ;)

[mikethefish]

That is a perfect example for the way I feel. The reason that I play a game with models as opposed to Parcheesi pieces is because there is a lot more to 40k than just the interaction of the rules. Vehicles spinning to move faster, models altered to lower their height, and other "clever" tricks can detract from the game as a whole.

And the responsibility with that rests fully on the heads of the GW writers, who came up with rules where this sort of thing is allowed. Perhaps they'll get it right in 6th edition :rolleyes:

[DarkLink]

And the responsibility with that rests fully on the heads of the GW writers, who came up with rules where this sort of thing is allowed. Perhaps they'll get it right in 6th edition :rolleyes:

Well, techincally speaking the fault lies with the people who get annoyed at rules-lawyering, or just get their panties in a bunch when they think "someone is violating the spirit of the rules", whatever the heck that actually means.

Now, it is GW's fault for producing a set of rules that are riddled with ambiguous loopholes. Subtle difference there.

[Mal]

The single loudest advocate for the 'spirit of 40k' in my area is actually someone who uses a lot of the tactics and 'rules lawyering' he denounces others for...

Says a lot really...

This is not to say that everyone who worries about the spirit of the game is like this... but there are plenty of this type about, and to be perfectly frank, they ruin the game for everyone involved.

I have found from personaly experience that the group who has a genuine concern for the spirit of the game do not rant at people for the tactics they use, at least not in my area, they sit down with people and discuss the level of fairness...
Simply put, they ask competative players to go easy on less competative players, which is a perfectly reasonable request, and it doesn't hurt the eardrums.