Worst Game of 40k EVER...

[Ryzouken]

Hey! Quit telling people how they should enjoy their hobby! (both of the three of us!)

 

Srsly, the best part about 40k is that it can be enjoyed in a bunch of different ways, from modelling to painting to gaming for fun or competitively (whatever that means). You can enjoy the painting and modelling, someone else can enjoy the social "beer and pretzels" gaming, and some of the rest of us can enjoy stomping other people into bloody messes with our cheesed out power lists. Each approach is 100% acceptable, regardless of whether you or I or anyone else agrees or disagrees with how the rest us of enjoy it.

 

Bad wolves! */newspaper*

 

(chiding and playful tone throughout this post, but seriously, quit stirring each other's kool aid.)

[Prathios]

Hey! Quit telling people how they should enjoy their hobby! (both of the three of us!)

 

Srsly, the best part about 40k is that it can be enjoyed in a bunch of different ways, from modelling to painting to gaming for fun or competitively (whatever that means). You can enjoy the painting and modelling, someone else can enjoy the social "beer and pretzels" gaming, and some of the rest of us can enjoy stomping other people into bloody messes with our cheesed out power lists. Each approach is 100% acceptable, regardless of whether you or I or anyone else agrees or disagrees with how the rest us of enjoy it.

 

Bad wolves! */newspaper*

 

(chiding and playful tone throughout this post, but seriously, quit stirring each other's kool aid.)

 

Ive said nothing that isn't emphasized and stated in the rulebook. I'm not telling anyone how to play. I think good manners and civil behavior will dictate the rest to people who wish to have friends.

[Ryzouken]

The extent to which I disagree with your assertion is constrained only by my inability to conceive of the infinite.

 

Your very last post:

 

"Negative. 40k was not intended to be a "competitive game" in the way you describe. Its a hobby game. Risk and Clue follow a simple and strict rule set where each player is put in a situation where they have equal chance to win. In 40k you can be at a disadvantage just by playing a certain team because they game is not balanced and the rules are so complex. People who pick it apart looking for ways to win are taking advantage of the fact that the rules are not 100% fair. In chess devising a strategy is a truly wonderful thing as it your mind versus the other persons on an even field. But in 40k each person is playing by different rules and "strategy" can be as simply as spamming Carnifexes. Finding loopholes in rules because the writer of the rules made a mistake can make you just look like an jerk.

 

Don't get me wrong, I try to win just like the next guy but I do so in an attempt to enjoy a fun game, not to prove to the world I have the biggest/greatest/coolest (insert boast here)."

 

You state that 40k was never intended to be played according to XYZ. You then decry against the scouring of rules for loopholes (which can, in and of itself, be an entertaining and enlightening excersize) and follow it by emphasizing how you enjoy the game (presumably in an attempt at proving it is superior to other methods you've previously argued against.)

 

This is pretty obviously exactly what I identified in my last post, telling people how to enjoy 40k (by telling them what they shouldn't/can't do according to your preferences. You even attempted to use peer pressure to force your beliefs on others, citing a desire for friendship as a reason to conform to your beliefs).

 

Now maybe that wasn't your intent, but it definitely was your statement...

[c-wrex]

Actually the list Vash was facing sounded pretty fluffy to me. Imperial Guard with lots of big ole tanks? Isn't that how they fight? What's the problem, really? He chose to fight one way, you chose another. It also sounds like your list is built in a typical wolfish way for close gunfights. Not a very good way to battle an army that kinds of plants and shoots. You played fluffy. He played fluffy. He won. Big deal.

 

I get it that the game is meant to be played together for fun, but the ultimate goal is to win the game, while having fun is a pleasurable side effect of playing the game itself.

 

And besides, you can't take a gaming shop crews opinion of some player as the truth. He could be a great guy and a fantastic opponent but maybe he has a knack for kicking ass on the tabletop. Doesn't mean you should never play him again, which you said you wouldn't, because he whooped you (not meant to be offensive), and because other people, who are not this guy, were telling you how you shouldn't.

 

Hey, it ain't all bad! Take heart in knowing that he had to spend the vast majority of his points on the few units he had access to which could actually hurt yours. And it only worked because of those few units. He built his entire list to win a very specific way. Deny him that way next time you play, and leave the ego at home.

 

Kick some ass, Vash. I'm positive you can do it. (and maybe leave the diapers at home :) ;) )

[Vash113]

The extent to which I disagree with your assertion is constrained only by my inability to conceive of the infinite.

 

This is pretty obviously exactly what I identified in my last post, telling people how to enjoy 40k (by telling them what they shouldn't/can't do according to your preferences. You even attempted to use peer pressure to force your beliefs on others, citing a desire for friendship as a reason to conform to your beliefs).

 

Now maybe that wasn't your intent, but it definitely was your statement...

 

Except your entirely missing Prathios' point. The Golden Rule, also known as the most important rule of Warhammer 40k, the first rule in the book, on page two right at the top in it's own, special little box says:

 

Winning at any cost is less important than making sure both players - not just the victor - have a good time.

 

As Prathios said, he was saying nothing not explicitely stated in the rulebook. If your not playing to have fun and trying at all costs to pound everyone into the dust then your not following the entire premise of the game.

[Prathios]

Indeed as Vash already pointed out I am apparently guilty of pushing my view of how to play the game on others by viciously citing the golden rule of the game. I'm a very mean person.

 

Oh but I love these, "The extent to which I disagree with your assertion is constrained only by my inability to conceive of the infinite."

 

Starting any post like this makes you look like an elitist. It doesn't mater if its just how you are, it appears to be an attempt to show everyone how smart you are so that your opinion carries more weight. But in fact all it really does is insult the person you are debating and make you appear to be lacking in those basic qualities I listed above.

 

If you break down someones post into bite size pieces to analyze you have already missed the point. So I have to ask, what is your personal problem with me? Is it my attempt to point out how overly hard-core people can be with this game, because if so there are several of you proving this for me.

 

I will then elaborate on my previous point to enlighten folks as to why 40k is the way it is. Games like football, basketball, baseball, soccer, tennis, chess, and other games of this nature are set up in a way that both sides have a completely equal chance at winning the game as stated by the rules. It is what they bring to the table mentally and physically that sets them apart. As a hobby game 40k was never meant to be this way as it is not 100% balanced. I dare anyone to win a 40k tournament and then stand up and say they are completely responsible for their win and luck and the team they chose had zero to do with it.

 

The game is based on a large degree of luck in the dice rolls, this is a factor you do not see in "real" competitive sports and games (unless you count the coin toss). If your goal is to pound the other person into oblivion you have already failed to show you read the rule book. If thats how you prefer to play the game with friends, so be it. You are playing the game on your own terms. You can do whatever you want, but you can't bring that attitude to public games if you want to show the quality of your character and adherence to the rules. The game was designed to present a hobby with many figures for people to paint of different types. Because of this its impossible to have a uniform rule set for all the teams and a totally balanced experience. This means that every time you win a game the factors involved can't be boiled down to "I'm the best". So you can take all the pride you want in your wins but you only earned a portion of them. Where as a chess player can take full credit for his wins and losses.

 

This is the difference in competitive and non-competitive games. There is a post in the librarium about ethics you may want to read, its very good and has a great deal of debate on this very topic. The thing the concerns me most though in reading some of these responses is the defensive attitude so many players take towards the "win at all costs" approach. Vash didn't even call any names and many of you assaulted him for being a baby, which is telling in many respects that you are "that guy".

 

If you need a game to prove your worth to someone choose something that puts you on even ground with someone. 40k was designed to be a fun hobby not a league sport.

 

And last to your point about scouring the rules, you state that you find this fun. Why? Does taking advantage of your opponent so delight you that you can't see the inherent flaw in this approach? The folks I play with do not need such ego-fluffing. Picking apart rules should be set upon with the desire to improve upon them in order to balance the game further not destroy the opposition. Here is a link to a thread I think many of you should read http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=134646 this stuff should be common sense, but why do they call it that when it is so uncommon?

 

*edited for grammar

[Bjorn the Fell-Handed]

Indeed as Vash already pointed out I am apparently guilty of pushing my view of how to play the game on others by viciously citing the golden rule of the game. I'm a very mean person.

 

Oh but I love these, "The extent to which I disagree with your assertion is constrained only by my inability to conceive of the infinite."

 

Starting any post like this makes you look like an elitist. It doesn't mater if its just how you are, it appears to be an attempt to show everyone how smart you are so that your opinion carries more weight. But in fact all it really does is insult the person you are debating and make you appear to be lacking in those basic qualities I listed above.

 

If you break down someones post into bite size pieces to analyze you have already missed the point. So I have to ask, what is your personal problem with me? Is it my attempt to point out how overly hard-core people can be with this game, because if so there are several of you proving this for me.

 

I will then elaborate on my previous point to enlighten folks as to why 40k is the way it is. Games like football, basketball, baseball, soccer, tennis, chess, and other games of this nature are set up in a way that both sides have a completely equal chance at winning the game as stated by the rules. It is what they bring to the table mentally and physically that sets them apart. As a hobby game 40k was never meant to be this way as it is not 100% balanced. I dare anyone to win a 40k tournament and then stand up and say they are completely responsible for their win and luck and the team they chose had zero to do with it.

 

The game is based on a large degree of luck in the dice rolls, this is a factor you do not see in "real" competitive sports and games (unless you count the coin toss). If your goal is to pound the other person into oblivion you have already failed to show you read the rule book. If thats how you prefer to play the game with friends, so be it. You are playing the game on your own terms. You can do whatever you want, but you can't bring that attitude to public games if you want to show the quality of your character and adherence to the rules. The game was designed to present a hobby with many figures for people to paint of different types. Because of this its impossible to have a uniform rule set for all the teams and a totally balanced experience. This means that every time you win a game the factors involved can't be boiled down to "I'm the best". So you can take all the pride you want in your wins but you only earned a portion of them. Where as a chess player can take full credit for his wins and losses.

 

This is the difference in competitive and non-competitive games. There is a post in the librarium about ethics you may want to read, its very good and has a great deal of debate on this very topic. The thing the concerns me most though in reading some of these responses is the defensive attitude so many players take towards the "win at all costs" approach. Vash didn't even call any names and many of you assaulted him for being a baby, which is telling in many respects that you are "that guy".

 

If you need a game to prove your worth to someone choose something that puts you on even ground with someone. 40k was designed to be a fun hobby not a league sport.

 

And last to your point about scouring the rules, you state that you find this fun. Why? Does taking advantage of your opponent so delight you that you can't see the inherent flaw in this approach? The folks I play with do not need such ego-fluffing. Picking apart rules should be set upon with the desire to improve upon them in order to balance the game further not destroy the opposition. Here is a link to a thread I think many of you should read http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=134646 this stuff should be common sense, but why do they call it that when it is so uncommon?

 

*edited for grammar

 

It is not denied that a persons list is a key factor in their victories and defeats. This si true, But, in a game like yous suggested, like football,baseball etc, the manager cant claim overall victory, like the players. The manager gets strategy and they fulfill the strategy and its requirements. They rely on each other. Chess, well, everyone has the same opening pieces, its what they choose to do with it. 40k, while, I deplore lists that are so cheesy it removes fun from the game to play against, there is an element of tweaking them to best effect. As for luck in sports, well a, a lucky deflection or an uinfortunate pass might lead to a gamebreaking score.

 

Ultimately, the game is about fun. I can see where people get they're jollies off by minmaxing. It might be a deplorable thing, but they are entitled to do it. Just they shouldnt expect people to like it, or play against them.

 

Ultimately, there will always be "that guy." If we don't like "that guy" what do we do? We don't play v "That guy". Or, we get our own Cheezey list, and shatter the fether with cheeze and tweaked strategy, and with luck, thatll teach them not to do it again.

 

Every list has an equal chance to win in 40k.The dice rolls make this so, as bad rolls for them, and good rolls for you, as well as some intelligence is what its about. Its just how probable that list and your playing style makes it.

 

Personally, I dislike powergamers by their principle. But, the person underneath the powergamer is the important thing; I know several such gamers, but they are cool peoples. I still play with them, and regard it as a challenge to do so.

[Grimtooth]

I have said this on Dakka,

 

No matter what genre of game it is, min/max power gamers are always looking for the win all list/deck/combo. A new codex is barely even out in 40k before those type of people have already used Mathhammer to design a win at all costs list. There is nothing you can do, but identify who they and don't play with them. At tournaments, mark their scorecard appropriately to voice your opinion of them. Eventually they will get the hint when they are in their own garage, playing one of their cheese lists against another of their cheese lists, alone.

 

Power Gamer: "I AM THE BEST GAMER IN BUM :tu: EGYPT!!!"

Gamer: "But you're a ;) ."

[Decoy]

If I might attempt to be succinct here...

 

Play the game. Enjoy the game. If you feel like being a (expletive deleted) every (expletive) game, and that makes you feel good, go ahead. No one can tell you how to play the game, but damned if I have to play with you if you're being a (expletive). I may even ambush you in the parking lot for being a (expletive), but I'll never tell you how to play.

 

I play with the intent to have fun. I also play with the intention of winning; They are not mutually exclusive. I play a 13th Company list that, by it's design, is HIGHLY CC dedicated, meaning I'm going to likely lose against anything that can shoot better than Nids. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy playing; I use tactics and strategies to make it so that my current win-status is swiftly approaching the Thousand Games Won mark.

 

On a personal note: You don't have to cheese an army to win. You don't have to take fifty AP1-3 weapons. You don't have to take nine Valkyries, you don't have to load up on plasma or starcannons or falcons or basilisks or Nobsquads or Carnifexes. No one -HAS- to do any of that. Just because a list is capable of doing so doesn't mean you -have- to.

 

I choose to play a relatively balanced, if dedicated, list. I win not because my army is overpowered, or I'm cheesing out the list, or I'm being a general (expletive)-hat, but I'm winning because I can outplay you.

 

In the end, 40K is exactly what it is; A GAME. Play it. Play to win, sure, but ultimately remember to have fun doing so.

 

 

In relation to the OP, my thoughts; The Guard guy was a tool. Simple enough. In a friendly pickup game you don't throw cheese that big at an unsuspecting guy. Hell, I don't throw that much cheese in a tourney, let alone some poor sap across the friendly gaming tables.

[Ryzouken]

Indeed as Vash already pointed out I am apparently guilty of pushing my view of how to play the game on others by viciously citing the golden rule of the game. I'm a very mean person.

 

Oh but I love these, "The extent to which I disagree with your assertion is constrained only by my inability to conceive of the infinite."

 

Starting any post like this makes you look like an elitist.

 

And last to your point about scouring the rules, you state that you find this fun. Why? Does taking advantage of your opponent so delight you that you can't see the inherent flaw in this approach? The folks I play with do not need such ego-fluffing. Picking apart rules should be set upon with the desire to improve upon them in order to balance the game further not destroy the opposition. Here is a link to a thread I think many of you should read http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=134646 this stuff should be common sense, but why do they call it that when it is so uncommon?

 

*edited for grammar

 

Doesn't matter if the view you're pushing is good or bad, it's still stepping on someone else's point of view. I like to imagine that any pairing or grouping of players can figure out how to follow "the golden rule" on their own, or can figure out that their opponent isn't compatible with their view of fun without someone else's opinions clouding their perceptions.

 

Also, I am an elitist. An intellectual snob too. Thus the allure of a rules system prone to argument: it gives opportunities to flex one's mental muscles in a way that a "normal" game (like Chess, as it's been invoked already) cannot. I also enjoy Chess, but the number of players that match my skill level (that is to say, meet and neither exceed nor fail to meet. Big Blue I am not.) in my area is fairly non-existent. I fail to see why elitism is such a horrible thing.

 

And with regard to rules crunching, it's an entertaining thought exercise, and worth its weight in gold when one trips over individuals generally termed ":cuss" as one can then quash their attempts at rules bending and cheating with cold, implacable logic. As far as using such exercises to win games, this behavior is only expressed in tournament games. Fun games often see me "Handicapping" my list by taking less efficient or abusive elements. As an example, I'd not likely run triple raiders against a friendly game, or if I did, I would adapt my tactics to allow my opponent to get some good kills in, resulting in a closer game that they will probably enjoy (all the while cursing my three land raiders, but if they didn't plan for such a stratagem knowing who I am as a player, then likely they deserve to lose.) I do not play pick up games, and if I did, I would engage with the utmost respect to my opponent, setting down a tournament caliber list and tactic unless they asked for a different type of game (and I often ask what kind of game they're looking for before the game begins).

 

As far as you as a person being "singled out." There is absolutely nothing personal about it. I do not know you. I do not care. I made a general effort to curtail a specific behavior (which was evidenced by not only yourself, but others) you chose to rise to the challenge, I responded. Please re examine my initial post at the top of the page to identify where exactly in that post I typed "Prathios."

 

And since I quoted you but didn't quote Brother Bjorn, I'll end by referencing that I intended my first paragraph after said quote to encompass his post as well.

 

The Devil needs to start paying me for his advocacy...

 

and a smiley to make everyone feel better: :D

[stinkenheim]

until he started working nights on the only days i was free i used to regularly play against a friend in 6k pt games where he'd take 6 baneblades and max out on heavy weapons/leman russ/ogryns and only take the bare min of troops (using old guard codex where u could tak 5 man stormtrooper sqauds)... sounds like power gaming doesn't it.... except i won everytime... and not just by a little, i generally demolished his entire force.

 

first game we had it waas a surprise, i just managed a win... next time i was expecting it so i drop podded my enitre force in which took him aback and resulted in a 3 turn win for me... the games afteri stuck with my normal list and won by superior useage of my units... i'm not saying i'm some sort of tactical genius but i could almost always out manouver and out think him in terms of strategy... does that mean that i am a power gamer?? no i'm merely better at exploiting the weaknesses inherent within his lists.

 

as for the statement that 40k isn't balanced and people only win by luck, well thats just rubbish... the points system is done so that you can engage on a fairly equal footing and works very well in most respects. I've had instances where a list which should have won lost because i was out thought and likwise i have won when many times i shouldn't because i have pulled something out of the bag that my oponent hadn't anticipated. Sure its not as tactically centred as whfb and the strategies you can employ are generally more basic but the win/lose divide generally comes down to who made the least mistakes not sheer luck of the dice.

 

the fact that someone built a list that was quite cheesy isn't the problem as i see it. the thing that seems to have annoyed yo is that he positioned every piece of terrain he got in such a way as it played no part in the game, if this is true then it is down to you to call him out on it and if you weren't happy then, then you should have asked a 3rd party to set it up so that it is fair on both of you or walked away then rather than playing and whinging that the guy was an eejit and the list was broken because you lost.

 

can you answer this for me, if you had won would you still have said the guy was a jerk and you'd never play him again or would you shake his hand and say 'good game, thought you had me there for a minute :D '.

 

i don't mean to ound aggressive or insulting, that genuinely isn't my intention but what i am trying to say is that power game lists can still be beaten by exploitng the weaknesses inherent in the list. because by 'power gaming' they are focusing enitrely on one aspect of their lists potential, in this case the ability to pound the opponent to dirt before he can close with you... next time make sure you have faster moving units, maybe some drop pods or sacrificial units that look dangerous in an attempt to out bluff him.

I hope you don't refuse to play against ths guy because of a one off game as he might be a nice guy who just has his priorities wrong. its up to us to teach him rather than say 'im never talking to that guy again cos he handed it to me and was cheesy'

 

i've been looking at the new guard dex and after my last game against orks i've already started looking at what tings are better and where i can improve, its not in order to power game as such, merely make my list as efficient as possible (for instamce vendettas rather than a 3 man lascannon team). i wll eventually get to the same point that my list has evolved so far that i won't need to change it regardless of who i play... its then up to my opponent to force me to alter its makeup and adapt his tactics to overcome mine.

[Rezil]

Here Here stinkenheim!

 

Nothing wrong with making an efficient/strong list and then beating someone with it. I see it as providing a great challenge and it's a good feeling (At least for me) To out play someone with a hard list. I too like to play as hard a list as possible. TBH I would play similar to the guard player , although I wouldn't do the same with the terrain... 3rd party setup all the way!

 

If when the game starts you think "wow, I can't beat that" then just say so and i'll modify it to make it so you have a reasonable chance. I'm sure if you asked him to do the same then he would do. Otherwise you must have thought you had a chance? And proceeded to game him.

 

It's possible to have fun whilst winning OR losing. The fun is in the playing, not in the outcome. Having said that there is not point playing the match if there is no chance of the foremost outcome for you as it defeats the objects of the game. (Unless your just doing it for a laugh/experiment)

 

Also in response to Prathios deeming the game as a non-competative game. I disagree, the game is designed where by players compete for various objectives (Capture & hold, total annihilation). And as many players form leagues/ tournaments of their own it has been adapted to this form more & more. Players need not be on exactly equal terms to compete, even though we are given the same points range and so our handicaps are only designated by our choices of our lists.

 

I think your going about it the wrong way to burn your bridges completely with this gamer. :P

[Grey Mage]

Oi, indeed... its a competitive game, your supposed to try and win. Risk and Clue are also competitive games, as is pong- that doesnt mean your an arse and lord it over your opponents every time you conquer a territory in risk eh?

 

No. You have fun, you enjoy each others company, and any jibes made should be friendly ones.

 

Negative. 40k was not intended to be a "competitive game" in the way you describe. Its a hobby game. Risk and Clue follow a simple and strict rule set where each player is put in a situation where they have equal chance to win. In 40k you can be at a disadvantage just by playing a certain team because they game is not balanced and the rules are so complex. People who pick it apart looking for ways to win are taking advantage of the fact that the rules are not 100% fair. In chess devising a strategy is a truly wonderful thing as it your mind versus the other persons on an even field. But in 40k each person is playing by different rules and "strategy" can be as simply as spamming Carnifexes. Finding loopholes in rules because the writer of the rules made a mistake can make you just look like an jerk.

 

Don't get me wrong, I try to win just like the next guy but I do so in an attempt to enjoy a fun game, not to prove to the world I have the biggest/greatest/coolest (insert boast here).

I didnt say you should win at all costs... but if your not trying to win then theres no point in a combat game.

 

Manners are a part of it. Good times and a bit of sensitivity adds alot ot the game.... but winning is definitely a central part of the game. Not the hobby, as you cant win a hobby... but the game, oh very much so.

[Ryzouken]

Actually, there is a certain set of people who can (and do) win at the hobby: GW employees and shareholders.

 

Otherwise, some tournaments offer paint and sportsmanship prizes, so those sections of the hobby can be "won" theoretically (after a fashion).

 

But I digress, and your point remains.

[c-wrex]

I think the big thing with this thread, and threads like it that pop up every so often, is that people seem to always be surprised that other people play this game differently than they do. Each gamer brings to the table his or her own unique style of play, and given the breadth of the 40k universe, honestly whose to say any given army might not run into any other given army. I think people in general would be much happier playing if they went into each and every game with zero expectations. Try it sometime. Just see what happens and see what you can learn.

[Rezil]

I think the big thing with this thread, and threads like it that pop up every so often, is that people seem to always be surprised that other people play this game differently than they do. Each gamer brings to the table his or her own unique style of play, and given the breadth of the 40k universe, honestly whose to say any given army might not run into any other given army. I think people in general would be much happier playing if they went into each and every game with zero expectations. Try it sometime. Just see what happens and see what you can learn.

 

Word

[Prathios]

Just a few things, I've said my piece and I don't feel it needs further defense. If you don't understand competitive gaming vs a game that can be used competitively I wont try holding any more hands. (It sounds like semantics but it isn't.)

 

@Ryzouken

I actually rather enjoyed your intellectual honesty with this post. Even if I disagree with your post I think your self awareness is refreshing. Although I am a little off put by your failure to understand the ethical limitations of your behavior. As far as pushing my own view. If I'm stepping on the toes of people with poor ethical behavior in the game then I simply don't care. I'm not a existentialist, im rather the opposite so I have zero issue with stepping on the toes of poor behavior.

 

@Bjorn

In a football game you can have a big break that totally wins the game but both players have the same chances as set by the rules to make that play. I have no real issue with anything else you posted. I think we're very much on the same page.

 

@Decoy

I think you summarized a lot of what I think on this issue.

 

@Rezil

You seem to have missed the entire point of it being competitive or not. I spelled it out pretty well.

 

@Grey Mage

I don't disagree. Finding the balance between the extremes is easy to do.T

 

he only other thing I can say is I find it odd how many people jump to the defense of this other player. Vash already commented that the persons attitude as well as their list was of poor quality. Why do others seek to adamantly to defend this behavior? I think if you wish to put together the most mathhammer unstoppable list you can you need to agree that this is what you are both gunning for. If both players seek to game like this its fine but you don't bring this to a friendly match. That's the difference. I've presented all the argument that needs presenting, at this point you get it or you don't. There are many ways to play 40k as long as both players are prepared, you can powergame to your hearts desire if your opponent knows that going in, but when you unleash this on a random guy in a friendly game you simply look like a jerk.

[Ryzouken]

I think the impetus behind defending the player in question is twofold:

1) we can't hear his side of the story in all likelihood

2) everyone has off days; days where we stub our toe on every outcropping and run over every object and animal in the street. Maybe the "enemy" in question just rad a really bad day and wasn't at his best form. Maybe he was, I don't know for certain, but don't believe a single instance of poor behavior sufficient to crucify an individual.

 

As far as ethics in gaming, short of lying outright in play or outright cheating in list building and rule interpretation, can one even be unethical? Is it really unethical to want to do good? Is attempting to achieve objectives in game in an efficient and effective manner unethical? I don't believe it is. I think we're grasping at straws in an attempt to attack abusive army builds, like Nob Bikers or Lash (though this one is less concerning these days) by attacking the players. It is more honest, IMO, to attack the rules that allow abusive army builds themselves. Of course, we have a very limited means to do that, but we should be careful not to vent our frustration over not being able to do anything about these annoying armies on our opponents or other players with the insight to utilize these forces. It's not (entirely) their fault the rules exist in this form.

 

Please, identify the ethical limitations of my behavior. I'm curious as to what precisely you might object to and why.

[Rezil]

@Rezil

You seem to have missed the entire point of it being competitive or not. I spelled it out pretty well.

 

Ah well perhaps you could dumb it down for me? I seem to be under the impression that you believe 40k to be a non-competitive game........

[Grand Master Tyrak]

Nothing wrong with making an efficient/strong list and then beating someone with it. I see it as providing a great challenge and it's a good feeling (At least for me) To out play someone with a hard list. I too like to play as hard a list as possible. TBH I would play similar to the guard player , although I wouldn't do the same with the terrain... 3rd party setup all the way!

 

If when the game starts you think "wow, I can't beat that" then just say so and i'll modify it to make it so you have a reasonable chance. I'm sure if you asked him to do the same then he would do. Otherwise you must have thought you had a chance? And proceeded to game him.

 

On the other hand, springing such a list on an unsuspecting player is quite underhand. If you want to do that, play an Ambush scenario.

 

It is more honest, IMO, to attack the rules that allow abusive army builds themselves. Of course, we have a very limited means to do that, but we should be careful not to vent our frustration over not being able to do anything about these annoying armies on our opponents or other players with the insight to utilize these forces. It's not (entirely) their fault the rules exist in this form.

 

Just because you can build a power-army, does not mean you should. And whilst building a power-gamer list in itself is not bad, not warning your opponent beforehand is. If you want to do "blind date gaming", make sure both sides know about it. The worse aspects of power builds can be largely mitigated by the behaviour of those who field them. They're still just as hard, but your opponent doesn't feel like they've been cheated.

[Rezil]

On the other hand, springing such a list on an unsuspecting player is quite underhand. If you want to do that, play an Ambush scenario.

 

They can always ask so that they don't walk in to these lists unprepared, however as you say you could also tell the other player. Either is good and I think both players would do well to tell or ask what is being deployed.

[OnlyInDeath]

I think as far as ethics in the game of Warhammer, it refers to playing a balanced, fluffy list OR, as stated above, playing a powergaming cheese list only when your opponent is aware of what's going on. There's many instances in the various rulebooks over the years where GW has tried to outline an ethical code with its players: try and remember to have fun, take turns setting up terrain to keep it fair, keep points values the same to be fair, reroll cocked dice to be fair, and bring in outside opinions when two players cannot agree, agree to any house rules before starting. The underlaying theme is always this, play it in a Fair manner, and trying to follow the "golden rule" of warhammer (yes, they are trying to be biblical in their ethical code).

 

Now, when you approach some random guy in a shop and ask for a game, then bust out a power gaming list against him unsuspectedly, and then proceed to manipulate terrain placement to ensure your chance at victory, that's not very fair, nor is it sportsmanlike. In random games against anyone who is not a GOOD friend of yours, this is deplorable behavior completely against the spirit of the game, and it will make it so that you, and your location, are viewed as awful places to play and will discourage people coming back (hence the GW shop in my locale threatening to take the "shenannigans hammer" to any powergamig list, it's bad for business).

 

That said, I think the realm where power lists shine is always going to be in tournies, where you are paying money in the hopes to win against other powergaming lists, so it only makes sense to see some truly beardy/cheesey lists. I am one who tries to bring balanced lists to tournies as I know that wolves dont need cheese to win, but I know what to expect there, and it's no surprise at all when I see what I see.

 

Anyway, I'm surprised that this thread hasnt been closed by now, and all it's serving to do is alienate people on the forums. Where's Ragnarok or Max when you need them...

[Prathios]

I think as far as ethics in the game of Warhammer, it refers to playing a balanced, fluffy list OR, as stated above, playing a powergaming cheese list only when your opponent is aware of what's going on. There's many instances in the various rulebooks over the years where GW has tried to outline an ethical code with its players: try and remember to have fun, take turns setting up terrain to keep it fair, keep points values the same to be fair, reroll cocked dice to be fair, and bring in outside opinions when two players cannot agree, agree to any house rules before starting. The underlaying theme is always this, play it in a Fair manner, and trying to follow the "golden rule" of warhammer (yes, they are trying to be biblical in their ethical code).

 

Now, when you approach some random guy in a shop and ask for a game, then bust out a power gaming list against him unsuspectedly, and then proceed to manipulate terrain placement to ensure your chance at victory, that's not very fair, nor is it sportsmanlike. In random games against anyone who is not a GOOD friend of yours, this is deplorable behavior completely against the spirit of the game, and it will make it so that you, and your location, are viewed as awful places to play and will discourage people coming back (hence the GW shop in my locale threatening to take the "shenannigans hammer" to any powergamig list, it's bad for business).

 

That said, I think the realm where power lists shine is always going to be in tournies, where you are paying money in the hopes to win against other powergaming lists, so it only makes sense to see some truly beardy/cheesey lists. I am one who tries to bring balanced lists to tournies as I know that wolves dont need cheese to win, but I know what to expect there, and it's no surprise at all when I see what I see.

 

Anyway, I'm surprised that this thread hasnt been closed by now, and all it's serving to do is alienate people on the forums. Where's Ragnarok or Max when you need them...

 

I can't agree more. Well said.

[Vash113]

Well Prathios and OnlyInDeath have pretty much spelled everything out quite well. Well said guys.

 

On a semi-related note has that Ethics article been finally published yet? I should go check on that when I get back.

[Ryzouken]

Anyway, I'm surprised that this thread hasnt been closed by now, and all it's serving to do is alienate people on the forums. Where's Ragnarok or Max when you need them...

 

I think I disagree. I believe there is still a fairly decent possibility for intellectual debate as regards ethics in gaming, but I agree that if feathers get ruffled this thread should close and probably be deleted.

 

I think as far as ethics in the game of Warhammer, it refers to playing a balanced, fluffy list OR, as stated above, playing a powergaming cheese list only when your opponent is aware of what's going on. There's many instances in the various rulebooks over the years where GW has tried to outline an ethical code with its players: try and remember to have fun, take turns setting up terrain to keep it fair, keep points values the same to be fair, reroll cocked dice to be fair, and bring in outside opinions when two players cannot agree, agree to any house rules before starting. The underlaying theme is always this, play it in a Fair manner, and trying to follow the "golden rule" of warhammer (yes, they are trying to be biblical in their ethical code).

 

Now, when you approach some random guy in a shop and ask for a game, then bust out a power gaming list against him unsuspectedly, and then proceed to manipulate terrain placement to ensure your chance at victory, that's not very fair, nor is it sportsmanlike. In random games against anyone who is not a GOOD friend of yours, this is deplorable behavior completely against the spirit of the game, and it will make it so that you, and your location, are viewed as awful places to play and will discourage people coming back (hence the GW shop in my locale threatening to take the "shenannigans hammer" to any powergamig list, it's bad for business).

 

That said, I think the realm where power lists shine is always going to be in tournies, where you are paying money in the hopes to win against other powergaming lists, so it only makes sense to see some truly beardy/cheesey lists. I am one who tries to bring balanced lists to tournies as I know that wolves dont need cheese to win, but I know what to expect there, and it's no surprise at all when I see what I see.

 

See, but everything you decry in your second paragraph as "deplorable" (a fairly loaded term) can be trumped or countered. If your opponent sets the first (or second) terrain piece in such a way as to benefit his army, you're fully within your rights to do the same or request a 3rd party set up the terrain. If they put a power list on the board, you're fully allowed to fight it out, take 5 and grab your power list, or pick up and go.

 

Every power list has a trump. Nob Bikers get owned by the new guard, the new guard get owned by fast movers and outflankers, triple Land Raiders get nailed by Eldar Brightlances or dedicated anti tank elements, seriously, it's not that big a deal. The only time it becomes a problem is if you built a take all comers (TAC) list that isn't prepared to take on power armies, in which case (I'm sorry to say) you don't have a good TAC list.

 

A pick up game is not a friendly game. It's a game against a stranger (like a tournament game) that's got nothing riding on it (like a friendly game) so you can approach it however you want.

 

EDIT: sorry again for the quote thrash, and what ethics article? That could be an interesting read...