Good Sportsmanship? What would you do?

[Khornestar]

Yesterday I was playing a game against a Genestealer Cult player, and I had deployed some units in my deployment zone as a screen to prevent him from popping up behind me while the rest of my army rushed ahead, deployed at the forward boundary.

 

On seeing this, the GSC player was rather disappointed with my deployment tactic and told me so. In the interest of good sportsmanship I moved my unit up so he could deploy behind me and wreak some carnage. Otherwise, he would have been forced to deploy stuff in his backfield and spend a turn or two moving up before those units could really participate in the game. As it happened, allowing this infiltration gave me a chance to finally use my berzerkers, who slaughtered a unit of genestealers after their Rhino survived the stealers' charge.

 

Honestly, I didn't mind doing so. Winning was less important than letting my opponent get the most enjoyment out of playing his army, but it did make me think.

 

Blocking his infiltrators just came naturally to me, I didn't even have to consider whether or not I should do it. I also didn't even consider that someone else would think differently. I had to ask, why would I just let him backstab my army? I also can't help wanting to win, if I can help it. I don't play cheesy lists or exploit anything, but it seems normal/fair to want my army to murderize the opponent's army. I also think that even though I was just taking standard CSM units (berzerkers, maulerfiends, heldrakes), the units in his army are just straight up worse. I'm sure a masterful GSC player/list-builder could come up with something that would have owned me, but we're both new to 8th so neither of us are in that position.

 

I think a big part of the whole situation is the amount of time I spend on forums discussing the strongest army options, tactics, etc. that largely come from competitive and tournament players. In my experience, at least lately, most players just buy the units they think are cool/fun or whatever they've cobbled together over the years and try to make the best of it. This is sort of a relief to me, because so often I look at the strongest lists out there and think, "How the hell am I gonna deal with that?" as if it's something that I'm ever going to see. Half the time, I think it works out just fine. The other half of the time, I've seen lists like Tau just shoot the entire enemy army off the table without suffering any meaningful casualties in the entire game. I realize Tau may not be "top tier," but against some casual old school style list without transports, I bet you can see how it really isn't going to be a fair contest at all.

 

Anyway, what would you have done in this situation? Would you have allowed the GSC army to infiltrate, and thus have the most fun/interesting match for both players, or would you have blocked him off and forced him to deploy into a non-ideal position and more or less guarantee his defeat? I don't really think either way is right or wrong, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2017 by Juggernut

[Slave to Darkness]

So for him to get enjoyment from the game he expected you to handicap yourself, you showed good sportsmanship (Khorne is honourable after all) but he didn't. If your both learning 8th that's fine, I would let it slide and give him a chance to learn his army, if it was a normal game with a player who knows what he is doing I would have said war isn't fair and carried on. Kudos to you for being a good opponent, Khorne is proud of you. 

[The Unseen]

If his entire strategy relied on you not understanding how to deploy against it, something that isn't hard to accomplish now that everyone has to follow the 9 inch rule, I don't see how its fair or fun for you to just allow him to do it. He still gets to deploy way farther forward than other armies get to do, and if he 'can't win' without his opponent handing it to him, he didn't really win.

Deployment zone screens are like, tactics 101, for 8th edition, if he (or his army, I have no idea how relatively strong or weak GSC are currently, no one in my area plays them) either can't adjust the list so it can win without playing jump scare, or just doesn't want to, that's either a problem with the army list that will hopefully be fixed, or he needs to figure out other tactics.

This is of course assuming a casual pick-up game or the like, in a narrative style game revolving around a GSC ambush, it'd be fine for the set up to be he pops up and goes to town.

 

Just a question, an ork player decides he wants to run an entirely melee ork horde. Would you as a player send your army forward as fast as possible to let him charge and murder your army? It's what would be fun for him I'm sure, and that would guarantee his units get to participate. But you probably wouldn't.. I don't see how this is any different.

 

If the GSC player has no chance without jump scare cheese, I would recomend either toning down your list, or helping make his better. Once models hit the table, I would expect players to make smart decisions, or at least decisions that 'their dudes" would make. For example, when I play BA casually, I go ham. If I've got a Death Company Marine left alive, he doesn't go run and stand on an objective, he keeps charging, even if standing on the objective might win me that game, but the DC marine doesn't know and doesn't care. On the other hand, during deployment I would be trying to wring out any advantage I could grab.

 

Not placing screening units properly and letting him take that advantage so easily was far more "sporting" to him than it was to you, and him asking you to kneecap yourself isn't very sportsmanlike.

[Ciler]

I certainly think it was very nice of you to accommodate his request.

 

I myself would have done the same in a casual game setting (because I enjoy a "fluffy" setting for my games), but certainly would not if it was a competitive situation.

[OnboardG1]

Honestly, if we're going to be playing narratively (which I do like) I want to know before we set up and I'll pick a mission type that supports it (one of the ambush ones for instance). If we're playing competitive or standard matched I also want to know in advance so I can match expectations. As said above once the models hit the table I'm going to play to the match type. I'd rather know in advance so I can avoid this situation, but if I were asked I'd probably ask if he wanted to switch to the ambush mission type. If he didn't then well, sadface tbh.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

I understand why you did what you did, but I disagree with your course of action. A player will never get better if he never has to overcome tactical obstacles. That would have been an excellent teaching moment.

[Stercus]

If the game isn't fun for both players, what's the point? Preventing a genestealer cult from infiltrating would have ruined it both competitively and thematically.

From my own personal view, I'd rather take a hard-fought defeat than a win where my opponent has no chance. There's no heroism in a foregone conclusion, no chance for excitement, it's just monopoly where one player starts with all the streets.

[Bryan Blaire]

Honestly, if you hadn't agreed to the scenario beforehand, what you did was more than Good Sportsmanship. Overcoming your own disappointment when an opponent does something you didn't want them to do is as much about the game and good sportsmanship as not being a putz about facestomping an opponent.

 

Honestly, as long as he didn't ask you to specifically change your deployment, you were an incredibly nice guy (and if he did ask like it was an expectation that you would, that is really poor on his part). Y'all are both learning, so it's understandable to change things up (may never learn what some rules do if you can't test them against a real opponent), but personally, I'd be really clear to set up expectations for the next few games. If you want to play competitive more tourney style games and he wants to only play narrative games involving a GSC ambush, then you both may not be the best opponents for each other. Or you may just need to agree to switch off each game, etc.

[Shockmaster]

I would have probably done something similar, as I know some players in my local scene have no interest in becoming better or more tactical players, I barely do anymore either, so I have on occasion not just in 40k made the decision to ignore what I know is the best tactical choice for me due to wanting my opponent to have as good a time as I hopefully am which is more important to me personally then teaching them a lesson or having a higher chance to win.

 

I measure my success on if I feel like we all had a fun night away from the stress of real life, as in recent years for me these games are purely an excuse to get my favourite models on the table for a laugh once a week.

[Corswain]

I just don't understand how he didn't expect you to deploy like that!? If I was playing GS cults, that is exactly how I would expect an opponent to deploy.

 

Next time you play him (if you do so), I wouldn't be so accomodating though. He got his way once, it's only fair you do too.

 

Good on you for being such a good sport though.

[Khornestar]

Thanks for the responses, friends. Great points made, all around.

 

I think it's good advice to spell things out beforehand, and that I probably wouldn't do the same thing again unless it was a specific scenario. It would be annoying if it happened again, but I would definitely try to suggest ways to work with the way things are set up.

 

He was a cool guy, and it would seem way more into fluffy play than facestomping.

Edited September 17, 2017 by Juggernut

[Claws and Effect]

Kudos on the sportsmanship.

 

I probably would have done the same. However, I would make it clear that I'm not going to do that every game.

 

Part of the fun of using an army with a lot of infiltrators or deep strikers is figuring out how to best utilize them when your opponent is trying to block it. If your opponent just gives it to you it takes some of the challenge out of it.

[the jeske]

Anyway, what would you have done in this situation?

 

now depending on where I would be playing this may be require different reactions, but back home it would be looking at my opponent in a suprised way and asking him to repeate what he just said again.

 

 

Would you have allowed the GSC army to infiltrate, and thus have the most fun/interesting match for both players, or would you have blocked him off and forced him to deploy into a non-ideal position and more or less guarantee his defeat?

 

In a normal pick up game? no, I would not. I may play against him again if he wants to play a different scenario. But gimping an army or changing it from, me rolling him to him rolling me is not something I find interesting. w40k is a game, games require rules and skill, checking what happens if I play stuff wrong or bad makes no sense to me, because what is there to check? that bad deployment affects the game in a bad way, we know that by my opponent wanting to reset the game. Stuff like infiltration pushing or forward deployment were crucial tactics in editions past. It is part of the game, in comparation to other games he may as well be asking that we don't do long passes or don't use low kicks. But outside of tournament games I am flexible, if we were doing testing we reset the game countless times. Or when dice decide the game [like his mecha army has its 4/5 immobilised without any LoS and we know that he will never reach objectives, so the game is done before my first turn], no problem with reseting the game then. But if someone makes an error, then the only way to learn is to make it hurt. Like with all things if you would never burn yourself a little as a child, then as an adult you may do something that will kill someone. Better to get burned in a casual game and learn something, then keep giving out free restart cards to people, as after sometime two things may/will happen. A no one is going to take you seriouslly B your opponents may expect those resets from other people and be suprised/angered/disillusioned when they are not being given them.

 

It is a bit like teaching someone to play. I can simplify the game. I can play with less points then normal games. But  I always tried to show people how the real game looks like. So they do not spend 700-800$ and have a nasty suprise when they start playing real games.

[Tyberos the Red Wake]

Wow a GSC player whining about not being able to get instant first turn charges. Must be tough.

[Kinstryfe]

If I were playing something where it could be fun, I would probably go along with it once, as long as it was a "fun" game rather than a competitive game. My most commonly played army though is Guard, and I've had games where leaving space for the enemy to deploy behind my lines is physically not an option. Even if it were, asking a Guard army to let you drop genestealers behind their lines is worlds different than them popping up behind Marines or Chaos, so I don't think that kind of handicap would be fair to ask of certain armies (Guard, tau, even sisters), and I'm someone who's been told more than once by my opponents to stop helping them win when they forget to activate units.

[the jeske]

As much as fun is subjective, I do agree with you it takes a very special person to play games over and over again when they do have fun playing them.And it is also that games with people you like are good, and games with people you dislike are well hard to say the least even, if nothing special happens in them. But I do question the way this was asked. Cult armies are weaker 8th, but they do have working builds [tier 2, and they do require people to buy stuff like sentinals], so it is not the case of stuff like pre magnus 1ksons armies.

now playing a losing game is not fun, specially if can't do stuff. But in a non tournament setting it should not be fixed by one player being forced to deploy bad, not use psy powers, not shot[or assault] etc. If anything it can "fixed" by the "good" players trying to high roll the game[ you know you could win with 3 out of 5 objectives, but you go after 5, as if this was a no back need the points tournament game], This type of game play gives the "weaker" army a chance to play [well there are of course exeption, some armies are build to high roll. eldar circus lists were like that for example] and do something even, if they lose 9 out 10 times. And at the same time the "good" player does feel as if he was throwing the game.

[Firedrake Cordova]

Anyway, what would you have done in this situation? Would you have allowed the GSC army to infiltrate, and thus have the most fun/interesting match for both players

Ask if he wanted to play a mission type that was more fitting for his army, background-wise (ambush?) instead. :)  Having said that, I'm more into the relaxed narrative play-style anyway, so ...

 

I would recomend either toning down your list, or helping make his better. 

This is a good (and very fair!) idea - offer to go over his list with him and see if there's any glaring "oops" moments.  It may be that there's one or two tweaks that could be made, which have a large effect. :)

[Guest Triszin]

I'd do it with new people/people I know that aren't power gamers.

 

sometimes people just need a win, and may want to try something out.

 

if they are a power gamer and an ass? nope.

[Adeptus]

It probably never occurred to him that you could defeat his ambushing units that way, so there's every chance that he saw it as being unfair. Hopefully, now that he's aware it's a thing and he's had a chance to think about it, he won't be as whiny in the future if someone tries to counter-deploy like that.

 

My response would have been to scrap the mission altogether and to use one of the narrative ambush missions out of the book, or to create one from scratch.

[Kastor Krieg]

It probably never occurred to him that you could defeat his ambushing units that way, so there's every chance that he saw it as being unfair. Hopefully, now that he's aware it's a thing and he's had a chance to think about it, he won't be as whiny in the future if someone tries to counter-deploy like that.

 

My response would have been to scrap the mission altogether and to use one of the narrative ambush missions out of the book, or to create one from scratch.

Yeah, I feel he might've not seen this coming, not being a competetive guy maybe. I can imagine him coming to the game knowing that his army has a schtick, enjoying the thematic "THING I CAN DO, COOL", and then disappointment when he finds out there's an easy way to counter this thing, which makes his army less special / thematic / fun. Now, my reaction would sorely depend on the way he said that. If that was an "Oh, crap. So there's no way for me to do THE THING now? That's such a shame, I was really counting on trying out how that works and it's so thematic for GenCult to do THAT THING, too", then I'd react like you did (kudos, pure sportsmanship!). OTOH, if he was entitled, considered my movement cheating him out of a cheesy trick he got from a netlist, then nope, no joy, I've outplayed you, tough luck.

[OPTIMVSCHRISTVS]

If he's *that bad* I'd kind of feel bad not giving him a little bit of a chance...after all, if he's that bad, he's still probably going to lose even if you do hamstring yourself.

[Azekai]

 

Yeah, I feel he might've not seen this coming, not being a competetive guy maybe. I can imagine him coming to the game knowing that his army has a schtick, enjoying the thematic "THING I CAN DO, COOL", and then disappointment when he finds out there's an easy way to counter this thing, which makes his army less special / thematic / fun. Now, my reaction would sorely depend on the way he said that. If that was an "Oh, crap. So there's no way for me to do THE THING now? That's such a shame, I was really counting on trying out how that works and it's so thematic for GenCult to do THAT THING, too", then I'd react like you did (kudos, pure sportsmanship!). OTOH, if he was entitled, considered my movement cheating him out of a cheesy trick he got from a netlist, then nope, no joy, I've outplayed you, tough luck.

 

I watched a game where a fresh faced new player took Grey Knights against a veteran mono-chaos player. The new guy was all excited to be dishing out mortal wounds and he was talking up how awesome his dreadknight was going to be...

 

The chaos guy ran precisely two demonic units, one of them a daemon prince and the other a helldrake. No list tailoring, but the chaos player was not going to be using scads of bloodletters or a keeper of secrets against a GK army. The dreadknight spent most of its time killing chaff cultists before being torn apart by a chaos lord and a pack of charging berzerkers. The GK player apparently expected to be handed a win against chaos irrespective of tactics or army composition, simply because the scions of Titan had an edge against daemons. In the aftermath of the battle, he was basically convinced his army was broken (in a bad way) when that didn't happen. Shortly after that he sold his army and picked up Death Guard.

 

@Juggernut, I totally understand going easy on someone who made a misstep or misunderstood something in good faith; it happens. At the same time, I am totally with Castor; demeanor matters a lot. If someone feels entitled to a win, only to get bent out of shape when they lose, well... maybe those are the folks who deserve to lose the most.

 

 

Edited September 19, 2017 by Azekai

[Khornestar]

I hear you, frater. I don't want to misrepresent the guy and make him look like a total whiner, because it wasn't that way. I think the idea that he had no idea it would be so easy to counter that deployment using the game mechanics and finding that frustrating or lame is probably closest to the truth.

 

I may be a nice guy, but I play World Eaters, so I'm gonna bring a reasonably competent list eager to take some skulls. Now that we know what each other's army is capable of, there's no good reason not to throw down in earnest the next time.

[Bulwyf]

I think you behaved well and showed good sportsmanship. I have played this game since rogue trader days and the one truth I've learned is this is a game meant to be friendly and fun for everyone involved. If he made a mistake that you changed things up a little to give him more of a chance to enjoy his army then that's good on ya mate. That's exactly the kind of behavior we need more of in this community.

[Steel Company]

I like to have games that are hinged around both of us trying to force the other player to play their game so to speak. Some of the hardest games I've had as a guard Air Cav player has been against infiltration player.

 

That being said, If the guy/girl I'm playing against is New or New to their army I don't mind giving myself a hindrance to give them a better game.