My name is Jim and I'm a Guard player

[Kahoolin]

OK time for a whinge. I don't do this often but . . .

I'm starting to get irritated by these constant online screams that the Guard codex is over-powered. It has some powerful builds, sure, but the codex itself is not overpowered. It is just full of options, and most of them lead to an enjoyable and balanced game in my experience. I'm a guard player and I:

- Don't own a Valkyrie or a Vendetta.
- Only field five tanks, two of which are chimera's in 1500 pts.
- Regularly field rough riders and Ogryns.

Contrary to popular belief, I don't automatically lose, and most of my games are draws or close fought against my regular opponents who I'd say have about the same skill level as I do. The Guard codex just has so many potential builds and many of them are well-balanced for a fun, challenging game against other codexes. It makes me sad when the online wisdom is that guard players are cheaty WAAC jerks who all field a bazillion chimeras. There is just so much more to the codex than that, and people are missing out.

Eh, that's all. News flash! The internet is judgmental and thoughtless! :rolleyes:

[Koppenflak]

If it makes you feel any better, I'm in the same boat.

People are constantly screaming how OP it is, and throw hissy fits when their dice show up poorly, and eventually turn in to cheesy gits trying to squeeze every last inch and buff out of their models for nothing more than dealing with frustration.

I've turned to playing Imperial Armour lists recently to deal with it. *shrug*

[Mal]

A word of advice for ya mate... as soon as someone says that person with 'X' army is a cheating WAAC player, then they don't have a clue what they are talking about.

No single codex in the game is that powerful.

Sure some books have stronger potential builds than others, and using those builds doesn't automatically make you a WAAC player.

Take the ork codex for example... when that first came out everyone was saying the same thing about them... yet there are only 2-3 really good ork builds.

So my advice to you, don;t take it personally, just ignore them and have fun playing your army.

[MajorSoB]

I feel your frustration but the current set of rules in 5th edition coupled with the current lack of any control system in tournament environments ( yes I mean comp!) has created this perfect storm. I would say that most player who play this game do it out of fun, to have an enjoyable game, and because that particular army of their choosing appeals to them due to their fluff or play style. The problem that arises is that a small but vocal minority of 40K players have devoted their lives, countless dollars, and their internet presence to pursuing tournament wins, and why would they use an army that is anything short of optimized when they can play one where the dice rolls and percentages tip greatly in their favor.

Guard has a few power builds that have been made popular due to the "information superhighway" just as the power builds that have been created from various other codexes. To be honest and fair, we all know that not every codex is capable of building to the same mathematically superior level. Guard happens to be at the top when it comes to building potential and we all know it!

So my advice to you is simple. Play your game, play your army and have fun doing it. If you want to cave into WAAC then do so, if not just ignore the detractors who cant tell a balanced build from a true Leafblower. Really why should it matter to you or anyone else out their what you play? Do what you like and make yourself happy. Hobbies are meant to be fun and last I checked 40K is nothing more than a hobby to play in your free time.

Thanks for listening! Rant off.

[Melissia]

I'm building a plasma spam company. 3x3 plascan sentinels, 3 plasma LR tanks, and then some platoons designed specifically top pop open transports in order to allow said plasma vehicles to have some fun with their contents.

Is it almighty powerful? I doubt it. But is it going to be FUN? I think so!


Also, stop using WAAC as a bad term and insulting the brave individuals of the historic WAAC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_Army_Corps).

[Mystery.Shadow]

I also play Imperial Guard. I've always wanted to, but with their ancient Codex I really didn't want to. Call me an Army-Jumper, but the new Codex's OPTIONS got me to finally put money where my mouth was.

It's very unfortunate that when people see me pull out The 'Guard they think they are automatically going to lose to IG-Spam. I've played many builds from the Codex, and never the same list twice. It's just plain fun!

There are some people, sadly, not many of us left, who play For Fun!


One thing that many people forget, is that it's the players' ability not the codex which wins games. There are very talented Tyranid players in my area which even with the new Blah-dex can often win. There's a Space Wolf player who never seems to win, and a Blood Angel player who has yet to win ANY games with the new Codex.

[Melissia]

The new Tyranid codex DOESN'T suck. Granted it's not OTT like the SW codex, but it's still quite good and better than anything that isn't a fifth edition codex. At least as good as the base SM codex.

[Kahoolin]

Also, stop using WAAC as a bad term and insulting the brave individuals of the historic WAAC.I'm quite happy to do that. What do we call 'em instead though?

[Lerra]

If it makes you feel better, I have to listen to constant IRL whinging about my OP power-gamer armies, too. One is a shooty space wolves list (deserved) and the other is infantry Tau. I've heard people whine about how Necrons are overpowered because the Warriors won't die and Monoliths are broken. I don't think anyone is immune.

[eldargal]

I've had people tell me my largely mobile Eldar army is un-fluffy and overpowered.:rolleyes: Yes, because the Eldar are well known as being a slow, ponderous army that make little use of vehicles...

[Beta_Ray_Bill]

Also, stop using WAAC as a bad term and insulting the brave individuals of the historic WAAC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_Army_Corps).

I couldn't figure out what WAAC meant earlier, so I looked it up, turns out there's dozens of meanings for the acronyms. Even though no one is using the term in the context you are, Win At All Costs shouldn't bear negative connotation. Neither should be referred to in that manner. You can have a WAAC attitude and still lose terribly.

I was at the chicago bunker saturday for the whole national IoB event, and took the cheesiest list I could muster, and still lost. It was really my greed that cost the skaven a draw by kill pts, but that's a tale for another day.

In short(too late), you can play like that and still screw up, it is somewhat a game of chance. The internet is a terrible source for info and army list reviews, I refuse to post them anymore because what the internet has to say (max melta/fist) doesn't apply much to my gaming group. We all have 3rd edition infantry heavy armies.

Rambling now, I'm done.

[DarkLink]

There are some people, sadly, not many of us left, who play For Fun!


Actually, I'm pretty sure that you mean that there's not many people left who don't play competitively. Don't make the mistake of thinking that competitors don't play for fun, either.

And BTW, you're probably wrong. I know a more people who aren't competitive than who are.


What do we call 'em instead though?

Competitive.

Not everyone likes competition, but there are plenty of people who do. There are some people who just naturally compete. There is nothing wrong with that. Aside from even the association of the term with the Women's Army Corps, the term WAAC shouldn't be insulting at all.

There are competitors, who are willing to be ruthless and fight as hard to win as they can. It's the exact same attitude that any elite athlete has, or any successful business person, or any competent soldier, or any one of countless others who work hard to achieve a goal. They work as hard as they can, to the best of their ability, and they don't hold back.

Then there's cheaters, who actually break the rules in an attempt to win.

One of these behaviors is 100% acceptable. The other is not.

[Koppenflak]

While we're on the topic, all. What are our thoughts on Guard vs. Codex marines?

Maybe I'm in a weird place where all Marine players struggle to beat guard, but have any of you come across Marine builds that actually do give Guard a run for their money?

It's gotten to a point around my gaming group where I do actually feel sorry for the Mary Sues whenever they cross swords with Guard. They just don't seem to be able to match them for firepower or coverage, and you can usually force enough wounds with a single guard platoon to completely butcher a tactical squad within FRFSRF range.

Genuine oddity? Or are the Marines in my area just... not learning to adapt?

[Beta_Ray_Bill]

While we're on the topic, all. What are our thoughts on Guard vs. Codex marines?

Maybe I'm in a weird place where all Marine players struggle to beat guard, but have any of you come across Marine builds that actually do give Guard a run for their money?

It's gotten to a point around my gaming group where I do actually feel sorry for the Mary Sues whenever they cross swords with Guard. They just don't seem to be able to match them for firepower or coverage, and you can usually force enough wounds with a single guard platoon to completely butcher a tactical squad within FRFSRF range.

Genuine oddity? Or are the Marines in my area just... not learning to adapt?

FRFSRF murders my crusaders, but when it comes to cc, I've had 3 marines cut through half a platoon without taking one wound. My opponent was still declared winner though, by 40k in 40 mins rules. Against a plasma heavy army blob guard would probably sh!t their pants though, template weapons still work too... And 2 assault cannon termies! :)

[Valkerie]

I recently had a game with my Dark Eldar (Old codex). My opponent complained about all the raiders, about the night field, about horrorfexes, about my bikes having S 4, about Vect's dias and all it's special rules. I personally have never thought of the old DE codex as being overpowered, even when it was new. I think a lot of the OP whingeing occurs when the opponent is losing. When my opponent started winning the battle, all his complaining went away.

I do also play IG. I do have a Valk, (have to get around to putting it together sometime,:)) and have been known to field several Chimeras and a mix of tank variants. Basically, I like to try things out, even if it costs me a game. Of course, everyone around here knows what a 'competitive' player I am.

Basically, I just want to have a good time, and if I happen to win, that's the gravy.

[fuzzbuket]

WOAH DUDE YOUR NOT USING A **** OR DAKKA LIST YOUR GOING TO LOSE OMGOMGOMGOMG


/:P/

really well done youve got a nice unique gaurd army and can win with it :D

[Kahoolin]

Competitive.

Not everyone likes competition, but there are plenty of people who do. There are some people who just naturally compete. There is nothing wrong with that. Aside from even the association of the term with the Women's Army Corps, the term WAAC shouldn't be insulting at all.I don't think you get it Darklink, we want a term that is insulting, not one that is perfectly reasonable :D

I'm pretty sure I speak for most of us when I say that WAAC, as an acronym for Win At All Costs, doesn't mean players who try their best. It means players who lack the spirit for co-operative gaming. Games, unlike wars and business, are co-operative. It's not a game if only one of you cares about the other player's enjoyment. Anyway I didn't mean to get into this age old debate again, none of us ever has anything new to say.

Just complaining about being complained about. It does actually make me feel better that a lot of people here seem to cop the same flak with a variety of armies.

[Mal]

The problem is Kahoolin, most competative players are accused of being WAAC simply because they are competative...

I get accused of it all the time, and let me tell ya, its not fun.

I really hate being berated for being a good player, it takes a lot of the fun out of the game for me, and that is simply unacceptable, im only hard to beat if my opponents refuse to adapt... and how is that my fault?

If being a WAAC player is unsportsman like, then what is ruining the game for other players?

The problem with that phrase is people don't stop and think before using it in a derogatory fashion.

The real problem arises because most people just lump everyone into one of 2 categories, 'friendly' and 'WAAC'... Yet there is a whole host of grey areas between the two.

Im a competative player, and im proud of it.

*Edit*

Ohh and considering I had 9 different armies at the start of the year and got called a WAAC player regardless of which I used... well that should tell you everything you need to know.

[Kahoolin]

The real problem arises because most people just lump everyone into one of 2 categories, 'friendly' and 'WAAC'... Yet there is a whole host of grey areas between the two.That's right. I guess if I was to describe myself, I try as hard as I can to win during the game, but I couldn't care less about optimizing my list. I make an all-comers army that uses units that appeal to me in terms of models, fluff or play style and is true to the theme. The whole meta-game thing of predicting what people will take and trying to counter it with bizarre choices seems unsporting to me. I won't say I don't do it at all, but I minimize it.

In game though, I play to win. I don't throw the game if the other guy can't handle losing. I guess that makes me competitive to some players and a weak-willed daisy-frolicking little fluff bunny to others *shrug*

None of that matters though because I play Guard so everyone hates me ;)

[Mobynick]

I had a 14yo brat look at my IG army and tell me "I don't like guard" I asked why..."I don't know I just don't like em. **** off I replied. Next week his Dad turned up....I told him the same thing. Now I made some enemies that week, but I made ALOT of friends too. (this was about 7 years ago)
People piss n moan because it makes them feel better when they lose. Most people that can actually play the game or that had any shread of sportsmanship about them don't care what you turn up with. It is how you play the game that counts not the army you bring.

[Xas]

If it makes you feel better, I have to listen to constant IRL whinging about my OP power-gamer armies, too. One is a shooty space wolves list (deserved) and the other is infantry Tau. I've heard people whine about how Necrons are overpowered because the Warriors won't die and Monoliths are broken. I don't think anyone is immune.

I not so long ago had a guy in my local club who claimed that necrons are overpowered and unfair.

15 minutes later I found out that he just built his first-ever GW model... a pegasus rider for fantasy.


I started laughing out loud when I realized that a hobby starter who just only started warhammer FANTASY and doesnt own a single 40k model comments on stuff like that.


bottom line: idiots are everywhere!

[chromedog]

How about "overcompetitive tools" instead of WAAC.

There's competitive and there's taking it to the next level. The level of no fun to play against. The kind who don't just like to win, they HAVE to win or their ego will shrivel and die like a slug in the sun.

[Mal]

Heres the best quote i've heard in a long time.


The objective of the game is to win. The point of the game is to have fun. The two should never be confused.

[JonnyRoxtar]

I generally make an army with what Ive got. Since this game can be pretty expensive, thats usually not a lot.

My last guard army was a chimera a leman russ 3 sentinals and a lot of guardsmen.Since they were Tallarn models I got from a sale they also didnt have a lot of weapon options (3 autocannons and 2 missile launchers If I remember rightly with no assault weapons)

It won it lost I had fun.

Then the infantry were stolen, when I moved house and I couldnt face painting that many guardsmen again. Might give it another shot in the future.

[Duncndisorderly]

Speaking from personal experience the people who whine most about losing have normally lost because of one of two reasons.

One: their tactically clueless but their lack of sportsmanship wont allow that to compute hence you must have cheated in some way.

Two: their incredibly unlucky but their lack of sportsmanship wont allow that to compute hence you must have cheated in some way.

The approach I take to both is similar, I deride them mercilessly for them incompetence and/or fail dice.

For the record I lose a hell of a lot more than I win, I'm sure my opponents must be cheating in some way because my tactices are teh awesomez :p

[Melissia]

Let's see.

Powergamer. Munchkin. Douchebag. Competitive.

I could probably go on but I don't care enough.

[Mal]

Let's see.

Powergamer. Munchkin. Douchebag. Competitive.

I could probably go on but I don't care enough.

So your saying anyone who is competative (remembering that this is a very relative term) is a powergamer, munchkin and douchebag....

Sorry but you seriously need to get over yourself, get off the high horse and grow up.

There is absolutly nothing wrong with being competative... and do you want to know why?
Well im going to tell you even if you don't.

Being competative simply means you know how to play the game well in your own area, you are capable of taking equal armies against another player and creating a winning situtation. Since the objective of the game is to win, this is what you are supposed to do.

The point of the game, the reason it exists, is to have fun. The objective, the goal if you will, is to win.

The only people who are not competative (relatively speaking) is people who play with the intention of loosing... can you honestly say you play the game to loose?

Completly, truthfully honest... very very few people can... so relatively speaking, almost everyone is do a degree, competative...

Congratulations you've just insulted hundreds of thousands of people all over the world. Have a cookie.

*Edit*

If you want even more proof that the vast majority of people are competative, simply look to genitics. The human species is genitically predisposed towards competativeness, we thrive on it. If you are completly non competative, then you are a very very rare individual.

Granted the level of competativeness varies from person to person, but this simply shows the grey area I was talking about before.

Now im going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you were being sarcastic, but please take into consideration in future the real meaning behind the word competative, and how it relates to the human condition.

[Rapture]

But if she gets down off of her horse then it will be harder for her to hear you sitting way up on yours.

[N0rdicNinja]

But if she gets down off of her horse then it will be harder for her to hear you sitting way up on yours.

Hahaha XD Well played sir.

On topic: I generally don't care what the play style of my opponent is, as long as they don't rub it in my face when they're winning, and they don't ***** when they're losing, I'm generally cool with them. I don't play competitively, and I avoid pulling "against the spirit of the game" type stuff, but I have friends who do both of the above, and they generally wipe the floor with me. But they're cool and friendly about it and I have no problem facing them, it does make the victories I do claim all the more sweet. =)

[Pendragon38]

Last Friday at my LGS I saw a full grown man throw a tantrum cause his nids got flamed by an Sm player and he kicked the leg of the table so hard that all the models fell over!Than got more upset cause he broke his on models when the hit the floor. I was trying not to laugh at him.

[Mal]

I've been in this hobby for over 18 years.... yes im a competative gamer (and i've shown that everyone is when they are honest with themselves), but I also do a lot with the fluff aspect of the game... the last army I finished took me 14 months of modelling, converting and painting and is 100% fluff accurate...

I've worked really hard to be as good as I am, I am not a 'must always win, even at cost of fun' player, yet I have had to listen to people insult me for years because I don't play down to their level at competative events.

So give me a reason why I should have to put up with people who want to insult me simply because I play at a higher level than they do... espically when I do not play these people! Give me a reason why I should meekly accept it and let pointless insults and abuse ruin the game for me and i'll get off of my high horse.

*Edit*

There is absolutly no situtation in this hobby where insults and abuse is acceptable, it is extermely unsportsman like (note this is what most competative gamers get accused of being) and completly unacceptable.

Even if your unfortunate enough to face comeone who cheats, simply refuse to play them.

There is NO reason for the insults, this is the reason why my post was so harsh towards melissia. Her (his?) post was simply unacceptable and has no place in this game.

[Melissia]

You're taking what I said too seriously. Didn't you read the last part of my post?

[DarkLink]

I've worked really hard to be as good as I am, I am not a 'must always win, even at cost of fun' player, yet I have had to listen to people insult me for years because I don't play down to their level at competative events.

So give me a reason why I should have to put up with people who want to insult me simply because I play at a higher level than they do... espically when I do not play these people! Give me a reason why I should meekly accept it and let pointless insults and abuse ruin the game for me and i'll get off of my high horse.

There is absolutly no situtation in this hobby where insults and abuse is acceptable, it is extermely unsportsman like (note this is what most competative gamers get accused of being) and completly unacceptable.

Even if your unfortunate enough to face comeone who cheats, simply refuse to play them.


Bingo




There is NO reason for the insults, this is the reason why my post was so harsh towards melissia. Her (his?) post was simply unacceptable and has no place in this game.

I don't think melissia meant it the way you think she did. I've never seen her condemn "WAAC" gaming in the past.

[Iceman]

I had a 14yo brat look at my IG army and tell me "I don't like guard" I asked why..."I don't know I just don't like em. **** off I replied. Next week his Dad turned up....I told him the same thing. Now I made some enemies that week, but I made ALOT of friends too. (this was about 7 years ago)
People piss n moan because it makes them feel better when they lose. Most people that can actually play the game or that had any shread of sportsmanship about them don't care what you turn up with. It is how you play the game that counts not the army you bring.
I'm not sure why you are proud of behaving just like the 14 year old brat. You would have been better off telling him that if you wanted his opinion you would have asked for it and he should find someplace else to be.

[Mal]

Melissia, I did read your whole post, which is why I gave you the benefit of the doubt, however the post wasn't written as a joke, there was nothing in there to say it was sarcastic... I doubt it was your intent, but the post was highly insulting.
And then for people to take a stab at me for being defensive about being insulted over a game of toy soldiers... well that got my blood up, and rightly so.

So I apologise if my post was uncharitably harsh towards you, the majority of the posts content was meant for a wider audiance and not to be targeted soley at you.

The unfortunate truth is I am faced with that kind of treatment on a very regular basis... I am constantly insulted and belittled by people who think I am doing something wrong by playing competatively.... the really odd thing is my opponents always seem really happy to have played me. Its the spectators and people I simply refuse to play who treat me badly.
It does take a lot of fun out of the game for me, and to be perfectly honest, if I wasn't so ungodly stubborn I would have packed up my armies and sold the lot off years ago.

[DarkLink]

I'm not sure why you are proud of behaving just like the 14 year old brat. You would have been better off telling him that if you wanted his opinion you would have asked for it and he should find someplace else to be.

Yeah, I was gonna say, he told someone to @#$@ off just because they didn't care for the IG? And it was to a 14 year old kid? And then did it to the poor kid's dad? And not even that they disliked them due to being cheesy or something. They just didn't like the asthetic/feel or whatever.

At least it's clear who the immature one in that particular exchange was.

[Mal]

This is exactly the kind of closed minded idiocy that is ruining the game, thank you for such a perfect example of the immaturity of some gamers pendragon.

[Pendragon38]

haha I'm having fun I'm not being mean and your blowing most of this stuff that is written on this page way out there I've enjoy alot of the stuff that is on this site, but when people like you how whine about the small stuff it gets sad for adults to cry over such privy things like WAAC or not getting there way grow up it life shrug it off and deal with it rather than make a scene at work or where ever you go to play your army since you cant take a rashing than you need to join a cult of EMO kids
your friend Pendragon38

[DadExtraordinaire]

Hey every one Mals Man-gina is weeping some on get him a tampon or better yet BOOGER HOOK him off the stage its getting sad!! (vagina)

Bullying is immature and a sure sign of cowardice either online or off it. There was no need for the remarks Pendragon, Mal apologised but I think Melissa should too as her comments were not clear as to their intent (to be sarcastic). A thought for you all....as the old saying goes sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

Mal has made it abundantly clear on this forum that he enjoys W40K and that he likes to win. He has clearly (to me anyway) stated he is competitive in nature and wants to win with the army he has spent hours creating, building, painting and playing. I do not see any issue in that. The hobby needs an eclectic crowd to bring diversity, experience, and “new ways of playing”. Don’t knock something until you try it……you might like it.

I think there should be online eating of humble pie for all concerned.

Personally, I don’t like the “win at all costs” syndrome however that does not stop me liking the individual, as I have learnt from the past playing WAAC friends, I gain experience, knowledge and always win in the end ;)

[Duke]

Guys, remember that making statements of a personal nature is not approved. Please argue and debate (on topic) all you want, but if comments are posted attacking people I'll have to close the thread.
Duke

[N0rdicNinja]

http://www.airsoftology.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/derail04.jpg

[Pendragon38]

Am sorry that I upset him never the less He needs to under stand that there are people like that every where you go! that re mark was to show that if you keep it up some one will say something to get a shot across the bow to open there eyes. my point is at the end of the day your still standing than pat yourself on the back! I'm a boxer and to say I'm closed minded is sooo far from the truth that its sad I have over 100 fights under my belt and I've lost as mining as I've won.I don't bully any one I just don't beat around the bush when it comes to be about the truth of the matter. if you want to cry about it deal with it your own way

[Pendragon38]

Sorry DUKE,Mal

[Mal]

Thank you Duke.

A debate on the subject of abuse and bullying is potentially very constructive, however when people use it as an excuse to propigate said abuse is just very sad.

All I want is the right to enjoy my hobby without having to take abuse... I really don't feel that this is too much to ask for.

I know that I personally would never stoop to such base actions, its is immoral and dishonourable.

As I have said many times, if you truely have a problem with someone your playing, do the adult thing, talk about it, if you can't resolve your differences then walk away. After all, you can't expect to get any respect if you refuse to show any (this is respect for your opponent and the people in your gaming group/store, after all im sure they don't want to hear such things while they are trying to enjoy their own games).

Im not saying im perfect, but if I ever give offence, I always apologise.

*Edit*

But thats the thing, im not crying about it, its a serious problem, and one that i've had to deal with for over a decade... please note i've yet to deck anyone for it.
I do deal with it, quite successfully, but that doesn't mean I like it or that im going to stand for it.

Unacceptable is unacceptable regardless of circumstance.

But I thank you for your apology.

[L192837465]

Also, stop using WAAC as a bad term and insulting the brave individuals of the historic WAAC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_Army_Corps).


How many ovens did they have to ship to that regiment? I guess the rest of the army only fights on their stomachs!


I kid I kid!

[Pendragon38]

Mal I'm sorry it wasn't intent on shaming or belittling you. just to show that there are the call it how you see it people are out there still I'm not mean I just don't take it laying down at work or the Gym you have to fight for what you want don't shy away grab the Bull by the horns and go with it. sorry again Mal your friend Pendragon38

[Grubbslinger]

Been reading through the thread and it has gotten pretty heated. Few, always a touchy subject when dealing with 40K power builds versus fun builds. I think the problem stems from the nature of 40K. Often when you get beaten, it easy for you to get utterly destroyed. Sometimes, it comes down to a few bad roles. I just lost a game last week because I rolled more scatter on a demo charge then a I needed. This snowballed into me calling the game on turn 4 since my opponent had so handley won.

At my LGS , I find that I get more breatted for not playing a IG power build. Everyone is confused when they see my army doesn't have a manitcore or single chimera. I don't run any artillery either. I do run a bunch of flyers but most people are not too bothered by them. I did have one guy say that he hopped I lost because I was playing IG. I was a little miffed about that but didn't try to take it personally. I think the best thing to do is remember that its a game, and while you want to win, sometimes, you lose. As long as the person is cheating or being to gamey (read: bending rules to the extreme), I don't mind playing what ever army they want to throw at me. The more power builds you play, the better you'll get at taking them out.

[Pendragon38]

I bow my head

[Mal]

Pendragon, I agree completly, and I do... its why I play competatively regardless of the c**p I have to put up with for doing so (ok it helps that im as stubborn as a mule).

The point I was trying to make here is that its unfair to people to do that to them, we all play this game for one reason, to have fun. And being abused is simply not fun.

I aprichiate open candidness in people, this is a very good thing in my opinion, but online it can get you into hot water. The problem with most internet communication is there is no human interaction... your seeing what im saying a a block of text, no emotion or meaning beyond that. Did you know that when 2 people speak face to face, 70% of the communication is from facial expression? You just don't get that online, so it is very easy for people to misinterpret your meaning or intentions.

[Mobynick]

Yeah, I was gonna say, he told someone to @#$@ off just because they didn't care for the IG? And it was to a 14 year old kid? And then did it to the poor kid's dad? And not even that they disliked them due to being cheesy or something. They just didn't like the asthetic/feel or whatever.

At least it's clear who the immature one in that particular exchange was.

LOL yeah it does sound bad huh but I'll put in into context. Spoilt brat, got everything bought for him and payed others to paint them...fair enough I guess but at 14...cummon. Anyway it was my first time at the club and a couple of mates had warned me about him...he hated anything that wasn't his basicly. Told a chaos played that his army looked stupid painted yellow...imperial fists are yellow not chaos...he refered to it as the stupid yellow army....he was a ...what do you guys say...douche bag?. He was a prick and I wasn't going to let him ruin my time in the club. Immature perhaps?, but it was certainly gradifing.

[DarkLink]

Bullying is immature and a sure sign of cowardice either online or off it.

Actually, I would define bullying as a sign of arrogance, rather than cowardice specifically. Which can be used to cover up cowardice... or the person could just be an arrogant jerk.




A thought for you all....as the old saying goes sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.


Worse than making puns?


LOL yeah it does sound bad huh but I'll put in into context.

Ok, yeah, I wouldn't call it immature now. Context can change everything.

[scadugenga]

I have a guard army--and I don't have a single chimera. 1 Ven/Valk still in the box, and I still have fun.

It's the attitude of the player that makes or breaks the game. Not the build.

If someone wants to play me with the internetz list of the week, then by all means. It doesn't make him/her a bad person, just someone potentially lacking in imagination and free thought. ;)

[Kahoolin]

I did have one guy say that he hoped I lost because I was playing IG.See that's what I'm talking about. Don't hate the codex, hate the player! Or the designers for making things unbalanced. Not that I even think the IG codex is unbalanced. It is very well balanced if you take an army that reflects the background, so I guess that's what the designers expected people to do. Poor naive fools . . .

[Flammenwerfer13]

OK time for a whinge. I don't do this often but . . .

I'm starting to get irritated by these constant online screams that the Guard codex is over-powered. It has some powerful builds, sure, but the codex itself is not overpowered. It is just full of options, and most of them lead to an enjoyable and balanced game in my experience. I'm a guard player and I:

- Don't own a Valkyrie or a Vendetta.
- Only field five tanks, two of which are chimera's in 1500 pts.
- Regularly field rough riders and Ogryns.

Contrary to popular belief, I don't automatically lose, and most of my games are draws or close fought against my regular opponents who I'd say have about the same skill level as I do. The Guard codex just has so many potential builds and many of them are well-balanced for a fun, challenging game against other codexes. It makes me sad when the online wisdom is that guard players are cheaty WAAC jerks who all field a bazillion chimeras. There is just so much more to the codex than that, and people are missing out.

Eh, that's all. News flash! The internet is judgmental and thoughtless! :rolleyes:

Try playing an all assault guard list with nothing but valkyries and vendettas. Nothing makes a marine player madder then losing h2h with guard.

Also welcome to the intratubes, it is nothing BUT judgmental and thoughtless ;)

[maddoc]

- Don't own a Valkyrie or a Vendetta.
- Only field five tanks, two of which are chimera's in 1500 pts.
- Regularly field rough riders and Ogryns.


My name is not Jim and i am a guard player.

I have 3 Vendettas
I never field below 5 Tanks.
I sometimes field RR.

But now comes the kicker,
i am not a "cheaty WAAC jerks who all field a bazillion chimeras", i might field a ****load of them but i am no "cheaty WAAC jerk".

[Rissan4ever]

The fact is that, no matter what list you play, you're going to run into someone somewhere who thinks you're a jerk for playing it. Personally, I think they're all wrong. It's not the list you run, it's the way you play the game that matters. Play the army you want to play and have fun. That's the goal.

[erwos]

Truthfully, I suspect that intelligently-designed all-infantry lists using Straken are probably stronger than the stereotypical mechanized lists everyone is so afraid of. That kind of list can not only shoot, but it can do some crazy stuff in assault.

IMHO, what has really pushed mechanized IG lists over the top is the addition of cheap Vendettas and Valkyries to the arsenal. They are a pure no-brainer in terms of value, especially when considering them as an alternative to a Chimera. I'm almost surprised to see mech IG armies that aren't running 3 of them with demomeltavets inside. There's basically no downside to taking them, and they have a huge potential upside bonus of a turn 1 alpha strike.

Without them, we'd just be running Hellhound variants and scout sentinels. Are you scared of those? Well, outflanking autocannon sentinels are a pain, and Bane Wolves hurt, but your average player shouldn't be terrified of such things.

[BuFFo]

Imperial Guard players, much like Ork players, suffered nearly 8+ years of a bottom tier, crap codex. Full of fluff, low on win.

Let IG players enjoy the power for once. :p

[DadExtraordinaire]

[QUOTE=DarkLink;103421]Actually, I would define bullying as a sign of arrogance, rather than cowardice specifically. Which can be used to cover up cowardice... or the person could just be an arrogant jerk.

No. Bullying is cowardice full stop. When a gang of youths beat up an elderly person its not arrogance its bullying and its cowardly. When somebody asks everyone else to join them in poking fun out of someone in a public format because they don't like what they are saying, then that's not arrogance that's bullying.......

Someone can be arrogant but not a bully, however, some are arrogant as well as a bully.

As for puns better than sarcasm any day - you can always watch the brilliant Monty Python sketches..... :rolleyes:

[Mobynick]

Imperial Guard players, much like Ork players, suffered nearly 8+ years of a bottom tier, crap codex. Full of fluff, low on win.
Let IG players enjoy the power for once. :D I agree totally !

Once the Dark Eldar get out people will be whinging like mad...you know the terms...overpowered, cheeasy ect and guard will lose some heat thats been leveled their way. As for competition the knights code states "Never offer combat to someone unable to meet the challenge", not because of a lack of honour but because the person my take your offer and die in the attempt.

I use this obscure reference to show that while you can take a kick arse army full of win that isn't always appropriate. It is encouraged in tournaments but at your local gaming club or against friends power builds say more about you than just "I can build lists". There is more to intelligence than the application of power, so you can build a hard as rock list...great, so you play a tactically sound game ...great but don't let your ego get the better of you and tell you this is intelligence. At the end of the day I argue that the aim of any game isn't to win, it is to have fun. If you turn up time and again with power lists then your ego may remain intact but you have missed the point.

[Mal]

The point of any game is to have fun. The objective of any game is to win. The two should not be confused.

This pretty much sums it up... ohh and the understanding that the point of a game outweights the objective of a game.

As for lists, most of my 'competative' lists are not your standard powerbuilds... most of my lists are just regular all comer lists or specalised lists that I have worked on enough to remove a lot of the weaknesses they suffer from.
I also cover a lot of a lists weaknesses with good use of game stragety and tactics, but this is not to say I go all out in friendly games, I don't..

This is all my perspective and what im looking for in a game so it may not apply to everyone here...

In a friendly game I am looking for a nice relaxing match where I can BS with my friends while pushing our plastic toys across the board, win loose or draw really doesn't matter. Its essentially a nice way to kill a couple of hours.

In a competative game I am looking for a match that will challenge my tactical thinking, I want an opponent that can pull out suprises and make me have to stop and think before reacting. I want a close fought, nail biting game. Again, win loose or draw doesn't really matter.

Essentially I really don't care if I win or not, but in competative games I do try a lot harder to win.

Ohh and i've got a bit of news that will probally make a couple of people at my game groups call me even more names than usual... I've decided to start building an infantry heavy IG list (i.e. no AV in the list at all, although I'll probally add some in at a later date). The big problem I have with this is that I haven't played guard since third.

[Melissia]

Mobynick is right. People will *****. People constantly ***** . Wah wah wah overpowered, wah wah wah too strong, wah wah wah broken blah blah blah. These people end up being whiney, pathetic players who can't cope with change, they don't know how to change their tactics to something new, they don't know how to adapt, they aren't good players-- so instead they whine incessantly about anything and everything that comes along that might DARE upset the status quo.

Such opinions are worthless, and you should ignore them as such. I've had to adapt my Sisters for two editions now, I'm not gonna let some newfangled codex force me to lose. I may have an outdated codex but I'm not gonna sit there and take it and whine like a little *****. I'm going to figure out a way to win. This is the essence of what makes a competitive player, and it has nothing to do with playing in a tourney or anything, it has to do with one's attitude towards the winning versus whining spectrum.

People who constantly give in and give up because they refuse to even try aren't worth your time.

[scadugenga]

Ohh and i've got a bit of news that will probally make a couple of people at my game groups call me even more names than usual... I've decided to start building an infantry heavy IG list (i.e. no AV in the list at all, although I'll probally add some in at a later date). The big problem I have with this is that I haven't played guard since third.

I love my infantry heavy army. It may not be "optimized" like the leafblower, but it's chock full of threat and handles pretty well.

That, and I love dishing out tons of orders and popping mech list vehicles. Warms my cockles, it does.

[erwos]

Such opinions are worthless, and you should ignore them as such. I've had to adapt my Sisters for two editions now, I'm not gonna let some newfangled codex force me to lose. I may have an outdated codex but I'm not gonna sit there and take it and whine like a little *****. I'm going to figure out a way to win. This is the essence of what makes a competitive player, and it has nothing to do with playing in a tourney or anything, it has to do with one's attitude towards the winning versus whining spectrum.
So, you think it's fun to play with one hand tied behind your back? Some of us do not. I adjust my tactics and lists to go with the times, but when you're playing Chaos and they just introduced evil army of doom that seems to be tailor-made to slaughter your one really good troop choice... it's not like there's a new alternative that just pops up out of nowhere, or a new tactic that somehow prevents poison weapons from working. You're just screwed.

In a wargame, balance is a virtue, not a vice.

[Mal]

I take it you mean poisoned weapons that wound nurgle marines on a 4+... you do realise they still get a 3+ save and a 4+ fnp right?

So they wound on a 4+ rather then a 5+, its really not the end of the world.

The weapons are 1/6 better than a boltgun against them... so to make them have such a game breaking inpact the DE player will need to take dozens and dozens and get them all into rapid fire range.... you really won't see many DE armies like this, besides to get close enough to the nurgle marines the raiders will be in range of the meltagun (ohh whats that, 2 of the per unit?), so pop the transport and charge the soft chewy center. It will only take a few surviving marines to really ruin the day for 10 kabalite warriors in combat.

Ofc if you were talking about the other troop choices... they are the same to wound as any other MEQ unit so there is no real difference there.

Accept that there will never be balance in 40K... its been this way for a couple of decades, its not going to change, so adapt your tactics to deal with the new threat (i've already given you a good tactic so you have a place to start).

[fuzzbuket]

so according to this we should all play the same grey plastic army with no lavish paintscheme or conversions ?

im considering spending 100000000000000+ hours on a army and moan conststantly when that squad dies :P

[1st Satiran Fusiliers]

Hi "Jim," welcome to Spirit of the Gamer's Anonymous? I'm Johnny-come-lately to this discussion I guess, but I did want to tell you that I agreed with the intent of your original post. I had been toying around with the idea of posting something similar, just to get it "out there," so I thank you for being bold enough to actually do it where I was not.

If I might be allowed to try and push the train back onto its tracks, let me join you in asking, why are the Imperial Guard so "hated" nowadays? In many of the topics on BOLS, they are referred to as the #1, top-tier army right now, elevated into a class by themselves, "which a lot of people hate," and therin probably lies the fundamental answer. They've become a focal point - which I find astonishing. As a long-time Guard player (got into playing Guard with the release of the Mordian Iron Guard), I have to agree with a previous poster who said, the Guard have suffered for 8+ years with very poorly designed codexes. Always plenty of cool models to build and paint, then rank them up into the inevitable immobile gun line on the table, and watch as your opponent's mobile assault force dictates the battle. Back into the cases, lads...better luck next codex.

I find it both humorous and depressing that we now have a codex and points structure which grants the most options for Guard mobility in the history of the hobby, but because of the Guard's crippling inability to fight in hand-to-hand combat (and the horrifying vulnerability of armor in an assault), what we see now is a fully-mechanized, completely stationary gunline. As Porky-Poster said elsewhere on BOLS, it's dull. I would also call it a tragic waste, to have spent so much time modelling and painting those beautiful Chimeras, and then use them as bunkers. But what other reasonable choice is there? For the Imperial Guard, every advance, even a mechanized one, is a suicide charge. It has always been so (would that it were not). The more things change, the more they stay the same? The rules we have been given dictate the Guard play style, not the players. If my Mordians could charge gallantly across the field and win the day, then absolutely, I would charge, bayonets fixed!

My own humble opinion is that the hobby has (and should have) room for "serious competion" (in the form of tournaments, or pre-arranged grudge matches between friends at the LGS). However, I strongly feel that things have gone too far in this regard, and here it is that the game's designers at GW, I believe, have much to answer for. Balance...why can't there be more of it? Why must we accept that there will "never be balance" in 40K? I don't think it's right (or fair, or fun) that there is such a HUGE dichotomy between lists that are considered "competitive," vs. lists that are considered "friendly," or "fluffy," or which have recently been called "baby seals." If you or I bring our balanced Guard army that includes banners, storm troopers, power fists on Lieutenants, and vox casters in every boot squad, and all of this has been lovingly modelled and painted over the course of a decade, then should we not be able to expect that we can show up to a game and have a reasonable chance to win? Maybe we might be a leg-down against our opponent's slightly more optomized, tournament-ready list, but with some careful planning in the turn, and a bit of luck with the dice, we are still in with a chance. Maybe our opponent wins, but it was still a close and exciting game right up to turn 5 or 6. Is that too much to ask, oh GW overseers atop Mount Olympus? And yes...this kind of experience can, and does happen, but it requires some planning with your opponent beforehand. The pick-up style game, perhaps with an opponent you don't know very well...? Player beware. I recently played a couple of games against Road Rage Orks, completely optimized to deliver the charge on turn 2. No guns in the army to speak of, just death rollers, choppas, and klaws. It felt very much as though I were a baby seal, being clubbed - so bravo to whoever coined that term. The competitive difference between our lists was like unto the wideness of the Grand Canyon. Why is this dichotomy allowed? Why is it built right into the game?

I would like to cry foul, but I'm also willing to accept that the game has evolved into something which is (to me) completely bizarre, full of "deadly unit combinations," as though the designers start by planning these out, then work backwards, fleshing out the codex and adding back in the less-powerful, storyline units as distractors, or chaff through which the more clever players can enjoy milling through to get to the good stuff. Some would say to this, just adapt. My answer is, that the super-cool new models for my beloved army are expensive, and even when I do have the opportunity to pick one up, such as the Manticore, I will never place it on the table until it is fully painted to the utmost of my skill. I owe my opponent nothing less. So it takes months, if not years, to adapt to a new Codex. By then, we will probably be in a new edition of the game. And so the desire for balance within the rules becomes even more pressing.

But that doesn't seem to be the direction the hobby is going. I'm not sure what's changed, but I think the designers at GW should know better. Because this is a hobby with multiple levels, including modelling and painting, I believe they should be more concerned with designing rules that keep the playing field a tad bit more level. There are those of us, and I hope I'm not in the minority, who will never be satisifed with just slapping together a Leman Russ Eradicator and flinging it naked grey onto the table so we can feel competitive against the new Dark Eldar. I guess this is my desperate, futile call for a return to sanity, fairness, and fun within the beloved hobby that I've participated in for so many years...perhaps it sounds strange, even foolish, coming from a dedicated Guard player, who by all rights should be reveling in the harsh spotlight of Top Dog of the Moment.

All this to say, I suppose, thanks, "Jim," it's good to know there are others of like-mind out there, somewhere. The veterans of the Satiran Royal Guard have been granted the honour of being transported to the fields of glory within the blessed hull of the noble Chimera. To all other platoon commanders, request denied.

[Mycroft Holmes]

I built my IG army around the thing that I thought exemplified the IG in my mind and/or I thought was 'cool.' I didn't duplicate things over and over, I didn't take too many of the extremely undercosted Vendetas; I tried to create a balanced force of tanks and infantry that work well together. Not the most optimized list possibility by any stretch of the imagination and it says Imperial Guard to me when I put it on the table.

Leman Russ Demolisher,
LR Executioner,
Scout Sentinels,
1 Valk,
Hellhound
Manticore
2 Vet squads (chimera)
1 good sized Infantry Platoon with 2 heavy weapon squads of lascannons
1 command squad (no chimera)


It's ridiculous.
I destroy my opponents. Even in games where I lose, my opponent gets annihilated and barely feels like he's won. I do think I'm a pretty good player, but the amount of destruction I'm able to lay into my enemy... it always feels like I'm clubbing baby seals.

Mycroft

[Mycroft Holmes]

Or the designers for making things unbalanced. Not that I even think the IG codex is unbalanced.

I make video games for a living. When players abuse a mechanic it's not their fault. If a designer left a loophole or didn't properly balance a mechanic, you cannot blame the user for playing it to it's fullest.

They're playing to WIN and the designer is the one at fault; we're just left with the fallout.

Mycroft

[Mal]

I make video games for a living. When players abuse a mechanic it's not their fault. If a designer left a loophole or didn't properly balance a mechanic, you cannot blame the user for playing it to it's fullest.

They're playing to WIN and the designer is the one at fault; we're just left with the fallout.

Mycroft

As someone who does a lot of beta testing (for games and tabletop wargames) I can attest that this statement is 100% accurate.

However unlike most companies who put out unbalanced games, GW do it on purpose, it helps them sell stuff.

[DarkLink]

What I don't get is how GW lets certain units past the radar.

I mean, I can understand letting really good units by, like TWolf Cavalry. That just encourages people to buy a whole bunch of new models.

But then there are some units that are just plain horrible. It would take, like, two playtest games for any reasonably intelligent person to realize that X unit sucks, and I would think that GW would then think "hey, no one will buy this unit because it isn't any good. We should make it totally awesome so that a ton of people buy it."

[Melissia]

In a wargame, balance is a virtue, not a vice.
Did I ever claim otherwise? No? Then shutup.

No, what I said was that incessant, pathetic whining is just that-- incessant, pathetic, and whining. If you don't have the balls to say "Here's my codex, I'm going to WIN with this" then you have no right to call yourself competitive.

That is precisely what I said. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Kahoolin]

What I don't get is how GW lets certain units past the radar.

I mean, I can understand letting really good units by, like TWolf Cavalry. That just encourages people to buy a whole bunch of new models.

But then there are some units that are just plain horrible. It would take, like, two playtest games for any reasonably intelligent person to realize that X unit sucks, and I would think that GW would then think "hey, no one will buy this unit because it isn't any good. We should make it totally awesome so that a ton of people buy it."Yeah that is weird. I mean fair enough if something is meant to suck, like Gretchin, and is low in points cost to compensate. But when something has a supposed role and it just can't do it on the table, that's definitely lame.